[ertdfgcb]

I think at least part of it is because the people on HN enjoy solving problems so much. When there's a post that says "we solved this problem", a lot of people here (me included) think "great, what's the next problem to solve". The focus is on "the next problem to solve" more than the "great", sometimes to the degree that the "great" is completely ignored. I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing, but it can get grating. It reminds me a lot of a part of the essay "How to ask questions the smart way"[0] by Eric Raymond:

> Much of what looks like rudeness in hacker circles is not intended to give offence. Rather, it's the product of the direct, cut-through-the-bullshit communications style that is natural to people who are more concerned about solving problems than making others feel warm and fuzzy

It's not quite the same, but it comes from the same cut-through-the-bullshit attitude.

[0]: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

[PhasmaFelis]

> Much of what looks like rudeness in hacker circles is not intended to give offence. Rather, it's the product of the direct, cut-through-the-bullshit communications style that is natural to people who are more concerned about solving problems than making others feel warm and fuzzy

With all due respect to ESR, and speaking as an autistic person who has struggled with socialization, I get tired of people trying to paint their failure to grasp basic social principles as a virtue. Behaving like an efficient robot is useful when dealing with machines, but other people are not machines and treating them as such does not improve productivity even if you think it ought to.

A couple of jobs back, I met with a supervisor to proudly tell him that a gigantic, exhausting project I'd been working on for the last nine months was finally ready to deploy. His response, almost verbatim, was "Cool. Here's what I need you to do next..." I found it nearly impossible to care about what he wanted for the rest of my time there. 60 seconds' worth of interest and congratulations would have gotten dozens of hours of extra productivity out of me.

Sorry, that got awfully off-topic. It's just a hot button with me.

[couchand]

Thanks. That was as or more apropos as the comment you replied to, and much more valuable.

60 seconds' worth of interest and congratulations would have gotten dozens of hours of extra productivity out of me.

Hundreds, probably, thousands maybe. It's hard to overestimate the value in these things.

Except, of course, on HN.

So, to reiterate, other people are not machines.

[mehwoot]

I think at least part of it is because the people on HN enjoy solving problems so much.

Or we're all cynical assholes. Just possibly.

[Thimothy]

I'd rather "Idealistic Perfectionist", thank you.

[asdkl234890]

I think it's because we are pedantic. In a pedantic way no more world hunger, but people still die in car crashes, is correct. Pedantically correct.

[lallysingh]

Well, which comment would you upvote?

1) Yay! 2) Here's where they could have done more...

[doktrin]

Or overly pedantic alpha nerds, the lot of us.

[Terr_]

"Por qué no los dos!?"

[innguest]

> Or we're all cynical assholes. Just possibly.

Unlikely. HNers are wide-eyed Utopians in the Platonic fashion of believing in virtue through central planning. There is no cynicism here to be found, but in the downvoted comments.

[slowmovintarget]

Not a fan of centralized control... I much prefer distributed, concurrent, fault-tolerant, scalable systems. You'd think most HN readership would too.

[saraid216]

> I think at least part of it is because the people on HN enjoy solving problems so much.

Possibly, but there are a couple more factors.

1) In the general population, criticism is still the norm. The default reaction to any change is neutral to negative. If any response is made, chances are it will be negative.

2) On HN, vacuous responses are discouraged. And since substantive positive responses are hard to make (most of the positive spin usually ends up in the article, not in responses), positive responses in general are uncommon. Comparatively, substantive negative responses are easier to make, not least because it's almost always easier to see a problem than to see a solution.

Either one of those would push the responses towards negative criticism. Combined with yours, you now have three not-insignificant forces. There are probably more. There probably aren't many forces pushing towards positive response, and demonstrably not enough to balance the scales.

[whoisthemachine]

I don't know - I think in order to properly recognize and understand the difference between achievements and failures the community should at least give some credit and also give itself a small pat on the back for achievements such as this.

If you never know what success looks like, you're always failing.