I read a tweet that referred to HN as "Silicon Valley", which struck me as odd because I suspect most HN users, like me, are located elsewhere. This piqued my curiosity about where HN users are located, so if you don't mind me asking, where do you live?
Polls are not supportedEdit: Sorry about the randomized ordering (I forgot HN does that for polls). Thanks ahead of time for using cmd+f or the equivalent to find and vote for your state or country. Also, each US state is included as "US: {state name}".
Thanks for this update. I've included a couple points below to improve on before our next meeting:
- can i get a similar look to this but in pie chart format? Maybe just include top ten labels?
- I would like to see a larger size of the visual on the page
- the color scheme is okay but try experimenting with black font for the locations
Best, LimitedInfo
Sorry for the delayed response, I was waiting on a response from our dev team, and Susan in accounting.
I appreciate the feedback but I'm currently assigned to other tasks, so if you'd like revisions please contact Issac and submit a request for some of my hours.
Also please stop leaving fish in the fridge.
Best, jarrenae
All the others (unless I missed it, in which case Sorry!) are total for the country
Source: https://github.com/gabrielsroka/gabrielsroka.github.io/blob/...
Noob question: is there a similar way to dump it to JSON, instead of a table?
Deleted Comment
console.table(Object.entries([...document.querySelectorAll('.fatitem table .athing')].map(el => [el.textContent.trim(), el.nextSibling.textContent.trim()]).reduce((rv, [a,b]) => {var key = a.split(": ")[0]; rv[key] = rv[key] || 0; rv[key] += parseInt(b); return rv;}, {})).sort(([,a], [,b]) => parseInt(b) - parseInt(a)))
$$('.score').map(node => [node.parentElement.parentElement.parentElement.previousSibling.innerText?.trim(), parseInt(node.innerText)]).sort(([,scoreA], [,scoreB]) => scoreB - scoreA)
BTW, the fact that only the US country has options separated by state reminds me of when I lived in Europe, and sometimes we got together with a bunch of international. Invariably the "where are you from" question would pop up, to which almost everyone would answer with their country... except Americans, who would answer with their state haha.
Once, I asked someone where they were from and I think they answered some random US state, he then asked me the same, and I answered with the state where I am from in Mexico... he had no clue where that was hahaha.
I think it also speaks to the degree of autonomy and identity among the states. The US originally thought of itself more like the EU is now, a collection of sovereign nations that agreed to a very strong alliance (first confederation, then federation). The difference is when the US’ “brexit” moment happened the northern states decided the southern states didn’t have the right to leave and enforced their opinion at the cost of 1 million lives (out of a population of about 32M at the time).
So that settled that and now the US is one country, not a collection of countries.
But the original idea still plays a large role in how people think about things.
It was over a century and a half ago, but we still owe the union soldiers who died in the US Civil War a debt of gratitude for their sacrifice in ending the scourge of slavery in the United States. Their lives paid for the freedom of millions of men and women. Their sacrifice saved us all from the debasement of living in a society in which one person can be owned by another person. You do disservice to their memory when you characterize their primary motivation as being to "enforce the opinion" of the northern states with regards to the southern states' right to secede.
Not all of them were motivated primarily by the abolitionist cause, obviously—many fought because they were conscripted into the army—but those union soldiers knew that they were fighting to end slavery, and they knew what they were risking to fight for that cause.
As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jy6AOGRsR80
It's also worth pointing out that the Civil War started after the South Carolina Militia, cheered on by the civilian population of Charleston, bombarded Fort Sumter with artillery until the US Army forces that had peaceably occupied the fort surrendered.
Who was it that enforced their opinion on whom?
An interesting analogy, but it downplays two key differences. Firstly, the confederate states opened fire on union troops, whereas Britain did not start a shooting war when it left the EU. Secondly, there is no provision in the constitution of the United States for a state to leave the union, unlike in the EU.
As a final point, I would note that the United States of America by that point had a history of using military force to expand (in line with Thomas Jefferson's "empire of liberty" doctrine), including two attempted invasions of Canada, the Mexican-American War, as well as successful wars (and massacres) against the Native peoples. So if you do take the position that the confederacy had the right to secede from the United States, it is hardly a surprise that the USA then took the opportunity to use military force to annex a smaller neighboring nation with a weaker military, limited infrastructure, and insufficient foreign support to defend itself.
I'm from Michoacan, and reading or seeing the clueless expression when I answer gives me some sort of joy and proudness.
Vermont -> green hills
Dakota -> hard deserts and Amerindians
Nevada -> sand desert
Texas -> ranches.
Arizona -> Lots of sun and hot.
Florida -> beach and spaces.
Kansas -> Big corn farms.
Massachusetts -> US version of Europe.
Missouri -> Rivers.
Of course you can double down if you really want to get eyes rolling by following up with something like “the good one”, “el primer mundo”, or “the rich one”
Honduras, Guatemala and the other countries in Central America would be the Linux equivalent, being left out.
But the very-literal should be reminded: the linguistic mechanisms of synechdoche & metonymy often result in a fuzzy use of parts, or regions, or emblematic examples, or associated items to mean some other closely-related more-amorphous entity.
For example, "the White House" for the entire elected president's policy team, no matter which part (or if it's operating from some other place). "Wall Street" for finance, even that outside of New York. Someone's "good eye" to mean their entire skills of evaluation (of detail, aesthetics, potential, etc).
And of course 'Silicon Valley' for, depending on context:
• a narrow geographical region around the south SF Bay
• dominant industries in that region, especially computer/infotech
• the whole SF Bay Area, or even Calfornia - at least to the extent there's some (possibly thin/alleged) connections to tech or the SF bay
• all computer/infotech companies everywhere, with weak but not absolutely-required implication of some connection (HQ/roots/investors) to above
• mindsets highly associated with the any of the above
These shifting boundaries based on context/intent annoy people who prefer precision, but are inherent to terms used this way.
Otherwise, out of 1000 people, there'd be at least 200 that are from North Korea, maybe another 100 that lives in Antarctica.
The author starts off with "But the very-literal should be reminded". Already any readers have to implicitly know that "the very-literal" refers to the specific group of individuals who have read the original post and also have a tendency to take things literally. It's not incorrect english, but since the word "literal" is more commonly used as an adjective, it does take a beat to realize that it serving to create a plural noun as part of "the very-literal". Again, not crazy strange, but it's a language device that is more commonly seen in other contexts rather than on Hacker News.
The reader might now be expecting the author to describe what specifically shouldn't be taken literally, but instead author continues with "the linguistic mechanisms of synechdoche & metonymy". I think it's a big leap to expect the reader to know: a) what a "linguistic mechanism" is, ie, how does it differ from a phrase? b) what "synechdoche" is c) what "metonymy" is
So now not only is the reader still in the dark about what they shouldn't be taking literally, but now they are likely grappling with trying to understand these definitions unless they are in the likely minority of people who already understand all of these.
The author continues: "often result in a fuzzy use of parts, or regions, or emblematic examples, or associated items to mean some other closely-related more-amorphous entity." To me, this just reads as a poor redefinition of the previously mentioned terms. It's like saying "when words are used non-literally, it results in the non-literal use of words". It's not WRONG, per se, but it just leaves the reader more confused about what ultimate point the author is trying to make.
To the author's credit, this sentence is immediately followed up with two good examples of synechdoche; however, unless the reader previously understood its definition the ultimate point of these examples is lost. On the other hand if the reader did previously understand the definition of synechdoche, then these examples only further the previous redefinition. At this point, the reader still hasn't been told what they aren't supposed to be taking literally.
Finally, the author mentions "Silicon Valley", and it becomes more clear the the crux of this comment is regarding its definition. More examples are provided regarding the specifics of how "Silicon Valley" could be non-literally interpreted -- which is probably the gist of what the author was trying to convey in the first place, but it was buried 88 words into the comment.
All in all, this comment could be distilled down to: "Silicon Valley shouldn't be interpreted literally; it can be interpreted a few ways, here are some examples."
Or maybe we can ask @dang to give it a "jobstory" treatment so it keeps around the frontpage for longer?
Unless this sits near the top of HN for a week, it's very likely to be skewed.
- "Poll: Where are you currently living?" (Countries, 2013) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6582647
- "Poll: If you're in the US, What State Do You Live In?" (US states, 2013) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5222370
The community is clearly a lot different than in it was 2013. I would guess a relatively larger portion of people outside of the Bay Area is part of that.
https://xkcd.com/1138/
Each US state is about the size of a European country, sometimes with similar population. That's one of the things that always comes up in polls of what surprised Europeans about the US when they visited - just how big it is.
This question feels primarily aimed at the US population, IMO.
Canada must be separated into 100 different pointless micro services each with a different docker configuration created by the summer C.S. intern.
HN joke.
This suggests that Silicon Valley still represents a significant portion of the HN community.
Someone get him on the phone, oh wait, it’s past 5pm on a Friday evening, he is probably at a “work event”.
Also, in IT or CS, a state like TX or CA are more prominent than any European one. CA is probably more important by itself than all of Europe. Even PA or GA are heavy hitters that would smoke most similarly sized EU countries.
I recall reading (years ago) that "If California were an independent country, it would be the sixth-largest in the world"... Which would still (at least at the time) put it behind Germany. So, faaar from "more important by itself than all of Europe".
> Even PA or GA are heavy hitters that would smoke most similarly sized EU countries.
Given how wrong you are about California above, I very much doubt this one.
- Americans = stupid, can't tell where Lithuania is
- Americans respond: name all states!
- Europeans respond: name all regions of all European countries
You're right, regions like London, Bristol, Berlin, Paris, Madrid, Bracelona, Frankfurt, Munich, Warsaw, Cracov, Wroclaw should have separate options
Just poll for countries.