John Cook writes that he looked on Hacker News to see which of his posts were most popular: “I [Cook] didn’t look at my server logs, but generally the posts that get the most traffic are posts that someone submits to Hacker News.”
I don’t look at my server logs either–that way lies madness! My question is, how much should we trust the popularity ranking from Hacker News?
I don’t know much about Hacker News myself. I went there and entered statmodeling in the search box, and by default it lists in order of popularity. Here are the first two pages of the most popular from 2024:
Suspicious data pattern in recent Venezuelan election (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/07/31/suspicious-data-pattern-in-recent-venezuelan-election/)
903 points|kgwgk|5 months ago|470 commentsBayesian Statistics: The three cultures (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/07/10/three-cultures-bayes-subjective-objective-pragmatic/)
309 points|luu|5 months ago|109 commentsThe immediate victims of a con would rather act as if the con never happened (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/01/07/french-bio-lab-research-scandal/)
230 points|Tomte|1 year ago|140 commentsBad stuff going down at the American Sociological Association (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/01/17/bad-stuff-going-down-at-the-american-sociological-association/)
129 points|Tomte|1 year ago|116 commentsThose correction notices, in full (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/11/24/those-correction-notices-in-full-yes-its-possible-to-directly-admit-and-learn-from-error/)
128 points|Tomte|1 month ago|35 commentsDean of Engineering at University of Nevada wrote a paper that’s bad (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/02/06/its-bezzle-time-the-dean-of-engineering-at-the-university-of-nevada-gets-paid-372127-a-year-and-wrote-a-paper-thats-so-bad-you-cant-believe-it-i-mean-really-you-have-to-take-a-look-at-t/)
123 points|Tomte|11 months ago|79 commentsDefining Statistical Models in Jax? (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/10/08/defining-statistical-models-in-jax/#comments)
118 points|hackandthink|3 months ago|18 commentsCritique of Freakonomics interview with psychologist Ellen Langer (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/10/28/freakonomics-does-it-again-not-in-a-good-way-jeez-these-guys-are-credulous/)
94 points|nabla9|2 months ago|82 commentsRefuted papers continue to be cited more than their failed replications (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/03/10/refuted-papers-continue-to-be-cited-more-than-their-failed-replications-can-a-new-search-engine-be-built-that-will-fix-this-problem/)
79 points|nabla9|10 months ago|34 commentsWell-known paradox of R-squared is still buggin me (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/06/17/this-well-known-paradox-of-r-squared-is-still-buggin-me-can-you-help-me-out/)
71 points|luu|6 months ago|103 commentsLevels of fraud: One-time, Linear, and Exponential (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/09/27/3-levels-of-fraud-one-time-linear-and-exponential/)
4 points|Tomte|3 months ago|0 commentsYou can guarantee that the term “statistical guarantee” will irritate me (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/07/05/you-can-guarantee-that-the-term-statistical-guarantee-will-irritate-me-heres-why-and-lets-go-into-some-details/)
4 points|Tomte|6 months ago|0 commentsIs it really “the economy, stupid”? (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/05/11/is-it-really-the-economy-stupid/)
4 points|munichpavel|8 months ago|0 commentsWhat are the best scientific papers ever written? (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/06/09/what-are-the-best-scientific-papers-ever-written/)
4 points|reqo|9 months ago|0 commentsZotero now features retraction notices (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/03/12/zotero-now-features-retraction-notices/)
4 points|Tomte|10 months ago|0 comments“the income of the average American will double approximately every 39 years”? (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/05/15/the-income-of-the-average-american-will-double-approximately-every-39-years-who-says-that-sort-of-thing-show-some-respect-for-uncertainty-dude/)
3 points|luu|7 months ago|2 commentsPrediction markets and the need for “dumb money” as well as “smart money” (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/10/25/prediction-markets-and-the-need-for-dumb-money-as-well-as-smart-money/)
3 points|nabla9|2 months ago|1 commentsIf you want to play tennis at the top level there’s a benefit to being ____ (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/09/06/meritocracy-and-womens-tennis/)
3 points|noelwelsh|4 months ago|1 commentsWhy bother engaging outside reviewers at all? (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/12/14/the-most-interesting-part-of-the-story-is-that-the-publisher-went-through-all-these-steps-of-reviewing-and-revising-if-they-just-want-to-make-money-by-publishing-crap-why-bother-engaging-outside-re/)
3 points|Tomte|16 days ago|0 commentsChatGPT o1-preview can code Stan (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/10/22/chatgpt-o1-preview-can-code-stan/)
3 points|lr0|2 months ago|0 commentsSean Carroll/Ellen Langer: Credulous, scientist-as-hero reporting (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/10/19/carroll-langer-credulous-scientist-as-hero-reporting-from-a-podcaster-who-should-know-better/)
3 points|nabla9|2 months ago|0 commentsFreakonomics asks, “Why is there so much fraud in academia,” missing one reason (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/09/14/freakonomics-asks-why-is-there-so-much-fraud-in-academia-but-without-addressing-one-big-incentive-for-fraud-which-is-that-if-you-make-grabby-enough-claims-you-can-get-features-in-freako/)
3 points|nabla9|4 months ago|0 commentsGoogle is violating the First Law of Robotics (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/07/16/google-is-violating-the-first-law-of-robotics/)
3 points|nabla9|6 months ago|0 commentsBest way to understand how a method works? Construct scenarios where it fails (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/05/25/break-it-to-grok-it-the-best-way-to-understand-how-a-method-works-is-go-construct-scenarios-where-it-fails/)
3 points|rossdavidh|7 months ago|0 commentsInfovis, Infographics, and Data Visualization (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/04/18/infovis-infographics-and-data-visualization-my-thoughts-12-years-later/)
3 points|Tomte|9 months ago|0 commentsWhat is the prevalence of bad social science? (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/04/06/what-is-the-prevalence-of-bad-social-science/)
3 points|Tomte|9 months ago|0 commentsThe Contrapositive of “Politics and the English Language.” (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/03/25/the-contrapositive-of-politics-and-the-english-language-one-reason-writing-is-hard/)
3 points|luu|9 months ago|0 commentsThe Contrapositive of “Politics and the English Language.” (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/03/25/the-contrapositive-of-politics-and-the-english-language-one-reason-writing-is-hard/)
3 points|Tomte|9 months ago|0 commentsHow can a top scientist be so confidently wrong? (2022) (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2022/06/08/how-can-a-top-scientist-be-so-confidently-wrong-r-a-fisher-and-smoking-example/)
3 points|EndXA|10 months ago|0 commentsMichael Lewis (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/02/22/michael-lewis/)
3 points|luu|10 months ago|0 commentsIs Matthew Walker’s “Why We Sleep” Riddled with Scientific/Factual Errors? (2019) (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2019/11/18/is-matthew-walkers-why-we-sleep-riddled-with-scientific-and-factual-errors/)
3 points|Tomte|10 months ago|0 commentsClinical trials that are designed to fail (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/02/11/clinical-trials-that-are-designed-to-fail/)
3 points|Tomte|11 months ago|0 commentsNumber of inline code comments is zero. Nada. Zilch. Nil. Naught (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/02/07/when-all-else-fails-add-a-code-comment/)
3 points|thaumasiotes|11 months ago|0 commentsThe Onion (ok, an Onion-affiliate site) is plagiarizing. For reals (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/01/01/the-onion-ok-an-onion-affiliate-site-is-plagiarizing/)
3 points|Tomte|1 year ago|0 commentsThe rise and fall of Seth Roberts and the Shangri-La diet (2023) (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2023/11/20/the-rise-and-fall-of-seth-roberts-and-the-shangri-la-diet/)
2 points|sowbug|1 month ago|1 commentsPrediction markets need dumb money as well as smart money (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/10/25/prediction-markets-and-the-need-for-dumb-money-as-well-as-smart-money/)
2 points|johndcook|2 months ago|1 commentsWhassup with those economists who predicted a recession that then didn’t happen? (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/05/31/whassup-with-those-economists-who-predicted-a-recession-that-then-didnt-happen/)
2 points|_pfco|7 months ago|1 commentsHarvard time baby: completely botched data but you don’t change your conclusions (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/12/12/harvard-lexicon-kerfuffle-is-what-you-call-it-when-you-completely-botched-your-data-but-you-dont-want-to-change-your-conclusions/)
2 points|nabla9|17 days ago|0 commentsWhat it takes to conclude that a research seam has been mined to exhaustion (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/11/26/i-wonder-just-what-it-takes-to-get-people-to-conclude-that-a-research-seam-has-been-mined-to-the-point-of-exhaustion/)
2 points|domofutu|1 month ago|0 commentsAndrew Gelman is not the science police because there is no science police (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/11/21/andrew-gelman-is-not-the-science-police-because-there-is-no-such-thing-as-the-science-police/)
2 points|Tomte|1 month ago|0 comments
I guess I should be thanking kgwgk, luu, nabla9, Tomte, and the rest of the gang for linking to us! It’s interesting how many of the links come from the same few Hacker News participants.
Also, I don’t know what these “points” represent. 2 points doesn’t sound like a lot, which is kind of a bummer . . . I put so much effort into writing these posts, I’d always appreciate more readers!
Pretty sure the points represent upvotes from users. I would guess that more people read the post (from a hackernews link) than upvote. But the number of upvotes can influence if something will reach the front page. And the front page gets most of the eyeballs. So unless your post gets to the front page, they likely won’t be seeing it and hence won’t upvote. It’s that viral kind of phenomenon, and authors aren’t always good at figuring out which of their pieces will go viral (a criticism of the “just write the viral ones” advice).
Ahhh, the rich-get-richer phenomenon. Which benefits me, at least within academia: people are likely to read my articles because they’ve already heard of me. Then again, I’ve been at this for 40 years . . .
When I had a blog (many years ago), I loved going through the server logs. Maybe I’m mad. But there was a lot of interesting data there, for example how much traffic seemed to be bots. I could see the mysteries of the algorithm at work, when Google would rank one of the posts highly for certain keywords. The most depressing result was that readership was a “power law” and highly dependent on a few high-traffic sites (meet the new boss, same as the old boss), otherwise there were very few readers.
Seth:
I’m sure I’d be interested in my server logs too. The “madness” is that then I’d be inclined to try to figure out how to get more readers. I think I’m better of not knowing, so that way I can just write what I want to write (fortunately for me, I get paid enough that I can do this “for free”; or, to put it another way, I can do this as part of my paid employment).
I think you are making the right call there. It ends up degrading your content to chase popularity. Read someone who refused to accept YT or SS “monetization” for the same reason. He knew it would end up skewing what he wrote.