The HN comment that really bores me is the one that totally denigrates the project described in the link because it's "been done before", "won't work because X" where X is a woolly hypothetical, "doesn't solve Y" where it's blindingly obvious that Y is either incredibly hard or tangential to the point, or "could simply be done with just A, B and C" where A, B and C are some permutation of a raspberry pi, arduino, a kinect, some random combination of open source libraries, emacs and a blender.
There is benefit in new approaches to old problems. Incomplete attempts are still useful. Actually getting a project into a state that more than one person can use it, even if that use is just "Here, read the code. It doesn't work, but you might find it enlightening," is an effort worth respecting.
It's extremely rare that these comments have any worthwhile content in them. They seem to serve to point at the commenter's username and say "Aren't I clever for spotting the problems with your project?" What effect is that supposed to have past your own ego? You can't rewind the universe to a state where the project didn't happen, so why not take 3 minutes instead of 2 and find something positive to highlight rather than a negative to pick on?
To put an even finer point on it, one of the worst and most pervasive comments is of this type:
"This is a cat, but I like dogs, why isn't this a dog?"
Once you understand the type you start noticing it everywhere all the time. Any time there is a creative work there will always be someone complaining that it's not the thing they wanted created instead.
This isn't specific to HN though. You can see it on slashdot, reddit, and elsewhere -- basically anywhere people are free to post ideas or accomplishments.
Those kinds of replies always read to me in one of three ways:
1. "I wish I'd thought of this obvious application of X, and because I didn't I will denigrate it." Typical responses are as you described.
2. "I am special. I am more special than the person who posted this thing or had this idea, so I will discuss how neither the person who had this idea nor the idea itself aren't that special in a passive-aggressive way" These are especially common when the person originating the idea is exceptionally young or otherwise noteworthy.
3. "This person is not as smart as I am. I will prove it by attacking his or her idea." These replies are typified by off-the-cuff responses that outline one or more extremely obvious weaknesses in the idea/approach being discussed. Such responses ignore the likelihood that the person or people who have spent weeks/months/years formulating
the idea could have possibly considered such a basic flaw that the respondent spotted immediately.
There is also a fourth reply: genuine criticism of the idea, including suggestions on how to improve it. In fairness to HN, I see that type of reply more often here than anywhere else.
It would be cool if more people realized that someone else's intelligence and/or good ideas don't reduce the intelligence of other people, nor take away from the ideas of other people.
There is benefit in new approaches to old problems. Incomplete attempts are still useful. Actually getting a project into a state that more than one person can use it, even if that use is just "Here, read the code. It doesn't work, but you might find it enlightening," is an effort worth respecting.
It's extremely rare that these comments have any worthwhile content in them. They seem to serve to point at the commenter's username and say "Aren't I clever for spotting the problems with your project?" What effect is that supposed to have past your own ego? You can't rewind the universe to a state where the project didn't happen, so why not take 3 minutes instead of 2 and find something positive to highlight rather than a negative to pick on?