> It's a trick I learned from pg for keeping the focus on content rather than personalities.
IMO none of us would’ve bothered reading this if it were just some random person’s commencement address. I personally would’ve been bummed if I skipped this post just because I didn’t find the nonsense title (nonsense unless you read the article) interesting enough.
A number of people would likely have recognised the title and publication date and inferred authorship. The piece is well-known.
I don't fully agree with HN's views on authorship. It's often inferrable through domain names (which serve as something of an authorship proxy, and are often weighted internally to HN's ranking algorithm). I'd much prefer there was more metadata on articles, and remember Slashdot's practice of providing a brief summary blurb with some fondness. (Slashdot itself is sadly largely irrelevant, at least for discussion. As an article aggregator it has ... some uses.)
Also included in his memoirs starting with “Surely you must be joking, Mr Feynman!”, well worth reading if you can get over the occasional sexist bits.
