Almost all of her posts are about demystifying the "magical" parts of a modern system usong code and hacking on things.

There are lots of books we could all read instead, but she uses a great mix of explanations and code and has an approachable reading style.

She also uses tools that we might want to use, so it's less abstract.

I second this. To add: she writes with an enthusiastic tone, hence entertaining and I still learn something as a bonus. If I happen to already know the topic, then it's still entertaining to read and allows me to go back to basics with whatever she writes about.

I like Julia's posts enough to subscribe to her blog. Her posts on Hacker News also routinely generate extremely interesting, technical discussions. I enjoy both. Also, I don't know Julia except through her blog and twitter.

Perhaps because they post a lot of interesting stuff.

This article isn't stuff I didn't already know in some form, but now it's made me want to write a debugger! :)

User deafcalculus submits stories from a variety of sources.

The domain jvns.ca gets submitted by a variety of people. (Lots from ingve, but that user submits a lot of other stuff too.)

So it's probably that people post it, and other people upvote it.

Do you think it's something that is interesting?

Sometimes I find it interesting and honestly other times I don't think its in depth enough to be either interesting or discussion worthy. If I found every single post of theirs interesting I would just subscribe to their blog.

Yeah, some of her articles don't add much to what I already know, but I bet other people say the same thing about articles I find really interesting, and where I like that she starts with basics.

Many (maybe "more interesting") articles about deep details of something don't get much attention because you need a lot of previous knowledge to understand what is going on, that hurdle almost never happens with her articles. Introductory articles often get more attention that way.

And sometimes I notice that apparently I didn't know as much as I thought about the details...

It's not every single post. "How do HTTP requests get sent to the right place?" have been posted on HN (because anyone can do that) but not gotten more than a couple of votes. Some, like "PolyConf 2016," didn't get posted at all.

It's fine for you not to find every post on HN interesting or discussion-worthy. There are other people who are interested and having a good discussion.

HN's lack of sections is the real problem. So much interesting stuff gets submitted and drops off the first page of NEW because there is only so much stuff that can get to the front page. subreddits solve this, and another problem is that HN's outgrown its initially designated purpose. If HN wants to stay relevant, it deserves to have some features rethought.

It's amusing to see the downvotes for asking a question.

This just reinforces my suspicion that that this blogger's friends and coworkers are the reason a single blog constantly ends up on the front page of HN regardless of merit.

"Why is this here" questions are very boring and always get downvotes.

"I suspect vote rigging" accusations aren't nice. You should send them to mods at the email address rather than post them to the thread.

If you have genuine reason to believe this is the case, please email [email protected] and we can investigate, but please don't make such accusations in the discussion threads.

I don't know that person at all, but I've noticed that she writes good posts that are worth reading.

Hehe, "regardless of merit".

You really think her blog posts have undeserved merit? :-)