Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Reddit is still in turmoil

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 521 posts

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#431

Post by steveklabnik »

makomk wrote: post #368
rmc wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"right wing" or "far right wing". Remember we're talking about literal neo-nazis here, not just Conservatives.

No, we're talking about applying the violence historically used against literal fascist marches against people online he's declared to be his enemies, because "the only things fascists respond to is violence". We're talking about an online culture where it doesn't matter if the targets are actually neo-Nazis or conservatives or anything else, because disputing any accusation against them no matter how trivially falsi…

I wasn't planning on jumping in on this thread, but I will leave one (and only one) comment here, just to make this crystal clear:

I have no advocated that anyone commit violence against "people online [I've] declared to be [my enemies]." In fact, in the thread you're linking to, right above the archived tweet, I say that I don't know what an anti-fascist movement in tech looks like. And today, years later, I still do not. But if you were ask me "hey Steve let's start a street fight with GamerGate, what do you think?" my first comment would be "what?" and my second comment would be "that sounds like a really dumb idea, don't do that."

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#432

Post by pavel_lishin »

tyleraldrich wrote: post #406
pavel_lishin wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think most game makers just put cheaters into a cheater-only pool of players.

I don't know of any game makers that do this. They probably should, like how Dota 2 will put players who abandon games often into games with other leavers, but most popular games go through "ban waves" to get rid of groups of cheaters at once (Valve has done this many times with CS: GO for example).

> I don't know of any game makers that do this.

Well, apparently Rockstar did this for Max Payne 3 in 2012, and apparently it also applies to GTA-V

http://www.rockstargames.com/newswire/article/35441/taking-a...

http://www.gta5tv.com/gta-v-cheaters-pool-details/

http://kotaku.com/gta-player-says-he-hired-cheater-to-rescue...

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#433

Post by vkou »

anjc wrote: post #235
ben_jones wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear that sentiment echoed a lot, but is their any hard evidence proving that a diverse staff increases the value significantly to the diverse demographics they themselves represent? WhatsApp is incredibly popular in South America and Africa, were their a proportionate number of South Americans and Africans on the WhatsApp team of ~18 people? Genuine question because I hear this preached like the bible whenever div…

Yeah, it's made-up bullshit which sounds like it makes sense. Enforced diversity is only a thing in the past few years, so you only have to think of....almost any mass-market product from before then to know it's untrue. It's funny to me that someone can say "having a diverse userbase is related to having a diverse workforce" with a straight face, while half the shit in their/everyone's home is Chinese and Japanese.

That explains why product localization is totally not a thing! Yet, ah, it is...

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#434

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

sbmassey wrote: post #266
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“The anti-fascists are the real fascists!” is a tired argument and it has been for more than 70 years, ever since that was said in actual Nazi Germany and the fascists proceeded to win.

Did anyone in Nazi Germany really claim that the anti-Nazis were the real Nazis or fascists or something? Sounds unlikely somehow.

Yep! The communists claimed the social democrats were fascists because they wanted to own the left, for example.

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#435

Post by stcredzero »

twblalock wrote: post #6

I think much of Reddit's problems with its userbase boil down to an early failure to manage expectations. It's pretty clear that the Reddit corporation doesn't want Reddit to be an anything-goes, absolute free speech zone with no moderation or anti-harassment policies -- but that's what the site actually was for many years. Now, when the company cracks down, users think their freedoms are being curtailed. The mistake…

It's pretty clear that the Reddit corporation doesn't want Reddit to be an anything-goes, absolute free speech zone with no moderation or anti-harassment policies -- but that's what the site actually was for many years. Now, when the company cracks down, users think their freedoms are being curtailed.

The change that came with moderation was very dramatic. It was basically cultural whiplash. It also accelerated the replacement of intellectualism and aesthetic freedom with groupthink and the same kind of web forum small mindedness you had in the early 2000's.

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#436

Post by gallonofmilk »

nommm-nommm wrote: post #301
gallonofmilk wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there is an inherent trade off though. would reddit have ever become so big and popular if it had enforced a strict conduct policy from day 1? many of the early users of reddit were not necessarily the mainstream "good" users that eventually came post-digg. it can be a distraction to focus on that early on when what's most important is user adoption...

>it can be a distraction to focus on that early on when what's most important is user adoption... Distraction? The wrong kind of initial user adaption will create a toxic community that excludes later users. Any community that goes unmoderated for long enough inevitably turns into a cesspool. The most important users are the initial adaptors, they form the basis of the expectations of the community.

yes exactly, and who were many of the initial users of reddit? I'm not saying it's not important, just that in the very early stages of a startup such as reddit was, it can be the wrong thing to focus on when you really need to get users first.

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#437

Post by Animats »

lazaroclapp wrote: post #170
Animats wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much does it really cost to run a forum system? Even a big one? Look at 4chan.

Well, I imagine Reddit costs far more than 4chan to run, not just because they store the content at perpetuity, but also because Reddit has actual employees, not just volunteers working out of the g... evil of their hearts. But, more importantly, how much Reddit costs to run , at their current scale, is immaterial. Reddit has raised $50 million in VC money and is valued at $500 million, that means that half a billion…

That means Reddit is trying to run a high-margin business in a low-margin space. As ad blockers get better, that may stop working. At one time, it was expensive to run a service with a large user base. Technology has progressed, and it no longer is.

Craigslist wiped the entire classified ad industry and much of the newspaper industry off the face of the earth merely by being the low-cost provider. Ad-supported businesses should be afraid. Very afraid.

As for Reddit, the VCs may have to take a haircut.

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#438

Post by wutbrodo »

brokenmachine wrote: post #128
wutbrodo wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My use of reddit is way own. I'm tired of going to the front page and seeing so many submissions about things I don't care about Why on Earth would you go to the Reddit frontpage? I stopped doing that like four years ago. Why not just create a Reddit account and avoid seeing the default subs on your frontpage? Reddit Gold has just about nothing to do with that.

It's still called the frontpage even if you're logged in. But yes, when you're logged in you only see the subreddits that you're subscribed to.

Right, I thought it was clear from context that I was referring to the defaults frontpage.

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#439

Post by dragonwriter »

sbmassey wrote: post #266
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“The anti-fascists are the real fascists!” is a tired argument and it has been for more than 70 years, ever since that was said in actual Nazi Germany and the fascists proceeded to win.

Did anyone in Nazi Germany really claim that the anti-Nazis were the real Nazis or fascists or something? Sounds unlikely somehow.

Well, if you replace "fascists"/"Nazis" with "totalitarian threat" -- the former is modern shorthand for the latter but obviously want used that way until after experience of their rule established that perception -- a big part of the Nazi schtick was portraying other groups that way (Communists, the supposed global Jewish conspiracy, etc.)

Re: Reddit is still in turmoil

#440

Post by nkurz »

reitanqild wrote: post #356
gohrt wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we more civilized when there is no anonymous free speech, and people are abusive only in semi-private situations?

I find HN and arstechnica.com a lot more civilized than the comments section on the major local newspaper. I have hypothesised that the reason is that without anonymity only * (trolls with) fake accounts * politically correct people and people who think they are pc * and people who don't care about real life reputation anyway post in any kind of controversial debate. Normal knowledgeable people doesn't want to lose t…

You missed:

* naive idealists who believe that truth and reason matter more than immediate public perception

This is subtly different than "people who don't care about real life reputation" in that they sincerely hope that despite any short term damage to reputation, in the long run others (or at least some subset) will come respect their honesty and rationality.

I'm probably naive and idealist, but at least on HN, I think this is a significant group. Although, am I reading correctly that you are considering HN to be "without anonymity"? In the current "persistent pseudonymous" system, what do you think constitutes a "fake account"?

Post reply on HN