Live data from Hacker News

Extremist group tries to game Digg

blogs.alternet.org

111–120 of 127 posts

Re: Extremist group tries to game Digg

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're seriously comparing a movie review and a well articulated op-ed piece about where our debt comes from to sites like this (the ones listed in the article about Google censoring 'conservative e-zines')? http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/ "Jesse Norton aka Younes Abdullah, How Did Your Conference Go At RM? You Know, The One With Convicted Terrorist Omar The Goat Humping Bakri Muhammed?" http://www.michnews.com/Alan_Caruba/a…

"well articulated op-ed piece about where our debt comes" This was an okay article and an opinion on where our debt comes from. I was merely pointing out the blogs and opinion pieces do get into google news. As for the links you just posted: I may not agree with any of the content, but they are also just opinions (and not much worse than the links I posted) The reason you don't want them posted is because you don't a…

I have no opinion of whether or not they should be excluded. In fact, one of the sites listed as "banned" (I have no way to substantiate this) was actually a decent news source with little to no understandably objectionable content: http://www.newmediajournal.us/

EDIT: I should say that I am interested in this inasmuch as it relates to Google censoring news. Having not found any evidence of censorship and having found evidence of actively selecting only quality content, my opinion is that they were right to exclude the blogs listed and it has nothing to do with whatever political beliefs I might hold.

No, the reason I think they were excluded from Google was because of examples like I posted. "Goat humping" has no place in a news feed. Likewise, comparing Islam to Nazi germany is not only in bad taste, it makes almost no sense. Framing this as an ideological debate when it is one of quality of information is nonsensical.

As to your last point, I think it's extremely important that both sides of this ridiculous debate get to talk to one another. Hopefully, if everyone is willing, we'll be able to work together and build a nation together that is tolerant of informed opinion and intolerant of those whose only goal is to inflame, incite and misinform.

Re: Extremist group tries to game Digg

#112
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's hard to tell whether these folks were submitting quality stories with a different slant, or were actively submitting crap. If I may quote from the article quoting the conspiracy's users about the submissions of 'these folks' > "If any of the usual suspects subbed a story claiming “sky blue/water wet,” I’d BURY IT without question. I’ve been on digg for almost 4 years… > -JeremiahLaments (account says Joined Di…

Right, that's the content they're getting rid of. But that says nothing about the content they're posting. If it's freep threads, that's unfortunate; if it's links to GNXP.com or Paul Romer, or touting Angelo Codevilla's new essay ( http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16/americas-ruling-cla... -- read it!), that's something completely different. To someone who disagrees with all of it, Codevilla is just Glenn Beck…

If they're exercising such intellectually dishonest and, to me at least, morally deficient behavior with suppressing other stories ("even if you agree with it"), then any content they post is probably of similar character.

Regarding "someone should have asked a conservative", that just goes to show how deeply the "we'll just believe our own facts, thank you" is embedded in the conservative movement. http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page. Not that liberals are always right or anything, but you can ask 10 liberals and get 20 answers, or you can ask 10 conservatives and get 1 answer.

Re: Extremist group tries to game Digg

#113

This is slightly off topic, but why do people do things like this? I don't understand why anyone would go to such lengths to do something like this. I just don't get it. I see people around me fighting over parking spaces. I see people holding conferences on how to fight over parking spaces (that guy is muscling in!). I see people do the same for roughly every damn topic in this world, and sometimes it gets really me…

Fighting for parking spaces... you might be surprised how underhanded even that can get. The state of California has a rule in the vehicle code about abandoned cars. It's clearly intended to deal with cars people just walk away from (without intent of coming back), and perhaps some that are left in unsafe places (on the freeway etc.) The code mentions the court system addressing some aspects of it. The city of San Lu…

while there is some validity to your argument, there is a reason for this strict code.

i went to school in San Luis. i know two people who left their cars parked on the street after finding out that fixing the car would cost more than the car itself.

the first two years i was in San Luis, i lived at a place that charged for parking. i would park my car on the street and leave it there for weeks until i needed to go visit my folks in the central valley. i did not have the problem you are describing even when i left the car unmoved for 3 weeks at a time.

Re: Extremist group tries to game Digg

#114
post #107
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're speaking nonsense. "Power to the people" is a completely empty PR phrase at Digg.

No, power to the people as a philosophically-organizing principle was quite popular around the time Digg was created. The idea is that the big problem with the world is that the control is all in the hands of $WRONG_GROUP and the correct solution is just to democratically hand all the power out to your userbase and it'll all just magically work because you've solved the underlying problem. The error of this thinking…

I was there (check the profile). "Power to the People" was entirely a marketing/PR construct.

Re: Extremist group tries to game Digg

#115
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of stuff (both sides) is why politics should be kept as far as possible away from Hacker News.

Maybe... At least I've got the impression that on HN reactions are way more professional, I see people here actually listening to the arguments of others and that's the least you need to keep things quiet. Most people here keep extremism out here anyway. Emotional arguments don't succeed to gain traction, you have to be factual and nuanced to gain respect here, and as far as I see blind extremism doesn't get that far…

Sorry, as a Flash supporter I've often encountered the opposite experience on HN. Logical arguments supporting Flash are pushed down into the neg, while profanity-laden anti-Flash rants score high.

Re: Extremist group tries to game Digg

#116

This is slightly off topic, but why do people do things like this? I don't understand why anyone would go to such lengths to do something like this. I just don't get it. I see people around me fighting over parking spaces. I see people holding conferences on how to fight over parking spaces (that guy is muscling in!). I see people do the same for roughly every damn topic in this world, and sometimes it gets really me…

The quote at the top of this article, from one of the people involved is literally "I’ll continue to bury their submissions until they change their ways and become conservatives," which makes me think that maybe they just don't understand how the internet works?

Re: Extremist group tries to game Digg

#117
post #71
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, reddit started that way too. It doesn't last long.

On HN the fear is "Are we turning into Reddit?". On Reddit the comparison used to be Digg. (I left three years ago, so I don't know what happened in the mean time.)

It's to 4chan now. With pride, usually.

Re: Extremist group tries to game Digg

#118
post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fighting for parking spaces... you might be surprised how underhanded even that can get. The state of California has a rule in the vehicle code about abandoned cars. It's clearly intended to deal with cars people just walk away from (without intent of coming back), and perhaps some that are left in unsafe places (on the freeway etc.) The code mentions the court system addressing some aspects of it. The city of San Lu…

while there is some validity to your argument, there is a reason for this strict code. i went to school in San Luis. i know two people who left their cars parked on the street after finding out that fixing the car would cost more than the car itself. the first two years i was in San Luis, i lived at a place that charged for parking. i would park my car on the street and leave it there for weeks until i needed to go v…

The enforcement is primarily complaint driven. It does catch some legit cases of abandonment, but also sees abuse.

Although the state vehicle code section cited in their paperwork mentions the court, the actual process of dealing with SLOPD or the parking people DENIES access to the court. Appeals go to the same people that issued the towing order.

Except for a home, a car is the largest investment that great many Americans make. There's notice to ones' mailbox before towing. A person that's ill or otherwise not using a car for legitimate reasons may very well not see a notice on the car. The fine is more than that for parking in a handicapped zone or for any other parking violation. They're unwilling to work with the community to solve problems. For instance I once had someone park across my driveway which is less obvious than most (especially at night) and I called the PD asking if they could help me by contacting the neighbor (I didn't know which apartment he was in) so he could move his car. It wasn't an immediate problem. They said sure. But when an officer showed up, he refused to go to the neighbor and instead had the car towed. They didn't make me happy, and I'm sure they didn't make the owner of the car happy. The solution was worse than the problem.

If they had 72 hour parking signs up and simply issued tickets with the right to go to court, it'd all be fair. But to put someone through some very expensive grief without due process is just wrong. Also, as you noted, the enforcement is spotty. It's often selective enforcement. It may not be bias on the part of an officer, but the complaint process is open to bias too. Someone of lower income with an older car is more likely to be targeted simply because a neighbor doesn't like seeing an older car, or some assume an older car isn't operational.

San Luis has many people that are very environmentally conscious. Many ride bikes, walk, take a bus or car pool. Some students rarely drive except to see family or buy food. Being parked for a period is not abandonment, and the state code used here has no time limit. The city is misapplying the law selectively. It is being applied to some people that have no intention of abandoning their vehicles. There is no opportunity to appeal towing/impound fees at all and only improper means are available (not to a court) to appeal the citation that follows.

Additionally, towing is overkill when in a residential zone. Extended parking downtown (in an area typically metered) reduces availability of parking in a saturated area. But in a residential area, a car that's parked continuously for a couple of weeks versus one that's used a few times during the day has no difference in impact because it's overnight (when essentially everyone is sleeping) that parking is closest to saturation. Someone towed and subjected to that cost and the impound release fee when it is not an abandoned car will most likely bring it right back to the same area it was towed from. So what's the point of towing?

Beyond simply being parked, there should be some pretty good additional reason to believe a car is intentionally abandoned. Not currently registered, owner failed to give valid address, flat tires... Issue a ticket with right to appeal, send certified mail to registered address... if the car is by the registered address maybe even knock on a door. The city employees and PD get huge salaries. Perhaps in the things they do they need policies modified to solve problems with the least possible harm. The refusal to knock on a neighbors door when he parked across my driveway by accident makes it clear just how unwilling to help they can be.

You never got cited. If you'd done something (could be trivial - rude when a party gets a noise complaint) they could throw the book at you for other things. Just laws don't make ordinary citizens into criminals that can be harassed and emotionally / financially damaged with no appeal. (and I said, a neighbor upset with you could easily have caused the same grief, it is often arbitrary enforcement where there is no actual problem)

Re: Extremist group tries to game Digg

#119
post #60

Are they different from Slashdot moderators?

Well Slashdot posts never get removed, just modded down (below the thresholds some users may read at, but they have a choice). The meta-moderation process should help catch abusive moderation and reduce the frequency of bad moderators getting mod points.

Since the moderation system isn't for down-rating posts that one disagrees with, the system get still get flooded with well-tempered deliberate misinformation.

Would MS pay people to post "I tried for days to get my Linux install to work right, but the buggy drivers made my screen flicker so much my dog had a seizure and died. I'm sticking with Windows forever!"? Fun for moderators...

Re: Extremist group tries to game Digg

#120
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of stuff (both sides) is why politics should be kept as far as possible away from Hacker News.

Maybe... At least I've got the impression that on HN reactions are way more professional, I see people here actually listening to the arguments of others and that's the least you need to keep things quiet. Most people here keep extremism out here anyway. Emotional arguments don't succeed to gain traction, you have to be factual and nuanced to gain respect here, and as far as I see blind extremism doesn't get that far…

I'd argue that HN's professionalism is due to the fact that most of us use our real names (or at least make it easy for people to identify us) and most of the other commenters here are potential future colleagues.

I'm just as guilty as the next person of saying something rude on HN every now and then, but for the most part I and I suspect most others do our best to make substantive contributions to the discussions here.

Post reply on HN