511–520 of 577 posts
Podcast Addict is not only the best podcast client but one of the best apps available.
Sorry I don't have anything substantive to add to the conversation, just wanted to add my vote for Podcast Addict.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the USA? The pressure comes entirely from their straight-from-college activist workforce, with nothing to do and no vision to aim for they've degenerated into constant virtue signalling of the form "we are so intelligent, we must use our intelligence to save the world from bad people/republicans". Google didn't used to be like this. Remember the glory days of organising the world's information, to make it universa…
Back when most people who worked there were adults Are you aware of the fact that Google was literally founded by two college kids?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think there is a legitimate reason and I’ve cited how those comments were factually accurate. You might disagree with the comparison but I don’t think we are likely to see eye to on that, which is fine. :) However I still object to you twisting my words to something far more sinister then they’re clearly intended. That’s simply not good debating.
There were comments with facts, but whether they supported the point being made was arguable. If the facts are irrelevant, it's not a great pity to see a downvote. And yeah, that disagreement is fine. But you need to understand that I am not trying to twist your words at all. I see those two things as synonyms. No twisting is intended. And for you to say "far more sinister then they’re clearly intended" sounds like a…
“Deliberate” and “malicious” is another example of related but terms that are not synonyms.
Whereas “mindless” was entirely fabricated by you.
You can’t just swap out words for more emotive terms and assume that was the writers original intent. Especially when you then go on to use those new, more highly charged words, as part of your complaint against the original comment.
I can also see for your post history ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23229973) that you don’t like it when you feel misquoted yourself, so why do the same to others?
My favorite (and only) podcasting app. I hope someone who works at Google reads this and flag it internally. This quote really sums up how ridiculous Google is being: > What Google is asking of Podcast Addict would be comparable to Google asking a web browser app to remove references to all the websites and social media posts that reference the coronavirus unless the reference comes from an official government entity…
> asking a web browser app to remove references to all the websites and social media posts Except usually a web browser doesn't include a index of sites, You go to a another site (Google/Bing) for that. If a browser does include "recommended sites" the landing pages of those sites best keep to Google's and Apples rules. For an extreme example, If Firefox was promoting PornHub on the new tab page we could understand w…
You mean sites like the BBC? That's where all the COVID-19 related content I have listened to with Podcast Addict came from. Is the BBC supposed to kowtow to Google's self serving rules and propaganda?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> asking a web browser app to remove references to all the websites and social media posts Except usually a web browser doesn't include a index of sites, You go to a another site (Google/Bing) for that. If a browser does include "recommended sites" the landing pages of those sites best keep to Google's and Apples rules. For an extreme example, If Firefox was promoting PornHub on the new tab page we could understand w…
> > asking a web browser app to remove references to all the websites and social media posts > Except usually a web browser doesn't include a index of sites, You go to a another site (Google/Bing) for that. OK then, it is like asking a search/video/advertising company to remove all such references from its search, and hosted videos, and other properties, and banning their apps & services until they do. I don't see th…
Why? It's not as if no one in Google knew that this would happen. I don't think Grace Hopper's 'Better to ask forgiveness than permission' applies here. Google knew what they were doing when they instituted the rule and their behaviour suggests malice aforethought.
(googler, opinions are my own). Looks like the appeal was accepted[0]. As well, Google's SVP of Android/Chrome/ChromeOS/PlayStore apologized to the Podcast Addict team[1]. [0] https://twitter.com/PodcastAddict/status/1262541050817605632 [1] https://twitter.com/PodcastAddict/status/1262562502417641473
Or is Google leaving their process unchanged in the hope that the next thing to be unreasonably suppressed will evoke less outrage?
(googler, opinions are my own). Looks like the appeal was accepted[0]. As well, Google's SVP of Android/Chrome/ChromeOS/PlayStore apologized to the Podcast Addict team[1]. [0] https://twitter.com/PodcastAddict/status/1262541050817605632 [1] https://twitter.com/PodcastAddict/status/1262562502417641473
What action is being taken to prevent similar foolishness in the future? Or is Google leaving their process unchanged in the hope that the next thing to be unreasonably suppressed will evoke less outrage?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No I’m just amazed that people are willing to give government more power - the same government who would like nothing more than to have more power to intrude on people’s life.
We're advocating moving this power from massive corporations to the government, because at least the government has some accountability, whereas Google has NONE.
Google is a publicly listed company. Members of the public, either directly or indirectly partially own Google. Google has a duty towards its shareholders. Isn't that some accountability?
I know that not everyone owns Google stock. But I'm guessing hundreds of thousands of people do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There were comments with facts, but whether they supported the point being made was arguable. If the facts are irrelevant, it's not a great pity to see a downvote. And yeah, that disagreement is fine. But you need to understand that I am not trying to twist your words at all. I see those two things as synonyms. No twisting is intended. And for you to say "far more sinister then they’re clearly intended" sounds like a…
“Disagree” and “hate” are not synonyms. They’re related terms but they don’t mean the same thing and are intended to express different extremes of sentiment. “Deliberate” and “malicious” is another example of related but terms that are not synonyms. Whereas “mindless” was entirely fabricated by you. You can’t just swap out words for more emotive terms and assume that was the writers original intent. Especially when y…
My post was only talking about disagreement as expressed by downvoting. I was not using disagreement as a synonym for hate.
> “Deliberate” and “malicious” is another example of related but terms that are not synonyms.
I wasn't saying they were. I feel like you're greatly misunderstanding my posts or something.
> Whereas “mindless” was entirely fabricated by you.
So what motivation were you implying, when you talked about it being a "great pity that all the factual comments" about the policy were being downvoted?
I wasn't swapping out your own words for other words. You never explicitly said what the motivation was, so I did my best to convert that into words. You're telling me I did that wrong, fine, but it wasn't on purpose. You tell me what words I should use there, to talk about the motivation of those downvoters.
> I can also see for your post history ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23229973) that you don’t like it when you feel misquoted yourself, so why do the same to others?
What a weird flex. They weren't quoting me at all.