Reddit was founded in June 2005. Aaron founded Infogami, Infogami merged with Reddit in November 2005. When Conde Nast bought Reddit in 2006 they each got one third of the money. The other founders then fired Aaron in 2007. http://blogoscoped.com/archive/2007-05-07-n78.html
So they are technically correct. It shows though that --given the near martyr status Aaron has-- he is left out of the picture. Reddit are no rebbels, at least not anymore or "less so nowadays". I have most hopes for Lemmy[0] as a place for the more rebbel Redditors to seek refuge. Really cool project, advancing really nicely. [0]: https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy
Reddit’s About page doesn't include Aaron Swartz as a founder
221–230 of 313 posts
Re: Reddit’s About page doesn't include Aaron Swartz as a founder
#222Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless you’re willing to pay for it you can’t have social media that isn’t a real estate for ads or at least some sort of commercial interest. Arguably even HN despite being technically a pro-bono side project serves the commercial interest of YC (and possibly others) if it didn’t and especially if it would have a negative impact on them it wouldn’t be around. And HN is a very niche social media (if you can even call…
HN is a very strictly policed safe space.
This thread (along with all COVID threads) are weighted to sink very quickly. So you won't see them often, but when you do, there's a treasure of diversity of information and viewpoints. The best threads are the ones that start with a greyed out comment.
Re: Reddit’s About page doesn't include Aaron Swartz as a founder
#223Just the one question: alternatives? Not necessarily already established and crowded platform, but also free and open, privacy friendly ones that can be slowly brought to self sustaining levels by enthusiasts, so that they can attract normal users.
Chapo.chat is a popular one for leftists that formed after the chapo subreddits were censored/banned a couple months ago. Fair warning: most HN users aren't going to like it because they advocate for things like food and shelter and healthcare for everyone, no matter what
>Some people deserve their heads to be displayed on spikes
Re: Reddit’s About page doesn't include Aaron Swartz as a founder
#224Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the utterly ridiculous "paradox of tolerance" is just a bad cope for people who truly do not believe in free speech. "Free speech" which only applies to your predefined set of approved speech is not free speech, but a monstrous parody of it. The purpose of free speech is to enable dissent, not to affirm the status quo.
Sorry,free speech does not mean that private companies have to provide their resources and time to support your hate speech. It means that you, on public property, using your own resources, have the freedom to say what you want without reprisal from the government. But even that should have limits, especially when your “free speech” limits the right to liberty and prosperity of others (most isms).
Re: Reddit’s About page doesn't include Aaron Swartz as a founder
#225Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the utterly ridiculous "paradox of tolerance" is just a bad cope for people who truly do not believe in free speech. "Free speech" which only applies to your predefined set of approved speech is not free speech, but a monstrous parody of it. The purpose of free speech is to enable dissent, not to affirm the status quo.
Nonsense. Do you think movies of child abuse are "free speech", or recruitment/instruction videos tot terrorist organizations, or inciting violence and hate? What about Assange, he published some stuff, could that be free speech? Or violations of copyright? To me free speech is like free markets. The word does not adequately cover the implementation as boundaries do apply. There are little to non truly free markets (…
https://battlepenguin.com/politics/why-i-no-longer-hate-amer...
Remember, at one time, saying homosexuality was okay was considered dangerous, hateful, flawed and needed to be banned. Saying god didn't exist could get you expelled from a university, excommunicated from your community or killed.
You only view some speech as okay today because you don't understand what some people went through to fight for that idea.
Assange is clearly free speech. However leaking that information is a crime if you're a member of the US military (hence Manning; maliciously prosecuted by Obama, and then also symbolically freed by Obama).
The NYT published information about Trump's taxes. That's free speech. The Person who leaked it committed a Federal crime. (technically NYT may be guilty of a crime here too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrvYNfsAgJY)
Re: Reddit’s About page doesn't include Aaron Swartz as a founder
#226For what its worth, Spez was caught abusing his admin access to secretly edit comments in the past, including other people's comments who he disagreed with politically. I would doubt any comment posted on reddit where Spez has stake in, as he might have just changed the story sometime down the line.
Re: Reddit’s About page doesn't include Aaron Swartz as a founder
#227I hope we get a good alternative to Reddit. Their governance issues aside, their disdain for web and open systems have made me not use the platform anymore. It has been sad to see the platform become worse.
Re: Reddit’s About page doesn't include Aaron Swartz as a founder
#228Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume those not banned subs are still there and you can link them. Because whole ton of subs were banned, not just Donald and not just right wing.
[1] is an example of a hate sub against men that's not banned by reddit. But [2] is just a group of men who have decided to never date, marry etc. is quarantined because somehow that is hate. Also how are women a minority when they are 50% of the population? Baffles me. 1 https://www.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/ 2 https://www.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/
[1] https://old.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/i3dqzi/very_superfic...
[2] https://old.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/iwaqm5/we_equality_n...
Re: Reddit’s About page doesn't include Aaron Swartz as a founder
#229Note that on the Wikipedia page for Chris Slowe [3], another person who joined Reddit very early on, he is also described as a co-founder, but he doesn't appear on the About page, even though there's been no public falling out between him and Steve/Alexis (he stayed at Reddit post-acquisition, then jumped to Hipmunk with Steve, and is now back at Reddit).
The thing is, for any company that makes it big, there will be ambiguity over whether particular people are considered founders vs early employees vs key people post a merger or acquisition.
But for the sake of the origin story, the simplest is the best: two longtime friends wanted to start a company together, so they sought out Paul Graham, got into the first YC batch, started working on Reddit and got it to its early growth and success, then continued on-and-off running/directing the company even through to this day; it makes sense to call those guys the founders.
None of this detracts from Aaron's legacy. He achieved a huge amount in his life, and his time/role at Reddit seems minor compared to other things he did.
[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/1octb/reddit_co...
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/1octb/reddit_co...
Re: Reddit’s About page doesn't include Aaron Swartz as a founder
#230Earlier quoted context omitted.
TBH the platform itself doesn’t lend particularly well to free speech by penalizing unpopular opinions through karma. Ironically I think HN is worse in this regard by greying out posts once they get to -1, I often find out that sorting by controversial on many topics gives you the most interesting read on reddit. I would actually love if both HN and Reddit allowed you to see a Karma graph for each post.
Any upvote/downvote concept on online content is flawed because it does not show the historical score of a post over time. Even here on HN I can post something during GMT business hours that gets scored based on the views of HN's readership at that time, but when the US wakes up the score can change dramatically. Essentially, the US west coast can have the 'final say' because of its timezone and probably larger user…
1. It favors people who are more careless with their votes. If pro-Coke users only downvote poor comments and upvote well crafted ones regardless of beverage choice, and pro-Pepsi users downvote any pro-Coke comment and upvote any pro-Pepsi one, you're going to have pro-Pepsi comments at the top and pro-Coke comments at the bottom. The better behaved group is going to have less of an impact.
2. It favors people who skim and read carelessly. If you're reading the original article, if you're taking time to fully read someone's comments, if you're taking time to see who they are reply to and the context, your voting output is going to be less than someone who quickly skims things and carelessly throws out upvotes and downvotes.
3. It favors individuals that spend all their time online over ones that have a more balanced life. There is simply going to be more votes coming from terminally online people. This is particularly an issue in cases where you have to pass the filter of people who vote on new submissions in order to get to the front page.
4. It favors group think. There are a lot of people who think that a top comment must have some validity, and that a downvoted comment must have some problem with it.
5. It can give people a skewed idea of where the community stands. Even if everyone in the community had an equal impact on things, a 45%-55% split in the community could still leave someone with the impression that one view is completely supported in the community while another is almost universally rejected.
They don't. As the earlier points indicate, a small minority drives the conversation, and posting habits outside of the upvote/downvote system play a huge roll as well.