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

Teddit: a free and open-source Reddit front end focused on privacy

teddit.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 312 posts

Re: Teddit: a free and open-source Reddit front end focused on privacy

#191

Post by chiefalchemist »

grishka wrote: post #45
sdan wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Title Content tag allows you to do that iirc. I use it on my site and works fine to hide things that you can expand upon when clicked.

Another way is to use the checkbox-and-CSS trick. You add a hidden checkbox next to the element you want to hide, add a label to trigger the checkbox, and then use a + selector to toggle the visibility based on the state of the checkbox. Like this: Toggle spoiler Spoilery stuff goes here #spoiler, #spoilerContent{display: none;} #spoiler:checked+#spoilerContent{display: block;} You can also use a variation of this fo…

Yes. But I believe details / summary is considered more accessible. Since its in the spec it's something AT has or is working towards.

Re: Teddit: a free and open-source Reddit front end focused on privacy

#192

Post by forest_dweller »

VWWHFSfQ wrote: post #24
gkoberger wrote: post #4

There's a weird paradox... I believe in privacy/free speech/etc, however any social media targeted at those usecases tend to be a cesspool of horribleness.

eg: voat vs reddit when reddit started banning objectionable subs edit: it is even more true than I thought. Look at the homepage of https://voat.co at your own risk.

Well of course this was going to happen. If you remove "objectionable subs" (which is arbitary as I will explain below), the first place they will move is the places that won't remove them and then people say "look see this is what happens when you don't do moderation, this place is toxic man". Well of course they are going to be concentrated on the sites that don't have stasi like moderation. This has to be some form confirmation bias.

Btw what is a "objectionable content" can be completely arbitrary e.g. a subreddit that was a criticism of consumer culture was removed, there was nothing on there that could be considered objectionable. I won't even get into the removal of criticisms of the Chinese Communist Party since Chinese companies own a large stake in reddit now.

Re: Teddit: a free and open-source Reddit front end focused on privacy

#193

Post by SahAssar »

grishka wrote: post #45
sdan wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Title Content tag allows you to do that iirc. I use it on my site and works fine to hide things that you can expand upon when clicked.

Another way is to use the checkbox-and-CSS trick. You add a hidden checkbox next to the element you want to hide, add a label to trigger the checkbox, and then use a + selector to toggle the visibility based on the state of the checkbox. Like this: Toggle spoiler Spoilery stuff goes here #spoiler, #spoilerContent{display: none;} #spoiler:checked+#spoilerContent{display: block;} You can also use a variation of this fo…

IIRC that will mess up screenreaders though. The detail tag is specifically made for this sort of thing and is therefore almost certainly more accessible.

Re: Teddit: a free and open-source Reddit front end focused on privacy

#194

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

m463 wrote: post #25

No cruft, no cdn domains and no javascript . I gave up on reddit a couple years back, but this might make me rethink. With so many things turning to mud, this is a good thing. What I cannot figure out is how they do the [-] show/hide stuff without javascript? Even hacker news - which is relatively lightweight - uses javascript for that. EDIT: ...and I'm back. It's like eating a box of candy for dinner - sugar rush an…

"... no javascript."

This is why I hang around on HN. Only place I know where I can find other people who agree that today's use of Javascript, 9 times out of 10, amounts to a nusiance.

The show/hide design pattern is annoying, IMO. Should be an accessibility violation; cannot tab through it.

I guess thats why I use a text-only browser. Avoids all the Javscript nonsense, not to mention the next CSS trick du jour.

Re: Teddit: a free and open-source Reddit front end focused on privacy

#195

Post by forest_dweller »

prox wrote: post #180
gkoberger wrote: post #4

There's a weird paradox... I believe in privacy/free speech/etc, however any social media targeted at those usecases tend to be a cesspool of horribleness.

As someone who has moderated various irc channels, mostly about debating / philosophical issues for years, there is a lot of confusion about the dialectic between free speech and moderation. That is to say, I like to compare a room/channel/sub a bit like a cafe where you never know who is going to walk in. It might be nice folks looking for a pleasant discussion, but it could be drunken brawlers high on their drug of…

I don't doubt that has been your experience. However there are several things that some would take issue with.

The first being your framing. The discussion is frequently framed in the following manner: Complaints about having their content remove or discussion groups removed is some sort of nazi-larping shitposter or other undesirable looking to cause trouble. I am sure there are quite a few that may fit into that, but you cannot lump all complainants into that category because it just isn't true.

The second is that is fundamentally doesn't address the actual complaint itself. When people are complaining about removal of content on social media, they aren't actually complaining about the rules per se. They are complaining about how they feel the rules are enforced.

Frequently the compliants are (but not limited to):

* That enforcement of the rules is applied arbitrarily and overwhelmingly favours one particular group based on the personal politics of the moderators. Whether that is true or not is another matter, they perceive it to be so and this isn't frequently addressed.

* Context is frequently ignored within a discussion and because it has certain verboten terms it is removed. This is true because this has happened when content in the UK have been removed because people have used local colloquisms that are considered offensive outside of those communities but not within them.

e.g.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/faggots-peas...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7911927/Meat-lover-...

* Enforcement is more lenient if someone is well-known (a presumably makes signifcant income for the site and themselves).

Re: Teddit: a free and open-source Reddit front end focused on privacy

#196

Post by Bayart »

gkoberger wrote: post #4

There's a weird paradox... I believe in privacy/free speech/etc, however any social media targeted at those usecases tend to be a cesspool of horribleness.

Well, the majority of those adopting these types of platform are people so insufferable they've been pushed out everywhere else rather than Ye Olde Neckbeard.

Re: Teddit: a free and open-source Reddit front end focused on privacy

#198

Post by implements »

gruez wrote: post #76
Kye wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can post it somewhere with standards of evidence if they want to be taken seriously. Why waste time looking into it on the off chance it has more veracity than everything around it?

The logic around these election fraud posts usually goes something like this: 1. something "suspicious" is presented 2. only conclusion must be election fraud, no explanations to the contrary is explored or accepted 3. go to step 1, preferably before the "MSM" debunks the first instance. You can try this yourself: try to find any election fraud claim from 2+ weeks ago that turned out to be "legit".

A glaringly obvious logic fail is “any apparent fraudulent behaviour must be on behalf of the winner” - er, no - it would be much more likely for the intended benefit of the less ethically sound candidate.

(Which one that would be in this case is an exercise left for the reader)

Re: Teddit: a free and open-source Reddit front end focused on privacy

#199

Post by zepearl »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #48
llbeansandrice wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh no way. Going to have to use this

Somehow it takes 4 seconds to un-collapse a toplevel comment in Chrome. E.g. this one: https://teddit.net/r/Bossfight/comments/k6vh5v/bearers_of_th... Pages also seem to take around 10 seconds to do the initial render. No server problem, just rendering. So if you do use this, I guess don't overdo it. :) Or at least profile. I use a 2015 MBP potato laptop. I guess my perf problems aren't really relevant. But it handle…

On Linux instantaneous in Firefox (78.5.0), takes forever in Chrome (87.0.4280.66) while using 100% of one CPU core/thread (I killed the tab after ~1 minute).

Re: Teddit: a free and open-source Reddit front end focused on privacy

#200

Post by NosyHammock »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #48
llbeansandrice wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh no way. Going to have to use this

Somehow it takes 4 seconds to un-collapse a toplevel comment in Chrome. E.g. this one: https://teddit.net/r/Bossfight/comments/k6vh5v/bearers_of_th... Pages also seem to take around 10 seconds to do the initial render. No server problem, just rendering. So if you do use this, I guess don't overdo it. :) Or at least profile. I use a 2015 MBP potato laptop. I guess my perf problems aren't really relevant. But it handle…

Dev here. This is a known issue. https://codeberg.org/teddit/teddit/issues/24

So far I haven't come up with any solution. The nested .comment styles seemed not be the problem. Although something in the CSS triggers the slow rendering on Chromium based browsers – not sure yet what.

If any of you have an idea, leave a comment here or in Teddit, appreciated!

EDIT: Oh, forgot to say: Works fine in Firefox, no rendering issues.

Post reply on HN