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

Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

play.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 547 posts

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#201

Post by TeMPOraL »

nostromo wrote: post #151
fireeyed wrote: post #22

There should be zero stars available for scamsters. Seriously this should be an option. Why should anyone give one star to a scamming firm Robbing Hood which has colluded with their backer Citadel. They have derogatory term for Retail Investors - Dumb Money. Now the 'Dumb Money' has figured out the the hedge funds'rigged game.

This is a pet peeve of mine about star ratings. Visually, allowing 1 to 5 stars inflates the way ratings look, because the first star is always present, even for the worst products. Imagine if it was pie chart or a bar chart: the lowest rating would look like 20%, not 0%. Or imagine a product where 50% of people gave it the lowest rating (1 star) and the rest gave it the highest rating (5 stars). This would be presen…

That's a consequence of the UI pattern - when you use the same widget as indicator and input, you need some way to represent "no vote yet" - plus, it would be hard to click/tap "no stars". It could be done better but alas, minimalism is the name of the game.

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#202

Post by worker767424 »

alangibson wrote: post #80

One of the good things I see coming out of Robinhood blocking trading, Twitter and Reddit booting problematic users, Parler getting vaporized, etc. is a sudden realization amongst people of just how easily major parts of their lives can be instantly turned off by intermediaries. My hope is that this will drive a reformist movement around digital rights (speech, commerce, etc.) As well as a movement from platforms to…

Throwing this out there, too: assorted government restrictions and lockdowns imposed by regional public health officials. The early ones were more justified because we knew less, but as the pandemic drug on, the burden of proof justifying closures needed to increase, and legislators needed to step up and legitimize the policies. It's like how the president can wage war for 90 days, but then has to get approval from congress.

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#203

Post by jackfoxy »

Most of the other brokerages (Schwab, Etrade, and TD Ameritrade, but NOT Fidelity and Vanguard according to the reports I am getting) are participating. According to the rumor on Reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/ClassActionRobinHood/comments/l723k... the call came from the White House.

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#204

Post by adoxyz »

ritchiea wrote: post #156
anm89 wrote: post #23

When retail in traders en masse decide that a trading platform is impinging upon their rights, the SEC should be obligated to open an investigation. Isn't this pretty much a major component of their intended purpose?

I've been reading WSB since yesterday and while I understand the outrage about blocking trading. They started blocking trading with $GME trading in the $400's, and a slew of redditors on WSB, Discord & Telegram pushing penny stocks. It started out a crusade against the hedge fund shorting $GME and quickly turned into rallying dumb money to pump and dump penny stocks. Looking at the direction things were going it seem…

Should Robinhood be an arbiter of what is a reasonable trade and what people can spend their money on? Because if so, they have a lot of restricting to do to keep people safe...

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#205

Post by zionic »

sebmellen wrote: post #153
alangibson wrote: post #80

One of the good things I see coming out of Robinhood blocking trading, Twitter and Reddit booting problematic users, Parler getting vaporized, etc. is a sudden realization amongst people of just how easily major parts of their lives can be instantly turned off by intermediaries. My hope is that this will drive a reformist movement around digital rights (speech, commerce, etc.) As well as a movement from platforms to…

There was a relevant document posted earlier today at this link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25942632 . "Protocols, Not Platforms: A Technological Approach to Free Speech (2019)" Article subtitle: > Altering the internet's economic and digital infrastructure to promote free speech I am somewhat skeptical of crypto, but I do hope that the DeFi ecosystem, 20 years in the future, will act as a democratizing for…

DeFi is a core component of my ETH bull hypothesis. All this decentralized activity requires the purchase of ETH to pay for/transact on.

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#206

Post by ziftface »

rvnx wrote: post #108

Not only they cheated their own users, they also artificially manipulated the market and that eventually defrauded users of other brokers who legitimately expected a buy pressure coming from Robinhood users. So, 1-star is even too much, jail time would be preferred.

I don't know what the next step is, but the fact that pretty much everyone knows that there will be no jail time despite them openly committing crimes to defraud so many people isn't going to lead us somewhere good.

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#207

Post by TeMPOraL »

afavour wrote: post #154
brink wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Parler incident sent a message across the tech industry that this kind of behavior is acceptable. Whether you liked Parler or not, the lynching of Parler was ultimately a loss for everyone for the precedent that it set.

I’m honestly very confused why people keep trying to draw a parallel between Parler and Robinhood. Beyond “big companies can do whatever they want” there really isn’t much in the way of comparison. And big companies doing what they want is something we’ve known about since around the time big companies first started to exist.

    Parler
  (deplatforming, service)
      |
      |
    Discord
  (deplatforming, WSB)
      |
      |
   Robin Hood
  (functional ban, WSB)
There similarities are not perfect, but enough to draw an analogy.

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#208

Post by dylan604 »

cromka wrote: post #21
xxpor wrote: post #8

I'm surprised the app stores (well, at least the play store) don't have hysteresis built in to prevent mobbing the ratings, just in general.

Why would they? They just need spam protection. If legitimate, independent users vote them down in thousands then why would an app need a protection?

If a dev releases an update that breaks the app or fundamentally alters the behavior of the app, why should users not be allowed to offer an updated rating based on those changes. If ratings are due to some recent change, then of course it will naturally look like a swarm. Nothing nefarious about it. Any kind of artificial disruption of the users being allowed to post their review is artificially protecting the dev.

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#209

Post by munk-a »

echelon wrote: post #163
alangibson wrote: post #80

One of the good things I see coming out of Robinhood blocking trading, Twitter and Reddit booting problematic users, Parler getting vaporized, etc. is a sudden realization amongst people of just how easily major parts of their lives can be instantly turned off by intermediaries. My hope is that this will drive a reformist movement around digital rights (speech, commerce, etc.) As well as a movement from platforms to…

Every time I mention this on Hacker News, I get downvoted by the neoliberal fascists that want to suppress the speech they feel comfortable with silencing. Free speech is only free if we allow all of it. Americans have thick skin. It's in our culture. We've accomplished so much in spite of internal disagreement and oppression: voting rights, women's rights, gay marriage (which still isn't enshrined in the constitutio…

> Free speech is only free if we allow all of it.

I am quite happy to see various platforms take on blocking commercial spam - this might be in their own interests (since they want to sell off the right to advertise rather than have people independently leverage their platform to spread advertising but I think it's fair to say that nearly no one wants completely unlimited speech.

I don't believe that the NYT should be required to print my novel into every sunday edition of their paper even if they do choose to print some letters to the editor - they have the right to choose what to print. A similar parallel was fax-vertising, where you send unsolicited faxes to random numbers in the hope that someone reads your flier and decides they want your services. Back in the day fax-vertising would result in a lot of paper waste since the fax would be instantly printed out, in the modern world people tend to screen incoming faxes, but it is still a problem... Your unlimited speech is causing someone to waste paper and ink to pay the cost of expressing your speech.

When it comes to digital information the cost goes way down and I agree that in this case the actions of social media platforms are pretty despicable but in all things we need to have balance.

(Also, please don't open up a statement by calling your detractors neoliberal facists - this isn't reddit)

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#210

Post by amelius »

nostromo wrote: post #151
fireeyed wrote: post #22

There should be zero stars available for scamsters. Seriously this should be an option. Why should anyone give one star to a scamming firm Robbing Hood which has colluded with their backer Citadel. They have derogatory term for Retail Investors - Dumb Money. Now the 'Dumb Money' has figured out the the hedge funds'rigged game.

This is a pet peeve of mine about star ratings. Visually, allowing 1 to 5 stars inflates the way ratings look, because the first star is always present, even for the worst products. Imagine if it was pie chart or a bar chart: the lowest rating would look like 20%, not 0%. Or imagine a product where 50% of people gave it the lowest rating (1 star) and the rest gave it the highest rating (5 stars). This would be presen…

Yeah but if I see 0 stars the result is that I'm assuming that there were no votes.
Post reply on HN