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

Robinhood Play Store listing went from 329K reviews to 180K in few hours

play.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 613 posts

Re: Robinhood Play Store listing went from 329K reviews to 180K in few hours

#421

Post by alisonkisk »

sthnblllII wrote: post #384
creato wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like maybe the solution is not to remove reviews, but weight them somehow. 100k reviews left in 2 days probably shouldn't have the same weight as 100k reviews left over 2 years. Or a more sophisticated version of this would be to somehow cluster reviews based on the particular issue they are reporting.

Robinhood can kick people off, block trading certain stocks to help big players, etc. All ordinary people can do is leave a bad review and you want to take even that away. Why?

Because spam isn't helpful to other ordinary people browsing the store.

Re: Robinhood Play Store listing went from 329K reviews to 180K in few hours

#423

Post by Fjolsvith »

0-_-0 wrote: post #133
TeMPOraL wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me neither. This month is crazy with very visible examples of blatant, unethical overreach of prominent companies. This thing absolutely adds up in people's consciousness. Sure, it decays over time, but right now, it adds up faster.

Someone could become US president riding this public sentiment. Let's see if it decays in 4 years...

Scary to think that after four years of solid market gains it could implode because of retail investors getting angry.

Re: Robinhood Play Store listing went from 329K reviews to 180K in few hours

#424

Post by Fjolsvith »

partiallypro wrote: post #150
0-_-0 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone could become US president riding this public sentiment. Let's see if it decays in 4 years...

If you through Trump was bad, just wait until a competent version shows up

March 4th.

Re: Robinhood Play Store listing went from 329K reviews to 180K in few hours

#425

Post by bubblicious »

kerng wrote: post #219
simias wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a tough decision to make. In general I understand that Google would prevent review bombing, since it can very easily be abused by social media mobs or competitors. The point of reviews is to give a genuine idea of how people on average like a given app. Reviem bombing completely distorts that, whether it be 1-star or 5-star reviews. But here it's a pretty huge app, and the bombing is motivated by a real…

Not really. Many of people are rightfully upset and want to leave a 1 star review. It would be extremely inappropriate if Google removed my review. I think the app sucks if they can just prevent you from trading a stock and make you the bagholder in favor of large investors. Seems like a legitimate concern that hundred thousands of other people share - not some organized random prank. People are losing money as we sp…

Wouldn't you see a similar rise in app store reviews though? Seems like that wasn't the case?

Re: Robinhood Play Store listing went from 329K reviews to 180K in few hours

#426

Post by perryizgr8 »

Same thing happened for tiktok in India. When people are posting reviews that call out actual grievances suddenly these are "fake reviews". But everybody justifies such actions by Google/Apple saying they have a right to allow/disallow whatever they want on their platform, no obligation at all.

First they came for us, and you didn't speak out. Now they are coming for you.

Re: Robinhood Play Store listing went from 329K reviews to 180K in few hours

#427

Post by SllX »

zouhair wrote: post #257
SllX wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We need to start by making it illegal to be a billionaire. I’m listening. What does this law look like?

Taxes. I think most human beings can survive with 100 millions of dollars of wealth (it's more than one can spend in multiple lifetimes). Anything over that can just be taxed. The problem of letting any private entities get that rich is they start to take control of everything. One such example is The East India Company having at one point a bigger private army than the British Army[0]. As things go we will soon be a…

So you’re not making it illegal to be a billionaire, you’re just taking it in the form of raising revenue for the government.

Except government revenue serves a purpose: paying for government services and salaries. What do you do with the surplus cash?

What about when someone does not have a billion dollars in cash, but has billions in assets?

Flesh this out for me please.

Re: Robinhood Play Store listing went from 329K reviews to 180K in few hours

#428

Post by SllX »

imglorp wrote: post #264
SllX wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We need to start by making it illegal to be a billionaire. I’m listening. What does this law look like?

Someone on /r/latestagecapitalism pointed out if you seized everyone's excess billions above $1B, you could end world hunger for 216 years, end climate change by 2030, etc etc. Around 7.5 billion people on earth would probably agree to those benefits.

Sounds like something /r/latestagecapitalism would say and this wouldn’t be the first time they were wrong. Show me the work.

Re: Robinhood Play Store listing went from 329K reviews to 180K in few hours

#430

Post by rpdillon »

odessacubbage wrote: post #405
rpdillon wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Completely unmoderated reviews would be awful, which suggests moderation is necessary. Moderation requires judgment, and different people have different ideas about what good judgment looks like. Your question made me think about what a "real review" is. Should the person have used the app for more than a certain period of time? Do they need to have taken certain actions (make an account?) Different folks will draw l…

why do scores need to be simple? why not simply graph satisfaction over time and allow for demarcations like number of hours used. trying to apply a roger ebert scoring system to products and services that are ephemeral and ever-changing is largely meaningless. whether review bombing is legitimate or not, it at least always has a cause and that cause should be considered highly relevant purchasing information.

Totally agree...ratings could be quite sophisticated. In the end, I suspect that sophisticated scoring system would still need to draw lines that some will disagree with, and we'd be back where we are now.

Sophisticated scoring might also bring common critiques, like ratings being biased or opaque (or just confusing). I recall Netflix had a issue when they made their star rating a prediction of what you would rate it (based on your previous viewing habits). It confused a lot of people who thought it was simply the average star rating. They since switched to percent-match as a result, and dropped star-reviews in favor of thumbs-up/thumbs-down.

Come to think of it, your suggestion may lead to something like percent-match for apps...though I suspect rating apps along dimensions the way Netflix does TV/movies may be tricky. Maybe different dimensions for different categories in the app store?

I'm still intrigued by a distributed approach that filters opinion through the sieve of the social network...I think it has more promise than centralized rating systems that attract abuse.

Post reply on HN