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

Tell HN: t.co is adding a five-second delay to some domains

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 447 posts

Re: Tell HN: t.co is adding a five-second delay to some domains

#321

Post by ajb »

JeremyNT wrote: post #212
ajb wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which instance? None of the ones I'm trying are working. Maybe it's regional

You can refer to the full list on the github page[0] (which I find to be pretty accurate). I personally use La Contre-Voie[1] for no particular reason. nitter.net was historically a little less reliable for me due to rate limiting, which is why I initially switched. They worked around the rate limiting issue now, so that may no longer be the case. [0] https://github.com/zedeus/nitter/wiki/Instances [1] https://nitter…

Thanks. Unfortunately, not having any luck with any of them, including lacontrevoie. Nitter.net gives a nim error, the others don't find any tweets

Re: Tell HN: t.co is adding a five-second delay to some domains

#322

Post by epistasis »

epistasis wrote: post #251

This is what I have come to expect from every person that calls themselves a "free speech absolutist." What they actually believe is that they should be able to say whatever they want and do whatever they want, personally, without any consequences for themselves. There is no grander principle than "my ability to do what I want and exert power over others however I want, without critique or criticism." I really wish t…

Update: hours after being exposed and publicized in the Washington Post, the behavior has stopped:

> On Tuesday afternoon, hours after this story was first published, X began reversing the throttling on some of the sites, dropping the delay times back to zero. It was unknown if all the throttled websites had normal service restored.

https://archive.is/2023.08.15-210250/https://www.washingtonp...

Re: Tell HN: t.co is adding a five-second delay to some domains

#323

Post by iguana_lawyer »

mutant_glofish wrote: post #18

I think that HN itself also shadow flags submissions from a list of domains it doesn't like. Try submitting a URL from the following domains, and it will be automatically flagged (but you can't see it's flagged unless you log out): - archive.is - watcher.guru - stacker.news - zerohedge.com - freebeacon.com - thefederalist.com - breitbart.com

Yeah. HN bans your favorite white supremacist blogs. I don’t see a problem with that.

Re: Tell HN: t.co is adding a five-second delay to some domains

#324

Post by nunez »

johngladtj wrote: post #201
dang wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want us to be user hostile. Can you link to some examples?

I would consider any moderation action that isn't visible to users to be user hostile. If you're going to censor someone, you owe it to them to be honest about what you're doing to them.

If it's visible, it can be worked around.

Blame the trolls that prevent us from having nice things.

Re: Tell HN: t.co is adding a five-second delay to some domains

#325

Post by DamonHD »

simonw wrote: post #256
johngladtj wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am fully aware of the issue. That's one of the costs with having a public website.

The HN moderation policies are clearly effective, because the site is mostly full of useful information that attracts a wide audience of readers. I really like this take on moderation: "The essential truth of every social network is that the product is content moderation, and everyone hates the people who decide how content moderation works. Content moderation is what Twitter makes — it is the thing that defines the…

We may not all be fans of Musk at the moment, but one of his observations about PayPal was that its job was not especially about payments because that bit was easy, it was about preventing fraud. And as the ex-director of a small payments system (e-money issuer), I agree. The bit which everyone outside the system doesn't realise is the hard bit is dealing with all the bad actors.

Re: Tell HN: t.co is adding a five-second delay to some domains

#326

Post by hackerlight »

graybeardhacker wrote: post #274

The solution to X (Twitter) sucking is to stop using it. It will either: get fixed or go out of business and be replaced. It seems we've become a society that rewards bad practices with attention which is all any company on the web is trying to get, your attention.

> It seems we've become a society that rewards bad practices with attention

I have a very different way of looking at this. It's not us that gives attention. It is them that take it via exploiting our evolved inflexible cognitive systems for attention/reward/desire/anger/lust. We are moths to a flame. The moth's free will isn't to blame for its inability to avoid it. Our cognitive systems are fixed, we can't just turn them off. If a sufficiently powerful dopamine-inducing technology is made, you can't just "opt out". It is not as simple as that. Any individual variation in the ability to opt out likely comes down to variation in genetics or other extraneous factors not inside one's immediate control.

This is where regulation needs to come in. Once you accept the reality that opting out is a comforting yet false illusion, you can then do something about it.

Re: Tell HN: t.co is adding a five-second delay to some domains

#327

Post by bravogamma »

dredmorbius wrote: post #300
bravogamma wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. Is it also true that users with certain karma count or special permissions have more significant - and potentially lasting - downvoting weight that impacts to the downvoted party's long term reputation?

I'm interpreting your question as "are there privileged HN members with supervotes", excluding moderators, and who can single-handedly kill submissions or comments. So far as I'm aware, no, and there are comments from dang and pg going back through the site history which argue strongly against distinguishing groups of profiles in any way. The one possible exception is that YC founder's handles appear orange to one an…

Thank you, dredmorbius, for this very helpful response. dang has mentioned a procedure or system that involves making guesses for the purpose of shadowbanning. I wonder if downvotes (edit: or post flags) from special users like the ones you mention are used as strong signals in that guess-making?

Re: Tell HN: t.co is adding a five-second delay to some domains

#328

Post by hackerlight »

BLKNSLVR wrote: post #102

I'd like to invoke Hanlon's razor here to at least cut down on the potential for over-the-top reactions that can be somewhat embarassing in retrospect: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

Hanlon's razor needs to be inverted when the person you're talking about has NPD. The assumption should be that there are sinister intentions until proven otherwise. You'll make better predictions about reality if you do that inversion.

Re: Tell HN: t.co is adding a five-second delay to some domains

#329

Post by rhaksw »

lossolo wrote: post #292
dang wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't forget to mention that - it's simply not what the word shadowban means, as I've always understood and used it. This is a big problem with trying to explain these things - people mean very different things by the same words, and it leads to misunderstanding.

Which other word do you think would be suitable here? In my view, 'shadowban' aligns with the definition in this context, as you aren't notifying people about it (hence 'shadow') and their actions of upvoting or downvoting have no impact (so same as shadowbanning comments or submissions etc).

I use the term "shadow moderation".

Re: Tell HN: t.co is adding a five-second delay to some domains

#330

Post by mdp2021 »

dang wrote: post #263
mdp2021 wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Understandable, but I think there should be some discriminating system for another class of sites, the "you can submit but not discuss" ones. For example, a recent submission (of mine): "Luis Buñuel: The Master of Film Surrealism" it had no discussion space because (I guess) it comes from fairobserver.com . Now, I understand that fairobserver.com may had been an hive of dubious publishing historically, but it makes l…

Oh I agree - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36924205 was a fine submission. Can you please email hn@ycombinator.com so I can send you a repost invite for it? That domain is a borderline case. Sometimes the leopard really changes its spots, i.e. a site goes from offtopic or spam to one that at least occasionally produces good-for-HN articles. In such cases we simply unban it. Other times, the general content is…

I have just spent a little time checking the Fair Observer, most recent articles.

I would say that it contains chiefly a political part and a cultural part. Some of the pieces in the political part can be apparently well done, informative and interesting, while some others are determined in just blurting out partisan views - arguments not included.

Incidentally: such "polarized literature" seems abundant in today's "globalized" world (where, owing to "strong differences", the sieve of acceptability can have very large gaps). It is also occasionally found here in posts on HN (one of the latest instances just a few browsed pages ago): the occasional post that just states "A is B" with no justification, no foundation for the statement, without realizing that were we interested in personal opinions there are ten billion sources available. And if we had to check them, unranked in filing, an image like Borges' La Biblioteca de Babel could appear: any opinion could be found in some point of the library.

Yes, I have (now) noticed a few contributors (some very prolific) in the Fair Observer are substantially propaganda writers.

But the cultural part, https://www.fairobserver.com/category/culture/ , seems to more consistently contain quality material, with some articles potentially especially interesting. In this area, I have probably seen more bias on some mainstream news outlets.

I think that revolution that is showing valid for journalism today includes this one magazine: the model of The Economist, of having a strong prestigious and selective editorial board (hence its traditional anonymity of the contributors), is now the exception, so you do not read the Magazine but the Journalist. The Magazine will today often publish articles from just anyone; the Reader has today the burden to select the Journalists and follow them.

--

I will write you in a few hours for the repost, thank you.

Post reply on HN