341–350 of 447 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
0.02% of a big number ... is still a big number 0.02% of 10,000 is 2 - pretty small 0.02% of 1,000,000,000 is 200,000 ... kinda big :)
In my opinion, absolute value is not important here, what matters is the fraction. I consider 0.02% to be large by itself for the given context.
It seems “it’s a private platform and they can do what they want” only applies when the mob wants [insert social network]’s undesirable behavior.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my opinion, absolute value is not important here, what matters is the fraction. I consider 0.02% to be large by itself for the given context.
What would be small?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trustful souls may not. Those who have been advised to do so, through the Guidelines, FAQ, comments, or moderator notes, do, to their advantage. (I'd had a submission shadowbanned as it came from the notoriously flameworthy site LinkedIn a month or few back. I noticed this, emailed the mods, and got that post un-banned. Just to note that the process is in place, and does work.)
You don't see the harm of elbowing out trustful people from the public square?
I've done this on multiple occasions, e.g.: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36191005>
As I commented above, HN operates through indirect and oblique means. Ultimately it is is a social site managed through culture. And the way that this culture is expressed and communicated is largely through various communications --- the site FAQ and guidelines, dang's very, very, very many moderation comments. Searching for his comments with "please" is a good way to find those, though you can simply browse his comment history:
- "please" by dang: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=pastYear&page=0&prefix=tru...>
- dang's comment history: https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=dang>
Yes, it means that people's feelings get hurt. I started off here (a dozen years ago) feeling somewhat the outsider. I've come to understand and appreciate the site. It's maintained both operation and quality for some sixteen years, which is an amazing run. If you go back through history, say, a decade ago, quality and topicality of both posts and discussions are remarkably stable: https://news.ycombinator.com/front?day=2013-08-14>.
If you do have further concerns, raise them with dang via email: He does respond, he's quite patient, might take a day or two for a more complex issue, but it will happen.
And yes, it's slow, inefficient, and lossy. But, again as the site's history shows, it mostly just works, and changing that would be a glaring case of Chesterton's Fence: https://hn.algolia.com/?q=chesterton%27s+fence>.
Worth pointing out that t.co has always been an instance of an annoying and seemingly unjustified practice I named "nonsemantic redirect". Rather than legitimately redirecting using an HTTP Location header, it instead is an HTML page with a META refresh tag on it. You don't see this with curl/wget because they use user agent sniffing. If they don't think you're a browser they _will_ give you a Location header. To see…
No, in fact now t.co even returns an empty body with it's 301 response: % curl -vgsSw' &1 | grep '^
> You don't see this with curl/wget because they use user agent sniffing. If they don't think you're a browser they _will_ give you a Location header. To see it, capture a request in Firefox developer tools, right click on the request, copy as CURL.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't see the harm of elbowing out trustful people from the public square?
What we do is try to educate them and loop them back in. I've done this on multiple occasions, e.g.: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36191005 > As I commented above, HN operates through indirect and oblique means. Ultimately it is is a social site managed through culture . And the way that this culture is expressed and communicated is largely through various communications --- the site FAQ and guidelines, dang's…
But that's selective education. You don't do it for every shadow moderated comment. The trend is still that shadow moderation more often disadvantages trustful users. Will you acknowledge that harm?
Over 50% of Reddit users have a removed comment in their recent history that they likely were not told about. When shadow moderation is in play, abuse runs rampant among both mods and users. Both find more and more reasons to distrust each other.
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...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What would be small?
This is subjective, but for me here a small fraction would be a few orders of magnitude less than that - few ten-millionths or less.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you explain what the intended/expected outcome is for this? What is accomplished by doing that?
The purpose is so that Twitter is seen as the source of the traffic. A lot of Twitter-sourced traffic comes from native apps, so when people click links from tweets, they usually don’t send referrer information. If the redirects were server side (setting the Location header), a blank referrer remains blank. Client side redirects will set the referral value. From Twitter’s POV, there’s value in more fully conveying ho…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is subjective, but for me here a small fraction would be a few orders of magnitude less than that - few ten-millionths or less.
Exactly, it is subjective, 0.02% is small in my opinion. Yet I'm getting downvoted and told that isn't small. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯