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

381–390 of 447 posts

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

#381

Post by dontupvoteme »

altairprime wrote: post #114
vasco wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Suggestions welcome "This domain is not allowed on HN" as an error message upon submission.

That’s not going to work, because now that’s an API for spammers to bulk process against a domain list. The only available API must be human communication to the mod team, or the spammers will overcome it with automation.

That's trivial to figure out.

It's quite possible the reason the list isn't public is because it would give away information about what thought is allowed and what thought isn't.

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

#382

Post by deepserket »

adhesive_wombat wrote: post #140
jquery wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I almost didn't believe OP, because it's so comically inept and petty. But, I can also confirm in some private testing there is a deliberate delay.

Considering how common it is to deliberately break (not just with a "you log in now" modal, but not loading content, spinning forever, breaking layouts, etc) websites for non-logged-in mobile users, that's exactly how petty in imagine them to be. Twitter and Reddit do it, and Imgur comes and goes so I can't decide if for them it's deliberate or just incompetence.

You can add Instagram and YouTube to the list of websites that are painful to use from a mobile browser

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

#383

Post by rhaksw »

DamonHD wrote: post #379
rhaksw wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With spam email, the recipient has a chance to recover the mail by looking in their spam folder. No such spam folder is provided to the public on social media.

Note that in the GreetPause case the SPAMmer will not see the rejection errors since they don't look at the response to their hit and run (ie no one gets to see any error, neither sender nor target), and a legitimate sender should never get the error, so even this may be messy by your criteria I think!

> even this may be messy by your criteria I think!

Only if the recipient sent a false response.

If the response were misrepresented then I would object to the technique. But it doesn't sound like that's what happens.

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

#384

Post by dontupvoteme »

dang wrote: post #148
mutant_glofish wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how was the decision made to ban Federalist, but not say Guardian or The Daily Beast? Do you have any process in place to ensure that your political biases don't influence the list, or you don't care about that?

We don't have "processes" at HN. The idea makes my skin crawl. Plenty of both left- and right-wing sites are banned and/or downweighted on HN. When a site is primarily about political battle, we either ban it or downweight it. Which of the two we choose depends on how likely the site is to produce the occasional interesting article (in HN's sense of the word "interesting"). That's why The Federalist and World Workers…

Would you be open to publishing the down-weighting values if they're based on politics not spam?

This is the murkiest part to me since it's not just a binary flag.

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

#385

Post by [deleted] »

chasing wrote: post #19
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

Good. Hacker News isn't an open-ended political site for people to post weird propaganda.

[deleted]

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

#386

Post by raxxorraxor »

jquery wrote: post #378
raxxorraxor wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few are and understand that most of the time your are defending scoundrels. But there is a sizeable and probable larger group that very easily wants to suppress speech they do not like. There never was a case where to much freedom of speech has been a significant problem, contrary to the other way around. Next is misinformation and tomorrow you wonder why you cannot state your opinion anymore. A cycle that has been…

Do you get mad at google for automatically detecting and removing spam from your email inbox? For a lot of people, probably the majority, speech by scoundrels falls somewhere in that realm... there is simply no debate to be had about the basic humanity of certain classes of people. Capitalistic companies respond to this demand. That said, I agree the government probably shouldn't be involved here for the most part (s…

We are not talking about spam if that wasn't a rhetorical question. Advertising not wanting any controversy attached to their product placement is no solution and isn't desirable. This isn't done in the name of users.

That there are limited worker protections in countries is a different problem, but is certainly not inhibited by too much speech, quite the contrary it would worsen the situation further. Civil liberties never suffered because too much speech was allowed, so the perspective to err on the side of freedom is only logical.

> there is simply no debate to be had about the basic humanity of certain classes of people

That is just an invalid generalization.

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

#387

Post by raxxorraxor »

jquery wrote: post #377
oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> advocate at least, absolutist is more of a slur Those two are enormously different, though. I'd consider myself an advocate, just as anyone who believes in a fair and free democracy should. But I am very far from being an absolutist — and I have a secret suspicion that nobody actually is. Musk certainly isn't.

Spam is an intractable problem for any so called free speech absolutist. One person's spam could be another person's desired message. But if a platform is overrun with spam, it becomes unusable for genuine discourse. Maybe the biggest challenge is defining what constitutes "spam." While some cases seem clear-cut (e.g., repeated identical messages from bots, malware, phishing), others are quite subjective. Subtle mark…

Of course spam is also tracible. There might be difficulties for government to regulate it because of the legal context, but the solution is to hand the decision of filtering it to the user as long as that user doesn't decide for others.

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

#388

Post by raxxorraxor »

semi-extrinsic wrote: post #380
raxxorraxor wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I call myself a free speech absolutist (or advocate at least, absolutist is more of a slur). False compromises belong in the past. What X is doing isn't free speech at all and they have stated that advertisers will dictate what content will be seen, there is no commitment to freedom of speech at all. But at least I can hold them responsible for violating their own stated values. The former Twitter leadership just hid…

> Restricting speech is always in the interests of those that have the power to shape discussions, so limiting speech is always counter productive. This is not true. Restricting hate speech is an obvious counterexample.

It isn't obvious at all. It doesn't help for that matter, but that is secondary. On the contrary, it is just a popular excuse to restrict speech because nothing about hate speech is objective. We see bad legislation around the globe and that will never protect any minority.

It is a bad idea and damaging and there is ample empirical evidence for that.

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

#389

Post by DamonHD »

rhaksw wrote: post #383
DamonHD wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that in the GreetPause case the SPAMmer will not see the rejection errors since they don't look at the response to their hit and run (ie no one gets to see any error, neither sender nor target), and a legitimate sender should never get the error, so even this may be messy by your criteria I think!

> even this may be messy by your criteria I think! Only if the recipient sent a false response. If the response were misrepresented then I would object to the technique. But it doesn't sound like that's what happens.

OK, thanks!

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

#390

Post by sevenc_nanashi »

I just took a benchmark using hyperfine.

Not threads.net, cURL User-Agent: 224.3 ms

Not threads.net, Firefox User-Agent: 227.4 ms

threads.net, cURL User-Agent: 223.9 ms

threads.net, Firefox User-Agent: 2743 ms

Twitter is trying to hide this fact? (As they don't make delay w/o browser User-Agent)

(Full log: https://gist.github.com/sevenc-nanashi/c77d18df6a5f326b0d292...)

Post reply on HN