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

The Pirate Bay is counting down

178.175.135.122

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–119 of 119 posts

Re: The Pirate Bay is counting down

#111

Post by zo1 »

purzlbaum wrote: post #74
nathanb wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any evidence that they're doing anything sleazy? This seems like a crackpot conspiracy theory, not actual news.

No it's really like that. Advertisers habe the possibility to get white listed. But they have to pay for it.

And this feature can be disabled in the extension:

Tools->AddOns->AdblocPlus Options->Filter Preferences->Allow some non-intrusive advertising

You can untick it, and right next to it are two links. One is to a link describing the non-intrusive ads and the other is to the actual white-list:

https://adblockplus.org/en/acceptable-ads https://easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/exceptionrules.tx...

I didn't realize this was on for me. But to tell you the truth, I have never seen any of these advertisements. So either they were so unnoticeable/rare or they really were completely non-intrusive.

I personally have no problem with this. As long as they keep the ads non-intrusive as it appears they have up until now, I will continue to allow it as it has made my web browsing completely annoyance-free from ads.

Re: The Pirate Bay is counting down

#112

Post by laumars »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #110
laumars wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because it was wrong. ...and once again you've failed to specify why it was wrong. Simply stating something to be wrong is a worthless comment. Provide an reason; or citation if it's necessary. I'm open to correction if you can provide a counter argument. Though on this occasion I can say with certainty that I'm right about Comic Sans being non-free ( http://www.microsoft.com/typography/fonts/font.aspx?FMID=35 ) an…

@font-face is not a solution that works 100% of the time. I'm not sure how to back that up, it's a basic fact. Someone was being cheeky about ensuring comic sans. You replied by 'correcting' them with something that wouldn't in fact ensure comic sans. It was wrong and not particularly useful, and it had a good amount of missing-the-joke, so it got downvoted.

I didn't say it works 100% of time. (See my other comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8832776) and I did say that I wasn't sure if that was a joke or not from the offset (text isn't always easy to judge sarcasm)

So basically what you are saying is you down voted me because you misread my post (and frankly, even if I did categorically state what you thought I said, I still think your reason would have been somewhat petty)

This is why people shouldn't down vote without leaving a reply first. :)

Re: The Pirate Bay is counting down

#113

Post by Dylan16807 »

laumars wrote: post #112
Dylan16807 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

@font-face is not a solution that works 100% of the time. I'm not sure how to back that up, it's a basic fact. Someone was being cheeky about ensuring comic sans. You replied by 'correcting' them with something that wouldn't in fact ensure comic sans. It was wrong and not particularly useful, and it had a good amount of missing-the-joke, so it got downvoted.

I didn't say it works 100% of time. (See my other comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8832776 ) and I did say that I wasn't sure if that was a joke or not from the offset (text isn't always easy to judge sarcasm) So basically what you are saying is you down voted me because you misread my post (and frankly, even if I did categorically state what you thought I said, I still think your reason would have…

>I didn't say it works 100% of time. (See my other comment

When you reply to 'ensures' then by default you are talking about ensuring. There are plenty of ways for hosted fonts to fail, even in supported browsers. And when you talk about fallbacks with 'at least' you have missed the point that an image format is comic sans or bust, never an inferior font.

>I did say that I wasn't sure if that was a joke or not

Being aware that you missed a joke doesn't make a joke-missing comment better.

>This is why people shouldn't down vote without leaving a reply first. :)

So you can pedantically argue about being right rather than accept that your comment wasn't as helpful as you thought? Seems like a net negative to me.

>somewhat petty

I suppose. It depends on whether you think downvotes are necessarily a rebuke.

>So basically what you are saying is you down voted me because you misread my post

I didn't downvote you. What an unfortunate misreading. ;)

Re: The Pirate Bay is counting down

#114

Post by laumars »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #113
laumars wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't say it works 100% of time. (See my other comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8832776 ) and I did say that I wasn't sure if that was a joke or not from the offset (text isn't always easy to judge sarcasm) So basically what you are saying is you down voted me because you misread my post (and frankly, even if I did categorically state what you thought I said, I still think your reason would have…

>I didn't say it works 100% of time. (See my other comment When you reply to 'ensures' then by default you are talking about ensuring. There are plenty of ways for hosted fonts to fail, even in supported browsers. And when you talk about fallbacks with 'at least' you have missed the point that an image format is comic sans or bust, never an inferior font. >I did say that I wasn't sure if that was a joke or not Being…

Now you're just arguing for the sake of arguing:

1. I didn't say "ensures" and commenting that the context carries over from the previous comment while also arguing it's a joke that shouldn't be taken literally is just daft.

Plus, as I'd already said, images aren't 100% supported either, so the 100% figure you're pining for doesn't exist anyway.

2. My comments have at least been informative, unlike the kind of non-constructive arguing and hit-and-run moderation you seen keen on promoting.

Your compliant seems to just be that I did not replied to a joke with a joke. Personally I don't think that's enough for negative karma, but opinions obviously differ on this. :)

3. You are arguing about me being pedantic while basing your entire rebuttal on fringe cases. Does that not strike you as a little hypothetical?

4. Making the assumption that you down voted me isn't a misreading when I specifically requested those that did down vote me to discuss why. You were effectively confessing to the act. However I am grateful that someone has elelaborate on why I would have received negative reputation, even if that was from someone who was reasoning about another's motives :)

Re: The Pirate Bay is counting down

#115

Post by tomp »

krapp wrote: post #82
alextgordon wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ads are a form of manipulation that somehow we have been convinced is acceptable for the mere act of reading.

Almost every form of communication between people is an attempt at manipulation. For instance, your comment is attempting to manipulate people into seeing advertising is a form of brainwashing. As attempts at manipulation go, though, advertising is at least up front and overt about its intentions. Can anyone say the same about politics, the media, even Hacker News?

I disagree; all communication has a purpose, but manipulation is communication that intentionally conceals it's true purpose and tries to deceive you. For example, saying "buy tickets for concert of band X at venue Y at time Z" or "if you have haemorrhoids, buy drug W", are "good", non-manipulative ads. On the other hand, "click here to earn 1000 a day", "you are 1000th visitor, you win", or displaying an image of a happy family in an attempt to anchor your brand to the viewer's idea of happiness is "bad", manipulative kind of advertising.

I don't oppose "good" advertising; I just think it should be limited (to information boards, Google, Craigslist, ...). However, most advertising is the bad kind, and I categorically oppose it.

Re: The Pirate Bay is counting down

#116

Post by Dylan16807 »

laumars wrote: post #114
Dylan16807 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I didn't say it works 100% of time. (See my other comment When you reply to 'ensures' then by default you are talking about ensuring. There are plenty of ways for hosted fonts to fail, even in supported browsers. And when you talk about fallbacks with 'at least' you have missed the point that an image format is comic sans or bust, never an inferior font. >I did say that I wasn't sure if that was a joke or not Being…

Now you're just arguing for the sake of arguing: 1. I didn't say "ensures" and commenting that the context carries over from the previous comment while also arguing it's a joke that shouldn't be taken literally is just daft. Plus, as I'd already said, images aren't 100% supported either, so the 100% figure you're pining for doesn't exist anyway. 2. My comments have at least been informative, unlike the kind of non-co…

You made a technical correction. It's just daft to say that your reply doesn't have to meet the same standards as the comment you're replying to. Joking doesn't matter when you're deliberately making a serious reply.

Image ensures that it's comic sans if it works at all.

Downvotes don't waste space, I don't see the issue. You're the one asking for meta comments.

You care way too much about karma for a single comment, you have plenty. And yes don't reply to a joke by correcting it to nobody's benefit.

"Browsers suck" is not a fringe case. And I don't think it's hypocritical to use pedantry in response to pedantry, which you started by 'correcting' a practice that works just fine here.

Re: The Pirate Bay is counting down

#117

Post by laumars »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #116
laumars wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now you're just arguing for the sake of arguing: 1. I didn't say "ensures" and commenting that the context carries over from the previous comment while also arguing it's a joke that shouldn't be taken literally is just daft. Plus, as I'd already said, images aren't 100% supported either, so the 100% figure you're pining for doesn't exist anyway. 2. My comments have at least been informative, unlike the kind of non-co…

You made a technical correction. It's just daft to say that your reply doesn't have to meet the same standards as the comment you're replying to. Joking doesn't matter when you're deliberately making a serious reply. Image ensures that it's comic sans if it works at all. Downvotes don't waste space, I don't see the issue. You're the one asking for meta comments. You care way too much about karma for a single comment,…

> "Browsers suck" is not a fringe case.

Eh? edit: oh, you think a sizeable market share of browsers don't support @font-face? Well you'd be wrong about that as well. Heck, even Google don't support browsers that pre-date @font-face.

> And I don't think it's hypocritical to use pedantry in response to pedantry

It is: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=define:hypocacy#q=define:h...

> which you started by 'correcting' a practice that works just fine here.

It wasn't a correction, it was an expansion. I wasn't trying to disprove the original comment, just offer an alternative.

You seem to make a habit of misreading my comments - which is ironic when the whole reason you're kicking off is because you felt I misread a joke.

Re: The Pirate Bay is counting down

#118

Post by Dylan16807 »

laumars wrote: post #117
Dylan16807 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You made a technical correction. It's just daft to say that your reply doesn't have to meet the same standards as the comment you're replying to. Joking doesn't matter when you're deliberately making a serious reply. Image ensures that it's comic sans if it works at all. Downvotes don't waste space, I don't see the issue. You're the one asking for meta comments. You care way too much about karma for a single comment,…

> "Browsers suck" is not a fringe case. Eh? edit: oh, you think a sizeable market share of browsers don't support @font-face? Well you'd be wrong about that as well. Heck, even Google don't support browsers that pre-date @font-face. > And I don't think it's hypocritical to use pedantry in response to pedantry It is: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=define:hypocacy#q=define:h... > which you started by 'correcting' a…

I was going to look for a better counter but simply typing '@font' into google autocompleted with '@font-face not working' :>

Anyway, your original comment was judged by the community to not be contributing to the conversation when you expanded or whatever you call it. So downvotes. No big deal.

Re: The Pirate Bay is counting down

#119

Post by laumars »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #118
laumars wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Browsers suck" is not a fringe case. Eh? edit: oh, you think a sizeable market share of browsers don't support @font-face? Well you'd be wrong about that as well. Heck, even Google don't support browsers that pre-date @font-face. > And I don't think it's hypocritical to use pedantry in response to pedantry It is: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=define:hypocacy#q=define:h... > which you started by 'correcting' a…

I was going to look for a better counter but simply typing '@font' into google autocompleted with '@font-face not working' :> Anyway, your original comment was judged by the community to not be contributing to the conversation when you expanded or whatever you call it. So downvotes. No big deal.

That Google gets you developer questions such CSS properties being used incorrectly or CDNs not issuing cross domain headers. Which is easily fixable by the web site developers / sysadmins and thus isn't remotely the same thing as the web browsers themselves not supporting @font-face.

There's a great many subjects I'm ignorant on, but I do know what I'm talking about here. So you're wasting your time trying to prove that I was wrong about @font-face.

The joke point you made at least makes some sense - even if I personally think it's a petty reason on its own. But everyones judgement will differ. :)

Post reply on HN