571–580 of 613 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This seems a lot like giving the Amazon app one star because something was out of stock.
But nothing was "out of stock". They just decided you can't buy?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sadly for me a lot of the apps I've made I'm pretty happy with are filled with reviews that basically say "Sally in customer service was mean, 1 star".
That is part of the customer experience. If Google / Apple really wanted to, they could give more than one dimenion to score on. For example, a five star rating for app quality, fun, and customer service. That they don't shouldn't preclude customers from rating the entire experience.
Jan 28 2020 (14:05): 196,808 reviews (2.x star rating) https://web.archive.org/web/20210128140536/https://play.goog... Now: 180,500 reviews (4 star rating) https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.robinhood.... It seems like they just deleted all of today's ratings.
You can see it in the screenshot: https://ibb.co/PwLD7Sh
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given that 2021 is gearing up to become even weirder than 2020, it wouldn't surprise me if the next president was WallStreetBets' own /u/DeepFuckingValue...
I'd be down for asking someone from WallStreeBets to be my runningmate. Why DeepFuckingValue?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure what your point is here? yes, you can make your own ecosystem - what does that have to do with google being run by AIs? If I build my own, google will still be run by AIs? BTW - I find the easiest thing to do is just not use a cell phone. All I use my phone for is lyft and authy. Much easier then 'building my own'. edit: grammar
My point is related to the general consensus of HN over the past few weeks giving a pass to companies (Twitter/AWS/Facebook/etc) for taking extreme partisan political actions (e.g. banning Trump from Twitter, shutting down Parlor, etc). The generic response was "if you don't like how they handled it, you can build your own platform". So now I'm gauging if that statement still holds when the situation doesn't cut acro…
But, for what its worth - I think "if you don't like it - lump it" still holds. There are other systems with zero commissions beside RobinHood. For instance, I didn't notice Fidelity stopping any trades the couple of times I spot checked today.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> were there really 100k legitimate Robinhood accounts that were blocked from an HME buy to justify a bad review? According to Motherboard, the majority of RH accounts hold GME. There's also over 5 million subscribers to /r/wallstreetbets as we speak (most of them from this week). What percentage of those do you think would be "eligible" (according to your own criteria) to leave a legitimate review?
> According to Motherboard, the majority of RH accounts hold GME. They retracted that later. "Correction: An earlier version of this article stated that 56 percent of Robinhood users hold GME stock. This is incorrect, based on a misreading of a statistic on Robinhood. Motherboard regrets the error." See the bottom of: https://www.vice.com/en/article/m7ak7y/robinhood-stops-users... They haven't provided an updated val…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
that just means the reviews skew lower, not that they need to be 'corrected for'... If a good product has 1K 'bad reviews', and a crap product has 10K 'bad reviews' - the system it working. Anything else is just gaming the system to inflate review scores across the board.
When I shop for products on Amazon the problem is such that more or less all reviews are negative. In that case it doesn't matter if it's 1k or 10k, they simply drown out the positive/neutral reviews, even though I'm pretty safe to ignore the "this product was DOA" reviews. The review incentive structure is fundamentally broken.
if you feel only 3 star reviews are valuable, amazon lets you read just the 3 star reviews. If stuff is being 'drowned out' its because your trying to read all 500 pages of reviews?
To me, a much bigger problem is the fact that reviews on amazon are for totally different products then whats being sold (Sellers 'recycle' pages and change the product being sold - allowing them to keep the reviews and ratings)
So basically - I have to read the reviews 'most recent' first anyway..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Responsibility for what, exactly? They don't have a responsibility to publish any particular review in the store. They're free to include/exclude/weight the data they receive to give you star ratings for apps in any way they'd like. Vote clumps like this one tend to make star ratings less trustworthy as a measure of the true quality of an app, so I'd expect an app store operator to discount them.
responsibility for maintaining the integrity of app reviews
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I honestly don't see how if this trend continues how things will end well. It will likely end with ordinary people being really cynical about the motives of big tech, the financial services industry, the media, and the ruling class generally. It is likely that what these entities say will be generally disbelieved, even when they are telling the truth. Sooner or later another populist will come along who wants to sh…
That's not how it ends, that cuts off the story halfway through. Also, the next populist will likely make Trump look level-headed and restrained.
I think the end point is one of:
- America comes to its senses, reforms, and becomes democratic
- America becomes a China-like oligarchy and police state, with ubiquitous surveillance, and a big-tech-run social credit system to keep everyone in line
- America bumbles along is the same fashion it has been doing, with things slowly deteriorating