Forgive me if I've missed something, but what's the connection here?
Do you people not use yt-dlp (or youtube-dl) because some of the sources they support can have more "extreme" content as well?
I'd understand it if the project was built by the same people who work at Gab, or meant for Gab, or something like that, so there really is an associated. But there is not, so why blame the project for it?
For all we know, the author could be reading Gab because sometimes you're curious to see what all the extremists are up to.
Seems like you are drawing conclusions that I, at least, never said.
> Do you people not use yt-dlp (or youtube-dl) because some of the sources they support can have more "extreme" content as well?
I don't think this is at all a fair comparison, as a simple glance at the front page can see. I also specifically tied my comment to there being only 6 options.
> For all we know, the author could be reading Gab because sometimes you're curious to see what all the extremists are up to.
Why would you want a recommendation feed for it then? Wouldn't you want to see it without the algorithmic distortion towards what you would prefer to see?
If I was building something like this, I'd start with something I use a lot (like Youtube), even if it required screen scraping, and then I'd move on to everything that had a dead simple API without low limits.
BUTTTT looking at the code, it would appear that they're screen scraping everything. But maybe it just so happened that the shape of Twitter's DOM is really really close to Gab's and it was super easy to add.
Or maybe this is a totally trojan horse approach to getting HN users on Gab. Who knows? But at least there's an easy way to turn it off. Not going to stop me from trying the extension, at least. (And as someone who tries to expose themselves to content bubbles that I consider insanely off-base, whether for education or entertainment, maybe I'll leave it on to see what kind of insanity is going on over there.)
Reading a site out of morbid curiosity doesn't mean you never want to follow a particular topic, and what is recommendation if not following topics without having to list them explicitly.
Because it shows a significant lapse in judgement.
> the author could be reading Gab because sometimes you're curious to see what all the extremists are up to.
Then they should say it. You can't assume good intentions when anyone willingly includes Gab because they'd be an incredibly rare outlier.
Ouch, this really hits me. I've seen so many issues lately because of this belief.
"Oh, but this one is justified!" they all say...
Viewing people as evil is different from guarding against evil input you might receive.
I don't have to assume everyone is a murder just because I also have a home alarm system.
If they are willing to publicly throw support (and jeopardize their user's opinion of them) at an extreme platform, what other explanation is there?