Hacker News Reader

Preloading links is often avoided because it creates a wide range of issues. Using up newspapers free stories a month on articles users never see etc. Speed just isn’t that useful by comparison.

Incompetence is obviously still a possibility, but the likely intent overcoming such issues is to make X seem to generate more traffic and thus appear to be more relevant.

Even so, Chrome has preloading turned on by default with an option for "extended preloading" which is even more aggressive. There may be some downsides, but I don't think what X is doing here is unreasonable. Speed makes a huge difference in UX.

>Using up newspapers free stories a month on articles users never see etc

Webviews are pretty quarantined from the main safari app. I don't think cookies persist, so I don't think this would be an issue.

I hadn't considered this.

>it's just there so that when a user clicks a link, they see the content as quickly as possible.

Yes and many people think that is outweighed by all the other issues raised in the larger thread here. That's "nuance and reason". Pretending it isn't there is not "nuance and reason".

Webviews have serious security issues, at least if you enter any data into them.

See this article from 2016: https://developers.googleblog.com/en/modernizing-oauth-inter...

So my worries are that someone is going to click a link in Twitter and then enter their username and password into a news website. When this happens you need to trust the app developers.

> It's intriguing how normal reasoned arguments are just absent here

No 'reasoned arguments' were provided in your take. I'll give you one against this though -- it's all fun and games until you end up on a list because of Musk's UX.

How are you supposed to have a "nuanced discussion" about a guy doing literal Hitler salutes in public?

When you're either unwilling or incapable of understanding other people's perspectives it is indeed very difficult.

Try this: steelman the argument that what Musk did all those months ago wasn't a "literal Hitler salute". If you can do that, I suspect you'll find it a lot easier to have nuanced discussions about that topic (and possibly others) going forward.

Or we could look at everything else he does, like advocate for the AFD in Germany.

And Reform UK in Great-Britain...

Looool is that all your argument? "Everyone hates this one simple trick against nazi: try to forget that they do nazi things, and boom!, you're no longer scared of actual nazis"

Fuck the salute. I can look at everything else he's done and still think he's a terrible individual that should not be given money or power.

Speaking of nuance, I find it rather unintuitive how it often seems like it's harder for people to have a nuanced opinion of other people than to have a nuanced opinion about a policy or software feature or specific situation.

You'd think given how complicated and faceted people are it would be especially easy to find both good and bad things to say about them, but online at least it almost seems to be the opposite: there's even less nuance when discussing people than there is discussing other topics. (Case in point.)

I'm not required to find the good in a person like Musk. I'm allowed to look at the many shitty things he's done and terrible opinions he expresses and say "that is a shit man, and I do not like him or trust him."

He has probably done something for someone somewhere that wasn't terrible. Does it counterbalance the rest? Not really!

There's that (possibly apocryphal) saying, "and Magda Goebbels made a great strudel." Just because a nazi has a redeeming quality somewhere does not undo them being a nazi.

You're not required to do anything. Consider though that if you refuse to see the good in people you disagree with, you have little room to complain when they refuse to see the good in you.

I'll happily do that for the guy who cuts me off in traffic.

One of the fascists that is destroying my country? Fuck no, no consideration for them.

There's a lot of overlap between those two groups. Half of the country voted for Trump in the last election, a few of them are probably your neighbors. They control the presidency and a majority in the house and senate. You better hope they don't all decide they feel the same way about you that you apparently do about them.

The largest share of the eligible voting population was the 'did not vote' group.

I'm OK with calling fascists what they are. I'm also OK with recognizing a neighbor who has been consumed by fascist propaganda.

The fascist is not one that can be negotiated with. As Sartre said:

"They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words."

I can negotiate with the propaganda poisoned neighbor. There is no negotiating with the people who are running the fascist show. Giving a fascist the benefit of the doubt is playing into their strategy.