asiando

I don’t see it.

Edit: Hah, my content blocker hid them.

Obviously it did, I was just arguing against “is actually not that difficult to figure out.” Everything is easy after you know how it’s done, but before it you only have grain berries and maybe a soup with grains.

You just oversimplified picking grains at the right time, grinding them to a powder, mixing it raw with water, but not too much, adding a third weird ingredient, and cooking it. At every stage you have a product that’s not really edible. Someone had to experiment.

> in the absence of facebook these groups would no doubt still exist.

I don’t think they would.

Creation, discovery, participation, following. None of these is particularly easy if you revert to forums and Google. I won’t join Cute Puppies Forum but I wouldn’t mind following an homonymous group on Facebook for a little while, maybe I’ll answer some questions too.

The average Joe won’t care enough to join their little city group, but Facebook makes it so easy that you find all kinds of non-tech people on it, ready to answer your questions (and sometimes insult you, but I block those on sight).

I don’t think recommendations are the only thing at fault here. You just need your uncle Frank to share a chemtrail article and someone will like it and reshare it. Maybe someone will start a chemtrail group and invite your uncle.

I think the engine speeds up discovery even for people who don’t have many connections, but if you’re already googling chemtrails chances are you’ll find your group.

Let’s not forget that 4chan has no recommendations, yet...

Your last point rings true.

What’s the solution here? Prevent companies from using engagement as a metric? Do you want to be recommended random 13-views videos on YouTube? Because that’s what you get.

I don’t know if I’d like to lose good recommendation algorithms because of bad apples. However I don’t like bad apples either, they rot the whole batch.

What you’re suggesting is moderation. Someone has to tell Facebook that heroin is bad.

From what I see Facebook already implements automated content detection but you know it’s not perfect, content slips through and it’s often in the gray area.

Would you like your account to be blocked because you joked about something? Bots don’t have sense of humor.

Do you want some ibuprofen? Sorry, that’s a drug. Request dropped.

(Heck I’m even afraid this comment gets marked as spam because of the keywords)

I don’t know whether that’s been proven, but I’ve always assumed it’s because controversy and rage fuels interactions, therefore Facebook “likes” the content. There’s a difference between numbers and human recommendations “tweaks” by Facebook themselves.

Covering doesn’t mean letting him speak directly to the public. CNN also let him speak live after the election, but when he started speaking nonsense they interrupted the feed.

What’s happening this week isn’t new, it’s been happening for years.

I still don’t know what to make of this information.

Assuming that Facebook isn’t an evil entity that favors chaos, all I see is plain numbers: People who like X also like this group.

I’m a reasonable user of Facebook groups and I sometimes join new groups. I’m currently part of about 20 groups but I rarely participate. Why hasn’t Facebook suggested extreme groups to me? All I get is travel and buy/sell/rent groups.

Is Facebook being good to me and bad to others? Or are bad/gullible people liking all kinds of stuff that leads them into the rabbit hole? Is it Facebook’s responsibility to curate all the content on the platform or are we just asking them to clean up some trash?

Is it possible to curate all of Facebook’s content? Would you like a platform where everything you share is curated? Would you use an email provider that blocked emails you might find interesting?

I’m not justifying what’s happening, but I don’t really understand what people expect of such a platform and whether they’d like it more if it just showed photos of puppies.

In 2017 I saw Twitter advertising in Tokyo’s metro with Trump tweets. Even if their PR said “we don’t like it but it’s in the public interest,” it was obviously in their interest. Twitter has been mentioned daily in the news for the past 5 years, they turned a huge profit thanks the guy.

The only reason they’re acting now is that their excuse is about to expire. If they found another good excuse, Trump would stay.

That’s just because there’s no Chinese Snowden yet. What do you know about surveillance in Asia? If you’re here speaking English I reckon you know nothing.

No, like toddlers we just need to match and retaliate.

I only remember the founders publicly promising that WhatsApp won’t be absorbed into Facebook or something like that. I don’t know if they also put it in the legal documents.

Chrome will also drop that soon and only allow a tiny fraction of extensions to continue using it.

This is in the name of security. Whether you believe that is up to you, but personally I don’t even install extensions that require access to all of my tabs, let alone something that can read pure requests (with the exception of uBlock)

I hate pooping where I eat since I’m trying to finally move to Safari, but all the writers saying how easy it is to port an extension now still have no idea.

Here’s what I need to port Chrome extension to Firefox:

  1. Upload a zip file
  2. Fill in very few additional details
  3. Wait for review

Here’s what it takes for Safari:

  1. Own a Mac
  2. Download 12GB of XCode
  3. Run the conversion tool (this is the point that everyone talks about)
  4. Well done, now you have an XCode project you’ll have to maintain
  5. Pay $99/yearly
  6. Fill pages of senseless details and read scary-sounding notices about encryption because your extension is enabled on HTTPS
  7. Wait for review
  8. Get denied because of an “entitlement” that the conversion tool added for you
  9. Wait for review
  10. Fix a number of slight incompatibilities you’ll find over time, from basic features that other browsers have had for a long time to the APIs actually not being standard.

If you’re just a number, you’re treated like one. This kind of news worry me because we’re all just numbers in someone’s eyes.

Legally this might have made sense, but what about the people that this change affects?

> The price alone is mostly irrelevant for the buyer.

Sorry but wow. This is not the kind of comment I expect on HN, but rather from my uncle:

“We got this new Lexus, it’s only $500/month!”

“Yes, for 200 years”

Offering the UI in the browser versus just the CLI is an interesting idea. Go one step further and just display the results in the browser. Go another step and you got an Electron app, no CLI at all.

The listener in this case is the microphone, so it has a fixed position related to the sound it would cancel (the keys).

So the issue in this case is just that the sound keys produce varies.

I recently used Vercel’s awesome magic link login. The feature was so awesome that I just needed to open the link in whatever browser.

Unfortunately that also means that if I click the link by mistake the bad actor now has full access to my account. All just a misclick away.

Having an app per country was unnecessary to begin with. All that Google and Apple had to do is supply the UI and accept government requests to enable the system in their country.