/r/StableDiffusion – Mod here – My side of the story(old.reddit.com)
old.reddit.com
/r/StableDiffusion – Mod here – My side of the story
https://old.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/y19kdh/mod_here_my_side_of_the_story/
254 comments
Unbelievable behavior from SD. The subreddit is currently an unmoderated mess, illustrating they have no clue how to run the community.
I am unsurprised at Discord's behavior, handing over a server like that. They have essentially been hostile when not silent to us at WSB with our 600K user server.
Reddit has an opportunity to do better here. Hand back control of r/StableDiffusion back to OP.
Steve Huffman alluded to the disaster that is sub transitions in the recent Mod Summit. If someone at Reddit is reading this, this is your opportunity to do better.
I am unsurprised at Discord's behavior, handing over a server like that. They have essentially been hostile when not silent to us at WSB with our 600K user server.
Reddit has an opportunity to do better here. Hand back control of r/StableDiffusion back to OP.
Steve Huffman alluded to the disaster that is sub transitions in the recent Mod Summit. If someone at Reddit is reading this, this is your opportunity to do better.
OP handed over the subreddit willingly and did not say they wanted it back... There really isn't a big deal other than supposed possible censorship and conflict of interest, but AFAIK there's been no hate threads censored anyway. The only thing "censored" was auto's webUI being removed from the stickied guide and the illegal novelAI leak torrent being removed.
There's nothing to indicate they wanted to leave. They are still a mod there (without full perms).
They handed over the subreddit under a promise that was immediately broken by the other party. So yes, I suppose you could say they handed it over willingly, but they did so about as willingly as handing money over to an advance-fee scam.
However, this is largely irrelevant because what Reddit truly cares about (insofar as community management) is stability, and I think it's fair to say the community is very unstable right now, and is unlikely regain that stability.
They handed over the subreddit under a promise that was immediately broken by the other party. So yes, I suppose you could say they handed it over willingly, but they did so about as willingly as handing money over to an advance-fee scam.
However, this is largely irrelevant because what Reddit truly cares about (insofar as community management) is stability, and I think it's fair to say the community is very unstable right now, and is unlikely regain that stability.
OP handed it over based on a deal that Stability did not hold up their end of.
Sure, but that isn't Reddit's problem. Reddit can't step in and choose sides based on he said/she said accusations about moderation drama. The fact is, this person handed over ownership of the sub to somebody else willingly. That's the end of it. Discord was another matter.
They do this all the time actually, though it's mainly here the reddit admins personally don't like the existing mods. So they're completely willing to do so for their own whims.
Of course they can
Could you link to the Mod Summit your talking about? I wonder if 'sub transitions' is code for stealing subreddits from mods the admins don't politically agree with.
I cannot, as it was invite only. (Edit: As lrae said)
The context is more around how communities should be able to naturally transition as opposed to only doing so during event-driven periods of great distress (E.g. r/AntiWork -> r/WorkReform).
There doesn't seem to be much post-summit discussion about it that I can find. I suspect because it's largely been overshadowed by other, more... spicy, topics.
The context is more around how communities should be able to naturally transition as opposed to only doing so during event-driven periods of great distress (E.g. r/AntiWork -> r/WorkReform).
There doesn't seem to be much post-summit discussion about it that I can find. I suspect because it's largely been overshadowed by other, more... spicy, topics.
Seems it didn't last long...
Oops, luckily the Internet Archive managed to catch it: https://web.archive.org/web/20220402052406/https://www.youtu...
Those are not public. Invite only.
Reddit management may sometimes have to accept marching orders from a higher power - geopolitically, AI is strategically very important as we've seen in various news stories over the last month or so, and being in control of narratives is plain old common sense if you ask me.
I think Discord's use of the word server is misleading, and it leads people to think they own something when they don't. Discord owns it and can pull the rug out from under you at any time, regardless of how much hard work you put into building a community, and that hurts.
I understand that "server" is an abstract term and just means "something which provides a service", but most other uses of the word relate to something owned by the person operating it. E.g., if I run a Matrix server instance, it's mine to administer, manage, destroy, etc. If I start a Discord "server" it's a glorified chat room or set of chat rooms owned and maintained by the company.
Language is powerful and helps shape our world, and by redefining "server" to mean a segmented part of someone else's website, it's another nail in the coffin for the concept of real ownership.
I understand that "server" is an abstract term and just means "something which provides a service", but most other uses of the word relate to something owned by the person operating it. E.g., if I run a Matrix server instance, it's mine to administer, manage, destroy, etc. If I start a Discord "server" it's a glorified chat room or set of chat rooms owned and maintained by the company.
Language is powerful and helps shape our world, and by redefining "server" to mean a segmented part of someone else's website, it's another nail in the coffin for the concept of real ownership.
I've also never quite liked the term, but I guess they wanted to go with terminology that gamers were already familiar with. For voice chat people would have been used to Vent, TS, or Mumble where you actually did connect to individual server instances. It seems unlikely to me that causing confusion over ownership was their intention even though that has been the effect.
(Interestingly it seems like the choice to call them servers must have come late in development, because in the API they're called guilds)
EDIT: A comment elsewhere in this thread is implying that they were officially called guilds initially but then changed because users kept calling them servers. I don't know if that's true. I don't recall ever seeing them called guilds even in the early days of Discord, but I also wouldn't have been reading their official user-facing docs and support page for pleasure.
(Interestingly it seems like the choice to call them servers must have come late in development, because in the API they're called guilds)
EDIT: A comment elsewhere in this thread is implying that they were officially called guilds initially but then changed because users kept calling them servers. I don't know if that's true. I don't recall ever seeing them called guilds even in the early days of Discord, but I also wouldn't have been reading their official user-facing docs and support page for pleasure.
[deleted]
Indeed. "Our server got hacked" sounds awfully more dramatic in a self-proclaimed crisis, laying the ambiguous notion of responsibility toward the "service" while maintaining the guise of ownership. Hey ho.
Wait, so you can't run Discord servers in your own server? I supposed they distributed at least a proprietary binary for running the server or something like that
Exactly this. Discord servers are more like free domain names given out on first-come basis in a private namespace...
[deleted]
https://old.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/xzdkio/stab...
apparently, there is a separate drama about hacking at SD and accusations of ownership of code.
apparently, there is a separate drama about hacking at SD and accusations of ownership of code.
Was there a dedicated HN submission for this topic?
This is extremely fascinating to me. In what Andrej Karpathy calls "software 2.0"[1], leaking your model is equivalent to leaking the main IP of your company. Unlike source code where it loses value quickly out of context (e.g. twitch leaked their code yet that didn't spawn a bunch of twitch clones), models can be fine-tuned and transfer-learning-ed for many other purposes
Since these models take millions of dollars to train, I see these sort of hacks becoming a thing! I wonder when companies will start adding "trap streets"[2] to prove that others are using their stolen models?
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y57wwucbXR8
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street
This is extremely fascinating to me. In what Andrej Karpathy calls "software 2.0"[1], leaking your model is equivalent to leaking the main IP of your company. Unlike source code where it loses value quickly out of context (e.g. twitch leaked their code yet that didn't spawn a bunch of twitch clones), models can be fine-tuned and transfer-learning-ed for many other purposes
Since these models take millions of dollars to train, I see these sort of hacks becoming a thing! I wonder when companies will start adding "trap streets"[2] to prove that others are using their stolen models?
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y57wwucbXR8
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street
I did actually submit a link to a GitHub issue about this, but it seems to have been blocked by HN. I can see the post title when I'm logged in but as a guest it doesn't show anything at all. The post wasn't even flagged as dead. It doesn't show up in my submitted links list when logged out either.
I don't know if it tripped an internal filter on HN or something. Here is the link to the post in case you're curious.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33146603
In case it matters I used the GitHub issue title as the name of the post - "Stable-diffusion-webui is using stolen code".
Here is the actual link I posted.
https://github.com/AUTOMATIC1111/stable-diffusion-webui/issu...
I don't know if it tripped an internal filter on HN or something. Here is the link to the post in case you're curious.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33146603
In case it matters I used the GitHub issue title as the name of the post - "Stable-diffusion-webui is using stolen code".
Here is the actual link I posted.
https://github.com/AUTOMATIC1111/stable-diffusion-webui/issu...
We banned github.com/automatic1111 a while back because it was being promoted by some sort of spam ring.
We can let that particular link go through if it's the best one on the topic but perhaps there is something else out there?
We can let that particular link go through if it's the best one on the topic but perhaps there is something else out there?
I can't speak to how people were behaving on HN, but automatic1111's is pretty much the gold standard for people who use SD locally on their machine, which might explain why a lot of people were posting it. It was however present on some recurring 'chan threads about SD, which might explain why it is linked to some unsavory behavior.
Ok, I've unbanned it. Thanks to both of you.
From my observation of the devolution on the SD Discord and reddit, that "spam ring" might just have been his user base.
Showing up as a blank page for me. Fascinating.
https://i.imgur.com/NzFX5Cz.png
https://i.imgur.com/NzFX5Cz.png
Do you have showdead enabled? To me, it looks like a post that's been automatically made dead – i.e. I see [dead] but not [flagged]. I know there are certain (very few) things a user in good standing can say in a comment to produce that outcome, not sure what's happened in this post though.
I do have showdead enabled. It's possible the [dead] marker doesn't appear for one's own posts, but I'm not sure.
This is what it looks like for me.
https://imgur.io/di80ueh
https://imgur.io/di80ueh
I see a "vouch" option below the linked post, so probably someone flagged it as soon as it arrived in the queue.
If you're going to make those claims you need to be providing evidence, like side-by-side comparisons. What you have posted there reeks of a hit-and-run.
Kind of with automatic on this one, good imperative code can only take so many forms.
Plus there is the argument that no IP deserves protection, and that no IP owner should have any rights, ever, given that information is infinitely copyable and yearns to be free.
Kind of with automatic on this one, good imperative code can only take so many forms.
Plus there is the argument that no IP deserves protection, and that no IP owner should have any rights, ever, given that information is infinitely copyable and yearns to be free.
“ Plus there is the argument that no IP deserves protection, and that no IP owner should have any rights, ever, given that information is infinitely copyable and yearns to be free.”
These arguments aren’t taken that seriously by people that understand investment, technology development, and risk mitigation though.
These arguments aren’t taken that seriously by people that understand investment, technology development, and risk mitigation though.
I get that, but that is because they have built businesses off the backs of IP exploitation. You cannot get people to understand your argument when their paycheck is derived from it.
That we allow (even encourage) such blatant violations of natural laws and physics is one of the more contemptible attributes of us as a people, IMHO
Just because an industry exists doesn't mean it's valid. Like living things, business entities have a survival instinct that will fight anything that that threatens it. And the dismantling of their business plan is a pretty big threat. Like cancer, these things start small and metastasize until they endanger the life of the host.
That we allow (even encourage) such blatant violations of natural laws and physics is one of the more contemptible attributes of us as a people, IMHO
Just because an industry exists doesn't mean it's valid. Like living things, business entities have a survival instinct that will fight anything that that threatens it. And the dismantling of their business plan is a pretty big threat. Like cancer, these things start small and metastasize until they endanger the life of the host.
That drama is most likely the catalyst of the current drama. (i.e. StabilityAI getting control of the subreddit to control the NAI leak/discourage use of the AUTOMATIC1111 UI)
Which violates a number of Reddit's conflict of interest rules for moderators.
Which violates a number of Reddit's conflict of interest rules for moderators.
> Which violates a number of Reddit's conflict of interest rules for moderators.
Those don't exist. There is something called the "Reddiquette" which is by the community and completely informal.
Subreddits owned by companies is the new normal and if you look at games, most reddit users these days even prefer it to community-run ones. Not uncommon to have two subreddits at a launch of a game and the unofficial one will always "lose".
Besides that, Reddit itself reaches out to brands & product owners and influencers to make official subs for them, managed by those entities then.
Subreddits are the new Facebook Groups and Reddit is completely "mainstream". I wonder what's next in a couple of years. Maybe we can go back to forums :)
Those don't exist. There is something called the "Reddiquette" which is by the community and completely informal.
Subreddits owned by companies is the new normal and if you look at games, most reddit users these days even prefer it to community-run ones. Not uncommon to have two subreddits at a launch of a game and the unofficial one will always "lose".
Besides that, Reddit itself reaches out to brands & product owners and influencers to make official subs for them, managed by those entities then.
Subreddits are the new Facebook Groups and Reddit is completely "mainstream". I wonder what's next in a couple of years. Maybe we can go back to forums :)
> most reddit users these days even prefer it to community-run ones. Not uncommon to have two subreddits at a launch of a game and the unofficial one will always "lose".
Games often link to the "official" reddit community from inside the game, so no surprise that traffic will be driven there
Games often link to the "official" reddit community from inside the game, so no surprise that traffic will be driven there
Sure, they also share them on their socials and are vocal about it.
But even besides that, if you look at any time this situation happened in the last ~3 years, you'll always see more users being vocal about the preferring the official sub than the community one in comparison.
Reddit's demographics changed, and it just exploded over the last couple of years with "casual users", "went mainstream" or what ever one wants to call it.
Most users these days don't even know that "official subreddits" were something that was super unpopular and uncommon on Reddit.
But even besides that, if you look at any time this situation happened in the last ~3 years, you'll always see more users being vocal about the preferring the official sub than the community one in comparison.
Reddit's demographics changed, and it just exploded over the last couple of years with "casual users", "went mainstream" or what ever one wants to call it.
Most users these days don't even know that "official subreddits" were something that was super unpopular and uncommon on Reddit.
Eternal September
> "Reddiquette" which is by the community and completely informal.
It used to be official, although still informal. It was eventually relegated to an obscure page in their help desk, though.
It used to be official, although still informal. It was eventually relegated to an obscure page in their help desk, though.
This is such a weird drama. The way I read it SD was effectively trying to put pressure on a guy because he developed a popular UI for using SD, and made that UI also support another model. So all their moral grandstanding is effectively just about trying to keep the popular gateway site pointing only at them, but their throwing shit at the guy who gave them that huge free PR push... What an odd position, but understandable, it looks like the people behind SD are a bunch of amateurs who weren't ready for the widespread attention and rather than ride the wave they are trying to shut down the beaches to claim that they own the ocean.
it's seem a case of "build an audience and monetize later" except they gave the golden gose itself to the audience instead of the egg,
now they're in "monetize later" and some rando's internet repo is more usable and has a better pipeline than their "dreamstudio", and to boot now these rare gtx aren't rare anymore thanks to the bitcoin crash, so enthusiast can readily use the model at home.
now they're in "monetize later" and some rando's internet repo is more usable and has a better pipeline than their "dreamstudio", and to boot now these rare gtx aren't rare anymore thanks to the bitcoin crash, so enthusiast can readily use the model at home.
Indeed it's a decision that feels like it was made in a tonedeaf echo chamber. As a rule of thumb, if it is allowed on GitHub then coders are probably okay with that, and individual companies will have to use the dmca process.
This goes beyond that, taking the stance that by merely conforming your api to work with a user-provided proprietary checkpoint, you're in the wrong? This same philosophy forbids sharing open source game emulators, and we all know how that turned out (can be the best way to play a game).
This goes beyond that, taking the stance that by merely conforming your api to work with a user-provided proprietary checkpoint, you're in the wrong? This same philosophy forbids sharing open source game emulators, and we all know how that turned out (can be the best way to play a game).
Is NAI related to SD in any way?
Different trained model, which was extracted from its creator via unauthorized system access and is illicitly available via BitTorrent. The drama appears to have started because an open-source developer who wrote a web frontend to control SD adapted that frontend to control the hacked model also, which has offended SD's CEO (because of the general principle of "Don't help software pirates").
The additional drama includes that said open-source author has looked at the leaked code and concluded that it stole some of his open source work in the way it tunes text parameters.
The additional drama includes that said open-source author has looked at the leaked code and concluded that it stole some of his open source work in the way it tunes text parameters.
> The additional drama includes that said open-source author has looked at the leaked code and concluded that it stole some of his open source work in the way it tunes text parameters.
My understanding might be out of date, but as I recall it seemed that the code he thought was stolen from his open-source work actually originated from a third project that's MIT licensed.
My understanding might be out of date, but as I recall it seemed that the code he thought was stolen from his open-source work actually originated from a third project that's MIT licensed.
I think that's confusing between two issues in opposite directions:
1. Accusations that AUTOMATIC1111 (the web frontend developer) copied code from the NovelAI leak relating to the loading of hypernetworks
2. The leak revealing that Anlatan (the company behind NovelAI) had copied code from AUTOMATIC1111's repo (who, as above, Anlatan are accusing of copying from them) relating to the weighting of words. AUTOMATIC1111's repo does not have a permissive license to allow this
The third party MIT-licensed code is relevant to #1. Some code AUTOMATIC1111 was accused of copying from the leak (https://i.imgur.com/r1AkvBG.png) actually already appears in multiple older permissively-licensed public repos (https://github.com/lucidrains/perceiver-pytorch/blob/main/pe..., https://github.com/CompVis/stable-diffusion/blob/main/ldm/mo...), one of which was credited in the readme by AUTOMATIC1111.
For #2, the Anlatan CEO blamed it on an intern (https://i.imgur.com/BFjKG1V.png). The leak shows that the offending code was committed by the CEO (https://i.imgur.com/aLiA2tr.png), which doesn't necessarily rule it out originating from an intern (e.g: "send me the code over teams to review and I'll add it") but doesn't look great.
From other examples I'd say AUTOMATIC1111 did get a bit sloppy in terms of not following clean-room design regarding the leak, but I'm inclined to give some leeway to a solo developer making a hugely popular public tool for free.
1. Accusations that AUTOMATIC1111 (the web frontend developer) copied code from the NovelAI leak relating to the loading of hypernetworks
2. The leak revealing that Anlatan (the company behind NovelAI) had copied code from AUTOMATIC1111's repo (who, as above, Anlatan are accusing of copying from them) relating to the weighting of words. AUTOMATIC1111's repo does not have a permissive license to allow this
The third party MIT-licensed code is relevant to #1. Some code AUTOMATIC1111 was accused of copying from the leak (https://i.imgur.com/r1AkvBG.png) actually already appears in multiple older permissively-licensed public repos (https://github.com/lucidrains/perceiver-pytorch/blob/main/pe..., https://github.com/CompVis/stable-diffusion/blob/main/ldm/mo...), one of which was credited in the readme by AUTOMATIC1111.
For #2, the Anlatan CEO blamed it on an intern (https://i.imgur.com/BFjKG1V.png). The leak shows that the offending code was committed by the CEO (https://i.imgur.com/aLiA2tr.png), which doesn't necessarily rule it out originating from an intern (e.g: "send me the code over teams to review and I'll add it") but doesn't look great.
From other examples I'd say AUTOMATIC1111 did get a bit sloppy in terms of not following clean-room design regarding the leak, but I'm inclined to give some leeway to a solo developer making a hugely popular public tool for free.
Damn, Emad seems sort of clueless? Hard rules about software piracy like that feel very 90's and totally unnecessary. Just avoid explicitly condoning any projects and move past it! It will be old news in like 2 weeks at the current rate of things.
Given the dude spent half a million dollars on training SD, I wouldn't be surprised if even though he chose to open-source the trained model, he has strong opinions on whether people should have the right to choose to open-source such things vs. having third-party crackers breach their systems and publish for them.
Perhaps, but the model weights themselves are currently understood to be uncopyrightable, and it's pretty inconceivable that the model could become copyrightable without becoming a derivative work of the training data.
Unless these AI companies want google and facebook to be literally the only companies in the world that can train large scale machine learning (by using their TOS to get licenses from their users) they should tread carefully.
In this particular case the leaked code apparently exposed that the proprietary codebase was also using the OSS developer's work without attribution.
Unless these AI companies want google and facebook to be literally the only companies in the world that can train large scale machine learning (by using their TOS to get licenses from their users) they should tread carefully.
In this particular case the leaked code apparently exposed that the proprietary codebase was also using the OSS developer's work without attribution.
If anything, in the absence of copyrightability, the only protection is trade secrecy and I'd expect Emad to be even deeper in the opinion space of "We cut off the oxygen (systematically speaking) of those who would steal trained ML data."
There's an interesting anecdote around how stand-up comedians protect jokes against theft, given how weak copyright is on jokes: it's keying cars, poisoning drinks (generally non-fatally, but it's hard to have a good night on stage when your lower GI tract wants to be elsewhere), and never-work-in-this-town-again agreements. We put these protections into the law because the alternative isn't no protection; it's people-take-it-into-their-own-hands protection.
There's an interesting anecdote around how stand-up comedians protect jokes against theft, given how weak copyright is on jokes: it's keying cars, poisoning drinks (generally non-fatally, but it's hard to have a good night on stage when your lower GI tract wants to be elsewhere), and never-work-in-this-town-again agreements. We put these protections into the law because the alternative isn't no protection; it's people-take-it-into-their-own-hands protection.
This method only works when the people you are trying to attack and/or blackball from an industry actually want to be in that industry. Lots of people will just use these ML models without trying to participate in the "ML community" the same way my wife and I tell each other jokes from comedians without trying to be comedians ourselves.
The users of these models and the developers are fundamentally different.
The users of these models and the developers are fundamentally different.
> [...] it's pretty inconceivable that the model could become copyrightable without becoming a derivative work of the training data.
Another perspective that may become important is the fact that not all cultures share the same interpretation of copyright. In Japan there was a case in which a court ruled that selling a memory card with preloaded save data for a video game was a breach of the original work's integrity.[1]
This I think will get greater attention in the near future because a large portion of the interest in SD stems from generating new art derived from the styles of art on Pixiv, a Japanese website. The data for many popular forks of SD like Waifu Diffusion and the proprietary NovelAI model were sourced from Western sites like Danbooru, which has been known for violating copyright and artist takedown requests by reposting art without the creator's permission for many years. With the sheer popularity of SD and the fact that so much of the innovation came off of the backs of thousands of artists who weren't so much as asked for consent, it remains to be seen if attitudes towards those sites and this process of mass-scale data collection will remain the same in the near future.
I also have to wonder what the implications would have been if NovelAI ended up launching what is now the leaked model as a paid service, given the unresolved question of consent that surrounds the original data.
HN and the people who support SD can have their own opinions about copyright not applying in this specific case. They can delve into the technicalities of why they think the models are not copyrightable. But even beyond legal means, the artists can still ask the programmers to take everything down, and potentially be refused. The insistence that "it's different in this case" can break the hearts of people that see the world differently.
I think this will be a debate that transcends arguing over the technicalities of copyright, involving fundamentally differing cultural values of how the acts of creation and reproduction should be treated with respect. It will not end with "how will this fit into the existing (Western-centric) framework of copyright," but "what is the right thing to do."
[1] https://ja.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%81%A8%E3%81%8D%E3%82%81%...
Another perspective that may become important is the fact that not all cultures share the same interpretation of copyright. In Japan there was a case in which a court ruled that selling a memory card with preloaded save data for a video game was a breach of the original work's integrity.[1]
This I think will get greater attention in the near future because a large portion of the interest in SD stems from generating new art derived from the styles of art on Pixiv, a Japanese website. The data for many popular forks of SD like Waifu Diffusion and the proprietary NovelAI model were sourced from Western sites like Danbooru, which has been known for violating copyright and artist takedown requests by reposting art without the creator's permission for many years. With the sheer popularity of SD and the fact that so much of the innovation came off of the backs of thousands of artists who weren't so much as asked for consent, it remains to be seen if attitudes towards those sites and this process of mass-scale data collection will remain the same in the near future.
I also have to wonder what the implications would have been if NovelAI ended up launching what is now the leaked model as a paid service, given the unresolved question of consent that surrounds the original data.
HN and the people who support SD can have their own opinions about copyright not applying in this specific case. They can delve into the technicalities of why they think the models are not copyrightable. But even beyond legal means, the artists can still ask the programmers to take everything down, and potentially be refused. The insistence that "it's different in this case" can break the hearts of people that see the world differently.
I think this will be a debate that transcends arguing over the technicalities of copyright, involving fundamentally differing cultural values of how the acts of creation and reproduction should be treated with respect. It will not end with "how will this fit into the existing (Western-centric) framework of copyright," but "what is the right thing to do."
[1] https://ja.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%81%A8%E3%81%8D%E3%82%81%...
The law is not ethics. The law is the bare minimum.
Anyone who sets their ethics based on the law is probably acting like a big jerk.
:)
Anyone who sets their ethics based on the law is probably acting like a big jerk.
:)
>also have to wonder what the implications would have been if NovelAI ended up launching what is now the leaked model as a paid service
huh? It was launched as a paid (subscription only) service before even getting leaked.
huh? It was launched as a paid (subscription only) service before even getting leaked.
Yes, you're right, sorry. I'm not sure what I was thinking when I wrote that.
Looking back it seems many in the Japanese community on Twitter aren't happy with discovering their art is being used as training data. In the last week since the NovelAI announcement the number of banned artists on Danbooru has doubled, approximately the same amount as all the banned artists that were registered in the site's entire history.
Beyond the training issue there is the fact that the art was reposted on another site at all, which is what many take note of. It seems Danbooru's initial statement to Japanese users made it seem like it was NovelAI's fault that things blew over, without bringing up the reposting part that was the root issue, and it didn't seem to be an effective apology as a result.
Looking back it seems many in the Japanese community on Twitter aren't happy with discovering their art is being used as training data. In the last week since the NovelAI announcement the number of banned artists on Danbooru has doubled, approximately the same amount as all the banned artists that were registered in the site's entire history.
Beyond the training issue there is the fact that the art was reposted on another site at all, which is what many take note of. It seems Danbooru's initial statement to Japanese users made it seem like it was NovelAI's fault that things blew over, without bringing up the reposting part that was the root issue, and it didn't seem to be an effective apology as a result.
Aside from reposting on Danbooru, training usage is explicitly allowed without original creator's permission by Japan law. https://storialaw.jp/en/service/bigdata/bigdata-12
Possibly that's why artists taking down from Danbooru , it's their right.
Possibly that's why artists taking down from Danbooru , it's their right.
[deleted]
“ it's pretty inconceivable that the model could become copyrightable”
If it costs $10 million to find information/weightings/etc., our current legal system would consider that intellectual property which might not be copyrightable but would be considered IP theft if stolen.
If it costs $10 million to find information/weightings/etc., our current legal system would consider that intellectual property which might not be copyrightable but would be considered IP theft if stolen.
Yes, it could be a trade secret, but if the trade secrecy would still apply is extraordinarily fact specific.
If they were negligent in handling it, e.g. left it on a publicly accessible share and some member of the public stumbled into it, then trade secret protection would likely be lost.
If some employee violated their NDA and snuck it out-- well that would be a different matter. etc.
If they were negligent in handling it, e.g. left it on a publicly accessible share and some member of the public stumbled into it, then trade secret protection would likely be lost.
If some employee violated their NDA and snuck it out-- well that would be a different matter. etc.
> which has offended SD's CEO (because of the general principle of "Don't help software pirates").
There is likely a legal threat by NAI involved in the decision calculus here.
There is likely a legal threat by NAI involved in the decision calculus here.
Whew, spicy. This will be interesting to follow. Did the AMA happen already?
So, to summarize: Both Reddit and Discord force transfered seemingly officially named communities to the trademark owning entity. That sucks, but it’s also something that social media companies have been doing 10 times a week since forever. Is there something special about this instance that makes it news?
Mostly that yet another online community is shocked to learn that they thought they were living in a house they'd invested their own sweat equity into building when the whole time, they were really living in a shantytown parked in a spare corner of some corporation's city.
If it ain't your computer (and if no money even changed hands), it ain't your property.
If it ain't your computer (and if no money even changed hands), it ain't your property.
It always sounds strange when someone is talking about a "server" after creating a chat channel on a glorified IRC-fork.
TBF server is what discord calls it. And a discord server can contain a multitude of channels with fairly extensive individual customisation.
So it goes quite a bit further than “a chat channel”.
So it goes quite a bit further than “a chat channel”.
As far as I know they still stick to "guild" as the official term, but virtually everybody calls a guild a "server"
They changed all the user facing docs to "server" a while back. Internally the code might still say "guild", but officially they've embraced calling them servers.
Reddit did not "force transfer" the community, the top moderator was convinced to hand it over.
Reddit, for all its faults, goes to great lengths to give its moderators latitude and discretion to operate their communities, and only steps in as an absolute last resort.
Reddit, for all its faults, goes to great lengths to give its moderators latitude and discretion to operate their communities, and only steps in as an absolute last resort.
The top moderator was changed at the request if stability to someone they had more trust in (but was still a community member and not an employee), and then they convinced that person to transfer. That person identified themselves as a minor.
I wonder if Stability fucked up by using a minor in this case. They seem to still view Stability in high regard, mostly it seems because they are hoping for future gain from the relationship, but I doubt they'll feel that way forever. Probably they won't feel that way for much longer given Stability's heavy handed approach. It might be a lot easier to reverse some of this once it's made obvious they took advantage of a minor.
I wonder if Stability fucked up by using a minor in this case. They seem to still view Stability in high regard, mostly it seems because they are hoping for future gain from the relationship, but I doubt they'll feel that way forever. Probably they won't feel that way for much longer given Stability's heavy handed approach. It might be a lot easier to reverse some of this once it's made obvious they took advantage of a minor.
Many people are under the false impression that Discord, Reddit, Twitter, etc., treat ordinary people the same way they do corporations and celebrities. Which is obviously false, as we see here--on these platforms, corporations win every time.
Social media died the day that Shaquille O'Neal was no longer @THE_REAL_SHAQ.
Social media died the day that Shaquille O'Neal was no longer @THE_REAL_SHAQ.
>Is there something special about this instance that makes it news?
I suppose one could go the, "SD had a minor doing the work, which they then capitalized on" route, but I find it a little uncompelling.
If SD had asked the minor to moderate the subreddit, then took it away from him afterward, that would be an issue. Doubly so if they were aware of his age. From the description that was given, none of that applied.
As it is, I see it as fixing up a parking spot for the CEO; cleaning the ground, repainting the lines, putting up a nice shiny plaque, all unasked. Then getting upset when the CEO parks in the spot and leaves garbage strewn about. It's not nice, or even fair, but it is not particularly surprising either. Hard work is rarely appreciated, even when it is actively being paid for. "Took you long enough" is a phrase I have heard thrown about on projects before. When work is unfunded? You will be lucky to get so much as a mention, let alone a head nod or thumbs up.
I just hope that he can learn from this experience and remind himself how much he is making the next time he takes up a project of this kind. There is nothing wrong with working for free, but it is crucially important to remember that the merit of working for free does not somehow entitle us to anything. It's not something that brings me any joy to say, but it is true.
I suppose one could go the, "SD had a minor doing the work, which they then capitalized on" route, but I find it a little uncompelling.
If SD had asked the minor to moderate the subreddit, then took it away from him afterward, that would be an issue. Doubly so if they were aware of his age. From the description that was given, none of that applied.
As it is, I see it as fixing up a parking spot for the CEO; cleaning the ground, repainting the lines, putting up a nice shiny plaque, all unasked. Then getting upset when the CEO parks in the spot and leaves garbage strewn about. It's not nice, or even fair, but it is not particularly surprising either. Hard work is rarely appreciated, even when it is actively being paid for. "Took you long enough" is a phrase I have heard thrown about on projects before. When work is unfunded? You will be lucky to get so much as a mention, let alone a head nod or thumbs up.
I just hope that he can learn from this experience and remind himself how much he is making the next time he takes up a project of this kind. There is nothing wrong with working for free, but it is crucially important to remember that the merit of working for free does not somehow entitle us to anything. It's not something that brings me any joy to say, but it is true.
Yikes. I know there are points in an early-stage company where things are very unstructured and you end up in situations that you maybe wouldn't want as a larger company.. but in this case, it sounds like it would have been better for them to allow official and community-based channels of communication to live separately.
He was a minor and seemed to have more business sense than any of them.
The /r/StableDiffusion subreddit appears to skew younger, surprisingly.
Open source AI art has likely been the biggest catalyst of getting teenagers interested in computer science/machine learning in years.
Open source AI art has likely been the biggest catalyst of getting teenagers interested in computer science/machine learning in years.
Or art, since there’s a new way to express yourself through a novel medium
And that's going to have a titanic political-shift effect once those young folks come to voting age and start shaping policy around intellectual property ownership.
In the early-2000s "copyfight", many people theorized that the apparent support of young people for the "low-protectionist" side, or their enthusiasm for P2P file-sharing, or remixing, or fan fiction, was presaging a radical shift in copyright law once those young people grew up.
A lot of them have grown up now and that shift doesn't seem to have happened on the legal side. Maybe there are some shifts in norms (e.g. many authors and publishers used to loudly maintain that fan fiction was not a fair use, but most seem to have decided that it would be a bad idea to sue over it, and it's become more normalized overall), but not much in legislation!
So I'm not sure this outcome is in any way guaranteed.
(Larry Lessig also said that his foray into copyright activism had convinced him that campaign finance was an obstacle to having legislation reflect public opinion. Not every issue is a "campaign issue", but some issues that legislators don't directly campaign on are very important to donors. Lessig concluded that copyright was one of those.)
A lot of them have grown up now and that shift doesn't seem to have happened on the legal side. Maybe there are some shifts in norms (e.g. many authors and publishers used to loudly maintain that fan fiction was not a fair use, but most seem to have decided that it would be a bad idea to sue over it, and it's become more normalized overall), but not much in legislation!
So I'm not sure this outcome is in any way guaranteed.
(Larry Lessig also said that his foray into copyright activism had convinced him that campaign finance was an obstacle to having legislation reflect public opinion. Not every issue is a "campaign issue", but some issues that legislators don't directly campaign on are very important to donors. Lessig concluded that copyright was one of those.)
Depends on how you define "young people", the average age of the US congress is 58 and Senate at 64. If the people I know in that age bracket are representative, they certainly don't exist in the "peer domain" that even has a conception of what we're discussing, even less so in the context of digital/software shit.
We're talking from 1958-1964, in particular (predominately) the "elite" class of people born in that period who became successful career politicians, who are arguably (though not much of one when considering the evolution of IP law...) beholden to lobbyists which is just a convoluted way to say corporate interests or arm twisting from their peers...
So no, young people aren't in control, and the ones that are will ostensibly be borne to power from their favorable starting position which means they're probably going to follow the trajectory and preserve the status quo.
We're talking from 1958-1964, in particular (predominately) the "elite" class of people born in that period who became successful career politicians, who are arguably (though not much of one when considering the evolution of IP law...) beholden to lobbyists which is just a convoluted way to say corporate interests or arm twisting from their peers...
So no, young people aren't in control, and the ones that are will ostensibly be borne to power from their favorable starting position which means they're probably going to follow the trajectory and preserve the status quo.
1. They grew up.
2a. Got a job and had kids/got hobbies. Stopped caring and just subscribed to Netflix like everyone else.
--or--
2b. Created copyrightable works. Joined the protectionists.
2a. Got a job and had kids/got hobbies. Stopped caring and just subscribed to Netflix like everyone else.
--or--
2b. Created copyrightable works. Joined the protectionists.
In the U.S. millenials just overtook baby boomers to be the majority of the voting population 2 years ago, so we're still pretty early on those people (myself included) being able to dramatically influence politics. It'll take even longer for them to become elected officials themselves.
I don't think so. When the Napster/eMule/Ares/bittorrent crowd reached voting age intellectual property ownership, if anything, got even more tight
Definitely makes me want to avoid discord. As far as Stability goes, it doesn't make them look great either. This kid showed a lot of good will and they still felt like they needed to pull the rug from under his feet.
> So Discord can just take servers from people and give them away to corporations without asking?
He never had a "server". Just like no one has a Facebook "server". Discord is a corporation not a person. Communities run by corporate services are different than servers run by human persons. You give up everything when you don't actually host your own server(s) for communicating with your community.
He never had a "server". Just like no one has a Facebook "server". Discord is a corporation not a person. Communities run by corporate services are different than servers run by human persons. You give up everything when you don't actually host your own server(s) for communicating with your community.
A Discord "server" is a colloquial term for the community space. The nitpick is meaningless, I could have an AWS "server", but at the end of the day we both know it's a virtual instance that sits on an actual server.
It's deceitful for discord to use that language because it implies some level of independence.
A VPS service like AWS goes out of their way to specify that it is a "virtual server". the product they provide is analagous to real server hardware and largely interchangable with other server hosts.
A VPS service like AWS goes out of their way to specify that it is a "virtual server". the product they provide is analagous to real server hardware and largely interchangable with other server hosts.
Unless your AWS server is a dedicated host...
Individual Discord communities are, and always have been, called "servers", despite the fact that they are entirely logical/digital entities and have no particular correspondence with actual physical servers (the way IRC servers do).
In my opinion that was a very clever naming scheme to target the TeamSpeak crowd. In gaming communities, having “your own server” has always come with a sense of pride.
Exactly. This intentional lie by Discord is to abuse the connotations associated with the idea of having a "server" that existed with teamspeak/mumble/etc. But since it's not actually a server in any way, just a service, users act shocked when Discord takes away their community on a whim.
> and always have been, called "servers",
That's not correct, originally they were called "Guilds", which is also what the API and code still use today.
That's not correct, originally they were called "Guilds", which is also what the API and code still use today.
Interesting. I joined Discord fairly early, and they were already called "servers" then—but I have, indeed, seen the "guild" terminology in the API.
I was also in pretty early (account says August 28, 2015) and I have only seen "guild" used in the API. I'm really curious what the timeline is on them being officially and publicly known as guilds and then changing to being officially called servers.
Is this a distinction without a difference?
Meaning, it seems eminently reasonable if I was 16, started a Disney Discord, got a verified badge for it, then Disney pointed out the delicacies of Discord handing the Official Disney Discord to a minor, it seems to be a reasonable compromise to make the official Disney Discord officially Disney's, and allow the 16 year old to still have the secret chats, etc.
Meaning, it seems eminently reasonable if I was 16, started a Disney Discord, got a verified badge for it, then Disney pointed out the delicacies of Discord handing the Official Disney Discord to a minor, it seems to be a reasonable compromise to make the official Disney Discord officially Disney's, and allow the 16 year old to still have the secret chats, etc.
There's difference, physical ownership of the server would mean no company would be able to transfer ownership with a click of a mouse.
Even if transfer of rights looks reasonable, it's better to live in a world where such transfer is made through law and not through company managers will.
Even if transfer of rights looks reasonable, it's better to live in a world where such transfer is made through law and not through company managers will.
A more reasonable compromise might be to give disney contol over the discord.gg/disney namespace but leave the existing server and it's community unmodified under the control of the people who actually built it.
[deleted]
It shocks and concerns me that someone needs to ask that.
Of course they can. It was never "yours" any more than "your" Facebook or Tiktok account.
Of course they can. It was never "yours" any more than "your" Facebook or Tiktok account.
That may be true in the technical sense, but discord uses the term "server" to refer to the collection of channels (text and voice) that it allows you to create. i.e. individual discord communities are called "servers".
It might not square with the traditional hardware definition of the the word, but it's being used correctly here.
It might not square with the traditional hardware definition of the the word, but it's being used correctly here.
And that technical distinction doesn't matter right up until the moment it does, which is why we're here today. While the distinction is obvious to most HN users, I would bet that it isn't to many Discord users. When Discord users create a 'server', I would bet that many of them do not understand how few rights they have, specifically because they are being purposely mislead by Discord.
"they have done a lot for me" ...
Okay, so maybe disclose what they have done for you? Because the only thing that would make sense is financial support. And if that is the case why spend time writing something that will not change the course of things.
Okay, so maybe disclose what they have done for you? Because the only thing that would make sense is financial support. And if that is the case why spend time writing something that will not change the course of things.
High-five for linking the “old” subdomain.
Which do you think is the bigger fuck up, finding out that you've accidentally put a random teenager in charge of your business's largest community and can't even get them to sign an NDA because they're a minor, or then mis-handling kicking them out so badly that you cause a massive uproar despite the person you've decided to kick being willing to co-operate. Just incredibly dumb on so many levels.
I'm not familiar with Reddit's rules here: do they generally allow minors to mod a subreddit?
Reddit's ToS require all users to be 13 or older. There is no other requirement to be a moderator, and moderation is independently managed by each subreddit. Reddit tends to be very hands-off with interfering with who moderates a subreddit, for both better and worse.
On the internet nobody knows you're a dog.
... until it matters, and issues like "Minors can't enter into contracts" result in someone getting their account unceremoniously ping-ponged around because they have fewer rights than an adult.
They don’t ask your age. (Except probably “are you over 13” at account creation).
When you realise Reddit is moderated by unpaid megalomaniacs and teenagers, everything starts to fall into place. In some ways Reddit is worse than Facebook because it is influenced by anonymous entities with zero checks and balances.
> In some ways Reddit is worse than Facebook because it is influenced by anonymous entities with zero checks and balances.
The discourse in many subreddits is invisibly dictated by the moderators.
It's not obvious when you browse posts because everything is organically coming from random people. However, moderators can entirely shape the conversation by only allowing posts that say what they want.
In other words: The moderators are speaking through users, by selectively filtering out everyone else. Many subreddits are also famous for banning any commenters who say anything that doesn't support what the moderators want to see. The remaining unbanned users are effectively curated to echo what the moderators want you to see.
Discord obviously has the same dynamics, but Discord makes it more obvious when you're switching between "servers". Reddit mashes it all into one feed that feels like something organic.
In this case, I suspect the core issue is that the person used the Stable Diffusion trademark, which resulted in Stable Diffusion playing the legal card. The correct response would have been to force a rename of this Discord (if legally obligated), though.
The discourse in many subreddits is invisibly dictated by the moderators.
It's not obvious when you browse posts because everything is organically coming from random people. However, moderators can entirely shape the conversation by only allowing posts that say what they want.
In other words: The moderators are speaking through users, by selectively filtering out everyone else. Many subreddits are also famous for banning any commenters who say anything that doesn't support what the moderators want to see. The remaining unbanned users are effectively curated to echo what the moderators want you to see.
Discord obviously has the same dynamics, but Discord makes it more obvious when you're switching between "servers". Reddit mashes it all into one feed that feels like something organic.
In this case, I suspect the core issue is that the person used the Stable Diffusion trademark, which resulted in Stable Diffusion playing the legal card. The correct response would have been to force a rename of this Discord (if legally obligated), though.
I was banned from r/streetphotography with my first post because, despite it being a street photograph, the moderator on the clock at the time thought it was 'too derivative' - It was a permanent ban.
Since then, I have taken tens of thousands of street photos, and the fact that I cannot post them on the most-used street photography subreddit is confusing and shitty.
Since then, I have taken tens of thousands of street photos, and the fact that I cannot post them on the most-used street photography subreddit is confusing and shitty.
I got banned from r/AskReddit for posting the Chicago Transit Authority's customer service phone number, because it was "personal information". (In a thread about the CTA, no less.
The rule is any comment that matches the regular expression /\d{3}-\d{4}/ is a permaban.)
I also got kicked out of a Discord server I moderated because someone asked to be nagged about doing their homework, and I nagged them, and then someone in the server created fanart of my anime profile picture hitting their anime profile picture on the head with a magic wand, and I pinned it. I thought it was hilarious and I treasure it to this day. But that apparently was the last straw. ("There must have been some underlying issue," I hear you cry. There was. There were some differences of opinion on how to moderate the channel and the discord server. The community skewed about 60% female, and I was pretty quick to time stuff out like "women should be in the kitchen, not watching a stream" when the inevitable edgelord showed up to troll. This was apparently a controversial opinion, and all the other mods that would back me up on those decisions had long since left. I was pretty late to the giving up party, but I'm glad I eventually left. Even if not on my own terms ;)
The TL;DR here is yeah, it's really easy to be a bad community manager, and people are pretty good at easy things. Stir in a spoonful of power tripping, and the results are predictable.
I also got kicked out of a Discord server I moderated because someone asked to be nagged about doing their homework, and I nagged them, and then someone in the server created fanart of my anime profile picture hitting their anime profile picture on the head with a magic wand, and I pinned it. I thought it was hilarious and I treasure it to this day. But that apparently was the last straw. ("There must have been some underlying issue," I hear you cry. There was. There were some differences of opinion on how to moderate the channel and the discord server. The community skewed about 60% female, and I was pretty quick to time stuff out like "women should be in the kitchen, not watching a stream" when the inevitable edgelord showed up to troll. This was apparently a controversial opinion, and all the other mods that would back me up on those decisions had long since left. I was pretty late to the giving up party, but I'm glad I eventually left. Even if not on my own terms ;)
The TL;DR here is yeah, it's really easy to be a bad community manager, and people are pretty good at easy things. Stir in a spoonful of power tripping, and the results are predictable.
On the other hand, nobody forces the feed on you if you choose your own community. Yes popular subs can be very political and biased but it doesn't mean you have to join them.
On reddit, you can totally avoid bans and still say something. On Facebook, your words and your whole account have no value if the algorithm decides you spoke a 'no no word'.
Facebook feed is entirely controlled by the algorithm and that algorithm is controlled by the people at Facebook, the reddit feed can be controlled by you. That difference alone makes Reddit a little bit better than Facebook.
Getting banned on Facebook is extremely easy, I got banned for quoting someone's comment and replying with 'ok' and unfortunately I'm not kidding. So far on reddit, haven't gotten any bans or warnings and I have always kept my discussions civil.
Facebook wants conformity, it doesn't slap you on the wrist if you do something that Zuckerberg doesn't approve, it totally takes your voice away for a long time.
I deleted my 10 year old Facebook account because the censorship was getting really crazy. Somebody could give you death threats and your comments would be the one getting deleted by Facebook, that's how bad it got near the end of 2020.
On reddit, you can totally avoid bans and still say something. On Facebook, your words and your whole account have no value if the algorithm decides you spoke a 'no no word'.
Facebook feed is entirely controlled by the algorithm and that algorithm is controlled by the people at Facebook, the reddit feed can be controlled by you. That difference alone makes Reddit a little bit better than Facebook.
Getting banned on Facebook is extremely easy, I got banned for quoting someone's comment and replying with 'ok' and unfortunately I'm not kidding. So far on reddit, haven't gotten any bans or warnings and I have always kept my discussions civil.
Facebook wants conformity, it doesn't slap you on the wrist if you do something that Zuckerberg doesn't approve, it totally takes your voice away for a long time.
I deleted my 10 year old Facebook account because the censorship was getting really crazy. Somebody could give you death threats and your comments would be the one getting deleted by Facebook, that's how bad it got near the end of 2020.
> On the other hand, nobody forces the feed on you if you choose your own community.
That's only true if you stay small. If the subreddit gains traction, it will be taken from you if you don't moderate in a way that suits the whims of the power mod / admin cabal. They may take it from you under a flimsy pretext even if you're doing a good job, simply because they want to add your subreddit to their dominion.
That's only true if you stay small. If the subreddit gains traction, it will be taken from you if you don't moderate in a way that suits the whims of the power mod / admin cabal. They may take it from you under a flimsy pretext even if you're doing a good job, simply because they want to add your subreddit to their dominion.
Yes, no denying that but at least you have the ability to reach the point.
Facebook on the other hand finishes before something can even start because the algorithm checks every single word that you post, unlike Reddit.
Facebook on the other hand finishes before something can even start because the algorithm checks every single word that you post, unlike Reddit.
This seems like arguing whether chicken shit or pig shit smells worse.
That was a really bad comparison.
Moderators on Reddit can be biased in different areas, they might let a comment pass or have a nervous breakdown over something they don't like. It's not clear and never will be but you still have the freedom.
Facebook algorithm does not miss. It does not overlook things or understand context. All it knows is someone said something they're not supposed to and that is the difference.
I'll take Reddit over Facebook anytime of the day because at least on Reddit, I can say controversial things (if any) on my own feed without the fear of the algorithm deleting it and banning me for a month where I have no voice, only a threat to be confirming to Facebook ideals that I have no idea what they are.
So yeah, both are censuring but Reddit allows more freedom.
Moderators on Reddit can be biased in different areas, they might let a comment pass or have a nervous breakdown over something they don't like. It's not clear and never will be but you still have the freedom.
Facebook algorithm does not miss. It does not overlook things or understand context. All it knows is someone said something they're not supposed to and that is the difference.
I'll take Reddit over Facebook anytime of the day because at least on Reddit, I can say controversial things (if any) on my own feed without the fear of the algorithm deleting it and banning me for a month where I have no voice, only a threat to be confirming to Facebook ideals that I have no idea what they are.
So yeah, both are censuring but Reddit allows more freedom.
It's a good analogy because they're both terrible. You can fly under the radar on reddit or facebook by staying small or using innuendo, but why subject yourself to either? Whatever relative merit one may have vs the other is irrelevant since neither is worth using. In both cases, you are only as free as a medieval peasant; "free" to say what you like as long as the lord or his informants don't hear you.
My utopia does not have Facebook or Reddit but whatever it has, is closer to Reddit than Facebook. So I'm ready to pick the better of the two options at the moment.
I do condemn censorship in all forms (unless specific laws are being followed) but after fighting against all the platforms for a voice, I see Reddit as the best option for civil discourse. Hackernews is also very close to reddit and we know the model works very well.
Wherever I am, I'm always looking for good discussions (like this thread for example) and I'm glad that I can do it more freely on Reddit and HN than I ever could on Twitter or Facebook, hence my comments.
I do condemn censorship in all forms (unless specific laws are being followed) but after fighting against all the platforms for a voice, I see Reddit as the best option for civil discourse. Hackernews is also very close to reddit and we know the model works very well.
Wherever I am, I'm always looking for good discussions (like this thread for example) and I'm glad that I can do it more freely on Reddit and HN than I ever could on Twitter or Facebook, hence my comments.
I spent a large part of my formative years on Reddit and I agree with everything you just said. I don't know how to fix the issue, but I have some ideas.
One would be a "mod action audit." Each subreddit, or perhaps each moderator, would have a score indicating what % of comments are removed. Some random chunk of the removed content could be reviewed by auditors to determine what % were just spam and what came from legitimate users.
This way when I see a community where >50% of content is removed, I know that what I'm seeing is not organic.
One would be a "mod action audit." Each subreddit, or perhaps each moderator, would have a score indicating what % of comments are removed. Some random chunk of the removed content could be reviewed by auditors to determine what % were just spam and what came from legitimate users.
This way when I see a community where >50% of content is removed, I know that what I'm seeing is not organic.
100%. The reality of moderation on Reddit is absolutely horrifying, like flipping over a rock and finding a pile of decomposing rat carcasses underneath. It's unbelievable, for instance, how often comments going against the grain are "shadow removed".
I find "throttling" or "shadow banning" to be far more objectionable than simply banning / removing comments.
At least if my post is deleted I can tell. But when companies artificially limit the reach of content they do not like, you might never know.
Facebook openly admits to doing this. They are playing god by curating which information is worthy / unworthy of being seen, as well as presenting a warped view of reality to their users.
At least if my post is deleted I can tell. But when companies artificially limit the reach of content they do not like, you might never know.
Facebook openly admits to doing this. They are playing god by curating which information is worthy / unworthy of being seen, as well as presenting a warped view of reality to their users.
I'm not talking about deleted comments, I'm talking about shadow deleted comments. The only way (without external tools, I guess) to know it's happened to you is to notice a suspicious lack of engagement with something you posted, then visit the same thread in a private window and see that your comment isn't there. If you look on the account that posted it, you will still see it.
You may not even have been aware that the above is a thing; most people aren't. But in my experience it accounts for a large fraction, if not the majority, of moderation actions against real human users on Reddit.
Shadowbanning is very similar but IMO less insidious since it's a lot easier for human users to notice. I'm not sure if per-subreddit shadowbans are a thing, but I lean toward no because it has not happened to me (that I'm aware of).
You may not even have been aware that the above is a thing; most people aren't. But in my experience it accounts for a large fraction, if not the majority, of moderation actions against real human users on Reddit.
Shadowbanning is very similar but IMO less insidious since it's a lot easier for human users to notice. I'm not sure if per-subreddit shadowbans are a thing, but I lean toward no because it has not happened to me (that I'm aware of).
Shadowbanning is at least not something that is available to normal moderators on reddit. You could set up AutoModerator to remove all posts by a user but they will be visibly removed.
Reddit as a whole does have shadowbans but at least as far as it is public knowledge that functionality is restricted to the admins. Perhaps moderators of large "default" subreddits get special tools though or perhaps they can call up the admins to do it for them.
Reddit as a whole does have shadowbans but at least as far as it is public knowledge that functionality is restricted to the admins. Perhaps moderators of large "default" subreddits get special tools though or perhaps they can call up the admins to do it for them.
> You could set up AutoModerator to remove all posts by a user but they will be visibly removed.
Is shadow comment deletion not available to AutoModerator? My own experience suggests otherwise, though not conclusively.
Is shadow comment deletion not available to AutoModerator? My own experience suggests otherwise, though not conclusively.
For forget you can get preemptively banned from many subs simply by posting in a “wrong think” sub the mods don’t like.
Granted you can just create a new account to route around it but still…
Granted you can just create a new account to route around it but still…
For a good laugh, drop a comment in /r/ChurchOfCovid and watch the auto-bans roll in for a few hours
I'll give reddit some credit for leaving that subreddit unbanned. It's good to be aware of what kind of misinformation is being spread around;.
I won't. They banned every other sub along the same vane. This one only gets by because they pretend the whole thing is satire. Read the comments
You might want to rethink your approval of spreading misinformation
You can't fight something you aren't allowed to see. Better to have your evil out in the open you so you know what it is, and where it's spreading.
Blinding yourself to the things that harm us doesn't make them go away, it only leaves you more vulnerable.
Blinding yourself to the things that harm us doesn't make them go away, it only leaves you more vulnerable.
Yup. The biggest tip off that our response to Covid is basically a scam is the fact that you are absolutely not allowed to think anything beyond what “the experts” say. And not just any “expert” either, only ones that fall inline and spread doom and gloom.
God damn I still cannot get over how many people continue to buy into this Covid nonsense.
God damn I still cannot get over how many people continue to buy into this Covid nonsense.
>The discourse in many subreddits is invisibly dictated by the moderators.
If you haven't signed up for alerts on reveddit, odds are good you have no idea how many of your comments and posts have been silently removed: https://www.reveddit.com/y/<your_username>
If you haven't signed up for alerts on reveddit, odds are good you have no idea how many of your comments and posts have been silently removed: https://www.reveddit.com/y/<your_username>
100% agreed. The /r/cycling subreddit is unexpectedly one of the worst offenders, from what I've encountered. Many removed comments and posts. Anything remotely seen as critical of any aspect of cycling (even coming from avid cyclists!) is immediately removed.
92 of top 500 subreddits controlled by same 5 people
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23173018
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23173018
Absolutely. And the front page is just full of this kind of specially curated content that aligns with the moderators' views. It's propaganda, basically. Question is whose?
who is pushing for antiwork to hit the frontpage constantly?
The issue is more that if you make a post critical of some of the ideas in antiwork, expect it to get removed within about 10 minutes. While no individual in particular is pushing for those posts to reach the front page, only posts that fit the groupthink stay alive long enough to do so.
Best example is r/legaladvice. Good luck getting any advice on dealing with corrupt law enforcement.
Can you elaborate or give some context? I know nothing about this sub or it's history.
> The discourse in many subreddits is invisibly dictated by the moderators.
In the case of r/bitcoin, the largely invisible reddit censorship allowed for the effective capture of the coin's community and development. It was used to silence and remove those who believed BTC's primary use case should be cash. It was incredibly effective too.
For further reading:
https://medium.com/@johnblocke/a-brief-and-incomplete-histor...
https://medium.com/@johnblocke/r-bitcoin-censorship-revisite...
In the case of r/bitcoin, the largely invisible reddit censorship allowed for the effective capture of the coin's community and development. It was used to silence and remove those who believed BTC's primary use case should be cash. It was incredibly effective too.
For further reading:
https://medium.com/@johnblocke/a-brief-and-incomplete-histor...
https://medium.com/@johnblocke/r-bitcoin-censorship-revisite...
Way worse than FB, I'd argue.
I used to think Reddit users skewed too heavily in certain ways, and didn't make sense. One day, using some tool (removeddit, reveddit, etc), I noticed how many posts and comments were removed by moderators - things that went against the skew.
It's one of the reasons places like r/politics became such an echo chamber dumpster fire.
I used to think Reddit users skewed too heavily in certain ways, and didn't make sense. One day, using some tool (removeddit, reveddit, etc), I noticed how many posts and comments were removed by moderators - things that went against the skew.
It's one of the reasons places like r/politics became such an echo chamber dumpster fire.
Totally agree with you but it's nowhere near how bad facebook is. At least on reddit, opinions aren't illegal or approved by how Zucc and team see fit.
Facebook is extremely ban happy and you can do absolutely nothing about it. On reddit, at the very least you can create your own sub or join subs where people won't ban you for whatever you have to say.
Facebook is extremely ban happy and you can do absolutely nothing about it. On reddit, at the very least you can create your own sub or join subs where people won't ban you for whatever you have to say.
> create your own sub or join subs where people won't ban you for whatever you have to say
Not exactly true. the_donald, all the numerous *InAction, some morbid, etc subs were all banned. Most of them because they didn't like what people were saying, regardless of what lies Reddit comes up with for the reason.
Not exactly true. the_donald, all the numerous *InAction, some morbid, etc subs were all banned. Most of them because they didn't like what people were saying, regardless of what lies Reddit comes up with for the reason.
Yeah I'm not denying that in any capacity. I'm only speaking from personal experience. Getting banned on Facebook for opinions is extremely easy compared to Reddit.
Yes both are biased but as long as you're not a guy infuriating more than half the Reddit employees, you're not usually banned which is opposite to Facebook as it would ban you no matter if you're a new account or an old account or are even posting an opinion on your wall with no friends.
Yes both are biased but as long as you're not a guy infuriating more than half the Reddit employees, you're not usually banned which is opposite to Facebook as it would ban you no matter if you're a new account or an old account or are even posting an opinion on your wall with no friends.
Trying telling someone to kill themselves on Reddit, any accounts tied to your IP will get banned. Sure, that was a mean thing for me to say, but it was towards a troll in Ukrainian threads early in the conflict where people were asking for help on how to evacuate. The troll was telling them to accept the bullets Russia had for them. They weren't banned.
> opinions aren't illegal
The correct opinions aren't illegal. Reddit is not a bastion of free speech [0].
[0] - https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jul/14/reddit-ce...
The correct opinions aren't illegal. Reddit is not a bastion of free speech [0].
[0] - https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jul/14/reddit-ce...
I didn't say it is the bastion of free speech but it's much better than whatever Facebook is.
2 reasons:
1. Reddit does not usually participate in censorship itself. It's extremely rare for reddit accounts to be banned on the whole or for users to be banned from creating communities for like minded people.
2. Reddit allows you to create your custom feed. You could sort by new, you could create your own community, you could post opinions only on your account and reddit would not care.
This is very different from how Facebook acts. The facebook algorithm is very biased, has checks for several trigger words and gradually profiles your political side and starts getting stricter as time passes.
In my last 1-3 years on Facebook, I was been banned for at least 6 times and no I'm not a political person. I was banned for either posting an image that facebook algorithm didn't approve of, opinion on tech that somebody else attacked me for or in general, not being the person facebook ideologically asked me to be.
2 reasons:
1. Reddit does not usually participate in censorship itself. It's extremely rare for reddit accounts to be banned on the whole or for users to be banned from creating communities for like minded people.
2. Reddit allows you to create your custom feed. You could sort by new, you could create your own community, you could post opinions only on your account and reddit would not care.
This is very different from how Facebook acts. The facebook algorithm is very biased, has checks for several trigger words and gradually profiles your political side and starts getting stricter as time passes.
In my last 1-3 years on Facebook, I was been banned for at least 6 times and no I'm not a political person. I was banned for either posting an image that facebook algorithm didn't approve of, opinion on tech that somebody else attacked me for or in general, not being the person facebook ideologically asked me to be.
>It's one of the reasons places like r/politics became such an echo chamber dumpster fire.
The day after election day 2016 in the US, it was actually possible to post non-leftist comments/articles in /r/politics. Basically, the mods and bot owners hadn't been given their new marching orders, and didn't know what to do.
The day after election day 2016 in the US, it was actually possible to post non-leftist comments/articles in /r/politics. Basically, the mods and bot owners hadn't been given their new marching orders, and didn't know what to do.
If true then services mentioned by parent comment should show a very clear dip on that day. That would be interesting to see.
TBH in the 90's most of forums I visited were also moderated by teenagers. If you build your community then you should be able to moderate it, as simple as that.
The internet was very different 30 years ago. What works for a niche, small community often does not scale.
Why does this child's forum where people post silly AI-generated pictures need to "scale"?
I'd rather have unpaid megalomaniacs and teenagers (read: people who care) than a faceless souless corporate bureaucracy.
However both suck in very real but different ways.
However both suck in very real but different ways.
You don't have to pick one or the other. I quit both.
This is the problem.
I got banned from one of the main subreddits for asking an innocent question on something I knew nothing about, something kicked off, I heard about it first on the reddit, couldn't find much info about it as most content around it had already been removed online, questioned if it was really that bad as I could only find one bit of information and was instantly banned for supporting sexual abuse.
I stupidly, avoided the ban by going to a different account as i felt I hadn't done anything wrong, after trying to speak to the mods about it but then Reddit managed to discover this and then my whole account was banned that i'd used for years on reddit.
Insane. Now I just make new accounts every few months and access via VPN's, but I don't get involved in most discussions, only use it for when i want to ask someone a question.
I got banned from one of the main subreddits for asking an innocent question on something I knew nothing about, something kicked off, I heard about it first on the reddit, couldn't find much info about it as most content around it had already been removed online, questioned if it was really that bad as I could only find one bit of information and was instantly banned for supporting sexual abuse.
I stupidly, avoided the ban by going to a different account as i felt I hadn't done anything wrong, after trying to speak to the mods about it but then Reddit managed to discover this and then my whole account was banned that i'd used for years on reddit.
Insane. Now I just make new accounts every few months and access via VPN's, but I don't get involved in most discussions, only use it for when i want to ask someone a question.
In many ways HN is worse than Reddit because comments get flagged way too easily here for being unpopular or off topic. That’s what downvotes are for. It feels really gross and censored in a way Reddit never does. Bury it under downvotes fine on Reddit but it is never just flagged and removed for the tiniest reason.
I do agree with you greatly though that Reddit mods have way too much power. The /r/movies subreddit is pretty garbage because of it. I wish they had just a daily thread for people to discuss movies. They refuse any sort of thing like this and persist their perverse love affair with movie posters.
I do agree with you greatly though that Reddit mods have way too much power. The /r/movies subreddit is pretty garbage because of it. I wish they had just a daily thread for people to discuss movies. They refuse any sort of thing like this and persist their perverse love affair with movie posters.
When comments get downvoted rapidly here, it is usually because their tone is deemed unacceptable by the community. Which, yes, is unabashed tone policing in the most literal sense of the word - but I think that's exactly why HN is much more pleasant to have conversations on than most other platforms online these days.
Also, when something gets downvoted solely for content, if you come back later, it often gets upvoted right back (and then some), with some comments below to the effect that downmodding is not a proper way to express disagreement. I've upvoted greyed-out comments that I strongly disagreed with myself more than once, solely on the basis that they make a valid argument that ought to be a part of the conversation - even if only to debunk it properly.
Also, when something gets downvoted solely for content, if you come back later, it often gets upvoted right back (and then some), with some comments below to the effect that downmodding is not a proper way to express disagreement. I've upvoted greyed-out comments that I strongly disagreed with myself more than once, solely on the basis that they make a valid argument that ought to be a part of the conversation - even if only to debunk it properly.
> In many ways HN is worse than Reddit because comments get flagged way too easily.
Ive never had that problem, but this is a tech and entrepreneurship forum and not a general form.
>That’s what downvotes are for
If you get enough karma here you can down vote, 500 iirc. They do this so you can't create fake accounts to downvote people multiple times.
Ive never had that problem, but this is a tech and entrepreneurship forum and not a general form.
>That’s what downvotes are for
If you get enough karma here you can down vote, 500 iirc. They do this so you can't create fake accounts to downvote people multiple times.
I'm having difficulty seeing how this comment relates to the post.
It's relevant because the moderator in the OP is a teenager and I question if kids should be handed the reigns to moderate like this no questions asked.
If nobody is being harmed, why not. It's unpaid management experience.
Giving kids responsibilities drives maturity.
Giving kids responsibilities drives maturity.
In my experience, moderation can absolutely be harmful to the moderator's own mental health, because it involves removing the posts that aren't allowed. Porn, gore, insane political ramblings... a moderator is responsible for cleaning all that up. A 13 year old should probably not be doing it.
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-57088382
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-57088382
In my experience, it's 13-year-olds that are posting the porn, gore and insane ramblings in the first place.
It's also a volunteer gig. If it makes you uncomfortable, stop doing it.
It's also a volunteer gig. If it makes you uncomfortable, stop doing it.
There's also the occasional direct or thinly-veiled threats of death, doxxing, tyre slashing or public stalking for removing an off-topic post where subby knows better.
Sure, but at the same time that's a lot of power to give to a random teenager (or anyone, for that matter).
Case in point, I dug into it the drama here a bit more, and it seems like the kid basically just handed control of the entire Stable Diffusion Reddit and Discord communities to the Stability AI corporation, no questions asked. That creates all sorts of conflicts of interest, and it seems to have been done against the wishes of the community itself.
Case in point, I dug into it the drama here a bit more, and it seems like the kid basically just handed control of the entire Stable Diffusion Reddit and Discord communities to the Stability AI corporation, no questions asked. That creates all sorts of conflicts of interest, and it seems to have been done against the wishes of the community itself.
Its an internet community. If the mod team screws up you make a new one. The stakes are really low.
That true to some extent, but it's also a bit like saying that if Facebook screws up we can just make a new Facebook and move everyone there. It's not that simple; there are huge network effects at play here.
Other considerations:
- Obviously from a purely technical perspective, making a new subreddit is easier than coding and deploying a new Facebook
- It's less friction for a user to subscribe to a new subreddit than to sign up for a new website
+ The name of a subreddit can contribute to its popularity quite a bit. The community can make a new subreddit, but not a new /r/StableDiffusion
Other considerations:
- Obviously from a purely technical perspective, making a new subreddit is easier than coding and deploying a new Facebook
- It's less friction for a user to subscribe to a new subreddit than to sign up for a new website
+ The name of a subreddit can contribute to its popularity quite a bit. The community can make a new subreddit, but not a new /r/StableDiffusion
Yeah but Reddit isn't mum and dad's little cafe. You can think of it as a public newspaper. Anyone can ask for their own page titled whatever they want and curate that content to their own biases as they please. I could have nabbed the r/StableDiffusion page of the news paper and decided to only allow posts that smear StabilityAI.
Add /s or people will not understand
They should be notified. He was not, from his claims.
I remember at some party I was talking to some guy who moderated something. He took it super serious and took everything a bit more serious than everyone else. I got the feeling from him that he held quite a low job. So it made sense to me that he would decide the desire to do something and have power somewhere so seriously. He talked about how hard it was to place clean.
I kind of felt bad for him, but the thing is, without people like this we don't have Reddit. It just doesn't exist. Community forums and discords don't exist. Honestly, I find them annoying at times but at the same time I understand the need for them.
I kind of felt bad for him, but the thing is, without people like this we don't have Reddit. It just doesn't exist. Community forums and discords don't exist. Honestly, I find them annoying at times but at the same time I understand the need for them.
Anyone can become a Facebook influencer and own pages that will be seen on everyone's news feed. Anyone can moderate Facebook pages and groups. There are few differences. It's web 2.0 by design.
I'm now over 30 years old, but I started being a mod/admin on online spaces when I was about 13. Back then it was IRC, several BBS's, flash chat and flash games.
If I do a total count, I personally supervise over 250k people in Facebook groups alone. Add to that the fact that anyone can comment on Facebook pages and you get an even higher number (millions).
I do it out of love for my communities but I know people who do it just for the power. You'd be surprised at how many pages there about major franchises that share the same admin/mods with the sole goal of controlling what is said there. I know people who create a page the minute a new trailer for a product or franchise comes out without even being interested themselves.
I'm now over 30 years old, but I started being a mod/admin on online spaces when I was about 13. Back then it was IRC, several BBS's, flash chat and flash games.
If I do a total count, I personally supervise over 250k people in Facebook groups alone. Add to that the fact that anyone can comment on Facebook pages and you get an even higher number (millions).
I do it out of love for my communities but I know people who do it just for the power. You'd be surprised at how many pages there about major franchises that share the same admin/mods with the sole goal of controlling what is said there. I know people who create a page the minute a new trailer for a product or franchise comes out without even being interested themselves.
>>> In some ways Reddit is worse than Facebook because it is influenced by anonymous entities with zero checks and balances.
Couldn’t one say the same about hacker news? Great quality content, from possibly anonymous profiles.
Couldn’t one say the same about hacker news? Great quality content, from possibly anonymous profiles.
> When you realise Reddit is moderated by unpaid megalomaniacs
True, there was a recent post on r/India talking about an IMF twitter post talking about India's projected GDP growth and the user was banned from the subreddit because it showed India in good light. This is just one instance, there are lots of big subreddits out there having the tag of being an Official subreddit which are nothing more than propaganda machines.
True, there was a recent post on r/India talking about an IMF twitter post talking about India's projected GDP growth and the user was banned from the subreddit because it showed India in good light. This is just one instance, there are lots of big subreddits out there having the tag of being an Official subreddit which are nothing more than propaganda machines.
The sheer amount of propaganda on Reddit is insane. You could take a random selection of titles off /r/popular and repost it to the /r/circlejerk of 5 years ago and it would've been a top post. I think that's part of the reason for its declining popularity: it's hard to make more absurd posts than what actually becomes popular nowadays.
Every community develops its own biases, HN included, but Reddit is in late-stage groupthink. It wouldn't be a bad thing if what got traction wasn't doom and gloom. So many posts boil down to "the world is a mess"/"I am a mess"/"other political side is so stupid how can other people think different?"/"hate this person for expressing X opinion or doing Y (at least for like 3 days)".
It's not just an online thing only, I've seen many people who have internalized some of these beliefs since they see them expressed so much online. Being ruled by what the internet thinks is acceptable is a horrible way to live your life, but if you're an awkward teen you might very well end up like that.
Maybe I'm just nostalgic but the early internet had this care free spirit where every interaction, good or bad, seemed somewhat fun at least since it was crazy you were able to at all, and there were no stakes. People would flame you for your political opinions but you'd just shout at each other until a moderator told you to shut up, not have an entire community go against you since you don't agree with them. It was fun!. This "ganging-up" OTOH induces the brain to start modifying its beliefs to fit the group. A very normal process, but harmful. And younger people, the audience of Reddit, are exactly the most vulnerable to this online peer pressure.
Every community develops its own biases, HN included, but Reddit is in late-stage groupthink. It wouldn't be a bad thing if what got traction wasn't doom and gloom. So many posts boil down to "the world is a mess"/"I am a mess"/"other political side is so stupid how can other people think different?"/"hate this person for expressing X opinion or doing Y (at least for like 3 days)".
It's not just an online thing only, I've seen many people who have internalized some of these beliefs since they see them expressed so much online. Being ruled by what the internet thinks is acceptable is a horrible way to live your life, but if you're an awkward teen you might very well end up like that.
Maybe I'm just nostalgic but the early internet had this care free spirit where every interaction, good or bad, seemed somewhat fun at least since it was crazy you were able to at all, and there were no stakes. People would flame you for your political opinions but you'd just shout at each other until a moderator told you to shut up, not have an entire community go against you since you don't agree with them. It was fun!. This "ganging-up" OTOH induces the brain to start modifying its beliefs to fit the group. A very normal process, but harmful. And younger people, the audience of Reddit, are exactly the most vulnerable to this online peer pressure.
I wish it was teenagers. Reddit is terrified of old moderators leaving so they allow them free reign with zero accountability or even a way for users to dispute anything. They re probably having a hard time finding young people (they prefer discord) and are stuck with the same aging people moderating for 15 years. And those have become way worse megalomaniacs over time
Evidently, teenagers are not the problem
Evidently, teenagers are not the problem
[deleted]
I got banned on /r/world news supposedly because I said something negative about Ukraine. The only thing I wanted was a healthy dialog without picking a side. I asked for clearification. Didn't hear anything. Got fed up with reddit anyway.
That sub has been long gone, unfortunately. The same goes for /r/europe, even though in this latter case I think the hive-mind is at least a little bit more genuine, as in there are real people holding those views, unlike what happens on /r/worldnews.
HN is moderated by upvotes/downvotes in a similar fashion. Hivemind floats to the top the most mundane of viewpoints.
imo, we need to eliminate upvotes/downvotes and just have a single flag/report type system for vitriolic content.
imo, we need to eliminate upvotes/downvotes and just have a single flag/report type system for vitriolic content.
Getting downvoted is not at all the same as having comments deleted, or getting banned, which is incredibly common on some subreddits.
Also not giving new users access to downvotes hopefully means that those downvoting are somewhat good citizens.
Also not giving new users access to downvotes hopefully means that those downvoting are somewhat good citizens.
Lets not kid ourselves, the main reason HN is much higher quality than Reddit is because of the users. It could all change tomorrow if they find out about us.
People forget that Reddit used to look a lot like HN does today in like 2006-10 before the Digg exodus. Today Reddit is almost entirely kids.
People forget that Reddit used to look a lot like HN does today in like 2006-10 before the Digg exodus. Today Reddit is almost entirely kids.
Also the quantity of users and comments. You can still see comments that have been downvoted by scrolling a bit. On Reddit, unpopular comments will be buried and require extra clicks to access.
The downvote (for me) is too ambiguous. Without a couple words specifically about why, it often (to me) comes off as, "I didn't like what you said, I'm too lazy to reply, so I'll down vote you." It's hard to take DV'ing seriously when there's zero context. How many times have we read a sub-comment similar to, "I'm not sure why you're being downvoted..." Nuff said.
Frankly, I can't be bothered to downvote. I've seen plenty of questionable things, and I just keep scrolling. I'd rather save my energy for upvotes. I'd rather focus on the positive. Let someone else play HN Police if that fulfills some kinky need they have.
Frankly, I can't be bothered to downvote. I've seen plenty of questionable things, and I just keep scrolling. I'd rather save my energy for upvotes. I'd rather focus on the positive. Let someone else play HN Police if that fulfills some kinky need they have.
I miss the days when people would almost always leave a comment when downvoting. That was back before you could "undown" a fat-finger downvote.
IMO downvoting is useful for comments that don't warrant a reply, or where replying would only encourage more bad behavior.
Right. When it's so painfully obvious. So then why bother? What's the objective at that point?
I agree it's not the same as mods literally removing content or banning users but it still yields the same result. People observe what type of thought gets upvotes and repeat those views/opinions over and over. This of course is exactly how reddit works too outside of mods.
> hopefully means that those downvoting are somewhat good citizens.
Definitely not. It only takes a few flags on HN to completely remove something from the front-page. It only takes a few downvotes to grey it nothingness.
> hopefully means that those downvoting are somewhat good citizens.
Definitely not. It only takes a few flags on HN to completely remove something from the front-page. It only takes a few downvotes to grey it nothingness.
Yeah, because they want to save on mod costs, I guess. Related to that: I am wondering, does @dang get a monthly paycheck for his incredible work?
Yup, @dang is paid.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23810452
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23810452
Worth every penny.
How much?
Why do you want to know? I can't imagine how knowing that answer is going to make anything better for anyone here. Are you a mod of a similar service and need something to negotiate with? Even as a negotiating datapoint, it's only valuable if YC would hire you to moderate (which I doubt) and you can use that as leverage.
If it was public, then random users might demand more of dang, thinking that his salary justifies it.
If it was public, then random users might demand more of dang, thinking that his salary justifies it.
Keeping salaries public in an industry lets you use them as a negotiating datapoint anywhere in that industry.
Not too related to the discussion, but I'm really hoping Twitch moderators start asking for a paycheck once their streamer's realtime chat reaches a certain size, as they have to stay quick and attentive for hours straight. But sadly, they often start when the streamer is smaller and work for them on their own dime and remain that way.
Not too related to the discussion, but I'm really hoping Twitch moderators start asking for a paycheck once their streamer's realtime chat reaches a certain size, as they have to stay quick and attentive for hours straight. But sadly, they often start when the streamer is smaller and work for them on their own dime and remain that way.
It's definitely none of your business, but as someone who does similar work, I'd guess in the territory of $100k–150k. (That's not how much I get paid, but I work at a much smaller and less established org.)
I'm pretty sure the HN moderators do it as a job and not just as a hobby. I remember reading this[1] a few years back when it came out, and from a quick scan it seems to support this, although it's possible in my skimming I might have misread.
[1]: https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-silicon-valley/th...
[1]: https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-silicon-valley/th...
Article about him here: https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-silicon-valley/th...
This says a lot about the biases of many journalists and why you are likely not getting a neutral viewpoint from many of them:
"Picturing the moderators responsible for steering conversation on Hacker News, I imagined a team of men who proudly self-identify as neoliberals and are active in the effective-altruism movement. (I assumed they’d be white men; it never occurred to me that women, or people of color, could be behind the site.) Meeting them, I feared, would be like participating in a live-action comment thread about the merits of Amazon Web Services or whether women should be referred to as “females.” “Debate us!” I imagined them saying, in unison, from their Aeron chairs."
"Picturing the moderators responsible for steering conversation on Hacker News, I imagined a team of men who proudly self-identify as neoliberals and are active in the effective-altruism movement. (I assumed they’d be white men; it never occurred to me that women, or people of color, could be behind the site.) Meeting them, I feared, would be like participating in a live-action comment thread about the merits of Amazon Web Services or whether women should be referred to as “females.” “Debate us!” I imagined them saying, in unison, from their Aeron chairs."
That strikes me as genuinely insane. I don't understand why anyone would care what journalists have to say anymore.
I don't know why Reddit moderation audit log isn't available for everyone. This is toxic.
And in other ways, reddit has much better moderation than either Twitter or Facebook
Reddit's admins are even worse people.
reddit is awful
this is why i prefer 4ch
[deleted]
[deleted]
I'm guessing that by choosing to respect the wishes of artists, stability has formed direct lines of contact with institutions (understandably) in favor of the status quo for art. Politics, to a degree.
I respect the initial decision, but this is all a bit much.
(pure speculation btw)
I respect the initial decision, but this is all a bit much.
(pure speculation btw)
I don't really understand what's being alleged here. Nothing really seems bad to me. This person helped out when Stable Diffusion was much smaller by being a mod and creating a discord server. The op seems to say that Stable Diffusion was generally nice to him but communicated taking the discord channel poorly - okay, so?
If you're working with people, especially on a rapidly moving startup, sometimes things aren't going to be communicated well. If the people are, on net, good to you with some problems shouldn't you be working with those people to improve problems rather than writing reddit exposès?
If you're working with people, especially on a rapidly moving startup, sometimes things aren't going to be communicated well. If the people are, on net, good to you with some problems shouldn't you be working with those people to improve problems rather than writing reddit exposès?
reddit mod management is a bit haywire. I am mod at a rather largish subreddit (> 750K subs/readers), and despite the top mod being gone from the subreddit for something like 6? years now and virtually inactive on reddit, I can't get him removed. I've gone through channels but, sigh.
When did you go through the process?
Reddit recently updated its top mod removal process (recently as in 5 days ago) and dramatically weakened requirements for removing top mods.
More information on that here: https://www.reddit.com/r/modnews/comments/xwim7v/updates_to_...
Reddit recently updated its top mod removal process (recently as in 5 days ago) and dramatically weakened requirements for removing top mods.
More information on that here: https://www.reddit.com/r/modnews/comments/xwim7v/updates_to_...
As an aside, there was some drama on /r/CSCareerQuestionsEU that spilled over into /r/CSCareerQuestions around a month ago ( https://old.reddit.com/r/cscareerquestionsEU/comments/xjbixl... and https://old.reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/comments/xoq0uu/r... https://www.unddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/comments/xoq0uu/r... )
The EU one isn't large, but the regular one is approaching 1M.
The EU one isn't large, but the regular one is approaching 1M.
months and months ago. Thanks for the heads up. I'll look into that.
Have you thought about moving to a Lemmy instance? When a platform neglects you with no recourse, that seems like the best option from my POV.
It did seem a weird turn of event them restricting 1.5 weights. Seems instead it was just a piece of the puzzle.
Which they aren't intending to do, but it's just part of the fud currently spread around.
Rarely have I seen so much fud spread, while also systematically using the least charitable interpretation of anything stability.ai or emad said/announced. (the whole covid skeptics shit storm comes to mind).
I could understand where this would be coming from if it was aimed against the use of these AI models, but this seems to be from the proponents.
Of course, I can see the dissatisfaction, but not the escalation, does any one really think stability.ai should associate itself with software piracy?! Cause that's what this started about, enabling the use of a a stolen model and weights. The way I set it the only safe action for stability.ai was to distance themselves from this as much as possible.
Of course the reddit “takeover“ happened a week before these events, the active mod, the one that started the linked topic, kept his moderation rights. One issue was that SD wanted to disclose private information to the modaal that required an NDA, not all ex mods wanted to sign. Either way the situation is more complex, not handled ideally, but again, using words life tricked is the least charitable interpretation. And for better or worse with stability.ai controlling the subreddit, in order to put distance between them and the tools that enable the use of pirated models (and in that repo there is an explicit discussion topic on how to use the pirated model to get the same results as novelai (the source of that model)) of course the link to the github repo that enabled the use of these was removed from the stickied topic listing blessed UIs and other things.
Rarely have I seen so much fud spread, while also systematically using the least charitable interpretation of anything stability.ai or emad said/announced. (the whole covid skeptics shit storm comes to mind).
I could understand where this would be coming from if it was aimed against the use of these AI models, but this seems to be from the proponents.
Of course, I can see the dissatisfaction, but not the escalation, does any one really think stability.ai should associate itself with software piracy?! Cause that's what this started about, enabling the use of a a stolen model and weights. The way I set it the only safe action for stability.ai was to distance themselves from this as much as possible.
Of course the reddit “takeover“ happened a week before these events, the active mod, the one that started the linked topic, kept his moderation rights. One issue was that SD wanted to disclose private information to the modaal that required an NDA, not all ex mods wanted to sign. Either way the situation is more complex, not handled ideally, but again, using words life tricked is the least charitable interpretation. And for better or worse with stability.ai controlling the subreddit, in order to put distance between them and the tools that enable the use of pirated models (and in that repo there is an explicit discussion topic on how to use the pirated model to get the same results as novelai (the source of that model)) of course the link to the github repo that enabled the use of these was removed from the stickied topic listing blessed UIs and other things.
[deleted]
I wish this post was renamed to, "Discord transfers the ownership of fan Discord server to company without owner's consent" @dang
This story reminded me of the Public Apis Github repo situation. Similar scenario, as soon as it became under corporate control things got wonky.
Repo issue explaining the situation: https://github.com/public-apis/public-apis/issues/3104
Repo issue explaining the situation: https://github.com/public-apis/public-apis/issues/3104
Anyone who "owns" a server or a sub should look at the TOS. Chances are they don't own anything. This is especially true for minors.
Decentralisation fixes this.
A minor? How do kids learn to talk all smart like that? I was real dumb when I was under 18.
They achieve linguistic mastery by not breathing lead fumes throughout their childhood.
I recently posted on a subreddit that has the name of a big company.
The post became popular.
I could not believe my eyes, when some hours later, the post was edited.
I have never seen that before. Mods cannot edit users posts, right? Do some companies have superpowers on their sub, or did they reach out to Reddit to change the post?
The post became popular.
I could not believe my eyes, when some hours later, the post was edited.
I have never seen that before. Mods cannot edit users posts, right? Do some companies have superpowers on their sub, or did they reach out to Reddit to change the post?
Mods cannot edit posts, only admins. In my experience, however, reddit generally opts to fully remove any posts that break terms of service or guidelines. I've never seen a partial edit of another user's post by an admin with one drama-filled exception.
On Reddit, supposedly only admins can edit posts. You should name and shame the company/sub
Unless it is a very recent change, that is always been true and admins don't even typically edit comments/submissions (with one very famous and controversial exception[0]). Mods can apply flair I believe though.
[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/5frg1n/tifu_...
[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/5frg1n/tifu_...
There is no mechanism to enable mods to edit user posts. If what you're saying is correct, it would be quite the controversy.
Use https://camas.unddit.com/ to look at the original version of your post, or share it here. You can also hover over the timestamp on old.reddit.com to show the last edit date.
Use https://camas.unddit.com/ to look at the original version of your post, or share it here. You can also hover over the timestamp on old.reddit.com to show the last edit date.
The admins have done it and even admitted to it. Reddit is a for-profit corporation and has no obligation to maintain integrity unfortunately. They are beholden to shareholders and will do what their large customers ask.
Admins admitted to it once and it created enough controversy that they just fully delete stuff now.
If your post was edited, you should change your password and enable two factor authentication. Editing posts is not something mods can do. Admins (Reddit employees) are able to do this, but it is an extremely serious action that raises red flags.
If your post was edited to say "[Removed]" or "[Removed by Reddit]" that is a deletion, not an edit.
[Disclaimer: used to work for Reddit]
If your post was edited to say "[Removed]" or "[Removed by Reddit]" that is a deletion, not an edit.
[Disclaimer: used to work for Reddit]
You should also check the login history for your account-- it may not be impossible that your account is compromised.
The entire subreddit is in a process of community migration now: https://old.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/