Reddit has been down for more than an hour(theverge.com)
theverge.com
Reddit has been down for more than an hour
https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/14/23640132/reddit-down-outage-offline-loading-posts-comments
280 comments
This is great I was in the middle of a pretty nasty argument and now it'll just stop
IDK what it is about reddit that makes it easy to get sucked into an argument. When I'm twitter, I just speak my mind. If you don't like it, fine, I feel little compulsion to engage. If things get nasty, I just mute or block.
I feel like I get the same amount of benefit out of each site, but twitter delivers it w/ less stress. Maybe it's just an artifact of how, on Twitter, I generally only follow 'experts' and interact w/ their followers vs the sorts of folks who camp on Reddit waiting to start arguments.
I feel like I get the same amount of benefit out of each site, but twitter delivers it w/ less stress. Maybe it's just an artifact of how, on Twitter, I generally only follow 'experts' and interact w/ their followers vs the sorts of folks who camp on Reddit waiting to start arguments.
It's in part the upvote / downvote, an horrible gamification of online discourse triggering your need to win the "spectators", even if you end up not having any vote at all because no one cares.
Personally, I miss the old slashdot system. It was far from perfect, but it was still much better I think.
Personally, I miss the old slashdot system. It was far from perfect, but it was still much better I think.
I use a css script to hide all karma on reddit. Upvote me, downvote me, I don't care about imaginary internet points. The only thing I loathe is posting something factually correct, but unpopular, getting downvoted, and then reddit decides 'you've been doing that too much!' and stops you from posting. No thanks. I'll just close the tab and move on with my life.
It’s really amazing how there are some simple and readily available economic stats that will get you downvoted deep into a hole in the ground, and people will call you a literal nazi. Reddit is a special place.
What economic statistics would those be?
My first guess: comparison of wages for men and women but adjusted to take into account years of experience and occupational choices. That comparison doesn't align very well with the ever popular "census data" report about wages for all women vs all men which "proves" that woman aren't paid "equally".
Almost any data that paints a positive picture of progress in the last 40 years will get you nuked. For example, median household incomes have actually risen and Americans are generally far richer today despite healthcare and education becoming more expensive relatively.
Can you share this?
I think this is the one I used:
https://old.reddit.com/r/Enhancement/comments/65fb3u/css_sni...
> 'you've been doing that too much!' and stops you from posting.
What does this mean? Does reddit actually ban you if you're downvoted "too much"?
Seems crazy.
What does this mean? Does reddit actually ban you if you're downvoted "too much"?
Seems crazy.
Nah, they just rate limit you to only posting once every 10 minutes if you're getting heavily downvoted. It's irritating as heck, but not a big deal, I just close the tab.
Thank you.
That's fascinating. I never knew this.
My brother's reddit account was suspended recently. He's somewhat conservative and the last bit of posting he made (that I could find) was arguing about COVID & masks. I don't know if he posted anything controversial beyond that because I haven't had a chance to talk to him recently. He seemed to relish going into hostile subreddits and "mixing it up."
That's fascinating. I never knew this.
My brother's reddit account was suspended recently. He's somewhat conservative and the last bit of posting he made (that I could find) was arguing about COVID & masks. I don't know if he posted anything controversial beyond that because I haven't had a chance to talk to him recently. He seemed to relish going into hostile subreddits and "mixing it up."
posting too much. Much like HN some reddit groups have a time out to let you cool off if you go over N posts, especially if your account is new. Happens to me a lot since I delete my account and start over ever 3 or 4 months. I don't care about karma more than say enough to not get rate limited.
Why hide instead of just ignoring?
[deleted]
Why ignore it when I can remove a toxic element entirely?
> It's in part the upvote / downvote, an horrible gamification of online discourse
HN isn't any different. Possibly worse, since only accounts with a certain level of internet points are permitted to judge others.
HN isn't any different. Possibly worse, since only accounts with a certain level of internet points are permitted to judge others.
Agreed, this has been my experience as well.
Well, I'd argue Reddit is worse simply because of the topics of discussion that proliferate there, and because insulting is allowed in many subs. But the gamification part and the subtle flamewars are very present here on HN.
Well, I'd argue Reddit is worse simply because of the topics of discussion that proliferate there, and because insulting is allowed in many subs. But the gamification part and the subtle flamewars are very present here on HN.
HN might not be different in terms of upvotes and downvotes, and wanting to get fake internet points, but I still find it qualitatively different. In particular, I have never felt the urge to read downvoted comments on reddit. On HN, if it’s an interesting thread, I find I will often intentionally read the faintest comments. I’ve found that on good threads even the quality of unpopular posts provide me with something at least worth considering.
> It's in part the upvote / downvote, an horrible gamification of online discourse triggering your need to win the "spectators", even if you end up not having any vote at all because no one cares.
Not everyone plays that game. I upvote all of my opposition in reasonable, heated arguments on Reddit to give them an advantage. That way, if my ideas truly have merit, the wisdom of the crowd will let me know. It’s a way to check myself and call BS on my own ego.
Not everyone plays that game. I upvote all of my opposition in reasonable, heated arguments on Reddit to give them an advantage. That way, if my ideas truly have merit, the wisdom of the crowd will let me know. It’s a way to check myself and call BS on my own ego.
This is the way. In theory, you're only supposed to downvote comments that don't contribute to the discussion. For me, that mostly amounts to very rude/unhelpful comments or extremely flawed arguments (flat earth level, not just arguments I strongly disagree with).
On the other hand, I find it's easy to be downvoted into oblivion for no apparent reason. I find it hard to just ignore and forget about those threads, even though I know I should. Example (sorry, I have to get this off my chest): a redditor with a history of substance abuse started with winemaking (as a hobby) and asked how many glasses of wine they could safely consume. A physician (verified in that subreddit) responded that two glasses every day would be fine. I commented (as a medical layperson) that suggesting OP that it's safe to drink two glasses of wine every day (not just every now and then) might not be a good idea considering their history, at least to my knowledge. Suffice to say, that day I learned that some people seem to be easily offended when commenting about reasonable alcohol consumption considering past addictions. Or perhaps I'm vastly overestimating the risks of substance abuse disorders...
On the other hand, I find it's easy to be downvoted into oblivion for no apparent reason. I find it hard to just ignore and forget about those threads, even though I know I should. Example (sorry, I have to get this off my chest): a redditor with a history of substance abuse started with winemaking (as a hobby) and asked how many glasses of wine they could safely consume. A physician (verified in that subreddit) responded that two glasses every day would be fine. I commented (as a medical layperson) that suggesting OP that it's safe to drink two glasses of wine every day (not just every now and then) might not be a good idea considering their history, at least to my knowledge. Suffice to say, that day I learned that some people seem to be easily offended when commenting about reasonable alcohol consumption considering past addictions. Or perhaps I'm vastly overestimating the risks of substance abuse disorders...
themulticaster says>"Suffice to say, that day I learned that some people seem to be easily offended when commenting about reasonable alcohol consumption considering past addictions. Or perhaps I'm vastly overestimating the risks of substance abuse disorders..."<
I agree with you. Perhaps they read your post after their second (or later) glass of wine!8-)).
I agree with you. Perhaps they read your post after their second (or later) glass of wine!8-)).
Hard to put my finger on why that shit is so objectionable, but yeah, your response deserves the reddit equivalent of a swift kick to the groin.
> That way, if my ideas truly have merit, the wisdom of the crowd will let me know
I thought that was a good idea, until I started seeing posts about stuff I knew really well.
I thought that was a good idea, until I started seeing posts about stuff I knew really well.
> I thought that was a good idea, until I started seeing posts about stuff I knew really well.
There’s no perfect system or perfect just-world. Like you, I see mistakes like this all the time on Reddit, with some of the best examples of what you describe found on r/todayilearned. And I’ve seen lots of cognitive bias at work just like you have. For example, if multiple people downvote someone who has the correct answer, other people will often jump in and follow the downvoters just because of the bandwagon effect. When my Reddit account gets more than 100,000 karma, I will often abandon it and start over, because people tend to upvote accounts with higher karma instead of honestly appraising the content. I love starting with zero karma and watching all the dynamics play out with a fresh account to limit this kind of bias.
There’s no perfect system or perfect just-world. Like you, I see mistakes like this all the time on Reddit, with some of the best examples of what you describe found on r/todayilearned. And I’ve seen lots of cognitive bias at work just like you have. For example, if multiple people downvote someone who has the correct answer, other people will often jump in and follow the downvoters just because of the bandwagon effect. When my Reddit account gets more than 100,000 karma, I will often abandon it and start over, because people tend to upvote accounts with higher karma instead of honestly appraising the content. I love starting with zero karma and watching all the dynamics play out with a fresh account to limit this kind of bias.
My current approach to the Reddit game is reportmaxxing. I'll make innocent-sounding comments with subtle triggers that will enrage some people, then pretend I have no idea what they're talking about in their furious replies, politely winding them up this way in our back-and-forth until they say something rash that I can report them for.
If I can frustrate them enough to make a violent threat, that's usually enough to get their account permanently banned. And then I win.
I got an account with an 11-year history wiped out the other day, that's my high score so far. Good times.
If I can frustrate them enough to make a violent threat, that's usually enough to get their account permanently banned. And then I win.
I got an account with an 11-year history wiped out the other day, that's my high score so far. Good times.
This is called dog whistling, and is frequently used to subtly spread racist and fascist views. If you're not doing that, arguing in bad faith is a waste of everyone's time and provides no value to the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_whistle_%28politics%29
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_whistle_%28politics%29
Once again we reflexively make it about race. It's basically Goodwin-ing a thread at this point.
Parent poster could just be an asshole trolling people.
Parent poster could just be an asshole trolling people.
An accurate summary of your comment is “making people upset makes me happy” and I just want to make sure you’re aware of that.
I like to think of it as freeing them from the conversational prison that is Reddit. As such, I'm essentially doing them a favour. If I didn't find this so personally enjoyable, it would be a wholly selfless act.
[deleted]
[deleted]
There must be bots that do this. I need to look through that old Cambridge Analytica code (or use ChatGPT 4).
I’ve seen a lot of people doing this across many platforms now. It’s the equivalent of baiting someone into punching you then calling the cops
That sounds like trolling.
as the kids say these days: you need to touch grass my dude :)
This reminded me of a time I got into an argument on Reddit. Someone eventually chimed in that I was probably right, that my logic was sound, but "look at all the downvotes you are getting". Even as they typed it out, it never occurred to them that there could be something more important than the internet points. I explained if you never get downvoted to oblivion, you're probably not saying anything interesting.
The thing I hate most about reddit are all the little bubbles that are created by bad moderation. Sometimes, this is even automated. You can only post on certain threads if you have the right skin color (r/BlackPeopleTwitter), or ideological disposition (r/conservative) or net worth (r/fatFire).
The absolute worst are when some mod shadow bans you (all posts / comments are silently removed), and refuses to tell you why. I had that happen on my city subreddit, I guess because I said we needed a larger police presence to get property crime under control. That was the only remotely controversial thing I've ever said there.
The absolute worst are when some mod shadow bans you (all posts / comments are silently removed), and refuses to tell you why. I had that happen on my city subreddit, I guess because I said we needed a larger police presence to get property crime under control. That was the only remotely controversial thing I've ever said there.
> You can only post on certain threads if you have the right skin color (r/BlackPeopleTwitter)
The joke goes that BPT is all white people, and TwoXChromosomes isn’t actually moderated by anyone XX
The joke goes that BPT is all white people, and TwoXChromosomes isn’t actually moderated by anyone XX
Mods do not have the ability to shadow ban users.
Well, alright, explain how any post or comment I make on a sub instantly disappears, and it only happens on that sub?
The /r/sandiego subreddit, for instance, is controlled by a weirdo who masquerades as two moderators and who will shadowban you for merely participating in the subreddit created to escape his control(/r/sandiegan).
sometimes people want to get together and not be antagonized by contrarians and people looking for a fight on the internet. i get it, even if i think the results of something like conservative are overall negative. whats the alternative.
black people in the US have some kind of shared experience they want to discuss, conservatives maybe don't want to fight with everyone all the time. its not my place to invade then. if there are people who to engage online with multiple viewpoints there are plenty of places to do that.
i wish the city subreddits enforced residency requirement or something similar to post
black people in the US have some kind of shared experience they want to discuss, conservatives maybe don't want to fight with everyone all the time. its not my place to invade then. if there are people who to engage online with multiple viewpoints there are plenty of places to do that.
i wish the city subreddits enforced residency requirement or something similar to post
If you wish to constrain participation in a sub, simply create a private one and only invite those you want to participate.
What I really disagree with is having a public sub that's basically 'read only' except for your chosen group. I will straight up filter your sub from r/all if you do that.
What I really disagree with is having a public sub that's basically 'read only' except for your chosen group. I will straight up filter your sub from r/all if you do that.
I automatically assume if im being downvoted im right lol.
Some sort of meta moderation of subreddit moderators could be such an improvement over there if well implemented... I miss the old slashdot system as well.
> an horrible gamification of online discourse triggering your need to win the "spectators"
Win the crowd and you'll win your freedom.
Win the crowd and you'll win your freedom.
I'm sad we 'lost' /. to the morons. I think a lot of us gave up at some point and moved on to kuro5hin, reddit, hn, etc.
It's too bad the content of a site is tied to its moderation system. It would be great if you could, say, use reddit but abide by a completely independent way of moderating.
It's too bad the content of a site is tied to its moderation system. It would be great if you could, say, use reddit but abide by a completely independent way of moderating.
The morons are the ones who click on adverts, and so long as clicking on adverts is the goal, they will always win.
That's why there are no social networks. They are moron menageries. Idiot aggregators. Stupidity sieves.
That's why there are no social networks. They are moron menageries. Idiot aggregators. Stupidity sieves.
How many adverts have you clicked on at Reddit? Or HN.
Plenty of ways to market without clickable ads. Shaping consensus and datamining reactions, in real time, is far more useful than getting the bottom 33% to click on ads which are easily blocked by modern browser plugins.
Plenty of ways to market without clickable ads. Shaping consensus and datamining reactions, in real time, is far more useful than getting the bottom 33% to click on ads which are easily blocked by modern browser plugins.
I miss kuro5hin and if we are going back in history, Plastic as well.
I should check if my five digit slashdot account is still valid.
Edit: yup, still works! #86xxx
Edit: yup, still works! #86xxx
Slashdot user ID measuring contest? Okay I'm in: #130x
The last time I was in such a contest I started out very proud of my low number, but was quickly and thoroughly beaten many times by people with numbers down to the single digits...
Oh well, I was an early user of the WWW too, using Mosaic. Before that: nn and gopher.
The last time I was in such a contest I started out very proud of my low number, but was quickly and thoroughly beaten many times by people with numbers down to the single digits...
Oh well, I was an early user of the WWW too, using Mosaic. Before that: nn and gopher.
Heh, mine still works too. #1xxxx id.
Used to love the site back in the day.
Used to love the site back in the day.
Anyone using moderator bots?
Twitter is a megaphone at best, and a series of bumper stickers at worst. Reddit is a cocktail party. If you want to say your piece, and can’t handle criticism, Twitter is the place. If you care about context and nuance, Reddit is much better.
The problem with Reddit is the same problem with cocktail parties — you really need to read the room before spouting of something that will be unpopular.
The problem with Reddit is the same problem with cocktail parties — you really need to read the room before spouting of something that will be unpopular.
Context and nuance? On Reddit? Usually I think it lacks both.
If Twitter is the frame of reference being used, then Reddit wins out by virtue of layout and content allowances.
Trying to cram context and nuance, about topics that can be very big and complicated, into 280 character text bites is not the easiest task.
While the character limit for a Reddit comment is 10k.
Trying to cram context and nuance, about topics that can be very big and complicated, into 280 character text bites is not the easiest task.
While the character limit for a Reddit comment is 10k.
I think its wrong to speak about Reddit as a whole. There a lot of small moderated communities where you can discuss anything without "noise". Just ignore most popular sabs.
Yay, someone downvoted me just like on a reddit!
Yay, someone downvoted me just like on a reddit!
Is it a front-page sub? or a niche / specialized / hobby sub?
Lowest common denominator means front page or highly trafficked subs will be terrible. But find a smaller community and it's generally better.
Lowest common denominator means front page or highly trafficked subs will be terrible. But find a smaller community and it's generally better.
Reddit is a negative image of context and nuance. That site repels anyone who knows anything about anything.
This type of flip generalization is exactly the type of “I’m going to tell you how it is” that might drive someone away from Reddit and toward Twitter.
I’m not talking about /r/politics or any of the other massive subreddits, I’m talking about tiny subreddits like /r/bikewrench or /r/hats. Subreddits narrowed to the point that conversation is actually reasonable. The discussion in /r/neoliberal and /r/socialdemocracy both have me subscribed.
I’m not talking about /r/politics or any of the other massive subreddits, I’m talking about tiny subreddits like /r/bikewrench or /r/hats. Subreddits narrowed to the point that conversation is actually reasonable. The discussion in /r/neoliberal and /r/socialdemocracy both have me subscribed.
The problem with political subreddits is they have gigantic blind spots due to heavy groupthink and constant obsession with semantics and labeling.
I've never seen a discussion of why some political idea is better than another getting in depth political theory with wide coverage outside of the current groupthink on reddit. It's always varying forms of appeals to popularity, authority, or someones favorite confirmation bias study that they are trying to shove down your throat to get a sweet dunk. The way the political subs differ is just rhetorical window dressing. Totally useless.
The other kinds of subs can be nice for a time. But i've always seen them to either die, become popular/overrun, and/or get a cancerous mod that makes everyone miserable.
I've never seen a discussion of why some political idea is better than another getting in depth political theory with wide coverage outside of the current groupthink on reddit. It's always varying forms of appeals to popularity, authority, or someones favorite confirmation bias study that they are trying to shove down your throat to get a sweet dunk. The way the political subs differ is just rhetorical window dressing. Totally useless.
The other kinds of subs can be nice for a time. But i've always seen them to either die, become popular/overrun, and/or get a cancerous mod that makes everyone miserable.
Not just that, but the moderator's bias is often responsible for culling any deliberative participation. I mean, r/conservative can almost be as bad as r/pyongyang.
I mean... you refer to the groupthink as some sort of force on the discussion, when in reality, you have a bunch of people who think a specific political or economic policy is sensible.
This obviously has it's limits when the group has diverse views about the policies.
The strangest, and often most interesting conversations that take place in /r/socialdemocracy when the socialists or communists who see social democracy as a stepping stone toward socialism are forced to deal with the other social democrats that firmly think some/many markets are good for society as a whole. There is a ton of nuance in those conversations, while at the same time, anyone suggesting that we shouldn't have some form of socialized health-care will be laughed out of the room.
Another example of this is the Strong Towns movement and their various subreddits. It seems to be a very serious, very cross-party neo-urbanism community which puts Bernie Sanders voters in the same subs as Mitt Romney voters, all discussing the merits of walkable cities and the inefficiencies and concerns about municipal bond debt capacity.
These niche political subs can get pretty interesting.
This obviously has it's limits when the group has diverse views about the policies.
The strangest, and often most interesting conversations that take place in /r/socialdemocracy when the socialists or communists who see social democracy as a stepping stone toward socialism are forced to deal with the other social democrats that firmly think some/many markets are good for society as a whole. There is a ton of nuance in those conversations, while at the same time, anyone suggesting that we shouldn't have some form of socialized health-care will be laughed out of the room.
Another example of this is the Strong Towns movement and their various subreddits. It seems to be a very serious, very cross-party neo-urbanism community which puts Bernie Sanders voters in the same subs as Mitt Romney voters, all discussing the merits of walkable cities and the inefficiencies and concerns about municipal bond debt capacity.
These niche political subs can get pretty interesting.
In my experience on reddit every interaction starts from 0 with minimal if any shared knowledge.
You speak of people debating communism vs socialism vs pro-market democrats, etc. etc. are these debates rich with historical and philosophical examples, building on a canon and discussing the ethics of how these ideas would actually play out? Or is it news articles, rhetorical games, semantics, and confirmation bias studies?
The real significance of the difference there is the sincerity of the curiosity to find a solution. If someone has dedicated their time (reading serious, old, important books or doing REAL research) to understanding they have very few original thoughts and observing what came before them so they can say something productive. From what I have seen, that sincerity is stuck at a high school level pretty much site wide.
For example, here on HN you can actually find people who have pretty deep knowledge in their fields and they don't need an online debate to show that. They just contribute and people often ask questions of them not as an infallible source or to test them but out of curiosity. The 'debates' that do happen here assume a much different character from reddit most of the time. There's a much healthier dynamic and its as realistic as I think it can get for what is possible on a text based social media platform.
You speak of people debating communism vs socialism vs pro-market democrats, etc. etc. are these debates rich with historical and philosophical examples, building on a canon and discussing the ethics of how these ideas would actually play out? Or is it news articles, rhetorical games, semantics, and confirmation bias studies?
The real significance of the difference there is the sincerity of the curiosity to find a solution. If someone has dedicated their time (reading serious, old, important books or doing REAL research) to understanding they have very few original thoughts and observing what came before them so they can say something productive. From what I have seen, that sincerity is stuck at a high school level pretty much site wide.
For example, here on HN you can actually find people who have pretty deep knowledge in their fields and they don't need an online debate to show that. They just contribute and people often ask questions of them not as an infallible source or to test them but out of curiosity. The 'debates' that do happen here assume a much different character from reddit most of the time. There's a much healthier dynamic and its as realistic as I think it can get for what is possible on a text based social media platform.
Even the smaller subreddits tend to have lots of groupthink. There’s usually a prevailing viewpoint on any given sub and anything contrary is downvoted to oblivion.
Maybe I’m not looking at the right subreddits though, who knows.
Maybe I’m not looking at the right subreddits though, who knows.
It really depends on the community you are involved in.
To add on a little: There are tiny subs that feel like HackerNews, but all the giant subs that the app and the normal site (not https://old.reddit.com ) funnel you into are complete cesspools
The natural cycle of communities on reddit is being overrun by r/all and becoming popular enough for some careerist mod to seek a position there and play politics, eventually bending it to some commercial or ideological interest personal or otherwise.
There's a bunch of communities I enjoyed for a while. All of them are polluted now.
There's a bunch of communities I enjoyed for a while. All of them are polluted now.
What kind of interactions are you expecting to have? People on any social media are either career self promoters, or they are on the toilet, waiting impatiently somewhere or procrastinating small snippets of time. It's only ever going to have superficial exchanges of information.
This is what frustrates me about the idea that social media promotes connection. It's more like standing in a crowded room and listening to snippets of other people's conversations. It's only once you've been there a while you realise everyone is talking to themselves
This is what frustrates me about the idea that social media promotes connection. It's more like standing in a crowded room and listening to snippets of other people's conversations. It's only once you've been there a while you realise everyone is talking to themselves
Reddit of 10+ years ago wasn't terrible even if naive. HN is fine. Just interactions that aren't mostly oppressive in favor of a groupthink. Twitter is unironically better for discourse than reddit, particularly now. There is no reigning ideology there.
If you get deep into many established subjects on reddit, most of the highest quality posts are all 8+ years old. That's not a coincidence. My usecase was the classics, but I noticed it to be true for many other topics. It has become a know-it-all facebook thats gamed by corpo and national interests now.
If you get deep into many established subjects on reddit, most of the highest quality posts are all 8+ years old. That's not a coincidence. My usecase was the classics, but I noticed it to be true for many other topics. It has become a know-it-all facebook thats gamed by corpo and national interests now.
Yep it's stuck spreading introductions to ideas, to a younger audience.
I wish it was only about avoiding unpopular topics. You get downvoted even for asking what makes a good coffee or any other questions that people will happily engage with in real life interactions.
Again, this is why I bring up reading the room. You're likely to find a subreddit for discussion making coffee, even if it's been asked 100 times before, but it probably won't be /r/coffee.
In /r/sanfrancisco, yea, asking "hey, i'm visting SF so what should I do?" is misunderstanding the subreddit. It's for locals.
Even for locals, many do not like the regular discussion of the very real socio-cultural issues facing the city. There is a regular push to "make this subreddit something that creates content for me" but that's not really what reddit is about. It's a place for people to share created content, it's not a curated news feed for users.
In /r/sanfrancisco, yea, asking "hey, i'm visting SF so what should I do?" is misunderstanding the subreddit. It's for locals.
Even for locals, many do not like the regular discussion of the very real socio-cultural issues facing the city. There is a regular push to "make this subreddit something that creates content for me" but that's not really what reddit is about. It's a place for people to share created content, it's not a curated news feed for users.
Just to add my 5 cents: spend few minutes reading sub rules and some popular posts. For example on subs about care about exotic animals you usually will get heavy downvoted while asking medical advice about your animal. Which is contrintuitive but logical - newcomers ask such questions everytime, whild most users of the sub is not exotic animal veterinar, and can't diagnose.
Given the downvotes to my comment (the irony), I have to add some context. When I talk about getting downvotes for asking what makes a good coffee, or other conversational topics like that, I mean doing so in the appropriate place, such as a sub's daily "cafe thread", where one can talk about anything within reason. The same comment made by another user or another time is received differently.
It's tiring and one of the reason I don't interact so much on the web anymore.
It's tiring and one of the reason I don't interact so much on the web anymore.
That's because you didn't google it and then ask specific questions after doing some research.
[deleted]
Reddit has the petty bonus of people going down your comment chain and downvoting it.
The site would benefit from listing who upvotes and downvotes each post/comment. That would sort out a lot of the abuse issues long before other ideas such as real identities.
The site would benefit from listing who upvotes and downvotes each post/comment. That would sort out a lot of the abuse issues long before other ideas such as real identities.
You are not able to go through a persons profile and downvote on people's posts. It looks like it from the UI, however it doesn't persist those votes. It may be capturing your attempt though.
To do that you have to visit each and every post and downvote it.
To do that you have to visit each and every post and downvote it.
And even if you click through to the actual posts, there's a fairly low limit on the number of times you can downvote a specific person per day before it stops counting.
I would love to read through a source code leak. I have wasted so much of my 20s on that god forsaken site. Now im in my mid 30s and occasionally reminiscence about how innocent I thought it was back in 2010. It is garbage now and it was garbage back than, we just didn't know. In my mind, I actually hold Digg in higher regard just because they never made it to the point where it became a net negative on the world. You know what they say: you either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain or something like that.
Reddit used to be open source: https://github.com/reddit-archive/reddit
I'd argue this code is so old that it probably bears little resemblance to current Reddit. I know this was used by right wingers when they made that alternative Trump Reddit. That Reddit was awesome (minus the actual content) because it took me back in time to the "good ol days" of Reddit.
I really want to see the current algorithms being used in the codebase. The rest is just shitty code written by overpaid monkeys.
I really want to see the current algorithms being used in the codebase. The rest is just shitty code written by overpaid monkeys.
> The site would benefit from listing who upvotes and downvotes each post/comment.
I used site with this rule few years ago. It results in immediate downvote of other post/comments (or group of posts/comments) of user that downvoted your comment. And also public shaming, and long comment threads with arguments "why you downvoted me?".
I started to think that its really very hard to fix social issue with some technological solution.
I used site with this rule few years ago. It results in immediate downvote of other post/comments (or group of posts/comments) of user that downvoted your comment. And also public shaming, and long comment threads with arguments "why you downvoted me?".
I started to think that its really very hard to fix social issue with some technological solution.
I think it's downvoting. It's one thing to see (what you think is) a really bad reply to you get some likes, it's another to see a negative number next to your comment, I feel much more compulsion to defend myself for the latter.
yeah.. my solution is to use old.reddit, and click "disable inbox replies" on everything I say
Then when I'm REALLY bored I'll go click my own history and see what the peanut gallery thought of my various comments. I get a lot of mega-downvotes for really innocuous stuff for no apparent reason, along with the occasional angry response, so it's best to keep my stress levels down by keeping that stuff isolated.
I'd be a nervous wreck if my phone/watch were buzzing at me every time some dickhead online decides to rip into me. I don't know how people can stand it.
Then when I'm REALLY bored I'll go click my own history and see what the peanut gallery thought of my various comments. I get a lot of mega-downvotes for really innocuous stuff for no apparent reason, along with the occasional angry response, so it's best to keep my stress levels down by keeping that stuff isolated.
I'd be a nervous wreck if my phone/watch were buzzing at me every time some dickhead online decides to rip into me. I don't know how people can stand it.
Judge your Reddit comments by the sum of the absolute value of votes, not the sum of the value of votes.
Redditors' opinions are almost completely worthless measures of comment quality.. if you want a huge karma score, you can just repost the top stuff from a couple of years ago into popular subs and repost popular comments from months/years earlier on posts that pick up traction in /r/rising
Some niche subs never downvote people, and some downvote almost everything
I think your best bet is to ignore karma altogether on that site
Some niche subs never downvote people, and some downvote almost everything
I think your best bet is to ignore karma altogether on that site
You can get a "high score" in any community that keeps score by repeating its tropes and doing stuff to signal you're part of the in-group.
Beyond a certain size all communities harbor this behavior.
Beyond a certain size all communities harbor this behavior.
I assume it can be generalized with votes being a proxy for social reputation, and internet users, being the humans they are, likely (consciously or not) adjusting their interaction depending on that surrogate cue.
> If you don't like it, fine, I feel little compulsion to engage. If things get nasty, I just mute or block.
I do this on Reddit. If there's a back and forth and I feel like the person replying is not commenting in good faith then I'll just block them.
I do this on Reddit. If there's a back and forth and I feel like the person replying is not commenting in good faith then I'll just block them.
My favorite trope on Reddit is when you explain something clearly and people respond that you haven't given an example or explained or whatever. It's not that you haven't explained, they just don't accept your explanation and demand more.
I've taken to increasingly absurd responses to this trope. I often explain with perverse metaphors involving their mothers. Highly recommend finding your own flavor of fun responses to this ludicrous bad faith response.
I've taken to increasingly absurd responses to this trope. I often explain with perverse metaphors involving their mothers. Highly recommend finding your own flavor of fun responses to this ludicrous bad faith response.
And an obsession with sources. Which makes sense sometimes, but you can tell someone your favorite color is orange and they're not happy unless there's a Reuters article about what color you like.
Reddit has a massive hard-on for external authority in any conceivable context so it shouldn't be surprising that they want a citation if you say the sky is blue.
A request for a source should include an argument for why a bit of information needs a source (what facts are in question, and how they impact the broader argument). A lazy “sources please!” should be treated as bad faith attempt to DDOS the other participant.
I see nothing wrong with an "obsession" with sources.
The www was very much built on sharing http links as a form of citation, no reason not to make use of such an fundamental and established function.
Imho the opposite has become a much worse issue; People casually claiming the most extraordinary things, far outside the realm of opinions, with not even an attempt to source it.
The www was very much built on sharing http links as a form of citation, no reason not to make use of such an fundamental and established function.
Imho the opposite has become a much worse issue; People casually claiming the most extraordinary things, far outside the realm of opinions, with not even an attempt to source it.
A bad-faith request for a source is just an attempt to waste the other person’s time. If a source is requested, it should be obvious or explained where the source fits into the over-arching argument, it might require just as much work on the asker’s side, to establish why it is necessary.
There’s also the risk that the request for a source just devolves into an argument about the quality of the source, which basically torpedos the discussion.
There’s also the risk that the request for a source just devolves into an argument about the quality of the source, which basically torpedos the discussion.
> A bad-faith request for a source is just an attempt to waste the other person’s time.
Why not add a source to begin with, so others don't have to "waste" their time asking for one/looking one up?
With anything that's citing numbers, or statements by some official person or institution, that's imho a no-brainer.
Particularly as a Google search can yield wildly different results based on location, search history, and wording of the search request. So assuming everybody else can "Just Google it", is often not very useful.
> There’s also the risk that the request for a source just devolves into an argument about the quality of the source, which basically torpedos the discussion.
You call it a risk, I call it an opportunity to fact-check if the original claim is actually true, or just one of the many headlines that take liberties for sensationalism.
It's also an opportunity to establish a "base truth" that people can agree on as a premise, to start a discussion from.
That's not a given when people from often vastly different educational, socio-economic, cultural and language backgrounds interact with each other, as it constantly happens online.
Why not add a source to begin with, so others don't have to "waste" their time asking for one/looking one up?
With anything that's citing numbers, or statements by some official person or institution, that's imho a no-brainer.
Particularly as a Google search can yield wildly different results based on location, search history, and wording of the search request. So assuming everybody else can "Just Google it", is often not very useful.
> There’s also the risk that the request for a source just devolves into an argument about the quality of the source, which basically torpedos the discussion.
You call it a risk, I call it an opportunity to fact-check if the original claim is actually true, or just one of the many headlines that take liberties for sensationalism.
It's also an opportunity to establish a "base truth" that people can agree on as a premise, to start a discussion from.
That's not a given when people from often vastly different educational, socio-economic, cultural and language backgrounds interact with each other, as it constantly happens online.
> It's also an opportunity to establish a "base truth" that people can agree on as a premise, to start a discussion from.
Source?
;)
Source?
;)
It makes sense on Wikipedia. But meanwhile, Reddit seems powered by anecdotes but will ask for a source when you bring opposition. Motte and Bailey.
[deleted]
If you actually care to be informed you will at least try to find a source yourself first, even to use it to disprove me.
If you actually care to inform, then you can add a source to give the information some third party background and more details.
Expecting others to put in the work to authenticate your claims, by sending them on wild goose chases on Google that might or might nor yield the same results you got, is a recipe for getting overwhelming amounts of disinformation.
As it's way easier to casually claim an unsourced falsehood, than it is to research a topic and debunk that falsehood with credible sources.
Expecting others to put in the work to authenticate your claims, by sending them on wild goose chases on Google that might or might nor yield the same results you got, is a recipe for getting overwhelming amounts of disinformation.
As it's way easier to casually claim an unsourced falsehood, than it is to research a topic and debunk that falsehood with credible sources.
It's this way of thinking that has made requesting a source the new "Nuh-uh."
A better response is, "I see it different, here's a source I'm providing or story of personal experience that suggests why. Do you have other context or information that could help me understand your position?"
A better response is, "I see it different, here's a source I'm providing or story of personal experience that suggests why. Do you have other context or information that could help me understand your position?"
Write a Medium article about your color preferences and link it. You might even make a few cents!
> If there's a back and forth and I feel like the person replying is not commenting in good faith then I'll just block them.
I do this regularly on Reddit, it's the only way to stay sane.
But get this: I had one person get so enraged they logged in with a second account just to reply to me saying I was dumb for blocking them, then they blocked me! I guess some people really need the last word.
I do this regularly on Reddit, it's the only way to stay sane.
But get this: I had one person get so enraged they logged in with a second account just to reply to me saying I was dumb for blocking them, then they blocked me! I guess some people really need the last word.
Don't block, it's so cheap and is equally in bad faith. It means they can't see your comments, it means they can't reply to people who reply to your comments, it's the worst mechanism Reddit has ever implemented.
Mute for sure, but blocking is just petty.
Mute for sure, but blocking is just petty.
Block used to be a mute. You "block someone" you no longer see them nor get pinged by them. But they can still reply to you and I believe you can still respond to them if you go out of your way to find the comment.
This was how it was until ~2 years ago. Then it turned into some intermediate step where you opted out of interacting with them at all but you can still see the comment chain by default. The blocked user was simply collapsed, but you can expand it and see everything. i.e. it ruined the point of a "mute".
Then almost a year ago it became what you describe. You still see collapsed blocked users, and you still can't respond, but the user can no longer respond to you nor any child in your chain.
I hate it and simply want a "mute". I don't care if someone wants to yell at a wall. The announcement seemed poorly revceived by comments, but they still kept it around to this day.
This was how it was until ~2 years ago. Then it turned into some intermediate step where you opted out of interacting with them at all but you can still see the comment chain by default. The blocked user was simply collapsed, but you can expand it and see everything. i.e. it ruined the point of a "mute".
Then almost a year ago it became what you describe. You still see collapsed blocked users, and you still can't respond, but the user can no longer respond to you nor any child in your chain.
I hate it and simply want a "mute". I don't care if someone wants to yell at a wall. The announcement seemed poorly revceived by comments, but they still kept it around to this day.
> IDK what it is about reddit that makes it easy to get sucked into an argument
Agreed that Reddit is particularly bad, but some of the worst flamebait arguments I've had were here on HN. One person insisted on having the last word, here on HN, no matter what. At the end he (I don't know why I think it was a "he") was simply mirroring back what I just said, which is more or less the way I argued with my brother when I was 10.
Agreed that Reddit is particularly bad, but some of the worst flamebait arguments I've had were here on HN. One person insisted on having the last word, here on HN, no matter what. At the end he (I don't know why I think it was a "he") was simply mirroring back what I just said, which is more or less the way I argued with my brother when I was 10.
> IDK what it is about reddit that makes it easy to get sucked into an argument.
Culture, partially due to mod slots being used for parallel construction of advertising and PR cleanup more than stimulating actual discussion.
Credit to DanG for keeping this place whole so long.
Culture, partially due to mod slots being used for parallel construction of advertising and PR cleanup more than stimulating actual discussion.
Credit to DanG for keeping this place whole so long.
I always do a quick scan of a user’s history before responding to someone I think might be debating in bad faith. More often than not, I’ll see they aren’t the kind of person it’s worth tangling with. Never wrestle a pig…
Arguments feel more public, like people are watching. Similar to forum threads in the past. When people are watching, I feel the need to defend myself (or "The Truth" as I see it).
It's the upvote/downvote mechanism. If you know you're right but you've been downvoted, you tend to try and redeem the argument. But because of herd mentality you'll never win.
The worst new tactic I've seen people use is replying to you and then blocking you so you can't see or reply to their comment, or any direct children of that comment. It's sooo petty and annoying, but Reddit has decided that's how blocking works. Which is ridiculous.
The worst new tactic I've seen people use is replying to you and then blocking you so you can't see or reply to their comment, or any direct children of that comment. It's sooo petty and annoying, but Reddit has decided that's how blocking works. Which is ridiculous.
In my experience: Twitter is a flood. At some point you just disengage because there's so many responses coming in and you can't answer them all. So you answer none.
Unless you get in early on a reddit thread that explodes, you will generally only get 2-3 replies per comment at most. Usually none, sometimes 1. And that's how you get into arguments.
Unless you get in early on a reddit thread that explodes, you will generally only get 2-3 replies per comment at most. Usually none, sometimes 1. And that's how you get into arguments.
For me, I think it's because most of the trolls aren't just like "no you!" they'll write a wall of text full of half lies that you feel like you should at least repudiate for future redditors to know that you're right, and the troll is wrong.
some sort of thing about the community I guess. I feel the same way, I'll catch myself trying to argue with people here occasionally, then be like, wait, this isn't reddit, nevermind.
I think maybe it's not just about writing content directly in response to someone else, but writing response that I think will be useful to the community who stumbles across and reads it? Not that I'm always perfect about that.
Either that, or HN strips emojis. Might be that.
I think maybe it's not just about writing content directly in response to someone else, but writing response that I think will be useful to the community who stumbles across and reads it? Not that I'm always perfect about that.
Either that, or HN strips emojis. Might be that.
Do you post under your real identity on twitter? And pseudonymoulsy on reddit?
Nope. Pseudo on both. I do feel like I have more of a persona on Twitter though, with some high profile accounts following me back and such. I regularly burn my reddit accounts every year and start fresh. It's not like the karma is good for anything.
In general though, I feel like... 25% of my reddit comments get replies from folks with questionable reasoning skills and entrenched positions vs maybe 5% on Twitter where it's more conversational and exploratory.
In general though, I feel like... 25% of my reddit comments get replies from folks with questionable reasoning skills and entrenched positions vs maybe 5% on Twitter where it's more conversational and exploratory.
One of the best life hacks is never get the last word in on Reddit.
the second best life hack is to block the person your arguing with so that they can’t respond and you guarantee getting the last word
Or reply with a short slam dunk, then delete the comment. They'll see the notification and be able to read it, but can't reply.
I would think any seasoned Reddit argumentarian would have an alt or two they could reply to you with.
I beleive it and have seen it. But it's never happened to me in my ~8-9 years on the site. I guess I lucked out.
I still end arguments with a beautiful "we disagree, it's okay". Such a relief.
In Reddit arguments, there are only losers.
You can probably extend this to "Never get the first word." There have been people having arguments on reddit for years.
> You can probably extend this to "Never get the first word."
Amen. From about 1999 to ~2010, I was a practitioner of "don't wait up: somebody's wrong on the internet."
It gradually dawned on me that it was better for my mental health if I just avoided arguments as much as possible. I'm not perfect about it, but I rarely get into pissing matches these days.
Amen. From about 1999 to ~2010, I was a practitioner of "don't wait up: somebody's wrong on the internet."
It gradually dawned on me that it was better for my mental health if I just avoided arguments as much as possible. I'm not perfect about it, but I rarely get into pissing matches these days.
I became a 10X Reddit user when I discovered this truth.
i just turn into a troll if it reaches this point
My life improved when I learned to detect these situations and walk away.
A good sign that I need to is if I am upset and a particular comment keeps popping back into my mind.
The best way I've found to walk away is delete all my comments and close all the tabs. If the thread is gone, I can't respond to it. If the tabs are gone, I won't have any reminders that the discussion existed.
Possibly I'll be perceived as losing the argument, but my pride is not more important than my mental well-being.
A good sign that I need to is if I am upset and a particular comment keeps popping back into my mind.
The best way I've found to walk away is delete all my comments and close all the tabs. If the thread is gone, I can't respond to it. If the tabs are gone, I won't have any reminders that the discussion existed.
Possibly I'll be perceived as losing the argument, but my pride is not more important than my mental well-being.
> delete all my comments
The thing which I've found helps me with this is to just delete my account. Besides some subreddit-specific accounts, I generally delete my one main account and start a new one every few months, usually after some nasty interaction with someone on reddit, especially when people start to follow me around. I've had multiple occasions where people start commenting about a disagreement on an unrelated thread/comment I make, even in a completely unrelated subreddit sometimes!
It's such a weird place, if it wasn't for some niche subs I enjoy participating in which I don't think have any parallels elsewhere, I would really prefer to just stop using it entirely.
The thing which I've found helps me with this is to just delete my account. Besides some subreddit-specific accounts, I generally delete my one main account and start a new one every few months, usually after some nasty interaction with someone on reddit, especially when people start to follow me around. I've had multiple occasions where people start commenting about a disagreement on an unrelated thread/comment I make, even in a completely unrelated subreddit sometimes!
It's such a weird place, if it wasn't for some niche subs I enjoy participating in which I don't think have any parallels elsewhere, I would really prefer to just stop using it entirely.
Man you must be so good and interesting enough that you live rent free in peoples head. I can only dream of being that important to someone's life stranger or otherwise. As it stands, the best I could muster up is people tend to block me over time(I can't prove it but I can see patterns in reduced responses & upvote/downvote counts). Both on Reddit and in real life.
I really don't know why and I don't really appreciate the attention to be honest.
The most recent one was some comments about The Last of Us TV show.
The most recent one was some comments about The Last of Us TV show.
Some people just have the knack and others like me don't and are forgotten to the sands of time.
People are so argumentative on Reddit, I don't find it's worth commenting most of the time. Same with Twitter. I like to engage on HN, but the rest of the internet I've mostly decided to only browse. Even then, I've seriously reduced how much I allow myself to do that.
The further I withdraw myself from it all, the stranger it looks when I return to it. I never regret not participating in these places.
The further I withdraw myself from it all, the stranger it looks when I return to it. I never regret not participating in these places.
I follow the three deep rule. If I haven't made my point clear enough within three comments, then I'm probably not capable of finishing the job.
I'll argue with you if you want. What are we arguing about and what is my stance on the issue? /s
The admins must've seen what you were doing and decided to just pull the plug to put you out of your misery.
You caused the shutdown!
Turns out most of the web problem have a simple fix, unplug it.
what were you arguing about?
I wish that we could all migrate to something new, just as swiftly as it happend with digg. It seemed like it took just days. Reddit is long overdue to die.
Reddit captures so much of what (to me) made the old internet so fantastic.
Anything I want to learn more about I can search for and find detailed descriptions/reviews/stories from real people talking about their real products with no advertising cluttering up my experience. It's a delight.
Disclaimer: I exclusively use Apollo, which is why I never see any ads.
Anything I want to learn more about I can search for and find detailed descriptions/reviews/stories from real people talking about their real products with no advertising cluttering up my experience. It's a delight.
Disclaimer: I exclusively use Apollo, which is why I never see any ads.
Agreed whole heartedly. Apollo makes it easy and concise. I tried old.reddit recently and the ads were less then the new side of things but no thank you.
Reddit takes me back to when everything was forums and message boards. Good times.
Reddit takes me back to when everything was forums and message boards. Good times.
There’s plenty wrong with Reddit overall, but there are any number of niche indispensable subreddits that I would hate to lose.
I fear the day that Reddit dies and every random ass community suddenly decides they need a completely overengineered Discord now.
Not only will Discord become unusable but large quantities of very specific knowledge will now be unindexable and therefore unarchiveable, lost for future generations. It will be a sad day for the internet.
Not only will Discord become unusable but large quantities of very specific knowledge will now be unindexable and therefore unarchiveable, lost for future generations. It will be a sad day for the internet.
That migration happened only because of a confluence of a few events. There was the redesign which was badly received and the whole DECSS kerfuffle.
but the biggest problem is, as I see it, there isn't anywhere new to go, really.
Reddit was a great upgrade from what digg was offering, threaded comments and subreddits and much more democratic moderation.
What's the alternative to reddit, what does it offer?
but the biggest problem is, as I see it, there isn't anywhere new to go, really.
Reddit was a great upgrade from what digg was offering, threaded comments and subreddits and much more democratic moderation.
What's the alternative to reddit, what does it offer?
I think the biggest upgrade that can never happen on Reddit (because of the entrenched moderator community) is the ability to democratically oust a rogue moderator. Reddit is really more of a dictatorship than a democracy, the most senior moderator can do pretty much whatever they want within the bounds of the site guidelines.
But then Sybil becomes the mod of every sub... or a brigade gets someone.
The ousting process has been updated a few months ago ( https://www.reddit.com/r/redditrequest/wiki/top_mod_removal ).
Unless you get to one real person, one vote (a significant hurdle) and avoid the possibility of a brigade from one interested and determined group, such a process would inevitably be far worse.
The ousting process has been updated a few months ago ( https://www.reddit.com/r/redditrequest/wiki/top_mod_removal ).
Unless you get to one real person, one vote (a significant hurdle) and avoid the possibility of a brigade from one interested and determined group, such a process would inevitably be far worse.
Yeah what if there was another site that was a bit more exclusive and promoted good faith discussion, maybe related to tech to begin with.. Hey wait a second!
For me HN is more similar to one moderated sub on a reddit, not a reddit as whole.
You can find small moderated communities on a reddit where you can discuss any topics without "noise". Also you can find big popular communities similar in style to 4chan.
And honestly I see nothing wrong with it.
I really hope this site doesn't become the next reddit. I don't think a massive influx of new users would be healthy for good faith discussion here.
But imagine if there would be multiple topics, instead of a single bucket, that - beside some tech news and releases - defaults to the same old discussions.
It would just be reddit (and reddit still has repetitive discussions)
Sarcasm aside, this site actively resists becoming Reddit in many respects. It's in no way a replacement.
If everyone flocked to Snapzu, Lemmy, or Aether, the quality of content there would immediately plummet. I'd like my September to end some day.
I feed Reddit is a point where a drop in the user base will improve the content making it better, which will make it more popular.
Do you know any historical examples where drop in userbase of a social site results in better discussion and generated content?
I think after the bans of certain, negative communities on Reddit
fatpeoplehate, incels, thedonald
They would go out into other parts of the site and be spread their pessimism with unnecessary arguments. It made the site more of an echo chamber, less diverse, and less supportive of free speech, but it did make many places less tedious
fatpeoplehate, incels, thedonald
They would go out into other parts of the site and be spread their pessimism with unnecessary arguments. It made the site more of an echo chamber, less diverse, and less supportive of free speech, but it did make many places less tedious
Today is just one of those tech news days.
OpenAI, Facebook and a major outage of a popular website.
Exciting times!
Exciting times!
Yesterday the BBC front page had an article about a teachers' WhatsApp group with a racist name. I thought to myself that it must be a show news day. Then today happens!
>Exciting times!
Beware the Ides of March...
Beware the Ides of March...
Getting 1998 vibes again...
Elon didn't just buy Reddit by any chance... :-)
God I wish. Then I could wean myself off of there too.
Just do it, you won't regret it. I was in your position in 2021 and genuinely found it difficult to stop using it. Now I don't use it and... I'm glad. Just like Twitter. Life really is better without them.
My main issue is that it can legitmately be the last place some more niche communities gather.
The front page is absolutely never worth interacting with, but those "smaller" communities (and we're still taking 50k-300k subs, larger than many alternatives I've seeked out) I haven't found a substitute for.
The front page is absolutely never worth interacting with, but those "smaller" communities (and we're still taking 50k-300k subs, larger than many alternatives I've seeked out) I haven't found a substitute for.
Only thing I'm annoyed is that old reddit isn't default for those rare occasions I need to visit it.
AFAIK you can make it the default in your user settings. I haven't seen new reddit for a long time
There's also an add-on at least for Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/old-reddit-re...
I don't like to stay logged into my account so I use this.
I don't like to stay logged into my account so I use this.
Did you switch to other communities or just swear off social media sites altogether? I’d love to just go back to smaller niche sites like the old days.
I starting joking about that like 2 weeks ago and I hope I did not start a self-fulfilling rumor because I would feel very ashamed
Every time this happens I make a stupid joke about how it never used to fall over before Elon took over and fired all the staff. It wasn't even funny the first time, but it feels like the appropriate response.
Your comment is ironic to me, because I often feel the need to suppress my urge to call out people who seem obsessed with Elon Musk, but your comment is proving that my instinct is right.
I think their comment is ironic, since today's downtime has been longer than any Twitter outage since the musk drama. And I guess I agree that it's pretty funny that redditors are usually the most vocal about the imminent collapse of Twitter's infra (in 2 more weeks)since it's now a complete dumpster fire of a platform or something.
Reddit seemingly has more outages than any other social media company. What is going on in their infrastructure? It's been like this since I've been using it. It must be unfixable or leadership has their priorities way out of line.
They have a storied lineage of mismanagement, but it would take hours to document so i'll get to the bullet points:
* Yishan Wong wanted to prioritize subreddits that had the most gildings and the users didn't like it, so he packed up and left.
* Ellen Pao took over and also resigned because the community didn't like a firing of an employee.
* Steve Huffman came back at Sam Altman's advisment, and proceeded to salvage an alt-right subreddit (/r/KotakuInAction) after being closed by its creator, approved the hiring of a sex pest admin, shut down RedditGifts, went all in on monetization, launched a React redesign that still sucks, gated features behind an app, and further siloed the community outreach from corporate.
Community oriented services are a pain in the ass as they scale, but reddit has not taken the challenges in stride. I feel like Digg got lucky imploding instead of becoming popular.
I wish Snapzu or Lemmy had the numbers reddit did to make them usable, but that's kind of a double edged sword.
* Yishan Wong wanted to prioritize subreddits that had the most gildings and the users didn't like it, so he packed up and left.
* Ellen Pao took over and also resigned because the community didn't like a firing of an employee.
* Steve Huffman came back at Sam Altman's advisment, and proceeded to salvage an alt-right subreddit (/r/KotakuInAction) after being closed by its creator, approved the hiring of a sex pest admin, shut down RedditGifts, went all in on monetization, launched a React redesign that still sucks, gated features behind an app, and further siloed the community outreach from corporate.
Community oriented services are a pain in the ass as they scale, but reddit has not taken the challenges in stride. I feel like Digg got lucky imploding instead of becoming popular.
I wish Snapzu or Lemmy had the numbers reddit did to make them usable, but that's kind of a double edged sword.
Until relatively recently (compared to other social media companies), Reddit used to have planned downtime. I supposed 100% uptime isn't deeply ingrained in their culture.
I've found 100% uptime pretty easy - never change anything; including patching.
Yeah, I'm not sure why they haven't been able to sort out their infrastructure issues. Nothing they do is rocket science. Especially these days.
Probably concentrating on IPO and trying to keep the balance sheet tight.
Probably concentrating on IPO and trying to keep the balance sheet tight.
Eh, at their scale(one of the most visited websites across the world) everything is complex. It doesn't excuse their continuous failures in some aspects (e.g. video player still sucks, years later), but in general reliability is decent. Their engineering blog was quite enlightening, but I don't think they've posted in a while.
the new layout is still pretty garbage compared to the old one and because of this, reddit has to maintain four different web front ends: new desktop, new mobile, old desktop (old.reddit.com), and old mobile (i.reddit.com). hosting their own image/videos so that 80% of the content isn’t dependent on third parties like imgur is probably a good change, but there’s no way it didn’t massively increase the complexity of maintaining the website too.
The old frontends aren't maintained, so their existence has a negligible impact. Hosting images/videos is indeed a non-trivial matter at their scale, but if memory serves me right they're just using Cloudfront, so it's pretty straightforward.
old.reddit not being maintained is a bonus imo - you don't see a lot of the gamification features they keep introducing.
everytime i accidentally visit new reddit i think "wow i would not be using this site if i had to wade through this visual overload"
Why would they IPO? They're owned by Advance Publications, which is owned by the Newhouse family. They're not an independent company and haven't been since 2011.
I remember with discussions about another site, people noted that Reddit only has a headcount of around 700 (perhaps a bit more now, looks like that figure was a couple of years ago). Some of those are going to be non-technical roles as well (HR, ads, management etc. etc.). So could it be they're just a bit too small staffed for the scale of site they're running, and just don't have enough people working on the basic "site should not fall over" type foundational issues? Kind of the reverse of the stereotypical bloated social media companies?
Not that long ago Reddit had a headcount of about 5, and it was already one of the biggest sites on the internet.
complex systems are complicated to run? it's incredibly expensive to chase another 9 of availability so everyone who isn't the bell system has had outages from time to time.
Maybe their priorities are appropriate? It doesn't matter if shitposting sites like reddit or twitter have five nines of uptime. Who cares, go outside!
[deleted]
They should fix it by reverting back to 'old' reddit; probably less demanding on their infra :P
Joking aside, old reddit always had the same issues
How financially damaging are outages to Reddit? It's not down enough to lose users. Sure, there is add revenue loss, but is it really enough to meaningfully affect the bottom line? If not, then I don't see why leadership would prioritize it.
reddit is down, circleci is down, our own AWS infra seems to still be up across all regions (at least the ones we deploy to), jira and slack are working, downdetector reportings lots of outages all over...definitely a perplexing mass outage.
HN - status page of the web (even if it is extremely slow right now, guessing it's getting hugged).
HN - status page of the web (even if it is extremely slow right now, guessing it's getting hugged).
HN is getting hugged by the holy trinity of major sites outages, major product launches and major tech layoffs.
Any one of those is usually a fairly large event around here, all three at once is another story
Any one of those is usually a fairly large event around here, all three at once is another story
I like how this is where most of the world's cloud tech experts hang out, and there's no "cloud" whatsoever. It's just some old crappy server in a room running custom software written by a venture capitalist in his spare time
On a custom language
Someone's probably misconfigured another BGP yet again.
Surely unrelated but Disney finally decided to go after the MarvelStudiosSpoilers subreddit.
Mastodon.social is down as well. Maybe all the bored Redditors went to see if Mastodon still existed? Or maybe one of the Clouds is having an outage?
You posted this six minutes before my post, but mastodon.social is up for me, and no mention of any downtime. If it isn't for you there may be network problems between you and the site.
I got an account on masthead.social, and that has been down for a week.
There is/was a thread about on Reddit, and half of the threads were someone saying, "Mastodon.social is fine, what's the problem?" and responses pointing out the post was about mastHEAD.social.
Daily Kos is also down. Archive.is was spotty this past weekend. It seems like outages are becoming more common.
There is/was a thread about on Reddit, and half of the threads were someone saying, "Mastodon.social is fine, what's the problem?" and responses pointing out the post was about mastHEAD.social.
Daily Kos is also down. Archive.is was spotty this past weekend. It seems like outages are becoming more common.
I believe there was a DDoS attack on .online & .social yesterday/early today, they may still be dealing with the aftermath.
The first victim of GPT4
Dish Network has been down three weeks now...
Whoa shit, they’re still down? Last I saw all services were down, that still the case?
From what I can see (my in-laws use them) if you are signed in to apps that rely on their SSO then you are good. If you need to login or if your token need to refresh then you’re screwed. If you are just watching broadcast you’re also good.
But we were trying to watch HGTV on Apple TV, got kicked out of an already logged in session, and now have no way to log back in. I can’t imagine they will have any choice but to issue at least some refunds if this goes much longer.
But we were trying to watch HGTV on Apple TV, got kicked out of an already logged in session, and now have no way to log back in. I can’t imagine they will have any choice but to issue at least some refunds if this goes much longer.
I don't mind the outages so much, but why is the site so slow most of the time? Even the old.reddit.com site is slow. Is there no incentive to optimize the serving infrastructure?
Reddit is focussed on tracking the user to keep them engaged as best as possible. Server-side rendering the page as a whole would render a lot of Reddits tracking useless. Just compare the amount of requests Reddit needs to load a single page to (e.g.) HN.
Edit: They don't really care about speed because there is no competition similar to Reddit? So why bother?
Edit: They don't really care about speed because there is no competition similar to Reddit? So why bother?
Now time to post memes on hacker news (Dang that was a joke.. your doctor paid me $20 to mess up your stress test numbers)
Maybe a spinoff site called hackermemes.
HN seemed to be having issues earlier, but I speculate it may have been overflow from people who couldn't be on reddit.
I wonder if it is only reddit, or if there is a cloud service that is acting up. AWS shows green across the board, but hasn't their status page been unreliable in the past?
I wonder if it is only reddit, or if there is a cloud service that is acting up. AWS shows green across the board, but hasn't their status page been unreliable in the past?
After a few hours I am now getting the error message "Failed to parse page JSON data: expected value at line 2 column 1" (I use libreddit so it might be different for you). I wonder what is going on over there.
Been pretty bad all day. Great for my productivity, they should mess up more.
Quick, someone post their JavaScript contraption as a service startup idea!
I thought the libreddit instance I was using was down and then I went to another instance, then another, …, and another, and finally thought “maybe Reddit is down?”
I lost power due to wind (SF Bay Area) right around when the site went down. I wonder if some of their remote developers are in a similar situation?
Well, okay, but when I clicked on the comments link, I was told that HN was down too.
I too thought they were related, but apparently not: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35157344
This is Big Tech's way to protest against further rate hikes.
And Reddit will be fine, just like Twitter.
tornadofart(6)
The best outcome for humanity at large would be if it never came back.
Reddit is one of the few places where I have actually been able to help people. Twitter is like shouting into a void.
Yeah, I’m maybe exaggerating slightly. Reddit is tolerable if you unsubscribe from the default subs.
Still, on the whole… probably net negative.
Still, on the whole… probably net negative.
Yeah I dont understand why people are glad its down. I have an account specifically curated to my interests, where I unsubscribed from all the default subs and only subscribed to things I'm interested in. Theres a lot of great niche communities out there for my hobbies that I've found on reddit.
You think you're helping them but the people you're arguing with
believe they're helping you.
I have a genetic condition that the medical establishment is particularly bad at treating. I've had tons of productive arguments on reddit about it.
If you're just arguing who's who in the Karpman Drama Triangle, those arguments are never productive, even outside reddit. Those are more about status than facts.
If you're just arguing who's who in the Karpman Drama Triangle, those arguments are never productive, even outside reddit. Those are more about status than facts.
And Facebook is like the void shouting back at you.
I mean, yeah, if you get off the default subs, but at some point the dross makes its way into the rest of the steel, and you can only do so much filtering and babysitting.
It's all subjective though and very much dependent on one's approach.
Reddit is a huge store of human knowledge, larger than Wikipedia, and, unlike Wikipedia, an interactive one. This where I go if I have trouble operating my new kettle, or to find key combos for the new game I just bought.
these mega-websites that are designed to host every community simultaneously and manage all their flamewars has been an entertaining but terrible experiment.
> Welcome back!
You are already logged in and will be redirected back to Reddit shortly.
Then..
> Something went wrong. Just don't panic.
Don't worry Reddit! I am OK. I hope you.. don't panic :)
You are already logged in and will be redirected back to Reddit shortly.
Then..
> Something went wrong. Just don't panic.
Don't worry Reddit! I am OK. I hope you.. don't panic :)