4 ms·

> I can't help but wonder what the motivation behind making this page was. Why would you immediately jump to assuming bad faith? No grand conspiracy required.

> I can't help but wonder what the motivation behind making this page was. Why would you immediately jump to assuming bad faith? No grand conspiracy required... the author believes that Chrome is slowing down his Mac and decided to share it. The end.

Etheryte 6y ago
I'm not really one for conspiracies, more so I fail to see where the evidence is that Chrome was somehow related to begin with. I do agree my wording could be better there, though.
edoceo 6y ago
Asking the question "wonder" is not really assuming bad faith is it? I don't see any intentional deception there.
- jodrellblank 6y ago
  The page says "I deleted Chrome, and all the files Keystone had littered on the computer, restarted, and it was so snappy it felt like a brand new computer. Yeah, I realize this sounds like a freakin' infomercial, but it worked so well I spent $5 on a domain name and set up this website even if it makes me sound like a raving nut." To then "wonder what the motivation is" is to suggest that you don't believe this simple positive explanation, and imply there's something less simple, and more scheming.
  - lorenb 6y ago
    Yeah, there was no super master plan here, just that after dealing with one sluggish computer for days (you name it, I tried it), and another one for 5 years... the fact that it turned out to be slow because of an app that wasn't even running was pretty frustrating. Filing a bug report that would get "works on my machine"'d and then ignored and auto-closed by a bot in 5 years didn't quite feel worthy. Auto-updating browsers are a good idea. Keystone is bad auto-updating software. It should probably get scrapped.
    - diebeforei485 6y ago
      What's a good way to verify that I've removed Keystone completely? Google doesn't provide any sort of uninstaller or uninstall instructions.
      - lorenb 6y ago
        try `mdfind keystone` in terminal
ehsankia 6y ago
Well, for one, going as far as buying a domain for a single rant is a little bit suspicious. If at least it was a website dedicated to gathering issues with chrome, but a single issue with zero evidence or research. That's not generally how people "decide to share it". Sure looks suspicious and not the content I expect to see on HN.
- _qulr 6y ago
  The author is the well-known Loren Brichter: https://twitter.com/lorenb/status/1337832978253230081 https://twitter.com/lorenb/status/1337832978253230081 So there's unlikely to be a conspiracy, just a dude with too much money and self-importance.
  - dang 6y ago
    Personal attacks are not ok here. Please don't respond to a comment that breaks the site guidelines by breaking them yourself. That just makes the thread even worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - _qulr 6y ago
      This entire submission has been flagged, so it appears that Hacker News itself sees something seriously wrong with the author's web site. Anyway, FWIW, I was defending the author from the charge of doing something suspicious.
      - dang 6y ago
        > a dude with too much money and self-importance Personal attacks are not ok on HN. Please don't post like that again, regardless of whom you're defending.
        _qulr 6y ago
        This is a serious, non-sarcastic response: honestly, sincerely, in my experience as a HN reader off and on for years, a commenter for 6 months, and occasional author of submitted articles (usually submitted by someone other than me) that have reached #1, violation of the HN guidelines is the norm on HN, and abiding by the guidelines is the exception. I myself have been personally attacked on here, or been interpreted uncharitably, etc., countless times. Mostly with no moderators intervening. In general I have no objection to "policing" the comments, if it is done well, and consistently, but the problem with policing, not just on HN but in general, is the selective, arbitrary enforcement of rules. Just looking at the current case, for example, why was my reply flagged, but the comment I replied to, which you also cited as violating the guidelines, was not flagged? Moreover, IMO this whole submission seems to be a strange time to be pedantic about enforcing the guidelines. After all, the submission itself was flagged as very low quality, and many of the commenters were justifiably complaining about the low quality of the submission and wondering why it was #1. The author is deserving of some rebuke, especially for the "nefariously hides itself from Activity Monitor" bit, which is technically false, indeed impossible. The author should know better, being or having been a Mac software engineer himself. In fairness, HN is no worse off than any other site that allows comments from the general public. HN wants to believe that its comments are higher quality than other sites, but the reality is that it's not really true, and it's hard to see how that will ever become true. Maybe it was true in the distant past when HN was less trafficked, I don't know.
Aeolun 6y ago
And domains are dirt cheap nowadays, so it’s not as if the author is out a lot of money.

Etheryte 6y ago

I'm not really one for conspiracies, more so I fail to see where the evidence is that Chrome was somehow related to begin with. I do agree my wording could be better there, though.

edoceo 6y ago

Asking the question "wonder" is not really assuming bad faith is it? I don't see any intentional deception there.

jodrellblank 6y ago
The page says "I deleted Chrome, and all the files Keystone had littered on the computer, restarted, and it was so snappy it felt like a brand new computer. Yeah, I realize this sounds like a freakin' infomercial, but it worked so well I spent $5 on a domain name and set up this website even if it makes me sound like a raving nut." To then "wonder what the motivation is" is to suggest that you don't believe this simple positive explanation, and imply there's something less simple, and more scheming.
- lorenb 6y ago
  Yeah, there was no super master plan here, just that after dealing with one sluggish computer for days (you name it, I tried it), and another one for 5 years... the fact that it turned out to be slow because of an app that wasn't even running was pretty frustrating. Filing a bug report that would get "works on my machine"'d and then ignored and auto-closed by a bot in 5 years didn't quite feel worthy. Auto-updating browsers are a good idea. Keystone is bad auto-updating software. It should probably get scrapped.
  - diebeforei485 6y ago
    What's a good way to verify that I've removed Keystone completely? Google doesn't provide any sort of uninstaller or uninstall instructions.
    - lorenb 6y ago
      try `mdfind keystone` in terminal

ehsankia 6y ago

Well, for one, going as far as buying a domain for a single rant is a little bit suspicious. If at least it was a website dedicated to gathering issues with chrome, but a single issue with zero evidence or research. That's not generally how people "decide to share it". Sure looks suspicious and not the content I expect to see on HN.

_qulr 6y ago
The author is the well-known Loren Brichter: https://twitter.com/lorenb/status/1337832978253230081 https://twitter.com/lorenb/status/1337832978253230081 So there's unlikely to be a conspiracy, just a dude with too much money and self-importance.
- dang 6y ago
  Personal attacks are not ok here. Please don't respond to a comment that breaks the site guidelines by breaking them yourself. That just makes the thread even worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - _qulr 6y ago
    This entire submission has been flagged, so it appears that Hacker News itself sees something seriously wrong with the author's web site. Anyway, FWIW, I was defending the author from the charge of doing something suspicious.
    - dang 6y ago
      > a dude with too much money and self-importance Personal attacks are not ok on HN. Please don't post like that again, regardless of whom you're defending.
      - _qulr 6y ago
        This is a serious, non-sarcastic response: honestly, sincerely, in my experience as a HN reader off and on for years, a commenter for 6 months, and occasional author of submitted articles (usually submitted by someone other than me) that have reached #1, violation of the HN guidelines is the norm on HN, and abiding by the guidelines is the exception. I myself have been personally attacked on here, or been interpreted uncharitably, etc., countless times. Mostly with no moderators intervening. In general I have no objection to "policing" the comments, if it is done well, and consistently, but the problem with policing, not just on HN but in general, is the selective, arbitrary enforcement of rules. Just looking at the current case, for example, why was my reply flagged, but the comment I replied to, which you also cited as violating the guidelines, was not flagged? Moreover, IMO this whole submission seems to be a strange time to be pedantic about enforcing the guidelines. After all, the submission itself was flagged as very low quality, and many of the commenters were justifiably complaining about the low quality of the submission and wondering why it was #1. The author is deserving of some rebuke, especially for the "nefariously hides itself from Activity Monitor" bit, which is technically false, indeed impossible. The author should know better, being or having been a Mac software engineer himself. In fairness, HN is no worse off than any other site that allows comments from the general public. HN wants to believe that its comments are higher quality than other sites, but the reality is that it's not really true, and it's hard to see how that will ever become true. Maybe it was true in the distant past when HN was less trafficked, I don't know.

Aeolun 6y ago

And domains are dirt cheap nowadays, so it’s not as if the author is out a lot of money.