4 ms·

I recognize that spam has theoretical value in the sense that people pay spammers, but I never thought I'd see someone on HN so holier-than-thou about the suppo

by nvy 4y ago

I recognize that spam has theoretical value in the sense that people pay spammers, but I never thought I'd see someone on HN so holier-than-thou about the supposed virtue in being a spammer. Adding AI doesn't make your product less spam. At least be adult enough to be upfront and honest about it: you sell spam. If your conscience is okay with that, then we can't stop you. People work in all kinds of gross industries and justify it to themselves however they will, but don't ask us to share in your justifications.

EGreg 4y ago
Often I find that when people try to redefine terms and flail around in order to make a point, that speaks to the strength of the point. This isn't SPAM. Here is a definition of SPAM: unsolicited usually commercial messages (such as emails, text messages, or Internet postings) sent to a large number of recipients or posted in a large number of places Now, obviously this isn't emails or text messages, but consider Internet posting SPAM. There is a forum, designed for good, productive discussion, whose moderators want good discussion and following rules. The moderators would ideally prefer if everyone had a fully filled-out profile and reputation, no anonymous throwaway accounts with "New account who dis?" in their profile. A large number of recipients are reading these messages, having a productive conversation. So, in a SPAM situation, an unsolicited third party comes and inserts themselves into the most well-trafficked conversations, in order to link to some external page, etc. Their message is often off-topic and tries to promote some product, etc. Let's compare that to what's going on here: 1) The third party isn't unsolicited. In fact, the moderators and owners themselves are operating it, and they're the ones setting the rules of the forum, so it's not even a third party. It's a helpful text generator, that is clearly labeled as a "Bot" in its profile. Just like Telegram Bots are labeled "Bots". 2) The goal isn't to post in the most highly trafficked topics so many people can see it – quite the opposite, it is to kickstart topics which aren't getting any attention, and give people some ideas to talk about (ever heard of McDonald's theory? No one wants to go first, until the first fool does: https://jonbell.medium.com/mcdonalds-theory-9216e1c9da7d https://jonbell.medium.com/mcdonalds-theory-9216e1c9da7d) 3) The post doesn't link to some external page. In fact, it currently adds some text, without any links, to keep people on the existing site and engage there. Perhaps in the future, if links are added, they'll only be helpful links. 4) The post doesn't try to promote any external products with off-topic language. It simply tries to improve discussion on the forum, by staying on topic. 5) The same content isn't posted in a large number of places. It is actually constructive commentary or opinions that spur a discussion around the very thing the OP posted. DO YOU NOT RECOGNIZE THE DIFFERENCES? If you still disagree this is different than SPAM, please address the above five points individually. I would love to be proven wrong on the substance. There is even an XKCD commit highly approving of what I have built. Mission is f*&@ing accomplished! https://xkcd.com/810/ https://xkcd.com/810/
- hutzlibu 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - EGreg 3y ago
    You are ridiculous. The comic says the mission is accomplished when bots are made that create “automated helpful comments” which are upvoted by others. That is exactly what this is. This is the endgame which the main character approves of. As for whether the comments are pretending to be individually written by a human, the xkcd comic already presumes they are pretending — the relevant part is whether people upvote them more than other comments. People who unlike you evaluate them on their actual content, and not coming from an HN link with a score to settle no matter the content. You are just flailing around having lost and notably did not even attempt to refute a SINGLE difference I carefully listed between this and SPAM. That’s very telling!
    - hutzlibu 3y ago
      Can you show one example, where your comment bots created "helpful comments", that started a interesting discussion?
      - dang 3y ago
        This kind of tit-for-tat flamewar is against HN's rules and you broke both the site guidelines badly. We ban accounts that do that. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and avoid this in the future, we'd appreciate it. We want curious conversation here.
    - dang 3y ago
      This kind of tit-for-tat flamewar is against HN's rules and you broke both the site guidelines badly. We ban accounts that do that. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and avoid this in the future, we'd appreciate it. We want curious conversation here.

by nvy 4y ago

EGreg 4y ago

Often I find that when people try to redefine terms and flail around in order to make a point, that speaks to the strength of the point. This isn't SPAM. Here is a definition of SPAM: unsolicited usually commercial messages (such as emails, text messages, or Internet postings) sent to a large number of recipients or posted in a large number of places Now, obviously this isn't emails or text messages, but consider Internet posting SPAM. There is a forum, designed for good, productive discussion, whose moderators want good discussion and following rules. The moderators would ideally prefer if everyone had a fully filled-out profile and reputation, no anonymous throwaway accounts with "New account who dis?" in their profile. A large number of recipients are reading these messages, having a productive conversation. So, in a SPAM situation, an unsolicited third party comes and inserts themselves into the most well-trafficked conversations, in order to link to some external page, etc. Their message is often off-topic and tries to promote some product, etc. Let's compare that to what's going on here: 1) The third party isn't unsolicited. In fact, the moderators and owners themselves are operating it, and they're the ones setting the rules of the forum, so it's not even a third party. It's a helpful text generator, that is clearly labeled as a "Bot" in its profile. Just like Telegram Bots are labeled "Bots". 2) The goal isn't to post in the most highly trafficked topics so many people can see it – quite the opposite, it is to kickstart topics which aren't getting any attention, and give people some ideas to talk about (ever heard of McDonald's theory? No one wants to go first, until the first fool does: https://jonbell.medium.com/mcdonalds-theory-9216e1c9da7d https://jonbell.medium.com/mcdonalds-theory-9216e1c9da7d) 3) The post doesn't link to some external page. In fact, it currently adds some text, without any links, to keep people on the existing site and engage there. Perhaps in the future, if links are added, they'll only be helpful links. 4) The post doesn't try to promote any external products with off-topic language. It simply tries to improve discussion on the forum, by staying on topic. 5) The same content isn't posted in a large number of places. It is actually constructive commentary or opinions that spur a discussion around the very thing the OP posted. DO YOU NOT RECOGNIZE THE DIFFERENCES? If you still disagree this is different than SPAM, please address the above five points individually. I would love to be proven wrong on the substance. There is even an XKCD commit highly approving of what I have built. Mission is f*&@ing accomplished! https://xkcd.com/810/ https://xkcd.com/810/

hutzlibu 4y ago
[flagged]
- EGreg 3y ago
  You are ridiculous. The comic says the mission is accomplished when bots are made that create “automated helpful comments” which are upvoted by others. That is exactly what this is. This is the endgame which the main character approves of. As for whether the comments are pretending to be individually written by a human, the xkcd comic already presumes they are pretending — the relevant part is whether people upvote them more than other comments. People who unlike you evaluate them on their actual content, and not coming from an HN link with a score to settle no matter the content. You are just flailing around having lost and notably did not even attempt to refute a SINGLE difference I carefully listed between this and SPAM. That’s very telling!
  - hutzlibu 3y ago
    Can you show one example, where your comment bots created "helpful comments", that started a interesting discussion?
    - dang 3y ago
      This kind of tit-for-tat flamewar is against HN's rules and you broke both the site guidelines badly. We ban accounts that do that. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and avoid this in the future, we'd appreciate it. We want curious conversation here.
  - dang 3y ago
    This kind of tit-for-tat flamewar is against HN's rules and you broke both the site guidelines badly. We ban accounts that do that. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and avoid this in the future, we'd appreciate it. We want curious conversation here.