4 ms·

People always say this but no one ever proves it.

adamomada 3y ago
At this point especially considering the article we’re commenting on, it would be amazing if there weren’t spam shills and bots - they go where eyeballs go There is an enormous vested interest to not let this become public and should make you question the concept that conspiracy can’t exist somehow
- xboxnolifes 3y ago
  Nobody is saying bot/shill accounts don't exist. Just that they aren't literally everywhere and in insane numbers. Also, it's about the distribution of the bots between the subs: are they mostly on the huge main subs, or do they also expand to the 10,000 person niche subs? If 1 formula company has 1 reddit bot that posts 1 post every month in every parenting subreddit, is that considered a bot infestation? How many bot posts is necessary to be considered endemic?
  - owlninja 3y ago
    Thank you, this is what I meant. I am well aware they exist but anytime I mention maybe I use reddit to do research before a purchase - everyone acts like not a single human even exists on there.
    - TulliusCicero 3y ago
      If there's a better source for general purpose product recommendations than Reddit, I haven't found it. I'd say the only real weakness is that sometimes the recommendations lean too hard on being for enthusiasts, and don't always fit what a casual user of a thing cares about. But other than that they're pretty great.
astura 3y ago
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jaymcgregor/2017/02/20/reddit-is-being-manipulated-by-big-financial-services-companies/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/jaymcgregor/2017/02/20/reddit-i... Unless you actually have a reason to have good idea of who you're interacting with you should probably assume they are trolls, shills, or children. Those are BY FAR the most common Internet activity. For example - I'm a normal human. I'll post a few comments on HN once in a while. Maybe a few up votes from time-to-time. Sometimes I don't think about HN for days. I don't post on other social media/forums. My father-in-law is a troll, he spends 10+ hours a day every day commenting and voting on various articles with his hundreds of sock puppet accounts. Which one are you more likely to see? Myself or my FIL?
mejutoco 3y ago
The founders admitted themselves to start traction on the site with a multitude of fake users. All the "just asking questions" posts pushing certain narratives in every regional subrredit are also quite noticeable. For me that is proof enough, but other people might have different standards.
- dalyons 3y ago
  that was like, 17 years ago? and imho not an unreasonable thing to get a social site off the ground that had no users. Seems pretty irrelevant to the problems of today.
  - mejutoco 3y ago
    It might not be unreasonable to allow more bots before ipo, then. It is not proof, but it is a precedent. In any case, my main proof is the narrative pushing (which imo is obvious)

At this point especially considering the article we’re commenting on, it would be amazing if there weren’t spam shills and bots - they go where eyeballs go There is an enormous vested interest to not let this become public and should make you question the concept that conspiracy can’t exist somehow

xboxnolifes 3y ago
Nobody is saying bot/shill accounts don't exist. Just that they aren't literally everywhere and in insane numbers. Also, it's about the distribution of the bots between the subs: are they mostly on the huge main subs, or do they also expand to the 10,000 person niche subs? If 1 formula company has 1 reddit bot that posts 1 post every month in every parenting subreddit, is that considered a bot infestation? How many bot posts is necessary to be considered endemic?
- owlninja 3y ago
  Thank you, this is what I meant. I am well aware they exist but anytime I mention maybe I use reddit to do research before a purchase - everyone acts like not a single human even exists on there.
  - TulliusCicero 3y ago
    If there's a better source for general purpose product recommendations than Reddit, I haven't found it. I'd say the only real weakness is that sometimes the recommendations lean too hard on being for enthusiasts, and don't always fit what a casual user of a thing cares about. But other than that they're pretty great.

astura 3y ago

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jaymcgregor/2017/02/20/reddit-is-being-manipulated-by-big-financial-services-companies/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/jaymcgregor/2017/02/20/reddit-i... Unless you actually have a reason to have good idea of who you're interacting with you should probably assume they are trolls, shills, or children. Those are BY FAR the most common Internet activity. For example - I'm a normal human. I'll post a few comments on HN once in a while. Maybe a few up votes from time-to-time. Sometimes I don't think about HN for days. I don't post on other social media/forums. My father-in-law is a troll, he spends 10+ hours a day every day commenting and voting on various articles with his hundreds of sock puppet accounts. Which one are you more likely to see? Myself or my FIL?

mejutoco 3y ago

The founders admitted themselves to start traction on the site with a multitude of fake users. All the "just asking questions" posts pushing certain narratives in every regional subrredit are also quite noticeable. For me that is proof enough, but other people might have different standards.

dalyons 3y ago
that was like, 17 years ago? and imho not an unreasonable thing to get a social site off the ground that had no users. Seems pretty irrelevant to the problems of today.
- mejutoco 3y ago
  It might not be unreasonable to allow more bots before ipo, then. It is not proof, but it is a precedent. In any case, my main proof is the narrative pushing (which imo is obvious)