3 ms·

This is a nytimes article. Not a dupe of the https://ssi.inc https://ssi.inc announcement. edit: looking at your account, about half your messages seems to be

by hu3 2y ago

This is a nytimes article. Not a dupe of the https://ssi.inc https://ssi.inc announcement. edit: looking at your account, about half your messages seems to be [dupe]. https://i.imgur.com/RomLfQG.png https://i.imgur.com/RomLfQG.png Are you automating this? I wouldn't recommend because of false flags like you just did. edit2: seems like i hit a nerve. got instant -3 votes for pointing out this is not a dupe.

whimsicalism 2y ago
you don’t seem to understand how dupe works on HN :) it doesn’t have to be literally the same article - these are both describing the exact same event
- hu3 2y ago
  I think you're assuming your understanding of dupe as a de facto HN rule. Guidelines say nothing about that: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html And this news article has context and information which the other post lacked.
  - whimsicalism 2y ago
    Yes it’s not a de jure rule, but it is a de facto one. HN has plenty of norms not formally in the guidelines
    - hu3 2y ago
      It's not the same link, not the same article, they aren't even written by the same person. The content is very different in content. They only relate in topic. One is the announcement from a company. The other is a news coverage. @dang could you please clarify if this is considered a dupe? In fact while searching for references about what is considered a dupe I found a false positive by THE SAME PERSON that reported this as dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40433658 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40433658 And I quote: " busymom0 30 days ago | root | parent | next [–] Related doesn't meant dupe. " ------- "snowwrestler 30 days ago | prev [–] Please stop with the [dupe] comments. No one is asking you to do it, and you’re not doing a good job of it." ------- "busymom0 30 days ago | next [–] This is not a dupe of those 2 posts you provided. This post is about the update issued by Apple yesterday (those 2 posts are from 6 days ago) and is also a more broader discussion calling for Apple to release details of the bug."
ChrisArchitect 2y ago
The point is there's already a post about this days old news, and plenty of discussion. Don't split up the thread. The discussion is over there.
- hu3 2y ago
  It's still not a dupe. One is a short announcement from a company. The other is a a news coverage and adds context not present in the announcement. Stop spamming HN with false positives. Users are smart enough to vote if related content from other sources is interesting. I hope @dang can clarify this because clearly I and others that replied to you in the past have different definitions of dupe.
  - ChrisArchitect 2y ago
    heh, you wanna add context? Post the link in the discussion over there, which is the culmination of multiple threads already merged from stories like this. 2 days old news.
    - hu3 2y ago
      Why would I add more context if the link serves that purpose? And in a much better format than hundreds of random comments? I'd rather let users vote on what's important than spam [dupe] on every other thread.

by hu3 2y ago

whimsicalism 2y ago

you don’t seem to understand how dupe works on HN :) it doesn’t have to be literally the same article - these are both describing the exact same event

hu3 2y ago
I think you're assuming your understanding of dupe as a de facto HN rule. Guidelines say nothing about that: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html And this news article has context and information which the other post lacked.
- whimsicalism 2y ago
  Yes it’s not a de jure rule, but it is a de facto one. HN has plenty of norms not formally in the guidelines
  - hu3 2y ago
    It's not the same link, not the same article, they aren't even written by the same person. The content is very different in content. They only relate in topic. One is the announcement from a company. The other is a news coverage. @dang could you please clarify if this is considered a dupe? In fact while searching for references about what is considered a dupe I found a false positive by THE SAME PERSON that reported this as dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40433658 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40433658 And I quote: " busymom0 30 days ago | root | parent | next [–] Related doesn't meant dupe. " ------- "snowwrestler 30 days ago | prev [–] Please stop with the [dupe] comments. No one is asking you to do it, and you’re not doing a good job of it." ------- "busymom0 30 days ago | next [–] This is not a dupe of those 2 posts you provided. This post is about the update issued by Apple yesterday (those 2 posts are from 6 days ago) and is also a more broader discussion calling for Apple to release details of the bug."

ChrisArchitect 2y ago

The point is there's already a post about this days old news, and plenty of discussion. Don't split up the thread. The discussion is over there.

hu3 2y ago
It's still not a dupe. One is a short announcement from a company. The other is a a news coverage and adds context not present in the announcement. Stop spamming HN with false positives. Users are smart enough to vote if related content from other sources is interesting. I hope @dang can clarify this because clearly I and others that replied to you in the past have different definitions of dupe.
- ChrisArchitect 2y ago
  heh, you wanna add context? Post the link in the discussion over there, which is the culmination of multiple threads already merged from stories like this. 2 days old news.
  - hu3 2y ago
    Why would I add more context if the link serves that purpose? And in a much better format than hundreds of random comments? I'd rather let users vote on what's important than spam [dupe] on every other thread.