12 ms·

Back when Reddit allowed API access, I used a reader (rif) which allowed blocking subreddits. I did an experiment where I would browse /r/all and block any sub

Back when Reddit allowed API access, I used a reader (rif) which allowed blocking subreddits. I did an experiment where I would browse /r/all and block any subreddit that had a toxic, gruesome, nsfw, or other content playing on negative emotions (like a pseudo feel-good post based on an otherwise negative phenomena). After a few years, and hundreds of banned subreddits, my /r/all was very wholesome, but contained only animal or niche hobby related subreddits. It was quite eye-opening on how negative reddit is, and also revealed how boring it is without the kind of algorithmic reaction seeking content. In other words, if 35% of hn content is positive (or neutral?), compared to reddit and most mainstream social media, it's actually very positive! Edit: I found the list of blocked subreddits if anyone is curious to see: https://hlnet.neocities.org/RIF_filters_categorized.txt https://hlnet.neocities.org/RIF_filters_categorized.txt Note that it also includes stuff I wasn't interested in at the time, like anime, and only has subreddits up until I quit, around the API ban.

pfdietz 9mo ago
Most ideas are bad, so maybe negativity should be common? To meta-steelman: if one steelmans a bad take, then the negativity becomes even more valuable.
- mikkupikku 9mo ago
  It's probably not a good approach to life though. Most bad ideas aren't really worth arguing about, better to focus on the good ideas, or at least the finding common ground with the good intentions behind bad ideas. I'm as guilty of negativity as anybody, maybe even more than most, but at least we can recognize this as a vice which may feel good in the short term but do us harm in the long run.
  - squeefers 9mo ago
    > but at least we can recognize this as a vice which may feel good in the short term but do us harm in the long run. harm??? so only happy thoughts from now on?
    - JKCalhoun 9mo ago
      I cut people a lot slack that might be dealing with a lot of negative issues in their head. If they want to drop out and spend the next year hiking the Pacific Crest Trail, cut off from the outside world, I'm going to respect their choices.
    - mikkupikku 9mo ago
      Negative emotions take their toll, too much will age you prematurely. It's not a black and white thing of course, there's a balance to be struck.
  - JKCalhoun 9mo ago
    I generally agree. Offline (ask my family) I'm Pollyanna. It's hard to let bad ideas go unchallenged though. Places like Reddit? Sure, brigades, bots—it's tilting at windmills to try to add balance there. But HN is a community I still care for. I still respect the comments (and commenters) here. (No, commentator is not a word—despite what Apple's dictionary is telling me.)
    - Y_Y 9mo ago
      What do you call the people who provide commentary on e.g. live sports? Oddly we don't use that word for people who leave internet comments, but it seems like it would fit pretty well. (See also: commentariat)
  - pfdietz 9mo ago
    I disagree. Life is a tightrope of limited duration and small missteps can be disastrous. Take risks, but tilt the odds in your favor by making the optimism as pruned by correct negativity as possible. Do not waste time optimistically on something that has little chance of success, or that has already demonstrably failed. Above all, do not get trapped wishfully believing in things that are wrong.
  - pixl97 9mo ago
    >It's probably not a good approach to life though. It is 100% how adults approach life. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3652533/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3652533/ >Most bad ideas aren't really worth arguing about, At the same time you have to stop bad ideas in their tracks otherwise they spread like bacteria on an unclean counter, and the internet typically does a bad job of stopping them unless moderation is heavy handed. This leads to a never ending circle of discussion of bad ideas.
    - mikkupikku 9mo ago
      Won't lie, I haven't read that paper, but I doubt it contradicts what I'm saying, which is that it is unhealthy to be stressed, and arguing with randos on the internet about shit that doesn't matter most of the time (and which both of you are almost always powerless to do anything about) is going to have a negative effect on your long term health outcome. Every minute that you spend annoyed about reddit user ballLicker6969 saying something ignorant is a minute of your life you'll never get back.
  - goatlover 9mo ago
    Bad ideas in politics should be argued about, particularly if they are gaining traction and have backing, because then there's a decent chance they will become policy. People who tune out of politics because of polarization and toxicity are letting the bad ideas win. Bad ideas in fields of expertise need to be discussed to the extent of keeping the field free of bad ideas as much as possible. Biologists will sometimes point out why intelligent design is not a good scientific theory for example.
- perfmode 9mo ago
  That’s a fair point, but I think we can distinguish between critical thinking and negativity. We can rigorously test an idea or decide it’s not for us while still maintaining a supportive environment. Often, the most helpful feedback isn't ‘this is bad,’ but rather ‘here is a different perspective to consider.’
  - JKCalhoun 9mo ago
    I like your attitude.
- 112233 9mo ago
  Most things are inedible, yet we treat food poisoning as unacceptable event. Places serving expired food get shut down. Yet preparing speech and sights we feed others is a lost art. When I read how people wrote 100 years ago I feel like a brute
  - pfdietz 9mo ago
    I'm very confused by this analogy.
    - MarkusQ 9mo ago
      Not the OP, but I'll try to unpack it for you. Reading online, listing to public discourse, etc. these days is like taking the Tide Pod challenge; people feeding you inedible or even toxic garbage that superficially looks like candy. If we fed others actual food with the same care we employ when producing "food for thought", we'd all be, at best, very, very ill. When compared with what people wrote in the past (especially through a survivorship bias filter, where the best writing is preserved longer and distributed more widely) what we produce today seems crude and disgusting.
      - 112233 9mo ago
        Thank you for putting it this eloquently. Even stranger, for me, is the current prevalence of collective shunning, the so called cancel-culture, that is triggered by the most diverse reasons, but seemingly never buy the negativity and toxicity of the discourse. It is always lone individuals leaving because of that. But as soon as another reason - political, cultural etc. — is added, there is a collective exodus and condemnation. twitter/x is good example.
- nospice 9mo ago
  I think this is a common view, but it assumes that most of one's negative hot takes are good. And frankly, I've seen HNers being confidently wrong more times than I can count.
  - pfdietz 9mo ago
    The critique of negativity assumes the positive takes are good. Why the asymmetry? It feels hypocritical.
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
yread 9mo ago
nit: 35% I did something similar and ended up opening only /r/AskHistorian posts...
- wellthisisgreat 9mo ago
  Unironically, how are history-related questions not negative? I’d imagine people would ask questions about some dark events. I was blocking subreddits recently and was contemplating if /r/historyporn because of the amount of photos of dead bodies and politically-charged discussions that sometimes unfold
  - slfreference 9mo ago
    If you block /r/history, you would prove the aphorism, "One thing we learn from history is that we don't learn from history"
Topgamer7 9mo ago
I personally only really noticed that I did not like the "after dark" style reddits. But I would generally try to ignore anything political, and focus on like craft/hobby content, media (but not tabloid style), and things not a commentary. Reddit (or socially generated sites) are really a mixed bag.
- tsunamifury 9mo ago
  I think what became interesting and I nailed down with others was any hobby forum became toxic and lost its utility in direct correlation with its popularity. For the most part I pinned it down to casual engagement from non hobbyists introduced noise and anti information at scale. For example in r/cars a site that talks about vehicles the vast majority of commenters do not own, comments become about the “simualacra” of having an exotic (comparing specs debating reviews etc). Where as Ferrari chat forum is about the utilitarian ins and outs of actually owning one (financing, maintence, dealer issues etc). This seems to apply to all hobby forums when grow in popularity to the point where engagement rewards contributions from non hobbiests over real ones. My final takeaway was that the nature of the internet being a simulation inherently rewards non real content over real. (Fake news is inherent to the internet) And karmic systems specifically reconstruct and enforce that simualacra.
  - Teever 9mo ago
    An adjacent problem is when enthusiasts in hobby subreddits become a bit too enthusiastic about the hobby which sometimes develops into an unhealthy obsession that the community (un)wittingly becomes a part of. I recently bought a pair of boots from a reputable brand. So I of course checked out the subreddit for the brand and while many posts are good and the community is receptive to questions but posts by weirdos with like a dozen+ pairs of $300+ boots dominate the discussion. Can these people actually afford like $5000 worth of boots and all the accessories they come with it? Maybe. Maybe we’re all participating in their shopping addiction when they post pictures of their stairs covered in boots. Either way there’s something unsettlingly unnatural about their posts, and I don’t mean in an astroturfing sort of way.
josefresco 9mo ago
I went through a similar process recently mostly by hand and found the same result. After blocking negative vibes, my only "subs" were intentionally "wholesome" subs like animals/feel good news etc. >also revealed how boring it is without the kind of algorithmic reaction seeking content. I also found this but realized this is a good thing(!) if your goal is to reduce Reddit usage. That being said, a little negativity might be warranted in order to be a part of the discussion. Otherwise you're just opting out completely.
- california-og 9mo ago
  I also found it a very good thing. After the API use ban, and losing my blocklist, I couldn't go back to browsing normal reddit anymore and was finally able to quit after 10+ years. And, it has made me very resistant to joining or doomscrolling any other social media too. I think the hn model is decent because it doesn't optimize for engagement but for intellectual curiosity, whether it's positive or negative, which leads to mostly earnest and interesting discussion.
epolanski 9mo ago
Controversial content is discussed more than positive one, that's a well known phenomenon from gossiping with friends to discussing politics online to whatever. I always bring the same example: if one of your best friends has troubles with it's partner you'll hear for hours. But when things go smooth they have nothing to say and you have little to add.
- rvnx 9mo ago
  It depends on the platform. Most of the platforms reward content engagement, no matter if the content is positive or negative. Engagement means money. Even if this is bait content then you get rewarded (on TikTok, X, YouTube, you directly get cash). Even here controversy is indirectly rewarded here because it creates engagement, and there is practically no downsides if you upset anyone; You get points for every answer that someone does to your comment, and the downvotes you get on your own comments don't offset the gained points. These points have real utility to make money indirectly: the more points you have, the more credibility you have on this platform and capacity to push a story. [...] and it helps to bootstrap your project or grab new customers for free (at most 1 day of writing the bot script). Let's say, you want to launch a new Juicero, and nobody knows about it yet, it's great to be able to push it on the homepage of HN, otherwise nobody is going to notice.
  - immibis 9mo ago
    I don't think YC startups need to sneak to promote their startups - they can just ask the moderators to give them a boost. Meanwhile if you say anything bad about capitalism the comment is removed.
    - zzzeek 9mo ago
      "you're posting too fast; please slow down"
    - rvnx 9mo ago
      I am genuinely none sure. I would tend to think that this goes naturally: you get boosted by a circle of people you know, and who wants you to succeed, because if you succeed they will get money), so there is the incentive in some way. but it's still plausible that getting a boost on HN is part of the package (but I am not sure it is needed, because of this natural push that you get from let's say 100 people around you). What you said about capitalism is true, I noticed it too, and it sounds even strange to me, as we are literally on a board that is initiated by a capitalist fund.
jayd16 9mo ago
If you had a no tolerance policy then over time you ban every single sub. 99.99% positive would still mean they could get banned, under this algorithm. You're also comparing Apples to Oranges by comparing zero tolerance records for subs vs average across all posts of hn.
gn4d 9mo ago
Had the same experience with rif/res, and on X. If you go into algorithm-heavy sites with the intention of actively curating your personalized algorithm into your areas of interest, the sites can work quite well. One click blocking of subreddits and topics/posters sends strong feedback to the algorithm to readjust. I really don't know how people can use sites in any other way. For YouTube, I have filters and blockers set up such that I don't even get recommended any videos, and don't see any videos to click on unless I type in a search query or receive a notification from a channel to which I am intentionally subscribed. Facebook was/is broken beyond all repair, though. I recall that you could not remove posts from random groups and people from your feed, even if you were not friends with them or members of those groups. Sometimes, I will see a screenshot of someone using reddit or YouTube "unfiltered" and it's night and day, full of slop and ragebait everywhere. No thanks! My only difference of opinion with you is that I don't find positive content boring. I find positive things exciting and engaging! Negative content just makes me want to tune out, for the most part, unless it's some cathartic or amusing scenario like the recent thread here about SO imploding lol.
- california-og 9mo ago
  I didn't mean to imply that I find all positive content boring — just the kind of positive content that would rise to /r/all in reddit at that time, which was mostly quickly digestable content (like animal pictures). And it was also boring in the sense that it was much "slower" to change within a day than the unfiltered /r/all, so I would largely see the same content for a lot longer. YouTube is also similiar. I need to be quite careful what to click so "my algorithm" stays interesting and wholesome. If I click on any remotely baity and negative video, the recommendations algo picks it up almost immediately and devolves into garbage.
b3lvedere 9mo ago
So a nice bubble? :) ( I actually mean that positive )
wildzzz 9mo ago
Unrelated but I still use rif daily. You can patch the apk using Revanced to use your own API key rather than the original developer's key. With the rise of AI, I've block a bunch of subreddits that have become infected with obvious engagement bait posts all with similar structures, writing styles, and tropes. "Am I the asshole for leaving my spouse because they pushed me down the stairs and murdered my dog? He's also a member of an ultra-nationalist terror organization and doesn't put his cart away at the grocery store. My friends and family have chimed in with mixed sentiments on social media. Some are praising me and others are telling me I'm wrong." The account will of course be brand new and all of the top comments will be accounts that solely respond to similar bait posts on similar subreddits. It reminds me of subreddit simulator, it's bots talking to bots. My personal conspiracy theory is that reddit encourages this AI bait slop because it drives engagement and gets people to see more ads. The stories are like the soap operas I sometimes watched with my mom growing up.
- skerit 9mo ago
  What! You can still use rif like that? That's interesting. I completely stopped browsing Reddit on my phone after it went away (though maybe that's for the best...)
  - Tenemo 9mo ago
    I'm not the person you replied to, but yes, I've been using RiF since the API changes ...with a small 4-month l break last year when I was automatically flagged as bot API traffic and instantly permabanned with no warning. Reddit's built-in appeals went unanswered and ignored. Luckily I live in the EU, I appealed under DSA and they unbanned me after actual human review right before the 1-month deadline. Could have I created a new account instead? Maybe. Did I want to check if DSA actually works in practice and can get me back my u/Tenemo nickname that I use everywhere, not just on Reddit? I sure did! Turns out Reddit cannot legally ban me from their platform without a valid reason, no matter what is in the ToS. Pretty cool! Back to using RiF with a fresh API key after that and haven't had any issues since.
    - 9mo ago
bena 9mo ago
I feel like this goes back to the "trick" of getting your questions about Linux answered. Basically, if you just asked your question "How do I do X on Linux?", you'd get no response. But if you said "Windows is so much better than Linux because I can't even do X on Linux", you'd get 5 different ways to accomplish your task before the end of the day. Nothing gets people engaged more than making them angry.
- Y_Y 9mo ago
  I feel ironically obliged to mention Cunningham's Law https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law
Workaccount2 9mo ago
The cynical doomerism of reddit is like an infectious disease that ensnares you in their pit of misery with it's initial blast of catharsis. People whose lives bring them out of that swamp leave reddit and stop contributing, so it's mainly populated with miserable cynical doomers all jerking each other off about how screwed they are. Most of them are teenage/college kids working bottom rung jobs/entry level work/unemployed, with all the naivete that comes with it. Stay away from it.
- mstipetic 9mo ago
  As someone who’s on Reddit a lot, I completely agree
  - Workaccount2 9mo ago
    I was chronically on reddit daily from when Digg collapsed until they pulled the API. I was long overdue to leave by that point anyway. Now in the last couple years, both my sisters have discovered reddit, and hanging out with them is like the god damn /r/all comments sections all over again. So insidious.
    - scottyah 9mo ago
      I am very much in the same boat. I still browse every now and then, and now it feels like I can spot a redditor from two opinions/values in a conversation. It's definitely turned more mainstream and more indoctrinating. If Fox News turned our parents political, reddit is doing it to our generation.
      - mstipetic 9mo ago
        I think often times they’re not wrong but then again what do I do with this constant barrage of cynicism, can’t change much anyway
- yodsanklai 9mo ago
  Cynical doomerism isn't limited to low pay jobs. Another super negative place is Team blind, where a lot of contributors are extremely well-paid.
asats 9mo ago
Same, and what made me finally quit reddit for good was realizing that on a given r/all page I was blocking 98+% of the content, to the point where it made me question why I am even bothering.
1970-01-01 9mo ago
A 45/65 balance feels like it's at the optimal balance for interesting. Users are expected to continually upvote more and more boring posts if the user pool grows with noise. If the system stabilizes to 50/50, the content would trend toward mediocre but harmless.. Ergo, HN really is a cut above social media.
- sp1nningaway 9mo ago
  This totally matches my experience and is good way of describing OP's negative subreddit filtering. R/weightlifting used to be total cesspool of rumors and gossip about athletes and coaches, but at some point the sub course corrected and got more heavily moderated. The result is a completely uninteresting feed of technique videos that are actually just kids showing off their latest PR. However, the sub also aggressively reenforces that mediocrity. I posted what I thought was an interesting video of Lebron James doing a weightlifting drill, (with much lighter weight than a competitive lifter) and commenters jumped all the way up my ass about it being off topic, but also how Lebron has terrible weightlifting technique. No compelling discussion about weightlifting for elite athletes in other sports was had...
Buttons840 9mo ago
Blocking subreddits is still possible with just the webpage btw. Go into the sub, click the 3 dots up top, choose "mute subreddit". I do the same as you. If any post is harming my mental health, I just must the entire sub. But then weirder and weirder stuff just keeps surfacing. Some of it is funny though; like it keeps showing me alien subreddits now, which I find funny because I'm pretty sure 65% of the comments are just satire.

pfdietz 9mo ago

Most ideas are bad, so maybe negativity should be common? To meta-steelman: if one steelmans a bad take, then the negativity becomes even more valuable.

mikkupikku 9mo ago
It's probably not a good approach to life though. Most bad ideas aren't really worth arguing about, better to focus on the good ideas, or at least the finding common ground with the good intentions behind bad ideas. I'm as guilty of negativity as anybody, maybe even more than most, but at least we can recognize this as a vice which may feel good in the short term but do us harm in the long run.
- squeefers 9mo ago
  > but at least we can recognize this as a vice which may feel good in the short term but do us harm in the long run. harm??? so only happy thoughts from now on?
  - JKCalhoun 9mo ago
    I cut people a lot slack that might be dealing with a lot of negative issues in their head. If they want to drop out and spend the next year hiking the Pacific Crest Trail, cut off from the outside world, I'm going to respect their choices.
  - mikkupikku 9mo ago
    Negative emotions take their toll, too much will age you prematurely. It's not a black and white thing of course, there's a balance to be struck.
- JKCalhoun 9mo ago
  I generally agree. Offline (ask my family) I'm Pollyanna. It's hard to let bad ideas go unchallenged though. Places like Reddit? Sure, brigades, bots—it's tilting at windmills to try to add balance there. But HN is a community I still care for. I still respect the comments (and commenters) here. (No, commentator is not a word—despite what Apple's dictionary is telling me.)
  - Y_Y 9mo ago
    What do you call the people who provide commentary on e.g. live sports? Oddly we don't use that word for people who leave internet comments, but it seems like it would fit pretty well. (See also: commentariat)
- pfdietz 9mo ago
  I disagree. Life is a tightrope of limited duration and small missteps can be disastrous. Take risks, but tilt the odds in your favor by making the optimism as pruned by correct negativity as possible. Do not waste time optimistically on something that has little chance of success, or that has already demonstrably failed. Above all, do not get trapped wishfully believing in things that are wrong.
- pixl97 9mo ago
  >It's probably not a good approach to life though. It is 100% how adults approach life. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3652533/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3652533/ >Most bad ideas aren't really worth arguing about, At the same time you have to stop bad ideas in their tracks otherwise they spread like bacteria on an unclean counter, and the internet typically does a bad job of stopping them unless moderation is heavy handed. This leads to a never ending circle of discussion of bad ideas.
  - mikkupikku 9mo ago
    Won't lie, I haven't read that paper, but I doubt it contradicts what I'm saying, which is that it is unhealthy to be stressed, and arguing with randos on the internet about shit that doesn't matter most of the time (and which both of you are almost always powerless to do anything about) is going to have a negative effect on your long term health outcome. Every minute that you spend annoyed about reddit user ballLicker6969 saying something ignorant is a minute of your life you'll never get back.
- goatlover 9mo ago
  Bad ideas in politics should be argued about, particularly if they are gaining traction and have backing, because then there's a decent chance they will become policy. People who tune out of politics because of polarization and toxicity are letting the bad ideas win. Bad ideas in fields of expertise need to be discussed to the extent of keeping the field free of bad ideas as much as possible. Biologists will sometimes point out why intelligent design is not a good scientific theory for example.
perfmode 9mo ago
That’s a fair point, but I think we can distinguish between critical thinking and negativity. We can rigorously test an idea or decide it’s not for us while still maintaining a supportive environment. Often, the most helpful feedback isn't ‘this is bad,’ but rather ‘here is a different perspective to consider.’
- JKCalhoun 9mo ago
  I like your attitude.
112233 9mo ago
Most things are inedible, yet we treat food poisoning as unacceptable event. Places serving expired food get shut down. Yet preparing speech and sights we feed others is a lost art. When I read how people wrote 100 years ago I feel like a brute
- pfdietz 9mo ago
  I'm very confused by this analogy.
  - MarkusQ 9mo ago
    Not the OP, but I'll try to unpack it for you. Reading online, listing to public discourse, etc. these days is like taking the Tide Pod challenge; people feeding you inedible or even toxic garbage that superficially looks like candy. If we fed others actual food with the same care we employ when producing "food for thought", we'd all be, at best, very, very ill. When compared with what people wrote in the past (especially through a survivorship bias filter, where the best writing is preserved longer and distributed more widely) what we produce today seems crude and disgusting.
    - 112233 9mo ago
      Thank you for putting it this eloquently. Even stranger, for me, is the current prevalence of collective shunning, the so called cancel-culture, that is triggered by the most diverse reasons, but seemingly never buy the negativity and toxicity of the discourse. It is always lone individuals leaving because of that. But as soon as another reason - political, cultural etc. — is added, there is a collective exodus and condemnation. twitter/x is good example.
nospice 9mo ago
I think this is a common view, but it assumes that most of one's negative hot takes are good. And frankly, I've seen HNers being confidently wrong more times than I can count.
- pfdietz 9mo ago
  The critique of negativity assumes the positive takes are good. Why the asymmetry? It feels hypocritical.
deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]

yread 9mo ago

nit: 35% I did something similar and ended up opening only /r/AskHistorian posts...

wellthisisgreat 9mo ago
Unironically, how are history-related questions not negative? I’d imagine people would ask questions about some dark events. I was blocking subreddits recently and was contemplating if /r/historyporn because of the amount of photos of dead bodies and politically-charged discussions that sometimes unfold
- slfreference 9mo ago
  If you block /r/history, you would prove the aphorism, "One thing we learn from history is that we don't learn from history"

Topgamer7 9mo ago

I personally only really noticed that I did not like the "after dark" style reddits. But I would generally try to ignore anything political, and focus on like craft/hobby content, media (but not tabloid style), and things not a commentary. Reddit (or socially generated sites) are really a mixed bag.

tsunamifury 9mo ago
I think what became interesting and I nailed down with others was any hobby forum became toxic and lost its utility in direct correlation with its popularity. For the most part I pinned it down to casual engagement from non hobbyists introduced noise and anti information at scale. For example in r/cars a site that talks about vehicles the vast majority of commenters do not own, comments become about the “simualacra” of having an exotic (comparing specs debating reviews etc). Where as Ferrari chat forum is about the utilitarian ins and outs of actually owning one (financing, maintence, dealer issues etc). This seems to apply to all hobby forums when grow in popularity to the point where engagement rewards contributions from non hobbiests over real ones. My final takeaway was that the nature of the internet being a simulation inherently rewards non real content over real. (Fake news is inherent to the internet) And karmic systems specifically reconstruct and enforce that simualacra.
- Teever 9mo ago
  An adjacent problem is when enthusiasts in hobby subreddits become a bit too enthusiastic about the hobby which sometimes develops into an unhealthy obsession that the community (un)wittingly becomes a part of. I recently bought a pair of boots from a reputable brand. So I of course checked out the subreddit for the brand and while many posts are good and the community is receptive to questions but posts by weirdos with like a dozen+ pairs of $300+ boots dominate the discussion. Can these people actually afford like $5000 worth of boots and all the accessories they come with it? Maybe. Maybe we’re all participating in their shopping addiction when they post pictures of their stairs covered in boots. Either way there’s something unsettlingly unnatural about their posts, and I don’t mean in an astroturfing sort of way.

josefresco 9mo ago

I went through a similar process recently mostly by hand and found the same result. After blocking negative vibes, my only "subs" were intentionally "wholesome" subs like animals/feel good news etc. >also revealed how boring it is without the kind of algorithmic reaction seeking content. I also found this but realized this is a good thing(!) if your goal is to reduce Reddit usage. That being said, a little negativity might be warranted in order to be a part of the discussion. Otherwise you're just opting out completely.

california-og 9mo ago
I also found it a very good thing. After the API use ban, and losing my blocklist, I couldn't go back to browsing normal reddit anymore and was finally able to quit after 10+ years. And, it has made me very resistant to joining or doomscrolling any other social media too. I think the hn model is decent because it doesn't optimize for engagement but for intellectual curiosity, whether it's positive or negative, which leads to mostly earnest and interesting discussion.

epolanski 9mo ago

Controversial content is discussed more than positive one, that's a well known phenomenon from gossiping with friends to discussing politics online to whatever. I always bring the same example: if one of your best friends has troubles with it's partner you'll hear for hours. But when things go smooth they have nothing to say and you have little to add.

rvnx 9mo ago
It depends on the platform. Most of the platforms reward content engagement, no matter if the content is positive or negative. Engagement means money. Even if this is bait content then you get rewarded (on TikTok, X, YouTube, you directly get cash). Even here controversy is indirectly rewarded here because it creates engagement, and there is practically no downsides if you upset anyone; You get points for every answer that someone does to your comment, and the downvotes you get on your own comments don't offset the gained points. These points have real utility to make money indirectly: the more points you have, the more credibility you have on this platform and capacity to push a story. [...] and it helps to bootstrap your project or grab new customers for free (at most 1 day of writing the bot script). Let's say, you want to launch a new Juicero, and nobody knows about it yet, it's great to be able to push it on the homepage of HN, otherwise nobody is going to notice.
- immibis 9mo ago
  I don't think YC startups need to sneak to promote their startups - they can just ask the moderators to give them a boost. Meanwhile if you say anything bad about capitalism the comment is removed.
  - zzzeek 9mo ago
    "you're posting too fast; please slow down"
  - rvnx 9mo ago
    I am genuinely none sure. I would tend to think that this goes naturally: you get boosted by a circle of people you know, and who wants you to succeed, because if you succeed they will get money), so there is the incentive in some way. but it's still plausible that getting a boost on HN is part of the package (but I am not sure it is needed, because of this natural push that you get from let's say 100 people around you). What you said about capitalism is true, I noticed it too, and it sounds even strange to me, as we are literally on a board that is initiated by a capitalist fund.

jayd16 9mo ago

If you had a no tolerance policy then over time you ban every single sub. 99.99% positive would still mean they could get banned, under this algorithm. You're also comparing Apples to Oranges by comparing zero tolerance records for subs vs average across all posts of hn.

gn4d 9mo ago

Had the same experience with rif/res, and on X. If you go into algorithm-heavy sites with the intention of actively curating your personalized algorithm into your areas of interest, the sites can work quite well. One click blocking of subreddits and topics/posters sends strong feedback to the algorithm to readjust. I really don't know how people can use sites in any other way. For YouTube, I have filters and blockers set up such that I don't even get recommended any videos, and don't see any videos to click on unless I type in a search query or receive a notification from a channel to which I am intentionally subscribed. Facebook was/is broken beyond all repair, though. I recall that you could not remove posts from random groups and people from your feed, even if you were not friends with them or members of those groups. Sometimes, I will see a screenshot of someone using reddit or YouTube "unfiltered" and it's night and day, full of slop and ragebait everywhere. No thanks! My only difference of opinion with you is that I don't find positive content boring. I find positive things exciting and engaging! Negative content just makes me want to tune out, for the most part, unless it's some cathartic or amusing scenario like the recent thread here about SO imploding lol.

california-og 9mo ago
I didn't mean to imply that I find all positive content boring — just the kind of positive content that would rise to /r/all in reddit at that time, which was mostly quickly digestable content (like animal pictures). And it was also boring in the sense that it was much "slower" to change within a day than the unfiltered /r/all, so I would largely see the same content for a lot longer. YouTube is also similiar. I need to be quite careful what to click so "my algorithm" stays interesting and wholesome. If I click on any remotely baity and negative video, the recommendations algo picks it up almost immediately and devolves into garbage.

b3lvedere 9mo ago

So a nice bubble? :) ( I actually mean that positive )

wildzzz 9mo ago

Unrelated but I still use rif daily. You can patch the apk using Revanced to use your own API key rather than the original developer's key. With the rise of AI, I've block a bunch of subreddits that have become infected with obvious engagement bait posts all with similar structures, writing styles, and tropes. "Am I the asshole for leaving my spouse because they pushed me down the stairs and murdered my dog? He's also a member of an ultra-nationalist terror organization and doesn't put his cart away at the grocery store. My friends and family have chimed in with mixed sentiments on social media. Some are praising me and others are telling me I'm wrong." The account will of course be brand new and all of the top comments will be accounts that solely respond to similar bait posts on similar subreddits. It reminds me of subreddit simulator, it's bots talking to bots. My personal conspiracy theory is that reddit encourages this AI bait slop because it drives engagement and gets people to see more ads. The stories are like the soap operas I sometimes watched with my mom growing up.

skerit 9mo ago
What! You can still use rif like that? That's interesting. I completely stopped browsing Reddit on my phone after it went away (though maybe that's for the best...)
- Tenemo 9mo ago
  I'm not the person you replied to, but yes, I've been using RiF since the API changes ...with a small 4-month l break last year when I was automatically flagged as bot API traffic and instantly permabanned with no warning. Reddit's built-in appeals went unanswered and ignored. Luckily I live in the EU, I appealed under DSA and they unbanned me after actual human review right before the 1-month deadline. Could have I created a new account instead? Maybe. Did I want to check if DSA actually works in practice and can get me back my u/Tenemo nickname that I use everywhere, not just on Reddit? I sure did! Turns out Reddit cannot legally ban me from their platform without a valid reason, no matter what is in the ToS. Pretty cool! Back to using RiF with a fresh API key after that and haven't had any issues since.
  - 9mo ago

bena 9mo ago

I feel like this goes back to the "trick" of getting your questions about Linux answered. Basically, if you just asked your question "How do I do X on Linux?", you'd get no response. But if you said "Windows is so much better than Linux because I can't even do X on Linux", you'd get 5 different ways to accomplish your task before the end of the day. Nothing gets people engaged more than making them angry.

Y_Y 9mo ago
I feel ironically obliged to mention Cunningham's Law https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law

Workaccount2 9mo ago

The cynical doomerism of reddit is like an infectious disease that ensnares you in their pit of misery with it's initial blast of catharsis. People whose lives bring them out of that swamp leave reddit and stop contributing, so it's mainly populated with miserable cynical doomers all jerking each other off about how screwed they are. Most of them are teenage/college kids working bottom rung jobs/entry level work/unemployed, with all the naivete that comes with it. Stay away from it.

mstipetic 9mo ago
As someone who’s on Reddit a lot, I completely agree
- Workaccount2 9mo ago
  I was chronically on reddit daily from when Digg collapsed until they pulled the API. I was long overdue to leave by that point anyway. Now in the last couple years, both my sisters have discovered reddit, and hanging out with them is like the god damn /r/all comments sections all over again. So insidious.
  - scottyah 9mo ago
    I am very much in the same boat. I still browse every now and then, and now it feels like I can spot a redditor from two opinions/values in a conversation. It's definitely turned more mainstream and more indoctrinating. If Fox News turned our parents political, reddit is doing it to our generation.
    - mstipetic 9mo ago
      I think often times they’re not wrong but then again what do I do with this constant barrage of cynicism, can’t change much anyway
yodsanklai 9mo ago
Cynical doomerism isn't limited to low pay jobs. Another super negative place is Team blind, where a lot of contributors are extremely well-paid.

asats 9mo ago

Same, and what made me finally quit reddit for good was realizing that on a given r/all page I was blocking 98+% of the content, to the point where it made me question why I am even bothering.

1970-01-01 9mo ago

A 45/65 balance feels like it's at the optimal balance for interesting. Users are expected to continually upvote more and more boring posts if the user pool grows with noise. If the system stabilizes to 50/50, the content would trend toward mediocre but harmless.. Ergo, HN really is a cut above social media.

sp1nningaway 9mo ago
This totally matches my experience and is good way of describing OP's negative subreddit filtering. R/weightlifting used to be total cesspool of rumors and gossip about athletes and coaches, but at some point the sub course corrected and got more heavily moderated. The result is a completely uninteresting feed of technique videos that are actually just kids showing off their latest PR. However, the sub also aggressively reenforces that mediocrity. I posted what I thought was an interesting video of Lebron James doing a weightlifting drill, (with much lighter weight than a competitive lifter) and commenters jumped all the way up my ass about it being off topic, but also how Lebron has terrible weightlifting technique. No compelling discussion about weightlifting for elite athletes in other sports was had...

Buttons840 9mo ago

Blocking subreddits is still possible with just the webpage btw. Go into the sub, click the 3 dots up top, choose "mute subreddit". I do the same as you. If any post is harming my mental health, I just must the entire sub. But then weirder and weirder stuff just keeps surfacing. Some of it is funny though; like it keeps showing me alien subreddits now, which I find funny because I'm pretty sure 65% of the comments are just satire.