> There is no physical or mental disability preventing people using modern technology.
Judging by the amount of insufferable "Got it! Got it! Got it!" modals, pop ups and other bullshit in "modern" technology, the apps themselves are the disability - wasting time and getting in the way of doing the thing the user is actually trying to accomplish.
I think the issue they have with your post is that you havn't explained why you think that anonfiles are victims (of what?) and why you think that HN is blaming them, and that you are refering to HN as a collective. This is a common pattern on reddit. The moderation here selects primarily for "convers[ing] curiously."[0] I don't know if the same can be said for reddit.
Of course, "don't be snarky" cuts both ways, and I don't necessarily agree with GP's language, although I think pointing out redditisms is in itself fair game.
i made the comment because the OP article was about anonfiles (a totally free service) shutting down due to unrelenting abuse. and rather than the comments talking about how unfortunate that abuse is or trying to offer a solution they instead basically say "well you made a public thing, fuck around and find out ig"
They bought the website, they didn't "make" anything. That was in the OP. You also can't take their word at face value. They certainly knew what the site was in part used for, and accept bitcoin donations for that exact reason. They also linked to/sold ads(?) for suspicious file sharing sites, (their own competitors) which has been pointed out here. And even your claim that they shut down due to abuse isn't a given — did they shut down or were they shut down by their provider? Or did something else entirely happen? We don't know, and it's fair to have multiple views on the topic, and even to be critical of the developers. Telling "hn" simply to "do better," without any explaination of what you realy mean and why you think that, isn't actionable. As a (former) user of anonfiles, I am sad they shut down, but I am aware that they were very suspicious compared to similar sites like catbox, who have a blog, FAQ and patreon. Nor am I surprised at all by their end. I think many are in the same situation in terms of their thinking.
Their comments seem fine to me? They pretty clearly explained the reason for their dislike of the name - if anything, their ability to do so concisely should be praised
I guess I find the name collision with Google X—quoting the guidelines again—to be "too common to be interesting." But one man's pithy is another's snarky, so to each their own.
If the Reddit admins don't want mods to have the ability to set a subreddit to private, then why did they even give them the option in the first place? Couldn't they just disable the "private" flag for all subs and be done with it?
I'm really surprised this isn't what they're doing. It has the same effect without causing a lot of strife and backstabbing that is surely just going to poison the well further.
They are terribly limited, which is marketed as a bonus - I don't see it that way.
I wouldn't go so far as to call them trash - they're very expensive toys.
You may enjoy this video about the OP-1's feature set, even without the background knowledge to know everything he's saying is 100% true (which it is) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU8alMWUmDI
I like Apple, quite possibly too much. I put a lot of value on user experience. But I would never buy a Teenage Engineering product with my own money. I find that 'I only drink $500 bottles of wine' kind of thing deeply uncool.
“Patrick Bateman’s Fischer-Price” is a superb phrase, captures the essence of the situation. I can see Bateman and friends comparing their devices one upping each other - this one has “embossed buttons”…etc!
You're not alone, and I'm kinda glad you posted. It's some sort of failed minimalism that just bothers me. It's like the bad Ikea manual of the music world.
