News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

doglet

Re: on Friday May 26, 2023 @01:16PM (#36087016)
tl;dr it got worse!
Re: on Tuesday February 07, 2023 @04:38PM (#34700137)
A possible connection between fake profile invitations from developers "from Ukraine" and Russia.
Re: on Friday August 12, 2022 @09:49AM (#32438609)
I've been getting these suspicious posts from people claiming to be from Ukraine. They always use the same template. Seems suspicious; any idea what's going on?
Re: on Monday July 25, 2022 @10:47AM (#32225088)
Extreme deception in advertising, if you ask me, from a major insurer.

Why Instacart Removed 'Buy It Again'

Most likely, users were actually too efficient with the app, not being exposed to enough sponsored results. By removing this option, shoppers will be forced to wade through more sponsored results.

( Read More... | no comments | 2 points | on HN )
Re:Quora Dark Pattern: Unsubscribe on Saturday October 09, 2021 @10:05AM (#28809944)
It was good, then got plagued by bad incentives, to sum it up

Quora Dark Pattern: Unsubscribe

Wishing to see an article, Quora required a sign-in through 3rd party auth. Upon signing in, I unwittingly opted in to getting subscribed to regular Quora emails. This is part 1 - the unrequested subscription.Now, for part 2: upon trying to unsubscribe, I find out that my unsubscribe clicks aren't working as expected. It's because on closer inspection, the email footer link takes you to page...

( Read More... | 4 comments | 9 points | on HN )
Re:Scikit-learn 1.0 has arrived on Saturday September 25, 2021 @09:35AM (#28653073)

Show HN: You Are Predictable

An Android app that demonstrates your predictable actions, especially when trying to act quickly: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.quantifiedclick.rpsrandomnesstrainerThe premise is that you cannot both be random and fast at the same time.

( Read More... | no comments | on HN )
Re:Beware “Amazon's Choice” on Sunday December 13, 2020 @01:18PM (#25408698)
As a non-expert, I need a name brand as my gold standard for comparison in normal usage scenario.
Re:Ask HN: Have affiliate commissions polluted reviews? on Saturday May 30, 2020 @03:06PM (#23363726)
> If you were to buy, say, a laptop, or a new washing machine... where would you go?

The Which magazine sounds like Consumer Reports, who purports to have no interest outside of the consumer's: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Reports#Editorial_ind... I wonder if the HN community has had positive / negative experiences with CR relating to this topic

Re:Ask HN: Have affiliate commissions polluted reviews? on Saturday May 30, 2020 @02:57PM (#23363644)
I too share your logic behind placing more trust in sites that go in-depth and review across all the brands, as opposed to focusing extra attention in only one or a couple.

Regarding SEO blogs, I have seen a lot of "review rewrite" jobs posted on a freelancing site, indicating there is a market for this kind of devaluing behavior (worse than not adding value, this actually is a net-negative on society, where costs are externalized)

Weasel Words and Weasel Stats

You've probably heard of "weasel words." I want to call the following a "weasel statistic" (from State Farm mailer):"[we] can help with an average of $507 in savings"(fine print: "1. Average annual per household savings based on a 2018 national survey by State Farm of new policyholders who reported savings by switching heir auto insurance to State Farm")

( Read More... | no comments | on HN )
Re:How to Inflate Your Stats on Wednesday February 21, 2018 @01:12AM (#16427263)
Re:The High Cost of Not Doing Experiments (2015) on Friday February 16, 2018 @04:54PM (#16396799)
I think at the root of the problem is statistical ignorance, combined with confused morale judgment, along the lines of "but if we think X is effective, it would be wrong to withhold providing X for everyone equally!"
Re:Amazon's Fake Review Problem on Wednesday December 20, 2017 @06:31PM (#15974884)
similar to a lot of apartments incentivizing positive reviews from their tenants
Re:Amazon's Fake Review Problem on Tuesday December 19, 2017 @01:35PM (#15962642)
In other words, repetition of the same mistakes implies higher probability of copying
Re:Amazon's Fake Review Problem on Saturday December 16, 2017 @10:56PM (#15943994)
Interestingly, Amazon might have a secondary payoff here: they actually get some good ground truth (honest review data) since these reviews - at least the positive ones - aren't tainted by the same incentives.
Re:Amazon's Fake Review Problem on Saturday December 16, 2017 @08:28PM (#15943384)
Nothing like the good old trusted hobby store. And yes, this repetition of phrase or structure should be a clear signal.
Re:Amazon's Fake Review Problem on Saturday December 16, 2017 @08:24PM (#15943369)
Maybe there's a market for verified customer reviews of popular items - even ones that aren't big ticket. Consumer Reports might grow to cover additional items and perhaps develop a browser extension for subscribers who gain access to trusted reviews.
Re:Amazon's Fake Review Problem on Saturday December 16, 2017 @08:18PM (#15943344)
We should still be able to ask them to make a reasonable effort, which keeps the fake review economy at bay
Re:Amazon's Fake Review Problem on Saturday December 16, 2017 @02:07PM (#15941223)
One problem is getting "ground truth." I think Amazon has a pretty good idea of a lot of near-certain true positives.
Re:Amazon's Fake Review Problem on Saturday December 16, 2017 @12:06PM (#15940365)
Should we conclude that Amazon does not have sufficient incentive to remove these fake reviews? Surely they could, when third-party sites easily detect them...

Older »