unescape
Joined 10 years ago
Karma
41
Submissions
49
Member since
Nov 22
Recent submissions
Comment · 9 years ago
Comment · 9 years ago
Disagreeable people also tend to get fired more, in my experience. Perhaps it balances out, which would explain why there are still disagreeable people.
Comment · 9 years ago
Somebody at Google could write a memo proposing that sexism might not be the only possible explanation of why a majority of their top engineers are male.
Comment · 9 years ago
Significantly more rights than who? Christians?
Comment · 9 years ago
Better than having news outlets embed them, is having browsers support mixing federated comments with the original content. How about it, Mozilla, Brave, and Chromium? Afraid to bite the hand that feeds you?
Comment · 9 years ago
What's still needed is a set of tools to
1. Aggregate comments from Mastodon, personal blogs, etc.
2. Interact with these comments by upvoting and applying filters, etc (i.e. moderate)
3. Publish your moderation actions and apply the same type of metadata from other moderators (and moderation aggregators).
If Talk has any value, it's to serve as a starting point for Tool 2.
Comment · 9 years ago
Read the top-level comment from hello_there:
In an ideal comment system I believe that articles, comments and moderation events should come from three different, decentralized streams (like Atom) that the end user can subscribe to individually and that are joined at the end users client.
What he is asking for is the exact opposite of "the added legitimacy of the site itself". He's asking for a user interface to integrate content that does not come from the site itself.
That would be a lot cooler than another comment moderation system, of which there are already multiple open-source implementations. Could someone at least provide an argument of why Mozilla Talk is better than the existing solutions?
Comment · 9 years ago
No, the idea is that they don't sign up for it. It's independent of the originating site.
Comment · 9 years ago
It seems that their goal is to help sites move away from 3rd-party comment management services such as Facebook and Disqus. Based on this discussion, I think federated (not site-owned) comments are the way to go long-term. Maybe Talk can eventually be adapted to help with decentralized comment moderation.
Comment · 9 years ago
HN is a pretty close second, especially after they added comment collapsing
Isn't comment collapsing in HN the same as downvoting? I find this confusing - or maybe I just don't have enough karma for the actual downvote button.
Comment · 9 years ago
I'm just going to point out that Mozilla and the NSF recently offered $2M for ideas to decentralize the web.
https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/06/21/2-million-prize-dec...
Comment · 9 years ago
We're talking about something like Twitter or Mastodon but (a) can be found using the original URL of the site, as in IPFS or content-addressable networking; and (b) uses distributed opt-in moderation, meta-moderation, and filtering; like a decentralized AdBlock.
It's something that doesn't actually exist yet, but maybe will.
Comment · 9 years ago
My observation is that Mozilla Talk does nothing to advance the decentralized Web, so why is it a good thing?
Comment · 9 years ago
If you look at the top-level comment you're replying to, we're describing "an ideal commenting system", not Mozilla Talk.
Comment · 9 years ago
doesn't solve the problem of, "The comments on my site are overrun with people posting racial slurs."
I think you're misunderstanding the proposal. Comments and moderation are independent of the site, not on the site.
If distributed commenting and moderation is too complex to implement, then we need to move to network designs that make it simpler.
I imagine people could delegate moderation responsibility to people and organizations with a strong reputation. Let's say GNU, EFF, and Larry Lessig would all publish moderation data and metadata; as well as your "friends" on various social media sites, friends-of-friends, etc.