The comment that you are replying to is saying that it's not exclusive to Apple and gives a non-Apple example. Your link has zero instances of the string "Apple". What am I missing.
> The law is about platforms that deal in pornography, self harm, etc
This is some real title gore, and I don't know who is to blame. As it appears:
> Microsoft is employing dark patterns to goad users into paying for storage?
That Microsoft is employing dark patterns is neither surprising nor a question. Can you explain this gross departure from the actual title jpmitchell[1]? Here is the original for reference:
Separately from that: can you please stop posting so aggressively to HN? You've repeatedly crossed into personal attack. We ban accounts that do that, and I don't want to ban you, so if you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and take the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. We can't have users throwing elbows like this:
All of those comments are in serious conflict with the intended spirit of HN, and unfortunately you've posted many more of those than I've listed here. In fact, it's been a problem for years:
I have no idea what happened. I literally just copy and pasted my post title for the submission. I assume there's some form of active curation going on. I've only recently started posting my content to Hacker News so I'm not sure yet.
It's well-known that HN mods will edit submission titles to reduce chances of flamewars/axe-grindiness in the discussions. Not saying that's what happened here, but not a new thing.
However, when we do that, we always try to find a representative phrase within the article itself. We try not to make up our own wording but rather to let the article speak for itself. In this case, we found this sentence:
> Microsoft is very obviously employing dark patterns in order to goad its users into paying for Onedrive storage
However, since that's also a provocative claim, we added a question mark at the end. This is also a standard moderation edit; it's basically shorthand for "the article argues for controversial claim X, but whether that's true or not is something each reader can decide for themselves". In this way the title that appears on the frontpage becomes more neutral, which is what we're going for.
The comment that is being responded to describes a behavior that has nothing to do with determinism and follows it up with "Given this, you can't treat it as deterministic" lol.
Someone tried to redefine a well-established term in the middle of an internet forum thread about that term. The word that has been pushed to uselessness here is "pedantry".
> trust me, they are going to be livid about this.
Just as soon as...what? How are two of the top three people named on the "Meet the team" page simultaneously oblivious to the half gig of ad downloads and on the verge of caring?
The guy you are responding to is longing for what was possible two decades ago. He is that one idiot. He even replied to your comment with confirmation!
> The law is about platforms that deal in pornography, self harm, etc
So...not exclusive to Apple.
reply