I considered opening an issue, having assumed that this was a bug and in such cases the bot might as well not comment at all, but apparently part of its intended purpose is saving people from having to open articles.
You should despise it (though I won’t judge you if you don’t). It makes people reliant on the bot rather than reading the removeding article. The only time a bot like this is useful is if the article is paywalled. The bot will miss pieces of the article that matter to the context of the whole situation, up to and including details like “Who” wrote the removeding thing… or “when” it was published. That context data matters a lot.
Discussions are better when those who intend to participate read the content first. Realistically, though, we know many read the headline and jump straight into comments. I think that’s a culture issue, and that’s difficult to fix.
The bot can alleviate its impact by giving these people more context. Without changing culture, however, removing the bot from these discussions could ironically make them worse. At least, that’s how I see it.
I don’t really like it, but I believe it helps.
What actually confused me, though, is that if you lump in some privacy/accessibility/convenience concerns, I could kinda see the point of a “Saved 0%” tldr.
But, on a phoronix article? They’re one of the few tech journalism websites I still trust and am grateful for, that I turn uBlock off for. It’s like I’m missing some context, I need more info.
Yeah, that’s funny.
I considered opening an issue, having assumed that this was a bug and in such cases the bot might as well not comment at all, but apparently part of its intended purpose is saving people from having to open articles.
Not sure how I feel about that, to be honest.
You should despise it (though I won’t judge you if you don’t). It makes people reliant on the bot rather than reading the removeding article. The only time a bot like this is useful is if the article is paywalled. The bot will miss pieces of the article that matter to the context of the whole situation, up to and including details like “Who” wrote the removeding thing… or “when” it was published. That context data matters a lot.
Generally, I agree, but there’s some nuance.
Discussions are better when those who intend to participate read the content first. Realistically, though, we know many read the headline and jump straight into comments. I think that’s a culture issue, and that’s difficult to fix.
The bot can alleviate its impact by giving these people more context. Without changing culture, however, removing the bot from these discussions could ironically make them worse. At least, that’s how I see it.
I don’t really like it, but I believe it helps.
What actually confused me, though, is that if you lump in some privacy/accessibility/convenience concerns, I could kinda see the point of a “Saved 0%” tldr.
But, on a phoronix article? They’re one of the few tech journalism websites I still trust and am grateful for, that I turn uBlock off for. It’s like I’m missing some context, I need more info.