←back to thread

Nvidia won, we all lost

(blog.sebin-nyshkim.net)
977 points todsacerdoti | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.526s | source
Show context
Arainach ◴[] No.44472814[source]
Why was the title of this post changed long after posting to something that doesn't match the article title? This editorializing goes directly against HN Guidelines (but was presumably done by the HN team?)
replies(5): >>44473148 #>>44473290 #>>44473818 #>>44473851 #>>44474717 #
cbarrick ◴[] No.44473148[source]
+1. "Nvidia won, we all lost" sets a very different tone than "NVIDIA is full of shit". It's clearly not the tone the author intended to set.

Even more concerning is that, by editorializing the title of an article that is (in part) about how Nvidia uses their market dominance to pressure reviewers and control the narrative, we must question whether or not the mod team is complicit in this effort.

Is team green afraid that a title like "NVIDIA is full of shit" on the front page of HN is bad for their image or stock price? Was HN pressured to change the name?

Sometimes, editorialization is just a dumb and lazy mistake. But editorializing something like this is a lot more concerning. And it's made worse by the fact that the title was changed by the mods.

replies(2): >>44473197 #>>44473709 #
tyre ◴[] No.44473197[source]
Okay let’s take off the tin foil hat for a second. HN has a very strong moderation team with years and years of history letting awkward (e.g. criticism of YC, YC companies) things stand.
replies(6): >>44473253 #>>44473362 #>>44473364 #>>44473758 #>>44474079 #>>44475958 #
1. cbarrick ◴[] No.44473253[source]
I said what I said above not as a genuinely held belief (I doubt Nvidia had any involvement in this editorialization), but as a rhetorical effect.

There are many reasons why the editorialized-title rule exists. One of the most important reasons is so that we can trust HN as an unbiased news aggregator. Given the content of the article, this particular instance of editorialization is pretty egregious and trust breaking.

And to be clear, those questions I asked are not outlandish to ask, even if we do trust HN enough to dismiss them.

The title should not have been changed.

replies(1): >>44473405 #