I agree with you at heart, but that's like saying the head of a hospital or the head union guy dictate what the experience of being in a hospital or shop floor are like.
That is absolutely true, but in the interest of making money the owners will replace them in a heartbeat. Sure, the vibe will change, some existing users will move on, but there are always, always new users to hook.
Reddit are not even paying these mods pennies, they couldn't care less about them and getting rid of them to find ones who are more "compliant".
EDIT: Redditor for 14 years 99,665 post karma
97,633 comment karma
Mods are like air traffic controllers. If you know their name, they probably fucked up badly. I suspect we'll know the names of many more mods if Reddit goes ahead with replacing them en-mass.
I'd hate to be so aware of the mods that I remember their names. As much as they deserve gratitude and praise it's supposed to be transparent.
I only knew one name, once, because the other mod showed him the finger and started another sub. I followed the drama, agreed he was a dick and moved to the new sub.
PS: actually, I remember heroofwar and pinko from HQGifs because they're part of the meta jokes of the sub.
Having it on the right is pretty convenient on mobile because it makes it much easier to use just one hand (assuming you are right handed).
Ironically (given how much hate they get), I find reddit new site and official app to have the best collapse ui. On the left on the web (and with a 100% vertical high which means you never have to scroll up to collapse), and tap anywhere on the message on mobile (much bigger and easier target than hn, works for both right and left handed people).
If interstaller thought us anything, the closer you are to a black hole the slower time gets. When they got close to the black hole they only spent a few hours there but lost years compared to our frame of reference.
> Google will not be required to charge Australians for the use of its free services such as Google Search and YouTube, unless it chooses to do so.
Yes the law doesn't imply this in any way.
But it requires Google to notify most changes "in terms that are readily comprehensible". What if an algorithm cannot be explained in comprehensible terms (e.g. machine learning)? What if they don't want their teams to be limited to changes that can be explained? What if they don't want to share their internal changes (e.g. they don't want a competitor to know, or they don't want these changes to be a "TODO how to update your site")?
What I'm trying to say is that I don't think it's impossible for a big company to decide to develop a less magic and simpler algorithm for Australia instead. And once you consider how small Australia is (in terms of population, and business opportunity), this might only sense if you combine it with a paid membership.
Note that I'm not saying this will happen, I think it's more likely that big companies will decide to opt out from displaying news or (in extreme cases) opt out from the Australian market completely (if they can't make it work).
> Google will not be required to share any additional user data with Australian news businesses unless it chooses to do so.
IANAL but section 52M(2) seems to contradict this (52M(2)(e) implies Google must make the data available to media companies)
> A healthy news media sector is essential to a well-functioning democracy.
Strongly agree with this, and I'm generally in favour of making sure media companies get their fair share of $$$.
But the idea that government can define which companies deserve an extremely unfair advantages (compared to all other companies, e.g. small media companies), and force google to explain all changes with a 28 days notice... that's just bollocks.
