[DarkNova6]

> This is one of the more broadly normal HN-reaction threads to large public news event I've seen in a while. A lot of love for Apple, respect for the decision, and respectfully stated nuance. Surprising and good.

In other words, nothing insightful or worth talking about. I don't want to read news for feelgood vibes.

[planb]

But there is interesting information in lots of the comments. Like the quote from Ternus about Apple Maps in one of the comments. This gives relevant insight of how he thinks and how he might handle problems when he takes over.

[sillyfluke]

If it's interesting to note that there are mostly nuanced takes and positive vibes in the thread, and an otherwise low-value meta comment is deemed to be a worthy top comment for saying so, then I suggest an auto-generated AI summarization comment pinned to every long HN thread. This will surely save everyone the trouble of doing so...

(I am not claiming the top comment is AI generated, only that an AI generated summarization of the thread can function just as well in its stead, despite the occasional inaccuracies)

[cimi_]

This is relevant information for this forum, for good or bad Apple has a lot of impact.

I find your reaction strange, do you read news to be angry and/or afraid? :)

[card_zero]

For critical thought. This overlaps with negativity, because criticism is disagreeable.

[Eisenstein]

Critical thought is not about negativity, it is about evaluation. You take a statement and evaluate it based on its merits using an epistemic system which prioritizes consistently, evidence, and logical coherence.

Saying it is disagreeable is like saying that honestly is disagreeable. Sure, it can be, but it is not an inherent feature, and a lot depends on how it is delivered.

[card_zero]

This is the ideal: friendly criticism. But first you have to make friends. If your audience aren't your friends, you can exercise your silver tongue to charm them while still delivering your criticism. If they aren't your friends and you unfortunately don't have a silver tongue, you can be negative, or be quiet, or stick to subjects they won't feel defensive about. You can't have the ideal in practical reality.

[Eisenstein]

If you don't have a silver tongue, say what you mean without denigrating anyone or anything, or just don't comment at all. There is no requirement to be negative for the sake of being negative.

[phlakaton]

Mostly when presented disagreeably. You might reflect upon that.

[card_zero]

Exactly! Good demonstration.

[keepamovin]

What are you like as a person? This isn’t just news - it’s conversation

[pembrook]

> I don't want to read news for feelgood vibes.

Yes, as algorithmic engagement has proven, most people want to read the news to get angry about stuff.

But I don't like hanging around that. I'd rather talk about tech news with nerds (old HN) and not just talk about coastal filter-bubble US politics with big tech worker bees (new HN).

US politics has definitely captured the crowd here lately. Half of the comment threads somehow devolve from discussions of Javascript frameworks into hysterical left-populist struggle sessions over the perceived political injustice of the day.

Maybe some feel good vibes and some apolitical news for the day aren't a bad thing.

[DarkNova6]

Sometimes the commenters actually have genuine insights that must reports/articles will never mention. Sadly, I'm quite a cynical person that expects everything to have a spin unless it comes from an authoritative source.

In general, I'd say it's about confirmation bias and having a fluffy statement that confirms preconceived notions is hardly interesting to me. If there is anything of substance that contradicts any narrative or general consensus than I find the signal in the noise highly valuable.

But I can't speak for the general case because I don't use any social media and find rage bate quite cumbersome.