I mean yeah but that's not what the study says though... full link here: https://dtg.sites.fas.harvard.edu/WILSON%20ET%20AL%202014.pd...

Participants did not choose to give themselves electric shocks continuously. The average was around once during the entire 15-min window. It also showed a stark difference in gender: only 25% of women participants did it while 67% of men did it. All of them did not enjoy it (but that's obvious). 1 man shocked himself more than 190 times during the 15-min period, so the average data is much higher because of him.

So overall, it is correct that the human mind will seek stimulus (even negative ones) if they're bored/have nothing to do but nothing suggests they will give themselves continous painful "electric shocks than be alone".

Additionally, they were alone, but they also had no cellphones, no computers, nothing to engage their brains with other than the possibility to give themselves a small 4 volt shock. And most of them did it once and not again. I think it speaks more to human curiosity than the idea that you'll prefer pain to social isolation.

Yeah I’d be in that group, boredom sucks, I’d heaps want to feel what the shock feels like also out of curiosity too.

Some would disagree, but I'm squarely of the opinion that comments being inciteful and insightful are not mutually exclusive properties. This is only compounded when you're the kind of person who goes out of their way to try find meaning in what people say (and since that's subjective, you can basically find a perspective in anything if you try hard enough).

I find this to be kind of the whole reason why acting inciteful is socially problematic anyways: it derails conversations. It's also why I can consider it malicious: you can lay into this effect parasitically, with intention. You point to HN; I find that this idea is reflected in the HN guidelines as well (or at least the lessons from it are), but also that it's by no means immune.

uBO lite is available for safari though: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/ublock-origin-lite/id674534269...

It's permanent. However, behind the scenes I'm sure it's using CSS selectors to identify the element you're blocking, and if the server changes that, then it wouldn't detect that exact element anymore.

Same. I have 4 browsers, 2 of them loaded to the teeth and the other 2 untouched since installation, one of them the one that I use for "mandatory" stuff or that you really need it to work, like banking or gov sites.

Usenet kill file, IRC ignore list, email spam filters, web browser adblockers, disabling JavaScript, using Archive.org/.today to read content, using plain text and a remote host to parse URLs to forward the content to email, RSS readers, converting content based on CSS selectors or json (e.g. jq) to XML/RSS.

The internet has and will always be about increasibg the signal te noise ratio for the user. The fact someone resorts to blacklisting entire comment section tells us something about how they view the quality of these in general; subpar.

It isn't just LLMs which contribute to that. Troll farms do, too.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_file

Odd comparison. Admin cancels on Usenet were focused specifically and totally on individual, service-abusing or commercial "spam". While this is a tool that wipes out comment sections from view entirely.