Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, trag3dy said:

For me it's not the thumbs down that bothers me but when a specific user goes through an entire thread and down votes every post you make without leaving any sort of response to any of it that bothers me.

 

I've even had posts where someone made a good point and I'd reply with something as innocuous as "fair enough" or something similar and even that gets thumbed down without a response. At that point they're not doing it because they disagree they're doing it because they have some sort of weird vendetta and it feels extremely childish.

 

I feel like if you're going to go through an entire thread an down vote every post a person makes a reason should be required otherwise why are you there? If you're not adding anything to a conversation then it amounts to being a low caliber troll at that point.

 

This is true, it becomes an a way of trolling that has no repercussions. They should at least reply with some substance. The fact that the notifications are within seconds of each other shows it is just an personal attack for them. They don’t read they fast!

37 minutes ago, adrynalyne said:

This is true, it becomes an a way of trolling that has no repercussions. They should at least reply with some substance. The fact that the notifications are within seconds of each other shows it is just an personal attack for them. They don’t read they fast!

100% agree with what you have said. The fact that this "feature" can be used to troll, or bring back arguments from months ago, without repercussions is disappointing. This thread is a little ironic, but I had it happen to me the first day they went active. Someone went back to posts from January and disliked a handful of them, from a thread where many arguments had happened, warnings were given out, yet they want to go back and dig it up in order to stir things up. This really showed the immaturity of some here at Neowin. It is a silly feature that does nothing for the community. One can easily see how there are groups of members who "target" each other and will dislike their posts no matter what. Sure, the dislikes don't do anything to your rep(which is pointless in itself), but they do potentially stir things up and if you make a comment like "hey why don't you add to the convo rather than just dislike everything" results in a warning for "calling someone out." Silly feature needs to disappear, but then again with the move to being more like Facebook and doing anything in their power to cater to the new crowd because of clicks and revenue, I doubt anything changes.

  • Like 2

I support the current reactions (and highly recommend a facepalm reaction :p) . I have not encountered any issues with it (heck, people like whatever I say :laugh:), but yes some people act childish with that dislike. Maybe some checks with the dislike button will be helpful. Something like "more than X dislikes to a particular person in a single thread brings the attention of a mod". 

23 minutes ago, Tuskd said:

Something like "more than X dislikes to a particular person in a single thread brings the attention of a mod". 

I mentioned this before, but most web forums that have a rep system are also setup so that you can only +rep someone so many times before you are told to "spread additional reputation around before adding rep to this user again" and similarly to -rep.

I really don't know why this was reopened since Neobond himself was not keen on changing the system. And it seems the majority agrees too. The thread no longer serves a valid purpose really. It's highly unlikely that the few who supported the change will bring new stuff to bring new stuff to the table.

13 hours ago, Circaflex said:

100% agree with what you have said. The fact that this "feature" can be used to troll, or bring back arguments from months ago, without repercussions is disappointing. This thread is a little ironic, but I had it happen to me the first day they went active. Someone went back to posts from January and disliked a handful of them, from a thread where many arguments had happened, warnings were given out, yet they want to go back and dig it up in order to stir things up. This really showed the immaturity of some here at Neowin. It is a silly feature that does nothing for the community. One can easily see how there are groups of members who "target" each other and will dislike their posts no matter what. Sure, the dislikes don't do anything to your rep(which is pointless in itself), but they do potentially stir things up and if you make a comment like "hey why don't you add to the convo rather than just dislike everything" results in a warning for "calling someone out." Silly feature needs to disappear, but then again with the move to being more like Facebook and doing anything in their power to cater to the new crowd because of clicks and revenue, I doubt anything changes.

Hmm, I made it very clear that was a test several times. The dislikes were quickly removed. But I would like to point oot that you're no better on that matter because you essentially did the same thing. Only difference being that you spread them out through different threads.

 

Anyway, I genuinely apologise for how much grief this has caused you. I hope you can learn to forgive me.

  • Like 2
  • Love 1

I want to echo a similar sentiment to @Circaflex, there are several users who just downvote every post I make in a thread and even some that simply upvote every post I make in a thread with little contribution. While I think it is a useful tool for those of us to react to things without having to resort to words (not everyone is excellent at getting their opinion across), it is odd when you see the same users regardless of the topic up/downvoting you. It almost feels as if you're being stalked by these users on a daily basis... just going to your new posts and just reacting in their usual pattern to everything in a thread.

 

I don't pay too much mind to it, but it's really weird behavior that has changed the way I feel about posting on this forum. Whether or not it prevents or results in more crap being slung around remains to be seen. Those being vocal about things typically don't stop at downvotes unless they feel they have nothing to truly add to a conversation anymore.

  • Like 1
1 minute ago, Emn1ty said:

I want to echo a similar sentiment to @Circaflex, there are several users who just downvote every post I make in a thread and even some that simply upvote every post I make in a thread with little contribution. While I think it is a useful tool for those of us to react to things without having to resort to words (not everyone is excellent at getting their opinion across), it is odd when you see the same users regardless of the topic up/downvoting you. It almost feels as if you're being stalked by these users on a daily basis... just going to your new posts and just reacting in their usual pattern to everything in a thread.

 

I don't pay too much mind to it, but it's really weird behavior that has changed the way I feel about posting on this forum. Whether or not it prevents or results in more crap being slung around remains to be seen. Those being vocal about things typically don't stop at downvotes unless they feel they have nothing to truly add to a conversation anymore.

I share that sentiment, it a little too lenient here now and trolls are running free.

Ok, to some I am a troll, hell I've admitted it freely in the past, but I try to keep it within certain threads where it's not hurting anyone. It bugs me a little that some trolls do get away with no repercussions to content that would have gotten me warning points in the past, and as such, I feel less enthused to visit.

  • Like 2
21 hours ago, Circaflex said:

I mentioned this before, but most web forums that have a rep system are also setup so that you can only +rep someone so many times before you are told to "spread additional reputation around before adding rep to this user again" and similarly to -rep.

We had a 100 like restriction previously, which was changed to unlimited likes in January. Maybe it should revert?

8 hours ago, LimeMaster said:

I really don't know why this was reopened since Neobond himself was not keen on changing the system. And it seems the majority agrees too. The thread no longer serves a valid purpose really. It's highly unlikely that the few who supported the change will bring new stuff to bring new stuff to the table.

Steve is open to feedback and asked us behind the scenes for info on how much work it has caused since it was introduced. Closing the topic off prevented members from sharing the issues they've seen and went unreported. Since it was closed we've had quite a few reports, mostly generated by the Playboy news this week. The feature might not disappear and could be tweaked. I think it's good to have transparency with the members to help direct the development of the site, which is why I re-opened the topic.

 

I'm not very concerned about how much work it causes for us, that's why we have mods to begin with. It's not just a badge without responsibilities. My worry about it being implemented originally was it would kill off discussion and give people less reason to reply at all. Instead it has turned into a tool for trolling, seemingly. So I would still like for those who have experienced issues to let us know, either in this topic or privately if they wish, and for suggestions or tweaks to be made.

32 minutes ago, Andrew said:

We had a 100 like restriction previously, which was changed to unlimited likes in January. Maybe it should revert?

Steve is open to feedback and asked us behind the scenes for info on how much work it has caused since it was introduced. Closing the topic off prevented members from sharing the issues they've seen and went unreported. Since it was closed we've had quite a few reports, mostly generated by the Playboy news this week. The feature might not disappear and could be tweaked. I think it's good to have transparency with the members to help direct the development of the site, which is why I re-opened the topic.

 

I'm not very concerned about how much work it causes for us, that's why we have mods to begin with. It's not just a badge without responsibilities. My worry about it being implemented originally was it would kill off discussion and give people less reason to reply at all. Instead it has turned into a tool for trolling, seemingly. So I would still like for those who have experienced issues to let us know, either in this topic or privately if they wish, and for suggestions or tweaks to be made.

Alright, fair enough. I do apologise for sort-of being part of that. My wrongfulness clearly has been @Circaflex's mind for months now, even though I was using it to test how the feature worked. I mostly just picked random reactions, however he seems rather upset when the disagree one was used. His repeated mentioning of it and the Playboy thread are the primary reasons I originally created this thread.

 

@Brandon H's implementation of the feature thing seems pretty neat. It would certainly make reacting to a post more meaningful, and it would reduce mass dislike abuse since it takes much more effort to explain things. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
24 minutes ago, LimeMaster said:

Alright, fair enough. I do apologise for sort-of being part of that. My wrongfulness clearly has been @Circaflex's mind for months now, even though I was using it to test how the feature worked. I mostly just picked random reactions, however he seems rather upset when the disagree one was used. His repeated mentioning of it and the Playboy thread are the primary reasons I originally created this thread.

 

@Brandon H's implementation of the feature thing seems pretty neat. It would certainly make reacting to a post more meaningful, and it would reduce mass dislike abuse since it takes much more effort to explain things. 

It's fine, you weren't to know how many reports it generated. My request for feedback attracted 3 or 4 reports almost immediately after I commented, and now we have 3 more member's feedback since we re-opened this topic. Keeping it open might generate more feedback.

 

I think the suggestion of providing reasons for reactions is pretty good but not without faults. We don't expect any justification for any other reaction, so it would be singling out those who use Dislike, and then it may even stop them using it because it involves more "effort". We'd may as well remove the reaction if that happened. Plus, it would be just as worthwhile to add the comment to the discussion, rather than a hover-mouse-over bubble.

20 minutes ago, Andrew said:

It's fine, you weren't to know how many reports it generated. My request for feedback attracted 3 or 4 reports almost immediately after I commented, and now we have 3 more member's feedback since we re-opened this topic. Keeping it open might generate more feedback.

 

I think the suggestion of providing reasons for reactions is pretty good but not without faults. We don't expect any justification for any other reaction, so it would be singling out those who use Dislike, and then it may even stop them using it because it involves more "effort". We'd may as well remove the reaction if that happened. Plus, it would be just as worthwhile to add the comment to the discussion, rather than a hover-mouse-over bubble.

Well I mean, there's no reason it can't be done with all reactions if you feel singling is bad. It's a simple fix to that concern. As for the comment thing, whilst that's true. The reason for the implementation would purely exist to stop abuse/complaints. If a member was using the system properly, they would have a reason for clicking the reaction. Typing a small sentence shouldn't be a problem if that's how they actually feel.

A suggestion, if I may.  Like and dislike both have connotations that could raise people's ire, especially in emotive threads.  However, changing them to Agree and Disagree do not, at least for me anyway.  Perhaps changing them to that would stop people abusing them?

  • Like 3

@LimeMaster,

 

Same thing to the rating system on other sites ... which lot of people leave bad ratings or false ratings.  

 

Especially that people go to other websites to leave bad comments or ratings, something like this:

 

Ford fans visits the Chevy website and leave comment like "Chevy sucks!" 

 

That has been going for many years since the rating and comment came out.

 

Nothing you could do about it unless admins decide to remove/disable the features to prevent from abuse and/or ban those abusers.

 

 

The features are used to let you know how visitors feel about said products or person's thoughts..  something like that.

5 hours ago, FloatingFatMan said:

A suggestion, if I may.  Like and dislike both have connotations that could raise people's ire, especially in emotive threads.  However, changing them to Agree and Disagree do not, at least for me anyway.  Perhaps changing them to that would stop people abusing them?

I like this idea, It would make a lot more sense too, because Neowin is a tech site.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • GitHub removes manual model selection from Copilot free and student plans by Karthik Mudaliar GitHub is removing the ability to manually select an AI model from its Copilot Free and Student plans, making its automatic routing system the default and only way to choose a model. This means users on these tiers will no longer be able to deliberately select a particular OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, or Microsoft model for a task. In its announcement, GitHub said Copilot Auto will dynamically choose what it considers the best model for each request. Free and Student accounts will retain access to models from multiple families, although the available selection will continue to depend on the restrictions attached to each plan. GitHub did not identify a fixed pool of models that Auto will always use, and its documentation warns that model availability can change over time. GitHub describes Auto as more than a random fallback system. On supported surfaces, its task-optimization technology evaluates the complexity of a request alongside real-time information about model health and availability. Straightforward prompts can be routed to faster and less expensive models, while more demanding coding tasks may be sent to higher-cost reasoning models. The company says this approach should reduce rate limiting, latency, and failed requests. Auto generally selects one model along natural prompt-caching boundaries rather than repeatedly switching models during a session, as GitHub found that mid-session changes increased costs without producing sufficient improvements in output quality. Users can still check which model generated a response. In Copilot Chat, the information appears when hovering over an answer, while Copilot CLI and the Copilot cloud agent display the selected model alongside their output. Auto is available in Copilot Chat, Copilot CLI, and the cloud agent, with the exact implementation and release status varying between supported development environments. The latest restriction follows several months of adjustments to Copilot’s individual plans. GitHub temporarily halted new Pro, Pro+, and Student subscriptions in April as it sought to manage demand and service reliability. It later introduced token-based billing and began gradually reopening individual-plan registrations on June 17. Alongside the picker change, GitHub is retiring the “Preview” label from Microsoft-developed models. It argues that the label is no longer necessary because Auto handles model routing and models are continuously updated behind the scenes.
    • Look up 'inflation' kid. Ask an AI for the numbers between both games.
    • Google reportedly set to lose two key Gemini and DeepMind researchers to Anthropic by Karthik Mudaliar Google is reportedly preparing to lose two more prominent artificial intelligence researchers, with Gemini contributors Jonas Adler and Alexander Pritzel planning to join rival AI developer Anthropic. According to a report from Bloomberg, both researchers are viewed internally as important contributors to Google’s flagship Gemini model family. Adler worked on Google’s AI coding efforts, while Pritzel was involved in the process used to train AI systems. Neither company has publicly confirmed the moves. The report also does not say when the researchers will formally leave Google or what positions they will hold at Anthropic. Training a large AI model requires decisions covering its architecture, data preparation, distributed computing infrastructure, and post-training methods that shape how the finished system behaves. Researchers with experience operating at the scale of Gemini are consequently difficult to replace quickly. Both Adler and Pritzel have previously contributed to Google DeepMind’s scientific research as well. They are listed among the authors of the company’s work on expanding AlphaFold protein-structure predictions across entire proteomes, alongside AlphaFold researchers including John Jumper. The reported departures arrive shortly after another important change within Google’s Gemini organization. Gemini co-lead Noam Shazeer is leaving Google for OpenAI, after returning to the search company in 2024 through its deal with Character.AI. Shazeer is particularly well known as one of the authors of the Transformer paper, whose architecture became the foundation for most modern large language models. Anthropic, meanwhile, has been recruiting recognizable figures from other leading laboratories. OpenAI co-founder and former Tesla AI director Andrej Karpathy joined Anthropic’s pre-training team in May. His move, followed by the reported recruitment of several Google researchers, suggests Anthropic is strengthening the research teams responsible for the core capabilities of future Claude models rather than concentrating solely on product and enterprise sales. The competition is complicated by the companies’ extensive commercial relationships. Anthropic competes directly with Google’s Gemini models, but it also relies on Google as an infrastructure partner. In April, Anthropic announced an expanded agreement with Google and Broadcom covering multiple gigawatts of next-generation Tensor Processing Unit capacity. TPUs are Google-designed accelerators used to train and run large AI models. via Bloomberg
    • This article makes my head hurt. Lots of confusing words
    • Google adds built-in computer control to Gemini 3.5 flash by Karthik Mudaliar Google has added Computer Use as a built-in tool in Gemini 3.5 Flash, giving developers a single model that can reason about a task and operate graphical interfaces across browsers, mobile devices, and desktop environments. The feature is available through the Gemini API and Google’s Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform, although it remains a preview feature for now. Computer Use enables an AI agent to examine screenshots and return actions such as mouse clicks, scrolling, and keyboard input. A developer’s application must execute those actions, capture the resulting screen, and send it back to Gemini, creating a continuous loop until the task is completed. Google says the integration can be used for activities including repetitive form filling, application testing, research across multiple websites, and longer enterprise workflows. Gemini 3.5 Flash can work with browser, mobile, and desktop environments, whereas Google’s earlier standalone Computer Use model was primarily positioned around browser interaction. The main change is consolidation. Computer control was previously offered through the separate Gemini 2.5 Computer Use preview model. As Neowin reported when that model was introduced, it was designed to interpret a visual interface and generate actions without requiring a website-specific API. Google later brought Computer Use to preview versions of Gemini 3 Pro and Gemini 3 Flash in January 2026. The latest release now incorporates the tool into the stable Gemini 3.5 Flash model rather than requiring developers to select a specialized model solely for interface automation. Gemini 3.5 Flash itself was announced in May as Google’s latest fast model for coding and multi-step agent workflows. It supports a one-million-token input context window and up to 65,000 output tokens, along with adjustable thinking levels that let developers trade additional reasoning for lower latency and cost. Google also added that Gemini 3.5 Flash received targeted adversarial training for computer-use scenarios. The company is also offering safeguards that can require user confirmation before sensitive or irreversible actions and automatically stop a workflow when suspected prompt injection is detected. Its developer documentation describes configurable protections for areas such as financial transactions and changes to sensitive records. Google isn't the first to bring Computer Use to its platform. Anthropic has made computer control available through Claude, while OpenAI has continued improving computer-use performance in its recent models. Microsoft has also applied the concept to business workflows, including a Computer Use capability for the Researcher agent in Microsoft 365 Copilot.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
    • One Year In
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      463
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!