Linked List: May 16, 2026

Saturday, 16 May 2026

Reddit Is Blocking Some Users From Accessing Its Website From Mobile Devices 

Nate Anderson, writing at Ars Technica:

But I was surprised this weekend to suddenly find myself cut off; Reddit simply would not let me visit the site on my mobile phone. Instead, a new overlay popped up, saying, “Get the app to keep using Reddit.”

There was no way to skip, bypass, or close the overlay. It did not provide any instructions or alternatives for continuing to use the mobile web version. What it did offer was a large button I could press to get the app. If I did so, the overlay told me, I would be able to “search better” and “personalize your feed” — two things I don’t care to do. [...]

I reached out to the company to ask what was going on. According to a spokesperson, “We recently started running a test for a small subset of frequent logged-out mobile users that prompts them to download the app after visiting the site. These users are already familiar with Reddit and we’ve seen that the experience is much better for them in the app. The app offers a more personalized experience and users can more easily find communities that match their interests.”

Yes, they’re doing this for the users’ benefit. Sure.

Santa Clara County Sues Meta Over Alleged Scam Ads 

Brandon Pho, reporting for San Jose Spotlight:

The lawsuit filed Monday alleges that instead of cracking down on deceptive ads designed to trick users out of their money, Meta has hamstrung its own fraud prevention teams and helped fake companies bypass its filters to enable the tech powerhouse to enjoy an estimated $7 billion in ad revenue from the scams every year. [...]

The county lawsuit seeks attorney fees and a ruling barring Meta from further alleged violations of false advertising and unfair competition laws. Much of the lawsuit’s allegations stem from a 2025 Reuters investigation suggesting Meta was at one point involved in one-third of all successful Internet scams in the U.S.

The company has vowed to fight the lawsuit.

“This claim relies on Reuters reporting that distorts our motives and ignores the full range of actions we take to combat scams every day,” a spokesperson for the company told San José Spotlight. “We aggressively fight scams on and off our platforms because they’re not good for us or the people and businesses that rely on our services.”

Reuters’s Jeff Horwitz and Engen Tham were awarded the Pulitzer Prize for Beat Reporting for their reporting on this story. As the adage goes, if the facts are on your side, pound the facts. If the law’s on your side, pound the law. If neither are on your side, pound the table.

I have to say, though, it does not seem scalable for individual counties to be suing Meta.

ArXiv to Ban Researchers for a Year if They Submit AI Slop 

Samantha Cole, writing for 404 Media:

Late Thursday evening, Thomas Dietterich, chair of the computer science section of ArXiv, wrote on X: “If generative AI tools generate inappropriate language, plagiarized content, biased content, errors, mistakes, incorrect references, or misleading content, and that output is included in scientific works, it is the responsibility of the author(s). We have recently clarified our penalties for this. If a submission contains incontrovertible evidence that the authors did not check the results of LLM generation, this means we can’t trust anything in the paper.” [...]

“The penalty is a 1-year ban from arXiv followed by the requirement that subsequent arXiv submissions must first be accepted at a reputable peer-reviewed venue,” Dietterich wrote. Dietterich told me in an email on Friday morning that this is a one-strike rule — meaning authors caught just once including AI slop in submissions will be banned — but that decisions will be open to appeal.

I see no cognitive dissonance in being pro-AI, in general, but vehemently anti-slop.