Hacker News Reader

The study is speculation about supposed changes to the algorithm based off of subsequent changes in trends in sheer ignorance to other events that transpired on the dates specified.

Basically arguing that correlation is causation and placing the cart before the horse. This isn't good grounds for insightful or even useful conversations and this was already breaking the guidelines by being a political subject matter about celebrities.

View on HN

First, you don't understand the methodology of this study. Difference in differences takes into account external events by assuming that two different time series are affected by external events in the same way. In this case, the two time series correspond to the number of views of Republican-leaning and Democrat-leaning users on X. Thus, the methodology takes into account external events.

Second, the speculation you're writing about is an interpretation of the new data analysis.

Third, the authors don't argue that correlation is causation. If you still think they do, then please quote the sentence where they do that.

Honestly, it looks like this thread is being taken down because some people don't like it, including you, which goes against HN guidelines.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com