TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Stopping the Internet of Noise – A useful internet back again

398 pointsby alanfranzalmost 8 years ago

39 comments

d--balmost 8 years ago
As much as I really liked using IRC back in the day, I still think I spent way too much time on it. I mean you got to know the people there, and after a couple of years most discussions were like office conversations. Plus the takeovers, the trolls, the noobs, the never ending screwing around with the bots, etc.<p>I&#x27;ve never done much newsgroups because I didn&#x27;t like public speaking without anonymity.<p>ICQ and others were like today&#x27;s WhatsApp and hangout. I didn&#x27;t use a single interface for them at the time, and still don&#x27;t today, I don&#x27;t see a big difference.<p>Today, I&#x27;m off Facebook, I barely follow twitter at all. I&#x27;m fine with reading hacker news, and other tech news aggregators.<p>I think you can lament on the disappearance of RSS, but to me, that&#x27;s just about the main issue.<p>I guess the big difference between then and now is that we used to control better what we opted in. Now we&#x27;re more force fed.
评论 #14701449 未加载
评论 #14700823 未加载
评论 #14701617 未加载
评论 #14701967 未加载
评论 #14701245 未加载
netsharcalmost 8 years ago
Great point about Twitter and FB not having the &quot;I&#x27;ve seen this&quot; flag (although they probably have this info for their &quot;engagement metrics&quot;), it keeps people addicted and returning. I remember being glued to Twitter during the Mumbai terror attack, but the way it was designed, it was an endless stream of the same info, repeated. And spam, since bots add trending hashtags to their junk messages. I guess it&#x27;s like cable news&#x27; rolling coverage, but instead of the same info repeated every hour, we can now read the same thing every second...
评论 #14702392 未加载
评论 #14700214 未加载
评论 #14699584 未加载
评论 #14699414 未加载
yositoalmost 8 years ago
My own theory about why our ability to focus on what we want to on the internet is Attention Capitalism. Our attention is the latest resource to be exploited by capitalism, and each company is attempting to control what we focus on for their profit. I&#x27;ve noticed this trend; very little software let&#x27;s me control what information I see anymore. It&#x27;s almost all controlled by some algorithm making me see what they claim I want to see.
评论 #14700768 未加载
chonglialmost 8 years ago
With all due respect, what changed since the 56k days (which I remember fondly as well) is that people showed up. Before that, the only users on the internet were early adopters. It&#x27;s unreasonable to expect &#x27;those people&#x27; to go away.
评论 #14699956 未加载
评论 #14699165 未加载
评论 #14698971 未加载
评论 #14700345 未加载
评论 #14699421 未加载
评论 #14699107 未加载
评论 #14700277 未加载
peterwwillisalmost 8 years ago
Elon Musk said that as time passes, technology continuously degrades, not improves, if people don&#x27;t make a hard effort to keep improving it. The Egyptians knew how to build giant pyramids, and forgot how. The Romans built fantastic aqueducts, and forgot how. We built vehicles that landed on the moon in the 60s, and the next vehicle we built could only go into earth orbit, and then we no longer even had a vehicle that could do that.<p>Today, for some reason, everyone thinks that writing software for a platform on a platform on a platform with no interconnecting standards or protocols is a great idea. Instead of trying to improve people&#x27;s lives, we&#x27;re just making things needlessly complex, buggy, and bloaty. You need 8 gigs of ram minimum just to browse the web, and god forbid you want to do something like back up your data. I was just in a meeting where nobody could get Google&#x27;s video conferencing to work.<p>Instead of building <i>internet</i> technology, we build <i>web</i> technology. The web is harder to write software for. It&#x27;s an ephemeral, inconsistent, difficult thing. But if we try really hard, we can turn the tide on the unnecessarily complex box we&#x27;ve forced ourselves into.<p>The proposed fixes are good ideas, but they&#x27;re bandaids on axe wounds. There are much deeper problems going on that won&#x27;t be fixed by a feature add or a pivot. We need a re-evaluation of all internet-based technology, how we develop it, how we incorporate it into our lives, and what we want as a society from it.
评论 #14700708 未加载
评论 #14700195 未加载
评论 #14699950 未加载
rakooalmost 8 years ago
This is partly what weboob (<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;weboob.org" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;weboob.org</a>) wants to solve, or at least work around. Its goal is to pull the web out of browsers (hence the name):<p>- each website is handled by a module that does all the scraping, or uses the api if needed<p>- each module provides one or more capabilities, such as &quot;list an account transactions&quot; (typically for your bank or your mobile provider) or &quot;receive and send messages&quot; (such as HN or reddit or tinder)<p>- applications plug into those capabilities and give the user functionalities, regardless of the website. You can list the schedule for your bus just as well as the schedule for carpoolings.<p>One of the applications is actually a daemon with the capability to send and receive messages (with threading and all) and sends messages to the email adress of your choice; you can also configure it as an smtp mta, which means you can use any mail client and interact with all your discussion websites without ever opening the browser.<p>Obviously this is not a perfect solution for OP&#x27;s problems, but it seems to me it&#x27;s going in the right direction. Oh and it doesn&#x27;t stop at websites; I use it for sending RSS feeds to my email in the background.
评论 #14702513 未加载
评论 #14700585 未加载
评论 #14705487 未加载
评论 #14700475 未加载
评论 #14701716 未加载
cronjobberalmost 8 years ago
&gt; But we need a common API ... so that people can use their favourite tools<p>Yup, that&#x27;s <i>exactly</i> what made the internet great in the good old days.<p>But how do you monetize users who get to use their favoirite tools <i>instead of yours?</i>
评论 #14701174 未加载
评论 #14699495 未加载
评论 #14700545 未加载
评论 #14701090 未加载
评论 #14700372 未加载
kraftmanalmost 8 years ago
I&#x27;m going to write a chat app built on IRC that gradually uses more and more RAM, and adds new features while breaking old ones.<p>Just as it has everything MSN used to have ill have it shut down, rename itself and its website and start all over again.
评论 #14699121 未加载
评论 #14699320 未加载
评论 #14699105 未加载
评论 #14699092 未加载
评论 #14700422 未加载
cyphunkalmost 8 years ago
Did we get to this point of fragmentation due to smart phones and their walled garden philosophy? People stopped making applications for the sake of interoperability. ... if RealAudio™ was founded today it&#x27;d be king.<p>Or is facebook to blame? John Gilmore famously said &quot;The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.&quot; -- he was wrong, censorship just has to wait for the right monopoly to appear. And with the success of monopoly interoperability becomes its casualty
评论 #14699611 未加载
评论 #14699797 未加载
anigbrowlalmost 8 years ago
<i>I&#x27;m not saying we should get back to IRC or to NNTP.</i><p>I am. Not in the sense of go back to using them for everyting (they&#x27;re still there if you want to), but int eh sense of building some new protocols on those existing foundations. NNTP was <i>really good</i> given its technical limitations. TBH I think part of the secret of Facebook&#x27;s success is that it hews to the same ethos of standardization and simplicity, as opposed to myspace which quickly feel victim to its own customizability and ended up being as chaotic and hard to navigate as the web itself.
tovkalalmost 8 years ago
&quot;Nowadays we have people instead of topics. I have nothing against people, but maybe, if I follow a great software architect, I&#x27;d like to hear what he&#x27;s got to say about software, not about other shits.&quot;<p>That&#x27;s so true. I want to follow some people on Twitter because sometimes they tweet very useful things, but the amount of &quot;noise&quot;&#x2F;tweets I don&#x27;t care about is too high. Tons of people put very good info on Twitter because is quick and easy compared to writing a blog post.
stuartdalmost 8 years ago
Yeah, I&#x27;m old as well. Things change. Not for the better maybe, but you can&#x27;t turn back the clock.. the only way forward is to make something new and better.
评论 #14699436 未加载
dredmorbiusalmost 8 years ago
&quot;There is no such thing in America as an independent press. I am paid for keeping honest opinions out of the paper I am connected with. If I should allow honest opinions to be printed in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation, like Othello&#x27;s, would be gone. The business of a New York journalist is to distort the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilivy, to fawn at the foot of Mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. We are the tools or vassals of the rich men behind the scenes. Our time, our talents, our lives, our possibilities, are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.&quot;<p>Anonymous publisher, as quoted by Hamilton Holt, <i>Commercialism and Journalism</i>, 1909.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.org&#x2F;stream&#x2F;commercialismjou00holtuoft#page&#x2F;20&#x2F;mode&#x2F;2up" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.org&#x2F;stream&#x2F;commercialismjou00holtuoft#page&#x2F;2...</a>
Mootyalmost 8 years ago
Maybe what people want is a centralised web, not a &quot;good practice&quot; web ? This is not what I want but as a matter of fact, that may be what majority wants. I wonder how devs&#x2F;techies people think they know the truth for other people.<p>What changed a lot of things are modern apps and their new features : push notifications, infinite scrolls (attention killer) or adding a f... emoji (I miss smileys personnaly). The rest is just filling empty boxes about what people want&#x2F;need : a chat for friend, a chat for work, a single feed and not 10&#x27;s of website to search to have a single information. All I think is missing is local web, all is considered as world and then maybe local, people don&#x27;t talk to each other in the bars, they prefer now to use Tinder and Facebook to insult themselves.
评论 #14702267 未加载
cryptosalmost 8 years ago
I think this is related to monetization, since the web gets &quot;louder&quot; to attract advertising consumers. Most companies are actually advertising companies and the users are just part of the product (sold to advertisers). Maybe we need more paid services - and the will to pay.<p>I&#x27;m thinking about creating a hierarchical forum like the usenet, but I&#x27;m sceptical whether this would earn enough money to work in the long run.
willhackettalmost 8 years ago
I&#x27;m very much for this. I have five messaging apps, two email clients, three file storage apps and a news reader all on my iPhone - just to stay in touch. It&#x27;s hard to stay organised when businesses use different technologies across different platforms and there&#x27;s no single place just for &quot;Messages&quot;.<p>I don&#x27;t care how the message is sent, I just want to make sure it gets to the right person.
miguelrochefortalmost 8 years ago
Don&#x27;t worry. I&#x27;m in the process of solving this.<p>The solution was in front of us all this time. It&#x27;s the semantic web. What was missing is an accessible client, and it will be available soon.<p>Imagine one giant unified semantic decentralized database of everything. Add smart contracts, quantified self, intent inferring, and binary input (à la Tinder or Akinator). Organize this on a timeline, so that your OS becomes a task management system. That&#x27;s it.<p>Unfortunately, my strategy is to target kids that haven&#x27;t yet be corrupted by current communication paradigms. I think 5 to 12 year old is the sweet spot. Older people will be able to use it, but I don&#x27;t know if they&#x27;ll be able to grasp the full potential. Only time will tell.
评论 #14699602 未加载
评论 #14700436 未加载
评论 #14700266 未加载
评论 #14699289 未加载
balladeeralmost 8 years ago
Whenever I come across a new Twitter handle I think of following I first run it through <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.tweetstats.com" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.tweetstats.com</a>. I check one simple data there:<p><pre><code> Number of tweets per day (tpd); and also maybe tweets per month (tpm) </code></pre> If the handle is churning out more than ~10 tweets per day I tend to stay away. Because if even a couple of hanldes I follow crosses <i>30 tpd</i> or so my feed will pretty much become pointless unless I am glued to my feed all the time and I would miss a lot of good content.<p>Another big problem is repeated content as the article suggests - I follow a quite some literary Twitter handles and longform handles. Everyday I come across just too many tweets that link to the same article. What is worse sometimes the same handles tweet about the same articles repeatedly (to get more views I reckon) with different texts. I usually end up unfollowing many of those handles and that means I actually going to miss a lot of content that I would have otherwise liked but in a <i>moderate dose</i>, at a slower pace.<p>I request my friends&#x2F;family members to remove me form there WhatsApp broadcast lists and after sometime I simply tell them if they don&#x27;t stop with that daily &quot;Good Morning&#x2F;Evening&quot; forwards and all that crap I am simple gonna block them. I wish WhatsApp let me remove myself from all the broadcast lists I am added to or let me choose that I don&#x27;t want to receive broadcast messagegs at all (if they can&#x27;t&#x2F;won&#x27;t make it granular).<p>I&#x27;ve completed given up on Facebook. Sometimes it shows me posts that I&#x27;ve marked hide like five times. It never keeps my friends photos, self written text posts on top but all those video and silly article shares, those annoying and mostly unfunny memes. In fact they have a limit I guess (haven&#x27;t really used them in a while) and the <i>personal</i> posts get drowned in the mass market noise.<p>Maybe the problem is we talk of Internet being decentralised but we are all try to find that decentralized Internet at any one place or vert few places - be it Twitter, or Facebook, Google. We are adopting the social networks, content sources wrong... maybe.
narratoralmost 8 years ago
I am excited at the proliferation of Mastodon servers. Every cohesive tribe that can afford a $15&#x2F;month VPS should set one up and ditch Facebook.
评论 #14701488 未加载
SZJXalmost 8 years ago
The internet is definitely getting noisier but I don&#x27;t get his &quot;solutions&quot;, especially about &quot;blogging&quot;. What does it ever mean &quot;I think most of us won&#x27;t discuss about so many totally unrelated different fields. It&#x27;s a change of mentality - we shouldn&#x27;t write something just because we can.&quot;? He makes it sound as if there are tons of irrelevant blogs out there spewing nonsense and polluting people&#x27;s experiences, while in fact the people who blog are still the absolute minority. I particularly agree with the idea of &quot;blog small things&quot;, since no matter how &quot;small&quot; your experience might seem to be, there could well be somebody else facing a similar situation who can be helped by your article. Also I don&#x27;t understand his &quot;blog with focus&quot; thing. Many of us are not writing blogs as commercial projects. We are just blogging whatever we find might be helpful to others and in this sense there&#x27;s absolutely no point in overthinking it. Just blog whatever you want. I get that he might be unsatisfied with the rambling <i>comments</i> in many websites and forums. But come on, what does that have the least bit to do with blogging and &quot;write just because we can&quot;?
ianaialmost 8 years ago
And apparently there are now state-sponsored sources of noise.<p>Wasn&#x27;t there an RFC finalized recently for a site-independent comment system?
评论 #14701456 未加载
znpyalmost 8 years ago
If anyone is wondering, Usenet is still alive.
评论 #14698837 未加载
评论 #14699741 未加载
评论 #14698817 未加载
评论 #14698945 未加载
makecheckalmost 8 years ago
Frankly I think what is missing is an understanding of statistics.<p>Even having “1000 friends”, which sounds amazing, is statistically insignificant when we are talking about populations of millions or billions. Think about the last “really long thread” you read on Reddit or something, and think about when you tuned out: was it a few dozen comments, maybe a few hundred? Still statistically insignificant, or at the very least severely biased.<p>People are regularly exposed to, and worse <i>respond to</i>, statistically biased samples. This is a really, really bad thing. What we need is a way to almost forcibly blend samples from many different populations so that the number of comments you can “stand” is a more representative sample. That way, when you get up in arms about “what people think”, it might actually <i>represent</i> what “people” think instead of “my friends” or whatever other biased sample is out there.
评论 #14699632 未加载
评论 #14700321 未加载
OliverJonesalmost 8 years ago
The internet era our author mentions was not dominated by companies whose investors measure success by &quot;engagement&quot; -- that is, by wasting our time.<p>FB and Twitter measure success by engagement. That means they don&#x27;t have the incentive to organize our information and save us time.<p>(Gotta go... Hacker News is about to tell me to get back to work!)
edgartaoralmost 8 years ago
What do you think about Reddit? Topics are enforced and have an API.
评论 #14699133 未加载
评论 #14700553 未加载
评论 #14699606 未加载
评论 #14699002 未加载
caternalmost 8 years ago
I still use NNTP every day. I&#x27;ve never used Usenet, but it&#x27;s very useful (through Gmane and Gnus) as a way to follow mailing lists. Also, the internal forums at $DAYJOB support connecting through NNTP, which is extremely convenient.<p>Likewise I use IRC every day, through Bitlbee, to interact with people on Facebook Messenger and other platforms.<p>I can do all of this from my client of choice (I choose Emacs) without a problem.<p>Admittedly this doesn&#x27;t solve the problem of topicality, but I think things are better than they seem.
beefsackalmost 8 years ago
The problem is that it appears most people actually want noise, and it&#x27;s becoming especially apparent as a lot of these content channels become more mainstream.<p>Anyone who&#x27;s been on Reddit for the majority of the site&#x27;s existence will probably have noticed monumental shifts in popular content, which I feel is essentially a movement away from serious diverse discussion towards entertainment and self validation.<p>I don&#x27;t think I&#x27;d be going out on a limb to say a large amount of HN readers are interested in serious discourse, and I wouldn&#x27;t be surprised to find there are many like me who feel completely alienated by modern Reddit. Previously it was enough to just ignore the default subs, but the momentum has become so strong that it has become pervasive even in niche subs.<p>I&#x27;ve been thinking about it a lot recently, probably mostly stemming from nostalgia of what Reddit used to be, but I feel something that is quite important is identifying that different people are interested in different content, an that nobody is really entitled to stop others enjoying the category of content they want to consume.<p>I don&#x27;t care about entertainment on Reddit, and I particularly don&#x27;t care about image macros, in-jokes and one liners. I absolutely love the high effort informational posts and discussions though, and some of them are truly insightful. I yearn for a mechanism to reliably filter out most of the entertainment things and promote the high effort content. I&#x27;d love for it to stay some form of voting mechanism though as it seems really effective when the community votes using congruent inclinations.<p>The Slashdot voting system worked using a classification system (interesting, funny, etc.) but that is hardly good supporting evidence for content classification as it didn&#x27;t work particularly well, perhaps because it was so limited (votes themselves were limited in quantity.)<p>My current line of thinking is using emoji reactions might be an interesting option like you see on GitHub comments. If I want to avoid the entertainment posts I could filter out posts which predominantly have the laughing emoji. There is evidence that emoji reactions themselves are compelling enough to be used, and possibly more compelling than the style of categorisation that Slashdot used.<p>I feel that it&#x27;s fundamentally important that a system like this needs to integrate into existing communities somehow, as there&#x27;s no point having it if there&#x27;s no content to apply it to. This is probably the hardest part but possibly also a very compelling part, having a content indexing &#x2F; classification system might also be a way to centralise a lot of this content.<p>This post got a little long winded and ranty so apologies for that, but I&#x27;ve been wanting to get these thoughts in writing for a little while. If anyone has any ideas around this general topic I&#x27;d love to hear. I&#x27;ve gotten to the point where I&#x27;d like to invest energy into attempting to solve it.
评论 #14699170 未加载
评论 #14699197 未加载
nippplesalmost 8 years ago
Now we have great discussion forums and link aggregators where a small group of moderators rule over a very large number of places and will frequently go on power trips, dominate discussion (or coddle a power user) and, not rarely enough, engage in doxxing.<p>One thing that keeps me returning to YC is that I&#x27;m not even reminded of the existence of moderators over here.
cylinderalmost 8 years ago
Indeed. I miss the days of IRC and such. The internet started feeling really noisy after the iPhone was popularized.
评论 #14700324 未加载
cookiecaperalmost 8 years ago
Walled gardens and a &quot;protectionist web&quot; are the natural outcome of the legal structure we&#x27;ve chosen to put up around the internet. It&#x27;s not a technical limitation, and technical solutions can not really affect it.<p>Just this week there was a &quot;Show HN&quot; that combined data from Twitter et al in interesting ways. It was offline less than 24 hours later as all the comments indicated that it was a clear violation of the policies of various content providers.<p>Why should we care about those policies? Well, because under the CFAA, we&#x27;ve made it a federal crime to send packets to a server in a way that displeases the server&#x27;s owner.<p>There is no technical limitation stopping people from collecting and curating data from many sources and combining&#x2F;filtering them according to their own interest. The internet is <i>already</i> open in principle (cue Schneier: &quot;trying to make digital bits not copiable is like trying to make water not wet&quot;). The issue is that we&#x27;ve given the Facebooks and Googles of the world the right to hold our data and our personal networks hostage.<p>Start a decentralized, standardized protocol like email or IRC and companies will cooperate insofar as they must to ride the wave, and then they will work aggressively to corner things off into their own little world.<p>Understand, all software companies want one thing: lock-in. They want to make it so that there is as much pressure as possible to remain on their platform. It&#x27;s the age-old story of someone who can&#x27;t move to Mac, even though they greatly envy it, because their greeting card program from 1997 won&#x27;t work on it. Instead of importable programs, it&#x27;s importable personal networks -- but now, with everything server-side, it&#x27;s usually illegal to try to bridge that gap on the user&#x27;s behalf (insofar as doing so involves contacting the server of a competitor).<p>The situation with potential copyright and patent violations was precarious enough when it was all occurring on the user&#x27;s local machine (WINE is in a big legal grey area, for example; my instinct is WINE would lose if MS ever decided to seriously try to squash them), but once you cross the line into some company&#x27;s IP space, all bets are off. The CFAA allows them to define &quot;authorized access&quot; to their servers on their own terms, including &quot;people trying to access our server to provide data portability&quot;. This has already been litigated with specific regard to Facebook in <i>Facebook v. Power Ventures</i>.<p>As long as we give companies the legal tools to exert effective ownership over user-generated data, we are destined to see well-designed, decentralized protocols that maximize availability, resiliency, and portability get whittled away by the overriding corporate interest in establishing some element that can be used to keep users locked in.<p>The Halloween memos may have caused a stir in the late 90s, and they&#x27;re all but forgotten now, but their sentiment is more alive than ever.
评论 #14700300 未加载
lyra_commsalmost 8 years ago
We are working to restore the openness of online discussion with Lyra: www.hellolyra.com. We aim to provide helpful services for conversation, not to get users addicted.<p>We have made the choice to focus around people and conversations rather than topics (because Lyra is designed to be harrassment-proof, and topics lead easily to harrassment - you don&#x27;t see this so much in the tech world but in the mainstream it&#x27;s a huge problem).<p>We are currently thinking about the best way to do notification aggregation (Facebook does this very badly - several comments on the same conversation will give you several different notifications) and marking-as-read. We have several interesting options in test at the moment.
评论 #14701297 未加载
grogenautalmost 8 years ago
As someone who remembers being uber frustrated at having to use trillian to talk to all of my friend, I disagree, there was major fragmentation back then as well. Also for which BBS you were on, which friends were on AOL or other nerfed internet.
评论 #14699783 未加载
sergiotapiaalmost 8 years ago
Medium is quickly becoming the central place for programming articles, and it&#x27;s ridiculous they don&#x27;t offer an API.<p>Check it out: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;Medium&#x2F;medium-api-docs&#x2F;issues&#x2F;91" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;Medium&#x2F;medium-api-docs&#x2F;issues&#x2F;91</a><p>More of these website are just becoming data silos and not sharing their data. Unfortunately I don&#x27;t know of a better place to write programming content. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;sergiotapia.me" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;sergiotapia.me</a><p>If you&#x27;re a developer and you care about this, like I do, where would you recommend we write articles sans-self hosting?
评论 #14702878 未加载
评论 #14699653 未加载
niftichalmost 8 years ago
It&#x27;s not that these points aren&#x27;t valid; they are, and I know some people who&#x27;ve been rightfully hammering the exact same points for, well, decades, at this point.<p>But we arrived here neither out of pure accident or grand overarching malice, but simply out of the necessity of the now-commercial web and its lack of good business models, and perverse incentives.<p>Back when most of the traffic on the Internet was academic, institutional, government, or hobbyist, the incentives were to get the content out there and interoperate with others, because the dissemination of the information was seen as having intrinsic value, and the expenses were covered by out-of-band means (i.e. not monetized through the content or the consumers).<p>On today&#x27;s particular flavor of a commercial web, especially when your next funding round depends on showing user numbers, easy out-migration is a liability, easy in-migration is a feature, so even the use of APIs frequently helps the product and the company more so than it helps the user.<p>When commercial entities started appearing on the Internet, particularly on the World Wide Web, some sites were pure billboards containing only an about page and contact information, e-commerce sites funded the operation through selling actual wares, but news&#x2F;media&#x2F;entertainment sites brought with them their previously trailblazed business model of giving away content and trying to recoup some of the cost with advertising. Later, VC-funded content silos took a page from early hobbyist web forums (that were mediocre reimagining of BBSes) and created login-walled playgrounds that funnel the content inward, making it easier to track, analyze, and monetize. It&#x27;s no surprise that today&#x27;s four largest display ad servers are Google, Facebook, Verizon&#x2F;Yahoo&#x2F;AOL, and Twitter.<p>Other business models only work for specialized players who can command some brand awareness and attract a discriminating customer willing to pay for quality (e.g. big-name or niche newspapers, streaming media sites, data brokers); and, as the HN meme goes, micropayments get much more interest from those who want to collect them than those who want to pay for them, so the everyman&#x27;s market is full of me-too sites vying for limited attention, or captive content silos that re-create everything on the inside. The battle is largely lost, unless realistic progress is made in the web monetization space.<p>Luckily, there are no technical barriers to people banding together and making interoperable services like the way things used to be -- and keeping up the protocols that make that a reality. It&#x27;s just that they will have to contend with the realities of playing in that space and competing with similar offerings that don&#x27;t. Havens on the old web, or the old Internet for that matter still exist, just like amateur radio still exists along with public access television. It&#x27;s just not where the mainstream attention-hours go.
评论 #14700156 未加载
sullyj3almost 8 years ago
<p><pre><code> &gt; Can&#x27;t mark things as read &gt; ... &gt; it could resurface at any time </code></pre> Except that you can&#x27;t come close to consuming content faster than it&#x27;s produced on things like Facebook. That&#x27;s what the news feed is for, taking the massive stream of <i>stuff</i> that your friends and pages are generating, and prioritizing it. I don&#x27;t think it generally shows you things you&#x27;ve already seen before.
type0almost 8 years ago
&gt; Incidentally, this is not a call for the open internet; I could not care less if there&#x27;s a leading provider for content, as long as such content is accessible in a standard way.<p>There is such a provider and it&#x27;s called Facebook, that is if you don&#x27;t care about the open internet is exactly what you get.
Semiapiesalmost 8 years ago
For all that RSS is &quot;dead&quot;, it sure still seems to be everywhere. A few big-name sites like Twitter shut their feeds down, sure. Out in the rest of the web, I can&#x27;t think of the last time I looked at a site or a blog that didn&#x27;t have a pretty usable feed.
Mathnerd314almost 8 years ago
If you want to focus on something, just google it - depending on what it is you&#x27;ll get Wikipedia, some blog posts, and maybe a book or two on the subject.<p>What Facebook &#x2F; Twitter &#x2F; Blogger &#x2F; etc. are good for is providing context - <i>why</i> should I be interested in something. Generally it&#x27;s as simple as &quot;I like Mr. X and he&#x27;s interested in Y&quot;. They&#x27;re also reasonable at finding new topics to explore, although if you dive deep enough it turns out that everything is interconnected and you&#x27;ll find it anyway.<p>It&#x27;s really hard to define &quot;topic&quot; or &quot;noise&quot; in a way that isn&#x27;t based on search keywords or (facets of) people.
clishemalmost 8 years ago
&gt; Once was IRC<p>Seriously?
评论 #14700559 未加载
评论 #14699173 未加载
评论 #14699070 未加载