TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Nobody should be a "content creator"

70 点作者 mfld大约 2 个月前

16 条评论

kcoddington大约 2 个月前
There has always been filler entertainment that caters to the lowest denominator. The new medium types just allow for more of it. Maybe I&#x27;m in a very small minority, but I only consume HN and a heavily curated YouTube account.<p>I don&#x27;t even see most of the viral content unless somebody else shows me. Anf since I don&#x27;t have an account with most social media sites, they have to show me directly on their own devices. I also filter on all email with the word &#x27;unsubscribe&#x27; and route it appropriately.<p>The short of it is: do better at filtering with allow listing or aggressive block lists. Consume content you search for. Or accept the fact that an algorithm will spoon feed you 99% filler.
评论 #43505140 未加载
pxoe大约 2 个月前
&quot;Nobody deserves to make money on the internet except some opinionated subset of people I deem worthy of it.&quot; Also, this utterly confuses what&#x27;s basically spam content with &quot;content creation&quot;. All in all, just odd conflations to make some point, doused in elitism.
评论 #43504917 未加载
评论 #43507301 未加载
OgsyedIE大约 2 个月前
Absolute rules have a high burden of proof and I don&#x27;t think the article meets it. One of the better essays on the merits of content creation I&#x27;m familiar with is Gavin Howard&#x27;s &quot;To Broadcast or not to Broadcast&quot; and it provides a respectable contrast:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gavinhoward.com&#x2F;2024&#x2F;09&#x2F;to-broadcast-or-not-to-broadcast-a-nuanced-perspective&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gavinhoward.com&#x2F;2024&#x2F;09&#x2F;to-broadcast-or-not-to-broad...</a>
Anthony-G大约 2 个月前
Here’s what Richard Stallman had to say about these terms in his 1996 essay published in “Free Software, Free Society: Selected Essays of Richard, M. Stallman”¹:<p><i>Content</i><p>&gt; If you want to describe a feeling of comfort and satisfaction, by all means say “content,” but using it to describe written and other works of authorship embodies a specific attitude towards those works: that they are an interchangeable commodity whose purpose is to fill a box and make money. In effect, it treats the works themselves with disrespect.<p>&gt; Those who use this term are often the publishers that push for increased copyright power in the name of the authors (“creators,” as they say) of the works. The term “content” reveals what they really feel.<p>&gt; As long as other people use the term “content provider,” political dissidents can well call themselves “malcontent providers.”<p><i>Creator</i><p>&gt; The term “creator” as applied to authors implicitly compares them to a deity (“the creator”). The term is used by publishers to elevate the authors’ moral stature above that of ordinary people, to justify increased copyright power that the publishers can exercise in the name of the authors.<p>¹ <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;philosophy&#x2F;fsfs&#x2F;rms-essays.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;philosophy&#x2F;fsfs&#x2F;rms-essays.pdf</a><p>Note: I have a paper copy of this book at home but I found very hard to find this text on the web via Duck Duck Go or Google. Thankfully, the Wikipedia article had links to the original.
评论 #43507167 未加载
trizoza大约 2 个月前
I&#x27;ve stopped using most social media but Twitter, it&#x27;s still full of indie hackers and the content is good. But you have to be careful and immediately unfollow when you smell the kind of indie hacker who schedule their content for the sake of scheduling content. They&#x27;re not real, they are not sharing their current thoughts, they are just following some playbooks on how to please the algo. Luckily they are often so obvious that it&#x27;s quite easy to weed them out and just keep following the interesting ones. And yeah, stay away from the &quot;For you&quot; tab.
评论 #43505348 未加载
JohnMakin大约 2 个月前
Long gone is the age where people created content for the sheer fun of it with no monetary expectation. Amongst some age groups this is now an entirely foreign concept, to the point they won’t believe you.
评论 #43506160 未加载
评论 #43505377 未加载
评论 #43506141 未加载
hobofan大约 2 个月前
The author seems to make up their mind early on that &quot;content creator&quot; = &quot;slop creator&quot;.<p>I think there is a lot more use to the label than that, and the reason why some people in the space happily self-label as &quot;content creators&quot;.<p>For one it creates a delineation to &quot;influencers&quot; with the contrast that a &quot;content creator&quot; _creates_ something. They also create _content_, which could on the one hand be seen as &quot;anything that fills a void&quot;, or more positively &quot;something that&#x27;s interesting&quot;. Most of the examples that the author highlighted I would classify as non-content&#x2F;slop.<p>I think &quot;content creator&quot; is also a good descriptor for people that work as &quot;independent creators in the digital media space&quot;, whose activities spread across multiple social media platforms, and would thus be hard to pidgeon hole into just one of: youtuber, streamer, podcaster, etc. as people working in the space full time often do all of that.
评论 #43504926 未加载
评论 #43505079 未加载
评论 #43505001 未加载
vintermann大约 2 个月前
I, too, hate the words &quot;content creator&quot; or (even worse) &quot;creatives&quot;. Everyone makes things for others. Creatives are not a subset of humanity, every human is a creative human. Now, whether you can <i>sell</i> the things you create on gamified online markets is another question, but it sucks to conflate the pride at being able to do that, with the pride in creativity itself.
abbadadda大约 2 个月前
Really well said:<p>&gt; “ Good thing I have this blog. Here is where I make the rules. Maybe this will get a lot of readers, maybe it won’t. I don’t make any money with it either way. It’s out of my head now, and that is what counts. Do wonderful things that make you happy, folks. Chasing the numbers will not give you any fulfilment. Quite the opposite.”
wespad大约 2 个月前
Comic books, original paperback books (crime&#x2F;detective stories, westerns, science fiction, etc.), hip-hop,... all intended as disposable entertainment—the commodified, created content of its day.
评论 #43505359 未加载
jtwoodhouse大约 2 个月前
We only suffer from these platforms because we put up with them. Social media is not the be-all, end-all. There&#x27;s a world of grass to touch outside of these walled gardens.
beeforpork大约 2 个月前
Hmm, I read the title as &#x27;nobody should be doing porn&#x27; (with which I disagree -- everybody should do whatever they want).<p>Because I thought &#x27;content creator&#x27; was synonymous with &#x27;onlyfans model&#x27;. I was then genuinely surprised by the content of the article and by calling &#x27;content creator&#x27; a generic term.<p>I&#x27;m not sure -- is it an ambiguous title, or is my context way off?
评论 #43506106 未加载
评论 #43506202 未加载
评论 #43505799 未加载
评论 #43506979 未加载
TeMPOraL大约 2 个月前
&gt; <i>The question is why you take part in social media.</i><p>&gt; <i>If your goal is to make money, good luck trying to compete with the deluge of AI slop.</i><p>&gt; <i>If your goal is to get reach as an influencer, this is also getting trickier as a lot of people want a slice of that pie. We are in a post Mr. Beast world and quite some ground has been scorched.</i><p>&gt; <i>If your goal is to use it as a source of passive income, there’s still some bits to gain, but you’d also have to keep abiding to the rules of the platforms.</i><p>And if you answered &quot;Yes&quot; to any of those, <i>you are part of the reason social media is a huge social problem</i>, and you should not have been allowed on it in the first place.
superfunny大约 2 个月前
I&#x27;m pretty sure many people on their internet would view themselves as &quot;discontent creators&quot;
ashoeafoot大约 2 个月前
Templated UnitOfWorks should not complain about the factory(factory(factorys(plans and namingconventions))). The recipe of the entertainment rich mystery slob is not yours to ponder unless its rich in vitamin a(&amp;d&amp;d)
floundy大约 2 个月前
Yet he created content for his blog. A very basic and derivative post, adding nothing more to discussion on the internet than the social media engagement bait and AI slop he is criticizing.