A crowd-funding charity website that collects monthly very tiny micro-payment (as little as .10 cents) from users for charity. This way many users would sign up, worry free, as .10 cents a month is extremely affordable and can add up to a lot of money with scale.
Ask HN: Idea Sunday
331–340 of 453 posts
Re: Ask HN: Idea Sunday
#332Sex toy that uses machine learning to find the optimal method of providing pleasure to it's owner.
Re: Ask HN: Idea Sunday
#333I'd like to see a site that focuses on the construction of logical arguments supporting various political and non-political views. I'd like for the system to allow for continued refinement of arguments on various topics and to allow for various branching of thought. That is, I'm not looking for a democracy that rewards majoritarian thought and punishes less popular but logically consistent argumentation. As an end pr…
I appreciate the idea, but it needs some reworking. In particular, I see two big flaws. (1) The essence of the use of this site would be that one chooses a position, and then finds arguments to support it. In other words, "I've made up my mind; now show me why I'm right." Now suppose I'm the person discussing an issue with you. Why should I pay any attention to some page chosen based largely on the assumption that I'…
If you have an online-community that you run and would like some ideas to combat vote-based-on-agreement, here are a few that I've thought up or come across:
(Not claiming that these strategies are ungameable).
* Limit the number of upvotes a user can give per day, thus making votes more valuable.
* Force users to space-out voting, allowing only 1 upvote every 5 minutes.
* Vote value: Votes are valued more the less you do it over a certain period - so if you only upvote once per-day, that post gets more points than if you upvoted everything in /new. Choice: Do it hidden on the backend, or could be interesting; do it in a user-configurable format. Give users, say, 100 points per-day and are allowed to upvote transparently - you can give one thing 100 points or four things 25 points.
* Time-delayed voting: votes are only allowed after a certain amount of time has passed since you clicked on a link. A well thought-out and reasoned article should take at least a couple of minutes to read, so I can upvote that after I read; I'm not likely to wait around to upvote an image-macro with fewer than a dozen words unless it's really special.
* Karma cap, both negative and positive: Limit max positive karma to something low, say 50. That's high enough to see that a user isn't brand new but isn't trivially attainable. That way, it's fine to get to the cap, but posting inane one-liners attempting to reap thousands of points for a single comment isn't so tempting. Limit negative karma to something lower, like -100 to dissuade trolls, while still showing that a user is disagreed with. Hopefully that encourages discussion for the sake of discussion.
* Meta-voting: You vote on how many points a post got, so if a pithy but well-timed comment that says "lol butts" gets a lot of points, you can vote to say that the post didn't deserve those points. Make this a limited power granted to a select (but changing) group.
* Make downvoting cost karma: If it cost karma to downvote, that could be a higher bar to drive-by-disagreeing.
* Not sure if it's a good idea, but turn the script around. Instead of trying to avoiding the Pepsi-Blue Advertising syndrome, charge money for votes transparently adding points to a post or comment. As users can still downvote items, it becomes expensive to elevate a bad piece of advertising. Maybe extend this to users by allowing users to receive money for lots of highly-rated comments. Or perhaps use Dogecoin as your currency of choice as the real-world value of 1 Doge is so low that it's effectively free in small quantities, but not actually free.
I don't think allowing the masses to vote on things is a bad idea, but it's an idea that needs some refinements for best effect.
Re: Ask HN: Idea Sunday
#334Re: Ask HN: Idea Sunday
#335A small device that lets me piggyback off my friend's phone's battery if my battery is at 5% and theirs is at 99% and they can spare some charge cycles.
If wireless charging gets more standard, then there won't be an eyesore of cables.
Re: Ask HN: Idea Sunday
#336Lower ligature risk USB charging cables. These would be used by mental health hospitals to allow (risk assessed) patient to charge their devices without introducing ligature risk. To go along with this: Bulk USB charger. Imagine a 20 port USB hub, but this has no USB connectivity. It only has USB power. It would be kept in a secure place in a mental health ward and would allow them to charge patient's devices. This w…
Would something like this fix that issue? https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/chargekey-for-iphone-and-... I backed this on Indiegogo and received it a few weeks ago. It is quite small.
Re: Ask HN: Idea Sunday
#337There are some services out there that will scan you for vulnerabilities, but I have yet to find a really slick way to integrate security "for free" into your own servers/services.
This would mean at minimum:
1. apt-get install X. Automatically decent kernel/network/firewall configuration occurs, removes cleartext passwords from ssh and changes the port, etc etc. This is just a base starting line.
2. malicious user detector. Probably cooperating with an API within ruby/jvm/python/php/whatever is a mixpanel-like way I can define custom events and possible milestone-firewalls. E.g. this is a new user sign up, here are the relevant fields & ip. Or here's a comment on an image from user X with IP Y. Rather than having to figure out if we're likely being abused outsource that decision to the service & have it help you block the evil-doer.
3. APIs to help with usernames/passwords, setting up TLS & perfect forward secrecy, etc. That is to say, give me patterns I can use that every app has even with some level of customization.
4. Have built in DDOS protection, particularly for resource starvation attacks that might be more app-specific (request X took Y>Z time, and it's being repeated endlessly).
I understand that security is complicated, ideally should have full time staff, every app/service is different, ya yada. Except when you're starting out you don't have these kinds of resources and something like this could get one quite far, not to mention be able to see much of the internet and what's happening across clients (like gmail with spam) and thus have an advantage over you. It seems like a giant hole in the world of app development and most people are terrible at security when it comes down to doing anything more than firewall + ssh keys + bcrypt user passwords.
Re: Ask HN: Idea Sunday
#338I have a hard time explaining this idea, so please bear with me. As a founder and hacker, I want to know how my users use my web and mobile apps. But I haven't found an intuitive and dead-simple way to do it. Mixpanel and google analytic are way more complex than what I have in mind. What I would like to have is more similar to Facebook, but instead of looking at my friends activity, I'd like to see what's happening…
I like it. It is like Mixpanel, the implementation on the page would be similar, but without data aggregation. There are open-source Mixpanel-like backends out there, some will not come with a frontend full of charts, you should just get one of these and build a frontend full of feeds.
Re: Ask HN: Idea Sunday
#339I always thought a DNA analyzer for potential dates would be a good idea. I know it sounds crazy but you want to know if the your date has any good bad genes or not so you can make a full gene ARRAY so you can see their store gene structure and see if they are eatable. This would also translate into better offspring for maximum efficient. /s before anyone jumps on me for posting this, know that this was posted as sar…
Re: Ask HN: Idea Sunday
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course there is one truth. 1+1=2, Global warming either is or isn't real, gun control either does or doesn't reduce homicide rates, etc. Aumann's Agreement Theorem suggests that two rational people can not disagree on a subject if they both fully understand all the evidence and arguments. All disagreements stem from some combination of misunderstanding, ignorance, or irrationality.
That's only true for factual statements. It's perfectly possible to reach different conclusion starting from different moral premises.
Then it's not a matter of disagreement or coming to different conclusions, it's just having different values.