Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Goodbye, Denver Post. Hello, Blockchain

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 102 posts

Re: Goodbye, Denver Post. Hello, Blockchain

#41

Post by bastawhiz »

a1369209993 wrote: post #39
Moodles wrote: post #36

I propose a new rule of the internet, much like the rule of "if you can think of it, there's porn for it." If you can think of it, there's a alt coin for it. It's genuinely difficult. One friend suggested "a coin for space travel". Nope. Mars coin is a thing. What about a coin for students? Nope. A coin for Kanye West. Nope. A coin for porn? Nope, of course that already exists. There's even a coin for keeping track o…

A coin for Cymothoa exigua. COBOLCoin. A coin based on MD2 hashing for proof-of-work.

Are you accepting investments?

Re: Goodbye, Denver Post. Hello, Blockchain

#42

Post by jmull »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #4

> People who purchase the CVL token, a form of cryptocurrency, will have a say concerning the projects hosted by Civil — meaning that they can vote on whether one of its websites violates the company’s journalism standards, which are outlined in the Civil Constitution This features the worst elements of public ( e.g. the BBC ), private ( e.g. the Wall Street Journal ) and patronage ( e.g. the Washington Post ) media.…

You’re assuming these votes are binding in some unreviewable, uncontrollable way. That seems quite unlikely.

Re: Goodbye, Denver Post. Hello, Blockchain

#43

Post by apo »

Ridiculous story. When was the last time you heard of a newspaper going under because its stories weren't "written permanently into the secure digital ledger known as the blockchain"?

Newspapers are dying because other kinds of companies ate their advertising revenue.

We can add the Denver Post to a list of old-guard companies desperately grabbing for blockchain straws on their slide to oblivion (Long Island Iced Tea, Kodak).

I'm all for innovation in applied cryptography. But these desperate stories of blockchain cargo-cultism need to stop.

Re: Goodbye, Denver Post. Hello, Blockchain

#44

Post by blattimwind »

pudo wrote: post #33
ilikehurdles wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, I would call very few people at the Murdoch’s and Mercer’s media conglomerates and the like journalists, and while they’ve significantly amplified extremism in the last two years, they’ve never been considered legitimate journalistic organizations like the New Yorker or the Washington Post.

WSJ is a pretty renowned newspaper. Coincidentally, they published the Theranos investigation which probably cost Murdoch $100mn. I'm somewhat entertained by the posters in this thread shitting on media organisations. You need to understand: the business model for a whole pillar of democracy is gone. $5 and your sarcastic comment will buy you a cafe latte, but the very last thing journalism needs more of is disruptio…

> You can propose that journalism needs to reinvent itself, but this is not an original insight. Smart people have been trying for years, and it's really hard to make a public good sustainable on the web.

Case in point, almost all of open source software exists because someone else paid for it, and releasing it as FOSS didn't directly contradict their business interests.

Re: Goodbye, Denver Post. Hello, Blockchain

#45

Post by [deleted] »

prolikewhoa wrote: post #25
aitrean wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And they shouldn't. News should not be determined by its shareholders. The idea that such privileges should be able to be purchased is so incomprehensibly stupid, I'm at a loss for words.

You don't think it already isn't purchased and hasn't been for a very long time? There are only a handful of media companies, at least in the USA.

[deleted]

Re: Goodbye, Denver Post. Hello, Blockchain

#46

Post by cabaalis »

I often click a bunch of links on here and receive a "Sorry, you've exceeded the free limit" message. Why can't I dump $5 into an account on NYT and then be able to click "I want to read this, use my tab." I'm not talking about a subscription. I'm talking about a "buy 10 reads" which I would absolutely use. I will not subscribe.

Re: Goodbye, Denver Post. Hello, Blockchain

#48

Post by geofft »

prolikewhoa wrote: post #25
aitrean wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And they shouldn't. News should not be determined by its shareholders. The idea that such privileges should be able to be purchased is so incomprehensibly stupid, I'm at a loss for words.

You don't think it already isn't purchased and hasn't been for a very long time? There are only a handful of media companies, at least in the USA.

It's obvious when the Washington Post writes articles about Amazon that there's a conflict of interest. They definitely write them, but I don't remember anyone sharing any stories from them about e.g. the HQ2 process. People know to look elsewhere. And conversely, the moment the Post publishes a news (not opinion) article about how every city should want to be HQ2, or worse, mentions it off-hand in an article about something else, everyone knows not to trust that and possibly to lose trust in the news source in general. So they don't.

It's not obvious when ownership is a thousand pseudonymous private keys when there's a conflict of interest. If a random article about a random company looks a little more negative than it should be, who knows if the current pseudonymous owners are shorting that company?

Publicly-disclosed ownership of the media by the rich has a ton of disadvantages, yes. But I don't the blockchain solving any of those disadvantages, and I see it introducing a new one that is specifically avoided by publicly-disclosed ownership by the rich.

Re: Goodbye, Denver Post. Hello, Blockchain

#50

Post by drb91 »

pudo wrote: post #24
drb91 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, how would you incentivise journalism? I can’t tell where articles i might want to read come from; i know that any given newspaper will have plenty of content that i find head scratching—that’s your editorial independence for you. There’s no good model right now to patronize journalists or topics.

You can buy an online subscription.

For instance, i like some journalists on the NYT, but i think i’m supporting poor journalism more than good journalism by funding them at all. The editorial independence is the source of the problem there.
Post reply on HN