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

Sovereign writers and Substack

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 169 posts

Re: Sovereign writers and Substack

#111

Post by nonameiguess »

oh_sigh wrote: post #74
tarkin2 wrote: post #67

Vaguely off topic, but why do so many programmers use substack and medium to write about programming? Why not use their own programming skills to create their own website, rather than consume a service? I used to love visiting programmers' websites, where programmer's would use their skills to not only write, but create. Now it's largely a drab stream of medium posts.

I host my content on other services because I have a full time job, a family, and interests outside of tech. Even though I can do it all myself, what's the point? I get paid well into 6 figures for my tech job. What are the odds my blog will start generating that kind of revenue? Basically zero. And I can talk about things I actually do create on my blog, even if my blog is hosted on substack or medium. I just can't…

Came here to say exactly this. This feels like asking why my dad, who has all of the skills to build a house from scratch if he wanted to, bothered to buy one that already existed instead. Because it's easier and he's busy. I can write my own blogging platform if I wanted to, but I can't conjure one from thin air in the two minutes it takes to sign up for one that someone else already built.

Re: Sovereign writers and Substack

#112

Post by nonameiguess »

analyte123 wrote: post #8

The writers aren't completely "sovereign" as long as they are using Stripe (and Visa and Mastercard) to process payments. It is basically inevitable that some entity in the payment system will eventually interfere with Substack even if Substack themselves hold the line.

That is extremely unlikely to happen, but there are plenty of other payment processors out there that I can't imagine any practical way of putting enough pressure on to stop them from processing payments. If facialabuse.com hasn't been de-platformed from their payment processor yet, then there is always somewhere to go.

Re: Sovereign writers and Substack

#113

Post by nonameiguess »

smoldesu wrote: post #88

I don't think I'll ever end up using Substack. In a world where information is virtually worthless, why should I pay you for your opinion?

A lot of these writers are operating on a freemium model, where you can consume nearly all of what they write for free, and subscribe if you want to for a few extra subscribers only articles. Only a tiny number are purely for subscribers.

Re: Sovereign writers and Substack

#114

Post by prepend »

wmf wrote: post #107
gnicholas wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminds me of a quote from an economics professor, whose high salary was questioned by someone from another discipline. "The university doesn't determine my salary; the market does that. The university only decides the city in which I earn it." /paraphrase

But the market was invented by economics professors...

Discovered maybe, but certainly not invented.

Re: Sovereign writers and Substack

#115

Post by coldtea »

glennismyfren wrote: post #98
coldtea wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've yet to read what I would consider high quality journalism on Substack. It's a lot of quick take opinion pieces. Most of what passes for "high quality journalism" in "high quality outlets" are fluff pieces and government/corporate PR masquerading as facts. And as Alan Kay said: "a point of view is worth 80 IQ points". I'd rather read the opinion of people with well honed points of view than what passes as news…

Glenn Greenwald has written a number of very good pieces on his Substack that I would in no way describe as quick take opinion pieces and Matt Taibbi has the best reporting on the journalism industry itself going around. These guys are "well honed" because they're well read on the activities of the media and they think and communicate clearly Maybe you're not reading the right posts or you just agree with the prevail…

>Maybe you're not reading the right posts or you just agree with the prevailing narrative in the traditional outlets?

Maybe you meant this for the parent commenter? I wrote in favor of Substack writers and against the "traditional outlets" superiority.

Re: Sovereign writers and Substack

#116

Post by coldtea »

purple_ferret wrote: post #101
glennismyfren wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glenn Greenwald has written a number of very good pieces on his Substack that I would in no way describe as quick take opinion pieces and Matt Taibbi has the best reporting on the journalism industry itself going around. These guys are "well honed" because they're well read on the activities of the media and they think and communicate clearly Maybe you're not reading the right posts or you just agree with the prevail…

>Glenn Greenwald has written a number of very good pieces on his Substack that I would in no way describe as quick take opinion piece. He wrote a piece about Parler and the storming of the Capital[0], within a week of the event that was certainly a quick take. There is absolutely no way to definitively make any sort of claim about how involved it was, especially from his position, thousands of miles away on a patio i…

>He wrote a piece about Parler and the storming of the Capital[0], within a week of the event that was certainly a quick take. There is absolutely no way to definitively make any sort of claim about how involved it was, especially from his position, thousands of miles away on a patio in Rio.

The position "on a patio in Rio" doesn't matter, as he was not doing reporting, he was doing a take. It wasn't some obscure event that needed on-the-field investigation for someone to make a take a week later (which is a lot of time in news).

It's enough that others did the reporting, or the events were plain and clearly recorded on video, or one has sources, or experience to see what's the deal behind what's reported.

Re: Sovereign writers and Substack

#117

Post by [deleted] »

mdoms wrote: post #78

Substack is what happens when the mainstream media elites overplay their hand and force heterodox writers out of the "mainstream". As it turns out there are still plenty of people who want to read this kind of writing, and we don't appreciate the gatekeeping from formerly reputable sources.

[deleted]

Re: Sovereign writers and Substack

#118

Post by baud147258 »

pier25 wrote: post #85
tarboreus wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Network effects. Medium and Substack help discoverability. It's trivial to geta site online, but difficult to have people come across it.

I don't know about Substack, but when I wrote on Medium the vast majority of readers came from outside of Medium. I don't remember the exact numbers, but I had a popular article with something like 170k reads of which only 15% came from Medium itself.

perhaps it's easier to entice readers to click on a link to medium.com rather than randomjoedev.com

Re: Sovereign writers and Substack

#119

Post by over_bridge »

prepend wrote: post #114
wmf wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the market was invented by economics professors...

Discovered maybe, but certainly not invented.

Don't even pretend that the market is some sort of natural phenomenon. That's got human fingerprints all over it
Post reply on HN