Live data from Hacker News

Why Craigslist still looks the same after 25 years

pcmag.com

331–335 of 335 posts

Re: Why Craigslist still looks the same after 25 years

#331
post #87

Another site that has changed little is the Drudge Report. I don't agree with the somewhat right-wing political bias of the site, but it's clear and easy to use.

There is little if anything that is still "right-wing" about Drudge today. If you doubt me, load it a few times every week and see what is featured. It's not the Drudge of 5 or 10 or 15 years ago.

I did a visit before posting and have to agree with you.

Though even in the early days there would be links to leftish news sources.

Re: Why Craigslist still looks the same after 25 years

#332
post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d politely suggest that you have interesting points here, and you could get them across much better if you wrote shorter sentences with shorter words.

Can you explain what the poster above you was writing? I have trouble parsing it, since it seems they are from some academic discipline I am unfamiliar in.

I'll take a crack at it.

> What absolutely confounds my comprehension of marketplace sites and any online business driven by user directed discovery, is the unbroken and never deviated from practice in every industry and field of making the method and techniques used for search as unique inviolable individual apotheoses of a imaginary USP.

I don't get marketplace sites. Specifically, it seems like every company decides they have a unique selling point, and they should build all search features around emphasizing that selling point at all costs, instead of building it around showing the user the thing they were looking for.

> why on earth doesn't occur to anyone that heterogeneous search methods producing a range of results with a identifiable classifiable process or at least perceptual sensibility that users can get some understanding of, might provide not only consumer choice but profit?

Why don't they provide a search interface that will be familiar to their users? Wouldn't that be both more user-friendly and also more profitable?

> The only thing that I can imagine to be happening is the overriding objectives must be econometric optimization and blow every other consideration. Or maybe it's possible with the adherent mantra of "internet speed" development that without constant investment in maintenance "development" nothing will work if left alone while bringing in alternative abilities.

Maybe the companies are Goodharting themselves to death? Or maybe they value developing new features over making sure that their core infrastructure actually works.

Re: Why Craigslist still looks the same after 25 years

#334

When I lived in the US, at a certain point I realized literally every major aspect of my life in some way could be worked back to a craigslist ad - cars, places to live in and jobs. We don't have craigslist where I live in Europe, and I miss it. Instead it's an endless parade of for-profit services like olx. I tell people about craigslist and it's alien to them, this idea that something on the internet could be manag…

sounds like opportunity

Re: Why Craigslist still looks the same after 25 years

#335
post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>has != earns Yes, and? >a choice of a 10 year contract to do X worth 100k/annual take-home with 1m delivered at start, or an unchanging biweekly paycheck. Would the biweekly need to be higher to make it more attractive than the one-time payment or could it be lower yet still be the favored choice. You can only make the up front payment so large before employees start quitting early and moving to Montenegro.

>>> Craig Newmark has roughly $1B. >> I doubt if he’s typical of people working at Craigslist. > A billion split ten ways is still a decent chunk of pocket change. The difference being that Newmark has an equity stake of some hypothetical value and the people working there would receive some fixed value per unit of time. If Newmark were to pay each of 10 workers $1B/10 then: * their paychecks afterward would be much…

> I'm of the thought that there is only so much leisure a person can take before there is a drive to contribute toward the betterment of humanity.

I agree completely.

> If someone trusted you and you were trustable, would you take a large lump sum and work for work's sake? Would it make a difference if the sum was an equity stake in the work's environment?

I wouldn't, if it involved a long-term commitment. It's the long-term commitment that's the issue. It locks you into one thing and eliminates the ability to do something better -- or just different -- later on.

The money doesn't really enter into it.

Post reply on HN