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

Vice website is shutting down

writing.exchange

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 477 posts

Re: Vice website is shutting down

#371

Post by shortrounddev2 »

arsome wrote: post #183
jacurtis wrote: post #180

Its sad that Vice feels like they can only gain value from social media and YouTube. I feel like the best part of the internet is dying (good written detailed content), but the worst part of it is surviving and thriving: social media (short lived, low quality, clickbaity, dopamine chasing content).

I think YouTube is the counter argument to this - long form content from passionate people has taken off pretty good there. Perhaps it's just me, but it seriously makes the rest of social media look like an absolute trashfire by comparison.

Most of the long form content I see on YouTube is a 10 minute video stretched out over 50 minutes

Re: Vice website is shutting down

#372

Post by Reubachi »

brokencode wrote: post #369
egeozcan wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their youtube really needs to be archived. It'd be a shame if they deleted all that content.

Why would they even archive it? They don’t have to pay for hosting on YouTube, so those videos at this point are a cost free revenue stream.

Because youtube DOES charge them via adsense, and TOS can change at any moment.

Eventually, that TOS can change and they can delist old content, reneg on ad terms, force new editing/censoring on old videos etc. All within their right as platform holder.

Sort of like saying "I haven't been in an accident. Why would I need insurance?"

Re: Vice website is shutting down

#373

Post by glfharris »

Scoundreller wrote: post #204
arsome wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think YouTube is the counter argument to this - long form content from passionate people has taken off pretty good there. Perhaps it's just me, but it seriously makes the rest of social media look like an absolute trashfire by comparison.

Sorta. YouTube is kinda anti-monetization of your content unless you get 1000 subscribers, which is kinda hard if you don’t do consistent topic or are entertaining. If you’re a grouchy mechanic and do boring videos of exactly how to do brakes on every car, that’s incredibly useful, but not subscribeable (unless your grouchiness becomes a meme). I feel bad for the one guy that did 1 perfect video on how to fix&overhau…

I suppose that's where things like tip jars work quite well. To reward useful but otherwise niche content.

Re: Vice website is shutting down

#374

Post by typeofhuman »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #257
jahlove wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems noteworthy to point out there are multiple, credible sexual assault allegations against this man: https://www.npr.org/2023/01/20/1149748975

I don't really think that's relevant to the journalism he's doing. If he didn't do it, hopefully the courts will determine his innocence. If he did do it, hopefully the courts will punish him appropriately. But either way the work is good and it's worth one's time to watch it.

Sorry to be pedantic, but in the US courts do not determine innocence as this is presumed. The courts determine guilt.

This is important to know because with cancel culture and even that previous comment, it seems people have this relationship inverted.

Re: Vice website is shutting down

#375

Post by coffeebeqn »

sanderjd wrote: post #334
input_sh wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, he left Vice over "creative differences" a couple of years before he founded Proud Boys. He wasn't as openly fascist while at Vice, though Vice definitely had to do some damage control over his comments.

I would honestly really like to read a book (or New Yorker article, but I repeat myself) about this period. Was he fascist, just not openly, in the early days of Vice? Or was he radicalized later? If he was radicalized, how did that happen? As loathsome as I find him, he also started two well-known organizations, with very different vibes, but also a through-line you can see if you squint. It must be an interesting s…

I had to do a double take when the proud boy stuff started showing up many years later. At the time I think he was kind of a comedian

Re: Vice website is shutting down

#376

Post by DennisP »

mdavidn wrote: post #107
DennisP wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why publishers take down Kindle books when the paper book goes out of print. It happened to one of my favorite scifi novels. It takes zero effort to keep the book available (I know, I self-published a silly little one), and zero effort to include it in your accounting as long as there's a data feed and a computer.

Halting digital sales might be necessary to declare a write-off and recoup a tax benefit that year. That was happening to some streaming shows, anyway. Which sci-fi novel?

The Golden Age trilogy by John C. Wright.

I read one of his later works and it was horrid, but Golden Age was incredible. The first several chapters were hard to get into, I quit several times and the people I loaned it to never got past that. But after that it takes off like a rocket. On a reread I found that the difficulty at first was just from so much being unfamiliar.

It's in a distant future with superintelligent AI, immortality, physical abundance and pervasive virtual reality. And in that setting he finds a deeply human tale of epic heroism.

Re: Vice website is shutting down

#377

Post by patmorgan23 »

nextaccountic wrote: post #21

It makes no sense to not let the site online in an archived form, for the posterity It wouldn't even be a significant cost and ads would recoup it anyway There should be a way to donate a website to the Internet Archive so that they run an online archive on it, basically keeping the site frozen forever (rather than relying on the Wayback Machine which has worse UX)

University libraries can serve a function here. They'll often act as archives for local newspapers and outlets. If a publication is shutting down they should definitely work to transfer their site to some organization that will preserve it.

Re: Vice website is shutting down

#378

Post by fleischhauf »

glfharris wrote: post #373
Scoundreller wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorta. YouTube is kinda anti-monetization of your content unless you get 1000 subscribers, which is kinda hard if you don’t do consistent topic or are entertaining. If you’re a grouchy mechanic and do boring videos of exactly how to do brakes on every car, that’s incredibly useful, but not subscribeable (unless your grouchiness becomes a meme). I feel bad for the one guy that did 1 perfect video on how to fix&overhau…

I suppose that's where things like tip jars work quite well. To reward useful but otherwise niche content.

is tip jars an actual software solutions for tipping? I'm wondering what is most commonly used for tipping websites/content?

Re: Vice website is shutting down

#379

Post by user_7832 »

tegling wrote: post #364

How can we solve this if we don't defer this to laziness but try to address it as a very real cost for the owner of the site in terms of - Brand damage (content), e.g. Cancel culture, etc when old articles are discovered later or seen in new light - Brand damage (privacy/user base), e.g. Assumed to protect identity of all old users, risk of exposing secrets, offering old user-generated content as training data to ML…

> Brand damage (content), e.g. Cancel culture, etc when old articles are discovered later or seen in new light

I have yet to see any major such instances, especially to brands. PR firms can do quite a lot for the right money.

The general “victims” I have seen are individuals post varying criminal charges (eg R Kelly).

Re: Vice website is shutting down

#380

Post by lightedman »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #206
Scoundreller wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I post on slashdot. They've passed the test of time (but not UIs, fuck beta). Looks like their first posts in '97 start here: https://slashdot.org/?page=8582 dunno what their december 31st, 1969 posts are after that (errors? intentional de-ranking?) Newspapers have a bad history of "experimenting" with enabling online comments and then deciding the experiment failed and delete them all. You're a newspaper…

I scraped a sample of their posts ten years ago and ran a regression on user activity by ID. They have zero significant growth in user base other than mobile users posting more as AC. There was a small core of older active 5-6 digit UIDs doing the bulk of the posting and that was shrinking toward zero around now. Slashdot will die in the near future even if Netcraft can't confirm.

As one of those 6-digit UID posters, /. has been dead for quite some time. Discussions barely breach 50 comments or so now days, for the most part. The firehose sucks. The 'editors' constantly post dupes and the left hand seems to have no clue what the right hand is doing.
Post reply on HN