391–400 of 477 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember when Gavin McInness was still making content for them. Their strength was always to have stories and bits that no where else would. Not sure how much they strayed from that in the last 5-10 years but they almost never showed up on my radar anymore
Gavin McInness? Founder of the Proud Boys, Gavin McInness?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It wouldn't even be a significant cost and ads would recoup it anyway I 100% don't get it when websites with lots of content and good SEO just delete everything. Fatwallet (fuck you Rakuten). Yahoo Answers (hey, I didn't say good content). Even on my own Drupal blogs that I didn't want to maintain/update anymore, I did a giant curl job, recursively regex'd out the login/comment submission fields and dumped them on…
I did some work for a design agency that got bought by Twitter.... we basically converted all their different sites to full static and put them on ice. It would have been expensive to keep hosting how they had been, but with everything flattened to static it's super cheap to keep up (although no publishing new stuff without some by hand work or restoring the old servers). All the good articles and design samples stay…
Nothing a simple notification bar can't solve
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
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)
* Potentially expensive licensing fees for the CMS, depending what it is, and migration costs to something “free” if not. * Ongoing costs to maintain the site (security updates etc). * Of course, hosting costs.
I agree in this case it would be smarter to keep it running in a stripped-down form since there’s still value there, then work to find buyers or someone who has an interest in keeping it running.
They ran out of dangerous places to do designer drugs. In all honesty, Vice was a cool outlet for out-there stories for teens and adults alike. Shame it’s shutting down but then again I never supported it.
My thoughts as well. It was pretty strong the first few years and rapidly declined in quality for the last 5 or so.
At the time I had the sense that they were burning money on very high quality (read: expensive) reporting in an effort to build up the brand, all while hoping to figure out how to make the financials work "later."
For some reason I had kind of assumed the strategy had succeeded, seeing as how they stuck around for so long. I guess in reality they just never figured out how to make it sustainable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> we basically converted all their different sites to full static and put them on ice. It would have been expensive to keep hosting how they had been, but with everything flattened to static it's super cheap to keep up I got absolutely tarred and feathered at an agency for suggesting this strategy and I just want to say thank you for validating what I wanted to do.
Out of curiosity, what was the argument against it?
I've been running a local instance for a few years now and download/save tech articles all time. I can search and find them as needed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did some work for a design agency that got bought by Twitter.... we basically converted all their different sites to full static and put them on ice. It would have been expensive to keep hosting how they had been, but with everything flattened to static it's super cheap to keep up (although no publishing new stuff without some by hand work or restoring the old servers). All the good articles and design samples stay…
Could the internet archive offer this as a paid service? For a reasonable fee, we'll archive your site, and give you back a copy of the assets you can turnkey host on the original domain for cheap with a static hosting solution (s3, cloudflare, etc). Everybody wins
The same thing happens with brands - someone bought the Montgomery Ward brand at a bankruptcy auction or something - and with store inventory: once the store goes bankrupt, they just sell the entire store contents, right down to the fixtures, to a liquidator who brings in the "Going out of business! Everything must go!" signs.
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).
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/feb/01/vice-media-sec...
>One employee claimed Vice executives were acutely aware of the potential reputational damage that could be caused if Vice’s western audience became aware of the extent to which it was working with the Saudi state, saying: “It is astounding that – despite ongoing opposition from staff – Vice is still happy to take money from a country that was literally responsible for the state-sanctioned murder of a journalist.”
https://theintercept.com/2023/09/09/vice-deleted-documentary...
>In the past, Vice has documented the history of censorship on YouTube. More recently, since the company’s near implosion, it became an active participant in making things disappear.