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

A website to destroy all websites

henry.codes

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 420 posts

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#141

Post by rightbyte »

gmd63 wrote: post #136
krapp wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Constantly? As if it were a psychological compulsion? So often that dang had to make a guideline about it, which no one even attempts to follow? Two actually - the guideline against being "curmudgeonly" is separate from the guideline against going on a tilt because you get triggered by any website that doesn't look and act as much like plaintext as possible. And yet if someone so much as cracks a joke they get rapped…

You've convinced me, I'm going to stop complaining about corporate slop and the connection between big tech / VCs and the awful political situation in the most advanced country in the world. I will try to glaze Liquid Glass from here on out, say some nice things about the richest man on earth who kept quiet about the fact that he pays people to grind video games for him, and make sure to give David Sacks and Jason Ca…

> he pays people to grind video games for him

The POE shilling might be what pisses me most off about him.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#142

Post by jeffbee »

A lot to unpack here, but the article fails to tackle the question of distribution. Creators put their videos on YouTube because that is the way to reach a nearly global audience at zero cost. I can assure you that although you can probably figure out how to host videos that nobody sees, you cannot afford to host a popular video.

The author clearly spent a lot of time writing and presenting this, but the facts and conclusions don't seem to warrant the presentation. In particular the (useless, in the narrative) section about antibiotics shows that the author is a deeply unserious person suffering from some pretty severe fallacies. Nobody can have seen a chart of childhood mortality over the 20th century and still believe such things.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#143

Post by roughly »

IvanK_net wrote: post #130
privacy2 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Each year, I spend more time in my car during my commute (on average) than a year before, which shows that being stuck in traffic is getting more and more useful to me.

You chose to do it, so it means it was better to you than all other choices. Why would you still do it otherwise? If your goal is to suffer as much as possible, it does not matter. You are still making choices that lead you to your goal as fast as possible.

I chose to give that nice man my wallet instead of taking a bullet, but that doesn’t actually reveal as much about my preferences as you seem to think it does.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#144

Post by esseph »

arjie wrote: post #103
Aurornis wrote: post #25

I think the comments here are a great example of why this idea always sounds better in nostalgic reminiscence than in practice: As I write this, nearly half of the comments here are complaining about this website. There are complaints about requiring JavaScript, the font size, the design, the color choices, the animations. Complaints about everything the designer did to make this site unique and personal, which was t…

I think that social networks are not meant to be moderated at scale. We are meant to have what I call 'overlay networks': we occupy the same infrastructure but see content filtered to the style that befits us. Most social networks have the notion of friend symmetry, but I think that read-time filtering needn't be like that. To that end, I made a trivial Chrome extension and an equivalent CRUD backend that just helps…

Beware of trapping yourself in a manufactured social bubble of emotional comfortable

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#145

Post by iamwil »

The solution offered is pretty weak. I don't think it addresses why the internet took the shape that it did. Publishing without centralized services is too much work for people. And even if you publish, it's not the whole solution. People want distribution with their publication. Centralized services offer ease of publication and ease of distribution. So unless the decentralized internet can offer a better solution to both, this story will play out again and again.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#146

Post by 65 »

dwa3592 wrote: post #50

Wait, this was a nice article. why are people complaining?

It says the same few things that always get hive mind upvoted on Hacker News. There is nothing new about this information.

Social media bad, Javascript bad, cars bad, old internet good, RSS good, personal websites good, HTML good.

If you want to farm upvotes on Hacker News, write about these topics. This content is like crack to developers.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#147

Post by d-lisp »

CGMthrowaway wrote: post #134
Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (side note I put your comment into LLM to make sense of what it meant re my comment without mentioning HN, it said "this is a classic Hacker News–style metaphysical sidestep: You made a practical design aphorism, He responded with ontology and epistemology. That usually signals polite disagreement or intellectual one‑upmanship" LOL) Woah homie, watch out for the model which is trained on reddit comments dataset to…

LLMs say yes to a lot. I often find myself priming it first with "absolute mode" type prompts before dealing with it. And also keeping my own opinions close to my chest

Seriously for my part, LLMs incarns exactly the only type of person that can break my nerves. Far too often I spot an hallucination, some bullshit rambling, sycophancy, or ----hughhhhh----- rethorical elements of language that makes me go mad :(.

examples for ---hughhhhh--- inducing stuff :

"I'll be blunt !"

"Here's the ground truth, no bullshit"

"Bottom line : "

"No fluff, technical, precise, no bullshit, devoid of unnecessary rethorical shapes, "Blunt answer: "

" : the hard truth"

I am becoming snob ?

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#148

Post by pavlus »

Aurornis wrote: post #25

I think the comments here are a great example of why this idea always sounds better in nostalgic reminiscence than in practice: As I write this, nearly half of the comments here are complaining about this website. There are complaints about requiring JavaScript, the font size, the design, the color choices, the animations. Complaints about everything the designer did to make this site unique and personal, which was t…

I've read your comment before visiting the site, and it got me wondering -- how bad can it be? Can it be worse than those acid green on red sites of the 90s-00s?

Imagine my surprise, when I opened the site and it looked and felt just like a museum or art exhibit. This was the literal feeling I had -- being at an art gallery, but online.

I guess, these comments tell more about the commenters, than TFA. We should remind ourselves to be more critical to the content we consume, regardless where it comes from.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#149

Post by jimbokun »

bbor wrote: post #109
evantbyrne wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hacker News, probably noticeably since 2016 or so, has been a negative, curmudgeonly place. It has become political (toward the left), sclerotic, and bitterly nostalgic. It's bad and no longer represents the future. I notice it every time I visit. It's sad. An easy way to help with the negativity is to stop leaving bait comments

Reminds me of on interaction a few months ago where I mentioned the left-right spectrum in passing and someone accused me of making HN a worse place, only to call me a "snowflake" in their very next response! As usual, "things shouldn't be so political" is often uttered from a highly-political sense of discomfort. The quintessential example for me was its usage in US anti-desegregation rhetoric in the 1960s, alongsid…

[flagged]

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#150

Post by jimbokun »

fouc wrote: post #63
lazzlazzlazz wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I disagree it's "toward the left" but I would also disagree if you said "toward the right". By that I mean I've observed BOTH extremes happening.

We've seen the same kinds of discourse arrive here as is common on other social media sites, where too much political discourse is just signaling what tribe you belong to and vilifying anyone outside it.
Post reply on HN