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

Wait, Google Sent Me

chrome.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 246 posts

Re: Wait, Google Sent Me

#71

Post by forgottenpass »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #38
ergest wrote: post #27

This is gonna mess up some major web analytics stats about referrers :)

As someone who works with SEO, this was my first reaction. It's going to make a lot of my analytics wonky and the numbers won't be very accurate. I guess you have to assume such a small percentage of people will actually be using this, so the numbers won't be too bad??

I guess you have to assume such a small percentage of people will actually be using this, so the numbers won't be too bad??

You don't "have to" assume that, but why start worrying about the source of error in your metrics now?

The cumulative wight of this and all the other problems with your data probably won't dip their utility below zero, so just go back to plugging your ears and yelling "lalalalala".

Re: Wait, Google Sent Me

#72

Post by whatsgood22 »

jashkenas wrote: post #68
donohoe wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... if you use our Trusted Corporate Partner™ No. Not like that. Basically, its Google saying publishes must do this or they won't send traffic their way (via search result / SEO) Its not publishers saying use Google over Bing over Yahoo etc. Lest we fall into a vortex where you're only allowed to browse the public web by logging in through Facebook The other argument that this may hold water is similar exceptions wh…

Who'd link to the NYT if it was always a paywall, indeed? Of course I understand that the publishers don't want to cut themselves out of the conversation. But why must "the conversation" be limited to powerful internet companies? Do we not converse about news articles in blog posts? Comment threads? Up and coming social platforms that don't have Facebooks media clout yet? It's simply unfair to treat a visitor arrivin…

>Let's build a better paywall.

and hasten the death of print journalism

Re: Wait, Google Sent Me

#73

Post by fixermark »

glibgil wrote: post #65
donohoe wrote: post #37

Disappointed in you Jeremy. Its fair for many here to complain about some of the online advertising practices of publishers. However the viable alternative it to pivot to some form of subscription model. Its a hard transition and many orgs are making risky changes to do better. Extensions like these are a step backwards. If you value the work you should support it. See bio for usual disclaimers

Why should I support the work? The work is given away for free on Google searches. I value a WSJ article very little unless it is free. I want to support their work with exactly zero dollars. Why is that a problem? I would prefer that everyone working at the WSJ were just doing something else with their lives. Is it okay for me to align my spending with my values?

That's a tenable position, but this extension should not be useful to people holding that position.

Re: Wait, Google Sent Me

#74

Post by fixermark »

yuncun wrote: post #58
donohoe wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... if you use our Trusted Corporate Partner™ No. Not like that. Basically, its Google saying publishes must do this or they won't send traffic their way (via search result / SEO) Its not publishers saying use Google over Bing over Yahoo etc. Lest we fall into a vortex where you're only allowed to browse the public web by logging in through Facebook The other argument that this may hold water is similar exceptions wh…

Makes sense from google's perspective. Why should they list sites that people can't access.

Listing sites people cannot access does sound like a bad user experience.

Re: Wait, Google Sent Me

#75

Post by woodcroft »

jfoster wrote: post #8

It would be nice if Google could make some of the Chrome permissions a bit more fine-grained. This one needs to "read and change your data on all websites", but with a better extensions architecture could be something much less scary like "read and change your data on the current website whenever you click the extension's icon".

Alternatively, it would be good if extensions could have a whitelist and/or blacklist of sites that they are enabled on, with most extensions having a default blacklist of all financial sites, banks, brokerages, email accounts, etc. Perhaps also create a way for corporations to blacklist their intranets. It makes me very nervous that if some extension owner sells out to the wrong person, suddenly they could see my private information.

Re: Wait, Google Sent Me

#76

Post by mapgrep »

donohoe wrote: post #55
patcon wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a fan of the shaming... If news orgs value their journalists and the future of the profession, they should experiment with more daring models, rather than ones that simply maximally enrich the org under the same old model EDIT: imho a model that falls apart legally under a browser extension that fits in a 40-line gist is nothing on which to base the livelihoods of a bunch of people

I agree - but to be fair you're assuming they haven't experimented. Micro-payments, dumb 'capthcha' based models, memberships, events, "premier access". All have been tried in various flavors. Some with limited success. I'm not asking for you to dream up an alternative solution, but don't assume this is a problem that has not been given a lot of thought by many organizations. This is partly why we are stuck with thin…

Even people inside the NYT know the pricing for digital subscriptions is excessive. They're high because circ department won an internal war and inflated digital prices in a misguided attempt to protect print subs. The NYT has experimented but is still clinging to the past.

Which is why the "All Digital Access" subscription costs more than Netflix, Hulu, and HBO Now combined. Give me a break.

Re: Wait, Google Sent Me

#77

Post by stevesearer »

aaronbrethorst wrote: post #64
stevesearer wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like Circa News (take my money please!) because they aggregate news from a variety of sources and present news items in small bit sized chunks listing facts or statements. They also link to the appropriate sources. edit: and you can follow news stories to get updates when new information is available.

They're either shutting down or being acquired soon: http://fortune.com/2015/04/30/news-app-circa-buyer/

That's unfortunate. I'd pay for it even if it were free otherwise because I like the service so much.

Re: Wait, Google Sent Me

#78

Post by cmstoken »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #67

I need a 'facebook sent me' version, lots of websites allow facebook references but not neccesarily google. I'm reduced to going to facebook and sending a message to myself with the url so I can click on it.

Curious as well... Which sites?

Re: Wait, Google Sent Me

#79

Post by k-mcgrady »

arielm wrote: post #57
jashkenas wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry to hear that, Michael. Subscription models are great, and paywalls are great. What's not so great is creating an internet where if you use our Trusted Corporate Partner™ you're allowed to view a public webpage, and if you come from anywhere less privileged on the internet, you're not. That's not sustainable. Lest we fall into a vortex where you're only allowed to browse the public web by logging in through Face…

I think the real "issue" here is that those paywalled content publishers want to get paid but also want the free advertising that comes with having a well indexed site. It's a pretty interesting subject in my opinion because I can easily see arguments for both sides, and if we compare it to the real world we have the exact same "issue. I can read an article that's on the newspaper's first page when it sits in the new…

>> "If there was a way for me to get what I want by paying quickly, maybe using some sort of a federated payment platform (much like downloading apps doesn't require subscribing) I'd be more inclined to pay."

Isn't this what Flattr tried (and failed) to do?

Re: Wait, Google Sent Me

#80

Post by stevesearer »

jerrac wrote: post #63
stevesearer wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like Circa News (take my money please!) because they aggregate news from a variety of sources and present news items in small bit sized chunks listing facts or statements. They also link to the appropriate sources. edit: and you can follow news stories to get updates when new information is available.

Never heard of Circa News before, thanks for mentioning it.

https://circanews.com/ for the interested. I use the app exclusively though and haven't spent much time on the website.
Post reply on HN