231–240 of 497 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nice. I like how clicking a tag also makes the word 'tag' light up.
Thanks for the kind words! I got encouraged by another HN poster a few days ago, let me know if you have any suggestions. I’m always open to criticism.
> Failed sending verification e-mail to XXX@XXmail.XXX, please contact administrator on stonky@stonkys.com
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"content creators" https://fgiesen.wordpress.com/2025/07/06/content-creator/
The word "content" is gross. "Creator", on the other hand, is beautiful. It means you don't have to pick a lane. Anything can be creative. Documentary filmmaking, stop motion, dance, costume work, historical reenactment, indie animation, economics essays, game dev... The problem is we don't have a nice word that holistically captures the output of creators. They're not all making films or illustrations. So what do yo…
If it were YouTube, "YouTuber" is a start, but you could also be a "YouTube science communicator" or something
The problem seems to be identify, a real problem, and looks like it will only get worse. Would creating a zero knowledge digital identity service (maybe centralized, maybe decentralized idk), where you prove you're human via your government id, passport, driver license, whatever, and the service can then attest you're a real person? So if I'm Digg, I would ask for some form of OAuth, the system would simply verify th…
But they can just plug an AI into a verified account.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Necessary for this is that subforums can't have unique names. If a bad mod can squat all the words like "computers", "programming", "coding", newcomers aren't going to know the best subforum is called "RealProgNoBadMod"
Yes, the "important" ones need some special attention. If "democracy" where anybody can create arbitrary amount of accounts is however questionable. The vast majority of sub forums however are more targeted and smaller to begin with.
Kinda seems like we’re rapidly headed for the complete collapse of the internet as we know it. Every site that is driven by user posting seems to be headed towards being overrun by AI bots chatting with each other, either for sake of promoting something or farming karma. And there’s really not much point in publishing good content anymore, since AI is just going slurp it up and regurgitate it without driving you any…
They will try and OpenAI will sell favorable placement to manufacturers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think there is a price point that locks out spammers without locking out poor people?
probably not, the problem is that spammers/scammers are looking for whales, and if you are talking about draining the retirement accounts of an American who's been saving all their life, that's quite a big payout in the six or seven figures.
The problem seems to be identify, a real problem, and looks like it will only get worse. Would creating a zero knowledge digital identity service (maybe centralized, maybe decentralized idk), where you prove you're human via your government id, passport, driver license, whatever, and the service can then attest you're a real person? So if I'm Digg, I would ask for some form of OAuth, the system would simply verify th…
But they can just plug an AI into a verified account.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> sites where real discourse is still possible without it being filled with memes, running jokes, “witty” one-liners [etc] There are subreddits within Reddit such as https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/ that have strict rules around sourcing, etc. However, I think that’s not what most users want, and may not be quite what you’re looking for either, apologies.
Eh - it IS what most users want. In the same way people want to be fit. There are 3 horsemen of Internet forums, one of them is topics with a low barrier to entry. At that point anyone can speak up, and their opinion takes up as much screen real estate and reading time (often less reading time) than a truly informed take. By putting effort barriers in place, it forces a fitness test that most users (and bots) fail. A…
I think communities like Reddit and Digg grow to a certain point and don’t grow anymore because everybody else absolutely hates what those communities have become. See the fight years ago where Digg thought it had to outgrow MrBabyMan. Problem is platforms don’t usually win those fights.
Sure, today’s redditors love sharing stupid image memes. For each of them there are 20 people who wouldn’t touch Reddit with a 10-foot pole.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I want a "reddit" like discussion board where: - Users don't have to pay to post links/stories - Users have to pay to comment on links/stories - Users have to pay to "upvote" comments. Downvotes don't exist - Each link "lives" a certain amount of time before it is locked. - After lock time, users who posted the link get "paid" a % of the collected $ comments/upvotes. Comments that are upvoted also earn $ proportional…
This sounds like a platform that has no appeal to the average person, and an incredible appeal to people wishing to launder money or use money to run an influence campaign. Deliberately determining popularity proportionally to the amount of money spent is little different than advertising, but this would be under the false premise of "someone thought this was important/valuable enough to pay money to suggest I see it…
https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/server/api/core/bitstreams/4176474...
Every election I see internet-connected gym machines have the leaderboards spammed with right wing messages because some people don’t have to work and just spin all day.