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

251–260 of 420 posts

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#251

Post by FarmerPotato »

fantasizr wrote: post #224
Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thinking about it. There are some things which can be done to better sooth the private forums. Like to me especially signing up to each and every forum and then waiting to be accepted by a person feels good but has tons of friction and has some stress attached because you never know how strict the community is as well, it might take a day or two, perhaps this is the reason why we got the dumpster fire of mega interne…

not essentially private per se, but usenet groups and bbs had a natural vetting because it required some competency to even access it

Listen while I tell of Christmas 1983, when every 14-year old with a VIC-20 got a cheap modem.

Seriously, haven't we been working tirelessly to expand the circle of access? Nostalgia reflects when the circle was smaller, and we felt that we knew everyone in it.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#252

Post by alex1138 »

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 can't take HN seriously, I just can't. It's where I get a lot of information but the naval gazing is endemic here. It's a certain type of culture, mixed in with the genuinely good posts and people who work in the industry

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#253

Post by OGEnthusiast »

noduerme wrote: post #247

Something that scares the shit out of me is the new American tourist visa requirement that you disclose your social media accounts over the last 5 years. This seems an ultimate example of the exclusion or people who refuse to participate in a technology. I'm not on social media. If more countries begin adopting this, what am I supposed to show the immigration authorities? Am I supposed to create a wholly fake set of…

That's by design. Many people in America today (including many in the federal administration) want to transition to a world with much less immigration and foreigners (including less foreign tourism) than the levels of the past several decades.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#254

Post by noduerme »

OGEnthusiast wrote: post #253
noduerme wrote: post #247

Something that scares the shit out of me is the new American tourist visa requirement that you disclose your social media accounts over the last 5 years. This seems an ultimate example of the exclusion or people who refuse to participate in a technology. I'm not on social media. If more countries begin adopting this, what am I supposed to show the immigration authorities? Am I supposed to create a wholly fake set of…

That's by design. Many people in America today (including many in the federal administration) want to transition to a world with much less immigration and foreigners (including less foreign tourism) than the levels of the past several decades.

I understand that, but that's not really my point. Yes, they have an isolationist and xenophobic bent. But while it's understandable that having a social media presence full of sketchy / terrorist / trafficking / whatever might now be a reason for a country to deny a visa, it creates the question of what they do with innocent people who simply refuse to participate. My question is what happens if you don't have any social media or smartphone at all? Will we be completely excluded from being allowed to travel freely unless we post our thoughts on a daily basis?

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#255

Post by janalsncm »

stephendause wrote: post #202
pavlus wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 remin…

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. My personal taste for the presentation of a piece of writing is that less is more. I usually find artwork that accompanies a text to be distracting. I love reading work that can stand on its own, invoking images in the mind. I also dislike animations that seem to be made for a certain scroll speed. Having said all of that, I certainly don't think it's bad, nor is it a commentary…

> My personal taste for the presentation of a piece of writing is that less is more.

TFA works with iOS reader mode, which is all that matters to me. I use it instinctively as it makes style more or less uniform and lets me focus on the content of the article.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#256

Post by Nevermark »

Uehreka wrote: post #226
LoganDark wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that the definition of tech bros? I thought tech bros were people who shilled cryptocurrencies, NFTs and other grifts.

The definition of “Tech bros” is “tech people you don’t like”. There’s no agreed upon definition (just like how people disagree about what is/isn’t a “grift”) because it’s not meant to be descriptive, it’s a rhetorical device.

Saying we don't like someone because we deem them to be a tech bro, is indeed a circular argument.

But saying we don't like someone that calls themself a tech bro? Well they had it coming.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#257

Post by Atlas667 »

These types of cultural analysis always fails to be substantial because they rely on "losing our way" argument consciously or even on a subliminal moral level.

I think this one is kind of better because it tries to place social transformations on a material base, but it still fails to do that properly with tech.

Tech or the internet isnt a freeform thing that just exists and obeys everyones psyches and wants. Tech is something made in factories from specific industries by specific companies and organizations to fit within certain monetizeable bounds.

The early internet obeys the grasp of the early industry. Very little was monetized then.

The development of the internet follows the development of the monetization of the internet, it follows the rules of capital.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#258

Post by Nevermark »

esseph wrote: post #144
arjie wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I think the problem really is more of: Beware of being actively trapped by deep dossier leveraged algorithms, in a manufactured social bubble of emotional comfortable, created by corporations that are expressly farming you.

People talk about social media is if it were passive, when its deep intel, deep analysis, manipulation. Where everything we do, is not just used to manipulate us, but in aggregate, improves manipulation overall.

It is amazing what toxins people will accept, if the toxins become baseline familiar.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#259

Post by OGEnthusiast »

noduerme wrote: post #254
OGEnthusiast wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's by design. Many people in America today (including many in the federal administration) want to transition to a world with much less immigration and foreigners (including less foreign tourism) than the levels of the past several decades.

I understand that, but that's not really my point. Yes, they have an isolationist and xenophobic bent. But while it's understandable that having a social media presence full of sketchy / terrorist / trafficking / whatever might now be a reason for a country to deny a visa, it creates the question of what they do with innocent people who simply refuse to participate. My question is what happens if you don't have any s…

> Will we be completely excluded from being allowed to travel freely unless we post our thoughts on a daily basis?

Yes, because even if you do, they will find other ways to exclude you. Their stated goal is to exclude as many non-Americans from the USA as possible, regardless of whether they consider you "innocent" or not.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#260

Post by Nevermark »

raincole wrote: post #203
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…

If you name your site "A website to destroy all websites" you're basically inviting people to judge it with extremely critical standard.

These are people who don't understand whimsy or other forms of contrast enhancing rhetoric. Designed to make reading interesting, points extra clear, etc.

Not designed to fool anyone into some random extremist view.

It may be that people who don't pick up on subtext humor, post more than average.

Post reply on HN