Live data from Hacker News

Ending our Medium integration

write.as

271–280 of 382 posts

Re: Ending our Medium integration

#271

Going back through Hacker News history to some of the earliest posts on Medium, and the earliest articles about it, it is evident that the community was somewhere between skeptical to downright antagonistic from the beginning. It makes sense, developers / IT people are most qualified to build and host their own websites, and more likely than the average person to understand the implications of allowing someone else t…

To be fair, "skeptical to downright antagonistic" could describe HN's reaction to almost anything.

Well at least we know we're among good company.

Re: Ending our Medium integration

#272
post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, when your reading experienced is interrupted immediately on page load by asking you to sign up I think you can argue its not a good experience at all. I stopped reading articles on Medium as well.

I don't understand the level of complaints on HN about that sign up overlay. Are they testing multiple nag screens and I got lucky and always get the minimally intrusive one, and the rest of you getting the terrible ones? Yes, it is slightly annoying, but it is extremely easy to dismiss. Unlike the nag screens at many sites you don't have to find and click an 'x' in some weird location. It goes away if you click anyw…

I can’t highlight/select text without it getting all hyperactive on me. I just want to read an article.

Re: Ending our Medium integration

#273
Sounds like it wasn't a "let's shut this down" decision, but rather an ordinary screwup or attack or whatnot... an "interruption" as Medium's response puts it.

Which isn't to invalidate recent criticism of Medium. They're basically trying to be the Netflix of blogs: a platform situated between readers & writers --> profit. But where Netflix gives you something cheaper & better for which you were formerly paying more, Medium is giving you something that used to be free and now I guess trying to do something profitable with that. I dunno...

Re: Ending our Medium integration

#274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or to sell themselves. Or worse, writing a subpar programming tutorial to have "online presence".

This is so toxic and tiring. It's worth paying for tutorials these days because not only are there thousands out there who want to promote themselves, they want to do so by pretending to be experts. Some are very convincing. If you're a junior or unfamiliar with a technology, you can find yourself reading some of the worst trash out there. I'm fortunate to have enough experience to tell the wheat from the chaff usual…

The other trouble is, once you have some experience there just aren't very many good tutorials. I was looking through tutorials for node, and most of the ones I found started off with how to open the developer console, and what a for loop is. I'd very much prefer if tutorial authors would just link to one of the many basic CS fundamentals tutorials, and then skip much of the basics. If I'm learning Javascript, I just want to know what the for loop syntax is, without needing an explanation of the concept.

Re: Ending our Medium integration

#275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My solution was to use an extension – Make Medium Readable Again – that, as of its features, removes the intro fullscreen ad. It's available for Chrome and Firefox, as far as I'm aware.

I understand there are browser plugins available but when reading text content requires installing extra software to improve the experience my solution is just to go read content somewhere else.

That's fair. My experience with Medium has so far ranged from neutral to highly-positive, with a lot of articles on cutting-edge web design technology or methodology.

If you don't wanna read it, that's fine. I'm just saying that if you do, there's a way.

Re: Ending our Medium integration

#276
I should write a blog post about this, but I'm like the last person on Earth who feels like writing articles about tech biz finance stuff, but I feel like somehow in the past twenty years one of the basic principles of transacting with other humans got lost.

If you're using a product or service, partnering with a company, using their API, buying their stuff, selling stuff to them, whatever, you should at some level understand their incentives. And, in a capitalist economy, "incentive" is mostly synonymous with "money".

If you don't know how the businesses you interact with make money, you're setting yourself up for heartbreak. As far as I can tell, tech companies make money one of four ways:

1. VC funding.

2. Selling your attention to other companies.

3. Selling your data to other companies.

4. You pay them for stuff.

1 has a finite lifespan which means, eventually, they will switch to one of the others. Unless you are certain which of the others they'll switch to and how, committing to use a business at this stage is a crapshoot. In practice, it seems businesses that currently rely on VC funding to stay solvent more often than not pivot to sad shady shit. Much of this has to do with not giving themselves any other options. Once they have a big userbase used to spending zero for their product, it's very hard to change, so they end up having to find money other sketchy ways.

2 is OK if you're OK with it. However, your attention is literally the most priceless commodity you own. Everything else you will ever do with your life begins with you spending attention on things. So if squandering a bit of that looking at dumb ads so that you can read a free article is worth it to you, that's fine, but I think most of us could probably find better things to do with our limited brain juice.

3 is maybe OK, but, man, it's dubious. The more a company knows about you, the more leverage they have to influence you. With machine learning is going, the amount of actionable intelligence companies can squeeze out of a given blob of data keeps going up. Stuff like Cambridge Analytica doesn't keeps me up at night. The long trajectory of this path looks an awful lot like straight up dystopia to me.

4 has served humanity fairly well for thousands of years. Its main point against is that you have to pay for stuff.

Personally, I try to do 4 when I can. Whenever I use a business that doesn't do 4, I assume anything at all could happen in the future. They owe me nothing because I've paid them nothing.

Anyone who's surprised by formerly-beloved-VC-backed-startup-that-turns-evil today must really be willfully blind.

Re: Ending our Medium integration

#277

Quora also started out as an awesome service just like Medium. Eventually though, the VC's need the promises they've heard during fundraising to be fulfilled. That's when the platforms start with the dark patterns. Non-VC companies are a longer and less glamorous slog to get off the ground but also don't come under pressure to compromise on their morals.

If I have to read a medium article the first thing I do is hide/block the elements for the annoying bottom bar (with ublock)

Re: Ending our Medium integration

#278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, that's what's going on. If I search, for example, "proton transfer balalaika" I get search results where the first few results are "Missing: balalaika | Must include: balalaika" but a result after these has all three search terms. I've been wondering what Google now thinks the word "must" means and why they're putting pages that don't include words that I've used above pages that do. That's frustrating. Low-volum…

The "must include" is a hyperlink. Click it and you'll get results that do include that word.

You know, it's obvious it's a link, and I'm pretty sure I clicked on it and noted it adds the quotes then immediately forgot.

I'm sitting here looking at it now and I still can't believe that's the function. It looks like a link to a search of just that term.

Of course, even when I click on it, I get ads for hotels that are missing "proton" and "transfer" first, then random word dictionaries, both well above perfectly valid results talking about chemists who played the balalaika or research done in the city of Balalaika.

Which means that it's a link to getting a different wrong set of results and it's there as a kind of fig leaf on the sin of distorting searches so heavily.

Re: Ending our Medium integration

#279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or to sell themselves. Or worse, writing a subpar programming tutorial to have "online presence".

I run a publication on Medium, Better Humans. My understanding is that the pivot to be a place where most writing is paid for was specifically to crowd out content marketing. The content marketing is, as the two of you say, basically Wikipedia summaries and people selling themselves. It's part of the style guide for their Membership program that writers can't have calls to action (with a few exceptions, like if it's…

Medium pays? I just found out about that. And how exactly does it pay you? Because they have never paid me a cent. On the other hand. Medium. It is a specific platform for the English language. It would be impossible to make a blog in Spanish inside of Medium, And earn some money, really? I think I'm right.. Mmmm

Re: Ending our Medium integration

#280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work for one of those fully bootstrapped successful companies now and it really is fantastic how we can have real business conversations around ecosystem improvement that don’t revolve around money. Money is good, but not having everything dictated by it is good for the mission. EDIT: Sure there's still a financial incentive there but it's framed more in the "we need to turn a profit so that we can afford to contin…

Is there still a concern about the profit? I'm assuming you're working for a for-profit company, where one of the goals – if not the goal, ultimately – is to make cash. (I don't mean to insinuate any sharply-materialistic outlook on your company: I sincerely don't know how a company thinks about money.)

Platform quality is long term money, platform monetization is short term money.

With VCs who only care that the growth curve is exponential, they go for short term money every time, because yeah you might crash the company, but you've got a 5% chance of becoming a big evil corp.

Post reply on HN