281–290 of 881 posts
Y can be combinations of asking or answering questions.
If you get banned before reaching bottom X% you lose.
I guess would need some sort of site to keep track of stats of those playing.
This is absolutely phenomenal. Naspers/Prosus are some of the savviest and most forward-thinking players in tech investment — would you have been smart enough to give Tencent all that money, way back when? And remember, they were a bunch of nobodies based out of South Africa when that happened. This is much more interesting than a monopolist like Microsoft buying SO, and I’d be keen to see what the growth strategy is…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Easy to build out the platform, difficult to build out the knowledge base (especially since so many areas have already been covered on SO)
Sure, GH lags SO considerably on the size of the knowledge base, but I don't think that's very important since, due to the rapid pace of tech, content rapidly loses value with age (consider all of the jquery or flash content, or content pertaining to old versions of libraries or frameworks). What matters more is the rate at which content is generated, and I think GH has a pretty competitive story considering that peo…
Some of those SO discussions are the only references to ancient legacy code that is useful, when asking any questions about it today would not get any answers.
So, depending on how we calculate value, if we ignore demand, it can be more valuable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Easy to build out the platform, difficult to build out the knowledge base (especially since so many areas have already been covered on SO)
Sure, GH lags SO considerably on the size of the knowledge base, but I don't think that's very important since, due to the rapid pace of tech, content rapidly loses value with age (consider all of the jquery or flash content, or content pertaining to old versions of libraries or frameworks). What matters more is the rate at which content is generated, and I think GH has a pretty competitive story considering that peo…
This is a weakness of SO and really the whole knowledge base business model (Q&A or not). You think you're building up this network-effect moat. "We have the best question-askers, answer-givers and answered questions. So everyone comes here!"
But, knowledge goes stale. "How do you X in JS?" is different than it was 10 years ago. People don't want a historical archive of how it was 10 years ago, they want to know today!
Then, like you say, GitHub brings in a whole new weird angle. Why ask on some other site when I have a spot where the maintainers and users hang out? Since my loyalty to SO is approximately zero, I'm just as likely to click on the Google result that takes me to GitHub if it looks more promising.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I agree that it is annoying whenever one reads something put out by the actual SO people, I notice that (thus far) if I simply ignore that and go there to look up the answers to questions (and very occasionally ask or answer them), it still works fine. As long as the new owner doesn't make it "pay to see", I can probably ignore them. There is, of course, no guarantee in this. But, while I find what I hear about…
> As long as the new owner doesn't make it "pay to see", I can probably ignore them. There was a very similar site about a decade ago, that would absolutely dominate in the Google search results - but of course, the answers were behind a paywall. Today, I don't even remember what their domain was called.
I hope they dismantle it and start over. So many outdated answers on there that I don't find it worth using anymore, whereas it used to be a staple of my software development.
IMO, two things would improve matters greatly. One, add a mechanism to mark questions as "potentially obsolete" based on thresholds that can vary per-topic, or per StackExchange site (so e.g. Java has an 8 year shelf-life, general Linux has a 10-year shelf life, Ubuntu in particular has a 4 year shelf life, etc). Two, allow moderators to override an accepted answer after some time passes. I've seen posters not bothering to mark a superior answer later on, or not knowing how to do it. If the community is unanimous about which other answer should go to the top, choose that instead of the original poster's selection.
I always thought Microsoft would be a natural buyer given the tech stack and Microsoft's support for developers. Unrelated story, I have a day one Stack Overflow account. I don't remember how I found it but I'm sure it was posted on digg or slashdot or something at the time. I had a lot of posts in the first few years about some generally broad concepts, and completely inactive since. In spite of this, I am in the to…
Something about how mean people are with voting keeps it this way. It's just very hard to get a vote at all. I happened to get a gold badge today for 10k views on an old question. Of those 10k people 17 decided to upvote.
On the other hand if I'm casually browsing twitter or instagram I'll gladly like posts that are interesting and there's no cost because it's recreation time.
I find parallels between Stack Overflow and Mozilla. Both started with fairly focused products that were best in class. The user base grew and the network effect multiplied. Both were started and largely staffed by engineers. Then both companies started focusing on "bigger", more ambiguous goals. Their about pages are riddled with the latest marketing-speak: Authentically empowering dignity, community, and inclusivit…
> Now their products are withering. Dying a slow death. What is SO business model? Is it ads-based? Just hope it won't devolve into news-sites free-article quota with account points mixed in for some throttling. IMO, the most attractive part of SO is that low friction to contribute an answer, oftentimes seeing a relevant topic to suggest an answer in passing or when looking for answers myself. Also SO's value is tied…
suggested Stack Overflow game - for all of those with top X% despite not contributing for years - see how quickly you can move from the top X% to the bottom X% by doing Y. Y can be combinations of asking or answering questions. If you get banned before reaching bottom X% you lose. I guess would need some sort of site to keep track of stats of those playing.
I'd love to see SO be replaced by some collaborative ad-free solution like wikipedia.
SO will never be wikipedia and that is OK. What we miss the the middle ground. And that is open for the taking! (hint) SO is transient and disposable. It is about the error message of the day and by chance hits the language/pattern of the year. Wikipedia is about stablished knowledge already accepted and published. The open spot in the middle is about accepted techniques for the pattern of the recent years. Those are…