Live data from Hacker News

Source for theguardian.com

github.com

31–40 of 104 posts

Re: Source for theguardian.com

#31
post #10

One more reason to support them. Even if you don't always agree with their opinions, it's nice to move away from commercial journalism and keep things as open and transparent as possible.

The Guardian is both commercial and pretty left wing, i prefer a more balanced view of my news.

Re: Source for theguardian.com

#32
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't see more commercially-oriented paper/website open-sourcing any of their code, even if it's a (good imho) recruitment ploy. There's very little cost to opening it up, and a huge benefit (recruitment as you say, openness, community engagement, maybe even bug fixes..). Why not open up the code?

opening up publishes all your vulnerabilities, bugs, hacks and swearwords in the code as well. Thats plenty of reasons to not go open source

Those are reasons to open the code up. You'll be motivated to improve it.

Re: Source for theguardian.com

#33
post #5

The Guardian has moved to a voluntary-subscription model for revenue - a gentle nagware if you like. No adblocker-blocking and (relatively) few actual adverts on the pages. I don't always agree with their opinions or editorials, but I do respect the quality of the journalism and the fact that they are a non-profit [0] I can't see more commercially-oriented paper/website open-sourcing any of their code, even if it's a…

Having worked in publishing, their effort and the NYT (particularly Bostock) to open up the code to the community is notable and admirable. I’ve tried to push for open source projects at similar business scales to no avail. Deaf ears.

It’s a shame that it’s viewed largely as a means to an end. Yet the very same companies used to work with printers to produce innovations. Digital media seems to be viewed much more as a commodity to many in the industry, unfortunately—in spite of it being the most effective and paradigm-shifting medium for mass communication since the television, radio, or platen press.

Re: Source for theguardian.com

#34
post #25
post #8

The docs include a recipe for Breton crêpes. :) [1] https://github.com/guardian/frontend/blob/master/docs/99-arc...

This is not even close to bretonne crêpes. Either you use buckwheat floor and water, in which case you are making Galettes. Either you use plain white wheat floor, in which case it's crêpes you are doing. Under no circumstances you can put sugar in it, it's only added at the end. And of course, it's missing the most important ingredient: butter. #notevenclose

> Either you use buckwheat floor and water, in which case you are making Galettes. Either you use plain white wheat floor, in which case it's crêpes you are doing.

Since we're already being pedantic, I just want to point out that you should never add flooring to crêpes (nor anything you intend to eat for that matter) :p

Re: Source for theguardian.com

#36
post #19
post #5

The Guardian has moved to a voluntary-subscription model for revenue - a gentle nagware if you like. No adblocker-blocking and (relatively) few actual adverts on the pages. I don't always agree with their opinions or editorials, but I do respect the quality of the journalism and the fact that they are a non-profit [0] I can't see more commercially-oriented paper/website open-sourcing any of their code, even if it's a…

>> I don't always agree with their opinions or editorials I really don't know why this always has to be pointed out when it comes to classic mass media. I would say: "Good thing" because if you'd always agree, they would be doing a lousy job. Newspapers shouldn't be worldview-repeaters, especially in the op-eds. Lots of people look for validation of their already existing worldviews instead of critically reflecting o…

It's not about the newspaper quality, it's about signaling that the speaker is not a card-carrying supporter of the political faction the newspaper is traditionally associated with. So for the Guardian it translates to "please don't assume I'm a Labour/Green supporter just because I read the Guardian".

With the Telegraph it would be Tories/UKIP; and with The Independent (or whatever it's called now) it would be Russian Oligarchs Living In London.

Re: Source for theguardian.com

#37
post #10

One more reason to support them. Even if you don't always agree with their opinions, it's nice to move away from commercial journalism and keep things as open and transparent as possible.

The Guardian is commercial journalism. It is set up as a completely ordinary company. Historically the newspaper has been keenly interested in the concerns of the working classes, but that has not extended towards some kind of alternative non-commercial structure for it.

(The Scott Trust does not make much of a difference here. A business can have such a way to remain free of outside pressures but still be a straightforwardly commercial company.)

Re: Source for theguardian.com

#39
post #5

The Guardian has moved to a voluntary-subscription model for revenue - a gentle nagware if you like. No adblocker-blocking and (relatively) few actual adverts on the pages. I don't always agree with their opinions or editorials, but I do respect the quality of the journalism and the fact that they are a non-profit [0] I can't see more commercially-oriented paper/website open-sourcing any of their code, even if it's a…

Having worked in publishing, their effort and the NYT (particularly Bostock) to open up the code to the community is notable and admirable. I’ve tried to push for open source projects at similar business scales to no avail. Deaf ears. It’s a shame that it’s viewed largely as a means to an end. Yet the very same companies used to work with printers to produce innovations. Digital media seems to be viewed much more as…

> Digital media seems to be viewed much more as a commodity [...] in spite of it being the most effective and paradigm-shifting medium

Or rather because: digital media is now so easy to produce and distribute, that its intrinsic value has now dropped to zero.

Re: Source for theguardian.com

#40
post #10

One more reason to support them. Even if you don't always agree with their opinions, it's nice to move away from commercial journalism and keep things as open and transparent as possible.

The Guardian is both commercial and pretty left wing, i prefer a more balanced view of my news.

Fox News :D
Post reply on HN