Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The 50 Best Websites of 2011

time.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 106 posts

Re: The 50 Best Websites of 2011

#92

Post by emp_ »

orky7 wrote: post #90
clark-kent wrote: post #55

Time could save us a lot of time by listing it in a single webpage. I just dislike this stale technique for getting pageviews.

full list in single window http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/completelist/0,29...

Took me a while, but this is 2010's.

Re: The 50 Best Websites of 2011

#93

Post by masklinn »

revorad wrote: post #61
masklinn wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Decent compromise while you wait for DDG to improve in certain areas (and it is improving). Since it mostly uses Y!S's results, which tend to suck compared to google's (for my searches anyway), I'm not sure it can improve much in that area, which is by far the one that pains me the most. And if I'm going to use google 9 times out of 10, I can just remove the indirection.

I wouldn't say it's as bad as 9/10. They don't mostly use Y! results from what I've heard from Gabriel. They do their own crawling and ranking too, so I do expect results to improve. They can afford to be more liberal about banning spammy sites, which helps a lot. 0-click info and search ideas are really nice features. Another useful hashbang I use a lot is !a which searches amazon directly.

> I wouldn't say it's as bad as 9/10.

You say what you want, I say what I did.

> They can afford to be more liberal about banning spammy sites, which helps a lot.

It's cool, but I've not seen it helping much so far, since the base results suck ridding them of some of the crap don't improve them noticeably.

> 0-click info and search ideas are really nice features.

They're nice features when they display information I want. They generally don't.

> Another useful hashbang I use a lot is !a which searches amazon directly.

No. Just no. Firefox has been able to do that since 0.9 if not earlier, I'm sure other web browsers can handle that as well. I have no need whatsoever for the indirection through DDG. Here's how I search amazon: focus address bar, type "a somethingsomething", return.

Re: The 50 Best Websites of 2011

#96

Post by streptomycin »

iamelgringo wrote: post #78
timr wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Personally, I feel that Gabriel contributes more to HN content and startup culture than the AirBnb, Hipmunk or Instapaper founders combined." ...and you're obviously free to express your opinion in the thread. But it's never been fair game to editorialize the headlines on story submissions here. (And for what it's worth, I think it was a fairly classy move that the editor didn't change the link/headline to emphasize…

But it's never been fair game to editorialize the headlines on story submissions here. I don't understand your comment about editorializing headlines. The process of editorializing is making changes after the copy has been submitted. And, that's what happened to both the headline and original url that I submitted. I submitted a link to this url[1] via bookmarklet. I trimmed extra headline cruft, and clicked "submit".…

> The process of editorializing is making changes after the copy has been submitted.

No, it's not.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/editorialize

"1. to set forth one's position or opinion on some subject in, or as if in, an editorial.

2. to inject personal interpretations or opinions into an otherwise factual account."

Re: The 50 Best Websites of 2011

#98

Post by yid »

mseebach wrote: post #64
dools wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to the guidelines: "If you're submitting a link, put it in the url field. If you want to add initial commentary on the link, write a blog post about it and submit that instead." I think a blog post along the lines of "Several regular HN members made it into Time Magazine's Top 50" in follow up to a single link to DDG making it in fits within the guidelines, but to each their own. All I'm saying is that, thi…

That's addressed to the Slashdot defectors who'd gotten used to every link being wrapped in a couple of sentences of clever commentary. The spirit of that guideline is that a link should speak for it self. If it can't, don't submit it. If YOU want to say something, write a blog post.

Slashdot's wrapper commentary hasn't been clever in quite some time, unfortunately. I had a very low uid there, and witnessed the decline firsthand. Count me in as someone concerned about editorialized headlines at HN -- I really don't want to see it go the same direction as /.
Post reply on HN