I now have my own stupid blog again[0] trying to add some good old fun and weirdness to the web along with some hopefully useful or thought-provoking posts in between.
I wish we could have a thread (possibly even a monthly thread here, like who is hiring) where people could mention their blogs, web sites etc.
Back when Google+ arrived we did that and I followed a number of interesting people from HN based on that I think.
Maybe it could help us rebuild a mini web of interesting blogs, websites etc.
Me, I'd be particularly interested in linking to pages related to electronics, programming, outdoors (but not slick "travel" blogs) etc. A little politics OK, but not much.
[0]: link in profile should anyone be interested.
[0]: http://danieljanus.pl [1]: https://github.com/nathell/nhp
Using DDG to search for my name, my website shows up as 3rd result, whereas on Google, the only reason I'm even on the first page is because I was published on Towards Data Science. So using one of the big players was the only realistic way to get some exposure for my tech-rants. It's a sad reality for me.
[0]: https://chollinger.com/ [1]: https://chollinger.com/blog/
Lifebased.org
I dig the sentiment. Isn’t that what Show HN and posting links to blog posts does though?
Thanks!
The reason I want a semiregular thread is because given the amount of work that goes into many show HNs I guess most people here are wary of posting their blogs as "Show HN".
Posting it in a "Ask HN: who is writing - October 2019" thread might be less scary.
If anyone posts that within a few minutes I'll upvote it (I have enough points so I don't need to start another valuable thread for that.)
I try to compile the sites that people list here: https://www.kickscondor.com/hrefhunt/ I will obviously be mining this thread. ;D
edit: also add my blog! https://blog.chewxy.com
Happens both on Safari on my iPad as well as on my Android phone with Firefox mobile.
Hello and welcome! This mailing list is for authors of technical blogs
and other publications to support each other's work. Feel free to post
questions, drafts for review, and so on.
Also planned: some kind of list of the latest pinboard.in entries from certain tags.
For locked down duopoly (85% and growing Google actually) walled garden, that has telemetry for every app launch, install, uninstall, access to every single push notification in plain text and can boot your "niche" app from the Play Store on a whim... Most of those newly connected to the internet are on locked down "smartphones" and not on general purpose computers anymore.
For every objection there is a can-do work around.
Even though i d say that a lot of innovation is stifled by regulatory constraints, the biggest one being: it's too hard to take payments and much harder to pay users. We have the technology to have digital cash on the internet but tax office won't let anyone use it
The US has a regulatory culture of permitting monopolies as long as they are lawfully gained. I don't think this is right. I also think a sequence of monopolies, each living 5 or 10 years, before being overtaken, is also wrong; just because a monopoly is eventually overtaken doesn't mean consumers must tolerate monopolies at their height.
"Being the change" means limiting maximum size and forcing competition through regulation. That's political. I don't think there's any choice at this point if we want to preserve democracy.
http://iwillansweryouremails.com
I like that I'm not tracking anyone, it doesn't require UI/UX, I have little to nothing to gain from it - it's just a human connection. Something fun we might have seen in the early years of the internet.
There is still an unlimited amount of content, but the rules have changed significantly. And mostly not in favor of users.
The article offers bad examples, but monetary interests and copyright changed the nature of most content.
This is such important advice across so many aspects of life in general! It's easy to support a movement that's already started to to gain momentum. Something I think about still from my college days is actually from a sociology class I took as an easy requirement filler (something to do with gender studies, I forget the name).
Summarized, there's rarely a reward for being the vanguard who blazes the trail. Sometimes you might even be penalized because your methods to break into the limelight were extreme and are now hobbling your movement's mainstream appeal. The class's talking point was that there were women who fought their whole lives for the right to vote but never saw it happen or even begin to happen. But their work served to inspire activists of a later generation who went on to succeed. Sometimes we have to plant a garden knowing we might not see live to see the flowers bloom.
Clearly software is a different beast but we too, as an undustry, have things which are mainstream or valuable now but which once upon a time had only their visionaries to fight for them.
Getting out there and developing the sites/apps you want to see will bring change. Be proactive. Be the change you want to see.
The article is about a lawyer arguing for 'justice' through highly politicized language. YMMV, but I don't think "The Internet of creation" was hindered for want of lawyers, lobbyists or regulations.
Similarly, sitting on the sidelines and impotently lamenting the state of the Internet today doesn't help. While this isn't detrimental in the direct sense, it is detrimental if the prevailing belief is that changing the current paradigm is impossible.
Creators are still active. New niches for content are still emerging. Entrenched sites/apps are not immortal. Nothing is impossible. It all starts with individual action, one developer at a time. Don't become hypnotized by the bigness of institutions. We've seen solo developers release sea changing software before. Be the change you want to see.