News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Gentleman's Agreement by c1sc0 on Thursday March 15, 2012 @09:40AM (#3708362)
Finding good content is a problem for me in the sense that content consumption has become a new form of entertainment. So if you don't entirely dismiss entertainment, then, yes, finding good content I will enjoy and maybe learn something from is a problem to me. The main issue I see here is that the incentives in social networks are all wrong: we're being prodded into over-sharing because that's where the money is. As a result of that we're drowning in a shit-stream of content.
Re:The Gentleman's Agreement by ryaf on Thursday March 15, 2012 @01:52PM (#3709628)
Sparks in Google+ seem like a step in the right direction, but it seems lacking. Though I cannot pinpoint exactly how I would improve it.
Re:The Gentleman's Agreement by glanch on Thursday March 15, 2012 @10:56AM (#3708695)
Imagine Facebook with this rule: when a user posts content, that content is rated by popularity (number of likes/shares/comments). Every user has a popularity score. Users can opt in to being ranked on a public popularity list in, let's say, up to 3 categories like Sports, Tech, Music, Politics, etc. Any FB user can check out the "top 50" lists for topics they're interested in, and subscribe/friend/follow people that are on those lists.
Re:The Gentleman's Agreement by derefr on Thursday March 15, 2012 @12:40PM (#3709217)
Why are you asking me to imagine Facebook with the rule that it's Reddit and not Facebook?
Re:The Gentleman's Agreement by c1sc0 on Thursday March 15, 2012 @01:05PM (#3709341)
So you're basically saying that the solution to our content quality problem is turning it into a popularity contest?
Re:The Gentleman's Agreement by glanch on Thursday March 15, 2012 @05:53PM (#3710806)
Categorized popularity. If a user in interested in a topic, they would have the ability to find the prominent voices related to that topic.