If this site starts getting any traction, you're going to get destroyed by lawyers and copyright infringement claims, so I hope you're prepared for that. outline.com does basically the same thing, but they've had to exclude most of the major sites from working through it now.
Outline even seems to make it difficult to find any way to identify/contact them, but it only took me a couple of minutes to find the identity and location (inside the US = easy target) of who's behind Trim. Seriously, talk to an IP lawyer before you continue trying to promote this. You can't just copy other people's writing onto your own site.
You keep using this word "blogspam". I don't think it means what you think it means. (Or "blatant" for that matter)
"Noun. blogspam (Internet) promotional material posted to a weblog, often one specifically created for the purpose" -- https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/blogspam
This definition makes it the very opposite of the post, since it's neither promotional, nor "specifically created for the purpose" of promotion.
At worst this is a personal blog site that posts interesting links and curates them. Don't know if you missed the whole 2000-2010 era, but that was a popular thing back in the day.
Sorta like a non-social HN -- where a single person selects the best bits and comments on them. Is HN "blogspam"?
Is anything that's not an original post "blogspam"?
If we were talking about automated aggregation, listicle sites, "link farms", etc, one could agree...
It's also suspicious that the page's title says $100 Million, and the headline says $75 Million. A bunch of the meta tags also say "$100" (without any "million").
Proof seems necessary when they obviously changed how much money they were saying they had by $25 million.
That much could easily be explained by when they were checking the valuation of BTC. Within the last month price has swung anywhere between ~$7,500 and ~$10,000.
I hate this pervasive attitude that paywalls are some sort of annoyance that sites just "hastily slap on" for no reason. They do it because the subscription is how they make money, so that they can pay people to write all those articles that you want to read.
Thousands of us pay for the subscriptions that enabled those articles to be written, while others complain about how annoying it is that they can't read them too. If you find that there are a lot of articles from a site you want to read but can't because of the paywall, that should be a hint that it's probably worth paying for.
Most of the major sites' subscriptions are very affordable, and they can only continue producing that content because some of us are willing to pay for it. Paywalls seem more common now because the old model of giving everything away for free doesn't work.
The problem I have with paywalls is that I will not subscribe to a random site. Ever. It’s not realistic for me to subscribe to the Times, WSJ, plus all the others. I subscribe to what I subscribe to.
Companies with paywalls will fail. They are failing slowly. The Times is perhaps most successful, but they are still spiraling downwards.
I think smarter companies will be ad supported or Patreon or some other business model that will work.
I don’t begrudge bad companies for trying to hang onto their models. But what’s annoying is when I forget about a paywall and click through to be annoyed.
I would like a feature in HN to filter out those articles because I can’t read them. Circumventing their blocks is possible, but annoying.
If the company produces content that the rest of HN feels is quality content... maybe you should subscribe if you're interested in consuming the content?
You don't have to, but it's either that or perpetuate ad networks that spread malware.
I’m not interested enough to subscribe. It’s cool that others find it valuable enough to subscribe.
But I think there are fewer and fewer willing each year, so they’ll die out.
It reminds me of the record companies in 2000 who talked about value and whatnot while they all died off. It’s cool that people liked paying, but the writing was on the wall.
A comment like this being upvoted and responsible for a large portion of the "discussion" on the language creator's goddamn retirement announcement makes me embarrassed for this community. Keep the pointless bickering over programming language superiority somewhere else.
A bunch of non-lawyers taking a tiny chunk of law in isolation and speculating about whether something "seems illegal" based on it is really, really useless.
And this HN thread is just going to be even more of that.
> A bunch of non-lawyers taking a tiny chunk of law in isolation and speculating about whether something "seems illegal" based on it is really, really useless.
To me, this is rather a sign that the law is far too complicated and should be radically simplified.
An operating system provide a few set of basic services to applications, but the linux kernel is some gazillion lines of code, because it has to work with reality
IANAL, but it is generally illegal to volunteer for a for-profit organization federally. See the Fair Labor Standards Act and Dept of Labor site [1].
The most relevant recent test I can find resulted in a settlement, when AOL paid people who contributed articles without payment[2]. There's been some conflicting decisions in other related cases and many are still in progress.
> A bunch of non-lawyers taking a tiny chunk of law in isolation and speculating about whether something "seems illegal"
Motions, Petions, and Trial are essentially the same, except typically also include Lawyers in addition to non-lawyers (pro-se), and rather than speculation, it's called Argument.
Spend less time in incel communities. You're falling for baseless propaganda written and spread by depressed people looking for a way to "rationally" blame others for their unhappiness and self-perpetuating loneliness.
* For what it’s worth in terms of context, I’m not an “incel” and I’m in a pretty decent sexual relationship.
* I think whatever brand of red-pilled you want to call me is the polar opposite of what an “incel” would be defined as. Most “incels”, as far as I can tell, take bad relationship advice about being yourself to heart and don’t seek out successful men who give good advice on lifting and other positive life improvements to really succeed. They fail to get success and feel bitter precisely because they don’t have good male role models who are willing to talk in an unfiltered way to them. To me, the lack of male role models is key.
* Despite not being an “incel” and disagreeing with them on many topics, I feel an immense amount of sympathy for people with this label. Isn’t it sad that there are a lot of men out there, many of whom are smart and productive members of society, who cannot find a happy and fulfilling relationship? We see mainstream society basically wanting to completely shun the unloved. Instead of joining the 2 minutes of hate, why not offer a path to success for them, or at least some sympathy to the unloved? If you’re an “incel”, how do you think you feel when you see stuff like this? https://twitter.com/ekp/status/991817194987114496?lang=en
