Comment by dsacco | Hacker News Reader

Comment by dsacco | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Awful is subjective. I get your point here (I personally wouldn't enjoy using that website either), but websites like this one are optimized to convert the greatest portion of the target demographic. It's very simple statistics. You can't please (or convert) all users, but you can convert enough of them to be a (highly!) profitable business.

HN users are usually a very poor demographic to optimize for. It's a small demographic, for starters, and it's a very sensitive one (as evidenced by your comment). On the other hand my girlfriend, parents and probably all friends not working in tech wouldn't even notice it (where notice means "perceptibly annoying enough to have an explicit thought about it").

A lot of people honestly just don't care if the website is bloated or has numerous prompts to subscribe or chat. The users of this site evidently put up with it because it provides them with enough utility that they're not going to nitpick. The creators of the site have likely researched the market and business model enough to know that this is close to the ideal for maximizing profit without sacrificing utility. The website has hit market equilibrium.

I bet OP understands that personal feelings are subjective.

That website makes someone a whole bunch of money. That doesn't mean that website isn't awful.

The website's profitability doesn't assure that it isn't awful, no (pure capitalism is not a moral framework). But the consensus of a lot of people who choose to use it sort of does mean it isn't awful, if you're trying to ascribe some sort of objectivity to that adjective (and I don't agree you can).

This is like bikeshedding the definitions of privacy, DRM, net neutrality, etc. Most people just don't give a shit, no matter how loud the minority is that demonizes things like throwing a newsletter subscription popup on a website.

The philosophical pillar you're standing on doesn't stop me from saying that this website is subjectively awful.

A website serves a purpose, to create income. If removing some of the modals would reduce their income, then having them is subjectively better than not.

I think you need a new word to describe your (valid, in a way) opinion.

If the only thing that mattered in this world was income then you might have had a point.

Thinking others should change their opinion because you don't understand subjectivity is absurd.

Exactly. Like when people don't give a shit about audio quality and end up damaging their ears because of speakers with poor frequency responses.

Most people would care if they knew the difference, they do not. It is up to those who know to tell them, to make a stance and denounce the shit.

> Most people would care if they knew the difference,

Would they?

> they do not. It is up to those who know to tell them, to make a stance and denounce the shit.

Counterpoint: How do you differentiate people who have made a choice through inadvertent ignorance vs those who have made a different choice than you because they value different things?

E.g. not caring if they harm their hearing, liking the frequency response of Bose over more neutral speakers, having other things they'd rather be doing than read audiophile forums, or rather save $500+ and use an inferior speaker

> Not caring if they harm their hearing

Usually people regret this later in life. I guess we fundamentally disagree on the ability of people to make good decisions that they won't regret later and whether or not we should help people avoid doing things they will surely regret.

> or rather save $500+ and use an inferior speaker

This is hyperbole, I'm talking about the difference between a $3 set of earbuds and $20. I'm not saying everyone should have the highest quality gear available.

Honestly I lump audiophiles, oenophiles, and creationists in the same bucket of magical thinkers.

There's a difference between believing that only copper from a specific mine in Poland is a must have for your audio quality, and not using speakers damaging to your hearing.

i assure you that audio quality is clearly determinable.. even at the most basic form. Listening to an analog vinyl vs a digital CD is night and day.. the flat tinny sound of digital audio is shite.

>That website makes someone a whole bunch of money

$125k/month in gross booked travel may not be a whole bunch of money. Typically, only portions of the travel have commissions, and not huge percentages either.

It could grow of course.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com