Hacker News Reader

Comment by khalidmbajwa | Hacker News Reader

And why would you do that ? I can see why the must-register roadbloack is annoying in theory but It takes a few minutes to register, and then its an absolute gold-mine of knowledge, with an extra-ordinary community, which is very positive, constructive and helpful. I find it way more engaging than HN Actually to be honest.

View on HN

If you want to have your private answer community, that's fine. Don't go whoring it on Google and other search engines as if the results are publicly visible when they're not. I'm also opposed on principle to sites which require registration and (in theory if not in practice) log all of my interactions -- what I read and how I interact with it is very personal information and data. It's why I'm opposed to the idea of logging in to, say, read The New York Times. It's one of a very small number of sites I'd subscribe to, but even then I'd prefer to access it without logging in.

I've created throwaway accounts a few times to see if there's anything sufficiently worthwhile there. I'm largely convinced that 1) there's not and 2) the dynamics of the site work against it scaling or surviving.

So I'm not going to waste my time with it.

As expected, i am getting downvoted because of my pro-quora stance. You clearly haven't spent much time on the site. The beauty of it is, that you can reach people, and ask questions who you normally can only dream of reaching.Nasa's engineers, Phd Doctors, Entrepreneurs, famous bloggers, Actors, filmmakers,World class athletes, they are all there. If you have a specific question , ask away. I once needed to find out how Gana.com the biggest music startup in india operated, i asked its CEO a question, and within a day i had a response. For all this amazing value, i dont see why taking a few minutes to register is such a big deal.

Note that as the parent of your responses, I certainly can't downvote. And from the HN Guidelines: "Resist complaining about being downmodded. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading."

http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Regarding Quora: its behavior runs counter to good netizen behavior. Clearly, people have an issue with that, and among those people is Paul Graham (as several others have cited and referenced in the discussions over the past few days).

Regards who you can encounter on Quora: in my experience the level and quality of conversation reached on a clueful but open site tends to be generally higher. You'll find quite expert people on HN (I've run across Charlie Stross a few times), and I've been online long enough to have seen numerous highly-qualified participants on Usenet, Slashdot, reddit, and even G+ (there are still numerous techies there). President Obama is among those who've run reddit AMAs, and I'll routinely find very qualified people within various subreddits there.

And again: the conversations are visible to whomever wants to view them without restriction.

It's not the registration, it's the morality.

I've found the Quora community to be great, but the register-walling and the robots.txt is very close minded, especially to the Internet as whole. Most of the time I find a link to a Quora I am turned down by the fact I can't read more than half an answer without having to sign in. Imagine if Stack Overflow did the same thing? They'd be dead.

Stack Overflow was created in response to a site that was doing something similar to what Quora is doing with search engines, except that site required a paid membership to see the answers. I recall one trick that people used before SO was around, which was to spoof the User-Agent to be GoogleBot. Doing so would show you the answer(s) to the question. :)

I thought Google specifically penalised sites which did that?

I haven't seen an expertsexchange result come up in google in a long time.

At some point they switched to a slightly different model where you would see the normal obfuscated answers with a request to log in at the top of the page, but if you scrolled down far enough, the answers would be there in clear text.

They were certainly walking a very fine line, but Google seemed to give them a pass with this system for quite some time.

DISCLAIMER: I'm one of Experts Exchange's volunteer administrators.

Google penalized sites that redirected from SERPs or buried content below a lot of "sign up here" stuff very heavily; you can even make the case that it could have been called the "EE Penalty" instead of Panda, if only because Google's web search team (i.e. Matt Cutts) collaborated heavily with the Stack ownership in developing the algorithm changes and consequences.

That's not to excuse EE's management's behavior -- quite the contrary. From the perspective of longtime users, EE's string of decisions, the consequences of those decisions, and its reactions to those consequences starting not quite a decade ago nearly destroyed what had been a vibrant community.

If there's anything good to have come of it, it's that EE has finally moved -- about six or seven months ago -- to a business model that allows the non-member to see what members see: the entire question and solutions. Joining for free does have a few minor advantages; paying (either with a credit card or by answering questions) has more.

But it took a long time for EE to learn those lessons and begin to implement those fixes. Whether Quora will learn them is a whole 'nother story; like so many other sites, it built its systems and market-share without much thought given to how it was going to monetize.

EE made that mistake too, in 1997. Quora has a lot of money backing it up, so it can maintain its facade for a long time... but I wouldn't be placing any bets on it being around 15 years from now if it actually had to depend on income.

The robots.txt thing really ices the cake.

The whole benefit of online discussion in general is to create as wide and persistent an archive of both questions and answers as possible. To that extent, I applaud StackExchange, even with its aggressive moderation (not too different from better-managed subreddits such as /r/askhistorians or /r/askscience): the audience isn't the person asking the question but all people who might want to know the answer to a given question. And they're better served by having a canonical response.

Quora blocking (explicitly) TIA means that that knowledge stays locked in their silo. Pretty much forever. Fuck that.

Just yesterday I was musing on energy (something I do a lot) and the fact that even in such advanced energy systems as nuclear fission and fusion powerplants (real or theoretical), all this advanced energy, provided directly in the form of electron volts, is degraded to heat, used to create steam, and then to spin turbines. That's fundamentally a technology that's hundreds of years old (and I think early steam or heat turbines go back further). Windmills date from the 1400s.

So I checked AskScience on reddit, and it turns out the question's been asked a few times. And I could read the responses. And, while, yes, I've got an account there, it's not necessary for that purpose:

http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/search?q=electricity+nucl...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com