There is a reason I had to lock my better version of this (https://quickish.site) behind Google OAuth to start. Like it or not, this type of stuff is going to be more popular than it was when Netlify / Heroku was doing it a decade ago.
387 karma · joined June 4, 2013
You can work on it locally however you like, there is also a `quickish dev` command you can run in the site folder that starts up a local dev server with live reload. When you're happy with the changes just run `quickish . /flipboard` and it will publish it.
With all of that said, I am working on a version that is exactly what you are asking for. An editable board that lets you change the grid size, give it a unique url and password protect on top of a POST endpoint that let's you change the content via API (also all hosted on quickish) for that exact use case. I have a few more optimizations I am going through and will get that out.
I appreciate the kind words!
The original drop flap board I remixed this from (also one I did as a demo) I added a couple more rows and cols. I played with a few things but felt like this was more in-line with what I wanted the result to be but it still feels like it could be better.
Here is how I personally define good software engineering:
- Does it do the job? - Is there low cognitive load in regards to following the code? (Can you jump back in the code in 6 months and get your feet quickly... AKA: Don't over-abstract). - Is it performant? - Can you easily make changes?
If those 4 things are true, the rest doesn't matter from my experience.
Nobody cares what your code looks like. Nobody cares what your architecture looks like. As engineers we should worry about creating forgettable experiences (at least in enterprise). They care that it does the job well, with low load times and an easy to use UX. That's it. If you did your job right they'll forget that software helped them do their job or complete their task faster / better because the experience was so seamless they spent the entire time focused on their own goal, and not how to navigate your software to get there. How you get there is irrelevant. Now it's your job as an experienced and intelligent engineer to make quick, thoughtful decisions on how to get your product to where it needs to be so that your _customers_ can create more impact on their own business / lives faster.
The second side of the regulation miss is that carriers have to self-report much of the time. These centers pay into the 6 figures monthly to their carriers. The carriers know exactly what kind of traffic is being sent through and many times aide these scammers in shaping the traffic to look more legit. Auto-warranty scams in the past? Huge amounts of that traffic were routed through the likes of Y-Tel and a couple others. Regulators knew this but enforcement took years to happen. It's the same right now.
Lastly is the issue of what happens once enforcement occurs? The answer is not great: The scammers change numbers and keep going. They aren't local and it's not cut and dry when it comes to continuous enforcement against foreign entities. Their carriers still support them and the fines are typically less than a month's revenue from the larger outfits (think Uber).
Better meta-data helps aide robo / scam / spam blockers. IMO, we should just shut down these carriers who knowingly aide these scammers. We know who they are, they aren't hard to find.
Their scams are purposefully asinine. It's not profitable to spend time and effort into tricking the wise into an unwise act. It's far more profitable searching for the unwise to act in kind. So when you throw your hands up asking "Who would fall for that!?" The answer is typically: Someone who'd be willing to buy a gift card or share bank account info. This contradicts your last point that a given locale is more or less likely to be scammed given the native language.
Language barriers are a part of the issue, yes, but these centers are capable of calling and speaking a number of languages. Cost and regulation are the big factors here. Just like any other business model. I got out of the business (telecom / direct marketing saas) right when EU started raising fees and coming down on some of the bad actors. Unfortunately for the US, that meant those bad actors focused even more in the US.
Also, the scams really aren't as profitable as you'd think most of the time. They generally can't afford more than a $50 CPA at best. Again, they have to turn heavy volume to get to their target market. They also rotate "offers". You hear about the big "wins" a lot (Grandma scammed for 50k+) but those are outliers. Typically it's $20 here, $100 there. Again, volume.
The reason carriers -- from the local exchange carriers and up -- ignore it is because just a single scam operation can mean 10s of thousands of dollars in volume a month, and sometimes more. Since they have to self-report for the most part they're not very incentivized to stop it. There are a few easy to implement regulatory / technical mechanisms that could nearly axe all of it, but carriers push back hard on those regulations and they never stick.
I know from experience dealing with this that it's absolutely not ignorance that's at play on the regulatory and commercial side. It's disgusting, and as fueled with greed and red tape as you'd fear.
We are actually competing but it's important to understand that companies like Booz Allen have fought (successfully much of the time) to have a number of qualifiers put in these RFP's that would prevent any start-up from being accepted. Things like "You need X years in this specific market for your proposal to be accepted". Obviously the only ones who can possibly have that are the existing vendors which virtually eliminates the possibility of fresh competition. We've successfully got a few states to change their requirements however, which is the first time that's been done in a quite some time.
Those running the parks hate their options, I don't see them as a crook here. The industry for park management software that fits the needs of a public land is stale. Fees for fees is normal. The process to become a vendor for a state is long and drawn out, and is riddled with red tape that was created in large part by the very same stale old vendors who've been in it the last 30 years.
After speaking with multiple states and now being in the proposal process for a number of them, hopefully we can be a step further in the right direction (think things like opening up 3rd party integrations, better bot prevention, etc).
Another thing I'd like to pass on from talking to a number of states including the national parks people: They are really trying to move in a more equitable direction when it comes to park access. They are very aware that many park experiences aren't as accessible (hard to get a reservation) to certain demographics and from my perspective they are making an effort to figure some of those things out.
On our network, our plan moving forward is to allow our users to verify their identity privately with the platform to earn an "ID Verified" badge while still maintaining an anonymous public pseudonym if they choose. The idea being that others can trust the user is a real person and not some troll (paid or otherwise) while also allowing those that wish to have it to maintain anonymity publicly.
Just to give some insight into how this anonymity becomes a problem. On our platform, I watch in real-time people / actors from outside the U.S. posing as seemingly real people in the United States and posting propaganda. Not the obviously false stuff either. Carefully crafted political BS that is meant to simply move the needle ever so slightly on the desired targets -- arguably a case where anonymity is negatively affecting democracy. There is so much to this I could probably write an entire blog on it, it's ever irritating as someone running a platform but also quite interesting.
To be clear: No, I'm not the one who made Truth, have no part of it, and don't know anyone working on it.
With that said, I really like what Mastodon has done and as far as federated and open social networks go (ActivityPub!). It's in a class of its own IMO.
People (Customers, VCs, Entrepreneurs) can empathize or sympathize with stories. They can't with ideas. It's really that simple. It wasn't the outburst or the emotion. It's the story.
If your idea doesn't have a genuine story, it's not likely to end up a genuine business.
Funny note, Parler did a copy-pasta of our motto in their re-launch.
It's kind of like a hybrid between Spotify, Twitch and YouTube Premium.
As for API's and scheduled posts, there aren't immediate plans for that until we nail down a proper OAuth implementation to roll out with the officially supported API's. Though there are 4 of us all together, I'm the only engineer of any kind working on it, with potentially some more help on the way here shortly.
Your questions are good ones. We asked ourselves very specifically how would we avoid being another parler yet at the same time not alienate one political crowd over another? Was a difficult question. The 4 of us span the political spectrum and I think that has helped keep us centered so far.