brosirmandude

"the bulk of NFTs". Are you implying a majority of NFTs do this? If so, I don't think that's correct. At least it very much doesn't jive with my experience or the creators I know.

Yes it's definitely happening, and that obviously sucks, but I don't think it's as large scale of an issue as most people seem to think it is.

I'd argue it's the opposite. Having many right clickers around does the opposite of their intention, it gives the NFTs free marketing and exposure. More right clickers > more eyeballs on the NFT > more people intrigued enough to learn more.

This is the point right here.

Every reaction to UBI discussions immediately assume UBI is trying to replace all income, which is very much not the idea.

It's a floor for society.

A lot of people saying that this decision is because of adblockers, third party scripts, and future laws but...what if they just don't need third party ads anymore?

They've likely been collecting reader data for awhile and are probably at the point where they can spin up their own internal ad service.

Good example piece: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/01/upshot/are-yo...

>if you have an approved extension with https://*/* permissions and active users, malware authors will offer to buy your extension for a very high price.

This is interesting, and I didn't realize this was a thing.

Are there any lists of extensions with these permissions, or ways that as an average consumer could easily audit my list of extensions for this?

FB is publicly traded though, and it's pretty clear that controversial content keeps people engaged with the platform, and in turn engaging with ads.

FB has a fiduciary responsibility to make their platform show content that it's users with engage with the most, for the longest amount of time. If that happens to be controversial content, it's going to be difficult to convince them to change their algos to inherently downplay controversial content.

Not sure it's possible to make them change like that without government intervention. And even then, what change can one government impose vs a a massive global company like FB? (I actually don't know this, but would be interesting in learning from some examples if anyone has any)

Can't this be done using NLP, or even just pulling term frequency within content? I imagine FB (& whoever else has access to the data) has to be doing this on the backend somewhere for their own research.

We essentially need a Google (the framework which they use to algorithmically understand web content) for social networks with a front-end UI for topical mapping.

--

Also to add to your idea, I'd be very interested in a social network that can do that, but also requires real ID's and has some sort of public display of the topics that any user talks about and engages with often.

That way if I'm talking to someone I can gauge if they're really someone I want to be talking to about a particular topic. (can also be used to better map taste to reviews of products/services/companies/etc)

I think the key words here are "with some effort". Ultimately anything is potentially worth the price depending on the amount of effort a person is willing to dedicate to solving something vs having it "solved" for them.

Honestly, public & private FB groups. Groups dedicated around specific subjects (mostly related to my career) have been some of the most influential places for learning, networking, building relationships that I've been able to call on later.

FB groups are king because:

1. Everyone is already there. 2. It's tied to your real identity (for the most part).

Other areas to learn/network and ask dumb/advanced questions exist, but to "community" vibe in FB groups is unrivaled.

My FB feed is almost nothing but groups posts. I've hidden/unfriended most people I don't care about and no one I've kept really posts to their actual pages much these days anyway.

I really wish Groups was a separate app. I'd keep that and messenger.

I realize my privacy on fb, and likely around the whole web is the tradeoff for this but unfortunately that's what's required to stay on. The advancements I've made in my career and personal life directly & indirectly due to the FB groups I'm in are definitely worth it, and likely would not have happened without the existence of FB groups.

So what I'm hearing is, start a tree removal service.

It could be defined a number of ways. Google, for instance, has said in the past that they strive to provide accurate information but they are not a "truth engine". So the "right" results would vary across many different criteria, which Google already partly does with more personalized results based on things like location.

I'm really just wondering if there's an objective "good" to having the results displayed the way they are currently (a list of links with SERP features added in), as right now the vast majority of clicks go to the top results. (And also to ads, maps, SERP features, etc.)

Yeah that's gonna be a no from me dog...

As a marketer I've been fortunate enough to avoid most of the AMP fallout because of the specific makeup of my clientele. However, my colleagues who have to deal with AMP want Google to kill it forever and never bring it back.

Oh this is interesting. Someone more code-inclined than me should build a review scraper (if it doesn't exist already).

>enter business

>scrapes reviews

>pulls out most mentioned phrases and can filter common ones like "great", "awesome", etc

>specifically highlight the negative reviews that DON'T mention the certain things you care about.

Sounds like that old site got bought by someone building a PBN (Private Blog Network).

They buy old domains, get the old content from archive.org, and then add a link in somewhere to their "money" site, or to another site in their tiered linking structure.

It's a BS tactic that can sometimes still work, but it's a LOT of effort to really keep up with it. TBH it's much easier to just actually make a site people want to use and reach out to people who might be interested in sharing it.

Hosting/managing 100's of sites just to prop up 1-2 money sites is too labor & time intensive for most of us. That said, there are some people making good money still using these tactics, as shady as they may be.

It could be this, but I also think it's just...no one has any idea how to market on reddit via paid advertising. Obviously /r/hailcorporate exists for a reason as many marketers are successful in marketing on reddit "organically", but those don't go through their official advertising system.

Reddit users as a whole seem averse (much like HN users) to ads. I would imagine conversion on reddit ads isn't very high, but I haven't looked at any data on that so I could be wrong there - just a feeling based on comments I see from many reddit users.

Also it's hard to implement ad types on the platform that don't piss off users or use shady tactics making them "blend in" to the organic content of a reddit page.

Yeah but they can tell us a whole lot about being a chimpanzee. That's about all we can rightfully expect of them.

A political candidate for president is actually running on a UBI platform. The way he says we'll pay for it is this:

"Andrew proposes funding UBI by consolidating some welfare programs and implementing a Value-Added Tax (VAT) of 10%. Current welfare and social program beneficiaries would be given a choice between their current benefits or $1,000 cash unconditionally – most would prefer cash with no restriction.

A Value-Added Tax (VAT) is a tax on the production of goods or services a business produces. It is a fair tax and it makes it much harder for large corporations, who are experts at hiding profits and income, to avoid paying their fair share. A VAT is nothing new. 160 out of 193 countries in the world already have a Value-Added Tax or something similar, including all of Europe which has an average VAT of 20 percent."

Source: https://www.yang2020.com/what-is-ubi/

>shaming cities into actually funding their road maintenance budgets

This would be what I tell myself is a noble goal while working on this project.

>Is the primary objective sales?

Yes, but indirectly. Primary goal here is likely brand awareness and keeping the brand in the public consciousness for awhile.

They want people who notice that that one nasty pothole on their way to work is fixed thinking "Huh, I wonder if Domino's paid for that to be fixed."

It depends on your definition of productive but in my opinion it's creating wealth, companies, & jobs.

People are going into work every day to work on crypto-related products. Bitcoin & other cryptocurrencies are putting food on the table for those people.

This 100%.

SEO is often more jumping between things that don't fit most peoples preconceptions of SEO than it is about editing a title tag or submitting a sitemap.

Sure, do you have a specific type of industry in mind?

In my experience, it's brand new or still relatively young companies that SEO is often not great for. It might be a great thing to engage in in the future for them, but early stage companies strapped for resources need to be more focused on building out an actual brand rather than on ranking page 1 against competitors who may be spending 10-100x on marketing than them and have been around for years.

I'm a little biased because I currently work as an SEO Manager at an agency, but I would say yes. It REALLY depends on the type of business, what stage the business is at, their goals, and probably a few other things. SEO should almost always be a part of a larger overall marketing strategy.

If you're an ecommerce shop optimizing product and category pages - SEO will help.

If you're a plumber and ranking higher than your competition will bring in new leads & jobs - SEO will help.

If you're an established SaaS company launching a new product - SEO will help.

If you're a brand new SaaS startup - SEO is probably not the best thing to spend money on. That money is likely better spent on PR getting press mentions, and on PPC ads promoting your brand.

The main problem I see many small businesses making is relying solely on SEO to bring them leads while having no other marketing strategy. This may have worked well for them back when you could spam websites to the top of SERPs, but it's not the case today.

>Otherwise, people won’t get the help they need, and dumbasses will continue to revert to their tropes of “laziness”, “lack of willpower”, “bad parenting”, and “just need to put in more effort”.

This hit me pretty hard. This has been me for the past 4 years. Diagnosed in college and convinced myself ADHD wasn't real, or if it was, I didn't have it. I was just inherently lazy and unfocused and needed to just "man up" and figure it out.

Still haven't gone back to attempt to get diagnosed again. I guess I'm a little scared. Even though I've struggled with inattention (not hyperactivity, though) my whole life there's an entire half of my being that is just screaming saying "it's not a real problem, other people have real problems, this is just something you need to get past already."

As a non-developer every now and then I see an article on HN that really hits home. This was one of them.

I find I have to "set the mood" in order to be able to even start reading a book, which involves a bunch of prep work that I never used to have to do.

It's...embarrassing to talk about. You can't talk about it with colleagues because the assumption is always that reading is easy, and admitting that it's not something you can do is like admitting lack focus and intelligence.

So many times I see really interesting book recommendations on HN and I immediately add them to an ever growing list on Amazon that I tell myself I'll buy "when I finish the 3 books I've been meaning to finish".

--

My more cynical side wonders if there's a service that provides in depth book-report style articles.

Part of the allure of an article over, say, a chapter of a book is the sense of progress you get while reading the article. And ultimately knowing that you'll be able to finish it in a reasonable amount of time. A chapter in a book is more ambiguous and that leads to an uncomfortable uncertainty while reading.

If tether pops, what happens?

Do people try to cash out immediately or do they flock to the "stable" coins like BTC or ETH?

To my knowledge the only thing you can trade tether for is other cryptocurrencies.

This sentiment comes up in almost every crypto thread and I think it's a bit misguided. It's referred to as crypto because...that's how people know it.

Google trends explains my point better than I ever could.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&q=...

Might be an odd question but do any of you have hobbies that are similar to fishing but without, well, fish. Specifically something that doesn't harm any fish/animals.

I'm worried about a world where everything is tokenized. I feel like this needs to be talked about more and no one is willing to because there's still so much money to be made.

Are we really going go be expected to use and understand what essentially amounts to one token per service we use?

You don't have to buy a whole coin though.

Bitcoin can be broken up. You can buy 0.01 BTC for $100 if the price is $10k.

This is actually already a thing., check out Gridcoin. Been around for a couple years but never really took off. I still think it's a really good idea, but might need better marketing.

http://www.gridcoin.us/