Incredible that we are regressing back to webrings and hand-curated lists like this, both of which I remember well. That's not a criticism! I guess that the quality-drop in search wasn't quite enough to make it happen, but the advent of AI content predomination will be.
> Incredible that we are regressing back to webrings and hand-curated lists like this
One of these hand-curated blog aggregator websites pops up on HN about every month. They're cool and good on the author for trying to solve the problem, but it seems like the wrong approach to me. They're too disorganized, a random collection of mostly tech- and politics-related writing from random people with zero way to vet the quality of the writing. They also require the creator/owner to care about the project for the long-term, which is unlikely. I never revisit the aggregators.
I wonder if webrings are a better fix here. The low-tech version could be to put a static-URL page on my blog that links to other blogs I like, with a short description. Then people who find my blog interesting might also enjoy the blogs that I enjoy. That could be powerful if it caught on widely.
Maybe a clever person could come up with some kind of higher-tech version that could present a more interesting & consistent interface to users, encourage blogs to link back to each other, and also solve the dead-link problem.
I think we're going to reinvent Google's "circles" mechanism from G+. We all (well, the terminally online, at least) are going to be part of several more or less overlapping villages, and the people in those villages are going to trust each other to not be bad faith actors. Everything else... everything that tries to scale... everything public... wasteland.
Something something Dunbar's number, Tragedy of the commons.
Interesting. Each time I think about how we could reboot the (social) web I have this on mind. I don't want exposure to everything, so kind of whitelisting the contacts/peoples/blogs is the first thought.
I guess it could work to carve your own cozy echo chamber that once in a while lets something new in.
The conflict I cannot penetrate is that some things (could) need a larger exposure surface. I.e. OS projects, maintainers that will naturally generate a large following. There are also individuals that want to maximize exposure, mostly for the sake of it. The latter could be neglected but the former not. That leaves an natural backdoor to turn any networking into the same cesspools we have right now.
I am not sure, maybe we have to subdue to the fact that a massive focus on a single thing will turn out into something bad. Considering the importance of Linus Torvalds to the software world, it can even work. He isn't really digitally socialized in a "modern" sense and he still is networked enough to manage an high impact project. Sure he is networked via the linux ecosystem, but that walls him away from direct interactions with the general public.
It seems like many people have the same or similar ideas. I was thinking of using a tool similar to bookmark-managers as the foundation of a new web. Where you subscribe to RSS-feeds of specific (or clusters of) people to specific topics as the "follow" primitive and you publish your own feed(s), which bookmark-managers btw. already allow. The missing pieces are commenting on the feeds of friends and a layer of federated ML for ranking, which the user controls by simple sliders that set the mark for dimensions like retrieval-vs-discovery, hightrust-vs-highnovelty, recency-vs-trendingimpetus and so on.
The few niche social media websites I have seen able to prevent rapid deterioration in quality without dying in active user count typically have a high barrier of entry. Reminds me evilzone one of the few decent hacking websites on the clearnet that actually had a decent community. They had some challenge you had to complete I can't even remember what it was, but it prevented new users from joining unless they could solve it. Was very simple iirc but it stopped large amount of the skids/hf peeps.
I like the idea of tree curation. People view the branch of their interest. Anyone can submit anything to any point but are unlikely to be noticed if they submit closer to the trunk. Curated lists submit their lists to curators closer to the trunk.
The furthest branches have the least volume (need filters to stop bulk submission to all levels, but still allow some multi submission). It allows curators to contribute in a small field. They then submit their preferred items to the next level up. If that curator likes it they send it further. A leaf level curator can bypass any curator above but with the same risk of being ignored if the higher level node receives too much volume.
You could even run fully AI branches where their picks would only make all the way up by convincing a human curator somewhere above them of the quality. If they don't do a good job they would just be ignored. People can listen to them direct if they are so inclined
Instead of having that one god-author who has to keep maintaining everything, I think a better option may be to have the whole comprehensively community-maintained. Which opens up the question: How do you open source structured data and maintenance?
> The low-tech version could be to put a static-URL page on my blog that links to other blogs I like, with a short description. Then people who find my blog interesting might also enjoy the blogs that I enjoy. That could be powerful if it caught on widely.
That has both caught on, is well-supported by WordPress and lots of other tools since forever, and is notable enough that there's a glossary entry for it on Wikipedia:
Reading aggergated news is somewhat of an art. I add and remove feeds and do keyword filterin then i scan over the 5000 newest headines and find 1 to 4 things that are really great finds (to me).
Maybe if you do that for 1000 days some automation can find a pattern in it? I doubt it. Filtering out garbage hundreds of items at a time is definetly doable.
The quality concern is real but I think it assumes writers are optimising for reach in a broad sense. I started writing about backend engineering a few weeks ago and what I actually want is to find the right hundred people, not a million random ones. Substack surfaces AI takes. HN surfaces whatever's trending. There's no feed for 'engineer who's been running Postgres in production for a decade and has things to say about it.' The problem isn't that I want to go viral, it's that even targeted discovery doesn't exist.
I think a web ring combined with some kind of web of trust style system would be nice. Ideally they could be both centralized where an initial creator holds the keys to what's allowed and decentralized where it just sort of exists. I haven't quite been able to sketch out a reasonable way to keep sites persistent and consistent except DNS records, though. DNS of course making it hard or impossible for smaller and less tech-savvy creators while also having it's own issues regardless.
I'm a big web ring person though so I might be biased and trying to use a hammer in place of a screwdriver.
Aggregate the aggregators, then add a search box and ranking algorithm. You’ll have something like early-internet search, because these blogs are reminiscent of the early internet, and higher signal-noise (even if you think it’s still low, at least there’s less obvious marketing).
> people who find my blog interesting might also enjoy the blogs that I enjoy. That could be powerful if it caught on widely.
Imho this is better at the blog post level of granularity. Sometimes I will like someone's writing style, much more often I will be interested in topical recommended reading.
Couldn't you technically crawl all these blogs for their "blog's I'm reading" and create a social graph? You could start vetting based on how often other blogs link to that one, sort of like an impact factor in research.
I don't like counting the number of subscribers, that ends up surfacing things like major news websites, or the hacker news feed. But I've found the graph to be useful in finding recommendations.
I feel like every new iteration of ways to find good content online: webrings, blogrolls, user upvoting/downvoting, giving everyone their own microblog to share interesting links, ML to learn your own preferences by your behavior - they all worked really well at first, but then eroded significantly once people figured out how to game them.
The economic incentive is overwhelming to corrupt these signals, either directly (link sharing schemes, upvote rings, bots to like your content) or indirectly (shaping your content itself to have the shape of what will be promoted, regardless of its quality).
What you almost want is to use any of these ideas and hope for it to catch on widely enough in your small niche to be useful, but not so much that it comes an optimization target.
Smolnet might be the answer. There really isn't a feasible mechanism for monetizing it. At worst, you could have some text ad embedded. No images. Minimal semantic markup (links, lists, quotes, code, generic text) in the case of gemini/gemtext.
I think the simple reason why small web / webring sites don't work is that if you're in the mood of "let's pull the handle on the internet slot machine and see what it surprises me with today", then social media does a better job. Without fail, it gives you something to be outraged about or impressed with.
And if you're looking for something specific - "I want to learn category theory" - then you don't visit a small web site because the content you're looking for is probably not on any woefully short, hand-curated list of URLs. So you do a normal web search (or ask your chatbot).
Another problem with web rings is that if you're hopping sites at random, you more often than not end up someplace weird in 3-5 hops. I guess it's the internet version of six degrees of separation: you're always at most six clicks away from neo-Nazis or SEO spammers.
It's a good question, and I think worth trying to answer. I think the key thing is that discovery is derived from a curated index rather than social link posting and voting, and the darwinian race to the bottom/popularity/campaigning that drives link aggregators is replaced by a more deliberate human curation with all of its good and bad. You find new things, you feel a slower pace, but maybe get bored more frequently too.
Thanks to a post here a week or two ago, I started looking at Gemini and the Smolnet in general. It looks really appealing to me. No layout. Just the data and accompanying meta semantics (this is a list item, this is a quote, etc.). There's even a Geocities-like hosting service that is completely free and without ads, and it provides a Gemtext -> HTML conversion for people accessing via HTTP instead of gemini:
> I wonder if webrings are a better fix here. The low-tech version could be to put a static-URL page on my blog that links to other blogs I like, with a short description. Then people who find my blog interesting might also enjoy the blogs that I enjoy. That could be powerful if it caught on widely.
I have been doing this by linking my linkhut profile with either my profile picture (I used to) or just mentioning it in comments like I am doing right now
https://ln.ht/~imafh , Although not really entirely to blogs, I have this place to recommend cool musicians,projects,links that I have found and I write a short note in all of them as to why I really liked the link. But with tags you can especially have a #blog #webring and use linkhut with notes feature
What do you think about linkhut, I had submitted it to hackernews as a submission after finding it but there wasn't really much traction to it, I am not going to lie when I say this when this feature really resonated with me so much.
I hope more people come to know about linkhut, I hope I am doing my part in making people know about it :)
I have submitted it again after reading your comment. I definitely feel like certain discussions can happen on linkhut side which will be both interesting to read/write on.
I love the idea of returning to this to be honest. What was missing was the big awesome list of RSS feeds haha.
This is actually a great idea. The key is to actually continue to do this and not gatekeep and charge money for promoted crap and add algorithms once it seems profitable to do so. If that happens we’re just recreating the wheel!
Webrings didn't fail because the idea was bad. They got buried under SEO and social feeds. Now that both of those are broken, hand curation starts to look less like a step backward and more like the only thing that was ever actually working.
Similarly, I feel like book publishers are about to become a thriving business soon again. With any book being most likely just a bot creation, trusting "Random House" sounds like a thing more of us will start paying attention to to make sure we're buying a human made thing.
We're heading to a future where (when) friction is a luxury. Anyways, I thank the organizers for the rare opportunity. Long live Blogosphere.app, long live blogs.
There was some overlap between the webring age and the early search age, but once search became entrenched and useful, webrings faded. Blogrolls survived for a little bit longer, but it was search.
Specifically, once search became the way you found the first page/site to begin with. Before search as default, you found sites in a bunch of scattershot ways: advertisements, word of mouth, lists in books, or lists on websites that updated periodically (that you had to have found/heard about one of the other ways) for example. Then you crawled out from there because that was the only way to find things. You had to either know the URL or use a link. And not all of the links/sites in the webrings were good.
Once search got good enough, people found the initial site via search and instead of taking their time clicking through a webring which might at any point lead them somewhere dead or useless, it was quicker to go back to the search page to find something else.
Page access went from being a chained together web of back and forth links to a 2 step process of search -> page.
I follow awesome lists. These are curated lists of software. It reverts google indexing, because search is awful.
About personal blogs... I have many many personal blogs in my repository. Around 4k. Respository below. The real problem is to find quality stuff.
You can have millions of them, but if they are not worth my time, then what is the point?
I cannot verify and decide what is good manually.
Obviously.
I think we cannot also rely on Google to provide rating, nor any corporation.
So I have my own ratings, because at least I will be able to find what I found worth before.
I am not sure why the title got truncated from 'I Created My First AI-assisted Pull Request and I Feel Like a Fraud', which conveys a very different impression, and makes more sense when browsing the comments here.
It does not look like encryption is even stated on their homepage.
1: bkmker is encrypted. Think 1pass but for bookmarks.
2: This is not a browser bookmark syncing tool. Its a stand alone bookmarking tool and website, it does not share your bookmarks with the browser. You can review the bookmarks from any browser.
3: Zero knowledge privacy. The only data bkmker knows about your bookmarks is the opaque binary produced from the encryption that happened client side. We never store or ever see your private key, we have zero web tracking (the exception your IP only used for tracking auth tokens so you as a user can revoke them)
4: We also allow you to save meta data about the site such as their preview image, tags and notes, this makes reviewing your bookmarks a much more enjoyable experience vs just looking at the title.
5: We are just simply bookmarks, by keeping the ui simple and distraction free don't overwhelm you when you just need to navigate to your bookmarks.
6: Our plugin focuses on fast and simple, one click add bookmark operations.
7: We don't data mine you, the only thing we know about you is your email used to register and the total number of bookmarks you have, that's it. We will never sell or share anything about you with anyone ever.
This problem is chronic with GPT[N] dealing with a Windows environment. I have to constantly remind it to prefer the GUI option, though nothing really works. I don't know if agents make use of screenshots the way older automation routines have always done, but increasing use of that kind of data would help LLMs progress beyond CLI-addiction.
I moved all my LAN machines to IoT LTSC 2021 a year ago. Though I don’t regret it, be aware that update delay limits are the same as other Windows OS versions; that useful things like WSL2 will need installing from the app store to get the systemd version, and you’ll need to install the Windows app store from an enthusiast repo on Github; that Windows major version number is a fair way behind, affecting max Docker dated releases and same for many other frameworks; etc. It’s not that I meet a new limit every day, but certainly every few weeks.
I almost never use Windows, and I don't want things like WSL or Docker anyway. I mainly keep it around for things like upgrading firmware, occasionally flashing new ROMs onto phones, stuff like that.
I tried the MyWhoosh virtual-cycling app on one of my boxes.
(I just Googled that link -- it might not be the right one. MyWhoosh is only available on the Store. It refused to run on my elderly GPU anyway, though.)
I checked it, but at $149 per year for the home server (and don't forget to click in the 'information' button on the 'Lifetime' License Duration option), there seems to be a bit of a premium on that MS styling, considering the functionality in competing F/OSS suites.
It's three and a half years since my last cigarette, after decades of smoking. Sometimes I cannot tell if I 'backslid' during that time, because I have had SO MANY dreams about smoking, and feeling regret, in the dream, that I weakened.
But as far as I can tell they are just dreams. But this demonstrates how deeply nicotine addiction was burned into my psyche and my life - that it can even blur the distinction between fantasy and reality.
reply