I think the big problem with profitability comes directly from why the userbase grew so large to begin with. People use it as entertainment, and are uploading content that is expensive to host. Video and images are magnitudes larger than simple text and links to that content. If Reddit didn’t take it upon themselves to host media, they wouldn’t be in such a crunch. They also wouldn’t have grown so large, true, but there was no question of Reddit’s sustainability then. With mainly text and links, weathering the slowdown in growth storm would be easier.
There is any believable amount of content being made where the value is so absurdly low, I welcome this change. For everyone that wants to setup a copy/paste version of a CRUD app or YouTube channel, that is a ton of time and effort being wasted. I’m not saying we should be focused on solely optimizing everyone’s time and efforts, but it’s clear we have tipped the scale too far with how much time and effort is being dedicated to bullshit.
If we as a society decided to channel these efforts into building infrastructure improvements and homes, I think this would help a lot more. I understand the biggest problems in that respect are legal and cultural, but I can’t help but feel people have tried nothing and are all out of ideas.
As someone who signed up for Lemmy and is planning to replace my Reddit use with it, I hear these points loud and clear. You also make a good point about Google search and how bad it’s become - I see so many stories of people adding “Reddit” to their search in order to get any decent results. This is the natural result when you have every business paying people for SEO and trying to game the system.
Between account walls and search’s indexing problem, it’s become very hard to find small to mid sized active communities on your own. In fact this problem seems to be something people are trying to solve in Reddit communities via related subreddits on the sidebar.
So having gone from using search engine’s to crawl for relevant content that was out there, people are now creating content specifically to end up in Google’s search results - destroying the value search once had. Indicated by what people have done on Reddit, and these discussions about finding alternatives, it seems we are well on our way back to webrings. I welcome this.
I have never been more seen in my life. It's very frustrating, especially when other people tend to extrapolate the little they know and apply it to everything. It can be frustrating when others are right but for the wrong reasons, and not even know it.
This is a bad take. You are asking for the forum and sub forum/tag approach. A community that small will simply not be engaged with frequently enough to avoid seeming “abandoned”. This is exactly the set of circumstances that led to content aggregation sites like Reddit.
You're triggering me real hard. 11th hour "I don't care how just make the system get to this number" regardless of the garbage number dumped in. Then you're stuck with a permanent bandaid in the core code that will inevitably screw things up in the future all because of one due date that probably didn't even matter anyway.
It's definitely a roll of the dice but I'd venture to say that, aside from constant pain and suffering, pretty much anything else is better than Alzheimer's.
Oh so you commute all the way out to the suburbs? Hey since we know you'll have nothing to do anyway please complete these additional tasks. If you work on the way home we won't bother you after you actually arrive there.
It's funny, I was pretty young back then and I though Amazon WAS TRU because of those site redirects. It remember going on the site and thinking how incredible it was, they had everything compared to other store websites and even other stores in person. It really left an impression on me and was a gateway that guided me to primarily shop at Amazon for years after - really just until recently.
I doubt this single incident alone is the reason, but maybe the catalyst. Google and its unhealthy lust for diversity has been an increasingly frequent topic. Hell, someone got fired for posting an anti diversity rant last year. While his arguments were weak or flat out wrong, it's clear that Google is making a point to single out underrepresented minorities to the detriment of others who may actually be better candidates.
How many of these users simply aged out of the demographic? I wouldn't be surprised if it's just a combination of people aging out and not too many new users signing up.
From my experience there is far less of this "what do you do" pertaining to work than of their primary hobby or interest. Might be a younger generation thing since there are so many of us that acknowledge we aren't working in the job or industry we would like to, and can blatantly see that in others.
What is this supposed to become, exactly? Google hasn't said much about it and speculators are making big claims like how this will replace ChromeOS and Android. I don't see that happening any time soon considering how deeply entrenched both OSes are, but Google's dedication mixed with the lack of comments makes me think again.
Sites like Codewars seem to me like good ideas starting out, but it doesn't take that long to turn into an arms race of complex one liners that people vote up as the coolest solution, not the best in terms of productivity for a company.
Seriously? This would be a deal breaker for me. It would also be nice to be able to save preferences so that I only ever get results from the past year unless I specify otherwise. It just takes additional clicks and is a big pain from the search engine that's supposed to be user friendly.
A better question might be "should we?" Consider that we as a species seem incapable of taking care of ourselves on our own planet. Unless that changes, it seems pretty irresponsible. We would be like the dad that skipped town.
Thought I'm the only one with this problem. Leather and leatherette are disadvantages to me - wish I could go with a premium cloth option and not have to sacrifice a more powerful engine, CarPlay, etc.
401k and investments from people who think their IRAs need to be contributed during the calendar year (and have the ability to) will go in because even with high prices, you only get to contribute a certain amount per year.
> My guess is that some point there will be an antitrust case featuring the "algorithm defense," which basically says: "Hey, I just set up the smart learning algorithm and let it run. How could I know that it would interact with other smart learning algorithms in a way that led to collusion?" And the antitrust authorities (or other law enforcement) will need to argue that when a guy named Bob sets up and signs off on an algorithm, Bob needs to be personally responsible for what that algorithm does.
How do you guys think this is going to be handled? It seems very complicated, because how are we even going to know which algorithm is at fault, or even IF any can be conclusively determined to be at fault?
Furthermore, is he talking about Bob the implementer or Bob the approver? In many organizations the people actually writing the code are not the same people who determined the specs and asked for it. Bob the implementer may have been given a limited spec that is followed, unknowing there is potential that an outside influence can manipulate the results. At that point who holds the responsibility?
Maybe it's just me, but recently I have noticed increased discussion regarding ethics in tech. It seems like there is growing awareness that all the focus on "how" to do something has eclipsed the fundamental question of "if" we should do it. This isn't to say we should just shy away from learning algorithms and complex systems, but maybe we should be put more of an effort to discuss the outcomes and how we agree to handle them before charging full steam ahead into uncharted territory.
Agreed! There are very few things I need immediately, and to be honest by the time I have enough time to make a trip over to a mall I could have ordered and it would have been delivered already.
So are you saying that this kind of situation is considered OK by most people's standards, so long as the party in control acts as a "benevolent dictator"?
Exactly my experience as well. It's difficult sometimes because a lot of what I do must be done outside of other people's working hours as not to interfere with their productivity. But at the same time, there is an expectation to be available if my assistance is needed throughout the average joe's workday - so there are really no boundaries unless you work at setting them yourself, which depends on your relationship with your managers/customers and company policy.
It depends on why you are hiring them. There is always a place for people who will just take orders, and it doesn't mean they will rise to the top. If everyone was imaginative and didn't want to follow suit, it would be much more difficult to assemble enough people to cooperate and build something big together.