The weirder thing is that redditors make it possible to own categories.
The name of the subreddit shouldn't matter much at all. For each category there are several subreddits but people don't actively move to the subreddits with the best moderators.
For aggregators as a whole, it's the same. Places like https://tildes.net/ don't have many visitors even though Reddit's flaws should incentivize significant amounts of users to try other aggregators.
The opposite of information hoarding is not unexciting, mind-numbing work. The opposite of information hoarding is doing what you want to do.
If somebody can do something nice, and still does information hoarding, things become interesting.
That's why it's more than a habit:
>Repetition compulsion is the unconscious tendency of a person to repeat a traumatic event or its circumstances
Information hoarding is the perfect repeatable event. There is an almost infinite supply of rewarding ideas and there is no physical obstacle building up that triggers invention from somebody else.
With those conditions, any traumatic event, any drama, can be projected onto these situations until the lesson is learned.
The cruel paradox of the information hoarder community is that they haven't managed to create a list of information that helps to resolves their unfortunate condition.
>Why do I find myself in this situation? Is it FOMO driving me to want to keep track of everything? Perhaps it’s some form of perfectionism or even an addiction.
My preferred explanation is Repetition compulsion [1].
>Whatever the cause, the end result is the same: I spend a huge amount of time collecting a never-ending stream of links, notes, and thoughts, only to never actually go back and read them again.
Do those notes have to be read again by the one who creates them? Connecting information and publishing that on social media allows others to do the next steps.
- Please offer the option to test the web app without having to register an account. The data could be static so that it doesn't tax your servers.
- Using votes is good, allowing users to vote would be better. Could you use ActivityPub to allow users to publish their votes and pool them within the Fediverse? I am waiting for a future where all RSS readers share their votes so that good content is highlighted.
- If you use ActivityPub, you could also enable your users to comment on posts.
>It has a CMS and social network to organize, share, and discover with others
What's your opinion on ActivityPub? Could you make the network compatible so that annotations can be shared on Mastodon and people with a Mastodon account can add comments to any highlight they find on Kontxt.io?
Would it be possible to export the data so that the notes, highlights and annotations can be used in case you discontinue Kontxt.io?
What I am missing from tools like Hypothes.is is the ability to interact with ActivityPub accounts. There is too much frictions if others have to create a hypothes.is account before they can react to a highlight or annotation.
>If Google isn’t making any money from you on Gmail
Isn't Gmail the core pillar of Google's ad network? Whoever is logged into Gmail tells Google who is using an IP address.
Facebook is the other ad network because they can also link requests to ids.
Facebook can monetize Instagram because they can sell targeted ads. Likewise, Google can monetize Youtube. If ads can be sold without those ids, Instagram and Youtube could have grown on their won.
Is this an emperor's clothing situation and nobody talks about this or do I have a complete misunderstanding of ad technology?
The printing press made it easy to quickly share finished thoughts, boosting science and bringing the industrial revolution. There should be an equal opportunity for progress when we start sharing unfinished thoughts.
What could change our attitude about privacy? We share code, but only good looking code. We share thoughts, but only finished articles and good looking tweets. This inhibits collaboration on the most difficult part of creating ideas.
AI like ChatGPT can become supportive. But why wait for a technical solution if a social solution is possible? What's better than a to-do list which is resolved or made easy because others just happen to have the necessary resources available?
>How often, truly, do you find yourself wanting to link a task in your todo list app to a file in Dropbox
Links are much more useful once notes and todo lists are shared and published. I am surprised that not all tools for thought have standardized on ActivityPub to enable their users to connect each other's notes. People with an account could correct mistakes or link to crucial knowledge that was overlooked.
Like Wikipedia, information would grow "on its own". Important ideas could be identified, information could be collected until it is enough for further steps.
Zettelkasten is great for one person but that's for prolific people who process a massive amount of information. With the internet, a group of average people can turn into a genius by collectively collecting information and turning it into a useful form.
I hope that Obsidian extends the social network beyond Discord integration. Those digital gardens only grow on their own when others can enrich notes and annotate ideas.
How much can be accomplished by somebody who isn't willing to take as much risk for their idea as women take for having a child? Of course, paternity leave shows that most men need an incentive to take time off for their children.
But that's kind of the point. In a world where there is no majority to give people the space for their intrinsic motivation, who is going to pursue innovative ideas? People could make it socially acceptable to take time off or to work less, but they don't. If you have to nudge them to make that change, you are back at square one: 'How do you give the people with new ideas the power to implement them?'
If it is work itself that inhibits people from pursuing their intrinsic motivation, how could you make it economically viable to give everybody the space for their intrinsic motivations? If it is not viable, doesn't that leave us with incentives?
>You empower people by making sure their basic needs are taken care of so they have the freedom to fully pursue these projects.
This is interesting because you look at the situation from a different point of view. I was wondering how somebody can influence others to create change and you focus on how to remove influence to create change.
I believe that you can never supply enough resources for people to feel free to implement change. What are the basic needs that have to be met? I would like to say that they are already met. Every software developer can reduce their working hours to a minimum and have ample time to pursue whatever they want.
People are already empowered but they lack motivation. Compared to the global south, the north has plenty of resources. But most citizens don't invest them. Instead they spend them on vacations, clothing, cars and houses because they want to match their peers.
With that perspective, what could incentivize people whose basic needs are met, to spend their time on innovations?
>writing software for banks or insurance companies
Look at Gimp. It's the software that people like to write but not the one designers like to use.
There was this submission: 'Ask HN: How might HN build a social network together?' [1]. With Mastodon, people create a social network, but one that is unnecessarily inefficient. Why hasn't that submission led to a better social network?
Ford is quoted with saying: 'People would have asked for faster horses'.
How do you give the people with new ideas the power to implement them?
Amazon doesn't make profits and thus doesn't pay taxes. Bezos doesn't sell much and thus doesn't pay taxes either. Changing rates wouldn't change anything. Tax rates only affect the middle class, and as @jliptzin has pointed out, those tax rates are quite similar.
The EU has a lower output because there are fewer investors. One successful startup creates wealth in the hand of knowledgeable people who can create the next startup. There are simply not thousands of millionaires and billionaires who can successfully pick the next round. There is also less of a network effect where venture capitalists can offer their portfolio as leads for the sales teams of their new investments.
The Nordic welfare levels can turn out to be the path to European success. It's easier to start an idea when failure doesn't end in an existential crisis.
1. Tesla has heavily invested in robotics. They will be able to build cars much cheaper than their competitors.
2. Tesla has long-term lithium delivery contracts. They will be able to pay far less for their batteries while the prices for their competitors will massively increase
I have not verified those claims but that would make Tesla's valuation more reasonable.
There is also the self-driving car race. Whoever wins that will take almost all profits. With Twitter, Musk doesn't look too good in the software department right now. However, if you ignore Google, then Tesla still has a chance to win.
Shout-out to the smallest interesting number [1] and Kolmogorov complexity [2].
How difficult is it to scale the approach, slightly adjusted for ROI [3], like a variation of kickstarter.com?
People with an unfulfilled requirement could announce their willingness to pay for a service. The incentive could be that those early adopters receive shares in the resulting company.
Some people may just take the ideas. Early adopters can punish them by only doing business with companies that handed out shares to early adopters.
If you want to have 40 different instructors, you need 40 times more students. That doesn't change the fundamental economics.
If you want famous professors, you either have to pay more, or create an enticing environment. You still have the option to pay for recordings of their lectures which should be more affordable.
A well-funded university will be better in several dimensions but quality of education and research is entirely within the influence of whoever starts a new university. Nothing else should matter.
>graduate students would receive a minimum stipend of $34,000 by October 2024—a raise of $13,000
How do those numbers add up? If a degree costs $100K and a graduate student costs $25K per year, then one person can pay a personally tutoring graduate student for four years to acquire all knowledge. If 10 students pool their money, education costs only $10K.
There needs to be some space to meet and there needs to be a budget for professors but another $10K should cover that easily.
What's the obstacle that prevents students and graduate students and even professors from going back to the beginnings? They can organize their own university where the administration works for them.
There is no need to strike if the university has to match the offer of a competent competitor.
>Universities were generally structured along three types, depending on who paid the teachers. The first type was in Bologna, where students hired and paid for the teachers. [1]
The name of the subreddit shouldn't matter much at all. For each category there are several subreddits but people don't actively move to the subreddits with the best moderators.
For aggregators as a whole, it's the same. Places like https://tildes.net/ don't have many visitors even though Reddit's flaws should incentivize significant amounts of users to try other aggregators.