At listennotes.com , we have to delete tons of fake podcasts submitted to our site [1]
why do people create fake podcasts? they want to get backlinks from all podcast directories
podcasts are distributed via rss feed. and spammers/"growth hackers" put tons of links in the rss feed.
and podcast hosting services (especially those allow free trials, e.g., rss.com, ) could help them one-click to distribute to a bunch of podcast apps / websites. this is like one-click large scale spamming automation
most podcast websites / apps don't delete fake podcasts like we do at listennotes.com . so i guess the backlink hack w/ fake podcasts works. real human podcast listeners might suffer with spammy fake shows even on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.
From our experience at listennotes.com over past ~10 years - people do click share buttons. For us, it's still worth the screen real estate to place share buttons.
The compensation can be high, but the psychological cost is real. Over time, that tradeoff isn’t always worth it: someone might earn more in the short term, yet pay for it with chronic stress, declining mental health, and even a shorter lifespan compared to a lower-paid role that’s more meaningful and less draining.
I’m building CurateKit.com - a lightweight content curation tool.
I always have growing lists of short texts, facts, and links that I wanted to host on a standalone site rather than burying them in a notes app. The workflow is simple: a browser extension to clip links with remarks, which then feeds into a public-facing list.
I’ve also added a "Substack-lite" feature. Instead of long-form writing, it lets you send simple roundup email digests (e.g., "Top 5 links this week") to opt-in subscribers.
My personal blog (wenbin.org) is currently powered by the tool.
CurateKit.com is in private beta while I'm fine-tuning a few things now, but I’m opening up invites to the waitlist over the next few days if anyone wants to give it a try.
The catch was that old boxed software eventually breaks on new OS versions or devices.
However, SaaS has the potential to "freeze" features while remaining functional 20+ years down the road. Behind the scenes, developers can update server dependencies and push minor fixes to ensure compatibility with new browsers and screen sizes.
From the end-user's perspective, the product remains unchanged and reliable. To me, that’s very good!
We should normalize "finished" software products that stop feature creep and focus strictly on bug fixes and security updates.
It takes real courage for a builder to say, "It’s good enough. It’s complete. It serves the core use cases well." If people want more features? Great, make it a separate product under a new brand.
Evernote and Dropbox were perfect in 2012. Adding more features just to chase new user growth often comes at the expense of confusing the existing user base. Not good
Email: [email protected]