Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | Isofarro's commentslogin

The idea that you have to read everything is a reader UI design flaw. By presenting feeds as an inbox, it gives the impression of RSS feeds being email. And that's not right, it can be, but it doesn't have to be.

The TikTok model is about scrolling, skipping, being selective.

RSS readers should be treated the same way. "River of news" is an RSS thing. You dive in when stuff interests you, and you let what doesn't interest you flow by.

Twitter is basically an RSS-like reader with 120 character limits on posts. You subscribe to interesting people, and their little posts drop on your homepage in reverse chronological order. There's no inbox or unread items. You just scroll past to the next item that interests you.

Yeah, turning off unread-items counters, definitely. The value of RSS is in what you chose to read. It's not an anti-library. And if something is really great, a good subscription list means someone you're reading will likely mention it and link to it.


I prefer the inbox to the river. It's not that difficult to scan my (categorised) inbox and “mark all as read” for a given feed.

But then again, I don't subscribe to too many things, and quickly unsubscribe from feeds that publish too often. There is a blog for fathers that publishes every day. No, thanks, I need to digest what I've read last week.


I find this topic of link aggregation, feeds and readlists highly interesting and believe that herein lies the solution for a new web similar to like reddit basically imagined it, before going full commercial.

Both presented ways in looking at an RSS feed make sense and come with their own set of pros and cons. But to me it looks like it is entirely possible and the best solution to treat it as both at the same time: the feed is a stream, but you treat it as an inbox not for the items that are streamed themselves (e.g. blog entries), but as the notification that they exist. So, I will try out in the future to keep three lanes: a readlis, where you store the things you want to read, a read-it where you store the things you actually read already and the RSS-feed aggregor "inbox" where you marked things as read if you decided to either put it on the readlist or not. So the read-marker of the RSS-feed aggregor becomes a "noted-it" button.

A fourth lane that forwards interesting reads or notifications could be the building brick of a new internet, where you aggregate things from people you like or trust and index them as your personalised search engine.


Yeah, everything you've said makes good sense. At the end of the day RSS is just a decent protocol for these purposes, even if more modern alternatives exist. But I think these modern alternatives are better for your purposes.

Do you have specific things in mind to which you refer as more modern alternatives?

I had looked into JSON Feed or WebSub as a layer on feeds. I'm not sure it's possible but the federated thingies like ActivityPub might also give the same result, especially since Ghost supports it natively in the dashboard.

I went through this thought process of creating a mechanical system to find interesting content all across the web for me based on my preferences that it learned.

And I started thinking about the supreme importance of high quality data sources... realizing there's a power law there, where I could just subscribe to a few high quality people... and ended up reinventing RSS from first principles.

And then instead of embeddings we have tags...

Honestly I think we nailed it in 2005 :)


This is an insight I realized several years ago: I want RSS, but I don't want to track what I've read and haven't. I solved my problem by writing a bot for each RSS feed - it would mirror posts in Diaspora. I would then subscribe to those bots.

These days it's Mastodon, but same idea. I just scroll and browse a bit, with nothing in the system telling me I have 573 unread posts.


Twitter was . Not is . And I'm not talking about the name change.

> And a lot of these people do employ a lot of people so they just start companies elsewhere.

Great, do that! Go start companies in other countries, and trickle down their wealth to employees in the form of wages and salaries.

If only they thought of doing that in the UK! Instead of the rich buying up properties turning them into buy-to-lets, both pricing out working people of their first home, and then taking their income as rent.


Most billionaires do employee people in the countries in which they live.


They already "open companies elsewhere". From the article, the non-dom status is a tax-exemption on a non-dom for profits and revenues from businesses outside the UK.

If these non-dom billionaires leave, and they aren't currently paying tax, will we even notice?

The housing market noticed; again from the article, the value of properties valued above £10m dropped by 37%. So these "just leavers" aren't just leaving, they are taking a near 40% hit on selling up.


So then leaving is giving the government less tax revenue and hence less money for other people


> Non domiciled are roughly 0.11% of UK residents and pay about 1.24% of UK taxes

It's curious that the percentages used to defend not taxing the rich (whether they are UK citizens, or operating as "non-doms") tend to be what percentage of the tax burden they pay. But it's never what percentage of their income and capital gains they pay as tax.

I think the latter is a fairer representation, considering we have a progressive taxation system. Someone who is earning over £125k a year should be paying close to 45% of their income and capital gains.

The question is: are they? If not, why not?


The world has to be dealt with how it is. For example:

>The question is: are they? If not, why not?

Because they're non-domiciled and for several centuries the UK didn't tax foreign income of non domiciled residents. It's not a mystery, it was the law.

The non-dom's came to the UK because of this tax regime. The UK can either have the revenue they get from them, which is substantial. Or, it can remove the non-dom regime, hope they stay, but be prepared for total loss of their revenue if they leave.

There's no magical third choice where everyone in that non-dom category stays just cause and pays more money. So far it looks like UK tax revenues are set to diminish from this change.


Dominic Cummings is the Chief-of-staff of UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson. He managed the Vote Leave campaign in 2016, the primary campaign during the UK referendum on European Union membership (campaigning successfully to leave the EU).

His success in Vote Leave is down to a targeted digital campaign on Facebook using the services of Cambridge Analytica / AggregateIQ. These are the root actions that sparked Facebooks turmoil around election advertisements that may again affect the 2020 US Presidential campaign.

Cummings is an anarchist and has said he wants to tear down the UK Civil Service, getting rid of mandarins and long-term civil servants, and replace it with something else. This blog post is part of that change.

It's government by data science, perhaps technocratic. With a governing majority of 80 seats, by December 2019 election, he thinks he -- the government -- has space to do controversial or unpopular things, and tearing down the civil service is something he believes is necessary.


Slight clarification: he's an anarchist in the sense of wanting to subvert the existing established order and ignoring rules and conventions along the way, not in the sense of rejecting hierarchies and advocating self-governed societies. Unless I'm completely mistaken.


The first no-castling match has already taken place earlier this month as part of the London Chess Classic

https://www.londonchessclassic.com/press/lcc19_pr5.htm

The current castling rule was an innovation of the Italians when the game was brought in from India. It, along with pawns moving two squares on their first move, ushered in the Italian School of Chess, known for its slashing attacks, sparkling sacrifices and all out aggression.

However, the Indian form of the game did have something like castling, the king could move from its start square to g2, where a fianchetto'ed bishop would normally sit.


>known for its slashing attacks, sparkling sacrifices and all out aggression

Interestingly this goes against the entire point of the article, that castling results in defensive play which results in draws.


Step one of fixing bad laws, or abused loopholes in existing laws is demonstrating the extent to which it's being abused. That way we can equate the lost tax revenue into something more identifiable. Stories like this give us the evidence we need that something in our tax laws isn't working.

These figures published are part of the public record of the company.


That is untrue. When IE6 first arrived it was on par with Mac IE 5.2 in terms of web standards support. It was a great browser for its time.

The problem with IE6 is Microsoft declaring victory in the Browser war with Netscape, and IE6 development stopped. For years until Firefox and Chrome threatened Microsoft's browser dominance.


The Web, the iPlayer app.


Bobby Fischer played a lot of Blitz, notably:

* 1958 trip to Moscow chess club he took on all comers, including Petrosian in blitz: https://nezhmet.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/the-fabulous-50s-fi...

* 1962 Stockholm, Geller pulls a trick on Fischer suggesting he play his "unknown" compatriot when Fischer challenged him to blitz. The unknown was Leonid Stein, a legendary blitz player, but largely unknown outside of the USSR: http://www.thechessdrum.net/blog/2012/03/16/bobbys-blitz-che...

* 1970 Herceg Novi Blitz tournament, held very soon after The World vs USSR match. Winner was a certain Bobby Fischer: https://www.365chess.com/tournaments/Herceg_Novi_blitz_1970


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: