d0de

I'd be curious to get the opinion of others on whether or not this was a mistake given the information they had at the time.

It's pretty useless to say "our biggest mistake was x because it turned out to be a huge failure". I'm not interested in hearing someone say "my biggest mistake was eating vegetables every day because I ended up choking on a piece of broccoli".

Huh. Less than I thought, somehow.

I did mean physical orientation, but I see from rereading my question that's not clear at all.

Thanks!

Isn't it easier to "sleep with" a laptop than a tablet?

A laptop holds the screen in a vertical orientation that you can watch while lying down. How do you do this with a tablet?

I ask as someone who has "slept with" a laptop more or less every night for five or six years.

Any stats on how big the typical HN traffic spike is?

Huh. I thought it was an update to reduce specifically "low-quality" EMDs rather than EMDs with "a lots of keywords in the domain name". Or are these two ways of saying the same thing?

Which part of the TOS do you think this would violate?

AFAIK you're not under any obligations to show Adsense ads to all users, or all of the time. I know quite a few people who only show Adsense ads to search engine visitors, for example, or block ads for people arriving with certain referrers.

This seems like a similar move.

Thanks, I appreciate your comment. Unfortunately, barring a change in my circumstances or a sudden upsurge in interest from the public, I just don't think it will be possible. It may not look like it but the research involved even in that one modest test section was (by my standards at least, possibly I'm just workshy) a massive undertaking.

Yeah, I've been following them for a while. Aside from the obvious difference in focus, my biggest gripe with that site is that the basic taxonomy is per supplement. The typical use case is the user hears about supplement A, hears it's good for purpose X, then searches for "A" or "A fox X", finds the examine.com page, and sees if A is really good for X.

With my project, the basic taxonomy was always per-complaint (or per-illness if you prefer). It doesn't presuppose the user has ever heard of any particular supplement. The idea is the user can browse to the page that documents their condition and quickly see a summary of all the evidence for all the different tested herbal treatments.

Now, I'm not at all sure that this difference in structure justifies starting all the research etc. from scratch. It may be the case that examine.com could trivially switch over to the structure I used. But I do think that my structure is superior.

>This turns your email inbox into a giant password manager

I already use my primary email for this purpose. Most passwords I memorize, but some, for services with requirements so arcane that memorization isn't possible, I just email to myself with a unique key I remember. To get the password, I just search my email for the key.

Yes, this makes me vulnerable if my email is ever compromised. But my primary email is already a single point of failure and pretending otherwise doesn't do me any favors.

I could use a password manager, which would have the advantage of encryption. But it's also limited to those places I have access to it. I can store the database in my dropbox, but that limits the platforms I can access it from (at least, without some serious headaches) and makes the whole process that much more painful.