pyrelight

I don't know if it's just me (checked in Firefox and Chrome), but the black text on the red buttons is really hard to read. I'd suggest using white, unless you had some reason to use black.

It's time to stop. Too much mental overhead in front-end dev right now.

I don't care what anybody says, ColdFusion was a beautiful mess and fun to write.

During that time, the web was mostly brochure websites. No revenue was generated from these sites as they were purely informational.

"Web 2.0" was born during this time (maybe a little later) and introduced a paradigm shift where the Internet was becoming more commercial. It took some time for things like merchant accounts to run credit cards to become available for Internet usage, which was huge since fraud was a major consideration with Internet shopping. There was also none, or very few, SaaS eCommerce platforms like Shopify, so eCommerce was mostly a roll-your-own or use a new open source eCommerce platform that was in its infancy. It wasn't until the mid 2000s that popular self hosted platforms like OpenCart, Magento, PrestaShop, WooCommerc, etc, were available and mostly feature complete for most customers needs back then.

Turbo Pascal's UI was magical and perfect.

Why/how did Git's UX become so bad?

This is the most hacker news conversation ever.

Motorola does a pretty good job. Their "bloatware" is mostly the Moto app, which provides really handy and reliable gestures like a double "chop" to toggle flashlight, twisting the phone a few times to enable the camera, three-finger screenshot trigger, etc.

Their phones are really solid but they do lag on OS updates, and their cameras are never good.

It's Flash Player all over again! Remember when SEO became important and everyone who had a Flash website had to make "low bandwidth HTML" sites for indexing? :)

Honest question from someone who has never worked at a Bay Area startup:

What do all these developers at these tech companies do all day? As a freelance developer who has to meet ridiculous timelines all the time, I don't really get how a company can have hundreds of developers and yet the product seems to languish and/or get worse or slower or both.

I suppose there's a lot more overhead with internal QA, code review, meetings, etc, but with the amount of developers these companies have as full-time staff, what are they doing all day? Is it mostly internal systems, tooling, etc?

I just find it hard to believe that there can be hundreds of developers at a company like Twitch and yet the product is largely the same as it was 5 years ago. I would think features could be cranked out so much faster than they appear to be.

It's tiny on Desktop too on a my 27" 1440p main monitor. I have it permanently zoomed in at least ~150%. There's no need for the font size to be that small in today's environment of high res monitors.

I do wonder how much longer Reddit can continue. Based on the numbers I can find, it doesn't look like they're making very much in the grand scheme of things. The best estimate I found was $350M in 2021.

Their operational costs and overhead must be very high given the amount of traffic they get (~#18-20 worldwide according to Similarweb) and the amount of data they have to quickly serve. I can't imagine you are anywhere near break even with the infrastructure and operations they need plus company overhead.

If true, the API changes definitely seem like a way to try to generate a new income stream that doesn't "take away" something from the base platform that users used to have for free (like Twitter Blue).

Seems like a pretty safe play from an investor point of view until you realize that the third-party developers using the API in the first place to build alternative clients are not multi-million dollar companies that can afford the API rates. I don't know who out there is using Reddit data that could pay the proposed rates and still be profitable. There just can't be that many of them for this play to make sense.

It's easy to see what will happen. Taking away a method to access your platform that your users are comfortable with (i.e., BaconReader, Reddit is Fun, Apollo, etc) will lead to a good number of those users abandoning the platform, others moving to the official app begrudgingly, and the net effect will be that all of the users are unhappy and Reddit will likely not be earning enough from their API to make it all worth it.

And through it all their official app will probably stay untouched or barely updated.

Or maybe they'll buy the most popular cross platform client and retool it to be official.

I honestly don't know why they never tried to monetize their subreddits. Imagine a monthly fee for:

  - Additional moderation tools
  - Additional design tools (i.e., force old design forever)
  - Slotted template layout for more design flexibility
  - More moderator slots, more flair, etc
  - Built-in highlighted community member feed at the top of the subreddit -- who in the community is live right now on YouTube, Twitch or Reddit, etc. Imagine the Final Fantasy 7 Remake subreddit having some of the mod team do a live head-to-head speedrun race streamed live in the subreddit.
  - Custom emotes like BTTV/7TV on Twitch, etc).
  - Dedicated account manager to help handle brigading when the topic of the subreddit has a bad day in the news cycle and 4chan is bored and starts spamming the sub.

The larger communities would definitely buy into that.

Some of these features could also be added to a monthly user subscription too. For example, you could get a handful of awards you can give out to posts as part of your sub (like Discord Nitro gives 2 server boosts).

Official subreddits could also be a thing -- imagine Xbox paying a few grand to make it the official subreddit and gain direct access to Reddit Admins, better tools for managing customer complaints and support tickets directly from the platform, lots of user metrics and data, etc.

Yeah I don't know where the pricing is coming from. $30/mo is like Creative Cloud levels and this is not comparable to the utility/functionality you'd get from even one of Adobe's tools.

I'd probably pull the trigger on this for $3-$5/mo.

Yeah, it's too late to shift it, but from everything I've seen when researching on Charity Navigator, leadership at non profits is viewed similarly as C-suite with regard to salary. I suspect it's probably because to be effective, it's much easier to just network at the level that C-suite professionals would, rather than the grassroots approach that requires raw labor, outreach, etc.

It's probably easier to get that guy you know who is high-up at Kroger to get involved in your charity in a mutually-beneficial way.

Or maybe I'm just really really over the edge jaded and cynical. It's probably that.