[HN Gopher] Ev Williams to step down from Medium ___________________________________________________________________ Ev Williams to step down from Medium Author : marban Score : 146 points Date : 2022-07-12 17:46 UTC (5 hours ago) (HTM) web link (ev.medium.com) (TXT) w3m dump (ev.medium.com) | EricE wrote: | "That's why Medium exists. We aim to make it simple to share deep | thinking and easy to find the thinking that's valuable to you." | Ha! | minimaxir wrote: | I'll give credit to Medium for _trying_ to diversify its content | /revenue streams with things like memberships and in-house high- | quality publications, but media is not an easy business. | | At this point, if you are still posting on Medium, you many want | to consider moving to your own platform since some of the network | effects that made posting on Medium a good proposition are dying | off as a result. | simonswords82 wrote: | Rats fleeing the sinking ship the impression I have of this. | | Am I wrong and in fact Medium is doing well and Ev decided to get | off whilst the going is good? | robmerki wrote: | It's easy to forget that blogging before Medium was mostly ugly & | slow WordPress websites. I am grateful that Ev & team were able | to push online writing in a better direction. | | Unfortunately Medium slowly turned into a incredibly frustrating | & hostile user experience. I haven't purposely clicked a Medium | link in many years because of it. I empathize with how difficult | it can be to generate revenue from online writing, but I wish | they figured out a better way. | lesstyzing wrote: | How to your two paragraphs go to together? Wordpress websites | can be good if they're set up right (and that's why Wordpress | powers such a huge portion of web content). Medium developed a | nice platform and turned it into something completely user | hostile and horrible. We shouldn't be grateful they started | with good intentions when it's currently so awful. I'd says we | should be thanking Wordpress and condemning Medium. | capableweb wrote: | Did you forget about cool and snappy Blogger (before it turned | ugly and slow)? Or cool and snappy tumblr (before it turned | ugly and slow)? Or even cool and snappy LiveJournal (before it | turned ugly and slow)? | | It's like the difficult part is not to initially build a cool | and snappy web service, but manage to remain cool and snappy | over a long period of time, when money seems to want you to | build something not-cool and not-snappy. | | Something Medium failed at. Yes, they managed to solve the easy | part (start out cool and snappy) but they failed at the hard | and valuable part (remain cool and snappy). | Mezzie wrote: | I'm still sad at LJ's downfall. I've been reminiscing since I | got an email two days ago about my LJ's 19th birthday. | | There are several aspects of that site in its heyday that | I've yet to find really replicated elsewhere, particularly | for longer text discussions. | notRobot wrote: | Unfortunately I was not able to use LJ during its heyday, | would you mind elaborating a bit on the features you miss? | rchaud wrote: | No it wasn't. Blogspot was fine. TypePad was fine, as was WP. | These are what powered the blogging boom of 2003-2010. They are | all still around. If you were a regular writer, you would also | have eventually developed a strong command of whatever platform | you were on. A writer doesn't stop because the pen isn't as | nice as they would like. | | Meanwhile, Medium failed to create any kind of boom at all, | despite its clean UX. They just kept the marketing/analytics | cruft out of the product JUST long enough to attract a large | enough audience, and then jacked everything up to 11. Standard | bait-and-switch for 'free' technology products these days. | pessimizer wrote: | The Medium experience is worse than any ugly & slow Wordpress | website I'm aware of. | rchaud wrote: | I have yet to run into a slow Wordpress blog. The slow WP | sites are usually corporate websites running a ton of plugins | (appointment scheduler is a popular one) that wouldn't exist | on a pure writer's blog site. | hunglee2 wrote: | Ev Williams is a legend and his contribution to posterity is | already assured, however it is hard not to conclude that he | dropped the ball with Medium - which had a dominant position for | the written word, and yet now looks to be superceded by SubStack | and - ironically - Twitter, where threading seems to be the new | blogging. It's not only about the writing / reading experience, | its also about audience growth. Look forward to his next project | Alex3917 wrote: | Tik Tok is a lot closer to what Medium is doing than SubStack | or Twitter. The fact that Twitter now has blogging doesn't | really make it a Medium competitor. And similarly, SubStack is | in a completely different business. | bspear wrote: | wahnfrieden wrote: | skinnymuch wrote: | Screwing Noah Glass over as the Twitter founders did should | never make any of them legends | aliqot wrote: | Legends, like legacies, don't have to be positive. | swyx wrote: | too little, too late. Medium sat on its hands while Substack ate | its lunch. its not a question of technology, but organizational | willpower. | indogooner wrote: | Blogger, Twitter and Medium. Thanks Ev. Still long for clutter | free Medium interface. | throwaway1777 wrote: | That's basically what substack is (trying to be) | rchaud wrote: | until it can't anymore because the now-generous VCs will | start to want to see some stats they can sell up to other | investors. | | History repeats itself. Medium.com was clean and cruft-free | too, until it wasn't. | capableweb wrote: | Medium also tried to be a clutter free version of Medi, eh I | mean LiveJournal. At one point, Substack, unless radically | different than Medium, will go the same way. | picardo wrote: | I think Medium showed the world that you can't build a | subscription business by commoditizing the content. I've read a | lot of great content on Medium, but I don't remember who it was | by, and that's why I never considered subscribing to Medium. | Their content lacks the personality that platforms like Substack, | and even traditional online newspapers like NYTimes, possess. | tonystubblebine wrote: | I'm the new guy replacing Ev at Medium. | | I don't think that you can't build a subscription business at | Medium. What I told the team internally is that we had a | Goldilocks problem where one thing we tried was wrong in one | direction and what we're doing now is problematic in a | different direction. | | But I've been publishing on Medium since the beginning and have | a pretty good sense of the intersection of quality and Medium's | model. What I'm saying is keep an open mind. We grew a pretty | large subscription already with a lot still that we can do to | make it much higher quality. | jsemrau wrote: | I was writing on Medium for many years building a small | audience of 1300 followers. | | While the posting experience is nice. Content discovery is | terrible. Content monetization is even worse. I can't justify | researching a post for hours for no reads and no money. | __rito__ wrote: | I quit your platform because you didn't have Partner Program | in India. | | I do not want to monetize my writings anymore, but there was | one day, when I did. | | But your behavior made that impossible. You said once Stripe | start working in India, you'd start MPP in India, then they | started in Beta. Then you said when Stripe comes out of Beta, | you will have MPP in India. | | Then when Stripe started full-fledged service in India, you | stopped mentioning India. | | This behavior really frustrated me and made me stopped | considering Medium seriously for anything. | | I made good money on Quora in the past. They could send money | to India- no problem, but not you guys. | | I don't want money for my writings now. I want all of them to | be free. But I am angry at Medium, and would never be | returning. | [deleted] | kromem wrote: | Personally the content model that's always made the most | sense to me is a Kickstarter-like format where content | pitches raise the funds necessary to execute on them and then | distribution is free and unfettered, or don't happen at all | if there's a lack of audience interest (saving the author the | effort). | | In particular for written content, the threshold for funding | is low and the bar for execution is as well, which skirts a | lot of the issues the actual Kickstarter has. | | And if funding is anonymous, there isn't any direct issue | with undue influence from benefactors. | | There's a number of written pieces I'd happily pay to help | bring into existence. And a number of other pitches that even | if I wouldn't be interested in funding, I'd be interested in | creating an account to vote up to increase visibility to | those that would, and in both cases being notified when that | content finally exists. | | But I have very little interest in simply funding an author | in general, or paying to access content when summaries of | anything important will exist elsewhere, or even in wasting | my time with free material that's over engineered towards | clickbait and maximizing my scrolling to serve the most ads. | | In particular, I'd love to fund a return of actual | investigative journalism on topics I'd value. | | We saw the short tail of this in action with Sanderson on the | actual Kickstarter, but I definitely think there's a long | tail model viability on a specialized platform for written | content. | | In any case, good luck with the new role. | hyeomans wrote: | I just created my account @ Medium and got this weird sign-up | follow up page: | | https://imgur.com/a/ItWEJoI | etc-hosts wrote: | are you complaining that Medium wants your email address to | identify you? | | Fight the good fight I guess, | mgh2 wrote: | Medium needs to branch out into other markets: | http://www.marcoshung.com.s3-website-us- | east-1.amazonaws.com... | ok123456 wrote: | can you cool it with the javascript? | RC_ITR wrote: | Unsolicited advice: The best media/social networks do two | jobs: | | 1) Allow creators to make content (Medium does great at this, | Ev's eye for product was key here, but always room to | improve) | | 2) Match that content with the correct/largest possible | audience, like how twitter has hashtags/trending, FB has the | friend graph, and ultimately Tik Tok has the algorithm | (Medium is _awful_ at this and if I were you, I'd focus | immediately on solving this). | hartator wrote: | Good luck Tony. | | I've been using Medium as a reader, writer, and subscriber | for some years. And nowadays I am unconsciously not using | Medium as much in profit of Substack and Ghost. My main draw | to Medium as a writer was to reach lot of people. A random | paywall means less reach. Not sure if max reach and paywall | are reconcilable and solvable. | dilap wrote: | As a reader there's always a little groan inside when I see | something is hosted on Medium. | | 'Cuz, here, look at it: | | https://imgur.com/a/EIAp2UM | | There's so much _junk_ in the way of the content. It feels | like Medium doesn 't respect the text or the act of reading. | Night and day compared to Substack. | | If I'm in any way typical, you've got a lot of work to do to | overcome the negative associations of the brand. | DiggyJohnson wrote: | Concurred. Thanks for including a screenshot. | | I am hopeful that /u/tonystubblebine will reply to your | comment, and I'm genuinely hopeful and interested in his | answer because it essentially determines whether I'll open | myself back up to reading and publishing on Medium. | christophilus wrote: | When I see Medium, I think: nag banners, web fonts popping | in and pushing the content around while I'm reading it, and | little social things lazy loading and popping in on the | side as yet another distraction. | | This annoys me about all sites, but I think it feels worse | on Medium because I remember a time when I thought Medium | was decent. The design itself still looks good, and that, | too might be why the bank feels worse. | duck wrote: | I would say it isn't a stretch at all to say most people | feel that way. I stopped including any Medium hosted | articles in my HN newsletter b/c of complaints from lots of | subscribers that they couldn't read them. | | I'll have to dig up my analysis I did last year (using | BigQuery HN data), but on HN there are more Medium links | than ever, but they tend not to get voted on at the same | rate as older stories which tells me at least for the HN | crowd it isn't worth clicking on them. | geodel wrote: | I mean yes, I would not click on any article hosted on | medium. And it is not just because of incessant login | popup that many correctly noted. It is also because I | feel if any individual / company can not host their | articles and blogs on their own platform they are not | worth reading. I dislike their reasoning on at least two | counts: | | 1) It is too much work: In world of static site | publishing and easy cloud hosting it is not too much work | for technically competent person to host their own | content if they have something worthwhile to say. | | 2) Not our core competency: Many companies or teams who | say this sounds to me management style BS. If hosting few | articles in your domain is beyond their competency then I | can't really trust whatever cloud, big data, distributed, | serverless computing they are talking about. | fossuser wrote: | +1 - Medium is a damaged brand, my immediate response is a | negative association. Basically the opposite of Substack. | CuriousSkeptic wrote: | I feel the main problem with medium is that i breaks the web. | Putting a paywall at the other end of a link makes that a | broken link. | | Somewhere I feel that when an author link to an article, that | link is an invitation to consume the linked text. It just | feels uncivilised to put out links and then not deliver on | it. | | That said, I was at one time a subscriber of LWN. The model | there was that articles were subscriber only the first week, | and then public after that. _Unless_ a subscriber decided to | provide a link, then the article was also available for | anyone following that link. | | Perhaps thats a model that could work for Medium? If I ever | get an rss-reader up, and start following sources again I | could perhaps see my self pay a subscription for "early | access" feeds (to support some pore journalist doing actual | reporting if nothing else) | blowski wrote: | To me, Substack just looks like a clone of Medium. What makes | it different? | bspear wrote: | Individual writers control their own email lists | ProAm wrote: | The UI is better. | blowski wrote: | Better how? I remember when Medium first came out, everyone | fawned over the quality of the UI. | forgotmypw17 wrote: | When I load a Substack article, I see the article, with only | the distraction of the "JavaScript required" banner at the | top, and the page works without JavaScript. | | When I load a Medium article, half the article isn't even on | the page initially, and it may or may not load, depending on | what they think my status is at the moment. The page janks | around repeatedly as all of this is happening. Then, as I am | reading the article, which I usually don't get around to | doing, because I've already conditioned myself to never open | medium.com links, there are other things competing for my | attention on the page, such as the same author's other | articles, other authors' articles, and promotions for Medium | itself. | dubswithus wrote: | You can open medium links in incognito mode. | flyingfences wrote: | I can. I shouldn't have to. | dubswithus wrote: | Because you have a right to view an article on medium? | jacobr1 wrote: | No, for UX reasons. If your content is primarily text and | images ... then you should NEED javascript to view page. | Maybe it is needed for comments, or some other feature, | but the basic content should be viewable just fine. This | is good both the readers, for accessibility for things | like screen readers, for bandwidth and more. That doesn't | mean medium OWES us this, but one can still make the | critique. | user00012-ab wrote: | I also skip any article that is from medium, not just | because of the noise on the screen, but medium seems to | just be people "building their brand" by repeating what | other people have already said. | bombcar wrote: | This is what I've found - (medium.com) indicates medium | quality at best, rehashed junk at worst. | javajosh wrote: | That's true for every medium, including paper. | | FWIW I don't like medium because it is unpredictably | paywalled. | rchaud wrote: | At some point, Substack will require Javascript, just as | Medium eventually did. | jacooper wrote: | Try Scribe, a private front end for medium and GitHub | Gists. | | https://scribe.rip/ | czottmann wrote: | That proxy is great, thanks for sharing! Most annoying | thing about Medium pages is the multi-second waiting | period while the page is loading. (On Chrome on a M1 Pro, | mind.) | andrewfong wrote: | The paywall on Medium prompts me to subscribe to Medium (and | presumably, some of the money goes to the authors). It feels | like a magazine. My relationship is with Medium, not | individual authors. | | With Substack, I'm prompted to subscribe directly to | newsletters from individual authors. | | None of the authors I follow on Twitter tell me to subscribe | to Mediums. A bunch of them point me towards their Substacks. | paxys wrote: | The big difference is that Substack puts its writers front | and center, while Medium focuses on itself. People read | Substack content every day without even realizing that the | company exists. Authors can build their own brands and gather | a dedicated following without too much interference. | karpierz wrote: | A focus on contrarian writers with unsubstantiated opinions. | And a personal subscription model. | kodah wrote: | > A focus on contrarian writers with unsubstantiated | opinions | | These are also features of Medium, maybe most blogs. Being | discerning is also a required feature of the internet, | regardless what one might dream of, imo. | ifyoubuildit wrote: | This seems like a pretty uncharitable take, and one thats | unlikely to be true. | | Do you think substack has some metric on "unsubstantiated | opinions" that they're trying to maximize? Or have you just | noticed more content that you disagree with there? | aikah wrote: | morelisp wrote: | ceejayoz wrote: | Substack exists because someone launched a very different | business model than Medium. They also have a program | where they pay prominent people advances to switch | (https://on.substack.com/p/why-we-pay-writers). | | Greenwald's Medium is still up. He just never really used | it. https://medium.com/@ggreenwald/almost-nobody-reads- | these-pos... | kradeelav wrote: | Substack fills an explicitly free-speech need (for now) in an | age where the backbone/service providers of the internet's | conveniently forgotten why that's important. | | You get a lot more interesting writers on board than Medium | in that case. People who stick to the safe areas of thought | don't make history (for good or ill). | rchaud wrote: | "Free speech" isn't a business model, unless the business | plan is to sell a story to VCs and get paid a percentage of | the term sheet. | | Substack has to pay the "I'm being cancelled" blowhards | huge sums to get them on the platform to begin with. They | earn nothing from eyeball traffic; people want to be | outraged, but they don't want to pay for outrage. And even | if they did, Substack would earn a tiny pittance from their | fraction of subscription fees from that demographic. | skybrian wrote: | That's not how it worked. Some authors got paid a big | advance in return for giving up _all_ subscription | revenue for one year. In at least some cases, authors | said they would have made more money taking the regular | subscription deal, where Substack gets a cut. | | So in those cases, Substack provided financing and made | money on it in the end. I don't know if that's true on | average, though. | minimaxir wrote: | Whereas Medium works better for network effects/SEO (and why | it became super popular before Facebook/Twitter became the | most reliable methods of distribution for personal articles), | Substack has a better writer/reader relationship, which | matters when trying to make a living off of it. Although as a | result, it incentivises "thought leadership" more than | Medium, which is funny in retrospect since Medium was the | blogging platform that started the trend. | | Conversely, technical content doesn't do as well on Substack. | Nextgrid wrote: | Medium is a bad value proposition for those who make good | content, therefore they tend to leave and as a result the | only thing left is trash. | | "Medium.com" nowadays is a sign of low quality and I | personally started skipping articles because of that alone. | huac wrote: | I wrote this piece about the different subscription models a | few years back and think that it held up very well: | https://hua.substack.com/p/subscriptions-as-price- | discrimina... | | In particular re Medium: | | > On the backend, the way [Medium's] partner program works is | that users' membership fees are allocated proportionally to | the writer based on how many articles the user read. Fine. | Also there is something about clapping. I guess if I really | like a writer I could make sure to read a lot of their | articles so they can get some of that membership fee. But, as | a consumer, I: a. can't subscribe directly to the writer, and | b. can't signal that I value their content at more than $5 | per month. No amount of claps can make up for that! | | Writers and readers both don't get the right amount of value | from their framework. | notatoad wrote: | The Medium model is that you provide content, and they | provide an audience. They're a middleman where both the | author and reader is a customer of Medium, which puts them in | the position of having to balance the needs of authors and | readers. | | The Substack model is that you provide both content and | audience, and they provide hosting and monetization tools. | They're a service provider where only the author is their | customer, and so they're able to focus exclusively on what | the authors need. | blowski wrote: | So they don't promote content in the way that Medium tries | to do? | erichocean wrote: | Correct, no promotion at all. | stefan_ wrote: | No wonder it's failed if that is the model, I've never | arrived on Medium .. from Medium. It's like the Vimeo of | text. | ignoramous wrote: | So: Medium is to Amazon/Best Western, what Substack is to | Shopify/Airbnb? | | https://stratechery.com/2015/aggregation-theory/ | nickjj wrote: | > The Medium model is that you provide content, and they | provide an audience. | | This doesn't happen in practice. Like most marketplaces | they have an incentive to market things that are popular or | appear to be trending. That means in order for Medium to | promote your article you need to do the marketing with your | own audience or outlets to get eyeballs on the article and | after Medium flags your article as popular it might get | promoted. | | This is a really big concept because it means if you're | just starting off with no audience you might as well grow | your own audience on your platform because most | marketplaces like Medium (and others) aren't heavily | promoting folks with no prior audience. | | I remember putting some of my blog posts on Medium and | setting the canonical URL back to my site. Out of the | hundreds of thousands of visits my personal blog got I only | had a few hundred total hits on Medium. That's because I | didn't promote and drive my own traffic to Medium and in | turn they didn't promote me. | johnchristopher wrote: | There's no way to pay Medium to promote your content on | their platform ? | nickjj wrote: | > There's no way to pay Medium to promote your content on | their platform ? | | That's not something I saw when I used Medium in 2018ish | for some of my posts. | | I know there was a partner program but that wasn't paying | to get traffic to your posts. That was a mechanism to get | paid based on how much engagement you had on your Medium | articles. It's just another incentive to get you to drive | your own traffic and audience to Medium to drive up | Medium engagement. Basically helping Medium grow their | business. | | If you wanted to pay money to promote your content you | can do that without Medium. You can buy ads on Google and | other outlets then run ads to your blog posts. I don't do | that personally but it's an option. | andreilys wrote: | I started with no audience and got >100k reads on one of | my articles because I used a medium publication. | | This resulted in being able to build an audience that | would read my work irrespective of whether I published | with a publication. | jmathai wrote: | Getting your content onto a Medium publication with a | large and/or relevant following is such useful method of | distribution. All of my most widely read Medium posts | have been via a publication that I reached out to. | [deleted] | layer8 wrote: | > both the author and reader is a customer of Medium > only | the author is [Substack's] customer | | That suggests that Medium should be more reader-friendly | than Substack, but it seems the opposite is true. I suspect | that even when readers are nominally customers on Medium, | they are really still just the product (in the sense of "if | it's free, you're the product" -- except it's not free | here). | blairbeckwith wrote: | Most (all good?) authors will prioritize good reader | experience as one of their own requirements, so a good | reader experience comes naturally downstream from being | author-first. | xhkkffbf wrote: | The substack model seems to be more focused on building and | supporting individual brands. So I don't think of visiting | Substack, I think of checking out what X, Y or Z said. The | Substack brand is subordinate to the individual | blogs/writers. | amelius wrote: | Medium is simply YouTube for written content. So what holds for | Medium holds for YouTube and vice versa. | paxys wrote: | Except YouTube is wildly more popular and sustainable. Any | company would _kill_ to be the YouTube of [xyz]. | erichocean wrote: | > _Medium is simply YouTube for written content._ | | They wish! Medium is Vimeo. | hellomyguys wrote: | A platform isn't necessarily neutral. It can cultivate and | influence the culture that that exists on it. Medium never | really seemed to do that imo. | cloogshicer wrote: | > So what holds for Medium holds for YouTube and vice versa. | | I think the fact that YT hosts video makes it quite a | different beast from Medium. Self hosting video is still | quite difficult, and expensive. Hosting text is much cheaper | and simpler. | | This fact changes the game quite a bit. | picardo wrote: | YouTube has a great personalization algorithm and a lot of | content. Content and personalization make up a virtuous | cycle, and drive higher engagement rates, which drives ad | rates higher. Medium has neither the scale, content nor the | engagement to be as valuable a platform for advertisers. | skilled wrote: | Medium is an absolute plague since it started to enforce its | draconian subscription model. | | It is literally a waste of space for the 10 results you see on | the first page of Google searches. | Andrew_nenakhov wrote: | I liked Medium at first, but it worked hard to make me stop | liking it. I feel I'm not the only one. | fleddr wrote: | Rather than this community's emphasis on petty issues ("no | javascript"), I'd start by saying something positive about | Medium. | | If you can't be bothered to self-host a blog, you can link your | domain to your Medium publication (before May of this year this | was free, and continues to be free for earlier users). You'd then | have a free blog on a proper domain, with zero ads and you can | even tweak the design with a few clicks to make it your own. | Further, it comes with a comment system, followers, etc. It's | easy to blog as the writing experience is quite excellent. | | I think all of that combined is a lot of value, in particular for | a casual blogger. And it doesn't cost a cent. To me, this | counters the list of small UI annoyances. We've grown extremely | entitled and cynical, I'm just trying to recognize value when I | see it. Because certainly the value isn't zero. | | The negative I have about Medium is that just like many other | content services, they failed to solve the discovery problem. | There used to be a lot of quality writing on Medium and there | might still be a lot, but those writers are not recognized by the | ranking/discovery algorithms. Instead, they are completely | outclassed by people gaming the system. | | Check any topic/category and see that most are flooded with low | effort no-substance articles with click bait titles. Those people | know how to work the algorithms, and they win. | | So...noise goes to the top instead of quality. And for those | quality writers to gain traction, they need to join the | engagement hacking or find crickets. | | It seems to be a generic problems across many networks: the loud, | dumb and unreasonable get 90% of all attention after which other | voices are discouraged or just give up. | | It gets worse when you consider the secondary problem: there's | limited appetite for long form content and the trend is that it's | decreasing even further. We quite simply live in a Tiktok | society. You have 30 seconds to make your point. | [deleted] | jacooper wrote: | > It seems to be a generic problems across many networks: the | loud, dumb and unreasonable get 90% of all attention after | which other voices are discouraged or just give up. | | I think its probably not a problem for the platforms, shorter | content mean its easier to put advertisements and easier to | recommend and manage. | | Its a race to the bottom because now probably for the first | time in history, social interaction is not made to be valuable | or important, its made to be profitable. | | Cafes and bars didn't control what you can say, and changed | which topics are preferable and which aren't, obviously Social | media does this and more. | | So as long users exist, advertisers are paying to advertise, | nothing really will change, and we are starting to see the | affect of this in the world. | | > It gets worse when you consider the secondary problem: | there's limited appetite for long form content and the trend is | that it's decreasing even further. We quite simply live in a | Tiktok society. You have 30 seconds to make your point. | | I think this really depends on the audience, and who you are | targeting. | | HN is totally the opposite from TikTok, yet it still grows, and | blogs that get on the front page get a very large amount of | traffic that almost any author would be happy with. | | But in general, I agree everything became stupider because its | a race to the bottom at this point. | fleddr wrote: | Ads don't apply to Medium. It's a subscription model. In | theory it's a refreshing take as they rightfully recognize | the many (ethical) issues with running ads, surveillance | tech, and so on. | | If for a moment we would assume a very large group of | qualitative "citizen journalists" regularly writing, together | they'd produce a vast sea of high quality content. Medium at | one point also onboarded actual pro publications, so you'd | get a really great set of content that in volume would be the | equivalent of several thousands of newspaper and in terms of | quality be close, whilst being more diverse. | | 5$ per month for that pile of quality is a steal. | | But for that to work, the quality has to be discoverable. You | need to able to look at the homepage, and see top notch | writing in the categories you're interested in. It would be a | single place to do most of one's deeper reading, with | seemingly no end. For very low costs. | | None of that has worked out, for the reasons I mentioned. | philipwhiuk wrote: | You can write exactly the same about Blogger. Medium added | nothing | revskill wrote: | Medium or any blogging sites MUST prevent usage of Javascript | (think HackerNews for blogging). JS is evil for websites like | blogging or news. | dewey wrote: | This is only the opinion of a very small (but loud on HN) group | of people. Most people want basic interactivity like | bookmarking things they want to keep for later, commenting, | interactive charts, image gallery. | revskill wrote: | If you can't control something, just forbid it. | | I built my internal apps with full of JS but when it comes to | website, No JS is the highest priority to me. | kodah wrote: | That's not really true. For instance, interactive charts can be | very useful on a blog. Diagramming is also quite useful, | especially if the diagram and data it acts on are kept in the | article itself - for instance, I use MermaidJS for this. | | What becomes bad is when platforms (or people) think they're | entitled to track you with said Javascript. | revskill wrote: | Yes for sure. If a service is free to use, you're the | product. You're the product because of JS of course. | | So let's be concise on "Free", i want "Free of JS", not free | of charge. | dewey wrote: | You are just repeating phrases. | | Nobody is the product just because a website uses JS. You | should be complaining about data collection, unnecessary | tracking, data brokers all of which can be done without JS. | cercatrova wrote: | I can make a product free of JS where the user is still the | product. Server side tracking still exists. | revskill wrote: | That idea doesn't work in reality. For example, i go to a | website, and just read and browse it. No data should be | collected as i never update or call the backend. | cercatrova wrote: | But...you went to the website. Now my server can track | you. It knows what IP address you're coming from, where | you are in the world, and it could theoretically cross | reference that data with other databases and determine | more about you. | aaaaaaaaaaab wrote: | Let me introduce you to the amazing <img> tag! | [deleted] | __rito__ wrote: | My quip with them is they never started the Partner Program in | India. And were very dishonest regarding it. | | There once was a time when I wanted to earn from my writings, but | not any more. | | But their dishonesty makes it unlikely for me to reconsider them. | | They said that they would start Partner Program (MPP) in India | once Stripe started serving India. | | Then Stripe became operational in Beta. They said, once Stripe | comes out of Beta, they would start MPP in India. | | Then Stripe came out of Beta. They just stopped mentioning India. | They can serve Lithuania, Slovakia, Latvia, Slovenia- and not | India. That made me frustrated enough to stop using Medium. | | I do not plan to go back, and I don't need money from writing | anymore. | | I made some money from Quora (you just have to sign W8-BEN, which | is a 10 minute process) running Spaces, but somehow Medium never | started MPP. | | Their dishonesty made me angry. | | Edit: they put a paywall on my writings by default even when they | didn't pay me a dime. | nvr219 wrote: | I wish Medium would step down from the Internet. | erichocean wrote: | I'm surprised he didn't leave five years ago. | EddieDante wrote: | It's called "Medium" because the posts are neither rare nor well- | done. | rg111 wrote: | To be honest, Medium still provides the easiest of discovery | processes. | | Twitter is still bad for the small guy. The algorithm is too bad. | I know at least n people will find a tweet content really | interesting, but I se k (<< n) likes. That frustrates me. | | Blogger, Wordpress, Bear Blog: none of them makes your content | visible to others like Medium does. | | Those are the solutions that I like, because I don't want to do | even little maintenance. And I want features like likes, | comments, bookmarks, share buttons. | | I posted to Bear Blog and Medium same content some weeks back. It | is on an obscure topic. The Bear Blog one has two toasts, nobody | reached out to me regarding it. On the Medium one, there are 13 | unique claps, two thoughful comments, people saving my article to | several lists. | | I didn't have this with anything else, tbh. | | I tried maintaining a site using Jekyll and hosted on GH pages. I | don't even like that amount of maintenance. | | I have research for org, self-research, books, family, physical | activity, minor hacking projects. Really cannot find the time to | fiddle with another thing. | rchaud wrote: | > On the Medium one, there are 13 unique claps, two thoughful | comments, people saving my article to several lists. | | Is a handful of additional comments worth the tradeoff? | | Because Medium.com can decide at any time to tweak the knobs of | their recommendation engine, and your admittedly low traffic | could go straight down to Bear Blog levels. That is what | happened to many people's Instagram accounts, as IG is now | favouring organic posts from users that also pay for promoted | posts...aka, servicing their real customers. | jmathai wrote: | But that tradeoff is hypothetical and would not retroactively | remove value that is created in the meantime. | | I'm not a medium fan either but my feelings are similar to | the parent post. If it's something I want to persist then I | _will_ take the effort and add it to my jekyll site but that | 's few and far between. Medium works great for the 99% of | long form content I want to publish. | rg111 wrote: | I do not _depend_ on my writings in any way. | | I also have a pseudonymous Less Wrong account where I say | unconventional, unpopular things. See, I don't earn money OR | make a name. | | I also write notes when I need- to Simplenote and Google | Docs, and share the links with the people I see fit. | | I don't measure anything serious or important to me regarding | views or reach. They are just a nice bonus. | | _I wouldn't even have that if not for Medium._ | | FB is where I can get the best reach. But I don't like the | _distribution of people_ there, and post seldomly with | extremely curated visibility list of "friends". I am happy | with 10 likes. | | I also have an YT channel that helps people (edit: it's code | and math). Very low effort channel with near-zero editing. I | earn a penny or two. | | As I said, don't care. Need low-maintenance stuff. | caseyross wrote: | The way I see it from the outside, Medium had a lot of lofty | goals that unfortunately turned out to be in conflict with each | other in the real world. | | One one hand, they wanted to create the best writing and reading | experience on the web, by investing heavily in product design, | and manually curating and promoting quality writing that would be | interesting to read. | | On the other hand, they wanted to democratize publishing by | making it easy to write and encouraging just anyone to get their | ideas out onto the platform, regardless of how readable those | writings were. | | Subscribers that were willing to pay monthly for access to | curated, thoughtful writing increasingly found a site filled with | low-quality boilerplate. Established writers who had at first | enthusiastically adopted Medium increasingly fled the site in | order to protect their personal brands and reputations. | | In the end, no one was happy, except mediocre clickbait writers. | There wasn't enough subscription money to justify focusing | entirely on quality, and ad-based models were too much in | conflict with the platform goals for them to be able to make up | the difference via scale. | | I definitely don't think Medium has been a failure in its first | 10 years. Quite the contrary --- they really did raise the bar | for reading experiences across the web, and for a time, they did | have the best and brightest writers churning out thoughtful, | interesting content. | | But it was an idea ahead of its time. Without established | cultural and technical micropayments infrastructure (a situation | which has seen practically no progress in these past 10 years), | it was always going to be an uphill battle to fund the kind of | experiences they wanted to create. | | I doubt there will be many changes in this state of affairs | during the next CEO's tenure. That said, I hope to be surprised, | not just because it would be good for Medium, but because it | would provide much-needed hope for the web as a whole. Our need | for social platforms that care about empowering and educating | people, rather than exploiting them, is even greater than it was | 10 years ago. Perhaps Medium's next act can help rekindle that | flame. | weeblewobble wrote: | Tangential, but I found Ev's recent Tweet about the Twitter/Elon | mess totally perplexing: | | "I'm sure there are legal/fiduciary reasons you have to say that | [you are going to sue Elon to force the acquisition], Bret. But | if I was still on the board, I'd be asking if we can just let | this whole ugly episode blow over. Hopefully that's the plan and | this is ceremony." | | https://twitter.com/ev/status/1545588839363727361?s=20&t=4g7... | | Why would Twitter want to just let this all blow over? Elon did a | ton of damage to the company and they have a good cause of | action. | drewda wrote: | I don't fully agree with arguments that Silicon Valley is full | of America's current meritocratic elite scratching each other's | backs. But I do think that tweet speaks to that argument. | | The board's responsibility to shareholders and other | stakeholders in Twitter doesn't seem to enter his awareness -- | just everyone getting along, where everyone means a select | crowd of entrepreneurs and investors. | cactus2093 wrote: | The stock made a huge jump when he announced he purchased a | large stake on April 4, and now it's back to $34 which is ~5% | above its mid-March low point. Most other tech stocks are down | in that time frame, e.g. FB is down 13%. | | Doesn't seem like Musk did any obvious damage. | paxys wrote: | That's because the possibility of an acquisition is still | being priced in. If Twitter announced tomorrow that they were | letting Musk off the hook it would take a much greater dive. | cactus2093 wrote: | If true isn't that alone a pretty strong signal? | | That would mean a shrinking possibility of an already | bungled acquisition going through is better than the status | quo. Seems like Musk has kind of done Twitter a favor by | shaking things up. Regardless of the acquisition, it has | become clear that the market thinks there is a lot of | potential here that's being wasted. | initplus wrote: | The only thing it's a signal of is that $54.20 is much | higher than the "true" stock price. | karpierz wrote: | The market isn't pricing whether Elon will improve | Twitter. The market is pricing in the fact that if the | acquisition goes through, each stock you hold gets | converted into 52.40$, regardless of what happens to | Twitter after it's acquired. | game-of-throws wrote: | The market just thinks there's a chance he'll be forced | into paying more than the company is worth. It needn't | have anything to do with the company's potential. | | If I made a credible $100B offer for the Campbell Soup | company and waived due diligence, the stock price would | shoot up, but it's not because they're wasting their | potential. | simonswords82 wrote: | Twitter will be worth about $5bn by 2026. It's a nonsense | platform with no intrinsic value. | smoldesu wrote: | > Why would Twitter want to just let this all blow over? Elon | did a ton of damage to the company and they have a good cause | of action. | | I don't think Twitter has much of a choice here. Suing Musk | seems like a pretty big risk given his defense, and it doesn't | even guarantee a payoff for the company. On top of that, the | fallout from such a high-profile court case wouldn't be very | good PR (arguably so even if Twitter wins), so the shareholders | are probably in for a net loss if they fight it out in court. | Plus, Elon could full-well just settle the $1B offer | cancellation fee out of spite and Twitter wouldn't see a dime. | | Elon definitely made a stupid and rash decision, but frankly, | Twitter is an even dumber company. A bunch of bagholders trying | to legally compel a multi-billionaire to buy them out doesn't | make a very strong court case. I don't see this ending well for | Twitter unless Elon _really_ fumbles his defense. | JumpCrisscross wrote: | > _fallout from such a high-profile court case wouldn 't be | very good PR_ | | In what sense? Will advertisers or users flee because of a | court case? If anything, it keeps Twitter in the news. Their | CEO could make any announcement today and have it reverberate | across America as he could never have done before. | rchaud wrote: | > A bunch of bagholders trying to legally compel a multi- | billionaire to buy them out doesn't make a very strong court | case. | | What case law would suggest this being a bad idea? Musk | voluntarily made himself the 2nd-biggest TWTR bagholder next | to Vanguard. | jorams wrote: | > Elon could full-well just settle the $1B offer cancellation | fee out of spite and Twitter wouldn't see a dime. | | This is not true. He can't just decide to pay $1B to get rid | of it all. | weeblewobble wrote: | My impression is that Musk's defense is pretty weak. This is | mostly based on Matt Levine's columns so I could be wrong, | but it doesn't seem like much to me. He's a known BS artist | with a strong incentive to get out of this deal so I don't | give a lot of weight to claims he makes without evidence. | etc-hosts wrote: | most recent Matt Levine column outlined a scenario where Elon | Musk sells back his 9 percent stake in Twitter back to Twitter | at a discount, and everyone agrees to back off. | radiojasper wrote: | Twitter hurt themselves by not being able to hand over crucial | details like how big the percentage of bot accounts is on the | platform. No matter what is being said, as long as Twitter | can't hand over these stats, all they say is worthless. About | as worthless as the Twitter platform itself. | hellomyguys wrote: | Elon hurt himself by waiving his right to any due diligence. | Any time he tweets he sees a ton of spam accounts replying to | him. Why didn't he ask for this information before agreeing | to the initial terms? | Dma54rhs wrote: | It doesn't matter from Twitters point of view who is right | or wrong. They need to close this fiasco it's tanking their | stock price. | leroman wrote: | A while back I was sold on a subscription because I wanted to | subscribe on some topics and get a nice digest in my mail every | day or so.. | | But in actuality I started getting - some shitcoin promoters - | some wfh scams - click baity topics without much substance.. | | So I cancelled (which unfortunately only happens some months | later..) | [deleted] | dodgerdan wrote: | Medium is pretty much on death row now. It's gone through so many | failed business model changes, its not a pleasant reading | experience, and it's brand isn't great. | pornel wrote: | I'm soooo disappointed in Medium. They were supposed to be a | clean, readable alternative to all the shitty sites that attack | you with popups and won't show text without JS. But bit by bit | they've joined the sites they were meant to replace. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-07-12 23:01 UTC)