shopkins

"Most corporations" don't do global surveillance on the scale Facebook does. It's that simple.

It's not about 100% purity. Just not doing this one little, tiny, fundamental-to-their-entire-business thing.

This is literally a way to "self-host your shit."

I've been using https://write.as for years and enjoying it. Perfect for plain text, does Markdown and code syntax highlighting.

The Write.as guys have been working on a good alternative with their Snap.as service [0]. It's tied to the blogging side, but looks like it'll be another simple tool that doesn't pull the same signup-wall crap as Instagram.

[0] https://snap.as

Here's the actual link, so you don't have to give out a temporary email address like I did: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/11Db_mfeUocbPSIN52y8h...

I would echo that this is a terribly user-hostile tactic and, to be honest, makes me want to avoid the main product you're launching.

Hard to find, but it's here: https://write.as/guidelines

From what I've read it sounds like they're not free speech absolutists, but they're pretty liberal about what is allowed.

Just a little feedback: as someone not deep in the blockchain world, I have no idea what Blockstack is, or why nothing happens when I click "sign in" or "start writing now". The page does a good job of describing the product benefits, but it doesn't cover square 1 and describe what I need in order to actually start using the product.

Otherwise I know this was a fun project, but it always helps to hone in on your audience on the landing page. Answer, Who's going to appreciate this the most?

There are also dedicated extensions for this [0]

[0] https://makemediumreadable.com

Obligatory life-saving browser extension: https://makemediumreadable.com

It means your posts are sent out to followers via ActivityPub. It explains this below, in the "publish to the fediverse" section.

1. No, services in the US like DDG largely aren't liable for what users post (or do) on their sites, mostly because of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 [0].

2. We don't know they haven't been served with a national security letter. DDG's protection scope doesn't cover you needing protection from the government, though. So we know using DDG != Google because that's the surveillance threat vector they're concerned with: literally not being Google (which they aren't).

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Decency_Act#Sec...

Much quicker to have the legal team fire off the standard email threat than get the dev team to reverse-engineer the extension and block it (if this wasn't just an automated email).

Yep on their cheapest plan, for $10 / year. Also comes with SSL.

I'm on Write.as and enjoying it a lot [0]. Simple, privacy-focused, and easy to create multiple blogs.

[0] https://shopkins.writeas.com

This argument is disingenuous, and not really more than a projected opinion. Not everyone is this tribal, and people are allowed to be angry when they see the manifest implications of surveillance capitalism without being partisans.

The point, I think, is to send a message. Yes, the damage is done. But public pressure to #DeleteFacebook might force Facebook to be a little less cavalier with billions of people's personal data, respect previous agreements with the FTC [0], etc. in the future.

[0] https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2011/11/faceb...

It does remove the fixed positioning.

This is what makes me lose hope for the web. I see the same celebrity tripe and clickbait on Snapchat, and while annoying, I'm not going to spend my limited time on earth teaching an app my preferences so it can suck up more of my time with brands that want to "engage" with me in new ways. I go there to engage with my human friends, and honestly I'd pay a couple bucks a month to get Snapchat without the brands taking up my screen.

All great reasons to leave. We really need to consider who's getting enriched when we put crucial parts of our businesses on certain platforms, and in Medium's case, it seems like they absorb most of the value (I always cringe when people say "check out my Medium post").

I've kept a personal blog on Write.as for the past few years, and while it's still not self-hosting, I can at least get my data out, have a custom domain and syndicate to Medium when I'm really fiending for those claps (hint: I'm usually not).

Those instances were usually resolved, but other times ISPs continued misbehaving, and in fact when the FCC has sued, the courts have actually said that they could've won and prevented the bad behavior under Title II [0]

Also, the argument that "the internet worked fine before" is misleading, because technically the FCC worked under the same wireline "neutrality" rules and norms applied to AT&T back in the 70s. A little more history here: [1]

[0] https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/EA10373F...

[1] https://www.wired.com/story/how-the-fccs-net-neutrality-plan...

Agreed. Working for a company that optimizes for cashing out loses luster really quickly. As someone who's been on that hamster wheel for too long, have to say it'd definitely be more interesting to work for a company that builds for long-term sustainability.

Agreed. Obviously they have every right to do this, but what are these companies actually contributing to the crowdfunding community, outside of (seemingly) inferior products like the Nebula Capsule [0] or Opal Nugget Ice Maker [1]? Why do we need to sacrifice more of our sacred startup / maker spaces to megabrands?

[0] https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/capsule-the-world-s-most-...

[1] https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/opal-nugget-ice-maker/#/c...

OP mentions a similar platform he made, Write.as, in the README. It doesn't do as much as Medium (I think that's on purpose) but they have a small Medium-like network for authors there [0].

I've been on it for over a year [1] and really enjoying the simplicity myself.

[0] https://read.write.as

[1] https://shopkins.writeas.com

Man, those were the days. Though I guess it's managed to keep them at the top, perched on top of people who still think it's The Best Place to Host Your Content™

Google has such a vast amount of data on users that its search really can't be beat right now. If you're fully in the ecosystem with mail, maps, contacts, calendar, smartphone, apps, etc. you're going to get better results -- not to mention switching could mean giving up these integrated products.

It's because we're skeptical of corporations that hold the kind of power Facebook does -- power derived from their data on literally billions of people -- just as we would be if it was a government doing the same. And companies like Facebook get extra (deserved) scrutiny, because they aren't as accountable to the people using their products, since those people aren't their customers.

It's not about "startups vs. market leading companies." It's this audience knowing the immense power and control companies like Facebook can (and do) exert over us all.

Absolutely agreed on the feeds issue. Unlike TV, the internet as a medium has the capacity to enable both unbounded discovery, creativity, production, etc. and unbounded consumption. Like TV, feeds and their ilk encourage pure consumption, but with little slot machine levers (like, favorite, retweet) that make you think you're contributing more than you actually are.

Overall though, it's all about how you use it, and many times it's a delicate balance and a constant fight against how these products are engineered to suck you in. But kudos for getting out of the giant casino that is social media!

It's completely ridiculous. There's one way to distribute software on the second-largest mobile platform in the world, so we either have to pay whatever cut they shake us down for, or provide a terrible user experience by not even letting users click on a link to using our own subscription backend.

I would argue it's also, uh, not in their business model whatsoever to support efforts like this (thinking Facebook especially). Better to develop the spec and forge on now, or we'd be waiting around for a long time.

It's their service, they're bearing the weight of being your "straw person," they can do what they want. I see nothing wrong with them writing their terms of service to reflect their values, and conveying them it in a cheeky manner like this.