7 Matching Annotations
  1. May 2022
  2. Oct 2021
    1. a way to transparently discover related blogs that avoids hidden algorithms

      Bristly pop cultural misuse of the term "algorithm" notwithstanding, a better solution that I haven't come across anyone else mention: make them explicit, not hidden.

      When it look like Dat might've had enough steam to take off (ca. 2017–2018), I wrote a draft straw proposal for how to solve the "discovery problem" with e.g. Fritter—i.e. the problem that because you only "receive" replies and other messages by checking the feeds of the people you're following, you'll be unable to reply engage with strangers who appear (or have a stranger engage with you in their thread) unless something happens like a mutual acquaintance alerting you out of band ("hey, did you see @foo's reply dat://foo.example.net/posts/ukifxdgbh.json?").

      The idea is that there is a special kind of feed operated by some service provider that specializes in doing exactly that. If you find Facebook valuable, for example, then you are free to opt in and subscribe to the Facebook analog that pays attention to all feeds and works to surface interesting content for you. Under this model, unlike the Facebook regime, "leaving" is as simple as unsubscribing to that feed (and going with a different provider if you want).

  3. May 2021
    1. many people have attached sensors

      This differs from LDN, where the the annotation service is squarely under the control of the document author. This is also using sensor attachment in a different sense that the way it first appears above. The application is more akin to RSS. With RSS, the links exist in some other "document" (or something like it; generall can be modeled as OPML, even if it's really, say, an sqlite store).

  4. Feb 2021
  5. Oct 2020
    1. What I dwell on the most regarding syndication is the Twitter stuff. I look back at the analytics on this site at the end of every year and look at where the traffic came from — every year, Twitter is a teeny-weeny itty-bitty slice of the pie. Measuring traffic alone, that’s nowhere near the amount of effort we put into making the stuff we’re tweeting there. I always rationalize it to myself in other ways. I feel like Twitter is one of the major ways I stay updated with the industry and it’s a major source of ideas for articles.

      So it sounds like Twitter isn't driving traffic to his website, but it is providing ideas and news. Given this I would syndicate content to Twitter as easily and quickly as possible, use webmentions to deal with the interactions and then just use the Twitter timeline for reading and consuming and nothing else.

    1. As someone who writes social media for work, I am deeply rooted in the practice of writing a unique intro when I share a post to Twitter, not directly syndicating it with whatever text I started the article with. For me that feels good enough (not saving that unique share to my site) since including the link means any likes and comments about the article come back to my blog thanks to Bridgy, but maybe someone will convince me otherwise ;)

      I'll often share articles to Twitter and don't necessarily do a 1-to-1 match of the syndicated copy on Twitter. Usually I'll excerpt a piece that ends up appearing on Twitter with a link back to the article. I generally presuppose that if they're interested, they'll click through and read otherwise they're bookmarking it or sharing the link with others, so those interactions coming back to the original are always fine with me.