9 ms·

Substack was down

25 points by benjyhirsch 4y ago

rvz 4y ago
- FollowingTheDao 4y ago
  You don’t have to call them grifters. Under capitalism everyone is a grifter. And who in the world is not dependent on someone else right now, when it comes to getting anything on the Internet.
pcvarmint 4y ago
https://twitter.com/SubstackStatus/status/1605621347253907456 https://twitter.com/SubstackStatus/status/160562134725390745...
juanbyrge 4y ago
Lol, I could host all of substack as static html pages on a $20/mo linode instance. Embarrassing.
- _Algernon_ 4y ago
  Doubt you could do that in a way where you'd attract users at the level of Substack.
  - miiiiiike 4y ago
    You could if you gave people $400-500k to move over.
    - nicky0 4y ago
      If my grandmother had wheels, she would be a bike.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
    - ScottyAdams0 4y ago
      They only pay $3500 and it comes with a big NDA.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - miiiiiike 4y ago
        They were fronting people 250k+ for their first year. IIRC
  - ScottyAdams0 4y ago
    Umm maybe it’s the fact substack is outright paying for traffic and lying about it? It’s just their own paid influencers who use it.
    - naasking 4y ago
      Where are they lying about it? They openly admit to paying writers. And no, it's not "just" their influencers using it.
    - Veen 4y ago
      Perhaps I'm a bit old-fashioned, but paying writers to write doesn't seem like a particularly nefarious activity to me. I mean, I believe the NYT does it too, and a few other organizations.
- MontyCarloHall 4y ago
  Everyone knows it is trivial to host a read-only static website with the traffic of Substack. It’s the read/write part that gets you.
higeorge13 4y ago
It’s odd that their status page mentions scheduled maintenance and everything is still green.
cjbest 4y ago
Founder here. Sorry about this everyone. We're monitoring a fix now
alphabet9000 4y ago
it's a shame substack continues to get more and more visually bloated. I remember when it first launched, thinking the site looked really clean and simple. i figured it was only a matter of time before the simplicity went away, and it became more like Medium.com (in a bad way). it seems like there is a very predictable model for how a site like this devolves: - it starts ultra clean, posts have a title and body, maybe (reluctantly) a share link appears somewhere on the page . - then "modern" looking custom web fonts are added, making elements on the page flicker/move around when the page opens. - then the entire site adds a sticky header that animates as you scroll up and down. - then the site is rewritten using some client-side rendering framework that requires javascript to run 'correctly'. - then a popup modal is added to every single page asking you to subscribe or sign in. (substack is currently here) - then "reading time indicators" (e.g. "5 min read") are added to the top of every story - then "related" stories are inter-spliced throughout the text of the story. - then it becomes hard or impossible to even find the actual content of the story, as the entire site is engulfed in "related" content
- berkle4455 4y ago
  hey those product managers gotta earn their equally bloated compensation packages.
  - passwordoops 4y ago
    PM here, and though I've only worked on delivering one web app, I was forced to follow this model because "we have a UX designer for a reason". At some point the future vision of the UI was getting so unnecessarily bloated, our UX genius independently came up with Clippy, but if he were a fox... Luckily we were sold and I got a new job because I knew I was gonna lose that fight
  - AlbertCory 4y ago
    The PMs, and the senior engineers. "Leave well enough alone" is never a winning pitch. We see this phenomenon literally everywhere. The Patent and Trademark Office just replaced their perfectly usable Search page with something vastly more complicated, and incomprehensible at first glance. When I was researching my article about Twitter and firing all those engineers, I looked at the R&D spending for Proctor & Gamble and other consumer products companies. It's usually 1-2% of revenue. They spend their money on marketing, where it belongs when your product is mature.
guelo 4y ago
After Twitter I hope we're all starting to realize that these billionaire VC backed media platforms are not the place to pour our heart and souls into. You are giving them power over you and your content. No matter what they promise, eventually they will abuse their power against you.
- guelo 4y ago
  At their whim

25 points by benjyhirsch 4y ago

rvz 4y ago

FollowingTheDao 4y ago
You don’t have to call them grifters. Under capitalism everyone is a grifter. And who in the world is not dependent on someone else right now, when it comes to getting anything on the Internet.

https://twitter.com/SubstackStatus/status/1605621347253907456 https://twitter.com/SubstackStatus/status/160562134725390745...

juanbyrge 4y ago

Lol, I could host all of substack as static html pages on a $20/mo linode instance. Embarrassing.

_Algernon_ 4y ago
Doubt you could do that in a way where you'd attract users at the level of Substack.
- miiiiiike 4y ago
  You could if you gave people $400-500k to move over.
  - nicky0 4y ago
    If my grandmother had wheels, she would be a bike.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - ScottyAdams0 4y ago
    They only pay $3500 and it comes with a big NDA.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - miiiiiike 4y ago
      They were fronting people 250k+ for their first year. IIRC
- ScottyAdams0 4y ago
  Umm maybe it’s the fact substack is outright paying for traffic and lying about it? It’s just their own paid influencers who use it.
  - naasking 4y ago
    Where are they lying about it? They openly admit to paying writers. And no, it's not "just" their influencers using it.
  - Veen 4y ago
    Perhaps I'm a bit old-fashioned, but paying writers to write doesn't seem like a particularly nefarious activity to me. I mean, I believe the NYT does it too, and a few other organizations.
MontyCarloHall 4y ago
Everyone knows it is trivial to host a read-only static website with the traffic of Substack. It’s the read/write part that gets you.

higeorge13 4y ago

It’s odd that their status page mentions scheduled maintenance and everything is still green.

cjbest 4y ago

Founder here. Sorry about this everyone. We're monitoring a fix now

alphabet9000 4y ago

it's a shame substack continues to get more and more visually bloated. I remember when it first launched, thinking the site looked really clean and simple. i figured it was only a matter of time before the simplicity went away, and it became more like Medium.com (in a bad way). it seems like there is a very predictable model for how a site like this devolves: - it starts ultra clean, posts have a title and body, maybe (reluctantly) a share link appears somewhere on the page . - then "modern" looking custom web fonts are added, making elements on the page flicker/move around when the page opens. - then the entire site adds a sticky header that animates as you scroll up and down. - then the site is rewritten using some client-side rendering framework that requires javascript to run 'correctly'. - then a popup modal is added to every single page asking you to subscribe or sign in. (substack is currently here) - then "reading time indicators" (e.g. "5 min read") are added to the top of every story - then "related" stories are inter-spliced throughout the text of the story. - then it becomes hard or impossible to even find the actual content of the story, as the entire site is engulfed in "related" content

berkle4455 4y ago
hey those product managers gotta earn their equally bloated compensation packages.
- passwordoops 4y ago
  PM here, and though I've only worked on delivering one web app, I was forced to follow this model because "we have a UX designer for a reason". At some point the future vision of the UI was getting so unnecessarily bloated, our UX genius independently came up with Clippy, but if he were a fox... Luckily we were sold and I got a new job because I knew I was gonna lose that fight
- AlbertCory 4y ago
  The PMs, and the senior engineers. "Leave well enough alone" is never a winning pitch. We see this phenomenon literally everywhere. The Patent and Trademark Office just replaced their perfectly usable Search page with something vastly more complicated, and incomprehensible at first glance. When I was researching my article about Twitter and firing all those engineers, I looked at the R&D spending for Proctor & Gamble and other consumer products companies. It's usually 1-2% of revenue. They spend their money on marketing, where it belongs when your product is mature.

guelo 4y ago

After Twitter I hope we're all starting to realize that these billionaire VC backed media platforms are not the place to pour our heart and souls into. You are giving them power over you and your content. No matter what they promise, eventually they will abuse their power against you.

guelo 4y ago
At their whim