3 ms·

Is it something you've considered opening up? Sounds like a much more useful paradigm.

by heliostatic 4y ago

ghostinthebash 4y ago
With the dependence on Superfeedr, this seems like it’d be difficult to scale and provide as a service.
- PaulHoule 4y ago
  Hard to say. Right now Superfeedr feels like a great value (less than $5/month) with the caveat about low-volume feeds. I think the API to add and remove feeds is silly (wet not dry) but getting updates through a webhook is nice. If I had a lot of people using it I wouldn't mind a $500/month Superfeedr bill and I know their pricing goes down if I have a lot of feeds and I'm sure they'd love to talk if I was a bigger customer -- but there are all the agency problems that come up when one business depends on another business. That said, web crawlers, scanners, and things like that were a subject I was interested in in the aught's and the last thing I want to work on now and Superfeedr frees me up to focus on the models and UI now.
  - kevincox 4y ago
    Superfeedr also seems completely unmaintained since Medium bought them. The blog is dry, other feed-related projects are frozen, they still don't support newer WebSub standards and the offical Medium hub for Medium blogs doesn't send updates. I suspect that Medium doesn't care about feeds anymore now that they are big so they are doing just enough to keep the current service running. I wouldn't want to build a service on top of them. But I guess if it does shut down switching to polling youself wouldn't be the hardest thing to do.
PaulHoule 4y ago
I've thought about it a little. There's the possibility of a self-hostable source code release, also the possibility of a service, these have their strengths and weaknesses. For the latter I'd probably want to partner up with somebody. I am not so sure how well it competes with collaborative filtering, if it becomes a service that targets the "anti-social" media market it probably will get some collaborative filtering for better or for worse. For very strong filtering I think it needs both a "popularity" and a "relevance" score the same way Google has PageRank and a relevance score. When I fed it all comments from HN it was really overwhelmed but when I feed it comments with a high score it does remarkably well. Collaborative filtering automatically gets information about popularity, but the content-based approach works better when your topics are obscure. I also don't know about the market. The smart RSS reader for a broad audience has Twitter Blue pricing (no ads, never) but a similar product aimed at people who sort through a lot of content for a living has more like Salesforce.com pricing. Not to say that you couldn't have plans for each market.

Is it something you've considered opening up? Sounds like a much more useful paradigm.

ghostinthebash 4y ago

With the dependence on Superfeedr, this seems like it’d be difficult to scale and provide as a service.

PaulHoule 4y ago
Hard to say. Right now Superfeedr feels like a great value (less than $5/month) with the caveat about low-volume feeds. I think the API to add and remove feeds is silly (wet not dry) but getting updates through a webhook is nice. If I had a lot of people using it I wouldn't mind a $500/month Superfeedr bill and I know their pricing goes down if I have a lot of feeds and I'm sure they'd love to talk if I was a bigger customer -- but there are all the agency problems that come up when one business depends on another business. That said, web crawlers, scanners, and things like that were a subject I was interested in in the aught's and the last thing I want to work on now and Superfeedr frees me up to focus on the models and UI now.
- kevincox 4y ago
  Superfeedr also seems completely unmaintained since Medium bought them. The blog is dry, other feed-related projects are frozen, they still don't support newer WebSub standards and the offical Medium hub for Medium blogs doesn't send updates. I suspect that Medium doesn't care about feeds anymore now that they are big so they are doing just enough to keep the current service running. I wouldn't want to build a service on top of them. But I guess if it does shut down switching to polling youself wouldn't be the hardest thing to do.

PaulHoule 4y ago

I've thought about it a little. There's the possibility of a self-hostable source code release, also the possibility of a service, these have their strengths and weaknesses. For the latter I'd probably want to partner up with somebody. I am not so sure how well it competes with collaborative filtering, if it becomes a service that targets the "anti-social" media market it probably will get some collaborative filtering for better or for worse. For very strong filtering I think it needs both a "popularity" and a "relevance" score the same way Google has PageRank and a relevance score. When I fed it all comments from HN it was really overwhelmed but when I feed it comments with a high score it does remarkably well. Collaborative filtering automatically gets information about popularity, but the content-based approach works better when your topics are obscure. I also don't know about the market. The smart RSS reader for a broad audience has Twitter Blue pricing (no ads, never) but a similar product aimed at people who sort through a lot of content for a living has more like Salesforce.com pricing. Not to say that you couldn't have plans for each market.