6 ms·
I subscribed to the Baffler because they write well, and to break out of my own echo chambers a bit. Glad to see them on HN, but a bit disappointed in the resp
by hardwaresofton 2y ago
I subscribed to the Baffler because they write well, and to break out of my own echo chambers a bit.
Glad to see them on HN, but a bit disappointed in the response. They article is mostly correct in it’s lampooning.
Even if you disagree with points or find it ironic that they offer a subscription (btw equating producing a publication with SaaS is quite erroneous) — I think its useful to take this as a datapoint on how people outside tech see tech. That matters.
- debo_ 2y agoI think a lot of folks in software would agree with most of the article as well. It has a hyperbolic edge but that's a stylistic concern rather than a material one IMO.
- sacul 2y agoThe fact that both offer a subscription is not ironic - it simply highlights the central point. In the end, those paying a subscription for thebaffler.com or for salesforce.com are paying for something very similar: they are paying for words and ideas. People think that building a software program is like building a house. And, I grant, in some ways it is. But in the end, the customer is not paying for anything tangible. He's paying for words and ideas.
- jtbayly 2y agoThat’s interesting. The thing is, the Baffler continues to create new words and ideas, and I pay for those new words and ideas every month if I subscribe. No new words or ideas show up next month on your software, so why should I keep paying you? I know you’ll say maintenance and updates, but from the user’s perspective there is quite the difference.