4 ms·

We need to take a step back, and stop building all these silly websites and applications. Seriously, this madness must stop. The application paradigm simply can

We need to take a step back, and stop building all these silly websites and applications. Seriously, this madness must stop. The application paradigm simply cannot scale. How many apps can you install? How many profiles can you maintain? How many inbox can you empty? How many activity feeds can you go through? How many shopping apps do you use until you buy that one thing? How many times have you seen the exact same article/story posted across your social networks? How many "share your startup ideas" communities does it take for humanity to find the meaning of life? After how long and how much are you going to realize that nobody will ever use your niche social network? We need to look at the big picture. We need to rethink all of this. We're doing it wrong, and now is the time to fix it. Everything else is distraction.

TACIXAT 12y ago
Someone just needs to capitalize on the complexity and make something to manage all the profiles, inboxes, and apps.
- miguelrochefort 12y ago
  You're still thinking in the wrong paradigm. This is the perfect example of what we should NOT be doing. To build on top of this mess is a sure way to increase complexity to new heights. Not in a good way.
  - mrgr1 12y ago
    I know this is old, but I still have to ask. Are you talking about machine learning and artificial intelligence?
    - miguelrochefort 12y ago
      Yes and no. I believe we need a new language, a new way to structure knowledge. Of course, AI will benefit from that, but I don't believe it's a precondition.
fidz 12y ago
So what is your proposal? We are all in this direction. Yes, we don't need another Facebook. I agree. But people still love this old-new thing.
- miguelrochefort 12y ago
  I don't expect my local pizzeria to design, implement and maintain a new natural language, to then ask customers to learn it before they can proceed to ordering pizza using that language. We all share English (or French in my case), so that's what we use to communicate. The natural interface to order pizza from Pizza Hut or Domino's is mostly the same. The interface to order a cab is intuitively similar. Why is it that once try to do these things digitally, things get a lot more complicated? Shouldn't it make things easier? Even though I'm not a big fan of natural languages as an interface, Magic [1] is a great example of what we should aim for in term of unification and flow. No need to install every pizzeria apps (if they have one) to start ordering pizza. You just need to ask. > But people still love this old-new thing. Can you tell me more about that? I can't seem to relate even though I'm a person. [1] http://getmagicnow.com/ http://getmagicnow.com/
Throwaway90283 12y ago
What's the issue? People use these silly websites and applications, and they provide a service. Why do we need 100 different to-do list applications? Well, because everyone has unique needs. Some people want a simple list, some people want categories, some people want to organize it by priority levels, some people want it to look like a piece of virtual paper while others prefer a modern design, some want to self host it, and others want it stored in the cloud. And what's wrong with niche social networks? You're on HN, this is a fairly niche place. Did you want it merged with Reddit, Facebook, Tumblr, etc?
- miguelrochefort 12y ago
  > What's the issue? There are many things to consider. 1. I don't believe in giving people what they ask for. People don't know what they want. If you give people what they need, they will eventually want it. 2. It is not possible for software that's designed with a user in mind to cover the needs of everyone. Even with 1000 different to-do list applications, nobody will truly feel it's perfect for them. We need generic and dynamic software that can adapt to users needs and context. Don't you think it's sad that we have to endure HN's horrible UI/UX to access its community and content? Shouldn't we be able to have this discussion through a client that's made for us and respect our individual needs? The current paradigm is full of unecessary trade-offs. If we stopped assuming and accepting that every user interaction should be manually designed by some UI person, and embraced a framework that automates that process, we would be a lot more advanced as a society.
mrcold 12y ago
The main problem is that these silly websites and applications are making money. I know it's hard to believe, but people don't want value. They want trendy. What's popular now. Build the perfect social network and nobody will use it. Build a shitty one with a gimmick and people will come in droves. Unless you hit their sweet spot, people will not support you. They pay for value out of need, not because they want to. Most people want toys, not tools. The market is just delivering.
- miguelrochefort 12y ago
  I don't believe people actually want "new and trendy". It just happens that nobody is giving them what they need, so they have no choice but to find the new "hot" thing. Because social networks are so disconnected and fragmented at the moment, it only makes sense for people to use social networks that others use, and that's why we see trends. Most consumers are satisfied with "the Internet", and as far as I know, not many are looking for alternatives. Most people use Google, they don't change their search engine every few months. People in the US speak English, and I don't see many people learn other languages based on trends. In a world of apps, where people can't think in any other way, sure the gimmicky app is going to win. They know that they will never find what they need, why not having fun doing so? With a slightly different mindsets, one in which you realize that there's no point in having so many apps, you think differently and your values change. People will find diversity in content, not containers. Are all businesses writing their own crappy internal management systems because it's trendy? Are banks spending millions to build a crappy banking system that's more or less a clone of any other bank's for fun? Are the millions of different "User" classes programmed by people who thought theirs was better/cooler? Society has taught people to think wrong. Instead of thinking about what they need, they go straight to thinking about how they need it. Then, once they're offered a solution that does exactly what they need, they reject it because it doesn't match the solution they imagined. And we're talking about people that can't think of a solution themselves, and can only pick examples from their past. We're in a world where people ask "I want to buy an iPad from Amazon.com" instead of asking "I want an iPad", or better "I want to browse the web and watch movies in my bed". That said, I would still like to understand why you believe that people want toys and trendy. Is it a symptom of something else, or are these features intrinsically valuable to them?
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

TACIXAT 12y ago

Someone just needs to capitalize on the complexity and make something to manage all the profiles, inboxes, and apps.

miguelrochefort 12y ago
You're still thinking in the wrong paradigm. This is the perfect example of what we should NOT be doing. To build on top of this mess is a sure way to increase complexity to new heights. Not in a good way.
- mrgr1 12y ago
  I know this is old, but I still have to ask. Are you talking about machine learning and artificial intelligence?
  - miguelrochefort 12y ago
    Yes and no. I believe we need a new language, a new way to structure knowledge. Of course, AI will benefit from that, but I don't believe it's a precondition.

fidz 12y ago

So what is your proposal? We are all in this direction. Yes, we don't need another Facebook. I agree. But people still love this old-new thing.

miguelrochefort 12y ago
I don't expect my local pizzeria to design, implement and maintain a new natural language, to then ask customers to learn it before they can proceed to ordering pizza using that language. We all share English (or French in my case), so that's what we use to communicate. The natural interface to order pizza from Pizza Hut or Domino's is mostly the same. The interface to order a cab is intuitively similar. Why is it that once try to do these things digitally, things get a lot more complicated? Shouldn't it make things easier? Even though I'm not a big fan of natural languages as an interface, Magic [1] is a great example of what we should aim for in term of unification and flow. No need to install every pizzeria apps (if they have one) to start ordering pizza. You just need to ask. > But people still love this old-new thing. Can you tell me more about that? I can't seem to relate even though I'm a person. [1] http://getmagicnow.com/ http://getmagicnow.com/

Throwaway90283 12y ago

What's the issue? People use these silly websites and applications, and they provide a service. Why do we need 100 different to-do list applications? Well, because everyone has unique needs. Some people want a simple list, some people want categories, some people want to organize it by priority levels, some people want it to look like a piece of virtual paper while others prefer a modern design, some want to self host it, and others want it stored in the cloud. And what's wrong with niche social networks? You're on HN, this is a fairly niche place. Did you want it merged with Reddit, Facebook, Tumblr, etc?

miguelrochefort 12y ago
> What's the issue? There are many things to consider. 1. I don't believe in giving people what they ask for. People don't know what they want. If you give people what they need, they will eventually want it. 2. It is not possible for software that's designed with a user in mind to cover the needs of everyone. Even with 1000 different to-do list applications, nobody will truly feel it's perfect for them. We need generic and dynamic software that can adapt to users needs and context. Don't you think it's sad that we have to endure HN's horrible UI/UX to access its community and content? Shouldn't we be able to have this discussion through a client that's made for us and respect our individual needs? The current paradigm is full of unecessary trade-offs. If we stopped assuming and accepting that every user interaction should be manually designed by some UI person, and embraced a framework that automates that process, we would be a lot more advanced as a society.

mrcold 12y ago

The main problem is that these silly websites and applications are making money. I know it's hard to believe, but people don't want value. They want trendy. What's popular now. Build the perfect social network and nobody will use it. Build a shitty one with a gimmick and people will come in droves. Unless you hit their sweet spot, people will not support you. They pay for value out of need, not because they want to. Most people want toys, not tools. The market is just delivering.

miguelrochefort 12y ago
I don't believe people actually want "new and trendy". It just happens that nobody is giving them what they need, so they have no choice but to find the new "hot" thing. Because social networks are so disconnected and fragmented at the moment, it only makes sense for people to use social networks that others use, and that's why we see trends. Most consumers are satisfied with "the Internet", and as far as I know, not many are looking for alternatives. Most people use Google, they don't change their search engine every few months. People in the US speak English, and I don't see many people learn other languages based on trends. In a world of apps, where people can't think in any other way, sure the gimmicky app is going to win. They know that they will never find what they need, why not having fun doing so? With a slightly different mindsets, one in which you realize that there's no point in having so many apps, you think differently and your values change. People will find diversity in content, not containers. Are all businesses writing their own crappy internal management systems because it's trendy? Are banks spending millions to build a crappy banking system that's more or less a clone of any other bank's for fun? Are the millions of different "User" classes programmed by people who thought theirs was better/cooler? Society has taught people to think wrong. Instead of thinking about what they need, they go straight to thinking about how they need it. Then, once they're offered a solution that does exactly what they need, they reject it because it doesn't match the solution they imagined. And we're talking about people that can't think of a solution themselves, and can only pick examples from their past. We're in a world where people ask "I want to buy an iPad from Amazon.com" instead of asking "I want an iPad", or better "I want to browse the web and watch movies in my bed". That said, I would still like to understand why you believe that people want toys and trendy. Is it a symptom of something else, or are these features intrinsically valuable to them?

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]