| Hello! I wrote this article. I want to say something about the pop-ups, which to have been much more discussed than what I wrote. (UX disaster as engagement bait?) My desire in showing was to make the site feel more “alive” and to make the reader aware that other people had been there. I was trying to build a vibe of website as public space. Clearly this was not an approach that handles hacker news traffic and attitudes very well. Secondly, I wanted to make readers aware of how much data is visible about them just from visiting a website. I wanted it to feel like when you land on a drop shipping site that occasionaly tells you “Alice in Norwich just bought a widget. They're selling fast!”. You slowly realise that the data is real, and that the site actually can see where you live, who provides your internet. Etc. It was meant to be creepy. Anyway, I've removed the feature now. It was clearly causing usability issues for some people, which was not what I intended. I'll think about other, better ways to get the effect that I had hoped for. Finally, I'll say that it was at least interesting for me to see things like “Someone else just connected to Johncom. They're in Kansas City, US, 64121 and are connecting with Spectrum” “Someone else just connected to Johncom. They're in Cape Town, ZA, 8001 and are connecting with airmobile.co.za” I got to learn about some new places, postcode formats, and ISPs. |
I'm curious to read more of your thoughts on podcasting as a medium. I bet my goals & tastes in creating podcasts differ wildly from your goals & tastes in listening to them. And if I can be so bold: why give our show the time of day, but not something more tightly produced (which, perhaps, stands a better chance of offering high signal-to-noise)?
In any event, Jimmy and I appreciated your post. We're thrilled whenever someone digs in to a paper we've covered and finds it meaningful.