Organisations that have existing business processes to publish to print and pdf but now want to publish in responsive formata for mobile or even desktop web.
Changing their process might be more expensive than paying a lot of money for them to carry on as is for a few more years while getting the benefit of modern eyes on their content.
Edit: concrete example would be government publications like budget narrative documents.
Your post has nothing to do with pointing elephants. You've just threw a bunch of baseless assertions mixed with gratuitous blanket personal attacks. Ignorance mixed with resentment is never helpful.
I cannot refute your comment, because it is not actually clear what you are referring to. Your comment is too vague to be useful; it barely conveys information above a sentiment.
An unfalsifiable theory is useless. An unfalsifiable comment equally so.
If you really need someone to point this stuff out then you can start by looking at your puerile jab regarding merit, but I'm not sure you're inclined to contribute constructively to conversations.
Yeah while I think one of the hardest parts if a software developer's job (working at multiple levels of abstraction), that's literally the job. You're translating between the business and the sillicon.
By all means restrict yourself to assembly but yhe rest of us will get more done by using things at convenient levels of abstraction for those specific units.
This says it's very either or, and I think misses the point of a lot of nocode tools.
One of the best measures of tools is their composability. Can you use this for what it's good at, and integrate that solution with another tool that's much harder to use but can solve the last 5-10% that's just too hacky or not supported directly by this tool?
For my that's where zoho creator falls down a bit. Their APIs are just web form post handlers. But it works!
We're doing a lot of stuff on webflow by dropping some custom javascript in there to hook it up to an API or do some very data-driven stuff beyond their interactions.
The point is, nocode isn't just for proofs of concepts, although it's great for that.
When evaluating nocode tools, look for integration/extension points, and think about your migration path should you need to replace it. Hopefully you're succefful enough to need that but don't build 100% of your app by hand because 10% actually needs hand-written code.
The project have multiple subprojects, and one of these is the parser. Any developer can compile or extend it without more effort and create a library. Just know to code in Kotlin / Java.
The aim of this project is only check if a given web resource can be crawled by a user-agent, but using a API
Wow. I literally just sat down to relax after building a cardboard prototype cat door fitting in my open window in winter. You just made me feel partly inferior, and partly like I'm in good company
Do we have any evidence that these issues are really the causes of people consuming news elsewhere?
- Clickbait headings with misleading information
Does this really put off more than about 10% of people? Even if people find it distasteful, do people actually resist clicking?
- Disabling the user from reading if ad-block is present
What percentage of users use ad blockers these days? And how many just disable it to read the thing they were willing to click for?
- Tracking the user with 3rd party scripts
Ok who actually leaves a site they believe tracks them? like 0.0001% of web users?
- Taking massive performance hits (specifically on mobile due to huge JavaScript blocks)
Maybe getting closer to what users actually care about
- Pop-up ads
Again - any evidence this puts normal internet users off so much they'd stop using a site? There must be a reason MEDIUM.COM and every single recipe blog pops up their newsletter subscription as intrusively as possible.
- Fixed headers or footers which leads to harder readability / accidental element interactions
Here's again an actual deterrent - if someone physically can't use a site, they might actually give up.
---
I'm not saying news sites are not dumpster fires, but I'm a techie and love a good boycott.
I'd question the premise of this article - it seems to be very much from a techie privacy-active (not just concerned, but actually willing to take action) perspective which I suspect does not represent the majority of the internet.
I suspect that if people are actually using news sites less, it's because of much simpler reasons...like that Google intercepts a user's attempt to read news linking to their favourite publications.
> - Clickbait headings with misleading information
> Does this really put off more than about 10% of people? Even if people find it distasteful, do people actually resist clicking?
I don't know, but I certainly know that there are news (mostly tech news) websites I have all but entirely stopped engaging with because any time I go to them, I read one headline ("This Spotify-feature has been wanted for years!", "Do you see what HP has done here?", "See what Dell has done", something like that) and just close out the tab again.
Maybe it puts of "just" 10% of people, but 10% is a fairly big chunk, isn't it?
> - Disabling the user from reading if ad-block is present
> What percentage of users use ad blockers these days? And how many just disable it to read the thing they were willing to click for?
Those were just the two first results on Google for the query "what percentage of users are using ad blockers".
I don't know how many people just leave when a page asks them to disable their ad blockers, but I have to imagine it's a fairly big chunk of people who use ad blockers, which, as shown above, is a fairly big chunk of internet users.
> - Tracking the user with 3rd party scripts
> Ok who actually leaves a site they believe tracks them? like 0.0001% of web users?
I don't know, I'm fairly sure the issue with pervasive tracking is relatively well known even among non-"techies". How many regular users haven't been told to use an ad blocker by a tech-literate friend, with third-party tracking being one of the reasons cited?
The vast majority of people may not avoid a website just because of invisible trackers (except maybe due to the massive performance hits from all the javascript), but I imagine the knowledge of such tracking scripts at least affects the percentage of people who are willing to disable their ad blockers when a page asks.
What good papers have all this nonsense these days? I am subscribed to NYT and LA times, I read the occasional article from the atlantic or new yorker, and I've seen none of this. Good content is behind paywalls for a reason. It isn't there solely to draw in your eyes for ads, its there just to be good and informative content on its own right, and maybe if its good enough you'd be willing to chip in a little for the salaries of the full time staff that put that good content together for you. LA times and NYT are a dollar a week a piece, a drop in the bucket and well worth it imo.
Maybe your local news 5 or something small market like that is a dumpster fire, but publications that have shifted to the online subscription model are absolutely fine as they bank on their quality alone (unless my ad blocking has hid all this from me).
Journalist rarely see two sides of a coin and are rarely educated in what they write about. NYT is no exception. You can find professionals on medium though with excellent articles.
I think I know what my next Erlang project's gonna be. Erlang-as-PID-1, here we come!
EDIT: or maybe as PID 2, per https://github.com/omisego/ewallet/issues/108 , though I'd be interested in the idea of writing an OTP application that can reap zombies and forward signals.
Changing their process might be more expensive than paying a lot of money for them to carry on as is for a few more years while getting the benefit of modern eyes on their content.
Edit: concrete example would be government publications like budget narrative documents.