Ask HN: Idea Sunday
A HN experiment. Every Sunday, a thread will be started to share product ideas. Why? Because many people have ideas they will simply not have the time to implement, and many need product ideas to work on.
If you think this thread should be started only every other Sunday or monthly, please state it in your comment.
452 comments
[ 15.3 ms ] story [ 455 ms ] threadSo I decided to make it right. I used chrome developer tools's edit html feature... I edited the html and behold the grammar error was gone. I read the paragraph again with pure delight. I love technology.
Idea Generated: There are lots of blog posts out there that have good content, but sometimes they are not written well or grammar errors exists because of lack of proof-reading.
What if there was a web-app where readers can correct blog posts or articles. Of course, it needs the approval of the author. There might be a 'Correct me if I have grammar errors' button of some sort somewhere in the post.
The editor is not allowed to edit the meaning of the content, only the typos and/or grammar errors, which of course needs the approval of the author. It's like github for blog posts and articles.
Resuscitate Xoopit, a much much better gmail search. Have you ever wondered why gmail search sucks when its parent company is the supposedly the best search engine in the world. Xoopit was a nifty addon that mine your inbox and 1) organize every file and links it found, and 2) gave you a search feature at least 10 times better than the gmail option.
I would pay once for the first tool, and monthly for the second product.
In case you want to automate the process, you can create an IFTTT recipe for it. :)
And you don't need to pay for it.
No affiliation to pocket and no idea if other similar products do the same thing.
When you want to use it, open that bookmark to open a new message in your mail client, then click Send without changing anything and switch back to your browser. To send the link to others, edit the To field in your mail client before clicking Send.
P.S. Firefox, Chrome, and Safari all have a menu item for this built-in, except they don’t prefill the To field with your email address for you. The menu item is in the File menu, about 3/4 of the way down.
Product Idea: a gmail app that shows me a graph with the number of mail I sent/receive a day , by person, group,...
:D
Reddit starts out cool, then slowly becomes 'dumber' (discussion-focused articles turn into quick reaction images) as it becomes more and more popular.
Hacker News avoids this by purposefully not trying to be as popular as Reddit -- UI remains minimal, tries to stay out of search engines' ways, etc.
But, in this way, HN is discussion focused through obscurity. What if you filtered out dumb crap by making it a cost to the user for posting? In that way, the user would have to really care about what h/she's posting about before h/she posts it. I.E.: thought-provoking discussion and not cheap images.
That way, you can mass market and accept huge gains in popularity while being sure that the people who are posting/voting on the stuff care enough to pay for it. Want cheap (often not even funny) images? Go to Reddit.
The best posters get compensated with the money that the voters paid. This creates a network of "I pay to post and I pay to vote but I get money from posting which incentivizes me to post but I only get paid if I get voted on a lot which means I'll want to encourage voting which means I'll have to vote a lot myself" : the voters and content contributors conflate in one genius network of money movement.
It still wouldn't ever get as big as Reddit, simply because people don't like direct payment for services on the Internet. But it'd be an effective way to get a bunch of smart, dedicated people who would kill for thought-provoking discussion on the Internet, and also pay them for just that.
Any service that offers a significant monetary incentive to cheat it, will implode.
Would be an interesting experiment to see though.
Reminds me of this : https://xkcd.com/810/.
Although granted - for the site to be worth the effort it would already have to be popular.
As an aside, I'd like to see a torrent site that uses a cryptocurrency model to control access/leeching/improve seeding. I'd rather fry an ethernet card than a GPU!
I was thinking up various ways to introduce money to our communication systems to incentivize certain behaviors. But not from the modern Facetwitter perspective of a site that wastes your life by addicting you. The true measure should be the correctness of the content and money should pay for that.
First a system where you have to pay to post and if you post is confirmed as not spam or abuse, then you get the money back. Otherwise the site takes your money. Should be a negligible amount. Mostly a way to make spam expensive and compensate for moderation, but of course a site can abuse a user this way as well.
If a user posts some profound story/comment and others want to compensate him directly with an easy UI, they can add a monetary amount to their upvote. But there is little guarantee that the amount will be significant or the money will arrive promptly. Users should be able to undo money sent for well sounding but ultimately wrong info. This is to discourage participation driven by points and monetary rewards.
If participation and content creation is driven by money even more than it is now, there will be a few new legitimate sources with useful information but the vast majority will be content farms. To discourage this "points" or "money" should accumulate, BUT should not be paid out for years until the accuracy of this content is confirmed by the passage of time, peer review, etc. If mistakes are found, all readers should be notified of corrections. There should be penalties for releasing misleading or mislabeled information (like tech blog posts that are really advertising but pretend not to be. You should pay to advertise and pay more for advertising what turns out to be crap after peer review.)
A site should take its share for moderating content well and working on rules that incentivize useful content/services and penalize attention seeking of little utility.
It's hard to predict effects of various new incentives. But a site should work on modifying the rules until desired results are reached. Users should not stray from normal behavior to satisfy some quick and dirty addicting point systems. If that means limiting participation to select trained users, releasing information to larger audiences only after it has been discussed by relevant experts (so no shocking attention grabbing studies are released) then so be it.
What I liked about the parent post is: It still wouldn't ever get as big as Reddit. When you find yourself thinking that way, you are probably onto something you actually want.
What you said about a system of experts and trained users determining whether your comment is worth exposing to the public ... eh. It sounds like it'd take a shit-ton of time and debating, especially as the service expands to handle a lot of content.
Also, isn't that just modern journalism? As a journalist, you apply to write an article for, or get a job at writing articles for, a well-established high-quality media company like the NY times or the New Yorker. A system of trained experts review your application and approve or deny it accordingly. Then you write articles and they get shown to the public after you've been approved.
I'm not saying it's a bad process, I'm saying it already exists. The problem is, it's slow and it takes a shit ton of time to determine who's a great writer and who gets limited participation and who doesn't. And when you allow the process to get faster, you have to give up the expert-authority, and well, you get something like Reddit.
This service would have to find a way to keep submissions and distribution extremely fast, like Reddit, but also keep the quality of discourse high, like NY Times.
The proposed solution is : money. People who submit stupid cat pictures to Reddit aren't dumb themselves, they've just been exposed to a forum for discourse that allows dumb content. Meaning, if you asked them : "Do you really think that cat picture is going to allow for quality discourse?", they'd definitely say "No."
So I'm willing to trust ilovekatpictures1998 on his judgment of discourse, if not his ability to create such discourse. So if we can trust the users to have good judgment, all we have to do is create a system that forces them to use their judgment, which Reddit doesn't do. And telling them to put their money where their mouth is by making them pay is the best way to force them to use their judgment.
The only reason it wouldn't get as big as Reddit is, people don't want to put their money where their mouth is. Well, most people. But then again, there are a lot of niches ...
http://www.well.com/
Can I get a frontpage? Links to different subforums? A design that isnt from the late 90s?
People are not currently penalized for contradicting themselves, being dishonest, being thoughtless. But they soon will.
Let's cure the web's Alzheimer.
How do you expect people to discern between Reddit reputation and TheWebsAlzheimersCure.com's (drop the "the" -- just WebsAlzheimersCure. Cleaner.) reputation?
Think "trails" from V Bush's "As we may think" article, implemented so we can collaborate. As users start bookmarking things in their own trail, the app works out what other trails are similar and suggests you merge your researching efforts.
It'd sink or swim on the details of the UI, though, and I have frankly no idea how to get those right. Lots of painstaking user testing, presumably.
I guess that with time it could be improved with APIs and better algorithms.
I'd be terrified of the results if /b/ get hold of it. I saw the results of a few chatbots and it was funny, but also scary.
Mitsuku (http://www.mitsuku.com/) won the Loebner Prize last year, and that chatbot still runs on basic AIML files.
I think a new approach is probably necessary to take chatbots to the next level, but I don't know what it is.
I was helping someone set up her android phone for podcasts and noticed how problematic the whole process is. First, the android apps aren't very good. More problematic is the process of getting a feed into it. Sometimes searching by name works. Often it doesn't. Getting from podcast's website to the app is a problem. Discovery is also quite poor.
But it's true that there's a problem with podcast, so take my +1.
[1]: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.podkicker
[2]: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ait.podsearch
I switched from iOS 6 months ago and podcasting was one of the initial problems I had. I trialed a handful of apps before properly purchasing pocketcasts. As good as the iOS app.
I work for a small company and we get catered lunch delivered every day. They never ask about if we liked it and if the amount we received fit our consumption. So, some way to inform them about which dishes we liked and how much food we threw away.
I would pay for this because then I wouldn't have to create a Venmo payment for each user.
You create a "use quest" of your mobile app. One or more screenshots of your application with a stated goal - e.g. invite a friend on a social app. You present the user the home screen and he has to find where in your app he can invite his friends. You record all clicks, and time and etc until he finds it.
This test is served as "partners quest" on free mobile games. The gamer has to complete your "use quest" in order to continue playing that pool game. You pay the game producer a small fee and charge from the mobile apps developers that want to test their designs.
You may give the gamers more in-game bonus if he allows you to record his voice and face (and pay the game producer a little bit more for this feautre).
What about a service/browser extension that understands thoses difference and guide the search accordingly ?
I like the idea of Soylent as a complete food, but instead of a nutritional drink, I believe a power bar would be a better idea, for portability, storage, and consumption.
* Not tech related.
More here: http://discourse.soylent.me/t/soylid-solid-soylent/3145
[0]: http://www.publikdemand.com/
eg1 - Enter your weight every month. If you go over a predetermined weight, it does something punitive. Posts embarrassing pictures online, emails your mom, donates $50 to the Klu klux Klan.
eg2 Create a todo list with due dates, goals or somesuch. Failing to complete them does something punitive.
eg3 Create out a challenge (exercise 5 times per week). Failure to complete challenge does something punitive.
The key is to get the psychological component right. I think if someone's daily task is 100 or more pushups they are more likely to fraudulently push a complete button than they are to enter a fraudulent number of pushups.
Could be a fun project.
[0] http://www.gym-pact.com/
One guy decided that he wanted to get healthy. So, he made a list of prohibited foods and actions and wrote a check for $750 payable to Oprah Winfrey (he dislikes Oprah for some reason).
He told his wife, "If I do anything on this list in the next 30 days, send this check to Oprah, no exceptions."
Here are all the other such apps we know of: http://blog.beeminder.com/competitors
:)
I built GTBee[1] using the Beeminder API which is pretty much #2. Again, the punitive thing is taking your money, starting at $5 and escalating from there.
This isn't to say that it wouldn't be a fun project to build things that do this though!
[1] https://itunes.apple.com/tc/app/gtbee/id779525180?mt=8
To go along with this:
Bulk USB charger. Imagine a 20 port USB hub, but this has no USB connectivity. It only has USB power. It would be kept in a secure place in a mental health ward and would allow them to charge patient's devices. This would mean that patients get electronic devices but without having access to cords (ligature risk) or mains plugs (self harm risk).
(Take a UK 3 pin plug. Place it on floor with prongs up. Jump off bed onto plug with weight on one foot. That's an unpleasant injury. Removing that risk is useful).
Advantages:
You don't need to PAT test each charger coming into the hospital. You reduce (slightly) fire risk from bad quality chargers.
You reduce ligature and self harm risk.
You allow patients access to electronic devices which has some "safeguarding of liberties" benefits.
Disadvantages: selling to the NHS is possibly hell, and selling electrical equipment to the NHS is possibly even harder.
You're creating a vigh value stash of easy to steal equipment. MH hospitals already have lots of IT and stealable medication so they should be able to keep it safe but maybe a ventilated safe would be part of the package.
Some people can cause surprising damage with a bobby pin so having robust, potted, cable shells would be important.
I backed this on Indiegogo and received it a few weeks ago. It is quite small.
http://www.hoyles.com/acatalog/anti-ligature-sanipull-pull-c...
(scroll down for the examples)
Perhaps it would be possible to incorporate the USB charging wires inside that and still have it work?
The hospital rooms could have special "charging" spots on the floor/build into the furniture or just a hole in the wall. The patients would charge their devices simply by placing them on the charging spot/shelf. Now there are no potentially dangerous cables or plugs, and all charging can be done without devices leaving the patients' reach, reducing the risk of theft at the same time.
There's already an international standard for wireless charging. The only problem is that it works only with a couple of the current phones, and it's not very likely to appear in low-cost low-end devices that the patients of the mental hospitals most likely to use. But if it ever gets a wider adoption, this would solve a lot of problems...
The best way to avoid ligature and self harm risk is to not have any cable or sharp objects around. Also, this solution will avoid the privacy risk when patient device is taken away for charging by staff members.