hckrnws
That's how news websites are supposed to look like. It's not good for revenue though, because there's no way to trick the user into clicking ads, nor dive into mindless scrolling.
I wonder if it would be possible to align revenue generation with user experience, instead of both goals being incompatible with each other.
That's how news websites are supposed to look like.
No, news websites don't have to be this sterile.
I think NYT is a prime example of how to merge classic text-based articles with multimedia content in a way that's beneficial to the consumer.
Use either Dillo or Netsurf with NYT and then we well talk.
JS and ad bloat made HTML5 video and audio tags rendered null with no actual usage IRL.
Just like how I don't try to run the latest edition of Flight Simulator on my 4-GB, GPU-less device; I also don't try to visit websites built with latest web features using browsers that are clearly not trying to support those features.
NYT doesn't have to hinder its innovative efforts to create informative content just because of a couple of folks who refuse to admit that tech evolves over time.
I understand that ads can be annoying, and for that I use ad blockers where necessary; but for everything else, I appreciate the advancements in the web tech capabilities that enable the creation of amazing stuff.
I also don't try to visit websites built with latest web features using browsers that are clearly not trying to support those features.
But good websites will let you, that's the point.
I find the nyt's website far more informative and way easier to use and navigate than this.
So why is neuter a good website while nyt's isn't?
Well, tbf, I'm speculating based on the evidence provided. But, if NYT provides a poor—or non-existent—experience to anyone, for example, without JavaScript enabled, then it fits my definition of "bad".
Comment was deleted :(
There is still plenty of design space between no JS and Carter licking his lips on the front page.
Possible yes, users would need to pay with money.
Successful much less. Most users happily open bloat sites and pay with their privacy and being manipulated.
I would argue it's "begrudgingly" rather than "happily".
Most users happily open bloat sites and pay with their privacy and being manipulated.
You can use bloat sites and pay with your privacy and be manipulated for free or you can pay for the experience, but you'll be using bloat sites and pay with your privacy and be manipulated no matter what.
Most user will probably want images, slightly more styling and recommendations on what to read next... other than that it's a perfectly usable website for the everyday user, something that can't be said about most news sites today, sadly.
I mean who even reads ad-spam websites in the first place? They used to host little bits of knowledge you'd search for... now I can reach that better via ChatGPT (eg. How to do mission X in video game Y)
I can only imagine... I read some well crafted news, no ads, no malicious tracking, no ad-blocker-blocker popup, no newsletter popup - and at end of the article: "This experience was great because we're supported by XYZ company, they have no control of our editorial process" (with company logo). Tasteful, still supported by ads, probably completely unsustainable.
I agree. I'm about to start paying for news again. Had only 2 years worth of subscriptions for news publications in print in about 20 years of adulthood. That's kinda crazy.
And if I subtract university and active library times, I really wonder how I didn't turn towards the conspiratorial kind of thought patterns instead of viewing it all in the light of "cooperation in a complex world full of prenatally brain damaged magic money people".
Related: "Libredirect" Addon to redirect certain websites to privacy friendly front ends
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32916318
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32288732
Also "Redirector"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29665373
On Safari iOS you could try "Stop The Madness"
Looks like you've basically created an RSS frontend for reuters.com. Which is useful since they seem to have got rid of their own feeds. Would be nice if you could add your own feed so that neuters is actually readable via RSS.
Some issues with pagination. I would recommend a non limit offset combo. Right now i get an error: "You tried to access /world/" when manually change the offset.
Does anyone know about the legal implications of building such a "fronted"? Doesn't Reuters own the copyright zo the contents of their news articles? Can't they send a Cease & Desist (or worse) to the developer, given they are potentially losing some ad revenue?
Or they can and simply don't bother?
Yes, it’s copyright infringement.
Yes, they can send a C&D to whomever is hosting the copies of their content.
Yes, they are losing some minor potential ad income.
They will likely bother if their legal department notices and thinks it rises to a level they must contend with. My guess is that it won’t.
Thanks. Is there some rule of thumb about how much should the article change so that the copyright doesn't apply any more? These points come to my mind:
- There is a whole category of software called "news aggregators". Are they all infringers? How can they operate, apart from praying that the news outlet doesn't care?
- News outlets quote each other, e.g. "According to Reuters", etc. Does that solve the copyright issue? Is it only the 100% verbatim copy that is copyrighted?
Many thanks already for the insights.
The rules are country-specific. For the US, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#U.S._fair_use_factors. There is no simple rule of thumb.
Aggregators are references to content. Frontends are copies. You can't sidestep copyright with a "according to Reuters" preamble for the entire article text.
If your alternative becomes popular they will sic their lawyers on you.
Wish there was an example link on the project homepage. Or better yet, links to a few of the top current articles from the Reuters homepage.
It's literally on the home page: https://neuters.de
I agree with the parent comment, though - it wasn't obvious to me that this is the 'About' page of the site. Also, the link to go to the Home page is in footer right at the bottom.
it wasn't obvious to me that this is the 'About' page of the site
What kind of browser are you using? Aside from the url ending "/about", the first thing I see on the page is a big bold heading that reads "About".
I was using a mobile browser; on many mobile browsers it's hard to see/edit the URL, unfortunately.
Sorry you were having such trouble.
On a positive note, the next time you land on a similar page, you'll know two more methods of finding a solution:
1. Check the URL.
2. Check the footer.Web pages have hyperlinks for us to use. Why would you ignore that?
Going back to home page should be built in and easy. I had the same issue, mobile browsers don't even show uri properly or hide menu, so manually editing address is not exactly my first thought on how to navigate a web page.
Reuters really broke the site for me when they did what looked like a rewrite about a year ago. Glad to see this as I hardly read it anymore. bbc news is going downhill too, another prime candidate for a project like this.
What made you use caddy in front of tiny-http? I guess tiny-http should be still fine on its own. genuinely curious
Likely for its letsencrypt integration, maybe for HTTP/2 or HTTP/3
I did one of these some years back and used it for a while. It stopped working and I didn't bother trying to fix it. I can post the code someplace if anyone wants it. A page or two of Python.
currently doing something similar with python, I'd love to deepdive your code, would github work?
There's not much depth to dive into but I could pastebin it maybe? I don't use github.
Is there a viable way for me to make every site load like this (iOS)? And optimally toggle back to the “full site” if I want to.
For individual websites on iOS, click the "aA" icon:
Website Settings > Show Reader Automatically
Settings > Safari > Settings for Websites > Reader > Other WebsitesFirefox reading mode? It won't work with all sites, though. A lot of large sites are insanely broken, so Firefox doesn't propose reading mode at all, or nothing loads.
Honestly, I have only one way with dealing with those: not using those sites.
I can make this in couple of weeks, but I need an incentive other than just having fun
What I'd love it's either a public Web Rendering Proxy or Browservice.
TIL: Reuters has a REST API: https://www.reuters.com/pf/api/v3/content/fetch/articles-by-...
But I can't find any reference for it, somehow. How did the author know how to write this https://github.com/HookedBehemoth/neuters/tree/master/src/ap... ?
You can see calls to it in the dev tools Network tab when browsing Reuters.
Comment was deleted :(
From all evidence, this is probably pretty accessible for the blind. Thanks
Something similar for the Gemini Protocol (“modern gopher”): https://github.com/acidus99/NewsWaffle
Very cool! I’ve added the following as a redirect in Kagi:
Awesome site, but it just made me realize that Reuters can't capture my mind share. Most of these articles can't even be used for small talk
Also I clicked on a few 301s in a row
Seems to be dead/down at the moment... noticed because my browser still showed me the same news as 2 days ago ;)
Similar (official):
- lite.cnn.com
- text.npr.org
Unofficial:
- 68k.news
- skinnyguardian.xyz
... I'm sure there are plenty more!
combines many sites
Sadly https://68k.news it's broken.
But you can alwyas either use gopher://magical.fish/1/news under Lynx or Dillo with the Gopher plugin or head to
http://portal.mozz.us/gopher/magical.fish/1/news
under any browser, even the ancient ones from the Netscape 4 era.
Also CBC.ca/lite as well.
nice, are there extensions/userscripts that replace strings?
"Syria this, France that" should turn into "Gov. this, Gov. that", for example
man i love the cleanliness
sounded like a vasectomy site though haha
Ads don't offend me categorically. If publishers had text links, plain banners or any combination of content that added up to around 100kb sans images, I would probably consume more of their content and occasionally click an ad.
Video interstitials, paywalls or modal dialogs asking me to allow megabytes of tracking requests are a deal breaker. Anything that annoys or slows me down is more expensive than the value of the content, which I typically want to skim.
The content is rarely worth it. As it concerns Reuters, the same content will be parroted and recycled elsewhere. Legacy media is tone deaf from editorial policy to the nuts and bolts of how content is displayed.
wouldn't that be straight up illegal? just asking
Why would it be?
Copyright infringment. But to be fair, perhaps the texts are licensed from Reuters to publish this way. It is unclear to me.
No feed?
"News"
Crafted by Rajat
Source Code