I think what recsys really should be trying to target is finding the group most similar to your tastes, and then picking based on the outliers of that group. The goal being to find something within your tastes, but far enough from your normal to be interesting
Recommending based on star personalities preferences, is I think, a way of approaching this idea: why would you want to know what the average item is? You want the best one.
I'll be sourcing recommendations from the silent majority of experts as well (https://prog21.dadgum.com/143.html).
OT: I checked your profile but couldn't find an email to contact you. It'd be cool if I can shoot an email once in a while to brainstorm.
Then you can also do SEO analytics on site for domain authority too, that tells you roughly how many people use it vs other software. Or check how old a site is, how old a video is etc
I don't mind if the site is stagnant.
Living in San Francisco, you hear just how narrow this focus gets, with 20-somethings walking down the sidewalk making conversation about how to monetize this public accommodation or that human impulse. It strikes me as an odd mixture of funny and repellent, and at least some of those folks will grow up someday.
It does mean a lot of folks are concentrating on a crowded path that smart people will avoid. I mean, sure, if your big idea is in enterprise storage or EV, that's not happening with investment. A recommendation website? If you're not building to flip (which would be stupid anyway), it would be crazy to go begging to build.
Scale, curation, combating spammed submissions to AJ, etc. might be the biggest things if the site gains momentum, but if the site remains a hobby project indefinitely (which I think is totally fine regardless of popularity), then it's absolutely not needed.
- Link the name to a list with all the recommendations by that person, use the date for a link to the place where the recommendation was made (using the date for a permalink is convention).
- Link tags.
- Show everyone who recommended something and sort by how many people recommended it. (For instance The Pragmatic Programmer is recommended by Joel Spolsky, Steve Yegge and Jeff Atwood.)
- Use Amazon Affiliate links to make money.
No to amazon affiliates.
Thanks you! This shows character and actual, proper altruistic intentions.
Before reading this, I was not even going to click the link.
There are other ways to make money.
I used to wait for ads to appear on my Garena client back in the days when I played DOTA because they were so cool (and useful).
If I know my audience, I don't have to compromise privacy to show useful ads clean and neat either (watertight curation is applied here as well).
Good ads are relevant.
On amazon affiliates:
The iron rule of nature is: You get what you reward for. If you want ants to come, you put sugar on the floor — Charlie Munger
I don't want to reward the wrong type of behavior.
But it's your site! I hope you do find success with the ad strategy, your site seems useful, and I hope it remains worth your time.
> If I trust you to keep ads clearly separated, I also trust you to keep recommendations undiluted.
True. I am the one curator at the moment. I'll open this so that others can curate / recommend. I require that dilution of intention doesn't happen then. DNA is important.
> Thanks you! This shows character and actual, proper altruistic intentions.
I hate ads and every other scheme to extort money from people, but I have no problem with affiliate links and do not understand why would someone have a problem with them. Could you, or someone else who thinks like this explain what problem you have with affiliate links?
If I decide to buy the same equipment, I see nothing wrong using their affiliate links.
OT: I checked your profile but couldn't find an email to contact you. It'd be cool if I can ping once a while to get feedback on where the project is heading.
I hope you will consider one thing, and please don’t mistake it for political correctness. The phrase “from good people” is distasteful and I think we’re all better off not implying such a thing as “bad people”. If the intent is to define a division, it’s important to be specific lest we undermine our egalitarian goals. I know you don’t mean it to be exclusionary, and probably instead aim to evoke positive feelings. But, for me it does the opposite. People accustomed to being excluded are likely to read “from good people” and wonder if that includes them or not.
* I don't know what is meant by "good" people; I'd choose a different term.
* My impression is recommendations from "famous" people, which don't interest me personally. Famous people aren't necessarily smart and unless a topic is in their specific domain, they have no more to contribute that the average person. (Personally, I find the idolization of famous people as 'smarter than thou' to be disturbing and unhealthy; they are no better than gits1225 and I'd like to see their recommendations too.)
* I would be very interested in seriously thought out recommendations by experts in their domains. For example, for a desk chair, I'd be interested in an anonymous chair designer's recommendation. For a history book, I'd be interested in an historian's recommendation. I'm not any more interested in a famous coder's recommendation for a chair or a history book than I am in any other coder's recommendation. (To be fair, some of the famous people are experts making recommendations in their domains.)
I checked your profile but couldn't find an email to contact you. I'd love to discuss details once I have written down my thoughts.
Thanks to Alexander and Michiel for pointing me to Knuth's and Keith's recommendations.
I'm signing off for today. I'll reply to new comments (if any) tomorrow.
Have a great day : )
Affiliation only seems worth it if you have a lot of traffic. Even then, maybe not--unless you're making serious money, I'd rather build genuine trust.
- I compiled a list (see comment on video) from a trailer video for John Doerr's "Measure What Matters": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aW5gdRRn_U
Thanks for pulling the book recommendations. I'll add 'em this week as well.
Hack: You can search for a book (The Mythical Man-Month) and see who all recommended it.
I have a request though - could you make it more obvious that clicking on the name of the recommender takes you to their review/the context of why they recommended the item?
That wasn't obvious to me at all, but it's often really useful to understand why the person recommended the item in the first place, and what you should expect to get out of it...
My suggestion would be to replace `source` (apart from the title) with some kind of icon for example.
For some reason, the design of this is very sweetly nostalgic to me--reminds me of the web from 10y ago (in a good way!).
Web fonts and accessibility concerns with small font size have made good ol 13px Helvetica with blue links on white bg rare.
Often, these recommendations come with a reason why this is a good book. You might want to include them, if possible.
I changed the header name from person to source. Does that make it obvious?
Clicking on a name, I'd expect either a bio, or a list of things they recommended. It didn't occur to me it might be the original recommendation. (But then, it might just be lack of coffee :)
Either way, thank you for building this and collecting the data!
How do you account for duplicates? i.e. Seveneves
The idea (posted elsewhere in this forum) of linking them to smile.amazon.com might be a great suggestion.
I agree on smile.amazon.com.
Thanks for the feedback. I'll look into it.
I couldn't find relevant information on Google for Billy G. Do you mind sharing his profile?
It is 1 or 0 : )