Explaining, at some length, Techmeme's 20 years of consistency

Explaining, at some length, Techmeme's 20 years of consistency(news.techmeme.com)

30 points by nhf 223 days ago | 10 comments

petercooper 219 days ago |

I run a similar business to Techmeme, just in a different medium, and Gabe's consistency and calm approach has been an influence in showing not everything has to grow huge or turn into 100+ employees. Being consistent and providing value over decades pays dividends of its own and can give you a good income.

The only thing that irritates me about the site is the wall of citations under every item on the desktop version, but I suspect that is key to its ongoing success since quite often I see people boasting about their appearance there and it's a form of social proof. However, if you want to skip that, the "river" view is perfect: https://www.techmeme.com/river

freddier 219 days ago |

I love how techmeme rewrites headlines. It removes the clickbait, gives you a clear idea, attaches tweets, reddit and hn links and saves so much time. It's the first thing I see in the morning, every morning.

eduction 223 days ago |

I can’t stand the way he rewrites headlines, mostly because he’s bad at it. They are so painfully long and complicated.

I don’t philosophically oppose rewriting headlines, god knows there are manipulative or just plain bad ones out there. But keep it simple and short!

Otherwise it’s a nice free resource that doesn’t spy on you or shake you down for money, and that’s nice. Yay open web.

Terretta 221 days ago | |

> I can’t stand the way he rewrites headlines, mostly because he’s bad at it. They are so painfully long and complicated.

Is some form of "click to find out" preferable?

I'm thrilled with how Techmeme headlines are rewritten since by now even major papers clickbait their headlines, removing the actual subject and outcome:

"This woman did a thing, then the incredible happened" -- NY Times (AYKM?)

Techmeme is one of the few sites you can read the headlines and decide correctly whether to click in to read or not.

// HN may need to revise its "don't editorialize headlines" guidance given how standard this headline badness has become.

eduction 220 days ago | | |

>AWS announces a commitment to invest up to $50B to build AI and HPC infrastructure for the US government, starting in 2026 and adding nearly 1.3 GW of capacity

could be simplified to

>AWS will invest up to $50B in AI and HPC infrastructure for the US government

----

>OpenAI unveils a free shopping research feature in ChatGPT that delivers a personalized buyer's guide, powered by a custom version of GPT-5 mini

could be simplified to

>New ChatGPT feature: A personalized buyer's guide powered by GPT-5 mini

-----

The main issues are too much info crammed into the headline and too many meaningless words as well. If he wants to add more info pre-click he could put it in a subhead/summary sentence while simplifying the headline. But some of this is basic editing, you don't need to say "AWS announced a commitment to" when you can just say "AWS will". "Shopping research feature" is just a different way of saying "personalized buyer's guide", you don't need both. Etc etc.

brudgers 223 days ago |

Though I stopped reading Techmeme many years ago, Techmeme is how I found HN (and HN is why I stopped reading Techmeme).

Terretta 221 days ago | |

You read Techmeme?

I find Techmeme more of a portal to sites with articles one reads...

brudgers 221 days ago | | |

Do you read HN?

I find HN more of portal to articles on other sites and occasionally related comments.

nashashmi 222 days ago |

> Techmeme has remained absurdly consistent

Everyone who talks to Gabe says bad things about Gabe, like he is stubborn, or rude, or something of that nature. I think he is cool and collected and totally not passionate about any changes. And only makes a change when there is significant pressure and a layer of obviousness.

Having said that, F** you Gabe for putting the Back button on the top left on mobile view, and breaking (not reflecting) the browser back history after clicking an article's right arrow. THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN FIXED A LONG TIME AGO.