44 pointsby rebane20014 hours ago19 comments
  • abhinaian hour ago
    This is a very neat idea. I am not sure why the page needs to load 40mb of data and make me wait 5 mins before the first view. I'd probably also add some ranking criteria to surface good quality articles that maximize the "I learnt something new today" factor. Overall kudos to the developer for original thinking.
  • pinkmuffinere2 hours ago
    Please fix the loading issue and I’ll return! I think you don’t need to pull all the data at initialization, you could lazily grab a couple from each category and just keep doing it as people scroll.
    • rebane2001an hour ago
      The loading issue is just a hug of death, the site's currently getting multiple visitors per second, and that requires more than a gigabit of bandwidth to handle.

      I sort of need to pull all the data at the initialization because I need to map out how every post affects every other - the links between posts are what take up majority of the storage, not the text inside the posts. It's also kind of the only way to preserve privacy.

      • goodmythicalan hour ago
        I feel very strongly that you should be able to serve hundreds or thousands of requests at gbps speeds.

        Why are you serving so much data personally instead of just reformatting theirs?

        Even if you're serving it locally...I mean a regular 100mbit line should easily support tens or hundreds of text users...

        What am I missing?

        • rebane2001an hour ago
          > Why are you serving so much data personally instead of just reformatting theirs?

          Because then you only need to download 40MB of data and do minimal processing. If you were to take the dumps off of Wikimedia, you would need to download 400MB of data and do processing on that data that would take minutes of time.

          And also it's kind of rude to hotlink a half a gig of data on someone else's site.

          > What am I missing?

          40MB per second is 320mbps, so even 3 visitors per second maxes out a gigabit connection.

          • goodmythicalan hour ago
            no but...why are you passing 40mb from your server to my device in a lump like that?

            All I'm getting from your serve is a title, a sentence, and an image.

            Why not give me say the first 20 and start loading the next 20 when I reach the 10th?

            That way you're not getting hit with 40mb for every single click but only a couple of mb per click and a couple more per scroll for users that are actually using the service?

            Look at your logs. How many people only ever got the first 40 and clicked off because you're getting ddosed? Every single time that's happened (which is more than a few times based on HN posts), you've not only lost a user but weakened the experience of someone that's chosen to wait by increasing their load time by insisting that they wait for the entire 40MB download.

            I am just having trouble understanding why you've decided to make me and your server sit through a 40MB transfer for text and images...

            • rebane200130 minutes ago
              > no but...why are you passing 40mb from your server to my device in a lump like that?

              Because you need all of the cross-article link data, which is the majority of the 40mb, to run the algorithm. The algorithm does not run on the server, because I care about both user privacy and internet preservation.

              Once the 40MB is downloaded, you can go offline, and the algorithm will still work. If you save the index.html and the 40MB file, you can run the entire thing locally.

              > actually using the service

              This is a fun website, it is not a "service".

              > you've not only lost a user but weakened the experience of someone that's chosen to wait by increasing their load time

              I make websites for fun. Losing a user doesn't particularly affect me, I don't plan on monetizing this, I just want people to have fun.

              Yes, it is annoying that people have to wait a bit for the page to load, but that is only because the project has hundreds of thousands of more eyes on it than I expected it to within the first few hours. I expected this project to get a few hundred visits within the first few hours, in which case the bandwidth wouldn't have been an issue whatsoever.

              > I am just having trouble understanding why you've decided to make me and your server sit through a 40MB transfer for text and images...

              Running the algorithm locally, privacy, stability, preservation, ability to look at and play with the code, ability to go offline, easy to maintain and host etc.

              Besides, sites like Twitter use up like a quarter of that for the JavaScript alone.

          • lazidean hour ago
            Why not…. Load it on demand?
            • goodmythicalan hour ago
              That's my point. So confused. Got a ton of users clicking off because of this.
  • joeyguerra27 minutes ago
    I wonder if this would be a "better" way to build this thing: https://www.infoq.com/news/2026/01/duckdb-iceberg-browser-s3...

    DuckDB loaded in the browser via WebAssembly and Parquet files in S3.

  • hamburglar2 hours ago
    Took several minutes to load for me, and when my download got to 100%, the browser (safari on ios) refreshed the page and started at 0% again.
  • kurtis_reed6 minutes ago
    It took forever to load
  • barcodehorse2 hours ago
    An issue I have with these apps that claim to be for doomscrolling is that you don't open apps like Instagram or Facebook to doomscroll, you open them to check messages or stories. The doomscrolling is an afterthought. These things assume you can realize you're doomscrolling and not only break out of it, but choose to hypnotize yourself in their app.
    • forgetbookan hour ago
      This could be a product. I'd pay for an app that fwd'd messages from other apps and gave me a wikipedia feed to scroll on the elevator / other places where the phone is a social respite
  • mathieudombrock2 hours ago
    This is unfortunately loading very, very slowly for me.
  • strich2 hours ago
    I was genuinely excited to try this and it sounded in theory like a lot of fun! Unfortunately yeah too slow to load.
  • with2 hours ago
    It's ironic that doomscrollable social media feeds are built for low attention spans, because this website is the opposite. Gave up after 20 seconds.
  • sputknickan hour ago
    If you load it in Chrome, it loads MUCH faster
  • Der_Einzigean hour ago
    I am so lucky to be basically immune to short form video garbage like TikTok, but I am not immune to Wikipedia's allure.

    I easily have over 100 tabs of wikipedia open at any one time, reading about the most random stuff ever. I'm the guy who will unironically look up the food I'm eating on wikipedia while I'm eating it.

    No need to try to make it "doomscrollable" when it's already got me by the balls.

  • esperent2 hours ago
    > Xikipedia is loading... (3% of 40MB loaded)

    I gave up after about a minute.

  • kachapopopow2 hours ago
    surprisingly... boring?
  • pedrozieg4 hours ago
    [dead]
  • RiceNBananas2 hours ago
    Cool story bro

    WP is already shit, why should anyone doomscroll it?

  • reader9274an hour ago
    Man wikipedia is full of trash
  • singpolyma32 hours ago
    Please only continue if you are an adult? You realize Wikipedia has no age restrictions right...
  • closetkantian25 minutes ago
    I like the concept, but I'm not going to be reading Simple English Wikipedia.
  • its_ubuntu22 minutes ago
    So they took the worst aspect of Wikipedia (Wikipedia), and the worst aspect of "social" media (doom scrolling), and combined them? Brilliant concept. When can we expect the IPO?