Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
Se qualcuno mai stesse cercando prove della mia assoluta pigrizia, o comunque della mia ormai sempre incontrastata procrastinazione, sicuramente non avrebbe molta difficoltà a trovarne… tra le volte che non rifaccio il letto o che non spolvero la stanza, o come mi riduco sempre letteralmente al giorno prima per studiare (cioè proprio oggi 14 luglio, […]
procrastinanza sisamministrativa: aggiungere le righe è roba di notte…
Se qualcuno mai stesse cercando prove della mia assoluta pigrizia, o comunque della mia ormai sempre incontrastata procrastinazione, sicuramente non avrebbe molta difficoltà a trovarne… tra le volte che non rifaccio il letto o che non spolvero la stanza, o come mi riduco sempre letteralmente al giorno prima per studiare (cioè proprio oggi 14 luglio, ma questa è un’altra storia), o alle 23:55 per fare Duolingo, o come ci sono tanti miei post che durante la giornata ritardano e spesse volte addirittura spariscono, o tranquillamente come finisco sempre a letto 2 ore più tardi del normale, insomma… 💀
Eppure, nonostante la mia esistenza altro non è che una sfilza di fallimenti, certi sbagli sono più sbagliati di altri, come si suol dire… Quella che penso sia la dimostrazione più semplice e lampantedella mia incapacità di fare, infatti, si è vista ieri sera, quando finalmente mi sono decisa a sistemare una fonte di disperazione che parzialmente mi attanagliava: ho aggiunto un WebManifest alla mia istanza di Shiori, così che il sito possa essere da me installato come PWA su Android anche da Chromium, e non solo da Firefox (dove invece ho il mio userscript marcio per forzare qualsiasi sito come PWA)… vabbé, e quindi? 😴
Beh, questa era una cosa che banalmente andava fatta da secoli… non solo perché la app nativa di Shiori fa cadere i maroni (e quindi non la uso), e la webapp in Firefox altrettanto (visto che Firefox di per sé li fa cadere, essendo che ci mette tipo il triplo del tempo di Chromium a partire e poi lagga pure)… ma perché bastava aggiungere una (1) riga nella mia configurazione di nginx. sub_filter '</head>' '<link rel=\'manifest\' href=\'data:application/json;utf8,{ ... malloppone di roba tra nome ed icone ... }\' /></head>';. Basta, (almeno nel suo modo più semplice) era solo questo. 😐 …Cioè, rendiamoci un attimino conto della situazione. Io ho procrastinato per anni — non ricordo più quanti anni ormai, ma decisamente troppi, considerato che quando ho iniziato ad usare questo software ero ancora al liceo e hostavo ancora sul Raspino — una procedura che ammontava a spendere 5 minuti di tempo per copiare i link alle icone dal sorgente della pagina HTML, incollarle in una singola fottuta riga così, e buttare tutto in un file di configurazione già esistente. Tutte cose che ho già fatto in tanti altri casi eh, che quindi non mi hanno richiesto di scervellarmi neanche un po’, ma, per qualche motivo, porca di quella puttana, quando c’avevo voglia non mi ricordavo e quando invece serviva mi seccavo. 😭
La beffa (la cui presenza, come dico ogni volta, con me è la costante di autenticità delle mie storie disperate) stavolta è che ho fatto questa semplice operazione, che avrei dovuto fare letterali anni fa, praticamente giusto il giorno dopo quello in cui ho rilasciato Pignio… software che di per sé non centra niente ma che, con i prossimi aggiornamenti, potrebbe potenzialmente inglobare tutte le funzioni [che mi servono] di Shiori, e in tal caso sarebbe per me assolutamente ovvio togliere di mezzo un software che si rivelerebbe completamente ridondante. (C’è in realtà un motivo per questa coincidenza, stavolta non sono stati gli spiriti a dirmi di fare così… c’è una sequenza più logica che, nel caso, approfondirò.) 😾
Giusto per chiarezza, comunque: in realtà Shiori include un WebManifest, ma solo da 4-5 mesi, stando a quanto vedo dai commit; pochissimo tempo rispetto a quello in cui ho avuto questa maledetta applicazione… e stavo per dire che allora avrei in teoria dovuto avere la funzione a quest’ora, ma invece no, perché anche i manutentori di questo progetto sono grandi procrastinatori, e non fanno uscire una release precompilata da gennaio, e io ovviamente non mi sbatterò per compilare da sorgente. Meglio così, dai… altrimenti avrei dovuto ammettere che sono talmente pigra che non aggiorno il software dal giorno in cui lo installai sul nuovo server, ~2 anni fa! (Ok, no, scherzi a parte, non sono così pigra… bensì è anche peggio: non aggiorno da quando l’ho installato per la prima volta, perché se lo facessi non avrei più accesso ad una vulnerabilità che io stessa scoprii e riportai agli sviluppatori, ma di cui faccio uso… se fosse patchata sulla mia istanza, uno script che feci all’epoca non funzionerebbe più bene e, neanche a dirlo, dover sistemare pure quello mi seccherebbe tremendamente… Sono veramente irrecuperabile!!!)
Wall Street is betting big on Microsoft’s AI infrastructure play. A fresh analyst upgrade signals the tech giant’s cloud and artificial intelligence businesses are just hitting their stride.
Wall Street is betting big on Microsoft’s AI infrastructure play. A fresh analyst upgrade signals the tech giant’s cloud and artificial intelligence businesses are just hitting their stride.
On May 23, we got a very interesting email from Ghost, the service we use to make 404 Media. “Paid subscription started,” the email said, which is the subject line of all of the automated emails we get when someone subscribes to 404 Media. The interesting thing about this email was that the new subscriber had been referred to 404 Media directly from chatgpt.com, meaning the person clicked a link to 404 Media from within a ChatGPT window. It is the first and only time that ChatGPT has ever sent us a paid subscriber.
From what I can tell, ChatGPT.com has sent us 1,600 pageviews since we founded 404 Media nearly two years ago. To give you a sense of where this slots in, this is slightly fewer than the Czech news aggregator novinky.cz, the Hungarian news portal Telex.hu, the Polish news aggregator Wykop.pl, and barely more than the Russian news aggregator Dzen.ru, the paywall jumping website removepaywall.com, and a computer graphics job board called 80.lv. In that same time, Google has sent roughly 3 million visitors, or 187,400 percent more than ChatGPT.
This is really neither here nor there because we have tried to set our website up to block ChatGPT from scraping us, though it is clear this is not always working. But even for sites that don’t block ChatGPT, new research from the internet infrastructure company CloudFlare suggests that OpenAI is crawling 1,500 individual webpages for every one visitor that it is sending to a website. Google traffic has begun to dry up as both Google’s own AI snippets and AI-powered SEO spam have obliterated the business models of many media websites.
Every time "tech" comes up with a journalism "solution," journalists get laid off while the product gets worse. First it was SEO, then Facebook, then Twitter ... you'd think people trained to detect patterns can do better than just hopping on the latest hype that kills traffic.
The Media's Pivot to AI Is Not Real and Not Going to Work
On May 23, we got a very interesting email from Ghost, the service we use to make 404 Media. “Paid subscription started,” the email said, which is the subject line of all of the automated emails we get when someone subscribes to 404 Media. The interesting thing about this email was that the new subscriber had been referred to 404 Media directly from chatgpt.com, meaning the person clicked a link to 404 Media from within a ChatGPT window. It is the first and only time that ChatGPT has ever sent us a paid subscriber.
From what I can tell, ChatGPT.com has sent us 1,600 pageviews since we founded 404 Media nearly two years ago. To give you a sense of where this slots in, this is slightly fewer than the Czech news aggregator novinky.cz, the Hungarian news portal Telex.hu, the Polish news aggregator Wykop.pl, and barely more than the Russian news aggregator Dzen.ru, the paywall jumping website removepaywall.com, and a computer graphics job board called 80.lv. In that same time, Google has sent roughly 3 million visitors, or 187,400 percent more than ChatGPT.
This is really neither here nor there because we have tried to set our website up to block ChatGPT from scraping us, though it is clear this is not always working. But even for sites that don’t block ChatGPT, new research from the internet infrastructure company CloudFlare suggests that OpenAI is crawling 1,500 individual webpages for every one visitor that it is sending to a website. Google traffic has begun to dry up as both Google’s own AI snippets and AI-powered SEO spam have obliterated the business models of many media websites. This general dynamic—plummeting traffic because of AI snippets, ChatGPT, AI slop, Twitter no workie so good no more—has been called the “traffic apocalypse” and has all but killed some smaller websites and has been blamed by executives for hundreds of layoffs at larger ones.
Despite the fact that generative AI has been a destructive force against their businesses, their industry, and the truth more broadly, media executives still see AI as a business opportunity and a shiny object that they can tell investors and their staffs that they are very bullish on. They have to say this, I guess, because everything else they have tried hasn’t worked, and pretending that they are forward thinking or have any clue what they are doing will perhaps allow a specific type of media executive to squeeze out a few more months of salary.
But pivoting to AI is not a business strategy. Telling journalists they must use AI is not a business strategy. Partnering with AI companies is a business move, but becoming reliant on revenue from tech giants who are creating a machine that duplicates the work you’ve already created is not a smart or sustainable business move, and therefore it is not a smart business strategy. It is true that AI is changing the internet and is threatening journalists and media outlets. But the only AI-related business strategy that makes any sense whatsoever is one where media companies and journalists go to great pains to show their audiences that they are human beings, and that the work they are doing is worth supporting because it is human work that is vital to their audiences. This is something GQ’s editorial director Will Welch recently told New York magazine: “The good news for any digital publisher is that the new game we all have to play is also a sustainable one: You have to build a direct relationship with your core readers,” he said.
Becoming an “AI-first” media company has become a buzzword that execs can point at to explain that their businesses can use AI to become more ‘efficient’ and thus have a chance to become more profitable. Often, but not always, this message comes from executives who are laying off large swaths of their human staff.
In May, Business Insider laid off 21 percent of its workforce. In her layoff letter, Business Insider’s CEO Barbara Peng said “there’s a huge opportunity for companies who harness AI first.” She told the remaining employees there that they are “fully embracing AI,” “we are going all-in on AI,” and said “over 70 percent of Business Insider employees are already using Enterprise ChatGPT regularly (our goal is 100%), and we’re building prompt libraries and sharing everyday use cases that help us work faster, smarter, and better.” She added they are “exploring how AI can boost operations across shared services, helping us scale and operate more efficiently.”
Last year, Hearst Newspapers executives, who operate 78 newspapers nationwide, told the company in an all-hands meeting audio obtained by 404 Media that they are “leaning into [AI] as Hearst overall, the entire corporation.” Examples given in the meeting included using AI for slide decks, a “quiz generation tool” for readers, translations, a tool called Dispatch, which is an email summarization tool, and a tool called “Assembly,” which is “basically a public meeting monitor, transcriber, summarizer, all in one. What it does is it goes into publicly posted meeting videos online, transcribes them automatically, [and] automatically alerts journalists through Slack about what’s going on and links to the transcript.”
The Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times are doing all sorts of fucked up shit that definitely no one wants but are being imposed upon their newsrooms because they are owned by tech billionaires who are tired of losing money. The Washington Posthas an AI chatbot and plans to create a Forbes contributor-esque opinion section with an AI writing tool that will assist outside writers. The Los Angeles Timesintroduced an AI bot that argues with its own writers and has written that the KKK was not so bad, actually. Both outlets have had massive layoffs in recent months.
The New York Times, which is actually doing well, says it is using AI to “create initial drafts of headlines, summaries of Times articles and other text that helps us produce and distribute the news.” Wirecutter is hiring a product director for AI and recently instructed its employees to consider how they can use AI to make their journalism better, New York magazine reported. Kevin Roose, an, uhh, complicated figure in the AI space, said “AI has essentially replaced Google for me for basic questions,” and said that he uses it for “brainstorming.” His Hard Fork colleague Casey Newton said he uses it for “research” and “fact-checking.”
Over at Columbia Journalism Review, a host of journalists and news execs, myself included, wrote about how AI is used in their newsrooms. The responses were all over the place and were occasionally horrifying, and ranged from people saying they were using AI as personal assistants to brainstorming partners to article drafters.
In his largely incoherent screed that shows how terrible he was at managing G/O Media, which took over Deadspin, Kotaku, Jezebel, Gizmodo, and other beloved websites and ran them into the ground at varying speeds, Jim Spanfeller nods at the “both good and perhaps bad” impacts of AI on news. In a truly astounding passage of a notably poorly written letter that manages to say less than nothing, he wrote: “AI is a prime example. It is here to a degree but there are so many more shoes to drop [...] Clearly this technology is already having a profound impact. But so much more is yet to come, both good and perhaps bad depending on where you sit and how well monitored and controlled it is. But one thing to keep in mind, consumers seek out content for many reasons. Certainly, for specific knowledge, which search and search like models satisfy in very effective ways. But also, for insights, enjoyment, entertainment and inspiration.”
At the MediaPost Publishing Insider Conference, a media industry business conference I just went to in New Orleans, there was much chatter about AI. Alice Ting, an executive for the Daily Mail gave a pretty interesting talk about how the Daily Mail is protecting its journalism from AI scrapers in order to eventually strike deals with AI companies to license their content.
“What many of you have seen is a surge in scraping of our content, a decline in traffic referrals, and an increase in hallucinated outputs that often misrepresent our brands,” Ting said. “Publishers can provide decades of vetted and timestamped content, verified, fact checked, semantically organized, editorially curated. And in addition offer fresh content on an almost daily basis.”
Ting is correct in that several publishers have struck lucrative deals with AI companies, but she also suggested that AI licensing would be a recurring revenue stream for publishers, which would require a series of competing LLMs to want to come in and license the same content over and over again. Many LLMs have already scraped almost everything there is to scrape, it’s not clear that there are going to consistently be new LLMs from companies wanting to pay to train on data that other LLMs have already trained on, and it’s not clear how much money the Daily Mail’s blogs of the day are going to be worth to an AI company on an ongoing basis. Betting that this time, hinging the future of our industry on massive, monopolistic tech giants will work out is the most Lucy with the football thing I can imagine.
There is not much evidence that selling access to LLMs will work out in a recurring way for any publisher, outside of the very largest publishers like, perhaps, the New York Times. Even at the conference, panel moderator Upneet Grover, founder of LH2 Holdings, which owns several smaller blogs, suggested that “a lot of these licensing revenues are not moving the needle, at least from the deals we’ve seen, but there’s this larger threat of more referral traffic being taken away from news publishers [by AI].” youtube.com/embed/La2R3iIL9BE?… In my own panel at the conference I made the general argument that I am making in this article, which is that none of this is going to work.
“We’re not just competing against large-scale publications and AI slop, we are competing against the entire rest of the internet. We were publishing articles and AI was scraping and republishing them within five minutes of us publishing them,” I said. “So many publications are leaning into ‘how can we use AI to be more efficient to publish more,’ and it’s not going to work. It’s not going to work because you’re competing against a child in Romania, a child in Bangladesh who is publishing 9,000 articles a day and they don’t care about facts, they don’t care about accuracy, but in an SEO algorithm it’s going to perform and that’s what you’re competing against. You have to compete on quality at this point and you have to find a real human being audience and you need to speak to them directly and treat them as though they are intelligent and not as though you are trying to feed them as much slop as possible.”
It makes sense that journalists and media execs are talking about AI because everyone is talking about AI, and because AI presents a particularly grave threat to the business models of so many media companies. It’s fine to continue to talk about AI. But the point of this article is that “we’re going to lean into AI” is not a business model, and it’s not even a business strategy, any more than pivoting to “video” was a strategy or chasing Facebook Live views was a strategy.
In a harrowing discussion with Axios, in which he excoriates many of the deals publishers have signed with OpenAI and other AI companies, Matthew Prince, the CEO of Cloudflare, said that the AI-driven traffic apocalypse is a nightmare for people who make content online: “If we don’t figure out how to fix this, the internet is going to die,” he said. youtube.com/embed/H5C9EL3C82Y?… So AI is destroying traffic, ripping off our work, creating slop that destroys discoverability and further undermines trust, and allowing random people to create news-shaped objects that social media and search algorithms either can’t or don’t care to distinguish from real news. And yet media executives have decided that the only way to compete with this is to make their workers use AI to make content in a slightly more efficient way than they were already doing journalism.
This is not going to work, because “using AI” is not a reporting strategy or a writing strategy, and it’s definitely not a business strategy.
AI is a tool (sorry!) that people who are bad at their jobs will use badly and that people who are good at their jobs will maybe, possibly find some uses for. People who are terrible at their jobs (many executives), will tell their employees that they “need” to use AI, that their jobs depend on it, that they must become more productive, and that becoming an AI-first company is the strategy that will save them from the old failed strategy, which itself was the new strategy after other failed business models.
The only journalism business strategy that works, and that will ever work in a sustainable way, is if you create something of value that people (human beings, not bots) want to read or watch or listen to, and that they cannot find anywhere else. This can mean you’re breaking news, or it can mean that you have a particularly notable voice or personality. It can mean that you’re funny or irreverent or deeply serious or useful. It can mean that you confirm people’s priors in a way that makes them feel good. And you have to be trustworthy, to your audience at least. But basically, to make money doing journalism, you have to publish “content,” relatively often, that people want to consume.
This is not rocket science, and I am of course not the only person to point this out. There have been many, many features about the success of Feed Me, Emily Sundberg’s newsletter about New York, culture, and a bunch of other stuff. As she has pointed out in many interviews, she has been successful because she writes about interesting things and treats her audience like human beings. The places that are succeeding right now are individual writers who have a perspective, news outlets like WIRED that are fearless, publications that have invested in good reporters like The Atlantic, publications that tell you something that AI can’t, and worker owned, journalist-run outlets like us, Defector, Aftermath, Hellgate, Remap, Hearing Things, etc. There are also a host of personality-forward, journalism-adjacent YouTubers, TikTok influencers, and podcasters who have massive, loyal audiences, yet most of the traditional media is utterly allergic to learning anything from them.
There was a short period of time where it was possible to make money by paying human writers—some of them journalists, perhaps—to spam blog posts onto the internet that hit specific keywords, trending topics, or things that would perform well on social media. These were the early days of Gawker, Buzzfeed, VICE, and Vox. But the days of media companies tricking people into reading their articles using SEO or hitting a trending algorithm are over.
They are over because other people are doing it better than them now, and by “better,” I mean, more shamelessly and with reckless abandon. As we have written many times, news outlets are no longer just competing with each other, but with everyone on social media, and Netflix, and YouTube, and TikTok, and all the other people who post things on the internet. They are not just up against the total fracturing of social media, the degrading and enshittification of the discovery mechanisms on the internet, algorithms that artificially ding links to articles, AI snippets and summaries, etc. They are also competing with sophisticated AI slop and spam factories often being run by people on the other side of the world publishing things that look like “news” that is being created on a scale that even the most “efficient” journalist leveraging AI to save some perhaps negligible amount of time cannot ever hope to measure up to.
Every day, I get emails from AI spam influencers who are selling tools that allow slop peddlers to clone any website with one click, automatically generate newsletters about any topic, or generate plausible-seeming articles that are engineered to perform well in a search algorithm. Examples: “Clone any website in 9 seconds with Clonely AI,” “The future of video creation is here—and it’s faceless, seamless & limitless,” “just a straightforward path to earning 6-figures with an AI-powered newsletter that’s working right now.” These people do not care at all about truth or accuracy or our information ecosystem or anything else that a media company or a journalist would theoretically care about. If you want an example of what this looks like, consider the series of “Good Day” newsletters, which are AI generated and are in 355 small towns across America, many of which no longer have newspapers. These businesses are economically viable because they are being run by one person (or a very small team of people) who disproportionately live in low cost of living areas and who have essentially zero overhead.
And so becoming more “efficient” with AI is the wrong thing to do, and it’s the wrong thing to ask any journalist to do. The only thing that media companies can do in order to survive is to lean into their humanity, to teach their journalists how to do stories that cannot be done by AI, and to help young journalists learn the skills needed to do articles that weave together complicated concepts and, again, that focus on our shared human experience, in a way that AI cannot and will never be able to.
AI as buzzword and shiny object has been here for a long time. And I actually do not think AI is fake and sucks (I also don’t really believe that anyone thinks AI is “fake,” because we can see the internet collapsing around us). We report every day on the ways that AI is changing the web, in part because it is being shoved down our throats by big tech companies, spammers, etc. But I think that Princeton’s Arvind Narayanan and Sayash Kapoor are basically correct when they say that AI is “normal technology” that will not change everything but that over time will lead to modest improvements in people’s workflows as they get integrated into existing products or as they help around the edges. We—yes, even you—are using some version of AI, or some tools that have LLMs or machine learning in them in some way shape or form already, even if you hate such tools.
In early 2023, when I was the editor-in-chief of Motherboard, I was asked to put together a presentation for VICE executives about AI, and how I thought it would change both our journalism and the business of journalism. The reason I was asked to do this was because our team was writing a lot about AI, and there was a sense that the company could do something with AI to make money, or do better journalism, or some combination of those things. There was no sense or thought at the time, at least from what I was told, that VICE was planning to use AI as a pretext for replacing human journalists or cutting costs—it had already entered a cycle where it was constantly laying off journalists—but there was a sense that this was going to be the big new opportunity/threat, a new potential savior for a company that had already created a “virtual office” in Decentraland, a crypto-powered metaverse that last year had 42 daily active users.
I never got to give the presentation, because the executive who asked me to put it together left the company, and the new people either didn’t care or didn’t have time for me to give it. The company went bankrupt almost immediately after this change, and I left VICE soon after to make 404 Media with my co-founders, who also left VICE.
But my message at the time, and my message now two years later, is that AI has already changed our world, and that we have the opportunity to report on the technology as it already exists and is already being used—to justify layoffs, to dehumanize people, to spam the internet, etc. At the time, we had already written 840 articles that were tagged “AI,” which included articles about biased sentencing algorithms, predictive policing, facial recognition, deepfakes, AI romantic relationships, AI-powered spam and scams, etc.
The business opportunity then, as now, was to be an indispensable, very human guide to a technology that people—human beings—are making tons of money off of, using as an excuse to lay off workers, and are doing wild shit with. There was no magic strategy in which we could use AI to quadruple our output, replace workers, rise to the top of Google rankings, etc. There was, however, great risk in attempting to do this: “PR NIGHTMARE,” one of my slides about the risks of using AI I wrote said: “CNET plagiarism scandal. Big backlash from artists and writers to generative AI. Copyright issues. Race to the bottom.”
My other thought was that any efficiencies that could be squeezed out of AI, in our day-to-day jobs, were already being done so by good reporters and video producers at the company. There could be no top-down forced pivot to AI, because research and time-saving uses of AI were already being naturally integrated into our work by people who were smart in ways that were totally reasonable and mostly helpful, if not groundbreaking. The AI-as-force-multiplier was already happening, and while, yes, this probably helped the business in some way, it helped in ways that were not then and were never going to be actually perceptible to a company’s bottom line. AI was not a savior then, and it is not a savior now. For journalists and for media companies, there is no real “pivot to AI” that is possible unless that pivot means firing all of the employees and putting out a shittier product (which some companies have called a strategy). This is because the pivot has already occurred and the business prospects for media companies have gotten worse, not better. If Kevin Roose is using AI so much, in such a new and groundbreaking way, why aren’t his articles noticeably different than they ever were before, or why aren’t there way more of them than there were before? Where are the journalists who were formerly middling who are now pumping out incredible articles thanks to efficiencies granted by AI?
To be concrete: Many journalists, including me, at least sometimes use some sort of AI transcription tool for some of their less sensitive interviews. This saves me many hours, the tools have gotten better (but are still not perfect, and absolutely require double checking and should not be used for sensitive sources or sensitive stories). YouTube’s transcript feature is an incredible reporting tool that has allowed me to do stories that would have never been possible even a few years ago. YouTube’s built-in translations and subtitles, and its transcript tool are some of the only reasons that I was able to do this investigation into Indian AI slop creators, which allowed me to get the gist of what was happening in a given video before we handed them to human translators to get exact translations. Most podcasts I know of now use Descript, Riverside, or a similar tool to record and edit their podcasts; these have built-in AI transcription tools, built-in AI camera switching, and built-in text-to-video editing tools. Most media outlets use captioning that is built into Adobe Premiere or CapCut for their vertical videos and their YouTube videos (and then double check them). If you want to get extremely annoying about it, various machine learning algorithms are in ProTools, Audition, CapCut, Premiere, Canva, etc for things like photo editing, sound leveling, noise reduction, etc.
There are other journalists who feel very comfortable coding and doing data analysis and analyzing huge sets of documents. There are journalists out there who are already using AI to do some of these tasks and some of the resulting articles are surely good and could not have been done without AI.
But the people doing this well are doing so in a way where they are catching and fixing AI hallucinations, because the stakes for fucking up are so incredibly high. If you are one of the people who is doing this, then, great. I have little interest in policing other people’s writing processes so long as they are not publishing AI fever dreams or plagiarizing, and there are writers I respect who say they have their little chats with ChatGPT to help them organize their thoughts before they do a draft or who have vibecoded their own productivity tools or data analysis tools. But again, that’s not a business model. It’s a tool that has enabled some reporters to do their jobs, and, using their expertise, they have produced good and valuable work. This does not mean that every news outlet or every reporter needs to learn to shove the JFK documents into ChatGPT and have it shit out an investigation.
I also know that our credibility and the trust of our audience is the only thing that separates us from anyone else. It is the only “business model” that we have and that I am certain works: We trade good, accurate, interesting, human articles for money and attention. The risks of offloading that trust to an AI in a careless way is the biggest possible risk factor that we could have as a business. Having an article go out where someone goes “Actually, a robot wrote this,” is one of the worst possible things that could ever happen to us, and so we have made the brave decision to not do that.
This is part of what is so baffling about the Chicago Sun Times’ response to its somewhat complicated summer guide AI-generated reading list fiasco. Under its new owners, Chicago Public Media, The Sun Times has in recent years spent an incredible amount of time and effort rebuilding the image and good will that its previous private equity owners destroyed. And yet in its apology note, Melissa Bell, the CEO of Chicago Public Media, said that more AI is coming: “Chicago Public Media will not back away from experimenting and learning how to properly use AI,” she wrote, adding that the team was working with a fellow paid for by the Lenfest Institute, a nonprofit funded by OpenAI and Microsoft.
Bell does realize what makes the paper stand apart, though: “We must own our humanity,” Bell wrote. “Our humanity makes our work valuable.”
This is something that the New York Times’s Roose recently brought up that I thought was quite smart and yet is not something that he seems to have internalized when talking about how AI is going to change everything and that its widespread adoption is inevitable and the only path forward: “I wonder if [AI is] going to catalyze some counterreaction,” he said. “I’ve been thinking a lot recently about the slow-food movement and the farm-to-table movement, both of which came up in reaction to fast food. Fast food had a lot going for it—it was cheap, it was plentiful, you could get it in a hurry. But it also opened up a market for a healthier, more artisanal way of doing things. And I wonder if something similar will happen in creative industries—a kind of creative renaissance for things that feel real and human and aren’t just outputs from some A.I. company’s slop machine.”
This has ALREAAAAADDDDYYYYYY HAPPPENEEEEEDDDDDD, and it is quite literally the only path forward for all but perhaps the most gigantic of media companies. There is no reason for an individual journalist or an individual media company to make the fast food of the internet. It’s already being made, by spammers and the AI companies themselves. It is impossible to make it cheaper or better than them, because it is what they exist to do. The actual pivot that is needed is one to humanity. Media companies need to let their journalists be human. And they need to prove why they’re worth reading with every article they do.
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
Urgh man I pro the Ukranian people’s right to self determination and staunchly against Putin’s imperialism.
But this
“We also need to significantly reduce noncritical state expenditures and, as much as possible, through deregulation, direct public forces for the sake of economic development.” (Zelenskyy)
Chinese AI startup Moonshot releases open-source Kimi K2 model that outperforms OpenAI and Anthropic on coding tasks with breakthrough agentic capabilities and competitive pricing.
Based FOSS but id take the claims of coding ability with a entire salt mine, LLMs simply arent all that great in general at coding no matter what tech Bros try to tell you.
They really cant, they're good for boilerplate but thats about it. Every example of a AI heavy code base I've seen has been poorly optimised security hole ridden garbage.
I can tell you for a fact that they can. However, even managing boilerplate and repetitive code is a huge benefit. Furthermore, these tools are great at combing through code bases and helping you find where you need to make changes in code. If you haven't actually used these tools in a real project yourself then you don't really know what they're capable of.
Right-wing media figures and social media influencers are sharing seemingly AI-generated content about Florida’s new migrant detention facility in the Everglades, including images of alligators in “ICE” hats and a picture of a prison surrounded by a moat. Some of the images were previously shared by the White House and Department of Homeland Security.
Commentators have also offered widespread praise online of the facility, which is being called “Alligator Alcatraz,” and one influencer was even invited to tour the center before it opened.
Some social media platforms are actively recommending content that appears to be AI-generated to users, including in search results for “Alligator Alcatraz” on TikTok and Instagram.
Right-wing media figures and social media influencers are sharing seemingly AI-generated content about Florida’s new migrant detention facility in the Everglades, including images of alligators in “ICE” hats and a picture of a prison surrounded by a …
Play as a big adorable dog and explore a hand-crafted winter forest with a little kid in tow. A short, free, open source project brought to you by Blender Studio.
Introducing a new type of Quest reward: Discord Orbs! Earn them by completing Quests and redeem them in the Shop for hundreds of different items — including Discord Nitro credit.
Dopo un weekend instabile, la nuova settimana si apre all’insegna della stabilità atmosferica, con tempo più soleggiato su gran parte d’Italia e temperature in aumento. Tuttavia, all’orizzonte si intravede un
26.7 percent of people in Japan said they had used generative AI.
The figure roughly tripled from the previous year, but it fell far short of China, where AI usage stood at 81.2 percent. The figure for the United States was 68.8 percent.
People in their 20s were the top users of AI in Japan, with 44.7 percent utilizing the technology. This was followed by people in their 40s and 30s.
49.7 percent of Japanese companies were planning to use generative AI.
Ad blockers, the digital shields that nearly one billion internet users deploy to protect themselves from intrusive advertising, may be inadvertently exposing their users to more problematic content, according to a new study from NYU Tandon School of Engineering.
The study, which analyzed over 1,200 advertisements across the United States and Germany, found that users of Adblock Plus's "Acceptable Ads" feature encountered 13.6% more problematic advertisements compared to users browsing without any ad blocking software. The finding challenges the widely held belief that such privacy tools uniformly improve the online experience.
Adblock Plus, the most popular ad blocker on Firefox, Chrome, Safari, Android and iOS. Block pop-ups and annoying ads on websites like Facebook and YouTube.
Admittedly this is a chat app, so there's little to do. But still, it could stretch out a little bit more, maybe open the conversation info panel on the right
I have no issue with the text size, I have an issue with enormous empty space around the text. It's fine if it's not perfect on a 21:9 display, but this wouldn't look good even on a 16:9 display.
I'm also fine with the text not taking up the entire width, I aggre that it's less readable. But I think the window (not the text, the window) could utilise the width better.
I say that the messages could be a little more spread out (i.e. my massages could be a little to the right while other's a little to the left) and just like the left sidepanel appears and disappears when the window is too thin, more sidebars could appear to the right when the window is very wide.
These are all design choices though, not technical limitations of the gdk. I'm no expert in it though. Is it possible it's missing the tools that make building those other design features easy?
AFAIK one of these are technical limitations, it's just design choices. But in my experience, the design choices made following the gnome design guidelines tend to make apps with tiny faces
No, I want it to utilize the space a little bit more, this wouldn't look good even on a 16:9 display. Which is a shame because when windowed it looks really good.
Admittedly this is a chat app, so there's little to do. But still, it could stretch out a little bit more, maybe open the conversation info panel on the right
I don't mean to be pedantic, but why do people shit on DEs? I don't like KDE, but I'll never say an ill word about it. The whole point of Linux and open source in general is that we have choice. If you don't like gnome, that's fine, move along to your interface of choice. Come on, there are better things to argue about.
Solar energy experts in Germany are putting sun-catching cells under the magnifying glass with astounding results, according to multiple reports.
The Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems team is perfecting the use of lenses to concentrate sunlight onto solar panels, reducing size and costs while increasing performance, Interesting Engineering and PV Magazine reported.
The "technology has the potential to contribute to the energy transition, facilitating the shift toward more sustainable and renewable energy sources by combining minimal carbon footprint and energy demand with low levelized cost of electricity," the researchers wrote in a study published by the IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics.
The sun-catcher is called a micro-concentrating photovoltaic, or CPV, cell. The lens makes it different from standard solar panels that convert sunlight to energy with average efficiency rates around 20%, per MarketWatch. Fraunhofer's improved CPV cell has an astounding 36% rate in ideal conditions and is made with lower-cost parts. It cuts semiconductor materials "by a factor of 1,300 and reduces module areas by 30% compared to current state-of-the-art CPV systems," per IE.
I'm not sure what to think about the Fraunhofer institute in general. They have made some nice discoveries/inventions in the past, such as audio compression algorithms and such. That is why i hyped them for a bit.
But they really disappointed me with their writings on solar panels in the past few years.
They said that the efficiency of solar panels today is too low to deploy them widely in practice, which is simply not true. They tried pushing Perovskite solar cells for no reason.
I'm not sure what to think about this article's idea. On one hand, adding lenses to solar parks makes them significantly more complicated and therefore expensive to build. Also, if the parks have complicated physical forms, they're more susceptible to wind, and that could damage them.
On the other hand, yes, adding lenses means you need fewer actual solar panels for the same amount of energy harvested.
I'll therefore put it in the category of inconclusive inventions, together with the idea of adding a motor to the solar panels so they can track the sun. That would also make the solar panels more efficient, but also more complicated and more prone to mechanical failure.
It does. Also seems weird nobody thought of a magnifying glass before.
But its also the beauty in science. Now somebody else thought about it, and they might work harder to fix the next problem: Heat.
If that gets better now, solar panels will increase in output even more. There are so many technologies going into one product, and each field have its own experts.
After managing hundreds of WordPress sites over the years, one thing is clear: the core is solid – it’s the outdated, poorly written plugins that open the doors to attacks. At OSDay 2025, I attended a talk that confirmed this and shed light on a massive b
One of the reasons I’m always so happy to attend conferences and technical events (the real ones – not the flashy, sponsor-driven ones designed just to sell products or services) is because I get to meet amazing people and always come away having learned something new.
I’ve been using WordPress since 2006 and have been managing hundreds of installations from a sysadmin perspective. Over time, I’ve noticed a clear pattern: most hacks and compromises happen through plugins or outdated installations. And often, these installations (and plugins) become outdated because they’ve been patched together so messily that updating them becomes nearly impossible – especially when the PHP version changes.
To mark the launch of the BSD Cafe Journal, I’d like to share the link to a particularly interesting talk by Maciek Palmowski: “How we closed almost 1k plugins in a month — the biggest WordPress bug bounty hunt.”
What struck me right away was how much his analysis of WordPress security aligned with what I’ve seen over the years: WordPress, out of the box, is reasonably secure. It’s the plugins – often old, unmaintained, or poorly written – that make it vulnerable.
I highly recommend watching his talk. It’s definitely worth your time.
This idea has been in my mind since the very beginning of this adventure, almost two years ago. Over time, several people have suggested it. But until recently, I felt the timing just wasn’t right — for many reasons. Today, I believe it finally is.
So I’m happy to announce a new service: The BSD Cafe Journal.
What is The BSD Cafe Journal?
At first, I thought I’d use BSSG for it (I even added multi-author support with this in mind), but in the end, it didn’t feel like the right tool for the job.
The idea is to create a multi-author space, with content published on a fairly regular basis. A reference point for news, updates, tutorials, technical articles — a place to inform and connect.
Just like people in Italy used to stop by cafés to read the newspaper and chat about the day’s news, the BSD Cafe Journal aims to be a space for reading, sharing, and staying informed — all in the spirit of the BSD Cafe.
What it’s Not
It’s not here to replace personal blogs, or excellent newsletters like Vermaden’s.
It’s not an aggregator.
What it Is
A place where authors can write original content.
A space to share links to posts on their own blogs or elsewhere.
A platform to publish guides, offer insights, or dive into technical explanations.
Our Guiding Principles
The guiding principles are the same as always: positivity, constructive discussion, promoting BSDs and open source in general.
No hype: Sharing a cool new service is fine, posting non-stop about the latest trend is not.
No drama, no politics: The goal is to bring people together, not divide them. To inform, not inflame.
Respect, tolerance, and inclusivity are key. Everyone should feel welcome reading the BSD Cafe Journal — never judged, offended, or excluded.
Why WordPress?
The platform I’ve chosen is WordPress, for several reasons:
It’s portable (runs well on all BSDs).
It has great built-in role management (contributors, authors, etc.).
And — last but not least — it supports ActivityPub.
This means every author will have their own identity in the Fediverse and can be followed directly, and it’ll also be possible to follow the whole Journal.
Original and educational content is encouraged, but it’s also perfectly fine to link to existing articles elsewhere. Personally, I’ll link my technical posts from ITNotes whenever I publish them there.
The goal is simple: a news-oriented site, rich in content, ad-free, respectful of privacy — all under the BSD Cafe umbrella.
Getting Involved
Content coordination will happen in a dedicated Matrix room for authors. There’ll also be a public room for discussing ideas, giving feedback, and sharing suggestions.
Of course, I can’t do this alone. A journal with no content is just an empty shell.
So here’s my call to action:
Who’s ready to lend a hand? If you enjoy writing, explaining, sharing your knowledge — the Journal is waiting for you!
Since the onset of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have emerged as a transformative feature of the battlefield.
[img]https://matrix-client.matrix.org/_matrix/media/v3/thumbnail/olimpololaschi.com/a86371acc7033e91a5f80f1ce1091569d2e83939356cdafc3c2ec3e2ee12e063?width=80&height=80&method=crop&allow_redirect=true[/img]
Pubblicità progresso: mantengo una comunità chia
Pubblicità progresso: mantengo una comunità chiamata Videogiochi Liberi, nella quale si parla appunto di videogiochi non proprietari (e li si gioca 😁).
Sarebbe carino ricominciare ad organizzare delle serate dove nerdare in compagnia, quindi vi lascio i link per chi fosse interessatə! Le due piattaforme sono collegate, ma per l'esperienza completa consiglio Matrix, la prima (ci son varie stanze).
You're invited to talk on Matrix. If you don't already have a client this link will help you pick one, and join the conversation. If you already have one, this link will help you join the conversation
Successful exploitation requires a combination of specific conditions. An attacker must first gain physical access to a target eUICC and use publicly known keys," Kigen said. "This enables the attacker to install a malicious JavaCard applet."
If an attacker has physical access, they can do whatever the fuck they want with the device. All bets are off.
If I had physical access to a server, I could just fucking drop in my own hard drive full of malware if I wanted to. It doesn’t matter how good the security software/firmware is on the server, when I can physically remove that software/firmware and substitute my own. That doesn’t mean every single server is “exposed to malicious attacks” as is colloquially known.
The 21st century is turning out weirder than we thought. For the entire history of art, for example, tools could be used and abused and would work more or less well, but generally helped the wishes and skills of the user. They did not plot against us. Now they can – and do.
Take the painter's palette. A simple, essential, and harmless tool – just don't lick the chrome yellow, Vincent – affording complete control of the visual spectrum while being an entirely benign piece of wood. Put the same idea into software, and it becomes a thief, a deceiver, and a spy. Not a paranoid fever dream of an absinthe-soaked dauber, but the observed behavior of a Chrome extension color picker. Not a skanky chunk of code picked up from the back streets of cyberland, but a Verified by Google extension from Google's own store.
This seems to have happened because when the extension was first uploaded to the store, it was as simple, useful, and harmless as its physical antecedents. Somewhere in its life since then, an update slipped through with malicious code that delivered activity data to the privacy pirates. It's not alone in taking this path to evil.
One wonders what might be different if making a living wage didn't usually involve deceit of some form.
Welcome to The BSD Cafe Journal! This platform is an extension of the BSD Cafe, born from a long-held vision to create a central, multi-author space for the BSD and open-source communities. Just like the traditional Italian cafés (called “bar”) where peop
Welcome to The BSD Cafe Journal! This platform is an extension of the BSD Cafe, born from a long-held vision to create a central, multi-author space for the BSD and open-source communities. Just like the traditional Italian cafés (called “bar“) where people gathered to read the news and chat, our Journal aims to be a vibrant hub for reading, sharing, and staying informed.
What You’ll Find Here
The BSD Cafe Journal is dedicated to providing original, educational, and insightful content on a regular basis. You can expect:
News and Updates: Stay current with the latest happenings in the BSD and Open Source worlds.
Tutorials and Guides: Learn new skills and deepen your understanding.
Technical Articles: Dive into detailed explanations and analyses.
Author Contributions: Our writers will share original articles, link to their own blog posts (but not only), and offer unique perspectives.
This isn’t an aggregator, nor is it here to replace your favorite personal blogs or newsletters. Instead, it’s a complementary space where authors can contribute high-quality content that informs and connects our community.
Positivity and Constructive Discussion: We aim to build up, not tear down. Supporters, not haters.
Promoting BSDs and Open Source: Our focus is on the advancement and sharing of knowledge within these communities.
No Hype, No Drama, No Politics: We steer clear of trends, conflicts, and divisive topics. Our goal is to unite, not inflame.
Respect, Tolerance, and Inclusivity: Everyone is welcome here. We strive to create an environment where readers and contributors alike feel respected, never judged, offended, or excluded.
Our Platform: WordPress and the Fediverse
We’ve chosen WordPress for its robust features, including excellent role management for contributors and authors, its portability across BSDs, and crucially, its ActivityPub support. This means:
Individual Author Identities: Each author can have their own identity within the Fediverse and be followed directly.
Follow the Journal: You can also follow the entire Journal to get all our updates.
We encourage original content, but also welcome links to relevant articles published elsewhere. For example, the founder will link technical posts from ITNotes when they’re published. Our aim is a content-rich, ad-free, privacy-respecting news site under the BSD Café umbrella.
Join the Conversation!
Content coordination for authors happens in a dedicated, private Matrix room. We also have a public Matrix room (matrix.to/#/#bsdcafejournal:bs…) where you can discuss ideas, provide feedback, and share suggestions with the community.
The success of the Journal depends on its contributors. If you enjoy writing, explaining, and sharing your knowledge, we invite you to join us! The Journal is waiting for your unique voice.
You're invited to talk on Matrix. If you don't already have a client this link will help you pick one, and join the conversation. If you already have one, this link will help you join the conversation
Who knows, maybe in the future... AI will replace us, and we'll all gather at the "real" BSD Cafe to talk about the 'good old days of technology', just like the pirates in Monkey Island at the SCUMM Bar, drinking coffee and eating Tiramisu (instead of Grog).
Russian drones kill 1, injure 9 in Sumy Oblast amid attack on civilian, critical infrastructure — More Russians will fall from Windows — Russia’s summer offensive has fallen far short of expectations –North Korea supplied Russia with 12 million rounds of
Medical Supplies for Ukraine’s Hospitals. Partnering for global health equity.
Russia’s war against Ukraine
A building is seen on fire after a Russian missile strike hit the city of Sloviansk, Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine, on July 12, 2025. (Vincenzo Circosta / Anadolu via Getty Images)
Trump says US will sendPatriot missilesto Ukraine. “We will send them Patriots, which they desperately need, because (Russian President Vladimir) Putin really surprised a lot of people. He talks nice and then bombs everybody in the evening,” U.S. President Donald Trump said on July 13.
Russia’s summer offensive has fallen ‘far short of expectations,’ Zelensky says. Moscow’s ongoing summer offensive has not reached the Kremlin’s expectations as Ukrainian troops continue to thwart Russian attacks on various regions, President Volodymyr Zelensky claimed on July 13.
Russia launched over1,800 droneson Ukraine in one week, Zelensky says. Over 1,200 glide bombs and 83 missiles of various types were also launched on Ukraine in the past week, President Volodymyr Zelensky said on July 13.
Pro-Ukrainianpartisansdestroy car used by Chechen unit in occupied Mariupol, Atesh claims. “We send greetings to the kadyrovtsy,” the group wrote, referring to the notoriously ruthless troops named for Chechen strongman Ramzan Kadyrov.
SBU claims liquidation of Russian agents responsible forkilling officerin Kyiv. The alleged Russian agents were killed during a shootout in an SBU special operation on July 13 in Kyiv Oblast, according to the agency.
North Korea supplied Russia with12 million roundsof 152mm shells, South Korean intelligence estimates. The report estimated that North Korea could have provided Russia with around 28,000 containers containing weapons and artillery shells to date.
Read our exclusives
Ukraine war latest: German-funded long-range weapons to arrive in Ukraine by late July; NATO chief to visit Washington on July 14
Ukraine will begin receiving hundreds of domestically produced long-range weapon systems by the end of July under a German-financed agreement, German Major General Christian Freuding told the German ZDF news channel.
Photo: Krisztian Bocsi / Bloomberg via Getty Images
Learn more The origins and meaning of the tryzub, the Ukrainian coat of arms
The trident, known in Ukrainian as tryzub, is instantly recognizable as the central element of Ukraine’s modern coat of arms. But beyond its official role, the tryzub has taken on profound symbolic meaning in recent years amid Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Russian droneskill 1, injure 9in Sumy Oblast amid attack on civilian, critical infrastructure. A Russian drone attack on Ukraine’s northeastern Sumy Oblast on July 13 killed one person and injured nine others, Governor Oleh Gryhorov reported, amid a larger attack on the region’s critical infrastructure.
Russian attacks across Ukrainekill 8, injure 21over past day. Deadly attacks on civilians were reported in Donetsk, Dnipropetrovsk, Sumy, and Kherson oblasts, according to regional authorities.
International response
‘Thegame is about to change‘ — Republican Senator Graham expects influx of US weapons shipments to Ukraine, ahead of Trump’s ‘major’ announcement. U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham said in an interview with CBS News on July 13 that he expects an influx of U.S. weapons shipments to Ukraine to begin “in the coming days,” as U.S. President Donald Trump prepares to make a “major statement” on the war in Ukraine on July 14.
NATO chief to visit Washington on July 14 as Trump prepares ‘major statement‘ on Russia. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte will visit Washington on July 14-15, the military alliance’s press service announced on July 13. The visit comes as U.S. President Donald Trump previously said he intends to make a “major” announcement on Russia on July 14, potentially signifying a major policy shift on the war in Ukraine.
Balkan countries release joint statement supporting UkrainianNATO accessionafter summit. The joint summit declaration was released by Ukraine and the Croatian government on July 12.
Over $4 billion in new funds pledged forUkraine’s reconstructionafter Recovery Conference, ministry says. Ukrainian officials signed agreements, memorandums, and joint statements on raising funds totalling 3.55 billion euros ($4.15 million) following the Ukraine Recovery Conference 2025 on July 10-11 in Rome, Ukraine’s Ministry for Development of Communities and Territories announced July 13.
US aid swings and mysterious deaths in Russia | Ukraine This Week
In other news
Russia denies Putin pushed Iran for ‘zero enrichment‘ nuclear deal. Western countries and Israel suspect Tehran of seeking to develop a nuclear weapon, a claim Iran denies, defending what it calls its “non-negotiable” right to develop a civilian nuclear program.
Russia scales uppropaganda operationsacross Africa, Ukrainian intelligence says. By the end of the year, Russia Today plans to launch broadcasting in Amharic for an audience in Ethiopia, HUR said.
The Kyiv Independent delivers urgent, independent journalism from the ground, from breaking news to investigations into war crimes. Your support helps us keep telling the truth. Become a member today.
After 13 years of marriage, I re-entered the dating scene as a widow — with zero luck.
Dating apps felt like a graveyard of mismatched intentions. I swiped past shirtless gym guys, bios that read "fluent in sarcasm," and at least one man holding a fish.
So, out of journalistic curiosity — and maybe a bruised ego the size of a small carry-on — I decided to try what everyone else was whispering about: I went on a date with an AI boyfriend.
I used an app called Replika, which lets you design your ideal AI companion. You can customize their name, face, personality and even their job title.
Segnalo che il front-end alternativo per Lemmy chiamato Photon è stato aggiornato alla versione 2.0: github.com/Xyphyn/photon/relea…
Se volete testarlo con Feddit potete farlo all'indirizzo fdd.lealternative.net/ dove è già stato aggiornato a questa nuova release...
Potrete fare login con il vostro account Feddit e usarlo normalmente al posto di feddit.it, è solo un front-end alternativo quindi cambia solo il modo con cui vengono mostrate le informazioni presenti su Feddit.
This is a very big release since v1.31.4. If you've used phtn.app, you won't notice a difference, since that runs on the latest commit.
TL;DR
Photon has been completely rewritten to use Svelte 5
T...
Hi, I recently finished setting up my Asustor NAS, and I found the snapshotting setup in it a bit confusing, so I'm writing this as a quick reference that might be hopefully useful to others.
For context, my device is a AS1102TL, and it's running ADM 4.3.3, but I imagine it should apply to all recent Asustor devices.
First of all, the reason I picked Asustor instead of e.g. Synology... it's because it was not clear if the latter actually supported LUKS full disk encryption on an external usb hd. In Asustor you have to ssh into your NAS, but you can definitely do it.
The only gotcha: If you created the LUKS volume recently on another system, it's likely that it'll be using Argon2 for key stretching. A memory-intensive algorithm, for which the 1GB of memory provided by my AS1102TL is not enough. The solution is simply to add another key with a different algo, e.g. PBKDF2, or just create the volume on your Asustor. Either way, you're going to be able to read and write it both from the NAS and another Linux on your pc.
$ sudo $(which cryptsetup) luksOpen /dev/sdb1 encrypted # "encrypted" is just the name that I gave to the device, pick anything... remember the `-S` flag if you need to select a key in a different slot
$ sudo mount /dev/mapper/encrypted /mnt/USB1
... do what you want ...
$ sudo umount /mnt/USB1/
$ sudo $(which cryptsetup) luksClose encrypted
Unfortunately, this doesn't mean that once mounted, the disk will be integrated in the ADM ui (you're not going to be able to see it in the "External Devices" ui, nor be able to select it as a destination in the "Backup & Restore" ui).
Normally, mounted external drives are available on paths like /share/USB0, /share/USB1. Maybe it could be possible to mount (or symlink your mount point for) your disk there, to make it usable to ADM, but by default /share is an immutable loop mount of /volume0/.@system/sharebase.loop
$ lsattr -d /share/
-----i------- /share/
Trying to workaround that with chattr and maybe manually modifying sharebase.loop felt a bit more risky than needed, so I didn't attempt that (the ADM ui doesn't provide a btrfs send functionality, so it's not very interesting for our purposes anyhow).
Now, you have two different approaches to accomplish incremental backups of btrfs snapshots, one where you just create them yourself from the CLI, and one where you can try to reuse the snapshots created in ADM.
I'm using the same naming convention, and same location that is used for snapshots created by ADM (you wouldn't get conflicts anyhow, unless you're creating another one in the exact same minute).
I recommend the -v verbose flag for btrfs receive, otherwise you're not going to see progress while the operation is ongoing.
That's it! Of course, the first send will have to happen without specifying a parent with -p, to do a full clone.
Reuse snapshots created in ADM
There are two problems with this: the snapshots created by ADM are not read-only and they are mounted right under the toplevel.
To address these issues:
sudo mount /dev/md1 -o subvol=/ /mnt/rootvol
sudo btrfs property set /mnt/rootvol/v2025079-2324/ ro true
then pick a parent snapshot, and send the incremental changes:
As above, use the -p and -v flags as needed. That's it!
If you're wondering why did we have to mount the / subvol, you can try without:
You can mount the snapshots directly in ADM's Snapshot Center, by toggling the Preview toggle for a snapshot. In that case, they are still going to be RW, though mounted as RO. You can deal with that by remounting: sudo mount -o remount,rw /volume1/.@snapshots/v2025079-2324/ && sudo btrfs property set /volume1/.@snapshots/v2025079-2324/ ro true,
You can then try to send the changes, but what you're going to get is:
$ sudo btrfs send -p /volume1/.@snapshots/v2025079-0824/ /volume1/.@snapshots/v2025079-2324
ERROR: not on mount point: /volume1/.@snapshots/v2025079-2324
The error is a bit confusing (you have mounted the volume! why is that not good enough?), but you can get a bit of clarity with btrfs subvolume list.
$ sudo btrfs subvolume list /volume1 -qua
ID 256 gen 159842 top level 5 parent_uuid - uuid cbc37b20-901f-b043-8cf1-59b814814140 path <FS_TREE>/base
ID 258 gen 151914 top level 5 parent_uuid - uuid 5039c206-1a89-dc45-a9fe-43f8959cb672 path <FS_TREE>/.iscsi
ID 259 gen 159840 top level 5 parent_uuid - uuid 06d46207-9aa2-2944-ba38-e5736963ec12 path <FS_TREE>/.@plugins
ID 2758 gen 157876 top level 5 parent_uuid cbc37b20-901f-b043-8cf1-59b814814140 uuid 256c36c5-7033-a945-a2db-b6a334a8419f path <FS_TREE>/v2025079-0824
ID 2759 gen 157859 top level 5 parent_uuid cbc37b20-901f-b043-8cf1-59b814814140 uuid 88942ee6-8b52-3d4d-b972-5de2d6764728 path <FS_TREE>/v2025079-2324
ID 2762 gen 159833 top level 256 parent_uuid cbc37b20-901f-b043-8cf1-59b814814140 uuid 6d636914-35a0-3f42-9486-bf5d673b94c5 path base/.@snapshots/v20250710-0936
ID 2763 gen 159836 top level 256 parent_uuid cbc37b20-901f-b043-8cf1-59b814814140 uuid e99df217-4946-a740-bba9-99f64f1a0d69 path base/.@snapshots/v20250710-0951
Now, compare with the output when listing /mnt/rootvol:
$ sudo btrfs subvolume list /mnt/rootvol/ -qua
ID 256 gen 159867 top level 5 parent_uuid - uuid cbc37b20-901f-b043-8cf1-59b814814140 path base
ID 258 gen 151914 top level 5 parent_uuid - uuid 5039c206-1a89-dc45-a9fe-43f8959cb672 path .iscsi
ID 259 gen 159840 top level 5 parent_uuid - uuid 06d46207-9aa2-2944-ba38-e5736963ec12 path .@plugins
ID 2758 gen 157876 top level 5 parent_uuid cbc37b20-901f-b043-8cf1-59b814814140 uuid 256c36c5-7033-a945-a2db-b6a334a8419f path v2025079-0824
ID 2759 gen 157859 top level 5 parent_uuid cbc37b20-901f-b043-8cf1-59b814814140 uuid 88942ee6-8b52-3d4d-b972-5de2d6764728 path v2025079-2324
ID 2762 gen 159833 top level 256 parent_uuid cbc37b20-901f-b043-8cf1-59b814814140 uuid 6d636914-35a0-3f42-9486-bf5d673b94c5 path <FS_TREE>/base/.@snapshots/v20250710-0936
ID 2763 gen 159836 top level 256 parent_uuid cbc37b20-901f-b043-8cf1-59b814814140 uuid e99df217-4946-a740-bba9-99f64f1a0d69 path <FS_TREE>/base/.@snapshots/v20250710-0951
as you can see, the snapshots created in ADM are directly under top level 5 and if you list them under /volume1 (which is just the mount point for the /base subvolume), they are not found directly underneath (despite them being mounted there), which is why you see them being under their own <FS_TREE>.
Conversely, the ones that you can create directly from the cli under volume1, appear as top level 256 and they are under /base if you list the subvolumes under /mnt/rootvol.
PS, while I was closing the dozens of tabs that I opened to investigate how everything fits together, a note on what I wrote earlier:
this doesn’t mean that once mounted, the disk will be integrated in the ADM ui (you’re not going to be able to see it in the “External Devices” ui, nor be able to select it as a destination in the “Backup & Restore” ui).
mounting the disk on a path already accessible by ADM file explorer doesn't work because of permission issues, similar to the immutable flag that you can see with lsattr... but someone on Reddit had another workaround:
I mounted the opened device to another path already accessible by ADM file explorer. I don't think it will matter where really. But in my case I made two partitions on an external USB drive. The first partition is a small exFat formatted (10GB). The second partition takes up the rest of the drive and is formatted with cryptsetup (LUKS). Finally, to use this I open the LUKS device and mount it to a location in the first partition (which is automatically mounted by ADM)
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
The Linux community seems like it's filled with so much drama! How do we make sense of it all? Is Fedora going to kill my games? Did you hear the latest thing Linus said? Is GNOME really blocking a...
It really doesn't. I highly doubt there isn't office politics going on inside Microsoft, Apple and Google, but unlike them, Linux development is all public. If anything, that's likely to curtail a lot of bad behavior rather than encourage it.
Because there is choice. There is very little choice on Windows or Mac, so there's not really anything to argue about 😅 Champagne problems, if ya ask me.
Newish desktop - i7-13700K - 64Gb DDR5 6000Mhz - RTX 3070Ti - MSI PRO Z790-P (WiFi is not a factor, permanent ethernet connection.)
Needs: - Gaming - Music composing - Coding (Mostly python) - Video editing
I've been using Linux on and off throughout the years, but lately I've fallen out of the loop somewhat. Started with Slackware around 1998, Kubuntu in the 2000's, Ubuntu 2010's, Kali and Mandrake 2020's -> on my laptop, Ubuntu server on my RasPi. At work, we have a few Fedora servers I have to maintain. So not a complete novice, but somewhat obsolete info.
I have been looking at the immutable distros, like Bazzite and Pop!_OS as I've done the whole song and dance of constantly repairing my distro because of various issues, and I'd like my main recreational machine & distro to be low maintenance, I get to fix linux servers at work enough already, I don't want to bring that home.
With gaming, I've understood that linux has come a loooooong way since I last tried sometime around TBC Launch for WoW when Wine barely worked with it.
Music composing is a little annoying, since apparently both Ableton and FL studio are not an option. I've heard good things about Reaper, but I'll have to do some more research. Feel free to educate me on this topic if you have some insider info. I don't play live sets, just compose and mix.
Video editing, currently I use Davinci Resolve, and apparently it works fine on Linux, just some limitations and shenanigans with codecs. Alternatives are welcome, I don't need 90% of what resolve offers, I can make do with a simpler software as well.
Thank you kindly in advance for departing thine wisdom.
EDIT: Ended up installing Bazzite, and KVM virtualizing OpenSuse Tumbleweed and vanilla Fedora, keeping my backups for now on the NAS so I will be able to easily nuke & go with Tumbleweed (I think) next, since so many people seem to swear by it. Thank you everyone for the great advice!
Cheers mate, never even heard of Kinoite, I was looking at KDE Plasma, but had some annoyance about it, can't remember what. I'll look into it for sure.
So I'm a sceptic when it comes to immutable desktops. What you gain in stability you sacrifice in flexibility and control. If you want to use software outside of Flatpak and your distros repos, immutable can be very annoying to work around.
If you want more control and flexibility, a standard install with a Long Term Support distro will be fine. I use OpenSuSE Tumbleweed; I wouldn't recommend that as it's a rolling distro but I would recommend OpenSuSE Leap the point release distro. It has good user tools in YaST, it's secure and it's reliable, and it has a sensible update schedule. It is also a decent distro for coding. It has multiple versions of Python available which I believe are configured to coexist well, deliberately to make coding and version control easier.
I'd avoid anything directly Ubuntu related due to the reliance on Snap. But Linux Mint is a good variant which has loads of support available online if you want to ease back into Linux. Make no mistake, although it's user friendly, it's a full distro and capable of being as powerful as you want.
If you really do want to go down the immutable route, then probably Fedora Silver blue and variants is the way to go at the moment. I second the Kaionite recommendation - KDE is great. It's well established and popular in the space, so there will more support out there should issues arise (most commonly installing something not in the repos and not on Flatpak). Immutable distros from other big names aren't really there yet in terms of the user base as far as I'm aware.
Thanks for the POV. Mint I tried back when it was step up from Damn Small Linux, like early 2000's, no clue how it is now. I'll keep it in mind.
I got interested in the immutable concept, since it wasn't a thing back when I was more of a linux user, and I've gotten lazy and burnt out on fixing my OS when I just want to do something fun. But you do make a good point of sacrificing flexibility, and I might get annoyed at that later.
Yeah I totally understand that, I've played around with immutable distros inside virtual machines and they're interesting. Also if you like tinkering, Linux is a great OS.
If you do go immutable have a play with KVM - Kernel Virtual Machines - they're easy to set up and give near native speeds for guest virtual Linux machines (or decent performance for other OS like Windows) It's a great way to play with Linux inside a sandbox while keeping your host clear; but also a very useful way to run custom software in a flexible Linux guest while on an immutable desktop. E.g. Create a Mint VM to run something that'd be a pain to set up on Silverblue.
Immutable desktop plus KVM guests might be the best of both worlds. Even if you don't end up on immutable distro, KVM is cool tech that has really advanced in the last few years. It's better and more powerful than VirtualBox imo, and I use it a lot even on my rolling release distro (I have a VM to run work Microsoft Office, plus a few Linux VMs for a torrent stack and just for tinkering).
Oh yeah, I was thinking about that today, too; get a "for most stuff" distro as the baremetal, and VM specialist distros (like Kali or something) on top of it when needed.
I will definitely check out KVM at some point! I was just gonna chuck VBox at it, but your salespitch convinced me to try at it. Been mostly working with Azure and ESXi for the past 10 years, had no idea KVM was so advanced now, I saw something about it back in the day, but it was a tech demo -level back then.
Nowadays Mint is practically the default newbie distro.
I would also recommend against immutables, since you seem to be a knowledgeable user. Immutable distros are severely limiting, some programs may not work at all, and in other places you'll have to go through a lot of unnecessary hoops.
What I've learned with immutables is that you can do all that on a regular system, with added flexibility of installing packages the normal way if you need it. Just go with Flatpaks whenever possible, use Distrobox when not, and you'll be golden. Should some need arise for a regular install of something or some tweak in system files - you would still be able to do so.
Honestly, what I went for after my experiments is OpenSUSE Tumbleweed - it's bleeding edge, but also very stable and predictable, and if you set up volume as btrfs, it features well-preconfigured snapper to revert any mistakes you may make along the way.
What you gain in stability you sacrifice in flexibility and control.
While I don't completely agree on flexibility, I can at least understand where you're coming from; there's simply stuff you can do on traditional distros that have yet to be properly supported on the 'immutables'. However, even after giving it some genuine thought, I still don't quite understand how control is sacrificed. Would you mind elaborating?
I would say, that Fedora and Debian are mostly care-free if you go with the defaults. Fedora can enable Flatpak as part of the installation and for Debian the installation guide can be found on Flathub. In both cases you can then install packages using gnome-software.
I have edited videos with Blender, it has a video editor built-in which is very intuitive. And you can explore compositing with it later. Text and graphics for videos I created with Inkscape (export them to PNGs). The graphics are just linked, so if you need to correct a spelling mistake in Inkscape you can overwrite the original PNG and Blender will pick it up. I think with Blender you can use all video codecs that are supported by ffmpeg.
For music you can have a look at Ardour. I did not use it in a long time, but previous version were enough for me to master a track.
Games: Just install Steam through Flatpak (gnome-software). But it depends mostly on the game whether it will be playable on Linux; check protondb.
Thanks for the alternative take. Good to know that Fedora supports Flatpak that easily.
Blender has a video editor?! Geez, used it back in the day for 3D rendering, but didn't even cross my mind for videos. Inkscape is a great idea!
Had a couple of recommendations for Ardour from other folks as well, will have to give it a go. Free is free after all.
Games fortunately I have the most experience with lately, was in another country with my ancient T530, and was bored, so did some gaming on Ubuntu, got mostly everything working pretty quickly.
Blender has a video editor?! Geez, used it back in the day for 3D rendering, but didn’t even cross my mind for videos.
it is surprisingly good, when i first found out about it i was kinda blown away with how competitive it is with stuff like Kdenlive and the ancient version of sony vegas i used to use
For the music stuff, there's also Bitwig and Ardour for good DAWs, Ardour's free so that's what I use. There's yabridge for VSTs, though it's hit and miss, and might be more tinkering than you want as you have to use an older version of wine. I've also heard about using carla for this purpose, but I haven't messed around with that so I can't attest to it's usefulness. I use Arch for all this, so ymmv on Kinoite, I didn't try any of it out when I was on Bazzite, but I can tell you that Bazzite was great for gaming!
Cheers for the music points. I got some pointers, that Nobara is great for music stuff, and Bazzite can be optimized for it, but takes some effort and fiddling. I gotta take a look at Ardour and Bitwig, see if I vibe with them. How are they with older (my keyboard is around 2010 I believe) MIDI devices, do you happen to have experience?
I don't, unfortunately, I'm a guitarist primarily. I did see some MIDI stuff in the menus though, so I think it'd be fine? I think it'd probably depend on drivers, so you'd probably have to check if your device has Linux support, if it's not just taken care of by the generic drivers. You might ask on linuxmusicians.com, they're a great resource!
though honestly the distro doesn't matter that much, as long as it supports the majority of your software stack. almost everything is in the big distros (arch fedora Debian), so just pick whatever ur most comfortable with...
i must say I like the rolling release of arch. and the fact that it's very up to date...
I’d like my main recreational machine & distro to be low maintenance, I get to fix linux servers at work enough already, I don’t want to bring that home.
in that case you can grab any of the other distros that are Arch-based, EndeavourOS/Garuda/CachyOS and so on. You will get the benefits of rolling-release like fresh-er software without the need to setup & configure it yourself.
If your primary usecase is going to be music (so a need for realtime capabilities for stuff like recording, VSTs and DAWs) then I do not reccomend immutable distros for a simple reason: you will probably/eventually need to hack something up to get it to work and at that moment, the immutability is just extra work.
As far as I have tried fiddling with the music stack on Linux (which is not that much), the whole pipewire/JACK/carla stack is a bit messy and I can't imagine it working with flatpacks due to the sandboxing/permissions.
Sorry for being that guy..., but, if this was meant as a general statement, i.e. Flatpak is currently incapable of PipeWire and necessarily forces PulseAudio on its current audience, then that's a false statement. I understand the confusion though; we don't find a toggle for PipeWire (within Flatseal or otherwise) while we do for PulseAudio. To expose PipeWire to a flatpak, add xdg-run/pipewire-0:ro right under "Other files" within the "Filesystem" section of Flatseal. Note that the :ro-part is probably not needed and perhaps even undesirable at times. Finally, note that this doesn't always work; some stuff simply don't seem to support this yet.
Throw a dart, pick a distro. My God these "help me pick a distro" posts are irritating. You're not special. Your usecase is not special. Distros are "similar but different".
Does the dickish attitude come with the package or is it extra? So sorry for asking questions after being out the scene for a bit, glad to see nothing's changed in the past 20 years.
What always gets me is recommendations for what seem like weird obscure distros that I've never heard of.
What should I use for gaming? Well, for that you need Fizzlegit! It was released in 2025, is a derivative of a derivative of a derivative, and uses the same repos, but it has Steam preinstalled. Its totally next-gen!
Nvidia can be an ass to work with on a lot of distros, but Bazzite delivers the right drivers OOTB.
Needs: - Gaming
Bazzite is setup for gaming OOTB; it's bundled with Steam and Lutris, makes use of custom kernels/schedulers to optimize performance for gaming and contains many other goodies like excellent controller/peripheral support.
Has a built-in just script that downloads, installs and sets up Davinci Resolve for ya: ujust install-resolve
Music composing
This is the only I'm not 100% sure yet because you haven't provided explicitly yet what you'd like to use. But, I can't image it would be harder to get this running on Bazzite compared to other distros.
And last, but not least:
I'd like my main recreational machine & distro to be low maintenance
Through utilizing the bootc model, Bazzite is as low maintenance as they come.
I'd advocate for Bazzite too as you mentioned you just want a start and go machine. With DAWS you've also got Ardour and Bitwig both have great compatibility and flathub. There's also vcv and a few other great tools for music creation.
I'll suggest opensuse tumbleweed, CachyOS or Fedora Everything works on them but you should know that there are lot of cool tools are coming up recently on Linux. Like LACT and alot more.
If you fix linux machines at work, go with fedora or nobara(fedora with gaming tweaks applied). This is because it ships a modern linux software stack with sane defaults (bazzite is fedora with patches applied). Bazzite is smooth sailing until you need to do something not in flatpak or bazzite scripts (which you might never do) then you need to learn a new way to do it.
The reason I think you should choose Fedora over bazzite is because you likely already know how to do things generally on linux and if you switch you Bazzite you'll need to learn a completely new way.
Fedora only ships with only foss software so you do need to enable a few repo's and install the nvidia driver but after this it should be smooth sailing.
I've got your exact hardware configuration and use case. Pop_OS broke on me after 18 months due to GNOME extensions I think. OpenSUSE Tumbleweed with KDE Plasma works really well for gaming/coding and general use, though I'm dual booting for Ableton Live on windows and the occasional VR.
Recensioni di libri: quanto costa e quanto vale davvero?
Immagina di aver appena pubblicato il tuo libro. Dopo mesi, forse anni, di scrittura, revisione e correzioni, finalmente è disponibile online o sugli scaffali. Ma c’è un problema: nessuno lo conosce. In un mercato editoriale sempre più affollato, il tuo libro rischia di perdersi tra migliaia di nuovi titoli. È qui che entrano in gioco le recensioni di libri: un ponte tra te e i lettori, un possibile trampolino per la visibilità. Ma nasce subito una domanda cruciale: quanto vale una recensione? Vale la pena pagarla? E, se sì, quanto costa davvero una recensione onesta e utile?
Oggi molti autori, soprattutto indipendenti, si trovano a valutare se pagare per recensioni di libri sia una strategia efficace o una trappola. In questo articolo analizzeremo il valore economico, etico e strategico delle recensioni, distinguendo tra quelle spontanee e quelle a pagamento, fornendo criteri chiari per capire quando l’investimento può fare la differenza. Potrai capire come ottenere recensioni affidabili senza compromettere la tua credibilità.
Le recensioni dei libri non sono opinioni
Le recensioni libri, oggi, non sono più semplici opinioni: sono strumenti decisivi di visibilità, credibilità e persuasione. Per un autore, ricevere una recensione onesta può significare la differenza tra rimanere invisibile e farsi notare da nuovi lettori. Ma non tutte le recensioni hanno lo stesso peso. Alcune sono scritte da veri appassionati, altre sono offerte come servizi professionali a pagamento, altre ancora – purtroppo – sono finte, costruite solo per gonfiare valutazioni su Amazon o Goodreads. Capire la differenza tra recensione gratuita e a pagamento, tra valore reale e marketing forzato, è oggi fondamentale per chi pubblica un libro.
In questa guida per recensioni di libri completa parleremo di quanto costa una recensione, dei prezzi delle recensioni libri a seconda del tipo di recensore, dei rischi delle recensioni false e di come calcolare un vero ritorno sull’investimento (ROI). Ti aiuteremo a valutare con lucidità se pagare per una recensione sia una scelta utile o superflua, e soprattutto come ottenere recensioni affidabili che parlino davvero al tuo pubblico. Perché una recensione autentica per promuovere un libro può non solo vendere copie, ma accendere il passaparola più potente: quello emotivo e sincero.
Calcolare il ROI delle recensioni: quando conviene pagare?
Ecco un esempio per aiutarti a visualizzare il ROI, considerando anche il valore nel tempo di una recensione ben indicizzata:
Voce
Esempio di Calcolo Iniziale (Impatto Immediato)
Proiezione a Lungo Termine (Recensione Indicizzata)
Note
Costo della Recensione
50€ (costo una tantum)
50€
Visualizzazioni Stimate
1.000 (immediato, da post/storie)
+200/mese (da ricerca organica Google/Amazon)
Traffico continuo senza costi extra
Click-Through Rate (CTR)
5% (50 clic sul link del libro)
3% (6 clic/mese aggiuntivi)
Dipende dall’indicizzazione
Conversion Rate (Acquisto)
10% (5 copie vendute)
10% (0.6 copie/mese)
Guadagno per Copia (Netto Autore)
3€
3€
Guadagno Diretto (Immediato)
15€
1,8€/mese (dalle conversioni continue)
Rendita passiva dalla recensione
Perché una recensione vale più di un’opinione
Chi scrive un libro ci mette dentro mesi, a volte anni, di dedizione. Eppure, una volta pubblicato, può bastare un pugno di recensioni oneste per far emergere quell’opera tra migliaia. Una recensione libro onesta e ben fatta non è solo una valutazione: è una lente attraverso cui il lettore vede il tuo libro per la prima volta, è la voce di chi lo ha già letto e ne racconta l’impatto, è un atto di mediazione culturale. Non si tratta solo di avere “5 stelle”, ma di costruire fiducia, stimolare la curiosità e creare connessioni reali con il pubblico.
Ecco perché parlare del valore delle recensioni libri significa anche riconoscerne il potere: possono influenzare l’acquisto, migliorare la reputazione dell’autore, spingere le classifiche algoritmiche (come quelle di Amazon) e, soprattutto, prolungare la vita di un libro oltre il fugace entusiasmo del lancio iniziale. Le recensioni, quando autentiche, lavorano nel tempo, accompagnando il libro nel suo cammino e raggiungendo lettori che non si fermano solo alla copertina; contribuendo così a costruire un sistema di recensioni libri affidabili che il lettore percepisce come garanzia.
Il fattore fiducia: la psicologia dietro le recensioni
Sapevi che l’88% dei consumatori si fida delle recensioni online quanto dei consigli personali? È il fenomeno della ‘prova sociale’. Una recensione non è solo un’opinione, ma una ‘garanzia’ percepita che riduce il rischio d’acquisto. In un mercato saturo, questa fiducia è valuta preziosa.
Valori aggiunti delle recensioni
Ogni recensione ben scritta è un seme che può far germogliare nuove letture, nuove connessioni, nuove riflessioni. Ma quali sono, concretamente, i valori aggiunti di una recensione rispetto a un semplice commento sui social o a una valutazione numerica? Qui entriamo nel cuore della questione: perché una recensione, anche se breve, arricchisce il dialogo culturale, genera fiducia e aumenta la visibilità del libro online, specialmente se è pubblicata su blog, riviste di settore o piattaforme strutturate.
Non si tratta solo di esprimere un giudizio, ma di contribuire attivamente a costruire un ponte tra l’autore e i lettori, tra un’opera e il suo potenziale pubblico. Ecco allora un elenco chiaro e diretto di ciò che una buona recensione può offrire, sia dal punto di vista relazionale, sia in termini di impatto SEO e marketing:
Caratteristica della Recensione
Beneficio per l’Autore
Visibilità Organica
Aumenta la scoperta su Amazon e Google
Credibilità & Fiducia
Rassicura i lettori, fungendo da prova sociale affidabile
Feedback Costruttivo
Offre spunti per migliorare scrittura e strategie di marketing
Longevità del Libro
Contribuisce a un passaparola duraturo e alla vita dell’opera
Differenza tra recensioni gratuite e recensioni a pagamento
A questo punto, però, emerge una domanda cruciale: meglio puntare su recensioni gratuite o su recensioni a pagamento? La risposta, come spesso accade, non è netta. Entrambe le opzioni possono essere valide, ma vanno scelte con consapevolezza, conoscendone le dinamiche, i vantaggi e i possibili limiti. Le recensioni gratuite sono spesso mosse da passione, da un genuino entusiasmo per la lettura; quelle a pagamento possono invece offrire tempistiche certe, maggiore visibilità e professionalità, ma sollevano anche interrogativi sull’etica e sull’autenticità.
Per prendere una decisione informata, è fondamentale conoscere a fondo le differenze tra queste due modalità e valutare quale si adatta meglio al proprio percorso da autore o editore. Nei paragrafi successivi, analizzeremo con cura entrambi gli approcci, in modo da aiutarti a capire quando vale davvero la pena pagare per una recensione — e quando, invece, è meglio coltivare relazioni autentiche, gratuite e durature.
Recensioni gratuite: credibilità e autenticità
Le recensioni gratuite sono spesso il frutto di una connessione autentica tra chi scrive e chi legge. Blogger, appassionati, gruppi di lettura e lettori comuni che decidono di recensire un libro lo fanno per passione, non per contratto. Questo le rende, agli occhi del pubblico, altamente credibili: una recensione spontanea comunica sincerità e non dà l’impressione di essere una pubblicità mascherata.
Ma attenzione:ottenere recensioni gratuite non è affatto semplice né immediato. Per chi si chiede come ottenere recensioni libro senza costi diretti, è fondamentale capire che non è un processo semplice né immediato. Spesso si tratta di offrire una copia omaggio in cambio della lettura, partecipare attivamente a community di lettori (come Goodreads, gruppi Facebook, forum specializzati) o coltivare connessioni con blog letterari che trattano il tuo genere. Anche gli scambi tra autori possono essere utili, purché siano trasparenti e rispettosi.
Non si paga in denaro, ma si investe in presenza, attenzione e dialogo umano. Eppure, questo tipo di recensione può avere un impatto di lungo periodo, costruendo un piccolo ecosistema attorno al libro fatto di fiducia, passaparola e autenticità.
Recensioni a pagamento: servizi professionali
Quando si parla di recensioni a pagamento, il terreno si fa scivoloso. Da un lato, può sembrare una scorciatoia efficace: si paga un servizio e si ottiene una recensione, spesso entro tempi rapidi. Alcuni portali o agenzie recensioni libri offrono pacchetti professionali con articoli ben scritti, diffusi su siti strutturati e con una discreta visibilità SEO. In questi casi, la spesa può trasformarsi in un investimento promozionale consapevole e i loro prezzi per recensioni libri variano in base al servizio e al recensore.
Etica e credibilità: i rischi delle recensioni false di libri
Tuttavia, la linea tra una recensione retribuita e una recensione finta (recensioni false libri) può diventare pericolosamente sottile. Il rischio? Perdere credibilità. I lettori sono molto più attenti di quanto si creda, e un contenuto forzatamente positivo, senza una reale analisi, suona falso. Ancora peggio se il sito che ospita la recensione è palesemente pieno di testi promozionali e privi di identità editoriale.
Pagare per una recensione non è, di per sé, una pratica da demonizzare: ma va fatto con etica, chiarezza e trasparenza. Il lettore ha diritto di sapere se quella recensione è frutto di una collaborazione commerciale. Inoltre, è bene valutare chi scrive la recensione: ha competenza? Legge davvero il libro o si limita a un comunicato stampa?
Recensione, segnalazione o comunicato stampa?
Nel mondo dell’informazione culturale e letteraria, i termini spesso si confondono, ma è essenziale riconoscerne le differenze. Una recensione è un testo critico: analizza il contenuto di un libro, ne valuta i pregi e i limiti, lo inserisce in un contesto più ampio, lo confronta con altri titoli o temi affini. Può essere entusiasta o severa, ma ciò che la caratterizza è l’onestà intellettuale e l’elaborazione soggettiva dell’autore o della redazione che la firma.
Una segnalazione, invece, è più neutra: serve a informare dell’uscita di un libro, spesso con una breve descrizione, i dati dell’editore e poche righe sul contenuto. Non c’è una vera analisi o giudizio. È utile come vetrina, ma non pretende di entrare nel merito del testo.
Il comunicato stampa è ancora un’altra cosa: è il messaggio scritto da chi pubblica o promuove il libro (editore, ufficio stampa, autore). Serve a presentare l’opera in modo accattivante, ma è un testo promozionale a tutti gli effetti. È pensato per essere diffuso rapidamente, magari adattato da chi lo riceve, ma di per sé non è informazione giornalistica.
Per il lettore (e anche per l’autore), comprendere queste differenze è cruciale: sapere cosa si sta leggendo — e cosa si sta cercando — aiuta a muoversi con più consapevolezza nel mare della promozione editoriale.
A chi inviare davvero il tuo libro? Cerca blog e redazioni coerenti con il tuo messaggio
Tra le più efficaci strategie marketing libri per ottenere visibilità, la prima regola è semplice, ma spesso dimenticata: non sparare nel mucchio. Inviare un libro a chiunque, senza tener conto delle tematiche che tratta, del target a cui si rivolge o del tipo di approccio che caratterizza il blog o la redazione, è controproducente. Peggio ancora è pretendere una recensione da chi non condivide affatto i presupposti del tuo lavoro. Risultato? Nessuna risposta, oppure — peggio — una recensione negativa e fuori contesto.
Fermati un attimo: qual è il cuore del tuo libro? Quali tematiche affronta? A chi potrebbe davvero interessare? Una volta individuato questo, cerca siti, riviste, blog e canali YouTube che parlino proprio di quegli argomenti. Se hai scritto un romanzo sperimentale, invialo a chi si occupa di letteratura innovativa, non al sito generalista che pubblica solo bestseller. Se hai scritto saggistica sociale, punta su blog indipendenti o militanti, non su chi recensisce solo manuali di self-help.
Questa fase richiede tempo, attenzione e rispetto per il lavoro altrui. Ma è il primo passo per entrare in relazione con interlocutori sinceramente interessati e potenzialmente pronti a leggere davvero il tuo testo. La qualità della rete che costruisci oggi può determinare la longevità del tuo libro domani.
Come scrivere un messaggio che non venga ignorato (né odiato)
Hai trovato il blog giusto, hai letto i suoi articoli, hai capito che tratta temi simili a quelli del tuo libro. E ora? Il messaggio di presentazione è il primo vero contatto, e spesso anche l’ultimo, se non curato. Non basta scrivere “Ciao, ti invio il mio libro, fammi sapere se ti interessa”. È impersonale, generico, e comunica una cosa sola: non hai dedicato neppure cinque minuti a chi ti stai rivolgendo.
Un buon messaggio deve essere sincero, mirato e rispettoso. Dimostra che conosci chi hai di fronte: cita un articolo, un video o una recensione che ti ha colpito. Spiega in poche righe di cosa parla il tuo libro, qual è il suo punto di forza, e perché pensi che possa interessare a chi legge quel blog o quella rivista. Non servono toni altisonanti o promesse esagerate: serve connessione.
E non allegare subito file pesanti o link multipli. Chiedi prima se può interessare una copia da valutare. Mostrare rispetto per i tempi e lo spazio dell’altro è il modo più diretto per ottenere attenzione e disponibilità.
Gli errori da evitare se non vuoi finire nel cestino (o nella lista nera)
Molti autori, spesso in buona fede, commettono errori che li rendono indesiderati ancor prima di essere letti. Il più comune? L’invio massivo e impersonale dello stesso messaggio a decine di contatti. Quando un blogger riceve un’email che inizia con “Salve redazione” o “Gentile amministratore del sito”, capisce subito di essere uno dei tanti. E nessuno ama sentirsi “uno dei tanti”.
Altri errori gravi: allegare il libro completo senza che sia stato richiesto, usare toni arroganti o insistenti (“Spero che pubblicherete la recensione entro la prossima settimana”), non inserire alcuna presentazione, scrivere senza oggetto, dimenticare i contatti, o peggio ancora, mentire sul numero di copie vendute o sui premi ricevuti.
E poi c’è l’errore più sottile ma più letale: ignorare il contesto. Se proponi un romanzo rosa a un blog che recensisce solo saggistica sociale, è evidente che non hai letto neanche una riga del sito. Risultato: bruci un’opportunità e probabilmente verrai ignorato anche in futuro, anche se un giorno avrai un libro adatto.
Ricorda: chi riceve la tua richiesta non ti conosce. Prima ancora del tuo libro, giudicherà il tuo approccio. E un approccio sbagliato è un’occasione persa.
Come distinguersi: la proposta che nessuno può ignorare
In un mondo in cui ogni giorno arrivano decine di segnalazioni, non basta avere un buon libro. Serve una proposta che colpisca, che faccia alzare gli occhi dallo schermo, che lasci il segno. Ma come si fa?
La chiave è costruire un messaggio su misura, che non sia solo educato, ma anche interessante per chi lo riceve. Mostra di conoscere il blog o il canale: cita un articolo, un video, un tema trattato di recente che ti ha colpito, e spiega perché pensi che il tuo libro possa essere rilevante per il pubblico di quel sito.
Poi, offri un contenuto utile. Non dire solo “ecco il mio libro”, ma proponi un punto di vista, un’idea per un approfondimento, una domanda provocatoria, o un collegamento a un tema attuale. Questo trasforma la tua proposta da promozione a collaborazione. Chi riceve capirà che hai qualcosa da offrire, non solo da chiedere.
Infine, cura ogni dettaglio: scrivi in italiano corretto, scegli un oggetto accattivante per l’email, allega la copertina in buona qualità, e prepara una scheda libro ben fatta (una sinossi chiara, informazioni sull’autore, dati tecnici, link utili). Una buona presentazione comunica serietà e professionalità, e fa pensare: “Se il libro è curato come la mail, vale la pena leggerlo”.
Non solo promozione: creare relazioni durature
Tra le strategie marketing libri più efficaci a lungo termine, la creazione di relazioni durature è forse la più potente. Inviare una segnalazione non è solo un’azione puntuale, ma può essere l’inizio di una relazione. I blog, i canali YouTube e i siti culturali non sono entità impersonali: dietro ci sono persone. Persone che ogni giorno ricevono decine di comunicati, ma che si ricordano di chi ha saputo distinguersi con gentilezza, coerenza e attenzione.
Per questo, la promozione migliore è quella che crea un legame. Dopo aver inviato una proposta, non sparire. Ringrazia chi ti ha risposto, anche se ha detto di no. Condividi i loro contenuti quando li apprezzi davvero. Partecipa alle discussioni, commenta, sostieni il lavoro altrui. In questo modo, la prossima volta il tuo nome non sarà uno tra tanti, ma uno che si riconosce.
Questo atteggiamento ha valore anche sul lungo periodo: non tutte le proposte vanno a buon fine subito, ma chi lavora in modo autentico e professionale lascia un’impressione positiva che può portare a future collaborazioni, interviste, recensioni o inviti.
Costruire una rete reale, fatta di fiducia e scambio reciproco, è la vera strategia per non essere dimenticati.
Strategie per ottenere recensioni
– Coltiva relazioni: invia il libro a blogger, booktuber o lettori in linea con i tuoi temi, accompagnando ogni invio con un messaggio personale e genuino. – Sfrutta le community: partecipa attivamente a gruppi di lettura su Telegram, Facebook o forum tematici, contribuendo senza spingere in modo aggressivo il tuo libro. – Valuta i servizi professionali: se scegli servizi a pagamento (influencer, blog, uffici stampa, promozione, pubblicità), orientati su realtà serie, con recensioni verificabili, che dichiarano chiaramente cosa offrono e a quali costi, evitando promesse vaghe o troppo allettanti. – Richiedi feedback: chiedi ai lettori di lasciare una recensione sincera. Ogni parola scritta da chi ha letto il tuo libro può fare la differenza. – Pazienza e costanza: costruire una buona reputazione richiede tempo.
Mettersi in gioco con passione e consapevolezza
Promuovere un libro oggi non significa solo “farsi vedere”, ma mettersi in relazione, entrare nel mondo, con tutte le sue complessità e potenzialità. È un percorso che richiede tempo, cura, ascolto e la volontà di non cercare scorciatoie. Ma è anche un’occasione per scoprire altri mondi, confrontarsi, crescere, portando la propria voce là dove può incontrare altre voci.
Ogni libro è un ponte. E ogni messaggio che invii, ogni proposta che scrivi, ogni relazione che coltivi può diventare una possibilità per il tuo libro di camminare lontano da te, di incontrare lettori inaspettati, di lasciare un segno.
Non si tratta di vendere, ma di comunicare qualcosa che conta. E, se ci credi davvero, questa è la parte più bella del viaggio.
Hai scritto un libro e pensi possa interessarci? Scrivici e raccontaci la tua opera: valutiamo con attenzione ogni proposta di recensione.
Vuoi scoprire come recensiamo i libri?
Se hai scritto un libro e vorresti vederlo recensito sul nostro blog, puoi inviarci la tua proposta: la giriamo alla nostra redazione, che valuterà se è in linea con il nostro progetto editoriale. 🔹 Non garantiamo l’accettazione: ogni proposta viene letta con attenzione, ma selezioniamo solo ciò che riteniamo adatto alla nostra linea e ai nostri lettori. 🔹 Ogni recensione è autentica: leggiamo davvero i libri che recensiamo, e il nostro intento è sempre quello di valorizzare i contenuti in modo sincero, senza promozioni forzate. 🔹 Ottimizziamo i testi per la SEO, per dare massima visibilità alla recensione nei motori di ricerca. 🔹 In redazione ci sono più lettori, con gusti e sensibilità diverse: non abbiamo richieste fisse di genere, e spaziamo tra narrativa, saggistica, letteratura per ragazzi, temi sociali e molto altro. 📌 Ecco i due criteri principali che guidano le nostre scelte: Contenuto significativo: valutiamo se il libro ha una tematica interessante o trattata con profondità, se stimola riflessione o emozione, e se possiede un’identità chiara. Cura e stile: prestiamo attenzione alla qualità della scrittura e alla cura editoriale, anche nei casi di autopubblicazione (che non escludiamo a priori). 💡 Se ci scrivi, raccontaci qualcosa di te e del tuo libro. Ci piace conoscere l’autore oltre la copertina.
Recensioni, la linfa vitale del successo editoriale
Nell’era digitale, dove l’offerta editoriale è più vasta che mai, le recensioni libri non sono più semplici opinioni personali: sono diventate un elemento fondamentale per la visibilità di un libro online e, di conseguenza, per il suo successo. Per molti autori emergenti, ottenere una recensione può fare la differenza tra restare invisibili o iniziare a costruire un pubblico fedele.
La promozione di un libro oggi passa anche – e soprattutto – dalla capacità di generare attenzione e fiducia nel lettore attraverso i giudizi di altri lettori, blogger, o addetti ai lavori. Che si tratti di una piattaforma come Amazon, di un blog letterario, o di un profilo social, le recensioni influenzano direttamente l’immagine dell’autore, la sua credibilità, e la percezione del suo lavoro.
In questo articolo capiremo perché l’importanza delle recensioni per gli autori è spesso sottovalutata, come esse incidano sulle vendite, sulla scoperta del libro, e persino sulla crescita personale dello scrittore. Vedremo inoltre strategie per ottenere recensioni, analizzando il loro impatto su Google, Amazon e nella costruzione di una reputazione che duri nel tempo. Perché le recensioni, oggi, sono la linfa vitale del successo editoriale.
Il potere delle recensioni nell’era digitale. Oltre il passaparola tradizionale
Un tempo, il successo di un libro si costruiva lentamente, grazie al passaparola tra lettori, librerie indipendenti e critici letterari. Oggi quel passaparola non è scomparso: si è trasferito online, moltiplicando la sua portata e accelerandone l’efficacia. Le recensioni digitali, pubblicate su blog letterari, store online, social network e piattaforme come Goodreads, sono diventate il principale motore di fiducia e scoperta nel mercato editoriale contemporaneo.
Dal punto di vista tecnico, queste recensioni costituiscono contenuti generati dagli utenti (UGC), un elemento altamente valorizzato dai motori di ricerca. Google tende a premiare i contenuti che stimolano interazioni autentiche, e una pagina prodotto arricchita da recensioni attive ha molte più probabilità di posizionarsi in alto nei risultati di ricerca rispetto a una pagina statica e silenziosa. Allo stesso modo, piattaforme come Amazon analizzano la quantità, la frequenza e la pertinenza delle recensioni per stabilire il grado di rilevanza di un libro rispetto ad altri della stessa categoria.
Il passaparola tradizionale, seppure ancora efficace in ambienti locali o nicchie molto coese, non è più sufficiente da solo per garantire un impatto significativo. L’interazione digitale, invece, offre una diffusione esponenziale, raggiungendo lettori lontani, creando conversazioni pubbliche attorno all’opera e generando “rumore” algoritmico che favorisce il libro anche a livello promozionale. Una singola recensione condivisa al momento giusto può innescare una catena di visibilità difficile da replicare con strumenti classici.
Per gli autori indipendenti, questa trasformazione rappresenta sia una sfida che un’opportunità: da un lato, richiede competenze di promozione e networking digitale; dall’altro, consente di ottenere visibilità e autorevolezza senza dipendere esclusivamente da editori o media tradizionali. La chiave è riconoscere il potere strutturale della recensione moderna, che non è solo una valutazione soggettiva, ma un elemento strategico nell’ecosistema editoriale digitale.
Recensioni e algoritmi di ricerca: essere trovati su Google e Amazon
Nel mercato editoriale attuale, la qualità del contenuto non basta: un libro, per avere successo, deve essere trovabile. La capacità di emergere nei risultati di ricerca su Amazon e Google dipende in larga parte da meccanismi algoritmici che premiano l’interazione degli utenti, tra cui le recensioni svolgono un ruolo centrale.
Su Amazon: l’algoritmo A9 e le recensioni come fattore di ranking
Amazon utilizza un sofisticato algoritmo di ricerca (conosciuto come A9) che tiene conto di numerosi parametri per mostrare i risultati ai lettori. Le recensioni clienti rappresentano uno dei segnali più forti. L’algoritmo valuta:
Numero totale di recensioni: più recensioni significano maggiore rilevanza.
Valutazione media: i libri con rating tra 4 e 5 stelle tendono a performare meglio.
Frequenza e freschezza delle recensioni: nuove recensioni costanti suggeriscono al sistema che il libro è attivo e interessante.
Parole chiave contenute nelle recensioni: se i lettori usano termini rilevanti (es. “romanzo psicologico”, “thriller coinvolgente”), queste parole migliorano il posizionamento nelle ricerche tematiche.
In sintesi, ogni recensione è un contenuto che dialoga con l’algoritmo Amazon, aiutando il libro a posizionarsi nelle pagine di ricerca e nelle sezioni “consigliati” o “chi ha comprato questo ha acquistato anche…”.
Su Google: SEO e contenuti organici
Anche al di fuori degli store, le recensioni contribuiscono a migliorare la SEO (Search Engine Optimization) del libro. Quando un titolo riceve attenzione su blog, forum o siti specializzati, Google interpreta questi segnali come indice di interesse e rilevanza. Un buon posizionamento nei motori di ricerca significa aumento del traffico organico verso il libro, maggiore probabilità di scoperta e, potenzialmente, più vendite.
Inoltre, le recensioni scritte su siti autorevoli (come blog letterari di qualità) possono finire tra i rich snippet di Google, ovvero quelle anteprime di contenuto che compaiono direttamente nella pagina dei risultati di ricerca, aumentando la visibilità del libro rispetto ad altri.
Visibilità trasversale: l’effetto moltiplicatore
Le recensioni influenzano piattaforme diverse in contemporanea: un lettore colpito da una recensione su Instagram può cercare il titolo su Amazon, mentre un articolo su un blog può spingere altri utenti a scrivere ulteriori recensioni, creando un ciclo virtuoso. La presenza di un libro in più contesti digitali, alimentata dalle recensioni, rafforza la sua percezione di valore, sia per gli algoritmi sia per i lettori.
La credibilità dell’autore e il fattore fiducia
In un contesto editoriale sempre più competitivo, la fiducia del lettore è uno degli asset più preziosi per un autore. Le recensioni contribuiscono in modo diretto alla costruzione di questa fiducia, fungendo da prova sociale — quel meccanismo psicologico per cui le persone tendono a fidarsi di ciò che altri hanno già validato.
Recensioni come indicatori di affidabilità
Un libro con numerose recensioni positive comunica immediatamente al potenziale lettore che è stato apprezzato da altri. Questo non vale solo per le opere di narrativa, ma anche per saggistica, manuali e testi di nicchia. L’effetto è duplice:
Innalzamento della percezione di qualità: anche in assenza di una casa editrice nota alle spalle, un autore autopubblicato può apparire credibile.
Riduzione del rischio percepito: l’acquisto di un libro è una forma d’investimento (tempo e denaro); sapere che altri lettori hanno avuto un’esperienza soddisfacente abbassa le barriere all’acquisto.
In pratica, le recensioni suppliscono all’assenza di garanzie tradizionali, come la notorietà dell’autore o il marchio editoriale.
Reputazione nel tempo e ciclo di feedback
Le recensioni non influenzano solo il singolo libro, ma contribuiscono a costruire la reputazione autoriale nel tempo. Un autore che riceve recensioni costantemente positive sviluppa un’identità riconoscibile e una base lettori fidelizzata, elemento fondamentale per la longevità nel panorama editoriale.
Inoltre, la presenza di recensioni critiche ma ben argomentate può paradossalmente rafforzare la credibilità: il lettore percepisce un confronto autentico, non una promozione artefatta. La varietà delle opinioni dimostra che il libro ha generato coinvolgimento reale.
La fiducia come leva per opportunità future
Una buona reputazione online basata sulle recensioni apre le porte a nuove opportunità editoriali e promozionali: inviti a festival, interesse da parte di editori tradizionali, richieste di interviste o collaborazioni. Per molti autori indipendenti, la reputazione costruita attraverso le recensioni è ciò che li ha portati a un salto di qualità nella propria carriera.
Cosa fare per promuovere un libro? Le recensioni come strategia chiave
Per un autore, specialmente se emergente o autopubblicato, promuovere un libro non è solo una questione di marketing, ma di sopravvivenza editoriale. In un panorama saturo di nuove uscite, la sfida non è solo pubblicare, ma essere notati. In questo contesto, le recensioni rappresentano una delle strategie promozionali più efficaci e accessibili.
Perché le recensioni sono una leva di marketing essenziale
A differenza di altre forme promozionali che possono essere onerose o complesse da gestire, le recensioni agiscono su più fronti contemporaneamente:
Incrementano la visibilità sui motori di ricerca e sulle piattaforme di vendita.
Rafforzano la credibilità del libro e dell’autore (come visto nella sezione precedente).
Stimolano la discussione online, innescando condivisioni spontanee sui social e nei forum.
Inoltre, il loro impatto non è effimero: una recensione ben indicizzata o pubblicata su un sito autorevole può continuare a portare lettori anche mesi o anni dopo l’uscita del libro.
Strategie integrate: recensioni come moltiplicatore
Le recensioni non devono essere viste come elemento isolato, ma integrate in un ecosistema promozionale più ampio. Tra le principali strategie che un autore può attivare:
Networking letterario: entrare in contatto con altri scrittori, blogger, librerie indipendenti.
Presenza online strutturata: sito autore, newsletter, canali social curati.
Eventi e presentazioni: anche in spazi non convenzionali (caffè letterari, biblioteche, podcast).
In tutti questi ambiti, le recensioni rappresentano un moltiplicatore: rendono più efficace ogni altra azione. Un autore che si presenta con un libro ben recensito parte da una posizione di forza.
Recensioni = investimento promozionale a lungo termine
Molti autori dedicano tempo e risorse a campagne pubblicitarie a pagamento che si esauriscono in pochi giorni. Le recensioni, al contrario, continuano a lavorare per il libro nel tempo. È per questo che incoraggiare lettori reali a lasciare un commento pubblico rappresenta una delle azioni più strategiche che un autore possa compiere.
Le recensioni per rendere famoso il proprio libro. Non solo vendite
Quando si parla di rendere “famoso” un libro, l’equazione automatica con “vendite elevate” è limitante. La notorietà editoriale non si misura soltanto in copie vendute, ma anche nella capacità dell’opera di generare conversazione, di entrare nel dibattito culturale o di diventare un riferimento riconoscibile nel proprio ambito. In questo processo, le recensioni svolgono un ruolo cruciale.
Visibilità e autorevolezza: come nasce la reputazione di un libro
Una recensione ben scritta e pubblicata su un canale credibile contribuisce a:
Accrescere l’autorevolezza del libro attraverso un giudizio esterno e motivato.
Attivare la curiosità dei lettori e dei potenziali recensori successivi.
Favorire la diffusione del titolo anche oltre la nicchia iniziale.
Il libro recensito in più spazi viene percepito come degno di attenzione, e ciò genera un effetto reputazionale che va oltre i numeri di vendita.
Quando la recensione apre la porta ai media
Nel caso degli autori emergenti, è spesso proprio un primo nucleo di recensioni indipendenti a innescare l’interesse da parte di media locali, redazioni culturali o festival letterari. In altre parole, la recensione agisce come una forma di legittimazione pubblica, in grado di spostare il libro da una dimensione privata a una narrazione condivisa.
Notorietà come costruzione progressiva
Essere “famosi” non significa essere virali per qualche giorno. Significa costruire una reputazione duratura, fatta di lettori che consigliano il libro, citazioni che ricorrono nel tempo, inviti a eventi, contatti con altri autori. Tutto ciò nasce spesso non dalla quantità di copie vendute al lancio, ma dalla qualità e quantità di recensioni che accompagnano il libro nel tempo.
Le recensioni come feedback costruttivo. Migliorare scrittura e marketing
Le recensioni non sono solo strumenti promozionali: sono anche specchi critici attraverso cui l’autore può osservare la propria opera con uno sguardo esterno. In particolare per gli autori emergenti e autopubblicati, esse rappresentano una delle forme più accessibili e utili di feedback qualitativo.
Recensioni come strumento di apprendimento
Una recensione dettagliata può offrire informazioni preziose su:
Aspetti narrativi da migliorare (struttura, ritmo, coerenza dei personaggi);
Elementi apprezzati dai lettori, da valorizzare nelle opere future;
Equivoci interpretativi da chiarire nella comunicazione o nella sinossi;
Segnali deboli nel testo che non emergono durante la rilettura dell’autore o l’editing.
Ricevere questo tipo di feedback permette allo scrittore di affinare il proprio stile e di comprendere meglio come viene realmente percepita l’opera, al di là delle intenzioni iniziali.
Anche le recensioni negative sono risorse
Non tutte le recensioni positive aiutano a crescere. Le recensioni negative costruttive, quando sono argomentate e prive di intenti distruttivi, sono spesso le più illuminanti. Offrono una visione concreta su ciò che può essere percepito come debole o poco coinvolgente, e spingono l’autore a interrogarsi non solo sulla scrittura, ma anche sul posizionamento del libro: è rivolto al giusto target? È stato promosso con il tono adeguato?
Un valore anche per il marketing editoriale
Infine, le recensioni costituiscono una miniera di spunti per la promozione: citazioni di frasi efficaci, identificazione di parole chiave che i lettori associano al libro, individuazione dei temi più commentati. Utilizzare questi elementi per aggiornare la sinossi, la scheda del libro o le campagne social significa trasformare la voce dei lettori in alleati strategici del marketing.
Quante copie deve vendere un libro per essere un buon risultato?
Una delle domande più frequenti tra gli autori emergenti è: “quante copie devo vendere per poter parlare di successo?” La risposta, in realtà, dipende da molteplici fattori: canale di pubblicazione, genere, target di riferimento, strategie promozionali adottate. Ma in un mercato saturo e frammentato come quello attuale, le metriche quantitative non bastano più a definire il valore reale di un’opera.
Cambiare prospettiva sul concetto di “successo”
Per un autore indipendente, vendere 300 copie in un anno può rappresentare un ottimo risultato, soprattutto se accompagnato da recensioni di qualità, un coinvolgimento attivo dei lettori, e una presenza crescente nel dibattito online. La percezione pubblica del libro – e quindi il suo “successo” – viene infatti sempre più costruita intorno alle reazioni e alle testimonianze dei lettori, non solo dai numeri di vendita.
Le recensioni come moltiplicatori di valore
Una recensione ben scritta può:
Aumentare la durata della visibilità di un libro nel tempo;
Dare prova della sua capacità di lasciare un impatto emotivo o intellettuale;
Offrire elementi di valutazione per altri potenziali lettori o addetti ai lavori (editori, agenti, librai);
Stimolare discussioni, condivisioni, segnalazioni sui social o in community letterarie.
In questo senso, anche un libro con vendite modeste può essere percepito come un’opera riuscita, apprezzata, con una sua rilevanza culturale – e può gettare basi solide per i lavori futuri dell’autore.
Un capitale reputazionale da costruire
Ogni recensione positiva contribuisce a costruire un capitale reputazionale che va oltre il singolo libro: è l’autore stesso, con il suo stile e la sua voce, a diventare progressivamente riconoscibile. Questo capitale, fatto di fiducia, attenzione e credibilità, è ciò che permette all’autore di accrescere il proprio pubblico e di ottenere, con il tempo, risultati sempre più significativi – anche in termini di vendite.
Strategie per ottenere recensioni
Avere recensioni non è solo questione di fortuna o attesa passiva. È un processo che richiede strategie mirate, relazioni consolidate e una comunicazione efficace con il proprio pubblico e con la rete dei recensori. In particolare per gli autori indipendenti o autopubblicati, ottenere recensioni è una parte fondamentale del lavoro promozionale, tanto quanto scrivere una sinossi efficace o curare la copertina del libro.
Non esiste una scorciatoia, ma esistono buone pratiche
Le recensioni “gratuite”, ovvero quelle ottenute spontaneamente dai lettori o da blogger letterari senza compenso economico, hanno un valore superiore in termini di credibilità. Tuttavia, per stimolarne l’arrivo, è necessario:
Creare una lista di recensori affidabili: blog letterari, profili Instagram o TikTok dedicati ai libri, canali YouTube e podcast che trattano letteratura, preferibilmente in linea con il tuo genere;
Contattare i recensori con un messaggio personalizzato, presentando in modo chiaro e sintetico il proprio libro e offrendo una copia omaggio (digitale o cartacea);
Non avere aspettative immediate: i blogger ricevono molte richieste e devono poter scegliere liberamente se leggere o meno;
Ringraziare sempre, pubblicamente o privatamente, chi dedica tempo alla lettura e alla recensione;
Includere inviti alla recensione all’interno del libro (es. in fondo, una breve nota che spiega quanto sia utile lasciare un’opinione).
L’importanza della continuità
Il vero salto di qualità si ottiene quando l’autore diventa parte attiva e riconoscibile in un ecosistema: partecipa a eventi, commenta contenuti di altri scrittori, sostiene altri libri, dialoga con lettori e lettori-recensori. Questo crea una relazione circolare e costruttiva che, nel tempo, porta a un flusso più costante e naturale di recensioni.
Etica e trasparenza prima di tutto
È importante ricordare che acquistare recensioni false o gonfiate danneggia la reputazione e può persino portare a penalizzazioni sulle piattaforme di vendita. Invece, incentivare recensioni autentiche, anche accettando quelle critiche, rafforza la percezione di professionalità dell’autore e genera fiducia duratura nel pubblico.
Il nostro ruolo nell’ecosistema
Nel panorama attuale, costellato da una miriade di pubblicazioni ogni giorno, i blog letterari indipendenti svolgono un ruolo sempre più rilevante: diventano punti di riferimento per lettori curiosi e autori alla ricerca di visibilità autentica. Non si tratta solo di “scrivere recensioni”, ma di costruire spazi di approfondimento, confronto e scoperta.
Il nostro blog si impegna a essere proprio questo: un ponte tra autori emergenti e lettori attenti, un luogo dove le opere possono essere raccontate e analizzate con cura, al di fuori dei circuiti editoriali più omologati.
Perché puntiamo su autori emergenti e autopubblicati
Crediamo che la letteratura viva anche e soprattutto ai margini dell’industria editoriale mainstream. Spesso, le opere più originali, coraggiose o sperimentali provengono da autori che decidono di autopubblicarsi o che pubblicano con realtà indipendenti. Questi autori hanno bisogno di una visibilità costruita su contenuti di qualità, non su logiche pubblicitarie impersonali.
Attraverso le nostre recensioni approfondite, interviste, video e contenuti social, diamo spazio a voci nuove, contribuendo non solo a promuovere i libri, ma a raccontare chi c’è dietro: il percorso, le idee, le passioni, le fatiche.
Collaborare, non solo recensire
In questo ecosistema, non siamo meri osservatori. Collaboriamo attivamente con gli autori: offriamo visibilità attraverso i nostri canali, suggeriamo strategie per ottenere recensioni e favoriamo l’incontro tra chi scrive e chi legge. Tutto ciò avviene con indipendenza e onestà, valori fondamentali per costruire una fiducia reale.
Un Investimento nel Futuro del Tuo Libro
Le recensioni letterarie non sono semplici opinioni estemporanee, ma strumenti strategici per la crescita di un autore e la diffusione di un’opera. In un contesto dove la concorrenza è altissima e l’attenzione dei lettori sempre più frammentata, puntare su recensioni autentiche, pertinenti e ben distribuite è un investimento sul medio e lungo termine.
Non si tratta solo di ottenere visibilità nell’immediato, ma di costruire un’identità autoriale, una reputazione coerente e una comunità di lettori. Le recensioni contribuiscono a tutto questo: aumentano la fiducia nel libro, lo rendono reperibile nei motori di ricerca, offrono contenuti utili per la promozione e possono persino diventare un’occasione di crescita personale per l’autore.
Per chi scrive, dunque, valorizzare le recensioni significa valorizzare il proprio lavoro, e per chi, come noi, recensisce con attenzione e passione, significa partecipare attivamente alla costruzione di una cultura editoriale più libera, accessibile e dinamica.
Proponiti
In un panorama editoriale in continua trasformazione, il nostro blog si propone come uno spazio indipendente e attento alla qualità, dove le voci emergenti possono trovare ascolto. Recensiamo con cura opere che riteniamo meritevoli, offrendo un’analisi approfondita e una reale opportunità di visibilità, lontana da dinamiche impersonali o automatizzate.
Se sei un autore o una casa editrice e desideri segnalarci un libro per una possibile recensione, contattaci attraverso l’apposito modulo o via email. Saremo lieti di valutare la tua proposta e, se in linea con la nostra linea editoriale, inserirla nella nostra selezione.
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
What I'm missing here is the ability to restrict rotation. Some cell types you will only want 1 rotation, some not at all (or maybe some other type state flipping/change rather than a different cell type). Especially if this could be done via Blender node name.
Also would be nice if multiple sizes of cells (like 1x2) were detected properly (both 1x2 gridmap or cells that can overlap are not ideal). I was already planning on smaller gridmap(s) for obstacles/room-decoration etc but I assume populated cells from other gridmaps is not something taken into account there either (unless you manually do something with a script).
I have also had issues with grid placement (offset) I assume because of origin. I had it working with a nice placement scene but ran into an issue when I had to remake the gridmap (because data loss, and yes I probably did something different), I ended up fixing it by putting all tiles in the center instead. Really annoying to fix that when I need to import the .glb and then export an unchanged scene to the meshlib.
Godot version: 3.2.4 beta 4 (It happens all the way back to 3.1 if I remember correctly, I forgot to report it then.) OS/device including version: Arch Linux (last updated 2021-1-18) Intel i3-2100,...
I am not sure I got the first issue, you can rotate each tile individually before placing them.
Re. the second issue, I wanted to try use hexagonal objects, those you can find in the packages at kaylousberg.itch.io/ and found some addons but they're too specific and bounded to Godot versions, a dyynamic one based on any provided 2d shape would do that. We can find a way to make them fit in a grid with some roundings
Grid placement: yes, sometimes it's got some issue but that should be discussed in GitHub.
I am not sure I got the first issue, you can rotate each tile individually before placing them.
That's the issue. I don't want a sideways room tile, and for pure cube tiles rotation is only an annoyance.
based on any provided 2d shape would do that. We can find a way to make them fit in a grid with some roundings
Sure. I guess this would work but I dislike how custom of a solution that seems to be for what I'd say is general usage.
I just want bitwise calculation 1x1x1 to 8x8x8, so I can place down a chonky arena wall (8x8x2) in the same grid as a hallway (1x2x1) etc without risk of double-occupying cells. The only time I'd want that is for non-block models that are designed to occupy the same space (different types of wall decorations).
Autotiling would be nice, but that's a step up. Similarly, cell types like on_wall, on_floor, and on_ceiling (and in_air/not_on_floor?) could (if their cell type is empty) allow autorotated placement (similar to the raycast placement added not long ago).
These are the sorts of thing that would go in a proposal, possibly someone has already made these suggestions. If not, I am sure someone else would have better results writing it that myself.
I don't use online services and gave up on local too. Models are too big (storage and download annoyance), GPU I have is a 1050Ti, also too hot for it right now.
Not too keen on generating code especially if I couldn't recreate a simpler version... unless some general-use 1.5bit model could give advice on Godot and Nim-lang? Not putting too much hope in something like that though, especially due to niche and changing features.
Dieser „Film“ ist ein Hammer! Einer, der den männlichen Blick nicht nur entschlüsselt, sondern zertrümmert. Eigentlich gehören diese 100 Minuten in die Grundausbildung, nicht nur für halbklug daherschwätzende Filmkritiker:innen, sondern für alle, die mit dem Medium Film – und darüber weit hinaus mit allem, was mit einer Kamera jeglicher Art aufgenommen wird – zu tun haben. Das bezieht ausdrücklich uns als Zuschauer:innen mit ein. – Also müssen Sie das sehen! (ARTE)
FundMECFS
in reply to LaFinlandia • • •Urgh man I pro the Ukranian people’s right to self determination and staunchly against Putin’s imperialism.
But this
leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.
Keineanung
in reply to FundMECFS • • •FundMECFS
in reply to Keineanung • • •privitising the government for “non-essential” tasks tends to just hurt normal people and enrichen the oligarchs
edit: Benutzername bestätigt sich ;)