You laughing your ass off triggers alarms.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44246859

FWIW, when potentially live saving content gets flagged on HN, effectively censoring it, I can't help but think there's a concerted effort by some actors (terrorist organizations, 3-letter agencies, foreign countries) to suppress information.

It's a big reason I avoid HN. I can imagine censoring free-speech being HN's downfall.

"First-in-the-World Ivermectin, Mebendazole and Fenbendazole Protocol in Cancer has been peer-reviewed and published on Sep.19, 2024!"

https://vigilantnews.com/post/the-overlooked-miracle-drug-fo...

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44246868

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

https://x.com/MakisMD/status/1845353670407233817

https://x.com/skymeds_store/status/1919695848222687548

https://vigilantnews.com/post/the-overlooked-miracle-drug-fo...

What would it cost? The vendor runs software that sells tickets. The same software can buy tickets back, invalidate the ticket IDs, and issue new tickets with new IDs. This feature can be part of the software at no additional cost.

Not running a buy-back scheme possible costs more to customers because of today's scalpers.

> How do you distinguish between someone buying tickets as a gift and someone who sold them on in a manner you did not detect?

As the venue/band, you don't need to. Sell to anyone.

As the customer, when you're buying from a scalper you know you're buying at a higher price than the advertised price.

> what if the group of friends changes - who pays the admin fees?

I don't see what admin fees must exist for this. Software manages anything. Printing a new ticket is cheap.

> Many scalpers are rather experienced and organised.

So is law enforcement. Scalpers can't hide the fact that they're selling.

If you were to do this again, how would you organize the source code differently?

Scalpers can't transfer tickets in this system.

Similar to quadratic voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadratic_voting

So the fee isn't a one-time fee, but an "open" fee that keeps increasing.

Another mechanism is to require a fee to view. If after viewing the content the user deems the content isn't valuable, they flag it in some way or they don't bookmark it, and this indicates the poster should pay the display fee.

This is easy to notice. You can't go around saying "I've got two front row" when the mere act of saying it gets you noticed. You can't post online you're selling tickets because it gets you noticed.

Only the venue/band sells. Only the venue/band buys back tickets, and they're required to buy them back at the price they were sold. Full refund of ticket price and bond.

If noticing scalpers is easy, the bond doesn't need to be silly high. Catch a scalper and you get 50% of their bond.

If you return the ticket to the venue/band, you get your money back, get the bond back, and you're not a scalper.

Charging the ticket buyer the price of the bond doesn't only harm the fans that want to see the show. It also harms the band that won't have fans come see the show. It's an incentive for the band to buy back unused tickets. Bands currently don't do that.

Fans demanding ticket buy backs puts pressure on bands to put an end to scalping. It's fans who pay the entire cost of scalping now, not bands.

Scalpers can't pay high bond amounts at scale combined with the risk of not having the bond returned.

Require a fee to post.

People will better use this app, lest they find themselves in the same situation, laid off, with no one to turn to for help.

Instead of make an ad that already consumes the visitor's attention to also consume their cpu, and this to enrich the ad-tech company, consider making a website pay the visitor for having their attention consumed by the ad instead of pay the ad-tech company.

This would be open to abuse by visitors, where visitors reload a page over and over to get paid. To prevent this type of abuse, require visitors to submit money as collateral to the website. Users pay $x per month to be part of this "ad network". If users view and get paid for more pages than their submitted collateral, they keep the money the ad paid them but they don't get their collateral back. In a way this forces users to pick which pages to visit.