Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

App.net is shutting down

blog.app.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 191 posts

Re: App.net is shutting down

#131

Post by nl »

puranjay wrote: post #91
reitanqild wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe because the reason people use twitter isn't because it is useful but rather because Either: It is cool. So we must use it. Or: Everyone else is using it so we must use it too. Seriously: 140 characters? Feature? Everyone can read everything? Feature? The two biggest technical "features" of twitter can be arrived at by dumbing down either google+ or facebook 98%.

I have no idea why anyone even likes Twitter. Beyond broadcasting, there is nothing of value on it. Every tweet has absolutely inane replies. You can at least find some half-decent commentary in Facebook post comments, but Twitter is just insane babble

Where else in can you follow DeepMind and FAIR researchers discussing the latest OpenAI research paper?

It seems to me that discussion is pretty much the opposite of inane.

Re: App.net is shutting down

#132

Post by TeMPOraL »

reitanqild wrote: post #126
sspiff wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I consider "everyone can read everything" one of the most important parts of Twitter. I wouldn't use Twitter if it was limited to people I already know, for instance.

But every other platform has that as well. It is just that twitter only has that option.

Facebook has become much less interesting once it started constantly reminding people about privacy options and almost everyone went from default-public to default-friends, or often even more restrictive settings.

Re: App.net is shutting down

#133

Post by timthelion »

I have the experience, that services with generic sounding domain names are never successfull. The only remotely successfull generic sounding domain site that I can think of is about.com

There are some exceptions, like messenger.com which I don't think is a counter-example. I think that messenger.com would be no-more or less successfull if it was named barf.com. People use it because facebook already has a foothold.

Re: App.net is shutting down

#134

Post by fpig »

akjainaj wrote: post #118
jelv wrote: post #92

Sad to see them go. Mastodon, https://mastodon.social/ , is a new and positive alternative. Mastodon is a free, open-source social network server. It's GNU Social-compatible and federated. https://github.com/tootsuite/mastodon Diaspora is also still going strong with 20k MAU but there is no interaction between the pods https://the-federation.info/ .

And there's also https://gab.ai if you're into free speech.

I just looked at their community guidelines and saw this:

Non-U.S. residents and citizens must follow the laws of their domicile pertaining to online conduct, communication and content. Gab AI, Inc. will respect the territorial sovereignty of nation-states and their applicable laws pertaining to online communications, though we urge governments of the world to consider Articles 18, 19 and 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

So does this mean they are willing to censor content from people who live in less-free countries based on those countries' laws even though they don't have to, being based in the US? Isn't that weird for a "free speech" network?

Re: App.net is shutting down

#135

Post by _up »

rhizome wrote: post #32
grenoire wrote: post #2

Unfortunate. Goes to show that you really can't break even without ads or selling/analysing data with a centralised social network.

you really can't break even without ads or selling/analysing data with a centralised social network I don't think we actually know that as a fact, it's just that not much else has been tried.

I find cloud feadreader aren't that different at least from the view point of a passive reader. They seem to be profitable, by restricting free features. Like: only x feeds free to aggregate and a ~15 minute delay of all feeds. Search is also a pro feature. I also have the feeling twitter is extremely over engineered.

Re: App.net is shutting down

#136

Post by nicky0 »

bald wrote: post #85

"give it ample time to bake" that was the strategy? having it sell itself?

They did try to sell it for a couple of years but by that point in 2014 I think they had essentially given up already. But the revenue was covering the hosting costs so it seemed sensible to just leave it going, and leave possibilities open.

Re: App.net is shutting down

#137

Post by jakobegger »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #130
2sk21 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right - it seemed at the time it might become e an idealized version of Twitter. My hope was that by having to pay money to get in, it would keep out the shills and noise. I was a paid member for several years but it became clear that none of the people I followed moved so it became a ghost town.

> My hope was that by having to pay money to get in, it would keep out the shills and noise. Interesting. I'd expect something entirely opposite - with one platform, pay-for-entrance, shills / marketers can just write the entry costs off as a small marketing expense. OTOH I can easily imagine a lot of smart people with interesting things to say shying away from spending money on such a platform.

It's not like using Twitter doesn't come with costs; you need to learn how to use it, you need to follow people to stay up to date, you should probably reply to some of the people tweeting at you; and last but not least, you also need to spend time on actually coming up with things to say. That's a massive time investment. The opportunity cost of that time is a lot more than the $5 app.net used to cost per month.

I assume that $5 a month is only a problem for occasional users -- but I doubt that those add a lot of value to the ecosystem (aside from higher numbers of total users signed up and other vanity metrics)

Re: App.net is shutting down

#138

Post by PanMan »

milesf wrote: post #54

So to recap, Twitter exploded onto the scene in 2007, the "fail whale" appeared a lot, developers made all sorts of wonderful programs hooked into Twitter, the fail whale disappeared, Twitter started to destroy the app ecosystem, App.net launched to great fanfare in response to Twitter's knuckleheaded anti-developer stance, Britney Spears and Justin Bieber arrived and knocked all the nerds out of the top spots on Twi…

Twitter has no issue making money: They made over a billion last year. Their problem is in growing: They have about the same users they had 2 years ago.

Re: App.net is shutting down

#139

Post by akjainaj »

fpig wrote: post #134
akjainaj wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And there's also https://gab.ai if you're into free speech.

I just looked at their community guidelines and saw this: Non-U.S. residents and citizens must follow the laws of their domicile pertaining to online conduct, communication and content. Gab AI, Inc. will respect the territorial sovereignty of nation-states and their applicable laws pertaining to online communications, though we urge governments of the world to consider Articles 18, 19 and 20 of the Universal Declarat…

Free speech for the western world. Their admins are right-wing, so they are respectful of the sovereignty of all states and their laws/customs, as expected from people from the right.

On the other hand, there's Mastodon/GNU Social (what GP recommended) for people from the left, where they ban fascists/nazis, but they apply the same rules to users from all countries, as expected from people from the left.

It makes me kinda sad that these alternatives to Twitter are so politically polarised...

Re: App.net is shutting down

#140

Post by nsgi »

jakobegger wrote: post #137
TeMPOraL wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My hope was that by having to pay money to get in, it would keep out the shills and noise. Interesting. I'd expect something entirely opposite - with one platform, pay-for-entrance, shills / marketers can just write the entry costs off as a small marketing expense. OTOH I can easily imagine a lot of smart people with interesting things to say shying away from spending money on such a platform.

It's not like using Twitter doesn't come with costs; you need to learn how to use it, you need to follow people to stay up to date, you should probably reply to some of the people tweeting at you; and last but not least, you also need to spend time on actually coming up with things to say. That's a massive time investment. The opportunity cost of that time is a lot more than the $5 app.net used to cost per month. I a…

Many regular users start out as occasional users. A fee impedes this.
Post reply on HN