81–90 of 313 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree! It feels like a good portion of the time when I see a new feature on a website it seems like it only exists because all the people needed to create it are employed at the company and we can't have them just sitting around all day.
I'm looking at you, Slack.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reddit is actually facing a lot of flak for their plan of disabling CSS. This has made several of the subreddits announce themselves as Pro-CSS - sort of a rebel against the admins. https://www.reddit.com/r/modnews/comments/66q4is/the_web_red... https://www.reddit.com/r/ProCSS/
I haven't seen a single sub where CSS would add value. The worst example is r/science where colourful tags make it especially noisy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also for context, Reddit found a lot of steam when Digg suffered a mass exodus based on seismic product shifts. I wouldn't be surprised if Reddit was consciously and unconsciously averse to that kind of mutation.
Kudos to reddit for not following the trend of "lets redesign the site just because we can" ethos. Not only did the product shift kill Digg, I also think it led to the earlier downfall of Slashdot. I may be dating myself, but I remember how each revision of Slashdot made it less usable for me. The "cleaner, minimalist, lots of whitespace" designs that were in vogue actually made it much harder to navigate comment thr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One thing I thought was interesting about the admin-editing-comments fiasco was how a large portion of users expressed surprise that an admin editing comments was even possible, and suggested it shouldn't be. Others had to come in and explain that yes, in fact Mark Zuckerburg could edit your Facebook comments if he really wanted to, and admins could edit your comments on other forums and so on. It's just usually they…
Eh, this wasn't all that surprising to me. It reminds of the time my sister was shocked to discover that her car had a battery. You don't have to know shit about how a web site works to use one.
Ugh I had a long argument with someone in college about why their car wouldn't start... it couldn't possibly be a dead battery, they didn't drive an electric car.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty clear, to me at least, that they'll become one of the biggest websites of any kind, and with a massive amount of data around what people like and are interested in. Pretty simple to imagine that being worth far more than $1 billion. Their user growth recently has been astounding.
Why are users worth money if they're barely being monetized? Considering how big (and old) reddit already is, they should already be profitable, and hence shouldn't need to raise money - unless they're planning something radical and expensive. Reddit is a cool site and wildly popular, but that doesn't mean it's going to make billions of dollars. Also I suspect the site is increasingly populated with bots, not real us…
Companies are valued based on discounted future cash flow. In other words, investors are betting that at some point in time Reddit will generate billions, even when adjusted for a discount for time. That's not crazy at all to me to see that happening.
Isn't reddit already successful? Why are they raising money? Shouldn't they be generating profits and returning those profits back to their shareholder(s)?
To become more successful
Isn't reddit already successful? Why are they raising money? Shouldn't they be generating profits and returning those profits back to their shareholder(s)?
What black magic is this? Surely you aren't suggesting... the d-word?!
I'm (obviously) not the target market, but I absolutely detest disingenuous behaviour like this.
Isn't reddit already successful? Why are they raising money? Shouldn't they be generating profits and returning those profits back to their shareholder(s)?