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

Why the Instagram founders really quit

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 112 posts

Re: Why the Instagram founders really quit

#81

Post by sjg007 »

blunte wrote: post #26

I predict that Zuckerburg, when he's old and seeking new prestige, will abandon his (dirty) capitalistic activities and take on the philanthropist persona that many other tech giants (who we often forget the dirty methods they used to reach their heights) have. The EU, with its often absurd laws (re: link tax, cookie rules) may be the only threat to the juggernaut that Facebook is (and by extension, the power that a…

I think Zuckerberg and Page should exercise their clout as a media moguls. Murdoch is scared of them. Also, Obama and Trump's Presidential victories show how a well coordinated social media campaign can win you the Presidency. Zuckerberg wants "to give people the power to build a global community that works for all of us." He should double down on that. You are right though.. Europe is really the only regulator we can rely on right now... but the global alt-right movement is trying to change that (see Steve Bannon in Europe).

Re: Why the Instagram founders really quit

#82

Post by mturmon »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #79
QuercusMax wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Offending one's delicate sensibilities" is a stock phrase. It's generally used in a tongue-in-cheek/mocking manner, referring to someone who is being overly dramatic; often used together with phrases like "clutching one's pearls". I think they're mocking both Facebook and Systrom at the same time.

To what end? They think people care too much about UI design?

It sounds like the Verge writer is trying to demonstrate that he has a perspective wider than any of the principals like Systrom and the FB management team, and is thereby entitled to judge them. (Systrom is effete, and the FB team is ruthless.) It does wear thin.

Re: Why the Instagram founders really quit

#83

Post by nakedrobot2 »

bitL wrote: post #47

Who wants Mark out? Too many critical articles from many angles recently, somebody on FB's board must be eager to get rid of him.

Or maybe his true character is emerging, as it inevitably does with anyone who has such a high profile. You can't keep putting makeup on a snake forever and keep fooling everyone.

Re: Why the Instagram founders really quit

#84

Post by spyspy »

goatherders wrote: post #38

Not seeing the meat on the bone here. It's quite normal at large companies for interview requests to be approved by someone. It's quite normal for infrastructure, support, tooling, resources to get moved around a lot. It's quite normal for people in one department to be irked at the (perceived) extra attention another department receives. I'm not FB fan but I'm pretty sure MZ isn't jealous of the growth of anything.

Yeah this sounds like trying to dramatize what is normal business operations. There's going to be politics at any company larger than a sole-proprietorship. The fact they stayed for 6 years is honestly a remarkable retention assuming this is at least 2 years beyond vesting.

Re: Why the Instagram founders really quit

#85

Post by naravara »

strict9 wrote: post #66
isoskeles wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> FB thirst traps What is this referring to?

They've given more and more nudges over the years to funnel people from IG back to FB. I have no idea but doubtful it's working, just smells of desperation. >badged notifications inside Instagram begging people to open Facebook being maybe the most prominent example. https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/25/17903556/instagram-founde...

Facebook designs its dark patterns to have the subtlety of a sledgehammer to the face.

On some level it's actually a minor blessing because they're all so grating and obvious. If they had any sense of tact they'd probably do a better of job of lulling people into indifference about them the way Amazon and Google do.

Re: Why the Instagram founders really quit

#86

Post by Fins »

sjg007 wrote: post #81
blunte wrote: post #26

I predict that Zuckerburg, when he's old and seeking new prestige, will abandon his (dirty) capitalistic activities and take on the philanthropist persona that many other tech giants (who we often forget the dirty methods they used to reach their heights) have. The EU, with its often absurd laws (re: link tax, cookie rules) may be the only threat to the juggernaut that Facebook is (and by extension, the power that a…

I think Zuckerberg and Page should exercise their clout as a media moguls. Murdoch is scared of them. Also, Obama and Trump's Presidential victories show how a well coordinated social media campaign can win you the Presidency. Zuckerberg wants "to give people the power to build a global community that works for all of us." He should double down on that. You are right though.. Europe is really the only regulator we ca…

Do you seriously believe the generic PR-speak of "to give people the power to build a global community that works for all of us."?!

Re: Why the Instagram founders really quit

#87

Post by 1337biz »

strict9 wrote: post #27

Instagram remains enormously popular because it's not exclusively 1:1 mutual relationships, has a minimal interface/feature set, and most importantly isn't easily susceptible to outrage and anger gawking like twitter/FB are. They can keep adding hamburgers and FB thirst traps but as long as they don't mess with central idea (big photos only with captions) they won't cede share any time soon.

The big question is... What can replace fb groups. For any non-tech topic they seem to be the goto replacement for good old discussion boards.

Re: Why the Instagram founders really quit

#88

Post by wll »

chillacy wrote: post #69
blunte wrote: post #26

I predict that Zuckerburg, when he's old and seeking new prestige, will abandon his (dirty) capitalistic activities and take on the philanthropist persona that many other tech giants (who we often forget the dirty methods they used to reach their heights) have. The EU, with its often absurd laws (re: link tax, cookie rules) may be the only threat to the juggernaut that Facebook is (and by extension, the power that a…

Back when his reputation wasn’t so low: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/mark-zu...

Saturday, 17 April, 2984. London Nova, Archmuseum of Human History, 21st Century Repository.

965th anniversary of “Early 21st century’s Uniform Resource Locator portraying a slice of the time’s Gordian technological landscape.”

Re: Why the Instagram founders really quit

#89

Post by kelnos »

strict9 wrote: post #27

Instagram remains enormously popular because it's not exclusively 1:1 mutual relationships, has a minimal interface/feature set, and most importantly isn't easily susceptible to outrage and anger gawking like twitter/FB are. They can keep adding hamburgers and FB thirst traps but as long as they don't mess with central idea (big photos only with captions) they won't cede share any time soon.

I use Instagram much less than I used to because of mainly three things:

1) The feed is no longer reverse-chronological.

2) I see way too many ads in my feed.

3) Feed clutter: I don't want to see suggested hashtags or follows in the feed. I don't need the feed to randomly remind me about a few people's Stories. I just want the photo posts, and nothing else.

I expect all of those things were driven by the FB side of the house. If so, for me, FB definitely has ruined IG. I no longer consider it to have the "minimal interface/feature set" you rightly cite as being so important.

I do appreciate that IG isn't as susceptible to inflammatory outrage posts like FB is (one of the reasons why I'm effectively off FB with the exception of event invites), but it's just not enough.

Re: Why the Instagram founders really quit

#90

Post by screye »

1337biz wrote: post #87
strict9 wrote: post #27

Instagram remains enormously popular because it's not exclusively 1:1 mutual relationships, has a minimal interface/feature set, and most importantly isn't easily susceptible to outrage and anger gawking like twitter/FB are. They can keep adding hamburgers and FB thirst traps but as long as they don't mess with central idea (big photos only with captions) they won't cede share any time soon.

The big question is... What can replace fb groups. For any non-tech topic they seem to be the goto replacement for good old discussion boards.

Reddit of works as a good alternative. However, the steep-ish learning curve of it seems to keep the average person away (for the better?)

FB now only serves the following uses for me:

1. Finding housing in a new city (FB groups are still king here)

2. Checking friends Birthdays, and to get in touch with them when I don't have their contact info

3. Checking events happening in my area / generating interest for an event I'm attending

That's it, and I can't wait to find alternatives for each.

Post reply on HN