Live data from Hacker News

Dear Mark Zuckerberg

daltoncaldwell.com

81–90 of 272 posts

Re: Dear Mark Zuckerberg

#81
Though I still don't understand that well what Dalton's product really is, I do respect him for the tough choice he made. It takes guts to turn down a lot of money from some big player. Good luck, Dalton.

Re: Dear Mark Zuckerberg

#82
post #64
post #5

I don't get it. FB took an opportunity to make an acquisition offer (or at least open the dialog) and used some hard tactics (in this case the threat of direct competition) to improve their negotiating position. What's the problem here? This is just business. Facebook has every right to develop that app, just like Dalton Caldwell did. If it makes sense for them to do it themselves, then they will. If it makes sense f…

The problem is that it's a bad faith negotiation. Dalton was under the impression that he was going to be making a pitch for some higher level support from FB for his product. That does not automatically translate to wanting Facebook to hire him(which apparently was FB's intent). Facebook's execs effectively ambushed Dalton during the pitch with an aquihire offer. That's where this turns into a bad faith negotiation,…

I retreat to the street when reading stories like this: FB subjected him to a hustle.

Re: Dear Mark Zuckerberg

#83
The issue is that facebook and twitter have derailed from their earlier stated mission of connecting people and facilitating communication. Their goal as public businesses is making money from advertising, anything else is just feeding into that. This kind of misalignment of goals results in end users experience suffering. A thing like a social network is part of the fundamental fabric of the internet As a result the organization running this infrastructure should have very clear goals. It doesn't have to be a non-profit, but the goal should not be to generate 30% growth and billions in profits. The goal should be to make it easier for people to communicate. Given the decrease in the cost of computing, there is no reason that it should cost billions of $ to run an infrastructure like facebook. What we need is a linux for the internet. Fundamental infrastructures like social network and search engine being run by entities with no hidden agendas! It will happen!

Re: Dear Mark Zuckerberg

#84

Why wait 1.5 months to make an open letter after a "June 13th, 2012 at 4:30pm" meeting? Did you try communicating directly with Facebook for 45 days, then let it go? What makes now the best time to incite public wrath against Facebook (I'm assuming that was the intent in resolving never to write another line of code for a "rotten to the core" company) in an open letter that was anything but conciliatory? It sounds li…

I have been waiting because I have been afraid.

I have been blogging extensively about platform-risk issues for the past month, but have never come out and said this part: http://daltoncaldwell.com/

Re: Dear Mark Zuckerberg

#85
post #3

I don't understand what you think Facebook did wrong. They intend to enter this new space, using their technology and their people. As a courtesy they offered to hire you / throw a lot of money at you. What would you have had them do instead? Not compete with you, because you're a precious snow flake? Acquire you and treat you like a prima donna, giving you your own team and allowing you to take your own technical di…

It is absolutely stunning to me how badly people miss the point on here. You really wouldn't be annoyed if I scheduled a meeting with you, decided to make the meeting about something else and then basically acted like I was being a good guy when it was clear I was trying to milk as much as possible out of the deal in a meeting I lied about the purpose of while I was wasting your time? Would you then want some angry asshole on the internet to mock you and call you a precious snowflake? You wouldnt? Bizarre, you seemed to think being an ass like that was pretty reasonable.

Re: Dear Mark Zuckerberg

#86
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like Dalton was under the impression that he was rather explicitly threatened with being denied access to the Facebook platform through a change in terms of service, in a way that is critical to his business. That's a strong-handed negotiation tactic for a supposed business infrastructure provider.

Strong handed and entirely legitimate.

wait, what? how?

Re: Dear Mark Zuckerberg

#87
We are moving into an era of the walled garden. Apple has it's iTunes Store and Mac Store, Microsoft will have a Windows store when Windows 8 launches, FB has its platform and apps that run on its platform, Twitter, on and on... All companies are looking to build walls and moats around their "platforms" because walls mean profits.

Now you need to blessing of the landlord, and not be competing against them in any way.

Re: Dear Mark Zuckerberg

#88
post #26

So you were building a service that competes with a service Facebook was working on, they offered to buy you out, you declined, and you're angry about this ? I'm sorry, but that's absurd. Most companies would not have even thought about steamrolling you, forget about offering a check. Did you expect them to just decide not to pursue their App Store offering because ol' Dalton Caldwell wouldn't like it? That's fucking…

This. Business is business. It's not the Dev Relations team that decides if an app on the platform is competitive. Just because they told him to it was 'cool' doesn't mean the execs think it's too competitive... Moral: Make sure you're talking to the right people.

I don't think that's the moral at all. The moral is that when you build on someone else's platform, they may decide to extinguish you at any moment.

That doesn't mean never build on someone else's platform, it just means to be aware of the risk and include it in your planning.

Re: Dear Mark Zuckerberg

#89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mostly agree with you, but I don't really buy the line that they were offering him millions of dollars for his company (I assume the aqui-hire would be in that range) as "a courtesy". What they'd really be paying for is avoiding exactly this situation they're in now, with him talking quite loudly about how they shut him down. Can't blame 'em for trying, but they need to suss out their target a bit better before thr…

So, you think Dalton refused a few million dollars (almost all acqui-hires would enrich a founder that much) so that he could complain publicly? Or is Dalton complaining publicly now in the hopes that Facebook will pay him more later than they would have if he'd just gone along with their proposal now? (Honestly curious: I do not have an opinion yet.)

I don't really think anything about Dalton's motivations, I was commenting more that FB was attempting to buy an amicable outcome. They sort of made a mess of it, but I think that was their intent.

When I do think about Dalton's motivations, I think he made a very risky bet and lost, and he's probably a bit angry with himself as much as he is with anyone else. Nothing wrong with that, I'd probably feel the same way.

Re: Dear Mark Zuckerberg

#90
post #54
post #3

I don't understand what you think Facebook did wrong. They intend to enter this new space, using their technology and their people. As a courtesy they offered to hire you / throw a lot of money at you. What would you have had them do instead? Not compete with you, because you're a precious snow flake? Acquire you and treat you like a prima donna, giving you your own team and allowing you to take your own technical di…

Would you please stop being gratuitously rude? Not compete with you, because you're a precious snow flake and Acquire you and treat you like a prima donna , etc. add nothing other than nastiness to Not compete with you and Acquire you , etc.

I just downvoted you by accident on mobile, it should have beeb an upvote.
Post reply on HN