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

Farewell, neighbors

blog.everyblock.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 101 posts

Re: Farewell, neighbors

#71

Post by jlev »

genwin wrote: post #64
cedrichurst wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that this code is not current is extremely surprising, actually. It's GPLV3-licensed, so my somewhat uninformed expectation is that MSNBC would be obligated to open-source any derivative works? Unless they did a complete rewrite of the codebase at some point. I created a petition asking MSNBC to open-source the latest codebase and also release the user-generated content to the public domain: https://www.chan…

From GPLV3: "One of the fundamental requirements of the GPL is that when you distribute object code to users, you must also provide them with a way to get the source." Presumably MSNBC didn't distribute object code to users, in which case they have no obligation to open-source any derivative work.

And that's why you should use the Affero GPL for web services. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.html

MSNBC really screwed the pooch on this one, from their initial "open source" via zipfile, to the zero-day shutdown. Not what the Knight Foundation intended to fund with their open source requirements.

Re: Farewell, neighbors

#72

Post by anon1385 »

cedrichurst wrote: post #66
tmcw wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The source was dumped with no version history once in 2009. So, yes, out of date. That said, I know nothing of the conditions around this, what their plans were, and so on - so not judging. And a site like EveryBlock is less about source code and more about execution and moderation, which they did quite well for a time.

But this code is GPLV3. It's really curious how the source code became out-of-date. Isn't that a violation of the license?

They own the copyright to the code: they can do what they want with it. The licence is only a restriction on what people who don't own it can do.

Also, the GPLv3 is not the same thing as the AGPL. Even if they didn't own the code, if it was only GPL then they could make changes without making those available since they were not distributing the software (assuming this was just a webapp). The AGPL closes that loophole.

Re: Farewell, neighbors

#73

Post by masklinn »

brador wrote: post #7

Startups, please don't do this. Users can become surprisingly dependent on your site, give a week warning before closing out if you can. It's not too much to ask and gives users time to prepare, move data, swap contact details, backup and such.

> Startups, please don't do this.

EveryBlock was acquired by MSNBC in 2009, and NBCUniversal took full control of MSNBC in 2012. NBC which has now decided to shut EB down effective immediately and little to no warning even to everyblock itself (they launched a new service exactly a month ago: http://blog.everyblock.com/2013/jan/07/neighbor-ads/).

Not exactly a startup, or a startup problem.

Re: Farewell, neighbors

#74

Post by clicks »

knowtheory wrote: post #30
adrianh wrote: post #21

I am super bummed about this. :-( I wrote some thoughts on my blog: http://www.holovaty.com/writing/rip-everyblock/ Adrian (EveryBlock founder)

So where to from here Adrian? Do you know whether the current team is staying on at NBC or are they looking for new gigs? And it'd be interesting to hear what you and the other founders have been working on as well.

> And it'd be interesting to hear what you and the other founders have been working on as well.

I'm not Adrian, but I'll answer for a small part: Adrian released a guitar album, and made http://www.soundslice.com/ (a guitar tab site, that plays tabs to Youtube videos)

Re: Farewell, neighbors

#75

Post by anon1385 »

geoffw8 wrote: post #22
brk wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Users, please don't become highly dependent on "free" sites with no obvious or proven business model.

Why should a user know about a sites business model? To an average joe you letting me sign up and do stuff is all I know. While "giving a week" isn't a rule, it sure sounds like it might be the nicer thing to do. You spout your answer like its the obvious and "derrr" response, but in all reality its not the users responsibility to provide longevity. And lets face it, we (startups) would be totally f'd if users didn't…

>And lets face it, we (startups) would be totally f'd if users didn't become entirely dependent on our services early doors, perhaps even pre-biz model.

I (and many other people) try to educate users not to do this. It's an uphill battle, most people are not interested until the day they lose a bunch of their data when some startup webapp they uses has burned through all their cash and closes down. This is becoming increasingly common though, so I think people are starting to realise that they can't trust cloud services/web apps. I'd like to think raising awareness will help end the trend towards centralised computing that denies users control of their data, but most people still don't even back up their local files, so…

These kinds of shutdowns are useful examples for the next time I'm having this discussion with somebody. Although I'd rather a bunch of people didn't have to lose data I feel nothing will change until this happens a quite a few more times with bigger sites.

Which is to say, I'm afraid I hope you are "totally f'd" because web startups are a malign force when it comes to data security. It's nothing personal…

Re: Farewell, neighbors

#76

Post by juan_juarez »

cedrichurst wrote: post #66
tmcw wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The source was dumped with no version history once in 2009. So, yes, out of date. That said, I know nothing of the conditions around this, what their plans were, and so on - so not judging. And a site like EveryBlock is less about source code and more about execution and moderation, which they did quite well for a time.

But this code is GPLV3. It's really curious how the source code became out-of-date. Isn't that a violation of the license?

Just because this code is released under GPLv3 it doesn't mean that the main codebase is GPLv3. They have complete ownership of their own code & can do as they will with it. The GPL only controls the rights of other people that want to use it.

Re: Farewell, neighbors

#77

Post by anon1385 »

JeffKnol wrote: post #14

This seems like a great opportunity for someone to acquire basic contact information from those former EB power users posting on this blog entry, each of whom will likely be able to rally hundreds of former EB users to help you populate an EveryBlock clone you swiftly roll out. Your site could easily take off now that the niche is completely empty again. Stop whining, start coding.

Creating yet another centralised web app on a shoestring budget is hardly the solution here. No doubt it too would lose money and get shut down or get bought out and get shut down. Unless somebody with resources is prepared to fund/maintain it, but even then you are reliant on the goodwill, energy and money of a single person. Even charging users doesn't solve the problem of the owner just pulling the plug for whatever reason.

The centralised web model is broken when it comes to any kind of services that stores significant user data (and it turns out that most things involve storing user data). If you are going to order people to start coding, at least tell them to start coding on solutions to the real problem.

Re: Farewell, neighbors

#78

Post by alaithea »

knowtheory wrote: post #19

I'm curious how many of the people reading this thread have ever actually used Everyblock (and if so how often)?

I wanted to try using it, but they only supported the city "proper" that I live near (a couple hundred feet from the border, actually), and not my metro area. While I could see that being a hard thing, dev-wise, to do, I'd say it was a huge shortcoming.

Re: Farewell, neighbors

#79

Post by brk »

mnicole wrote: post #58
brk wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting tired of this response. Understood, but the problem seems to be growing lately in the sense of "shoestring funded" startups going for broke. When it finally becomes apparent that the business can't continue there are not always a lot of resources left for a graceful shutdown. My opinion is that the "you owe it to your users..." idea is dangerous. That line of thinking could eventually lead to a class action l…

There's no incentive to try new services and give feedback if the very next day you are left with nothing, just as there is no incentive to try a service if it is forcing me to pay before so much as a demo or trial period. The point I'm making isn't that free should stay free, but that if you know that something is going to happen to the service, your users deserve as much of an exit strategy as you do. I knew those…

There's no incentive to try new services and give feedback

Note that in my original comment I said "... please don't become highly dependent...". By all means you SHOULD try new services, and offer your feedback and suggestions where possible if you think that the site has potential. But understand that it might not be a good idea to get overly invested in a site that does not have a clear ability to maintain its persistence.

Re: Farewell, neighbors

#80

Post by mnicole »

brk wrote: post #79
mnicole wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no incentive to try new services and give feedback if the very next day you are left with nothing, just as there is no incentive to try a service if it is forcing me to pay before so much as a demo or trial period. The point I'm making isn't that free should stay free, but that if you know that something is going to happen to the service, your users deserve as much of an exit strategy as you do. I knew those…

There's no incentive to try new services and give feedback Note that in my original comment I said "... please don't become highly dependent...". By all means you SHOULD try new services, and offer your feedback and suggestions where possible if you think that the site has potential. But understand that it might not be a good idea to get overly invested in a site that does not have a clear ability to maintain its per…

If my intent is not to get invested, I'm not going to use it. I look at it, I toy around with it, and I decide whether or not it is applicable to my needs. If it is, I'm going to use it, and the more I use it, the more dependent I become on it. I don't see how not using a service helps anyone on either side of the fence. If I don't 'depend on it' - therefore not use it - it definitely won't continue to exist, free or not.

From the outset, nothing about the site looked like it was going under; they'd recently redesigned, they were adding/changing features, my collections were clearly getting picked up somehow without my assistance, they were still sending their newsletters and highlighting users. There was no way of knowing until the email hit our inboxes that afternoon, just hours after I'd last submitted a link.

Post reply on HN