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

I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it

ca98am79.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 648 posts

Re: I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it

#101

Post by echelon »

viccis wrote: post #76
giancarlostoro wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like that was what made Google Plus better and yet because it was Google shoving everything into Google Plus itself to force numbers… it failed. Circles in Google Plus is the most underrated thing I have ever seen. You can basically group friends under specific labels, so if you want to only share some posts / photos with family, only family will see it, wanna share posts with former and current coworkers? Hav…

What killed Google+ is the same thing that prevented Bluesky from ever being good. They had a brief window where everyone wanted to use it, and they kept it locked behind a hard to get invite system for months and months.

> the same thing that prevented Bluesky from ever being good.

That's not it at all. Bluesky is simply just too political.

X is too political. Bluesky is too political. When you focus on content and sharing and having a good time, then the network takes off.

I'm not saying politics isn't important. I'm saying it can't become the miasma that pervades the entire service and makes the entire point of the social network complaining about politics, polarized attacks, etc.

Re: I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it

#102

Post by onemoresoop »

ejoso wrote: post #53
readitalready wrote: post #33

I really wish more social networks would have a "fading connections" limit. So many social networks suffer from stale connections and networks, and these connections should expire after a year. Otherwise, it will permanently define a social network's content and editorial direction without algorithmic control. For example, Selena Gomez will always have 400million followers on Instagram, but she's socially irrelevant…

I would hate it if the system removed nodes from my network without my influence. Perhaps a rules engine with user defined criteria would be useful. Ultimately, users define their network in current-day social media and the relevance of any celebrity or other person within it. 400M people still find Selena Gomez relevant to themselves - she’s simply not relevant to you. I asked Gemini very simply “is Selena Gomez rel…

Could potentially show you withering connections you havent interacted with, almost an auto recycle bin with the option to dig on there and bring it back later on but dissapear from your main radius of attention if withered.

Re: I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it

#103

Post by kQq9oHeAz6wLLS »

mattmerr wrote: post #99

What does "a domain that was making about $9k/year in ad revenue" look like? Is this domain one where people randomly stumble upon it and give ad views to a parking page? A website with regular use or other content that people visit for some purpose that is now under different ownership?

Probably a parked domain with ads that people stumble across. We used to call these guys cybersquatters.

Re: I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it

#104

Post by bpt3 »

dnnddidiej wrote: post #32

Nice. Quick hypoyhetical. Meta offers $1bn in 5 years time when you have 2m users. Will you sell? If so this is a meta-or-dead social network. Making it federated etc. would make me trust it more.

If that's your standard, you basically can't interact with any entity other than megacorps, which you obviously disdain.

What is the benefit of that perspective? It's just social media. If it goes away tomorrow, no real loss. Use it accordingly.

Re: I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it

#107

Post by chr15m »

pixel_popping wrote: post #38
dnnddidiej wrote: post #32

Nice. Quick hypoyhetical. Meta offers $1bn in 5 years time when you have 2m users. Will you sell? If so this is a meta-or-dead social network. Making it federated etc. would make me trust it more.

Anyone will sell any project for $1bn, absurd take.

Incorrect.

Re: I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it

#108

Post by kQq9oHeAz6wLLS »

alwa wrote: post #60
alex1138 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry, Facebook already has Fading Connections You can be married to each other and your posts won't show up on the other person's feed (there's a post on HN about this)

I don’t post on Facebook—HN is my closest analogue. But I assure you my partner(s) have no interest in seeing whatever I post here. Any more than I want to be in the thick of the extended-family group chats. Or, frankly, Facebook. In that sense, maybe this is Facebook doing its part for domestic harmony…

I think the point was two people can be the absolute closest of friends, and Facebook will still fail to show them relevant posts.

Re: I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it

#109

Post by readitalready »

apsurd wrote: post #97
readitalready wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean Kim & Selena will always have a certain level of celebrity status but people like Sydney Sweeney are currently a lot more popular. This is in terms of "are they the most popular people right now" as their instagram count states. They are literally in the top 10 on instagram right now.

i think you're talking about trending vs popular. The signals are working as intended. More people will know Kim K than Sweeney because Kim K is more popular and has had more time to be more popular. why am i talking about kim k on hn lol

The signals aren't really working though. It's why algorithms are required, because people want relevance instead of popularity.

Having fading connections equates relevance with popularity.

Re: I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it

#110

Post by kQq9oHeAz6wLLS »

apsurd wrote: post #97
readitalready wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean Kim & Selena will always have a certain level of celebrity status but people like Sydney Sweeney are currently a lot more popular. This is in terms of "are they the most popular people right now" as their instagram count states. They are literally in the top 10 on instagram right now.

i think you're talking about trending vs popular. The signals are working as intended. More people will know Kim K than Sweeney because Kim K is more popular and has had more time to be more popular. why am i talking about kim k on hn lol

Everything I learned about the Kardashians has been learned against my will.
Post reply on HN