We don’t need another company to hold our data and then change its mind later for the correct price.
Make the social network private, end to end encrypted, not harvested by your servers
I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it
241–250 of 648 posts
Re: I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it
#242Earlier quoted context omitted.
They dictate the capabilities that their device is offered and how the device is designed. It is up to the consumer to decide if that is worth the price of the device.
You are correct and I don't get OP's point. Don't want apple rules, don't use apple products. They are the business, they can do what they want with it, right?
We have consistently made exceptions to this rule in situations with limited choices. We would not abide by the electric company dictating a range of things, even of you have the option to run your own generator.
The truth is there are two reasonable platforms, as long as that is the case we should apply scrutiny.
Re: I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it
#243Earlier quoted context omitted.
> allow Bluetooth I'd have a hard time getting over my aversion to this. I automatically reject any app's attempt to find local devices, etc.
I can't imagine how it would be possible to detect a phone in close proximity without allowing this though
Accelerometer, by putting the two phones together and shaking (some app used to do this, but I can't find it with a quick search). Edit: I might have been thinking of Bump, mentioned downthread, though it's a different physical mechanism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bump_(application)
Camera, and point it at their changing screen (or both at the same scene at the same moment). Not too intrusive.
GPS, but that would require location permission. Intrusive.
Audio, but that would require allowing microphone. Intrusive.
Re: I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it
#244> this failed Apple App Store review because of Guideline 4.2 — Design — Minimum Functionality. They said “the usefulness of the app is limited because it seems to be intended for a small, or niche, set of users. Specifically, the app is intended for invited friends only.” This is why we need laws regulating mobile platforms. Apple shouldn't be able to dictate what you use your phone for, or what apps you can give to…
Have you heard of Android? Graphene OS? You do have freedom of choice here
Not for long if Google has any say about it. Hardware remote attestation is here, and it's the number one threat to mobile computing freedom.
The future is one where everyone can, theoretically, install anything they want, but they get banned from everything should they actually do so. Rooted system? Attestation fails. "Oh no, looks like someone tampered with the system". Can't access your bank account. Can't communicate via WhatsApp. Can't watch something on the streaming services. Can't even play video games.
Discrimination against "untrustworthy" devices, where "untrustworthy" means not corporate owned. Leading to complete ostracization.
Re: I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it
#245> He said he would sell it to me for $40k. I offered $20k, which he refused but he said if I had any domain names generating ad revenue, we could do a deal of domains and cash. He said he would accept a lower amount if I paid in Bitcoin. > So we worked out a deal where I gave him $20k in Bitcoin and a domain that was making about $9k/year in ad revenue, and he gave me the domain friendster.com. Now I was the owner of…
From what I can tell, The upper bound on price for any site making less than 100k a month is 24 months of revenue, but the more common is around 12 months.
The buyer takes on substantial risk because it's easy to fake the numbers, and google updates can tank the site at any time.
Also, most sites will require maintenance/upkeep to keep earning, or they can tank quick. Even if they have got evergreen content, without updates google might drop their search ranking.
Re: I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it
#246Earlier quoted context omitted.
This argument falls apart since there is no real freedom of choice, and the importance of smartphones in our lives. People are becoming more aware that they don’t want a corporation in control over this essential near ubiquitous technology. I see no good reason to follow a “it’s a corporation they can do whatever they want” mindset
Who is forcing you to exclusively buy into Apple’s ecosystem? Are other competitors banned where you live?
Apple is, because of vendor-lock in. Once you're sufficiently dependent on Apple's ecosystem it becomes painful to switch to a competitor because it requires switching to a different smartphone which then locks you out of most of Apple's ecosystem.
Re: I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it
#247Earlier quoted context omitted.
What even is the idea, what would be the value in weeding out niche apps, if they did it consistently? To reduce the work involved in keeping everything in the garden lovely?
None of the app store rules are used as guiding principles for ensuring some higher goal. It's just a bunch of random rules that allow them to ban anything they don't like at any moment in time. Sometimes it's because of the whims of a particular app store reviewer, and sometimes it's to get rid of apps that compete with something Apple wants to do.
[dead]
Re: I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it
#248Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 1. Make it QR code scanning instead of tapping so it can be a PWA. Misses the point completely. The entire idea is that this enforces in-person meetings, which QR codes do not.
You could make the qr code extremely short lived, like 2 seconds or so.
one could video call and scan
Re: I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it
#249I attended a concert last night and was wishing for this exact kind of app, being able to quickly exchange a follow with someone you just met in real life but will otherwise never see again unless you specifically ask for their name/number, which is awkward. Could spawn some special relationships.
> unless you specifically ask for their name/number, which is awkward
How is this any less awkward? "Oh do you have the new Friendster app?" "Friendster? Isn't that from the 1900s?" "No, the new Friendster, see you download it, register, then we bump phones...."
Maybe just because I'm an autistic introvert, but the idea of asking someone to exchange numbers is terrifying enough, but at least this is an almost universal social ritual that people understand implicitly. I ask if you want to keep in touch and exchange phone numbers. I do not need to explain literally anything else and the other person almost always knows what I mean, how to do it, and what thin social relationship that implies. And if they don't seem to understand or are hesitant, but are otherwise coherent and cogent, I take the message that they don't want to keep in touch.
Now add a new app to download (iPhone only), a new social network to register, a new social ritual... Are they being hesitant because this is a new app or because they don't actually want to keep in touch? No thanks.
Re: I bought Friendster for $30k – Here's what I'm doing with it
#250The 'tapping phones' gimmick strikes me as something that sounds cute but will become an annoying chore that one should be able to opt out of. Particularly given various unintended side effects -- I personally wouldn't want my connection to my deceased best friend to be subject to some decay feature on a social network. And either way, it's not the core feature that will draw users to the site If you want to differen…
I think the tapping phones feature -- for initial friend creation, not upkeep -- is THE killer feature of the app.
Do I want my teens on any social media apps? No.
Would I let them be on Facebook of 2006, when you were just connected to your friends and family, and not influencers and "the algorithm?" Sure! That and early Instagram were great ways to keep up with real-life friends.
If you made this as easy and pleasant to scroll through as 2011 Instagram was, with only-real friends allowed, I might even return to social media myself. It would beat having to WhatsApp my family my vacation photos.
(And heck, if this got big enough that celebrities were bumping phones with fans, heck, at least that's a more intentional connection than Insta forcing the latest wellness guru on my teen girl.)