261–270 of 480 posts
Not they are worth $15bn? It is crazy valuation for the chat app that's basically gaming version of Slack. I always thought Slack would purchase Discord and make it its "Gaming division" chat app.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Recently, they replaced the fun, gamery loading messages with something more "formal". Now it does it's one thing slightly less well. The first of many casualties, no doubt. This is funny because my impression was that Discord users by and large hated those messages.
You must know a lot of people who take themselves too seriously.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Problem is the tech world is changing very fast. If you're going to sit idle hoping to make the same amount of cash every year, you're going to disappear within 5-6 years. Not liking where Discord is headed either, just saying some change is necessary not only for growing, but for staying relevant.
The difference between 'keeping up in a fast-changing market' and 'failing to focus on your core market' is often only obvious with hindsight. Google's launch of Google+ to keep up with Facebook was a huge waste of time, resources and goodwill. It had nothing to do with their core search and e-mail products, except for sharing ads/tracking. On the other hand, Google's acquisition of Youtube was a genius move that's m…
They had Orkut, they could have used it to compete with Facebook instead of creating a new service. Its the same thing with Googles multiple chat apps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is the better alternative? I have not heard of a society that has succeeded to incentive people on a large scale without the possibility of profit. Note that the context of this conversation is someone blaming capitalism for Discord becoming bloated because Discord’s founders have a goal of increasing their wealth. It seems alternatives to Discord exist for users that do not wish for this bloat, but users do not…
> What is the better alternative? I have not heard of a society that has succeeded to incentive people on a large scale without the possibility of profit. Have society really taken on learned helplessness on a mass scale? In a sense that everyone has a defeatist attitude of "we can't think of any system better than current capitalism so why change?" Or is it more probable that there are some vested interest in keepin…
I have a bad feeling about this. Discord essentially does one thing really well. I don't want to see it go down the way of so many chat platforms trying to be everything and becoming a bloated mess. Recently, they replaced the fun, gamery loading messages with something more "formal". Now it does it's one thing slightly less well. The first of many casualties, no doubt. It makes me despair of business models which re…
My main recent annoyance is that they removed the mentions tab on mobile, and replaced it with some weird feature called stage (some sort of clubhouse ripoff where you do... livestreaming?) It placed the mentions in under the search(?!?!) tab, which adds 2 clicks, and also added significant time delays sometimes when the search tab has to load for 3-10seconds........ I have a server with lots of discord "OGs" back fr…
And for what? Discord stages are an absolute ghost town. The top ones are all "Talent shows" in bait servers. I don't mind changing UX as much as most people on HN, but changing UX to chase a fad that has already died out really grinds my gears.
True sign of success: HN doesn't get the appeal of the product and they wonder why people are using it. This have happened so many times, it's actually a good indicator.
Also I see nothing about Discord trying to compete with Slack or Teams. I see it to expanding other communities like sub-reddits, forums and Facebook. Offering a different service from them. And for such purpose it's perfectly good product. Managing and allowing largish communities a chat platform.
As far as I'm concerned it's pretty much a drop in replacement for slack. There's very little that slack does that I need that discord can't do. Slack however does lack the nice/easy to use UX for talking to each other or sharing screens.
Where they lack is enterprise features that have nothing to do with the UX which would include things like auditing and security, billing for a team, ensuring everyone in the team has the premium features, etc. That's probably hard to fix because the way discord is setup, only individuals pay for getting premium features such as high resolution video for sharing. That makes more sense for gamers than for corporate usage. Likewise, you have one account on discord for every community and slack has a one account per community thing. I have about 10+ accounts with them. Really annoying actually. Discord could do something like Github did which is allowing Github members to be added to any team and managing premium features on a per team basis.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You must know a lot of people who take themselves too seriously.
Clever humour at the right time is great. A dumb message while I'm trying to get on with my work or hobby isn't good humour or at the right time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but what is broken is that the people who have ultimate control of large public companies (in 90% of cases - founder controlled companies are a prominent exception) are the shareholders. And these are typically not domain experts, their main interest is in making money. So they generally see fit to appoint executives whose main objective is to make money and to remove those who care about anything else. What altern…
> What alternatives are there? Worker representation on boards is one example. Imagine if the board of public companies was 50% shareholders and 50% workers. > The most profitable public companies seem to invest quite heavily in long term investments and have long term planning. This does not seem to square with your statement. The most profitable companies yes, but not necessarily the ones making the most money for…
Sure, that is an interesting option. But what about Discord, since it is not public? Does anyone that starts a business have to give half of the decision making power to workers from day 1?
I cannot parse the concept you are trying to explain in your second paragraph.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a bit ridiculous. It's a gaming platform before anything else. In that scene it's very common to share your gaming status with others. Not to mention that you can obviously disable this.
If you were introduced to Discord in a non-gaming-related context, it is very common to be unfamiliar with the tendency of gamers to share what game they are currently playing. There is no such habit in other, more "serious" contexts - for example MS Teams does not set "currently using Microsoft Powerpoint" or "currently coding in VS Code" as my publicly visible status at work. I can thus fully understand that a lot…
Don't worry, Discord will!