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

Reddit raises $200M at a $1.8B valuation

recode.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 451 posts

Re: Reddit raises $200M at a $1.8B valuation

#361

Post by ericd »

puranjay wrote: post #354
rdtsc wrote: post #303

I don't understand this. Anyone remember a time when companies used their developers to update their site without having to raise hundreds of millions of dollars? > An early version of the new design, which we saw during our interview, looks similar to Facebook’s News Feed or Twitter’s Timeline: So they will look like Facebook. Because nothing says cool and trendy like the social site your parents and aunts and uncle…

I've tried Reddit ads. Not only do they don't work, they invite backlash from Redditors. And I say this as a heavy user of the site who knows exactly what kind of content formats work best on it.

We had the complete opposite experience - we ran a tiny ad buy when the platform had just opened up, and the effect was amazing. The community embraced us and for years afterwards, people shared it in comment threads throughout reddit.

You have to make something they want, and you have to engage with them in the comments section as a redditor. If they feel pandered to, it's going to backfire. I see a lot of ads on there that seem like try-hard pandering.

It's certainly more difficult to use well than most ad platforms, especially for bigger companies.

Re: Reddit raises $200M at a $1.8B valuation

#362

Post by mcbits »

stevenj wrote: post #3

>the company is literally re-writing all of its code Wow. >An early version of the new design, which we saw during our interview, looks similar to Facebook’s News Feed or Twitter’s Timeline: A never-ending feed of content broken up into “cards” with more visuals to lure people into the conversations hidden underneath. >“We want Reddit to be more visually appealing,” he explained, “so when new users come to Reddit the…

I haven't used their app, but I use the desktop site with the custom subreddit CSS option disabled because otherwise I wouldn't be able to tolerate it. Even /r/webdev is more usable with the default styles, and the ones that disable downvoting are downright offensive. If they're just cleaning up that side of the fence, it could be an improvement.

Re: Reddit raises $200M at a $1.8B valuation

#363

Post by jondubois »

rdtsc wrote: post #303

I don't understand this. Anyone remember a time when companies used their developers to update their site without having to raise hundreds of millions of dollars? > An early version of the new design, which we saw during our interview, looks similar to Facebook’s News Feed or Twitter’s Timeline: So they will look like Facebook. Because nothing says cool and trendy like the social site your parents and aunts and uncle…

Totally agree. I've worked for several big corporations and they are extremely inefficient; as a software dev you could do nothing all day and nobody would say anything... I think sometimes it's actually better FOR THEM if you do nothing all day than add more code to the growing pile of over-engineered garbage that they're building (and which will need to be rewritten)...

Big companies are so entrenched in their over-engineered ways that they develop very low expectations about productivity.

I mean, if you look at Facebook; does anything actually change? No, it looks pretty much the same as last year - 5000 Facebook engineers working on it full time for a year and there is no noticeable, meaningful improvement.

I don't know if these big tech companies are hiring all these unnecessary software developers out of duty, for competitive advantage (just draining the talent pool) or what else but it definitely looks like a bubble.

Re: Reddit raises $200M at a $1.8B valuation

#364

Post by elmar »

justinzollars wrote: post #332
rdtsc wrote: post #303

I don't understand this. Anyone remember a time when companies used their developers to update their site without having to raise hundreds of millions of dollars? > An early version of the new design, which we saw during our interview, looks similar to Facebook’s News Feed or Twitter’s Timeline: So they will look like Facebook. Because nothing says cool and trendy like the social site your parents and aunts and uncle…

Once I was fortunate enough to work at a company that did not take VC money. I was very very lucky. It was a combination of luck, and ethical founders. On the other hand, a VC funded company I worked for (Hampton Creek) seemed like a ponzi scheme. When I quit the options strike price was so expensive I couldn't afford to pay for the options nor the taxes to "gain", the alleged hundreds of thousands of dollars in valu…

Steve Blank on the Tech Bubble: 'VCs Won't Admit They're in a Ponzi Scheme'

https://www.inc.com/zoe-henry/steve-blank-tech-bubble-burst-...

VENTURE CAPITAL IS A "LIQUIDITY PONZI SCHEME," SAYS STEVE BLANK

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12061550

Re: Reddit raises $200M at a $1.8B valuation

#365

Post by pvdebbe »

Chardok wrote: post #95

I am of the opinion that trying to turn a profit on something like Reddit is a catch 22. The concept of Reddit, which is user generated content curated by users, doesn't have a lot of need for a middleman, more of just a few moderators and admins to keep everything running smoothly. The power of the website is solely in its users and their content generation. Unfortunately these slow changes have been eroding what wa…

IMO reddit should just take a couple steps towards federation. Don't have any default subreddits, more rights to subreddits and less federal governing. That way /r/politics can be left as they want to be and so on.

Re: Reddit raises $200M at a $1.8B valuation

#366

Post by laumars »

jondubois wrote: post #363
rdtsc wrote: post #303

I don't understand this. Anyone remember a time when companies used their developers to update their site without having to raise hundreds of millions of dollars? > An early version of the new design, which we saw during our interview, looks similar to Facebook’s News Feed or Twitter’s Timeline: So they will look like Facebook. Because nothing says cool and trendy like the social site your parents and aunts and uncle…

Totally agree. I've worked for several big corporations and they are extremely inefficient; as a software dev you could do nothing all day and nobody would say anything... I think sometimes it's actually better FOR THEM if you do nothing all day than add more code to the growing pile of over-engineered garbage that they're building (and which will need to be rewritten)... Big companies are so entrenched in their over…

Facebook can't really risk changing much to the frontend UI else risk alienating the millions of non-techies out there who use the site because their brothers, sisters, aunts, parents and grandparents are on it rather than because it is hip and trendy.

However there is always backend work that needs to be done: security updates, bug fixes, updating frameworks to work with newer tech, automation / pipelining improvements (since they are working on such a large scale), etc. And that's not even mentioning the business side of things like ads, moderation, etc.

Re: Reddit raises $200M at a $1.8B valuation

#367

Post by cyxxon »

apercu wrote: post #152
pmoriarty wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't think of a single popular site redesign that actually made the site better. They're almost inevitably worse, usually much worse. A common failing is trying to make the design more shiny and pretty while decreasing functionality, dumbing the site down, adding bloat, and slowing the site down to a crawl. I really hope Reddit does not go down this road, because they really have a good thing going now. It would b…

I have no idea why I care about the NFL, but I have been going to profootballtalk.com daily for years. NBC partnered with a bunch of independent sports blogs like PFT a few years ago. They then rolled 'em all out on a new redesign. I stopped visiting after the first couple tries, then PFT backed out of the redesign and went back to their previous (crappy, old) layout. The other blogs I used to go to (pro hockeytalk a…

I also never get why these sites don't change gradually. I mean, Slashdot tried - their code was a mess, and it looked really old. But it took them ages to rewrite this, and they did it all in one go. Bam! Community was pissed. Why not move the broken old HTML to standard compliant one section at a time, and clean up things here and there, and maybe introduce a new font, or section images, ... instead of this huge explosion_ Sure it might be more work and might also not be completely doable, but if you do it all at once, you are almost guaranteed to alienate your users. And if you are Reddit or Slashdot, that's what makes you.

(I somehow triggered a wrong keyboard layout while typing. I tried to find all typos, but probably didn't get them all)

Re: Reddit raises $200M at a $1.8B valuation

#368

Post by [deleted] »

jondubois wrote: post #363
rdtsc wrote: post #303

I don't understand this. Anyone remember a time when companies used their developers to update their site without having to raise hundreds of millions of dollars? > An early version of the new design, which we saw during our interview, looks similar to Facebook’s News Feed or Twitter’s Timeline: So they will look like Facebook. Because nothing says cool and trendy like the social site your parents and aunts and uncle…

Totally agree. I've worked for several big corporations and they are extremely inefficient; as a software dev you could do nothing all day and nobody would say anything... I think sometimes it's actually better FOR THEM if you do nothing all day than add more code to the growing pile of over-engineered garbage that they're building (and which will need to be rewritten)... Big companies are so entrenched in their over…

[deleted]

Re: Reddit raises $200M at a $1.8B valuation

#370

Post by hycaria »

guelo wrote: post #328
Spivak wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some reasons this happens: * Most people don't actually need free speech because in large their ideas are popular, tame, uncontroversial, and respect the established order. * We are quick to define ideas that disagree with popular opinion as hateful which drives those that hold them to the fringe. Only the loudest and angriest will have so little to lose socially that they'll dare speak in public (i.e. the top and bo…

No. The people that are saying black people are bad, gays are bad, muslims are bad, women are bad, etc etc, are hateful, they're the definition of hateful. It's not "PC" to call them out as hateful. In fact, there's a new Political Correctness saying we can't call bigots bigots. If you want to make a safe space for hatefulness then nobody else is going to want to be there. These hateful people are terrorists in that…

What a simplistic point of view. People not often say "black people are bad, gays are bad, muslims are bad, women are bad". I am moderator on a national sub on reddit, and it's a very difficult question. A few examples :

- What are you supposed to do with people who think it's unfair that men can be tricked in impregnating a woman and sued for child support ? Is this sexism ?

- What are you supposed to do with people who feel unsafe in a specific neighborhood because of the great concentration of immigrants there ? Is this "muslims are bad" ?

- Is someone against surrogacy a "gays are bad" people ? Or is this legitimate concern ?

- What about people who use IQ per country studies ? Is this racial hate speech ?

And for these examples, we have people who deeply consider all these as "bad", and harangue us mods as people who leave hate speech, yada yada.

Where do facts stop and propaganda start, where does a fast generalization ends and real, systematic hate for a whole group of individuals begin (over a common denominator considered "bad" by PC, because no one will ever harass you or call you hateful if you think people who wear fur are douchebags) ?

And by doing so, you don't allow any discussion, private or not to be made around these questions, as they are directly flagged as "good vs bad" and arguments are an expression of the hate, and not legitimate questions. Which I don't think is good, but that's my own opinion.

Post reply on HN