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

The money part of App.net is a red herring

alexhillman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 108 posts

Re: The money part of App.net is a red herring

#61

Post by eridius »

alexknowshtml wrote: post #49
OoTheNigerian wrote: post #44

I personally think that this post does not belong to the top of HN for the mere fact that it says nothing. Writing a blogpost speculating about the motivations behind App.net, behind people backing it, the result, the lesson about the post speaking of the fear of money, about how app.net will turnout. Just a bunch of negative speculation bundled together and called a blogpost then to go on to the comments and boast a…

I have an honest question for you because I'm trying to understand this mode of thinking myself: why suddenly "no fear" of the rug being pulled out from under you? How does giving Dalton your money permanently align your interests with his? Edit: this isn't meant to accuse Dalton of nefarious plans in the least. I just don't understand the causal link.

Because the user is the customer. With Twitter, the advertiser is the customer, and the user is the product. This leads to seemingly-capricious changes like the recent backlash against third-party developers. But when the user is the customer, then the business's goals are aligned with the user's.

Re: The money part of App.net is a red herring

#62

Post by philwelch »

larrys wrote: post #47
philwelch wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People do this with politics quite frequently. Really? Do you have an example? "I didn't really think the war in Iraq would go very well, and I don't really support it; I just wanted to see what would happen."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870375750457519... http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2011/06/dueling-donations-lo... You can find examples here of the same individual supporting people in both parties: http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/indivs.php

Supporting both parties is just support for the status quo, really, it doesn't really require opposing anything. Supporting individual candidates from both parties is even less suspicious.

Re: The money part of App.net is a red herring

#63

Post by stock_toaster »

greghinch wrote: post #43

I still don't get App.net. There's no possible way anyone outside of this tiny dev community will actually pay of a service like Twitter, yet there's no way for it to become actually relevant if it's just another echo chamber for startup hipsters

Don't (didn't?) companies pay for yammer?

I could imagine companies wanting silo'd instances for company use (if app.net started offering it at some point). Status.Net offers something like this I believe too.

Re: The money part of App.net is a red herring

#64

Post by guscost »

alexknowshtml wrote: post #57
guscost wrote: post #54

Boy, a lot of people sure hate this project, don't they?

I actually don't hate this project, I think it's interesting or else it wouldn't have caught my attention in the first place. I just noticed a few things about it and wrote what I saw.

Not necessarily talking about you.

Re: The money part of App.net is a red herring

#65

Post by dinkumthinkum »

I think there is definitely something to be said for the view that App.net is this elusive concept that people are wildly dreaming about. Look through at the 100 submissions about App.net per day, there are so many different speculations, even contradictory ones, but not a lot of information coming out.

There's a group that thinks App.net is not the point, they think App.net is somehow the social network backbone or "social-network-as-a-service" or something. But that doesn't make a lot of sense to me because App.net is charging. So if you start you're little niche social network "MechanicWorld," which seems like back-to-the-future but ok, are the users paying MechanicWorld or App.net (how would they know App.net exists?). Is MechanicWorld going to offer free signup, provide an advertising based business model, and simply subsidize the free user accounts? If that's the case, what's the point of App.net again?

Some people think it is a twitter but for people that visit HN/TechCrunch ... don't those people use Twitter? That's a pretty strange market, but this one is a bit of a strawman, I've only heard it a bit and I don't think Dalton has intention of this.

I think it is still very vague what it is and how it will work. I think most concrete, least nebulous, it could be is "Twitter that You Pay For - Period." It has been covered to death, but I don't think you can rival Twitter with that.

Do you really see CNN blasting it all over the place, restaurants putting "Follow us on App.net, ($50/yr)," etc? That's the weight, unfortunately Twitter has. Twitter has people believing they are responsible for the Arab Spring (yeah right) -- I don't know how App.net is going to get this kind of press.

And the other thing, App.net, really? That's the name? When I first heard about it, I thought "Oh, ok they seem to have some completely unrelated business already and are just using this 'App.net' thing temporarily" but I don't see anything implying that is going to change; I'm going to assume someone is working on this, because that's no name for what they're trying to do (whatever it is exactly).

Nevertheless, it is nice to see something besides "We are revolutionizing the way users share photos or communicate" "... but we don't know how we're going to make money -- advertising?"

Re: The money part of App.net is a red herring

#66

Post by alexknowshtml »

eridius wrote: post #61
alexknowshtml wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have an honest question for you because I'm trying to understand this mode of thinking myself: why suddenly "no fear" of the rug being pulled out from under you? How does giving Dalton your money permanently align your interests with his? Edit: this isn't meant to accuse Dalton of nefarious plans in the least. I just don't understand the causal link.

Because the user is the customer. With Twitter, the advertiser is the customer, and the user is the product. This leads to seemingly-capricious changes like the recent backlash against third-party developers. But when the user is the customer, then the business's goals are aligned with the user's.

I was with you until the last sentence. How does that help developers who are being harmed under the advertiser arrangement?

The developers still make up a minority of the user revenue. Even if that flipped...there are multiple customer interests at play. Developers, member users, and the company.

No advertisers is better than advertisers, but I don't see anything that protects developers (except Dalton's word, which you didn't bring up) from similar fates in this model.

Re: The money part of App.net is a red herring

#67

Post by jay_kyburz »

jbigelow76 wrote: post #29
unimpressive wrote: post #13

My current suspicion is that Dalton has no idea how to build what he wants, in fact he doesn't even know what the thing he wants is . So he's fanning the flames on this discussion to let everyone else come up with something for him.

I was once tasked with building a web app for a real estate company. The ultimate stake holder (can't remember his title) told me as we were wrapping up a requirements gathering meeting: I don't know what I want, but I'll know it when I see it. I was still too green to know that I should have run for my life after that statement.

Really? When I hear that I think I think "You Beaut!"

A customer who wants to pay you to mess around with new ideas and come up with something great. Nothing more boring than client that knows exactly what they want.

Re: The money part of App.net is a red herring

#68

Post by OoTheNigerian »

alexknowshtml wrote: post #49
OoTheNigerian wrote: post #44

I personally think that this post does not belong to the top of HN for the mere fact that it says nothing. Writing a blogpost speculating about the motivations behind App.net, behind people backing it, the result, the lesson about the post speaking of the fear of money, about how app.net will turnout. Just a bunch of negative speculation bundled together and called a blogpost then to go on to the comments and boast a…

I have an honest question for you because I'm trying to understand this mode of thinking myself: why suddenly "no fear" of the rug being pulled out from under you? How does giving Dalton your money permanently align your interests with his? Edit: this isn't meant to accuse Dalton of nefarious plans in the least. I just don't understand the causal link.

1. Because being a platform/ an API as a service is its's publicly stated goal.

2. The clear business model of charging users makes that goal viable and feasible.

So far, I have no reason to doubt him. Do you?

BTW, I have no idea if it will be wildly successful. However, I'm certain interesting things will come out of it.

Re: The money part of App.net is a red herring

#69

Post by [deleted] »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #58
alexknowshtml wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I donate regularly to donorschoose.org and organize a blood drive for the Philly tech scene 3-4x a year. I hope you've got a favorite cause, too :)

The two are orthogonal. App.net is not about charity. Bring that into the conversation is, IMO, trying to confuse the conversation.

[deleted]

Re: The money part of App.net is a red herring

#70

Post by ninetax »

OoTheNigerian wrote: post #44

I personally think that this post does not belong to the top of HN for the mere fact that it says nothing. Writing a blogpost speculating about the motivations behind App.net, behind people backing it, the result, the lesson about the post speaking of the fear of money, about how app.net will turnout. Just a bunch of negative speculation bundled together and called a blogpost then to go on to the comments and boast a…

I think the reason this is at the top of HN is that people want to talk about app.net and, though it may be lacking in substance, the OP brings up an interesting point of view.

A lot of people feel very deeply about some of the ideas around app.net and with people's speculation/discussion you can get a sense of what is really important to people who use HN.

Post reply on HN