Democratising publishing

What strikes me about Ghost's story is that if they hadn't failed to get in to YC[0], they probably would have failed for real, because eventually the VCs would have come calling and they're obviously not a unicorn.

Instead, they have a successful organization providing a livelihood for almost 50 people, and real value to countless more.

[0]: https://john.onolan.org/a-decade-after-being-rejected-by-yc/

Re: Democratising publishing

#5

Post by johnonolan » Thu, Oct 31, 2024, 8:46 PM UTC

breck wrote: post #2

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: Democratising publishing

#6

Post by breck » Thu, Oct 31, 2024, 8:50 PM UTC

luqtas wrote: post #3

breck wrote: post #2

[flagged]

> ... to make the leap to an intellectually free world how do you interpret the MIT license?

[flagged]

Re: Democratising publishing

#7

Post by nightpool » Thu, Oct 31, 2024, 9:15 PM UTC

I can't really comment too much on historical Wordpress politics—given Matt's recent public meltdown I'm completely willing to believe that he's continued to shoot Wordpress in the foot in more obscure ways in the past—but the posturing here vs. Wordpress really strikes me as someone who has gotten lucky and has attributed that luck to skill instead.

What happens when Ghost gets popular enough to get their own "G Engine" competing with with Ghost (Pro)? As Wordpress.com shows, there's no serious moat for open source hosting. Either Ghost devotes resources away from their open core and towards their hosting platform, or they lose the competition for marketshare to a company that does devote those resources and then they have no funding stream, aside from what G Engine deigns to give them out of the grace of their own heart. And all of the platitudes about voting or board seats and everything else don't really make one lick of difference if you don't have any funding to make that happen, and you have to rely on pay-to-play funding from the people who are actually making money in the space, and let them set your agenda.

So, Matt's behavior aside, I do think these issues are pretty endemic to the idea of "open core" funding as a company (or market) grows beyond a certain size. Unified non-profit or dual-corporation structure (Mozilla Corporation vs Mozilla Foundation) doesn't change the fundamental logic of "where does the money come from?". I don't think Ghost is providing any new solutions here—they've just gotten lucky / been small enough to not be out-competed in their hosting niche yet.

Re: Democratising publishing

#8

Post by senko » Thu, Oct 31, 2024, 9:39 PM UTC

apitman wrote: post #4

What strikes me about Ghost's story is that if they hadn't failed to get in to YC[0], they probably would have failed for real, because eventually the VCs would have come calling and they're obviously not a unicorn. Instead, they have a successful organization providing a livelihood for almost 50 people, and real value to countless more. [0]: https://john.onolan.org/a-decade-after-being-rejected-by-yc/

There are so many solid business ideas that take VC money, turn out not to be unicorn potential, and crash and burn, where a slower, sustainable growth might work just fine.

Gumroad is a famous example.

Re: Democratising publishing

#9

Post by troymc » Thu, Oct 31, 2024, 9:40 PM UTC

nightpool wrote: post #7

I can't really comment too much on historical Wordpress politics—given Matt's recent public meltdown I'm completely willing to believe that he's continued to shoot Wordpress in the foot in more obscure ways in the past—but the posturing here vs. Wordpress really strikes me as someone who has gotten lucky and has attributed that luck to skill instead. What happens when Ghost gets popular enough to get their own "G Eng…

1) Many people or orgs who are aligned with Ghost and want it to succeed long-term will be okay with paying a bit more for hosting on Ghost(Pro); they might see the extra cost as paying for the continued existence and development of their publishing software.

2) Not all foundations-behind-open-source-projects use revenues from hosting as their sole source of funding. Notable examples include the Blender Foundation and the Linux Foundation.

Re: Democratising publishing

#10

Post by zokier » Thu, Oct 31, 2024, 9:48 PM UTC

nightpool wrote: post #7

I can't really comment too much on historical Wordpress politics—given Matt's recent public meltdown I'm completely willing to believe that he's continued to shoot Wordpress in the foot in more obscure ways in the past—but the posturing here vs. Wordpress really strikes me as someone who has gotten lucky and has attributed that luck to skill instead. What happens when Ghost gets popular enough to get their own "G Eng…

> I don't think Ghost is providing any new solutions here—they've just gotten lucky / been small enough to not be out-competed in their hosting niche yet.

While I agree with most of your comment, I do want to point out that intentionally targeting to be small/niche is a kinda solution in itself. To me SourceHut is another good example of how being small can be winning move. Being sustainable with 1000 employees.