Hacker News Reader

Comment by Touche | Hacker News Reader

It's fun that we consider 3 minute clips to be "long form" nowadays. When YouTube was being bought people said that it only consisted of short amateur clips and copyright violations; two things advertisers would supposedly not be interested in.

Now I'm not saying that Vine is the next YouTube or even that it is monetizable, just that "we haven't figured it out yet" is not a convincing argument, and surely its userbase would be appealing to some buyer.

View on HN

Well to be honest I'm not a hive mind. When I said long form it's quite likely I was mistaken. I was under the impression YouTube started with 15 minute videos which is infinitely longer than 6 second clips or whatever vine is.

"We're losing money on it and have to fire people from the main company we should probably not keep this thing alive and we dont want competitors to our main product now it does videos neither" is definitely a convincing argument

What in Twitter's past makes you believe that b/c they are making this decision that it must be the right one? What decisions in their past instills this confidence?

I think Twitter is just failing hard right now and the shit has hit in the fan with investors. They are now on the "let's focus on our core product" phase of failing and hey, maybe it'll work, but that doesn't mean Vine is worthless.

For a very very long time, YouTube wouldn't let you upload videos longer than 10 minutes.

And then for quite a while after that, you had to "unlock" the capability by uploading a few videos.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com