Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by cubes | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

cubes

The reasoning in this article is pretty specious and circular. Some of the author's arguments can be summed up as:

* Diaspora will fail because it sounds similar to something someone else tried one time that failed.

* Nobody will use Diaspora because it will fail.

* Diaspora will fail because nobody will use it.

* Nobody will use Diaspora because it will never ship.

* Nobody will want to pay for Diaspora because nobody will want to pay for it.

* Diaspora will fail because the creators are young.

I don't know whether or not Diaspora will succeed. The old school cypherpunk in me wants to see Diaspora, or something similar, succeed. I would be more curious to see a well reasoned article on the obstacles Diaspora has to face with getting traction, and finding a viable business model.

View on HN

I agree that the arguments in the article were not well formed. One big thing they seemed to have overlooked (or consciously ignored) is the timing of the project. I think its obvious by the amount of donations that they received that the announcement of Diaspora certainly had good timing (or luck).

Now the rest really is in the hands of those four to actually deliver. It'll be interesting to see what the reaction is when they "finish" in 3 months. I think its possible that even if they deliver on every promise interest in actually using the product will be limited to the set of those who donated to the project. A lot can happen in 3 months. Depending on how Facebook reacts to the recent privacy criticism, everyone might not care about these issues in 3 months. How many people were still complaining about the news feed 3 months after that was released?

1) It will only succeed if it integrates into shit like facebook. (as in can pull friends from there)

2) It will only succeed if setting it up is only a tiny bit more difficult than facebook.

3) It will only succeed if a hosting service provides basic plans for say 300M of storage of an automatically set-up account. The idea is its as easy as facebook BUT you own an encrypted account instance which can't be used by the hosting service. The service makes money by people investing 1-10 bucks a month for their super awesome more space service.

I cannot imagine it ever succeeding if these conditions are not met. (1) is an uphill battle, (2) possible, (3) idk what the cost possibility is.

Maybe 1 is not so bad, but when FB started MySpace was not the size of facebook today, and it was sort-of crap. Will people be willing to just leave facebook and their friends and stuff to go to this new service? Its like why people still use AIM today. AIM protocol ain't great, but if your friends are on there, you can't use google talk, because everyone you know is not there.

But yea the article is all about "kids cant succeed" and circular arguments.

Facebook did not integrate in to MySpace, and managed to unseat it. I agree that ease of use is key, and this is what has crippled cypherpunk projects in the past; it's why STARTTLS protects so much email, and PGP protects so little. Also, most people using IM service today use Adium or Pidgin, which supports multiple networks.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com