Reddit hires its first chief financial officer as it prepares for an IPO
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
I am still waiting to see how Congress acts overall to the likes of WSB and trading apps in general. I am betting they will have some wonderful sounding law with all sorts of wording claiming it is to protect the unwitting amateurs while in fact simply protecting their wall street donors from these amateurs upsetting their apple cart.
I'd phrase that as "is standard operating procedure", actually.
There are thousands of people who would accept the position.
If so, indeed they may strike and indeed they may be in the right demanding some part of an IPO's value.
While I can see shenanigans with replacing mods, I don't see them shutting down the subreddit.
For every mod that goes on strike, many more people will step up to take over.
Most of the mod work in the high volume subs are through automod anyway.
The stock price harm is less from the site disruption but more for continuing the site's reputation as hard to monetise.
There are options beyond removal and a notice.
Rich or many people buying and selling though.
Reddit was only founded 15 years ago, but I'm pretty sure HN is actually larger than the reddit of 12 years ago, when I joined.
/u/Deimorz (former Reddit admin, prior to that foudner of r/Games, which was one of the more successful attempts at doing a "same topic but more serious" competitor to a sub that ended up meme filled) is also trying his own competitor at tildes.net for more general purpose. Notably it's not a "free speech zone" like Voat and other attempted alternatives, so shouldn't be full of nazis when more reasonable users are looking for somewhere to migrate to.
I hope so! That was the intention behind its name change in 2007: https://news.ycombinator.com/hackernews.html.
Reddit was founded at a specific moment in history, and a lot of what made it special was what was going on in that moment of history. It was right when the web became useful and mainstream and it became possible for a few guys to put together a website and change the world. A lot of the excitement of that time period was around "What else is about to change in the near future that we could take advantage of?" The early Reddit userbase was often 20-somethings and a few late teens, right around the age range when peoples' futures are most fluid and eager to jump on the next thing.
There are a bunch of similar exciting developments happening right now, with similar exciting communities. DeFi, drones, self-driving cars, robotics, EVs, a lot of climate tech. Curiously, most of them get dismissed when they're posted on Hacker News, much like how most 40-somethings dismissed Web 2.0 when it happened. Maybe it's more a function of the age than the community or tech.
DeFi: Sounds really interesting but feels like something really niche not like the next Reddit.
Drones: Drones are really cool and programmable. Fully agreed.
Self driving: Potentially transformative in 10-15 years. There’s not much most of us can do to be a part of it. It will be dominated by Tesla, Waymo.
Robotics: The eternal dream. But right now it’s hard to even make a robot that prepares Amazon packages. Might definitely change at some point.
EVs and climate tech: Very important work but it’s hard to get rich quickly off of it. That reduces interest.
Drones: My 3-year-old will ask me "Daddy can you fly the drone now?" and absolutely loves chasing it. Great toy now, starting to find some industrial uses with insurance/forestry/firefighting/etc. Will absolutely revolutionize warfare when the next war happens.
Self-driving: Another wartime technology. I think this will limp along in niche markets until then, and then explode (no pun intended) when we need to maintain logistics networks under armed threat. Likely to be a cornerstone of post-war transportation networks, but not in the form they are now. Rather than struggle with sensor algorithms, we'll likely build the sensors & coordination into the road infrastructure and ban manual driving.
Robotics: This is like AI in that when it succeeds, it's no longer called "robotics". It's already used very extensively in manufacturing and logistics (have you ever looked up airport baggage handling systems on YouTube?). We aren't going to get general-purpose robots, but we might see a wave of micro-manufacturing appliances a la 3D printing (put in raw materials, get back a product made to your specifications, distribute products digitally) as well as descendants of today's household appliances (we already have this with Roombas, robotic lawn mowers, robotic tractors, etc).
EVs: Will probably go mainstream around 2023-2024. If you're already a top-notch electrical engineer you can likely get very rich on this right now by founding a company and letting a SPAC take you public next year. For the rest of it the excitement will be in buying one and upgrading our solar panels, power wall, power grid to support it.
Climate tech: Will likely ultimately fail in stopping global warming but will invent lots of useful innovations that might be applied to other industries in the future (sort of like how microwave ovens came out of radar and computers came out of artillery guidance). If you have good skills and a long time horizon, the play is to go work for one of these companies, learn everything you can, spend your time researching, and then ride it until it goes bankrupt and then apply the technologies toward something more mundane.
I'd agree that we're not in 2005 now - it feels more like 2002-03, where you can tell that there's interesting stuff going on but nothing's really ready for primetime yet. We had stuff like Friendster, Kazaa, LiveJournal, BaseCamp, then - all precursors to really important stuff, but the specific successes hadn't yet happened.
Self-driving: Can you elaborate on this a little more? You mean having self driving trucks on supply routes makes it much harder to break supply lines?
EVs: I think this one is already mainstream. Not in the sense that most people already have or are buying EVs but everyone from car manufacturers to bureaucrats are on the train already and it is only a matter of time.
Self-driving: Right now, the biggest problem with self-driving car adoption is that when anyone dies at the hands of a self-driving car, there's a huge press outcry and the whole program gets shut down. That calculus changes dramatically if the other side is actively trying to kill you. Then, it becomes a huge advantage to not even send drivers into the war zone, and resupply with automated logistics lines. Instead of becoming an invention that potentially kills people, it becomes an invention that saves lots of people, because the baseline shifts from "nobody ever dies young" to "young people are actively trying to kill each other". It also gives a huge advantage to the side that adopts it, because they can resupply as quickly as they can build materials instead of losing costly human lives in the effort, and the vehicles themselves can often follow evasive routes that wouldn't be practical for a human crew.
Drones (like nuclear weapons before them) make war a lot more expensive. I guess only the top 5-7 armies in the world will have the technology and expertise to maintain drones. So a conflict like the one in Iraq will have a swift conclusion, but the calculus among the big nations will remain mostly unchanged IMHO.
Self-driving: I think the biggest problem with self-driving in this scenario is the very moniker "self-driving". But it is very likely there are vehicles being tested today that are programmed to avoid minefields, use sophisticated path planning algorithms to avoid detection, minimize fuel consumption etc. Sort of a jeep-sized roomba that traverses a region instead of your living room.
The next war already happened btw. The Azerbaijani government used a large number of Turkish-supplied attack drones (self-destruction drones too iirc) against the Armenian forces.
Edit: an open source project where you can quickly roll out your own reddit style, link agg, site.
lol.
Gab / Parler are self-proclaimed bastions of free speech, but they boot left-leaning opinions and have no privacy protection (because they were hacked).
Voat gained popularity when Reddit got rid of the hate subreddits, and it shut down late last year because nobody wants to invest in or advertise on a platform where everything goes.
Sorry for zooming in on your 'censorship' comment, but it's something that just rubs me up the wrong way. No community can do without censorship (or I prefer "content moderation", censorship is mainly used for governments and e.g. journalists; you won't get put in jail for being a prick on the internets) and be sustainable at the same time.
Anyway, my point is that that incident wasn't even out of the norm for reddit administration. Their standard for objectionable content is based on whether something gets negative media attention. Spez is nothing new.
Nothing in this post constitutes professional and/or financial advice.
The market caps of the existing community tokens are as follows:
/r/EthTrader - $1.6 million https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/donut
/r/CryptoCurrency - $19.75 million https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/moon
/r/FortNiteBR - $5 million (based on expected issuance of 250 million BRICK tokens) https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/brick
[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/l6c3kx/reddit_ann...
I don't think what you're saying is true at all.
Companies willing to run ADS in a non curated venue get traction the others do not.
People talking freely will say thing the company may not like. That is no big, unless they make it so.
They will also say a lot of other things, including stuff the company likes.
And that is where the traction comes from.
The Internet natives hate corporate bland and prefer real discussion.
[1] Squarespace isn't in the Fortune 500 because they're 575th, so it's close - https://fortune.com/company/square/fortune500/
[2] Toyota isn't in the Fortune 500, but they're 10th in the Fortune Global 500 - https://fortune.com/company/toyota-motor/global500/
[3] BSkyB is not in the Fortune 500 size, but would be about 180th by revenue if it was.
[4] British Telecom, which is not in the Fortune 500, but would be about 100th by revenue if it was.
Why?
Is it because if the public sees their ad next to some gross content they'll do boycotts?
I'm curious if anyone has numbers available to see the extent to which businesses are impacted by all these "don't buy X" 'cause they advertised on Y and I don't like Y.
Coins can be used to buy either their premium subscription (no ads and a few other things) or can be used to "award" posts/comments. You can select which award you want to give, there are multiple that are by reddit and there are awards that are subreddit specific. An award can also give the awardee some coins (e.g. you pay 200 coins and the awardee gets 100).
Like I think Reddit of ~2015 was a relatively sustainable lifestyle business, but the traffic numbers were way higher than that so there's the big push to turn it into another facebook/twitter.
That's a massive risk for their business. My guess is that they are going to get rid of the nsfw subreddits like tumblr did.
Maybe it's one of those whale markets like with in-app purchases, where <2% of the users are responsible for >80% of income.
That said, Reddit has also been giving out free awards that users can hand out, probably to try and get them hooked into the award system.
Huh, I haven't seen that. Do you have any examples? Everything I've seen seems to indicate that most people are at least vaguely entertained by awards, while acknowledging that they're pretty frivolous.
But yeah, I would definitely expect it would be a whale market.
IIRC you used to very rarely see actual celebrities in the ama subreddit because it was a weird place where they'd ask you how many toddlers you thought you could fight at once, or maybe someone would get accused of trying to bang a highschooler. Now it's just your standard softball interview space where you go plug a movie, someone asks you what it was like to work with (other famous person), and then you're off to go do the exact same thing on kimmel.
It's advertiser friendly but it's about as exciting as a bowl of oatmeal and as thought provoking as the number eight. The only reason people stick around on reddit is because they're addicted to the skinner box content feed.