Hacker News Reader

Comment by dnnddidiej | Hacker News Reader

Nice. Quick hypoyhetical. Meta offers $1bn in 5 years time when you have 2m users. Will you sell?

If so this is a meta-or-dead social network.

Making it federated etc. would make me trust it more.

If that's your standard, you basically can't interact with any entity other than megacorps, which you obviously disdain.

What is the benefit of that perspective? It's just social media. If it goes away tomorrow, no real loss. Use it accordingly.

It is good to point out this alternative is 90% likely going to be a rugpull on "nice cosy 90s style social network" by systemic factors. Regardless of the intent of the owner.

I just realised federated helps re. censorship but not privacy/secrecy needs.

It's not a rugpull, because there's nothing invested by users.

Again, there's no alternative that meets your original criteria let alone your additional ones.

I mean.. yeah. That's why no "Facebook like 2007" social networks have happened since. It would have to be run by someone with a lot of built up trust in order for people to trust it in the way that people did with Facebook. The world has been burnt.

If say, Valve started a social network I would consider using it because they've had decades to screw up Steam and they haven't. It is a bit outside their wheelhouse though.

This random guy though?

Steam friends chat is already my primary method of contact for certain people, having very little to do with playing games together.

Anyone will sell any project for $1bn, absurd take.

That is literally their point.

yea the moment 1bn was on the table id quickly think about how not-necessary social media is for humanity and id take the check and peace out like tom from myspace & proceed to drink liquor out of coconuts on a beach somewhere.

though id have the utmost respect for someone who could hold onto the possibility to threaten the facebook/instagram/snapchat moat, realistically i don't think anyone in here could stick to the ideals so strongly.

it's not even a valuable thought exercise. if this thing were to gain any traction at all it's assuredly gonna get acquired. you gotta be tech-buddha to resist that.

or already have enough money

I think the point was that it should be unsellable. If it’s federated, how are you able to sell it? Then, it could be trusted.

> If it’s federated, how are you able to sell it?

The domain would dominate sign-up flows.

I'd probably sell any project of mine for $1m, I'm very cheap.

$1B is life changing money. More than you can reasonably spend, unless you start an airline or something like that. $1m is like two Ferraris. If you buy the second one used. Of course it's also life-changing amounts of money to many. It's enough to retire in a cheap country. But only if you are very careful about your money

There are a lot of projects I would sell for $1m, but it is little enough that I would carefully consider for anything I've invested serious time into

I dunno, if I spent even a couple years building something and could sell it for a million relatively quickly I probably would too unless it's something I'm really passionate about. I've sold side projects for waaaay less.

I’ve always wanted to own a sports team. I think I need 10-15 1B exits to make that a reality.

Craigslist never sold afaik, theres loads of other example companies worth more than a billion now that never sold. Depends how you define "project" of course, but you gotta make sure you don't define it such that this would no longer be a "project" when it's worth 1bn. Also everything that sells for more than 1bn is something that presumably nobody would sell for 1bn.

The idea that anyone would sell any project for 1bn is kinda nonsense, if a project looks worth buying for 1bn to someone, it may look to be worth keeping to the people who made it or are in control of it.

Incorrect.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com