5 ms·
This feels a bit like a marketing gimmick, especially when you read the fine print. If forever means "till Svbtle becomes financially insolvent", that is no dif
by palakchokshi 11y ago
This feels a bit like a marketing gimmick, especially when you read the fine print. If forever means "till Svbtle becomes financially insolvent", that is no different from any other company that shuts down because they don't have money. The only thing that this promise promises is that if Svbtle gets acquired then as part of the purchase agreement the buyer will be required to keep Svbtle "alive". But what guarantees the buyer from selling again and not including that in that agreement and the new purchaser from shutting it down? And don't make a promise where your fine print says these policies are subject to change. That's not a promise that's a promise with your fingers crossed behind your back.
- dcurtis 11y agoIt's not a marketing gimmick--it's a promise. It's how I want my own blog to be treated. We announced this publicly so that you now know: if you write on Svbtle, your content is vastly more likely to survive for a long time than if you used your own server (probably) or if you used another publishing startup.
- palakchokshi 11y agoOk I understand your motivation, I really do. However announcing something publicly with fine print that says you can't be held liable for that announcement basically negates that announcement. Either you promise and stick to it (no fine print) or you announce something that catches someone's eye because they wish there was something out there that worked this way and you get them as a paying member but has a way for you to go back on your promise (thus making it a marketing gimmick).
- zimbatm 11y agoI think that you mean a pledge. Anyways, I think that it would have been more effective if there was an actual plan associated to it. For example explaining that all the static content is stored on S3 and there is money set aside to fund the static serving for 5 years. And that users can get a dump of their website for after that period.
- hotcool 11y agoyour content is vastly more likely to survive for a long time than if you used your own server (probably) I had to chuckle.
- deegles 11y agoWhat if you published monthly dumps of (public) Svbtle content and distributed them by bittorrent? Then in the event of an acquisition, someone else could host the content. Much like how Geocities was mirrored. You could even set up a separate legal entity that would have a trust set up to keep these backups alive, or partner with e.g archive.org. Edit: looks like you're already doing something like that :)
- calinet6 11y agoI could see it as substantial if it was attached to a public strategy of longevity, but sans a sweeping organizational shift designed for sustainability over the long term, this amounts to nothing more than words. I'm thinking something on the level of changing into a non-profit organization with a backing trust to support the continued existence and maintenance of the product. Similar models have worked throughout history, and it would be ground-breaking to do something similar for the concept of digital content. (Edit: apparently this is what Posthaven is trying to do, and has taken steps to at least attempt to set up. Sounds difficult!)
- notahacker 11y agoA promise the buyer will be required to keep a service alive is certainly worth something when services are frequently shut down by acquirers despite being possible to operate profitably simply because they're not that interested in it.
- palakchokshi 11y agoBut unless there is something in place that prevents ALL future buyers ad infinitum to keep the service alive is going to essentially make the first buyer not buy this in the first place. So if you don't put in the clause that ensures this promise is kept for all subsequent buyers there is nothing stopping the first buyer from essentially selling it to a shell company controlled by the buyer then shutting it down and then buying the shell company.
- notahacker 11y agoI think you're greatly overestimating the level of determination of the average corporate acquisitions team to ensure the legacy product gets killed rather than left in "maintenance mode" or merged into a new service with grandfathered rates.
- palakchokshi 11y agoAgreed it might be a rare occurrence but still a possibility that "the promise" does not address.
- hkmurakami 11y agoI'd be shocked if that's not open to negotiation during an acquisition process.
- glenngillen 11y agoAs someone who built a content platform to address most of the same issues, I tend to agree. I'm definitely starting out with the mindset of "I want to grow this into a modest and long-term sustainable business, but...". It turns out making sure my product isn't on the critical path for you always having a copy of your data, should I go out of business with zero warning, is actually a lot of work.
- glenngillen 11y agoI should add: if you're using such a tool, it's valuable, and you want your data to stay around then pay Dustin for all of his effort! The biggest challenge I've seen here is people wanting things to last forever for zero cost.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- jarmitage 11y agoStartup idea: a service that prevents your startup from fucking your users over when you go out of business with zero warning. Our Incredible Journey as a Service (OIJaaS.. kinda sounds like ouija...)
- adinb 11y agoIt almost sounds like a type of insurance company. While the actuarial tables would be horrible on startups, the cost of keeping relatively small amounts of data alive could be easily spread across lots of startups. Besides, you wouldn't have to buy the servers until the startup died. I wonder if this would work as an add on for a backup company? Calling @backblaze!
- teddyh 11y agoOr possibly The Internet Archive (http://www.archive.org/ http://www.archive.org/) and/or Archive Team (http://www.archiveteam.org/ http://www.archiveteam.org/).