4 ms·
>A new social media that says, "we're not removing anything unless it's clearly illegal or we get a court order to do so" is a reasonable pitch in my mind. And
by ramesh31 5y ago
>A new social media that says, "we're not removing anything unless it's clearly illegal or we get a court order to do so" is a reasonable pitch in my mind.
And then they will face the same market forces as Facebook and Reddit, and be forced to either capitulate or remain a tiny niche. Which may sound fine to a programmer, but anyone investing serious money into this will force their hand. And then the cycle repeats.
- gjsman-1000 5y agoI don't understand why anyone investing money would be a serious issue. Trump has enough money to keep it going until he can get ad revenue or subscriptions, so I don't see why he would need to sell it or capitulate to market forces unless he wanted to. I would have a hard time believing that Trump is not approaching it as a business.
- ramesh31 5y ago>I would have a hard time believing that Trump is not approaching it as a business. I also have a hard time believing he would invest a single a penny of his own money into this. He's a repulsive human being, but he's not an idiot. And his investors will be calling the shots.
- pavlov 5y agoIf it’s like every other Trump-branded venture, he’s happy to get paid to lend his name and equally happy to leave customers and business partners in the lurch as soon as he sees something more interesting.
- brodouevencode 5y agoThis assumes Facebook and Reddit operate solely from the consequences of market forces.
- pseudo0 5y agoAs we saw with Tumblr, trying to sanitize a platform to make it corporate-friendly can also be a great way to shoot yourself in the foot. If the operators are smart, they will be happy with a target audience of "just" 75 million people in the US and right-leaning advertisers.