4 ms·

The basic problem here is HN posters unable to conceptualize the idea 'right thing for the project'. They're stuck in 'investor mode' so to them, anyone interac

The basic problem here is HN posters unable to conceptualize the idea 'right thing for the project'. They're stuck in 'investor mode' so to them, anyone interacting with the project (or the world) can only be interested in extracting profit from the system, rendering what the project does, meaningless. Not a good way to get work done. At the end of the day you have to have done something.

Nevermark 3y ago
My view, for ambitious projects likely to be in a competitive space, is that “right thing” converges in the long term for profit-seeking and non-profit-focused paths. I.e. aim for maximum growth of happy customers/users in the long term to best grow and thrive in the long term. Short term worries about quarterly growth can seriously inhibit long term potential. Often without this huge opportunity loss being recognized. Alternately, a rejection of profit as healthy can limit the ability of a non-profit focused project from achieving more also. The key is, aim long term, for best positive impact, then work back from that to now, and use all constructive positive-sum tools available.
- Applejinx 3y ago
  That's fair. Good luck selling investors on this 'long term' thing. Better to, like Bezos, retain control and COMPEL them to deal with you over the long term. That guy is somebody who understands the value of power over profit. Never underestimate the amount of chaos a homo economicus can run into when they're dealing with a fanatic, a prophet, or a vindictive businessman with a taste for vengeance. You don't only need to worry about self-interested idealistic hippies. You might also run into someone who is able to take a position using open source against you specifically to undermine you, and who can take a loss if it's for the purpose of taking you out. This too is 'long term' in a sense. I like your 'long term' better, mind you. I'm just saying.
  - Nevermark 3y ago
    Agreed on Bezos, for a long time. Perhaps one reason he retired, is Amazon got so big he couldn’t see any more significant long term growth, relative to its monstrous size, without enshittification: Extorting income from partners, using sales data from third parties to compete with them, forcing ads and a gamed search onto customers. He could only (or only wanted to) hold off Wallstreet for as long as he had a better plan. Other than staying private, with stakeholders who care about the discipline & rewards of only finding quality growth (even if that path isn’t always clear), I don’t know of a way out of that trap. I am no hippie, but I don’t think public ownership has found the perfect structure yet. There must be a way to better incentivize positive sum-only games. Keeping individual company growth tied more closely with customer improvement.

Nevermark 3y ago

My view, for ambitious projects likely to be in a competitive space, is that “right thing” converges in the long term for profit-seeking and non-profit-focused paths. I.e. aim for maximum growth of happy customers/users in the long term to best grow and thrive in the long term. Short term worries about quarterly growth can seriously inhibit long term potential. Often without this huge opportunity loss being recognized. Alternately, a rejection of profit as healthy can limit the ability of a non-profit focused project from achieving more also. The key is, aim long term, for best positive impact, then work back from that to now, and use all constructive positive-sum tools available.

Applejinx 3y ago
That's fair. Good luck selling investors on this 'long term' thing. Better to, like Bezos, retain control and COMPEL them to deal with you over the long term. That guy is somebody who understands the value of power over profit. Never underestimate the amount of chaos a homo economicus can run into when they're dealing with a fanatic, a prophet, or a vindictive businessman with a taste for vengeance. You don't only need to worry about self-interested idealistic hippies. You might also run into someone who is able to take a position using open source against you specifically to undermine you, and who can take a loss if it's for the purpose of taking you out. This too is 'long term' in a sense. I like your 'long term' better, mind you. I'm just saying.
- Nevermark 3y ago
  Agreed on Bezos, for a long time. Perhaps one reason he retired, is Amazon got so big he couldn’t see any more significant long term growth, relative to its monstrous size, without enshittification: Extorting income from partners, using sales data from third parties to compete with them, forcing ads and a gamed search onto customers. He could only (or only wanted to) hold off Wallstreet for as long as he had a better plan. Other than staying private, with stakeholders who care about the discipline & rewards of only finding quality growth (even if that path isn’t always clear), I don’t know of a way out of that trap. I am no hippie, but I don’t think public ownership has found the perfect structure yet. There must be a way to better incentivize positive sum-only games. Keeping individual company growth tied more closely with customer improvement.