4 ms·

That business model is laughable. The percentage of users who care about a domain name, are willing to pay a subscription for it and don't have one already has

That business model is laughable. The percentage of users who care about a domain name, are willing to pay a subscription for it and don't have one already has to be in the single digits. They better have a good answer to this because it's a threat to the ecosystem as a whole if they don't. Because relying on VC money in this environment is not the smartest thing to do.

steveklabnik 3y ago
I would agree that if that were "the business model" instead of "a thing that generates some revenue," it would be laughable. However, nobody, including BlueSky, believes that this is solely enough to power the business. I agree that a healthy Bluesky PBLLC is a good thing, and hope they manage to pull it off. Time will tell.
- threeseed 3y ago
  Well hopefully they take it more seriously. Because based on them raising $8m in a seed round middle of last year they aren't going to have much time to decide and implement a strategy before they will need to start thinking about raising a Series A. Or maybe Jack does become a bigger investor. Either way I think it's insane to prematurely rule out advertising.
  - steveklabnik 3y ago
    I don't think they're not taking it seriously. I also don't believe (and again, don't work there, just a huge fan, so maybe this is wrong) I'm not sure that the revenue was the reason for shipping this feature. It's best thought of as an accessibility feature, for folks who do not know what a "DNS record" is and have never hosted a domain. Without this, more technical users get something special that non-technical users do not: a nicer username. The money is just a side effect of the fact that purchasing a domain name already requires money, and so a partnership with a revenue split just makes sense. > Either way I think it's insane to prematurely rule out advertising. I hear you in an abstract "that's the way you make money in this space" sense, but I also think it's a smart reaction to the public sentiment around this stuff. People do not like advertising. It is a differentiator. We'll see if it works out for them or not.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - layer8 3y ago
    The whole point of Bluesky is to build a social network that is not incentivized by advertising. They don’t rule it out completely, but it can’t be a major part of their revenue.
    - steveklabnik 3y ago
      > They don’t rule it out completely, Well, > Are you thinking about advertisements at all? > > There will always be free options, and we can't enshittify the network with ads. This is where federation comes in. The fact that anyone can self-host and anyone can build on the software means that we'll never be able to degrade the user experience in a way where people want to leave. https://www.wired.com/story/bluesky-ceo-jay-graber-wont-enshittify-ads/ https://www.wired.com/story/bluesky-ceo-jay-graber-wont-ensh... This reads as definitive to me personally.
      - layer8 3y ago
        In their business-plan post, they stated: “We set out to build a protocol where users can own their data and always have the freedom to leave, and this approach means that advertising couldn’t be our dominant business model.” Which reads like advertising could still be a possibility, but not as a dominant factor.
        steveklabnik 3y ago
        Fair!
      - Repulsion9513 3y ago
        > enshittify with ads > we'll never be able to degrade the user experience in a way where people want to leave Neither of those is the same as "no ads". They're just saying that they can't make the ads so bad that most people want to leave, because then people will leave and the ads won't be shown to anyone.
        jakebsky 3y ago

steveklabnik 3y ago

I would agree that if that were "the business model" instead of "a thing that generates some revenue," it would be laughable. However, nobody, including BlueSky, believes that this is solely enough to power the business. I agree that a healthy Bluesky PBLLC is a good thing, and hope they manage to pull it off. Time will tell.

threeseed 3y ago
Well hopefully they take it more seriously. Because based on them raising $8m in a seed round middle of last year they aren't going to have much time to decide and implement a strategy before they will need to start thinking about raising a Series A. Or maybe Jack does become a bigger investor. Either way I think it's insane to prematurely rule out advertising.
- steveklabnik 3y ago
  I don't think they're not taking it seriously. I also don't believe (and again, don't work there, just a huge fan, so maybe this is wrong) I'm not sure that the revenue was the reason for shipping this feature. It's best thought of as an accessibility feature, for folks who do not know what a "DNS record" is and have never hosted a domain. Without this, more technical users get something special that non-technical users do not: a nicer username. The money is just a side effect of the fact that purchasing a domain name already requires money, and so a partnership with a revenue split just makes sense. > Either way I think it's insane to prematurely rule out advertising. I hear you in an abstract "that's the way you make money in this space" sense, but I also think it's a smart reaction to the public sentiment around this stuff. People do not like advertising. It is a differentiator. We'll see if it works out for them or not.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- layer8 3y ago
  The whole point of Bluesky is to build a social network that is not incentivized by advertising. They don’t rule it out completely, but it can’t be a major part of their revenue.
  - steveklabnik 3y ago
    > They don’t rule it out completely, Well, > Are you thinking about advertisements at all? > > There will always be free options, and we can't enshittify the network with ads. This is where federation comes in. The fact that anyone can self-host and anyone can build on the software means that we'll never be able to degrade the user experience in a way where people want to leave. https://www.wired.com/story/bluesky-ceo-jay-graber-wont-enshittify-ads/ https://www.wired.com/story/bluesky-ceo-jay-graber-wont-ensh... This reads as definitive to me personally.
    - layer8 3y ago
      In their business-plan post, they stated: “We set out to build a protocol where users can own their data and always have the freedom to leave, and this approach means that advertising couldn’t be our dominant business model.” Which reads like advertising could still be a possibility, but not as a dominant factor.
      - steveklabnik 3y ago
        Fair!
    - Repulsion9513 3y ago
      > enshittify with ads > we'll never be able to degrade the user experience in a way where people want to leave Neither of those is the same as "no ads". They're just saying that they can't make the ads so bad that most people want to leave, because then people will leave and the ads won't be shown to anyone.
      - jakebsky 3y ago