3 ms·

Oh yes, I should be able to pick my own business model! What fun. I know: I'll just pay old investors with new investors' money. That may be completely idiotic,

by tikhonj 14y ago

Oh yes, I should be able to pick my own business model! What fun. I know: I'll just pay old investors with new investors' money. That may be completely idiotic, but it works. After all, nobody has to invest in my venture! There's always some risk in any investment, so it's only fair. Now, I'm definitely being too glib. But I think you are as well: it's a complicated issue, and simplifying it down to your view while being almost unbearably condescending helps nobody.

tptacek 14y ago
The problem with your message isn't that it's glib; it's that it isn't logical. "Just pay old investors with new investors" isn't a business model (it is, obviously, the definition of a Ponzi Scheme). "Pay a licensing fee for XXX" is.
- tikhonj 14y ago
  It might be illegal, dishonest and relatively unsustainable, but it is a way to make money. And existing business models (even legal ones) can still be dishonest and unsustainable. It is actually a very similar model to a lottery, except there's more lying involved to get more people to put in more money. So it's just an illegal and unethical business model. Also, the argument isn't that businesses shouldn't be able to use that model, it's that the government shouldn't be helping with draconian laws.
  - tptacek 14y ago
    So anything that makes money is a "business model", morally and/or economically equivalent to any other business model? That can't possibly be what you meant to imply.
    - tikhonj 14y ago
      I never implied that it's morally or even economically equivalent to any other business model--nothing says that all business models have to be morally or economically equivalent. But it is a business model very much like an illegal and dishonest lottery (e.g. people put money in with the hope of getting more out). And yet, despite the fact that it is a business model, society does not condone it. The fundamental point, of which this is a very extreme example, is that there is no inherent right to a business model.
      - tptacek 14y ago
        Look, again, this is simple: I said something to the effect of "I have a problem with the mentality that dictates other people's business models to them when we disapprove of the one they're currently using". You responded with a glib comment to the effect of "You're suggesting we have to respect everyone's business models and make sure they work, so everyone should just run a Ponzi Scheme". It does not take a cutting intellect to see the problem with your logic. Essentially what you're engaging in is the time-honored message- board- forensics tactic of "redefining words to fit your argument". If it makes you feel better to do that, so be it, but the only people you're going to persuade with that tactic are people who don't care what you say as long as it somehow supports file sharing. I wouldn't want to waste my time writing those kinds of comments, but I can't tell you how to spend your time.

by tikhonj 14y ago

tptacek 14y ago

The problem with your message isn't that it's glib; it's that it isn't logical. "Just pay old investors with new investors" isn't a business model (it is, obviously, the definition of a Ponzi Scheme). "Pay a licensing fee for XXX" is.

tikhonj 14y ago
It might be illegal, dishonest and relatively unsustainable, but it is a way to make money. And existing business models (even legal ones) can still be dishonest and unsustainable. It is actually a very similar model to a lottery, except there's more lying involved to get more people to put in more money. So it's just an illegal and unethical business model. Also, the argument isn't that businesses shouldn't be able to use that model, it's that the government shouldn't be helping with draconian laws.
- tptacek 14y ago
  So anything that makes money is a "business model", morally and/or economically equivalent to any other business model? That can't possibly be what you meant to imply.
  - tikhonj 14y ago
    I never implied that it's morally or even economically equivalent to any other business model--nothing says that all business models have to be morally or economically equivalent. But it is a business model very much like an illegal and dishonest lottery (e.g. people put money in with the hope of getting more out). And yet, despite the fact that it is a business model, society does not condone it. The fundamental point, of which this is a very extreme example, is that there is no inherent right to a business model.
    - tptacek 14y ago
      Look, again, this is simple: I said something to the effect of "I have a problem with the mentality that dictates other people's business models to them when we disapprove of the one they're currently using". You responded with a glib comment to the effect of "You're suggesting we have to respect everyone's business models and make sure they work, so everyone should just run a Ponzi Scheme". It does not take a cutting intellect to see the problem with your logic. Essentially what you're engaging in is the time-honored message- board- forensics tactic of "redefining words to fit your argument". If it makes you feel better to do that, so be it, but the only people you're going to persuade with that tactic are people who don't care what you say as long as it somehow supports file sharing. I wouldn't want to waste my time writing those kinds of comments, but I can't tell you how to spend your time.