3 ms·

> want to see if a service can be built in which the users are the customers instead of the advertisers. That's not accurate. The $50 is for a full year of Ap

> want to see if a service can be built in which the users are the customers instead of the advertisers. That's not accurate. The $50 is for a full year of App.net service. That's all. Where is the binding agreement that that says what you are suggesting? People like to quip that if you aren't paying for something, you are what's being sold. Frankly, the same is true even if you are paying for something. We should have learned by not that unless it's spelled out, we should be wary. After all, if App.net gets bought out, you've effectively paid to become the product. So, what rights is App.net giving you for paying $50? What promises have they made that can be enforced? Take this: > We will never sell your personal data, content, feed, interests, clicks, or anything else to advertisers. We promise. Maybe I'm just cynical, but that doesn't mean much. I mean, you don't have to sell the data to sell being able to advertise using that data. It's very easy to get away with saying this and still provide data to 3rd parties or allow for advertising to target users. My hope is that App.net is sincere. But unless they've hidden it, nothing on their site suggests they are doing what people say they are doing.

ghshephard 14y ago
It's very accurate - If you do a poll, you will find that 90%+ don't see the money they are paying is for a "full year of App.net service" but money to encourage Dalton to try and do something interesting. If it was just for a full year of service, almost nobody would have put their money into App.net, I assure you. It's an experiment akin to what was done with Diaspora, just this time with someone who has both the experience and the track record to demonstrate he can pull it off.
- jasonlotito 14y ago
  I understand what you are saying, but it is just a years worth of service. That's the only thing you are guaranteed. You are banking on good will and good karma to carry you. > he can pull it off. Pull what off? What is "something interesting?" You said it was a service where "the users are the customers instead of the advertisers." But nothing of the sort is promised. > It's an experiment akin to what was done with Diaspora… And we've learned nothing from that? You've given $50 for a years worth of service in return. You hope for more, and you hope for specific things, but none of that is promised. What's so wrong with asking these expectations be clarified? Isn't that the entire point of App.net, to be different, to be about the users? If so, then why isn't that made clear? Nothing I see promises anything different then you see with other social networks. Except in this one, you are paying them $50.
malandrew 14y ago
To me, this is the most important point to be made: "What promises have they made that can be enforced?" Until legally binding promises are made for what will and won't be done, I can't really buy into this. Also, I think it is reasonable to ask whether that $50 price will come down over time, because if we can't expect it to eventually drop to at most $1 per month, I don't see this ever getting any major adoption justifying the $50 investment now.

ghshephard 14y ago

It's very accurate - If you do a poll, you will find that 90%+ don't see the money they are paying is for a "full year of App.net service" but money to encourage Dalton to try and do something interesting. If it was just for a full year of service, almost nobody would have put their money into App.net, I assure you. It's an experiment akin to what was done with Diaspora, just this time with someone who has both the experience and the track record to demonstrate he can pull it off.

jasonlotito 14y ago
I understand what you are saying, but it is just a years worth of service. That's the only thing you are guaranteed. You are banking on good will and good karma to carry you. > he can pull it off. Pull what off? What is "something interesting?" You said it was a service where "the users are the customers instead of the advertisers." But nothing of the sort is promised. > It's an experiment akin to what was done with Diaspora… And we've learned nothing from that? You've given $50 for a years worth of service in return. You hope for more, and you hope for specific things, but none of that is promised. What's so wrong with asking these expectations be clarified? Isn't that the entire point of App.net, to be different, to be about the users? If so, then why isn't that made clear? Nothing I see promises anything different then you see with other social networks. Except in this one, you are paying them $50.

malandrew 14y ago

To me, this is the most important point to be made: "What promises have they made that can be enforced?" Until legally binding promises are made for what will and won't be done, I can't really buy into this. Also, I think it is reasonable to ask whether that $50 price will come down over time, because if we can't expect it to eventually drop to at most $1 per month, I don't see this ever getting any major adoption justifying the $50 investment now.