5 ms·

True, but at least Hyperloop can actually be useful for someone and improve people's lives. To me, the thought that 3 billion were paid for Snapchat is not hila

by weland 13y ago

True, but at least Hyperloop can actually be useful for someone and improve people's lives. To me, the thought that 3 billion were paid for Snapchat is not hilarious, it's horrifying.

vdaniuk 13y ago
Arguably, there is nothing more important for a human being as an sentient organism than an endorphin fix obtained from various sources: love, surprise, food, etc. Snapchat provides that in a form of secure ephemeral messaging allowing users to share private information pseudosecurely. That is real value. If you find human nature horrifying I can't blame you, but saying that messaging apps do not improve people's lives is intelectually dishonest.
- romaniv 13y ago
  What's intellectually dishonest is pretending that "endorphin fix" constitutes the purpose of human existence, whereas it is just a byproduct. How it is attained matters. In fact, ability to reason about that is what makes humans self-aware. Besides, "endorphins" are just a roundabout, cowardly (and factually incorrect) way to refer to general human happiness. You're implying that Snapchats of this world make people feel happy and fulfilled. They don't. There are hundreds of these social media start-ups, yet 1 in 10 Americans takes antidepressants. (Which is a diagnosis problem, but it does illustrate how many people feel seriously unhappy.)
- weland 13y ago
  > Arguably, there is nothing more important for a human being as an sentient organism than an endorphin fix obtained from various sources: love, surprise, food, etc. On one hand, the balance of values is more complex than "there is nothing more important than the endorphin fix that allows you to translate your values into pleasures for your brain". Hookers and weed give you ten times the endorphin fix Snapchat gives you, and yet there aren't too many people who would eagerly applaud investment in that. So no, I don't think that I am intellectually dishonest in claiming that the umpteenth incremental improvement over a photo sharing app significantly improves people's lives. Snapchat isn't shaping the form of future communication, it doesn't bring people closer together any closer than IRC already does, it's not encouraging communities anymore than a dinner conversation is. It just makes sexting somewhat trendier, and twenty years from now we will look upon Snapchat the same way that we now look at elm. On the other hand, Snapchat is not the same as "the messaging apps". I'm not claiming messaging applications in general are useless; I'm claiming that Snapchat is just a slightly trendier one. The money that were invested in it, while creating financial profit in the short term, are hardly used for any significant impact. Some people will end up with fuller pockets, big deal.
  - vdaniuk 13y ago
    I see no problem with investing in weed and prostitution if it is beneficial for all(impossible) or most stakeholders. Yes, Snapchat provides small incremental improvement of people's lives. But it does it for 25M users, mind that. And that incremental improvement is considered to be worth more 3B dollars. Why? Because you can attach a business model to that improvement and extract revenues. It is simultaneously filling pockets of some people and providing value for users. If you don't think that sexting is valuable, that is your personal opinion. Millions of people think otherwise.
    - weland 13y ago
      > Why? Because you can attach a business model to that improvement and extract revenues. I don't think that is a reason to attach more value to something. I realize this is not everyone's opinion, of course.

by weland 13y ago

True, but at least Hyperloop can actually be useful for someone and improve people's lives. To me, the thought that 3 billion were paid for Snapchat is not hilarious, it's horrifying.

vdaniuk 13y ago

Arguably, there is nothing more important for a human being as an sentient organism than an endorphin fix obtained from various sources: love, surprise, food, etc. Snapchat provides that in a form of secure ephemeral messaging allowing users to share private information pseudosecurely. That is real value. If you find human nature horrifying I can't blame you, but saying that messaging apps do not improve people's lives is intelectually dishonest.

romaniv 13y ago
What's intellectually dishonest is pretending that "endorphin fix" constitutes the purpose of human existence, whereas it is just a byproduct. How it is attained matters. In fact, ability to reason about that is what makes humans self-aware. Besides, "endorphins" are just a roundabout, cowardly (and factually incorrect) way to refer to general human happiness. You're implying that Snapchats of this world make people feel happy and fulfilled. They don't. There are hundreds of these social media start-ups, yet 1 in 10 Americans takes antidepressants. (Which is a diagnosis problem, but it does illustrate how many people feel seriously unhappy.)
weland 13y ago
> Arguably, there is nothing more important for a human being as an sentient organism than an endorphin fix obtained from various sources: love, surprise, food, etc. On one hand, the balance of values is more complex than "there is nothing more important than the endorphin fix that allows you to translate your values into pleasures for your brain". Hookers and weed give you ten times the endorphin fix Snapchat gives you, and yet there aren't too many people who would eagerly applaud investment in that. So no, I don't think that I am intellectually dishonest in claiming that the umpteenth incremental improvement over a photo sharing app significantly improves people's lives. Snapchat isn't shaping the form of future communication, it doesn't bring people closer together any closer than IRC already does, it's not encouraging communities anymore than a dinner conversation is. It just makes sexting somewhat trendier, and twenty years from now we will look upon Snapchat the same way that we now look at elm. On the other hand, Snapchat is not the same as "the messaging apps". I'm not claiming messaging applications in general are useless; I'm claiming that Snapchat is just a slightly trendier one. The money that were invested in it, while creating financial profit in the short term, are hardly used for any significant impact. Some people will end up with fuller pockets, big deal.
- vdaniuk 13y ago
  I see no problem with investing in weed and prostitution if it is beneficial for all(impossible) or most stakeholders. Yes, Snapchat provides small incremental improvement of people's lives. But it does it for 25M users, mind that. And that incremental improvement is considered to be worth more 3B dollars. Why? Because you can attach a business model to that improvement and extract revenues. It is simultaneously filling pockets of some people and providing value for users. If you don't think that sexting is valuable, that is your personal opinion. Millions of people think otherwise.
  - weland 13y ago
    > Why? Because you can attach a business model to that improvement and extract revenues. I don't think that is a reason to attach more value to something. I realize this is not everyone's opinion, of course.