zlacker

Makes me think about how Bluesky is also a Public Benefit Corporation and took $8m in funding.

>>Kye+(OP)
Those who don't learn history are doomed to repeat it, or whatever the saying is.

>>Street+h3
That, mixed with "there's a sucker born every minute".

>>Street+h3
"History Does Not Repeat Itself, But It Rhymes"

- possibly Theodor Reik [1]

I expect Bluesky to make their own mistakes.

[1] https://quoteinvestigator.com/2014/01/12/history-rhymes/

>>skybri+Qk
This is the quote I believe: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" - George Santayana

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Santayana

>>Street+Wm
Yes, but I like the other one better.

>>Kye+(OP)
I mean Bluesky is founded by Jack Dorsey, who made a fortune for shareholders with his last social media company by conning an idiot into paying way above market value for it. Of course it'll be hard to make that particular lightning bolt strike twice, but it's not like he doesn't have a good track record.

>>Kye+(OP)
I don't think Bluesky was launched with a manifesto, so the user expectations are different.

That, and the fact that the lifespans of new social networks appear to be getting shorter and shorter with each new generation. If Bluesky were to disappear in a few months, the general reaction might be "Oh no! Anyway, what's next?"

>>Analem+8y
For investors anyhow. It could be argued that he ransomed his users.

>>skybri+zo
Ah I assumed you were correcting me, apologies.

>>Analem+8y
Dorsey is not involved anymore; he technically has a board seat, but he deleted his account, and does not appear to care about BlueSky anymore.

>>Analem+8y
>conning an idiot into paying way above market value for it.

That idiot, how you call him, bought the user base and the market position of Twitter. Either he has a plan to make it profitable or he doesn't care, as long as he doesn't loose too much money.

>>DeathA+fi1
The fact that he immediately tried to back out of the deal, to the point of going to court about it, suggests to me your version of events is not correct and the "idiot got conned" interpretation is much closer to the truth.