[rogerkirkness]

I love the outrage about $20/month. It's clear that social networks create almost no individual utility at all, and that the reason we have privacy violating ones in the first place is that people "really want it" but also really don't want to pay for it. Facebook will clearly win, based on the comments about pricing. People don't value privacy, they value free stuff.

[s3r3nity]

> It's clear that social networks create almost no individual utility at all...

That's a broad statement. I find a lot of utility in social networks like FB to keep me in close contact with my family on the other side of the country.

Yes I value the fact that it's free - there's a low barrier for folks in my family to join. There's no way in hell I'm going to convince my grandmother to pay for a social network; she has no interest in yet another subscription that offers no marginal value over the free services like FB or even Twitter.

Well...she _might_ if that was the _only_ way to contact me, but I personally wouldn't put her through the hassle of memorizing yet another account/password login.

[aldoushuxley001]

The comment your replying to said they would be willing to pay $1 a month for a social network, so there’s definitely appetite for paid social networks, but $20 a month is understandably a crazy price.

[rogerkirkness]

It's market failure because you'd have to find a way to basically compete with Facebook while your TAM/potential is 5x smaller.

[aldoushuxley001]

idk if people are downvoting me because they think $20 a month for a social network isn't crazy, or if they think that someone willing to pay $1 a month isn't a sign of appetite for paid social networks...