[codingdave]

Why would you build it?

That isn't being snarky, it is the question you need to answer. Why would people join it? What problem are you solving for them? Why are celebrities and influencers on those platforms to begin with?

When you can detail out those answers, those answers tell you what you need to do to launch. You have to match the table stakes of existing platforms, which means you need to know not only what those are, but why they are important to the userbase.

I suspect you'll find that your drive for privacy-first is going to be well-received in theory, but not a match for why people join such platforms. But you'll need to do the research to figure out such things.

[telgareith]

Theres a HN post not very old (less than a year. Maybe less than 6mo.) of this concept... it was even a "public benefit corporation," but it quickly went off the rails into a bad imitation.

The reality is- real users won't pay for these services and the only entities that will pay.

Well, they're paying for ads with the knockoffs because (ironically) instagram et. al. won't run their ads because they're "bad for users."

[wintermutestwin]

I would shift a lot of charitable giving to a non-profit privacy first site that is Facebook or Instagram which is focused only on sharing photos and text with friends, family and my local community. That excludes news, celebs, influencers, et al

I can't imagine that there wouldn't be enough people like me to support an inexpensive (compared to FB, etc) endeavor like this. If it still isn't enough, have local only ads that are not tracked and are served right from the site (and give users control over the type of ads they want to see). I wouldn't mind a couple unobtrusive ads for local restaurants, services, etc.

Maybe I am underestimating the cost here, but I also think that HN generally underestimates the social angst over the massive invasion of privacy by corporations. 90% of my non-tech friends and family have asked me how bad it is and how they can avoid it. Of course I just shrug and say you can't...

p.s. can you please link the HN discussion you referenced?

[thunderstruck]

Thanks for your comment! Honestly, I didn’t expect anyone to respond to such a vague post.

The reason I’d build this platform is to help people connect without the distractions of sponsored content or random memes. I stopped using Facebook about seven years ago because I wanted a space where I could simply engage with the people in my network and their thoughts. AdBlock helped for a while, but eventually, my feed filled with random posts from pages I hadn’t followed. I understand that Facebook’s goal is to keep users engaged, but the constant noise led me to switch to Instagram. Unfortunately, Instagram went down a similar path, especially with the rise of Reels.

Now, I mainly use WhatsApp groups to stay connected.

Why are celebrities and influencers on those platforms to begin with?

I considered a model where users could pay to access celebrity posts. It sounds similar to OnlyFans, but I see it as a potential revenue stream or, alternatively, a way to support a fixed monthly fee in exchange for privacy.

[rglullis]

It seems like you are going through the same thought process that I went through and led me to work on https://communick.com. Save yourself a world of pain and find something else to work on.

The amount of people who really value their privacy and are willing to pay to avoid getting their data exploited is too low to matter in the context of a social network. I've tried different pricing, I've tried different extra features, I've tried going upmarket, but I never got a critical mass of people to make the whole endeavor sustainable.

On the content creator side, it's even worse. Creators will always prefer to work on platforms that offer them the widest reach. So even when you have privacy enthusiasts or creators who know all the issues from YouTube/Reddit/Instagram, they will still keep a channel there out of fear of not keeping up with "the algorithm".

If you really insist on going mad like me and believe that this is a worthy cause to work on, look at the existing social networks that are based on open source and open standards, like PixelFed [0] and Vernissage [1].

[0] https://pixelfed.org

[1] https://vernissage.photos

[shinycode]

I agree. Millions of people will never ever pay for something they can have for free with instagram. And because the adoption rate will be slow they will have to use instagram anyway in the meantime to find the content and people there which will kill your adoption rate unless you invest in huge amounts in marketing.

You can try to built something new but people who value privacy are not in the masses. Most people don’t care at all unless in immediate threat (like usurpation or stealing money).

There is already so many platforms that do just that and we don’t know about them because the problem also lies there. It’s hard to get known in the internet now with all the services that exists and distractions there is.

For example I haven’t been in the AppStore in years, only searching for something specific. Never ever for discovery of what is in there. Many, many people are like that as well which makes them hard to reach.

[SiempreViernes]

> I considered a model where users could pay to access celebrity posts.

Why would celebrities be on your platform if you lock the audience away from them?

Also, celebrities with public accounts are ultimately just doing advertising for themselves (and whoever pays them), so you haven't actually escaped the realm of ad-funded networks.

When you "own" a "social network" the fundamental asset you have is the audience, and only people with something to advertise are willing to pay for access to it.

[meowface]

For what it's worth, I agree with the other comments that you should drop this idea and pivot. Not nearly enough people care about this.

My advice is to run some other thing and just - as a gift to yourself and a somewhat silent gift to the world - don't monetize it via advertising or selling user data.

Don't make that one of the selling points of the platform: just do it because you think it'll create a better product that more closely aligns with what provides a good experience for users, and because you think it's more ethical. It's very likely not going to be a significant draw for the product in itself. You can mention it as a bullet point in marketing, but don't make it "the thing".

[remram]

You answered "why I'm building it" but not "why you should join".

[ramses0]

Three observations: "The OC Problem", "Useful for n==1", and "Build an Internal Internet".

1) OC, aka: Original Content. Most sharing has trended towards reposts, memes, etc. That is the toxic cancer that has spread throughout most "social" networks. Somebody finds a funny meme, or ridiculous tornado picking up a car while someone dances a jig in front of it, and that drowns out "real" pictures of peoples kids or cats or whatever.

2) Useful for n==1. I believe it was an interview with the founder of del.ico.us (one of the OG bookmarking sites) who said "if you want users, you have to make something that's useful for _just that one user_, and if more users use it, then it gets better". It was shockingly insightful! He made delicious where I was motivated (for myself) to save bookmarks / links. If other people saved the same link, a counter went up (social proof?). I (and others) could explore shared tags (eg: `#tech`, `#javascript`, whatever), and that had an exponential utility based on number of users, BUT BOUNDED IN THE n==1 CASE!

3) Build an Internal Internet: I had a blog once upon a time (still do, and still nobody reads it ;-), and then twitter came along. Of course it grabbed my attention, of course I tweeted to be cool like the cool kids. Then I got upset with myself: "I like this micro-blogging thing, but it's taking away from my own blogging!" So I made `tweet.sh`, which did `echo "$1" > "~/blog/entries/tweets/$DATE-tweet.md"` and then styled it appropriately.

Putting it all together, build an INTERNAL instagram to help people back up, organize, showcase their photos (n==1). SOCIALIZE it via cooperating / federated instances (exponential utility). Allow tagging/repost/non-OC suppression (and SOCIALIZE that... eg: allow people to anti-socialize reposts).

For monetizing? Good luck. It's got to be better than iPhotos.

[exe34]

> Why would you build it?

he already told you, revenue goals.