[awillen]

This works for the subset of people who have a good story or a real connection to their brand, but that's just not most businesses. I buy and operate e-commerce brands, and I can't do it both because I really don't want to be on camera and because "hey I bought this company that sells leather handle covers for cast iron pans, and I personally don't use them but the cashflow was good" is not so compelling as a message. Sometimes you just need messages that convey the value proposition of the brand. (And FWIW they are nice handle covers, I just prefer to use a kitchen towel to grab my cast iron.)

That said, I think video generation is at the point where someone will probably develop a product that fakes the kinds of videos you're talking about in the near future.

[soulofmischief]

* * *

[awillen]

I would say a couple of things:

1. Just because I don't use something doesn't mean that I think it shouldn't exist or be sold. People can make their own choices. A product isn't bad or useless or unnecessary because it doesn't align with my preferences. I'm fine with people being able to make their own choices about what they buy. Also, I generally don't think people should have to live a totally ascetic lifestyle. I have three monitors - certainly redundant, but fine. I have art on my walls - could've gone without that. I have a dog who I buy toys and food for - not strictly necessary. These things are all more than fine in my book.

2. There are other reasons to be in business besides deeply caring about the business itself. The biggest benefit to this business is that it doesn't require a lot of day-to-day work, and I can do that work whenever I want. That means I can almost always be there for my kids. That's what matters to me. I would take a job that I don't particularly care about that lets me put them first over one that I'm deeply passionate about that takes them away from me any time.

[soulofmischief]

Thank you for sharing your perspective. I do agree that we don't need to extremify asceticism. I certainly own useless crap.

I think I do specifically have a minimalist approach to kitchens inspired by setups such as hundred rabbits' https://100r.co/site/cooking.html plus I also am becoming increasingly concerned with my carbon footprint given the climate-related extinction event we are currently facing, and that probably strikes out personal promotion of any unneeded kitchenware.

I'm curious about the economics of what you do, if you've ever written about it elsewhere.

[awillen]

Not as much about the economics of the business as my work on using AI to automate it, but I do have a Substack: https://theautomatedoperator.substack.com/

[soulofmischief]

Thank you, I appreciate the response. I'll check it out!

[tomhow]

Please avoid generic tangents on HN. This turned into an awful flamewar, which is what happens when people introduce tangentially-relevant-but-inflammaory topics into a discussion. Please have a read of the guidelines and make an effort to observe them in future. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

[soulofmischief]

With due respect, there was no intention to start a flame war, and no intention to start a generic tangent. I calmly and directly asked awillen a question meant solely for them, regarding their comment and they responded kindly, and that could have been the end of it.

While I failed to restrain myself from continuing to engage with what in hindsight was obvious bait by two other users, even rereading their comments now, and the comments from multiple other users agreeing that these two users were being needlessly negative and argumentative, it seems clear to me that my comments were not intended to escalate (sans my final, unnecessary comment).

I even edited a comment at one point after I absentmindedly introduced a swipe, and one of the users continued to attempt to escalate by fixating on words I intentionally removed from the conversation. And at the very end, I lost my cool and got fed up.

While I respect the decisions of the moderators on this website, I fully disagree that my original comment which you have detached deserved moderation.

I try my best to observe the guidelines, in fact you can see I mentioned them several times in this thread, as I saw several blatant, wholesale violations of them. In this case, it was an innocent question to a user that was well-received, but became a target for others.

As another user in this thread mentioned, it seems quite relevant to Hacker News for a user to raise questions about the morals and ethics around owning and running digital businesses. I saw the exchange between awillen and I as very healthy, and I appreciated their answer, it meant something to me to encounter such a perspective.

From my personal view, moderating this comment is vindicating to the two individuals who attempted to derail what could have been a very tight, focused conversation between another user and I. The user did not have an email address or I likely would have just reached out to them over email to avoid attracting negativity.

[tomhow]

OK, fair enough. Re-reading your initial comment in isolation, without the rest of the subthread to influence the perception of it, I can see how it was more neutral and benign than others perceive it to be.

You were still a player in the flamewar and you could have done more to defuse the situation rather than inflame it, but I can see that it was the others who escalated first.

I've re-attached your comment and the healthy part of the subthread and detached it where it became a flamewar.