互联网与文化blog.pinboard.in
不要做免费用户
Don't Be A Free User
2011 — 2017，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
Pinboard 创始人 Maciej Cegłowski 写于 2011 年的文章，警告用户不要依赖免费网络服务：免费产品往往靠融资维持，最终不是倒闭就是被大公司收购后关闭，团队被“人才收购”去做别的项目。作者主张付费服务，因为付费用户才是公司真正的客户，服务更可能长久存活。
为什么经久不衰：它精准预言了此后十年“收购即关闭”的行业常态，提醒人们把数据托付给谁时要想清楚商业模式，至今仍是选择网络服务时的重要参考。
HN 评论精选
免费创业公司本质上只能卖团队，付费自力更生才是正道
这篇文章提出了一个好观点：如果你发现一个超酷的免费网络应用并爱不释手，那你使用它并向朋友推荐时，很可能只是在为某家大公司制作一份漂亮的“人才收购”简历。大公司很乐意这样——他们找到几个能吸引和留住用户的人，然后砍掉产品，把人调去给公司想推的其他产品做增长。网络应用看的是眼球，创业公司卖的是团队，那么逻辑结论是什么？靠无收入模式获取眼球的公司，能卖的只有团队本身。从这些交易看，“拉高再抛售”式的创业生意利润可观。这也暗示了一个层级：最底层是没有增长的公司，然后是有增长但没收入的公司，再是基本收支平衡的公司，最后是有势头的公司（在巨大市场里有强劲势头还能加分）。我越看这个模式，越觉得自力更生（bootstrapping）靠谱。
DanielBMarkham查看英文原文
This article brings up a good point: if you just found some super-cool free web application that you love? Odds are the only thing you're doing when you use it and recommend it to your friends is creating a nice resume for some large company to do a "talent acquisition" Large companies love this -- they find a couple of guys who are able to identify and engage audiences and then they kill their product and stick them on some other product that the company wants pumped. Web apps are about eyeballs, right? Start-ups are about teams, right? Well what's the logical conclusion then? Startups that gain eyeballs with income-free business models only have themselves -- the team -- to sell. And from some of these sales, it looks like there's serious money in "pump and dump" entrepreneurialism. This also suggests that there is a pecking order. At the bottom we have start-ups that don't have traction. Then we have start-ups with traction but no income. Then start-ups who can mostly break even. Finally start-ups that have momentum (extra super bonus points for big momentum in a huge market) The more I look at this model, the better bootstrapping looks.
付费不等于存活，免费也不必然死亡，文章的假设站不住脚
这篇文章建立在一个非常错误的假设上：付费服务永远不会关闭，免费服务被收购后也不会被接手延续。后者有 Flickr、YouTube、PayPal、Skype、Picnik、Grand Central、Picasa、Siri、MySpace、FriendFeed、FeedBurner，甚至 pinboard 最大的竞争对手 Delicious 为证。至于前者，反例数不胜数（可以看看 TechCrunch 的 deadpool 标签）。可惜的是，几个人每月 7 美元的收入撑不起一个服务。
gkoberger查看英文原文
This article operates under the very incorrect assumption that paid services never shut down and free services are never carried on by their purchasers. See Flickr or YouTube or PayPal or Skype or Picnik or Grand Central or Picasa or Siri or mySpace or FriendFeed or FeedBurner or even pinboard's biggest competitor Delicious for examples of the latter. As for the former, there's an unlimited number of examples (for a few, try http://techcrunch.com/tag/deadpool/) Unfortunately, $7/month from a few people can't keep things afloat.
付费服务同样会被收购后关闭，作者的建议有利益相关之嫌
大公司关闭有用的小服务、只为收割开发者的问题确实值得讨论。但“这只发生在免费服务上”的前提站不住脚。恕我直言，建议只用付费服务来避免这种结局，对一家只做付费服务的公司 Pinboard 来说，未免太自我服务了（尽管它确实很优秀）。我随手就能从 Google 的收购清单里举出几个被关闭的付费服务：PostRank（付费博客数据服务）、Jambool（虚拟货币支付系统）、Gizmo5（VOIP 服务）。有时即使公司有收入也不代表可行；有时像 Google 这样的收购方会因为更大项目的“更高目标”关掉盈利的业务。
dotBen查看英文原文
The issue of BigCo's closing useful small services just to harvest the developers post acquisition is certainly a valid one that's worthy of debate. However, the premise that this only happens because the startup in question was "free" doesn't hold weight. Call me a cynic but the recommendation to use "paid-for" services only to avoid this outcome just seems a little too self-serving to paid-for-only service PinBoard (as excellent as it is). I don't have an exhaustive list of startup acquisitions that were then shut down, but here's a few just from a Google acquisition list I found: * PostRank was a paid-for blog data service Google acquired, shut down * Jambool was a virtual gold payment processing system Google acquired, shut down * Gizmo5 was a VOIP service Google acquired and shut down. In some cases even if a company is taking money that alone still doesn't make it viable. In other cases, like PostRank and Jambool where the $$$ being paid by customers was probably significant, acquirers like Google have other circumstances where they'll shut a profitable businesses for a 'higher goal' in a bigger project.
开源加自托管是让服务超越公司存续的出路
这正是网络服务应该开源并支持自托管的原因：懂技术、会跑服务器的人可以免费使用你的产品，作为交换你获得 bug 报告、补丁等；其他人则付费，因为你也提供付费托管。而且由于产品本质上是开源和联邦化的，它可以——也希望会——比原作者活得更久。
nerdponx查看英文原文
This is why web services should be open source and available for self hosting: - The geeks with the know-how to run a Web server benefit from your product for free, but in exchange you get bug reports, patches, etc. - Everyone else pays, because you also offer a paid hosting option. But because the product is fundamentally open source and federated, it can and hopefully will outlive its original developer.
历次讨论
同类还值得读
如今电脑上几乎所有操作在感知上都比 1983 年更慢（2017）
Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)
2017 年的推文串认为，尽管计算机硬件比 1983 年快得多，日常操作的感知速度却常常更慢：启动、界面响应和网络应用被层层抽象、动画、后台检查与网络依赖拖累。
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2017–2020twitter.com网站肥胖危机
The Website Obesity Crisis
Maciej Cegłowski（idlewords）的经典演讲文稿《网站肥胖症危机》，批评现代网页越来越臃肿：动辄数 MB 的 JavaScript、追踪脚本和广告，把本可以轻…
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2016–2021idlewords.com编辑精选亚马逊那本标价 23,698,655.93 美元的苍蝇书
Amazon’s $23,698,655.93 book about flies
博文讲的是亚马逊上一本关于果蝇的二手书被标到 23,698,655.93 美元。
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2011–2022michaeleisen.org浏览器 User-Agent 字符串的历史
History of the browser user-agent string (2008)
2008 年的经典文章用戏谑的“创世纪”口吻，讲述浏览器 User-Agent 字符串如何从简单的标识演变成层层叠加的伪装：浏览器为了绕过按 UA 分发的网站检测，纷纷把自己伪装…
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2012–2022webaim.org编辑精选最后的问题——艾萨克·阿西莫夫
The Last Question - Isaac Asimov
阿西莫夫最著名的短篇科幻小说《最后的问题》的在线全文。
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2009–2019multivax.com编辑精选