[HN Gopher] Revue will shut down and all data will be deleted
___________________________________________________________________
Revue will shut down and all data will be deleted
Author : 101008
Score : 110 points
Date : 2023-01-05 13:58 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (help.getrevue.co)
(TXT) w3m dump (help.getrevue.co)
| hobo_mark wrote:
| Sounds like a good time to ask: alternatives to Substack that
| people actually use?
| burkaman wrote:
| I subscribe to some writers that have switched from Substack to
| Ghost (https://ghost.org/). It's open source, seems like a good
| company from what I know, and the experience as a subscriber is
| basically the same as Substack.
| j45 wrote:
| Interesting. Could the technical part of its user base crowdfund
| to acquire it?
| WJW wrote:
| Just curious, why would it be the technical part of the
| userbase that raises money to acquire it? After all "raising
| money to buy a company" is typically more of an MBA activity
| than something done by the dev team.
| cheriot wrote:
| Surprising they couldn't make this work. It seems like every
| substack author promotes their work on twitter. Maybe it's just
| hard to avoid tossing a few babies out with the bath water when
| reducing headcount by 75%.
| uuddlrlrbaba wrote:
| [flagged]
| BoorishBears wrote:
| It's an idiom that dates back to the 1500s that means
| accidentally getting rid of the good part of a subject while
| trying to get rid of the bad part.
|
| Not exactly corporate or jargon.
| adrian17 wrote:
| It's also present (as in, a direct translation) as a casual
| phrase in other languages, like Polish.
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| I tried to double click into this but I think there's an
| impedance mismatch. When you have the bandwidth, can you ping
| me back with some extra color on how this phrase fits in with
| synergistic corporate jargon?
| uuddlrlrbaba wrote:
| Let's put a pin in that, it's bigger than a breadbox and
| we'll have to circle back when there is more bandwidth.
|
| It's bizarre to me that my original comment was
| downvoted/flagged. Guess it triggered the tech managers on
| HN
| ianvisits wrote:
| As a saying it's been around for over 500 years.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_throw_the_baby_out_wit.
| ..
| input_sh wrote:
| I don't think there was an actual attempt to make it work.
| They've acquired it, slapped it below the profile, and when
| Musk took over Twitter it was immediately obvious it's going to
| die.
| xd1936 wrote:
| But for some reason, Musk would be open to buying Substack[1]
| (even though it's not for sale[2]).
|
| 1. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1607936197602562050
|
| 2.
| https://twitter.com/hamishmckenzie/status/132311671881069363...
|
| Just invest in the Substack competitor that your company _already
| has_...
| [deleted]
| felipellrocha wrote:
| He probably looked at the codebase and decided it wasn't worth
| it. Not saying that is a good decision, or a bad codebase. In
| fact, nowadays, I'd say the opposite. Lol
| rchaud wrote:
| I wouldn't want to look at a printout of Revue's source code
| either.
| klyrs wrote:
| You think he printed out the code and read it on his private
| plane? No, I think this is a much more utilitarian decision:
| Revue wasn't making money, it got cut.
| was_a_dev wrote:
| Musk doesn't want to develop a competitor. He wants to aquire
| the existing userbase
|
| Shutting down Revue moves more users to Substack
| jameshart wrote:
| So you do it _after_ you 've purchased substack, not before.
| hennell wrote:
| Elon doing something stupid without thinking it through?
| What an unexpected unprecedented situation. /s
| marcusverus wrote:
| That's a stupid hypothetical, alright!
| rchaud wrote:
| His interest in Substack is more likely centred around
| controlling the public conversation in a more direct way than
| on Twitter.
|
| On Twitter, Musk gets dunked on daily, as do his $8/month
| boosters, all of whom are at the top of the replies (hence
| creating a larger dunk attack vector).
|
| Substack is more 'buttoned-down', everybody there is trying
| to be a "thought leader", so it already skews more "rich guys
| know better", even without considering all the conservative
| op-ed writers that have paid gigs there.
| comice wrote:
| > "In the meantime, you will be able to download your subscriber
| list"
|
| ...
|
| > "Twitter, Inc. has not obtained permission for you to use
| subscriber information for any purpose."
|
| Twitter thinks it has permission to provide account owners with
| their subscriber lists but explicitly says that those same
| account owners have no permissions of their own for the data.
|
| I do not think this is how how most countries' data privacy laws
| work.
|
| This is a very murky situation and Twitter seem to be writing it
| all off with a wink and a nod.
| privacylawthrow wrote:
| It's very much how most privacy laws work.
|
| According to Revue's platform privacy policy[0], Revue
| processes subscriber emails as a data processor. Each
| newsletter publisher owns the email addresses of their
| respective audiences. Revue would have a legal obligation to
| make those email addresses available to the newsletter
| publishers until the shutdown date.
|
| [0]: https://www.getrevue.co/privacy/platform?locale=en
| comice wrote:
| Their privacy policy very strongly suggests that they are the
| data processor only when the account owner (Publisher)
| provides the email address, which they call indirect
| subscription.
|
| Direct subscribers are users who subscribed themselves via
| the Revue service. and the privacy policy says nothing about
| providing direct subscribers' private data to the Publisher.
|
| Their closure announcement does not distinguish between the
| types of subscriber.
|
| So either the Publisher is only getting the indirect
| subscribers' info (and isn't being told they are losing the
| direct subscribers) or the Publisher is getting direct
| subscriber info which the direct subscriber never agreed to
| allowing (unless that is a separate agreement from the
| privacy policy, in which case presumably some permission
| _was_ indeed obtained).
| [deleted]
| Dylan16807 wrote:
| > explicitly says that those same account owners have no
| permissions of their own for the data
|
| "Twitter has not obtained permission for you" is not the same
| as "you have no permissions"
|
| You have whatever permissions you brought to the table, and
| nothing else.
| feklest wrote:
| Does anyone know if the Internet Archive is on the case?
|
| A lot of profile and newsletter links of the form
| "https://www.getrevue.co/profile/..." are going to be dead very
| soon.
| mattl wrote:
| Check Jason Scott's Twitter account. I'm sure it's being worked
| on.
| trynewideas wrote:
| Discussion from Twitter's acquisition in 2021:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25914865
| Andugal wrote:
| "You would have to be a complete idiot to try and build your
| revenue on something owned by Twitter. They will shut you down
| at any time, for any reason, with no recourse."
|
| Indeed they did.
| netman21 wrote:
| "Excellent acquisition. Twitter will definitely compete and
| take marketshare from Substack" did not age well.
| spaceman_2020 wrote:
| I tried launching an ad campaign on Twitter on their self-
| serve ads platform.
|
| On the very first screen, I'm asked to select my country and
| time zone.
|
| Except the time zone selector only has +1 hour increments.
| You can choose UTC+5 or UTC+6, but you can't choose UTC+5:30
| (which is my time zone).
|
| So I had to choose UTC+5.
|
| This multibillion dollar corporation was running a
| multibillion ad platform where customers couldn't even choose
| their correct time zone.
|
| No wonder they couldn't make any money, even during the
| pandemic.
| jefftk wrote:
| This isn't even that weird an edge case: ~1.5B people are
| in UTC+5:30.
| Raed667 wrote:
| But how many of them work for Twitter? Representation
| matters.
| nemothekid wrote:
| Their previous CEO was one of the 1.5B
| mattl wrote:
| Who?
| rippercushions wrote:
| Comment #2, on the other hand, nailed it:
|
| prestigious on Jan 26, 2021 | prev | next [-]
|
| You would have to be a complete idiot to try and build your
| revenue on something owned by Twitter. They will shut you
| down at any time, for any reason, with no recourse.
| bbarnett wrote:
| _They will shut you down at any time, for any reason, with
| no recourse._
|
| True, but this also sounds like Google, or Youtube, or
| Facebook, or Apple, or the Play Store, or payment
| processors, or github, or...
| user_7832 wrote:
| I mean that's not wrong, it just speaks poorly of these
| tech giants in general. For example dark sky was recently
| shut down, after being acquired by Apple.
| benatkin wrote:
| It's like saying "Thanks to the work of (nonprofit) there
| will be at least a 5% increase in the number of comfortable
| affordable housing units in New Orleans by the end of the
| year" before Hurricane Katrina.
| trynewideas wrote:
| Same comment, though:
|
| > Twitter could absolutely become a paid service and move
| away from ads as its business model. ... Imagine paying $1-3
| per month for FB or Twitter. We'd no longer be the product --
| our data not for sale -- and the companies would make more
| money!
|
| or
|
| > It's almost a running joke, up there with Daft Punk playing
| at the trash fence, that Twitter just won't release an edit
| button. With a move towards paying subscribers, maybe Twitter
| will listen to its real customers -- content writers --
| rather than advertisers.
|
| Monkey's paw and all that, but not bad otherwise.
| edwnj wrote:
| [dead]
| deely3 wrote:
| Seriously, Musk fired all people?
| benatkin wrote:
| [flagged]
| INeedMoreRam wrote:
| [dead]
| mattkevan wrote:
| Probably fired everyone who worked there without realising. 'Oh
| crap, there's no-one left. Quick, write something and stick it on
| the homepage.'
|
| It's telling that the sign in with twitter functionality was
| broken for a few days after the initial announcement. Was
| seriously worried I wouldn't be able to download my subscriber
| list and content.
| vincefutr23 wrote:
| A good product / VC strategy would be to double down on anything
| Twitter shuts down about 18 months after
|
| Open APIs > short form mobile video > creator owned long form
| text?
| autokad wrote:
| I sincerely doubt that.
| paxys wrote:
| Substack already exists. Twitter wasn't the innovator in the
| area, like the other products you mention.
| kuboble wrote:
| " it is your responsibility to adhere to any (...) regulations in
| connection with your subscriber list (...)and Twitter, Inc. has
| not obtained permission for you to use subscriber information for
| any purpose. "
|
| What does that mean exactly? > "Twitter hasn't obtained
| permission for you"?
| Centigonal wrote:
| It's poorly worded, but I think they're saying, "this link will
| let you download your list of subscribers. We're giving this to
| you with no warranties, don't use it to spam people or
| otherwise break the law."
|
| Honestly, I don't think that's a particularly strong legal
| defense, but IANAL.
|
| I do appreciate the revue team for letting users port their
| subscribers to other services. This is basic decency, but with
| Twitter banning links to other social media, I don't know what
| to expect from them anymore.
| [deleted]
| Giorgi wrote:
| Looks like they discovered that nobody pays for subscriptions.
| paxys wrote:
| It's pretty clear that the service was a failure. The company was
| formed in 2015, two years before Substack. They were acquired by
| Twitter in Jan 2021. Two years later they pretty much have
| nothing to show for it, while Substack has become the dominant
| blogging/newsletter platform.
| rchaud wrote:
| Is Substack a success? A piddling $9m revenue after a $650m
| valuation?
|
| > According to the Times, Substack separately told investors
| that it saw revenue of just $9 million last year. (It told the
| Times directly in a story last month that it has hundreds of
| thousands of paid newsletters now on the platform.)
|
| https://techcrunch.com/2022/05/26/report-substack-the-highly...
| gregdoesit wrote:
| Some insider details as someone who knew some of the Revue team -
| based mostly in the Netherlands.
|
| The majority of the team was cut in the first wave of Twitter
| layoffs on 4 November (wrote about this [1]) - when 50% of people
| were let go. By this time, most of them were working on Twitter's
| long form tweets, which feature was being tested with customers.
|
| So this decision was indirectly made on the first week of the
| Twitter takeover. In the end, it was perhaps two people left from
| the old Revue team. Today, there's only the founder of Revue, who
| wrote this article, everyone else let go AFAIK.
|
| What was very, very surprising to me is how, a month and a half
| later, Elon Musk replied to a question on how he's open to the
| idea of acquiring Substack [2]. But he just shut down Revue,
| which was exactly "Twitter's Substack" version with all the same
| features: newsletters, support for paid, plus first-class
| integration into Twitter that Substack does not have.
|
| [1] https://blog.pragmaticengineer.com/cruel-changes-at-twitter
|
| [2] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1607936197602562050
| pnf wrote:
| I suspect the value of something like that isn't the tech but
| the established writers+audiences. Substack is the best current
| example of independent journalism and columnists managing and
| monetizing their loyal readership without the brand umbrella of
| a major publication.
| tobyjsullivan wrote:
| > Elon Musk replied to a question on how he's open to the idea
| of acquiring Substack [2].
|
| Every CEO is "open to" any acquisition, just as any VC is "open
| to" funding any company. At least until someone asks for terms.
|
| The only interpretation of "open to" in the business world is
| "not a hard, irreversible 'no'."
| pcthrowaway wrote:
| He's probably more careful not to say anything legally
| binding regarding an agreement to acquire after the Twitter
| misstep.
| ssharp wrote:
| > But he just shut down Revue, which was exactly "Twitter's
| Substack" version
|
| Google Video was "Google's YouTube" but Google still decided
| YouTube was worth acquiring.
| throwaway14356 wrote:
| strangled by python
| agentdrtran wrote:
| Not all that surprising that Elon either made a short-sighted
| decision or is lying to his fans.
| dvt wrote:
| Short-sighted decision? Revue was basically DOA and Twitter
| did zero customer development since its acquisition. Shutting
| down Revue is probably the _best_ decision he 's made so far.
| philip1209 wrote:
| I'm finishing a Revue data importer for Postcard. If you want to
| move over your posts + subscribers, there's a form to submit them
| for import:
|
| https://postcard.page/alternative/revue
| danrl wrote:
| [flagged]
| stewx wrote:
| Bring back Nuzzel. https://twitter.com/nuzzel
| dangoor wrote:
| Nuzzel kinda sorta exists as "Top Articles" which is a feature
| of the Blue subscription.
| maxfurman wrote:
| What was Revue? I'd never heard of it before today.
| Centigonal wrote:
| Substack competitor acquired by twitter
| coldpie wrote:
| What is Substack?
| jillesvangurp wrote:
| It's a blogging platform. A bit like medium.
| bombcar wrote:
| What is Medium?
| dylan604 wrote:
| Not big and not small...medium.
| cinntaile wrote:
| Not media but medium.
| dylan604 wrote:
| now you sound like you're searching for the right word,
|
| mediuhhh, mediyum, medi...hmmm
| adventured wrote:
| A blogging platform a bit like Geocities.
| spillguard wrote:
| What is Geocities?
| bombcar wrote:
| It's like Twitter but longer-form.
| coldpie wrote:
| Now you've gone too far. Geocities is the only one of
| these I've actually heard of!
| [deleted]
| Ekaros wrote:
| Your own personal kinda NNTP posting place?
| quadrifoliate wrote:
| NNTP? Can you explain that in terms of TikTok please?
| MissTake wrote:
| [flagged]
| amelius wrote:
| YouTube, but for written text instead of video.
| psnehanshu wrote:
| What is YouTube?
| Ekaros wrote:
| Blogging platform aimed for journalists. And kind. Offering
| paid subscription. Partly marketed as direct to customer
| columnist platform.
| autokad wrote:
| I'm being honest here, I never heard of substack either.
| linuxftw wrote:
| Neither had I. Probably the right decision to terminate it,
| likely loses several million dollars per year or more.
| eatonphil wrote:
| Micah Lerner who publishes a popular Systems Papers newsletter
| used it. Now he's on substack.
|
| https://twitter.com/micahlerner/status/1608249534676885504
| mlerner wrote:
| Came to the comments and found my blog mentioned. Aw schucks.
| rchaud wrote:
| This has been known for weeks, I'm surprised that it only seems
| to be appearing on HN now.
| forgotpwd16 wrote:
| Apparently someone submitted it few weeks ago:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33985798
|
| Just never got any upvotes.
| swyx wrote:
| alright I'm in need of a move. I tried Convertkit in the past and
| it was expensive + the editor was extremely slow/buggy and
| constantly ate my typing.
|
| what's the Revue alternative?
| holler wrote:
| Maybe superficial but it seemed "tacked on" in terms of UI/UX. I
| don't think most people go to Twitter to read newsletters, and
| the way it was implemented just felt weird.
| johnhenry wrote:
| I wonder if they'd still be around if they weren't acquired?
| aliqot wrote:
| Vine
| xrd wrote:
| Apparently this happened almost a month ago?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-01-05 23:01 UTC)