A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
Despite having been founded in 2005, the S-1 notes that Reddit is “in the early stages of monetizing our business and there is no assurance we will be able to scale our business for future growth.”
Did they seriously just say "although our company start 19 years ago, we only able to start figure out how to make money, and if you buy our stock, we can't guarantee our company will grow further and give you more profits."
Where's the plan, Stevie?
"there is no assurance we will be able to scale our business for future growth.”
Then why IPO? Lol.
Yes, we can't make money and can't grow. Invest pls?
To cash out
Spez is trying to outfit his doomsday bunker and wants the cash.
AI.
Is it insider trading if wsb members short the stock, then make controversial content that frightens investors away?
If thousands of people contribute to it, even if it is insider trading, can it be reasonably investigated and prosecuted?
But more seriously, not a lawyer, but no I don't think so. The users don't know any non-public business information about future Reddit business decisions (i would assume) and compete fairly with other potential shareholders. It's not like other shareholders couldn't do the same thing, after all.
In the MOONs sunsetting, some moderators got a 1 hour advance warning before the public announcement... and some sold before it was made.
For the IPO, it would depend on the kind of user: if some mods decided to short Reddit, then stage a sub locking protest like during the APIcalypse, they would have both information and means not available to other public investors.
A lot of redditors hate reddit
It's a Love-Hate relationship. The core concept and idea of Reddit is wonderful. But the corporate decisions ruins it. Just like in good videogames...
Just like anything else that started good and had more pure intentions than "money at all costs!"
The core concept and idea of reddit can be found in other places, such as right here. And without the corporate decisions ruining it.
"I hate it here but i don't wanna leave here because i love here."
Pretty much why people stay in abusive relationships.
That's so reddit.
This is the most interesting information I could find (while skipping a lot paragraphs): BTW Huffman is CEO Steve “u/spez”.
Altman was, and still is, the CEO of OpenAI. Altman’s also Reddit’s third-largest shareholder and owns more than twice as many shares as Huffman. Altman was the CEO of Reddit for eight days.
Altman and short stints regarding being CEO or not, name a more iconic couple.
It's clearly a move for Huffman to cash out before bailing out. I wonder if things would have gone any differently with the last CEO? I forget her name.
Also buying into the stock early, seems stupid. For a company that's never been profitable, during a time of mass tech layoffs, and how the valuation of other social media has tanked after an IPO, just seems like you're gonna lose money investing in Reddit.
My guess is that they're offering early sales because they predict that the stock value will tank after the public offering, so this way there's a slightly higher margin of profit for the current shareholders. If that's correct then it's completely scummy. (i.e. extremely typical for Reddit)
Another possibility is that they're trying to "force" power users to be more cooperative towards the platform, by giving them a financial incentive to do so - "if you shit here you'll be tanking your own shares".
Stock options: "if you make the thing work, you'll be able to cash in on the stock price increase"
Pre-sale: "pay us now, find about later"
One incentivizes cooperation, the other can be a way to get support from large investors to grow a new business... or a scam to cash out from a 19 year old unprofitable one.
Ellen Pao.
It's never been profitable but Huffman gets millions as CEO. Fuck spez.
I am not sure why anyone cares. As far as Reddit, I moved on last year.
I care about it like Facebook or Twitter. It has a big influence on our society, even if I don't use it.
Of course we hate it. It will trigger a whole new phase of enshittification.
I still use reddit because for some things it's still a valuable resource that Lemmy isn't yet for lack of users. Hopefully more redditors will find lemmy as this proceeds.
One of the nice things this time around is that Lemmy has really crystallized as an ecosystem. It's missing some significant niches, but now people who need a working example, and can't just envision it based off of the concept, can see it truly in action, instead of just seeing Leninist wankery.
Future waves should, hopefully, be stickier.
Just curious here, because I don’t really know how this works - will they have to disclose how many shares they sold to power users prior to the IPO? I’d love for that number to be as close to zero as possible.
But won't move anywhere else 🤷
Why do boomers put a license link on public comments where the license has no value? I'd recommend removing it since having it automatically makes your opinions worth less.
From the notices section
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain
Which means comments posted anywhere.
Online sovereign citizen?
That's not how public domain works.
You mean, how you waive your rights to what you post on a website? That makes them public domain.
It depends on the website hosting location. TOS,, users location and relevant international copyright treaties.
It's not a one-size-fits-all.
As a UK citizen I can't claim my (US) first amendment right to call you a "cunt".
It's against the website TOS and I'm not American.
Putting a license at the bottom clears any ambiguity.
Funnily enough you're only highlighting your own "Zoomer" naivety of law by making your "Boomer" comment.
And the license means fuck all on any public website where you waive your right to privacy by using. Esp by federating across other websites, where rules are different across every place it's federated to.
So, expecting to apply a CC license to comments made publicly, is like expecting to not be recorded or photographed when in a public place.
And nice try on the zoomer comment, but way wrong. People trying to license their comments has happened for quite a while and it's always been shown as not binding. Trying to impose your licensing on a public website is laughable.
Also, the 1st amendment has nothing to do with what you can or can't say to a private person. So, please don't speak and try to compare things you obviously don't understand.
Posting something on a website does not make it public domain. Typically, the website's Terms of Service will require that you grant the website operator a license to use any content that you post on the site (so that they can display it to other users). That license does not extend to other visitors of the same website.
Of course, in practice, it's very unlikely that someone would take you to court over copying a website comment. But if someone posts, say, an original work of art or a short story in a comment thread, you should be aware that it is still protected by copyright.