[HN Gopher] Imgur Acquired by Medialab ___________________________________________________________________ Imgur Acquired by Medialab Author : mburst Score : 242 points Date : 2021-09-27 19:19 UTC (3 hours ago) (HTM) web link (imgur.com) (TXT) w3m dump (imgur.com) | beervirus wrote: | Oof. I hope medialab didn't spend much on this dog. | l-albertovich wrote: | Huh, a few days ago I listened to the darknet diaries on kik, I | guess imgur is about to become a child porn den... | | Sarcasm aside, it'd be cool if they got their shit together. | srjek wrote: | https://blog.imgur.com/2021/09/27/celebrating-imgurs-next-ch... | may be a better url. At least on mobile, the gallery link fails | to load. Any scrolling then redirects and rewrites history to a | random post. | soylentgraham wrote: | Well, why change a formula that leads to an exit. | lindseymysse wrote: | I've been doing stuff on neocities.org lately. It reminds me what | I love about making the internet. | | I pay the monthly $5 fee for 50gb, and I have no complaints yet. | And if I ever have a product idea -- their website is open | source, so I can just fork their project and make my own | business. | quickthrower2 wrote: | Hosting companies selling 3 years for $150 of traditional PHP | shared hosting are still around. I love how skills I learned 15 | years ago still work on these and it feels closer to the older | web. Probably can run Perl on them! Also a PHP file on one of | these is close to "serverless" - it's a lot simpler doesn't | change its UI and API every 5 minutes like Azure | sergiotapia wrote: | An image hosting site seems like one of those applications that | are easier than ever to build but impossible to monetize. | | Most people who use imgur just hotlink - what's the incentive for | a company to buy or start a new imgur? | balozi wrote: | Congratulations to Medialab for their newly-acquired gigantic | pile of porno content. Sir, please invite us over when you get | settled in. XOXO | MauranKilom wrote: | Hm. My bet would be that you can now count the number of years | until imgur links go dead on one hand. | | This prompted me to check whether there were any backup efforts | already, and how much data that would involve. Indeed, | archiveteam has some good info: | https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/Imgur | | > Imgur serves a _massive_ amount of traffic. In 2012 alone, 42 | petabytes of data were transferred. Fortunately, the amount of | images uploaded is much less, albeit still a lot. In 2012, around | 300,000,000 images were uploaded; assuming an average size of | 120KB, that 's 36TB in one year. As of 2014, there were 650 | million images with 1.5 million being added each day according to | one source. An analysis in 2015 based on extrapolation from a | sample of random image IDs estimated about 2 billion images with | a total raw full-resolution image size of 376 TiB. | | Also makes me think about whether/how much I currently link to | imgur in various places on the internet, and whether there's | anything that I should prepare to replace. Do people have | suggestions how to best approach this? | catillac wrote: | I would change any links you have pointing to Imgur. But as for | storing the contents, wasn't it just a site for memes? I can't | recall a single time over many years seeing anything worth | preserving that wasn't essentially throwaway content. | vitalychernobyl wrote: | This is a tough one to make sense of - are they just getting | killed by reddit on one side and tiktok on the other and cashing | out? Anyone have any insight? (also anyone know the purchase | price? just for fun) | sieabah wrote: | They stopped being just an image host and attempted to branch | out. Except the content creators just post the garbage to | reddit and tiktok directly because the reach is much greater | than linking to imgur from the various platforms. | didntknowya wrote: | it use to be my fav time waster app rather than the selfies on | IG or silly politics on FB. but yea rarely use it now so I | guess engagement is dropping | monkeybutton wrote: | There is definitely a dedicated subculture there with their | own rules (e.g. selfies being mercilessly down voted in | usersub). Also the demographic was relatable for me as it | skewed more towards older millennials. | bubblehack3r wrote: | Isn't this the company that aquired Kik and completely abandoned | it? Pretty sure this is it. There goes Imagur... | | https://www.distractify.com/p/what-happened-to-kik | | Edit: fixed spelling mistake | bozhark wrote: | abandoned* | solarkraft wrote: | Oh no. Imgur was already close to being overloaded with ads. I | have no doubt this will get much worse. | | Any suggestions for alternative no bullshit image hosting | services? | mpd wrote: | I'm currently using https://postimages.org/ for the odd | occasion I want to upload something. | stavros wrote: | I made one: https://imgz.org/ | jamescun wrote: | Interesting, I hadn't heard of MediaLab until just a few days ago | when I listened to a Darknet Diaries episode[1] about Kik and | some "content problems" that MediaLab are leaving unresolved. | | [1] https://darknetdiaries.com/episode/93/ | Belphemur wrote: | I thought exactly the same. | | It doesn't bode well for Imgur future. They don't care about | their acquisition. It's to wonder why are they doing it in the | first place. | | The company doesn't have any public information either. All I | can find is a LONG list of job openings: | https://jobs.lever.co/medialab | | Weird list if they are just "investors". | oneplane wrote: | That exactly the first thought that came to my mind as well. | RIP Imgur? It doesn't seem like medialab is anything more than | the 'internet brand' version of a patent troll. | madrox wrote: | Congrats to Imgur on its exit, I suppose. | | Honestly, this is probably the best outcome they could hope for. | I suspect their growth has stagnated and are losing mindshare in | the meme economy to Reddit and Discord. Imgur was started in a | very different world from today and they didn't evolve enough. | | Regardless, I'm grateful to them. Imgur will always have a soft | spot in my heart. | ChrisArchitect wrote: | Imgur, great service, lasted this long, amazing. But I always | wondered how any of these random image hosts afforded bandwidth | (reminds of the other various ones like TwitPic who was saved | from being taken offline by Twitter). I mean, I have a gallery of | images in there, privately stored, directly linked to here and | there around the net, without paying for anything for years. I | think at one point I can't even remember now I did _pay them_ a | small fee and then they removed that option to go it alone with | ads and refused to 'take my money'. Which seemed crazy and still | does. Does the small imgur community (Which exists as a bizarre | also-ran of Reddit) sustain them enough on ad views? | mkr-hn wrote: | I emailed one of them 12 years and 4 months ago to ask how they | paid for everything. This was back in 2009 when the internet | was still small enough that companies would respond to random | emails. They responded to say they had funding covered. They | shut down a few years later. | | The domain is there, but it just says "ImageHost.org is closed" | with a Google Analytics tag. | [deleted] | BiteCode_dev wrote: | My guess is PR. | | Regularly, on imgur, you see a pic in interest for a celebrity, | a rich person, a movie. It looks organic, but if you look | closely, there are plenty of weird things about it. Then it | disappears as suddenly as it arrived. | | I believe that they sell the front page to PR firms that need | to promote something in a way the people think themself came up | with the hype. | | It's probably the same for a lot of communities with a strong | influence on trends, like popular sub reddits or hacker news. | | There is no better ads than the one you don't see. There is no | better slogan than the one you repeat to your friends as a | catchphrase. And there is no better propaganda than the one | based on ideas you thought you had by yourself. | djhn wrote: | But who are these companies that successfully provide this | service? | BiteCode_dev wrote: | It's just an educated guess, so I don't know. | | Besides, such company would do its best to stay discrete, | by design. | robertoandred wrote: | Yeah but who goes to the front page of imgur? | corobo wrote: | The exact opposite personality type to people that browse | HN I'd wager | JadeNB wrote: | I, and apparently Swizec | (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28676558), do both, | and I doubt we're the only ones. | everdrive wrote: | Yes, there might be dozens of you. | BoorishBears wrote: | No there's plenty, HN just has the kind of people who | need to loudly proclaim they don't engage with <insert | popular thing> | | That wrongly creates the impression that there are only a | few HN users engaging with it. | Swizec wrote: | Who doesn't? It's the best source of almost everything. | Perfect mix of culturally important twitter and news | screenshots and entertaining gifs. | dTal wrote: | Absolutely this. imgur.com is the only reason I can | pretend to be "down with the kids". | Swizec wrote: | Oh yes also all the good/important tiktoks end up on | there. I don't even have tiktok and am conversant in all | the memes. | | 7/7 would recommend | hbn wrote: | I recall being in high school (around 2013, 2014) and some | of my classmates would browse imgur while slacking off from | work. Not sure how big it is these days, but I think some | people use it the same way you'd browse r/funny on reddit, | or iFunny. Except there isn't really a topic, it's just | images of whatever people think is interesting. | dh4h45b4 wrote: | Anecdotal and I can't substantiate any of this. About 5 years | ago my old boss's wife worked for imgur and it did not sound | great. They had constant churn. She was an upper manager of | some sort and even she left after a short time. From what I | understood, the company was not profitable and like many other | tech companies relied heavily on investor. | | I seriously doubt their community can sustain the costs of the | service. In fact, the quality of imgur's service has declined | in an effort to make profit. For instance, all images are | compressed now. That used to not be true. | | Most platforms you are using today cannot survive without ad's, | because their business model is not one that can make a profit | without a monopoly first. | intricatedetail wrote: | Bandwidth is pretty cheap if you look beyond cloud. There are | providers that offer magnitudes cheaper bandwidth than e.g. AWS | but you have to set servers yourself. | wasmitnetzen wrote: | If I request one of the images in the post, I end up on a | Fastly IP, and their public pricing[1] is pretty much the | same price per GB as AWS[2]. They probably get a discount | there, but that's probably about the same deal if you're a | big AWS customer. | | [1]: https://www.fastly.com/pricing/ [2]: | https://aws.amazon.com/s3/pricing/?nc1=h_ls | smnrchrds wrote: | At their scale, nothing is cheap. Some things are cheaper | than others, but even the cheapest option must be costing a | fortune each month. | ChrisArchitect wrote: | Right, it's the scale and seemingly limitless ceiling.... | seems crazy. Obviously there's a lot of low res tiny images | on there etc but there's also not -- and for years and | years? | mcny wrote: | I remember back around 2009(?) ish I had a chance to talk | to some folks at Justin.tv (now twitch) and they said one | ad on the stream every few hours more than covers all the | costs. What changed? | | I guess the videos are much more high resolution now than | the webcam size 320x240 videos back then but has cost | gone up that much? | icelancer wrote: | Ads are worth a magnitude less today than they were in | 2009. | bserge wrote: | What? They're crazy competitive these days. Every popular | ad space online has been bought by the highest bidder. | AdWords, Facebook, Imgur, Reddit, companies are dumping | cash like mad. The market grew by billions over the past | decade. | sha90 wrote: | But you need to consider that so have hosting costs-- | proportionately too. Hosting data was incredibly | expensive 10 years ago. If the math was working then, it | should at least be pretty close to working now. | evanmoran wrote: | Where have you had success with hosting outside the usual | aws/gap/etc? It seems like digital ocean has a bit cheaper | bandwidth, but curious if you have a better recommendation! | missedthecue wrote: | DataPacket has a lot of locations globally (compared to | Hetzner), though you're going to need to spend more than a | few dollars to get started. | Aeolun wrote: | Not only to get started. What costs me EUR20 on hetzner | costs me $800 on DataPacket. | | That's quite a difference. | nickstinemates wrote: | Buy a server or 10, host in equinix, buy bulk bandwidth. | Amortize cost. | bserge wrote: | Anywhere you rent bare metal. Cloud hosting providers | always had the worst bandwidth prices, I'm not joking. | toomuchtodo wrote: | Hetzner or OVH. | danbtl wrote: | Try OVH | a2tech wrote: | My preferred server provider would set you up with a linux | machine with SSD with 20TB of transfer on a gigabit port | for $130/month and another 100TB on a gigabit port for | $79/month | ma2rten wrote: | I don't think it's a big mystery. Bandwidth and ad revenue | scale together. Sometimes the image will be embedded, hot | clicked or the request is otherwise not monetizable, but you | can assume that those are a fixed fraction. Every image clicked | on otherwise will generate some ad revenue which is multiples | of the bandwidth cost of serving it. | dapatil wrote: | You can shop around for bandwidth even if you're a small shop. | I run https://filepost.io. It lets you share large files and | images. It is profitable with ads alone. | adventured wrote: | > But I always wondered how any of these random image hosts | afforded bandwidth ... reminds of the other various ones like | TwitPic who was saved from being taken offline by Twitter | | Image hosting is relatively cheap, so you can have good margins | if you can get a lot of use and fill the ad inventory. The way | you do it, is by running as thin of an operation as possible. | | When the first wave of one-click image hosts were popping up | back in 2004-2005 roughly, I noticed one called ImageVenue. The | founder, Vlad, was out of Eastern Europe somewhere. I emailed | him and bought advertising, the price was right and he had a | lot of impressions to fill. Back then he was just buying tons | of $40/month dedicated servers from one specific host, using a | img7.imagevenue.com scheme for each machine, and filling up the | boxes. You can still use ImageVenue.com 17 years later, even | though the traffic for the service has never been what it was | during the early peak years (tons of image hosting competition | swamped the market). | | And regarding TwitPic, circa 2010: "TwitPic is generating $1.5 | to $2 million in ad sales on an annual basis, with 70% profit | margins, says its founder Noah Everett" | | https://mixergy.com/interviews/twitpic-noah-everett/ | stavros wrote: | It seemed crazy to me, and I didn't want to be the product, so | I made https://imgz.org/. Maybe you'll like it. | tomcam wrote: | Your pricing page is a delight | | https://imgz.org/money/ | stavros wrote: | Haha, thank you! | | Now pay. | going_ham wrote: | You sir, gave me a good laugh. Kudos. | keyle wrote: | Even the terms are great. | | "Where was I" | | https://imgz.org/help/terms/ | | Maybe charge $1/month for MVP sarcasm. | riquito wrote: | > Paying us money doesn't entitle you to anything except | owning less money | | Brilliant | silisili wrote: | Agreed. It's delightfully funny without going overboard, or | being too cheesy like most bigger companies who try to be | cheeky. | | I'm signing up. | stavros wrote: | The trick is to actually not care about whether people | buy your stuff! Hard to pull off when you're trying to | make money, but easy for me. | version_five wrote: | This website is great, I have no use for an image sharing | site but in tempted to sign up just to help see it become | successful. And behind all the humor there is actually a very | sensible concept: pay a reasonable amount of money to get an | actual service and not some ad infested crap. Also I love | | > If you're expecting professionalism, call Oracle and ask | for a quote of Oracle Advanced Image Sharing for Hadoop or | whatever crap they sell | emptysongglass wrote: | This is one of the greatest pieces of website comedy I have | ever seen. | stavros wrote: | Thanks! Check out the blog, we're innovating. | jdmichal wrote: | Your architecture page is an inspiration to me. | tppiotrowski wrote: | I think there's a cost to taking money from thousands of people | vs taking the money from an investor or advertiser. | | First off there is tax compliance, if you want to be global it | will cost a lot for accountants and lawyers that understand how | this should work "anywhere" in the world. | | Second, I know some people that will just cancel credit cards | because they don't want to make the next recurring payment for | a service. Coming after these people is not worth the effort | but hurts the bottom line. | | Third, you need to hire employees to look after customer | accounts and billing if there are any questions. | | I think there's other reasons and I know payment processors | like Stripe and Square are attempting to make this seamless, | but I'm guessing a single source of funding is still desirable. | reilly3000 wrote: | As a side note I find it amusing how the HN community | simultaneously obsesses over startups, equity, funding rounds, | etc but gets grumpy when a company actually does sell. The | cognitive dissonance is sublime. | jacquesm wrote: | HN contains enough people of different vintage and background | that it would be rather more surprising if there was any | subject that we all agreed on. This has nothing to do with | cognitive dissonance, which is something unique to an | individual, at best you could conclude that HN is able to cater | to people on opposing sides of some spectra without turning | into a hate fest. | filmgirlcw wrote: | They should have sold to Reddit when that option was on the | table. The founders didn't want to because they thought they had | options beyond Reddit, but that was never really true. | | Congrats on any exit, but this one has to be a letdown and I'm | sure it didn't work out for any of the non-founders with options | that are now assuredly worthless, but congrats on an exit | nonetheless. | efnx wrote: | Does anybody know what the acquisition price was? Or what the | terms were (like how long must the founders remain on the team, | etc)? | ChrisArchitect wrote: | Medialab's other things include like, Genius (ok, fair enough, | sustains itself / useful/ well-used I'm assuming)....and Kik? The | teen messaging app from like 2010 that no one uses anymore? hm | | Had to look a bit harder to even find their website | (https://www.medialab.la/) - 'a holding company of consumer | internet brands' heh, sheesh, yeah that's not sketchy. | jdorfman wrote: | > Kik? The teen messaging app from like 2010 that no one uses | anymore? | | I use to think the same thing, until I listened to this episode | of Darknet Diaries: | | https://darknetdiaries.com/episode/93/ | xmprt wrote: | 1/3 American Teenagers use the app according to Kik... I have | a feeling they're not counting right because that doesn't | sound right to me. | toyg wrote: | After reading this, it's clear everybody knows (multiple | legal challenges, involvement by MS...) and nobody with | actual power wants to crack down on it. Safe haven or not, | when authorities want to destroy a sketchy business, they | have a number of weapons at their disposal. To me, it all | suggests Kik (and by extension, possibly, Medialab) might | well be some sort of law-enforcement front at this point. | NelsonMinar wrote: | Kik's the website that had a serious child porn and child | sexual solicitation problem. I think they've tried to do | something about that in the last couple of years but from a | quick Google search it's not clear it's really worked. | Lammy wrote: | It's probably worth a lot more as a honeypot than it was | before. | Jerry2 wrote: | > _Had to look a bit harder to even find their website | (https://www.medialab.la/) - 'a holding company of consumer | internet brands' heh, sheesh, yeah that's not sketchy._ | | I find it curious that there's no page about who owns/runs | MediaLab. Not even a single blurb about their | executives/management! | LookAtThatBacon wrote: | According to their public Statement of Information (https://b | usinesssearch.sos.ca.gov/Document/RetrievePDF?Id=04...), the | CEO of MediaLab.AI Inc is Michael Heyward, the co-founder of | Whisper. | Lammy wrote: | To save others looking it up: `.la` is the ccTLD of Laos. | They're using it here to mean "Los Angeles", of course, but I | hadn't seen that one before :) | kyle-rb wrote: | MediaLab probably got Kik at a pretty big discount. There were | child grooming issues, and at one point they did an ICO and | subsequently got fined by the SEC. | | They were also indirectly responsible for the whole leftpad | disaster lol. | teawrecks wrote: | Hey, before you judge them, note that their stated goal is: "to | enrich and empower consumers in their everyday lives...through | expansion and acquisitions." | | All I can think of is that silicon valley tech disrupt bit. | "We're making the world a better place...through paxos | algorithms for consensus protocols." | ChrisArchitect wrote: | oh the Genius acquisition was also (announced) today?! wow | someone just went shopping eh? | | Edit: Sorry missed that was news from the 16th: | | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28550527 | cjenkins wrote: | Just a note, we're getting close to fiscal year end (9/30) | for a lot of companies. Maybe totally anecdotal but I've | noticed in the past that I see a lot of these kinds of | announcements this time of year presumably to get these done | before the next fiscal year. | mdoms wrote: | I have never seen a service decline so quickly from "simple and | actually pretty useful" to "bloated, slow mess" as Imgur. I don't | see that trend reversing for them. I suspect much of the slowness | is because I live in the ass end of the world (NZ), but that's a | problem that can be solved with money.... money they likely don't | want to spend. | seattle_spring wrote: | > I have never seen a service decline so quickly from "simple | and actually pretty useful" to "bloated, slow mess" as Imgur | | Reddit did a pretty good job of going from simple and | relatively lightweight to bloated and unusable in a very short | timeframe. | andrefuchs wrote: | There is a great DarknetDiaries episode about the dark side of | Medialab's Kik-Messenger. | | https://darknetdiaries.com/episode/93/ | anonymous344 wrote: | imgur has long been a political manipulation machine. I'll bet | after this sell it will only get worse. | | ps. Have you noticed how 9 gag shows you violence or racism every | day in one of the top 5 posts. As tought that "happy site" is | trying to make you angry... | Andrew_nenakhov wrote: | I can't share the love for Imgur: for some reason, all imgur | posts, including this one, are never displayed on my mobile | Firefox. Just blank screen, and that's it. | | (the only addon I have is uBlock origin, and I'm too lazy to try | turning it off for some random images) | BitwiseFool wrote: | Imgur does this weird thing on mobile where it will always | redirect you to some page where it can then nag you to download | their app with grayouts, big buttons, and then a content feed | they hope you scroll down on. | | It also downloads like 6 megabytes worth of local content. | Doesn't matter if you are going to the imgur page of the image, | or literally the URI to the image file itself. | actusual wrote: | Ah yes, the ol' app interstitial where they hound you to | download the app by interrupting whatever you were trying to | do on their site. I hate websites that use these. | harry8 wrote: | Imgur sort of claims to be organic and user driven but that just | seems a stretch. | | Before the 2016 election it was full of Pro-trump meme content. | Now there is absolutely none and it's full of orthodox Democrat | boosting meme content with any Republican mention advancing the | idea that the whole party and all its supporters are completely | beyond redemption being in league with Satan himself. | | No way that's not curated, for mine and I think it will backfire. | calltrak wrote: | imgur sucks. i prefer https://picc.io | missedthecue wrote: | Is this the same Medialab that bought the lyrics website Genius | for $80 million last week? | gsich wrote: | Imgur has gone to shit. | paxys wrote: | https://www.medialab.la/ for those wondering. | | > medialab is a holding company of consumer internet brands. | c3534l wrote: | Ah, this explains why imgur suddenly became unusable. | jdlyga wrote: | Imgur was awesome for a bunch of years. Glad they had an exit | plan. | EasyTiger_ wrote: | Wasn't this the company that ostensibly began on reddit? Their | founder used to post many promises about "not selling out" and | the rest. | judge2020 wrote: | Yes, and they have since cut out all references to Reddit, even | in their company history section. | | https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/y81ju/i_created_imgur... | | https://imgurinc.com/about?forcedesktop=1#huge-impact-little... | xenihn wrote: | I'm sure there's good reasons for this. but I'd be curious | for details. | | I wonder if Reddit would be what it is today without imgur. I | started using Reddit shortly before imgur launched, and I can | still remember the day that it went live. It was by far the | best image uploading experience I'd ever had, and I'd used | most (maybe every) major uploader that came before them, | between 1995 and 2009. | gjs278 wrote: | this is a lie MrGrim told reddit. in reality he was promoting | imgur on digg, SA, anywhere really. he just told reddit that so | they'd think they were part of some secret new club since | tinypic, photobucket, and imageshack were all terrible hosts in | comparison. | WORMS_EAT_WORMS wrote: | Ha. I love reading terrible inflaming comments like this. | | - What would you have done? | | - Do you even know 1% of the effort the founding team put into | this? | | - Do you know the exact details of the digital cold war between | Reddit and them? | | This is just a terrible comment by a terribly grumpy person to | inflame. | | - It's AWESOME the founding team exited | | - It's AWESOME someone went heads up with Reddit | | Everything they did mattered. Nothing you shared did. | cmbell715 wrote: | So many straw men, so little time. | WORMS_EAT_WORMS wrote: | My comment was flagged but what the person is complaining | about was probably 10 years ago... and provides little | discussion except a quip that doesn't belong on HN. | Whatever. | pram wrote: | My favorite part is that they added 'social' stuff to imgur | uploads, so your images (probably) have a separate set of | terrible comments you're not even aware of. | sbierwagen wrote: | Imgur comments have the old twitter length limit, 140 | characters. | ruined wrote: | even worse! | bozhark wrote: | watch they weren't even hosting the files, it just | backpages to twitter posts | pfraze wrote: | To be fair, the Imgur comments are actually pretty funny | didntknowya wrote: | everyone sells out eventually. nothing wrong with it. either | that or they run it into the ground or die. | | people move on that's just life. congrats to the imgur team and | good luck for their next adventures. | vesinisa wrote: | You don't need to sell out if you can create a service or | product that people are willing to pay money for - even | indirectly. Granted, this is certainly a difficult feat to | pull on a free image hosting site. | rapind wrote: | Not everyone, but it's definitely rare. Feels good to believe | that everyone sells out though when you're in the process of | selling out. | Aeolun wrote: | Ah, yeah, after the previous host was taken over. We all saw | that for the lie it was after they took outside investment of | course. | BurningFrog wrote: | "Selling" and "selling out" are not (always) the same thing. | munk-a wrote: | My dad worked in M&A for a long time and handled the sale of | a plastic molding company where the owner was getting quite | old and couldn't really run the business anymore. The company | was extremely well established and had a very strong and | loyal customer base and ran off a single manufacturing | facility in a small town out in the boonies. The owner | certainly wanted a fair value for the company but he also | strongly desired that the plant be kept open and employees | retain their positions. Adding this sort of a restriction on | a company you're selling is possible - but it is hellishly | expensive, generally you're considering adding some sort of | third party oversight and auditing for all HR actions and | business decisions. If you buy a company under these terms | you can end up utterly destroying the company if supply | chains shift - the local labour pool is unsustainable or a | plethora of other reasons... And almost certainly this burden | is mandatorily bundled with the company - so once you've rode | the company value down a bit and are looking to get out all | of the buyers will know how much of an impossible situation | that company is in. | | At the end of the day when you sell a company you are | divorcing yourself from the future direction - you might be | invited to stay on as an executive - and the new owners might | listen to you... or they might not - that's entirely up to | them. Any promises or commitments you've made as an executive | are only as good as your word - and when you sell your | company your word stops having any power (because you sold | that power). | | I would never shame someone who wanted to keep an ideal going | from making an exit they personally need to make - always | prioritize your health and happiness over any venture - but | when you sell you're accepting the fact that at any moment | the buyer may completely reverse the direction of the | company. | munchler wrote: | Can you think of a notable example when they weren't? | [deleted] | mtnGoat wrote: | facebook, zuck took all the investor money but maintained | all the control. | popcube wrote: | stackoverflow? I mean, there still are many people. | munchler wrote: | I think it's still too early to judge the SO purchase, | but I agree that it hasn't been a problem so far. | missedthecue wrote: | Anything bought by Microsoft in the past 10 years. | Minecraft, Github, LinkedIn, all are better products today | than they were at the time of sale. | Lammy wrote: | Sounds like the attention of those properties' users is | worth more in some other metric than the | maintenance/improvements cost in engineer time. I wonder | what. | slig wrote: | They began on Reddit because Reddit was incapable of handling | image uploads. | kordlessagain wrote: | Reddit forwards /r/imgur to /r/drugs | throwaway1777 wrote: | Fake news. | SquareWheel wrote: | No it doesn't. If you mean reddit.com/imgur, that's the ID | from a random post in /r/Drugs. Reddit automatically | expands the post ID to the original thread. | ryder9 wrote: | bullshit artist | techrat wrote: | > They began on Reddit because Reddit was incapable of | handling image uploads. | | I'd argue they largely still are incapable of handling image | uploads. Their gallery system sucks and the redesign just | makes it harder to even see what was posted. | hanniabu wrote: | And their video player is even worse! | cptskippy wrote: | The image uploading fails most of the time for me. | dpedu wrote: | IIRC at the time imgur launched, all of the other free image | sharing websites were pretty bad. Reddit itself didn't start | allowing uploads until long after imgur. | badsectoracula wrote: | IMO all the other free image sharing websites are still | bad, i've yet to see anything that lets you -e.g.- make | direct links to the images for use in Discord, Reddit, | forums (phpbb), etc and not surround them with garbage and | images tend to stay around for a long time unlike other | places where they disappear after a while. | | The only thing i found annoying with Imgur is the mobile | site not allowing zooming for some reason (can be bypassed | by loading the desktop version but it is still an | annoyance). | | Not sure if this will still be the case going forward | though. I used to like Minus since they allowed all that | stuff plus had unlimited GIF sizes and didn't reencode PNGs | to JPGs (not sure if Imgur does that anymore) but after | Minus was sold it went to hell and then disappeared | completely. | quickthrower2 wrote: | Who's paying if there are no ads? | minimaxir wrote: | Here's a data analysis I made years ago on how Reddit | native image uploads overtook Imgur uploads: | https://minimaxir.com/2017/06/imgur-decline/ | degenerate wrote: | Correct. ImageShack was the most widely used host on reddit | and had recently disabled hotlinking (after nearly a year | of ad bloat on their main site) so user MrGrim on reddit | created Imgur and announced it on Reddit 12 years ago: | | https://old.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/7zlyd/my_gift_ | t... | | He did an AMA 3 years later: https://old.reddit.com//r/IAmA | /comments/y81ju/i_created_imgu... | tschwimmer wrote: | Holy crap, I have not thought about imageshack for a | decade. It was hot garbage: slow, ad ridden and if I | recall correctly they would disable your hotlinked images | if they used too much bandwidth. Imgur was something of a | godsend at the time. Now it's commodity unfortunately. | jagger27 wrote: | I remember when ImageShack was the best of all the bad | options. TinyPic and PhotoBucket were super slow, and I | remember popular forums back then either didn't support | image uploads, or they were even slower to load than | external hosts. So much internet history has been lost to | "this image has exceeded its bandwidth limit" | placeholders from PhotoBucket and TinyPic. | | Imgur really did change everything. | pfraze wrote: | The disabled hotlink images are the only reason I know | imageshack exists. How's that for marketing? | [deleted] | gsich wrote: | And now Imgur has disabled hotlinking. Depending on | device and/or image. | corobo wrote: | And has an interstitial ad to wait through before upload. | I don't think even ImageShack thought of that one | mrkramer wrote: | Imgur only exists because Reddit at the time didn't have native | image host but since they introduced it Imgur is in decline[0]. | | [0] https://minimaxir.com/2017/06/imgur-decline/ | bluedino wrote: | And now the race for the next free image host begins... | darkwizard42 wrote: | Medialab has now acquired Kik (2019), Imgur (2021), Genius | (2021)... | | Big spree of acquisitions! Anyone have any idea the goal? | filmgirlcw wrote: | To buy old, dilapidated tech/media brands that no longer have | any ability to get pay out investors (who are happy to sell on | the cheap for a write-off), but still get some level of | traffic. Bundle all the traffic together to sell ads across a | network of sites with the hopes of profiting. | | It's a strategy as old as time. Sometimes it works (IAC, is | arguably a good example of a company who has bought or funded | companies at various stages of distress/hype (and incubated | some that are very successful in their own right, like Match | Group) and managed to get goodish CPMs across the sites they | bundle together), most of the time it doesn't. But the goal is | to acquire the brand/traffic, cut costs to the bone, and | attempt to profit off the traffic by selling ads or user data | or whatever. It's a rollup play and the goal is definitely not | to invest back into the companies themselves any more than they | need to run. | exogeny wrote: | To be the biggest media company of 2014. | [deleted] | taurath wrote: | Yeah to be an ad network like everything else | jacquesm wrote: | To become the next Yahoo. | DarknessFalls wrote: | Imgur could have pivoted to becoming like Reddit faster than | Reddit was able to pivot to incorporate its own image repo. | | It's all user-submitted content. One was either a link or a blurb | of text, the other was imagery. | Traster wrote: | By the way, it's pronounced "Imager" for those that don't know. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-09-27 23:00 UTC)