it's an added shame because i thought with the instagram pedigree, there'd be some willingness to run without making a huge hit. these guys got their big win, can't they build something that is pleasing without chasing another fortune?

but also, i had grown tired of its pivot to social and was overwhelmed with its frontpage view that combined the posts and headlines. so can't say i'm sad to see it go as much as i'm sad it declined to a point where i'm not too sad about it going away.

Yeah, I have to imagine being an Instagram founder probably distorts your measure of what a successful app is :)

My main interaction from the app was through alerts that I'd click on and be taken directly to the news source, but when I did run into the social stuff, it felt tacked on and unhelpful.

Fair enough. The founders have that same SV mentality though in that it's not about the specific thing that they are building (that they claim to be passionate about) or the team they have assembled but rather about growing very quickly and focusing on whatever the eventual monetary goal is (funding, IPO, big sale) and if that stuff doesn't look like it's working, then just shutting the whole thing down. Maybe this is just my bias, but it seems like moonshots don't work all that often and moving a bit more deliberately would be preferable to speedrunning the enshittification curve (especially if you're stupid rich and there's no outside money on the line).

oh this is so interesting. tech seems so full of economic potential that the idea of a foundation supporting a customer-facing app seems ludicrous, but i imagine once this generation of tech founders looks to build their legacy, we may see foundations that focus on ensuring good apps have resources to grow, much like some (but not enough) media organizations rely on fundraising efforts. married to a fundraiser, so this really tickles my brain in the right spots...