Clearly, this could not have happened without YC's financing behind it.
However, I've started to ask myself if YC's involvement is still the best thing for the community. Today, there's a strong bias toward YC startups (e.g., when they are hiring or launching) which is still within acceptable limits and doesn't disrupt the community.
But this strong dependence on YC is not good, and could lead to more influence or bias down the road. YC is HN's benevolent dictator.
Would one possibility be to spin HN off into it's own non-profit entity and with it the moderation and tech (?) teams? I'm sure many regular HN users would gladly donate a monhtly or yearly amount to keep HN independent and going. I know I would.
Of course, this is something YC would need to decide. I'm aware that they probably get a good amount of their application through the "Apply to YC" link at the bottom, but this still might be the right thing to do.
Do you think the dependence is a problem? If yes, what other things could be done to decrease it?
- Hacker News classic would cover technology/business/Silicon Valley
- Hacker News "rest of world" would cover the usual mixture of interesting curiosity-inspiring links
There could even be an interface choice to re-combine the two back into one (effectively reversing the split in the first place).
Maybe the same thing could be accomplished just by adding an (optional?) tagging system for submitted links, along with a way to zoom into a specific tag's link if that's what you're interested in.
Of course, all that sort of begs the question: what exactly is the motivation for running Hacker News? Put another way, what outcome would they be trying to optimize for?