Still, I suspect that Kickstarter will suffer more than the Diaspora guys if Diaspora fails.

Some people have a lot of problems dealing with peer pressure, and are willing to make promises because they think that's what people expect of them, not necessarily because they're convinced they can actually deliver.

Sure, they could have chosen not to make those promises, but you have to put it into context.

I think Kickstarter is an awesome website and I really hope they don't get any ill will towards them due to the possible failure of Diaspora.

My own take: wake me when they've shipped real, working software I can actually use to replace Facebook while controlling my own data's access rights and durability. Until then, this is still pretty much another case of a few guys making a piece of software somewhere, that may or may not ship, that may or may not succeed, and they started only a month ago. Yawn.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2255807183978932387#

But I'll say three serious things:

1) Yes, of course nearly everybody in the world is worse off than these guys.

2) No, such facts do nothing to cheer anybody up, however factual they may be:

http://www.poemhunter.com/poem/richard-cory/

3) Empathy is not a zero-sum game, in which giving it to one person implies that you must withhold it from another. Rather, empathy is like a muscle: If you work it, it gets stronger. The opposite is also true: If one makes a habit of sneering at the pain of the rich, one may soon find oneself sneering at the pain of the poor as well. Practice makes perfect.

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/

And, yes, that is what it means. I guess http://stufftheuppermiddleclasslikes.com didn't test as well.

Your reference to Springtime to Hitler brings another question: have there been known cases of startups who raised money with intention to fail, The Producers-style?

(To clarify, this is obviously not a reference to Diaspora, just a tangential question.)

"Some of these schemes were plausible enough, and, had they been undertaken at a time when the public mind was unexcited, might have been pursued with advantage to all concerned. But they were established merely with the view of raising the shares in the market. The projectors took the first opportunity of a rise to sell out, and next morning the scheme was at an end. Maitland, in his History of London, gravely informs us, that one of the projects which received great encouragement, was for the establishment of a company "to make deal boards out of saw-dust." This is no doubt intended as a joke; but there is abundance of evidence to shew that dozens of schemes, hardly a whit more reasonable, lived their little day, ruining hundreds ere they fell. One of them was for a wheel for perpetual motion—capital, one million..."

"But the most absurd and preposterous of all, and which shewed, more completely than any other, the utter madness of the people, was one started by an unknown adventurer, entitled 'A company for carrying on an undertaking of great advantage, but nobody to know what it is.' Were not the fact stated by scores of credible witnesses, it would be impossible to believe that any person could have been duped by such a project. The man of genius who essayed this bold and successful inroad upon public credulity, merely stated in his prospectus that the required capital was half a million, in five thousand shares of 100l. each, deposit 2l. per share. Each subscriber, paying his deposit, would be entitled to 100l. per annum per share. How this immense profit was to be obtained, he did not condescend to inform them at that time, but promised that in a month full particulars should be duly announced, and a call made for the remaining 98l. of the subscription. Next morning, at nine o'clock, this great man opened an office in Cornhill. Crowds of people beset his door, and when he shut up at three o'clock, he found that no less than one thousand shares had been subscribed for, and the deposits paid. He was thus, in five hours, the winner of 2,000l. He was philosopher enough to be contented with his venture, and set off the same evening for the Continent. He was never heard of again."

This, of course, is Mackay's account of the South Sea Bubble of 1720. There are countless subsequent examples.

(By the way, in case it isn't obvious: I am convinced that the Diaspora guys are absolutely serious and above-board. That is why it might be amusing to pretend otherwise.

And I'm rooting for them too. That's why I'm engaged in the vital project of talking down expectations. How else are they supposed to make a splash at this point?)

Examples:

-Phantom Entertainment

-Moller International

-Blacklight Power

* the wrong amount of money being given

* extremely high expectations

* 24 / 7 monitoring, with anger if any tiny mistake is made

In Diaspora's case, I suspect many of the donors have low expectations and are not monitoring the project carefully, because it doesn't make sense to spend much time following up on a $20 donation.

who poverty and tatters and hollow-eyed and high sat up smoking in the supernatural darkness of cold-water flats floating across the tops of cities contemplating jazz,

The best minds of all generations always suffer!

What they need is some solid UI people to come take a look, and a few backend people wouldn't hurt either. They probably have something right now, they're just terrified of launching. What they need is a safe group to beta-test with who can help clean up some of the rough edges.

That said, if they don't want the money I'll bake a cake instead.

Your serious advice is, of course, perfectly fine, if serious advice is what the project actually needs. If, however, what the project needs is fewer expectations and more whimsy, I offer my services. I am a very poor substitute for _why, but open source projects must make do with what they can get.