Hey HN —

I made something simple called Space.

It’s one digital billboard.

Anyone can buy it. It starts at $1. Every time someone buys it, the price increases by exactly $1.

That’s the whole mechanic.

Why I Built It

I wanted to test a constraint:

What happens when ownership is singular, public, and progressively more expensive?

At $1 it’s impulse. At $100 it’s intentional. At $1,000 it’s a statement.

By the time it reaches $1,000, it will have generated $500,500 in total revenue — purely from the $1 incremental mechanic.

I’m curious about:

How price escalation changes meaning

Whether late buyers value symbolism over reach

What people choose to display when cost forces consideration

The Constraint Layer

The constraint is the point.

Only one “space” exists at a time.

Price is deterministic (+$1 per transaction).

The entire history is embedded in the current price.

The value increases because participation increases it.

No auctions. No bidding logic. No variable pricing.

Just math and participation.

Technical Side (Where I’d Love Feedback)

This has been more interesting to build than I expected.

Some things I’ve been dealing with:

Race conditions around concurrent purchases

Locking logic so two buyers don’t claim the same price

Ensuring atomic increments on the backend

Payment confirmation before state mutation

Preventing replay or double-submission exploits

Keeping it minimal without overengineering it

Right now it’s intentionally lightweight. But I’m thinking about:

Should price increments be fully on-chain / provable?

Is there a cleaner way to handle concurrency at scale?

Would you introduce time decay or leave it purely linear?

Should the historical ownership chain be immutable + public?

What safeguards would you add?

Part of me wants to keep it naive and raw. Part of me wants it architecturally tight.

Show HN: I Built a $1 Escalating Internet Billboard – Called Space