diff --git a/articles/single-person-apps.md b/articles/single-person-apps.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a4dedafb1d07004ffa44af58b8983481fb4e06d3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/articles/single-person-apps.md
@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
++++
+title = "Single-person Apps"
+summary = "Thoughts on the lack of single-person applications"
+date = 2024-08-11
+category = "Misc"
+draft = true
++++
+
+### Why are so many apps built for >1 users?
+
+I think I know the answer to this, more or less. Most apps are fairly easy to extend from 1 user to 2 users,
+and if you go >1 you may as well go to some undetermined limit of users.
+
+In most cases this is probably great! Extending how many users an application can handle means you can share it with friends,
+colleagues, or whoever may want access.
+
+As of late, however, I've been lamenting on how few apps are created for 1 user only.
+
+### What are the benefits of a single-user application?
+
+1. Namespacing (or lack thereof)
+
+Most applications that have user accounts also then require namespacing, such as 
+```
+blog.example.com/user1
+blog.example.com/user2
+blogexample.com/user3
+```
+
+Now, say `user1` wants to simply host their blog on this hypothetical application for themself
+```
+blog.user1.com/user1
+```
+
+There's stuttering in the domain. A minor issue, and maybe even a nonissue for most people, but it bothers me enough to want an alternative.
+
+2. Security
+
+Okay, this one is somewhat subjective. But I would argue that ACLs for a single user can be significantly simpler than >1 users.
+
+Any application that needs to deal with public/private (and maybe unlisted) 
+_and_ a matrix of those permissions between N users is going to be more complex than a single user.
+