HenriNext

That is just not true.

Many market dominating companies/products aim for the exact opposite: try to be "platform" instead of "product". For example Google Apps and Salesforce.

I had very similar idea a few years ago, did some quick numbers and came to conclusion that it was not going to fly commercially.

Interestingly the working name for my idea was also "ResearchEngine", so i guess it summarizes pretty well the unmet need you and me have.

Fair question, I totally get your point. But yes, i've been full-time entrepreneur since i was 19. 6 companies, 20+ years, and lot of mistakes by now.

Fair point. But if after 2 years you haven't found a business model, it might be better to fire couple of the product people and get dedicated biz people, as opposed to waiting 5.5 years and then go belly up.

No, it didn't become VC, because it ain't giving me any moneys.

I even said "AI" and refreshed my bank account balance, but still nothing.

> "We are a team of 8. We are 2 full-stack, 1 iOS, 1 Android and 4 product people."

And that leaves 0 for business + marketing + sales.

Maybe you didn't find the right business model during 5.5 years because you had nobody working on finding the right business model?

I didn't say it was law enforcement directly taking down the domain name, I said that it was collateral damage from law enforcement operation against botnet.

As the original operation was run by interpol, europol etc i think this was a fairly accurate description, especially in context of a tldr; which gives some constitutional rights to simplify things :)

Sorry, but that is a broken analogy. Wikipedia's revenue model and cost structure is nothing like startup's.

tldr; Collateral damage from law enforcement taking down a botnet, resolved reasonably fast.

Click-bait redirects here.

The figures don't look anything like growth rate of cancer, they look like growth rate of a toenail.. 10-15% a year.

Then the author claims that "spending is growing at an ever-increasing rate" like cancer. But it is not. Draw a trend-line over the spending graph, and you'll see that the growth rate is actually damn linear (and well aligned with revenue growth).

Rest of the article is reasons why spending should be reduced. Well maybe it shouldn't. As long as there is revenue growth, maybe it is better to invest the revenue on better tools. When revenue growth stops, you've got the better tools you invested in, and can then reduce spending by not building further new tools.

First, congrats on launching!

Second, to give your idea a change to take off, i'd guess that you need to:

- Bring the pricing to realistic level; You are asking for Splunk level monies for beta quality side project. $500 per month for 1m records is just really steep.

- Have clear messaging why your best-effort schema inference + sql queries from flat files would be superior to standard inverted index + full text search approach.

Interesting idea. I already track/log my decision making process for everything important, so i'm right in your target audience, but I think your approach has the following problems:

- Decisions and opinions brew over time, but in bursts; you spend some 'active' time thinking, or get intuitive realization in 'background', or something 'external' happens. When one of those occurs it's important to write down the new ideas or changed opinions immediately when it is in memory with all details and emotions. Your timed email reminders seems completely wrong way (for me).

- The decisions worth tracking are the important ones, and to trust any cloud based application with critical financial or personal decisions is major barrier. You would need to offer some pretty amazing benefits over tracking in encrypted plain docs, but i'm not sure what those amazing benefits could be: plain docs work fine.

This is a command line tool, not a library. It's not feasible to spawn python process 30+ times per second (during scrolling).

Minimaps make sense as a navigational aid in editors and IDEs, but what is the use case for command line tool that creates static minimap picture?

I don't think lack of real "chat" is a problem, as long as you are clear about it.

for me the real attraction was that this looks like a more fun way to answer boring survey questions, and thus hopefully higher percentage of people will complete the survey.

Best of luck, and i'll be following how this progresses!

Very fresh approach, but based on the video this is not really a "chat bot", but only works with predefined answers?

The landing page is also very thin on details... what kind of survey elements are supported? Can the surveys branch based on previous answers? Can the response data be exported?

Oh and the "I Accept Terms and Conditions" link gives error..

Yep, but I think "architectural differentiation" etc. often doesn't matter to customers directly. More important is what that architecture allows them to do, or how that architecture makes you better/faster/cheaper than your competitors.

Nice. Some ideas for the landing page:

- You don't have any use cases. Good technical explanations for sure, but generally people "get" a product better/faster with some examples of what it can do for them (instead of "hybrid reverse proxy" stuff).

- On the surface this seems similar to lot of other real time messaging services. Clear "why this over those" or unique selling points is missing.

- The free cloud plan seems really stingy.. 500 free messages per day is so low that it left negative impression.

Though, if the mentors poach mentees, then the company of the mentee won't be happy paying for the service.

The idea seems extremely useful for the mentees.

However, i'm curious how you convinced YC, as this seems to be against what YC normally wants:

- Your market seems very small: only software engineers, and only at specific career stage.

- Your mentor side doesn't seem scaleble: top mentors won't be willing to handle unlimited number of calls as the number of mentees grows, the number potential high caliber mentors is very limited, and if you get lower caliber mentors then the service won't be that valuable.

Well A/B testing has been around for ages. We did traffic splitting to two variations in the 1990's. No fancy tools, but fundamentally same. In regards to one-liners, there probably were multiple changes occurring over long time, interleaved:

- Increasing information overload etc changed visitor behavior to prefer less text.

- Large companies who did A/B testing eventually noticed that change in visitor's preferences and evolved towards one-liners.

- Some small companies who didn't do A/B testing copied the one-liner style from large companies, when seeking "inspiration".

- Remaining small companies followed, as one-liners were the dominant trend.

Well, the transition from "proper text and descriptions" to one-liners was thoroughly A/B tested too, over the course of a decade, by millions of web sites.

Ultimately, on majority of sites large majority of visitors didn't read "proper text and descriptions". Monkeys like shiny things.

Congrats on launching!

My first impression was extremely positive: the look of the landing page is really professional, but then disappointingly the text content was really unprofessional.

Here's two specific examples of what you could improve:

> ethx.in is the favourite place in India to store, buy and sell ether.

You are on invite-only limited beta -- saying that you are "favourite place in India" is not credible.

> Secure | Ease of use | Amazing Usability

Your three selling points are totally boring, the second and third point are largely duplicates, and they all are written different grammatical forms.

Compared to the overall complexity of operating an exchange, fixing these superficial things takes no effort.

Best of luck!

Great, just downloaded and trying now.

What is the updater tech that you are using?

Personally, i wouldn't care at all for some like/clap counter by itself, but I'd be interested in honest, brutal, in-depth, professional dissecting of landing pages.

I haven't surveyed current alternatives so there might already be something decent, but everything i've bumped into has been shallow "wow +1 plz visit my page" stuff.

But of course building community for digital marketing professionals is entirely different undertaking than having gallery of landing pages..

> too many landings focus on the "one-liners" that look more of an advertisement rather than an actual tagline

I'm not sure how you judge "too many" -- every major site has A/B tested their one liners to death, and what you see are the winners..

This would be great with discussions and perhaps ratings.

Basically instead of just looking for inspiration, people could dissect the landing pages and share opinions/ideas about them for learning purposes.

Slick looking. For tuning your website, here is a story of the ADHD age, aka how i ended up NOT downloading it:

1. Scrolled through the page and screenshots, thought: "looks interesting"

2. Arrived at 'Try for free' download button, thought: "ok it's paid"

3. Scrolled back up to find 'pricing' or 'buy' menu link, (as the menu is not in fixed position) but didn't see any, thought: "huh is this free or not"

4. Tried 'license' link as alternative, but it contained wall of text and no clear pricing information, thought: "fuck it" and closed browser tab

Only when checking the exact link names for this feedback i noticed that you had the pricing information within the plain text wall mixed with feature descriptions, above the download button.

So, the purchase experience needs tuning, but well done with the software and best of luck!

Looks cool, but from marketing point of view you'd probably convert much better if you:

- Allow users to start creating their game without registration (lesson from early facebook games), and only after they're hooked ask them to register.

- Be upfront about free vs paid: if it's free and you don't say anything about it, then you lose the paranoid users, and if it is paid, then you piss everybody off by asking money at late stage.

Anyway, well done and best of luck.

Actually it's on both.

The 'show' has recent top submissions, selected and sorted by ranking algorithm [1], and 'show new' has all recent submissions, sorted in reverse chronological order.

[1] https://medium.com/hacking-and-gonzo/how-hacker-news-ranking...