ballard

Plus switching stacks would be risky and costly. Google would have to give away an enormous amount of credits for shops to consider it.

Google is about 2 years too late. Many startups switched to AWS in droves and never looked back. The failure is that Google would have to give away GAE, GCE and friends in order for folks to switch because the work to change stack tooling would be very costly.

DVD players.

If you paid for a license to something and they provide the source with purchase, but don't want the source shared or modifications to it shared either.

In reality, if redistribution of source is forbidden, restricting unreleased modifications of source is hard to enforce.

Yup. I had the beta source of win 2k when it was refered to as NT 5.

Never said their was.

The wrong cofounder/s is like the wrong spouse.

The right cofounder/s is like the right spouse.

Best to know them previously, it helps a lot.

Further, the biggest point of having other people around is killing off bad ideas quickly because people won't see the entire picture themselves but they will believe their own bullshit. It's harder to delude yourself in the wrong direction of thought if your cofounder/s are there to help you keep you honest.

That would be a funny contest: most desperate tweet.

Yup. I think OAuth calls it scope, and it's a list of requested permissions.

Wow cool!

Would really like to see related tags, built in the usual big data algorithms / search UX way.

One thing is to keep ongoing tech (servers etc) costs low so it can simmer. Shutting apps down just destroys value.

Anything but folks arguing sex politics.

Did anyone even bother to look to see how this site compares in their market? Who's their closest competitors even?

It's minus half a credibility point for being a lone wolf founder. The reasons to have founders plural are countless.

So they're employees. Paid / unpaid, stock?

Yup. 'sama tweeted something similar about users not really caring about underlying tech. None of it matters if users don't love the net result. JFS - just fucking ship. Worry about delivering a compelling product, why you are building it and monetizing to stay fucking alive. Bikeshed on which testing framework to use another day.

It's ever since the pg incident and reinforced by the github gate, the valley is in a "see we welcome women, women are great and we've always loved them" mode. Folks are already calling it "gender washing."

And she takes credit for it personally.

Gotta promote the team members or it looks like they're replaceable cutouts.

Look up their stats on quantcast and compete, tells a different story.

Or 50 years.

R.I.P.

A.S.

Not to come off as green ink, but this narrows the implicit incentive to find news (eg mostly gossip) and perhaps even incite a little drama to make quota now and then. It's like the investment timescale of a stockbroker vs Warren Buffett (G.G.). Basically this trend kills off more potential investigative journalism stories that would actually matter, or requires a bunch of popular crap stories to fund them.

Smart and wisdom of experience together are as kids say... gangster. It's only when a person gives up either learning or trying and accept status quo that their ability to make a big impact can be questioned, and that can happen at any age or sometimes never with a lucky few.

Universities these days are sitting on huge cash reserves. And then also look at how much cash is being spent on new buildings. Buildings at Stanford were torn down are less than 8 years old.

So a guy I know took his Yale scholarship, bought a boat and sails around the world and made the diff by working summers. Can't do that anymore.

The client needs to actively manage the projects for risk so that the do succeed and don't pretend to "succeed." In other words, doing a good job making sure a good job is being actually done.

This is how I imagine this department operates:

http://youtu.be/fKRV40LZSuY (Brazil)

I don't know, that's why I asked. What is FBA and how are they different from Shipwire?

That's an anecdotal example. Amazon is different in that Bezos has enough room to dial back reinvestment and generate more cash or turn up reinvestment to reduce apparent profit.

Profit doesn't just magically appear, costs and pricing have to eventually face reality. Sooner, the better.

Spending more money does not necessarily make a business any better. That's like these noob business people that buy stock before they sell any of it... An example of a horrible waste of cash.

Without profit, it's not a business, it's an idea-guy dream.

For someone ignorant of physical product businesses, can someone please explain how this is better or different that existing logistics vendors?

Yeah, it's closer to a necessity product but not usually an impulse buy (unless say if a woman were pregnant). This makes it less necessary to have it delivered within X minutes.

I like that. That's clever.

150 tiny orders is like cutting down a forest with a herring. Catering events is where the real cash is at. Large universities like Stanford operate like cities with 100s of autonomous departments free to choose whichever vendor/s they like.