brucephillips

Even if the IP allegation is illegitimate, how is such a lawsuit an instance of masculine posturing?

> But to get there we have to train ourselves to see all these "maladies," as you say.

I agree with this, but your initial comment is creating gendered maladies that don't exist. How is an IP lawsuit a gendered issue?

If you view an IP lawsuit as masculine posturing, you should check your blind spots.

Zimride predated Uber. Lyft predated UberX.

Interesting. I suppose that's not too surprising, though. As a man, my biggest gripe with tinder is how much work it is.

Maybe by market share, but Tinder predated Bumble, whereas Lyft predated Uber.

I'm failing to see how your comment is any less cynical than the comment above.

If one wants to start a new social network, open source or not, or any other product dependent on network effects, they have to market it appropriately. You have to segment the market, and work your way out. The open competitors up until now haven't realized that.

I'm a bumble user. They sent this post as an email to their user base. I don't understand what they're trying to accomplish by airing their dirty laundry publicly. Users don't care if you're in an IP battle.

Also, I could have done without the sexist implication that bullying is a masculine characteristic.

Ah, then "low end" is the more appropriate descriptor.

Did you mean to reply to someone else? You didn't address what I said.

WaPo bundles authorship and curation, which is exactly the problem I'm describing. The problem isn't cost, it's incompleteness.

Popular curation is awful, you're right. But it remains unfortunate that old media still bundles their curation and authoring services. I'd like to see expert curation applied to the entirety of news articles.

What do you mean "useful"? Every viable product is useful for something. That doesn't narrow it down.

For how many of your daily searches would you prefer to use voice? Voice has much higher latency and lower bandwidth than text/vision.

Ideally you'll work with early users who are just one or two degrees removed from yourself, so they'll feel social pressure not to ghost you.

The biggest advice I'd add is to talk to users before buidling your MVP. You can potentially save yourself a lot of work.

Also, there's a ton of details in how to identify risks and validate assumptions. Four Steps to the Epiphany is a good tactical book on how to do this.

Yes, Michael Seibel, please read up on the history of Twitch.

If you're going to complain, offer a solution. What should be illegal? Patents? Transferring patents?

Shkreli did not increase epipen prices.

> Cornering a drug and hiking the price simply for profit and no other legitimate reason (supply chain issue, newer/more effective version, etc...) should be illegal.

This is how all patents work. Are you against patents?

AFAIK, only the insurance companies paid his exorbitant prices.

Nowhere in that article does it describe an actual crime that went unprosecuted.

Shkreli broke the law. The financiers causing the financial collapse did not. Perhaps the laws should be changed.

It also contradicts PG's advice that startups should hill climb.

Interesting. What's an example of deep interoperability you'd to see that isn't currently available?

SaaS products interoperate through APIs.

Blackmail, economic exploitation, political repercussions including imprisonment are all real consequences of surveillence.

TLDR: Obama is responsible for the housing bubble.

Which is absurd.

The ability for third parties to sniff your traffic is a big problem.

I don't see how desirable unit economics refutes GP's claim that the initial market was lamp oil.

As much as I disagree with his thesis here, the entire point of it is that YC wants to and does fund toy companies. So they're trying to solve the exact problem you're railing against.