The amounts would be less impressive to the uninformed, sure. But much more encouraging for everyone about to start.
317 karma · joined October 29, 2009
The amounts would be less impressive to the uninformed, sure. But much more encouraging for everyone about to start.
But I don't embrace the culture of free as much as Tim. If he gets his way, no company would be allowed to profit, everything would be open. Somehow, Google would be the only one to survive in the environment.
Tim is not shocked that Google is giving away for free the GPS software and therefore killing the GPS device makers. It would be anti-dumping if software had a fixed cost, but it doesn't...
Where is the fine-line between playing dirty and being a great contributor to free technologies? Think of it this way: if Microsoft had done the same 10 years ago, they would have immediately been sued for abuse of monopolistic position.
The thought-provoking part of the article is what Tim leaves out. What does an open world look like? Can the world be 100% open, or will there always be large companies fighting to control it? To me, it sounds a little bit utopian to hope or assume that 100% open is possible.
I'm not able to use Google Docs as a replacement for Word and Powerpoint yet when I'm doing precise positioning of elements. I'd like to use Google Docs, but it's just too limited for my needs.
And how many ads did I click on when I was reading the paper version of a newspaper or magazine?
[One of] The great downfall of newspapers is that now each action can be precisely measured. We know exactly what our instant return on investment is.
I was one who looked at our company's advertising budget, looked at the return (number of clicks), and said to cut it in half because we could put that money to better use somewhere else.
I know the pain because I had many meetings with editors and people selling ad space in magazines who were desperate to get our advertising budget, to the point where the editor would offer to let us guest write articles...
And then a good reason why I stopped reading those magazines in the first place is the poor quality of the articles. No wonder, if they are just repeats of press releases, I don't need to read that.
Yes and no. 10 years ago, at best I'd buy and read one newspaper per day.
Now I probably visit 10 newspapers' websites per day to read various news.
While physical circulation is down, overall exposure may not be.
It has worked before (can't find a link right now).
Actually, a bunch of sites do this for twitter specifically, but extending it with a bunch of categories, so that it would show that I'm famous in the bay area, less so in the midwest, and popular among geeks. That could be fun. (must have been done before though?)
Isn't that everyone's dream job? Director of innovation... looking at the stars... love it.
Sure, a good GPA is good. But if you back it up with experience, you are ahead.
Really? Isn't that story slightly embellished by the founder? As an investor, I'd be concerned that this guy is taking me for a ride, especially after I read this:
Well unfortunately he doesn't know Cocoa - but that doesn't stop him. He sends an email to the firm who advertised for a bid to code an iPhone app -- then goes ahead and mis-represents to them that he is an iPhone Cocoa whiz
Especially, the "ask an immigration lawyer" live chat was super-popular. Everyone wants to ask a quick question to a lawyer without paying the fee or entering into a long-term commitment.
While your message is quite tongue-in-cheek, there is some truth to it and I wanted to follow-up on this comment.
From anecdotal experience, it seems that YC favors a team of technical founders. Whereas in a blog post today on VentureHacks, the authors recommend the tech/business pair.
So which is better? Two techies, or a slick biz plus a techie?
Did that for boxes of Cheerios when we were out of the "approved" brand and it worked wonders.
- asynchronously (wiki or other technology), update everyone before the meeting
- synchronously (meaning face-to-face, the actual meeting), you are not allowed to say something that you didn't write down on the wiki, unless it's a question.
Consequence: the catching up of information is done asynchronously before the meeting, not wasting anyone's time, freeing up the meeting for actual brainstorming and problem-resolution.
I guess the survey (show of hands) was the right approach to immediately know what to do. What if you had had about half and half? What would you have done then?
It helps that the same happened in my previous startup. When we were very small, I think we did a couple of great things. Some of those could be used in a business book as examples a smart company.
But a few years later, and 5X more employees, we were quite messed up. Whatever wisdom we had as a small team didn't carry over to the larger organization (I guess you could use this example in reverse in another business book :-)
Why are you convinced that you are better than newer users, to the point that all new users should be forbidden? It sounds a little harsh. You could impose some new thresholds so that people's votes and comments only start mattering once they have some amount of reputation. That should help get rid of the obvious trolls.
But please, not extreme measures.
Because leading with an example is more powerful than a vague statement. The average reader will understand better a story like "John at Ford faced the challenge of flat tires and did ..." than some abstract problem description.
It looks like I wasn't the only one to be offended by the 17 pages of post-purchase maze when ordering business cards on vistaprint. Those pages really hide the one "next" button and do everything in their power to make you accidentaly click on a myriad of junk offers.
Looks like Mike Arrington's crusade is gaining some friends and the US senate is getting involved. I'm curious to know if there is a link. Does a tech blogger have such influence? It looks like the senate stuff is based on older investigation. Nonetheless, it's scammers' season and it's good for us.
But once in a while, you need serious face-to-face brainstorming. That's where your coffee shop probably saves you. No one has designed a tool yet that allows several people to really have a brainstorming session remotely (hint for a future YC startup: if you have a solution to this problem, go for it).