eroo

Once we start seeing reliable metrics for other common vitals, I'm optimistic we'll see massive benefits from data insights. With a large enough sample size and the right vitals, I'm hopeful we can find highly correlated early predictors of some massive events: e.g., does 20 minutes before a heart attack have a reliable signature?

Is there any boilerplate legalese for open sourcing that kind of data?

Likewise. That was my primary reason for buying the FitBit originally; I was disappointed at how inaccurate it was, even with the tempered expectation of knowing it was just a 3-axis accelerometer. That being said, FitBit et al. do seem to be making headway on getting people to buy into a device that is always on you, touching your skin. That is a prerequisite for any sleep tracker that didn't seem palatable only a few years ago (e.g. Zeo).

I'm very excited about wearables in the near future, but they are currently a curious case of public attention outpacing the technology. "Sleep trackers" are a joke, current pedometers aren't very accurate, and basic things like heart rate and blood pressure monitors are still a ways off from solid implementation.

At least this will have open APIs. I had a fitbit until I found out they don't let you easily get YOUR OWN DATA off the thing. The healthcare insights derived from better wearables, at scale, are going to be huge.

I'd be very curious to know how much of Time Warner's DVD/digital distribution is through Amazon. That's probably the most relevant metric for measuring Amazon's leverage.

Admittedly this is a crude metric, but Amazon's market cap [1] is about 3x that of Time Warner [2].

[1] https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AAMZN&ei=wWeYU_CtKs... [2] https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3ATWX&ei=sWeYU_CkLcea6...

Interesting Amazon has started more aggressive pricing tactics with digital/published media providers. They must be pretty confident that they have the distribution share to squeeze them.

Since their acting in a way beneficial to the end customer (i.e., by reducing prices), they're in a good position to avoid antitrust allegations.

If you wouldn't mind providing some insight, I'm curious what your approach is to verifying a hire is w.r.t. collecting commission?

Seems intuitive, though interesting to see some actual data. I'd love to know how much the author's "real followers" increased after the artificial boost.

This reminds my of Gary Becker's paper[1] which notes "demand by a typical consumer is positively related to quantities demanded by other consumers" as an explanation of why restaurants don't raise prices when demand is higher than supply (e.g, maintaining inertia for a 'hot' restaurant). In this context, it would appear the more popular someone appears, if only superficially, the more popular he is likely to become.

[1] http://www.unc.edu/~fbaum/teaching/PLSC541_Fall06/Becker%20J...

Without additional context of what you're trying to build: talk face-to-face with people and stand over their shoulder as you walk them through the signup/first use process.

Though neither sufficient nor strictly necessary, willingness to pound pavement for your first users appears be highly correlated with traction. It's the quickest way to find out how people will actually play with your product.