jmm

Yeah, I can't say I feel all that sorry for this guy. He got his 15 minutes of HN fame, if that's what he was after.

This is a more interesting to me as a Pitchfork copyright/trademark issue: http://pitchforked.com/ (Context here: http://twitter.com/zachklein/status/9188476155 )

I hope the guy doesn't get the smackdown after just building the site, but who knows. (A lawyer knows.)

It may be that DHH's last point (taking money off the table) is the crucial element here. I.e., this could be an easy way for Joel and Jeff to get their second or third homes without destroying their baby and their darling developers at Fog Creek.

Exactly. This is a non issue (non article). Who even cares? I bet a survey of Tweetdeck or Bitly would reveal that 99.something% are actually shortened and not just modified. And you have the option not to shorten URLs in Tweetdeck anyway...

This is a silly back and forth until you can point at the "something" she got from b-school aside from pathway and pedigree. Again, that's what's being discussed. It's certainly possible that the degree got her the job, yet her own natural intelligence, undergrad experience, or professional experience led to her success. And /not/ the b-school curriculum.

Depends what you mean by "something," I suppose. Pedigree and pathway, sure. Knowledge and real training? That's the issue being discussed here.

Eh. Not sure it's "the future" in its current form. While clicking next a few times (read: few hundred) is strangely addicting, a session feels like a bad night at the poker table - empty, wasteful, and morally depraved.

Without filters or some kind of account system it will remain mostly a diversion for bored and lonely youngins and pervs. I think random video chat has a place in the wider world of normal people (e.g., foreign language learning), but not in this form.

"Inevitably" vs. "necessarily" vs. "may no longer/have been" is an important distinction.

The community itself, the nitty gritty of the mechanics, and moderation all play a role in success/failure in respect to the underlying biz goal(s).

Agreed - pretty good implementation.

But I wonder how sales in the higher price range (> $500 or so) are going. Historically, fine art pricing (especially as prices move out of the range of the casual shopper) has been very much tied to the identity of the artist. Am I going to pay $2000 for a painting from an artist that I know next to nothing about? And from a virtual gallery? Probably not.

The brick and mortar gallery model relies on this kind reputation and identity. And even when an artist is unknown, the reputation of the gallery is shared with the artist.

So I guess what I'm saying is that I'm not sure about the consumer fundamentals here. Etsy's pool of sellers is quite different in that prices stay for the most part under a hundred bucks. With lower prices comes higher volume. And Etsy's model ($.20 per listing per four months) exploits that volume. Etsy also takes a percentage of the sale, which Zatista is doing.

Sorry for a little ambivalence.