justinbeaver

The chart at the bottom is the most interesting part of this blog post.

Rap Genius has raised $15M from a group of premier investors including Andreesen Horowitz and yet their comps (according to Rap Genius, themselves!) are a bunch of black hat, spammy link farms containing music lyrics.

When it comes to ISOs, are there any tricks/loopholes to avoid the cash commitment required for early exercise but also somehow become qualified for long term capital gain tax treatment at the time of liquidation? I understand that is having one's cake and eating it too, but figured worth asking. Thank you.

In fairness to Crazy Eddie, they're prices were INSANE!

Pretty sure data scraping is their pivot, as articulated in this article.

Not only are these Mattermark posts becoming quite boring and repetitive, but for the company's sake it's time to move on. Readers of HN aren't going to make a purchase. And if entrepreneurs/hackers are the target market, then it's time to rethink that strategy a bit.

Not exactly. Here's a quote from the article: "The watch is lovely. Truly. Considering that I paid $125 for it - a reasonable price considering its potential - I'm happy with it and would recommend it."

http://www.hanselman.com/blog/SmartWatchesAreFinallyGoingToH...

This comment is terrible. For one, it's purely anecdotal with no evidence to support the statement "NYU is a school for rich kids". Have you really seen the wealth distribution of these individuals? Second, that very same statement is an attacking one, attempting to paint all "rich kids" with one brush as people who like "luxurious four year vacations." Do all "rich kids" not like to work hard? And finally, is there any proof that NYU is really anything like a "luxurious four year vacation?" - at least as it compares to any other university?

Agreed on the growth capital point completely. Was referring specifically to early stage capital in my comment - should have been clearer. Thanks.

Dear dumb entrepreneurs who want to raise VC: bootstrap instead. VC forces you into a 'go big or go home' strategy. There's nothing wrong with going big, but just do it the patient, more sustainable way. And then you never need to worry about the points made in these articles. You just get to sit back and laugh at them while you're owning and running your own business.

P.s. there is a time and place where big time capital is necessary to start but most of those businesses aren't reading HN.

perhaps even worse than privco's non-stop rubbish "research" is the naive reporting on this story without seeking a second source to verify "the facts". would it have pained the writer to at least request the so-called "financial documents"? such is the sad state of affairs in journalism these days (sigh).

The "aww shucks" card isn't going to fly. This is very much a content marketing campaign and HN is the soapbox right now.

All the points regarding why this post is so ridiculous have been thoroughly covered. I'm just pulling back the curtain on your exploitative use of HN as part of your grand marketing plan (in case it wasn't obvious).

This is an advertisement for an eventual product. We may as well be discussing the merits of Ron Popeil's latest blender infomercial. So let's stop voting up every ridiculous article submitted by this blog already and get back to real content.

Having personally attended numerous Bloomberg press conferences in NYC (through his affiliation with the local startup community), let me paint perhaps a more objective picture from which this article arose:

This press conference likely had absolutely nothing to do with the Boston bombing. In fact, yesterday he was busy announcing a new ice skating facility in the Bronx. But using history as a guide, once the Q&A started, the media hounded him for quotes surrounding the Boston situation b/c stories about ice skating rinks are "boring".

And then once the media got a couple quotes that fit their mold, they wove some story around it to meet their biased agenda. Simply strip out Bloomberg's quotes from the article here and see for yourselves: they're not all that incriminating. But read them in the context of the author's story, and whoa, watch out! We're about to lose all of our freedoms.

Look - I get it. Some of the thing Bloomberg have done overstep the boundaries of what some consider reasonable. And having open discussion on this is totally warranted. But reading the comments here you would think those who view NYC from the outside think we live in some totalitarian state. Nothing could be further from the truth, in fact. The city remains largely liberal from a social standpoint (and Bloomberg seems to be no exception). And in terms of diversity - whether it be religion, ethnic background, interests, etc. - you're simply not going to find a better melting pot.

So everybody please stop panicking for us - we're doing just fine. This is just some underpaid journo looking for a scoop and it seems she got more than a few clicks today courtesy of the alarmist HN crowd, so kudos to her. Now back to work.

It appears that the company behind this study is running a business selling data - that's why.