ssebro

If this is true, then he (Craig Newmark) really needs to read the innovator's dilemma (http://www.amazon.com/The-Innovators-Dilemma-Revolutionary-B...). TLDR: If you allow yourself to become a prisoner to your success, you're actually making your continued success unlikely. You can solve the dilemma by spinning out a smaller, irreverant version of yourself & giving them what they need to destroy the old company.

In craigslist's case, he could include a link on the old site that allows users to upgrade to a more modern version, and have the modern site basically consume an api/scrape the old CL till it gained momentum.

I agree - at first it was novel and interesting that some companies would give you a puzzle to solve. As I've gotten older, and as my time has increased in value, I'm not as interested in solving a problem just because someone gives it to me. I like to create value, not merely create code.

I'm also an iOS dev, and I also love developing iOS apps, but you have to realize - you are a pawn in their game, where they stand between you and potential income.

After a user has seen the message and navigates to another site, anyone can use the back button to see the unmasked message. I like it though - maybe you can turn it into something that allows you to pass notes to coworkers at work?

I think that part of the idea is that reading a message, replying to a message & all other things that you do with mail can be considered as "tasks".

I think this would actually work better as a quick reference for people who are already coders - sometimes you just need to look stuff up. Target Stack Overflow rather than Stanford.

Ok - so we know there's demand from top-level talent. Who's going to make it into a platform?

AFAIK they didn't do anything illegal, and it wasn't their job to care - it was their job to comply with takedown notices, which it seems like they did.

However, the real reason HN cares about MegaUpload is fear that heavy-handed law enforcement can destroy tech companies. Many of us are here because we have or are interested in having tech companies.

It depends on how and why you watch tv. If I didn't watch tv, I probably wouldn't have gotten into Stanford.

I think a lot of the replies to my post are missing the point: "harm" isn't as obvious as you think it is, and pain can be inflicted by creating demand that must go unfulfilled.

"first world problems" do matter. As someone from a third world country, I have a keen sense of how much is conveyed and how much is learned from "silly" tv shows. You may not notice it yourself, but they define a large part of culture. Understanding that culture is extremely important to success in a variety of fields.

Not true. Please see http://news.ycombinator.org/item?id=3653006

Death and physical injury aren't the only ways someone can be harmed. Trust me - if you're the only kid in highscool without cable who isn't able to talk about that show from last night, you miss opportunities to bond. Those missed bonds are worth quite a lot, since they directly impact your future.

I think it'd be interesting if everyone did this with their failed side projects, at that point when they realize there's no value in continuing down their path. Bravo guys.

it does because I'm fairly sure they aren't deduping at the file level - which means they're doing significant introspection into exactly how different copies of the same file are. This is why dropbox is so fast - they only need to send unique diffs.

I think it's worse that dropbox dedupes files, which means that they(dropbox) already have infrastructure that could seriously combat their use in infringement.

I do wonder how this plays into the whole Swizz Beats is CEO news.

While I agree with the overall idea in principle, I think you'll find that what you've done is to create a startup with infinite (at least until you die/give up) runway.

I think you've covered why it's a good idea, but I wanted to add a warning - having an infinite runway may cripple you. It may take away from your sense of urgency and desperation, which in turn may lower your chances of ever landing a success. This may change the equation so you'd be better off being a normal employee, given your skillset and drive.

Amazon's ability to forgo short-term profits and look towards the long term is their biggest weapon. Very few companies are able to act on threats far enough into the future to fight against Amazon's strategies at a time when defeating those strategies still possible.

I just had a CRAZY session with some random dude. We wound up playing tic-tac-toe together, without saying a word.

edit*-> I guess I'm assuming it was a dude...

It would be awesome if the system gave a rating (read:score) based on how many revisions someone puts into a document, so people have an idea of how hard they worked on it.

Yip - email me too!

I just love how the title of this post implies causation.

And right now, I think we're going through the human revolution, where we use applications to make humans be better, and do better, and everything is centered around the human experience.

That's not exactly true- they are innovating, but they're also a patent troll. There's no reason why they can't be both.

I had a similar terminal groupon experience: I had meal of really, really bad indian food, at a restaurant I would never have tried otherwise and when I mentioned I was going to use a groupon I was told that my bill now included a 15% non-negotiable "service charge". In fact, my bill was taken back and changed so it was clear that the "tip" was compulsory.

Wait a second- is it seriously that hard to get a meeting with a great VC? Maybe I'm disconnected from reality... but VCs chase deals, and are always interested in meeting ppl. I've never found it difficult to get meeting - is that just me?

Google Cached copy:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://...

1. There are obviously more that those three types of Entrepreneurs. Hopefully you weren't making that assertion.

2. I'm a bulldozer, but not because I'm forceful or a bad person. I just see that reality has different levels of rules, and I pay attention to the most important (undeniable, or carrying heavy fines for malfeasance along with a high chance of getting caught) rules. To be clearer:

p(I get caught)*(cost of fine for getting caught) +moralCostOf(thisNaughtyAction)= expected cost of being naughty (taking conscience into consideration).

Some people are willing to pay more to be naughty. Some people overestimate/underestimate the probability of getting caught. Some people have no moral cost for a particular naughty action.

Anyways, there are thresholds that could predict whether or not I'd be naughty, given what I think the expected cost of being naughty is, and how much I'm willing to pay to be naughty in that particular case.

It seems to me that you'd be better served by talking to your actual customers than chasing investors, particularly for $4000. Investors will come to you when they see the money/users.

Why is this free? B/c you're not charging for your product, I'm skeptical that you'll be around long enough for it to make sense to learn how to use your product. Remember you're target is businesses, who are much less price sensitive, and are much more interested in stability. PLEASE CHARGE.