1,614 karma · joined August 25, 2010
I think you're right that it's a model that would work well - if I could raise the money to code it I'd happily make it open source after that (running costs means it'd have to cost something to use on someone's server).
Perhaps the reason some HNers are Rails-phobic is that Rails is rightly designed to be precisely the opposite of tool you want for hacks: convention over configuration, config opaquely doing as much as possible for you, and development being as far as possible snapping together canonical bricks (Devise, WillPaginate et al).
If it didn't get in your way for hacks with very different requirements to the apps Rails was designed for, it wouldn't be doing its job. Right tool for the job, as ever!
That said, the line "we could eat meat ... (albeit much less) with a clean conscience" is a little glib, surely most people know that the ethics of killing things just to eat them is at least an open question for reasons beyond environmentalism?
First it's the same old 'users first, monetize later', a distinct problem from monetization strategy: it's a failed mindset where every day you're not charging people is a day you're not learning what you can actually get people to pay for, that is, what constitutes your business.
Secondly he doesn't event start addressing the hard problems of Q&A sites:
1) How to keep the quality of answers high. As soon as more people get on the site, the quality will drop unless there is a smart mechanic to prevent it. All he has is assertion that 'You’re answering questions because ...' as if he knew the answer to that question for the next 100k users who aren't early adopters!
2) How to monetize a Q&A site in the face of approaching commoditization, on a scale that warrants investment. Ads? Really?
A business epic...
The most important skill to take from HE is the ability and desire to continue to learn: the only skill that'll never be obsolete (I'd better keep telling myself that, since I'm a history graduate :) ).
If you don't have any cash, you can't have employees :) Find some co-founders!
If you're not sure you've built an inspiring, learning environment where everybody feels driven to do their best, are you sure a) it's them, not you? b) anyone you'll hire will do any better?
The way you've worded it though, it sounds like they are a bit rubbish. Maybe it's the kindest thing, it's painful all round if they're trying and failing.
But I'd agree that BNW has more to teach us about today - lots of us are losing/have lost the ability to think much beyond our next pleasurable experience.
http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/2PAuup/www.recombinantrecords....
Recently each of Alain de Botton's books (Status Anxiety, Pleasures and Sorrows of Work and Essays on Love) had a valuable lesson to teach.
Alexander Pope's 'Essay on Criticism' (poem, not a book) was one the first poems that I gleaned something from, and that opened up a whole new library of potential reads.
Too easy to hire someone because they're likeable, and/or be taken in by past experience, and then realise the horrible truth: they're awful at their job!