I changed my opinion on Color after seeing this Interview with Bill Nguyen | Hacker News Reader

I changed my opinion on Color after seeing this Interview with Bill Nguyen

arnorhs.com

34 pointsarnorhs25 comments

There is a really simple solution to the problem that color tries to solve: Put your phone away, go to the group of people you want to interact with and say Hello. This is something that can be practiced and improved over time. You might feel like an idiot for the first 5 times or 10 times. Or even 50 times. Who cares? I can go up to anyone and talk to them, so can you. It's a matter of practice.

Hiding behind a stupid app that lets you see pictures of the people around you doesn't solve the problem of social interaction in any way, because you are still separated from them until you walk up and say Hi. What the app really does is make you complacent in your comfort zone.

It's kind of funny that the author talks about proximity, since proximity truly benefits the most of having real people around you and interacting with them in the good old fashioned way. Talking to the guys, flirting a bit with the ladies. There is really no need for an additional layer of abstraction (like the Color app).

I think they're trying to enable "introverts," give them confidence and an icebreaker to approach people around them. Your solution, "put away your phone" is easier said than done, especially for introverts. Personally I hate being glued to my phone in public as many people are, because it reminds me of how far apart people are by using their phone as a crutch to not interact.

Its hard to predict how color might affect an outdoor street atmosphere, but their goals are admirable.

I believe that this the biggest fallacy about Color. The only way to enable introverts to get up to people and talk to them is by practice and overcoming the fear of rejection. I didn't say that "put away your phone" is easy for introverts, I just said that "keeping your phone" doesn't make it any better. How do you think could a photo app give them confidence or an icebreaker? First impression is mostly body language and walking up to someone with confidence can only be trained, but not "hacked" with an app.

Are you an introvert? I'm pretty introverted, I have a good deal of social anxiety, but not quite agoraphobia. I think one of the scariest thing about trying to talk to someone you've never met is not knowing anything about them. I can't just go up to someone and say "Hey, how 'bout them giants" unless I know they are a Giants fan.

Color provides this weird insight into people's lives you wouldn't normally get. It's what I absolutely loved about facebook in 2005, I made some awesome friends that way, who often happened to be introverts, and eventually people got up tight about it and locked stuff down.

Introvert and social recluse are not the same thing.

I'm an extrovert (happy speaking publicly, I think out loud and so on) but not by nature particularly sociable. At least one good friend is the opposite.

Introversion / extroversion is a way of interacting and thinking, not a measure of desire to interact with people socially.

You are correct that being introverted and a social recluse are not the same thing.

Extroversion is the characteristic of being outgoing and comfortable in social interactions. It has nothing to do with speaking publicly which is more about controlling performance anxiety, many actors and other performers are introverted in private life.

People who self declare to be "not by nature particularly sociable" may be introverts, some of them may be social recluses, what they aren't is extrovert.

I agree with the speaking in public, that's a bad example.

But in terms of people who self declare themselves "not by nature particularly sociable" not being extroverted, I disagree and offer myself up as an example.

I am an extrovert. Psychological testing confirms this (and I'm a strong extrovert, not just marginal and this has been tested more than once) and no-one who has ever met me or worked with me would suggest anything else.

But I am also not by nature particularly sociable. I am an only child and by default prefer my own company (or that of a small number of close, established friends). I could happily spend days on end alone and often turn down the chance to go out because I don't particularly like the experience.

Extroversion is a way of thinking. While it may correlate with sociability, being an extrovert and being anti-sociable are in no way mutually exclusive.

tangent... the point is, he's trying to enable people to converse and interact in person in a public setting.

You're confusing introversion with shyness. An introvert looks in at themselves and isn't looking for a way to meet others. That's what makes them an introvert. Someone that's shy however may want to meet or interact with others but cannot overcome their shyness.

If Color does indeed help true introverts catalog the humans around them then it's actually pretty creepy.

I actually like the concept of color, but they really fucked up the launch. I don't see the use case as you describe.

Imagine being at a baseball game and in between innings you can pull up pics from all over the stadium.

Or you're a high schooler in a suburban town bored on a friday night and you can see pics of what your class mates are doing all over town.

The 150 ft range is stupid...it should automatically adjust to cover an area of interest whether that's a sporting event, party, apartment building or small town.

The reason Color got funded isn't because it will let people share photos with nearby people. It's because anyone who installs it will have authorized Color to do personal data collection on a massive scale. The photo sharing bit is little more than a pretext to get them to install it.

Did you listen to the interview? The CEO explicitly said that they collect no personal data, and that the only data transferred to their servers is photographs, their locations and the iPhone ID - of which they have no way of tying back to an actual person.

The reason Color got funded is because, as the founder explains, this is a new kind of social graph and could easily become as huge as Facebook.

Photos, locations and iPhone ID seem pretty personal to me.

The interesting point is, end users don't give a damn for "social graphs". They just want to be able to connect to their friends, and maybe a friend of a friend in the very odd edge case.

The only people who get excited about social graphs those who see it as a data mine.

I bet they care even less about privacy

AFAIK in Japan there are gadgets similar to color in concept, that will bip if someone nearby has set its gadget in the same way (preferred color and such). So the concept isn't new after all.

If you have ever worked with GPS you would know that it is terrible in near-field applications. for eg. you can't pin a user to an exact location, let alone which floor of a building they are on. Color's attempt to solve this problem by using bluetooth, image recognition, the microphone etc. is very important.

That alone could be a killer application.

Thinking back at the Color launch, I don't know what they could have done different. They had a lot of coverage, but the lead story was criticism over the amount of money raised.

This leads me to think that the startup and tech audience today is a lot more pessimistic when fundraising is involved. Only a few years ago raising $41M from Sequoia would get a lot of positive attention. It would be something that every entrepreneur would loved to shout from the rooftops. The lead story would be 'there must be something interesting here' as opposed to 'wtf are they smoking'.

The attitude may have changed because of the financial crisis, or general pessimism, or because the audience is expecting every startup now to be bootstrapped and funded with $10k.

Color did find themselves in a tough situation with a reaction that they likely didn't foresee. I wish some of the initial coverage was in-depth and analytical as some of the follow-up coverage has been. The entire point of pre-briefing and embargo's is supposed to be to avoid the rash quick judgement.

Yes, Color's technology is impressive. Especially if it can detect which floor you're on etc..

I'm betting they have some hidden tech or application or some sort of insight which causes the valuation. It's also very possible that Sequoia just really wanted to get into the space and just needed a team to team up with and make something epic.

Time will tell

Most of the time when I would use such an app the people locally around me are not connected to me in any way - like in a bar or a cafe.

Will a social recluse build the next social network? It seems a bit counter intuitive, but then it's supposed to have worked for Mark Zuckerberg. Certainly a lot of people would appreciate networking without investing any work. No more "become my friend" button - just stand next to somebody and kaboom, you have a new friend.

Will a social recluse build the next social network?

Quite possibly, if only to mop up the "long tail" left by Facebook.

I think the average person just flipped at the moment they saw the big 42 beside a new software they have never seen. I'm pretty sure if we would have seen the Color app and idea by its own, we would have taken much more time to investigate the story and potencial of the app rather than the reason of funding.

May be i am wrong. But I think that pr funding news will kill early adopters. Gmail, facebook, twitter early adopters in the most active parts are geeks. Geeks love cool and new ideas. But when you know that millions are put on the stake, that will encourage not to use their product. For tech audience stakes are high and i cannot imagine pressure in colors ofise:) Everyone will expect kind of "magic". The first product iteration is not enough polished to justify prelaunch money. After seeing interview it's clear that they didn't have communication strategy and all information storm got them off guard. There is another problem with this big funding -the message clearly is we are sure you wil love it because we are betting big. Bad pr move guys, for company to succeed, and to get followers you must have mantra for your selves and clear public message like no evil company in case of google. Perception is reality. Now the message reads: color.com(domain name for 350 000 usd) have 42 millions on their hands to change the world by making something useful (social app) and to have profit by selling data to third parties. Guess what, if facebook was communicated in public eye like color.com, they will be dead long ago.

I'll be honest: my experience with Color on my iPhone still sucks mightily, but Mr. Nguyen is a terribly articulate, charismatic and obviously intelligent individual, and the interview embedded on that page has really left me a lot more inclined to check back and see how they're doing as Color iterates.

I've said before that the bad PR is by no means a death knell for Color.

After watching this interview, I'm firmly convinced that they're going to find some way to make it work, or find that one little piece of the app that people latch on to and build that out. One of the things Bill said got me really excited, and that was the idea of being able to walk into a room and see something like "you might like to talk to Jason because you both work in the technology field, here's his LinkedIn profile".

$41 million gets you a lot of leeway to experiment and make it work.

Calacanis is right, the launch was a huge success. If you can't cause mass enthusiasm, the next best thing is mass controversy. Now everyone is falling over themselves trying to figure out what Color is all about. Whatever they do, they'll have no trouble getting noticed.

I changed my opinion on Color after realizing that saying as much in a blog post would get me a ton of page views.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com