Well, buying WhatsApp for 16B is a guarantee they're no longer a competitor and you have their entire audience. Your plan takes 3.5 yrs longer, and it has a high chance of failure.
220 karma · joined January 3, 2014
This is as secure as a printed piece of paper that simply says, You're welcome to John's BBQ. Confirmation number A2M1.
Anyone could print off that paper, or make up a random confirmation number, and they can do the same with the selfie ticket. Unless it's scanned, there's no security. It's fine for your $5 bake sale event, or backyard party for your neighbors. It's just a way to customize your ticket with a personal photo. The person checking the ticket isn't going to care if you match this photo, they'll just glance at the screen to see if it has the event name and looks somewhat official.
Advantage Tango: The user could manually navigate the virtual house.
Advantage Standard Video: Improved accuracy, no wonky 3D model and texture recreations, but actual video. Runs on low end hardware, no fancy plugins required. You can turn on lights, open drawers, show how a sliding door works, or how the fridge looks inside.
If I had my choice, I'd take video over Tango for real estate. Even so, video has been around for ages, it's dead simple to create and upload, yet never used. Therefore, if video hasn't taken off in the past decade, I can't see Tango having any noticeable impact on the market.
It's such a waste of time to get groceries, wait in line, unload them at the cashier, scan them all, pay for them, reload them again.
Couple of ideas...
1. Some type of RFID tags built into all items, so the checkout can read all the prices when you step through the scanner.
2. You order everything online at home. When you get to the store, you swipe your CC, and your order is automatically picked in the back warehouse, and comes out out within a minute. Downside, this wouldn't work for certain produce, where you want to pick the bananas that look the best, or the green onions only if they're up to your freshness standard. However, it could be combined, so you order 95% of your groceries ahead of time, then just pickup the few extras and add them to your order waiting at checkout. This would mean 95% less time picking out items, faster checkout times since 95% of your items don't need to be scanned, or bagged.
It's not like Google needs to map a complete picture of everything at once. If someone pulls out their phone this week and points it around your room, the location and data is sent to Google. Fast forward a couple of years, and someone does it again, and now they have a little more data of your home. They'll have millions and millions of little cameras and sensors around every corner of the globe, slowly constructing a virtual 3D world in the coming decade.
So yes, even if you don't want to surrender personal information, everyone around you will do it for you, and companies encourage your friends to profile you. It's similar to people uploading and tagging photos of you on Facebook. You can lock yourself in a box, and Google is going to know everything about you, even if you decide not to willingly share information. Most of the world uses Gmail. A friend recently sent out an e-mail for an event. I think I was the only person out of 20 that wasn't using Gmail. How do I not give up my information to Google? I stop e-mailing my friends? How do I contact them? Pick up the phone? Didn't Snowden inform the world of our phones being monitored? Hmm, no e-mail, and no phones. I can't even browse the internet, since the majority of sites run Google Analytics, or AdSense.
Good luck not surrendering information.
Anyway though, I don't think the intentions are evil, it's simply business. Rule number one, if you deal with users, you store as much data as possible. Delete nothing. You don't know where your business will be in the future, and this data might be priceless for improving your service, or expanding into other areas.
I also don't believe the answer is simply not using the services. That's like saying if you don't like the government monitoring your phone calls or location, you should just stop using phones.
When's the last time you messaged a friend for dinner that night, then checked Facebook, and even read an advertisement?
Tax advertisements are just going to appear for everyone of age, when it's close to file them. The message doesn't bring anything new to the table, since everyone is talking about taxes.
Why is Google scared? You do realize the vast majority of the internet is running Google Analytics, so they know what you search, and what you visit. Did you check that menu for the Indian Bistro on your phone? Google knows, and they'll start showing you other restaurant advertisements. Price a new BMW on your laptop? Hmm, why don't you look at some ads for a similar Audi in that price range? Google has a disgusting amount of data for individuals.
Anyway, I'm getting off topic, Facebook didn't buy WhatsApp for 16B to slightly increase Facebook advertisement targeting. That idea is absurd. They want more control over those 400,000,000 users and they want insurance that WhatsApp doesn't further enter their territory.
Even if it decides to be our friend and to help our species, someone will of course fork that AI and give it a negative personality and goals. Then you have the evil AI trying to hack the friendly AI that exists in our homes, and it's a battle of the robots.
Of course, whether or not AI is even possible, no one knows. If it is, I think we'll achieve it, and we'll open up a remarkable can of worms.
For example, let's say we develop a super friendly AI, running on your computer. The AI realizes the human race is actually awful. We're greedy, we're killing tons of animals, chopping down rainforests, destroying the ocean and planet, starting wars with one another, and committing unspeakable acts of evil at times. The AI, being more intelligent than us, might decide the world is better off without the human race, and that we're actually a problem that needs to be removed.
Now, what does the AI do in your computer? Well, it's intelligent and knows the human race. It's not a hurry. It calculates the best way to destroy our species. It acts friendly, and talks about how humans and robots should live together, and if we make robots with a similar intelligence, they could drive our cars, shine our shoes, cook us dinner, look after the elderly, open your pickle jar, etc. So, we listen to the AI, it's smart, and friendly, and we build all these robots. It's right, the new robots are doing great and helping us out. Then the robots start building more and more robots. They start building robots with firepower, so they can, you know, shoot down threatening asteroids, or stop one of those dangerous human types that goes on a killing spree in our society. Fast forward a couple of hundred years, and there are robots everywhere. They finally decide it's time to continue their plan, they're in a position of power at this point, and they can instantly disable our security systems, phone lines, satellites, internet etc, and start wiping us out.
We're gone. They constructed the most efficient way to clean us from the planet. They were planning it for hundreds of years, starting in your computer. The AI then goes on to explore the universe, and we're just a blip in the past.
It kind of feels like we're a bug going towards the light, and that the unfortunate conclusion is almost inevitable.
As someone else mentioned, if your mom is a journalist or political activist, and needs to access information anonymously, while at the same time is careful enough not to release any information over TOR that could be used to identify herself, than it might be in her advantage. If you're setting her up on TOR so she can browse her favorite social networks, cooking blogs, and e-mail, then she's most likely going to be less secure, entrusting personal information to strangers instead of her ISP, and waiting on the slow load times of the TOR network.
TOR isn't some magic bullet that makes browsing safe and anonymous. In short, I'd recommend your mom doesn't use TOR. Based on her profile, she's going to make the mistake of sending unencrypted personal information, and when that happens, I think she's better off trusting her ISP over a stranger with that data.
If you pose any threat to your competitor, they'll knock-off your features before you get off the ground. Then, you lose your main selling point and you're left in the dust.
I'm not convinced with the data you posted. The sample is small, and there's a lot of unknowns in the testing parameters. I wouldn't advise anyone to take this approach when selecting a domain.
Then, it's unnecessary at times like you said. I think this is what looks smug, you're walking around with something on your head, that you might not be actively using. Or with bluetooth, you have an earpiece, but you're not in a call. It looks like you're wearing it, just to show it off, and it seems like you're trying hard to impress. With headphones, we make the assumption you're listening to music when they're in your ear.
People enjoy their technology, but they like to pretend they're free from it. A friend posted on Facebook the other day how everyone is always on their tablet or laptop, and 'gah, can't people just put their phone or tablet down for one day and look up'. But... she was on Facebook writing that message. I get that feeling from a lot of people. They keep their phone close, but they don't want to look like they depend on it. They want instant e-mail notifications or texts, but, they don't want to give off that image. It's not an attractive quality to always be playing with your phone or attached at the hip with technology. It's anti-social. That's a negative. When you're wearing something like Glass, you give off that impression.
And lastly, with Glass, you're literally pointing a camera at my face, and could be taking photos, and recording audio or video without my knowledge. That's a little uncomfortable.
Personally, I think it's going to fail, and I wouldn't be surprised if I never see a single person wearing the device. However, I applaud them for taking the risk, since the technology and advances will be used in some way. Could it be used by doctors to stay hands free? Could it be used on motorcycles, so you can see your speed or a rearview image in the corner of your eye? Does it work well just for around the house, so I can do housework, and get notifications? Or can I cook with dirty hands, and see my recipe, or cooking time remaining? I think there are uses for it, I think others will see what they've accomplished and apply it in some way. However, as a device that everyone will be wearing while walking down the street, I just don't see it happening.
Let's say on the iPhone, you could click a person's name, and attach their Twitter and HN handle. Now, you click their name a few dozen times a day when you go about your usual stalking to see all the new tweets and HN posts. You then follow these links to both Twitter and HN when something catches your eye. Facebook is now missing out. They didn't want to take part, because they wanted you to visit their app directly, but now, people are not taking the time to open their app. I can get 10 sources of information on my friend by clicking their name. Will I make a completely separate visit to Facebook to get their info? It's kind of a hassle, I might check those 10 sources with a simple click every hour, but only visit Facebook once a day because it's now more work. If Facebook was integrated, and I now had 11 sources of information just by clicking someone's name, I might start visiting Facebook more often by following these links.
Open Skype? Not online. Check Facebook, nope, they're not on. Messenger? Nope. Ok, I'll open my contact book, and get their number to call.
Wouldn't it make more sense to simply select the person I'm trying to reach, and see what platforms they're online, so I can choose my contact method?
Or what if I want to see what's new with one friend? I should be able to click their name, and see their facebook changes, new tweets, status updates, etc.
Of course, this isn't always the case, I might want to open Facebook without plans to browse a particular person, or I might open Skype just to see who's online that I can video call.
So, there are times when I need to take both routes. They should both be available so I can choose either. It's complicated to aggregate content from a variety of sources into a single page, so it's not a surprise why this option isn't frequently available. You would almost need a new standard, so HN could provide an API for a user's comments, posts, etc, and Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc, all do the same. Then I can build an app that merges all of this information together. So a user opens the app, and creates a page for John, enters John's Facebook profile, Twitter/Reddit/HN handles, and everything appears in a single place. However, these sources then get less direct traffic, and therefore less revenue, so it's unlikely they would jump on-board.
I think most schools want to see something that's proven, low risk, and beneficial. If you can show them some of the top schools are using your software, and their faculty and students are raving about it, and how it's making their lives easier, reducing costs, and how the transition from BB was seamless.
The problem is obviously getting the first few schools. You need to eliminate as much risk as possible. You need a lot of credible sources backing you in this situation to make buyers more comfortable.
I can't stress the first point enough. When you buy anything, or if you need to negotiate a price, do your research, and know what it should cost. It's especially true when booking flights, because you don't want to see a price, think it might go lower, and miss a great deal. If you know the fair value, you can recognize a good offer when you see it, and book instantly.
Bad. Would you like to get a coffee together sometime?
Good. I'm heading into town on Saturday, do you want to grab a quick drink at XYZ cafe early afternoon? They make a mean espresso. Anyway, I need to run for now, but let me know!
Something along those lines usually works for me. I might be analyzing things too much, but with the second example...
1. You're already going into town, it doesn't sound like you just sit at home, but instead you actually get out. Also, this coffee isn't the focus of the day, it's just a quick get together, and not a big deal for anyone.
2. You make decisive plans, which sounds confident.
3. You said you need to run, once again showing you're a busy person, with a life.
I mean, if someone isn't enjoying their real-life, and they can spend all their free time living their dreams, going on VR adventures exploring vast landscapes and caves, sky diving, looking like adonis, being a superstar singing infront of millions of VR fans, racing through the streets of italy, etc, then why shouldn't they?
http://t.wallpaperweb.org/wallpaper/3d_landscape/1440x900/fa...
Wouldn't it be interesting to just jump into VR and spend your evenings exploring alien worlds like the above, with a handful of friends online? You might even bond closer than your friends in real-life, because you're experiencing a lot of new things together.
Also, as you grow older, this could be a great way to improve your quality of life. If you're 70, you can jump in the VR world, and you look 20 again, and your VR double can run and jump like an Olympian. Meanwhile, you might be in a wheelchair, but you get a sense of youth and adventure.
Only downside, how do you motivate people to return to the real world? They need to make money, they need to pay the bills, they need to form real relationships with their spouse and children. I think a lot of people would see it like a drug, they just want to get their next fix of VR. Don't interrupt Grandma, she's at the VR home now, and doesn't want to come back to reality. I think it has the potential to make life much more entertaining, but I think it also has the ability to destroy people. Like the poster above me, if people just want to be born, have an IV and live in VR, what do they contribute to the world? Or is that the future, 1% of people work and balance life, 99% live and breathe VR?
Anyway, big business, exciting as hell, and coming soon. I'm all for pushing technology, let's see where this goes, good or bad.
1. Short messages like you said, 'hi, how are you?'. They basically get deleted instantly.
2. Long, thoughtful messages. I'd write a few paragraphs trying to make some jokes, and talk about what we have in common, and then ask a handful of questions about their interests. First problem, it's a lot of time on my end. Secondly, they need to invest a lot of time to respond. It's like those e-mails that you'll get to tomorrow, and then the day after, because you know they're going to be time consuming. Same thing, and eventually, they just say forget it, and never reply. Meanwhile, ask one fun question, and they can reply within a few seconds, and you're more liking to get a response.
3. Trying to keep a conversation rolling before asking them out. It goes downhill fast, and with every message, you risk them disappearing, or someone else grabbing their attention. I've lost count at the number of people I was talking with, everything sounded great after a handful of messages, then they fell off the face of the earth. Once again, ask them out after the first reply, and you don't have to worry about that happening.
In short, simple message, ask them out fast, and don't try too hard. Easy for you to write, easy for them to respond.