During economic instability, the public sector is always the safest place to be. Plus government opportunities tend to grow during recessions while businesses shrink to weather the storm.
140 karma · joined June 9, 2009
IMHO, KISS is part of why Craigslist has been so successful.
I would assume that they (those who charge) fund at the same rate as other Angels, which basically makes the claim of "filtering quality" bogus.
"Supposedly there is no proof that PG is a cold blooded killer but there are no facts to prove otherwise."
Most of that article was stretched assumption & hyperbole, at best.
The only shady thing in all of this is that site forces a pop-up.
It's refreshing to see this communal response to the closing of a startup rather than the typical icy headlines with droves of disconnected commentary...
Just seems odd that the author complains about not being able to find a job, yet takes zero responsibility for his situation.
When I graduated college (into a shitty job market) many job offers were delayed, rescinded, or simply unavailable - I don't remember blaming everyone else.
Would you argue he's just "blogging" so fact-based reporting is optional?
Dvorak was pushing the limits of responsible journalism (similar to TechCrunch at times).
We agree on one thing: his credibility is taking a huge hit, rightfully so.
I guarantee a significant percentage of the US population will take this headline as fact, despite all efforts to refute it in the future.
Plus, huge kudos to them for not relying on RIAA as is true with most other online music services.
Figure out what your users value on and off your site. Also, research competitive and complementary sites to get a quick and dirty list of potential options. There could be existing or future features that users would be willing to pay for.
If your site doesn't display ads, carve out space so that you ease them into it. Set their expectations and you're less likely to shock/upset them (sage advice from Reid Hoffman).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect
You do realize your example essentially says that if ~98% of your fb friends left, you would still choose to stay & pay fb $5/mo?
That said, TechCrunch has still chosen to publish many sloppy or sensational articles - essentially thumbing their nose at journalistic integrity. I have trouble viewing TC in a positive light after reading through these:
http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism_ethics_and_standards
@jkincaid most of these HN comments aren't ignorant/ridiculous bashing but are piecing together some constructive feedback for TC:
Be Truthful
Be Accurate
Be Accountable
You could garner more readership and respect...
But quality, unique content is not...
There are many viable solutions that have yet to be tested & they might not resemble "paywalls."
Media outlets need to understand & appropriately segment their customers i.e. people willing to pay for specific products/services.
Regarding who might pay and how much, if content providers can tease out WTP across their viewer base, they are much more likely to build a paid model that could work.
Finally, what's that ubiquitous phrase..."And from viewers like you"? Oh that's right, NPR is kinda free - it's just that without paying viewers it would cease to exist. Strange how that works...
On a side note: The rest of the article about NPR.org was useful to see how a radio oriented news org is moving content online.
...But there are subtle ways to provide incentives for user voting behavior.
For instance, why not attach greater risk/reward to voting?
Incomplete ideas that come to mind: 1)scarcity - finite votes force greater selectivity in voting 2)vote transparency - anonymity permits nastier activity 3)user transparency - highlight ornery vs constructive users
As for doing away with downvotes: Zero is an artificial floor that would simply bundle mediocre comments with comments that are off-topic/spam/in poor taste etc.
...apparently if we look the other way, it'll go away.