Just a little history on what Dre and Jimmy consider "innovation": http://gizmodo.com/5981823/beat-by-dre-the-inside-story-of-h...
621 karma · joined April 8, 2011
But ultimately, the two main data storage strategies employed were: * Physical redundancy - six copies of everything, mailed out to six physically separate facilities every week. * No archiving "forever" - Archived data was (theoretically) to be restored to contemporary storage technology whenever there was a significant step change in storage technology. At the time, another member of the lab was working on restoring old Voyager data feeds, although I have no awareness of how common this actually was.
Like Uber, BlaBlaCar takes a cut of the fare, but crucially, prevents its drivers from trying to turn this into a job. In each of the countries it operates in, BlaBlaCar uses government guidelines on driving costs to set a cap on the fare. These calculations account for fuel costs, insurance and tax. The rule helps to avoid giving the impression that the app poses a challenge to cab drivers' livelihood.
"Because they don't make a profit, BlaBlaCar drivers aren't classed as professionals," says Nicolas Brusson, the co-founder and chief operating officer at BlaBlaCar. "They don't require special insurance or a special license."
Can somebody (who won't presuppose my motivation or my opinion) answer my question?
In the near future I hope to have limited access to all these books for free, or unlimited access for $9.99 a month, and the ability to easily switch between the two consumption models. That, for me, would be an easy sell. This is pretty much how i consume Hulu - most of the time, I just want to watch recent episodes of the Daily Show and am satisfied with the free tier. And when I want to get after specific content, I bump up to the paid tier for a bit.
I don't understand why "some content is always free" model isn't more popular in the content world. If Netflix offered something like three free movies a month, I would never "cancel" my account. They would get better brand loyalty, better app lock-in, and lower customer churn. Instead, I get annoyed at the always-on subscription model and cycle between subscribed and unsubscribed.
Digitization of content changed distribution patterns, which changed pricing patterns, and the combination of both changed consumption patterns. It feels like there is a feedback loop where now it makes sense for pricing and user management (acquisition, retention) strategies to adapt once again, this time to changes in user behavior and consumption patterns.
If anybody from this project is reading here, are you abel to change that, or can you comment as to the motivations for how things are classified as public vs privileged?
It seems like a great idea...for opening a giant MITM attack vector to anyone who chooses to use it.
"Investors are not in the same business you are"
And if so, why are those entrepreneurs surprised? What are their expectations?
There used to be a world where all things on Twitter and Facebook were published to RSS feeds, drastically lowering the barriers to entry for experimenting with content consumption ideas, or cross-content aggregation, or personalization, etc.
There used to be a world where big, public technology players like Google and Firefox were helping on-board new users, and appeared to be making a long-term commitment to the technology. When Google Reader was a thing, the rate at which non-technical users in my personal network were starting to talk about RSS was astounding. And _everybody_ was thinking about whether or not RSS was a natural fit for their product/idea/platform/drone/toaster.
There was a moment in history where RSS was poised to become as ubiquitous as e-mail. But that opportunity was taken away, because the big tech companies either couldn't or wouldn't innovate on their business models, instead they're focused on the near-zero-sum game of user acquisition and retention.
A similar thing happened in the late 1990s with the major ISPs - AOL/Compuserve/Prodigy/etc actively encouraged you to only communicate in-network, e.g. how their chat clients initially worked. Unfortunately for them (but fortunately for us), their core identity system was based on the already standardized technology of e-mail. And eventually the ability of others to provide better/different experiences via e-mail (Eudora, Hotmail, Gmail, etc) changed how people viewed those networks.
This time around, the big tech companies are much more self-conscious regarding user base degradation, and the risks of having their core user experience compromised by out-of-network innovation. Consumers always lose this game.
They're recognizing that the location browsing/discovery UX is fundamentally different than their social UX, and de-coupling them, while presumably using the same infrastructure under the hood. Hopefully, this will allow UI/UX development that diverges and serves each user group better.
I want a better, more usable location database on my phone, I would use it all the time. Yelp is unfortunately the default, I think because through crowd-sourcing data validation, they just have the most accurate listing of addresses, phone numbers, business hours, etc. But after that, Yelp is social features I don't care for, review writing that make me sad about humanity, and very likely bully-esque business practices (but I do like the pictures). Foursquare has the second best location DB that I've used, but historically the app has been more aggressive about pushing it's social features, which I do not want. So, I am curious and cautiously optimistic.
From the comments, it seems like what may be missing is the ability to check-in via the core foursquare app. This would be a problem if the life-tracking-but-not-social subset of users is as high as the comments suggest, but also may not be a problem if the "I was here" feature still exists in the core app and just has been messaged incorrectly.
1. Treating delivery drivers as "independent contractors". This seems to be a very common approach, with all kinds of plausible motivations (limiting liability, making variable demand handling easier, being able to call your service a "platform", keeping headcount cosmetics appealing for parent VCs, etc). Historically, delivery driving is a usually regulated and often unionized industry, so I wonder if this approach will scale. There are also often distortionary impact of these contractors on overall regulated wage industries (hint: your postmate probably does not make a living wage for the time spent being a postmate). Viewed from the lens of potential acquirers, if your "efficiencies" are based around not paying drivers in the same way they have been historically paid, that is not something I need to acquire.
2. User acquisition seems to be at a premium - quite a few of the delivery-on-demand businesses in San Francisco have been running generous new user and user referral discounts recently. It makes sense if their goal is to increase user rolls, but I find that most of these services have limited, if any, lock-in effects [a]. Obviously, in order to innovate on delivery-at-scale, companies must first achieve sufficient scale to be able to prove out new ideas. But, from my peanut gallery seat, the user acquisition strategies appear to be driven more by the "acquire users first and monetize later" strategy that happens when many similar VC companies are competing for the same users. Amazon/Google/etc don't tend to get excited about acquiring you for your user base, unless you can demonstrate high brand value or user loyalty, which seems particularly challenging in this industry.
So, my $0.02 is simply that platformization followed by paid user acquisition seems to be the template for this industry, and yet it does not make sense to me.
[a] I have heard recently of a local, "last mile" food delivery start-up that is approaching it's vendors with exclusive sales agreements. I am not sure how effective this well be - the business from whom I heard that also found the request completely ridiculous.
Alternatively: can you think of any software patents that make sense to you?
1. Everything in this github repository (https://github.com/mortardata/mortar-recsys) appears to be truly open - it's just a bunch of pig scripts, some java UDF definitions, and some python management code. There doesn't appear to be any dependencies on proprietary MortarData anything. All the code is licensed under the Apache 2.0 license.
2. The blog post states: " You can run this code anywhere. It’s built on widely-adopted open source technologies—Hadoop, Pig, and Python. But we think you’ll want to use our platform."
They are labelled as "Made with cricket flour", but other than that you wouldn't know it was any different from the dozens of similar protein/nutritional bars out there.
They are a bit expensive, but I highly recommend getting the sampler pack at least once if you're at all curious about the taste, texture, etc: http://www.exo.co/products/pre-order-multi-pack
This is the other "major" brand of cricket-based protein bars: http://chapul.com/
http://www.psmag.com/navigation/health-and-behavior/women-ar...
To me, it seems simplistic and woefully inaccurate to characterize all internet communities with comments as sufficiently similar to even consider either approach as a blanket dogma.
Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7232175
Why are we having opinions about how other people spend their time and money? People have been contributing to open source projects without any compensation for a lot longer than any of these on-line "tip" services have existed.
edit: Five minutes on Tip4Commit reveals:
Meaningful, feature-enhancing and bug-fixing commits to the linux kernel are earning ~$0.02 each
* 0.00002458 ɃTC https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/3405d230b374b692387...
* 0.00002559 ɃTC https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/fb5bb60cd004a00c1d1...
Meanwhile, storing a google drive mirror inside of a git repo and committing things that shouldn't even be in source control is generating $10+ per commit
* 0.01648708 BTC https://github.com/super3/Peercoin.net/commit/3921ceaa64ce39...
* 0.01632221 BTC https://github.com/super3/Peercoin.net/commit/574d0f43389ee0...
Maybe Tip4Commit is just not a well designed system for allocating reward and value? As a developer working on something you care about, this kind of comparison could potentially be a turn-off from participating in the tip community.