jaebrown

This question may get better traction on inbound.org or growthhackers.com.

So, should we assume anytime a minority or women is asked to be on a board now, that it's for PR? Regardless of the success of the person? Tech is nothing new to Magic Johnson, he has been a venture capitalist in the industry for some time now. He's also part owner of the LA Dodgers.

Doesn't work always involve your body? Your brain is a muscle and part of your body, right? Not to mention be healthy plays a huge role in your productivity. Learning how to be discipline and focus is something all professionals of all levels work to get to and maintain. So, if they're able to transition that energy and concentration once out of the sport, it's to no surprise they'll be successful.

When looking through your website, I didn't see any information regarding any of what you've mentioned. As a Detroiter, I take it personal when organizations try to award pity on the city, as if we're some type of charity case. Yes there are some that are in real hardship for the moment, while other make choices. It is those choices that has led to the ruin porn of Detroit. I simply don't agree with providing assistance every time a hardship is presented versus providing resources for people to ensure it never happens to them again. I probably don't have to tell you the story of "Teach a man how to fish" or provide links on how giving away anything has statistically not helped; which others have already done.

I know people taking advantage of the programs already established and organization like yours. As you may determine a fraud case with some applicants, I would find it very hard to believe there is no fraud.

I have a problem with this and question YC for taking on The Detroit Water Project. I'm truly not trying to be difficult but I do not see the full context of the situation here or in the TC article. I'm a native Detroiter (not the suburbs and live in the city now) and know that this problem is not as severe as often publicized.

There are programs already in place for people who are struggling to pay their water bills by the city, county, and state to avoid shut off regardless of their economic status. Why not focus your efforts on getting people enrolled in those programs; which would ensure they're doing everything within their power to keep water on.

As indicated by the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department, in the news, talking circles, and community events, there are some that simply choose not to pay their bill over others (i.e. phone, cable, etc...). What is the need to pay your bill if others will do it for you? The city has made a ton of bad decisions but this is not one of them.

Have you ever applied to a job and wanted the email to be different than the one who have listed?

WOW!!! Didn't know that. It could explain why connecting with someone you know is so important. When I think about it: Here is a situation that has a happened a couple of times in the past couple of years: Someone request to connect with me, we have a lot of the same connections and they really look like an all-star but there is no picture. I connected on the feeling "Why Not, a lot of my connections are connected to this person". I then get emails as if I subscribed to a much smaller service similar to a Monsters.com or Dice.com for technology related positions. I also get recruiters sending me emails for directly, and in one instance a recruiter called the main line to my employer and asked to speak with me and got transferred over.

I've always wondered how these things were taking place but never took the time to investigate because of how infrequent the occurrences were. It usually takes a while to unsubscribe from these services via email, so I just mark as SPAM. I just looked and they're still sending stuff, at least some are. I just removed all people I didn't know from shaking their hand from my connections; which includes recruiters that only request invitation to connect to talk about a job opportunity.

I wonder if LinkedIn knows about this sort of Growth Hacking type of SPAM or just doesn't care?

I really like the idea of the product but the idea of looking at three screens gives me anxiety. I know the product can be used for a single device but the video scared me off by showing its potential. I'll stick with what I got.

I saw this and had to read. I feel obligated to post after reading some of the comments. I've never dealt with Network Solutions until I arrived at my current employer, fall of last year. I've to say, that they're by far the worst in the industry. I've dealt with many registrars and I use to think GoDaddy was the worst until I came across these guys. They nickel and dime you for everything. It cost just to redirect a domain via their c-panel. Transferring domains is a pain, along with just about everything else. You'll definitely be talking to a sales guy when you call support and he'll escalate the issue because he has no idea what he's doing. The real support guy will also try to sell you. I work for a company that owns a lot of domains (in the 100s) and have found my experience with Network Solutions to be horrible. Lucky for me, we only have 30 something domains with them and I've been waiting until this year got here (new budget begins) before I paid the fee to transfer them all over to the registrar that manages majority of our domains.

The housing industry in general is at least a decade back from any other industry because of regulation. I work in the apartment industry and can concur that tech could improve it 10 fold. However; this sector along with the industry has an old mindset and are against change.

This may be my optimism talking but I don't think violence solves any problems. We will continue to have enemies as long as we kill innocent people. Now that may be the objective; which refers back to my point that war is money. But you can not tell me that in the history of civilization that line of thinking has ever worked. People will always rebel when they consider the force governing or dictating their fate to be unconcerned with their true value or to be evil.

You bring up our police forces domestically; which have in the past decade gotten the reputation of being too militarized. This has not resulted into anything positive for police. Violent crimes are still high and innocent people are outraged and always lashing back. It has been more of a win for people like you and me, with the Supreme Court ruling that we have a constitutional right to record; which majority of police despise. There has also been an increase in lawsuits; which results to a decreased budget next fiscal year for the departments. That money comes from the taxpayers in the end but the real lost is clearly on the departments. [1] A lesser budget; which means fewer jobs created and less resources to invest in upgrades and new tools (more stress to do more with less). [2] Continuing to battle public opinion that you're needed and that you're there to do good and not evil. Next time a vote comes up on the ballot for anything that has to do with the police department; which way do you think people are going? [3] Congressional and legislative scrutiny because they have become the safe attack to ensure that they're getting constituents votes in the next election. I'm just pointing out the obvious but I believe this trend to be getting worse. This is a whole other topic though.

If our interest were to have peace in this region, we would approach the situation diplomatically but our interest are economically motivated. We have never approached this situation diplomatically since day 1.

I have to admit that your way of thinking in your comments scare the shit out of me. The thinking that violence solves violent problems is a little elementary.

But my reply is in regard to this -->>"People mention that drones may create terrorists, but if we assume that Pakistani public opinion is proportional to the number of deaths, then terrorism (which has killed far more innocent Pakistanis than drones [2]) ought to be significantly less popular."

I would argue against your rationale here. There is a parallel if not similar problem in the US and in just about every place in the world that is stifled with problems. Just because nothing seems like there is any being done, doesn't mean nothing is being done nor that the people approve or disapprove of it.

This was my point above in my comment. War is a good thing for the US.

Some of the comments on Salon are just sad. A death is a death. Whether it's 900 or 2, drone strikes that kill innocent civilians are unacceptable. Trying to justify it by saying that there is only a small death toll number is inhumane. We can not say are objective is to protect innocent life and then take innocent life. Giving precedent to American life makes us and NATO forces seem like evil pretentious bastards. We constantly create enemies with these tactics. If your mother, brother, sister, etc.. was killed during one of these attacks, it makes it easier for you to join an extremist group to bring down the countries that had anything to do with their deaths.

From my readings, it seems that a lot of these group's efforts are a lot less religious motivated and more revenge motivated now of days, hence the increase in extremist groups post 9/11. The US foreign policy since President Truman has set precedent on innocent American life and those of our allies. Not to sound like a conspiracy theorist but I think all of this boils down to three words a woman from Brooklyn, NY famously said best in a popular Pop-culture rap song "Money, Power, Respect". In that order as well.

War is money, so keeping an enemy is important. If the US ended its War on Terrorism today, there would be no other organization, faction or nation willing to step up to be Public Enemy #1. Sure we have those that could be considered (Iran and North Korea) but they tremble in a NY minute if chosen to take up the title. A defense budget pumps trillions into the US economy; which creates return for shareholders, jobs, tax revenue (personal income), and enforces the US Foreign Policy of democracy everywhere. More spending, more borrowing; which has been the trend of the US in the past decade.

Power and respect are essential to America's continued dominance as a super-force and leader amongst nations. We take a different stand on power than other rich nations. We concentrate on using our power for evil instead on good by focusing on fear. We attempt to bully with the fear of us stepping into a foreign situation; which has been manipulated over time and thru history to seem that are presence brings a win for us or our allies.

Respect gives others faith to continue to believe in the US; which means continued belief in the US dollar. Any lack of faith in the US dollar means lack of investing; which then turns into countries like China trying to salvaged what money they have left on their US bonds and other securities; which do not allow them to hit maturity. We then pay out what we owe; which will be nothing because that is what we have. The results are a depression because our debt is now our currency to the world and that is deflation.

Just my thoughts, first time I typed them out or shared for anyone to hear other than the audience I gather when talking about tech, startups, student load debt, sports or politics. Sorry about no data or sources, I just got into the zone typing but this comes from my research as an undergrad and somewhat grad student.

It's quite the opposite. Congress makes laws to protect corporations. (i.e. Hollywood, TeleCos, Insurance, Health Care, etc...). It's not people championing and cheering companies for their business practices. I think you're confusing it with the way people might support companies by buying their products or services. But here's the trick question. When no company is truly good and your government, essentially wrote the book on the shareholders dilemma; who is really at fought?

Sounds like the government crying over milk they spilled.

I love it, puts things in great perspective.

I agree, that another firm may be the best option in the short term. Hopefully, you had a change management clause or agreement set up in your contract, that keeps your current firm from completely ditching you without a proper hand-off. Because it will take you some time to hire a your own dev (This guy will probably be your CTO & co-Founder), you'll need your new firm to comprehend, apprehend and decipher everything your old says. One of you will need to participate in this dialogue and you have to require that your new firms does great documentation (to the point that all three of you understand).

This will not be inexpensive and finding an individual to hire will require more than a stake in your company in a small salary. You may want to consider a reasonable or slightly above stake and an average salary. You're asking a lot of any individual to come into a situation and repair it. At this point, you need this person more than they need you. There are a lot of executive decisions to be made but it goes with the territory of a startup.

You face two huge challenges outside of the dispute with your outsource firm. Hiring a capable individual that can do all that you are requesting now and in the future. Convincing a VC firm that this is not a huge problem.

Good Luck

Ann Arbor, MI

After reading the story on Fisker and their founder, I wonder if this is "Karma"?

I agree. If you're posting on HN, you can do a lot better then what you typically see in the ""Who Hiring" every month. There is a larger issue outside of HN with recruiters and the hiring process at most companies, including startups. That could be thread of its own.

This is a really good article. I was just talking with my friends on how it seems like LeBron realized that he can be unstoppable; which in reality and from this read, means he's more efficient. When you're efficient at anything, it always look like you're dominate and at times unstoppable. Take Apple for example: During 2007 - 2011, they were on a run where we all thought the world would be iEverything.

I think finding your efficient level is the key indicator to someone or thing looking unstoppable once in motion. Meaning, once your startup is off the ground with a business model and making money on said business model, your next step is to find the efficiency level for which you best operate on. This includes all aspects of the company, not just sales. LeBron is an efficient scorer but also an efficient passer and defensive player. It wasn't until all things were working together and not in isolation, when people were like "WOW!!!, I think he figured it out". So if sales and everything else are booming but you have a very inefficient product development cycle, you will not be at your peak performance level. VentureBeat had an article about Tibco; which details this about having great technology and rocking but a sales missteps; which didn't allow them to get to their true efficient/ peak performance level (http://venturebeat.com/2013/03/28/tibco/). This seems like the problem with Apple now. They don't seem to be as dominate and unstoppable as before; which could be by design but I doubt it. The management shakeup and recent hiccups with Maps and Siri, shows that Apple is now not as efficient as it once was.

I believe when your efficiency level is found, you take nothing for granted as LeBron mentions is the reason he has transformed as a player. When you work at being great and the best you can be, you find out who you are and what works the best. You also find out who you are not and what doesn't work. You exclude what you're not and what doesn't work from the equation and focus on the variables that work for you. Only you can stop you, once you found your efficiency level that gets you to peak performance.

I believe you may to want to state the subject matter that you would like to get your friends engaged with. If it's stuff like SEO, social media, CPC and business, then try inbound.org. Other then that a sub-reddit around specific content may be your only shot. There are sub-reddits for just about everything. Once you create an account and choose your sub-reddits, that is all you see.

Your argument is really off base. Like most, it seems that you're biased on this issue. There are clearly a couple of things most people have an issue with in this case and all are no reason to be mad at Apple.

1. Design - It has been stated over and over by people that Apple shouldn't be able to patent hardware and software design; which is why these same people believe they lost their trial against Microsoft in the 90s. I believe Apple lost that trial because they waited to late and by that time; which was years in, people had a hard time believing the novelty of a computer UI was something to copy but rather a standard to implement. This is why Apple since Jobs return in 97, has made it their mission to put design first and foremost. They have built the company since 97 on design because it's the one thing, that truly distinguishes a product upon appearance. This is why that went after Samsung early, as they didn't want to give people time to infuse the two.

No, Apple did not win the right to have a rectangle. Clearly Palm, Blackberry and a couple other smartphone makers from earlier in the 2000s have been doing this but Apple did win because Samsung blatantly copied the look and feel of their rectangle.

2. Innovation - If anything, this verdict will spur innovation in the smartphone space. I personally can't wait to start seeing different UIs and hardware models. After the iPhone in 2007, everything has pretty much looked the same. It has really become boring. I applauded Microsoft for what they did with Windows Phone/Mobile from a UI perspective. It shows the possibilities when you think outside the box and try to innovate and now their Windows OS is going in the same direction. We don't know the possibilities with hardware because no one has taken the risk to introduce some truly different or revolutionary, since 2007.

Look what FrogDesign has done with the UI of Android, that no other OEM has even attempted to do. http://www.frogdesign.com/work/sharp-aquos.html

3. Patents - The Patent System is clearly broken and needs change; which is why there is a bill on the Senate floor right now for that. I personally don't agree with software patents but I'm in huge favor of design and utility patents. Those are the patents that don't stifle innovation and force companies to be creative and innovative when building their products. Companies should definitely have to license patents that infringe on these two, as these are the areas where the most and hardest work is done because these are the areas that are most transparent to the consumer.

For all the talk and comments, I've seen and read from people, I've not heard of any more pressure to Congress on this issue. I've not heard one politician say "I'm pushing this issue because my constituents have been urging me to do something about it". We did something about SOPA and PIPA but have done nothing about patent reform. So, I fail to really hear anyone out on this stance if they're not actively trying to pursue a change. I've not seen one sign up or online petition on HN, Reddit or any of the other internet darling pushing this issue.

I think people need to stop taking such an interest in this, as Apple is only doing whats best for them, within the law that we all follow and are not trying to change. We all do whats best for us. An even though we're not companies, I think that's a greater reason for them to do so, as they adhere to shareholders; which are people. So if you have a problem, have it with the Shareholders Dilemma.

Using Blood Diamonds as an example is offensive. The two are no where close to related nor should be reference when speaking about each other. All companies engage in crooked anti-competitive behavior. Samsung is not excluded from the list and one of the reasons that this thread exist. Our choices should always be about how companies treat people, not just consumers of their products.

I totally understand your point but these are the rules in which the game they play in. Each company has the money to make a stand for the change they want to see and if it was truly broken, I think we would see a unified body of tech companies coming together to enforce those changes. Either Congress is not listening or there are some companies that are fine with the current system. The companies I'm referring to are not Patent Trolls because they do not have the money to go toe to toe with a big company like Apple, Samsung, Microsoft or Google when it comes to hiring lobbyist, court fees, legals fee and PR. They're the companies we're speaking of now, that secretly like the current structure. Congress seems to be interested as they have a patent reform bill on the Senate right now.

Consumers should take more of a note on issues of the companies and products they buy but I believe in this case it's irrelevant to them. I too choose CostCo over Sam's Club and Meijers over Wal-Mart because of the same thing you brought up. However, our choices are based on how they treat people and not patents on which a company clearly infringed upon. The basis on why they infringed or if it's wrong or not is not for us to decide but for the courts.

I don't like the current system either but it is the current system.

Not to say you're not right but just about every company behaves indecently. Samsung, Google, Microsoft and others all have their offenses in the people's eye for what is right but this is business and we people should just let it play itself out in court.