jsloss

What’s the trick? More page views?

The cost of acquiring new customers once they reached scale was the issue. The cost went up significantly making their unity economics unfavourable.

They rent buildings (long term leases) and then rent out spaces (short term leases).

It scales. But you’re right, not in any way like a tech company.

The fact that they say tech is at their core is a joke. The only reason to use their app to to book a meeting room or remember your printing code.

You know there are a large number of people who rely on these platforms to earn enough to take care of their families...

Exactly. Just look at the numerous twitter apps that are no longer around but we’re very useful to twitter at the time.

Tech should just be for tech people! Mothers and brothers be damed!

I get the frustration, but shouldn’t we be working towards models that allow for better compensation for creators rather than ... well I’m not exactly sure what you’re advocating for here ...

The ability to compensate someone who is creating value in a network with ownership of said network (eg giving an early uber driver, or Airbnb host, options or equity.) this is currently not possible to do in the US, but is possible with crypto networks.

It’s the most well known climbing destination, not just a “remote and hostile” place. It speaks to the end of the normal distribution curve for experiences/social signalling like this.

There’s Everest and there’s the rest.

We’re moving from a world where we actively search to a word where “the best” is recommended to us.

Google will continue to build out lines of business that make sense in a post search world (hardware, shopping platform, ....?)

Brigading from folks with some reason or another to be very pro china.

There is no shortage of examples of how powerful platforms and governments are using this technology in a way that reduces personal freedom. Surveillance is the name of the game in our current era of internet business models. Are you suggesting that this isn't the case?

Can you expand on your point? Because it makes no sense to me.

All great points. I guess we'll see where the chips land.

Is it easy for new entrants though? And is there competition?

I'm not sure about the future profitability of this space, but I think you're disregarding a few key points.

1. The innovation was less the app and more solving supply problems. No app will be able to change that for the taxi business.

2. Competitive advantage in this space is having more drivers and less wait time. That drives folks to use one provider over another. The lock in isn't the tech, but the availability of rides.

You're right that the lock in or network effect in the ride sharing space is very different than other big tech cos (FB, Netflix, AMZN etc) in that they're localized, and should result in more competition.

The bet investors are making is that the market will shake out with one category leader, a runner up and virtually no competition beyond that. Should be interesting to watch.

It's opt in. That's the angle. They're betting that advertisers will be willing to pay more to reach people who opt in to be reached.

That's not what this is. I believe Brave has always had this model in mind. Or for quite some time at least.

If you’re in Canada simpletax dot ca is great.

Something to consider is that most VC’s that are investing in this space are now doing so for equity. The risk of tokens being unregistered securities is very high.

Most investors today see tokens as a bonus, but invest in equity.

I'm getting the same error on Firefox Quantum.

Bitcoin is an example of the value that has and will come from blockchain. It has everything to do with it.

You’re right I should have included a “so far”.

Right, 10 years in and bitcoin has proven it's value as a digital alternative to gold.

Ethereum is 4 years old, and the vast majority of "tokens" even younger. Crypto is very much still early. I don't mean this as a "cop out" but rather a sober reality of how much further the tech has to go.

Would it not be more fair to compare crypto progress to that of the early internet? It took most of a decade of development before the modern internet was born, another decade before the bubble burst and a few more years before pundits stopped calling it a fad, and recognized the business value.

We should all be skeptical of those who would over promise and under deliver on new technology, but I can't imagine why we wouldn't assume an optimistic stance towards it.

I think his point is to focus on fixing yourself, rather than trying to fix others. He’s not suggesting that you avoid getting help from professionals to do so.

Yes, that is my point. Current anti-trust laws are only relevant when monopolistic behaviour leads to a worse product for consumers. Which is not the case for the big internet companies, who use network effects and their data advantages to build a better experience for the user (cheaper, faster, more etc)

The problem is, we have no way of knowing what ISN'T being built or what benefits or new offerings consumers aren't able to access because these companies have created an environment where competition is severely limited.

There's no easy answer here. Consumers are clearly better off being served a better product. Regulating based on the idea that there could be some future benefit that consumers are missing out on because of these monopolies, is a tough argument to make.

Should Facebook be able to buy up all the social graphs? If regulations prohibited them from doing so, would it really hurt facebook? Or would it create an environment with more choice, options and competition?

Exponent.fm podcast has some interesting episodes on this topic. Worth a listen.

You make a great point. An interesting question is, are anti-trust laws in their current form, adequate for the networked era?

When organizations are able to use their network effects to decrease competition in markets (FB / Amazon / Google) does that create a negative outcome despite clearly delivering a better product for customers in the short run.

It's clear that network effects and big bank accounts decrease innovation and competition, and it's hard to think that won't have long term negative effects. Just think, is starting a social network a smart thing to do today if your only option is being bought by Facebook, or having them integrate your innovations into one of their services?

That being said, innovation thrives on constraints, and there is no indication that these companies wont fall prey to new technology and user demands. It just seems less likely given the powerful position they are all in.

I’m not convinced that’s true. The friction involved with public transit (limitations schedules, routes, and sharing of vehicles) are enough to limit much of the usage outlined in the above comment.

Big fan of the lifestraw. It's easy to use, effective and they do amazing things for folks in areas with low water security. I live in the city and keep one in my earthquake preparedness kit.

Store managers most likely aren’t the front line’s direct supervisor. And the gap between roles as far as responsibility would be high. I would expect very high standards and tough to reach goals would make being a store manager a challenging role to succeed at.

They only recently put in a disclaimer clearly stating the ability to buy and not sell, here in Canada. Was deceptive as hell before that.

Set up a GDAX account, send your coins there (save fees), then transfer them to a better off/on ramp for your location.