moadeel

Are video views a good barometer to measure YC interest for interviews?

Honesty is the best hack. If it's coupled with a genuinely good way of solving a big problem, then it's an even better hack. And if it's associated with a team that has accomplished things in the past, viola!

Annnnd this post is a hack :) If it gets more points and you get up in the queue, then this would turn into a great hack indeed.

And by hack, I mean a smart way of getting noticed, not a deceiving hack.

Very considerate of YC to do that.

I feel you my friend. Up vote for you :) When the heck did it become to have a business that does not make money, does not focus on making money and gets a valuation to half a billion. When? Is there something that I just don't understand that the investors do?

I think its simple. People are investing hoping that hype will continue and the next round will cash them out. With that in mind, when IPO hits, the people cash these types of business in and everyone loses once they find out that the company is still trying to find out a business model.

Well I was very young in 1998 - I was too interested in getting my maxpages in top rankings in the maxpage domain :) so i don't know much. But man, this is just ridiculous. Really, $500 Million! $500 Million! for a photo sharing app that has a huge list of competitors and easy to knock off?

wow, I could not agree more with the writer. Some where along the way, the basic concept of making a profit, and making it fast, and making it within a certain period has simply been erased in the mirage and conveniently accepted excuse of "money will come later." Really, why can't money come now, and how later is later. It seems like, the investors are simply putting money in to reap cash in the next round and walk out while the last person or entity to take on the investment burden (public if it goes ipo) will deal with the massive losses of a business that has yet to figure out it's revenue model. Unbelievable.

Some of us may not agree to their responses. But, they should be respected for their willingness to respond with such thoroughness in such a short period of time without playing the anti-smear or victim card.

I have seen quite a few pictures trying to depict the "mightiness" of humans over small beings and their "tinyness" compared to celestial bodies ... but this interactive presentation takes the cake. Do check it out.

Hmm not sure why, but I cannot seem to see anything on the page.

Thanks. Number theory sounds very interesting. I think I am going to pick up a book or a website on it ... really want to look into it.

the customer service response could have been better crafted. Right now it screams "that's what you get when you are part of a website that has so many customers. Your request is not priority enough to fix in the large pool of our customer base"

Is it just me who is hearing this.

great, in that case wouldn't it be easier to simply pick up a book or two or listen to a few open course lectures to get a referential understanding of avoiding classic pitfalls in CS while focusing hardcore on web languages like Python :) and learning "Python the hard way" :)

wow .. thanks. That's quite a summary on the mechanics of how it works.

Do you mean to say, it would be a bad idea to start with C coding?

Thanks for the all the replies below, they clarify quite a bit. Here is another question, how much of the "incredibly difficult" math actually comes in handy and serves real coding purposes other than honing your ability to think logically? Math can be incredibly conceptual at times and as someone who has a psychology background, I know that a person can be not very good at math due to inability to think conceptually, but can be very downright logical on matters that he can understand practically. what do you guys think?

I have always wondered how much of CS coding knowledge applies to web apps and how necessary it is to take some of the killer math courses offered in university to be able to code web apps proficiently. And if there is that big of a difference between coding and web apps, then shouldn't universities and students be better off learning how to code web apps since they seem to be in dominant usage anyway?

Btw, I am not a technical person, hence the curiosity. Insights would be much appreciated.

What are some of the main differences?

It is not okay in the legal sense. But it has been given a green light far too many times by tacit approval of the users who could care less so long as the info is not leaked.

Amen to that. I couldn't have said it any better. I have been arguing the same thing - history of the web and these companies have been a pretty clean one.

Theoretically speaking, in every conceivable world, would the users not trust the companies who steal their data. However, practically speaking, users trust the companies who "steal" their data so long as that data is not publicized/leaked. In fact, I would argue as much that most users know that there is information being collected of them that they are not aware of, and they have accepted it because they haven't seen huge negative consequences in their personal life or in the media that make them worried of the collection of their information.

In my opinion, it would have to take a data breach of the likes of katrina, tsunami 2004 and BP oil spill all within a few weeks for users to get hammered with the point that they should be more concerned about what is happening with their data.

Having said that, there will always be a small group who would be up in arms about the simple act of stealing whether a negative consequence follows or not. And kudos to them for they are doing a service to us all by keeping an eye on these companies.

The point that I am trying to get across is that the history of the web along with the time consuming nature of reading huge agreements has led to users entering into social contracts of trust with these companies. They could care less about how much you try to alert them. Companies can continue to take one action after another to alert the users of all that the things company will do and the user will merely see that has an obstacle to get to the app and therefore will simply accept/agree robotically and move on. Why?

Users behave in herd mentality, respond to only the most imminent of threats or fear of extremely dire potential consequences. If they see everyone else doing something they will do it too, even if that means you get them to agree to very stiff contracts. They will simply accept it as a way of life and move on.

When creating privacy policies, companies play this balancing act. What to constantly alert a user about, how many of them will actually care, we as a company know that all their data will be protected and not used criminally anyway?

Whatever path, facebook, twitter and others do with our data is irrelevant to most users so long as most of their trusted circles are doing it too. It just isn't a big issue for them as they maneuver around other pressing issues in their lives. Kudos to those few who have made it a big issue and have kept these companies at their toes. Their effort is worth commending and appreciating, and not mocking as has been done by others.

Bingo

Yes, I think it is quite a clear statement. Uploading to an app is not the same as posting it publicly.

Other points that you are mentioning have more to do with user's willingness to take privacy seriously. Most don't take it seriously because a) it's tedious and time-consuming b) they probably don't understand it c) it is easier to trust the company like everyone else and get onto using the app and 4) ... as long as it does not include criminal, financial, health or their telephone records, everything is pretty much a go go for a user.

Users don't care about their privacy unless it has elements of the 4 categories stated above. Users hate hassle and they have pretty much resigned from the fight for privacy mainly because they have found that the benefit of sharing things with others outweighs the willingness to be clear of a trouble that rarely every shows up in their conscience anyway .... think about it ... when was the last time a major security breach occurred that compromised so many millions and devastated so many thousands that it has left a blip or a bad mark on users conscience.

We maybe very techi ... but average users are far more occupied with other concerns. So blind trust plays a strong role for them.

This is apples to oranges. Most users, use applications because they find about it from trusted sources. They are more interested in just using the application and moving on. Users have shown time and again that as long as the source is trusted (friends, media, overhyping blogs) then they leave it up to the company to make sure their data is private. Calling to a challenge of posting everything to public is misstating what users actually provide: a permission to take their data and keep it private versus here is my data for the rest of the world to see. There is a social contract between the user and the company that is bound by the trust that "my info will not be leaked" and looking at the history of the web I think the companies backed by competent teams take this contract very seriously.

Well, with the arrival of Project A ventures, you may not have to worry about getting them outlawed - now that an alternative exists you will probably have more people siding to the route of original ideas anyway.

Don't know much more. I read the article and recalled convos with a few German friends in Accenture when I was consulting with them.

Is it just me (finance background, ent.) or is the IPO scene becoming unfathomable. Groupon went public despite losses looming in the air (they tried to cook the books remember?) and now Yelp going public despite it's history of operating losses. When did it become acceptable by the investors to invest in companies that have not shown a profitable business model?

It seems like the wall-street investors have become the ultimate VC firm (willing to invest in unprofitable businesses) without realizing that actual VC firms invest in unprofitable businesses fairly early in the lifecycle which warrants their hopes for a turnaround and a potential payoff. But to invest in unprofitable company years after its founding seems ... well .... unfathomable, unless investors believe that the company will be able to do something it hasn't been able to do so far: make a decent profit. Would love to hear what you guys think.

I have a few German friends, I understand them to be quite risk averse. However, what Samwers have accomplished in Germany is something far far more important and bigger than a clone industry - it is the spirit of taking risks, a willingness to aspire to be something other than traditional careers and a strong stance/philosophy on a type of entrepreneurship (clones) - stances such as these almost always lead to an ideological opposition and make way for others to engage in similar realms with differing philosophies. You can see that in Project A ventures, which is a reaction to Samwer's philosophy, and that reaction is good for Germany's start-up culture.