saucerful

For what it's worth, I don't think I could possibly read as quickly AND effectively as he talks. What a great speaker! I learned a lot.

You do know about arxiv.org, right? This is the de facto place for preprints in all of the fields that I know of, and is pretty much removing the need for publications altogether. But it is definitely limited from a technology perspective. Search is poor, subscription types are limited, no comments or rankings (though many would argue that these last two are undesirable, at least on the original site), etc. Would be nice if you could provide a front end to the arXiv, but the amount of data on there is insane and you will need some hardcore computing power to keep up. You could start with the cs papers first, though.

How do you compete with MapMyRun? Everyone I know uses that...

"Will you sign an NDA? How do I know you won't steal my idea?

No, we won't sign an NDA. No venture firm would at this stage. The informal commitment to secrecy on our application form is more than any VC would make.

In this connection you may want to read the first section of How to Start a Startup on the value of mere ideas."

Thanks, I missed this. The "informal commitment" is what I was looking for.

Is there any sort of NDA attached to the application? How can I be sure that if I'm rejected and then one of the accepted teams tosses their idea, you won't just hand them mine to work on?

(I'm aware that there are differing theories out there on the merit of shrouding a startup idea in secrecy, and my own personal opinion on the matter is that it totally depends on the idea. But the question still holds.)

I don't. Excuse the cynicism but it sounds to me like you're complaining. Did you happen to be involved in a start-up that isn't doing so hot and you believe Google is to blame?

Sorry but just because this is the internet doesn't mean real world business rules don't apply. There is a difference between form and content. Your only reasons for preferring Oyster over TripAdvisor is that the page is cleaner and there are less ads? Ummm if you had actually used the two services it would become clear that TripAdvisor has better content. And again, just because this is the internet doesn't mean that there is no barrier to entry. Think about the search engine market, the social networking market, the audio statistics market (c.f. the totally off Last.fm article also curretly on the front page). Try displacing those guys.

Point is, if Oyster in fact proves to be a superior website in the long run, it will hopefully (and probably) get its due. But to expect an algorithmic search engine to order results based on hope is just... wrong.

Typical startup fallacy. Just because they aren't overhauling their site every few months doesn't mean they are stagnating.

There is a difference between being stagnant and being stable.

The new content and change come from the data users scrobble and from the new music musicians make. The site is a platform for that, and IMHO it does its job perfectly. Not only that, but it makes a lot of money doing it.

I've been using last.fm for just over 7 years (and I was one of the last of my friends to join). I love it. Why? Because unlike other "social networks", last.fm is actually useful. For me, its is about data, both aggregating my listening data (across several devices including desktop laptop and squeeezebox) and using it to recommend new bands to me as well as local concerts to go to.

This article is laughably bad. It's creating a problem where there isn't one. Last.fm is not on the decline. It is not any less exciting than it was 5 years ago. In fact, the service only gets more interesting the longer you use it. IMO the premise for the article is false. Moreover, the recommendations for improving Last.fm are weak and for the most part frivolous.