A year and a half. More or less. But it was relatively fast.
7,435 karma · joined July 22, 2012
I simply left for another employer who filed it right away.
I'm always baffled how bad is Google at playing long term games. Their biggest mistake with Glass was trying to productize it too fast and stopping when they saw it didn't have good consumer fit.
They could have instead go more incremental by releasing developer hardware and learning from that. They could have kept that program small and nimble, but instead they pivoted into some bizarre enterprise program that has always gave me the impression of a "save face" move. Weird company.
NFTs conceptual value doesn’t map to anything that seems remotely valuable at present moment. There’s no mental model for owning this inmaterial thing that is pegged to a digital file that can be duplicated infinitely without your approval.
Even the most widely accepted use case which is crypto-currency fails to break out of the theoretical value outlined in the different white papers. I own several crypto-currencies and there hasn't been a single moment in which I thought of buying something with a crypto-currency. I have crypto-currencies because I'm speculating in their asset class value, not necessarily because I'm betting on their utility.
Now, I know that crypto coins are indeed used in real service/product transactions, but I think there's a difference between the present economical use of cryptos and its potential mainstream use where cryptos can effectively replace fiat currencies in super wide economic settings.
I believe that Web3 would happen but I honestly can't see a clear trajectory for Cryptos, NFTs, DAOs etc to become effective instruments that can replace existing Web2 instruments.
In fact the reason why everything in Web3 feels like BS right now is because everything in this space uses Web2 distribution. People promoting NFTs on Twitter feels a little bit like someone faxing you a webpage. Owning the rights to a random JPEG is something that feels too abstracted from the present Web2 mental model and value proposition.
It needs a base video to be modified. They need a video of a person talking to do the deepfake.
Selling behind bars doesn’t solve any problems for CVS, Walgreens, etc. These are big stores with a lot of walking surface that benefit mostly from uninterrupted traffic of people.
Paying gangs? Dude, these are not gang-level crimes. The people who loot stores are uneducated poor people with a low sense of morality. But what you’re suggesting is absurd simply because paying criminal organizations for protection is a crime itself.
The last point does make sense though. But again, this completely ignores how retail commerce and urban distribution works in the US.
These are all ideas that only work in corrupt, lawless and economically challenged settings.
I always know when is a mass message or a real personalized message based on whether or not they include that initial.
Works surprisingly well for me but sadly for LinkedIn that’s a case of an implementation detail totally destroying their value proposition for recruiters.
Some examples:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-ImMjOrbbI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCA-0cPS1eM
They also have a bunch of research using other sensors in the phone as an input.
You're not. If you were you will understand that astrology and other esoteric beliefs are culturally anchored to the human experience of many people in the world. In particular the self-development that many people seem to get from astrology. I don't need to believe in astrology to understand its cultural role.
I think it's completely fair to build a business around a cultural idea and use that idea as a thematic glue to teach people about self-development and self-care. If you donwload the app, you will quicky realize that's exactly what they are doing. Personally not my thing, but I respect what they do and their approach to building a business around this.
My idea is that I could also plug the mic directly into the camera. I like how the A6000 looks and I only need it for recording so I wonder if there’s some slightly cheaper mirrorless that can produce similar quality.
TikTok is the epitome of content augmentation through engagement. They literally will push more and more of what you're engaging with. Their algorithm is highly optimized to put you into very deep rabbit holes of content.
During the BLM protests you could see two very different feeds depending what content were you liking and engaging with. After a few minutes of browsing it would literally feed you only pro-BLM or anti-BLM. No middle grounds.
I think the tech industry needs to realize that their talent needs can't be solved this way. We need a more proactive and consistent system to identify potential and educate students. I think VC money creates incentives that impact quality, so for starters we should be thinking of these businesses as real non-profit organizations. Not wannabe mega tech corps.
To get accepted and graduate from a reputable university you have to get good results in standardized tests and work your self through multiple courses for at least 3 years. That by itself doesn't mean anything but there's a level of rigor and self-drive required to succesfully traverse this experience.
I mentored in one of these bootcamp programs and you would be surprised how little people give a shit, even though they are paying. Most of them know that the job placement guarantee is a safeguard for their own laziness.
These programs accept people who think pursing a career in tech would be cool and easy until they realize is a tough learning experience and a tough job. Perhaps tougher than anything else they have done in their lives.
The problem with these companies is that they have to balance the quality of students with the quantity required to meet scale. This is probably the worst type of VC backed business because the investor expectations on scale are in direct conflict with the quality of potential students pre-bootcamp and the demanded quality by employers post-bootcamp.
How likely is for one of these search engines to catch-up technologically to Google's sophistication? I really can't see a clear trajectory for them to compete with Google's quality.
> Can you really not distinguish Amazon, it’s market position, and their acts from brick and mortar retailers that carry private label items?
Who do you think had the dominant market position before Amazon was a thing? Again, this play is older than Amazon itself.
My argument was just a rhetorical statement reflecting on the government's ineffectiveness and contradictory behavior when defining what harms customers or competition. It's only now they care, because it's only now that they seem to see the political benefits from pursuing what's a rampant decades-long behavior.
Believe me, my comment is not trying to defend Amazon, is simply trying to showcase how politicians are opportunistic demagogues.
They all check what sells the most, then they create their own brands, and then they promote and prioritize those brands over their shelved vendors.
Show me one retailer that doesn’t do this.
This strategy is the very reason why the direct to consumer model exists. Brands realized that they couldn’t compete fairly through product aggregators and their real survival and path to success was to do what retailers were already doing: to verticalize.
I know that most car enthusiasts dismiss Teslas as straight-line acceleration novelty cars, but Tesla is clearly not going after Porsches 718 market. They are going after the German Sedan market where performance has been always their upsell for higher prices (think M-Series or AMG)
Absolutely. This exactly what Tesla has been doing with car industry incumbents. For example, the higher specs versions of the Model 3 beat +$100k cars in acceleration, raw power, torque, handling, etc.
Incumbents have been selling performance as a high-ticket price feature for decades. Traditional brands cannot compete on high-performance features against Tesla without cannibalizing their ICE offering.
But this is not an opportunity of growth for Amazon. It is not a business critical area either and certainly is not perceived as meaningful threat or weakness.
More aggressive investments in this area aren’t justified because it truly doesn’t have a clear effect on the bottom line.
Reputationally, I doubt they care. Amazon has hundreds of thousands of vendors who sell up to 12 millions SKUs to hundreds of millions of customers.
It just makes sense to invest in tools and programs for the hundreds of millions of legit interactions (including reviews) that happen on their platform, than focusing too heavily on those who are not playing by the rules.