whysonot

tbrooks I'd love to learn more about this -- could I get in touch?

Interesting to see not a single mention of VR/AR

Anecdotally this has not been my experience. Would love to see more data points in various geos at different degrees of surge. That said, this is reason enough to press notify every time now just in case.

> When Iribe said, Yeah, it’s pretty much just about gaming, at least for now, Zuckerberg seemed to lose interest. Facebook was not a video-game company and over the years had moved to make games a smaller part of what users saw when they logged on.

I've seen Mark's vision for Oculus described as the next step in connecting all of the people on the planet in a few pieces now. What interests me about this position is that it implies:

1) gaming and entertainment braodly are not the end game. Instead, the social interactions.

2) VR hardware will see broader consumer penetration in the population not yet reached by facebook than mobile phones

Not sure what I think yet.

In case anybody is interested in the google books chart of the word "mobile":

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=mobile&year_st...

After the context is set, the most important page appears to be 44. It suggests that the next blessing[1] of unicorns will tackle enormous markets by building products around mobile. Didn't this shift already happen? I couldn't think of many major industries that don't already have mobile-first contenders.

Maybe I'm missing the point of the "tech is outgrowing tech' sentiment?

[1] http://www.answers.com/Q/What_is_a_group_of_unicorns_called

(a) Mobile usage > 50% of total internet usage (b) Mobile advertising ~ 25% of total internet advertising

Gap between (a) and (b) represents a ~$25B+ opportunity (slide 16).

Last few years, mobile ads have been propped up by VC funded companies buying installs. This means the opportunity is primarily for brands.

Why do you think it has been so slow? There seem to be enough mobile platforms to advertise on. Are the ad units too expensive for brand awareness campaigns? Or maybe that's wrong and inventory is limited and the platforms aren't charging enough? Maybe large companies are just slow?

I guess I'm trying to understand what shape this opportunity takes. Is it for new platforms to emerge? Existing platforms to sign more customers or charge more for their ad units? Novel ad exchanges to make it easier for companies to advertise on mobile?

Does this read like an advertisement to anybody else?

Business cat translation attempt:

- Facebook makes money on desktop ads and mobile ads - They are making less money on desktop - They are making more money on mobile - They may be seeing trends before anybody else that mobile is where they will make money - So they might value engaging mobile apps more than competitors

Thus, as Snapchat, you realize that FB is willing to pay a lot of $$, but also that what you have (the active users on mobile) is valuable and will continue to grow in value. It's interesting because it sheds light on what went into Snapchat's decision to reject the acquisition.

Same feeling here. Thanks OP. Really needed a new comic in my life.

Oh man that sounds pretty freaking amazing... look forward to following your progress!

Basically the same concept as the sous-vide (precision cooking) without the water bath, right? I like it a lot in theory because I cook several meals a week with sous vide and bet that Cinder will produce a slightly different cook with for the same time/temperature.

$500 is a tough sell though if you can get roughly the same thing with a sous vide for <$200.

I should have clarified that there's a difference between showing up and mindfully playing / practicing and simply showing up. You and Cal Ripken Jr showed up to practice with the intention of getting better. If you're to actually get better at your job, you show up and try and get better at your job. But if you show up and just go through the motions (the real-life equivalent of clicking a bunch of buildings to mine resources) you will be squandering your potential. I think we agree--I just wasn't clear enough in my first comment.

Agreed. I think these games teach its players harmful life lessons too. They're rewarded for spending the most money (like GoW) or for showing up (like an MMO). That's not how you get good at things in real life.

I've been a (relatively serious) gamer since I was a kid. My parents always thought it was a waste of time. But I think I learned more about dedication and growth playing WC3 than I did playing sports. I definitely would not feel that way had I played GoW instead.

Reminds me of the popular Steve Jobs quote about death and decision-making:

> Remembering that I’ll be dead soon is the most important tool I’ve ever encountered to help me make the big choices in life. Because almost everything—all external expectations, all pride, all fear of embarrassment or failure—these things just fall away in the face of death, leaving what is truly important

The Dalai Lama too:

> Half of our lives we spend asleep. The first ten years we are merely children, and after twenty we begin to grow old. Meanwhile, our time is taken up with suffering, anxiety, fighting, sickness, and so forth, all of which limit our ability to practice

I struggled a lot with what OP describes and focusing on outcomes is something that has helped me a lot. Another slightly less intimidating way to describe this might be focusing on projects instead of skills. So the outcome doesn't have to be some grand, world-shaking innovation, it might just be the completion of some "thing" that you enjoyed making.