Facebook Profit Jumps 71% Year-over-Year - <AUTHOR> https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-profit-jumps-71-1501100844 <comment><USER2> Some fun Facebook facts from the earnings call/report

\- Facebook has a massive, $35.5 billion hoard of cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities. It's the third biggest S&P 500 company by this metric that isn't paying a dividend, after Berkshire Hathaway and Alphabet.

\- Facebook's headcount is now at 20,658. That's up 43 percent since last year

\- Average Revenue Per User Rises 23% to $4.73, Down from 4Q 2016

\- Facebook Offers No Break Out of Instagram Revenue

\- 2Q Daily Active Users 1.32 Billion, Monthly Active Users 2.0 Billion

\- Shares Up 1.6% After-Hours, Near Session Highs

\- Zuckerberg: WhatsApp and Instagram Stories each have more than 250 million people using them daily. Each of those is a single SNAP whose entire daily user base is around 170 million.

Wow, this is a company that is killing it right now.

Facebook and Google combine to account for up to 99% of advertising growth.

As this relates to SNAP, I have to think that investors will spend atleast a year spending marketing budges with SNAP but after that, RIP Snap......

Also as a crazy aside, Meg Whitman just resigned from the HP Board and has been reported to be visiting Uber.....

<comment><USER3> Maybe I'm just a crazy millennial, but I absolutely loathe the idea of FB / Insta stories. Snapchat going under wouldn't convince me to move over -- I'd just stop using the service and move on to communicating some other way. And Stories aren't the only appeal of SNAP, though I suppose they are a large producer of revenue.

HN just loves to hate SNAP, and I can't really fathom why. I can get being skeptical but every comment here seems like they /want/ to see the company fail.

<comment><USER4> Another crazy millennial here. I don't have an Instagram either, and frankly I don't want one.

As for why HN hates Snap, I'm not exactly sure. Is it because the average user on HN is older and isn't targeted by Snap? Maybe it's seen as a frivolous plaything? No matter what the reason, there's definitely a lot of hate for Snap on this site.

<comment><USER5> My reasoning for loathing snap was their refusal to even allow a snap client for windows phone to exist.

<comment><USER6> No more entries, we have a winner for the most obscure reason to dislike a social service.

<comment><USER7> I don't loathe Snap, but I do dislike their decision for not supporting Windows 10. Microsoft even offered a cash incentive to Snap for creating an app and Snap still outright said no. Surely no matter how much you hate a platform, if you're being offered an incentive, you would say yes?

<comment><USER8> There's a huge opportunity cost in putting some of your developers on creating an app for a niche market. Snap probably felt that Microsoft's incentive didn't cover that cost.

<comment><USER9> Not to mention maintenance and upkeep.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Maybe I live in a bubble, but I just assumed that Facebook would be on a decline trajectory by now.

Their website is almost meaningless to my day-to-day life at this point. I login once every couple of weeks, upload some pics of my kids for Grandma to look at, and then log off. I don't personally know anyone who still uses it regularly as we did back in 2007. I don't know a tactful way to put this... but it seems like mostly older people and Walmart shoppers, posting angry bumper sticker nonsense about Obama or Trump.

Am I just COMPLETELY out of touch? Or it is an Eternal September situation ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September)), where the unwashed masses are still coming on board faster than people like me are leaving?

Even if it's the latter, aren't they near a saturation point by now? Once everybody's signed up, where's the growth come from? How do you squeeze out additional monetization from a platform once there are no new members coming in, and old ones trickle away because the content is so poor?

<comment><USER11> > _I login once every couple of weeks, upload some pics of my kids for Grandma > to look at, and then log off_

Pretty much proves the point: Even people who actively dislike the company and product exhibit engagement and retention that other consumer apps would kill for. It sounds like you've been using it for a decade!

It's less of a 'product' than a globalized, cross-generation, ubiquitous social norm.

<comment><USER12> Exactly right. OP is a monthly active user every month!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Interestingly, I'm someone who does not click on ads, but the last 3 ads I've clicked on were on Facebook, and two resulted in purchases.

I can't help it when the ads are for cool things like a $20 USB endoscope.

<comment><USER14> I work at an agency that does a decent amount of digital PPC advertising. A year ago, we'd almost entirely steer our customers away from Facebook to PPC- search advertising. Back then, the campaigns we ran on Facebook were almost entirely wasted money.

But today, Facebook has really improved their ad platform. They offer pretty much unparalleled user targeting features, coupled with some clever tools like product ads that are much easier to use and integrate than Google's.

For some advertisers, we've been able to deliver a much lower CPA on Facebook than Adwords or other platforms.

<comment><USER15> > I work at an agency that does a decent amount of digital PPC advertising. A > year ago, we'd almost entirely steer our customers away from Facebook to > PPC-search advertising. Back then, the campaigns we ran on Facebook were > almost entirely wasted money.

A year ago? You sure you don't mean like 3-4 years ago? 1-2 years ago Facebook advertising was also really awesome with a high ROI. Almost all the people I work with who has done, or still does marketing, has moved almost all of their money into Facebook over the past 2 years because they get a far higher ROI than any other service including Google AdWords.

I'm actually surprised to not hear about huge declines in AdWord spending (unless I missed it).

<comment><USER13> > I'm actually surprised to not hear about huge declines in AdWord spending > (unless I missed it).

There have been some pretty big signals, the most significant of which has been the pricing of Google phones, tablets, chromebooks, etc.

Google found that simply selling high margin consumer electronics was a better investment than growing the user base and delivering a subsidized top-tier experience.

Thus Adwords faltering has left the door open for Apple to take over some of Google's former strongholds.

The cost of commodity storage tech and mature open source infrastructure means that Google's free cloud products compete mainly on the basis of features. Google's early lead and infrastructure advantage is no longer much of a factor, and Google's recent attempts at product have been (in my opinion) weak compared to Apple and even Microsoft.

The problem with Adwords is that pagerank-driven ad units end up being purchased only by the companies willing to blindly pay the most for the ads.

Since there are better ROI options out there, only the stupidest (or richest, thus already best-known and tolerant of the lowest yield) companies are the ones buying Adwords ads. Since Google has departed from its original low profile ads and moved into a dark pattern where sponsored content is commingled with actual results, this means that the quality of Google's content (when viewed simply as content) is declining.

Another big signal was YouTube Red. The ads got so bad that the only way Google could avoid destroying the platform was to bifurcate it, allowing the ads-present version to sell all the inventory to the poorest people who can't pay $10/month to stop the annoyance.

There are two kinds of marketers, those who need to care about ROI, and those who are expected to spend a percentage of their budget on the top few ad options. Google is now catering mainly to the second group, mainly because the second group is larger and cares little about ROI.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I'll give them credit, Facebook figured out how to monetize themselves.

Versus say, Twitter, which i don't use and still don't understand how it even exists.

<comment><USER17> Interestingly, Twitter's problem is not monetization, it's cost vs scale.

They managed to do $2.5 billion in sales with about 300 million monthly actives for 2016 (the 300m is wonky, I don't know what the avg was for the year etc, but they were near that anyway).

If you scaled them to Facebook's size, they'd be at an equivalent $16.5 billion annually. Account for the benefits of scale that Facebook derives, and it's reasonable to say they're monetizing OK given their 300x million users.

The problem? Their costs are well out of line. When Facebook had $2 billion in sales (2010), they generated $600 million in net income. Instead, at that scale, Twitter is bleeding half a billion dollars on the net income line; they've basically got a billion dollar profit imbalance vs what Facebook was doing at the same scale.

Also worth noting, Facebook hit around 500 million users in July 2010 (the year they did $2b in sales). Twitter is monetizing better than Facebook was at the same user scale. The negative comparison of course, is that Facebook had far more users, and still generated $600m in net income (radically better cost management).

<comment><USER18> Great point. It's easy to judge twitter here, and by many different data points FB has been an exceptionally well run company, but engineers are a lot more expensive now than they were in 2010. I imagine Twitter has to pay interns today what Facebook was paying experienced engineers in 2010 (100% serious).

<comment><USER17> I definitely agree with the salary inflation. Here's another interesting contrast between them given that.

Twitter has roughly twice as many employees, versus what Facebook had at a comparable monthly active user count. It's costing them something in the neighborhood of $200 million per year to keep those employees.

Twitter's organization size was built up on the assumption of a much larger userbase that never materialized. Then their leadership chose not to adjust to the new reality (until perhaps recently, as they seem to be finally focusing on costs).

<comment><USER19> Wait, Twitter are paying $200m on employees, bringing in $2.5bn and spending $3bn (draining half a billion)? I assumed their biggest expense would be employees, what are they spending $2.8bn/year on?

At that scale spending 4x what Facebook spent on employees at the same level (assuming 2x as many with 2x salary inflation) barely registers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Interesting thing is that GOOG's results which were released several days ago weren't so stellar. It's good to see real competition in advertisement market.

<comment><USER21> I'm not trying to be snarky but is it really competition if it's just two players?

<comment><USER22> Yes. Isn't a basketball game a competition?

<comment><USER23> Are there any leagues with just two basketball teams?

<comment><USER24> It's funny. Anyone following the NBA right now would tell you it's a league with just two teams :P

<comment><USER21> Right. And they'd also say the league is incredible uncompetitive.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> One thing I just can't get my head around... who is clicking on online ads? I click on maybe one a year, and probably less than that, and I don't think I've ever bought anything based on what I was shown in an online ad. Perhaps I'm an outlier, but considering the popularity of ad blockers I don't think my lack of engagement with online ads is that extreme.

<comment><USER26> There are people out there that fall for 419 scams and spam email. You are on Hacker News. It's safe to say you're not the average measurement when it comes to who clicks ads.

On the whole ad blockers are not as popular as you might think, you just hear about them more frequently due to the circles you browse in.

In any case you say you click on one a year. Lets assume everyone does likewise and multiply that alone by Facebook's userbase and you've got a good 5 million ad clicks per day.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Hopefully their newly unionized cafeteria workers can extract a bit more from them, then Google would have to do the same to Google Express drivers, then Apple to its coach drivers, and this trickle down effect to non-tech jobs may actually work. [http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/07/24/hundreds-of- facebook-c...](http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/07/24/hundreds-of-facebook- cafeteria-workers-join-union/)

</comment><comment><USER28> > Facebook's formidable ad business, along with Alphabet Inc.'s Google, soaked > up 99% of the online ad industry's growth last year, according to Pivotal > Research.

Does that seem crazy to anyone else?

<comment><USER29> That is absolutely insane. Should we seriously be considering anti-trust regulators to crack down on their insane growth?

<comment><USER20> As far as I understand, In the US monopoly is fine unless it leads to increase of price paid by consumers. EU probably has different opinion.

<comment><USER30> I was under the impression that even this was okay, it was using a monopoly position in one market to take over another market that wasn't kosher.

<comment><USER31> If I recall correctly in the US court case history they ruled one couldn't both own the means of production (ie movie studios) and the means of distribution of content (ie movie theaters). Not sure if the movie business used market power in one to take over the other, but that would be interesting to know. If you take it as an assumption that the only things that changed with the internet were 1) the volume of content increased and 2) the barrier to entry reduced, then it gets tricky. Example: the Huffington Post proved that content creators would be willing to do so for personal brand exposure instead of pay (kind of like I'm doing now as I am now realizing...). FB has created a content collection and distribution engine "employing" people who are willing to populate it for free in exchange for some non-monetary benefit. This doesn't really get FB out of the antitrust problem IMO.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Considering how Facebook still has so many giant monetization levers to pull(Groups, Events, Video, Whatsapp and Messenger) their financial performance is nothing short of amazing,regardless of opinion on the product itself.

</comment><comment><USER26> I guess ruining videos is paying off then.

I'll be watching a video lets say it's a downbeat makes-you-feel sort of video. In the middle Facebook decides it's cash-in time and you get some zany wacky advert for something or other. Yeah cheers Facebook.

The overall effect is I realise I'm wasting time watching videos and exit out during the ad, I imagine eventually I'll just not bother watching videos at all.

I'm also aware most of the videos I'm watching out of convenience are freebooted too, it's a bit cheeky to profit on those.

</comment><comment><USER33> Anyone please explain what is the utility of FB. The newsfeed quality is terrible, with lots of spam and inaccurate content. I stopped using FB a while back, I don't get why a Billion people are still hooked on to this social media trap.

<comment><USER34> • All my friends are already there (and many of them are thousands of miles away from me) so it's a convenient way to stay in touch or just get a passive awareness of what they're up to. Other services don't fill that same niche for me.

• It's an easy way to organise events and participate in small online social groups for common interests or memes or whatever. (It's a partial replacement for forums and newsletters.)

• My newsfeed is now mainly stuff that's interesting & relevant to me—hell, even the ads sometimes—because I'm proactive about unfollowing people who post stuff I don't care about, hiding uninteresting content, and reporting spam.

• Even though I was an active user before, I worked there, and after having met many of the the people running the show, I generally trust that they're technically competent and care about making something useful & good for people.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> The insane thing to me is that they've barely gotten started on monetising outside the Facebook feed. They've taken that, injected ads and garbage until it's useless for me and almost everyone I know, and billions still use it every day. Me and almost everyone I know use some combination of instagram, WhatsApp and Messenger, and they could inject way more ads into all of those. I'd probably end up not using them any more, but that's clearly not representative. It's insane how much un-monetised space they have right now.

<comment><USER35> A problem with monetizing messaging is that messaging services are a commodity. Buying WhatsApp mitigated this problem. Still:

Fancy non-messaging features aside, I have at least two or three functionally identical channels I use to talk to my contacts. If one service gets too clumsy with content injection I could probably change the channel without the other end even noticing it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> I have met very very few people who actually like Facebook, and still it continues to make impressive strides, technologically and financially. May be I am living in a filter bubble where no one likes Facebook and there's a world somewhere where people are all the time hooked on FB, Instagram and WhatsApp.

P.S. I use WhatsApp and like it, so it makes me minor hypocrite.

<comment><USER37> You might have noticed a trend in this thread of people claiming to hate facebook but also still using it regularly

<comment><USER35> ...kind of like with public transport.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Link to non-paywalled article: [http://archive.is/h2465](http://archive.is/h2465)

</comment><comment><USER39> I barely use Facebook anymore. Are there any reasons other than user growth to justify the profit jump?

<comment><USER32> They keep coming up with great, easy to use ad products that convert.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> The new tobacco companies.

</comment><comment><USER41> I suspect a significant portion of this 71% spike is from people fuming about Trump.

</comment><comment><USER42> *since last year

The jump in EPS from the last earnings call a few months ago is just a few percent - nowhere near that. It's about 18% above expectations. This is good if you're a shareholder for sure, but the title is misleading.

</comment><comment><USER43> Is there an alternate article that isn't behind a paywall?

<comment><USER44> @recursion posted this around the same time: [http://archive.is/h2465](http://archive.is/h2465)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14860289](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14860289)

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> How would you define "killing it" to a non-native, English speaker?

<comment><USER46> We detached this subthread from [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14860331](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14860331) and marked it off-topic.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What is an important thing you learned in your education? - <AUTHOR> What is an important thing you learned during your education? <comment><USER2> There's no such thing as a free lunch</comment>


Ask HN: What Is Your Favorite Quote? - <AUTHOR> One quote that you think is better than any other quote. <comment><AUTHOR> _" Never accept a no from someone who doesn't have the power to say yes"_ — Eleanor Roosevelt

</comment><comment><USER2> _" When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time."_

-Maya Angelou

</comment><comment><USER3> "Any time you have an opportunity to make a difference in this world and you don't, then you are wasting your time on Earth." -Roberto Clemente</comment>


Vysor puts a fully controllable window of your Android on your desktop - <AUTHOR> http://vysor.io <comment><USER2> This is pretty awesome! Great "hack" that uses the ADB debugging protocol in a way that probably wasn't intended...

Regarding security, sometime back in Android 4.x the ADB protocol was updated to include public-key authentication. So it's (relatively) safe to keep debugging enabled now, even when you are plugging in to an untrusted USB port.

I think it's done in a similar way to SSH, i.e. the first time that a new computer wants to debug your device it supplies a public key and your Android device shows a popup with the key fingerprint and allows you to accept/reject the debugging connection.

</comment><comment><USER3> Kind of remote control of your Android device, if physically connected to your desktop.

</comment><comment><USER4> Really useful! Thanks for making this - big help for anyone doing product management related to Android (like me)

<comment><AUTHOR> I have no contribution in it .Its by Koushik Dutta , Koush[1].YOu should check out his other projects too.I use his apps on a regular basis.

[1]:[http://koush.com/](http://koush.com/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> this is pretty nice. install chrome app, launch, works.

edit: on a second though: what are the security implications? anyone done some research on this?</comment>


How I migrated from Heroku to Digital Ocean with Chef and Capistrano - <AUTHOR> http://matteodepalo.github.com/blog/2013/03/07/how-i-migrated-from-heroku-to-digital-ocean-with-chef-and-capistrano/

<comment><USER2> I'm planning to move away from Heroku too, partly because of the routing system issues you mention in your article, but also because I want to sharpen my sysadmin fu. Have you considered <https://www.cloud66.com/> because it seems like a nice tradeoff between going "bare metal all the way" and Heroku's comfy environment.

<comment><USER3> DigitalOcean recently became fully integrated with Cloud66.com just last week. It's a great way to easily spin up a new server, and echo's our mantra of simple cloud hosting.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> So how does this resolve the Heroku routing problem for you? You have one server that internally routes efficiently - but what happens when you scale past one server?

If you're not scaling past one server, why does Heroku's routing cause you issues?

<comment><AUTHOR> On Heroku I was using thin that forced me to scale horizontally to handle more than one request at the same time. With this setup I can set a number of unicorn workers bigger than 1 and I'm done. I can scale vertically until I can and then set up more machines with the same methodology and use a load balancer like HAProxy to manage requests.

<comment><USER5> Why not use Unicorn on Heroku?

<comment><AUTHOR> There is a limited amount of workers you can run with 512mb of memory (max 3 for my application) and the random routing can overload one dyno while the others are doing nothing. Basically you have to scale and pay more when with Digital Ocean I can buy a 2gb machine and run 10 workers spending 20$ per month.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Interesting article I think (as someone who already uses Chef).

That said like I commented on your post, create a proper user instead of running as root, really.

<comment><AUTHOR> I totally agree and it's next in the list of improvements I want to do. I just wanted to share this asap until it's fresh in my mind.

Edit

Done! :-)

<comment><USER6> Sure :-) I will definitely forward this to people new to this, I would have loved to have such a tutorial a couple years back!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Every time I see someone doing something cool with Chef, I think of this: <http://progopedia.com/language/chef/>

And then I think, "Wow. This person must be a mad genius."

</comment><comment><USER8> I would be very leery of hosting any serious business on Digital Ocean. Their terms of service are simply too strict.

For example, you can't send email to your users without double opt-in.

Yikes!

Not to mention the ambiguous language banning 'offensive' and 'inappropriate' content.

<comment><USER9> Hi - It's Mitch from DigitalOcean. We are still ironing out our TOS. Given that we are still a startup we are always constantly looking to improve the language.

We don't consider ourselves too strict. As long as you are not trying to run an attack or spam/flood our network, we are totally cool. :)

<comment><USER8> Mitch,

I appreciate the sentiment, but I can't stake my livelihood on promises made on an internet forum.

I want to be a Digital Ocean user, but I'm going to base that decision on the legal agreements first.

I do hope this will encourage you guys to remove some of the ambiguity in your TOS, and to remove that double opt-in requirement.

Best,

Jacob

<comment><USER9> I totally hear you Jacob. Know exactly where you're coming from.

And yes, we will continue to work on our TOS. :)

Best of luck! Mitch

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> With <https://github.com/rmoriz/knife-digital_ocean> you can launch and bootstrap an instance using knife in a single command.

Works with knife-solo and traditional chef-server environments.

</comment><comment><USER11> This is great. Two weekends ago I did the same type of migration using Linode and Capistrano. Heroku taught us what we should expect from a platform, and it seems like, as a community, we're moving towards getting those great features ourselves.

<comment><USER3> This is one of the fundamental differences between a platform and an infrastructure provider. As a platform you build a single tool that is used by everyone and with it come inherent limitations. If an infrastructure provider can give you the building blocks to create a platform service on your own, you maintain full control. So long as your time investment into growing the infrastructure doesn't outweigh the cost savings of a platform you get much more predictable growth, better pricing and maintain full control allowing you to develop a product that's customized to your needs exclusively.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is great. Thanks for sharing. I've been toying around with mina, but I may give Capistrano another shot. Right now I have a bunch of build scripts that would be much better suited for Chef and your setup closely mirrors my own.

</comment><comment><USER13> Did the same thing 2 days ago! And cannot stress enough how rewarding the experience was. Although I never heard of Digital Ocean so I chose linode, but I'm also very happy with them so far.

<comment><USER14> Linode have stackscripts, so you actually could do without Chef with a well structured bash script.

I have asked Digital Ocean about the possibility for Stackscripts, and I don't think they have planned for it, sadly.

It is nice to order a server, choose a stackscript, and have a server to deploy to without even logging in on the instance.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Anyone who's interested in migrating from Heroku go do a lot worse than giving Cloud 66 a try. All the lovely deployment goodness without the lock in.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Author here, I updated the article; now a user called "deployer" runs the app. Turns out it was easier now than when I started with the migration.

</comment><comment><USER16> This was a very helpful and practical tutorial. I don't know why sysops is a source of perpetual confusion for me but it's good to have as many examples as possible. Could you elaborate on the actual hoops that creating a non-root user was creating for you?

<comment><AUTHOR> First of all I didn't know whether to provision my machine with root or not. Scraping through sysadmin resources I found people installing Ruby with the "deployer" user and people using root for that task. When I tried installing Ruby with deployer I got many permission errors, but I realize that was caused in large part by my lack of experience with sysadministration.

Also, running processes with runit as non-root requires extra [care][1] and I just wanted to get everything up and improve my scripts AFTER I knew that my setup was viable.

Edit

One more thing: I couldn't install ruby-shadow, which is needed to handle passwords with chef, due to some errors with the version of ruby I had.

[1]: <http://smarden.org/runit/faq.html#user>

<comment><USER17> With rbenv you can install ruby directly to your deploy user, no sudo required as it installs to your home directory

[https://github.com/sstephenson/rbenv/wiki/Deploying-with- rbe...](https://github.com/sstephenson/rbenv/wiki/Deploying-with-rbenv)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, I'll try it as soon as I can :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I hate the term cloud computing and all the stupid hype that comes with it.

It's called mainframe computing, the exact same clusterfuck your grandfather used in 1970. With bigger hard drives.</comment>


Ask HN: How do you grade a job ad? - <AUTHOR> When reading through a bunch of job ads what are the soft and hard metrics you use to grade its quality? <comment><USER2> Proper grammar and spelling. Concise description of what the organization does and how the job fits into the organization's activities. For software positions the technical mix should make sense.

<comment><USER3> Do they have a realistic job description? Or do they describe things in a way that would make even Superman wonder if he might be qualified?

<comment><USER2> on that note, the job description should also be an accurate reflection of what to expect during the interview, which should be an accurate description of the position responsibilities (and not a catch-all wish list)</comment></comment></comment>


Richard Branson on Time Management - <AUTHOR> http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/220418

<comment><USER2> Even if you find this advice pretty generic, I really admire that he takes a little time to do lots of entrepreneur-advice articles and interviews and such. He could brush off these things as beneath him, but it's so amazing that he takes time to share advice.

</comment><comment><USER3> One thing to keep in mind about guys like Branson is that they have a small army of assistants and secretaries. So they can get a lot more done because of this help.

I saw a talk from some young dude in Salt Lake City who built and sold a large company.

One neat piece of advice he had was that the executive assistant should be one of the first five employees. Because a good EA gives time back to the founders, it's basically like getting another founder. He said that he and his EA have their teamwork down so well that he gets another 40 hours in his week.

</comment><comment><USER4> His advice about checking email (or any distraction, _ahem_ , Hacker News, Reddit, Facebook) in bursts is spot on. You'll see your productivity go up and your focus will improve.

As an entrepreneur, my ability to hire and motivate great staff is a big concern. Branson is right about it being essential to a successful business. I'd like to see specific, practical advice on selecting and retaining stellar employees.

<comment><USER5> Having worked at a startup that had the most loyal employees I've ever seen, I can offer these points that I noticed (aimed at the rockstar employees): 1\. Pay them above market rate. 2\. Involve them in your idea process. 3\. Give overall guidance, but let them brainstorm how to implement an idea and who will work on it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> My trick for handling email is to only answer the previous day's email unless an incoming email is urgent (ie. requires an immediate response). That way when you start your day you'll know how many emails you'll have to answer; AND once you answer those emails you are done for the day. Otherwise, you'll get stuck using email as IM with all those folks replying instantly from their Blackberries and iPhones.

</comment><comment><USER7> I was thinking for a time saving solution in regards to email, dont know if it exists, some plug in for email that gives you word clouds so you know what to read or not.

</comment><comment><USER8> good points. I can't think of how many times I let myself get distracted by checking the inbox every time a new messages comes in.

<comment><USER9> In an attempt to increase my productivity I turned off e-mail notifications, now I only notice new messages when I mouse-over the OSX dock or manually check my mail client. The result is messages only catch my attention when I was already context-switching, which so far seems much less harmful to my productivity then every new message triggering a context switch to my mail client...

</comment></comment><comment><USER10>
      Be sure to hire great people who you can trust to run your business

Wise words for entrepreneurs.</comment>


Check This Guy Out - <AUTHOR> http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/08/24/check-this-guy-out/ <comment><USER2> Impressive is all I can say.</comment>


Inc. or LLC? - <AUTHOR>

What would you suggest for a startup? <comment><USER2> Startup implies rapid growth, which means you want to be a Delaware Class C Corporation so you can raise VC money.

An LLC is fine for a business where you expect to make your money from profits rather than a liquidity event and aren't trying to raise VC money.

<comment><USER3> According to this, it should be possible to convert an LLC into a Delaware corporation later: [http://www.feld.com/blog/archives/2006/03/entity_conversa.ht...](http://www.feld.com/blog/archives/2006/03/entity_conversa.html)

<comment><USER4> Yes, but what's the point? Not that much difference in cost or maintenance time. And it is just one more hurdle to deal at a time when you don't need hurdles, e.g. when you are trying to close a funding deal.

<comment><USER3> I don't want to say that everybody should choose an LLC at first. Rather, if you're not 100% sure you'll get funded by Y Combinator or other investors soon, you can keep the LLC and its possible benefits under consideration even if you hope for the best. YMMV.

Based on what I've read, LLC in your legislation may have tax benefits, cheaper and easier setup process, and less yearly bureaucracy.

<comment><USER5> Just a note for potentially cash-strapped California startups:

CA collects at least $800 a year for all corporations operating in the state, _however_ , S and C corporations are exempt in the first year while LLCs are not. That $800 is due about 120 days after incorporation and it's an annual minimum franchise tax, so you'd have to make like $9,000 profit your first year to recoup it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> This will be a small to begin with, I just finished school and owe too much in student loans to quit my day job. An LLC is attractive for the low record keeping and tax paperwork requirements. One concern is that I see no legal framework for vesting built into LLCs, I'd rather not roll my own.

Has anyone looked into filing an operating agreement in Nevada instead of Delaware? Among other benefits, a cursory glance at the facts seemed to indicate that the tax burden would be lower in Nevada.

Am I missing something obvious?

<comment><USER5> An LLC has shares just like any other corporation. You just keep giving shares to those who stay on and don't give them to those who don't. Stock options are another matter.

The primary point of incorporating in Delaware is for the outstanding legal and administrative structures they have for corporations. Not everyone is incorporated in Delaware -- Apple has always been a California corporation. But better to do it now rather than have to later.

In any state, the tax burden for a foreign corporation (one incorporated in another state) is going to be about the same as one incorporated in that state. That's because states have complete control over taxing revenue earned in their state, regardless of where entities are incorporated.

Nevada is business friendly, but since the state has no income tax, it also has a stigma of being quite popular with tax cheats. So it may increase the chance of an audit.

<comment><USER2> In PA, an LLC can have shares but only if you write the legal framework yourself. By default, a PA LLC has membership interests, which are defined as a certain percentage of the company.

<comment><USER5> Good to know, thanks. I guess in some places LLCs are still more like partnerships than corporations.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I just inc'd in CA, I looked at LLC but that's a partnership and I'm doing this alone.

I went for the quick and easy route. I'm looking to build a good product not a big corporation. The less time I spend having to futz with the lawyer/Accountants and Tax man the happier I'll be.

<comment><USER7> You can be the sole owner of an LLC.

<comment><USER8> If you are an LLC in Tennessee and operate as a foreign entity in PA as a corporation - not an LLC. Would this be legal? Would you have to file Articles of Incorporation or Amend Authority to do Business?

Please answer. Your response will be greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

Lynda

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I went with an LLC, but I think it depends a lot on your situation. Mine is that I'm going it alone in many ways, and want to keep costs down, and don't foresee investments in the near future.

<comment><USER9> Why not a subchapter S if you wanted to keep costs down?

<comment><USER7> From what I read, non-US citizens/residents can't take part in S-corps, and since I am physically located in Europe, should I ever want to partner up with someone and include them in the company, perhaps it would be easier with the LLC. It also seemed like a slightly lower hassle way of doing things. I could be wrong, but in the end, after doing my reading, I just picked one and got on with it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The reason most attorneys advise Delaware is that the precedents are strongest there. Furthermore, it makes long-term legal costs lower because most corporate lawyers are familiar with Delaware's nuances.

All corporations are C by default. You have to file a special from with the IRS to become an S Corporation. S Corporations are flow-through entities which are not taxed at the corporate level. The reason VCs require you to be a C Corporation is two-fold:

1\. VCs like to have unilateral rights and terms to give them downside protection such as liquidity preference and preferential stock classes such as Preferred Shares. S Corporations are simpler entities which only allow a maximum of 40 shareholders - as your company grows and you give stock grants or options, this won't work. LLCs only allow 75 shareholders.

2\. VCs will claim that a C Corp structure gives you more flexibility. This is marginally true, but LLCs give you the same flexibility with slightly higher administrative cost but you can maintain the flow-through status which is advantageous.

The real reason is they want preferred shares and special rights. Stay an LLC or S Corporation if you don't need institutional investors. Angels are happy to invest in well structured LLCs or standard subchapter S Corporations.

<comment><USER10> who are you? :)

<comment><USER9> Someone.

<comment><AUTHOR> Whoever you are, thank you. Could you suggest any good books on the VC process? I'd like to be prepared if we decide to go that route.

<comment><USER9> You're most welcome. The best entrepreneur's legal guide is called "Entrepreneur's Guide to Business Law" published by Thompson / West Law written by Bagley and Dauchy. I bought it when I was doing my first start-up and I'm sure they have an updated version. I just found one at Amazon:

[http://www.amazon.com/Entrepreneurs-Guide-Business- Law/dp/03...](http://www.amazon.com/Entrepreneurs-Guide-Business- Law/dp/0314223169)

In general, I think too many young entrepreneurs give up too much equity too quickly because they fall for the "oh we're making the pie bigger so giving us a huge percentage is fine" fallacy.

There are so many things to take into account when taking VC money. Too many VC firms replace young CEOs quickly at which point the founders get heavily diluted. Also be careful of VCs that try to reserve too large of a pool for management they want to recruit.

Management team members recruited by your VC work for the VC, not for you, the CEO. When push comes to shove, they will side with the VC because they know the VC will find them another job if your start-up goes bust.

The golden rule of VCs is this: He who has the gold makes the rule.

<comment><USER9> One more reason to stay a subchapter S Corporation if you don't need to raise VC money:

\- There is a special election you can make when you sell the company that allows you to sell the assets instead of the equity which is something you can get the acquirer to pay more for because they can get a stepped up basis at market value and then depreciate it to create tax savings.

I don't remember the exact research, but I believe subchapter S corporations that undertake the election sell for 10% more than companies that cannot or do not take the election with all other things being equal.

<comment><USER4> I believe LLCs also have this property (or something similar where a stepped- up basis can be achieved for the buyer).</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Privat DE Mail - <AUTHOR> http://privatdemail.net/en/

<comment> wc- I like what they are attempting to do, but without any validation that what Privat claims is true (no logs, encrypted info, etc), isn't it possible this is just some honeypot and all your data is vulnerable?</comment>


How Minecraft is helping kids fall in love with books - the-enemy https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jul/11/how-minecraft-is-helping-kids-fall-in-love-with-books <comment><AUTHOR> Recently, I have been trying to play video games in the same way as I would read a book i.e. I play the story or the interactive puzzles and events until I am finished or satisifed, and then move on.

I find I get very similar things from a good video game and a good book. Both entertain me, but also educate me and make me think about the world in a different way. The main difference is that each format has different strengths, books tend to change how I describe the world or find insight into ideas and things. A good game changes how I experience the world. "The Last of Us" made me really focus on the sounds around me in a way I hadn't before, "Cities Skylines" made me think of the visible and hidden networks that keep our cities functioning.

Do others have similar impressions?

<comment><USER2> Maybe similar, but maybe not--I use video games as a way to monitor my status, kind of get an outside view of myself. If a particular video game sounds interesting, I'll play it for a while and analyze the imagery, story, music, etc. to get a sort of metaphorical read on what my interest says about where I'm at.

For example, if I am experiencing lots of stress, and feeling a deficit of power, I noticed that military tactics and strategy games seem to suggest themselves. If a really long-term, cool strategy is called for, I notice that I play games like golf. If the day is filling up with lots of busy tasks that require a deft navigation of circumstance, the classic Snake-like game always seems to sound fun to play.

Looking more objectively at the game as a learning opportunity, I find that game development is huge for me here. I develop pen and paper games of given topics (from tennis to dungeon combat) and it's interesting to map real life attributes and circumstances like charisma and "home court advantage" onto my mental model of the game. I have to develop a broader model of what makes a player successful, and this spills over into my own approach to life and its problems. For example, if I'm a skilled researcher, it should follow that the more I ramp up and employ that particular skill, the faster my luck will grow, as opposed to skills at which I'm naturally an amateur. And it follows that I probably need a diversely-skilled team to turn to, should I come up against a truly difficult problem which does not yield to my research skills easily. While I build that team, I employ and continue to deepen my research skill.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> As a full time kid and an ex minecraft player, I think that's a way to get into books. The only way I got into books was by trying hard at first to read on my phone (it was hard and boring for a month I was reading during boring classes at school). But now a year later I've never read any paper books, all the books I've read are ebooks.

<comment><USER4> > But now a year later I've never read any paper books, all the books I've > read are ebooks.

This is the most mind-blowing thing I've read on HN. It really makes me appreciate generational differences.

<comment><USER5> I'm around 40 and haven't read a physical book since the Kindle came out. Same goes for most the people around me (including parents and older friends). I think I know one single person who reads physical books, and they're a collector/enthusiast.

I don't think it's generational rather just some people "clicked" with ebooks and some didn't.

I couldn't live without search, saving passages, device handover, hold-click dictionary/wiki (so good for setting the image in your head if the book mentions a city/country you haven't been). I read maybe a few physical books a year before, now I read a novel or 2 a week, almost every week, and carry my kindle absolutely everywhere since they launched (have worn out 3).

<comment><USER6> I really don't care for all the ebook features you mentioned, I just like the convenience and lack of weight of having hundreds of books in your pocket.

I do like the feel of a real book when actually reading it but don't mind reading books on my phone either.

<comment><USER7> I don't find there is that much convenience on having "hundreds of books in your pocket". Unlike music or films/series, most people are never reading more than two or perhaps three books at the same time and most books take days or weeks to finish (unless you are reading full time). Carrying a kindle is not that much more convenient than carrying a pocket book...

<comment><USER8> The question is where to store all your physical books though. I own hundreds of physical books (and that's after pruning the collection of books I have no desire to reread at some point). I prefer ebooks now because there's no issue of storage (plus being able to increase the font size is nice now that I'm approaching 50).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Realy though I wish that there was something like minecraft, but with an RTS- style disembodied god-view camera, with zoom, pan and rotate, which I think will make building things much more painless. Perhaps some mods can approximate that, but if there was something build up from the beginning for such an interface it would be a nicer thing to have for people who would rather build than walk around catching the scenery.

<comment><USER10> I've given some thought to making a better world editor that would interface with Minecraft through command blocks or via the Glowstone MC server. There are a few existing world editor applications but they are quite sluggish (last time I checked). If you want to build small things with cubes then you should check out the latest voxel editors.

<comment><USER9> I checked some voxel editors sometime ago(unfortunately not remembering their names right now), they seemed geared towards modeling small things, not huge monuments, vistas, mountains or expansive landscapes like people seems to do in minecraft.

<comment><USER10> might be worth checking out >> [https://ephtracy.github.io/index.html?page=mv_renderer](https://ephtracy.github.io/index.html?page=mv_renderer)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Whenever I'm in a bookstore I am amazed at the sheer number of official and unofficial Minecraft books. I suppose someone must be buying them of they wouldn't be making more of them.

That being said, I'm skeptical that making book-related things in Minecraft will encourage reading any more than Second Life did.

<comment><USER12> I remember being motivated to read endless crappy Pokémon books churned out in the 90's, this is probably no different. It worked for me.

<comment> kyle-rb I read a lot of those pokemon books as a kid as well, and I agree that they provide some motivation.

But watch out for recent unofficial books, specifically the "Diary of a <insert pokemon>" series (which I think got C&D'd, because they changed all the cover art and replaced the pokemon names with generic animal substitutes). It's pretty enjoyable to make fun of, but probably not the best for kids to read.

[https://www.amazon.com/Diary-Farting-Pika-Animal-Book- ebook/...](https://www.amazon.com/Diary-Farting-Pika-Animal-Book- ebook/dp/B01M0GT7YN)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> This is kinda like saying a movie based on a book will get kids to read. It might. Or they might just skip the book.

<comment><USER14> If 10% changed reading habits that is a big change because those 10% can influence peers through the copy cat effect.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> As a parent I applaud this greatly! Kids with ASD (especially boys) are very into Minecraft. Giving them a tool for getting into reading is very, very awesome and helpful, indeed.

</comment><comment><USER16> I imagine that books could be enhanced with a virtual reality game that presents you the main characters and the place where the book develops the plot. So the line between books and virtual games becomes slimmer.

<comment><USER17> One's own imagination is more precious than any defined virtual game can ever be.

<comment><USER18> Minecraft and imagination are two sides of the same thing. People with no imagination put Minecraft down very quickly.

It is a sandbox afterall.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Minecraft is absolutely not helping in the war on screens. As a former educator I laugh heartily at the proposition. Although, I did use "screen time" as a gift-able and earn-able commodity, and in a small classroom of kids it works great to encourage sharing, participation, group watch / observance, and "can I please share with Timmy now so I can have more screentime later?" [success fist]

<comment><USER20> > war on screen

So, is it like the war on drug and war on terrorism ?

Also I remember when I was a kid, people were over my back for reading too much books, as I was supposed to "go outside", "play with the other kids", "make things with my hand". I won't use the eternal 'I ended up fine' argument, but in any day and age we're grindingly pushing kids toward stuff they don't care about for no decent reason. As a general rule you shouldn't be at war against stuff your kids are into.

<comment><USER21> Screens are even more addictive than books.

My 1.5 year old shuts off completely whenever he can get access to a screen, it is amazing and scary. He likes books also, but is much more engaged with them.

Screen time is probably a top issue for parenting today.

<comment><USER22> Current pedagogical advise is to keep children under 2 away from screens, period. Presumably because they are much more affected by them.

Does you kid gain access to a screen accidentally or is it something you employ as an emergency pacifier on rare occasions?

<comment><USER21> Accidentally for sure. He is only 18 months old! We don't even have a TV.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


New York bans use of facial recognition in schools statewide - <AUTHOR> https://venturebeat.com/2020/07/22/new-york-bans-use-of-facial-recognition-in-schools-statewide/ <comment><USER2> Should be banned in general.

</comment><comment><USER3> Coming soon: publicly accessible stores?</comment>


100 Exclusive Photos Inside North Korea – Part 1 - <AUTHOR> http://www.earthnutshell.com/100-photos-from-north-korea-part1/

<comment><USER2> Awesome photos! I'm looked through both parts 1 & 2 and was most surprised about the detail even in the photo frames. (Photo frames must be thicker at the top so it looks as if the leaders are looking down on you)

</comment><comment><USER3> If you got all your information about the world from HN, you'd end up thinking that the DPRK is a fairly common holiday destination.

</comment><comment><USER4> Not your typical HN post, but I always enjoy looking at photos from North Korea. It's the "forbidden fruit" aspect of it I guess, seeing images from a place so cloistered.

One thing I would have liked to have known are which of the photos were deleted from the camera. What did the DPRK consider delete worthy?

</comment><comment><USER5> Please don't editorialise the titles of submissions:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

"100 Photos Inside North Korea – Part 1" is sufficient to get the jist of the content.

<comment><AUTHOR> Will do. Thanks for pointing out the right way.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Strange world. I wonder though, how long can it last?</comment>


Dapps - <AUTHOR> https://avc.com/2018/04/dapps/ <comment><USER2> So much of VC funding is just about being in the right place at the right time. A lot of these guys seem like geniuses because of winning bets, but that's because nobody talks about their flops.

It's entertaining watching all of the VCs who have made a major bet on crypto, who are now doubling down on what looks more like an overheated casino losing steam. Fred Wilson might end up watching the tide go out on this one. Maybe people will finally remember that he was part of Twitter's clueless board, the one that didn't think it was important to buy Instagram?

<comment><USER3> _> , but that's because nobody talks about their flops._

The KPCB flops in "green tech, clean energy, etc" were widely reported.[1] Also, the VC firm DFJ and Tim Draper in particular were laughingstocks for investing in the Theranos scam because they didn't do proper due diligence.

 _> Fred Wilson [...] was part of Twitter's clueless board, the one that didn't think it was important to buy Instagram?_

Is there a source that says it was Fred Wilson who blocked the acquisition of Instagram?

The story I read was that both Jack Dorsey of Twitter and Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook were courting Instagram at the same time.

Jack offered ~$500 million (all in Twitter stock).

Mark offered ~$736 million ($300 million of that in cash).

Basically, Facebook had the more enticing offer.

In 2012, Twitter wasn't generating any profits and didn't have any excess money in the bank to include any cash component to their bid.

On the other hand, Facebook was already profitable for 3 years and had ~$4 billion in cash in the bank even before the IPO in May 2012. Having a stock that was backed by real profits and a war chest of cash lets Facebook make more attractive acquisition offers.

[1] [https://www.google.com/search?q=kpcb+green+tech+lost+money](https://www.google.com/search?q=kpcb+green+tech+lost+money)

<comment><USER4> Do you have any sources for the DFJ/Theranos backlash? I've wondered if that would hit them, so I'd love to read more if you're aware of any good journalism on that specific investment by DFJ.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> So after browsing through Blockstack's website and a few of these Dapps there's something I don't quite understand. Storing data into the blockchain itself is obviously extremely expensive so I wondered how they did that. Turns out that for most of these apps they either don't tell (as far as I can see) or have this exact same snippet of text in their FAQs:

>By default, your data is stored in a dedicated Microsoft Azure Blob. But you can and should connect your Blockstack Browser to your own cloud storage solutions (preferably multiple).

So... what's the idea here? I don't need ethereum to encrypt my data and upload them to various cloud storage services. Sounds to me like blockstack is an app framework like Google Play or the App Store, only you pay with ethereum instead of fiat and your data is encrypted locally before being uploaded. I mean that last bit is definitely a good thing but where's the famous "blockchain technology(c)(tm)" exactly?

<comment><USER6> From the FAQ: Can Blockstack apps scale, given that Blockstack uses blockchains which don't scale that well?

Yes. Blockstack only uses the blockchain for name registration. Everything else happens off-chain, so apps work just as fast as they do on the Web.

<comment><USER5> Ah, thank you for confirming that, I didn't think about looking at Blockstack's FAQ itself. But then I reiterate my question: what does the blockchain enable here exactly? TFA says that it's "exciting for crypto[currencies]" but it just seems like a cloud computing framework that happens to use ethereum for purchases.

Just to be clear I'm not saying it's useless, actually being able to host your own data anywhere you want and having "end-to-end" encryption sounds great, I just don't see the "blockchain is going to revolutionize the world" angle.

<comment><USER7> Part of the problem here is that we are still in the infrastructure phase of blockchain development, so most dapps still rely on multiple centralized services. But as the infrastructure develops that will shift. For example, (i) all of the blockchains are working on scaling, (ii) Sia, Filecoin and a few others are working on blockchain based storage systems, (iii) Maker Dai, Basecoin and others are working on a stable coin, (iv) 0x and others are working on decentralized exchanges without custodians, (v) many are working on making addressed and key management easier, (vi) distributed identity verification and 'user trust' systems are developing, etc. All of that will take time, but as systems develop, more complex and more truly distributed dapps will be enabled.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> So what Dapps does anyone here use apart from decentralized exchanges and crypto kitties?

One I came across recently that looks promising is joy stream:

[http://joystream.co](http://joystream.co)

Joy stream appears to be a service which rewards people for hosting torrents. I could see this being used by a lot of people.

Are their any services that provide usage figures for any of these Dapps? I'd be curious to know how much they are used as I think Dapp usage is a good bellwether for utility token valuation.

I really want to see crypto currency move beyond just being used for speculation.

<comment><USER9> The Dai stable coin. Many different smart contracts are constantly working together to keep the token worth very close to 1 USD: [https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/dai/](https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/dai/)

<comment><USER10> Why is that good?

<comment><USER8> I assume because it allows you to trade in and out from crypto positions to something that tracks fiat.

This of course assumes that this coin can actually hold its value in the event of a market crash. I also assume it's not backed by real dollars held in a bank but some kind of basket of other cryptoassets right?

<comment><USER11> It's currently backed by ETH but is moving towards multi-collateral assets. Today, they announced a partnership with Omisego [1], with one goal to allow OMG to be used as a type of collateral. There's also chatter about using DIGIX, which is another stablecoin pegged to the price of gold.

The mechanism by which they maintain stability is quite fascinating. From the whitepaper [2]:

> The Dai Target Price is used to determine the collateral-to-debt ratio of a > CDP, and thus the Target Price represents the price at which Dai is backed > by collateral in the long term. The Target Price is continuously adjusted > according to the current Target Rate. Automatic Target Rate adjustments > ensure that the Dai market price remains stabilized around the Target Price > in the short term.

> When the market price of Dai is below the Target Price, the Target Rate > increases. This causes the Target Price to increase at a higher rate, > causing generation of Dai to become more expensive. This leads to CDP users > covering their CDPs and leaving the ecosystem, causing the outstanding > supply of Dai to decrease. At the same time, the increased Target Rate > causes the capital gains from holding Dai to increase, leading to a > corresponding increase in Dai demand. This combination of reduced supply and > increased demand causes the Dai market price to increase, pushing it up > towards the Target Price.

[1] [https://medium.com/makerdao/makerdao-and-omisego- announcing-...](https://medium.com/makerdao/makerdao-and-omisego-announcing- dai-and-omg-collaborations-23600a080046)

[2] [https://github.com/makerdao/docs/blob/master/Dai.md#target-p...](https://github.com/makerdao/docs/blob/master/Dai.md#target- price-target-rate-and-the-sensitivity-parameter)

<comment><USER12> How does the system gets information about its own price in relation to the US dollar?

<comment><USER11> They have a an oracle smart contract that takes the median of a variety of whitelisted price feeds.

[https://developer.makerdao.com/feeds/](https://developer.makerdao.com/feeds/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> The big elephant in his post is the fact that you need to pay (ie buy ETH) to start using dapps.

That's a big stumbling psychological stumbling block that the "regular" internet doesn't have.

And I think that fact will shape whether any of us or the regular public ever launch a dapp.

There will be a small set of services I believe which will cross this threshold. Not sure if it will be a large number or not.

<comment><USER14> The whole concept of gas is user hostile and is a huge setback to broad adoption.

<comment><USER5> Isn't it integral to the way these dapps work however? Is there an other way to achieve the same results? After all eventually somebody has to pay the bill for there computations.

It seems to me that the big problem of dapps is not so much the fact that you need to pay to deploy them but that you have to pay _so much_ to do anything meaningful. The system is extremely expensive compared to regular "not- trustless" distributed/cloud computing offerings out there.

For instance while browsing through the blockstack website I saw that the first such application was a "docs suite" (à la office/google docs) called "graphite": [https://www.graphitedocs.com](https://www.graphitedocs.com)

That seemed interesting but my first thought was "man, if they store the files in the blockchain that must be absurdly expensive to use". They probably thought the same so, according to the FAQ at [https://www.graphitedocs.com/faq](https://www.graphitedocs.com/faq) :

>By default, your data is stored in a dedicated Microsoft Azure Blob. But you can and should connect your Blockstack Browser to your own cloud storage solutions (preferably multiple).

Oh. So that makes sense but doesn't that destroy the whole point of it? What if I decide to, say, use OpenOffice on my computer, encrypt the files using GnuPG and then upload them to dropbox, spideroak and some AWS bucket, wouldn't that effectively grant me the same privacy and control over my data?

I'm going to sound like a naysayer but it just looks like yet an other example of using blockchain for the sake of saying that you use the blockchain.

But of course it's just one dapp out of many. Let's see the next one, "stealthy": [https://www.stealthy.im/](https://www.stealthy.im/)

It's a "A secure decentralized communication platform". Now storing small text messages in the blockchain would still be very expensive but it might be acceptable, especially if you worry a lot about censorship or your message remaining available "forever".

>By default, your data is stored in a dedicated Microsoft Azure Blob. But you can and should connect your Blockstack Browser to your own cloud storage solutions (preferably multiple).

Oh. Nevermind then.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> > The bottom line for me is that we are finally seeing some useful > decentralized applications being built for consumers on these blockchains.

I don't know if the word "decentralized" should be used so merrily. Research was published recently [0] showing that the blockchain protocol requires a central authority to prevent coordination failures and externalities. Maybe these "useful decentralized applications" should come with a caution sign to the consumers: "product will not only be slower and more expensive than the centralized alternative, but there is also risk of coordination failure and double-spends".

[0] [https://www.tse-fr.eu/publications/blockchain-folk- theorem](https://www.tse-fr.eu/publications/blockchain-folk-theorem)

<comment><USER16> What is the "blockchain protocol"? I think we really need to pick A blockchain and criticize it specifically.

And with applications: some will be more expensive, some won't be. Ethereum developers are already exploring ways for dapps to pay for gas instead of users (searching for link).

<comment><USER15> They define what blockchain is in the first two sections of the paper. Their model of the blockchain applies to both Bitcoin and Ethereum, for example, and seems general enough to apply to most networks people today refer to as "blockchain".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> So, I might be an idiot.

I investigated "Dapps" the other day, and I'm struggling to see the point of these. Yes, they use a blockchain to store their data, and their data manipulation logic ("contract", or schema, and stored procedures as we'd call it in the RDBMS / Monolith days). The UI, and such is all run by some centralized entity. If the App needs cryptocurrency in order to work, you have to run your own wallet.

If (1) I need to run my own "geth" daemon, and (2) some central authority's ownership is reigns over the apps availability, I don't see how this is better than the current world. Until there is a Coinbase-like experience to solve (1), I think it'll be very difficult to get real market adoption. (2) to me strikes a whole set of problems — What's the point of Dapps? I would think it'd be better if the UI and API was hosted on a blockchain, and there was some kind of UI (browser?) with an embedded wallet, and agent to be able to interact with contracts. I know some of this is in development, but is anyone close to the ability to run a Reddit-like site without the existence of some central authority, along with being economical to run?

<comment><USER18> You can host the UI wherever you want. You can put it on IPFS, you can broadcast it as a bittorrent, you can put it on Github, you can put it in a pastebin, you can even put it on the blockchain.

A lot of developers choose to have a replica hosted on traditional HTTP for easy onboarding, but the point is that the application itself can be completely decoupled from the developer.

Even if the developer hosts their app on their own domain, there is nothing stopping you from forking it and replicating/hosting it elsewhere. It's like the ultimate extreme of open source, but also applied to APIs that can't be taken away.

For example, you can launch a smart contract which hard-codes an IPFS hash to a GUI that can never be changed, even if the original owner wanted to.

It's more about what can be done, rather than what is being done today. The possibilities are inspiring and attractive.

<comment><USER17> But, if you put it on IPFS, what hosts the wallet, and wallet API?

Also, last I checked, IPFS is not censorship resistant: [https://github.com/ipfs/faq/issues/36#issuecomment-140567411](https://github.com/ipfs/faq/issues/36#issuecomment-140567411)

<comment><USER18> > But, if you put it on IPFS, what hosts the wallet, and wallet API?

Which wallet? You can use whatever wallet you want which supports the functionality the DApp requires. There are dozens of wallets, some are in- browser.

> Also, last I checked, IPFS is not censorship resistant: > [https://github.com/ipfs/faq/issues/36#issuecomment-140567411](https://github.com/ipfs/faq/issues/36#issuecomment-140567411)

While I didn't mention anything about censorship, I suggest reading that entire thread and its continuation. All it discusses is the ability to have curated blocklists. It's up to you whether you want to use them or not.

What I did mention is that you don't have to use any specific replication protocol. Don't like IPFS? Use something else.

If you did want to use IPFS and you're concerned about censorship, then consider that IPFS is a distributed hash table protocol with some default client rules. If you don't use their default bootstrapping nodes, you can create your own IPFS network. In fact, IPFS is totally usable in an isolated local network, or even over a sneaker net.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Sure Dapps might be an interesting concept but let's not pretend it is free from manipulation. Miners are the gatekeepers to the system.

F2Pool is one of the biggest pools in Ethereum. It was alleged that they manipulated the Status ICO:

[https://themerkle.com/f2pool-allegedly-prevented-users- from-...](https://themerkle.com/f2pool-allegedly-prevented-users-from- investing-in-status-ico/)

They controlled 26.6% of the total Ethereum hashing power.

So, lets say this twitter clone - Peepeth takes off. And then there is someone who wants to post some stuff _against_ F2pool. What is stopping F2pool from manipulating the feed? You might say other miners controlling 75% of the hashrate will pick it up. Sure, you might be correct. But what if the post shits on every other mining pool out there? What happens then? What if the post is time sensitive?

Decentralized apps can only go so far considering there has to be a record for the system to work. And if record keepers manipulate the system it will fail. The question becomes then:

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

<comment><USER16> Having a huge mining pool is super lucrative.

Why would you want to mess with your underlying cryptocurrency and threaten your income if you're a mining pool?

<comment><USER20> Incentives dont matter, any centralized entity has no incentive to do bad things about their system yet here we are.

<comment><USER16> In most centralized entities, interests are conflicted. With mining, the value of the income is directly determined by the price of the cryptocurrency.

<comment><USER20> There are other incentives beyond most obvious ones. E.g. hijacked miner could attack to pump another currency (crypto/fiat) the miner holds.

Incentives are out of equation when you speak of fault tolerance. Incentives are not calculatable. Only "tolerance" (# of tolerable byzantine nodes) matters. And that's 2 for eth and btc. TWO.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> > it sure feels like 2018 is the year we start getting decentralized > applications (Dapps) we can use.

does it, though?

<comment><USER16> Yes, it does to me:

0) Augur, decentralized prediction markets and a very early ICO has reached the bug bounty phase, getting much closer to launch ([https://medium.com/@AugurProject/announcing-the-augur-bug- bo...](https://medium.com/@AugurProject/announcing-the-augur-bug-bounty- program-36034da9a4cf))

1) Golem, another early ICO has launched ([https://www.coindesk.com/golem- arrives-one-ethereums-ambitio...](https://www.coindesk.com/golem-arrives-one- ethereums-ambitious-apps-finally-live/))

2) Distense, a decentralized code-cooperative with be running on the Ethereum mainnet in a few weeks (disclosure: my project) ([https://disten.se](https://disten.se))

3) 550 more live here: [https://www.stateofthedapps.com/](https://www.stateofthedapps.com/)

<comment><USER22> So they're close to launching or just launched. Any evidence suggesting they're not going to crash and burn in the short term?

<comment><USER16> Well, yes, actually.

Augur has undergone multiple security audits.

[https://medium.com/@AugurProject/augur-core-security- audit-r...](https://medium.com/@AugurProject/augur-core-security-audit-report- cd6b4060ccf3)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Not exactly a Dapp, but to me the first killer cryptocurrency use case is/will be Althea: [https://altheamesh.com/](https://altheamesh.com/), incentivized mesh-networking and internet provider services with micropayments.

<comment><USER23> Hmm, I think one thing people forget, is that most of the time benevolent centralization, and revolution to another centralization when necessary is more valuable to consumers, than always on decentralization.

<comment><USER12> I don't know how that comment applies to Althea.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Can someone explain to me why I should pay to use the dapp Twitter clone?

<comment><USER25> One reason is to move from being the product to being a user, so that your attention is not sold to the highest bidder and your behaviour manipulated in such a way that it produces the highest value. Of course, paying with your attention is a valid way of paying for things as long as the implications are clear.

edit: spelling mistakes

<comment><USER26> IMO, federation is a better model of this. With Mastodon, sure somebody is still paying server costs, but there is no unavoidable fee for the software/service and it has the same censorship-resistent properties.

(I'd like to see signed messages in Mastodon but that's not a problem inherent to a federated model)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> `Error establishing a database connection`

So is the joke that is this wouldn't happen if their blog was hosted on a dapp?

</comment><comment><USER28> _Error establishing a database connection_

There's a Dapp for that:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterPlanetary_File_System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterPlanetary_File_System)

Interesting points:

\- there is no token, and so IPFS isn't as sexy as some of the stuff running on Ethereum

\- there may be no role to be played by VCs in advancing IPFS.

There's a lot of innovation going on that ticks both boxes. I'm curious to see how venture funding will adapt (or not).

<comment><USER29> IPFS has a token called filecoin and has a whole slew of VCs invested in it.

<comment><USER30> It's important to get the relationship between IPFS and Filecoin correct. Saying "IPFS has a token called Filecoin" is not true, as IPFS works (today, right now) without Filecoin, which has not been built yet.

Filecoin is simply a way to store things in exchange for FIL (or vice-versa). Filecoin does depend on IPFS, but IPFS is a standalone project and does not require Filecoin to be useful.

Disclaimer: I work for Protocol Labs, specifically on the IPFS project

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> crypto should not mean cryptocurrency it should mean cryptography

<comment><USER32> And distributed should mean distributed, not 'using a blockchain'.

<comment><USER33> Agreed

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> I'm getting a database connection error, which seems ironic given the subject of the post.

</comment><comment><USER35> One project I really like is Streamr. It looks promising. Monetizing realtime data on top of ethereum. It's great to see projects on top of ethereum creating real value.

<comment><USER36> There's no value here! Even their own examples are so tenuous it's bizarre to me that anyone could post that with no sense of shame.

'what if what people know for free today would be wrapped up in an insane network of constantly negotiating prices for that same information'

<comment><USER35> I respect your point of view. I like the project as i like Golem. They are trying to build decentralized cloud services on top of an existing blockchain. Hacker news is not read by idiots, so please don't accuse me of trying to deceive readers. The average reader here is quite smart, they don't need your defense.

<comment><USER36> I was just counter pointing your opinion, I absolutely don't think you were actively deceiving anyone.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Fred may as well be describing the turboencabulator[0]. I get that VCs should swing for the fences, but this seems like they are totally ignoring first principles when it comes to cryptocurrency/blockchain apps.

[0] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ac7G7xOG2Ag](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ac7G7xOG2Ag)

</comment><comment><USER38> Link appears to be down - try here: [https://avc.com/](https://avc.com/)

</comment><comment><USER39> This is the guy who supports back doors for encryption. Proceed with caution.

and there's this:

>Error establishing a database connection

</comment><comment><USER40> cached version: [http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https:/...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://avc.com/2018/04/dapps/)

</comment><comment><USER20> True dapps dont exist yet. Now they all rely on some authority or served as a website

</comment><comment><USER41> Down. Damn, of all the people, I wouldn't have expected that this happens to Fred.

</comment><comment><USER42> In my day we called "decentralized apps" simply "programs".

<comment><USER43> What makes dapps "special" (i.e. why we have a separate name for them) is that they utilize a blockchain in one way or another. For example for storage or transfer of data.

<comment><USER44> I think the point is that's not actually an interesting feature. The programs use an over-hyped database hoping to siphon off a bit of the hype...did we have a separate name for programs using NoSQL too?

<comment><USER45> >have a separate name for programs using NoSQL too?

Yeah, horrible legacy projects that are a pain in the ass to maintain

Source: I am working on a legacy API based on a noSQL database with a very dumb design (because the data was relational of course) in a very large company

<comment><USER42> > Yeah, horrible legacy projects that are a pain in the ass to maintain

How can a "legacy" project be using noSQL? In my company, "legacy" projects are projects that have been around for 10+ years. MongoDB hasn't even been out a full 10 years, yet...

<comment><USER45> >How can a "legacy" project be using noSQL?

A project doesn't need to be 10+ years old to be legacy.

This API is 3y old, and was the first iteration, the v1, of the company's digital asset management API, it's only maintained for a few teams around the world, whereas the v2 is well crafted and has a way more logical datamodel

Legacy != old

<comment><USER42> It's just weird when I read stuff like "Yeah, I've had to do a bunch of maintenance on our legacy webpack/Angular 2 system" because in my mind webpack and Angular 2 are still very recent technologies, just not recent compared to webpack 2/Angular 5

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> Basically that's centralizing the decentralization. Am I right?

</comment><comment><USER47> know the real data of dapps [https://dappinsight.com](https://dappinsight.com)

<comment><USER48> Looks like I will have to submit HelloSugoi: [https://tickets.hellosugoi.com](https://tickets.hellosugoi.com)

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> Page appears to be down from Tokyo.

</comment><comment><USER50> How does Blockstack make money?

</comment><comment><USER47> visit the real data of dapps [http://dappinsight.com](http://dappinsight.com)

</comment><comment><USER51> "Error establishing a database connection"

<comment><USER26> If only he used a dapp as the database backend, we'd be able to read the post! /s

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> "Error establishing a database connection"

Is that irony?</comment>


My weirdest database experience - <AUTHOR> http://www.vertabelo.com/blog/notes-from-the-lab/my-weirdest-database-experience

<comment><USER2> Saving you a click: The author's "weirdest database experience" was that she didn't over-engineer a user interface, gave a user more or less direct database access for data entry and trained her on how to use it properly for her specific task, and didn't have any trouble.</comment>


Show HN: A Tiny UI for Twilio SMS Chat - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/TheSimplePostcard/twilio_chat_history <comment><AUTHOR> Debugging an sms chatbot has been tedious at times, so I built this simple UI to view a conversation with a given user!</comment>


How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000 - <AUTHOR> http://thomvest.com/blog.html?fb_15675306_anch=15766449 <comment><USER2> I have a big problem with this because it takes advantage of people who need the money, otherwise they wouldn't be participating in this kind of contest. It's one thing if you have ten participants and you pay the winner the equivalent of 10x the value of one site. But that's not happening here. If there are ten sites worth of work being done, only one site worth of pay is being spent.

Let's make a comparison:

Let's say a day's worth of yard work is worth $100. Ten home owners in a neighborhood need yard work done. They get ten unemployed people to each do the work on their homes. These people really need the money. At the end of the day, the person who does the best job gets the $100, and the rest get nothing. Ten houses worth of yard work has been done, but only one day's worth of pay is given out.

Yeah, you can get away with it, but it's because you're taking advantage of people. Just because you can ask for it and just because you'll find people to do it doesn't make it right.

<comment><USER3> Most of the complaints I hear about crowdsourced design services come from people who don't participate in them (just for the record, I don't either). It seems kind of presumptuous to say the designers are desperate and being taken advantage of. Maybe the long-term value is worth it for them (e.g., winning 10% of contests)? Maybe they find it a fun way to build experience?

<comment><USER4> It's easy to forget about revisions, it's not unusual for a simple project to go through 3 iterations and several meetings -- all of which sap up time.

In a healthy crowdsourcing process, failed bids aren't all that different from thrown out iterations and dead-end meetings (in the long term).

<comment><USER5> They are different - because some companies are left with the task of only creating iterations (for which there's no payment)

<comment><USER4> Hence the "healthy" part (I agree with the general tone of the comments that this instance seems a little less than healthy).

In general (like an average 99designs user) a long term process where you win 10% of the bids can be entirely fine. Especially if the trade off is towards spending more time designing and less time in meetings.

(Worth noting too, many designers submit slight variations of the same design to multiple contests)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Not sure where to even start on this one. Spec work sucks, it wastes designer's time and the end product often doesn't turn out great because they have an incentive to spend as little time as possible.

But I have to say, this is even worse. Looking at point #4, they actively went out and tried to get as many designers as possible to do free work for them. From their post:

"The response rate was staggering, with around 85% responding and almost an equal amount actually submitting designs. The most time effective way to do this is to download an auto-text completer which allows you to save a message and quickly populate any document with it by selecting a shortcut."

Congratulations, you just figured out how to minimize your time spent while maximizing the hours wasted by the 'losing' designers. Or, in their own words... "For a minimal amount you are able to tap the creative abilities and talents of a multitude of people across the world. Why pay one designer 10 times more for a product you may not like?"

Edit: Not looking to get into a back in forth here, so I would recommend this to anyone who thinks design contests are a good idea: <http://www.no- spec.com/faq>

<comment><USER7> Whose fault is it if a designer chooses to engage in a contest and they end up spending their time in a losing effort?

We all have to compete but rather than disparage a business owner for being a good steward of their money could you instead present a valid argument for using a designer as opposed to a contest? Some good reasons why a designer, that might hypothetically cost 10x more than a contest, would be better money spent in the long run, would offer a lot of value to this conversation. I feel like the last quote in your post is valid. Why would someone want to pay a lot and possibly get nothing for it? Is that not a waste of the business owner's time and money?

I'm not trolling. As a business owner on a limited budget and with clients in the same boat, I'm genuinely interested in the answer.

<comment><USER8> A good designer would treat it as an actual design project rather than merely a "make it pretty" project. A good designer would step back and examine the actual business and functional problems and evaluate ways in which design could solve them. They'd work with the client to translate those problems and solutions into a visual and functional design.

Rather, in this project, it sounds like this Andrew.Tweed (the OP) attempted to solve all those problems himself, and then went shopping (shadily, I would say) for a photoshop monkey to solve his only issue, the "make pretty" part.

One of the other things you get working with a real designer is an actual relationship. When you need some collateral designed or work on a new project done, a designer that knows you and your business is invaluable. I wouldn't say it's impossible to find with some guy over the internet you paid $3000 to make your website, but I'd say it's less likely.

This may have been effective from a narrow viewpoint, but a real design process it was not.

<comment><USER9> The part that's so frustrating is that thomvest (and lots of other companies) is in the business of creating relationships and yet they don't understand how having a relationship with a designer/agency will benefit them.

<comment><USER5> I completely agree.

If a company treats the people involved in its business relationships as cheap, expendable commodities - the company is not going to shine.

<comment><USER10> And it's an investor/partner/employer to avoid

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I think the problem with this whole notion is that you didn't get a $25,000 website. The results look like something that could have been bought off of themeforest.net for $50 and installed in under an hour. Nothing wrong with that at all but let's not go conflating things.

And just to be clear, there are many amazing freelancers or small agencies out there that deal in the sub $5k price range that would provide the same level of service discussed in the blog post. Hell, as a small investment firm it should be obvious that there's room for both big and small and everything in between in any industry.

</comment><comment><USER11> That's a pretty shady approach for a VC firm. Do they deal with startups in this way too?

<comment><USER3> In what way, specifically, is it shady? Is using a crowdsourced design service inherently shady?

<comment><USER12> A nice word like "crowdsource" doesn't eliminate the exploitive aspects of this technique.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Spec work controversy aside, they make a statement at the end I find ironic:

      The one big drawback is that it is a time-consuming endeavor, and to manage a good contest takes a decent amount of planning and focus.

I've worked through redesigns with many clients, and the time they spent on running this contest is on the low end. Plus, they did more work than they really needed to by emailing contributors and coding it themselves. If they want to take the easy way out (crowdsourcing) then they may as well go all the way.

Managing a "good contest" takes anything but a decent amount of planning and focus, and is not time consuming.

<comment><USER14> How could it ever be? In order to run a really top-notch contest, they would have to spend a lot of time and effort on each part of it, including the design. And how will they find somebody to design their contest for them?

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> The article is informative, but I don't find this approach really "ethical".

<comment><USER16> I'd second that. It's not about saving $22K, it's about getting people to give things away and devalue themselves as professionals.

<comment><USER17> No, actually it's about saving $22K.

<comment><USER10> Actually no it isn't because he got exactly what he paid for: A template-like design and a mess of code worth $2K-3K tops.

Instead of saving $22K what he actually did was waste time running an ego- stoking circus for two weeks.

<comment><USER12> Maybe this story would be better framed as "how to convince people that your $2K redesign is really worth $25K." I mean, if the guy is the CEO and this took two weeks, $22K "savings" over two weeks works out to about $500K/yr, which is probably near the value an average CxO sees in themselves.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Looks like a cookie cutter template.

Why not just use a premium wordpress theme, or the like? Get your '$25,000' website for closer to $100.

<comment><USER18> To back up my somewhat inflammatory comment, I'd like to add that a quick perusal of sites like <http://www.freepsd.com/> or <http://www.elegantthemes.com/> will back up the contention that it looks like a template you could get anywhere much more cheaply.

I'd bet that the crowdspring designer either based their work on a template from a site like this, or developed templates of their own that they reuse on project after project. It's the most efficient way to do spec work. It's what the business model rewards. Anyone doing time consuming original or creative work burns out quickly after investing hours in work they were never paid for.

Browsing websites like 99designs or crowdSPRING, it seems like all you see are three column layouts with slideshow. The most standout aspect of this one is that it's not blue. But since most of the clients on crowdsourcing websites seem to want the same design as everyone else, this model seems to work for all parties involved.

The only losers are the clients, who are overpaying for templates they could procure more cheaply elsewhere.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Woah, hold on. Their website is not worth $25,000. They would have gotten a bad deal if they paid $10k for it.

If they would have put the same amount of time finding a competent agency they may have ended up with a better site for at little as $5-6k.

</comment><comment><USER20> Inline styles, tables, 344 validation errors, no meta descriptions and 88 objects (coming in at 800kb/page) loading. 25,000?

Also why is the blog homepage a single post?

</comment><comment><USER21> Still trying to make up my mind about crowd sourcing, but I like to compare it to the well-established practice of architecture contests. That system also gets criticism for forcing architects to do a lot of work without a guarantee of being paid anything, but nevertheless it is broadly accepted: big-name bureaus participate in them too. The reason why it works, imo, is because the potential reward is much bigger. They might spend weeks preparing an entry, but in case of a win it's usual to have months or years worth of paid work. In my eyes, for web design/software crowd sourcing to gain the credibility needed to attract more than starters looking for a foot in the door, it will need the same effort/reward ratio. For example, you design a specific part of the future website in detail, and the winner gets to redesign the whole site. That way, the client still has the benefit of getting more than well-written intentions in a project proposal, and the contestants know that the potential reward is bigger than being paid for what he has already done.

</comment><comment><USER22> Eh, all is fair in war and business. They didn't break any laws, so let's throw fair and ethical out the window.

First off, who is to say this site is a 25K site? Web developer rates are all over the map, you can pretty much pull any number out of your ass in declaring how much your site could have cost to build. I bet I could have found someone who would have charged 50K. ;)

This site was done in only three weeks. That includes the time taken to figure out all this stuff and gather submissions. They also essentially took the design and coded the site themselves, that's going to take a chunk out of the cost. This site wasn't very complex to take that long.

So, you did a lot of the work yourself. That's going to take a big chunk out of the cost. A lot of people aren't willing to do this. Some people just want to deal with one person who is a professional in this industry. People doing work for free aren't industry professionals, they are doing this on the side (or they are bored.)

So... why did it cost you so much then? I bet I could have done it for $1500, but not for someone else. ;)

</comment><comment><USER23> Would anyone care to explain the prevalence of comments from designers complaining about "spec work"? I had never heard this term applied in a derogatory manner before. Is the idea that because you are an "artist" you are somehow exempt from the economics of competitive pricing?

<comment><USER5> It's not about competitive pricing - it's about working for free.

Spec work involves doing a unit of bespoke work for a company, for the _chance_ of payment. It's not fair - and there aren't many industries which operate this way. I totally abhor the concept.

<comment><USER23> I'm guessing many of the designers on those sites are from developing countries, where even the chance of landing a $3000 contract would mean a great deal to themselves and their families. So yes, it is competition: somebody is willing to do the same work for less.

I can see how this rankles the establishment, to which I say, Welcome to the 21st century. You don't get a free pass any more simply because you live in the first world.

<comment><USER5> This isn't creating some brave new world - levelling the playing field for all .. if you believe that you're quite simply bonkers :)

The injustice isn't that some people are being paid less - _it's that some people aren't being paid at all_.

On top of this there's one person, or company, who is wholly benefiting from the situation, while another takes a cut of the proceeds.

Logically, the system works because some people are willing to work for free. It's rotten.

<comment><USER23> This is what I was getting at in my original post: why do so many people feel the need to render a moral judgement on the behalf of others? If it's rotten, don't participate. Everyone using those sites does so of their own free will.

<comment><USER12> For the same reason you've been replying in this thread: it concerns you. Similarly, if you don't like peoples' comments here, why refer to them or reply to them at all? Just ignore them. See how anti-social your line of logic is?

<comment><USER23> Last post on this and I'm finished. Read the comments I was originally referring to. They are not of the "This threatens my way of life and my stream of income, and I'm concerned about it" variety. I would have no problem with that.

Rather, they uniformly denounce the whole practice as immoral and wrong. They disguise their own self-interest as a moral argument. Why? Because admitting that's its their own asses they are looking out for immediately begs the question, isn't that what all these spec designers are doing as well?

At which point the argument is shot, unless you happen to believe that by some preordained right certain people should be allowed to pursue happiness and wealth, while others should not. Now /that/ is anti-social.

<comment><USER5> I don't think crowdsourcing is allowing many people to pursue happiness and wealth.

Well .. unless you include the company operating the service :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I was aware of crowdsourcing design, but I like how the article outlined each step of their process. Looking forward to the next one about figuring out the message to convey with a site's design.

</comment><comment><USER10> Two words: "View Source"

<comment><USER25> I second that. Good front-end coding, just like good graphic design is a real skill not a cheap commodity. I don't see who has gained from this exercise except as an example of how not to get your website made.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Can any designers here give us a clue on how much it would've taken them to make a design of about that quality? Naturally if you work no spec it's going to be better... but approximately?

<comment><USER12> We can't judge because we don't know the inputs. We don't know what the site looked like before and we don't know what the requirements were, what the company asked for. You can't extrapolate from a finished product.</comment></comment>


A alternative to truecrypt - <AUTHOR> http://www.cipherdyne.org/gpgdir/

<comment><USER2> _gpgdir is a perl script_

Hardly a replacement for TrueCrypt's graphical interface.</comment>


Video Interview with Prolific Angel investor Paige Craig (30 deals in a year)  - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lY9yCorHvo&feature=player_embedded ... by Jason Nazar, founder/CEO of DocStoc. <comment><USER2> Great interview. How many angel investors have gone into a warzone and set up an intelligence network? Also, love the line about how he hates people who hedge their bet.</comment>