11–20 of 91 posts
The media is 100% to blame here... I think in large part because of how they treat female entrepreneurs, with well-meaning, but harmful attitudes. IMO we live in a world where there are too few successful female entrepreneurs and at the same time people are very eager to see that world change. So as a result, if there is any inkling of a successful female entrepreneur, that story gets gobbled up by the press ad nause…
If I want someone to give me the lowdown on what's really going on, then I'll turn to the NYT first, not TechCrunch. Surely I'm not alone in this?
It's kind of funny seeing this on a day when three traditional news outlets are screwing the pooch on the whole Craig Wright/Satoshi debacle.
Non-tech press outlet: "Uhh, it wasn't us, it was them."
This is Nick Bilton, occasionally of the NYTimes. Definitely an insider, even if not preaching from the usual pulpit. He's legit and worth reading.
I find it bizarre to bio Calacanis as a "blogger and founder of Weblogs" in the context of this quote.
It makes him sound like an informed third party offering his two cents.
When in fact Calacanis is less a "blogger" than a major force / champion of startup news via his "this week in startups" podcast, founder of inside.com which reports on startups, and runs Launch Festival which is exactly the kind of major conference he is pointing the finger at.
And the author of the piece Nick Bilton has even appeared on Jason's start-up show http://muckrack.com/link/5Gn7/this-week-in-startups so can't be that he's unaware that the outdated biline doesn't' make sense.
It's worth noting that The New York Times, where Nick Bilton worked previously, did not write any articles about Theranos/Holmes. (I checked) The discussion about the suspiciously positive press strongly resembles uBeam ( http://techcrunch.com/2015/04/26/kill-the-cord/ ): the wunderkind founder, the game changing product. But no practical proof of concept and a weak defense when others point out it violates the laws…
But the sound levels they talk about are insane. Their numbers imply a few kilowatts of power going in. You do not want to be in a kilowatt sonar beam. Maybe you can't hear it, but that energy has to come out as heat,
It's worth noting that The New York Times, where Nick Bilton worked previously, did not write any articles about Theranos/Holmes. (I checked) The discussion about the suspiciously positive press strongly resembles uBeam ( http://techcrunch.com/2015/04/26/kill-the-cord/ ): the wunderkind founder, the game changing product. But no practical proof of concept and a weak defense when others point out it violates the laws…
She was featured in this one: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/12/t-magazine/eli...
It's worth noting that The New York Times, where Nick Bilton worked previously, did not write any articles about Theranos/Holmes. (I checked) The discussion about the suspiciously positive press strongly resembles uBeam ( http://techcrunch.com/2015/04/26/kill-the-cord/ ): the wunderkind founder, the game changing product. But no practical proof of concept and a weak defense when others point out it violates the laws…
I wrote about UBeam here.[1] It's come up several times on YC, and most readers are skeptical. The megahertz ultrasound part can't work in air; attenuation goes up rapidly with frequency, which is why megahertz ultrasound isn't used much. Their patents talk about 75 KHz, which propagates OK in air. But the sound levels they talk about are insane. Their numbers imply a few kilowatts of power going in. You do not want…