Newsweek, a/k/a the poster boy of declining circulation, (from 3.1 million in 2007 to 1.5 or less in 2010) lecturing others on how to run their business?
(source: http://idsgn.org/posts/newsweek-can-a-redesign-save-a-dying-... )
The sad truth about Facebook
21–30 of 127 posts
Re: The sad truth about Facebook
#22I think Twitter has immense value. And I would be happy to see it go public and achieve $billions in market cap. Cant say the same thing about facebook or zynga.
sometimes i feel like facebook is that waste-of-my-time show that i get pulled into when i switch on my tv. it sucks up time from my life i will never get back.
Re: The sad truth about Facebook
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't shoot the messenger. His message: Before our arrogant, materialistic society hits the next iceberg or 'crash', it would be wise to create technology for the long-term survival of humanity and habitability of Earth. What problems are more important to solve? "The risk is that by focusing an entire generation of bright young entrepreneurs on such silly things, we’ll fall behind in creating the fundamental buildin…
That implies: (a) we know what comes next (b) we know what today's entrepreneurs are focused on (c) we know what we are currently focused on will not help us achieve (a) Counter: (a) we don't really know what comes next (b) heck, we don't really know what all stuff folks are working on. Just because there are two well-known start-ups called Twitter and Facebook does not mean there aren't dozens of start-ups doing stu…
A.) It's called intuition for a reason. No one in the current paradigm sees the next one out, except maybe the brave scientist or artist who is peering over the horizon.
B.) He or I never said there aren't ANY startups that are solving real problems, just that most are starting out chasing the shallow end of potential. Much of it can be attributed to people having to find a way to survive in a rapidly changing world.
C.) You can use all the rhetoric you want, the bottom line is: the more minds there are collaborating to realize human potential, eliminate needless suffering, and healing our planet, the better. There is simply nothing else worth pursuing that has lasting value.
Re: The sad truth about Facebook
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
That implies: (a) we know what comes next (b) we know what today's entrepreneurs are focused on (c) we know what we are currently focused on will not help us achieve (a) Counter: (a) we don't really know what comes next (b) heck, we don't really know what all stuff folks are working on. Just because there are two well-known start-ups called Twitter and Facebook does not mean there aren't dozens of start-ups doing stu…
A.) It's called intuition for a reason. No one in the current paradigm sees the next one out, except maybe the brave scientist or artist who is peering over the horizon. B.) He or I never said there aren't ANY startups that are solving real problems, just that most are starting out chasing the shallow end of potential. Much of it can be attributed to people having to find a way to survive in a rapidly changing world.…
...the more minds there are collaborating to realize human potential, eliminate needless suffering, and healing our planet, the better. There is simply nothing else worth pursuing that has lasting value.
Please explain how in the early days of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs you'd know that they were going to help humanity?
The whole heal-the-planet argument is very different from do-something-challenging. You and the author of the article seem to be confusing the two. Which one do you really want more entrepreneurs to work on?
Even in hindsight, it would be hard to see how the top 50 of Valley from the 60s and 70s were helping the planet heal.
Other than Bill Gates, everyone else is pretty up in the air as far them contributing to our planet. And even Bill G, it wasn't until he made all that money and decided to give it all away that he truly started having impact.
Now you can sight examples of how the iPod saved a life here and there and how Windows gave rise to the tech revolution etc...in which case, I'd counter that Facebook and Twitter have just as much potential and are in their very early days.
Re: The sad truth about Facebook
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't shoot the messenger. His message: Before our arrogant, materialistic society hits the next iceberg or 'crash', it would be wise to create technology for the long-term survival of humanity and habitability of Earth. What problems are more important to solve? "The risk is that by focusing an entire generation of bright young entrepreneurs on such silly things, we’ll fall behind in creating the fundamental buildin…
That implies: (a) we know what comes next (b) we know what today's entrepreneurs are focused on (c) we know what we are currently focused on will not help us achieve (a) Counter: (a) we don't really know what comes next (b) heck, we don't really know what all stuff folks are working on. Just because there are two well-known start-ups called Twitter and Facebook does not mean there aren't dozens of start-ups doing stu…
The dot com bubble is back. You can get seed funding to the tune of 3/4 of a million dollars for any mediocre idea right now. If that is proving hard to accomplish in Silicon Valley, move your operations to NYC, where there is more money and the investors will invest in anything.
Re: The sad truth about Facebook
#26Myhrvold is a known patent troll, even going so far as to sue the same companies multiple times under shell companies: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100217/1853298215.shtml
Why anyone cares what this guy says is beyond me. The author says Myhrvold runs 'an invention lab'... yeah not exactly. A better term would be patent extortionist: http://techcrunch.com/2008/09/17/nathan-myhrvolds-patent-ext...
Here's another article for good measure: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060626/1011256.shtml
Re: The sad truth about Facebook
#27Complete poppycock. Running Hackers and Founders SV, I think I have a pretty decent picture of what Silicon Valley is like on the ground floor, and as far as I'm concerned it's pretty frigging amazing. There's tons of small teams doing amazing things with Big Data and real time analytics like Factual (making Open Data easier to manage and use), MixPanel (Real Time analytics for applications). There's a number of comp…
The point of the article is that Silicon Valley used to be focused on hardcore infrastructure like semiconductors, networking, operational systems. Note that almost all companies you mentioned are related to either marketing, media or entertainment. Even Factual, their main customers are media-related.
Re: The sad truth about Facebook
#28So essentially his argument is that he prefers industry work to flashy consumer plays. I can't say I disagree. The only thing is that there's no indication that the "serious" stuff is any less significant than it was 50 years ago. Yeah, you have Madison Ave layered on top now thanks to the mainstream adoption of the internet, but should everyone just leave that money on the table in the name of "science"?
Re: The sad truth about Facebook
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
A.) It's called intuition for a reason. No one in the current paradigm sees the next one out, except maybe the brave scientist or artist who is peering over the horizon. B.) He or I never said there aren't ANY startups that are solving real problems, just that most are starting out chasing the shallow end of potential. Much of it can be attributed to people having to find a way to survive in a rapidly changing world.…
...the more minds there are collaborating to realize human potential, eliminate needless suffering, and healing our planet, the better. There is simply nothing else worth pursuing that has lasting value. Please explain how in the early days of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs you'd know that they were going to help humanity? The whole heal-the-planet argument is very different from do-something-challenging. You and the auth…
1.) They are not different at all. We have to 'do something' to fix our civilization's problems or 'heal our planet'. That doing part is where startups come into the picture.
2.) You ever read Steve Wozniack's autobiography? If you haven't, you don't know the full story. They believed a PC could do a lot more than just crunch numbers, it could realize creative and scientific potential. Steve J. believed computers were 'bicycles for the mind'. To this day, Apple is still focused on creating hardware and software that make life simpler and allows people to create easier. Whether they do or not, is all up to them...
3.) Bill G is not the only one, he is just the most famous one. This generation will yield many more scientists inspired to create technology that serves Earth.
Re: The sad truth about Facebook
#30Complete poppycock. Running Hackers and Founders SV, I think I have a pretty decent picture of what Silicon Valley is like on the ground floor, and as far as I'm concerned it's pretty frigging amazing. There's tons of small teams doing amazing things with Big Data and real time analytics like Factual (making Open Data easier to manage and use), MixPanel (Real Time analytics for applications). There's a number of comp…
Most of the funding todays goes to:
1)"OSI Level 7" (Social Networking, Web 2.0, Mobile Apps and Widgets companies).
2)"OSI Level 6" (Cloud, Big Data and BI/Analytics).
"OSI Layers 1-5" are more capital intensive and they are heavily underfunded.
My startup somewhere between the "OSI layers 5 and 6" and I fully agree with the people quoted in the article.
While using non-mainstream and exotic programming languages is fun, it has nothing to do with the actual problem domain. One can build "Facebook for cats" using Erlang/OTP and "Twitter for dogs" using Clojure, but they still not solving hard problems, mere a pet entertainment problem.
I have nothing against these languages. I myself using Erlang/OTP for solving problems in Semiconductors industry.