Live data from Hacker News

Request for Startups

evaz.substack.com

21–30 of 41 posts

Re: Request for Startups

#21
post #4

"Consensus on need, no consensus on action. Why are there problems that a majority find important but aren’t incentivized or paid to work on (e.g. why does it take so long and so much energy for negative externalities such as climate change to be recognized and regulated)? The tempting default seems to be inaction when there is a consensus on need but no consensus on approach." This is so true, and it's crazy how sim…

When the convenience is enjoyed immediately and any negative effects suffered much later, it can be a tough sell to get people to, from their current baseline, sacrifice even further now for a better outcome 20 or 50 years from now.

Applies to retirement savings, diet/exercise, climate, and many other things.

Re: Request for Startups

#24
post #4

"Consensus on need, no consensus on action. Why are there problems that a majority find important but aren’t incentivized or paid to work on (e.g. why does it take so long and so much energy for negative externalities such as climate change to be recognized and regulated)? The tempting default seems to be inaction when there is a consensus on need but no consensus on approach." This is so true, and it's crazy how sim…

> This is so true, and it's crazy how simple some of these solutions could be.

Maybe. I worked for a water startup that was the very first company, globally, to make a fully automated and digital water meter to solve the worlds water problems that most people don't even know they had. I worked there as a junior and then came back ten years later to be a Director. I learned a few things:

- Most people don't know they have water scarcity, water delivery, or water cleanliness problems. In fact, many people in big cities think their water is the best and are shocked when I tell them about how we deal with lead-based service lines. I have a picture somewhere of one of our meters, which were entirely plastic, looking like it was powder coated from the inside in a pure auburn color.

- Big money is often not attracted to municipal projects because the competition is fierce and the audience is limited to a few reviewers. As a Director I was constantly having to produce white papers to counteract misinformation. One that comes top of mind is one of our competitors kept referring to RC4 as a "modern and robust cipher", which was perplexing to me. I found out it's because they used it in their devices and did not have a cryptoengine to be able to make use of modern ciphers.

- Many cities didn't want out of the SCADA game. They were unable to accept that new systems, built on the same principals, using modern technologies could replace the millions they had sunk into these solutions. Sunk cost, although a fallacy, is a factor. Interestingly, our most innovative solutions occurred in rural parts of the country, due to a lack of prior investment, which net us bigger wins but smaller publicity.

I'll try to add some more if I think of them.

Re: Request for Startups

#25
The ad monetization problem is not solvable, or rather, it's already solved by something like the Brave browser. The internet needs its own money. Anybody remember coin-operated game arcades? You just put a coin in it and you get entertainment. No having to input your card credentials, no leaks, no banks taking a cut, no recurring scams, no 3 letter agencies watching your every move etc. It's not a technology issue, but a regulatory one. If ppl want to solve this, governmnets need to allow people and businesses to send/receive a small amount of money per month completely anonymously.

Re: Request for Startups

#26
post #12
post #7

On ads: the fundamental problem with them is that most people don't realize that they are paying for digital content and free social services anyway, albeit indirectly, since the ad spendings are included in the prices of consumer products. Even if you use an ad blocker you pay for the ads you don't see anyway. In fact the more we use free social platforms and digital content, the more we pay for it from our pockets.…

> most people don't realize that they are paying for digital content and free social services anyway, albeit indirectly, since the ad spendings are included in the prices of consumer products That's a zero-sum argument that's a bit disingenuous. If you make widgets, and it costs you $5 to make a widget, you can sell 10 of them at $20/pop to the consumer for a total profit of 10 * (20-5) = $150. If you spend $100 on a…

Actually I don’t agree with zero-sum argument, but your example seems to be equally wrong.

Every widget you sell with advertisement is one widget sold less for competitor (or something totally else)

Advertisement is not increasing the money consumer can spend totally. So basically you are trying to steal someoneelses share

Re: Request for Startups

#27
post #4

"Consensus on need, no consensus on action. Why are there problems that a majority find important but aren’t incentivized or paid to work on (e.g. why does it take so long and so much energy for negative externalities such as climate change to be recognized and regulated)? The tempting default seems to be inaction when there is a consensus on need but no consensus on approach." This is so true, and it's crazy how sim…

I don’t understand this one. TFA requests a way to agree on problems without requiring commitment on solutions?

If so, I think that’s terrible. It’s easy to agree that I need to lose weight, but that won’t help get me to the gym.

Worse, I could drum up support for some worthwhile cause but neglect to tell supporters that my favorite solution has horrible side-effects.

Re: Request for Startups

#28

The ad monetization problem is not solvable, or rather, it's already solved by something like the Brave browser. The internet needs its own money. Anybody remember coin-operated game arcades? You just put a coin in it and you get entertainment. No having to input your card credentials, no leaks, no banks taking a cut, no recurring scams, no 3 letter agencies watching your every move etc. It's not a technology issue,…

Why does it need to be anonymous? To me it seems the public can't be persuaded that paying for something is better than getting it "for free" (with ads and tracking)

Re: Request for Startups

#29
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most people don't realize that they are paying for digital content and free social services anyway, albeit indirectly, since the ad spendings are included in the prices of consumer products That's a zero-sum argument that's a bit disingenuous. If you make widgets, and it costs you $5 to make a widget, you can sell 10 of them at $20/pop to the consumer for a total profit of 10 * (20-5) = $150. If you spend $100 on a…

Actually I don’t agree with zero-sum argument, but your example seems to be equally wrong. Every widget you sell with advertisement is one widget sold less for competitor (or something totally else) Advertisement is not increasing the money consumer can spend totally. So basically you are trying to steal someoneelses share

> Every widget you sell with advertisement is one widget sold less for competitor (or something totally else)

Not exactly. It's true that consumers sometimes make choices between competitors, like deciding to go to one fast food chain or another. But oftentimes consumers make a choice about how much money to spend vs save. If a consumer has $500 in discretionary funds, the consumer can decide to buy a simple, no-frills, commoditized "meets-my-needs" product and save the $400 for later. Or the consumer can decide to spring for the ultra-deluxe $500 product and save nothing.

Discretionary income is far higher than most people realize. Nobody needs to buy soft drinks, new cars (i.e. instead of a used car), new clothes (instead of sewing up old ones), yet another new video game (instead of a library of millions of older titles that are still as entertaining as they were when they were first released), or a million other things that you see if you look at people's financial decisions. People do so largely because of desire that has been aroused in them by marketers.

Re: Request for Startups

#30
post #28

The ad monetization problem is not solvable, or rather, it's already solved by something like the Brave browser. The internet needs its own money. Anybody remember coin-operated game arcades? You just put a coin in it and you get entertainment. No having to input your card credentials, no leaks, no banks taking a cut, no recurring scams, no 3 letter agencies watching your every move etc. It's not a technology issue,…

Why does it need to be anonymous? To me it seems the public can't be persuaded that paying for something is better than getting it "for free" (with ads and tracking)

> "To me it seems the public can't be persuaded that paying for something is better than getting it "for free" (with ads and tracking)"

This is even more true when the paid option is often a worse version of the "free" offering.

Post reply on HN