191–200 of 209 posts
With the growth of electronic commerce and mobile commerce, fraud is going to be a factor for all businesses that have a web presence. Online fraud takes a variety of forms but charge-backs appear to be the most preventable. Using a multi-layer strategy of various prevention and detection methods (fraud scoring model, device profiling, new type of authentication), merchants install a plug-in and do not have to worry…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every time you upload your own photos, you are forced to rate other people's photos before you get your own response. This is the incentive. Rating photos is very fast -- just look at two photos and tap one. All network lag can be eliminated by pre-caching the images. I'd bet the average rating speed is one per second (it's all snap judgements). As long as the app has 30+ people using it at every moment of the day, y…
You don't want to force people to do anything, otherwise it skews the results. Force someone to vote for 30 seconds, or to vote 10 times, and they'll just sit there tapping the first picture until they reach their target. You'll get lots of votes, they'll just be useless. I think you'd get enough votes if the app was in the right format. It would have to be like hot or not, where you have 2 photos, pick one, and inst…
Some people would do this, but as long as you randomize the order of the pictures their data won't alter the winner since each image would get an even number of bad votes.
You can also detect when people are doing this and start throwing out their votes, or just don't even prompt them to vote and show them ads instead. I'm pretty sure this would be a minority, since most people would understand that they want to get real results for their own photos, so they need to give real votes to other photos.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You could offset the "tap the first picture" effect by e.g. randomizing the order the pictures are shown, weighting the votes of serial "top clickers" less, etc.
Then you're just applying random votes, instead of actual votes. For example, something that should be 15-2 votes, ends up being 95-82. You'll be applying a large number of votes to both sides, and pushing everything towards a 50/50 rating. This doesn't help anyone, the goal is A/B testing, and you're making it more difficult to get accurate data. 15-2 shows a lot of promise for A, but then you add 80 random votes to…
It's all in the presentation. If you just highlight one image and stamp "WINNER" next to it, most people won't even look at the numbers. Crowning a winner is more important than being scientifically accurate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're right, the methodology is similar, just for different goals. That one is trying to figure out which picture to use for your profile, whereas this app is trying to help you in making every-day decisions such as what to wear or what to buy. A key element is the response time -- I'm not sure how fast this service gets you an answer but I'm assuming it's not within seconds.
Well, their slow response time is presumably because that's the best they can do.... how would you improve on it?
A site to discover content using an algorithm that ignores metrics we have begun to game (likes and viewings) and instead builds rankings based on pairwise comparisons. Would allow discovery of new good content that hasn't employed growth hacks and will also differentiate between equally rated content. https://aeolipyle.co (algorithm complete -- need to find good use for it.)
"please", a command-line interface for natural language commands. So, like Siri, but for your terminal. Ie: $ please push the changes i've made today to the master repo $ please archive this directory into foo.zip $ please clone the bootstrap repo from github $ please find any files under ~/ matching 'foo-*.txt' and containing 'bar' Sure, all of these can be expressed using CLI tools we have today, but isn't it time…
"please", a command-line interface for natural language commands. So, like Siri, but for your terminal. Ie: $ please push the changes i've made today to the master repo $ please archive this directory into foo.zip $ please clone the bootstrap repo from github $ please find any files under ~/ matching 'foo-*.txt' and containing 'bar' Sure, all of these can be expressed using CLI tools we have today, but isn't it time…
[deleted]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You could offset the "tap the first picture" effect by e.g. randomizing the order the pictures are shown, weighting the votes of serial "top clickers" less, etc.
Then you're just applying random votes, instead of actual votes. For example, something that should be 15-2 votes, ends up being 95-82. You'll be applying a large number of votes to both sides, and pushing everything towards a 50/50 rating. This doesn't help anyone, the goal is A/B testing, and you're making it more difficult to get accurate data. 15-2 shows a lot of promise for A, but then you add 80 random votes to…
I suppose the question then becomes: will the end user notice or care if the votes are random? Do the votes need to come from humans at all?
A search engine for the legal system. I had sent this idea to YC 2013 and they asked me to submit a video, but I felt I don't have the creds to apply. Take each section of a country's law and convert it into prolog clauses. Queries can then be run on the legal engine. For defendants it gives you insights on how to build a case and for prosecution it identifies relevant sections and evidence that needs to be provided…
Take Argentina, a case I know far too well. As INC magazine pointed out, the tax rate on businesses goes up to 108% of your profit. (http://www.inc.com/magazine/201106/doing-business-in-argenti... >). How's that possible? Here's how: the government purposely passes endless contradictory laws thus ensuring you are always breaking the law, just to survive. (A business can't pay 108% of its money in taxes and still survive!). Therefore, you live in a state of somehow doing something illegal. The result? If the government doesn't like you, they find the illegal thing you're doing (that you have to do, just to survive, since the laws are contradictory and unreasonable, like that 108%), and then punish you for "breaking" the law.
Welcome to the jungle, we've got fun and games ;)
Conclusion: If you step into the third/developing world, the key isn't what the law actually says -- but _how sh*t gets done in practice_.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You could offset the "tap the first picture" effect by e.g. randomizing the order the pictures are shown, weighting the votes of serial "top clickers" less, etc.
Then you're just applying random votes, instead of actual votes. For example, something that should be 15-2 votes, ends up being 95-82. You'll be applying a large number of votes to both sides, and pushing everything towards a 50/50 rating. This doesn't help anyone, the goal is A/B testing, and you're making it more difficult to get accurate data. 15-2 shows a lot of promise for A, but then you add 80 random votes to…
Instead of showing the user 95-82, or 25-12 you tell the user "others prefered shirt A 2-to-1 or shirt b 66% to 33% or whatever might be appropriate.
Anyway, again, I'n not suggesting any particular techniques are the right ones, just that there (almost certainly) viable techniques available to mitigate the problem.