I'm not sure he still gets it. He didn't built something people want (even less so want enough to pay for).
He built something he merely thought people should want. In the end, people didn't really want it.
291–300 of 408 posts
I'm not sure he still gets it. He didn't built something people want (even less so want enough to pay for).
He built something he merely thought people should want. In the end, people didn't really want it.
Essentially he developped a tool to facilitate meta-analyses, both building them and then presenting the results.
So, his customers should have been people who usually are investing in meta-analyses. Doctors are not investing, merely passive consumers of existing analyses they can find.
So, research teams should have been his target, probably mainly in academia and in public health bodies. He could have grasped public funds.
The right market was researchers, i.e. in real life usually the ones owning biology PhDs (and often professor chairs), and not the physicians with medicine PhDs, who are the engineers of the human body (engineers applying known solutions, versus researchers looking for extending or consolidating the knowledge).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, Airbnb and Uber aren’t the best examples, are they? Their growth and “success” is fueled by either operating in a legal gray zone, or defying the local regulations all together. Many people all over the world think their lives were made much worse since Airbnb is negatively affecting the long-term rental market. Point is, the effect of the company on the society can’t just be measured by market cap. Back to the…
I think they’re ideal examples. Market cap is pretty much everything. It affects the world more than morals do. HN has drifted further and further from reality, which has been very strange to watch. The classic example was someone dismissing Dropbox when they first launched, but now it’s turned into dismissing billion dollar companies after they’ve clearly won.
YC also says all the way through "Talk to your users/prospects".
That's how you "Make something people want".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think they’re ideal examples. Market cap is pretty much everything. It affects the world more than morals do. HN has drifted further and further from reality, which has been very strange to watch. The classic example was someone dismissing Dropbox when they first launched, but now it’s turned into dismissing billion dollar companies after they’ve clearly won.
Only the parent doesn't dismiss "billion dollar companies", they dismiss comparing them to shut down, non winning, companies like in TFA.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only the parent doesn't dismiss "billion dollar companies", they dismiss comparing them to shut down, non winning, companies like in TFA.
Ah yes, one failure = the idea is horrible. Another classic trope.
I also note the "weasel word" idea. This wasn't just an idea, but an implementation.
The same thing might make sense as a value-added feature in a more comprehensive health service (so the "idea" might be good when put in that use).
But as an idea for a service based entirely on it, it failed hard. What exactly twist do you have in mind to save it? Or are you just saying "we'll never be sure" with more words?
> Make something people want. It's Y-Combinator's motto and a maxim of aspiring internet entrepreneurs. The idea is that if you build something truly awesome, you'll figure out a way to make some money off of it. So I built something people wanted. Consumers wanted it, doctors wanted it, I wanted it. Where did I go wrong? I'm not sure he still gets it. He didn't built something people want (even less so want enough t…
But you know who would pay more if they prescribe Lexapro? The manufacturer of Lexapro, and that's who he should have pitched this to. And they have the marketing muscle needed to make it scale.
That said, there's all sorts of conflict of interest/slippery slope issues going down that path, and I'm not sure they would buy this either, but they'd still have been his best bet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I believe your experience, and I think it highlights the issues we have with communication in medicine. While it may look like your doctor is just blindly Googling something, I would imagine they're probably using it as more of a reference source (at least that's what I often do). I regularly use radiopaedia.org just to look up a quick fact or find alternative examples of a diagnosis I'm working with. It's like…
> Obviously no programmer is solely relying on StackOverflow to do their job I've encountered a few people who were doing something very close to this. I really hope that doesn't happen in medicine too.