Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Goodbye, Twilio

blog.miguelgrinberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 353 posts

Re: Goodbye, Twilio

#311

Post by rajanaccros »

brigandish wrote: post #306
rajanaccros wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A flippant dismissal deserves a flippant reply.

Somewhere else, maybe. To think one's opponents are evil or stupid only reveals a lack of self-awareness, arrogance, and over-confidence. Just as the spoon cannot taste the soup, someone displaying those qualities will learn nothing here, and no one will learn anything from them except a bad example, hence why I think HN is not for someone like that. There's always Reddit.

> only reveals a lack of self-awareness, arrogance, and over-confidence

Says one with the hubris to decide what is right for me.

Re: Goodbye, Twilio

#312

Post by activitypea »

kelnos wrote: post #307
louwrentius wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know that France is a capitalist society right?

Capitalist, yes, but with many more socialist features than the US.

My impression that welfare state and social support systems are on par with their neighbors, they just have a stronger culture of labor rights.

Re: Goodbye, Twilio

#313

Post by Corrado »

yed wrote: post #291
rsync wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"At this phase we have to talk both to the business and to developers." How can I send my wife a grocery list, with a twiml bin, and not register a business use-case and provide a US EIN for A2P 10DLC (along with example messages and opt-out mechanisms) ? Haha - just kidding. I know I can't do that. ... and as long as we have you here, what, pray tell, will Twilio do with the pages and pages of use-cases and howtos f…

For what it’s worth, this is driven by federal regulations and carrier requirements, not by Twilio itself.

Yes, but the Twilio implementation of this has been very frustrating. The process is (needlessly?) complex and has changed several times since it's inception. The last time I had to adjust our 10DLC configuration I was forced to use the Twilio API instead of the web console.

An API is great if you have to do something hundreds of times or automate a process, but I had >10 sub-accounts to update and doing it through the API made it much more difficult. I feel like Twilio really dropped the ball here and could have done much more to make the 10DLC process more manageable.

Re: Goodbye, Twilio

#314

Post by Daz1 »

Kbelicius wrote: post #305
Daz1 wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because capitalism is the only system which incentives continual innovation through market competition, removes non-competitive organisations which fail to meet consumer demand from the market, and empowers consumers to make choices which are in their self-determined best interest.

> Because capitalism is the only system which incentives continual innovation through market competition Why would a for profit company invest into basic research without a clear goal to monetizing that research while their competitor is spending that money on marketing?

What is the implication of your question?

Re: Goodbye, Twilio

#315

Post by miguelgrinberg »

fastball wrote: post #243
ds0 wrote: post #11

Tangentially, I'd like to shout out both Miguel's work both in explaining the Flask web development framework for Python as well as his work developing Flask-SocketIO, both of which I've used extensively.

I've had to move away from Python-SocketIO due to countless regressions and subtle failures of the library.

Have you reported these? The library has a fairly complete testing suite, and if you are saying there are regressions I'd like to know what those are so that I can make sure the testing is adjusted to cover those cases going forward. Thanks.

Re: Goodbye, Twilio

#316

Post by eastbound »

gbanfalvi wrote: post #300
eastbound wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The state takes 63% of our income here in France, and there are still homeless people. I’d say the capitalists do a better job.

How are capitalists addressing homelessness? Have you read about homelessness in SF and the bay area?

Caritative actions are part of capitalism. I donate voluntarily to charities, this is part of capitalism. Capitalism doesn’t prevent people from having a soul.

Capitalism is the framework that makes all those people work together: The nun, the family guy, the corporate shark, the idealist who can buy land and create an inefficient community based on non-monetary exchange.

Capitalism also makes us globally quite rich (by virtue of allowing us to simply take the revenue we generate in our startups), which affords us the luxury of giving 63% to the state. Supposedly in exchange for the state taking care of poor people. It’s the capitalism that allows me that money.

So I get it, you pin everything bad on capitalism. It’s just that you allow CEOs to pactise with the state to remove freedoms from you. Meanwhile you forget that this unprecedented lifestyle improvement since the industrial revolution, it’s also due to capitalism.

Re: Goodbye, Twilio

#317

Post by Eisenstein »

andsoitis wrote: post #277
Prickle wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "why don't you do it?" type of argument is probably the most common straw-man response to this topic. The whole point, is to point out that some people have enough money to uplift hundreds of thousands out of poverty. Some have greater personal wealth than the GDP of an entire country, and that those people should either: Give up some part of their wealth for the greater good. Never be allowed to accumulate that…

> Give up some part of their wealth for the greater good. And you think they don’t?

s/some/most

Re: Goodbye, Twilio

#318

Post by Eisenstein »

Daz1 wrote: post #314
Kbelicius wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because capitalism is the only system which incentives continual innovation through market competition Why would a for profit company invest into basic research without a clear goal to monetizing that research while their competitor is spending that money on marketing?

What is the implication of your question?

I assume they are stating that we don't actually live in a pure capitalist society, or else your definition is wrong.

Re: Goodbye, Twilio

#319

Post by rapind »

anon-3988 wrote: post #293
rapind wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What he said that "its hard to prove if we are still peasants" is wrong. I think this depends on how you classify peasant. If we can agree that it's about income inequality, and not quality of life, then there was a study done comparing income inequality in the late eighteenth century to current day, which concluded that "Incomes were much more equally distributed in colonial America than in America today, or in ot…

Why does income inequality matter? Why does it matter that some people are way, way richer than the other. This correlates with poorer quality of life, sure, but income inequality itself is not really that important. Calling the modern middle-class human a peasant is quite misguided imo. It is important to acknowledge that we have fared much better than our ancestors. Is it a problem, say, if we all achieved nirvana…

It matters a lot since wealth translates to power and influence.

> Calling the modern middle-class human a peasant is quite misguided imo.

The modern middle class is shrinking fast. About 17%. Most people are either low income or poor.

> It is important to acknowledge that we have fared much better than our ancestors.

Look, we generally live much longer these days, so I think that's a decent measurement that we're far better off in aggregate compared to the middle ages. However life expectancy has actually been decreasing recently in many places, and we have some really big global problems to solve if we don't want that trend to continue. If that trend does continue though, then it becomes very hard to say we're better off than our ancestors.

> Is it a problem, say, if we all achieved nirvana but some achieved better nirvana? Must we rebel against them too?

Probably yes. Most people aren't zen. It's in our nature to measure our status among our peers, and probably responsible for most people's wealth and their drive to do better. Better is always relative. Before arguing the morality of this, you'll need to also defend the morality of billionaires (what's the point really?).

Re: Goodbye, Twilio

#320

Post by TheRealDunkirk »

dheera wrote: post #292
jmacd wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Venture capital has been long gone from Twilio at this point. It's a public company and no matter what the history of how the company raised the capital to build its business initially, it is simply acting as a public company now. Had they chosen to stay private and continue to use venture capital, they may not have had to reposition the way they have. See: Stripe. Plenty of privately owned businesses IPO and become…

I think they were saying that a investor-backed company only has a pathway to either (a) acquisition, likely by a public company, or (b) going public. Investors need (a) or (b) to get a payout, that's their business model, that's the reason they invest in your company. If you avoid the venture investor route, you can avoid both outcomes (a) and (b), keep the company privately owned, just stay awesome and customer-fri…

All the perfectly-successful, privately-owned companies seem to have a price at which they eventually sell out to a soulless conglomerate, q.v. StackOverflow and GitHub.
Post reply on HN