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

Don't. Waste. Time.

humbledmba.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 75 posts

Re: Don't. Waste. Time.

#51

Post by kamaal »

noahc wrote: post #46
balsam wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One might define a meritocracy as one in which the coolness signalling aspect of money is no different from the resource gathering aspect. You also raise the interesting point about the granularity of money: if IBM makes more money than the Lisper for her Lisp, does that make IBM cooler? It could.

I think you can see this in real world. Look at Linus or David of 37 Signals. They have created at least millions if not billions of dollars worth of value (uncollected). As a quick experiment with my girlfriend: Do you know who Linus is? => Uh, No. Do you know what Linux is? => Yeah, it's your system. Do you know what IBM is? => Yes, it's a computer company. It's pretty clear to me that outside of our nerd/geek bubb…

Talking about 'How much someone is rich' without talking about 'How someone became rich' is so plainly wrong.

You have to work in order to make money. And to make a lot of money you need to work a lot, or at least harder. To do that you need to know how to use your time well.

Understanding some meta aspects of work is very important. And sometimes studying nerd lives can give you how they manage those meta aspects which affect the actual aspects which make them money.

Re: Don't. Waste. Time.

#52

Post by gbog »

noahc wrote: post #44
gbog wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money is not a good point system, except if you think a big mac is more valuable than a book by Jane Austeen.

What does this even mean? I assume that you're talking about in a moral sense because of the value judgement you appear to have made. Of course, when I say 'good' I don't mean in the moral sense. Imagine you were to design a way for people to keep score and they had to use tangible things. What would make one tangle item better than another? Here's a quick list I came up with... 1. Easily transferable. Money fulfills…

> in a moral sense

No, not really. You said money is "an excellent points system". I inferred that if it was the case, the price of current products sold on the market should reflect well their inherent value, which I think it doesn't.

Money is is too ductile and doesn't involve enough the "donor", a bit like "vote by SMS for your favorite star". The voting system itself is still not involving enough the person giving the vote.

My favorite "point system" is "feet-voting": the best city is the place where people move to, the best country is the one that people want to go to live, raise their kids, etc. This evaluation was used during the Warring State period in China, and it induces the kings and feudal lords to enforce justice and proper retributions. If not, their administrate will move away. Trying to force them to stay by forbidding expatriation will push them away even stronger. And this voting-with-your-life thing is such a deep decision from the voters that we can trust them to ponder long-term consequences.

Granted, this evaluation cannot apply to each and every case, but in the web services it has a clear equivalent in how many users stay on a site and use it.

Re: Don't. Waste. Time.

#53

Post by rrrazdan »

gbog wrote: post #52
noahc wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does this even mean? I assume that you're talking about in a moral sense because of the value judgement you appear to have made. Of course, when I say 'good' I don't mean in the moral sense. Imagine you were to design a way for people to keep score and they had to use tangible things. What would make one tangle item better than another? Here's a quick list I came up with... 1. Easily transferable. Money fulfills…

> in a moral sense No, not really. You said money is "an excellent points system". I inferred that if it was the case, the price of current products sold on the market should reflect well their inherent value, which I think it doesn't. Money is is too ductile and doesn't involve enough the "donor", a bit like "vote by SMS for your favorite star". The voting system itself is still not involving enough the person givin…

"Inherent value." How do you decide that? I mean how do you say that a Jane Austen novel is a more valuable than a Big Mac?

Re: Don't. Waste. Time.

#54

Post by goblin89 »

gbog wrote: post #52
noahc wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does this even mean? I assume that you're talking about in a moral sense because of the value judgement you appear to have made. Of course, when I say 'good' I don't mean in the moral sense. Imagine you were to design a way for people to keep score and they had to use tangible things. What would make one tangle item better than another? Here's a quick list I came up with... 1. Easily transferable. Money fulfills…

> in a moral sense No, not really. You said money is "an excellent points system". I inferred that if it was the case, the price of current products sold on the market should reflect well their inherent value, which I think it doesn't. Money is is too ductile and doesn't involve enough the "donor", a bit like "vote by SMS for your favorite star". The voting system itself is still not involving enough the person givin…

> if it was the case, the price of current products sold on the market should reflect well their inherent value, which I think it doesn't.

Money is good since it provides a reference point, a solid ground for measurement and comparison. Although often you need to take into account some non-obvious stuff when you compare two amounts of money (esp. prices), it still does work.

For ‘inherent value’ each person would see their own price tag. And I'm sure my tag would reflect smaller amount for Jane Austen's book than yours.

And feet-voting is good if you can judge on a large scale, which is not always applicable. Edit: by the way, most people would feet-vote for a big mac rather than a book (that is, if we were able to conduct a really unbiased experiment with random selection of people).

Re: Don't. Waste. Time.

#55

Post by philwelch »

gbog wrote: post #40
noahc wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The really cool thing about money is that it makes an excellent points system. It's neat that you can trade green paper for physical things, but more importantly money is a way to keep score to two decimal places. Often times when people talk about money they are talking about resource gathering. At some point the resource gathering turns off and the money becomes an easy proxy for points. So I'm not sure that creati…

Money is not a good point system, except if you think a big mac is more valuable than a book by Jane Austeen.

Actually, a given copy of a book shouldn't be worth much since it's not difficult to get another copy. The last surviving copy of an Austen novel would be worth millions.

Re: Don't. Waste. Time.

#56

Post by gbog »

goblin89 wrote: post #54
gbog wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in a moral sense No, not really. You said money is "an excellent points system". I inferred that if it was the case, the price of current products sold on the market should reflect well their inherent value, which I think it doesn't. Money is is too ductile and doesn't involve enough the "donor", a bit like "vote by SMS for your favorite star". The voting system itself is still not involving enough the person givin…

> if it was the case, the price of current products sold on the market should reflect well their inherent value, which I think it doesn't. Money is good since it provides a reference point, a solid ground for measurement and comparison. Although often you need to take into account some non-obvious stuff when you compare two amounts of money (esp. prices), it still does work. For ‘inherent value’ each person would see…

> most people would feet-vote for a big mac rather than a book

Seriously? If you had to be thrown on a desert island and bring only one thing, would you bring a short term belly chemical satisfaction asset like a big mac, or a long term spirit satisfaction asset like a Classic book in your mother tongue?

Re: Don't. Waste. Time.

#57

Post by Fliko »

noahc wrote: post #44
gbog wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money is not a good point system, except if you think a big mac is more valuable than a book by Jane Austeen.

What does this even mean? I assume that you're talking about in a moral sense because of the value judgement you appear to have made. Of course, when I say 'good' I don't mean in the moral sense. Imagine you were to design a way for people to keep score and they had to use tangible things. What would make one tangle item better than another? Here's a quick list I came up with... 1. Easily transferable. Money fulfills…

It means that money isn't a good point system. The simplest way to reason this is that many people around the world make tons of money for selling something that isn't useful/valuable. Scams are probably at the bottom of the 'point system' but pull in tons of money.

For money to be a good point system, everyone with a wallet would have to be sensible and make good market choices but unfortunately the case is, for the most part, the exact opposite.

On top of that I would argue that (for example) Khan Academy is much more valuable than most of the investment firms, but investment firms are worth more $$$ than Khan Academy will ever be.

Re: Don't. Waste. Time.

#58

Post by Fliko »

count wrote: post #41
gbog wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money is not a good point system, except if you think a big mac is more valuable than a book by Jane Austeen.

One of those can keep a starving man alive.

A big mac would only keep the starving man alive for a few more hours. At least the man with the book could get some good entertainment before he starved to death.

Re: Don't. Waste. Time.

#59

Post by Fliko »

zacharycohn wrote: post #12

Opened up HN. Saw this headline at #1. Posted this comment. Now I'm closing HN and going back to work.

You talk about (on topic of why you need 500 karma to downvote) understanding the community and not posting contentless posts 5 posts ago and now you post this. The irony levels are off the charts!

Re: Don't. Waste. Time.

#60

Post by Fliko »

Alex3917 wrote: post #20
andrewflnr wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he means the entire article to apply mainly to pre-product startups. He would probably agree that after that is the time to work on business cards and stuff.

I think this is incorrect. The business card is the first deliverable of every startup, and whether or not you have a well-designed card is one of the strongest signals that your first prospective customers will use to decide whether or not you can ship what you say you are going to. Trying to save a couple hours and a couple hundred bucks by using one of the templates at Kinkos instead of working with a designer is…

Zuckerberg didn't get his "I'm CEO bitch" business card until he was rich, so why should I?

In all seriousness I'm 100% sure people care more about the product/idea of your startup more than the gold lettering on your business card. If you can prove me wrong than I'm going to get gold lettered business cards to get people to invest into my (fake) startup.

Post reply on HN