How is this Apple's fault? Slapping the big A on the headline seems like a derail at best.
It's not, it's just interesting that the level of media coverage of an Apple event overshadows everything else.
Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder
71–80 of 115 posts
Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's almost exactly what the headline of the article says!?
Maybe he wanted a discussion about, how apple news bury interesting news. Instead of discussion how founders get screwed?
Then post something interesting about it I guess.
It's pretty clear it happened. Is there anything else to say about it?
(Personally, I think the Tinder thing is more outrageous than the Snapchat thing, and it was a bigger drama when it first surfaced.)
Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder
#73Money. Greed. It destroys more friendships (and marriages) than anything else. So what's the lesson here? Don't be careless. I don't care what the idea (startup) is - get the details on paper. True, 99% of startups fail, but you don't want to be in that 1% that's making the lawyers rich.
I think the other lesson here is to consciously know when you cross the line away from an amount of money you're willing to walk away from to save the friendship, and be sure that's what you want.
Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder
#74As a co-founder who got screwed on a large acquisition, it makes me happy to see that Snapchat finally settled. However, a settlement doesn't change the fact that Evan Spiegel really went out of his way to intentionally screw the guy that actually invented Snapchat's model - and seemed to enjoy doing it. He's definitely not someone I'd ever do business with. http://www.businessinsider.com/snapchat-lawsuit-video-depos…
A few friends of mine saw Evan speak at Stanford this past spring. He was in a room with Eric Schmidt and Sam Altman (IIRC) and his attitude towards them was nothing short of smug. I don't remember the specifics of what he said but my friends said he basically "told Eric, Sam and other prominent VCs on the panel off because he thought he was more successful than them". Take that for what it's worth.
>Take that for what it's worth.
Which is nothing. We don't have the context and it's always amazing how people, even just observers with no skin in the game, will have wildly divergent interpretations of the same events. There's definitely some interpretation going on here as Snapchat guy almost assuredly didn't say "I'm more successful than you".
Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder
#75How is this Apple's fault? Slapping the big A on the headline seems like a derail at best.
Not Apple's fault per se, just the Silicon Valley equivalent of a "Friday Night News Dump" that's common in industry and government.[1] It happened to be Apple this time, but it could have just as easily been a Google acquisition, some new Amazon product, basically anything guaranteed to get most of the attention and press.
[1] - http://www.rff.org/Publications/Pages/PublicationDetails.asp...
Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder
#76I was going to link to the mandatory reading of Joel Spolsky's canonical answer on splitting shares in startups between founders and beyond. But as Stack Exchange's policy of shuttering less popular subsites that is now lost in its original form :( It was originally here http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/6949/forming-a-new-s... Is there a good reproduction elsewhere?
Found it copied here: http://www.gravitycomputing.co.nz/joels-totally-fair-method-... """ This is such a common question here and elsewhere that I will attempt to write the world’s most canonical answer to this question. Hopefully in the future when someone on answers.onstartups asks how to split up the ownership of their new company, you can simply point to this answer. The most important principle: Fairness, and th…
>Ideas are pretty much worthless.
I've found this sentiment is very prominent among engineers (myself included) and not-so-prominent among anyone else. It seems the general populous believes 90% of the work is "thinking up a great idea". The reality is that almost any annoyance or inconvenience in your life could be turned into a profitable company. There is an unlimited supply of ideas that could, hypothetically, be developed into a profitable company. That's one of the reasons new profitable companies can keep getting started, even though there are 6 billion other people on earth who could've beat you to the punch.
I just wonder why that knowledge is so rare. I understand engineers understand it intimately since they spend years making these things come to life, but you'd think it'd be at least a little more visible to non-engineers.
Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You really have to believe in the company as a whole to make that commitment Or just get a good salary/benefits/etc
Somewhere like Google will likely pay better, though.
And would be harder to get a job with, presumably. I would venture that it would be much more difficult, but I'm simply speculating.
Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder
#78Is there any interest in "this is how I got fucked" at a startup type article, or is it so common that it doesn't matter?
I have an experience...
Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I wish we could ban most of the top active commenters on hacker news. Assuming I'm on it, let's see the rest of your list of HN'ers you'd like to see banned.
HN should remove the option to delete your post once someone's replied to it. Also show all versions of your comment, like facebook does.
Situation: someone accidentally copy-pastes personal data into a comment. Someone else replies, "you probably should remove that". The first person can no longer remove it.
I find it annoying when people delete posts as well, but there are valuable reasons to do it.
Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
A few friends of mine saw Evan speak at Stanford this past spring. He was in a room with Eric Schmidt and Sam Altman (IIRC) and his attitude towards them was nothing short of smug. I don't remember the specifics of what he said but my friends said he basically "told Eric, Sam and other prominent VCs on the panel off because he thought he was more successful than them". Take that for what it's worth.
>Take that for what it's worth. Which is nothing. We don't have the context and it's always amazing how people, even just observers with no skin in the game, will have wildly divergent interpretations of the same events. There's definitely some interpretation going on here as Snapchat guy almost assuredly didn't say "I'm more successful than you".
It was a room full of Stanford students, many of which had zero context of who he was or what his reputation was. They were there to learn from successful VCs/Founders/etc and every student I spoke with generally agreed he was smug, off putting and dismissive not only to the students but also the other panel members.
Given it's consistent with the public's perception of how Snapchat operates, I'm simply reinforcing the parent comments sentiment.