3 ms·
Too abstract, and very fluffy piece. So how is DDG gonna make revenue again?
by AznHisoka 14y ago
Too abstract, and very fluffy piece. So how is DDG gonna make revenue again?
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- FireBeyond 14y agoAgreed. He spends 326 words saying what can be summed up as "when you're small, small changes will be noticeable. When you're large, you'll need to make some larger changes to notice a difference". Actually, that's not a summary, so much as I challenge anyone to find more value or detailed analysis in the original piece.I read it and thought "what did I learn here?", not to mention how utterly vague it was.
- tptacek 14y agoFunny how when Gabriel Weinberg writes something, random anonymous HN commenters get voted to the top of the thread explaining how obvious and superficial the article is. But when 37signals, which, like Weinberg, actually runs a real business that has to deal with these issues, acts in a way that is entirely consistent with that article, so much so that you have to wonder whether Weinberg's post is literally a response to them! --- the peanut gallery is up in arms about how "no company would ever walk away from 6 figure passive income".
- Mithrandir 14y agoThis kinda reminds me of an article Gabriel Weinberg wrote a couple months ago about eliciting emotion: http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2012/05/eliciting-emotion.html http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2012/05/eliciting-emotio...
- tptacek 14y agoWhat the fuck does this comment have to do with Gabriel's post? Who's voting this comment to the top of the thread?
- AznHisoka 14y agoI wasn't expecting anyone to upvote it, but why does it matter who's upvoting it? You're not God, and can't dictate what others should upvote or downvote.