The idea behind this comment is that if people don't care enough about the work to bother viewing it, the maker shouldn't be paid. Which I agree with; I hate the idea of government sponsorship of art no one wants. The difference here is, PEOPLE WANT THE ART, THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR IT. That's a huge distinction. It has value to people, but because they have the opportunity to steal it with no consequence, they do so.
By this rationale, if you had a way to sneak into concerts without buying a ticket, would you do so? If so, what percentage of the time? 100%? 50%? How would you decide?
Yea that's what I'd be afraid of. It sounds like you handled it well. Since betali.st only features products that haven't fully launched yet, I just don't want to submit, and then by the time they see my submission we're live and they won't accept it. How long did it take between when you submitted to them and when you were actually featured?
How long was the turnaround between submitting to betali.st and getting featured? I've heard some people submit just a few days before going live, so by the time users get invites it's still fresh in their minds.
How do you intend to balance the need for high quality with the desire of users to get involved in the community? Are you worried if someone can't post/comment for months after joining, they may lose interest?
I wonder if this will be the next step for them; mapping all indoor and outdoor locations, integrating relevant ads into the street view of certain stores?
Having spent a few years in the finance industry, in my experience most people in my area of work were not these type A money addicts described. That said, I am confident they added no value, and made millions of dollars taking management fees in exchange for lower returns to their clients than they could have gotten in an index ETF. That might be just as big a problem: that even honest members of the industry can convince themselves they're worth their exorbitant salaries, because someone's willing to pay it.
I enjoyed this essay. Unfortunately, one of the drawbacks of tech culture is the importance of momentum/hype to bring in investors and users. Unsurprisingly, it brings out some bad apples. I do think most are going about things the right way, but maybe I'm naive.
This was a great read, especially as our startup gets closer to launch and we need to keep in mind both the value of rejection, and the philosophy of always trying as hard as we possibly can. The 100 hours specifically can be debated for job applications and etc., but the idea behind it is hard to argue against.
That's a good start! I guess I wonder how much the uptake will be for a broader audience who can get WP for free and may not care as much about the customization experience.