bpm140

NGL, the pronunciation of Waikiki as “Why, Kiki?” made me laugh out loud.

This is the same thing I tell entrepreneurs.

At least with startups you can get lucky.

Writing (or producing) something memorable requires something more.

The author keeps mentioning capital-E “Elites” and never names one or even defines what that means.

My Spidey senses go off whenever someone uses an undefined label to describe a sweeping societal change.

And, yes, it is all about real estate.

It’s interesting that Graham doesn’t seem to say what Founder Mode looks like in any capacity, other than referring to a few outlier founders.

Less than one quarter of companies that go public do so with their original CEO.

Most people would say that indicates Founder Mode doesn’t generally work as companies scale.

It looks like Graham feels that it’s because too many founders listen to common wisdom and eventually get pushed out / leave?

I honestly don’t buy it. In order to scale, companies have to learn how to operationalize more and more processes. This fundamentally looks like “hiring people and giving them the space and authority to operate.”

I feel like his entire post could have been reframed as “just as VCs know there are relatively few excellent founders and identifying them is hard, there are similarly few excellent executives and identifying them is also hard.”

“they also told me my usage was higher than other developers...”

Next you’ll tell me that they’re NOT actually experiencing higher-than-normal call volumes!

Not relying on your network sounds like terrible advice.

Employee: “Hello, hiring manager. I know an incredible candidate for that job we posted last week.”

Hiring manager: “Thanks, employee, but we have hundreds of resumes from strangers, so we don’t need to talk to your contact.”

I’m not saying that never happens? But I am saying that it happens rarely enough that you shouldn’t use it to guide your networking strategy.

aka “Galt’s speech reformatted for TikTok”

Tell us more about the moochers, please?

I don’t think you’re following my point (I probably explained it poorly).

People voluntarily agreed to follow the robots.txt model when they could have ignore it. To this day, a plurality of people seem to support that standard.

That doesn’t keep content from being discoverable or accessible. All sorts of ways to find web sites outside of sites that use crawlers — directories, web rings, social media, etc.

There could have been an ads.txt model, but people probably would have likely ignored it. Your response would seem to be the norm for defending ad blockers — you somehow have a right to the content and if they can’t force you to view their ad, that’s on them.

Why do people get to dictate who accesses a page but not how it’s accessed? That binary seems completely arbitrary.

With all the ad blockers out there, which functionally demonetize content sites, why isn’t there an ad equivalent to robots.txt that says “don’t display this site if ads are blocked”?

So many good comments from several points of view in this thread and the thing I can’t square is the same person championing ad blockers and condemning agents like Perplexity.

Gaslighting has a very specific definition — lying to someone in a way that causes them to question their own reasoning or grasp on reality.

For folks who are just finding out they never stood a chance because Google does indeed have a “small site” designation, they probably feel pretty manipulated.

I’d rather not have tens of thousands of small business owners wasting their time trying to figure me out how to work within Google’s system when it’s all a tissue of lies.

At least they didn’t say it takes courage to brick a perfectly serviceable product.

That was last month.

I saw down below that you’re not familiar with Vampr, which is very similar to what your screenshots suggest.

Moments like this always make me sad. Even a cursory web search would have surfaced Vampr, along with several other find-a-bandmate sites.

Weeks or even months of work because Googling was too much trouble.

So what happens now?

Do you let sunk cost dictate your actions and force you to continue working on an undifferentiated and far less feature-rich product?

Or do you stop working on your app and just start using Vampr?

I have no strong point of view and am interested in why you think safety is okay and financial auditing is not. Are both not about serving the interests of the public?