jseims

I find this title misleading.

What this post describes is a 2-of-3 multisig, which adds further encumbrances in constructing a valid transaction.

But any transaction, once broadcast, is irreversible.

I'm building something on top of Hangouts, and I had an exchange that this reminded me of.

I was finally connected with a developer evangelist, and I sent an email saying something like "would love to know more about Google's strategic goals with Hangouts".

Her response was "I'm sure you're aware that Google doesn't discuss its strategies outside the company".

What a striking cultural difference from startups, where we're constantly discussing our strategies together.

Do you have a link that elaborates on N. Zaka's architecture?

Can you allow sorting of movies by rating? That's what I'd need to use it as a discovery engine.

I agree with a lot of the points this article makes. What worked for me was to have a co-founder who basically handled everything that was not coding.

I installed two of these in my house. One of the best uses of money ever :)

I've heard really good things about Braintree.

If you're just at the "idea stage", then no one is going to steal your idea.

If you've progressed further and have some traction, some lessons learned in customer acquisition channels, etc., then you should be cautious about what you share because your information has real value.

What I would find more important than a comparison of technical features is a comparison of their active communities.

How many people are using each project, how active is development, that sort of thing.

I think the negative comments here are missing the fine points of the article.

* Stage of growth is important. In the beginning, success is more about individual effort. When you get bigger, it's more about overall team culture.

* It's not just "being a jerk" that's the problem. It's being a naysayer, working against the culture.

At a certain size, the negative effects of someone's behavior on the culture can outweigh the positives of their brilliance. And when that happens, you have to let them go.

Good point.

As someone who has run a company for a decade, there are several meaningful inflection points:

* Becoming cash flow positive (aka Lift) is wonderful and stress relieving.

* Becoming profitable enough to start hiring lots of people and building a team culture marks a sea change in how you must think about your company and how you spend your time.

* Switching from growing to shrinking (albeit still profitable) changes the company culture, as everyone now feels like they're rats on a sinking ship. It's amazing how much people react to directional changes over absolute amounts (i.e., a company with $100K in annual revenue that doubled from last year is more positive than one with $20M that shrank by 20%).