RobIsIT

Wrangler currently has two auth modes: OAuth, full user permissions and static tokens that are manually created in the dashboard. Neither is designed for the pattern where a human operator and one or more AI agents need different permission boundaries.

I'd like the ability to create scoped, short-lived tokens from the CLI itself. There's an open GitHub issue (13042) for this.

But, there needs to be a twist: Tokens should be sociable not just by resource type, but by specific resource ID and action.

In my mind, part of the definition of a content farm is that there are people "planting seeds". In other words, content farms have a tier of people (or a process) to orchestrate which content is created in order to generate revenue.

Without this tier, there is too much confusion between the definition of a platform and a content farm.

"What is the easiest way to get a web app up and running that would generate $10 a day?"

Solve a problem.

Take a close look at stable, non-tech industries to figure out a common problem that a number of businesses inside of them share. Ensure that your solution will save / earn the company more than $10 a day.

It's an old, tired adage, but it's true: "Content is King".

On HN, obtaining topical, interesting news and conversation is the most rewarding and valuable thing that this site has to offer.

Your question shouldn't be "what can we give you" but rather "what can we do for you".

Here on HN, the answer will be a variety of ways to improve both the quality of the submissions and the conversation that surround them.

"The practice" I'm referring to could have stated with a bit more clarity. Thanks for pointing this out.

I'm talking about the practice of creating a centralized app store.

Providing developers with a way to monetize and market their apps is important. However, creating an environment where one company has complete control over the hardware, operating system and development ecosystem results in issues like these.

The developer in the OP hasn't done anything other than pay homage to the style of Star Trek. However, when issued a DMCA takedown request, the app is blindly removed from circulation with no notice, no appeal process and no options. It's easier for one company with complete control to enforce arbitrary standards that result in the least amount of friction for them.

This is the biggest issue with App Stores, Marketplaces, etc.

This practice is extremely short sighted of Apple, Google and RIM.

This type of thing will only push more developers out of the boxes they are placed in so that they can have full control over the hardware consumers use.

It's funny how we fight this fight over-and-over again even when companies like Google have an air of openness.

How much effort is coverage in a major tech blog worth?

Thinking about Moore's Chasam, doesn't coverage in a major tech blog encourage more early adopters that will consume the few startup resources you have before they move on to the next startup covered?

Or...

Is coverage worth it? Do a shockingly strong percentage of early adopters reliably become paying customers or engaged users?

I know the answer to this will be subjective, but in my mind, this is why I've never pushed for coverage in major tech blogs. If they pick something up on their own, that's fine... but I've never been sure if the effort is worth the cost and reward.

The answer that I've always wanted to hear Rob give would come from these questions:

What are the underlying linchpins of the SlashDot community? How would you rebuild it? What steps would you take, what processes would you put in place, what technology would you use?

I would never want to create a SlashDot clone, nor would I expect anyone could clone SlashDot. However, there are very important lessons in community building, management and infrastructure planning that Rob is an expert at.

One of the things that Groupon has taught me is that there are certain businesses and products that work well with certain types of offers.

I'm hesitant to call this a "reverse auction" because it's more like a discount fueled by sharing.

I think that this type of discount process would work well for those who make more by selling more, even if the price is reduced. Products and services with a "long tail" would benefit particularly well from this system.

As an example, this system would benefit a movie studio. A movie studio could offer discounts on tickets to see a movie, limited release extra content, etc. The biggest advantage of one movie studio over another is the ability for them to push their product as far and as hard as they can. The profit a film sees is a direct result of the number of people who see a movie, not necessarily how many people use a coupon or discount to see that movie.

In contrast to the Groupon model, this type of deal would work best for products that don't have a tangible limit on their production.

Also, it would be important to weigh the quality "sharing". A system like Klout, while certainly not perfect, is an example of an existing product that could use this type of deal to measure and weigh the influence of those who have shared.

Not bullshit: Motivation.

Gamification is one way to motivate people. There are others.

Overall, a nice idea. I'd have a very close look at what successful wine sites have done in this space. Allow the best of what they've done to influence your initial product.

Specifically:

1. Hire a designer. Based on your design, you're a programmer. You're likely a very good one. Stick to that, there's more money in it :) The words you've used and the general block layout you've created are well done, but you need to have the site styled up. Whiskey is sold based on style and your site will live or die in it.

2. This is a user generated content site but you're not promoting the ugen aspect of it. For example, check out this listing page: http://www.whiskeynotes.com/releases/Jameson-18-Year-Irish-W... Without registering, it should be blatantly obvious (and attractive) for the user to contribute photos, video, reviews and ratings. It should also be easy for users to provide feedback on other user reviews.

3. How can I see the highest rated whiskey's?

4. Is there a way for users to buy the whiskey directly from your website?

5. Have you called the sales reps at the whiskey companies that are highly rated? You should talk to them about how you can integrate your site in to their marketing. This extends beyond simple advertising. They will likely be happy to provide you with custom, unique photographs, direct people to add honest reviews, etc.

6. You should sell an regularly delivered document to whiskey industry folks. They'd be interested in a summary of reviews, ratings and trends. I'd do this from the start and charge a healthy monthly fee for it.

Here's what I took away from PG's "life improvement triangle":

It's very difficult to change the processes people learn. If someone has been throwing a ball a certain way for their entire life, it's an uphill battle getting them to change. Similarly, if someone has been filling out a paper TPS report in the same way for the past 10 years, it's tough to get them to fill out that report online.

It's not impossible to change behavior, but it's an uphill battle.

The best businesses (ie: those with the highest value) supplement and improve the lives of people rather then changing their behavior.

In the Bloomberg video, the interviewer asks PG about his opinion about Groupon. The smarter question would have been "did Groupon improve the lives of people?" The answer is yes. They took something people were doing and made it better.

The best businesses don't often reinvent the wheel, they make the wheel 150% better.

"4. I do not think they can do this, huge part of their brand is software"

I don't think that RIM should ignore their OS or the software that runs on it - far from it. I think that RIM needs to make a course correction and that the course correction should focus on hardware. Software is will easily make or break RIM (as you've noted with QNX), but centering their products on a strong, reliable, thin and easily extendable OS should become front-and-center.

"5. Not sure, my plan costs me $35 cdn and its unlimited sms, 5gb of data etc (go WIND!)"

Sadly, Wind is only available in heavily populated metropolitan areas and RIM has done nothing to ensure low rates. Wind is simply competing on price.

RIM needs to publicly open discussions with every carrier in the world. They need to form collations to reduce cellular data fees so that their devices proliferate even faster. How much more popular would the Playbook be if it came with an unlimited data plan that cost $5 a month? How many more Blackberries would we see (regardless of product changes) if they openly supported the customers who used their devices?

Beyond offsetting hardware costs with term fees, monthly data costs are outrageous. Battling them is a way to win favor with the public and secure a larger number of users.

+1 for Waterloo. I'm not far from it.

"3) I am not sure if [Blackberry apps are a problem] anymore."

Yup - they are. I think the solution is in the money developers can earn. Quote from Gizmodo: "BlackBerry App World debuted in 2009 and had about 26,000 applications as of April 2011. Android had over 200,000 apps and iOS was pushing 350,000."

"In my opinion, it all comes down to how well QNX can create a compelling smartphone operating system."

With the current outlook and direction of RIM in mind, I completely agree with you. However, Apple's mobile devices are founded on cheap, disposable hardware. It's a sound strategy. RIM however previously found a great deal of success by founding their products on the hardware along with a secure, reliable OS. The times have certainly changed, but I think that the fundamental problem with RIM is that they have lost sight of this.

Consistently, Apple's "dirty secret" has been their use (and sometimes over use) of cheap offshore labor. This has allowed them to release products quickly and earn high profits.

RIM is still in a position to take the high road. Their devices don't need to compete on price. They can compete on quality. With manufacturing brought completely in to North America, RIM could say things like "take pride in our products - we do" and "Apple is in it for the money, we're in it to make our lives better".

1. RIM needs to to stop trying to be Apple. I'm not saying ditch the touch screen completely, but they need to stop following so closely in Apple's product development footsteps.

2. RIM needs to stop being shy about where they manufacture their products. They need to bring manufacturing completely (as in 100%) in to North America and advertise the heck out of that. Apple relies on inexpensive, cheap labor - hit them in the marketing cahones.

3. RIM needs to build a profitable developer marketplace. The only reason anyone cares about iOS Apps is because there is a chance small developers can make a lot of money developing. RIM needs to create a system where developers can easily earn money. From in-app purchases, to a robust in-app ad serving platform to flexible purchasing options, RIM needs to take a giant step back and let a developer develop any app they want and charge any way they want.

4. RIM needs to remember that it is first and foremost, a hardware company. They've never been good at making pretty software that works well. Palm, Handspring, HP, Microsoft, and Apple have all at one time or another beat RIM time and again with software - but rarely hardware. Mobile Internet Devices don't need to be complicated or even revolutionary - they just need to be sturdy, refined and fashionable. Forget about saving money on Curve keyboards, forget about trying to breakthrough some crappy "clicking screen", build really great hardware, even if that hardware doesn't conform to the latest trends.

5. Last, RIM needs to kick cellular providers in the butt. They need to step up where Apple hasn't and make their consumer level data plans inexpensive, open and user friendly.

Groupon (and their clones) have created a brand new style of sales. This new sales niche hasn't been properly researched, tested or evaluated. Groupon simply went full out, launched and is learning as they go.

I would be very interested in a category-by-category analysis of the effect that Groupons have.

With this data, we could figure out what types of businesses and specifically what types of deals work best for those businesses. Then, we could expand on this knowledge by creating new products, services and perhaps even entire businesses around this model.

Until we have this data and these conclusions, stories like this are anecdotal and even entertaining, but they don't represent an understanding of this new niche.

So far, Twitter has been invading third-party developers who have built extensions of their system. From apps that hold users (TweetDeck) to those that facilitate extended service (URL shortening, image hosting), to date, Twitter has been carefully identifying what their users consider valuable and bringing those features, functions and complete applications under Twitter's privately owned umbrella.

AdGrok is a departure from this logic. Why did Twitter buy AdGrok (other then the stellar team)?

Google monetized their core product not by bowing to paid placement but rather in building a robust ad network to compliment it. Is this what Twitter is doing?

This is exactly my point. We've seen several iterations of online marketing. Short of spam, e-mail has been such a powerful messaging platform that it hasn't changed - and hasn't needed to.

I don't think that e-mail is perfect. I think that there is something better. I don't know what it is and neither do the current batch of social network powerhouses. It's out there though - email conversion rates are far too low for it to be the end solution :)

Comments aren't dead. The problem that the author of this article has identified lies more in moderation then the comment system.

Comments have evolved. Many high profile sites rely on passive, one way comments that are occasionally peppered with the odd reply, but for the most part act solely as the receptacle of one-way feedback. This isn't necessarily bad and at one time, provided adequate engagement.

Today, readers have become accustom to community and participation rather then simple contribution. We expect more, but we don't receive it.

The solution is a mix of additional functionality, increased participation and eventually clear identification of authority.

Additional Functionality: We've seen basic moderation systems evolve. From Digg style voting buttons to full on wiki style comment systems where users can add sources and refine messages, there have been technological advances that have been largely overlooked in commenting systems.

Increased participation: This is more then simply encouraging users to comment. Users need to be engaged and that happens by the author in the comments. After an article is composed, authors need to become conductors and individually guide conversations and continue to contribute their ideas and messages. Generally, commenters need to have their thoughts validated while the article is thought of as an introduction to a topic while the comments contain the larger message being presented.

Authority: Comment systems such as Disqus and Facebook Comments gather contributions across blogs. All of the comments a commenter has made are available through a common system that supersedes individual articles. This needs to be expanded and improved. Comment systems need to identify authority and encourage "cross seeding" through related people, their individual expertise and the interests they share.

We're getting there. However, we have a long way to go.

This article sounds a little like a plug for Return Path.

Fred does however conclude with an interesting observation that made me think:

"I do think the rise of alternative notification channels; sms, mobile push notifications, direct messages on twitter, facebook messaging, etc are going to move some of this kind of thing off of email over time."

E-mail is powerful. Groupon proved it to us again with their staggering valuation and penetrating marketing.

However, I think that e-mail is only powerful because it is the only reliable platform over which we have to communicate. Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, etc all have messaging systems, but none of them have been able to push through their own glass ceilings to compete with e-mail as a platform over which to distribute messages.

Trust, market penetration, usability, usage advantage... however you want to justify it, e-mail is "social media's secret weapon" only because social media hasn't figured out how to become more important.

E-mail isn't a secret weapon, it's the only platform available. Make a new one.

"Sorry, you must be in the US to use PintPay"

Ugh. I'm a Canadian. A Maple Tree just died because you made this a U.S. only service.

We've heard a lot about how "platforms" will lead the future. It's nice to see a few smart products dive into this head first.

Why not host your own?

I've been using Yourls (http://yourls.org/) for a while now. It works very well. I bought a short domain, installed Yourls in under 5 min and have been happily using it ever since. It even works with Tweetdeck to auto shorten URL's and has a couple of bookmarklets to make things easy. It's locked down for private / non-spammer use and is under my full control.

What effect will this have on the PSN and on Sony as a whole?

If this happened to a smaller company, their ability to process would be taken away and after their infrastructure was verified, they would be forced to pay higher transaction rates.

A litmus test for many VC's is the question, "what would happen to your product if you were hit by a bus?"

This article talks a lot about the social aspects of what to do in the office if a co-worker dies. From a startup perspective, important projects can hinge on a single employee. One of the things that this article missed was how important documentation and communication are to avoiding the "hit by a bus" problem.

I've been trying to introduce an intriguing planetary system to my wife for years now.

Yeah, these guys have my meaning correct.

In my mind, the difference between teaching and educating is the same thing as the difference between an "instructor" and a "teacher" and explaining my definition of education might be better illustrated using these titles.

An instructor is usually hired (often by a community college) to open a book and deliver curriculum to students. Sometimes, personal anecdotes or experiences are peppered in but for the most part, it's cut-and-dry. A teacher on the other hand delivers curriculum using their own string of lessons and methods. A teacher gives part of his or her experience to each student giving them more then a simple instructor ever could.

Last year, I took on an interesting role with Mahalo.com. I was a "Vertical Manager" responsible for managing labor, defining tasks, etc. Here are 3 things that I learned:

Educate people. Don't "teach" or "instruct" them. Truly educate them on what you need done, why, and what you expect the results to be. Education is a talent learned through experience. Not everyone is good at it and more often then not a failure in labor can be explained in part by the quality of education distributed.

If … Then rewards often fail. They can be demotivating and worst of all, people will naturally do the lowest amount of work or preform the lowest quality labor for the "then" reward. Dan Pink author of Drive authored an exceptionally good book on the subject of reward and motivation. You should read it.

Kindness, honesty and respect are conveyed in every action that one makes and if people know that you will treat them well, they will treat you well. Motivation isn't some secret science and "doing onto others" is perhaps the most significant cornerstone of it.

I don't think it's about support. I think it's about respect and honesty.

The collective mentality at many companies (web or not) relays things such as "oh, they're just users" or "well, that's too bad it didn't work out".

It's easy to default into the general presumption that great support will solve problems like these. However, the underlying issue isn't support, it's respect.

It comes from the top and is echoed throughout the company right down to the customer. Sometimes support issues can't be solved and when they can't, respect defines the interaction. Even when problems can be solved, if a user / customer / co-worker is treated with respect, they typically feel valued and satisfied when they are treated with true respect.