besvinick

Not arguing that MBAs are the "new black." I'm simply saying that one explanation is how many MBAs who have been successful at tech startups are known for other things - not the degree.

And as for your jab after reading (or rather, misinterpreting) one blog post, we can simply agree to disagree.

Thanks for commenting and checking out my blog, though - happy holidays!

Seems like nothing in Google+ is original, simply a mash-up of other social media services that already exist.

I definitely agree it's an exception but the more blogs like TechCrunch publicize people dropping out (Thiel Fellows, Penn students from a post yesterday), the more prominent (and viable) it appears. The best option is to run the business at school, leverage the vast array of (usually free) resources on campus, and graduate with a startup AND a degree.

Clearly there are numerous successful entrepreneurs without college degrees, but would they have been even better served with 4 years of college under their belt?

If you don't get the idea of NYC being a startup hub, take a look at this post: http://ventureminded.me/post/5891689041/why-nyc-will-win-out...

Also, even though Foursquare opened up a SF office, the key point is that it is BASED in NYC. The app still says "made in NYC." Dens is an East Coast guy, and that's what matters. If Zuck started Facebook now, he just as easily could have stayed in Boston or come to NYC (he's from just outside the city). However, in 2004, he had no choice but to go to the Valley.

How is Microsoft "hot?" Last I checked it wasn't 1998...

Great call on the TMZ analogy - it's become too mainstream and gossipy. I'm all for hearing major news about the big name startups, but I feel like they have sold out by not giving as much exposure to the up-and-comers.

While their growth has been absolutely staggering, part of me thinks they could have done it in a much more effecient way. Do they really need this many salespeople? Do they really need 925 writers for the site? A reduction in headcount should be coming and is necessary.

Love this idea - really think there's a huge opportunity for making suggestions to people (what Lorimer calls randomness). Users are inherently lazy for the most part, so the more "work" you can do for them while also keeping them engaged with and excited about the product the better.

I have a hard time believing that integrating Skype video chat into Hotmail will have people abandoning Gmail to go back to a somewhat dated service. Thoughts?

Sports and social media is ripe for the taking and SBNation is making all the right moves to be the preeminent player in the space

I feel like all the articles that get posted on HN are ones that I come across through a variety of other sources (SAI, TechCrunch, etc.) on Twitter. I find HN to be much more useful for discussions that are started based off the aforementioned articles from other sites.

Wouldn't it leak out if Zuck was still raising rounds to take money off the table?

While I agree that it's still in the hype phase, I could easily see FB hitting a market cap on the seconday market of $100B pre-IPO.

And with regards to raising way more than Google, FB is doing much more at this point in its lifecycle than Google was. FB is launching many more products that are more capital intensive than Google was back in the early 2000s.