In the past five years, I've started and sold a company. Bought a house on a golf course, purchased expensive foreign cars and went on insane trips all over the world.
Last year, my wife woke up one morning and told me that she no longer wanted to be married (that's a story for another time). Got divorced and lost almost everything except the stock that I still own in the acquiring company that may never have an exit. The house, the cars and the trips vanished.
I guess my take away from this is that life is a series of ebbs and flows and it's our responsibility to gain greater self-awareness each day that we wake up. If you feel like you're behind then that is actually an amazing step in the right direction. Ask yourself why you're you're feeling behind and work through those emotions with yourself.(Literally talk out loud to yourself. It's weird but it works)
Are you biased because your former co-founder still has his house and a new baby? Are you biased because your closest friend just took his company public?
What I noticed about myself is that envy tends to create the anxiety that leads to feeling behind and the inadequacies associated with that emotion.
If you understand and even accept those emotions then you can reverse it by playing devils advocate to your feeling of insecurity (everyone needs a little self-love) then you start to be grateful for the things that you are doing well and doubling down on those strengths.
Although, I find him at times to be utterly unbearable. Gary Vaynerchuk does has some very sage advice for anyone feeling behind. His content about playing the long game has had the greatest effect on me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsB9U9kSXUc
I struggle with debilitating depression but I've created mental models that enable me to get out of bed on those days and get to work. I'm hyper-aware of my state of mind and when I'm feeling depressed or sorry for myself I let myself become aware of it and work through it instead of falling into the recursive emotion that is feeling depressed about being depressed which leads to feeling even more depressed.
Once those issues are ironed out then I do my best to break up my day into very small tasks that I can accomplish in order to keep the serotonin levels high.
Today for instance, I needed to finish some financial modeling
for the new company that I started but I had serious FOMO because it's labor day weekend and everyone's at the beach. I recognized it so I took a pen and paper to the beach and did some work at the beach.
Now I've created some momentum for my self-esteem and I'll end up having an exceptionally productive Sunday. ; )
Would love to gather everyone's thoughts about my new platform Creator Arcade. The basic premise is to teach people how to make music by making music alongside the world's best producers and artists.
This idea came about after having many discussions with several producers and DJ's and we thought that it would be interesting to teach people how to recreate popular songs step by step from the ground-up.
We've already created 2 courses with Marshmello and we're looking for beta testers for those classes.
If anyone is interested in beta-testing then please sign-up on our platform and then email me at brock@creatorarcade.com and I'll give you access to our videos.
Relationship Hero is hilarious to me. We're going to solve the unpredictability of human relationships with a "light-weight" solution. Oh and we assume no responsibility for the advice given or the actions you take.
Luckily no one reads the ToS and it's a huge market - everyone has relationship problems.
So they'll make millions because most of the population isn't rational enough to understand that at a base-level that none of us know shit about all the intricacies of human relationships. Life coaches and psychiatrists included.
Kudos to them on their traction. I'm talking shit but preying on people's insecurities in relationships is an endless market. Can't wait to see their FB ads pop-up right after a Tai Lopez infomercial.
Directly quoted from their TOS:
The Platform enables you to communicate with a Dating Expert for the purpose of getting dating advice, information or any other input, benefit or service (not considered "Counselor Services").
The Dating experts are neither our employees nor agents nor representatives. Furthermore, we assume no responsibility for any act, omission or doing of any dating expert.
We make no representation or warranty whatsoever as to the willingness or ability of a Dating Expert to give advice.
We make no representation or warranty whatsoever as to whether you will find the Dating Expert’s advice relevant, useful, correct, relevant, satisfactory or suitable to your needs.
We do not control the quality of the dating advice and we do not determine whether any Dating Expert is qualified to provide any specific service as well as whether a dating expert is categorized correctly or matched correctly to you.
While we may try to do so from time to time, in our sole discretion, you acknowledge that we do not represent to verify, and do not guarantee the verification of, the skills, degrees, qualifications, licensure, certification, credentials, competence or background of any Dating Expert.
This sounds like that wretched YC Startup, "Dating Ring" that was subject to Gimlet's season 2 series. The idea being some interviews and questionnaires would give an employee enough insight to designate a dating match.
Don't even see how it's scaleable, even if they manage to find someone capable of that intuition.
>the endless sea of video chat experts websites wasn't enough
This is what annoys me about the current "innovation" worshiping cult. Everybody just takes a already existent idea and changes just a simple variable.
"Uber/Airbnb of X" style of thinking should just be put to rest forever.
This is obviously happening because our current way of thinking is a mistake in itself.
Everything should be modular and Jef Raskin was a proponent of this idea unfortunately nobody took him seriously enough.
I should be able to use a search application that lists to me every available expert, click the link, and then have a modular app skype/whatsapp/telegram blend in my workspace or open and be able to chat with that said expert.
Speaking of search engines every website should index they're own content and those indexes be categorized in blocks and linked to a central repository that then can be coupled with searching algorithms and users should be able to connect to that central repository and query it like a public library of the internet.
Goodbye Google!!
Another thing if find annoying is paywalls. What if I go to Netflix and I just want to watch a just a specific movie or episodes without having to pay a membership fee.
Let's say that Netflix has "Pirates of the Caribbean" and just want to click that video and stream it for 0.9 cents with not login in features and my ISP provider to add that payment to my utility bill.
No Paypal/ApplePay/Google Wallet!
Is it that hard to innovate in those way?
The reason people don't do that is because VCs can't fund that. Disintermediating or removing the middle man means "you can't make money from this". Well your shares don't have value anyway, you as an individual might make some money though.
VCs tried to fund a bunch of dreamers decentralizing and modularizing everything in their blockchain apps. Many organizations conduct ICOs or token sales so they are able to secure funding in their one-time revenue event, and bring the product to the world. Is it a panacea? Nah. It is very Machiavellian and we'll see this evolve very quickly into something more efficient. But we aren't stuck in the limitations that require companies to become the same toll-taking middlemen as before.
I believe the current system is already over saturated and the online players Amazon, Apple, Google, Netflix, Tencent, Alibaba, Facebook and Microsoft are already encroaching on each others territories.
Also a lot of the companies already posses powerful network effects and product synergies that make the entry of newcomers almost impossible. I'm force to remember every time I see a new VC investment that the purpose of VC is not to make the next tech giant like a Microsoft but to rapidly make a exit.
I'm really sad by the current investment in tech but perhaps the real investments in disease treatment/space exploration are being ignored by the mass media.
Streaming a movie for 0.9 cent is something I would hardly call a steal seeing how Netflix fee is 9 usd/month and a streamed video isn't something you can rewatch.
Also a lot of websites make money out of ads and your personal data but image that build in payment system that I described could be used to pay for my facebook use.
All those annoying ads and data collection goes away.
Facebook/Linkin/twitter are storing systems that present data in a certain way along with a address booking system.
Since they are all storing system that means that they are similar in cost with G Drive that costs 100GB/3 usd/month. 3 usd per month to use Facebook without data collection and ads!? Where do I sign up?
Streaming a movie for 0.9 cent is something I would hardly call a steal seeing how Netflix fee is 9 usd/month
Well, at nine cents, that'd mean you'd only pay the $9 if you watched 100 movies per month. Most people don't watch nearly that much, so you've just heavily decreased the price per movie. Even if you hadn't, a fixed subscription is probably much better for them than variable income; it's not like Netflix couldn't just let you buy "credits" and then spend them, even while using existing payment providers. Chances are they don't want to suffer from the "app store problem", ie, users having to make a spending decision on every item.
Also, what makes you think your ISP would be cheaper than whatever payment provider they're using now?
Do you mean 0.9 cents or 0.9 dollars (90 cents)? One is equivalent to a tenth of a Netflix subscription, the other a thousandth. If you're talking about the higher amount, I misunderstood you.
But why doesn't it "just work"? Why isn't the internet more simple? It comes down to two things: this way is more profitable, and stuff is hard.
I don't believe that these companies have a personal data fetish. They have a money fetish. If they believed they could make more money by charging every user a flat rate and keeping their data secret, they'd do it. And I'm pretty sure they're right. If simple pricing and privacy was the better option, it would have won by now. There is no shortage of people who want to try a new twist on things in the tech world.
As for the second item, the hardness. Indexing data is hard. There isn't enough value for every given website to do it. So, Google does the work for them and also extracts the value.
You want a video site to charge your ISP. So they'll have to integrate with every ISP? That's quite a task. Maybe a company will come in and help with that. They'll integrate with every ISP and then allow every movie streamer to use them as a service. And perhaps to simplify things, they'll charge the thing you use to pay your ISP bill (credit card) instead of adding to the bill. Cut out a middle man. Maybe they'll even let you use any credit card you choose and hide them from the merchants you're purchasing from. Of course, this is a good idea, so they'll have competition.
Oh shit. Now you have all those payment processing companies you're tired of. It's hard.
Meant 0.90 cents.
"Why isn't the internet more simple?"
I guess it's the same reason why we don't use modularity in operating systems and applications. We have gotten used to how things have been done until now.
Recommend reading this article since this ideas have been in my head for some time.
"Indexing data is hard. There isn't enough value for every given website to do it."
Well a lot of websites have their own search feature and a modular FOSS search engine wouldn't be out of the question. The database would need to figure out what is the context of the content and then tag those contents.
The data could be feed to a repository or pass around different computers if we would use a decentralized protocol.
Given the modular nature of the system you could be hooked to more than one repository and your application would only need to figure out if the data feed is a duplicate and sort the content by metadata.
I'm curious to what would the web look like if a large numbers of websites decided that they don't want Google. A verification system would also be need to verify that no one website tempers with it's data in order to rank higher in the results.
Then again this would be a very modular experience so you would have a lot of choices regarding verification systems,wall crawlers, database repositories.
True, the last part is true, that you would have more choices but isn't that what we want? Also i'm not saying that I wouldn't want Paypal and Gwallet to not exist just saying that there is a lot of interesting things out there I would wish to see happen.
I'm not the previous poster, but the ISP charging thingy could probably be done with a standard protocol, a bit like OAuth. The site would emit a payment request, then redirect to the ISP (you could have a generic URL that each ISP would redirect to their own payment system) that would sign it and redirect back. Then the sites could take those signed tokens and charge the ISP in a lump sum.
Still, the ISPs would definitively charge something for the service, so it's unclear if it would actually be cheaper.
There are two things that I've always found that will immediately engage people and make a lasting impression.
1. How did you become who you are?
People work hard to where they're at and they rarely get to tell their story - so I found that engaging them on this level allows them to reminisce a little bit about where they came from and most people will light right up.
2. Write hand-written notes.
This is a lost art and Brian Chesky talks about how he learned from George Tenet the value of writing hand-written notes.
From a funding standpoint the first question that comes to mind is, "How did this happen?"
Theranos to date has raised $88.4M. The Series C was raised in 2010 following a 4-year hiatus.
In the ten years since the founding of Theranos, they were unable to hire anyone who would help them figure all this shit out?
It seems insane to me that a well respected venture firm like DFJ, who invested in their Series A,B and C, would not have done their due diligence and understood where Theranos would become vulnerable. Everyone knew that government regulators would be involved since day one.
I am bullish on Elizabeth. She is obviously extremely intelligent and charismatic but I'm bearish on her investors. Step one of funding should have been building a blood test that actually works and step two is getting that $88M test approved.
Without knowing the whole story it's hard to form an opinion about the situation but I am super interested in the psychology of how all "this" happened.
> It seems insane to me that a well respected venture firm like DFJ, who invested in their Series A,B and C, would not have done their due diligence
She's childhood best friends with Tim Draper's daughter.[0]
It really is that simple. If you saw a state construction contract going to a firm controlled by a friend of the Chinese Premiere's daughter you wouldn't be confused at all right? So why should anyone be confused now?
> Clinkle had a polished demo that came before things like Apple Pay, said one former employee, who declined to be named. But most importantly that person added, Duplan “was charismatic when he wanted to be” and could “raise money in absurd abundance.”
You really want to change the world? Forget being a programmer, learn to be be charismatic.
More like learn to be a wealthy, elite, and well-connected.
These founders are as privileged as Bill Gates but totally lacking his work ethic and sincere passion. They're pedigreed out the ass, so those involved (including themselves) think they're actually good. In fact they just seem like they should be.
So the VCs keep pumping more and more money into them, knowing that at least people won't blame them so much when they fail, given how elite the founders are. It's easier to keep funding them than to admit you were fooled. That's the mystery behind why they burn through such huge quantities of money.
I wouldn't say that either Theranos or Clinkle have changed the world.
I would say that Apple, Google, EBay, Uber, Android, and Twitter have, but Steve Wozniak, Larry Page, Pierre Omidyar, Garrett Camp, Andy Rubin, and Evan Williams are far from charismatic.
This is more an example of "You can fool some of the people all the time or all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time." Charisma can help fool a critical mass of people early on, but once you try to expand to a product all the people use all the time, you'll fall flat on your face. Build something useful and then you don't have to fool anyone.
I don't think you picked up on Jeff's snark. I read it as "the key to successfully getting funding is to be charismatic" and "successfully getting funding" is currently synonymous with the sentiment that you would be "changing the world".
The author gave a great talk in the Stanford Entrepreneurial Thought Leaders lecture series. She opens her talk with a delightful story about Marilyn Monroe, and the ability to flip charisma on and off like a light switch. Watch it and learn you some charisma.
It seems to be endemic to these biotech darlings: 23 & Me pulled the same thing and faced the same consequence. They thought as a tech prima donna that they did not have to adhere to the FDAs medical device regulations (or even publish efficacy data). They got smacked in the mouth - serves them right.
23&Me was presenting patients with studies based on genes they actually found in the samples. They got busted because the studies weren't clinical trials done by the FDA. I've got a rare genetic disease for which there is no FDA approved test: too few patients, and it's 100% penetrant, so the geneticist just looked at the sequence. 23 & Me wasn't so different from that.
Taking your sequence data to a counselor is a solid use of 23&Me data. RE: risk prediction - they need to show efficacy & describe methodology in a clinical trial. Otherwise one is just taking their word for it that your risk is what they say it is -- or that they didn't mix up your sample/lose chain of custody.
23 & Me's tests worked, though. And it's possible for a reasonable person to believe that the regulations they violated are BS. Their actions were arguably no more inherently immoral than Uber's "disruption" of the taxi incumbents and their captive regulators.
The ignorance of, and/or disregard for regulatory standards is the common thread here.
Also, How do you know they work? They got slapped for giving people risks of disease using genetic data over the internet -- a method which was not peer-reviewed or shown to be accurate and precise. That is not bullshit - that is effective regulation.
The saddest thing is - even if you are right, all the FDA asked 23&Me to do was file a premarketing authorization -- something that many tiny companies do all the time to buy time to generate solid evidence.
"They got slapped for giving people risks of disease using genetic data over the internet -- a method which was not peer-reviewed or shown to be accurate and precise."
So if they delivered the results by mail or phone call they would have been in the clear? That is bullshit.
Nope. It doesn't matter if the results came by courier pigeon: The test has not been validated in controlled trials or even published in peer-reviewed literature -- let alone approved by the FDA. If it were so simple don't you think they would have obtained approval by now? The sad thing is any idiot can invent a glucose meter and file their PMA properly -- but a company essentially backed by Google blows it horribly.
I disagree with your opinion on the CEO. Intelligent? clearly, but also weird to the point that it's uncomfortable to watch her speak, and she's clearly very bad at handling the press.
Except, the article details specific conditions of the ultra-competitive environment in Palo Alto high schools. As someone raised in Iowa, I can assure you that this is not the universal adolescent experience.
You're completely right. And as someone raised in Detroit she will never have to experience my environment. You or I cannot truly understand how she feels. What is hard for her may be trivial to us and vice versa. Everything is relative.
“When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves…. Everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way.” - Viktor Frankl
Agreed. Everyone perceives the world from the tip of their own nose. Life could be much worse. As a counter point of view, my brother went to a high school just outside of Detroit. During his senior year the district ran out of money, most of the teachers quit but the students still had to "attend" class. The grad rate was < 65%. There were no after school programs or accelerators to attend. Most students and their families are living on welfare and/or working to help support their family. Homework is the last thing on their mind. Public education is flawed in many ways and it's usually those who show the most resourcefulness that survive in any scenario.
https://www.joshuakennon.com/if-charlie-munger-didnt-quit-wh...
In the past five years, I've started and sold a company. Bought a house on a golf course, purchased expensive foreign cars and went on insane trips all over the world.
Last year, my wife woke up one morning and told me that she no longer wanted to be married (that's a story for another time). Got divorced and lost almost everything except the stock that I still own in the acquiring company that may never have an exit. The house, the cars and the trips vanished.
I guess my take away from this is that life is a series of ebbs and flows and it's our responsibility to gain greater self-awareness each day that we wake up. If you feel like you're behind then that is actually an amazing step in the right direction. Ask yourself why you're you're feeling behind and work through those emotions with yourself.(Literally talk out loud to yourself. It's weird but it works)
Are you biased because your former co-founder still has his house and a new baby? Are you biased because your closest friend just took his company public?
What I noticed about myself is that envy tends to create the anxiety that leads to feeling behind and the inadequacies associated with that emotion.
If you understand and even accept those emotions then you can reverse it by playing devils advocate to your feeling of insecurity (everyone needs a little self-love) then you start to be grateful for the things that you are doing well and doubling down on those strengths.
Although, I find him at times to be utterly unbearable. Gary Vaynerchuk does has some very sage advice for anyone feeling behind. His content about playing the long game has had the greatest effect on me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsB9U9kSXUc
I struggle with debilitating depression but I've created mental models that enable me to get out of bed on those days and get to work. I'm hyper-aware of my state of mind and when I'm feeling depressed or sorry for myself I let myself become aware of it and work through it instead of falling into the recursive emotion that is feeling depressed about being depressed which leads to feeling even more depressed.
Once those issues are ironed out then I do my best to break up my day into very small tasks that I can accomplish in order to keep the serotonin levels high.
Today for instance, I needed to finish some financial modeling for the new company that I started but I had serious FOMO because it's labor day weekend and everyone's at the beach. I recognized it so I took a pen and paper to the beach and did some work at the beach.
Now I've created some momentum for my self-esteem and I'll end up having an exceptionally productive Sunday. ; )