I just thought that, all else being equal, people on both sides are equally stubborn about sticking to their own ideas. Do you find this not to be the case?
I didn't think in terms of people on sides, just about arrogant hackers. Of course there are all kinds of people who only ever consider their own ideas to be worthwhile.
If this is the case for hackers then I can at least see a very good reason for it. The _only_ reason I learned to program was for the power it gives me to create new things and explore whatever I want.
Take that away from me? Forget it, I'll do any number of occupations where I can earn more.
Two things: 1) It would be great to have more reasonably good people here. 2) But I just don't want the scoring to be screwed up. If the voting keeps stuff that's only of interest to people who are into hacking and startups on the front page then other people will simply not stick around.
PG, please consider action for #2. Don't go with the "show everyone different rankings" approach of reddit though.
I wouldn't work for rates "competitive" with those at eLance or Rent-A-Coder. I've done projects through those sites, and despite explicitly stating, "Don't bother with lowball offers--we're looking for good work, not low prices. We are developers, and we will be judging your experience and code harshly." I still got bids of 150 bucks for a project that I would have billed a weeks worth of hours for. They, of course, would do a horrible job, and not even worth that much...but you shouldn't try to compete on price with those folks.
True. Asking any amount is probably enough to weed out the folks who think hackers are inter-changeable and completely devoid of business ideas or acumen. Of course, you can also just say, "No thanks, I'm working on my own idea for the time being. Best of luck to you, though." That's what I do.
My strategy has always entertained me because the guys I've known were so thrilled about their rediculous "world changing" idea that they were crushed to find that hardly any outsourcers were even interested:)
Yours will work well enough, but I also like to test to see if anyone is actually determined enough to go through all this trouble and carry out their plan anyway. Serious entrepreneurs are very few in this part of the country...
Even the least skillful trolls mask their ill intent by blending in and maintaining a non-descript tone. This is done in order to get past the "human spam filter." If you run stupidity detection based purely on the contents of their comments then you run the risk of simply banning controversial topics or people with bad spelling instead of controversial (trolling, roughly) behavior.
To better detect trolling behavior, I'd focus on responses:
- Content of the responses. Lots of shouting? Length.
- Number of responders. 50x more replies than you would otherwise expect from the thread?
- Depth of thread. Conversation still dragging on after all sane people have left?
- Timing of responses. Heated arguments leave no time for cooling off.
So measure effect of the troll, and your system won't have to try to understand what he's saying.
+ But you were referring to "stupid" measuring based on the submitters data may work just fine.
[nevermind] ---Untrue. Unless your product has already shown considerable traction or you're a startup legend, it is 100% percent certain that they will not accept you as a single founder.
Not making a judgement on this policy, it just seems fair for people to know before they take the time to apply as a single founder.
You do realize that this is the antithesis of the core reason of why startups work, yes?
What's fundamental is that it is those few abnormal people who change the world 1000x more than the regular person. When you have near infinite money like Google, I'd be very afraid of missing out on those few people who are going to carry the company.
