Probably relocating from Israel to a new office in San Franscisco, in addition to hiring new staff, and marketing to keep the buzz going (they even turned the funding itself into a PR campaign, which is very well done).
I'd imagine the developers threw a massive party with kegs and thousands of pizzas...
I'd imagine this shows either some disconnect or envy, or a little bit of both.
Apps like this shouldn't take funding, they're short-lived hype apps, they're not the next Twitter or Facebook.
Why not? So they can slave for months on some feature set that needlessly bloats their simple product? Buzz around the funding grew them from 50k users to an estimated 250k users in a span of less than a week. Why sit still and not ride the wave to full-on virality or an early exit? If they manage to eat just 1% of WhatsApp's lunch, the investors would have made a fine investment.
Yo is an MVP product that is not refined nor innovative and could be built by a 14 year old with a Udemy course on Objective-C
The first version of Facebook was not refined or innovative. There are a lot of talented coders on HackerNews who could built any app currently on the market in a weekend. They either do not bother (because they don't think it is innovative enough) or they do bother, but fail to connect with the market. Yes, this product is a victory of smart marketing and user virality, not a victory of using the technology.
If you can build an MVP application that attracts funding, 250k users and a lot of media attention, then I suggest you go start that Udemy course and do so. I won't complain when you get funding to realize the full potential.
Save the VC funding for startup ideas that actually deserve it.
No. Save the VC funding for those startups that show promising growth and realistic strategies. Save the VC funding for startups that will bring return on your investment. Save the VC funding for the pet rock startups that managed to sell 15 million $ in profit in their first 6 months.
There are a lot of talented coders on HackerNews who could built any app currently on the market in a weekend.
I see comments to this effect every now and then on HN (ie. any skilled team could build out Facebook in 30 days)
It's great to shoot for the stars and have faith in yourself, folks, but shockingly lots of people who get paid to program also happen to be REALLY GOOD at what they do.
While I could focus on the benefits of a little bit of humility (and they are many) instead I'll say that there are people who come on to these sites and see ridiculous statements like this and will suddenly start to wonder what's the point of learning to code if they'll only be good once they can build any app in a weekend.
So no, there aren't people who can build any app on the market in a weekend. And that doesn't mean that any of those people are bad at what they do.
I am not saying I am one of those coders. But I know that they are on HackerNews. There is a large chance that the founder and VCs of Yo will see this thread. If you post about a computer language, chances are the authors are reading it.
Yes, there are a lot of coders on here that can code your MVP or a basic mobile app in 48 hours. And I think some of them are still constantly learning new ways to code and getting better.
I made no qualitative statements about these topcoders vs. those coders who can't (or won't) deliver in a weekend.
...will suddenly start to wonder what's the point of learning to code if they'll only be good once they can build any app in a weekend.
I think that's more of an issue with self-esteem than it is with the observation that there are hackers on here who can crank out production-ready code in a short amount of time.
HN really seemed to like the posts by Jennifer Dewalt (http://jenniferdewalt.com/). It is not unwelcome to starting coders. You may be interested in Norvig's article: http://norvig.com/21-days.html "Teach Yourself Programming in Ten Years" which aligns much more with my true view on this.
Speed is not everything. Often these weekend hacks lack market demand, lack user experience, can't overcome the chicken-and-egg problem.
Comments
Probably relocating from Israel to a new office in San Franscisco, in addition to hiring new staff, and marketing to keep the buzz going (they even turned the funding itself into a PR campaign, which is very well done).
I'd imagine this shows either some disconnect or envy, or a little bit of both.
Why not? So they can slave for months on some feature set that needlessly bloats their simple product? Buzz around the funding grew them from 50k users to an estimated 250k users in a span of less than a week. Why sit still and not ride the wave to full-on virality or an early exit? If they manage to eat just 1% of WhatsApp's lunch, the investors would have made a fine investment.
The first version of Facebook was not refined or innovative. There are a lot of talented coders on HackerNews who could built any app currently on the market in a weekend. They either do not bother (because they don't think it is innovative enough) or they do bother, but fail to connect with the market. Yes, this product is a victory of smart marketing and user virality, not a victory of using the technology.
If you can build an MVP application that attracts funding, 250k users and a lot of media attention, then I suggest you go start that Udemy course and do so. I won't complain when you get funding to realize the full potential.
No. Save the VC funding for those startups that show promising growth and realistic strategies. Save the VC funding for startups that will bring return on your investment. Save the VC funding for the pet rock startups that managed to sell 15 million $ in profit in their first 6 months.
I see comments to this effect every now and then on HN (ie. any skilled team could build out Facebook in 30 days)
It's great to shoot for the stars and have faith in yourself, folks, but shockingly lots of people who get paid to program also happen to be REALLY GOOD at what they do.
While I could focus on the benefits of a little bit of humility (and they are many) instead I'll say that there are people who come on to these sites and see ridiculous statements like this and will suddenly start to wonder what's the point of learning to code if they'll only be good once they can build any app in a weekend.
So no, there aren't people who can build any app on the market in a weekend. And that doesn't mean that any of those people are bad at what they do.
I am not saying I am one of those coders. But I know that they are on HackerNews. There is a large chance that the founder and VCs of Yo will see this thread. If you post about a computer language, chances are the authors are reading it.
Yes, there are a lot of coders on here that can code your MVP or a basic mobile app in 48 hours. And I think some of them are still constantly learning new ways to code and getting better.
I made no qualitative statements about these topcoders vs. those coders who can't (or won't) deliver in a weekend.
I think that's more of an issue with self-esteem than it is with the observation that there are hackers on here who can crank out production-ready code in a short amount of time.
HN really seemed to like the posts by Jennifer Dewalt (http://jenniferdewalt.com/). It is not unwelcome to starting coders. You may be interested in Norvig's article: http://norvig.com/21-days.html "Teach Yourself Programming in Ten Years" which aligns much more with my true view on this.
Speed is not everything. Often these weekend hacks lack market demand, lack user experience, can't overcome the chicken-and-egg problem.