Ask HN: What is the problem you try to solve?
We see everyday startups/projects pitches that explain what they do. There're often on hackernews lists the describe what the startups do.
But can you, in less than 140 characters, describe the PROBLEM your project/startup tries to resolve?
122 comments
[ 0.27 ms ] story [ 89.0 ms ] threadPaying outdoor writers and photographers competitive prices for their works and delivering users amazing stories in well designed, modern, web pages, only online, no print.
Link to a sample article ("real" ones will have better writing then this): http://acivitillo.com/articles/2013/vistula
--
Knowledge workers spend too much time looking for information and knowledge[1] instead of, you know, thinking about problems. Organizations can be more effective when they provide tooling and processes to encourage and support knowledge sharing and transfer, and more efficient information retrieval.
---
[1]: according to some research, up to 50% of knowledge workers' time is spent just looking for stuff. But to be fair, other research puts the number as low as 17%. Still, we believe that facilitating more efficient knowledge use, transfer and creation, will benefit all organizations.
Give workers the information they need so they could spend more time thinking/building.
For example, we could reduce it further by saying:
"Make things better".
But I don't think that would be a very useful message.
So this, to me, is the struggle... to figure out how to be as concise as possible, while not being overly concise.
I freely admit that I'm not great at this, but it is something I hope to get better at - distilling the message to its essence, without losing the essence.
In this particular case, I will say that "Give workers the information they need so they could spend more time thinking/building" probably does strike that balance fairly well. I may have to crib that from you. :-)
Anyway, the point in saying all this was just to point out that while conciseness is a virtue, it can - I think - be taken too far if one isn't careful.
Passive income generation is one of the pinnacles of what we as software engineers can do.
Nah but really, I try to solve the music listening and artist compensation problem on my spare time. Without regard for copyright since Im not doing it to make money.
Soundslice: http://www.soundslice.com/
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_Public_Key_Infrastruct...
[2] http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/12/bgp-hijacking-belar...
[3] http://ethanheilman.tumblr.com/post/64208098281/on-trusting-...
Nice Weather : http://alexiscreuzot.com/apps/nice-weather-2/
http://www.airdispat.ch
Not so obvious to me. Consider browser plugins, desktop application (e.g. Outlook) plugins, letting users grant your service access to their online email, etc.
Duet has a one time fee and is hosted on your own server.
http://duetapp.com
http://www.collegeanswerz.com/
Solution? Svpply/Pinterest for Amazon.
http://www.gemsinthejungle.com
- Study scientific papers by deconstructing them through a wiki-like interface.
- Filtering news feeds, automatically removing stories and tweets I don't care about.
- Keeping an updated journal for each of my projects in the fastest and least intrusive way.
- Learning languages by cutting and pasting single expressions from podcasts into a personal audio library.
- Aggregating my soundcloud, beatport, bandcamp, youtube and shoutcast 'likes' into a single cloud playlist.
While there has been quite a few attempts at online music collaboration, clearly the average amateur musician is not using any of them.
PROs use pro-music software to collaborate with other people, and some tech-oriented amateurs hang out in collaboration forums.
But all that is too hard/annoying for the average amateur musician.
BandHub "The Internet Music Studio" - makes it easy to make music with other people over the Internet.
http://getbandhub.com
http://beatrixapp.com
I sort of wonder about stuff like that. If you look at what we know about the algorithm that "is" the human mind, it's not actually capable of creating. So nothing is created. It's copies of other things, usually mixed together.
Most commercial AI products these days avoid patent issues by using AI. Every AI program that isolates and OCR's text uses dozens of patent pending techniques. It's just that this is not visible in the actual code. The reason that it's not in there is that that code encodes something akin to a VM, and the real program is the training results. It is generally very hard to determine what exactly the program does, but for trivial patents that (e.g. energy-lines to separate individual letters, or tracing likely pen movements and recognizing the derivative) is something these algorithms can be shown to do. Yet as far as I know, no-one's been successfully sued.
The algorithms themselves have the advantage that most are quite old, and have obvious roots in the 60s and 70s. So they are not patented in the US (effectively). Is this the perfect way around software patents ?
I wonder. Copyright-wise. If I use an algorithm analyse all text from an author and then have it produce "his next book", would that be legal ?
We solve both - http://www.supportfu.com