i think your valuation is a little low and unfounded based upon recent M&A activity among comparable companies!

i was having a really bad day because my dog died and a VC called me fat but then I found this service and I have to say this is a really great service I think it will solve world hunger eventually but before that it will change the dynamism with which we interact with and share from our daily lives and those of others. my only complaint is that this didn't come out earlier when there was still time to save my third marriage!

how come i can't facebook like this more than once??

i am currently on a plane. i would love something like this. apps like spinlister and flitecar let me make every city my own city. this fits in that same mold.

I feel you. I book my Airbnb, rental car (and now gym) after I land, not before. Decision windows are shrinking for all travel verticals

This is so much better than we deserve.

Somewhat related, the recently launched Bay Area Bike Share system has a not-too-well-publicized API at http://bayareabikeshare.com/stations/json

The number one reason to write CLI apps in node is npm. npm gets package management right, preferring local dependencies to global ones - this means no worrying about what version of a library a user has in their global environment.

You also get to bring node's parallel io-centric patterns to your scripting. Need to download a bunch of files from a remote host, process them, and write them to disk? Go for it.

But take it with a grain of salt: it's very much a use-what-you-know kind of thing.

I thought a lot of people discourage the use of static linking or any form of local dependency bundling, because when there's a security update every app needs to be updated individually. But it seems that with the emergence of Bundler and NPM, people are trending more and more towards local bundling. What happened?

One possible contrarian view: global dependencies actually cause a lot of those security updates to be necessary. Exploits that target a given version of a given library may be easier to propagate if you know that almost every application run by every user depends on that library version.

Need to download a bunch of files from a remote host, process them, and write them to disk?

    cat urls.txt | while read -r url; do 
      base="$(basename "$url")"
      wget "$url" -O - -o "$base.log" | process > "$base" &
    done
    wait

For ad-hoc scripting, I tend to prefer bash, with anything remotely corresponding to heavy lifting assigned to the language with the best library / performance / whatever critical factor for it. Fork-join parallelism in bash is very easy.

alternatively: maven managed to get dependency management right about 5 years ago.

Hahaha really? Have you seen a pom file on a real project its about 10 pages with plugins galore.

The verbosity of the XML pom is the problem. Alternative syntax using the same coordinate system are great and much easier on the eyes. The real value in maven (I think) is having that clean dependency chain and it works great. XML is what sucks (especially doing it by hand).

Yeah, pom files are disgusting, but leiningen (the clojure build tool) is built on top of maven and it's wonderful.

    [enlive "1.1.1"]

instead of

    <dependency>
      <groupId>enlive</groupId>
      <artifactId>enlive</artifactId>
      <version>1.1.1</version>
    </dependency>

really. if a page is about 60-80 lines, that's what, 1000 lines? and most IDE's help manage them. The makefile's to some open source projects get longer than that, and they only get worse when they're proprietary.

I didn't know that the bar is makefiles... welcome to 1977.

Check out https://github.com/mozilla/SocialShare and Persona :)

"You are insane" sounds like a great compliment to a marketer.

Which is why you can't trust people who work in marketing. They're professionally dishonest.

All people who work in marketing are dishonest. You literally can't trust any of them.

Edit: I guess sarcasm should be mentioned.

"Hello" he lied.

At a minimum it might make a good defense in federal court.

I'm pretty sure they mean marketing approval, not regulatory approval. Parse before you preach.

I read it the other (regulatory approval) way the first time too...

The amount of knee-jerking on this thread is why we can't have nice things.

Because there are some of the harshest/confusing laws around alcohol (for anything legally sold) in the United States? Its easier to legally sell a handgun to a friend than sell a bottle of wine.

So we can't have nice things because people want to obey laws that tend to be extremely strictly enforced?

This kind of juvenile behavior is not a "nice thing". At least not in the context of running a business.

I actually think this promotion was extremely on-brand for what this startup is (or was) doing. I can't speak to the regulatory compliance angle, but the fact is that this was clever, effective, and well-placed customer contact. It's not the risk profile that I would personally look for, but it is a little sad to see so many on HN rushing to condemn it.

We can't have nice things when people who claim to be "disruptive" are actually busy pursuing safe, risk-averse targets.

Indeed. Our market back then was quasi-legal loft parties and house parties, so this was idea was definitely to fit the mood of the "modern speakeasy." Thanks!

I don't really care about ATF regulations, but there is no moral high ground here. This was just plagiarism. These people pretended to have done something that they did not do. They took credit for someone else's work.

So "we can't have nice things" here means "we can't plagiarize vodka"? Well you can't plagiarize Steven King either. Deal with it.

So, if I buy 1000 pens, and have my company name printed on them, I'm plagiarizing someone else's work? That's nonsense.

Cheap vodka is a commodity, not an art form.

It would be if you lied to people and told them that you made the pens.

The example you chose is deliberately one in which it would be assumed that you were not asserting authorship. Frankly, choosing that example shows you're dishonest.

No it isn't. People shafting consumers for a quick buck is why we can't have nice things.