The comments of a submission are valuable to those other than the participants. To readers that don't or won't comment, the concept of 'live active discussion' is moot. In fact, I could argue that it's most beneficial for a reader to wait until the comment activities die down.

Either way the link to another similar thread is an odd thing to be tired of.

Off topic, but why does Google return "About 187,000 results" for ("* is about to *" site:wired.com) and only "About 14,600 results" for ("is about to" site:wired.com)?

Isn't the second query less restrictive?

I believe the number of results is totally made up. If you click all the way to the last page you will find there are far fewer than whatever number is shown there.

Looks interesting. You might want to consider fixing this...

"Safe time optimizing bottlenecks" should be "Save"

thanks fixed!

I spent entirely too much time trying to parse 'outagelet'.

Maybe this term "outagelet" should be added to list of terms to automatically replace in article titles.

I propose we replace it with "outagelet".

But carefully.

I read "outragelet" which is something else that occasionally happens around here.

yup. It took me literally several minutes before I saw the word "outage" in there for some reason. For some reason the non-word "gelet" overwhelmed my brain so I kept seeing out-a-gelet. Kind of like port-a-potty. Then I migrated to outa-gelet->ou-tage-let->o-utage-let->(I skipped ou-tagel-et because that looked like a german word sandwiched between two french words)->outage-let---eureka, where's my bath tub!

For some reason my brain insists on adding an extra 'l' so it reads as "outlagelet" every time.

>Isn't this the same as bookmarking?

>No, because when you bookmark you have to remember to go back to your list of bookmarks to re-read the article

I have a folder on my bookmark bar titled "Articles". When I don't have time to read an interesting article I see, I add it to that folder. When I'm bored and can't find anything to read, I open that folder.

I'd argue that most people's pain point isn't lack of remembering they have articles saved to read.

Actually, that's exactly the problem that I have.

I don't have a habit of checking in on my Pocket account, so I often end up Pocketing things that I want to read later, forgetting about them altogether, and then finding them weeks after they're no longer relevant or useful.

  > I often end up Pocketing things that I want to read later, 
  > forgetting about them altogether, and then finding them 
  > weeks after they're no longer relevant or useful.

Interesting. I seem to recall that the Getting Things Done time-management technique uses this very approach to help weed out unnecessary work (reading). The idea is that if the article is safely bookmarked, there's no longer any worry that we might loose track of something important yet (as you experienced) most of what gets bookmarked can be safely discarded without reading at all, saving time. So in the GTD context this "bug" is a "feature".

I've got a "Other Bookmarks" folder on my Chrome Bookmarks bar that backs up what you're saying.

I always add things there to read later, and then I forget, and then I spend my time cleaning it out of crap that's no longer useful or relevant.

It looks like the point of this web app is to encourage you to re-read articles, rather than read them for the first time.

In other news, The United States has launched a "Freedom Campaign" against itself to locate and seize weapons of mass destruction.

Alcohol makes me sleepy and lose the ability to concentrate. I have no idea why people enjoy drinking when they're trying to get stuff done. Especially if any of that "stuff" requires significant brain power.

Maybe because different people react differently. That might be it.

Apps like candy crush are edge cases that make general comparisons meaningless.

Given most successful apps aren't anywhere near as popular as candy crush you're not comparing apples to apples.

The chances of building a successful anything are low. Even lower for the first attempt. So if you take 2 years to build something...you've stacked the odds so high against yourself you might as well not even try. And if you're the one paying the bills, 2 years is a long time to wait for a failure.

But we also know overnight successes don't really happen overnight. So I imagine you also don't want to be the person creating new apps every month because you're misguided about how hard it is to achieve success. So again, it doesn't seem like a useful metric.

You're overthinking it. The faster you can build, the more of a competitive advantage you have. It's that simple.

If it takes person A 1 month to build the same thing as person B in 2 months, all else being equal, person A has a better shot at succeeding.

It's never that simple - and making the product awesome and launching at 95% can introduce way more rewards than launching at 75 or 80%. I think the concept of an MVP is regarded as the word of law around here, and sometimes an MVP looks like shit and nobody will use it afterwards, so spend the extra two weeks making it absolutely awesome. I know that's not really what you were talking about, but I think people shouldn't shy away from taking a step back and just thinking about what you're building without being stupid-productive all of the time. It's all about balance.

> sometimes an MVP looks like shit and nobody will use it afterwards

Then it's not viable, which is what the V stands for. So it's not an MVP at all, it's just shit.

Respectfully disagree. The key phrase in your response is: "all else being equal"

When it comes to marketing what you've made, you do get the first-mover advantage but that's about all you get.

I've made many a useful, problem-solving prototype in my spare time (and even 'launched' a few of them among close friends and family) only to see the same thing going big a month later. Except, it is someone else who happens to have made the same thing a; they just manage to push it a lot better that I ever could. It also doesn't help that I'm really bad at the business side of things.

I really need to find someone who can do that for me and my ideas/prototypes... :(

We'll it's what the observations converted to audible sound, sounds like.

"It will eventually blow over." -NSA