Mashable - The Social Media Guide - Latest Comments in Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Izkas — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 03:39:32 -0000

I have found one nice tool http://www.GoogleItFaster.com . Is so clean and user-friendly, that I'm surprised why more web searching services are not using that solution. Do you have any idea?

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Linn — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 22:18:33 -0000

I have found, that many blogs "review" sites without actually reviewing them at all. Most blogs out there are just looking for something to write about and do not actually take the time to test a new system, but merely use text that website provide and add a sentence or two of their own...

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Motorcycle Guy — Sat, 28 Apr 2007 16:15:13 -0000

Lol at putting a question mark behind it and your right either way.

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

smr — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 16:10:52 -0000

very nice collection.

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Pete Cashmore — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 22:45:54 -0000

It's just your standard "web 2.0" pick - companies are included randomly, based on Ludwig's image (cc licensed). And anyway, this is nothing to do with startups that lie - it's about the cliches and shortcuts that are used by Mashable when writing reviews.

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Pete Cashmore — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 21:56:59 -0000

That attitude, my friend, is why you don't have $30 million in VC funding. ;)

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

shadilac — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 19:50:33 -0000

I want to ask this question with all sincerity and curiosity -- please believe me that I'm not trying to be an ass -- can you define "worth reviewing"?

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

shadilac — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 19:47:08 -0000

"And sites that are â€œDigg with some slightly more complex featuresâ€ donâ€™t usually work out anyway."

That's self evident, most sites "don't usually work out" regardless of whether they are extending an existing idea or presenting a completely new one. My point is that the idea itself is not necessarily worthless and deserving of ridicule simply because it isn't revolutionary. Specifically I was responding to the comment about many similar sites -- I would imagine that if you asked the people who created those sites to outline how they are different they _should_ have an answer for you.

Unfortunately, I have seen that often a site may only come to the larger community's attention after it's been out for a while, and many of its ideas have been duplicated back into the original project they were extending... or other startups who implement the idea plus something else. The sites may stay alive for a while because the costs are low and there may be a small community using the service, perpetuating the belief that there really are 21 equivalent social bookmarking sites in production with active development, but that's probably not likely the case.

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Greg — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 19:23:15 -0000

Ok this post is funny on it's own but I had just finished a conversation about blogging and honesty when I read this. It really helped the comedic timing of it all.

At a conference on parenting blogs, a speaker noted that lies or hidden agendas will kill your blog, which makes sense. But you know, communication always has a perspective and sometimes the most transparent agenda can be the most hidden.

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Pete Cashmore — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 18:41:50 -0000

As for the reason these cliches are used: readers don't have much time to digest all the information out there on blogs. Most of the time, the cliches give a good overview. And sites that are "Digg with some slightly more complex features" don't usually work out anyway.

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Pete Cashmore — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 18:38:57 -0000

"since there are so many sites out there and many bloggers only review the guys with connections and VC money"

I can guarantee that's not true. Bloggers review whatever is worth reviewing.

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

shadilac — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 09:34:58 -0000

Tony -- I think the answer to your question is that these sites often do have a slightly different twist, but the absence of a professional marketing staff often makes it difficult for technical folks to properly promote those differences in a way that the casual visitors (who will spend a grand total of 30 seconds at the site and based on the homepage lump everything you have created into one of a handful of categories based on concept they are already familiar with) will see and understand them. (breath) So the problem, in my opinion, is as much with the cynical user, as with the ambitious developer. People EXPECT to lump every site into a "whatever clone" category, and so it is in their head.

Also, since there are so many sites out there and many bloggers only review the guys with connections and VC money, it's not unlikely that 90% of these startups don't even know about all the competition that exists. This is a crazy new connected world, you can't just drive up and down the street to check out the competition anymore.

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Tony Bell — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 08:01:33 -0000

This is a good start. But what's really missing is a deeper and more rational assessment (business, economic and technology) of what happens when you have 3500 Flash/Ajaxy upload and share sites. Nevermind attention share issues -- really, when you account for work (8 hrs), meals (2.5 hrs), sex (3 minutes) and personal hygeine (30 minutes) how much time do we have to Flickr, Twitter or Puttr around? -- the real question I have is why does the 250th photo/video/slideshow site think it should exist? They are all using Flash, so there's no unique IP. They all have the same features. They are all chasing the same audience. What's going on here? Is is really a case of the costs being too low to dissuade bored techno-geeks from quickly slapping up a beta site? While I wish them all well, the reality is that this incessant noise and the coverage these sites get on TC on Mashable, etc., is going to result in a big implosion (the Deadpool) very soon. And that's not good for anyone. That's it for this morning. I need to see my wife for 3 minutes and then upload the videos.

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Pete Cashmore — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 05:06:33 -0000

Thanks Jack.

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Pete Cashmore — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 04:58:35 -0000

This is the last level, I think.

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Pete Cashmore — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 04:28:12 -0000

Ah, I see.

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Pete Cashmore — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 04:27:32 -0000

Wonder how many levels this goes to.

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Pete Cashmore — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 04:27:06 -0000

What, like this? ;)

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Brij — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 04:15:25 -0000

Nice work Pete

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Phil Butler — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 02:03:03 -0000

Now I realize why I use the word "entity" so much, I have been sucked into the BS 2.0 zone.

I mean "compelling" Web 2.0 "entity", with the most "innovative" "architecture" is a nice way of saying: I am compelled to vomit if this Web 2.0 BS does not transform the 2007 version of an Internet chat room with video into something new soon. :)

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Ilya Berelson — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 00:35:37 -0000

awesome

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

Pete Cashmore — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 23:05:54 -0000

Ryan,

This is about Mashable reviews specifically. We have never taken payment for a review.

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

sindhu — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 21:34:05 -0000

great post. it true that bloggers exxaggerate a start up's ability , who would know? maybe it's a paid in cash or kind post. there is got to be some benefit for the blogger (you know these teenagers who are all about their adsense accounts).

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

gordon — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 20:11:43 -0000

you know, most of the blogosphere is crap. very very little original content. if a company is starting and people get what they do, it isn't new or unique.

http://www.cheapgreencar.com

Re: Web Startups and the Lying Liars that Lie About Them

dan — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 16:07:58 -0000

Why is Lulu there? I think if Bob Young can get rich selling FREE software...than Lulu gets a pass...at least for now.