Just looking for some inspiration. It's that simple. I don't think 'THE MAN' is trying to hold me down. If I had that mentality I would have never made it this far.
Not many black programming role models. Sad to say but many black youth still see sports and entertainment and the only way to achieve a high level of success in America. My primary goal in life is to try to change that perception by becoming a successful programmer.
The Facebook and Twitter apps are actually web services that require a username/password and their apps are merely extensions of their website. Does his app have a standalone service that would justify a username/password? Or would it be equivalent to forcing me to register to play a game like Plant vs Zombies, which has no functionality that would justify password protecting it.
people are motivated by the "reward" their efforts may reap them. For some people this "reward" is money or power, for others it may be acceptance from peers or loved ones,
for the plumber it was the ability to take care of his family.
I would find out who is really pulling the strings. Could the founder's lawyers or maybe the investor be asking that all parties involved sign an NDA? Are the founders merely advising themselves? You may want to think about having a meeting with everyone(founders, lawyers, investors) and find out where the contingencies are. The people in control may not even know your situation.
In hindsight you're classifying these individuals as Geeks, Nerds, Dorks, but to an average high schooler these terms are synonymous unless you actually belonged to one of these groups and felt the need to create a hierarchy :)
Why are we assuming that all nerds are smart? My high school had several "dumb" nerds (Napoleon Dynamite-ish). Nerds are people who are socially inept. Add intelligence to a nerd and all you have is an intelligent nerd, he has not moved up the social ladder at all. The real question should be "Why are smart black kids with no social skills unpopular?" but that wouldn’t be much of a question, would it? They’re unpopular because they have no social skills, being smart has nothing to do with it. Since the author states that blacks put so much emphasis on their social status, it makes perfect sense that anyone not exhibiting socially acceptable behaviors would be deemed unpopular. You could easily have said:
Why are black kids who wear tight clothes unpopular?
Why are black kids who listen to heavy metal unpopular?
Why are black male virgins unpopular?
If you do unpopular stuff then you will not be popular. Interesting article, but way off base. Oh, and if you are wondering, I’m BLACK.
Web applications are a lot easier to develop. I think too many people are still applying methodologies that applied to more "traditional" forms of software development. If I have a good JavaScript hacker bail on me a week before launch, I don't think it would be extremely difficult to find another good JavaScript hacker.
I don't dispute that. What if you have great technical people in the beginning who happen to have no equity stake? A talented developer is a talented developer (regardless of how they are compensated)...equity doesn't make them any better, does it?
Equity should be given to individuals who are critical to the success of your company, individuals who are indispensable. Too many companies give equity to individuals who can be replaced once the company becomes self-sustaining. Equity shouldn't be given to "good" coders just because they contributed in the beginning. Equity should be saved for the "great/exceptional" coders that you may attract as your business grows.
There are too many other factors that come into play when it comes to selecting a good co-founder/equity holder. Things such as vision, rapport, dedication, etc. Equity/options are too compensate someone that you want in your company when you don't have the financing to pay them what they are worth.
What would be the reason for "throwing" them an equity stake? Many people believe this makes a person more dedicated to the company, which is absolutely false.
Success is defined by the goals you set for your startup. Some people may create a startup in hopes to match their current salary at their "real job", so that they can quit. Once that goal is attained they consider their venture a success. Others have higher, loftier goals (go IPO) and if they don't achieve that goal then they feel that were unsuccessful and thus continue creating/joining other startups and ventures until that goal is reached. One man's failure is another man's success.