I'm really glad that you pushed out this app, I was looking for something like this. On the other hand, I'm really curious about how you'll make money. I signed up, but if you were asking for some money (either monthly or app purchase fee), I'd feel more secure.
We just added a section to our 'learn more' page to address this important question:
>Millow is not a social network. There is no feed, and no advertising. We designed Millow to be used no more than a few minutes each week. We eventually hope to sustain our business by helping you make reservations at local restaurants and businesses, and making a sliver of revenue from such transactions. This is in support of our goal to stay independent as a company, so we can continue to provide this product for perpetuity, and maintain our focus on our mission of helping you stay connected to your inner circle.
Crickets so far from patio11, pc, and edwinwee. I wrote a kind and thoughtful email expressing my grievances and giving them the benefit of the doubt. But I've heard nothing back. I've even left voicemail.
Even though this is better than the lack of it, I find it weird that they're not using Contextual MAB and instead just went with the MAB. You've got the preference of your users anyhow, why not show the picture first that will perform best according to that specific user?
I'm guessing the reason was that this was born out of a hackathon. E-greedy is likely the easiest algorithm to implement for a MAB problem like this. Given that they mention there's an API to specify sort order (assuming it was on a per-view basis), the specific algorithm could be swapped out for something smarter.
I think a contextual bandit algorithm would be interesting in this case, although I wonder if there would be enough data behind photo swipes to back each context meaningfully.
I'm not sure, Bitbucket's price effectively is $1/user and Github's $9/user. I wouldn't expect organisations to move to Bitbucket either, as change is generally costly in terms of man-hour, but current price structure makes Bitbucket eight-fold cheaper.
Please be aware of the fact that this survey is commissioned by Bloomreach to reach a conclusion they'd like.
"By a 2-to-1 margin, respondents to Survata’s survey said they don’t understand why their favorite retailers don’t offer the same kind of dead-on, personalized experience that the big search engines do." It must be a great coincidence that Bloomreach provide personalization services to online retailers.
I know. The article falls apart quickly when they get to the
"Key takeaways" section. Nobody (except people selling marketing services) is looking at Amazon for "personalization."
Good search and filter and important. I take Newegg to be about the best at this.
But the real reason everyone starts the shopping search at Amazon is because they have a good selection of almost everything! Few stores are going to be able to match this scope, even in a deep vertical.
Also, Amazon (and again Newegg) have somewhat useful comment and ratings sections. You can skip all the four and five star reviews. They're mostly spam these days. But you can pick through the one and two star reviews to find the non-spam ("this thing sucks and broke before I got it") posts to find out specific issues that might cause you to rule out a product. And that only comes about with a large customer base of active shoppers. Which only comes about once you've reached critical mass.
I'd totally agree with Google part. Their free services (Search, Maps, Mail) are amazing but once you're doing business with them, they are a PITA to work with.
I think Instagram acquisition and this are not similar cases. Instagram was a direct competitor of a core product of Facebook: Photo Sharing while there's no such competition in Tumblr case.
I believe they were just being funny, reporting how ridiculous these event ticket buying process became, instead of reporting this as a comparison between two companies.
