Fizzer

They had given me six days to add a Privacy Policy button into my app (my website has it, and my app's metadata has it, but apparently they require a button in the app UI itself, which I didn't have).

I told them I would add it, but I needed more time, as getting an app update out with only 6 days notice the week before Christmas is impossible (I have 5 apps that use Facebook login across 3 app stores, iOS/Android/Amazon).

They told me I could request an extension, which I did do multiple times, but the extension was not granted.

What does this even mean? "on a path to self-sustaining" makes it seem like they're not currently self-sustainable. Given the crazy profit margins in software, I find it hard to believe that most apps making millions per year are not sustainable.

The goal of Tesla's Autopilot is to take you from your garage to your parking space with zero input. Therefore it's exactly the same as a plane's which takes you from runway to runway.

Just because it's a work-in-progress doesn't mean it's named wrong.

They do this all the time, and they get crucified every time. I built a Google Hangout App and a Chrome App, both of which were platforms eventually shut down.

This is where the meme came from, and it's why I personally stopped building on top of Google products. A 1-year deprecation policy is no assurance to me if I plan for my app to live longer than that.

The Transferwise website was horrible. It gave error messages and kept telling me to fill out some field that didn't exist. After sending screenshots to their support team, they just sent me back links that didn't work.

After several back-and-forths with support they eventually fixed that issue, but then on a later step the website told me to upload "the documents" and gave an upload control. I carefully read every piece of text on the website, and nowhere did it explain what documents it was asking me to upload. It wouldn't let me proceed until I uploaded "the documents". I sent screenshots of all this to the support team and they didn't know what documents I was supposed to upload either.

Eventually support helped me fix that, and I got to a later step, where it asked me for the username and password I use to log into my bank. I am not comfortable providing this to anyone, so I refused. This was the last straw that finally led to me giving up at using Transferwise.

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/6xh3xp/reddits...

So even if there isn't a per-view payout, I'm sure the view numbers do contribute to the studio getting more money.

I'm curious since I don't ban swastikas on my site, although some of my users ask me to.

It's all in the presentation. If you just highlight one image and stamp "WINNER" next to it, most people won't even look at the numbers. Crowning a winner is more important than being scientifically accurate.

Some people would do this, but as long as you randomize the order of the pictures their data won't alter the winner since each image would get an even number of bad votes.

You can also detect when people are doing this and start throwing out their votes, or just don't even prompt them to vote and show them ads instead. I'm pretty sure this would be a minority, since most people would understand that they want to get real results for their own photos, so they need to give real votes to other photos.

Rating photos is very fast -- just look at two photos and tap one. All network lag can be eliminated by pre-caching the images. I'd bet the average rating speed is one per second (it's all snap judgements).

As long as the app has 30+ people using it at every moment of the day, you'll always get a response of at least 30 responses within 30 seconds. Plus I suspect people would enjoy voting and would spend time doing it even while not waiting on their own response, meaning you'd get more than you put in.

This takes a lot more effort than simply tapping one of two photos without reading anything. A/B responses can be given in less than a second. It's all snap judgements -- no reading is necessary.

It would also be important to make it very fast. Cache all the images before the voter gets there, and send the results asynchronously so they don't need to wait. One could easily do a rating in less than a second. It's all snap judgements.

The advantage of having two images is the voter doesn't even need to read a description or know what part of the image they're supposed to up/down vote. They should be able to easily see the difference between the two and just make a snap decision in less than a second. Not having to read text makes it more fun, I would think, and also provides a lot more results for the picture-taker.

Pickfu also charges for their service, which I don't think would work for someone wanting to simply choose their wardrobe. It'd have to monetize in other ways (ads, or charging for getting gender/age breakdowns of the results, more results, allowing to compare more than 2 photos, etc.)

Here's an example: Say a someone is deciding which shirt to wear. They whip out their smartphone, launch the A/B app, takes a picture of themselves wearing each of two shirts. Within 30 seconds, they have an answer of which shirt hundreds of people liked better. While they're waiting for the reply, they're prompted to rate other people's pictures. This is as simple as seeing two pictures and tapping the one that they like more.

The number of use cases is endless. You could be shopping for eyeglasses and trying to figure out which look better - just try on both right there in the store and get a response from the A/B app.

It's not limited to fashion, as people could use it for any subjective comparison.