But he's also contributed to a lot of open source software. Linux grew to the point of being "cool" among geeks due to the strength of its open source ecosystem. One of the things my wife admires about me is my proficiency with computers, which I got into through Linux. So indirectly his software (e.g. Xscreensaver) got me laid.
I think it's more a philosophy of "You get what you give", in more ways than one.
I wrote the Translate application for Android and I've had numerous people telling me in comments that thanks to my app, they were able to hook up with foreign girls and get laid.
My thought when I got the first comment of this kind was "jwz would be so proud".
I sent my ex-girlfriend a similar graph months ago with the subject line "graphing my way to your heart". I failed. I even installed the Android SDK on my machine to get the screenshot.
Not if they were arguing over whether he loved his band more than her. Android app - boom - evidence overpowers doubt.
But to go from that argument to insta-lay, he probably also needed to pull some puppy dog eyes, and maybe reminder her of the flowers he bought that day for no particular reason?
Why this is only natural. What does a 22 y.o. college kid have to talk to his bandmates about ON THE PHONE? Naturally, he chats more with this girlfriend than with his friends. This doesn't mean that he spends more time with them since generally for that demographic I would think the in person communication would be more important.
Being Canadian, I can't put up paid apps (yet), so I don't know.
It's also a hard question to answer, because it depends on app popularity, price, complexity of the app, etc. For my next project, I am planning to roll over iPhone and Android nearly simultaneously, so I look forward to answering that question in a blog post, at least in a relative way.
I just checked - currently you can sell apps from Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Spain, UK and US. From what I've read, the local carriers play a large role in where paid apps are available.
I've made about $200-$250/month on my Android app, but it looks to be on track of making $500 this month, possibly due to the launch of the Droid phone. Just did a post on this:
It's not really so smart to go into a market right at the start of the bump, because the values at the very start will be way off the charts compared to when it is a stable store.
agreed, however, the mobile app market appears to be very fast and finicky. Unless your building an application that is tied to, or supports another, already existing application, it's primarily a craps shoot on making money or not.
"use case" should be, there's a 22 year old college student living in the dorms. How will this software get him laid?"
well this use case is certainly the main strategy for facebook and myspace.
With due respect, I think that this post is unbecoming HN. JWZ's quip was sexist and so is this follow-up. Also, while there is a long history of the successful monetization of business models which "get people laid," generally speaking such models command at best low respect and at worst criminalization. Sometimes some people wonder why computing tech industries are seemingly so uninviting to women. Other times, other people wonder why that first group is acting so surprised.
"How many feminists does it take to screw in a lightbulb?"
"That's not funny."
is funny, because it's true.
> generally speaking such models command at best low respect and at worst criminalization.
So... a site that allows people to search for other people that want to have sex is a criminal organization? How does facilitating sex between two consenting parties deserve low respect?
If 'Girl A' wants to have sex tonight and 'Boy B' wants to have sex tonight too, what exactly is the problem with finding a way for them to find each other so that they can both have sex tonight?
I'm really not seeing the outrage here. Feminism was (supposed to be) all about empowering women. Doesn't allowing a woman to actively search out sexual partners on her own terms empowerment?
I mean if you really want to misinterpret his post to the extreme you could say that he's advocating becoming a pimp because it "gets people laid," but I doubt that you'll find many other people willing share in that interpretation with you.
Guys really want to sleep with girls, and have less options and a harder time of it, especially when they're younger. Guys spend hundreds, thousands of dollars to try to get girls, and almost everything is marketed to men as the answer towards getting women.
Making that explicit acknowledges how things are and what's really actually happening in the world, and is probably less sexist than the average car commercial, beer commercial, diamond commercial, men's magazine, or women's magazine.
The post in question doesn't acknowledge that "that's how things are" and it certainly doesn't acknowledge that there are reasons why things being that way is an undesirable condition. On the contrary, the post in question joins in making sure that "that's how things are" and thus contributes to an overall environment that is detrimental to most women.
Mate, the guy did something sweet for his girlfriend, and she was happy and touched and affectionate with him afterwards. That's a nice thing.
> ...and it certainly doesn't acknowledge that there are reasons why things being that way is an undesirable condition.
Okay, think about this for a second: Women can go to basically any party with decent people, whenever they want, with no money and no transportation, without knowing anyone very well, and be fully confident that they can get home safe later. Men? Not so much. For a lot of reasons, women are more sought after and desirable than men, especially from ages 16-24 or so. They have more options and dating and sex is easier for them.
Yet, guys tremendously want women, so they work really hard to try to get women. Now, I believe that men should spend their time primarily working on developing their character and becoming more outstanding instead of chasing a particular girl and being less outstanding. But I digress, the way things are is that women's dating/sexual market value is orders of magnitude higher than a man's, especially when they're both younger. Acknowledging that explicitly - "Your goal should be to get your users hooking up and connecting with people" - is much more honest than the vast majority of marketing and commercials where a guy cracks a beer and then there's the bikini team dancing all around him. "Get your users laid" is a slightly crass and amusing way for saying "facilitate communication between genders to make dating, sex, romance, and courtship more rewarding and less awkward", and that's not a bad thing.
Using somewhat crass terminology - "get laid" - isn't so much sexist as just being a little crass and casual, but gets the message across a lot easier than some politically correct, "Your app should facilitate interpersonal communication and interaction, especially between people open to an intimate relationship" - which means the same thing, but doesn't call it like it really is.
"Women can go to basically any party with decent people, whenever they want, with no money and no transportation, without knowing anyone very well, and be fully confident that they can get home safe later."
That's very much not the case. How the hell do women judge whether the people at any given party are "decent" without knowing anyone very well? Given the very real risks and dangers women face in these situations (mainly rape), they can't really know. It's one of the more serious problems that women face.
I'm not saying you have a bad overall point here, but this particular example is way off base.
I hate to ask, but can I get an explanation on the downmod here? I did my best to honestly convey an accurate and useful point and am not sure what I did wrong.
Duh. You discouraged girls from attending parties. Correct or not, that's the last thing the world needs. I was in a hotel bar in Santa Clara last night with 60+ men and 0 women.
> be fully confident that they can get home safe later.
You're leaving out the possibility of rape (date or otherwise). And I'm not sure what you're implying here about men. Men can't be confident that they will get home safe when they go to a party where they don't know anyone?
The only thing that I can guess at here is that you think that a man that goes to a party where he doesn't know anyone will get beat up. If that's the case, how is it more or less likely that a man will get beat up at a party full of strangers than a woman will get raped? If anything I think it would be more likely for a woman to get raped (gets drunk and passes out; guy goes too far while making out and she has a 'victim mindset' so she doesn't protest loud enough for others to hear/notice; etc)
Geesh, calm down puritan. The only thing remotely sexist about JWZ's famous quit is that he said "get him laid" rather than "get him/her laid". Pull your head out of the dark ages and wake up to the 21st century.
Like the old song said "Sex is natural. Sex is good. Not everybody does it, but everybody should". :-)
With due respect, I am offended by your assumption of heteronormativity. By assuming that "get people laid" refers to a traditional dominate male submissive female sexual dynamic, you clearly reveal your own sexism.
