5V is extremely bad from efficiency point of view. The voltage drop over an LED is ~3V, that leaves 2V to be sent through the current limiting resistor (dissipated as heat). There could be only a single LED (no series).
These strips have a chip and individual control for each RGB LED that work on 6V max, so "higher voltage would be better" doesn't really make sense for them (unlike strips where all LEDs in the strip are driven the same, without individual control).
I get that you both thought maybe I was soldering my own strips raw but the DIY in the title is about setting up your own strips, not just buying a bunch of LIFX or Hue strips.
which is "building WITH LED strips". I once "built" a LED-matrix display from strips, because it was a demo project and money for HW was scarce (and time to short to look into fabrication for a non-EE-person; also brightness maxes out at 1000cd/m² last I checked) - I seriously came there for some info how you created your own, cheap DIY high-density setup for the WS-LEDs (cooling becomes also a problem eventually for high brightness, so I was looking forward to a solution to this problem). Instead I got the blog equivalent of a YT-video: how to decorate your room in 5 easy steps.
BTW: You actually did do nothing more than buying a bunch of strips, I don't see a big technical difference between hue and chinese strips + a chinese hue-bridge except for the soldering (but afaik they also offer connectors for solderless application...). So you might change the title to: "setting up a chineses hue replacement for cheap with soldering" (though I would expect pictures of your soldering then...
This is rough back of the envelope calculations, but we only have 62k paid users, only about 12k come back every day, so subscriptions would need something like 25%-50% of the daily userbase paying, not just 2%.
Thanks Matt. As someone not very familiar with your site, I have some observations about the user experience of the site:
I just tried signing up for the site. My first hurdle was finding the sign up button. It's nearly impossible.
After finding the "New user" link and clicking on it, I'm presented with your community guidelines, which I understand make MeFi what it is. But, that page could still do with a sign up button, instead of the link buried at the bottom.
Anyway, I clicked on the "Go ahead and sign up for an account here" link, filled in my details and then I was presented with the "pay $5 to complete your signup" message. I didn't know it was going to cost me $5! I went back to the guidelines page, and I noticed you did mention the $5 there, but I didn't read it.
I expect this is the most common user experience of new visitors to your site interested in joining.
I don't know if improving these things will move the needle at all for you, but there seem to be a few simple things you could try to increase signups.
Lurking on Metafilter doesn't require an account; you need one only if you want to post or comment. The $5 threshold (and the wall of text "guidelines" page where it's mentioned a couple of times) serves as an incredible gatekeeper. That is probably the single most effective thing that is responsible for the high quality of Metafilter's posts and comments. The exceptionally well-done moderation is a very close second.
Most mefites actually did read the guidelines page, because by the time they've decided to become a member, they know that text on that page is probably important, and (much like the rest of Metafilter) is probably worth reading in full.
Because what usually happens is a user will read Metafilter for days or weeks, slowly realizing how special it is, and then finally hit a topic that they're passionate about -- the kind of thing where they just have to post, because they know they can contribute to the community... so they spend the $5 and sign up.
The catch is, they've been a member of the community for a bit already, albeit a mute one, and they've probably picked up on some of those guidelines already. That's the point. Optimizing the site so a first-time-visitor is more likely to become a (paid) user would inherently be deprioritizing community quality.
It's that community that makes MetaFilter what it is.
I agree with "Most mefites actually did read the guidelines page, because by the time they've decided to become a member, they know that text on that page is probably important".
But just wanted to say that I love MeFi but the interface leaves a lot to be desired. Really :(
I suspect that a major reason for the demise of Metafilter is it's just so rude that people have started leaving and not returning. I used to love it and spent a lot of time hanging out there, until it started to get so incredibly snarky that I felt uncomfortable commenting. The last straw was when some veteran accused me of trivialising the holocaust just because of an innocent quote. Nobody needs that stuff.
That's the reason I stopped visiting. I once asked a tech-support type question and was told to "man up and grow a pair", and tell my users they would just have to live with the problem (no attempt to answer the actual question). Unfortunately, answers like that tend to get lots of favorites since they sound so emphatic, and people on MeFi seem to like emphatic answers, in the same way reddit likes funny answers.
Man, I am sympathetic if you got an obnoxious answer like that, but for what it's worth as one of the folks who moderates it that as stated is a comment I'd delete from an Ask Metafilter thread in a heartbeat and would expect other users to have flagged a bunch as well. The system isn't perfect but "man up and grow a pair" is really precisely deletable as a crap non-answer in our moderation rubric.
Thanks for that :) It's a great community but some of its flaws grew a bit tiring. I genuinely hope it can come through its current crisis and keep right on going.
Your caricature of what MF is like is so grotesquely at odds with my experience that I would suspect that you are exaggerating or making it up. Metafilter, by and large, has an informed, intelligent and very helpful community. There are always jerks or people having a bad day but the mods deal with that promptly. That said, people who are just asinine, like perhaps those making unfair generalizations, are often dealt with by gentle ridicule. I have never seen anyone unfairly snarked, ever.
My problem was that everything you need on that page is along the left-hand side. The number of contacts pre-selected is pretty small, and off to the right. I was breezing through this, trying to find old friends (and it worked! The first contact suggested was someone I've known for ten years), and I just missed that little number line on the upper right.
Ideally, it should throw up a warning for trying to add anything over maybe 50-100 accounts, like a simple "Are you sure Y/N?" before allowing you to continue adding that many.
I wish I took screenshots, but honestly my memory is I only saw six invites to review and in tiny 10px text below the "connect now" button was a thing saying (and also 1,132 more).
For what it's worth, a designer that works on this feature tweeted an apology and said they should add a warning, as it was way more common than intended.
Last I checked, about 400-500 had accepted. I put the blame squarely on me for not reading carefully, but also on LinkedIn for not warning me, but Google as well. Turns out Google has a group in your contacts for everyone you've ever emailed and it's at something like 6,000 for me, so I guess about 1/5th of those were on LinkedIn, who got invites.
Some of the invites went to people I'd banned from my sites for spamming, an old accountant I haven't talked to in ten years, and PR flacks I had arguments with over sending me press releases I didn't want. My LinkedIn account used to be a pretty well-curated list of people I'd actually interacted with in person before and done some business with, and now it's just a random hodge-podge of a bunch of internet strangers I crossed paths with at some point.
Supposedly LinkedIn has a karma system where you will be punished for anyone not accepting your requests.
You may end up banned from making future requests, although that might come as a relief and it sounds like LinkedIn might be BSing there given that combine that with support for mailing >1k people at once.
I mentioned that specifically because I've invested myself in a few startups and typically I only get 1% at most for sometimes much more money than what Ycombinator offers.
People get much more than just funding from yc; I think people are happy to give 10% of their company for $6k plus all the connections and expertise that yc offers. If yc only offered money, they wouldn't get a 10% stake for $6k.
I for one specifically did not apply to Y Combinator this year because of the big stake/small amount of cash they offered, though would have loved the mentoring and publicity. Six per cent for $6,000 per founder might be okay if you are a couple of guys or gals with an idea but if you are already profitable, it just does not make sense.
There almost needs to be a Y Combinator for small-but-already-profitable web businesses, offering much better terms.
Great talk, btw, Matt. As a fellow bootstrapper, it resonated with me.
Commercial banks offer what you're seeking. In our local scene when one of our cash-flow+ portfolio companies is seeking further capital for expansion, often debt is a better (cheaper) option than taking on VC investment (if they're CF+ they shouldn't be seeking angel terms!). We've actually had a big bank actively trying to sell such debt.
If you're CF+ and need capital, talk to your bank.
