The post is very inaccurate. Editors, please check the facts before posting sensationalistic headlines.
There is a law being discussed in the Italian parliament which intends to set the rules for online publications, and define their responsibilities. The goal is to recognize and treat professional online news sites in the same way as traditional newspapers, where there is an editor ultimately responsible and accountable for the information published. This is not unlike press laws in most western countries: if, for instance, the New York Times publishes unfounded corruption allegations against a politician, its editor is ultimately responsible for those allegations, and the politician could sue him for defamation.
There was some initial concern in the blogging world that this law could also apply to bloggers, but this concern was already cleared by the undersecretary to the Cabinet, Ricardo Franco Levi, which is the main curator of the text of the proposed law. He clearly stated that the new law would only apply to professional journalists, and that it would absolutely not apply to bloggers of any kind.
From the article (referring to Meebo, another AJAX company): Several venture-capital firms have approached the three-person start-up, which is still figuring out its business model.
I think it's hard to find a better example of bubble: the founders themselves don't know how the business will make money, and VCs are already looking to invest.
Invest in what, exactly?
technology? How much technology can be in company founded 6 weeks ago (14th Sept)?
technology expertise? Last time I looked on Seek, technology expertise comes cheaper than a million-bucks-per-head.
Being the founder and main developer of a small software firm that has been around since 2000, and luckily escaped dubious VC deals (yes we did get offers), I can say that if you want to run a long-term viable business, you better have a clear idea on how to make it generate revenues, understand what your market is, etc.
Maybe the latest buzzword is good for luring investors with disposable money and no tech knowledge. But customers in the real world don't care about AJAX or other buzzwords. They want something that solves their problems, and how you solve them it's up to you. A profitable business (one whose founders have made up their mind on the business model, to start with) learns what customers need, delivers it, supports it. And you'll find out that if you play it right, the business will steadily grow. As we're experiencing.
Sure, on the other hand, if you're the founder and like to ride flashy BMW cars, and someone throws money at you, then take it while you can. But a viable business is another thing.
Slashdot Mirror
The post is very inaccurate. Editors, please check the facts before posting sensationalistic headlines.
There is a law being discussed in the Italian parliament which intends to set the rules for online publications, and define their responsibilities.
The goal is to recognize and treat professional online news sites in the same way as traditional newspapers, where there is an editor ultimately responsible and accountable for the information
published. This is not unlike press laws in most western countries: if, for instance, the New York Times publishes unfounded corruption allegations against a politician, its editor is ultimately responsible for those allegations, and the politician could sue him for defamation.
There was some initial concern in the blogging world that this law could also apply to bloggers, but this concern was already cleared by the undersecretary to the Cabinet, Ricardo Franco Levi, which is the main curator of the text of the proposed law. He clearly stated that the new law would only apply to professional journalists, and that it would absolutely not apply to bloggers of any kind.
More information (in italian): http://www.corriere.it/politica/07_ottobre_23/levi_legge_editoria_no_bavaglio_ai_blog.shtml
From the article (referring to Meebo, another AJAX company):
Several venture-capital firms have approached the three-person start-up, which is still figuring out its business model.
I think it's hard to find a better example of bubble: the founders themselves don't know how the business will make money, and VCs are already looking to invest.
Invest in what, exactly?
technology? How much technology can be in company founded 6 weeks ago (14th Sept)?
technology expertise? Last time I looked on Seek, technology expertise comes cheaper than a million-bucks-per-head.
Being the founder and main developer of a small software firm that has been around since 2000, and luckily escaped dubious VC deals (yes we did get offers), I can say that if you want to run a long-term viable business, you better have a clear idea on how to make it generate revenues, understand what your market is, etc.
Maybe the latest buzzword is good for luring investors with disposable money and no tech knowledge. But customers in the real world don't care about AJAX or other buzzwords. They want something that solves their problems, and how you solve them it's up to you. A profitable business (one whose founders have made up their mind on the business model, to start with) learns what customers need, delivers it, supports it. And you'll find out that if you play it right, the business will steadily grow. As we're experiencing.
Sure, on the other hand, if you're the founder and like to ride flashy BMW cars, and someone throws money at you, then take it while you can. But a viable business is another thing.
I wonder if VCs read Slashdot...