The kind of tech that underpins this gets a pretty good reception here.
But this page looks slick to a fault. The user story approach feels pandering and I lose interest fairly quickly. Is this closed source? IOS only? I see a waitlist - Why don't they want a general audience to see it?
"Will it? Forever? What are you doing to ensure that?"
Because most consumer startups fail. The ones that get bought out usually end up sunset or neglected. Even the ones that IPO often alienate users by chasing quarterly earnings (evernote/dropbox/pinterest).
If _toxic_ technology and products don’t have a chance for optimism on HN, where do they? Fixed that for you. Also, is this really “technology” through and through? I mean, surely there’s scientific knowledge behind it, but is the materialized outcome really something those two founders really achieved out of applied scientific knowledge? From reading their about page, I doubt they are invested in factoring the neuropsychological, social and cultural impacts, long or short term. It seems more like a narrative they’ve built and liked how it sounded in their head. I’m a designer engineer and I known how tempting it is to prototype such aesthetic pipe dreams, those that you never bothered to honestly and seriously question the validity, since it would obviously ruin all the fun. In those cases it’s easier to let yourself be fooled by your own foolishness. After all, how can it be not good if it looks good and pleases me? It must be good! No, more than that. It is necessary! It’s the way of the future! It has to be done! Right? Has it ever occurred to you that the, hm, “hackers”, might actually have a bit of sense, affording them the ability to distinguish useful technology from bullshit?
