[_delirium]

If there's something insightful to say, sure. But the bubble/not-bubble, talented-team/questionable-product, smart-VCs/dumb-VCs, can't-use-$41m/can-use-$41m debates don't seem to be getting anywhere, as far as I've seen. Not just that it's repetitive, but that none of the discussions, even if they were the first and only one you saw, has a lot of substance. They all seem to be some combination of ridicule and "it's not worth ridiculing but maybe is good" defensiveness, with both sides mostly based on speculation rather than any solid facts.

Am I missing the insightful writeups where this case study can help me learn something about either technology or the technology business? I click to the HN discussion in hopes of finding such things!

[mweatherill]

I see a lot of similarity between the Color discussions and anything written about Fukushima; a small number of facts are being drawn together to produce wide-reaching conclusions. It is a lot less interesting to say "we don't know all the facts so lets just wait and see how this turns out". These days I find it much harder to find people who are undecided about a topic - everything is polarising.

[erikpukinskis]

This particular writeup said a lot about the strategies Sequoia could be using to protect themselves which I hadn't seen in previous discussions.