I think that by Apple's "level", the above comment was referring less to design elements and more to manufacturing processes that would not be feasible for a company operating at smaller scale. An article a while ago [1] had a list of examples, such as CNC milling at scale and laser drilled holes.
It's the best piece I've ever read dealing with the question of attracting users to an early-stage startup. The gist of it is this: your first 100 users will be completely different from your last 10,000. The first 100 have to be courted - you're going to have to bend over backwards to make them happy. If that means customer support emails from the founder, so what? Those first 100 users, the ones who are overwhelmed by your support, will be the most valuable customers you'll get, because once they're through the door, network effects can really start to kick in.
The apocryphal story I've heard (but never verified) is of how PayPal broke out in the eBay marketplace. Instead of trying to convert customers with advertising and the like, they pretended to be customers on eBay, offering to buy inexpensive items from popular sellers before asking if the sellers accepted PayPal. This got the first few sellers through the door, and once they started using it the network effects propagated through eBay and beyond, turning PayPal into the giant it is today.
And the fact that they just got funding means that they don't have too much of a head start on you. If you already have an MVP, you should be able to catch up fairly quickly, as fundraising should hopefully be much more productive now that the space has been validated.
Just a side note though: you might want to consider slipping something extra into your slide deck/whatever to mention the competition in the space and how you plan on adding value over your competitor's product. Good luck!
Card College by Roberto Giobbi is pricey but provides excellent instruction. If you don't mind reading older, more formal language (though not as old as Erdnase!), The Royal Road to Card Magic by Hugard and Braue, and its sequel Expert Card Technique, cover more material than Giobbi at a fraction of the cost, albeit with slightly less attention to the subtleties of finger position.
Hugard and Braue are, again, totally canonical. (Almost sort of analogous to Thompson & Ritchie's published works on C/Unix, but for cards...sort of ;) They're cheap and easy to come by for <$10 each, and I agree that pound-for-pound, you're going to get more effects from them than anywhere else.
I do think for a serious beginner right now, though, Giobbi is probably more appropriate. I would argue he offers considerably more detail on subtleties of handling and overall performance and in more accessible language which is important. It's kind of like you're getting the best of Erdnase, Hugard, Braue and so many of the greats who came after them in the 20th century distilled down to best practices with Giobbi's course. There's nothing wrong with taking it slow either. You don't have to get all the volumes at once. In fact, it would be better to spend a long time mastering each before buying and moving on to the next.
As a note, too, R. Paul Wilson did a rather decent DVD series of The Royal Road to Card Magic, which you can get for ~$60. The book is a useful reference, but actually -seeing- the sleights can be amazingly useful.
And as others have mentioned, if you do go to Erdnase (or get sufficiently hooked to just want a copy), there is both the Annotated Erdnase by Darwin Ortiz (which is pretty readily available), as well as Dai Vernon's Revelation book (not to be confused with the 'Revelations' series of DVDs), his own annotations on Erdnase ( http://www.mcmagicwords.com/books_revelation.html ).
Yes, yes -- start with The Royal Road. It's a fantastic place to start. Graduate to Card College if you can afford it; otherwise, Paul le Paul, and then dive in deep with Buckley's Card Control. If you're still hungry after that, you and Erdnase deserve each other.
"Terms are offered. You can accept them or reject them"
Isn't this the exact opposite of a negotiation? By definition, doesn't "negotiation" imply that both parties enter into a discussion in an attempt to reach an agreement.
When you buy a cup of coffee, Starbucks doesn't force you to sign a legal document saying that you will only drink Starbucks coffee for the next five years, or that whenever you buy a cup of coffee from somewhere else you must simultaneously buy a cup from Starbucks. Also, if you refuse to buy the cup of coffee, Starbucks will not post your picture in every branch in the country to prevent you from ever buying a cup of coffee from them again.
In this case the "product" is an automated system for paying royalties on the customer's creative output which Google is making money off the back of, and they haven't so much "dropped" it as changed the terms to compel the customer to agree to a distribution deal with YouTube.
If any other online hosting service (with substantial network or lock-in effects) changed their terms to give themselves rights to host and slap ads on any of your other public output there would be an outcry. Why is this one different?
Loda also had a good performance at the Summit recently, standing in for Tinker. Even if Alliance may not be so hot on the scene right now, the talent at the core of their team is still present.
[1]: https://medium.com/@BoltVC/no-you-cant-manufacture-that-like...