Alan reminded me of something else that launched last week:

If you go and check out my profile on Jobster today, and you happen to have a browser plugin that knows about microformats, you'll notice that hCard, xFolk and hResume data are all available from these profile pages now.

Here's something I've been tossing around for a while: I've seen a lot of noise about whether or not we're in some sort of dot.com bubble 2.0, usually by people with the foregone conclusion that a bubble is Bad News.

What's lacking is actual discussion about the pros and cons of a bubble in the venture business. Alan pointed me towards a thorough article covering both sides of the argument, with a great quote from VC writer Paul Kedrosky

[A bubble] is, frankly the only way to justify being locked into a seven-year illiquid fund full of infrequently-priced equities. While that doesn't mean we shouldn't worry about bubbles and over-funding, the reverse — some notional steady-state, bubble-free venture market — would be more disastrous.

Alan provided that emphasis and the following comment

Commentary like Dead 2.0 is based on the false premise that markets should be efficient, rational and orderly at the micro level of individual deals as well as the macro level - both assumptions are questionable, but the former is laughable.

There is another flaw in the argument: as with many articles like it, it conflates the phenomena of seed- and early-stage funding of questionable models with larger later-stage funding events to create the impression of the bubble, comparing a $1m investment in some backyard site with $50m investments in Jobster and Zillow. A common journalistic trick, but there's a big difference between $1m and $50m.

From the perspective of someone holding a $5-10b venture portfolio, the $1m is like a lottery ticket and the $50m is like a nice dinner out for 2. The lottery ticket is pretty much an impulse buy, but usually you read the restaurant review before heading out to the dinner. Doesn't guarantee a great meal, but at least you did the due diligence...