skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't know the details of the Etsy's financial situation, so my initial comment seems a bit flippant, having re-read it.

But regardless, Etsy was a high profile B corp IPO, so I expect people to draw conclusions from its success or failure regarding the viability of B corps in public equity markets. (Warby Parker and Patagonia are two other B corps.)

After all, public companies are legally obligated to maximize shareholder value.
As a rule of thumb, you should only invest what you can afford to lose, in any stock.
There's people willing to take cheaper and shittier accommodation in return for extra spending money. Like, community college prices haven't risen top cap out against loan amounts.
I heard three young women refer to each other as "dude" in the Portland airport a week ago. It seems to be a generational thing.
iAd App Network Will Be Discontinued
Global Entrepreneurship Index – do you know/agree with this list?
They have very clear business models, but even if they capture 100% of their market the possible revenue can’t support their current valuations.

I think both these businesses are fantastic businesses that will make a lot of money, but I would not buy at their current valuations.
Information technology is growing faster than any other technology has ever grown, and yet there is none sophisticated marketplace for the developers to showcase their talent or the innovative work they have been doing all the time. Every industries has a thousand of marketplace to sell their product. Digital world has always been confused with either open source or Licensing terms! What the heck! If I am good at something that has potential to change the way things work, I would like to sell it to enhance and innovate without dealing with licensing stuff. Money is just a rewards for contribution towards innovation. Its time to think about reinventing marketplace for the IT developers, let them build their own digital shop just like every other industries has. Information technology is grown so much, yet it has just born about 60 years. From one wheel to car to airplane, it took thousands of years, can't imagine the infinite possibility of digital world. Lets expedite the innovation even faster with platform that I am envisioning with Colaxy.
GoPro: from 64$ to 11$

http://www.google.com/finance?q=GPRO
That is why you don't ship it back - you put it outside and a local hauling company picks it up for recycling / donating / trashing
This is extremely optimistic. We don't have AI that advanced, or evidence that AI will get that advanced any time soon. People joke all the time about the crazy stuff that Siri comes up with.

What IS coming soon is automation of mindless, lower-level jobs. Waiting tables is a good example here: humans do a terrible job of it, and add 10-20% to your food bill in exchange for screwing up your order. Having a tablet computer on the table for you to place your own order would be better, and some restaurants already do this (like Panera) to some degree. Factory work is another: today's factories are filled with automation, and robots produce better-quality products than humans because they don't make mistakes. Taxi driving is another: we're working on automated cars, so pretty soon "Johnny Cab" will be a real thing, and all those cab drivers will be out of a job. This will extend to truck drivers pretty quickly, probably faster than cabs actually. Fast food cooking is another: McD's already has the job of cooking a Big Mac down to something that someone with almost no training can pick up right away because their machines do most of it, they just have to follow some pictorial directions. People have Roombas to clean their floors.

So what happens when you automate all the simple jobs that don't require an education? Now you have a large portion of the population that's unemployed, and they're really not smart enough to get an education and get a higher-level job, or there's not enough higher-level jobs to go around for them if they are.

It's going to be a long time before engineers, for instance, are replaced by robots (and maybe never), but you don't need smart people to cut grass and rake leaves, and jobs like that are going to go away before long.
Definitely tried that combo, and it definitely didn't work for me. Tried again just to be sure.

Then I started typing this comment to wonder out loud what might be different, and in the process checked my version of Chrome. As soon as I did, Chrome started updating itself, and after a re-launch, the game works. Nice!

Chrome 46.0.2490.86 (64-bit) - no worky
Chrome 47.0.2526.111 (64-bit) - happy fun times

I guess this game is on the bleeding edge of feature support. :P
Yeah, bunker C is awful environmentally, but it's cheap and still pretty good as far as energy density is concerned. Even if freighters ran on refined petrol they would still be going through millions of barrels of petrol a day though, I'd be interested to see the breakdown of pollutants exhausted from burning a gallon of bunker C vs refined petrol - I'm having a hard time finding this data.
As an additional data point, a former client (female) addressed our mixed-gender team as gals. This is something the article explicitly calls out as taboo. It didn't bother me (male) at all nor did it seem to alienate anyone on the team.
Disclaimer: I use "guys" as mixed gender a lot and this slack bot would really piss me off; the opposite of "valuing, respecting, and supporting the needs of every individual".
Did you mean drones ?
That's interesting, I wonder if tea travels better than coffee.

I find (black) coffee starts going bitter/sour if not drunk soon enough.
Charles Nutter banned from Rubinius
Yeah, it could be very good for customers and new entrants in the ocean forwarding industry. What I meant is that it cannot be good for the incumbent forwarders that Amazon will now be competing with.
I would argue that 14% isn't a significant number and, therefore, PG's point stating "a significant number who get rich by creating wealth" is indeed disproved.

The rest of your comment I agree with.
Exactly. Grabbing coffee is my excuse/reminder to stand up and stretch my legs for a few minutes at work. If I had everything delivered to my desk I wouldn't like it.
Well you should buy some shares because Wall Street currently think Core Yahoo is worthless.
Do you think they're running loads of security tests all the while or something? I'd imagine a majority (if not all) of the checks are done up front- especially given it's 2015.

Pretty sure they get a nice bump on their balance sheet for cash "in-transit" - and keeping the timeframe to 3-5 business days only magnifies that effect.
> On the flip side, every time someone takes an Uber or rents a room on AirBnb, they pay the company.

Yes, but Uber and AirBnB do not have (from a technical perspective) innovative products, nor strong lock-in businessmodels. Everybody could start a competitor. In fact, Uber faces a lot of competition already; see e.g. [1], [2].

[1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/liyanchen/2015/09/09/uber-wants-...

[2] http://www.wsj.com/articles/uber-meets-its-match-in-france-1... (paywalled)
We live in what is relatively speaking a capitalist market economy, which means when it comes to businesses people with more money get more votes.
I'll concede that Uber and Airbnb business models are stronger than the others, but they are still massively overvalued based on near future growth prospects. Those two will probably succeed in the long run, but they still won't be good stock picks
I wouldn't go that far. "Soon" implies they might not put it off for years yet, which is why I was being purposefully ambigious. "some time before the heat death of the universe," maybe. But maybe not soon.
at least in java (i'm using https://github.com/kilim/kilim, but quasar appears to be similar), only methods that yield need to be aware
> Before 2007, the way to participate in Open Source was fragmented. Each project had their own workflow, patches circulated in emails, issues were reported in a myriad ways, and if anyone wanted to contribute they had to figure out every project's rules.

Don't you still have to figure out every project's rules? Being on Github does not impose coding guidelines, testing requirements, documentation requirements, contributor license agreement policies, project management and governance system, code review process, dispute resolution process, and so on.

> Nowadays doing Open Source is infinitely easier thanks to you, GitHub. You've provided the tools and the social conventions to make those days a thing of the past.

Nearly every time over the past 30+ years that I've wanted to fix a bug or add a feature to some open source thing I've been using, and been thwarted, it was never figuring out the workflow, or patch procedure, or issue reporting that did me in, or figuring out the project's rules.

The big problem has usually been one or both of (1) the project has a bazillion files and it is not at all clear from the meager documentation and haphazard directory organization which are for the thing itself and which are for ancillary tools, and (2) it gets build errors that I can't resolve.
Uber Wants to Conquer the World, but These Companies Are Fighting Back
Yes the disruptors are at risk of being disrupted.
We don't disagree.

If power moved from governments to a handful of developers "it would completely upend the political power structures."

It is democratic is because people are voluntarily adopting BTC where alternatives exist - which is unprecedented in the history of money.

They vote by acting.
The salary that is generally paid for your role in jobs you could get (with no equity)
Mining Minecraft diamond
Specifics about 'guys' aside, I like the idea, and there's a library that would probably help to implement more rules - http://alexjs.com/. There are a few text editor plugins using this library to basically lint your document with suggestions like using 'their' instead of 'his' in ambiguous situations and so on.
I still have an email account with them that I setup a long time ago. Use it to sign for various one-offs.

It's amazing how bad their email has become. Constant timeouts. Have to switch the "basic" mode to actually get email to load sometimes. The mobile version is barely alpha quality - the drafts workflow is horrible, it sometimes sends the same email multiple times. Issues with refresh. Shows stale emails. "Your login session has expired, you must log back in" errors even though a refresh makes it go away...

I mean it's bad. Really bad. Embarrassingly so. Like "how has someone not lost their job over this" bad. Or maybe they all did and now there's no-one left...
The only problem I have with your comment is that there are quite a few people who starve or nearly starve in the US. Dismissing all poverty in the US as just a hard time paying bills is incorrect.

Yes, there are a lot of programs to provide help in the US but many of them are far enough away that you'd need a car and if you don't have a car you are out of luck.
Implying current titles using DRM don't make lots of money? :P If that was the case, then the business case for not implementing would be unignorably strong!
They are pushing a political agenda -- leftist views on inequality -- and are doing so in line with the vast majority of academics in Europe and the United States[0].

[0]: http://heterodoxacademy.org/problems/
I'm no big fan of Laffer curve - and especially the stupid way it was used to justify the position that lower taxes are the right answer to every problem - but using a similar approach with inequality could help.

With total inequality, everybody starves and dies except the few mega-rich, and not even the mega-rich would be happy as nobody would be able to produce the luxury things they enjoy spending their riches on.

With total equality, productivity and innovation plummet, because most of those who are able and willing to work more and/or better resent the freeloaders that enjoy what the actual producers produce without putting in the effort, and become demotivated.

So, obviously, some inequality is good for society, but too much inequality is bad. Western societies have been moving towards higher and higher inequality in the last 30 years - incidentally, also thanks to the Laffer curve.

At some point, too much inequality is bad not just for "social justice", but also for business. Have we already passed that point? If so, shouldn't we do something to stop the trend? And what?

What PG is maybe missing is that startups aren't the main engine for creating inequality, but excessive inequality is going to create problems, and we can't just ignore those problems because a policy to limit those problems could also limit the number of unicorns created in SV.
The previous poster made the point,

On the other hand, those 5 million additional people probably aren't going to sit around doing nothing. That's not how human nature works, either - most people are happier doing something rather than nothing! Self actualization and all that.

I don't think that it's completely relevant to the BI debate, but what if everyone actually did just decide to sit around doing nothing?
Also, everyone gets the checks. Some workers' parents will be living off them. Their kids in college. Their cousin who was crippled in a car wreck. It's not like they won't know people benefiting who aren't exactly lazy freeloaders.
Unfortunately, the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent.
I am surprised by the rank of France, Australia (expected them lower) and Germany, Poland (would have put them higher). Does this look trustworthy to you?
The "once or twice in your life" thing caught my eye. Google "mattress lifetime" and the general consensus is around ten years or less.
What's on the market that does work? I've been waiting for the chance to experiment with this stuff for years. Last I tried, the thing I bought didn't work either.
No but it would help when you can't get anyone to sell you puts :-)
IIRC, they did that to save a few cents on a track/head sensor. So they just did exactly what you stated they seeked a whole disk's worth of tracks, even when the head was already there (but there wasn't a good way to find that out except by trying to read the disk, which was slow).

Of course none of this helped by how loud the drive was just seeking.
No, my main complaint is that extreme wealth inevitably leads to political corruption and oligarchy. Among the wealthy, there are always some who aren't satisfied with wealth. They want political power, and to crush everyone else underfoot until they are in rags (some people think like this, seriously).

If people like that can't get political power honestly, then they'll find a way to buy it, and reap the benefits of their political power in government concessions paid by the taxpayers. Then they and their ilk will buy more political power. And then the systems enters a feedback loop, which is where we are now in the US.

Edit: I should add that I don't think that extreme wealth is the natural conclusion of capitalism. In a limited government system, combined with the natural dispersion of wealth that comes from passing money down generations, I think that competition serves to keep the top 0.01% within a reasonable multiplier of the average. Unfortunately, big government combined with big business is the worst of all possible worlds, and serves to increase and perpetuate inequality (a deeply-held belief I find difficult to properly convey to my Democrat friends).
still waiting for the fresh bread delivery service, as I had when I was a kid.
Facebook: $38.23 to $94.97 (May '12 - present) [0]

Wayfair: $32.18 to $37.81 (Oct '14 - present)[1]

TripAdvisor: $27.91 to $70.63 (Dec '11 - Present)[2]

Hubspot: $29.05 to $50.04 (Oct '14 - Present) [3]

Tesla: $10.40 to $204.99 (Jul '10 - Present ) [4]

ZenDesk: $15.25 to $23.10 (May '14 - Present) [5]

LinkedIn: $90.09 to $196.10 (May '11 - Present) [6]

0: https://www.google.com/finance?q=facebook&ei=OGyZVsiyEYqNmAG...

1: https://www.google.com/finance?q=wayfair&ei=k22ZVqnFKoShmAHG...

2: https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3ATRIP&ei=DG2ZVpGGGI...

3: https://www.google.com/finance?q=hubspot&ei=2m2ZVvmlEImamAHg...

4: https://www.google.com/finance?q=tesla&ei=Am6ZVuHRBNGzmAH9n7...

5: https://www.google.com/finance?q=zendesk&ei=UnGZVtK-Go21mAGr...

6: https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3ALNKD&ei=ZXGZVqCWA4qH...
Seems like BMW is following in the footsteps of Ford and partnering up with an accelerator to focus urban mobility. Its really interesting that the major automotive companies are being serious about investments into alternatives to the vehicles they produce.
> The recovery process would be as simple

You're only thinking of the most trivial part of the migration: the immediate technical one.

It's like suggesting that it's not so bad if a massive forum shuts down by pointing out how easy it is to install phpbb and run an import script.
Why would anyone even expect the set of companies that are most fun to write about to be the same as the set of the companies that are most successful? I kind of figure they would just have a representative amount of success.

I don't know why TechCrunch is indicted because it writes catchy profiles about cool-sounding companies instead of digging into the economic fundamentals. That's just two different things you can write about. AFAIK (not very far) it never pretended to be doing the other one.
Etsy's problem is not that it is a B Corp, it's that it loses money and has slowing growth (which means it will likely lose a lot more money!). If they had great numbers it could be run as a sketchy holding company in the Cayman islands and still attract investors.
The interesting bits for me:

Slide 11

PCs (m) Population (m) PC/person
US 282 307 0.92
China 252 1340 0.19

Slide 12

In 2009, China produced 182 million computers, 61% of the world.
A spirited merger pairs Untappd and Next Glass
Split the difference and call it Battery Man or Burning Mine? Where the festival is also a forced labor camp?
These programs can't do much that the carrier couldn't do without your help: set up calls, send/receive SMS/USSD, sort of thing. It's not as if they ran on the application processor as root or had DMA to the app processor's memory.
And Box? They had a simple, clear defined business model.
> Standardizing DRM is one way to limit the power of platform holders over content providers.

Half the problem is EME doesn't even attempt to standardise DRM in any real way: it just provides a JS API to deal with DRM'd content, decrypted by some "module" which interfaces with the browser in an undefined way (and in every case except Firefox, does so by bundled with no possibility of any other modules being installed).
Absolutely, many non-engineers are unaware (or in denial) that they benefit from open source projects. In one previous company I worked at, a VP told me how terrible it was that an open source project was competing with them, and that open source (in general) was against capitalist principles.

I had to explain very slowly that if he couldn't compete against an open source project... perhaps his company with tens of millions dollars in VC funding didn't deserve to succeed. And, that the company's product depended on using dozens of open source projects for free.

Needless to say he wasn't pleased.
What would you call significant then?

Are you arguing that it's ok to apply blunt instruments that will hurt those 14% as much as the rest, since they are not enough to care about?
Grubhub(Seamless): from $40 Apr 2014 to $21
Porn stars Improving their Digital Reputation
> When the math cleared from their analyses, the economists estimated that 14 percent of the increase in the share of income going to the top 1 percent of Americans between 1975 and 2012 "may be explained by an increase in innovation."

Normally I don't bother to comment when news writers leave out links to their sources, but the study in question[0] provides an estimate of 17%, not 14%.

> If you take that as a proxy for the Silicon Valley effect, though, you're left with a problem: 86 percent of the recent inequality increase can't be explained by innovation.

This conclusion is a good example of excessive journalistic license, as it is unfounded and almost certainly false. First of all, the 86% or 83% or whatever remainder is not mentioned in the study at all. Second, the 17% represents the percent of income gap widening their model predicts based on one measure of innovation, as is plainly stated. For anyone interested in a much better summary, the study includes some tables (I think the 14%/17% result is on page 44).

[0]http://scholar.harvard.edu/aghion/publications/innovation-an...
> Taken together, they make the case that Graham -- and others who wave off inequality as inconsequential -- has misread what's happened in the American economy.

It's like everyone who read PG's essay (even respectable journalists!) lack basic reading comprehension skills. Paul never waved off inequality -- he merely pointed out that measuring inequality is measuring the wrong thing, and that we need to have a slightly more nuanced view of the world. I haven't seen a single rebuttal yet that actually responds to the arguments in the essay, instead of a straw man argument PG never made.
I'd prefer they be honest with themselves and use crystal balls.
> Open source projects need donations in talented engineer time, not in money.

I'm willing to believe that most open source projects could make substantial improvements if they had funding. See how Patreon has made a huge difference for Youtube videographers.
The problem actually started before you guys came to the Resque :)

I remember you commented on my open source project (Resque plugin), I was impressed with the reach of how deep you want to go with this.

I agree with what you said 100%, everyone is using it and no one invests in it. That's why it's hard to maintain and that's why Sidekiq is "winning". Since money is a justified investment to any company for that project and it keeps the project going.
The GP was talking about social incentives. You're talking about monetary incentives. Different things. I agree with the GP. There is a real stigma about being on welfare. Someone close to me would rather be homeless than be on welfare. Homeless in the sense that he sleeps on people's couches, and has for several months.
The biggest difference between perceived and actual value that I'm aware of is the tulip mania that early 1600s. In hindsight, it's pretty obvious that flowers didn't become less valuable in the short time period between the height and the collapse. Any utility or purpose they had, other than resale, was retained in its entirety.

This wouldn't apply to Bitcoin. Any utility or purpose in a bitcoin is entirely in terms of its perceived value.
The GP mentioned resource intensive delivery services with high overheads, outsourced products, and small userbases.

Your reply talks about chat apps, which are pretty much the opposite of that.

You actually seem to be agreeing, but it is very hard to tell due to the grammatical errors and formatting, which make it hard to understand.

So your post, for those who read through it, turns out to be pretty much the same thought as the GP, but with a harder to understand message.
except the world and san francisco/bay area are about the same thing around here. if you're coming from a normal place, your first ride through SF will be an eye opener: instead of ads for shoes, tvs and toothpaste you've got iphones, tech conferences and cloud services. hiking around national parks in the area you can listen in to people chatting about service stacks and investors instead of movies and books. it's a world within a world.
No the limited partners lost some money. Guess who they happen to be?
> Most open source infrastructure tools lack a business model to capture revenue from its users.

Like youtube videographers? Who start off doing it for fun, and then later monetize it?

That evidence shows you're wrong.
Oh my god, seriously?!