skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Tim Harford's http://www.amazon.co.uk/Undercover-Economist-Tim-Harford/dp/..."Undercover Economist and http://www.amazon.co.uk/Logic-Life-Uncovering-Economics-Ever... Logic of Life are both excellent at drawing out serious economic principles from everyday experiences.

Philip Coggan's http://www.amazon.co.uk/Money-Machine-Penguin-Business-Libra... Money Machine is not directly an economics book, but details the movement of money through the global economy (but focused on London, specifically) and is an excellent overview of fiscal policy.
They've got a guy talking to startups here in the valley about it for the next several days, and they'll be talking about it at Startup Camp. I must assume that means they are taking it all very seriously.
For enterprise search their acquisition of FAST should have a very strong impact. I wouldn't count them out for intranet oriented solutions.
You really probably want to refrain from posting rms's articles, given your nick.
The Power of the JVM
Am I a troll? Can you be a troll and not know it?

Experiment: vote me down to zero karma, and I won't read yc news again until 8/8/8
Wow, I'm surprised no one has defended the Yahoo shareholders here. They have a lot of good reasons to sue.
Partnering with Yahoo would have given them dominant market share in IM and Mail - which means more data to play with to beat Google out of the advertising/search market. Advertising/search brings revenue, unlike Flash or Silverlight.

I'm not sure why I'm not seeing it, but could someone expound on what "owning" Flash would even give MS, aside from bragging rights...
Computer keyboards can harbour more filth than the average toilet seat
The book is great. His criticisms are spot-on.

His proposed solution is bold, but as of yet, unproven. It's probably wrong, and in a way, he admits to that in the book (he says we'll need a lot of changes).

If you get bored on chapters 6, skip it.
I meant the other rms, I don't really write many articles for the FSF.
"Manhattan Project": The government's new cyber-security
You have to read their previous comments.

This was a troll post of mine, but I think it's really funny. No one fell for it. Clearly it is the worst suggestion in the thread.

Intent matters... sometimes trolls are malicious and sometimes they are doing it for their own entertainment. Oftentimes both. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=180676
Hadoop vs GridGain
Wolfenstein 3D in JavaScript
The Myth of the Lone Programmer
"My husband still berates me for not
having jumped on the Google bandwagon at the beginning,"
she said. Still, she insists she does not regret her
decision to stay in academia. "I like the freedom to
explore the things I care about," she said.

That seems a bit silly. Given the computational infrastructure available at Google, it would seem that it's the only place where one would be free to try all kinds of ideas unavailable elsewhere. If she's as brilliant as they make her seem, I'm sure they'll let her work on whatever she wants.
Thanks for the tips pg. Of the people we've spoken to, its been a mix of associates and partners. I guess what you are saying is that none of it really matters until you get a term sheet. That's fine with us, since we are not desperate for money. The type of value add we're looking for is guidance/networks/advice, not monetary.
The most effective existing approaches to natural language understanding are purely statistics based.

This is where practicality and idealism ought to diverge. Sure, with enough data, we might be able to find spelling mistakes or figure out what pictures someone is looking for.

But the techniques we are looking for don't address understanding, (granted they never set out to). Most interesting would be to define meaning and understanding, using strict mathematical models. As McCarty said, language is just the froth on those waves.
How do you think the VCs heard about you to start getting in touch? Are your private alpha users that influential? That's a pretty good sign.

And can I try your site? I signed up with the email kfischer at gmail
IPL Live Streaming 24th Match Jaipur
Sun 04 May 2008, 14:30 GMT
Rajasthan Royals v Chennai Super Kings
IPL Live Streaming 24th Match Jaipur (D/N)
BRASIL2008
NOTHING FOR NOW
Get hold of at least two textbooks. In economics even more than elsewhere, each book will give you a different perspective.

If you're feeling really adventurous, pick up a second-hand textbook that's a decade or two old, and keep an eye on how the orthodoxy has shifted.

Which to buy? The best-sellers are all pretty similar: quite clearly written, but maybe longer than they need to be. Mankiw, Samuelson/Nordhaus and Baumol/Blinder all seemed OK to me; I'm not aware of any truly exceptional econ. textbook.
"false coder heroism..."

This was me, but now I'm learning the valued art of project management. Like marketing, I used to think it was all baloney, but now I know better.
radical changes will flow top down not bottom up. at least not in any organization of yahoo!'s size.
Ask YC: PhD, yes or no?
I am currently an undergraduate student in computer science in the UK and I plan to move to the states to pursue graduate studies. However, I am not sure whether I really want to spend the next 4-6 years doing a PhD; I'd much rather like to start working, doing my own projects, etc.
What's a PhD worth? Does a PhD matter in the working world in the long run, i.e. will a PhD get me somewhere a MA wouldn't be able to get me? Should I only pursue a PhD if my goal is to go in academia/research? Would a MA be more advisable if I just want to pursue my entrepreneurial career?
A PhD program will get you free tuition. Don't ever pay for a PhD program at a US university. If you do a PhD program where you get a Masters along the way, then you could get a Masters for free and then drop out if you want. There are a lot fewer paid tuitions for Masters students, a lot of these students have their companies pay full tuition.

As long as you can get into a PhD program, it gives you a lot more flexibility and is cheaper than a Masters program.
Right, but PhD admissions is naturally much more competitive. But leaving financial aspects aside for a moment, is a PhD worth 4-6 years for a future career in the business world?
No, you should only do it if you will find the learning itself personally enriching or you desire a career in academia, a corporate research lab, or a hedge fund. You should only do it if you really want to, not because it will pay of at some time in the future.
I have just quit a PhD after three and a half years of work. In the UK PhD courses generally last between 3 and 4 years so it was a large proportion of that time completed.

But I decided that it was more important to be doing work that I enjoyed rather than slaving away on a PhD that was not interesting to me and irrelevant to my future career anyway.

I've now got a good job in an exciting startup (http://www.songkick.com/) doing the work I wanted to be doing. What more could I want?

Whether this is relevant to you I don't know. But I have strongly come to feel that unless you are going to be an academic, or work in a field for which it is specifically useful, like finance or pharmaceuticals, a Phd is not useful.

But I have a vested interest in that being true so perhaps you shouldn't listen to me :-)
Are they wireless headphones I see as well? Genius.
Eric Go Dot Net
It's about $9.43 per gallon in the Netherlands, and it's still cheaper than public transport (unless you are a student, then it's free).
O'Reilly published Lisp book
Are you stubborn, emotionally mature, and have a certain degree of self-hate? Only if you answer yes to all three questions should you consider doing a PhD.

Let me explain: you'll be broke, you'll have the worst emotional roller-coaster ride of your life, you will be neglected by your supervisor/advisor, you will be part of the biggest whining demographic in the world, and you will hate it and hate your life. Yes it will not be all bad, but it will get really bad at many points and no one tells you about it in advance.

On the other hand, the emotional highs can be really high. The sense of achievement is amazing. When you discover something new (which is what you're supposed to be doing as a researcher), it's amazing to know that for a split second, you're the only one in the world that knows what you just discovered - it's yours and only yours.

The end of the day, it's a balance: are the emotional highs enough to offset the lows? For me, it was just enough and I finished my PhD on time. I ended up leaving academia because the experience overall was not one I would like to live with the rest of my life.

Finally, I want to note that doing a PhD is not an objective decision most of the time. Some careers essentially demand a PhD (IP law, academia, etc) but most PhDs do not work in academia and a large proportion do not work in their field of study. Don't think it will open wonderful doors that were closed beforehand.

Good luck.

Pierre
Phun (2D physics sandbox) released for MacOS!
The Perfect SpamSnake - Ubuntu 8.04 LTS
I did a PhD (actually a DPhil since that's what Oxford insists on calling it). I enjoyed doing it (managed to finish in 3 years) and it's been an asset (sometimes it's been useful to be "Dr John Graham-Cumming", although I rarely use the title), and it's always been useful to have gone to Oxford (because it has a certain brand cachet).

But.

I don't think those three years were a good investment when seen from a start-up perspective. I think three years of extra real-world experience would have been more valuable.
Sorry, I lost track - were you talking about a PhD there, or about doing a startup? <grin>
call it what you will...Sun is building a commodity solution to the problem

The problem with Sun is precisely that. They are turning everything into a commodity. This is good if your strategy is to make money on a complementary product.

The thing is: they forget to make money from complementary products. They are commoditizing the software, the hardware and everything they do... but where are they going to sit when the dance stops? Where do they intend to make money?
Short answer: No, Long Answer: Maybe.

Select your graduate school and advisor very carefully. If you have an advisor of the entrepreneurial type, then go work for this person and get your PhD. E,g: Working for Robert Morris.

Some very interesting companies have come out of grad schools: Google, Yahoo, Akamai, Teoma, etc. It helps to go into grad school with an open mind, get your Masters and at that point in time, decide if you want to go ahead with a PhD.

As a general rule of thumb, this line from the movie Ronin, helps:
"Whenever there is any doubt, there is no doubt."

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0122690/quotes (4th quote from top)
Did you learn anything in your studies at that level that you still use?
That's one way to look at it, the other is to understand the analytic thinking, rigor, patience, new ideas you get out of it -- these are hard to quantify.
Flash going under Microsoft control would be a nightmare scenario for me. Noooo!
I'm currently approaching the end of graduate school in biology, so my experience only partially covers your question. That said, I don't think you should get a PhD. The worst part about graduate school is that you have to work on someone else's ideas instead of your own. The fact that you're considering graduate school means that you will probably have a viable idea someday, and you'll find that your pursuit of that idea will be delayed until you've finished your thesis.

Another problem is the opportunity cost, you loose four to six years of your life that you could have spent doing something meaningful, or at least accumulating resources. That might not seem like a big deal right now, but it will become a serious issue after two to five years.
Make Big Promises; Overdeliver
Formally, a PhD gives you the authority to supervise other PhD students. It also makes it easier to pursue research funding and publish in peer-reviewed journals. If you don't want/need to do these things, you don't need a PhD.

I tend to agree with the tone of the responses so far: don't pursue a PhD unless you're convinced that you want to live the life of a professor (and you're comfortable with the fact that you'll likely never make it into a professorship at a good school, if at all). Definitely don't pursue a PhD if you've been told that you need it for a job (i.e. in pharmaceutical research), but you've never experienced the industry in question; if you think you need a PhD for a job, get a job close to the one that you want, work for a few years, and then decide on the degree. The job market for professional researchers is quite tight, and you may well decide that 5-8 years of post-secondary education and poverty isn't worth it for the jobs that a PhD makes possible.

That said, I can hardly think of a better place to meet smart, interesting, creative people than in a PhD program at a top university. If you go into it with your eyes open (and you don't get sucked into the cult mentality that makes it hard to quit), you'll learn a lot, meet brilliant people, and you can still leave with a master's degree in a reasonable time. (And hey...there are worse places than a college campus for a 20-something single man to be spending most of his time....)
Cool! Does anyone know if Scala uses a similar call site cache technique?

I think the death of the JVM has been greatly exaggerated. :)
LOL! You're absolutely right.

The only difference is that with a startup, the potential for a bigger paycheck is higher than with a PhD.
Sounds like you already know the answer and need confirmation here. OK. Finish school ASAP and get to work.
AOL?
What's Next for Yahoo? Merging With AOL Still My Pick
Announcing Teh - the minimalist blog tool using Google App Engine
Twelve commandments for Beautiful Python code
Q&A: Microsoft ends Yahoo bid
Long-awaited electric sports car rolls out
It might be bad enough to get the government involved again. The government killing flash would be awesome.
Will they be laughing at this in 42 years? - Imagining the tech world in 2050
I'd have to say 'no'. I did a DPhil by pure research and had to produce a thesis of original work. That means that I did my own learning with some guidance. My thesis is all about provably secure computer systems (using CSP) and I developed an algebra for reasoning about secure systems.

I've never used any of this stuff.

There are plenty of things that I learnt as an undergraduate that I use, however.
Ask YC: Masters in CS? Or no?
Hey guys,

I'm currently an undergrad student at Stanford University, and I'm wondering if I should pursue a 1 years masters program to get a Masters in CS. Here's the lowdown: I've done a lot of programming before---in fact, I've written four books on programming (two were international bestsellers), sold a facebook application to Kaplan Inc, and have developed for some hot start ups in Silicon Valley. I'm studying abroad, and I was planning to stay abroad until next April, but if I want to pursue the masters program I will need to come home to start working on it.

My future goal is to start a freelancing company to develop enterprise software--my first project is this summer in Italy. So, my question is, based on the cost ($45,000 for a year--after TAing, it should be closer to $15,000) is it worth it to pursue a masters degree at Stanford? Will a master's open up any doors that wouldn't be open for a Stanford grad with a good resume?

Thanks!

-Maneesh Sethi
But I think I got most of those things from the undergraduate degree.
18 month waiting list.

Let's see. Get on waiting list. Hack. Angel. Launch. Series A. Acquisition.

Perfect timing.
Funny Side of Linux
Awesome? It would kill my project and many others, e.g. YouTube. I hope Adobe opens everything up before any of that happens. "In the long run, the utility of all non-free software is zero."
>"Nothing personal, but that's the kind of shareholder that ruins good businesses. The language of Ballmer's letter is clearly intended to cause precisely that kind of action from Yahoo! shareholders."

Perhaps you are right. But shareholders rarely hold stock to build good businesses they are there to make money. They would happily invest in a bad company if it was about to be bought out for a huge premium. Once you go public, few things matter other than the numbers.

Plus 72% of Yahoo shareholders are professional money managers, arbitrageurs, and regular investors. These people are likely to want this deal to go through.
I would start with this one: http://www.amazon.com/Economics-One-Lesson-Shortest-Understa..., or free online at http://jim.com/econ/contents.html.
https://friendfeed.com/yegg
Best Ways To Break Unhealthy Habits
America's Most Congested Cities
"... However, I am not sure whether I really want to spend the next 4-6 years doing a PhD; I'd much rather like to start working, doing my own projects, etc. What's a PhD worth? ..."

Go ahead and do your PhD. You'll learn some interesting stuff. It will be narrow, deep and might have some application. You will learn intellectual rigour, how to write and think. Then when you finish you will be just the type of new-hire a startup might want.

I often think doing a PhD is the anti-entrepreneur approach. The sheltered workshop of academia. All analysis, no action and devoid of the real cut and thrust of commerce. Then I think of all the new ideas generated by those who spent their time thinking about stuff. But did Woz need to do a PhD to build computers and start Apple? Do you need a PhD to do a startup? No. But the skills you learn there might help. Alternatively by the time you become a newly minted 'Dr', you might have created something of value and still learnt.

So what is it to be? The risky path of the Startup with its uncertainty, risk and commercial experience? Or the almost certain path of a PhD, a title and specific knowledge and less potential reward?
If your story happens to be more like:

Hack. Launch. Get turn down by angels/vc dozens of times. Slowly start bringing in revenue, eventually profit. Acquisition.

You can still get the next model with ~600 miles on one battery charge :~).
Nicely done ~ http://github.com/btbytes/teh/tree/master/webapp.py and shows just how versatile the framework is by the number of different libs being used. Bret still hasn't released his sample code ~ http://bret.appspot.com/entry/experimenting-google-app-engin... so this is good for users. The feed doesn't work. The best bit Bret showed was the decorator '@administrator'. My version uses webpy, sans disqus. Work on that some other time ~ http://seldomlogical.com
Startup Sezmi provides new way to deliver TV content
What do you suppose the size limit for a company is, for changes to flow from the bottom up?
I don't regret doing a PhD, but there are so many downsides. It took me away from hacking, and I'm only just feeling like I'm getting back to loving it again. There's a sort (possibly necessary) attitude in research where you judge at everything with a pretty high level of abstraction - but so much of good in something is in the detail. It's hard to do significant implementation and detail work and write a paper on it. So your focus, and the standards by which you judge other peoples work and they judge yours, ends up being pretty artificial.

The other big problem in academia is working with the people you want to work with. You can't generally band together with your friends and do a PhD together. There will probably be some great people in the lab but you usually aren't working too closely.

It can be a good way to get paid (a pittance) for doing interesting work. I don't think it helps in the startup world - much. Certainly not when you consider that working for a pittance for 4 years could allow you to startup and fail at a number of ventures of your own.
Game development with Lisp, how to acquire knowledge (from manuals), and other random thoughts
It sounds to me that you are already 1 (perhaps 3) steps ahead of the game. A graduate degree from Stanford will always "look good" on the resume, but I wonder what it will do toward further your freelancing goal. One thing to keep in mind, and all caveats apply, but in my experience I have found that many organizations/clients view higher level degrees as a "sign" (valid or not matters little IMO) that you are prime leadership material. This may be beneficial in winning contracts. At the same time it may make you appear over-qualified (less likely I would say). It's a delicate balance.
Astrophysics/Climate Science/Systems Biology is a pseudo science.

It does not follow the basic principle that knowledge is proved and disproved by experiments. You can find all the sophisticated mathematical methods you want in geophysics, and none of them would stand a test of reality. Most of so called 'models' come with disclaimers against various features, and pretty soon you discover that our whole life is one big exogenous phenomenon.

Your criticism applies to the study of almost any complex multiscale system. The fine scales are poorly understood, and most models come with various disclaimers. Many parameters are unknown, and reasonable quantitative predictions are impossible. Plenty of examples show models to fail, but they are still used since they sometimes work.

Life is messy, and studying a mess leaves you with a messy field. It's a pseudo-science when you stop admitting that, and pretend you have all the answers. I don't know of any economists who have reached that stage.
It pays to get inside your opponents' heads rather than their hearts
TexShop (http://www.uoregon.edu/~koch/texshop/) is nice if you are writing on a Mac. The editor is not quite as nice as TextMate, but everything is nicely integrated.
Oops. I guess I fail. I swear I saw a 1.
Besides the monetary cost, you'd be investing a year of your life. When faced with a similar situation, I went for it not so much because of the future earnings potential but because I thought it would be a valuable life experience (which it was, and I'm happy I did it).

If you see it purely as an investment, you have to figure out what else you could be doing in the meantime that would give you the same return, both financially and emotionally.
A masters degree is always good when you are selling yourself to other people. If it only takes you one more year, I would simply do it.
I'd planned to read this, then come back here and grumble about whatever it had got wrong.

But it turns out, I agree with every word.
>My future goal is to start a freelancing company to develop enterprise software

Based on some interviewing I've done in a corporate setting, Masters is often looked at as a trade off for lack of work experience. In your case it doesn't seem like that would be an issue.

Whether or not you have a Ph.D. will matter more for your career long term, than whether you have a BS/MS.
If you are starting a company why not pursue an MBA, sounds like you wont get much more out of the mscs degree.
Exactly. Founders tend to think that the holy grail is going public but then you'd have to worry about shareholders and short term growth.

It would be perfectly fine to stop right before going public and run the company the way you wanted.

Cargill is a private company with $67B in revenue in 2004 so it's not a question of generating the money (http://www.forbes.com/lists/2005/21/5ZUZ.html).
Since I have no idea how much does energy cost in US, I'll be the one to ask: how much would be the electric bill for someone who drives, say, 100 miles/day?

Better: how much would cost each driven mile?
Thanks.

The feed is in Atom format. It works in Safari, but not in Firefox.

Feedvalidator tells me that the date does not follow RFC-3339. I'll fix that.
If your goal is to developer enterprise software, and you already have your first project (i.e. this summer in Italy), what do you need the Masters degree for?
I guess you have never heard of a reverse merger:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_takeover

http://reversemergerblog.com/
What does he need his BA for? Not for what he is doing ATM anyway.