skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Don't be a dick. Those notes were awesome. None of my partners are going to sit through a DHH talk; I was able to cut-paste from this to start a conversation.
"His product" is Basecamp, not Campfire; a tiny fraction of their revenue comes from Campfire.

Most people would take good odds of running a multi-million dollar business over infinitessimally small odds of flipping and retiring. And he's obviously right about the odds: what percentage of YC companies have flipped?
am i reading this right? dropbox does the same thing as the shared documents folder in windows?
Ok, but the point that the economics of information goods are often quite different from physical products is a valid one. That said, the idea that you should look for markets that aren't winner take all, where you could have a sustainable, mid-sized business, is a good one.
If your Google Talk bot is popular, then your bot will hit one or more of the per account limits enforced by Google. The best way to implement a bot on the XMPP network is to run your own server. See Twitter and FriendFeed for examples of how to do this.
Clicking 'Put Me In Center' when trying to set my location doesn't do anything.
Yes, it was a very nice presentation.

There's too many kool-aid drinkers in the web 2.0 world these days, and its a true breath of fresh air to see somebody with some real business fundamentals talking. I hope his talk makes more people wake up and realize that by trying to build a solid business over time, you have a much much MUCH greater chance at success than people flipping dodgy startups.

I don't think his message was controversial at all. Instead, its a shot of common sense in a world of disinformation.
my experience was that Hungerford's presentation was organized, concise, and its great how he is explicit in differentiating between a proof and a proof sketch.

I'd hesitate to suggest to any of Lang's writings as the first go on a technical topic. If you are already comfortable with the material, his writings will give new insight and intuitions, but thats different from a first go at understanding a topic

(note to audience, we're talking about different math textbooks)
No iphone in stock for sale
Hey,

I'm here in LA and no apple stores have any model of iphone in stock since friday.

Anyone know what's going on?
> Go look at the actual research

I can and have lost eight pounds (not water) in three days. I could do it right now. I call BS on whatever research.
Interesting about the 10KRPM 2.5" SCSI drives. How bad is the power consumption for equivalent SATA configurations?

AdWords used pretty much the same rig for MySQL servers (RAID 10) although the drives were all 15K 3.5" SCSI drives.
http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/4/apple_iphone_shortage_20_...
It's more than just metabolism. Slow twitch exercise like distance running and cycling causes your body to shed weight in excess of calories metabolized. Your body says "Hey, I seem to be carrying this extra weight around long distances. Better get rid of it as an efficiency measure."
Am I the only one having a hard time relating the title of the submission with the content of the article?... In fact, what was the content of the article? Postgres lacks in-place upgrades while competitors have it?
The Startup School Career
> i was quite chubby. i was a good runner, too

Sure you were.
I'm not going to say you haven't lost eight pounds in three days, but I will say that most of that was water weight and the rest was probably muscle.

A pound of fat is roughly 3500 calories. In order to lose eight pounds of fat in three days, you would have had to induce a caloric deficit of over 9000 calories per day.

A note to everyone: The most weight you can healthily lose is about two pounds per week. More than that and you're going to start losing a measurable amount of muscle mass. The exception is when you first start out exercising and eating properly, but that should only last for a couple of weeks.
> I advocate focusing on the basic lifts

For the average dude just trying to stay in shape, nothing beats the full olympic lifts. Take the barbell from the ground to over your head with snatches and cleans. Do it right and you'll be stronger than 90% of the people in the gym from 10 minutes three times a week.

FYI:
The kind of lifts you see most people do in a gym are derived from body building routines, not proper strength training for athletic purposes. Such lifts will puff up muscles through sarcoplasmic hypertrophy. These slow movement high volume exercises actually decrease peak force, and puffed up muscles will slow you down and decrease aerobic efficiency. Hence the terms "blown-up" or "puffed-up" fighter.
Did you read the linked presentation?
http://www.commandprompt.com/files/mysql_learn.pdf
There is a difference between an entrepreneur and a speculator.
Losing weight is as simple as eating less and doing anaerobic exercise for up to an hour a day, 3 to 4 days a week. If you're lifting hard, then the only variable is your diet. Drop a couple hundred calories off of your intake every day for a week - if you aren't losing 1 - 2 pounds per week, take another couple hundred calories off. I would say, in general, no man should eat less than 1800 calories per day, however. If you are, and not losing weight, you should most definitely see your doctor.

Aerobic exercise is great, but you shouldn't do it to lose weight. Do it for the benefits to the cardiovascular system. Anaerobic exercise will add muscle mass which in turn increases your metabolism. Also, by strenuously using your muscles every week, your body has to continuously repair them.

That is important because our bodies are designed for survival. What I mean is that when forced to lose weight, your body will first burn whatever muscle it doesn't need, then resort to the fat. It takes less effort for your body to break down muscle than fat, so it does so first. Your body puts a priority on repairing itself, so it's going to be forced to not burn the muscles it is repairing and instead break down fat for the energy it needs because you're eating less than you need to maintain your weight.

If you want a good weight lifting routine, check out www.wannabebig.com. Specifically, take a look at this routine: http://www.wannabebig.com/article.php?articleid=25
Paul, I would like to get a recommendation about your outsourcing in India. Could you please contact me at thiagolg at gmail.com ?
You're not alone - it seems the content of the article was exactly the opposite of the title.
30 minutes of snatch and cleans per week will not result in you being stronger than 90% of the people in the gym.
It's really too bad that "diet" is treated as a "four letter word" in the US and not simply the foods and eating habits that make up your regular intake.
A high-protein, low carb diet isn't necessarily good. However, most people probably do not eat enough protein and eat too many carbs. I would say about a gram of protein per kilogram of bodyweight would be good for most people who are getting in to proper diet and exercise, which may need to be adjusted depending on the individual's goals.
Well, a lot of peoples have basically hibernated for the winter. Inuit hole up for almost half the year and live off provisions. Back in more agrarian days there really wasn't a whole lot to do all winter. Cows and chickens only make milk and eggs all year now from artificial stimulation.

People ate high fat preserved food. Cheeses, pemmican, manteca, bacon, etc. Also pickled stuff.

So if all you do is sit around, try living off tubs of lard and sauerkraut.
So I changed my radius to cover the entire US and Canada, and I still get "no users in your location".
Thinking down the road is what got me off my ass and in the gym. I realized that I'd been 40 pounds overweight for the past seven years and that there is no magical weight loss fairy who would wave her wand at me and make me wake up one day without that fat.

Right now I'm still getting "newbie gains", but I can't even begin to describe how great it feels to know that every day I'm stronger and healthier than I've ever been in my life. I'm also happier and handle stress better than ever. Really, exercise is that miracle drug everyone seems to be searching for.
I'm aware of lighthouse. but Haven't seen a way to use it for tracking my own project. (and I currently believe lighthouse has beaten trac on being confusing).
Even still, drinking a glass of orange juice delivers fewer nutrients than eating an orange, and of course you don't get any of the fiber, either.

Pretty much every drink other than water is empty calories.
Done properly, yes they will. Strength increases from exceeding previous peak maximal effort. That's almost the whole story. This does not require a lot of time. Very brief and intense sessions are effective. Explosive full body movements done to failure have by far the biggest effect on strength.

Strength is more a neurological matter than people realize. Achieving higher explosive strength is almost more about training the nervous system than the muscles. The explosive lifts done properly achieve this training, whereas slow heavy-weight movements simply don't.

To equivocate, just snatches and cleans will lead to accommodation quickly. Variations will be necessary. But I will stand by my assertion that ten minute strength training routines done three times a week can leave you stronger than most of the people in a typical gym. You won't necessarily puff up bigger, but you will throw a much harder punch.

p.s.

I like how you admit to being a newbie elsewhere yet you're contradicting me with confidence. I'm not just talking out my ass. This is knowledge I use to win in the ring.
You're advising too much protein: One to one and a half grams per kilogram is enough for almost anyone except the most devout lifters (read: those who compete).
As for determining calories, most people eat a similar amount every week, so all they need to do is track their calories for a week then subtract from there until they're losing one to two pounds per week; not counting the first one or two weeks where they'll lose a lot of water weight.
"Creatives"?
More recent research has shown that it doesn't make much if any difference as to the number of meals you eat. I don't have the journal link right now, but it's out there. I'm most comfortable not eating much for the first 3-4 hours of the day so that I can eat more in the afternoon and evening to get that nice, full feeling at dinner. If you prefer eating 5-6 meals a day, go for it. Anything is better than eating like the masses.
Protein digestion causes your body to produce more heat. This thermal effect causes greater idle calorie loss.
Excess protein intake puts significant stresses on the kidneys and is unnecessary.
wait... so you can attempt to add friends that aren't registered? how does that work?

and why pray tell would I want to constantly defend against people who I don't know adding me. Sounds like a new form of social spam. MySpace has this problem except you have to confirm before they are added. You would just be making it worse.

My 2 cents, no offense.
When you cover huge distances all day the weight/calorie arithmetic is not linear. Your body rapidly sheds large amounts of weight to become more efficient.

I specifically said it was not water.
Boo! Hiss! When will folks learn that extending the prototypes of built-in JS classes is a bad, bad idea?

The problem comes when you try to build libraries on top of the extensions. You have your set of extensions to Date, somebody else has their set of extensions to Date (possibly with the same names), then two other folks each build libraries on top of those extensions. What happens when a poor app developer wants to use both libraries? Whose extensions win out?

Or what if the two library guys both just use your extensions, but in between library A's release and library B's release, you update the extensions with some subtle backwards-incompatible changes? One or both of the libraries will crash with unsatisfied dependencies.

Just say no. The right way to implement functionality like this is through a namespace object that holds a bunch of standalone functions. The namespace should expose only itself to the global namespace, and have a noConflict() method that restores the full state of the global environment on demand. Then any dependent libraries should close over the libraries they use, so that you can call noConflict after loading the dependent library and it'll use the bindings that were in effect at load time. There's a good example in the JQuery source code. It's a pain, it's cluttered, it's more verbose than pure prototype extension, but it ensures that your abstractions don't leak. You can be sure that adding a new JavaScript library won't suddenly break the libraries you're already using.
"The problem comes when you try to build libraries on top of the extensions. You have your set of extensions to Date, somebody else has their set of extensions to Date, then two other folks each build libraries on top of those extensions. What happens when a poor app developer wants to use both libraries? Whose extensions win out?"

How often does this actually happen with JavaScript projects, and why wouldn't unit tests and TDD catch this?
Ask YC: What do you use for personal workspace lighting when natural light is not available?
I'm lucky to have my office desk next to a window, so I get some decent natural light during the day, but when I want to work into the evening I find that my current GE "Reveal" full-spectrum 60-watt lamp isn't quote enough.

What do folks here do to get good lighting when the Sun isn't around?
Great post. I got the impression from three YCombinator companies last year that they thought they would be big. I witnessed entrepreneurs excited about creating an Outlook plugin, a video sharing site, and a PDF posting site. But, it was exciting and the entrepreneurs felt they will have tons of users. Look where they (you) are one year later--Xobni, Justin.tv, and Scribd, grown from 2-4 full-time people to 10+ each. Adam Smith especially seemed very confident, and must have believed in the company to bring you and other smart people along. ;)
> Move more, eat less. It really is that simple.

It's probably not quite "that simple." How else to explain the epidemic of obesity? Lifestyle hasn't changed that much since the 70s. It's dietary changes, most conspicuously much lower fat intake. Composition of calories matters a whole lot. So many people have difficulty executing on weight loss because they are malnourished in various ways.

I hate this guy and think he's a self promoting huckster, but he does an adequate job of making the point on calories here:
http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2008/02/25/the-science-...
I would also say "no" for similar reasons. Your project is not his first priority and I doubt that will change once he moves into your apartment. I think that having cofounders living together is great if you guys are a couple or have been best friends since elementary school. Otherwise though, I can only see problems from this arrangement.

If he wants to move to your city then let him, than you can have weekly meetings at starbucks or something. But I'd not recommend living with a random developer that is your cofounder just because you have an extra room. Again, I can only see problems arising from this (both professional and personal).

I'd be curious to hear what you decide to do. Let us know.
If she was good friends with the developer then I would agree with you, but from what I could tell from her post, the developer is not a friend but someone she probably met and hired online. In that case, I would definitely say no to moving in together.
On viral expansion loops
How can one estimate growth for a new service?
Or by phone, text "CHTR JOIN ss08 ss08" to 41411

Or by email, "@join ss08" in body to ss08@chatterous.com.

Or by Jabber/Google Talk, add ss08@chatterous.com and send "@join ss08"
It's not a zero sum game, you can make money selling stuff that also given away for free elsewhere. Putting out a free version of Basecamp won't kill Basecamp, the market is big enough for everyone to live. As far as most businesses are concerned, $25 a month is free, it's pocket change. If your app solves one of their problems for that price, they'll pay it gladly rather than deal with hosting or maintaining their own free version, or using someone else's free version because most real business folk don't trust free.
Article does not match description at all. If anything, it's what PostgreSQL can learn from MySQL.
cool, but it is buffering half of the time.

ah, and Justin tv, really needs to work on their interface. It makes myspace look good.
good points.

you don't start a startup to get rich. you start a startup for any number of reasons but the primary one should be that it makes you happier than working for some company. if you do really well? bonus.
I've been there and it worked great. That was for same gender and while single though.

So, depends. No pressure either way.
You body stores about 1 pound of glycogen (a quickly available starch energy source) in the muscles and the liver. With it is about 5 pounds of water. When you eat a low carb diet, the first thing your body does is burn that off. That, plus dehydration, means you can expect to lose about 6-8 pounds in a few days. I can and have done that many times. And then I can gain it back in two more days with a couple of big plates of pasta. Competitive athlethes like wrestlers who need to make weight can routinely cut and gain a temporary 15-20 pounds in less than a day.

In other words, sorry if you don't believe me, but much of what you lost was water.
No, but it sounds like Loopt can
As opposed to the rest of humanity, code-named "chopped liver"... ;-)
Excess, significant -- numbers? I'll tell you what puts stress on your body, being fat.

Huge numbers of people have being-fat related diseases. Never have I heard of someone succumbing to this protein myth.
I know all this. But when the weight stays off, and you in fact continue to lose weight in the following weeks, then it is not water loss. A lot of muscle, yeah.
I find the same. But I am close into a large city, so attending multiple user groups/conferences (even in subjects/technologies I am not currently involved with) seems to help alleviate that. Plus you tend to meet people at those places of a higher "quality" (or some measure) then the average office drone in a regular business.
No, in fact you are wrong for exercise like intense weight lifting.

Of course proper diet does have a huge effect in weight loss though.
I hope I won't be misunderstood, but I wouldn't be so sure to call the poster a "she". There is nothing in the post that guarantees that the poster is female. Is there?
this falls in line with the idea that computers of tomorrow might be what a keyboard is to a computer today.

any individual computer will be just a tool used to connect to your online virtual desktop.

can this already be done with windows virtual machine?
I liked his comment about scalability. When you have paid subscribers, you like scaling issues. Scaling issues (server capacity being utilized) means your business is doing well. With your subscription fees producing a healthy profit, you can buy another server (a kick-ass one).
A lot of hard rock. It compliments the liquor
Are you working on data mining algorithms or the supporting infrastructure?
Ultimately, how much are you willing to sacrifice for the project? That includes sanity ;) Shared living can make things difficult, but if it's needed to give your project the extra boost it needs, it may make sense to try. At least living in the same city so you can meet regularly really helps, since there's nothing like face to face sometimes for quick idea exchange.

Ground rules, respect for each others' privacy, and talking all that out up front seems to be the best approach if you're going to room together, so you're not making assumptions about who will do what and when. My current roommates are the messiest I've ever lived with, and since I work from home that makes it a really hard work environment. They have to be told to do even the most basic things or they won't do them. Fortunately, I'm moving June 1st.

I was actually talking with my business partner about becoming roommates, but we're still on the fence about it. The place has to afford enough privacy and space separation that our respective messiness won't drive the other one crazy...

So I couldn't give a definite yes or no, but do exercise caution and plan accordingly :)
Even though they have slashed the price by £100 this week here in the UK, I was still able to order on Friday afternoon at 2pm and get it at 9am the next morning. Getting one has proven to be one of the best decisions I have ever made.
> healthy fats (olive oil, peanut butter, nuts, etc)

Saturated fat is healthy fat. It's a lot easier to eat properly once you understand butter and suet are great.
there is no healthy way to lose weight fast. period.
it is stressful on your body. the way to lose weight is to change your habits so that over time your body can accustom itself to new conditions.
This doesn't look like SaaS to me. It's software rental. I'm sure a lot of customers don't know what the difference is, though, and it probably benefits MS to confuse the two.
Times change, and America is much more corporate than it used to be. When a market becomes saturated innovative people will look elsewhere to make their mark.

I don't want to spend my life managing a business. I want to make some money and do something else. I have no doubt that I would make a fitting CEO. But the hours are long and the work is unappealing. There aren't any CEOs I want to be like. Apple's CEO, maybe, but what price does he pay to do what he does?

I really get the feeling that anyone ('anyone') could be a CEO these days. I feel like the CEO is a reward that keeps everyone else on the corporate pyramid. Maybe I'm wrong. I could be. But I haven't seen the argument that debunks that idea. (And I have seen a lot of instances of CEOs who didn't deserve what they received.)

The money is a silly motivation. What am I going to do with $6 billion that I couldn't do with $6 million? Spend conspicuously? Raise a family of layabouts?

I would much rather become financially independent and begin doing the work I want to, when and where I want to. I like to make things, and I like to talk to creative people. I like to do small things really, really well. And I don't like to spend my time dealing with red tape. I feel like I have an obligation to society, but that I don't have to fulfill it by spending my time managing a large corporation. There a lots of other less flashy positions desperate for someone to do a really great job. I want to do something small perfectly, not something huge good enough. Does that make sense?
In high school, I got rejected by McDonalds, Taco Bell, and Kentucky Fried Chicken. I really wanted a job at one of those places for money for recording equipment for my band. They all rejected me.

I finally got a job at Roy Rogers after a year of searching, and the rest is history. I got over the rejections, and you can too. Of course it's pretty funny looking back, but only given the proper perspective. You have to look at things for what they are.
I feel strongly that "virtual" startups dramatically increase your chances of failure. You need everybody in the same place, bouncing ideas around and sharing the workload. And many people simply don't have the discipline to work a full-time day without being surrounded by peers. I am one of them--I thrive on the shared energy and, without it, my interest fades and I get distracted.
Downmodder, could you point out where I am wrong, along with support? It'd be a help for me, since the above makes the most sense to me.
The most important thing is to be in the same room during the day when you're working on your company. Ideally, you would live in separate residences but meet in your house during the workday. But if living together is the only way to make it happen, you should do it.