skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's misleading to point out how startups worked in Bill Gates and Steve Jobs era. Then, it really took a team to build anything.

The technology has improved drastically. 10 years ago, it requires millions of funding to start a web business. Today, a team of talented developers can build an impressive app in a weekend.

Even marketing has become easier. With App Store, it's now possible to have apps distributed to millions of users over night.

Yet, our assumption about startups stayed the same disregarding the change of context.

Sure, even Steve Jobs had a cofounder. But then what would be the equivalent of building a PC in today’s age? And have that distributed to millions of users in that age?

Take into account now it takes a beginner Rails developer 15 minutes to build a blogging app. If the cost of running a startup is going down as technology matures, then it really shouldn’t take a team to build a startup. It should take one guy with a vision, a few freelancers and/or interns.

Solo founders are being discriminated against for all the bullshit reasons. Time has changed, technology has matured. It’s time to end it!
I do this too, along with Home/End to navigate. Once in a while though I want to move only half way left of the indent, which is one press on tab, 2-4 of space. Can't use ctrl+left there.

But more than anything I'm sure it's just familiarity.
Most of my friends, tech-savvy or not, are fiscally conservative but socially liberal. If the republican party and its candidates dropped its stance on some of the social issues, I can definitely see them attracting a lot of voters who traditionally vote democrat.

Not to mention the beneficial effects of having people in office who don't think that rape can be legitimate, etc., etc.
The title is a little misleading. It looks like an asyntotic improvement, that is 532x at the scale the benchmark ran. Looking at the graph, it appears to be a significant improvement, as the old version clearly dropped to about 0, while the new version looks constant. (It took some staring to see the downward trend)
International, looks like. I've seen people all over the world playing:

https://plus.google.com/109471940039062886080/posts/5ZBXzZmh...
Look, we have all been there. Counting while starting at zero is fucking hard.
I didn't know that different browsers implemented those things differently, aside from the default and maximum amount of space given to localstorage.
"Ron Paul has been, in most policy dimensions"

This is absolutely untrue. He is fully social conservative, and unafraid to put forth Federal legislation to enforce his moral code.
Not directly. Davinci is a different business unit than OMAP.
This writeup is information poor. It's easy to say that smartphones and tablets are different devices, but what should be different exactly in the way apps work and display info? Should the UI be necessarily different or is the context the differentiator? This essay needs 2-3 more paragraphs.
Everyone commenting on this thread should read Founder's Dilemma to at least give some statistical information about success rates of founding teams.

http://www.amazon.com/Founders-Dilemmas-Anticipating-Foundat...

Regardless of one's opinion of solo vs team, statistically it is easier with co-founders. That doesn't mean it can't be done solo, but you have better odds. And YC makes investments so why wouldn't you play the odds?
I read the presentation here: http://tokutek.com/downloads/mysqluc-2010-fractal-trees.pdf

The math looks a bit hand-wavy to me but I get the basic data structure, you basically have sorted arrays whose lengths are each a power of two, so 1, 2, 4, 8, etc...
When you insert a set of values, you can either fill an entire array or leave it empty. So for example if you have 5 values, you'd have an array of 1 element, an empty array with 2 spaces and a full array of 4 elements.

Each array is sorted by itself but the smaller arrays do not necessarily contain all values that are lesser than all values of bigger arrays.

To do an efficient lookup you have forward pointers from each node to the next-bigger node in the next array, so you can basically start your binary search at a given index in a bigger array and move faster.

The problem is when you are inserting lots of values because you have to merge arrays multiple times and overwrite a bunch of data, but the point is that you are getting better disk IO doing that than rebalancing a B-Tree because you're not making the disk head skip around all the time, thus achieving greater speed.

I'm curious about the details of this benchmark though, what kind of values are we talking about? Are they all the same size rows or do you have variable sized values (like strings?) in the benchmark?

This looks promising but I'd love more explanations from the authors...
It's really fun but… I feel old.
I do, but the link here is out of context.
When my code compiles on the first try...
The comment you refer to isn't to the (noob) pull request author (Roman), it's to a troll (Joseph) that has since deleted his comments.
Not at all. I am the real fan boy of Microsoft. Really.
I may have chosen my words incorrectly, since in many ways I agree with you about the teenager's (or young adult's) thirst to make an impression in the world.

That said, there's a huge difference between wanting to be a creator, and actually creating stuff. In my experience, most young people quickly settle down into caring less about the acts of creation and self-expression, and focus more on 'making an impression' in their immediate peers. This path leads to obvious, uninteresting, facile, lazy, short-term, me-too, style-over-substance, meaningless creations that I can barely label as such.

Is it down to proper encouragement and guidance? For sure that must help a lot, especially when dealing with setbacks and lack of validation. But I believe there needs to be a level of inner dialogue and disregard for what's popular around oneself, that is a) at odds with the desire for teens to 'fit', b) rarely encouraged in practice in our society, and c) hard to sustain against the amount of noise (media, fashion, etc) we surround ourselves with.
I have the same thing. We should research it.
don't feel old! we have all sorts of songs from the 60's up until today to take into account all ranges of users.
It looks like drip does not automatically work with lein:

https://github.com/flatland/drip/issues/36

Here's my workaround to use drip to start up lein repls instantly:

https://gist.github.com/4103370

Should work with lein1 & lein2.
Glad it worked for you, Ryan. You makes some very valid points, especially in #3.

As I am learning daily, techpreneurship has so many facets from the core technical, to biz dev, sales and day to day activities. Can be overwhelming to go solo (assuming one has all the various abilities). Though I am not personally sold no the idea of having a co-founder, I think it helps to bring in folks to augment as needed.
Everything You’ll Ever Need To Know About Gamification
we had a great experience using xcode with MakeGamesWith.Us rather than non objective-c languages that SongPop used! They are great people to work with and we've learned so much!
You can't define what should be exactly different in the implementation. It completely depends on the type of content, and the features of the social network.
Here is some more FUD for you ( http://www.thoughtworks.com/articles/technology-radar-octobe... ):

"Backbone.js is a great example of an abstraction pushed too far. While we initially liked the ease of wire-up, in practice it suffers from the same issues as all such data-bound frameworks from WebForms to client/server tools. We find that it blurs the framework and model too much, forcing either bad architectural decisions or elaborate framework hackery in order to preserve sanity.

As the industry shifted from desktop GUI development to the web, it seemed natural to port the most successful patterns and designs to the new paradigm. After 15 years of trying, we feel that there are still no component-based frameworks that have successfully achieved this. We recommend not attempting to make web development into something that it fundamentally is not. It is time to accept the page and request-based nature of the web, and focus on the frameworks that support - rather than work against - these concepts."

This is diametrically opposed to my experience, and I'm really surprised by the stance of ThoughtWorks on the matter. Hope I'm not doing a disservice by spreading the FUD. My belief is that most of the competing JavaScript frameworks are abstractions (and magic) pushed too far.
looks like the course lecturer was still an undergrad student at the time he lectured this course. I wonder if that is common at Stanford or whether he is a Doogie Howser style child prodigy.
PG, I always wanted to ask you. What do you mean by "moral weight" exactly? Thanks.
Google Blacklist - Words That Google Instant Doesn't Like (2010)
Google App Engine + JavaMail Expert
Seeking Freelancer with Remote Capability
You missed the point of what pg said, in both spirit and semantics.

Semantically, pg said that it's empirically difficult for one person to start a big company on their own. This does not preclude the possibility of it happening. It's just rare. And his evidence is the fact that most large companies were started by multiple people. You may not like the implication, but his statement is factual. He was careful with his words and he's right.

You also may have misinterpreted the spirit of what pg said. He didn't say that a cofounder was the only path to human happiness. He didn't say anything disparaging about single founders. He just said that most of the successful startups that he's seen have involve multiple people, without publicly taking an opinion for or against the issue.

FWIW, pg's logic isn't entirely sound either. Saying "most of the successful startups I've seen have multiple founders" is no more valid than saying "Most of the corporate CEOs I've seen have been white males, therefore being a white male must be one of the criteria for success."

It doesn't matter how many people are involved in the founding of a company. If it's the right idea at the right time with the right execution, things will be fine.
Great article and discussion. I'll add 2 predictions.

Assuming we've mastered genetic engineering, adding the ability to live and breath underwater will be tempting. This would be the catalyst for significant speciation as an additional 70% of the earth's surface becomes habitable.

As a secondary consequence of this, Europa could become habitable. Vast amounts of water, radiation protection from its icy crust and warmth due to the extreme tidal stresses of Jupiter all combine to make it far more desirable than lifeless, atmosphere deficient rocks like Mars.
Made in japan: file storage/collaboration service (beta)
thank you! it took a lot of hard work, but it definitely paid off.
That's our fault, not Swizec's. We cap it at 10x the minimum price (I think that's how we coded it, anyways).

We're thinking of making the slider exponential (or something with an increasing slope, anyways) instead, which would help.
The Java calendar and date APIs are the worst for this and several other design flaws that come back to bite you. There's a reason why JodaTime (http://joda-time.sourceforge.net/) is so popular.
It comes back to the ultimatum game http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimatum_game). Most people don't like others getting a better deal than themselves and will even choose to get nothing instead of something just so the other person also loses.
Already been done: Tent.io - http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4418904

"Tent is a new protocol for open, distributed social networking.

Tent is decentralized, not federated or centralized. Any Tent server can connect to any other Tent server. All features are available to any server as first-class citizens. Anyone can host their own Tent server."

They're already running a beta service for end users at http://tent.is/.
From what I understand, Apple's concern is circumventing the App Store, making it possible for developers to distribute apps that Apple hasn't seen yet. In short, the concern is viruses, worms and other security issues. This, I believe, is why they don't change the limits.
Advertising like this thread.
There is a lot more to a business than simply making the product.
The cars crash sometimes too. Software has bugs.
I was puzzled by this, since obviously there are elements that are more rare than iridium, so I checked the original data source. They eliminate most radioactive elements which kind of makes sense. I was a bit surprised to learn that polonium and radium are less common in the crust than iridium. They also eliminate noble gases from the list, of which krypton, xenon, and radon turn out to be rarer in the crust than iridium. Also a couple sources have rhenium rarer than iridium.

(I'm not trying to be pedantic and start an argument, but just fill in some information in case anyone else wondered about this data.)

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundances_of_the_elements_(dat... and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_of_elements_in_Earths...
Don't get your hopes up. I doubt it will be getting LTE functionality in the future. They would've said so otherwise.
I may be wrong, but I can guarantee I'm not willfully twisting anything! Like any analogy it works differently depending on how you interpret it.

As I see it, people don't 'live' within the corporation they work for, therefore they are not like the cells. They are better understood as the energy that made the whale tick. 'Decomposers' are helping those resources become re-deployed somewhere else.

In the economic end of the analogy, they're not dying, they're getting jobs in another company that is growing, not dead. Just because a company fails, it does not follow that net jobs in the economy need to.
Nvidia  releases GeForce 310.54 Beta drivers
Then it's not peer-to-peer.
If you look at his credentials -- he's pretty well qualified to teach this course. And he is one of the coaches of the Stanford team.
It's funny you should link to that essay because, IIRC, the HN discussion had a whole lot of people missing that exact point. Despite the footnote.
The #1 piece of data I wish pg would release is a comprehensive (if anonymous) survey of every YC founder "would you do YC again?" and the related "would you recommend YC to a friend doing a startup?". (although as a control, "If you were doing another startup, and couldn't get into YC again for that business, would you still go ahead with it?")
Your terms and conditions at the end of lodging says http://james/something

I like the service (just used mailinator to test it) but in the end I'm left with the feeling there is some hidden cost to me. I'd like if it was clear that it was a free service for me.

I notice you are Australian? Or have you localised your site really well?

>You must not modify, adapt or hack the Service or modify another website so as to falsely imply that it is associated with the Service, ChargeBack.cc, or any other ChargeBack.cc service.

You must not do illegal stuff?

>ChargeBack.cc reserves the right to update and change the Terms of Service from time to time without notice

Please change your policy on this, tos-dr.info will likely rate that section badly.

Have yet to get a notice as a "merchant" but I love the experience as a consumer.
Actually it validates their intellectual experiment. That this is the way to correct answers.
Hi, I'm one of the authors (I'm an engineer, not an author of the original papers, though I can discuss those too)! What would you like to know?

First, the structure you described is called a cache oblivious lookahead array (COLA), and is not what we implement. It betrays a lot of the concepts that make up a fractal tree and is a good educational tool, which is why you'll find lots of Tokutek material that describes it, but there are some key places where it departs from what we actually ship. Conceptually (and asymptotically) they're similar, but when you get down to the details of an industrial-strength implementation (like variable-sized keys, as you mention, concurrency is another frequent question we get), you have to be more specific about what we build.

So. What we build is closer to a cache-oblivious streaming b-tree, but I won't make you look that up. Basically, we take a b-tree and stick an unsorted buffer on each internal node. To insert data into a subtree rooted at node X, you just append your data to X's buffer. Then, if the buffer's too full, you flush X's buffer, distributing all its elements among X's children (but that just puts them in the buffers of the children). You can flush recursively, and make leaf nodes just hold data instead of buffers. This gives the same insertion asymptotics as the COLA did.

Now you need to pick a node size, a strategy for querying, ideas for concurrency, recovery, etc. but this is a start. I'll start by saying that since we write nodes less frequently, we can pick a much larger node size, which helps eliminate fragmentation and gives us a chance to get much more aggressive compression (since large blocks compress better than small ones).

Hopefully this gives some insight into how we handle variable sized elements. The mongo benchmark (as with all our mysql benchmarks) is running on something that supports variable sized elements (though I don't remember if the benchmark itself takes advantage of that).

This is still pretty unspecified, and we can keep talking about fractal trees, but does what I've said so far make sense? Do you have any new questions?
http://www.sedo.com/search/details.php4?language=us&doma... <-- might want to fix that
YC has funded >300 startups, so I think it's funded a lot more solo founders than any individual solo founder has started plausible businesses (Mr. "I'm working on 42 other businesses!" Way aside...)
Debug mode is the only mode
International. Player from Poland here (#enlightened).
>In my experience, most young people quickly settle down into caring less about the acts of creation and self-expression, and focus more on 'making an impression' in their immediate peers. This path leads to obvious, uninteresting, facile, lazy, short-term, me-too, style-over-substance, meaningless creations that I can barely label as such.

Of course- but one must give them time! They're barely starting to figure out how to interact with their peers and themselves, and you want them to create masterpieces on the side? "On n'est pas sérieux quand on a 17 ans!" ("We are not serious when we are 17" - Rimbaud had it right)

Everything in its moment; the important thing is that their creations should not be dismissed as "obvious, uninteresting, lazy [...]", because negativity is the mother of sterility.

> But I believe there needs to be a level of inner dialogue and disregard for what's popular around oneself, that is a) at odds with the desire for teens to 'fit', b) rarely encouraged in practice in our society, and c) hard to sustain against the amount of noise (media, fashion, etc) we surround ourselves with.

Some of them can figure that out on their own; some don't (and most are in between).
That's where we come in as educators (which I believe every philosopher implicitly is [as in us, φιλόσοφος, lovers of wisdom- which is a description HNers rally under]) :)
What interest would we have in mischaracterizing it?

Advantages to YC of multi-founder companies that have nothing to do with "growing really big":

1. Multi-founder companies shrink the available pool of founders.

Assume the pool of available founders is fixed at any given point in time. By requiring start ups to have 2 or more founders, YC is able to capture a larger part of that pool, harming competitive incubators and increasing the likelihood that the founders they've been able to capture will produce for YC.

2. Split ownership is much easier for YC to manipulate favorably.

By providing YC with two or more avenues to affect the actions of a company, the autonomy of a founder is reduced even below the numerical amount: a single founder in a company with two isn't just half as influential, it's probably more like 1/3. The extra influence is retained by YC, which can play the founders against each other.

3. To maintain this competitive advantage and influence, YC effectively forces successful single founder companies like Dropbox to dilute themselves and gain a founder.

The entire process is now self-reinforcing, with YC actively manipulating the inputs while claiming the outputs are unbiased. (1) and (2) above demonstrate why YC has incentives to do this.

Of course, pg is a good person and would never blah blah blah. I agree, he is a good person. That doesn't mean the above things are untrue though, even if YC is consciously telling themselves they don't matter, or even "don't want" these advantages. Humans are really good at deluding themselves, especially when they have something to gain.
Players are choosing 2 to 1 enlightened, despite it being counter to the narrative. What made you choose that side?
What if I pull out the plug to the server while you're in the middle of a buffer write?
You say you achieve throughput by writing to nodes less frequently, does that mean in case of a hardware/power failure the amount of data loss will be higher than with a system that writes more often to disk? How often do you guys flush to disk?

Edit: I'm not saying those are necessarily bad trade-offs, i'm just curious :)
Because unix? :)
> Even our most die-hard OpenBSD "everywhere" fanatics (and we have a number of them) don't run it as their Desktop OS, and have never suggested you should. OpenBSD is a server/router/network service OS.

OpenBSD 4.9 had much more solid ACPI support than Ubuntu 11 on my Acer NAV50 netbook (Ubuntu will latch wireless network interfaces to off on wake-from-sleep half the time, among other things). I had to switch to Linux because Adobe will not port Flash to OpenBSD, and all the shiny plug-and-play stuff that comes by default with Lubuntu. OpenBSD ports was also really behind for things like Firefox. If OpenBSD had Flash, pulseaudio, Chrome with gtalk plugin and/or Skype, and good plug-and-play support for memory cards/USB sticks/external displays, it would be a perfectly fine desktop OS.
Idea paint. We painted our room with idea paint (white board paint) I actually think better in there then anywhere!
PC Makers Find New Ways to Destroy User Experience
I find this somewhat disturbing, but at least these are mainly on google instant*

*for the most part
Cool, I hadn't heard about that one. That's good news.
Playing devil's advocate here, there's another reason:

Rule #1 of startups is: don't die.

In reliability planning, 2 is 1 and 1 is none. A single founder is a SPoF. They get cancer, get an unsupportive SO, get a needy family member, lose a rich uncle, etc., they kill the company. Having 2+ founders guards against these likelihoods (over the course of the company).
I guess the idea is to use the month as an array index to convert it into a string. You don't usually convert the day of month or the year into a string.

Nontheless I agree that it's bad API design.
> It would be nice if there was a unified driver model that the OS developers could easily add a wrapper level to accomodate there needs.

At the source level, NetBSD developers came up with exactly this idea, which is now colloquialy known as bus_dma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Busdma). FreeBSD and OpenBSD picked up the interfaces modulo a few changes, and now get to share drivers relatively easily.
Networks. Besides (and I'm arrogant as hell, have several accomplishments under my belt etc...) if you don't think these Judges and their guest speaker can help you then you may be "too" arrogant. It's always heathy to learn. This isn't on of those (excuse my French) "bull poop" HOW TO BE AN ENTREPRENEUR class. It's an elite network for advanced networking and help.