To me it's strange that I see so many comments on HN about how technical skill isn't the most important thing: business sense, life experience, communications skills, etc. count for more.
But when someone with no technical skill creates a product by outsourcing the technical side, suddenly the comments are all negative.
My critique of the model is more that outsourcing will get expensive quickly. The founder of this product 120+ schools to support with 30k. Many of these schools are expecting lifetime support: they paid a one time $250 fee. It's not clear what the legal relationship is between the service provider and the schools either, which may be a problem.
So my critique has nothing to do with technical skill, it's more that getting 'profitable' quickly without any consideration of the potential long term debt can be a bad business decision.
In my view, these were shaky business decisions (to outsource development, cutting legal corners w schools, one time fees), rather than technical ones, if that makes sense. There are times when outsourcing is the right call, in the context of this particular business I'm not convinced.
Ps. The adequate technical skill to execute is kinda assumed if you're founding a tech startup. If it's just building a product without the expectation of scaling it you can maybe get with outsourcing. This might be why there's more of a discussion on HN about the business side - this is the area that most of the audience here need to develop.
I remember reading that YC was founded in the first place with a hypothesis that teaching tech founders the nontech skills (eg. business/communication skills) is far, far more effective than vice versa. Seems it was right.
Hi - you've assumed this is not being done by s full legal entity that my company is - the software also has a global base with customers all over the planet - 120 schools is really not the case. You've also assumed I don't have full time staff now to manage the project
Most Australians and Italians would object to this. Unfortunately most White Christians are irreparably racist. I would suggest a tolerant liberal nation like Israel as the destination.
This is really impressive. The problem is highly constrained. Because a house is a sturdy structure, large amounts of physical material are involved. Furthermore, there are quality/safety requirements.
It's great to see Ikea applying their deep expertise in producing sturdy structures that can be shipped cheaply, to this area.
The problem with bubble prediction is the perverse incentives. If you say there is no bubble, you look like an ignorant groupie. If you say there is a bubble, even if nothing happens, you can just say "you guys got real lucky this time".
That's why I only consider the opinions of people who put their money where their mouth is. Having skin in the game usually tends to lend the proper incentive to having an informed and insightful opinion. Usually, but not always.
I agree it's bad habit, but I don't see it in the article.
The article goes to great length to argue why Java should use the same terminology as other languages. I would not say that the statements:
Sun wanted to push Java as a secure language, and one of Java's advantages was that it does not allow pointer arithmetic as C++ does.
They went so far as to try a different name for the concept, formally calling them "references". A big mistake and it's caused even more confusion in the process.
can be called "actively trying to misunderstand people". In fact it shows an understanding with the position he's arguing against.
One amusing artifact of that leaky abstraction is "java.lang.NullPointerException". How is that even possible, if Java doesn't have pointers under the hood?
There are no claims that Java doesn't use pointers. You just don't have direct access to them. Also i don't. Think the entire purpose was to hide pointers for correctness sake but to make the memory model consistent across plarforms.
Maybe they should. Studies have found that ratings of a surgeon skill based on a video recordings of surgery, are predictive of patient outcomes[0]. The problem with associating prestige and respect with not stooping to being tested, is that testing can be useful and necessary.
No, if you read the article, you'll see it is absolutely nothing to do with maternity leave.
The article describes a market where companies pay women for breast milk that is left over after they have fed their own babies, and use it to produce a pharmaceutical product for premature babies. The controversy is between non-profits and for profit companies both doing this (but the non-profit doesn't pay the women).
in the English speaking world outside the US, the "toilet" refers to the entire bathroom, not the piece of porcelain. This also explains why "use the toilet" is considered crude in the US but not outside. In the US it refers to the physical act of defacating, but elsewhere it is equivalent to "go to the bathroom"
I personally consider myself part of the alternative right, but my views are overall fairly mainstream. I fall into #3 not because I'm part of some "dark side" but because I think both big government and big tech largely do what they claim to, and the negative side effects are exaggerated.
I am very wary of "X always ends up as Y" arguments. If you don't like big companies abusing power, then close the loopholes or break them up (though I much prefer the former). If you don't like big government abusing citizens, then change the laws to limit government.
I like big government because they really do tend to work towards the public good. Look at healthcare or welfare in Australia for an example. I like big tech because they really do increase economic efficiency, and drive technology forwards.
I think as poorly of the conspiratorial thinking of #4's as they do of the "dark side".
