HN user
I'm a coder, philosophy enthusiast, and neuroscience research technician. Hit me up to talk about any of those things!
Are there any legitimate wikipedia competitors though? I still view genius and hypothesis as not in the same field of "encyclopedia knowledge base." To really be a competitor to wikipedia you'd need to look like an actual wiki in my opinion.
I had the very same exact experience. It is astounding to me that there are no legitimate competitors to Wikipedia at all after 15 years. It's funny how social networking is such a competitive space from facebook --> instagram --> snapchat etc but it's still just Wikipedia --> Wikipedia --> Wikipedia
lol for some reason I thought you were going to say Walmart.
I'm wondering the exact same thing. And also, I am wondering if all these companies that are clearly later than seed stage get the exact same offer of 7% for 120k. Is there somewhere in YC terms that says that is the only deal they offer to new companies, or are we to assume they potentially are recieving more diversified deals?
Giphy clearly comes to mind as something recently created that is in the consumer tech/data market which is going to become a behemoth at its rate of growth.
None of this clickbait nonsense compares to what Facebook and Google have on most of us and the average American. These people that run something like this and boast about knowing "When the last time you had Chinese food was" are literally the information industry's equivalent of click farms and scraper sites.
What a big fall from grace. Really wasn't expecting this to happen :( I think now the elephant in the room is that just how much of the actual company is built on substantial, tangible, and valuable assets. Unlike some people here, I really don't believe the entire thing could possibly have been a massive lie/fraudulent venture. This is probably textbook "overstretching the truth" and failing to deliver before everything implodes in a massive blaze of glory.
Does anyone here that actually has even slight first/second hand knowledge of the inner workings at Theranos know just how much of it is an 'actual, tangible business?'
What was the controversy about?
This is the most correct and obvious/very low cost way to do it that you almost start to think Amazon is in on the conspiracy with these fake reviewers because they have something to gain that we are not seeing.
This whole thing reminds me of a relevant paradox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window
Ya I thought almost everyone used the mobile site to the point that the Wiki app is almost unspoken of.
Tyler Burge, Kripke, and David Kaplan are still left from the old guard of the golden age of philosophy of language/mind era.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_field_potential
One of the most important ways the brain communicates is actually not just ionically through chemo-ionic channels but through summed wave activity. This is especially important in sleep and also during long term potentiation of circuits.
This is a really neat idea. This could also go much further as it grows to cover "nearby redditors" as a mobile app too. Really good potential there.
Both Uber and SpaceX are technically 'transportation companies' in a loose sense. None of the things you listed above really further any field in basic science and academia. SpaceX's achievements simply sound cooler because it is with big rockets and more tangible to write down for record keeping. They are essentially using rocket tech in a new, different way that employs a new business model for success - which, surprise surprise, is exactly what Uber does as well but with terrestrial transport vehicles.
I was very surprised at that exact same thing as well. I thought I was the only one. I really thought for a second that it was some magazine from the 90s or even early 00s.
Ya, makes sense. What about all the trendy open source stuff that have the TLD .io as their suffix like socket.io etc? How did the .io trend start anyway?
Man, if there was ever a cool domain name to use the .io TLD it'd be iojs...WHY ARE THEY .ORG!!
I think the difference between you and the people that want to work hard to "make the best chat app" is that the sense of fulfillment and the concept of living a good life between you and this group comes from two different things. For you it's just being happy by being with friends and family etc while for others its accomplishing something they truly believe in whether it's some college kid trying to make the next chat app or Elon Musk trying to make humanity an interplanetary specie. That sense of fulfillment is attained from different things - and that's ok. Everyone has their things that make them feel fulfilled, and they are not always the same. You just have to be honest with yourself to know what that is.
As others have mentioned, the one main distinguishing factor between blockchains and git (at least in practice because bitcoin's POW makes rewriting the chain expensive) is the consensus among its general users and in inability to actually change the history of the blockchain. Mathematically they are very similar, but git repos aren't "secure" in the same way. That's why I would argue against the author that git isn't the most valuable blockchain in use today although it could very well be the biggest.
He also probably got a pass because the article was created by an established editor rather than a brand new user.
This is the biggest deal that no one else is realizing. The rest is basically in the details. Not only did an established editor create the page, but the expertise in formatting, properly citing (or at least making it look like it), and writing correct verbosity that imitates a very professional and 'notable' wikipedia article is what made this fly under the radar. A quick skim of the article leaves absolutely no suspicion to the even partially trained eye (I'm not some power editor on Wikipedia, but I do edit/am active).
Are you sure things like this can't work? I work in a computational neuroscience lab and we do a lot of modelling and also machine learning. Things like Eulerian Video magnification (EVM) already prove you can do the rudimentary proof of concepts of such "FAST scans" like being able to extract heart rate and blood flow from a simple video. Techniques like EVM can even be used to detect sound from video files simply based off vibration of the objects captured in video. It seems it wouldn't be too outlandish to assume that EVM techniques + some other more classified technologies + unlimited funding of the NSA/Homeland Security/CIA/TSA could be combined to create something like the tech purported in the link. For the record, I don't work in the actual lab that developed EVM, just in a similar field.
EVM info: http://people.csail.mit.edu/mrub/vidmag/