chplushsieh

Interesting. I didn't expect this kind of content from a blog I usually associate with giving startup advice.

No problem. And I’m delighted to find out that there is actually an Ask HN to answer your question: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8363625

So in our case here, GP is nocoiner.

Not GP, but perhaps this is the post: https://longform.asmartbear.com/two-big-things/

Jeff Hawkins gets shit on a lot in ML because his theories haven’t produced models with results as good as the mainstream approach, but I’m glad they keep working at it and keep coming up with interesting ideas.

I just ran across a paper [1] from Numenta on Time Series Anomaly Detection using HTM last night which provide a benchmark[2] with some existing approachs. (But it seems to me there is no NN based approach in them. )

[1] Unsupervised real-time anomaly detection for streaming data http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925231217...

[2] https://github.com/numenta/NAB

Finally: "Those who have done really great things generally report, privately, that it is better than wine, the opposite sex, and song put together." This is strongly contradicted by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi's evidence. Nearly everyone he talked to (many Nobel Laureates among them) said their greatest achievement was raising a family or something in personal life.

Strictly speaking, these two claims don't contradict each other. Talking to a book writer/researcher in an interview doesn't count as talking privately.

Related: http://duckietown.mit.edu/

I agree with you.

But what Google does is as far as any sane donator/sponsor would go. We can't really expect them to keep sponsoring more doughnut shops after they find out their money is not being put into good use.

"If I could talk to my 20 year old self I would recommend this: Stay away from the Internet as much as possible and don't look for general advice."

... which is also a piece of general advice, coming from the Internet.

Alternative explanation: Star scientists are just highly productive scientists. After they die, their not-as-productive collaborators can't keep up with the amount of publication as high as before. Naturally collaborators publication percentage falls while Non-collaborators' rise.

Startups take several years to exit.

So isn't it perfectly normal that it also takes several years for the total value of IPOs and acquisitions, i.e. money that flows out of startups, per year to catch up with the rising trend of total startup investment, i.e. money that flows into startups, per year?