Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stanford profs from DB & Machine Learning class are founding a company Coursera

plus.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 42 posts

Re: Stanford profs from DB & Machine Learning class are founding a company Coursera

#31

Post by wisty »

unignorant wrote: post #21
endtime wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously? At Stanford? Every professor other than Daphne (I believe) at the AI lab has worked for Google at some point and Stanford is the last place where CS profs look down upon starting companies.

Starting a company wasn't the issue. It's more that for-profit education has a bad reputation (think University of Phoenix). There was some initial concern/confusion.

This is for-profit education, not for-profit degree milling. There's a difference between the two that universities don't like to see.

Re: Stanford profs from DB & Machine Learning class are founding a company Coursera

#33

Post by sanderjd »

codeonfire wrote: post #23
kunj2aan wrote: post #8

It's surprising that they wouldn't collaborate with Sebastian Thrun (AI), who I think is also founding a company.

It's not surprising if you understand academic politics. If you go to many research presentations, you'll be amazed to see people openly deriding the presenter's work to their face. Collaboration is something valued by people who greatly depend on others. So it's normal for most people to think that collaboration is something that is desirable, and it is for the average person. If you are trying to be the world's lea…

As a disclaimer: I don't claim to understand academic politics. Having said that, I think you need some sort of citation or at the very least a stronger argument to back up the statement that "collaboration is something valued by people who greatly depend on others". To a non-involved observer such as myself, what you're describing (in a positive tone?) just sounds petty and extremely unproductive for everyone involved, whether they're average or "very capable".

Re: Stanford profs from DB & Machine Learning class are founding a company Coursera

#35

Post by WildUtah »

endtime wrote: post #25
unignorant wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starting a company wasn't the issue. It's more that for-profit education has a bad reputation (think University of Phoenix). There was some initial concern/confusion.

How is Stanford not a for-profit institution? I'm not trying to be argumentative, I think I must just be missing some distinction.

Non-profit organizations (mostly corporations) are defined as non-profit by having no residual claimants. That means that if there is money left over after the bills have been paid, that money (roughly "profits") does not accrue to any stockholders or other interested parties but can only be used for ongoing operations.

Responsibility is usually held by a board of directors or trustees that appoints its own successors but that is not universal.

Often the managers of a non-profit will balloon their salaries or give bonuses to the board of directors if there is money left over. This is a form of corruption but remains common.

A 501(c)3 corporation in the USA is a type of non-profit that receives special privileges, the most obvious of which is that contributions can be written off the taxes of the donor. To be a 501(c)3, a non-profit corporation has to be former for one of a specific set of public charitable purposes and meet special reporting requirements. The principal purposes that qualify are churches and schools but also include aid to the poor and others.

IRS publication 557 details the rules for 501(c)3 and other tax-exempt non-profit organizations.

Re: Stanford profs from DB & Machine Learning class are founding a company Coursera

#36

Post by endtime »

mikek wrote: post #27
endtime wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is Stanford not a for-profit institution? I'm not trying to be argumentative, I think I must just be missing some distinction.

Non-profit organizations are registered as so to the IRS in the United States: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprofit_organization

So what "caused a bit of a stir" was a tax status?

Re: Stanford profs from DB & Machine Learning class are founding a company Coursera

#37

Post by nchuhoai »

euccastro wrote: post #30
nchuhoai wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry I meant to say wouldn't. I'm sure they could together create a bigger impact then seperate

Andrew Ng is the dude of ML Class. Do you mean why wouldn't they collaborate with the dude(s) of AI Class?

yeah, thats what i meant

Re: Stanford profs from DB & Machine Learning class are founding a company Coursera

#38

Post by codeonfire »

sanderjd wrote: post #33
codeonfire wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not surprising if you understand academic politics. If you go to many research presentations, you'll be amazed to see people openly deriding the presenter's work to their face. Collaboration is something valued by people who greatly depend on others. So it's normal for most people to think that collaboration is something that is desirable, and it is for the average person. If you are trying to be the world's lea…

As a disclaimer: I don't claim to understand academic politics. Having said that, I think you need some sort of citation or at the very least a stronger argument to back up the statement that "collaboration is something valued by people who greatly depend on others". To a non-involved observer such as myself, what you're describing (in a positive tone?) just sounds petty and extremely unproductive for everyone involv…

If one depends greatly on someone else to achieve things, then by definition they value collaboration. I assume we are still talking about academics because there could exist people who simply don't want to accomplish anything and therefore don't value collaboration. It's no secret either that people who are highly capable don't need collaboration except to meet societal and political expectations or to reduce their workload. Again, that follows from the definition of highly capable.

What would be a far more interesting research topic would be to measure negative reaction to any notion that some people can work better alone and any correlations those sentiments might entail.

Re: Stanford profs from DB & Machine Learning class are founding a company Coursera

#39

Post by sanderjd »

codeonfire wrote: post #38
sanderjd wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a disclaimer: I don't claim to understand academic politics. Having said that, I think you need some sort of citation or at the very least a stronger argument to back up the statement that "collaboration is something valued by people who greatly depend on others". To a non-involved observer such as myself, what you're describing (in a positive tone?) just sounds petty and extremely unproductive for everyone involv…

If one depends greatly on someone else to achieve things, then by definition they value collaboration. I assume we are still talking about academics because there could exist people who simply don't want to accomplish anything and therefore don't value collaboration. It's no secret either that people who are highly capable don't need collaboration except to meet societal and political expectations or to reduce their…

I'm sorry for being dense, but you still haven't convinced me that "people who are highly capable don't need collaboration" is implied by the definition of "highly capable". Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Larry Page, etc. - these people are all highly capable and all collaborated to achieve their greatest successes. Are we using different definitions of "collaboration"?

Your proposed research topic would be a lot more interesting without the inherent bias you introduce by measuring only the correlations of negative reaction and ignoring any correlations to positive reaction.

Re: Stanford profs from DB & Machine Learning class are founding a company Coursera

#40

Post by codeonfire »

sanderjd wrote: post #39
codeonfire wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If one depends greatly on someone else to achieve things, then by definition they value collaboration. I assume we are still talking about academics because there could exist people who simply don't want to accomplish anything and therefore don't value collaboration. It's no secret either that people who are highly capable don't need collaboration except to meet societal and political expectations or to reduce their…

I'm sorry for being dense, but you still haven't convinced me that "people who are highly capable don't need collaboration" is implied by the definition of "highly capable". Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Larry Page, etc. - these people are all highly capable and all collaborated to achieve their greatest successes. Are we using different definitions of "collaboration"? Your proposed research topic would be a lot more inter…

There's no evidence that their success was due to collaboration and I only said they don't need to collaborate, not that they don't collaborate. On the contrary, in the Bill G and Steve J cases, the general public overwhelmingly attribute the success of their respective companies to the individual and not to their choice in co-founders.
Post reply on HN