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

New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

blog.samaltman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 219 posts

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#181

Post by adwn »

mahyarm wrote: post #128
justhw wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious: How do you suggest funding to arrive? What is the net benefit to the stake holders?

Cheaper rocket launches.

No. Getting into space (starting at 100 km) is relatively easy. Staying in space, i.e. reaching orbit, is the hard part, because you need a very high speed to do this. xkcd's what-if #58 sums it up pretty well.

But even then, 15 km would only be ~5% of a typical low earth orbit (LEO) of 300 km, so ... yeah, not worth it at all.

This tower seems like a truly useless project.

[1] http://what-if.xkcd.com/58/

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#182

Post by patrickk »

pg wrote: post #113
steve19 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most databases I see on HN are a case of take algorithm X and apply it to problem Y through interfaces Z[], which is fantastic if you have problem Y and no good solution. Infinitely scalable nosql db running on raw SSDs is fantastic, for example, but not even close to designing a theoretical spaceship. Would or could ycombinator fund a company that could only tell you what to expect in 0.25 + n years where n>9 and Bo…

We'd fund anything that had big potential and effective founders. It might be harder to raise money after YC for something that was going to take a long time, but there are certainly some VCs who'd like an idea that was going to take a long time but had proportionately high expected value.

Would you have to consider letting some companies that are executing these ideas reside outside of Silicon Valley for the YC program, due to geographical constrains?

For example, let's say Mate Rimac, the founder of Rimac Automobili (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rimac_Concept_One) who is a Croatian guy scratching an itch by producing the type of bonkers performance EV that he wanted to become reality, came to yc and you liked him, but his team, lab, equipment etc was all back home in Croatia. What would you do? It seems like some of these ideas will be constrained by location.

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#183

Post by mcintyre1994 »

josteink wrote: post #171
zoba wrote: post #30

Am I the only one who doesn't know what RFS stands for? Its not clear from AcronymFinder either.

Nope. I had to search the internet, article and finally this thread, trying to find out what it meant. As far as I can tell, the other answer on your comment seem to be the only place on the internet where this usage of this acronym is documented.

PG might have coined the term then, the others are here: http://ycombinator.com/rfs.html

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#184

Post by argumentum »

foobarqux wrote: post #119
pg wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://boostedboards.com

That looks like a great company with a great product but it's only capital intensive relative to web software.

The point isn't to try and do everything right off the bat, but rather to find a the right size bit of the "capital intensive" problem for a startup to bite off and chew.

From Sam's article:

> We think the YC model works well for these companies. We invest with infinite time horizon and are not afraid of risky-looking companies. ... And our model helps companies figure out a right-sized initial project achievable with a small amount of time and money—great companies get built with a series of small wins that compound over time, and early momentum is critical. A common failure mode of many ambitious companies is to bite off an initial project that is far too big and expensive.

Boosted Boards is exactly such a company.

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#185

Post by argumentum »

hooande wrote: post #85

There's a new sheriff in town. Previously YC treated some of these things, especially "AI" (whatever that means) as third rails. They've funded an extremely broad range of companies, but if you go back and check their past investments most of the areas listed in this RFS are underrepresented. Infrastructure, food and water, biotech, robotics...YC could be reaching much higher in terms of ambition than it has in the p…

> It's hard for two guys in a garage to build a prototype 10X battery or come up with innovative biotechnology.

In the early late 1800s and early 1900s, governments and industrial titans around the world were spending unbelievable amounts of resources on what was the hardest problem of their day: human flight. The primary focus of their efforts was increasing engine power. Of course, it must have seemed, only the most powerful entities had any business trying to fly.

Two "guys in a garage" were obsessed with a different approach, which they called solving "the flying problem." To most everyone in the world they must have seemed crazy, like overenthusiastic children who had never grown up.

Guess who won?

Perhaps that's the role YC could fill: to find, inspire and support the Wright brothers of today with just enough resources to keep on going but not enough to change who they are underneath: two guys (or girls) in a metaphorical garage with a crazy obsession.

(The Wright brothers weren't the financial success they should have been, given the magnitude of what they accomplished. YC & the modern Silicon Valley ethic could certainly help in improving that outcome as well. Google is a good analog here).

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#186

Post by JoeAltmaier »

argumentum wrote: post #185
hooande wrote: post #85

There's a new sheriff in town. Previously YC treated some of these things, especially "AI" (whatever that means) as third rails. They've funded an extremely broad range of companies, but if you go back and check their past investments most of the areas listed in this RFS are underrepresented. Infrastructure, food and water, biotech, robotics...YC could be reaching much higher in terms of ambition than it has in the p…

> It's hard for two guys in a garage to build a prototype 10X battery or come up with innovative biotechnology. In the early late 1800s and early 1900s, governments and industrial titans around the world were spending unbelievable amounts of resources on what was the hardest problem of their day: human flight. The primary focus of their efforts was increasing engine power. Of course , it must have seemed, only the mo…

Today is different of course. But the biotech example is surprisingly approachable. DNA processing equipment has come down about a millionfold in the last decades. MRI devices are handheld and available. Its more approachable than maybe its ever been?

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#187

Post by argumentum »

Jack000 wrote: post #137
bfe wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's plausible as a fast, minimal entry point to electric vehicles in general, potentially attracting more capital to expand a proven product line, instead of trying to start with a car. I hope they're planning something like that.

I think another company ate their lunch, unfortunately. Came out with a similar product for 1/2 the price and 2x the range. That company also makes other EVs..

I don't think "ate their lunch" is a reasonable description, it's early days and successful startups win over the long run. The "E-Go" board you linked to below has hardly any of the mindshare that boosted boards has, and their website doesn't inspire much confidence that their product is anything more than a cheap knockoff that pretends to have more range by reducing top speed.

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#188

Post by argumentum »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #186
argumentum wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's hard for two guys in a garage to build a prototype 10X battery or come up with innovative biotechnology. In the early late 1800s and early 1900s, governments and industrial titans around the world were spending unbelievable amounts of resources on what was the hardest problem of their day: human flight. The primary focus of their efforts was increasing engine power. Of course , it must have seemed, only the mo…

Today is different of course. But the biotech example is surprisingly approachable. DNA processing equipment has come down about a millionfold in the last decades. MRI devices are handheld and available. Its more approachable than maybe its ever been?

> Today is different of course.

What make you so sure? The people assuming that "of course" you'll need a ton of money to get started on a big idea are the ones usually left behind in the dust.

And yes, many biotech ideas are "startupable".

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#189

Post by argumentum »

kyro wrote: post #107
cbhl wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> older, more experienced in a given field, maybe with obligations like a spouse and kids I'm not convinced that this describes the Thalmic guys at all.

Sure, there is a subset of science-oriented startups that don't require founders who fit that description, but for many of the industries listed in the article to be disrupted, you'd need doctors, lawyers, researchers, biotech engineers -- ie. seasoned experts who understand the intricacies and harsh realities of their fields -- and many of them would certainly fit my description. I'm assuming that the type of startu…

> you'd need doctors, lawyers, researchers, biotech engineers

There are lots of these types of people in every recent YC batch.

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#190

Post by ihnorton »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #186
argumentum wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's hard for two guys in a garage to build a prototype 10X battery or come up with innovative biotechnology. In the early late 1800s and early 1900s, governments and industrial titans around the world were spending unbelievable amounts of resources on what was the hardest problem of their day: human flight. The primary focus of their efforts was increasing engine power. Of course , it must have seemed, only the mo…

Today is different of course. But the biotech example is surprisingly approachable. DNA processing equipment has come down about a millionfold in the last decades. MRI devices are handheld and available. Its more approachable than maybe its ever been?

> MRI devices are handheld and available

Really? Did you mean NMR?

edit: found this, https://pines.berkeley.edu/research/optical_detection which, although not yet handheld MR (imaging), could be quite a big advance.

Post reply on HN