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

New Requests for Startups

ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 407 posts

Re: New Requests for Startups

#121

Post by foobarqux »

sambe wrote: post #92
danielweber wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That whole paragraph was bizarre. Yeah, lots of people are doing things wrong, but there is a competitive industry of index funds and ETFs out there. I'm sure they could be squeezed a little bit more, but not much.

I think this and the grandparent miss the point. The paragraph starts "it's too hard". Too much choice, lack of metrics, lack of clear comparisons can make things as hard as no choices. The availability of discount brokers doesn't solve the problem, as evidenced by the number of people making mistakes. "Most people either pick individual stocks and bonds and expose themselves to high volatility, or pay very high fees…

The paragraph I quoted and replied to was pretty explicit, claiming that discount brokers selling index ETFs don't yet exist.

Telling people to just invest in an S&P500 ETF (metrics and comparison don't matter because people don't understand them anyway) doesn't seem like a great business, financial writers are already advocating it pretty regularly and investment in index ETFs is growing steadily.

Re: New Requests for Startups

#122

Post by mindcrime »

seiji wrote: post #108
mindcrime wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In practice, "AI" is used as an umbrella term that definitely includes that kind of stuff. I can't speak for YC, but IMO Semantic Web work should probably fall under the AI umbrella in this case. (Edit: in the interest of full-disclosure, my startup is doing a lot of work with Semantic Web technologies, particularly in terms of applying them to Enterprise knowledge management)

I think there's two viewpoints. There's "outside in" when the media calls things like Siri "AI" then there's the scifi AI perspective where we want talking starships. Siri++ doesn't get us closer to sarcastic GSVs. If saying a structured connected wisdom of the crowds folksonomy is actually AI helps people get funding/attention/growth, that's what people will do. There's also "middle out," but that's a talk for anoth…

FWIW, when you talk about the Semantic Web, that also entails reasoning and reasoners, and there's no requirement that those reasoners be simple deductive logic based reasoners. Work being done to make a more useful reasoner could certainly be "real" AI work. I'd also personally say that "knowledge representation" is part of AI, and KR problems are also being attacked by the SW community. Those, among other reasons, are why I say that one should classify SemWeb "stuff" as AI.

But you're right to say that there are different definitions, and it does depend on who you talk to. The media definitely take a more expansive view of AI than probably most of us, but what can ya do? shrug

Re: New Requests for Startups

#123

Post by cik »

BillFranklin wrote: post #89
cik wrote: post #43

While interesting - the thing that surprised me the most was not seeing "security" (take that for what you will) on the list. Given the year of disclosures, the heartbleed incident, and all other sorts of things - I feel like this field is ripe for a disruption. Between the staid companies that have been providing tools for decades that can be better, the tools that don't really exist that need to - I think we're rea…

Yep, I was surprised too. We submitted our infosec company and hopefully there'll be others who are doing the same thing. There aren't enough easy to use security tools, maybe one of us will be caught in the net.

Awesome, good luck!

Re: New Requests for Startups

#124

Post by Stwerner »

akkartik wrote: post #32

> What comes after programming languages? I've been working on this for several years, though a startup seems the wrong vehicle for it. I think the description in the RFS is misguided: "We’re interested in helping developers create better software, faster. This includes new ways to write, understand, and collaborate on code, and the next generation of tools and infrastructure for delivering software continuously and…

I've really enjoyed your writing on your blog at http://akkartik.name which I found through your guests posts at Ribbonfarm. Have you been writing anywhere else about your work or thoughts about readable programs?

Re: New Requests for Startups

#125

Post by seiji »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #120
seiji wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Game of Life is completely deterministic and is the opposite of real life in pretty much every way My computer also can compute 5 + 5 and that is the opposite of real life in pretty much every way too. Not every algorithm results in life [and it requires algorithm + data + continual input, which the GoL doesn't integrate]. is a rejection of the idea that quantum computing allows any new problems to be solved Because…

The fact that a previously-intractable problem can be solved in a tractable amount of time on a quantum computer is important. It doesn't mean the problem didn't exist before, but rather that the problem can now be solved. For all we know, making an intractable problem tractable is the necessary step to make AI a reality. In fact, it's hard to argue that it isn't, so quantum computing becomes very interesting.

For all we know, making an intractable problem tractable is the necessary step to make AI a reality.

But, we know that's not a necessary step. We have computer vision systems working essentially the same way our brains perceive images (and since the new systems are on computers, we can speed them up millions of times to recognize millions of images quickly instead of relying on our dumb 10Hz to 100Hz brain clock).

so quantum computing becomes very interesting.

But quantum computing doesn't magically reduce difficult things to non-difficult things: http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=206

Also, required reading on why no quantum juju is required: http://www.scottaaronson.com/papers/giqtm3.pdf

Re: New Requests for Startups

#126

Post by jdp23 »

Great to see diversity on the list. I notice that gender isn't on the list of what you're looking for ("all ages, races, sexual orientations, and cultures"). Just an oversight or a conscious decision?

Re: New Requests for Startups

#127

Post by akkartik »

programminggeek wrote: post #110
akkartik wrote: post #32

> What comes after programming languages? I've been working on this for several years, though a startup seems the wrong vehicle for it. I think the description in the RFS is misguided: "We’re interested in helping developers create better software, faster. This includes new ways to write, understand, and collaborate on code, and the next generation of tools and infrastructure for delivering software continuously and…

I'm pretty sure that our assumption that programming languages will look like programming languages in the future is sort of like the assumption that phones will always have buttons on them. Once Apple and other companies showed what the world looks like when a phone is a giant touch screen + giant battery, phones with buttons become a niche, not the norm. I don't know what the programming paradigm is that completely…

Speaking from personal experience, the thought: "Take away languages. Now what do I use instead?" can be paralyzing.

I'll suggest an alternative approach that might stimulate your neurons. Look back at the ways that your life is improved reading code today compared to twenty years ago. When I look back, the highlights for me are:

a) version control, and

b) automated tests

Forget all their benefits to the people writing code. For me, the guy with one afternoon to make a tweak to an alien codebase, it has been invaluable to have not just the current snapshot of a codebase but a story of its evolution so that I can see what the skeleton of the program used to look like in a simpler time, and gradually play enhancements forward atop it[1]. It has also been invaluable to be in situations where I can go, hmm why do I need _, why don't I just rewrite it as _, try it, and find a failing test with an enlightening name.

What's common to these two ideas is that they are additive. You don't have to give up programming languages. You just need new ways to share information between programmers besides just the code that runs "in production". My current favorite candidate for the next augmentation for codebases is logs. More info: http://akkartik.name/post/tracing-tests. If that whets your appetite feel free to get in touch. My email is in my profile.

[1] More details of how this helps: http://akkartik.name/post/wart-layers

Re: New Requests for Startups

#128

Post by danielweber »

sambe wrote: post #92
danielweber wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That whole paragraph was bizarre. Yeah, lots of people are doing things wrong, but there is a competitive industry of index funds and ETFs out there. I'm sure they could be squeezed a little bit more, but not much.

I think this and the grandparent miss the point. The paragraph starts "it's too hard". Too much choice, lack of metrics, lack of clear comparisons can make things as hard as no choices. The availability of discount brokers doesn't solve the problem, as evidenced by the number of people making mistakes. "Most people either pick individual stocks and bonds and expose themselves to high volatility, or pay very high fees…

Too much choice

So we are going to make another choice?

What if I only have $1000 to invest?

Put it into your savings account because you need a rainy day fund.

When you have $3000 to invest, put it into Vanguard's S&P 500, and call it a day. You are already beating more than half the managed funds out there. You spend time with your kids.

This is slightly more complicated than YO, but only slightly.

Re: New Requests for Startups

#129

Post by wffurr »

hazz wrote: post #51

>Specifically, lightweight, short-distance personal transportation is something we’re interested in. Doesn't this already exist, in the form of the bicycle?

Yes, this one was licked in 1885. The problem is not something amenable to a startup company. It's a huge entrenched cultural preference for terribly inefficient vehicles and development patterns that go with them.

Bicycles are not an 80/20 solution, they're a 99% solution, with the appropriate kind of bicycle and accessories. You can haul all kinds of crap - construction equipment, children, appliances, etc. - with a bicycle.

There are many other kinds of bicycles that make them accessible to people with reduced mobility: tricycles, hand-cycles, electric assist. Further - active transportation also counts as exercise and physical therapy, even further reducing the number of people who end up with reduced mobility in the first place!

I don't really know what a startup could possibly do in this area that's not already being done by the dozens of active transportation advocacy organizations at every level of society.

Re: New Requests for Startups

#130

Post by saosebastiao »

ealloc wrote: post #79

I'm surprised no one has commented yet on the first couple of these - Energy, AI, Biotech, and Drug design. These have traditionally been domains requiring a huge research apparatus with tremendous manpower, for only very long term gains. Not good for startups. In AI, how can a startup hope to succeed when academia has had almost no success in 50 years (and I am doubtful throwing more CPU/neuron layers will 'solve' t…

These have traditionally been domains requiring a huge research apparatus with tremendous manpower, for only very long term gains. Not good for startups. In AI, how can a startup hope to succeed when academia has had almost no success in 50 years (and I am doubtful throwing more CPU/neuron layers will 'solve' the problem).

This is a pure example of the AI Effect[1]. Academia has been extremely successful with AI Research, but you don't see it because as soon as something becomes successful, you disassociate it with AI.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect

Post reply on HN