New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies • Hacker News Board

mullingitover wrote: post #22

> Throughout history, when the cost of energy has come down a lot (for example, with the steam engine) I'm going to have to review my physics textbook, but I could swear that steam engine consumes energy. edit: Can't believe I'm getting downvoted. I thought this place was full of pedantic engineers, like me? The steam engine turns energy into work. If anything, it probably increased the price of energy (at least temp…

I think you know what he meant. But just in case: the steam engine allowed people to harness energy that would have been impractical or even impossible to harness without it.

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#34

Post by AnimalMuppet » Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:13 PM UTC

mullingitover wrote: post #22

> Throughout history, when the cost of energy has come down a lot (for example, with the steam engine) I'm going to have to review my physics textbook, but I could swear that steam engine consumes energy. edit: Can't believe I'm getting downvoted. I thought this place was full of pedantic engineers, like me? The steam engine turns energy into work. If anything, it probably increased the price of energy (at least temp…

Well, it consumes fuel. It turns (some fraction of) the fuel into useful work.

Before the steam engine, there was the horse. The horse turned a much smaller fraction of the energy input into useful work.

This means that the steam engine lowered the cost of useful work. We (over)simplify this, and say that the steam engine lowered the cost of energy.

But I have a nagging feeling that I may be explaining the blindingly obvious to the deliberately obtuse...

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#35

Post by bfe » Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:14 PM UTC

This sounds terrific, but it doesn't seem self-consistent between wanting companies with the scale of ambition of SpaceX and Tesla, but insisting on early momentum being critical and avoiding a big and expensive initial project.

Tesla took four years to introduce their first product, the Roadster. When they went public two years later, they had gone through a net loss of around 300 million dollars, and were still two years away from introducing the Model S. Even then, it had a few near-death experiences. SpaceX took 200 million dollars of investment, and took four years to launch their first flight, which failed. Over the next two years, their second and third flights also failed. Neither company really showed momentum until seven to nine years after founding.

It would be nice to see a clear path from a three-month-to-demo-day minimum viable product to a breakthrough company that overturns a capital-intensive industry, but it's hard to think of good examples of this so far. At the least, it would probably require substantial development before applying to YC, and/or starting with a very limited prototype.

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#36

Post by ilaksh » Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:14 PM UTC

I have wanted to experiment with some ideas that would solve "real world" problems, but software has always been vastly more accessible. Maybe YC could also consider funding companies with consumer products aimed at making other fields more accessible at home. Sort of analogues to the cheap personal computer. Like the Personal Lab, Personal Biobrick Lab, Personal Fab Lab.

Another idea is just any consumer focused startup in one of the areas he focused on. For example an inexpensive solar panel kit you could buy at Walmart. Or maybe advanced hydroponics kits for people to grow some of their own food. I believe the key to really taking advantage of new technologies in an efficient way is to get them widely distributed and into the hands of individuals and families. And I think that high tech solutions to a number of traditionally highly centralized or large organization-driven areas such as energy and food production can make better distribution of those things practical and will result in not only a more efficient but also more robust and secure future for families.

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#37

Post by breadbox » Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:14 PM UTC

cjoh wrote: post #26

"Of particular interest to us are ways to use the Internet to fix government—for example, crowdfunding social services." Aren't all social services crowdfunded?

Indeed. One could argue that government is the original crowdfunding.

This is actually kind of a nice illustration of how backwards our ideas of social services have become.

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#38

Post by abdullahkhalids » Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:15 PM UTC

A distinction between actual breakthrough companies and meta-breakthrough ones would be nice. Companies that enable others to magnify their efforts (such as https://experiment.com/) are different from ones that create new tech (Tesla/SpaceX). Meta companies have fuzzier goals and have longer term goals than tech ones. They are also, perhaps, more software oriented than tech ones.

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#39

Post by ph0rque » Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:16 PM UTC

ilaksh wrote: post #36

I have wanted to experiment with some ideas that would solve "real world" problems, but software has always been vastly more accessible. Maybe YC could also consider funding companies with consumer products aimed at making other fields more accessible at home. Sort of analogues to the cheap personal computer. Like the Personal Lab, Personal Biobrick Lab, Personal Fab Lab. Another idea is just any consumer focused sta…

> advanced hydroponics kits

We're working on it: http://automicrofarm.com/ (well, aquaponics, not hydroponics).

Re: New RFS – Breakthrough Technologies

#40

Post by calcsam » Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:17 PM UTC

YC will need a change in their funding model if they want to fund these type of technologies. $14k to $20k is irrelevant if you need 3 years R&D and/or $5M capital to prototype; we need new metrics for funding businesses with high capital cost and/or long incubation time.