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

What’s the Matter with Boston Tech?

recode.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 70 posts

Re: What’s the Matter with Boston Tech?

#61

Post by api »

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #57
michaelochurch wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, you really have an axe to grind with those two, don't you? How is Clinkle "something people want"? Snapchat, sure. I'll give it that. These unlikeable Joffreys are bad for the world and bad for our image as technologists. Thanks to them, people think of technology as a playground for reckless rich kids, not a slow and laborious and thoughtful process. That's going to lead to backlash like we haven't seen. (Vomit…

Disclaimer: I know jack shit about these men. I don't think the douchebags are the problem. The insane, Gilded Age-level, verging-on-Medieval-level inequalities of income and wealth are the problem.

That's kinda like saying the problem is clouds, not rain. :)

Re: What’s the Matter with Boston Tech?

#62

Post by eli_gottlieb »

api wrote: post #61
eli_gottlieb wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disclaimer: I know jack shit about these men. I don't think the douchebags are the problem. The insane, Gilded Age-level, verging-on-Medieval-level inequalities of income and wealth are the problem.

That's kinda like saying the problem is clouds, not rain. :)

Which means I'm succeeding in complaining about the cause rather than the effect, yes ;-).

Re: What’s the Matter with Boston Tech?

#63

Post by eli_gottlieb »

api wrote: post #59
eli_gottlieb wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>People who say failure and hardship are good have never experienced them. It teaches you all the wrong things-- be conservative, be suspicious, be jaded, don't dream, assume the worst about people, ... Wow! Can I quote you on that?

Sure. I don't think I'm the only one who's said something like that though.

As a matter of fact, you're one of the first I've seen. At least as long as I've been alive, the hegemonic cultural norm I've seen has been that hardship builds character, conservatism is wisdom, and those who dream are fools. It's refreshing to hear someone say that cynicism is incorrect and teaches the wrong lessons rather than being merely unpleasant.

Re: What’s the Matter with Boston Tech?

#64

Post by mattl »

bcardarella wrote: post #18

Money. Unfortunately VCs and Angels in Boston have a very poor reputation for taking risk on startups. Instead they want to invest in companies that have already proven their model or just need money to scale. Public transportation. I know that every city dweller thinks their city has poor public transportation options. Let me tell you, Boston has you beat. When we take into consideration the perceived importance of…

Where in Somerville has no T access?

Re: What’s the Matter with Boston Tech?

#65

Post by api »

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #63
api wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. I don't think I'm the only one who's said something like that though.

As a matter of fact, you're one of the first I've seen. At least as long as I've been alive, the hegemonic cultural norm I've seen has been that hardship builds character, conservatism is wisdom, and those who dream are fools. It's refreshing to hear someone say that cynicism is incorrect and teaches the wrong lessons rather than being merely unpleasant.

Yeah, that which does not kill you beats the crap out of you. :)

Actually I think the situation is more complex. I do entertain the notion of hormesis to some extent-- it makes biological sense (I studied bio) and I can see examples of it subjectively.

Hardship seems to do both harm and good. The good it does is in the realm of toughness-- it builds up your immune system so to speak.

I once lost about four years of work and almost $100k to a con man type, and I am now positively allergic to those character traits. (Glib, superficially charming, fast talker, seems to be able to "accelerate" things...) I can smell them a thousand miles away. Yet immunity can overreact, and heuristics are not perfect. It's taken me years to perfect that heuristic so as not to yield a lot of false positives.

Yet this immunity came at a cost. Immediately after this event I'd switched from being someone who admires others' achievement to someone who resents it, and it's taken me years to work my way to back to being a positive-sum thinker again.

It made me tougher, but it also made me more cynical and less open to new ideas. It makes you "wise," and after becoming wise I decided to set about trying to un-wisen myself so that I can dream again. Naivete is under-rated, wisdom over, and the ideal would be to try to take the good things from both sides of the divide.

So yeah, like most things in biology it is not simple. Biology is not a field of study for people who like absolutisms and totalistic models of things. It will disabuse you of those notions real fast if you study it with open eyes. Complex dynamical systems just don't work that way.

Re: What’s the Matter with Boston Tech?

#66

Post by hga »

mattl wrote: post #64
bcardarella wrote: post #18

Money. Unfortunately VCs and Angels in Boston have a very poor reputation for taking risk on startups. Instead they want to invest in companies that have already proven their model or just need money to scale. Public transportation. I know that every city dweller thinks their city has poor public transportation options. Let me tell you, Boston has you beat. When we take into consideration the perceived importance of…

Where in Somerville has no T access?

I'm pretty sure bcardarella is referring to subway access, in which case "almost all of it" applies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MBTA_Boston_subway_map.pn...

There's a whole lot of nice housing in walking distance to Davis Sq. (well, as of the '80s, but I don't gather that's changed), and there are some adjacent stations, but the vast bulk of Somerville is bus, car, bike, or (long) walk access to where you're likely to want to go.

Also, per Wikipedia:

"To settle a lawsuit with the Conservation Law Foundation to mitigate increased automobile emissions from the Big Dig, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts agreed to extend the Green Line north to Somerville and Medford, two suburbs currently under-served by the MBTA."

And per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Line_(MBTA)#Plans they're going to drive a spur of the Green Line straight through the middle of Somerville (and on to Medford). Someday. Hmmm, and this list of recent accidents makes me question the wisdom of riding on the Green Line: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Line_(MBTA)#Incidents_an... (which I did regularly for a couple of years without that sort of worry).

Re: What’s the Matter with Boston Tech?

#67

Post by geebee »

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #56
michaelochurch wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's about the fact that Real Technology requires some underlying Real Science, and engaging with/in Real Science requires research experience, which means time spent in the grad-school salt mines. I sort-of agree. I think that someone who wants to be a career scientist should go back and get a PhD-level education. That said, the opportunity cost (a million dollars at my age, and I'm only 31) is so severe that the so…

>You don't need a graduate school experience to target ads or be a financial quant Yeah, but targeted ads and financial quant-games don't actually constitute real innovation or advancement of... much anything. The fact that this sort of crap pays so very much better than doing actual research that genuinely advances mankind's fundamental capability to arrange the universe to our benefit is, to me at least, a low-leve…

> The fact that this sort of crap pays so very much better than doing actual research that genuinely advances mankind's fundamental capability to arrange the universe to our benefit is, to me at least, a low-level itch or irritant of moral indignation that I am unfortunately condemned to experience regularly due to growing up in the neoliberal era ;-).

I share your indignation, but I suspect the relative difference in pay might not bother you so much if Professors and other people doing this sort of research had easy access to the middle class. I grew up in the 70s in San Francisco, and two of my friends dads were professors at SF State, one in Physics, and one in Communications. The physics professor owned a 4bedroom house in the inner sunset. The communications professor lived in West Portal. They had kids raised a family largely on one income, kept the old station wagon running. They weren't rich, but it was not a big problem being a professor.

When that's the case, when someone who manages to get a PhD has a strong chance at a good position where he or she can do good research without massive time pressure, and you can buy something like a 4br house in a nice place and raise a family, then it's easy (well, easier) not to worry about who is living in the mansions in Pacific Heights. You might grouse a bit, but you in the end, the professors probably wouldn't trade places with them.

To me, the moral indignation comes from a number of things: 1) elite PhD programs in the sciences often have attrition rates of 50%, 2) it's difficult to get (and keep!) a good job even if you make it through 3) the pay often isn't sufficient to buy a house or raise a family even if you're a winner on winner on winner (got into an elite program, completed program, got a tenure track job at a decent university) 4) congress's response to this is to declare a shortage of PhDs.

Re: What’s the Matter with Boston Tech?

#68

Post by michaelochurch »

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #62
api wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's kinda like saying the problem is clouds, not rain. :)

Which means I'm succeeding in complaining about the cause rather than the effect, yes ;-).

The douchebags inequality connection goes both ways.

Extreme inequality produces douchebags because it enhances the importance of authority and favors promotion of those who'll uphold arbitrary authority (in order to enjoy a powerless but privileged status, hence the connection between the douchebag and what is sometimes called "white privilege") over those with actual talent.

That said, those douchebags are promoted for a reason, which is their usefulness as stewards of an unfair, failing society who'll keep the secrets of the shit running it. This keeps them in power and enhances social inequality.

Re: What’s the Matter with Boston Tech?

#69

Post by jkestner »

praccu wrote: post #47
smeyer wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I have heard the occasional horror story like year, but they seem to have things mostly under control. I haven't been eating there all that long, but word on the street is it's definitely better than back in the day. Definite second to all of your other suggestions as well. I'm glad to see HNers by and large seem to have good taste in Kendall area food joints.

Jumping (back) onto the Kendall food comment train: Other places I haven't seen mentioned: -- Squeaky Beaker -- Boca Grande -- Take-out from Similans Also, what happened to the MIT food court and when is it coming back? I want terrible Chinese food again.

The food court at the Kendall stop? That place has (had?) the best terrible Chinese food. Cheap warm student fodder with too much rice. The one in the student center had decent Indian food.

Oh, and how could I forget Helmand? So good! Afghani food is like a cross between Indian and Middle Eastern, judging by them.

Re: What’s the Matter with Boston Tech?

#70

Post by eli_gottlieb »

geebee wrote: post #67
eli_gottlieb wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You don't need a graduate school experience to target ads or be a financial quant Yeah, but targeted ads and financial quant-games don't actually constitute real innovation or advancement of... much anything. The fact that this sort of crap pays so very much better than doing actual research that genuinely advances mankind's fundamental capability to arrange the universe to our benefit is, to me at least, a low-leve…

> The fact that this sort of crap pays so very much better than doing actual research that genuinely advances mankind's fundamental capability to arrange the universe to our benefit is, to me at least, a low-level itch or irritant of moral indignation that I am unfortunately condemned to experience regularly due to growing up in the neoliberal era ;-). I share your indignation, but I suspect the relative difference i…

>I share your indignation, but I suspect the relative difference in pay might not bother you so much if Professors and other people doing this sort of research had easy access to the middle class.

Well yes, of course.

>To me, the moral indignation comes from a number of things: 1) elite PhD programs in the sciences often have attrition rates of 50%, 2) it's difficult to get (and keep!) a good job even if you make it through 3) the pay often isn't sufficient to buy a house or raise a family even if you're a winner on winner on winner (got into an elite program, completed program, got a tenure track job at a decent university) 4) congress's response to this is to declare a shortage of PhDs.

Yes, exactly. Professional science is often compared to a monastery, but the difference is that monasteries are not allowed to induct people then throw out the bottom 85% of monks when they've already been at their devotions for seven years.

Post reply on HN