Startups that launched today at Y Combinator’s W18 Demo Day
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
I think Voicery does itself a disservice by featuring a "pick the human voice versus pick our machine voice" demo quiz on their website. I got 100%, and it led me to emotionally response "they have failed", but in fact the voice sounded great.
A more useful demo would have been to hear a range of different voices and be able to put my own text in and hear it read back.
But it is not the point that a machine voice can be determined versus a human voice. The important question is "does the machine voice sound good enough".
Instead, their marketing approach has forced me to make a comparison in which my conclusion was that they tech "lost" in some sort of contest.
It seems some people are more sensitive than others to robot-sounding or robot-looking. I have a very hard time watching modern movies because most special effects completely ruin the experience for me; but other people seem to not mind at all.
I think if they could do three things (other than be in my jurisdiction which is currently complicated by laws) I would be an avid customer:
1) Make it taste pretty good with food
2) Make it fizzy
3) Make it not terrible for you (vs soda, juice, alcohol) so you could have a couple at the end of the day / with dinner to de-stress.
This sounds familiar ...
And though science is still hard, signals from the NSF, QB3, Berkeley, UCSF, MIT and Cornell all point towards a much different culture and kind of company than was to be found in Theranos.
Most recently, in particular:
- Bear Flag Robotics
- Macromoltek
- Culture Robotics
- AesculaTech
- Reverie Labs
- Ovipost
I can see all of these being positively impacted. I just hope they can capitalize off it in some fashion. Definitely follow these companies for a while.They're one of the best crypto asset exchanges around.
Crypto Racing League is excited to finish integration with them soon! http://cryptoracingleague.io/
It would be interesting to analyse the categories of startups that succeed and fail.
I wonder if this is really molecular innovation or does it result in derivative work from a machine learning algorithm pattern matching human successes.
Wondering what sort of coverage SafetyWing will do and their policy is way too long and opaque for me to make sense of. If they could have something that's like "You can go canyoneering/scuba diving/mountain biking" like WorldNomads does, and add to this "anywhere in the world with a subscription and we'll cover you for x$/month", I'd be sold. Even if it's the same price as WorldNomads in the end, just for the convenience.
Password contains invalid characters (^, {, >, ?, >, ;)
Something that should be addressed I think. Devil's in the detail and this makes me wonder how my data will be secured on your servers.[edit] well after sign up, it seems there's no way to get coverage and maybe the product isn't yet working. I guess this is really early days. =P
Sure about that? With no details at all on the website, I will believe this guy first, who in late 2015 estimated USD$400,000 worth of solar energy per acre of land from outdoor growing. https://youtu.be/ISAKc9gpGjw?t=13m26s https://youtu.be/ISAKc9gpGjw?t=21m17s
Switzerland eliminated the group markets, so everyone buys in the individual market even if they don’t have single payer.
Ah, there it is https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/20/these-are-the-64-startups-...
Supreme court has also ruled that opposing them because they are racist is also not racist.
> It has come to this. Called upon to explore the jurisprudential twilight zone between two errant lines of precedent, we confront a frighteningly bizarre question: Does the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment forbid what its text plainly requires? Needless to say (except that this case obliges us to say it), the question answers itself. “The Constitution proscribes government discrimination on the basis of race, and state-provided education is no exception.” Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U. S. 306, 349 (2003) (Scalia, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). It is precisely this understanding—the correct understanding—of the federal Equal Protection Clause that the people of the State of Michigan have adopted for their own fundamental law. By adopting it, they did not simultaneously offend it.
The law doesn't care if people with one set of genitals doesn't want to hang out with people of another set. What it is concerned about is if a given group has significant power to prevent another group from pursuing life, lib, and happiness.
Viewed from that angle, it becomes clear why antidiscrimination laws favoring AA in traditionally Cauc challenges are legal, but the reverse would not be true.
https://www.acacamps.org/resource-library/campline/single-ge...
Note that, for example, Hooters Rest. lost a discrimination case against males on the grounds that the hiring criteria was unfairly weighted (power applied) towards women (given their ostensible marketing strategy).
Viewed from that angle, it becomes clear why antidiscrimination laws favoring AA in traditionally Cauc challenges are legal
I'm not sure it's a good idea to enshrine the idea that "Cauc" have an inherent power over "AA" into law. This seems close to running afoul of Equal Protection.
Theranos but real?