gull

The most valuable idea you can work on, and the one most likely to succeed, is one you are scared of. An idea you won't admit to yourself.

So one approach to finding that idea is to try hard to not come up with an idea. Make that a goal and you may notice that ideas start flowing in that way. Individually, write down these urges, and focus on summoning the courage to face them.

But more reliable than betrayer's judgement who never saw it coming.

And what happens if one combines that data with other data?

I deal with it with an old trick.

(1) Backing away. Pushing through stressed produces inferior results.

(2) Using a different constraint. That's the real trick.

Only I can't make myself pick the right constraint from the get go if I'm feeling stressed, so I stay stuck in a loop. I need to back away for the subconscious to reveal the right constraint.

It's as if I have to give up first. It seems it's only then I finally let myself attempt a solution I haven't tried before.

So ironically the way to deal with the stress of getting stuck and having deadlines is to manage to reach the point where, after trying everything, you sincerely no longer give a damn.

A big takeaway:

  Everyone who gives up a serious childhood dream — of
  becoming an artist, a doctor, an engineer, an athlete —
  lives the rest of their life with a sense of loss, with
  nagging what ifs.

Isn't the issue the exercise price instead of the time window?

Wouldn't it be more effective to keep the time window to 90 days and have the exercise price be under $1 in total?

What I think I want to have deleted after a period of time is the connection between username and comment. I may still want to see the comment, but I don't want it connected with my username.

Like conversations in real life. It's one of the advantages of forgetting who you heard something from.

> in some misguided attempt to reclaim privacy that never existed in the first place

From the Guidelines: "Don't say things you wouldn't say in a face-to-face conversation."

With a face-to-face conversation you have better privacy after the conversation is over than you do on HN. I would prefer a forum that offers this privacy. I'm ready to join one.

Can you imagine any downside to remembering all the material you try to learn?

Do you plan on giving an encrypted filesystem?

I may use this if it supports built-in encryption. Are encryption keys saved on the client or are they saved on your servers?

Because it's only then you permit yourself to not do what you think you are supposed to do.

Similar to how what people truly want to do is often written LAST in their list. After subconscious pressure is gone.

Which is more valuable:

1. Receiving email replies fast.

2. Receiving the work you are paying for finished fast.

I'm curious about this. Does something like wxWidgets offer all widgets that are available in an OS?

Does it offer the files listing widget the Mac has in that fourth mode, where flipping between files shows on top an extra area that feels like flipping between music CDs?

I guess the point is, what do you do with widgets available in one OS that aren't available in another? Should UI libraries keep up?

It's ok to say no.

Just as it's important to be agreeable under uncertainty, it's important to say no under certainty.

"No, sorry, it doesn't make sense to start sniffing the wire protocol and checking the OS/hardware before testing the application logic first."

Learning to write embarrassingly clearly.

Don't ignore your feelings. You should get pissed, and also understand the forces at play.

Not everyone you work with will have an equal or greater work ethic as yours. The harder you work, and the better you become at your work, the more apparent it will become development in many companies is less than ideal.

And that's ok. You'll be happier if you understand that.

You went on to dig deeper as a result of getting annoyed, which people who blindly succumb may not have done, and may lead to changes.

But please, stay focused on the bug, not the person. Address the process, not the person. The process is a stronger force.

One of the most effective ways to handle cases like this is to face the problem directly. In your case it may have been to send an email, containing only one sentence and nothing else (so there are no distractions) that says "I believe the problem is with scopes in compute_since_how_long -- can you please test this function?"

How did you choose to work on this idea?

Peter Thiel's opinion: computers complement humans, not compete with them.

And also, that knowing the traits doesn't mean you can change yourself to adopt them fast enough or at all.

If I followed this correctly, the gap is between talking and doing, not between reading and doing. Reading is not the problem.

I liked you have the guts to make this public.

I'd suggest you read the How To Apply guide, particularly the section on Matter of Fact answers: http://www.ycombinator.com/howtoapply/#matteroffact

I have trouble understanding what you plan on making by reading your answer to the first question. Write web software that records benefits? Make phone calls to insurance companies to figure out the best plans?

If the answer is you'll make a web-based payment system that aggregates and automatically invests premiums, I would put that in the first or second sentence.

Is there any way this be done systematically with software?

Before doing anything, do you want to sell the company?

Read this: http://paulgraham.com/corpdev.html

Good question.

Design by consensus generally produces inferior results. The first version of the most noteworthy innovations are often the result of a single person's effort. But it's also evident big projects are the results of teams. You can't produce something big without a team.

So what makes me uncomfortable is that I don't see one of the inventors of Go having produced a rough version one before pulling other people in (but to be fair, I simply don't know).

I'm more suspicious about the first Go program. Was computing a prime sieve the number one problem the Go creators had? Doubtful. When C was being written, the authors were also writing an application they deeply needed: UNIX.

Finally, the thought of making something "serious" spoils the general hack flavor of innovative solutions. It's like a beacon that ideas are about to start being policed, which sounds like the opposite effect consensus intends to produce. It may be a good idea to keep a project non-serious as long as possible instead of optimizing it prematurely.

A separate issue - I never know exactly what people mean when they say this:

"Diverse teams are more innovative and adaptable than monocultures."

Although Go is more popular than ever, I'm not sure the following observations are good signs. Something about them makes me uncomfortable.

"The decision process was consensus driven."

"The first Go program was the prime sieve."

"In July 2008, the project became more serious."

Indexing speeds up a data store. If an extra layer that builds an index was added to git, or was build on top of git, that would make git queries faster.

This changes the question. Could one build an index for git? Why doesn't git have an index already?

> It's hell getting into Ivy League universities for middle class people.

Corollary: On the Internet no one knows you are a dog.

> Merit's not a part of it.

If you are good enough to build something people want, skip VCs and get paid directly from users.

Attempt the impossible, often.