In mathematics, orthogonality is the relation of two lines at right angles to one another (perpendicularity), and the generalization of this relation into n dimensions.
I believe it's possible YC has overextended themselves such that top AI companies - the most valuable companies in the future - are going to first try Gradient Ventures or more specialized funds, and it may cost them their future. I understand they want to be a destination for AI, but I have a tough time imagining it. Maybe when they opened the floodgates to 100+ per cohort was when their brand became "the best anything and everything of startups," and if a rich, connected AI veteran launched his own AI fund, I'd be more excited to knock on that door first, if not an AI fund from an org intimately tied to a top AI shop.
Well, I don't assume the Cartesian cogito or the rational, centered world of Logos. I just assume that consciousness is this thing that flipped on about 70,000 years ago, which brings its own rules or structures that impinges on any sense of reality, and we've basically been immersed in it since, with the fortunate even accidental side effect of being able to understand things in a way we might call 'rational.' I'm much more on the side of "It thinks, then I register it" than "I think". So I guess, similarly, I too approach the world with a sort of distance towards things, while taking certain things sincerely for the sake of utility and happiness, but while also seeing that our "self" (in the form it is) and consciousness are rooted in Real capital-R structures produced by nature, so it's not a post-modernist, everything is endlessly decentered/ no substantial basis, etc... there really is something there governing in specific ways... enough to build a principled world with its own, I guess, absurd form of 'centeredness'... it just requires a weird sort of dynamic stance towards things, chalk it up to the fundamental condition of being a homo sapiens in-consciousness.
I don't know why you're being downvoted, as your response is typically true of any A v. B discussion in philosophy, there's always grey lines. Rationalists can still claim categories of knowledge coming primarily, or even only, from sense experience, while also claiming other categories of knowledge that come from rationality alone.
Fwiw I subscribe to the anthropological view that human consciousness/ culture as we know it "turned on" about 70,000 years ago (this was introduced in my first anthropology textbook in college and is also the topic of the very popular "Sapiens"), and we've had a unique, if not structuralist, system of reflection and developing knowledge ever since; if I had to pick one, without doubt on the rationalist side.
It's also a problem that our culture is so damn obsessed with cars, which we have in part to thank the auto industry shoving itself down consumers throats, lobbying, and running into the dirt other viable modes of transportation for almost a century. I'd take sophisticated, public transportation and efficient inter regional lines any day over American Car Culture.
I just don't think you can lament the state of inter regional transportation in the US without talking about our country's very unique obsession and history with the auto industry.
I understand - I never claimed equivalence or even a comparison. I don't believe its wrong to acknowledge other parties also affected, especially when designing an ideally lasting and widely adopted solution.
Oh c'mon, it's a thread about solutions too, which was the focus of my original comment; I intended it to be "Thanks for a solution that is helpful to guys anxious about all of this," not a detailed discussion about the validity of those feelings or anxiety. If you insist on the latter,
This has nothing to do with "men forums," thanks. People I know working in tech actually think holding eye contact is harassment. I had a female coworker complain about the vibe of another coworker who was clearly attracted to her; just the vibe, imagine how that affected other coworkers when that got around? You're free to dismiss this sentiment, but it's still something on the mind of a large group of well meaning guys.
Again, enumerating detailed descriptions feels like a good solution for everyone.
Sorry but the rules aren't black and white like that, "Too much eye contact" "Your vibe get flirty" (or conversely "Your vibe gets weird") gets thrown in; it's anxiety inducing when you have to worry about anything that's natural or involuntary when in the presence of someone you're attracted to being policed as causing discomfort to someone. Hence enshrining detailed coordinates means you don't have to worry about that (presuming the list actually excludes such involuntary innocuous behavioral changes as extra eye contact).
I like it - the all or nothing approach is terrifying as a guy, and defining levels of inappropriateness with exact descriptions of actions is very helpful for those who are freaked out they are going to unwittingly harass someone they are attracted to even just acting naturally. I'm hopefully not belittling the recipients of undesired advances of VC assholes like McClure, but I hope it's also not wrong to say these scandals induce anxiety in a ton of well meaning lower level guys who get circled over as part of the problem, and thinking of a solution that considers this large segment of guys is nice to hear.
It's really just bothersome in as much as the accusations cross into involuntary territory when in the presence of someone you are attracted to. Lingering eye contact, vibe change, getting in a cheery mood that makes you want to crack a joke (light flirting), is involuntary for most around people they are attracted to. It has nothing in common with overtly hitting on someone, yet such involuntary responses do sometimes get policed in the same way. I could see someone leveling against a man, "Your vibe changes when a pretty girl walks in." or "You make extra eye contact with her." and I have to wonder if people are indeed mixing those types of claims with the serious ones when they call out figures like Chris Sacca or McClure. If so, there should probably be a discussion...
Give us a break, it's not a huge no-no. One of the most lasting TV series of all time was based entirely on co-worker romances (The Office). I know multiple girls and guys who met their SOs as coworkers.
You may think it's lame (I do too fwiw), but it's still clearly acceptable almost everywhere, so I don't appreciate your gatekeeping.
I think it's because he wanted to pepper in details like "It was over drinks and I thought it was social", aka actually defend his actions while renouncing them on the surface. The "upcoming discussions" with 500 associates reads like he's looking to get back onboard.
No point in talking about China from the lens of traditional communism. China is an authoritarian capitalist country, 'capitalism with Asian values' as is said with Singapore arguably the architect, so being upset about Chinese communists being invited into the country because they are communist is kind of absurd. Not wanting them in the country because they support an oppressive, racist government with more state executions than every other country in the world combined, if they do in fact actually support it, is a legitimate reason to be bothered. Anecdotally living abroad, the Chinese are deeply racist and nationalist, as are all the main East Asian countries really, even younger generations to my surprise, but immigration obviously adversely selects, and even if then, you're quickly going to lose those those views when you move to a new land as a worker.
> be confident enough to start purging negative people
Except at 18 it's often your own raging insecurities that instantly label people as bad. More so, the main thing to tell my 18 year old self would be to just relax and open up around people who knee-jerk make you feel insecure - athletic, good looking people, really smart over-confident people, attractive women, etc. I put up all sorts of defenses when I was younger, and I paid for it, even now moving into my 30s. It's obvious now I could have easily befriended these people, or dated others, if I had just relaxed and kept my wits about me.
Uber being more mainstream has nothing to do with quality comparison.
Even so, tell me again which is actually the crappy toilet paper in this comparison...
I use Lyft primarily because of the grossly offensive scandals surrounding Uber, I'm talking even from the early days when execs were caught bragging about threatening journalists, to sex abuse, to lying to everyone about their 6 blown red lights in a single week during self driving AI testing in SF. The services do the same thing, almost exactly; Uber's track record might as well be the deciding factor.
You're excluding brand dilution as a function of class size. Knowing you are going to be one of 100+ companies going through the program each semester makes you less enthusiastic to join if you already have a very promising or successful company, and it makes it harder for VCs to determine signal; "It's from YC" stops being good enough.
A big reason for the class size explosion is almost certainly for network effects, a fleet of ready customers who support YC and drive growth out of the gates.
It creates the space for another brilliant investor to launch a rival YC that caters to a small size of elite founders. Isn't that almost inevitable?
? There's a difference between explaining something complex to a layman and explaining something complex in simple terms. You can always do the latter, and if you can't you don't understand the topic; this is a different exercise than trying to fit a topic into someone else's horizon of understanding, which may be thousands of simple building blocks behind.
At least the proposal allows for full apartment rental any x months of the year, it's just you can't be an AirBnB landlord and snap up a bunch of units you don't live in.
Still true to the spirit of AirBnB without housing market externalities. Sounds like an ideal model for cities.
Bootcamp marketing methinks? I have never met a recent bootcamp grad who seemed even remotely qualified to work at Google as a SWE. Just don't buy it (keep in mind none of them had CS degrees or worked in industry before). I'd love to be proven wrong, in a verifiable way.
> Instead, each word should have a vector based on context, for disambiguation and nuance.
You do realize even under vanilla Word2vec, each word embedding is a sum of both the word vector and a vector of a surrounding window of words? Each embedding results from maximizing the likelihood of a small surrounding context given the word. Thus, context is factored in.
I think Github is a tremendous resource, but while Github profiles can give a positive signal, they are not sufficient for negative filtering.
Many, especially older developers it seems, only begrudgingly have a profile for tickbox judgments encountered during job seeking. The best developer I ever worked with just didn't care about bothering with a Github profile, and the worst guy I ever interviewed had an expansive profile, including a repo with 80+ stars that was trivial and terribly coded, and our team's conclusion was that he got his bootcamp associates to star it.
At the end of the day it's a private company seeking a profit, and it's a little ridiculous that it's become defacto mandatory for proving you are a good developer, in the same (somewhat annoying and unfortunate) way that FaceBook has become defacto mandatory for proving you lead a social life.
To be clear, this is what happens when your commissioner lets one of the league's top 3 superstars join an already 73 win historic team, even after that superstar took the 73 win team to 7 games in the conference finals right before. It's the most "piled on" team in NBA history, not even by a little.
Last year had 2 of the best series I've ever seen in the NBA (the WCF and the finals), this year there's nothing particularly exciting watching the Warriors play, it was all inevitable, and it just feels a little dirty.
It also feels even more dirty that the commissioner pretends like there is parity in the league, and even the officiating last night where they re-assigned technical fouls to prevent having to throw out a Golden State star (never, ever seen something like that, and as Jeff Van Gundy said right in the broadcast, "This is an absolutely terrible look for the NBA").
Seeing as people I know who don't even know or care much about Silicon Valley talk about Elizabeth Holmes like she's the next Jeff Skilling (something about Houston I guess), it seems, at the minimum, highly likely, given lawsuits, severed ties, total collapse, etc. that she trafficked in fraud. You're welcome to push PR on me, but you're fighting common sense, for better or worse.
Well yes, - they don't publish, they don't have a reputation (no teams like FAIR, DeepMind, MetaMind, MSFT AI, etc.), they don't attract the top AI talent, and anecdotally, they don't even even know how to hire for AI (had a brilliant colleague working in AI turned away because he didn't know some facets about the Python language when they hit him with Leetcode whiteboard questions; IMO they aren't in a position with AI where they get to flex programmer egos).
Well, my professional experience has been completely different, maybe hardcore research in images is different. At any rate isn't TF already the Rails/ magical framework of DL, in some sense?
Interesting to see that the Google Brain Residency isn't that much more advanced than other graduate work or fellowship programs out there.
I disagree with him about needing a "Rails for deep learning," I think it's quite fine now in practice, especially since DL code is typically significantly less than a web app. A file for data pipeline, a file for your model, and a file for training and/or inference. Not sure it really needs to be much more complicated than that.
IMO YC depends on its branding as the exclusive, "Harvard of incubators," and if they keep funding so many startups they are going to lose that edge and create the space for a new YC.
Each class is like 130 startups now, right? I keep seeing startups that duplicate other existing YC startups. I just imagine as an investor you have to be thinking "Ok, now there are 2 or 3 or 4 times as many startups as 3 years ago being pitched to me that are going to fail."