Startup School: Every Company That Applied Is Now Accepted - <AUTHOR> https://blog.ycombinator.com/startup-school-every-company-that-applied-is-now-accepted/ <comment><USER2> Man, credit where credit is due, this showed a lot of integrity. There was one good solution, it was just a painful one, yet they still did it. Well done YCombinator!

P.S. They make the point that this is an experiment, and I think all of us who join should prove that it is a good one. Nobody rails against applications and qualifying scores like HN peeps (check the comments of any article, ever, about SAT/GMAT/GRE scores for evidence). And since YC choose to go the universal route, standing strong to the HN ethos, I think we can prove that decisions like this do work for the best by being focused, engaged, and building some kickass tech companies.

<comment><USER3> I disagree. They didn't do anything except open up the grant application part to everyone (no cost to them) and promise everybody that they would get some credits (probably no cost to them). The course was always able to be audited.

What this really does is make clear the desire of the people at ycombinator to open their pre screening program (which is what startup school is, essentially) to more startups. The value to them is clear - they now get more companies that have an initial touchpoint with ycombinator, and they can maybe make money off them or whatever. But they don't have to scale the thing that was most useful about startup school - that is, the advisors and small groups. For ycombinator this actually is a win win - they can now phase out advisors next round if this is a success and then the course would be very simple to run (and mostly free to create!).

The value that they were really providing (advisors, small groups) doesn't scale for a free program, and with this new method of acceptance they aren't offering that value to the newly "accepted" startups. For me personally, If I wanted to independently learn the things they teach in startup school, I already had the ability to watch last years lectures and read last years course material.

If there are credits, that will be valuable I suppose. But, again, I want to emphasize that ycombinator isn't giving startups anything of real value here that it wasn't already giving away (except, I guess, the ability to save face if you had already excitedly told friends that you were in this program).

<comment><USER4> Hi, I was involved in the decision to open Startup School to all applicants and am the developer primarily responsible for writing the software we'll need to make this scale. We're all planning on working overtime for the next 12 weeks as we prepare for and go through the course. Although we don't have the resources to assign an advisor to every group, we do want to provide human attention to every single company we've accepted.

In general, we're committed to making Startup School an excellent experience for all 15,000 of the companies that applied. This is going to be a great deal of effort for all involved, but it's a point we wanted to get to anyway (even though the timing and communication that lead to this decision was a terrible mistake that we're still really sorry for).

<comment><USER5> Thanks for your time and commitment. I'm not even an applicant, but it is still quite an admirable thing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Unpopular opinion here.

The value of startupschool (as a previous graduate) is the individual attention we got from a hand selected instructor.

I know yc screwed up with the emails, and their response was to please those that they have misled, accidentally of course. But I think they also devalued the class. It's gonna be much harder to offer the quality attention of the past.

I think the right thing they should have done, which is harder, was for yc to apologize for their mistake and move on. I know it sucked for those who were selected then deselected, but if you are a startup owner you need to be prepared to be rejected, cause someone will reject you.

I don't know what criteria startupschool goes through to select a company, but I think they must have seen something unique in those four thousands.

I do congratulate them for this decision still because obviously the influx of students is gonna be a great challenge to surmount.

<comment><USER7> I personally think that they've rectified this in a smart way by introducing 2 tracks: the advisor track and a normal one (this is just a guess since I received mail saying I've been accepted to the 'advisor track').

So YC is giving forum access to all the companies that applied but advisor access only to a subset of all the companies that applied. Is that correct?

<comment><USER8> I don't know. The fair way to handles this would have been to first honour the original deal. They have already put people through the application process and the were going to reject them if this hadn't happened. Instead of "accepting everyone" they should have rejected the ones original being rejected and then asked them forgiveness and confidence in this additional track. Now they have left a lot of people in the awkward position of doubt if they want to do it but without an easy way to say no.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> As someone who was critical at first of the way the situation was handled, I have to say that YC has been exemplary in their followup.

The response from all of the YC folks in the threads was respectful and empathetic, and didn't try to make excuses or shift the blame. They just took the heat and acted with honor.

I think we've just learned our first lesson from Startup School: how to handle a bad situation with grace, and recover well.

<comment><USER10> I am with you. I was really upset as I called my young cofounder to tell her we were in. I felt she needs this way more then me and when I got a reject letter it was a huge letdown.

Anyhow, they offered good save, it will not be easy for them, and they came up with that quickly, before this blew up more.

I think they handled this way better then many CEO's handle their company firedrills.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I hope somebody runs the data in the future to see if there was a statistical difference in outcomes between the companies intended to be accepted vs. not :-)

<comment><USER12> That is a good idea! We conducted an inadvertent A/B test :)

<comment><USER13> Is there any chance you can blind yourselves to any extent? Or does everyone involved already know too much about which companies were initially accepted?

<comment><USER14> _any chance you can blind yourselves_

I wouldn't worry too much about that angle, personally.

The human mind can follow a community of about 150. This is two orders of magnitude larger.

I think they will be lucky if they can even remember names of folks they are dealing with.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Hi everyone! I went through SS last year, and I was going to email them suggesting this exact solution.

Know that trying to decide 1000 out of 15000 startups is incredibly challenging, especially given the fact that the application asks for very little data. So don't ever think you weren't meant for this, because it is a school program and everyone has the potential to dominate. This isn't a zero sum game.

As for startup school, there are two critical things: being accountable and having a support network. Everyone will get those things which is great. I'm not trivializing the role advisors play, but YC noted that everyone will get access to advisors in the forums. Some startups will find them a useful resource for specific problems, but you don't necessarily need them every single week; indeed some startups waived their five minutes some weeks.

Congratulations! Now let's get to work! :D

<comment><USER16> Do they really call it SS? Not to summon Godwin here but historically that wasn't a great organization to be in…

<comment><USER17> I haven't heard anyone call it that.

<comment><USER16> Parent comment says it.

<comment><USER17> Of course, but I meant 'heard' literally.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I can't stay mad at y'all after this response.

I am looking forward to making your application reviewer peeps feel silly after this is all over though. Team 2nd chance has a lot to prove, and I think many of us do really appreciate YC's new commitment to supporting ALL founders at this point, even if it took a mistake to get there.

<comment><USER19> I was the application reviewer and I look forward to feeling silly :) But really, one of the things I've been thinking about for a long time is how YC can help every startup in the world. We're still not there yet but this pushed us some steps closer.

<comment><USER18> This is a big move in that direction then.

To me, the biggest thing this announcement signaled is that YC is getting serious about inclusion. As someone from the "wrong" part of the country for technology, I struggle immensely to not feel resentful towards founders and VCs who give preference candidates from their social class, their university, their geographical region.

The whole culture of "founding" and "connections" in general is like nothing I ever had experienced growing up. My parents didn't just "know" lawyers, investors, doctors, researchers, technical experts, we knew teachers and mechanics and middle managers. They barely knew what startups were. How could I have competitively prepared myself for this path when it was essentially invisible to me until I was an adult?

Now I have a CS degree and have proven myself at one of the most intense technical corporations, but I'll still never be as convincing as the person who had parents that encouraged them to apply to Stanford and got admitted, or the person who's family "connections" landed them the opportunity for an investment at a younger age. Or the person who could actually afford to not work part-time or over summers and could do their own projects then and build a portfolio.

The Startup School was supposedly a chance for YC to expand their reach to include people all over the world, but I wonder if the same exact biases around social-class, university, and geographic area were key to the selection of the preferred class.

Regardless, this is indeed huge step forward and on that improves my perspective on YC and tech investment culture in general.

<comment><USER20> You will still have to attract VCs at some point. I would recommend you leave the baggage behind when you do.

I hear what you are saying, but someone who wants to build their own custom car garage would complain that he didn't grow up around mechanics.

It's relative, and honestly you know nothing about those people who supposedly 'got a head start', when it comes to their health, their personal relationships, or even who they are as people.

Furthermore if you really want to play that game, why not compare yourself to someone from Syria, or Africa and compare 'unfair advantages' then.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> For anyone who hasn't seen the previous thread where this all played out, it's [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17804371](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17804371).

<comment><USER21> Thank you for sharing the link.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Startup School Battle Royale. Love it.

Way to handle a really messy, potentially embarrassing situation. I feel for all of the founders that broke good news and then had to break bad. 10x more painful than just saying 'oh well' and moving on. I wouldn't be surprised if this becomes one of the best mistakes YC has ever made.

</comment><comment><USER23> I got a rejected email first and then I got the accepted email with an apology. So I am assuming I was among the originally accepted startups, now since everyone is going to be accepted, the originally accepted startups will have a disadvantage and will we still get an advisor? The thing to rejoice is being accepted out of a pool of competition but now since everyone is accepted, its just something usual.

<comment><USER7> Does your email say you're accepted to the advisor track? That's how you know if you will be a part of a group that gets an advisor.

<comment><USER23> Yes, it says I am in the advisor track but now since everyone is in the advisor track, I am expecting it to change?

<comment><USER7> Not everyone is in the advisor track. About 4000 out of the 15000 are in it—is what some of the comments are saying.

The applicants that were initially erroneously accepted and then rejected are in something like an audit track, except they will have access to the forums and will stand a chance to compete for the $10k (I think).

Hope that clears your doubt. Congrats!

Are you a founder based in India? (just taking a wild guess from your username and time zone activity, asking because I'm from Mumbai, got accepted to the advisor track and would love to connect with my peers from Startup School as well!)

<comment><USER24> Founder from India, got accepted into the advisor track. Hit me up.

<comment><USER7> Your bio doesn't have any contact info. I've updated mine to include my email address.

<comment><USER25> Hi guys!

I'm also a founder from advisor track and from India. You can ping me at mail (at) Khandagale dot com

<comment><USER26> I didn't apply and I've not been selected because I was moving but I would love to connect with everyone here.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Wow! Thanks to YC for this opportunity. The valley is in no way perfect but its these sort of moments that make you excited to be in technology. I'm sure one of the companies that did not make it initially will earn the $10,000 credit.

</comment><comment><USER28> How can we volunteer to advise groups who didn't get an existing advisor?

<comment><USER7> Interesting question. Now that the forum is going to be open to all applicants, I guess you (and others like you) can post some information about yourself and how you can help what kind of startups and how many. And then startups can choose whether they'd like you and / or can get you to be their advisor.

<comment><USER28> I don't believe I have access to the forum - I think you had to apply to startup school... which is why I'm asking YC if they have a plan here for this!

<comment><USER7> Yeah, it didn't occur to me that you weren't an applicant, sorry. Sounds like something YC or Startup School applicants could do something about.

Although, realistically speaking, YC may not have anything to gain from connecting the rest of the students to outside advisors, keeping in mind that this would require some effort.

This may be something the students will have to do themselves, using the forum as a place to coordinate.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I really like this response, I would totally understand if they sent up follows ups "we're _really_ sorry...", but this seems like a really neat response.

I'd be really interested if at the end of the cycle they published the success stats vs. their original invitee success stats. I would _expect_ a lower overall success result - I'm sure there are startups that would never work ("our business model is to just directly give our VC money to our users and profit on scale") they would be denied, but it would be curious _how_ the stats diverged.

e.g. comparing overall performance when controlling for gender, race, religion, field, etc

<comment><USER30> Hey! Our business model involves just directly giving money to our users. =)

<comment><USER29> Oof, that seems like a challenge.

I'm not sold on basic income, I think a solid welfare system would in effect be "basic income" for low/no income people, but By essentially having a tapering payout as the recipients earnings increase you resolve a number of issues BI produces.

I do think it's an interesting idea to have essentially a private fund do a real world experiment, I'm just not sure of the long term feasibility. The problem you have is that the addition of a basic income does not result in any increase in the funds available to you. For a government back system, BI theoretically should result in an over all increase in tax revenue that can then fund said BI, while also reducing the amount spent on poverty related disease, illness, crime, etc. (to be clear I'm not saying poor people are criminals, just that some crime is a result of poverty - theft of food, "crimes" like prostitution, etc).

Anyway, good luck to you fine folk!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I got the rejection email first then acceptance email. Regardless of those emails, I am actually happier now cause everyone is getting in so that this startup community is bigger.

I think it's hard to decide which companies can be in, but I know everyone is working so hard for their startup. So, everyone being accepted is the best outcome I want to see. Good job YC! Looking forward to exchanging ideas and getting advice from everyone!

</comment><comment><USER32> Do all 15,000 still get AWS / Digital Ocean credits? Or is that only reserved for the 100 selected companies?

<comment><USER12> We're working hard to renegotiate the credits with the companies offering them. We'll definitely be able to offer some credits to all 15,000 companies but we're not sure exactly which ones yet.

<comment><USER32> Thank you! I was one of the ones who got the second email, and I really appreciate the integrity YC has shown. Lot of respect for you all.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> We have a slack group of people who previously didn't get in but are now in, feel free to join: [https://join.slack.com/t/startupschool- rejects/shared_invite...](https://join.slack.com/t/startupschool- rejects/shared_invite/enQtNDE5NTM5ODUxNjY1LTIxOGNhMDA3NGI0NjdlNjU5MWU1MWYxYjc5OTNmN2RjMDRmNmIwM2EyYmU3NjllZGZhOWE0ZWEyZDA1Y2Q3MDg)

<comment><USER33> (I.e those who got accepted, then rejected, and are now accepted again. I.e, Team 2nd chance!)

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Gutsy moves starting YC & offering SS to begin with.

Public stumble today—it happens.

Gutsy recovery.

Thanks.

Now it's up to all of us to make the most of it and make it _more_ than it would have been.

</comment><comment><USER35> Nice save, well done.

Understand that the advisors won't be able to give personal feedback, but I am happy to be discussing ideas / issues / feedback with other peers.

<comment><USER36> Excited to chat with you there as a fellow peer!

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> As someone that is now in the Team 2nd Chance, this has been a fun emotional rollercoaster.

Two great lessons can be taken from this experience, first for those that got accepted, then rejected then accepted; dealing with rejection is an essential part of a startup or any business, shit happens and is how to deal with it that makes or breaks companies.

Second, YC just thought a masterclass on how to handle mistakes and how to fail forward. A mistake turned into an opportunity for them and the 11,000 people that got rejected.

Looking forward to be learning side by side with y'all!

<comment><USER38> There's another lesson in this as well: There's still a group of people who aren't in this class... the people who didn't even apply in the first place. How many people were either too lazy to fill out the application, or thought "we won't get in, why bother", etc, who arguably would now be benefiting from this had they applied?

To me this is a good example of how, while you can't _literally_ "make your own luck", you can make decisions that put you in a position to benefit from fortuitous events. (For the same of argument, let's assume that getting in to SS, even as one of the 15,000+ is still beneficial).

"You have to enter to win" as they say.

<comment><USER39> or alternatively, thought that the value to be gained from this was lower that the next best use of their time?

10 grands at best, no mentoring - a consulting gig is worth more in money and experience.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> A bold and compassionate solution, that only YC would have the guts and integrity to do. Well done.

<comment><USER12> Thank you so much! I was feeling terrible earlier today and your comment really helped.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Is there a way for companies to tell if they are on the Advisory Track, besides the emails?

That's totally OK, mistakes happen, but I'm not sure what the emails say. If startupschool.org perhaps had the final status (advisory track or not), that would be super helpful.

</comment><comment><USER42> Very exciting stuff. I hope this experiment is successful and it paves a way towards a completely open model. It seems only logical that any startup should be able to enter the arena and fail or succeed on their actual merit itself, and not some kind of proxy or guess.

This really does seem like one of those magical "listen to your users" moments in a startup's life. Startup School teaching by example and practicing what it preaches.

</comment><comment><USER43> I was so happy seeing the email of me being accepted to Startup School, but then I saw another email about it being an error, I am a bit sad, but then after reading I'm feeling happy again, than you to YC for giving us an opportunity.

<comment><USER44> I went to bed after the false acceptance email and had a beautiful sleep! Woke to the kinda bad news and then the acceptance but no advisor email. What a roller coaster!

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> I feel like that one of the spirit of YC is try something new, well done. I still have a question, can I join the class on Tuesdays? I mean be a live audience. We're willing to give up $10k, and ask no questions in the class.

<comment><USER4> There will be an application process open to all SS participants for the in- person class (unfortunately our room has limited seating). We hope that everyone who wants to will be able to attend at least one lecture in person!

<comment><USER46> That's exciting to hear! I filled out the class attendance application attached to the mistaken acceptance email before the correction was sent -- is that the form you are referring to or will there be a new one?

<comment><USER4> That form works fine! We're keeping track of all the form responses from both the old and new emails we sent out, so your application made it in.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> This is great! I may honestly be even more motivated now to prove YC wrong for initially declining me :-)

<comment><USER48> Be careful -- If it turns out that those rejected end up with the $10k, YC might start making it a policy of rejecting companies and accepting them on their second application :P

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> A great way to save the situation. And the resulting community created by 15k startups might lead to interesting directions and developments. I'm looking forward to participating and meeting our peers out there.

<comment><USER12> I totally agree! I am very excited to see how the community evolves.

<comment><USER50> This is going to be really, really interesting run! Super pumped!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Nice. Understand this is going to stress the infrastructure pretty severely, but it seems like both A. the right thing to do, and B. an interesting experiment / learning opportunity.

Looking forward to the class.

</comment><comment><USER51> I've just been catching up on mails at like 2.30am and I also received the initial acceptance and then the decline. I must admit that I didn't take the rejection as personally as some might have. This is a norm in startup life. Whilst I am thankful that everyone was accepted into the program, what would have been of great value to me was understanding why I wasn't accepted, learning from that feedback and applying again. Given the amount of competition in the tech space its nice to know what your shortcomings are. I think perhaps in the next batch there could be some scoring criteria perhaps. I assume that if X amount of people are shortlisted there was some sort of acceptance criteria and someone experienced rated your pitch anyway ? Big up to y combinator for owning up to the mistake made. Many other organizations would have just moved on.

</comment><comment><USER52> 15,000, huh? That's a _lot_ more than I expected.

How many had you originally accepted? (And thus, how many have advisors?)

<comment><USER53> We had originally accepted about 4000 - although our goal has always been to make our MOOC as much about "open" as we possibly can. Our own misstep has caused us to accelerate things.

<comment><USER54> Could you explain what happened more?

4,000 companies were accepted but 11,000 received acceptance emails?

<comment><USER17> Yes, and the 4,000 received rejections. It was a big boolean fuckup.

<comment><USER55> Cornell University did a similar thing one year, needless to say, they did not resolve it the same way.

<comment><USER56> While Cornell was the first big example in 2003, it's been done many times since:

[http://time.com/3637980/college-admissions-mistakes- johnshop...](http://time.com/3637980/college-admissions-mistakes- johnshopkins/)

It actually happens dozens of times per year on a one-off basis, usually with college coaches telling recruits they've been accepted when the admissions office has only provisionally accepted them.

<comment><USER57> SUNY Buffalo seems to have held the previous record of 5109. [https://www.cnn.com/2016/04/18/us/us-university-buffalo- acce...](https://www.cnn.com/2016/04/18/us/us-university-buffalo-acceptance- letters/index.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER58> 1\. Is it possible to find out why a startup was (initially) placed in the audit track?

2\. Does this mean all startups will get access to benefits such as DO, AWS? And the chance to win $10k?

Rollercoaster of emotions, but thanks to the YC team for handling this well!

<comment><USER12> Yep, everyone will be eligible for the $10K equity free grant (on an equal playing field).

We're talking to our partner companies and working hard on securing access to credits for all 15,000 companies. You'll definitely get a lot of credits and we're going to make it as close to the original list as we can.

</comment></comment><comment><USER59> Thanks for the second chance. Will be cool to be able to connect with other founders and access the private community forum.

</comment><comment><USER60> For Russian speaking attendees, we made Telegram channel. Please join if you want to share your progress and enthusiasm: [https://t.me/joinchat/ATOCuBDWgp3s7S7y7rOQrw](https://t.me/joinchat/ATOCuBDWgp3s7S7y7rOQrw)

RUS: Мы создали канал в Телеграме для общения и обмена опытом среди русскоязычных слушателей курса. Добавляйтесь и приглашайте своих друзей [https://t.me/joinchat/ATOCuBDWgp3s7S7y7rOQrw](https://t.me/joinchat/ATOCuBDWgp3s7S7y7rOQrw)

<comment><USER61> this link isn't working, maybe there is some typo in the id?

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> I thought what happened earlier was pretty shitty - this is 100% the right action to take and totally above & beyond. Congratulations to all startups who applied and get to move forward!

</comment><comment><USER33> This is fantastic. It would be great if there could be a way for teams to 'level up' and get access to an advisor + the AWS / Stripe credits. Is that possible @yc ?

<comment><USER63> We have a limited number of advisors but YC partners/staff will be on the forum to help out in any way we can.

<comment><USER33> As some of the 'accepted' companies with advisors quit / drop out and spots open up, could those spots be filled with promising companies who don't have advisors?

<comment><USER63> That's a great idea. We'll definitely consider that.

<comment><USER33> Awesome, thanks :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER64> Aren't the partners that provided exclusive discounts going to be upset about this? Seems to be fueling the extreme frugal ideology that hosting is an entitlement and free. Reminders me of tee-ball everybody gets a participation trophy, yet in the real world of business it does not work like that.

> EXCLUSIVE DEALS Cut startup costs and get discounts from the best in the > business (Stripe, Digital Ocean, Amazon Web Services, and more).

<comment><USER17> Presumably the benefit they get from providing discounts to 4k companies will apply as much or more with 15k? It remains to be seen if they'll go for it, but people here are going to try.

The participation trophy analogy doesn't really hold because being open to all startups was what the original planners of Startup School (including pg, Sam, and others) really wanted to do. This forced things back in that direction, which hopefully we'll all be grateful for in the end.

</comment></comment><comment><USER65> I wish I applied :(, any chance for me to get all the course materials?

<comment><USER17> Yes: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17806627](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17806627)

<comment><USER66> Is there a mail list or something to get notifications when it's ready?

Would love to see this. Seen many of the [https://startupclass.samaltman.com](https://startupclass.samaltman.com) videos

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER67> [https://imgflip.com/i/2g9y7k](https://imgflip.com/i/2g9y7k)

<comment><USER68> Yesssss.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I received a rejection mail at 02:15am IST and then an acceptance mail (saying I should've received it in the first place) around 2 hours later for the 'advisor track'.

Making me wonder how many tracks are there? And what's the difference between them? There seems to be no mention about the track in this blog post.

</comment><comment><USER69> Hey guys - this is awesome and compassionate; thank you

<comment><USER63> Thank you for giving us another chance. We're truly sorry for all the trouble this caused.

<comment><USER54> I truly think that YC is going to be surprised by the entrepreneurs in this group.

<comment><USER70> The Un-Snappening has occurred

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER71> "FUCK IT! WE'LL DO IT LIVE!" In all seriousness, great decision. Well done YC.

</comment><comment><USER72> Classic "It's not a bug, it's a feature" scenario :) Amazing move, SS!

</comment><comment><USER73> Dang this is really cool! This is an act of faith on YC's part - they believe in us. If nothing else, I think this is a great culture-shaping move that should help bring what makes Silicon Valley special out into the rest of the world.

</comment><comment><USER74> I initially received the rejection letter, to be followed with the letter of acceptance. Good to know that the letter of acceptance wasn't a comforting reward! The startup I've applied with is not the one same as my username.

</comment><comment><USER75> Nice job guys, totally the right call.

Is this the beginning of a fully crowd sourced Y Combinator?

<comment><USER4> We're definitely experimenting with different ways of opening YC's benefits up to a larger group of companies. Startup School is one initiative of many that we're trying.

</comment></comment><comment><USER76> can we also increase the 100 slots for the 10k grant, to 400 slots?

because it used to be 4000 startups and now it's 15000!

<comment><USER17> I asked Sam that exact question earlier and he was already working on it. But it's complicated for fiduciary reasons, and not the sort of thing that can be put together in a few hours.

<comment><USER76> thanks for trying!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER77> excited to see how we are able to connect with other founders. This is something I have wanted for a long time.

</comment><comment><USER78> Will the course materials also be available to those who did not apply?

<comment><USER4> Yes! All the videos and content from the course will eventually become public for everyone – we're trying to optimize for maximum impact.

<comment><USER79> So, can you explain, what is the main difference between 'new-way'-accepted participants and people who even did not apply to Startup School and will be able to watch the videos also?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER80> The more the merrier!

I got accepted last year, and I remember they have a group chat or something, but pretty quiet.

Running your own startup can be lonely, and joining a graveyard group chat doesn't help much. I hope this time is different!

Note: I have joined a couple accelerators, online and offline. By far, Founder Institute has the best comradeship. I think it's bcoz you're still working fulltime, while learning startup with tough weekly assignments that can get you kicked out anytime from the program, creating strong group bonding.

</comment><comment><USER81> For someone out of the loop, what exactly are in the discount code and the 10K equity free grant? Does everyone get it on the completion of the course or does YC choose a selected few?

<comment><USER63> Since this is a brand new update to Startup School, we're going to work on figuring out how we can offer discounts/deals to all founders in the program. Stay tuned!

</comment></comment><comment><USER82> So were all companies that applied accepted onto the Advisor Track? Or are the Advisor Track companies a subset of the 15k companies that applied? If so, what are the numbers like?

<comment><USER12> We mostly removed the differences between the tracks. Everyone is part of the same community. About 4,000 companies will be explicitly assigned an advisor. The other 11,000 companies won't have a dedicated advisor, but the advisors (and YC employees) will participate in the discussion forums with them. Everything else will be the same.

<comment><USER82> Got it. Thanks for clearing it up :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER83> I first got the rejected, then acceptance yesterday. For me the feeling is that, hurry up, a lot of works needs to be done to "win" 10k grant since we have so much more "competitions".

Also a network of 15K founders would be very very helpful, especially for the company providing services for small startups like us.

So let us forget about what happened and focus on providing the best product to our customers. Without product and customers, your journey is not started yet.

</comment><comment><USER84> Here is a slack channel I created to keep all interested entrepeneurs connected and share our experiences. Feel free to join here: [https://join.slack.com/t/startupschool18/shared_invite/enQtN...](https://join.slack.com/t/startupschool18/shared_invite/enQtNDIxNTA5NTI0MzU4LTg5NTgyZDNlODEwYWYzODNmOGFhYjkxY2NiYTRhNDgxYjk1NDY4NjYyNjJhY2Y5ZDhhM2FhNTY3NWYxMDk2NzU)

</comment><comment><USER85> Nice job James Bond-ing the solution. Totally the right call.

</comment><comment><USER86> Those who registered for the audit track only, did you get any confirmation mail? I seem to not have got any and am unable to sign-in. I wanted to change to advisor track later but was already late - there was a "Get content updates" button/form which I duely filled, but still no email.

Is there no login for audit track? Will the content be shared later for all? Is there any use of signing up for audit track?

</comment><comment><USER87> Good on yc. Now I'm disappointed that I'm just auditing the course this term as I bet the forums will be a very interesting place with this many teams.

Best of luck to all.

</comment><comment><USER88> I'm out of the loop. What are the actual costs of advisorless groups? Is it just bandwidth and server costs or are there further services.

<comment><USER4> Mainly we just didn't build the course's functionality or navigation with that volume of users in mind. We also want to make sure we provide a great experience to everyone, whether their group has an advisor or not. We're going to be working very hard over the next week making sure we're able to do that for everyone.

<comment><USER89> Thank you.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER90> I only received this email, and no other rejection or acceptance email.

 _We are deeply sorry, but an error occurred in the software that triggers acceptance emails and you were actually supposed to receive the email below accepting you into the Startup School Advisor Track._

I guess that means, unlike the apparent screwup narrative for others here, we were actually accepted and really did make the cut.

<comment><USER17> It sounds like it, but it's odd that you didn't receive the prior incorrect email. Have you checked your spam bin?

<comment><USER90> Yep, not there. Probably GMail's fault not yours, it's been randomly dropping emails recently (have same addresses since 1990s ... heaps of spam .. apparently exceeded daily limits for free GMail tier) so I am in the process of attempting migration to Fastmail. Unfortunately they don't allow Chinese phone numbers to sign up, and their SMS never arrives at my HK number, sigh. Nothing ever easy.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER91> I woke up to check my email. I was accepted, then rejected and then again accepted. Nonetheless, will be looking forward to see you guys.

</comment><comment><USER92> Startup School lesson one: keep iterating :)

<comment><USER93> First rule of Startup Club... you DO NOT get accepted to Startup club.

Second rule of Startup Club... you ARE NOW ACCEPTED to Startup Club.

Third rule... if either of these notices from the other two rules affected the trajectory of your startup you are not a true founder. So get to work and stop worrying if someone else approves your startup or not.

</comment></comment><comment><USER94> To send an email. Every mistake is an opportunity to learn something new! Hope this motivates the startups even more.

</comment><comment><USER95> I applied, but haven't received a rejection or and acceptance email. Does this announcement mean I'm in?

<comment><USER17> You may be the only person who didn't receive a rollercoaster's worth of emails today. Maybe check with firstname.lastname@example.com to make sure they got your application?

<comment><USER95> Sent an email. Thank you.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER96> The email mentions organizing groups by yourself. My initial thought is that a group of startups in the same industry would be the most beneficial but maybe the cross-pollination from a wide-range on industries in a group would yield different viewpoints and better results in the long run.

Any tips on organizing groups?

</comment><comment><USER97> Probably not really a mistake at all, the ss is a remarkably ambitious project as it is

</comment><comment><USER98> I think this is the best outcome - cheers to YC for handling this in this way.

</comment><comment><USER99> I think this is a great solution! I hope this year will be amazing.

</comment><comment><USER83> For wechat users... the wechat group qr code: [https://goo.gl/wAmQ4F](https://goo.gl/wAmQ4F)

</comment><comment><USER100> Let's see what they do for the real YC W19 :D

</comment><comment><USER89> Was a bit disheartening getting that second mail. I mean, I'd already shared the news with Anita, the cofounder. When I woke up to the third mail, I wasn't sure what to think. 'Getting in' is okay, right? But knowing you 'got in' on merit is easier than knowing you got pushed in because of a system malfunction. Was almost not going to participate, but reading comments here, maybe I will. Hopefully, we get to learn and make something really worthwhile from this.

<comment><USER14> If you think the primary value of acceptance is some social signal rather than access to the system, wow. This is not the first comment of this sort I have seen suggesting this will be a lousy deal. And I am resisting the temptation to say "I'll be happy to take your slot if you don't want it" only because I have other plans, basically.

<comment><USER101> I was a bit surprised to read that comment, as well. Opportunities multiply as they are seized. OTOH, do not interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake (that was a joke). Anyone in this position has an opportunity many many others do not.

<comment><USER14> Metaphorically, getting into a YC program is not evidence that you are a good egg. Instead, it is a guarantee of being kept warm so you have a chance to hatch.

Even without an advisor, this gives applicants access to important stuff, like discussion with other like-minded individuals who are also reviewing the same materials. That's huge.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER102> besides having an advisor, is there any difference between those who were supposed to be accepted originally vs the rejected ones?

<comment><USER17> Looks like Jared answered this here: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17807241](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17807241)

</comment></comment><comment><USER103> So the folks who got the advisor track already started getting access to tools. Anyone without the advisor track who got access?

<comment><USER104> I am from the advisor track. What tools are you talking about.

</comment></comment><comment><USER105> sweet, looking forward to those discount codes

<comment><USER106> Joke, or is that a thing?

<comment><USER48> "Stripe will be giving startups discounted payment processing and an invitation to Stripe Atlas to incorporate and open a company bank account.

In addition, startups will receive over $50,000 in credits to a variety of other services, Digital Ocean, Amazon Web Services, and Clerky."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER107> Startup School may have the potential to become another HN-like community(But focus on very early stage startup founder).

</comment><comment><USER108> Was this all just a PR stunt? /tinfoil

<comment><USER7> Pretty sure it wasn't because a lot of originally accepted startups received the rejection email and to be honest it's slightly embarrassing to make such a mistake.

However, saying that we're "accepting" all applicants does seem to be an attempt to turn this mistake into something positive, when all that's really changing is that all the applicants get forum access, whereas, only the originally accepted startups still get an advisor (as a part of a group).

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> Since everyone is in now, are the spots that we signed up for in the live in person classes still available to all?

</comment><comment><USER109> This is great news! Thanks YC for making things more accessible for everyone. Can't wait to get started.

</comment><comment><USER110> Thank you.. !!!

</comment><comment><USER111> So, has anyone received instructions on how to access the private community and courseware?

<comment><USER112> I had access to a group page where I could see companies in same group but now its returning 404.

</comment></comment><comment><USER113> Anyone founders want to join our study group in San Mateo?

email me: firstname.lastname@example.com

</comment><comment><USER114> wow, this should be fun.

</comment><comment><USER115> More than 15000 startups... I wonder how that will play out.

<comment><USER54> I bet that 25-40% complete the course fully. They expected 4000 so it will be around there. We will see. Great move by YC and really excited to experience the program!

<comment><USER98> I was thinking the same thing - probably the number that actually starts the course will be in the 90%s of the total and there will be a fair amount of attrition as the course proceeds.

It would be interesting to see what these numbers look like as well over the ten weeks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER116> Just saw this. Hah!

</comment><comment><USER117> Thank you!!!

</comment><comment><USER118> Well done.

</comment><comment><USER119> Huzzah!

</comment><comment><USER120> I was originally accepted and then got the second mail about the mistake and it being opened up.

This may sound sour but it's just some honest feedback, even if it's bitter to swallow. For an accelerator that prides itself on grooming some of the world's best in technology this is a trivially amateur mistake that just shouldn't have happened. There should have been a double check process for the notifications. Any other company would have been lynched on HN.

Saying you're opening it up is a popular response but talk is cheap. It's easy to make it sound like it's a better thing but the reality is it's a devalued experience for those originally chosen. Both in terms of advisor bandwidth and the quality signalling of being selected. Any company who partakes in this course is now not considered special at all. YC took the easy road and sold out a pound of their credibility for that but that's their prerogative.

So I won't be participating because of this as time is precious and it's no longer worth it for where I'm at but good luck to the others who still do. Respect to everyone who breaks out of the conventional lanes to try and make the world a better and more exciting place.

<comment><USER44> The deserving 4,000 startups are not getting a devalued experience. They will still have an advisor in groups of 25 startups. The remaining ~11,000 won't have an advisor (at least not yet).

And innovators always make mistakes. YC has actually admitted to being "always slightly broken" [https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/14/y-combinator-is-zeroing- in...](https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/14/y-combinator-is-zeroing-in-on-bigger- breakaway-companies-with-a-new-growth-stage-program/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER121> Am I the only cynic who wonders if the original "mistake" was fabricated?

It doesn't really cost YC anything extra, they get lots of good press and praise, and ultimately they wind up with an even fatter pipeline of companies they can select from. Win, win, win situation as far as they're concerned.

<comment><USER17> I hate to ruin a good theory but it wasn't fabricated. People were genuinely upset, including all of us.

I guess it's worth a cheer if the outcome was so good that anybody would be wondering if it was staged... but you'd have to be insane to stage something like that. Nobody sane would play that game with their reputation.</comment></comment>


Valve demonstrates Steam Controller [video] - <AUTHOR> http://www.joystiq.com/2013/10/11/valve-demonstrates-steam-controller-in-new-video/ <comment><USER3> I have never been able to get good at using analog sticks with FPSs. I'm so bad at it that if the game doesn't have auto-aim, I basically can't enjoy the game because I am sucking so badly.

The problem for me is that the analog sticks are velocity-based; ie. you don't get to control the position directly, you can only control the first derivative of the position, the velocity. That means instead of just moving the controller where you want to go, you have to move in the _direction_ you want to go and hold it there for just the right amount of time.

I'm amazed that so many people can do this so well, because no matter how much time I play I still suck at it. It just feels so clumsy.

So the idea of being able to use a handheld controller that isn't velocity- based really appeals to me, though I do worry a bit that the active area is so small.

<comment><USER4> I can't believe that the trackball (very old tech might I say) hasn't replaced the analog sticks yet!

People have already modded controllers with a trackball, and it works great for the most part, bringing the best of both worlds together, yet Sony and Microsoft still insist on using analog sticks...

<comment><USER5> The reason is because it doesn't work. How do you walk forward continuously for a long stretch? Do you roll it to some position and keep it there? Do you keep rolling?

<comment><USER6> Yet you have two such analog sticks. But usually only one is used the way you describe, to keep walking continuously. The other is usually used to rotate a bit, to look around you. So it seems having an analog stick on the left of the controller and a track ball on the right would be nice.

<comment><USER7> The rollers for the tracking ball would collect a lot of dust. Could be one reason they opted out of it. Cleaning the rollers for the track ball every other week to get a smooth feeling would quickly become bothersome, contrary to the nice feeling of relaxation or thrill the console is supposed to give you.

<comment><USER8> I have a Logitech trackball: [http://www.logitech.com/assets/32954/3/logitech- wireless-tra...](http://www.logitech.com/assets/32954/3/logitech-wireless- trackball-m570.png)

Granted, it doesn't reach console levels of use on most days, but I only clean it once every month or so, and even then it's easy - Logitech has a simple system to pop the ball out and cleaning it is very easy and fast.

Using a trackball is definitely not a major chore.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I was really skeptical about this and I'm getting more and more skeptical.

1\. See how he always lift his right hand thumb to reproduce the same movement, sometimes three times, just to go through the screen (in Civ5).

2\. Also the fact that buttons get mapped like a "pie chart" on the trackpads could have been a good idea, but we need buttons. We forget the luxury of having buttons with all those new tactile screens because we want more tactile surface, but for a controller we hold in our hands, we need some feedbacks bellow our fingers. This is really a bad idea...

3\. I'll have to admit that it looks like a better alternative than joysticks for FPS games.

EDIT: As someone else pointed out, if you get two controllers : a valve one for FPS, RTS, games that works well with it, and a Xbox/PS4 controller for the rest, then it's a very good thing.

<comment><USER10> What exactly are you skeptical of? The skepticism previously was that this controller would be unusable. This video shows a person playing PC games with the controller rapidly and with skill.

I still want to see a platformer and a fighting game since the best mapping is a little unclear. (Though these a) won't be showstoppers and b) are likely to be workable.) Humans are adaptable and if this controller is reasonably usable in all the main gaming genres then very quickly you'll see people get really, really good at using it.

<comment><USER11> It doesn't show a person playing PC games rapidly - it shows, for example, a common Civ5 action (moving cursor to a position in menu and clicking) being slow and awkward, requiring multiple separate finger movements just to push the cursor from middle of screen to side.

It's better than any other couch-options, but the controls in Civ still looked frustrating instead of fun.

<comment><USER10> He lifts his finger just as much in Portal play as he does in Civ. It's incredibly fast. The ergonomics of this thing make it pretty hard to say that it will be frustrating to track the cursor across the screen just because you have to lift your finger. Think about how you use a trackball. This is basically a trackpad device with the thumb ergonomics of a trackball.

<comment><USER11> The last time I touched (or saw) a trackball was a dozen years ago, so it's hard to say - but on any acceptable trackpad its dpi should allow to move across the screen in a single motion, shouldn't it?

I.e., if I move my finger across the whole steam controller right pad, then the sensitivity should be high enough to move across the whole screen in that motion while still allowing enough accuracy to click where I want.

<comment><USER12> I would be shocked if it couldn't be configured that way.

<comment><USER11> If, for example, some pad was an inch-wide and with 1000 dpi resolution, then it couldn't ever be configured to cover a 2000 pixel wide screen that way - <USER2> don't know the specs of the controller elements yet.

<comment><USER13> With some acceleration it could - finer control with small movements, but quick movements provide more travel. Not sure how well this would work, but I like Apple's implementation on their trackpad (I realise I may be in the minority here!).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Valve's main objective was probably to replicate the keyboard/mouse combo rather than improve or alter the standard joystick gamepad (like the X360 Controller). In the end, it looks like a controller halfway between these 2 types of input.

The main problem with a controller-based "mouse" (and it shows in the video) is that you control the cursor with only your thumb rather than your full hand gently set down on your desktop. I guess we'll never obtain a perfect alternative to the mouse. And the Steam controller will probably leave both joystick users _and_ mouse users somehow frustrated because it tries to be _both_ at the same time. But considering the variety of Steam's library, it was probably Valve's only solution. Anyway, like this comment, everything still remains speculation until you've tried it yourself (for a reasonable amount of time).

<comment><USER15> There would be two disadvantages compared to traditional mouse-and-keyboard: 1) a low number of total possible bindings, and 2) a lower range of possible movements compared to a mouse.

1) is straightforward, if you don't have enough input buttons you're out of luck. A problem for games like SC2 and WoW.

2) this problem forces you to use acceleration for input, which is commonly accepted to ruin precision (reproducibility) because you lose the easy mapping between inches and pixels.

I'll use Team Fortress 2 (an FPS) as an example for this. First, if 180 degrees takes more than 1 swipe, the controls are effectively unusable. The demonstration indicates this may be the case.

You need to be able to flip 180 degrees to check your back, as well as make other large and fast movements like those required by rocket jumping. At the same time, you _also_ need the ability to make very small aim adjustments. It's guaranteed that the trackpad will be weak somewhere along this variety of movements.

It's unsurprising that it will be a poor replacement for mouse and keyboard, but existing controllers have demonstrated that people are fine with sacrificing resolution of controls for other advantages like relative simplicity and easily playing with friends.

<comment><USER16> Having played all StarCraft games so far, somewhat well, I can get by with maybe 8 buttons as Protoss: A, H, E, P, B, V, G, Z. Other races might need other buttons, but 8 is reasonable. If I remember correctly, the Steam Controller has 16 buttons. The other functionality is 1 click away and is (usually) not hat time sensitive, if you are not from Korea :-) obviously it's not for competitive players.

Also, flipping the camera 180 degrees can be achieved with a button press. I think I remember Need For Speed having this feature, though they didn't allow you to flip the car, just the camera. Anyway, I think pressing a button to flip 180 is an acceptable solution given the constraints of the controller.

<comment><USER15> > obviously it's not for competitive players.

Yep, I just wanted to explain why it isn't :) Having to click rather than press a key is a big downside, but if I remember correctly SC2 already has a keybind mode that limits you to a subset of the full qwerty keyboard. World of Warcraft is a good example of a PC game that uses a huge swathe of keyboard, players often have 30-60 unique keybinds.

My point about the 180 was that you need a wide range of different motions. Sometimes it'll be 170, sometimes 145, etc, sometimes only 2.4 degrees, and if a mouse user uses 1 swipe when you need 2 or 3 you're toast. A common tactic for Scouts in TF2 is to stay in the air above your head, which from experience is basically impossible to beat on a trackpad.

I'm looking forward to the Steambox/Steam controller, if only because I have quite a few Steam games accumulated and the biggest reason for me to avoid consoles is that I'd be forced to buy multiple copies of games.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> If anyone else is looking for the straight youtube vid it can be found here:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeAjkbNq4xI#t=12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeAjkbNq4xI#t=12)

</comment><comment><USER18> Looks like what I expected. When it comes to FPS games, it's difficult to know his skill level, but it's probably not something you'd use competitively. Many times better than an analog stick though, so I'd use it for casual gaming.

<comment><USER19> Yea, I can't remember where I saw it but i think they tried pitting top COD players from console vs PC and even with auto aim assist on PC player destroyed console players. Mouse is just too accurate of a pointing device compared to joysticks (physical or virtual).

<comment><USER20> This might be what you were remembering? [http://games.slashdot.org/story/10/07/23/2127253/pc- gamers-t...](http://games.slashdot.org/story/10/07/23/2127253/pc-gamers-too- good-for-consoles-gamers)

It also reminds me about how CS:GO was originally supposed to allow true cross-platform play (PC against console) but Valve scrapped that support because they couldn't work out a reasonable way to patch on consoles due to "patch scheduling" on PS3.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The demonstrated FPS aim-and-shoot was very slow, it's not clear if it's because they couldn't do it better because of the controller, or didn't do it faster because they did everything slowly to be clearly visible how it happens.

A full speed try-to-do-the-best-you-can FPS aiming demo would be welcome.

<comment><USER9> They're not trying to emulate mouse + keyboard precision neither. I don't think you could have played like that with a Xbox/PS controller (I know I couldn't have, it would have looked more smooth but not as precise for headshots).

For me it seems like FPS with this controller will be somewhere between Xbox/PS3 controller and mouse+keyboard.

<comment><USER11> I'd like to see a video that I can compare with, for example, controlling the same game on a good laptop touchpad - the current video is weak even compared to that; if they can do better, then they should make a video that proves it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I was surprised to see the negative comments on the article page. I'm personally excited for it. As I think it will open up "couch" gaming to more genres and it looks like a pretty decent controller when compared against other controllers. I don't think it will be a true mouse + keyboard replacement but will do great for big screen HTPC / SteamMachine type setups.

</comment><comment><USER22> Valve released this video on their Youtube channel. I don't think it was necessary to link to a blog post about the video.

<comment><USER23> Joystiq has a habit of downloading YouTube videos and self-hosting them with their watermark. (How is that even legal?)

Then when people visit their blog articles, they see watermarked videos and think they're exclusives.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Basically we still don't know enough to know how good it's going to be. Having used the next gen controllers at PAX, it's going to very hard to be as good at they are at being a controller.

Valve's controller does seem to be a good 1/2 step for mouse/keyboard replacement, eg very good accuracy, but maybe not the best of all worlds. Also able to do controller based games but not quite as good as a real controller.

to me it's a sign that they hope to help developers support console versions by making a control system that will work well for games designed for mouse and keyboard, if not as well as a mouse and keyboard. But to be honest, standard controllers on games not designed for them are quite bad. Moving a "mouse" pointer replacement with a controller is not good. So I think it will be good in that regard. It'll also be better than a keyboard and have MUCH better support than a logitech controller for games that want controllers.

So I see it as a good middle ground. And I think this will allow game devs to support both more easily. It's not the tactic I would take to make games work on both, but I think it's a good approach even if it isn't going to be the best of either world.

However, if it IS as good as the next gen console controllers and it does better than them at mouse/keyboard then it's a big win.

</comment><comment><USER25> Looking at this, I'm starting to wonder why trackballs on console controllers never became popular.

<comment><USER26> My guess: dirt.

With as few moving parts as they typically have, console controllers already experience durability issues for less... hygienic, players. With trackballs that issue is compounded, even if you make them easily removable so you can clean them (just having to clean them at all would be more of a hassle than people are use to).

<comment><USER27> Logitech's optical trackballs are pretty bulletproof. No moving parts; they use a special dot pattern to detect how the trackball's being moved around.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> It would be nice if a single two-handed controller or even some type of two element controller (ala. wii) could somehow approach the accuracy of a mouse and a keyboard.

This clearly does not appear to be at the same accuracy and speed level as the combination of a mouse and keyboard. There may be a console controller that can approach, equal or exceed the speed and accuracy of a mouse and keyboard, but this doesn't seem to be it.

Addition: I suspect that every steambox will have USB ports available for whatever controller, keyboard and mouse floats your boat.

</comment><comment><USER23> Looks like a great alternative to the Xbox PC controller, but like everyone has been thinking, this is in no way a serious replacement for a mouse. Especially if you're a competitive gamer.

</comment><comment><USER29> The biggest problem is not the controller itself but the expectation that people that use this will be able to compete at all with those using a keyboard & mouse. The only reason FPS games currently work on consoles is because everyone is essentially equally handicapped. Even a casual player using a mouse dominates versus game pads.

</comment><comment><USER30> Maybe his aiming in a fps is not up to competitive level of quake/cs, but this is definitely a step up from controllers for these types of games. Hopefully, this thing will bring the skill of being both fast and precise to consoles. It will be good for consoles, and good for gaming in general.

</comment><comment><USER31> I'd like to see a traditional platformer like rogue legacy played with this, and how the left pad compares

<comment><USER32> The developer of Super Meat Boy, which is a very precision-platformy game, talked about trying it: [http://tommyrefenes.tumblr.com/post/62476523677/my- time-with...](http://tommyrefenes.tumblr.com/post/62476523677/my-time-with- the-steam-controller)

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> I get tired of using mouse and keyboard, and the same goes to a controller. It would be nice to play with hands in the air..

<comment><USER34> I wanna aim with my finger and with zero latency. Heck it's probably possible to hack something like that already in fact. Not sure if we'd be as good as with the mouse as you will lose awareness (hand in front of you = can't see as well)

but it'd be fun.

<comment><USER33> Hehehe or maybe with eyes. Hence virtual reality :3 imagine you could just sleep in and imagine all the actions <3

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> They could just make an app for a phone to act as a wireless controller.

In fact, many mobile games already use similar control layouts.

<comment><USER36> And that would be just as horrible an experience as current joystick style controls are on touchscreen smartphone games.</comment></comment>


NSA merging anti-hacker team that fixes security holes with one that uses them - <AUTHOR> http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/03/nsa-hacker-cybersecurity-intelligence <comment><USER2> That seems like a mistake. One of these groups, probably the one that uses security holes, will get the upper hand, and the other function will be relegated to the dustbin.

Bruce Schneier has called for the current NSA to be broken up into two agencies, so that no conflicts of interest exist, and both functions actually get done.</comment>


The sports footage you won't see on TV this Thanksgiving - <AUTHOR> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203716204577015903150731054.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

<comment><USER4> You can figure out whats happening on the field just from what they show on TV. I wrote an answer on quora on how to do this:

What I enjoy in a football game is understanding the strategy thats being carried out and the efficiency of execution on every play. I've broken down a list of positions/schemes/plays to look for below.

The following applies when watching a regular play from scrimmage - ie one that will be either a run or a pass.

_The offense_

1\. First pick out the number of tight ends and their position on the offensive line. This will tell you what base formation the offense is "telegraphing" to the defense. 2 or more tight ends implies that the offense is showing "run" unless its the damn Patriots of 2010.

2\. Look at where the running backs are - the full back and the half back. This along with the above, will give you an idea of whether the offense is hedging towards a run or a pass. If they are in line, in front of the QB then you can safely assume a pass or trick play.

3\. Next the formation of the wide recievers. Are they split, with a slot or are they bunched on one side.

_The defense_

1\. Due to camera angles you wont be able to see some of the players on the defense. But its okay because you can workout where they would be (except for how deep they are playing) based on the offensive formation.

2\. The rectangular area in front of the offensive line is called "the box". This is where the running back is expected to try to make a run. Count the number of players in the box. A fast way is to group the players in 3s going from bottom edge of the offensive line to the top.

The number of players in the box will tell you what the defense is showing the offense. If the number of players is >=8 then the defense is expecting a run.

Using the following formula, you'll be able to figure out the number of safeties.

Number of safeties = 11 - (the number of players in the box + the number of wider receivers on offense )

_Position of the safeties_

* 2 Safeties

If you've figured out there are two safeties then this implies that the defense is looking to take away big passing plays but give up the middle of the field. This will usually be a cover-2 formation or a derivative. If you see that a line-backer is cheating towards the safeties then you know its tampa-2.

* 1 Safety

If there's only one single safety then this usually means that the defense is being aggressive, ie they want to blitz, or are showing that they are expecting a run.

_Blitz_

If the number of players on the line of scrimmage for the defense outnumbers the number of players on the offensive and in the vicinity of the QB then this implies the defense is showing a blitz. Picking out the blitzing player is a lot of fun when watching the Jets, Eagles or Ravens play.

Player in motion

On a passing play, most teams will use the player in motion to figure out if the defense is in zone or man coverage. (They are mostly always in zones but do use man coverage to shake things up.)

So as the offensive player in motion moves, watch who covers him. Does he get handed off from one player to another on the defense or does the same defensive player follow him as he moves from one side of the field to the next. If the same player moves to cover the man in motion then it usually implies that the defense is playing a man-coverage. If the man in motion is handed off between players then this usually implies a zone.

Of course there could be special cases in which the defense chooses man/zone depending on which player is in motion at the time of the snap.

_Exercises_

How do you know if your seeing/understanding enough of the action:

1\. On regular plays you should be able to see the "hold penalty" at the same time as it happens and before the commentator explains it on TV.

2\. You should be able to call some percentage of the plays as you get familiar with understanding the strategy your team plays as well as the play callers idiosyncrasies and the players who get the most attention on the team.

3\. Figure out if the defense is in a zone or man coverage. This will take a while because most defenses dont run a scheme which is instantly recognizable.

As you enjoy more aspects of the game, you'll realize the true brilliance of Peyton Manning, the genius of Rex Ryan and you'll be baffled by how precise these NFL plays are.

These are the basics and there is so much more happening on the field. If you have any questions then please ask them here and I'll update this answer.

<comment><USER5> This is excellent.

Here's a question: Where can I buy the equivalent of _this post_ , but in video form with actual illustrative game footage?

I've wanted to see that for some time. Want it for every sport on earth, really.

I've thought about trying to watch a bunch of coaching videos for my sport of choice, but was never sure it would help. They aren't designed for me. I don't need to know how to think like an above-average high-school coach or player; I want to admire the work of top-level pros.

<comment><USER6> If you have an xbox or playstation buy Madden and try learning to play the game it a bit. The formations, plays, and strategy are pretty much all real. You'll learn about different formations, routes, zone defense, etc.

<comment><USER7> Agreed. I really didn't understand football much at all until I started playing Madden with a group of friends. They helped me out in the beginning by answering questions like "why are there two different colored lines for the QB routes?" (it's an option play). By learning the game of Madden, I learned the game of football and now have an appreciation for the sport.

<comment><USER5> Interesting that this didn't occur to me. An artifact of being just a little too old, I think. (In the Atari 2600 days one did _not_ play sports games for the knowledge...)

What's sad is that I read a whole article about how much hard work it is for sports-game programmers to get all this stuff perfect and I still didn't get it until now!

Many thanks. Madden it is. ;)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I have always been a football fan but when I was in college I lived in the Football dorm and it changed how I saw the game forever. (Back story, I lived in those dorms because I'm a big guy and the coach wanted me to play for the team. I told him yeah because I noticed that at registration all of the Football players were able to skip in line. I never did play because I loved Basketball more than Football at the time).

Anyway, when you live around Football players 24/7 you start to learn facets of the game that you never knew about. You learn what every position is doing on every play and why they are doing it.Now when I watch Football it is more like a game of chess than a brutal grudge match. The real excitement in the game comes from watching the linemen and not the skilled positions.

On another side note, you would think that all of this football knowledge would help actual players when playing Madden (That was all that was played in those dorms. Hours and hours of Madden). It does but only to a certain extent. Football players take Madden too literally and try to play it as a simulation. They forget the video game part. I would use that to my advantage all of the time.

<comment><USER9> There a few things that are starting to bleed from the madden into the real life game. Time management is one of them. I can't remember who it was but a few years ago a player was running for the ends zone and had a huge lead on the defense, 1 yard from the end zone he started running sideways draining as much clock as possible, assuring no come back from the opposite team.

I saw I believe Leon Washington for the Jaguars pull a similar stunt once, the D seemed to be giving him a free TD at the end of the game but he preferred to just take a knee right before the end zone. With the new Canadian Football rule requiring contact to end the play the D lost a few seconds not reacting fast enough (first year it was implemented I believe) thinking he was down.

The game is also teaching much better strategy to players, getting them to understand more than their position.

<comment><USER10> It was Brian Westbrook for the Eagles on Dec 1, 2007. He actually just dropped at the 1 because the Cowboys had no timeouts left and the game was effectively over with a 1st down. I believe in the post game interview he acknowledged that he did it because that's how he wastes the opponents time in Madden games.

Maurice Jones-Drew did the same thing in 2009 against the Jets.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Here's the NFL survey asking fans if they would like access to this footage for a fee: <https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/9FXQC3D>

In case it gets pulled, here's the attached image: <http://cl.ly/3e1m1b0x1L410V0I1i0h>

The poll says "The NFL is evaluating an online streaming product providing consumers with exclusive Coaches Film footage of all 22 players on the field for every play and game."

The whole survey: <http://cl.ly/1Q3R0h1L161b3J1a2J3u>

</comment><comment><USER12> Good article on the subject in Slate, from 2007: "The NFL's Perplexing Refusal To Help Fans Understand the Game"

[http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/features/200...](http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/features/2007/how_to_watch_pro_football/the_nfls_perplexing_refusal_to_help_fans_understand_the_game.html)

A bit more from Football Outsiders: [http://www.footballoutsiders.com/walkthrough/2006/too- deep-z...](http://www.footballoutsiders.com/walkthrough/2006/too-deep-zone- big-jaworski)

</comment><comment><USER5> I used to watch NHL hockey when I was a kid. Then I started going to college hockey games, and that was great, but a terrible side effect is that I've never been able to enjoy TV hockey in quite the same way. Those players off the screen are _really important_.

The advent of HDTV has done a lot to fix this for hockey, where the rink is not so huge. But it would be awesome to have full-field perspective on football.

<comment><USER10> I agree that most sports are better live. The problem is that NFL games have so many TV timeouts now that watching NFL games live gets _boring_. There is so much downtime, that it's not worth the $100+ for a ticket anymore.

<comment><USER13> You can get around this pretty easily by just using a DVR and starting the game about halfway through. Fast forward through the commercials/breaks and you'll progressively catch up as the game goes on, and hopefully finish at about the same time.

The only major issue with this is if you have friends watching separately who regularly text you about occurences in the game as it's going on. You'll also have to make sure you don't look at any NFL websites during the game.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> What's the reason for keeping the footage out of the public's hands? "Proprietary NFL coaching information" doesn't really explain it. Are the NFL making money off the teams by cutting them a special deal of All-22 footage of their own games, and opponents?

<comment><USER15> The NFL's lawyers stated the NFL competes in the "entertainment marketplace" ([http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?renderfor...](http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?renderforprint=1&id=e655f9e2809e5476862f735da11d017d&wit_id=e655f9e2809e5476862f735da11d017d-1-2)) and operates as a single entity, not as 32 teams. The NFL makes a large portion of its revenue from television, and ratings are higher on close, competitive games.

What prevents owners from keeping the games close or trading wins/losses now to help a storyline in exchange for markers for future wins when they're on a championship track?

While it is illegal to fix sporting events for gambling purposes, evidently you can fix sports for entertainment purposes. The All 22 footage would make this more difficult because this type of stuff would be easier for fans to detect.

<comment><USER16> The _only_ way the NFL could hope to come anywhere near fixing a game is the either a) change the rules to benefit certain team makesup (as they have done to make passing/scoring easier) or b) get the refs to call fouls more against a certain team.

b) is watched frequently and doesn't seem to be happening statistically a) has occurred but it's not secret and all teams know the rules. It's not really 'fixing' as much as it was the NFL wanting more scoring overall.

There is no way for the NFL to do mass game fixing because that's just too many people that have to agree to doing it. Keep in mind this means they would need current players, ex-players and the ex _disgruntled_ players too all agree to not talk. I've talked to players from all 3 groups at the gym and fixing a game is simply something that doesn't happen. Some of these guys are very negative on the NFL and would have loved to say it's fake if it was true.

<comment><USER15> All you need is the coach calling the plays and one high-paid player to have a bad day, like the quarterback. "Any given Sunday," right?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> If college or Canadian football started doing it and fans responded extremely positively and started asking for/expecting it elsewhere, that could force the NFL's hand a bit. The XFL's crazy wire camera rigs almost immediately made their way into the NFL, so there's at least a little precedent.

<comment><USER18> Conversely, if the NFL released this footage, competing leagues could analyze NFL tactics and raise their level of play. So it really is a competitive advantage.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Seems like there's an opportunity here - how difficult would it be for a fan to video / stream the "all-22" from high angle (read nosebleed) seats? I've brought my Laptop and SLR into football and baseball games (Oakland), so they aren't that strict about allowing media/comms equipment in.

<comment><USER20> I am pretty sure the NFL would shut down any distribution very quickly - <USER2> sure how much of an opportunity there is if it blatantly violates someone's IP rights. What I don't understand is why the NFL wouldn't use it to generate more revenue. Do they really think the criticism would be any worse than it is today with 24/7 sports talk and online message boards? Why not have the criticism be more grounded in reality?

<comment><USER19> I'm a pretty strong supporter of IP rights - but in this case I feel capturing the game that I'm watching falls into grey area - something akin to a bootleg of a concert.

I agree it's likely that a live stream would be shut down fairly quickly, particularly at scale, but I'm thinking a combination of after-the-fact + some intelligent post-processing might be useful/valuable.

Admittedly, the majority-value is in the real-time production, but, by providing after-the game all-22 videos, you might be able to fly somewhat under the radar.

I've never been asked to stop taking pictures with my (admittedly small) 70-200 lens - and it's usually perched atop a rail for the entire game - <USER3> could just as easily have been filming the entire game as snapping pictures.

Looking at various venue's policies - it would be hard to do this on a reliable basis with a larger lens: <http://www.coliseum.com/info/prohibiteditems.php>

But, the all-22 isn't really a zoom situation anyways...

<comment><USER21> I can see them not letting you film in the stadium, but how about you rent a blimp, and get sufficiently above/outside the stadiums airspace?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> It sounds extremely challenging, but could someone use image detection to process the existing camera angles and use the field markers to recreate an overhead view of the game? If it worked, you could probably use that to do some interesting play analyses over a large number of games.

<comment><USER23> I think the point isn't specifically about the overhead angle, it's that the existing camera angles don't show some of the players (who may be moving in ways that are relevant to the overall strategy, but their movements aren't sufficiently telegenic to bother showing them on TV).

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I'd be willing to have a stab that the people who really don't want the public with this footage are the sports bookies offering point spreads/line betting.

The bookmakers would already have access to this footage, because it is a competitive edge over the public. If the public suddenly had access to the all 22, there might be a correction in those betting markets.

And if the bookmakers don't have access to the footage? Could be an opportunity to capitalise on their in-efficiency ;)

</comment><comment><USER25> Does anyone else just see this as them gauging interest in charging for this footage? Some of the wording almost makes it sound like a market segmentation strategy.

</comment><comment><USER26> end zone view would be good too.

</comment><comment><USER27> Well, this is why NFL Films and the old programs they produced in the 70's and 80's are so cool. NFL Films had it all. Every angle, every sound plus the all-22. They could do the full analysis. And their choice of music was, in retrospect, brilliant. I can watch those old programs year after year. Somehow I never get tired of them.

Now we have ESPN.

Hats off to keeptrying. You are a true fan.

<comment><USER9> While ESPN has some problems, I'm not going to complain about them as the only way I can watch my College team play while in Canada is through their espnplayer.com service. My wife thinks I'm crazy for paying for it but hell it's an addiction. If I can't be in the stadium I have to see every play somehow. (I'm sure I'm not the only one watching then end of the game when loosing by 50 points right? )

<comment><USER27> How about the CFL?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I won't see this sports footage this Thanksgiving because I will be programming and reading the hacker news articles related to hacking.

</comment><comment><USER29> This reads like a dark parody of life on earth as we know it. Finally put me off American Football for life, too.</comment>


Introvert at the Party, a little art/game thing. Requires cursor. - <AUTHOR> http://andrewbadr.com/party/

<comment><USER2> I don't really see how this represents an introvert's experience. It does kind of match how someone with Aspergers' (or in an unfamiliar culture) might see the situation - navigating a maze they usually can't see, and having to blunder into walls on purpose to get a brief insight.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, I actually agree. Even so, "Person With Asperger's at the Party" would be a bad title.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Perhaps it would be nice if the game came with instructions.

<comment><USER4> I think not having clear instructions is part of the design. It fits in well with the rest of the game :)

<comment><USER5> You fire up this game while anxious at a party. It makes it look like you're doing a lot of intense stuff online. Check your eyes and fingers when you play, looks to me you're surfing an awful lot of important stuff- especially with that look of concentration.</comment></comment></comment>


Stop Paying Executives for Performance (2016) - <AUTHOR> https://hbr.org/2016/02/stop-paying-executives-for-performance <comment><USER2> I got my first job because the director of the IT organization had some incentive to show lowered expenses so he routinely laid people off near the end of the year and then desperately hired new ones at the start of the next. Somehow the math worked out for him. This was a long time ago though.

<comment><USER3> I know a guy who collects people as layoff fodder at a bank.

He finds a group that is tenuously related to what he does, uses bureaucrat- kungfu to take them on, then uses them when the next 10% layoff comes. So he protects his core team that generates his bonus, and gets the extra bonus for firing people.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> by Nassim Taleb

"4\. Do not let someone making an "incentive" bonus manage a nuclear plant – or your financial risks. Odds are he would cut every corner on safety to show "profits" while claiming to be "conservative". Bonuses do not accommodate the hidden risks of blow-ups. It is the asymmetry of the bonus system that got us here. No incentives without disincentives: capitalism is about rewards and punishments, not just rewards. "

from: "Ten principles for a Black Swan-proof world (2009)"

[https://www.ft.com/content/5d5aa24e-23a4-11de-996a-00144feab...](https://www.ft.com/content/5d5aa24e-23a4-11de-996a-00144feabdc0)

<comment><USER5> The balanced scorecard provides a way to manage non-financial measures of performance, and incentivize long-run measures.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balanced_scorecard](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balanced_scorecard)

If you measure the result of independent inspections and auditors on the executives' scorecard, don't be surprised if you get a financially healthier long run management of the firm.

I think at some point Taleb was learning the math and theory behind statistics, and then decided it was time to stop learning.

<comment><USER6> That seems better than judging performance based on a single metric, but still wide open to gaming.

In my experience, it's better to use your full range of objective and subjective facilities to select a good manager, and then trusting them until it's time to re-evaluate (using the same means but now with more evidence of their performance).

An organization that runs on extrinsic motivations can only ever be mediocre at best (and often worse), and there's very little that kills intrinsic motivation more than putting people into systems designed reduce a human's potential to a number (or several numbers in the case of your balanced scorecard).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> It's not paying people for performance that's the problem, it's paying them based on metrics.

When you incentivise people to optimize metrics, they will optimise the metrics. But the metrics are probably only intended as a stand-in for something that's harder or even impossible to quantify.

This applies to every profession.

If you pay programmers based on the lines of code they write, programmers will write more lines of code. But what you were probably trying to pay them for was productivity -- instead you may have ended up paying them for verbosity.

This is basically the Cobra Effect: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect)

<comment><USER8> How do you contractually pay someone for performance without relying on metrics?

<comment><USER9> Don't tie bonuses to individual contributions. Individuals will work to meet their individual KPIs/metrics often to the detriment of the organisation.

If every employee gets a bonus based on the organisational performance then there is a greater incentive for team work and cooperation within the organisation.

I previously worked in a company with this policy. It meant the receptionist got the same bonus as the Principal Engineers. That policy might make some people unhappy if they think they deserve more compensation because they are more educated / smarter / experienced in a specialty. The thing is, the admin ans support staff worked hard to make the place run smoothly. The engineers were almost completely unburdened with flight, accommodation or training bookings. IT equipment was procured and commissioned in days, not weeks/months. If someone was roadblocked, the organisation worked to remove the roadblock.

It was the best company I have ever worked for. Sadly, the company was acquired and the cooperative culture died after a few years.

Other places I have worked are in contrast much more mercenary. Individual performance is measured and used to determine compensation and promotion. Individuals and internal teams actively compete with each other resulting in significant inefficiency. Internal politics dominate business making decisions.

You can still measure performance against KPIs but not tie it to individual compensation. Instead use the metrics to analyse where there might be opportunities for improving efficiency through restructuring / training.

<comment><USER10> Do you think that this successful bonus strategy would work if it was done as profit-sharing rather than bonus? I guess it is kind of the same thing, but there might be subtle differences. I don't know much about this area but I was always impressed by Balsmiq's profit-sharing ideas.

<comment><USER9> In some sense it is a profit sharing strategy. The owners will still have strategic spending goals for profits (growth, R&D, acquisition etc). Also, depending on how long the company has been around, the owners may also have to pay down debts taken out to start/grow the company.

That must be balanced against ensuring employees are adequately compensated vs the local market expectations.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Maybe a much longer window in the equity would be a better idea.

Instead of vest over 4 years - vest over 10 years, with the bulk of them later.

This way they know they have to create long term value.

<comment><USER12> No, that would not work any better. Who is going to be that god-like genius to disentangle cause and effect of an individual person's actions anyway, and now even in the long run? In an environment where no experiments or tests are possible, because the chosen path is the only path we will ever know.

<comment><USER13> For an executive, I don't care tracking cause and effect of their individual actions. I care about the aggregate outcome for stakeholders (shareholders, customers, and employees).

Whether 13 weeks of paid parental leave or this healthcare plan vs that one or this change to the telecommuting rules that they advocated for is irrelevant. Did the company succeed and thrive and serve its stakeholders?

One measure that I've seen recently (and like) is "compounded growth rate, over 6-10 years, of the 3 year moving average of stock price" from grant to payout date, subject to minimum thresholds [so you're not just paying for ordinary market growth].

That measure is also imperfect, but it seems less imperfect than others. (Disclosure: the company I work for adopted such a plan last year, so we won't know how it really plays out for at least 5.5 more years. Edit: program summary here: [http://ir.cimpress.com/mobile.view?c=188894&v=202&d=3&id=aHR...](http://ir.cimpress.com/mobile.view?c=188894&v=202&d=3&id=aHR0cDovL2FwaS50ZW5rd2l6YXJkLmNvbS9maWxpbmcueG1sP2lwYWdlPTEwOTIzNDE5JkRTRVE9MCZTRVE9MCZTUURFU0M9U0VDVElPTl9FTlRJUkUmc3Vic2lkPTU3) )

<comment><USER12>
      For an executive, I don't care tracking cause and
      effect of their individual actions.

So you want to pay executives but not based on how THEY actually did as individuals, but on a group basis?

That is a truly innovative bonus system. Excuse the sarcasm, you invited it.

In case you meant something else than me, you replied to my comment that was a reply to one very specific comment, and I obviously assume we are still on that topic. In that context your reply "I don't care how the individual does" is strange at the very least.

EDIT:

Ah I get it, but it does not make any more sense because if you assumed I meant the actions of the executive on a Tuesday at 2 pm in September instead of his whole reign than I don't understand how one can come up with such an interpretation. Reminds me of the topic submitted one or two days ago of that investor person who didn't want to say anything in public any more to not have to have exactly these kinds of ridiculous misinterpretations to deal with.

You _cannot_ say if it was that specific individuals actions specifically that caused success! Not even if the executive is CEO for 30 years. It has been shown again and again that such successful executives, when placed into a different environment suddenly fail. Because it isn't _just them_ , it is the _whole environment_ that caused their success.

<comment><USER13> >So you want to pay executives but not based on how THEY actually did as individuals, but on a group basis?

>That is a truly innovative bonus system. Excuse the sarcasm, you invited it.

Yes, that is _exactly_ what I want to do. As a customer, shareholder, or employee, I don't care if it was Bill the COO's execution or Jane the CEO's vision and strategy caused the company to succeed; I care the company succeeded.

It is "all for one and one for all".

> In case you meant something else than me, you replied to my comment that was > a reply to one very specific comment, and I obviously assume we are still on > that topic.

I also assumed that. We adopted a similarly structured program as edblarney contemplated, summarized here: [http://ir.cimpress.com/mobile.view?c=188894&v=202&d=3&id=aHR...](http://ir.cimpress.com/mobile.view?c=188894&v=202&d=3&id=aHR0cDovL2FwaS50ZW5rd2l6YXJkLmNvbS9maWxpbmcueG1sP2lwYWdlPTEwOTIzNDE5JkRTRVE9MCZTRVE9MCZTUURFU0M9U0VDVElPTl9FTlRJUkUmc3Vic2lkPTU3)

Your text was clear that it was "individual person's actions". I did not misread that as "what they had for lunch on a random Tuesday".

I'm sorry that you are frustrated by "exactly these kinds of ridiculous misinterpretations" in this thread. I don't think they are with the person you think though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Doesn't this article contradict itself? On one hand, the article quotes some guy who says his work isn't influenced by bonuses and then just a few sentences later it says the danger of bonuses is that they influence risky behavior.

Which is it?

<comment><USER12> So we have

1) _" his work isn't influenced by bonuses"_

2) _" the danger of bonuses is that they influence risky behavior"_

I see two statements - but I don't see a contradiction.

      Which is it?

They are independent of one another?

<comment><USER15> Exactly. They influence but not in a good way.

<comment><USER12> Now _that_ is a contradiction: You say "exactly" to then claim the exact opposite?

How do they interact? I said - and still say - those are completely independent statements.

How does 1) have any influence on 2)? If that individuals work is or isn't influenced by bonuses the general statement 2) changes somehow? Magically? Or vide versa, the same. No connection. No matter what you think of 2), the personal statement 1) is right or wrong independent of 2).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> There is no intrinsic motivation. [http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/inmotiv.htm](http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/inmotiv.htm)

<comment><USER17> You're making a rather sweeping statement based on the opinion of a single professor. A quick Google Scholar search will show you that the vast majority of research on motivation still shows that intrinsic motivation very much exists. It's just our definitions of extrinsic vs. intrinsic and the recognition of how the two interact that are changing slightly. See, for example, [1][2][3].

[1] [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361476X99...](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361476X99910202)

[2] [http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/amp/55/1/68/](http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/amp/55/1/68/)

[3] [http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/bul/125/6/627/](http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/bul/125/6/627/)</comment></comment>


Peter Thiel, YC, and Hard Decisions - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/projectinclude/peter-thiel-yc-and-hard-decisions-2b91bab83764#.smxav41bn <comment><USER2> ...written by Ellen Pao. Famous for doing a not-so-well job at Kleiner Perkins, getting fired for that, and then her filing a lawsuit against Kleiner Perkins because they "fired her because of sexism" (and then losing that lawsuit in court).

So yeah, I take everything I read from her with a grain of salt.

([http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/28/technology/ellen-pao- klein...](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/28/technology/ellen-pao-kleiner- perkins-case-decision.html), in case someone wants to know)

</comment><comment><USER3> I will get down voted for this, but it is worth it to speak my mind:

I get so fed up with people telling other people what to think, which candidates to support, etc. I don't much care for Donald Trump, but it is a free country and if people want to support him, that is their business and I support their right to their own opinions even if I don't like their opinions. I would hope that most Trump supporters are just voting anti-establishment, but their reasons are their own business.

<comment><USER4> I'm voting for Trump because of the alternative. He's an awful candidate, and really a bad human being. However I'd rather vote and make that vote count, than to piss it down the drain by folding my arms and staying out. Better the devil I know...

<comment><USER5> > Better the devil I know...

Usually, when someone uses this phrase, they don't know anything about the other option. It sounds like you know plenty about Clinton.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> How did the previous story ( [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12726970](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12726970) ) get knocked off the front page so quickly?

<comment><USER7> That story, currently on the second page, was put there because of user flags. It was also heavily penalized by the software flamewar detector, but we've turned that off. Moderators have not penalized the post.

<comment><USER8> What changes are you making to the implementation to prevent this from happening in future?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Speaking as a woman in tech, I thank the team at Project Include for standing up in public. That's hard to do and in itself, means a lot.

</comment><comment><USER10> Maybe he knew about this.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY)

</comment><comment><USER11> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12727602](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12727602)</comment>


Not alone: how fluidinfo is organised - <AUTHOR> http://www.fluidinfo.com/terry/2008/12/05/not-alone/

<comment><USER2> Ok, I've watched the first and 3/4 of the 2nd video, and I'm not quite sure how this is revolutionary. Unless I'm missing something, I could write this in a couple days, less the scaleability, maybe I'm missing something?

</comment><comment><USER3> hmm, reminds me of couchdb a little.

interesting=true</comment>