Poutine Dynamics (2016) - <AUTHOR> https://www.erudit.org/fr/revues/cuizine/2016-v7-n2-cuizine02881/1038479ar/ <comment><USER2> I mentioned this in another thread. I'm a bit concerned about the possible effect of declaring "cultural appropriation" on poutine and other things.

In my city, and possibly Ontario, and maybe all of Canada, Shawarma Poutine has become a big hit. It's poutine with Shawarma chicken shaved onto it. It's glorious. All the shops I've been to are run and owned by either Iranians or other middle Eastern immigrants.

So to me it's a beautiful success story of immigration in Canada. These individuals are refining a brand new dish by combining middle Eastern and Quebecois food.

If we call it cultural appropriation and wag our finger at it, we possibly lose out on new things like shawarma poutine. What's the fear? That others will embrace and adopt your culture?

I feel less strongly about this part. I'm probably wrong. But I wonder if it has to do with the feeling I felt strongly as a kid. I played Bungie games like Marathon and Pathways before Halo came out. And then Halo arrived and a whole new breed of gamers appeared and made it their thing. They spoke like experts at the lunchroom table. But they didn't grok Bungie and didn't know the origins like I did. And it made me so inexplicably frustrated at them. They were stealing my thing.

Edit: a lot of good responses that have opened my eyes to additional perspectives. If you've gone this far, be sure to read the responses, too!

<comment><USER3> I don't feel like anybody is asking for any shop to stop serving anything.

The paper is highlighting the dual identity of being Québecois: whenever Canada celebrates anything Québécois it's Canadian, but when it's a bad thing then that's not Canadian.

I remember the terrible jokes at the expense of poutine when I was a kid. How it was a horrible Québec thing. Now the jokes have stopped because poutine is deemed wonderful, but poutine is no longer Québecois, it's now Canadian.

That's cultural appropriation, and the reasonable thing to do is to express its existence, internalize the meaning of this act, and move on. No one should stop serving poutine.

<comment><USER4> Last time I checked Quebec reaped the benefits of Alberta's oil sands... didn't they?

<comment><USER3> Are you like a Russian troll trying to sow dissent or something? We're talking about poutine!

<comment><USER4> Nope. The OP is talking about cultural appropriation as if Quebec and Canada were 2 different places. They're not.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I thought this would be an examination of the fluid dynamics of poutine, perhaps a revelation that fully-integrated poutine dishes are non-Newtonian fluids.

Additionally: given the heavy cultural significance ascribed to poutine by this "paper", would it follow that the import of poutine in US places like New York under the name "disco fries" constitutes an egregious form of cultural appropriation and erasure?

I just want to enjoy my fries, man.

</comment><comment><USER6> The title is fun, but this is a terrible paper. Yes, Canadians poke fun at Québécois, and sometimes poutine is used (but rarely these days given its popularity).

But a big part of Canadian culture is being "in on the joke". We tend to love it when we're satirized in the media, particularly American media. I think this appreciation for jokes made at our expense is partly responsible for our high volume of comedian exports.

So we make fun of BC folk, they make fun of Torontonians; Quebecois make fun of Acadiens; we all make fun of PEI. It's not done from malice, just good- natured ribbing about our differences.

This paper is a great example of research-free critical theory.

<comment><USER7> > It's not done from malice, just good-natured ribbing about our differences.

I'm Québécois. My family has been Québécois for hundreds of years. My first language was French but I spoke English from a very young age, and went to a mixture of English and French schools. I watch Québécois movies and tv shows, listen to Québécois music and radio, and cook traditional Québécois food for myself and friends every chance I get.

I can't vouch for any of the other Canadian subcultures you've named, but I can assure you that I never enjoyed the taunting, the name calling, the literal physical violence (I got beat up many times as kid because I was "one of those fucking French frogs"), and not to mention the inevitable eye rolling and pointed questions about why my particular cultural heritage was even allowed to exist in Canada.

Some people view us as some sort of blight that needs to be eradicated because we don't fit the mould of what a "Canadian" is. I've had people tell me to my face that they "can't wait for the French to just die off in this country", and then laugh because they think it's a funny joke.

I'm not saying everyone is like that, and things seem to have softened in the past few decades, but please don't believe that we enjoy being marginalized.

<comment><USER6> I mean hey - that really sucks. It sounds like you've met some shitty people.

It doesn't change the fact that good-natured ribbing is really common in cross-cultural contexts. I grew up in Ottawa, a really bilingual city, and making fun of each other was part of how we all bonded in spite of our differences.

Intent matters.

<comment><USER8> Intent matters, but so does being aware of the effect of "punching down". Ontario, specifically Ottawa and Toronto, dominate so much in Canada, that people in repressed Quebec, impoverished PEI, or one of Ontario's western colonies may not appreciate it as much as you think.

<comment><USER6> I find this claim that Quebec is a repressed province bizarre, particularly when more Prime Ministers have hailed from Quebec than any other province (including Ontario): [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Prime_Ministers_of_Can...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Prime_Ministers_of_Canada_by_constituency)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Cultural appropriation of foods is completely natural and should absolutely be encouraged... Do we really want southwest/mexican food without herbs based in europe and spices from the east? Or, for that matter, removing tortilla chips, or flour based tortillas. It's absurd to try to stop, and at a net loss to society to do so. It's been happening forever and it's a net good.

</comment><comment><USER10> Living in Northern Ontario, I'm no stranger to Poutine. All sorts of places are popping up selling 'flavoured' poutines. Nothing beats the original. In fact, the best poutine is found at chip stands with suspect food handling standards. Not in fast food places nor even restaurants.

My personal favourite comes from the bush town of River Valley Ont. My god I could go for one now and it's only 8:30am.

Hey, were all gonna die sometime!</comment>


CSound for Android - <AUTHOR> http://www.palmsounds.net/2015/12/csound-now-available-for-android.html <comment><USER2> I'm not sure about the utility of CSound on Android (I'll have to try it out), but I'm happy it's there, all the same (I'm of the NetBSD "put it everywhere" school).

CSound is the portable C (programming language) progeny of what's called "Music-N"[0] synthesizers by Max Mathews[1] of Bell Labs c. 1957. I'd say it eschews a learning curve in favour of a learning wall, but that said, once you're in, it's _fascinating_. I've heard it described as an audio version of programming in assembly (I don't disagree with this), which might sound off- putting, but you can't help buy learn interesting things if you stick with it.

Trivia -- Max/MSP audio software is named after Music-N creator Max Mathews, and Miller S. Puckette, the author of Max/MSP[2] (and the logical free successor, Pure Data (Pd)[3].

Congratulations, CSound.

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUSIC-N](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUSIC-N)

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

[2] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_%28software%29](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_%28software%29)

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

edit: formatting, links

<comment><USER3> Utility of CSound on Android? I think it just means that Android is mainstream enough for it to be of use to someone out there .. I mean, I know of a few students who still have CSound assignments these days, so I imagine that it will be quite useful. I wonder if Pd is already onboard?

Both tools are very welcome, imho, on Android .. which has a real lack of great-quality audio apps - unlike iOS. The fact that Androids' Audio latency is terribly sub-par won't make a difference to us Csound users though, and I think thats a key point: In spite of Androids dull audio performance, CSound can still be used to do amazing, advanced synthesis on the platform ..

<comment><USER2> > Utility of CSound on Android?

Yes. My CSound experience is vi, and csound in X Windows. There's a tremendous amount of editing (I don't do much MIDI with it), and batch-oriented work (which you touch on wrt Androids latency).

So, the compute-power of an android device would be enough to render a score, but when I think of producing original work, or even editing some pre-existing work on an Android device, I think "pain" and "frustration".

> I wonder if Pd is already onboard?

Apparently [0][1].

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

[1] [https://puredata.info/downloads/pddroidparty](https://puredata.info/downloads/pddroidparty)

<comment><USER2> OK. Downloaded, playing with it[0]... at first blush it looks like it presents the sort of interface one might have made themselves w/ the fltk toolkit. So I've got 5 buttons, a trackpad (nice!!) and 4 sliders.

It's fun, but different from _MY_ typical work flow which is: edit a score, run, and tweak the text of the params, so I have a sense of control and understanding, versus "just knob twiddling"[1]. This Android port might be fun, though, for experimenting with parameters of instruments, or just recreational noise making.

[0] Use "Drone IV", by Michael Gogins from the Examples.

[1] I'm not knocking knob-twiddling, I'm just saying it's not _my_ style.

<comment><USER2> Fun, but even like "desktop" CSound, it seems pretty easy to introduce artifacts when using it in realtime (I think CSound's greatest strength is batch-processing whereby you set-up the environment, and then let the CPU churn on it and emit a .wav, like a compiler producing a binary). I don't know if this is strictly CSound or Android audio (as @fit2rule was worried about), or combination. It's unfortunate, because CSound is awesome; hopefully anybody who's introduced to CSound via this is patient and tolerant enough to stick with it.

Not perfect, but still a great achievement. Congratulations again.

<comment><USER3> Thanks for reporting in on your experience - if I had an Android device handy I'd check it out .. maybe later in the week. Got any samples of your session online by chance - it might help to introduce newcomers to this fantastic tool.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Two problems: ① Android 5 only, and ② for some reason it doesn't seem to be on F-Droid: [https://f-droid.org/repository/browse/?fdfilter=csound&fdpag...](https://f-droid.org/repository/browse/?fdfilter=csound&fdpage=1&page_id=0)

<comment><USER5> To bad Google play doesn't offer older version downloads.

<comment><USER6> As an Android developer, I am very glad that Google Play does not offer that. I can see where you are coming from though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The CSound API for Android has been around for a while now. A few years ago I built an app called EtherSurface (my first and only Android app): [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.zebproj.et...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.zebproj.etherpad)

</comment><comment><USER8> Unfortunately seems it is incompatible with all my Android devices. I was hoping to try it out!</comment>


Nine Web 2.0 startups beating the odds in down economy - <AUTHOR> http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/11/06/Nine_Web_20_startups_beating_the_odds_in_down_economy_1.html?source=fssr <comment><AUTHOR> 6 or 9 are from YC (Wufoo, DropBox, RescueTime, PollAnywhere, Posterous, Disqus)

</comment><comment><USER2> i think some of them are in the 'too small to fail' category... in which case, there are too many of them to list.</comment>


Sip – A daily digest of short, delightful tech news (by Product Hunt) - <AUTHOR> https://sip.fyi/ <comment><USER2> I do not want to install an app to read tech news. The web, while not perfect, is the ideal tool designed for this.

Literally why?</comment>


AIRTAME takes on Chromecast with wireless HDMI - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3fqcP3RoNE

<comment><USER2> I am a big fan of this product, I have backed it already on Indiegogo, really looking forward to getting mine! :-)</comment>


Show HN: I learned to code to launch my first iOS game - Sky Fish Phonics - <AUTHOR> http://itunes.apple.com/app/id640258308?mt=8

<comment><AUTHOR> I'd love to hear your feedback. You can also learn more about the game, Sky Fish Phonics, and its adaptive learning system at [http://www.knowbilitygames.com](http://www.knowbilitygames.com)

</comment><comment><USER2> Congrats! What's your background? I noticed "designed by experts"</comment>


Google Science Fair 2012 - <AUTHOR> http://www.google.com/events/sciencefair/

<comment> Tim-Boss "How can we turn garbage into energy?" Burn it.

"Why do cats purr?" Evolved basic social actions, display of affection/assuagement.

"Is it better to boil or bake?" Boil water, bake cake (or get bake).

"Can robots change their mind?" Only if they were programmed with algorithms that enabled them to.

"Why do some things bounce?" Newtonian laws of conservation of momentum, angular momentum and energy.

"Why do spinning balls curve?" The spin of the ball forces air around it in the direction of spin, coupled with a forward motion this produces a difference in air pressures on either side of the ball causing it to 'curve' a path through the air.

I can't help but feel the kids time would be better spent aiming their question at wikipedia instead of another thinly disguised Google Co. marketing site! ;)

<comment><USER2> The point of science is never the answers, it's the process you use to arrive at the answers.

Yes, you can search Wikipedia for answers to any of the answers to the questions you list. That's not the point. If you do that, you'll be completely lost when you need an answer for a question than _nobody_ , anywhere, has ever investigated before.

I wish this point was drilled into kid's head in elementary school. It's not what you know, it's what you do when you find something you _don't_ know.

(Aside from that, all of the questions you list have much deeper answers than the ones you give. "Can robots change their mind? Only if they were programmed with algorithms that enabled them to" is false in the era of machine learning, or tautological if you count machine learning as "an algorithm that enabled them to." "Why do some things bounce? Newtonian laws of conservation of momentum, angular momentum, and energy" ignores the vast field of material science, and questions like why does rubber bounce while clay does not, and why does silicone not bounce very much yet if you add boric acid to it (making Silly Putty [tm]), it bounces a lot?)</comment></comment>


About that audition project - <AUTHOR> https://ma.rtinseeba.ch/about-that-audition-project/

<comment><USER2> I don't think a week-long project means a 40 hour project, as the author suggests. In my experience, a week-long audition project has been typically a 5-8 hour project, something I can knock out in a few evenings.

Additionally, it's always been a toy example, typically in the vein of "read some input from a file and do something with it". It can almost always be knocked out with the standard libraries for any given language.

</comment><comment><USER3> When there are bigger corporate hiring en mass then something like audition project might be unfeasible but serves as a very good measure when hiring in startups.</comment>


Ask HN: Do you use any alternative microblogging platform? - <AUTHOR> and what's unique about it?<p>alternative meaning not twitter/tumblr/mastodon <comment><USER2> Weibo large user base</comment>


$6k per person to cryopreserve everyone? - <AUTHOR> http://lesswrong.com/lw/5w1/the_cost_of_universal_cryonics/

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm thinking the figure probably errs more on the pessimistic side, though the author considers it optimistic. It doesn't take into account increased technology, the benefits of assisted suicide, or the availability of cheaper labor and materials in third-world areas.

But in any case, this is a handy number to start thinking about how realistic the goal of a post-death society really is. If everyone could have it, would everyone want it? And if so, what is the maximum we would collectively be willing to pay?

</comment><comment><USER2> Seems to me that spending that much money preserving "hardware" (bodies) another (better) option would be to preserve "software" (e.g. DNA sequence, MRI, cat scan, EKG, etc.).

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2590217>

<comment><AUTHOR> While better than nothing, I am skeptical that a good enough MRI or CT scan can be taken to preserve one's personality to the degree that preserving the brain physically could do. Chemical preservation is one inexpensive option that has been around for centuries -- Ben Franklin mentioned the possibility, and some brains such as that of Charles Babbage are still preserved. Brains preserved this way and scanned at a later date would yield much better data than the best brain scans taken today.

However, even this is probably a lot less fidelity than cryonics at its best. The vitrification process actually preserves a significant degree of cellular viability. For example, a rabbit kidney has actually been successfully implanted after cryopreservation. So if we are trying to maximize the degree to which someone avoids death (acknowledging that some degree of death / memory loss is probably inevitable, for now at least), cryonics is likely to be the best available bet.</comment></comment>


Why you should be skeptical that any video is real - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2016/03/23/why-you-should-be-skeptical-that-any-video-is-real/ <comment><USER2> video discussed here before: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11314931](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11314931)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. I did not see this.</comment></comment>


Easel (YC S12) launches as an easier way to design for the web in your browser - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/07/easel-a-web-app-for-web-design/

<comment><USER2> Excited to see where this goes - the team is spot on that

"The current web design process is broken. People use image editing tools for creation, share screenshots/flat exports over email, and spend more time than necessary manually translating the design into a working product."

Certainly the future of application design should be with tools that understand the medium and the process.

<comment><USER3> > _Certainly the future of application design should be with tools that > understand the medium and the process._

This. The reason why web-design is very hard to abstract out into a Photoshop- like app is that because non-trivial websites are at their core, a fundamentally different medium than anything that Photoshop-familiar-designers are trained to create.

To treat the transition from visual-sketch to working-website as just some tedious code-work that gets in the way of brilliance and implementation is missing the point...the brilliance IS typically in the code that implements the vision in such a way that the site is maintainable and graceful across different platforms and screensizes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Great, now it's even easier for people like me with no talent for design to make horrendous UIs.

Edit: For a more helpful comment, they really need some <input type=number> things in there. You now, TSpinEdits (any Delphi users out there?). Number controls.

<comment><USER5> I've gotta agree on this one. Generally all I can think when I use browser- based design tools is how much faster/easier it would be for me to go into Photoshop or better, the code itself.

I think the biggest flaw in these apps is they start people with either an amateur design or a blank template instead of exposing the grids and guides that define a website (and further define the limitations of web design) right off the bat. Even though it starts as a blank page, I love Alex Maccaw's Stylo (<http://styloapp.com/>) because the tools are simple and familiar, they don't overburden the page I'm focusing on and it creates smart guides that show up when I've got two elements on the same plane. It's the only one of these apps I've tried that actually extends my creativity and doesn't end up taking me longer to design something I like between clunky UI elements or trying to figure out what everything does.

<comment><USER6> Haha, I'm honored (and slightly amazed) that people are using it in production.

<comment><USER4> Hey, perhaps I'm missing something, but could you add a button to show the styles on an element, somehow? Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> We've been using Easel to quickly prototype new designs for Vayable, and we're pretty happy with it. It's way more convenient to send around easel links than mucking with Photoshop files.

Congrats to Easel! Keep going!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Really impressive to see how fast these guys are iterating. Excited to see where this goes.

</comment><comment><USER9> Just tried it. Really cool. I have one question though. The option to right click and "Export HTML/CSS" only exports the current selected widget and not the entire grid/layout. That would be awesome if possible :)

<comment><USER4> I think that's intentional. The web doesn't need more fixed-size, absolutely- positioned-everything sites.

Easel aims to be a design tool, I think, to help you in coding and designing sites, but won't do all of the former for you.

<comment><AUTHOR> Exactly what we are thinking.

We realize that it's a difficult problem to create good markup but that doesn't mean we can't help. So we felt the best tradeoff was to give the CSS properties used so you can spend less time with the eyedropper tool.

There is an option to export the full page but we think it's best for quick prototypes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Getting the details right on individual CSS elements is one of things that always falls to the back of the priority queue. Easel seems like a fantastic option for quickly polishing up buttons, forms, etc, which adds up to a much better UI over time. Great job guys!

<comment><USER11> Thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I love it! Some tabs would be awesome, as would multiple background images (just saying that because I'm having trouble with them today, I doubt many people use multiple images)

</comment><comment><USER13> Well done. This solves a big problem for some. Enough said.

</comment><comment><USER14> this is cool, but hope we won't see more terrible UIs from people with bad design sense</comment>


San Francisco wants to become a manufacturing mecca again - <AUTHOR> http://sf.curbed.com/2016/11/2/13501634/sf-manufacturing-businesses <comment><USER2> But how will you deal with toxic byproducts of manufacturing? Sure, those can be mitigated, but that adds cost, and there is already high cost being in San Francisco.

<comment><AUTHOR> You mitigate by redefining toxins as resources through technology, i.e. carbon capture, waste-to-energy, toilet-to-tap.

This will add costs, but in a macro-economic context, these costs would be negligible, offset by a healthy rate of inflation, increasing wages and overall economic growth.

Plus, once toxins are resources, they have value and could be used to offset, at least partially, the additional costs.</comment></comment>


The World's First Digitally Signed International Agreement - <AUTHOR> http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/12/behold-the-worlds-first-digitally-signed-international-agreement/282582/

<comment><USER2> >they've been widely adopted in the business world (and, controversially, by President Obama)

The link discussed President Obama's use of an Autopen to sign a bill. I'm not entirely sure how that is comparable to Digital Signatures.

<comment><AUTHOR> It is always strange coming from Estonia with strong crypto based certificate based digital signatures hearing services like Echosign or Hellosign called digital signing, when often people there use writing their name in an input field and the software turning it into a Comic Sans like script being called a digital signature.</comment></comment>


More Extreme in Every Way: The New Titan Is Here – Nvidia  TITAN Xp - <AUTHOR> https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2017/04/06/titan-xp/ <comment><USER2> It's funny I remember this magazine cover as a kid:

[http://s7.computerhistory.org/is/image/CHM/500004286-03-01?$...](http://s7.computerhistory.org/is/image/CHM/500004286-03-01?$re- medium$)

The machine pictured (Intel Touchstone Delta) performed 30GFLOPs and cost upward of $10m. Now a computer 400x as powerful fits on a card and can be yours for $1.2k.

<comment><USER3> Wow - that brought back memories. Here's a link to the full article: [https://books.google.com/books?id=ogEAAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PP1&pg=PA...](https://books.google.com/books?id=ogEAAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PP1&pg=PA50#v=twopage&q&f=false)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Someone updated the 10-series Wikipedia page [1] making comparison to the previous card easier.

Compared to the Titan X Pascal it has more cores, a higher clock, and more memory bandwidth.

[1] - [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_10_series#GeForce_10_....](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_10_series#GeForce_10_.2810xx.29_series)

</comment><comment><USER5> Finally! MacOS drivers for Pascal

<comment><USER6> Nice to see this but surely this is only of use for Hackintosh builds? Or is Thunderbolt connectivity supported for external GPUs?

<comment><USER7> The very old Pro, and external GPUs:

>Currently Mac users are limited to Maxwell GPUs from the company's 9-series cards, but next week we'll be able to finally experience Pascal, albeit a $1200 Pascal model, on the Mac.

>We have reached out to Nvidia for a statement about compatibility down the line with lesser 10-series cards, and I'm happy to report that Nvidia states that all Pascal-based GPUs will be Mac-enabled via upcoming drivers. This means that you will be able to use a GTX 1080, for instance, on a Mac system via an eGPU setup, or with a Hackintosh build.

[https://9to5mac.com/2017/04/06/nvidia-titan-xp-beta- pascal-d...](https://9to5mac.com/2017/04/06/nvidia-titan-xp-beta-pascal- drivers-mac/)

<comment><USER8> Thats awesome, I was thinking about putting a hackintosh build together with a spare 1070 I have laying around.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Also the previous Pascal Titan appears to be dropped from the 10 series webpage[1], although it's not hard to find [2]. So it looks like this replaces the old card entirely. I've not followed the consumer GPU market too closely as of late, is this normal for Nvidia? Or have they perhaps got yields up to better level?

[1] [http://www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/10series/](http://www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/10series/)

[2] [http://www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/10series/titan-x/](http://www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/10series/titan-x/)

<comment><USER9> The 1080 Ti was marginally faster than the previous Titan, while being significantly cheaper. This is a small spec bump to put the Titan back on top, so that people with money to burn still have an excuse to give Nvidia $1200 rather than $700.

If you ask me the 1080 Ti is still a better choice, but there are always a few people out there who just have to have the very fastest thing and Nvidia is happy to take their money.

<comment><USER10> I keep my eye on the Folding@Home spreadsheet of GPUs and their price/performance ratios, updated with price changes regularly. My 2012 Mac Mini going full blast does about 5k Points Per Day (PPD), while the Titan X Pascal does 1200k, but performance per Watt is the key metric. [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1v5gXral3BcFOoXs5n1M6...](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1v5gXral3BcFOoXs5n1M6l_Uo3pZpQYogn6gVlxRPnz0/edit#gid=0)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I wonder when the Linux drivers will be out. I'm running dual 1070s powering a single Dell 5K on my Arch Linux desktop machine and it's amazing.

<comment> Mk-0 Serious question- what benefit do you get out of this? I had an SLI setup with Linux for awhile as well, before realizing that the second GPU was never being tapped into at all. It's recognized, and is getting power, but it's wholly under-utilized (if at all).

From everything I've found, Linux doesn't benefit from SLI nearly as much Windows can.

<comment> semi-extrinsic I've used several multi-GPU (up to 8x K40) Linux machines, and if your application can provide enough GPU work (say ML/AI, or physics simulations, etc.) they scale perfectly. For gaming, I don't know, but could be GP is doing non-gaming stuff.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Does anyone have any idea, or even educated guess on if and when we might see a price drop on other, now ""outdated"" (not really) GPUs? I was just starting to plan building a desktop with plenty of CUDA cores, and now that this has come out I'm wondering if I should wait a few weeks or a month to see if prices fall.

</comment><comment><USER13> Does this also mean we will finally get mac drivers for the new cards? (Hello Hackintosh Community)</comment>


Ask HN: What keeps you from burning out? - <AUTHOR>

Let's face it, nobody can code every minute of their lives without burning out too fast.  What kind of stuff do you promote at the office / home office that keeps you motivated, loose, and happy?
We're setting up the office space now, and we're committed to making it as fun as possible from the start, to help offset all the stress that is sure to come.  Given a budget and space restraints of course ;)
Here's our table / setup so far: http://post.ly/AkcX <comment><USER2> Games? Sometimes I take a break with some video game, but then again I'm kind of young so I don't know if this works for older people.

Also if the thing I'm working on is mentally stimulating and challenging, it motivates me by itself and keeps me from burning out. So something like a couch to sit on or a place with a great view is good to go to and just think.

If you can put in windows, put those in. A TV would work too, and a place for snacks like a fridge.

</comment><comment><USER3> I think the best thing you can do is focus on results and not the clock. If someone wants to take 2 days off in the middle of nowhere, or work odd hours, they should, as long as they eventually produce as much as they're supposed to.

A "fun" workplace may not actually be, since it seeks to turn the office into the new home. People should actually go home in order to feel the most at home.

<comment><AUTHOR> that's definitely a good point. balance between real life and work is a must, rather than trying to keep people only at the office. I like the foosball table because it lets everyone step away from work and do something together that's fun and totally different than what they were just doing before.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> My favourite (home-)office 'things':

* big punching bag. (this is a must have!)

* place to be alone (toilet does not count!)

* working hammock (as homer suggested) probably a big sofa is ok too

* a kitchen

* my brother works for a company where they have breakfast together every Friday.

and since I visited your website, I would like to have a fish-tank. :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Punching bag is cool, helps promote health too! Good suggestion.

Glad you took a look at the blog, the fish tank is currently in my house, but if budget permits, I'd like to set one up in the office area too. Saltwater reefs are ridiculously soothing to watch and take care of.

breakfast together sounds like a fun idea =) do they go out somewhere? make it there? cater it?

<comment><USER4> Afer I got my punching bag, I really had a lot more respect for boxers. :)

From my understanding, they do not go out, but make breakfast in a conference room. Basic stuff is somehow organized.. and everybody brings small stuff like special marmalade once in a while to spice things up. I guess that they are about 20-30 people. They do talk about business all the time. But as it is not enforced anyhow, it does not feel like work.

They seem to have a very nice working culture. To quote from his (german only blog): 'Meetings are very important. Showing up late is strictly forbidden and would result in drastic punishment. Meetings are so important, that we would never ever let the times overlap with our foosball table tournaments.'

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Trying to be conscious of feeling like I am burning (out). If I can be conscious of that feeling, I am able to detach to a certain degree. This enables me to go a hell of a lot further. I guess simply being aware that I may be burning out helps me find perspective.

</comment><comment><USER6> Reading Hacker News and not being made feel guilty :-)

</comment><comment><USER7> Environment. When I'm putting more effort into tuning out a noisy, distracting environment than I am into the work product, burnout is on the horizon.

Beware of people who claim to like such environments: Some function well in them, but in my anecdotal observation, many crank out substandard work. This accumulates over time into big problems.</comment>


Ask HN: What's the equivalent to a 3 Michelin starred restaurant in tech? - <AUTHOR> I've been watching "Chef's table" recently and I was so impressed by the level of expertise that the chefs have. Even more impressive is the team spirit, attention to detail, desire to never stop innovating, pursuit for perfection. It feels like working in such a restaurant is an amazing and enriching experience. I'm wondering if there is an equivalent in the tech world - if there are companies that work like this, and if so, are they more successful than other companies? <comment><USER3> Michelin awards the whole experience in the dining room and doesn't check what went into creating it (they don't step into the kitchen). From documentaries I learned the low level kitchen staff gets a lot of pressure and many are only enduring it (low pay, longer hours) to have that on their CV. I'm not sure I'd call that "amazing and enriching experience", maybe it is later if they look back.

I would see [https://developer.apple.com/design/awards/](https://developer.apple.com/design/awards/) as the tech equivalent award currently.

<comment><USER4> This is interesting. I worked in a kitchen for a while after high school. People look down at kitchen workers but it takes a strong, well organize, calm person to do the job.

The pressure was high, the pay was low and you are constantly being told how to do your job. If you don't agree think about how you act when you're hungry.

The workers have to deal with people that are waiting for their meal. 99% good is a failure because there will always be someone that gets upset because their meal was wrong in some way. It has to be perfect and needs to be done in a timely manner. An to top it all, people get upset because it's too expensive.

When I compare those days to my IT career. IT is easy and I'm happy I never have to work a kitchen again.

I would say, from what I've heard, Amazon would take the 3 Michelin stars.

<comment><USER3> I have chefs in my family and worked at kitchen staff one summer and can relate. Everytime we meet they tell me I'm lucky to work in tech.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The game development industry. Low pay, high pressure, trying to achieve better graphics and gameplay and whatnot all the time. Ratings and reviews as Michelin awards.

<comment><USER6> Sadly unlike Michelin restaurants, you are not guaranteed to get a good game even if it has good reviews. Too much corruption going on.

<comment><USER7> I don't know much about the Michelin process, but I would be shocked if it was completely impartial either.

And I do know that there's the well-known "French Michelin" phenomenon - <USER2> star in France means much less than a star elsewhere. There are, by repute, three-star Parisian restaurants that would be struggling to get two stars elsewhere in the world.

<comment><USER6> What I mean is that a 3 stars restaurant is really never going to be "bad" by any measure. Michelin would kill their reputation if they gave out 3 stars to just any high-class restaurant.

On the other hand, there are games like BioShock Infinite which get widespread critic appraisal, while the game is obviously just a repetitive shooter with corridors and an obvious lack of any freedom. Sure, it has a storyline (whether you like it or not is a different topic) but a game should be rated primarily for how good it is in its interactive medium, not its novelization. I picked on Bioshock Infinite but it's certainly not limited to that one.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> A long time ago we used to obsess over the SEI/CMM (Capability Maturity Model), where a software organization is inspected and rated on a level from 1 (chaos, cat herding) to 5 (managed, optimizing).

Managers would read papers about the CMM and declare that they wanted to be a Level 5 organization, causing insane amounts of busywork and document generation and overall grief to realize that their underlying business processes were hopelessly in the way of any positive change.

So then the goal went from "Level 5 or Bust!" to "Okay, let's try to get to 3" and then later "Um, can we make Level 2?" Then everyone just gave up. There were only a handful of shops that ever made 5 and stayed there, the Space Shuttle engineers being the most famous example[2].

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

[2] [https://www.fastcompany.com/28121/they-write-right- stuff](https://www.fastcompany.com/28121/they-write-right-stuff)

<comment><AUTHOR> But it doesn't seem like 3 starred restaurants create "busy work" or documents, and yet, they highly value craftsmanship, quality, creativity.

What's the equivalent of that?

<comment><USER8> You might want to dig in and truly understand what a "3 star" establishment is and the _insane_ amount of hard work necessary to achieve it. The trick to earning any kind of Michelin Star, even one, is to keep the diner _from ever seeing that work_.

It may seem "amazing and enriching" from the outside, and sous-chefs that work in these establishments surely have a resume that will open doors around the world, but to think it's a fun or entertaining experience is an incorrect assessment.

Here's some reading to get you started:

[http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2015/09/top-chefs- michelin...](http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2015/09/top-chefs-michelin- stars)

<comment><USER9> Likewise, while I haven't worked in a CMMI-5 environment, I have worked in an organization where I was required to be trained in TSP/PSP which (arguably) provides an even lower defect rate than CMMI-5. The amount of process and paperwork required was absolutely ridiculous and eventually caused me to leave due to all the fun simply having been removed from the job.

It may produce high-quality output, but you won't enjoy doing it!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I think such discipline is exceptionally rare in software, and it's never sexy. How about NASA? Haven't they only had like 4 software bugs in their control software ever (or some equally absurd figure)?

In design, Apple's core hardware design team is over the top psychotic about the quality of their work. It's a true obsession for them. Many font foundries have similar neuroticism driving their work.

I think Chef's Table (great show!) does us all a disservice by kind of skipping over how unbelievably grueling such an undertaking is. It truly is inhuman. It's unfathomably difficult to create merely a successful restaurant... it takes a perfect storm — in both the positive and negative sense — for someone to create something like a Michelin starred restaurant.

So yes, probably. Is it sexy? Certainly not. It looks insane more than anything outside of the lens of a beautifully crafted documentary.

</comment><comment><USER11> It really depends on how you define success. Cheesecake Factory is more "successful" then Jiro's Restaraunt with regard to cash generation.

</comment><comment><USER12> This is a people service business like cooking. Which makes it hard to scale when it comes to excellent service. Boutique consulting companies may offer excellent service. Like with kitchens there are plenty of them all claiming to serve great food. Stellar are few. The initial looks can be deceiving.

Hint: The proof is in the pudding. But you have to sit through the whole meal to know whether you enjoyed it...

<comment><AUTHOR> Any concrete examples for such a boutique consulting company?

Can't a product company have these characteristics?

<comment><USER13> Galois is one example

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I would say probably Apple is a good example in past experiences.

Their products were regarded as things that "Just work" their website was very easy to use for support and information, and these were consistent over a long period of time.

I'm not so sure about the Apple today, but in the 2000s they were certainly were hitting their marks.

</comment><comment><USER15> Working with Jeff Dean or Sanjay Ghemawat.</comment>


FeeFighters - Make credit card processors bid for your business - <AUTHOR> http://feefighters.com/

<comment><USER2> I knew of these guys back when they were TransFS. I have nothing but good things to say about them. Other than they brought to market the idea faster than I could. grrr

</comment><comment><USER3> I used these guys a while back and was very pleased. Highly recommended if you're stepping out into the world of credit card processing.

</comment><comment><USER4> fantastic. I love the attitude.

my question is, how do you get into a situation where you make a business that traditionally waits for you to come to them, come to you?

I guess that's The Question :)

</comment><comment><USER5> Love it.</comment>


Ask HN: Where to meet non-technical cofounders? - <AUTHOR> I spent most of my undergraduate degree (in applied math/physics) with my head down powering through courses and working a job in the evenings to pay for my education. Over that time, I met a bunch of talented people, many of whom I keep in touch with, but none of whom I could ever see myself working with. Moreover, they're also all engineers as well with skillsets that more or less resemble my own.
I'm at a FAANG company at the moment and I'm finding it quite unfulfilling (nothing new here), and for the last several months I've been hacking away on my own projects just to keep honing my skills and to try to figure out what's possible in terms of turning technical know-how into commercial products.
The last one I built felt like a relatively solid idea but I quickly realized (a) how much of the difficulty in launching the product depended on having a good network and knowing how to utilize it, and (b) how much I felt poorly equipped to do (a). Moreover, I'm also understanding how deeply reliant tech products are on domain knowledge in the industry they're attempting to push into.
The conclusion here seems to be that I'd be far more effective at reaching my goals working in partnership with someone who checks the above boxes (which, in hindsight, was incredibly obvious). The problem I'm having now, though, is that none of my friends are similarly motivated to me, and networking feels nigh-impossible with the COVID-19 situation.
Does anyone here have tips on how they meet people and feel out whether there's any professional compatibility – especially in the current situation? While I'm not opposed to just riding this out and trying to network the traditional way when the world reopens, it seems like there has to be a more effective way. <comment><USER4> From Paul Graham ([http://www.paulgraham.com/bronze.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/bronze.html)):

> The good news is, choosing problems is something that can be learned. I know > that from experience. Hackers can learn to make things customers want. [6]

>This is a controversial view. One expert on "entrepreneurship" told me that any startup had to include business people, because only they could focus on what customers wanted. I'll probably alienate this guy forever by quoting him, but I have to risk it, because his email was such a perfect example of this view:

        80% of MIT spinoffs succeed provided they have at least one management person in the team at the start. The business person represents the "voice of the customer" and that's what keeps the engineers and product development on track.

> This is, in my opinion, a crock. Hackers are perfectly capable of hearing > the voice of the customer without a business person to amplify the signal > for them. Larry Page and Sergey Brin were grad students in computer science, > which presumably makes them "engineers." Do you suppose Google is only good > because they had some business guy whispering in their ears what customers > wanted? It seems to me the business guys who did the most for Google were > the ones who obligingly flew Altavista into a hillside just as Google was > getting started.

<comment><USER5> > Larry Page and Sergey Brin were grad students in computer science, which > presumably makes them "engineers." Do you suppose Google is only good > because they had some business guy whispering in their ears what customers > wanted?

Larry Page and Sergey Brin originally wanted Google to be a pay-to-use service and were against ads. I don't know how they came to their change in business model, but I suspect it was after they hired people that weren't engineers to help.

<comment><USER6> It occurred after Eric Schmidt took over operational control of Google. He focused in on a rational business model (swiped from GoTo.com [1]), it's specifically why the venture capitalists installed him. Schmidt had both an engineering background and management experience. The story I recall from back then was about John Doerr telling Schmidt to not fuck it up (recounted in a nicer way by Schmidt, below [2]); the advertising runway was pretty simple for Google, given the product they were building under the hood.

Schmidt joined Google in March 2001. For all of 1999 Google only had $220,000 in revenue (founded Sept 1998). Their early, primitive experiments in advertising worked well enough, they brought in $19m in revenue for 2000 (which would increase 300% in 2001, and then 400% in 2002).

[1] 2013: [https://slate.com/business/2013/10/googles-big-break-how- bil...](https://slate.com/business/2013/10/googles-big-break-how-bill-gross- goto-com-inspired-the-adwords-business-model.html)

[2] 2005: [https://www.gq.com/story/google-larry- sergey](https://www.gq.com/story/google-larry-sergey)

> Schmidt met all of Larry and Sergey's stringent criteria. He had a credible > name, a Ph.D. (from Berkeley), and he promised not to push the boys aside or > dismantle the quirky culture they'd engendered. "The board members told me, > basically, 'Don't screw this thing up!' " Schmidt says. "They said, 'It > needs some infrastructure, some growing, but the gem here is very real.'"

<comment><USER7> Wow, that growth is absolutely insane even by startup standards.

Has there been another company since Google that grew so fast? $19mil revenue in 2yrs, then tripling and quadrupling.

<comment><USER8> I believe Uber's revenue grew at that pace.

<comment><USER9> Fastest company to reach $100m ARR [1]:

Slack - 3 years Twilio - ~5 years ServiceNow - 6 years Shopify - 7 years

[1] [https://www.bvp.com/bvp-nasdaq-emerging-cloud- index](https://www.bvp.com/bvp-nasdaq-emerging-cloud-index)

<comment><USER10> This list is saas companies. Its missing all consumer brands.

<comment><USER11> Compaq grew nearly as fast as some of those SaaS companies, and was engaged in design, manufacturing and sales of a complex technology product that actually had to work, not just buggy web software. IIRC, they reached $1B faster than any company ever at the time. SaaS and "sharing" economy (really skimming economy) apps are not sustainable, but then as it turned out, neither was Compaq, after they entered into a stupid mergers...

<comment><USER6> Apple, at least back then, used to hold the record for fastest entry into the Fortune 500. It took them seven years to get there (#411 their first year on the list, in 1983).

They had $583 million in sales for 1983. $1.5 billion in today's dollar. They hit basically $1b the next year, at $982 million for 1984 (in 1984 dollars). Inflation adjusted I'm guessing they hit the $1 billion mark at about six years in business.

I similarly recall that Compaq grew extremely fast. Dell's liftoff followed a similar trajectory (the start was a bit slower, due to how Michael Dell started the company).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Unfortunately, founder-dating is the same as normal dating but probably even harder as the stakes are higher. It's very difficult to find same "motivation- level" people (how much do they "want" it, are they as "hungry" as you, etc.) and it is very hard to gauge with talk as you have to see their actions to really know and sometimes it may be too late. At the same time, there is also the "stage in life" (single, married, etc.) and how much can they risk (like a 45-yr old person may not be able to quit their high-paying job so you will carry the load and end up with a lot of resentment)

Since you work at a FAANG as an engineer, I assume you are fairly well compensated so I suggest finding a semi-expensive hobby (definitely not FIRE friendly) like sailing or flying which may cost like $1k/mo to something you remotely enjoy so you get to meet people from all walks of life and domain expertise enjoying a "not cheap" hobby. The fact that they can afford it means they are motivated. The person doing your hobby may not be the person you end up starting a business with but it may be one-step away (degrees of separation).

This may be bad advice ... so take with a grain of salt :)

<comment><USER13> Basically, go hang with rich people. It's probably not bad advice. I'm not entirely sure why but it makes me a bit sad to think about.

<comment><USER12> They can't be "too rich" where they are financially retired (they are not going to be in the same motivation level) but at least have some disposable income to engage in such an activity. It's a self-selecting network.

Why do people pay $150k to get an MBA at Harvard if you can pay $20k somewhere else and maybe get the EXACT same education? It's because you know 99% of the people there paid $150k and you have a "better" network.

<comment><USER13> And yet we like to fool ourselves with ideas of a meritocracy.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'm a VC, so this take is biased. Liberally apply grains of salt.

If you are looking to start a VC-scale startup, I'd suggest talking to VCs who can help introduce you to domain experts. There are a few reasons this is beneficial:

\- You get to battle test your idea to hone the story. This will help you recruit non-technical people.

\- You build relationships with VC for the moment you need funding.

\- You learn which VC are actually helpful. The meme is that all VC have to pitch how much value they add, but the reality is most can't/won't/don't outside of MBA 101 platitudes.

\- A great VC is always building out networks for BD and founder identification. You should leverage that to help in your space.

\- Even if the idea doesnt pan out, if you prove yourself to be talented and hard working, they are incentivized to help you find a role relevant to your interests.

This is colored by my personal investing philosophy that you should prioritize meeting "makers". Others prioritize meeting executives, or sources of capital, or influencers, etc... None is a "true" path, there are successes in each. But the ones focused on makers always want to chat with folks like you.

<comment><USER15> I doubt you all reply to cold emails ? As someone who has no connections to the VC world, it does feel intimidating just writing a cold email. Then again - nothing to lose.

<comment><USER16> You'd be surprised. VCs will often respond to cold calls because part of their job is to cultivate connections with people who will be starting the Next Big Thing. The best way to do that is to get them into their rolodex before they get on anyone else's radar.

But be careful what you wish for. Getting the cold call response and even the first meeting is relatively easy. But it is also easy to exhibit a level of cluelessness that will get you blackballed, and if that happens you will probably never know it. So that first meeting can be very much a two-edged sword. You only get one chance to make a first impression.

<comment><USER17> Why would you get blackballed for being clueless? Are founders suppose to come equipped with how to speak VC jargon? Aren't VCs suppose to find unpolished talent with the ability to execute, invest and be a resource to make them successful?

<comment><USER16> Being clueless != not knowing the jargon. In fact, one of the most common forms of cluelessness is throwing jargon around in a misguided attempt to show that you know things that you actually don't. Being clueless means not knowing something that you really _should_ have known, and that does not include jargon. I'll give you an example from my own experience: I had a meeting with a name-brand VC during which I levied some harsh criticism at a company that it turned out that they had invested in, indicating that I either didn't know they had invested in it or that I did know and was just being obnoxious. Either way, I was exhibiting cluelessness. One of the many things you _are_ expected to know before talking to any VC is all the information on their web site: their portfolio companies, who the partners are, where they spent their careers, what their investment thesis is. Happily, that one mistake was not enough to actually get me blackballed throughout the industry, but I never had another meeting with anyone at that firm.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> There are numerous ways to approach the problem you're facing, but first of all it'd be good to understand the core problem you're running into. Unfortunately, without too many details this is all going to be a little abstract.

Based on the detail you've provided, it seems one problem you're facing is access to industry domain experts who can both validate what you're doing and also perhaps help you refine the product and market access.

If that is correct, I'd suggest that you don't, at this point, look for a non- technical co-founder but rather just approach people with domain expertise in the industry that you're trying to target for advice and validation by requesting a short conversation. LinkedIn can be a very good source and depending on how you approach the people and your own profile you may get a very good response from people. Anywhere above 20-30% response rate would be very good just to set expectations, it can be higher or lower but don't be disheartened.

Depending on the domain you're targeting there is a much much larger pool of people who will offer you initial advice than who will be willing to join as co-founder. Once you get connected and they accept, just talk to these people. Get input, and also ask for further connections, as in is there someone you should be speaking to that they can introduce you to. Use them in future when you're looking to make a sale or for early adoption and again, for advice.

This will kick start your journey and you will find people. If you find someone truly awesome and nice, who is also interested in what you're doing, you can ask them to be an advisor. If you find someone who is interested in joining, then perhaps have them join. But be careful, and make diligent decision before having people join the team.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey, thanks for the very thoughtful response.

I realize now that my initial post may have implied otherwise, but I'm mostly looking to start establishing relationships that may lead to entrepreneurial collaboration in the future. I'm definitely not looking to jump straight into anything at the moment – it's not like there's a particular idea I'm in love with, and I'm naturally a very cautious person so I'd like to take the time to get to know people before starting a project with them.

My concern is moreso that it takes a lot of time and effort to build trust, and so I'd like to start meeting such people sooner rather than later.

<comment><USER18> You're welcome and welcome to entrepreneurship. :)

Another option, often not considered, depending on where you are in your career is to join a very early stage startup that is doing something in your domain, for 1-2 years.

This may or may not be an option for you depending on your own factors, but that is a good option as it helps people migrate from the large company mindset to a startup mindset. Also, it helps extend your network with the right kind of people that may help when you go on your own.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I'd recommend joining an existing, early stage startup in the same/similar niche you eventually want to build your own product in. While there, make an effort to network with the non-technical staff.

Not only will you learn a ton about shipping product in a startup (risking someone else's money), but you will also grow your own network - <USER2> non-technical founder types.

This model worked for me. I spent twelve years with the US federal government. I had great tech and business skills, but it was all federally focused.

I joined the founding team of a startup, using my tech background. We got acquired 15 months in by a later stage startup. The resulting company IPO'd four years later. I joined another startup in the same industry as CTO just after their Series A, we got acquired two years later. Then I launched my own - 8 years after leaving the federal government.

It is a ton easier now, with all the relationships from the last two. (Not to mention the depth of knowledge on everything)

It is easy to think startups are all about the product & technology. But it is so much more!

<comment><USER20> A variation of this was posted above and I want to repeat: not always a great idea as it is easy to end up not having deep engagement with other business functions. It becomes heavily dependent on finding the right team.

Good options for maximizing your network 1) stay with a Faang and reach out to people internally - many of the best non tech people are inside Amazon, FB etc 2) consider consulting that blends you with larger teams or different functions, either with a company or freelancing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I wouldn't co-found with a business person (whatever that means). You need as many people as possible who actually make the product (developers and designers), and someone who is passionate about solving problems in a particular domain and talking to customers (a product manager). Sometimes these roles are just one person, sometimes two or three. Sales & marketing can be handled by the same team or hired for. You can hire sales people with existing networks if that is needed. I think that if one person can handle all of these roles, he should.

</comment><comment><USER22> 1\. I don't think finding a qualified "business" person will be excessively difficult. From my experience, there is an under-supply of engineers and an over-supply of business people wanting to found. Thus, if you are an engineer from a FAANG company, there should be large demand for your skillset by business people looking to found. That being said, the main ways to find non- technical co-founders is via network (your FAANG friends are bound to know someone, ask them for an introduction) and events. Also, don't be afraid to cold reachout to someone who might be interesting. 2\. Be sure you want a "business" person in your founding team. Many great companies made it without one. If you need very deep domain knowledge then yes, it can be beneficial to have such a person. However, that being said, if you don't have knowledge in that domain you should also not really be looking to found in that domain. However, that is besides the point. Many "business" skills like sales, marketing and fundraising can be learned to a good enough standard by most technical cofounders. I have always has bad experience taking on non-techincal co-founders to handle the "business" part.

Just to make this clear, I do not think "business" co-founders are useless. There are a lot of very good ones that bring a lot of value. All I am saying is that I have made bad experiences taking in "business" people to handle the "business" part of the startup. Most of the time you can (and should) learn the necessary skills yourself. Every startup needs technical co-founders, however most startups don't NEED non-technical co-founders.

<comment><USER23> I think there is a huge difference between the "business" taught at university and the "business" skills you need to launch a new venture.

In my experience, formal education tends to be very corporate-operations focused because that's where most grads go. Most courses presuppose that the company has already found product-market fit - using these same behaviours in a new venture context could be dangerous.

Ideally, you'd find someone who recognises this difference and works to learn the differences between the environments, and brings the best of both worlds to the venture.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> It is important to work with someone that you can trust. Someone that can push through hell together with you and not abandon everything at the smallest bump. It takes a strong character, ambition and sense of urgency. When it comes to non-technical / business people, it might be counter-intuitive, but having attended a good university or having worked for a good company can indicate high intelligence and not entrepreneurial drive. This being said, you can still collaborate with technical people that are comfortable with selling the vision, product and services, can hustle and are reliable.

Also, be careful of non-compete agreements by joining other start-ups.

There are several ways in which you can find good co-founders:

1\. Don't prioritise finding a co-founders, just start building something and reach out to people. They might love what you're doing and come on-board.

2\. Get recommendations via your network about people who want to build a company and have complementary skills / similar goals.

3\. Increase your visibility, publish your thoughts, network and debate about the future - randomness / serendipity is a wondrous force

4\. Accelerators such as Antler and EF - as a last resort.

I'm also looking for smart, relentless people that want to build a better future for generations to come. Don't hesitate to reach out via linkedin - username: tudordragos

<comment><USER11> ^^THIS! Trust is THE most important factor. Treat this like finding someone to marry, because (sadly) there's a decent chance your startup could outlast your marriage. (Pay attention to that, BTW! Your family is _really_ important, and unless you've already made a huge mistake, no company is worth losing them over.) Any good/honest partner will be willing to tie equity to milestones - never just toss a big chunk of equity to your CEO/cofounder just because others are stupid enough to do that. (Keep in mind the dictum that in most all startup cos., your equity is simultaneously worthless and the only thing of value the company has, other than your team which is usually there because of the potential for equity. As soon as you're funded, pay people fairly - <USER3> top of scale, but enough to keep them happy and loving the job.) And yes, FWIW, I've been on (and been burned on) both sides of these deals, both as a CTO looking for a good CEO to raise money and get us to market (lost my a$$) and as a contract CEO hired to get a company off the ground. The ONLY thing that matters is the people themselves, and more importantly, their character, trustworthiness, and insistence on being fully upright in all things.

It's much harder to find these people than you might think, and it can be really hard to get rid of a bad one if you screw up. (As the Russians say, "Doveryai, no proveryai - Trust, but verify!")

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Honestly my advice would be to leave FAANG and join an early stage startup ... you're much more likely to meet a wider array of people with similar passions and interests and varied skillsets.

Even if that startup itself fails you are likely to meet people you could start another company with and if it succeeds it will be an even better place to start a company from when leaving, most exceptional founders love to support their employees leaving to start something new.

<comment><USER26> Respectfully this is awful advice, as someone who's worked at FAANG and early stage startups. The idea that working for early stage startups will help you start your own is a myth propagated intentionally by founders/VCs to recruit SWEs with lowball offers.

FAANG is actually way better to meet cofounders. At Google you can have lunch with a talented person every day (there's internal apps to network like this), plus countless other opportunities to network both formally and informally.

In contrast, at an early stage startup you'll mostly work with the same people every day and your network will stagnate.

Furthermore, early stage startups tend to have a ton of work that needs to be done that they hire there engineers to do. Unless you get CTO title, you're probably not going to get exposed much to the BD side or get investor access.

Finally, being able to work full time on your startup to get demo ready to pitch is super helpful. A nest egg from FAANG RSUs is key here, startup ISOs are probably worth nothing and will reduce your cushioning.

If you want to do a startup, go to networking events, apply to YC, etc but leaving FAANG to be an early stage employee w goal, not closer, especially if you don't at least get CTO title.

<comment><USER27> I have to agree with ditonal. Going from a FAANG company to a startup for anything less than a CTO role is a bad idea. I know this because I did this. While it all worked out in the end (I wanted to move to Los Angeles to do heavy metal stuff with my heavy metal friends anyway) there's definitely a hard ceiling at a startup.

Stay at the cushy high paying job and network on nights and weekends. Even better, make a point to ask a person out to lunch every week at the FAANG job once the pandemic is over.

"Networking" for me has just been hanging out with my music and YouTuber buddies. Turns out if you know how to SPELL PHP or HTML you can provide HUGE value to non-technical friends. Doing something as simple as fixing a typo in some JavaScript tracking code for friend's websites makes me look like I've shown them fire for the first time. Find a hobby you like that's non-technical (for me it's learning Chinese, salsa dancing, and metal), show up, have a good time, and within a year or two you'll have a high quality network of non- technical partners.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> There's one way and one way only: former coworkers. That's the only good option. Someone you've worked with. And not just someone you liked... someone you admire.

That being said, all high-impact jobs at a startup are technical at first and then slowly shifts to nontechnical. So early on, your non-technical cofounder will be bored and not have much to do. And as time goes on, assuming they are still around, that will shift.

Consider instead going with two technical founders, and assume one or both of you will end up shifting into a more operational role.

</comment><comment><USER29> This is a semi serious answer but...

If we were not in the middle of COVID I would say to take a trip to Atlanta. In the Atlanta startup community there is no shortage of MBA and marketing types with lots of ideas that are just looking for a developer who is willing to work for next to nothing and equity that is much smaller than it should be.

Of course all of these business types will tell you about how they are the tech visionaries. They dominate most of the big startup events in that town that are supposed to be tech focused and will write countless marketing pieces telling you why their next co-working space makes Atlanta the "Silicon Valley of the East". In reality, a former tech reporter for the Atlanta Business Chronicle more accurately called Atlanta the Bangalore of the South since many larger tech groups will open offices here to try to reduce costs.

Don't get me wrong with Atlanta, it is a great place to live from a standpoint of having a lower cost of living compared with what you can get for a salary, especially if you are able to work for a west coast company that pays well. There are also other cities with a similar dynamic.

My point is that there are many ways to find it, but be careful because you may be trading one set of problems for another.

<comment><USER11> FWIW, though I love and grew up in Austin, it an _extremely_ dysfunctional startup/VC community, so unless you just have to have the cool factor, find almost anyplace else to start your company - real estate will be lots cheaper, too, and you might even have a functioning city government. As I said, I love it here, but will be leaving before too much longer, as it's going all the wrong ways, esp. w.r.t. startup culture.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> We have helped a number of teams form at the Bootstrapper Breakfast over the last fourteen years. You are welcome to join us, here is a schedule of meetings in September: [https://bootstrappersbreakfast.com/2020/08/25/roundup- of-eve...](https://bootstrappersbreakfast.com/2020/08/25/roundup-of-events- for-bootstrappers-in-september-2020/) You can also see a list of meetings on eventbrite: [https://www.eventbrite.com/e/silicon-valley-bootstrapper- bre...](https://www.eventbrite.com/e/silicon-valley-bootstrapper-breakfast- online-tickets-112267146056)

I would NOT quit your day job until you have a clear direction and a reasonable certainly of progress. Treat your current employer as a passive investor in your next venture.

Here is a pointer to the first blog post in a series that provides some practical advice on how to find cofounders: [https://www.skmurphy.com/blog/2010/06/25/finding-a-co- founde...](https://www.skmurphy.com/blog/2010/06/25/finding-a-co-founder/)

</comment><comment><USER31> right here on hn is / has the potential to be an ideal recruiting ground for non technical entrepreneurs.

i mean, what you're essentially looking for is the intellectual equivalent of a bar, or more conveniently, the halls of residence in a good university.

the reason universities are so ideal for finding cofounders is that perfect blend of infinite trajectory (minimal real world obligations) and equal standing. ideally, the place you're talking about has the capacity to integrate these things into a social sphere, without the media.

hn can fulfil this role more or less, and could do so to a greater extent if they had the incentive to. you have the karma / profile to judge someone's character and understanding, and their further contact if that's what they want.

it so happens that all of the job postings are for technical positions, but that is due to the fact that it is more likely for someone nontechnical to need an engineer than the other way around.

where else would the millennial steve jobs be lurking? (this is not exclusively rhetoric – if there is another answer that's not hn then go there)

if they're nowhere obvious, then they're hustling, and good luck finding them if you didn't go to school with them.

</comment><comment><USER32> Non-tech founders are more abundant, but usually outside your circles. You'll probably want two types: someone who can handle business/funding/sales, and someone who can focus on the product. More people have finance degrees than tech ones, and there's a lot of people who are domain experts.

A good bet is someone who has their soul into the product. Someone who sincerely understands the pain point and works at it. If you're doing something for ships, you probably want to find someone who works within the ship industry. Spotify wasn't founded by music producers, but it was founded by people who were passionate about music streaming.

</comment><comment><USER33> Why don't you learn some business skills yourself? The materials are available on internet. Sure it takes time.

You want to learn digital marketing? There are many good tutorials on Youtube or you can buy some digital marketing books.

If you took this path, you would reach the state on which you may not need a business co-founder anymore. If you met a good business co-founder, at least, you could gauge whether they are competent or not using your business skills.

Some good materials for you to start learning business skills:

Digital marketing: [https://www.youtube.com/user/neilvkpatel](https://www.youtube.com/user/neilvkpatel)

Corporate finance: [https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUl4u3cNGP63B2lDhyKOs...](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUl4u3cNGP63B2lDhyKOsImI7FjCf6eDW)

Supply chain: [https://www.coursera.org/specializations/supply-chain- manage...](https://www.coursera.org/specializations/supply-chain- management#courses)

HR: [https://www.coursera.org/specializations/human-resource- mana...](https://www.coursera.org/specializations/human-resource- management#courses)

Of course, YC Startup Library is a top-notch resource: [https://www.ycombinator.com/library](https://www.ycombinator.com/library)

About networking in Covid-19.... Actually it's still possible. You could join some online communities. You could build your brand on social media (Linkedin, Twitter, etc). For example, if I wanted to network with some influential people on blockchain space, I would follow their Twitter and contribute to the conversation (Twitter threads), I would join an opensource blockchain project and build some connections with the core developers. You get the idea.

Good luck!

<comment><USER34> Everyone should learn the basics of business, but people have different talents and if you're born an engineer chances are you'll never be a very good salesman, and vice versa. Much better to focus on what you enjoy and do best, and find a business guy to focus on that part.

Obviously, if you are both well rounded and have some understanding of the other's area that will make things more efficient but don't try to BE the other.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> It's nice when you have friends that have the same goals/aspirations. For the rest of us, I suspect the best you can do is to put a lot of effort into searching for someone compatible via a combination of cold outreach, friends of friends, etc. -- being as vocal as possible. (On the other hand, don't let it be your excuse for why something isn't taking off.)

I would take my products, show them to as many people as possible, and find out who is interested. While engaging with those people, explain to them your situation and that you're looking for some help. Try to leverage your potential users' networks. (Just my 2 cents.)

All that aside -- I'd be interested in chatting about what you're working on and seeing if we might collaborate in the future. Feel free to reach out: firstname.lastname@example.com

</comment><comment><USER36> As the solo founder of a profitable $1MM ARR company I'd say you can do it on your own and there's nothing they can add anyway. Just pick a domain you're deeply obsessed with in the first place.

Remember, in software in 2020 the only important thing is distribution. Work backwards from distribution. The biggest SaaS products aren't that great, they just have a great way to get sales/leads. The best consumer products, aren't that great (or weren't that great) - they just found an hack. 99.9% of startups thinks they need to make a great product and then raise VC and throw millions on FB and G ads -being highly unprofitable- (since PPC is a game for established deep-pocket companies with ridiculous CACs)

Literally just hacks: Airbnb, spamming Craiglist. Dropbox, referral incentive- based storage + a viral funny video for hackers. Stripe, they happened to be in an early YC batch. Facebook started with the most exclusive place in the world: Harvard. Hotmail: adding "sent with hotmail" at the end of the email. etc.

If you find a way to for ex. post on Facebook Groups at scale, then you should work a product backward from there since not all channels are suited for all products. If you have many friends in the intel community, probably you should make a product for the US Defense. Get the gist?

in 2020 any decent dev can create any product and/or copy your idea. what's impossible is getting tons of customers at a reasonable acquisition cost as to be profitable and have to spare to re-invest in growth.

Hardware/scientific breakthroughs are obviously different. Making the product is h hard part and distribution is easy: if you inventhe the transistor, the customers will be there.

so yeah a sales cofounder will add nothing as he wont happen to know which temporary weird thing on the internet allows in a very specific way to get a ton of customers at a very cheap price (ideally free). If he did, he would hire anyone in the world as a contractor to build a prototype and distribute it through the hack he found- 99% of the work is already done when you found the well. If you'll attempt to methodically find a well (usually one just stumbles upon it), know that before you'll find find 1 you'll have to go thru 100+ dry wells.

The alternative I guess is you could make software for a super niche kind of business. like Insurance. Software for insurance agents. Maybe an even more narrow niche. That's because you can reach these people via phone or email. which is free.

</comment><comment><USER37> > I'm finding it quite unfulfilling

Leaving your job is going to be a very expensive mistake. If this is your motivation, your personal lack of fulfillment is going to be the #1 obstacle to recruiting others. This would be true of a cultural or non-profit enterprise too, and you underestimate how much recruiting by people who are chasing fulfillment in their lives boils down to, "And here's a bunch of dad's money" \- those are the people you are competing with in terms of recruiting people into your thing, and those rich kids are going to do it better than you.

My suggestion is to only pursue something that you can do exclusively by yourself. That is the only takeaway. Or don't do this at all.

</comment><comment><USER38> [https://www.joinef.com](https://www.joinef.com)

<comment><USER39> ^ an alternative: www.antler.co

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> Offer free technical reviews, delivered by video call, for business pitch/plans written by founders who are looking for a technical co-founder.

Either you recruit them to your idea, or they recruit you to theirs.

In the best case, you will jointly come up with a new idea.

</comment><comment><USER41> I think you need to go to a smaller company not a startup necessarily. Go to a company that has PMF, working on scaling but the org size is still small to have meaningful relationships. Also you should be able to see your work directly impacting to your customers. People in other orgs are coming to you or your immediate team to discuss rollout/customer issues etc. Avoid companies with too many levels in the hierarchy.

Assuming you're in your 20s or early 30s, I recommend going to a place run by experienced people who can mentor you. I'm beyond that age range, but still have a boss who is experienced and teaches me something everyday.

</comment><comment><USER42> [https://indiehackers.com](https://indiehackers.com) has local communities around the world and online forums for discussing technical and non-technical startup processes

<comment><USER43> There's even a group: [https://www.indiehackers.com/group/looking-to-partner- up](https://www.indiehackers.com/group/looking-to-partner-up)

In my experience Indie Hackers has an unusually high concentration of people who get things done, the kind of people with grit who you might want to partner with.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I am non-technical (strategy consultant, worked in biz Dev, led scrum teams in implementation programs, program management, implemand now work with Faangs as clients). Would love to connect to future founders and others interested in my skillset, but felt like most people around HN are looking for good SWEs, and never see any postings or even discussions that fit my experienced. Would be awesome to have a regular post where non technical folks can stick their hands up for roles, discussion, to make connections etc.

</comment><comment><USER44> As a successful startup founder I see both sides of the table, the problem for business founders seem to be that they literally have no idea what a good technical founder looks like often signing up junior devs as cofounders.

Then I see great devs and tech leads that wonder how to break into engineering management or CTO of a credible startup because all they see is random people with no clue pitching them.

Reach out to me and if you're a solid engineer I'll find you a solid business partner. (email in profile)

</comment><comment><USER45> You can learn a lot of these things yourself and if your into bootstrapping you can do it solo for a long time. It'll be more work and take longer for sure.

I would suggest getting on twitter and communities like indie hackers. People share how they're getting users, they're first customers, marketing tactics etc

As you consume more of this information and hack on your own projects you'll develop a playbook for how to do it yourself.

Good luck.

</comment><comment><USER46> As an engineer who later did an MBA, I found b-school to be a great melting pot for people from different backgrounds. Granted your situation is different, but your uni might be a great place. Depending on what you mean by "non-technical", you might want to seek out alumni who are successful salespeople or marketers etc. Good luck!

</comment><comment> i-j An additional perspective, Carol Chen had an interesting post and thoughts about her ups and downs of being a co-founder / founder

[https://carolchen.me/blog/founding-bad/](https://carolchen.me/blog/founding- bad/)

</comment><comment><USER47> Send me an email (<username> at gmail), would love to connect! I was in the same situation but found two non-technical cofounders. Now I'm the only technical person on the team, but it's at least great working with others. Much less lonely than working alone.

</comment><comment><USER48> Kind of relevant to the topic, but I am unable to find a technical co-founder to work with me on my pet project that might or might not take off. I am a software developer but it is a two man job, because I lack knowledge on mobile department.

Any ideas?

<comment><USER49> I am always open to new ideas and if it sounds like a good one I can get onboard

</comment></comment><comment><USER50> For context: I am a software engineer and angel investor that specializes in early stage exits. I have built and exited multiple startups together with a bunch of wonderful people over the years.

The problem you are describing is not unique in any way, shape or form. I coach dozens of startups every year and your problem is more common than you might think. When I first started, I was just like you. I had no one to turn to and I felt like I could get nowhere. Meetups and networking events were and still are a waste of time for the most part as you don't really want to get into business with people you´ve only met for 2 hours and know very little about on a personal level. So where does that leave you?

1) __You don't need a non-technical person __: Find a technical co-founder who has transitioned into management or have some sense of how to run a business and have said person be in charge of the duties that you don't excel at. The reason I usually make this recommendation to people in your position is that most non-technical people tend to have a problem communicating with their technical counter-part because they don´t understand the technical challenges ahead the same way you do. It leads to resentment and hostility when communication breaks down. This is one of the most common reasons startups fail. Communication is key in team building.

2) __Keep working on your product and ignore all the fluff __: Put your head down and grind an MVP out before worrying about any of the other stuff. We can all pump out ideas by the hundreds, but execution is really what matters at the end of the day. Building an MVP most often does not require a co-founder. It just requires you to spend some of your free time building things. Do what you can for now (if you are serious about this) and stop worrying about "expansion plans", "go to market strategies" and "networks".

2) __Get a couple of advisors that you can trust __: Ask those who have gone through this whole thing before and let them mentor you. A lot of times people connect via their advisors´ networks and that usually ends up being a lot more successful of a partnership. This is because any person your advisor is going to suggest you partner up with in some capacity will have been screened /filtered by said advisor. I connect people at least a dozen times a year that I think would be great fit for each other, and that ends up working a lot better than finding people via networking events. The key here is to find advisors that are honest and want what is in your best interest.

3) __Utilize capital properly __: If you have an MVP for an idea that is worth its salt, finding capital these days is extremely easy. In fact, it is so easy that people raise absurd amounts because capital is competing for deals. There is a lot more money out there than there are good companies to invest in. All you need is for your product to be in the hands of a couple hundred people. This validates __you __and shows that you are actually doing real work. Investors invest in people first; products and ideas are secondary for the most part. Take that money and hire for the things you are not good at. You don't always need a co-founder. Sometimes a good employee can become your co- founder after the fact as they prove to you over time that they are trust- worthy, hardworking and capable.

4) __Create a communication channels __: Once you have an MVP ready, make sure that communication channels with your users are well established for continuous feedback. As an example, you can create a Discord group where your users can give you feedback and feature requests /ideas. That becomes the mechanism for other like-minded people, that are already using your product, to reach out to you. It would be impossible for me to count the number of times people have reached out to me via one of those communication channels about one of my startups. When people are excited about what you are doing, they will seek you out rather than the other way around.

5) __COVID is actually a blessing not a curse __: There are now tens of thousands of people like you that are sitting at home waiting for their moment to shine. They are all motivated and willing to get to work. __You just need to have something to present to the world so that people can be excited __. Remember, you are asking for someone to go on a journey together with you. Excite people and have them chase you.

Finally, if you (or anyone else for that matter) wants to have a chat about their startup/product, feel free to reach out to me. My email is in my profile.

<comment><USER30> your email is not currently in your profile [https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=wesammikhail](https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=wesammikhail)

<comment><USER50> Fixed!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> I would love to have a business co-founder! I'm a solid dev, worked for many years at a FAANG company, and MVP is done. Feel free to reach out (email in profile).

</comment><comment><USER52> My I suggest Lunchclub, "Curated 1:1 professional connections."

[https://lunchclub.ai/](https://lunchclub.ai/)

</comment><comment><USER53> I'd love to connect and collaborate, or point you to contacts who could collaborate with you. Please ping me at email@example.com

</comment><comment><USER54> I went through joinef.com - a startup incubator which focuses on individuals joining in and finding cofounders there

</comment><comment><USER55> Foundersnetwork.com has a few. If you need an invite let me know.

<comment><USER56> I tried to submit my email and got an access denied security warning, no explanation.

<comment><USER55> Do you have a website with your portfolio

<comment><USER57> Not OP, but I am interested in this community and I am also getting an error when I try to sign up:

Access Denied foundersnetwork.com is using a security service for protection against online attacks. An action has triggered the service and blocked your request. Please try again in a few minutes. If the issue persist, please contact the site owner for further assistance.

I have a personal website but am not comfortable sharing here - is there a way to message you?

<comment><USER58> hey there, writing from FN. Would you be willing to share the reference ID on the WAF blocked access page so we can troubleshoot your issue? You can email it to support(at)foundersnetwork(dot)com.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER59> what kind of projects are you working on? or what do you want to be working on?

</comment><comment><USER60> here there might be one

</comment><comment><USER61> twitter

</comment><comment> 100-xyz Hi,

Dont mean to hijack the thread...

I am in a similar position. I have a startup toonclip.com. Its a web based animation editor, has about 100 registered users and has some product market fit. Would love to meet business oriented founders who are familiar with this industry. Please drop an email to leisenmint AT protonmail DOT com</comment>


Clueyness: A Weird Kind of Sad – Wait but Why - <AUTHOR> https://waitbutwhy.com/2016/05/clueyness-a-weird-kind-of-sad.html <comment><USER2> This parallels my own experience so much that I broke up reading it. Sometimes I wish had a manual gain control on my amygdala so the world didn't hurt so much.</comment>


Professor kicked me out of the honors program, I sent him an email a year later. - <AUTHOR> http://blog.politify.com/politifystory.jpg

<comment><USER2> Oh, snap! You really showed him who's boss.

But seriously, gloating is not considered good form. Showing off how effectively you gloated is even worse form.

</comment><comment><USER3> Well, the best revenge is success, but this kind of thing just makes them look childish and crass.

</comment><comment><USER4> Yeah, what chad_oliver said, this is a bit childish. What do you win by this?

<comment><USER5> It's really not about winning or losing, it's to show that good ideas, sometimes REALLY good ideas are stifled in an academic environment. And to show that the Professors who have obscene amounts of power in college don't use it responsibly. Why give them so much power over students if they won't wield it with the public interest in mind? Especially at a public university? How could a Professor not see the potential of this idea? The student tried the limited amount of recourse he had at his disposal, and eventually gave up, and pursued the project on his own time, lucky for us.

<comment><USER3> And sometimes good ideas, really good ideas, get stifled by <significant others, bosses, industries, societies, etc...>. Reward is in the success, going back to gloat just makes you look like an ass and doesn't teach anyone anything, except maybe that you are a major dick. Was the professor in the wrong? Maybe, we have a very one sided story here, not the facts, but the facts as seen through the lens of one of the participants, one exhibiting enough childishness to make me seriously doubt their telling in which they were akin to Ghandi fighting the oppressive British Empire.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> 40.000 in grants? Mentioned in The Atlantic, Forbes, and US News? Sorry, but that doesn't sound impressive at all.

If you had exited for several tens of millions, or build a hundred million long-term company, that might have been something to instill some jealousy on the professor, but would still be nothing to counter an academic judgement.

<comment><USER7> 40k for a bachelor level research project? sounds pretty impressive for something that isn't even a business.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What do you use as browser start page? - <AUTHOR> iGoogle used to be great, also there are some plugins like start.me which shows widgets <comment><USER2> A blank page.</comment>