BUBLER's comments

On: Map / Reduce – A visual explanation

[BUBLER]

I am sorry but this does not explains map reduce in the way it is currently used, wikipedia does a much better job http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MapReduce

Amazing how 44 people upvoted an incorrect example.

[akkartik → BUBLER]

Why do you think voting something up is corroboration? People read something that was internally consistent and engagingly presented. They learned something from it, more than any inaccuracies in the details. I think that merits an upvote.

People will upvote far more egregiously false content if it's well presented and seems to be internally consistent. They thought they learned something from it. They weren't voting as experts on the material. There's nothing wrong with this. The system is working as desired.

Voting by correctness easily slips down the slope to voting by agreement, and that leads to a less interesting, more echo-chamber-y community. Vote up interesting stories even if they're inaccurate.

[nivertech → BUBLER]

I guess Ayende first heard about MapReduce in CouchDB context, while most people talk about MapReduce in Google/Hadoop context.

[nivertech → BUBLER]

This all what Erlang programmers need to know about M/R:

    -spec split(term()) -> [{k1(),v1()}]. 
    -spec map(k1(),v1()) -> [{k2(),v2()}]. 
    -spec reduce(k2(),[v2()]) -> [v3()].

On: How We Pivoted from eDiscovery to Siege Weaponry and Raised $60k in 30 Days

[BUBLER]

Sorry but, this post epitomizes the current entrepreneurship for sake of it trend.

The bubble seems to be inflating exponentially!

[redthrowaway → BUBLER]

If you wonder why you're getting downvoted, here's a couple pointers:

>Sorry but, this post epitomizes the current entrepreneurship for sake of it trend.

This statement, while being mildly insulting, doesn't actually give any information. It's a conclusion without an argument. If you feel the post is fluffy and insubstantial, explain why. Rather than a drive by Youtube-style comment, write to convince. You have an opinion that you'd like others to consider, but it will take more than merely stating it to be taken seriously.

>The bubble seems to be inflating exponentially!

This, again, is a statement without substance. There's been a lot of bubble talk lately, and arguments flying back and forth on whether there is a bubble and what form it takes if so. If you feel that this post is symptomatic of the "bubble-era" startup attitude, you need to explain why. Be aware that many people are growing weary of the constant bubble talk, so if you want to be taken seriously you need to make a serious argument. Exclamation points rarely have a place in that kind of exposition.

[samatman → BUBLER]

Actually, this post epitomizes a different trend entirely; the trend of startup culture moving into physical objects.

Kickstarter has been a great blessing for that trend, bridging the otherwise difficult gap between a good design or prototype and pilot-scale mass production.

This is what we've done with MakerBeam, this was behind the success of the Glif and TikTok, and it looks like Siege Toys is next in line to make a go of it.

There's no bubble when one is manufacturing goods and selling them at a profit. Entirely different, older economics apply.

Looks like you gents have a great product, Siege Toys: Best of luck!