Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | Nutella2's comments login

According to the article, one of the main advantages of Thiel's program is the contacts they make. So how different is it from the Ivy League?

-----


The comment I replied to suggested that an in-state school followed by grad school at Princeton would be a better alternative than paying for an undergrad degree at Princeton. I was responding to that.

-----


And more important, a significant financial incentive to correct their own obviously inadequate procedures.

-----


Amazon does this. If you look at a product and then come back later to buy it the price will be higher than it is if you bought it immediately after looking. If you want to get the best prices and look up things whenever you want, use one computer to do lookups and one to buy.

-----


He's suing the charities along with Inman and IndiGoGo on his own behalf, not for FunnyJunk. He's acting as his own lawyer and demanding his legal fees be paid by the defendants. That's some amazing chutzpah.

-----


We appreciate the uniformity of men's clothes sizes, too. One of the reasons women have to think about clothing and shop for clothing a lot more than men do is that we can't just look at the jeans in our closet, note the size, and walk out of any store with a pair of jeans labelled with that size and expect that they will be wearable. Women's sizes on labels have very little to do with the size of the clothes, even clothes from the same brand/store.

Fashions come and go more in women's clothing, too. My go-to dressup item is a navy blue blazer which is a standard that should be available all the time, right? No, some years standard blazers are out of style and cannot be found.

That's why all the work put in by the OP to find simple, classic styles is mysterious to many men. They can find simple, classic clothes that fit pretty much anywhere. That's a lifehack that's MUCH more difficult for a woman to achieve.

-----


As I guy, I've had a similar experience with most clothing. I always have to actually try anything, can't go by labelled size alone.

Of course, this probably varies with location.

-----


No, because Craigslist is not a broker. They're an advertiser. AirBnB is a broker because all the financial transactions go through them so their legal and tax responsibilities are different.

-----


Most languages were proprietary and expensive through the 80s. When C took off it wiped out (or much reduced) the use of expensive proprietary languages. C was free so a lot of people learned it in university and wanted to use it on the job later because they were used to it. Since it was free it was easy to introduce to companies. It established a base and then when Java came out in 1995, also free but a higher level language than C, it took off like a rocket. Now the idea of expensive proprietary languages seems absurd.

Many tools have been developed that support C-family languages and most programmers depend on those tools. It's a huge job to move out of that and into an image-based language like Smalltalk because everything changes at once. That's a major reason why new frameworks like node.js or Rails can take off quickly now: They fit into most programmers' normal workflow so they are easy to adopt.

I worked in an image-based language in the 80s and it drove me crazy that I didn't have diff and grep. I was glad to leave that language when I moved on to a job that used a conventional text-file language. I'm sure I'm not the only one who found it awkward.

-----


Agreed that tutorials on 'how to program' are and should be different from tutorials about a new language for experienced programmers, but one thing that both should do early on is a complete 'Hello World' example to show the minimum of code and compile/run steps required to run the simplest example. Too many tutorials skip that step and leave many of their readers unable to run the tutorial code at all because the authors haven't bothered to describe how to get a simple program to run. Those are obvious after you've done it once but completely unobvious to the people who read tutorials to learn a new language.

-----


Affirmative action has and continues to be a problem, though. The vast majority of affirmative action has favored and continues to favor rich, connected white men. Famous example:

"I remember back in the late 1990s, when Ira Katznelson, an eminent political scientist at Columbia, came to deliver a guest lecture. Prof. Katznelson described a lunch he had with Irving Kristol during the first Bush administration.

The talk turned to William Kristol, then Dan Quayle's chief of staff, and how he got his start in politics. Irving recalled how he talked to his friend Harvey Mansfield at Harvard, who secured William a place there as both an undergrad and graduate student; how he talked to Pat Moynihan, then Nixon's domestic policy adviser, and got William an internship at the White House; how he talked to friends at the RNC [Republican National Committee] and secured a job for William after he got his Harvard Ph.D.; and how he arranged with still more friends for William to teach at Penn and the Kennedy School of Government.

With that, Prof. Katznelson recalled, he then asked Irving what he thought of affirmative action. 'I oppose it,' Irving replied. 'It subverts meritocracy.'"

Quoted in http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2009/09/republicans-to-the-man...

-----


The vast majority of affirmative action has favored and continues to favor rich, connected white men. Famous example:

And the famous example is that... white men network. As do black lesbians, Papuan pearl divers, and for all I know the Turkish blue-ringed octopus (our only social octopus).

The leap from "vast majority" to "famous example" is great, too. I never cease to be fascinated by the bizarre pseudosequiturs that pass for logic in the orthodox mind. It's like tumor pathology - every case its own disease.

What's wonderful is how similar this general strain of disparate impact theory is to the classic logic of German anti-Semitism. Did you know that 80% of the lawyers in 1932 Berlin were Jews, even though only 1% of the population was Jewish? Ineluctable mathematical proof the Jews are conspiring against the Aryans - scratching each other's backs, while stabbing their good German competitors under the table.

Too bad Streicher and company never got a chance to read Cochran and Harpending 2005:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_Jewish_intelligence

But to paraphrase Goethe, against stupidity even the Jews contend in vain...

-----


I think I still have the box somewhere at home. I should donate it to the Computer History Museum.

-----

More

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: