Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | bmelton's commentslogin

Believing your beliefs are the only correct way to believe is fine, but gets rather interesting when accusing the "other party" as brainwashed.

reply


Fair enough!

reply


Compare and contrast Stephen King's lessons with Elmore Leonard's "10 (really 11) Rules of Writing", and the difference is as stark as the author's respective works.

reply


Link for the lazy: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/16/arts/writers-writing-easy-...

reply


I'd never read that. That's wonderful. It literally is like the "Guide For Not Writing Like Stephen King". But, it's also like the "Guide For Not Writing Like Mark Twain", making it somewhat dubious advice.

reply


I'd attempt to categorize it more as "How To Write Like Elmore Leonard", really. He tends to ascribe to Hemingway's terseness.

The other, real point there is that there's more than one way to do something well. Hemingway and Mark Twain don't write very much like each other, but both are worth reading.

reply


Stark difference?

3. and 4. are identical to King's recommendations in "On Writing". King is pretty passionate about that.

5. is the same, I think.

7. is kind of a difference, although King laments that few writers can actually handle it.

8. and 9. are real differences.

reply


Having read On Writing I can say that 8 and 9 aren't even real differences.

King is against detailed description of characters -- (paraphrased) "If I describe character too much, it conflicts with your view of them."

He's also against overly detailed description of places -- (paraphrased) "Keep it brief. You want to give a description of the room, it's not a travelogue."

reply


I was primarily referring to presentation.

reply


> Does anyone have any viable solutions to this problem?

Lawmakers could either abstain or vote No until they've read and understood the legislation. The problem is that votes aren't generally cast on understanding, or even how the law will affect the welfare of the populace, but on party lines, with not enough exceptions.

On the cure for that, I am equally clueless.

reply


He was an early entrant into the tech world, having been a software reseller and integrator, selling custom systems and maintaining them himself.

Then he joined Broadcast.com, a sort of mini-Netflix-but-audio for broadcasting sporting events, which sold to Y! for $5 billion or so dollars.

He then co-founded AXS TV, which was the first HD satellite network.

He may be wrong on this issue. He may be right. But to pretend he isn't tech-savvy is to either ignore his history or to set the bar to an absurdly elitist standard. At the least, he's likely more tech savvy than your elected representatives, and possibly moreso than Tom Wheeler.

Whether this is germane to the discussion is another matter.

reply


This really isn't helpful. If you'd read his comment, it would be clear that his last account was banned, which would all but necessitate that any new accounts would be, y'know, new.

Further, it shouldn't need to be pointed out, but the insightfulness of one's posts should not be judged against how long they've been members of a website.

reply


As someone else pointed out, a lot of new accounts were posting ISP talking points, which looks a whole lot like astroturfing.

Obviously the insightfulness of comments shouldn't be judged by how long someone has been a member of a website, but how long they've been a member of a website may be a good indicator of their motivations.

reply


> At the least, Magic is not as easily cloneable. That just means the clones will be even worse.

Interesting you say that, as this article posted as a Show HN the other day was derided as having exposed how easy it would be to clone Magic.

http://blog.sendsonar.com/2015/02/23/add-magic-to-your-busin...

reply


Processing and tying requests to a phone number isn't the scalability bottleneck; that's easy to do.

The hard part and main scalability concern is coordinating user requests with other third party services, and that can't be automated in any way. (For at least the next few years, anyways). That's not something you could implement and scale at a hackathon.

reply


One unstated question in all this discussion of Magic is how what they are doing relates to the terms of service for the third parties they are using to actually deliver. Couple that with the usual money laundering / fraud type problems you get with accepting credit cards and then placing an order with a third party service and you have a real life legitimate "hard problem" on your hands.

How, exactly, do they plan to handle chargebacks and allegations of non-delivery from third party service providers that they don't have any apparent reseller agreement with?

reply


That's the key point.

What happens when my pizza isn't delivered? Normally I call the pizza shop.

What happens when my Magic pizza isn't delivered? I text Magic and say so. The magician (may or may not be the same person dealing with my case the whole way through) calls the pizza shop, get's an update. They text me 'Oh the shop said they delivered it'. I text back, a different person gets on the phone to the shop again, etc.

How is that manageable?

reply


Sticky message persistence is a pretty trivial problem to solve, FWIW. No idea if Magic has done so, because the magic is apparently operational opacity, which is fine, but either way, the current agent should have ready access to your conversation history.

reply


The way to scale it would be to contract it back out to an existing personal concierge service, but then it might be obvious that Magic is new marketing for old services (with a little bit of an updated tech twist).

It might be valuable in that Magic might be accessing a market that basically didn't know such services existed. But I don't really see any fundamental process efficiency that Magic brings to the table for this market...

reply


Derided by morons, yeah.

It's clearly not easy to clone Magic. It's pretty easy to clone "software to SMS message with customers via a browser", though.

reply


As one of the idiots who responded with a property tax argument, I did not. Then again, I don't live in California, so I'll just eat the downvotes as the cost of a lesson learned.

Don't ask questions that other people know the answer to.

reply


That was my first thought as well, and my first answer to the question of "What do they fear exactly?" was "Democracy".

I find it equally preposterous that the mass of Google employees operate as some sort of a hive-mind too, abandoning their own personal politics in favor of their employer's, but at the same time, would be foolish not to acknowledge that Google employees are likely going to favor Google-centric endeavors like Google Fiber, self-driving cars and that sort of thing at polling stations.

reply


> Or you can stay and enjoy your new-found wealth

I am equally unsympathetic, but is that statement true? A teacher buys a house in 1982 for $125,000. That house is now worth $800,000, but while her salary has increased according to cost of living (ideally), it has definitely not accounted for the massive increase in property tax that her new values command.

There's a difference of around $500 a month, just in property taxes between her home in 1982 and 2015, and that doesn't even account for the increase in cost of goods and services as the rest of the economy thrives around her.

reply


Just for reference, that situation doesn't apply to California because of [Prop. 13](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_%2819...). It restricts the annual increases of property taxes to an inflation factor, not to exceed 2% per year.

reply


I've never paid property taxes in California, but my understanding is that Prop 13: 1) limits increased in assessed value to 2% per year (under the rate of inflation historically); and 2) prevents re-valuation of property except on ownership transfer or new construction.

reply


Ahhh, that would change the situation dramatically. I'm used to dealing with property value assessments occurring every 5 or so years.

reply


If magic's only chance for success was in ensuring that nobody else could figure out how they were doing it, they weren't going to be in the marketplace for very long anyway.

For reference, almost everybody knows how to wash their car, but that hasn't put car washes out of business. McDonald's doesn't succeed because nobody knows how to make burgers, or that their special sauce is thousand island.

Restaurants, maid services, landscaping, etc., all benefit from the same aims -- if they can provide convenience to the users willing to pay for it, and do so in a way that compels those users to keep paying for it, there will be space in the marketplace for them.

reply

More

Applications are open for YC Summer 2015

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Y Combinator | Apply | Contact

Search: