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

The point of this article is that as a B+ student, you can get into a globally competitive university for free. Financial aid at a competitive college in the US is available to students at A- or above.

-----


A different view is countries compete for knowledge-based workers that may go on and start startups. The key criterion in starting a startup isn't academic performance. In a startup heading towards a foreign environment and navigating it may be just as valuable.

The article may also be pointing to the beginning of a trend. That globally competitive universities exploit a major flaw in the US education system.

"I feel like my child is getting an absolute wonderful education over there for free. Betrayal is too strong of a word, but why can't we do that here?""

-----


I wonder how long this has been there.

-----


Last-Modified: Tue, 01 Jul 2014 22:03:05 GMT according to the headers. It probably hasn't been up for much longer than that, or it would have been found already.

-----


Congrats Otavio and team!

-----


Mobile advertising is getting pretty competitive - MoPub's reports offer pretty solid evidence: http://www.mopub.com/2013/10/07/mopub-quarterly-advertising-...

Advertisers are somewhat familiar with this format because it's so similar to Facebook's format.

-----


Having to show results to your fellow founders every week at your in-person meeting is extremely motivating. Doing everything via Google Hangouts doesn't allow for the sort of serendipitous encounters that happen at the weekly meetings. Investors come to Demo Day not just to see the newest batch of companies, but also to meet with others.

I'm skeptical that this would work.

-----


Where in the code is the eval() is performed? There is not a single call to eval() in that source.

Maybe a listing of the Wi() function would be useful.

-----


I wonder if this is something that Google and Co. will also be allowed to do?

-----


They already do. Google have been publishing statistics and reports about this stuff for a while:

https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/

None of this is relevant though. These are legal requests. The issue that people should remain focused on is whether or not the NSA has illegal, ongoing, unfettered access to wholesale data under PRISM or other programmes.

-----


Google does not publish information about requests which come with a gag order. They were the first to request the ability to publish that data several days ago, followed by Facebook and others shortly after. Facebook is the first to publish updated statistics with the numbers from National Security Letter and FISA warrants included after being granted permission. Google presumably will do so soon as well.

-----


Incorrect. Google disclosed NSL summary stats months ago. As you say, FISA stats are next. I'd expect them this evening.

-----


I stand corrected. They do indeed have the NSL stats, in the somewhat useless 0 – 999 range, here:

https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/U...

-----


Yep, but it was more than any other company in the history of this country has ever disclosed. And give them another 48-72 hours from now to divulge more info.

-----


Oh, I agree. I think it's great they're disclosing what they can and pushing to be able to disclose even more. The "somewhat useless" remark was directed more at the restrictions preventing them from divulging more than at Google themselves.

-----


Google was only allowed to release some of this data. FISA requests were not permitted.

>we can now include in a transparency report all U.S. national security-related requests (including FISA as well as National Security Letters) – which until now no company has been permitted to do.

So, this is a change, albeit still a limited one.

-----


I imagine they're all getting the go-ahead.

-----


The headline for that row implies that they're talking about one selected founder of the company.

-----


The title is "60% of Top 25 Tech Companies Founded By 1st & 2nd Generation Americans = 1.3MM Employees, 2012". It was created to support a thesis (immigrants found highly successful companies at a higher rate than their share of the population suggests), but it presents an incomplete data set. Either the authors are naive and didn't understand how misleading the chart was, or they chose to structure it that way to support their agenda. It's so wildly misleading that it makes the rest of their "data" suspect.

-----


How much does one of these plants cost? It's said that they're astronomically expensive, but I haven't seen a dollar amount for building one.

-----


TSMC Spent 9.3 billion on one of their plants back in 2010.

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

Though the numbers I've typically heard are around 3-4 Instagrams.

-----


Things may not be as bad as they seem.

Don't worry about the investor's money - it's called venture capital for a reason.

You've probably learned a tremendous amount from the experience.

Think about what the next step for you is after this company. Sounds like you're a developer and can easily get a well-paying job. Sounds like there is still some money left and you can take some time and decompress from the experience.

This isn't doom. It's the first step of what you're doing next.

-----


Agreed. Part of the job of being an investor is to balance your portfolio, and losses are to be expected. Such a world doesn't exist where investments are risk free.

There are many entrepreneurs who have raised again from VCs even after they didn't make it from their first raise. As long as you tried your hardest, there isn't much else more you can do. Keep at it.

-----


OOC, Have either of you built and lost others money from investors as well as lost your own?

-----


I got pretty freaked out about playing with other people's money when we first took on investment. On discussing it with one of the lead investors, his response was "If all of this goes wrong, my children will still have shoes on their feet."

Your investors would not be investors if the failure of any one of their investments would create an insufferable financial burden upon them. If that statement is not true about a particular investor, that's their fault and not yours.

-----


When I was 25 I lost more than $20,000 of my own and FFF money investing in my own project only to have it fail. At the time I was obviously, really upset.

Fast forward to today -- looking back it was one of the greatest investments in my life so far as all the stuff I learned both emotionally, psychologically and professionally has really helped with current work and life.

I used to think losing money was a big deal, but now I realize it isn't. Investors are in a sense "buying" your time. Can you really put a value on your time? Your own life?

Sure, the memories were disappointing and frustrating, but I wouldn't have had it any other way. And yes, I plan to save and try it again.

EDIT: Just to be clear I'm not saying throw VC money around... of course you still need to be responsible.

-----


I remember the first $10,000 I lost on a business. It was my own money (well, a loan I ended up paying for years afterwards). Losing that much money when you make minimum wage is huge disastrous. But it taught me a lot about businesses, money, and myself. I do not regret what happened.

-----


It sounded like you supported what the original commenter said, not to worry about investors.

Having a slack attitude towards money (our own money or others) doesn't build a business or an understanding of value that ultimately ends in a revenue stream.

It's nice of you to share you story -- I don't think many folks do. I have similar experiences (good and bad), but I think the one thing that really stands out for me is that investors are in a sense "buying" your time, not much different than consulting...... :)

-----


> Having a slack attitude towards money (our own money or others) doesn't build a business or an understanding of value that ultimately ends in a revenue stream.

Of course you need to value other people's money, but when they gave you they money they know that there were higher chances to fails than to succeed. If you did 100% of what you could have done, you have done your job. If it was easy everyone would do it.

-----


"investors are in a sense "buying" your time, not much different than consulting"

Brilliant. I've never heard the concept of investing in a startup phrased so well.

-----


It was a gong moment for me too.

I think I'd be much more open to funding if it was like this because I'm used to people paying me to build ideas, it just might be my own ideas that someone else happens to agree with.

-----


I have not, but isn't it safe to say that if this money wasn't going into venture capital it would probably be going into something like oil speculation or mortgage backed securities, which undoubtably has much more negative impact on our world then giving some people jobs to try out their crazy ideas for a few years dont you think? It's good OP is concerned about his investors, but its just money from people with lots of it. His own money is more of a concern imo, but at least the job market is good for someone with his skills. He'll bounce back, hang in there!

-----


Indeed, it may be possible to radically reduce expenses, get a moonlighting job, and make the business more easily maintainabile at that point as well. If the investors won't call you back, and you and (and presumably co-founders) want to commit to being successful, it may not even be too late if you are willing to get secondary jobs to pay bills with.

-----


Absolutely agree with this - it's venture captial. They're taking a risk, sure you should be responsible with their investment, but it's a risk. They're not buying guaranteed success, if they were I'd imagine it'be a far larger pricetag than what they paid.

Best of luck, but definitely do _not_ feel guilty.

-----

More

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

Search: