Rariel

I'd love if some of the downvoters could explain 1) why I'm wrong or 2) what an alternative would look like?

THere is a simple solution to the Social Security "crisis". Right now only income up to 100,000 is subject to social security taxes. Anything over 100,000 is not taxed for social security. If we raised taxable income to 150,000 or 200,000 even we'd have plenty of money.

THer

Maybe I'm missing it, but where is the article? All I see is a slide show about 15 athletes that have gone broke. Google didn't return anything recent. Can somebody reply with the link?

"Most NBA players are scouted from very early on (AAU), then to college for 1 year, then to NBA." This is completely untrue. Players that go to the NBA one year out of college are the exception and not the rule.

"Nonsensical?" There's no need to be rude. We're both allowed to have an opinion. And for the record, it's not "nonsensical" to say that she sidestepped the traditional corporate experience most women have because she did just that. She was able to do that based on her exceptional talent/intelligence and the connections she had/made.

Really great idea. This is perfect for roomates, especially college aged. Also very good for ADHD types like myself! Can't wait to start using it.

You mean ArgumentSolver

Ok let's get back to the basics of this discussion. I said that I didn't like Sandberg saying that the glass ceiling doesn't exist because she wouldn't know much about it since she got to side step it. You came along and started talking about how I was downplaying her hard work. Not so, she's a hardworking person who is also exceptionally smart. I'm not sure if you're just trying to disagree with me for the sake of disagreement, but you are seeing things in my comments that aren't there, at least not intentionally.

"Working hard and hoping you get noticed by the right people is how just about everybody gets ahead"

I'd have to strongly disagree. There are plenty of people in this world (plenty at the top) who were born in to the right position and either worked hard to stay there (+connections/influence) or didn't work hard but still stayed there (connections/influence). Very few people are like Barrack Obama--come from the semi-bottom and are now extremely high up. More common are people like George Bush, Jr. and Al Gore. Both were born in to the right position and stayed there.

Also, it's not that her example doesn't count, she's the exception--not the rule. How do we make her the rule is the question. There are many answers/ideas about that.

How does my comment significantly downplay "the extent to which it was her own hard work and good work attitude that got her to where she is now?" All I said was that it is unnerving to see somebody who hasn't really had a chance to run in to the glass ceiling say it doesn't exist? She got to side step a lot of the sexism and discrimination other women face because of her sponsorship by powerful respected men. She was sponsored because she was/is exceptional. It doesn't change the fact that she was sponsored and got to side step certain aspects of the more traditional corporate experience many women go through.

Sad to hear you think you lack the qualities that make her worth sponsoring but that isn't really relevant to this discussion.

Sure I can elaborate on my "[propping] up and sponsored by men" comment although you questioning that makes me feel like you didn't read the article. That was a consistent theme--people asserting that her attitude about women in business/tech/being under represented was a result of her having a lot of advantages (via men propping her up and sponsoring her) that most women don't have. And I don't know your mother but what I said is hardly BS. I'm sure both she and you know who I mean by "most women" I mean women who make up the vast majority of women in our western society. Women who have to choose between giving their all to their career and having children because unlike Sandberg they don't have nannies or a 50/50 relationship where they can expect their husband to co-parent. Women who aren't mentored by the best of the best and don't have parents who are PhD (dropouts) and Ophthalmologists. I'm not discounting anything she's done--she's remarkable and a brilliant person. But for her to act like other women aren't doing what she's doing because they aren't assertive enough or that the problem lies within their reaction to sexism--give me a break. In the article somebody counters her points on that by saying that Sandberg acts as if this is a meritocracy when it's not--that's spot on.

As for glass ceiling metaphor, why don't you ask Sandberg what she's referring to. I was just referencing what she said "She opposes all forms of affirmative action for women. “If you don’t believe there is a glass ceiling, there is no need,” she told me."

Oh and as for specifics about being propped up and sponsored by men I'd point to things like this "In January of 1991, Summers became the chief economist at the World Bank, and that spring he recruited Sandberg as a research assistant." I don't care how smart or good you are, without certain connections you're not going to get a research associateship at the world bank.

It's a little unnerving to see a woman who was propped up and sponsored by men and given every advantage (yes, after working hard--like many others) say there is no glass ceiling. How would she know when she got to ride in the special elevator to the top?

It's easy to say there's nothing wrong when you've never encountered the problems that most other women have.

"Facebook won based on amazing technological innovations in the form of the app platform."

I don't think this is true. I know that people I was friends with on myspace who migrated to facebook did so because myspace got to be too much of an online pick up spot/crowded with sparkly graphics

Great. Now all we have to do is wait until Zefram Cochrane invents the warp drive in 2063. :-)

"We will not share your idea with anyone else, but we cannot guarantee that we will not work on something very similar."

That makes me almost 100% unlikely to use your site. I know that you're CYA here, but I would need to cover mine too...It seems a little stupid to tell you an idea if you say in big bold letters that although you might not share it, you may steal it or "work on something very similar."

I second this.

Not anymore, they took that off a while ago. Funny thing is for a while the gmail logo still appeared even though when you clicked it to import via gmail it didn't have the option.

I think they would. They are getting pretty savvy these days...

The only way I can think of for them to really, really make this worth it beyond just owning the service is to integrate it in to Outlook like gmail video/voice chat. Although worker bees would hate it, it would be cool as a supervisor to be able to "call" your employee from a program you already have open all day anyways. Or even co-workers working on a project too lazy to get up or lawyers who need to talk about something but don't really have time to stop what they're doing. They could implement a feature enabling you to "add" friends who use outlook to your chat/buddy list. I don't think it would kill off gmail, but it would make some people much less likely to try it.

On a more personal note, I really hope they don't take away all those cool chat thingys (refuse to call them emoticons). That dancing guy and disappearing pizza get me every time.

Fellow old fogey here. What kind of startup are you looking to join?

"On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity."

from http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

"Nobody in their right mind should credit this to Obama." Why not? He gets the blame for the last administration's screw ups so why shouldn't he take the glory of finding bin laden? (Not that I agree the last admin did anything to help find Osama). Additionally, he's the commander in chief of the military--so the head of the military shouldn't get credit?

Are you starting a "deather" movement?

That was one of my first thoughts upon hearing the news! "Can we go back to walking people to their gates?" Part of me is afraid of retaliation, however,...

I am a non-dev teaching myself to program and something like what you describe would be great. Something for people who want to learn about the tech side but aren't going hardcore with the self-teaching would probably be good as well--meaning a class that teaches you enough to understand what exactly your tech co-founder does, will do, can do.

I thought Wave was a good idea, and a good amount of my friends used it for a while. I think integrating it more with gmail would have made it dynamite. Or some how using it as a regular email account. I kinda miss wave now.

I think it depends on what type of marketing you need, e.g. online ad sales? B2b? Where you're trying to go with your startup or business probably should determine what type of help you need.

I've thought a lot about this "Great Team v. Great idea" and I think what you're saying is partially true. You have great teams failing right this very second, and it's viewed as ok given that they are, well, great teams. But that still leaves them failing.

I think a major problem is that neither the biz nor the tech co-founders are the lynch pin, it's the correct combo of both + an amazing idea + that 'never give up' determination + timing.

I think there are a lot of people getting full of themselves, be it devs, biz people, or VCs. I think it would do us all well to realize that yes, we DO need each other.

Apparently it's already trademarked--they have the TM right next to the name when you search it in the app store. I am really surprised by this...