Sure, so did Walter White.
26,409 karma · joined March 16, 2009
pius@alum.mit.edu https://pius.me
Sure, so did Walter White.
I've tried to teach friends with that hangup and found it difficult. Those people weren't good at math, though. I feel like with mathematicians, you should just be able to explain with limits.
Let's not inject FUD about affirmative action into this conversation.
MIT, for instance, has a robust affirmative action program and I can assure you the Institute isn't in the business of picking unqualified applicants. One of the most famous (and successful) affirmative action programs in the world is implemented by the NFL — hardly a charity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rooney_Rule
Institutions that implement affirmative action do so selfishly to ensure that they're fielding the best proverbial team possible.
You're right, but I don't think the author would claim otherwise.
The article is not about the possibility of breakout success, but about lone, reasonably skilled game developers being able to make a consistent living. Not the same thing.
http://anovaculinary.com/products/anova-precision-cooker
http://www.seriouseats.com/2014/05/new-anova-precision-cooke...
If that's true, how about you simply make your comment minus the joke?
Also worth noting that those scams mostly come from the United States now, not Nigeria.
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/U-S-Internet-fraud-at-al...
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2150981/yahoo-drops-do-not-tr...
No.
Don't trivialize the slave trade so you can make a weak rhetorical critique of YC.
A completely pointless humblebrag of a post.
??
To most people reading, that is a distinction without a difference.
You really want to focus on what problem you're solving here. Can you say in a sentence why this is a better publishing platform for writers than any other?
Yahoo's isn't investing $10bn; they're investing some amount of money at a $10bn valuation.
Give the guy a break. It's Lecture 1, I'd imagine he was nervous.
The value prop isn't just breaking stories quicker than the next outlet, but we do happen to break a fair amount of news. For instance, we broke a story [1] last week that moved eBay's share price up by 4-6%. [2]
[1] https://www.theinformation.com/PayPal-s-Future-Still-in-Play
[2] http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=EBAY+Interactive#symbol=E...
That's the net effect; it's not my place to impute a motive.
All I'm saying is that you wrote a piece about sexism and titled it as if it were about a broader topic. And I know that you're usually a sharp, precise writer.
I do recognize that none of this is easy and I think it's admirable that you've addressed this (very thorny) topic. You've said that you plan to address the other aspects of diversity as it relates to YC and I'm looking forward to reading about it.
Sure, but you clearly didn't call the piece "Gender and Startups" or "Sexism and Startups." Presumably the broader title was chosen deliberately.
For instance, I'd push back on an essay called "YC and Startups" if it only mentioned one company in one batch, but with a quick token sentence about other batches.
i don't think we're playing this on "easy mode", but i'm sorry you feel that way.
What can I say? It's a piece that scores points for "addressing diversity" but only substantively discusses the less controversial, more tractable subtopic of sexism.
Excited to read the upcoming, more inclusive posts though.
Making diversity all about gender is effectively playing the topic on "easy mode." Kinda lame, honestly.