akg

Congrats on a tremendous technical feat!

Any advantage of using a full-scale FS over something like git-annex (http://git-annex.branchable.com/)?

This list is inevitable I think for anyone who is trying to ship or has some sort of deadline. The most important thing I find in maintaining large code bases is to vigilantly keep the broken window theory in mind (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory). It takes some discipline to actually go back and fix things that are broken, but it does help to avoid longer term software rot.

No codebase is perfect at any single given point in time, but when you see a broken window, fix it.

http://pragprog.com/the-pragmatic-programmer/extracts/softwa...

I remember looking at Yahoo Pipes back in 2007, but perhaps the timing was not right for it back then. Now as the Web is getting more and more ubiquitous and the need for services to talk to each other grows, an approach like this could very well take off.

A live-demo would be nice to see. It's hard to gauge how to use the app and the descriptions in the help screen are far too long for anyone to read carefully IMO.

Excellent story. I think people in general overestimate the time they have available to do things and underestimate the time it takes to actually do it; which inevitibly leads to situations where you think you can make up for "lost" time by sprinting forward, tomorrow. The most valuable lesson I learned about productivity is that small actions, done now, can lead to huge productivity gains tomorrow. The hard part of course is to subconsciously justify to yourself that those small actions are actually making significant progress towards your end goal. It's important not to get discouraged and keep charging ahead.

What's more insidious are those "busy working" tasks that can consume your day where you actually feel productive, but haven't made any real progress towards where you want to be.

There's an excellent TED talk by Daniel Goldstein about the present and future self; highly recommended: http://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_goldstein_the_battle_between...

The book "Architectural Geometry" http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/193449304X/103-2668819-9693... is a fantastic read with plenty of nice geometric insights.

Some excellent advice from Chris Dixon on the chicken and egg problem: http://cdixon.org/2009/08/25/six-strategies-for-overcoming-c...

and also by Joel Spolsky: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000054.html

I found a nice introduction to lock-free data-structures here: http://www.cse.yorku.ca/~ruppert/papers/lfll.pdf

It is restricted to linked-lists but has some nice take-aways and worth the read.

Problem and Solution number 42 is a genius way to help the less fortunate. I do hope that the more metropolitan cities adopt that in their transit systems.

There seems to be a pretty common message for many of the rules here that encourage trial-and-error and re-doing things. I think that is just brilliant advice for innovation in general not just story writing. Not being afraid to fail and trying things again and again truly leads to amazing results.

It's a great method to get inspiration for potential problems in the B2B space. The challenge however, after you've come up with a solution is the sales. Enterprise sales are notoriously difficult especially due to "big business" culture that creates inefficiencies to solve in the first place.

PG has this to say in his essay (http://paulgraham.com/start.html) :

"Start by writing software for smaller companies, because it's easier to sell to them. It's worth so much to sell stuff to big companies that the people selling them the crap they currently use spend a lot of time and money to do it. And while you can outhack Oracle with one frontal lobe tied behind your back, you can't outsell an Oracle salesman. So if you want to win through better technology, aim at smaller customers."

I have tried open-source (octave,mathics) and closed-source (matlab, mathematica, maple) and I can say that nothing comes close to mathematica. In our physics lab, mathematica has truly changed our entire workflow, making it a lot simpler to focus on the real crux of the problem; instead of dawdling around in symbolic manipulation.

I'm not sure what they are using in undergraduate courses, but I think the toolchain by Wolfram has really advanced the way scientists work. It's far from perfect, but it is an amazing tool.

Feynman has a unique insight and perspective of the world.

One of the lessons I learned from him, and I can't find the quote now, but when he was diagnosed with cancer he had this to say:

Everyone knows that they will one day die, yet they find a way to "live" life despite that fact. They have ambitions, dreams, desires. The only difference for me is that that the time is now limited. Why would I be depressed about that when the basic principle of life is the same. The only difference for me is that the time is shortened. It's simply a matter of scale, but the philosophical conundrum remains the same.

Donald Knuth's Art of Computer Programming Volume 3 has an excellent exposition on hash functions and hash tables in general. If you can get yourself a copy I would highly recommend the read.

An excellent example of embracing the changing technological landscape and providing new value in addition to it. Now if only Hollywood would realize this, stop mourning antiquated ways of doing business and provide new value with the amazing technology that is available.

Cornell's recent move to NYC (http://www.cornell.edu/nyc/) is going to be a great boon to the startup scene there. This will undoubtedly attract some very good tech talent from 3 schools (Columbia, Cornell, NYU) in a very dense area. The one draw back about Silicon Valley is how spread out everything is. I would imagine serendipitous meetings in NYC will spur the startup culture there quite rapidly. Looking forward to the exciting changes there.

Here is an excellent paper written about a similar premise:

http://dunn.psych.ubc.ca/files/2010/12/If-Money-Doesnt-make-...

HN discussion here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3922794

Here is a paper I found extremely useful when studying Lock Free data structures. It focuses on linked lists, but has a nice exposition of the idea: http://www.cse.yorku.ca/~ruppert/papers/lfll.pdf

This list I feel has material with significantly higher quality: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3496038

The notable differentiating factor I can see is tight integration with social. I'm not sure WebEx supports that, albeit it's been a while since I used it. That is also not a significant competitive advantage. I would think their focus is on usability rather than features, at least that is what I gather from reading the article.

I would not be surprised if FB is positioning itself to be the "front page of the internet". Many people spend lots of hours on Facebook and most of the time FB serves as their portal to current events, news, events, etc. Search is definitely missing, but I am sure that is in the works. FB is still a relatively young company and it's exciting to see where they are headed, especially now that they have plenty of cash to invest in the business.

Of course, this is all just conjecture at this point.

Interesting point, however the main difference between a printed book and the app store is that the product on the app store can be constantly changing based on the user feedback. If reviews are inherently prejudiced in one direction, does that leave much incentive for developers to improve their app?

On the other hand, a private engagement directly with developers could prove to be more beneficial since it allows developers know of shortcomings/user-expectations without negatively affecting the overall ratings. This way, they can improve the app without having lingering negative comments affect the perception of their updates.

Lawrence Lessig's book Free Culture: http://free-culture.cc/freecontent/ gives an excellent exposition regarding this behavior of the RIAA and potential solutions to this problem. I highly recommend giving that a read.

Paul Graham has a similar premise in this essay: http://paulgraham.com/hubs.html, where he mentions that the default mode for startups is Death. Dixon argues for surrounding yourself with extraordinary people, Graham makes the case for being in a startup hub.

I am not sure how things like this will change our lives to be honest, I think it is too early to say which will have a bigger impact.

To your latter point, I can understand that most people use social networks to merely chat and browse drunken photos of friends, but that is like saying that all the invention of the telephone did was make it easier to share mindless banter with your friends. There are fringe benefits that arise from these kinds of technologies that could be really impactful. Twitter's use during the Arab Spring comes to mind as the most recent example of this.

I admit that Facebook doesn't provide any great "technological"/scientific achievement, but it does have a strong network effect supporting it; and that is something that can be impactful in a very productive sense.

Innovation can come from unlikely places, especially when people connect and come together. I don't think social is just about where the money is, I think it can be powerful force in the way we live our lives and also a source for future innovation. I'm not just talking about Facebook, but tools that bring the world a lot closer together.

I wonder if people criticized the telephone as much when people instead of "working" spent time chatting on the phone with their friends. Sure there will be people who waste time doing that, but I think in broader terms, it will help open up communication channels, enable new collaborations, allow a free exchange of ideas, and also lead to more innovation. It's just hard to see where things are going, but I would bet that they are headed in a positive direction.

If time is wasted driving, is building more efficient cars really the solution? I would venture that technology that makes the world a lot smaller and puts information at your fingertips, e.g., tablets, phones, social networks, etc. will be a much bigger disrupter in the way we live our current lives. Maybe in the future we won't have to drive as much since we can just get things done without having to waste time in cars.

This is actually pretty cool. Now I just need this to come up (modulo the large headshot of PG) every time I get distracted from building/shipping product.

I think goals are a way to drive yourself to do something productive/stimulating so that you don't get bored. However, the accomplishment of goals and fulfilling your every desire, albeit important, is not what makes a person happy.

I think happiness comes from something much more abstract. It is a visceral reaction to your life and everything in it. I truly believe that in the end, the thing that makes you happy in life is when you live uncompromisingly, upholding the beliefs/principles/truths/etc. that resonate deep within your heart; whatever they may be.

Agreed. I think the main problem in this story however is the the red-tape between people and not so much the process itself.

Ask Homer, well Homer is not in so ask Marge, well I don't have access to Marge. Delays like this that come from artificial communication barriers can be easily avoided if they worked on improving communication throughout the organization. It would probably have saved them 1-2 days, if not more.