bonsaitree

I'm not sure I understand your question.

A skydiver is transitioning (abruptly) from unpowered free-fall into unpowered, albeit greatly slowed, descent. The jetpack user is transitioning from powered, controlled horizontal flight (with its characteristic 6 degrees of freedom) into unpowered descent.

A back-up chute for the skydiver has essentially, but not quite, the same flight characteristics and initial deployment conditions as a main.

Parachutes in a stable flight configuration are incredibly safe and reliable, but it's GETTING that 6-axis dynamic flight-body INTO that stable flight configuration that's the real challenge.

It's relatively easy to design a system for even extremely large, static, dead-weights (such as cargo or even battle tanks) to be safely launched, arrested, and landed via parachute.

It's an entirely different problem when your safe chute deployment must take into account the wide variance in airspeed, pitch, yaw, altitude, and environmental influences which powered free flight allows. Imagine a worse-case scenario where all power was lost just after a major inadvertent yaw maneuver (it appears to be designed to minimize yawing). That's a sticky-wicket to solve repeatedly and reliably.

I can only guess fuel-consumption-to-thrust efficiencies (longer flight times) or pure cost since a pure gas turbine will always beat out a mechanically linked fan-stroke in specific power (i.e. kW/kg), but will almost always be more costly due to the extremely high manufacturing tolerances required for turbines.

Mainly due to the fact that a 'powered parachute' (e.g. an ultralite) undergoes essentially no mass modal volume delta in airflow when transitioning between powered and unpowered flight.

The controls, and fundamental aeronautical responses to flight inputs, remain the same in both flight regimes and, for the most part, there's a gradual and manageable amount of pilot feedback during the transition.

In fact, this lack of "gradual feedback" was the main reason that power steering took so long to be safety-approved in automobiles. It's also why, in most countries, pure 'drive-by-wire' controls are only allowed in experimental and prototype road vehicles. Despite the obvious ergonomic and cockpit layout virtues of joysticks, steering wheels and worm gears can still work without active power-assists.

The same can be said for a gliding light airplane or helicopter under auto-rotation.

Alas, the same CAN NOT be said for the Martin jetpack when deploying its ballistic parachute. Btw, aside from cost and liability issues, this is one of the reasons emergency ballistic parachutes haven't caught on in small single-engine aircraft.

Assuming the employer/employee relationship is healthy, I give the customary 2 weeks, but always allow for up to 4 additional weeks of off-site 1099 consulting and communication.

This can be especially helpful when transitioning a large codebase, or really any suitably complex project, where some of the undocumented "lore" isn't readily apparent to either party until after the formal transition effort is already well underway.

Exactly. It's the silver-spoon opportunity cost fallacy over which he has ZERO control.

It's irrational and wrong, but sadly makes for more "press" and "drama". A prime example is the plethora of rich-kid "reality" t.v. shows which leverage those atavistic reactions it to the hilt.

Despite the clever marketing (and it is quite clever), hand-formed room-set silicone has been used in the building trades for almost a decade--mostly for long-run ductwork dampening and high-service-interval electrical junction box seals.

It's precisely analogous to when cyanoacrylate adhesive compounds were re-marketed as Krazy Glue.

;-)

Did you read the full post?

This was not a "complaint". I was trying to sum up the 2 key points of the discussion and defend Ms. Culver's excess press via sociology in both the historic (e.g. Ms. Polese) and current context of the Silicon Valley press ecosystem. I also did my best (clearly poorly) to give some defense of her efforts.

This sort of thing gets highlighted on HN, and having modern studies to quantify the effects is useful, but one need look little further then Helen of Troy.

Nothing new under the sun here.

Who's iJustine? ;-)

I held my tongue on this earlier today thinking it would simply go away, but no more.

Bottom line #1: The content of this article is not technically newsworthy by HN norms.

Bottom line #2: If you're a photogenic & telegenic young woman software developer in Silcon Valley and you're also sufficiently socially charming, creative, or just plain lucky enough to fall in with the "right crowd" at the "right time" you can get spades of press far easier than any male or any non-photogenic female.

Remember Kim Polese? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Polese ('nuff said)

I can't cite the study offhand (I believe it was published in Nature in '05), but physical looks are a large multiplier (and and even larger divider) in young women's careers in almost all fields (there's an XKCD for this somewhere too). The effect dampens sharply later in life. As society has become more mediated, I'm sure that effect has only grown.

Looks sell, but that sales job must be followed through with commitment and execution. Judging from afar (Pownce's infamous Python eval() hole aside), I've not seen her lacking in either.

"Easy" fame and press is a double-edged sword. She's then expected to live-up to her "billing" and I doubt anyone is quite prepared for such a sudden burst of notoriety and the implicit expectations which come as part of fame's "package deal". At least by being a developer, her contributions can be more objectively judged. I suspect she takes great comfort in that.

I also think even by Valley Standards she's bounced from one company (and one relationship) to the next with alarming frequency. The fact that I even KNOW those few details of her personal life is evidence of our society's double-standard for women.

I can't think of a single other 'famous' developer who's personal life I know about other than Guido, but that's because he and his family used to live near us in Virginia.

I suspect Leah had few options for advancement at SixApart and simply had to "ride-out her earn-out" per Pownce's acquisition agreement.

I also suspect one of the implicit assumptions with her arrangement at Plancast was press-related (again simply leveraging fame as many "advisorships" in Valley companies end up being).

Nevertheless, I'm sure she takes a good deal of comfort from the fact that, at the end of the day, she's now a developer with a deliverable exploring a fresh new non-Django-related API and platform.

If she had wanted to be purely a "face" she likely would've stayed at CNET (err..Webshots) or moved to a more media-centric role.

I also suspect she's already seen the darker side of Silicon Valley and has little wish to return to those salad days. Let her build. Let her be.

Um, yeah. Technorati has been essentially an undead company for years. When your CTO resigns along with a good deal of the founding staff, that's never a good sign.

Offhand, barring lack of infrastructure (e.g. money) to support a public API, it's sheer insanity NOT to use a slow deprecation & migration strategy for versioning.

Offline for months and no updates--deadpool indeed.

IMO, the bulk of the vitriol comes from two issues (not that I think much of it is sound):

- Multiple claims of outright dishonest behavior and undue credit-taking entitlement from his co-founders (even prior to the lawsuits)

- His extremely privileged background. Given his family's political connections, wealth, ivy-league legacy, and prep-school pedigree, he risked very little (compared to most entrepreneurs) when giving a pre-undergrad start-up a go.

Correct.

In "modern" laptops with Li or Li-Poly batteries, it's really more about the embedded intelligence, or lack there of, of the power regulator relative to the reactance headroom of the power source (relative to system demands) than the battery itself.

Some systems, notably netbooks, have virtually zero variance in their reactive power loads so the manufacturer can skimp a little on the regulator--not so for full-featured notebooks with multiple drive and fan servos powered by induction motors. A MackbookPro running only an SSD and idling fans has the same effective reactance profile of a netbook.

A suitable analogy can be made with automobile transmissions. Two identical models can have vastly different mpg performance and component wear with different transmissions under different loads though they weigh nearly the same, run on the same fuel, and have the same horsepower/torque curve.

While correct, I really view this as a non-issue.

I suspect for most people, their in-memory data, time, and attention are far more valuable than not having power redundancy protection against an accidental cord disconnect or possible increased degradation on a ~$100 replaceable component on a $1k+ machine--namely the battery.

You're absolutely correct regarding the trademark, but not infringement.

In order for infringement to hold up, you'd have to get around the "fair use" defense. As this is 3rd party non-vested commentary on "news and current events" in a public forum, it's basically air-tight.

Guilty as charged and absolutely correct.

Ahhh, I still have fond memories of the Sun Ultra Enterprise server we ran back in the late 90s.

The computer so fast (for its day) that it came with it's own spoiler (e.g. a separate bit of snap-on plastic for its top fan ducting). It was affectionately known around the lab as the "Purple Monster".

I won't miss Solaris's "pkg-add" installer though--what a kludge.

<voice actor="Phil Hartman" role="Bill McNeil" show="News Radio"> Good times...good times. </voice>

Patently (heh) false.

Given that the Tweet is already attached to an identity (individual or corporate account) and assuming one may claim even a reasonable semblance of creativity and originality on the content of said Tweet, it's technically Copywritable, but a mere "status" update, link, or factual listing is not.

- Think of all the copywritten corporate and government slogans (Just Do It, Army of One, What can brown do for you, Aim Higher, etc.) which could quite easily fit into a Tweet with room to spare.

- Think of all the haikus (see @MJ), other short poems, and unicode/ascii-art #twitterart (see @l_I__I_l) posts.

That being said, I can't think of any rational (e.g. economic) reason which would support registration of the Tweet as the "fixed medium".

Mostly, I can envision defensive sorts of legal actions such as blatant plagiarism or abuse/mis-use of a pre-existing logo, unattributed passage, or slogan.

As the multitudes of "sampling" lawsuit precedents in the music industry has shown, authorship rights of even nano-sized digital content can be successfully asserted.

This sounds great. I'd recommend glancing over some of the earlier releases of the, sadly now defunct, Perl Journal.

I thought they absolutely nailed their target demographic with a great balance of practical programming tips, history/cultural pieces, and op-eds.

As my dad was fond of quoting:

"A worker uses his tools. A journeyman knows his tools. A craftsman makes his own tools."

Actually, they may not be making ANY money off of his friend. Most 'charter' deals and seasonal specials are loss-leaders for gyms. The former, as part of the initially pre-financed membership drive and the latter when they're already below break-even capacity on a per-membership basis.

Keep in mind he's asking for more than a 8.5% discount on the stated price even before excluding the bogus initiation fee.

This article smells more of self-aggrandizing attitude than sound business reasoning. I'm amazed that he would bother with the artifice of negotiating when he's essentially unwilling to budge from his friend's price tier. That's not negotiating.

FWIW, contract strikes work just as well (sometimes better) on gym memberships as for any other legal agreement. If he's willing to pay the "full price", but doesn't want to deal with a cumbersome cancellation method, strike that clause and see if they will still approve the membership. That's a give and take. That's a negotiation.

Either he is deliberately feigning ignorance as fodder for a blog post (likely) or Mr. Steinberg is unaware of how modern gyms, especially ones located in dense urban environments, actually make money.

Mainly it's through un/under-utilized memberships and revenue-sharing from ancillary services (personal training, first-aid classes, childbirth classes, etc.) and seminars which can best leverage the uncommon properties of the real estate.

What's one business's "Price Discrimination" is another's "Flexible Pricing Strategy". A classic example are the near orders-of-magnitude margin differences for the same 1oz. of Coke depending on the customer (vending machine, supermarket, restaurant, stadium). Same customer, different channel, same product. For those who remember, a similar strategy was leveraged successfully (for a limited time) by AOL to manage subscriber churn.

In this specific example, I highly suspect "Dan" joined the gym during a lull point in the calendar year (low-demand) or was a so-called "charter" member (pre-paying). Though likely the same physical space and equipment when "Dan" joined, the financial profile & goals of the company which own the facility may be very different today--and, hence, reflected in their membership pricing.

That said, there's clearly a market for a "hassle-free" gym, but that business model is going to have roughly the same fixed capital costs of other gyms, but get squeezed between low/no-margin YMCAs & county/municipal facilities at the low-end and high-end "clubs" (like Crunch) where, sadly, part of the business model's revenue is the social and life-style exclusivity afforded by that membership fee. In big cities, high-end gyms are the modern equivalent of country clubs.

FFS This is "sales 101".

Know your client before the "get to know you" meeting. Anticipate. Try to outline reasoned solutions to their problems from their perspective before the RFP request.

Solution latency, or lack there of, even in a "rough form" is a deal maker/killer.

As an aside, who actually uses briefcases anymore?

Wow. Just...wow. Ugh.

Given all the posts on this forum, and even his direct participation in the discussion, I honestly thought that he would've recognized both the technical problems in Mahalo's content & linking stratagems as well as the hollow tenor of his words.

Sadly, no. More duplicitous ignorance and classic "PR framing" piece straight out Political Communications 101.

1. Couch direct criticism as "feedback". Do not directly apologize for any perceived or actual misdeeds as that is seen as an admission of purposeful dis-service and guilt.

2. Enumerate an ill-defined set of seemingly concrete, but very porous, actions to be enacted within an indefinite time frame. This overtly defines a 'scorecard', albeit one without any measurable boundaries for future compliance. In other words, the Overton Window is wide open.

3. Within the context of the response, inject positive spin on (any) tangentially related side-issue to serve as a defensive soundbite reservoir against any possible pointed questions within the limited time-windows of future radio and t.v. media interviews.

4. Make offers to "work more closely" with the opposite party, but exclusively on your turf/terms while (un)subtly highlighting your strengths and their weaknesses to continue business as usual. In this case, Aaron's individual "free" time & attention versus their "paid" team of developers.

5. Release "off-cycle" (e.g. late Friday, holidays, weekend) and in a forum where you can have as much control as possible in 'shaping the break' of the story as it makes its way through the media ecosystem.

This is just sad from every angle and, quite honestly, bumming me out. I wish I hadn't clicked on Hacker News this afternoon.

I fail to see how there's a "middle" here at all.

We're both participants in a public online discussion regarding the behavior of the CEO of a company which, at least for me, I can say I have no legal vested interest or direct financial dealings.

Fundamentally, this is between Mr. Calacanis, the management of Mahalo, and Google.

We're both mere spectators. By replying personally, Mr. Calacanis chose to make this a personal public issue--in both the original article & this forum. That's entirely within his purview. I'm sure he's experienced enough to know the potential ramifications of those actions.

With regards to personal attacks, see my reply below.

No management directives were given in the original article, nor my comment. For all we know, this "business model" is being forced upon Mahalo given the present economic climate.

Although I think it unlikely, Jason himself may not feel he has any other option and is being forced by the other investors in the company down this revenue path.

I urge you to read the original article and the previously posted comments on this thread for the full context of Mahlo's behavior and Mr. Calacanis' response. It's the double-speak and clearly disingenuous ignorance of his response which is the crux of the matter.

Unfortunately, as is the case with Mahalo, when one is both the CEO and "public face" of a corporation's brand, it is difficult partition the two relms outside of clearly personal matters (e.g. health, friends, family, etc.). A classic case being Martha Stewart.

In some instances, with morality and 'key executive personnel' insurance clauses in compensation agreements, they are, in fact, inextricably contractually coupled. As the saying goes, "it comes with the territory" and I'm sure is adequately reflected in his ownership of the company and current compensation.

Also, FWIW, I don't believe this was his original plan (e.g. Mahalo Daily's original format hosted by Veronica Belmont). Nevertheless, that's been the situation for years and Jason, and his board, have apparently seen no good reason to change it.

There's smart, shrewd, duplicitous, deceptive, and finally downright dishonest. I don't know the man personally, but it's my opinion that Mr. Calacanis's business practices moved into that final category some time ago.

It's actually really sad. I wonder what's driven him to this level. Greed? Ego? 3rd party investor pressure? Simply not wanting to ever have his name associated with a repeat failure?

Especially amongst the entrepreneur crowd which he espouses to represent, truthful "honest" failure itself is looked upon less harshly than shady "gamed success".

Though in retrospect totally full of late 90s Internet hype, I remember being inspired by his Charlie Rose interview back in the "Silcon Alley" days of NYC:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9192442030075924272#...

What happened to THAT Jason?

1. Programmer has a domain problem ill-fitted to his current programming language of choice and knowledge is said language's libraries.

2. Programmer switches languages to one well-suited to the domain and his current knowledge.

3. Miraculously, the domain's previous speed and abstraction munging issues suddenly disappear.

Why is this news?

Use the right tool for the right job. Syntax matters. Baked-In abstractions matter. Standardized library interfaces matter. This is precisely why the number of programming languages has grown, not shrunk, over time.

For the most part, programming languages aren't "better" or "worse"; than each other; they're simply "different".

Let that same programmer attempt to leverage C against an entirely different problem domain, such as a 3D physics simulation, and watch how rapidly the language's merits suddenly dissolve.

Kudos indeed. I'm glad Tptacek brought up the often-neglected 'flag' feature.

Again, there's no accounting for taste, but offhand I'd say labeling curse words, and their creative use, as "childish" is quite overreaching. Have you read any David Mamet, Frank McCourt, or Larry McMurtry lately? Do you honestly feel a child would have sufficient skill to structure prose in that fashion?

Even a casual search of ScribD content will reveal the motives for Mr. Mann's post. He has every right to be angry. The malice has been well-earned by ScribD's repeated actions with other creator's content for nearly its entire history.

While it's true there's no accounting for taste, I suggest you consult the dictionary on the definition of 'drivel'.

At the end of the day, PG can do, essentially, whatever he likes with the content, routing (or lack there of), and posting permissions on Hacker News. It's HIS site.

It's a shame that ScribD doesn't seem to play by an equivalent set of ownership principles. Namely, hosting and making money off other creator's content without so much as asking their permission; let alone proffering any ad-revenue sharing.