kyro

I think this idea is great and have no issues with the way they've structured it.

"Likely" is the word you seemed to have overlooked.

You don't have to be an authority to criticize others for speaking about a topic in which they likely have zero expertise.

Be thankful the topic isn't mental illness.

Thanks for asking the hard questions.

I'm excited to see what this new equity-share model will lead to, and hope that the value and quality I already get from reddit can be multiplied with this capital. You can be displeased with certain aspects of something while at the same time acknowledging the good and its potential, like with children, friends, your country, really any relationship or community.

I think my main issue is with the front page and default subs. They are so unrepresentative of the great quality that can be found, and yet that's the face reddit chooses to put on. Why have default subs at all? Why not rotate through a constantly changing set of high-quality subs throughout the front page? Or why emphasize individual stories on the front page and instead present snippets of entire subreddits, almost like a real newspaper?

Exciting news. One thing I sincerely hope reddit will do with the new injection is to increase the level of quality of content and discussion across the board. Often the advice given is "you've got to find the smaller subreddits" and while that's true, I think having the first few layers filled with terrible content and hive-minded, often racist/sexist discussion is incredibly detrimental to both the site's image and new user experiences.

I know there's great content there, and great people having great discussions, but it's not terribly easy to find. I'm thoroughly convinced that reddit could be an incredibly valuable source of reliable news, discussion, and entertainment, but the way it's structured highlights its more juvenile aspects.

And if it can find a way to establish legitimacy, it'll be worth far more than it is today.

Ah wow, thanks, really appreciate it.

This is such a clever idea. I can seriously see this getting some huge mainstream attention. Nice work!

Sad not to see watermelon or mango in that list of powerhouses.

I have always had a huge problem with the non-reproducible nature of medical research and its acceptance within the field. Being in medicine, every day you hear a physician citing some study from 15 years ago conducted on a sample size of 20/50/100 or so patients as a way to justify their clinical decisions. And it always worries me that we tend to put so much faith in these "landmark" studies, as if their findings are somehow legitimate and true because statistical significance was reached at least once, and seem to forget all of the misaligned incentives and game-playing that goes on in research, and the amount of data burying by the FDA, all that almost certainly influence and manipulate data, publication, etc in a negative way.

I tend to take the majority of medical research with a grain of salt, for the reasons listed here and in the article, unless there's some very convincing meta-analysis or successfully reproduced evidence. Call me overly cynical, but that we calculate a parameter or administer a drug or change our methods because of some article you read last month in NEJM is beyond bogus.

So I guess people should stop preparing for Google interviews by looking at and practicing the myriad of coding puzzles they've previously asked. You'd be stupid not to.

Which isn't that big of an issue. I'm sure the YC folks are aware of the practice and look for other less-reproducible signals. Plus, the cramming, interview, 3-month sprint may lead to quite a bit of learning. Most doctors crammed in school.

hoping our working prototype will get us in

i always assumed civets had the market, but never considered rats

Absolutely. I'm not advocating that we do away with the regulatory system, but that those drafting the rules look at startups like Uber/Lyft as signals and catalysts for change as opposed to reflexively treating them as threats on the system that Has Been And Always Shall Be. The world is changing rapidly, new needs and demands emerge, others die, and the red tape should be in constant reapplication, in tow.

already cofounder/ceo of kyll, lyft for assassins, and looking for investors

Reading things like this make me OK with startups bending an even breaking the occasional law if they're truly providing something of value. The legal system is rife with regulations and actors that are often not intended to benefit the public. There is nothing inherently right or efficient about it, and it's the oldest and most inflexible of the man-made institutions, behind Comcast.

What is wrong or unethical about it?

> "The cost and burden of filing taxes is a major hammer people use to chip away at the whole concept of progressive taxation. That $10 million doesn't guarantee Intuit favorable legislation--it leverages a deep divide in the polity that happens to advance Intuit's specific interests."

How are these not the same exact thing? I don't think anyone is claiming that lobbying is akin to submitting a payment for immediate legislation approval. We are all well aware that there are politicians and voter bases that may side with a company like Intuit. But in either case, the money is being used to influence legislation, whether that's a sure shot or to tip the scales. Rather than legislate based on the merit of both opinions (eg. paid vs free tax filing), companies are introducing often personal financial incentives for politicians to dig their heels into the ground by claiming that a particular opinion is Right and True. Deepening the divide does nothing more than cause people to bury their heads further into their ideologies and works against progress.

Uber is well within their rights to pay for Lyft rides and solicit their drivers, and Lyft has every right to implement systems to prevent Uber's tactics.

If what Uber says is true regarding their denial of intentional cancellations, then I have no issue with what they're doing. These drivers are not Lyft employees. They are independent contractors providing their services and will jump ship at the prospect of making more money elsewhere. I have spoken to dozens of drivers, and there is no sense of loyalty. They are not under contract to work exclusively with Lyft. In fact many drivers are using both services simultaneously.

The analogy used by Jason Fried about entering an engineer's office really does not apply. An engineer does not interface with their customers and the outside word in their office. There is a sanctity to someone's office, and a barrier that separates work from the world, that does not apply to cab cars. A driver's job is to open their office and to invite in the world, and little is off limits. I have spoken to drivers about everything from racism to politics, to soccer, and mentioning another car service and how it may benefit them more hardly seems to violate some sort of unwritten code of ethics. I as a customer cannot storm into your cubicle and do the same.

I said this on twitter, but I'll say it here too: What Uber is doing is no different than paying for a haircut at a barbershop, sitting in the barber's chair, striking up conversation, and suggesting they join your high-end boutique. That's sales, that's competition, that's business.

Not entirely true for non-pain relief uses. Dronabinol, synthetic THC, is sometimes given to treat nausea and vomiting in patients receiving chemotherapy.

> "In the most technologically advanced countries, filing a tax return is free, easy and fast: Instead of taxpayers painstakingly calculating figures themselves, the government provides estimates of what they owe based on the very bank records and wages it already collects. Intuit, maker of the popular tax preparation software, TurboTax, has funnelled millions to oppose every effort to make tax day less painful."

http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/27/turbotax-maker-funnels-mill...

What you say may be true, but I would much rather have public outcry against this practice than the opposite of overlooking the issue because there are bigger fish to fry.

Does being Egyptian qualify me for this? I am technically an African American. I'm half-serious.

Rachel Maddow, popular American talking head, mentioned this project and your site on her show tonight.

I love the idea of Amazon Prime Air, but there's one concern I have. I know next to nothing about the FAA and airspace regulation, so I'd like to hear from someone who does.

The common argument to raised concerns of drones buzzing about is "well, we have cars and delivery trucks!" That doesn't quite sit well with me because we have designated specific areas to the use of automobiles. It's easy to stay off the road. We can consciously stay out of harm's way, even if it's an asshole driving recklessly.

How is this accomplished with drones? How is the airspace structured in a way where drones are in designated areas that either avoid or are avoided by humans? How do you prevent an asshole piloting a rogue drone from dropping a heavy item on someone in a balcony? One can make the argument that these concerns also apply to planes, but I'm assuming both the airspace and ownership of planes are heavily regulated and monitored. Will we need a similar system to manage drone use?

Congrats to Chas and the Aptible bunch. Really smart guys. Also saw they joined RockHealth. Tackling a ton of hard problems in healthcare to make it easy for people to build apps. Learned quite a bit about HIPAA compliance from their blog, but it seems like they've taken that stuff down, unfortunately.

uBiome may be onto something. I read a study the other day that said obesity may actually be linked to gut flora, which I found very interesting. Excited to see what comes of this.

YC is getting involved in some serious tech and markets. Long gone are the days of web apps. Deep insight, experience, and skill in today's heavyweight industries are what matter now. Really happy to see this change and very impressed with the first portion of this batch.