stuki

Just imagine the level of job candidates you could be selecting amongst if you were the only one hiring from a population as big as the black community. In any competitive field, employers are fairly limited in how 'racist' they can be in their hiring practices without setting themselves up for a fall.

Another big advantage for Silicon Valley: Rich (from tech or real estate) parents supportive of playing around with computers instead of getting a real job.

....And IBM Intellistations for desktop use. They're almost studio pc quiet, built like a powermac, and I have never had a single problem with one. They even ship with a decent keyboard. Just can't go wrong buying IBM....

IIS7 is Vista/Longhorn only. Major reason to upgrade for developers.

Also, like mattmaroon above, I fail to see why people hate Vista so much. I have no problems with it. Its stable, has support for my hardware and seems fast enough. And I run the x64 version, which is likely more quirky that the 32 bit one. I did do a fresh install, so I maybe upgrades are more problematic. I have also been a Mac/Linux user since the Windows95 days, so have little experience with XP and 2003.

Check out Gemstone/S. A distributed, persistent and transactional Smalltalk image. It's flat out cool. As far as I know, they have even ported Seaside to run on top of it, which would make it the ne plus ultra for rich object model web app development. Just like every other odb or network db, the problems only surface when you need to query along paths you didn't design for up front (i.e. when you can no longer chase pointers). That's where rdbms' really shine. And when people not intimately familiar with your apps' object model need some of its data. Expecting some 'analyst' somewhere, to fire up a Smalltalk image, in order to create a report making his boss look good, is probably a bit much.

Really good C++ programmers are often unwilling to give up the control and power (in practical terms) of the language + libraries. Any piece of code written in a higher level language can always be 'improved' upon / optimized in C/C++, while still remaining reasonably generic. This over time pretty much guarantees that 'timeless' code, like math and graphics libraries, ip stacks etc. will have their canonical representations in C or C++, with 'easier' languages simply linking to those, instead of bothering to provide their lesser own. Soo, those who want to write timeless code do it in C / C++, hard or not.

I think Haskell's appeal lies in being everybody's favorite local maximum, while remaining only a very select few's global one.

I think the reason is simply that desktop software is in many ways already a mature field, with few earth shattering developments in the last decade or so, while web apps are a more recent phenomenon, and hence more 'exciting'.

Most of the recently hyped webapps, like MySpace and Facebook, are really apps that currently make no sense as desktop software. Their entire raison d'etre is to provide lightweight communication between huge masses of people. As people start demanding more from them, I expect them to start adding desktop offshoots in order to support more sophisticated behaviors and interactions.

By encrypted mail, I meant end to end, pgp style encryption. For this to be of much use, Google (nor anybody else) would not have my private key, so all they see is a wall of random bytes.

The very core of what makes Gmail so enjoyable is that their expertise in free form search allows me to pretty much stop caring about organizing my mail at all. I generally just hit archive, and rely on search to retrieve whatever I may need to later. No web mail client can provide such a service against encrypted mail.

At the same time, it is Google's access to my mails' content that allows them to show me 'relevant' ads. Without this ability, providing Gmail for free will get a lot harder to justify.

Reliance on mail content for search and ad placement makes it less than ideal if the world is moving towards encrypted mail, which it ought to.

If my future choices are being stuck coding in JS, Flash/As or Silverlight, I'm rooting for MS, monopoly or not.

Despite what Joel seems to think, though, I still believe the general trend will be for successful browser apps to move out of confinement of the browser, rather than for successful desktop apps to move into it.

Frank Soltis used to gloat that Microsoft ran on as/400. They supposedly even tried to port to NT, but failed miserably and had to roll back. http://www.mcpressonline.com/mc/.5bfa7907

Coke Zero, Diet Coke with and without caffeine, milk, oatmeal and cinnamon. If I exercise, I also get cravings for meat, veggies, fruit and pasta, which helps confirm the healthiness of exercise. I wish I could get caffeine free Coke Zero, to reduce my caffeine intake.

The way I learned it is the natural alertness cycle is sinusoidal, and by taking stimulants strategically timed one can square it off. That way one can increase total hours of close to peak alertness, as well as make sleep deeper and heavier.

If the price of gas goes high enough (i.e. global peak oil with sharp declines like the North Sea), people will pay up front to lower gas consumption one way or the other. Even in Mississippi. That doesn't necessarily mean buying hybrids, but hybrids, especially plug in ones, seems like nice transition technology while another 'supply grid' of some sort develops.

Nice find! That guy has lots of good stuff on his site.

"...100 of his vocal supporters can dictate the stories for a site with 100,000 users."

Only for as long as the 100,000 is reasonably happy with what the 100 is providing them. Otherwise you'd think they'd have the sense to either start downvoting, or simply stop using reddit, rendering it a site with 100 readers who all vote. More likely many of the 100,000 see reddit as their best source for all the Ron Paul news the 'mainstream' media is 'trying to hide' from them.

Homeschooling doesn't have to mean preventing your kid from socializing with other kids. Most zip codes have a large enough home schooling community to provide plenty of similarly, and for that matter, differently, aged kids to interact with.

Video conference units are awesome in work from home developer scenarios. When collaborating on code, the ability to see the guy at the other end coding away, is soooo much better than wondering if he hung up or got disconnected when he stops talking to think or type. It really must be tried to be believed. (And understanding Indians is a lot easier when you can see as well as hear them:)). Also, with these things available, there is even less reason for developers not to work out of private offices.

YC should convince Tandberg or Polycom to provide them some samples for a lower cost. I'm sure some founders could find ways to put them to good use, and the manufacturers could get some exposure in markets where they're not well represented.

" foo()

is equivalent to

foo "

Man, I hate that 'feature' of Ruby. In Python, foo is the function, foo() the result of calling it. So much cleaner.

Get a job at a game company. Many have huge turnover of coders, and are 'always' hiring. Unless you're a real superstar, they'll make you do shitty work for shitty pay for a shitty number of hours, hence are unlikely to dent your entrepreneurial aspirations like more cushy jobs have been known to.

Stash whatever crumbs they do pay you, and be on the lookout for designers that are both decent and disgruntled.

Does this almost weightless material really 'negate' acoustical energy transfer, as mentioned in this link? Considering the current cost and engineering effort required to build an upper floor recording studio with decent drummer insulation....... Sounds like startup material to me.

Supposedly competent people trade billions of dollars daily based on models without looking beyond possible disruptions a few perceived standard deviations out. Heck, some hardy souls even drive across Minnesota bridges without much prior modeling. 4 years of smooth sailing before a major crash have been quite profitable for Skype, and has given them the resources to allegedly fix this problem, and the mindshare and market penetration to survive it.

Is there any good reason why MS couldn't spread their default auto reboot times out a bit? Or could the Skype installer request it randomly changed? I'm not really all that familiar with Skype or network security. Could such staggered reboots for example allow attackers to look at fixes early and launch a quick attack, hence be unacceptable to MS? If not, it sure seems like they would make life a lot easier on realtime P2P networks dependent on consumer desktop availability.

Also, any company being dishonest about technical matters is soon left with only incompetent tech people. So if Skype is dishonest, they are likely incompetent as well.

I, for one, would vote for you over any of the current major party candidates. I do, however, think you overestimate the need for government in some areas.

I agree with point 1). I think most people do, other than Somali Warlords and their like.

I think what you are trying to solve with 2) is better left to individuals. There will never be any surefire way of deciding what information is 'vital', is included in 'full disclosure' etc. Laws as vague as these always, in practice, degenerate to my-lawyer-is better-than-yours, jury shopping and other pathologies. Absent such laws, there is no reason why, for example, some form of 'standardized' contract for the most common transactions won't be written. These contracts have the advantage of being standard, widely used, and hence come with predictable legal precedent. And they are optional, so not everyone have to use them all the time.

Another problem is that such regulations tend to render a seller's efforts to build a reputation less valuable. A seller who has carefully cultivated a great reputation amongst an audience, can no longer benefit competitively by giving his 'word'. Instead he is subject to the same consumer protection laws as any random huckster, with the same cost of compliance. This leads to less incentive for him not to just act like a huckster in the first place.

3) The only 'monopolies' that can develop in a free world are those that are enforced by government, and possibly those related to physical resources. I think your land lease scheme would take care of the latter, and a reasonably limited government wouldn't contribute unnecessarily to the former. Most current day 'monopolies' are just companies someone finds hard to compete with (MS), or government sanctioned ones in (light) disguise (Telco's, utilities).

4) Hard to argue with that. Just make sure everyone has an equal 'claim' on these externalities. The right to emit CO2 should be given equally to each citizen, not as quotas to Exxon etc. Then Joe bicyclist could sell his share to Exxon, or if he so pleases, donate it to the Sierra Club.

5) For local roads, absence of government involvement does not mean a developer could not buy (or lease for a sizable term according to your scheme) a plot of land, put roads in place, and profit by selling off individual (now presumably more valuable) lots. The selling price could also include a contract to maintain roads for some lease term. Bigger arterials are a lot easier to price by usage.

I totally agree with you about obtaining government revenue from real estate rather than income. My 'scheme' would be a bit different than straight leases, but that's just details. Currently, most libertarians I know, especially American ones, seem very opposed to this. Most want government intrusion to, at the very least, stop at their property line. Since libertarian candidates are consistently getting less than 2% of the vote, and their share is not increasing, I think reworking some of their policy prescriptions are wise, though, and taking the hammer to some old dogmas about real property might be just the ticket.

I love this article. Not because I'm convinced Dyson is right, but more because it helps point out the importance of being an impartial observer if one is to be taken seriously as a scientist. Postmodern academia's focus on activism as a proper, and even encouraged, activity for scientists, have done the field of science great disservice, to the point where many lay people no longer believe even half the stuff being touted by so called scientists. Even the ridiculous evolution debate might not have gotten off the ground were most 'scientists' not so obviously politically partial and vested.

Other than that, if Kurzweil is right about exponential growth and technology, approaching problems possibly solvable by biotech in a lazy fashion may in fact be the wisest of all approaches. Makes me think of the Albert Bartlett quote, "the greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function."

Police, courts and defense, with defense also including the 'most important' vaccinations for all who enter, whether through ports or by birth. Some reasonable upper bounds on the destructiveness of weaponry and toxins sold over the counter are likely also necessary, even for purchasers who haven't per se 'done anything wrong'.

There also need to be some regulation of how individuals use 'commons' like air, water, electromagnetic and sonic spectra etc., as well as land use rules, to avoid one person land locking others, parking their mile long yacht alongside Golden Gate Bridge, blocking bay entry, and such.

Some minimum levels of diplomacy, aimed at providing Americans, both individuals and organizations, 'fair and reasonable' treatment abroad would be nice, as well, especially if backed by military muscle.

I'm sure there is more, but those are the ones I can think of right now.

I suspect evolution dealt with 'bad parents' long ago.

My parents certainly weren't bad. Not that they ever did much beyond enrolling and sending me off to public school, but still. If public school wasn't there, I'm sure they wouldn't have left me completely illiterate. In fact I'm sure, and my parents now agree, I would likely have been 'better' schooled if it wasn't for public schools' near complete monopoly on funding and mindshare when and where I grew up.

None of the parents of people I know were 'bad' either, including those of many who insist on using mythical 'bad parents' as excuses for public education. Furthermore, amongst those I have asked, none of them seem to have acquaintances with bad parents, and I have asked enough people, from enough different backgrounds, to be convinced this 'bad parents test' could be applied recursively through all six degrees of separation without turning up more than, at most, some exceedingly rare corner cases. Rare as in at least an order of magnitude below likely available private charity to deal with them.

This doesn't mean I think everyone's parents are equally ambitious on their children's behalf, or equally concerned with educating their child; just that in absence of public schools, almost no parent would completely neglect facilitating any kind of education for their children, whatsoever.

It sure does look like you're right. I could have sworn I saw .asp pages there when I was a member, but that was probably 4-5 years ago. One less reason to use .net, I guess.

I believe Netflix is built on .net. They might not be Google, Yahoo or Amazon, but damn... .

Tooling and integration are definitely major points. I guess any time you get the whole app stack from a single vendor; you're likely to get a more integrated product (os/400, db2, RPG and green screens; ...maybe not.....:)), while at the same time forfeiting opportunity to pick the individual components that suits you the best. You're obviously more dependent on developments at your vendor as well. So if you believe MS is dying, you should probably choose another database. Considering Word's dictionary includes RPG, yet neither Postgres nor MySQL, that belief might not even be that farfetched:).

Now, for what I am trying to do, easy access to a proven distributed transaction infrastructure is non negotiable. MS provides this. So does Oracle, and certainly IBM. The Java world provides this in spades as well, but I'm not sure how nicely the popular open source db's play along. Last time I looked at Postgres, this seemed at best a medium priority work in progress. Since it doesn't take too many systems left in disagreement about the status of a million dollar transfer to annoy the heck out of some people, in this case I'd rather stick with one of the known entities.

For somewhat similar reasons, I prefer MSSQL's ability to replicate in synchronous mode over the asynchronous / possibly lossy replication that MySQL ships with (.net client auto failover is a nice added bonus). I believe there are add on products for MySQL and Postgres to accomplish the same, but that they are neither free nor used, developed and tested as widely as MS' version.

In addition, MSSQL comes with non rdbms features that Postgres/MySQL lacks. Some of these may have Unix/Linux/open source, or at least Java, competitors/equivalents, but since I intend to use several of them, combined they add a lot of value to Sql Server. For example, a pet peeve of mine is that the root of at least some evil is doing synchronously that which could be done asynchronously (obviously not db replication:)). Since my app is financial enough to 'require' strong transactional support, Service Broker asynchronous transactional message queues alone might have been enough to sell me on Sql Server.

I'm also assuming many end users will be Excel jockeys. Hence, giving them access to slice and dice 'their' data in Analysis Services cubes (still trying to wrap my head around the security implications of this one), and integrate said cubes into their own worksheets, instead of just providing canned reports, looks advantageous. Less work on my part as well:).

And, although I have written my share of database transfer and replication scripts in Perl and Python, the latest SSIS seems a better tool for that purpose. I'm assuming I need to generate reports involving data from multiple outside systems.

Damn, this ended up being a long post. Hopefully some will find it valuable. If nothing else, the pills I popped are finally winning the war against my Saturday 'morning' hangover:).

The point I was trying to make is that since processors now almost exclusively gain performance by adding cores rather than by speeding up each individual core, a per socket license lets the customer continue to keep the gains from processor evolution.

With Oracle's per core license, if you swap out your dual cores for quads, you owe twice (or thereabouts) as much in license fees, essentially guaranteeing your (some processor performance metric) / (license fee) ratio no longer increases over time.