abbazabba's comments

That guy invented one of the most revolutionary ways of looking at things on the internet.

With a green and black blog without any css3, what right does he have to comment on design?!

Interesting sidenote: the author invented mozilla (the name), and was a founder of netscape. It might not excuse the hypocrisy of his own blog's design, but I like the point he makes.

Is this becoming a common practice? I've had my own frustrations when I double-tapped content which triggered a giant subscribe/paywall ad to cover everything in my view.

Is there anyone around that "does data science" for a living that can talk about what it is they do exactly?

I'm under the impression that "data scientist" is as ambiguous a term as "designer". What's the minimum amount of math or statistics required to be labeled a data scientist? And what's the minimum amount of programming too?

HA.

Yes, but hey if someone's got the evidence to support it, it wouldn't hurt anyone to see it.

Those are the companies that were actually accepted to Y-Combinator. The Y-Combintor acceptance rate is said to be 3%. So, your odds of success are now more like 3% 7% = 0.2%*

All of this hinges on the assumption:

Y-combinator is a proxy for the start-up population.

Even taking the optimistic Y-Combinator outcome, would you be willing to accept a 7% chance of making $400K?

This is assuming you only get paid in that 1% equity while assuming the 40MM exit. If I got paid a SALARY I can accept + 1%, why wouldn't I take that chance? It is +EV. Compare this to the lottery, which carries a -EV.

"According to data compiled by Wadhwa, the average age of a successful entrepreneur in high-growth industries such as computers, health care, and aerospace is 40. Twice as many successful entrepreneurs are over 50 as under 25. A whopping 75% have more than six years of industry experience and 50% have more than 10 years when they create their startup. "

Yeah but the data also says that most chess masters are under 30. And chess is more strongly correlated with success than success.

the how is interesting. the why, moreso.

"By one estimate, as much as $600 million dollars in assets changed hands in the milliseconds before most other traders in Chicago could learn of the Fed's September surprise"

whoever leaked it probably had a connection that gave them an incentive greater than their career or any fines the government could impose.

career reputation + fines < %cut of income from arbitrage

d3's interactivity > excel and tableau in terms of quality data visualization.

anytime someone looks at a chart, they should be able to ask "but what happen's when x, y and z change?" being able to manipulate the data without forcing the audience to run calculations themselves should be the norm. it takes work, but i hope we get there someday.

There's as much an ISO protocol for charting as there is for designing websites across all browsers and platforms.

It sounds like a lot of passive-aggressive behavior on everyone's end and observing from the sidelines without bringing things up like an adult.

Conflict is good in healthy doses.

But if a disgruntled employee can't even maturely say "Look we've got a problem. This is the way I see things and this is the reason I disagree with you, nothing personal...", then there's a problem with culture.

A CEO, or any decent leader, needs to be decisive, communicative and live with the consequences and risks of a decision while learning post hoc. People do get territorial. People do act like dicks. People do threaten to quit. Be a leader and learn to manage these people and situations. Firing someone or moving someone to a corner without first talking to them is a pretty dickish move too.

A good CEO will hire people that complement his or her skills.

If you're too worried about directly confronting someone who is too valuable to you, at some point you should hire someone with the people skills to diffuse these situations in a way that minimizes the damage.

Why does it matter if the dollar is devalued? A less valuable dollar makes American goods cheaper, and foreign goods more expensive. People in other countries would rather pay for cheap American things, than something made in their home country. That money goes directly to the pockets of Americans.

If the dollar is strong, then Americans will buy more goods made in other countries. So when Americans travel around, they will buy more things in those other countries. That money goes directly to the pockets of other countries.

Is that in the best interest of the American people?

You also have to consider the weight each country carries in a global economy.

Everyone is tied to everyone else, and so there are bigger players and smaller players. If you are a country with an economy that does not do business with other countries (eg you do not import nor do you export), then you probably have more macroeconomic independence.

So if China or Japan try to move independently, they can't, because in order to buy or sell goods to other countries, they have to buy and sell those other countries' currencies. And the business of buying or selling currencies is tied to macroeconomic policy.

Thanks for the insight. But why is taking a little bit more here and there considered immoral? Isn't it the fault of the people setting the specifications, or rules, or laws for failing to be specific?

Is there anyone else that shares my thoughts?

I want to play devils advocate here.

Whenever anyone offers "some" amount of anything, candy in this case, is it wrong to take all but one? They're rationally maximizing their holdings within the bounds specified. Therefore, if they follow this lifestyle for every decision that comes about, they'll be in some sense richer, or more optimal, than people who don't take all but one.

In other words, anytime the rules are ambiguous, why not test them?

I'm curious if anyone thinks this is neither right nor wrong?

I'm in the same boat (background in data/finance trying to eek into UX or prod mgmt). I've noticed it all just boils down to definition.

"Design" seems to be evolving from pure aesthetics (what's the first emotion evoked upon sight) to aesthetics+function (what's the first reaction, and how does this affect my audience). Maybe it's because 10 years ago "designer" was purely synonymous with fashion or pure photoshop/illustrator. Now it seems to represent anyone and everyone from graphics/visuals, to interaction and information, and even just product.

It makes me wonder though, if there were a dribbble of site flows, wireframes, and creative call-to-actions, would people flock to it?