barmstrong's comments

Same with https://www.researchhub.com/

Someone should make a documentary about the history of StarCraft and where it's going next

I also wish we saw more AI leagues and gameplay

One of the best games of all time.

Responded here https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/15353049437284147...

Really liked this post - brings up some great points, and I consider Moxie a friend.

Here are a few notes that came to mind though...

1. For NFTs, some keep their data in IPFS (decentralized file storage) or in the smart contract itself for procedurally generated images. We (as a community) should probably move more to solutions like this over time, since it is indeed more decentralized to build them that way.

2. I agree with the overall point that clients don't behave like full nodes. However, there has been quite a bit of discussion about "light clients" in the crypto community even going back to the early days of Bitcoin/Ethereum, so i wouldn't say it hasn't been an area of focus.

3. I agree there is an overall move toward using platforms. But there is a big difference between using a platform that also owns all the data also (web2) and a platform that is merely a proxy to decentralized data (web3). In the latter, if a platform ever turns evil, people will switch. Not owning the data counts for a lot.

4. There are more options than Infura and Alchemy. Access to simple blockchain data will be relatively commoditized. Which is good for decentralization.

As Moxie points out, it's still difficult to build things in a decentralized way (nascent tools), so you are seeing various apps/companies revert to using more centralized web2 techniques when they run into a hairy technical problem. As a result, there are a lot of "hybrid" web2/web3 apps during this phase of web3 development. That doesn't mean the overall trend is bad though. I think it's great that more and more web3/decentralized technologies are being developed.

I do agree that all networks tend toward centralization over time. Great book on this https://www.amazon.com/Master-Switch-Rise-Information-Empire...

I don't think crypto is anywhere near this end stage though. We are still seeing a lot of new technology and players enter the space. It's not "already centralized" as much as it is "still using some web2 components".

These points aside, the post is great and I basically agree with the overall premise.

No he did not. We didn’t even discuss it.

I'm also a founder of an $xB fintech (Coinbase!) and I have to say, this does not ring true to me at all.

I've known Patrick since 2013 or so, and I have found him to be nothing but the highest integrity. Same for John. We are semi-competitors (not a ton of overlap) so you might find it strange for me to stick up for him like this, but I just think this description is wildly inaccurate. As one small example, Patrick has proactively told me when wanting to build competitive products, even when he didn't have to (very positive sum thinking).

He has direct control over reporters and YC? I'm sorry but this sounds like conspiracy theory.

People are living all over due to covid - so what. Remote is the future of work.

There are plenty of more reasonable Occam's razor explanations for some of what is being reported in this thread (and from the OP). You always have to assume ignorance over malice first. For example:

- companies often look at startups they may want to acquire, and decide to pass for various reasons (saying no more than yes is a good process), they then launch their own products (this is why they were looking at acquisitions in the first place), pretty normal

- any time you have thousand of interviews going on, you are bound to get some bad candidate experiences, I know for instance these happen in Coinbase periodically, and we try to minimize it for sure, but you will not get it to zero (especially when growing quickly)

- most rational explanation for OPs issue is that references were checked and came back luke warm/negative, so more were done which delayed it etc (they may not tell you this was the reason to protect sources btw), this is one of many potential reasons, i'm guessing, but benign explanations are more likely

- also, "discussing details of an offer" is not the same as receiving an offer

Anyway - if people had negative experiences, then feedback is great. I just hate to see HN jumping into tear downs and wild conjecture like this. Patrick and John are great founders we can all learn from, and yes human like all of us (not perfect). Let's all help each other improve here, and assume positive intent.

Came here to post this - storing it on a blockchain is probably the most elegant answer to create high redundancy.

Coinbase CEO here. Thx for mentioning it, we’ll get that fixed.

This is an early release from us and I would expect there to be a few quirks. Please keep sharing any feedback.

Kind of amazing - i didn't realize anyone was using this HTTP code just yet.

This is part of what we created https://www.researchhub.com to improve on. We should be getting weighted ratings (peer reviews) in real time on all research.

Here is the study https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-0...

The study has this line which caught my attention:

> The incidence of any psychiatric diagnosis in the 14 to 90 days after COVID-19 diagnosis was 18·1% (95% CI 17·6–18·6), including 5·8% (5·2–6·4) that were a first diagnosis.

So only 5.8% of people got a first diagnosis, and the remainder of the 18% were people who had been previously diagnosed with one of these conditions.

This seems to contradict what is written in the linked article:

> In the three months following testing positive for COVID-19, 1 in 5 survivors were recorded as having a first time diagnosis of anxiety, depression or insomnia.

So it seems like the linked article has a bit of hyperbole in it.

We tried to make it clear to employees that the package was only intended for folks who weren't aligned with this new direction. If folks were interviewing elsewhere, or just feeling burned out, and wanted to take it, but they were still aligned with the direction of mission focused, then we discouraged them from taking it. Of course, people can always lie about their intentions, but we're counting on the honor system preventing most of that.

Is there a list of others?

I love using sci fi as inspiration for new products.

This is a great summary of how to show causal effects. Thx for pointing it out.

I feel like we need a new way to do peer review, that is more real time - so that papers can be upvoted/downvoted, flaws can be pointed out - and we have some way to assess the truthiness of what the paper is claiming. Your comment is a step in this direction (but we're not capturing the wisdom of the crowds quantitatively around papers today - arxiv is great, but 1990's era web design).

I'm working with a team that is trying to build better tools for science at https://www.researchhub.com/about

Rethinking peer review is one item on the roadmap.

The Khan Academy mobile app is great. I've been doing about 15 minutes of study each morning while doing cardio at the gym (running makes it tough to use your phone, so walk on a steep incline for half hour, or stationary bike).

Basically - build in a little bit of time to do it into your daily routine somehow, and make it a habit. In a year you'll wake up and have made great progress.

Sorry to hear that this was the case!

I wrote about how scientific research is broken earlier this year, and what you're describing is one of the most pernicious. https://medium.com/@barmstrong/ideas-on-how-to-improve-scien...

https://www.researchhub.com/about is a project I'm helping get off the ground which hopefully can help this problem, by eventually replacing the traditional journals. Still early days (just beta launched).

Coinbase CEO here - apologies for the confusion on that.

I certainly wouldn't say we are treating it as a "shitcoin". I tweeted out a few thoughts here to share how I think about it:

https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/89248668753155686...

Hope it helps. Thx!

We make it as easy as we can with the cost basis report https://support.coinbase.com/customer/portal/articles/149648...

Garry was one of the first investors in Coinbase and acted as my CEO coach for the first ~6 months of the business, during a very stressful time. He was incredibly helpful to us early on! Would recommend them as a firm.

Coinbase CEO here. This is (sadly) quite accurate.

The other reason you see so many complaints there is that there are many scammers trying to buy digital currency with stolen credentials, and a common scammer tactic is to appear angry (via support channels, or any public forum) in the hopes that we will approve their purchase.