T_S_

New Risk board released

Anybody remember Kohoutek? Exactly. If I were a comet, my strategy would be to underpromise and overdeliver. That's the best way to rally a comet's soothsayer base.

It's Newtonian. People have no appreciation for how far you have come (position) or how fast you are going (speed), but they are extremely sensitive to acceleration. VCs especially so.

I am calling bullshit.

Amazing Fact (TM): I've been throwing right-handed for my whole life. Make me throw lefty and I throw like a girl. Something to do with an urgent need to get base runners out.

Another Amazing Fact (TM): If you play catch with an Aussie, notice their motion will be more overhanded than yours, if you are a Yank.

It's nurture not nature here. Go get a softball and try to fast pitch. I bet there's a girl nearby that could beat you.

Yeah, you can have a target market of $100 billion and not even crack 0.25.

I think I am at 0.25 on this scale.

The OP gives great advice. But I was amused by the Dorsey quote referring to "...founders - who may not have been there at inception."

Let's take some highly desirable attributes in an employee and give them a label "Rockstar". Er, no. "Founder".

When words are the currency of persuasion, expect inflation.

I have been using Haskell seriously for about two years now and humorously for a bit longer. For some reason I bought the old sales pitch some time ago. Now that I have a clue about the language I would like to rewrite the sales pitch for anyone considering a move.

Here's what happens in the middle of a big Haskell project.

1) Take some existing code.

2) Refactor (Add a feature, change a record element, etc.)

3) Run ghc, then fix all the errors it reports. Repeat this step as needed.

4) Done.

What would be different in python? For one, no compile errors means very little. How many test cases would you need? How would you find all the places the code must change?

Lesson: A tough, smart compiler can be the programmer's best friend.

Meta-lesson: There is little need to discuss laziness, purity or static typing to "sell" Haskell. They are enablers of ghc. What you need is a big, complicated code base and an urgent need to make changes to it. You won't have that until you get your feet wet.

Is Haskell perfect? No, but I'll save that for an OP that is overhyping the language.

Only as long as you use static linking.

As a corollary to this, keep your eyes on relative prices, incentives and human nature. Dull be highly effective.

What technology does is send some the prices of some actions from infinity to nearly zero. Meanwhile humans remain pretty much unchanged.

Politics is theater. At least under our current setup and probably most others.

Ever notice how little policy is actually discussed even when a supposed policy wonk (e.g. Clinton, Ryan) are giving the speech?

Why can't the TSA make me a suit? They already have the measurements. I'm barely half joking here. Seems like this is one of those unsolved "solved problems".