ispivey

Now that's what I call selling pickaxes!

Understood! I'd looked at Keyczar in the past as a component of a system to manage secrets/keys, but I see it's actually providing about 0% of what Keywhiz does.

I'd love to hear from some of the team who built this about differences between Keywhiz and Keyczar, which to my mind was the best-practice open-source cross-platform solution to date (i.e. if you're not relying on things like AWS Cloudformation config or Heroku config vars to "manage" secrets).

Obvious pieces to me appear to be (1) roles and auditability (2) end-user front-end (3) filesystem interface & associated ease of access for various services. But I'm not an expert!

The advice on min-width vs min-device-width strikes me as controversial:

  Therefore, you should avoid using *-device-width, since the
  page won’t respond when the desktop browser window is
  resized.

GMail, Facebook, New York Times, and lots of other smart folks don't show their mobile-web versions if you make the browser viewport very small. Their sites have min-width ~980px when viewed on desktop.

I imagine this is because (a) their mobile sites use different interactions that require different DOM and JS, not just different CSS styles, and/or (b) those different interactions might not be appropriate on desktop even if you shrink the viewport and/or (c) it's confusing for the site to work differently when you resize your window and/or (d) they don't want to send unused JS/DOM to devices that aren't going to use it.

Any thoughts, kinlan?

This is probably a new HN record in mistakenly ascribing bad intentions, which is pretty impressive.

Perhaps people are interested in watching some awesome founders speak.

We're used to looking at a pronoun's antecedent to determine its subject. In the sentence, "Jacob finally published a post he'd been mulling for a long time," we don't object that it's unclear whether "he" refers to Jacob. I don't understand why "The user receives the data they requested" is so fundamentally different. You still look to the antecedent; it's still clear.

I grew up taking great pride in "correct" English usage, but I now think insisting on gendered pronouns causes harm without any tangible benefit.

In the most meaningful way, it could be Android for consoles. It's "freely licensable" for hardware manufacturers, so companies will be able to build new consoles without building their own OS -- the same innovation that led HTC and Samsung to become two of the world's leading phone manufacturers.

Imagine being a single mother with a young child. You're a great programmer. But you spend 90% of your time outside work raising your kid, so you can't make the time to make significant contributions to OSS.

...

You can't get a job that requires a Github OSS history. You're severely disadvantaged in job hunting when OSS contributions are a major metric.

If people tested your suitability for a job by pair programming with you, or looking at code samples, you'd look just as good as someone who contributes to OSS. But because OSS is an important metric, you're disadvantaged.

Does this make clear how it's discriminatory?

That investment amount seemed low, as it suggested you weren't exercising your pro rata rights.

If the initial $400k bought 10% of the company, USV would need to buy 10% of each subsequent round to maintain their ownership, which would be ~$12.5M. That's ignoring varying definitions of pro rata rights, other dilution but probably a good lower bound.

If the initial $400k bought 20% (more likely for Tumblr in 2007), USV invested ~$25M to keep their ownership stake.

Fred seems like the kind of guy who always does his pro rata, so I'd imagine those numbers are closer to reality.