kom107

Joined 15 years ago

Karma
132
Submissions
45
Member since
Oct 4
kate.mcginley (at) gmail.com. http://www.linkedin.com/in/katemcginley

Current personal projects: quantitative trading on my own accounts, creating enterprise information risk models

Interested in learning about: neural networks

I did stand up comedy for money in college.

View on Hacker News

Recent submissions

Comment · 9 years ago
Hi Suvinay! Do you all have a website that keeps interested people updated about the upcoming Swarm hardware? I would like to follow this work. Thanks!
Comment · 10 years ago
I think this is a large part of the problem. I believe that the standard quantitative models used for productivity are no longer accurate. They are somewhat precise, but do not correctly reflect value that is produced.
Comment · 10 years ago
They are valuable, except for the fact that machines can now do the disinfecting aspect of the job (the most important part) better and faster than they can.

See: http://tru-d.com/

And to the point someone else made in this thread, they are easily replaced; not requiring a significant amount of training or onboarding resources.

Comment · 10 years ago
Understood. I think one of the problems is that (fill in the blank: society, parents, students, guidance/admissions counselors, et al) seek to categorize and create blanket answers, whereas the correct answer is highly variable relative to the application. Boolean vs bayesian.

As a mental exercise, I'm imagining a product that would, given a number of inputs, produce a bayesian curve of the applicant's possible outcomes, and then selects the best school for that applicant. While developing this product sounds like a fun side project, I can't imagine it gaining traction, because the aforementioned groups would get upset (read: not pay) that Prestigious U is not the best choice for Johnny, rather, Mid-Atlantic Middle College is. It would be difficult to get the secondary actors in the process to pay as well, because there is value generated for them by maintaining process homeostasis.

Current thinking would suggest that I should have gone to, say, Bucknell over Penn State (again, I understand n=1 here, and I am not measuring my level of selective perception), whereas I am very happy with the course of events and think it produced the best outcome. I have to believe there is some grain of truth to my line of thinking and a potential for value generation in the decision aspect of college admissions.

Comment · 10 years ago
Agree 100%. Great conversation tangent over on reddit's FI sub about this article, and specifically, the fear that those of us who were/are responsible will be taxed to support those who were/are not: https://www.reddit.com/r/financialindependence/comments/4fhs...

For those of you who prefer the whistling-past-the-graveyard approach, Christopher Buckley's book 'Boomsday' is hilarious.

Anyone care to share how they are protecting their savings against this increasingly likely prospect?

Comment · 10 years ago
That's not entirely true. See: http://yscouts.com/executive/where-did-fortune-500-ceos-go-t...

Stanford has some fantastic opportunities, sure. But those opportunities come with significant opportunity costs (at the very least, financially). For some, it is better to attend a state school; the mental calculus involved in making this decision is rather difficult for an 18 year old and his/her family, especially with all of the noise that surrounds the college admissions process.

If a kid is going to be a success, they'll be a success. Multiple studies support this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/20/where-you-go-to-col...

Disclaimer: I'm a proud Penn State alum, which was (at the time) my safety school. Just my $0.02.

Comment · 10 years ago
Agreed. I've just gone about it by refusing to sign the IP agreements, OR by editing the document to say that anything I do on my own time is mine. Have yet to run into an issue with those approaches.

I wonder how much innovation here is stifled because there are still only a handful of major employers, and all of them have blanket IP agreements. Frankly, if I was running UPMC, PNC, or Highmark, I'd set up a VC arm and encourage any employee with a good idea (related to the industry) to start a company with seed capital from the VC arm. UPMC is KIND OF doing this (I work for them now), but they're not quite there yet, and it doesn't seem like current employees can swing over there to start their own company easily. Still, I think they're headed down the right path.

Comment · 10 years ago
Snagged my house in Morningside, which is in the city. You can still get pretty inexpensive houses throughout the East End, but you'll need to put in some elbow grease. Average prices seem to be around $200,000 for a decent home in the city. $500,000 and it's a move in ready palace.
Comment · 10 years ago
Ooooh. Talk dirty to us. YC Pittsburgh batch. Dig it.
Comment · 10 years ago
Born in Pittsburgh, raised in Pittsburgh, started (and failed, 2009-2014) my own company in Pittsburgh, currently have an excellent tech job in Pittsburgh and am going to launch the beta product of my new company (YC reject) in Pittsburgh in June.

So. First off, I nearly cried reading this headline, and did tear up reading it. So whether or not he reads this, thanks, Paul.

Second. To the hard work of it all. I agree with every point he made, with the caveat that Pittsburgh needs to be careful with the historic preservation aspect of things: they vascillate between 'hey let's forget all of our history and blow this place up' to 'we must preserve every nook and cranny exactly as it was, even though it's detrimental towards progress'.

We could also stand to improve tax policy (lower them, significantly), and get our major employers here to knock it off with their ridiculous IP agreements. Also, I'd love it if our politicians stopped directly trying to ape Silicon Valley (or New York, or perhaps most ridiculous, the Paris of Appalachia). Let's be Pittsburgh.

Here's the thing that perhaps Paul missed when he was here, and perhaps others who aren't here can't see: I feel we've reached a critical mass of people who just DGAF (in a good way), because the opportunity costs of testing out your vision here are so low. By that, I mean that you can try out your weird (read: innovative) vision of the future, and no one bats an eye. On top of that, if you are producing a signal, it's much easier to cut through noise here. I spent a fair amount of time interviewing in SF for startup gigs, and it's not a good value proposition compared to here, to me. Finally, while the investment scene is terrible, that can be very beneficial to the right founder, because obviously one will retain more for themselves, and one don't NEED very much capital to get started in Pittsburgh. I bought my first house for $80,000 in 2013. 4/2, hardwood throughout, 1944 brick single family, 2 car garage, yard, granite, stainless, wine fridge, etc, in a good neighborhood. It's that cheap here. Anecdotal, but if you're smart with your money here, you can build your own runway.

All of that said, I'm hoping it happens. More than that, I'll work for it to happen. Onwards and upwards, fellow Yinzers. And Let's Go Bucs.

Comment · 10 years ago
I'm registered as a Republican, and in theory, would rather date a Republican than a Libertarian. In unsurprising news, every woman I have ever dated has been a Democrat, and my wife is a Democrat from a socially democratic country. She will be joining me in voting for Gary Johnson in the upcoming presidential election, but is voting for Hilary in her party's primary.

It's funny, I used to look at the types of signaling you reference when I was dating (do we like the same things, have the same outlook, etc). I have found my greatest happiness with my wife, and the only two signals there I used were her work ethic and intellectual capacity. Well. And she's the hottest woman I've ever seen. All three, and I couldn't wait to put a ring on it.

No, she doesn't know my HN username.

Comment · 10 years ago
Bingo. My academic studies of political systems, US politics, game theory and economics leads me to believe that a true free market economy is the causa sine qua non for a more tolerant and free society.

I also believe that one cannot legislate social mores, and that the government does not, can not, and should not grant or even 'uphold' rights. Further, I believe that free markets CAN and HAVE caused (on net) greater social change than any legislated social change, and that on an individual level, free markets are the best channel for allowing minorities/oppressed individuals to champion their cause while simultaneously avoiding and stamping out oppression.

Ergo, I dedicate myself (and my vote) to the goal of an entirely free market. In essence, I swipe right for the Austrian School. (Go ahead and groan).

Comment · 10 years ago
"Current and future quality of life for myself and others trumps paying lip service to ideals that are never realized."

Agreed. However, I bet we differ on the means by which one should go about achieving/obtaining (I separate those words very deliberately here) a high quality of life for oneself, and the means that will help others. If you're truly interested in a political conversation, and open to learning, my email is in my profile. While the HN community may benefit, we are going on quite the tangent from the main topic. Cheers.

Comment · 10 years ago
I go back to the old-school, small government intellectual Republicanism (this may sound crazy to many of you, but I assure you, at one point it existed). I realize that this is currently not where the party is (see: Trump, Cruz, Jindal, Carson, Palin, et al), but I believe in trying to change it from the inside.

As it stands, I vote libertarian a lot.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton