nartz

Game would be a lot more fun if it were simplified - the betting / offering market / trades go way too fast, especially with bots

Whats said in this blogpost may be 100% true, and of course red hat does do a lot for the community, but unfortunately the damage is done. Its always going to feel like:

* Red Hat was a bastion of open source

* Red Hat sold out to IBM

* Red Hat stopped being Red Hat, and started being IBM by focusing on $$ over open source

* Red Hat reputation degrades as $$ are put first, killing off centos, now this, just downhill from here. >

The lobby is strong with Comcast.

This. As a non film person, I basically have no clue what this does.

Feels like the person who responded has little or no experience with working together with the media and just freaked out.

At your next job offer, yes evaluate the work itself, but after you've qualified it, spend more effort seeing if you can connect with the people. Come for the money, stay for the friends.

Best piece of advice, take a stand. Have a perspective. And stay focused on a small amount of things that you care about. This might start out as one thing - which is completely fine. The rest, make sure you set up a scheme where you are empowering others, and there is someone who is directly in charge of other tasks, and delegate it to someone, or a specific team. The worst is when something is "everyone's job" - but make sure that the person who is in charge knows how to solicit opinion and isn't a dictator. Make sure you can use the team to give you the info you need, so you can make decisions. Making (good informed) decisions is your best point of leverage to keep things flowing, but make sure you are making decision at your level (and not too low, which is micromanagement). Feel free to redirect decisions that are someone else's to make. Don't be a single point of failure, empower others. Default to using questions, as opposed to prescribing answers as a tool for mentoring your direct reports. Make sure you are doing 1-on-1's and anything else that lets you see the truth of the state of things, and also so you can see peoples weaknesses and strengths so you can delegate tasks appropriately and coach up that talent.

Meeting with people, Hiring, setting up correct processes are your main tools.

Very few entrepreneurs understand that sure, market matters, and sure product fit matters, however the variable of time is an interesting one. Most startups growth looks super slow, then ramps up, and then quickly ramps up. This is very similar graph to investing $$ with e.g. a X% annual return. The key similarity is the concept of compounding. Individual features, marketing campaigns, blog articles, monetization channels probably won't have an immediate impact, but over time can compound. Similarly, entrepreneurs often think that developing a feature will immediately cause users to sign up. In reality, all you've done is "invest" your money, but you need time to work it's compounding magix.

Disagree with some of this. There is a need to define what 'management' actually 'is'. Great 'managers' are leaders imho. The difference being, that they help inspire and motivate a team, and help contribute to vision, direction, and clarity which a team can rally around, while encouraging collaboration and excellence, and setting clear and ambitious expectations.

Great ICs actually have a huge advantage here, because the key skill for an IC is often technology skills, whereas the key skill for a great leader/manager is trust with the team. Being able to have a deep technical understanding of the problem space will help to develop trust that much faster. However, the key transition is then to get out of the way, and use your knowledge to help challenge ideas while growing the team. The #1 piece of advice is to hold back from giving answers, and instead, challenge people with questions, to let them do the thinking.

Patents should only be enforceable for:

- companies that have a history of utilizing/operating with the patents subject (e.g. no patent troll legal firms would be able to meet this requirements)

- only be enforceable against competitor companies that are larger than a certain size, e.g. more than 10 million ARR, so smaller companies can still be formed and get off the ground

- be different based off of the domain - e.g. it should be very hard to get a patent for software or related items

Very interesting. I like the idea of "virtualizing" the hard schema with views to abstract away some things.

View performance can be a thing at larger scale for OLTP workloads, also, the solution you propose also adds complexity since you have two schemas now instead of one, and as you rightly point out, complexity with views themselves. The question becomes when is this added complexity worth it?

There may be some high-level validity to using gini splitting as a means for 'general' prioritisation to better understand the data; however, second order effects (e.g. assumptions of non-independence between variables) can often dominate, in which case multi-dimensional clusters tend to be a better mental model for logical groupings. The simplest is like a k-means, or other 'embedding' or latent based models calculated from matrix factorizations (CF, PCA, etc) which seek to summarize data into 'topics' or 'categories'.