rksprst

I don't think your example works - when a valuable item is broken beyond repair that is a fact (based on known physics / science). If I snap a ruler into two pieces I know there is no way to bring it back to the state it was originally in - a single piece. We can glue it back and use other mechanisms but it won't be exactly the same - we know this definitively. The same cannot be said about mental illness.

We do not have the knowledge and science to make such a statement about mental illness. In fact, medical science and research shows the opposite, that we are learning more and getting better at treating mental illness.

Mental illness is usually not a downhill spiral to death, but a roller coaster that you can jump out of. Your perception of being beyond repair depends where on the roller coaster you are.

Why is FB login required? I was going to purchase, but don't want to link my FB profile.

You're right physicians as a rule generally dislike software like that (partly because of their egos and distrust of software and partly because of job security). There are so many edge cases and so many examples physicians could give you of the AI/computer being wrong. A simple example is that any software will need input regarding the patient's history, his/her vitals. Right now heart rate data in ICUs is fed every second to storage systems. Let's say the this is a NICU and the baby's heart rate is suddenly elevated to extreme levels. The software would assume that something is wrong with the baby, when in reality a nurse is simply taking a blood sample and the baby started crying, being agitated by the nurse/needle. There are a lot of examples like this, it's a non-trivial problem to build use machine learning to take all of these factors into account to produce a diagnosis/treatment/intervention plan.

I was recently at a medical/technology conference and the physicians in attendance were all actually in support of moving to using machine learning/AI (selection bias though, that was what the conference was about). They would rather have a machine with a 5% error rate than a human with 20% error rate. They believe that the role of physicians is going to change and become more of a management role as technology catches up.

Something similar does already exists, telemedicine. A lot of hospitals are starting to experiment with consulting via telemedicine (with robots for instance for video communication and bedside visits) for interesting/hard cases. It's not the same as what you're describing, but HIPAA regulations and how hospitals work would most likely rule out an "open" service like that.

Companies have gotten acquired for very low or no revenue. In that case, you'd make nothing off the sale.

If you'll be a co-founder, ask for equity (50%). Or if he's looking at you as an employee, ask for a market-rate salary and the profit/sale share for the risk you're taking.

Great idea - nice when you've just launched. FYI, GetClicky does this as well as part of their Spy section.

It is common for a business to rely on it's own plans. It is uncommon (or at the very least a bad business decision) for a business to reply on the plans of another business.

"If everything goes as planned" is not something any business can rely on.

Yep, founders+investors win. Customers lose.

I guess that's the new way to run a business. Exit > customers.

Great to see a fellow startup get acquired.

But, I wish they held off on the acquisition until other "cloud providers" were willing and ready to implement these services that will be open sourced. Or at least keep your service up until then. This is great for the IndexTank team, but screws all of their customers (of which I am one).

Microsoft has key-value database on Azure as Azure Tables. They also have Azure SQL which is different than just SQL Server (though very similar).

No, you can actually run Ruby on Rails, and other languages on Azure. That's a goal for them, actually. It's not only access to the storage API.