webmasterraj

Yes, this. I'm self taught -- half the time I'm coding, I don't even know what a "good" approach should be. So I just get started on something, since there's no perfectionist ideal I'm visualizing that I need to hit.

The ironic part is that I face this exact problem with the thing I am formally trained in -- writing. The blank page paralyzes me in a way blank vim never does.

Maybe. Search is a resource-intensive algorithmic problem. So you need one of two things to beat Google: more resources or a much better algorithm.

You're not going to get the first unless you're Facebook or Amazon or God, but maybe you can build a smarter algorithm. You are up against an army of some of the smartest computer scientists and mathematicians ever assembled -- but what you have going for you is a complete lack of inertia or legacy. You could try crazy things that Google might not, because they won't think it'll work. If you get lucky, one of those blows up. But you have to get very lucky (this is the Innovator's Dilemma in a nutshell).

Anyone want to give it a shot?

Oh HN and unsolicited startup advice. A blog post and 2 minutes and you've pattern matched your way to a solution. Bravo.

Dear OP, please ignore all this sage advice from people in cushy tech jobs telling you what you should do with your baby. Life is hard. We never know if we're making the right decisions. But it sounds like you have a clear vision that is driving you - that is priceless. Don't sell it away for the smart "business" move, when you already know what you should be doing.

I hope 2016 is cheerier for you. Fwiw, when I've been burnt out, what's gotten me excited again has more often tended to be finding new interesting people to work with, rather than finding interesting projects. I think both can work, but the latter can be harder when you're struggling for motivation.

Make sure you guys get a daily newsletter going out asap. I don't have inside information, but I'd guess it drives a ton of PH's daily returnee traffic. I for one know I won't be checking this every day, but I would read something in my inbox every morning (same with PH)

One person can build something that starts a revolution. See Woz/Apple.

The real issue here is that self-driving cars are probably the wrong place for that to happen in AI. At best, a solo project creates a crappy prototype where there was no product before (again, see Woz/Apple). The expectation for driverless cars is too high – they need to be 100% good, because your life is on the line, not 80% good.

What's the AI project that would blow people away, even if it was a shadow of a working prototype? I think that's the real question.

> Everyone is a private contractor, they are free to make their own choices and work (or not work) for a company.

I don't know if Sprig hires cooks as contractors but that doesn't necessarily mean they have the same freedom contractors usually have. See the lawsuits that brought Honejoy down, and the class action one against Uber.

I actually think this is the biggest argument in favor of Josephine, that the author didn't bring up. Sprig needs to standardize user experience, so has to walk the line between enforcing policies on their cooks and still treating them as contractors. Josephine is literally a marketplace, where your interaction is directly with that contractor. Much better, from a legal risk question.

This is the tldr of the whole thing

I was thinking of something maybe even simpler - a place for people to post projects they're actually interested in maintaining as open source projects. A subreddit could be the mvp.

Or go the other way, and train a searching algorithm based on a data set of actively maintained open source projects on Github, with things like commit history/contributors/etc as features.

> an even bigger problem is that once you have a startup you have to hurry to come up with an idea, and because it’s already an official company the idea can’t be too crazy. You end up with plausible sounding but derivative ideas. This is the danger of pivots.

A great point, that I haven't seen in too many places. I sometimes feel like we're seeing too many people who "want to have a startup" for the supposed fame and fortune, and not enough who are truly passionate about an idea. Believing in an idea will get you through, not dreams of gold coins.

Sam, I noticed you didn't mention watching cash burn or unit economics. Is that a later section you might add? Too many founders don't realize the importance of that until it's too late (speaking from personal experience)

There's a tangential problem I've been thinking about a lot recently: the long tail of open source projects on GitHub.

There are 20M+ repos on there. Which leads to a serious discoverability + signal/noise problem around 'true' open source projects. As someone who wants to put up an open source project for collaboration (with willingness to maintain), it's hard to get the right eyes on it. Too often, it seems like no one cares. Conversely, as someone who wants to contribute to open source projects, it's a little hard to find small early ones where I feel like I can make a meaningful contribution (yes, the big ones maintained by well known companies are easy to find, but I much rather work on something put up by an individual programmer).

How do you cut through the noise on GitHub to find projects you actually want to work with (and want you too)?

This explains half the comments I see these days on HN. More concerned with defending their point and criticizing people who disagree, than a genuine attempt at finding something actually true.

I gave him money, and I didn't think he had a chance to win. I just wanted to see what happens. Even though it failed, it was an interesting experiment (exhibit a, number of upvotes and comments here). Definitely worth my $20.

This is a really good point, and explains why later-stage investing seems so wacky vs early and mid stage. The decisions to invest in later-stage startups, eg Uber, seem more influenced by other investors and the fear of missing out, while early to mid stage might steer closer to the independent decision making model.