Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | sceadu's commentslogin

not sure if it counts as a list of case studies, but a relevant and recent video nonetheless https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZeIEiBrT_w

also in general bayesian statistics

random medium article: https://medium.com/pythoneers/monte-carlo-simulation-ideas-a...


Comment history says yes to your second point


looks like it. I really don't get it. warming the account up for spam? or does some dweeb really think this is something beneficial for anyone?



trickle down economics?


are you planning on turning this into a book also? if so I'd be interested. the blog posts were very helpful :)


I've been thinking about it! Maybe a book that covers the basics of putting an app up on AWS... networking, covering the different options such as EC2, ECS, and fargate, plus a bit about load balancers and IAM.


Don't know about radar but here's a good book on classical CV https://udlbook.github.io/cvbook/

even though I think Simon admits that most of it is obsolete after DL computer vision came about


> is obsolete after DL computer vision came about

I just don’t understand this. Why would new technology invalidate real understanding and useful computer algorithms?


Seems like you're unfamiliar with enterprise IT


Your comment is unnecessarily dismissive.

Disrupting the space now doesn't seem any less hard now than it was 10 years ago when slack and zoom did it.

But yes, if your point is that it's hard, then indeed. It is hard. Should that stop someone? No!


Slack and Zoom both predate Teams. Teams only gained penetration through bundling with the rest of MS products on large enterprise contracts.

There are already open source alternatives built for both Teams and Zoom. The issue is that open source projects don’t have salespeople that will promise compliance and integration (whether or not they can actually deliver).


> Teams only gained penetration through bundling with the rest of MS products on large enterprise contracts.

Hard disagree on the "only" modifier. Surely integration helped, but I've used Zoom, and I hate it every time I have to use it. Teams is comparatively a godsend.


He wasn't dismissive, he was countering dismissiveness. It was dismissive to throw out "just build your own". 99% of companies don't have that option, most companies are customers, not builders. This commenter was pointing out the obvious lack of perspective on the majority of businesses. That is a huge problem in SV and software development these days, the lack of awareness and context about real problems out in the market. "Just build a replacement" is a non-viable route for most people and most companies.


I think it's dismissive to say that explaining something is harder isn't important.

And something being harder stopping your from doing it is ubiquitous in life. It's a good skill to know how much effort something will take and weighing the risks and rewards.


Let’s try to turn this into a productive thread that adds some value here.

What is it about enterprise IT that is preventing us from building a better alternative?

How can we get around those hurdles?


Chat is a commodity. Right out of the gate, that's not great for margins.

Enterprise chat might not be a commodity quite yet - SSO, DLP/data classification, auditing, retention, compliance checkboxes - but these seem insurmountable at first glance to get a FOSS solution to reach a viable enterprise feature matrix.

Killer features as a moat might help, but while almost everyone uses chat, everyone probably uses chat differently, so that means discovering killer features for a niche and trying to own that segment before expanding. Unfortunately this is the "Draw the rest of the owl" part, because while I have quibbles with chat apps, I struggle to envision a chat app that does something radically different than any other chat app.


If you built that alternative, would companies choose to use it? they get teams built into their outlook and office 365 contracts and all the other integration. Slack didn't lose because it was worse, so just being better isn't enough.

The hurdle is producing a full suite covering everything Microsoft sells in one package, which seems impractical without their funding to start with.


Cronyism and nepotism is how you get "Enterprise IT"


Slack is not open source. Neither is Zoom.

Your comment is just fake empathy noise.


I work at a large company, and we use Mattermost, which is open source.


> But with solar, how is the synchronization provided? In like a giant buck? Or in software somehow? Does the phase shift matter as much as in the electromechanical systems?

If you mean how does solar detect phase and synchronize to the grid: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase-locked_loop

If you mean how does solar act to reinforce the grid: search for terms like "grid forming inverter vs. grid following inverter" though not all generators are the same in terms of how much resilience they add to the grid, esp. w.r.t. the inertia they do or do not add. See e.g. https://www.greentechmedia.com/squared/dispatches-from-the-g...



the vim one is pretty irritating with input delay but the neovim one isn't too bad (the one that hooks into neovim)... at least it makes vs code tolerable enough for me so I don't bang my head against the wall when I have to use it


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: