|
aww jawn honey ill play with your data any time
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 00:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 08:23 |
|
|
Ian McLean posted:It would be nice if there was an actual setup like kickstarter except for using equity raising. people are working on stuff like this but there's a shitload of regulatory hoops to jump through, I think one will be out in Europe before the US
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 00:56
|
|
|
Ian McLean posted:It would be nice if there was an actual setup like kickstarter except for using equity raising. I wonder how many people pledge money but then don't have enough left on their credit card when the project becomes successfully funded and Kickstarter tries to collect the money. Kickstarter only puts a $1 hold on the person's card from what I understand.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 00:59
|
|
|
TheMoneyPit.co.uk FlushYourKroners.se InstantEuroWriteoffs.eu
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 00:59
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:that right there Obviously both(perhaps multiple) parties would get credit. The data gatherers, and the data manipulators.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:02
|
|
|
Printfreemoney.ng
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:03
|
|
|
im working on a new kickstarter competitor called GoFundYourself! u can use it as the answer to when kickstarter refuses to let you have a kickstarter or you otherwise are having trouble raising capital to fund your awesome idea! when u can't raise money, just imagine someone telling you 'GoFundYourself!' and u'll have the answer to your money needs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:03
|
|
|
if just anyone could invest in a business that would be awful. im glad only rich people get those opportunities
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:05
|
|
|
Ian McLean posted:Obviously both(perhaps multiple) parties would get credit. The data gatherers, and the data manipulators. no, it's not about the "credit" or w/e strawman you aligned me with it's this idea that there's a website out there and some bored nerd goes and finds a data set and starts working on it that's never going to happen. wiki only works because people understand an encyclopedia and want to get their viewpoint out in *the* collection of human knowledge. memory alpha only works because of the pre-existing rabid fan base of trek. you've got.. nothing. i basically agree with you that it'd be awesome to have a nerd horde I could toss data to, but you can't just spit out a website and expect the nerd horde to follow, the hordes you see are driven from within
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:13
|
|
|
0xB16B00B5 posted:if just anyone could invest in a business that would be awful. im glad only rich people get those opportunities Have you heard of online brokers? Only established companies can capture the ordinary person wanting to invest in something? If what your saying is correct, where would trading volume be, and what do you imagine the market growth would be without individual investors? Where would market liquidity be? What would this mean in terms of market efficiency? Sounds to me, the only thing letting anyone invest in anything would do is facilitate growth in entrepreneurship and innovation. Obviously the best projects would still be the ones to attract the most funding, and thus natural selection would still play a role in market efficiency.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:14
|
|
|
What you need is the nerd caller, the nerd whisperer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:15
|
|
|
Ian McLean posted:and thus natural selection would still play a role in market efficiency. what type of industrial lubricant have you got over there to prevent chafing
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:17
|
|
|
Ian have you heard of Bit Coins? They're an interesting investment opportunity you might like to get in on the ground floor of
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:17
|
|
|
Ian McLean posted:Obviously the best projects would still be the ones to attract the most funding, and thus natural selection would still play a role in market efficiency. poe's law strikes again
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:19
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:no, it's not about the "credit" or w/e strawman you aligned me with So... lets just discount the hordes of professors, graduate students, and researchers out there that might want a place to easily upload their data to be saved in a system that they can get recognition for their work, and will be posted on the internet in a place that will be there for generations. Then you are saying some kid comes along needing to do his science project won't want to go through and try to create a nice visual display combining different datasets? Obviously if the individual does a bad job at visualizing and interpreting the data, the display will get bad ratings, and be pushed down in the hidden archives of internet cyber waste. Eventually though... some good stuff will be created, and the best data paired with the best display will be the outcome of what is displayed in search. Seems like a simple enough concept that makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:21
|
|
|
 someone post the other version pls I need it
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:21
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:25
|
|
|
Ian McLean posted:So... lets just discount the hordes of professors, graduate students, and researchers out there that might want a place to easily upload their data yep, I know them and they can't be hosed dumping their data on a third party quote:to be saved in a system that they can get recognition for their work quote:, and will be posted on the internet in a place that will be there for generations. ahahahahaha quote:Then you are saying some kid comes along needing to do his science project won't want to go through and try to create a nice visual display combining different datasets? ahahaaahahahahaahah yep you're totally solving the hard problem in this sentence. quote:Obviously if the individual does a bad job at visualizing and interpreting the data, the display will get bad ratings, and be pushed down in the hidden archives of internet cyber waist. ah yes, upvoting ahahahaha quote:Eventually though... some good stuff will be created, and the best data paired with the best display will be the outcome of what is displayed in search. 1. dump things in database 2. ???? 3. relevant search results quote:Seems like a simple enough concept that makes sense. it only seems easy because people who are smart have made it look ridiculously easy. i wish you the best of luck in reinventing google, wolfram alpha, and wikipedia.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:26
|
|
|
thanks
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:26
|
|
|
Ian McLean posted:So... lets just discount the hordes of professors, graduate students, and researchers out there that might want a place to easily upload their data to be saved in a system that they can get recognition for their work have you ever interacted with any of these people, described your idea, and received positive feedback? or are you the kinda idea guy unfettered by the actual people you want to "help"?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:27
|
|
|
admittedly, if I took on problems the size of my ego, i'd ignore users too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:30
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:have you ever interacted with any of these people, described your idea, and received positive feedback? “people don't know what they want until you show it to them.” ― Steve Jobs But no, I do ask around, and continue to get good feedback.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:32
|
|
|
"My girlfriend always laughs during sex --no matter what she's reading." -Steve Jobs (Founder, Apple's Computer)
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:37
|
|
|
tef posted:
If you see this I'm probably doing a sig check
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:42
|
|
|
We need to make a victor/atwood-esuqe crank checklist [X] “Don't you see it's visionary” complete with paragraphs of big ideas. [X] Trivial dismissal of hard problems and existing alternatives. [X] Can be alorithmically better than google/wolfram/facebook with lone engineer. [X] If we build it they will come, especially if I do it. [X] Obligatory steve jobs or similar quote. [X] Wants to be new central point of failure for internet thing. [X] Voting!
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:45
|
|
|
ian have you thought of making a site thats vaguely immoral and/or has pictures of a mans anus on it, that works p well in my exp
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 01:51
|
|
|
Ian academia has a very stringent vetting process for publishing data and it is highly frowned upon to release data without it being vetted. Some college professors and PhDs aren't going to finish up their paper on some obscure theory and then just throw it up on your website before it goes into Nature or something else. Even if you could somehow get people to publish to your site you lose the one thing that existing publications have and that is the knowledge of its user base. I don't want some 30 year old nerd editing a paper I have spent the last 7 years researching because he thinks he knows a way to make my data look more appealing or he thinks he knows the subject better. As it is right now Wikipedia, with its massive circlejerk of bureaucracy, has trouble getting actual professionals to edit things on the site and then to hold that informed opinion over someone who just finished editing Naruto in Popular Culture. A site with just numbers and not the associated information describing those numbers(like the 200 page paper that goes with it) will devolve into editing wars and incorrect interpretations of data. Data is only good when it is interpreted correctly otherwise it is useless and I would say detrimental. Do you really want people citing a source they don't understand? And your idea doesn't make the data easier to understand it makes it easier to remove the data from the theory and then interpret it in your own wrong way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 02:09
|
|
|
Ian McLean posted:“people don't know what they want until you show it to them.” ian, i knew steve jobs. steve jobs was a friend of mine. ian... you're no steve jobs
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 02:10
|
|
|
Cryin Burnigan posted:Ian academia has a very stringent vetting process for publishing data and it is highly frowned upon to release data without it being vetted. Some college professors and PhDs aren't going to finish up their paper on some obscure theory and then just throw it up on your website before it goes into Nature or something else. Even if you could somehow get people to publish to your site you lose the one thing that existing publications have and that is the knowledge of its user base. I don't want some 30 year old nerd editing a paper I have spent the last 7 years researching because he thinks he knows a way to make my data look more appealing or he thinks he knows the subject better. SO! I WAIT FOR NATURE MAGAZINE TO PUBLISH THAT ARTICLE, AND SOME RANDO SNATCHES THE DATA UP AND ADDS IT TO STATPEDIA! THEN DATA GATHERERS COME TO ME AND SAY HEY! THAT IS MY DATA! And I SAY okay... lets negotiate. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 02:19
|
|
|
atwood effortposting about how voting systems don't actually destroy constructive discourse was the saddest case of aspergers i ever did see
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 02:21
|
|
|
Lmao I forgot about the Atwood forums revolution. Heh. Heh. HEH.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 02:28
|
|
|
Ian McLean posted:SO! I WAIT FOR NATURE MAGAZINE TO PUBLISH THAT ARTICLE, AND SOME RANDO SNATCHES THE DATA UP AND ADDS IT TO STATPEDIA! THEN DATA GATHERERS COME TO ME AND SAY HEY! THAT IS MY DATA! And I SAY okay... lets negotiate. woah he's gone full victor guys
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 02:29
|
|
|
collecting data is meaningless if you can't make it easier to interpret, a stack of normal graphs will be a huge chunk of your data but what makes graph 1 different from graph 200 besides the axes labels if you don't have the associated information to interpret it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 02:32
|
|
|
Cryin Burnigan posted:collecting data is meaningless if you can't make it easier to interpret, a stack of normal graphs will be a huge chunk of your data but what makes graph 1 different from graph 200 besides the axes labels if you don't have the associated information to interpret it. You will be able to save an article to one datapoint, or many datapoints within a set from a specific source. So... what type of information are you referring to?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 02:40
|
|
|
did atwood hire victor? that seems to good to be true, am i remembering that correctly
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 02:44
|
|
|
with an idea this good i'm surprised he didn't want us to sign an NDA
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 03:25
|
|
|
jawn tef qirex together at last 
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 03:28
|
|
|
Ian McLean posted:You will be able to save an article to one datapoint, or many datapoints within a set from a specific source. So... what type of information are you referring to? if you are linking the articles to the data you are creating wikipedia
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 04:02
|
|
|
tef posted:internet cyber waist. mods
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 04:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 08:23 |
|
|
Ian McLean posted:SO! I WAIT FOR NATURE MAGAZINE TO PUBLISH THAT ARTICLE, AND SOME RANDO SNATCHES THE DATA UP AND ADDS IT TO STATPEDIA! THEN DATA GATHERERS COME TO ME AND SAY HEY! THAT IS MY DATA! And I SAY okay... lets negotiate. I run into the bank and take money out of the vault. Then when the cops show up, I say ok(ay).... lets negotiate 
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2012 04:08
|
|
