As someone else mentioned just looking Fund+Number doesn't exclude non-VC funds. However, the 2024 NVCA report supports the OP's thesis:
see page 17:
https://nvca.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/2024-NVCA-Yearbo...
Readit Newstryitnow commented on Charting Form Ds to roughly see the state of venture capital “fund” raising tj401.com/blog/formd/inde... · Posted by u/lemonlym
tryitnow commented on Launch HN: April (YC S25) – Voice AI to manage your email and calendar · Posted by u/nehasuresh1904
The only reason I'm not downloading it is because 3 days not enough for me to evaluate it and I don't really want to have to add another reminder to cancel yet another subscription.
tryitnow commented on Launch HN: April (YC S25) – Voice AI to manage your email and calendar · Posted by u/nehasuresh1904
Valid concern - April does not write emails for you unless you specifically ask for it. Users usually dictate what they want to reply.
But do you think a 'safe mode' - where April does only non destructive operation like read/summarize/draft/move emails to a folder would help you build trust?
It's in our pipeline - we can prioritize it to mitigate that fear.
Yes, a safe mode would be great. I think it's a "nice to have" for a lot of early adopter (type of people who read HN), but it will be a "must have" more corporate types (a much bigger market).
tryitnow commented on Everything is correlated (2014–23) gwern.net/everything... · Posted by u/gmays
This relates to one of my biggest pet peeves.
People interpret "statistically significant" to mean "notable"/"meaningful". I detected a difference, and statistics say that it matters. That's the wrong way to think about things.
Significance testing only tells you the probability that the measured difference is a "good measurement". With a certain degree of confidence, you can say "the difference exists as measured".
Whether the measured difference is significant in the sense of "meaningful" is a value judgement that we / stakeholders should impose on top of that, usually based on the magnitude of the measured difference, not the statistical significance.
It sounds obvious, but this is one of the most common fallacies I observe in industry and a lot of science.
For example: "This intervention causes an uplift in [metric] with p<0.001. High statistical significance! The uplift: 0.000001%." Meaningful? Probably not.
Agreed. However, I think you're being overly charitable in calling it a "pet peeve", it's more like a pathological misunderstanding of stats that leads to a lot of bad outcomes especially in popular wellness media.
As an example, read just about any health or nutrition research article referenced in popular media and there's very often a pretty weak effect size even though they've achieved "statistical significance." People then end up making big changes to their lifestyles and habits based on research that really does not justify those changes.
One moral risk we play is does legalizing our recreational drug (eg alcohol/cannibis) increase the harm done to addicts[0]? While I maintain that there's a logical inconsistency to having legal alcohol and illegal cannabis, I'm on the fence if the consistency should be that both are somehow controlled/illegal (though absolutely not criminal).
Another thought on the subject is how many small charges were simply because the police were fairly sure the defendant was up to some other crime, but were unable to make a court case over it (due to difficulty of evidence etc)? It may be that it was hard to prove the accused was doing X, but the bag of weed in their pocket was undeniable...
Just musings don't get too aflame over them...
[0]: https://www.newsweek.com/americas-heaviest-drinkers-consume-...
I support full legalization of cannabis and I agree that those are valid concerns.
Yes, the harm done to addicts will probably increase. There's always trade offs. I think people on the pro-legalization side are not doing enough to address this.
One of the problems with public discourse is that each side doesn't want to give an inch to the other side. I think a lot of people who support legalization of cannabis kinda know that harms to addicts might increase, but they're afraid that if they mention that then that will just give a talking point to the prohibitionists.
Both sides are guilty of misusing or ignoring facts and concerns that don't benefit their preferred take on the issue. However, it seems to me the prohibitionists are far more egregious when it comes making bad arguments.
tryitnow commented on Should you post that you’re OpenToWork? A tale of two labor markets interviewing.io/blog/whos... · Posted by u/leeny
In software we call this a “micro-optimization”… Something that programmers waste a lot of time fussing with while ignoring the factors that dominate the overall performance. Fiddle with LinkedIn if you want, but understand that it probably won’t make a significant difference either way.
This pretty much sums it up. There's about ten other things that are self-evidently more important in a job search than this.
tryitnow commented on Apple halted M2 chip production in January amid 'plummeting' Mac sales macrumors.com/2023/04/03/... · Posted by u/tosh
FWIW, macs are high quality and last a long time.
My wife needed a laptop for class a year ago, so I gave her my old macbook pro 13 i bought in 2014. I also had a macbook air m1 for personal use, which I replaced recently with a macbook pro 14 m1, and planned to give my wife the air. She refuses the air bc she likes the old 13 so much, and she abuses the shit out of it.
How often does a laptop go strong for 9 years? Even the battery life is still ok. I am going to have to force her to consider the air bc the old 13 is a security risk without OS updates.
The only reason why I replaced the old 13 with the air was bc the 13 could not render 4k 60fps on an external display. Otherwise, I would have kept using it.
The old 13 cost me about $1600 USD new (256GB HD, 8 GB ram). Amortize that cost over 9 years and that doesn't seem so bad. Even my iphone 8 is still going strong.
Another anecdote - my current employer gave me a new macbook pro 15 when I started here back in 2017. It took my abuse well and the only reason I am not still using it is bc my employer forced me to upgrade when the m1 pros came out.
You probably won't need to replace your air for like 7 years, or when apple stops updates for your machine.
EDIT - I am surprised I am getting downvoted. You would think more folks on HN would be happy about long lasting products but the anti-apple bias is strong enough to override the concern of having a more sustainable product.
Just chiming in to confirm this anecdote - the only difference is that the machine I gave my partner was a macbook air, not pro. Still works fine for almost all normal person use cases.
tryitnow commented on Keeping up with the overwhelming pace of AI innovation ryanshannon.substack.com/... · Posted by u/investinai
Having worked in the space on-and-off since my PhD, the pace is not "overwhelming". You just started paying attention to it.
ChatGPT and Stable Diffusion are good, but they're incremental gains over what came before, which were incremental gains over what came before that, and so on...this has been happening for a long time now. If you ask me, the "amazing" part of ChatGPT isn't the output, it's the query understanding. The output is still (very pretty) garbage >10% of the time, and that's the danger zone...the Level 4 of autonomous thinking.
At the risk of saying something that makes me look dumb in ten years, this moment feels a lot like the "Level 5 self-driving will make driving obsolete by 2020!" panic we had circa 2015. Lots of investors and tech enthusiasts told me how stupid and shortsighted I was back then, when I said that we hadn't made as much progress as they thought we made, and how steep that remaining curve would be.
Newsflash: it's 2023. We still drive.
Agreed. But I think you're referring to "AI innovation" and the author (and others) are referring to "AI product innovation," i.e. how AI is actually showing up in people's everyday life - and that pace is absolutely overwhelming.
tryitnow commented on The FTC wants to ban tough-to-cancel subscriptions theverge.com/2023/3/23/23... · Posted by u/bluish29
Yes please, this is a legitimate course of government action. I personally am very reluctant to sign up for new subscription from smaller companies because I don't want the hassle of unsubscribing.
Tough-to-cancel subscriptions actually make it harder for small businesses to succeed because potential customers like me are reluctant to sign up for subscriptions thanks to a few bad apples polluting the market.
tryitnow commented on San Francisco cops pull over a Cruise driverless car for no lights on theverge.com/2022/4/10/23... · Posted by u/bmitc
I am really worried by the fact that I am the unwilling tester in the Great Driverless Car Experiment.
Tradition has it that when you load-test a new bridge, you put the architect underneath. I feel like this, except I didn't design those driverless cars, somebody else did. Being an experienced software engineer, my trust in the software in these cars is pretty low. And yet they are testing them on me, because I can be the one getting killed.
I think we should set a much higher bar for allowing those cars on the streets, rather than "it kinda works, so let's roll with it".
I agree with your basic idea, but I don't think there's really any way around this - at some point these systems will have to be tested in a real world environment.
I guess the question is: how much higher should the bar be set? And if we set it substantially higher then how much longer will it take to improve the performance and safety of these systems?