aneesh


74 points by aneesh 10 months ago | link
cached 19 days ago

My 23andMe DNA Results (techcrunch.com)
65 points by aneesh 10 months ago | link
cached about 1 month ago

Voting Machines (xkcd.com)
31 points by aneesh 4 months ago | link
cached 1 day ago

30 points by aneesh 6 months ago | link | top
cached 16 days ago
So, a couple people asked for an explanation, so here goes:

t_s basically serves as "gravity" to make older posts fall down the page. Why Dec 8, 2005? Maybe that's when they launched. Anyway, what t_s does in the function is equate a 10-fold increase in points with being submitted 12.5 hours (that's 45,000 secs) later. So a 1-hour-old post would have to improve its vote differential 10x over the next 12.5 hours to maintain it's rating to compensate for elapsed time. If a post's vote differential increases more than 10x in 12.5 hours, its rating goes up.

As for where the numbers come from, I'm pretty sure they're tuned by trial-and-error. It's really hard to predict voting patterns beforehand (ie how fast should items "fall" from the main page?)

The log function is there because your first 10 upvotes should have more weight than the 101st to 110th upvotes. The way the formula is written (and assuming 0 downvotes), your first 10 upvotes have the same weight as the next 100 upvotes, which have the same weight as the next 1000, etc. Again, the base of the logarithm is somewhat arbitrary, and can be tuned by trial and error.

And needless to say, if you have more downvotes than upvotes, your rating is negative. That's about it.

(note: I'm just reading the page and interpreting the algorithm - I don't have any special insight into how they chose these particular constants)

Edit: Time since Dec 8, 2005 is an elegant way of doing it. My first (crude) thought would've been to use "time since posting" to determine gravity, but that requires keeping track of what time it is now. This method is completely independent of the current time. So nicely done.


30 points by aneesh 3 months ago | link | parent | top
cached 9 days ago
If this is his personal blog, I don't see what's wrong with that.

Paul Graham can promote YC in his essays, so why can't Brin promote something he believes in on his personal blog.


The End of Ballmer? (techcrunch.com)
26 points by aneesh 8 months ago | link
cached 7 days ago

25 points by aneesh 8 months ago | link | top
cached about 1 month ago
Who are you? I'm not doubting your intentions, but it seems strange to solicit this information without mentioning at all who you are.

25 points by aneesh 5 months ago | link | parent | top
cached 11 days ago
> "..I... clicked 'buy'...and it really bought this app"

Gee really? What else is clicking "Buy" supposed to do?


25 points by aneesh 2 months ago | link | parent | top
cached 9 days ago
No, that's when the retrospective "This is how [Obama|McCain] won" articles start about who was best organized, who used technology best, etc :)

24 points by aneesh 16 days ago | link | parent | top
cached 11 days ago
Somebody needs to give you the other side of the story.

Don't even think about dropping out of high school to do a startup. Statistically, you have a ~99% chance (okay, I just made up that number) of failing and then you'll just be a high school dropout. Stay in school, and do something on the side.

There will always be opportunities for cool startups in the future, and probably after you finish college, you'll be much better equipped to go after those opportunities.