>If those people don't believe in the whole thing, why are they members in a church about it?

Usually they inherit the religion from their parents. They grow up with the church as family so even if they don't believe in the tenets/beliefs they still participate.

>which is 8% of the 80-char limit.

What a strange problem to have. Why not just increase the limit? Why can't you have a special title with a higher limit?

Because it's a major part of the look-and-feel of the site and we don't change that without a good reason. Actually, we pretty much don't change that ever.

Respectfully, I'd challenge you on that and say you have good reason.

>Actually, we pretty much don't change that ever.

A classic mistake.

I would say the classic mistake is arbitrary redesign. Users hate change. Not inflicting random change on them is one of our secret weapons. Not saying we'd never do it, but there's a hierarchy of problem importance, and "need to have meaningful YC launch titles" is multiple levels below "don't inflict arbitrary change on users".

Thanks for this comment; that's a fascinating bit of information.

But that was just like saying what F-35's mission is to fly high in the skies, sorry.

This sort of proves my point, no one knows which exactly research JWST will do upon deployment, because original mission goals mainly became obsolete.

There is a long list of scientists that know exactly what research they are doing on JWST down to the minute [0]

For example, Dr Christine Chen et al will be using JWST for at least 34.9 hours to study the Icy Kuiper Belts in Exoplanetary Systems using near infrared spectroscopy [1]

[0] https://www.stsci.edu/jwst/science-execution/approved-progra...

[1] https://www.stsci.edu/jwst/phase2-public/1563.pdf

>This sort of proves my point, no one knows which exactly research JWST will do upon deployment

The research isn't a secret, JWST is already booked solid for like 18 months after it launches. You can see how that time is allocated across various projects here: https://www.stsci.edu/jwst/science-execution/approved-progra...

Yeah, I read that, just not impressed by minor projects with low outcome. It roughly equal to routine PhD-tier experiments done on the accelerator at some provincial lab.

Just look at breakthrough chances from, for example, 5 days trans-neptunian object search or the pointing of instrument at largely unexplored Uranus system for petty 30 hours.

The minerals of course! Squeezing water from rock means its natural organic Mineral Water™ and it's sustainable too!

"Invest in the team" gets you Juicero.

Great ambition; they raised a bunch of money.

Great production; watch a tear down of the Juicero product itself, it is a mechanical work of art.

Great potential; a SaaS for a fruit drink? Lots of people love fruit drinks! They can buy our packets of delicious pre-made juice, people drinking juice is a huge Billion Dollar Market™!

Stupid Idea! You can just squeeze the juice out of the bag by hand, no fancy device needed. It is less convenient than pouring from a bottle! Does it really taste better than the delicious organic juice you can buy at any grocery store in every city for a lower price?

Lets put one hundred and twenty million dollars behind it and find out. Hahahahahahahahaha big swing and miss! Survey said? No.

You can of course have a great team with the smartest best credentialed people working on the idea motivated by tons of money. If the idea is bad they still fail, maybe they can pivot, but probably not.

> "Invest in the team" gets you Juicero.

It can get you Juicero, or it could get you Android. That's the whole thing with investing, isn't it? It's rather uncertain.

The Juicero was very overbuilt, I know because I watched the AvE video, but isn't that a sign of amateur engineering? I'm thinking of the old saying that anybody can make a bridge that stands, but it takes an engineer to make one that barely stands.

Hah! It's totality overbuilt for a product that squeezes a bag of Juice! That being said the idea did work for Coffee: e.g Keurig; just not juice.

>it takes an engineer to make one that barely stands.

Engineers do not build bridges that barely stand. They build bridges that they reason will stand for an amount of time in the conditions they predict the bridge will be subject to versus the cost required to build said bridge. They build realizing that no bridge will stand forever but it must stand for a specified amount of time.

They build to "Correct",

Not "Perfect"

YCombinator doesn't put in that much money though. I'm sure they don't intentionally fund scams or juiceros, but if they do, that's not the end of the world. It's a bigger deal to miss the dumb thing that turns out to be good then to accidentally fund a few dumb things.

Totally agree not trying to be critical of YC. Situations like Juicero, Theranos, this topic, et al scams, are interesting to observe.

It's not really that surprising. At some point the established players ossify and are unable to innovate when the playing field changes.

A new thing comes along without this problem and dominates the new playing field. For Teamspeak and Ventrilo the field changed in that it became possible to host the voice servers themselves, rather than the 'customers' hosting.

Except the US Military has exactly zero helicopters capable of lifting anything that heavy.

Russian Military has: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mil_Mi-26

That's the one they've used to rescue downed US helicopters :)

Looks like your right. The US has: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_CH-53E_Super_Stallion... as its near equivalent with a external payload of 36,000 lb. The Russian helicopter carries 8000lbs more at 44,000lb, though Wikipedia doesn't say if this is an external or internal payload.

Looks like a 40ft shipping container weights around 8000lbs empty, couldn't find a stat on full. It seems such an operation would be outside the capacity of these helicopters. Sure they could comfortably lift empty containers, but probably not full ones.

I read his story. What a terrible miscarriage of justice.

That's an interesting way to say, "A sorry piece of shit named Carmen Ortiz trying to make a name for herself."

She accomplished that for sure.

It really is.

I keep buying into the Apple ecosystem because of their stance on user privacy. Sure, they aren't perfect; but they are miles ahead of there competitors.

I'm sure Portal was heavily playtested but it hasn't significantly changed after release so there is no reason to believe that they are making changes based on player analytics (even if they are collecting at least some via achievements).