I seriously thought about that Digital Designer article for months after reading it - his take on the skills an interdisciplinary/digital designer should posesses. A -lot- of insight there, especially the fact that he mentions Tools for Making Tools, Systems that Evolve, and Histories....but most of all....-mooost- of all...Modeling with Fractals, Genetic Algorithms, and Cellular Automata (ftw!)
I went to one of their meetups about this but am just lost/uninspired as to what compelling story can be pulled from this data-set. It's just federal spending amounts broken down by very general categories and organizations which - without any other axes of data attached to them - make it hard to discern any kind of meaningful correlations.
You're also restricted to this and only this data set (and any data you can gather in the course of an interactive visualization's run).
I like the idea of algorithmic logos/identities - concepts that aren't specific logos per se but instead provide a set of guidelines through which one's generated.
Not valid at all, except that I know some people in that situation like to purposely ask jarring questions to see how one will respond to pressure. It may or may not have been condescending.
Ditto. This article's so well written; so much meat and actual, rigourous dissection of a problem and it's landscape. Super applicable to the idea i'll be submitting to YC o:) This is spot on what I most needed to read right now. I've had experience with all these different ecosystems and personality types and really had no idea such a distinctive, robust pattern of relations was lurking therein.
This doesn't apply to all such people but non-technical startup founders - unless the idea is very much -non- technical - don't garner any sympathy from me. My opinion is mostly based on having worked with, but mostly just for, some types who wanna squeeze you for technical information so they can shine for VCs without giving you much stake in anything. Worse yet are the ones who're aiming to be bought by Google or some other similar tech-giant that was founded by technical members. The smart people in this group will get paired up with a technical founder quick, but even still how will they know someone's the real deal? Really it just boils down to a question of how one expects to "win the war" if they are not - and have never been - "in the trenches"? Then again, I'm pretty certain those particular guys i've worked for were just special pieces of work and that senselessness is not a trait specific to non-technical founders o:)
If you don't have the guts to stand by your opinion, how are we to take it (or you) seriously? I may have to look at them with a suspicious eye, but my opinion of you - whoever you are - has probably taken a greater hit.
I really dont care what you think of me as long as I feel that I did the right thing by warning fellow entrepreneurs. I would not want others to waste their time like we (and several others) have wasted theirs.
Note the 21 upvotes yet no comments besides mine. Nobody wants to go public with this but many of us feel the same way.
http://www.dubberly.com/articles/becoming-a-digital-designer...
I seriously thought about that Digital Designer article for months after reading it - his take on the skills an interdisciplinary/digital designer should posesses. A -lot- of insight there, especially the fact that he mentions Tools for Making Tools, Systems that Evolve, and Histories....but most of all....-mooost- of all...Modeling with Fractals, Genetic Algorithms, and Cellular Automata (ftw!)