Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by neutronicus 5563 days ago
It's a lot harder to break into solving real, hard problems.

For instance, consider the market I know: neutron physics modeling of nuclear reactors. The existing solutions represent a ton of accumulated domain knowledge, but they're none of them very user-friendly or well-integrated into either the reload design process or the document creation process, nor were they designed with certain improvements in technology infrastructure (distributed computing, GPU computing) in mind.

Getting into this type of technology is hard, though - you need to pay for access to nuclear data files, and vast reserves of historical data are essential for validating your code's predictions, as well as reams of experimental thermal-hydraulic data for building empirical correlations. Information about modern neutron transport algorithms is scattered throughout academic journals, and unbiased comparisons, to say nothing of sample implementations, are so rare as to be nonexistent. Once you've done all of this work, then you need to produce all of the documentation required to convince the NRC that your algorithm is accurate enough for design calculations.

And after all of that, chances are the utilities will just buy the fuel vendors' codes because why deal with two companies, and the fuel vendors will keep using their in-house codes, because fuck you, that's why.

To compete in a market like that, you need connections, and you need experience, probably way more than 4 or 5 people's worth of either. A minimum viable product is probably a man-decade or so of labor.

2 comments

It's especially difficult because investors aren't interested in funding long-term projects. I've put in that man-decade of labor (I've been working on my current project in various forms since 2001), but no one in the Valley's elite circles could care less. This is okay in that I own 100%, but it sure does make it difficult to get things done sometimes.
FaceCash looks pretty cool.

What were the barriers to entry? I imagine competing with the credit card oligopoly at point of sale is pretty tough.

Barriers to entry include, but are not limited to:

1. Building a scalable accounting system that works for merchants and consumers

2. Keeping good enough records to get audited financial statements for as many years as it takes you to build (1)

3. Building mobile applications on 3 or more popular platforms with completely different SDKs

4. Applying for 43 state money transmitter licenses

5. Getting enough money to be able to afford (3) and (4)

6. Complying with the changing USA PATRIOT Act, Bank Secrecy Act, Federal Reserve Bank and U.S. Treasury / FinCEN directives on an ongoing basis while maintaining profitability

7. Convincing people and POS vendors to sign up and develop for a new system en masse...

8. ...without allowing malicious hackers to sign up en masse

9. Not moving so slowly that Apple, Google, PayPal, Visa, MasterCard, Discover, American Express, Intuit, AT&T, Verizon, Sprint or any other startup trying to break into mobile payments can copy you

10. Not moving so quickly that everything breaks, because it can't

It's a hard problem.

Why isn't photo sharing a real problem? Why isn't it hard? I think it's easy to be dismissive of things like this, especially from a purely technical viewpoint.

I'd like to see the other pics people take at get-togethers or on camping trips, but the effort of uploading them to something like facebook doesn't seem worth the effort for many (most?) people (that i know, at least), and there's no way easy way to collate the pics taken by diff people.

I thought "hard" was meant in a purely technical sense.

But anyways - three smart guys in a garage can build a minimum viable photo sharing application using knowledge and technology obtained from the internet.

You can say "oh, it's hard to do photo sharing right, it's a hard problem", but the fact is there are technological problems out there that are hard to do at all, that are completely beyond the reach of three smart guys in a garage using only knowledge available on the internet.

If we're talking about the article, I don't think they were implying anything about technical difficulty (it doesn't even use the word 'hard'), but more about importance (the significance of the consequences). edit: removed typo.