It's 10-20% of the price of a segway, and you can climb stairs, and carry them much more easily. They also look easy to put on (unlike rollerblades).
If they can sell 500 units, they'll easily hit their stretch goals. I think they'll do OK.
They just shouldn't be afraid of being the next segway - segway didn't fail because it was "dorky". pg was using that as an example of the problems companies get when they run fat and are too cloistered. Segway had a lot of other problems (with the same root cause) - it was way too expensive, and it was too awkward outside a controlled environment (both of which these skates seem to solve). It also tried to sell 50,000 units on the first iteration, while these guys are selling maybe 1000 (for the kickstarter), and can then tweak things based on customer feedback.
I think he's saying it's a souped-up poisson model, not an agent based model. It's not trying to predict individual behavior.
A poisson model is probably valid, but it should perhaps be refined a bit. Maybe it should account for a systematic drift if the whole team plays badly (or a vital player, like the goal keeper, has a bad day). But it's probably really hard to calibrate that, and it's probably not too relevant unless you want to model major upsets.
Wouldn't that refinement basically be identifying the tails as quite a bit fatter than you'd thought before? But in that case, the tails are probably substantially fatter for everyone, and so the numbers 538 is quoting may not be far from the "real" ones.
My reading of this 538 World Cup analysis is that the error bars are taken as being very large, and the relative numbers are mostly interesting as a means of comparing the impacts of various players and other factors in the model. Obviously there can still be major flaws in this method, chief among them being that the method tends to atomize the team's contributions. But that's not a horrible first pass, and still can yield some interesting insights.
FTA, it seems she's front-running some approvals requirements and the sales / payola cycle by running a testing lab as well as developing the tests.
To IT people, this is counterintuitive. You don't vertically integrate, you go for a horizontal slice. Intel won by making chips, not making whole systems (like IBM did).
I guess vertical integration might make more sense in healthcare though, for regulatory and market reasons. I guess the market might be a bit more like IBM renting out mainframes than Intel selling CPU to OEMs. Also, making the tests cheaper (which is the main thing she's doing) might be unattractive to labs, if cost-plus pricing is popular - existing providers might not want to cut their prices.
edit: Answered in other people's comments - it's somewhere between HTML5BoilerPlate and Bootstrap - a basic "hello world" bunch of HTML / SASS / js boilerplate code. This one has an emphasis on mobile.
Ideally, if you can convince a court there's a reasonable chance that the property was legally obtained (using income you legally earned), and that it wasn't purchased with the intent to primarily use it for illegal activities.
Proof beyond reasonable doubt doesn't mean you're definitely guilty. But if it seems reasonably likely (to the judge, or better the jury) that something was legitimately purchased for legitimate reasons, it should be yours.
Campervan fitted out as a mobile meth lab? That should get seized. The house your kid sold drugs from, but is your primary place of residence, and you paid for it with legally obtained money? That should be yours.
The problem is, US police forces seem to want to seize anything that's remotely connected with illegal activities, to raise revenue.
It sounds like the Soylent Revolution will be pleasurable.
If you have Soylent for one or two meals a day, then you'll really enjoy everything else. The mechanics of pleasure are well understood - you enjoy things more when you don't get them so often.
And it's cheap(ish), and apparently not too unhealthy.
It's 10-20% of the price of a segway, and you can climb stairs, and carry them much more easily. They also look easy to put on (unlike rollerblades).
If they can sell 500 units, they'll easily hit their stretch goals. I think they'll do OK.
They just shouldn't be afraid of being the next segway - segway didn't fail because it was "dorky". pg was using that as an example of the problems companies get when they run fat and are too cloistered. Segway had a lot of other problems (with the same root cause) - it was way too expensive, and it was too awkward outside a controlled environment (both of which these skates seem to solve). It also tried to sell 50,000 units on the first iteration, while these guys are selling maybe 1000 (for the kickstarter), and can then tweak things based on customer feedback.