take two shots of expresso and get to work :). alternative would be to splash your face with ice code water and go out for a quick run.
do any intelectual thinking after.
if you can separate your code from the GPL in such a way that the GPL version becomes only a lib (unmodified), then you can close or do any licensing you like.
for example.
package com.mycompany.lib
import org.someGPL.lib.A;
myClass B extends A {}
In this case you simply include the GPL lib as GPL and your Lib as any type of license
in your class B you can override functions you don't like and add more of your own functions.
Finally when you release your code you have to say that this code uses the following GPL code...
if he/she edits all config files by hand instead of using some tool AND he can write shell scripts AND he knows how to do builds AND has experince with setup of any app server...
nerve cell have axons with receptor sites where they recieve messages of certain types. so in your model each person/neurons needs to decide what types of messages they are willing to accept. you would need to generate those classifications and integrate your point system into it so that people/nerons become specialized in solving those types of problems.
I don't think that YC is claiming to be a VC. Unless I am missing something? everybody knows that 10-20k is not worth much. People apply for something else.
I manage my own servers. it took a while to get it to a point where you could realy call it production servers. and I wouldn't have done it if I could have found hosting services that offered what I needed for a good price. but now that I have it's not bad.
The best alternative would be managed private servers.
I think language is also a factor. English grammar is dependent on word order. a thought is more free. so transforming that into sentences that reflect the thought order is a challenge. maybe this is only true for people like me who speak a different language (Farsi) which has free word order. I can write a long sentence putting all my thoughts in it without much problem. but when I write it in English it turns into run-on sentence. The only solution I've found is short senses that follow my thoughts. While English is a simple language it's an art to be able to write well so maybe that's why Paul's well written work include revisions in the process. I'm sure there are more to this but I'm not a language expert :)
they both have a certain feel to them. call it web 2.0 web 3.0 :) or just look at the graphics or the language and yes sometimes features too. "Share the love" / "concert-savvy friend" just an example. There are other bits and pieces too. You could say that this is the general trend, what attracts yc, and so on. of course. that would be the value of their vision. I don't have any arguments about that at all. And it's a good think that they can see it. but my argument is that this is the theme of yc.
Another thing I've noticed is how features that have been around for a long time (web time), are slightly "modified" (most times more simplified, either for the good reason of simplification, or simply because of lack of technical experience, or in the worst case because of bad copying) many examples of this. but since you brought up dropbox, the first thing brings to my mind is box.net. again I'm not saying anything bad about it. I'm sure its better since I know about box.net and their not that great anyway. but my point is that there are not that many selections that are either new innovative products or an old idea that you could say wow this is how it should be implemented. say Google for example. And, they have common theme to them. no not from the perspective of the consumer or what the products are.
I really don't know about how yc views things but the theme of yc is clear. alteast to some degree. either because that's simply the result of their total work and it just produces this, or intention by design to move in this direction or both.
if you go to many vc's site and look under their portfolio many times you can find a common theme in their select.
All of these are good points but the reality is something else. you can take whatever yc says on its face value or simply look at the types of companies they take and the common theme in them as well as the types of persons.