Anthony Levandowski Charged with Theft of Trade Secrets - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/27/technology/google-trade-secrets-levandowski.html <comment><USER2> Why did reporters keep calling Levandowski an engineer? He's really not, at least not for quite a number of years.

Anyway, Levandowski was a lousy leader, and was really detrimental to Uber's ATG. He bloated ATG from fewer than 100 people to more than 2000 within less than a year, without paying the slightest attention to culture. As a result, the number of people grossly exceeded the quantity of work. Political infighting quickly became rampant. Chaos ensued. Morale nose dived. Worse yet, instead of aligning and uniting the teams in Pittsburg, he created a huge fight with the Pittsburg teams, so much so that Travis, then the CEO of Uber, had to fly to Pittsburg every few weeks to resolve the conflicts.

It's sickening to even think about what he did in Uber.

<comment><USER2> P.S., Levandowski caused similar drama when he was in Google's self-driving car division too, per the book Autonomy by Lawrence D Burns.

<comment><USER3> It's baffling to me how everyone seems to hate the guy and say he was a terrible leader, employee, and person, and yet companies seemed to have been valuing him like a diamond. How did that work? Is he just good at duping and persuading and sweet-talking people? Does he have some past accomplishments that were respectable? Does he have some insight into autonomous driving no one else has? Why would Google and Uber bet so much on this guy?

<comment><USER4> He was on the Berkeley team for the original DARPA Grand Challenge. Their team was notable for being a motorcycle while everyone else used a car, the complexity of using a motorcycle earned them big points with the higher-ups even though the bike didn't do very well on the course.

So if you were a CEO looking to hire a senior guy for autonomous vehicles, he was one of the most senior in years of experience, pretty much nobody was working on autonomous vehicles prior to the Grand Challenge.

<comment><USER5> Sure, but once it becomes clear that he doesn't fit in the culture and causes more issues than he solves, why does he keep getting promoted and his pay increased?

<comment><USER4> I suggest that wasn't as clear as you think it was to the right people (either through incompetence, ignorance, or bad leadership), or that if they did have some idea that he wasn't a great fit they were hoping that he would produce a miracle that would make all the pain worth it.

Coming in with wunderkind status gives you a lot of leeway with some people, and things need to be pretty bad before the people that hired you will admit that they made a mistake, hired the wrong person, and paid them way too much. Admitting such a mistake does some damage to your ego and reputation of hiring problem solvers. Plus, by many accounts he was producing decent results- after all, he's led some pretty famous projects, and most of the projects weren't regarded as failures, so why should he be regarded as a failure? Other than stealing IP and being a dick, he's not usually called a loser or a failure.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The level of greed, hubris and stupidity of some people never ceases to amaze me.

Levandowski was paid a bonus of $120 million while at Google, which is more money than any reasonable person will need for several lifetimes. This was actually a running joke at Google (while I was still there) to describe $120M as "1 Levadownski". Like Sundar one year was described as earning "only 1.7 Levadownskis" (he got paid $200M one year).

Why someone would risk jail time doing something so clearly wrong (taking material trade secrets from an employer) for even more money is just staggering to me. Even if he escapes prison time the stress and cost of a protracted criminal trial is huge. The loss of reputation is likely permanent.

I get why some high fliers have big egos and they privatize their success (even when pure dumb luck can be a huge factor). This is the hubris part. Right or wrong, that belief in your own abilities is almost a prerequisite for disruption.

The interesting part is how he "cheats". Like he clearly went to efforts to cover his tracks. Those aren't the actions of someone who felt they didn't do something questionable. So at this point, it's not about the hubris of the individual, it's about being _perceived_ as being gifted, intelligent, a visionary and so on.

Honestly it makes me glad when such charlatan have their almost inevitable fall from grace.

<comment><USER7> It's weird walking away from 120 million but I think I might get what he was thinking. He was probably over confident with the tech, and thought it was close to roll out. He was also probably thinking the tech was worth billions. I bet Anthony felt he built the tech himself and he owned it. He probably wanted and felt like he deserved a bigger piece of the multi billon dollar self driving pie than just 120 million.

<comment><USER8> Imagine not being satisfied with 120 million dollars. Unreal to think about, but greed is never satisfied.

<comment><USER9> You can't even buy your own wide-body private jet or ultra-yacht with 120 million dollars.

[https://www.businessinsider.com/most-luxurious-private- jets-...](https://www.businessinsider.com/most-luxurious-private-jets-in-the- world-photos-details-2018-1)

[https://www.beautifullife.info/automotive-design/worlds- top-...](https://www.beautifullife.info/automotive-design/worlds-top-10-most- expensive-luxury-yachts/)

If you're aiming for the billionaire narcissist bracket - because of course it's the lifestyle you deserve - 120 million is chump change.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> "Theft of trade secrets" is how Silicon Valley was built.

Fairchild was "theft of trade secrets" from Shockley; Intel was "theft of trade secrets" from Fairchild. When Camenzind left Signetics and designed the 555 (under contract to Signetics), he was "using trade secrets" of Signetics; in today's legal environment, they could have just ordered him to stick around as an employee and work on a less risky project. MOSTek was built out of "trade secrets" of Motorola. Unix was only released under a source licensing agreement, and for decades the Lions book, the bible for Unix kernel engineering, was illegal and could not be printed legally, because it contained "trade secrets" (and copyrighted code!) of AT&T. (Or, rather, Western Electric.) Indeed, economists have published a number of papers arguing that that California's prohibitions on non-compete agreements and on employer ownership of private work product underpinned the 1970s–1990s shift from Boston to Silicon Valley.

So this movement toward resolving such conflicts in the courts, instead of by companies competing to out-innovate one another, is very troubling. Investors, and in this case Google upper management, are killing the goose that laid the golden egg; they want to shift power from engineers, who make things, to lawyers and investors, who specialize in getting paid for them.

This is probably a major factor in the widely-observed shift of the center of innovation from Silicon Valley to Shenzhen, where shanzhai ("theft of trade secrets") is a way of life.

I live in a poor country which is poor mostly because the established economic powers are able to strangle new centers of wealth creation in the cradle, using the government and laws. Don't let that happen in your country.

Engineers create wealth. Lawyers and investors just compete to privatize it.

<comment><USER11> > So this movement toward resolving such conflicts in the courts, instead of > by companies competing to out-innovate one another, is very troubling.

A lot of the things you cite _were_ actually fought out in the courts. Motorola sued MOS Technology [1]. AMD and Intel have been in constant legal battles since their inception. The complicated question of Unix ownership started the famous SCO-Linux litigation. This isn't anything new.

And Anthony Levandowski is one of the least sympathetic figures in the industry; virtually no story about people who worked for him has been a positive one. I have sympathy for ordinary senior engineers getting strangled by non-compete agreements. Not for Levandowski.

[1]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOS_Technology_6502#Motorola_l...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOS_Technology_6502#Motorola_lawsuit)

<comment><USER10> Do you think MOStek would have been able to survive in today's legal environment? I don't think so, and that's what worries me.

The SCO-Linux litigation wasn't complicated. It was just fraud on SCO's part, under copyright law that was well-established at the time. With the Google/Oracle precedent in place, SCO would probably win.

I agree that Levandowski, like weev, is profoundly unsympathetic, but we can't let that blind us to the precedents he is being used to set. If Levandowski wins his case, ordinary (and extraordinary) senior engineers will be safer from getting strangled by non-compete agreements; if he loses, they will be in more danger.

<comment><USER12> The Google-Oracle precedent is not actually relevant to SCO v IBM, because IBM didn't re-implement an interface copyrighted by SCO.

<comment><USER10> You're right, of course, because it turned out SCO wasn't the owner of the relevant copyright.

<comment><USER13> True, but the bit about interfaces is also not comparable between the two. There wasn't a lot of commonality between openserver and IBM (RedHat) Linux. It's not like the libraries on one system would run on the other. SCO's seminal allegation was that code was copied between the two, but they never produced evidence. Likely, because there was none. The case was eventually dropped when it was determined SCO couldn't even make a claim to begin with and the rightful copyright holder, Novell, stated they didn't believe SCOs claims. Then SCO went bankrupt and the whole situation just kind of quietly went away.

<comment><USER10> They did eventually show some "code", namely signal.h and a couple of other similar files.

However, thanks to iBCS, it is actually possible to run SCO Unix binaries on Linux, and has been since last millennium. That's why interfaces like signal.h shouldn't be copyrightable: the goal of copyright Law is not to give SCO control over code their customers write.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I used to work for Anthony at 510 systems. He tried to hire me for Otto as well. Watching this whole thing unfold from, obscure story in 2011 to the Waymo Vs. Uber trial to federal charges and national news is rather surreal. Anthony is one of the most creative, energetic thinkers I've ever encountered. If he stopped taking shortcuts he'd probably be the next Jobs or Musk.

<comment><USER15> That's tragic and awful. I think calling this a "shortcut" though is misleading, at least from what the times is reporting here.

It's one thing to own your own brain, it's another take 14K files, including circuit board designs and lidar designs. It's yet another to start using them at new-co that is a direct competitor to old-co. I'm by no means an IP fanatic, but that really does cross over to theft in my mind. But, on balance, the very specific details really matter here, so we'll see...

<comment><USER16> Taking PCB design files and using them at a competing company absolutely is IP theft. I'm honestly surprised anyone would think they could even get away with this; the old company just has to get their hands on one of the competitor's units and open it up and look at it.

<comment><USER17> Many of us do not believe IP is a legitimate property right.

<comment><USER16> Many people think the Earth is flat. What's your point?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> FTA, the significant aspect of this new twist in Levandowski's ongoing legal saga:

> _It is not uncommon for tech companies, which fiercely guard their > intellectual property, to sue former employees or the firms they join after > they leave. But criminal charges of a senior executive for theft is > unusual._

<comment><USER19> "According to the complaint, Mr. Levandowski, who worked on self-driving cars at Google, downloaded more than 14,000 files containing critical information about Google's autonomous-vehicle research before leaving the company in 2016. He then made an unauthorized transfer of the files to his personal laptop, the complaint said."

If the allegations are true (always important to bear in mind from a one-sided view of the complaint), I can see why they took that step in this particular case. Any "senior executive" should know that's illegal.

<comment><USER20> levandowski never liked when rules got in the way of progress. his attitude was "whatever it takes to birth self-driving cars".

<comment><USER21> >never liked when rules got in the way of progress.

Yes, that seems to be the Silicon Valley Culture.

"Move fast and break things"

"Its better to apologize and seek forgiveness, than ask for permission"

"Though the most successful founders are usually good people, they tend to have a piratical gleam in their eye. They're not Goody Two-Shoes type good. Morally, they care about getting the big questions right, but not about observing proprieties. That's why I'd use the word naughty rather than evil. They delight in breaking rules, but not rules that matter."

<comment><USER22> I used to go back to my university and speak at the ethics class in my recruiting trips. I stopped after people's questions changed to "Uber, Airbnb, etc all succeeded because they broke the law. Why are ethics important?" and I had no real answer.

<comment><USER21> >I stopped after people's questions changed to "Uber, Airbnb, etc all succeeded because they broke the law. Why are ethics important?" and I had no real answer.

You should go back to it, as those are examples of why ethics are needed more than ever.

As someone in the "trenches" and who sees the damage done by them everyday, I'd suggest you can point to the trail of damage they left in their wake and the real lives that have been negatively effected.

In the case of Uber I would simply start with highlighting the number of drivers who now have criminal records as a result of doing nothing more than driving for Uber. How Uber as a matter of policy would fire drivers who were charged criminally for illegally operating rides for hire for Uber. Perhaps most shockingly for these students perhaps informing them of the reality they are far more likely to become an Uber driver than the founder of the next Uber.

<comment><USER23> I would also recommend hanging out on subreddits like /r/uberdrivers, /r/lyftdrivers, or /r/lyft and look for every instance of drivers using "we're independent contractors" to justify abusive behavior towards customers that would get them fired if they were actual employees and in some cases behavior that is straight-up illegal.

Some things I've actually seen on those subreddits:

* Give three-star ratings (or worse, one-star) to any passenger who has a wheelchair or a service animal to make sure you're never matched with them again. Straight-up ADA violation.

* When you mark that you've arrived, keep your doors locked until the destination shows up, and if it's a "sketchy" (read: majority black) neighborhood, keep your doors locked, wait five minutes, call them, immediately hang up, report them as a no-show, and collect a $5 no-show fee from them (waiting five minutes and calling is a requirement to collect the no-show fee). Redlining is illegal, and this is straight-up fraud.

* If you get a request to pick someone up at a supermarket, drive _just_ close enough to the supermarket that the "arrive" button becomes pressable, then do the above and collect your no-show fee. Again, straight-up fraud.

* One-star every passenger who doesn't tip. Retaliating against people who don't tip would get you fired from any other service job.

* One-star every passenger who orders a shared ride, no matter what. Again, that kind of retaliation would get a real employee fired. (Yes, shared rides suck for everyone involved, but retaliating against a customer for ordering the most annoying thing on the menu wouldn't be tolerated at a restaurant, yet Uber and Lyft are a-OK with it.)

* One time, a woman complained about how a Lyft driver kicked her out of his car in the middle of the ride because she just nodded along to his stories and didn't engage him in conversation, and he told her "if you don't want to talk, order an Uber instead". The response on the subreddit was universal: he's an independent contractor, so he has every right to kick her out for any reason, and Lyft isn't even allowed to fire him for it because that would count as interference in how an independent contractor does their job. At any other job, flipping out on a customer for not making enough conversation with you would get you in huge trouble, and _advertising your employer 's biggest competitor_ would get you fired in a heartbeat.

* This came from the Rideshare Guy blog and not Reddit: since repeatedly cancelling rides after accepting it will get you in trouble, drivers used cancel rides by putting their phones in airplane mode because a loss of connectivity would auto-cancel without penalties. When Uber started detecting that a few years ago (2014-5 maybe?) and counting it against a driver's cancellation rate, drivers started _picketing Uber 's local hubs_ over it. In the rest of the service industry, lying to your employer over this would get you in huge hot water, and publicly complaining about it even more so.

Every single one of these was justified by saying "we're independent contractors, we can refuse service to anyone for any reason". Again, a few of these are straight-up illegal, but since only the contractor is liable and not Uber/Lyft, enforcement is exceedingly difficult, and for the ones that _aren 't_ illegal, they're still unethical, and any reputable employer would fire an employee engaging in that kind of behavior, but Uber/Lyft drivers get to hide behind "we're contractors and not employees, so Uber/Lyft firing us for how we treat customers would violate _our_ rights".

Unethical behavior is actively harmful to customers.

<comment><USER16> >to justify abusive behavior towards customers

I guess you never used taxis before Uber was invented! The whole industry has been a huge racket for decades.

>Redlining is illegal, and this is straight-up fraud.

I guess you were never black and trying to get a taxi in NYC to go to the Bronx. There were countless complaints from black people about this practice with the cabs.

Basically, while your complaints are justified, though they definitely seem like cherry-picking the worst horror stories, the situation wasn't actually any better before these services existed. People didn't have any recourse when cab drivers treated them poorly, or made up bogus fares, turned off the taximeter and made up numbers, drove them around in circles to make more money, etc. It didn't matter that the drivers were technically employees; the cab companies had an oligopoly enforced by law, and didn't have to worry about customer service or reputation. And there certainly was no way for customers to inform each other about lousy drivers.

The real problem here is a lack of decent government regulation, and worse, when the (local) government does try to regulate, it just results in cronyism and high prices rather than better service and experience for the taxpayer.

I'll also point out that Uber doesn't have much presence in Japan, because their taxi drivers are actually highly professional and aren't a bunch of lying crooks like the ones in America, so people don't feel the need to flock to it. The fundamental problem is obviously the culture and the people in America, and that's why Uber is successful there.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I would have a lot more sympathy for Levandowski if he had taken trade secrets and created his own company.

But he didn't take the engineer/entrepreneur route. He took the corporate espionage route and just stole stuff from one company so that another company would profit, in the process further enriching himself.

At one point he was a good engineer. Then he became just another greedy executive.

<comment><USER25> > But he didn't take the engineer/entrepreneur route. He took the corporate > espionage route and just stole stuff from one company so that another > company would profit, in the process further enriching himself.

Levandowski actually had his own startup Otto which was acquired by Uber.

<comment><USER26> It was acquired in eight months, and founded specifically after Levandowski and Kalanick had a meeting. Otto looks like a prearranged sham legal entity to justify a huge payout, than a bonafide startup.

<comment><USER27> "If you buy us, you'll also buy some Waymo code"

<comment><USER26> I figure it was just two bros figuring out how to funnel a tens of millions dollars into Levandoski's pocket.

<comment><USER27> If I'm hearing this right, this is pretty much money laundering

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> He's already off the Pronto.AI about page, his current startup where he was the CEO until this news: (mentioned towards the end of the NYT article)

[https://pronto.ai/about/](https://pronto.ai/about/)

[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:I7ifOu...](https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:I7ifOuQOp- QJ:https://pronto.ai/about/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ch)

<comment><USER29> They do mention it on the homepage and link to this though: [https://pronto.ai/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Pronto- Statemen...](https://pronto.ai/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Pronto-Statement- Aug.27.2019.pdf)

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Official filing: [https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/pr/former-uber-self- drivin...](https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/pr/former-uber-self-driving-car- executive-indicted-alleged-theft-trade-secrets-google)

PDF: [https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/press- release/file/1197991...](https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/press- release/file/1197991/download)

<comment><USER31> > The prosecution is being handled by the Office of the U.S. Attorney, > Northern District of California's new Corporate Fraud Strike Force

I'm curious if this explains the delayed timing... New agency team gets started and looks around for the biggest fish to fry. Everyone already dislikes Uber and AI is big right now so it's win-win. Smart move by the prosecutors if so.

(Or it could just be a long process due to the other civil trial happening first or just the FBI criminal investigation taking long, and the new group simply took up the prosecution, I'm just speculating)

<comment><USER32> IIRC, there was a criminal referral made by the judge during the (civil) Uber v Google proceedings. It probably took time for the grand jury to be set up and complete its investigations after that.

<comment><USER31> Interesting that would explain it. Thanks

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> For more background, this New Yorker essay is useful.

[https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/22/did-uber- steal...](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/22/did-uber-steal- googles-intellectual-property)

<comment><USER34> Great article, I liked that it illuminates the question--whats a trade secret vs knowledge from on-the-job-experience? And where's the line across which a company can say you've used a trade secret? It's scary to think that one of the outcomes of this case could be a precedent that allows companies to go after what's in your head.

<comment> compiler-guy It's unlikely that this will be a precedent for companies "going after what is in your head."

The accusation is that Levandowski downloaded numerous proprietary files and plans, which is very far from personal knowledge.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Is levandowski actually exceptionally talented, such that one of him is worth 120-600 other employees?

What has he actually accomplished? All I've read is that he built a self- driving motorcycle for the Grand Challenge, but IIRC his motorcycle made it about 25 feet before falling over.

<comment><USER36> talent != value created != compensation earned

<comment><USER35> Great, cool. Did he actually create value at Google or Uber, or is his primary skill just convincing Page and Kalanick to give him money?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I am going to admit out loud something that I suspect many people here also feel:

 _I am envious of Anthony Levandowski_

Not his unscrupulous behavior, theft, and all that. But rather the fact that his confidence, swagger, and the ability to talk to Thrun and Larry and Sergei and Travis as _equals_ (or as inferiors, actually, in this technical domain) gave people such a high impression that they bestowed him with $centi-million bonuses.

I'm well-paid in silicon valley but my stock grants have been flat for years. I haven't been able to grow a large team (let alone 2000 people like Levandowski at Uber apparently). If I'm caught in an elevator with our Senior VP, I don't really know what to say (and I'm certainly not invited up to the executive floor to continue the conversation afterwards).

And yet here we have a guy who did all this by orders of magnitude and at multiple companies. I don't want to be a dirtbag like him, but I will admit I am envious.

<comment><USER38> Not me, totally fine if I never have 2000 people working for me.

<comment><USER37> Oh I know, me neither. But I've been denied headcount several times. I don't want 2000, but envy the magical ability to get at least a bigger number.

Unfortunately, time and again I've seen that the person who grows that big team, etc, is an unqualified idiot asshole. Good guys don't frequently win.

<comment><USER39> Nice guys finish last is a saying that rings true in multiple fields.

It's also entirely within anyone's control to realize that and act accordingly.

I'm less of a nice guy these days, and my life is better for it. Though I try to ultimately be very nice to the people I care about.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> So I've been reading about this dude, and apparently he started _several_ technology companies _while working at Google_, and sold a couple of them back to Google. Clearly his Google employment contract terms weren't the same as mine. In fact "normal" employees would be fired the same day for some of the things he did even before he copied off a bunch of Google IP.

I kind of wonder what's so special about the guy that Google wanted him so bad that they let him basically write his own employment contract, allowed him to have huge conflicts of interest, and then also paid like tens of millions in bonuses per year.

I also wonder what else he wrote into that employment contract of his. You can charge anybody with anything, doesn't mean it'll stick.

<comment><USER41> Larry Page founded his own side startup while CEO. Levandowski worked on on Larry's startup.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> It doesn't change the criminality of his actions, but something I haven't ever seen any info about: were the designs he downloaded and took with him for LIDAR systems that he had played the primary role in developing while at Google or were the designs largely the work of other Googke employees?

<comment><USER43> He stole schematics, does a senior executive draw schematics? Likely no. He probably considered it all his own and didn't think about how many people played a role in building this tech.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> I seriously doubt this will result in any jail time. Levandowski's lawyers will do everything they can to see to it no time is served. But he will probably pay a fine.. chump change to this man.

And this pisses me off; people in America get thrown in jail for stealing chewing gum.

</comment><comment><USER45> Most engineers I have met in Silicon Valley have a very high standard of personal ethics. For example, I have seen engineers risk their own careers to insist that their employers give back to open source projects when the employer is in violation of an open-source license's terms.

But I've also seen a few, rare bad apples. There are some people who are borderline sociopathic, who don't think twice about theft, misdirection, misappropriation of credit, and throwing co-workers under the bus for personal gain.

Usually, such people are not caught, and are not punished ... ever. People who learn about such sociopaths, just avoid them.

But sometimes these sociopaths go too far. This seems to be one such case.

This prosecution will discourage the very worst behavior and it will feel therapeutic for people that have felt victimized by various sociopaths who used them as ladders on the climb to fame and wealth ... but the less criminal kinds of sociopathy in the workplace is probably never going to go away. And there's no real way to stop it.

I haven't been to Google or worked with Google in a long time, but for a while there, say between 2010 and 2015, I felt like it was chock full of sociopaths in mid-level management. I don't even think Anthony would have stood out as particularly sociopathic in that environment.

<comment><USER46> Any thoughts about this article in Wired? [https://www.wired.com/story/inside- google-three-years-misery...](https://www.wired.com/story/inside-google-three- years-misery-happiest-company-tech/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> I'm just here to thank whoever changed the title that used this as an opportunity to smear engineers. Levandowski was not an engineer. He was an executive and this type of behavior is completely in line with executive behavior.

</comment><comment><USER48> Here's a nice write-up of the backstory, from 2018:

[https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/22/did-uber- steal...](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/22/did-uber-steal- googles-intellectual-property)

and HN discussion:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18219612](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18219612)

</comment><comment><USER49> > It is not uncommon for tech companies, which fiercely guard their > intellectual property, to sue former employees or the firms they join after > they leave.

Is it really that common?

I feel like most software engineers don't really take intellectual property all that seriously. Most will not think twice about backing up emails when leaving the company which might contain code diffs, design docs, etc.

Friends from different companies usually talk about internal system designs and technical problems pretty freely. One of the circles I hang out with even backup and share the interview question database from every company they've been at.

So while it's probably crossing a line, it's still not something I expect they will ever get sued for, let alone criminally charged. (This is in contrast with friends from the finance industry who are a lot more tightlipped about everything and you do hear stories about regular employees getting sued)

<comment><USER50> > I feel like most software engineers don't really take intellectual property > all that seriously. Most will not think twice about backing up emails when > leaving the company which might contain code diffs, design docs, etc.

You can't be serious. I would never think of doing this, and I can't imagine who would.

<comment><USER51> You'd be a rare bird.

Most employees don't even bother to not pirate software, look at porn or whatever on their work laptops. Its somewhat hilarious.

<comment><USER52> You're comparing apples to oranges.

I know a lot of engineers at a lot of companies who look at porn on their work laptops (which isn't illegal). I don't know a single engineer who would take documents from their previous company to their new company (which is very illegal).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> Interesting this is only against Anthony and not Uber this time. The stakes seem much smaller here. I would be surprised if he actually goes to prison for this. And max fine of $8 million or so is small for him

<comment><USER54> The maximum penalty is 250k per count _or_ twice the gross gain/loss, whichever is greater. So the financial penalty could be quite significant.

<comment><USER55> Wouldn't a conviction open him up to a more costly civil suit? Harder to defend a civil suit if you're guilty in a related criminal charge.

<comment><USER54> Maybe so. At the time, everyone wondered why Google did not sue him, just Uber. Now I wonder if Google's legal team wasn't already in touch with the FBI/US attorney's office. It might be that the reason why they didn't pursue him in civil court was to leave the way open for the criminal procedure to blaze the trail. That would be sick, if so.

<comment><USER56> I got the impression that Google couldn't sue him, per se, because their employee arbitration requirements were working against them in this case.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> Likelyhood he faces jail for this? What will become of his new company pronto.

</comment><comment><USER58> This is Google harassing him.

They can't sue him in a civil suit, because, as a Google employee, Google made him sign an arbitration agreement. There's already been an arbitration between him and Google, there was some settlement, and Google is now barred from suing him.

<comment><USER59> The judge from the Google vs. Uber litigation referred the case to the US attorney. Looks like they found enough evidence to charge him. Not sure how Google is involved in this "harassment".

</comment></comment><comment><USER60> I really don't think it was about the money. He was making $120M a year at the time?

He probably had a sense of ownership on that idea and wanted to see it through to economic viability.

I don't know - thats the only way I can rationalize

</comment><comment><USER61> Levandowski still lists his occupation on Linkin as "VP Engineering at Uber ATG". How the _!_!@ can that still be true? Hasn't Uber cut ties with him yet?

<comment><USER62> because its not true anymore?

</comment></comment><comment><USER63> Can someone explain the difference between this situation and the following situation:

\- engineer at Company A has expertise in a certain field, and is really, really good at solving problems in this field and knowing what to do next at any point in time. They bring quality to Company A's systems. \- engineer moves to Company B to do the same kind of work, and uses their expertise to bring Company B's systems up to high quality as well \- Company A says that this engineer must have stolen trade secrets.

<comment><USER64> The indictment[1] sheds some light on the difference: "On or about December 11,2015, he downloaded approximately 14,000 files from SVN. These files contained critical engineering information about the hardware used on Project Chauffeur self-driving vehicles, including schematics for the printed circuit boards used in various custom LiDAR products."

In other words, the accusation is that he stole technology that was the output of the entire Project Chauffeur team, not simply stuff of his own creation. Presumably, those materials were non-trivial and represent the combined effort of many engineers over many years.

Imagine you're toiling on a team for years and your absurdly compensated boss decides they want the whole pie, clones the repo their laptop, and dips out to found their own start up based on everyone's work.

[1] [https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/press- release/file/1197991...](https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/press- release/file/1197991/download)

<comment><USER65> > In other words, the accusation is that he stole technology that was the > output of the entire Project Chauffeur team, not simply stuff of his own > creation.

Even "stuff of his own creation" that he created for Google while an employee there would be Google's intellectual property (assuming the usual terms of employment), and if he took it with him after leaving, it would still be theft.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER66> I use to feel bad for Google and wanted this thief to face justice. But umm he's just doing what he witnessed and was taught(told) to do while working for the big G.

Google blatantly steals IP from the biggest fish to the little dreamers they inspire and such is well documented. See this popular HN thread... [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18566929](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18566929)

<comment><USER66> Why is this point being downvoted? It is not relevant to this discussion or it's something else???

Again It's well documented the big G steals IP!!

<comment><USER67> Because you're letting your emotions get the best of you.

<comment><USER66> You might too if the company who inspired you to dream and create tech invited you to demo and then treated you like a dog(possibly stole from u). I met with other names like Samsung, Intel, Black n Decker and no deal was made there too but I was treated respectfully with dignity!

I told my story for years here then last December lo and behold Ji Qie of MIT tells the same story I've told for awhile but with emails/evidence clearly showing Google getting caught stealing IP. She met with Google ATAP too!

Overall the narrative shouldn't be only about Anthony doing wrong rather he was mimicking what he witnessed and was taught (directly or indirectly) by his employer, Google to do; steal IP!</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Watch Tim Cook's full 30-minute interview on Apple's fight with the FBI - <AUTHOR> http://www.theverge.com/2016/2/24/11110802/apple-tim-cook-full-interview-fbi-iphone-encryption <comment><USER2> You know, at first, I really thought Apple & Tim Cook were taking this stance for the PR value of it. I still think that's a little bit true.

However, after watching this interview, I think he's sincere. I think it's great that he's flying in the face of public opinion and the government and trying to protect people from a dangerous precedent.

Good interview.</comment>


Hello Bar a simple tool I love and gets eyeballs for sure. - <AUTHOR> http://www.hellobar.com Been using Hello Bar lately and I been loving it. Simple tools like this are definitely the most powerful web services, that can make a big difference in your online projects. <comment><USER2> After 5 minutes I have no idea what it is.</comment>


Show HN: RubyProctor, a website for developing Rubocop rules - <AUTHOR> http://rubyproctor.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> Here's a blog post explaining how I handle user-submitted code: [https://medium.com/@squidarth/running-user-provided- code-6c8...](https://medium.com/@squidarth/running-user-provided- code-6c87b94720a3)

</comment><comment><USER2> Nice, I've been looking for something like this. What technology did you use to build it?

</comment><comment><USER3> Wow this is really useful!</comment>


HTML5 Game Dev Competition for Students - sponsored by Mozilla, GitHub - <AUTHOR> http://clay.io/competition

<comment><USER2> Cool, but i cant shake the feeling theyd like to boost the games portfolio of their gaming site on the cheap with this.

So this is not to be seen negative per se, but USD 1500 for the winning team and subsequently less for runner ups is a bit poor considering teams will probably be more than 1 guy and you have to expect to get nothing at all.

<comment><AUTHOR> I would be lying if I said that's not a small part of it, because it is.

But what's _much_ more important to us is having HTML5 games in general move forward, and that starts by getting more folks (especially students) developing games with the technology versus Flash or Unity. If HTML5 "fails" for games, Clay.io no longer exists.

We gathered as much as we could for prizes, but the main issue was with securing more sponsors. Clay.io in its current state is 3 undergraduates at the University of Texas - we don't have funding at this point, so we have to be a bit scrappy.

<comment><USER3> Hey. Another contestant here.

Looks like you guys have a problem with the background animation on that page ([https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2Fy-Q78JeVpLXlWRW4xejlOQ3c/...](https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2Fy-Q78JeVpLXlWRW4xejlOQ3c/edit))

<comment><AUTHOR> Did you by chance open it up while the browser window was small, then resize the window?

<comment><USER3> Yeah, I think I did. Looks like it doesn't handle resizes properly if you start out with a small(ish) window.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Hey, I created the game that you guys first ported to clay.io (SlimeVolley). It's awesome to see how many games you've got hooked up to your system, I hope your user base is growing similarly. There's no shame in trying to grow your portfolio with this competition; it's a win-win for all parties involved. Best of luck.</comment>


WireGuard for macOS released - <AUTHOR> https://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/wireguard/2019-February/003853.html <comment><USER2> I'm really excited about this. Finally, can seamlessly connect to all my DO droplets, in the US and EU. Thanks @zx2c4 for releasing this.</comment>


Passenger iOS app hits the AppStore - <AUTHOR> http://psngr.co/

<comment><USER2> I really like the design of this one, great work!</comment>


Gentle Introduction to x86-64 Assembly - <AUTHOR> http://www.x86-64.org/documentation/assembly.html <comment><USER2> Wish the examples were using intel syntax.

<comment><USER3> I had a reply to this (see below), but reflection revealed that this is just a flame-baiting comment. Intel/AT&T is apparently a long-running flamewar. See e.g. [http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&...](http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fbooks.google.com%2Fbooks%3Fid%3DPas0YoxygnkC%26pg%3DPA9%26lpg%3DPA9%26dq%3D%2522ida%2Bpro%2522%2Bintel%2Bsyntax%26source%3Dbl%26ots%3DQmWE1Cboiq%26sig%3D989vPlCpSXF9dYVsRhh7AoKFRps%26hl%3Den%26ei%3DosUjStODFIjOMqKzwa8J%26sa%3DX%26oi%3Dbook_result%26ct%3Dresult%26resnum%3D1&ei=osUjStODFIjOMqKzwa8J&usg=AFQjCNG5ZZ39JZbRt_bfzq9dOMB69z8mXQ) .

Originally wrote: Why? The OSS world uses AT&T syntax, because that's what gas uses.

<comment><USER4> It is not flame bait. (BTW, I can't read your link due to Google's copyright restrictions.)

gas uses AT&T syntax because it needs a format that applies to multiple architectures. But the Intel format dominates Intel-specific compilers and, I expect, the mindshare of Intel assembly coders. The OSS world is no exception; the open-source Intel nasm and fasm assemblers use Intel format. Intel syntax is so popular, in fact, that gas itself was modified to support it: [http://sourceware.org/binutils/docs-2.19/as/i386_002dSyntax....](http://sourceware.org/binutils/docs-2.19/as/i386_002dSyntax.html#i386_002dSyntax)</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Hangable.co – A curated collection of stunning canvas prints - <AUTHOR> http://hangable.co/?referrer=hn <comment><AUTHOR> Here's a little Node web app I came up with on a rainy Sunday.

I found an API offered by a company that manages the printing of photo canvases and decided to try to hook it up.

To take things one step further I also linked it up to Unsplash as a source of the images and Amazon S3 for storage.

Unfortunately I think the prices offered by the canvas printing API service are a bit too steep, so I'm actively seeking alternatives!

Would be great to get some feedback!</comment>


Ask HN: fields that computerized glasses could disrupt? - <AUTHOR>

What fields do you think technologies like Glass, combined with computer vision and machine learning, could disrupt?
Some random ones of mine include: - Analysis of plants (for gardeners): tell which ones are healthy or not - Mineral mining: see which rocks might contain precious minerals, rather than guess-and-check
- For sports players: project where players/balls are going to be in the near future, draw it (overlay) on your vision - Learning of any visually-oriented task (like what though?)
What ideas do you see being useful? <comment><USER2> 1\. Accessibility - For people with poor eyesight this can be a great tool as it has camera built in.

2\. Augmented Reality apps where information will be overlaid on top of Real life objects to provide useful meta information.</comment>


Show HN: cookies.js, making cookies a delight to work with on the front-end - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/franciscop/cookies.js <comment><USER2> Congrats on shipping it!

This got me thinking about what the existing cookie libraries looked like in npm, since I figured it was a solved problem already, potentially even with the exact same API.

There are a lot of cookie libraries for the browser in npm! Here are the ones I found, grouped by what syntax they end up implementing, and showing their current downloads per month...

Using the .get() .set() .remove() syntax:

        js-cookie           (141,938)
        cookies-js          (36,319)
        cookie-cutter       (8,848)
        cookie-monster      (7,457)
        client-cookies      (216)
        cookie-browser      (198)
        cookie-handler      (118)
        juicy-cookie        (115)
        cookies-es5         (109)
        cookie.js           (84)
        mmm-cookies         (41)
        cookie-crisp        (60)
        easy-cookies        (13)

Using the Web Storage syntax:

        cookie-storage      (1,101)
        mozilla-doc-cookies (491)
        cookiestorage       (27)

Using the almost-Web-Storage syntax:

        oven                (111)

Using the `(get, set) syntax:

        component-cookie    (7,360)
        cookee              (1,568)

Using your syntax:

        cookiesjs           (49)

I think it's a good example of npm's problem as a search engine for packages. Realistically all of these libraries have the same goal, and probably achieve it equally well. A few have better browser support, a few have better docs, a few have better tests, etc.

No one should be prevented from creating and publishing whatever they want as a library.

But npm should be doing a much, much, much better job at pointing people towards the popular libraries. It takes a lot of work to figure out what cookie libraries to use. Or what snake-case library to use. When it really shouldn't. You could easily eliminate most of these libraries with a few simple metadata checks. And I think it's incredibly unfortunate that npm isn't pushing people in that direction.

<comment><USER3> I think you raise a good point, but when has this been the package manager's concern?

When I type in 'dnf search' or 'apt-get install' or 'pip search' or the equivalent, I don't get details, I just get a list of packages, one of whose title or description fields match what I pass on the command-line. A package's exported API is important (obviously, since without it you can't use it), but I'm not entirely sure the package manager is the best place to surface this information. Or maybe it should be, but no package manager so far does this well?

<comment><USER2> Yup, I don't think any package manager has ever really done this well.

But what makes the problem worse is that npm advocates using lots of small modules, and using them in an environment (the browser) where duplication weight has big negative consequences.

I think there's a real opportunity to unseat npm if someone applied to same kind of UX-first thinking to package management that has been applied to other areas.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Good work, but I prefer the syntax of cookies-js [1]

Side note, Bower is a dying package manager. You'd get better results if you promoted the npm link over bower.

[1] [https://www.npmjs.com/package/cookies- js](https://www.npmjs.com/package/cookies-js)

<comment><USER5> Bower is definitely not dying, and in fact Npm is totally unsuited for some communities

[http://harry.garrood.me/blog/purescript-why- bower/](http://harry.garrood.me/blog/purescript-why-bower/)

<comment><USER6> [https://www.google.com/trends/explore?q=bower,npm](https://www.google.com/trends/explore?q=bower,npm)

"Dying" is a bit strong, but there's no question that NPM is becoming the go- to choice for javascript development across the stack.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Cool submission!

Per RFC 6265, which is the cookie spec you seem to use, the valid chars for cookie names is defined [1] by RFC 2616 (since obsoleted by the 723x series; but agreeing on this issue [2]).

The cookie name must be a 'token', which is incidentally the exact same rule as for HTTP header names. 'token' evaluates to one or more of the following ASCII visible characters:

        "!" / "#" / "$" / "%" / "&" / "'" / "*"
      / "+" / "-" / "." / "^" / "_" / "`" / "|" / "~"
      / DIGIT (0-9) / ALPHA (A-Z, a-z)

Right now you allow any valid JSON object key to be set as a cookie name.

EDIT: To be more precise, _your defaults are fine_ as they URLencode the key too, along with the value. But the defaults are overridable and affect both the cookie key and value simultaneously. Allowing the value encoding to be overridden would be useful, while allowing the name encoding to be overridden can cause the cookie to fall out of spec.

[1] [https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616#section-2.2](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616#section-2.2)

[2] [https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230#section-3.2.6](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230#section-3.2.6)

<comment><AUTHOR> I URL-Encode it:

        var res = opt.encode(key) + '=' + encoded + ...

Where `opt.encode()` is defined as:

        function (val) {
          return encodeURIComponent(val);
        }

But from your comment I understand that this is not enough and I should dig deeper into this (though I find the RFC really dense/difficult to read).

<comment><USER3> I did more research and have a further follow-up. According to MDN [1], encodeURIComponent escapes all characters except the following:

      alphabetic, decimal digits, - _ . ! ~ * ' ( )

which means that out of the allowed ASCII characters in a cookie name:

       "!" / "#" / "$" / "%" / "&" / "'" / "*"
      / "+" / "-" / "." / "^" / "_" / "`" / "|" / "~"
      / DIGIT (0-9) / ALPHA (A-Z, a-z)

the following matrix of behaviors results:

          Gets-Encoded? Is-Allowed?   Current-Behavior
      </comment></comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>-----
      !   not-encoded   allowed       behavior-OK
      #   encoded       allowed       unnecessarily-encoded
      $   encoded       allowed       unnecessarily-encoded
      %   encoded       allowed       unnecessarily-encoded
      &   encoded       allowed       unnecessarily-encoded
      '   not-encoded   allowed       behavior-OK
      *   not-encoded   allowed       behavior-OK
      +   encoded       allowed       unnecessarily-encoded
      -   not-encoded   allowed       behavior-OK
      .   not-encoded   allowed       behavior-OK
      ^   encoded       allowed       unnecessarily-encoded
      _   not-encoded   allowed       behavior-OK
      `   encoded       allowed       unnecessarily-encoded
      |   encoded       allowed       unnecessarily-encoded
      ~   not-encoded   allowed       unnecessarily-encoded
      (   not-encoded   not-allowed   invalid-must-encode
      )   not-encoded   not-allowed   invalid-must-encode

[1] [https://developer.mozilla.org/en- US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe...](https://developer.mozilla.org/en- US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/encodeURIComponent)

</comment><comment><USER7> This reminds me of jquery-cookie which was replaced by js-cookie. [https://github.com/js-cookie/js-cookie](https://github.com/js-cookie/js- cookie)

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, after the initial simple version, when I thought of expanding it, I looked into js-cookie and Cookies [1], but they all seem to require a `.set()` and `.get()` methods which I find too verbose for something so simple. A couple more of differences:

\- I just added a CDN to cookies.js

\- The default is a 100-day cookie, as _cookies_ for me imply long-lived cookies, not _sessions_.

\- The default is that if you visit `https`, it will require secure connection.

\- [configurable] to remove a cookie you can just null-ify it.

[1] [https://github.com/ScottHamper/Cookies](https://github.com/ScottHamper/Cookies)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> It would be interesting if you adapted this to use the WebStorage api. [https://developer.mozilla.org/en- US/docs/Web/API/Web_Storage...](https://developer.mozilla.org/en- US/docs/Web/API/Web_Storage_API/Using_the_Web_Storage_API)

</comment><comment><USER9> Someone already mentioned js-cookie [0], but they didn't mention that it supports legacy browsers! If you're tied down supporting old IE, it's a great choice.

I've used both js-cookie and cookies-js, and ultimately ended up going with js-cookie. Unfortunately, I don't remember the reason why js-cookie won me over; I think I encountered some issue with cookies-js.

[0] [https://github.com/js-cookie/js-cookie](https://github.com/js-cookie/js- cookie)

</comment><comment><USER10> Obligatory old man rant/question... why does software development need to be delightful? I just need it to work and not get in my way. I have other things I can do in my life that are delightful, like reading a good book or watching my kid's first steps.

Edit: I'm sorry, that came off with a lot extra snark and not nearly as much joking as I was intending. I'm happy that people find working with cookies delightful.

<comment><USER11> It could be argued that if it "just works" and is not in your way that it feels delightful to program with :)

<comment><AUTHOR> That was totally my original meaning; sensible defaults, easy options and just a simple function to work with makes me want to keep using a library all day. So I try to follow that when writing a new library when I'm not comfortable with the status quo.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This feels so wrong....

        cookies({ token: '42' }, {
          expires: 100 * 24 * 3600,     // The time to expire in seconds
          domain: false,                // The domain for the cookie
          path: '/',                    // The path for the cookie
          secure: https ? true : false  // Require the use of https
        });

<comment><USER13> Why? It looks pretty standard to me. It uses named variables for options, instead of argument position, and has reasonable defaults, so you don't have to specify every option.

This is the standard, modern way of added options to a function.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> No one should ever use cookies! You should use local storage, and only send what you need to the server and only when you need it

<comment><USER15> There are situations where cookies make more sense. Local storage gives you less control on the origin where that data can be accessed. Local storage doesn't let you set things such has HttpOnly so that JavaScript can not access the data (this is important to limit the risk of XSS when dealing with session ids). Local storage also doesn't give you as much control over when data should expire.

<comment><USER16> Sure but here we're talking about javascript cookies that aren't htttpOnly or secure. The expiration date and broad compatibility are the only arguments for the use of js cookies.

<comment><USER15> and the `path` attribute which allows you to control where a cookie should be used within the same origin.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> How does this compare to Express's cookie parser ([https://github.com/expressjs/cookie- parser](https://github.com/expressjs/cookie-parser)) which relies on cookie ([https://github.com/jshttp/cookie](https://github.com/jshttp/cookie)) for parsing?

<comment><AUTHOR> > "Interactive and easy cookies from your browser in javascript"

It is a front-end package, not a Node.js package. I am totally happy with the state-of-the-art Node.js cookie parsing</comment></comment>


Have you ever coded while high? - <AUTHOR>

If i hurt anyone by asking this question it is not what i meant. I just cant stop wondering what a coder could come up with while "high"? <comment><USER2> I find that coding while high never produces good code. I've done it before, and while I can sit and code for a long time, I just make too many stupid mistakes. It takes me forever then to go back and figure out what I did wrong while high; I usually have to wait until I'm sober to debug it. However, the actual logic of the code usually makes sense and it works, it's just little things that I forget or simple errors in logic.

The other problem is that while I can code more mundane code, anything that actually takes a lot of thought is just impossible. I can't remember all the things I'm trying to do and can't keep everything straight. This is just because weed basically destroys your short term memory.

I recognize that weed may give you the motivation to code or give you insight into how to tackle a problem, but just be aware that you'll have to do a lot of debugging of the code after you come down.

As rms said, kratom is a different story. I can code for hours on kratom and actually make very few mistakes.

</comment><comment><USER3> It's all about smoking the right blend at the right amount. Varying strains have different properties when imbued, so you have to choose carefully and not go overboard. You need to know what your smoking, the amounts by which to smoke it, etc.

I'd say that 90% of my staff smokes on the regular. I find the cognitive dissonance helps me abstract problems out much more quickly, as well as increases concentration and thoroughness when tackling an issue. I understand this is the opposite response one would naturally assume to occur, but it really is about what you are smoking and how much. If you smoke so much that you suffer from a round of derealization, then it's going to dampen your output. Also, it's about how regularly you smoke as well. The more you do it, the more skill you have in dealing with the high itself. If you don't smoke weed regularly, social or otherwise, the less capable you will be of being functional on it.

Naturally, it's not something I'd recommend doing every day, but it's certainly helped us more than hurt us at our particular company.

There are some negatives, but for me, the positives of smoking and coding far outweigh the negatives.

YMMV.

</comment><comment><USER4> It worked for me when I wrote GCC-CIL, and that was one of my most productive periods ever. I worked a 40 hour/wk job at a research lab and hacked on GCC- CIL on evenings and weekends, progressing so quickly that it freaked out my mentor. But this data point really means nothing... it's probably just an indication that you have to be either drugged or insane to hack GCC's internals without vomiting.

Overall, I don't recommend it. Do it every once in a while and you might have some cool ideas, but I bet you'll spend most of your time giggling and watching The Simpsons. I have not experimentally confirmed this, but apparently proper use of hallucinogens is the way to go for broadening perspective and etc. I'm personally interested in learning meditation techniques and seeing what sorts of effects that can have on the mind.

<comment><USER5> >you have to be either drugged or insane to hack GCC's internals

I think that it is really funny that this is a logical conclusion you made.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Ballmer Peak: <http://xkcd.com/323/>

</comment><comment><USER7> Kevin Herbert, a technical fellow at Cisco solves problems using LSD. He makes no secret of his use of the drug and is quite open about its contribution to his work.

See <http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/01/70015>

</comment><comment><USER8> It only helps with large regular expressions.

</comment><comment><USER9> IME, stimulants (xanthines, amphetamines, etc) in doses for which their effects are mild, tend to make me more productive while all other drugs (depressants, disassociatives, opiates and psychedelics) make me much less productive.

</comment><comment><USER10> Only on caffeine, though I have found that alcohol (number of drinks dependent on language) can help with debugging.

<comment><USER5> More or less drinks for functional/mostly-functional languages?

<comment><USER10> More for anything obnoxious like PHP or IE Javascript incompatibilities. Fewer for things that are hard, but not evil (including functional languages).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Weed makes me worse at doing anything that takes serious cognitive ability, except thinking of ideas -- but I need to wait until I am sober to actually evaluate the merit of said ideas. As far as coding, I have one friend who says he is great at coding while high and he is a terrible coder all around. I am hesitant to think that anyone is truly better at coding while high, because weed certainly impairs overall cognitive function, especially short term and working memory. However, I have corresponded with someone on this forum who has made something impressive and he says coding high sometimes lets him tackle problems that he has been stuck on for a while. But I really don't think he made most of his site while high.

Coding on Kratom, on the other hand...

<comment><USER11> Nice plug for your Kratom business ;-)

<comment><USER5> Kratom is a rare stimulant that makes you more productive. It is unfortunate that our culture chooses to only tolerate caffeine which makes you twitchy, and nicotine, which slowly kills you.

Kratom is currently neither a food, drug, or herbal supplement which puts it in a weird legal wasteland. Kratom is usually consumed as a tea. It is very palatable when sweetened with sugar and contains healthy anti-oxidants[1]. One of the active alkaloids of kratom, 7-hydroxy mitragynine is an incredibly strong opiate, 17 times as strong as morphine[2]. Kratom has been further tested as a drug on your average variety of small mammals. This study is on a guinea pig, where they didn't get the 17x number but concluded that 7-hydroxy- mitragynine is a dose dependant antinociceptive that is stronger than morphine.[3] They do a follow up study demonstrating cross tolerance with morphine. [4]

Erowid[5] is the authoritative list of studies[6] on the subject of kratom. You can read more than 50 personal experiences with kratom, mostly with regards to it as a recreational drug though some individuals there use it as a substitute for real opiates or to potentiate other drugs. Most of the negative experiences can be attributed to people incorrectly consuming kratom[7]. Kratom is properly consumed as a tea with lots of sugar and the extra kratom powder filtered out with a french press.

Kratom is completely legal everywhere except some of its native Southeast Asia: Thailand, Burma, and Malaysia, and Australia[8]. It is legally grown in Indonesia and India, though I haven't found any real Mitragyna Speciosa sold out of India. Most of the guys on Ali Baba are selling fake kratom, except PH. All of the kratom on the market comes from this mystery world landowner who owns dozens of legal drug plantations in all the continents. If anyone could undercut him for one of his major products, the second supplier would make a lot of money because a successful international kratom operation could source kratom 100 fold cheaper than PH. This would require you to grow your own kratom, in a warm, wet climate or travel to Indonesia and give people money to take you to the kratom, which would probably work. Unfortunately, I don't have any contacts in Indonesia or anywhere else where Kratom is legally grown. Maybe one of these days I can take a sourcing trip.

I'm not trying to push a drug here, I'm trying to tell the truth. This is a substance with a lot of potential and I would love to collaborate on research with anyone that is interested.

[1]The antioxidant alkaloids in Cats Claw ( [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db...](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=15649507) ) and Kratom ( <http://www.erowid.org/plants/kratom/kratom_journal2.shtml> ) are similar. I'll write up a comparison eventually but here are the raw sources for now.

[2]<http://www.thieme-connect.com/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-2005-837822>

[3][http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi...](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T99-4H40J48-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=215e6795bf74d94792757f1f32c8e3c5)

[4][http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi...](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T99-4H40J48-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=215e6795bf74d94792757f1f32c8e3c5)

[5]<http://www.erowid.org/plants/kratom/kratom.shtml>

[6]<http://www.erowid.org/plants/kratom/kratom_journal.shtml>

[7]<http://www.erowid.org/experiences/exp.php?ID=36154>

[8]<http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/drugs_concern/kratom.htm>

<comment><USER12> So, are you a major user yourself? Even caffeine, which I use out of weakness and necessity, I worry about. Subjectively, it seems like my increased focus and lack of tiredness comes at a cost to my higher intellectual functions. No objective proof of this, though subjectivity counts for something.

Has anyone here achieved good enough control over their body where they don't need this stuff? Have you found a significant difference between operating on and off drugs when going without sleep for long periods?

<comment><USER13> I strongly recommend naps! It doubles the daily time when I can hit a flow state while coding, which is when I produce my best code. In terms of coding, I find the cloud that comes from tiredness to be worth always avoiding. I do this because coding's not like moving lumber where you're just slower if you're tired. Instead you'll move the lumber to the wrong place! If I'm not at-peak, I dedicate that time to grunt-work, research, but not coding. My newest approach is personal "sprints" where I ignore all distractions, set a big goal and race at it for 1-2 hours.

<comment><USER14> einstein never slept, he only took naps several times a day.

<comment><USER4> [citation needed]

<comment><USER5> It's an urban legend. Einstein was not a polyphasic sleeper; he was a heavy sleepy.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyphasic_sleep#Urban_legends>

<comment><USER14> thanks for that correction, i 'learned' that in like the 8th grade, but only just now researched it when the citation was asked for...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I find I write my best code when I am extremely tired and working late into the night.

Mind you, I need to have a good idea in my head already of how I want to solve the problem, but I write a whole chunk of code often in one evening (or all nighter). When I write code and am entirely awake, I often get bored or distracted, or keep trying to rethink ways to solve the problem better.

I definitely can't code after a beer.

</comment><comment><USER16> Crap: This post, code produced while high, and all responses to this post (this response included).

</comment><comment><USER17> I never produced anything worthwhile while high back in my experimentation days. Having said that, coding while drunk, especially with other people, is quite enjoyable. It can be a bitch to debug though, all depending on how drunk you ended up getting.

</comment><comment><USER18> I've found that drinking a beer or two and coding with loosened inhibitions allows me to take on riskier approaches to solving problems. Things that might ordinarily seem too hard or like too much work seem less so.

</comment><comment><USER19> Say no to drugs.

</comment><comment><USER20> Did any one try programming on Modafinil?

<comment><USER21> I only tried it every single day for the last 6 months. Works for me.

<comment><USER5> I would be curious if you got it from a doctor or the internet, etc. Send me an email if you get a chance.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Lots of parentheses?

</comment><comment><USER23> Try for, winamp visualizations.</comment>


IDEA individual license - <AUTHOR> I love Intellij products. I inquired about buying their All Product license, and discovered that this license permits the use of one product at a time. So if I am in Intellij, and want to use AppCode, I have to exit Intellij first. And then exit Intellij to switch back to AppCode.
This seems nuts, so I've been going back and forth in email with a sales person. The goal is to prevent multiple users from using the same license. Which, of course, is not a concern for an individual developer license.
The sales person also said that individual developers actually do purchase multiple licenses due to the restriction. Can this possibly be right? Anyone out there do this? My current thought is to by AppCode and use the community edition of Intellij. <comment><USER2> I have both intellij (paid edition) and clion open right now.

<comment><AUTHOR> Corporate or individual license? If individual, how many licenses did you buy?

<comment><USER2> Individual, one license.</comment></comment></comment>


An old-school shell hack on a line printer - <AUTHOR> https://drewdevault.com/2019/10/30/Line-printer-shell-hack.html <comment><USER2> This is beautiful! Not enough tiny, pure hacks are done anymore.

[https://stallman.org/articles/on- hacking.html](https://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html)

 _The hacking community developed at MIT and some other universities in the 1960s and 1970s. Hacking included a wide range of activities, from writing software, to practical jokes, to exploring the roofs and tunnels of the MIT campus. Other activities, performed far from MIT and far from computers, also fit hackers ' idea of what hacking means: for instance, I think the controversial 1950s "musical piece" by John Cage, 4'33" (_ __ _), is more of a hack than a musical composition. The palindromic three-part piece written by Guillaume de Machaut in the 1300s, "Ma Fin Est Mon Commencement", was also a good hack, even better because it also sounds good as music. Puck appreciated hack value._

 _It is hard to write a simple definition of something as varied as hacking, but I think what these activities have in common is playfulness, cleverness, and exploration. Thus, hacking means exploring the limits of what is possible, in a spirit of playful cleverness. Activities that display playful cleverness have "hack value"._</comment>


Glass gets Connected to 200+ Services - <AUTHOR> https://zapier.com/blog/google-glass-gets-connected-200-services/

<comment><AUTHOR> I heard a concern about the quality of the integrations that you might be able to make with Zapier and Glass.

Integrations are of course limited to what can fit inside the "trigger/action" model. However, most of the first-party Glass apps take advantage of Glass in about the same way and you can't extend them like you can with Zapier.

Glass is also a bit limited in how you can consume content. Right now you can read content from Gmail (only one inbox), SMS, CNN, New York Times, and maybe a few others. With Zapier you can push any content you want to the device in any format and filtered in any way.

Some of my favorite use cases while building the integration:

1\. Take a photo on Glass -> Upload to Dropbox

2\. Send RSS headlines to Glass, when I "share" a headline and add a caption -> Send to Buffer

3\. Set up event reminders inside Google Calendar -> Send reminder to Glass when the event is about to start

All said, I'm super excited to see what others start building. Not just developers (we've had access to the Mirror API already) but what real users want to use Glass for.

Zapier users constantly blow me away with their creativity and given an open- ended device like Glass, I'm sure we'll see some super creative use cases.

<comment><USER2> Hey, I was trying to set this up. This looks really good. Sadly GitHub integration requires FULL GitHub account access with all permissions. So I skipped that one. I'm gonna try the RSS example in a bit...

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey there! You might try using Github webhooks with our "Webhook" service which enables you to be a little more granular on the Github end about what gets sent.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> This is a dream come true for law enforcement. People willingly filming everything and sending the data automatically to Google.

<comment><USER4> This can cut both ways. I've had two experiences where I saw police officers do things that would have gotten the department in trouble if it'd been videotaped.

So, it may be a dream for some enforcement and a nightmare for others.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Sounds nice. I've been trying to use IFTTT for similar things, but it's fairly limited. If you add feedly I'll sign up! I'm still trying to find a nice easy solution to save the full text of RSS items that I mark as "save for later" in feedly...

<comment><AUTHOR> I'd love to add Feedly. I've been waiting for their official API to drop then it should be a quick add.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> awesome</comment>


Why AppLovin was acquired for $1.4B and who's next - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@kevinleong789/why-applovin-was-acquired-for-1-4b-and-whos-next-39fccf04f51e#.ngilesku3 <comment><USER2> Chartboost is so widely adopted? I don't hear of them so much. That said, I know they are really big with games, so maybe if you dominate games, you sorta dominate

</comment><comment><USER3> I am surprised too that Mopub has slipped so much. It would be awesome to see a time series of all the SDK install base over time.

<comment><USER4> Twitter is the champ in snatching defeat from the jaws of victory

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Looking at the exits here, why do people say adtech is out of fashion. I mean, there are some really big exits here.

</comment><comment><USER6> This is great chart. If I was an acquirer that hasn't bought anyone, this is what I want to dig into

</comment><comment><USER4> Isn't the SDKs apples and oranges? I think some like Vungle are video ads and not display ads.

<comment><USER7> I think the point is they all serve ads

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> It would be great if you put how much they raised next the the exit column.

<comment><AUTHOR> Good point, I'll add it in a bit.</comment></comment>


Raspberry Pi Dramble - <AUTHOR> https://www.pidramble.com <comment><USER2> We've seen small Raspi clusters (especially for web hosting) frequently on HN, always as proof of concept. But does it really stand out? What about performance/(dollar spent on hardware) or (dollar spent on electricity)? How does it compare with an Intel NUC or an Atom/ITX Board?</comment>


ISO Rejects NSA Encryption Algorithms - <AUTHOR> https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2017/09/iso_rejects_nsa.html <comment><USER2> [https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/560.pdf](https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/560.pdf)

Notes on the design and analysis of Simon and Speck Ray Beaulieu Douglas Shors Jason Smith Stefan Treatman-Clark Bryan Weeks Louis Wingers June 8, 2017 Note. This document was prepared by the designers of Simon and Speck in order to address questions regarding the design rationale and analysis of the algorithms.</comment>