Flipper Zero – Tamagochi for Hackers - <AUTHOR> https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/flipper-devices/flipper-zero-tamagochi-for-hackers <comment><USER2> This thing is basically JC Denton's multikey mixed with his electric multitool thing.

Yes, I am channelling my inner Sheldon Cooper for needless pop culture references but this device is totally sweet and a perfect tool to assert dominance over you co-workers as "king nerd".

I really like it's Y2k aesthetic and this thing is totally feature packed! You've got yourself a backer @zhovner!

<comment><USER3> Sigh. And another backer here. :) I figured I'll inevitably need one of the radio features in the near future, and would kick myself for not having a Flipper or other convenient radio multi-tool at hand.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I was wondering what's the real duration of the battery.

Here on the diagram it's saying 30 days (which is awesome) \- [https://flipperzero.one/zero](https://flipperzero.one/zero)

But on the same diagram on kickstater it's saying 7 days only... -[https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/flipper- devices/flipper...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/flipper- devices/flipper-zero-tamagochi-for-hackers)

I'm really into this device but the [https://flipperzero.one/one](https://flipperzero.one/one) looks so more promising and having a raspberry inside open a whole new world of possibilities, mainly on wifi.

<comment><USER2> Dang they should've added one options to the kickstarter.

Well, I assume the reason they didn't is because the one model will require more R&D time. Presumably the zero was intended to be a cut down model they could easily bring to market to gauge interest (Which isn't so easy now that we're getting bluetooth and NFC!)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Hi, founder here. I'm glad you liked it.

<comment><USER6> May I ask you how you are going to declare them in shipment notification? Will it be "Flipper Zero" or "Hacker multitool", for example.

I'm worried to order one myself due to possible questions from authorities.

<comment><USER5> It will be something like "Electronic toy Flipper". This name we will try to use for certification.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> My latest obsession is to decipher any Japanese text I encounter, so for anyone curious フリッパー reads as "Furippā" \- Flipper.

</comment><comment><USER8> The people involved in this are great, I don't have an interest in that kind of tech but I sent over a small amount.

Support people doing hackerspaces!

</comment><comment><USER9> Already at $130k, at this rate it will get bluetooth and NFC as well.

<comment><USER10> Yes, not bad at all. I would back it too, if I could afford to.

What I wonder is, did they have a following from before, and that is how they were able to reach enough people to get to 200% of their goal in so short time? Or did it simply spread organically because of how awesome it is? The video was really good and convincing. I just always wonder this because I would like to do a Kickstarter for a project of my own some day maybe, but don't have any following so I think my project would not receive enough backers. But if it is possible to get backing without a pre-existing big group of followers then that is very encouraging.

Edit: Also, what's the name of the chiptune at the end of the video again? I've listened to that one many times before but can't remember what it was called.

<comment><AUTHOR> The folks behind the project did a lot of posts on design/development for the past year. Unfortunately mostly in Russian.

Here's reddit post in english from a while back: [https://www.reddit.com/r/TechNewsToday/comments/g4vkqf/flipp...](https://www.reddit.com/r/TechNewsToday/comments/g4vkqf/flipper_zero_tamagotchi_for_hacker/)

And here's pre-kickstarter post in russian, that kinda sums up everything that was posted before: [https://habr.com/ru/post/513074/](https://habr.com/ru/post/513074/)

Edit: and even here: [https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=flipperzero.one](https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=flipperzero.one)

<comment><USER11> Hey, let me know if anything unclear from automatic translation, I'll try to explain. (I'm not the founder just really like this concept)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Very well done marketing pitch. I am convinced.

Honestly, my biggest worry is that the gadget will stay in a drawer after a day or two.

</comment><comment><USER13> It's looks like a video game so that you can show it to police/your targets and they won't "get" what it is.

</comment><comment><USER14> There are so many things I like about this little device:

      - The promotional video is funny, it shows all the potential of the device.
      - The character is adorable, I really like that angry dolphin (am I a joke to you?).
      - The device is clearly inspired in those old 90s-ish electronics.
      - It is open source and expansible.

However, it is a bit pricey. Do not get me wrong. Although it could seem like a toy, there is a lot of work behind this tiny device. Congratulations to the team behind the project, from graphical designers that created a wonderful and funny dolphin to developers that created a great device for hacking.

</comment><comment><USER15> Amazing launch, congratz to Pavel and the team!

I really like that it's extensible, has a battery and contains so much features for a compact device. Great multi-tool for me as a maker / hardware/software developer.

<comment><USER16> If you want to build something similar, this seems like a good place to start: [https://hackaday.io/project/169103-low-power- esp32-handheld](https://hackaday.io/project/169103-low-power-esp32-handheld)

<comment><USER15> That's pretty cool! I also backed Flipper Zero so hopefully will have the device in feb 2021 :D

</comment></comment></comment><comment> arc-in-space This seems way too cool, and I'm not even particularly interested in these kinds of hacking areas, but I'll be sure to follow this project and I'll consider backing.

</comment><comment><USER17> The LCD is orange [lit] in the mockups but is that a design requirement? Some of the technical images show it as the default "LCD green-grayish" color.

<comment><USER18> Looks to be the Sharp "Memory" LCDs. They're highly reflective so don't require backlights like traditional LCDs. Think e-ink. So any colour LED can be used as embellishment, including orange.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> My major takeaway from Johnny Mnemonic was the efficacy of cybernetic hacker dolphins, so I can tell this is going to be successful.

</comment><comment><USER20> Does this device have any security features? It opens garage doors, acts as a 2FA key, etc, etc. I wouldn't put any of my own data on this thing unless I could lock it somehow, but it doesn't look like it's designed for that.

Other than that it looks really fun!

</comment><comment><USER21> > Out of the box, Flipper Zero can emulate remotes for popular garage doors > and barriers. You can keep hundreds of remotes in Flipper's memory as well > as create a blank remote for the new wireless gate.

I'm struggling to find an honest use for this.

<comment><USER22> Easy. I'm already envisioning all the ways this device could make my life easier. I would no longer have to juggle RFID keys to multiple clients' premises. I can lock and unlock my 1994 BMW that uses a long obsolete RF keyless entry system that is difficult to obtain replacement keys for. I can adjust my RF controlled lighting system at home without having to dig for the remote. So much of the world runs on RF that having a device that can speak to everything is invaluable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> So, why buy this v. s. building a pwnagatchi? Am I just missing the use case. difference?

<comment><USER24> From the page:

Flipper was inspired by the pwnagotchi project. However, unlike all the other DIY boards for hackers, it's designed with the convenience of everyday usage in mind. Flipper has a robust case, handy buttons and shape, and none of these dirty PCBs and scratchy pins.

<comment><USER25> > ...and scratchy pins.

mmmm, scratchy pins... Though there's nothing like a DIP-16 chip biting into your heel...

Maybe that's why I prefer QFN chips nowadays ))

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Please don't be fake. Please don't be fake.

Deciding between 1, 2, or 3... Really it depends if I can use these with the new garage door openers made in the past 5 years.

<comment><USER27> I was following the founder on the Telegram for last year – definitely not fake.

[https://t.me/zhovner_hub](https://t.me/zhovner_hub)

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Well I think this will be my first kickstarter participation. The novelty of changing channels on a public set is alone worth the price for entry.

</comment><comment><USER29> What's the story behind the R25 stack?

Roadmap says DFM was last month, so hazarding a guess that this won't find its way into v3 release?

</comment><comment><USER30> My allowance I give myself is spent, but if this comes to market I will definitely be buying when I get my allowance back haha

</comment><comment><USER31> Loved the concept and the promotional video is amazing! Now i just want it to arrive. Backed!

</comment><comment><USER32> This looks great fun! As a child I loved my red tamogotchi and carried it everywhere. Backed!

</comment><comment><USER33> This looks awesome! Just backed - very excited for February!</comment>


Ask HN: What is the best way to target restaurants and small businesses? - <AUTHOR> Hello,
We are a chatbot startup, targeting restaurants and other small businesses, brick and mortar that might be affected by covid19.
What is the best way to target these businesses, specially that many of them are closing down? We want to help them sell through our delivery system. <comment><USER2> Almost every brick and mortar company's website includes a phone number.

Call 5 of them and order a meal, when you pick it up ask to talk to the manager for a minute.

Elevator pitch: you've got 5-10 seconds to get them to ask for more time.

 _"When I was ordering food I noticed that I couldn't prepay online, I almost thought of going somewhere else, how come you don't have a way to pay before coming in?"_

 _"Don't know how to do that"_

 _"I built a plugin that takes 5-10 mins to set up and people can pay while they order so I don't have to come inside, can we do a Skype call when you're not busy to walk through this?"_

Once you've gotten a handful of trials like this you can start calling but your options with restaurants(especially mom and pop) are to walk in the door or get to them directly on the phone.

<comment><USER3> Restaurant owners: Oh, we have thought of it, many guys comes in and invite us just like you. But at the moment, we're unable to use it. Maybe sometime in the future.

P/s: there is another they won't tell

<comment><USER2> If I heard that objection I'd record a video of me ordering from a competitor down the street compared to placing an order with the prospect.

Showing the prospect how easy it is in some situations against reality is a good way to highlight a real pain point.

Prospects tend to fall into three categories: [1] they'll buy no matter what you do, [2] they won't buy no matter what you do or [3] they'll buy depending on how you sell to them.

Many prospects feel they're in group 2 but if you can outline how your solution solves a problem or provides an opportunity, many of those group 2's will change their tune. The hard part is keeping their attention so you've got to get to value quickly, making it personal is just as important IMO.

<comment><USER3> You're theoretically right. But figuring out the actual pain points that the store owner doesn't see is hard. You might need to observe for sometime of time.

In your case, when people ordering from a different store. Well, it might convince the new restaurant. But old ones will say not in their area, and they're fine with that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Shoeleather

Like a lot of the comments here hint at, most of these places do t care at all to be up to trend on the latest plug-in integrated junk.

They could probably use a hand with making their product easier to buy, but the margins are tight and no one wants another Yelp.

Show them how you're going to help them make more sales, or pay less on fees for the sales they make.

Or just enjoy your sandwich.

Not everyone needs ML/NLP/freespace/Kubernetes/feature flags (Bingo!), but they'd probably benefit from using Stripe

</comment><comment><USER5> Has anyone ever interacted with a chat bot to which they did not just type "agent" until they got a human?

<comment><USER6> I have. I typically type "representative" until I got a human.

<comment><USER7> Swiggy (a deliver app in India) has very nice bot feature for handling most of the queries.

You don't have to type but select from bunch of choices and then the bot automatically does the needful.

Examples

Report an item is missing from the order. The bot pops ups the list - asks the user to select which item is missing - refunds automatically.

for most use cases I would rather have the bot do the work for me than having to talk to a rep.

<comment><USER8> That's even worse because you have to squirm through seven variations of the same question to get to a live person.

It's like chutes and ladders with the wrong answer taking you back to the start of the bot time waste loop.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Please understand that these companies are often promised the (tech) moon yet rarely get tech that delivers. The are not, as HN seems to think, lazy or dumb but rather short on cash, now more than ever.

</comment><comment><USER10> Phone & Face2Face

Everybody wants to sell them something, and they have very, very slim margins. So they ignore most of it. Have a good pitch ready. Don't expect that they have low-level access or even content access to their sites. Prove your value to them For free. Deliver. Upsell to paid.

</comment><comment><USER11> Not a great time to try selling to SMBs and restaurants, many of which are already on life support or just barely holding on. Try to find another industry that could benefit from the product and still has money to spend.

</comment><comment><USER12> 1\. Yellow pages or equivalent. 2\. Maps software. Simply search for restaurants within a geographic area. 3\. Coupon mailers. You can subscribe to these and get a ton of info about local small businesses.

</comment><comment><USER13> Start local, check your business district and/or chamber of commerce. Depending on your state (assuming US-based) also restaurant groups like frla.org. You can also try to target other companies thay already have large restaurant customer bases, but then you become a SKU in their offerings. It may be more about lead genertion than anything else.

Source: spent the last 5 years doing SaaS where one of the verticals is restaurants. I'm on the tech/product side, but some of these are things we've looked at for marketing and finding leads.

</comment><comment><USER14> It seems like they are probably out there searching for ways to get cash to survive, so maybe figure out if you can make either of these statements work:

"Our chatbot will help you find people who want to buy your toilet paper, raw ingredients, and cleaning supplies"

"We will pay you a signing bonus if you commit to doing X, Y, and Z"

Naturally, this is only a speculation, I've never run a brick and mortar chatbot business.

</comment><comment><USER15> Out of curiosity, does anyone even go to a restaurant's actual website anymore?

I personally go straight to DoorDash or GrubHub to find my desired restaurant, or something like Yelp or Zomato if need be.

<comment><USER16> I spent 7 years (ending late 2018) as the web developer at an agency that did branding & design for local restaurants. Unfortunately I don't have access to any of the analytics accounts anymore to give actual numbers -- but I can say that yes, people do go to the websites.

If you're just looking for hours and address you can get that via search (especially on mobile), but a properly-developed website will also provide sub-navigation in Google results for menus, contact info, events, etc.

Menus were also a big part of it. Dropping a PDF (or worse, a JPEG) of a menu onto a website sucks for usability. The sites used responsive design to lay out the menus in a way that was actually readable, and my CMS made it easy for the chef/manager to update on a regular basis. The menu pages were highly popular among first-time site visitors.

For restaurants that host private parties (larger or more complicated than what OpenTable & company will handle), the website was the primary way that people contacted them to start the reservation process. Many more people did that than message on Facebook.

Gift cards around the holiday seasons (mother's/father's day, graduation, December holidays) are also particularly popular.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Yelp has a massive team of sales folk that calls local businesses.</comment>


The Microwave Plasma Mystery (2019) - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0u8Vtf2GoQ <comment><AUTHOR> Most microwave plasma videos on youtube (i.e., grapes) show microwave plasma being created via some method, and then, almost as quickly, being dissipated.

This microwave plasma video is different, because its author is trying to figure out _how to get the microwave plasma to persist_ , and the causative factors behind it persisting or not persisting...

The video is a bit long at close to 28 minutes, but it's worth a look if you're interested in cheaply, easily produced plasma...</comment>


Data roaming charges to end in EU within two years - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-33325031

<comment><USER2> The problem with these sorts of legislature as I've experienced is that while the theory seems quite appealing it never really works as you would expect.

Canada did a similar thing a couple years ago. The CRTC imposed a law where an individual could only incur a maximum of $50 in data overage charges locally, and $100 when roaming.

I was ecstatic when this was announced. And then one month I went over on data by $50. And then my data was cut off until I bought a "pack".

So yes, your phone bill will be unsurprising at the end of the month, but now your carrier will expect you to purchase a bucket of "roaming data" in the form of an add-on or package to your regular phone plan so that you can post your selfies with the Eiffel Tower in real time.

<comment><USER3> That's still better than the horror stories you hear about people who went abroad with a torrent client running in the background of their tablet and rack up thousands in charges.

I would say that cutting of the data would be "expected behavior" as far as I am concerned.</comment></comment>


Gulp is awesome, but do we really need it for our SPAs? - <AUTHOR> http://gon.to/2015/02/26/gulp-is-awesome-but-do-we-really-need-it/

<comment><USER2> This makes sense but if you are using Gulp for legit reasons with certain projects there is something to be said for doing it for all your projects just to keep things consistent.

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't know if I'd still do it for consitency. If I'm using mostly the same CLI tools, there's no much to learn and less code to mantain.

I'd stil not use Gulp if it's not really neded, which in most cases isn't to be honest!

You'd just do it for consistency when calling gulp watch or gulp build?

<comment><USER2> For some of my projects the build process is pretty complex and gulp provides true value. However, after thinking about it more you could alway standardize on build through package.json script and if gulp was needed you have package.json refer to the gulp build.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's true, and just call gulp from package.json :)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


How much would $1.50 in 1945 be worth today? - <AUTHOR> http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%241.50+1945+today <comment><USER3> If you had $1.50 in 1945 and held it until today, you'd have $1.50. Problem is, in 1945 it would have bought you lunch for a week, and today it would buy you one miniature fast food hamburger.

My parents tell me tales of my great grandparents who didn't trust the banks and probably buried money in the yard near where I live. If they buried it in cash, well, it wouldn't be a very impressive sum today.

That same $1.50 invested at 3%, you'd have... $12.22 today. A little better, but inflation's still pretty rough. You'd have been better off buying that pair of overalls in 1945.

Now, $1.50 worth of gold in 1945 would be worth $57-ish today, so if my great grandparents didn't trust the greenback either, then that theoretical coffee can is worth something. But don't take that as investment advice; the dollar price of gold went through the roof when the dollar was taken off the gold standard (go figure) and that's not going to happen twice.

<comment><USER4> My wife's grandad left her some cash as an inheritance. It was only something around 20k. But he saved diligently for his grandkids for years and year even before they were born. I wonder if at the time it was a decent savings but just destroyed by inflation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Even better: the half-cent was last minted in 1857 so:

        $us0.005 1857 today

        14.04¢ (2014 US dollars)

So the half-cent was worth more than a dime when it was eliminated, and the penny (new smallest denomination) was worth more than a quarter. We could simplify our currency by eliminating all coins smaller than a quarter and have currency in similar resolution to 1857.

</comment><comment><USER6> I get the query "$1.50 1945 today" with no answer. What am I supposed to see?

<comment><USER7> Change it to $1.50usd 1945 today to see what the OP expected you to see.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Fix: $1.50 USD 1945 today

The problem with this query is, wolframalpha auto detects location and uses the $ currency (if available) in that country. So it only really works in the states, and maybe countries that don't have a $ currency.

</comment><comment><USER9> $1.50 in 1785 (when US dollars were issued) [http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%241.50+1785+today](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%241.50+1785+today)

<comment><USER10> I was more surprised at the lack of inflation (about the same between 1785 and 1945 and 1945 and now).

<comment><USER11> Interestingly, the period after 1945 coincides with the explosive growth in computing performance, according to William Nordhaus of Yale University in a 2002 study entitled The _Progress of Computing_ [1].

Nordhaus documents computer performance improvements on the order of 1 trillon to 5 trillion times "...in constant dollars or in terms of labor units since 1900." During that period, Nordhaus notes that "...there were relatively small improvements in efficiency (perhaps a factor of ten) in the century before World War II. Around World War II, however, there was a substantial acceleration in productivity, and the growth in computer power from 1940 to 2002 has averaged close to 50 percent per year."

Automation really picked up in industry in the period since 1970, which has seen relatively stagnant wages for most of the working population.

[1] [http://nordhaus.econ.yale.edu/prog_030402_all.pdf](http://nordhaus.econ.yale.edu/prog_030402_all.pdf)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> The more interesting result is that what was "worth" $1.00 in 1945 is "worth" $13.20 today. Of course a nice family car was $1,500 in 1945, which would be $19,800 today, except you can't buy a nice family car for $19,800 today. Its quite useful to compare things like "how many hours of labor bought you car?" or what percentage of your production went to feeding your family. That is when you start looking at whether or not people are better or worse off than they were in 1945.

</comment><comment><USER13> I remember reading a Time magazine article about inflation around 1980 when I was at university. I remember it projected to the not too distant future (maybe to 2000?) and said, and I quote because it stuck in my mind; "We'll probably all make $100,000 then, but the downside will be that a candy bar will probably cost a whole dollar". I think of it whenever I buy a confectionary item, invariably for multiple dollars.

</comment><comment><USER14> I've come to believe that inflation is the least-understood concept in personal finance. The fact that this is on the HN homepage seems like evidence supporting that.

</comment><comment><USER15> for anyone using it outside the US try "$us1.50 1945 today" or it will attempting this with your local currency and there will probably be no data

<comment><USER16> It interpreted it as 1.50 CAD * 1945 and I briefly panicked.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> It's interesting. I'd like to see more countries. How about _¥1 1980 today_ ?

<comment><USER17> I haven't looked for others but Australia has a convenient calculator: [http://www.rba.gov.au/calculator/annualPreDecimal.html](http://www.rba.gov.au/calculator/annualPreDecimal.html)

<comment><USER18> 1 pound 10 shillings in 1945 (which would convert to $1.50 in 1965 with the changeover to decimal) becomes $98.74 in 2013. Ouch!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> The US had no net inflation from 1800-1914, and endemic inflation ever since.

<comment><USER20> And thus William Jennings Bryan's famous Cross of Gold speech: "You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns; you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold."

The gold standard meant that there was no ability to increase the monetary base (and thus no inflation!) at that time (1890s), causing much bitterness among populists.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> That's a pretty lousy rate of return for inventing time travel really.

The normal way one calculates this is by buying power of those dollars - <USER2> could you buy then and what would it cost now.

But really I could have bought a Sub-Mariner comics #15 in mint condition, and it would be worth quite a bit more today.

</comment><comment><USER22> I get:

Assuming Hong Kong dollars for "$"

HK$1.50 (Hong Kong dollars) to | today

(no exchange data available)

<comment><USER23> Change it to $1.50usd 1945 today to see what the OP expected you to see.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Inflation is very powerful. I always feel like people don't think about it in enough detail. For example, the year that your dollars were worth twice what they are now? That would be the long-ago time of ... 1988. Did you learn your general sense for how much "20 dollars" is in the '80s? Doesn't "40 dollars" just _sound_ like more, somehow? I wonder how many people mentally account for just how elastic nominal amounts are.

<comment><USER5> I know, and you rarely see a $50 (in fact many places will refuse to take notes larger than $20) despite the fact that $20 notes were common in the 80s and a $50 is similarly valued now.

<comment><USER25> To be fair, credit cards* are much more common now than they were in the 80s. Cash is mostly a back-up medium.

* or Eftpos cards, if you're in Australia or New Zealand.

<comment><USER5> Naturally. My grandfater did business meetings in NYC, and a lot of restaurants even didn't take charge cards (credit cards weren't even a blip on the radar). He would probably bring a few thousand dollars in cash with him on those trips.

I can't imagine carrying that much cash, even before the bump for inflation!</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Why are we still using passwords? - <AUTHOR> It has been a while since I windows introduced login with fingertip. iPhone also uses fingertip for unlocking.
While the possibility of using facebook/twitter/google/github login in multiple services decreased the need to create more logins/passwords we still have a huge number of logins.
Besides that, the password may easily be guessed/stolen. Even with 2 factor in some services (like github and google), recovery codes exist and can be stolen.
And about fingertip? Why is not being implemented? Why can't I login with my fingertip on email, facebook, HN, or whatever? And I don't remind of having read that some big IT player intends to implement it.
Is it due to security issues on saving a fingertip to a database? I find it hard to believe that it is impossible to implement some protocol to prevent that... <comment><USER2> Most fingerprint readers are not that hard to beat. Also, you can't change your fingertip: If _one_ service/device looses to much details about them or someone obtains your prints, everything is compromised. At least with a password, you can change it and be safe again.

<comment><AUTHOR> well, we have 10 fingers...</comment></comment>


Remote Code Exec/Remote DOS in All Linux Kernels Before 5.08 - <AUTHOR> https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-11815 <comment><AUTHOR> The good news is that the fix appears to be one line of C, so backporting to older kernels should be as simple as these things ever are.</comment>


Show HN: Sombras.app, toy to play with shadows and 3D, TensorFlow logo style - <AUTHOR> https://sombras.app <comment><AUTHOR> I really liked the original Tensorflow logo and wanted to make a generator for graphics like that.

You can select which shadows to cast, the color of the lights and a 3D object is generated for you. The app can export images and be shared and generate a thumbnail with the design.

I made this app to test `react-three-fiber` and `useCannon`.

<comment><USER2> Beautiful!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> very cool!</comment>


Workflows and Shortcuts for developers – Part 1 - <AUTHOR> https://darmalovan.dev/2020/05/workflows-shortcuts-for-developers-part-1/ <comment><USER2> Loved this post!</comment>


Daily things to do as entrepreneurs (week 13): How to turn ideas into products - <AUTHOR> http://2above.com/entrepreneurship/daily-things-to-do-as-entrepreneurs-week-13-become-your-own-product-manager-with-examples/ <comment><AUTHOR> For first time starters (according to 37 signals book "rework"), a few tips about turning ideas into products.</comment>


Ask HN: What's a Good Heuristic for Life? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Trust but verify.

This is vital enough in CS/engineering but also in life. U can't do it for everything but at least for the things that matter to you or things that you can do it for cheaply (time/effort) and can yield greater results.

      - Back up plans
      - Disaster plans
      - Legal/financial
      - Second opinion for doctors

</comment><comment><USER3> "Run in the opposite direction of the explosions."

If you're into this kind of thing try reading _Simple Rules_ by Donald Sull & Kathleen Eisenhardt.

</comment><comment><USER4> happy wife, happy life.</comment>


Ask HN: "Rockstar" job listings, yay or nay? - <AUTHOR> Is the use of the term "rockstar" by the "average/generic small business, corporate department or other software shop" in a job listing generally appropriate?
Do you find it to be an overused, dead, beaten horse of a meme? Do you find it's often overused and abused by non-technical hiring personnel? Do you find it's often used in lieu of appropriate title and/or compensation?
Do you find that it automatically prejudices you against a job listing?
Do you use the term rockstar in your own job listings? If so, where do you see your startup or shop on the scale of gee whiz hotness? <comment><USER2> I always groan when I see it in job listings. The handful of real "rockstar" programmers don't need to scan job boards.

I'm guessing what you're likely to attract with this kind of post is a lot of arrogant code cowboys that don't play well with others.

<comment><USER3> > The handful of real "rockstar" programmers don't need to scan job boards.

The handful of _connected_ real "rockstar" programmers don't need to scan job boards. One could be a completely awesome programmer at a company which does not realize his/her potential and could be looking for a new job. Of course, mentioning the word "rockstar" doesn't really mean anything if the pay/benefits are no different from average. My point is not every rockstar programmer has a fan-following, famous blog, and tons of open-source projects. Corollary, not every programmer with a fan-following, famous blog, and tons of open-source projects is a rockstar.

<comment><USER4> _not every rockstar programmer has a fan-following, famous blog, and tons of open-source projects_

This is a problem with the term. 'Rockstar' has pretty strong connotations of fame and confidence. 'Rockstar toiling in obscurity' or 'underappreciated rockstar' are contradictions in terms.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> If they let me show up with massive hangovers, allow me to drink at work, don't care that I smoke inside and miss half of my deadlines. Sure. Otherwise, stop fucking using that term.

Great thing I'm my own boss, I guess.

</comment><comment><USER6> I got a rockstar job offer from some time ago.

I responded to the recruiter to ask if drugs, groupies and obscene amounts of alcohol were involved. And also if I could destroy a hotel room or two.

I then explained to them that there is nothing rockstar about software development and that I would rather be approached in a more professional way.

I quickly got a followup email back from the recruiter's boss saying that they made up the rockstar bit and that the client had nothing to do with it. He did apologize and said he would love to have a serious talk.

</comment><comment><USER7> I wrote about it at length here: [http://thesethings.posterous.com/rapping- grandmas-and-ninja-...](http://thesethings.posterous.com/rapping-grandmas-and- ninja-rockstar-fatigue)

Short version: It was initially a helpful construct to suggest that:

* Your potential place of work was not stuffy. That the applicant could seek relief from their horrible bank job. (This signal is now false given that boring bank jobs say "rockstar." :D )

* The applicant will be respected and treated well (like a rockstar), not a codemonkey.

Nowadays, "rockstar" implies the applicant must be all-skilled, all-talented, with no burden on the potential place of work to live up to anything suggested by use of the word :)

</comment><comment><USER8> I think the alleged appeal of a job listed as being "for rockstars" is a certain amount of automatic respect once you get there. No one wants to go and be some day trader's or insurance adjuster's software lackey, so the idea of being the 'star' of the company is very appealing.

The problem is that this is inherently completely bullshit. Most companies are driven by sales of a service or non-software product, which makes you less important than the people directly responsible for making and selling the product. Even if you're a developer centric company, there are so many 'stars' that there are none, so it's more like being part of the choir that accompanies a rock band (every 10 years or so, when that's cool again). It's pretty nice, but you're certainly going to be held accountable for destroying your hotel room.

In my opinion, the _only_ things that can be appealing about a job listing are technologies used (if they're telling the truth and not just spitting out buzzwords) and location.

On the flip side, if you want me to think your culture is cool and fun (as the 'rockstar' listing aims to do), you have to make sure that every person I meet from your company (or a vast majority) are cool and fun. Otherwise, no amount of buzzwords is going to attract me to your position.

<comment><USER6> "I think the alleged appeal of a job listed as being "for rockstars" is a certain amount of automatic respect once you get there. No one wants to go and be some day trader's or insurance adjuster's software lackey, so the idea of being the 'star' of the company is very appealing."

It does sound appealing. But then you quickly become part of crazy meetings, changing priorities, deadlines, 'agile' planning, dealing with other teams that are less rock-band-like and other stuff that gets in the way of rockstar habits.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> The use of "Rockstar" reeks of self-importance on the part of the hiring company - obnoxious. I've seen it so many times it motivated me to write the following Job Ad:

[http://blog.submitmy.info/2010/02/wanted-the-worlds-best- can...](http://blog.submitmy.info/2010/02/wanted-the-worlds-best-candidate/)

</comment><comment><USER10> I personally find it to be slightly negative because a) The job ads where I initially saw it about 2-3 years ago were generally for rockstar interns ready to work in a microscopic paycheck. aka - everyone here at McFranchise is a manager but gets paid minimum wage. b) It is now used by companies like Intel. Any company who wants to hire a rockstar and insists on doing a background + drug test is not cool in my book.

</comment><comment> brown9-2 Personally I find that using the words "rockstar" or "ninja" makes the company that placed the ad sound like a bunch of immature amateurs.

<comment><USER11> Whenever I see such an ad, all I can think of is this:

<http://bit.ly/XosCo>

<comment><USER12> Since this is not Twitter, here's the actual URL of the above link: [http://johnstamosfever.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/ninjas- an...](http://johnstamosfever.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/ninjas-and- guitars.jpg)

<comment><USER13> Nice 404 you have there.

<comment><USER14> I get a nice 200 OK. Maybe someone has installed a ninja-filter in your firewall?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I think that this phrase was moderately useful when it first appeared, as it indicated both a certain level of respect for the skills involved and a relaxed work environment. Unfortunately, it also became useless almost immediately afterwards due to companies jumping on the "We're cool too!" bandwagon.

My question is, are there other ways of indicating those qualities that won't be immediately copied by the "uncool" companies?

</comment><comment><USER16> When I see a job posting looking for a "rock star" I immediately think "OK, but are you willing to _pay_ for a rock star?" If the ad indicates that they are looking for skills way above average, they better be willing to pay way above average. Otherwise, it seems to me they either aren't sincere or are only really looking for a bargain.

</comment><comment><USER17> In Lake Wobegon, all children are above average.

In the bay area, all programmers are rock stars.

</comment><comment><USER18> I don't like to see such colloquialisms in job postings, but as someone who has done a fair amount of hiring in my career, I also don't want to see them on resumes or CVs unless you've worked for Rockstar Games or real Rockstars.

</comment><comment><USER19> I wonder if these listings ever come with "rockstar" salaries. I doubt that the people who use this term is even prepared to offer 2x market rate.

</comment><comment><USER20> I'm not a fan, but that's because it's overused. I feel the same way about "Ninja," although it does seem more appropriate for Software Development jobs.

One term from a job posting that I really liked was "best available athlete." It was for a business development type job, and it said to me that they were looking for talent over experience. Unfortunately, it turned out that they were looking for someone who could take on an entry level job at the company while also filling in for their soon to leave admin.

I guess the best way to determine what terms are effective an which are overused is to split test them somehow. Someone should build that kind of functionality into an Applicant Tracking System.

</comment><comment><USER21> Put it another way: are you a rockstar business? If not, why would a rockstar want to work for you?

Do rockstars even have jobs? Probably they do in a way, but I could imagine that they don't see themselves as people who have jobs.

</comment><comment><USER22> Well it's definitely becoming more common in job listings to say the least:

[http://www.indeed.com/jobtrends?q=rockstar&l=](http://www.indeed.com/jobtrends?q=rockstar&l=)

</comment><comment><USER23> It definitely turns me off to a job. But then maybe I'm just not a rockstar.

</comment><comment><USER24> I find it ambiguous, but on the whole probably a good sign. A negative part is that it appeals to the needy ego. A postive aspect is that it maybe signals a knowledge of the Spolsky school of management, which is a clear improvement over average companies.

But it's not as informative as other signs. For example, programming language choices and transparency. In this regard, the most impressive company I know is Relevance:

<http://thinkrelevance.com/>

Other good companies include Freiheit and RethinkDB:

<http://www.freiheit.com/tag/Jobs> (note the google translator)

<http://rethinkdb.com/jobs/>

</comment><comment><USER25> I am almost guaranteed to read the post if it has something like that, whereas I sometimes skip ones like "Application Developer II" or something lame like that. It's usually obvious from the rest of the post whether it's a phony HR ploy or a company truly searching for top talent (most of the time). And if so, I know that 1) they are willing to pay well, and 2) I'm going to get to work with other smart people. Sure, it's a cliche and sometimes abused, but so are lots of words, like agile, lean, software craftsman, etc. Just bc someone says it, I don't trust it 100%, but it's still sometimes useful to use it to convey an idea in a single word.

</comment><comment><USER26> I think it's appropriate in terms of describing an _attitude_ , but it is not so great at describing skills. "Ninja", "rockstar", "guru" and such tell me that they want somebody to show up who doesn't feel stress and is able to make the tough decisions needed to be made to make the thing happen. It also means you're willing to put up with a bit of cowboy mentality in return for exceptional performance.

Doesn't mean that the programmer is worth a damn. That's a different question. Confusion results when you confuse what's being said.

It also doesn't mean that a rockstar programmer is what you really need. But that's also a different question.

</comment><comment><USER27> I think the actual position almost never lives up to such a breathless description.

Back when the economy was a bit more dire, I interviewed with a place that called itself "funky", with a team of "ninjas".

Turned out to be an accountancy software house with some typical line of business apps that needed to be ported to the web because a local web startup was eating them up for breakfast and converting their customers like crazy.

</comment><comment><USER28> I hate the idea of the term "Rockstar," (or "Ninja") because it implies that by just showing up, you've already done your part; by extension, it implies that you don't need to improve.

I'd much rather see a job ad looking for a "Software Samurai," already possessed of great competency, but eager to learn new tricks and improve himself as a developer.

</comment><comment><USER29> Anyone here have advice for those non-technical people who know they need a great programmer on their team?

<comment><AUTHOR> Get someone -- a friend, a consultant -- with domain knowledge and preferably hiring experience to help write your listing, screen and interview your candidates. Make sure your qualifications are spot-on, well-targeted and appropriately descriptive.

<comment><USER30> In addition to this good advice, make sure you give some indication of what makes your project interesting _to the programmer_. Only another good programmer can tell you what this is.

If it's not an interesting project, getting a good programmer to jump on it will be hard.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I'd never respond for an ad looking for a "Ninja" because I'm a software "Pirate" and we're natural enemies.

</comment><comment><USER32> If you are shooting for the kind of people who aspire to be rockstars (i.e. teenagers, mostly?), why not?

<comment><AUTHOR> That's just it -- many of these listings are misnomers, targeting the naive and/or desperate. Why beat that horse any more than it already has been if it's not even an accurate use of the term?

<comment><USER33> That might be a little harsh. I suspect that what's going on is that rather than _targeting_ the naive or desperate, it's naive HR folks that think they're "getting into our heads" or "speaking our language".

It's sort of like a parent that really wants to be cool telling their kids that they really like those "Limp Biscuit" fellows - it's not that the sentiment is entirely unappreciated, but the attempt is so misguided and cheap that it's a bigger turnoff than if they'd just embraced their un-coolness to begin with.

<comment><USER34> Yeah, after a few weeks of a clueless founder, and surrounded by our fellow 'agile' and 'rockstar' programmers, you might be longing for reassuringly foosball-free break-room, and the steady whir and click as the TPS reports roll into the out-tray of the HP. Mmm. Kay.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Take a look at this posting on Quora for a related discussion: [http://www.quora.com/Do-the-terms-ninja-and-rockstar-come- of...](http://www.quora.com/Do-the-terms-ninja-and-rockstar-come-off-as- patronizing-in-job-postings)

The general sentiment is that it is neo-corporate and shows a lack of understanding and lack of concern about substance of candidates.

</comment><comment><USER36> For me "Rockstar" is now a shibboleth.

If you have to call yourself, your company, your product or your programmers "rockstars" then none of you are real rockstars. If you have to ask "what's different about rockstar's lifestyles compared to the small people?" then you definitely have no idea what you're even talking about.

It's just like being called a "hacker", or a "gangster" or similar. You either have legit street cred, and thereby are automatically included amongst an elite, meritocratic subculture, or you don't.

<comment><USER37> and if you're posting on a site called "hacker news", you are not a "hacker".

Even people who wrote an single excel script call themselves hackers here (and are defended for it! I've seen it happen)

EDIT: At this point in my life I'd be embarrassed to be called a hacker. So I don't feel ashamed being an impostor here.

<comment><USER38> I'm not sure you deserved to be down-voted because it's a legitimate question.

Fortunately I don't think that anyone has tried to claim that posting to HN makes you a hacker. It's (news (of interest for hackers)) rather than (news of interest (for hackers)). So posting doesn't mean you are claiming to be a hacker, just that you are interested in the stuff hackers are interested in.

By the way in my view some of the most interesting hacks are done in Excel (for example the guy who wrote an Excel 3D engine - [http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3563/microsoft_excel_r...](http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3563/microsoft_excel_revolutionary_3d_.php) \- no one can seriously claim that this isn't a hack in the best sense of the word.) Making constrained systems do things they were never designed to do is practically the definition of hacking.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> I maintain a blacklist of recruiters who annoy me. Mostly it's the ones who call me up repeatedly, or who call me about ridiculously bad fits. However, I also keep a special section in that black list for any recruiter that uses the term "Rock Star" or "Ninja", and I openly mock the companies who use the term. I also find smugness later on when they fail, because they clearly were prima donnas trying to attract other prima donnas.</comment>


Jerks and the Startups They Ruin - <AUTHOR> https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/01/opinion/sunday/jerks-and-the-start-ups-they-ruin.html <comment><USER2> This is basically a more serious riff on Dan Lyon's 'Disrupted' \-- and having read that book, I'm a little disappointed in this editorial as it doesn't bring anything particular new to this (Uber) discussion.

His previous book, with its first-person descriptions of life inside Hubspot rang _eerily_ true to me as a late-30s employee at a Bay-area unicorn, and has caused me to re-evaluate a lot of things around me. Disrupted is hilarious, depressing, and fucking spot-on.</comment>


Beek (YC W16) is the emoji-based book review site aiming to change e-commerce - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2017/03/14/beek-is-the-emoji-based-book-review-site-you-never-knew-you-needed/ <comment><USER2> I want to understand the idea of rating a book throughout while reading it but I'm not sure that I do. Maybe it's analogous to how SoundCloud lets you leave comments throughout various points in a song.</comment>


Less Framework 3 Released (css media query framework) - <AUTHOR> http://lessframework.com/#

<comment><USER2> Link gives me Less Framework 2. Here's the link directly to 3: <http://lessframework.com/v3/></comment>


View of Scala from Java - <AUTHOR> http://thepolygl0t.blogspot.com/2013/01/a-view-of-scala-from-java.html

<comment><USER2> From the article:

        val x = new Array[Integer](3)  //type inferred for x
        x(0) = 1
        x(1) = 2
        x(2) = 3

        for (y <- x if y > 2)
            println(y)

The idiomatic way to do this is:

        val x = Array(1, 2, 3)

That infers the type and sets values in one shot, with fewer characters. Also, using Integer (that's the java.lang.Integer) has been deprecated since 2.8.1 I believe. `Int` is preferred unless you really mean to use `Integer` (e.g. you're using a native Java library).

<comment><USER3> By not using the declaration, the type of x is Array[Nothing], and it lacks the `withFilter` attribute.

<comment><USER4> I'm not so sure about that...

        C:\Users\bert>scala
        Welcome to Scala version 2.9.2 (Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM, Java 1.7.0_06).
        Type in expressions to have them evaluated.
        Type :help for more information.

        scala> val x = Array(1, 2, 3)
        x: Array[Int] = Array(1, 2, 3)

        scala>

You can see that scala infers the type right (Array[Int]).

<comment><USER3> Even, I find this strange and I may be wrong. With your definition, when I use the for construct, I see this:

        scala> for (y<-x if x > 2)
             | println(y)
        <console>:9: error: value > is not a member of Array[Int]
                  for (y<-x if x > 2)
                                 ^

As you suggested, there may be a idiomatically better way to get implicit inference and also use the filters. I would be glad if some one corrects me on that.

Edit: Yeah, I see the silly error I made. I'll better get some sleep. I will leave this comment intact, for the responses to make sense.

<comment><USER5> Get some sleep, then spend another week playing with Scala and its REPL. It's a terrific tool to learn. If you like Eclipse, install the Scala IDE and the Scala Worksheet. It's rough around the edges, but it's even better than the REPL.

<comment><USER3> Yes, I have been using the Scala IDE and Scala worksheet for my initial learning. As you said, it is great and more friendly than the REPL itself. It reminds me of Python Notebook in terms of being able to get good feedback and recursively edit.

<comment><USER6> Most folks find that the IntelliJ Scala plugin is the best tool rather than Eclipse.

<comment><USER7> Have you tried the Scala Worksheet for Eclipse? Pretty cool.

I see that the recently released IDEA 12 has a similar feature (but so far incomplete and undocumented according to their bug tracker).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> There are a number of syntactic errors and typos in the article. For instance `sum` should be:

* def sum(x: Int, y: Int) = x + y

Why `return x * y`? That is not a sum... Also using `return` is not idiomatic scala.

* List(1, 2, 3) ::: List(4, 5, 6)

That is the more typical way to concatenate lists. Using `+` will actually fail to compile.

* list.map(i => i + 1)

to increment the list. forall checks that a predicate is true for all elements.

And so on...

<comment><USER3> Thanks, fixed the errors.

<comment><USER8> I still see under the heading 'Choose between explicit type declaration or implicit type inference' the following:

> Sum(x: Integer, u: Integer): Int = return x * y > or > Sum(x: Integer, u: > Integer): = return x * y

Clearly, x * y is not the sum. And y isn't in the argument list, u is. And in both cases the return statement is unnecessary and should be omitted.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The article confuses immutability with being 'final' (both in Java and in Scala).

From the article:"In Java you can use the final keyword to differentiate variables that are not mutable. Scala has two keywords val and var to differentiate between mutable and immutable types."

If a variable is 'final' in Java, then the variable cannot be reassigned to another object once initialized. This does not at all prevent it from being used for a mutable object. For example:

      final Map<String, String> stateToCapital = new HashMap<String, String>();
      // since HashMap is a mutable type, I can add a key/value pair:
      stateToCapital.put("Indiana", "Indianapolis");

Similarly in Scala, I could make a 'final' ('val' as opposed to 'var') assignment on a mutable data type:

      val myMutableMap = collection.mutable.Map("Indiana" -> "Indianapolis")

</comment><comment><USER10> If only the Scala compiler wasnt so slow...

<comment><USER6> That's what nailgun and zinc are for...

See what the Jetbrains guys are currently using: [http://blog.jetbrains.com/scala/2012/12/28/a-new-way-to- comp...](http://blog.jetbrains.com/scala/2012/12/28/a-new-way-to-compile/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> ...am I the only one who finds type inference _bad_ , at least when "reading the code as documentation"?

<comment><USER6> Types for method and constructor parameters are always explicitly specified. Type inference generally used for local variables and method return types. This strikes a good balance between having no type info (e.g. python) and having type info for everything (java). The convention in Scala is to specify the return type of a method if the return type is complex.

In practice the type which is inferred is pretty obvious: val x = 800 vs. val x: Int = 800

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> The features described are nice, but are they nice enough to make up for Scala often using more memory than Java and being a bit slower?

One data point: <https://docs.google.com/open?id=0ByTAIYFOarh0cm9aSXlzc0NWaXc>

It is always about trade-offs, but you had the above with the much smaller functional language talent pool and I don't think I would want to use this are a core/shop language. If I was going to go functional, I think I'd go for Haskell GHC and get the functional lang benefits with better than Java performance.

Scala is definitely a good alt. lang for a Java shop though :)

</comment><comment><USER13> "It is easy to notice that in Java, one might have implemented infinite number of for loops trying to do such lookups using iterators."

??

val list3 = list1 ::: list 2 // returns a new list of 6 elements

final list3 = new ArrayList(list1).addAll(list2);

list3.drop(2) //return a new list without first 2 elements

new ArrayList(list3.subList(2));

list3.filter(s => s > 4) //return a list with elements 5 and 6

new ArrayList(list3.subList(4));

Also the Java versions use standard convenience methods which seems preferable to language features since anyone can re-implement them, or add new ones. Plus the copy-on-mutate behaviour is optional.

</comment><comment><USER14> This article focuses ONLY on minor syntactic differences. These are nice, but the things that will make all the difference are bigger issues, like the ability to easily write functional code (good) or incomprehensible type inference error messages (bad).</comment>


Finally a comprehensive query language for your repositories - <AUTHOR> http://www.jfrog.com/aql-the-google-of-repositories/?utm_source=Hackernews&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=AQLthegoogleof_post1

<comment><AUTHOR> You know that old proverb about giving a man a fish vs teaching him to fish? We decided that the right approach is not to keep "giving new APIs" to satisfy more and more search needs, but rather to empower the community with the ability to build ANY search query your collective imagination can dream up, and thus… Artifactory Query Language was born.</comment>


Pressflip Is A Belly Flop - <AUTHOR> http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/07/19/pressflip-is-a-belly-flop/ <comment><USER2> _shrug_

It doesn't mean Uncov wasn't on the mark (most of the time). Maybe Ted should bite the bullet and give self-review of Persai/Pressflip/whatever, Uncov- style.

</comment><comment><USER3> Sounds more like Techcrunch are exacting their 'revenge' for Uncov and giving these guys a kicking as they launch. Couldn't have seen that one coming...

I've used pressflip.com a little bit, but I think their (and any other search engine's) problems are going to be:

1\. Competing with the default Google search box/tool bar in a lot of people's browsers. When I want to search for something, I instinctively go to the handy toolbar, not pick a search engine bookmark or URL.

2\. Offer search results that are easily distinguishable as better than Google's by some criteria.</comment>


Show HN: Glean, a tiny bitmap font for programming - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/benwr/glean <comment><USER2> > This monitor has a lot of pixels by decade-ago standards, but its pixel > density leaves much to be desired by today standards. I have accidentally > become accustomed to crisp, small fonts by a couple of years of using an old > Retina Macbook. Bitmap fonts are better at this than scalable fonts, > especially on screens with low pixel density.

IMO these are all the right reasons. I also suffer from a bad purchase: 27" FullHD Monitor, which means 82dpi (if I remember correctly). But even at more common resolutions like 90-100dpi, vector fonts totally suck at small sizes. So bitmap fonts it is for coding work.

However this font clearly suffers from being only 5x10 size. The characters look similar to vector fonts without antialiasing: Random disproportions -- the same line is 1px here, 2px over there.

What's not to like about the default font that comes with xterm (6x13 size)? [http://jstimpfle.de/dateisalat/2016-10-xterm- screenshot/](http://jstimpfle.de/dateisalat/2016-10-xterm-screenshot/)

<comment><USER3> _What 's not to like about the default font that comes with xterm (6x13 size)?_

That's one of my favourites too --- the only "what's not to like" about it is the nonslashed zero, but that's easily fixed with a suitable font or even hex editor.

There is a 5x7 in the same family, but I find it too small for regular use; on the other hand, it looks much like the standard font on embedded systems' character LCDs, which are much lower DPI.

<comment><AUTHOR> I confess that I did not know about the 5x7 variant - I'll check it out.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Nice work, but I'll take SGI's "Screen" font over this one any time.

<comment><AUTHOR> Wow, that's an awesome one I hadn't seen! The best way to get recommendations on HN seems to be "make an approximation of the thing you want - others will point you to the version that you should have made"

<comment><USER5> This has got to be one of the most refreshingly positive responses to a backhanded compliment I've ever seen. Well done!

No offense to GP. I know "backhanded compliment" seems like a loaded phrase, but I use it for the sake of expediency.

<comment><USER4> Make no mistake, this was no compliment of the product, but for the effort.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I find this font pretty hard to read, judging by the screenshots.

If you want bitmap fonts, I'd recommend taking a look at the Proggy set of fonts at [http://upperbounds.net/index.php?menu=download](http://upperbounds.net/index.php?menu=download)

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah! I was actually using progsole before making this - I'm primarily interested in squeezing legible characters into pixels, and progsole is sliiiightly wider. Even the difference between 5 and 6 pixels can be substantial if you're trying to keep 6 files in your head at once.

<comment><USER7> I use these [http://int10h.org/oldschool-pc- fonts/fontlist/](http://int10h.org/oldschool-pc-fonts/fontlist/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > My company has been very generous in giving me two monitors

That's a terribly low standard for generosity that you have there. Basic equipment to get your job done.

</comment><comment><USER9> Now we just need an IDE that runs in mode 0x13 320x200 VGA.

<comment><USER10> Another bitmap, programming font I really like is Dina[1]. It's MIT licensed (though this isn't mentioned on the home page).

[1]: [https://www.donationcoder.com/Software/Jibz/Dina/](https://www.donationcoder.com/Software/Jibz/Dina/)

<comment><USER3> I can see the point of licenses on vector fonts containing nontrivial characters with many complex shapes etc., but at these small pixel sizes it seems like a bit of a fool's errand to talk about licensing/IP at all --- e.g. there's only so many ways to put pixels on a 6x13 grid and make it look recognisable as the letter 'M'. Hence all these small bitmapped fonts are extremely similar, with only slight variations in things like serifs/lack thereof, slashed zero/plain zero/rounded zero/etc. --- which are themselves a handful of pixels' difference. They all look almost like xterm6x13, which is public domain.

<comment><USER10> All works should have a free license. It's better to be safe (I'll just add a licence anyway) than sorry (I didn't add a license and now users are technically violating copyright). If a court decides otherwise, that's a separate issue. But until that court case, I will continue to license everything I make under free licenses.

<comment><USER11> Good. You're doing it right.

I'm going to try out Dina in XTerm, by the way.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I don't understand what the employer thinks they're gaining by making you work with two small monitors. I mean they're saving, what, $500? They'd recoup that amount in productivity gains within a week, tops.

Forcing your employees to use blunt saws when sharp saws are cheap is the most shortsighted of false economies.

<comment><AUTHOR> There's no force involved - the gains of a slightly higher-res monitor aren't worth the $500, even just to me personally. It was worth the time and the (negative cost of) learning, though!

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Font Book says the dfont file fails "System Validation", whatever that means, and warns they might cause system disruption. Anyone know what this means? Ignorable?

<comment><USER14> I ignored it and it works fine. It's even powerline patched!

<comment><USER13> Thanks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> 5x10 without subpixel support is super limiting, and the result reflects that. I assume you'd get used to it, but I really have to work hard to read this font.

<comment><USER16> Yeah, that's _save up for eyeglasses or your next prescription_ territory. I'll cheerfully continue to use 16pt Inconsolata.

<comment><USER17> Why would exercising your eyes make them need glasses?

<comment><USER18> Exercise involves muscles contracting and relaxing; this looks like just the contracting part, as you squint at too-small things on the screen.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> > Glean is released under version 3 of the GNU GPL, or any later version.

While I love the GPL (and commend you for using it on a non-software work) I would recommend that you add the font exception to the licence (allowing embedding of the font in documents without licencing the document under GPL).

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm not sure I can - Neep was released under the GPLv2 or later. IANAL though...

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> What kind of format is BDF? It seems that it isn't readable by any of the font tools on my computer.

<comment><USER20> It is the original source format for fonts for X11 [1]. There are several command line tools that will work with it.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyph_Bitmap_Distribution_Form...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyph_Bitmap_Distribution_Format).

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> For some reason I like the 6x8 font of the windows command prompt.

[http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/243590/command_pro...](http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/243590/command_prompt_06x08)

Click on the pixel button to see it unscaled.

</comment><comment> white-flame I use a standard vector font in small size, around 5x8 pixels. The inherent antialiasing can give far more visual information cues than just pure binary bitmaps. The high-frequency edges of small bitmap characters are also much harsher, making AA vector fonts easier to look at.

[https://i.imgur.com/51qOPv4.png](https://i.imgur.com/51qOPv4.png)

(Liberation Mono, 6pt, greyscale antialiasing, no hinting, default 96dpi setting)

Explore your available fonts to see which happens to scale down reasonably. Make sure to disable font hinting when using vector fonts at small sizes. Hinting absolutely destroys the shapes at those sizes, as the ~1 pixel fudging that lines get is massive relative to the glyph size of just a handful of pixels.

<comment><AUTHOR> I understand this position, but I don't agree that that screenshot is easier to read than a bitmap font - the fuzziness really bothers my eyes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Hmm, does anyone know how I can import this font on Ubuntu? Nothing recognizes it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Oh, Ubuntu has weird rules that prevent you from using bitmapped fonts. There's some configuration file in /etc/fontsomethingorother that you need to delete. I forget the specifics. After that you should be able to drop the bdf files into ~/.local/share/fonts (preferred) or ~/.fonts, run fc-cache, and see it show up in applications.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> too hard to read... i am old... :(

</comment><comment><USER23> I still prefer the Hermit font.</comment>


Do You Love Music? Silicon Valley Doesn't - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/20/opinion/do-you-love-music-silicon-valley-doesnt.html <comment><USER3> I got four paragraphs in before I said to myself "This reads like a hit piece, who is this guy?"

A quick search of the author reveals a slant and bias so strong you'd think he was a lobbyist writing legislation instead of an Op-Ed.

Whatever points he's trying to make about the "value gap" he runs right to the absolute same party-line Azoff, the RIAA, and multi-national conglomerate rights-holder firms want: Fiddle with safe harbors, and get the US government to jack up the rates streaming services pay for music by way of tweaking the rules for terrestrial radio. It's all very clear for anybody who is keeping track of this debate.

So, if you want a consolidated, heavily biased stump speech designed to raise sympathy ("Think of the poor musicians! Think of Prince!") and deflect from the more customary benefactors of such changes, multi-billion dollar companies, here you go. It is what it is.

And, while I'm a fan of Prince and his successes, I think the guy isn't an icon to be emulated when it came to rights management and his approach to "the music business" in some ways. As a musician he had just as many flops - if not more - than actual hits. He also wanted to completely ban cover songs, which is a really shitty and selfish attitude in my opinion. Guys like Prince and the author would, by logical extension, want to kill off "remix culture" and some of the changes that are pushing toward real, useful Copyright Reform in time.

I don't think SV and VC doesn't love music, and I don't think the whole intention is to rip off music artists. The industry already rips off music artists to an insane degree. The music industry doesn't have a lot of high ground to get preachy until it cleans up its own accounting (Eminem's successful lawsuit regarding digital royalties for licenses vs. sales) and contract issues (Kesha and Kemosabe) that reflect poorly on the motivations, actions, and long-term vision of the industry.

<comment><USER4> What if the music industry saw the sales of their music more as a marketing awareness play than an income generator?

Songs played on Youtube, Spotify, Pandora, etc. and their covers drives little direct revenue to the artist. I doubt that will change anytime soon.

However, that drives serious brand awareness to the artist, who could then sell other add-ons (music tickets, t-shirts, limited edition releases, etc)

Maybe I'm naive to the industry. But most business owners I know would kill for marketing that paid them and returned an ROI.

<comment><USER5> > However, that drives serious brand awareness to the artist, who could then > sell other add-ons (music tickets, t-shirts, limited edition releases, etc)

Not all genres lend to live performance. Not all audiences buy t-shirts. Not all audiences purchase music at all.

<comment><USER4> What genres have artists that do not sell anything outside of their music?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> "The song "Drag Me Down" by One Direction appeared on YouTube 2,700 times after the service was asked to take down unlicensed copies. These 2,700 pirated uploads allowed Google to continue profiting from advertising while the artists got nothing."

That is objectively not true. Labels are very strict about issuing takedown notices. The only videos that stay up are those using content ID, in which case the artist gets paid.

I know this is an op-ed, but shame on the NYT for allowing such a blatant falsehood to be published.

<comment><USER7> Didn't Google make participation in music content id contingent on participation in an unrelated music program through youtube that artists weren't keen on? I seem to recall seeing a artist blog about it posted here months ago.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> And by music, we mean only the radio-friendly corporate pop and top 40 that used to have a stranglehold on music revenue.

<comment><USER9> >radio-friendly corporate pop and top 40

This also happens to be the most popular music in history, so I don't know that it's worth completely brushing off with angst.

<comment><USER10> Which came first: the Top 10 hit, or the media blitz to convince you that it's what everyone else is listening to?

<comment><USER3> The hit, which is why stuff out of left field like Len's "Steal My Sunshine" instantly got pushed by KROQ and the record label and to this day rakes in tons and tons in royalties for a guy who absolutely hated being a pop sensation and to this day thinks the song is a horribly twisted joke and can't believe it was a hit:

[http://www.stereogum.com/1877413/behind-the-music-steal- my-s...](http://www.stereogum.com/1877413/behind-the-music-steal-my- sunshine/franchises/weird-90s/)

<comment><USER10> This week's "number one" song by Rhianna has "moved" 54,000 copies, and those numbers are almost certainly as inflated as possible.

From Forbes:

"Anti rules the Billboard 200 with just 54,000 equivalent units moved. If that figure was comprised only of actual sales, it would make it one of the lowest- selling number one albums of all time, but it's actually a combination of both pure purchases and streams. When looking solely at sales, Anti sold a paltry 17,000 copies. Yes, that's right—the number one album in the largest music market in the world sold just 17,000 units."

<comment><USER3> Funny story with Rihanna and "moving" copies: Jay-Z struck a deal with Samsung to "buy" the 1 million download credits and give them away to people on the internet so her album would go Platinum by RIAA standards in its first week (provided they all got downloaded, which they did). Talk about a joke.

<comment><USER10> Yeah, if you read Hit Men by Fredric Dannen, you can learn about how they used to skew the numbers for record sales by counting every copy that shipped, regardless of whether it was sold or returned.

And today, we are told that 1,500 streaming plays equals an album sale, which is presumably because they tell us that royalties are something like $0.0017 per play and the artist's cut should be around $2.25 per album sale? Who knows.

<comment><USER3> Not so much the "Who knows" bit at the end because I think your numbers are exactly right on the Billboard/RIAA counting process. It was recently revised. Having worked in a big box US media retailer I can still recall putting 27 DVDs on the shelf of the Johnny Knoxville flop "The Ringer" and taking the same 27 DVDs off the rack later to ship...somewhere else. A lot of 'eat these and we will cut you a better deal on the ones you REALLY want' type deals were made, I'm pretty sure - no hard evidence, but fits the industry profile.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> "The song "Drag Me Down" by One Direction appeared on YouTube 2,700 times after the service was asked to take down unlicensed copies. These 2,700 pirated uploads allowed Google to continue profiting from advertising while the artists got nothing."

When an average music video has hundreds millions of views, 2700 views is actually an incredible proof of how quick google is to take down pirated music. For comparison, the original "Drag Me Down" video has over 459,286,538 views.

<comment><USER12> It's not 2700 views. It's saying that "Drag Me Down" was uploaded to YouTube 2700 different times, which each time getting its own distinct view counter.

<comment><USER11> That's a reasonable interpretation. In that case - it just goes to show how much work and effort is required to remove pirated copies.

Also - I'm pretty sure a lot of these so called pirated versions don't really include the original, unaltered audio track, or just include a few snippets from the video.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> > First, Congress should update the safe harbor rules of the copyright act to > achieve the balance that was intended... That means strong, well-defined > consequences for repeat offenders, easing the process for filing notices and > ensuring that services are using the best technology to take pirated > material off their sites and keep it off.

Is it really too _difficult_ to file a DMCA claim? Especially since most content holders seem to use automated, mass report systems these days.

Also, I bet YouTube could get behind the "best technology" requirement, since it would likely make it impossible to make a user-uploaded-video site unless you already have the technology resources and content databases of someone like Google...

</comment><comment><USER14> Anecdote: I have been to musician forums where you will find plenty of threads bitching about The Evils Of Youtube Destroying the Industry. Without a hint of irony, they are often nearby to "What Are You Listening To Now?" threads full of Youtube videos of other musicians' favorite music.

This is what the article reminds me of. The big music industry sometimes seems clueless to how people actually experience music. They instead want to blame the (visibly public) tool, and think that drastically tightening up the tool will be the solution to their problems.

As seen above, music is a natural part of communication and identity etc. People naturally like to share music with others. Even in the "record industry" days, people traded tapes all the time (for instance, tape trading popularized many of the speed/thrash metal bands in their day. Such as Metallica, which is one of the big reasons why their anti-Napster attitude was so ironic).

For this reason, I believe far more in content ID type solutions than strengthening the takedown weapon. If 2700 people upload One Direction songs, so what as long as One Direction is correctly identified and paid for all videos and views?

Certainly there is work to be done on effective monetization models for streaming, and the mechanics of content ID, and other challenges. But actually _calling_ Google and streaming services pirates (as this article did) is completely wrongheaded.

I think Google and streaming services are legitimate businesses. If the industry tightens the noose too much on the legitimate businesses, consumers absolutely _would_ go back to underground, the new Napsters.

</comment><comment><USER15> Back in the day, just after Napster went down, Courtney Love wrote a really great piece about what the actual economics look like being an artist under the major labels, and has some interesting insight into the imminent changes in distribution:

[http://www.salon.com/2000/06/14/love_7/](http://www.salon.com/2000/06/14/love_7/)

Keep in mind that this was written in 2000.

</comment><comment><USER5> Biggest problem of tech disrupting the music industry is that it has completely devalued recorded music for several generations of people who typically were large paying consumers of music. No regulation will fix this and the long term effects of this will likely kill off a few genres that do not lend to current monetization strategies.

<comment><USER16> Those genres won't be killed-off, they'll be driven underground and further into the background from the pop genres that are much more easily monetizable. Where jazz and classical are now (not dead, but not profitable) will go various categories of metal, world, and other eclectic-mashups that require more attention from the listener than does, say, a Sailor Twift radio-hit.

<comment><USER5> Assuming that pop music is more easily monetizable is an iffy assumption. There's much more money to be made in pop music but the number of slices in the pie are far fewer. I don't understand how the rest of your comment will do anything but predict more homeless musicians.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Just came in here to point out that we've allowed a title with a double bind in it on our site, which is not cool. I love music and I'm part of the SV culture, or at least on the fringes.

How about a "this is a double bind" argument button next to stories?

<comment><USER18> The article should be titled "The traditional music distribution industry wants its revenue back."

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Is there that much difference between getting paid say $2 a year from Spotify or other services and getting paid nothing from pirated works? As a musician, I'd rather people listen to my tracks regardless of how they're distributed rather than trying to get a few dollars out of them and severely limiting their distribution. It seems like the music industry was fucked over by Spotify way more than it was by Napster/piracy in general. Piracy is still pretty niche while Spotify, Youtube, etc. are all mainstream. Perhaps artists will start rethinking the benefits of such distribution channels. Unfortunately, for the vast majority of music whose copyright is in the hands of giant corporations, it's already too late. Let's be clear that most money being lost wasn't money going to artists but money going to big corporations. The artists who supported such systems were just too stupid to see this. Now they can't make a living with music anymore.

<comment><USER20> I don't see how your argument makes sense. Spotify is worse for artists than piracy? Could you elaborate?

<comment><USER21> Spotify pays artists as much as piracy does, in many cases, while be socially acceptable and normalized.

For example, I got a book at Barnes and Noble the other day, and when I responded to the cashier's pitch for a Barnes and Noble card with something like "No thanks, I get most of my books through torrents", they looked at me like I was trying to talk about the taste of baby meat. Your average content consumer pays for media, and there is no definitive evidence pirates would pay for music and media if free downloads were not available. Spotify, on the other hand, is targeted at those people who would normally buy music, and offering a cheaper alternative that also pays the artist substantially less (almost nothing, in some cases).

<comment><USER20> I see your point and I guess I hadn't thought of it like that. In my case, I pay for Spotify as a replacement for pirating. I probably buy more music now in a physical form now that cassettes and records have become available. I would point out that the reason I pay for Spotify is not due to the access to music (I could get most of it for free online), but for the convenience... I can't store all the music I want to hear on my phone and I don't want to run a Plex server or whatever 24/7 to deal with that problem (let alone buy a bunch of drives and fill them with music!). I also appreciate the curation they provide (the Discover Weekly is a regular source of artists I've never heard of before), so I think there are some intangible benefits to the artists from Spotify beyond the meager pay. I've definitely gone to shows based solely on having heard an artists on Spotify.

I'm not sure how sold I am on the idea that Spotify converts more people away from buying music "the old fashioned way" than it does convert former pirates into now (meager) paying customers, but I can definitely see it as a possibility. Unfortunately buying music sucks. Having to keep track of, discover, and store music (in any medium!) sucks. Especially if you aren't a collector of some kind. Spotify/Google Play/Apple music make that easier and that's why people are going to pay for it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Not mentioned: YouTube is a break even business. They already pay all they can to license content.

[http://marketingland.com/report-youtube-roughly-break- even-e...](http://marketingland.com/report-youtube-roughly-break-even-even- billion-users-119735)

</comment><comment><USER21> While I agree tech is hurting music, the recording industry has been ripping off artists since records were popular. The entirety of Lola Versus Powerman and the Moneygoround, for example, is about artists not making any money off their music[1], and it was released shortly after the ARPANET was created. The biggest change with digital music piracy is that record companies are also earning less.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lola_Versus_Powerman_and_the_M...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lola_Versus_Powerman_and_the_Moneygoround%2C_Part_One?wprov=sfla1)

<comment><USER3> Another case that I think shows the music industry likes to have things both ways was the Eminem digital sales vs. licenses lawsuit that got settled privately (I mention elsewhere but here's a link):

[http://www.spin.com/2012/10/universal-settles-influential- em...](http://www.spin.com/2012/10/universal-settles-influential-eminem- digital-revenue-lawsuit/)

Not to mention the industry wants all its aging / legacy acts to not think about how sound recordings before 1972 may be eligible for return to the creators rather than the business enterprise that owns them currently. It's complicated but financially worth the trouble for some!

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> The Internet loves music! It just doesn't love paying for it.

<comment><USER24> Replace music with anything served over the Internet: news, movies, photography, art, etc.

Will this become unsustainable at some point? Money is definitely flowing on the Internet, but not necessarily into the pockets of the content producers.

In fact, this article glosses over the fact that the RIAA used to have such a huge stranglehold over the industry that they were the ones profiting off the musicians, wasn't this why Prince was "formerly known as" for a long while?

<comment><USER3> Yes, Prince was very clear that he felt his recording contract was unfair. To the point of going out in public with "Slave" written on his cheek[1]. Not surprised the author left out that kind of musician-industry relationship when bringing up Prince.

[1] [http://esq.h-cdn.co/assets/16/16/640x320/landscape-146126259...](http://esq.h-cdn.co/assets/16/16/640x320/landscape-1461262593-prince- avedon-1.jpg)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Do you love musicians? The record industry doesn't.

<comment><USER16> The recording industry LOVES musicians. But the musicians they love most of all are the musicians who don't know how to negotiate.

<comment><USER3> Every entertainment book I've ever read by a successful and intelligent musician or writer has emphasized, time and again, to get a really, really, really, really good lawyer. Or, in the case of Willie Nelson, two of them. Thomas Lennon (Reno 911, The Odd Couple) wrote a screenplay guide and said, paraphrased, "Oh our lawyer is a really nice guy and we like him - he's just not afraid to rip your heart out and eat it in front of you."

<comment><USER16> Amen.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> While the article is primarily about piracy, the existing pay models are fairing no better. Here is one musicians take: [https://medium.com/cuepoint/streaming-music-is-ripping- you-o...](https://medium.com/cuepoint/streaming-music-is-ripping-you- off-61dc501e7f94#.n1lxwtqlh)

</comment><comment><USER27> I'd love to see evidence how the US has a history of undervaluing musicians. You'd normally observe that through a decline on the supply side. However, supply is not an issue at all.

The author probably just wanted to say that he wants more money for his own work. ..that's understandable, but meaningless.

</comment><comment><USER28> So build a better systems. Super successful artists have the ability to create better and "fairer" platforms for other artists and consumers (if that's your belief). We are all open to new models. Let's see how Patreon does, for example. I hated this article.

<comment><USER3> Yeah lots of eyes are on Tidal and its grand statement of purpose.

Deadmau5 kind of has taken your approach with a direct-to-fan subscription service that might be an interesting case study.

<comment><USER5> The biggest problem with any new "system" I've seen is that none of the facilitate artist discovery. Especially now that the bar to produce and distribute music is at the lowest it's ever been, there is no easy way to discover new artists.

<comment><USER16> Sure there is. Join the communities that support the genre(s) of music you enjoy. Listen to the various internet radio programs that feature the music you enjoy -- those curators will introduce you to new music, and new-to-you music.

<comment><USER5> As many flaws as the major labels previously had, they did discover and nurture artists. Internet radio is not going to discover a random lounge cover singer in the middle of flyover US. You are not going to have an internet radio station that features random unknown artists that has widespread reach. The bar to discovery is much higher and arguably requires less on the music end and more on the promo end than it has in the past. This leads to more of the chaff rising to the top.

<comment><USER3> That's been true but there are some artist examples that are showing new artists can embrace the new dynamic and reach fans. CHVRCHES got their start on SoundCloud. Chance the Rapper still is in the "mixtape" game. Pretty much any "viral" hit that isn't actively on a Major Label at the time of the release can be considered, I think, to be a case study in how the dynamics are changing. Edit: Forgot Run The Jewels as well.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Funny how musicians complain. We all steal from what we love. Intential or not. Musicians earn there living by PLAYING their music. Real musicians that is.

<comment><USER30> Why is it any less of an art to record something than to perform it?

<comment><USER3> Honestly it's a scarcity thing, aside from the art point. It goes back to the tradition of the bards - walk around, play a tune in a new place, get some food and a place to stay, move on. Live entertainment has very strong traditions. Regarding "less of an art" \- there's a lot of things that can be done in a studio to make a musician/act seem superior.

<comment><USER29> I'm both a producer and musician, so i get what you are saying. Never the less dj's make most mobey today so i dont see your point. Yes there are lots of talented producer who dont play live, but in regard to music and musicians in general, the mobey is and has always been in live performance. Most good producers i know and live also has the ability to create stunning live performances. For the rest i can see the problem offcourse; they deserve the gain from online play, but i suspect they actually earn more plays and buts and streams from piracy based advertisement than without. Regardless i agree the topic is a problem in general.

<comment><USER3> Fair point, I do see DJs making the big money but again it's for the experience of the show or festival. I agree the money has always been in live performance. Making recordings is really a way to get people interested - <USER2> how those people get those recordings is sometimes less important to musicians than it is to business people. If the recordings are free, but the musician makes money live, then the musician wins - the only people who don't win are the ones trying to get a piece of money from distributing the music recording. Good to chat with you, best of luck with your music!!</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>