Ask HN:  Do you think inheritance should be illegal? - <AUTHOR> What exactly is the rationale behind such an unfair concept?
Why not give away the money to a charity or the government once someone dies?
You could even have a system that limits how much money parents can give to their children while the parents are still alive, again, in the interest of fairness. <comment><USER3> In English history, the ages-ago method of bequeathing one's estate consisted of the "fee-tail" system - that is, property was passed (or "entailed") by lineal descent in a way that allowed the testator to control it for generations to come (for example, "I bequeath Blackacre to the eldest surviving male from x line, provided that he does not marry a non-Aryan wife and, if he does, then to the next male heir in succession and, should so-and- so (or anyone in his line) die without male issue, then Blackacre shall revert to the oldest surviving male in y line.") This is the world of _Pride and Prejudice._

Now _that_ was a system that cried out for reform and it was reformed, in time, to the point where legislatures abolished the fee-tail system in favor of a "fee simple" system - meaning that, once property was transferred, the transferee had the full bundle of rights relating to its disposition, including the power to alienate it during that person's lifetime and the power generally to bequeath it to whomever that person desired.

In the midst of this, the law injected value judgments of varying types, one of which was to _favor_ children, meaning that if someone died intestate (without a will), the law set up default categories by which the decedent's property would pass, and this routinely favored spouse first and then direct lineal descendants, i.e., children. Indeed, even if a testator (person with a will) intended to disinherit children, he had to follow prescribed forms for doing so or the law would presume that he intended to leave appropriate shares to all children.

This is the legacy we have in the United States from the English common law tradition. It is based fundamentally on the idea of private property and on laws promoting what we today call the "nuclear family." And this is, by and large, the way the law has continued to this day, though the idea of "family" has broadened somewhat.

In theory, none of this needs to be as it is. If the state reigned supreme in people's lives, and if private property were regarded as an evil, then confiscatory policies could be enacted as desired. Of course, if one's estate were to be routinely confiscated upon one's death, then the equivalent of the modern "gift tax" proscription would also need to be in place, preventing a living person from making _inter vivos_ transfers to his children as a way of circumventing the ultimate confiscation that society deemed to be fair. This would mean that the idea of "private property" would become largely illusory. No one would own property as such. Rather, each person would have a lease of sorts on property during one's lifetime, with a reversionary interest held by the government.

Since such a system would ultimately lead to widespread government confiscation, it would not long leave us with a free society but rather one in which we each would be required to seek permission from the sovereign state to use "its" resources as its bureaucrats and regulators deemed just.

The modern estate tax doesn't do this because, even while it seeks to promote the idea of busting up large estates at a person's death in the name of fairness, it comes nowhere close to doing this. The vast majority of average middle class people have always fallen under the minimum threshold such that the tax has not applied to them and, if it has, it has applied in a comparatively innocuous way - that is, it has imposed a tax on some portion of the estate such that the heirs still retained the larger portion. For extremely wealthy people, a system of foundations has been established by which the heirs can effectively control the family fortune even as it bypasses the normal estate-tax mechanism.

Thus, the question becomes, is the fee-simple form of property ownership, with its system of vesting the full powers of ownership and disposition in the hands of private individuals largely free from the authority of the state, a system in need of reform in the same way that, say, the old fee-tail system cried out for reform?

This is ultimately a question of the values a society seeks to reflect, with a state-run society of individuals largely beholden to the government for major elements of their subsistence versus a society grounded in individual rights, as best summed up in the Declaration of Independence, who are free to engage in "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" free of the influence of the state. "Fairness" in this context in a purely subjective term rooted in one set of values or the other.

It took centuries to move from a system of medieval serfdom to a system of fee-tail to a private property system of fee-simple ownership. I doubt that we would want to throw the modern system of property ownership away without some pretty careful thought and not without careful consideration of what has happened (or one might say the horrors of what has happened) in societies that do not respect private property ownership.

<comment><USER4> Thank you for taking the time to provide that overview. I found it very thoughtful, judicious, jurisprudentially precise, and all-around edifying. The treatment you give to the issue -- specifically, of the question of its logical implications ("This is ultimately a question of the values a society seeks to reflect,") -- represents an ethos to which we should all aspire.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Given all the discussions here recently about the unintended side-effects of changing incentive structures, it's worth bearing in mind that providing for one's children (including after one's own death) is an important—perhaps _the_ important—incentive to attain material wealth. Take it away and you may find you have taken away much of the reason people work in the first place.

<comment><USER4> It may be that there are far-reaching side effects beyond the immediate issue of passing the hard-earned fruits of one's labour to children.

If it is suggested, hypothetically, that the ability to pass wealth to children is _not_ a material reason for people to work to accumulate it, it may nevertheless be the case that their incentives to work are contingent upon indirect conceptual ligaments of their children's prospective inheritance. For example, they may make certain assumptions about the life their children would be able to lead in connection with - but not exclusively because of - <USER2> they may come to possess.

Edit: In addition to possibly removing an incentive, it may even go so far as to create an explicitly negative _disincentive_ for many people--people who believe the government is least morally entitled and least competent to dispose of their money. Like it or not, many people who possess the ability and the inclination to accumulate wealth for themselves through the transaction of commerce of some description feel this way about the government, precisely because the government supports those who lack that ability or desire. Wealthy people feel that that choice is for others to make for themselves (or, if the choice is truly not theirs, gain or suffer from as a consequence of certain natural and inexorable variations in the content of people's lives and the limitations of their abilities and intelligence), but not one that should have repercussions for them and the choices _they_ have made.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I was all set for an interesting discussion on inheritance vs composition in OO design, and instead I got _this_?

Ah well, I'll answer the question posed. To me the only reason to reward different people differently is to create incentives to motivate people to produce more. Inheriting great wealth takes people who likely have the ability to produce and robs them of the incentive. Therefore I find myself in complete agreement with Warren Buffett that _a very rich person should leave his kids enough to do anything but not enough to do nothing._

<comment><USER7> > Ah well, I'll answer the question posed.

Except that you didn't, you know. You said what rich people should do with their money. The question was what rich people should be _allowed_ to do with their money. And that is really a very different question.

<comment><USER8> "The question was what rich people should be allowed to do with their money."

No, the question was, what _people_ should be allowed to do with their money.

My answer: rich or poor, it's your money, and you should be allowed to buy anything you want with your money, including comfort for your children and fish.

"Why not give away the money to a charity or the government once someone dies?"

If anyone is less deserving of my money than my children after I die, it's the government. They squander it now while I'm watching, I shudder to think what they'll do with it when my eyes are closed.

<comment><USER6> Something to consider. It is only _your_ money because the rest of society enforces rules that _keep_ it being your money. How, why and when should they do so?

The problem with extreme libertarianism is that property rights fall apart without the constant intervention of the legal profession, including government run police. This requires more government and consent from fellow citizens than most libertarians seem to want to acknowledge.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> 1\. Why would you say it is 'unfair' of me to be able to decide who gets the benefit of my lifes work when I pass on?

That's the rational. I earned it, so I decide who gets it. Usually my kids. YMMV from country to country, and state to state yadda.

2\. Why not mind your own business. I worked for it, and I'll decide what to do with it. If you'd like to decide the fate of vast wealth, than go earn vast wealth.

3\. You could even have a system that prevents people from whinging about how unfair life is on the internet whilst some people don't even have benefit of a decent soapbox, but it wouldn't make much sense either.

</comment><comment><USER10> "in the interest of fairness."

How exactly is "fairness" defined? I see that word used in discussions of social matters ("fair-trade coffee", "fair wages", "fair share of taxes") and it's assumed that everyone is just going to have the same idea of "fair" (or not bothering analyzing what the word is supposed to mean in the given context), and think, hey, *fair", who could be against that? People use it, but no one defines it.

It's like asking someone if they like good food or good movies without making clear whose taste is deciding things.

The only interesting argument I've seen that argued against inheritance asserted that once a person was dead they were no longer able to make any claim on the money, nor was there any person from whom that money could be taken; there's no owner; they simply not exist. Decisions made about property while still alive had no bearing; when you're dead, you're out of the picture. (It seems to avoid the whole issue of "fairness", too.)

What wasn't explained to me was how one goes from that idea to it being OK then for the State to come and just take the wealth left behind.

</comment><comment><USER11> Who chooses the charity? Inheritance is just one subset of the _what happens to my money when I die?_ question. Maybe I'd like to give it to a charity, maybe my children. Do I have that right or should some of it be confiscated and used for something I likely wouldn't approve of explicitly? If so, how much?

We've just chosen the default case to be one's surviving relatives, in order of closeness, if a will doesn't specify otherwise.

Perhaps we should just change the default? Or raise the taxes? Making "inheritance illegal" doesn't really have a practical meaning.

<comment><AUTHOR> Instead of charities, maybe require that the money be given to the government.

Moreover, there would be a limit on how much money you can give to your children while you are alive.

If you are poor, you would be able to get money to give to your children.

<comment><USER11> _> Instead of charities, maybe require that the money be given to the government._

This is known as _tax_. We do this to inheritances already.

 _> Moreover, there would be a limit on how much money you can give to your children while you are alive._

Very well, I'll buy from my son this fabulous vintage 1976 El Camino for the modest sum of _one-meeelion-dollars_.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> _What exactly is the rationale behind such an unfair concept?_

What's unfair about it?

<comment><AUTHOR> Think about it from the children's perspective.

Why should their wealth be determined in part by something they had no control over?

<comment><USER13> It is. That is not what must be established. Why should a childs wealth (usually in the West it is an adults wealth) not be determined by the success of a past generation?

You need a pretty convincing argument here to change this particular aspect of the status quo.

<comment><AUTHOR> It is fundamentally unfair.

Granted people are not born equal to begin with, but adding more unfairness to life isn't a good idea.

<comment><USER14> Haha! Life is not fair. It never has been. It never will be. I've stopped worrying about how fair life is, and I, instead, try to make sure I'm not the one getting screwed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Should giving gifts be illegal?

> What exactly is the rationale behind such an unfair concept?

What's the difference (in real terms) between giving a gift before you die and giving a gift after you die?

> ...limits how much money parents can give to their children

Why are you singling out parents giving money to their children? If we want the freedom to give gifts to whoever we please, we also must accept that most people will want to give gifts to their children.

There is also the obvious evolutionary benefit if you consider the "selfish gene" (Dawkins).

</comment><comment><USER16> It's not unfair to give an inheritance to your children; it's unfair _not_ to. But I can't make everyone else do what I think is right.

</comment><comment><USER17> My SO has serious medical problems. Shouldnt I be able to leave her the house and some means of support. Most inheritances are fairly modest. Taking them away would only hurt the majority with little benefit to anyone.

<comment><AUTHOR> If someone is unable to work, then they can get money from the government.

<comment><USER13> Do you advocate ruling out any giving of gifts beyond necessity, period?

If I earn money (or any asset really) and then gift it to someone does it matter if I died between me earning it and them being given it?

<comment><AUTHOR> _Do you advocate ruling out any giving of gifts beyond necessity, period?_

Yes.

<comment><USER8> Then Christmas is gonna suck this year.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Question 1: Is it your money, or the state's?

Question 2: Do you like the ideas of the family farm and family small business?

Question 3: What about life insurance for families?

</comment><comment><USER19> I thought this was a question about programming.

And yes, I think inheritance in programming should be illegal.

</comment><comment><USER20> Here are a few reasons I disagree with you. Let me know what you think.

1) The point of gathering wealth is to somehow make yourself happier. Without this, wealth is meaningless. One of the things that make many parents happy is the knowledge that their kids will be well off. If you take that away, you are removing one method of achieving happiness through wealth.

Now, as a society, we do eliminate methods of gaining happiness through wealth. E.g. we don't allow you (legally anyway) to use your money to hire an assassin. There are other, less glamorous limits as well, such as limits on what you can buy in the stock market, etc... Each of these limits has a reason (or should anyway, if it doesn't, we should get rid of the limit) that relates to harming society. You seem to be saying that the money could be better used in other ways by the government. Although I question if the current incarnation of government would do so (in any country) I'll grant the premise for now, but still disagree.

I disagree because not only is making one's kids well off one way to gain happiness through wealth, it is a hugely significant way for many parents. If you want to change the inheritance laws, society needs to weaken the connection between parents and children, something which I don't believe would be a good thing.

2) You seem to think of inheritance as money. Its not just money. Inheritance is also property and rights (and other things? I'm not sure). With your system, after a few generations the government would own everything. Sure, we could find a way to have the government disperse these properties and rights, but this would be a very cumbersome system that would need to be frequently implemented and its unlikely to produce fair results. For example, lets say we do an auction when each person dies. How would people place bids? How can we make sure everyone is allowed to place bids? How can we make sure the rich don't use this to pick up things at way under market/reasonable value because they happen to be awake during the bidding process? Etc... You can probably create a system that solves the questions I asked, but it would be cumbersome and difficult to manage.

The problem is even worse with rights. Lets say I own some long term debt... i.e. I have the legal right to receive cash from a someone periodically over the next 20 (say) years. Now, if I die... who gets the rights to that cash? You want to auction that off as well? Who even knows I have that right? I may have it written down, but it may just be an informal contract with someone. This can be a problem even now, but with wills, people will want to write it down for the sake of their children.

3) In reality, I don't accept your premise that a governing body would do a better job with the inheritance. We see now that so many government programs are a waste (even though many are a success. I'm not being anti-government here). Do we really want to trust some body to use this money? This leaves so much room for error. Also, there are individual/family needs that won't be taken into account. The sick significant other is a big one (mentioned by @russell) and I'm sure there are more.

4) Think of how weird the situation is. Say you save up for your kid to go to private school or college. If you stay alive during that period your kid gets through it without debt. But, if someone hits you with a car, suddenly your kid will need to get loans? That doesn't make any sense. To reconcile this, either you need to do what you said and limit what kids can get while the parents are alive, or allow inheritance.

Lets say we go with option 1 (limiting what kids can get while alive) and say the private school is a religious school. Now, the parents are sending their kids there because they want to instill certain values. So now, we are limiting the parents rights to instill these values? This is not something that should happen in a free society.

Just some thoughts...

</comment><comment><USER21> If you don't like capitalism, move somewhere that doesn't use it as their economical system so life can be more "fair". You might not like that kids get their parent's wealth without technically earning it, but that's the nature of the game. Want the same wealth? Go earn it. That's the beauty of capitalism. The same reason that wealth was created in the first place is why you can also get it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Why is it "the nature of the game"? Why can't you have capitalism where you create wealth for yourself and a safety net for everyone?

<comment><USER14> Because I'm not breaking my back for the benefit of others. Hell, half the time I wonder why I am doing so much work for myself and my family.

<comment><AUTHOR> Your money doesn't have to go to the government after you die. You could spend it on yourself taking advantage of your doctor's prediction as to how much longer you will live.

<comment><USER14> Life often ends unexpectedly. I seriously doubt I could time the cash flows to expire at the exact moment I expire.

EDIT: I am absolutely certain I could not time the cash flows to expire at the exact moment I expire.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


The broken web - <AUTHOR> http://www.entertainingcode.com/archives/the-broken-web/ <comment><USER2> I'm surprised this article makes no mention of CSS3, which has a solution to equal column heights. Besides, didn't the promotion of CSS-only layouts for tabular content only come about after the introduction of CSS2, with predictable results?

These are the options I see in decreasing order of immediate utility: 1\. Use tables if that's the most elegant solution. 2\. Promote/advocate for adoption of CSS3. 3\. Propose another means for layout. 4\. Complain about CSS2.

<comment><USER3> Ahh! I had forgotten CSS3 already had some new love for columns. Excellent.

Also, I agree with your options. Tables for this one little thing won't kill us until we get widespread CSS3.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I think this article misses the point a bit.

 _Well, if having to use 6 nestled divs, large-number positive and negative margins and all kinds of bullshit like that isn't an ugly hack, then I don't know what is._

Point 1: If your css contains large number positive and negative margins, you are probably doing something wrong in the first instance.

Point 2: Whilst tables may be an easier/less hacky/whatever solution the fact is, is that they are terrible for accessibility. At least with your nested divs a screen reader can still (hopefully) make sense of your document and make the web a little bit nicer for someone who requires assistive technology.

Disclaimer: I'm a front-end developer so this kind of thing is my bread and butter.

<comment><USER5> Also it misses the point of "CSS hacks", interpreting it to mean hacky CSS, just so they can score points.

In reality a "CSS hack" is a way to write CSS that doesn't get seen by certain browsers, usually by reverse engineering and taking advantage of certain wacky interpretations of CSS. That is "hack" here is used in the good sense.

<http://www.webdevout.net/css-hacks>

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I just was ranting to a friend about this exact problem before clicking this link.

This "using a background image to make your faux columns look like columns" business is bunk. To call it "hack-free" is lunacy.

Is there any other part of CSS that's so jacked up? (Other than all the stuff that's really IE's fault.) I find CSS to work fine in nearly every other way... always takes some trial and error since I don't code CSS every day, but it's sensible and in many ways seems elegant. But equal-height columns really need some love in CSS4 or something.

I'm switching to a table for the one part of my site that needs this. And I won't abide any grief for this "hack" since it's about 50x less hacky than what I'd have to do to make it work in a "non-hacky" way.

</comment><comment><USER6> I just followed some of the links and came across a very interesting effect, much in line with the theme of the "broken web"...

if you follow the homer simpson link you end up on the blog of Roman Cortes, which happens to be in spanish. Chrome helpfully offers to translate the page into english for me (and does a reasonable job too), which is great, but destroys the CSS effect, and you get a somewhat different homer than everyone's used to...

<http://www.romancortes.com/blog/homer-css/>

<comment><USER5> It's not clear from your post if you understand this or not, but for the benefit of anyone else, the reason it breaks is (I guess) because the face is made up of many superimposed letters, colored and positioned with CSS. If you translate the page it's likely that certain letters or runs of letters will be translated to equivalent words in the other language.

This is kind of interesting, but doesn't really say anything about whether the web is broken or not. The fact that it doesn't work for me in Chrome even in the original spanish might though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I wrote a post on a potential way we could fix the layout problems with HTML, but stay backwardly compatible. This article hits on exactly the problem. Layout. More precisely the default page flow layout of HTML which is great for text layout, but that's about it.

[http://wrongnotes.blogspot.com/2009/09/what-if-html-wasnt- to...](http://wrongnotes.blogspot.com/2009/09/what-if-html-wasnt-top-dog.html)</comment>


Bitcoin Reaching 150 USD. What now? - <AUTHOR> http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/chart.png?width=940&m=mtgoxUSD&SubmitButton=Draw&r=60&i=&c=0&s=&e=&Prev=&Next=&t=S&b=&a1=&m1=10&a2=&m2=25&x=0&i1=&i2=&i3=&i4=&v=1&cv=0&ps=0&l=0&p=0&

<comment><AUTHOR> Growth has been insane, with the price rising nearly 2 times in he last 10 days. Better hop onto the bitcoin bandwagon before it's too late?

<comment><USER2> Definitely. Cheap at twice the price. Don't get left behind by the new paradigm.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Litecoin is a great addition to cryptocurrency as well, so look at both. Litecoin is the silver to Bitcoins gold.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm thinking of investing in litecoin too. Are you?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> bitcoin alternatives -- <https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=134179.0>

</comment><comment><USER5> It will continue increasing, unless it doesn't.</comment>


Ask HN:How can we get referred in AngelList (we don't know people who can help)? - <AUTHOR>

Hi all,
Just as the title say, we don't know investors or entrepreneurs that can refer us on AngelList, because if we don't get referred we won't get noticed by investors.
Thanks in advance for your help and time. <comment><USER2> 1\. Make something good enough to warrant attention without connections.

2\. Start with the people you do know and constantly ask for introductions to their network.

</comment><comment><USER3> Where are you based ?

<comment><AUTHOR> for now we are in Morocco (North Africa).</comment></comment>


The Security Implications Of Google Native Client - <AUTHOR> http://www.matasano.com/log/1674/the-security-implications-of-google-native-client/ <comment><USER2> Wow. I didn't even realize it was an x86 bytecode verifier. I was under the impression that NaCl was some kind of a virtualization trick, given that it came out about the same time as CPUs with virtualization instructions started to get popular.

Oh well. Maybe they'll get it to work in a secure manner, but I don't see it happening any time soon.

<comment><AUTHOR> The research paper says it's a sandbox.

[http://nativeclient.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/nacl/googleclie...](http://nativeclient.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/nacl/googleclient/native_client/documentation/nacl_paper.pdf)

Here's an interesting comment I read on Slashdot a while back that summarizes the paper:

 _This is really a little operating system, with 44 system calls. Those system calls are the same on Linux, MacOS (IA-32 version) and Windows. That could make this very useful - the same executable can run on all major platforms.

Note that you can't use existing executables. Code has to be recompiled for this environment. Among other things, the "ret" instruction has to be replaced with a different, safer sequence. Also, there's no access to the GPU, so games in the browser will be very limited. As a demo, they ported Quake, but the rendering is entirely on the main CPU. If they wanted to support graphics cross-platform, they could put in OpenGL support.

Executable code is pre-scanned by the loader, sort of like VMware. Unlike VMware, the hard cases are simply disallowed, rather than being interpreted. Most of the things that are disallowed you wouldn't want to do anyway except in an exploit.

This sandbox system makes heavy use of some protection machinery in IA-32 that's unused by existing operating systems. IA-32 has some elaborate segmentation hardware which allows constraining access at a fine-grained level. I once looked into using that hardware for an interprocess communication system with mutual mistrust, trying to figure out a way to lower the cost of secure IPC. There's a seldom-used "call gate" in IA-32 mechanism that almost, but not quite, does the right thing in doing segment switches at a call across a protection boundary. The Google people got cross-boundary calls to work with a "trampoline code" system that works more like a system call, transferring from untrusted to trusted code. This is more like classic "rings of protection" from Multics.

Note that this won't work for 64-bit code. When AMD came up with their extension to IA-32 to 64 bits, they decided to leave out all the classic x86 segmentation machinery because nobody was using it. (I got that info from the architecture designer when he spoke at Stanford.) 64-bit mode is flat address space only._

[http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1056231&cid=260...](http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1056231&cid=26048381)

<comment><USER3> It's a sandbox implemented with a verifier.

Some other notes:

I'm not sure I'd call X86 segmentation "elaborate", at least in the context of X86 programming (sure, it's very elaborate compared to MIPS).

I don't think I've heard the word "call gate" used with the definite article before, as if there was just one of them... but I'm an X86 autodidact and that could be my mistake. My understanding is that a call gate is anything that vectors a program from one context to another. In most X86 operating systems, there are 2-3 basic call gates that will get you from userland to kernel: the INT instruction (the interrupt handler will check your program state and dispatch the right system call) and the SYSCALL instruction (which does the same thing without the interrupt overhead).

NaCl disallows both of these instructions, along with the FAR CALL opcode that would let you jump between segments and the segment override prefix that does the same (note this was the epic fail Dowd found in the contest).

The trampoline mechanism that NaCl uses is not at all dissimilar from how Win32 and BSD libc issue system calls; the library exports a stub interface and hides the mechanics of actually issuing a system call.

Note: not trying to be pedantic here. Just love geeking out on this stuff.

<comment><USER4> The x86 instruction set has a mechanism called "call gates" for system calls. Basically, the OS puts the entry point of the system call handler into a segment descriptor with the call gate bits set. The unprivileged user program then performs a far call to an address consisting of a segment selector for that descriptor and an offset which does not matter. Execution resumes at the system call handler, with a privilege level as encoded in the call gate descriptor.

That way, you could have thousands of system call entry points and avoid the overhead of an int instruction and the syscall-number dispatch. I believe OS/2 used that mechanism extensively (and all the other elaborate segmentation stuff).

And I call x86 segmentation "elaborate" :)

<comment><USER3> You're right, I'm being imprecise.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The general impression I got from this article is "never write software, since the software could have a security problem". Technically true. But sometimes the new functionality is worth the (minimal) security risk. Worry about making something interesting first, and making it secure enough to run on your banking computer later.

Also, if your parsers allow remote code execution, you are doing them wrong. Don't write application code in C! Use a safe language like Haskell or Lisp or Java or ... anything else. Then your bugs are bugs, not major security problems.

<comment><USER6> _The general impression I got from this article is "never write software, since the software could have a security problem"_

What he's saying is that _this_ specific piece of software is very tricky to get right. Moreover, if it becomes popular, then the consequences are enormous if they get it wrong, as in the case of ActiveX or Flash exploits. The aggregate damages from viruses and malware must surely run in the tens of billions of dollars.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> So who'll be the first to port the Java VM itself to NaCl for a "belt and suspenders" approach to dynamically-downloadable-code security?

<comment><USER8> Would that buy you much over installing a JVM + Web Start?

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> If Google NaCl comes to fruition, they might have to consider rewriting their arsenal of Javascript apps as x86 apps! This is certainly one of the more potent salvos in the war on Microsoft. Come on, M$, fight back! You can do it. You used to know how to innovate...

<comment><USER10> I'm failing to see how this could possibly disadvantage Microsoft at all. Since the sandboxed code runs as a native X86 app, it also uses native system calls. Games (or any desktop app delivered via NaCl) using DirectX or other native Windows system APIs would be just as tightly coupled to Windows under NaCl as they were when running standalone.

If anything, Microsoft should _welcome_ this as a defense against the encroachment of cross-platform JS and Flash applications.

<comment><USER3> Wow is that ever wrong.

NaCl sandboxed code does _not_ use native system calls. If it did, running a NaCl program would be just as bad as running an ActiveX control.

NaCl programs are restricted by the verifier so that they can only run a set of virtual system calls defined by Google. That system call file is like its own cross-platform OS interface, like NSPR except for desktop programs.

<comment><USER10> Okay, good to know. It was unclear from the article _what_ set of syscalls we exposed to the apps running within the NaCl sandbox.

<comment><USER3> You build a NaCl program with a special GCC toolchain Google provides, which creates ELF binaries with a base address of 0 and text starting at 0x10000.

When NaCl loads your program (which, remember, it wants to do without asking you), it forks a "secure ELF loader" program, which populates the first 64k bytes with a runtime (think crt0, on steroids), which we call the "trusted code base". The TCB isn't verified the same way the NaCl binary is, because it's code that Google wrote that never changes.

That code implements or trampolines to a common set of systemy things NaCl wants to let NaCl programs do. We made the comparison in that post between the NaCl runtime/TCB and the JVM applet sandbox, and I think it's apt. In both cases, you have a wad of code that is trusted by the system and needs to be bug free, and in both cases that's the first place a security researcher is going to look for flaws once the system is mature.

<comment><USER10> I think the reference to gaming in the article threw me off a bit -- looking over the NaCl API docs, I don't see any references to accelerated 3D of any sort[1]. Basically, it can handle Quake, because it works with a software-only rendering pipeline, but Crysis is going to be out of reach for some time to come.

As I understand it now, NaCl is really just a way to offload CPU-bound tasks to native code with minimal overhead. It's interesting, but I'm not sure I like the trade-offs vs. a platform actually designed from the start to insure confinement of untrusted code (i.e., Java).

[1] -- Does anyone know of good literature on confinement of GPU-intensive code? I've read up x86 and Java security issues, but don't know of any good work on the security profile of code using OpenGL or DirectX...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Another x86 VM is vx32 which runs 9vx, a version of Plan 9 From Bell Labs as an application. We promote it to new users as an alternative to finding compatible hardware or running Qemu.

vx32 : <http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/~baford/vm/>

9vx : <http://swtch.com/9vx/>

I think a Windows port of 9vx is one of our GSoC projects</comment>


Ask HN: Should I be a plumber? - <AUTHOR> This bothered me for awhile. I consider myself pretty good software architect, with significant abstract thinking abilities. In the same time I am handy enough to fix my cars/bike, make new copper/pvc/whatever piping at home, I can easily mount dry board and figure out how to make a nice texture on the wall. I can replace a bathtub, install gas water heater, read codes to find what are local requirements are, etc.
In my opinion all this stuff I do with hands is way easier than trying to come up with good thought through software/hardware/network system. I understand, that I am sorta "IT plumber" too, but I feel like my skills set is out of reach of most plumbers/handymen out there.
Or put it simply - I can do basic plumbing and I can code, plumbers out there can do plumbing, but have hard time with craigslist.
So... My concern is that when I am asking $100-$125 / hr only very few clients are OK with that (they usually either pass this cost on their client or get way more value out of my work.) On top of this I constantly get "Impostor Syndrome". On the other hand plumber, who need just a bit of common sense and practice (and honesty to get nice feedbacks) charges $100+ an hour without even thinking twice, and everyone pays...
I constantly see in Craigslist's Service section maid service for $25+/hr (if they provide their supplies - it is extra), Handyman charging $50+/hr for simple things like fixing drywall hole. Plumber's help - from $75/hr (it is good deal)
Why is that? Why becoming a plumber actually can be more profitable than trying to solve way harder problems? Either all IT professionals are heavily underpaid, or their work simply brings less value somehow?
Sorry for this rant, but this bothers me for quite a while. Were I grew up plumbing for for people who did not have enough will to pursue college degree. And here in US they somehow charge often more than I can do. <comment><USER3> Plumbing makes good money mostly because people don't want to deal with the sewage side of things and because it tends to ruin your body. Clean work (water lines and such) is easy enough and easy to check, especially with the new generation of water lines. Gas lines come with a lot more responsibilities (and in many places certification requirements), sewage is just simply dirty work. It's also very hard work, crawlspaces are not named aptly, you can't really crawl there. And after a day in a crawlsuit you'll just love sitting behind your desk. There is no such thing as easier money than IT money. Figure a decade or so as a plumber will teach you more about appreciating the ability to do IT work than anything else will ever do. Maybe a few months of doing it every day will suffice.

Also, get professional liability insurance and don't touch any gas lines until you (a) know what you're doing and (b) have the required papers (if that's applicable where you live).

That's not stuff to mess around with if you are not 100% sure how to do it right. (you'll need pressure test gear and such to do this properly)

<comment><USER4> I can definitely agree with your point about no such thing as easier money than IT money.

Prior to working in programming (still in college, but I've done a few internships) I worked restaurant jobs--prep cook, dishwasher, busboy, etc. I'd come home from those jobs and not want to do anything for the rest of the day. It was completely mentally and physically exhausting.

Now I'm working for a software company and get to sit in a chair 8 hours a day and take breaks whenever I feel like it. When I worked at restaurants my managers would be all over me if I wasn't moving around and doing something.

Working in software I'm basically paid to do what I would have done in my free time. I find that pretty remarkable.

<comment><AUTHOR> This means it is what you are good at. If it would be that easy for anyone, everyone would try to be in software development and salaries would plummet. Instead I have many friends whom I tried to direct into software development direction, but after few evenings they would throw it all away saying it is impossible for them to get it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> My brother-in-law is a plumber, and he's on his way to doing as well as any of us rank-and-file tech guys. The hard part is he's had to go through indentured servitude (ahem "an apprenticeship") of several years, the risks of getting injured, and the risks of being furloughed / laid off the moment there is a downturn in work. As I've learned through him, there are actually a lot of different sub-fields in plumbing too - everything from maintenance and installation on industrial dishwashers to major construction projects.

He's barely 30 but already his body is wearing down from carrying hundreds of pounds of pipe up flights of stairs. He's been laid off twice - and guys that have been in the field longer have told him that he's had it good. I have used the residential side of the company he works for - and they charge the equivalent of $250 / hour.

So, like all professions it has its pros and cons. As a freelance developer though, I'd agree with your synopsis - once you get outside a few tech geographies and particular companies, the pay scale for tech work drops off quickly, as does the excitement of the work. So then money is less the determining factor than the work itself and/or the lifestyle. Do you like sitting in an office or do you want to be on the road going to job sites and people's homes? Do you want to use your body as a machine or your mind? What level of risk of layoff and career competition do you want? There's no passive income in plumbing unless you build a company and sit on top.

</comment><comment><USER6> See this, boys and girls? _This_ is why people think IT folks are arrogant.

> In my opinion all this stuff I do with hands is way easier than trying to > come up with good thought through software/hardware/network system.

> Why is that? Why becoming a plumber actually can be more profitable than > trying to solve way harder problems?

Your entire premise of this post seems to be "I can glue two PVC pipes together, therefore I can do what a plumber does!"

So let's consider replacing a water heater, which you mention you can do.

Did you get a permit to put it in? What did you do with the old heater? How much money did you spend on the tools to put it in? Are you _super duper sure_ that you installed it properly and to code? And when you go to sell your house can you prove it, or are you just gonna hope the buyer's home inspector doesn't ask too many questions?

And here's the big one: when you add up all money you spent getting the permits, the fees associated with taking the old one to the dump, the materials, etc. - be sure to also figure out how many hours you spent, multiply by your hourly rate, and subtract.

Gluing two pipes together doesn't make you a plumber. Putting a band-aid on your finger doesn't make you a doctor. Banging up a website in Frontpage doesn't make you a programmer.

<comment><USER7> > And here's the big one: when you add up all money you spent getting the > permits, the fees associated with taking the old one to the dump, the > materials, etc. - be sure to also figure out how many hours you spent, > multiply by your hourly rate, and subtract.

I am not aware of any trades that do not charge for permits, materials, and disposal fees on top of their hourly rate. The one time I actually called a plumber, the $150/hr was straight labor.

That said, I agree with the gist of your comment. People often underestimate how difficult it is to do things after only working with the simple cases or because they don't understand what is involved in doing something properly.

<comment><AUTHOR> Why when I ask someone to help with simple case they still charge me like they are working on high pressure gas pipe?

<comment><USER7> Professionals and trades generally charge a consistent labor rate, regardless of the specific tasks. Adjusting the rate based on the specific tasks would be very complicated, impractical, and possibly open these people up to legal challenges about what work should be billed at.

<comment><USER6> Yeah, this is really confusing to me. When I freelance I charge a fixed hourly rate no matter if I'm doing a 30 second site that's all Django scaffolding or something much more difficult.

I also charge by the hour - so I'd take 1000 of those 30 second Django sites any day of the week :-) Heck, some good freelancers have a minimum engagement period in the days.

For a tradesperson this is even more imperative: it's far easier for me to switch from one project to another; our plumber has to load their tools and drive to the next job site. This means the plumber is always going to charge a fixed rate or risk losing money because they took the "$35 unclog the sink" job over the "$220 'the poop is everywhere'" job.

<comment><AUTHOR> When I do work - I explain to my client that there is no need for my service "to install something" and refer them to less experienced devs who does major work and client invites me to fix something specific, or architect things or something like that. End result - less time billed and more cost effective work.

In the same time other developer can learn stuff and gradually progresses to more advanced level.

Contrast this to any handyman or plumber - they always seems to charge $50+/hr and $75+/hr no matter how simple task is at hands. And I bet if I had to deal with serious stuff, this rate would only go up. I.e. what they do is comparable to installing wordpress for $10/hr work. This is my problem.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm not gonna write my life story on hn, but I have the exact opposite experience as you. I grew up in a blue collar family. No real white collar mentors or apparent options in that world. So I followed my dad into the trades. I spent my summers in high school as a plumber (apprentice) and became a full-time plumber after high school, eschewing college even though I was accepted to a number of good schools.

After a number of post-high school years of being a plumber it quickly became obvious what type of life this would lead to for me. In particular, the physical toll. You are often carrying heavy equipment or supplies up or down stairs or ladders. You spend your entire day working with sharp edges, saws, and electricity. Accidents occur all the time and any of them can be debilitating.

You also have to consider the risk of the impairment of others and what damage it may cause you. Let's say a co-worker in IT gets drunk at lunch and comes back to work. He may accidentally drop a table or even a database. That sucks for sure, but in the grand scheme of things, your life and ability to continue working aren't impacted. But consider being on a job site with others and the electrician gets drunk at lunch. He could accidently miswire something that could end up with a severe injury to you or someone else. The risks from the mistakes of others upon yourself is much larger in the trades.

There are lot of things that seem similar. New development is akin to new construction. Both have maintenance and service. But IT is essentially a virtual environment. The data is important to many people and can even have lives depending on it. But in the trades, it is a completely physical environment. There is no undo. There is no restore from backup. Mistakes can and do result in physical injury and death. It is the difference between coming home at the end of the day sulking that you had to do some user support and coming home minus a few fingers because you or someone else sneezed at the wrong time.

My dad is retired now, not by choice. He was on a rooftop holding an air conditioner panel. A gust of wind kicked up and he had the choice of either letting the panel blow off the top of the building onto others below or hold onto it. He held onto it. In the process, destroying his back. He was never the same. That doesn't happen in IT.

</comment><comment><USER9> Plumbers on craigslist are, for the most part, doing lots of little 1-2 hour jobs. That means that there is likely lots of potential empty space in their calendar. They're probably lucky if they pull 20 jobs a week, so the rate has to go up to make a living.

IT work like you're talking about is probably going to be minimum of two weeks at 40-50 hours a week, so you probably have to pull 2-3 jobs a month. So the rate you have to charge to make a living, and the expectations of people hiring goes down as well.

Its the same effect as why I am paid $35/hr for an IT job (plus benefits, so lets say $45/hr) for a regular job, but wen we bring people in for contract work, we never pay less than $125/hr.

<comment><USER10> The higher rated plumbers and electricians (on Yelp) see to be quite busy. This one particular electrician said he had a 3 week lead time before he could work on our project. I think if you are good and treat your customers well, you will have unlimited business as a plumber or electrician.

<comment><USER11> Yup. Friend of mine started his own plumbing business after working in the industry for decades. He's made more money with just himself and a few employees than he can probably shake a stick at.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Thought 1: I love hearing that good plumbers are getting paid well. There is such a need for reliable, professional just-solve-my-problem-with-service tradesmen in America. In a just economy, the makers and doers (like plumbers) are well paid and BS jobs ([http://strikemag.org/bullshit- jobs/](http://strikemag.org/bullshit-jobs/)) are hard to find.

Thought 2: You should start taking plumbing jobs, and after 6 months do a big writeup / post that tells the story ("How I raised my rates by leaving software development for plumbing"). I think a lot of people love to read about it. And possibly it could lead to more lucrative software work if that's what you are really looking for.

</comment><comment><USER13> I worked as an assistant plumber one summer during college. I needed a job and my friend knew a guy.

It sucked. It was unexpectedly back-breaking work. (Granted this was for mostly new construction and not just fixing problems.) It was hot, and often smelled like urine since roofers would piss in the sump hole of unfinished units. The guy I worked for seemed to hate life and looked like a catcher's mitt from being out in the sun so much.

Though I enjoyed the physical challenge, that summer I really learned the value of getting an education. That said, if you hate IT, I'd suggest trying a few different things before jumping headlong into a craft you're not entirely sure about.

</comment><comment><USER14> What would happen if this question was inverted?

"""

I consider myself a pretty good plumber, with concrete manipulation abilities. In the same time, I'm handy enough to setup my own website in HTML, style it in CSS, and even animate stuff on my static site using jQuery.

...

In my opinion, all this javascript and css stuff is way easier than septic systems or repairing frozen/busted pipes in a turn of the century home.

...

I constantly see craigslist postings for web developers and entry QA positions at $20/hr...

"""

I'm not trying to be excessively snarky, I'm just trying to point out that our society is at the point where different services have reached different natural values. They're typically based on your standard economic factors like how saturated a market is with available employees, how much experience employees bring to the table, and how much they have determined to charge based on competition.

Alternatively, you can just go with Betteridge's law of headlines. :-)

<comment><AUTHOR> This definitely can be inverted for me or you (if you are good with manual work, not sure if this applies to all engineers)

But ask you handyman joe or plumber you meet when fixing toilet how to make dropdown with jquery and see where it go. My point is that most software engineers can fix leaking pipe (some might decide not to deal with it, but still can do it,) while plumber/handyman CAN NOT deal with typical IT problem even after spending couple evening with youtube. God, I had trouble explaining to guys laying laminate floor about how they can save money by opening checking account and depositing check there instead of going to one of these "check cashing" stores.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Part of the problem with billing as a software engineer is that our work is easily offshored. You can't hire an offshore plumber for $5/hr and if you could, I'm sure plumbers would get a lot more people upset at them charging $100/hr.

Also, I don't think it's fair to plumbers, mechanics, electricians, etc. to say their jobs are a lot easier than programmers. It all depends on the project. Setting up a Wordpress site is probably comparable to installing a new exhaust. And the industrial electrician rewiring a factory is probably comparable to the software engineer setting up a new SaaS site.

<comment><AUTHOR> Installing wordpress is comparable to installing exhaust to you (although I don't think you can charge even maid's rate for that.) but ask car mechanic to install wordpress and tell me what you hear in return.

<comment><USER15> I think that's over simplifying it. People specialize. Ask me to make a bagel from scratch and I doubt I could. But those cooks probably get minimum wage.

This is all about competition from offshore work which drives programming rates down and makes customers unwilling to pay very much. The abundance of offshore Wordpress shops is why it's not very well paying work.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> First, I don't know if this is really HN material, but that being said, plumbers get paid what they do because they deal with ridiculously nasty stuff, and they have to be on call 24/7 (or go out of business). They also need decent people skills. And insurance ($$$).

And they need to get really dirty sometimes, and the people who live with them have to be OK with that (a shower will only get you so far; there are mental barriers to having sex with someone who just had their arm elbow deep in a nice blend of rancid oil, mold, and shit).

If all that is OK with you, go for it.

<comment><AUTHOR> I am talking about laying down new PVC pipes stuff. And no - I have to wait for plumber to come over to give me an estimate. I am not talking about ones who are on 24/7 calls and dealing with nasty stuff.

<comment><USER3> Being picky is not going to get you very far.

Someone lists themselves as a plumber, they'll be called for whatever plumbing job is available. If you do the dirty jobs they'll hire you for the nice jobs too. If you refuse the dirty jobs then those plumbers that _do_ do the dirty jobs will will end up running off with your potential customers. Especially in the early years you won't be having too much work that you can afford to send away the jobs (and thus the customers) that you don't want.

You want to build up a reputation that says you are a good plumber, not a picky plumber that doesn't want to get his hands dirty. (In fact, that's one of the reasons plumbers can charge what they do.)

edit: this comment is a nice example of what I mean: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8120404](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8120404)

<comment><AUTHOR> The reason why poster from this comment you referred called same plumber - because they did dirty work for free. If they would charge $250/hr - $350/hr - it could turn differently (could, not necessary would)

<comment><USER3> They got the job because they came, showed they had what it takes to get the job done and then took their lumps because they said their estimate was free (so they stood by their word). That's the start of a fruitful business relationship which you can see for yourself worked out well for them.

If they would have charged for their estimate then the job would have probably gone to another plumber. Free estimates are fairly standard for plumbers and will reduce your profit margin, but it is a long term investment in the relationship.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I dunno. A plumber's overhead includes, tools, supplies, and what can be harder labor than the non-trivial work you've accomplished.

Until you are crawling in nasty crawl spaces replacing 4 inch drain lines or doing the more challenging work of replumbing in 100 year old walls with demanding clients warning you to not ruin their plaster and hexie tiles... I wouldn't discount the challenge, risks, and physical difficulty that plumbers face. They have a standard rate which is higher margin for putting a new wax seal in your toilet bowl. but digging long trenches to fix busted main drain lines to the street is far worse than grabbing a coffee on the way to the Herman Miller Aeron.

Depending on where you are, there's also the apprenticeship/licensing process and dealing with the range of niche plumbing areas. There are plenty of basic plumbers, so high competition (you don't just get 40hr/wk starting up). If you get into commercial, then you deal with fairly complex issues and entrenched rackets for middle management to ensure that they get paid more than you.

Do you want to be hands on the pipes or a supervisor? Hands on pipes? You better be tough, never get sick, and ready to deal with a lot of shit - literally. You better work.

</comment><comment><USER18> I am a recovering software developer that had a terribly failed startup. We raised venture capital, had angel investors, and just totally blew it. I'm 29 at this point, was 27 then. I had to let go of a team of developers, maybe 3 of them, they had family, it was heartbreaking. I still talk to most of them. I went through a really dark period.

Few months later, we still hadn't raised any money to keep things going and I find out my wife and I are expecting. I basically say, 'Fuck it', I need a real job. So I apply anywhere that would even possibly want me, and I end up interviewing at a Mechanical Contractor as a Project Assistant. Just pushing paper for Plumbing and HVAC jobs.

Two years later, I'm running my own jobs, and working directly with union pipefitters and sheetmetal guys. Here's my advice.

Join the union in their apprentice program. You'll be paid well to start with - you definitely, definitely won't starve. You might not be making $150 per hour, but you might make $30 per hour all week long, plus the opportunity for overtime. It'll take a few years, but you'll end up becoming a Journeyman, and that means more like $40-$50 per hour, all week long, with overtime potential, incredible benefits, and more. Working for an established mechanical contractor will help you get more steady paychecks and if you're good, you'll end up becoming a foreman running larger jobs. The foreman that managed the last project I was on - it was a $2M job - made $65 per hour, plus opportunities for overtime and doubletime.

It's dirty work. You'll be so tired you won't have time for coding like you used to.

</comment><comment><USER17> I consider myself a pretty good plumber with significant problem solving abilities. In the same time, I am able to learn how to use a computer and put together a WordPress site for my small business. I even learned enough CSS and HTML to embed some videos I did.

In my opinion, this computer stuff is way easier than dealing with customers in emergency situations, lugging heavy stuff everywhere, and dealing with the daily...

You see where I'm going.

If anything. Partner with an awesome plumber and do part-time plumbing work while helping create software that helps the plumber build a happy customer base and get out of being the labor plumber before her body is destroyed from all that hard work.

Think, online payment processing, estimate delivery/website, mobile app to take pictures of plumbing situations that can be married to estimates or remediation documentation, lead management, accept images from customers of their issues, etc.

Eventually, you will have built out a suite of tools and will be able to sell that to plumbers and/or customers. Add in reviews, etc. and you've got Angie's List on the run.

</comment><comment><USER19> Plumbing can be hard work. Being on your back / knees for hours at a time day after will end up getting to you. Also, it sounds like your doing some of the more reasonably easy plumbing. Things are a bit more complex when you have to do things like figure out how to maximize water pressure after N different horrendous bend angles, etc. If you think of it in terms of software engineering, the plumbing you've probably done is probably through intermediate software work. You've set up some CRUD apps at this point (in the plumbing world). There's a reason plumbing is a trade and a craft...it can get very complex and the time they're charging to fix a trivial flush valve on a toilet could just as easily be spent on a commercial plumbing gig with some corporate client who is paying the plumber to set up every toilet in a small hotel (for example).

<comment><USER20> In addition to being physically hard work, you need to get out and go to the job site. That incurs overhead in the form of fewer billable hours per day. So if you're 30 minutes to/from a 1 hour job, your rate is effectively cut by 1/3.

I'll add that it's pretty comfy sitting on a soft chair in an air conditioned or heated office to work.

<comment><USER21> I ran straight into this when I was doing chemistry lab demonstrating last year. The job pays pretty well for what's asked of you...but since I wasn't actually at uni at the time, it meant I had about 1.5 hours of commute for a 2 hour lab period where I got paid. Which made the rate far more ordinary.

Still doing the same thing this coming semester, but since I'll be an undergrad and it'll run straight to classes, the value proposition is much better.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Yes you should.

Go do it for 6 months full time. Advertise, take jobs, bid, be a subcontractor, hire subcontractors, go to all the plumbing wholesalers and build relationships. Get involved in the world of the professional plumbing company.

You will then see many ways to use IT skills to improve the life of people in the plumbing trade. Write some code, solve some problems, charge $20 per month per person (some sort of SaaS for plumbing companies) and live happily ever after.

Hopefully we can read about you here on HN in a couple years, after you have made headlines for being the Uber of the plumbing trade. It is a way to cross- pollinate your skills and make something that few others could.

You will end up with an unfair advantage [http://blog.asmartbear.com/unfair- advantages.html](http://blog.asmartbear.com/unfair-advantages.html)

</comment><comment><USER23> I struggle myself with why I think I _have_ to be a programmer. More and more I feel like "what am I trying to prove?" when I suffer from the same nagging imposter syndrome and self doubt. If you don't like it as much, don't do it. Go for what makes you happy, relaxed, and fulfilled. Not what you think you should be doing. I'm sure you'll end up with something that takes advantage of your existing skills with software and your aspirations to work more with your hands.

<comment><AUTHOR> I am still in my life phase where I enjoy creating software. But I enjoy creating something in general, so I might follow you advice later in my life.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> im a plumber, not working right now due to a fami.ly illness but, i usually end my day by cleaning all the shit i had to roll around in all day, litterally feces, human excrement . im nothing but a turd herder . when i look at it that way with you in your nice clean office and my work is either on the roof of your building or its underneath or outside in areas you probably would not want to spend 8-10 hrs a day, i think i want to charge even more(i should have been an office worker)

<comment><AUTHOR> can you pick what you do? If no - why?

<comment><USER3> No. Because he wants to feed his family.

(I don't pretend to speak for the OP but you have a very naive view of what it is like to be a tradesman that wants to stay in business for more than 3 months. Hint: you take the work you can get at hopefully a price where you make enough money that if there is a lull in business you can still survive. Then there's taxes, tools, breakage, late payers, non-payers and so on, it's not exactly a joyride compared to being a desk-jockey.)

<comment><AUTHOR> computer software freelance have all the same issues (i would argue even more with unpaying clients since there is less physical contact involved often)

And you answer is counterintuitive - if they have to take all jobs - <USER2> there should be pressure from market to drive prices down. In practice I had to go through many guys/companies to get someone same day in my house to estimate work, and two weeks from estimate when they actually would start and they still charge tons of money in my opinion.

<comment><USER3> Freelance software is a ton easier than freelance plumbing. But don't take my word for it, and please prove I'm wrong.

The market is not 100% efficient, not for freelance plumbers and not for software people. One thing I do know: if I call a plumber and he turns me down for job 'a' I won't be calling him ever for job 'b' (which he might have gladly accepted). You build relationships with people that get the job done, not with people that are afraid to get their hands (literally) dirty.

<comment><AUTHOR> What is there would be a place where all skilled professional would post offers to do work and describe what kind of work they do. One type of work per account/post or something. And feedbacks and rate for this type of work. So if you had broken off outside AC discharge pipe, you could hire Joe with 5 stars for doing exact this level of work for $25/hr, but once you got problem with busted sewer pipe somewhere under your house you could only find Dan with team of 5 people who deal with only that kind of serious problems for $300/hr for whole team.

In such artificial scenario, would you hire both in different situations or you still would go with more expensive Dan and his team? If you answer would be former, then it is inefficient market.

<comment><USER3> Not that simple. Customer relations are not price only affairs. If you already hired Dan for the sewer job you'll hire him again for the broken off outside AC discharge pipe because _you have a relationship_ with Dan. And Joe will now have to 'bust' that relationship in order to even get a chance. So until Dan is unavailable (says 'no' to some job you want him to do), ill, dead on a holiday or otherwise indisposed it is very likely that the 'plumber' entry on the phone of the customer will contain Dan's number. And that will be the first person to call in case of trouble.

This is known as mind-share for bigger brands and for smaller relationships like these it is best described using the dutch word 'gunnen' for which I still haven't found a good English translation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Plumbers make good money because: 1) Demand a. A lot of people have plumbing problems. b. There is shortage in skilled plumbers (especially those willing to do small jobs). 2) Perceived Value a.Working plumbing is a necessity for most people. 3)Fear a. If people toilet is leaking they are worried about damage it may cause. (Fear is one of the reasons rates for security focused IT people generally make better money) b. Most people are scared to do their own plumbing.

A couple years ago my job was outsourced. I took my severance and registered in a Carpentry course. Part of the course was building a house for Habitat for Humanity. It was a great experience and gave me skills I never had before. I can now do all of my own renovations.

I also worked in trades for a while. Trades can make you good money but not right away. When you start in trades you are a glorified janitor and treated like one. It's very labor intensive work. In Canada it takes about 4 years of experience to get your ticket.

One of the best things I gained from my experience was the appreciation of hard work. The saying "If there is time to lean then there is time to clean" is the rule in trades. You basically have to make yourself busy at all times or you won't have a job.

</comment><comment><USER26> Fixed, high demand combined with a low offer explain the high price.

Contributing to reduce the offer of work capacity is that handyman, plumber, gardener and related careers still rely on experience and apprenticeship to qualify people (as opposed to easy access to formal and informal information sources in IT) - how does a subredit for plumbing compares with stackexchange, moocs and all sort of tech manuals availabe?

On the other side, IT gets other forms of compensation, such as a greater sense of "doing something with your life", and that is one reason it can pay less than plumbers. N.B. I'm not saying one can't feel accomplished with a plumbing career, but it is far less common to find one such person than it is to find someone who finds a IT career fulfilling.

You could also say the IT market is just better/more efficient and that there is way more liquidity on IT work than plumber work. If you have a stock and someone is attempting a aggressive takeover (that is, one agent in the market intensely needs what you have), you can ask more than market price and still sell. In plumbing, the client often faces similar situations. Other factor is that there almost always is a time pressure and the client does not have perfect information, calling every plumber in town to gauge prices has a cost in time.

Concluding, I still wouldn't go for plumbing. I (personally) wouldn't be fulfilled with such a career. More relevant is the fact that $125 is probably the most you will ever be able to charge (correcting only for inflation, some fluctuation on demand or offer) while on IT, the cap is likely higher (I don't know the market you are inserted in, but plumbing is more commodity than IT)

</comment><comment><USER27> You have to factor in how much time you actually work in a day.

Unless you work in a big construction project such that you arrive 9:00 in the morning and leave at 18:00, you will probably need to spend a significant amount of time travelling from one client's house to another. And you cannot charge your clients for that time.

And then there is the question of whether you will even be fully booked all the time.

<comment><AUTHOR> I never was booked full time when i was doing freelancing. And to get to the project I had to do my research and no one was paying for my research time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> How much you get paid for a job isn't solely determined by how difficult it is. It is determined by supply and demand (and difficulty is one of the ingredients in supply). My impression is that unions and licensing also severely limit the supply of plumbers in any one location, making it a high paying job.

</comment><comment><USER29> I understand where you are coming from. But keep in mind that there are many factors to consider. Getting a van and buying supplies. Driving time. Having consistent business to bill 40 hours per week etc.

I would be very surprised if your overall net income or free-time was higher being a plumber.

<comment><USER30> _I would be very surprised if your overall net income or free-time was higher being a plumber._

Plumbers run a business. If they run the business well, they can be quite financially successful. Do not expect any free-time running the business, but you might be able to retire early.

My stepfather was a plumber, and he's earned (significantly) more over his career than I'm pretty sure I will. But he had to run a successful business to get there. Maybe it's on-topic for HN after all.

<comment><USER31> Be interesting to hear from plumbers about the risks that come with expanding the business. It starts with your good name getting around and more people hearing about you. Do you stay at that level, or do you take on staff to do the more boring jobs or to help cover the busier times or to give you an easier week. But with that kind of set up reputation is so important.

<comment><USER30> Without going into too much detail, his business was severely hampered in development for several years because they couldn't find good (extra) personnel. i.e. kids that graduated only wanted to work for bigger firms, had wage demands he didn't consider sustainable, or simply didn't seem good enough.

During that period they tended to focus on bringing in as much big projects as they could by being friendly with architects and project developers. It's easier to do more with a tiny team if you can batch work on a single site. Getting a good reputation in terms of quality and delivery was obviously very important there - you do not want to race to the bottom on prices.

Around 2008, shortly after the financial crisis, many business got into problems, often also because customers were insolvent. Suddenly it became easier to hire more people, and he did expand the number of workers, and consequently the business, at that point, but never more than what they could reasonably check up on himself. (I reminds me a bit of the story where just after the .com crash, Amazon suddenly announced that for the first time in their history they'd made a profit)

It was basically a slow, very careful growth, taking opportunities when they presented themselves. Customer satisfaction was very important. If you leave people in the cold, literally, they will remember and tell others. This means leaving the house to fix stuff at 10pm Sunday evening in the middle of the winter.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> I was talking to my dad about how I repaired a few of my toilets and that I find it hard to believe plumbers charge that much. He then enlightened me to the fact that most calls plumbers get are of the 'messy' kind... Something to think about.

</comment><comment><USER33> It sounds like you're talking to the wrong "potential" clients. You don't "ask" for your hourly rate, you tell them. I've found the best way to get new clients is through networking and referrals. It requires the ability to sell yourself but if you lack that skill it's something you can learn.

I recommend Brennan Dunn's book Double Your Freelance Rate. It's not as much about your development skills (but you should have those down too) as your ability to manage the project, meet expectations, and relate to the client.

With dev vs plumber, do whichever you most enjoy.

<comment><USER34> I looked the book up, just out of curiosity, and I can't seem to find it anywhere. It's not available on any bookstore's site (Amazon, Half.com, Barnes & Noble). Even on the author's website (doubleyourfreelancing.com -- named after the book!) the book itself is not specifically for sale. Sure, I can enroll in a $200 course, and the book is provided with it, but I can't buy the book by itself.

That's fine, for me at least. I'm not currently looking to freelance (I was at one time, which is why I'm interested, but I'm pursuing another venture right now). But I don't think OP is going to be able to read it unless he wants to take the author's course!

<comment><USER35> There's 3 bundle options. The minimum package including the book is $69. [http://doubleyourfreelancing.com/rate/](http://doubleyourfreelancing.com/rate/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> A bit off topic, but there's a quotation I find so compelling that I post it in my office and on the front of my website:

"The society which scorns excellence in plumbing as a humble activity and tolerates shoddiness in philosophy as an exalted activity will have neither good plumbing nor good philosophy; neither its pipes nor its theories will hold water." J. Gardner

I'm in a field (academia) where it is very easy to allow yourself to get away with doing shoddy work as a result of pridefulness.

</comment><comment><USER37> @OP, it seems that @logicalmind has the exact opposite problem as you. You know, I could start a startup that is like "TradingPlaces", where you get to swap professions by getting first hand training from a master at his craft, maybe gaining access to each other's network and clients over time.

Except, to start a company I would need to be very business oriented, and I'm not (I'm product/sales/service oriented), and I'd need a business co-founder.

Thoughts?

</comment><comment><USER38> So you have plumbing and software engineering skills. You know how plumbers are struggling with the internet-y side of things? Are you aware of the fact that _plumber + {city}_ is worth $40-60 a click through Google AdWords? Are you aware of the fact that the vast majority of landing pages are none... as in suck badly and don't convert? See the gap you could fill with a solution? Reply and I'll get in touch with you for some ideas.

<comment><USER39> Interested as well! email@example.com

I'll use my personal email for further communications ;)

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> Why not do both?

You can do contract IT work for 15-20 hours a week and then try to fill the gaps with freelance plumbing.

It will take a while to set-up: liability insurance, increasing your skill set, ect.

But, I have always believed in doing multiple, sometimes unrelated projects just so your mind doesn't go crazy.

Who knows, some day you might build a "smart toilet" and make a shit ton of money.

</comment><comment><USER41> I am not good with my hands, but I am aware of the discrepancy.

I do blame fools who often spend time pontificating here as a depressing factor of my rates. Which btw are close to $100 and I am fully engaged (40+hrs) yet I believe I should be able to get more and do more fun stuff.

And yes, I do believe we are heavily underpaid, just look at lawyers for example

</comment><comment><USER42> Plumbers don't typically have multi-month gigs. Their overhead is way larger, which is reflected in their rate.

</comment><comment><USER43> Most people can tell the difference between a leaky pipe and one that is properly plumbed. However, most people cannot tell the difference between well-designed software and shit.

Also, they can take their time choosing a software architect. But if they take their time choosing a plumber, their house fills with shit.

</comment><comment><USER44> Answering this properly would require a nice mix of philosophy, economics, and a discussion of value. Not sure if I can even come up with a tldr (after I thought about it for a bit)

</comment><comment><USER45> Having just read the story about the dentist who got into the dental software business ... who not turn plumber then write plumbing company management software? :)

</comment><comment><USER46> Go for it. Be a plumber for a while but leave some time to keep your software skills sharp / take the "few clients" that pay >$100.

Report back in a few months!

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> EDIT: here I am not discussing extreme cases, I am talking about day-to-day help without call at 3am and digging into sewer full body.

<comment><USER30> You basically want to do clean handyman stuff. I would expect the issue to be finding enough customers, although if supply/demand is sufficiently twisted in your area, it might work.

Calling it "plumber" is quite a misnomer as they have to deal with a lot more shit (literally and figuratively).

<comment><AUTHOR> handymen charge $50+ which is still too much in my opinion for level and rarity of skill they have.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> you might find this interesting [http://gselevator.wordpress.com/2013/09/04/meet-jack-the- plu...](http://gselevator.wordpress.com/2013/09/04/meet-jack-the-plumber- philosopher/)

</comment><comment><USER48> Do the job that gives you most satisfaction.

</comment><comment><USER49> I feel the same way, if I had things to do over again I would have gone into a different and likely skilled labor field.

TLDR: perception, complex value proposition, dev project are not making enough money, wholesale / retail projects, & dev projects are expensive to sell.

Better hours, awesome power tools, significantly less politics & frustration. I like solving problems and I spend most of my time keeping clients from sabotaging their projects and dealing with syntax & communication.

A couple points I'd make: 1) Skilled labor have significant fixed costs with equipment and buildings, I have about 5k (maybe) total invested in my little home based web dev business (contact me for quality onshore+offshore web development ;). The fixed costs for skilled labor are easier to understand, for example the phrase "it was cheaper for me to higher it out than buy the tools and probably mess it up the first time".

2) Most software projects are losing money, get on a project where your work is within the direct profit stream and rates are higher, as are expectations.

3) One of the many difficult things about tech projects are that it's really difficult to understand what is hard and what is easy. Estimates are rough even after over 10 years of programming, non technical stakeholders have no idea, that goes double for the ones that tell you about all the cool tech stuff they did in the 90's. With plumbing, and almost any other skill, the value proposition is easier to see.

4) Dev's do not do a good job of appearing to be important. Like it or not perception is a big deal, I loath working with suits, and do what I can to avoid looking like them because looking professional has become synonymous with high quality hair product and low quality work. I realize if I look expensive, act like I know what I'm doing, people assume I know what I'm doing. I usually do, but I'm also usually working at home in a T-shirt, carhartt shorts, and flippy flops, but when clients seem me I dress like Bill Gates & Warren Buffet, not to slick but professional.

5) Many dev clients are not retail, they are wholesale. It's important to adjust rates based off volume & project risk. Joe Shmoe from craigslist is going to offer a low volume project, with the high risk that he's going to mess up his project and blame you because he has no idea what he's doing, those guys get higher rates. Agencies that have a good plan, reasonable volume, and a history of success have earned a lower rate.

6) Dev projects are expensive to sell compared to skilled labor projects, this means sales guys deserve a bigger cut, and since they are good at negotiating they leverage this to get as much as they can. This leaves a smaller piece of the pie for the rest of the team.

</comment><comment><USER50> www.handybook.com/apply

</comment><comment><USER51> No, because your passion is not plumbing.

You seem frustrated monetarily, yet seem to enjoy your profession.

Honestly, find a new niche for your services and keep working hard and doing your best in your current field. As long as you are following your dream/passion the end always justifies the means.</comment>


Ask HN: Should I take the plunge? - <AUTHOR>

I am a wannapreneur and have been working (moonlighting) on a start-up idea for last 9 months or so. I work as Director - Business Development for a mobile internet company in my day job. I've been thinking about quitting my job and doing this full-time but, i am not sure if its such a good idea to take the plunge during current economic times.
I am stating personal and project related data points and a couple of options. Do you think it might be a good idea to take the plunge?
Personal
Education - BS (Computer Science) and MBA from top tier school Experience - Software Engineer (2yrs), Marketing/Sales/BD (3yrs)
Product
Proven concept applied to a niche segment (I guess 2-3mn and growing) Using open source - zero product development costs so far. Demographics - predominently 22 - 30, very affluent male.
Traction Below is some data on the uptake of service:
Month	UV	Visits	Pageviews
Feb	734	1266	22500
Mar	1964	3596	37314
Apr	3246	5975	158898
May	3948	7949	77877
Jun	4922	10134	98626
Jul	6438	12806	138758
Aug	8536	15407	186394
Sep	9414	18256	180612
Oct	9308	17436	171421
Nov	10188	19239	176359
Registrations: 1500
Financials I bought a house recently.
Paid - 25% Savings - 40% Deficit - 35%
I can stretch the savings to pay the mortgage for next 12-18 months. I would need to work for 12-16 months to save 35%.
Options
Option 1: Work for a year and pay for the house before taking the plunge
Option 2: Take the plunge hoping things will work-out in next 12-18 months (while the savings last)
What do you suggest? <comment><USER3> You certainly appear to have an abundance of education that should assist you tremendously...

A born financial conservative, I say go with Option 1 - but note that I have completely no experience in these types of ventures.

What I can offer is that in this time of economic turmoil, if you happen to be doing alright - you don't need Warren Buffet to tell you that now is a nice time to buy as things are on sale, even if we haven't completely hit bottom yet. Now that only relates to the market and stocks specifically, but apply that to your idea - startup costs specifically, mustn't they be low too? Supplies, equipment, all marked and coming down due to businesses going belly- up. You fancy open source, so that's a cost saver too... heck, you've got an MBA and you're asking us about plunging, mortgages and finances?

I say keep at your goal in the moonlight, pay off deficits as much as possible, that way you'll have less to worry about when you do take the plunge. I'm not really impressed with the numbers showing page views - <USER2> company could go bankrupt for some illegal exposure that you didn't foresee occurring. What I am concerned about is how much can you afford, and/or how much can you risk? If you don't have a backup plan, I say you have no plan - hence the cushion that the 35% would provide.

Best of luck.

</comment><comment><USER4> I am going to have to say, go with Option 1. You could take the plunge today, but personally I'd rather be safe than sorry.

Another option would be to slowly phase out your old job, cut from 40 hours a week to 35 and spend that extra time working on your new business. I'm not sure if this is possible in your current situation but if it is it may be an option worth exploring.

My 2 cents.

</comment><comment><USER5> how confident/comfortable are you with the idea of working on this company as your sole source of income? ... really, you need to honestly answer that question first.

second, do you have a co-founder? though one isn't necessary it doesn't hurt to have one (or more).

to go with option 2 (which is my knee-jerk recommendation), answering affirmative to the first is required, for the second it's "strongly encouraged".

also if you have a spouse, sig-other, or any dependents, it might be nice to (see: you better) talk this over with them and get their input.

</comment><comment><USER6> Something you gave no mention of: what if any revenue is the site generating? Ads? Paid premium service?

</comment><comment><USER7> One thing to consider: Lots of situations can wipe you out in cash (family member gets ill, you get ill or injured, new child born, etc) BUT if you go for it now, you'll know if your cashflow is good enough to keep going or if you have to get a new job. You seem qualified, intelligent, and responsibile: You should be able to find a job pretty quickly if the entrepreneurial thing doesn't work out.

Faster you jump in, more likely you are to do it. There's tons of things that can come up to make jumping into the unknown a very bad idea. But right now, you can try your hand for 6-10 months and see where your cashflows are and if your business is growing. If it doesn't work, you've got 8-12 months to find a new job before you're broke.

Also as an employer, trying your own hand in business is a huge plus on the resume. Staff that can think strategically/managerially are really cool to work with. You'll learn a hell of a lot on your own, you've got a long time to make things work, and then if something changes, you'll know if your biz is viable to support you and your family.</comment>


Intel replace Nokia with Samsung, and MeeGo with Tizen - a new mobile Linux OS - <AUTHOR> https://www.tizen.org/

<comment><AUTHOR> More discussion: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3046642></comment>