If your product is Great, it doesn't need to be Good. - <AUTHOR> http://paulbuchheit.blogspot.com/2010/02/if-your-product-is-great-it-doesnt-need.html <comment><USER2> I'm not so sure that's what the focus of the iPad naysayers is. It's more "why do I want this?". Nobody questioned why everyone would want a tiny, pocketable device that held every song they would ever want. They questioned whether Apple's mp3 player would be the one people wanted (and, by the way, the first iPod was not, it took a few generations). Nobody questioned whether people would want a smartphone at all, they'd been popular for years, just where in the market the iPhone would end up.

The iPad's a different animal because it's trying to sell people something they don't even know they want. It's more akin to the Apple TV than the iPod. Maybe they want something like this or maybe they don't, but it isn't the feature set that's worrisome, it's the fact that we all have a smartphone and a laptop, and do we really need something in between?

Only time will tell.

<comment><USER3> That is simply not true. Not everyone has a laptop and a smartphone. The ipad is far more compelling than a smartphone for me, maybe not for you. I can think of a dozen innowative usas for it. If it lives up to the promise of 10 hrs battery that's amazing in itself.

It ain't what you do it's the way that you do it. I see this as innovation rater than the last 10 years of immatation.

<comment><USER4> I agree with that. I don't own a notebook, and here's why: as a developer, I find it very hard to work on a laptop: I need two displays, a proper keyboard, a proper mouse and a powerful machine. It's question of taste, I suppose. For my "mobile communcation needs", my Android phone is satisfactory most of the times. However, for casual browsing / reading, the smartphone is too small / slow and the desktop computer is too big / uncomfortable. Laptops are way to big for casual browsing either in my opinion. I believe a tablet would be an ideal device for me.

I don't know yet if the iPad will be the "one" for me, but right now I'm pretty much certain that I will purchase a tablet in the next few years.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Good article and the core idea is so spot on that I did not mind it riding the iPad publicity wave...

This made me chuckle:

"""For markets that have purchasing processes with long lists of feature requirements, you should probably just crank out as many features as possible and _not waste time on simplicity or usability_."""

<comment><USER6> That quote pretty much sums up enterprise/government software consulting and sales. A committee will come up with a grocery list of features that must work, but don't need to work well. The longer the list, the more the consultants make, so they gladly help their clients lengthen the list for a fee.

<comment><USER7> I've sat in some multiple-day long RFP sessions where there the sales guy "moderates" items like "14.2.2 Support integration with process engine...ok on to section 14.3"

It's a scary mentality / even if 14.2.2 is not supported - they might lose the sale on too many N/A's so the sales guy will gloss over it (with the assumption, usually right, that the client doesn't really need that). And if they really do - litigation after the sale

<comment><USER6> Litigation, or often additional consulting fees to add the features.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Those three well-executed features need to be done in the context of marketing/sales magic, otherwise the product won't take off. GMail by all rights should be the dominant email client today, or at least every other surviving email client should have copied the conversation view from GMail. FriendFeed should be bigger than Twitter. I'll admit that twitter got the "few things" part, but I don't think they won based on doing those few things well.

EDIT: More discussion at [http://friendfeed.com/paul/e75a7022/if-your-product- is-great...](http://friendfeed.com/paul/e75a7022/if-your-product-is-great-it- doesn-t-need-to-be-good)

<comment><USER9> FriendFeed is about discussion. It's back and forth. There are lot's of software/site/thing on the Internet doing this, in many forms.

Twitter is about publishing. It's one way. It's a minified blog without comments. A mini-blog for everyone is a need, apparently. Only Twitter is doing it.

<comment><USER8> Your assumption is that a product takes off because it meets a need. When you say, "a mini-blog for everyone is a need, apparently" you're reiterating that assumption, not supporting it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Once again, Google and Apple get it, the rest of us don't. The revolution will not be televised. If you can solve a major problem I have, I don't care whether you try and solve all my other problems.

<comment><USER11> Honest question: what problem does this solve for you?

<comment><USER12> I can hand around photos, movies, web pages.

This is a common enough use right now with the iPhone I recognize it immediately.

The fact that the screen is viewable from wide angles is not a coincidence me thinks.

<comment><USER13> That's not a problem. Paint me the picture of when you REALLY wish you could hand around photos, movies, and web pages. 95% of the time, methinks, it's when you are NOT toting around a laptop/tablet (i.e. it's a smartphone problem).

I can see the market for road warriors who do demos and/or fly a lot, rich folk who love tech, etc. Other than, "I'd love to have one on my coffee table from time to time", I don't see a draw for most people that'd cause them to cough up $600-$1000.

And, for the record, the "it's a computer for non-geeks" argument is pretty weak, IMO. My parents HATE onscreen touch keyboards and print everything.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> s/great/well-designed\ and\ properly-tested/; s/good/feature-complete/; (Am I getting this right? My perl is rusty.)

It's hard to disagree with this guy. What's the point of a 5 megapixel camera if it can't focus properly?

</comment><comment><USER15> Probably the best iPad article so far. I think the iPad's winning features are misjudged. That it's simple to use is pointless; YouTube clearly illustrates idiots can use computers and do stuff on the internet. However since it's "just a large iPhone", it's UI is designed around the fact your finger is far fatter than a mouse pointer. Also opening and closing laptops is a pain in the ass.

Where the iPad is risky is that it has enough potential UI bandwidth that you want to use it like a normal computer but the OS may be too close to the iPhone model.

<comment><USER16> I've personally always wanted a phone with a 5-6 inch screen. I really, really wouldn't mind carrying it and would use it all the time.

As it is now, I use my phone's 3inch screen so often, just becaues I'm too lazy to pull out my laptop. I think previous articles have hit this one home pretty well - most users simply don't need a computer. I know that when all I want to do is check email quickly and catch up on reading (blogs, hn, etc.), I certainly don't.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> so true. The original GMail launched with no "save" feature for drafts and it was a major inconvenience but my friends and I still loved it to death.

</comment><comment><USER18> 37 signals already hits this same key for a long time in their 'getting real' book: 'make half a product, not a half ass product'.

<comment><USER19> Actually this advice is pretty difficult to follow IMHO. We tend to give-in to the demands of clients/users and add complexity without even realizing it. So it needs continuous hammering.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I think 'great is simple' applies to programming too. The reason I learned BASIC at school was because there were computers lying around which _all_ had the same BASIC pre-installed on ROM. They switched on in less than a second.

Nowadays, apart from a few web-based 'try it out' pages, learning a language usually requires installing it and several other packages and getting everything to work together and with your OS. This is hard, especially for beginners. In the meantime, you're using your computer for other important things.

If I could buy a pad with the major languages and text editors pre-installed, or even just with one language and one editor, I would. It would be separate from my browsing pad. Which would be separate from my gaming pad. Etc.

Hopefully pads will continue to get thinner and cheaper because they will be a lot of them lying around the house by 2020.

<comment><USER21> _Nowadays, apart from a few web-based 'try it out' pages, learning a language usually requires installing it and several other packages and getting everything to work together and with your OS._

Counterpoint: Linux and Python.

Which makes the strong intersection between Mac-weenie-ism and Ruby-weenie-ism all the more idiosyncratic. Python is a much more Apple-y language: it works right out of the box; and the way you'd expect to do something is usually the way it is in fact done in Python.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Totally agree. But I think that even in hindsight, it's not always obvious which of even just 3 qualities was actually crucial for success.

With google search, it was fast, uncluttered, had a patented pagerank algorithm and didn't sell search placements. Though "the algorithm" was seen as crucial, I've heard people argue that it wasn't (though it added a PR factor). I remember comparing it with other searches early on, and it wasn't that different - but it felt a lot better to use, probably because fast, clear, honest and cool.

With gmail, it was 1 GB, fast, and used search and tags instead of hierarchical folders (btw what was new about conversations?) - but how can one tell what was crucial for its success? Perhaps the 1 GB was the main thing? (was there evidence showing how crucial each aspect was?)

<comment><USER23> "I remember comparing it with other searches early on, and it wasn't that different"

It wasn't that different? For me it was just radically different:

ALtavista->Advanced search->"car AND red AND 200 AND horsepower"

You had been redirected to a "portal". Ads flashing every second, and the first two pages filled only with sponsored links. Slow search with non related pics.

Google "car red 200 horsepower"

Clean and lean, text only, with just the information that you were searching for in the first page.

<comment><USER24> [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=f...](http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen- US%3Aofficial&hs=ZeD&q=car+red+200+horsepower&aq=f&aqi=&oq=)

I'm not seeing any relevant results on the first page

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Gmail's killer features for me upon launch were (1) exclusivity of the address invites, (2) storage space, and ultimately (3) POP support so I didn't have to use the web client any more.

I almost never use the GMail web interface.

<comment><USER25> Interesting that 2 people disagree so vehemently to downvote. My point is that the "killer features" aren't necessarily the same for different people.

<comment><USER26> One important thing to note in this "pick three features" strategy is that you can't please all of the people all of the time. There will always be people happy to chime in that they don't like some GMail feature or other but that doesn't take away from the product's successes.

My dad chooses a generic USB MP3 player over the iPod but that doesn't say anything bad about the iPod.

<comment><USER25> Indeed - and I never said I didn't like the GMail web interface, simply that I don't use it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> The points about board games and the device being easily shared are nice observations.

Using the device for board games would save on storage, solve the problem of missing pieces, and save time setting up, all while maintaining the immediacy of sitting around the table with a friend or three.

Chess and Risk strike me as particularly well suited to be played on the iPad.

<comment><USER28> You could even have iPad / iPhone combination for where the players required to keep their 'hand' hidden from the other players.

Eg a HN favourite of Settlers of Catan comes to mind - the game board on the iPad, and each player has an iPhone with their resource / victory points cards and they all interface to the iPad to play...

Of course, playing an actual board game with actual cards might be more fun :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I agree with the jist of this article. And Apple's strong point IMO has always been their IJFW technology (it just f __ _ing works), which seems to elude so many others who cram in 10,000 features and wonder why nobody uses their product which takes a Ph.D in computer science to decipher (especially open source projects in many cases_ steps off soapbox _).

The problem is, I actually think Apple is starting to abandon this approach for a more of a corporate driven 'I want you to lock you into this' model, which will NOT work.

The whole Flash debacle is the prime example of this IMO: if I want to use a Flash application on a webpage, and I'm the average user who doesn't even _know* what Flash is, it better just f __*ing work. Otherwise this product will be going back to the store, and I as Joe Public average computer- illiterate internet user will be on to something else. End of story.

</comment><comment><USER30> As usual, a very good article from Paul. BTW, what would be those three key features of iPad?

<comment><USER31> 1) Instant—in broad sense: instant on, rendering speed, responsiveness to manipulation.

2) Comfortable—allows more flexibility orientation and holding-wise than notebooks. IPS screen with 178 viewing angle helps a lot there too.

3) Interface. Combined with 1) it makes to happen the thing that David Carr noticed: "the gadget disappears" (<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ysq7mmGaWoU>). When you get impression that you are directly manipulating web page, photos or e-book with your bare fingers without much effort why would you think about GHz, number of USB ports, etc.?

One of my favorite quotes about design is "Good design is invisible".

<comment> loup-vaillant 0) Trusted Computing.

More seriously, their design is so good that even their "Trusted Computing" scheme is invisible to most people. This is scary.

<comment><USER31> Most people don't even know what "Trusted Computing" is, leave alone why would they should be scared by that.

Frankly, I am a bit tired of "open is good, closed is bad" rubberstamping without putting much effort into thinking why is that and is it always the case. Reminds me "Four legs good, two legs bad" from the _Animal Farm_.

<comment> loup-vaillant What _really_ scares me about the iPad is that as a whole, it is the ultimate consumer's device: you don't produce with the iPad.

You don't produce with the iPad because of DRMs, lock down etc. You don't produce with the iPad because of the glorification of the "point and grunt" interface. You don't produce with the iPad because it is more like an interactive TV or a game console than a general purpose computer.

If the iPad proves sufficient for most common customers and purposes, it could be successful. Worse, it could set an example. Worse, that new kind of computers could take over most of the world. A world of very very few producers, and many many consumers. Precisely what the internet allow us to avoid, and not very democratic to boot.

This, is my "why". About the iPad, at least.

Anyway, I don't think such a dystopia will occur. Yet I am certain that many people _want_ it to occur. We have to fight them. I do by not buying the iPad, and telling whoever wants to hear it that this kind of device convey dangerous ideas.

<comment><USER32> Why would people only interested in consuming pay extra for a "producer" computer that's harder to use?

Do you also refuse to buy a TV that doesn't include a camera?

<comment><USER33> You can get a netbook more cheaply than an iPad.

Also, how many people will not be producers _in any capacity at all_?

I mean, cut out the student, then cut out the managers and accountants, then the writers, then the geeks and designers. Cut out anyone who want to write long emails and even those who want to write long hn replies. I think you're left with a smaller group than you'd think.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> I'd say that in the business product space, this concept still applies. However, the lack of features becomes a marketing problem to be solved (hopefully not by adding more features).

<comment><USER35> Fortunately for Apple, marketing isn't a problem because they're Apple. But you're right, like many others we've discovered that lack of features is a marketing problem.

There's no clear answer. Demonstrating that we had something which was clearly better than the alternative for a specific problem has got us a long way. People will forgive an awful lot if you can make their day easier.

<comment><USER34> What we've done is outlined in this blog post: [http://www.woobius.com/scribbles/posts/0017-construction- col...](http://www.woobius.com/scribbles/posts/0017-construction- collaboration.html)

Basically, make the tool so easy to adopt that it gets adopted from below, by people who are actually using it, rather than needing to be imposed from above. This obviously doesn't apply to all tools and all industries.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> This article is very much in sync with what 37 signals preaches.In fact in their book also they suggested this thing, to work on features that are important and can make the product successful, and to cut the rest. In short the product is designed for something specific and it does that brilliantly so it doesnot need any add ons for marketing gimmicks.

</comment><comment><USER37> _one thing I've noticed is that I spend more time browsing the web from my iPhone than from my laptop_

can't say I agree with that. The iPhone has a great browser - considering - but a laptop is orders of magnitude superior for my usage. I bet he didn't type that blog post on his iPhone, for example.

<comment><USER38> If I add up all of the 5 minute long "killing time while waiting to pick up my daughter" types of browsing sessions that I do on my phone (a Droid :-) I bet it would easily add up to the amount of time I spend with my netbook on my lap.</comment></comment>


Donald Kennedy, Stanford's eighth president, dead at 88 from COVID - <AUTHOR> https://news.stanford.edu/2020/04/21/donald-kennedy-stanfords-eighth-president-dead-88/ <comment><USER2> Stanford University has been blessed by a continuing string of outstanding presidents. Don Kennedy was an outstanding educator and president, always approachable and always willing to share advice and ideas. Even giants are vulnerable to strokes and then to the COVID virus. May he rest in peace.</comment>


JBQ shares his opinion on 64-bit mobile devices - <AUTHOR> https://plus.google.com/112218872649456413744/posts/Gbdj4XnE2QK

<comment><USER2> > In the immediate future, this will make zero difference for consumers. > Applications that ship today will continue to be compiled as 32-bit, so that > they can run on all the other iOS devices as well.

Actually, applications that ship today (well, in a week) can be fat binaries, compiled for both 32- and 64-bit. Apps should see a performance boost from this, though in most cases it's probably negligible.</comment>


Having a Servant Is Not a Right - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/21/opinion/having-a-servant-is-not-a-right.html?hp&rref=opinion <comment><USER7> > Last week, I watched with bewilderment as India's most vociferous talk show > host, Arnab Goswami, repeatedly asked his guests if they expected an Indian > diplomat who is paid $4,180 a month to pay her domestic servant $4,500 a > month. Meanwhile an American guest, Lisa Curtis, a senior fellow at the > Heritage Foundation, tried to make a point: "If somebody cannot afford to > have domestic help, then they don't have domestic help."

I had a few Indian friends in college who all lamented the lack of servants in their American day-to-day. One woman I knew recalled having 6 or 7 servants, but described herself as coming from just a normal, slightly-upper-middle class family.

It really stuck with me over the years. Growing up in the U.S., servants have a kind of old-world upper-class, if not crusty and exploitive, vibe.

Yet I've found myself over the years, as free-time disappeared into work and salaries increased, hiring a maid to come in once a month to clean house and a gardener to mow my lawn and tidy my plants once every couple of weeks. I've hired tutors and other private instructors, a fixit guy who comes and does other maintenance on my home every once in a while and so on. My wife and I have toyed with having a cook come in once a week and prepare a bunch of meals.

I'm sure if pressed I could come up with a half dozen other people I've hired on for their physical labor at one time or another. If needed, I'm sure most of them would become "live in servants" for the right price and accommodations.

It's also not uncommon in my area for families to hire Au Pairs which is really just a fancy way of saying live-in Nanny/house maid, which is a servant's title. They're given fairly little pay, maybe $1200/mo and room and board in exchange for child care and some house chores/personal assistant work. In other areas dedicated personal assistants are quite common. And I've seen people setup "internships" for their personal businesses which are so tied to their personal lives that the work is usually just personal assisting for intern pay.

Yet in the U.S. we've allergic to calling these people "servants" because it seems menial and disparaging I guess.

I'm curious though, where does the concept of "servant" actually end? Is my mechanic a servant? Or is he not because I go to his place for him to do the work instead of having him come to mine?

<comment><USER8> > I'm curious though, where does the concept of "servant" actually end? Is my > mechanic a servant? Or is he not because I go to his place for him to do the > work instead of having him come to mine?

A mechanic is a specialist. You likely can't repair your car so you have to purchase that service. Servants are just a plain time-to-money arbitrage. A maid isn't significantly better at vacuuming than you are, so you are just trading a surplus of your money for more free time.

And yes it is exploitative in that it puts a much higher value on your time than on your servants. Suppose a maid saves you 1 hour/week in household chores which you then use for working, earning you $X. But you only pay your maid $Y, a value likely much smaller than $X. The difference between the values is how much your maid has saved you by doing household chores for you.

<comment><USER9> Isn't exploitation based on the idea that you're manipulating some part of the system to pay someone less than they're worth? If maids are typically worth $Y and you pay the maid $Y, that seems fair to me.

<comment><USER10> Yes - this is my point too - from an elitist western perspective it maybe exploitation - but the servants are not indentured slaves who dont have an option to go find better paying work! They are earning what the market is ready to give them and all of Indias middle class didn't get together one day and decide to manipulate that rate!

<comment><USER11> > all of Indias middle class didn't get together one day and decide to > manipulate that rate!

What do you think the caste system _is_?

<comment><USER10> not that. the caste system has nothing to do with it AT ALL. my cook was a higher caste than my family was. Caste system is yet another concept people from the west who've watched a couple of documentaries about India like to throw around. You dont understand it - it doesnt work the way it used to. Being from a "lower caste" is actually a damn boon in todays India. IF you want to get into a decent engineering college atleast.

<comment><USER12> I am an african from africa currently in the US giving my perspective.We have always had a house maid,we call them "house girls" and they are usually in the mid teens going up.Most families i knew had one too.Typically these are young girls from the rural places,they go to the city,work as house maids for a year or two and they go home and get married.

This has nothing to do with caste system and everything to do with "cheap labor",if there were no minimum wages laws in america or if americans were getting paid much much much more than they are,it would also have been common here.

Parents send their kids here to day care here because its cheaper than having a "house girl",if the other way was possible,the other way would be more common.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I think it was wrong to strip-search and do cavity searches on the consular officer (in this case, a woman) "accused" of underpaying a maid. However,I'm not going to focus on that and I'm not going to quibble with some of the exaggerations in this column. Overall, I agree that Ms Khobragade must be prosecuted and the evidence clearly suggests that she is guilty.

However, I find it astonishing that so many people (most of them sharing my citizenship) can be so oblivious to some of the _mind-boggling arrogant hypocrisy_ going around.

Recently, there was a news report on "diplomatic immunity" for an "information management officer" in the US embassy in Kenya. This American man was speeding in his SUV. He crossed the middle-line and crashed into another vehicle _killing_ one man and injuring many more.

This wasn't just the garden-variety "hit and run" accident we see in America. This man didn't just flee the scene, he fled Kenya (with US government help) and the US government is asserting "diplomatic immunity".

Can any critic of India seriously argue that it is OK for the US to assert diplomatic immunity and spirit this "information management officer" out of the country - even though he killed one innocent man (in this case, a father of three) with his reckless driving.

<comment><USER14> Well he may well have been conducting official business when the crash occurred, meaning it would be quite justified to claim diplomatic immunity. Underpaying a worker in a domestic situation has nothing to do with official consular business.

The US is taking a very strong stand that it will not tolerate abuse and exploitation in its borders, even under the guise or protection of diplomatic activity.

<comment><USER10> right - then maybe the US should take a look at California where Mexican agricultural workers are severely underpaid. That's just one example. But then again - someone has to harvest those avocadoes right?

<comment><USER15> To be sure, the people and companies who own those farms are some of the strongest opponents of immigration laws.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> An important thing to clear up here is that Khobragade was not a full "diplomat" at the time of her arrest but rather a "consular official" who receives a limited type of immunity that only applies to laws broken while carrying out official duties.

Also the most serious charge against her isn't the wage dispute but perjury resulting from incorrect data she put on the visa forms.

India has subsequently promoted her from the NY consulate to the Indian diplomatic mission to the UN and has claimed retroactive diplomatic immunity for her, but there are procedural questions about this move.

<comment><USER17> A better approach would have been to deport Khobragade while still offering protection/visas to the servant and her family. Quite a few Indians have been arrested on similar charges in the past without serious uproar, it's the fact that a consular official was treated this way. The US tends to be rather lax in its definition of "diplomatic immunity" when it comes to their benefit (see Raymond Davis) so such strictness is very hypocritical. The impression I get as a neutral observer is that the focus of the action was to punish the alleged guilty rather than try and achieve recourse for the alleged victim.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> > "If somebody cannot afford to have [X], then they don't have [X]."

To be fair, many Americans could take the same lesson.

(And thanks for making me have to agree with the Heritage Foundation. Now I need to go take a shower and read some Paul Krugman columns...)

<comment><USER19> If being fair is your intention, perhaps "Americans" ought to be replaced with "people." There's a lot of things you can lay on the USA's doorstep, but a monopoly on irresponsibility or entitlement is not one of them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> "India is furious that the diplomat, Devyani Khobragade, was strip-searched and kept in a cell in New York with criminals."

Because wage theft isn't at all like those nasty crimes everybody _else_ does, amirite?

Well, it is slightly different - it's only committable by people who have enough cash to pay wages. So in short: "waddya mean I'm a criminal? I'M RICH!"

<comment><USER21> Well, it's white-collar crime. Even Americans are not entirely happy with white-collar criminals getting thrown in with blue-collar criminals. Not because of classism, just because white-collar criminals are non-violent and it doesn't seem right to throw an embezzler in with cutthroats & muggers.

<comment><USER22> There are plenty of "blue collar" crimes that are non-violent. Some Americans have a problem mixing white collar and blue collar criminals because they are classist, like thier peers in India. This American thinks there should be one criminal justice system, not a seperate one for the rich (see e.g. affluenza).

<comment><USER21> Ok, then replace "blue collar" with violent and "white collar" with non- violent in my comment. I don't care which term we use, I just started with "white collar crime" because that's the most common term for financial crime, and "blue collar crime" (though an uncommon phrase) is the antonym.

<comment><USER23> It does not work like that because there is plenty of crime which is non- violent as well as not financial.

<comment><USER10> such as?

<comment><USER24> Any person jailed just for selling drugs.

<comment><USER25> I don't have a horse in this race, but have you ever been around drug dealers?

<comment><USER23> Some of them are violent but some are not. It's not too hard to find people who would not use violence an sell wee for example.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Arresting a diplomat will always cause problems but it was absolutely inexcusable for this diplomat to expect to get away with underpaying their housekeeper.

That said, strip-searching someone over a wage dispute is far beyond the pale as well.

And strip-searching an Indian diplomat for no particularly good reason during an arrest, is not just wrong, but also really fucking stupid, as it could have actual security implications for the US in India as we have already seen with some of the embassy's protection being withdrawn.

<comment><USER27> Rich, poor, American, Kazakh, it doesn't matter. If you are arrested you are strip searched to protect you, the prison staff, and the other prisoners.

There are different kinds of diplomatic immunity. Hers was explicitly limited to official work. The run-Americans-over-and-get-off-scot-free kind is a different diplomatic designation.

<comment><USER26> _If you are arrested you are strip searched to protect you, the prison staff, and the other prisoners._

Given that it obviously doesn't at all work at keeping stuff out of jails, would you entertain the idea that the reason behind standardising strip-search might be more psychological in nature.

<comment><USER28> This is false, It's not a given that it doesn't work at all. This measure could well be dramatically reducing the amount of stuff in jails. Just because there are other ways to bring things in that haven't been prevented yet does not imply that all measures are ineffective.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> The numbers in this article don't make sense. The article complains that servants in India receive earn $64-161/month (4-10,000 rs/month). India's median income is only 53,000rs/year. So according to the article, the average servant in India is earning between 1x and 2.5x the median income.

(These numbers are skewed a bit due to the rural/urban divide.)

I have no idea what is "exploitative" about this. The article talks about paying Indian servants low wages by "any objective standard", which I assume means US standards. This is true but silly - it's not just the servants with low income, even the masters are dirt poor by US standards.

[http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServ...](http://www- wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/IW3P/IB/2012/11/06/000158349_20121106085546/Rendered/PDF/wps6259.pdf)

[http://dipeco.uniroma3.it/public/WP%20163%20Liberati%202012....](http://dipeco.uniroma3.it/public/WP%20163%20Liberati%202012.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER30> According to the story, servants only earn about $64 to $161 per month, which is too little. Author also opines that if someone cannot afford to pay more for domestic help then they shouldn't have domestic help.

That's easy to say. That's like saying it is better to starve than work for $64 to $161 per month. If that's the most the employer can afford to pay you, why wouldn't you take it, as opposed to starving?

Indian salaries are low across the board. A school teacher may get paid around $320 per month. If that school teacher wants to hire domestic help for $160 per month, and the alternative for the would-be servant is starvation, what's wrong with taking that job? What's wrong with the school teacher hiring that help?

<comment><USER31> I think what you may not be considering here is that there's a broader point being made about what constitutes a "living wage." Of course it's better to get some money rather than nothing. But if the money is below the minimum wage and/or below a living wage, it forces the "servant" to either live close to poverty or work multiple jobs.

Also, what's being touched on is a notion of entitlement. For instance, I hire somebody to periodically come and clean my house every few weeks. I pay well, way above what they asked for - both because they do a good job and because I know it's a hard way to make a living. When I made less money, I cleaned my house myself, and I never felt a sense of entitlement or right to that help.

<comment><USER32> If I offer Joe a job at $2.00 an hour, which is less than the minimum wage, and Joe wants to accept the job, then I have forced Joe to live close to poverty or to work multiple jobs?

The offer is voluntary. Joe can either accept it or refuse it.

Why doesn't Joe get to say whether he's willing to accept the job or not? I'd say that the government is the entity introducing the use of force into what was otherwise a voluntary situation.

<comment><USER31> _The offer is voluntary. Joe can either accept it or refuse it._

I feel like this point is really kind of secondary to the discussion, or at least, it seems like there's an assumption in here that I don't share. For some reason, I feel like maybe there's an assumption that Joe has other options? Maybe I'm missing something.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> While this diplomat person as an individual is none too commendable (back home in India she is involved in some questionable property dealings [1]) - <USER2> is much more to the story than this shallow but seemingly introspective "article".

The lady (servant - according to the article) was brought in on an authorized "Au pair" visa. Indian Diplomats in the US are paid little in-terms of monetary benefits. Most compensation is in the form of "perks" that help in their day-to-day lives - this "au pair" benefit is one such perk.

While in the US this "au pair" ran away despite being (apparently [2]) treated well. Then there are serious allegations that she contacted a lawyer thru whom she tried to extort the diplomat [3].

No one is implying that having a "servant" is a right. Having an "au pair" was an accepted & Authorized perk. The article starts off with a wrong-headed premise and does some hand-waving from there.

Also see [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6947473](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6947473) for the real motivation behind this incident.

[1] [http://www.firstpost.com/india/adarsh-scam-devyani- khobragad...](http://www.firstpost.com/india/adarsh-scam-devyani-khobragade- ineligible-for-flat-says-panel-1299599.html)

[2] [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2526719/Pictured- The...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2526719/Pictured-The- housekeeper-center-international-furor-arrest-Indian-diplomat-boss-kept- virtual-slave-leaked-letter-home-reveals-claimed-not-feel-like-servant- all.html)

[3] [http://www.americanbazaaronline.com/2013/12/18/richards- dema...](http://www.americanbazaaronline.com/2013/12/18/richards- demanded-10000-khobragade-change-visa-status-termination-contract/)

<comment><USER34> Your response perfectly illustrates the flawed attitude the author was describing. Can you not hear yourself? You are calling another human being a "perk"!!!

Enough with the semantic arguments:

1\. Calling a servant an "au pair" or a "perk" doesn't make her less of a human being.

2\. ALL human beings have rights, and in the US those rights include employment protections, such as a minimum wage.

3\. It doesn't matter what "perks" the diplomat was promised. She cannot violate another's legal rights because she feels entitled to a servant (excuse me, an "au pair").

4\. Shipping a human being overseas to be a servant with the expectation that they will be underpaid doesn't make this okay. On the contrary, that's ominously close to human trafficking.

5\. Asking to be released from unjust and illegal labor conditions and proposing a settlement for back-pay and damages IS NOT BLACKMAIL! (If it were blackmail, why is the servant not being prosecuted for extortion? Answer: because it's not blackmail!)

6\. The arrest really isn't about the servant (Ms. Richard). Ms. Khobragade is being prosecuted by the federal government for a crime committed against the federal government. She lied on a federal form, which is a felony right there. She also did so to cover up that she violated the minimum wage law. That's why she was arrested.

7\. All the talk about servants that has arisen in Western media and online is due to India's response and how stunned we in the West are that there are still people on this planet who can be this inhumane (as your comment sadly illustrates).

Edit: Grammar fixes.

<comment><USER35> 'You are calling another human being a "perk"!'

uh, no ... CEOs get assistants as perks (our CEO has three - maybe one is 'necessary' but the others are certainly perks) and no one bats an eye. That's because they're paid a salary and are employed at-will: they can leave whenever they want. It's not "another human being as a perk," it's a position benefiting the CEO that the company is willing to pay for.

About #7: I'm a USian and I'd absolutely have servants if I could afford them. Not slaves, but servants with a paycheck. Why not? I'm happen to "spread the wealth" but I'm not just going to give it away- you need to earn it ... how about keeping my lawn looking nice? Here's your paycheck. Maybe do my laundry? Here's your paycheck. Keep the place tidy, please... and here's your paycheck.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Yeah. OK. I think any rational human would agree that the treatment of the servant was wrong. OTOH: NEVER violate diplomatic immunity rules! They are there to protect US...not THEM. You know, sort of like how it would be incredibly hypocritical to agree to international war crime laws then commit acts of torture and overthrow the sovereign ruler of a country. You can't do that! You...oops.

<comment><USER37> U.S. is not a member of ICC [1].

And regarding war crimes... You know that the Geneva rules only apply to enemy __combatants__ right?

[1]: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_Internati...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_International_Criminal_Court)

<comment><USER38> It is true that the U.S. is not specifically bound by the ICC, and that the Geneva protocols have never been held to apply to franc-tireurs, which is probably the closest analogue to "terrorist".

However, this has very little bearing on GP's main point about diplomatic immunity, which is a widely-observed custom going back to at least the Council of Vienna; apparently, it's even an official convention [1] nowadays. The U.S. can and should indeed be expected to respect that. (Yes yes, I know about Assange/Snowden, no need to bring it up again.)

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Diplomatic...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Diplomatic_Relations)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Having a maid/gardener etc is fairly common in most 3rd world countries. Often the wage is a bit on the dubious side, but I think most of our 1st world country hn people are misinterpreting this as intentionally malicious. The process usually involves asking some close friends/relatives what they pay & then paying similar amounts. The end result is that its market forces driven.

As for minimum wage - certainly. However it must be set according to the country. e.g. If you set the minimum wage in my country at what an American might think appropriate then you'd double unemployment overnight. "Living wage"...sure but one has to be realistic too - at some point you push people out of the formal economy & that point is very very low for 3rd world countries.

</comment><comment><USER40> Typical idiotic argument by NYTimes, As someone who had multiple servants working at my home (a cook and cleaner), so that my mother could work at her job. I find the argument "If you can't pay a decent wage, don't hire one" idiotic. Wages are determined by market, and in case of our house, we routinely had to give a raise as well as bonus near holidays. Simply because reliable servants are hard to find. Who determines the "Decent" wage, idiots at NYTimes?

This is the same misguided argument against garment factory workers from Bangladesh and FOXCONN workers in China. Rest of the world does not have the luxury of Social Security, Food Stamps, Medicaid and a ridiculous minimum wage.

<comment><USER41> > Wages are determined by market

Yet there is a minimum salary you ought to pay in the USA. Your comment is rather idotic too if you ignore that fact.

> Who determines the "Decent" wage, idiots at NYTimes?

yeah , who?

> This is the same misguided argument against garment factory workers from > Bangladesh and FOXCONN workers in China. Rest of the world does not have the > luxury of Social Security, Food Stamps, Medicaid and a ridiculous minimum > wage.

ok,I wont even bother answer that. When you find yourself in a dire situation , remember that comment you've made.

<comment><USER40> Market! Market determines the wage.

>> minimum salary you ought to pay in the USA

Yes, but it was an Indian diplomat, and the comment is made wrt indian society, where there is no prevailing minimum wage. There are other issues such as visa status of the maid as au-pair.

>> ok,I wont even bother answer that. When you find yourself in a dire situation , remember that comment you've made.

Oh we as a humanity are already in that dire situation. The pseudo intellectuals at NYTimes, don't want anyone to work. This cute worldview is only held by affluent people in USA. Even Germany does not have a minimum wage and it is reflected in their unemployment rates. In USA it just means hiring illegal aliens.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> The real curse of India is the hindu caste system. Here in India it's something like "you shall not name it, or say it". Everyone knows it's the real cause, but no one says it or worse tries to generalise and hide it in other words. For every single Devayani, or K.R.Narayanan (who was made the president of India), there are lakhs and lakhs of untold unspeakable cruelty and suffering and that is the true ratio.

International readers would get the real picture of India if they skim through local hindi newspapers (especially states of Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar) using Google translator everyday to know about the real India and the real hindu caste system, instead of relying on sugar-coated and watered-down reality and wonderland being churned by cunning authors or Bollywood.

Here the issue is simple. It's a matter of protocols and rights. It was about nations. But even the cunning author (like the other snakes in India) brought in the hindu caste factor, perhaps for a good reason. You know the kind of sly hint to the upper caste NRIs that she's not one of us, so lie low for now and pretend to be good in the eyes of the US.

The low castes (untouchables) are making headway in India not due to any empathy of the hindu caste system and hinduism but due to their becoming aware of the sheer strength of their numbers and the power of organisation. So much so that even karma and dharma have been flushed down the latrines, and people have begun to realise and make their own destiny and bright future. And the best part is that, hinduism no more has the balls to assert or speak about its true philosophy and values but is forced to hide itself in the "progressive" sheep cloth.

<comment><USER43> [http://archive.tehelka.com/story_main13.asp?filename=Cr07300...](http://archive.tehelka.com/story_main13.asp?filename=Cr073005Dont_look_at.asp)

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> Isn't it obvious this is the result of a country of extremely low average income and extremely high population?

Of course it would be great to have even a semblance of equality, but I dont see a solution given the current economic model.

<comment><USER45> Low average income, but extremely low median income. There's nothing obvious or inevitable about that.

<comment><USER44> Can you clarify what you mean by that? The slightly less poor exploit off the extremely poor?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> I've noticed this tendency to abuse the crap out of the Air Stewards on-board Singapore Airlines from indians. Not a single occurrence, but several times on several flights.

</comment><comment><USER47> The moral of the article is "it's wrong to exploit the impoverished." It's easy to apply that moral to other cultures and societies, but difficult to apply to one's own.

Indians deny injustice when it gives them servants just like Westerners deny injustice when it gives them iPhones.

</comment><comment><USER48> The talk show mentioned in the last paragraph is here [1]. The quote comes at the end, ~45:30. Pretty terrible moderation - it's hard to watch, though it might at least bring out some of the points from another perspective. The focus seems to be entirely on the diplomatic insult of a pretty woman put in handcuffs over a 'trivial' matter. But combined with the US's (genuine) hypocrisy as noted by their handling of the Raymond Davis issue in Pakistan, there seem to be ulterior tensions leaking into this particular incident.

Diplomatic relations are hard - there is such difficulty knowing how actions will be perceived by another nation/culture.

[1][http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbHYiOAtFS4](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbHYiOAtFS4)

</comment><comment><USER10> The author shows a complete lack of understanding of India - and brings up completely unrelated topics (casteism?!) to support her already weak point. In fact - bringing up the Diplomats caste is her being racist (casteist? - <USER3> the right word but you know what I mean) herself. It's as if an American author were to say "well a few hundred years ago these black people were slaves - and now they dare to treat someone badly" \- how is that a reasonable argument by any means?

Coming to the crux of the matter. Having lived in Bombay - and having had servants I can say that its in no means as "exploitative" as the author claims. Sure - an indian house helper earns less than an american does. So what? The median income in India is nowhere close to comparable to that in the US. An uneducated village boy - who would either earn a few hundred rupees (10-20 USD) a month working on someone elses farm in his village - is much better off coming to the city and earning more than five or six thousand rupees (100 - 120 $) a month in the city - with which he can also support his family back in the village who get by on subsistence farming. Many servants take on multiple jobs - earning almost double or triple of that. Which is NOT bad by any means considering he will often be provided meals and accomodation in addition to his salary. Its a simple calculation - the average IT worker earns approximately 40-5000 rupees after tax per month - assume if a couple - both employed in IT - earning around 100000 rupees per month - keep a maid to cook and clean - and pay her 10000 a month. Thats 10% of their salary - why is that exploitative? The maid is free to go take 2-3 others such jobs to fill her day and is easily making close to what the IT guys make. Until we reach a standard of literacy and education where everyone can make tonnes of money - this will continue - and its NOT a bad thing. A lot of families try to break the cycle by paying the school fees for their servants children or buying them the yearly textbooks etc - we did that growing up. At the end of the day - <USER4> a free market and these are not indentured slaves - if they find better paying work elsewhere (and often they do - cleaning malls and the like) - they go do that - and no one can stop them.

As for why people "need" servants - well - its a part of the culture and has a lot to do with economics as well. Right now - in a city like Bombay -its cheaper to have a servant who washes your clothes and cleans your house - <USER5> it is to have a washing machine (if you're lucky enough to have the space to fit one in) & a vaccuum cleaner. Its a dusty country - and you do need to clean more often than you do in the temperate regions. In families where all adults are working - it just makes sense to have a servant. Its economics and logic - not exploitation.

<comment><USER49> Your sample is too small. India is more of a fragmented subcontinent than a country. There is no "city like Bombay" (other than Mumbai).

<comment><USER10> eh... Bombay is Mumbai - and since the author referred to her life growing up in Bombay / Mumbai - the comparison applies. That said - Bangalore, Delhi, Kolkata, Ahmedabad, Chennai - are all comparable to a reasonable extend to Bombay.

<comment><USER49> That really depends on your definition of "reasonable". I'm not saying you don't have a good point about the economics of it, that would be the one thing included in "reasonable" metrics. But the fact is that all of the cities you listed have different versions of everything from traditions to religion to language. Ignoring that gets you nowhere when talking about India, though politicians and nationalists would have you believe otherwise.

<comment><USER10> I still dont see your point? I'm the first person to accept that you cannot generalize india - but that does not exclude the reality that if people could find better paying / more meaningful income - they'd go do that rather than be servants - thats all im discussing here - the sample size is irrelevant.

<comment><USER49> Here's my point: even the job you can offer someone in India as a servant, cook, driver, DJ, depends on having access to that opportunity. You don't just go in a slum and randomly pick somebody (if you do, I admire you, but you're not the average). That access itself is based on a lot of other factors that have nothing to do with economics, and the rules for that access vary greatly accross India.

<comment><USER10> sure - there's saying "depending on your connections you may or may not have access to opportunities" \- which is true in pretty much ANY country in the world and theres saying the mere fact that people have servants is exploitation - which is simply not true. What you're saying is not false - <USER6> it has nothign to do with the original argument of my post.

<comment><USER49> I'm not saying having servants is only exploitation, I'm pointing out that to chalk it all up to economics is the mistake you're making. That's all.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> A minimum wage would definitely help the wages of a lot of servants. But it would (probably) mean some percent of them becoming unemployed because they can't be afforded/aren't worth the cost anymore. It might also decrease working conditions, because those unemployed people are now competing for your job. You can't compete on the basis of wages anymore so now it on the basis of how much you can do/put up with. Also because it then becomes harder to leave your job and find another.

That doesn't mean there isn't a net benefit to doing it. An ideal solution would be a basic income. Tax everyone equally, not just those that hire lots of servants, and benefit everyone equally, not just employed servants. But I don't see that happening anytime soon.

</comment><comment><USER51> Yes, I see it so clear, USA culture is superior /s.

</comment><comment><USER52> First things first, as an Indian,

Ms. Khobragade if she exploited the maid is in the wrong. The rich and the powerful do get away with a lot in India, which to the chagrin of Ms. Khobragade, she found out was not the case elsewhere.

Most of the criticism we see in India about US actions and support for Ms. Khobragade isn't necessarily that. There are a couple of concerns which largely underlie the anger

(a) US diplomats (and diplomats of other nations) enjoy many privileges in India. These privileges are reciprocal and India feels that this reciprocity was not available when dealing with Ms. Khobragade. Older folks like my father who was a government officer for his entire working life understand that she should be prosecuted, they only expect an apology for the treatment meted out to Ms. Khobragade during and after the arrest, which is not forthcoming.

This reciprocity extends to looking the other way when granting permits and licenses such as those for importing liquor, visa for same sex couples, which is a grey area in Indian penal code and many other benefits which are not all clearly legal.

(b) US actions to grant visa and arrange for Ms. Sangeeta Richards and family be flown out of India despite requests by Indian government, which provided US with details of a missing persons/absconding report having been filed in India, undermine Indian Judiciary. The undercurrent claim, Ms. Richards would not be served justice in India.

It is debatable whether Ms. Richards would have justice served in India, what is not debatable is the wrong doing of the US to publicly undermine the Indian judiciary. Ms. Richards is an Indian citizen and needs to pursue cases under the Indian law.

(c) There has been for a time now, a proposal to contract and place positions like those of Ms. Richards directly under the preview of the Indian government. This proposal had not been approved by the parliament yet, however the US department of state was aware of this. It is expected to be approved and when it does pass the parliament, Ms. Richards would be paid wages in India and would be free to accept or decline the offered pay. Ms. Richards was in a similar situation and was free to return to India if she considered herself exploited.

This is the gray area reciprocity that India extends to US diplomats and expects the same in return.

Ms. Khobragade is a smoke screen for why India feels wrong.

</comment><comment><USER53> Did anyone else read the title as "Having a Servant is Not Right"?

</comment><comment><USER54> What a piece of crap link-bait. The actual title of the article should have been the last sentence of her piece: "Having a servant you cannot pay a decent wage cannot be a birthright".

</comment><comment><USER55> When we choose a diplomat for a country that makes homosexuality illegal, shouldn't we avoid selecting a homosexual diplomat? That seems like fairly basic diplomacy.

</comment><comment><USER56> India has a class problem.

<comment><USER10> just like the US - or pretty much any latin american country - and a lot of parts of africa and europe and the rest of Asia. Your point is? Humans have a class problem.

<comment><USER56> Oh, then they're all the same then, right?

India has _more_ of a class problem than the US. Obviously, or this situation wouldn't have happened.

If inequality in India suddenly dropped to the same level as the US, I would be very happy for India. And I would still want the US to be less unequal.

<comment><USER10> except for the flawed assumption that this happened due to some class problem - I agree with your argument.

<comment><USER56> OK.

It's not an assumption, it's my theory as to why this happened.

<comment><USER10> Which is wrong.

<comment><USER56> What's your theory?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> I wonder if the same people who say "If you can't afford to pay a servant a living wage, you shouldn't have one" also like to claim the raising the minimum wage doesn't increase unemployment?

<comment><USER58> i'm pretty sure there have been studies on this. i think one study found that raising the minimum wage either didn't make a difference in unemployment, or that it lowered unemployment slightly (i believe this study was based on a border region between two states, one of which raised the minimum wage)

but either way, i don't think you should assume it's a simple matter

<comment><USER57> but the point is that if you are saying "don't hire a person to do something that you can't afford to pay a living wage for" then you are encouraging them to hire less people, which directly creates unemployment (even if there are other mechanisms that counteract this).

I'm aware of the study, but I think that economic theory is more informative than a single study that can't necessarily be generalized.</comment></comment></comment>


Gitlab 12.6 - <AUTHOR> https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2019/12/22/gitlab-12-6-released/ <comment><USER3> I am thankful for this release. It finally fixed two major issues that had plagued Gitlab for us for a long time:

\- The "Rebase" button now actually seems to work reliably with no cases of endless spinning to report in the few tens of button presses so far for me (we merge fast-forward only). Hoping this is not a fluke and will not regress in the future.

\- The "Hide whitespace changes" button works again after breaking what feels like some time in 2018.

These 2 sound like really basic functionality, so it also represents the sad state of Gitlab development - a priority on useless fluff on top of regressions in each release, while hundreds of bugs that actually affect users go unaddressed.

This is a good release.

Edit: Their issue tracker [1] actually lists 37.8k issues with 23.9k "open", which represents 63% of all issues ever created. As a project matures and ages, you would expect this metric to start to go down naturally, as you "plateau" on a sustainable level of open issues. If this were my project, I would be freaking out.

[1] [https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/issues](https://gitlab.com/gitlab- org/gitlab/issues)

<comment><USER4> Not all of those issues are bugs though. Only 4,000 are labeled as bugs, with many more being labeled as improvements or product direction discussions.

Gitlab's development runs through those issues, so there are a _lot_ that are related to that.

<comment><USER5> Correct. A lot of the issues are feature requests.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Unfortunatelly there is still no way to run CI file locally which is major turn down. Deprecated `exec` command is hell to use.

I should be able to install runner on developers machine and just run and debug pipeline there, with or without Gitlab server present.

<comment><USER7>
      Deprecated `exec` command is hell to use

Curious what makes it hell to use?

      Unfortunatelly there is still no way to run CI file locally which is major turn down

I don't think thats correct. As you mention there is `exec`. Do you know of better alternatives?

<comment><USER6> One example that comes to mind is codefresh.io. It allows local run of the pipeline (and even debug via breakpoints) and only requires docker to be installed locally.

I currently use task system with Gitlab to make any job in 1-3 lines. Then I can easily replicate build locally. The task engine is either installed on runner's host itself or run inside docker container.

<comment> jl-gitlab We are looking to add breakpoints in an upcoming release, building on our interactive web terminals feature. If you're interested in providing feedback the public issue is [https://gitlab.com/gitlab- org/gitlab/issues/39527](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/issues/39527).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > Streamline Audits with Release Evidence

I've seen companies with overly painful audit requirements, and making the process of generating artifacts for audit as easy as possible is a great way forward. Box ticking exercises should take minimal engineering time.

My current project doesn't use gitlab, but I love the constant innovation Gitlab pushes out.

<comment> jl-gitlab Thanks, that's really great to hear. Release evidence, and where we plan to take that feature long term ([https://about.gitlab.com/direction/release/release_governanc...](https://about.gitlab.com/direction/release/release_governance/)) is really exciting to me, having spent a lot of my career in release management. Would be great to get your feedback on where we are headed - <USER2> if you aren't a GitLab user today, may you will be in the future.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Interesting addition of Conan support right into GitLab.

> For any development organization, having an easy and secure way to manage > dependencies is critical. Package management tools, such as Conan for C/C++ > developers, provide a standardized way to share and version control these > libraries across projects.

> In GitLab 12.6, we are proud to offer Conan repositories built directly into > GitLab. Developers can now publish their packaged libraries to their > project's Conan repository. Simply set the Conan remote to the GitLab > Package Registry and start uploading, installing, and deleting packages > today.

<comment><USER10> Yes, that's very odd as it would be relatively trivial to extend packaging support to handle DEB or RPM packages, for example.

<comment> jl-gitlab We are looking at adding many new kinds of packages, including potentially Linux package types such as these[https://about.gitlab.com/direction/package/package_registry/...](https://about.gitlab.com/direction/package/package_registry/#linux- packages)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Any update on telemetry? Looks like nothing in release notes.</comment>


Twitter is at least a dress rehearsal - <AUTHOR> http://www.scripting.com/stories/2009/04/14/twitterIsAtLeastADressRehe.html <comment><USER2> Was there any content at all ? This post could be a textbook example of fluff piece.</comment>


Seeking Senior Project Advice - <AUTHOR> Hey HN,
I'm a senior CS student and I'm currently working on my senior project. Our group decided to go with my idea and I'm having trouble conceptualizing what we're going to need to develop. I haven't really had much experience building a project of this scope before. I was wondering if any professional developers would mind lending me some of their wisdom on how to prototype/develop a semi-ambitious web-app?
Thanks, Stressed CS student <comment><USER2> hello,

Whats your idea ?</comment>


Show HN: SnippQR - A Custom QR Code Generator - <AUTHOR>

We just launched SnippQR (http://qr.snipp.com) – a free custom QR code generator.
We first built our generator for internal use to create QR codes for clients like ESPN, Taco Bell and Sección Amarilla but quickly realized that this could be a great tool to share with everyone.
Yes, QR codes are still relevant. According to eMarketer, 36% of adults aged 18-34 have used a QR code at least once – that's greater than the percent of people who have used Twitter. QR code usage in China has quadrupled in the past year, to over 9 million scans per month. <comment><USER2> API?</comment>


Webhook testing tool: Receive webhooks while behind a firewall - old-gregg http://www.ultrahook.com

<comment><AUTHOR> Hmm, how did the dupe detection miss this one? [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6052621](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6052621)</comment>