Data structures and algorithms: computer's memory visualization – online sandbox - <AUTHOR> http://trepl.xyz/ <comment><AUTHOR> This website is a part of my engineering thesis. I have started creating it as a private project and just then decided to publish it. It's an online sandbox created for teachers to help them explain students how the computer's memory looks like during program execution. It provides TRE programming language, designes just for this portal. I know that this approach has some disadvantages, as I don't expect people to want to learn it, but I've had some rasons to do it this way. First, I wanted to put inside it as many programming concepts, as possible, which I wouldn't be able to do while using, for example, js. Second, and more important, I just wanted to create my own programming language, to see how it's done and to learn something new myself. To compensate that, I've decided to create series of ready to use programs, so people might just pick one and see how it works, without learnig TRE. Creating those lessons is still in progress, so there are just few available right now. The whole project is just an early version (even tho I have been working on it for a while), so some things might not work as expected, or not work at all. I wanted to share it to collect some feedback, especially that I have released a source code today on the github.</comment>


3Taps to countersue Craigslist, citing antitrust laws and uncompetitive behavior - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2012/09/23/3taps-is-planning-to-file-a-countersuit-against-craigslist-tomorrow-citing-antitrust-laws-and-uncompetitive-behavior/

<comment><USER2> Tough bone to choose to chew on, PadMapper, Craigslist has insane resources and antitrust cases can go on FOREVER. Maybe they'll SCO it and get some Ballmer dollars along the way to put in the gas tank.</comment>


PHP is the right tool for the job (for all the wrong reasons) - <AUTHOR> http://blog.samuellevy.com/post/41-php-is-the-right-tool-for-the-job-for-all-the-wrong-reasons.html <comment><USER3> One thing I really like about PHP is it's execution model. Here, every request is mapped to a single static .php file which is executed by a single PHP interpreter process. The execution is essentially stateless (aside from any bugs in the interpreter which from what I've seen tend to be few when it comes to this issue). Essentially, every request gets its own execution environment and does not have to worry about anything outside of itself. You also get code reloading: requests currently in progress are handled by old code. New requests are handled by new code after you replace the .php file.

Contrast this with RoR/Django/nodejs/etc. Here you have to be the one controlling the process/thread. You can mess up and create a dirty execution environment. In your requests you have to be aware of what the other requests might be doing at the same time. Moreover, running two simultaneous applications requires two different execution environments (apache processes, nodejs processes, etc.) The common solution to this is to either provide some environment isolation by running one set of interpreters per application or to have a whole virtual server dedicated to every application, incurring the overhead of an OS per app.

Don't get me wrong, I detest writing code in PHP for many reasons, but the execution model is efficient: if you want more power for your applications, just increase the number of available interpreters. Moreover, every interpreter is the same, so by doubling your total number of available interpreters, you double the concurrency of all of your applications. This is the pinnacle of cloud apps: you have a simple single toggle that controls how many requests you can process concurrently. This is why shared hosting now costs $2/month while Heroku is an order of magnitude more expensive.

<comment><USER4> > You can mess up and create a dirty execution environment.

Then don't mess up. It's not _that_ hard. If you follow best practices (don't use global variables) you should handle this fine. I haven't heard anyone having this problem in Rails _at all_.

> I detest writing code in PHP for many reasons, but the execution model is > efficient

No it's not. You'll have to re-open connections to databases all the time. You can't use keep-alive to external HTTP APIs. You'll have to re-parse the PHP for every request.

(Added later: Yes, this isn't how PHP actually works, and that was kinda my point: parent's concept of "PHP execution model" isn't actually used in PHP _because it's stupid!_ There will always be some things that you want to share (connection pooling, opcode cache) so even PHP isn't a "perfect" share-nothing architecture.)

It's perfectly possible to write a shared-nothing architecture without dumbing it down to CGI.

<comment><USER5> > _No it's not. You'll have to re-open connections to databases all the time. > You can't use keep-alive to external HTTP APIs. You'll have to re-parse the > PHP for every request._

What? This is all factually incorrect.

1) PHP has supported persistent database connections for _ages_. The fact is, persistent DB connections aren't really that great for websites, where you need a few resources quickly and then nothing for a long time. Having 10,000 idle DB connections is a great way to eat up resources. But you _can_ do it.

2) PHP can use cURL's multi-handles, providing a _per-application_ keep-alive connection pool (e.g. see Guzzle: [http://guzzlephp.org/tour/http.html#managed-persistent- http-...](http://guzzlephp.org/tour/http.html#managed-persistent-http- connections)).

3) While not part of PHP itself, most serious PHP applications use something like APC, which caches PHP opcodes to prevent constant reparsing.

<comment><USER6> >The fact is, persistent DB connections aren't really that great for websites, where you need a few resources quickly and then nothing for a long time. Having 10,000 idle DB connections is a great way to eat up resources. But you can do it.

Which is why you should be using connection pooling. Which can not be done efficiently with PHP. Necessitating that people create an entire extra layer of database proxying software to do the pooling for you.

<comment><USER5> Ah fair point, I misinterpreted the grandparent's statement in terms of persistence, not necessarily pooled persistence.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> These threads always get "interesting" don't they?

A common problem I see in these kinds of discussions is engineers. Yup, you and me. In my case it took me years to move away from being a typical clueless egocentric engineer. I am sure I still am to some extent. Whatever is left pales in comparison to my younger self.

What made the change? Business. And the realities of the insanely simple business equation coupled with actually launching and running them with my own money.

There's a huge difference between holding a cat by the tail and watching someone else do it from afar. Huge.

Where I am going with this is that we (engineers and technical folk) tend to focus on, and talk about, FEATURES almost at the expense of BENEFITS. The reality of business is that the value of the former pales in comparison with that of the latter.

I love Python. However, when faced with having to do a benefits analysis it is almost impossible to not choose PHP these days. Liking it has nothing to do with making the choice. Well, it shouldn't.

I wish engineers could see what they sound like from the vantage point of a business person. You see this all the time at pitch events. There's an absolutely abysmal difference between presentations from "virgin" engineers and those who have had even a few business scars.

<comment><USER6> >However, when faced with having to do a benefits analysis it is almost impossible to not choose PHP these days

For what? We were already heavily invested in PHP, but still our benefit analysis had it second last, only ahead of javascript. What benefits were we missing?

<comment><USER7> Each organization is going to be different.

If you have a team that already rocks on PHP, migrating people to Python is likely to be a problem.

Depending on where you are located, finding good Python programmers could be difficult (stats: over 10x more PHP programmers than Python.

If your project is pretty far along, translating to Python might carry with it a non-trivial cost.

In general terms I think it might be easier/cheaper to launch an MVP in PHP with a sensible framework (like Yii) and then migrate to Python + web2py or Django for the "real" product.

I prefer Python, but it is hard to ignore job market statistics when considering what it might take to put together a team.

I'll go out on a limb and piss off a bunch of people in the process. I'll venture the thought that most PHP-only programmers are really bad programmers. Someone not formally educated in CS or having no experience in a variety of languages (and paradigms) before adopting PHP will probably be "challenged" as a programmer in more than one way. I have a feeling that, because of the nature of the language, a larger percentage of Python programmers are really good "traditional" programmers with a good balance between theoretical and practical knowledge.

Let the flaming begin.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's pretty much how it is, but I believe the _why_ is largely to do with the large amount of bad PHP learning aides available for free on the internet (I'm looking at you, w3schools).

That being said, I have met (and work with) some "PHP first" programmers who are genuinely great programmers, and who _get_ how to write clean, reusable code. "I learnt in PHP" isn't a blanket euphemism for "I'm a horrible programmer".

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Can you spot the outliers here?: "where PHP has excelled with projects like Wordpress, Joomla!, _Drupal_ , _Magento_ , Moodle, PHPBB, and so many more.".

Some projects "swing the PHP-way" and they are "retarded" but easy to use and fix and keep with the "fail fast, fail cheap" philosophy. Otoh, things like Drupal or Magento "swim against the tide", are hypocritically claiming to be newbie/weekend-warrior friendly, and basing your project on them lands you over-time and over-budget 90% of the time, ending up costing more than a custom made Rails app - unless you have the rare mystical creatures called "real Drupal (or Magento) gurus" working for you. It's a very weird jungle the PHP ecosystem nowadays, and lots of the creatures in it _byte hard!_. If you stick to riding a gentle sloth like WordPress, you're fine... but I'd suggest rapidly switching languages and technologies (something like Django + django- cms is almost as cheap and can be deployed even on dirt-cheap shared hosts) as soon as you grow over WordPress level, otherwise something will end up biting you hard!

<comment><USER9> Based on experience, I would agree with you on the Magento front (as my perpetually-in-the-planning-stages blog "I Hate Magento" will attest), but I have yet to find anything more usable (and customizable) for larger scale operations. I know there _must_ be something less bad. Thoughts, anyone?

<comment><USER10> Agreed - its a stinking turd, but at least it's not oscommerce :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I don't understand why "low-skilled people can use it" is constantly trumpeted as an upside. If you can't work out how to set up the DB by hand (for example), there's little chance you're going to be able to get through the rest of the job without making a horrible mess which you (more likely your client) will come to regret.

Imagine if we took this attitude in civil engineering, or medical science. Not good. Obviously not every web project is as important as those two things, but "the barrier to entry for foot-shooting is low!" should never be a plus point for a technology. Especially when it's not your foot.

There's obviously a need for a tool for low(er) skilled people to make websites, but perhaps it should be less powerful to match? It should at least have abstractions that don't leak so much.

I'm happy to be lectured to about why this is wrong.

<comment><USER12> You're right, if we took this attitude in civil engineering or medical science then it'd be a problem, but hey, it's not those things, so why waste the time, money and effort that it would need?

You say "obviously not every web project is as important" as civil engineering, but I'd put it the other way "Almost every web project is not anywhere near as important" as civil engineering.

People build Ikea shelving units in their home all the time, without a civil engineer being involved.

<comment><USER11> Let's torture this analogy some more.

Ikea shelves often break, and thus commonly need replacing every couple of years. This might end up with a higher total cost/kg/year for holding your stuff up in the air, compared to hand building your shelves out of oak or whatever.

Of course, many people move apartments each year anyway, and the old shelves will not fit in their new apartment. So it makes sense to use ikea shelves in this case. Unless of course, the handmade oak shelves were modular and could be easily reconfigured in a way that the pressed-fibre ikea shelves couldn't.

The real problem comes when your ikea shelves fall down, breaking all your stuff. In which case, you were an idiot for putting your important stuff on ikea shelves. In this scenario, you may wish to hunt down and disembowel the interior decorator who told you the ikea shelves would be fine.

So yeah, the right tool for the job. Who'd have thought it? ;)

Personally I won't be giving up my life as a designer of premium bespoke home storage solutions for a job on the checkout at ikea.

<comment><USER13> God I hate analogies.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Why is PHP so threatening to so many developers? Don't use it. Don't take jobs where it's the primary tool.

The complaining that it's a poor tool while many people create tons of value with it leads me to believe there's a disconnect between the two camps that I don't get.

<comment><USER6> >Why is PHP so threatening to so many developers

Because we inherit the horrible mess of shit PHP developers leave behind when the company finally releases they've painted themselves into a corner and can no longer move forward because every time they try to fix a bug in their software they add two more.

>Don't take jobs where it's the primary tool.

It is so widely used that even avoiding jobs where it is the primary tool, you will still almost certainly be stuck dealing with some PHP mess.

<comment><USER15> "horrible mess of shit PHP developers" has nothing to do with anything. Horrible mess of shit Ruby developers can be just as ugly if not more.

<comment><USER16> It can be but in my anecdotal experience the mess left by PHP developers is the worst. Especially when it comes to blatant XSS and SQL injection vulnerabilities PHP holds a clear lead.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I don't see PHP as any more easily deployable than Node, Rails or even self- contained Go/Gorilla.

Python, maybe, but even that's trivial to get going. Most of these - save Go - are installed on shared servers anyway.

What this sounds like to me is "I'm most comfortable with PHP, thus it's faster (read: cheaper) for me to create freelance projects in it."

Which might be true; there is a cost associated with learning and thus becoming comfortable in another language. But that's a very different argument than you're making here, Sam.

If someone asked a freelance programmer to make X and you can make it in PHP, Python or Ruby ... the actual cost of development should be relatively even. What you're factoring in is an inherent time cost for your lack of comfort in the other languages.

<comment><USER18> Come on, I hate php with a passion and even I will admit it's easier to deploy than anything else. Go comes close, but still requires writing a service.

With Python, you need to create a service to run your WSGI server and proxy it from your web server. You also need to handle your static files properly. PHP, you just copy everything in there.

Hell, I have half a mind to create a project that will run Python scripts CGI/PHP style (run this file and send whatever it returns), just to make deployment easier for people. I'm not convinced the convenience is worth the cost of this horrible dirtiness, though.

<comment><USER17> > Come on, I hate php with a passion and even I will admit it's easier to > deploy than anything else

I don't see how this is true anymore. Setting up LAMP versus setting up LAMPython or Node are all one line of aptitude/(your package manager here). I can have a LAMP stack spitting out "hello world" in the same time it takes me to get a Node app running.

<comment><USER18> Say you're on a shared host. How do you deploy Python in the same time as copying a few files in? You have to copy the files in _and_ do some more things, which is a strict superset of the PHP way to deploy.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> If you use a decent web framework for your project, I think PHP isn't a terrible solution. It will be maintainable, organized, thoughtful, and documented. Obviously in the end, _it's still PHP_ , but a good framework makes those more complex PHP applications understandable.

If you're building a website (in any language) without a framework, you're doing it wrong...

<comment><USER6> If you are using a framework, then you've lost the "advantage" PHP had to begin with: simplicity. Once you are using a framework, everything is just as complex as with rails or django, so why not just use one of those?

And your last statement is terribly ignorant. There's tons of web sites and apps that are better off built without a framework.

<comment><USER19> I'm sure if you think of any successful web site/app they use some type of framework, even if they made it themselves.

<comment><USER6> I'm sure you are very wrong. Again, tons of sites a framework is counter- productive, not helpful. Do you think a framework makes sense for a 99% static site that just wants to use include($header) and have an email contact form? Or any of the tons of random admin interfaces people need to write for things that don't fit in to the assumed database backed web app mold?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I'd love to use Python or Go or whatever. But everyone wants to pay me to code PHP on some mediocre stack. So be it ...

At least I home I am free to use whatever I want. So I use Symphony2 ;) ... which adds verbosity and complexity to a language that still can't decide if 0 is something empty or just the number 0.

<comment><USER17> But this is a different issue altogether.

If someone asks for product X without a language specification, you're probably free to create it in any language you're comfortable (although admittedly it would be stupid for a client to allow this).

PHP is not faster to write, debug and deploy than most other languages. It _is_ faster to write, debug and deploy if you know PHP well and language X not as well.

<comment><USER20> I guess it goes hand in hand. PHP is good enough for most of the jobs, cheaper/easier to host, and you get cheaper and easier-to-find developers

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> This is what the team behind Discourse is attempting to address somewhat, making Ruby software as idiot-proof to set up as PHP applications.

Whether they will end up succeeding is yet to be seen, but this does definitely seem like an area where competition will benefit the greater good, as displacing PHP with any one of the better designed languages out there would benefit the internet as a whole.

I do wonder though: is the procedural nature of PHP equally responsible for it's adoption by inexperienced developers?

Sure, PHP is cheap and widely available, but you also don't need to understand the concepts behind object orientation to hack together a "dynamic" website with a few includes. And at that point you're just familiar enough with PHP to favor it for future development.

<comment><AUTHOR> I think that's a chicken/egg situation there.

<comment><USER22> Agreed. As is often brought up in PHP threads, the biggest thing is universal adoption of PHP in web hosting. People learning how to stitch together web pages aren't going to grab a VPS, learn the complexity of managing the server, and use something complex like Rails (where there's a language, a framework, and MVC to learn).

With PHP --> the newbie just has to FTP the files up and it works. Fewer variables to manage, fewer things to learn. You go from 0 to 60 much faster. Now, you probably will go from 60 to 100 much much slower than with a different stack, but that's a different discussion...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> My opinion on the success of PHP has more to do with how it integrates with Apache... All of the other languages were designed as languages first, then web development was bolted on... HTTP is fundamentally request / response oriented and PHP provides brain dead access to GET and POST vars via simple to understand global variables... In addition, the same mechanism is provided for session state...

</comment><comment><USER24> I would note that the article doesn't consider having to install any custom PEAR/PECL packages that your PHP application might require. Sometimes they need to be installed on the command line (as root), or sometimes as OS packages. If you're using managed web hosting, you will probably need to email the administrators and ask them to install the needed packages, and they might refuse.

In this context Ruby on Rails wins because of its standardized Gemfile approach. Every RoR application always specifies the dependencies in a standard way and their installation is always part of the deployment process. PHP has nothing like this.

The same applies to asset pipelines. When your application contains SASS/SCSS or CoffeeScript files, you need to worry about how they're going to be compiled, optimized and deployed. Ruby on Rails also standardizes this so that all you need is the same basic RoR application layout that you generated in the beginning.

So, as long as the web hosting provider supports Ruby on Rails, I think it's currently the simplest way to deploy full-featured web applications. Using PHP will require you to either 1) not use many modern web technologies or 2) build your own deployment processes to support them.

<comment><USER25> Composer (getcomposer.org) and Packagist (packagist.org) are largely a popular replacement for PEAR, though once you need a C extension (PECL), you're right, it does become a pain.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> "the only language that makes deploying a website effectively idiot-proof"

I work for a large web host and can assure you this is not the case.

<comment><AUTHOR> I've worked for a reasonably sized (business) host myself, and yes - <USER2> that's idiot proof is just waiting for a bigger idiot, but PHP is far easier to deploy for a non-programmer than anything else.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Exactly. I detest PHP, but I've used it to quickly build a sign-up website for an event. If you pair PHP with an interface library like Bootstrap and an ORM like Paris/Idiorm you can have something up and running cheaply and quickly. Is it maintainable? No, but that's not important in this case.

edit: let me clarify, I don't assert that ALL php code is unmaintainable, just the quick site I built. Though if you're in the mood to argue: statically typed languages are infinitely more maintainable than dynamically typed ones in my opinion.

<comment><USER28> "Is it maintainable? No"

Anyone who has worked with codebases in multiple languages for any length of time realizes that's a wrong statement. Maintainable is, to some degree, in the eye of the beholder (and often author), but you can write unmaintainable code in any platform. Everyone seems to love RoR - I inherited a Rails 1 app written over 18 months that still didn't work right, and was essentially unupgradeable - every piece of advice from every Ruby person I talked to was "just start over in Rails 2 and port some of the old logic over".

OK - so now I'm talking 'upgradeable' vs 'maintainable'. Try to 'maintain' a Rails 1 app in 2011 - simply searching for how to do certain things in Rails 1 is pretty hard to do, because the docs are wrong/outdated or simply _gone_.

But hey - "Ruby is maintainable, PHP sucks", right?

Give me a well-thought out Zend Framework app written by a senior developer with experience writing good code vs Rails hacked together by someone with 2 weeks of udemy lessons under their belt _any_ day.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Simply not true.

Have you ever tried to install and setup PHP on a fresh server? It's almost as painful as writing code in PHP.

The article is talking about managed hosting, were that might still be true (Admins are incredibly conservative and stubborn individuals).

But for everything else? PHP doesn't work 'out of the box'. It's due to the work of a poor admin somewhere that you can just upload your crap and it runs.

In contrast, I can install and setup a complete Ruby server in about 15 minutes.

<comment><USER30> Really?

apt-get install nginx php5 php5-fpm php-pear php5-common php5-mcrypt php5-cli php5-gd

Takes about 2 minutes.

<comment><USER6> If you want to pretend that is all that is involved, then your argument suggests web development with haskell is just as easy to setup as with PHP:

        $ pkg_add snap

Well, that was easy.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> The one technology that's nearly as ubiquitous on shared hosts as PHP is CGI. Plain, one-shot process-per-request CGI.

So if we want a language that can displace PHP in its niche, perhaps we should choose a language that's amenable to short-lived CGI processes. For this, I think a language that can be compiled ahead-of-time to fast-starting native code is appropriate. By fast-starting, I mean that startup should consist of little more than the kernel's exec routine.

I think the Go language would be a good fit.

So the next time you need to write a web app that should be easy to deploy on a shared host, try writing it in Go, using a web framework that supports FastCGI, which can then degrade to plain CGI. Then compile the app on a Linux box, upload it to the shared host, and thanks to the self-contained nature of executables produced by the Go toolchain, the app should be ready to go with no fuss.

<comment><USER32> Except that my web host runs freebsd.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> When people complain about McDonalds being horrible food, not fit for human consumption, they will often talk about the health benefits of their favorite foods. And you know what? They're right.

But McDonald's is still better food.

Imagine a programmer from a top software company writing long-winded rants about how horrible PHP is; how PHP should cease to exist. Everyone would roll their eyes, and say "Well that's the bloody point of PHP, you idiot!"

McDonald's caters to poor people, especially those who don't have their own cooking skills. This is the challenge for all the people who want to complain about McDonalds - if your chosen food is so much better, then make it accessible in the way that McDonald's is.

\--

"The easy path is often not the best path." -Me

<comment><USER34> "best" is a very subjective term. PHP is not the best language for making in- house web app stacks like many people on HN build, but it is the best language to deploy a basic marketing web page for the chip shop down the road. That's the point I believe this article is trying to make, and basically just boils down to "the right tool for the right job".

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> I guess that if "can be deployed my a non-technical user through FTP" weighs heavier than all other technical considerations put together, then I guess PHP is the right choice. Or you could just CGI.

</comment><comment><USER36> Try dropping files in an environment where apache / php is not installed, or where db drivers or gd bindings are missing. Or try to set it up with nginx and php5-fpm.

There is a big difference in being ubiquitious and being easy to use, and lets not infer casuality where there is none. Most popular PHP projects come with a good installer, but go to sourceforge and try a lesser known project. Or go back to the 90s and see if installing drupal or wordpress was as easy.

I can argue that shell scripting is the best programming language by this logic.

</comment><comment><USER37> I disagree. Deploying a Python site, for example, is equally easy.

<comment><USER38> So, you're saying that you can buy cheap shared hosting with a Python server set up, where you only need to upload the files via FTP and it will just work?

<comment><USER33> Deploying with FTP is harder than deploying with git.

<comment><USER38> Maybe, but even so, learning to use FTP is a heck of a lot easier than learning to use git.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Its sad no other languages have noticed this. PHP is a natural progression from HTML for beginners. Learn HTML, sprinkle a bit of inline PHP here and there, and bam you have a "dynamic" website.

An incredibly bad and impossible to maintain website, but a "dynamic" website none the less.

From there, ramping learning up to MVC / Frameworks / caching / templates / optimizers is all small leaps from the initial understanding of "put html here, sprinkle php here". Nothing else really has this apart from maybe ASP.

</comment><comment><USER40> > It works, out of the box, for people who don't know what they're doing

here's the worst of all the bad reasons right here..

<comment><USER41> Absolutely nothing bad about it.

It's called empowering people.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> How cheap does the shared hosting need to be? DigitalOcean offers virtual machines starting at $5/month. At a somewhat higher level of abstraction, WebFaction offers shared hosting for $9.50/month with a broad selection of technology stacks.

<comment><USER42> When doing freelance jobs, I've rarely had the chance to choose the hosting provider for the client as they in most cases already have a web site which they need to extend with certain functionality (web shop, blog, etc). Convincing them to switch hosting provider without obvious (to them) benefits is pretty pointless. Of course, your point still stands if the job entails creating a platform from scratch.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> Only way to "idiot proof" anything is to not let idiots build your software. Regardless of the tools, idiots _will_ create a mess.</comment>


Show HN: Spaced Repetition System for iOS - <AUTHOR> http://cleverdeck.com <comment><AUTHOR> Hi HN! I first posted CleverDeck about 2.5 years ago and received a lot of support and encouragement from the community. Since then, I've built it out into a more general purpose spaced repetition system and added seven new 3000-word frequency lists for major languages. I launched the big update today ([http://cleverdeck.com/blog](http://cleverdeck.com/blog)) and would love to once again submit it here for feedback. Cheers!

<comment><USER2> What are the advantages over Anki?

<comment><AUTHOR> Two things, I think.

First, I was a long time power user of Anki and don't mean to disparage it, but I think CleverDeck has a much better user experience and design.

Second, we've spent a tremendous amount of time putting together high quality frequency lists (mostly for languages right now) that incorporate professional imagery, native-speaker audio, transliterations (where relevant), and example sentences. Usually, making or piecing together your own decks and cards is the most time-consuming part of using an SRS - and user content is often of dubious quality.

In terms of the spaced repetition, though, CleverDeck and Anki actually use the same algorithm.

<comment><USER3> where did you get the native speaker audio ?

<comment><AUTHOR> We recorded it ourselves by interviewing and hiring local to us.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I really dislike the 'per month' monetization. I would rather be able to buy the decks that I'm interested in.

<comment><AUTHOR> What do you think is a fair price for one of our 3000 word language decks? In the previous iteration of the app, people showed themselves willing to pay $15.

Repeat revenue makes it easier for me to make a living as an indie dev, so I wanted to give this model a try while charging what I think is a fair price. I'll keep an open mind about it and adjust if enough people want it. Appreciate the feedback!

<comment><USER5> > _Repeat revenue makes it easier for me to make a living as an indie dev_

Of course it does! "And a pony."

You have to realize that most people are _exceptionally_ leery of subscriptions as they are open-ended long-term commercial relationships with some random entity. There gotta be rock-solid clear benefits for a subscription to be justified. There are none in your case. What you have is a product, not a service. A subscription makes no sense whatsoever.

With regards to the fixed pricing - 3000 word pack is not the best option. What's more useful from the language learners perspective are packs that cover specific domain area - foods, kitchen utensils, car parts, body parts, weather elements, household tools, etc.

"3000 words" = "Unclear what you are getting"

"100 words, Garage" = "I may be able talk to the mechanic"

If you have smaller packs, you can sell them at few bucks a piece. You can try and experiment with discounted bundles of packs. And you can also try an all- you-can-eat option with a monthly access (yes, subscription), but as one of the options, not the only one.

PS. Have an option of switching off photos on cards.

<comment><USER6> I don't think domain specific packs are very useful for language learners. You need a rather large vocabulary just to follow a normal everyday conversation. Basic conversation and reading skill are the foundation upon which you can build. You need to consume and produce a large amount of material in your target language if you want to master it.

Buying the language a few hundred words at a time won't get you to fluency as quickly as learning words by frequency until you have covered the most frequent ~80%. Only then does it make sense to focus on specific domains that are most interesting to you.

<comment><USER7> Actually, it does make sense to have packs that are structured in a particular way.

For example, I am learning German. I would rather have a pack with the 25 most frequent nouns, 25 most frequent verbs, and maybe 25 most frequent adjectives. Then I have a foundation of vocabulary to learn the dativ and akkusativ. I don't need the adverbs yet.

Also, if I'm learning the modal verbs, I'd like a pack of those.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Hi. I actually had it in mind to create something like this myself -- a mobile-first, nicer-designed version of Anki. But it looks like you already started on this, 2.5 years ago. Always the way..

It definitely looks nicer than Anki. It's also better for creating simple cards, something which I haven't really been able to do on the Anki app. The workflow for adding a new card is a great experience. I _do_ think that creating my own cards is an important part of the memorisation process. I've downloaded pre-made cards before, but the stuff I use in conversation is almost always the stuff where I've created the card. Those are the words/phrases that leap to mind.

One issue - my recorded audio didn't play when I reviewed the card (either on the front side or the back side). Maybe a bug?

Based on just 5 minutes of experimentation, I expect that this will become my "on the go" card creator, while I'll keep Anki around for the time being because, when I create cards on my laptop, I can import Forvo pronunciations etc.

Have you thought about how to monetise this?

<comment><USER9> > I actually had it in mind to create something like this myself -- a mobile- > first, nicer-designed version of Anki.

This is also my current project. Although not mobile first. I use Anki a lot and personally find the UI to be insufferable.

<comment><USER10> 100% this. I solely use the unofficial AnkiDroid port because it's leagues beyond the awful desktop app.

Somewhat related: a lot of its horribleness comes from the fact that the UI is written with QT, which is equally horrible for Windows and Mac, and basically okay for Linux as long as your DE is KDE.

<comment><USER9> > a lot of its horribleness comes from the fact that the UI is written with QT

I would agree with this. It also doesn't appear that much thought went into how the application should flow. It really feels like a smattering of UI components were picked out because they could accomplish the goal at hand without much thought as to what would optimize the user experience. For example, the way you browse through cards leaves much to be desired. Even stuff like the size of the buttons when you're reviewing cards. It DOES feel like the kit used to handle the GUI limits the application.

One thing that I think Anki got right (and I got wrong in my first iteration of a spaced-rep app) is doing away with the visual metaphor of a card. The reason you put information on a back of a real-life flash card is so you can review the question without seeing the answer. The answer is obfuscated, but readily available (you don't have to go look it up). There is NO reason to keep the metaphor alive in an app. It is actually less optimal to animate a card flipping over when you want to see the answer. It is better for the answer to simply appear underneath the question so you can easily reference each aspect.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Love the idea! Is there any way to import existing Anki decks? I don't want to start my learning from scratch.

<comment><AUTHOR> Working on it! There's no really good way to do this on the device, so I need to build out a web app. But this is the number one most requested feature, so stay tuned :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Do I understand correctly that paid subscription effectively removes 100 card limit? The description on the Settings page says something about "unlimited access to all content," but I can't seem to understand what this means exactly.

PS. I'm probably not the only one who stuffs his wallet deeper in the pocket upon seeing an "auto-renewable subscription." I would strongly encourage you to add non-subscription way for people to give you some money. I like what you made, it's useful and I'd like to support you, but no way in hell I'm entering a recurrent $ committment with a vendor of any app that I may or may not be using few weeks from now.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the advice.

I don't necessarily feel like I have nailed the business model right now - I'll see how it goes. More broadly speaking, I think the jury is still out on subscriptions in productivity apps. Everyone is trying to get away with it now - and it is very attractive as an indie developer.

For what its worth, I feel similarly to you. I buy year long auto-renewable subscriptions, immediately cancel them, and then resubscribe if I'm still using them next year.

<comment><USER13> the immediate cancel yearly subscription approach is the move...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Great work, I've been searching for something like this for a while, and never really liked the UX for Anki. I love the UX, very clean and easy to use. Tutorial / intro was the perfect length, gave me a quick run down on how to use it without taking too much time.

I almost skipped over this because I didn't know what "spaced repetition system" was. My only suggestion is to market it around what benefit the user will get out of it, and not SRS / or the algorithm behind it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, yours is the second comment along these lines and I think you're right.

My thinking was that I wanted to differentiate it from the very gamey branding of apps like Memrise and Duolingo. "Spaced repetition system" sounds more serious, more academic - and I do want people to get the impression that CleverDeck takes the spaced repetition implementation as seriously as Anki. I think I can probably still do that while being more clear - thanks for the feedback.

<comment><USER15> FWIW, I was drawn in by the term Spaced Repetition because I like Anki in theory but hate the UI

<comment><USER16> As a very heavy Anki user, I would love to know what you don't like about the UI. I use Anki mostly as Ankidroid on a Note 3, but I add all my material on the Desktop (CentOS).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Spaced repetition is why drip marketing works. Definitely the way to go when building memory.

</comment><comment><USER18> Just downloaded.

Quick feedback: flicking away a card takes too long (vertical distance) of a flick. I have to carefully drag it from top to bottom for the card to flick away. Wish it was more sensitive. Perhaps 30% of the screen height is enough of a threshold. Otherwise, thank you. Going to be using this!

<comment><AUTHOR> Hmm, I wonder if there's some confusion here. Cards can be swiped left, up, or right - but not from top to bottom. Otherwise, thanks for the feedback!

<comment><USER18> If I swipe long enough vertically, the card does seem to go away, so I figured it's a "come back to this later" feature. Didn't realize could do up/left/right to mark status, that's handy!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I love spaced repetition but serious question - what can you give me that Anki doesnt. Yes, I know Anki's interface is ugly but it is open source so I can actually change things and know how the spacing algorithm works. etc.

<comment><AUTHOR> You can change most variables in CleverDeck's algorithm (the same one Anki uses), as well.

If open source and super customizability are important to you, Anki is probably a better choice for you. For many people, I think having the ready- made decks and a nice interface is more important. And CleverDeck does have some features, like three-sided cards and siblings, that I personally loved in Anki.

<comment><USER19> Personally I don't think super cuztomizability is that important for me. I prefer to have an out of the box solution with ready-made decks but being able to create my own decks is definitely a nice plus. My favorite aspects going through the app (learning Turkish) is the beautiful and intuitive design. Spaced repetition might sound a bit daunting, but completely got it once I started using the app. Well done, this is definitely something I will use daily and that will improve my learning.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> The UI is great andI love that each one actually has example sentences, but the text isn't selectable and you can't tap to get the definition of other words in the example sentences.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you! That's a good idea for a feature :)

<comment> herrvogel- Yeah I had the same idea! While doing the advanced english deck I sometimes wanted to check for translations in my native language.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> The great thing for me is that there are great materials for lesser studied languages - I've used it for both Turkish and Persian, which ive really struggled to find.

</comment><comment><USER22> Actually really quite well done, got it after the first posting, and quite enjoyed using it! Still do from time to time, the interface is seriously meditative :)

</comment><comment><USER23> Why it is better than other options, like Anki?

<comment><AUTHOR> Pasting my response from below:

Two things, I think.

First, I was a long time power user of Anki and don't mean to disparage it, but I think CleverDeck has a much better user experience and design.

Second, we've spent a tremendous amount of time putting together high quality frequency lists (mostly for languages right now) that incorporate professional imagery, native-speaker audio, transliterations (where relevant), and example sentences. Usually, making or piecing together your own decks and cards is the most time-consuming part of using an SRS - and user content is often of dubious quality.

In terms of the spaced repetition, though, CleverDeck and Anki actually use the same algorithm.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Looks pretty good (coming from a Anki user).

One piece of feedback: The toolbar UX in the deck is confusing as it's inconsistent with every other iOS app. The 'back' button should be on the left and the 'options' button needs to be on the right.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, my mental model for the app has been that the main list of decks "lives" in the center, the settings live on the right, and the actual studying happens on the left (you'll see that it also slides in from the left - mirroring the exit animation).

You're not the first to mention this, though. I should probably change it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> How much effort is it to add a new language? My wife is trying to learn Serbian using spaced repetition and had an app to create her own flash cards with her own pictures and sounds, but it's very laborious

<comment><USER26> Have you heard about Memrise? It is site/mobile app dedicated to learn new language using SRS.

Apart from official content, most of the content is contributed by bilingual users. So I don't know the quality/accuracy of them, but the result is that they have lots of courses.

[https://www.memrise.com/courses/english/serbian/](https://www.memrise.com/courses/english/serbian/)

It is a bit hard to pick up grammar or conversationnal skills but to learn some vocabulary it is great.

<comment><USER25> I haven't heard of it but will definitely check it out. Thanks for the tip!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> _CleverDeck_

 _Spaced repetition system for iOS_

Might be effective to have "memory" in there somewhere?

Also, somehow the first 3/4s of the linked page (before scrolling) put me in the frame of "this product is primarily about making my own decks".

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, I think you're right. The tagline can be improved.

I'm kind of doing a balancing act right now - I've built out CleverDeck to be a fully functional SRS that could be used for any subject, and I want to convey that. At the same time, people primarily use it for learning languages and I also want to communicate my dedication and efforts toward that particular niche.

I'm sure I can do a better job with messaging. Thanks for your feedback.

<comment><USER27> IMO, the screenshots on your App Store page do a great job of progressively disclosing details on the app starting from its primary value proposition.

I'm enjoying the app, which is very nice! I think it, too, could make its bundled content a bit more upfront without losing the emphasis on DIY.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> This looks really cool, I was just thinking earlier today that I need to set up some Anki decks.

I just have one question: Do you gain any rights to user-made decks? Ownership or usage rights or otherwise.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you! No - right now, CleverDeck doesn't even have any deck sharing functionality. Whatever you make is yours alone.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> This looks pretty good, but I really wish you had support for Korean.

<comment><AUTHOR> Me, too :(

It's next on the agenda.

<comment><USER29> Glad to hear it!

Is there any way I can sign up to be notified when you add support for it?

<comment><AUTHOR> Shoot me an email at firstname.lastname@example.com with your email address and I'll make sure you get notified :)

<comment><USER29> Done. Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> I'm on an Android phone in an airport, so no chance to check it out, but what kind of tech stack are you using?

<comment><AUTHOR> Nothing fancy - objective C with core data. The backend is Django + AWS.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Quizlet seems to be doing the same thing and already has a somewhat large community behind it.

<comment><AUTHOR> I mean, yeah, Quizlet is massive. I'll never compete with their user-content library and community. They've never had a particular focus on spaced repetition, so I don't really see them as a big competitor.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Tips on using it if you already have a vocab of 2000 or 3000 words in a target language?

<comment><AUTHOR> You can jump ahead in any deck by holding the red trash button. Since the decks are ordered by frequency, you could probably jump ahead 1000-1500 words and then just get rid of any words you already know.

Otherwise, you can always just create your own cards. If you do that on top of one of CleverDeck's decks, it will autocomplete if we've already made a card for a particular word.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Great App! Could you provide APIs for people to create Deck easier and quicker? Thanks!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you!

I probably don't have the bandwidth to support a full-blown API, but making a web app that makes bulk creation faster is a priority.

<comment><USER34> Bandwidth shouldn't be an issue here, although this is a side project (so I realise money is limited), from experience you can send and receive roughly 200-400 images per second for every $5/month you spend. I don't know your precise usage count, but I would be surprised if you were to get that many images downloaded every second.

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry, I meant bandwidth metaphorically. I'm an indie dev, so I just don't have a ton of time to divide across so many things that need to get done.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I wonder if there's a way to provide custom content? Is there an API or something?

<comment><AUTHOR> You can make your own decks and cards, and import decks from Quizlet or csv.

I'm currently working on an accompanying web app that will allow importing of lists from more services and allow for faster bulk content creation.

<comment><USER36> When importing from csv, can you import to a deck multiple times and have it just update? Or do you have to create a new deck each time?

Also, can decks be shared?

Love the design and it's a welcome change of pace coming from other SRS apps.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you!

Right now, the import is pretty rudimentary. It just parses and creates a new deck.

I've been working on - and now will redouble my efforts based on the feedback here - a web app that will make creation and import much easier and flexible.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Any plans to support iPads?

<comment><AUTHOR> Not right now - I quite like using it as a universal app on my iPad. To be honest, I'm not sure how I could significantly improve it with all the extra space.

<comment><USER37> Thanks for confirming no plans. I've lost track of the number who have promised it for years and never delivered. This looks like a nice app for iPhones, but its not useful for serious iPad work.

In case you revisit this decision in the future, using the extra space isn't the issue. The "improvements" I'd be looking for on iPads would be much more mundane: support for the basic stuff like using the iPad keyboard, supporting split screen and landscape orientation, and text quality that doesn't look like it's from pre-retina days.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey thanks! That's really helpful. Noted!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I don't have iOS, but... what benefits does this have over Anki?

<comment><AUTHOR> Pasting my response from below:

Two things, I think.

First, I was a long time power user of Anki and don't mean to disparage it, but I think CleverDeck has a much better user experience and design.

Second, we've spent a tremendous amount of time putting together high quality frequency lists (mostly for languages right now) that incorporate professional imagery, native-speaker audio, transliterations (where relevant), and example sentences. Usually, making or piecing together your own decks and cards is the most time-consuming part of using an SRS - and user content is often of dubious quality. In terms of the spaced repetition, though, CleverDeck and Anki actually use the same algorithm.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Are decks created by user stored local or remote? Thanks!

<comment><AUTHOR> Completely local unless you make an account and turn on sync. In that case, they'll be stored remotely for the purpose of syncing between devices.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> Um, so we can advertise our apps on hackernews now? Cool.

<comment><USER40> Yes, in the fourteen days since you created your account, you might not have noticed that "Show HN" is quite common. I don't know what the guidelines are, but perhaps they are outlined in the FAQ.

<comment><USER41> [https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html)

> Show HN is a way to share something that you've made on Hacker News.</comment></comment></comment>


Facebook tracks what you do online, even when you're logged out  - <AUTHOR> http://venturebeat.com/2011/09/25/facebook-tracking-logged-out/ <comment><USER2> Original discussion: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3035418></comment>


Ask HN: Does Google still have 20% time? - <AUTHOR>

<comment><USER2> Marissa Mayer debunked this in 2013: [http://www.businessinsider.com/mayer- google-20-time-does-not...](http://www.businessinsider.com/mayer- google-20-time-does-not-exist-2015-1)

"It's funny," she said. "People have been asking me since I got here, 'When is Yahoo going to have 20% time?'"? "I've got to tell you the dirty little secret of Google's 20% time. It's really 120% time."

</comment><comment><USER3> [http://qz.com/116196/google-engineers-insist-20-time-is- not-...](http://qz.com/116196/google-engineers-insist-20-time-is-not-dead-its- just-turned-into-120-time/)</comment>


Facebook made my teenager into an ad - <AUTHOR> http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/15/facebook-advertising-opt-in-privacy-issues <comment><USER2> I can offer an instantly effective alternative to "someone needs to supervise the social network," stop using it. The terrible tyranny of facebook has to be the epitome of first world problems.

Why are your kids there? In your own words, it's a professional risk, den of commercialism, not to mention the inevitable psychological damage from refreshing a webpage instead of having actual social interactions. And it's not even hip any more.

<comment><USER3> >stop using it

You are ignoring the reality of network effects. My friends will post photos that include me on Facebook whether I have an account with them or not. My friends will coordinate activities with one another via the group chat and event invitation facilities, including location metadata and description context whether I participate in the discussion or not.

Whether you have the choice to give Facebook data about you is increasingly out of your hands.

<comment><USER4> Speaking as someone whose pictures ended up on Facebook (without me even having a Facebook account), I can't even begin to describe how frustrated I feel about this. I basically have no option of recourse, because there's a revised culture thanks to Facebook which tells me it's outside of my hands now. I can't request my peers to take down group photos that include me (or even photos with only me) because I'd sound like a dick if I did. For this reason I really hope that some black hats, upon finding some 0days or something, just do something to bring this behemoth down. So please, when you find something, don't disclose vulnerabilities to FB, disclose them to dark corners of the blackhats' residences.

<comment> k-mcgrady >> " I can't request my peers to take down group photos that include me (or even photos with only me) because I'd sound like a dick if I did. For this reason I really hope that some black hats, upon finding some 0days or something, just do something to bring this behemoth down. So please, when you find something, don't disclose vulnerabilities to FB, disclose them to dark corners of the blackhats' residences."

So rather than speak to your friends about photos that you are in you would prefer hackers to takedown Facebook and for your friends to lose all their photos and other content...

If you're concerned don't let people take pictures of you. If you are as concerned as you sound don't leave the house. People can take your picture in public and do what they like with it. This is only going to happen more and more as cameras get smaller and put in more places.

<comment><USER5> No way to stop Facebook's unethical operations.

"Don't leave the house haw haw" is not a valid response to objections to Facebook's unethical operations.

<comment> k-mcgrady >> ""Don't leave the house haw haw" is not a valid response to objections to Facebook's unethical operations."

My point was that this is nothing to do with Facebook. If you go out in public people can take your picture and they can put it on any website they wish. They can publish it in print media too. Facebook preventing you from taking down any photo you appear in isn't unusual - it seems like the best option they have. If group photos started disappearing from my account because one of my friends who voluntarily appeared in them was paranoid I'd be pissed off. For a lot of people that's the only copy of the photo they have. To Facebook it's a choice between pissing off users and satisfying the paranoid who don't even use Facebook. Seems like a simple choice to me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Question:

IANAL but isn't it illegal (grounds for a lawsuit at least) to use the image of someone, who is too young to provide legal consent, in an advertisement without their legal guardian's express written consent?

I could have swore that was a thing on a higher than state level but maybe I'm wrong? Like I didn't think you could make a 'settlement' and then legally avoid this sort of thing in the future.

Isn't this quote all sorts of legally indefensible? When did non-adults ever have the ability to 'represent' anything in the absence of their guardian?

 _any user under 18 "represents" that her parent agrees to let Facebook use her image in ads._

<comment><USER7> _IANAL but isn 't it illegal (grounds for a lawsuit at least) to use the image of someone, who is too young to provide legal consent, in an advertisement without their legal guardian's express written consent?_

In the article they list the states that it is illegal in. This is presumably a federal case that doesn't take that into account.

<comment><USER8> Here's the In Re: Facebook Privacy Litigation docket:

[http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/index.html?id=1782789](http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/index.html?id=1782789)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This article reaks of helicopter parenting, with all the usual over-blown statements that make talking about targeted advertising so hard to explain:

> Facebook can't buy our children, and it can't sell them either.

Yes, slavery, because that's exactly what's at stake…

> But 10-year-olds still need supervision.

Not sure I need to point out that they have nothing to do on Facebook in the first place, or that humanising young corporation in a way to disparage the ability of their (very mature) executives to make decisions is lame. You are not Mark Zuckerberg's, or Sheryl Sandberg's mother — stop thinking that because you are someone's mother, you are always right on all matters; otherwise, I'll have to point you to how the authors' of Freakonomics have truckloads (litterally) of hatemail proving that being a parent… doesn't exactly make you reasonable in general.

I'll pass the "my child is so smart" because… well, with a mother like you, I can only hope that she is, and focus on a simple thing: someone as opinionated as a hippie teenager can be probably never 'Liked' big corporate brand on Facebook, yet, they are apparently listed as such.

That is a purely technical problem, that has nothing to do with parental consent and kids' agency, about how much control Facebook users have over their listed 'Likes'. I wouldn't sue Facebook, because, well, they have good lawyers and your narrow-minded hysterionics and over-helicoptering seems to have ruined the patience of every judge available. I'd go with the announcers, telling them that they are advertising to the wrong crowds because of technical glitches. But that's just me.

<comment><USER6> Why all the name calling? The issue may not be all about corp hating hippy helicopter moms but something more important to everyone.

The issue (to me) really seems to be that a company is using images they do not own, that depict people's children (who cannot legally consent to their pictures being used or any other contract), for their own profit.

Regardless of if this is Facebook or anyone else it seems like there is an issue with the company claiming the right to use other peoples images for advertisements.

I seem to remember a big flap about Instagram claiming they own the rights to peoples photos in the recent past. In this case it seems like there is the additional issue of the photos picturing people's children.

Edit: I understand putting the text "so and so Likes this company" next to something if they actually 'liked' it. But the article implies that they are using the person's image in a custom advertisement in the feed.

<comment><USER9> Why the name calling? Because, given Facebook size, it should be addressed with calm and enough technical skillset — and because nothing gets on my nerves more than the "I'm a mum, therefore I'm right" argument. Having a vagina does not make anyone a specialist on gender issues (unlike what far too many people think), education and obviously not social networking policies.

<comment><USER10> Spit the hook. You got trolled hard by a bit of click bait in the shitty opinion section of an otherwise good newspaper.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> When you "like" something you are telling Facebook that you want your social network to know that you like that thing. Doesn't it make sense that Facebook would then go about telling people that you said you liked it? That's the whole point of clicking the like button.

<comment><AUTHOR> 'Like'ing something on FB is entirely different that endorsing a product for your friends, which is what the AD makes it appear.

Too many times I have searched something on Google and then later on in FB low and behold I see an ad whiz by on my timeline pertaining to what I searched earlier on Google.

Taking this to the extreme, if my teenage son searched for Condems on Google and then later see's the AD on FB and clicks like, do I want the AD to appear with my sons pic endorsing this product?

<comment><USER12> Why the heck would your son press like on a condom ad?

<comment><AUTHOR> It was an extreme example hopefully it wouldn't happen, BUT if it did at least his G'ma, G'pa, aunts, uncles and cousins who are friends with him would at least know his choice of condoms.

Which would inevitably lead to the call from them to me letting me know what my son is up to which then leads me to explain a bunch of non transparent FB rules to non technical people.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> > A generation of 'opt-in' kids is being exploited, and someone needs to > supervise the social network

I'll happily bash facebook all day. But before you allow your children onto the Internet you really really need to decide about what you think is acceptable, and talk to them about it.

Do not arrange to meet in real life anyone you do not know in real life without talking to me first; do not take photographs of your unclothed body and for god's sake do not send those photographs to people.

<comment><USER5> Why not both? It is both true that Facebook does many very unethical things, and that you should talk to your kids.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> "the global supply chain that exploits workers" can we please stop perpetuating that ridiculous myth, in the countries in which sweat shops exist, they are generally far better options for laborers than the alternatives.

<comment><USER14> Exactly! The few rich people who bought up all the land and placed foreign- owned sweatshops on it are doing the workers a favor. Sure, many goods produced there are priced way out of the range of what the workers could ever dream of affording, but what the locals have lost in terms of self-sustainable living has been more than made up for by the pleasantries of factory towns, jobs for every man, woman, and child, and living quarters with meals for purchase on site, making it easy for children to fulfill the labor requirements they were contracted for as adolescents. And since capitalism has priced every other option but starvation and crime out of reach, sweatshops certainly appear to be good options for wage slaves.

<comment><USER15> Yes, this is exactly what every country which ever had sweatshops looks like. It's not like England, or the United States, or South Korea ever developed a middle class capable of buying the kinds of products being manufactured in their sweatshops. Capitalism only reinforced existing class divides, which is why the preindustrial nobility are still the only rich people in the world.

<comment><USER16> "Which is why the preindustrial nobility are still the only rich people in the world"

Obviously false.

Bill Gates? Jay Z? Zuckerberg? There are so many people on the Forbes Billionaires List who are self-made.

<comment><USER15> Um, that's my point.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Why do you care? So what if your face is on an ad? Only idiots would believe you had anything to do with that happening, and why would you care what idiots think?

<comment><USER18> I'm not sure if you understood the complaint ... I'm not sure anyone is weird that someone will think that someone else will think their child endorsed a product ... The issue is about their child's image being used at all.

<comment><USER17> But why does that matter, if it's not actually affecting anything? It's not like they printed 10 metre high adverts with their face on and put them up around town. All that happens is people you know on facebook see your photo next to an ad and think "ha, stupid facebook, that doesn't fool me"

<comment><USER18> Sure, but you not want your child's image used for those purposes. Seems reasonable to me. I think you're focusing on whether Facebook can fool anyone, which is besides the point.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Maybe the law isn't the most important thing here. I think that Facebook has to act like a grown up and think in an ethical way about this. It's just immoral to use children their images in adds. And I don't think that this fits Zuckerbergs original intentions when he started Facebook.

<comment><USER4> > It's just immoral to use children their images in adds. And I don't think > that this fits Zuckerbergs original intentions when he started Facebook.

Heh, really? Are we talking about the same Zuckerberg who got his start making webapps by having people rate illegitimately-gained pictures of his peers? ("The Kirkland dormitory facebook is open on my desktop and some of these people have pretty horrendiedous facebook pics. I almost want to put some of these faces next to pictures of some farm animals and have people vote on which is more attractive."). [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facemash#Facemash](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facemash#Facemash)

Or the guy who called people who submitted information to his site "dumb fucks"? ([http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mark_Zuckerberg](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mark_Zuckerberg)).

This latest move is exactly the quintessential spirit of the Zuck. But honestly, I'm expecting a lot more to come as the secret comes out that they can't make a lot of money ([http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVfHeWTKjag](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVfHeWTKjag)) -- I think they'll sell private information of users to insurance companies.

<comment><USER15> Because obviously Zuckerberg is personally choosing which profile picture to use in advertisements.</comment></comment></comment>


Offer HN: A few domains I have that I won't need at cost - <AUTHOR>

I have a few domains that will expire soonish that I don't plan to renew and instead of going to some domain parking company, I thought maybe someone could be interested in any of them:
objectivepixel.com objective-pixel.com paperplaneapps.com paperplanegames.com paperplanesoftware.com appticious.com
Price is whatever it costs me to move them to you. They are all registered at name.com <comment><USER2> I would be interested in appticious.com. Please email me at mindcast.software at gmail if you're still interested in parting with it. Thanks! -- Benjamin

</comment><comment><USER3> Hello!

Do you still have ObjectivePixel.com? I'd love to make use of it!

Cheers, Derek

<comment><AUTHOR> Yep, just mail me at brunomtsousa at gmail and we can setup the transfer.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I also have mobilek.it if anyone is interested</comment>


Analysis: Apple turns the flamethrower on Android - <AUTHOR> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/03/apple_htc_google/

<comment><USER2> Ahh, Apple. Do you realize that your only value for most of my friends is that your OS is actually a NIX beast?

I wish someone had enough money to come up with decent UI on Linux (pardon me but GNOME looks and _works_ horrible), better typography and write some general, and widely working, framework for supporting Windows drivers.

It should not take more than $20-30m I think. Ubuntu, unfortunately, is not aggressive enough in those, critical, areas.

<comment><USER3> Did you miss the reports about the estimated value of the Linux kernel being about $1.4 _billion_?

What makes you think that completely overhauling GUIs on Linux to create a new desktop environment _and_ adding binary compatibility with a completely different (closed-source!) OS would cost less than 2% of what it would take to write just the kernel?

Developing a UI framework with comparable technical capabilities to what OS X provides might be doable starting from the best of what's available at the moment given your budget of $20-30m, but building a cohesive desktop environment on top of that would be an extremely huge undertaking.

<comment><USER4> It will be 2 billions in ten years when linux + new gui has conquered the desktop (or what is left of it) and mobile devices. The difference between 2 billions and $20-30m (or whatever imaginary sum you suggest) is called profit (or rather some share of it).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _A system in which a software module called an event consumer can indicate an interest in receiving notifications about a specific set of events, and it provides an architecture for efficiently providing notifications to the [event] consumer_

Hmmm, Smalltalk implemented this. All objects in Smalltalk implement listening and notification. Apple licensed certain concepts from Xerox, so this may or may not apply. How about Java? Do Java programs that use its notifications violate the patent?

Or what about Javascript libraries? How about Windows programs? It seems to me that event-driven architectures with listeners are everywhere.

This is the natural consequence of software patents. Just as the inner workings of a physical engine can be patented, the inner workings of software can be patented, which means things like patterns.

I wonder if future versions of books like the GoF patterns book will be annotated with warnings that some or all of the patterns are covered by patent and must be licensed?

<comment><USER6> I wish more people would read the actual patent claims before coming to conclusions about them based solely on their titles. It seems that many news organizations have articles claiming this is a ridiculous lawsuit based on the titles which they claim are overly broad. If however they took the time to read the patent claims, they would see that they are relatively specific. For example: [http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=L-IeAAAAEBAJ&dq=5...](http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=L-IeAAAAEBAJ&dq=5,566,337)

Now I'm not saying that software patents are necessarily right, but I am growing weary of people making broad generalizations based on the titles of these patents and having them perpetuated. That is somewhat like a book review discussing the book's title and deciding whether or not it's a good book without having read the book or having any knowledge of its contents.

In other words, leave it to the lawyers. If you went to LN (Lawyer News - doesn't exist, but let's pretend for my analogy) and there was a lawyer claiming that Javascript is stupid because it has the word Java in it and therefore must have all the attributes of Java and he hates Java, we'd all cringe at his lack of knowledge of the subject and wish he'd leave it up to the Hackers who actually know what they're talking about to criticize.

<comment><USER7> That patent is on NeXTSTEP's NSDistributedNotificationCenter [1], which admittedly might actually be enforceable (I'm not sure of any prior art in this regard).

That said, after reading the claims of a lot of the other patents Apple is citing it is apparent that they are complete rubbish, for example [2] (the observer pattern applied to a desktop environment), [3] (generic proxy objects for IPC/RPC - Smalltalk/CORBA did it), and [4] (WTF???????).

1\. [http://developer.apple.com/mac/library/documentation/Cocoa/C...](http://developer.apple.com/mac/library/documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/Notifications/Articles/NotificationCenters.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/20000216)

2\. <http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=zIwLAAAAEBAJ>

3\. <http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=7d4aAAAAEBAJ>

4\. <http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=HrobAAAAEBAJ>

<comment><USER8> When you say "rubish", are you going off the description or the actual patent claim? Descriptions are always written in broad strokes and never really seem enforceable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The article starts with some naive and clearly exaggerated statements about what might happen before finally getting to the real point, which is:

> The case will take years to resolve, but that's no bad thing for Apple: > manufacturers are going to be hesitant to create Android handsets...

If Apple thought they could get a clean victory they would go after Google.

<comment><USER10> I think it's pretty clear they are going after Google. By going after one manufacturer you put the brakes on the rest. Either it was a piece of HTC technology that violated patent or it was Google tech.

BTW. I hate the idea of software patents and wish it ends badly for Apple.

<comment><USER8> I would rather that law makers deal with the IP issues in a mature way then wish ill-will to someone using the current system. We really need to get some pressure where it matters (government). The courts do what they are told for the most part.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This article has the clearest description of a "patent arsenal", and it's purpose, that I have seen.

</comment><comment><USER12> What could the Free Software Foundation be thinking about this, I wonder. Particularly patenting the hand gestures sounds really absurd.

Doesn't Apple know that one cannot proceed by clinging on the patents and legal protections alone.

<comment><USER13> _Doesn't Apple know that one cannot proceed by clinging on the patents and legal protections alone._

They're doing no such thing. They're trying to slow others so that they can stay ahead.

For the longest time I refused to buy new smartphones because I don't agree with Apple's iPhone lockdown (If I _buy_ a product, it's _mine_. Nowhere does it say I'm leasing an iPhone, Apple should have no say about what I do with it.) and because multi-touch was a make-or-break feature.

By keeping manufacturers afraid of implementing multi-touch Apple keeps consumers like me from going to them because they seem behind on the times.

<comment><USER14> If Apple thinks I'm going to buy an iPhone in the future because they're using legal methods to hinder the competition, they are dead wrong.

<comment><USER15> They know that some people would be bothered by this but they don't have any great reason to care as the competetive edge this might give them on the 99% of their market which does not care would far outweigh the damage done by bothering the 1%.

<comment><USER16> 99% of their market doesn't even know about this trial, or even what software patents are. Only the one 1% that is bothered about this knows about and understands the issue. In the end it will be a big loss of money for Apple and its shareholders and HTC too. A lose-lose situation, well done Apple...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> From the geek mindset, apple is the new microsoft. Apple has nice products, but seemingly agressive in their approach. Don't they realize that competition is good? Of course not...

</comment><comment><USER18> Hmm,

Does this action actually make Nokia's suit look like a pre-strike in a war that Apple had implicitly declared?

<comment><USER16> It does indeed.</comment></comment>


The Top 50 Websites by Traffic in 1998 - <AUTHOR> http://www.geekosystem.com/1998-web-traffic-stats/

<comment><USER2> All I can think of when I see this list is massive missed business opportunities. Quite a few of those business have absolutely no excuse for squandering their first-mover advantage (mapquest, altavista, etc).

Which is great because it makes me more confident of being able to overcome an established player in the market today.

<comment><USER3> There are good excuses, like browser capabilities, broadband, % of users online, ad serving platforms, ad agencies, mobile usage, knowledgable people/employees. Heck, I could go on and on and on.

There was absolute no way for Google Maps to have happened in 1999, the strongest evidence being that it didn't happen in 1999.

<comment><USER4> True but irrelevant. When Google Maps _did_ happen, there's no reason why MapQuest could not have built the same thing at the same time.

The fact that they didn't, and that Google did, suggests opportunities for upstarts (sorry, startups) to get the jump on established players by introducing disruptive innovations.

<comment><USER5> Not to mention the fact that MapQuest took _years_ to come out with something that even comes close to the user experience of Google Maps, which suggests to me that GMaps completely broadsided them, and that they didn't have anything remotely close to that sophistication even considered/researched.

It seems to be, as an outsider anyways, that MapQuest got lazy, not just out- done by Google.

<comment><USER6> Exactly, forgiveable that MapQuest didn't invent Google Maps, unforgiveable that it they kept the same ugly static maps for _years_ after GMaps.

<comment><USER7> well, all this is true... but at least MapQuest is still around (since 1967). And I don't think GOOG makes any significant $ from maps yet.

Perhaps you tried to say that in 90s they should have tried to make a better search engine instead, apply advertising business model to it, make a lot of money... and then proceed to make the best maps on web by deploying those profits?

Because otherwise I don't see how MapQuest could have done it.

<comment><USER6> They worked on their business, not their technology. Since they were in the _mapping business_ , they might have invested more $ into their _mapping product_.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> A _lot_ of free web hosts. What I remember most about those days is how many people just created web pages about Star Trek or something, threw it up on a free web host (or even their ISP's web hosting), and sometimes even kept it updated. Now we have Facebook and Posterous and Wikia, but all of that tries to fit it in a box, to make it easy or private or constrained to the form of a blog or wiki or whatever. Back in the day you just wrote HTML files (there was even a form on Geocities to write an HTML file in your browser) and you weren't constrained to any real form.

</comment><comment><USER9> I feel as though a table may have been a more appropriate way to present that data...

<comment><USER10> More readable, certainly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> some of them just changed the urls.

i.e. "BLUEMOUNTAINARTS.COM" is now actually just bluemountain.com not a #9 site...but still not 18 million either

<comment><USER12> Agreed. CDnow, for example, was acquired by Amazon, so their traffic ranking is meaningless too. I still have a soft spot in my heart for CDnow :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> It's good to see that the public's relative need for weather(.com) forecasts has not changed in the last twelve years.

</comment><comment><USER14> Blue Mountain Arts. Was anyone else here one of the millions who saw Internet greeting cards as a great idea?

What were we thinking?

<comment><USER15> In a way, they were -- they're just now called 'virtual gifts' and 'wall posts' and 'app notifications'.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Bonzi.com still ranks #1 in my heart.

<comment><USER17> I'll always wonder what percentage of those uniques were actually user- initiated.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Related is a recent post on waxy.org with a list of the top 100 websites of 1999: [http://waxy.org/2010/02/dennet_and_the_top_100_websites_of_1...](http://waxy.org/2010/02/dennet_and_the_top_100_websites_of_1999/)

<comment><USER11> #90 911 Gifts - ouch...wonder if these guys got killed by 9/11 or if they crashed before that

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> (Comment here because I can't be bothered to create a login on every random website just to comment.)

How are aol.com and yahoo.com both ranked #3 in 2010?

<comment><USER20> He fixed it, its now crossed through.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Whoa angelfire.com

It's like it's been in a time capsule</comment>


Online vigilante hacks scam call centre CCTV, owner now in custody - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51740214 <comment><AUTHOR> To the mods (and others) ...

I've deliberately adapted text from the article as the title here to give a better idea of the content. The original title does not do this.</comment>


WHICH UNI: Texas A&M, UT-Austin,U of F, or Uof C,SD? - <AUTHOR>

I would love feedback from Alums or others familiar, but am looking for a little more than world news rankings. I am looking for the best learning environment, not just most recognized.
I plan to move to one of the four this June. I worked five years as a self taught chemical engineer for a mining company, looking for something new.
I have a young family, money is not an influencer, looking for a serious CS program with other serious developers. <comment><USER2> I think you should probably consider the lifestyle differences more than the academic ones, since they're probably going to mean more to you in the long run.

On Texas:

University of Texas is where blue-staters go. Austin is full of progressive- minded folks and all the cultural tidbits that come with it (organic food, bike-friendly, dog parks, indie coffee, etc). The IT set is very strong here, as is the CS program (#8 according to USNews), and there's no shortage of discussion on Austin as a rising startup hub. Edsger Dijkstra was on the faculty from 1984 until 1999, and undoubtedly contributed a great deal to the shape of the department. Austin has some of the friendliest people you'll ever meet, if you like striking up random conversation with strangers. Also, Live Music Capital of the World, if you're into that kind of thing.

Texas A&M is where red-staters go (I am a former student). Very cheap to live in B/CS but can be culturally homogeneous at times (this has changed a on campus a great deal in recent decades). A&M's undergraduate CS program didn't seem too special, at least while I was there. Being a very large state university, they have plenty of resources, but the CS dept is not in the top echelon of "significant" programs there. Probably a pretty decent place for kids, being a sort of values-oriented community. Also, Johnny Freaking Football, if you're into that kind of thing (and you will be if you go there).

I know nothing about the others but the weather's probably a bit nicer in Gainesville and San Diego. You might want to visit each city and get a feel for them if you intend to stay there for a full 4 years.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback! I added the karma point :)

I like the feel of Austin, but have meet a number of people from college station that I really connected with.

stoic--went to Texas A&m. Do you know if there CS is theoretical or practical?

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> University of California, San Diego

</comment><comment><USER3> Texas at Austin, also has a brand new CS facility opening this week - <http://apps.cs.utexas.edu/goto_gdc/>

<comment><AUTHOR> did you go to UTA?

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> University of Florida, Gainesville

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Texas A&M college station

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> university of texas-austin</comment>


Clojure eXchange 2012: David Nolen on The Refined Clojurist [video] - <AUTHOR> http://skillsmatter.com/podcast/scala/the-refined-clojurist

<comment><USER2> Another video from the event: Rich Hickey - The Language of the System

[http://skillsmatter.com/podcast/scala/the-language-of-the- sy...](http://skillsmatter.com/podcast/scala/the-language-of-the-system)

</comment><comment><USER3> I wish skillsmatter would clean their web design up a bit :-(

<comment><USER4> Speaking of which, blip.tv, on which most Clojure videos[1] are hosted, is one of the most frustrating websites that I have come across.

It's a pity those videos are not found elsewhere.

Try to start from the oldest videos on the channel.

[1]<http://blip.tv/clojure>

<comment><USER5> At a glance, it seems like some of those are available on infoq.com. infoq still has some problems but all in all it's a lot better. And it even offers MP3 downloads of some talks, which I've made extensive use of.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'll guess this is the same as the 'unconference' talk that David Nolen gave at the 2012 Conj. He's doing some really spiffy stuff with the new constraint mechanism in core.logic, and this talk was among the best of the week.

</comment><comment><USER7> I really liked that talk, I had not seen the constraint logic programming befor. David mentions that the zebra example would be better solved with constraints. Is there a example of solving the zebro puzzle with constrains?

Also about the predicate dispatch work, is there allready some code somewhere one could look at (other then core.match)?</comment>


Ask HN: Approached by BD guy who wants to help - what next? - <AUTHOR> Hi HN-ers,
Hoping to hear your thoughts - we've been approached by a BD guy who wants to help us commercialize our technology in the hotel space. He claims that he has relationships/friendships to the top guys in the hotel chain industry. In exchange, he's looking for equity.
Has anyone ever had experience dealing with BD folks? Our challenge has been trying to get into the hotels and we could see how he could be useful but we're also wondering if it's better for us to do it ourselves? <comment><USER2> What's his goal here as far as position/future go? Does he want to move into a C-level position, or is he more keen to make some introductions and work as more of an advisor? Is he thinking full-time or part-time?

Based on what I've read, this doesn't seem very legit. It's easy to say that you have connections to x industry to get y% of equity in z startup. But, it's hard to deliver actual business, even if you have those connections.

Basically, bringing in the wrong person and giving out equity too soon is a recipe for disaster. Worst case scenario, you end up with an angry outsider on your cap table. I know that you said you're bootstrapped, but if you ever raise funds, an angry outsider on your cap table can royally fuck things up.

If I were in your shoes, I would treat this as a recruiting process for a CEO (even though you don't have $$$ to pay and presumably don't want him to be CEO). If you were hiring a CEO, you would check references, maybe send some cold contacts to former employers/co-workers (LinkedIn is amazing), and generally do a metric shit tonne of due diligence. If he is offended, run. Anyone who is qualified enough to work out in this kind of situation wouldn't hire himself based on what you've told us!!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks.

He's most likely interested in some sort of exit within 18 months and he's open to being an advisor but also getting hands-on (which I really find interesting considering that he hasn't spent a ton of time knowing us yet) although he doesn't seem to think this would be a full-time gig.

The thing is - how can we break through the larger hotel chains if we're basically starting the relationship from scratch? My assumption is that the product would have to be really great and then potentially getting investors to help us open the door.

As a side note, who would I usually talk to about all these things? My team and I are still fairly greenfield - should we enlist some advisors to help guide us?

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Set up milestones. If he hits those milestones, he gets pre-agreed upon tranches of equity. If he doesn't hit those milestones, he doesn't.

<comment><USER4> Not sure why this comment is on the bottom, but this is the most reasonable arrangement to me. Hot shot salesmen at paid on closed deals, not butt in seat time. Not even a vesting schedule makes sense here.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Give him a trial run first. hire as a freelancer (no equity but pay them an hourly/flat fee). If he can get you a few paying customers using his contacts and sales skills, then you could consider giving equity/partnership of some sort.

The thing is that anyone can claim to be anything. You need to ensure that they can actually deliver. Don't give equity and then find out. Find out before you give equity. Remember, equity means they own a percentage of your company possibly for a really long time.

<comment><AUTHOR> We're bootstrapped at the moment - what could we do as an alternative to an hourly rate/flat fee?

I agree with your 2nd paragraph. That's what I'm worried about. Could we do something like vested equity? Where each deal we land will provide more equity? Or a sales commission of some sort?

<comment><USER5> Equity should always be vested. But I am not even sure if you should give them any equity until you know for sure that they are worth it. Even if he lands you 1 or 2 deals, how do you determine the equity (even if vested) just based on that ?

I am just a stranger on the internet so take my advice with a grain of salt. Based on what you said so far, it seems like you don't know this person well and you don't know anything about their track record. That is a huge red flag for me to even discuss equity. Too early.

If you are bootstrapped and money is tight, you could perhaps give him a commission on the first few sales (a fixed percentage of the sale per client etc) instead of equity. If he is really interested and worth it, he will agree. If not, then you are taking a big risk by agreeing on equity upfront without knowing anything about him and his ability to sell.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the advice. I really appreciate it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Can he provide any evidence that his relationships/friendships are real?

I remember an old post were they get a salesman for a few month, he never sold anything, and later asked for severance payment and equity. He was the viceprecident of something in the previous company. There was a funny detail that he left his special big chair in the office and never passed again to get it. I can't find the link now.

Get everything in writing and reviewed by YOUR lawyer. With an oral contracts is hard to be sure how bad it can be later.

I like the idea in a sibling comment of hiring him as a freelancer until he can prove he can sell something.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the great advice about getting a lawyer. I think we may need one and put everything in writing before anything else.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> On first glance his offer seems reasonable. He seems to believe in the potential of your technology as he's happy with equity alone, which is a good sign (provided he can deliver on his promise).

Your decision basically boils down to time. How many people are on your team already? If you spent time doing the BD yourself, what would the opportunity cost be? Could your time be spent better on the product or tech? Do you see him bringing value proportional to his cost? (x% equity)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your response.

I see him as valuable potentially if he can make introductions to the CEOs/CTOs in the hotel industry. We've been going at it ourselves but I've only managed to get time from boutique hotels as opposed to larger chain hotels. I wonder if having someone like him could open more doors for us.

What's a reasonable equity amount to give a business advisor or a business development person?

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> There's a lot of risk if he does not deliver. On the other hand, if he is the real deal he could be very valuable, so I think you'd be much better off offering him a generous revenue sharing agreement on the actual business he brings in rather than equity.

</comment><comment><USER9> He can earn equity each time he brings in money. I don't know of any other way, you can't just give away your company on promises.

</comment><comment><USER10> Equity is for closers!!

Hire a lawyer. Do _serious_ due diligence on the guy.

Protect yourself before you agree to anything permanent.</comment>


Go to http://healthcare.gov, type a semicolon into search, wait for autocomplete - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/cjoh/status/402458394860462080 <comment><USER2> They are populating the autocomplete with recent searches with high volume, so it just reflects what people are typing.

</comment><comment><USER3> This looks more like people trying random crap in the search box and the autocompleter is just caching the last known matching queries.

Type ' and you'll see _' drop all'_ in the autocomplete list.

</comment><comment><USER4> So awesome. healthcare.gov is the comedy routine that has fresh routines every day.

</comment><comment><USER5> at least they use mnemonic table names and that's a good sign.</comment>