Should I Resign from My Full Professor Job to Work Fulltime on Cocalc? - <AUTHOR> http://blog.sagemath.com/2019/04/12/should-i-resign-from-my-full-professor-job-to-work-fulltime-on-cocalc.html <comment><USER2> This is a hard question to answer, but here are a few thoughts:

1\. Resigning from a tenured position likely means taking a one-way street. The exception is a well-known scientist that can _easily_ switch tenure to 2-3 other school _today_. In many fields competition for tenure is brutal and once you leave you may have some disadvantages in re-entry against a bunch of post- docs. "Only losers leave academia" is still a widely held mindset. All this does not mean not to resign; just be aware.

2\. Do you still need money? The fact that the company is not ramen profitable in 7 years (including last 3 years of dedicated effort) means it may not be a source of income for a while. If you are not set for life, how long can you afford to not work? Will you be OK in industry (some professors thrive there some are completely miserable with a manager who tells them what to do and imposes deadlines)?

Unless you are set for life I would seriously consider your 50% option -- you get another year to fully dedicate to your startup without teaching a single day and still maintain tenure. In a year, re-evaluate. My 2c.

<comment><USER3> > 1\. (OP here) I doubt I could easily get a tenured position somewhere else > today, because I have not published much in the last few years, due to > focusing on CoCalc. I also I have a 2-body problem (my wife is an academic), > which would make getting another position in academia that much harder.

> 2\. Do you still need money?

Yes. In fact, I didn't save enough as a college math professor to retire while living in Seattle (an expensive place)!

> The fact that the company is not ramen profitable in 7 years

The company is not profitable, but it is "ramen profitable" according to [http://www.paulgraham.com/ramenprofitable.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/ramenprofitable.html). Without getting into details, the bank balance goes down a little each month since we pay hosting and for four fulltime employees (we have about 2 years of runway). However, we're close to profitable. If we instead had only three employees (or paid ourselves less), then we would be profitable. If we had just one employee (me), then I would be making a LOT more money than I made working at UW, though I would likely be much less happy (the other three people working on CoCalc are fantastic!).

<comment><USER4> Do not leave that tenured position!! The market has been pumped up so hard that you should be making stability-reinforcing life choices. There's also just nothing comparable to the benefits of being a tenured professor in the modern labor market short of winning the lottery. Find a way to make it work with fewer people or look for other ways to increase your revenue/demand.

<comment><USER3> > There's also just nothing comparable to the benefits of being a tenured > professor in the modern labor market short of winning the lottery.

Having a few million dollars in the bank is comparable to being a tenured professor, at least in terms of guaranteed income. (Of course, I don't have millions of dollars in the bank.) Maybe that's what you meant by "winning the lottery", e.g., that phrase is sometimes used to refer to startup founders who sell their company.

<comment><USER4> No I mean the modern labor market is horrible outside of the very hard to get positions at the FANGs. Have you researched what working and work culture are like? Read some of the Rachel by the bay blogs. You have a quality of life as a tenured professor that you simply won't anywhere else. Especially as a "startup founder". There's a reason the valley takes them straight out of college graduation.

Do Not Leave Your Professorship.

You will regret it.

<comment><USER5> This seems like a very warped view of the world. The US economy is doing pretty well. The main worry people have is that it is doing too well and will lead to a crash at some point. Unemployment is basically non-existent in many parts of the country. Wages are finally starting to go up, after being stagnant since 2008.

Putting up with poor working conditions is mostly poor decision making, especially in tech.

<comment><USER4> Inverted yield curve

Decreasing job creation numbers

Looming Brexit

Recent Fed decisions to raise rates and more recently leave them unchanged.

Investment choices, "beta", should reflect a heightened risk aversion for people later in their careers. That's just standard financial planning.

I could even make a case for stagnant wages suddenly increasing indicating irregularities necessitating caution in financial and career decisions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > My third year of unpaid leave from UW is up. I have to decide whether to > return to UW or resign. If I return, it turns out that I would have to have > at least a 50% appointment. I currently have 50% of one year of teaching in > "credits", which means I wouldn't be required to teach for the first year I > go back as a 50% appointment. Moreover, the current department chair (John > Palmieri) understands and appreciates Sage – he is among the top 10 all time > contributors to the source code of Sage!

> I have decided to resign.

NO, WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT?

<comment><USER7> To be perfectly honest, it's not that risky. It won't be hard for him to get an academic job _somewhere_ if it doesn't work out. This is usually not the case, but for someone with his background, finding another academic job won't be difficult if he's willing to work outside of a highly-ranked research university math department (and the probability of being able to get one of those jobs is even good).

<comment><USER8> Well, they got to find a position for the wife too; prepare for trouble and make it double.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I saw Prof. Stein's talk at JupyterCon last year and was blown away by what he had accomplished with CoCalc. It was one of the best talks at the conference IMO. Very excited to see where CoCalc is headed and wish Prof. Stein all the best.

Edit: here is the talk [https://pyvideo.org/jupytercon-2018/real-time- collaboration-...](https://pyvideo.org/jupytercon-2018/real-time- collaboration-with-jupyter-notebooks-using-cocalc-william-stein-sagemath- inc.html)

<comment><USER10> Thanks for the link. Watching it I can't help but feel a little sad. Prof. Stein is a highly trained mathematician with a track record in establishing successful software projects like Sage that many people benefit tremendously from (watching the video I learned that he actually started Cython as well!). It says something about the state of affairs -- the general lack of awareness and interest in the development of math unless it benefits some business directly -- when he could not find the resource needed to develop the math software he loved the way he wanted to. Maybe he really enjoyed working on the sync protocols, text formats, backend databases and file systems etc needed to get CoCalc running smoothly. But I wonder if he had the resource he needed would he make the same choice? I say this as I have a son who is double majoring in CS and math. As a freshman he is already mostly done with upper division math (3 A+ in honors real and complex analysis) and is taking graduate math classes. Yet it seems prudent for him to at least put in the minimum effort to get his CS degree to keep his option open. Eventually it will be a hard choice down the road for him as well.

<comment><USER3> > But I wonder if he had the resource he needed would he make the same choice?

If I had the resources I needed, I definitely would not have made the same choice. Though I enjoy somewhat working on sync protocols, databases, etc., it is only a means to an end. Mathematics software is much deeper and more interesting me. If I had sufficient resources a few years ago, I absolutely would have instead built a team to work fulltime on Sage, similar to how John Cannon successfully built an amazing team around Magma, partly leveraging that Magma is closed source and commercial -- [https://magma.maths.usyd.edu.au/](https://magma.maths.usyd.edu.au/).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> As lead developer on Axiom, an open source computer algebra system, I can fully appreciate his funding problem.

One problem is that open source software can't really handle grants. Government grants require accounting to handle receipts, and follow all of the rules. We need a couple "open source accounting" people who can handle managing grants (just like a school's bursar's office).

I have tried to find a funding stream for nearly 20 years, without success.

I am currently doing computer algebra research as a visiting scholar. That is an unpaid position. Perhaps you can remain connected to the department as a visiting scholar.

If there is some way I can help, please let me know.

<comment><USER12> I know this isn't the most appropriate place to ask, but what are the main feature gaps between commercial computer algebra systems like Mathematica/Maple and systems like Axiom/Sympy?

<comment><USER11> Several comments.

First, Axiom is a research platform (currently working on proving the algorithms correct). It is no longer a commercial competitor to Mathematica and Maple (as it was in the 90s).

Second, Axiom is based on Group Theory, giving it a reasonably sound mathematical superstructure. Mathematica is based on rewrite semantics. You can rewrite anything to anything. Maple is based on tree semantics. You can re-arrange a tree in any way. Obviously, their computational mathematicians are well-versed and clever enough to avoid most obvious failures. It is just easier in Axiom.

Third, Axiom is open source. Consider what happens to computational mathematics when the companies supporting closed source disappear. (Companies die, on average, after 15 years). Macsyma (Symbolics) is gone. Derive (Soft Warehouse) is gone. I am deeply concerned about the impact on computational mathematics when this happens. Axiom, as open source, won't disappear as there is no company behind it. It will, of course, probably stall once the key developers stop maintaining it.

Mathematica and Maple are amazing systems. If you need what they provide I strongly recommend buying a license. I know some of the developers from these systems and they are extremely clever people.

If you're looking for competitive software, I'd look at Sage and CoCalc. This is an open source alternative to Mathematica, Maple, Magma, etc. It is open source and (mostly) free. I can strongly recommend it.

As for "feature gaps", there are many. If what you want are "features", Axiom isn't for you. But if you want answers that are proven correct, stay tuned. Computational mathematics IS mathematics. You can rightly demand that the results are proven correct. That seems to me to be a required "feature".

<comment><USER12> Thanks for taking the time to reply.

I am 100% in support of software like this being open-source. Not just because companies go out of business and disappear, but for scientific-computing software, it's important to be able to extend these systems. When I talk about features, I often mean can I rewrite this integral into something more computationally tractable? Or is there some reparameterization of this function into something differentiable?

I know this are very much how someone might pose a problem coming from Mathematica or Maple, but really I hope it's clear the end goal is still the same. Discover an equivalent mathematical representation of my problem that's more amendable for further work.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> This post resonated with me strongly. Yes, resigning sounds like the obvious best choice. I hope it works out well!

I can certainly understand why Prof. Stein doesn't want to trash his colleagues, but I'll come out and say it: if academia wasn't completely dysfunctional, it would find a way to support this work.

For my own work (which is nowhere nearly as academically relevant as CoCalc and Sage) I'm planning on doing it myself without worrying too much about funding. I can use a combination of savings, random consulting gigs, Patreon, etc. I can imagine doing more "company" kinds of things, but only to the extent it supports the work. This is not an easy problem, and again I wish Prof. Stein well.

<comment><USER14> If Jim Simons wouldn't play ball it's hardly only academia that's implicated

<comment><USER15> Jim Simons doesn't understand open source and open access, because the source of his $15Billion net worth (proprietary hedge fund strategy) depends on him not understanding it. And also perhaps because he doesn't understand software very well. He could have made Magma free for everyone, but instead he bought a license only for his chosen elites to use.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10175563](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10175563)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I'm really disappointed (with my impression) that UW doesn't seem to appreciate what has been accomplished with Sage and the value of a major open source competitor to Mathematica, Maple, Matlab, etc. I hope William and Cocalc are tremendously successful.

<comment><USER17> If I'm reading the article right, he's only done work for UW for one out of the last 5 years. That seems to me to be an enormous amount of flexibility on their part.

<comment><USER18> Yes, but you'd think the university could find a way to directly support building the software.

<comment><USER3> I used to think that too. I only started CoCalc when I realized after a decade that this probably wasn't going to happen (for me).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Professor Stein is an active HN member by the way: [https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=williamstein](https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=williamstein)

<comment><USER20> not only that, his actual post of this blog post is here [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19665027](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19665027)

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I wish I could come up with a more helpful comment, but, as someone with 1-3 terminal windows dedicated to Sage pretty much at all times on my machine: no, giving up a tenured professorship for Cocalc sounds like a bad plan.

</comment><comment><USER22> Yes, you are absolutely correct in your decision to resign.

It's - if I'm being honest here - painfully clear you are much more interested in your side project (from the prospective of UW) than your ostensible job.

I think for your sake and theirs' you should resign and try to commercialize this, or you will fail at both. Either that or completely hand off or abandon the project.

<comment><USER23> It's not inherently a side project, it only has to be one because his department doesn't view this work as a contribution to pure mathematics. Seems shortsighted for a field where progress is often measured in centuries.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Wow, I just went to the Cocalc website, and it's truly shocking. It seems like an interesting service, but terribly marketed. Do you have any designers? I know your service is targeted towards technically minded people, but it still needs to be able to market itself. Have you done any user testing on how people use your marketing website? Here is my experience so far:

The first thing I see is a NINE minute long video. As a first time visitor who doesn't know anything about this service, that's too much time to invest.

The second thing I see is that it supports a lot of stuff. Cool, but why is it better than what I have now? I see that I can share things privately. I can already do that. I can "time travel". Yes, version control is a thing. I can publish it online. Great, I already do that. These are the only thing I read because they are the only thing that's bold. To be honest, this is where I would have clicked away.

It also doesn't help that the navigation is unusable at half-laptop screen width, let alone on mobile.

Only after scouring your website do I realize that it's basically Google Docs but for math, which is cool! But this was not clear at all when first visiting your site.

If you're interested in more feedback feel free to reach out.

</comment><comment><USER25> UW is a prestigious university and you already earned tenure. Even if you quit your job and the project fails, you're going to be just fine. Probably still a scary decision, but in my eyes you have already "made it".

(I'm a tenure-track first year prof.)

<comment><USER26> Is it really that easy to get tenure all over again, after a failed project/startup?

<comment><USER25> Many, many schools would hire him with tenure if he decided to go back to academia. Or he could choose to go to industry and make plenty of money.

Plenty of lucrative and fulfilling options.

<comment><USER2> Can you elaborate? Is this field-dependent? This is completely against my (very, very limited) experience:

I got my PhD ~20 years ago and saw a few tenured professors (math and physics) leave academia. While I have no first hand experience I did hear through a grapevine that some explored options for coming back, but could not. This is a sensitive topic with little data and so my info is certainly suspect.

<comment><USER25> I'm coming from a CS perspective.

If they are successful at a top university and leave to try other things (usually startups), then they will have no problems going back to academia. Sometimes it is even viewed positively.

For example, right now Carnegie Mellon has been seeing a flock of their faculty leave to go to tech companies or to do their own startups. Other universities would fight over a successful ex-CMU (or UW!) prof to come to their institution.

Depending on their level of success, they may not get back to a top 5 university, but some other R1 university would gladly take them!

<comment><USER27> I bet he could get tenure in a CS department if he tried.

<comment><USER3> (author of blog) If I were to attempt to return to academia, I would consider departments other than pure mathematics. E.g., the last place I interviewed at (about 10 years ago) was Emory University's department of Mathematics _and_ Computer Science, and I remember being excited by computer science being part of the same department. I just checked, and see that it's now split into two departments: [http://www.mathcs.emory.edu/site/home/](http://www.mathcs.emory.edu/site/home/)

I would likely have a lot of trouble re-entering academia due to lack of recent academic publications; I've been on many hiring committees over the years in pure math, and we never considered hiring anybody who wasn't already in academia.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I worked at Wolfram Research and I have sideline knowledge of how hard it is to successfully commercialize a CAS. I personally would wait for NSF funding to improve (it is an unfortunate reality how funding is prioritized nowadays), and perhaps get resourceful about developing your system further in an academic setting- I've done similar work as a university student looking for a resume booster.

</comment><comment><USER29> Brutal, but:

Either:

1\. Do it -- You're ok with this failing and being locked out of academia -- then go for it! Maybe, if it fails, you'd be happy joining cloudera or another placing building notebooks!

2\. Do it -- You're on track for paying living wages, both for yourself and future employees, say within 6mo organically, or with outside investment (from your post... you're still before then). Maybe live abroad for a year to further cut down!

3\. Go back for a year -- Let it grow a bit more, and push any income you'd have taken to others who are earlier in their career

In both 'do it' scenarios, get ready to pivot/expand to areas that will do a better job of keeping food on the table for your employees families, and to keep failing at it until something works. If you can't stomache that, wait till you can hire someone who will, or keep it as a hobby.

I normally wouldn't offer to chat w/ someone over the internet, but I'm close- ish to this space, and a stage or so ahead wrt commercialization, so would be happy to do so

</comment><comment><USER30> That you are asking this question.. then No. And you should bootstrap this with UW or carefully manage your obligations. There are many profs with a foot on both sides.

I would not leave until you've achieved escape velocity.

</comment><comment><USER31> Looking at the full scope of things here it seems like it would be batshit insane for this guy to resign his professorship (on the economic calculus). Of course if he hates every day at the university it's different.

</comment><comment><USER27> Since he brought up he may have been in the wrong place being in the math department, did he ever actually try to switch to the CS department?

<comment><USER32> In UW's case, that would be even more difficult than usual because of its organization. The mathematics department is in the College of Arts and Science and the CS department is in the engineering school. These are practically like separate universities within UW.

<comment><USER3> Indeed -- CS is now the "Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science and Engineering", so it's not just a department. I never tried to move to CS, and I have no idea if there would have been a path to do so. When I first got hired at UW in 2006, some faculty in the CS department were very supportive of Sage, even giving me some temporary office space in one of their old buildings.

<comment><USER27> I would have tried to explore that option before leaving completely. I know two professors who have switched fields, one was physics professor who did work in string theory, switched to genomics and got position at a medical school. Another was a CS professor who actually went in to math.

You sometimes see CS professors who have degrees in pure math just browsing different department's websites.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Flip a coin, when it's in the air, you will know what side you hope it lands on.

<comment><USER34> He's already decided, and is resigning, as per the end of the post.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> I know this isn't exactly related, but as someone interested in numerical analysis, what is the difference between working on Sage, Octave, and Julia?

<comment><USER3> Sage is primarily developed to support pure mathematics research (and undergrad teaching). Probably the main possibly unique thing Sage brings to numerical analysis is good support for arbitrary precision and interval arithmetic. Beyond that, Sage is written in Python, so it inherits the standard numerical functionality from that ecosystem, namely numpy, scipy, pandas, etc. Sage also has excellent support for Cython, since much of Sage is written in Cython (I even made up the name "Cython").

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> I was going to counsel that you retain your tenure but I guess you've already decided to resign. (If so, why ask?)

The rationale for my recommendation is largely captured in other comments so I'll be brief: Winter is coming (macroeconomically). And it sounds like cocalc lacks: a strong balance sheet, a scalable sales model, and a story that would interest outside investors. As such, I personally would view the company as lifestyle/earnings supplementation and not core sustenance. It is also synergistic with your day job.

</comment><comment><USER37> TBH I feel like there's very little risk with quitting to work on a project that already has users.

It seems like he's a good enough programmer that he could always find a job at a big tech company, make a bunch of money and then quit once he has enough saved up. And that's assuming he doesn't find any paid users or get any source of funding which again is hard but not impossible or that unlikely given that he already has a product with users.

I think he'll be just fine and I wish him the best.

<comment><USER38> Job market for programmers will not always be what it is today.

<comment><USER37> Curious what's your reasoning behind this? If anything I see programmer jobs as one of the only professions that will survive the next couple of decades.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> I took a number theory class from you almost 10 years ago, and it changed my life. So, thanks. :)

</comment><comment><USER40> I am commenting because I have read parts of your algebraic number theory book and used Sage extensively. The book helped me but did not significantly change anything about my life. It is possible to learn the same topics by reading other books. I love many parts of Sage and it has changed what I am able to do.

It seems like the options are

tenure: a path where you make incremental progress on narrow problems with the benefit of low stress and an excellent standard of living.

company: a path where you get to continue changing the world in a meaningful way. The cost is high stress and a less certain standard of living in your current city.

You provide a lot of details about your situation but I don't think they are relevant. The details would only matter if the worst case outcome of either path was a life that you could not bear to live. Given your many accomplishments this is not a problem.

I think people should try to minimize the regret in their lives rather than maximizing their average daily happiness. It sounds like you would regret not continuing to work on your company.

</comment><comment><USER41> I view economics as the gating factor. If, as you posted downthread, you don't have lifetime financial security, don't drop your tenured job.

This is like the preflight "put on your own oxygen mask before you assist others with theirs" instruction. IMHO, you'll be far less able to contribute if you're scrambling to pay basic expenses.

</comment><comment><USER42> It seems to me that a more flexible university would be lucky to have you. "William Stein" was a household name among the number theorists I knew.

</comment><comment><USER43> The subtext I get from reading your question is that you are overwhelmed with the support issues. Problems can arise at any time, and need to be fixed within hours. That's not a way to run any kind of product. If you can solve that problem (lower expectations for support), then you should be able to go back to your 50% position and still make progress on CoCalc.

</comment><comment><USER44> I find it interesting that nobody has asked this question: what is your life situation?

Do you have a family? House/mortgage? Health insurance? You mentioned that CoCalc hires some engineers, some hat's the burn rate? What do you need to keep working on it?

If you have got your baseline covered, William, i'd say go for it. Your heart is clearly on this path.

<comment><USER3> > Do you have a family?

Only a spouse, who has an excellent job.

> House/mortgage?

Yes, I bought a detached house 12 years ago in Seattle.

> Health insurance?

Yes, through my spouse.

> You mentioned that CoCalc hires some engineers, so that's the burn rate?

Yes, we employ 4 people (including me). If we employed three instead, we would not be losing money...

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> You have a 10% chance of success even if you are accepted into YCombinator (honest feedback: I wouldn't invest in your company). Stay a professor, and don't regret not wasting time as an entrepreneur. It's overrated.

</comment><comment><USER46> Most important question: what will minimize your future regrets?

</comment><comment><USER47> If you are a developmental neuroscientists then yes. I need your job. The job market is not great, as you'd know.

<comment><USER48> Should I reply to the title of a posting without reading it?

No, I probably shouldn't.</comment></comment>


An introduction to ASM80 - <AUTHOR> http://www.uelectronics.info/2014/11/15/an-introduction-to-asm80/

<comment><USER2> Ah, for a minute there I was excited that someone had written an onboard assembler that targeted multiple CPU's, but then I read the article .. its a wonderful thing to see such things being made as a cross-platform OS development environment for 8-bit CPU's in this day and age. Still, I yearn for better onboard tools. :)

<comment><USER3> You probably want FORTH then :)

<comment><USER2> Yeah, actually for me at the moment, Lua is the thing, eLua specifically. No onboard editor .. yet!</comment></comment></comment>


10+ Deploys Per Day: Dev and Ops Cooperation at Flickr - brown9-2 http://www.slideshare.net/jallspaw/10-deploys-per-day-dev-and-ops-cooperation-at-flickr

<comment><AUTHOR> Love that this presentation really nails the fact that continuous deployment is effectively a side-effect of truly integrating Dev and Ops.

(At IMVU our VP of Operations is also our VP of Engineering)

</comment><comment><USER2> The actual presentation video is on blip.tv <http://velocityconference.blip.tv/file/2284377/>

</comment><comment><USER3> Decent presentation. Didn't know they deployed (deplew?) so often, but makes sense. Staying ahead of the game is kind of why they are successful (as is true for nearly any web app, as switching is so easy).

The basics are:

      no fingerpointing
      understand each other
      automate automate automate every little thing
      automate automate automate every big thing
      profile the results

<comment><USER4> I agree with most of your comment, but switching is not so easy for social networks. Flickr is largely a social network for photography enthusiasts.

<comment><USER3> This is true. I was referring more to non-social-network web apps, like going between Google Docs and ZoHo, or switching version control hosts. There's typically a loss of _some_ data there, but the really important stuff (raw content) can be pulled out and transferred with minimal effort.

Social networks are about the opposite, as a lot of the content isn't really "yours", it's a result of interaction. I made no reference to this in my comment though, so thanks for pointing it out :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> "Branching in code"? I'd be curious to know what is the average half-life of a developer there. How long until they throw their arms up and say "no more monkey-patching... I'm outta here!"

<comment> brown9-2 There was an article about Flicker's mentality on "we don't branch" a few weeks ago: <http://code.flickr.com/blog/2009/12/02/flipping-out/>

From the outside it sounds like it would be a nightmare to manage. How could you sanely test all the permutations of "Feature X on, Feature Y off, Feature Z = 4"?

<comment><USER6> [I work at flickr and gave the presentation linked to above]

You don't need to test every permutation. Pretty much all of the flags in the codebase are independent of each other - someone might be working on changes to our admin interface in some files while someone else is changing the way comments are displayed elsewhere. There's no overlap in the changes.

If the flags do interact with each other then in most cases the features will launch one after another, so you only need to test a handful of states (foo off bar off, foo on bar off, foo on bar on)

If the flags interact with each other and the features will be launching at the same time (or the betas overlap) then you have to do the same amount of integration testing that you'd have to do with landing several branches into trunk at once. This is complex, we don't do it very often.

And we clean up flags once they're not needed any more, which minimizes the possible combinations.

I was skeptical about this before I started working at flickr, now I can't imagine working any other way.

<comment><USER7> How do you guys handle plumbing work on different layers? Do you ever launch something that doesn't correspond to a specific user feature (say a cleanup to make something more reliable or efficient)?

We're looking at what we can do to adopt continuous deployment in our own shop. I suspect that it requires a bit of rethinking how development happens.

<comment><USER6> All the time. For example, we switched from one video transcoding backend to another recently. Having a single config flag used to chose which codepath a video went through meant we could launch it for staff only at first. Then, as we rolled it out to more people we could very easily switch to the old codepath if we found issues.

We've used flags for changes at all layers within the application code itself - whether to use the more optimized javascript, the new css sprites, the new database access layer, the new database schema, the new spam detection system etc etc.

You get even more out of config flags when deploying non-user facing changes - nobody knows if you roll it back so you can turn it off and on as many times as you need to get detailed data on exactly what impact the new code has on your metrics (both business and infrastructure).

One thing we don't use flags for is changes in the layers below the application - the OS, web server, php libraries etc. It's much easier to roll these out server by server.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Anyone has a link to the video recording of this presentation?

</comment><comment><USER9> The negative side-effect is that people tend to take what they want from presentations, and present them as fact or proof of best practices. Since this presentation, I know systems administrators at a number of rather poorly engineered, but large start-ups who have said "Our developers saw that and said, "See we should break the service all of the time and you should get in the way of deployments even if it means having to wake you up at 3am every night" ...

<comment><USER10> Sounds like they weren't understanding the presentation, because that certainly isn't at all the type of communication or collaboration we have at Flickr.

The video of the presentation, which might give more context, is here: <http://velocityconference.blip.tv/file/2284377/>

(please pardon my potty mouth on the video)

<comment><USER9> I've watched it several times, it's a great video. I've just heard several stories now (often when asking admin friends if they watched it) of developers using it as an excuse for bad behavior, cherry picking a couple of points.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> And yet, it was ages since I saw a new cool feature at flickr.

last one I recall was the flashy album manager and video, both wich i rarely uses.</comment>


Amazing collection of Free PHP Frameworks and CMS - <AUTHOR> http://guidesigner.net/collection-of-development/amazing-collection-of-free-php-frameworks-and-cms/ <comment><USER2> Maybe not an "amazing" [this blogger seems to need to use that descriptor for half his posts :( ] collection - but some new (to me) offerings, along with established oldies.

What _is_ amazing is how many people continue developing independent approaches to web-dev CMS.</comment>


Earth has lost half of its wildlife in the past 40 years (2014) - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/sep/29/earth-lost-50-wildlife-in-40-years-wwf <comment><USER2> Not coincidentally, the human population has doubled in the same timeframe.

Is everyone else screaming inside, or is it just me?

<comment><USER3> Only a few people, I think. It's like we found the asteroid headed for Earth and instead of panicking, just shrugged.

There are probably fifty times a day I feel a deep seated dreadxiety about something I'm doing. Wearing synthetic fibre. Finding out a soap has triclosan in it. Using a disposable nappy. Eating an avocado. Eating fish (appropriately enough, eating said synthetic fibres in that fish). And yet I have colleagues who toss aluminium cans into the garbage when the recycling is RIGHT NEXT TO IT and they do. Not. Care. I don't know what to do. Individual action is meaningless - every gallon of gas I don't burn just makes it cheaper for someone else. Maybe even the driver who wants to mow me down. I despair.

<comment><USER4> Get used to it. Everything comes to an end. All your favorite animals will, and humans will, and whatever comes after them.

I highly doubt consuming meat today affects lifestyle of most humans in 50 years noticeably.

<comment><USER3> True, and given the heat death of the universe I'm pretty nihilistic, but I like to think there is purpose in even temporary goodness and beauty. A bell's ring will fade to nothing but their sound still brought joy, if only briefly.

<comment><USER5> Nothing wrong about being an anti-nihilist. [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheAntiNihilist](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheAntiNihilist)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Does anyone know the source of those stats?

"steep decline of animal, fish and bird numbers was calculated by analyzing 10,000 different populations, covering 3,000 species"

Logistically speaking, I'd like to know how they tracked that. I've seen how caribou are tracking in Canada rather effectively ([http://mffp.gouv.qc.ca/the-wildlife/hunting-fishing- trapping...](http://mffp.gouv.qc.ca/the-wildlife/hunting-fishing- trapping/caribou-migration-monitoring-by-satellite-telemetry/?lang=en))

However, specifics of their research I'd find very interesting if indeed I could see it sited.

Any help?

<comment><USER7> Not by tracking, really, but I'd assume by population sampling. Rough counting of a species in an area or on a migration path, and then comparing it to historical data.

<comment><USER8> There was a more recent study about insects in Europe confirming your assumption. [https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-11-14/global-population- fly...](https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-11-14/global-population-flying- insects-crashing-dangerously-fast)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This article is from 2014. The fact that it is 2018 and we still have to convince people this is a bad thing is alarming.

<comment><USER10> Problem is how many people really care enough to do much about it?

<comment><USER11> I think it's more brutal than that. How many humans are we willing to kill (or watch them die) in order to do much about it?

Most humans care some about animals, but they care more about humans.

(Yes, I am well aware that the developed world could accept a lower standard of living, and that would help. I question whether it's enough. And yes, I am aware that that is not an excuse for the developed world to do nothing.)

<comment><USER12> This is a good point as while there's not an agreed upon formula for how many nonhumans are worth a human, I'm certain that the vast majority will prioritize human life over animals.

Fortunately, the human growth rate is stabilizing so hopefully we can figure out how to have humans grow to a natural equilibrium AND keep diverse ecosystem. If the question is framed as either humans or animals, society will end up with only zoos, farms, and humans.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Steep incline in usage of synthetics and synthetic pollution might also be a leading cause. We might have to use everything biodegradable and for long. No wonder cancer, premature babies, allergies have increased in past years.

</comment><comment><USER14> What if say 200 years from now, we have a human population of 20 billion people where everyone lives like the current top 10% of people in the USA. There is long life-expectancy, very low childhood mortality. Low inequality.

There are however no wild animals on land. Every land animal is either a pet, livestock, or in a zoo or preserve. Except for the limited species above, every other land species is extinct (but their DNA is preserved).

Would the above scenario be one that is appealing to you. Is wildlife and ecological diversity a good apart from its human benefit? Is human good worth harming ecological diversity for?

<comment><USER15> I am reading your post wondering how that could happen. Wildlife disappearing is not the problem is merely as symptom of the problem - too many people.

<comment><USER14> We have much more people on earth than we had 500 years ago. We probably have much less wildlife than before. However, people now on average live longer, healthier lives than before. As humans, we are much, much better off than we were 500 years ago. Wildlife as a whole is probably worse off than it was 500 years ago. Thus, it is not an impossible scenario to have humans thriving, but wildlife in serious danger.

<comment><USER15> > As humans, we are much, much better off than we were 500 years ago.

That's very subjective and depends on what you are measuring. Sure we have less conflict, less people in absolute poverty, but we also have more people in slavery than any time in history.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> It would continue even if we disappeared today.

We have spread invasive species all over the place. Many of them haven't even been noticed yet. This includes stuff like soil fungus.

Even when we do notice, we do nothing. Cats are a huge problem, but obsessed cat lovers are well-organized politically. They show up in force at every town council and country commissioner meeting where a cat issue comes up, defending stuff like giant feral cat colonies right next to the beach where endangered beach mice should be reseeding the grass that holds the beach in place. [edit: getting my cat lover downmods... but this is an actual problem causing beach erosion in Florida, and there is indeed a giant cat colony in my area that isn't more than 500 feet from the beach]

If we disappeared today, the extinctions would just continue.

<comment><USER17> Feral cats in Australia are seen as pests in some region.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> This is so sad.</comment>


U.S. Mortgage Rates 'Somehow, Some Way' Rise Amid Market Turmoil - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-12/u-s-mortgage-rates-somehow-some-way-rise-amid-market-panic <comment><USER2> There's too much demand they had to put up higher rates to slow down applications so they could handle/process the existing applications</comment>


Ask HN: Mac Python "Build Applet": how does it work? - <AUTHOR>

Does anyone have experience with the guts of the Python "Build Applet" program on Mac OS X?  (/Developer/Applications/Utilities/MacPython 2.5/Build Applet.app).
Specifically, I'm really curious what its tiny Python binary is doing, because I may need to replace that myself.
I'll start by saying that I have Googled this to death, and experimented, and I am out of ideas; it is not that I am being too lazy to look elsewhere. :)
The basic problem I face is that applets now embed a binary that is inherently non-portable.  On 10.6, it is apparently built in the new default way, which is to require new compressed system libraries.  This makes it fast and functional on 10.6, and unusable on 10.5/Intel as far as I can test.
My research suggests that if I could rebuild an equivalent version of this binary in a certain way, the result would be portable to older systems.
I will also say that I've tried not using the binary.  After all, Mac bundles are not really rocket science; most of "Build Applet" could be done in some other way.  But the tiny binary appears to fulfill a critical role: it ensures that the bundle is identified properly by the system.
For example, if I force /usr/bin/python instead, the system acts as if the whole application is in the bundle "org.python.pythonapp", instead of whatever "com.foo.bar" is requested in my bundle's .plist file.  On the Mac, this kind of renaming will completely break anything that searches for auxiliary files (not to mention treat 1, 10, or 50 Python bundles as if they were all the same application).
My use of "Build Applet" is as recent as Leopard.  In 10.4 and earlier, the system didn't care how you ran Python, and bundles worked beautifully.  I have submitted bugs with Apple requesting that this behavior be improved, that have been ignored. <comment><AUTHOR> Ah, I eventually figured this out (if anyone is curious), by crawling the Python source tree to find this executable.

It is little more than a program with a main() function that calls Py_Main(arg, argv) (defined in <Python.h>). I was able to create my own program like this, and solve the problem.</comment>


What are your options for cognitive enhancement? - <AUTHOR> https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/at-work/tech-careers/what-are-your-options-for-cognitive-enhancement <comment><USER3> I haven't tried microdosing but am all for nootropics to help increase mental acuity and focus.

At the same time I so agree with the author's statement that 'The perspective I'm advancing calls for first exhausting "analog" means to achieve mind- expansion before pursuing either pills or processors or both in combination.' \- if your diet is crap, your exercise is nonexistent, you get no sleep, no nootropic concoction is going to make up for that.

As for employer-mandated enhancers - what follows is a very initial stream of thoughts at the idea, not something well thought-through at all. This article made me consider this for the first time. I can see the risk. At the same time there are so many other methods of mental improvement employers could be mandating today. Sure, none may be a "magic pill", but there are things proven to improve or deteriorate our performance at work. Sleep being one of them. Yet not once has an employer attempted to track and mandate a certain number of sleep hours to me. Not once have I had an employer force me to take up exercise. Having said that my employer does subsidize gym memberships so we are encouraged to stay active, so maybe this is a counter-example; maybe if a magical brain pill existed the way an employer would get you on it is by simply sponsoring it for their employees.

<comment><USER4> > if your diet is crap, your exercise is nonexistent, you get no sleep, no > nootropic concoction is going to make up for that.

Are you saying this as a statement of fact or more like an advice?

Because, as a statement of fact, it is very probably false. Anti-ADHD medication will make up (and then some) for crappy diet, no exercise and bad sleep (this one probably only to a certain extent).

<comment><USER5> >Because, as a statement of fact, it is very probably false. Anti-ADHD medication will make up (and then some) for crappy diet, no exercise and bad sleep (this one probably only to a certain extent).

This is provably false.

Amphetamines reduce the appetite; they in no way "make up" for crappy diet.

Amphetamines increase blood pressure and heart rate; while this keeps one skinny when combined with the above point, it does not strengthen the cardiovascular system. It doesn't "make up" for no exercise.

Finally the comorbidity associated to bad/no sleep is exacerbated by amphetamine usage.

I am impressed at how every point you made is false.

<comment><USER4> Only impressive thing here is that you managed to miss the context of the thread.

We are talking about using "nootropics to help increase mental acuity and focus". In that sense, amphetamines will make up for lessened mental performance that you may have due to bad diet or lack of exercise.

<comment><USER5> Sounds like an opinion claim.

There are plenty of studies of the effects of amphetamines on sleep-deprived individuals (it does help with alertness and mental acuity, provided the deprivation is not severe, and even then only in the short term).

Can you link articles proving your claims about amphetamines clearing up reduced mental performance specifically due to bad diet or lack of exercise?

<comment><USER4> If you are actually interested, there is lot of information here: [https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/12/28/adderall-risks-much- mo...](https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/12/28/adderall-risks-much-more-than- you-wanted-to-know/) (with sources)

The summary is that Adderall works well to increase focus for basically everyone.

<comment><USER5> This is about its cardiovascular safety primarily, not the claims you made.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Mine:

1500 calorie dinner with lots of fresh salad, fruits, meat, veggies, cheese at ~5:30 pm.

Get at least 7 hours of sleep.

One cup of coffee at 6:00 AM, black, no dairy/sugar, no breakfast (continue fast).

At 12 pm, have 1-2 apples to break fast and to fend off hunger. Eat the entire apple/core for probiotic properties.

Tip: try to stay on my feet most of the day, standing desk, moving to other places, etc. —

It has taken a decade to find this diet for my cognitive enhancement. I do not get tired post noon now until after 4 pm.

Extremely alert around 9 to 11 AM.

A daily 18 hour fast seems to be working really well for some reason. Only one cup of coffee per day. Sleep is critical and should be repetitive.

I know I am in a good place when I am consistently waking up 3-5 minutes prior to 5:30 AM alarm.

<comment><USER7> Is this real? How in hell are you eating a 1500 calorie single meal? Especially with salad and vegetables which must be pretty low in caloric density. I barely manage to eat that across an entire day!

<comment><USER6> No breakfast, and a very small lunch. A standard sized male needs around 2k a day :)

<comment><USER7> But how are you fitting it in your stomach, or achieving the caloric density that allows you to do that? Unless I ate that meal over the course of about 3 hours I don't think I could physically manage it. Usually I feel full or over- full from a meal of 400 to 600 calories.

<comment><USER6> No idea. If I am very hungry, I could eat an entire red baron's frozen pizza with ranch, that is like 1600 calories right there :) Just add a lot of fat! Energy density is high

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I appreciate the author raising the risks of cognitive enhancement in terms of a future where it is economically nonviable to opt-out. This is an interesting framing which I hadn't thought of before.

<comment><USER9> This is a common framing borrowed by steroid use in athletics.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I've never heard someone persuasively and eloquently express to me, in a non- dopey way, just how (small amounts of) acid can act as cognitive enchantment. Anyone care to take a stab at it?

For instance, is the effect only temporary, in the sense that it unlocks some region of not normally traversed mental state space? (E.g. allowing you to write paragraphs you wouldn't otherwise be able to.) Or is the effect more permanent, in the sense of teaching you something, providing you with a new muscle which can be used later even in a sober state of mind (teaching you to ride a type of brain bike, which then can't be unlearned), or by showing you connections between disparate ideas you hadn't previously had the ability to see next to each other?

<comment><USER11> As somebody who has microdosed, I'd attribute most "enhancement" to perceived improvement in mood, and an improvement in my ability to look at problems from "outside" the box.

I'm currently leetcoding in preparation for tech interviews, and find it much easier to work out the "trick" to solve problems while microdosing LSD

<comment><USER12> This is a perfect example of nootropic dystopia: paying for a small advantage in a mostly meaningless unproductive task with possibly maladaptive permanent changes to the brain.

Of course this is not new. Ritalin has been used as a study drug for meaningless academic tests for decades.

But it really goes beyond drugs. The experiences created by media and games today, even social app feedback loops, are far more powerful than any real- world experience. Go to bed every night with a show or a game or a social app, and you will lose your edge very quickly. (I'm currently embroiled in a muted partner dispute of several years over this.)

And yet I have considered exactly the same, because the last few years has filled my head with so much crap that I never wanted to think about; perhaps microdosing would allow a more intentional reset, and leetcode may be the closest thing normal folks have to productive mental engagement. Certainly not most jobs, even in tech, which is sad.

<comment><USER13> I mean, I'm doing cocaine to beat the Advent of Code leaderboard currently.

<comment><USER14> This comment is awesome whether it is true or not.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I do think that trying a psychedelic drugs might be a positive thing for many people. The problem is that not all people can are suitable for it, not everyone is ready to experience certain feelings.

I would love to hear entrepreneurs who find it useful (I talk mainly about micros dosing now)

Related articles I read not long ago, about this subject:

\- [https://psmag.com/education/microdosing-may-increase- creativ...](https://psmag.com/education/microdosing-may-increase-creativity)

\- [https://qz.com/1449166/study-finds-magic-mushroom- microdosin...](https://qz.com/1449166/study-finds-magic-mushroom-microdosing- boosts-creativity/)

<comment><USER16> Almost everyone that I meet who has done considerable, or even moderate, amounts of psychedelics has clear and obvious personality changes. Personality is a poor word to use, but something like their disposition, "hippy" attitude is extremely common. So much so that I think these drugs cause long term physical damage to peoples cognitive faculties. This is completely anecdotal, but I have seen it so many times in my life that I wouldn't touch a psychedelic with a ten foot pole. And yes, I have tripped on acid, but only once, and do believe that while in some ways it was earth shattering, in many ways I would take it back if I could.

The most productive and successful people I meet almost always have been mostly sober their whole life, exhibiting balance and clear headedness. If psychedelics are doing any good, it is because those who are taking them are already so broken, any kind of change could be construed as positive.

<comment><USER17> Those are big claims you're making, and I doubt you could find much actual science to back up them up.

Remember, psychedelics are not a new phenomenon in human society...

<comment><USER16> Growing up I was friends with a large group of people deep into psychedelics, I watched them transform from who they were before the drugs to who they were after. These are people took the drugs seriously, the dosages, their "set and setting". Society tells us that anecdotal evidence is false, but thats brainwashing. I can see with my own two my eyes what drugs do. Most likely certain areas of people brains are dampened or flattened by these drugs, and so if youre and anxious person, maybe you experience "relief", but that comes at a cost.

<comment><USER17> What cost?! If all you have is anecdata, then here's mine: Psychedelics have been the catalyst to some of the most profoundly positive experiences in my life, and any changes that I've experienced afterwards were wholly positive. Same with my group of friends who did the same. There.

You won't take my anecdotes seriously, just as I won't take your anecdotes seriously, so I hope you see now why this kind of hyperbole is worth nothing if not backed up by peer-reviewed science.

Are you seriously suggesting I'm brainwashed because I asked for sources? Jesus man, you're very far gone.

<comment><USER16> Not suggesting brainwashed, just that its very common for people on hacker news and elsewhere on the internet to argue against being able to extrapolate truth from subjective experiences. It's common that we are told that what we see have seen cannot be the full truth because we "don't have enough data". "But thats a topic for another time

The thing is that it maybe true that your definition of "positive experience" fits my definition of what I have seen as the before and after. Many of these people who have become more hippy like would also describe that as a positive thing. But like I was saying, what I have seen has been that psychedelic effects on peoples brains are often deterministic, many people who have taken too many end up with very similar psychological profiles and dispositions. Clearly there is something going on there.

In some ways, part of the angst in my post arises from all of these different news articles popping up that talk about the positives of psychedelics, when neither the people writing the articles, nor those reading them probably know very many people with any experience.

<comment><USER18> People on the internet probably have a better background in statistics than you since you're suggesting your hypothesis using one qualitative sample based entirely on your memory with no variance or power calculations can be used to infer anything about the general population. You're just stating an opinion which leads to pointless rebuttals. Psychadellics allow you to revalue things, if you use that opportunity to group think with a subculture instead of finding your own better values then that is more of an issue with the user than the psychadellics effects in general.

<comment><USER16> I work as a machine learning engineer, and have a masters degree in applied math, I know statistics. Thanks for the subtle you must not be smart cheap shot though

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> nitpicking here, but Cogito Ergo Sum ("I think, therefore I am") has absolutely nothing to do with intelligence. in modern vernacular you might translate it as "i percieve/witness therefore i exist"

<comment><USER20> You might take it that way, but are you sure that's correct. The derivation/etymology of _cogito_ appears to imply active thought, as does _penser_ (I've always assumed Descartes conceived it in French, and translated, but I confess I don't know which natural language - if any - <USER2> mind was using). As opposed to merely passively regarding the World. The epigram's context is "application of reason", at least.

<comment><USER21> I'm pretty sure when Decartes said that, he meant that that's the only thing we know for sure to be true, since everything else could be a hallucination. He wasn't making an argument for cognitive enhancement... was he?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Whether it be drugs, cybernetic enhancements, mental discipline and training, and changes in diet, I'd eschew all of them (maybe except for diet improvement) and instead advocate for this: engineers should stop taking work so seriously.

I don't really care if I'm working to 100% of my potential. My employer won't pay me more for that optimization anyway.

I think there's something of a toxic attitude in Silicon Valley that we should all be honing ourselves into this amazing constantly-tinkering engineer who runs a really cool blog. There's also a general toxic mentality in America that we can all work our way to becoming billionaires - in reality, none of us can optimize our way into having family connections to the elites in our society. In reality, that engineer doing all that cool stuff in the Bay Area in their shared studio apartment probably doesn't have a better retirement plan than the community college sysadmin with a paid-off single family home in upstate New York.

For me, I just work to put food on the table. I want to be average enough to he employable. Anything beyond that isn't worth the diminishing return on investment, or a reduction in family time.

I can't optimize my way to being genetically gifted enough to match the output of the 10x engineers who _do_ get promoted, and I certainly can't match their 24/7 dedication to work. Employers generally promote people for making the right person happy at the right time, not for producing the most technically competent work.

<comment><USER23> > There's also a general toxic mentality in America that we can all work our > way to becoming billionaires - in reality, none of us can optimize our way > into having family connections to the elites in our society.

Current billionaires are almost all from non-elite backgrounds. Only 1 of the top 10 came from a family with billion dollar wealth. [https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/#57168b13251c](https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/#57168b13251c)

If you come from an upper middle class background (top 25th percentile), you can become a billionaire in America (with luck and hard work).

<comment><USER24> You don't need a billion dollars to have an elite background.

No one in the top ten is a rags-to-riches story. Plenty of elite universities and family connections.

<comment><USER23> please don't strawman. I never said rags-to-riches. I said upper middle class (25th percentile). Elite universities take great students from upper middle class, and many of those billionaires did not graduate from elite universities.

<comment><USER25> Eh...you probably can't get into an elite university without already being elite unless you're a recruited athlete or have another "hook". Normal, middle class kids don't win ISEF or math olympiads unless their parents are professors or something.

<comment><USER26> Many kids do. Just because you didn't doesn't mean others don't.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> the arguments against cognitive enhancement being easy: \- [https://www.gwern.net/Drug-heuristics](https://www.gwern.net/Drug-heuristics)

</comment><comment><USER28> Cutting out processed carbs, staying active, and fasting has had the greatest impact on my cognition. The best part is it's sustainable! I can keep going day after day. Caffeine and nicotine give minor boosts but quickly become liabilities rather than enhancers.

<comment><USER29> Tried IMF for two weeks recently, and my mood was so bad in the mornings I had to stop it; my wife thanked me afterwards. I'm a little disappointed I didn't get "over the hump" which reportedly lasts 3-4 weeks, and then mood is supposed to stabilize.

Anything relatable in this sentence, and any tips to help "get over the hump" you might have?

<comment><USER30> I got into long distance running during this morning-not-eating period. Totally distracting to any hunger thoughts. Also, you start to find it's actually a huge benefit not to have a stomach full of food while you're trying to run a long distance.

Also, my wife had success starting with putting Coconut/MCT oil in her coffee. The Bullet Proof coffee folks swear by this and I think most would say they're still "fasting" and getting the same benefits but now they have a TBSP of oil in their stomach helping. Might be a step to going full "nothing but coffee" for 16 hours or whatever you're trying.

<comment> blaser-waffle I found a little sea salt in the coffee helped -- "admiral style" or something.

Electrolytes (salt et al) are a commonly recommended aid for the intermittent fasting folks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Look into transcendental meditation, starting with this short overview by David Lynch: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2UHLMVr4vg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2UHLMVr4vg)

</comment><comment><USER32> Learn Rust. You'll think clearer, make fewer errors, and be more productive. You'll find yourself thinking about programming problems in new, better, ways.

Rust _requires_ you to program well. At the same time, it doesn't expect you to know everything before starting. When something is not going to work in a program, the compiler will not only tell you what is wrong but suggest fixes to the code.

</comment><comment><USER33> It would be interesting to identify the differences in genomes, epigenomes and microbiomes between geniuses, average and impaired/neuro-atypical persons. Maybe then, some un/ethical gene editing/silencing would be possible.

</comment><comment><USER34> > _I figure that most engineers will reject collectivism and be comfortable > with a libertarian framing._

I realize this is a bit besides the point, but why are the two often presented as mutually exclusive? Why can't something be done both in a collective and a libertarian fashion?

<comment><USER35> Because the core of libertarianism is individuality in opposition to collectivism.

<comment><USER36> Against _forced_ collectivism

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> disappointed based on the headline. I thought I was going to get a list of nootropics and dosages that have been proven to be effective.

<comment><USER37> You will probably be interested in [https://www.gwern.net/Nootropics](https://www.gwern.net/Nootropics)

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Get enough sleep (most important I guess), don't do drunks nor drink alcohol.

I'm only good at _giving_ advice, but I don't think there's any secret besides those things..?

<comment><USER39> Physical exercise, is the other one with a definite effect on cognition. Not really SECRET though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> Frequent exercise and healthy eating.

</comment><comment><USER41> So the premise of the article is to literally take mind-altering drugs in order to become more valuable to your employer.

This is so fucked up.

<comment><USER42> But that's not the premise. It's your interpretation. I get the whole hate vs employer and capitalism, but then again - if you're after biohacking yourself for whatever reason - overclocking machines always comes with a cost, even if it's human body. Its equilibrium exists for a reason, disrupting the equilibrium in order to "overclock" a part of it (cognition) must come with backlash of some sort.

<comment><USER41> "I think we are the verge of entering this brave new world of work, where enhancers are essentially mandatory."

It literally is the premise.</comment></comment></comment>


My Bash and Vim setups - <AUTHOR> http://www.swaroopch.com/blog/bash-vim-setup/

<comment><USER2> "I find it surprising on how little time coders spend on their development environment (the "dev env")."

That's funny. I've always suspected that "tweaking my dev environment" was the #2 time suck on every developers' list. #1 always being "checking [HN|reddit|RSS reader] for updates".

<comment><AUTHOR> That is probably true for the HN-reading crowd. I was referring to the remainder majority :-)</comment></comment>


Giant archaeological trove found in Google Earth - <AUTHOR> http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/onepercent/2011/02/giant-archaeological-trove-fou.html

<comment><USER2> * _potential_!

I am disappointed that there is no image of the aerial imagery nor the ground. At least the photo looks 99% like generic stock footage.

The commemts seem to be spammers.

</comment><comment><USER3> To the best of my knowledge, Saudi Arabia is completely closed to archaeology due to the state religion (happy to be corrected on this one). If it ever does open up it will become a fantastic treasure trove of knowledge: all sites never before excavated (by scientists) and the location astride the cross- roads of all the old-world continents.

</comment><comment><USER4> On a related note, National Geographic has been doing a similar thing for the past couple years:

<http://exploration.nationalgeographic.com/>

Just this past summer they went to Mongolia and used data from that little game to find tons of tombs and even an ancient city!</comment>


Four (More) Reasons Why It's Time to Shop for the Best and Brightest - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/07/four_more_reasons_why_its_time.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+harvardbusiness+%28HBR.org%29 <comment><AUTHOR> Interesting perspective:

"Buy new businesses for the people, not the products. Just ask young Mr. Zuckerberg about that. Facebook has bought a slew of startups, snagging their top talent but usually killing off their products. Facebook's chief technology officer, Bret Taylor, was a co-founder of FriendFeed, one of those acquisitions. He had previously been a bright star at Google. We've noticed that the most successful M&As are small tuck-ins — deals made to acquire skills and capabilities rather than large-scale acquisitions designed to enlarge market share or to diversify. Given that M&A will remain high on the agenda for companies that are sitting on plenty of cash, business leaders should view M&A as opportunities to hire talented new business builders and new leaders."</comment>


2014: year of the skeptic? - <AUTHOR> http://www.thewhatnoise.com/2014/01/2014-year-of-skeptic.html

<comment><USER2> I'll believe it when I see it.</comment>


XFINITY from Comcast vs. Google Fiber - <AUTHOR> http://www.xfinity.com/compare/comcast-xfinity-vs-google-fiber.html <comment><USER2> There was a photo[1] that made the front page of reddit today[2] showing that this is not limited to their online marketing. Apparently they are distributing similar material, in print, to potential Google Fiber customers.

This is pretty low. I get grumpy when I see technology companies attempting to take advantage of the knowledge, or lack thereof, of their consumers. I think about my grandparents and how their Comcast installer tried to tell them they needed to pay extra if they attached an HD cable from their television to their cable box when they were already paying for HD cable service.

Sickening and I would love to see regulations to prevent this kind of misleading, even if not false, advertising.

[1] - [https://i.imgur.com/FrdGhgr.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/FrdGhgr.jpg)

[2] - [https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/44x78h/nice_try_comca...](https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/44x78h/nice_try_comcast/)

<comment><USER3> It's almost funny, Comhem (Sweden's Comcast, except they don't actually have the monopoly they seem to think they do) has also been pushing the "Fastest wifi" angle really hard lately, whatever that actually means.

Meanwhile, my grandparents just upgraded to a "250Mbps" connection with them which actually seems to be about 5Mbps... Wired...

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is just a long-tail SEO play, nothing particular to Google Fiber. See also [http://www.xfinity.com/compare/comcast-xfinity-vs-att-u- vers...](http://www.xfinity.com/compare/comcast-xfinity-vs-att-u-verse- directv.html), [http://www.xfinity.com/compare/](http://www.xfinity.com/compare/), etc. I'm guessing people googling "xfinity vs <competition>" is a phrase they'd like to bring in more traffic for.

</comment><comment><USER5> Well that's interesting. As a Comcast customer, I have been seeing about ~40M down for a few years. Just did a run on SpeedTest.net and I'm now at ~175M down.

Good to see Google Fiber's goal of spurring competition in this sector actually working.

<comment><USER6> How much are they charging you for the 40Mb connection?

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> If you paste this link in to Facebook as if you're going to share it, the page title in the summary box ends up reading "Service Interruption" with no other text. I can't think of anything more appropriate.

<comment><USER8> Can confirm... That is the funniest thing ever...

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> > Fastest in-home Wi-Fi speed [etc]

You mean that the crappy Comcast-supplied access point has a better maximum speed than the presumably similarly crappy Google Fiber-supplied access point?

Sheesh. Just buy your own AP. A top-of-the-line model is <$100.

</comment><comment><USER10> The part where they give themselves a win for customer service has me laughing so hard I might die.

</comment><comment><USER11> Too bad they don't have "X Dollars per Mbps" \- because that's what really matters.

Google fiber is what, $70 for 1000Mbps? The fastest XFinity package in Chicago (that I can see) is $79.99 with commitment for 75Mbps.

<comment><USER12> I don't think it makes a ton of sense to price it that way. I'm paying 60 for 80up/80down from Firs, and it's not 1/10th the value that Google fiber is.

I can't think of a common application that would work better with 1000 than 80. The only time I sit around waiting for downloads to finish is xbox downloads. And that's because MS severs aren't even saturating my connection.

I guess my usenet binaries will download faster but it already happens real fast.

I'd probably pay an extra 20 dollars for the novelty value. But a lot of working class folks wouldn't.

<comment><USER11> I agree it shouldn't be priced in that way, but it should be compared in that way. Leaving relative prices out of the equation is unfair / biased. Of course xfinity has more services, but it's cost per increment of speed is dramatically higher.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> A lot of people also got a flyer in the mail, e.g.: [http://i.imgur.com/ZzqYCYV.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/ZzqYCYV.jpg) (from r/googlefiber)

</comment><comment><USER14> Seems like mostly "by the way, we still own all the TV." If they really wanted to inspire confidence in me they would at least put a checkbox for both with 'unlimited data'.

</comment><comment><USER15> Ironic that I now get a "Service Interruption" page: [http://imgur.com/AJmxdw2](http://imgur.com/AJmxdw2)

</comment><comment><USER16> This page could be summed up by "proprietary content Comcast holds licensing for" and "who cares about the internet part that does the fast internet?".

</comment><comment><USER17> The styling is even bad lol</comment>


In Browser iOS Prototyping Tool - Geared Toward Designers - <AUTHOR> https://www.flinto.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> Would be interested to see if anyone else has suggestions for tools that they use for this sort of thing.

</comment><comment><USER2> AppGyver Prototyper (appgyver.com) is my weapon of choice. Quite similar, but more native stuff.</comment>


OpenSSL.org hacked? - <AUTHOR> http://www.openssl.org/ <comment><USER2> I tend not to click on links advertising pages that are hacked. You know, not that many zero days on Chrome, but still seems like a risky click, as they say.

<comment><USER3>
      $ curl www.openssl.org
      TurkGuvenligiTurkSec Was Here @turkguvenligi + we love openssl _

<comment><USER4> but what if they set-up the server side so that the server returns different results depending on the browser/OS?

<comment><USER5>
        $ curl -A "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/31.0.1650.63 Safari/537.36" www.openssl.org

<comment><USER6> But what if they return a joke, so funny, that it kills whoever reads it?

<comment><USER7> Then they should split on spaces and only read one word at a time

<comment><USER8> This is a proven method, but care must be taken to make sure no individual gets more than on word to translate at a time.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_funniest_joke_in_the_wor...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_funniest_joke_in_the_world)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Yet another example of why to both sign release artifacts AND verify them is important.

Also, if you're running the public website for a security lib or core FOSS package, expect more attacks by kiddies trying to build rep... so very conservative tech choices (mostly static website served from a read-only fs) and defensive practices are de rigueur.

<comment><USER10> What's the use in a static website or a read-only FS when you can overwrite what's in RAM, or just attack routing or DNS? Security is a little more complex.

<comment><USER11> The point is to minimize attack surfaces. If you're serving static content that's one less path for an attacker to potentially exploit. With only static files exploits are limited to those contained in the web server or the OS network code. With a read only filesystem certain classes of privilege escalation are eliminated.

Attacks on routing or DNS are more difficult to deal with, but at least it isn't your server being compromised, and if you're using HTTPS properly then the certificate should show as invalid at least.

So yeah, security is complex, but his advice was spot on. The fact that you seem to call it into question says that you don't know much about security.

<comment><USER10> Are you kidding me?! At the very least suggest Grsec, SELinux, containers! Who gives a shit about "certain classes" of privilege escalation? Are you securing your webserver against 5th graders or actual hackers?

If you want to minimize your attack surface, what he suggested is quite possibly the least effective possible thing anyone could do. I point out just a few of the more important issues to consider first, and you tell ME I don't know about security? I don't know what kind of systems you secure, but mine don't rely on 'mount -o ro,remount /' as a defense strategy.

<comment><USER9> You're missing the bigger point: enumerating every possible defense is beyond the scope of a comment AND does not exclude any technique by omission. If you'd like to raise technologies in a civil manner, please. Just don't start getting defensive and name calling. [1]

[1] [http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I said this in a lower thread but I figured it's better up here.

Why is there not a standard for links of this type in browsers. Eg OpenSSL

That's a simple way to go but I really think it's as generally insecure as reading a signature form a url that is advertised by a website. It's also why I rarely bother.

But if browsers were good about this then it could be done in a much better way which is to sign the application with a real peer verifiable signing method. Such as the SSL cert that covers the site behind the open source project .

now this only works for projects that have SSL certs. Another method would be to have a clearing house that can do 1-1 with github et al and a re cert, like a oss cert organization. A final good way would be to use the beauty of git and use the source checksums and a repeatable build process (which is fricking hard) and come up with a way to give a signature for oss applications based on a git commit and check that back to the public git repository.

really I think knwon public keys for oss projects and branches would be the real answer. And the security gating for newbs would be like windows and linux which check the public signature of the application before they run them from the web and make the end user feel safe instead of doing nothing.

Browsers have a good share in this responsibility as well. Standard domain security should work well here as well. Better than what we have.

I leave this to more entreprenurial minds to make this work and I'd love some real telegraph style sinkers to point out the flaws. This is must me talking after a belated xmas dinner. but I think I'm kind of on course.

<comment><USER13> Yeah the public key used for signing has to be communicated via a different channel, otherwise we're spinning our wheels. I think DNSSEC is headed in the right direction, but hasn't arrived yet.

But that's if we're talking websites in general. For the specific use here, installing "trusted" software packages, far better solutions already exist and already protected the users of OpenSSL.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> What is a good reason for openssl.org not to utilize HSTS[1]?

      $ curl -I https://www.openssl.org/
      HTTP/1.1 200 OK
      Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2013 03:57:54 GMT
      Server: Apache/2.2.22 (Ubuntu)
      Accept-Ranges: bytes
      Vary: Accept-Encoding
      Content-Length: 15686
      Content-Type: text/html

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

<comment><USER10> Because it doesn't need it. Technically no website needs it. Only people who don't know how to type "https" need it.

<comment><USER14> Point is, I should not be able to access a plaintext version of a website hosting such cryptographically crucial software/information.

It's obvious why it can be a grand target for Man in the Middle, defacement and worst of all integrity attacks. Apart from preventing many of the latter, implementing HSTS could have really mitigated the problem. Anyone who had already visited the site wouldn't see the defaced page. Furthermore, they could get added to an STS preloaded list[1], making the attack invisible to anyone using a modern browser.

If you are interested, the Wikipedia page[2] does a fair job at explaining more about why HSTS is needed.

[1]: [https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome/trunk/src/net/http/tr...](https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome/trunk/src/net/http/transport_security_state_static.json)

[2]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_Strict_Transport_Security...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_Strict_Transport_Security#Applicability)

<comment><USER10> Or maybe they should have plaintext access, because then they can get the software if they don't have an SSL-enabled HTTP client, and they can compare the digital signature of the sources later via 3rd parties.

But this is all crap, really. OpenSSL is a library distributed across tens of thousands of independent providers all over the internet. Nobody needs to get it from the main site, and even if they do, there's a multitude of ways to tell if it's the real deal or not. If you know what OpenSSL is, you can type in "https" and be totally secure without HSTS. Even if you needed HSTS (which you don't), who's going to the OpenSSL.org website time after time that HSTS would even be useful?

People make way too big a deal over half-baked countermeasures that don't apply to every case. You find me the person who's downloading vanilla OpenSSL libraries from the main site over multiple visits and is at risk of a client- side MITM and _not_ verifying their sources, and i'll show you someone who's going to get owned even without a MITM.

<comment><USER15> You seem to have completely missed the fact that HSTS can be combined with an STS preloaded list, to which the previous comment author also gave you a reference to read. HSTS is TOFU (trust-on-first-use) by default, but the TOFU portion can be upgraded to a full PKI-based authentication mechanism just fine using preloaded lists, which doesn't require any previous visits whatsoever.

Furthermore, it's just embarrassing to see such attacks on these high-profile sites. If they can't defend their site (even for users who don't type "[https://"](https://")), who is to say their library is secure? These kinds of attacks threaten the confidence we have on our fundamental cryptographic building blocks and should be avoided.

<comment><USER10> In reverse:

1\. These attacks don't bear at all on cryptographic building blocks, because any script kiddie can brute force a login or fuzz an input, etc. Has nothing to do with crypto _at all_. Has nothing to do with their code _at all_. Completely different systems with completely different attacks with incredibly different requirements... it's worlds apart. There is nothing about defacing a website or even MITM that could ever be compared to breaking a crypto library.

2\. HSTS is quite a bit different from the PKI of TLS. That said, what you are basically saying is "HSTS is the same thing as HTTPS when you add the URL to the browser's STS whitelist". (Which could be avoided altogether if you just type "https")

So what your argument _really_ boils down to is: a crypto library is worthless because we _really need_ to use HSTS because OpenSSL.org users are too stupid to type "https".

Not only is this inaccurate and nonsensical, it's just a crappy security model. Now I have to manage HSTS exactly the same way TLS certs are managed and basically reproduce one protocol into a pseudo-protocol and juggle both, keeping things like RFC 6797 in mind. Suddenly the complexity's gone up enormously over time, only to prevent MITM on the client, and we don't even consider whether or not the content was compromised before the connection of the client to the server.

Even if the server is hacked, you still have absolutely no guarantee if the content was modified, because you're not verifying the content once you download it. But sure. Let's freak out about the possibility of a one-sided MITM to the client over HTTP (which every idiot knows is not secure _by design_ ), because that's clearly the most important or likely attack to be worried about right now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> For when the page is fixed, it currently says:

TurkGuvenligiTurkSec Was Here @turkguvenligi + we love openssl _

<comment><USER16> Yeah I dont see it at this point, so fairly fast turnaround.

<comment><USER12> I've wondered this for quite a while but why isn't there a standard for browsers like Download with check I mean no one ever checks them anyways so it's not like they're useful. The second step would to be to provide a reputable repo of software version -> checksum lookups so I didn't have to trust a given server for that. This is me thinking and drinking and I'd love comments.

<comment><USER17> You run right back into if you don't already trust the signer of the checksum, you can't trust the checksum, either.

The next logical step is some kind of third party authority, and then you right right into the Certificate Authority problem set, including code signing licenses like Apple and Windows use.

Some F/OSS systems are starting to use similar systems, like the newer Python package distribution systems.

<comment><USER12> Yes I agree. See my more fully fleshed out statement parallel. But checksums are currently pointless from a secuirty standpoint.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Posted on Twitter an hour ago: [https://twitter.com/Turkguvenligi/status/417099879463129089](https://twitter.com/Turkguvenligi/status/417099879463129089)

"openssl.org/ owned ;) [http://zone-h.org/mirror/id/21425720](http://zone-h.org/mirror/id/21425720) …"

</comment><comment><USER19> Does anyone have any details about how this was done? Was it a compromised admin account, a local root exploit, social engineering, etc? I'm eagerly awaiting the post-mortem.

<comment><USER20> No, and this is what makes it non-news. Especially since it links to the hacked webpage. Neither really Hacker nor News...

<comment><USER21> Hopefully, hacker has a meaning far more open than "security guys" or "security guys that know how to break things".

Sorry to prefer build things and creating value than destroy it.

I wonder why so many security guys are so condescending and contemptuous...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Forgive me for the ignorance but why is this significant if at all? Honestly curious, not being facetious.

<comment><USER23> If they can replace the front page html, they could probably also replace the source code distribution with a backdoored/trojaned tarball. Or someone else might already have done so, since who knows how long ago, using the same exploit.

<comment><USER24> But would they also be able to replace the public key of the authors in all the _other_ places it appears on the Internet?

<comment><USER15> That. That's why the authors PGP-sign their sources. Furthermore, some of us maintain GPG trust paths, so replacing it on every other place on the Internet would still be futile.

<comment><USER25> There is also benefits of using decentralized distribution channels like bittorrent. So a single source can't be compromised.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> The fact that the OpenSSL maintainers haven't communicated about this issue yet make me feel very uncomfortable.

<comment><USER27> Currently posted:

29-Dec-2013: Web site defacement. Investigation in progress, more details to follow.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Other pages are still up (although I haven't checked that they're unmodified) - it does appear the attacker didn't bother to bring anything but the front page down.

<comment><USER29> They did that on purpose, their intent seems to be to bring awareness rather than destruction.

<comment><USER30> An email works too :)

<comment><USER29> Awareness with a side order of boasting.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Zone-H Mirror > [http://www.zone-h.org/mirror/id/21425720](http://www.zone-h.org/mirror/id/21425720)

</comment><comment><USER32> Their security certificate still appears valid.

</comment><comment><USER33> Who is in the favicon?

<comment><USER5> Nobody; it's the text "OpenSSL" squished into 16x16.

<comment><USER33> ok

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> they're back...

</comment><comment><USER35> Is this the site that offered you free SSL certs?

<comment><USER36> No

<comment><USER35> Oh sorry, 'apt-get' has spoiled me (somehow I've never knew what was the official home of openssl).

Not cool at all, and apparently the guys running the site haven't took notice yet.</comment></comment></comment>