Facebook content policies tweaked over time to accommodate POTUS - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/06/28/facebook-zuckerberg-trump-hate/ <comment><USER2> I am not a fan of Facebook and have deleted my account. But Zuck is right in trying to avoid policing political content. It just won't work.

Twitter's attempts, although idealistic, are a complete failure. Some tweets that are sanctioned are far less harmful than others that aren't. Some tweets that are allowed are outright lies. Inserting Jack and his buddies as the arbiters of truth is not going to work. And frankly, I don't want the Twitter exec team to tell me what I should believe or see.

I understand that there is more pressure on Zuck to follow. And he may very well have to bend to the outrage of people even though it makes no sense.

<comment><USER3> Serious question: why do you limit your argument to policing political content only? Do you think they should also not police sexual content/paedophilic content?

I personally believe that inoffensive* content does not deserve policing. However, content that strays outside the bounds of common decency, probably needs to be censored. If a political campaign started advocating for the legalisation of child marriage, for example, despite it being a political ad, it is also far beyond the realms of common decency and should be censored. Similarly, for political ads that insight hate or xenophobia.

\-- *Defining "inoffensive" is difficult, but that's part of your job if you're running the largest social media platform in the world. Once you filter out the bots, your own "like/hate" buttons should allow you to highlight the more controversial items.

<comment><USER4> I agree with your point, but am personally skeptical of anything more than what is literally illegal speech, with controls for individuals to personally filter more if they so choose. There are too many ways for Facebook, Twitter, Reddit etc to fail. The policies that shape speech restrictions on the primary means of communication for many people should come through the appropriate political processes, as problematic as those can often be, not SV boardrooms.

<comment><USER5> By that standard, doxxing is fair game. It's not technically illegal in most cases, and the victim, their loved ones, and employers are free try their best to personally filter out the abuse.

<comment><USER4> Thanks for pointing it out. That was not a abuse case I considered.

It's straightforward to create a list of restrictions based on types of information to prevent doxxing, at least from my understanding. Avoiding postings of addresses, employers, etc without the consent of the original person can be made an unambiguous rule. I don't believe such a restriction could be used as a weapon to silence legitimate speech.

My ultimate concern however, is the poor application of harder to define restrictions like "glorifying violence" being used maliciously. I could see pressure from various people that recent protest organizing would fall under the same category (not that I agree with such assertion). As Twitter has decided to filter some speech, bad actors are going to try to use that filtering to get opposing speech filtered.

Additionally, that's all assuming Twitter, Facebook, etc are acting in good faith. There are numerous ways the good intentions here result in dystopian outcomes.

<comment><USER5> I'm not sure it's so straightforward. Under the anti-doxxing restrictions you laid out, journalists could have been muzzled for identifying the unmarked law enforcement officers in DC a few weeks ago [1].

[1] [https://www.cbsnews.com/news/washington-dc-protests- unidenti...](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/washington-dc-protests-unidentified- law-enforcement-officers/)

<comment><USER4> Maybe different categories for government employees in their public roles?

I think this highlights my original concern even more. While an ideal world would have some board at Twitter able to make these decisions in an ideal way, the implementation you desire requires subjective judgments. Based on the recent stories on HN about difficulties with app store filtering that should have an objective standard, I am still highly concerned about giving the power to make subjective speech filtering decisions to SV social media companies.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This is why I find all this talk about free speech completely disingenuous. From the start, these websites had rules to moderate content. They've just been afraid to enforce them against the president.

<comment><USER7> They've been moderating content since they introduced algorithmic feeds. If they want to claim to be neutral then bring back a simple chronological feed of the people I follow.

<comment><USER8> You can just switch to "Latest Tweets" mode by clicking the little stars button at the top right.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Call your congress critters and ask them to look at drafting legislation requiring the Executive branch of government to self-host its own standards- compliant social media site, using government infrastructure.

We live in a day and age where ActivityPub exists and the White House could be running its own Mastodon server (well, I would not recommend that exactly, but it could be running something that speaks the same language).

<comment><USER10> Why only exec?

In any event rather than the official account for the office, they'll communicate from their personal non gov account —which given first amendment, they have a right to.

<comment><USER9> okay, widen the scope. Any public official should be communicating from publicly owned and controlled infrastructure.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Free press is surprisingly supportive of an idea of a private corporations policing and setting standards of content and political discussions.

I hate how discussions look online about politics, but I worry that instead of pushing for accountability of public figures, through democratic tools and institutions, articles like that focus on trying to get a private police up and going.

Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc censoring more and more content from public figures won't change the fact that USA have a racist president and that tons of people support him.

And while I think it's a valid question how much of their racist and discriminatory content they should be allowed to say before they're thrown out of office, it shouldn't be decided by Silicon Valley.

<comment><USER12> _Free press is surprisingly supportive of an idea of a private corporations policing and setting standards of content and political discussions._

Yes, and it's a worry. Twitter and Facebook are entitled to label or comment on inflammatory posts, but if you're willing to post non-anonymously, what you put up should stay up. High volume trolling by anons, though, needs to be detected and stopped. That's bulk spam, not discourse.

As a kid, I used to walk past the headquarters of the American Nazi Party, a house in a residential neighborhood in Arlington, VA. They had a big sign: "White Man Fight - Smash the Black Revolution Now". They were a local joke. We survived that.

<comment><USER11> I personally think that having 3 tier policy is reasonable. Anonymous - anything can be removed. If you attach your name to it - internet companies should still be able to remove really bad content, as in the end they're private business. But for highly ranked elected politicians, especially president, bar for removal should be really really really high.

But at the same time, adding context and flagging demonstrably false statements is no brainier that companies are falling behind on

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> love that everyone is expecting some sort of impartiality from advertising companies and data miners

policy isn't the problem, it's the platform itself

<comment><USER14> That generalises over almost everything in real world. "Everyone is expecting done sort of impartiality from X companies" is the reason why we have many laws.

<comment><USER13> laws aren't impartiality! in general you're never going to get something akin to federal free speech with a privately owned publishing platform!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> [https://youtu.be/l7o4A16QCxE](https://youtu.be/l7o4A16QCxE)

</comment><comment><USER16> whats stopping a new titan website from ignoring this pressure?

</comment><comment><USER17> Why is it that I can have a group called 'the only good cop is a dead cop' and this doesn't violate any of Facebook's terms? It's clearly a hate group that is biased against an entire group of people. Aren't we supposed to be against bias and bigotry? Or is it accepted because it's a group that isn't liked?

I also see death threats on Twitter all the time to: white people, republicans, white people, Jewish people, and police officers. These are allowed to persist to this day.

Ice cube, for instance, had a cartoon ripped straight out of anti-semitic propaganda from the Nazi era and it was taken down after many weeks because of a 'copyright violation'.

Yet, if I even hint that I don't agree with BLM or underage trans surgery, I will get booted off of Twitter for hate speech and if I'm not anonymous, mobs of people will attempt to get me fired from my job and kicked out of society.

The system does need to be changed.

We need to start with the uber-progressive tech companies that take it upon themselves to stifle the speech of people they deem unworthy.

Nobody should be able to have this much control over the population and it's definitely going to start affecting our elections. It's so much more powerful than the handful of fake Russian ads that were purchased in an attempt to sway voters (which wouldn't have caused stadiums of people to come out to see Trump when he was running in 2016).

The reason we have Trump today is a direct result of this meddling. Trump and his team realized that all he needed to do was create the perfect sound byte and they would run with it and it would give him free advertising. He cast a net out and social networks and the media ran right into them every, single, time.

His team was also the most tech savvy. They used data mining companies to find out the best ways to get votes and played the social media game better than anyone.

Obama did almost the exact same thing in 2008. His team exploited a Facebook app that allowed them to get information on you and your friends when you installed it.

I still remember all of the tech magazines lauding his campaign as revolutionary, genius, and the the new way of political campaigns. It clearly violated Facebook's TOS and user privacy. Yet, we saw no investigations.

It's proof once again that it has more to do with politics than anything else. Progressive and liberal candidates and supporters of progressive and liberal causes can get away with murder.

I just wish we had true equality instead of special treatment for select groups of people.

<comment><USER18> Sounds like you have a persecution complex because your positions aren't well liked.

I'd suggest you look at the data around who and what is popular on Facebook. It supports none of what you've written. Sometimes it's not the kids who are wrong...

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> POTUS is one side of it, and Facebook is a very big regulatory target if it decides to start a pissing contest with the elected US government; but apart of that, half of the voting Americans voted for POTUS and silencing their elected official is quite alienating too.

<comment><USER20> More like half of those that cast votes in the last Presidential Election cast votes for the sitting POTUS (well, technically a significant number less than half but that argument is pointless b/c of the electoral college).

It turns out that group represents less than 20% of the population (~63 million out of ~328 million is less than 20%).

If alienating them is an unintended byproduct of simply labeling a verbal invective that incites violence and provably presents lies to the detriment of public health might be a worthy venture in content moderation. The mere act of labeling outright lies and calls to violence as such really shouldn't be so controversial.

<comment><USER21> Social media platforms should only moderate illegal content, not things they (you) don't agree with.

<comment><USER20> First Amendment guarantees were created to prevent The Government from regulating speech, not to private entities from doing so. Are they private or public entities? Are they required to use their technologies and resources to publish any and all content that isn't explicitly illegal?

What if some content is deemed illegal in some jurisdictions and not illegal in others? If a community decides to ban a piece of art (such as a book, or a photograph, or a movie) should the platform then be liable for moderating that content specific to that location? Doesn't that imply that in order to accomplish that task they MUST track user location? What a win that would be, legislation that requires location tracking in order for compliance to occur.

Should "Legal" be the ultimate arbiter of what is right, or what is just? How has that worked out for us in the past?</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Tutorial teaching a team new to testing and CI how to get started? - <AUTHOR>

A company I work with is in dire straits. They have been delivered a bunch of barely functional very unstable code for a ridiculous amount of money. They have a mixture of in-house people and hired guns that together have built this totally over-the-top solution. I'm coaching them - hands off for now - on getting things back under control.
One of their biggest flaws - besides the over-engineering - is that they have absolutely atrocious testing. I want them to make a start with and eventually move over completely to automated testing. But when I figured I'd send them a couple of links to get them on their way I realized that there are a lot of crappy tutorials but not a single one that stands out as the reference for automated testing for distributed teams.
Is there anybody on HN that can point at a reference for a start-to-finish approach to automated testing?
Pre-emptive thanks for giving this your time. <comment><USER2> This isn't what you've asked for, but I'd like to offer some unsolicited advice, if I may.

When you are selling high-priced products to consumers you have to sell an idea first and your product second. Let me offer an example.

I used to sell beds. Selling expensive beds to your every day person is really hard, because they are so expensive. Who is going to spend $7,500 for a luxury Tempur Pedic when they could get cheap mattresses from Big Co for $300? Eventually, I gave up trying to sell beds. It was just a waste of time because nobody every bought them.

Then something interesting happened: somebody gave me the advice I gave you.

You see, when you are selling something expensive, you can't just push the product. You have to sell your customer on the experience.

How did I apply this to mattress sales? It was easy!

Did you realize that you spend approximately 33 percent of your life sleeping? Sleeping is your body's way of regenerating itself. It's the biological equivalent of turning off your laptop when it starts to overheat. It gives your muscles and tissue time to rebuild themselves. It gives your brain time to digest everything you've learned that day.

A good set of mattresses will last you 20 years. With that said, very few people go so long without replacing their bed. In reality, a bed will last about 10 years; less if the customer has a lot of money or moves frequently. But let's assume a 10 year lifespan for your new $7,500 bed.

Over ten years, that bed will cost you $2.05/day.

Now is $7,500 a lot up-front? Absolutely. But like anything else of high quality, this bed is an investment. And what an investment it is. I will bet you that a luxury Tempur Pedic will give you a better ROI than most stock traders who have been in the biz for 20 years get.

How?

Simple. Better sleep = better productivity. If you got a great night sleep every single night, do you think you could turn that extra productivity into $10 dollars each day? I know I could! If I were productive for one extra hour each day, I would make an extra $100 a day.

Assuming you make an extra $10 a day from your new found productivity, this bed will pay for itself five times over throughout its lifespan.

And so on and so on.

You see, I'm no longer selling a bed. What I'm selling is a complete experience, an investment and a new way of life. $7,500 doesn't seem so bad when it makes your life better for the next 10 years now does it?

What's the point of my rambling?

You need to avoid selling your coworkers on testing. Very few people like testing and the only sure-fire way to make somebody do something is to make them WANT to do it.

Instead, try selling them on how their lives will improve if they increase the quality of their software. Show them how they will benefit from shorter release cycles, fewer bugs, higher quality code, etc. Show your coworkers the benefit of taking the time to correctly architect a solution before they start implementing it. How does taking the time to learn and correctly use the tools at their disposal benefit THEM?

Will this be difficult? Absolutely. People don't want to change. Your job is to make them WANT to be better. There is simply no other way to accomplish your goal with any lasting impact. Sell your team on the complete experience, the investment and the new way of life.

Hope my two cents helps. :)

<comment><USER3> This reminds me of a TED talk I watched last night ([http://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_inspi...](http://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_inspire_action/transcript?language=en))

"People don't buy what you do, they buy why you do it". You sell the bed not based on the quality of the materials so much as the improvement that it gives to their life.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I do exactly that as a job, I teach modern development techniques to established software shops. The way I present it, is to teach good development habits by using good development tools.

1\. Before _anything_ start with version control and how to use it effectively. With out this step you got nothing.

2\. Collaboration. Choose a project management tool (Jira or the like) and show them how to use it effectively. Show them how developers use it to keep PHB & managers honest.

3\. Continuous Integration. Choose a CI of your choice, set it up, get it working for them, get them addicted to the time/work savings. (I use Jenkins, but now there are better ones)

4\. Testing. Teach them _why_ testing is good, help them implementing the testing framework (On the CI) and help institute it as a 1st level part of the development process.

My style, is to never give them "more work", but to show them how each step _saves_ them work and time.

Regards

<comment><USER2> I'm interested in hearing more about your work! Would you mind trading a few emails? My email is in my profile if you're interested. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I work mainly with front-end JavaScript developers, who generally speaking got into programming through HTML and CSS and see testing as something someone else does after they've built the thing. (Which also perfectly describes me up until a year ago.)

I don't have a reference for start-to-finish automated testing, but I like the way in which Justin Searles explains the difficulty of such a thing here: [http://blog.testdouble.com/posts/2014-01-25-the-failures- of-...](http://blog.testdouble.com/posts/2014-01-25-the-failures-of-intro-to- tdd.html)

I gave a brief presentation about testing a few months ago and felt like it didn't really connect. I think it's genuinely hard to break the preconceptions about testing, and also there's a fair amount of incidental framework and library minutia that can be hard to isolate from the big picture ideas.

Subjective experience is a huge factor. Trying to rationally explain the advantages or conceptual underpinnings of testing doesn't always work. (In hindsight it didn't work for me either.) It really takes sitting down next to somebody and walking them through a process. I've had success in showing a test I wrote from some unit that I wanted to exist, deleting the implementation, walking them through a re-implementation, and then passing them the keyboard to implement another deleted implementation.

Make sure that the developers _actually experience_ a cycle of red-green- refactor.</comment>


This is Google's Titan security key - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/30/this-is-googles-titan-security-key/ <comment><USER2> Supporting Bluetooth may seem a feature to some end users, but seems to be a terrible idea for a device saying it is one of the most secure on the market.

Bluetooth has been problematic in it's implementations, and has had a myriad of security issues, and issues with end users, guaranteeing the connection will last. The NIST CVE list isn't exactly charming. [0]

Issues like CVE-2018-5383 [1], where the encryption key leaked over Bluetooth for most iPhones, Androids and Macs could render the Titan useless.

[0] [https://nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/search- results?query=bluetoot...](https://nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/search- results?query=bluetooth&search_type=all&cves=on)

[1] [https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-5383](https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-5383)</comment>


Show HN: From Them to Us, Elderly Folks Sharing Their Take on Life in Video - <AUTHOR> http://fromthemtous.com/

<comment><USER2> Intereting idea. I must admit I found the cinematography great, but the interviews themselves not so engaging.

I think your interviews would benefit from something like Errol Morris' 'Interatron' (1). Basically, this allows you to make eye contact with the interview subject while they look directly to camera. This creates a far more intimate connection between audience and subject. There are even simpler systems out there where you don't need a teleprompter (2).

Also, a bit of sound post would add another 10 percent to your production value.

On the other hand, I actually really like how you've used no music. Let's the wisdom speak for itself.

(1) [http://vimeo.com/80076226](http://vimeo.com/80076226)

(2) [http://www.eyedirect.tv/](http://www.eyedirect.tv/)

<comment><USER3> Thanks for your feedback. I've just started to watch part of the interview you've shared, the fact that the interviewee looks directly at the camera is indeed very engaging. The tool is pretty pricy but it's good to know such solution exists – I did not know at all about this. I'll dig more in Errol Morris' filmography.

Regarding the sound, do you mean adding a light music in the background? I try to keep the videos as raw and with as less cuts as possible for the interviews, in a way to preserve the words of people and to make them at the center of all this, with less distraction. I could give this a try but I feel that adding music would be pretty much like an interpretation of their words.

Thanks for sharing all this, this is helpful!

Cheers, Robin

<comment><USER2> No, I think you nail it with the rawness and lack of music. Maybe do a little research into noise gating and micing techniques. I also think the more you shoot in rooms without reverb, the closer we'll feel to the subject. I'm a film-maker myself, so happy to reach out and go into more detail if you have an email.

<comment><USER3> Would be great! ameego[at]gmail[dot]com. Thanks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Designer here. I'm Robin; I've started this project last June to record thoughts and perspective of old folks I meet. I live in Singapore which gives me access to pretty different profiles. It's easy to go abroad from here so I'm trying to meet people from different country. I do everything alone which makes the update not as regular as I wish. I'm trying to make people contribute now with videos of their own grand-parents that they would record with their smartphone. I'm considering enabling an upload feature.

Any feedback is welcome in terms of design, videography, or anything that could help me to improve the site, the videos, or make the "Your Videos" section more appealing.

Cheers, Robin

<comment><USER4> Hi Robin,

I love this idea. Wish I could have a video like this from my grandfathers. One thing that leapt out to me was wondering what the questions were that kicked off the video -- if I wanted to make, could there be a list of questions that gets the topics and wisdom flowing?

Also, if you're looking to implement direct upload, something like red5 would be able to give you the ability if you wanted to run it yourself, otherwise there's always youtube which everyone can use the app.

<comment><USER3> Thanks for your message. Generally, it all start with a casual conversation around the idea of transmitting a message to new generations. I feel that people are very encline to share when they're listened to. Once the valve is open, the flow does not stop :) John for instance kept talking for 45min without me asking any questions.

You have a point though: people need to have references in terms of questions to be able to do interviews on their own. I will think about how to integrate this in the site. Thanks for the idea and for the red5, I will look into it.

Robin

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I really like this and enjoy the fact that the interviews aren't fast-paced, snappy-answers kind of drivel. Its OK to take your time, think, reflect, stare out the window - and that's coming from a true expert ;). I don't have a mobile-phone, only a landline and an answering machine. Never lost a friend or a client due to that. On the contrary. I find that people value my presence more because I don't make myself immediately available. That's scarcity economics in effect. Feel free to copy.

Its hard to beat the life experience of a 80+ year old person. Its like a fine whiskey. Distilled and aged. Some have survived wars and famine. I think its time to stop talking about so much of today's vapour values and listen to someone who has managed to get to 80+ and learn a bit about what really matters in life. Someone who's lived through wartimes should know.. right?

</comment><comment><USER6> This is fantastic!

A valuable resource preserved for future generations. It's frank and intimate. I'll others comment on how you could improve the production values. I just wanted to say that I appreciated this a great deal.

<comment><USER3> Thanks, I'm glad you liked the videos!

Cheers, Robin

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Are there any plans for English subtitles?

<comment><USER3> Yes, the videos are already english subtitled: you need to click on the CC at the bottom right of the video. For now, Vimeo does not support default subtitle for the video, looking forward for this feature.

<comment><USER7> Oh, I didn't realize that the different videos would have different languages. The one showcased on the front page had only French, so I went and assumed that they were all only French.

<comment><USER3> You have a point :) you make me realise that I forgot to add the english subs.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Instead of elections, let's use lotteries - <AUTHOR> http://aeon.co/magazine/living-together/forget-elections-lets-pick-reps-by-lottery/ <comment><USER2> If you understand French, Etienne Chouard's web site contains lots of argumentation for lotteries instead of elections. [http://etienne.chouard.free.fr/Europe/tirage_au_sort.php](http://etienne.chouard.free.fr/Europe/tirage_au_sort.php)</comment>


Highlights from "The Checklist Manifesto" by Atul Gawande - <AUTHOR> https://www.chestergrant.com/highlights-from-the-checklist-manifesto-by-atul-gawande <comment><USER2> It's a fine book. My learning after that book was to try to ask for and read the checklist for medical procedures my family members undergo. At least over here (the Netherlands) they are usually given without problem or even publically accessible online. In case of the chemo of my father, I was able to point to missed steps twice, once needing immediate intervention. In case of simple family disease I can at least understand the reasoning of our GP without totally cross-examining him.

In work I've only once (alas) hit the sweet spot of having team members being able and willing to define their own checklist and following and refining it regularly. The results were pretty great (30x efficiency gains on the same procedure in two years). Since, I've noticed quite a lot of professionals being resistant to the idea of checklists. The dogma is that you can't capture skill, experience and intelligence in a checklist. That's a false dichotomy, since the checklist is ment to save you from embarrassing errors, but it's a persistent thought.

<comment><USER3> After being in the Weapons Department of a submarine crew, I generally swear by checklists, or a tthe very least, not just a 'let's think about this' session but as close to a walkthrough as I can manage. Vacation planning? Major holiday shopping/preps? New pet? (Other unusual circumstance?)

Imagine what it will be like to live through the time and actions that you expect, and almost guaranteed, the gotchas will pop out like a sore thumb, and you'll be planning ahead for those.

Wherever I can get to a checklist level, though, I do. Even if it's a list of possible options that I only select a few priorities from each day, it keeps me in mind of the possibilities and things I may be neglecting, etc.

<comment><USER4> Always nice seeing a fellow submariner here at HN. :) I feel the same way, though I was in Radio on a fast attack out of Pearl: Checklists are the way to go. Now as a civilian, I'm always extolling the benefits of (regularly updated) checklists to my co-workers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I was working at [a large cloud company] a couple of years after this book came out when suddenly all the managers (in my area) started reading it in a very short space of time. They became completely prepossessed by checklists, but IMO totally misunderstood what makes an effective checklist. They turned checklists into an oppressive regime of documenting every conceivable step and path to the tiniest detail. Checklists became impossibly long and far to cumbersome to be useful.

These managers wanted to treat engineers as robots and thought these checklists would be the code they fed into other flesh-robots, that then wouldn't need to know anything about what they were doing. Meanwhile the real engineers among us wanted to write actual code that would run on actual computers to do automation and scale instead. But the managers couldn't read code so didn't trust this desire of these engineers and stifled it for a considerably long time. It was a frustrating interpretation of a book I otherwise enjoyed.

<comment><USER6> > They turned checklists into an oppressive regime of documenting every > conceivable step and path to the tiniest detail.

That's a shame since this exact pitfall is covered in the book when the first list he comes up with for an operating room fails spectacularly because it's over-detailed. He has to circle back and revisit the checklists used by pilots and realized they only cover the most essential steps. He also discusses the difference between a pilot's checklist and the checklists used in construction projects and why they have different levels of detail.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I can see how checklists are valuable for extreme high-stakes but routine operations, like surgery or aviation.

But in practice, in the realities that we face in non-life-critical jobs, they're oppressive.

Some project managers cling to the fantasy that work will get done in a predictable and orderly fashion if only they wrote down everything that needs to be done and put checkbox next to it (preferably with a target date). The problem is for many projects we don't know what needs to be done in advance or we don't have a deep bench of experienced talent that is able to even generate a realistic checklist.

What often happens with these "checklist project managers" is that they end up creating excessively turgid checklists for which many items are inapplicable to the task at hand, many important items are utterly missing, and there's no prioritization of which things are truly the most critical-- everything's just an identically emphasized line item.

Checklists are for activities which are _extremely_ well understood, practiced exhaustively, and also critical to the mission.

<comment><USER8> You can get value from making your own. I have a small list for coding that says "commit, test, story" that reminds me to be always saving my work, coding against a test, and testing against a story. As long as you remember that you're the one in charge and don't treat it like your boss, a list can be a great aid to memory and discipline.

<comment><USER7> You're right there's a lot of value in writing down what you need to do on a personal level, adapt and modify it to suit yourself and the situation at hand. It's not "your boss" and that's why it helps.

I am talking about checklists devised in a work situation by "a boss" as an integral part of how work is actually preformed.

It's sooo easy for these things to get stupid when they're abused. A checklist, used improperly, is like a pre-waterfall workflow-- almost militaristic in it's simplicity.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Read the fantastic essay by the author in the New Yorker: [http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/12/10/the- checklist](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/12/10/the-checklist)

He expanded the essay into the book. The book is only okay, because it adds length and a few anecdotes, not all of them convincing, but the best stuff is also in the article.

<comment><USER10> Also his 2014 Reith lectures (a BBC institution): [https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/6F2X8TpsxrJpnsq82h...](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/6F2X8TpsxrJpnsq82hggHW/dr- atul-gawande-2014-reith-lectures)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> It was a fine book, but this summary serves the point perfectly while also being way shorter. My working assumption with all these popular books is they could be half (or less) as long and retain effectiveness.

<comment><USER12> There are a _lot_ of books that really deserve more than a magazine article or summary. You get context, examples, maybe some history, and so forth.

But they could probably be, say, 75 pages rather than 250. The problem is that the economics and practices of the publishing industry--and, in all fairness, the expectations of most book buyers--are built around 250-300 page books. So authors end up padding out their 75 page book to 250+ pages.

Philip Greenspun wrote the following in _2003_. It was in the context of blogs as an alternative but the reality is that books still carry a certain gravitas that online publishing usually doesn't have.

"Let's go back to the beginning. The commercial publishing world supports basically two lengths of manuscript: the five-page magazine article, serving as filler among the ads; the 200+-page book. If you had a 20-page idea and didn't have access to the handful of "long-copy" magazines in the U.S. (old New Yorker, Atlantic, etc.), you could cut it down to a meaningless 5-page magazine piece or add 180 pages of filler until it reached the minimize size to fit into the book distribution system (cf. any diet book or business bestseller)."

<comment><USER13> There are also essay collections. You can write 10 20 page essays and turn that into a book.

<comment><USER12> In my experience, it works better for relatively timeless self-contained topics. (Or for topics that are interesting in a historical context for whatever reason.)

I find it works less well when you're just hoovering up a bunch of random content that was perhaps interesting relative to current events and trends but is less so in isolation. Nothing wrong with doing it as a way of archiving past work but it's probably not something that's likely be to the average reader.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> An important takeaway from the book I got was that distilled checklists didn't work alone. It took some flexibility within the environment using the checklist to allow for its full potency, such as nurses being allowed to second-guess a doctor without fear of reprisals.

In the tech industry I think we can apply the construction company example more appropriately, which was construction companies structuring themselves over the decades for an immediate rescheduling of work and inspections to meet a construction sequence when something came up.

To be blunt and cynical, I don't believe that today's software management styles and scheduling are realistic in that manner. Whatever calendar flexibility exists is covered in name only. So I feel that too often project management decisions serve the calendar instead of allowing field hands to push back on launch dates.

<comment><USER15> Having a checklist is just the start. Adoption of checklists and training on them is almost as critical and sometimes far more difficult.

Sometimes leading by example (coworkers seeing positive outcomes) is the best way to gain adoption within your org.

Like all artifacts - things can get stale - maintenance of the checklist needs to be part of the overall group's ongoing tasks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> The New Yorker article on which the book was based was a real eye opener for me. That something so simple and so well known could have such dramatic effects in real life was unexpected. It was the magnitude of the effect that was a revelation.

Generalizing, since then i have consciously tried to force myself to follow/look at the simplest possible technique/explanation/etc. in all my endeavours. Our modern life is so much filled with _incidental complexity_ that 90% of the time a simple approach always works. It has all been done before and we just have to follow established conventions/heuristics.

</comment><comment><USER17> I'm building a SaaS around creating repeatable checklists (and procedures). Experienced people know how to do their jobs, but they are still people. People are error prone even on a good day. On bad days, well...

<comment><USER18> Please include a function to print nice looking versions. My not-for-profit is still quite paper based and when the checklist is online and the paper it relates to is offline the checklist doesn't get used.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Related from yesterday: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21283398](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21283398)</comment>


The Flawed Theory Behind Unit Testing - <AUTHOR> http://michaelfeathers.typepad.com/michael_feathers_blog/2008/06/the-flawed-theo.html <comment><USER2> Nice article, but provocative title.

Essentially it comes down to that TDD works mainly because it forces you to think about the implementation more clearly before you begin coding, while the various benefits of automation come as a bonus.

</comment><comment><USER3> Is Clean Room Software Development orthogonal to Test Driven Development or not? Clean Room minimises tests; Test Driven maximises tests. Clean Room minimises side-effects when code is written; Test Driven minimises side- effects when code is changed.

</comment><comment><USER4> I think I agree with this. We do TDD and the first test we write for a new module is usually a high-level test that walks entirely through the process, touching several classes or libraries. Then we write smaller tests, working our way down to fine-grained level with multiple tests for individual classes/functions. We catch errors at every level, and the end result is (usually) clean, bug-free code.

My understanding is that this is frowned upon from a TDD purist standpoint. Our high-level tests that touch lots of areas of code probably wouldn't be written in most shops.

</comment><comment><USER5> Well, shouldn't the quality be defined first. Quality differs based on situations, people, etc.

<comment><USER6> Talk to Phaedrus about that one.</comment></comment>


The Twelve-Factor App - <AUTHOR> https://12factor.net/ <comment><USER2> Holy shit i first read it as something like "The Twelve-Factor Authentication app" and thought this was some sort of sick proof of work based authentication system that makes you go back and forth 12 times through multiple parties just to sign in.</comment>


Ask HN: How much would you pay someone to get you a job? - <AUTHOR>

Assume that someone writes your resume, markets it to the "right" companies, gets you in the door, prepares you for interviews, and hand holds you until you get a job. <comment><USER2> Market rate = Zero. In practice recruitment consultants will be taking 20% or more of first year salary, but that's from the employer and is therefore _not_ net of income tax, and possibly not net of salary brackets, for employers that have them. More importantly the job seekers are able to take the recruiters' advice (for what its worth, which may be nothing) and go and find their own job through their own efforts and not owe anything.

There are companies and individuals that make a living from commissions paid by _employees_ for getting the job, and there are probably individuals that would benefit from getting paid career consultancy, but when the competition is free at the point of sale it's not an easy market to get into.

</comment><comment><USER3> I actually do something like this already. I don't do the cold calling and stuff like that, but since I work with developers and designers everyday (dealing with startup stuff), I do have many connections.

So I do headhunting for both sides. I get paid a commission from the company for finding them great talent(I use already established connections of mine so I already know if they are a good fit for the job or not), and the person that gets hired pays me a commission for finding them a job.

It's typically 20% of their monthly salary for 6 months from both sides.

Good deal for a person to make some extra cash on the side of whatever they do already, and they have time to do so.

</comment><comment><USER4> With a number of companies, this already happens when you go through recruiters. You don't see how much money you're paying, as it's factored in before you see the offer.

If you look at it from the perspective of the employee, it's quite possibly their biggest single expense all year. 20-30% of salary is common. It's easy to see why recruiters are paranoid about getting stiffed by the hiring company.

Unfortunately, it also puts you at a disadvantage when negotiating with the hiring company. The next guy who applied for the same job but didn't have to go through the recruiter would cost the company the same even if they earned 20% larger checks.

Still, as bad as recruiters are, the companies themselves are worse, by and large.

</comment><comment><USER5> This is a business where your performance can be measured easily, so just aim for a risk-adjusted commission. If you manage to score me a deal that improves my situation 50%, you can keep half of it. No strings attached. We share the risk of me not liking the job and leaving after a month or so.

In order to be successful you will probably require me not to leave the new job for at least 6-12 months. That can be an expensive term to have because of the risk being stuck in some crappy workplace, the risk of missing better opportunities and some other more subtle limitations that costs me money. That can drive your cut down significantly. On the other hand if you have premium companies like Google, you can claim a bigger cut and it's still a good deal.

</comment><comment><USER6> I am very interested in this thing. I am not a US citizen/residence and I would like to get help finding a position in a certain area. I don't mind paying as much as my first 2 salaries or more for some help. How can approach help like this?

</comment><comment><USER7> Zero dollars. Not to be flip, but someone else writing my resume wouldn't get me a job I'd want.

<comment><USER6> What about doing some calls and using their connections?</comment></comment>


Antikythera Reborn - The Hackers of Ancient Greece | Tux Deluxe - <AUTHOR> http://www.tuxdeluxe.org/node/104 <comment><USER2> Wondrous.

How is it that the book "Heron's Automata" that they mention hasn't been translated yet? I would have thought scholars of ancient Greece would long since have run out of works to translate.

<comment><USER2> That should be "scholars of ancient _Greek_ ".</comment></comment>


DIY Bertin Matrix with 569 Dominoes and No Glue - <AUTHOR> https://aviz.fr/diyMatrix/ <comment><USER2> The footnotes lead to some fascinating context into the associated research field.

The World Values Survey, which started in 1981, is "the largest non- commercial, cross-national, time series investigation of human beliefs and values ever executed, currently including interviews with almost 400,000 respondents. Moreover the WVS is the only academic study covering the full range of global variations, from very poor to very rich countries, in all of the world's major cultural zones".

"WVS consists of nationally representative surveys conducted in almost 100 countries which contain almost 90 percent of the world's population, using a common questionnaire" .

Their latest research study examines "Values In a Time Of Crisis" & the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on values.

"a natural experiment indeed—to study how people's moral values behave during times of crises. In the face of lacking evidence, we cannot take it for granted that the glacial stability of values observed in normal times continues throughout the Corona crisis. This uncertainty opens new territory and raises several imminent research questions:

      - Does the Corona pandemic impact on people's values? In other words, do people change their values under the imprint of this crisis?

     - If yes, how massive are these changes? And if these changes are massive, in what direction do they move?

     - How enduring are these changes, once an end of the crisis is at sight and once its economic consequences are overcome: do people's moral values revert back to their old setpoint or does the crisis leave a lasting impact?"

[http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSEventsShow.jsp?ID=416](http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSEventsShow.jsp?ID=416)

</comment><comment><USER3> This optimization problem is very similar to that of minimizing the diagonal bandwidth of a matrix, a common problem in large numerical computations [1]. It is also related to cluster finding in graphs and graph layouts by considering the adjacency matrix.

The difference is that in both those cases the values are boolean, but in this post the cost function is weighted.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuthill%E2%80%93McKee_algorith...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuthill%E2%80%93McKee_algorithm)

</comment><comment><USER4> I'm a mediocre woodworker, but it seems to me cutting the dominoes on a table saw would be faster than laser cutting. Setup a sled with a stop of the proper width to create strips. The strips could be run through using the sled with the stop set to a potentially different dimension. One can then use either a drill press or a hand drill with a template to guide hole placement. A drill press would be preferred, since getting exact placement and alignment is essential to getting the rods to work.

</comment><comment><USER5> I love the physical modelling and manipulation; but there has to be a better way than removing and replacing all those rods every time you want to switch dimensions, surely?

<comment><USER6> If those rods were attached together like a comb, it would be much faster

<comment><USER7> That could work, but it seems like part of the purpose of this form of matrix is to be able to rearrange rows or columns as a unit. (Hence why it says, "Reordering was clearly the most crucial.")

So for example, you might remove all the vertical rods, leave the horizontal ones, and use the horizontal ones to rearrange rows.

This means you'd have to be able to detach the rods from the comb, but that's probably doable. You could build the comb so that the connecting piece clamps onto the end of the rods, for example. Put balls on the ends of the roads and have corresponding voids in the connecting piece and a hinge to close the connecting piece around the balls.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> What a neat way of thinking about (dimension a, dimension b, value) tuples.

Does anyone know of any library to visualise data this way?

<comment><USER9> The authors created Bertifier (project page [1], demo [2], paper [3]); the paper has comparisons to other tools.

There was a paper at IEEE VIS last year ("Guiro: User-Guided Matrix Reordering" [4]) about a tool that implemented > 70 matrix seriation/reordering methods, but I don't think the code is available. There was also a State of the Art Review on matrix re-ordering methods from 2016 [5, 6]: it is mostly about the algorithms rather than available implementations, but it mentions reorder.js [7].

[1]: [https://aviz.fr/bertifier](https://aviz.fr/bertifier)

[2]: [https://aviz.fr/bertifier_app/](https://aviz.fr/bertifier_app/)

[3]: [https://aviz.fr/wiki/uploads/Bertifier/bertifier- authorversi...](https://aviz.fr/wiki/uploads/Bertifier/bertifier- authorversion.pdf)

[4]: [https://vcg.seas.harvard.edu/publications/guiro-user- guided-...](https://vcg.seas.harvard.edu/publications/guiro-user-guided- matrix-reordering)

[5]: [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/cgf.12935](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/cgf.12935)

[6]: [https://bib.dbvis.de/uploadedFiles/MatrixReorderingSTAR.pdf](https://bib.dbvis.de/uploadedFiles/MatrixReorderingSTAR.pdf)

[7]: [https://github.com/jdfekete/reorder.js](https://github.com/jdfekete/reorder.js)

<comment><USER8> O wow, what a fantastic reply. Thanks a lot for all those delicious links!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Is the reordering NP complete?</comment>


Creeping Authoritarianism Has Finally Prevailed - <AUTHOR> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/04/hungary-coronavirus-just-excuse/609331/ <comment><USER2> A great warning of what could happen in any country that doesn't stay vigilant in keeping their government in check.

</comment><comment><USER3> > Why does this matter? Because although Hungary is a small country, it is one > whose creeping authoritarianism is widely admired. In early February, I > wrote about the rapturous reception that Orbán had received at a conference > of self-declared nationalist and far-right intellectuals—American, Israeli, > and European—in Rome. I fully expect his tactics to be imitated: Anybody who > disagrees with my emergency laws is trying to spread illness

The Canadian Civil Liberties association is apparently seeking donations right now as it helps keep an eye on how the government is using its new power. I imagine most other democratic countries have similar organizations</comment>


Ask HN: What language would you like instead of JavaScript in the browser? - <AUTHOR> Assuming you could write in any language other than JS for the browser, what language would you write in? <comment><USER2> Elixir.

The frontend world is gravitating more and more towards functional stuff, so let's go straight for the real thing. The actor based model of the VM should also _greatly_ help to achieve concurrent/parallel/distributed stuff. Plus one could design awesome DSLs through Elixir macros.

But I guess everyone has at least one opinion why his/her fav language should be in.

The most interesting part would be (given that a BEAM VM runs natively in the browser/tab) what people would build with the power of _linkable_ VMs. I'd be very curious!

</comment><comment><USER3> COBOL

Just kidding... Given my druthers I'd take something like Groovy, Java, or maybe Scala.

</comment><comment><USER4> Give me python in everything.</comment>


A Manager's FAQ - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@henrysward/a-managers-faq-35858a229f84 <comment><USER2> quite good actually. I can spontaneously think of several mangers who should read this.</comment>


Any Tcl hackers here - <AUTHOR>

Any Tcl hackers on HN?  I ask because I'm preparing to open source a project in Tcl that most people have been telling me seems quite compelling.  In my most grandiose vision its a project which in turn could enable other startups.  Anyway, just want to see who out here hacks Tcl, and/or might be interested in the announcement of the release of version 0.1.  Until then, vapor-tastically yours.... <comment><USER2> I believe davidw(<http://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=davidw>) is a Tcl hacker.

</comment><comment><USER3> I used to use Tcl (with AOLServer and ACS/OpenACS.) It's not my favorite language by any stretch of the imagination, but I would use it again if there was a compelling reason to do so.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Hah I've already told davidw about the idea but thanks, I've known him online from other Tcl forums</comment>


Guide for GPlus refugees to choose a new social network in the Fediverse - <AUTHOR> http://homehack.nl/guide-for-gplus-refugees-to-choose-a-new-social-network-in-the-fediverse/ <comment><AUTHOR> I'll be missing Google+ because of the multiple places one could duscuss topics:

\- general gardening

\- chilies (two different groups)

\- photography

\- Linux

\- etc

You could follow peoples posts in those groups without havin to read what those people wrote about politics.

I've started blogging again, as write.as/eriki, and I'm researching hubzilla, mastodon and other options.

But I will be missing Google+, the layout, the streams that seemed to be made for me and not made to show more ads (I can't remember seeing a single ad on Google+ btw.)

One IT group has moved to mewe.com BTW. That site seems promising (just like WhatsApp did before Facebook bought them :-|, but I am still optimistic )

And to all Google+ haters, congrats, you won. As did Facebook as there is now one less option to choose from.</comment>


European funders detail their open-access plan - <AUTHOR> https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/11/european-funders-detail-their-open-access-plan <comment><AUTHOR> > But structural biologist Lynn Kamerlin, who wrote the open letter, says the > guidance still limits researchers' freedom to publish their work. "It's a > step in right direction," she says, but "I'm afraid [it gives researchers] a > false illusion of choice. … This is something that funders and publishers > should negotiate rather than putting researchers in the crosshairs."

The primary goal of Plan S is to transform journals to Open Access, at least in the sense that they allow all research they publish to be freely available at the time of publication _somewhere_. In other words: the goal is for journals that do not immediately make some articles available to no longer exist.

That means that it is, and will always be, fundamentally incompatible with Kamerlin's wishes: for academics to be able to publish in any journals they want, regardless of whether they immediately make their research available.

There is also no way that funders would be able to achieve their goal through negotiation - which is why they haven't, in the decades the OA movement has existed now. If they cannot restrict where researchers can publish, they cannot negotiate: all they can do is accept whatever demands the publishers make, because if they don't, they're limiting the ability to publish wherever.

<comment><AUTHOR> And maybe as an addendum: arguments like the one Kamerlin is making are always wrapped under the guise of "academic freedom". I feel this is disingenuous.

Academic freedom is important because we do not want funders to suppress results of academic research that does not suit their world view.

That is not likely to be at risk when funders demand publication in OA venues, however. Rather, when the term is used in this context, academics are not afraid of their research being repressed, but their career progression.

It's a legitimate worry. However, it's of a far different nature than academic freedom, and tolerating research behind paywalls is not the only solution.</comment></comment>


Fee likely for Times's news via iPhone - <AUTHOR> http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2009/06/24/fee_likely_for_timess_news_via_iphone/ <comment><USER2> I'm ready to pay for access to newspapers via electronic means. If I could get a Kindle DX in the UK I would buy one and use it for magazine and newspaper subscriptions. I think it's the perfect way to get access to recent material like this.

I would prefer to continue buying physical books because I like having them around the house (except for technical books which have a limited shelf life). That way I can read them again, give them to people, etc. I like the serendipity of looking at my bookshelf and rediscovering.

But I don't keep newspapers or magazines. If I need access to their archives I'll pay for it. If I could subscribe for a reasonable fee on a DX that would be ideal.

At the US prices for magazines and newspapers I can imagine subscribing to much more content if I had a DX. But the killer publication for me would be The Economist.

</comment><comment><USER3> For the skeptics, consider books that are availible free online but sell well (Practical Common Lisp comes to mind). People are paying for the distribution method, not the content.

</comment><comment><USER4> I have real doubts whether this payment model is going to work for Times in future. As a _consumer_ of their info it is _right now_ a PITA. [ I'm open to seeing what ease and cost/benefit emerges with future micropayment processes. ]

The conventional wisdom seems to be (becoming) if you start out offering something for free (as they do now), it's going to go hard for you if you _begin_ charging.

<comment><USER5> I disagree. I've written off the times because of their terrible website usability (full page ads, pop-ups, attempts at forced registration).

I'm assuming the product in there is good on some level since they have such brand cachet, but I don't care to deal with getting at because it such a pain. If they made it an enjoyable user experience, I would probably pay for it because I know that it is good.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> The NYT's content is generally very good, so I have no argument against paying a subscriber fee. Their iPhone app is another problem though- it's definitely the buggiest iPhone app I've used and needs a lot more stability before I'm willing to pay a subscription for something which crashes 1 out of 3 times I use it and has blatantly broken features.

</comment><comment> brown9-2 Couldn't iPhone users just go to www.nytimes.com in their phones web browser and circumvent the fees?

<comment><USER7> They could, but in cases like this ease of access is everything.</comment></comment>


I was a multi-millionaire by 27–here's what I learned - <AUTHOR> http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/28/i-was-a-multi-millionaire-by-27-heres-what-i-learned.html <comment><USER3> You know how these articles never end? "So I've decided to give away all my riches to the less fortunate and go back to scraping by for a living like everyone else."

Give me a break.

Don't like managing your wealth? Just let it sit in your bank account (after all, it doesn't really matter that much if it grows or not right?).

Don't like mistrusting people? Live a humble lifestyle and there's no reason they'd ever suspect you're wealthy. I've met plenty flip-flop and $10 shirt millionaires.

Can't figure out your "purpose" in life? Sounds like you have too much time and too little imagination; join a charity they'd be glad to keep you busy.

<comment><USER4> > Can't figure out your "purpose" in life? Sounds like you have too much time > and too little imagination; join a charity they'd be glad to keep you busy.

I openly say that this would probably something that is to me very far away from giving a purpose - quite the opposite. Perhaps because I am a nerd and charities typically "do something social involving humans", while I think all the time when, say, teaching children from disadvantaged background (just an arbitrary example) of how one can scale the impact by a factor of 10 (or if this is too simple) by 100 - for example using modern technology.

So my hints for finding a purpose:

1\. Study mathematics: So many hard, important and unsolved problems to solve - many of them having a deep impact on humanity if someone would tackle and solve them.

2\. Learn programming and solve deep problems that you find. For those for which 1 is too hardcore. This is HN, so I hope I don't have to write anything further about this.

3\. If you still into charities, found one that has "how can we scale our impact by a factor of 10 as soon as possible" in mind all the time instead of "doing something social with humans" (no experience with this, though, but this is the only kind of charity that I can imagine having fun working at).

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> He mentions the "basic necessities being taken care of", but I just want to mention again that a certain amount of money can make a surprising amount of problems go away. I don't think that aspect should be underestimated. As I am scrambling by these days, I often run into these problems.

For example recently our dishwasher broke down. I spent a lot of time deciding whether to get it repaired or buy a new one, and then researching the latter. With money I would have saved lots of time by simply buying a medium priced new one off the internet.

Health issues, accommodation, travel plans, lots of worries can go away and they wear down people who don't have the cash. For example we often stress out about travel plans because we have to book far in advance or it gets too expensive. (I know these sound like luxury problems, but when it is a strain on the marriage it can escalate into real problems quickly).

On the other hand, it seems a lot of people feel rich when they aren't yet. For example, 5 Million $ doesn't seem that rich to me, more like a slightly higher pension prospect.

I have friends in the tech industry who have some money (not super rich) and take it slow, not taking into account that one day their needs might change and they might suddenly need a lot more money, and have less opportunities to earn it (for example because they get a family, or health issues).

<comment><USER6> A dishwasher and travel bookings are not basic necessities.

When I had no money I did not have a dishwasher at all, but washed by hand. My travels where in the woods nearby, very relaxing and enjoy full at no cost at all. No booking required.

Reading stoic philosophy help me a lot more than money.

<comment><USER7> Maybe not, but having, say, $100k in the bank does resolve a menial amount of issues that are not worth thinking about.

Do I want to think about buying a dishwasher? Not really. Do I want to do the dishes by hand? Not really either.

If you want to read stoic philosophy, having basic things like a dishwasher will save you hours. That's the only reason why I would get one: less time wasted on things I don't like.

<comment><USER8> This is not directed at you personally, an open question if you like, so, what is not to like about washing dishes? What is it that you do like doing? Would that still be enjoyable if you spent ALL your time doing that ? Perhaps happiness is as likely found in a stack of clean plates as a Pilates class...

<comment><USER7> Clean plates are awesome, but I just don't like it. I'd rather take a walk outside in nature / read a book / etc.

If I had more money, I imagine I would probably pick up a new hobby. When my cousin sold his company, he bought himself a helicopter because he has a love for flying (studied to be a pilot, etc). It's good fun, but obviously also not a basic necessity.

<comment><USER8> I agree, getting out into a forest is always more rewarding than I expect and something I aspire to do more of, as is reading books from fields I know nothing about (which gives me lots of options...). I have not seen creative output mentioned much either, I love to make music, write, those things take time, so it's a luxury for sure, a rewarding and low cost one too if it has to be.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This is so contrastingly similar (yup, that's a phrase) with an equally thought provoking set of tweets notch put up a couple of months after selling minecraft:

"The problem with getting everything is you run out of reasons to keep trying, and human interaction becomes impossible due to imbalance.

In sweden, I will sit around and wait for my friends with jobs and families to have time to do shit, watching my reflection in the monitor

When we sold the company, the biggest effort went into making sure the employees got taken care of, and they all hate me now.

Found a great girl, but she's afraid of me and my life style and went with a normal person instead.

I would Musk and try to save the world, but that just exposes me to the same type of assholes that made me sell minecraft again

People who made sudden success are telling me this is normal and will pass. That's good to know! I guess I'll take a shower then!"

Really puts a light on the whole, money will make you happy spin that so many technologists seem to have fallen into.

References:

[https://twitter.com/notch/status/637562496056995840](https://twitter.com/notch/status/637562496056995840)

[https://twitter.com/notch/status/637563038258868224](https://twitter.com/notch/status/637563038258868224)

[https://twitter.com/notch/status/637563226755067904](https://twitter.com/notch/status/637563226755067904)

[https://twitter.com/notch/status/637563481139638272](https://twitter.com/notch/status/637563481139638272)

[https://twitter.com/notch/status/637563733124980736](https://twitter.com/notch/status/637563733124980736)

[https://twitter.com/notch/status/637565210266570752](https://twitter.com/notch/status/637565210266570752)

[https://twitter.com/notch/status/637569407208849408](https://twitter.com/notch/status/637569407208849408)

<comment><USER10> This is totally not at the same scale, but still applicable. Coming from am immigrant family, jumping from 20k a year to 150k @ the age of 20 felt to me like i had made it. I traded in my civic for a sports car, bought a house, all the whisky a young man could want etc etc. Did i feel content? At first. Happier? At first. Then the realisation that there will always be someone wealthier dawned apon me. Those people work longer, harder, have more pressure, responsibility and usually dont even have the time to enjoy their wealth. Managing wealth? You do stupid shit like getting into more debt to try and "save money from the tax man".

The more money u earn, the more money u spend, the more stress u have.

I quite my job 8 years later, sold everything and travelled the world for 2 years, trying lifestyles i never imagined. In the far reaches of the amazonian rainforst where i vonunteered to help study the pink dolphins, I saw the poorest people were actually the happiest people. They had "nothing", but everything at the same time. Everywhere i went this was true. All my ailments that followed me while i was in civialisation suddenly dissapeared. Did they suffer from depression? nup. Poverty? from the outside we assume this was a bad word, but at the ground level, nup. If u live in a place that provides u with everything u need natually, u dont need money.

That was just 1 experience of many. Everyday was saturday and i had a purpose - looking for the meaning of life. I found it everywhere i looked, and money was never part of the equation.

So now im back; i love coding. Im already living the dream. I dont choose work based on pay, i choose it based on my moral compass. What did i discover? Well i think the meaning of life is a little different for everybody, but at our core, its love, connections, and experiences. No matter how much money you have, you cant buy the above.

[http://www.avvx62.dsl.pipex.com/boto/br_about.htm](http://www.avvx62.dsl.pipex.com/boto/br_about.htm)

<comment><USER11> Points of note from your comment:

>> stupid shit like getting into more debt

>> The more money u earn, the more money u spend, the more stress u have

The key to more happiness for anyone who is not dirt poor is to live with the means of someone 1-3 tax brackets below. If you make $100k/year, live as though you only make $60-70k. If you make $300k, live like you make $120k. It really is that simple. Stop trying to attain the "next lifestyle bracket", because it will NEVER "be enough". You will be miserable your entire life, trying to scrape your way to the "next level". "Unfulfilling" does not begin to describe that path.

I used to pay $1300/month rent, with a $700/month car financing, a $120 internet package, etc. I now live in a cheaper neighborhood with $640 rent, gave up the car (ie: $0/month financing), with $40 internet, etc. I went from $40k in debt and $0 savings account 3 years ago to $0 debt and 5-digit savings today. The difference in quality of life that makes on a day-to-day basis is enormous.

Forget the white picket fence and the $50k+ car. Nobody gives a crap where you live or what you drive - including yourself, whether you believe that or not. Live somewhere with great public transit or, if you really need - not want - <USER2> car, buy used for $500-$2,000 that gets you from point A to point B. Stop trying to impress people with your lifesteal. Live cheap, and use the incredible amount of disposable income to lead a happier life.

<comment><USER12> > Nobody gives a crap where you live or what you drive - including yourself.

Nope. Cars are one of my passions in life. I love driving my sports car. It's not about impressing people either. I don't understand why nerds _never_ understand this.

<comment><USER11> Of the four people I know who make < $120k/year who are paying $1,000+/month to finance a > $60k car, only one of them is a real "car enthusiast" who does it for _himself_. The other three are trying way too hard to prove that they are living the rich life. They don't give a single damn about the car; their only concern in the world is that other people notice they have an expensive car.

If owning an expensive car is what brings someone _personal_ joy, I'm all for that. When a friend tells me he can't come watch a movie with me or come on a cheap local road trip because he's behind on his car payments, and he says it with a depressed facial expression that clearly shows regret for the car... yeah. I don't know how else to take that other than "stupid life decisions". And no, I don't drop my jaw in awe over their car - I just see them as a moron who has misplaced priorities.

<comment><USER12> Ok. I will concede that the above two responses to my comment are fair.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Cicero - the famed roman author - explained very clearly the difference between being wealthy and not.

The wealthy are able to control how they spend their time. The not wealthy have somebody else control what they do with their time. The Romans had a word for the time period that you control - 'otium'. It was the ideal state for the Roman nobleman, as they were supposed to have enough income coming from their properties so that they don't have to work out for it.

The time that you didn't control was the opposite state of 'otium': 'negotium'.

It's more than just a matter of how much money you have and your believes. Having more money lends you a greater power to bargain on what you do with your time. Personally, I have enough of a rainy day fund so I am not compelled to stick around a job I don't like. But I still have to go to a job each day, and I feel really lucky that I can choose a job that I like. The vast majority of people are not as fortunate as myself.

</comment><comment><USER14> I was never into luxury cars, with the exception of a Tesla that I love I bought because I was interested in the technology more than in the car itself.

But I always dreamed about having a good yacht so after selling my first company I bought one. The person who sold it to me joked about two greatest days of owning a yacht: the day you buy it, the day you sell it.

I did not understand at the time the second part deeply. But it did not take too long. The thing was a pain in the ass. Turns out the more beautiful the yacht, the more maintenance it needs, the bigger problems it has, the weaker it is against the elements and the bigger the storage you need to use, the more people it needs.

After a while I realized instead of giving me happiness it was giving me frustration, anger and pain. Instead of me owning this thing it was the opposite, the thing owning lots of my time and money.

In the end I just sold the thing and I felt like 100 kgs(200pounds) were taken off my shoulders and it was an amazing moment.

In the future if I need sailing I will lend it instead.

Being wealthy could be a trap. It is a good thing to have some psychological training first and prepare. Also learn about investing your own money, never trust others with your money, specially if they are the experts.

<comment><USER7> Not sure where I read this, but you're better off chartering something if you are unsure whether you'd like it (e.g. to try it out).

I have a friend, and his family owns a pretty large yacht. Finding a suitable and capable skipper that will stick around (e.g. more than a year or two) has often been a major source of frustration for them.

<comment><USER15> >Finding a suitable and capable skipper that will stick around (e.g. more than a year or two) has often been a major source of frustration for them.

They must not be very good employers.

<comment><USER7> I think they're actually quite good employers (from what I've seen) and they pay well.

The issue is that the yacht is used by people all year around, and there isn't much opportunity to not work. You're away from your family and the people you love, and so, by default, it's a limited time gig for most people.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> It sounds like a fun challenge. Someone sign me up please. The average downsides of wealth are far better than the average downsides of being poor.

I understand where this article is coming from though and it does a good job of making the point it intends to.

<comment><USER17> I went from being in a 'poor' household to being above average, but not rich by any standards.

Luckily, poor in the Netherlands is not the same as poor in the US, also, my parents knew how to handle money quite well, so we managed. A lot of my neightbours, however did not. I've seen what being poor does to health. What it does to behavior towards others, who seem to 'have more', but just spend it differently. What it does to expectations and opportunities of their children.

I'm sure that money doesn't make you happy, it often does make you happier than being in the exact same situation without money.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> _I have become aware that I tend to worry about not having enough money in the future, and that this fear has been with me all of my life._

Less affluent people have that same fear, the difference being that "in the future" can mean next year, next month, or even tomorrow.

While wealthy people may worry that they won't be able to keep up their lifestyle forever, they know that they will still be able to buy food and shelter (and medical care) even if they lose nearly all of their wealth.

<comment><USER19> I think the point he's trying to make is that that emotion doesn't go away just because it should.

This isn't about what's actually going on, it's about what's being felt.

Comparative suffering is really only suitable for comedic flirting.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Was expecting a humblebrag puffpiece, but there is a lot of experience there worth sharing. Dealing with friends / family, self worth / image / confidence, investing, the luxury treadmill were all quite interesting and thought provoking.

<comment><USER21> yea i really liked the tone. its tough not to piss people off when you complain about being rich, but he does it in the right way, not too melodramatic, and very matter of fact.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> While i don't necessarily agree with the overall dystopian tone of this article (almost a version of - richest person in the room is also the saddest one), I have to agree on some of the points. Below is my take on this :

1\. Having more money does present you with complications. You can't just keep it in a Savings account and ignore it. You just can't , especially for long periods of time. This adds a significant amount of stress, much more than you would've imagined !

2\. You start making investments (good and bad). With bad, you learn a lesson and move on. With good, you again go back to the first point.

3\. Worst problem is when you invest in expensive/market-risk assets (Ex:a house). After your purchase, if the market goes bad/you don't want to maintain it etc., it becomes a burden like no other. There are many a sleepless nights to be had in anticipation of the outcome.

4\. I've a friend who goes to a 9-5 job, stays in a rented house, has a small piece of land he has bought as an investment for his old days, and spends most of his free time watching movies (basically doing what he likes). He doesn't have a fancy car (he actually doesn't have any car), or a fancy house, but he seems quite happy with what he has. That's the crux of the article I presume ?

<comment><USER23> 1\. You definitively can leave all your money on a saving account.

The worst that happens to it in the first world is inflation eating it away which really isn't going to make a practical difference on a few millions. That's like the cost of a cleaner to clean your house.

2-3. That's self-made problems. You don't need to make that kind of investment unless you want your job to become "investor". In any case a lot of the more traditional investment like real estate have countless middlemen to take the stress out of it.

4\. That is something you can definitively do with a lot of money too. I know people that retired just after Uni or later in life and did just that.

This is an attitude problem. It is very common here on HN or in the tech community in general, even the one with 9-5 jobs. The obsession to make every minute of your time productive, self-convincing yourself that's what you really want to do or that you must do it in order to stay relevant is destroying a lot of people.

Unlike the lawyer, doctor, ... the tech community is its own enemy. The other communities tries to get the member to cope with the pressure, the tech one openly encourage it: "So your brain surgeon is not volunteering as a knee surgeon nurse over the weekend to extend his skill and does not run mental health practice in the evening as a hobby business ? What a loser."

<comment><USER24> Fully agreed.

Also, 1-3 can easily be solved with a Vanguard/ETF/S&P500/etc. While technically not risk free, it practically is in the long run.

Having money doesn't inherently create any problems for you. Having no money however definitely limits your options of living.

Having these problems (mentioned in the article) is completely unrelated to money.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> So he learned literally all bottom lines from all holywood movies about wealth ever ?

Kudos man. I'm glad it took 5M$ to get you to that point. I paid a netflix fee for the same result but hey, tomato...

<comment><USER5> Hm, I don't trust those Hollywood movies. They are always about how money doesn't make you happy, but the producers are probably laughing about the poor people paying for the movie tickets all the way to the bank.

So essentially movies made by rich people to teach the poor masses not to be envious.

<comment><USER25> The point is not saying movies are a good source of information. Just that the guy is stating the obvious. We all know that money don't make you happy. We all know that not having enough money will make your life difficult. We all know having enough money will make your life simpler. We all know that human relations get twisted with money. No point in writing an article that is just the clone of most movies/songs/books about people getting rich.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> From the end of the article: "This article originally appeared on Medium."

[https://hackernoon.com/multi-millionaire-at-27-what-i- learne...](https://hackernoon.com/multi-millionaire-at-27-what-i- learned-7df8153f5425)

<comment><USER27> Second the suggestion to move original link, from CNBC, to Medium.

The former has added a number of CNBC content ad links which the author didn't seem to have in the Medium source.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> "In fact, wealth can actually make life worse. We can use wealth to distract us from our deeper issues by spending money on things we don't need, or worrying about losing our wealth."

You'll have those 'deeper issues' when you're poor as well. The difference will be you'll be anxious because you won't be sure if you'll have the money for all of your bills or you'll have enough to feed your family and not worrying if you can afford next luxury car.

I see blogs/articles like this pop from time to time. A rich guy (who probably didn't ever experience in his life how it's like to be poor) saying "being rich isn't a solution to all of your life problems". Well, I'm sure it isn't, being rich doesn't equal being content in life, but it sure as hell beats being poor.

</comment><comment><USER29> >I have a very strong impression that what defines how much money or income anyone has is almost completely defined by their limiting beliefs.

This one really struck me. Repeatedly this point comes up in all the new age money related philosophies, and I'm kind of starting to agree with it. Nice write up.

<comment><USER30> Try telling that to the homeless guys I pass on my way to work every morning. Especially the one guy who can barely talk; I don't think what he _believes_ matters at this point in his life. Maybe, if he believes in his ability to overcome being homeless and unable to speak, one day he'll find that his life is turning around. But to suggest that the amount of money he "has" is limited only by his belief is absurd.

<comment><USER19> Huh. Actually, I would bet money on that kinda working, if you could actually convince him?

Remember when that one guy in New York, I think it was, gave a homeless guy a deal: money now, or programming lessons - and they made an app, and the app made money... that the guy couldn't collect because he couldn't get a bank account because he couldn't Deal with going into the government offices to get an identity?

Or that thing that happens when you give someone who's been homeless for awhile an apartment and they camp out in the apartment like they were still on the street?

It's like... min(x, y, z). It makes sense that belief does not get you money, but it also makes sense the lack of belief leads to lack of money.

I'm not saying that everyone is in that boat. That is definitely not the case. But I would say that most people are in that boat.

There's also a big difference in if the boat has three off-board motors and a Jacuzzi, or paddle... But if you don't believe there's someplace worth going that you can get to...?

<comment><USER30> I would take your bet, and you would lose.

The things you aren't describing are "lack of belief." They're "serious emotional problems brought on by seriously hard life situations."

Do people still really believe in this pull-yourseful-up-by-the-bootstraps stuff?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> "Deeply enjoying whatever it is you're experiencing right now is the ultimate wealth."

This. Finances are currently a struggle for me, and work hasn't been all easy either, however I still have the ability to deeply enjoy whatever I'm doing - not all the time, but often enough that I feel happy in light of everything.

I feel a sense of gratitude* for that.

*) [http://freakonomics.com/podcast/why-is-my-life-so-hard/](http://freakonomics.com/podcast/why-is-my-life-so-hard/)

</comment><comment><USER32> The content ads in the article like "Rich people use these 6 mental tricks to make more money" or "How rich people save" are kind of funny - and sad at the same time.

</comment><comment><USER33> On one hand, I appreciate the insight and advice from people much wealthier than me on how being wealthy isn't as cracked up as it's made out to be.

On the other hand, they are wealthier than me and _can_ say that. I can't. It is difficult to take their advice at face value because of it.

I think that the only two solutions to this problem are (1) Fore-go wanting to become wealthy and being content with what you have, or (2) Try to attain enough wealth to see for yourself whether the sacrifices made were worth it.

If staying where you're at doesn't seem right to you, then you're only option is door (2).

To be clear, I don't think that doing everything you can to make more cash is the right way to go. From what I've seen, it is very difficult to attain massive amounts of wealth without getting in really early on a business opportunity that rocket ships. I think having core values (i.e things you cannot give up) helps. But if the expected reaction from reading this piece is "Well, being rich doesn't sound much better than having to worry about money all of the time, so I guess I'll just keep working at okay salary levels until I retire 60 years from now," then I can't feel ok with that.

That's where my head's at right now.

</comment><comment><USER34> I love how the author bears resemblance to Russ Hanneman from _Silicon Valley_ —even warning the reader of the perils involved in buying exotic sports cars.

</comment><comment><USER35> I've noticed something which I refuse to believe might be the case. I rather deny the fact then accept it around the people I am with because if I accept it, I feel I don't know what I'm doing in my life and all might have been a lie.

I've been living in a developing country [my home country] after moving away from a the first world country for family reason. As a 25 year old, introvert and someone who has social anxiety without ever knowing it, I just can't understand what is happiness.

I have observed people out in the street, at stores, at restaurants just doing their jobs and happy. They laugh and go to small parties and look as if content. This observation was made even by a working at a small local company which wasn't much that people just worked. They did not have any desire to make more money as to gain skills. It boggles my mind they just 'keep churning'. They go back to their home living with family and come back, rinse on repeat. Even small shops, really small shops/restaurants who might think they need money to survive, they don't have any real check and balance. It's literally "I want this". You go off someone else where the cook might be, you pick up it up after it's done and you head back to the cashier. The cashier doesn't have any idea what I ordered, the quantity or anything. There is possibility just walk away without paying.

Whereas what I believe at the moment, I need skills and wealth to achieve happiness. I sometimes question, am I even unhappy? Yes I'm unhappy because I don't have a career, I don't have a home, I don't wealth etc. But in reality, the way families work here, they want everyone to live under the same roof, making small amount of money to 'run the kitchen', share family car. Why seek an independent life when all the needs can be provided by entire families working together.

I fear the life I'm striving for might lead to loneliness. I.e moving away from my home, starting a career, moving to a different country from developing to develop, getting into corporate life and eventually becoming wealthy. In my eyes, I would feel I'm the most successful with most money in the bank, but what would other think?

</comment><comment><USER36> > _It 's really challenging being wealthy. Approach with caution._

</comment><comment> d--b Well, this is more about what the OP unlearned. He has yet to learn how to live with moeny, now that he's kind of stuck with it.

I have some very wealthy friends who do not fit that pattern at all. They know what to do with their money (and no it's not about buying luxury cars). They know how to keep a sense of purpose in their lives. They know how to keep healthy relationships despite the money imbalance.

What's interesting is what comes AFTER the realization that money doesn't buy everything. It still buys you a lot of freedom, the question is what you do with that!

</comment><comment><USER37> The section "Most financial advisors know nothing" made me laugh

</comment><comment><USER8> Not much patronage mentioned, if you have the cash and are lacking inner beauty, why not find an auteur, artist, student, anyone who will create beauty and bring joy, throw money at it joyfully and if you are lucky you are creating cultural wealth and financial opportunity for others. Commission some art, buy your own orchestra! (Email address in profile... ;)

</comment><comment><USER38> TLDR

The best things in life are free.

</comment><comment><USER39> Boohoo... poor you.

Sorry no sympathy.

</comment><comment><USER40> >Most financial advisors know nothing

I worked at a bank and can confirm. Most financial advisors even lack the basic math skills, they can do linear functions if they are above average. Needless to say, I'm outta there and in tech now. Just do your homework and decide what to do with your money yourself. You'll save time and lots of money.

</comment><comment><USER41> "Limiting beliefs" eh? God damn, I hate how wealthy people love their therapists so much and all need some simple dogma or narrative to explain their success. Though I guess I see poor people doing the same with finding externalized reasons for their lack of success.

</comment><comment><USER42> This coming from the guy who's already _rich_.

I doubt he had the same opinions before he got rich.

<comment><USER43> Yeah, that's the point of the whole post, you know. It tells you what is it like to be rich, which most people won't be, ever.</comment></comment>


What is the best way to share blog posts? - web-guy What is the best way to share blog posts? <comment><AUTHOR> Twitter/Facebook/Reddit/HN.</comment>


[HN] Has the flag posts feature been removed? - <AUTHOR>

I've noticed that I can no longer flag posts. Is everyone else encountering this too? <comment><USER2> Nothing has changed. What happens, exactly?

<comment><AUTHOR> I see no flag link underneath stories, but I do see them on comments.

<comment><USER2> You see no flag link on _any_ story? None of the top 10 on the new page?

<comment><AUTHOR> After preparing screenshots to post here they've re-appeared on stories now, strange. Think I must have been looking for them in the wrong place or something.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Moleskine Tips, Tricks and Hacks - <AUTHOR> http://freelanceswitch.com/productivity/the-monster-collection-of-moleskine-tips-tricks-and-hacks/ <comment><USER2> [http://www.amazon.com/Roaring-Spring-Products-Notebook- Wireb...](http://www.amazon.com/Roaring-Spring-Products-Notebook- Wirebound/dp/B000GAZ8LK/)

I am a happier person after I got off Moleskine. Ideas flow better when you can rip out pages without guilt.

(kinda like the 'cheap branch' advantage of git)

<comment><USER3> Really? I've carried a Moleskine notebook with me every day for the past 9 years (I go through 3 or 4 a year). I've found that it's advantageous to see any mistakes I've made when reviewing my notebooks. Sometimes it's good to know I've gone down 3 other paths before I found the one that worked.

Tangent: If you're going to get into the habit of keeping handwritten notes, start devising a shorthand scheme or a set of symbols that you can use to let yourself know if something is important, or needs to be followed up, or needs review. I have a set of about 25 different sigils I use regularly in my notebooks that not only cuts down the amount of writing I do by quite a bit, it also makes it easy for me to scan a page quickly and get the important facts out fast.

<comment><USER4> Care to write up said sigils, scan them, and post them somewhere? I'd love to see your system.

<comment><USER5> I took some notes for a hypothetical personal system, although it isn't great:

* Learn what common and abbreviable (I'm not sure that this is a real word) words are, and abbreviate them.

* Create a system of declensions similar to German or Latin -- you could probably drop a lot of prepositions this way.

* Use symbols if they're easier/faster to write.

* Leave space to create a legend, explaining abbreviations or symbols made up or allocated on the spot.

* Leave lots of margin and whitespace.

Nothing very comprehensive, I'm afraid. I'd be interested in seeing a more- developed system too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Here's the problem with Moleskines: if you s/moleskine/notebook/g on almost any article written about them online you get exactly the same effect.

</comment><comment><USER7> I am posting this comment 69 days after the thread started. It was with this thread that I first heard of Moleskine notebooks.

"Absurd," I thought. "Just get a cheap regular notebook."

But something kept pining away at me. So I finally spent $15 to get a mid- sized Moleskine notebook and give it a try. If it was a waste, well, I've wasted way more than $15 before.

I must say I have been pleasantly surprised, and I'm not entirely sure why. The size, the durability, the rubber band around the outside all add up for nice features in a notebook, but something about it -- and it may well be the fact that it cost $15 -- makes me take journaling my thoughts more seriously.

I may will ditch it sometime, if it doesn't prove beneficial in the long-term, but at minimum, I can understand why for some people these seemingly overpriced notebooks may actually be a good thing.

</comment><comment><USER8> Wow. I am blown away at the formalness of this habit!

I thought my girlfriend was the only person that took this process to such an extreme.

I was also just thinking today my spiral notebooks are horribly difficult to navigate, maybe I might start a system.

</comment><comment><USER9> My favorite stationery is from Muji, <http://www.muji.net/eng/>

What pisses me off about Moleskine is that they lied about the "used by famous writers like Hemingway" thing. It worked as a marketing ploy, but it is just not very endearing to lie to one's customers.

Edit: found better Muji link, uk shop has web catalogue. Notebooks: [http://www.muji.eu/pages/online.asp?V=1&Sec=1&Sub=4&...](http://www.muji.eu/pages/online.asp?V=1&Sec=1&Sub=4&CHK=Y)

</comment><comment><USER10> Don't forget the moleskine ipod hack:

<http://www.moleskinerie.com/2007/10/moleskine-ipod-.html>

</comment><comment><USER11> What the hell is wrong with a legal pad or a $1.50 mead notebook? Moleskine is a silly fashion accessory. I was ready for him to recommend never writing in your moleskine with anything but a montblanc.

<comment><USER12> Some people don't care in where they write; $1 notepad is just fine for them. But sometimes, this same person is very particular in what they wear; hence, for example, they buy a very expensive jeans at $100. So let's ask them, "What the hell is wrong with a $30 jeans?"

In a nutshell, different people have different ways in manifesting their sense of egoism.

P.S. I am not a moleskine user.

<comment><USER11> There is proven benefit to dressing reasonably well. You look better and people treat you better. Cheap clothing is also generally a false economy: the more expensive stuff lasts longer, at least for men's clothing.

None of these clear-cut advantages apply to silly fashion accessories like pens or notepads.

<comment><USER13> Read: "My fashion accessories help me fit in with my guild, so it's OK. Your fashion accessories are just silly, don't waste the money!"

Hoist by your own petard.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Drought of Real Peer2Peer Apps in Montreal (Canada) - <AUTHOR> I noticed something while leaving in Canada. The absence of a real P2P platform allowing people mostly millennial to transfer each other funds. Don't come at me with intérac or Paypal :). With Intérac you have to create a question, an answer and send that to the recipient etc. A whole lot of work for only 5 bucks. With PayPal, there is not that social aspect to it that I which it had.
So I asked a close friend to help me build something. We came up with the idea to gather in one place all financial activities people are involved in (P2P, Pay bills etc).
I'm really interested in you guys takes on this issue, especially if you live in Montreal. And what will you do to solve it? <comment><AUTHOR> Contact me at firstname.lastname@example.com if you leave in Montreal and wants to take on this project. My co-founder Christian is focusing on the back end. I made the design and elaborated the UX. So we need a good front-end iOS dev to help us.

</comment><comment><USER2> I noticed that too. Few products really match Venmo, Square and others. It seems that the majority of Fintech startup here are focused more on complementing the banks rather than creating real disruption.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, the few solution that exists provide complicated experiences. Like I explained with Interac for example. I really think there is something to be done here

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I don't leave in Montreal but I am really interested in what you guys are building exactly.

<comment><AUTHOR> We are allowing users to use their money in one and only places. I told one thing to my co-founder which was: « People want to put their money in a strainer». What I mean by that is, for me, people want to put their money where they can easily and quickly withdraw it to exchange for some goods. My conclusion was then, why not allow people to send money, buy goods directly where they store their cash?. I cannot speak too much about the features etc but this is what we believe in.</comment></comment>


Typekit and Google Announce Open Source Collaboration - <AUTHOR> http://blog.typekit.com/2010/05/19/typekit-and-google/ <comment><USER2> Glad to see that Google isn't going to push Typekit out of the way with their new project.</comment>