As an entrepreneur in India - <AUTHOR> http://www.nithyadayal.com/blog/2011/06/03/as-an-entrepreneur-in-india/

<comment><USER3> This is a great post - "moral suffering" exactly captures the feeling I have as an educated and affluent Indian. Yet, I keep going back, keep doing more in India.

I have thought about this quite a bit, and here is an interlocking set of problems that cause this "moral suffering". The phrase "private wealth and public squalor" captures the present situation in urban India very well. A city like Chennai or Bangalore is not that poor anymore on a per-capita basis, but they looks much poorer. The contrasts are just shocking. You can find apartment complexes where flats cost $150-200K and up (yes that is in USD) , sitting on potholed roads, surrounded by trash. Here is an explanation of how the system doesn't work in India:

* Taxation system is irrational - the $200K apartment would pay next to nothing in property taxes, probably as little as $100 a year (legally). Local governments require state or central assistance to run themselves. Consequence: there is no way for a local government to plan ahead, it has to rely on entities at a much higher level. Even the state government doesn't have much of a tax base, so it relies on grants from the center. This is a completely broken over-centralized public finance system, but there is absolutely no political will to tackle it.

* Relentless concentration of economic activity in major cities, because smaller cities and towns are even more starved of resources (on a per capita basis) and lack any local tax base at all, so both investment and people migrate to large cities like Chennai or Bangalore. This self-reinforcing dynamic has resulted in ridiculously overpopulated big cities. At Zoho, 70-80% of our employees come from smaller towns who have migrated to Chennai, so we are part of the problem of this over-concentration of economic activity.

* Increasing private wealth and non-existent urban infrastructure combine to produce some of the most extreme valuations in real estate in the world. Right next to Zoho office in formerly suburban Chennai, land goes for $10 million an acre (there are no acre-sized parcels, of course) simply because as a close-in suburb, this has a nominally functioning infrastructure, which far out places would lack.

Note that I don't mention a world about corruption because that exists in so many other countries without producing the same urban squalor and "moral suffering" that India produces.

The solution I have come up with, something we intend to adopt in Zoho, is to abandon major cities, and move to much, much smaller towns. At the level of about 50-100K population, there are many towns that offer a decent quality of life, particularly when you bring in the kind of jobs and economic activity a company like Zoho can bring. This is the plan we are working on.

Now I will mention some good news, because some posters here are so pessimistic. In my life time, I have seen massive improvements, massive reduction in human suffering in South India. I routinely saw sights as a kid that I don't see anymore: train stations full of emaciated, sick people begging, severe malnourishment everywhere, higher education serving 1-2% of the population (now in the Southern states, it is closer to 20-30%), and a general mood that life would never get better. Today a lot of smart young talent coming on stream that is a capitalist's dream in India. Yes, you have to invest in training and skill building, but if you do, the rewards are immense. The monetary rewards are very good, but the psychic rewards are immeasurable.

<comment><USER4> I think bringing in your nationality into the debate makes it somewhat irrational.

You've said you are "an educated and affluent Indian". In reality, you are "an educated and affluent person". Whether you choose to live in India or choose to pursue a greencard in the US as a Princeton PhD in academia or industry, or maybe go to UK/Canada/Europe, or maybe even South America - Brazil, Costa Rica, all of these are/were valid choices. You've simply chosen to return to India, perhaps as some sort of default choice. But all those other choices still exist. Each of them will have some component of moral suffering and some component of psychic reward.

I think many of the "system does not work" points you've made are simply examples of a different system. When I'm back home in India and I see people pissing on the street corner, I don't think "Hey, system does not work. They should be pissing in restrooms". I think "This is a different system with some pluses & some minuses. Pluses : no infrastructure needed, organic waste in a tropic country decays rapidly, freedom to piss wherever since its accepted culturally. Minuses : the pervasive smell of ammonia."

I think that attitude makes it much easier to adapt to the different system than to try and westernize everything by saying "system doesn't work in India".

<comment><USER5> Interesting way of thinking. So, what is your thought process on each of these:

\- Garbage everywhere, especially next to your local restaurants.

\- Feces in the streets

\- Slum across from your house

\- Beggars attacking your neighbor

\- Frequent blackouts for a whole day

<comment><USER6> Where do you live dude?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The author in the rush of justifying her feelings of _moral suffering_ has put some factual lies and false notions.

First, she claims that the standard of living in India is _plummeting_ and goes on mentioning slums, filth, corruption, bureaucracy etc. If one checks the recent national census and other survey results, the poverty has been steadily declining [1], the illiteracy has sharply declined [2], Indian consumers are the most optimistic in the world! [3], and ironically - <USER2> entrepreneurs are the most optimistic in the world! [4]. The rest of her complaints are just nitpicks.

Second, the notion that _happy existence_ or _perfect system_ is the prerequisite to creativity and success. This is false. If one studies Anthropology, creativity/art/culture/economic-activity/entrepreneurship exist everywhere, even in the most failed country. It is the nature of man to grab every little opportunity. The fact that Mercedes has opened R&D centre in India only shows their creativity, their ability to grab the opportunity and their entrepreneual spirit. More power to the potholed roads! There's nothing called perfection in this universe.

Third, not a criticism but, one doesn't need to be overly pessimistic. India and other emerging economies are yet to see several decades of growth. Especially India and China, because of their huge population, will continue to see high economic growth for very long (ask any economists) [5][6]. And no, the _moral suffering_ due to inequality will not disappear anytime soon. China even after growing at a breakneck speed of 10% a year for last three decades and pulling millions of people out of poverty has more inequality than India (Gini coefficient) [7]. I think we'll just gradually _evolve_ to live with it.

[1] - [http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/current-affairs/indias- pove...](http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/current-affairs/indias-poverty- declined-to-322009-10-plan-panel-est_537354.html)

[2] - [http://www.deccanherald.com/content/150267/indias- literacy-l...](http://www.deccanherald.com/content/150267/indias-literacy- level-74-per.html)

[3] - [http://www.afaqs.com/news/story.html?sid=30621_Indian+consum...](http://www.afaqs.com/news/story.html?sid=30621_Indian+consumers+continue+to+remain+the+most+optimistic+globally:+Nielsen+Survey)

[4] - [http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:5wJKiOx4osAJ:w...](http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:5wJKiOx4osAJ:www.li.com/attachments/Legatum%2520Institute%2520Survey%2520of%2520Entrepreneurs%2520-%2520China%2520%26%2520India.pdf+indian+entrepreneurs+optimism+legatum&hl=en&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShjlYdq8b2VaWCleGadm9BSKIrYo30wHqMYVLhRZ5z_Hdc4m4A-JLsvqZhJpqh94PQRAq3S5HA9yfJNUGyJPL8VUVypBLuJH7RXspWKZh6m0VzoWGgjyHny8H3-hNRuS4qiFib6&sig=AHIEtbROuyp3RIPfmt3kaLIoZGk0tBkB5Q)

[5] - [http://www.livemint.com/2011/05/25191535/India-could-be- worl...](http://www.livemint.com/2011/05/25191535/India-could-be- world8217s-3.html)

[6] - [http://www.deccanherald.com/content/140463/india-likely- worl...](http://www.deccanherald.com/content/140463/india-likely-worlds- largest-economy.html)

[7] - [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gini_Coefficient_World_CIA...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gini_Coefficient_World_CIA_Report_2009-1.png)

<comment><USER3> Standard of living is going up, but quality of life is definitely declining in major cities. There is a lot more money (even after adjusting for inflation) so the purchasing power has increased tremendously. There is a much richer variety of goods and services people have access to, housing is a lot nicer, people can afford vacations and so on. All that is on the positive side. On the negative side, people spend longer and longer time commuting in worse and worse traffic, suffer more water & electricity shortages. The general stress level of urban life has gone way up. Overcrowding would explain all of the negatives, and I have outlined why the overcrowding occurs. It is not just "too many people", because even the most densely populated regions of India have plenty of space when you leave major cities and India's population density is at the same general level as Western Europe. It is the inadequate infrastructure that causes massive overcrowding.

I agree with your overall point though - I am an optimist.

<comment><USER8> As an entrepreneur who moved to Bangalore recently, I completely agree to Sridhar's post here.

My 2 paise - do a India based / focused startup, just live outside India's cities (if you can't live outside India, that is).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Here is the counterpoint: India is awesome if you're not struggling.

A lot of people complain about traffic. You know the salary of a driver on a monthly basis? About $100-250 (depending on the car you drive).

Bureaucracy is killing. Takes 3 months to incorporate. But do you know how much accountants charge in India to take care of all your business details? A startup probably won't have to pay more than $150 a month on an accountants fees.

Things are so cheap in India that you can live an extremely shiny life on the same budget at which an entrepreneur struggles to feed his family in USA.

But yes - a lot of the things are broken in India if you don't have the little bit of money required to throw at it to fix it. On the bright side: the pace of improvement is staggering (I mean - Indian literacy rate went from 65% to 75% in 10 years. Thats 650 million literates in 2001 to 900 literates in 2011! Still not awesome. And college education is still lacking in many places. But the speed of improvement is staggering.)

Disclosure: I'm a glass-half-full kind of an Indian who studied in USA but is now living in Bombay working on a startup.

<comment><USER10> Isn't this the exact moral qunadry that the author faces right now? India (and China) benefits from what I call as human subsidy. The living standard on average for general population are low which lead to reduction in cost for manpower, which makes stuff cheap. Sure if you are in top 10-20% of the earners, your life is amazing, you can have all the benefits of developed world at the price of developing world. I am not saying that people who live in other place are free of such guilt, consider Americans buying Apple products, made by Chinese workers who live in poverty. However for Indians the guilt is significantly higher. At least Americans can invoke Us vs Them argument, or point out the fact that actually buying the products might be the best thing that they can currently do considering their government.

Regarding India,there would be significant inflation in next decade, the main problem will start when our generation enters later thirties. There would be significant stress on India's healthcare system. (Indians might make fun of US healthcare, but Medicare/Medicaid is amazing and there is no equivalent in developing world). Worse India does not even has large army or pressure to grantee energy security. Unless there are groundbreaking inventions in energy/healthcare (which are quite possible) the next two decades are going to be challenging. India's best bet is that its demographic dividend and ageing population in US/Europe, pays out.

<comment><USER5> We're already in an necessity inflation period. Check how fast food prices went up in India.

As for the demographic dividends, I doubt it will last long. When a large, unemployed segment takes control over at US/Europe, the first thing they'll do? Make sure they have jobs. How do they compete against cheap labors in Asia? Simple. Tariffs.

Look at Greece, Ireland, Spain protesting...we're almost there.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> In India to succeed as an entrepreneur you need either Caste or Cash.

Caste since banks give 84% of the loans to <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_caste>

Cash since you've to bribe govt officials and business executives [http://business.rediff.com/report/2009/sep/24/indians- among-...](http://business.rediff.com/report/2009/sep/24/indians-among-most- corrupt-while-doing-business-abroad.htm)

</comment><comment><USER12> What the article says is very true.. Sometimes I feel like a time traveler trapped in dark ages, waiting for the things around me to catch up to what I know is already a reality else where.. like last weekend when there was a 9am-5pm power-cut in bangalore, wondering how life without such basic problems can be.. :(

</comment><comment><USER13> Another link-bait. What's a diatribe about conditions of infrastructure, pollution, corruption et al, got to do anything with the title of the blog.

Yes. things suck in developing countries, either move to the US, its easy enough if you are good or stop complaining and deal with it.

</comment><comment><USER14> I need a plan to get out of India.

</comment><comment><USER5> Exactly. All the media hogwash about 'brain drain' flowing back to India....nobody smart enough is going to go live India to start a startup. It's like trying to fight your schizophrenia while living in a bomb shelter in a war zone. At best these entrepreneurs are going back briefly to setup offshore office in India before hightailing out of there. And from personal experience, offshore teams aren't that great...the smart ones left India already.

<comment><USER15> I returned to India 3 years ago. I have other friends and people I know who have come back since. Many of them are doing startups. Others are working in academia. Not a single one is setting up offshore offices or looking to fly back (AFAIK). These are mostly young guys returning soon after their studies.

But media hype is perhaps not about these people. It is about people who are coming back after 10-15 years of career in US, have families and a reputation to carry. In this segment, I know many who have come and gone back, after establishing the Indian centers of their employers. :)

So depends on who and what you want to see.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> 800 million people are starving in India.

And the Govt/Politicians doesn't want people to prosper. They fear people might vote as per their conscience in elections.

[http://www.deeshaa.org/2011/06/02/the- starving-800-million-i...](http://www.deeshaa.org/2011/06/02/the- starving-800-million-in-india/)</comment>


Google's Book Search: A Disaster for Scholars - <AUTHOR> http://chronicle.com/article/Googles-Book-Search-A/48245/ <comment><USER2> All this is not an argument against Google Book Search, but an argument for improving the metadata of said system. If the scholars are so distraught by this, they should offer to help review and correct Google's digital library. I'm sure they can come to some kind of arrangement.

<comment><USER3> They did not agree to this in the first place. Most of them were not happy about the deal google was given. I strongly believe it is google's job to ensure that their work is of good quality. This is similar to Wikipedia errors that find their way into newspapers and even research. The difference is that wikipedia isn't claiming to be a reliable source. Google is trying to build an exhaustive catalogue and they are the only one allowed to distribute a large amount of text due to a court settlement. Good metadata should be part of that deal.

And like the article mentioned, there already exist much better catalogues (or whatever they are called) such as the library of congress one. They might not be perfect but they sure beat scanning a book cover and picking the first date found. Why not just license it?

<comment><USER4> That's what I've often wondered. Why isn't this a government initiative to take the Library of Congress and provide a digital layer on top of it for public access. Then just turn the regular libraries into community centers without the overhead cost of book storage, purchasing, & cataloging. I don't know about anyone else, but the idea of this being in the hands of a single corporation is unnerving.

<comment><USER5> _Why isn't this a government initiative to take the Library of Congress and provide a digital layer..._

There's nothing in the Constitution that gives the Federal government the authority (let alone the _responsibility_ to do this).

 _the idea of this being in the hands of a single corporation is unnerving._

And having it controlled by the government would make you breathe a sigh of relief? The opportunities for curating the collection as in _1984_ are scary enough, but consider the accuracy of government data in other areas.

<comment><USER6> There's nothing which makes it off-limits either. In fact, Article 1 s.8 specifically grants the power to Congress '[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries,' which is why the Library of congress exists to begin with, and if you want to sue someone for infringing your copyright it helps considerably to have your work already registered in said Library of Congress.

Making that information digitally accessible would seem to be a natural extension of that, in much the same way that being able to look up regulations, legislation, court decisions etc. online has vastly simplified and lowered the cost of research. True, there's nothing explicit about the internet in the Constitution. I sometimes wonder how you can bring yourself to use the internet, considering how it's an out-of-control government boondoggle and all.

<comment><USER5> _which is why the Library of congress exists to begin with_

Interesting, I was not aware of this. Can you cite evidence?

 _I sometimes wonder how you can bring yourself to use the internet_

Exaggerate much?

In any case, the Internet's underlying technology was developed by the DoD. Today, the infrastructure is private. To be honest, I'm not clear on where bodies like ICANN fall, in the public/private space. Can someone enlighten me?

<comment><USER6> _which is why the Library of congress exists to begin with// Interesting, I was not aware of this. Can you cite evidence?_

Surely. I'll put Google books links in the same order as the legal citations.

Beginning with the copyright act of 1790, 1 Stat 124, those seeking copyright protection were required to deposit a copy of the work in question with the office of the secretary of State. [http://books.google.com/books?id=u90WAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22unit...](http://books.google.com/books?id=u90WAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22united%20states%22%20%22statutes%20at%20large%22%20%22library%20of%20congress%22%20copyright&pg=PA30#v=onepage&q&f=false)

At this time, the Library of congress didn't even exist; it was established in 1800 when the US moved the government to it's current location in DC. The post of Librarian was made a paid position in 1802, and in 1815 the purchase of Thomas Jefferson's (much larger) personal library for ~$25,000 was authorized following a fire which destroyed the most of the books in the Congressional library. At this time it was not a public library, but only for use of members of the government - first Congress, then the executive, and later members of the judiciary. Although it kept expanding, it was basically a private reference library.

By 1844 many thought the US should have a national library of some sort - something Jefferson himself had urged, arguing that there was no subject on which congress might not at some point wish to research as part of its lawmaking activity. The generous bequest of James Smithson led congress to pass on 8/10/1846 an act to establish the "Smithsonian Institution, for the Increase and Diffusion of Knowledge among Men." Article 10 of this amended the Copyright act of 1831, directing that copies of all copyrighted works should henceforth be deposited with both the Smithsonian and the LoC, 9 Stat 106. [http://books.google.com/books?id=TGcZAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22unit...](http://books.google.com/books?id=TGcZAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22united%20states%22%20%22statutes%20at%20large%22%20%22library%20of%20congress%22%20copyright&pg=PA44#v=onepage&q&f=false)

By 1859 neither the Smithsonian nor the LoC had established themselves as clear 'national' libraries, with varying complaints about the completeness of their collections, accuracy of the catalogs and so on. Development of LoC had been set back several years by another fire in 1852, as well as the need to service new, smaller, libraries for the sole use of the House and Senate. The situation had become confusing, so in the meantime Congress passed "An act for keeping and distributing all public documents," 11 Stat 138, which directed that copyright and patent materials still held by the Secretary of State be transferred to the Department of the Interior, apparently on the theory that the DoI was best placed to service requests for copies and catalogs from libraries in the individual states. [http://books.google.com/books?id=vio3AAAAIAAJ&dq=1859%20...](http://books.google.com/books?id=vio3AAAAIAAJ&dq=1859%20act%20congress%20public%20documents&pg=PA379#v=onepage&q&f=false)

The Civil war interrupted matters, and Lincoln's first appointee as Librarian spent most of the war out in the field After it had ended, a new librarian took over named Ainsworth Spofford, who was dedicated to the original idea of a national library. His efforts led to the passage of legislation bringing copyright deposits back to the LoC (13 Stat 540 (1865)); the Smithsonian deposit, which moved the whole Smithsonian collection into the LoC and for the first time provided in law that it should be fully accessible to the public except for one month a year during recess, to make repairs (14 Stat 13 (1867)), and amendment to the Copyright making registration with the LoC mandatory on pain of a fine (14 Stat 395 (1867)); and the Copyright Act of 1870, which left the Department of the Interior in sole charge of patents and trademarks, and made the LoC the sole organ for registration and (mandatory) deposit of copyrighted works (16 Stat 198, pp212-216). [http://books.google.com/books?id=u90WAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22unit...](http://books.google.com/books?id=u90WAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22united%20states%22%20%22statutes%20at%20large%22%20%22library%20of%20congress%22%20copyright&pg=PA42#v=onepage&q&f=false)

The International Copyright Law of 1891 set up reciprocal recognition of other countries' copyrights, conditional upon deposit of those works in the LoC. All this collecting swelled the volume of works in the library to something approaching half a million, which eventually provided the justification for the purchase of land for and construction of the building which houses the LoC today (after a couple of expensive false starts) in 1896, and in 1897 Congress decided to grant authority to make "rules and regulations for the government of the Library", including administration of copyrights, to the Librarian. [http://books.google.com/books?id=uwguAAAAIAAJ&dq=act%20o...](http://books.google.com/books?id=uwguAAAAIAAJ&dq=act%20of%20congress%20%22rules%20and%20regulations%20for%20the%20government%22%201897%20library&pg=PA544#v=onepage&q&f=false)

there's general information (beyond the scope of your question) about the development of the library at <http://www.loc.gov/loc/legacy/loc.html>. You might be surprised to know that the LoC also has (IMHO) the most comprehensive collection of media filespecs, at <http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/formats/> which is very useful if you're asked to provide a codec for some obscure file format.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> > In any case, none of that should relieve Google of the responsibility of > making its collections an adequate resource for scholarly research.

I wasn't aware Google was under any such obligation. If it is, from where did the obligation come, when, and by whose authority?

<comment><USER8> I'd imagine in being allowed to scan a large amount of the works they are storing they presented the system in a way that would improve the way scholars did things. It's possible they gave no guarantees but if they did they have the responsibility to live up to them.

As mentioned they may have a monopoly on scanning the vast majority of older texts online due to the court settlement and deals with processors. If they are to be the gatekeeper and don't act responsibly then it is really a loss for everyone, regardless if they are bound to or not.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> This article argues seems to be suggesting that Google have a unique responsibility - almost as if they have somehow removed something that already existed.

I disagree with their fundamental premise that Google is "the world's last digital library". Google's demonstration that such a thing is actually possible removes one barrier to entry. They have also set a precedent which reduces the negotiation required for future projects.

The fact that Google has done a poor job (so far) on the metadata is something that's worth highlighting - but it's not a reason to curse the whole project. This is fixable, possibly even a transient issue. GBS is an entirely new resource, which scholars have not had before; if they find it unsuitable for scholarly research, perhaps they could continue to use their existing tools or work to improve it, rather than slam the effort as "A Disaster For Scholars". "A Useful Tool Which Still Needs Improvement" might not be as snappy but the The Chronicle Of Higher Education doesn't look like the Daily Mail either.

<comment><USER10> > _"I disagree with their fundamental premise that Google is "the world's last > digital library". Google's demonstration that such a thing is actually > possible removes one barrier to entry."_

That was my first reaction too, but then I realized the article was implying that the real barrier to entry is the work of scanning billions of books into digital form.

After Google has done that, there will be little incentive for anyone else to incur that same expense to create a service that Google already has a 5 year head start on.

Alot of startups these days are about finding better ways of doing things in already-crowded domains. Google itself showed the way there. But I'm not sure I disagree with article in its assertion that doing this will be much more difficult, if not virtually impossible, in this domain of creating a digital library from scanned books. There really is a significant moat here.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I often need the very specific tiny bits of information that is trapped between pages of paper stored in some library somewhere. Today I need to fill out forms and afterwards wait days/weeks to get that information delivered to me.

The thought about all of the necessary resources for this (paper, transportation, storage, etc) makes you almost feel ashamed, because most of the time the amount of desired information is very small.

I would love to abolish this waste and have a service payed for by a flat rate that gives you access to all books, papers, phd-thesises, etc by keystroke. The service should not be completely free in order to maintain the incentive of writing well structured books as way of personal income.

Whether it is Google Book Search or something else, I think humanity definitely needs something like a global digital library.

</comment><comment><USER12> I devote a fair amount of time to indulging my idle curiosities in gbooks, and it takes a lot of work and more than a little luck to find anything useful. It's a total mess. Great resource, but nowhere near what it should be.

I'm glad someone is drawing attention to the irresponsible sloppiness.

<comment><USER13> I'm pretty sure Google Book Search was never intended for puny humans to read. It's for the future Google AI to learn from.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I think what Google is doing is fantastic, despite these problems. Some of the sloppiness is a byproduct of the attempts to automate the book scanning and metadata gathering. This has got to be a hugely expensive undertaking, so I can understand the shortcuts to reduce cost.

Until this gets cleaned up, what then, is the fallout from the metadata errors? Researchers will have to verify publishing dates and use other means of search for period pieces, but they will have access to historical texts over the internet. That's still pretty awesome.

<comment><USER15> But without good metadata, accessing and searching those texts will be an exercise in frustration and missed results.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> The Internet Archive's 'Open Library' is a project to create one reference page per book, created and corrected via the wiki model:

<http://openlibrary.org/>

[I work for the Internet Archive, but on our web archiving rather than our book projects.]

<comment><USER17> Is there a way to link each of your references to each of Google's Book references? A one-to-one mapping could solve almost all the issues the blog author raised.

<comment><USER16> Looks like a feature to formally link to a copy of a book/edition anywhere on the web is coming soon. (Informally linking from description hypertext or a list of related links is already possible.)

Whether Google backlinks or otherwise uses the info to improve their own metadata is of course up to them, but Google didn't get where they are by turning down free sources of crawlable quality information.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> The idea that the barriers to entry mean that Google will never have competition are very high is true today but won't be true going forward.

Once all books are published (or reprinted) in eBook form, the conversion is potentially something which can be automated for all new (or still in "print" books). This will cover the majority of titles of interest.

Additional titles can be scanned where they're of significant interest or projects similar to Project Guttenberg may do some of the work.

Google has a head start but in actual fact has done a lot of their work when it's high cost / high labour where future competitors won't need to invest this level of effort.

You could certainly see publishers providing access to their own works and, having access to the electronic versions of texts even for non-eBooks, they could do so relatively cheaply. Add a standardised interface over the repositories provided by each publisher and you have a decentralised repository, owned by the publishers which you'd imagine could compete with Google.

<comment><USER19> > Once all books are published (or reprinted) in eBook form, the conversion is > potentially something which can be automated for all new (or still in > "print" books).

I think that's unlikely to ever happen, though. There are still thousands of even relatively prominent movies available on VHS that have never been released on DVD, due to a mixture of disputes over rights, expense of mastering a DVD from the source material, worry about whether they'd be sufficiently marketable this many years past their release, worry about too many back-catalogue releases cannibalizing new releases, etc.</comment></comment>


Simon Peyton Jones on Lenses: compositional data access and manipulation - <AUTHOR> http://skillsmatter.com/podcast/scala/lenses-compositional-data-access-and-manipulation <comment><USER2> Anyone giving a technical talk, take note. SPJ does such a fantastic job. Perhaps it helped in this particular case, too, that he didn't write the library, but is explaining it as a user who only just learned how it worked.</comment>


Google Announces Acer Chromebook Tab 10 for EDU - <AUTHOR> https://blog.google/topics/education/chromebook-tablets-versatile-learning/ <comment><AUTHOR> $330 and comes with an EMR stylus. The EMR stylii have no battery, are about ~$10 to replace, and come in a wide variety of styles.

Seems like a really strong EDU offering over an iPad Pro.</comment>


Show HN: AddictionLocker – Simple Password Manager to reduce screen-time - <AUTHOR> https://addictionlocker.com <comment><AUTHOR> I built this as a way to curb my own screen-time (which has exploded during the pandemic). Everything I set up to limit my screentime, I'd inevetably just unlock it (because I set the password) and binge harder. This lets me hide the password from myself and makes me donate to charity if I really want it back.

Its still pretty MVP, but would love to hear any feedback on how it could improve.</comment>


Ask YC: Anyone remember a site like this? - <AUTHOR>

Hi All, sorry to do this but a while back I remember someone had posted a cool little tool (it may have been someone's baby) that would help build a url that was actually available.
For the life of me I can't seem to find this in my saved links, and Search YC doesn't seem to turn anything up either.
Anyone remember something like this? Thanks. <comment><USER2> <http://www.instantdomainsearch.com>

<http://www.bustaname.com>

<comment><AUTHOR> Bustaname! That's it! thanks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> um, are you talking about <http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com> ?

</comment><comment><USER4> <http://www.makewords.com/>

Like that?

</comment><comment><USER5> What does "help build a url that was actually available" mean?</comment>


Introducing New Glassboard Memberships - <AUTHOR> http://www.secondgearsoftware.com/blog/introducing-new-glassboard-memberships/ <comment><USER2> I'm happy to see this service growing up and getting a real revenue model. In today's world it seems that to succeed you have to be free, get tons of VC money and sell your users or operate on a loss and exit.

That's not how great _products_ are built, just short-term sexy companies.</comment>


Ask HN - what is the best method to learn how to code? - <AUTHOR>

I'm a business guy but I want to learn how to code as a frontend developer.
Which method is more effective?
1.  Should I learn by doing?  I have a website and want to improve it.  Will I be able to teach myself by trying to fix features?
or
2.  I pick up books and start from scratch?  And only then, after reading the material I will be ready to make something happen?
Please advise.  Thanks! <comment><USER2> I'm not sure what you mean by "frontend" so I'll make a wild guess.

Start with some lightweight tutorials about creating web pages (static content): <http://www.w3schools.com/html/default.asp> <http://www.w3schools.com/css/default.asp>

Creating dynamic content (programming) is a whole different issue ( <http://norvig.com/21-days.html> ).

Start with learning procedural programming: [http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and- comput...](http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and-computer- science/6-00-introduction-to-computer-science-and-programming-fall-2008/video- lectures/)

<http://www.greenteapress.com/thinkpython/thinkCSpy/html/>

And then experiment with a simple web framework: <http://webpy.org/tutorial3.en>

The learn workflow shold be a combineation of: read some -> do some -> try some -> read some more -> experiment some -> read some -> continue

This is just a startingpoint, there are many topics to web development, from javascript for interface interactivity to distributed systems, message queues, scaling ( I'll write this link again just for kiks <http://norvig.com/21-days.html> ) etc.,

The resources are for the Python language, personally I prefer Ruby, but the resources for "learn programming" are more evolved in Python as it has bean adopted as a teaching language by many schools/universities.

PS. Exercise oriented: <http://learnpythonthehardway.org/>

<comment><AUTHOR> wow! this is really helpful!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> It depends on your goals and learning style. If you're just looking to be able to tinker a little bit with existing code, or learn best by doing, then jumping right in is probably the way to go. If you want a deeper understanding, and to avoid making as many beginner mistakes and poor decisions, books are a great way to pick up "best practices" without wasting time going through all of the worst practices first. But lots of people have found success with each approach so if one way fits your learning style better, by all means go with that one.

And really, the _most_ effective route is to do both. Focusing too much on doing without the book knowledge results in creating terribly awkward solutions to problems that have been already been solved. On the other hand It's easy to follow along with a book and fool yourself into thinking that everything makes sense while lacking the experience needed to figure out how to put all the little pieces together to create something useful. As is usual in life, balance is key.

</comment><comment><USER4> A combination of both.

When you try to do something, you'll always find yourself stuck in the middle, and that's when you'll google stuff.

And then you'll find tutorials, or blog posts, or what have you. And as you read more of those, you'll see references to books and other tutorials/posts/essays.

Start by just doing, and you'll eventually end up reading a lot.

</comment><comment><USER5> Both? Many books have coding exercises in them and I find it very difficult personally to retain all the knowledge I've glanced over in a book and be able to apply that in execution without having done any coding in-between.

</comment><comment><USER6> New to programming, you should probably get a book, start reading it at the beginning, and do some of the exercises. As soon as you think you understand how to do something, try it on your website. Pretty soon, you'll find you know enough to learn by doing, reading tutorials, etc.

What you want to avoid, whether you choose method 1 or 2, is the idea that you can write your first lines of code as a useful part of a real project. To learn effectively, you have to be willing to implement some examples, experiment, and throw some code away.

</comment><comment><USER7> It's a constant cycle of learning and applying. You can't retain the knowledge without actually doing the coding. I'd say, read enough to know the basics (maybe chapters 1-2?) and then jump into your IDE and code away, then when you hit the knowledge wall go back to the books and continue the cycle. I guess my main point is that 1 and 2 go hand-in-hand. hope this helps!

</comment><comment><USER8> It's complicated. The art includes much more than just "leaning to code"-- design, algorithms, analysis, testing, interaction styles, psychology, and more. I believe the best approach is an apprenticeship. Find someone who is an expert and work with her/him on several complex projects.</comment>


Facebook rejects funding at $4 billion valuation, may not raise more - <AUTHOR> http://venturebeat.com/2009/04/15/facebook-rejects-funding-at-4-billion-valuation-may-not-raise-more/

<comment><USER2> _Facebook made under $300 million last year, was a little shy of breaking even, and at first expected to make towards $400 million in revenue this year. But the company said in late March — incidentally at the time that chief financial officer Gideon Yu left the company — that it was beating projections by 70 percent. I've confirmed that this run rate has the company possibly breaking half a billion in revenue by the end of the year._

If that's true, it's remarkable.

<comment><USER3> What are they making money off? I have never heard of anyone clicking an ad on facebook. (conversely I have met few Internet users who have NOT clicked a Google ad)

They could be selling data/information. If so, I hope it's anonymized.

<comment><USER4> full disclosure: I build/make money from facebook apps

 _Facebook made under $300 million last year, was a little shy of breaking even..._

Why is this surprising to so many? There are dozens of _developers_ that are netting 100k+ a month (yes i actually talk to one of them quite often), and at least half of this is from ads. Facebook is the largest social network in the world and growing at about 1 million users a day; why is it a surprise that they are actually almost break even?

<comment><USER5> Good for you! It's not so great for Facebook's investors, though.

FB: Hi, we're a conduit that funnels small sums of money from millions of people into a smaller number of developer's pockets.

Investors: So, how much of that do we get?

FB: Um. Almost 0, but we're working on that.

Investors: ...

<comment><USER6> Surely the same could be said of Google. Their revenue is some tiny fraction of 1% of the value they create for users.

<comment><USER5> Google makes more money than it spends. Facebook does not (yet). This is a crucial difference.

> Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen six, result > happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pound > ought and six, result misery.

\-- Charles Dickens

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Facebook apps and ads appeal to a market very far away from us tech guys so it can be hard to think of how it works. Think of things as random as bored at home fat housewives and Swedish people as your money makers. Also facebook ads can be hyper local, because people in facebook tend to actually put accurate information in! Imagine local businesses and organizations advertising their cancer runs, concerts or what not.

<comment><USER8> Hmm, yes and no. Facebook ads are generally well targeted, I think. I get ads mainly for diving and snowboarding (which I have followed), dating (I am single and looking, not quite ready to take the plunge into online dating yet tho') and fitness (and I know those "get a six pack" ads are all scams, but showing them to me is a reasonable decision by the algorithm). I also get "become a fan of X" as sponsored ads which is just plain stupid.

Google's ads seem to be simple keyword matches and are context-free, I think Facebook could have the edge here, but they really do need to get rid of the scammers _and_ actually pay attention to feedback (e.g. if I flag an ad as uninteresting, FB is wasting my time and its advertiser's money by showing it to me ever again).

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I'm a little puzzled by the skepticism about Facebook's utility. I don't know about you guys, but losing touch with old friends is something I feel bad about all the time. Facebook let's you keep informed in a shallow way about people who you don't meet often (enough). That's certainly better than being uninformed.

I would actually pay a small amount for something like Facebook.

If you build something with utility, usually it's possible to derive value.

</comment><comment><USER10> Interesting...does this mean that Facebook will only accept funding for nothing less than $15 billion?

</comment><comment><USER11> _Facebook made under $300 million last year..._

How?!</comment>


I control my co-worker's computer. What should I do? - <AUTHOR>

I'm at war with my co-worker. In retaliation for a rubber chicken attack (an actually rubber chicken; it was brutal), I've written a simple trojan on his computer. He's now sitting at his desk, happily working away. I can execute arbitrary code as his user. Fun ideas?
EDIT
It's a mac running mountain lion <comment><AUTHOR> I'm also thinking take a screenshot, and set it as his background. Bam, two of everything!

screencapture ~/screen.jpg osascript -e "tell application \"System Events\" to set picture of every desktop to \"~/screen.jpg\""

</comment><comment><USER2> Write an automator script to download and play pR*n at random. Loud. Note: the Hacker part in Hacker News refers to people who build stuff, not the other ones Hollywood and US courts portray as supervillains.

</comment><comment><USER3> It's like Microsoft Sam....but way better:

[http://gizmodo.com/5641305/whoa-your-mac-can-make-the- droid-...](http://gizmodo.com/5641305/whoa-your-mac-can-make-the-droid-sound)

</comment><comment><USER4> Move his mouse a few pixels in a random direction every time a mouse click event is registered.

<comment><AUTHOR> How do I do this?!

</comment></comment><comment> jack-r-abbit If he has speakers, find a low volume, high-pitched noise and play it.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> say "there once was a man from nantucket"</comment>


Classes of functions (partial, total, bijective, injective, etc) - <AUTHOR> http://www.matusiak.eu/numerodix/blog/index.php/2009/05/24/classes-of-functions/

<comment><USER2> Bijections aren't necessarily isomorphisms. A bijection is just a one-to-one correspondence between two sets; an isomorphism also preserves functional and relational structure on those sets.

I note that this was brought up in the comments and dismissed by the author. A mistake is one thing—we all make them—but the way he shrugged off the correction is concerning.

<comment><USER3> For people who aren't up to speed on Abstract Algebra, the analogy to have in mind is:

A: Rectangles and squares are the same things.

B: That isn't correct. All squares are rectangles but the reverse isn't true.

A: I only care about the number of sides the polygon has so for my domain of interest rectangles and squares are equivalent. (Therefore the falsity of the first statement is a minor issue?)

<comment><USER2> Diagrams can help too. Here's a bijection _f_ that doesn't preserve the <-ordering.

             a > b > c > d
             ^   ^   ^   ^
        f :  |   |   |   |
             w < x < y < z

Here's an isomorphism _g_ that preserves the <-ordering.

             d < c < b < a
             ^   ^   ^   ^
        g :  |   |   |   |
             w < x < y < z

Note that the domain {w, x, y, z} and range {a, b, c, d} are the same for both _f_ and _g_ , but one of them preserves the ordering while the other doesn't.

<comment><USER4> Nice example, I hadn't thought of using ordering (hmmm, it's just the binary _less-than_ relation... most technical examples I've seen use a trinary relation, like _a + b = c_ ). I find it helpful to separate an isomorphism into two: bijection and homomorphism. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphism#Informal_discussio...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphism#Informal_discussion) (the formal discussion is in terms of groups - above my reading level).

What's a simple example of a homomorphism that _isn't_ bijective? All the ones I can think of are more complex than I'd like, using two functions, one for the structural property that is preserved and one for the mapping. It's hard to explain because there's three relations to keep track of; it's not as much of a problem if you visualize it, but ordinary english makes it hard distinguish whether you're talking about relations between values of the first set (i.e. the structure before the mapping), relations between values of the second set (i.e. the structure after the mapping), or relations between a value of the first set and a value of the second set (i.e. the mapping). It's even confusing to write that, let alone read it.

e.g. structural property of _squaring_ and the mapping of taking the _absolute value_. Before mapping: _5^2 = 25_ , _-5^2 = 25_. After mapping: _abs(5)^2 = abs(25)_ and _abs(-5)^2 = abs(25)_. The mapping of taking the absolute value is not bijective, as both _abs(5)_ and _abs(-5)_ map to the same value, _5_ , but is it is homomorphic with respect to the absolute value, because the the pairs of values that have this relation before the mapping also have it after (and pairs that aren't related in this way aren't related after).

It's even harder to think of a simple example that is obviously useful.

<comment><USER5> I'm assuming you want non-trivial examples of non-bijective homomorphisms, but you can create a trivial one using the <= relation: Consider the two element set {0, 1} and the function f from {0,1} to {0,1} so that f(0) = f(1) = 0. f preserves the <= relationship but is not a bijection.

<comment><USER6> Or to make it less abstract: Look at a rubics cube. Taking out all edges, just leaving the corners, is a homomorphisms that isn't an isomorphism.

<comment><USER5> I don't follow -- what is the structure being preserved in this example?

<comment><USER6> If you have an algorithm that solves a normal Rubik's cube, you also have an algorithm that solves a corners-only Rubik's cube.

<comment><USER5> Oh, fair enough! That's a fun example.

<comment><USER6> To bore you with more formal terms: All manipulations of a Rubik's cube form a group. And so do all the manipulations possible on a 2x2x2 Rubik's cube. And the 2x2x2 cube's group is a subgroup of the 3x3x3 cube's group, and there's a trivial homomorphism from the 3's group to the 2's group. That homomorphism is not an isomorphism.

<comment><USER5> I was aware of the group structure of the Rubik's cube (it is, after all, a subgroup of the permutation group on 54 elements), but apparently I had never given it much thought beyond that. Thanks!</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Canadian scientists create powerful new lithium battery material - <AUTHOR> http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/05/18/tech-lithium-battery-sulphur-cathode-material.html?ref=rss <comment><USER2> Does anyone have hard numbers on this one? "impressive capacity" fuels the imagination but I'm not sure my laptop will run on that.

<comment><USER3> It looks like she had a page on li batteries, but it's been removed:

[http://www.science.uwaterloo.ca/~lfnazar/linda%20nazar%20li-...](http://www.science.uwaterloo.ca/~lfnazar/linda%20nazar%20li- ion%20battery.html)

This announcement / press release has a bit more information:

[http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-05/nsae- crt05180...](http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-05/nsae- crt051809.php)

 _The finding is reported today in the on-line issue of Nature Materials._

[http://www.nature.com/nmat/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/nmat246...](http://www.nature.com/nmat/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/nmat2460.html)

Yet a bit more info, including some numbers, for those who don't have access past the paywall:

[http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/05/researchers- develop-...](http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/05/researchers-develop- electrode-materials-for-highcapacity-lis-battery-cells.html)</comment></comment>


Apple Testing Watch-Like Device - <AUTHOR> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324196204578296171274865646.html?mod=djemalertTECH

<comment><USER2> My mother used to be an extremely dedicated watch wearer... but she stopped wearing a watch after she got her iphone.

<comment><USER3> So maybe once Apple releases their thing, she'll ditch the iphone and get a watch ... :]

[Personally I hate pulling out my phone just to look at the time; a watch is much more convenient.]</comment></comment>


Embedded data storage engines, papers and benchmarking - <AUTHOR> http://engine.so <comment><USER2> Cool project.

It might be useful to include licensing information in the table since the restrictions on BerkleyDB might make it a non-starter.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> good idea, thanks!</comment>


Simultaneous Localization and Mapping (SLAM) - <AUTHOR> https://semiengineering.com/simultaneous-localization-and-mapping/ <comment><USER2> Could we have video tag, also it is a decent overview.</comment>


Ajit Pai wants to cap spending on broadband for poor people and rural areas - <AUTHOR> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/03/ajit-pai-wants-to-cap-spending-on-broadband-for-poor-people-and-rural-areas/ <comment><USER2> Makes sense. I was thinking based on the title of the article that this would be a good thing for low-income people, as in their spending on broadband would be capped. but... it's Ajit Pai. Of course it's shit for the public. What a travesty of a human being.

</comment><comment><USER3> Too bad there isn't any accountability on the spending, just like all the tax credits to entice the telecom's to build out broadband, but they didn't spend that money.

The telco's will claim to have spent that money, but they won't do anything, and once the cap is reached the telco's and shut it down again until the government gives them more incentives which they can use to line their pockets.

What a racket.

</comment><comment><USER4> > _Pai 's plan suggests an $11.4 billion annual cap on the total cost of the > four programs, which is more than current spending but would put an upper > bound on what the program could spend in the future._

This isn't as bad as the headline makes it sound to be.

<comment><USER5> Agreed. The entire article rests upon the assumption that once the cap is reached, and the government may not spend anymore money on subsidizing broadband, all those reliant on those subsidies are now in peril.

It shows a narrow way of thinking, and also assumes quite a few things about the US Govt / FCC.

After just glossing over the fact of fiscal responsibility, it assumes budget constraints in this regard are bad, as if a single penny of government money (taxpayer's money) is never wasted or poorly allocated.

Second, the article's attitude seems to take the position (and certainly the comments do) that the government is one of the few (if any?) entities capable of improving access to broadband in these affected areas. I doubt this.

I would also be interested to know if wireless telcos do a better job serving these apparently under-served communities versus their broadband providers. For example, what is the ratio of people who have slow broadband but smartphones with LTE service?

A distant third is that somehow the issue of a budget cap cannot be readjusted at a later date. Or that there are no programs outside of Universal Service that can also augment and support rolling out broadband. Or that you cannot create a new program targeting specific needs, etc...

This is a false dilemma.

It also makes the assumption that broadband equals improved economic development. I don't discount the idea, but I question just how much of an impact it has, in order to use this as leverage against the idea of the budget cap.

Ultimately, we're seeing a lack of imagination to problem solving unless it includes a blank check from Uncle Sam.

Oh, and we can slam Ajit Pai while we're at it -- let's not pass on that.

<comment><USER6> While I mostly agree. Most wireless carriers do underserve huge areas of the country. My vacation times are mostly spent on cross country road trips for the past decade. About 2 years ago, I switched to Verizon specifically because it had the best rural coverage. Huge areas of Utah, Wyoming, Idaho, Minnesota etc have no coverage by any other carrier. Where my mom lives in WY, there is some spotty ATT coverage and meh VZ coverage. Definitely nothing to write home about.

I also tend to mostly use tethering for my laptop in these areas, and can say, it's been a crap-shoot for the most part.

I also feel that this spending probably shouldn't target any metro area with more than say even half a million people in it. Simply because that is generally enough to create actual market pressure where local solutions are likely to be better and Federal funding will likely only help incumbents anyway.

I'm not against a budget cap, that's part of what a "budget" is. I think this is partially mis-sold, but in a lot of ways, I have almost no trust in current FCC leadership.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> First, I'm a Libertarian. My opinions are not part of the LP, but my own. I am not an-cap, but much more pragmatic here.

Second, I think that the Federal government should be in place to provide for what is considered essential infrastructure. In the late 1700's, essential infrastructure was enough road maintenance to support interstate commerce. Through the 1900's that grew to encompass clean water, electricity and telecommunications and radio. Today, I'd suggest that includes internet access. IMHO, if you can get electricity, water and a phone line, you should have access to high speed internet.

I'd rather see spending accountability and a focus on green markets over admittedly aging infrastructure in urban areas where market pressure should be forcing upgraded infrastructure and private spending for such measures. Also, I do feel there should be a spending cap and budgeting in most things. It isn't bad by itself, but it could be... the real thing comes down to "it depends." Given the guy in charge, I'm not sure that it's a good thing in any way.

</comment><comment><USER7> And I want Ajit Pai to stand trial for criminal and traitorous wrongdoing against the United States of America! Hope we all get what we want.</comment>


More evidence essential oils 'make male breasts develop' - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.com/news/health-43429933 <comment><USER2> soapmaker here. While lavender oil is nice to have, its also rather cost prohibitive in what i believe would be a compelling dose to elicit this type of response.

as for tea tree oil, im in favor of phasing this out entirely as it seems to serve no real purpose in cosmetics and is actually somewhat toxic to humans. Its had a number of folk remedies, such as a cure for syphilis and a tincture to reduce boils, but none of these have succeeded in scientific testing.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_tree_oil#Safety](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_tree_oil#Safety)

most cold process soaps will fragrance at 3-5% the weight of the actual oil. I can speak from experience that 5% tea tree oil soap is vile. The final product emerges with an acrid fragrance not unlike pine floor cleaner, and each bar is brittle enough to crack if dropped. many crack during the curing process, and the final product has a texture similar to the gear shift on a cheap car.

<comment><USER3> I thought it was well known that tea tree oil is toxic.

I've been using it for a while do deodorise my shoes. It seems to be effective at killing whatever makes them smell. Anecdotally it also works for killing fungal infections of the feet too, although I've switched to using iodine, which is actually proven to be effective and tends to clear fungal infections within a couple of days.

<comment><USER4> Tea tree oil kills MRSA on the skin. All the low dose natural products are causing the bacteria to become resistant. Otherwise, for fungal infections soaking feet in vinegar once a day for a week should work just fine. Smells a little.

<comment><USER3> I wasn't using low dose natural products on my feet.

I had a spray can of 100% tea tree oil that I would spray on my feet. It would sting like hell anywhere I had broken skin but it was effective.

Iodine is much more pleasant to use and doesn't smell so bad, it's cheaper too.

<comment><USER5> Doesn't it stain?

<comment><USER6> Temporarily, it then sublimes directly into gas form without passing through a liquid phase. (Verify before you use it everywhere, but this is what I would expect with the mixes I've used. Also see [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iodine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iodine))

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> A better link:

"Since there was no identifiable cause for prepubertal gynecomastia in the three patients we reported, we speculated that environmental factors might be contributing to their condition. Together, the case histories and NIEHS in vitro studies provide support for our hypothesis that topical exposure to lavender and tea tree oils likely caused gynecomastia in the three patients."

\- [https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/lavender- tea-t...](https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/lavender-tea-tree- oils-may-cause-breast-growth-boys)

<comment><USER8> Sample size of 3?!

<comment><USER9> Three boys and a lab test of cancer cells. And they don't expect long term effects from the oils.

The article title is a bit sensationalist, but a thorough investigation is arguably worthwhile

<comment><USER10> Hmmm, so a there's a broad suspicion that endocrine disruption is a widespread problem, and suddenly we see a dubious article provoking confusion, and possibly a lot of very costly research only to determine we might've been barking up the wrong tree?

This story sounds familiar... [0]

[0] [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2146171.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2146171.stm)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> >> _" The American study found that key chemicals in the oils boost oestrogen and inhibit testosterone."_

I find this highly suspect. If the effect were significant, every trans woman I know would be talking about their essential oils instead of salt cravings and estrogen pills/injections.

Is there something to this, or is it another case of shoddy science reporting?

<comment><USER12> I doubt the effect is anywhere near large enough to be satisfactory for people who want to transition.

<comment><USER13> Trans woman here. Was going to say this, but you nailed it.

Just going to confirm right now any effect this has is nowhere close to the kind of estrogen changes that actual hormone therapy provides.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> From personal experience, I avoid eating too much tofu. At one point, I had a condition called gynecomastia. The doctor asked me about my diet (eating steamed tofu every day) and recommended that I stop based on some research he had read. Condition went away.

<comment><USER15> Just bro science here, but if tofu had a real effect on the hormones, wouldn't that mean that gynecomastia should have a much higher prevalence in the countries, such as Japan, where tofu is consumed daily?

<comment><USER16> Genetic variance based on geography much like the situation with lactose intolerance.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Does anyone know why there seem to be so many more estrogenic substances compared to androgenic substances, in our everyday lives?

It seems a bit unfair ...

<comment><USER18> Speculation is that plants produce phytoestrogens for herbivore birth control.

"Phytochemical mimicry of reproductive hormones and modulation of herbivore fertility by phytoestrogens" [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1474615/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1474615/)

<comment><USER19> This is really interesting, thanks for sharing. Question: so are plants leeching it into the soil => our water supply? Or is it the plants that we're eating?

<comment><USER20> Plants have phytosterols instead of cholesterol. If anything, predation chose for plants that had some population controlling affects on predators. But I've read those same compounds are completely ignored by our bodies.

I'm going to suggest there's more going on than we know here. Ie there are toxic compounds leaching into food from plastic containers, possibly water supply, and definitely cooking utensils.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I started using a diffuser at home, typically with tea tree or eucalyptus oil. It helps me relax, maybe via the placebo effect. But I have also become somewhat obsessed with it, to the point where I have a diffuser at home, the office, and even in my car. Had anyone else had this experience?

<comment><USER22> This sounds like a somewhat minor psychological addiction (I'm not a doctor though and addiction is not always harmful)

<comment><USER21> It can't be worse than my coffee addiction...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> See, now this lends some credence to the idea that the oils can have any (medicinal or other) effect at all... which up to this point I found highly suspect.

<comment><USER24> 2 years ago I had a boil on my neck that lingered for months. It shrank to nearly nothing within a week or two of tea tree oil.

But now I'm worried about manboobs. So far so good though.

<comment><USER25> Another comment indicated that it's poisonous, so I assume that's how it worked for you.

<comment><USER24> I'll take it

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Given the problems with replication, and the selection biases, I've decided it's a safe bet to ignore the implications of articles about health studies!

It's shocking how many dietary and medical practices have been championed, and then later repudiated.

One challenging example: fish oil.

Article saying it's good...

[http://time.com/4619488/omega-3-fats-heart- health/](http://time.com/4619488/omega-3-fats-heart-health/)

Article questioning the overall research:

[https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/03/30/fish-oil-claims- no...](https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/03/30/fish-oil-claims-not- supported-by-research/)

</comment><comment><USER27> I'm happy to be so sensitive to any kind of flavor to eliminate everything that smells from my life, more or less. I guess it is some form of innate protection.

</comment><comment><USER28> Drat, my favourite toothpaste contains tea tree oil.

<comment><USER29> The hypothesis is that topical exposure is linked to the hormone changes. For me, that means tea tree oil in toothpaste shouldn't be something to worry about.

<comment><USER30> _Tea tree oil should NOT be taken by mouth for any reason, even though some traditional uses include tea tree oil as a mouthwash, treatment for bad breath, and treatment of toothache and mouth ulcers._

[https://www.poison.org/articles/2010-dec/tea-tree- oil](https://www.poison.org/articles/2010-dec/tea-tree-oil)

<comment><USER31> Don't you get the oil when you drink tea?

<comment><USER30> Melaleuca alternifolia (tea tree) is a different plant altogether than Camellia sinensis (Tea plant)

Tea tree smells very similar to turpentine - you know: paint thinner. I often wondered if they are chemically similar.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Containers from scratch(Pt 1&2) - <AUTHOR> http://tejom.github.io/c/linux/containers/docker/2016/10/04/containers-from-scratch-pt1.html <comment><AUTHOR> These are two short articles I wrote that explain how I hacked together simple containers. There are some things about containers that weren't very clear to me so I thought doing something like this would me understand. Part 1 focuses on running processes and part 2 is about networking.</comment>


Interns Resist Working Free - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/30/us/interns-resist-working-free.html?_r=0

<comment><USER2> The idea of an internship is this:

The intern gains experience and gets a chance to show his skills, the company has cheap labor and has better chance spotting future rockstars (or "people with potential"). I'm fine with it.

However, there are internships and there are internships, and in the real world, all things are not equal.

Interns should really think what they have to gain. Is an internship involving photocopying really worth it. If you're an engineer and your internship is in the "mail room", you got the concept of "internship" wrong.

I did an internship with a company. They had a slogan for that: "Internships That Don't Involve Photocopying". The recruiter insisted on that. She said she did internships while she was a student and it was terrible.

And they put their money where their mouth is: I've been flown in, taken care of for a month, great accommodations in a nice hotel(pool, gym, etc..). Had our own blocks for interns exclusively. The work we were given ? We shadowed Engineers as they worked. We did pretty much what they did. We went on the field with them. Got them to explain stuff to us. And did presentations: We were asked to chose a piece of technology, and learn as much as possible about it, and then do a presentation about it where they would ask us questions (how to use these tools, technology involved, troubleshooting, typical problems, etc...).

You get your clearance taken care of of which doors you can open and which you can't. So it's pretty much all thought about in advance: They don't improvise.

Of course, pretty much everything is tagged "Private" and is classified. They make you sign an NDA and a contract before you go. You get briefed _and_ debriefed. What you can and cannot say. But still.. It's a great internship and you learn a tremendous amount of stuff. And you get to see some high-tech stuff and learn what the word "added value" really means. Oh, and I got paid, too.

Don't do internships with the wrong company. If it's a "big" company that treats employees like shit, you got to ask yourself the question: "Do I want to be involved with such a company?" As "big" as it may be. What's in it for me and will I be allowed to bring value to this company. I did my internship because I _liked_ that company. I've never sent a résumé in my life to any other company simply because I chose it. I wasn't looking for an _internship_ at all costs, and I wasn't looking for a _job_. Nothing easier than to be employed, but with whom. That's the question.</comment>


A Tale of Two Kickstarter Campaigns: A $500K Difference from Marketing - <AUTHOR> https://www.novaline.io/blog/2018/11/16/a-tale-of-two-kickstarter-campaigns-a-500k-difference-from-marketing <comment><USER2> The same arguments can be made for Beats headphones. There are better products for less money but your average consumer is not going to figure that out. It follows to say that the Public Relations industry has more value than most engineers realize.

<comment><USER3> I don't know why you suddenly turn to saying engineers don't understand marketing (although that's not the same as public relations).

Just because a project doesn't do something well doesn't mean they don't know how to value it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I might have given their words some thought if not for the fact the kickstarter link has an undisclosed referral in it: kickstarter.com...bla?ref=2iw5zq

<comment><AUTHOR> Totally unintentional, came from copying a link from a website. I just removed the referral.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> This whole thing has led me to wonder - does crowdfunding encourage crappy products?</comment>


Microsoft Finally Saw Where The Developers are Going - <AUTHOR> http://www.dreamintech.net/2012/04/microsoft-finally-saw-where-the-developers-are-going/

<comment><USER2> Javascript is also supported as a language to develop native apps by communicating with WinRT, the new runtime.

<comment><AUTHOR> I know, but Microsoft needs more developers on the mobile side, which is laking of applications, than on the desktop side.

<comment><USER2> sure it does, so what is your point? Native apps still rule mobile, so MS makes a smart move by allowing javascript in native apps. This way they lower the barrier for web developers to start with native development.

And yes I would also at the same time try to get more love on mobile web sites, so great that they released a Metro theme for jQuery Mobile</comment></comment></comment>


Dubai 45 gigapixels - <AUTHOR> http://gigapan.com/gigapans/48492

<comment><USER2> Is it afternoon prayer time on a WE with 50C or something like that? As I can see the entire city has:

\- nobody walking in the streets (I failed to find a single one…)

\- no cars beyond the handful in far away parking lots

\- nobody working on construction sites

<comment><USER3> I did see some people working on construction sites. However, I have been to Dubai and it is perfectly normal that nobody is walking down the streets - it's way too hot.

This one time I stepped of a cab to take a picture and it was excruciating, we could only stay outside for about 2 minutes before giving up.

</comment></comment><comment> j-b Here's a 50 gigapixel image of Vienna:

[http://photoartkalmar.com/Photoart%20Kalmar%20high%20res/Gig...](http://photoartkalmar.com/Photoart%20Kalmar%20high%20res/Gigapixel/Vienna%2050%20Gigapixel/Donauturm.html)

</comment><comment><USER4> Surreal. Looks like video game art of depiction of a future city.

</comment><comment><USER5> Beautiful, surprisingly few people in the shot. Since I only found 3-4 in a few minutes, I guess it's hot outside :)

</comment><comment><USER6> What are these towers mainly used for? Housing? Businesses? Tourism?

Also that mall is HUGE.

<comment><USER7> I found giant road cones the size of people!

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I am thinking of the ocean in Lems Solaris, who might have built something similar.</comment>


National Broadband Network CEO says Australians don't want super-fast broadband - <AUTHOR> http://www.couriermail.com.au/technology/nbn-ceo-says-australians-do-not-want-superfast-broadband-speeds/news-story/822bc8b57836bc8dc80cc9bd285d56d5 <comment><USER2> This guy was specifically installed to hold back the project as much as possible for the sake of partisan politics and making profit. He's well aware that he's installing a useless network, that's his job. They're actually actively installing _slower_ connections than people had before, and spending around 2300$ per house to do so. And the technology they're using has no capability to be upgraded. At all. Ever.

Labor wanted fibre, so the Liberal Party wanted copper. The current plan is to waste the entire NBN budget so that even if the other government gets back in power, they still can't give us good connections.

There is no excuse for deploying fibre-to-the-node in 2007, let alone 2017. It's a deliberate, political move.

Jobs, education, small businesses, science, research, film, art -- all of these will sadly be held back in Australia for at least a decade while we wait for decent internet.

Thanks for destroying our future, Turnbull. But at least a few Telstra shareholders got a bigger mansion.

<comment><USER3> To be fair VDSL is good enough for a single household to run a 4K stream or two and other activities provided you actually get the whole 55Mb downstream and not the BS "up to" line the telcos like to use for their craptastic DSL offerings. 100Mb+ isn't really a necessity for most people.

<comment><USER2> You can get 100Mbit even, if the node happens to live in your front lawn. Problem is they're installing them up to a km away and only promising 25Mbit -- and lots of people aren't even getting that. There are people on 10 and less.

Also, why spend MORE on "Maybe 25mbit or up to 100" with no upgrade potential when you could install the fibre and have reliable gigabit right away? It makes no sense.

The NBN should be for the future, not for what's okay for most people today.

Imagine if we only had dialup now because that was all we needed 15 years ago. That's what the Liberals are doing to the NBN.

<comment><USER4> Are coaxial cable connections not available? These days, you can get 10/1 Gbps with DOCSIS 3.1 (although TWC in USA offers only 300 Mbps), and the standard seems to be improving still.

<comment><USER2> In some areas they are, but it's a minority of houses in Australia. Telstra and Optus have them.

NBN is decommissioning the Optus HFC network and replacing it with VDSL. Yes, I'm serious.

They're taking over and using the Telstra coaxial network, which should improve upload speeds, but they aren't planning to offer anything above 100Mbps (about 94 actual throughput) on it. They're replacing the DOCSIS 3.0 equipment, but with more DOCSIS 3.0 equipment.

Since Telstra's max plan goes about 115mbit, this is actually a downgrade in speed at my house. I'll be waving 20Mbit/s goodbye.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Can't agree with this sentiment more. I've been involved directly in two separate decisions over the last 5 years where US companies decided not to invest in product and operations launches Australia specifically because of the cost of bandwidth to residential users. This is not just about home users wanting to streaming movies, Australia is losing jobs because of this short- sighted, political farce over the NBN.

The clincher is that my mother, who lives in the nation's capital, has only two options for Internet connectivity at her home, both are ADSL1, neither offers downlink speeds in excess of 8Mbps and uplink is capped at 256kbps, with actual speeds more like 2Mbps down/128kbps up.

Why? Because Telstra, the national telco decided to implement micro-exchanges in the form of roadside cabinets (RIMs) in the 1990s, thus locking out all other players from offering ADSL access, and themselves from being upgraded to ASDL2/2+.

Almost 30 years later, these RIMs are still a key part of their landline infrastructure and due to lack of competition and the delays in the NBN, they're able to charge the poor customers that are connected to them top dollar (~AUD$70/month) for third world Internet speeds.

<comment><USER6> > I've been involved directly in two separate decisions over the last 5 years > where US companies decided not to invest in product and operations launches > Australia specifically because of the cost of bandwidth to residential users

Cost of bandwidth and last mile network are completely unrelated. Australian bandwidth is the most expensive in the world because it is poorly peered mostly one-way expensive transit.

You could install gigabit to every home tomorrow and you'd still have 100GB download caps because an international link is $25/Mbps+

I find a lot of people confuse these issues, which is unfortunate because all of this NBN energy directed towards the price of Australian bandwidth could actually fix something tangible.

<comment><USER7> Really? NZ is in a similar situation and I can buy an unlimited 1Gbps residential fibre connection in a town of 43,000 people for NZD115/month.

NBN handover charges are excessive, and interconnecting with Telstra is crazy expensive, and you need to for good domestic connectivity. The NZ UFB fibre network has much lower handover costs, and the incumbent telco here is marginally more reasonable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I remember moving from New Zealand where I'd had 100-200Mbit/s fibre for several years to Australia in 2012, when I arrived I moved into a brand new apartment in the first suburb to get fibre to the home, turns out it wasn't to all homes... and I was stuck with 2Mbit/s, which is what i had when I started high school in NZ many many years ago. 2017 is here now and I literally spent over an hour today trying to help someone figure out how to get better than her 2.5Mbit/s ADSL to her house which is not at all far from the CBD, turns out there's nothing she can do. Up until recently I was paying for 3x ADSL lines all set to annex-M and peered together using PFSense because all you can get in most of the cities is 100~ year old copper that's falling apart thanks to the hard right governments that are anti-technology and often anti- education from what I can tell. Recently I gave up on my three links and managed to get a point-to-point 5ghz wireless link from a beam off the top of my roof to a large building in line of sight which is better but obviously won't scale well.

<comment><USER9> Where the hell did you get 100-200Mbit fibre? We had a fibre connection at work for our data centres in Wellington and I still felt the connection wasn't all that great (mostly the limit of the undersea fibre cables to Australia/US Pacific).

Even people I knew on TelecomNZ/Spark fibre didn't have the greatest connection speeds (They were decent I guess, but not what I'd consider fibre at all).

<comment><USER8> It was common as anything in Christchurch, most of my friends had between 40 and 500Mbit at home either on fibre (up to 1Gbit to the home at the time back in 2011), VDSL (I think up to 200Mbit if you're close to the exchange back then) or the old Cable network which was 100Mbit.

At my work we had two 1Gbit internet links at our primary site and anywhere from 1Gbit down to 50Mbit~ way out in rural areas and we had between 500Mbit and 10Gbit dark fibre between sites.

<comment><USER8> Here's some pricing: [http://ufb.org.nz/pricing- plans/](http://ufb.org.nz/pricing-plans/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Had a mild argument with a friend before the "NBN election". He thought that our internet was just fine. He could read news sites and so on. I argued that, before long, we'd be streaming video as a matter of course, and it would be high definition. More people would be working remotely or storing information online.

I remembered this the other day. The kids were watching Netflix, my wife was watching Stan (another streaming service) and I was live streaming sport. We almost never switch on regular TV. Without NBN in our area for years yet, this makes for a lot of buffering and quality degradation. And if anyone needs to be working, the streaming generally stops.

At work, my docs, time tracker, email, backups and so on are all in the cloud. Multiply that by every person in the office.

As a nation, we can't compete on manufacturing. We should be making sure our infrastructure for online services (education, entertainment, etc) is exceptional.

<comment><USER10> Do you remember the "No household would really use more than two HD streams. That's enough" comment, made at a time when 4k monitors already existed? Fun times.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> For those who are unaware, NBN stands for National Broadband Network, the Government-funded project to bring "high speed" Internet to all of Australia, both urban and rural.

This article is about comments the CEO of the NBN company made yesterday.

</comment><comment><USER12> Sure. You can survive without high speed internet. This website is fantastic for me because I do not have a high speed connection. Australia would do itself a disservice to write off the impressive power of connectivity high speed always on connections provide.

As a side note, a friend from several years ago attended University of Queensland, and at that time they implemented a program to provide only extremely limited volume of bandwidth to students which made geographically distributed collaboration much more difficlt.

<comment><USER13> Current UQ student here. They currently provide 40GB a month. If that's not enough, you're probably torrenting.

<comment><USER14> 40GB is like one week's worth of one hour a night HD video. That's emphatically not enough.

<comment><USER12> Imagine if you're running netflix ;)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Context for international readers:

The original plan was to roll out fiber to each house to for 90% of the country, despite the large size of the country and low population we are very urban so this was doable. Then the other party had to differentiate themselves and promised brand new copper for a about 2/3rds the price (know looking to cost a lot more).

So the debate isn't so much do we need fantastic fiber connections to every house, it's should we spend a bit more to get a more future proof result.

</comment><comment><USER16> As always, get the story through Google to bypass the paywall.

[https://www.google.com.au/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=Y0adWIbZCI_Y8AfT5LZ4...](https://www.google.com.au/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=Y0adWIbZCI_Y8AfT5LZ4#q=http:%2F%2Fwww.couriermail.com.au%2Ftechnology%2Fnbn- ceo-says-australians-do-not-want-superfast-broadband-speeds%2Fnews- story%2F822bc8b57836bc8dc80cc9bd285d56d5)

<comment><USER17> That's what the "web" link at the top of every thread is for.

<comment><USER16> You learn something new every day.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> There's a six-hour old reddit thread[0] on this article with comments from (mostly) Australians in /r/australia, for the interested. It may provide additional context and opinions, although I'm sure you can imagine what the overwhelming opinion is going to be.

[0] [https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/5t3arf/nbn_ceo_s...](https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/5t3arf/nbn_ceo_says_australians_do_not_want_superfast/)

</comment><comment><USER11> One thing that the US-based HN crowd do well is mobilise in order to contact their local politicians. Australians aren't so inclined generally.

In case you are though, you can contact Prime Minister Turnbull through this form:

[https://www.pm.gov.au/contact-your-pm](https://www.pm.gov.au/contact-your-pm)

</comment><comment><USER19> Sure - who doesn't love 1mb/s down and 256kish up?

I'm in the process of moving apartment and I am living in the Melbourne CBD and it's fringe and I would say at least 60-70% of the apartments are still ADSL only!

I can't do my job on infrastructure like that!

<comment><USER19> Actually maybe that's why I got a permanent visa over here, I'm British and I DO want fast internet, so I can... you know... be efficient!

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Yeah, yeah. Telegraph should be good enough too. It's the pinnacle of innovation after all. Or may be this guy should just stick to the pigeon post.

</comment><comment><USER21> This would be a Murdoch newspaper?</comment>


Flickr founders name project "Tiny Speck"; starts hiring - <AUTHOR> http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/10/flickr-follow-up-project-has-a-name-tiny-speck-and-theyre-hiring/ <comment><USER2> Flickr started as a MMORPG! Let that be a lesson to all of us founders. Questions your ideas, because you're smart but not perfect.

<comment><USER3> Flickr is still an MMORPG -- the social features are still pretty great and the primary focus of the site, but Facebook is taking that market. Flickr made a number of huge mistakes too (like the NIPSA bullshit).

It's absolutely awful for actually looking at the photos though -- to look at photos at a decent resolution you have to click through to the photo page, then click through to 'all sizes' without knowing whether there will be a larger size on the other side, and then maybe click a larger size again from there. Now you're at a dead end, and have to start the process all over again!</comment></comment>


Colosseum killing machine reconstructed - <AUTHOR> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/11655510/Colosseum-killing-machine-reconstructed-after-more-than-1500-years.html

<comment><USER2> The documentary: [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/building- wonders.html#c...](http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/building- wonders.html#colosseum-death-trap)

</comment><comment><USER3> I was at the Colosseum a few months ago. I couldn't believe they built this right in the middle of the ruins. In my opinion, it greatly detracts from the surroundings, and would have been better displayed elsewhere.</comment>


Beware of Other-Optimizing (2009) - <AUTHOR> https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/6NvbSwuSAooQxxf7f/beware-of-other-optimizing <comment><USER2> The article makes a fair point which I'm having a hard time agreeing with based on anecdotal evidence.

A lot of my habits and hobbies stemmed from other people giving me advice. This includes the physical activities I do, meditation, certain technologies and ways of learning and so on. I am incredibly grateful to the people who introduced me to those things.

I will gladly give out similar advice to others. Advice from other people rather than summarised data and their personal experience has been invaluable for my personal growth.

I think it's important to acknowledge there are a lot of unknowns and give advice in a personal way "this worked for me" vs. "this is how it should be done". I think that if advice is given from a place of "here's something cool to maybe try" and not "here's what you should do" then it's pretty great - people just tend to like absolutes a lot better since they're simpler.

Edit: Not to mention the "You should check out this programming thing, it's pretty cool" which led to a fulfilling career which I love.

<comment><USER2> Also, if a startup solves this for me (hobby and habit matching for an individual) I will pay $1000 for it or use a subscription service.

These things are very time consuming and there has to be a better way to match people with ideas.

I think that finding things you can rock at and self efficacy is very important for career development and I spend considerable amounts of time on my hobbies.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I once read a hypothesis, which is that _all self help advice works_ because it makes people pay more attention to their own behavior for a while. And my own observation is that ideas for becoming more self disciplined always work for unusually self disciplined people.

Another view of mine is that it's one thing to be rational, and another to be a good debater. I consider myself to be reasonably rational, but it doesn't mean I should be at the mercy of someone who's a better debater than I am.

I'm a terrible debater. What it means is that if you present me with a seemingly well reasoned argument, I might have to find some socially acceptable way of declining your advice, well short of refuting it. I might think about your ideas, or I might not, but I won't make any promises on the spot.

>>> Sometimes—I suppose—people are being lazy.

It may be that laziness is an acquired behavioral trait that confers a survival advantage under some conditions. I'm lazy. I make my living inventing gadgets that remove the effort from difficult tasks. Assigning "laziness" is just an _ad hominem_ argument anyway.

It seems possible that a lot of our seemingly "irrational" traits actually allow us to survive in a social environment where other people are trying to manipulate us. Traits such as stubbornness and habit may have evolved for this reason.

</comment><comment><USER4> I'm baffled by this bit:

> "Different things are true for different people" (which is simply false).

I mean, "English is the easiest language to understand" is clearly true for me and untrue for others. I suppose one could couch it in terms of the specific point of view but that seems to be finesseing away the counter argument.

I presume I'm missing something. What's the author getting at here?

<comment><USER5> The statement "English is the easiest language to understand" is either true or false, and doesn't reference any specific speaker. It may or may not be the "easiest language to understand _for a specific person_ ", but that is a different statement, which is also either true or false.

<comment><USER6> If it doesn't refer to any speaker at all it will be neither true nor false. It will just be meaningless.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> tl;dr: Everyone is different. Don't be that weirdo who tries to push advice from random internet listicles on people.

Aside: if a board member tells you that you don't need a raise because you can use fucking coupon books, and you don't immediately get extremely offended, then maybe you're under-rating common sense and over-rating "rationalism"...

<comment><USER8> What is the value in being offended, like, ever? Surely if you could genuinely acheive your goals by leveraging coupon books, wouldn't that be worth considering? And, if after consideration, you Vickie it's not a viable substitute to a raise, you'll have an understanding of why it won't work beyond "well it offended me". Assuming that the math work or such that using coupons would result in the same outcome from the perspective of your bank statement, the most likely reasons I can think of are either status (you don't get any from using coupons, but you do for having a higher salary), or the externalities if putting a coupon book habit into place and the overhead of actually using them.

Of course the problem in the article was really one of communication. If the only problem to be solved was "keeping up with inflation" then coupon books could be a solution... once, until inflation continues and overcomes the buying power provided by the coupons. However it's a communication problem because the problem isn't "keep up with inflation", it's "maintain a consistent quality of life despite inflation". The latter would have meant the overhead of the coupons was a non starter unless they actually increased QoL beyond merely overcoming the impact of inflation on my back statement, which, they don't.

It's a bit of a ramble as I've written it here, but this is the approach I find valuable (not saying you _should_ do the same, only that I find it works well for me), and I would never take the time to do this kind of thinking if I rejected ideas that "should offend me" without consideration.

<comment><USER7> _> What is the value in being offended, like, ever?_

It's a good bullshit detector. Instead of wasting time dealing with my board member's asinine suggestions, I can study interview questions and get a job at an employer that doesn't suck.

An employer who suggests coupon books in lieu of CoL adjusted salaries is probably out-of-touch or manipulative in a lot of other ways. Call me irrational, but I don't want to spend my days working for a super manipulative employer...

 _> Surely if you could genuinely acheive your goals by leveraging coupon books, wouldn't that be worth considering?_

Sure. But in lieu of raises that keep up with CoL? Hell No.

 _> you'll have an understanding of why it won't work beyond "well it offended me"._

Again, I suggested common sense!

Until I start seeing 2 for 1 mortgages, 1/2 off gasoline, BOGO surgeries, and 25% off tuition in coupon books? Well, it doesn't even take a spreadsheet for me to know that the things moving my CoL up aren't stocked in the Target or grocery stores...

Again, hyper-rationalism that distracts you from using common sense is silly.

 _> However it's a communication problem because the problem isn't "keep up with inflation", it's "maintain a consistent quality of life despite inflation"._

CoL is a quantitative measure of QoL. I'm having a really hard time imagining situations where inflation in the face of stagnant wages doesn't translate into lower QoL. Especially for folks who work for a living.

 _> and I would never take the time to do this kind of thinking if I rejected ideas that "should offend me" without consideration._

So you would really response neutrally to your employer handing out coupon books instead of annual raises?

Then you're being had.

<comment><USER8> > I suggested common sense!

Common sense is far from infallible and in the face of an apparent in-good- faith suggestion I'm willing to question my common sense rather than follow it blindly. Note that this isn't the same as ignoring it, I'm just willing to admit that I might be wrong to start with.

> Until I start seeing 2 for 1 mortgages, 1/2 off gasoline, BOGO surgeries, > and 25% off tuition in coupon books?

If I were really offered coupons as a solution to CoL, I would look into if such things existed. Sometimes what exists if you care to look for it can surprise you.

> So you would really response neutrally to your employer handing out coupon > books instead of annual raises?

Realistically I would react as follows:

A) Immediate surprise and perhaps some incredulity depending on how the suggestion was delivered, but still thank them for the suggestion and let them know I would consider it.

B) Knowing basically nothing about using coupon books in this context, I'd take a few tens of minutes to look into how viable such a solution would be.

C) Conclude that while potentially useful in isolation, the overhead involved in implementing the suggestion wipes out the usefulness.

D) Return to my employer and inform them that their suggestion is not a viable solution and that I wish to continue salary negotiations in good faith.

This whole process would take less than a day.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Eh. I disagree.

Somethings really are just a matter of simple advice.

I read a reddit thread where old people were asked what they wished they did different about 7 years ago. I started flossing daily. I quit smoking. I stopped consuming first pop and, later, 95% of my other refined sugar intake. I started biking to get around. I started running. I started doing body weight mobility exercises. I started standing while working for half of the day.

I read in that thread how one of the older people said that the key to getting a new habit to stick was to do it multiple times per week and to not try to change anything else until it had normalized. I'm not sure if that works for everyone, but it really worked for me. Once every month or so I'd introduce a new small change.

I'm so much healthier and attractive now than I was back then. It's changed everything about me. My politics. My mind set. I even came to accept that I wasn't just attracted to women.

This article seems to be attacking something that I also agree should be attacked[0] but he throws the baby out with the bath water. The truth is, unless there is a serious medical condition involved, it is simple to lose weight. It is simple to have a healthy body. It is simple to have a healthy mouth and to keep your teeth into old age.

What's hard is changing your default reaction to information. It's the perceived threat to your sense of self-worth. Some people never learn this lesson or never fully embrace it. If you have the right mind set and someone says "you should eat more veggies and less sugar" the humble person says "how do you make those taste good?"[1] instead of scoffing.

[0] Those incessant listicle articles and garbage _one-simple-trick_ magazine advice articles.

[1] If I ever write an article on how to eat healthy I'm going to spend 50% or more of it on how to have food taste great[2]. The Atkins / keto crowd get flavour by default because fat and meat is naturally flavourful.

[2] Coles notes below.

Salads:

Find fresh herbs, learn what they're useful for, and use them everywhere you can. For salads mix some combination of olive oil, butter, mustard, finely chopped raw garlic, an anchovy or three, salt, pepper. Don't use store bought salad dressing it's loaded with garbage.

Favour mixed greens, kale, and shredded veggies over lettuce.

Breakfast:

Omelettes, make sure to get the right pan and jiggle the eggs. I prefer thyme, mushroom, onion, soy sauce, red hot chillies combos; but red onion, dill, and goat cheese is good too.

If time is a concern you can pre-make breakfast burritos and freeze them or look up overnight oats. When you're not that hungry eat a banana or other fruit. Berries taste better the smaller they are.</comment>