Ask HN: Why are airplane touch screens so poor? - <AUTHOR> I was wondering if anybody with a bit of understanding of touch screens or electronics on-board airplanes would have some insight on why touch screens are so poor on planes. I just flew on Virgin America and while the functionality is steadily improving (wi-fi, google maps, ordering your food in seat), it's still pretty poor and the performance is a joke, especially when you compare to your iPad.<p>Is the software just crap? Is it the hardware? Is there no financial incentive to improve? <comment><USER2> Let's forget the rants against airlines for a while: The big difference in touch screen technology is about resistive (old-fashioned, "soft" screens) vs capacitive screens (cf. iphone etc.). The last time most airlines installed their systems was when resistive technology was still state of the art, so I assume that most of what you get in the recent airliners still reflects that date.

Have we forgotten that decent touchscreens are still pretty new? Ferchrissakes, the first iphone came out in 2007…

</comment><comment><USER3> It's because everything in an airliner is heavily regulated by the FAA. Everything has to be rigorously tested and certified.

This just increases the development cycle length. Compare to car nav systems, which also lag behind. Then add the length of the certification process, (even more extreme) conservatism in the industry, installation time (airliner must be taken out of service for a week or two, which is a lot of forgone revenue), etc.

Also, there are power consumption and weight considerations. It may not seem like much for one seat, but multiply by 300 seats in an airliner and it starts be significant.

Add that all up, and it's no longer surprising that the systems are outdated.

</comment><comment><USER4> Think about it for a minute. We're talking about hardware and software installed by companies who now charge for _pillows_ on many flights. They no longer provide meals. Their employees, in particular the flight attendants, are paid something like $25-35k per year and they deal with all the crap that we as human beings can make another person go through.

They cut costs at every corner, while charging more and more money to fly. That's why its a terrible idea as an investor to put your money into airline companies. Very little chance of long-term return on your investment.

</comment><comment><USER5> The quick answer, bureaucracy. It has been several years since I have worked in the field. From what I recall, companies developing airborne software have to be indoctrinated, trained, and certified. Then every line of airborne software whether it is for engine controls or in flight entertainment has to be certified by the FAA. These are not quick, easy, or cheap to obtain.

[http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/air_so...](http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/air_software/)

</comment><comment><USER6> Well, there are a lot more regulatory issues they have to deal with in regards to EMi and such. The certification process of those kinds of devices is long and expensive. Plus, airlines are not exactly cash cows, so its not like they can afford to put a $2k entertainment system in each seat.

So, what you're looking at is the 5 year old state-of-the-art-on-a-budget technology. With that in mind, the rest of it becomes more clear.

</comment><comment><USER7> On a Delta flight, my screen was rebooting itself every couple minutes. By the time we landed I had nearly memorized the boot messages from Linux kernel 2.036, which dates back to 1998 or so.

</comment><comment><USER8> Maybe they suck because the airlines run the screens. Why aren't there media or advertising companies running the screens, like the screens in the back of some taxis? In exchange for installing/upgrading/maintaining the screens, the company gets to put occasional commercials in the movies the passenger watches, takes a cut of the proceeds when the passenger browses and buys from Skymall on the screen, etc.

<comment><USER9> They could simply run them on Android and install a couple of apps.

<comment><USER10> All the more reason they can easily make it better :)</comment></comment></comment>


How Poetry and Math Intersect - <AUTHOR> https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/how-poetry-and-math-intersect-180968869/?no-ist <comment><USER2> This reminds me of this quote by William James in a review of a book of essays by the mathematician and philosopher William Kingdon Clifford:

 _But even the distant reader must allow that Clifford 's mental personality belonged to the highest possible type to say no more. The union of the mathematician with the poet, fervor with measure, passion with correctness, this surely is the ideal. And if in these modern days we are to look for any prophet or saviour who shall influence our feelings towards the universe as the founders and renewers of past religions have influenced the minds of our fathers, that prophet, if he ever come, must, like Clifford, be no mere sentimental worshipper of science, but an expert in her ways. And he must have what Clifford had in so extraordinary a degree—that lavishly generous confidence in the worthiness of average human nature to be told all truth, the lack of which in Goethe made him an inspiration to the few but a cold riddle to the many._

</comment><comment><USER3> I write regularly, and I call it poetry. I write 3 to 4 nights a week while I'm out.

I've also participated in slams and open mics. There is some poetry I'm just like meh on. It's like I don't like country it's just not my tune.

I didnt really get into it till I saw a guy perform at a slam. The inflection of his voice, body posture, it was close to rapping in a way. There was just a palpable fire. But I won't read others poetry, ill gladly listen. Poetry is best seeing the missing element the author left off the page.

I feel my writing is very cold. Being an aspie my emotions are very distant. So my writing comes off cold and logical. Instead of math i rely heavily on mythology Greek, Nordic, Roman, and enochian. Then will also drop to Latin at times.

Listening to people perform. It's often in a similar bar, and phrasing. Which makes sense they've crafted a tool set. Then are crafting new ideas with it.

<comment><USER4> If you don't mind my asking, where did you see this person perform, and what topics of poetry did they speak upon that inspired you to begin writing?

</comment></comment><comment><USER5>
      KING CLAUDIUS

      Thanks, dear my lord.

      Exit POLONIUS

      O(0), my offence(0) is rank it smells to heaven;
      It hath the primal(1) eldest curse upon't,
      A brother's murder. Pray can I not(0),
      Though inclination be as sharp as will:
      My stronger guilt defeats my strong intent;
      And, like a man to(2) double(2) business bound,
      I stand in pause where I shall first(1) begin,
      And both neglect. What if this cursed hand
      Were thicker than itself with brother's blood,
      Is there not(0) rain enough in the sweet heavens
      To(2) wash it white as snow? Whereto(2) serves mercy
      But to(2) confront the visage of offence(0)?
      And what's in prayer but this two-fold(2) force(4),
      To(2) be forestalled(4) ere we come to(2) fall,
      Or pardon'd being down? Then I'll look up;
      My fault is past. But, O(0), what form of prayer
      Can serve my turn? 'Forgive me my foul murder'?
      That cannot(0) be; since I am still possess'd
      Of those effects for which I did the murder,
      My crown, mine own ambition and my queen.
      May one(1) be pardon'd and retain the offence(0)?
      In the corrupted currents of this world
      Offence's(0) gilded hand may shove by justice,
      And oft 'tis seen the wicked prize itself
      Buys out the law: but 'tis not(0) so above;
      There is no(0) shuffling, there the action lies
      In his true nature; and we ourselves compell'd,
      Even to(2) the teeth and forehead(4) of our faults,
      To(2) give in evidence. What then? what rests?
      Try what repentance can: what can it not(0)?
      Yet what can it when one(1) can not(0) repent?
      O(0) wretched state! O(0) bosom black as death!
      O(0) limed soul, that, struggling to(2) be free,
      Art more engaged! Help, angels! Make assay!
      Bow, stubborn knees; and, heart with strings of steel,
      Be soft as sinews of the newborn babe!
      All may be well.

<comment><USER5> Also, "too, too solid flesh," "double, double, toil and trouble," etc. etc.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Disappointed to see no reference to this brilliant paper/book proposal:

[http://people.sju.edu/~rhall/proposal.pdf](http://people.sju.edu/~rhall/proposal.pdf) Rachel Wells Hall - The Sound of Numbers: A Tour of Mathematical Music Theory/Math for Poets and Drummers [2008]

Slides:

[http://people.sju.edu/~rhall/Rhythms/Poets/arcadia.pdf](http://people.sju.edu/~rhall/Rhythms/Poets/arcadia.pdf)

More:

[http://people.sju.edu/~rhall/Rhythms/](http://people.sju.edu/~rhall/Rhythms/)

Even more:

[http://people.sju.edu/~rhall/](http://people.sju.edu/~rhall/)

</comment><comment><USER7> I have never understood the attraction of poetry, and I spent 4 years getting a degree in Creative Writing.

I've talked to my peers about this, tried to "get it." It's something wrong with _me_ , I'm not trying to come across as if I'm the only one seeing through the emperor's clothing here. But, this first poem in the article for example (by the way, copy-pasting from this website is a fucking nightmare)

>I prove a theorem and the house expands: the windows jerk free to hover near the ceiling, the ceiling floats away with a sigh.

I can appreciate a clever use of vocabulary, the choice of breathing words like "expand, hover, float, sigh" centered around the fulcrum of "jerk." Academically I get why it's a good poem. But I feel _nothing_ towards it, it doesn't seem special to me, to the point that it seems even unnecessary.

Maybe someone else is here that used to be as cynical and boring as me and somehow has since "gotten" this art form that people have been playing around with for a couple thousand years, and is willing to share how they did it?

EDIT: I'm remembering specific incidents now, like of sitting around on a grassy hill on campus, smoking pot, while my peers read their favorite poems to eachother, everyone's nodding their heads, but I'm just _not fucking getting it!_

>As a professor, she used poetry in her mathematics classes to help students to connect emotionally to mathematics...

how???

<comment><USER8> Your comment really resonates with me. I feel the same way towards poetry. I have a background in music so I understand rhythm and I can appreciate good word choice and other poetic devices.

But I don't feel anything from poetry.

I've described it as like being tone-deaf but to poetry. The majority of poems make me feel nothing, and the ones where I do feel something is more because of the story than because it's in the form of a poem. I think that for the poems I do feel an emotional response to, I could experience the same emotional response without the form of the poem as long as the same story was there.

One of the few poems I felt an emotional response towards was Shel Silverstein's "Masks" that I read as a kid. It was a short poem and I think I responded to it because of the story it told, and not necessarily because of the form.

I wonder if you feel similarly. Do you feel something towards poems that tell a compelling story or do you never feel any emotional response to anything written in the form of a poem?

<comment><USER9> Never bother with a poem that is less than 100 years old.

If you really want to be 'moved', don't bother with any poem less than 200 years old.

The poems that remain after 300 years are even better... Unfortunately, you start running into problems in that more work is put into deciphering the archaic English than enjoying the ideas expressed.

The point is, 99.9% of modern poetry sucks. It's not you.

<comment><USER10> > 99.9% of modern poetry sucks

I don't believe that that's what's going on here. The majority of _all_ poetry sucks. As does the majority of all music, novels, paintings etc.

But the ones that don't suck persist. That's why it seems that older poetry is better, because we've forgotten/ignored the dross.

This tendency has been exacerbated in some fields by the split between art for marketing purposes and art for commercial purposes. But that hasn't really affected poetry, most of it's poor because most poets aren't very good.

<comment><USER9> You are exactly right. I left your observation unstated as I felt it obvious.

I was involved in a project to create an anthology of poems. I spent much time reviewing previous anthologies, published in the 1800s, of 'contemporary' poems... that is, the books contained the best poems written during the period the book was published.

And, the verdict? The overwhelming bulk of the poems were terrible.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


4-year-old genius has same IQ as Einstein - <AUTHOR> http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/4-year-old-genius-iq-einstein-article-1.1547147

<comment><USER2> This could be reincarnation of Einstein ^_^ "Sherwyn has read over 190 books and his favourite is the encyclopedia as he loves learning new things."

<comment> vezzy-fnord While no doubt he will grow up to be of high intellect, having a very high IQ by itself does not guarantee you will accomplish anything major.

Case in point: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Ung- yong](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Ung-yong)</comment></comment>


Show HN: Tinder for Startups - <AUTHOR> http://volleyit.co/

<comment><USER2> Nice looking UI and very easy to use. Just signed up. Can't imagine I'll remember to check this site often, will there be any email notifications?

<comment><USER3> There are e-mail updates. I've even gotten a personal e-mail from the co- founder Mike Murchison himself when I signed up.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> So apart from just having a sign up form, what does this actually do? I haven't signed up, give me the reason why I should.</comment>


Protecting data in the cloud (2013) - <AUTHOR> https://news.mit.edu/2013/protecting-data-in-the-cloud-0702 <comment><AUTHOR> "Cloud computing — outsourcing computational tasks over the Internet — could give home-computer users unprecedented processing power and let small companies launch sophisticated Web services without building massive server farms.

But it also raises privacy concerns. A bank of cloud servers could be running applications for 1,000 customers at once; unbeknownst to the hosting service, one of those applications might have no purpose other than spying on the other 999."</comment>


An Outspoken Voice for Women in Tech, Foiled by His Tone - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/26/technology/personaltech/an-outspoken-voice-for-women-in-tech-foiled-by-his-tone.html <comment><USER2> Foiled by his tone, or his content?

I don't see this as very complicated. Women, just like any aggrieved minority, don't want to be spoken for, or spoken to. They want to be heard; they want to speak for themselves.

The goal of engagement is not to get some establishment figure to "parrot some feminist line", it's to listen to women's voices, for a change. The primary work of male allies should not be speaking up on behalf of women, it should be facilitating the voices of women. I.e., mostly, stand aside and listen.

<comment><USER3> >I don't see this as very complicated. Women, just like any aggrieved minority, don't want to be spoken for, or spoken to. They want to be heard; they want to speak for themselves.

Are you a woman?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Read the Amelia Greenhall post and look at the conversation on Twitter about this. The entire "conversation" emanating from people critiquing him is a thermonuclear kafkatrap. None of it is in good faith and much of it is flagrantly abusive, in particular the accusations that he was sexually propositioning a woman by suggesting speaking in person.

</comment><comment><USER5> Ironically, I'd never heard of Wadhwa until the current campaign accusing him of hogging the spotlight started.

</comment><comment><USER6> Well, there is a greater issue. Social scientists (or social sciences) have been reduced to a variant of identity politics: who speaks for which group!!

Instead of this (who speaks for which group), these scientists (after all, Wadhwa was (is?) a professor of business) should have produced 'knowledge' about what is going in the tech industry. Here, it requires more than "who speaks for which group": generating non-ad hoc hypotheses to understand phenomena, testing such hypotheses for testable consequences.

When one can't produce knowledge, they end up with arguments. On one hand, one can reasonably argue for any proposition, say P, to an extent. On the other hand, some others can reasonbly argue for the logical opposite of P too. In the end, it boils down to who believes P or not-P.

</comment><comment><USER7> It's best to just stay away from discussion of this issue IMO. Lots of heat but very little light.

</comment><comment><USER8> Oh for pete's sake. This is why I swore off commenting on this issue on HN. You can only lose; you certainly can't win. Unless you stick to parroting some feminist line (and good luck picking WHICH line).

<comment><USER9> I don't see how it's that hard to avoid Wadhwa's mistake. Despite what the article asserts, from what I've seen his problem wasn't so much his tone on Twitter as it was that he was putting himself forward -- and being booked to speak at conferences, etc. -- as a spokesperson for women in tech. And the spokesperson for women in tech _shouldn 't be a man,_ no matter how well- intentioned he is. It should be a woman. Women are perfectly capable of speaking for themselves; they don't need a man to do it for them.

If you're a man (like I am!), and you want to help women in tech (like I do!), and someone approaches you to speak at a conference about that, the thing to do is to _recommend some awesome women you know_ to speak instead. Instead of talking about how women need support in this industry, support an _actual woman_ in the industry.

Otherwise you run the risk of coming off like Wadhwa did. He looked like a carpetbagger ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpetbagger](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpetbagger)) -- someone who had identified a hot trend and jumped on it to raise his own personal profile. And if you're a man who sincerely wants to help women, the way you do that is by helping them raise their own profiles, rather than using their problems to goose your own.

<comment><USER8> Yet, that's cutting out half the available supporters of equal rights, isn't it? Only women may speak about women's issues, seems reasonable. Until you have something to say, and others aren't saying it. Then what? Do you choose a puppet to speak for you? Do you keep silent, hoping someone will make your point for you? What about venues where there ARE no women?

<comment><USER10> You also now open a problem where women should not be speaking for men. Do we really want to enforce such a gendered nature onto our public discourse?

<comment><USER11> This is specifically public discouse about gender-specific issues.

Maybe it's okay for a man to be the spokesperson for women's issues, or a white person to be the spokesperson for black issues, but it's important to realize you're speaking for _someone else_. It's really hard to do that better than that someone. Maybe I'm a better public speaker. Maybe people are more likely to listen to me. Maybe I even have a better understanding of power dynamics and sociology and tech culture. But it's also really, really critical to have an understanding of the perspectives of those I'm speaking for. That's hard. And in this situation, seems like a bunch of those people seemed to feel that wasn't the case.

<comment><USER10> If I'm being given information about heart attacks, I'd much rather hear from a doctor who is well informed on the scientific consensus than a survivor of a heart attack, even if the doctor has never had a single heart problem. Why is information about the experiences of gender or race so different than all other information, being that for any other information, experience is neither necessary nor sufficient for expertise?

Also, anecdotal experience, even by large numbers of the population, should not be taken as anything significant without a scientific endeavor to interpret them. Consider the numerous parents who will state "As a parent..." when disagreeing with an expert on child development. Even if thousands of parents disagree, even if the expert has never been a parent, an immunologist saying children should receive vaccines is still correct.

In all other fields, the expert lacking personal experience has the better perspective than part of the population impacted with their own personal anecdotes.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


How I Use Foursquare Checkins to Beat the Crowd - <AUTHOR> http://blog.zachschnell.com/post/45694585226/how-i-use-checkins-to-beat-the-crowd

<comment><USER2> This is awesome.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you! I love looking at this kind of real-world data, and the project doubled as a great way to practice Python.</comment></comment>


Satellite View Of China's First Aircraft Carrier - <AUTHOR> http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/slideshow/ALeqM5gsDIXw0lMCiDUT3zN_BgUMvYo0vw?docId=ff45a05f37d542fea0f6854bfff884e1&index=0

<comment><USER2> Wow, the last I heard of this, it was an engine-less hulk bought from Russia in order to study how to build aircraft carriers.

</comment><comment><USER3> That is the aircraft carrier they bought from Russia, I believe.

<comment><USER4> Definitely. Varyag is a russian word.</comment></comment>


3D canvas concept - <AUTHOR> http://www.yankodesign.com/2009/05/06/drawing-in-3d/

<comment><USER2> Interesting, but I don't see how this could be very comfortable since there's no resistance, I could see one's arm getting quite tired by holding it in the air for long periods of time on nothing.

I'd much rather something like a falcon for 3D production, or better yet, just stick with a 2D analogue like mouse/keyboard and just use imagination.

It doesn't take that much to manouver in 3D space with a mouse/keyboard combo.

For those about to reply with something along the lines of "but you probably don't..." I use 3D software for several hours a day, every day. I would find something like this (having to move around the object in real space) would only end up hampering my workflow, not enhancing it.

</comment><comment><USER3> The position of the pen could be tracked via infrared with existing tech, but you'd also need to be able to track the position and angle of the glasses in order to render the view correctly.

Also, I doubt that 3 infrared stations would actually suffice, since your body would occlude at least one of the sensors in most positions. You'd probably need several, and they'd likely need to be placed on the ceiling and walls as well as the floor for full coverage.

Not being able to draw on a hard surface would introduce a learning curve, but remember that people already accomplish some pretty intricate designs while never actually touching the surface - Graffiti, airbrushing, etc. I don't think that would actually be too big a stumbling block.

<comment><USER4> I've worked on a project like that before, and two IR cameras is usually sufficient. The user learns how to position the pen such that there are no obstructions. It really just involves facing mostly in a particular direction.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Note that this is _not_ from Wacom despite the name-dropping in the text. It is a very impressive concept nonetheless.

<comment><USER5> A very expensive and unrealistic concept with modern tech. And would be very hard to use without a very good steady hand well designed extensions and a fine program to run it.</comment></comment>


Anger makes people want things more - <AUTHOR> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101101151730.htm

<comment><USER2> That is a subjective conclusion to draw on the data. Wouldn't associating an aggressive face with an object just as likely drive a more aggressive response when the subjects saw it again?</comment>


Earth Had Its 4th Warmest Year on Record in 2018, Say NOAA and Nasa - <AUTHOR> https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/Earth-Had-Its-4th-Warmest-Year-Record-2018-Say-NOAA-and-NASA?cm_ven=hp-slot-2 <comment><USER2> Statistics like this and global warming in general doesn't really worry me that much because I feel like we've got the technology and methods to stop global warming in a very short space of time. The only thing stopping us doing this is people's habits / lack of education. However I reckon they'll come a point when the urgency really hits people and we'll be fine.

<comment><USER3> What evidence do you have to support this? I don't know if any tech that can stop this let alone reverse it. Even with zero emissions tomorrow we are in for real trouble.

All the money in the world won't help you if the planet's ability to support life collapses and takes millions of years to recover. Yes, that's a thing that we are on track for.

We won't be fine, it's a question of how bad we let it get and if it's even feasible to stop it once we realize the trouble we are in. People don't know how much danger we are in already.

<comment><USER2> I don't have any evidence to support it, I just feel like it would be easy to reduce global emissions in a short space of time as we already have the technology. E.g mass installation of renewal energy like wind and solar which we already have the tech for. Eating more plant based foods as animal products are incredibly wasteful, again we can easily do this it's just changing people's habits. More recycling etc, lots that can be done.

Is it really true that with zero emissions tomorrow we'd still be in trouble? I find that hard to believe

<comment><USER4> > I don't have any evidence to support it, I just feel like it would be easy > to reduce global emissions in a short space of time as we already have the > technology.

Unfortunately, none of our _feelings_ are going to be helpful when we pass tipping points that cause the effects to compound on each other. We've already started that process—melting arctic ice means that the ocean there absorbs massive amounts more heat, rather than it reflecting off the surface of the ice.

By the time it's obvious enough that even deniers might believe in it—that is, by the time we have sea levels rising enough to start to drown coastal cities, and formerly fertile places start to become genuine deserts—it will be much, much too late to just "reduce global emissions in a short space of time" or "just change people's habits."

 _If_ it were possible to have zero emissions tomorrow, it would still take many years for the climate to return to what we consider "normal"—and some parts might not be able to do so at all, as weather patterns have already begun to change enough that they might not return to a previous equilibrium, but find a new one that shifts moisture or heat from one region to another to the great detriment of both (at least for a few generations).

And zero emissions isn't something we're going to be able to get to this century. Not unless the political situation changes hugely worldwide.

So...we're in trouble. Not "we will be". We are. Now. And it's going to get a _lot_ worse. It is _possible_ to make things better, but it will take massive shifts in patterns of consumption, and probably won't happen until we've seen several parts of the world devastated by famine and war.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Another way of saying this year was colder than the last 3 years

<comment><USER6> Or another way is that the past 20 years have been hotter than the previous 20 years, excluding 1998 which was a spike in the the otherwise consistent trend. It's in the chart in the article.

You did read more than the title, right?</comment></comment>


It's Samsung's fault for Apple's shitty products - <AUTHOR> https://hackernoon.com/its-samsung-s-fault-for-apple-s-shitty-products-6dbb5d03ba2a <comment><USER2> > People do just fine with knobs. We have opposable thumbs. We can flip > switches.

:-)

</comment><comment><USER3> This guy is wow. Self centered arrogance anyone?</comment>


NYC accused of illegally altering parking tickets to get more fines from drivers - <AUTHOR> https://nypost.com/2019/10/19/city-accused-of-illegally-altering-parking-tickets-to-squeeze-more-fines-from-drivers/ <comment><USER2> From the article it sounds more like the cop who initially wrote the ticket filling in the missing info later (before filing it), rather than the city doing it in bulk.

Which makes the title clickbait, so I flagged it.

Suggested new title: NYC Cops accused of illegally correcting incorrectly written parking tickets

<comment><AUTHOR> Please read the complete article, it does not state that the officer updated but that the tickets appeared altered later which seems more like NYC has a group of people doing it.</comment></comment>


Premium Advertising marketplace and self serve - <AUTHOR> http://www.adclays.com

<comment><AUTHOR> Check out Adclays for your direct advertising needs. launching soon...</comment>


Inactivity Is Harmful, Even With Trips to the Gym - <AUTHOR> http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/12/the-hazards-of-the-couch/?src=me&ref=homepage <comment><USER2> My stars, this is stupid. What if I sit around all day reading books or writing in notebooks? Sedentary activity often involves looking at a screen but is by no means the same thing.

/rant</comment>


A simple guide to GIT using spatial analogies (scroll down) - <AUTHOR> http://web.archive.org/web/20110511175022/http://tartley.com/

<comment><USER2>
        To visualise this, it's simplest to think of the
        state of your repository as a point in a high-
        dimensional 'code-space',  in which branches are
        represented as n-dimensional membranes, mapping
        the spatial loci of successive commits onto the
        projected manifold of each cloned repository.

Oh, of course, it's so clear to me now! -_-

<comment><AUTHOR> Exactly! :)

A good satire about all the "git is super simple" tutorials.</comment></comment>


New HackerSpace in South Florida - <AUTHOR> https://www.hacklabnobo.org

<comment><USER2> It doesn't load.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, will repost (with the right link)</comment></comment>


Typekit.com goes down taking with it many websites - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/#!/search/typekit%20down <comment><AUTHOR> Their Status page (<http://status.typekit.com/>) is also down.

<comment><USER2> Working here

<comment><AUTHOR> Seems that it is only down in Australia & New Zealand.

I was able to get on it via a vpn. They have updated the page with the following message:

We are currently investigating issues related to font serving in Australia. We apologize for the inconvenience. If you have any questions, please drop a note to firstname.lastname@example.com</comment></comment></comment>


The History of Medicinal Lithium - <AUTHOR> https://literaryreview.co.uk/whats-in-the-7-up <comment><USER2> Curiously, but I suppose not surprisingly, another element in the same column -- chromium -- has been shown to yield similar positive effects against depression. In the US, this is available over the counter as chromium picolinate. [https://www.cell.com/trends/pharmacological- sciences/fulltex...](https://www.cell.com/trends/pharmacological- sciences/fulltext/S0165-6147\(00\)01622-9) [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12559660](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12559660)

<comment><USER3> please be careful in equating the two: there are decades of studies, including large trials, demonstrating benefit for lithium. It's considered gold standard treatment for bipolar disorder even in an era where big pharma pushes hard for newer and more costly meds. there is modest and inconsistent evidence from small trials that chromium picolinate, a dietary supplement, may be beneficial in depression. Oh, and note that chromium is more expensive than lithium too!

(edit to add: re lithium: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5947163/;](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5947163/;) re chromium, I could find one RCT with n=15 in depression)

<comment><USER4> > big pharma pushes hard for newer and more costly meds.

Lithium is not perfect. It causes permanent kidney damage and is a pretty bad teratogen. Also overdose is pretty bad, which is never ideal for a mood medication.

There is actual value in investigating new medications for bipolar beyond big pharma profits.

<comment><USER5> I was under the impression Lithium side effects or dangers can be mitigated by monitoring blood levels properly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Liquid lithium syrup is still available (with a prescription?). I purchased some, but without sugar it doesn't taste much like sevenUp when combined with soda water. The first time I ever had it (in a mental ward) it really tasted like sevenUp, but I think that was set and setting more than anything. I love lithium (especially in comparison to newer mood stabilizers), but I do have to track my liver function with it. I generally just use pills, but in other countries the liquid is more popular. This is all for bipolar, not for recreation. I'll have to check out that book from the old library.

<comment><USER7> My wife has tried several new mood stabilizers and combination drugs, but none of them work as well as lithium

Her old med (Latuda) will go up to $300/mo after the 1 year trial period....but it never worked very well.

It is absurd that something so simple should work as effectively as it does

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Fun lithium fact: while most people start the lithium story with Cade (indeed, there's a form of lithium-responsive bipolar disorder which was sometimes called Cade's disease), it was previously used by Lincoln's surgeon general, William Hammond, to treat manic excitement (in the form of lithium bromide). But Hammond thought it was the bromide, not the lithium, that did the trick.

obligatory wikipedia reference: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_A._Hammond](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_A._Hammond)

</comment><comment><USER8> Related read: [https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/opinion/sunday/should- we-...](https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/opinion/sunday/should-we-all-take- a-bit-of-lithium.html)

</comment><comment><USER9> Some practical provisos if you are actually taking lithium:

[https://pro.psychcentral.com/what-to-remember-about- lithium/](https://pro.psychcentral.com/what-to-remember-about-lithium/)

[https://www.drugs.com/lithium.html](https://www.drugs.com/lithium.html)

[https://www.livestrong.com/article/553214-correct-liquid- int...](https://www.livestrong.com/article/553214-correct-liquid-intake-with- lithium/)

</comment><comment><USER10> interestingly lithium's medicinal properties depend on its isotope</comment>


Linux Kernel Interactive Diagram - <AUTHOR> http://www.makelinux.net/kernel_map

<comment><USER2> IMO more convenient version: [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5b/Linux_ker...](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5b/Linux_kernel_map.png)

<comment><AUTHOR> but non-interactive.

<comment><USER3> The interactivity was only getting in the way for me. And if the file was in a vector format, such as pdf, I could navigate in all the same ways using Preview (or another pdf reader).

<comment><USER4> But the interactivity is really cool -- not only can you pan/zoom, you can click on any function, and it'll take you to the exact file(s) and line where the function is implemented.

I wouldn't want to do that in a PDF reader.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> You can pan and zoom with the mouse, too. The controls at the top right made me think i can't do that, at first.</comment>


New Zealand Government Announces That Software Will No Longer Be Patentable - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/sites/reuvencohen/2013/05/08/new-zealand-government-announces-that-software-will-no-longer-be-patentable/

<comment><USER2> Looks like Richard Stallman wins again this week.</comment>


Show HN: HakiTo, Perfect App for Dog Owners - <AUTHOR> http://www.haki.to <comment><AUTHOR> Hi all,

HakiTo, the dog lovers app, completely revolutionizes how you manage your dog's health and wellness—all in a fun and engaging way to help ensure that with your busy schedule, all responsibilities to your pooch are taken care of.

Besides the obvious — reminders and tracking for scheduled mealtimes, playtime, health check-ups etc. — HakiTo provides training tutorials from experts so when you ask your dog to sit, give you the paw, or not pee on the floor—you worry no more.

Looking forward to your feedback and at the end of this month we have a limited beta testing, so if you want to be part of it register on the form on our website.</comment>


Ask HN: What do you look for in a remote developer? - <AUTHOR> I'll be applying for jobs soon. I'm a Rails dev with 4 years exp, currently learning Elixir. I've just created a blog for my future employer and potentially future clients, gotten testimonials from my previous clients, reading interview questions, anything else that I can do to improve my chances/add value to the company I'll be joining? <comment><USER2> My background: Worked many years in offices, and the last ~4 years remote.

Understand that companies hiring remote developers, especially for the first time, might not be aware of things _they_ need to do for success. These include:

(1) The manager needs to be above-standard.

(2) They need to be ready to treat communications challenges as first-order, high-priority problems.

(3) They need someone onsite who will advocate for you, particularly w.r.t. challenges that are specific to you working remotely.

(4) They need to understand the challenges posed by distributed teams, particularly if the team isn't _entirely_ remote.

As far as what _you_ can do, I'd suggest:

(1) Learn everything you can about the challenges of being a remote employee.

(2) Address those challenges as best you can at your end.

(3) Be ready to educate your employer about those challenges as well.

(4) Recognize that the employer just might be incapable of properly handling a remote employee. I'd suggest screening employers carefully if possible, and be prepared to move on to another job if they're not able to do what they need to do to make remote work.

<comment><USER3> You mention it, but I want to harp on it -

There is a huge, huge difference between being a remote employee on a mostly colocated team, and a fully distributed team.

I would NOT take a job that had me be remote to a colocated team, unless you have experience doing that, and the team in question has experience with remote members already.

Transitioning from an onsite to a remote role on the same team is different, as you already have carved out what expectations you have with your team, and going remote doesn't change those. But starting out like that makes it so only -you- have the communication difficulties. That conversation that changed all the priorities this sprint that happened in a hallway? You missed it. No one thought to tell you. Etc. That sort of thing -happens-, and it's very hard to solve.

A fully remote team, however, hard as it may be, at least doesn't suffer from that. Everyone -has- to be cognizant of who is involved in a conversation; every conversation requires a bit of effort, be it on Slack, email, the phone, video conferencing, etc. That little extra effort that is required for any conversation ensures all the relevant parties get looped in (unlike a conversation at someone's desk or in the hallway).

That's huge.

So, if you haven't worked remotely before, look for a fully remote team, or look to transition from a colocated job to a remote one. I would seriously consider staying clear of being a remote employee on a colocated team.

<comment><USER4> "I would NOT take a job that had me be remote to a colocated team, unless you have experience doing that, and the team in question has experience with remote members already."

yes! That is very good point and can't be overstated. Being the only remote worker on an otherwise face-to-face team takes an almost peerless manager and team. Even if it starts off well i've seen it devolve to where the remote team member is left out of all discussion and becomes just a place to park tasks.

<comment><USER5> As somebody doing this now I am absolutely out of the loop on certain discussions but while it's often challenging, it can actually be helpful in certain cases. Many of my teammates end up being roped into meetings and ad- hoc tasks as backup but ultimately provide little or no input and just waste their time. Meanwhile, I'm protected from a lot of the distracting, low-value work and am left to focus on things I'm leading and anything important enough to be communicated to the group as a broadcast or call to action. Additionally, my group has become so accustomed to working in a way that accommodates remote work that the colocated team members have started working from home more often, encouraging further adjustment to support remote work. That being said, I don't think my arrangement would have been successful without having my manager and a couple of colleagues acting as my advocates on the ground.

<comment><USER6> Good management will also avoid including people unnecessarily and encourage a culture where people can depart when it's obvious they're not needed. I tried making an early exit from meetings more acceptable with humor. But ultimately everyone has to buy into the idea.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'll be 100% honest even though it might not be applicable for you:

One of the most valuable things I look for is someone who has _already_ worked remotely.

From my personal point of view not everyone is suited to doing remote work.

* Some people cannot work up the motivation to get stuff done when the bar for others realizing they are slacking off is a lot higher.

* Some people realize they miss the meatspace interaction and decide to quit after three months which you mostly spent ramping them up, so not quite their full potential.

* And some others realize they cannot really focus at home for a plethora of reasons.

Anyway, hiring someone with no remote experience always feels like a risk. Perhaps you could find a way to assuage those concerns, and improve your chances that way.

<comment><USER8> Second this - I worked remote for 3 years, and it's a unique skill set. I don't think I could do it again, until I have kids at least - the loneliness and "you're never working, or done working" thing gets _weird_. I'd need to know someone has already worked through all of that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Our team is entirely remote (mostly contractors currently). Here are the things I look for:

1) Productivity. Is this person working and getting things done? Can I rely on them and trust them?

2) Quality. Is the work being done to a satisfactory standard?

3) Communication. Can this person speak English well enough?

For number 1, do you have a github profile with private contributions showing? It's the first thing I look at when talking to anyone. If you have a wall of blank, I'm immediately less interested. Obviously there are false negatives here, but there are so many candidates that it's easier to just move on to people who look productive. Other things I look for here are positive reviews on sites like Upwork or good tenure at previous positions.

For number 2, we typically hire very quickly and just give people test tasks. If they are completed well, we keep on giving more test tasks. Eventually the tasks become much larger.

For number 3, this is really simple. If the writing is good, then I'd look to have a video call and see how good the verbal English is.

</comment><comment><USER10> This is a pretty good question! When i'm looking to hire this is what I look for: (1) Excellent written and verbal communication. Since there is limited in-person interaction it is paramount that a developer can clearly and effectively communicate about a project/status/whatever.

(2) Asks lots of questions. Builds off of communication.

(3) Be a self-starter/self-motivator. Supervision is very low, so I need to make sure someone can get started/done without a ton of oversight.

(4) Knows how to ask for help. Don't be shy about not knowing something and getting stuck. Sometimes it's better to ask someone for help rather than trying to brute force the issue yourself.

Edit: formatting

<comment><USER11> Unless this is a some kind of deeply sarcastic/ironic answer, I love it as a prime example of how interviewers do not actually know what they are looking for, and most of their questions are just there to reinforce their initial gut feeling about a candidate.

How can points 2 and 3 even remotely co-exist? They are like completely opposite of each other! You _by definition_ cannot be a self-starter and get work done without oversight, if you require to ask a lot of questions to do anything. Yes, it is always helpful to ask clarifying questions whenever you are not sure about something (and sometimes even when you are sure), but this is like the very opposite of a lack of oversight.

Now you may try to clarify whatever you meant, but, oh no, that would mean that you yourself cannot communicate effectively about what you are actually looking for and what you mean, which makes the first point very vague as well.

<comment><USER12> Of course you can. Someone may not need oversight, but may need guidance. If I hire the best developer on technology X, he will still need guidance navigating my own problems before fixing X's usage.

Also bear in mind that _initially_ you will need some orientation, but the expectation is that you will progress to self starter.

And finally, a good communicator doesn't really need to communicate well all the time.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'm a Freelancer and work a lot of remote projects. Here's the most important skills.

1\. Clear communicator. Get in front of and clarify issues so you dont waste anyones time.

2\. You get things done on your own. You dont waste time on irrelevant stuff, but you constantly pludge forward getting stuff on the agenda done, without anyone having to watch over you / motivate you.

3\. Excellent Communication skills. Did I alread mention that? Ita that important. You better be able to clearly communicate and be able to manage sending emails, answering chats promptly, etc.

<comment><USER14> pludge?

<comment><USER15> Maybe plow + trudge? I've been on a few projects where that was a valid verb.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> So you are really asking two questions:

How can I improve my chance of being hired?

And, if I am hired, how can I improve my chance of success at the company.

I will defer answering question #1 to folks who have hired plenty of remote devs (I have only hired a few).

For question #2, I have a few things to say, based on my experience as a remote developer and observations of others. Many of these are predicated on working for a company where remote work is not normal.

1\. Set expectations. This will be a conversation between you and your manager. Depending on how experienced the manager is, you may or may not be driving the conversation. But have it either way. This will include things like:

How is status communicated?

Are there core hours of availability I need to keep?

What are the best tools to use fot asynchronous and synchronous communication?

Can we set up a regular meeting to check in about my remote work performance?

2\. Be proactive. Proactive about communication. About your work. About making sure your manager or lead knows what you have done and are doing. Don't let any needed question go unanswered.

3\. Perform above average, at least for the first 6 months. This is important when starting any job, but especially when you aren't there. This means being on time to every meeting, going above and beyond in helping other team members and in general bringing your A game. This will pay dividends when your situation comes up in future management discussions.

4\. Be prepared to ask a lot of questions. Discussions will happen without you, and you need to be able to confidently ask how decisions were arrived at. If possible, document how the decisions were arrived st (Google docs, slack). This discipline will benefit everyone, but is easy to slack on when everyone is onsite.

5\. Be prepared to have a slower career trajectory. Even for remote friendly companies, management is typically a onsite function (unless the company is 100% remote, of course).

I love my remote commute (roll out of bed, walk a few feet to the office). Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER16> Aside from all of the usual hot fluff, I know some will disagree, but..

a) open source activity b) github activity c) active blogging on knowledge or topic related to dev

The reason? Remote work takes a lot of independent work (obviously). And external activity from just a job is a great signal that "hey they like this enough to do it in their own time." This indicates that their interest goes beyond just what they're getting paid for.

I know, I know. "But that's not necessarily a great indicator!"

When you're on a big time crunch to fill the role, and you have 100s of folks to look through, you've got to filter somehow. And quite frankly things like this are going to be far more proving than just "well I have nothing up because it was all company work so I can't show you" or "I have a life outside of coding" etc etc.

</comment><comment><USER17> At Envoy ([https://envoy.com/](https://envoy.com/)) we have roughly 33% of our engineering team working out of their homes so I can speak to both what we look for and what we've found that works:

(1) High I/O. Communication between folks on and offsite can be lower bandwidth due to tech, not always face to face or synchronous, and fewer serendipitous interactions. You need folks who love hearing from and reaching out to people, such that they have a bias to compensate for these limitations.

(2) Overlapping time zones. Related to above.

(3) Fully formed, mature human beings. Related to above.

(4) Evidence they've been effective doing it. Not everyone can self-manage and motivate. I, for one, suck at it.

(5) Working experience. It's harder to have less-experienced folks tether to teams in other locations, because by nature they need much more communication both ways.

As a bonus, here's what you should look out for when seeking your next team:

(a) The same stuff as above :)

(b) Unintentional biases. Ask when the meetings are scheduled. What tech they use to "dial in" folks. Unclear differentiation in comp, benefits, etc. (it may be different by location, but there should be a methodology behind it) Even clues like heavy use of the word "remote" (which sounds 2nd class) vs something like "distributed".

(shameless plug, we're hiring. [https://envoy.com/jobs/](https://envoy.com/jobs/))

<comment><USER18> Yay, you are looking for a dedicated Product Manager. Too bad all your job offers seem to be relatively non-remote (I'm in Europe).

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> When I have a side project, and I need remote developer, communication skills are the number one skill I look at. Secondly, I look to see if they can code according to a technical specification.

There have been countless times where I have had to spend excess time going back and forth due to lack of these two skills.

Your situation might be a little different if your employer is not someone who can write technical specifications. If this is the case, I would say the skill of translating the customers requirements into a specification would be an important skill.

</comment><comment><USER20> Most important thing I look for as a manager is the candidate's driving/travel distance to a common location.

Example: If the job's main HQ is in Atlanta, you can work remote and live in Tennessee, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, etc. If we're having a new kickoff meeting and we need everybody to be on site for an in-person meeting, then a short 2-3 hour drive can solve a ton of issues.

Upper management gets to see real live people tackle a project. (If you think your CFO isn't internally questioning spending 6 figures on a remote developer then you haven't spent enough time with him/her). It also builds rapport with the rest of the team. For the remote folks, after working in a house for so long it can start to feel like a prison, and a road trip is a good excuse to get out of the house. I also work remote, so when I travel it's actually a good break during the day.

And we don't do it often. Perhaps once a quarter or so.

<comment><USER3> If it's once a quarter, the cost of a flight + hotel is minimal. An extra $1k a trip (and that's cross country in the US + expensive hotel), for four trips a year, is a drop in the bucket compared to the cost of a developer (especially if they're living in a cheaper area). Driving distance shouldn't be a factor if it's that infrequent; I'd happily pay $4k if I could save even more on salary costs, or if it meant the difference between hiring someone who nails the interview and looks like a great addition, and waiting another month as we keep interviewing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I think number one is the ability to work independently without constant handholding. But there is also the need for willingness to fit in with what's there already. I had remote developers who got a kind of an ego trip and wrote beautiful software but it used some tech that didn't fit with our code so in the end it was useless.

It's really important to listen a lot and understand current processes first before you try to add some innovation.

Be willing to clarify things a lot and if you go the wrong direction be willing to drop your work without hard feelings.

<comment><USER22> Ability to work independently is a double-edge sword.

I've been in situations where independence was communicated to be desired. Yet CTO was a micro-manager and very nit picky during code reviews. This kind of approach backfired and I ended up asking a lot of questions and consulting them on every decision to make sure I don't waste time writing things that were not up to his unwritten/uncommunicated standard.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I've been working remote about 4 years and have managed both good and terrible remote workers.

You have to position yourself as someone who can handle working remotely. Some otherwise great people just can't do it very well, no knock on them, it's just the way some people are wired.

Join a coworking place and put that in your blog. That says to an employer even though this person is remote they appreciate a workspace separate from their personal life. Intermingling work and personal life, even trivial things like folding a load of laundry over lunch, only leads to problems.

Also, say up front that you're up to traveling from time to time to meet face to face. I try to spend about 4 days a month at corporate having lunch and coffee with the people i chat with on slack all day. It goes a long way both for them and for me.

<comment><USER23> I disagree. I am consistently doing small things around the house and have been for the past 3 years in my role. I view it as my break time or the time people in the office spend at the ping pong table, talking in the break room, or on social media. No one is 100% productive. We're not machines.

As for coworking spaces. I am only now joining one because after 3 years I am beginning to get a bit lonely. The one I am looking also has a ton of other benefits like an onsite gym.

<comment><USER24> I would definitely agree here with @systematical. As a remote worker for about 11 years, at least strictly remote with no office travel (ever), there is a real need for human interaction. Be it at a local coffee shop, or a coworking space. We are more than simple task robots, we are humans.

<comment><USER25> Seconded. I like to take a break and go to nearby park with a coffeeshop just to see other people. I don't miss office interaction at all and I have good off hours social life.

And discussing tech stuff at HN is better than doing it with "average" peers at work anyway.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Proactive. You're not having those serendipitous water cooler conversations, so you need to go out of your way to be proactive and think about what work should be done in the future, what issues may arise, and make decisions based on those projections.

This can take the form of brainstorming potential future features/issues, but it can also be as simple as trying to schedule quick 1:1s with coworkers to allow for unstructured verbal conversation.

(Personally I don't think Slack/IRC allow for the same sort of interaction as a verbal conversation)

</comment><comment><USER27> Self-awareness and self-motivation.

I worked for 5 years in a fully remote company, and every single new hire spent a few months iterating and tweaking their own work life -- their office setup, working hours, home life, etc. You have to be able to do that, and manage yourself in general, to be effective. There is nobody there telling you how or when to work, when to relax, when to slack off or not, etc.

Everything else can be practiced and learned, but to be remote it is a fundamental requirement to have the ability to manage thyself.

</comment><comment><USER28> When we hire (we are a 100% remote company), our questions focus on conflict resolution and communication. We like to be able to see assumption of good faith by default, and red flags are things like "automatically blames X for issue Y" or "constantly says negative things about management they've worked with in the past" (people are definitely allowed to have whatever conflicts and opinions they have, but the red flag is bringing that up as the inherently unsolvable obstacle to happy and/or productive work rather than treating it in the same class as any other work-blocking obstacle). We want people to focus on how issues can be fixed rather than who broke them. We look for signs that someone is comfortable receiving guidance from disembodied words in a chatroom, and willing to proactively ask clarifying questions, as well as to patiently answer clarifying questions from other people. Familiarity with remote-collaboration tools is a plus (the usual list of suspects--git and the fancy website UIs built around it, ticket-tracking software, some form of CRM, and IRC/Slack/Discord/keybase chat/whatever, everyone uses some form of group messaging app and this last thing is a really low bar). If the candidate hasn't worked remotely before, we want to suss out how comfortable they will be not being able to see their workmates in person on a daily or weekly basis, because there are a surprising number of people who aren't chill with that and who don't know it until they try. We want some indication that the person can be productive without someone breathing down their neck, although honestly this shakes out pretty fast (once you're with us, we know your commits and your releases and we're either happy with them or not, whether you spent exactly forty or fifty hours a week on your butt in your home office producing them isn't really relevant).

</comment><comment><USER29> I might sound pedantic, but try to write in correct English:

"reading interview questions, anything else that I can do to improve my chances/add value to the company I'll be joining?" -> there should be a ; after "questions", or even better a full stop and a new sentence.

As an employer, I value your grammatical skills as much as your coding skills. I believe that the two go hand in hand.

</comment><comment><USER30> As someone who ran a company that spent most of 18 years with all employees working remote: The most important thing to me was that workers had the ability to treat it as a job. During interviews I'd ask where they planned to work, if they had an office, if they had a family and if so what their plan was for having an office at home.

For example, I had one employee that I spent a significant amount of time over nearly a year trying to help with his performance. The situation seemed to be that his stay-at-home wife just wouldn't respect that he was "at work". One of our discussions he said "My office currently doesn't have a door on it, and she's always coming in to ask me questions."

But, of course, just being at an office doesn't mean the job will be treated seriously. Another co-worker would do maybe an hour of work a day, and spend the rest of the time dicking around on the Internet. Actually, I'd say this described the bulk of my co-workers when I was at the phone company...

</comment><comment><USER31> Background: we are 20 people all remote, 2 years old startup, with employees across US and Europe.

The key is a great communication. You need to show you can easily communicate via emails, slack, video. And I mean: being quick to reply, never keep unanswered questions, be proactive and be able to write and say your thoughts and difficult concepts is simple language.

Example: after the interview, send a follow up email to the interviewer. Send me daily updates on the status of the project even if I did not ask.

</comment><comment><USER32> Don't mention remote. It's unrelated.

What you need to convey is low risk and high fidelity service that you deliver.

All with constant communication.

Make employers realize that requiring someone to sit on their local chair can mean more risk and less quality to them then to hire you.

<comment><USER33> In my experience looking for remote positions (in the last few months) it needs to be part of the conversation. It is related because most companies are not going to be open to a new hire going remote unless they have already considered it for the position.

For example: at one company I talked with the dev lead/manager was 100% remote, so I assumed it was at least a possibility and didn't directly address being remote until I got to the last round of interviews. Ultimately they passed because "we have no doubt of your ability but we want people in the (open) office regularly."

Mentioning it at the beginning would have saved us both time.

<comment><USER34> As a remote senior lead who's hiring developers right now, I'm making a point of telling people whether we'll consider remote or not. Unfortunately my company _really_ wants on-site but given their location and the talent we're after... not happening.

<comment><USER2> I hope you consider posting your job openings in the upcoming "Who's Hiring".

<comment><USER34> I sure did, posted last month too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Being able to work independently. You're not being closely supervised, so you want to make sure your resume, and interview, convey your ability to work on your own.

</comment><comment><USER36> Name != 'jcadam'

I mean, as far as I can tell. I've been trying to land the mythical 'remote gig' for years.

</comment><comment><USER37> In past I have looked for candidates with a bit of experience working remotely.

If you have never done this, you could partner with someone (from different location) on a side project. Product hunt community has a slack channel for finding people.

</comment><comment><USER38> Excellent communication and responsiveness. If you're able to respond to any question on Slack or email within 2min during waking hours, that drastically improves the remote dynamic.

<comment><USER2> But do you really consider that a reasonable bar to set? I don't think most _onsite_ employees want to be that reachable when they're outside the office.</comment></comment>


2009 Startup School, October 24 at Berkeley - <AUTHOR> http://www.startupschool.org

<comment><USER2> FYI - Cal Football has a home game that day. Parking is going to be difficult to come by and expensive. Public transportation will also be pretty full so plan accordingly.

[http://www.calbears.com/sports/m-footbl/sched/cal-m- footbl-s...](http://www.calbears.com/sports/m-footbl/sched/cal-m-footbl- sched.html)

<comment><AUTHOR> Uh oh. Parking in Berkeley is a hard even on ordinary days. I don't want to think what it would be like on the day of a football game. I would not recommend driving to this event. Park somewhere else and take the Bart in.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> And I thought that the speaker list couldn't top last years. Yeah, I was wrong:

<http://www.startupschool.org/speakers.html>

Thank you YC, Berkeley, St@b,etc. for putting this on.

<comment><USER4> Indeed, looks pretty amazing. Thankfully we don't have to choose between which ones to listen to, as that would be quite difficult.

Since "(so far)" hints there will likely be more, what's the expected speaker count?

<comment><AUTHOR> Last year we had 11 so we'll probably have about that many this time.

<comment><USER5> Amazing list you've got so far. If you're taking input, I'd be very interested in seeing Eric Ries there as well.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Thanks for organizing this. I hope to see all of you there. This functions as the defacto international Hacker News meetup. Maybe, just maybe, Nickb will be seen in the same room as pg.

</comment><comment><USER7> I think we should be able to buy our way in with HN karma ;)

<comment><USER6> With karma like yours I would be comfortable buying the plane ticket ahead of time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I just turned in my application, then read the faq about getting responses.

...now, I'm wondering if I typed in my email address properly...no feedback until October...hmmm

<comment><AUTHOR> One of the advantages of the rewritten application form is that you can edit your application. Just go to <http://news.ycombinator.com/susapply> again.

<comment><USER8> Sweet, thanks!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Would any other out of town HNers want to split a hotel room in SF? I figure I might make a trip of it and stay a few days.

<comment><USER6> I was going to do <http://www.airbnb.com/>

<comment><USER10> Is it possible to make a listing for a particular event, e.x. say I only wanted to open up my apartment to Startup School attendees?

<comment><USER6> Probably saying in your listing that you only want to rent to Startup School attendees and then confirming with them is good enough.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Anyone know approximately how many applicants get accepted?

<comment><USER12> Look at the capacity of the venue... that is most likely the number.

<comment><USER13> No venue has been listed yet but Zellerbach Auditorium has a capacity of 2089 ([http://facilities.calperfs.berkeley.edu/zellerbach_auditoriu...](http://facilities.calperfs.berkeley.edu/zellerbach_auditorium/techspecs.php#capacity)).

<comment><USER6> A venue has been listed, it's Wheeler Auditorium with 705 capacity. :( I think a 2000 person theater would have just felt too big, but I guess it would have been worth it anyways from our perspectives.

[http://facilities.calperfs.berkeley.edu/wheeler/techspecs.ph...](http://facilities.calperfs.berkeley.edu/wheeler/techspecs.php#capacity)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Just out of curiosity, pg, why are you holding the event at Berkley this year?

<comment><USER15> Bigger facilities than that pretty junior college on the peninsula. :-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I've been looking forward to this year's startup school for some time and hope I get the opportunity to go.

If accepted, I'd be flying in from the east coast. Since no one finds out before the submission deadline, I'm stuck making travel arrangements two to three weeks before the event, correct? Just want to make sure for planning purposes.

<comment><USER9> I'm in the same boat (Atlanta). Tickets are cheap from what I've found- $89 each way if I book nowish.

<comment><USER16> If its a choice between buying the ticket now for $89 or later for several hundred, you're probably off better buying now even if you think your chances of getting selected are slim.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Looks awesome. Wish I could be there.

Will this event be streaming on ustream/ some other variant for non west coast people?

<comment><USER18> Justin.tv usually streams/archives the talks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> What is meant by "tools" on the application? Any examples?</comment>


70,000 Blogs Shut Down by U.S. Law Enforcement - <AUTHOR> http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/70000_blogs_shut_down_by_us_law_enforcement.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+readwriteweb+%28ReadWriteWeb%29&utm_content=Google+Reader <comment><USER2> If the hosting company says that they can't name the agency and can't say anything about the nature of the claim, that immediately makes me think of a National Security Letter:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_security_letter>

"[A National Security Letter] is a demand letter issued to a particular entity or organization to turn over various record and data pertaining to individuals. They require no probable cause or judicial oversight. They also contain a gag order, preventing the recipient of the letter from disclosing that the letter was ever issued."

<comment><USER3> derwiki replied to this comment by saying:

 _"The gag order was ruled unconstitutional as an infringement of free speech, in the Doe v. Ashcroft case." (same article)_

For some reason, his reply is dead, but it seems like a valuable comment so I'm reproducing it.

<comment><USER4> Thank god for the separation of powers. It is incredible how many rights the Bush presidency attempted to take away from its citizens all in the name of national security. The more I read stuff like this the more it seems that we were heading to a totalitarian government.

Edit: In case anybody wonders why I threw in Bush's name in there is because the Patriot Act, created during his presidency, greatly extended the NSL powers. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Letter>

<comment><USER4> If you are going to down vote me at least explain why.

<comment><USER5> Maybe it is because you pick on a single president what every president has done. (From all parties.) Did Bush do things that where a violation of rights? Probably, but so did every president including but not limited to Obama, Clinton, Bush (senior), and Reagan. I would venture to guess it is impossible to name a president that did not infringe on the rights of citizens. Second, it was the current government that did this, not Bush.

<comment><USER6> _I would venture to guess it is impossible to name a president that did not infringe on the rights of citizens._

The degree to which any perceived infringement occurs is what is significant. Bush pushed for and succeeded in suspending habeas corpus, a Constitutional protection by which people can challenge their imprisonment. This was only done twice in history, once by Bush and once by Lincoln at the start of the Civil War. By contrast, President Obama opposed the suspension of habeas corpus since he was a senator.

<comment><USER5> And yet is continued by the current administration: [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/us/politics/21obama.text.h...](http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/us/politics/21obama.text.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all)

And Obama authorized the assassination of a US citizen; something even Bush never did: [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/07/world/middleeast/07yemen.h...](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/07/world/middleeast/07yemen.html)

<comment><USER7> The speech you point to does not support your point. My reading is that he is trying to cleaning up the toxic legal spill that the previous administration left behind (while trying not to give his Republic critics ammunition).

Re. the assassination of a US citizen, that hardly seems notable given that the guy is very actively involved in putting together terrorist attacks. Surely any president would make the same decision.

<comment><USER5> It seems the origigonal post was deleted I guess... Now it seems I'm like I'm talking to myself.

1) Among all his rhetoric about not continuing the policy he slips in

"there may be a number of people who cannot be prosecuted for past crimes, in some cases because evidence may be tainted, but who nonetheless pose a threat to the security of the United States...must be prevented from attacking us again "

His policy stays the same, he is just better at hiding it from the public.

2) Thats the same rhetoric people used to defend Bush. Innocent till proven guilty in a court of Law I say.

<comment><USER6> You should have listed more of that quote. Directly above that President Obama said:

 _Now, finally, there remains the question of detainees at Guantanamo who cannot be prosecuted yet who pose a clear danger to the American people. And I have to be honest here -- this is the toughest single issue that we will face. We're going to exhaust every avenue that we have to prosecute those at Guantanamo who pose a danger to our country. But even when this process is complete, there may be a number of people who cannot be prosecuted for past crimes, in some cases because evidence may be tainted, but who nonetheless pose a threat to the security of the United States. Examples of that threat include people who've received extensive explosives training at al Qaeda training camps, or commanded Taliban troops in battle, or expressed their allegiance to Osama bin Laden, or otherwise made it clear that they want to kill Americans. These are people who, in effect, remain at war with the United States._

The ease/danger of a transition from a democracy to a totalitarian regime was something of which the Founders were aware. Our freedoms are protected precisely by a Constitutional framework which provides safeguards, like habeas corpus. President Obama is a Constitutional scholar, and acknowledges our bindings to it. Compare that with Bush who was rumored to say it's "just a piece of paper". There may be case by case issues which are difficult as well as debatable for any president to decide, but altering the legal framework in ways which diminish civil liberties and protections is dangerous, and can too easily lead a public that is not paying attention to a place they realize too late they don't want to be.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wmc60JmaLbE>

<comment><USER8> > Directly above that President Obama said:

It doesn't matter what he says in a speech. What matters is what he says via executive orders, policy, and executive branch action.

> President Obama is a Constitutional scholar, and acknowledges our bindings > to it.

Oh really? Feel free to cite any of his scholarly writings.

> Compare that with Bush who was rumored to say it's "just a piece of paper".

By someone who had an axe to grind. What has that person said about Obama's continuation and expansion of the same policies? (To be fair, some folks who criticized Bush for doing certain things have criticized Obama for continuing and expanding, but they're a marginalized minority. The "good people" have largely fallen into line.)

Of course, if you want to play "was rumored to say", there are some doozies attributed to Obama.

Double-standard much?

<comment><USER6> _It doesn't matter what he says in a speech._

I disagree. Words have both immediate and historical significance and impact, whether by a dictator like Hitler or a president like John F. Kennedy.

 _What matters is what he says via executive orders, policy, and executive branch action._

I agree.

 _Oh really? Feel free to cite any of his scholarly writings._

"Mar 28, 2008 ... Barack Obama is correct in saying he is a constitutional law professor." source: FactCheck.org ([http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/was_barack_obama_reall...](http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/was_barack_obama_really_a_constitutional_law.html))

 _Of course, if you want to play "was rumored to say", there are some doozies attributed to Obama._

I will retract the rumor text. I almost didn't put it in, but I wanted to give some context for G. W. Bush's apparent disregard for Constitutional law. But I don't need to. Just watch the 6 minute YouTube video with a noted Constitutional law professor I included. Here it is again: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wmc60JmaLbE>

<comment><USER8> >> Oh really? Feel free to cite any of his scholarly writings.

> "Mar 28, 2008 ... Barack Obama is correct in saying he is a constitutional > law professor." source: FactCheck.org > (<http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/was_barack_obama_reall...>)

The claim was that he was a constitutional law scholar, not that he was a professor. While there are overlaps between the two groups, neither one is a subset of the other.

I'll ask again - if Obama is a constitutional law scholar, where is his scholarly output?

<comment><USER6> _The claim was that he was a constitutional law scholar, not that he was a professor. While there are overlaps between the two groups, neither one is a subset of the other._

You're kidding, right? Him being a scholar is an even easier proof than him being a questionable professor -- which the link I listed at FactCheck.org also asserts is true.

Oxford Dictionary (First Definition):

scholar (schol·ar): a specialist in a particular branch of study, _especially the humanities_ ; a distinguished academic

From the UC Law School statement at FactCheck.org:

"Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are _regarded as professors_ , although not full-time or tenure-track ... Like Obama, each of the Law School's Senior Lecturers have high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined."

<comment><USER8> >>The claim was that he was a constitutional law scholar, not that he was a professor. While there are overlaps between the two groups, neither one is a subset of the other.

>You're kidding, right?

Not at all. I have reasonably high standards for scholars.

For example, even though the degree is "Juris Doctor", I don't call lawyers "Dr.". (However, I will call them "Esquire".)

Meanwhile, you'd call a 6th grade history teacher a "scholar" if they teach some constitution....

<comment><USER6> _Not at all. I have reasonably high standards for scholars._

This is not about you. It's about the definition in the dictionary. It has as a primary entry for scholar "a distinguished academic".

The definition for "professor" from Wikipedia:

 _The meaning of the word professor (Latin: professor, person who professes to be an expert in some art or science, teacher of high rank[1]) varies by country. In most English-speaking countries it refers to a senior academic who holds a departmental chair_ ... etc.

I don't know how you equate "Senior Lecturers regarded as professors" by a university to a 6th grade history teacher who may also be the school gym teacher filling in. That's stretching things a bit.

<comment><USER8> > In most English-speaking countries it refers to a senior academic who holds > a departmental chair

Which Obama didn't....

In general, real professors have publications. Heck, so do real academic doctors. Honorary and "we're giving him an appointment to curry favor" ones don't.

<comment><USER6> Bottom line:

Point 1: You had a problem with me referring to President Obama as a scholar. Regardless of your semantic arguments, dictionaries also define scholar as simply a student or learned person.

Point 2: The university statement clarifies how and why Obama was regarded as a professor -- and not just an "honorary" one.

Point 3: Most academic doctors or professors with publications do not go on to become the President of the United States. Have you ever stopped to think maybe he was busy in service of the public as well as his family?

Honestly, the original point was about the contrast in perspective, as far as the Constitution is concerned, between Obama and Bush. I really don't see what you are challenging.

<comment><USER8> > Most academic doctors or professors with publications do not go on to become > the President of the United States.

Irrelevant. Becoming president doesn't imply that he's anything else.

Or, do you want to argue that he's an astronaut too? He didn't ever go into space, but that's just because he had better things to do.

> Have you ever stopped to think maybe he was busy in service of the public as > well as his family?

It doesn't matter why he doesn't have scholarly output. If he doesn't....

FWIW, almost every other editor of the Harvard Law Review managed to crank out a paper or two during their tenure.

> Honestly, the original point was about the contrast in perspective, as far > as the Constitution is concerned, between Obama and Bush. I really don't see > what you are challenging.

You seem to think that teaching a class tells us something important. Without scholarly output, we know nothing about what he did. (I'm a lecturer at a major university....)

<comment><USER6> _You seem to think that teaching a class tells us something important._

Correct. In the context of a presidency, along with his words, I believe we can infer a regard for the Constitution. And Obama made essentially this point. Take a look at an excerpt from a speech by President Obama on national security:

 _We are building new partnerships around the world to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda and its affiliates. And we have renewed American diplomacy so that we once again have the strength and standing to truly lead the world. These steps are all critical to keeping America secure. But I believe with every fiber of my being that in the long run we also cannot keep this country safe unless we enlist the power of our most fundamental values. The documents that we hold in this very hall - the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights -are not simply words written into aging parchment. They are the foundation of liberty and justice in this country, and a light that shines for all who seek freedom, fairness, equality and dignity in the world._

I challenge you to find _any_ reference Bush made to any of the above documents at any time while on the subject of national security where he is clearly expressing a regard for the document(s) as a guide.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I am skeptical - The host, <https://www.burst.net/> Looks like a template monster design with a reseller system, no traffic rank and a nearly empty forum- From a outsider looking in, it looks like a host that is barely in business and likely ran by one guy from his apartment.

Maybe they are over-exaggerating for press? Maybe the server crashed, and they dont want the bad press so did a bogus excuse? Stranger things have happened. But I highly doubt this has even remotely anything to do with "operation in your sites" and is likely related to some issue at burstnet. I wouldnt be surprised if law enforcement isnt even involved.

<comment><USER10> Trust me, burstnet is far from a small host. They went through a rebranding I believe as part of their clean up effort from their last brand which had a reputation for attracting high bandwidth questionable sites.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> BurstNET is located very close to where I am. About a year and a half ago I toured their facilities for a colocation project. Upon walking in I was horrified. They rows of tower based servers with their cases ripped off on the wire-frame racks you would find in a home improvement store. After seeing that and hearing they lacked any fire suppression system I respectfully walked away from their bid.

</comment><comment><USER12> Well, there is a link to a thread on a webhostingtalk.com, where some people are discussing the issue. After reading the original posting by the blog service provider and some of the replies, here are some basic lessons to be learned from this.

1\. A lot of people have no clue as to the legal process

2\. It pays REALLY well to have external backups

3\. It might be a good idea to use encrypted volumes to store sensitive data, so if authorities are involved, they have to serve you with papers to get your decryption keys. This way you stay more informed.

4\. Your hosting provider probably has a clause in their ToS that more or less says "we can terminate your service whenever, the hell, we want and there is nothing you can do about it". Deal with it.

5\. This story still sucks.

6\. Seems like this guy was simply small enough to just serve a court order and shut down his service. I don't think anyone would shutdown Google for questionable content on a blogger account or google web pages.

7\. I am pretty sure, that there is no legal way for a law enforcement agency to remain anonymous while doing something like this. Either I am wrong about it or something is amiss.

<comment><USER13> Your hosting provider probably does have such a clause, but after exercising it they should expect to go out of business.

<comment><USER12> Not if they only do it to a small percentage of clients and within common sense. Generally the clause is there, so that they have a legal ground to shut you down without waiting for legal process to catch up (i.e. if legal authorities ask them without providing a warrant, if they get complaints about some questionable content etc.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> A blogging service works on a per-account basis, for them to shut down the whole server instead of just taking down the offending account(s) seems to be pretty excessive, no matter what those accounts have 'done'.

There is some chance they found themselves the unwitting participant in a child pornography distribution network, and that they don't know which accounts are 'the ones', and they've taken everything off-line until they've verified which accounts are bad and which are good.

<comment><USER15> Why keep it a secret if it's just kiddie porn?

<comment><USER14> Brand damage.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> If this isn't just sensationalist reporting, then this is pretty bad. I wonder if it's related to the piracy crackdown that was recently announced by the White House.

<comment><USER17> The spokesperson said it wasn't a copyright thing; it sounds a little extreme for that anyway. I'd rather not speculate on what it is though until we get more details.

<comment><USER16> Sorry, I missed that the first time I read through the article.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> From BurstNET:

"We cannot give him his data nor can we provide any other details"

I guess this is one of the dangers of hosting a user-generated content site- law enforcement may confiscate your server. This seems highly unusual even for something like child pornography. Usually they ask (politely then forcefully) the server owner for cooperation. It's possible that the owner of Blogerty is a suspect.

</comment><comment><USER19> Instead of closing down the blogs why not impose fine on print & electronic media, if they publish a lie.

</comment><comment><USER20> Yeah! joshwa's got a point there! Law enforcement agents concerned with not publicly identifying themselves might also likely be concerned with: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act>

<comment><USER15> That only applies if this was done by the _military_ though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> A phrase with the words sledgehammer and nut comes to mind.

Obviously somebody was a naughty boy, but what about the other users of the server?

</comment><comment><USER22> More details from BurstNet's CTO: <http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-20010923-261.html>

</comment><comment><USER23> This is why I don't trust the government with an internet kill switch.

</comment><comment><USER24> That is a bit Kafkaesque.

Everyone has the right to know why their right is being denied or what they are being charged with. If it was a privet firm then fine, but the government can't just go around closing websites without saying if not in detail then in general what the charges are. How, if the website owner is wronged, is he able to challenge the decision if he does not even know what the allegations are against him.

<comment><USER25> What you say was more or less true in 2000. Things have changed a bit since then. The fact that many recent laws and programs obviously defy the first ten amendments to the US Constitution have gone "unnoticed" by the SCOTUS, and both major brands (D & R) seem content with how things have developed the last decade.

"We the rabble" are likely in for a 10 year slog to fix things, if we are lucky: paper ballots; some kind of coalition or runoff voting rule changes to take down the "two" party system; reestablishment of the rule of law.

<comment><USER24> I am sorry. I can not quite agree with that. I do not know about the united states, but here in the united kingdom we have a very independent judiciary which has ruled against the government time and time again.

I do agree in a way, just before Tony Blair left, which I think was 2008 or 2007 things seemed to be going in a very dark direction, but frankly, it is the peoples fault.

We are so lucky as to be able to change government without bloodshed and in the UK for what I know we are so lucky as to not go down without a very real power struggle between the executive and the judiciary.

Take them to court I say. That is what they are for.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I am thinking that the subject might be child pornography, espionage or cyber terrorism. Should some of those blogs had some sort of method of communicating information with terrorists I do not see why the NSA would not shut the whole thing down.

I hate to be in the shoes of those 70000 people but from the article and evidence available right now this is a really serious matter.

<comment><USER27> maybe the fbi thinks terrorists were communicating via blog comments, in a secret code designed to look like spam? as far as 'movie-plot terrorism' goes, i don't think it's too far fetched.

<comment><USER28> Does it mean that any site can be shut down if it's used by terrorists? Which one is next: facebook, because terrorists can create a group there and send messages, twitter, because a terrorist cell can use it to coordinate attacks, or perhaps wordpress? Which service will be shut down next?</comment></comment></comment>


Any portable Linux laptops? - <AUTHOR> I want to buy a new laptop, but I don't want to buy one that was made for Windows and change it to Linux. What options are there? I know about Dell XPS 13 DE but a larger screen would be nice. <comment><USER2> [https://www.debian.org/misc/laptops/](https://www.debian.org/misc/laptops/)

[http://linux-on-laptops.com/](http://linux-on-laptops.com/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, I'll look into it.

<comment><USER2> and more [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fzmm87oVQ6c](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fzmm87oVQ6c)</comment></comment></comment>