A VC: The Age Question (continued) - <AUTHOR> http://avc.blogs.com/a_vc/2007/05/the_age_questio.html <comment><USER2> Why would age matter?

If you feel driven to start something, do it. If you can accept the risks, do it.

You pass through this realm only once; don't let a string of digits on your drivers license determine your life.</comment>


Neo nazi wealth is rapidly growing why? Bitcoin - <AUTHOR> https://mic.com/articles/186438/neo-nazi-wealth-is-rapidly-growing-why-bitcoin#.QOYArK1i9 <comment><USER2> All the balances mentioned in the article combined seemed to add up to around $300k. I'm sure we'd all prefer these scum to have no money, but I don't see how this is newsworthy in the least. You could barely fund a small business for a few months with that amount of money.</comment>


Fort project – An open source RPKI validator - <AUTHOR> https://fortproject.net/ <comment><AUTHOR> FORT validator is an open source RPKI validator. This solution allows operators to validate BGP routing information against the RPKI repository for use in router configuration and resolution.</comment>


It's Not a Church, It's Just an Apple Store - <AUTHOR> http://recode.net/2014/01/02/its-not-a-church-its-just-an-apple-store/

<comment><USER2> "It's really not okay to pour down personal hate and derision on people who happen to use and like a tech product that competes with the one you prefer."

"Apple cultists are often quick to question not just the judgment, but the motives and personal character of anyone who dares to question the company's magic touch"

What happened to not pour down derision?

People are always quick to point out apple fanatics. I wonder if this is due to a real widespread zealotry among apple adoptees or is it some kind of knee- jerk contrarian response to apple's marketing.

I guess either way, the controversy is part of what keeps Apple relevant in pop culture.

<comment><USER3> > _People are always quick to point out apple fanatics. I wonder if this is > due to a real widespread zealotry among apple adoptees or is it some kind of > knee-jerk contrarian response to apple 's marketing._

It's the conspiracy-theory level idea a few have that somehow hundrends of millions of people are delluded, and buy some products because they are taken in by marketing / fad / reality distortion fields and the like.

Now, the fact that said products win tons of industry awards, are also used by some of the most brilliant hackers in the IT industry (you can't go into a programming conference without seeing 70%+ Macbooks), doesn't seem to play any part in their theory.

That the company sells great and ever increasing volumes for 13+ years (ever since the iPod) doesn't seem to register in their minds to remove the "fad" factor.

That marketing doesn't play much role outside the US, were, in my country for example, we never see any Apple ads in the press or on TV, but still they sell very well, doesn't also seem to register with them. Or that MS, for one, spends as much and more in marketing, without getting the Zune / Surface / Windows Phone, etc off the ground.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I guess his new venture, recode, needed a few low quality linkbait articles to get a few more eyeballs and Walt was ready to oblige.</comment>


Ask YC: That Step Before Profit. - <AUTHOR>

I've been looking around at options for collecting payment from customers, and the number of options is staggering.  PayPal, Amazon, Google Checkout, various payment gateways, dedicated merchant accounts, thugs armed with baseball bats, and so on.<p>I'm probably not the only person here who has had to spend a dizzying amount of time in researching payment and billing options, so methinks it might be time to ask all the other business-minded people here at Hacker News: What methods have you used for that crucial step of 'Getting money from the customer'? <comment><USER3> At my last startup we used PayPal exclusively. Why? Because we're in the UK and all our customers were in the US. This was less than ideal but worked surprisingly well - the money certainly came in and we only had a handful of "we won't use PayPal" comments from customers.

More generally, I've seen startups using authorize.net a lot recently - <USER2> example: <http://letsfreckle.com/> \- so they must have options for fresh startups.

I'd be interested to see any recommendations for the UK though. I'm planning to launch something in 2009 and will be using PayPal again unless I can find a better option. I'd rather have a more slick sales process, but the alternatives I've seen that can get me up and running fast in the UK for selling to US customers haven't been that great :-(

</comment><comment><USER4> I am in the process of implementing Authorize.Net CIM for <http://statzen.com>.

We are a subscription based service so I think it makes sense.</comment>


Our continued commitment to combating child exploitation online - <AUTHOR> http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/our-continued-commitment-to-combating.html

<comment><USER2> Its a bit of a slipery slope when they start saying things like "information that should never be created or found". Who gets to decide what should and should not be created?

Information should never be illegal. Creators of certain information perhaps needs to be tried in public, if he is deemed to have created some "bad" information, but the actual information should never be illegal.

</comment><comment><USER3> Don't politicians use this common excuse to take away people's privacy rights on the net? Julian Assange calls it one of the "Four Horsemen of the Infopocalypse" (terrorism, drugs and money laundering are the other three).

</comment><comment><USER4> What about user exploitation... when are you going to combat that?</comment>


Ask HN: How do keep track of potential and existing customers? - <AUTHOR>

When starting up a lot of the work involves dealing with all kinds of people like customer leads, people who are using a trial and real (paying) customers. How do you keep track of them all? I'm looking for something that where I can keep everything organized in groups. I looked into Highrise but it doesn't quite seem to be what I'm looking for.. Suggestions? How do you do it? <comment><USER2> SugarCRM allows you to do this easily. SugarCRM allows you to track Prospects, leads and contacts. If you have a potential customer you can easily convert your lead into a contact. Also, you can easily create and integrate a web-lead capture form using SugarCRM. <http://www.sugarcrm.com/feature/marketing- automation> and <http://www.sugarcrm.com/feature/sales-force-automation></comment>


"Building an Effective Dev Portfolio", a free guide for junior devs - <AUTHOR> https://joshwcomeau.com/effective-portfolio/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hi HN! Author here.

Sharing a book I released today about building developer portfolio sites.

A few months ago I reviewed several hundred dev portfolios on twitter, and found I was giving the same feedback over and over. I also had a lot to say on the subject; I've been involved with hiring for many of the orgs I've worked for, and I've reviewed a whole lot of portfolios in that capacity. I also work as a career coach for a local bootcamp, helping recent grads land their first role.

The book distills everything I've learned into a tactical guide. A portfolio site is only one small part of the job hunt, but I believe doing it well can offer a huge advantage.

I hope it's helpful!</comment>


Advice for PhD students - <AUTHOR> http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~andre/general/student_research_advice.html <comment><AUTHOR> I found this helpful back when I was starting, and I think the general ideas here are applicable across disciplines.</comment>


Design for testability - grey-area https://blog.nelhage.com/2016/03/design-for-testability/ <comment><AUTHOR> > Optimize your code for testability

If you do that, the only thing you'll get is code that is easy to run tests on. If you get somewhat good and composable code out of that, that's only a vaguely related byproduct, and only because good code is usually easy to run tests on, not the other way around.

Testability is by no means substitute for good architecture and thought-out interfaces.</comment>


SoftBank to slash planned WeWork investment - <AUTHOR> https://www.ft.com/content/282bd084-12a0-11e9-a581-4ff78404524e <comment><USER2> "Japanese tech investor will inject $2bn into shared-office provider, down from planned $16bn"

"The funding could be announced as soon as this week, according to one of the people, who added that the deal had not yet been agreed and could still fall apart."

It's also yet to be seen if SoftBank will exercise their $3B in warrants (one due this month and the next in April).

I believe there's a high chance the $3B in warrants get exercised and the $2B mentioned in the article closes, but it's still a risk.

"[WeWork] has more than $6bn of cash and cash commitments on hand."

This is a bit misleading because according to WeWork's Q3 deck they had $2.5B in cash and are at a quarterly burn rate of $500M, giving them until the end of 2019 to survive assuming costs don't go up dramatically because of free rent periods on their properties expiring or the increased costs they will bare from their massive expansion.

<comment><USER3> At it's core, WeWork's business model seems solid and every time I've been in one, it's been at least close to full. If the main driver of the losses is the initial investment in acquiring and remodeling the real estate, then they're in fine shape - they could always pull an Amazon and stop expanding for a quarter to show just how profitable they could be. I'd think that's the most likely scenario but, if not, I can't imagine why anyone would throw good money after bad.

<comment><USER4> WeWork has a major problem in that they signed a vast number of real estate contracts during the financial crisis 10 years ago at fire sale prices that are now expiring and will require renegotiation. Unfortunately for WeWork they are a gentrification agent which means those leases are going to be negotiated at rates which would be a multiple of what they were originally at.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Paywalled. :(

<comment><AUTHOR> Use the HN "web" link, or here's an article about the article.

[https://www.reuters.com/article/us-wework-m-a- softbank/softb...](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-wework-m-a- softbank/softbank-to-slash-planned-wework-investment-ft-idUSKCN1P11YJ)</comment></comment>


Information Physics: The New Frontier - <AUTHOR> http://arxiv.org/abs/1009.5161

<comment><USER2> This is really nice: "The implication is that physical law does not reflect the order in the universe, instead it is derived from the order imposed by our description of the universe."

btw to download this: curl <http://arxiv.org/pdf/1009.5161v1> > infophysics.pdf

<comment><USER3> I always thought that was what all Physical models were, a best approximation, given the empirical data available at the time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm surprised that something titled "Information Physics" was not submitted to quant-ph, which is where all of the quantum information papers go.

The arXiv is strongly based on the category a paper is placed in. (Tons of controversy when submissions are recategorized.)

</comment><comment><USER5> A long time ago (1990) Tom Stonier wrote an expansive and thought-provoking book on Information Physics ([http://www.amazon.com/Information-Internal- Structure-Univers...](http://www.amazon.com/Information-Internal-Structure- Universe- Exploration/dp/3540198784/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1303712208&sr=8-1))

I'd never seen anything quite like it at the time. So while it's certainly a 'new approach' to science, it's not exactly 'new'. It's not fair to be dead and forgotten...

<comment><AUTHOR> It's definitely not strictly "new", but I read a sense of a broader historical narrative in which the current time will at some point be considered the infancy of information physics.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Hmm. Sounds a bit frothy, but since I'm reading James Gleick's _The Information_ ... I'll take a look.

<comment><USER7> Are you enjoying Gleick? I've been considering it, but other books keep jumping the queue.

<comment><AUTHOR> I recently read Gleick's _The Information_. It's a quick, interesting read, although I suspect people who don't share my combination of interest in the OED and Babbage's difference engine may find one of those sections to drag. Like a lot of good science writing, it strives to make scientific and technical concepts palatable through the conceit of a historical narrative, and it's largely successful. As a hacker and a geek, I naturally wish it were more technical and less biography.</comment></comment></comment>


BankSimple: We have cards - <AUTHOR> http://banksimple.com/blog/2011/05/20/we-have-cards/ <comment><USER2> This is very intelligently done. I'm glad they are releasing the cards to just a small set of people first to check that everything works. People are very wary of any issues with their money/with their bank and absolutely any problem at the beginning would seriously hurt user adoption. Start slow and make sure it works.

<comment><USER3> How is this "intelligent" and not obvious, common sense before you _roll out a bank_?

<comment><USER4> But I thought BankSimple wasn't a bank, despite the confusing name.

<comment><USER5> _"BankSimple: Personal banking from a company that respects you."_

That's not a bank?

<comment><USER6> From the FAQ:

So, what's the deal... are you really a bank?

We are not a bank. We work with partner banks (soon to be announced) to provide FDIC insured products. What this means for you is that your money is safely insured with our partners. Our wholesale partners provide the financial products, we provide the customer service and experience.

<comment><USER7> They're "simple" but they like to play semantics. I mean, really, they have "bank" in the name and they provide banking services. To me, the consumer, they are a bank.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> As I understand it, banks make a large amount of revenues from fees and such. How will BankSimple succeed if it doesn't use that? How will overdrafts work? Will the check just not go through?

I love that they are trying to revolutionize the banking industry, and I wish them well. But I'm afraid that they'll succumb to adverse selection to the greatest degree. The reality is that most of a bank's customers are not profitable (without the fees), which is why they institute these ridiculous fees to either drive them off or make them profitable. If BankSimple can make these previously-unprofitable people profitable again without surprise fees, they'll be a great success.

Let's hope that happens.

<comment><USER9> The 1.5% they get from every single credit (and debit) card transaction as the issuing bank. I also understand that they'll have no branch locations. My local credit union has no fee checking and savings accounts, and in the years of using them they have only given me fees for the occasional coverdraft and absolutely nothing else. Just like how netflix is usurping cable companies $100 bills for a $10 + Internet bill, they'll do just fine.

<comment><USER10> Do debit cards typically incur the same fees as credit cards?

I thought many places here (Canada) accepted debit but not credit because it was a fixed fee per transaction not a %

<comment><USER9> In the US (and the UK I believe), debit card transactions are done through mastercard/visa and can incur similar fees. You can also type your debit card number on online purchases and it will work correctly, vs. interac where that doesn't work. Interac is very nice for retailers in canada since it's just one flat .25 fee for any transaction, just limited by your daily card limit.

<comment><USER11> I thought that fees and such were only incurred when you ran your debit card as a credit card transaction, with signing your name and such - I was under the impression that using your PIN number and using it as debit didn't incur those costs.

<comment><USER12> From memory, I am quite sure that here in Australia standard bank cards, which are generally referred to as debit cards, use an entirely different fee structure to credit cards. These bank cards always require a PIN and work on the EFTPOS network. Important, as you can't use them online. The rate is a flat one if I'm correct.

Debit cards issued by Visa or Mastercard and operating over those networks incur a lower fee than credit cards but follow the same interchange fee structure. Australian Visa interchange fees are here: <http://bit.ly/visainterchangefees>. Just incase anyone was interested. Whether or not these cards require a PIN or signature depends on whether they use the Chip-and-PIN system, which all new cards issued in Australia should.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Only 4 days after losing their Lead Engineer. <http://twitter.com/#!/KirinDave/status/70217986962751488>

<comment><USER14> Interesting that his pic is still in their "Team" mosaic on the homepage.

<comment><USER15> Twitter's staff pic on their recruitment page shows a lot of people who have left too.

<comment><USER16> They should put big red X's over each member that left, Battle Royale style.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Can someone please tell me the benefits of BankSimple over all the other online banks or your local credit union? I'm afraid I don't get it.

<comment><USER18> In some ways, they're over-reaching. Sure, people hate the banks right now and it seems like a cash-cow industry that one could really disrupt. However, banking has a lot of competitors including not-for-profit ones in the form of credit unions. It will be very difficult to offer higher rates, better service, etc. than a non-profit credit union while one is trying to make a profit.

However, if I were BankSimple and you said what you and I have said to me, I'd respond that banks are crap at IT. I'd say that we (BankSimple) are basically a better IT department for your bank. We're going to create a banking technology stack that you'll enjoy using while getting you better rates than the large banks (BofA, Chase, etc.) offer you and better terms (like ATM refunds). We're going to do this by using wholesale banking offers from FDIC- insured institutions.

Will it work? Maybe. I'm skeptical. Refunding ATM fees and better terms are going to eat into margins a lot. The wholesale bank is going to take their margin. That doesn't leave much for good rates. Plus, some banks are starting to get good at IT. Wells Fargo and Bank of America have deposit-scanning ATMs. Chase has an iPhone app that lets you scan checks. When it comes to terms, I already have a bank that offers me 0.55% checking and 1.25% savings with ATM refunds.

It isn't an easy road for them, but what they're trying to do is create a better technology package for users. That might mean making a card that can do both credit and debit in one card - I've wanted that. That might mean NFC payments faster than banks will support them. That might mean better Mint.com- like tools than Mint. That might be the plainer, easier to understand language they're pushing.

And, even if they don't completely succeed with a retail venture, they might end up with a great OEM package for banks and credit unions to outsource their web and mobile technology stack to. Most small banks do outsource their interfaces and BankSimple might be creating the best OEM package for small banks (if/when their retail ventures fail) inadvertently in the process. I've seen plenty of banks with horrid web interfaces and very few allow for check scanning on either desktop or mobile. BankSimple could do well in the OEM market even if it fails to convince consumers of its retail ambitions.

/just to clarify, I'm not affiliated with BankSimple, it was just a pleasant way of phrasing that paragraph.

<comment><USER19> _Chase has an iPhone app that lets you scan checks._

Only for small amounts. If the check is for a large amount (over $750? I'm not sure exactly what the limit is), the app will refuse to let you scan it in and tell you to go to a branch instead.

<comment><USER20> I imagine they also have a bank-by-mail option, which (I find) is useful if you don't go near your branch normally anyway and don't care about a few days delay in your deposits.

True, it'd be nicer to scan in the check (and not have the mail delay) but it's not a huge pain point for me to drop the envelope in the mail; so I haven't been to my bank's branch in 5 years.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I've always wondered why after winning something (or in this case, getting 50k sign ups), people say "I'm humbled." I think the truth would be the opposite: "Wow, looks like I'm pretty awesome after all."

<comment><USER22> <http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/false_modesty>

<comment><USER23> Yes, and it becomes to be a kind of cliché here and around. We could list them. Years ago we had the "X reasons to" lists, now we have "I'm very humble to be the best". It is a "preciosity" (not sure if this word applies correctly in English, I need to read Les Précieuses Ridicules, Molière, in English to make sure). Really intersting guys like PG do not usually have these preciosities themselves, but it is something that flourish during interesting times (like was Molière's).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> BankSimple sound interesting but they will have to be offering something really awesome for me to even remotely consider doing business with a commercial bank ever again. (There days, I only deal with credit unions.)

<comment><USER25> They themselves aren't a bank. They partner up with banks that provide FDIC insured products. They just provide the customer service and the user interface.

<comment><USER26> This may sound like a perfect match, but honestly most banks can't be trusted: <http://www.amazon.com/Best-Way-Rob-Bank-Own/dp/0292706383>

BankSimple, not being terribly large, can't force the incumbents to play their game (like say, Apple could with AT&T to some degree - and they got lucky getting in with Cingular).

It will be interesting to see how this fares when the "financial service" supplier(s) starts yanking the chain.

<comment><USER27> What exactly would the chain-yanking look like? "Make your online banking suck!" "Charge random fees in an opaque manner!" "Make your customer service worse!" ?

And if they do have their chains yanked, they can switch their provider. It's not like banks have "coverage" to lock you in, like mobile networks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> In traditional banking, UX is an afterthought but from what I see, for BankSimple, banking takes the backseat but UX rules. I say this coz there's no details on FDIC, interest rates, etc. IMO, instead of doing Banking; they can sell their product to banks

<comment><USER29> "BankSimple account plus BankSimple debit card replaces your existing personal bank account. Make deposits, withdraw cash, pay bills, earn interest, and more.

However, BankSimple is not a "bank." We partner with chartered banks who provide FDIC-insured products, leaving us free to concentrate on designing the complete consumer banking experience, via the web and your smartphone. "

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> If any industry was waiting for a startup to come along and revolutionize it, it's the banking industry.

<comment><USER31> That's already happened you didn't notice (yet), it's called bitcoin.

<comment><USER32> You _might_ make a case for "happening" with bitcoin, but the banking industry is far from "revolutionized" in the past-tense.

Besides which, currency and customer support are two very different pieces of a much larger pie. At best, currency is the "implementation detail" behind a much larger set of day-to-day usability concerns inherent in banking.

<comment><USER31> Well given that just with the bitcoin client alone many banking services are either no longer needed or already provided by the bitcoin network.

Savings, transfers(much faster than any bank transfer, I mean my bitcoin reaches it's destination before I can finish filling in the bank transfer forms), security. All there.

I don't need customer support when there's no problems. I've never had something so easy to use to buy on the internet before.

<comment><USER33> I'm not discrediting it's future potential, but the number of things which you can buy with bitcoin right now is _extremely_ limited

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> This sounds great. Props to them if they can disrupt banking. The fact that they're not a real bank but some entity that works with partners to provide FDIC insured products is reassuring from a customer point of view. Not sure about how they will do their marketing though. Now, I hope that we, non- American customers, won't have to wait too long for this service.

</comment><comment><USER17> Wait. I think I get it now. They're like mint, but with account management?

</comment><comment><USER35> I'm pulling for BankSimple's success thanks to the abysmal nature of banking customer service. Hidden fees, long wait times on phone calls, ATM fees, ridiculous procedures to dispute charges...

With that said, how is BankSimple anything but a middleman? In my eyes, they fill one of two potential roles:

1\. They're a customer service wrapper for banks, which means banks pay them to provide support. So banks are their customers, right?

2\. They actually manage your money for you---a "broker for personal accounts." How do they generate revenue in this case?

#1 and #2 are both problematic. In a way, I'm the opposite of Aloisius: I clearly see BankSimple's benefits (Mint + support + SmartyPig), but I cannot understand how they will generate revenue while staying loyal to customers.

<comment><USER36> I'm BankSimple's CTO. To your points:

1\. We're more than a "customer service wrapper". We don't license our technology or outsource our support staff to other banks. Banks are our partners, not our customers, and we only partner with a small number of banks who share our values and are willing to set aside things like fee revenue to work with us. We have a symbiotic relationship with those banking partners: we bring them deposits, and they make loans on those deposits and share the resulting interest margin with us. That is one of several sources of revenue for us, but not our sole source of revenue.

2\. If customers like the way we help manage their money, we're able to connect them to a variety of financial products that are mutually beneficial to our customers, our banking partners, and to us. As above, our banking partners are happy because we're bringing them new customers for various financial products, many of which have a decent margin on them (CDs, for example). We share that margin with our partners, and that's another source of revenue.

Our business is all about aligning the interests of the banking industry with the interests of our customers. Where we can create that alignment, we profit.

<comment><USER37> I may be a corner case, but I suggest you https your entire site. I have my browser set to alert upon transitioning from https to http, and the alerts quickly become annoying while navigating your site.

That aside, I'm one more hoping you can bring some sanity, on behalf of the consumer, to this market.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> So, this prob isn't the place, but instead of cards or short range radio, I thought plugging into headphone jacks and having the phone do transactions (akin to what short range radio would do). Doesn't require any modification to phone and is backwards compatible with almost all phones (that have their won sdk (Symbian, iOS, Android, RIM) or use J2ME or BREW.

I wouldn't be able to bring this up myself (I just do code, hardware and banking is beyond me at times), but I would never object to being included with people who could:-D

Anyway, ::shrug::, just thought I'd place the idea out there since I feel it's good and like to see someone do it.

</comment><comment><USER39> What's the big deal about BankSimple? They look about the same as most credit unions. My credit union has a good website & iPhone app, and doesn't charge hidden fees. They pay interest on my checking account.

</comment><comment><USER40> Is it just me or does it seem sort of odd that they don't mention the FDIC anywhere on the page (whether they will be insured) You can't advertise that you will be FDIC insured?

<comment><USER41> See the FAQ (<https://banksimple.com/faq/>).

> Will my deposits be insured by the FDIC?

> Yes, all deposits will be insured to the FDIC limit (currently $250,000) > through our partner banks at launch, just like with any other major bank (or > credit union through the NCUA). FDIC insurance guarantees the safety of your > deposits.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> I think BankSimple is going to struggle to find customers with its current proposition. The fact is that people are not as unhappy with their banks' fees, customer support or websites as BankSimple thinks (or at least suggests). People like branches and brands. The one thing people do like is products which is how ING broke into the business but an approach that BankSimple appears not to be pursuing.

</comment><comment><USER43> The use of the phrase leaning into it is highly appreciated.

</comment><comment><USER44> Interesting idea. I wish it were 'MortgageSimple' though - the mortgage industry is in serious need of an overhaul even more than banks right now.

</comment><comment><USER45> I am surprised that so many people are willing to open a bank account with someone you've never heard of. I couldn't even find if they are FDIC insured.

I know several friends who wouldn't use mint.com. For them, it is a single point of failure. You can explain all the technical details you want but there is no way to get past their fears.

When shit hits the fan, you can expect the US govt. to bail out Bank Of America. SimpleBank? I am not so sure.

<comment><USER25> It's right on their page. Under 'Find a new alternative:'

"However, BankSimple is not a "bank." We partner with chartered banks who provide FDIC-insured products, leaving us free to concentrate on designing the complete consumer banking experience, via the web and your smartphone."

<comment><USER24> I hope that never leads to a "hot potatoe" situation when there is a problem.

<comment><USER46> FUD.

<comment><USER47> Sure, it _might be_ fear, uncertainty, and doubt on the part of adopters. But rightly so -- if there's one place where people are going to be conservative, it's with their banks.

The very first thing I did when I hit BankSimple.com was CTRL+F "FDIC". One tiny mention in a blog preview 2/3ds of the page down. That doesn't cut it.

It's BankSimple's job to inspire confidence in their offering. Their front page seems to spends more time talking in vague terms about how their service is going to be mobile centric, and how they're going to put me first. What their service is all about, and how it works -- the things I care about -- are buried and quite vague.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> Judging by the IIN of the card in the picture it looks like they are using Visa behind the scenes.

</comment><comment> DanI-S I'd love to see someone like this be the first place to seamlessly incorporate a Bitcoin exchange into personal banking.

</comment><comment><USER49> Competition is always good!

</comment><comment><USER50> Poor site design. I can't read the vision statement. White out. Fixit. Simple</comment>


Three things you need if you want more customers - <AUTHOR> http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2009/02/three-things-you-need-if-you-want-more-customers.html <comment><USER2> It's weird how Seth Godin usually has a good general point, and then manages to pick the worst possible examples to illustrate it.

 _A service aimed at creating videos for bestselling authors_

[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9448156...](http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94481566)

 _And a counseling service helping people cut back on Big Mac consumption_

Um..Weight Watchers? Jenny Craig?</comment>


How to Get Some User Feedbacks - Just Ask - <AUTHOR> http://dev.karriere.at/post/45684740145/how-to-get-some-user-feedbacks-just-ask

<comment><USER2> Anyone have a copy? I get the error "Unknown Host - Description: Unable to locate the server named "dev.karriere.at" --- the server does not have a DNS entry. Perhaps there is a misspelling in the server name, or the server no longer exists. Double-check the name and try again."

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Strage ... its hosted by tumblr and it works from me ...

traceroute dev.karriere.at traceroute to domains.tumblr.com (18.104.22.168)</comment>


Sir David Attenborough makes stark warning about species extinction - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-54118769 <comment><USER2> I've been watching Sir David Attenborough since I was a kid, and I am now middle aged.

And I've known about species extinction since I was a little kid. They've happened and keep happening. Little to nothing seems to have done to prevent them during my lifetime.

I feel powerless and have no idea what to do about it.

I mean things that will actually make a huge difference, not just telling myself I am making a difference by doing little things like not having a car, or re-using and recycling.

And pardon me for saying this, but part of me is ever so slightly disappointed Covid-19 is not a lot more deadly. I am a terrible person.

<comment><USER3> > I mean things that will actually make a huge difference, not just telling > myself I am making a difference by doing little things like not having a > car, or re-using and recycling.

I think if we all do more to make a little difference, we'll make a big difference as a group.

I've been making a focused effort to buy food produced locally. Details on how this helps here: [https://www.terrapass.com/eat-your-way-to-a-smaller- carbon-f...](https://www.terrapass.com/eat-your-way-to-a-smaller-carbon- footprint). Lettuce from across the country costs the same, and isn't as fresh.

We moved for a better quality of life, and part of that was reducing our commute. We were able to cut the commute back from 3hrs a day to about 30min a day per adult, if that. There's a calculator here that can help you figure out the carbon savings: [https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/household-carbon- footprint-...](https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/household-carbon-footprint- calculator)

When our water heater failed, I did some research and realized the state where we were living at the time would pay for a replacement tankless combined water heater and furnace. That saved us about $4k from the cost of the system, plus it is super efficient so our heating and cooking costs dropped, plus we had endless hot water for showers.

I realized one day it's like working on legacy software: if you look at it as a whole, it looks like a completely intractable problem. But if you start making incremental changes, over time you can change and have an impact.

<comment><USER4> What you describe is a good way of coping with individual anxiety but doesn't really get us closer to tackling the bigger problem. If this approach was so great, why isn't it working already? I think you're assuming that everyone else is embracing optimality and that everyone else sees the mutual benefit in that. In reality, many people don't care and quite a few find negative outcomes sufficiently profitable that they're willing or even eager to sacrifice your future wellbeing for their benefit.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_action_problem#Soci...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_action_problem#Social_traps)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I was arguing with someone on the internet, and biodiversity became the arguing point. They ended up flat-out asking me why anyone should care about biodiversity.

It's such an ingrained assumption inside my head that everyone should understand the value of biodiversity that I couldn't even answer.

I grew up watching David Attenborough, David Suzuki, and Carl Sagan explaining the natural world.

I can't imagine how much poorer my life would be, if I hadn't grown up with that.

And I can't begin to imagine how to explain my world-view to someone who clearly didn't grow up with them... Other than to sit them down with all those fantastic series, and hope that they take hold in them.

I mean, like, start by watching "Queen of the Trees," and see how inter- connected all of that life is:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xy86ak2fQJM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xy86ak2fQJM)

<comment><USER6> Some time ago I worked for a small company and one of the owners was a pretty nice guy, often talked of his mountain home and being near nature versus in the city. Then one day he mentioned that he had to change the oil in his sons ATV and always did that at the downhill slope of his properties edge. He would park the ATV over a small stream and empty the oil directly into the water.

Of course the staff were all furious at hearing this, which he seemed to enjoy. I asked the other owner if he was serious and he said he 100% was serious. So I approached the owner dumping the oil why he did this, why he didn't just empty the oil into a container, etc. Long/short he said it didn't effect him and couldn't care what any of us hippies though of the practice.

I would say that there is a fundamental difference in the way people are; they either view things in the long-term and strive to ensure the best for all of us. The other side of the coin are people that just want what's best for themselves and maybe their family. They don't care or want to believe such actions have long term effects on them directly.

<comment><USER4> _Of course the staff were all furious at hearing this, which he seemed to enjoy._

There's a certain personality type that derives more pleasure from the loss of another than a gain of their own.

<comment><USER7> "It Is Not Enough to Succeed; One's Best Friend Must Fail"

Gore Vidal's vversion is well-known: "It is not enough to succeed. Others must fail."

[https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/08/06/succeed- fail/](https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/08/06/succeed-fail/)

<comment><USER8> In a survival of the fittest this makes perfect sense

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The conservationists shared a portion of the revenue from the park with the adjacent villages. This helped create a symbiotic relationship between the gorillas and villages.

Not saying that this solution will work with poachers but there is probably a combination of approaches needed to preserve the biodiversity. One national park in India has given legal protection to park rangers if they were to kill to poachers and that has had a dramatic impact on the population of single horned rhinos. In 2015 park rangers shot dead more poachers than poachers killing rhinos for Chinese medicine.

</comment><comment><USER10> It totally makes sense for someone to try to capture the public attention about the impacts of climate change and habitat destruction on species most of don't get to see on the other side of the planet. Those impacts are important, and worth discussing.

But would you expect it would convince anyone to change their lifestyle or behavior, given the other evidence that people seem to just accept as the new normal? The west coast of the US is burning. And when California isn't burning, Australia is. Chunks of Florida already regularly experience "nuisance flooding" related to sea level rise, and it's frankly confusing to me that people are still building stuff in Miami. Rising temperatures have meant that the ranges of some infectious diseases have expanded in rich countries (e.g. Lyme disease in parts of Canada, Zika and Dengue in parts of the US). But most Americans, Canadians, Australians and others haven't substantially reorganized their lives to stop emissions.

If direct impacts on the lives of people living in rich and powerful countries doesn't cause people in those places to change their behavior, why would you expect them to be moved or motivated by threats to pangolins or rhinos?

<comment><USER11> I live near Seattle and I'm astounded to see people going about their normal lives while the air they are breathing is literally toxic. It makes me wonder how much people actually know or care about the problem as they are willing to sacrifice their lungs in order to ignore it.

This also further solidifies my belief that asking people to change their lifestyles in ineffective in tackling the climate disaster. Given the choice people will carry out their normal businesses (even as the world is burning around them).

What we really need is actual policy that combats this. We need the state to build the infrastructure and enact restrictions on polluting behavior so people aren't given the choice of carrying out our polluting destructive business.

<comment><USER12> What's the alternative? Should everyone on the west coast have dropped what they were doing and fled over the mountains? Are we supposed to be helping to put out the fires? Or are you just astounded that we haven't all retreated to the personal hyperbaric chambers we've all pre-constructed in our respective bomb shelters?

What have you been doing?

<comment><USER11> According to airnow.gov:

> People with heart or lung disease, older adults, children and teens: Avoid > physical activities outdoors.

>

> Everyone else: Avoid strenuous outdoor activities, keep outdoor activities > short, and consider moving physical activities indoors or rescheduling.

I've been staying indoors, and so have many people. You definitely should not go fishing, golfing, play football in the park, etc. like I've been seeing people doing

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Restoration of habitat and setting aside half of earth for the rest of the species would be an easier solution than cloning or Crispr

Human beings procreating responsibly is a major factor in continuing our species to perpetuity. It should not be for religious, economic, political or social reasons.

Species extinction occurs because human beings are outbreeding every other species on earth exploiting all the planet's resources and keeping it for themselves.

This is detrimental to our own survival as we are super apex predators. When an apex predator gets hungry, nothing else can survive. And we are always hungry and we keep adding hungry mouths.

If we pick quality over quantity, we will have a healthy stock and sufficient earth resources when the eventual depopulation event occurs. Depopulation is a mathematical certainty.

We can either control population with responsible procreation and resource conservation or we can burn all existing and non renewable resources and perish in a spectacularly tragic and violent way.

The only way to prevent species extinction is to conserve habitat for the species. Since everything is below us, we have to step aside and make space. Without habitat, we will perish as a species.

Being the apex predator, it's like sitting on the top most branch of a tree and sawing off all the branches. Because apex predators consume everything. Increase in population is like inviting everyone to come and sit on top of the tree too.

Hunters and fishermen know this. That's why most conservation groups seek hunters and fishermen and NRA support. They donate because they realize the importance of preservation of habitat.

How do we go about this? By removing population pressure from economic activities like work and employment and GDP. This can be easily achieved by automation. Growing high calories, nutritionally dense food to feed the population and investing in local food security by utilizing modern tech like hydroponics and vertical farming on marginal land. Figuring out the environmental cost of replacement rate of human births and helping people gain resources to justify having children rather be a continual drain by incentivizing large families.

When resources disappear, civil unrest and war begins. We have always seen this. Famine and drought have always preceded every major war. From tribes to the latest Syrian incursion. Even way back, primitive tribes will go to war with the the neighbours when there is a famine or drought or food runs low. The men who die remove themselves from the food chain. Women and children are spared and were always spoils of war. The resources are combined for greater survivability of species..not a tribe.

The latest upheavals we see and the protests and revolutions in recent memory have always been due to less resources to distribute amongst a larger population. Densely populated regions revolt when resources are stretched thin. We incarcerated criminals when they show a tendency to appropriate community resources without contributing to the common pot thereby reducing their ability to be multiplying and replicating vectors of DNA. We did not allow the sick and the weak to continue sharing the commons.

If we look at the bigger picture unemotionally, what we pride ourselves with..the genteel fair kind and sociological progress Is what has allowed this resource restriction.

We can't let go of that progress. The only way out is automation. And removing economic incentives for procreation. And resource allocation and distribution equally by removing speculation over resources that contribute to human survival.

<comment><USER14> >feed the population and investing in local food security by utilizing modern tech like hydroponics and vertical farming on marginal land.

I think your hearts in the right place but this is misguided. Marginal land should not be farmed, via any method. Re-wilding marginal lands is one of the best ways to restore ecological health and diversity on a wide scale.

Hydroponics are also not a silver bullet, the tech has conformed to the hype curve just as predictably as anything else. You can produce leafy greens, and even some meat via aquaponics, but not significant calories or staples.

>The only way out is automation.

I know you had a few 'and' after this but nevertheless, hard disagree. A major contributing factor to mankind's abuse of the natural world is abstraction from it. We will not solve that by going deeper into the darkness where kids grow up believing the food that sustains then springs into existence via inexplicable magic. We need to become closer to nature and the origins of our food, not further away from it via automation, urbanisation and increasing specialisation. All of these further the ignorance, misunderstanding, and abuse of the natural world on which we depend.

Is it most efficient to have more people return to rural environments and become involved in food production? No. But seeking greatest efficiency is one of the biggest errors we are committing here - nature is not efficient, it is broadly stable and able to support great diversity of life, at the cost of efficiency. We should be seeking to emulate nature in these regards, instead of attempting to extract and refine the parts of it we believe we need to maintain our particular version of life.

<comment><USER13> I think I understand what you are saying. My reasoning was that right now we are using good farmland for frou frou crops like lettuce that have a quick turn around(45-60 days)..they use a lot of fossil fuels, have to transported long distances and involves labour exploitation for very low calorie/nutrition. And then strawberries that require the soil to be fumigated with really nasty stuff like methyl bromate fungicide. These are kind of crops are better grown in urban spaces indoors and vertically where there is soil already contaminated and is essentially warehoused.

Using solar, better led lights and maybe hacks like placing them near water treatment plants etc can be a good optimization of energy and resources that are other wise underutilized. Further aquaponics that is also fish farming is even more environmentally friendly as it's a closed loop system with minimal inputs.

By marginal lands, I mean abandoned factories and soil contaminated with heavy metals that is difficult to remediate without a lot of expenses. Growing highly perishable produce like lettuce and strawberries indoors in these spaces is a win-win. My 2c.

I dream of little nuclear 'suitcases' that can power cities for weeks or months. Factories that can be run with solar as well as nuclear energy. Hopefully we will find a way to dispose and dismantle nuclear installations safely in the future.

Your other point: if we are to emulate nature and get back closer to natural growth and evolution of civilization as we know it..we could model it around the Nile valley or the Indus Valley. I think having clusters of small self sustaining villages with intra trade and further away trading for other wgat we can't produce is better. If we can create village clusters networked to other clusters connected together to bigger and bigger fractal systems of both tech and environment and wilderness, we can have it all.

In the future, a lot of trade would be services. For small scale sustainability, we would need automation. This frees up labour force to do other things. Even a simple adjustment like a 4 day work week or 20 hour workweek or working remote would have a massive impact on how we consume and our collective footprints.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> This video narrated by Sir David Attenborough should be watched by everyone on our planet: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Puv0Pss33M](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Puv0Pss33M)

</comment><comment><USER16> About the two rhinos, do we have the technology to keep genetic material from animals that are endangered so we can reintroduce them later? I realize the population would be too much of a monoculture, but maybe it's better than nothing.

<comment><USER17> We do and use it!

SD zoo just made a horse!

[https://www.cbs58.com/news/a-clone-of-the-endangered- przewal...](https://www.cbs58.com/news/a-clone-of-the-endangered-przewalskis- horse-is-born-of-dna-saved-for-40-years)

<comment><USER16> That's exciting news, thanks!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> The wildfire smoke has brought that future that we'd feared and daydreamed (daymared?) about; where we can actually see the posibility and impetus for living in self-contained bubbles of breathable atmosphere and livable temperatures.

Now is the time that we are finally transitioning to electric vehicles and hopefully toward sustainable policies and economies, but has the collective level of consciousness risen to empower us to meet these challenges?

<comment><USER19> Electric vehicles are just one piece of the solution. We stop the output of new CO2 emissions for private and commercial transportation. Then we gotta do agriculture. Then we gotta decentralize the power grid. Then we gotta further decentralize agriculture again. Then we gotta better manage tens of millions of acres of hardly traversable terrain that's been fuel loading for a century. The list goes on and on. We've lost decades of progress by side-tracking ourselves with complete bs narratives being pumped out of monied interest groups that prefer things stay they way they are. I hate to be a pessimist but we might be right and truly fucked at this point.

<comment><USER20> We have to follow the same refactoring strategies we use for programming to refactor the way the world works

<comment><USER19> Exactly. And nothing's off the table.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> We'll struggle to address this until we get the global population under control, particularly in the 3rd world where regard for the Environment is much lower than in the West.

At least in the West, we can phase out beef, coal, and oil; as well as dramatically limiting immigration (accepting migrants only from other highly developed countries, deporting all illegal immigrants, and ceasing all permanent refugee programs) in order to limit overall population growth.

<comment><USER22> >as well as dramatically limiting immigration (accepting migrants only from other highly developed countries, deporting all illegal immigrants, and ceasing all permanent refugee programs) in order to limit overall population growth.

Those people won't cease to exist. They'll just stay in poorer nations. In fact, wouldn't accepting them into a wealthy nation reduce the average number of children they have? And if these nations can drastically reduce the impact of their citizens, all the more reason to start recruiting migrants.

<comment><USER21> The reduced number of potential children is offset by the significantly higher net increase in emissions from moving from a poor country to a rich country, and participating in a more CO2-intensive economy.

Unskilled migrants and refugees move to the West for economic reasons. However, their labor can increasingly be replaced with robots. Additionally, in Welfare states, their existence is a cost on the rest of society, as well as increasing demand for finite land and transport infrastructure, thus worsening quality of life for existing citizens.

With all of that, it would be much more effective to provide free and universal education, contraception, and abortion for women, which will also address the underlying cause of mass migration and habitat destruction - regional human overpopulation.</comment></comment></comment>


The Nasuni Blog: Quality Still Matters - <AUTHOR> http://www.nasuni.com/news/nasuni-blog/quality-still-matters/

<comment><AUTHOR> Makes me wonder if there's a parallel to Brewer's Theorem in software development:

Quality, Features, Speed. Pick two.</comment>


DJI Flight Simulator Possible Malware - <AUTHOR> Downloaded the DJI Flight Simulator last night (4/30/19). My antivirus program blocked the install, saying "DJI_FS.exe" contains a pattern consistent with "TR/Crypt.ZPACK.Gen [trojan]". So, I clearly cannot use it. I already deleted it, so cannot confirm the version -- possibly 2.20....
My tinfoil hat says to watch out for a non-US's company trying to infiltrate other countries' computers. But, nah, that'd never happen. Right?
My science geek side says that perhaps it's a false positive.
How do you prove it? My only options seem to be to either not use it or install it on a dark PC without connection to the rest of my network, but I don't know if the app will still work without a network connection. <comment><USER2> Have you submitted it to Virus Total to see if the other antivirus detect it? [https://www.virustotal.com](https://www.virustotal.com)

<comment><AUTHOR> No, it was interesting. Results:

Cyren = W32/Trojan.CSLT-4203; Ikarus = Trojan.Crypt; McAfee = Artemis!CE570BABD051</comment></comment>


ProperInvoice - Life is Short. Don't waste time Invoicing - <AUTHOR> https://www.ProperInvoice.com <comment><AUTHOR> Hello Product Hunters,

Life is Short, Don't waste time Invoicing. Focus on Growing your Business.

ProperInvoice is a simple and easy to use App that helps Freelancers, Startups and Small Businesses invoice, quote, expense, accept payments and also monitor key financial metrics online and in realtime.

ProperInvoice Features: 1\. Invoice Online 2\. Quote Online 3\. Track Expenses Online 4\. Accept Online Payments 5\. Manage Suppliers, Customers, Your Products and Services 6\. Monitor Key Financial Metrics of your business in Realtime 7\. Get Notified when Invoices are Viewed or Paid 8\. Allow your customers to Accept or Decline quotes online 9\. Automatically remind customers of Pending & Overdue Invoices 10\. Create and Send Recurring Invoices 11\. Automatically record Recurring Expenses 12\. Allow multiple team members to Invoice, Quote and Expense

You can get started on ProperInvoice using a Free account. Upgrade only if you feel like.

Also we are offering 30% OFF to all HN users / Product Hunters using the code PH30.

PS: I am the creator of ProperInvoice. Feel free to gimme a shout incase you have any questions.</comment>


Mark Zuckerberg will be our downfall - <AUTHOR> https://theoutline.com/post/1572/mark-zuckerberg-will-be-our-downfall <comment><USER2> Not a big fan of FB or Zuckerberg, but the article reeks of fear mongering. FB won't be the cause of society's downfall. There are way more powerful factors capable of causing it.</comment>


A new approach to user onboarding. Reduces live chat sessions - <AUTHOR> http://onboardio.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> Onboardio gives you the opportunity of matching visitor actions with alternative answers of potential questions. Prelaunch campaign has started. Product will be live in 3-6 weeks.</comment>


Numbers 0 to 11111 in terms of Increasing and Decreasing Orders of 1 to 9 (2014) - <AUTHOR> https://arxiv.org/abs/1302.1479 <comment><USER2> The abstract and introduction don't explain this very well.

My understanding is that the author wrote the digits 1 through 9 in ascending order, and then inserted parenthesis, addition, subtraction, multiplication, division and exponentiation operators between them where appropriate to get every number from 0 to 11111.

And then he did the same thing using the digits 9 through 1 in descending order and did the same thing.

He was able to find a solution for every number except 10958 with 1-9 in ascending order.

EDIT:

The paper also doesn't explain much about how or why they did this. At first glance I don't think it would be too difficult to come up with a branch and bound algorithm to search through all the solutions.

<comment><USER3> I wonder if any numbers have multiple solutions.

<comment><USER4> I am nearly certain many do.

<comment><USER5> Your sibling comment has an example in 1+2+3=1* 2*3

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> At my office we lost a lot of time because someone put up a challenge to represent all the numbers 0-99 with algebriac expressions containing exactly four digits '4'. The use of powers and radicals was allowed.

I myself solved several numbers before exhausting the tricks I could think of, and reverted to brute force/search with Polish/prefix notation, then realizing how massive the search space was for even just a few operators. Adding parentheses ordering further explodes the search space.

Finally, while this kind of concrete and explicit expression is "toy math", it is related to Godel Sentences and lexigraphic ordering of proofs used through much of the establishment of logic, the foundations of proof systems, and computer science.

</comment><comment><USER7> It wasn't clear why this was interesting from the title. But here's an example:

       0 = 12 + 34 − 56 − 7 + 8 + 9.
       1 = 1^23456789.
       2 = 123+4−56−78+9.
       3 = 123 − 45 − 6 − 78 + 9.

And then in decreasing order

       0 = 98−7−6−54−32+1.
       1 = 98−76−54+32+1.
       2 = 9+87−65+4−32−1.
       3 = 98−76−5+4+3−21.

That this is possible at all is counter-intuitive to me, and hence fascinating. Even more fascinating is that he does not have a solution for 10958 in the ascending case.

<comment><USER8> There's not a lot interesting about "facts about numbers" when you place such a low upper bound on your achievements. If he'd only done this up to 100, he'd never have had trouble finding a solution for 10958. But why 11111? Why not 111111111111?

To me this is just as interesting as any other arbitrary list of permutations of symbols.

<comment><USER9> I assume 111112 is unrepresentable as well?

<comment><USER10> To me, the pattern of unrepresentable numbers (like the pattern of primes) would also be an "interesting" result.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I just wrote a script to do this in, like, 5 minutes :) And the whole thing runs in 7 seconds on my machine.

[https://github.com/adtac/123456789/blob/master/output](https://github.com/adtac/123456789/blob/master/output)

Admittedly, it doesn't have every number. I suspect it's because I haven't included bracketed expressions.

<comment><USER12>
      3 = 123+4+5-6*7^89

First verifiable instance of error?

Did a little fishing for overflow candidates with the following regex:

      [1-9]{3,}\^[1-9]{3,}

...caught 58 results between 266 and 10940:

      266 = 123^456-78-9
      ...
      10940 = 12345^6789

My kung fu isn't Python so I don't know how types are handled. That eval() function sure smells suicidal for anything remotely serious though.

<comment><USER13> No, Python doesn't have integer overflow.

"^" is the XOR operator. GP's code has that bug.

> That eval() function sure smells suicidal for anything remotely serious > though.

Yes, ast.literal_eval() should be used.

<comment><USER11> Ugh, fixed it.

Using * * is not really an option now because it takes insane amounts of time to compute something like `1234567 __8 __9`.

And this is just a tiny script - `eval` shouldn't really be an issue. And yes, I know it's evil, generally. But if you think about it, Python itself is just one big eval loop :P

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Would be more interested in the script than the list and how long it took to run.

And if this is the best so far? Seems surprising given it's a popular kids game.

It's not really maths IMO since I think using 98 is cheating for instance, it's really (9 X 10 + 8), 10 not being allowed. So kids are not learning real maths, more arithmetic.

<comment><USER15> There is no script, he did it mostly by hand.

<comment><USER14> I would have thought that to be the fun bit!

I think there was at least one script for some of the numbers, this I would have thought the most interesting, optimisation of the script and for all numbers and proving some numbers have no solutions([edit] possibly very hard) -

"The author is thankful to xxxx in finding some difficult representations using computerized script."

<comment><USER15> "some". In previous versions of the paper, he claims to have done everything manually: "To bring these numbers, thousands of combinations are considered without use of any programming language."

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> So, who is going to find the increasing solution for 10958?

</comment><comment><USER17> Why did this paper need four revisions?

Edit: the revisions have different ranges of numbers, but they go up and down. Odd.

<comment><USER18> Actually, four is even.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Maybe something neat to bring up as a "drinking game"...at my next Math Symposium

Pick at random 3 digit number and try to express using the digits 1 thru 9...loser has to drink

</comment><comment><USER20> Seems related to this recent Numberphile video which does a similar thing for e and pi:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgBGibfLD-U](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgBGibfLD-U)

</comment><comment><USER21> This is way more numerology than math, and I don't see any deep results coming out of this. Was this just a fun side project for the author?

<comment><USER22> Not everything that's written as an article is serious :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Interesting fact: every integer can be written with three 2's.

<comment><USER24> n + (2 - 2) / 2 ?

<comment><USER23> Nope. You can use three instances of number 2, all arithmetical operations and elementary special functions that are taught in high school.</comment></comment></comment>


Is space exploration over? - <AUTHOR> http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/is-space-exploration-over.html

<comment><USER2> i can't imagine how far down that line Humanity would be, if the resources and manpower wasted on our own internal problems (conflicts, war) would have been applied to it.

Perhaps not living on Mars, but definitely not where we are now.

EDIT: I can only imagine how petty everything must feel for astronauts, our problems, looking at Earth from so high. At least that's how i personally feel when i look at the stars, like many other people out there.</comment>


How Far Can You Get From McDonald's? - <AUTHOR> http://www.datapointed.net/2009/09/distance-to-nearest-mcdonalds/ <comment><USER3> Back when Starbucks first exploded to such ludicrous levels that you'd sometimes find two of them sharing a single parking lot, the expectation became that there would _always_ be a Starbucks nearby.

So much so that when I tried to drive from Phoenix to Los Angeles early one morning, I was surprised, then baffled, then amazed, then outraged that there was no Starbucks at all on I-10. I spent nearly 4 hours driving with _no mocha in me at all_ , and was likely a hazard to other drivers.

I wouldn't be surprised to find that somebody had driven off the road on that stretch and sued Starbucks for negligence in not providing the requisite number of restaurants per square meter that its customer base had come to expect.

Fortunately, they've now put one in Blythe, so the drive is much less perilous.

<comment><USER4> Starbucks' expansion was interestingly "clumpy". Not surprising, I guess, when you realize they have to deal with the same supply chain issues as anyone else in a similar space. They didn't open a freestanding store in Tulsa until 2002, years after seemingly every other corner in Manhattan had one.

<comment><USER5> Starbucks also has a very sophisticated siting operation which predicts demand similar to how an oil company predicts oil. For green fields, you measure proxies, look at formula based on historical data, and guess. If you sink one well and hit a gusher, though, your expectation of profitable exploitability in the vicinity goes WAY up, so you start going nuts.

You'd think that two Starbucks across the street would cannibalize each other, but you'd be betting against very smart people who have made this their lifes' work and been richly rewarded for succeeding at it.

Source: anecdata from my father, who works in commercial real estate and thinks they (and Walgreens) are the two savviest businesses he's ever worked with in his industry.

P.S. A software solution to turn any arbitrary firm into Starbucks would be worth tens of millions of dollars if you sold it correctly. Billions if you went the next step and started flipping properties based on the software. (e.g. "101 Main St. on foreclosure auction for 200k, predicted value to a banking customer is 1.2 million, expected cost to work deal is 200k. Placing bid now.")

<comment><USER6> _You'd think that two Starbucks across the street would cannibalize each other_

Speaking of that, would they operate as two competing entities? Or would they help each other out? Ie lend each other supplies, direct overflow customers across the street, refrain from price wars, things like that.

<comment><USER4> Freestanding Starbucks stores aren't franchises, so they have every incentive to coordinate for maximum benefit. I'd be surprised if SBUX management had set up any incentives for it to work any other way.

<comment><USER6> Interesting.

Even if they were franchises, there might still be some game-theory advantage to cooperating. After all, a happy customer at one Starbucks is going to be positive toward all Starbuckses.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This post is from 2009, he updated it in 2010: [http://www.datapointed.net/2010/09/distance-to-nearest- mcdon...](http://www.datapointed.net/2010/09/distance-to-nearest-mcdonalds- sept-2010/)

He also visited the spot [http://www.datapointed.net/2010/10/the-farthest- place-from-m...](http://www.datapointed.net/2010/10/the-farthest-place-from- mcdonalds-lower-48-states/) which makes for a pretty entertaining tale.

<comment><USER8> The followups are nicer than the original one, and I think that, in spirit, NW Nevada/Southern Oregon are a better fit for 'far away' places. The desert out there is very high and lonely, in a hauntingly beautiful sort of way. It's also extremely _empty_.

One place in particular that merits a visit is Steens Mountain - you can drive most of the way up it and hike around. The view from the top is amazing - <USER2> can see for miles, and there are very few signs of people visible.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I think this visualization would be far more interesting at the city level. At the country level, it's basically a map of population density. At the city level, I think it might reveal much more about demographic differences between neighborhoods and also do a much better job at highlighting key transit routes/hubs.

<comment><USER10> Yeah, in all honesty, that graph looks not too different from a map of lights at night (proxy for population density).

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> > Which begs the question: just how far away can you get from our world of > generic convenience?

An interesting kind of related question is to ask what is the farthest you've ever been away from other humans.

For most of us, we've never been more than a few miles from others.

I've read that the record is probably held by one of the Apollo astronauts who remained in lunar orbit while the landing party landed.

<comment><USER12> He should have said "raises the question". " begs the question".means assuming the conclusion of your argument.

<comment><USER13> Common usage has it the other way around - 'begs the question' does mean 'raises the question', simply because that's how it's used. That philosophical jargon has it differently doesn't change that.

<comment><USER14> I'm usually sympathetic to that argument, but the origin of 'begs the question' is philosophical jargon, and the misuse of it perpetually reproduces itself from people hearing it being used properly, not understanding what is being said, and trying to parse the phrase to figure out what it means.

Since the phrasing is anachronistic, there's really no chance that they'll come up with 'asks you to accept as true' for 'begs,' and 'the conclusion' for 'the question.' But honestly, if you mean to say 'brings up the question' you should just say it, instead of reaching for an anachronistic pithy phrase or buzzword.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I know it's not really related but still... this article reminded of the section in the book 'Behind The Golden Arches' that discussed that although many people think that there are too many McDonald's restaurants around, there are still more car dealerships.

And how many times do you buy a car compared to a burger?

So this article claims around 13,000 McDonald's restaurants, and I just found a page that claims 37,500 separate car and truck dealership franchises.

I don't know exactly what it is about those numbers that amaze me but every time I think about it I'm gobsmacked...

<comment><USER16> When you say "separate ... dealership franchises", are you counting each physical location once, or once per brand? Around here, many dealerships carry multiple brands. Also, there tend to be multiple dealerships clustered together (probably due to zoning, and tax incentives that some municipalities offer), so they're not as smoothly distributed as McDonalds. Still, those are amazing numbers!

<comment><USER15> To be honest I just took the numbers from [http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_car_dealerships_are_in_Am...](http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_car_dealerships_are_in_America) which claims to quote the National Automobile Dealers Association. More completely that page says "more than 17,000 new car and truck dealers with approximately 37,500 separate franchises" so even without the 'separate franchises' the number is still higher.

But yeah, I agree that the numbers are amazing...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> The place I grew up was 103 miles away from the closest McDonald's. There were people there that would drive to McDonald's for breakfast.

</comment><comment><USER18> I grew up in rural Australia, and we used to host a ton of exchange students from North America.

Driving from Melbourne back to my home town, there is a huge billboard saying "Next McDonalds 100km" (60 mi.). Many times we would have to pull over so the American exchange students could take a photo, as they were in disbelief they were so far away from one.

On that same road you're easily 250km (130mi.) away, but there is no sign.

<comment><USER19> Most Americans have no taste-buds. They don't eat lamb, and prefer grain-fed beef (which tastes like slightly gamey chicken) to grass-fed beef (which has a much more ... beefy ... flavor). And don't even _think_ of offering them kangaroo.

On the other hand, I'm sure there's some Minnesotan here, who'll tell me I'm a wimp for not eating gopher. Regional US food rocks, but generic "US food" is just bland.

<comment><USER20> >They don't eat lamb, and prefer grain-fed beef

That really has as much to do with cost as anything. Grass-fed beef can be twice the price of grain-fed, and lamb's definitely not cheap, either.

<comment><USER10> I'm surprised it's not corn-fed beef - corn's a lot cheaper.

<comment><USER20> Corn _is_ a grain.

<comment><USER10> Sorry, read that backwards (grass vs. grain). My mistake.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Not only is this an interesting factoid, but the author is also a very good writer. I recommend reading the follow up articles.

</comment><comment><USER22> I think his result might be wrong. It doesn't jump out at you from his map since it's on an edge of the area, but it also has big voids on the northeast corner of Minnesota and Michigan's Upper Peninsula. If you examine carefully, you can pick out Kinross, Gladstone, Escanaba, Marquette, Iron Mountain, Ironwood, Ashland, Duluth, Two Harbors, Hibbing, Eveleth, Virginia, and International Falls. That means the tip of Pigeon Point would put you a good 130 miles or so from the nearest U.S. McDonald's in Two Harbors, Minnesota, compared to 115 miles for the author's spot in northwestern Nevada.

The northeast tip of Isle Royale would be a little farther still, if you want to count islands that are part of the lower 48. And the northeast tip of Keweenaw County wouldn't be as far from the nearest McDonald's as the crow flies, but might be the longest drive from any McDonald's, at 143 miles by road from Marquette, in a loop around Keweenaw Bay.

I also found it interesting to compare the map defined by distance to nearest McDonald's with a light pollution map of the lower 48, used to find excellent dark sky locations for setting up one's telescope. McDonald's and light pollution largely overlap in tracing population density and major highways, but McDonald's is also overrepresented relative to light pollution in isolated areas that are popular vacation destinations. This jumped out as most apparent in south central Utah, and also holds for Arizona and New Mexico. The McDonald's voids are vast areas that are not only isolated, but also boring.

<comment><USER23> Indeed, the Arrowhead of Minnesota and Isle Royale are farther from the nearest U.S. McDonald's, as the crow flies, but they're only about fifty miles from the Micky Dee's in Thunder Bay, Ontario.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> From a cursory look, the plots just seems to correspond with population density more than anything else.

<comment><USER25> Very closely, I'd say:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_Stat...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States#Population_density)

The major difference I see is the McDonaldses following highways in the western states -- for example, look at the sparsely populated parts of Montana.

And even there, it's possible that the McDonald's density matches the population density. That's just not what's graphed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> What I find most striking about this map is that it is eerily similar to maps of distance from or concentration of supermarkets in the US, which are fairly commonly used after Ravenstein's human mobility studies to track things like urban expansion. Simply put, this map would suggest to me that McDonald's has become so entrenched that it actually serves as a reliable landmark for human evolutionary and sociological studies. Which is frightening.

</comment><comment> steve-howard >Which begs the question: just how far away can you get from our world of generic convenience? And how would you figure that out?

I'm an insomniac much of the time. Some weeks/months I don't sleep until it's light out. Out here in suburban Chicago, the only places still open to me when it's late and I'm hungry are 7-11, McDonald's, and Burger King. So I'll take "generic convenience," because it at least makes my life a little easier to be able to get something resembling food when there's nothing else open.

(Yes, I could plan ahead and put things in my fridge and cook food. I'll get back to you when I have the energy or the inclination to do that).

<comment><USER27> Don't expect high energy when you munch on McDonalds, look into what proper nutrition can do for your body and mind.

<comment> steve-howard My energy level problems stem from something else, because I've not had any of it since I was 12. Still trying to find the cause.

<comment><USER28> Maybe it's your diet.

<comment> steve-howard My diet was very different before I got to college.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I would like to see a similar analysis based on venture funded, active startups. Obviously in the valley they are concentrated, but outside the valley it would be an interesting analysis.

</comment><comment><USER30> I can't find the source for the life of me, but I remember reading an article about 6 months back that declared basically "there is not a single square foot of land inside the continental USA that is considered 'silent' any longer".

In other words, no matter where you "go to get away" in the USA, you will never truly leave the buzz of the city.

EDIT: Perhaps this is it [http://geohazards.usgs.gov/staffweb/mcnamara/PDFweb/McNamara...](http://geohazards.usgs.gov/staffweb/mcnamara/PDFweb/McNamaraBuland.pdf)

<comment><USER31> I just skimmed that paper very quickly, and it seems to include wind and water. If you count all the noises that nature makes, nowhere on the planet is going to be "silent".

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> I remember when I was a kid (late 80s early/mid 90s), and I'd visit my aunt in California (I'm from Georgia). It seemed almost like a different country-- different stores, different architecture, different culture. The same was true for rural areas closer to home.

Now everywhere I go, there's a Walmart, a McDonalds, an Applebees/Chilis/TGI- Fridays, a BestBuy, a Staples/OfficeMax/Office Depot, and a Home Depot, or Lowes.

The world feels a lot smaller.

<comment><USER33> It still feels like a different country because it's happening globally. I just moved to London and there's a fucking Whole Foods around the corner! Closer in fact than it was when I lived in Mountain View, Santa Fe, or Minneapolis (all big Whole Foods markets).

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> That was an entertaining but true and worrisome article, enlightening. When I was in my 20's I might have thought wow, South Dakota needs more McDonald's.

</comment><comment><USER35> Subway became the largest restaurant chain in the world recently. Is it, perhaps, more apt to ask how far one can get from one of them?

</comment><comment><USER36> If you like maps like this and are from Boston, check out <http://bostonography.com>

</comment><comment><USER37> Lol, I initially read the link as:

The United States, visualized by distance to the nearest McDonald's (DISAPPOINTED.net)

</comment><comment><USER38> If you look closely you can see his coloring algorithm is broken. The "spheres" of close restaurants appear to "squash" each other rather than just intersecting. The result is grooves between restaurant spheres that should be more brightly coloured. If anyone even notices this comment and replies to it, I expect them to be disagreeing with me.

TL;DR: I can tell by the pixels.

<comment><USER39> The algorithm isn't broken, the zones you're talking about are squashed together to show you, at any given point, _which_ McDonalds is the closest to that location. It's like a Voronoi diagram (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voronoi_diagram>).

<comment><USER38> For a map intended to show the distance of points from the nearest McDonalds' that isn't the best algorithm; equal pixel colour should => equal distance. I was thinking it'd be cool if distance were represented by height, in a 3D rendering. Also, make it a flythrough, with music :)</comment></comment></comment>