Lessons from the frontline on how to figure out startup sales - <AUTHOR> http://www.heavybit.com/library/video/things-i-have-learned-about-sales-so-far/ <comment><AUTHOR> I'm the guy talking in the video. Sales is hard. It's the number one thing b2b startups fuck up. I have a pretty pragmatic approach which is hard-learned. Happy to answer any specific questions if you got 'em.</comment>


Show HN: Foreign Support – Q&A community for foreign students - <AUTHOR> http://foreignsupport.co/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hi Community, We trying to build a community for aspiring/foreign students. Please provide feedback on the same.

TIA</comment>


Why did we decide to write Docker in Go - <AUTHOR> https://www.slideshare.net/jpetazzo/docker-and-go-why-did-we-decide-to-write-docker-in-go <comment><USER2> Slide 21: "Why Go? 2) Neutral", it's not C++, Python, Ruby or Java.

This isn't a real reason, by itself.</comment>


Why We're Having an Everybody Draw Mohammed Contest on Thursday May 20 - <AUTHOR> http://reason.com/blog/2010/05/18/get-ready-for-everyone-draw-mo

<comment><USER2> This absolutely sickens me. While yes, I think certain parts of the Islamic community is exacerbating the reverence of the Prophet Muhammad, this kind of parody-centric/faux humor xenophobia is a contributing reason why some groups think Americans are assholes.

 _There comes a point in any society's existence where it must ultimately, to paraphrase Martin Luther (who himself was more than happy to see opponents put to death), dig in its heels and say here we stand, we will do no other. We don't need to be perfectly consistent philosophically or historically or theologically to assert what is special and unique not just about the United States, with its bizarre and wonderful articulation of the First Amendment, but the greater classical liberal project comprising not just the "West" (whatever that is) but human beings in whatever town, country, or planet they inhabit._

And stop using the First Amendment as a means to satirize an entire culture of people. Open the doors to conversation, embrace their differences and understand why this upsets them beyond conjecture. For Christ sake, stop acting like children and try to work with these people, instead of _purposefully_ angering them, and putting a wedge between us.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm glad you were able to say that without fear of being attacked.

As for me, you can slander my person, my family, my dog, my culture, my religion, my property, my intelligence -- you can say whatever you want. I may disagree and be angry by your words, but I will fight to the death for your right to say them.

Freedom of speech means nothing if it comes with your right not to be insulted.

 _If mankind minus one were of one opinion, then mankind is no more justified in silencing the one than the one - if he had the power - would be justified in silencing mankind._ \- JSM</comment></comment>


Piglet – A simple scripting language for data processing inspired by Apache Pig - <AUTHOR> https://code.google.com/p/piglet-mtj/

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm engaged in monthly projects, of which Piglet was the second of this year. I'm a big fan of Apache Pig, and wondered what a "small-data" version of Apache Pig would look like in code (though it's not a complete version of Pig).

This was implemented very quickly and is not ideal in some cases (RPN for expressions, for example). It's heavily assert-ridden to help in debugging and is not for the faint of heart. But you can see numerous examples to illustrate how it's used.

I'm curious what people think?

Thanks,

Tim.</comment>


Ask HN: How long does it take to learn Common Lisp - <AUTHOR>

How long does it take to learn common lisp, to apply your ideas ..., For me it took more than 3 months ..,May be i'm not working hard. Just started reading Commonlisp Code such as CL-ppcre. It seems i have learned nothing ... What about you guys ? <comment><USER2> How long is a piece of string?

</comment><comment><USER3> I can't answer that question. I wrote a Common Lisp book for Springer Verlag in the late 1980s and I don't consider myself to be an expert after years of using CL for work. I am not being modest, it is just that I have worked with Lisper's who were much better than I was.

I do enjoy learning and using new programming languages but I learn them a bit at a time by using them in projects.

So I would advise you to not force it, choose small projects and start coding. After a few small projects, if you are not having fun, then just choose another language.

If you love to program, then learning new languages helps you program in other languages that you already know. As long as you enjoy yourself it is time well spent.

<comment><AUTHOR> thanks, it really helped me to overcome hardness... instead of beating myself

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Lisp doesn't take any more time to get productive in it, than any other modern language. It takes a bit longer to really get it though. There are a lot of things in Common Lisp that take some time to sink in, because you rarely see them in other languages, like macros, generic functions, conditions, etc. But you don't need to know these things to start using lisp right away.

</comment><comment><USER5> This is a hard (if not impossible) question to answer. It will vary hugely based on a lot of different factors:

How many languages do you already know?

How long have you been programming?

Have you done any functional programming before?

Are you familiar with lambda calculus?

and the list goes on.

</comment><comment><USER6> try these: <http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/> <http://landoflisp.com/></comment>


Linear Algebra by Jim Hefferon – free textbook - n-izem http://joshua.smcvt.edu/linearalgebra/ <comment><AUTHOR> If you want to learn linear algebra by coding in python, this is hands down the best book out there.

Coding the Matrix - Philip Klein [0]

It used to have a Coursera course, but I think it's been taken down. The website has videos of the course taught at Brown I think.

The associated website is: [http://codingthematrix.com](http://codingthematrix.com)

[0] [https://www.amazon.com/Coding-Matrix-Algebra-Applications- Co...](https://www.amazon.com/Coding-Matrix-Algebra-Applications- Computer/dp/0615880991/)

<comment><USER2> The course is available here: [http://academictorrents.com/details/54cd86f3038dfd446b037891...](http://academictorrents.com/details/54cd86f3038dfd446b037891406ba4e0b1200d5a)

It is legal, not a pirated version.

<comment><USER3> That was a great course! I'm glad it's still accessible. I was not aware of this resource for courses. There was a fantastic course on probability from the University of Pennsylvania that disappeared when Coursera went through a change a few years ago. Maybe I can find that one there too. Thanks for the link.

<comment><AUTHOR> Did you find the Upenn course on probability? I have been looking for it for a long time. The professor was absolutely brilliant.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> How nice to see this link here! I could answer any questions that anyone has. --Jim

<comment><USER5> First, let me say THANK YOU for making this a free textbook available online to everyone everywhere. The world owes you a debt of gratitude. I, for one, will do my part and make a donation via the link at the bottom of your textbook's web page. I hope others here will join me.

My question is: What motivated you to create this freely available book?

<comment><USER4> Thank you for the donation. I use the funds to work on revisions of this text, and on developing others.

For motivation: briefly, I was at Union College and was asked to teach Linear. I saw a second edition of Strang's book, thought it was wonderful (still do), and adopted it. But the students, who were perfectly good students, did not get it. They just couldn't solve the problems that a person should solve in that class. I decided after some reflection that the folks I had need to be brought along to where they are ready for a higher level understanding. So I put together a presentation that uses lots of examples, motivation, and naturalness to try and develop maturity in people who do not yet have it.

(Again, I'm not talking Strang's book down, it is very fine indeed. But the students that I have in front of me at this point are just not yet ready.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Ten years old discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=351334](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=351334)

<comment><USER7> If a link is getting hits with comments 10 years later, should there be some sort of special class of points? Everybody else is running JV sprints and this guy is dropping olympic marathons.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Here is another [1]--perhaps not to everyone's taste, but it was influential for me. In particular, the first words of the preface: "The underlying spirit of this treatment of the theory of matrices is that of a concept and its representation."

[1] [https://archive.org/details/LinearAlgebraAndMatrixTheory](https://archive.org/details/LinearAlgebraAndMatrixTheory)

<comment><USER9> My own take is that the "theory of matrices" (not a standard usage but should be) is worth learning for some (sp if you're going into hardcore numerics like stability of algorithms) but not for everyone. It's like studying calculus as the theory of smooth curves -- it robs you of some potential for growth.

Also: some people just want "math for deep learning" and that's mostly baby calculus: the chain rule and gradient descent.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> What is nice about this book is it includes solutions to exercises. I wish more proof-theoretic books included exercises in the back of the book like this one does. Yes, you can prove something in multiple ways, and no that isn't a good excuse to not include at least one version of the proof in the back of the book. It really benefits the self-learner. The math community seems to have a lot of artificial gatekeeping to keep non-academics out.

They do this in several ways.

1) They recommend textbooks to beginners that are too advanced for their skill level.

2) These textbooks do not include solutions and the advice given is that solutions would somehow rob them of the experience (don't let those that lack self-discipline ruin learning for non-traditional students that aren't in a formal classroom with access to professors and TAs). The self-learner needs some sort of feedback system.

3) They tell the self-learner that solutions aren't provided because everyone has the ability to know if their solutions are correct without having their work checked. Would you write a complicated program and write no test cases, or could you instantly know your program is bug free the first time you write it? Why is math suddenly any different?

Despite popular elitist opinions, I'd recommend this book over Axler for the beginner that doesn't know linear algebra. Everyone says Axler is the perfect first book in linear algebra. It really isn't. Even Axler admits this himself in the preface. He assumes that it is a second approach to the field.

But people like to be elitist and recommend books to beginners that aren't always best from a pedagogical perspective.

Those are the same class of people that recommend Rudin or Spivak to someone that wants to study elementary calculus 1 material.

<comment><USER11> In my experience (math teacher at a community college for 20 years and former Ph.D. student who quit before finishing the thesis) the overwhelming majority of people can not learn mathematics properly from a textbook. They need a teacher or someone to help with problems. It's very difficult to get to a point of really understanding the definition/motivation behind concepts. Even with a teacher it's hard to understand.

Here's a simple example. The distributive property says:

a (b + c) = ab + ac

I can teach students to expand 3(x + 2). With some practice almost all of them will get this. They'll say

3(x+2) = 3x + 3(2) = 3x + 6

Do you know how hard it is to convince people that due to the nature of equality you can reverse the steps? Some never understand that

3x + 6 = 3(x + 2)

Some will never understand that 3x + 2x = 5x because of the distributive property and that combining like terms for the expression 3x + ax is the same process.

I don't think there is any desire to be elitist in terms of having good books that are appropriate. It's just hard to do. We've gone through various cycles of reforming calculus, introducing old concepts in a new way. Through all of the changes one thing has remained constant in my experience. The percentage of people who can get it remains the same.

I do agree with your point on providing solutions.

<comment><USER12> > the overwhelming majority of people can not learn mathematics properly from > a textbook.

While you are right, a related issue is that most maths textbooks are atrocious at most aspects that aren't writing pages of equations. There is almost nobody sitting at the 3-way intersection of great mathematician, great writer and great educator who can then write great textbooks.

I've found books with terms like "History" and "Philosophy" in the title are much better places to learn about mathmatics; combined with wikipedia for formulas and details. Any book with excercises but no solutions or historical context has turned out to be basically useless to me, even as a reference (wikipedia is usually better for simple stuff).

I've got something like 4 books on statistics on my shelf at the moment. The only one that I've actually manged to read and learn something from has been Chatterjee's Philosophy of Statistics, because it talks about what techniques were developed in context of which problem, failed alternative approaches, explains what was confusing to some of the greatest minds in the history of statistics, etc. This has been vastly more useful in setting up a framework for what the world of statistics looks like that I can attach a whole bunch of proofs and suchlike too. It has been enlightening in a way that textbooks can't really manage.

<comment><USER13> Did you mean "Statistical Thought" by Chatterjee?

<comment><USER12> Oh, sorry, yes I did. "Statistical Thought: A Perspective and History". The first half is basically all the schools of thought on how probability theory and the real world interact; so I keep thinking of it as a philosophy book.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> The lab on the cover of the lab manual deserves all the upvotes.

<comment><USER4> It is kind of you to notice her. We had to say goodbye last year. She was a sweetheart.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> It's nice to have a free book as a supplement. Linear Algebra Done Right by Sheldon Axler is a much better choice and when making an investment in learning, particularly a difficult subject like linear algebra, saving money with a free text is probably the most expensive thing you can do. You might save $40 but end up not really learning and wasting hours you don't have. Above all, find a good teacher.

<comment><USER16> Axler's Linear Algebra Done Right has always been my favorite linear algebra text (I say this 10+ years after reading it and finishing my math PhD, if that matters).

For those who want a free alternative, behold: Treil's Linear Algebra Done Wrong[2]

The books is downloadable as a free PDF. The name is an answer to Axler's book (dry mathematician's humor), and offers an opposite approach (getting to determinants first).

While I agree with Axler and diagree with Treil, LADW offers way more examples and applications, and _together_ LADR and LADW offer a complete, excellent course material.

\</comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>---

As for the linked text: not a bad text, but I wouldn't pick it over LADR + LADW.

Here's why:

1\. size: it's larger than LADR+LADW taken together. It's hard to see the forest behind the trees.

2\. exposition: it follows the structure of many other texts that I don't like because they terribly confuse the students (that I'd have to re-teach afterwards): starting with solving systems of linear equations, then jumping into vector spaces, for example.

3\. I don't like how key concepts (matrix product, determinant are introduced). If you already know the material, it will be hard to see what's wrong with the approach of throwing a definition at the reader, and _then_ talking about why that definition was made. But the opposite should be the case.

After teaching Linear Algebra, here's my litmus test for a _good_ book. At a glance, it should make the following clear first and foremost:

1\. A _matrix_ of a linear map F is simply writing down the image of the standard basis F(e_1), F(e_2), ... F(e_n). These vectors are the columns of the matrix. If you know them, you can compute F(v) for any v by linearity. That's called "multiplying a vector by matrix"; we write Mv = F(v).

2\. The _product_ of matrices is simply the matrix of composition of linear maps that they represent. The student can figure out what that matrix _should_ be (or should be able to do so); here's how. If M is the matrix of F, and N is the matrix of G (where F and G are linear maps), then the first column of MN is F(G(e_1)) = M x (first column of N). Same for other columns. Ta-dah.

3\. The _determinant_ of v_1, .. v_n is simply the _volume_ of the lopsided box formed by these vectors (mathematicians call the box "parallelepiped"). In particular, in a plane, the area of the triangle formed by vectors A and B is half the determinant. This are can have a minus sign; switching any pair of vectors flips the sign.

4\. _Eigenvectors_ and _eigenvalues_ are fancy words that allow us to describe linear maps like this: "Stretch this picture along _these directions_ by _this much_ ". Directions are eigenvectors, by how much - eigenvalues.

Bonus:

5\. Rotation and scaling are linear maps. That's all _any_ linear map does: rotates and stretches. Writing a map down in this way is called _singular value decomposition_.

6\. Shears are linear maps that don't change the volume. Any box can be made rectangular by applying a bunch of shears to it. That's called _Gaussian elimination_ or _row reduction_ when you look at what happens to matrices (and apply scaling as the last step). This is also an explanation of _why_ the determinant gives volume (if you define it as an alternating n-linear form).

That's the beginning of a solid understanding of the subject.

From my experience, LADR+LADW leave the student with an understanding of 1-4, and other texts, due to being organized badly, don't (even when they contain all the information in some order).

\</comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>---

Books I recommend:

[1]LADR: [http://linear.axler.net/](http://linear.axler.net/)

[2]LADW: [https://www.math.brown.edu/~treil/papers/LADW/LADW.html](https://www.math.brown.edu/~treil/papers/LADW/LADW.html)

<comment><USER17> > 6\. Shears are linear maps that don't change the volume.

Just to nitpick, but this sentence might be read ambiguously by some people, who would understand it as the definition of shear. You may want to say "Shears are an example of ...".

<comment><USER16> Thanks; I'm past the edit time cut-off, but will keep it in mind for the next time I say something like that :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Are there any books like this for probability?

<comment><USER19> First chapter of this book has a similar style and will get you started: [http://mbmlbook.com](http://mbmlbook.com)</comment></comment>


Military Reading List - <AUTHOR> http://www.bookadvice.co/military-reading-list.html <comment><USER2> Letter from John Adams to Abigail Adams, post 12 May 1780:

"I could fill Volumes with Descriptions of Temples and Palaces, Paintings, Sculptures, Tapestry, Porcelaine, &c. &c. &c. -- if I could have time. But I could not do this without neglecting my duty. The Science of Government it is my Duty to study, more than all other Studies Sciences: the Art of Legislation and Administration and Negotiation, ought to take Place, indeed to exclude in a manner all other Arts. I must study Politicks and War that my sons may have liberty to study Painting and Poetry Mathematicks and Philosophy. My sons ought to study Mathematicks and Philosophy, Geography, natural History, Naval Architecture, navigation, Commerce and Agriculture, in order to give their Children a right to study Painting, Poetry, Musick, Architecture, Statuary, Tapestry and Porcelaine"

Always wanted to amass library of military history, strategy, diplomacy. Seems a great list to start. Also wondering if any list available regarding the more technical side. Jane's guides to aircraft carriers and the like. Thanks!

<comment><USER3> Kind of interesting that John wrote 'my' instead of 'our'.

<comment><USER4> There was no sort of feminism 200 years ago, so of course they were his sons and it was his duty. Most of the autobiographies of the 19th century were written by men who did not mention their wives, not because they did not love and honor their wives, but because it was understood that women did not have a public role, and scrutiny of the private business of great men was not welcome.

<comment><USER5> Also, many men were widowed and then remarried, perhaps multiple times. Many of my male ancestors from that time had 3 wives, no divorces, and at least 2 children from each wife. Some of them may have had illegitimate children, but those are much harder to verify genealogically.

Society becomes markedly different with contraception and modern obstetrics.

<comment><USER3> While this is technically true, in the particular case John Adams was married only once, to Abigail, with whom they had six children.

<comment><USER5> My spouse and I frequently refer to one child or the other as "that's _your_ kid", usually when exhibiting a trait characteristic of one parent in particular.

John Adams may have been referring to a theoretical class of sons that may have included unborn future sons, which may or may not have been born to Abigail. He might have said to her that he wants _his_ sons to share his values, just as he might suggest that _her_ sons should share hers, and it would be coincidence that those two classes happen to be identical.

Or he might have believed that all sons were intrinsically their father's children, not their mother's.

It's a lot of implied meaning to derive from a possessive pronoun. I wouldn't make too much of it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm not sure if this is an official list. But for those interested, the top offices of the military do pretty regularly publish reading lists.

National Defense University (an actual part of the Department of Defense) has links to them all here.

* [http://www.ndu.edu/Libraries/Professional-Military-Reading-L...](http://www.ndu.edu/Libraries/Professional-Military-Reading-List/)

EDIT: Well, plenty of the links appear to actually be broken. But a quick Google can probably find those ones.

<comment><USER7> For those interested, here's the Marine Corps reading list. (Edit: that's actually already in the list of links you posted, missed it). There are a lot of good books on leadership; I'd stick to the Officer lists.

[http://guides.grc.usmcu.edu/usmcreadinglist](http://guides.grc.usmcu.edu/usmcreadinglist)

It's not on the list, but the best book I've ever read was One Bullet Away by Nathaniel Fick; current CEO of Endgame Inc.

Turn the Ship Around! is also a great book about leadership and empowering your subordinates.

<comment><USER8> I found some of the books on the Marine Corps lists somewhat propaganda, so one has to be careful to not follow their lists blindly.

Source: I was a reserve Marine grunt and have read some of the books

<comment><USER9> Agreed, but that's why you read the generals list and work your way down instead of the other way around.

If I hear one more gates of fire reference... my head is going to explode.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Leadership is key to everything you do. Everyone has to show it from the lowest rank to the highest. It is the most important characteristic of the US services.

This is the meaning of leadership:

[http://msl-cdn.radiantforestllc.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/up...](http://msl- cdn.radiantforestllc.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/boss-vs- leader-800x800.png)

Also I can highly recommend Turn The Ship Around! by L. David Marquest

[http://www.davidmarquet.com](http://www.davidmarquet.com)

</comment><comment><USER11> Stephen Bungay, Most Dangerous Enemy: excellent revisionist account of the Battle of Britain.

Anthony Beevor, Stalingrad

Anthony Beevor, Downfall: Berlin 1945

TN DuPuy, A Genius for War: explains how and why the German army was better

Von Manstein, Lost Victories: inside account by the author of the sickleschnitt, the recapture of Kharkov in 1943, and possibly the best product of the system DuPuy explains.

All armies work with raw material of the same quality. Given roughly equivalent tech, why did the German Army outperform? There are lessons for all kinds of organisations.

</comment><comment><USER12> All the lists in this thread are insular. There was a time when officers across nations were expected to have read certain works. Things like the classics, shakespeare and The Art of War were universal even across languages. The books on military reading lists today may be inspirational stories, but the language is nothing in comparison. If they want officers able to speak and write well they need to assign books of a higher calibre.

Now perhaps it is TV that forms the common basis for communication between officers. Blackadder references are common in the UK armed forces. In the US TheSimpsons now forms a basis for shorthand expressions. I was at talk by an RCAF officer a while ago where Firefly and Wash were referenced in regards to information flows and workload. Perhaps today's officers are expected to be versed more in television than books.

<comment><USER3> The canon changes, as it must, with time. (To use one of your examples, 'The Art of War' didn't have an english translation until the early 20th century).

There's also a class issue involved, see for example Dorothy Sayer's "Busman's Honeymoon" and in particular the references Lord Peter and the local throw at each other.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> For those interested I read many of these in 2016 and I've put some comments on my retrospective post

[https://tselai.com/the-books-i-read-and-the-world-i-lived- in...](https://tselai.com/the-books-i-read-and-the-world-i-lived-in-2016.html)

</comment><comment><USER14> I think I would add "Team of Teams," co-authored by General Stanley A. McChrystal. It blew my mind when I read it a year ago at how relevant it is to working in tech, and was a fascinating read in improving how folks make decisions in complex environments.

</comment><comment><USER15> What affiliation do you have with bookadvice / bookrepository ?

</comment><comment><USER16> I would also strongly recommend "Small Unit Leadership: A Commonsense Approach": [https://www.amazon.com/Small-Unit-Leadership-Commonsense- App...](https://www.amazon.com/Small-Unit-Leadership-Commonsense- Approach/dp/0891411739)

</comment><comment><USER17> The Marine Corps reading list is really good, I read a number of books from the list when I was in and have continued reading from the list after leaving service:

[http://guides.grc.usmcu.edu/usmcreadinglist](http://guides.grc.usmcu.edu/usmcreadinglist)

</comment><comment><USER18> David McCullough's (author of book #1 - 1776) thoughts on Trump prior to the nomination.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eimt7yz0ID8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eimt7yz0ID8)

</comment><comment><USER19> In what way "Professional"? Why have these books been picked? By whom?

The list does have good books on it but the lack-of-context around this list leaves me confused.

<comment><USER20> "Professional" probably in terms of "professional development", i.e. the ideas about character and historical knowledge deemed necessary by the military. I think that each branch has its own reading list, and the book lists are "picked" and revised by the most senior leadership (and also most likely their staff). For example, the Commandant of the Marine Corps's reading list ([https://www.usmcofficer.com/marine-corps- knowledge/commandan...](https://www.usmcofficer.com/marine-corps- knowledge/commandants-reading-list/)), which includes books for each rank for both enlisted and officers.

<comment><USER19> Yes, but this list offers no such context.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> 1776 also has an amazing unabridged audiobook read by the author. David McCullough has a great speaking voice that will keep you interested in the material.

</comment><comment><USER22> in his book "Doing Time Like A Spy: How the CIA Taught Me to Survive and Thrive in Prison" by John Kiriakou, he tells about the "20 rules" taught to him by the cia to survive in an environment like prison. he briefly discusses these 20 rules in interviews. i dont have the book, does anyone happen to know what these 20 rules are?

</comment><comment><USER23> Thucidides (peloponesian wars)

How a democracy can turn into an expansive military dictature (Athenes) to please the wealthy and make a dictature look good (Sparta) and at the end Helen civilization collapse.

May I hazard that USA is looking very much like Athen?

Ho! And the guy who poisoned with his alt-truth democracy with a fascist lies named Republic was Plato.

Sorry. I used to read and write old greek.

</comment><comment><USER24> It includes Starship Troopers? ok...

I would suggest adding The March to the Sea and Beyond: Sherman's Troops in the Savannah and Carolinas Campaigns

it was the textbook for the civil war part of my History of American Military Affairs class back when I was a student. Very easy read. I think I loaned my copy to someone and never got it back, I may have to buy it again.

[https://www.amazon.com/March-Sea-Beyond-Carolinas- Campaigns/...](https://www.amazon.com/March-Sea-Beyond-Carolinas- Campaigns/dp/0807120286)

<comment><USER20> _Starship Troopers_ was written by Robert Heinlein, who attended a service academy and was an officer before WWII. The fact that it's science fiction somewhat obstructs the satire present, namely citizens' relationship to war and violence as a national value. The movies are basically entirely unrelated in this way.

e: Heinlein wasn't in the Navy during WWII.

<comment><USER24> I know that, and have a well worn copy of the book myself. Was just surprised to see a work of fiction, no matter how insightful, on a "Military Reading List". But I guess I can see the point.

<comment><USER25> Yup, official military reading lists include a fair bit of fiction. Recent ones that I can think of are Ghost Fleet, Starship Troopers, Enders Game, Red Badge of Courage, The Orphan Master's Son, The Kite Runner.

The really nice thing is that since many of those lists are refreshed yearly, they are an ongoing fountain of interesting books. Good stuff!</comment></comment></comment></comment>


LibreOffice 6.1 released - <AUTHOR> https://blog.documentfoundation.org/blog/2018/08/08/libreoffice-6-1/ <comment><USER2> I have grown increasingly disinterested in Office Suites, and in particular word processors, over time.

When composing documents, I prefer to let the final production medium to dictate the production process. (If I don't, I tend to run into issues relating to the final product that are costly to overcome late in the process.)

With this mindset, I still haven't found the use case for word processors. If I aim for something to be designed well in print, it makes most sense to use a desktop publishing tool like Scribus. For the web, something like Org or Markdown covers 99% of the use cases. Org or manually writing LaTeX is good for print use when fancy designs are not key.

What do you people use word processors for?

<comment><USER3> I've been thinking that we need a new generation of word processors aimed for authoring blog posts (and wiki pages etc). Sure you and I might be happy editing markdown with vi (although honestly I'm not happu with that), but that is not really solution for wider usage.

Most features of word processors are equally applicable for web-style content, but somehow we ended up having completely separate ecosystem there.

One major issue hampering creation of such tool is the relative lack of standardization on the web. Every content platform has its own format and api etc, so making common tooling is difficult.

See also Windows Live Writer

<comment><USER4> Windows Live Writer became Open Live Writer!

[https://github.com/OpenLiveWriter/OpenLiveWriter](https://github.com/OpenLiveWriter/OpenLiveWriter)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Congrats on pushing out an updated UI, often one of the biggest complaints people have against OSS is the outdated UI the permeate the space because it's one of the hardest things to get right and it takes so much time to change.

I think these new icons and menus look wonderful.

It's especially impressive because LibreOffice doesn't really seem to have any big corporate backers like other OSS projects, and yet they seem to be holding on. I don't think I've seen LO installed in any corporate environment, and I'd imagine that MS Office holds like 95% of the market, so I do appreciate this alternative.

</comment><comment><USER6> Detailed changelog:

[https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/6.1](https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/6.1)

</comment><comment><USER7> Way better than any Office alternative but also extremely sluggish on my machine. I just use it to read csv files and even at that it's abnormally slow.

<comment><AUTHOR> I use it on Linux and macOS and it's pretty fast with CSV files (although I'm not sure how large the ones you're using are!)

If it's specific CSV files that are causing an issue, and you don't mind sharing them, you could attach them to a bug report: [https://bugs.documentfoundation.org](https://bugs.documentfoundation.org)

Also try resetting your profile in case that's an issue: [https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/UserProfile#Resolving_co...](https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/UserProfile#Resolving_corruption)

<comment><USER7> 25MB files "work" but still abnormally slow for my 16GB RAM machine, 200MB files forget it.

I'll do some more testing and report.

<comment><USER8> I can confirm that large CSVs are dog slow on libreoffice. If excel can do it a lot faster (which it can) this should definitely be logged as a bug.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> It would be great to actually see the new Windows theme, and the UI changes mentioned, in the actual blog post.

<comment><USER10> here you go: [https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/6.1#Icon_Th...](https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/6.1#Icon_Theme)

<comment><USER11> Thanks, I hate it.

The old icons were far clearer as to their purpose. Save is now a download button in case children don't recognize a floppy...

<comment><AUTHOR> Then simply use the older icons :-)

EDIT: Three steps:

1\. Go to Tools > Options in the menu 2\. Click View on the left 3\. Then choose Icon style on the right

<comment><USER12> > Then simply use the older icons :-)

Simple for you doesn't mean simple for other people.

Without writing down the steps on exactly how-to use the older icons, it doesn't equate to simple in my opinion.

IOW, you probably had done yourself a favor to not use the word "simply".

<comment><AUTHOR> I was referring to the fact that he "hated" the icons - it's not the end of the world, as you can use the old ones. But you're right, I've added the three steps to my original post!

<comment><USER12> Cool. Great that it can be changed via the GUI, disliking icons certainly is not the end of the world.

FWIW, I didn't like the word choice on not like an icon set with the word "hate", but well I guess that's what he felt.

Personally I do like the new icons. Keep up the good work!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I find it a bit strange that I have to download the LibreOffice "built-in" help package separately.

</comment><comment><USER14> Just download it and compare to 6.0 it seems the startup time are heaps better.

</comment><comment><USER15> _To continue navigation on the website, you need to acknowledge our privacy policy_

Policy not linked or displayed. After clicking "Privacy Preferences":

 _As the protection of your personal data is an important concern for us, please click on the "More information" link to access our Privacy Policy page_

No such links anywhere in that thing. But there is one in the page footer:

[https://www.documentfoundation.org/about- us/privacy/](https://www.documentfoundation.org/about-us/privacy/)

        301 about-us/privacy/
        302 privacy/
        301 about-us/privacy/
        ...

<comment><USER16> I browse with Javascript disabled by default, so I didn't know they were doing this. Why does the Document Foundation need to track me? Is LibreOffice itself doing something sneaky that I don't know about? I'd expect this kind of behavior from Facebook or Google, not a Free Software charitable foundation. Seeing that pop-up when I enabled Javascript made me think less of the Document Foundation. If they have a legitimate need for tracking, e.g. user logins for a forum, they can present the warning at the time the user interacts with it.

<comment><AUTHOR> > Why does the Document Foundation need to track me?

It's not "tracking" (in the sense of monitoring what you do on other sites). On the LibreOffice website, we use the open source stats tool Matomo (formerly Piwik) to get an overview of how people use the site, how people go from one page to another, so that we can improve it. Lots of FOSS projects do this. Also, as explained in the privacy policy, JavaScript is required if you want to use certain third-party services that are embedded into some pages: [https://www.libreoffice.org/about-us/privacy/privacy- policy-...](https://www.libreoffice.org/about-us/privacy/privacy-policy-en/)

> Is LibreOffice itself doing something sneaky that I don't know about?

Of course not. We're a volunteer-driven, community open source project. It's all in the open :-) If you really want to change how the website works, we'd appreciate a hand: email@example.com - thanks!

<comment><USER17> 1\. What you've described as 'not "tracking" ' is tracking. It's not third- party tracking but you're still deliberately adding a cookie for the purpose of tracking users across your site.

2\. Your privacy policy contains:

> !!!add opt-out frame on the website at this position!!!

<comment><AUTHOR> > 1\. What you've described as 'not "tracking" ' is tracking. It's not third- > party tracking but you're still deliberately adding a cookie for the purpose > of tracking users across your site.

OK, we're using open source tools to try to improve the site. Plenty of other FOSS projects do this... Not sure why we're being singled out :-)

<comment><USER15> _Not sure why we 're being singled out :-) _

Didn't mean no harm or to single you guys out. You're doing fantastic work. But broken and noncompliant notices do bother me a bit.

Sorry to drag on like this but the privacy statement (thanks for linking) says:

 _takes place only with the consent of the user_

It does not, as there appears to be a second cookie notice underneath the first stating how consent is assumed:

 _We use only those functional cookies which are absolutely necessary to ensure that we give you the best navigation experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with them._

From my understanding, if you're using only functional cookies and no tracking you don't even need consent (as you have legal basis) and you can drop the notice altogether. But I don't think analytics count as functional cookies.

Now aside from that nitpicking, thanks for writing such a clear privacy policy and making such good choices regarding the social media buttons, YouTube's privacy mode, and so on. Props!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback! I'll pass it on to the website team :-)

<comment><USER18> Don't let comments on Hacker News unduely influence your website decision making. The issues raised here tend to be laser focused on things that likely won't correlate with your success in the market.

You'll never be able to please everyone so your ability to study and run experiments is key. If anything, it sounds like you are doing things exactly the right way.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


How to Calculate Impedance for Single and Differential Transmission Line-Altium - <AUTHOR> https://resources.altium.com/altium-designer-videos/how-to-calculate-impedance-for-single-and-differential-transmission-line-how-to-adscvid <comment><AUTHOR> I'd love to learn about the algorithms used for impedance calculation...</comment>


Tell Sam Altman: I will take your bet - <AUTHOR> Sam,
I will take your bet.
I run a VC fund called Immaculate Conception Ventures, I am a TechStars Boston mentor, and I like to invest in TechStars alumni companies.
Michael de la Maza Immaculate Conception Ventures LLC <comment><USER3> I sort of love that the person willing to take the other side of this is a Boston-area VC :)

I accept subject to verification that you really qualify as a VC, and I can't find a website for Immaculate Conception Ventures. What investments have you made and how large is your fund?

If terms from the blog post are acceptable I will enter into longbets.

<comment><USER4> Eh, I would be cautious, you might be getting played for publicity. If that's the case it wouldn't serve the purpose of the bet because the other side doesn't have any conviction about the outcome and only wants to raise their profile in the VC world.

$100k is probably cheap to get your name in many major news outlets.

<comment><USER5> $100k is going to a charity one way or another. That's a good thing no matter how you cut it.

<comment><USER4> It doesn't serve the main purpose of the bet which is to find someone with a strong enough conviction about the specific terms to risk $100k.

<comment><USER6> Pretty much everything a startup does is find resources that are underutilized and then utilize them for something outside their main purposes. If it is someone who's donating $100K to charity for publicity...well, that's a pretty neat hack, and one that everybody wins from.

<comment><USER4> Fine, well done. But no one should care that Sam Altman bet that we are not in a bubble against someone who doesn't care much one way or the other but wants his name in the paper.

<comment><USER7> I doubt anyone really does care.

The only thing I'm really interested in is why sama decided the other bettor had to be a VC. That's a pretty silly requirement.

Anyway this isn't a ballsy bet at all, really. Guys on 2p2 (poker forums) routinely make huge proposition bets that are more fun, interesting, and risky than this--occasionally for charity, as well (though not that often).

Losing this bet will likely do no more to either bettor than losing a $5 bar wager would do to me. Pony up the cash, shake victor's hand, move on with my day and forget about it.

<comment><USER8> I agree, this bet would make more sense if the other party was a hedge fund manager or someone else with a professional interest in being bearish on tech innovators. No active serious VC who's might have raise a fund or invest at a high valuation is going to bet publicly against the unicorns. Might as well just retire.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Context: [http://blog.samaltman.com/bubble- talk](http://blog.samaltman.com/bubble-talk)

<comment><USER10> Thanks, I have been off HN for the last week or so - and had no context.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Hi! I'm delighted to see you'll be using Long Bets: [http://longbets.org/](http://longbets.org/)

As the programmer behind that, I'm glad to introduce you to the folks at the Long Now that can expedite that.

<comment><USER12> Didn't know this service existed. Just registered and tossed it up onto product hunt --> [http://www.producthunt.com/posts/long- bets](http://www.producthunt.com/posts/long-bets)

looking forward to see this play out.

<comment><USER11> Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> The great irony of Sam's bet is that, win or lose, the terms themselves prove a bubble mentality. Every one of the terms is focused on valuation, with no mention of revenue, much less profit or cash flow.

In the short term the valuation of a company is a popularity contest, in the long term it is a direct reflection of the discounted value of the cash one can expect to extract or reinvest. This is true for all investments, stocks, bonds, public, private, and even unicorns.

I have no idea if Sam wins this bet. It's quite possible that within the next five years enough of these companies are acquired at inflated prices to satisfy Sam's terms.

What I do know is when industry leaders start to use valuation itself as a metric to demonstrate that we are not in a bubble, without even the most casual mention of underlying fundamentals necessary to justify valuation, then we are in a bubble.

</comment><comment><USER14> I'm curious which one of his propositions do you think has a higher chance of not happening, and why. #3 can be phrased as "there is at least one unicorn among these 114 companies" so betting against that is rolling dice. I imagine you're either bearish on 1 and/or 2, or are betting on a macroeconomic event that would bring all valuations down. Could you elaborate?

<comment><USER15> Note that the bet is the conjunction of those three propositions, so you don't have to think any one of them is particularly unlikely to think that all three of them together are.

For example, if you consider the propositions to be roughly independent, you might believe each one of them is individually nearly 80% likely to occur, yet you'd rationally believe Sam would be more likely than not to lose the bet, since 0.5^(1/3) = 0.794.

<comment><USER16> The whole point of the particular three propositions is that they're highly correlated. Each condition involves an aggregate of many companies. If any of the conditions is true it says more about the general tech climate than it does about the luck of any particular company.

Personally, I might put the odds of each at 60%, 70%, and 90%, respectively. Independently, that gives me a mere 37.8% chance of losing. However, I also think that condition 1 succeeding is _highly_ indicative that the others will succeed too. So, if it were really $100,000 at stake, I wouldn't take the bet.

The real conundrum is that stakes of winning aren't $100,000. The loser's money goes to charity, and the winner's takings are the publicity gained from being right. No doubt both participants feel that the publicity is worth more than $100,000. They don't need to have even 50% confidence to take the bet.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Unrelated, but are you the same Michael de la Maza who wrote Rapid Chess Improvement?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes.

<comment><USER17> I didn't follow the program exactly, but it was influential in my training (and quick improvement) during my teen years.

It's a shame you stopped playing. I'm sure it would've been interesting to see how the program would have to adapt as you aimed for 2200 and beyond.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> 1\. Dropbox: NPV is less than 10B. Will probably get brought for 3-4B by bigco if bigco can transcend internal politics. Not sure who will buy them - <USER2> probably Microsoft under Ndella.

2\. Palantir: I have some experience with working with Palantir FDEs who were marketed to BigCo as 'gift from god to solve all problems'. They were pretty useless.

I think Palantir is basically shit. Wait and watch.

<comment><USER19> _Will probably get brought for 3-4B by bigco if bigco can transcend internal politics. Not sure who will buy them - most probably Microsoft under Ndella._

I'm asking in all sincerity - what does Dropbox have that Microsoft would want? Their OneDrive technology is "good enough" for the vast majority of users.

Latest statistics I could find were that DropBox has 200,000,000 users and that 96% of them were free user accounts. That means DropBox has about 8,000,000 paying users. Instead of buying the company for $4 billion they could instead pay each paying DropBox customer $500 to switch.

Or they could spend $4 billion on marketing / giving away their free 1 TB of OneDrive space with purchase of an Office 365 subscription for $6.99 per month.

I'm probably missing something?

<comment><USER20> Same reasons MS ended up buying Skype, despite having a near decade lead in tech (NetMeeting before MSN Messenger), 300M active users, etc. etc.? MS even had VoIP-to-PSTN in the 90s, albeit via a poor partnership with MCI.

Same reasons MS ended up investing in FB, instead of turning Messenger (think: you've already got everyone and their friends using it!) into a good social network?

<comment><USER21> There are network effects in both of those. It's not the same.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> When I moved from SF to Boston (after co-founding Inkling six years ago), the top two things I was worried about are a) a less pro-startup culture, and b) less available early-stage money.

This really doesn't help either point. We need more early-stage money here and more optimism, not less.

<comment><USER23> Understandable. The seed environment in Boston is sub-optimal. But hopefully it will continue to change as more people like me band together with friends to start seed stage VC firms. The market is just too good to not take advantage while there's no competition and no crazy valuations.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I'm surprised at someone actually taking the other side of this bet as I thought Sam was _very_ conservative on his projections.

1) Any one of those companies (besides Pinterest IMO) could conceivably achieve a market valuation of $200B by Jan 1, 2020.

2) Again any one of those companies (besides Teespring IMO) could conceivably achieve a market valuation of $27B by Jan 1, 2020.

3) Easy win for Sam.

<comment><USER25> Seriously? As I write this, Microsoft, the largest purveyor of enterprise software in the world, is worth roughly $340 billion. Oracle? Less than $200 billion. Hell, Amazon, the company that Dropbox runs on isn't worth $200 billion.

You honestly believe that any one of those companies, none of which has been around for more than ten years, could reach a market cap of $200B within 5 years? Either you are incredibly bearish on the dollar or we are officially in bubble times.

<comment><USER24> Yes, seriously. Which company is anyone's guess, and some are more likely than others, but it's conceivable a single company from that list could achieve a $200B valuation on a 5 year time scale.

<comment><USER25> My point isn't really to take anything away from those companies. They're all very impressive. It's more that I am surprised that people don't seem to think that $200B is an incredibly large amount of money. It's more than three Ford Motor Company's. Or $80 billion more valuable than Cisco Systems, in many ways the backbone of the entire internet. It's just an incredibly large valuation to achieve for any company let alone in a five-year time frame.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I have no idea how this bet will come out but I was not pursuaded by Sam's argument because he did not address the root cause of the bubble. Put another way, he's sitting on the surface of a bubble and pointing out that there's not a bubble rising from that surface.

He's saying that there's innovation and the innovation makes these companies more valuable-- on that we can all agree. Whether VC investments are correctly valuing companies or not at various stages, I don't even think that's an issue, so I will take his general assertion that they reasonably are. To the extent that people think that the nature of a the "bubble" is unrealistic valuations, I think it's silly to say there's a bubble. That's not the bubble. The actual bubble causes these high valuations but has nothing to do with VC judgement -- who are all acting based on the pricing information they're getting from the market-- so that they are being irrational is due to the irrational pricing info they are getting, not due to having lost their senses. The irrational pricing info is that the cost of money is way too cheap.

The bubble is not a startup funding bubble, it's a dollar bubble.

The main argument for us being in a bubble is not that we're in a bubble of VC expectations for companies-- though that is a side argument that VCs expect google and Facebook to buy everything whatever the quality.

The main argument is that since 2001 and especially since 2008 the money spigot has been opened wide. Helicopter Ben is in full effect. The 2008 bubble was a direct consequence of that spigot being open, combined with interest rates being held below the cost of money and the Clinton era "not loaning money to people who can't repay is racist" agenda and changes to the CRA that forced banks to make bad loans. Everything else that happened in 2002-2007 was secondary effects.

When 2008 happened the spigots were opened even wider, the interest rates forced lower ,and now, instead of having an open market for T-bills the federal reserve itself is buying them. Totally distorting the market.

The short description of what that means is that money is really cheap-- really cheap for the institutional types that have a lot of it already, and especially really cheap for anyone who can go to the federal reserve window. EG Banks. T he banks have all this money and have to put it somewhere that earns a return over the borrowing cost (carry)... which from the Fed is even cheaper than the money you lend them in your savings and checking accounts.

The way the money spigot works is it filter thru tiers of the economy. Banks lend as much as they can which produces economic growth (though not without cost, hence the whole misrepresenting this system as Keynesian-- keynes recognized the cost and danger of this, but everyone who claims to be "keynesian" since then and advocates this system seems to ignore the cost and danger.).... and a lot of it hits the stock market and then even more risky ventures.

All this money in the VC pockets chasing startups is originating at the federal reserve as they shove money into the economy.

Sam talks about "interest rates rising". Well, interest rates would have risen, but the fed is providing unlimited demand for T-bills so that's distorting a market signal. The FOMC is providing unlimited money to paper short gold, so that's distorting another market signal.

I don't know how it will break-- just as I wasn't sure how the housing crisis would break in 2008, even though I knew there was a bubble (and at that time, by the way, everyone said there wasn't a bubble. They also said there wasn't a bubble in 1999. How old was Sam in 1999? I honestly don't know but I'm guessing he was not 18.)

And all of this is on top of a hundred years (since the founding of the federal reserve) of exporting the effects of US dollar inflation onto other economies-- most of which were weaker than us but now are reaching parity and don't need the dollar to back their currencies so much anymore.

The bubble is not a startup funding bubble, it's a dollar bubble.

I'm certain we are in one. I have no idea if it will bust in the next 5 years. But when it does, it will be worse than 2008, 1999 and the 1930s combined.

<comment><USER27> I'm on shaky grounds trying to talk about macroeconomics, but I don't think loose monetary policy counts as a bubble, exactly.

It would be a bubble if everyone believed that loose monetary policy was going to last forever. The Fed is well aware of the trillions of dollars they've created and they have the ability to make it go away, once the economy is moving again to their satisfaction.

Planet Money did a segment on this last week.[1] The problem is, a lot of that money never made it out into the regular economy -- when the Fed creates money, it's really creating it for banks which are supposed to have incentives to loan it out. But mostly, according to that show, the banks aren't lending it out. At the very least, this shows they don't have the requisite irrational exuberance for it to be a bubble.

One thing for sure: it seems that banks have less incentive to make productive investments than the Fed thinks they do. A possible reason why: "manager capitalism"[2] yields higher incentives for short term speculation, bonuses, etc. Maybe a trickle of that money has made it into VC but I have no idea how to determine that.

[1] [http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2015/03/20/394274484/episode-...](http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2015/03/20/394274484/episode-612-the- indicator-strikes-back)

[2] [http://www.vanguard.com/bogle_site/sp20030611.html](http://www.vanguard.com/bogle_site/sp20030611.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Well, with Amazon's "unlimited storage" announcement today, you can bet some wind got knocked out of Dropbox's sails...

</comment><comment><USER4> After the bet has been finalized, please post your rationale for the "against" case.

</comment><comment><USER29> Hi Michael, would you mind explaining your rationale? In particular, why would you believe his bet and still be a VC?

<comment><USER30> I'm also curious about the general case of people believing that we're in a bubble giving advice to startups. Do they advise that startups keep a really low burn rate and wait it out, or go for broke and raise as much as possible now? Do they advocate certain business models that do better in recessions?

<comment><USER6> Both. When the last bubble hit, the advice given to startups was:

1.) If you're in a position to raise capital, raise money now, because the funding window may not be open for a long time.

2.) Cut burn rates immediately.

3.) Get to cash-flow positive.

4.) Cut non-essential features, and focus on customers that are willing and able to pay.

It's usually not practical for a startup to change its entire business model (although LoudCloud did it in the first dot-com bust), but they can trim fat, and stop doing activities that aren't absolutely essential to generating revenue.

[http://venturebeat.com/2008/10/10/the-sequoia-rip-good- times...](http://venturebeat.com/2008/10/10/the-sequoia-rip-good-times- presentation-get-your-copy-here/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> ...what bet ?

<comment><USER32> [http://blog.samaltman.com/bubble-talk](http://blog.samaltman.com/bubble-talk)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9258798](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9258798)

<comment><USER33> Directly from link

 _To win, I have to be right on all three propositions.

1) The top 6 US companies at [http://fortune.com/2015/01/22/the-age-of- unicorns/](http://fortune.com/2015/01/22/the-age-of-unicorns/) (Uber, Palantir, Airbnb, Dropbox, Pinterest, and SpaceX) are currently worth just over $100B. I am leaving out Snapchat because I couldn't get verification of its valuation. Proposition 1: On January 1st, 2020, these companies will be worth at least $200B in aggregate.

2) Stripe, Zenefits, Instacart, Mixpanel, Teespring, Optimizely, Coinbase, Docker, and Weebly are a selection of mid-stage YC companies currently worth less than $9B in aggregate. Proposition 2: On January 1st, 2020, they will be worth at least $27B in aggregate.

3) Proposition 3: The current YC Winter 2015 batch—currently worth something that rounds down to $0—will be worth at least $3B on Jan 1st, 2020._

<comment><USER34> Ironically a basic statistics class indicates that cherry picking companies that deliver 2x, 3x and ... whatever the fuck that third pick is ... as a guaranteed return over 5 years is indicative of the overenthusiastic hype that historically surrounds bubble valuations.

#3 is a die roll. #2 is the killer. And I might take the bet on just #1.

<comment><USER35> #3 isn't just a die roll, it's the entire basis of early stage investment. If he loses on #3, YC will either be a shadow of its former self, or Sam will have given himself enough rope to hang himself (as president of YC).

This is exactly the sort of thing that _everyone_ making press about investment capital should be willing to do. Sam isn't making a bet about _money_ here, he's making a bet about his reputation as a forecaster/analyst.

<comment><USER36> That's not true, YC could just have a bad batch, or the economy could be in a serious downturn in 2020.

A number of reasonably likely events could cause #3 to be false without any catastrophic loss to YC.

<comment><USER34> Exactly. I admire Sam's balls but the externalities here are immense. The greatest financial mind of our time built Berkshire Hathaway to $350B over 50 years. GE is worth $250B. Microsoft $340B.

To believe Sam's motley list of companies can either hold onto valuations approaching those "real" companies for five more years, let alone actually generate viable earnings and go public (even at goofy P/E multiples) in line with what GE, Microsoft, or Buffett's candy, ketchup and mac'n'cheese subsidiaries alone make seems ... optimistic at best.

If he loses, might I suggest the book title? "Oops! Brands Aren't Businesses!" by Samuel H. Altman.

<comment><USER37> It's $200B on aggregate, so they just need to be worth $33.3B on average. That's more on the level of Adobe than Microsoft.

<comment><USER34> I understand the bet. I do not think you understand what "averaging $33B" means.

For instance Rubbermaid simply owns numerous home, commercial and healthcare markets. They make everything from saws to Sharpies. They doubled their market cap in the last five years. 20,000 employees (more than anyone on that list) $6 billion in revenue (ditto) P/E ratio of 30 ... and they're worth $10B.

<comment><USER37> Rubbermaid is a razor-thin margin business, with plenty of exposure to both the pressure of retailers like Wal-Mart and the rising costs of supplies, and very little in terms of differentiation from competitors. That's why it went bankrupt and got bought by Newell.

<comment><USER34> It averaged a gross profit margin of 38% the past five years. While paying a dividend. And doubling the stock price.

Which companies in that list have profits let alone profit margins? And are half as diversified? I see the big upside. I see the big downside. But I don't see how they all grow to average 3x NWL/Rubbermaid in the absence of bubble valuations.

Also all this "2x or 3x" after the big rise talk is just dilly-shaking anyway. The numbskulls who jumped in on the last Tumblr round would've made more money flipping Microsoft stock over the same period. Talk about unnecessary risk for the sake of risk.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> This is a nice way to get publicity for relatively cheap.

Should I be disturbed that our YC batch ended up being just a bet? I feel like I'm in the Silicon Valley version of "She's All That."

</comment><comment><USER39> I wonder how this works, is it necessary for Sam to acknowledge the bet? What happens if more than one person wants to take the same bet?

<comment><USER32> The bet is only open to the first VC to publicly take it I believe.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> I think Michael will almost certainly lose the bet.

I also think this is a very shrewd move by Michael. It is pure genius to accept that bet. (No sarcasm)

</comment><comment><USER41> 2) and 3) seem like a given, but looking at the companies in 1), I think Sam might have his work cut out for him...

<comment><USER42> SpaceX alone makes me not want to bet against Sam on point #1.

<comment><USER43> SpaceX is dependent on government contracts for their business, which is risky. Government contracts could go away, or get reduced, for a bunch of different reasons--some of which have nothing to do with how good you are.

<comment><USER44> While they are dependant on government contracts they are also in a industry with huge barriers of entry. On top of that their main competition had a rocket explode earlier tho year, so I would say their outlook is pretty positive.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> boy this is an awkward post.

<comment><USER46> Awkward or not, $100,000 will be going to a charity at the end of this. I think we can all put up with it for that alone.

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> sama and mdlm: since you're effectively going to lock up $100k each for 5 years, how about you both give the interest on that capital to charity?

</comment><comment><USER48> Pretty confident Sam will win, given the current track record, and baring a complete market collapse.

<comment><USER26> That's the nature of bubbles. This is a bet about whether there's a bubble or not. IF there is a bubble, of course it's going to look like Sam has a slam dunk win here-- until the bubble pops and then it looks obvious that Sam could not have won. This is irrespective of the bubble popping in 2019 and thus Sam losing the bet and 2021 - where Sam wins the bet but loses the point.

The problem with bubbles is that when you're in them, it's very hard to know you're in a bubble and thus crazy things seem perfectly rational.

I'm not saying we're in a bubble or not in early stage investment--- I'm just pointing out the nature of bubbles.

<comment><USER49> The funny thing is, this is the first time I remember everyone speculating on if we are in a bubble or not. Once bitten, twice shy I suppose.

But, I also think that although there is a lot of optimism a lot of it rightfully there. Technology has been creating a revolution in communication, media, entertainment and just about every other industry. The internet finally arrived for the masses in the mid-2000's followed by the smart phone revolution followed by tablets and smart devices. There's simply a lot of opportunity out there.

I don't think we are in a bubble so much as in the middle of a rare technological revolution. So many things are happening at once between computer systems becoming so powerful and networks becoming so large and fast, etc. Old industries are dying while new, more profitable companies take over.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> I would like to bet on proposition 3 but damn I don't have that kind of money!

</comment><comment><USER51> Do you guys need someone to act as escrow? _makes call-me handsign_

</comment><comment><USER52> I think it's pompous for both you and Sam Altman to be wasting our threads with these bets.

<comment><USER3> Agreed; I would have greatly preferred he emailed me.

<comment><USER53> I think it's generated some interesting discussion. I'm sure the same occurred on the original thread, but I didn't read that.</comment></comment></comment>


1990, meet 2018: How far does 20MHz of Macintosh IIsi power go today? - <AUTHOR> https://arstechnica.com/features/2018/07/classic-computing-joyride-cruising-through-modern-workloads-on-a-macintosh-iisi/ <comment><USER2> I used my IIsi till ~2000 for burning cds. Two things i did to speed it up:

1) I overclocked to 25mhz -- I soldered a new crystal on the motherboard

2) Ran in black and white or grey (the graphics card seemed slow)

<comment><USER3> wow, fellow IIsi owner!

I tried the crystal swap but it turned out to be glitchy.

I upgraded the machine little by little, 17MB, NuBus coprocessor, Radius 24bit color display card, 240MB APS technology SCSI external drive...

Good old days of simpler computing when every little thing was magic...

<comment><USER4> PC user here, but yeah it was magic. Installing a new ISA or PCI card was like entering a new world. I remember my first sound card, modem, and 3d accelerator vividly.

Upgrading modern PCs is still fun, but it isn't nearly the same as giving your machine a whole new capability it never had before.

<comment><USER5> Same thing for us Amiga-owners. While the Amiga had pretty decent sound/graphics-capabilities in the early 90's, expanding the computer with something like a hard drive (which wasn't standard on the smaller models), or more RAM, or video processing hardware, was simply mind-blowing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'd like to see a comparison of a IIsi (or a 25 MHz 040 NeXT Cube) to a Raspberry Pi, or even a microcontroller.

</comment><comment><USER7> I had a Mac classic for freshman year at university. I hated that machine and Apple for many years afterwards.

<comment><USER8> What year was that?

<comment><USER6> 1990, 1991, or 1992, most likely, the years the Classic was on sale.

<comment><USER7> Yup. Door #2 is correct.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


A Rational Defense of the New Facebook Homepage Design - <AUTHOR> http://blog.dorkitude.com/post/10481943131/a-rational-defense-of-the-new-facebook-homepage-design

<comment><USER2> Can't say I agree. Just because two things are desireable alone, does not mean they will go together well. For example, I like fish sandwiches, and I like peanut butter sandwiches. I'm not certain I'd like a fish & peanut butter sandwich.

I don't mind the new changes, but I rarely used the top news feed. Having it integrated amounts to 'noise' in the feed for me.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hmm, maybe it would be the best for everyone if you could collapse one of the two section types.</comment></comment>


21 things I learned on my trip to Silicon Valley - <AUTHOR> http://www.jorgecuadra.info/2012/02/21-things-i-learned-on-my-trip-to-silicon-valley/

<comment><AUTHOR> I wrote this after participating in StartupWeekend SanJose in January 2012</comment>


Workflow fragmentation - <AUTHOR> http://www.avitzurel.com/blog/2016/04/08/worfklow-fragmentation/ <comment><AUTHOR> Author here: This is a huge pain point for me. As someone who also reviews other people code.

Discussions that lead to important decisions get lost in the mix of tools we are using these days.

Would love to hear/read what your thoughts are on this and how you feel you (and your company) are dealing with this.</comment>


Ask HN: Would adding this to my website scare clients away? - <AUTHOR> https://skitch.com/e-wojciechk/8c456/vertical.psd-100-builds-web-apps-rgb-8

<comment><USER2> If I were the potential client, yes. Not because I would want a contractor to work over hours but because I would want a contractor to be commited.

For me what "No over-hours" on a front page means is that you're the lazy kind. It means that not working is more important to you than doing things right.

Again, I'm not going to expect a contractor to work over-hours, at least not without paying. And I understand separating work from personal life. I'm the first one asking for that. It's very important that anyone who work have a great life balance. It makes better people, better work quality, better work environment.

What are you trying to achieve by putting this on your front-page ? Or actually, putting it anywhere on your website ?

Preventing client from getting advantage of you ? Then maybe the way to go is to say no when the problem arise. Contracts should protect you...

If you're not doing over hours it's fine, but discuss it when you come to the details. You actually probably know how to approach a customer more than me as you seem to have way more experience.

It's like when you started dating your wife (I presume you have a wife since you seen to have a kid). First time you saw her, did you say "Ok we're going to date, but 'NO <put something here you that don't like in other people>'. She wouldn't want to hear it.

What do you think ?

<comment><AUTHOR> As for dating I would, for instance, definitely want to know very soon that she's a rock singer and travels with her band for months. I got your point though.

Ideally the message would be: "He has a life outside the internet but in the morning he's excited to get in front of his computer to build stuff. He also doesn't do side-projects so my contract will get his full focus and attention. He's got a family so he's probably won't work for sweat-equity only. We have to arrange some work schedule because he won't be available round the clock, but during those working hours he's really pushing hard to get things done." So now I just have to find a witty way to say that.

You're probably right it might not be the best idea to start with "caveats" (-:

<comment><USER3> I think rather than put something like that up and have all sorts of assumptions come to mind, it is better to address these after you've had a chance to open up a dialog among yourself and the potential client. This way you guys can have a proper discussion with all the proper expectations on both sides rather than have all sorts of misunderstanding or misconceptions.

In your example, dating a rock star who's away for months at a time is something you certainly want to know, but having that on her dating profile without giving yourself the opportunity to get to know her by making your own assumptions or to see if this might even work in some other capacity is leaving stuff off the table that in end might have been doable. Just saying.

<comment><AUTHOR> Let's say the labels are gone... Do you think that simply posting a picture of you with your child on your professional home page could also trigger warning light in the visitors? The only think I could think if is "Not again, there's too much of this on Facebook already."

<comment><USER3> Its hard to say. Some might take it as not professional. Others may not care. Some will think its cool. In my personal opinion, I wouldn't post it at all. But that's me. I mean realistically, is there a business reason to? You should ask yourself that and quantify it as such.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Zed Shaw: What I Been Up To Lately - <AUTHOR> http://zedshaw.com/blog/2009-12-21.html

<comment><USER2> Knowing where the One is.

Easy for 2 3 and 4 beats. In most styles of music, more than that is treated as a compound of 2 and 3 beats. So 5 is 1-2-1-2-3 1-2-1-2-3 or 1-2-3-1-2 1-2-3-1-2. There is one Middle Eastern 9/8 rhythm which is 1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2-3. There is the obvious and symmetric 9/8 that Irish trad enthusiasts are familiar with: 1-2-3-1-2-3-1-2-3.

By treating things as compound rhythms, you never have to remember where the one is. One is one. You just have to remember how many beats there are this time around.

I think this comes from the way humans walk. Since we are bipedal, we naturally fall into gaits with 2 or 3 beats. (Skipping is based on 3. Waltz step is another one based on 3. Since we have two legs, we have to repeat on one foot to get 3. 4 is really just a smoothed over 1-2-1-2.)

<comment><USER3> I don't quite parse "Take Five" that way, but I will give it another listen.

So is any music influenced by the various gaits of a horse?

<comment><USER2> Old Time, Bluegrass, and French Canadian trad fiddle.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> A browser for music, isn't that what Songbird was supposed to do? The idea was that it was a web browser / RSS reader optimized for acquiring linked media files. A similar attempt to break out of the iTunes walled garden.

Although Zed seems to be talking about making some internet-friendly format for describing the band and their albums and other works. That's an interesting idea, although such formats don't seem to take off in practice.

</comment><comment><USER3> The pain of doing something new: "Me: Never mind, I guess I have to make it first."

<comment><USER5> The pain of not knowing what you're doing, such that you can't even explain it to a willing listener.

<comment><USER3> Interesting--I read it as being a new concept that people didn't immediately get. I felt that way the first time I heard about the Smalltalk IDE. It wasn't until I tried it that I understood it. I had no previous frame of reference for it.</comment></comment></comment>


The Life of Aaron Swartz, Collected by: Internet Archive Global Events - <AUTHOR> http://www.archive-it.org/collections/3492

<comment><AUTHOR> Anyone can upload their own memories of Aaron Swartz here: <http://archive.org/details/aaronsw></comment>


KaiOS – A Smartphone Operating System - <AUTHOR> https://www.kaiostech.com/ <comment><USER2> I have actually developed for this platform. KaiOS powers Jio Phone and Reliance JIO is by far their largest customer (and also an investor from what I know).

The thing I like about this platform is that it runs most web technologies. You can thank Firefox OS for that. We used React ecosystem to develop apps for KaiOS and they worked well enough. Jio Phone ships with Video and Audio streaming apps which are all built on either React or Angular and use HTML5. I think all of that was possible on Firefox OS as well and they haven't really changed anything substantially. We were given links to archived FirefoxOS documentation pages when we asked for documentation.

They have managed to package FirefoxOS for enterprise customers. From what I know the KaiOS team comprises of people who worked on parts of Firefox OS (but not the core FirefoxOS team). This makes me wonder why FirefoxOS shut down and why did it not try to market itself like KaiOS has managed to do.

<comment><USER3> I think it was combination of factors that shut down FireFox OS:

* The foundation was bleeding money and had to limit it's focus

* The Matchstick on KickStarter made FireFox OS look like a non-viable product

* Not a lot of chimerical interest outside from outside the community

<comment><USER4> I think there actually was and is a lot of outside interest in a open and web stack oriented phoneOS.

The firefox OS website tried to divide visitors into hardware vendors, consumers and app writers. Imagine the success of Linus's first announcement if he told people which lines they could stand in to appreciate Linux when he was done writing it..

Digging deeper than you appeared to be welcome would get you into setup tasks with AOSP.. There is no better way to lose help then to ask them to learn about a more complete competitor.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It seems like folks aren't aware that KaiOS is that runs on the JioPhone, a super cheap & popular feature phone in India, bundled with a super cheap data plan:

[https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/hardware/jiophone-...](https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/hardware/jiophone- deliveries-likely-to-start-over-weekend/articleshow/60783048.cms)

To get some sense for the importance of this phone, this is the only feature phone you can get the Google Assistant on: [https://www.androidauthority.com/google-assistant-coming- fea...](https://www.androidauthority.com/google-assistant-coming-feature- phones-starting-indias-jiophone-820110/)

</comment><comment><USER6> Looks like the new HMD-Nokia "banana" is powered by KaiOS [1].

[1] [https://www.nokia.com/en_int/phones/nokia-8110-4g](https://www.nokia.com/en_int/phones/nokia-8110-4g)

<comment><USER7> Ugh...school wheel hijacking in the middle of the page ... still not has bad as the KaiOS page.

<comment><USER8> Is it scroll wheel hijacking when the scroll itself works as intended (as configured by the user) but some part of the content "locks" to the viewport? I'd say it doesn't touch the wheel at all.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'd really like to see a truly open alternative on the mobile space. The biggest issue is the hardware. It's just not standardized and there's no incentive to do so. It's really preventing the way Linux took off on developers desktops back in the late 90s/early 2000s.

FirefoxOS and Ubuntu Touch looked promising, but they lacked good hardware to run on. I'd really like to try Plasma, but I don't like any of the devices it supports.

PostmarketOS is just a way to turn an old phone into a Raspberry Pi type device, but maybe that's the first step in a truly unified mainline kernel for all mobile devices.

<comment><USER9> Speaking as someone not at all involved in this space, I'd love for Google to take smartphones waaaay more seriously. I feel like in an effort to make Android easy to adopt and customize they have let the "feel" of Android suffer. I hate bloatware on every new phone. I hate that phones differ so greatly. Something invaluable to me on an iPhone is the switch to silence alerts.

I wish Google would define a "standard" like Intel has with what is and what isn't an "Ultrabook". As in, to be a "Nexus" phone it must have a minimum resolution of ..., it must last for x hours of video playback and x hours of wifi use, it must have the damn alert-killing side switch, it must have a camera of a minimum quality (megapixel/zoom/can record at 1080p@60hz), etc...

Google should be defining what an Android phone is in terms of hardware; define a brand other makers can adopt so customers can trust the standard to at least cater to those needs. And that isn't even getting into how fucking awful the Google Play store is. What a malware magnet.

Sorry this is somewhat off-topic, I just feel this is how Google has lost us and why we seek alternatives.

<comment><USER10> That's exactly what the Android One (and previously Android Go) standards where all about, they set minimum hardware standards and experiences. They then guarantee updates for two years, etc...

<comment><USER11> Guaranteeing updates for X years is an empty promise unless they also guarantee the maximum delay in adopting upstream (security) updates and releasing them, with reimbursement in case of failure to comply.

<comment><USER12> The first generation of android one's phones (the ones that released in India and Indonesia, powered by mediatek mt6582) have this. They even sometimes have the monthly security update early (for example, the November update is rolled out in late October).

Sadly, the newer generation does not have that. Google given up the update to the vendor, which in turn do what they do best, not updating the goddamn phone.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> A chromatic nightmare paired with zero information, and that zero is stretched to fit a multi...thing I can't scroll properly. I sincerely hope whoever made that website isn't involved with the operating system. Please give us back the web made by people for people, not these abominations made by designers for investors.

</comment><comment><USER14> Let's face it, web on mobile has failed.

Web abstraction layer for UI is too heavy and very limited. Even today we can't have multithreaded scrolling or manage painting with the latest web standards.

Native platforms don't have to worry about "other browsers" so they can optimize their UI abstraction layer specific to their target devices. They also don't have to wait for ever to get consensus for new APIs and architectures firm multiple parties that don't specially care about your platform.

No wonder native apps are so much better for the user and with recent developments in tooling they are as easy to work with as th eweb technologies

<comment><USER15> That's not even remotely true. We are seeing significant, growing app development on the "hybrid" stack at Ionic, and strong interest in Progressive Web Apps.

<comment><USER14> How many of top 20 apps in App Store are web apps?

I agree that web apps are faster to iterate but the user experience is guaranteed to be worse.

I've worked on some of the web apps that are usually featured as "see web can do this". I'm not an outsider. I'm just observing how any app that is successful is either native already or they are making it native asap

<comment><USER15> At the risk of sounding flippant, what the top 20 consumer apps in the app store use and what the rest of the market use are very different things, especially when factoring in the enterprise. I say that as someone building a business and making money from these customers.

At any rate, we have a number of well know brand flagship apps built on Ionic, though they might not have usage patterns like Facebook/Snapchat. By far the most mobile development happening right now is outside of the well known consumer social app space.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> To me the mistake that was made with Firefox os was going after android instead of going after chromebooks. If firefox os had been designed to run on commodity x86 hardware like chromium os it would not have fallen so hard because a lot of people would be able to run it on an old laptop even if no one was making official hardware for it. Because these run html5 web apps the lack of appstore depth would have been a non-issue as well.

</comment><comment><USER17> From the FAQ

 _Can I develop apps for KaiOS?_

 _KaiOS is a curated platform for apps and we are working closely with app developers to provide the best experience for our users. At the moment we are not accepting submissions into the Store, but will do so in the future._

 _If you are interested in developing apps for KaiOS in the future, leave your email in our developers section. We will notify you when of important product updates. You can also follow us on Twitter to stay up to date._

I'm not sure if this is really a good way to get developers on board given the ease of starting and experimenting on iOS and Android.

<comment><USER18> It's a good way to _not_ get developers on board. Yes, you can easily develop for iOS/Android and as a result the respective stores are drowned in crap. Merely publishing on there will give you zero visibility. On curated platforms, there's the benefit of being a big fish in a small pond.

<comment><USER19> This is what Apple did in the beginning, too. I felt as you did about it at the time. Six months later things opened up and the rest is history.

<comment><USER18> Apple didn't start out with a curated store, they started out with "open" HTML5 apps that couldn't do shit.

Today, Apple barely can do quality control on the iOS store, Google essentially _doesn 't bother_, why should a small shop deal with the issue right off the bat?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I couldn't find a link to the source code. Then I found this:

>KaiOS is based on the Firefox OS open-source project and we are committed to abide by the rules of the applicable open source licenses. Therefore, we'll make the source code available to the extent required by the applicable open source licenses.

Haha. Good luck with your OS. Next.

</comment><comment><USER21> I'm on a high horse (I'm able to afford an iPhone), but what kind of problem does this solve? To me, it looks like Nokia now has Android, their own operating system, and this to upkeep. Does anyone else remember what happened when they last time partnered with an experimental mobile operating system? I think it was Microsoft last time.

Would love to hear some reasoning from the folks from HMD about this.

<comment><USER22> Windows Phone is discontinued, but sure as heck wasn't experimental. I've used it flawlessly since about 2011 with rock-solid stability and battery life.

<comment><USER21> What I meant was that I don't follow why does Nokia rock the boat with their choices of operating systems. They already have their own software running on the likes of the renowned 3310, so why not spend the engineering time to extend that instead of risking another platform becoming discontinued? That's what I would want to hear more about.

<comment><USER22> Ah, understood. I hope I didn't sound offended, just confused until I read your reply.

I agree that it is similar to Google in that they seem to hedge their bets too much (like how Google has two OS, two languages...etc etc). I would really like a third popular OS...there are so many out there, but with no steam (this, firefoxOS, sailfish...)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> This website is terrible for providing information

</comment><comment><USER24> This is definitely a promising OS. The fact that they have a maps app is extremely important. I think they'll also need a WhatsApp app to be truly competitive. They could use a few other mainstream messaging apps too. The mbasic Facebook messenger should work fine on this OS.

</comment><comment><USER25> I'd like to see [https://www.redox-os.org/](https://www.redox-os.org/) ported to mobile phones and perhaps integrated with this or FirefoxOS somehow.

<comment><USER7> Do they have any mobile work in the Redox tree yet?

<comment><USER26> No, and they said several times that they had no plans for it (which might have changed, to be fair). Their roadmap was to target servers, which have a use for secure OS and sane driver requirements.

([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15293436](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15293436) is the only source I can find, but I'm sure I've seen it elsewhere)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I don't know. I really liked Microsoft's phones, but there was no Google Maps, no Google Inbox, and bunch of other apps that I use daily were missing.

Software is the problem for these OSes. The only way to be able to compete IMHO is to make it compatible with APKs, installable via a store.

Otherwise, it's a nice effort but you'll never reach the adoption necessary to make it worth continuing working on the project.

<comment><USER18> Remember all those feature phones with a plethora of custom operating systems? Almost none of the users cared (or knew) what the OS was. This is an OS for that kind of device. Nokia is shipping it right now.

<comment><USER27> The target market might not care or know what the OS is, but they'll want to use software they're used to: Google Maps, Facebook, Facebook Messenger, Snapchat, Tinder, Skype, games, etc.

I'm just saying that whatever OS will be useless to a lot of people if it doesn't run what they want it to. One way to do that is to make it compatible with Android apps, which have already a version of virtually every major app.

<comment><USER28> Are you sure you know the target market you're speaking of? They're not coming from Android world, so they're probably used to exactly the kind of services these phones support.

<comment><USER27> No, not really. I'm just thinking about my mom--she doesn't know anything about phones or technology, but she'll ask right away if Whatsapp works.

Also, in my original comment I was speaking more in general rather than about KaiOS alone.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> From the website, it appears that all apps are written in HTML5+CSS+JS, however they target feature phones with 256MB of RAM and claim to have a long battery life.

Considering how much resources some electron apps need and how battery hungry they are, what's the "secret" here? Is it a subset of HTML? Is Firefox that much more efficient than Chromium?

<comment><USER30> Electron isn't a good benchmark here because every app spawns it's own Chrome renderer process. In the case of Kai, I'd imagine they'd only need to spawn a single instance, and just add/remove view handles as needed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Even if I had to tune for low-end hardware, I'd love to own and hack around on a simple device with this sort of OS.

</comment><comment><USER32> Competing with the Android/iOS duopoly was a war of attrition the Microsoft, Firefox, Canonical and Samsung (Tizen) all lost. If you don't have the resources that those companies do I have a hard time seeing how you survive, and I have no interest in investing in a platform that has an extremely high risk of being orphaned. I wish it was otherwise - earlier today I was lamenting that my Samsung Galaxy S7 is laggier and less responsive than the $100 unlocked Lumia I bought myself years ago was. But I don't see another platform succeeding here.

<comment><USER18> How do you define success? This is not a competitor to iOS/Android, it's for cheap low-end devices, which is still a sizable market. Try running Android on 256MB of RAM...

<comment><USER33> My first Android phone only had 192 MB of RAM.

<comment><USER18> Funny story, so did mine. It was a nightmare. That was almost a decade ago. If you want an experience as bad on modern Android, you need 512MB ram.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> This is actually based off the Mozilla project - 'boot to gecko'

<comment><USER35> ... more well known as Firefox OS.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> I hope "discoverability" doesn't mean "easily trackable".

</comment><comment><USER37> It seems to offer less than the average Android or iOS? Why should I use it?

<comment><USER18> If you have to ask, you probably shouldn't. It's for people who buy a phone for its low price, who don't care what the OS is.

<comment><USER37> If I buy a phone for ~60 bucks there is already Android on it. If I don't care why would I even install another one?

<comment><USER18> End users aren't supposed to install KaiOS, vendors are supposed to ship handsets (like the new Nokia 1) with it preinstalled.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Can I install it on a phone?

</comment><comment><USER35> Nice: it looks like the system font — for the Alcatel Go Flip and Nokia 8110 4G at least — is Open Sans. I've been using Source Sans Pro for most things lately, but I did always like Open Sans.

</comment><comment><USER39> What version of Gecko is it based on, and what's the story with security patches from upstream?</comment>