Apple in Talks with US Banks to Develop Mobile Person-To-Person Payment Service - <AUTHOR> http://www.wsj.com/articles/apple-in-talks-with-u-s-banks-to-develop-mobile-person-to-person-payment-service-1447274074 <comment><USER2> The US is so archaic in banking I'm not surprised that it takes Apple to do something about it, a shame. I'm still sending a paper check to the landlord every month, ha! What is this, the 70's?

The rest of the world already has direct, often immediate, free money transfers a few clicks away, and for a long time. We should focus there, rather than inserting more middle-men.

When I was in New Zealand, we even paid for cookies and such with it. Just paste in the account number, type in the amount, and hit the send key, done.

<comment><USER3> This still astounds me.

I'm Australian but also hold a US account. The difference in ease between the two is insane. I cannot believe how difficult it is to simply wire money from a US bank account. In Australia, you can make a free transfer entirely from web/app and it will be received, often the next day.

It's no wonder why Paypal/Venmo are so huge in the US...

<comment><USER2> In NZ it is immediate if same bank, 10pm that night if different. That few hours though can be nice if you change your mind.

<comment><USER4> On my New Zealand business account we can see transactions turn up every hour - that's how often they are cleared between the major banks. And my personal credit card balance on my mobile app changes seconds after I make a purchase.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'll use Venmo until they pry it from my hands, it's one of the most life- transforming services I have ever used. I'll just repost my comment from the last Venmo thread here:

</comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>=====

Venmo was started by UPenn alums so it was popular among my friends long before it was a phenomenon (one of my good friends interned there and wrote the BlackBerry app). I used to use it exclusively by SMS starting around 2011. It used to be smart enough where I could text in "Pay John $5 for food" and it would figure out which John I meant and do it. I loved that. It's been amazing to watch Venmo grow to what it is now. If I could only keep three apps on my smartphone, I would choose Uber/Lyft, Venmo, and Google Maps. I can't navigate my life without all three of those. In my last year of college my Venmo year in review showed that I had spent $17k on Venmo and received $18k. So not a huge net, just a constant movement of money in and out among my friends (rent, food, parties, etc). If I had to use cash we would have never been able to make the small things work, and if I had to use PayPal I would have accrued $100s to $1000s in fees. So basically: thank you Venmo. You make my life measurably simpler.

<comment><USER6> Venmo still takes several days to transfer the money to your account, and you have to remember to request the funds—they don't even begin the transfer process until you do that.

It would literally be faster to write your friend a check.

We need instant cash transfers in the United States, like the rest of the world has.

<comment><USER5> My Venmo cashout transfers take <24h if I do them during business hours. Not instant, but not several days.

How does the rest of the world manage instant transfers? I thought the ACH method was still in use not because we're technologically slow (see: High Frequency Trading) but because it saves a huge amount of coordination to sum up net inter-bank transfers at the end of the day rather than constantly shuffling money around due to the fact that the net is often very small.

<comment><USER7> > How does the rest of the world manage instant transfers?

The same way the US stock markets can do 5 billion trades per month in realtime, with technology: technology that costs money, wipes out a major investment revenue stream, and necessitates cooperation between competitors. Does it surprise anyone that the EU pulled this off and the US is the farthest behind?

<comment><USER8> To be fair, the actual transfer of money between stock market participants is no faster than it is for personal bank accounts.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Yes! I was just thinking: One hundred person-to-person payment services aren't enough... we need 101!

Seriously though, Apple has a terrible time creating online services ([http://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-and-the-cloud-a- magnifice...](http://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-and-the-cloud-a-magnificent- missed-opportunity/)) and there is no way another entry in the "Proprietary, heavily policed, middle-man-encumbered social payment tool" is going to go anywhere.

<comment><USER10> That article is a year old, and somewhat off. Apple's recent cloud stuff has all worked very well for me. The only spotty things are CoreData syncing (which may be deprecated, it's certainly not encouraged) and anything that touches iTunes (which is probably the oldest infrastructure they have).

Stuff they've launched since then such as iCloud Photos has been working great. Heck Apple Pay works extremely well and that's technically a 'cloud' service.

<comment><USER11> If CoreData syncing is discouraged, what is offered as its replacement?

<comment><USER12> CloudKit? [https://developer.apple.com/icloud/](https://developer.apple.com/icloud/)

<comment><USER11> CloudKit doesn't do syncing, or conflict resolution like Core Data iCloud Syncing does.

So I guess you have to do those things yourself. Perhaps this is why CloudKit is more reliable -- because it doesn't do the tough parts that Core Data syncing attempted to do?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Apple's major advantage over Venmo and others is that they don't need to make money off the payment service. They can give this away for free, because they really care about the device margin. And using geo+TouchID would make for a very secure service, minimizing fraud problems that competitors would have to deal with.

Apple's in a unique position to make this happen. And yes, it could be bad news for Square.

</comment><comment><USER14> Full text link: [https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB4QqQIwAGoVChMI9Oi --qOJyQIVhTYmCh25mg_s&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsj.com%2Farticles%2Fapple-in- talks-with-u-s-banks-to-develop-mobile-person-to-person-payment- service-1447274074&usg=AFQjCNHkVGQrLWpRVRZaXVj3eh0AyciByg&sig2=YJcI7YoHzE30KbihlpCHRw&bvm=bv.107406026,d.eWE)

</comment><comment><USER15> In Denmark we have two competing solutions. One is MobilePay, where you register your credit card and then you can make payments to contacts in your phone book which are also registered. It doesn't matter which bank you have. No fees, however there is a 2500 DKK limit of how much you can use and receive each day. The other one is Swipp, which is a collaboration between all the small banks, which is integrated in their mobile banking apps, which kind of works as MobilePay, it is just tied directly to your account. The MobilePay one is the most popular and stores have begun to accept that as payment as well, making it possible to use NFC or a QR code which you scan in the store when you check out. Some smaller stores just have a phone number you transfer money to. Works pretty well and has been for the past ~2 years.

</comment><comment><USER16> With all the available options why would you want to use a service that requires you to figure out if the other person uses an iPhone?

<comment><USER10> My whole family and many of my friends use iPhones.

iPhones are extremely secure thanks to TouchID and Apple's software.

Apple already has payment info for me and a good relationship with banks.

They're normally pretty great at UI and can integrate it into the OS in ways no 3rd party ever could.

It will be built into the phone and come preinstalled so I don't have to convince people to install it.

Apple shows a lot more respect for my privacy than other companies that I could see doing this (such as Facebook/Google) and isn't a company I already despise (PayPal, YMMV when it comes to despising Apple).

Let's look at this a different way: no one has cracked this potential market yet (at least in the US, just nibbling at the edges)... what makes you think Apple _can 't_ make a good play?

<comment><USER17> No disrespect but you didn't answer OP's question. Instead you went on with a bit of an advertisement about how great Apple is. Venmo has cracked this potential market (per the article they have great market share)

I think Apple could build a tremendous P2P service based on your comments. But it's never going to be the platform lock in they desire because if we really do have meaningful broad adoption of P2P only cross platform offerings will work.

<comment><USER18> _I think Apple could build a tremendous P2P service based on your comments. But it 's never going to be the platform lock in they desire because if we really do have meaningful broad adoption of P2P only cross platform offerings will work._

Of course it could; for a growing number of people, the combination of Apple Pay, Touch ID and the iOS eco-system is already creating lock-in. If Apple were to create a P2P payment service that was secure and dead simple to use-- kinda like Apple Pay--it would become the leading way to pay on the iPhone in a week or two.

Looking at the latest 10K, Apple sold over 400 million iPhones the past 2 fiscal years. Yes, that's a relatively small percentage of the global cell phone market, but that puts them at around 44% (and growing) in the US, so they could easily create an iPhone-only payment service if they wanted to. Even something that leveraged the fact that all Apple Pay users have at least one debit card in their Wallet app that could be used to send and receive payments.

Apple of course has the huge advantage of being the platform vendor and being able to make their payment app available to hundreds of millions of potential users literally overnight with a software update. None of these other guys-- Venmo, PayPal, Square Cash--can do anything like that. And among these companies, Apple is likely to be way more trusted, especially among the 40 and 50 year-olds who not only have never heard of Venmo but wouldn't trust it with their payment information. Apple doesn't have that problem.

Edit: I wrote about other Apple advantages in an earlier post: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10550853](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10550853)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> The question is why it hasn't happened sooner. This thing in your pocket is not just your telephone, but also your watch, map, calendar, contact book, music player, library, and so on. It can't be long before it's also your passport and your wallet.

These are things that had a life as separate items in days of yore and separate websites not long ago. They're also things that naturally lend themselves to the format of a phone.

You'd have thought the mobile wallet would have been the first thing on the minds of the big platform companies.

<comment><USER20> It has already happened. College students don't pay each other back in cash. They do so in Venmo

<comment><USER21> Yep, Venmo is the go-to on my campus. I actually prefer Square Cash as a product but Venmo has the adoption necessary.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> This will be apple pay via ACH basically. It will allow merchants to avoid the 1% charge on debit cards etc..

<comment><USER23> But it's describing a person-to-person service, not merchants.

<comment><USER24> That's how it starts. Which, presumably is the same vector for Square Cash.

<comment><USER23> It is? Given that Square already does merchant payments it would be a pretty odd direction.

<comment><USER25> Square Cash for Business followed regular (consumer) Square Cash. Square Cash for Business lets Square save money by charging debit cards instead of credit cards and spinning it as more convenient for everybody (it is very convenient once set up).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Last bit of the title is "...Payment Service Like Venmo"

Seems to be the latest push by Apple to integrate Apple Pay into some sort of payments ecosystem by force.

Should be interesting to see if there is any compelling reason to use Apple's solution over Venmo which has a huge incumbency advantage at this point.

<comment><USER27> _Seems to be the latest push by Apple to integrate Apple Pay into some sort of payments ecosystem by force._

I'm not sure why you'd consider this to be 'by force' – surely having a large market share, and offering a decent experience, are enough reasons for an ecosystem to develop because users want it?

<comment><USER26> _surely having a large market share_

Having a large market share of what, the smartphone market? It's the _users_ of the peer-to-peer payment service/application that they need, and they have 0 of those right now.

Venmo already has millions of those users (many of whom who use iPhones) due to a good UX/UI and seamless integration with all major banks/card providers. So what value does apple bring to the table if my network is already set up on Venmo?

<comment><USER27> _Having a large market share of what, the smartphone market? It 's the users of the peer-to-peer payment service/application that they need, and they have 0 of those right now._

I think having a large smartphone platform to which you can roll out new features is really useful! There are what – maybe 4-5 million active Apple Pay users? That's a decent chunk of in-built market for the service, assuming it's seamlessly available to them all.

Obviously P2P Apple Pay doesn't offer you much benefit if you've already got a working solution to the problem.

<comment><USER26> It is definitely a benefit, but it's a far cry from guaranteed success. I have a trash folder full of 10 or so Apple pre-installed apps and I'm sure many others do as well. Apple P2P Pay will most likely be another one of those for me, which is why I see it as a catch-up play and one they will have to force on the market.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I love Apple and all but they'd have to somehow make it easier then Venmo, because it would be pretty hard to convince my non-tech friends AGAIN to move away from something that works so well

<comment><USER29> Easier than having it automatically installed on your phone, already aware of your contacts and payment details, and able to recognize nearby iphones and offer them as Payee's?

This service will push adoption of apple pay as well as benefit as people start to use it; I predict it'll take off here in exactly the same way that Paypass and similar took off in Australia when they were introduced. Lots of skepticism tied to a huge acceleration in uptake.

<comment><USER28> Good point; +1 for not bashing my opinion.

I will say that Venmo already is installed, is aware of my contacts, who I pay the most, and my payment details. But I use Apple Pay and I agree that it would be heavily adopted just because it's already there and it's one less "account" people have to worry about.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Independently of the "cool factor", there is one more consideration to take into account. With the multiplication of electronic payment systems we are at risk of physical cash becoming marginalised. From a practical point of view I am not sure I would miss it, but from a privacy point of view this would certainly becoming a loss. Every single payment would end up being tracked. Another surveillance state dream coming to reality.

</comment><comment><USER31> If it's "person to person", then why do the banks need to be involved? If they are involved, then it's more like "bank to bank", isn't it?

> It also represents the latest attempt by banks and other providers to shift > Americans away from cash and checks.

The good news is that the police can't steal the cash on you anymore. The bad news is now all of your purchases will be tracked all the time.

<comment><USER32> Because access to the source and target accounts still needs to be coordinated, and the appropriate withdrawal/deposit handled. Although it is interesting to consider, we are not yet at the point where our devices hold "actual" money.

<comment><USER33> Arguably Bitcoin is there.

<comment><USER34> Arguably, but it isn't a very good argument in 2015.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Apple got big money and only one successful product. They relentlessly want to own another successful product or service but I hope they won't.

<comment><USER36> You have to be kidding me. You don't get to be the biggest company on the planet with one successful product.

They may not be the biggest in everything they're successful at, but they don't need to be #1, as long as they're the #1 premium.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> This is the solution to this problem as it exists in Sweden:

[https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=se.bankgirot.s...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=se.bankgirot.swish&hl=en)

</comment><comment><USER33> "Service would be rival to PayPal's Venmo platform"

It's interesting that this is the subtitle. That is not the first service I would have compared the idea to.

<comment><USER38> Sincerely curious - which is? This sounded like a direct competitor to Venmo to me.

<comment><USER39> Google Wallet?

<comment><USER38> Ah, makes sense. Is Google Wallet widely used, especially for person-to-person transactions? I've only ever used Venmo for that.

<comment><USER39> I use it with my roommates for rent - I think the sending limits are higher than Venmo. Otherwise it seems to work much the same way.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Apple already had Apple Pay. What's better about the new one?

<comment><USER10> Apple Pay is consumer -> business, so you can buy groceries at Whole Foods.

This is consumer -> consumer. Letting me send my friend $5 to split the tab on the pizza he's ordering or a quick $20 birthday gift to a niece.

<comment><USER40> PayPal originally offered that, then dropped it. Is there a major business there?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> And both persons should use iPhones? Nope.

</comment><comment><USER42> I was thinking about this. Square, you are F __*d!

</comment><comment><USER43> Why do you need banks, when you can just transfer Bitcoin?

<comment><USER44> If Apple introduces this, it will likely require scalability higher than that of the current blockchain, which allows for roughly seven transactions per second. Peer-to-peer is definitely the way forward, but for now, banks have the infrastructure, and the customers.

<comment><USER45> This will be fixed when it's needed. To deviate from the discussion, I don't know why Bitcoin doesn't move to a faster block time. Less time to confirm a transaction, more blocks per minute, more transactions per second.

<comment><USER9> It is very, very unlikely any major architectural tweak will happen with Bitcoin ever again. The only thing that will ever happen is maybe a few additional opcodes (to enable lightning networks perhaps) but even that will take many years.

(This isn't necessarily a bad thing... although I'm certainly not a fan of this approach)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do you convince someone that you are the creator of an app? - <AUTHOR>

I have an interview where I need to talk about an app I created. The app is closed source and doesn't identify me anywhere on screen. How do you persuade someone that you're the creator in that case? <comment><USER2> If they're skeptical (and you haven't given them reason to be skeptical), you probably don't want to work for them anyway. There needs to be an atmosphere of trust-by-default; if you don't have that at the _interview_ stage, what's the _job_ going to be like?

<comment><USER3> There is no trust by default. You've handed me a piece of paper (your resume), that you've authored, that puts you in the best possible light, with facts that I cannot verify independently without your permission. Where have you earned trust?

99% of the people I interview have lied on their resume. When I accept an interview, it is because your resume has stood out. That doesn't mean I have put my guard down and instantly trust you. Everything you do at the point where the interview is accepted is looked at. Appearance, handshake, attitude, demeanor, etc.

We advertised a position in May and received 41 resumes. Of those, four were reasonable candidates. I personally called all 41. The 37 were told that their resume didn't meet our requirements, thank you for applying. Resumes are rarely kept on file for later hiring. When you hear that, it is a friendly way of getting you off the phone. Employers lie too.

Of the four, only one seemed like a reasonable match. During the interview, despite his claims of his coding experience, he wasn't a problem solver. Could he have really worked 4 years for a competitor without being able to solve a problem I had posed? As it turns out, he had just received a promotion but was using that title to represent himself.

A true illustration of the Peter Principle.

Was I wrong to be skeptical? He didn't get the job.

My competitor knew he was laying off people. He gave them promotions to make them more marketable when they applied for other jobs. He didn't do them a favor.

An interview is a date. I have to decide in that two hour period whether you're the right candidate. A decision costs me roughly 90 days of your salary plus a reduction in someone's efficiency while you are brought up to speed. This carries a cost as well.

You earn trust. You do this by answering honestly during the interview without giving me those canned answers that are the double edged sword. You don't embellish things on the resume by extending dates a little bit to cover up for a period of unemployment. The ONLY piece of data I can get from a previous employer are your dates of employment. I can't get salary history or even whether the company would rehire you. Anything else that company gives me is illegal. Unless you've given me permission, I cannot talk to your coworkers or previous managers. Handing me your Aunt's name as a reference is worthless unless she writes code or has seen you in a work environment.

So, as an employer, what have you set forth other than handed me a piece of paper and a cover letter expressing interest in a position that should make me trust you?

If I pursued you, that's a different matter, but then the original author wouldn't have posed his question.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Years ago I interviewed an employee that wrote "Expert MySQL and PHP Coder" on his resume. He submitted code that was very well written, commented, no unit tests, but, the code was relatively clean. He showed me his web site where it was running and had substantial evidence in his favor that he was the author.

During his first programming assignment, his code quality was horrendous -- certainly not anything like the code submitted. He had passed two Brainbench tests that we had asked for and had other Brainbench test results that suggested his coding issues may have been a result of being immersed into a large codebase. Perhaps he wasn't used to our environment, coding style or method of doing things. Programming was a small portion of his job and he made it through his 90 day probation.

After the second project, his code quality hadn't improved. I approached him and was told: "I didn't write that code, I maintain that code." His rational for expert: "Compared to my friends, I am an expert."

He beat me. He had a friend help him on the Brainbench tests, he presented code that wasn't his and he lied on his resume.

If you claim you wrote code and there is no way to independently verify it, I'm going to err on the side of caution. Other programmers that we've interviewed now take a pseudocode test. I don't care if you don't know Python because language is just syntax. If you know programming logic, you can become proficient in a different language relatively quickly. This is much easier in a pairs environment.

You will have a hard time convincing someone you wrote any code where your name isn't present on it. If they are hiring you because you wrote the app, then they have some idea. If they are hiring you and you are presenting that application as a code sample, you need to bring a piece of the code that solves some problem in a unique way and be prepared to discuss why that code segment is coded in that manner. Were there other ways you could have solved that problem? Why did you choose that method? If the code belongs to your previous/current employer, don't even think about bringing it.

Stand out against the crowd by being prepared. Bring a few copies of that code snippet printed on clean, bright white paper - in black and white. Don't bring me a sample using your editors language color scheme. Have a copy of some function or class that calls that piece of code handy as well. Bonus credit for bringing a copy of the unit tests for that function/class. Keep it light. I'm going to look at no more than two or three pages and one of the other programmers will probably glance over it as well. There is no time to study code during an interview, so, it needs to be a small sample.

As an employer, especially right now, I can pick and choose. Why are you the best person for the job? Why is your code superior to someone else's? How well can you debug code and solve problems?

That is what we look for. I don't care if you don't know a particular language -- I want to make sure you have the ability to solve problems without needing someone coaching you.

As a sidenote: When asked when you are willing to start, if you are currently employed, your answer is two weeks. If you tell me you can start work Monday, I'm going to believe that you have no respect for your job and aren't willing to give that company the respect they deserve by closing out your existing position. If you don't respect them, why would you respect me? If the company offers to throw a bonus to get you to start in a week, your answer is: It wouldn't be fair to my current employer as I need to close out tasks, finish some documentation/train the new person, etc.

Everything you say and do during an interview is going to be analyzed. During the last two interviews, I've taken both to a pizza place during lunch to 'take them out of the stressful office.' This is still a test. Everything, and I mean everything you do during that interview is going to be analyzed. Don't lie. When the question is asked about your flaws, don't give that same old answer that you're a perfectionist and sometimes you spend too much time working on a piece of code. We've heard that too many times. When asked why you are leaving your current position, be honest, but, don't disrespect your current position. I might know someone there.

All I want to know is, can you do the job well? Are you a better candidate than the others? Are you going to fit in with the existing team? Can you work unsupervised? Are you a leader or follower? Are you going to make my job easier? Are you going to be honest? When something breaks, are you going to try to lie about the problem or own up to it? I've written code for 25 years, I know there are bugs and they can crop up. If you made a mistake, am I going to get an honest answer when you're under intense pressure to get a solution or are you going to shift the blame? Extra credit here if you can solve the problem. Don't ever break something and fix it and not tell me.

I am willing to overlook some things. Lie to me, disrespect your current position, complain that your existing boss wouldn't give you a raise because of this or that and your resume hits the shredder the instant my office door closes.

</comment><comment><USER4> During the interview, simply talk about the real challenges you had with making it, the decisions you made as you went along and why you built it in the first place. These could probably be faked but I'm sure most people would be able to pick out a fake and they'll probably be able to tell that you're credible.

</comment><comment><USER5> is this something you own or something you built for a client?

I'm just wondering why you can't upload a secret "bio" page on the app somewhere that only you know the url to...

</comment><comment><USER6> Tell them the app's most obscure bugs</comment>


Multiple Windows Clipboards - <AUTHOR>

I have this idea from long time in my mind - In Windows we can only copy (ctrl + C) one thing at a time and keep in the clip board or memory buffer. I think windows should have multiple clip boards incase you want to play around with multiple things. The multiple clipboards can be made accessible using various different key combinations like [ctrl + 1....ctrl + 9] or [ctrl + c + 1....ctrl + c + 9] . These various clipboards can be made accessible using windows sidebar with also a feature to see the content in them. If there is any such thing already existing please let me know. Any takers?<p>Thanks. <comment><USER2> There are plenty of tools that offer clipboard history such as phraseexpress</comment>


Live footage of the London Riots - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14449675

<comment><USER2> Watching this on TV, areas across the city are descending into anarchy. The rioters are staying ahead of the police using Blackberry messenger, the police have no idea where the next riot is going to be and it seems to be gaining momentum as more kids from different areas join in. Yikes</comment>


"Doomsday Clock" moves one minute away from midnight - <AUTHOR> http://www.thebulletin.org/content/media-center/announcements/2010/01/14/doomsday-clock-moves-one-minute-away-midnight <comment><USER2> The Doomsday Clock covers _climate change_ now?

I thought the point of the PR device was to demonstrate that we're (at first literally, then figuratively) minutes away from annihilation of the human race if people get itchy trigger fingers.

The worst case scenarios for climate change are closer to "We're going to be seriously inconvenienced as a species in a couple of decades if we don't do something."

Am I allowed to call these folks unscientific alarmists? Please?

<comment><USER3> I believe the reasoning is that climate change will destabilise regions leading to world conflict.

The major destabilisation will come from resource shift, such as water scarcity/abundance, leading to land conflict leading to major players (US/Russia/China/Europe) posturing.

It may seem like 'serious inconvenience' but if Europe suddenly had it's gas supply cut off by Russia and diplomacy failed do you not think they would mobilise their army BEFORE the eastern European winter arrives? The same would be true if water were scarce.

The dependencies between major blocks of our species are changing and climate change will strain relations.

<comment><AUTHOR> > if Europe suddenly had it's gas supply cut off by Russia and diplomacy > failed do you not think they would mobilise their army BEFORE the eastern > European winter arrives?

No, they would not.

If you thought that Europe would go to war with Russia over natural gas then you're somewhat out of touch with the European sentiment on starting wars, and on the ability of Russia to fend off invaders.

<comment><USER4> "It's" is only ever an abbreviation for "it is'.i.e.,"its gas supply". Otherwise articulate and smart people seem to have difficulty with this. I can't fathom out why.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for correcting my ability to _quote_.

Otherwise articulate and smart people seem to have no problem in finding out which part of a text is original and which part has been quoted.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The whole clock is kind of ridiculous. There's no metric to it at all. It's just the opinion of a bunch of guys. Their whole reasoning is "a more hopeful state of world affairs"

The fact that a Doomsday clock that was designed to warn against the problem of nuclear weapons is being moved back mere months after Iran decided to defy the UN and start building another uranium enrichment plant should tell you how much of a crock this is.

</comment><comment><USER6> Did anyone else first interpret this headline to mean it moved to 11:59 and anxiously click to see which world event was more alarming than the Cold War that somehow wasn't at the top of HN?

<comment><USER7> Yup, that was my exact reaction, even more disturbing after having read a couple of newspapers this morning and wondering quite what had changed so rapidly ;)

A bit of a personal coincidence for me as well, don't know why but for some reason I've been reading up on nuclear events, scenarios and near-misses. It would have almost been fitting, end of the world aside ;)

<comment><AUTHOR> September 26, 1983

<comment><USER7> Indeed. This is one list of near-misses I read earlier on in the week:

[http://www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/key-issues/nuclear- weapons/...](http://www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/key-issues/nuclear- weapons/issues/accidents/20-mishaps-maybe-caused-nuclear-war.htm)

<comment><AUTHOR> That particular one stands out for me because I think it is the 'nearest' of all of the misses (or, as George Carlin would say, 'it's a near hit').

A lot of people owe their lives to Stanislav Petrov _not_ following his brief.

For more reading on this:

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

<comment><USER7> Terrifying stuff... and then two months later NATO pulls off operation Able Archer:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Archer_83>

A part of me rather likes the thought that if we're all going to perish, it's because of someone's cock-up.

<comment><AUTHOR> From the wikipedia article:

> culminating in a coordinated nuclear release

You have to love the language in there.

Pinnacle of euphemisms, kill a few million people and call it a 'coordinated nuclear release'.

<comment><USER7> I saw this hypothetical nuclear war scenario linked on HN a few days ago, it shares the same kinda language:

<http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/nuclear/nuclearwar1.html>

The UK produced a series of short TV programs to be broadcast in the event of impending nuclear war called "Protect and Survive." Check them out on YouTube, there's something terrifying about the calm language used.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> that's such a stupid title -- it sounds like the clock is at 11:59. it should be 'doomsday clock more one minute further away from midnight'

</comment><comment><USER9> Call me in the morning...

</comment><comment><USER10> It's easy to dismiss Doomsday Clock as alarmist or whatever.

It's much harder to devise a better index reflecting risks to mankind.

I applaud Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists for trying.</comment>


Direct links between old carbon, graphite and seafloor hydrothermal vents - <AUTHOR> https://phys.org/news/201a9-12-links-carbon-graphite-seafloor-hydrothermal.html <comment><USER2> Link seems dead? I think it should be this one:

[https://phys.org/news/2019-12-links-carbon-graphite- seafloor...](https://phys.org/news/2019-12-links-carbon-graphite-seafloor- hydrothermal.html)

(No letter "a" in 2019 :) )

<comment><AUTHOR> I guess I accidentally pasted in an a when pasting in the link. Edit window is closed for url so I guess @dang will have to change it?</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What style guides are there for technical documentation? - <AUTHOR> Do you use one at work? Do you prefer or recommend any? What freely available ones are there? <comment><USER2> Here are some examples from the computer industry, all available at no charge:

• Apple Style Guide: [https://books.apple.com/us/book/apple-style- guide/id11618552...](https://books.apple.com/us/book/apple-style- guide/id1161855204)

• Google Developer Documentation Style Guide: [https://developers.google.com/style/](https://developers.google.com/style/)

• Microsoft Writing Style Guide: [https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/style- guide/welcome/](https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/style-guide/welcome/)

I've found earlier editions of Microsoft's guide to be helpful when writing about user interfaces on the Windows platform.

Other industries have their own conventions. For example, the maintenance manuals for commercial airplanes are often written in Simplified Technical English ([http://asd-ste100.org/](http://asd-ste100.org/)), and the Securities and Exchange Commission has published a _Plain English Handbook_ ([https://www.sec.gov/pdf/handbook.pdf](https://www.sec.gov/pdf/handbook.pdf)).

There are many other style guides; some are listed on the Wikipedia page: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_style_guides](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_style_guides)

Your team or organization may also need to develop its own style guide, to standardize the names of your products, features, concepts, user interface elements, and so on.

</comment><comment><USER3> I have the same question, I'm writing a whitepaper (a useful one, with how-to steps things and supporting code), and I cast about looking for a style guide and format for "whitepaper". Imagine my surprise when I found a site from someone who calls himself "the whitepaper guy" \-- he writes whitepapers for hire, for anyone, any business. I'm made to realize it's marketing under a veneer of tech information exchange.

What amounts to _genuine_ tech exchange these days, as it appears to me, are mostly PowerPoint presentations at conferences. The formal docs are man pages, and probably RFCs, the informal docs are some guy's blog or a single blog page. The project's README.md are helpful as well but they conform to the individual and not any style. Serious tech papers conform to scientific and research publication style, and even then style guide has more to do with citations. There's nothing standard and easy to reach for in the business- technology intersection.

</comment><comment><USER4> This varies from company to company for the most part. You have some standardized formats such as business process maps and use-case diagrams. I can't remember the name of the free tool we used in my BPM class, but there are tools out there that follow a standard.

My recommendation is to find documentation for an existing system that you find helpful and easy to understand, then use that as an outline for creating your documentation.

<comment><USER5> I've also found that it's more useful to use a good doc as an outline for your own documentation than to start from scratch + style guide. Using a good doc as a guide can help you develop your own documentation style – you can figure out what works and doesn't work for you.

Style guides can be great in the right context, but I think focusing on them too much can take away from the most important part of documentation – the content.

<comment><USER5> That being said, Microsoft and Google have decent, publicly-available tech writing style guides: -Microsoft: [https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/style- guide/acronyms](https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/style-guide/acronyms) -Google: [https://developers.google.com/style](https://developers.google.com/style)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> See also [0] which was discussed here on HN [1]

[0] [https://www.divio.com/blog/documentation/](https://www.divio.com/blog/documentation/)

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21289832](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21289832)

</comment><comment><USER7> I think one should ask who the audience of the technical documentation is.

Is it the practitioners who will use the technology in the wild? Or do you want to sell your technology to the CTOs and technology scouts? A whole different format and content might be chosen in case you would like to receive a thorough feedback and review of your technology (RFC).</comment>


Can You Die from a Broken Heart? (2014) - <AUTHOR> http://nautil.us/issue/15/turbulence/can-you-die-from-a-broken-heart <comment><USER2> Absolutely.

This phenomenon of love and devotion is not limited to humans either. Animals, especially dogs, elephants, certain bird species, may die of a broken heart when a loved one leaves.

I had a pair of lovely, rare, small parrots. A week after one of the birds died, the other followed. It's heartbreaking to see. No pun intended.

Even the Bible warns us: Pro 4:23 NIV - 23 Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it.</comment>


Meals on food delivery apps can be 90% more than if bought from the restaurant - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/26/technology/personaltech/ubereats-doordash-postmates-grubhub-review.html <comment><USER3> Food delivery in its current form will be short-lived.

It is a 4 party system where the company controlling the money is the only one that wins.

Restaurants are asked to pay 30% of the ticket. The customer is asked to pay more than expected for their meal, a delivery fee, and a tip. For the customer, this can be nearly double for a simple $10 lunch.

The driver that has to deliver it gets stuck with fuel, automatic, and typically much less than $15 an hour. All of this is happening while Doordash has a 10billion dollar valuation.

<comment><USER4> I do consulting work in the grocery business and serve as a point of contact for software and tech purchasing for a handful of retailers and producers.

Uber Eats has been calling me every year to sell their platform to some of the stores I work with.

Grocery _product_ margins are about 30 percent in the happy case (specialty foods), usually much lower. Uber Eats wants 30 percent of the basket on each sale they make.

The last salesperson who called, after I gave him that context, suggested this would be a new revenue stream. I remarked that we would lose money on each sale. He clarified that Uber Eats would only take 30 percent of what we sold through their platform, not all of the sales made by the store (how generous of them). I thanked him for clarifying and said I understood that.

He then suggested to me that customers who buy from us on Uber Eats might do so only once, and make the rest of their purchases in store.

I asked him why they would do that, and he uncomfortably said a few words about how Uber is working on something for grocery stores and said they would try back later.

They have reached out to me about once a year since 2016, and pretty much every conversation goes the same, and their pricing is the same.

It's ridiculous to me how they don't bother to understand the customers they engage, and that they train their sales people to continue goad businesses into working with them even after they've made clear they would lose money. Either way, it's very clear to me that this model is indeed going to be short lived. It depends primarily on weaknesses in labor laws and operators being swayed by their bizarre sales pitches enough to act against their own bottom line. In any case I certainly won't be sad to see it crash and burn

<comment><USER5> What is bizzare about all of this is that I honestly do think that when Amazon figures Drone Delivery all out they will basically eat everyone alive in the food delivery business. They totally will automate the storage and picking systems, do it in warehouses (that also do normal delivery and act as Go/ Whole Foods distribution networks) and the Drone systems will be AI piloted possibly with human oversight. (one human, 10 drones, they may also use fleets to ease air clearance)

Once they solve all of this you chop distribution to the store, shelf stocking, checkout staffing, picker payment, driver payment, property and lease fees, the margin will be higher, the experience faster, the costs lower.

I bet Amazon will mass produce the drones at a rather low cost over time, maybe produce UWB tracking devices (like Apple's Tags will use) so you can be hand delivered products without the landing pad they currently use. It's a real infinite game and that's okay if it all takes 10+ years.

I'm not saying this is a good thing for mankind, but might be a reality.

<comment><USER6> > when Amazon figures Drone Delivery all out

This feels similar to "when self driving cars are figured out", i.e. a much bigger ask than it would first appear.

<comment> Fire-Dragon-DoL In italy we used to joke over how people will stsrt buying rifles to shoot down drones and get the packages...

<comment><USER5> I mean you can do the same with a postal truck if you like too. It's going to be pretty easy to prosecute when someone shoots a camera-covered, GPS and cellular connected object.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I find the niche answer to this fascinating. With kosher restaurants (captive audience) in my city:

1\. They increase their prices on skipthedishes and friends, in order to account for the price difference.

2\. They add a piece of paper to EVERY ORDER indicating that if you call or text your food would be 30% cheaper, which includes a flat $3 delivery fee, and no need to tip the driver.

3\. Many of them run targeted sub-brands on these platforms, under 'regular' (re: non kosher) restaurants and do the exact same thing, thereby expanding their reach.

<comment><USER8> > They add a piece of paper to EVERY ORDER indicating that if you call or > text...

That's really clever, given that many of these delivery apps work by inserting themselves invisibly in front of the business.

Having a communication channel that you _know_ will reach the customer and that you know the delivery app can't block is a way of getting around some of the constant fight of "how do I make my real site show up above Grubhub's when my name is Googled?"

<comment><USER9> Businesses are deluding themselves here. People use the big apps because they don't want to install a billion different special-case apps, set up their payments, set up their address etc etc etc, or literally phoning the restaurant (people don't want to speak on the phone anymore, they find it awkward.)

Hotels try to berate you for booking through a third-party but I ain't got time to go poking around on their individual websites.

Same with taxis - 'don't use Uber, just install this local app' \- nice idea, but I really don't have time or space for a trillion local apps for the cities I visit all working slightly differently and needing different accounts - <USER2> try to keep it simple. I don't care if it's 5% better or 5% cheaper - it's 100% overhead compared to a single app and I don't want it.

<comment><USER8> I would agree with you in theory, but the restaurants we're talking about just take phone calls. Most local chains that are fighting with Grubhub (at least in my area) aren't pushing their own custom apps. They just either have

A) an order form on a website, or

B) a phone number

I don't think it's unreasonable for them to say, "hey, we know you have a working phone. Instead of launching the Grubhub app, send us a text message and we'll knock X% off of your price."

<comment><USER9> > hey, we know you have a working phone

Sounds like a rebuke. I'd be pretty offended if a business tried to call me out like this for using an app that (presumably) they're willingly taking orders from. If they don't want to be on there then don't, but don't have a go at me about it.

<comment><USER8> Part of the issue is that restaurants don't always sign up for Grubhub. When you place an order with a food delivery service, there may not be a special infrastructure or agreement set up -- the food delivery service may just call the restaurant and pretend to be a customer[0]. People assume that there's a strong relationship here, like selling a product in Walmart. Very often, there's not.

I'm not in the food service industry, maybe it's just expected that you monitor all of these things and manually request your restaurant to be removed every time a new one launches. But it's not crazy to me that someone could get fed up and say, "no, I don't need to pay attention to every VC backed startup that scrapes my website and starts advertising with my menu on top of my own business on Google. I just want to let customers know that a direct relationship with me is cheaper than a relationship with a middleperson."

Is offering a discount to someone having a go at them? If I was ordering through Grubhub, and I could save even just $5 by ordering directly, I'd want to know the option existed. I might not take advantage of it if it was a tiny amount of money. But I'd like to be informed; choices are nice.

[0]: [https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2020/01/13/park-ridge- restauran...](https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2020/01/13/park-ridge-restaurant- complains-that-grubhub-is-selling-its-food-for-delivery-without-permission/)

<comment><USER10> How does the delivery service get the restaurant to foot its 30% of the bill in that case? Do they call the order in as a regular customer and then show up and identify as GrubHub, at that point the food has already been made and they hold the order hostage? If so then that is beyond shady.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Anecdatum:

With skipthedishes in my town, all the big chains mark up their prices and send smaller portions than you get in the restaurant itself.

Whereas, the smaller independents seem to charge the same amount, but they blatantly try to get you to switch to ordering yourself by phone and picking up yourself. They advertise deep discounts when you call them directly.

It seems obvious that the smaller places want to use meal delivery as a sales tactic, but then convert as many customers as possible to a direct relationship.

The big chains, on the other hand, seem to have their own major sources of revenue and don't appear to want any part of taking orders directly.

<comment><USER12> They're probably experimenting with their own apps as well as feeling out the market in terms of costing. Plus its "a bandwagon to jump on". They might jump off when they are ready however.

Another aspect is their scale. A small business can feel a delivery app taking out a few dollars. A bigger one might be using it as a cost that might only last a few years and seen as "research" to be recovered later.

Both can use these strategies however. The smaller businesses converting people to call direct might end up with their own apps and deliveries etc. A lot where I am are actively doing this. UberEats had them but I've noticed a few are setting up their own deliveries now. Others are keeping their options open.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Well, yes. If you get someone to individually drive something cheap to your home then the cost of the delivery can be a large chunk of the final cost.

I don't know why people would be surprised by that.

<comment><USER14> Did you read the article? Much of the markup comes from restaurants charging higher prices for the same items if they are delivered.

<comment><USER15> Yes, as the article explains, that's how restaurants compensate for the delivery companies taking a fat cut of their revenue.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I find it very interesting that, according to my own brief observation, almost the opposite situation is happening in China.

In China the dominant food delivery platforms are ele.me and meituan. The food offered there are not marked-up so ridiculously compared to dining in.

As far as I understand, this is because

1\. The demand is huge. People prefer food delivery, especially for lunch, to save time to either play mobile games, or squeeze more hours for work. Another reason is much more choices are available online than say within 10 minute commute.

2\. Due to 1, food preparation is often moved to backstreet or upstairs where rent is significantly lower.

3\. Due to 2, many sketchy food providers on the platforms are not actually restaurants. So, they don't have to bare the cost of regulation compliance like license or hygiene standards.

<comment><USER17> Labor costs are lower. Delivery is 100% labor costs.

(It's worth observing in passing, for those who don't know, that the URL ele.me is the mandarin equivalent of "hungry.questionmark".)

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> And they don't factor the harm caused to restaurant margins when these apps take 30%.

But the convenience os hard to beat when you don't want to take a long break.

<comment><USER19> In a effort to be nice to restaurants AND be lazy I have learned that seamless / grub hub do charge 30% but others do not: chow now charges a flat monthly fee and a card processing fee, but no inflated per order charge. Not sure about the others.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Who cares? Some people wish to pay for convenience. Let the market figure out what that is worth.

<comment><USER21> Well this convenience could be shown as a single fee, the delivery fee. Adding to the price might seem non transparent and an example of clouding the consumers judgement.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> "I focused my tests on DoorDash, Postmates, Grubhub and Uber Eats, the four largest delivery apps in the United States."

I'm stumped. I live in NYC and all my friends use Seamless. I even have colleagues that will describe these companies mentioned as a "Seamless clone".

<comment><USER23> Grubhub owns Seamless

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> what I want is a simplish way to text a restaurant my main basic wants, have them call me back via voice to confirm and make any adjustments, then I go pick it up. or... maybe delivery (I don't live in an area where delivery is huge but maybe that a gotta-have in some places).

I don't like calling because I'm always put on hold - call me back within 2-3 minutes, when you're actually calling me, vs me interrupting you. confirm the basics of what I texted you, but if you have a special going, or i ordered a 'wrong' size, etc. fix it. confirm price. send back via text.

you can 'own' the relationship then, without a middleman. you can confirm via voice, do your upsells, warn me of any delays, etc.

<comment> grayed-down Absolutely agree!

I even do this with a local Chinese restaurant. We email them our order and they'll call back if there's a question. They only called back once on a pretty big order.

<comment><USER24> FWIW, I text in an order to our local burger place now and then, as I'm a regular, they know me, and I get the same thing every time. Normally it's something like "regular - I'll be in in 15 min". If there's a problem, they text back with "no" or "wait" or "30 min" or whatever...

"Food ordering" outside of "food delivery" should be a separate category. "Food ordering" businesses, imo, likely have a wider audience.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I don't really understand what this article is about. There is a market opportunity. Companies see it and move into new market. More people's needs are fulfilled than before.

Market economy works! Not news.

<comment><USER11> This is a site devoted to business as much as technology.

The details of HOW markets work are vital to understand for people doing business in a market. For example, understanding how the revenue is distributed amongst all the participants in a value chain is relevant and highly interesting.

Thus, the article, the upvotes, and the discussion.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> This is why I have never ordered UberEats. Plus cold McDonalds is gross. Its not hard to order takeout and run down the road myself.

To be honest I don't really get why this whole trend is so popular.

<comment><USER27> I use it on business trips if I'm not scheduled to go out with customers. Uber back to the hotel, order some Grubhub and enjoy a quality meal without having to go to a restaurant by myself. Much better quality/variety than room service.

<comment><USER28> I suppose it depends on the type of places you travel to. I haven't ordered room service in decades but I'd much rather walk or take a short drive from the hotel and get out than hang out in my room with semi-hot takeout.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> As pricey as they are, they'll likely be doing some brisk business soon as more and more people stay home and order out in the wake of the COVID-19 outbreak.

</comment><comment><USER30> Pretty much. I'll be like oh nice that's 6$ and I'll add that for 3$ and great "Your total: 74.95, would you like to tip 20%?"

</comment><comment> grayed-down I found this great food delivery app. It's you!

How it works is, you actually call and speak to someone at the restaurant you want to order from. They take your order, and at a pre-arranged time, you get into your car and go pick it up and bring the food to where you want to eat it.

Warning: This app is not for everyone

</comment><comment> alberto-m (small typo in the post title: "90% more than" should be "90% more expensive than")

</comment><comment><USER31> Isn't it misleading to mention sales tax in the inclusion? You're always going to pay for it anyway, right (I am not from USA)? Why not simply either avoid mentioning it in the comparison, or add it everywhere (which is a long term fix).

</comment><comment> Fire-Dragon-DoL Really? I tested this the other day and with the required tip, i ended up paying basically the same. I was actually pretty annoyed by the fact (I have a 2 years old, so eating at the restaurant takes some parenting effort)

</comment><comment><USER32> Completely ignores cost of travel and value of time. Factor that in and the additional cost is either comparable or less.

<comment><USER33> If you had to drive 30 mins round trip in the largest truck with the worst MPGs, you still wouldn't be anywhere close to 90% of the meal.

<comment><USER34> Time is scarce.

<comment><USER35> Only when mismanaged.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> It would be great if Hacker news could add tags to these posts letting us know when there is a paywall.

<comment><USER37> " Are paywalls ok?

It's ok to post stories from sites with paywalls that have workarounds."

There is no workaround. HN hasn't honored their own policy in years. At this point I can only assume there is a referral deal.

<comment><USER38> Archive.is works: [http://archive.is/GbUIH](http://archive.is/GbUIH)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Dear NYT: if all I can see when I visit your article is your advertisement and a request to create an account to continue, I'm closing the tab again.

<comment><USER40> Try this if you are using chrome:

[https://github.com/iamadamdev/bypass-paywalls- chrome](https://github.com/iamadamdev/bypass-paywalls-chrome)

I think there is also a firefox addon by the same developer.</comment></comment>


Theranos Founder Faces a Test of Technology, and Reputation - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/20/business/theranos-founder-faces-a-test-of-technology-and-reputation.html?_r=0 <comment><USER2> The idea of rapid disruption in the healthcare industry makes me uncomfortable for some reason. I admire Holmes's ambition and in interviews I've watched she seems competent and well guided but something just doesn't seem to add up.

How was a college dropout able to get a break in the healthcare sector? Becoming a doctor requires years of education and training and along comes this young woman who just decides "I'm going to change all of this." What? I don't understand how a person with no experience, no vetting, no medical training, no engineering training, and frankly a product that I find to be of questionable value ends up getting millions in funding and at the head of a multibillion dollar company.

Perhaps I just don't understand the phobia that some people have around blood tests but it is my understanding that you get a blood test as a way to gauge your health, not because it makes you feel nice. The hold up doesn't seem to be that tons of people are afraid of needles otherwise they would be getting tested all the time. The hold up to people getting blood tests all the time is that doctors don't order them, presumably because doctors don't think people need them. As long as the test isn't extremely uncomfortable for the patient, I would think that accuracy is really the only measure of quality for a test and it seems to me that they are willing to sacrifice accuracy in favor of making people feel comfortable.

Also, why would I ever get a blood test at a grocery store? Why would I ever trust some random employee at a food store to respect my privacy and be medically competent enough to administer a test like that. What exactly do I have to gain by getting one in the first place?

Correct me if I'm wrong on any of this because this is just my viewpoint as an outsider. I would however _never_ get a blood test from Theranos and if I wanted one I would call my practitioner and have them administer one at a doctor's office, not at the local grocery store.

<comment><USER3> She comes from a very, very privileged family with the kind of connections most of us can only dream about. Alas that still counts for a lot, even amongst the VCs (especially amongst?) in PAMPA.

<comment><USER2> This is a true point. When you have a lot of money available to invest and you already have a diverse portfolio of high risk-reward investments I suppose it isn't such a big deal to spend 1m on an intelligent family friend. Still... they didn't get to be that wealthy by being careless with their money so I suppose we/I just don't know the full story.

<comment><USER4> It's the other way around. They will have approached her, as they smelt an opportunity to use her, as they are still now. Egoistic people are really easy to manipulate, and you only have to stay one step ahead of the wake of your reality distortion field to pull it off.

The house of cards will come tumbling down at some point, but it won't matter, there won't be consequences.

I know this because I've spent enough time in the world of the mega-rich, had enough passes made at me by apparently well meaning robber barons, to know that this is how this works.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> There is so much ... hype around this technology. But some of their use cases aren't all that useful, and their technology (while supposing to be cheaper) is often done on handheld units at the moment in isolated regions.

Let me explain:

 _Use cases outlined in this article that have minimal real medical benefit, but sound great:_

\- Home blood testing (why? there are only 2 types of people who may find this useful: patients on Warfarin, and patients on dialysis. Dialysis patients (if not on home dialysis) get tested 3 times a week when they go to dialysis. INR is usually stable once established, ceteris paribus)

\- Field blood testing (Mostly pointless. Clinical signs are much more useful in a casualty situation. Arterial blood gasses are useful in resus rooms in emergency departments but in the field you want to keep them breathing, not go reversing exotic blood gas abnormalities)

For the majority of tests (EUC, CMP, LFT, FBC, Coagulation studies) in rural/isolated places, the i-stat machine is used in australia. This is priced ok... around $40 per cartridge for around 6-10 results.

The i-stat works with not much more than a couple of drops of blood as well, although it needs to be drawn from a vein, not a finger-prick.

Other tests, like lipids, or antibody markers, etc, are rarer and much more expensive. It would be great to have them cheap (but again, we don't really know how cheap theranos is saying tests are going to be) which may make them more common, but again there just isn't much benefit in taking them regularly.

Theranos may well be a white elephant. which is unfortunate. The promised technology (fingerprint testing) would be great. But I can't comprehend how they could go for 12 years without a product. And as a doctor, I would be very suprised if the technology works as advertised. There is unfortunately too much hype surrounding this product for me to believe that we will get what has been promoted, but you never know and I would love to be pleasantly surprised.

I wonder how popular this viewpoint will be here on HN - the home of lifehacking and microanalysis of bodyfunction (often without the corresponding knowledge to go with it, but prefaced with a view that 'more data will always be better').

<comment><USER6> I was hoping the product would pivot to passive blood pressure monitoring. I want my blood pressure to be recorded every few seconds, logged and cross- referenced against what I did, ate, and drank. For correlation purposes, knowing those things can be as simple as snapping a photo.

Smart people apparently claim that blood pressure is one of the most reliable indicators of how long you'll live. If so, then it's always seemed strange it's (almost) never measured.

<comment><USER5> Now that would be a cool product. Lots of datapoints. I'm skeptical about the claim - yes, it's important, but there are so many variables that feed into it, and I need to be convinced that constant, 24 hr monitoring of BP would enable better management than spot tests, home BP management and the occasional 24 hr ambulatory monitoring.

It's a very consumer-targeted technology, although it would certainly find a place in emergency departments and ICUs. I am at a loss to think of ways as to how we would actually capture the data, although better minds than mine I hope come up with ways.

The problem is that to get a good read on arterial pressure you either need to do it the old fashioned way (occlude the artery and record that pressure, then slowly drop it until it's constantly flowing again - see [0]) - or you need to stick a cannula into an artery, as we do in ICUs, and measure pressure using a transducer.

Even technologies that stress their 'passivity' (see [1]) and try to capture this market use the old fashioned way. I don't see that changing anytime soon - you could try and somehow monitor the stretch of a small artery maybe using some variation of current o2 saturation sensors, coupled with advanced computer models of flow rate and variation in small arterioles, but that is a world away and would seem to me to be highly subject to variation/sensitivity.

My prediction is that this won't be possible until we are commonly implanting biometrics in people, but I guess we will wait and see!

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korotkoff_sounds](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korotkoff_sounds) [1] [http://www.visimobile.com/](http://www.visimobile.com/)

<comment><USER6> It seemed promising to do some experiments with sewing a BP sleeve into a shirt, then setting up an Arduino to trigger it to inflate/deflate. It should be possible to record the result digitally. It'd be slightly uncomfortable, but even if it's only once per hour, it's still better than zero per hour. The noise would be annoying, but I have some ideas for how to make it quiet. But would anyone actually want such a thing?

Thanks for batting around the idea with me, and for the valuable references. I didn't know there was any other way to measure BP than the old-fashioned way.

<comment><USER5> You're describing creating an ambulatory blood pressure cuff. I've had one attached to me and you get used to it fairly quickly, although it failed to measure blood pressure when I was active (I was cycling for a few of the readings, which you think would keep your arm fairly still and not cause a problem) Cool to make it yourself though! Have a look at these further links. The australian prescriber article you may find particuarly useful

[http://www.racgp.org.au/download/documents/AFP/2011/November...](http://www.racgp.org.au/download/documents/AFP/2011/November/201111nhf.pdf)

[http://www.australianprescriber.com/magazine/20/1/18/20](http://www.australianprescriber.com/magazine/20/1/18/20)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambulatory_blood_pressure](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambulatory_blood_pressure)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> _> Dr. Bill Frist, the former Senate majority leader from Tennessee who joined Theranos as a director last year, supports Ms. Holmes and asserts that "the data I have seen speaks." But he also points out that the Theranos story has taken on the cast of a vicious political campaign and there's nothing more appealing than watching a front-runner fall from grace._

This is ridiculous. A lifetime politician accuses other clinical scientists and medical practitioners questioning Theranos' basic technology and its secrecy as political campaign? That's not how Science and Medicine work. Even that "a front-runner" statement is questionable. Theranos can not even releases its revenue number to be compared to LabCorp or Quest Dx.

 _> In the early 1990s, Mr. Holmes moved the family to Texas where he worked for energy companies, including Tenneco and Enron. (Mr. Holmes has since returned to public service and now works at the United States Agency for International Development.)_

NOW that gets very interesting! Mr. Holmes [1] was found to be listed as officers in at least four Enron subsidiaries[2,3]. Guess that would be great lessons for some future entrepreneur. Conveniently such Enron experiences are not listed on USAID website [4].

[1] [http://individual- contributors.insidegov.com/d/c/Christian-H...](http://individual- contributors.insidegov.com/d/c/Christian-Holmes)

[2] [http://www.corporationwiki.com/Texas/Houston/christian-r- hol...](http://www.corporationwiki.com/Texas/Houston/christian-r- holmes/34634412.aspx)

[3] [http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~eesi/scs/Holmes.htm](http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~eesi/scs/Holmes.htm)

[4] [https://www.usaid.gov/who-we-are/organization/christian- holm...](https://www.usaid.gov/who-we-are/organization/christian-holmes)

<comment><USER8> As a med student, Bill Frist adopted cats from animal shelters under false pretenses so he could experiment on them, sometimes fatally. Definitely a good fit!

<comment><USER6> An accusation this serious should be accompanied by evidence, or dismissed.

<comment><USER9> He wrote about it in his book -

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Frist#Medical_school_expe...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Frist#Medical_school_experiments)

[http://web.archive.org/web/20021101052043/http://www.boston....](http://web.archive.org/web/20021101052043/http://www.boston.com/globe/magazine/2002/1027/coverstory_entire.htm)

<comment><USER6> You know, I didn't expect this to be on his Wikipedia page. My apologies for not doing the most basic of searches. (The topic was uncomfortable enough to want to avoid it, but I still should've checked.)

Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> _They [former employees] say she [founder, Elizabeth Holmes] would become angry and sometimes fire people who pointed out problems. She often spoke as though the company's technology already existed, they said, rather than as if it were still in development._

Funny how that works. I'm just getting into the book _Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction_ by Tetlock and Gardner and came across this passage:

 _Galen is an extreme example but he is the sort of figure who pops up repeatedly in the history of medicine. They are men (always men) of strong convinction and profound trust in their own judgement. They embrace treaments, develop bold theories for why they work, denounce rivals as quacks and charlatans, and spread their insights with evangelical passion._

So even if Theranos is a complete flop, Holmes may still prove a groundbreaker in her hubris. Tetlock and Gardner sum up the problem by quoting Richard Feynman:

 _What medicine lacked was doubt. "Doubt is not a fearful thing," Feynman observed, "but a thing of very great value." It's what propels science forward._

Less so, I guess, visionary entrepreneurs.

<comment><USER11> Another Feynman quote that comes to mind:

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled."

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> The Washington Post's article about Thernos and the DoD was probably the most interesting thing published about them since the original WSJ articles.

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/12/02/inter...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/12/02/internal- emails-reveal-concerns-about-theranoss-fda-compliance-date-back- years/?postshare=3491449147304325&tid=ss_tw)

I found General Mattis joining their board, after supporting them within the DoD over internal objections, to be particularly interesting.

</comment><comment><USER13> Have you guys seen Elizabeth Holmes' Twitter favorites?

99% of them are faves for someone saying how inspiring she is. How she breaks glass ceilings. How she's doing something significant. How the press just wants to build people up to then tear people down. How she should run for president. How her speeches were transformative. How she has vision. Her bio. Her story. Videos of her. Press puff pieces about her. Her face. Her.

I've never seen anyone on Twitter use faves in quite this way. It's not faves about anyone else's content or jokes. It's _not_ faves about Theranos, either. It's all. about. her.

[https://www.twitter.com/eholmes2003/favorites](https://www.twitter.com/eholmes2003/favorites)

#narcissism

<comment><USER14> That's pretty weird. I didn't believe you until I checked it out myself.

I wonder how much of Theranos is a long-play effort to create a "brand" around Holmes?

Perhaps years later, long after Theranos is dust, she'll point to it as a huge success that made her into the billionaire she became.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> In my opinion, Holmes is a fanatic. This is subtly different from being fanatical or obsessive about certain things, which is probably a good or even necessary characteristic for a founder. She seem to just be a fanatic. She has found a mission, and is pursuing it without any second thoughts. Never mind whether anybody else thinks that the mission is actually that important... Fanatics have the ability to impress those close to them, because of their overriding zeal. From a distance though, they seem crazy and somewhat deficient human beings.

I'm not sure that fanatics do science well, or handle other people's money that well either....

</comment><comment><USER16> The images in this article are awful: generic shots and captions of a machine shop; a (possibly empty) black box that's supposed to be a testing machine. Where are the actual machines doing the tests? Where's the science?

<comment><USER17> The main topic of the article is about how Theranos won't share any info about the science or about the machines. So that's probably all the NYT has to work with.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> An author of one of the gushing cover stories on how he feels he was misled - [http://fortune.com/2015/12/17/how-theranos-misled-me- elizabe...](http://fortune.com/2015/12/17/how-theranos-misled-me-elizabeth- holmes/)

I know founders sometimes need to create a reality distortion field and sometimes act as if, but as a patient I would also expect transparency to understand exactly what the company is doing and if the tests are accurate.

Puffery and misdirection in a business whose key selling point is accuracy is a bit concerning.

</comment><comment> xkcd-sucks Why are all these articles about Holmes' personality?

<comment><USER18> Because she refuses to talk specifics about the technology. And the subtext is that Theranos has been able to attract such a high valuation based on her personality even when the technology isn't apparently there.

<comment><USER19> Also, have you looked at Theranos website? She is just.. everywhere.

<comment><USER20> The sound of that is almost hilarious so I took a look. There are two pictures of her in the rotating highlights things and one on the company page. I clicked around on at least 10 other pages or so and didn't find any more pictures. Didn't seem like "everywhere" to me unless I happened to visit the few pages without her photo.

<comment><USER19> There are 3/6 in the rotating thing. She is the first face on Company, actually it's a one minute video of .. just her. Leadership is a jumbotron with a quote of her. Careers has another quote with bonus picture, I love this one:

 _"The minute you have a backup plan, you 've admitted you're not going to succeed."_

Elizabeth Holmes is a category filter on their News page.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Theory: They had some early tech that looked promising in some specific clinical circumstances that through dumb luck were the ones that were tested early on. Holmes, as an almost engineer with no particular experience in anything, thinks medicine is just like engineering. It didn't work in the general case or was less accurate than acceptable for medicine, and so now Theranos is basically just doing normal lab tests, but subsidizing the costs with VC money and trying to make it up at scale or a breakthrough in the original technological approach at some point in the future. Holmes is spinning a convoluted web of misdirection, nonspecific, fractured answers and non-answers until either or both of those things happen.

The questions are easy to answer and wouldn't give away any trade secrets, but she pretty systematically refuses to give simple direct answers to very simply questions. If answering these simple questions, like how many tests they can run using their tech, would give away trade secrets then their tech isn't likely very interesting. The copy coming out of the company insists they are able to do the things they claim, but it doesn't appear they have any particularly commercial ready technology to go to market with.

Holmes is caught in a bit of a bind, she used her family's powerful connections to raise absurd amounts of money on nothing at all and now has to deliver or face the wrath of those same powerful connections. She's also managed to fill the board up with big names through her family connections who have absolutely no medical background at all (except for Dr. Foege) in an effort to give some kind of legitimacy.

Here's an example of her answering simple questions to get a feel:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8qgmGtRMsY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8qgmGtRMsY)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBs- oj7U-bo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBs-oj7U-bo)

Here's an example of how she answers things, (exact quote) "So we have developed hundreds of tests over the course of the last 12 years that can run on a tiny sample using proprietary Theranos technology..." The critical missing components to this statement:

a) To what accuracy compared to traditional tests?

b) All of the tests on one sample, or one test per nanotainer sample?

c) Are all of those tests current tests that Theranos would run on a sample? (R&D could be generated 10 tests a week, but 90% of those tests could be poor, or could not be clinically useful)

She then goes on about taking the data they've generated for their FDA submission and putting it into the public domain and being a leader in transparency. She goes on to talk about all the various technologies Theranos has developed, but it's only the nanotainer tube that's being tested and blah blah blah it's all very complicated and none of the answers clarify or complete any other answer - it's like getting a good image from a shattered mirror.

Simple yes/no answers turn into minutes of non-answers. This isn't difficult, but she makes it absolutely excruciating.

Here's an exceprt from her bio from theranos.com

"Theranos' breakthrough advancements have made it possible to quickly process the full range of laboratory tests from a few drops of blood - instead of numerous tubes - and at unprecedented low costs, and are now directly accessible to people and their physicians through Theranos Wellness Centers opening nationwide."

Except not a single part of this has been demonstrated to be true in any way.

<comment><USER21> It's interesting that the only test cleared is one for herpes. Conceptually, a finger prick sample would very clearly work for binary, "you've got it or you don't" tests, like STD tests (e.g. you've been able to buy home HIV tests for years that just require a few drops of blood from a finger).

Most blood tests, though, are about detecting whether _levels_ of a substance are in a particular range - milligrams of cholesterol _per_ deciliter of blood, mg glucose _per_ deciliter, etc. Taking a much smaller sample is pretty much guaranteed to make the plus/minus error range larger, and capillary blood from a finger prick will have a greater percentage of contamination from intracellular fluid.

Even glucose meters you can use at home are much less accurate than glucose readings taken with a venous draw in a lab. In that case, the benefit to a diabetic of being able to do frequent home testing outweighs the loss of accuracy. If you're going to get work done by a lab, though, you are going to want it to be as accurate as possible, and in that scenario I don't see how a finger prick will be able to compare to a venous draw.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> > _Ms. Holmes said that she needed secrecy to keep others from stealing her > ideas, but several former employees say that Ms. Holmes's steely focus on > her mission — an attribute deeply admired by outsiders — made it difficult > for her to acknowledge any serious shortcomings in the company's products. > They say she would become angry and sometimes fire people who pointed out > problems. She often spoke as though the company's technology already > existed, they said, rather than as if it were still in development._

This seems a little unfair to Holmes. In this one paragraph, anonymous former employees paint Holmes as a megalomaniac -- e.g. she fires people "who pointed out problems" and lies about the existence of technology. She may very well be a megalomaniac, but these assertions should at least have vague anecdotes ("A former employee recalls a 2008 incident in which Holmes fired a senior engineer in a Reply-All email after he replied that he didn't think the machine could be finished on deadline."). The judgment of what is simply pointing out a problem is sometimes context dependent. And nothing else in the story mentions other proof that would affirm that Holmes is a power-freak when it comes to being the CEO. Yes, there are plenty of anecdotes of her being headstrong in negotiations and attempting projects and deals that went nowhere, but that's a different thing than being a vindictive charlatan among her own employees. The NYT sat down with her for a 2.5 hour interview and could have at least confronted her with this and given her a chance to deny it. In contrast, the WSJ, who couldn't score an interview, had actual anecdotes [0] (the hearsay of one of Theranos's chief engineers, who had claimed the technology was a fraud before committing suicide, and emails about fudging the FDA tests).

The parts about her pre-Theranos life were similar to the New Yorker's story from last year [1]...it sounds like she was the real deal in terms of being a passionate engineering student. It makes me wonder if she had spent at least a couple more years beefing up not just her engineering experience, but life experience, that some of the poor CEO decisions she's made would have been mitigated.

[0] [http://www.wsj.com/articles/theranos-has-struggled-with- bloo...](http://www.wsj.com/articles/theranos-has-struggled-with-blood- tests-1444881901)

[1] [http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/15/blood- simpler](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/15/blood-simpler)

<comment><USER22> "It makes me wonder if she had spent at least a couple more years beefing up not just her engineering experience, but life experience, that some of the poor CEO decisions she's made would have been mitigated."

I think that is a very astute observation. When you are in the top 0.01% of CEOs you don't have a lot of scrutiny. Bill Gates says that he got lucky with his success and that graduating is a much more sure path to success ([http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/upshot/bill-gates- college-...](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/upshot/bill-gates-college- dropout-dont-be-like-me.html)). If you do make mistakes or have a failure _and_ you dropped out then that (for better or worse) is a focus and probably makes it more difficult to bounce back. She hasn't failed yet, but the fact that she didn't spend the extra year or two finishing her degree will make it more difficult if she does fail. And lets be honest. We all fail at least once or twice.

<comment><USER23> > but the fact that she didn't spend the extra year or two finishing her > degree will make it more difficult if she does fail.

If she weren't so well connected or known I'd agree with you. But she isn't some unknown dropout who failed fast and hard trying to get into YC or bootstrapping in some random location in SF. Unless Theranos gets revealed as a giant fraud, I doubt she'll find it tough to find another position in the future.

<comment><USER13> That "unless" is looking more and more likely by the day.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Who picks the pictures for these articles?

</comment><comment><USER25> I actually wonder if this is an early signal that there maybe corruption inside the FDA. The goal of recruiting a BoD of this level of influence but of irrelevant skills was an attempt to control the outcome of the FDA approval process, regardless of whether the tests actually work or not.

The purpose of NYT article seems to be to message that while Holmes may get removed from the CEO, the shareholders are still hoping to retain the value.

<comment><USER26> When you hear hoofbeats, you don't think zebra.

I'm no fan of Theranos, but the more plausible explanation is that she's blue bood family w/ connections, and they're pulling those in because they can.

I don't accept as supported the assertion that influential accomplished people on your BOD means you're out to corruptly influence process (any more than general business).

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> It's really put up or shut up time for this company. There's been so much hype around this, but things are starting to smell funny.

</comment><comment><USER28> This company is 12 years old and has never once made an honest dime. How the hell is she or it succeeding in any capacity?

</comment><comment><USER19> Why are there random pictures of tools in this article?

<comment> xkcd-sucks Because they're the only functional pieces of instrumentation to be found within the Theranos building

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Is Elizabeth Holmes breaking the law?

</comment><comment><USER30> I don't quite understand the negativity this company is getting. Sure the product that it is developing may not turn out successfully but that is the risk for any company that tries to innovate.

Ms Holmes seems to be solid leader in the sense that she is well-connected, possesses salesmanship and communicates a clear vision. She has certainly been able to raise large funds.

Sure there might be hr problems but that is the case with any company and surely professional mid level management can be hired in to fix that.

</comment><comment><USER31> If i post an article on Hacker News,it wont make front page.But if someone else posts the very same article many hours later,it will [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10764636](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10764636)

Talk of double standard.

<comment><USER32> Or you just posted mid-afternoon in the Americas and fairly late evening in Europe, instead of hitting American prime time right on the nose... :)</comment></comment>