Ask HN: 1 Programming Language to Add to my Skills? - <AUTHOR>

I have some free time from now until the new year, and am wondering from the community, if you were to learn 1 new programming language right now, with a focus on how important the language will be over the next 3 years, what would you learn?
Assume that you are very experienced in the "common" languages like C++, Java, and PHP and want to learn one of the "up and coming" languages that are becoming more important.  Assume also you want to become a 7/10 on the new language, and be able to apply to jobs in that language come 2011.
Thanks! <comment><USER2> Choose the domain first and then the language. Decide what type of programming do you want to do and what type of company do you want to work for. Then choose the biggest or hottest language / framework in that domain.

Do you want to do science and R&D? Then maybe Matlab, R, OpenCL/Cuda? Finance? Maybe F#. Big Data and statistics? R, Hive, Scope, Pig, Cascading, DryadLinq, Clojure. Web front-end? Javascript. Web back-end? Javascript, Python or Ruby. Mobile? Objective-C or MonoTouch. Games? Lua. Etc, etc.

<comment><USER3> Javascript as back-end? Is Node.js already at a point where it can be used for commercial websites?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> That probably much depends on what you are doing or want to do, and to chose a language that best complements what you already know. If you want to make safe bets, pick one from the "most popular" chart that you did not list (JavaScript, Python, C#, Perl, and Ruby). However, some more exotic ones might be worth your time, too: Scala might become more important in the future, for example, as it offers concurrency support. Same for Clojure that has some popularity on HN at least. On Erlang I probably do not need to comment, either. An if you work Apple stuff, Objective-C, naturally. If you go into games development, Lua is an option. Etc., etc., etc. In essence, it is not very hard to pick up a new language - the real work is knowing an important framework that the language provides really well; Which ties in with what you want to do with it in the first place, again...

EDIT: And one more thing occurred to me: With NoSQL loosing popularity currently, I think having good SQL skills will be of more value once again. And, truly efficient DB management (and design) cannot be done from some ORM alone; designing well-formed Schemas and writing good SQL (or knowing how to use an ORM to produce the "right" SQL) is an art that should not be underestimated.

</comment><comment><USER5> This isn't exactly an answer to your question, since you asked for just one programming language, but there is a book coming out soon (pub date listed in Amazon is Nov 10th) entitled "Seven Languages in Seven Weeks: A Pragmatic Guide to Learning Programming Languages". It's written by Bruce Tate (author of books on Ruby, Rails, Java, etc), and published by Pragmatic Programmers.

The book covers Ruby, Io, Prolog, Scala, Erlang, Clojure and Haskell, spending presumably, a week on each. According to the book description, "you'll explore the most critical programming models of our time". This would seem to be a good way to learn about a lot of different programming languages, in a relatively short amount of time. Of course, if what you want is something that will be immediately useful on your resume, this may not be of interest to you right now.

</comment><comment><USER6> Besides Tiobe and Alioth shootout, here's some other attempted quantifications

<http://github.com/languages>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1843083>

<http://therighttool.hammerprinciple.com/>

<http://www.hackernewsers.com/skills/index.html>

[http://www.reddit.com/help/faqs/programming#Whatlanguageredd...](http://www.reddit.com/help/faqs/programming#Whatlanguageredditsarethere)

</comment><comment><USER7> If you're interested in systems programming, I'd learn Go (<http://golang.org>). The team behind Go (which includes Ken Thompson and Rob Pike) is very strong technically, and there's a lot to learn about programming style and techniques for any language by reading the source code to the standard Go packages (<http://golang.org/pkg/>).

However, Go is still very young and being actively developed so it's probably premature to add as a marketable skill to your resume.

</comment><comment><USER8> Learn Ruby or Python if you don't know one of them yet. They are rapidly becoming the go-to scripting languages, and you will not regret learning them.

(Plus, they're easy and stupid productive)

</comment><comment><USER9> I think that depends on where you do most of your work.

If you're a front-end developer then jQuery. If you're a mobile guy, then objective-C. If you're a backend developer, then erlang.

</comment><comment><USER10> Rails seems to be popular for people that do C++, Java and PHP in terms of jobs. Python is something that you can get to about 3/10 in an afternoon, but there are less jobs (except in domain-specific areas where python has an advantage).

Personally I'd recommend python to anyone to pick up and run with, see if they like it and carry on if they do. Having said that, if it's coin you're after with your current skillset I imagine that C sharp or a .NET-based language may well be more appropriate for you.

<comment><USER11> Python is your get-shit-done language. You will probably see it used a lot playing a support role in places where the code base is, officially and nominally, in C++, Java, or another language. Running automated test servers, munging data out of CSV files, etc. Heck, a lot of shops are using scons and that's _written_ in Python.

In short: Learn Python. But don't do it to get a job. Do it to get better at the job you have.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> This depends a lot on the person and what type of work you like to do.

Perhaps take a dive into iPhone (Obj-C) or Android development (Java)?

You could also consider going for something totally different -- most of my experience lies in C based languages and I've noticed that picking up another one of those languages is usually not that hard and thus less interesting than trying out for instance Haskell, Erlang or Ruby.

</comment><comment><USER13> Smalltalk, if you want to understand what the future will look like.</comment>


Watching the birth of Flickr co-founder's gaming start-up - <AUTHOR> http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-10448459-52.html <comment><USER2> From memory flickr was born from a project to create a photo sharing site for photos of the game the founder were developing. So this isn't surprising. I think I got that from Founders at Work.

<comment><USER3> Yes, the people at Ludicorp (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludicorp>) were making Game Neverending (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Neverending>).

And as pointed out in the Wikipedia article on GNE: "Occasional signs of this legacy are visible, such as the '.gne' file extension appearing in Flickr's URLs."

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Very impressed by CNET spending the resources to embed a reporter like this.

Here's a great gallery of in-progress art, prototypes, etc:

<http://news.cnet.com/2300-10797_3-10002397-1.html?tag=mncol>

</comment><comment><USER5> that's a puffy piece, as it's called in journalistic circles.

<comment><USER6> Technically, I think that's "puff piece," but I concur.</comment></comment>


Waste Water from Oil Fracking Injected into Clean Aquifers - <AUTHOR> http://www.nbcbayarea.com/investigations/Waste-Water-from-Oil-Fracking-Injected-into-Clean-Aquifers-282733051.html <comment><USER3> A worthy report, but some valuable context is buried near the end of the article/TV news report.

 _"We are still comparing the testing of what was the injection water to what is the tested water that came out of these wells to find out if they were background levels or whether that's the result of oil and gas operation, but so far it's looking like it's background," said James Marshall from the California Department of Conservation._

So it seems as if no actual contamination of the aquifer has taken place so far - not an excuse, but far from the environmental disaster you might have imagined when you heard about 3 billion gallons of waste water.

 _When asked how this could happen in the first place, Marshall said that the long history of these wells makes it difficult to know exactly what the thinking was. "When you're talking about wells that were permitted in 1985 to 1992, we've tried to go back and talk to some of the permitting engineers," said Marshall. "And it's unfortunate but in some cases they (the permitting engineers) are deceased."_

Again not an excuse, but when you learn that these injection sites were permitted 20-30 years ago (at a time of lesser technological and environmental awareness, as well as of lower population and land usage intensity), then it's not so surprising that some bad decisions could have taken place. On the plus side, the fact that the injection wells have been in use for oil exploration for so long and contamination actually seems to be quite limited suggests that halting further injection and carefully monitoring the surrounding wells may be sufficient. In other words, an unjustifiable risk but one that seems to have been identified and halted prior to a serious failure.

<comment><USER4> Marshall followed up with "But when those (further) test results come back, we'll know for sure". I think your assessment of the situation is premature at best.

In any case, the tone for the statements by Marshall that you quoted were, to me, set with this earlier one:

"There have been past issues where permits were issued to operators that they shouldn't be injecting into those zones and so we're fixing that,"

Could this guy be any more wishy washy?

<comment><USER3> Hence my use of the word 'seems'.

I don't think you can conclude much about someone's tone from a heavily edited TV news report where people's explanations are chopped up into single sentences.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> From another comment in a thread last week about the same subject:

"I'm currently working in the industry in the Permian Basin area (Texas/New Mexico) and can say that my main concern is environmental. With the fracking operations, you get a huge load of oil, saltwater, and sand/crud/junk/chemicals. They truck them to a SWD disposal facility (my company does PLC's and controls etc for these) which then separate the oil out. The problem is that, at most of the SWD disposal places I have been too, disposal consists of pumping the junk/crud/chemical water straight back into the ground. They say they drill below the Ogallalah aquifer, but what if they don't? Having actually been a contractor for one of the bigger public oil companies, I can just say I don't really trust them to do things like that properly, and my guess is that within a few years we will find out, oh shit, "Someone poisoned the water hole". That's when T. Boone Pickens will unleash his high-priced water. I don't thing people realize how close the south is to major water shortages and is vulnerable to a drought. Hopefully this upcoming winter will help offset some of that."

</comment><comment><USER6> As a part of the Oil and Gas industry, I find this inexcusable. The industry is going to be a part of international energy picture for the long-term, and there are "environmentally responsible" ways to economically produce O&G. These corner cutting idiotic antics hurt the image of the whole industry, and are becoming more common. Sadly, with the size of the industry, the demand for the product, and the desire to keep the price low, its difficult to oversee every action.

<comment><USER7> "We're sorry for any inconvenience and we regret..."

Someone should have to pay for this. If the standard excuse is all you need, there's always going to be someone who is simply going to do the same thing.

<comment><USER8> Right, that's the fundamental problem with free-market idealism. There is not an effective limit to the damage that can be done, but there are limits to liability. Many industries are capable of committing environmental destruction on large scales, but don't have any assets when the EPA comes around looking for restitution.

<comment><USER9> I don't see what the free market has to do with this. In a free market, or really any system that has property rights at all, you can't take or destroy someone's property without their permission.

Edit: by "can't" I mean it's not allowed - it's a crime. Not that you physically can't.

<comment><USER10> Tell me again how property rights prevented this from happening.

<comment><USER9> The industry is already regulated, and companies are ignoring the regulations. This isn't even an approximation to a free market, let alone some ideal. Adding more regulations isn't going to help if they're not enforced.

<comment><USER3> But how are the companies ignoring the regulations here? It appears that state permits were granted to drill and use these injection wells ~25-30 years ago and that the owner/operators have been fully compliant with regulations - <USER2> anything, the failure in this case was a regulatory one, for granting permits that should not have been issued in the first place.

<comment><USER9> So, who is responsible to pay up if a resident wants restitution for the pollution in their well? The company or the state?

<comment><USER3> On the limited information available here, if the company had not been breaking the terms of the permit then I would certainly consider my dispute to be with the state.

<comment><USER3> Looking at this later I see I worded it badly - I should have said 'as long as the company hasn't been breaking the terms of the permit.' I might have mistakenly given the impression that they had done so, whereas in reality I have no reason to think they did.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Some wisdom from Mexico:

[http://www.propublica.org/article/message-from- mexico-u.s.-i...](http://www.propublica.org/article/message-from- mexico-u.s.-is-polluting-water-it-may-someday-need-to-drink)

</comment><comment><USER12> Why in the world would it ever be okay to inject contaminated waste water into the ground? That sounds just plain stupid.

<comment><USER13> Oh, but that's the whole idea of fracking.

You inject (not necessarily polluted on purpose from the start, but it will be at some point if reused a few times) water under high pressure into the ground to break up sediment, releasing a mineral resource. Often: Natural gas, or some sludge high in oil content. Sometimes also done for certain metals, then it's called "in situ leach".

Problem is: At some point you'll have accumulated just too much polluted water than what you could reasonably store as barrels stacked up in your parking lot, or just dump into a nearby lake or river.

The amount of waste generated it not really surprising, probably one should have considered this environmental impact before allowing companies to start these operations.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> This is a shame. But as usual, people start caring about environment very late. They should have had that in mind right off the bat when they started using this technology.Sadly back in those days all was going good, nobody cared. Now when it becomes critical, suddenly people start getting scared. Well, too late guys. How many screw up we will need to stop being late?

<comment><USER15> Did anyone read the article? The state gave the company permission to do the well injection of waste. The state screwed up!

<comment><USER16> And I'd bet the oil companies lobbied for 'deep' aquifers to be deemed usable for fracking.

<comment><USER15> Massive conspiracy! I think you overestimate the impact of lobbying.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I can't actually get the article on my iPhone. I keep getting spammed or redirected to another ad page or to download an app.

<comment><USER17> Try the printed version: [http://www.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?expire=&title=W...](http://www.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?expire=&title=Waste+Water+from+Oil+Fracking+Injected+into+Clean+Aquifers+|+NBC+Bay+Area&urlID=534261522&action=cpt&partnerID=1127095&cid=282733051&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcbayarea.com%2Finvestigations%2FWaste- Water-from-Oil-Fracking-Injected-into-Clean-Aquifers-282733051.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I must have missed the memo on the terminology change. So, now, waste is "injected" into the environment, not "dumped"? Guess that does sound better.

<comment><USER19> It's obviously a different process.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What's the difference between president and CEO? - <AUTHOR>

I have seen people took the title of President and Founder, but there's also a different CEO running the company.  Is the president title just in name? <comment><USER2> <http://ask.yahoo.com/20050830.html>

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, in a big organization, president usually is the head of a division, and the CEO is the overall head. In a startup it's more dubious. I guess the confusion comes in this case that the founder being the "president" but no specific CxO title. Usually when a new CEO comes in, the founder steps aside as CTO, COO, or something. President just sounds empty. Unless that's what it is, he has no real duty.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> pretty much.</comment>


Ask HN: What are your must-read essays for indie entrepreneurs - <AUTHOR> The internet is noisy, books are usually 200 pages too long and the most important ideas can be condensed into the essay format. Can you help curate the best? <comment><USER2> These are a bit on the philosophical side, but nonetheless must-reads:

1\. On the Shortness of Life, Seneca

2\. The Risk Not Taken, Andy Dunn

3\. How to Start a Startup, Paul Graham (read all of PG's essays)

[1] [https://tripinsurancestore.com/4/on-the-shortness-of- life.pd...](https://tripinsurancestore.com/4/on-the-shortness-of-life.pdf) [2] [https://medium.com/@dunn/the-risk-not- taken-40cf0a8919cb](https://medium.com/@dunn/the-risk-not-taken-40cf0a8919cb) [3] [http://paulgraham.com/start.html](http://paulgraham.com/start.html)

<comment><USER3> "On the shortness of life, by Seneca" Wonderful. Haha Happy people in the world are making a positive impact.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> As a tech startup founder,I found these extremely useful:

1\. Strategy to Master the odds

2\. Zero to One(5 Stars)

3\. YC Startup Library

[1] [https://functionalflow.github.io/brains/2018/04/strategy- to-...](https://functionalflow.github.io/brains/2018/04/strategy-to-master- theodds)

[2] [https://github.com/functionalflow/brains/blob/master/Zen- Of-...](https://github.com/functionalflow/brains/blob/master/Zen-Of- Founder/Zero%20to%20One.pdf)

[3] [http://www.ycombinator.com/resources/](http://www.ycombinator.com/resources/)

</comment><comment><USER5> Dude just grow and run your business, cash flow is everything, not sure what an essay is going to do for you.

</comment><comment><USER6> I quite enjoyed Hackers and Painters by Paul Graham. It's been a while since I read it, but two things that I still remember are:

* As a hacker, you are more valuable than your organization might lead you to believe.

* You can still and you should pursue side projecst despite being employed.

<comment><USER7> It's worth reading [http://idlewords.com/2005/04/dabblers_and_blowhards.htm](http://idlewords.com/2005/04/dabblers_and_blowhards.htm) as a counterpoint to "Hackers and painters"

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> What is an "indie" entrepreneur? And what other kind of entrepreneurs are there?

<comment><USER9> I think they mean one without external funding.</comment></comment>


Cronycle Content Research Platform Launches - <AUTHOR> http://cronycle.com/ <comment><USER2> Cool tool

<comment><AUTHOR> yeah must be a pretty neat back-end on this baby. Love the filters!</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How Do I Thrive Working with a "Hands-On" Founder? - <AUTHOR> I just started work as interim CMO on very exciting new marketplace project. The founder and I get along great. He has no ego, 20 years of domain experience, and works with a small team that has been by his side for more than a decade. He defies all the stereotypes, except one--he's extremely hands-on. Too much so.
While the founder isn't your "typical" control freak, or a micromanager, per se, but he wants to do everything himself.
It's been great in many ways. Today I refreshed my knowledge of PPC ad buying as we reviewed our paused campaign with another consultant. Last week we set up our CRM from scratch. I know I'm adding tremendous value, and I feel appreciated every day.
While today was great, we also spent the better part of an hour fine-tuning a single email to cold leads. And on today's PPC call, our founder went down the rabbit hole trying to tweak the copy in a single Google ad. Successful campaigns run and optimize dozens or hundreds of variations.
I admire and appreciate our CEOs commitment to getting things right. He's excited to learn, and I'm learning along with him. I am also afraid his time and my own aren't being put to their best use. Tasks take 5x longer than they otherwise might.
I've worked with many (many) startups where VC's set unhealthy growth targets, and everyone runs themselves into the ground. Now we're self-funded, and time pressure seems to be a thing of the past. After building the platform for the past three years, we signed up our first user this week.
No one is cracking the whip, and I admire and vibe with our CEO. I also notice myself getting impatient with the glacial pace.
Am I crazy to look sideways at such a chill situation? How can I guide our hands-on CEO to move little faster, or let go of individual tasks sooner?
If you have strategies to make this partnership thrive, I'd love to hear your best tips. <comment><USER2> You say you just started, so I will assume you mean < 30 days or so on the job. If I was your CEO I'd be watching things really close till you built up some more trust with me too. Not that I'd distrust you, and I'd want you to have some autonomy early, but not without me being in the loop overall. A mistake around some of this could be super costly to the business too, so if he stays involved for a time period it won't all fall on you.

As you prove yourself, after say 60-90 days (depending on your experience level could be longer) then if he stays this involved and over analyzing things then it is more a time to chat with him about how to pick up the speed and have him back out some. But till that, you are new, take this time to learn what he likes and what he dislikes before it is all on you.

With experience also comes an understanding that setting unrealistic paces and trying to push hard just usually leads to more mistakes being made. That doesn't mean the pace should be glacial, but just that more thought out and deliberate decisions means the pace doesn't need to be frantic. So I'd step back and appreciate that as well a little. Also, when self funded, it is more important to be deliberate and focused than it is when you have backing from a VC. Not that you should waste VC dollars, but there is an expectation of growth that is much different so running more tests and doing things faster is more critical. Self funded it is more important to focus on getting a return than racing to your next round and trying to learn as much as possible.</comment>


Decade in the Red: Trump Tax Figures Show over $1B in Business Losses - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/05/07/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html <comment><USER2> We already know this. Read "Art of The Comeback" by Donald Trump</comment>


Ext JS + jQTouch + Raphaël = Sencha - <AUTHOR> http://www.sencha.com/blog/2010/06/14/ext-js-jqtouch-raphael-sencha/ <comment><USER2> Be careful with this company. They've burned open source developers with a bait and switch tactic. I lost about six months of work. [http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web- Toolkit/browse_thr...](http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web- Toolkit/browse_thread/thread/2918164133ac9b2e)

<comment><USER3> This seems disingenuous. While it certainly sucks that something which was once completely free to you now costs money or comes with several strings attached, it's hardly unfair or dishonest. What you had for free continues to be free, forever. That's the nature of open source. You could fork that code base and continue to improve it, or start your own project around it.

Sencha decided they couldn't build a sustainable business by continuing to not charge people for their hard work, a reasonable and dare I say responsible decision. People who are making money off their work now have the choice to financially support that work, rather than simply seeing it die completely, which is what would have otherwise happened.

<comment><USER4> While the point you make is true, the parent is correct. Beware of this company if you use their GXT product. They continually treat their GXT CUSTOMERS poorly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Funny, I was actually just browsing the ExtJS site last night, and decided I would almost certainly never use it. Its way too crazy corporate.

I just hope Raphael and jQTouch will continue to be developed independently.

<comment><USER6> What do you mean, corporate? I've used it, and it does incredibly well for performance and stabilty, has a beautifully consistent API, and the best documentation for such a big js lib. Give it a go, man, you won't be disappointed (I hope).

<comment><USER5> The massive support drop down (with all really prominent I'm-a-middle-manager- can-i-pay-you choices)

The highlighted quote from Adobe.

The fact that Sencha is named "in the tradition of Java".

If you look at the front page, you easily tell that it isn't oriented toward developers. Contrast this with, for example, <http://jqtouch.com/>, <http://jquery.com>, and <http://raphaeljs.com/>

When you finally figure out where the API and demos are, it still takes quite a while to figure out if some jslib things are supported -- for example, some kind of rich text editor. I just looked again, and I don't think it is, but really I'm not sure.

I very well may try it, though. I've been looking for a project that makes a beautiful, cohesive interface, largely for web game programming purposes. I'm glad to hear that, despite its homepage, developers find it to be a nice project to use =)

<comment><AUTHOR> _The fact that Sencha is named "in the tradition of Java"._

I found that rather chilling, myself.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> My biggest concern is what happens to jQTouch as a result of this acquisition. Will it continue to sit on jQuery or will they switch it to ExtJS?

<comment><USER8> it won't switch to ExtJS unless it gets trimmed down to like 40kb. It won't. I think this is just a diversification for ExtJS since other frameworks are doing UI components now (jQuery UI will catch up to it soon)

<comment><USER9> > (jQuery UI will catch up to it soon)

I seriously doubt that. jQuery UI is a hack compared to ExtJS.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Where's Jack Slocum in all of this?

<comment><USER10> It's been over a year since Jack posted to the ExtJS forums: <http://www.sencha.com/forum/member.php?2-jack.slocum>

Probably safe to say that he's no longer involved.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I understand that lots of the modules are optional.

However, I cannot see a several megabyte framework [yes, it is: the ext js download is nearly 11MB, zipped(!!!)] working very well for mobile development.

<comment><USER3> This is a silly metric. Development downloads have nothing to do with code deployment size.

Cappuccino's download, for example, comes with two complete versions of the code, plus the documentation, plus a sample app. And there's also a separate tools download. Hardly representative of anything at all.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> fdgfd

</comment><comment><USER9> Tacky name change clearly aimed to counter the mass of online content critical of their licensing model.

<comment><USER13> +1 This is why they changed the name!</comment></comment>


Greek Yogurt's Dark Side - <AUTHOR> http://modernfarmer.com/2013/05/whey-too-much-greek-yogurts-dark-side/ <comment><USER3> This article seems suspect in its sensationalism, not for the facts presented, but for the ones _not_ addressed. Greek yogurt is widely eaten in lots of countries (called labneh most of the middle east).

If we were to address this seriously we would have to ask: What do _they_ do with the strained byproduct? The article doesn't seem to give any thought to the countries that already consume a lot of labneh.

My (Lebanese) grandmother used to make it by hanging a cloth above the sink, so her solution was merely down the drain.

edit: Woah! Sorry, I don't mean to imply that it isn't a problem. I mean to imply that many other countries may consume as much per capita as the US, but if lots of it is home-made, the waste problem might not be as visible, even if it is just as real.

<comment>~

> one expert calls a "dead sea,"

The proper term for oxygen-deprived waters is actually "dead zone", to reduce confusion with the (merely very saline) Dead Sea:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_zone_(ecology)>

<comment>~

I found a paper that I think is much more interesting than the posted article:

 _Utilization of Labneh Whey Lactose Hydrolyzed Syrup in Baking and Confectionery_ , from the Pakistan Journal of Nutrition

<http://www.pjbs.org/pjnonline/fin2285.pdf>

<comment><USER4> > My (Lebanese) grandmother used to make it by hanging a cloth above the sink, > so her solution was merely down the drain.

Which is exactly what companies would do, on an industrial scale, if it weren't illegal. But in a sense what your grandmother does is wrong. Even if we assume that there is no inherent value to healthy oceans and rivers, it robs, in nickles and dimes, fisherman whose catches are affected by the acid in household wastewater. Your grandmother saves a few cents on proper disposal while costing other people a few cents to deal with the problem she created.

<comment><USER5> 1\. You assume she's not paying for sewage processing.

2\. Acid whey is likely to be completely harmless in small amounts, and is certainly less of an issue than many things going down the drain like soap.

<comment><USER6> If every household (instead of buying a factory product) is pouring homemade whey down the sink, it's not "in small amounts." It's simply distributing the source of the pollution.

<comment><USER5> That's still a very small concentration, because it's distributed.

Acid whey is not a pollutant. It's something you don't want high concentrations of, but low concentrations can be _literally_ harmless. And it doesn't build up over time.

Not everything is a tragedy of the commons.

<comment><USER7> So all the industrial producers should do is get massive amounts of water, mix their acid whey with it, then use that mixture to irrigate the larger area around their plants? Maybe just inject their whey into irrigation systems at the point they pump up their water? (hint: no that is not a solution)

Of course the whey is not the pollutant, it's the acids in it. Low concentrations of _anything_ are harmless.

<comment><USER5> >Low concentrations of _anything_ are harmless.

That is a true and useless statement. By the same token high concentrations of _anything_ are harmful but nobody is going to call water a pollutant. The question is about why and how something is harmful and whether it builds up. First off, why are you saying the acid is the problem? From my reading, talking about decomposition sapping oxygen, it sounds like it's the sugar and the fact that it's a food. And food isn't a pollutant. You leave it alone, it rots, nobody is harmed unless you dump large amounts of it in one spot. Now let's contrast with an actual pollutant like smoke. A whole lot of people emitting small amounts of smoke _does_ build up, and it lingers. It causes direct harmful effects.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This article is complete bullshit.

It presents the issue as if it's a sudden surprise problem, when in fact there are established markets for whey and whey derivatives. The global market for whey protein is worth $3.8bn. To call whey (even relatively poor quality whey) "waste" is ludicrous - it's a byproduct with an established commercial value. Acid whey requires more processing than sweet whey, but it's an established and well-understood problem for the dairy industry.

The problem for the yoghurt producer is simply that liquid whey is right at the bottom of the value chain - it requires a great deal of processing to become $8/kg whey protein concentrate or $12/kg whey protein isolate. Yoghurt manufacturers may be extremely keen to move up the value chain and extract more profit from their whey byproducts, but there's no great market failure occurring here.

<comment><USER9> my grandmother's ranch :

milk produced by cows -> sell to cheese factory

whey the factory returned back -> feed to pigs, chicken, turkey

<comment><USER10> The article does mention that cheese making produces sweet whey as opposed to the acid whey that Greek yoghurt produces.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Interesting, but some important facts are buried late in the article.

In particular, as anyone in the U.S. who reads food labels knows, whey is a _very_ common ingredient in processed foods. So what's the problem? A partial answer:

> The concept is roughly modeled on the success that cheese-makers have had > selling products derived from their own byproduct — sweet whey. Sweet whey > is more valuable and easier to handle than acid whey, as it has a lot more > protein, and is easier to dry because it isn't as acidic as Greek yogurt > whey. Cheese-makers have developed a lucrative business selling whey protein > for use in body-building supplements and as a food ingredient. And Greek > yogurt makers are eager to follow suit.

\----

EDIT: Another comment.

> Rejman's workers take the shipments and try to find uses for the whey: mix > it with silage to feed to the farm's 3,300 cows; ....

Wouldn't most adult cattle be lactose-intolerant? (As human adults were until that wacky lactase-persistence mutation hit parts of Europe & Africa.) Adding whey to feed for adult cattle sounds to me like a good way to make cattle sick. OTOH, surely farmers would have figured this out.

Can anyone explain this?

<comment><USER12> I would sort of expect it to be less problematic for ruminants to have bacteria digesting sugar for them.

It's also going to be a relatively small proportion of the feed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Sounds like we've finally found a use for all those oceans we built.

The problem with liquids like this that use up oxygen when you dump them in water is that they use up _all_ the oxygen when you dump them in the pond. Dump them in a place with plenty of water and they find all the oxygen they need and happily degrade without killing all your fish.

Back in my Environmental Engineer days, I worked on a study of Ethylene Glycol (the stuff they use do de-ice airplanes), and how it affected the local wetlands. The worry wasn't that it would get into the waterways. There's no stopping that if you spray thousands of gallons of it onto a runway. The worry was that those local waterways wouldn't disperse it fast enough for it to harmlessly degrade into weetabix and rainbows (or whatever similarly neutral stuff it turns into when you add water and oxygen to it) before it affected the critters in the pond.

So it seems like a nice solution to this, that definitely won't fly if you tell anybody with an easy sense of environmental outrage and a disinclination to read a chemistry book, would be to load up a big boat full of it, steam well out to sea, and open the cork.

</comment><comment> guard-of-terra Why don't they use it as a base for cooking biscuits?

Replace water with acidic whey and throw some baking soda in to produce CO2 to leaven dough. You'll get more tasty biscuit with proteins and minerals. You'll probably need to remove lactose, tho.

<comment><USER14> I was going to say—input for yummy baking. Probably not a realistic answer for the scale being discussed, but when we strain our homemade yogurt at home, I toss the drippings into the next loaf of bread I bake.

Gives it a wonderful tangy flavour.

<comment> guard-of-terra I think that all biscuits combined make for all greek yogurt combined. We're talking comparable output here. Of course, not all recipes win from using whey, but that will seriously soften the problem already.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> The only problem with "Greek Yogurt" is that there is no separate thing as Greek Yogurt. It's just a western marketing name for strained yogurt. Yogurt is a food of Turkish origin and even the words Yogurt and Chobani are directly from Turkish language. Yogurt and its derivatives are very common throughout the former Ottoman geography, from Balkans to Arabic countries. Does that really matter? Yes, if culture and history has any importance.

<comment><USER16> Origins of yogurt in general go back much farther than the Ottomans though by at least 1500-3000 years. Though, you're correct that the word itself is Turkish. Also correct that it's basically called Greek Yogurt because marketers in the West thought it sounded better.

 _In ancient Indian records, the combination of yogurt and honey is called "the food of the gods".[17] Persian traditions hold that "Abraham owed his fecundity and longevity to the regular ingestion of yogurt".[18]

The oldest writings mentioning yogurt are attributed to Pliny the Elder, who remarked that certain "barbarous nations" knew how "to thicken the milk into a substance with an agreeable acidity".[19] The use of yogurt by medieval Turks is recorded in the books Diwan Lughat al-Turk by Mahmud Kashgari and Kutadgu Bilig by Yusuf Has Hajib written in the 11th century.[20][21] Both texts mention the word "yogurt" in different sections and describe its use by nomadic Turks.[20][21] The earliest yogurts were probably spontaneously fermented by wild bacteria in goat skin bags.[22]_

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogurt#History>

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> This reminds me of a client I had a long time ago who sold silane gas, which is the byproduct of making metallurgical grade silicon. It is a byproduct of semiconductor production (among other things) and very scary to store because it combusts upon contact with oxygen. So as you can imagine if there is a leak... it's bad news.

In the 90s they had so much of this stuff and it was really expensive to store and not much could be done with it, by then they discovered it could be used to coat the glass exterior of entire skyscrapers to reduce glare, and to make solar panels, and many other things. I always think of this story when I hear about byproduct management problems, and hope they'll find a commercial solution - they just might invent something new and awesome out of necessity.

</comment><comment><USER18> Some people run thriving startups based on whey. [http://www.thedailypage.com/isthmus/article.php?article=2964...](http://www.thedailypage.com/isthmus/article.php?article=29643)

<comment><USER19> Thanks for that link--good read :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I actually was faced with the same problem a little while ago. I started making my own Greek yoghurt once a week at home. So I started having to throw out these big amounts of whey. That felt very wasteful, so I started to do some research into what I could do with the whey. It turns out to be a great substitute in many recipes that call for buttermilk (pancakes, mashed potatoes). It also is great in smoothies. Apparently you can even make ricotta cheese from it. Last weekend I actually still had enough yoghurt, but made yoghurt because I was out of whey! It's great stuff and I haven't even been able yet to make any ricotta, since I don't have enough left after all the other now mandatory use cases. I am really surprised that the whey is so acidic. Mine at least doesn't taste that sour. I would like some explanation for that. However, cultures used by these big corporations also aren't real, sustainable greek yoghurt cultures. You can use the culture from commercial yoghurt as a starter for your own yoghurt and go from there. However, the culture will die eventually, since they are bred for maximum consistent result in a laboratory like environment. I wonder if that has to do with it.

The topic of fermentation is super interesting. I can throng lay recommend to everyone o read Sandor Katz's "Art of Fermentation". It's a great work about the history, culture and basic workings of fermentation.

</comment><comment><USER21> In Switzerland and the Netherlands we use the milk whey to create a soft drink: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rivella>

Afaik, it was indeed invented in order to find a use for this by-product.

It tastes "a bit weird, but pretty good" (that's also their slogan, and it's quite accurate IMO :) )

</comment><comment><USER22> I 'm more interested on why hackers are interested in this article. Somebody will come up with a good idea on how to process the whey further. Yoghurt production certainly hasn't destroyed Greece until now, so there is a bit of sensationalism here as well.

<comment><USER23> Here in Iceland we drink it and use it to store food in the traditional way (don't see that catching on anywhere else though).

The most interesting use of it though is in sports drinks. They've managed to make the whey taste ok and still keep the drink healthy. I'm sure we will see this elsewhere.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> The presence of lactose made me curious as to whether all this whey could be used in ethanol production. It would help reduce the need for corn ethanol while taking care of this problem. Curiously, this possible solution wasn't mentioned in the article at all.

Here is a white paper describing a fermentation process (pretty standard ethanol production, from the looks of it). <http://nzic.org.nz/ChemProcesses/dairy/3H.pdf>

And here is an excellent USDA review looking at a lot of the different solutions to this whey surplus: <http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/pub/RR214.pdf>

<comment><USER25> In my cursory search on the matter (and comment a few moments ago to another reply), ethanol production was my first thought when dealing with the excess lactose. It seems that there are a few cooperatives that own a facility in California & Minnesota. I am still unsure of the difference between "sweet" whey & "acid" whey, I believe that they should be able to convert the lactose into a useable ethanol.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> The article said that the whey was "toxic" because if put it in a lake or stream it will consume the oxygen and kill the fish. That's mostly just FUD, hype, and nonsense:

The water treatment industry is very aware of 'biologic oxygen demand' (BOD). Basically, yes, decomposing some whey in a lake will consume some oxygen from the lake. Consume too much oxygen and then will kill the fish. Sure. But that doesn't make the whey "toxic". Indeed, lots of things go into the streams, rivers, and lakes that consume oxygen. If don't consume too much oxygen, then likely fine. No problem (at least about oxygen). And, of course, what consumes the whey is biologic activity that might make the water better for plants, fish, etc.

Sure, go to a big city sewage processing plant. What do they do? Sure, bubble air through the dark liquid! Or, they follow the recipe, "Add air and stir."!

Net, the article looks like traditional newsie stuff -- claim the sky is falling and get eyeballs and ad revenue. Smelly bait for the ad hook. Make people feel guilty from their 'sins' of their consumption of thick yogurt and what they pour down their drains. Deliberate, confused, nonsense guilt trip. Bummer.

For over 20 years, I've poured lots of stuff down my kitchen drain. Too old, sour milk has been a common item. Much worse, when I feed canned cat food to my kitty cats, they often don't eat all of it, and, being smart little kitty cats, don't eat it at all after it becomes old and dry. So, then I have to clean out such food dishes for them. To do this I soak the dishes overnight in water with detergent, rinse the dishes, and flush the rest.

And I'm 'destroying the 100% all-natural, pure, pristine, precious, sensitive, delicate planet'? I don't think so! Instead all the 'stuff' from the kitchen and bathrooms goes through big, white plastic pipes to a big concrete tank sunk in my backyard. The tank has some 'bugs' that reduce essentially everything into clear water, some methane gas, and a tiny quantity of solids. The gas floats off; the water goes into the drain field in my backyard; and the solids accumulate. The tank has been working fine for over 20 years without cleaning. For the water, the backyard loves it. Net, no worries. So, I'm not destroying the planet! And I'm not guilty.

</comment><comment><USER27> Huh, apparently Greek yogurt doesn't fall under the Protected Designation of Origin scheme (and I don't think the US follows that anyway), so it doesn't actually have to be Greek to be called Greek. Interesting.

<comment><USER28> Neither does I assume "Italian Dressing", "French Dressing", "Greek Salad", and of course "French Fries" which apparently are actually Belgium

<comment><USER27> Those are combinations of things. Greek yoghurt is a method of making yoghurt (and the resulting product), like Feta cheese, for example.

<comment><USER29> French fries aren't a combination of things.

<comment><USER27> Neither is the Chinese wall. How does this have any bearing to my point above?

<comment><USER30> That's a good question.

What is your point anyway? How does being, or not being, a combination make any difference anyway?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> The first thing which came to my mind was the argument against nuclear energy; it produces too much waste. The waste from yogurt seems to be a far bigger problem though. While not so long-term, it is massive. Interesting to draw parallels.

Over here there's a syrupy-like product called Calpis. It's slightly acidic yet milky and sweet. As far as I remember, it is made at least partly from this byproduct. Of course it's a small step to the solution.

Another ten cents, if it is largely water based, what about letting the water evaporate? Or does the acid go with it?

I apologize for the unrelated thoughts.

<comment><USER30> > .. the argument against nuclear energy; it produces too much waste.

??? Nuclear power produces less waste than any other energy source on earth - including solar and wind. And coal produces more nuclear waste (by volume, not intensity) than nuclear power does.

<comment><USER32> Nuclear power generates a large amount of waste heat - which, in turn, acidifies local waterways. Nuclear power, even with subsidies, to be profitable/feasible, requires a very large amount of fresh water (or de- salinated sea water).

It's actually a bigger problem than whey - there's no market to absorbe the waste output.

<comment><USER30> > large amount of waste heat - which, in turn, acidifies local waterways

Say what??? That makes no sense. Do you really believe that, or did you typo?

Yes, nuclear power does need a heat dump, but the waste heat has only a local effect on the water in the close vicinity.

You understand that it doesn't really consume the water right (except for a small amount that evaporates)? It just dumps heat in it, then sends it downstream, which isn't great for fish, but it's not terrible either - <USER2> effects are minimal, and local only, by the time the water flows a bit downstream it has cooled off back to the normal temperature.

And you can use sea water, the salt doesn't effect the cooling ability, but I don't think there are any plants near coastlines.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Why would it have to be farmers who make a capital investment to convert this stuff to methane? I would think the yogurt companies would just do it themselves and save on the shipping, nobody needs farmers to invest millions, just buy the manure (or I'm sure there's another way to do it).

<comment><USER34> Farmers have manure. Shipping that manure around doesn't make much sense. It's heavy, dirty, smelly, gloopy.

Shipping whey makes more sense. It's heavy, but not as dirty or smelly or gloopy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Would the whey be usable for production of protein supplements[0], or is it too acidic? It seems like a fairly major industry.

[0]: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whey_protein>

<comment><USER36> From the article: "The resulting whey is roughly as acidic as orange juice. It's almost entirely made up of water... and a very small amount of proteins."

<comment><USER37> how does water and sugar gets acid?

<comment><USER38> > how does water and sugar gets acid?

Yogurt (which is what the whey is the result of straining) is not just water and sugar, it contains a number of other things -- notably, lactic acid.

<comment><USER37> my confusion was mostly that the article claim the residue solution is pretty much water and sugar

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> If this is the same whey as in whey protein… Whey prices are THROUGH THE ROOF the last couple of years owing to inflation and large purchasers drying up supply.

<comment><USER38> > If this is the same whey as in whey protein... Whey prices are THROUGH THE > ROOF the last couple of years owing to inflation and large purchasers drying > up supply.

Whey protein is usually processed from whey that is a byproduct of cheesemaking; as the article notes, the acid whey from making Greek yogurt is much more acidic, and has much lower protein concentration; while it is probably possible to extract whey protein from it it is a much poorer source of it than the whey from cheesemaking (and given the apparently huge supply and the rather visible market for whey to supply the supplement, etc., industry, I suspect if it were even marginally economically viable for that use, we wouldn't have articles like the one here.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> I use whey from Greek yoghurt for baking in recipes that call for buttermilk. Probably not a large-scale solution, but it works brilliantly on a small scale.

</comment><comment><USER41> It would be interesting to see if this is viable as a food source for genetically modified bacteria to convert into biofuel.

<comment><USER42> The article describes that it already gets converted by non-engineered bacteria into a biofuel - called methane. it's just that building processing tanks and methane capture equipment is expensive. Not like nuclear power plan expensive, but a million bucks is a lot of capital investment for a farmer - note that some farmers already do this to process animal manure.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> Any reason why they couldn't divert the "greek yogurt" whey into ice cream like they do for "ordinary whey"?

<comment><USER44> If you RTFA, it mentions that Greek Yogurt produces extremely acidic byproducts which are more difficult to deal with.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> Sure, big fonts for headlines look nice --- but this is ridiculous.

</comment><comment><USER46> I read this article while throwing back some Oikos. So meta.

</comment><comment><USER47> My tub of whey protein powder costs $50 for 5lbs. If this is becoming so endemic, please tell me where precisely to go so I can save barrels of money a year.

<comment><USER48> From the article: "Barbano, who specializes in filtration methods for separation and recovery of protein, has his sights set on the tiny amount of protein in acid whey. He believes it might be usable as an infant formula ingredient. But first Barbano has to figure out how to extract the protein in a cost-effective way, and his research is just getting underway."

<comment><USER47> My comment was tongue-in-cheek. That said, I've known bodybuilders ever since they forced us to start working out freshman year and they'd drink 20 gallons of highly acidic fluid if it meant some protein was in there.

Hell, you could market it as a miracle supplement.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> Better out than in, as Shrek says.

</comment><comment><USER50> Did anyone else do a double-take at the picture half way through? For a split- second I thought it was Robert Scoble!</comment>


So, you want to move away from America - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@bovermyer/so-you-want-to-move-away-from-america-d727879a1026#.wyweeisbm <comment><USER2> Unless you are under threat of violence or severe economic hardship, I don't understand the purpose of leaving your native country because you disagree with the elected leader.

Maybe I'm missing something, but what's the real risk for the mostly-secular white guy? Sounds just like a working holiday abroad.

<comment><USER3> > Maybe I'm missing something, but what's the real risk for the mostly-secular > white guy?

What you're missing is that not everyone is "lucky" enough to be a mostly secular white guy.

<comment><USER2> Obviously yes. That was a generalization more directed at the author than a blanked statement. Obviously there are groups which could be under great hardship should certain candidates take over.</comment></comment></comment>


A company with $400M in assets went bankrupt in 45-minutes - <AUTHOR> https://dougseven.com/2014/04/17/knightmare-a-devops-cautionary-tale/? <comment><USER2> Needs (2014).</comment>


Mark Zuckerberg: The temptation of Facebook's CEO - <AUTHOR> http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/06/technology/facebook_excerpt.fortune/

<comment><USER2> "You just saw my apartment," Zuckerberg replied. "I don't really need any money. And anyway, I don't think I'm ever going to have an idea this good again."

Now, that's a lean startup, huh?</comment>


Cloudera and Hortonworks agree to merge - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/cloudera/status/1047597196172976128 <comment><USER2> I was an early employee at Cloudera, am a Hadoop contributor and think this entire market is garbage. Basically the big data field went off the rails and this is Cloudera's way of trying to remain relevant. It's hard to point to a product that came after my tenure (I was on the team that original made the POS called Cloudera Manager) that's really used by anyone at scale. Cloud is displacing all of these tools and never got the clouds to play ball.</comment>


Paul Buchheit: Insights into "Don't be evil" - <AUTHOR> http://paulbuchheit.blogspot.com/2007/06/quick-dbe.html <comment><USER2> I think it's difficult for a company not to be "evil" once they grow to the size of Google. A company of that size has to please too many stakeholders. I think Craigslist is the perfect model of how a company can avoid being evil -- stay small.

</comment><comment><USER3> On the subject of morality, I suggest Bernard Gert's "Common Morality: Deciding What to Do."

<http://www.amazon.com/Common-Morality-Deciding-What-Do/dp/0195314212/>

</comment><comment><USER4> Paul, originally I heard "do no evil" as the motto, then after a bit it altered into the current "don't be evil". Was it ever the former or was that just Chinese whispers at the time? Personally, I prefer it.

<comment><USER5> No, it was never "do no evil" -- it just got misquoted a lot.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Could someone tell me why Google allowed advertising by essay writing companies for such a long time? What happened to "Don't be evil"?

<comment><USER2> Your evil might not be Larry and Serge's evil.

<comment><USER6> For a company that values merit, it seems strange that it would help students to cheat.

<comment><USER7> If you're into educational theory, you might like Alfie Kohn's book No Contest: The Case Against Competition. It's a really good look at the systemic effects of competition. It touches on cheating among other things.

It's funny, these days I find myself mostly reading counter-intuitive stuff. I figure if it's intuitive, I'm probably smart enough to have figured it out already. This book (and his other book, Punished by Rewards) is a really good example of something that just diffs with your current knowledge.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Well, could you give an example of an evil product that's being sold right now, that was known to be evil from the start?

</comment><comment><USER9> _If you honestly believe that kids are well served by drinking a dozen spoonfuls of sugar every morning before school_

Nope. Nor pron. Nor warez.</comment>


Show HN: My weekend project Hot Or Not...for bread - <AUTHOR> http://hawtbread.com

<comment><AUTHOR> This is a silly weekend project I put out last Wednesday night. I presented it at a lightning talk at Minnebar (Barcamp in Minneapolis) and it got a surprisingly warm reception. So thought I'd share it here.

Platform is: Bootstrap, Django, Pinax. Hosting it on webfaction.

And if there are any bakers out there or you are interested, I highly recommend this book by authors here in Minneapolis:

[http://www.amazon.com/Artisan-Bread-Five-Minutes- Revolutioni...](http://www.amazon.com/Artisan-Bread-Five-Minutes- Revolutionizes/dp/0312362919)

They have a no-knead bread method that is appeals to the hacker mindset; heavily optimized and efficient.

</comment><comment><USER2> this is kinda cute</comment>


Yahoo to close its directory - <AUTHOR> http://searchengineland.com/yahoo-directory-close-204370

<comment><USER2> I fully agree that there should be more to this burial than a couple sentences. Why not take the opportunity to throw a party and collect memories, show how Yahoo has grown? The Yahoo directory changed lots of people's lives. It connected us to ideas we might never have been exposed to. It allowed us to pop our cultural bubbles before search engines and social networks decided to build new bubbles for us.</comment>


Free place to stay in Silicon Valley if you code - <AUTHOR> http://blog.letslunch.com/2011/03/08/free-place-to-stay-in-silicon-valley-if-you-code/

<comment><USER2> I have a free lunch for you.

it just take 8 hours of coding to get it</comment>


T7.js: alternative to JSX that compiles template literals into vDOM objects - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/trueadm/t7 <comment><USER2> What's the advantage of this over using JSX? You can already go JSX->virtual- dom [https://www.npmjs.com/package/virtual-dom- jsx](https://www.npmjs.com/package/virtual-dom-jsx), and the fact that it's "vanilla" JS doesn't mean much as it's ES6 which needs Babel.

<comment><USER3> One less dependency is always a good thing. The fact that template strings are part of the standard is a big advantage; any current or future tools that support ES6 will automatically support your templates as well.

<comment><USER4> > One less dependency is always a good thing

I think the parent's point is that to use template strings today one would have to use Babel, which already supports JSX. Thus the number of dependencies is the same in all scenarios: Babel + virtual-dom, or Babel + T7.

<comment><USER5> That's not necessarily true with Babel 6. The new modular approach requires that you explicitly list which plugins you want Babel to use. So for JSX, you'd need to have `babel-plugin-syntax-jsx` as a dependency.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'll probably stick with JSX, but it's nice to have different options if you don't want to be locked into using the React virtual DOM.

</comment><comment><USER7> This is fantastic! I tried to make something similar a few months ago and couldn't quite get it to work.

</comment><comment><USER8> Url changed from [http://t7js.com/](http://t7js.com/), which points to this.</comment>


Rams will give you $100,000 if you guess their entire 2014 schedule - <AUTHOR> http://www.stlouisrams.com/schedule/guess-our-games.html

<comment><USER2> Well you don't need any skills to win this, just pure luck.</comment>


Faster, Better, Cheaper – The Art of Making Software - <AUTHOR> http://jrsinclair.com/articles/2017/faster-better-cheaper-art-of-making-software/ <comment><USER2> Nice. Now read this (I think it says the same thing just shorter): We are uncovering better ways of developing software by doing it and helping others do it. Through this work we have come to value:

Individuals and interactions over processes and tools Working software over comprehensive documentation Customer collaboration over contract negotiation Responding to change over following a plan

That is, while there is value in the items on the right, we value the items on the left more.

<comment><USER3> That sounds vaguely familiar. ;)

<comment><USER2> just a shorter version of everything he said in the blog post.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> There will always be a war between developers and sales. Sales always needs a foot in the door - and incomplete software can get them there. The customer (and sales team) might even expect faulty software, but just as long as you can demonstrate some features can be delivered that might be enough to get the sales through (and pay for the better quality).

It's great that we want great software and even make the customer be part of some feedback cycle but sometimes you need to play "dirty" to make your company survive, and making your sales department happy is one of them. A good sales department knows the business and requirements better than any developer and sometimes you need to listen to them and not "agile your way around it".

Too many drinks with the VP Sales guy yesterday. :/

<comment><USER5> The point of being agile and have continues feedback is exactly pleasing the sales department. Focus on the features they need to close a sale, then everything else.

<comment><USER6> That is not enough. Typical agile process is also supposed to keep software easy to change, but instead what you get is pushing a prototype into production even before it is finished in the limited feature set.

<comment><USER5> Then don't create a prototype to begin with. I have had zero issues when clearly communicating these things. If you want me to prototype things, then fine, but I'm not signing it off to production. If they overrule me anyway without a really good reason, I'll find somewhere else to apply my skillset.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> > The issue is that estimation and predictability are impossible problems to > solve.

Not the first time I read something like that, but it still soothes my nerves every time. I keep feeling like an idiot when I can't answer those inevitable questions from people wearing managerial hats.

<comment><USER8> Never forget you're not alone in this. This is one of the things many people want to suppress in the experts because there's a big economical interest in those people keeping quiet about these things because that means you can pressure the experts by guilt-tripping them.

Never works on me for years now.

Keep fighting the good fight. I do as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> 99% of the time the problems I've had with business people stemmed from this simple lie:

"I understand you need to make it better and I understand we need to invest now in order to save expenses later. Fine! But let's make it quickly and ugly right now because we need to get to market."

You can predict what I'll say. "Later" never comes. They lie. They are businessmen and they know how to make you feel good about yourself so you can get to work on their interests.

"Why do you need to rework? The thing is working!"

...Of course.

Too cynical, I know -- just venting and that attitude I'm showing here is not representative of how I communicate. I manage to find a common language with most of them but I'd prefer never to have to deal with them in the first place.

That costs me a lot of income lately but I still don't budge.

</comment><comment><USER9> Faster, Better, Cheaper - pick two.

<comment><USER10> That's easy. Better and cheaper please.

<comment> GuB-42 Slow is only applicable in a few cases.

When you identify the needs and start developing, you must make sure the needs are still there when you finish.

The more time you take, the more likely a competitor can steal your market.

You need serious backing, because you won't make any profit during the initial phase.

Sometimes, being fast is a customer requirement, otherwise, you won't get the job.

Companies like Blizzard Entertainment can get away with "when it is done" but they are the exception rather than the rule.

<comment><USER6> Almost never the first incumbent takes over a market a in the end. It is a lie propagated in the same way as all the get rich quick schemes.

Blizzard did not invent the RTS. Nor the hack and slash roguelike. What they did is produce polished experiences from the outset. Heck, compare even the silly Overwatch. It is not even close to the first team shooter.

<comment><USER9> General Electric.

Kodak.

IBM.

Xerox.

All were the first incumbent in their area and were dominant for many decades.

Craiglist even qualifies.

<comment><USER8> Pretty huge corporations and I'm willing to bet an organ they used very shady techniques to keep themselves on the top. So not really a good comparison.

Apple was small and on the brink of going out of business. There were smartphone-like devices on the market already. They improved on them. I belive that's what your parent commenter is saying.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Planning on selling statup, what do you think it is worth? - <AUTHOR>

Hello Fellow HN,
Last year myself and two other partners got together to work on our startup. We got an offer from one of the YC competitors for 40K seed money. We turned down the offer because one of the founder was expecting a baby 2 months later and one founder was in process of re-location.
Fast-forwarding to today, we kept on working on the idea and bootstrapped it. We all are making 100K plus salaries so did not feel the need to quit our jobs for 40K.
We are at the stage where we now think that it is better to spin off the startup as we can no longer contribute our time to it due to personal commitments.
What do you think something is worth which had 40K seed offer and has a working product?
Note: we have not launched the application yet to public. It was only shared with Friends and family and few investors and got good feedback. <comment><USER2> My instinct (knowing nothing about your business or it's potential) is to launch but maybe you have legal or financial or personal reasons for not doing so.

There's a potential problem of perception from a buyers perspective:

The buyer is getting an unlaunched, friends & family market tested batch of code. Further, it is apparently something the founders don't believe in enough to take a chance on. (big red flag.) I'm not saying it doesn't have value, I know all about life choices and timing (spouses, kids, mortgages, car payments.) You just have to be aware of what you may be communicating to a potential buyer.

If they were planning on building it they might buy it but if they can build it for less, they might just do that.

 _I would be very tempted to launch it_ and see if I could get some traction. It's going to be worth much more if you can get some adoption. Yes this is riskier, if it flops out of the gate it might be worth less, realized than it was when it was all potential energy.

When it comes to the $40k: was the seed offer about the product or the team? Very commonly in seed people are betting on the team as much as the product.

Can you find someone to take over and execute on the product but leave you and your partners in the equity mix? This is risky too, you might get washed out but it's an alternative if you can't sell it. Some return may be better than none.

Can you sell your codebase to a potential acquirer? What large company would benefit most from having this product in their offering? Could you sell it to a potential incumbent who hasn't innovated in a long time and is suffering from stagnation? It might be cheaper to buy it than for them to pay to have it built. Essentially a contracting gig on spec?

<comment><AUTHOR> We are not selling it for money. We are selling it so we can see our idea taken to the next level. Ofcourse, in the process we would like to make our invest back. We are thinking to let it go for the money we have put in it (which is not a whole lot) and not seek any additional profits.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> The offer was just last year. You probably can go back to the table with them to talk about the offer they made and if they're still interested.

Or, shop around, which is time-consuming. If there are multiple offers, it's up to your group to decide.

Or, this may not the option you're looking for but, i think, this is your BEST option....

SHIP IT!

Only then you'll know how much it's actually worth. Look for ways to manage it - outsource the management of the product if it needs some backend support. Maybe find another co-founder who has the time to run the product.

<comment><AUTHOR> I like the idea of finding another co-founder who can take the lead and run with it. We can provide some back-end support as needed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Just ship the darn thing. Any money you receive from selling won't be life changing, and will help you out in the short term. Also, it sounds like you're pretty much done with the product development - marketing is important but it's less time consuming, and less stressful than the actual development. Go for the home-run.

</comment><comment><USER5> Nothing probably. Very few people want to buy a pile of code with no users, revenue, or team to go with it.

</comment><comment><USER6> How do you plan to find a buyer? The price is probably going to be quite different if you put it on eBay and hope for the best, versus if you have some networks where you can market it privately.

<comment><AUTHOR> We haven't though about that part yet. I think there is a site called Flippa.com but seems like that site is sell site which have ad revenue or customer. So not sure yet.</comment></comment>