Pernosco: Fast, Fun, Omniscient Debugging - <AUTHOR> https://pernos.co/ <comment><USER2> Rookout - [https://www.rookout.com](https://www.rookout.com) \- is a related tool. Very handy!

</comment><comment><USER3> > Pernosco is a commerical product. We do not plan to open-source Pernosco > unless and until we discover a viable business model compatible with that.

Seriously, why do people keep making this mistake? I'm never going to use _a debugger I can 't debug._

"So how do I make money?"

That's the wrong question. The _proper_ question for a _computer programmer_ to ask is, 'How do we align our technology with our values to eliminate the _necessity_ to "earn a living"?'

I'm a Bucky Fuller fan. We're about 30 years overdue for the Design Science Revolution.

\- - - -

edit: Other than that it looks promising. A damn shame.

</comment><comment><USER4> Is this a paid product? I was pretty sure a FOSS equivalent already exists.

<comment><USER5> You're probably thinking of rr: [https://rr-project.org](https://rr- project.org)

From the Pernosco FAQ:

 _> What is the relationship between Pernosco and rr?_

> rr is a free software project founded by Mozilla. rr is an enabling > technology for Pernosco, and rr maintainers founded Pernosco. We aim to > maintain rr as free software with at least its current level of > functionality.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Also [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21352983](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21352983) (but no comments)</comment>


Looking for Hypercard-like development environment - <AUTHOR>

A friend of mine is looking for a development environment similar to Hypercard (pref. open source) that will enable his to create standalone apps (obv. with the runtime included). He's not looking to make any money from these, hence the interest in open source, but does need to be able to provide most of the functionality associated with Hypercard (incl. video playback) as well as data grids. I've looked at a number of for-pay options and things like PythonCard (not rich enough in controls) and Shoes, but they don't seem to fit his requirements. LIkewise, he's not a "heavyweight programmer" (his description, not mine) so something at the level of Hypercard seems to be the best fit. Anyone working on or know of anything like that?<p>Thanks! <comment><USER2> I'm curious, is there a reason the apps need to be standalone (e.g. performance)? A modern web site could do a good job of displaying the kinds of data you mentioned.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, he said that he wants people to be able to use the app without having to be on the internet. I mentioned Mozilla Prism and Google Gears as well as small web servers like Abyss, but he's not too keen on that approach. I'm sure that there may be performance issues that he hasn't mentioned as well, but his primary motive seems to be that internet connectivity should not be a requirement.

Shoes was interesting because it took the approach of being completely standalone, but _whytheluckystiff has vanished so in some regards the driver behind that project is gone.

I've pointed out Supercard and Runtime Revolution as descendants of Hypercard, but I think he's trying to avoid having any out of pocket costs.

Most likely something like Chrome might be possible, but not everyone has (or wants) to install Chrome just to run an app. However, I'm still open to any ideas that I can pass along.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Not open source but RunRev, is hypercard descendant that _has_ evolved. <http://runrev.com/></comment>


How multi-lingual children learn languages - <AUTHOR> https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/blogs/c06ef551-0127-483d-a104-cdd02b1cee31/entry/how_multi_lingual_children_learn_languages9?lang=en

<comment><USER2> I was born in to a multi-lingual environment, learning Dutch, Swedish and English since birth. Later in life I learned French and German due to my locality; I also took Latin and Greek in school and have been teaching myself Japanese just because I enjoy the challenge. Finally, I also have enough exposure to Spanish as well as Hebrew to be able to put together a decent conclusion as to what a conversation might be about. Each of these languages have been learnt at different parts of my life and I would say that the only one I am still fluent in speaking is English. My Dutch is rusty, but I can hold a conversation, though will stumble over words as I try to translate them (ironic since I used to think in Dutch and had the same issue translating what I wanted to say in to English). The interesting thing is, while I may not be fluent in speaking any of the other languages, I understand them. I can pick up on key words and can figure out what is being said. Due to the nature of languages and the etymology behind words - I can often pick up on conversations in other languages I have not learned.

In contrast of my multi-lingual background in the spoken form, I also try to diversify the programming languages I am familiar with. While the idea of a programming language and a spoken word language vastly differs, I still see it as just learning another language - that is the mindset I go in with. A spoken language has rules - wether they are related to phonetics, semantics or most importantly the idiosyncratic rules of gender and relationships. Programming languages have a much more defined ruleset at the core that they all share (to a certain degree) and the language itself on top of it follows many of the rules I would expect in a spoken language.

I don't know if there is a correlation to the exposure of languages at a young age - but in my experience it has helped me.

</comment><comment><USER3> There isn't any citation to the (quite interesting) study finding mentioned as a premise in this article. My two older children are native speakers of BOTH English and Modern Standard Chinese, and they once spoke to each other mostly in Chinese, although in recent years they have much more occasion to use English. There should have been follow-up studies on what happens to native multilingual persons when they suffer strokes by now, and there could even be brain-imaging studies on first-language and second-language multilingual persons by now, perhaps without conclusive results.

This submission makes me curious about the author's premise than about his conclusion.

<comment><USER4> I haven't found the full text, but it seems that this 'The bilingual brain: Cerebral representation of languages' by Fabbro in 2001 might be it. A related study: 'Multilingualism in Stroke Patients: A Personal Account' is available here : [http://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijel/article/view/27556...](http://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijel/article/view/27556/16679)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> There are too many factors involved here.

For example, human languages are reinforced completely differently.

From birth, you will hear from inside the womb often one language. Later, you hear and speak either a couple or more languages but generally in different contexts, e.g. mostly one with parents, maybe one or more with friends or strangers and one with school and media.

The latter context is normally reinforced further with reading and writing, while the former rarely or not at all. I suspect, though without more studies it would be impossible to know, that it is the exclusively spoken languages that are most affected. The reading and writing languages, as well as being used in different contexts, are highly likely to be processed by the brain differently.

In addition, almost all of these human language uses will be tied to life events and (strong) emotional feelings.

So, the comparison to programming languages seems tenuous at best, especially since there are plenty of other contexts where one can misapply learned rule- sets in general. The word "language" is almost a misnomer across these two different fields, in my opinion.

</comment><comment><USER6> Trying to extrapolate between learning natural languages and learning programming languages seems rather questionable to me.

<comment><USER7> True, but that's just how he came up with a new way of looking at the results of the study. (Serial vs. parallel learning)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> The point about keeping languages separate is interesting. I know bits and pieces of many different languages, but I only know two reasonably well. I studied French for about six years in high school and college, but I haven't had much occasion to use it since and am somewhat rusty. Conversely, Japanese I hear quite a bit of these days so my experience with it is much more recent.

But sometimes when I try to remember the French word for something, I get a Japanese word instead, which is odd because the languages are nothing alike. Similar problems exist for programming languages, for example, trying to remember the Perl way to do something and getting the Ruby keyword instead.

<comment><USER9> I have similar experiences -- I spoke only English at home as a child, then studied French starting in 6th grade.

Nowadays I'm fairly fluent in French (and live in France, so I use it regularly), though nowhere near my level of comfort in English, and I know scraps of various other languages to get by when traveling -- but it seems like my brain is inclined to store words in just two buckets -- "native" vs. "foreign".

Often when I'm trying to come up with a word in any other language, the French word pops into my head first, I discard it, then I'll get the right word in German or whatever (if I know it). If I'm trying to say something in Spanish or Italian, I sometimes don't realize that I don't _know_ the right word, because the French word in the right accent (and possibly modified ending) sounds about right.

My wife grew up truly multilingual, though, with 2 languages at home, a 3rd as the medium of education, and friends who all spoke a 4th among themselves -- and she has less of a problem keeping them separate (including new languages she's been picking up as an adult).

<comment><USER8> I know what you mean about Spanish. I've never really studied it, unless you count a few weeks of introduction in high school and a bit of exposure due to living in the Phoenix area, but thanks to its Latin base and knowing French, I can read it somewhat reliably by guessing that words that look like French words have similar meanings. I can even pronounce it reasonably well according to some Spanish-speaking coworkers because the phonics of other languages have always automagically "clicked" for me, except when I have to learn new vowels or consonants.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> _There are some languages that are so difficult that they have never been successfully learned as a foreign language and are only spoken by native speakers who started at birth._

I am enormously skeptical of this claim, and would like to see evidence for it - and it would have to show that people had made significant efforts to learn the language, had access to a level of resources similar to those available for other languages, etc. I suspect that the examples that would actually come up would be some dying tribal language where nobody has been able to learn it properly from the remaining three grandparents who speak it, which is in no way evidence for 'the language was simply too difficult'.

<comment><USER11> I vaguely recall watching a program on tv in which there was an African tribal language composed of clicking sounds and other sounds that were claimed to not be able to he repeated unless learned from birth. I'm not entirely sure of the specifics but I remember it being cited as an "unable" to learn language

<comment><USER12> More likely, no one cared enough to make the effort to become fluent in the language.

I would say that if it can be categorized as a language, it can be learned, because categorization would require the observation of patterns of cause and effect.

(I know they're illusions, but they're _useful_ illusions.)

Then it's just a matter of gathering data, developing hypotheses, and testing your interpretation of the data by asking someone if their hovercraft is full of eels.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> As a multilingual speaker (English, Mandarin, French, all fluent) who eventually let English take over as my main language here's what I think.

If you learned two languages since birth you develop two language sites. I read somewhere that the Wernicke's area is divided into two if you do this as well. Perhaps auditory memories are triggered based on language as well. You think and have internal dialogues in different languages which triggers completely different memories. This explains why one might lose one language, but keep the other one.

Whereas, for learning languages later in life, a person tends to translate the new language into the main language. The internal dialogue is always in the form of the main language. The memories are one contiguous experience based on one language. Often, when self examining during meditations, it is hard to make out what language is used. This explains why a brain problem will wipe out sections of speaking ability across all languages because they are all eventually translated from the main language.

Like people who started with C, we tend to think in C and see how new languages add on to C and just remembers the new rules of the new language relative to C instead of having a completely new life experience from ground up of learning the new programming language.

In short: Bane said: "I was born in darkness, you simply adapted"

<comment><USER14> I think you can come to false conclusions quite a bit if all you are basing your research off of is your own intuition. I learned Russian, and as a native English speaker it was difficult, but I can think in Russian, and I don't translate Russian into English in my head. There are some things I say in Russian that I would have no idea how to properly translate into English. The first programming language I learned was basic, but I don't think 'oh this in python is like x in basic'.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Let me give you another tiny sample group for the study. Indians! I started learning Hindi, English and Bengali when I was four. Most of my fellow citizens(middle class) were in the same boat because there are 22 official languages here in India. After college I moved to South India, where there is another myriad family of completely different languages. I can barely keep up with them. Does it improve or harms my ability to learn new programming languages? Personally, no. Generally, well the answer to that question lies in the high quality programming services provided by Indians well recorded by thousands of forums across the web :). So, no I don't think the comparison has any merit. Edit: The no. of official languages is now 22.

<comment><USER16>
        > 18 official languages here in India

Correction: it's 22. Wiki: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_languages_of_India>

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I've always thought this subject was very interesting as when I was younger I lived in Germany and German was actually one of my first languages, I used it in school as well as with friends. However when we came back to the US there was simply no opportunity to use it so I have lost most of it. Same goes for Spanish that I used to use semi-regularly when I was in my teens.

Naturally when I joined college I started studying language classes, Japanese the first year and every year after, as well as concurrently learning Chinese starting the second, I also went to college in Japan for a year focused on upper level Japanese. The process was me religiously studying, watching tv shows, constantly writing essays on my thoughts about society, culture, news, Rubik's Cubes, artificial intelligence, etc. even blog daily. Also listen to music. I can't emphasize enough how much I'd write and from the beginning engage daily in only using Japanese and Chinese in conversation. It took a year and a half to be conversational in Japanese (largely due to the completely different grammar and kanji) and for Chinese only around a year. I have also recently started Korean, to find that the overlap of Chinese and Japanese make it almost trivial to learn. So language similarity is also important.

Also in my years of interacting with foreigners who are learning English. The best speakers are typically ones who came here younger, there is even a large difference to students who studied abroad as early as high school (versus college)

I can definitely contest that you can still learn a language to very technical competency as late as in college. It just takes a lot of effort and discipline, and perhaps a bit of accumulated skill. Finally, you certainly get better at learning languages with every new language as with learning any subject.

</comment><comment><USER17> The difference between L1 and L2 language competency is deeper than whether you acquired multiple languages in "parallel" or "serially". The competency level, whether you are fluent or near-fluent, is based on the critical- learning period which ends roughly at the onset of puberty. Nothing rules out acquiring multiple L1s in serial, which I suspect to be the case in many instances of multilingual children.

Moreover, the author's anecdotal support is in contradiction with the fact that children do acquire multiple languages largely without problem. There are effects of one language on the other, but they are different in natural, and far less frequent, to crossover effects in L2 language learning, e.g. learning Spanish is high school.

</comment><comment><USER18> Here's a thought from someone who's semi bi-lingual from a very young age. (Semi because I'm not completely fluent, but proficient.

Some people when speaking another language that's not native, will 'image' the english word when talking. Like, saying "ni hao" but in their mind it will be 'hello'.

However for people who've learned it from a young age, 'ni hao' is simply 'ni hao' and 'hello' is 'hello' but the meanings we recognize as the same. I don't remember the source to this, but take it as you will.

<comment><USER19> That theory sounds bad, man. I'm an bi-lingual Asian from a relatively older age compared to you (10+) and have been living in the US for quite some time.

The 'imagine' part only happens when one is still relatively bad at the language that person is trying to speak. I wouldn't say that I 'imagine' or have any intermediate representation when I speak in English.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Stephen Pinker writes about this in <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Language_Instinct>

</comment><comment><USER21> I suggest reading the review article "Bilingualism and the brain: myth and reality" published in Neurologia in 2010: [http://www.elsevier.es/en/abstract/revistas/neurologia-295/b...](http://www.elsevier.es/en/abstract/revistas/neurologia-295/bilingualism- and-the-brain-myth-and-reality-13156053-revisiones-2010)

</comment><comment><USER22> by attaching more than one label/tag to an inner representation?</comment>


Fed likely to keep raising rates - <AUTHOR> https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1ML2KM <comment><USER2> There seems to be significant disagreement over how robust this recovery is. It's hard to separate out political posturing from rational economic argument, but the macro indicators certainly seem powerfully positive.

People can't seem to figure out why inflation is so low with employment so high. The Fed is doing what they do when unemployment drops this low, despite the fact that inflation isn't knocking at the door.

It seems like the best assessment is that as long as the macro indicators stay strong, we might as well dry out some powder for a rainy day.

But I personally worry about knocking the legs out from under the strongest bull cycle we've ever seen when the next few years seem poised to deliver very strong gains, particularly to disadvantaged populations which are the hardest to bring into full employment, and for whom better paying jobs are life changing.

<comment><USER3> > But I personally worry about knocking the legs out from under the strongest > bull cycle we've ever seen

Because when the tide goes out—and it will—the Fed needs to be in a position to reinvigorate the economy. It's standard mainstream economic theory.

We're already in a precarious position, with the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act doing precisely the opposite of what we should be doing. Thank goodness the Fed has so far managed to remain sensible. I would be far more worried if they were _not_ continuing to raise rates.

<comment><USER4> The Feds balance sheet is nuts. We all knew they'd need to deleverage at some point.

<comment><USER5> I'm no republican, heck not even close to US. But the timing of it raises eyebrows.

<comment><USER4> Well I wasn't going to go there, but yah. The timing does smell a little.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> What's "loco" is not the tightening now underway, but the super-lax monetary policy that preceded it for many years.

The Fed kept short-term rates close to zero for nearly a decade. Longer terms rates were negative for many years.

All of the world's central banks joined in the orgy of money creation.

The Fed's balance sheet (assets bought by conjuring money) ballooned 4x in the same time:

[https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst_recenttren...](https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst_recenttrends.htm)

This Fed will now face unprecedented political pressure to reverse its course of monetary tightening and balance sheet unwinding. The President will almost certainly lose an election held during a recession.

But reversing course is going to be very difficult, given the sharp and sustained rise in inflation over the last few years:

[https://stats.bls.gov/regions/mid- atlantic/data/consumerpric...](https://stats.bls.gov/regions/mid- atlantic/data/consumerpriceindexhistorical_us_table.htm)

Oddly enough, it looks like the President has the legal authority to fire the entire reserve board if he so chooses:

 _Upon the expiration of the term of any appointive member of the Federal Reserve Board in office on the date of enactment of the Banking Act of 1935, the President shall fix the term of the successor to such member at not to exceed fourteen years, as designated by the President at the time of nomination, but in such manner as to provide for the expiration of the term of not more than one member in any two-year period, and thereafter each member shall hold office for a term of fourteen years from the expiration of the term of his predecessor, unless sooner removed for cause by the President._

[https://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/section10.htm](https://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/section10.htm)

Never before in the modern history of US banking has there been a President with so much drive to kick convention to the curb, nor a Federal Reserve that has painted itself into such a small corner.

If I were a gambler, though, I'd bet on the President. One way or another, the Fed will be forced to reverse its balance sheet unwinding and short term interest rate increase campaign.

<comment><USER7> This article says that the President cannot fire Fed Governor at will or because of policy disagreement.

[https://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-trump-cant-fire- powell...](https://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-trump-cant-fire-powell-for- disagreement-over-monetary-policy-2018-10-11)

"The law goes back to the 1940s when President Franklin Roosevelt removed a member of the Federal Trade Commission and cited as a reason their divergent views of public policy. The Supreme Court unanimously reversed the firing, saying executives of independent agencies cannot be removed in their term of office except for cause. These agencies "must be free from executive control," the court ruled."

I would be interested to learn more so it would be great if someone has more info to share.

<comment><USER6> We used to think that Presidents can't unilaterally enact new trade policy. That also turned out to be wrong.

What's more, the active term is "for cause," which is an exceedingly low bar.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> US government is implementing pro-cyclical fiscal policy – throwing more money into already heated economy.

Of course Fed should attempt to suck at least some of that excess out of the system.

</comment><comment><USER9> Forgive a related question, but I have never understood why quantitively easing was used to get demand into the economy by buying back bonds. Surely the money will just get reinvested in stocks or other bonds and not stimulate demand? Buy back a rich persons Ferrari and they just go and buy a Bently instead.

Why not do the obvious, which is to give every adult some free money each month? Most people are not rich and so most of it gets spent very quickly on goods/service? I live in Australia and this happened back in 2008 to stave off a recession. I remember twice getting cash in the bank account without having to do anything! I am not an economist so forgive me if this is a banal question.

<comment><USER10> > Why not do the obvious, which is to give every adult some free money each > month?

Since the supply of goods and services is fixed in the sort term, pouring more money into the economy doesn't change anything in terms of consumption. Only, prices go up, because there's more money competing for the same amount of goods and services. These idea is called "neutrality of money".

<comment><USER11> Given that it's cash payments "each month", how can that be short term? If all recipients simultaneously wanted to spend the money on burritos, by month 2 there's going to be a lot more restaurants selling burritos.

A better use of the money is infrastructure spending. It provides employment across multiple sectors and targeted correctly is one of the best investments a government can make.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> BTW can somebody share a link to where can I download historical data on the interest rates of all the major countries central banks (FED, BOE, ECB, BOJ, RBA, SNB etc)? BOE is the easiest, FED is not hard but for the majority of the rest finding the historical rate datasheets seems not really easy.

<comment><USER13> a start: [https://www.global-rates.com/interest-rates/central- banks/ce...](https://www.global-rates.com/interest-rates/central- banks/central-banks.aspx)

<comment><USER12> Thanks. I know this site but it has (or I just can't find where are the full lists there) really short lists - just 10 last rate changes for every country.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> We've been in a low rate environment for almost a decade. Rates need to rise but it needs to happen more slowly. Just because the fed has been warning everyone it's coming doesn't mean the market is ready for it.

<comment><USER15> > Rates need to rise but it needs to happen more slowly.

How do you know?

Serious question: Would anyone realistically have a better idea than the fed about that?

<comment><USER16> I tend to agree here. Any tolerance for "slowness" is anti-free-market. I don't necessarily think completely free markets are optimal, but I can't see a reasonable argument for slower being better than faster in general.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> They pretty much _have_ to. With big tax cuts and trillion-dollar deficits during a _boom_ time, we're not leaving much in the quiver to use in an economic downturn.

<comment><USER18> You mention tax cuts and deficits — isn't spending equally to blame? Why is cutting government spending viewed by some as not an option? Those who oppose the tax cuts almost never suggest cutting entitlement spending which is the largest percentage of the federal budget — 56% of all federal outlays are from mandatory entitlements. That's far more significant than any tax cut effects.

Besides, even after the tax cuts, the government has collected record revenues this year. We are collecting plenty in taxes — but we are spending it wrong.

Here is a list of some of the more ridiculous expenditures:

[https://www.dailywire.com/news/12309/9-ridiculous-things- gov...](https://www.dailywire.com/news/12309/9-ridiculous-things-government- wasted-money-year-aaron-bandler)

<comment><USER19> The list of "maddening" items in this article are so comically low-budget it's hard to take this complaint seriously.

None of the 9 listed in the article sound particularly egregious. Almost all are grants to research institutions, which as a process has a lot of flaws, sure, but unilaterally cutting all grant funding is definitely not the solution.

The report totals at $5 billion, but the supposedly most egregious are not even in an order of magnitude near that cost.

Meanwhile, federal income is measured in trillions.

If you want to actually cut federal spending, you have to cut pensions or military spending—political suicide.

<comment><USER20> A few thousand facebook, twitter and reddit bots and we could get trump fans to start asking for this.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> So will this force all the tech companies that have been raising huge amounts of capital in the private markets to finally go public?

<comment><USER22> The question is the point where rates start to cause serious valuation deflation. Is that very near? Is it 3%, 4%, 5%, etc? There is a lot of money sloshing around looking for somewhere to go. There's a rather epic pile of cash sitting on the sidelines at this point.

I doubt that breaking point is as high as it was in the late 1990s, both because of the debt load in the economy being higher and markets being a lot more sensitive to rate hikes after nearly a decade of exceptionally low rates.

More broadly, mortgage rates just hit a seven year high. That's going to start to slam the brakes on some economic activity as people re-adjust to more expensive borrowing costs. It'll soon climb well over a 5% average for the 30 year fixed at the rate the Fed is hiking. That's cheap vs the 1980s, however consumers have been spoiled. On the affordability upside, it'll start restraining house price increases.

Corporations are fairly well loaded up with debt. That's all going to start getting more expensive. The increase in interest costs over time will to a modest degree eat into some of the profitability gains the corporate tax cut delivered. Fortunately for US corporations, their profitability is also at an all-time high, if they're smart about it at all they can trim back debt as it gets more expensive (we'll see, I'd expect a mixed bag of behavior).

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Lack of inflation is not easily understood through the lens of individuals.

Better to look at the fractional reserve system. The Fed creates money (M0), a lot of it in the shape of quantitative easing. But it was offsetting the deleveraging banks (reduction in M, M2 and M3). M0 = cash, M1= M0+ short-term instruments, M2= M1 + medium-term, M3 = M2 + long-term stuff /mortgages.

Even now, banks are less leveraged due to more stringent capital requirements (think Basel accords).

Translation to inflation is tricky. It's about demans vs. supply at its fundamentals - too much supply them you introduce inflation. Since banks can create money, supply is governed by M1,M2,M3 depending on the horizon. Demand is the economy which looks to be booming. Plus in the case of the US, the dollar is still the global reserve currency. So we have China, developing countries wanting more dollars. And the world still uses it as a vehicle currency, trade in brent oil is in dollars.

And we have inflation expectations - which is why the Fed is independent. And Trump should be quiet. The Fed will target 2%, thus we expect it to be 2%.

</comment><comment><USER24> On the plus side, higher rates means lower assets prices and greater wage growth.

<comment><USER25> How is wage growth getting higher because of higher rates?

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> This doesn't do anything to address the new Gilded Age we're entering.

</comment><comment><USER27> Paul McCulley, the guy who called the housing bubble and liquidity trap first, had this to say (18 months ago):

McSquared - The Coming War between Trump & The Fed: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnYZwxzxd9Y](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnYZwxzxd9Y)

</comment><comment><USER28> Stupid^3. When (not if) the dollar is dropped, within a decade, as the de- facto intl currency, the American economy, combined with the insane and unsustainable public and private debt, will tank like nothing before.

[http://www.usdebtclock.org/](http://www.usdebtclock.org/)

<comment><USER29> This combined with student loan debt is disaster in making

[https://goodlyapp.com/clock](https://goodlyapp.com/clock)

<comment><USER17> If I'm Googling correctly, there's $1.5 trillion in US student loan debt right now. We spent about that on the F-35 thus far, and it's only an extra year and a half of the current annual deficit to pay it off entirely.

Or, to put it another way, wiping out all student debt in the US would increase the national debt about 7%. Hardly catastrophic sounding.

<comment><USER30> There is a major moral hazard in just canceling student debt. Unless it comes along with serious reform of higher education financing, the problem is just going to come back much worse because, not only did we not resolve the original cause of the problem, but now borrowers think that their debt will be erased if they wait long enough.

<comment><USER17> Maybe you're fixing the wrong moral hazard.

Maybe forcing people into debt to pay for a necessary education is the moral hazard, and we could pay off that debt _and_ publicly fund secondary education like most of the rest of the developed world already does.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> The Fed is notoriously independent and cannot appear to be influenced by the President. So if Trump comes out and tells the Fed to put a pause on rate hikes... Well... It's enough reason to turn a "no hike" vote into a "hike" one...

<comment><USER32> What is this based on? I tried correlating decisions with presidential remarks advising the opposite, but I'm having trouble finding and dating the presidential quotes.

<comment><USER33> You won't find the quotes from US Presidents (present excluded). Heads of state who comment harshly on reserve bank decisions are typically met with steepening rates enforced by the sovereign debt market's perception of higher credit risk.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Does anyone know why the FED has to keep manipulating the supply of money?

Let's say we have a very responsible government which taxes well, reinvests well in productive work, private markets that operate smoothly, why does the FED have to step in periodically to raise/lower interest rates (outside of very bad circumstances).

Another way of asking this question is, "What is a neutral rate?" or "What is an economy in equilibrium?"

<comment><USER34> All you need to do is look back a little over 100 years to a time before we had the Federal Reserve. It didn't look good. There was no equilibrium, but rather a boom and bust cycle, banks going under and people losing their life savings, and so on.

One of the Fed's purposes is to moderate that cycle. And clearly it does not always succeed, but there is no reason to believe that the economy would reach some kind of equilibrium or neutral rate without it, because we know that didn't happen before the Fed existed.

<comment><USER25> The best explanation. Thank you.

I wonder if there's a better way to do this though. Maybe letting lenders fail, arresting bankers for not pricing risks in loans and setting an example is a better way to set up the money supply?

The busts are only painful if they affect non-speculators. Speculators (lenders and borrowers) should handle their own risk?

I'm sure it's not easy but the current system really really favors the rich with resources at the expense of retail retirement stock holders.

<comment><USER34> > Maybe letting lenders fail, arresting bankers for not pricing risks in loans > and setting an example is a better way to set up the money supply?

I'm not in favor of arresting people who did not break any laws, and it's not illegal to misjudge risk when making loans.

<comment><USER35> You don't ban making loans! You ban fractional reserve banking - the act of issuing currency _not backed 1:1 by central bank money_.

All it takes to stop boom/bust is full reserve banking and abolition of central bankers. Very simple, technically. After that to get yield on savings, people must invest in funds and be exposed to their relative lack of liquidity. Good bankers can keep things relatively liquid anyway, at least when times are stable, but you'd still have to wait to get your money back if you wanted out of investment funds. The underlying mechanics of finance are exposed: loans still occur, but investors see that their money is gone from their current accounts until the fund reaches maturity.

Now, will the citizens or politicians tolerate the long sucking sound as all the unstable credit is withdrawn from the economy? No, probably not. It's politically hard, not technically hard.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Zed A. Shaw - The Web Will Die When OOP Dies - <AUTHOR> http://vimeo.com/43380467

<comment><USER2> This audience sucks...</comment>


Twitter is replacing its head of product again - <AUTHOR> http://www.recode.net/2016/6/6/11873278/twitter-head-of-product-replaced-jeff-seibert <comment><USER2> Why can't Twitter get it together? They seem so much less relevant than they once were, and so toxic</comment>


Automation Threat and Wage Bargaining [pdf] - <AUTHOR> https://antoinearnoud.github.io/files/jmp.pdf <comment><AUTHOR> Automation likely won't lead to mass unemployment, instead low wages.</comment>


Europeans Fear Crisis Threatens Liberal Benefits  - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/23/world/europe/23europe.html

<comment><USER2> I would like to make an outlandish suggestion: 10 years of pension / retirement / paid healthcare. Take it whenever you want after the admittedly arbitrary age of 30. After that, you're on your own.

</comment><comment><USER3> While I could make any number of sarcastic and cutting comments on this, note the tiny bit about Sweden. Many would say they were/are the leading European "lifestyle superpower", but when they found themselves at the brink not too many years ago they drew back and are therefore much better positioned now that the Great Recession is dragging on pretty much everyone.

<comment><USER4> Yes, but laws about to come into effect in Canada basically halve peoples legal entitlement to disability benefits while keeping their payments the same and removing their ability to get fair arbitration leaving lawsuits the only option.

Yes, Europe has been the superpower in this, but the same effects are happening _everywhere_ , it's just not nearly as good a story.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Isn't this just general political liberal v. libertarian debate about the proper role of the state, not really hacker news?

<comment><USER3> Well, there's the trends/tipping point issue.

I.e. suppose we accept for the moment the "lifestyle superpower" is a a good thing thesis and ignore the US Free World military hegemony that helped to allow its development (OK for the sake of argument at least for now, given the dissolution of really big existential threats like Nazi Germany and the USSR).

Are such systems sustainable in the medium term? If not, how might they be adjusted, and will any reasonable set of adjustments truly fix them or merely kick the can down the road?

For those asking these questions the Great Recession has been a boon, illustrating Warren Buffet's comment that "When the tide goes out you find out who's been swimming naked."

<comment><USER5> I don't see how you can separate that from the wider political and economic debates, though. Is, say, finance-based capitalism sustainable in the medium term? If not, how might it be adjusted? Etc. Should people start submitting Paul Krugman pieces here? I just don't think particularly useful discussion is likely to result, apart from the usual two sides squaring off.

<comment><USER3> " _Is, say, finance-based capitalism sustainable in the medium term?_ "

In a forum nominally dedicated to the subject of angel and VC financed startups, I'd say that's germane as well.

Certainly advocates (at least somewhat) against that thesis are aiming directly at the heart and sinews of angel financing (Dodd's bill with the impossible regulatory regime as well as net worth increases).

Earlier in this decade they finished the run of VC based IPO financing that started in the late 1950s (expensing of stock options and SarBox)....

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This crisis will considered a mere precursor to the pensions timebomb coming our way.</comment>


Ask HN: Is anyone doing Blackberry app development? - <AUTHOR>

I know coding in Java is unappealing, but it seems like there is a lot of opportunity for the Blackberry appstore launch in March 2009. Do you think Blackberry users will be less likely to buy apps than iPhone users? <comment><USER2> Yes, kind of. I have a neat little app on the Android Market (<http://phonalyzr.com>), which I am going to port to the Blackberry in time for their store launch. The reason I'm targeting Android and BB is because of the iPhone's ridiculously restrictive SDK - on these devices the OS notifies the user that my app will be reading their call log/contact list and the user can choose to proceed or not, whereas on the iPhone that decision has already been made for the user by someone in Apple's HQ.

At my day job I use python and js to do web development while this is my spare-time project and to be honest, Java isn't so bad. Yes, it's tiresomely verbose, but Eclipse and the Android plug-in are an awesome IDE and since you're dealing only with the mobile-specific SDK, you don't have to contend with issues that make Java bad in other contexts (heavy frameworks, endless XML config files, etc). Perhaps someone with experience in both can clue me in, but I doubt Objective C is less verbose or more dynamic than Java.

But I think you're right in that people might be missing an opportunity by focusing so heavily on the iPhone. The BB SDK is more powerful than the iPhone's, there's more than twice as many BB users than iPhone users and I don't think anyone will argue that they're any less affluent than iPhone users.

Mostly, I think, it'll depend on how RIM promotes the app store and the kind of deals it manages to get the carriers to accept. I worked for RIM a few years ago and saw how incredibly difficult and demanding it is to work with carriers, as they are the actual manufacturer's "customers" and their interests are frequently at odds with those of users.

<comment><USER3> > I doubt Objective C is less verbose or more dynamic than Java

Oh, Objective C is certainly more dynamic. It uses a message passing mechanism. You can do this in Objective C without a compile error (note "id" is a generic object type)

id anObject = _Do some initialization_ ; [anObject passSomeMessage];

The closest in Java would be:

Object anObject = new SomeClass(); anObject.callSomeMethod();

Which wouldn't compile.

(Please note I haven't used Objective C nor Java in a while. Please excuse any errors.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Yep, I've been working on a downloadable app store for BlackBerry devices for a while called BerryStore (<http://berrystore.com>) and it's been getting decent uptake from BlackBerry users. I started way back in August, long before RIM had announced any of their plans.

There is a lot of opportunity for RIM here, but there are also a lot of things they would have to get right. For example, I've heard rumors they might only support newer phones or OS versions. That would be a mistake - Curves running really old versions of the OS are still being sold today. Another rumor I heard was that they might only work with developers who are part of their Alliance Program which costs $2,000 to join. Then, there is the hurdle of getting the app store onto devices in a way that makes carriers comfortable. Presumably some sort of revenue share has to be negotiated with each carrier. RIM certainly doesn't have an easy road ahead of them.

Also, if you read RIM's October press release announcing the Storefront, they claimed they would be letting developers submit apps starting this past December. December came and went and I didn't see anything. That means they're either behind in schedule, or worse, they're only working with Alliance partners and that's why we didn't see anything.

</comment><comment><USER5> I haven't myself, but I've worked at a company that did. Here's what I picked up: BlackBerry users tend to use their devices a lot and are not afraid to download things.

It's not going to be nearly the same market as the iPhone reaches, so iFart and the like would, IMHO, fail miserably on the BlackBerry. I bet there is money to be made in apps targeting certain verticals where BlackBerries are common. Law, real estate, and investing come to mind.

<comment><AUTHOR> My understanding of the ifart/novelty apps is that people with disposable income bought them to entertain their kids randomly for 3 minutes. Why will that be so much less common on the Blackberry? Do people not want to pervert their business device with things so frivolous?

<comment><USER6> On a business device, usually paid for by the company?

Many companies don't allow their Crackberries to be used for personal crap; iFart and other novelty apps definitely fall into that category.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> On a related note, how complex is BB development compared to Andorid, iPhone or WinMob?

I think I might want to port my app, but I'm afraid to get stuck in it without the end in sight.

</comment><comment><USER8> I have to disagree about the Java part.

After developing for WM, j2ME, BB and Android I found iPhone is a mystery. Apple knew what they were doing making people downloading those applications. You've have got fart apps for all platforms and no one could turn them to a profit until iFart.

BB is a different market, I'm sure that if you'll investigate you'll be able to come up with an idea.

BB can be a potential good market but

</comment><comment><USER9> Since lots of BB users are enterprise they may be less willing or able to install apps. But if you build a great app there's always customers for your app.

</comment><comment><USER10> We do, but for enterprise apps only - there may be decent sales for consumers with the Storm, but the BB will almost always be an Enterprise Play.

</comment><comment><USER11> Looks like RIM has begun accepting applications to their store. Has anyone gone through the application process yet? I'm glad they got it out, and its not the much past their original December launch date.</comment>


The Puzzle of a Lifetime - <AUTHOR> https://kotaku.com/the-puzzle-of-a-lifetime-1821235999 <comment><USER2> "The fact that Annapurna could bring a dedicated marketing budget felt important."

This article sounds like a result of that marketing, although it does sound like an interesting game. The best part is the mention of inbflat.net that I hadn't heard of before and is awsome.

<comment><USER3> This is an inspiring piece of modern art. Btw, www.inbflat.net is the work of [http://www.darrensolomon.com](http://www.darrensolomon.com) who has made a number of really cool projects that melt your mind a bit.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I played through this last night and it was interesting, surprising, weird, and very artistically and technically competent. I think it's the most interesting game I've seen this year, and I play a lot of games. The only thing that was slightly disappointing was that it's short, which I mitigated by playing it through twice.

<comment><USER5> The piece was too long. Could you please TLDR; where one can play this game?

<comment><USER6> Steam.

<comment><USER7> Also iOS and Nintendo Switch.

<comment><USER5> Thanks. Just played it... It does look artistic but there are too many missing playable elements. Things only interact in certain way and exploration involves only few free actions. I guess I'm too spoiled by games like Monument Valley to appreciate it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > He'd saved up a bunch of money before leaving his job, and figured he'd have > the game out by the end of 2013. Two years later, he had spent all his > money, and Gorogoa wasn't finished.

That's the dream, followed by the nightmare

</comment><comment><USER9> Marketing or not, I got the game and played in one sitting. Initially I did not realize how it was getting solved. Soon the creator's puzzle techniques started becoming evident (repetitive) and then it was enjoyable. Became easier though.

</comment><comment><USER10> I played the demo some 3 years ago, maybe 4, and loved it. I can barely wait to get it (but I will, I'm gifting it to my wife for Christmas).

</comment><comment><USER11> This is a fantastic and inspiring game. It's short but worth it, very unique. It's a masterpiece of it's game mechanic.

</comment><comment><USER12> I love the idea behind this game. It's like a point and click puzzler with less random clicking guesswork.

</comment><comment><USER13> I think this is just a game advertisment.

<comment><USER14> Maybe it's somewhat promotional, but there's a meaningful and interesting story here.

What do you want? For-profit stuff can never show up on Hacker News?

<comment><USER15> Of course not. But it's extremely clear to me that the primary focus of the article is promoting the game, and the story is secondary.

After having seen a lot of these articles, it becomes easier to distinguish the real story ones from the "ad" ones. And thats why they do it, its effective, so many people can't tell its a paid advert.

<comment><USER16> It's positive coverage, but that doesn't mean it's paid. When game journalists like things, they write positively about them.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Type12.com – make coding interviews don't suck - <AUTHOR> https://www.type12.com <comment><AUTHOR> HN, we made Type12 because hiring is broken on so many levels, but – unfortunately – it happens to be one those huge, neglected problems.

The traditional technical interview process is designed to ferret out a candidate's weaknesses whereas the process should be designed to find a candidate's strengths.

No one can possibly master all of the arcana of today's technology landscape, let alone bring that mastery to bear on a problem under pressure and with no tools other than a whiteboard.

Under those circumstances, everyone can make anyone look like an idiot.

We made Type12 to let companies go beyond riddles and brain-teasers when testing candidates but actually putting them in their day-to-day scenarios. How? No better way than simulating their production environment and pair program with them on real-world problems.

While the ability to solve a coding puzzles tells you almost nothing about the skills the candidate has to solve day-to-day challenges, real scenarios and assignments let you simulate your day-1 work experience and are - indeed - good predictors.

In a bit more technical details, for each interview, Type12 creates a new (docker instance under hood) sandbox fully configured with languages (Python, JS, Ruby, Java, Scala, etc) frameworks (Django, Flask, Ruby on Rails, Node, Spring, etc), databases (MongoDB, Redis, MySQL, PostgreSQL, etc) and other technologies (Amazon S3, Amazon DynamoDB, etc) of your choice.

Thoughts?</comment>


How to Raise Boys Who Read - <AUTHOR> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704271804575405511702112290.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion <comment><USER2> How I raised two boys who read:

1\. Start reading to them pretty much as soon as they're born.

2\. Read _a lot_ \- both frequently and as long as their attention holds. Their attention for stories will get longer as they get older if you keep reading to them.

3\. Get comfy and make reading time a time to cuddle.

4\. Read really well-written books - engaging plots, smart dialogue, solid exposition. Even young children are sophisticated and discerning enough to know when an author is condescending to them.

5\. _Perform_ when you're reading. Don't just read in a monotone: recite the book, with intonation and voices and accents and everything.

6\. When they interrupt you to ask questions, take the time to answer them. By doing this, you help children to engage the story and build their own listening comprehension.

7\. When they start to show an interest in reading, start teaching them how to do it. Get into the habit of taking turns reading to each other.

 _Edit - one more thing:_

8\. Be seen reading a lot yourself.

<comment><USER3> It's posts like yours when I wish that HN had a "save" feature.

<comment><USER4> It does, sort of. If you upvote a story, it is added to the "saved stories" link on your profile page.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I used to be one of those 'boys who read' (still am, just not so much of a boy I guess, maybe). I would read _anything_ that had letters on it, packaging, comics, stuff that was way over my head and stuff that made sense to me.

There was a second hand bookstore near my grandmothers house that I had a deal with, if I brought back a book the next day after taking it I could exchange it for free. The little hacker in me didn't take long to figure out that for the price of one book I could technically read through the whole store.

Long nights with the flashlight under the blanket to avoid being discovered :)

It never really stopped, I still read, pretty much all day long, unless I'm coding or doing something else.

If you have a kid that likes to read, make sure they don't have to do it in secret, they'll do it anyway and it helps to have everybody on the same page instead of having secrets about your 'habits'.

The internet is changing our reading habits, and I think that those 'electronic media' that are to be kept under control according to the author are really the new books.

Another decade or so and you'll be able to find all that good stuff online and on mobile devices. To deal with the distracting element of that is going to be the real problem, but forbidding their use is to throw out the baby (that vast library out there) with the bathwater.

Project Gutenberg and Wikipedia are accessible through the same medium that leads to major sources of distraction.

<comment><USER6> Given youngsters' propensity for rebellion I wonder if furtive nighttime reading by flashlight actually encourages the behavior.

<comment><USER7> I think you're probably right. Probably best to keep up the illusion of furtiveness!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Having raised two "boys who read," (and three girls as well), I think that the secret here is, like many aspects of "how to," simply lead by example.

Read to your kids when they are very young, let them see you read, make sure that there are plenty of interesting books around, and do your best to instill them with a sense of curiosity. From time to time, drop a book on their bed or desk and say "you might find this one interesting."

Also, my secret policy is to always buy my kids whatever books they ask for, without consideration to price or budget. My younger son (20) almost literally eats advanced math books for breakfast. I am happy to keep him well-fed.

Net-net: Well-informed kids who love to read and a house stuffed with books.

<comment><USER9> _My younger son (20) almost literally eats advanced math books for breakfast._

I'm not sure I understand what it means to almost-literally eat advanced maths books for breakfast.

I understand what it means to do it figuratively, and I understand what it means to do it literally, but I'm afraid that almost-literally has me puzzled.

edit: Wow, modded down to -4 for linguistic pedantry? That's unusual.

<comment><USER10> The definition of literally has changed over time. Now a commonly accepted definition is: "used for emphasis: used with figurative expressions to add emphasis"

So "literally" is one of the few words that keeps its traditional meaning and means the opposite as well (like "bad" :-))

<comment><USER9> I'm not sure where the dividing line is between "has changed its meaning" and "is commonly misused", but I'm pretty sure that "literally" is still on the commonly-misused side of things.

Very few words come to mean their exact opposites via misuse. (I am assured that "bad" meant "good" in some brief period of the 80s in which I was too young to know the cool slang, but it wasn't because people were confused about which meant which.)

<comment><USER11> It's an auto-antonym, a word that has two opposite meanings.

Wikipedia used to have a good list of them, but it looks like they just deleted it. Thank god for revision history: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_auto- anton...](http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_auto- antonyms_in_English&oldid=386146896)

<comment><USER10> I'm going to start using autoantonyms in completely ambiguous ways in email. I love it!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I'm not sure I buy the argument that you have to eliminate other media habits in order to become a reader.

When I was younger I watched loads of TV, beat Zelda and Super Mario Bros, honed my Gameboy Tetris skills to near Woz-level, watched skateboard videos over and over again to analyze the moves, futzed around with Amigas and Macs and PCs for hours, ran up my dad's phone bill with long-distance BBS charges, etc. I also read 2-5 entire books per week, got a perfect score on the verbal section of the SAT and the reading comprehension portion of the ACT and subsequently got a full ride academic scholarship to college.

I'm also not convinced that reading a bunch of junk books is actually a great use of one's time. I have a lot of nerd friends who never read anything other than HOWTOs and they are much better at their mathematical software jobs than I am. I can read a 300 page crime novel in about 90 minutes, but what's the point?

<comment><USER13> I agree with you 100%. Trouble brews when people are illiterate, but unless you're pursuing a literary career, there isn't _too much_ use for reading fiction. Nonfiction has its own benefits that attract anyone who wants to learn in general, or has complex goals.

Remember the phrase 'bookworm'? It wasn't always a cute alternative to the word nerd. I know about it, because I wasted years of my life reading crap fantasy novels, hardy boys casefiles, etc.

<comment><USER14> You mentioned an interesting point. Is the time spent on reading crap books really wasted? I wouldn't say so. It helps telling good books apart from bad ones. Reading wide variety of books makes one's taste more sophisticated. Also, mere familiarity with some books can be helpful in some social settings, when we want or need to make friends with people who read those books too.

<comment><USER13> True, I wouldn't say wasted, but I believe there are sharply diminishing returns for the classes of books I was referring to.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> In my unproveable anecdotal experience, the tendency towards gross-out books identifies the problem but misses the solution. The problem is that reading curricula tend to focus nearly exclusively on literature (novels, short stories, plays) and target the choice towards the students' reading comprehension level rather than their emotional comprehension level.

For example: Most 10th graders can read "Of Mice And Men," but how much are they getting out of it? Conversely, "Romeo and Juliet" has much harder words, but at least works at an emotional level they can understand.

Beyond that, there's usually a token 'biography' unit in a reading class or a short section on comprehending a science article, but almost never a full science, engineering, history, current events, etc. book assigned. Kids who have acquisitive minds are left out in the cold by reading Jane Austen -- in their minds, they're learning nothing useful at all.

<comment><USER16> "The Pearl" was required reading in high school. If that had been anywhere near my first book, I would have stopped reading for recreation forever. Love of baseball doesn't begin with the workout, why should reading.

// my book report was the subject of a parent / teacher conference

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Anecdotal evidence: my father raised me exactly that way.

No TV (that was in the 80s), no newfangled Nintendo thingie (I got one when I was ten, and was allowed only during the weekends)

And an all-you-can-eat collection of books, by an Argentinean editorial that included books by Jack London, Mark Twain, Jules Verne, Lewis Carroll, Charles Dickens and Emilio Salgari and many many others.

Plus, my mother re-married and her second husband is a huge science fiction fan, so I got acquainted with Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke and others also from an early age (it also set me into my career path, so maybe it wasn't that healthy :) ).

The result: I'm about the fastest reader I know of (whenever they offer me a fast-reading course I see the benchmarks of what you can supposedly archieve are a bit lower than what I already do archieve), and when I moved I had to leave 14 boxes full of paperback novels (about 300 books) which I had read - add to that a few thousand I've borrowed from family, friends and libraries or read as e-books, and I'd say that my father's experiment turned out a success as far as book-reading goes.

On the other hand, I'm often "out" when it comes to discussing movies or old TV shows and other shared cultural experiences, which makes me think I missed out some things as well.

<comment><USER18> Anecdotal evidence:

I've owned every video game console made in the last 15 years or so (While I was growing up). I had a TV in my own room and my own computer with broadband as soon as it was available in our city. I skipped classes to play video games in high school. I played video games into the wee hours of the night for all of high school and college. I've seen all the latest movies and TV shows and enjoy critiquing them with friends.

On the flip side, I have some 20 or so boxes of books I've completely read... I average maybe 2 books a week and have done so since I was old enough to find what I wanted at the library. I read faster than anyone I know. I read books from all genres for fun, and always have. I managed to do well in college which got me into grad school with a stipend.

The point: anecdotal evidence is not very useful. Also, the article and your comment seem to take a very naive view of human development. There is a lot more to this than just "video games made my son stupid".

<comment><USER17> "The point: anecdotal evidence is not very useful."

Indeed, I'm not arguing that, I just wanted to share my anecdote because it was relevant to the article.

"Also, the article and your comment seem to take a very naive view of human development. There is a lot more to this than just "video games made my son stupid"."

Sorry if it sounds that way, I didn't want to imply that (though my father does believe it). I'm pretty sure there are lots of people that played video games a lot and turned out well.

Also, all I have to show for it is an improved reading ability, I don't think it made me smarter or anything(1). I'm extremely bad at personal interactions, communications and other stuff, which is why I'm still programming and not in a managerial position.

I will try out doing a startup on my own, but I doubt I'd climb the career ladder in a "traditional" way - I'm always being overtaken by the arrogant, self-confident, usually way less technically capable people-talkers on the way up, at least on the big corporate environments I've worked in (finance and insurance).

(1)Edit: see these two other posts by maxawaytoolong and awakeasleep which seem to agree on it not being that useful:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1724089>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1724269>

<comment> m-photonic >I'm pretty sure there are lots of people that played video games a lot and turned out well.

Not only that, there are lots of people who had access to video games restricted and ended up worse off for it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> The computer helps my boys to read. I have an 8 year old who's desire to read stemmed from his wanting to be able to play online games like Club Penguin. He needed to read the instructions. The same is true for the Leapster video game console and the Nintendo DS.

Now he reads all the time. Has complete the Percy Jackson series, read several of the Harry Potter books cover to cover, etc.

His younger brothers are readers, but not like he is. I think it is in part because their older brother showed them how to play the games.

Then again, it is likely that my kids are somewhat self-directed learners like I am.

Still, I don't think technology should be vilified as an obstacle to reading. Especially interactive technology.

</comment><comment><USER20> Anecdotal : move to a really far away country (the remote outskirts of Indonesia, in my case, but I imagine the highlands of Cameroon or tea plantations in Eastern Bhutan would work just as well), bring nothing but your father's (!) old children's books (on account of which I know to this day that to operate a home built radio receiver one must "scratch" at a "crystal" until one gets a "signal") and wait what happens). While there is enough to do there in the way of outdoors-y activities ("let's climb that there volcano!"), intellectual stimulation will have to come not from the internet, computer games or even television (you would not believe how little worthwhile there is to see on television channels aimed at the remote parts of third world countries) but from good old fashioned books. As a result, if you (that would be me) have been subjected to such a regimen in your childhood, you will always, always, continue to hold good old fashioned books as belonging to a quite, quite dear portion of your heart.

To make it a little less anecdotal, by the way, I've seen a similar love of books in others who have grown up in this way.

<comment><USER21> I can confirm this worked for me, although the outskirts of Indonesia were not that remote in my case.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> WARNING: RANTING AHEAD

"Everyone agrees..." No support evidence for this claim. Furthermore, the entire premise of the argument relies on looking at number of boys below a certain level. That's fine in it's own right, but they seem to assume this means boys are overall worse at reading, when no evidence has been presented to support this claim, and every study I have read about male intelligence indicates that it has higher variance than females.

This man seems obsessed with imposing his arbitrary and unnatural social views upon boys. He denounces the natural desire for boys to be active, negatively calling upon the properties of 'squirminess'. And we sit to wonder why America is expected to be 75% obese people in a few years, when activity is denounced?

The author then reveals his complete ignorance when he cites one study demonstrating correlation between media consumption in boys to academic progress as Scientific Fact that his claims are accurate. To quote, "Hard to believe, isn't it, but Science has spoken." Yet, he ignores two very important parts of Science - experiments must be repeated, and correlation != causation. He steps through magical logical leaps that somehow playing video games makes your children illiterate and that the solution to illiteracy is removing anything interesting that is not a book, when there are in fact several simpler explanations supported by much more repeated research reflecting child development patterns. I am sure he does not want to accept this 'barbaric' view, but boys have a tendency to learn more effectively through trial and error, and develop their analytical (as he might call it, 'civilized') language skills later. Boys are learning about the world around them by pushing the boundaries to see how it reacts - no matter how much it upsets this author's view on how civilized people should act. Those boys not held back by imbeciles like him will grow up to become Engineers and Scientists, spending a little time in their day to use their superior literacy and reasoning skills to retort people such as the author here.

A boy raised on the stimulating electronic media of infinite possibility, will imagine - and create - the future that narrow-minded president's of publishing companies could never think of, but take for granted anyway.

<comment><USER23> Everyone agrees that statements proven by appeal to majority [consensus] are logically fallacious.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Dungeons and Dragons, while not quite a gateway drug into books for me, was sure close. I read before D&D, but I _read_ after D&D.

I know exactly why I read newspapers: my fourth grade English teacher taught me the joy of political cartoons, and to have the context for the jokes you need to know most of the rest of the paper. Dad and I read together at the kitchen table.

<comment><USER25> "I know exactly why I read newspapers"

Then I assume you read Japanese newspapers, which makes me curious, which one(s)?

Asked because I never quite got to the level of Japanese newspaper reading, I'm curious about which Japanese papers are any good, and wonder how they're different from American papers.

<comment><USER24> Sadly, I do not read much Japanese other than technical documents, transactional correspondence, and the odd manga. I just learned the other day that I can understand an insurance policy.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Short answer, from the article: The secret to raising boys who read, I submit, is pretty simple—keep electronic media, especially video games and recreational Internet, under control (that is to say, almost completely absent). Then fill your shelves with good books.

<comment><USER9> Also known as: "How to raise boys who hate their parents". Possibly also "boys who are shunned at school", since they won't be able to take part in a huge fraction of the conversations going on in the playground.

The best way to raise children with good habits is to have those habits yourself. If every day after dinner both parents retire to the lounge room to listen to some music and read a book (each), the children will quickly get the idea that's what people do. If they go and watch TV instead, they'll get that idea.

One more point: childhood habits don't always bleed over into the adult. From age 13-17 I probably barely read a single novel that wasn't assigned for school. (I read plenty of non-fiction for pleasure.) But once reading novels stopped being "schoolwork" I started doing it for pleasure, and have since read... a lot.

<comment><USER27> Oh give me a break. Not playing video games and reading lots of books growing up never made me shunned on the playground and never made me hate my parents (and I've never heard anyone say they hate their parents for video-game deprivation). Playgrounds are for running around, kicking things, messily digging in the dirt, and generally making mischief, not analyzing video games.

<comment><USER28> Swear on my life, I _love_ my parents for video-game deprivation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I'm a little late to this discussion, but I have one more suggestion for boys over the age of 13. Get them around girls who find boys who are artistic and literary attractive.

I know, anyone who watches glee thinks that jocks and cheerleaders run the high schools, and I know that my experience (a small private high school in san francisco) probably isn't representative... but still, if you can find an environment like this for your kid, go for it.

He'll look back with mild embarrassment at how oh-so-suave he felt hanging out in north beach cafes reading beat lit, but hey, at least he's reading, right?

(ok, fine, that was me).

</comment><comment><USER30> > "One obvious problem with the SweetFarts philosophy of education is that it > is more suited to producing a generation of barbarians and morons than to > raising the sort of men who make good husbands, fathers and professionals. > If you keep meeting a boy where he is, he doesn't go very far."

> "Whom would you prefer to have shaped the boyhood imagination of your > daughter's husband—Raymond Bean or Robert Louis Stevenson?"

I'm surprised how the article emphasizes being a 'good husband'. What if it said "good wives, mothers and professionals"?

<comment><USER31> Umm...it's an article about getting boys to read and the long-term effects of meeting boys where they are. I'm guessing they didn't emphasize being good wives and mothers because boys rarely grow up to be wives and mothers.

<comment><USER30> That is clearly not where I'm coming from. I'm just trying to point out how an analogous article today that would make such emphasis would probably strike most people as inappropriate or chauvinistic. Don't you agree?

<comment><USER32> That's because people associate 'good wife' with a _subservient_ wife. Feminism has encouraged women to act in their own interests rather than their families interests for some time now and the values have sunk into the culture.

'Good husband' doesn't have that connotation and for better or for worse, people still think that husbands should care for their wives and children and be respectable people themselves.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> >keep electronic media, especially video games and recreational Internet, under control (that is to say, almost completely absent). Then fill your shelves with good books.

The problem with these books is that they interfere with the more traditional crafts of _conversation_ and _oratory_.

<comment><USER34> This was a good bit of wit that seems, alas, to have gone largely unappreciated.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> One trick that's worked for us:

If your kids want to take a toy with them to bed, instead let them pick out a few books. This way they think of books as toys and therefore a sort of privilege (i.e. fun!).

</comment><comment><USER36> An issue with any reading-related arguments is that the definition of "reading" is so loose. Here are at least three different definitions commonly in use:

1\. A person can look at a page full of sentences and translate them into appropriate sounds coming out of his mouth. An add-on to this definition is the ability to answer basic comprehension question questions about these sentences.

2\. A person can reason upon, expand upon, interpret, or otherwise think about the words he has read.

3\. A person can read fiction and appreciate it in some way.

#1 seems like an obvious necessity for life in a society where so much is communicated via written language. #2 seems like necessary skill for someone to be a high-functioning adult. But, why do we couple our discussion about why Johnny can't "read" with our concerns that Johnny can't think? Isn't written language simply an (important) input method for ideas upon which one may reason?

As a guy who hasn't read a work of fiction in a long time but still considers himself a regular "reader", I consider definition #3 to be ill-conceived. Why is it more important for a person to be proficient in the interpretation of "written word" art than visual art, performing arts, cinema, etc.? What's so darned special about literature? I spend a lot more time observing others' photography (in an attempt to improve my own) than I do with other art forms. Am I un-cultured? Un-intelligent? In college, when I had lots of time on my hands, I enjoyed sitting down in the afternoon with a Guiness and reading large swaths of the Wall Street Journal. Does this count as reading?

The lack of definition around the test "is a reader" results in many mushy arguments. Shouldn't those proficient in Definition #2 be able to detect this?

</comment><comment><USER37> PS, Does this make anyone else want to read such titles at "Sir Fartsalot Hunts the Booger" and "The Psycho Butts of Uranus"? I never read books like those, but I can easily see books like this getting young boys into the habit of reading.

<comment><USER9> Oh wow, those are real books? From the titles, they sound like they were written entirely via mad libs.

If I had children, I would absolutely forbid them from reading books like Sir Fartsalot Hunts the Booger and The Psycho Butts of Uranus. Then I would smile to myself, because I'd know they'd be reading them behind my back, and the effort they'd be going to in order to hide it from me would prevent them from getting into any worse trouble.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Unfortunately, my advice is useless for English speakers.

I was raised in Russia, and my mom tricked me into learning to read. Russian is very phonetic - if you know the alphabet, you can sound out words and understand them (compare this with "daughter" - good fucking luck, kid.)

So she would start reading a book, wait until a really exciting part of the plot was coming up, and then put the book down next to me and excuse herself for a moment - she had to stir the pot on the stove, or help my dad look for something, or whatever sounded plausible to me - and being impatient, I would pick up the book and struggle to read, because I wanted to know what was coming next.

</comment><comment><USER39> While I agree that video games are compelling to the 11-14 year old boy scouts that I've spent a lot of time with over the last few years, I know of a few who are prolific readers as well as being competent gamers (we have video game nights every once in a while, too :)).

I think the author is well meaning, but probably not entirely on base. The author must certainly also know of the golden mean (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_mean_%28philosophy%29>). As Aristotle professed, moderation in all things (including video games and reading).

</comment><comment><USER40> How I became a boy that reads:

My parents read to me _alot_. I would find a book, walk up to mom and say, "Book." I loved them. Then once I learned to read I read everything, you name it, I read it. Books, magazines, billboards, cereal boxes, coke cans, if it had letters, I read it. Simple as that. I have read nearly every book in the house, twice. I just ate up books.

Now I read HN articles, programming articles, free books on Kindle, iBooks, and real books. They are the single most influential part of my life.

Reading is a very fulfilling addiction. I caught the bug. I hope you did too.

</comment><comment><USER37> I think more than anything, is to encourage your children to learn, and help them to find passions early in life. I used to read a lot when I was a kid because I was really interested in our founding fathers, so I read a lot about Ben Franklin, Jefferson, etc. I lost that for a while because I didn't have any books available that interested me. Near the end of highschool, I was forced to read a few books that really got me going and I've been reading fiction ever since. I found a passion for it.

<comment><USER41> This seems appropriate. I didn't really start "reading" a lot until I was in my mid-twenties and wanted to know more about global issues and international affairs, and I could find books on those topics pretty easily in the best- sellers list.

My dad would have me read classics like The Lord of the Rings. I appreciate them now, but they had little relevance to me as a boy.

The internet was probably the best thing for me because it allowed me to quickly find more information on topics I actually cared about.

So I'd say the way to get anyone to read, not just boys, is to facilitate the link between their interests and books. So when someone shows an interest or aptitude in a certain hobby, show them a bunch of books in that area.

It's not quite so obvious to people that there is a ton of information out there on the things they love.

Also I think it's funny to read comments on hackernews saying that kids shouldn't have access to video games when a lot of us grew up on computer games, BBSs, MUDs, etc. and are now hackers/coders.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Is there an implication that reading means reading books? Because I'd think that it's harder to raise a child who doesn't read in the internet age.

</comment><comment><USER43> I think one of the best things my dad ever did for me was read to my brother and me as children. And I'm not talking about stupid kid books. These were classics. Books that you might be assigned to read for a literature class.

Hell, he read The Road Ahead to us at one point. Don't ask me why.

But as a result of him reading to me, I took an interest in reading for myself, and learning in general. I think I can say, without trying to be immodest, that it improved my life enormously and allowed me to get through school with ease. I have never had trouble writing either, though this was probably because my dad was an English major. Up until high school, he would personally proofread and comment on anything we had to write.

Even today, my first draft is always my final draft.

So read to your kids dads. It will prove to be an invaluable experience.

</comment><comment><USER44> I volunteer for an organization called Raising a Reader, a non-profit literacy organization that teaches families the importance of reading to a child from birth to age 5 in order to have them reading-ready for school. This is a very worthwhile cause.

When my own children were born I took reading to them as a given and read to them every night, enjoying the cuddle time. When they became competent readers themselves, I would read the first chapter of a juicy book to them and they'd be grabbing the book from me like it was a piece of candy.

The screens are ok, as long as you don't use them as a babysitter. We're in a technology age, so we can't ignore them. As parents, we need to teach our children a balance between screen time and other stellar activities like reading.

<comment><USER23> Watching and reading are both quite sedentary - don't forget to mix in some 'fleeing from rampaging space-monster-vampires' and associated activities.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> The author's argument that what worked well for the elites of 50 years ago should be good enough for everyone today is unlikely to be correct. What worked for the elites of 50 years ago probably works just fine for the elites of today, like him and his kids. However, what has changed over 50 years is that we're now trying to educate all kids, not just elite kids. It's likely we'll need different approaches to reach all kids today, just like we would have needed different approaches to reach all kids 50 years ago - if anyone back then cared about all kids.

</comment><comment><USER46> I would rather raise my (hypothetical) child as someone who is open minded, who can listen to suggestions and choose what they'd like to read themselves. I'm not into the idea of raising a closed-minded elitist who's only allowed to read the books his father loved as a child.

Incidentally, I can say firsthand that the _Captain Underpants_ series is wonderful. If you have a child (or are one), I highly recommend checking it out.

</comment><comment><USER47> My 5 year old son is significantly ahead of his peers in terms of reading. We do play video games together in moderation (Minecraft!), but we also read together _every_ night. Fortnightly visits to the library, and modelling good choices by reading ourselves instead of turning on the TV, seem to be cultivating both love and respect for books.

</comment><comment><USER48> Don't watch TV.

My father never watched TV. He finally put a tv in the living room of his home long after all three of us were out of the house. Growing up, I'd be doing homework while my father read and smoked his pipe, the tv downstairs off.

He'd unplug for a week/month as punishment for even the smallest mistakes, but he would always bring us to the library.

</comment><comment><USER49> Can't remember who it was, Bradbury, Heinlein, possibly Spider Robinson, who gave the advice:

Make your kid the deal that they can stay up as late as they want as long as they're reading. Kids will fight bedtime by any means necessary.

</comment><comment><USER50> Entirely anecdotal as well, but how many of us got into computer science/engineering/programming _because_ we played lots of computer games?</comment>


Lessons I Learned Earning $119,725.45 from Amazon Associates Program - <AUTHOR> http://www.problogger.net/archives/2009/08/19/amazon-associates-tips/ <comment><USER2> One of the ways that people are making money with Amazon is just by the cookies. I believe Amazon is a 7-day tracking cookie, so what this means is that if a user clicks on your affiliate link to Amazon if that user makes a purchase from Amazon in the next 7 days, you get credit. Of course the game is "who helped me last" so it's whoever planted the Amazon cookie on that user's browser most recently will get the affiliate payment.

A potential strategy for monetization if you have a lot of return visitors is to just send them to Amazon as much as possible with your tracking cookie. It doesn't even have to be something like "buy this product I just reviewed here, now". Just a "check this random page out" and some of your users will likely make a purchase within a week without having your cookie overwritten, and boom you get a nice affiliate fee.

There is obviously a broad spectrum of how to send people to Amazon, and how to ethically get credit for that. But fundamentally it just comes down to having a user click through and get that cookie set.

eBay is a similar cookie game.

I'm not sure about other affiliate programs/networks. It'll be interesting to see if Google uses a similar cookie approach with their CPA AdSense ads. One would hope.

<comment><USER3> The Amazon Associate web site said 24 hours of clicking through from your site, they buy something, or they click through from another site.

<comment><USER2> Hmm then I probably got it mixed up. 1 day for Amazon, and 7 days for eBay.

This was a bit before my time, but apparently eBay used to have 30 day cookie tracking! Needless to say the temptation for planting cookies was pretty damn high and resulted in some clever tricks.

I think pop-unders are still used by some sites, but obviously are far less successful nowadays.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Funnily enough the public library here (or the person who runs their catalogue) uses amazon associates:

[http://library.redbridge.gov.uk/02_Catalogue/02_005_TitleInf...](http://library.redbridge.gov.uk/02_Catalogue/02_005_TitleInformation.aspx?searchTerm=king&searchTerm2=&searchTerm3=&searchTerm4=&searchType=98&Page=1&media=&branch=&authority=&language=&junior=&rcn=0749506857&fr=tl)

</comment><comment><USER5> Amazon's affiliate program is nice because you can throw in a link to Amazon in almost any article, and readers will find it useful/relevant. I'm always surprised when I see big sites linking to Amazon, but not including a referral code. They're throwing away thousands of dollars in potential income.

<comment><USER3> I had links to books on Amazon before I became an Associate because I discuss sources and references in many of my posts. Being an Associate hasn't made me any money yet though; too few readers, and I've been posting too infrequently to get more.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> useful. even if you're not a blogger and your monetization strategy involves affiliate.

If anyone's company relies on affiliate fees, I'd like to know your story as well. (what works, what doesn't) We just signed up for the amazon associates program and we'll be launching in a month.

</comment><comment><USER7> Not enough examination on monetization strategies on this site (HN) in my opinion. As much as these "get rich on the interweb" bloggers get a bad rap, they can teach us a lot; both overtly and by observation of their methods about how to create financial success.

I'd love to see more like this discussed on Hacker News, in place of a good chunk of the VC capital obsession.

This is real money, this is what startups should be looking to create.

<comment><USER8> My parents taught me to not disclose the amount of money I make, and to not trust people who do -- they have every incentive to lie, be it due to ego or simply a desire to leverage an appearance of success into actual (but usually much diminished) success.

A 'professional blogger' is blogging about how to make money blogging. What does that tell you?

It tells me that what makes this blogger his money (however much he actually makes) is leveraging page views from individuals who want to know how to make money blogging. Thus, the blogger has every incentive to inflate the numbers, or simply lie outright about the expected return.

Unsurprisingly, he sells a "31-days to build a better blog" ebook here: <http://www.problogger.net/31dbbb-workbook/>

<comment><USER9> Hi there - I actually welcome your skepticism on this one - there's a lot of people claiming a lot of things online these days.

The reason I actually revealed the amount I've made with Amazon in this post was simply that I constantly get people telling me that Amazon is impossible to make good money with because it's just lots of tiny tiny commissions (ie 5% of a book sale isn't much).

In terms of what makes me my money - if you read the article you see that I'm linking to my photography blog. That is my main blog (in terms of both traffic and earnings). I do make some from ProBlogger but it's small in comparison with the photography one.

Yep I sell an ebook from my site - it's done ok but it's not my main income source by any means.

In terms of inflating the amount - not quite sure how to 'prove it' - I don't like to post screenshots of earnings pages because people tend to say they are photoshopped - but if you know anyone in Melbourne Australia and want to set up a meeting I'm more than happy to show them my reports live and have them verify them for you.

I'd also say that if I was going to inflate the numbers I'd probably go a little further than I did - $119k in 6 years isn't really the most amazing claim of making money online that I've heard :-) It's more than pocket change but it's small time in comparison to many.

Again - happy for people to be skeptical - I actively encourage people to be in this game, there's a lot of big claims, hype and empty promises going around. I myself pride myself on not promising big easy money - in fact I've written many times on how hard it is to make this kind of money, I've worked my butt off for 7 years building my blogs up - it certainly doesn't happen over night.

Happy to chat with anyone who wants to raise concerns over my approach and shed as much light as I can on the topic.

<comment><USER10> I'll put my hand up as a Melbournite if someone is desperate to check up on Darren. Let me know if anyone is actually interested in some HN confirmation.

(for my behalf - I think Darren looks pretty legit - he makes money on stuff like photography & the olympics - and gets famous writing about blogging)

<comment><USER9> happy to have a meet if there's a genuine interest in it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Tip #12: Blog about something that costs a lot of money. In other words, this guy's running a website about digital cameras. I run a site about a band. While the occasional album release will net me a couple thousand dollars, what used to be a month-to-month income of $20-$50 in random CD shopping has all but disappeared in the last couple of years.

Luckily, t-shirt sales through another site and eBay affiliate links keep my site afloat & earn a little fun-money too - although I typically turn that cash around and invest it in the site, whether it's better hosting, or funding contests to keep the readers on their toes.

<comment><USER9> you're right - topic is a factor both in terms of the traffic you can generate as well as the options to monetize.

A blog about a band is a tough one to make money from. There may be opportunities to monetize by promoting products from similar bands as well (ie: if you like Megadeth you might also like this album from.... ummm.... Britney Spears). Otherwise there may be advertisers looking to get their message out to the kind of people that like a certain band (if the band has a tight demographic following).

Ultimately though - some topics are hard going. They attract audiences that are not in a 'buying mood' and as a result affiliate promotions and even advertising can be tough going.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I've added a 2nd post to this series with 10 more tips - hope it's helpful - [http://www.problogger.net/archives/2009/08/20/10-more- amazon...](http://www.problogger.net/archives/2009/08/20/10-more-amazon- associate-program-lessons-i-learned-on-my-way-to-six-figure-earnings/)

</comment><comment><USER12> funny that none of the comments here or on the post talk about how the FTC is going to regulate disclosure of this income verrrrrry soon

<comment><USER13> Not relevant to the OP as he lives in Melbourne, Australia. The ATO (our IRS) already requires that this income is declared.

<comment><USER14> He's not talking about disclosure to the IRS. He's talking about disclosure to readers. It isn't an issue of hiding income from the government in this case, it's about hiding 'who gives me money' from your readers so they can have an informed opinion on what you write (including any potential conflicts of interest).</comment></comment></comment>


Digital Nomands open Slack community - <AUTHOR> http://alldigitalnomads.com <comment><USER2> Nice slack so far. Lets see where it is going but so far i like it :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Looking very promising so far. DMs people are awsome :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> just joined. great start!</comment>


Show HN: Tabiverse – Get a random planet on every new browser tab - <AUTHOR> https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tabiverse-a-universe-in-y/hpplgjkooibhfkmmepoikcjpadcojcik?hl=en <comment><AUTHOR> Hi everyone!

Tabiverse is a procedurally generated universe in your browser tabs. Every time you open a new tab, you are teleported to a procedural planet. You are also able to share your planet coordinates with your friends so that they can explore the same planets. Currently, three types of celestial object are in the Tabiverse: planets, stars, and asteroids. We are adding stars, black holes, space anomalies, and moons very soon. I also want to explore a way to integrate browser bookmarks, shortcuts, and widgets into this eventually so your browser home page can be fun and productive. Let me know what you think :)

Album of screenshots: [https://imgur.com/a/o7PbxLJ](https://imgur.com/a/o7PbxLJ)

Chrome: [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tabiverse-a- univer...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tabiverse-a-universe- in-y/hpplgjkooibhfkmmepoikcjpadcojcik)

Firefox: [https://addons.mozilla.org/en- US/firefox/addon/tabiverse/](https://addons.mozilla.org/en- US/firefox/addon/tabiverse/)

Twitter: [https://twitter.com/tabiverse](https://twitter.com/tabiverse)

Discord: [https://discord.gg/MUgRGwE](https://discord.gg/MUgRGwE)

</comment><comment><USER2> I like this a lot <3</comment>


Scheme on CoffeeScript - <AUTHOR> http://dmitrysoshnikov.com/scheme-on-coffee/

<comment><USER2> Ha ha ha! Absolutely fantastic. The wizard would be proud! How do you handle tail call optimization with JavaScript? (at least, until the next version of JS with proper tail calls - woot! [http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:proper_tail_c...](http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:proper_tail_calls) )

</comment><comment><USER3> Here's direct links to the source (which is worth looking at).

The parser : [https://github.com/DmitrySoshnikov/scheme-on- coffee/blob/mas...](https://github.com/DmitrySoshnikov/scheme-on- coffee/blob/master/parse.coffee)

The evaluator: [https://github.com/DmitrySoshnikov/scheme-on- coffee/blob/mas...](https://github.com/DmitrySoshnikov/scheme-on- coffee/blob/master/eval.coffee)

The definitions of all the caddr, cdadr variants is kind of fun, and the definition of "lookupVariableValue" is enlightening, if you were curious about how that sort of thing worked in Scheme.

<comment><USER4> > if you were curious about how that sort of thing worked in Scheme.

If that's the case you should really read SICP, since there's a lot more enlightenment where that came from, so to speak.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Scheme in JS is an attractive idea, but it looks like the reader isn't doing reader-macros correctly:

        '(a b c)
        (Error: Unbound variable: "a" Error: Unbound variable: "b" Error: Unbound variable: "c")

There are a couple others of these:

<http://javascript.crockford.com/little.html>

This one seems to support call/cc:

<https://csel.cs.colorado.edu/~silkense/js-scheme/cps/>

</comment><comment><USER5> Obligatory: <http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenspuns_Tenth_Rule></comment>


Could Lab-Grown Brains Develop Consciousness? - <AUTHOR> https://singularityhub.com/2019/07/03/could-lab-grown-brains-develop-consciousness/ <comment><USER2> Don't know, but I bet they'll be delicious.</comment>


Show HN: Visual Speed Tool – View your site as it loads natively, in China - <AUTHOR> https://www.chinafy.com/tools/visual-speed-test <comment><AUTHOR> if you're curious about testing different networks based on mobile, you can give this a try - [https://www.chinafy.com/tools/global-speed- test](https://www.chinafy.com/tools/global-speed-test)?

<comment><USER2> Nice - I like how basically every site I test doesn't work in China. Didn't realise how badly sitse perform there.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yea, the numbers are pretty wild.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER2> Cool, any idea if it has mobile screenshots? And also the network speed?

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> great question. This test's version is desktop/good 3g, but putting in feedback for a mobile version.</comment>