How AeroPress Fans Are Hacking Their Way to a Better Cup of Coffee - <AUTHOR> http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2015/04/14/399337724/how-aeropress-fans-are-hacking-their-way-to-a-better-cup-of-coffee <comment><USER2> I use my AeroPress twice a day, every day and love it. But the article is mistaken in calling it espresso. It's not even close, although someone has rigged one to produce espresso[1].

And don't let the article fool you, there are really only three important factors: water temperature, grind size, and steep time. Varying these can get different characteristics from a particular roast, and it's fun to experiment! What I found most surprising was how differently the same roast can taste from an AeroPress vs. an expensive espresso maker. If I don't like it from one, there's still a good chance it will be delicious from the other. Very strange!

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIfZ84qtBOc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIfZ84qtBOc)

<comment><USER3> Absolutely agree on the three important factors. But I'd say the fourth is bean quality. Makes all the difference.

<comment><USER4> You don't think pressure matters when plunging? I've speculated that a faster plunge might extract more solutes from the coffee grinds due to greater liquid penetration into the coffee grounds from higher pressure.

<comment> semi-extrinsic It's hard to get that much pressure variation with an aeropress. The plunger is around 5 cm x 5 cm, so the full body weight of a male human (say 90 kg) only gives you 3.5 bar. That's if you're standing on your aeropress. A real espresso machine puts out 9 bar.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Had no idea the inventor was 76 years old. Good to see someone not buying into the notion that anyone over 30 is a has-been.

<comment><USER6> The world is run by people over 30 and us over 30s know it. That we don't challenge the conventional wisdom that wonder kids are disrupting everything is just a demonstration of our secure confidence.

<comment><USER7> I tend to read that wisdom as referring to things like mathematical theory being mostly advanced by people under 30. People's brains seem to hold onto some extra bit of IQ between 20 and 30, that can be used to do some "wondrous" things. Of course, most big things that need doing don't need a supergenius; they need 10-20 years of steady hard work, so by the time you accomplish those you are indeed 30+ (or, god forbid, 40+.)

<comment><USER8> "god forbid"… it happens sooner than you think, kid.

<comment><USER7> That was sarcasm. I'm no kid myself :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I was using the AeroPress Inverted Method for about two years with varying degrees of success, however, I finally soured on the clunkiness, mess-making potential, lack of easy containment/storage, and lack of body to the coffee it produced so I sold out and got a Nespresso VertuoLine. It's such a refreshing experience to just push a button and have espresso (actual espresso) or coffee. The only downside was the lack of bean choice, however, a clever YouTuber put me on to a method of reusing the pods with your own grind. So when I get tired of the Nespresso flavors, I brew my own (although this is pretty rare since the Nespresso varieties are pretty damn rich and tasty).

I still keep the AeroPress around though — who knows why — affectation maybe.

<comment><USER10> Hm. I'll have to acquire and open one of those capsules. I was under the impression that the toxic mess was some kind of freezedried, nasty paste (I certainly haven't tasted a nespresso that tastes like "real" espresso (nor anywhere near what I can get from my aeropress). But if one considers to re- fill the capsules (which would imply you'd need to vacuum seal them in order to keep the fresh-grind taste, or make them just before/soon before having a coffee...) -- sounds like more work than just getting a proper espresso machine.

On the off-chance that you're not trolling... which Nespresso flavours have you found to be "rich and tasty" (by which I take it you mean comparable to freshly-ground beans from a specialist, along the line that a barrista would use)?

<comment><USER11> I have a real automatic coffee machine and a professional level manual one at work, and I find Nespresso pretty good. I can't remember the name but my favourite flavour is in a pale gold capsule.

It's not as good as my machines do, but way better than your comment implies.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Aeropress is made out of polypropylene plastic which has been found to leech quats and oleamide. I have become more and more alarmed at how often coffee is prepared or delivered via plastics that are prone to leach, specially at the higher temperatures of coffee. From plastic drip coffee machines to the lids on coffee cups sold at cafes. Even glass french presses normally have a plastic in the lid. This is one reason why I currently prefer the pour over method.

<comment><USER13> Have you tried the Moka Pot? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moka_pot](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moka_pot) It's very popular in Italy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I have a very fine stainless steel mesh strainer for my aeropress (replacing the little paper discs). Using it, I'm able to let the coffee steep for 45+ seconds, gaining the benefit of the inverted method without needing to mess around with inversion.

That said, I still prefer well-executed pourover (once I got the hang of my pourover method) to aeropress coffee but I think that's more of a personal preference thing. Nowadays I travel with the aeropress (and a nice travel grinder that fits inside) and do pourover at home.

<comment><USER15> Can I ask what grinder you're using that fits inside the aeropress? The ones I've seen are always these terribly boxy little devices.

<comment><USER16> I use a Porlex Mini for that. ([http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0044ZA066/r](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0044ZA066/r))

<comment><USER15> Awesome, thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I have found my AeroPress coffee to be lacking body. I returned to pour-overs and French presses.

Having read this, I feel I must again tinker with the Aeropress.

Likely case of "Doing it wrong."

<comment><USER18> I wasn't a big fan until I read about the inverted method [0]. You might give that a try if you haven't already.

[0] [http://stumptowncoffee.com/brew- guides/aeropress/](http://stumptowncoffee.com/brew-guides/aeropress/)

<comment><USER19> Everyone talks a lot about the inverted method, but I feel like you get the same controlled steep time by easing the plunger in a little and then pulling back out a little to create negative pressure inside tube.

<comment><USER20> This x 1000. To my mind, espousing the inverted method betrays a scant grasp of vacuums and basic physics.

Allowing a drop or two of coffee to escape early to the cup massively outweighs the risks of using very hot water to give something a very high centre of gravity.

<comment><USER21> Practical point: I've had an Aeropress for years, using it at least once a week, often daily, always inverted.

I've never knocked it over. It's much more stable inverted than you might think.

<comment><USER20> And ditto from my perspective. But it still bugs me when I have my kids running around that the exception that proves the rule will arise, and it's more robust to have the AP directed into the mug at brew time than inverted, so I just rely on the vacuum to work the magic.*

But for me, the key point is that there's no appreciable difference in the coffee either way.

*Although you might legitimately point out that the whole caboodle is taller as a result doing it the old fashioned way, which increases the chances of it being knocked over.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I've tried a great many ways of brewing coffee including several Aeropress setups - I can honestly say that Aeropress is no better than your standard French press - it's not even close to espresso or even a handpresso or similar device.

<comment><USER23> However, it is much easier to clean than a French press, doesn't require a particular grind size, and you can use either a paper or metal filter if you are worried about cafestol or like oilier coffee.

<comment><USER24> A french press can be cleaned simply by rinsing it out, with the occasional more thorough cleaning. Also, you can vary the grind size considerably. It's only superfine grinds that will clog the filter.

I have an aeropress, but I rarely use it. Maybe I'm just a clutz, but I always have to wipe the counter down after using an aeropress (especially with the inverted method), while a french press is pretty much mess-free. The aeropress is very fidly. That's great if you're in the mood to experiment but not so great if you just want a decent cup of coffee. I do like the results of the aeropress for making iced coffee, but generally prefer the flavor of french press coffee. Paper filters remove a lot of coffee's flavor-rich oils.

The one deal-breaker that some people have with french presses is the sludge they let through, especially when used with a low quality grinder that doesn't produce grounds of uniform size. If you can't stand sludge and have a crappy grinder you pretty much have to use something with a paper filter.

<comment><USER23> The aeropress is self cleaning. You just plunge it into the trash.

<comment><USER24> Yeah, and then you rinse off the grounds that stuck to the edges. Then you go back and rinse out the funnel for putting the grounds into the aeropress. Then you rinse off the stir-stick. Then you clean up all the grounds that didn't make it into the funnel. Then you get the drips that escaped if your inverted technique wasn't flawless.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I would like to "hack" together a stainless steel AeroPress, at least the outer tube, I think the press is fine.

I don't know whether I've been pressing too hard or what, but I've noticed that my cylinder is expanding.

<comment><USER26> Mine has been stress-cracking from heat expansion and contraction. Definitely thinking of giving it up in favor of my glass french press.

<comment><USER27> If it's cracking your probably using water that's too hot. I've used mine almost daily for years with no issues at all.

<comment><USER2> Same here. I never use water over 180 degrees Farenheit and never put it in the dishwasher.

<comment><USER28> For most coffees you're going to want to be a little higher, around 198-203 degrees for proper extraction.

Very good choice to never place it in the dishwasher, it takes just a few seconds to clean and it lasts a lot longer

<comment><USER29> The standard recommendation for the Aeropress, including from Adler himself, is to use 175F water, much less hot than you'd use in other preparation methods.

<comment><USER30> In Seattle at least, there is near-universal consensus among every coffee shop I've been to using an Aeropress that 175 is much too low. Most go closer to 200.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Was impressed with mine, but after the first few days the mess, fuss, and hassle started to get a bit old. Next, this guy needs to invent the 21st century version, which is connected to your water supply, filters and heats the water, stores and grinds a few weeks worth of coffee, and you just press a button and out pops your coffee, with no mess.

<comment><USER32> I find it surprising that you find it to be overly messy / too much of a hassle. Maybe I've just gotten used to it, but I find it much less of a hassle than my old drip coffee maker, and it takes about 10 seconds to clean when I'm finished.

<comment><USER31> Perhaps I'm just a stickler for efficiency. If it's something that I'm going to do two or three times a day, every day, for the rest of my life, I like to think that I can economize every possible step and movement to the bare minimum. Certainly some people like the ritual aspect of crafting something by hand in multiple steps, and like I said, it was fun for me the first few days until it got old. Now I just want to press a button and have my cup of coffee.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> If the inventor will please make a portable, electric burr grinder I would be extremely happy. This is the missing piece, for travelers and those who cannot otherwise own a proper burr grinder.

Edit: came across this which looks promising [http://handground.com/](http://handground.com/)

<comment><USER34> Blue Bottle recommends Portlex [https://bluebottlecoffee.com/travel- kit](https://bluebottlecoffee.com/travel-kit)

Portable and electric are also mutually exclusive for car travelers, campers, etc.

<comment><USER33> I've been using the Hario hand grinder and I find it extremely difficult to maintain a grip. Is the Portlex easier to hold? I'm female thus possible not as strong as others who may be using this.

<comment><USER35> Is that the Skerton? I find that annoying at times even with relatively large hands. Wondered if the Hario MINI MILL SLIM would be better.

<comment><USER36> I had the Skerton. The Porlex Mini is better in every way.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> So it's a french press made of plastic?

<comment><USER38> Without the sludge.

<comment><USER25> With the stainless steel filter screen, you can even have some sludge!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> For the last few months I've been doing Aeropress or a pour-over in a chemex on the weekends. I'm still getting my technique down for both and I can't claim that either tastes remarkably better than my Keurig (I totally admit I dont have a great palette for coffee), but it seriously is a lot more fun than just pushing a button. I really looking forward to my weekend morning coffee now.

Recently I've started doing cold brew coffee -- starting it Friday night and then diluting it with hot water in the morning. For me it tastes noticeably better and less bitter.

<comment><USER40> I've recently become a huge fan of the simplicity of a french-press cold-brew - something I came up with on my own, while being completely unsurprised that plenty of others have as well.

Just a course grind into a French Press full of water. Leave it on the counter over night, and press in the morning. At first I was letting it steep in the fridge, but found that it steeps stronger and faster at room temperature. Sometimes I'll throw it in the fridge in the morning and let it steep longer while chilling if I know I'll want iced coffee later in the day.

Cold brew definitely seems to maintain far more flavor. And I agree that it tends to be less bitter, though I've found lowering my water temperature (regardless of method) has removed most of the bitterness in my [near-]boiling brews.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> How complicated it has become to drink coffee ;-)

<comment><USER42> Significantly less so. The Vacuum pot predates the french press, percolator and auto drip. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_coffee_maker](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_coffee_maker)

They're also a huge pain in the ass to use.

<comment><USER43> And dangerous, if you have a glass one. I do, from the '60s; it's cracked and I've never tried it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Is this article only available in a visual format? No audio version?

</comment><comment><USER45> Honestly I would prefer a Clever Coffee Dripper any day of the week. zero mess, probably even more dummy proof than the AP, higher capacity, imho better coffee.

</comment><comment><USER46> I know someone that loves International Roast instant coffee. Can someone define "better" coffee to me?

<comment><USER6> Freshly ground, careful amount of roasting, proper picking time and storage of beans. Those differences are very easy to taste. If someone appreciates the difference in taste then it is better to them. Why is this a difficult concept to you? Are you trying to talk others out of their preferences and suggest that instant coffee should satisfy them? Are you trying to be a sort of anti- snob? Sounds a little snobby in a different direction.

Update: Thanks for the downvote. I get the message. I should never answer a stupid question. Apologies.

<comment><USER47> You're being downvoted because your response started informative and then turned snotty. Would have been great with just the first 3 sentences.

<comment><USER6> I didn't want it to be great. I wanted to tell the guy the answer he already knows: different coffee tastes different. Can't my comment be just not-great?

<comment><USER48> Your comment can be damn near anything you want it to be. Do you expect that you should never get downvotes because you don't want them? I don't even understand why people pay attention to votes, but to have such an emotional reaction to the comment score truly boggles me.

Note: I don't expect this to be a great comment either. Downvote away! I honestly don't care.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> I always wind up making a mess everywhere with mine

<comment><USER2> You might benefit from the inverted method and using a normal teaspoon to add the grounds and stir, instead of using the included accessories (I never use the funnel, and the stirring paddle is just...weird).

<comment><USER50> Unless I want to break out the kettle to heat the water, I heat the water in my cup and then pour into the press. My coffee cups pour like shit, leaking steaming hot water about. Plus if my ceramic coffee cup isn't pre-heated this way, the resulting coffee is luke-warm.</comment></comment></comment>


It's not a privacy 'breach' when information about you is out there already - <AUTHOR> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/13/AR2010111300227.html <comment><USER2> It being illegal to intercept unsecured communications isn't entirely new. For example, it's long been illegal to drive around a neighborhood intercepting phone calls made on cordless phones, even the older ones that are really easy to eavesdrop on. Especially if you're doing it in any sort of systematic way.

I do agree that it's imprudent to rely just on that to protect your information, though.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I agree.</comment>


Rise of the machines: who is the 'internet of things' good for? - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jun/06/internet-of-things-smart-home-smart-city <comment><USER2> Years ago I decided I didn't like the idea of just emitting data online. I mean with personal stuff, who I know, what I do, where I am going. I just felt the only thing coming out of that is that it will be used against me later. I still cannot see a single positive from allowing outsiders to know so much abut my life.

I don't have a phone and stuff like that. I like a quiet life and am content with the handful of people I know well. I wonder though, at what point (if ever) will I be left behind by society? Or if there will always be options for me.

Like a day where, you go to jail for not having a smart meter installed. Or, you must access Terminals in an Airport via the Government App on your device. I am worried about such things.

<comment><USER3> Interesting thoughts. I guess as always with life, everything becomes a negotiation between what you want and what you must concede to get it.

Often this concession is a resource exchange - you pay, they provide - but one that has few other expectations upon you. For instance when I buy some breakfast cereal I don't have to prove I have bowls, spoons and milk. Market forces dictate that the widest market is desired and this is the one that expects the least from it's customer. The store just wants to sell cereal. However, for some things I might want, I have to demonstrate my suitability to society. It might be dangerous to sell guns as widely as cereal or fiscally irresponsible to sell houses to unknown parties. The management of your suitability for various things is often held by other, trusted structures within society - government records etc. Thus the task left to the individual is to prove their identity so that these 'suitabilities' can be attributed to the person present and to connect appropriate 'suitabilities' stored in disparate structures e.g. bank account and gun license. Therefore, the key questions as we journey through this technological transformation are 1) can I pay and 2) can I prove my identity?

To my mind this is why the mobile phone is such an iconic piece of technology as it looks like it is becoming the preferred mechanism for a person to answer both. However, in answer to your question I think what you may begin to experience is inconvenience more than exclusion.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> From what I can tell, the Internet of Things is really good for creating botnets. [https://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/news/leet-iot- botnet-b...](https://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/news/leet-iot-botnet- bursts-on-the-scene/)

(also, 650Gb/150Mpps DDoS? Holy crap!)

Remember, the "S" in "IoT" is for Security!

</comment><comment><USER5> > But the benefit to the individual customer is tiny compared with what Amazon > gains.

This asymmetry in gains is what I'm most worried about. People get a bit of convenience (enough to partake), company builds knowledge monopoly.

</comment><comment><USER6> I'd like to have network which reacts by using sensors to play audio I was listening to in another room. It could also remind me of things when I enter a room and maybe other conditions are met.</comment>


Here's why we are in a massive bubble. - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.in/Heres-The-Evidence-That-The-Tech-Sector-Is-In-A-Massive-Bubble/articleshow/25183693.cms

<comment><USER2> Yes, contrary to Betteridge's law of headlines, apparently.

<comment><AUTHOR> going to google that!

<comment><USER3> pretty sure it's something like:

if the headline is a question, then you can answer no [and go on with your day?]</comment></comment></comment>


'I can't see how my ads work if I can't target people': Confession of a marketer - <AUTHOR> https://digiday.com/uk/cant-see-ads-work-cant-target-people-confessions-marketer/ <comment><USER2> I've no sympathy for someone who makes money off peoples personal data</comment>


OZY - <AUTHOR> http://www.ozy.com/ <comment><USER2> Such a nice site. Hope this gains traction.</comment>


Facebook pauses app reviews, disables new user authorizations - <AUTHOR> https://developers.facebook.com/blog/post/2018/03/26/facebook-platform-changes/ <comment><USER2> The so-called "data breach" was always in reality a by-product of an open platform that hundreds of thousands of developers could easily build apps on top. You may err on the side of "more reviews" or "less powerful API", but in the end, those ideals are in tension. The more open the platform, the more open to this kind of "breach".

People who believe in the idea in this kind of platform having an API should have long ago spoken up in Facebooks defense. This is exactly what I was afraid would happen, and I expect worse to come from this "platform review". Given the kind of media coverage here, Facebook seems to have more to lose than to gain from letting random Hacker News kids build on their platform. And if so, they won't in the future.

<comment><USER3> Apple got this right from the beginning despite years of criticism about the "walled garden". They took arrows for years: all the "open always wins" from the FOSS types, all the press coverage of some app developer crying about App Store rejections or onerous rules.

They didn't get it wrong because they know who butters their bread: customers. Developers are rightly prioritized last.

Fun to give this Paul Graham essay a read again [1].

[1] [http://www.paulgraham.com/apple.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/apple.html)

<comment><USER4> You're comparing Apples to oranges (I'm sorry)

Apple doesn't have a social network. They also don't rely on advertising and 3rd party data brokering.

It's easy for Apple to be the 'good guys' here when they have physical products as their profit generators.

FOSS would have worked better in the Facebook case too as people and developers would know/discover a) where their data is and b) what risks it faces

<comment><USER5> I swear there is some kind of downvote bot on HN - reasonable posts are often down-voted grey within the first few minutes (like this one's parent), and then eventually climb up to a reasonable place, when, what feels like, the humans have had time to see it - has this been noticed or discussed before? I'd be curious to know if some accounts are serial downvoters, especially as soon as comments go up - does HN look for that kind of stuff?

Of course part of the answer is that new comments have no votes so a quick downvote will make them grey, but there are frequent strange cases.

One thing for sure is that a lot of people downvote based on disagreement rather than a comment's quality - which in my opinion is not right (and I think against the intent of a downvote), but that's a different issue.

<comment><USER6> I'm fairly sure there are multiple downvote bots operating on HN. Frequently, certain comments to topics considered by some as "political" on HN will get an _immediate_ 2 or 3 downvotes in the first 30 seconds, and then over the course of the next 2 or 3 hours, be upvoted back up to black.

Although it's possible that there's some confounding happening here, such as the handful of people who hit refresh on HN hundreds of times a day are also ones who can't stand certain political viewpoints. But it seems unlikely. Far more likely is that there are a handful of downvote bots in operation on a keyword basis.

It's not a huge deal to me, but it does seem kind of obvious.

<comment><USER7> I get downvoted on agreeable comments on 4 day old conversations....there's definitely bots or something going on.

<comment><USER6> A downvote on a 4-day-old comment is unlikely to be a bot, since it's likely that no one will even see it. If you're seeing agreeable comments being downvoted after several days, it's probably just a grouchy misanthrope or two catching up on HN on their day off.

<comment><USER8> _A downvote on a 4-day-old comment_...

Is not possible since they turn downvotes off after 24 hours.

/pedant

As someone who incessantly refreshes HN and spends a fair amount of time on the Comments page, I see no reason why it wouldn't be people seeing new comments to older discussions via the Comments section rather than bots. Although I am a demographic outlier in multiple ways, I cannot possibly be the only person routinely cruising the new comments section.

<comment><USER9> Good point about the new comments feed. I think your parent either misspoke or misunderstood their parent's "[downvoted] comments on 4 day old conversations", which would mean a new (down votable) comment on a thread that started 4 days earlier.

<comment><USER7> Correct.....old conversation, new comment.

The giveaway, imho, is a downvote on a completely inoffensive comment, combined with certain other increasingly common patterns.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> The Facebook API has been useless since 2014 when most access to friend data was cutoff. Since then, if your objective was data collection, that could be easily achieved by scraping publicly available information (many friends lists are public, there are many public posts, etc. - certainly enough to use in aggregate to formulate campaign strategies etc.). I suspect that will be the next "scandal," since in 2018, people can't possibly take personal responsibility for the things they post and allow to be public.

Ironically, the "scandal" that caused this whole thing is a non-issue. Pre-2014 Facebook apps could collect a lot of information about you and your friends, along with their Facebook user IDs, and that was scary because there was a time when you could simply submit a list of user ID's that you wanted to show a specific ad to. But since Facebook advertising cannot be targeted by user ID anymore, and this policy was in place well before the 2016 election, all of that data was essentially useless to any participant in the 2016 election other than for aggregate things like general campaign strategies. I am intimately familiar with the advertise by ID issue - I was awarded a $2k Facebook bug bounty for spotting an exploit in the Custom Audiences feature that allowed an equivalent version of targeting by ID after they disallowed it.

So while it's possible that Obama used his special access to the entire US social graph to successfully influence his elections, it is impossible for Trump or Hillary to have done it _even if they had the data_ because of the changes in the FB ad platform in between 2012 and 2016. This entire "scandal" was created and promoted by people that don't understand, or actively ignored, this concept. If you ask everyone that has read the recent headlines, including reporters that wrote the stories, I'll bet 99%+ will tell you that they believe they could be specifically targeted with ads.

It would be interesting to see if the executives at any of the media companies that have managed to sell this scandal to the public took unusually large short positions in Facebook stock before releasing the story. Since the story is effectively fraudulent (it was not possible for the election to have been influenced in the way that the stories imply), I assume that would be securities fraud.

<comment><USER11> >Facebook advertising cannot be targeted by user ID anymore

This doesn't matter much if you can do essentially the same thing by targeting with extremely specific location and demographic data.

<comment><USER10> You can't "essentially do the same thing" in the way you mention though. You are bringing up a second issue, that is also not allowed. You cannot, for example, use specific GPS coordinates to target a house or even a group of houses. Anything less specific than that and the effect gets watered down significantly, and the platform simply doesn't allow anything close to that kind of "extremely specific" location targeting. Same with demographic data (which can easily be obtained through other places, where the data is much more accurate than you would get from Facebook - see Acxiom).

<comment><USER12> The idea is this:

given the complete graph and add some external data, you can identify those users you should advertise to, i. e. email@example.com.

BUT: what is still possible, and what Cambridge Analytica was actually building, is slightly different: with a statistical sample of maybe a few ten thousand complete profiles, you can build a statistical model that targets your advertisement not to a user, but a set of criteria: "Males between the ages of 35 and 40 living in a mid-sized town in Texas who liked curling and Star Wars Episode I, but has never traveled to Australia". This is still perfectly possible.

It's likely the latter model performs at least 90% as well as the former, with an upward trajectory as methods are improved. Note that CA probably didn't get this working terribly well. But someone else definitely will.

Intuitively, I am far more uncomfortable with the first. But practically, I can't really think of a reason why.

<comment><USER10> Agreed that it's scary if someone actually manages to get it working. CA did not, nor did Obama who was given access to far more data. But the issue is the false narrative being sold by these news stories. If you ask an average person right now what happened based upon these news stories, they'll tell you that Trump hired someone to hack their Facebook data and then used it to target Facebook ads to them, and that this was so effective that he was able to steal the election from Hillary. That's what I take issue with - it's a provably false narrative.

<comment><USER13> I'm actually not opposed to this. In fact I wouldn't mind if a similar narrative started about Clinton and how she used it to steal the popular vote. Then both major parties would be pushing for privacy in the US. Digital privacy is complex and I'd rather people have a misinformed motivation for it than apathy. It's not unlike geopolitics or economics in that you almost need to have egregiously simplified propaganda to get people onboard because the reality is so complex and nuanced that most people's eyes glaze over at the thought of it. The truth and depth of understanding is available to anyone that wants it but my parents are never really going to get it the way I do. They don't have my understanding of how data, applications and the web actually work to make it all click so they think Facebook spies on them using their microphone when the reality is so much more insidious.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Pausing app reviews is annoying for sure, but not allowing new users to authorize their app is really bad.

Meaning that new customers can't connect with facebook anymore to access their own data using OAuth! We don't need permissions about your friends, your photos, or whatever. Just accessing their own messages and posts (which is what our customers want to see in our app and pay for).

I know they are shell-shocked after #deletefacebook stuff, but this overreaction is ridiculous.

So glad it's not our only channel of communication through. Times like this you appreciate email - crazy huh?

<comment><USER14> Drastic action and outcry from developers may be necessary to attain enough media coverage.

The spin from Zuckerberg as a result will be along the lines of "We're really glad you asked that question, and it's one that's really important to all of us. We are prioritising the safety and privacy of our users, and unfortunately that might upset some over-reaching applications."

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Reading Facebook's PR as they try to fix "problems" that they previously leveraged to profit massively is like someone purposely tripping you and as you stand back up they spit in your face and say "Oh, sorry. I'll try not to do it again" in a condescending tone. [edited to remove things HN can't handle]

<comment><USER16> Wow man that's some top level hate. You do realize that Zuck has pledged away 99% of his wealth? Providing third party apps access to friends list was a strange permission. I have never used an app that asked for it. But there are plenty of dating, games and social apps that could only work with a permission like that.

I think people are reading too much into this fiasco. We are better off fixing Facebook. It serves its purpose well.

<comment><USER17> > You do realize that Zuck has pledged away 99% of his wealth?

He hasn't. He has pledged to donate 99% of his wealth to a private, for-profit organization that he owns.

I also pledge to donate 99% of my wealth to my bank account.

<comment><USER18> >He hasn't. He has pledged to donate 99% of his wealth to a private, for- profit organization that he owns.

I initially thought you were being overly critical here. It looks like you're right, the "Initiative" he created is an LLC and not a non-profit.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chan_Zuckerberg_Initiative#Com...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chan_Zuckerberg_Initiative#Company_form_and_taxation)

<comment><USER19> If you read higher up in that wiki it lists all of the money the initiative has given away so far. I'm not sure why people think that the LLC doesn't give away money.

<comment><USER7> That's called influence, changing people's minds with relatively small amounts of money. And it works.

<comment><USER7> Changing people's minds is no longer considered influential?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Where does it say that facebook is disabling new user authorizations? I don't see it on the page OP linked.

<comment><AUTHOR> It's not mentioned in the post specifically, but this is what you get when a new user tries to login with Facebook: [https://imgur.com/a/iAf6r](https://imgur.com/a/iAf6r)

<comment><USER21> It sounds like this might only affect apps requesting the "pages_messaging" scope... [https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&vertical=default&q=platf...](https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&vertical=default&q=platform%20access%20disabled&src=typd)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> This is a bit out of left field, but since the height of Farmville I've argued that Facebook should offer cloud services. I know these days everyone wants you to build on their cloud and it's a bit oversaturated, but a very easy way for Facebook to make data available to developers while maintaining security is to run the code that operates on that data on their servers. Seems like such a no-brainer I'm surprised they haven't done it.

But maybe I'm missing something obvious.

<comment><USER23> Ben Thompson from Stratechery has convinced me that Facebook _wanted_ to be a platform, but changed their mind. They realized that making the world's most valuable consumer dataset available to developers (and competitors) was dumb, as was letting those companies all pollute the core FB experience (like Farmville), and they would make far more money in the long run by letting advertisers target with that data.

This lines up with my experience. I did a ton of (painful) Facebook platform development from 2007-2009 or so, but I haven't followed it as closely since. My sense back then was that there was this huge build-up of activity around the FB platform; they were creating all these new APIs and ways for developers to build super social experiences and deeply integrate with the core FB experience, there were huge companies like Zynga that were entirely dependent on Facebook and also were responsible for tons of FB revenue, etc. And then it all seemed to fizzle? It doesn't seem like there's really hardly any activity any more in terms of deep integration with Facebook as a platform, other than FB login. I never see anything on my news feed any more from weird apps, or get invites to take some dumb quiz, or whatever. I mean, I'm sure that stuff is there somewhere, but not anything like it was. That could be wrong though!

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Our app which has only `email` permissions is still allowing new users to sign up.

<comment><USER25> Do you have an alternate means of signup available for those that don't have Facebook?

<comment><USER24> Yep, users can sign up by email too.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I wonder if it's all still a net benefit for fb. I remember back in the day while doing heavy fb dev, being flabbergasted at what we were able to get. It solidified our decision to invest heavily in their platform. We were able to get millions of likes and other data by simply having a few thousand signups. At one point I thought it was a bug and had to ask around about it. We had to consider whether it is something that will be "discovered" and shutdown or not. The power of it cannot be understated, and without a doubt a major catalyst for the success of their platform. It's possible that they would be worth less today, including the $100B loss, without it.

</comment><comment><USER26> Not sure if this headline is 100% accurate. oAuth for apps that have already passed Login Submission is still functioning. For example, new users to an app that is already in the FB app ecosystem can still create accounts via oAuth.

However, apps that request scopes like "user_friends" or "pages_messaging" [1] may error out during authentication.

[1] [https://messenger.fb.com/newsroom/messenger-platform- changes...](https://messenger.fb.com/newsroom/messenger-platform-changes-in- development/)

</comment><comment><USER27> Seems kind of late for this kind of thing doesn't it?

<comment><USER28> As in, a week late? No. Changes like this take time; some of these Facebook devs and managers are probably already working around the clock on this and related changes.

Or as in many years late? In that case yes. A bit more privacy from the start would've been nice.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Interesting how it's all about "sharing" and "community" when they want you to get on Facebook and all about "well you know you signed your privacy away" when you ask any questions. It's so disingenuous - I'm loving Facebook's self- created troubles.

</comment><comment><USER30> facebook privacy through restricting the api is an illusion, a lot of content can be extracted with scrappers

<comment><USER28> You have to be someone's friend to extract that same info with scraper though, no?

<comment><USER31> It depends on their privacy settings. Some people expose a lot of information, and you can (if you're pateitnt) put together a great deal of information about a person with their privacy settings locked down if you study enough of their friends.

Of course, FB could just resort to making everyone's info private. But then it would suffer a serious loss of utility, as many friendships and social connections are validated by the existence of mutual acquaintances. Most of the time this is completely innocent and desirable for all parties, which is what allowed FB to become so popular in the first place.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Just turn off all Facebook apps. I never turned them on, and don't seem to be missing anything.

<comment><USER33> Or how about: "Don't use Facebook. I never seem to miss anything."

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> How does one even pause app reviews? They don't own the app stores do they?

<comment><USER35> I think this means that they're not allowing new apps into the app store.

<comment><USER28> Close, but no (: They don't own any app stores, this refers to apps that use Facebook login or data.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Can anyone think of a useful Facebook app? I can't think of one. They're not as intrusive/awful as they were in the FarmVille era, but are any actually useful for users, not marketers?

<comment><USER37> I mean just having a Facebook login on your own website can be useful. I believe even that qualifies as a Facebook app.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Is it possible to create an app that can easily remove personal info, and delete all posted content that is, say older than n days old? If so, is there a new demand for this kind of app?

</comment><comment><USER39> "people have noticed that a lot of horses get stolen from our barn, we guess it's maybe time to finally close the barn door"

</comment><comment><USER40> Seems like the right answer here is analyzing usage of the API and looking for malicious patterns</comment>


Ask HN: Would you like to come and work for us? - <AUTHOR>

The College of Business at the University of Central Florida (State University) is looking for a programmer and web developer. They are not two positions, no. Just need someone who knows the two.
Interested? Apply at:
http://www.jobswithucf.com/postings/33235
You will be working in Orlando, FL, for a State University (paid vacation, sick time, holidays, pension plan, very secured job, etc), and with a boss that let you do whatever you want, as long as you get the job done. <comment><USER2> If you guys helped me with the h1b, I would surely over-deliver what you want.

:(

<comment><AUTHOR> And I wish I could offer you one. UCF will hire -- and help on getting further - any "current" H1B holder, but nothing else.</comment></comment>


Scientists discover Indonesian cave with 'stunning' record of tsunamis - <AUTHOR> http://www.news.com.au/technology/science/scientists-discover-indonesian-cave-with-stunning-record-of-tsunamis-dating-back-thousands-of-years/story-fn5fsgyc-1226782895230

<comment><USER2> I can't find the original paper, unfortunately. With that said, it's interesting to compare the OP with the BBC's reporting of the same story: [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science- environment-25269698](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25269698)

</comment><comment><USER3> A story about something "stunning and beautiful" found in a cave, without any pictures of the cave.

These compact teaser stories have little substance. They're more about attracting clicks with "stunning" in the headline.

</comment><comment><USER4> Wait, people thought tsunamis came on a schedule?

<comment><USER5> I guess the original article concluded that it doesn't look like a Poisson distribution, and this is the journalist's attempt to explain that for the intended audience.

<comment><USER4> [skims wikipedia] So does that mean there's not even a nicely defined average rate of tsunamis? Can you explain that in a slightly less dumbed-down way for someone who doesn't really know about statistics?

<comment><USER5> I haven't read the paper, so I don't even know whether they said anything remotely like that, but "not a Poisson process" could mean anything.

For example, if you start with a Poisson process of tsunamis, but add a tsunami exactly one year after each tsunami of that process, the resulting is not a Poisson process. Such a theory can easily be proven incorrect, but the idea that an event may make it more likely to have further events soon doesn't sound that illogical. After all, for earthquakes, we talk of aftershocks. In a true Poisson model of earthquakes the idea of aftershocks, that is, of relations between earthquakes would be nonsense.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Website with halloween spider mode - <AUTHOR> http://www.education.com/ <comment><USER2> Clickbait title for unrelated page.

<comment><AUTHOR> did you not click on the creepy toggle?</comment></comment>


Show HN: Oyster Hour - Find Oyster Happy Hours - <AUTHOR> https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/oyster-hour/id862906367?mt=8

<comment><AUTHOR> A little background on this:

I really like Oyster Happy Hours (when Oysters are sold at a discount, usually $1, and also usually with other drink and food specials). However, I realized that it was very hard to find where and when all of these events were occurring, especially in NYC.

So, I built an iPhone app that makes it easy to see nearby Oyster Happy Hours, based on your location and the current time. I manually compiled data on over 100 Oyster Happy Hours for this, and we currently have data for NYC and San Francisco.

If you like oysters and live in either SF or NYC, check it out!</comment>


Ask HN: Intention setting before starting new job - <AUTHOR> Hi everyone,
I am starting a new job soon (software engineer, distributed systems/ML infra). I wanted to try out setting clear intentions for myself, and track those at a very broad level during my tenure. I have never done it before, but read a few articles which recommended doing this. At a high level, I wanted to work on innovation, and depth of knowledge (about my area of work, and the field in general).
I was curious if any of you have tried this before, either in work, or in general. Are there any small everyday habits that you would recommend to help with this (e.g like writing frequent essays)?
Thanks a lot, and excited to read your responses! <comment><USER2> Unless you're already prone to writing frequent essays, I would advise against that.

<comment><AUTHOR> I was thinking more on the lines of something similar to an enhanced journal entry, perhaps once a week. Have you had any experience with it? Curious to learn from your experience.</comment></comment>


James Damore's Lawsuit Is Designed to Embarrass Google - <AUTHOR> https://www.wired.com/story/james-damores-lawsuit-is-designed-to-embarrass-google/ <comment><USER2> From the article, "Many are written with the earnest, unguarded candor of people who did not expect their words to travel outside of Google."

Surely, Damore's screed was also written with the same expectation?

To be perfectly clear, I'm not siding with Damore's inferences or conclusions.

</comment><comment><USER3> Well it's certainly embarrassing _someone_</comment>


AngularJS: Factory vs. Service vs. Provider - <AUTHOR> http://tylermcginnis.com/angularjs-factory-vs-service-vs-provider/ <comment> chao- I enjoy quite a few parts of Angular, but its choice of naming between Factories & Services is maddening. The fact that Factories are not Factories- as-seen-in-any-other-context made me sad. Unless I am mistaken, from what I have seen:

Angular Factories are Singletons (you always get the same object).

Angular Services are Factories (you can get many independent instances of an object from them).

<comment><USER2> Really, Services and Factories are just a shorthand way of creating providers.

.factory('foo', function() {

      var foo = {};

      return foo;

});

is the same as:

.provider('foo', function() {

      this.$get = function() {

        var foo = {};

        return foo;

      };

});

And,

.service('foo', function() {

      this.bar = 'bar';

});

is the same as:

.factory('foo', function() {

      function Foo() {

        this.bar = 'bar';

      }

      return new Foo();

});

is the same as:

.provider('foo', function() {

      this.$get = function() {

        function Foo() {

          this.bar = 'bar';

        }

        return new Foo();

      }

});

<comment><USER3> So when should we use each?

<comment><USER2> That can be a matter of personal preference, so the best I can do is share my preference.

I usually use the "service" method because most of my services are objects, and I have no aversion to constructor functions.

However, if I want my service to be a function (a la $http or $timeout,) I'll use a factory (because I don't want a constructor to be new-ed, I just want to create a function.)

And, as the article states, I'd use a provider if I want to provide methods to configure my service before it is instantiated.

I think a lot of it comes down to semantics. Maybe it's just me, but describing my object via a constructor function (as a "service") makes it feel a bit weightier than creating and returning a POJO in a factory. But, from a practical standpoint, you can see it as this:

A provider is responsible for creating (providing) an injectable (as a singleton) object that others can request to be injected. The provider creates this object in its $get method. It can also have methods/properties other than $get that can be called/modified in the config stage to configure the object it will create.

But, often times (maybe the majority of times,) you don't need to configure your injectable before it is created, so we really only care about the $get method of the provider. This is where the "factory" API comes in. It just eliminates all the boilerplate around creating a provider that only has a $get method.

And finally, for reasons that are not entirely clear to me, the angular team also decided to provide a shorthand for creating a constructor, and returning a new instance of that constructor in the $get method of the provider (or the factory function if you like.) And that's what the "service" API is.

So, the provider is the root API, factory is sugar on top of the provider API, and service is sugar on top of factory API.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Yesterday, I spent 8 hours writing an AngularJS directive for setting focus on an input field. You know, last year we used to just document.getElementById('myfield').focus(), but it's much more reusable and maintainable with a custom 'focusable' directive.

If you want to learn more about the subject: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14833326/how-to-set- focus...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14833326/how-to-set-focus-in- angularjs)

<comment><USER5> If you can solve something in jQuery, why are you using Angular? Wrong tool for the job.

If you have an application that otherwise uses Angular, and you have a snippet of jQuery code that you want to use, wrapping it in a directive takes about 30 seconds. Alternatively, if you don't want to write a directive, you can just run the jQuery code directly as if Angular didn't even exist.

<comment><USER6> To me, a large part of the value proposition behind angular is in a) making your app as declarative as possible and b) isolating resuable and imperative code in modules (directives or services in the parlance of angular).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I don't know if Angular is stupid or I am.

<comment><USER8> It's when Angular has to play with something else, some other library or plugin. And the more Angular Modules you outsource, the hope is that you're all using Directives and Promises rigorously. It gives templates a lot more say in terms of complexity.

Some days my vim looks like (mostly Directives):

        </comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>----
        |    |    |    |     |     |
        |    |    |    |</comment><comment>-----|
        |    |    |    |     |     |
        |    |    |    |</comment><comment>-----|
        |    |    |    |     |     |
        </comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>----

And I'm thinking: Oh god what's happening, is this the abyss?

<comment><USER9> You can put more than one directive in a file. If it gets too unweildy, separate stuff into separate files based on functionality (ordering.js, login.js, shared_ui.js, etc)

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Angular reminds me of Puppet in an odd way. Reading the Puppet docs you will come across passages that say "in the recent release we have added this new feature. Do not use it as it is not well thought through and here is the old simple reliable way to get what you want done." Angular seems to suffer from the same problem. Services are completely unnecessary as Factories are a far simpler and superior way of doing things. Providers are a terrible way to do things. Instead a config service (with a lowercase s) should handle getting initial values to the Factory. The DI system that works in dev but not prod unless you use the explicit way of listing your dependencies is another example of this.

</comment><comment><USER11> What I like about Angular: the scope system, two way binding, clever use of HTML markup for templating. I just wish it was more library like and less like a framework. I guess what I would really like to see is a hybrid of Backbone and Angular. Does such a thing exist?

<comment><USER12> After successfully implementing a project with React.js + Backbone models and routers, I'm now sure Angular is both unnecessarily complex _and_ limited.

One of the nicest things about React.js is not having to deal with such a layered architecture, you work at the right level of abstraction ("components"), and those components are composable. Some people freak out with JSX but it pays off to finally have a proper GUI pipeline for web apps instead of manipulating the DOM directly, or being limited to directives embedded in HTML.

<comment><USER13> Do you have any open source projects for others to learn from?

Used backbone a few times, always turns into a train wreck.

<comment><USER12> Unfortunately it's a commercial product so no source. Drop me a mail though (see profile), I can give some pointers.

I know what you mean by Backbone, and all I can say is that often wiring up the views is the culprit. Models and routers work nicely and that's all I used from Backbone in this project.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> the guy didnt want to name them singelton (because it is what hey are basically), because of bad rep,so he went with factory/service/provider. It's like naming your presenter controllers when they are not controllers. Angular definetly has a nomenclature problem which make it difficult to understand at first, but its concepts are quite simple and elegant.

</comment><comment><USER15> Finally I feel like I understand Java.

Was that too snarky?

<comment><USER16> Exactly. How did we end up porting J2EE to the _client side_? People appear to think this is a good idea because... javascript? Because google?

It's crazy.

[http://intercoolerjs.org/why.html](http://intercoolerjs.org/why.html)

<comment><USER17> I was reading through this and thinking "holy crap these angularJS guys are missing the entire point." They are running a damn app-server inside the browser page, for the love of god!

<comment><USER18> Well, I'm missing it - what exactly is "the point"? When building client side applications that have hundreds of components and must be able to function in a stand-alone mode robustly, potentially over multiple user sessions, until a network connection becomes available, having access to a robust implementation of proven, testable software development patterns makes sense to me. It did when I was building those client-side apps in Java or .NET, what changes now I am building them in the language with wider reach than any other in history? All of a sudden I should approach it like a script kiddy?

<comment><USER17> Building a client side application that has hundreds of components and be able to function in a stand-alone mode robustly, potentially over multiple user sessions, until a network connection becomes available, having access to a robust implementation of proven, testable software development patterns:

\- Objective C \- Java + Android \- Monad and #C

Why are we killing ourselves with browsers? I mean, to a degree I get the cross platform deal... but unless you are building for exactly that environment (ie NOT A WEB APPLICATION) then it doesn't make sense to me... at all. There are better tools.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


New micro startups geared to revenues in recession - <AUTHOR> http://www.reuters.com/article/deborahCohen/idUSTRE57K50620090825

<comment><AUTHOR> _"I see a lot of companies here today that are more an application than a company," said Ted Driscoll of Claremont Creek Ventures. 'They are not something that would scale for ventures.'_

Interesting trend. Maybe they all watched DHH's video on not trying to be the next Facebook or Twitter. =)</comment>


FreeBSD/EC2 on C5 instances - <AUTHOR> http://www.daemonology.net/blog/2017-11-17-FreeBSD-EC2-C5-instances.html <comment><USER2> While the new C5 instances are certainly welcome - I've been hoping for their release since their announcement in November _2016_ (and they were already late for Skylake at that point) - we have encountered a number of show- stopping problems that point to this project being just a bit too ambitious.

To name a few:

1\. EBS volumes attached to C5 instances show completely bogus CloudWatch metrics, over an order of magnitude higher than reality (e.g. average read/write latency prints at 100-60,000ms depending on load)

2\. C5 instances don't work - at all - behind an NLB with a Target Group pointing to it as an "instance". You have to put it in "IP" mode.

3\. OpsWorks, as always, lags way behind AWS offerings. You can't launch C5 instances. This was true of even R4 instances for a while, but you could at least change them via API. Not so with the C5 instances; unless you want to lose track of their type completely, you just have to abstain for now.

3a. As a result, we have to run R4 instances for some of our web tier - despite not needing the memory - because they have the highest network allocation. To make matters worse, AWS won't tell you the network allocation. You don't know until you start dropping packets.

4\. ZFS on C5 instances can behave strangely. We've been unable to resize drives (zpool online -e <pool> <drive>) if they're identified by ID ("unable to read disk capacity"). Moving the instance back to any other type fixes the issue.

As always, you expect a couple of quirks with a new architecture, but I found myself wishing they had just stuck a new board with a Skylake chip into a rack and launched it.

Compared to this, GCE has a far more attractive offering: even ignoring all these issues, we simply can't get the instance size we want (a few fast CPUs + lots of memory). It just doesn't exist.

<comment><USER3> > 3a. As a result, we have to run R4 instances for some of our web tier - > despite not needing the memory - because they have the highest network > allocation. To make matters worse, AWS won't tell you the network > allocation. You don't know until you start dropping packets.

Ugh, I hate that. They also have hidden limits on the number of incoming tcp connections you can have.

<comment><USER2> Worse still, we spent weeks on the phone with AWS insisting there was no throttling - just to find out there was throttling. And that would have been discoverable if a single engineer had looked at CloudWatch.

<comment><USER4> Do you have Enterprise Support? If so, this is a very surprising result.

<comment><USER2> Just Business Support, we're not that large of a shop.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> > YOU'RE BUILDING A HARDWARE FRONT-END TO EBS? You guys are insane!

It seems more likely that they've put in a software device model of NVME as a replacement for the BlkBack software device model that the BlkFront driver talked to. Not much different than the software e1000 NIC that xen/qemu already supports.

That said, with their virtualizable Annapurna wonder-NIC, they could be doing it in "hardware", though even in that case a reasonable part of the device model would be software, just running on a NPU, not a CPU.

Hopefully Amazon will disclose more details.

<comment><USER6> There's absolutely no way that they would get the performance I'm seeing from an emulated disk. We're talking to real hardware, exposed via PCI passthrough.

Now, exactly what form that hardware takes is an open question. I would assume it's something like "NVME interface hardware" \+ "ARM CPU which implements the EBS protocol" \+ "25 GbE PHY", but that guess is based solely on "that's how I would design it".

<comment><USER7> It's fun to speculate about how other clouds do things :)

> There's absolutely no way that they would get the performance I'm seeing > from an emulated disk. We're talking to real hardware, exposed via PCI > passthrough.

There's a wide spectrum between "emulated" and "real hardware, exposed via PCI passthrough". Passing through to PCI hardware, in and of itself, gains you very little in terms of absolute guest-visible performance versus eliding all VMEXITs via other means, but it has other important characteristics that I suspect AWS very much wants in the c5 family.

> I would assume it's something like "NVME interface hardware" \+ "ARM CPU > which implements the EBS protocol" \+ "25 GbE PHY", but that guess is based > solely on "that's how I would design it".

I would expect something along these lines, although I'd be a little surprised if they bothered putting the NVMe bits down in silicon. My personal guess would be a good silicon DMA engine and PCIe interface married to sufficient general-purpose processing (ARM SoC, FPGA, etc.) to keep pace with the NVMe Command/Completion queues.

Regardless of how they've implemented it, the end-to-end result seems to hang together very nicely. Kudos to the team at AWS.

(note: I work on Google Compute Engine's hypervisor; my speculation about AWS really is speculation about how they'd do this — the two companies have very different engineering approaches, so I may be _entirely_ wrong trying to project onto theirs — like I said at the top, it's fun to try :)

<comment><USER5> > I would expect something along these lines, although I'd be a little > surprised if they bothered putting the NVMe bits down in silicon.

You and Colin both know they bought Annapurna Labs, right?

We don't have to speculate _that_ much about what is probably going on here...

<comment><USER7> I do, hence my speculation about putting the NVMe in firmware instead of hardware :)

(Colin's speculation in a peer reply is also reasonable -- personally I've seen enough errata in "off the shelf" IP to shudder at the idea of anything in silicon that doesn't have to be, but fundamentally I'm a SWE, so that _would_ be my take, wouldn't it)

<comment><USER6> The way I see it, everything has errata... but if you're taking something off the shelf, it's more likely that someone else already found them. :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Colin is one of the many smart wizards we are lucky to have in FreeBSD land. Well done Colin!

<comment><USER6> I can't claim much credit here. I haven't made anything work; all I did was figure out what didn't work and let the right people know.

<comment><USER9> That is basically what a Project Manager does, and from my perspective it is a lot more valuable then what can been seen form both inside and outside.

<comment><USER6> Fair enough. Maybe I should say that I didn't demonstrate any special talents here. What I do could have been done by anyone in the FreeBSD project, but I ended up managing the FreeBSD/EC2 platform by accident and now I'm the obvious person to keep on managing the platform.

<comment><USER9> > Special talents

Speaking from my (limited) project management experience, I found distributing tasks to the right person is actually a talent in itself.

Note: I was actually surprise how many people could not do it when I was trying to transition away into another project.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> What kind of device does freebsd hang off nvme? Is it da or something not cam? Haven't really been paying attention.

<comment><USER6> It's nvme. The GEOM disks (which are what you want to use) show up as /dev/nvd#.</comment></comment>


'The Pirate Bay' Back Online, BUT Seized by FBI - <AUTHOR> http://anonhq.com/anonymous-says-pirate-bay-new-domain-old-domain-compromised/

<comment><USER2> Can anyone provide further information/confirmation on this? It seems sketchy for a lot of reasons. The FBI doesn't go after individual torrenters, so I'm not sure why they'd be logging IPs. I'm not sure how anyone would know it if they were. The alternate address given, thepiratebay.ac, doesn't work at this time.

Seems like this could be a bunch of FUD/trolling. Any thoughts?</comment>


MySQL client allows MySQL server to request any local file by default - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/gwillem/status/1086275952915533828 <comment><USER2> I never worked on anything as complex as mysql, and I'm definitely not trying to say "well durr hurr see you should use postgres since mysql is developed by morons".

But how on earth do you end up with a design like that? I've done a lot of network development, including file transfers, but never ended up in a situation where I was like "uh, this is totally backwards and can easily be exploited, but doing it the right way is an order of magnitude harder." Imagine HTTP PUT would work that way.

I'd really love to learn how they ended up with this. The past has shown that in _most_ cases there is an explanation that's at least somewhat understandable.</comment>


In honor of Wufoo: our interview a year ago - <AUTHOR> http://vimeo.com/11093594

<comment><USER2> This is entirely off topic and I apologize profusely. If you don't want to read an off topic post please don't continue.

I know Firefox is not as popular among the HN crowd right now but I still like using it for a variety of reasons. Flash video works very spottily on this computer because it is an older linux. When flash has decided to crap out vimeo has started showing this dialog that says I need to either get flash (which is fine) or a "HTML 5 Compliant Browser," which I have in Firefox4.

Saying FF4 is not "HTML 5 Compliant" is BS. As is pointing at Safari, as if I could use Safari. This is as bad as the old days of "This site is designed to work with IE 5.5"

/end rant

Sorry for the off topic post but seriously internet use a better less biased error message (As I am pretty sure Windows users have no wish to use Safari either).

</comment><comment><USER3> There are a lot of interesting ideas in this video about customer support, management and pricing. Definitely worth a watch, really inspiring!

</comment><comment><USER4> Is there a list somewhere with links to all the _Founders at Work_ videos?

</comment><comment><USER5> Is this lady in HR or something? She has a weird vibe.

<comment><USER6> Jessica's a founding YC partner, among things. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Livingston>

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> thanks jessica. This was an inspiring one. It's unbelievable how many unique management techniques they came up with.</comment>


What is Haskell's primary feature? - <AUTHOR> http://blog.tmorris.net/what-is-haskells-primary-feature/ <comment><USER2> > Haskell's evaluation model and its implications is perhaps its most widely > misunderstood feature. While the benefits are (enormously) enormous, they > are far too deep to consider writing a short article about.

That strikes me as... bad marketing. You have to have an elevator pitch for your language, or at least a concept that you can use to win people over.

<comment><USER3> It's not bad marketing because it's not marketing.

> your language

Some people do not subscribe to programming language cliques.</comment></comment>


Rose Marie Bentley lived for 99 years with organs in all the wrong places - <AUTHOR> https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/04/08/health/99-year-old-backward-organs-medical-oddity/index.html <comment><USER2> This is fascinating! I was diagnosed with dextrocardia w/ situs inversus at 19.

I didn't make it to 99 years old to find out I had it, but several physicians and doctors in my childhood missed the diagnosis too. Story time!

This is written on mobile so I apologise for grammar and spelling errors.

I had awful asthma as a child and would frequently visit hospital till my teenage years because of asthma attacks and similar. I couldn't estimate how many X-rays and Ultrasounds I had growing up. No one picked up the Dextro Cardia till I got my medical exam for Permanent Residency in Australia. You can imagine how surprised I was when I found out all my major internal organs are a mirror of where they should be. The consensus so far is that because my organs are all mirrored, most doctors look straight past the condition and consider it to be an X-ray Technician error.

Similar to Rose I experience chronic heart burn and I'm at heightened risk of heart disease, but little more than that. Unlike the majority mentioned in the article, but like Rose, I'm quite healthy and I'm now at the age of 30 with no signs of stopping.

One funny story within a story. I have to wear a medical alert to describe my condition in case of an accident.

When I was in my mid twenties I was in a car accident and my (car hits bicycle, I was on the bicycle) and didn't wear my medical alert. The one time in my life I definitely needed it. In vehicular accidents it's common for your organs to be moved around your chest cavity and abdomen as a consequence of the trauma and inertia of your body travelling and the inevitable sudden stop at the end. I got taken straight to triage in ER at the hospital and was whisked away to get stabilised, x-rays taken and my visible wounds cleaned.

I wasn't quite with it at the time but vividly recall the doctors looking distressed at my X-rays, the doctors came over to mention there's some 'anomalies' in my chest and require an ultrasound.

I have a brief moment of lucidity and mention to the doctor, 'Oh, I usually have a medical alert for this. I have Dextro Cardia w/ Situs Inversus. Thought you should know.'

The doctors lost their minds with laughter and took particular attention to finding the apex of my heart beat (it's not where it should be), prodding and poking my body to find out how it ticks.

To think if I wasn't with it at that time, I may have ended up with corrective surgery which is quite common when DC w/ SI is found to minimise risks associated with the condition.

I was quite fortunate, I had no broken bones, but I did have a concussion and so much road rash and other open wounds as a consequence of the accident.

Still to this day I now wear my medical alert daily, and when ever meeting a doctor they show visible delight in getting to play around with me and my rare genetic disorder. It's all quite fascinating. Including my girlfriend who's a doctor, as are most of her friends. :)

Thanks for reading!

<comment><USER3> I also have Situs Inversus Totalis. Thankfully I haven't had any major health incidents to date, and my experiences with doctors and nurses has been similar. EKGs in particular can be quite interesting. :)

I'm also diagnosed with Primary Ciliary Dyskinesia, and your mention of asthma issues as a child had me wondering if it's something you're aware of? About 50% of people with PCD also have Situs Inversus Totalis. The primary symptoms are a chronic cough and congestion.

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

<comment><USER2> Holy shit! Yeah perhaps, I'm due for a medical examination, I'll bring this up.

Do you often get chest infections too? Apparently that's very common as it is with me and those who have DC or Situs Inversus.

<comment><USER3> Yes, it's common, and I have regular mucus build up because, well, my cilia don't clear it well for me. :)

As rscho mentioned, you should definitely bring it up and see if you can get a referral to a specialist. I see a pulmonologist regularly to keep an eye on it. The term Kartagener syndrome (SI + PCD) may ring a bell to them more than PCD will.

I was misdiagnosed as a kid as having asthma (or something like that, I don't remember this well), and doctors prescribed an inhaler but it had no effect. My parents had me seen by a pulmonologist which then led to a diagnosis.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Biochemical Individuality by Roger Williams [1] is an amazing read. It discusses a wide variety of "unusual" human physiological characteristics, including bones that only occur sometimes.

One hears the refrain "everyone is unique". The thing is, technically you can say "every factory made part is unique" at some level. But humans are much more unique on many more different levels, than any human-made-machine (things like bone density or blood saltiness vary widely. Indeed, very few measures are uniform for everyone).

The remarkable thing is how the different parts of a living thing can still function well with that capacity to vary.

[1] [https://www.amazon.com/Biochemical-Individuality-Roger- Willi...](https://www.amazon.com/Biochemical-Individuality-Roger- Williams/dp/0879838930)

<comment><USER5> My favorite was a statistician in the late 40's early 50's who was tasked by the air force to find the 'average pilot'. The reason was new fangled jet fighters were crashing due to pilot error. At higher rates than could be anything but problems with the man machine interface.

He and his helpers took 10's of thousands of measurements of thousands of air force pilots and determined that, there is no such thing as the 'average pilot'.

Well there was. About two dozen of them. Turns out that all the measurements were uncorrelated in the already highly selected group that is air force pilots.

Aerospace manufacturers were forced to redesign cockpits with adjustable seats and controls. And the rate of accidents declined.

> The remarkable thing is how the different parts of a living thing can still > function well with that capacity to vary

What's really whack when you consider it is the same neuromuscular system that allows us to walk can also be repurposed to drive a car, fly a plane and operate other machinery.

<comment><USER6> _What 's really whack when you consider it is the same neuromuscular system that allows us to walk can also be repurposed to drive a car, fly a plane and operate other machinery._

Isn't this because we purposely design all those things around our anatomy though?

I'd imagine alien octopuses' vehicles would be designed around their anatomy and they would have no trouble using them.

<comment><USER7> Not OP, but I always thought it's amazing how it becomes second nature.

You think you want to turn left and slow down, not I have to use my left foot to slowly press the brake and slowly move my hands in a circle while grasping.

<comment><USER8> Breaking with the left foot sounds really dangerous. What is the right foot doing?

...though I guess you were just reinforcing your point: driving becomes so second nature that you forget the implementation details.

<comment><USER9> Actually, two feet driving is superior to traditional method in every way, especially on a slippery road. The only problem with it is that when you try it, you are a newbie again, so of course you can mix up pedals just like when you were learning driving. So train it on roads without traffic.

[https://www.vox.com/2015/7/1/8877583/two-foot-driving- pedal-...](https://www.vox.com/2015/7/1/8877583/two-foot-driving-pedal-error)

<comment><USER10> If you are used to a stick shift car, the issue is that the left foot is too 'heavy' and totally lacks the sensitivity to apply the brake.

At least that was my experience. I drove an automatic for the first time some years ago, and that was the only issue I detected.

The fact that you never have to move your feet from the corresponding pedals actually helps to avoid mixing up pedals.

It would be an issue in a rally when downshifts require a bit of throttle and you have to use two feet for three pedals.

<comment><USER9> Yes, that's a problem, but I'm used to a stick, and that issue was quickly resolved after an hour or two of practicing. One hint - use your ankle muscles, not calf to apply pressure with a left leg. If you don't have a low traffic road to practice, you can use go-kart for that too.

<comment><USER7> I'm not sure what you mean, but I noticed back when I was driving stick one of the things I do with my left foot (and I hate how I misspoke and derailed stuff) was lifted my heel from the floor of the car.

With my right foot on the gas and on the brakes I can just pivot my ankle to control the pedal with my heel resting on the floor, but with the clutch you typically have to quickly press it in completely, but then slowly and smoothly release it. Which is easier to do with your heel in the air.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Very interesting. I have "Intestinal Malrotation" and have had surgery for it (cutting ladds bands). Still experiencing several of the issues that I had before the surgery. I am 28 and was diagnosed when I was about 25-26. It is a very rare condition.

One thing I've learned since I was diagnosed is how little we seem to know about the gut and the surrounding area. I hope more research will shed light for future generations.

</comment><comment><USER12> One of my cats was born with a diaphragmatic hernia and we didn't know until she was like five years old. Organs were all over the place but things were fine. Stomach was in the upper chest, and the lungs had grown into the lower abdomen.

She ended up showing symptoms of not being able to keep food down (although eating slower seemed okay) and so we got it fixed for a pretty penny. It really seems like depending on where the organs end up, there might not be any issue. I was really impressed with how mechanical the problem is and how reliably successful surgery is. Presumably there could be complications if there's a real tangle.

</comment><comment><USER13> How does the body figure out which side is left and which side is right? I can think of an easy way to break symmetry but it seems harder to consistently know which side is which.

<comment><USER14> Short answer: at the single cell stage there's a cilium that, spins in a single direction and establishes chirality. People with immotile cilia thus have a 50/50 chance of getting SI, because the developing body chooses randomly.

<comment><USER15> I thought it was multiple cilia, wafting fluid in a current around a cavity, a bit later than the single cell stage but still very early?

Either way, the reason a cilium spins in one direction rather than another is that the motor is a molecular machine built out of amino acids, and amino acids are themselves chiral. If you made a person out of amino acids with the opposite chirality, their cilia would go the other way, and their body would be flipped. It's a lovely example of magnifying something up from the molecular to the macroscopic.

<comment><USER14> The motion of the cilia is not directly coupled to the chirality of the amino acids, you could probably make a cilium that obligatorily moved in the other direction with a handful of mutations.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> The article states that situs inversus sufferers "invariably" have severe heart defects, and generally gives a pretty bleak outlook for the condition. And yet this woman made it to 99, without diagnosis, despite several surgeries.

I wonder if anyone has done a statistical analysis to find the true number of undiagnosed cases, because it would seem to be very high.

<comment><USER17> They explain the likely reason:

> But Bentley was an anomaly, one of the few born with the condition that > didn't have heart defects, Walker said. "That is almost certainly the factor > that contributed most to her long life," he said.

<comment><USER18> Which means that they shouldn't have used the word 'invariably'.

I'm also not keen on their use of the word 'survivor' in the same paragraph.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> My uncle has a condition where all his organs are flipped left to right too, I think it's a slightly different condition though.

<comment><USER20> There's multiple variants of heterotaxy syndromes (left and right variants) as well as many on a wide spectrum. We see a couple a cases a year pass through the radiology department.

The working understanding is that these are ultimately ciliary dysfunctions in utero which cause aberrant gradients for body patterning.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I've already planned to do willed body when I pass on. There's nothing like it in anatomy class. Ours had a pneumonectomy, which was interesting to discover (why was the tissue different on both sides?).

</comment><comment><USER22> My very elderly paternal grandfather has a similar condition. He had a minor abdominal surgery (spleen or gallbladder) in the 1960's, and it took an unusually long time to find the correct surgical site.

</comment><comment><USER23> The molecular mechanism that determines left-right asymmetry in the body is extremely interesting. For mice, it comes down to Nodal flow from ciliary movement that occurs around E8. The cilia rotate clockwise to generate leftward flow to establish a gradient to generate left-right asymmetry.

</comment><comment><USER24> Why does a prefect mirror image of organs in your body result in things not working? One would assume most things would work...

The only explanation I can think of as to why this would cause an issue is that not everything is mirrored.

<comment><USER25> In many cases, it doesn't cause problems.

 _In the absence of congenital heart defects, individuals with situs inversus are phenotypically normal, and can live normal healthy lives, without any complications related to their medical condition. There is a 5–10% prevalence of congenital heart disease in individuals with situs inversus totalis_

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

<comment><USER24> I understand this. My question is what is the mechanism that causes the 5-10% prevalence? Was something not mirrored?

I only ask because it wasn't explained on wikipedia.

<comment><USER25> The rest of that paragraph: _most commonly transposition of the great vessels_.

From my read, yes, sometimes not everything is mirrored. But, also, a problem with the cilia can be a cause of the organ reversal. This will cause additional health problems.

Just trying to be helpful. Hope that answers your question.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Here is the Associated Press News story on this.

[https://www.apnews.com/456c51d0a69b4b86bde1a52e9a5e9a60](https://www.apnews.com/456c51d0a69b4b86bde1a52e9a5e9a60)

</comment><comment><USER27> > To honor and respect the privacy of those who offer their bodies to science, > no further details are given medical students about the person who had once > inhabited the body lying on the silvery slab before them.

Unless you are special I guess?

<comment><USER28> It sounds like they talked with her surviving family and got permission. The second half of the article is from them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Why is this so rare?

<comment><USER30> Given the number of people who commented here with their own stories I wonder if it actually is rare.

I imagine you only find out if you're undergoing x-rays, operations and similar.

If there are no obvious side-effects there could be a lot more flipped-people out there.

<comment><USER29> Doesn't almost everybody receive x-ray, ultrasonography, abdominal palpation, stethoscopy, ECG or surgery today? Does it happen often that a person grows up never ever examined by a doctor closely?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Autoplaying video that starts after I already scrolled down and switched to HN tab with the comments? Thanks, no.</comment>


Obliterate Startup Depression - <AUTHOR> http://www.humbledmba.com/obliterate-startup-depression

<comment><USER2> I'm always glad that this kind of topic comes up.

Last month I went to the HN Meetup in London that Harj spoke at. On the way there I was recounting to a workmate how low the lows can be and how at the record label we would have these bleak months wondering if we'd screwed up absolutely everything.

It's really hard to explain to someone without this experience what it feels like. How hard it can be to go into work, and how you struggle to remember that this is what you want when through your head part of you is demanding you quit and work in a kitchen somewhere anonymously and simply.

He didn't believe me, not really. He was just listening.

Then during the speech that Harj gave, after inspiring everyone to take the risk, he then mentioned the lows. The devastating lows.

And I think that's important.

The only truths I firmly hold from having done a startup and now doing one again:

      * Everyone is a mess and doesn't know what they're doing.

      * Everyone is going to go through their darkest days with their startup.

It's much harder to invest the time and energy over a prolonged period to deliver than anyone thinks. And there is no easy path or way around it.

The only thing that seems universal in coping with it, is exercise. Make exercise part of the startup. Being fit for the job is part of the job, and if that means coming in late post-exercise some day, that's way way better than working your butt off until midnight and doing it again at 6am.

</comment><comment><USER3> In my experience, this tends to happen to different founders at different times so hopefully there's always one person who's "up".

The solution for us is to exercise competitively: "Did you go to the gym today? I went for a run this morning...".

<comment><USER4> I definitely agree, one cofounder & I recently discovered that doing intense exercise in the evening can really help decompress after a long day and clear the mind.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'd like to add another suggestion, this probably goes double for the solo founders out there.

Join a co-working space. Working from home/coffee shop just doesn't give you enough social interaction and community to keep you going indefinitely. I learned the hard way, a couple times, I simply can't work from home for sustained periods of time. Co-working spaces gave me the flexibility to go somewhere that I got to know people, make friends and escape work every once in a while. Working on a startup is very isolating, simply being around other people makes it a lot easier. (Shameless plug if you're in DC - Affinity Lab is the place to be)

</comment><comment><USER6> If you're looking to better understand and treat depression, this is a good resource: [http://www.clinical-depression.co.uk/dlp/understanding- depre...](http://www.clinical-depression.co.uk/dlp/understanding- depression/understanding-depression/)

</comment><comment><USER7> It somehow helps when I know we are not alone.

</comment><comment><USER8> Ok rant time.

I go to your website. It demands an email address before you tell me anything about your company or how it will "change commercial real estate forever". I don't want to you to spam me in the future so I enter a fake email address. Some ajax happens and it tells me to "invite at least 3 friends using the link" to get "priority access". I don't even know what your product does. I'm not going to spam my friends in order to get "priority access". Also there are links to follow you on twitter and "like" you on facebook. Again, I don't even know what your product does.

So I figure that the information must be in the email that you send to the address I give you. I give you my real address and lo and behold I get an email which says you're not going to tell me what your product does and that I should spam my friends with my referral link.

The only reason I would want to give you my email address or like your facebook page or follow you on twitter is because I'm interested in the product that you're creating.

Maybe I'm just weird, but this has been a negative experience with your company so far.

\--

Nice blog post though.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm sorry you don't like the Launchrock strategy. I don't disagree the Launchrock implementation has its drawbacks, but it's also a very useful service. I certainly understand your frustration. The reality is we're not ready to say anything more yet. We iterate too quickly at this stage to put up a more informative page. We've had 20k+ visits to our sparse splash page, but it's not for everyone.

We're providing a way to stay up-to-date to those people that want it. The vast majority of them know me through my blog, because that's the only place I advertise it. The super early adopters, including many investors, want to make sure they know about it long before the rest of the people.

When we're ready for a more public launch, we'll provide a much different user experience. If you'd like to talk it about it further, please ping me directly.

<comment><USER9>
       "I'm sorry you don't like the Launchrock strategy."

It's your strategy if you selected Launchrock. What's the point of asking people to tell their friends when there is nothing to say? Also, investors are not "super early adopers."

       "We iterate too quickly at this stage to put up a more informative page."

If you are changing every substantive aspect of your business such that there is no foundational premise you can communicate it sounds more like something else than iteration.

<comment><USER10> Or they're just busy building it and haven't had time to even spec out an informational web site yet. If you feel so strongly about this, then don't sign up for his list.

Cut the guy some slack.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Moonlighting and how to handle it? - <AUTHOR> I am a SE working for a small sized company as a full stack dev.
Recently I was approached by an acquaintance telling me that he is looking for some SE to work on a project he has etc.
I gave it a thought and I was thinking that I could definitely do that for the extra money and the fun involved when developing a new system.
So I approached him and told him that I could potentially work on his project as a freelancer on my off time. He offered to pay me fairly for my services etc and I also explained to him that I would like if there is some sort of small term contract 1 month, where I can stop working for him if I feel overwhelmed with the amount of things I'll have to do for work and on my own time. He agreed that this is very reasonable etc.
Now my question to you guys is what do I do about it and do I tell to my employeer?
I've already discussed this with my director which is a  very straight forward guy and we are friends, and he told me to look online about it and that we never ever had this conversation. He told me to put on an email to him with my offer etc, payments and details and send it to him to get forwarded in the higher ranks.
From what I understood is that the company wouldn't rly be very happy about it and the answer would be a no.
So what do I do about it? Do I start working for the other guy and just go with it if its just gonna be for 2-3 months? Do I declare it to my employer and then quit if he says no? (I don't rly want to be working for a company that limits what I do on my personal time)
I live in the UK, and my contract has a clause where it says that I need to inform my employer in case I am taking on another job. The company that offers me that job is not a direct competitor to my company.
Let me know how you'd have handled it. <comment><USER2> I'd have to see the exact language in the contract, but if the clause says you have to notify them of other work, then that is that. They could accuse you of breach of contract etc if they find out and you didn't tell them.

It doesn't say you can't take it, I guess, but effectively you can't take any such job because it sounds like management expects that they hired an indentured servant. Which is entirely common these days. Always pay attention to the details in the contract! This clause is common boilerplate, so it depends on how much your company actually cares. It sounds like they use this as a kind of 'warrant canary' to determine when an employee needs to be pushed out.

The fact you already notified your boss<?> and he expects you to send an email w/ the job details (pay etc) - which is really out of line - means... you can lie to him that you didn't take the job, but he is under some possible obligation to report to the company you do or might have another job... it looks messy.

I'd have not told anyone anything and just done the weekend work. The capital/labor relationship is such that you can't trust the other side, ever, beyond some point. The myth of the Golden Age of the 1950s and life long employment is long dead. Management is not your friend. You are your own corporation and have to act like it. Corporations are sociopaths and so you have to learn how to use companies like they use employees. It's "just business" as they say.

The real problem is when contracts give employers the right to everything you think up or work on outside of the 9-5 job. Make sure that clause isn't in the contract. Then I'd start looking for another job (don't quit until someone else hires you)

</comment><comment><USER3> If it involves a contract, it's probably a question for an attorney. The 'quit with am months notice' contract probably should also be looked at. Generally, as a free lancer it is better to have the client sign your contract with your terms and conditions than vice versa. Mainly because it can be more or less standard to the industry for the services you provide whereas the client may adapt a contract used to buy coal to govern the delivery of software.

Good luck.

</comment><comment><USER4> Is the second job "official"? Here in Brazil, no office rule can force you to disclosure to your employeers of other gigs (unless you work for government). Here, you sell 8 hours of your day and what you do in the free time is up to you (neither a NDA can change this).

<comment><AUTHOR> No its not official, am pretty certain though that here in the UK they can fire you and even get you to the court if they have proof that you work for someone else.</comment></comment>


What started the biggest population boom in history?  - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/matter/1909ce55ada2 How Iran's explosive expansion warns us about our overpopulated future —and shows us how to fix it. <comment><USER2> Too long, insufficient structure. Wall of text.</comment>


National Academies Press Makes All PDF Books Free to Download - <AUTHOR> http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=06022011

<comment><USER2> As long as the work is a result of taxpayer's money, they SHOULD make it free for the public's access.

</comment><comment><USER3> Maaaaan.... I submitted that within hours of the announcement. And got nuttin! (<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2616450>). It's a good program. More people should poke around that collection.

</comment><comment><USER4> NAP has long been a leader in on-line publishing.

</comment><comment><USER5> Anybody familiar with NAP's business model?

<comment><USER6> It's not a business, it's the publishing arm of the National Academy of Science, which was chartered to "investigate, examine, experiment, and report upon any subject of science" by the US Congress and signed into law by President Lincoln in 1863. The idea was the government needed an academy of experts to advise law makers on matters of science.

<http://www.nationalacademies.org/about/whoweare.html></comment></comment>