An alarming number of scientific papers contain Excel errors - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/08/26/an-alarming-number-of-scientific-papers-contain-excel-errors/ <comment><USER3> Previous discussion - [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12349391](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12349391)

</comment><comment><USER4> MS Excel is _absolutely_ unfit for most scientific and engineering problems.

The spreadsheet GUI, lack of good version tracking/history, and eagerness to coerce data types and "correct" values makes it easy to introduce errors that will go unrecognized and propagated through calculations. Unfortunately this story just keeps repeating itself.

But all of this is just a secondary concern to Excel's real trouble: it's history of incorrectly implementing numerical and statistical procedures. One could plumb the depths of this topic for hours, but here are a few highlights: regression formula accepts illegal/nonsensical inputs (e.g. collinear predictors) and gives illegal/nonsensical outputs [0], variance/standard deviation change incorrectly with sample size [0], output of a paired t-test changes when missing values are included [0], formulas are mislabeled [0], v. 2007 gives very wrong answers to 11 of 27 tests in the NIST test suite used for statistical software benchmarks [1], the random number generator was broken as late as v. 2007 [1], and calculations relying on any of 12 particular floats display an incorrect result [2]. There are plenty of other issues mentioned in the links and elsewhere; if you're interested you'll have no trouble finding them.

Remember, friends don't let friends use Excel for science. :)

[0] [http://people.stern.nyu.edu/jsimonof/classes/1305/pdf/excelr...](http://people.stern.nyu.edu/jsimonof/classes/1305/pdf/excelreg.pdf)

[1] [http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~bdm25/excel2007.pdf](http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~bdm25/excel2007.pdf)

[2] [https://blogs.office.com/2007/09/25/calculation-issue- update...](https://blogs.office.com/2007/09/25/calculation-issue-update/)

Edit: clarify and add a new issue I became aware of while researching further.

<comment><USER5> I'll just quote Soustrup here: "There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses." In particular you see the spreadsheet GUI as a downfall, but I think it is a great enabler that has allowed millions of non-programmers to create useful programs.

<comment><USER4> I would counter with "use the right tool for the job."

Excel is great at churning out fast and dirty estimates for low impact work. The problem is when it's used for large, complex, or important problems because these are just not Excel's domain--something obvious when looking at the kinds of features and bug fixes MS has prioritized over the years.

<comment><USER6> It is damning that you cannot use a basic computer tool for anything that is large, complex, or important. Isn't that exactly what computers are for? Call me idealistic but I want a spreadhseet that can handle milions of rows. Maybe add a "strict" mode to keep people out of trouble.

<comment><USER7> You could have an option to disable any formatting in a tab, and then Excel should be able to handle a billion rows in that tab. But you can't have all the flexibility of Excel on a massive scale. Even a laptop today is insanely fast and has an insane amount of memory.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> First I thought this story was about math and numerical errors. But it's actually about auto- formatting and auto-correction.

"Excel automatically converting gene names to things like calendar dates or random numbers"

In this case, I think what is needed is some kind of rudimentary knowledge of data-types. Or perhaps more simply a scientific template which is actually plain text by default.

But how are people not noticing auto-correction and auto formatting taking place!

The only perfect solution is to hire a developer to build you a data entry system. The developer can build the system which they have no cause to entirely understand the science behind, and thus a human to take the blame for errors instead of excel.

<comment><USER7> The worst with these formatting is that Excel will behave differently in different regions. Another headache in large international corporations/collaborations.

<comment><USER9> But that's an advantage too. As a non English-native user, I like when companies care about my language and culture and they do not stick dates to the MM-DD-YYYY format that is used by Americans only. Yes, of course, we should all go for YYYY-MM-DD... fine by me, but now you go telling my mom :¬)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> [https://help.libreoffice.org/Calc/Deactivating_Automatic_Cha...](https://help.libreoffice.org/Calc/Deactivating_Automatic_Changes)

Type apostrophe at beginning of the gene name ('MARCH1) or format the column for gene names as text (click column letter, then Format | Cell and select text)

If people want to use a spreadsheet application for this kind of data collection (and that is a big if I think) then they perhaps need to have some agreed lab protocols for setting up and checking the spreadsheets. This is a known issue in financial circles...

[http://www.eusprig.org/basic-research.htm](http://www.eusprig.org/basic- research.htm)

<comment><USER11> Ah, you beat me to EUSPRIG. A fine organisation whose research findings give me the heebie-jeebies.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> When my Ph.D is finally done (~3 months), I'll post some of the code I've had to work with daily for the past three years.

"Spaghetti" doesn't even _begin_ to describe it. "Ball of yarn under a cat- lady's sofa" comes readily to mind, as does gouging my eyes out and amputating my fingers.

The problem isn't excel. The problem is scientists.

<comment><USER13> During grad school, I found that MATLAB, in particular, lends itself to spaghettification.

I can think of a lot of reasons why that is, but the one-function-per-file and single flat directory structure of MATLAB programs is part of it.

Language quirks are another, but I could write an entire book about that.

<comment><USER12> >I found that MATLAB, in particular, lends itself to spaghettification.

How did you guess? ;)

I've been gently pointing people towards python for this exact reason. The younger generations need little convincing, but the old dogs would rather write the same shitty code.

I suppose change takes time.

<comment><USER13> Python has definitely been a much better way forward for my work!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Why is the auto-convert 'features' in Excel not opt-in?

When Excel encounters the first cell in a new sheet that it thinks should be auto-converted, why does it not ask if that is desirable for that sheet?

Like: "Do you want Excel to interpret and auto-convert all strings with format <X> into the type <Y> in this sheet?"

At least for conversions where the original data is lost.

<comment><USER15> I don't think Excel ever destroys the underlying data. It simply layers formatting over it. One can override by specifying custom formatting, or opt out by selecting all cells and setting their format to text.

<comment><USER16> Once the data is in the cell, changing cell formatting is a nondestructive visual layer. But while inputting data, cell formatting changes the interpretation of the input, which is destructive.

The article describes in some detail how inputting SEPT2 in a cell with default formatting displays 9/2/2016, but is stored as 42615 (which you get if you later change the cell to text formatting).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Highly relevant: Felienne[0] Hermans' compsci research on spreadsheets out there in the wild, and how to develop software engineering tools to make them better:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Cdgew5zvI4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Cdgew5zvI4)

[http://www.felienne.com/archives/tag/spreadsheets](http://www.felienne.com/archives/tag/spreadsheets)

[0] pronounced Fay-lee-nuh

</comment><comment><USER18> Same thing hapened in Economics involving a major figure in Economics.

[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-04-18/faq- reinha...](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-04-18/faq-reinhart- rogoff-and-the-excel-error-that-changed-history)

<comment><USER9> Yes, they did not get what the world "hide" means in English...

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> It's funny to consider that these errors slipped past the peer review stage. It really highlights the major issue with reviewing source code published as part of an analysis.

If there aren't enough resources / skilled eyes to catch these simple errors, what are the chances they would catch errors in source code too?

<comment><USER20> How many of the studies are doing anything statistically interesting though [ie new/different in the field of statistics]. In most cases it should be possible to have an analysis program, perhaps specialised to the field, in which you simply load the data attached to the study and look at however many regressions or time series or whatever you want - they're standard tools, surely you can download the data and put it in a GUI and look at the same graph as is in the paper in 2 or 3 clicks?? If not why not?

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Anyone doing serious statistics uses SPSS or R, or similar stats programs. If not, you deserve all the bad data you get. Using Excel for that is akin to using a point and shoot camera for a fashion photoshoot, or a crossover car offroad in Death Valley.

</comment><comment><USER22> Consider that given the poorly conducted statistical analyses, p-hacking etc that goes on in the life sciences, Excel garbling gene names might actually improve the net accuracy of the results by removing false positives.

</comment><comment><USER23> Is everybody a washington post subscriber? Or have I missed the route around the paywall somehow?

<comment><USER24> I read all my WP articles via right-click "Open link in incognito window".

(OT now:) If anyone thinks that's cheating them out of money - the choices are not "read for free" and "read for the appropriate price", the choices are "read for free" or "don't read". The reason I read is to procrastinate, so the value I get out of it is actually _negative_ (same with HN...). Even their occasionally excellent articles (like their series on asset forfeiture) is stuff I'm at most mildly interested in (as a foreigner) to distract myself. That's my issue with today's media, I don't actually feel "informed" as in "it this is good for my life that I know these things". I can't do anything about 99.99% of the stuff I read about anyway, nor is it a representative sample of reality but consists almost solely on reporting the outliers.

<comment><USER20> >The reason I read is to procrastinate, so the value I get out of it is actually negative (same with HN...). //

Entertainment has value doesn't it? It's not a simple financial value like the simplistic use of opportunity cost as being the price you could bill those hours at, but it's a useful and functional part of being human.

I don't have a problem with you reading something people broadcast to the public internet though.

<comment><USER24>
        > Entertainment has value doesn't it?

If it's procrastination the _net_ value is negative. You may put any value you like on the "entertainment" \- but what it displaces has higher value.

If I delay my work (which I do, even now) the overall value of writing comments on HN or reading a WP article that talks about issues that don't directly concern me and that I cannot do anything about is negative, even to myself (and don't try to argue they may concern me indirectly because, well, _everything_ does).

It's like being addicted to drugs: Sure you can argue if the drugs (and let's assume those especially crazy and destructive ones) had no value to the person taking them they would not take them, but a more appropriate model than high school economics would be the neuroscience of addiction. But even if you decide to stick to using an economic model you would have to take a very narrow view - like picking exactly the period where a stock was rising to show how great a pick that company is - to argue the person gets a positive value from taking those drugs.

<comment><USER20> >You may put any value you like on the "entertainment" \- but what it displaces has higher value. //

Disagree. This conversation has a value, I [likely] can't derive anything financial from it, one might term it "entertaining" even [that wasn't supposed to sound quite so denigrating!]. The value is difficult to define, but it doesn't _remove_ value from my life IMO. It possibly takes some time with which I can argue for opportunity cost, but I see the conversation as a generally positive thing.

I'm not sure if a mere conversation can be equated so easily to the value positions involved in drug addiction. However, I would say that it's a mixed bag. Some aspects that come out of drug addiction can have positive value - I'm thinking the progression of the arts: some great works of literature, paintings, dramatic performances, appear to have at least some relationship to the artists drug use [and in some cases addiction, it's hard to know where the divide is].

>"This is no more true than to say that Van Gogh was only Van Gogh because of his inner turmoil or than Jean-Michel Basquiat needed heroin to draw or paint. But it is also worth remembering that it killed them both." ([http://www.worldcrunch.com/culture-society/under-the- influen...](http://www.worldcrunch.com/culture-society/under-the-influence- tracing-a-long-twisted-history-of-artists-and-their-drugs/drugs-art-bizarre- hallucinations-painting/c3s11162/))

Similar ground with a greater focus on musicians - [http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest- blog/creativi...](http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest- blog/creativity-madness-and-drugs/).

<comment><USER24> You can disagree all you like - on what basis??? How do YOU know what I'm doing and what my time is worth? This discussion certainly has zero value - more like a _negative_ value to have to encounter so annoying. Ridiculous!

        > This conversation has a value

I covered that!!! Do you actually READ the comments you respond to? I mean, without the filter that removes the things that don't fit your narrative?

<comment><USER20> Lol, your indignation made me laugh ... um, does laughter have any value in your philosophical framework?

>I covered that!!! Do you actually READ the comments you respond to? //

Right back at your there - it has a value because I value it. Might seem a bit too self-referential but that's how value works.

>How do YOU know what I'm doing and what my time is worth? //

I don't. There's extrinsic and intrinsic values for sure - if you're chatting inanely to me on HN when you would normally be performing successful heart surgery on people who want to live longer then the opportunity cost [in terms of life enrichment for the people who would have been saved] is high, for sure, but that doesn't mean the intrinsic value is negative.

You appear to be arguing that because there is a potential for foregoing financial gain through having a conversation that the _value_ of the conversation -- the ability of it to enrich, educate, improve, entertain, etc. -- is negative. The true value can't be counted, you don't know it's effect on me and I don't know the effect on you (or others who are reading). Maybe an onlooker has read something in the conversation and that's inspired their PhD thesis on the teleology of communication.

IMO you appear to too readily decry the measurable negative aspect - <USER2> for foregoing financial gain (opportunity cost) - whilst you under-estimate the potential for positive improvement, extrinsic value, and the like.

[FWIW Currently I'm suffering with mental health problems and this conversation has actually made me realise that I can be positive. I'm not saying this to try and shoe-horn in an extrinsic value, that's a genuine self- reflection.]

Happy to hear any further responses if you can steer away from declarations of "ridiculous!" and "annoying!" and illucidate why you feel it's ridiculous, how it conflicts with your value judgement in expanded terms?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Should decison maker's spreadsheets in business, policy, and government be peer-reviewed in the same way as scientific papers?

Disclaimers: 1) Yes, scientific peer review needs improvement. 2) Yes, spreadsheets are not ideal for science... what makes business less important?

</comment><comment><USER7> I wonder if that also applies to DNA tests used in criminal investigations...

</comment><comment><USER26> An alarming number of business spreadsheets contain Excel errors. But it's the linga fraca of businesses, departments & teams everywhere.

</comment><comment><USER27> *Excel mutations</comment>


Ask HN: What skills a company expects to have a self-taught web dev? - <AUTHOR> Being a self-taught web dev myself, I'm curious how a company assess a self-taught candidate versus a CS degree one. <comment><USER2> Simple, get SHIT done. If you can get SHIT done, you are in. That's what matter

</comment><comment><USER3> I've never seen a company that has different assessment based on education, if it's for same role. Especially since most of what you learn in CS degree is irrelevant to web development.

<comment><USER4> I disagree. Building performant and reliable web software requires good knowledge of data structures and algorithms.

<comment><USER5> Maybe for backend development, but definitely not for frontend, which is what the majority of web developers do anyway.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> IT wouldn't make a difference. If you're asking each candidate different questions based on their education you aren't equally assessing them. There are enough variables involved when interviewing there is no need to introduce more.</comment>


The Internet Is Held Together with Bubble Gum and Baling Wire - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/29/the-internet-is-held-together-with-bubble-gum-and-baling-wire/ <comment><USER2> Years ago (1989?) there was a push for a "data super-highway" (pushed mainly by Al Gore, leading to the myth that he said he invented the internet). I was at a conference on the subject. There were a lot of talks on possible alternatives. The audience had a lot of telco people, who assumed it would be based on the phone infrastructure.

To make a long story shorter, at one point a neckbeard stood up and said "we already have it. It's called the internet". Most of the audience laughed and the speaker pointed out that something so fragile and unreliable could never scale out.

</comment><comment><USER3> If you work with email at the protocol level, it's flat amazing how well everything works given the hundreds of non-conforming bits of text you receive. Just parsing email addresses accurately in the wild is a feat.</comment>


In Spain you have to be a hacker to be able to pay your taxes - <AUTHOR> https://redemptionthongs.wordpress.com/2015/11/05/in-spain-you-have-to-be-a-hacker-to-pay-your-taxes/ <comment><USER2> And he didn't even get to mention the x509 client ceritifcates and java craplets.

</comment><comment><USER3> Spain has the most incompetent burocreacy of west world.

<comment><AUTHOR> And they are not ashamed of it ;)</comment></comment>


Collection of 15 People's Google Interview Experiences - <AUTHOR> http://linkmingle.com/list/15-plus-Collection-of-Google-Interview-Experiences-interviewresources

<comment><USER2> A Google interview isn't really different than other interviewing experiences I've had. A little quirkier and more competitive, but that's about it.</comment>


The Global Seed Vault, a reserve of seeds in an arctic mountain. - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/europe/29seeds.html?ex=1361941200&en=f60f75f1d67464c8&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all

<comment><USER2> Not a bad idea, but they built it at sea level. In geological time the sea level is anything but stable.</comment>


Picking Locks with Audio Technology - <AUTHOR> https://cacm.acm.org/news/246744-picking-locks-with-audio-technology/fulltext <comment><USER2> I hate the way journalists try to make things sound scarier by throwing in 3D printing, as if a new world of criminal technology is upon us. Surely 3D printing is the very worst, and slowest, way to make a key. Nobody has been waiting for 3D printing to enhance their breaking-and-entering game.

</comment><comment><USER3> Last week some comment linked to a LockPickingLawyer YouTube video and I've been binge watching since. Odds are, it is faster just to pick your lock for anyone who knows enough about the type of lock to know the right blank to cut. And access to set up a microphone means access to set up a camera and work from a picture of your key. But with that kind of access, traditional impressioning is probably practical.

Anyway [https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCm9K6rby98W8JigLoZOh6FQ/video...](https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCm9K6rby98W8JigLoZOh6FQ/videos)

</comment><comment> GuB-42 That's an interesting attack. However, it looks like they used it on rather simple lock. These locks could be picked quickly by a moderately experienced picker, and with the right tool, decoded.

But most high security locks have some kind of trick: sliders, rotating pins, pin in pins, or simply a rediculous amount of pins. It would be interesting to know how exciting security features in locks could prevent that attack. For example, if two pins are lifted at the same time, how to tell which is which by sound?

</comment><comment><USER4> Given some isolation from prying eyes, a good non-technical method of making a key is to use a blank and grind it by hand. By binding the cylinder and wiggling the key, it leaves marks for each pin that is bound up; grind a little and repeat. Obviously not going to work for certain lock styles with security pins, or Medeco locks (but nor will audio work either, unless you can somehow hear a pin rotating a specific direction)

<comment><USER5> For anyone who's interested in this, it's called impressioning and is really cool. It basically uses the design of the lock (pins pushed down into the keyway by springs, preventing the cylinder from turning) in the attack by using the marks those pins make on a key, to gradually fashion a working key.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> The talk on this is here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxyAa_txM34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxyAa_txM34)

</comment><comment><USER7> I'm not sure what the threat model that this brings is. It's certainly very cool research, but nothing particularly scary to even the highest security facilities... I can't really imagine a situation where you can install an audio bug where you can't also install a video bug to grab a picture of the key...

</comment><comment><USER8> Acoustic side-channel attacks on mechanical locks, I guess it's possibly more effective than an acoustic side-channel attack on an electronic lock running inside a computer. Side-channel, side-channel everywhere.

</comment><comment><USER9> If your home is broken into, but there is no smashed window, most home insurance policies won't pay out.

This sort of research will hopefully allow more homeowners to get payouts they are entitled to.

<comment><USER10> This is not even remotely true. Please point to any legitimate insurance provider that has this exception.

<comment><USER9> There isn't a written exception for it in the policy, but when the claims adjuster comes round they'll use it as an excuse to not pay anything because there's no evidence of theft.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> > _work out how to surreptitiously acquire the audio from a key insertion_

Another way: hang a flyer or bag on their door knob. Include a free pen that has a hidden microphone/transmitter in it. People stick things on doors all the time for marketing purposes, so probably not too suspicious.

</comment><comment><USER12> Interesting. I wonder if a laser/receiver pointed on the door would give a good enough vibration noise/signal ratio to get the required detail level audio to print a key?

<comment><USER13> ... from space ...

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> This is ingenious!

</comment><comment><USER15> Or make clicking noises when you insert your key?</comment>


Sequoia Capital: Armchair quarterbacks - <AUTHOR> http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/1304-sequoia-capital-armchair-quarterbacks

<comment><USER2> This is an attack on a strawman.

What the Sequoia presentation says is: Economic conditions vary. In bad times you can't take as much risk. Bad times are here. Stop taking risks.

Though I don't endorse Sequoia's conclusions (I don't know how bad the economy will get, or how long it will stay that way), the chain of reasoning is just common sense. It doesn't make them hypocrites, or imply that what they had been telling startups before was wrong.

<comment><USER3> It's not an attack on a straw man. It's an attack on Sequoia's logic and its presumptions -- a valid attack, if you ask me. Except for Sequoia's recommendation for stasis (bad advice in any conditions), all of its suggestions are _how you run a startup_. If you aren't doing everything that the deck suggests, your startup probably isn't going to do well. As a startup, you should not be taking stupid risks. Smart risks: you need those, even in "bad" times.

If a startup can only survive in "good times" (still trying to figure out what that means, given the past eight years), then it probably shouldn't have existed to begin with.

Google, while a startup, added value to the universe and soon enough figured out how to take monetary advantage of that value. Google busted out of the dotbomb era like a bat out of hell.

Pets.com did not. Turns out the world needed a better way to find information/ideas/people, but not a "better" way to order dog food.

<comment><USER4> "If you aren't doing everything that the deck suggests, your startup probably isn't going to do well."

It depends on the business models. Some companies can be built cheap and they can reach profitability quickly. Not all companies can follow this model. Sequoia doesn't just invest in YC style companies that can be built by 2 people over 3 months. I highly recommend you take a look at <http://www.sequoiacap.com/company/all-stages>

"Google, while a startup, added value to the universe and soon enough figured out how to take monetary advantage of that value."

How do you define "soon enough"? IMHO soon enough at a time where there's plenty of venture capital to go around might be very different from soon enough at a time when capital is scarce. Take a look for example at the story of how Amazon reached profitability. <http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/158315_amazon28.html> Amazon also figured out how to become profitable, but it took them 6 years to do so. That was soon enough back then, it might not be soon enough today.

<comment><USER5> A quote from the seattlepi.newsource:

"What few people understood was that the reason that they didn't make money was that for the previous five years every time there was a trade-off between making more money or growing faster, we grew faster,"

They were making money.

<comment><USER4> I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This seems like blatant linkbaiting from 37signals, and frankly I think it's childish.

They know quite well (or at least they should) that the reason some companies get a huge cash injection from investors is to grow fast and grab marketshare. This costs a lot of money. It's a risky strategy but if it works it pays off bigtime. The get fast big strategy is obviously not for 37signals, but I'm sure they are aware that there are people in the world that have had success with it. Amazon comes to mind as a classic example.

What Sequoia is saying now is that the get big fast strategy will have to be postponed if you want to survive. And they're right.

<comment><USER7> Just curious, can you think of another company besides Amazon where 'get big fast' actually worked?

"Get big fast" was actually a rather symbolic phrase for the excesses of bubble spending. It worked for amazon and few others.

<comment><USER6> I'm not on firm ground here, but I would think that ebay, Cisco and paypal are all in that category.

<comment><USER8> EBay got big slowly...they went almost 2 years between initial launch and VC funding. Also, they're one of the few companies that was profitable before the founder quit his day job.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> 37signals have been extremely successful in their niche and I think they have a wonderful product. However I think their biggest mistake is to try and extrapolate their experience to what seems like all tech businesses and start- ups, with the diversity we see in funding requirements, growth strategies and segments start-ups appeal to chances are slim that the 37signals model is for everyone. Furthermore considering Sequoia Capitals track record this post is unimaginably arrogant, you need to come up with a better argument than that to take them on in a business model ideology war.

<comment><USER10> I agree... that blog post came off a bit arrogant and naive TBH. It doesn't sound like Jason has an ounce of experience outside of 37signal's success.

On the flipside, I've seen wayyy to many inexperienced but well-funded companies burn through cash like it's never ending and with little purpose or direction. So in that regard, I do agree with the general point of his post.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> This was a pretty predictable and lazy post... "We were right all along. We are the best in the world, 37s kicks ass!!! We're _awesome_... we're wildly successful etc etc"

Reading the embedded slideshow was more interesting than the 37s ego post, so thanks for posting that anyway.

The point for me was that before, you could wait maybe 2 years or something building something awesome, building up traction before making profit. Now, you should try to achieve that a lot faster, as investment will be harder to come by. I think that's pretty sound advice.

</comment><comment><USER12> Personally, I like what 37s has to say. It's the same thing people here (myself included) have said to all these "How to survive in hard times" articles (and that is "why do sound business principles only count in hard times?").

I'm glad someone with a bigger voice is saying this.

Yes, I understand "get big fast, grab market share" MO–but I guarantee they have portfolio companies that have burned a lot of money with nothing to show for it (revenue or market share).

Yes, Sequoia had to say this given their current situation. But, what's wrong with having an opposing voice to "raise vc/ramp up fast/ignore revenue for now" mentality? It's good to give entrepreneurs both sides of the coin.

</comment><comment><USER13> Let's say it's boom times and money is cheap and plentiful and there are a stable of eager acquirers looks for companies to buy. Why not grow fast in that case? It didn't seem like it hurt the guys who started YouTube. And there are more examples where that came from. Then, when the economy slows, cut back. Seems like a good approach to me.

A lot of the innovations we take for granted today are the result of people with big dreams and no clear path to profitability. If we didn't have big dreamers and investors to fund them based on... gasp... a leap of faith, then the web would probably consist of nothing more than simple project management services, enterprise chat services, and single page editors.

"If you had to keep borrowing to stay afloat, were those good times?"

I know the good people at 37s understand what venture investment is, but they keep trying to prove that they don't. If you're taking money from Sequoia, you're not borrowing money, you're exchanging money for ownership.

<comment><USER14> Yeah, but Youtube got acquired, and it really hasn't had a business model.

I think this getting big fast is really useful when you want to get bought.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Amazing... the sheer volume of news.YC folks jumping on the defense wagon here. If I wouldn't know any better, I would say that 37Signals personally offended some you.

To do some reflection... I can't help but wonder how many adjustments a company such as 37Signals is going to have to make to their operations compared to the average overfunded "innovator" from Silicon Valley...

I know for damn sure who to put my money on.

</comment><comment><USER16> The sub heading of the article more accurately describes their point about Sequoia as "Monday morning quaterbacks.

Armchair quarterbacks would mean that Sequoia is not directly involved in the industry and is chiming in on something they know nothing about (not speaking of something with the benefit of hindsight like the term "monday morning" confers).

</comment><comment><USER17> Personally I think Sequoia's goal with these slides was to calm people down and provide reassurance during tough economic times. I don't think they were trying to really get people to change their spending or strategies. The people at Sequoia are definitely smart enough to not recommend major business changes based on the events of a few weeks.

Kind of saying "Just stick to the basics and everything will be fine people". As a vc, I would imagine there is some incentive to keep the confidence of your portfolio companies up in tough times.

</comment><comment><USER18> We get it: 37signals hates VCs.

</comment><comment><USER19> Sequoia Capital are a bunch of idiots.

<comment><USER20> That could be true, but they're a bunch of successful idiots at the very least.</comment></comment>


FBI chief calls unbreakable encryption 'urgent public safety issue' - <AUTHOR> https://ca.news.yahoo.com/fbi-director-calls-unbreakable-encryption-urgent-public-safety-151252010.html <comment><USER2> I feel like this is kind of like tsa locks on luggage. If they can access your lock, so can others.</comment>


How to Fix the Software Industry - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@fagnerbrack/how-to-fix-the-software-industry-c2b627ec3d9d <comment><USER2> The software industry doesn't need to be "fixed". Within years, code will write itself completely.</comment>


Introducing Spaces - A Micro-chat platform. - <AUTHOR> Fellow hackers, we are launching here today so please enjoy and check us out. Spacesapp.com
Spaces is a free, fun and simple way to chat with people around your favorite interests. Topics can be happenings, locations, products, events, hobbies or anything!
It's dead simple to discover, create, share and chat. There's no login or secondary screens, just launch the app and you're free to discover, create and chat in seconds. We created this app to be super fast, easy and beautiful.
Sharing deserves it's own paragraph. Each space comes with slashes - /topic/. This tells people a conversation is happening and exactly where to find it. When you can chat about anything, and share it, there's a lot you can do: tweet it, post it to your blog, share it with your beta testers or customers, include it in a marketing campaign, create "episodes" of discussion around interesting topics, etc.
I've created a few spaces for today /CarolBartz/ /yCombinator/ /Techcrunch/
Spaces was developed by Joey Primiani (Google & Cortex), James Mudgett (theCrowdapp.com) and myself (Pennsylvania).
Spaces is for iOS, but we plan on releasing new features (like following topics/notifications) and launching on Droid.
Also follow us on Twitter - @Spaces_app. We have fun there. <comment><USER3> So its a social media twist on IRC?

Take the concept of IRC chatrooms and simply make a topic and chat around that topic (chat/share media)?

I see that you use "Starbucks" in the image on your site, the only thing that would be interesting is if the "starbucks" space were to be also visited by Starbucks who would post a QR code for free/discounts into that space. Go into the space, redeem the QR code from that vendor at starbucks.

Otherwise, I can think of absolutely ZERO reason why I, or anyone, would make a chat room about starbucks. Unless we were bitching about starbucks.

<comment><AUTHOR> We've been described as a social IRC or an inverse Twitter.

Yes, sponsored spaces are where brands can have a real conversation with their fans. They would also be able to offer discounts, etc.

I love Starbucks. I love sharing my experiences and favorite beverages. I'd love to hear other people's stories or hear what other people are drinking the same time I am and talking to a real person from Starbucks would make my day.

Even the most insignificant item can have a following.

<comment><USER3> Well, just remember that not everyone shares that passion - but here would be a suggestion then.

Have content/category/context tabs in each space.

Lets say you have a space called "Starbucks" - you click into it and you can then swipe left and right into a different context/category/content area. Swipe left and get current QR coupons. Swipe right and get list of locations withing X miles of your current GPS - each location a different color line. Swipe again and get a chat line - the color of the user's text corresponds to the starbucks location they are chatting from/about. Swipe again and get anther panel - maybe the starbucks menu. etc...

Now take this concept with a consumer electronic and have panes as follows:

specs | coupons/sales/deals | ratings | chat | MFR contact info

You can make this such that if you have a list of things you have/want - <USER2> can track purchasing decisions and vendor contact.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Another interesting use would be to create channels based on places you go frequently with friends, like a particular club. You/your friends post events into that space channel - such as "We will be here on friday night" and it gives you alerts when an event is posted. Then you can post your status/replies about that event at that place into that channel. After the event is over, the comments get rolled up under that event so they dont clutter the space for the next event.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your input Sam. I believe I get your meaning (dealing with a head cold). Any event or club has a lot of potential for engagement, just because it's a closely defined experience - same time, place, activity, beverages, type of clientele, etc.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> It would be interesting to have a chat room called /nearby/, so can easily bored people to chat with.

</comment><comment><USER5> Link - <http://Spacesapp.com></comment>


Ask HN: Learning to conduct an interview? - <AUTHOR> Hi HN,
I am a new grad and I just recently joined a pretty big tech company. They are in the process of changing their interview process and I want to be a part of it. My interview was pretty typical; I had an interview on my campus, which was 1-2 coding questions, and a fly out to the company with 5 1-hr interviews, 4 of which were coding questions, and one was behavioral. All the coding questions were very typical Cracking the Coding Interview style questions. There were some general knowledge questions like algorithms and data structures
My questions to HN are:
1. What is an example of a company or an interview process that you think is good? If you think the setup I described above is good, why do you think that?
2. How do you select what interview questions to ask?
3. What are some good resources for preparing myself for something like this?
Any help is appreciated :) ! <comment><USER2> General suggestions :

\- Make sure that the candidate has a really positive experience after the interview. That would mean being very courteous and not interrupting him when he/she is talking, etc.

\- When I interview candidates, I generally read up his resume and circle interesting topics/projects he has worked on. By engaging in a technical conversation with him/her you can gauge his ability. I despise interviewing processes which google/Amazon follow where they just throw a bunch of programming questions irrespective of what his skill set / role he is interviewing for.

Being junior, you might not be exposed to all those technologies/terminologies in the resume, but that's where your learning comes in! If you are interviewing a senior candidate, see if he/she can actually explain a complex idea and distill it so that you are able to grasp it. Senior folks in the team are expected to lead/mentor junior engineers and his/her ability in this regard can easily be judged. Also, you can ask him/her to explain trade offs/design choices, etc.

\- With respect to programming question/design question, let the interview take its own natural course. Have a couple of back up questions just in case. My favorites are design LRU cache or something to that effect / atoi or something similar. The problem in itself is simple, but there are a lot of layers to it. You can see the candidate thinking through the problem loudly/arriving at a solution and improving on it. Please don't ask questions which are hit/miss - Eight Queens problem, etc. They are hardly useful!

To summarize, \- Make it a positive experience for the candidate. \- Go for his resume - engage in a tech conversation. Ask for a design diagram, explain trade offs, etc. \- Keep a couple of design/programming back up questions just in case.

And have fun!

</comment><comment><USER3> Suggest reading Laslo Bock's book- Work Rules!

One rule stands-out, hire only people who are better than you. And importantly, "hire by committee."

> [http://www.amazon.com/Work-Rules-Insights-Inside- > Transform/d...](http://www.amazon.com/Work-Rules-Insights-Inside- > Transform/dp/1455554790/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1456850969&sr=8-1&keywords=bock%2C+work+rules)</comment>


OSC: From Node to ChucK - <AUTHOR>

Hey guys. I've started a new project just for fun. It's a good challenge for my current skill set, but I'm running into a brick wall.
I've been doing a lot of work linking Processing/Arduino and ChucK by Princeton and allowing them to communicate (e.g. GUI in Processing/Arduino, Audio in ChucK). I've rewritten a javascript chat server, originally written by a friend of mine, modeled after NodeJS's chat server.
I've tried to work with OSC4Node (https://github.com/hideyukisaito/osc4node), but I'm unsure of how to send osc messages with it.
I'm familiar with sending messages via Processing and I assume that javascript is similar, but I'm wondering if someone can give me some starting tips. I'm just calling a sndbuf in ChucK. This will be a locally based server (e.g. localhost), so I'm not looking at cross-machine communication.
Anything tips help. Thanks. <comment><USER2> Is the README not enough? What exactly are you confused about?

You may have better luck asking this kind of question on a Stack Exchange website, by the way. Hacker News is not really a site to ask for programming help.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah. I just thought about StackExchange.</comment></comment>


Director Of National Intelligence Tries To Downplay PRISM Paranoia - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2013/06/08/director-of-national-intelligence-tries-to-downplay-prism-paranoia-says-the-system-doesnt-mine-data/

<comment><USER2> How might you _unintentionally_ target someone for surveillance? Their careful wording -- "we don't intentionally target US citizens" \-- necessarily means they believe it's possible to "accidentally" catch a US citizen in their surveillance dragnet.

Taking them completely at their word, that this is a good faith operation, under what circumstances might an unintentional targeting occur? What would it look like? What does it say about the data they've collected and the analysis they're performing against it? What would the reconciliation process look like for a US citizen who was unintentionally surveilled without a warrant? Would the government still bring charges? Or are the secret courts allowed to issue _ex post facto_ authorizations? If they're not allowed to issue such authorizations, how would we know if they did so illegally?

I don't normally buy into these big hype stories but there is just so much here that is very wrong. The phrase "secret court" just sounds totalitarian.

<comment><USER3> Easy - you search for second-order links. Anyone who's ever made a phone call to someone who's made a phone call to a foreigner or a foreign country.

Whoops, that's everyone! We'll just keep this information forever in case we need it.

It's completely disingenuous.

<comment><USER2> So, would a second-order link be the launching pad for a legal surveillance of a US citizen?

If Joe in NYC called Pavel, a Chechen activist who the NSACIAFBIODNI is monitoring, is that sufficient basis for obtaining a warrant for monitoring all of Joe's communications?

This is the sort of information we need.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Note that he doesn't deny that they did in fact collect literally every piece of phone metadata generated by Verizon (and presumably every other phone company).

Every single phone call you have made for quite some time exists as a record in an NSA database.

</comment><comment><USER4> We should all trust James Clapper after this, you guys.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRhjgynfhag](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRhjgynfhag)</comment>


Jailhouse: A Linux-based Partitioning Hypervisor - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/siemens/jailhouse

<comment><USER2> The official announce email ( [https://lwn.net/Articles/574273/](https://lwn.net/Articles/574273/) ) provides a bit more detail, including a link to the Jailhouse presentation at this year's KVM Forum for the differences between KVM and Jailhouse: [https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6HTUUWSPdd- Zl93MVhlMnRJRjg](https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6HTUUWSPdd-Zl93MVhlMnRJRjg)

<comment><USER3> [https://github.com/siemens/jailhouse](https://github.com/siemens/jailhouse)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is the most exciting kind of virtualization I've seen. I wish it was ready for prime time so I could use it for real!

</comment><comment><USER5> This is interesting, in that it seems to be in compeiting space to LXC.. but makes use of VMX for machine isolation rather than using namespace / cgroups.

It's a shame they haven't provided some benchmarks...

<comment><USER6> It can't be competing with LXC, with LXC you can do over-provisioning of the server and maximize the utilization. With Jailhouse you under-subscribe your system in order to get maximal separation and performance guarantees.

I can see using this for real-time applications alongside management stuff and for separating critical and possibly buggy kernel drivers to where they can't harm the rest of the system.

<comment><USER7> Be fair. It can be said they compete, but, due to their very different design priorities, they don't compete directly.

I don't think the benchmarks make much sense in this situation, unless you measure server utilization and performance guarantees (which is the dimension in which they differentiate themselves).

<comment><USER6> You are right.

One could use LXC for completely allocating a CPU for some container so they can compete on one aspect. LXC still doesn't run on bare-metal and so can't take on the cpu separation for hardware accesses but there is a dimension in which they compete.

<comment><USER7> That's a really interesting idea - LXC and Jailhouse can be stacked in order to achieve both of their design goals.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> How do guests (ehm, inmates?) get access to shared hardware?

<comment><USER9> As far as I can tell, there is no shared hardware. The point is that it dedicates certain hardware to the guests, and they have full access to it.

This is not supposed to fit into the same space as Xen or KVM; it's supposed to give the guest pretty much bare-metal control over the resources that you give it, with minimal interference from the host, so it can be used for real- time applications even if the host kernel is not real-time.

<comment><USER8> Ok, makes sense. But then "jail" is a bad name for it, I'm sure inmates have to use a lot of shared hardware in the real life. In fact "partition" conveys the right meaning.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I've been working with FreeBSD Jails for quite a while now and this looks like a clone for Linux.

For those who don't know, a FreeBSD Jail is a virtualization on the OS level (rather than Hardware level as provided by VirtualBox et al). It's similar in concept to creating a chroot, but you're also locking down processes.

[http://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/jails.html](http://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/jails.html)

<comment><USER11> LXC is the Jails equivalent.

Jailhouse appears to be almost like an exokernel.</comment></comment>


Are we doing MVC wrong? - <AUTHOR> http://withouttheloop.com/articles/2013-10-20-are-we-doing-mvc-wrong/ <comment><USER3> My issue here is that BorrowABook is a verb. This isn't a model class, and in my understanding of OOP, doesn't really deserve a class by itself at all. You could instead put the borrow method in a class called Book that represented the model of your application. Then you call borrow on the book, the book does some logic, and returns a status code to the controller. Or since it's a bit silly to ask a book to borrow itself, have a library model object that handles a bunch of book objects, and put the borrow method in the library class. That's how I do MVC anyways.

<comment><USER4> BorrowABook is a Command. What the article is, albeit unknowingly, discussing is roughly the CQRS pattern. CQRS can rarely ever be considered to be a bad practice. As good developers mature, they come to realise that generally all the good patterns in the world worth pursuing have traits of immutability, messaging and functional programming (FP), even in OOP-land. Most good OOP designs are merely trying to emulate what FP does.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Unfortunately you've misunderstood MVC.

None of that code belongs in the controller. Your 'typical' controller is anything but. All that code belongs in the model.

Your controllers should have zero LINQ statement. You should do all of the validation in the model and the validation failures should returned in a List.

This stuff's been in MVC for years:

[http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2010/01/15/asp-net- mv...](http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2010/01/15/asp-net-mvc-2-model- validation.aspx)

When people talk about 'light' or 'skinny' controllers, this is what they're talking about.

So we're not doing MVC wrong, you've just developed bad habits from bad microsoft examples, work with some experienced Devs so they can teach you how to do it correctly.

<comment><USER6> What's the advantage?

Is the model constantly pulling session state to validate against?

Does this prevent caching of data on the models? Or is there 'supposed' to be some even higher level API manager that deals with the responses before they get to the model?

<comment><USER7> Your controller should be passing the session state to the model (passing the items needed from session state for the model to manipulate data). Models should have no concept of a session. They should be almost entirely self- contained.

Controllers should do only basic validation (length, format, etc.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> MVC is not a dogma, it is a no-brainer instruction to make 90% of programming fruits less miserable. I usually end up with something like Views-Composers- Handlers-Routes-Libs etc. And this can vary from project to project.

<comment><USER9> I agree. There's a lot of sentiment around, "the right way to do something". I somewhat blame rails for the explosion of opinions, but maybe it's just developer nature.

The right way is the way that works for you and your business requirements.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> It's not that the MVC is wrong, it is that the model is not being built right. Moving to the BorrowABook feature is making a model class.

All too often in my experience I see code that has the model rolled into the controller. Controllers and UI are structurally supported better in frameworks. We get lazy and put model code into controllers. It is the way we make spaghetti code today.

<comment><USER11> We get lazy because most of the time ,without a proper Ioc container , writing code the right way is too much verbose.

Ioc containers changed the way I code since I did not have to care anymore about how complicated it was to instanciate objects. It helps write very clean code and makes OOP easier.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is similar (or more or less the same) idea that has been advocated by Uncle Bob and others. Here's my comment on the experiences we have had with this approach: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6470693](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6470693) (the topic was about running tests quickly, and the approach, as mentioned also in the article, decouples the business logic from frameworks - <USER2> testing without firing up web server, database, etc.).

I agree that the interactors make rather odd-looking OO classes, but I suppose the imperative nature of most requests to perform some logic make them less objects in that sense. This has the added benefit of seeing what the system does, just by looking the class names in the interactors folder/namespace.

</comment><comment><USER13> > Features return a glorified tuple (Feature<TOutcome,TResult>) that combines > an enum value that represents what the outcome was, with a value that > represents the result of the operation.

Sounds similar to my understanding of what a monad is. If you have many cases of this, it might simplify the switch statement and improve maintainability.

[http://devtalk.net/csharp/chained-null-checks-and-the- maybe-...](http://devtalk.net/csharp/chained-null-checks-and-the-maybe-monad/)

[http://stackoverflow.com/questions/674855/help-a-c-sharp- dev...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/674855/help-a-c-sharp-developer- understand-what-is-a-monad)

</comment><comment><USER14> The controller is always the ugly part, because it's the piece that's responsible for interfacing between transaction-specific logic and your general backend interface. The article is right that it's easy to put too much business logic in the controller, but fails to recognize that "MVC" isn't supposed to be your whole application - just the UI side. The functionality of this BorrowABook class doesn't belong in the UI layer at all.

<comment><USER15> MVC is something I've never really been able to wrap my head around. I wonder if this is why... All of the guides/articles that I've read on the subject have acted as if MVC was how the entire application was handled.

Could you recommend any references for back-end patterns?

<comment><USER16> I like Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture, which includes some domain logic patterns. A common one is SOA, by dividing the backend into services that your UI consumes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> > Controllers are the UI

I agree.

> What is the responsibility of the controller?

Controllers are the UI ? but the UI of what ? HTTP. controllers should only deal with HTTP (request,respone,cookies,session) stuff , nothing else. The rest should be encapsulated in services, which communicates through models.

The truth is , it is not MVC , MVC is a poor label for that kind of architecture since MVC means something very specific in software engineering.

</comment><comment><USER17> Several peopls have commented that this is really just CQRS.

The approach I described above has nothing to do with CQRS, in fact it directly contradicts CQRS. The design of features is intended to combine commands and queries. If the controller is restricted to commands and queries then the logic of combining those operations ends up in the controller which is exactly what we need to avoid.

</comment><comment><USER18> This reminds me of Data-Context-Interaction (DCI):

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data,_Context,_and_Interaction](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data,_Context,_and_Interaction)</comment>


Eric S. Raymond is a dickhead - <AUTHOR> http://keiron.d3s.co/eric-s-raymond-is-a-dickhead/

<comment><USER2> The first quote sounds about right to me. If you're good at what you do, you don't need to constantly prove it to everyone. I don't understand why you'd be bothered by that.

The second quote is taken out of context. He thinks he's citing some statistic, but doesn't give a source for it. So assume he's wrong until a source surfaces, and then scrutinize that.

You're misinterpreting the third quote, but it also makes him sound silly. He's not claiming that HIV isn't real; he's claiming that AIDS isn't a single thing that is _only_ caused by HIV. That's not really a profound statement.

<comment><USER3> "In the U.S., blacks are 12% of the population but commit 50% of violent crimes; can anyone honestly think this is unconnected to the fact that they average 15 points of IQ lower than the general population? That stupid people are more violent is a fact independent of skin color." \- Eric S. Raymond

This hearkens back to the worst days of "scientific evidence" that Africans are inferior to Anglo-Saxons or whatever European race suited the people making the argument.

Study history and you'll see that we, as a society, have already dealt with these fucking nutjobs and there's no reason a sane, educated adult should be spouting this utter, reprehensible bullshit. It doesn't matter if he "thinks he's citing some statistic". Saying that African-descended people are dumber, and therefore more violent, than European-descended people is completely repugnant.

How could you even defend something like that? Ignorance or misinterpretation is not an excuse on his part.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> You sir are not his wife or family, so his views are his own. Argue and try to convince him you are right, and otherwise, ignore his non-related to software personal beliefs.

Calling him names doesn't help.

Grow up kid.

<comment><USER3> Ignoring prominent racists is a great way to help racism spread.

For that matter, ignoring anyone/anything vile and influential is, in my opinion, tantamount to helping them spread their ideas.</comment></comment>


Rumor: Microsoft about to unveil web-apps strategy - <AUTHOR> http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2008/03/rumor_microsoft.php <comment><USER2> I wonder about their strategy for unveiling the strategy. First they should unveil that.

</comment><comment><USER3> I think Microsofts biggest problem in relation to a webstrategy is this: Style. They don't have any.

What is required in the web space is elegance and simplicity in your userinterface and workflow. The reason for this being that if a potential customer doesn't "get it" within 5 seconds he will move on to the next offering. Microsoft is not used to this scenario. Of course MS has some muscle to move around, but it won't get them the users they crave. They have tried moving on to the web before, and never had the success a company their size aims for. Remember passport?

Their problem is very fundamental, making it hard for them to bridge the gap. They value lock-in and pushing other services from themselves or their partners. This muddles the proposition of their products, and makes it very hard to create a good webbased product.

<comment><USER4> >>I think Microsofts biggest problem in relation to a >>webstrategy is this: Style. They don't have any.

True. I would say they just don't have the _taste_. I guess you just cannot create design marvels without _taste_. I'm still at a loss to figure out why Ray Ozzie couldn't add any magic to the recipe. I also think he's in agreement with MSFT-Yahoo acquisition. If so, then this is beyond my comprehension and they (MSFT) should admit that this is a problem they cannot solve. Even worst, they have lost focus on delivering quality desktop software (but thanks goodness there are investors like YCombinator and companies like Xobni :-). Vista is also miserable failure and a thorough rip-off. Remember Apple SE VP's comments?

<comment><USER3> Yes, taste might be a better word.

I started noticing how deep the problem runs after Ray Ozzie joined the company. He has done great work, knows a great deal about usability, hacking, etc. And he has taste. Yet he has completely failed to change anything, despite the fact that he is as high on the corporate ladder as you can get, and has a lot of clout within the company.

What that shows is that the corporate culture simply doesn't support what he has to offer, and that it is not willing to change in order to accomodate a new reality.

Same thing happened to IBM in the 90's.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Wow. Microsoft is really at the head of technological innovation, aren't they? How do they come up with this stuff, I mean, applications that run on the web!? What a great idea...just think of the possibilities: you could keep all of your photos online and see them from anywhere! And your word processing files...you could share them with your co-workers without having to email a bunch of copies around! This is gonna be awesome. I can't wait until Microsoft starts releasing these products so I can use them.

I wonder what they'll think of next?

</comment><comment><USER6> I don't think strategies are news.

I'd rather a company tell me what it has _done_ , what products _exist_. A strategy is just "hey, everyone else is doing something cool, let's tell the world that we are too so we can reserve our piece of the pie".

Especially coming from Microsoft, who made part of its business by telling the public all the great things it was going to do without actually having a product...

</comment><comment><USER7> So MS will turn into an application hosting company!

Hmmm ... I wonder when will google start offering ERP modules, actually I wonder why are they so late!

All in all, i believe this is a good thing, it should kill most IT departments or largly downsize them, and MIS ppl might be the first to resist this, but, well, its coming .. and few can stop it

<comment><USER8> _So MS will turn into an application hosting company!_

The next Microsoft will probably be one. So the question is whether the next Microsoft is Microsoft or someone else.

<comment><USER9> I would say its Google - its very similar to what happened to ISVs in the 90s - if they were too close to the horizontal stuff MS did, they were steamrolled. today, its similar with startups and google - if what you do is too close - you will either be steamrolled or acquired (if you are lucky).

<comment><USER10> In the very limited field of dinky web calendars and todo lists, maybe, but not in the startup world in general.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> MS unveils strategies, everyone else just unveils.

</comment><comment><USER11> Does this mean it will take 10 minutes to "Start" the internet?

<comment><USER12> Be more concerned about the shutdown ( [http://www.gandalf.user.xirium.com/tech/computer/network/hum...](http://www.gandalf.user.xirium.com/tech/computer/network/humour/end/) ).</comment></comment>


Guide to the CoreCLR Source Code - <AUTHOR> http://mattwarren.org/2017/03/23/Hitchhikers-Guide-to-the-CoreCLR-Source-Code/ <comment><USER2> >> Just over 2 years ago Microsoft open-sourced the entire .NET framework,

Except they open-sourced a new .NET stack, not really the entire .NET Framework, .NET Core and .NET Framework are similar but not fully backwards compatible. I've been porting .NET Framework code to .NET Core and depending on how specialized your project is you may not always find the same libraries supporting your project. A project that perfectly compiles with .NET 2.0 will not just compile for .NET Core, at least not as easily as using a .NET Framework 2.0 project in .NET Framework 4.6. I love Microsoft and .NET but I think Core is executed poorly. You also have EntityFramework vs. EntityFramework Core which lacks features from EF which were deemed "unused" which bites some people in the face.

<comment><USER3> .NET Standard/Core 2.0 will add back many APIs. It'll be the real release of the newer framework, similar to how the original .NET Framework took until v2 to get things into shape.

.NET Standard is all about compatibility - so you can use that to determine which framework you can/need to use. However .NET Core is a distinctly designed for cross-platform reach so it will be a break from .NET Framework in some ways - this is just a given, otherwise they would've just released another .NET Framework version instead of doing all this.

<comment><USER2> Yeah I know this, and hopefully they get it right, unfortunately I'm not there yet. To be fair .NET Core has been great otherwise, I have been able to develop from Ubuntu (used Sublime Text, which I didn't use the plugins since they seem abandoned or something) gave Rider a try but it was buggy at times. I wish Microsoft releases either a plugin for MonoDevelop, or "Visual Studio for Linux" at some point.

<comment><USER4> Have you tried VS Code yet? It's not a full "Visual Studio for Linux", but in terms of intellisense and debugging it has a lot more than you might expect.

<comment><USER2> I've used it, but I never took the time to figure out how to make it run code / debug and I like how fast Sublime Text / CudaText are by comparison.

<comment><USER5> Me too, but I've been trying out newer builds and Code is getting a lot faster than it started out

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I find these runtime VMs fascinating to ogle at after looking at how Erlang's GC worked. I think you have provided me reading material for this weekend.

<comment><USER7> Glad to be of service!!

BTW if it's reading material you want, you should also check out me other post 'Research papers in the .NET source' [http://mattwarren.org/2016/12/12/Research-papers-in- the-.NET...](http://mattwarren.org/2016/12/12/Research-papers-in-the-.NET- source/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> gc.cpp, 37,000 lines of code. And some want to remove Regions from the .net framework!

<comment><USER9> Regions aren't a .Net Framework feature, they're a language feature.

There's absolutely no reason they should be in C# and encourage bad coding practices (like overly long .cs files). Even if you need all your code in a single class, you can shard that class across several .cs files to make organisation and maintainability easier.

Regions are just a crutch people use to allow them to create 10K+ line .cs files that will eventually become a maintainability nightmare (as well as making merges/check-ins/finding things more annoying in general).

Only region I'll use is the built DEBUG one and I only use that to create:

         private bool IsDebug()
         {
         #if DEBUG
           return true;
         #else
           return false;
         #endif
         }

Stackoverflow answer for why regions are bad: [http://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/53086...](http://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/53086/are- regions-an-antipattern-or-code-smell)

<comment><USER10> I agree about regions, but `#if` et al are preprocessor directives, not regions. They actually influence how your code is compiled.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> What's with the Smalltalk portion? Anyone knows why that is?

<comment><USER12> There's no actual Smalltalk code in there. It's just a Github display bug.

[https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr/search?l=smalltalk](https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr/search?l=smalltalk)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> The GC Sample is really interesting.

<comment><USER7> Yeah it's great, I learnt so much about the GC from looking at that sample.

BTW if you want a bit more info on it, I wrote a whole blog post, see [http://mattwarren.org/2016/02/04/learning-how-garbage- collec...](http://mattwarren.org/2016/02/04/learning-how-garbage-collectors- work-part-1/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I want to note something that my interest some:

The second biggest fear which made Sun sue Microsoft was that when MS licensed Java, their VM was faster than Sun's. Microsoft is (was?) the king of JIT. Technically biggest since if theirs was faster, they wouldn't have cared for Microsoft's anyway. Even now CLR is generally considered much faster than JRE.

I don't know how Chakra compares against v8 but then it also depends on what makes money for MS.

<comment><USER15> > Even now CLR is generally considered much faster than JRE.

That's... not really true. JRE's HotSpot is much faster than CLR, even today.

I'd be interested to see benchmarks proving your argument, because basically every benchmark out there proves you wrong.

Sun's HotSpot does recompilation and profiling, to reoptimize depending on use case, while CLR only JIT's once, so the base performance is very low. This is also why HotSpot can reach better-than-C performance in some cases (because it can optimize at runtime for actually taken code paths, and jump to interpreted code for rarely taken paths), while .NET (and native code) can not. (This is what gives HotSpot the name – it recognizes hot spots, and swaps them out for more and more optimized versions at runtime)

<comment><USER16> I tried to find any studies because the claim surprised me, but I didn't find any, so I wasn't going to try to refute that without any data.

But I can say that the number of research papers around the JIT in the JVM is probably and order of magnitude more than around the CLR. Someone else linked to 'Research papers in the .NET source', and guess what? Several of them are really JVM papers, talking about how they've used the same technique.</comment></comment></comment>


Barack Obama's FCC transition co-chair is a (hardcore) World of Warcraft player - <AUTHOR> http://www.wowinsider.com/2008/11/20/obamas-fcc-transition-co-chair-is-a-wow-player/

<comment><USER2> I feel like I'm supposed to believe this a good thing. I am struggling though. I'd prefer a reformed WoW player.

<comment><USER3> To read the linked GigaOM article, it looks like he's a professor whose field of study is internet law, and the people he plays Warcraft with are largely academics interested in the dynamics of virtual worlds (or so they say...).

[http://gigaom.com/2008/11/18/obamas-fcc-transition-team- co-c...](http://gigaom.com/2008/11/18/obamas-fcc-transition-team-co-chair-a- wow-player/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Um, if they were, then why'd they pick a relatively shallow hack n slash game? So that they could write papers about getting ganked, camped and teabagged by a rogue who is in real life a slightly overweight 15 year old boy?

<comment><USER4> I think that's a rather unfortunate simplification. I'd say that there is quite a bit to be gained from studying leadership in these settings. If the Harvard Business review is covering it, I'd say it is a safe bet that there is some good research being done in this area.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The torch has passed to a new generation....

</comment><comment><USER6> He'll never get anything done. This is not a good thing, people.

<comment><USER3> Really? It seems to me when the FCC gets something done, it fines TV stations for offending someone, grants media companies bigger monopolies, or oversteps their authority by trying to introduce the broadcast flag. Do we really want them to get something done?

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> 25 bid that a high-ranking federal official cites _Chrono Trigger_ in a speech before 2030. The question is: what will he pull? Let's see... how about "power is beautiful, and I've got the power"?

<comment><USER8> "On the eve of this election night victory, I want to reflect on how we got here. I thought the campaign was over when I died. But, thanks to my team, I was brought back to life. I don't have a frog on my team, but I do have a girl with glasses, a girl with baggy white pants and a guy who floats when he runs. Oh, and a robot."

<comment><USER7> Crono himself pretty much can't become president. He never speaks, except in one of the endings.

I can definitely see Magus as a campaign manager, though.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Why aren't there any 'good' long-term personal use printers available? - <AUTHOR> Since I was a kid (im ~23), I have always been fascinated by printers- of all sorts. I developed a liking towards certain HP model, which was an inkjet printer and very portable... until I had to get a new cartridge. So I figured out a way to refill the ink cartridges and pray that it'd work.
I'm curious why no one worked on creating really portable printer (Epson Workforce WF-100 for example) with different ink options, so the printer is really just one time investment and the ink could be just as cheap as it can get. Currently, it seems like an oligarchy where the goal is to sell printers and then keep making money by selling single use cartridges.
On the other hand, the space like 3d printers, or mechanical keyboard is already getting so much 'indie' development. I'd personally love to buy a printer (like my mechanical keyboard) that I can use every once in a while and something that is easily/cheaply refillable. <comment><USER2> Newer Epsons do have refillable cartridges. I'm not sure that's the solution, I'm sure they're not giving the ink away. My older Epson seems to be mostly ok, but the last time I let it sit for a couple of months I did notice that I had to run the calibration and head cleaning a couple of times before the colors came out right again.

I suspect you're right about it being mostly a money generation effort.

</comment><comment><USER3> Not sure it is an oligarchy but the rest of this sentence is probably the correct answer ("...where the goal is to sell printers and then keep making money by selling single use cartridges.").

</comment><comment><USER4> I bought an HP LaserJet printer in circa 2005, printed with it occasionally, and the original toner cartridge lasted about 11 years. I was pretty delighted with that.

</comment><comment><USER5> Long-term you say? I hear LaserJet 4M printers are still going strong.</comment>


Futures for C++11 - <AUTHOR> https://code.facebook.com/posts/1661982097368498/futures-for-c-11-at-facebook/ <comment><USER2> The past discussion was interesting: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9746405](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9746405)</comment>


How Chris McCandless Died: An Update - <AUTHOR> http://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/chris-mccandless-died-update <comment><USER2> What's fascinating is inferring the other motives and agendas swirling around the issue that are then cut through by hard science (in Krakauer's favor):

From [http://www.alaskacommons.com/2013/09/22/what-everyone-is- get...](http://www.alaskacommons.com/2013/09/22/what-everyone-is-getting- wrong-about-chris-mccandless/):

"The forensic question "Were the seeds poisonous?" is of interest only because it sheds light on broader, more contentious question, expressed bluntly as "How stupid was Chris McCandless?" If, like Alaska Dispatch reporters Dermot Cole and Craig Medred (and again), you think McCandless was a clueless, crazy knucklehead, arrogant in his disdain for wild nature and its perils, then you want to think the seeds weren't poisonous; the kid just died of starvation because he was too stupid/crazy/arrogant to make it to safety."

"But if, like Jon Krakauer (and, in the interest of full disclosure, like me), you have some level of empathy with or sympathy for McCandless, you want to think the seeds were poisonous—he was doing his best to survive a difficult enterprise and was done in because he consumed something that was not known to be poisonous until two decades after his death."

<comment><USER3> I have empathy for McCandless, he didn't deserve to die and I wish he hadn't. But clearly he didn't know what he was getting into, didn't prepare and unwittingly contributed to his own death. It's not a judgment about his character. He wasn't a knucklehead, he was probably fairly intelligent.

He was probably just unaware, like most people, how hard it is to subsist in nature alone, and how harsh the beautiful landscape can be.

In the right context, ignorance is a kind of superpower. When you survive and it all works out, you are a genius. Many successful people start their story with: "If I had known what I was getting into, I would never have started..."

So yeah, I kind of admire this ignorance ... in other people. I am WAY too self-conscious and introspective to embark on some enterprise where I know that I know nothing.

Oh, and the poisonous seed thing - he was just eating a plant whose edibility was not established. I dunno, maybe people think nature is benevolent, and sure I can think of a bunch of edible plants in the woods near my house ... but I can think of plenty that are poisonous, or mildly toxic, or carcinogenic, or indigestible, or otherwise liable to disagree with you. He didn't know if he should or shouldn't eat it. He was rolling the dice. If you roll the dice and you live, you're a genius and in a few years you get to write your memoirs as the next Thoreau.

<comment><USER4>
        "But clearly he didn't know what he was getting into
        didn't prepare and unwittingly contributed to his own
        death."

In the postcard at the very top of the article Chris says:

"If this adventure proves fatal and you don't ever hear from me again I want you to know your (sic) a great man. I now walk into the wild"

And earlier he asks his friend to return all mail to sender for the foreseeable future.

That and everything else I've ever read has made me think he was entirely aware of the potential for danger in the wilderness. He walked in & did it any-ways.

Plenty people look to test themselves in nature's crucible with minimal preparation, fully cognisant of the risks. Sometimes they lose. I think looking down upon them with the rosy vision of decades hindsight from the comfort & safety of home does them a disservice. Their lives, their choices.

I hope Chris found what he was looking for.

<comment><USER5> Alternatively, he was a clueless kid who fantasized about disappearing into the wilderness ala Hatchet or My Side of the Mountain. Cancelling your mail and talking melodramatically does not mean you _intend_ to die, just that you intend to cut all ties.

<comment><USER6> I have a friend from high school who, at 40 years old, had an amicable divorce with his wife so he could go do something similar to Christopher's adventure, but here in the backwoods of Georgia. His philosophy is that we're all going to die sometime, so we should live the life we always wanted to live on this "ball of dirt and water hurtling around a ball of fire" as he puts it. I envy him, as I'm also an avid outdoorsman who never gets to go outdoors anymore (from the house to the car to work and back does not count as "outdoors"). My friend studied flora and fauna for years, both because he loves nature and in preparation for the rest of his life on his own.

So far he's been out there for the better part of a year, sleeping in a bivy sack, eating what nature provides, riding his mountain bike and towing his trailer with his few worldly possessions, a backwoods hobo by choice. He's documenting the entire adventure and plans to write about it. He is fully aware of successful adventurers before him, as well as those who died to soon like McCandless. Who knows how long he'll live this life, but he looks to McCandless as an inspiration, not a "clueless kid", and he's doing just fine.

<comment><USER5> Your friend spent years studying. He also had the sense to pick one of the most hospitable and temperate locales in North America. And even in a friendly environment, he acknowledges that he needs more supplies than he could easily carry. I bet he also had multiple plans for bailing out if events went really sour. Just from what little you've said, he sounds responsible, level-headed and practical. He could probably accomplish anything he sets his mind to, and I look forward to buying his book.

But other than living outdoors, your friend has little in common with McCandless.

(Nothing says you can't consider someone to be both clueless and an inspiration. I consider all of history to be an inspiration to do better, including the less-clueful half of the past.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> If you found 'Into The Wild' interesting, make sure to checkout 'Into Thin Air' from the same author. It's about a summit attempt of Everest that went awry and is awesome.

Edit: come to think of it, I've read pretty much everything that Jon Krakauer has written. The guy's grocery lists are probably well thought out and have a compelling narrative.

<comment><USER8> I read everything he writes. The only time I have had a problem with anything he said was in "Under the Banner of Heaven" he partially blamed the Mormon church for the kidnap and rape of Elizabeth Smart. I suspect that the guy that kidnapped her would have been a piece of shit no matter what religion he was born into.

<comment><USER9> I'm guessing you must be Mormon to take offense. For all the glory of God that religion may bring, there's a lot of less "praiseworthy" elements. It's important to acknowledge all of it.

<comment><USER10> Actually, if he were Mormon, "shit" would be the last word he'd write.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This is pretty awesome. Clausen seemed a bit snotty about the original theory not being in a peer-reviewed journal. Now the followup is, and the underlying science also blows a hole in one of Clausen's own papers. He messed with the wrong guy. Citizen science FTW.

<comment><USER12> I don't think it's snotty to be skeptical of the results. After all, their original hypothesis turned out to be incorrect. ODAP was not present in the seeds.

Because the author took Clausen's consideration seriously, they were able to uncover their mistake and correct it.

<comment><USER11> It's not snotty to be skeptical, but it is snotty to be "skeptical" because the theory comes from an amateur, and to go on about "highly technical and complicated" etc. That's pure appeal to authority, the error of which is amply demonstrated by the fact that one of Clausen's own papers got through peer review with _the exact same mistake_. Hopefully he has learned to address the science, instead of the source or the publication process, next time.

<comment><USER12> It would, however, be easy for a non-peer reviewed amateur to make a mistake. It's an appeal to authority, but in this case I don't believe it's a fallacy.

Furthermore, since peer review is fallible, I don't believe Clausen's identical mistake making it through peer review proves the process any less important.

Perhaps Clausen's criticisms were not well intended, but wouldn't any respectable scientist demand rigor before seriously considering such a hypothesis? After all, the burden of proof is not on Clausen.

<comment><USER11> The mirror twins of ad hominem and ad verecundiam (appeal to authority) are _always_ fallacies, regardless of person or circumstances. To say that certain people should get away with them is _itself_ an appeal to authority. In logic, science, or debate, the identity of the person making or disputing a claim is irrelevant. If Clausen had a concern about the data, he should have said so. If he had a concern about the reasoning applied to that data, he should have said so. That would have been "demanding rigor" as you put it, but he did neither. Instead he addressed _identity_ , and that's where he came off as snotty.

<comment><USER12> He did have a concern about the data. His concern that was it was not peer- reviewed.

Had the data come from someone with a proven track record in the field, he may have found it worth his time to peer review it himself.

Appeal to authority is not always a fallacy. It would have been fallacious if he was outright denying or accepting a hypothesis as being the logical conclusion based on one's standing. All that I read from it, however, was that he had a hard time believing it, and would not spend the time to look into the data personally, but that it should be reviewed.

I don't think it's illogical to take more seriously the hypothesis of someone with a proven track record of good research.

<comment><USER11> If he couldn't spend the time to examine it, he should have just said that instead of taking the time to blather about journalistic vs. academic review processes. Clearly he did have the time; he just used it poorly.

<comment><USER13> Your argument is interesting, but it seems to boil down to dismissing the entire system of peer reviewed journals. If they can't be appealed to, and everything needs to be independently researched based on personal expertise, then they have no purpose. Would you agree with that?

<comment><USER14> I took his meaning to be that appealing to peer reviewed journals as an "authority" is what is wrong. The value of the peer review system is the rigorous process and the continuing search for the truth.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> "The death of Chris McCandless should serve as a caveat to other foragers: Even when some parts of a plant are known to be edible, other parts of the same species may contain dangerous concentrations of toxic compounds."

Definitely, the most obvious example is potatoes. The fruit and other parts contain solanine. In general there is a great amount of danger around us, within 100 square meters of my home I can recognize at least 5/6 toxic species, so when one learns to eat a plant, it is important to also learn how all the similar plans that are dangerous look like, and what part of the plans are edible and what not.

</comment><comment><USER16> Discussion on the original: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6376498](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6376498)

</comment><comment><USER17> There are many hooks in the story and the "whodunit" or in this case 'whatdunit' is a hook that keeps a lot of readers through the story. I don't have a big log of books I've read in my life as compared to some, but this was one that I would pick up and devour and then push away from me upset. I'd stare at it thinking I didn't want to read more of the tragedy then I'd pick it up again. I can't think of any other book like that I've felt the same with.

That Chris' story has a proper resolution is important to the author and for those of us who took Chris' journey by reading Krakauer's book. There are still plenty of mysteries within it aside from the cause of death. Why did he do what he did? There's a theory out there that he may have been suffering an onset of schizophrenia. We have a good record of what he said to people and his journaling, but we will always be limited by what remains of that.

He was in many ways a very amazing person. If you recall he sought to 'kill the false being within' him. His seeming desperation to seek his most authentic self through a journey and a physical and emotional withdrawal from his family and familiar lifestyle (as I understand, which I may not) is something that is as relatable as it is strange and unique.

Nuggets of the idea you hear elsewhere by some pretty amazing individuals. For example, I have loads of respect for Bruce Lee. He was a celebrity and a person of deep thought but of massive action in his life. He made a point in an interview of the challenge to being able to actually express yourself honestly in what you do. To anyone seeking authenticity in themselves rather than whatever expectations or reactions real or imagined the rest of the world may have, to be completely free of that mindset.

I hope Chris believed he succeeded in the end. But I selfishly wish a lot more that he would have maybe almost succeeded but instead came back to tell the rest of us about it in his own words.

</comment><comment><USER18> Why doesn't someone just feed wild potatoes to a few rats for a few weeks and see if they die? Did we forget how to actually do science?

</comment><comment><USER19> i saw the movie and thought the alexander supertramp guy came across like a huge asshole.

i also watch pro wrestling.

</comment><comment><USER20> Do the exact mechanics of Chris McCandless's death really matter? He didn't take the wilderness seriously and that's what got him killed. We shouldn't romanticize his stupidity.

<comment><USER21> The last sentence of the article:

"And because many people—both admirers of McCandless and his detractors—regard "Into the Wild" as a cautionary tale, it's important to know as much as possible about how McCandless actually may have died."

<comment><USER22> Does it really matter whether he was poisoned by one chemical or another, or simply starved to death? Either way, the cautionary tale of against deciding to go live in the woods without adequate preparation stands.

<comment><USER23> Well, I think it's worth finding out just for the sake of knowing.

But as a cautionary tale, yeah it still matters. Say you meet some guy planning on taking this same "adventure", you show him Into the Wild, he says "no problem, I've been hunting and trapping for 10 years, no way I'll starve".

People who just think "It's a bad idea in general, I don't need to know exactly how he died" were probably not in any danger of making the same mistake. If you want to convince people on the fence, you need specifics.

<comment><USER22> Whether he died because he either ate a poisonous plant or starved, the issue is the same: lack of proper preparation for a food supply.

<comment><USER24> Many people view foraging for food in the wilderness to be a perfectly adequate plan for having a food supply. If the theory is correct, he didn't starve to death because of poor planning, he starved to death because he ate something poisonous, which then prevented him from foraging for food.

You seem to be implying that foraging isn't an OK way to feed oneself in the wilderness.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Krakauer's arguments on this subject are based on conjecture and ignore facts. He conjectures that McCandless misidentified a plant he had been identifying for an extended time, for another plant. Unlikely. He makes claims without providing supporting evidence. Sorry, but saying "there is evidence that..." is not evidence. He states that eating this plant poisoned him to death, despite the fact that he died almost 3 weeks later. The autopsy ruled the death as starvation. The natural conclusion of extreme, extended calorie deficiency is starvation.

</comment><comment><USER26> > And because many people—both admirers of McCandless and his > detractors—regard "Into the Wild" as a cautionary tale, it's important to > know as much as possible about how McCandless actually may have died."

Cautionary tales are just that, tales. It's entertainment pure and simple.

Cautionary tales have never taught, if anything they do the opposite and create wrong thought patterns.

We don't need to know to not go off to live in the crazy wilderness unprepared. Eat less cheese burgers is a boring story(Morgan Spurlock aside) but a better lesson.

The fact people seem to have the need to self justify that they are entertained about stories of someone else's downfall is an interesting condition.

<comment><USER27> Actually, the least interesting part of the story for me was that he died from poisoning. I was entertained by the rest of the story, that he decided to quit everything and leave everything behind, to start a new life of some description. I wouldn't describe that as a story of someone's downfall. I'm not sure I would go as far as to say the entire film was about someone's downfall and I find it rather strange that you do too. It was a story of being free.

<comment><USER26> I personally think the ending was an important contrast to the beginning from a traditional story perspective. Has he succeeded would it have been a movie....

I do agree the beginning was a great story about being free and what I enjoyed most.</comment></comment></comment>