U.S. spy agency bugged U.N. headquarters: Germany's Spiegel - Suraj-Sun http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security-nsa-idUSBRE97O08120130825 <comment><AUTHOR> The US really could stand to learn a few things from Henry L. Stimson, who held many important political positions related to foreign policy during the first half of the 20th century. Here are two choice quotes:

        "The only way to make a man trustworthy is to trust him;
        and the surest way to make him untrustworthy is to
        distrust him and show your distrust."

and

        "Gentlemen don't read each other's mail."

The US Government doesn't act with trust and goodwill towards anyone and therefor should not be surprised that no one else shows us trust and goodwill back.

Given this news, it would be most fitting if the UN decided to move its headquarters elsewhere. My vote is for Berlin.

<comment><USER2> Stimson was also the Secretary of War during WW2, which saw the creation and explosive growth of signals intelligence. As Secretary of War, he would have overseen the bulk of American signals intelligence and cryptanalysis, which let us view the Japanese and German thoughts in real-time and gave us an incredible advantage. ULTRA and related efforts saved convoy shipping across the Atlantic, gave the Allies North Africa, and won Midway (among many other victories).

The irony is that he said "Gentlemen do not read each other's mail" as the Secretary of State, when he was made aware of the American Black Chamber. The Black Chamber was the one of the first "production line" signals intelligence units in the US government, and Stimson had it shut down due to his ethical concerns. This set the US at a signifigant disadvantage entering WW2, as we had to start on signals intelligence from scratch and learn a lot from the British (and what was left of the French and Polish signals intelligence units). It is telling that when it became truly necessary, these earlier ethical concerns were discarded in the face of military necessity.

<comment> grey-area Nowadays, of course, the US is eternally at war with a ever-changing and indistinct enemy, the terrorist, and so military necessity requires ignoring those ethical concerns permanently.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> "Citing secret U.S. documents obtained by fugitive former intelligence contractor Edward Snowden, Der Spiegel said the files showed how the United States systematically spied on other states and institutions."

So you mean, the very purpose for which the NSA exists?

<comment><USER4> It would be wonderful to see the US reaction if Canada was found to systematically spied on the united states. Being an other country and all, it surely doesn't matter if US phone lines was tapped, US internet cables was intercepted, and data centers was encourage to give up emails about US citizen.

And... how wrong would it really be if diplomats from Canada planted a bug in the Whitehouse. Surely nothing wrong with that.

<comment><USER5> > how wrong would it really be if diplomats from Canada planted a bug in the > Whitehouse.

Not much worse than when they burned it down.

Anyway, Front street 151 in Toronto carries a substantial amount of US traffic. Maybe someone should check the place for taps.

<comment><USER6> Technically that was Britain. Canada didn't exist in 1814.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'd suggest finding a list of countries that haven't bugged the UN headquarters. It is probably shorter.

<comment><USER8> Given the location of the UN Headquarters, it isn't possible for any country to be more effective at spying than the US. Like I said in another thread[2], if you spy on the UN, you own it. You have a disproportionate advantage in all negotiations (unless other countries are also effective at spying[1]). You might think that it is fine that the US effectively owns the UN, but its credibility is ruined.

The compromised UN is effectively a body for representing and legitimizing the wishes of the cabal of US allies as if they were the actual consensus of all UN member states.

[1] But it is still not possible for any nation to be more effective at spying than the US, given the UN's location.

[2] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6272458](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6272458)

<comment><USER7> None of what you say refutes my assertion that spying on the UN is a common activity. If anything, it sounds like you're saying it's only wrong when the US does it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> It might make for a shorter list if we name the people and groups that the NSA hasn't spied on.

<comment><USER10> It's almost as if that's their whole purpose.

<comment><USER11> Could someone elaborate what for is such spying happening in the first place? What is it _really_ needed for? What would happen without it?

<comment><USER12> The core basic legitimate reason is to verify what is said with what is actually happening; to discover the genuine intentions of the opposition. So, olde days, USSR says "we have no intention of starting WW3", and US spying would seek to verify that. If of both sides can convince themselves that the opposition is being honest, diplomacy can work. If you cant be sure of what is being said, you quickly end up in trouble. Both sides legitimately do this as much as they can. Its a confidence builder. It is why both the US and USSR tolerated spies and had a no assassination rule. They both new, in the olde days, that it was beneficial to both to allow each other to spy and gain confidence in each others position.

Trouble comes when nation states extend that to seek political or commercial advantage, or apply it to their own citizens and / allies, who expect to get the benefit of the doubt. Worse still when law enforcement and spy agencies start to combine. This is why I assert that the US, and UK governments treat their citizens as enemies. We have seen plenty of times what its like when intelligence agencies and secret services (SS) are turned on the population.

Unless Obama and Camoron do something now to reign this in, some very dark days are ahead of us.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Is this link broken?

I'm taken to an article titled "U.S. spy agency edges into the light after Snowden revelations"

Another comment quotes the article as saying the following, which doesn't appear in the article I'm reading. "Citing secret U.S. documents obtained by fugitive former intelligence contractor Edward Snowden, Der Spiegel said the files showed how the United States systematically spied on other states and institutions."

This is the link I'm being sent to [http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security- ns...](http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security-nsa- idUSBRE97O08120130825)

<comment><USER13> I think this is the link that was intended [http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk-usa-security- nsa...](http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk-usa-security-nsa- idUKBRE97O08B20130825)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I think the article text and headline has been changed! What's the name of that news article diff website?

This is what was at the link: [http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk- usa-security-nsa...](http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk-usa-security- nsa-idUKBRE97O08B20130825)

Now it is this: [http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security- ns...](http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security-nsa- idUSBRE97O08120130825)

EDIT: Newsdiff doesn't diff Reuters, I guess.

</comment><comment><USER14> I don't see how Snowden can justify releasing top secret documents that DON'T show the United States spying on it's own citizens.

One of the goals of NSA is to gather foreign intelligence. The UN constitutes foreign intelligence. While it may not be popular opinion here, there is a distinction between NSA spying on United States citizens and NSA spying on foreign and international organizations. The former is illegal; the latter is expected.

<comment><USER15> Is it certain that these leaks actually came from Snowden? In light of the Independent's GCHQ story [1][2], it sounds like there may be State actors providing leaks in the name of Snowden that cast him in a negative light. Ideally, these news outlets would be able to confirm it's the real Snowden via GPG fingerprint or something.

[1] [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/exclusive- uks-...](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/exclusive-uks-secret- mideast-internet-surveillance-base-is-revealed-in-edward-snowden- leaks-8781082.html)

[2] [http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/23/uk- gove...](http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/23/uk-government- independent-military-base)

<comment><USER14> Ah! Interesting angle. It could certainly be possible, and if it were I definitely wouldn't hold it against Snowden.

In fact, the Der Spiegel article [1] fails to release the source document(s), so I'm fairly dubious about who provided this information.

[1] [http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=...](http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.spiegel.de%2Fpolitik%2Fausland%2Fnsa- hoerte-zentrale-der-vereinte-nationen-in-new-york-ab-a-918421.html)

<comment><USER15> There's an English version of the article now, co-authored by Greenwald/Snowden-related journalist Laura Poitras. Looks like the Snowden connection is solid!

[http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/secret-nsa- documen...](http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/secret-nsa-documents- show-how-the-us-spies-on-europe-and-the-un-a-918625.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> In the past the State Department, under Hillary Clinton, also tried to do things such as steal the DNA of UN leaders.

[http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy- cabl...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables- spying-un)

<comment><USER10> It's questionable [1] how much Hillary Clinton had to do with that order and I'm not sure "steal the DNA" is a fair characterization. Also, that order had its roots at least as far back as 2001.

[1] [http://www.nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/hillary-clinton- di...](http://www.nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/hillary-clinton-didn-t-turn- diplomats-into-spies-20101130)

<comment><USER17> _I 'm not sure "steal the DNA" is a fair characterization._

Your National Journal link describes an order "to collect the 'biometric data'... including DNA". What's unfair about this characterization?

<comment><USER10> It's out of context. It suggests the memo is primarily about "stealing DNA" when, in fact, the letters "DNA" do not appear in it: [http://www.theguardian.com/world/us-embassy-cables- documents...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/us-embassy-cables- documents/219058)

<comment><USER5> [http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy- cabl...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables- spying-un)

f3, DNA, enter.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Earlier thread.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6271259](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6271259)

</comment><comment><USER18> Because when you're keeping the American people safe, there are no rules - it's a jungle out there you know.

</comment><comment><USER19> Pretending this is just an American problem actually benefits the US because the info sharing deals will continue uncontested as participating countries are given a pass. Never mind those military bases in Germany or the five eyes. The West is intertwined, hell the whole world is, but deceive yourself if you like.</comment>


Ask HN: How do you identify the people to interview on an IT project? - <AUTHOR> I'd like your input for an article I'm writing.
Let's say you're starting a new IT project. You're brought in to make it happen (as contractor, staff, freelancer). It could be custom software; a migration to cloud services; a shiny new IoT project. Whatever. You're in charge of the design (or an important part of it), and making sure that the resulting system makes everybody happy.
How do you make sure that you are interviewing the right people to find out what "make them happy" looks like? What do you do to get input from the people who matter for the project's success… without inviting so many suggestions that it's impossible to deliver everything?
Case in point: Ten years ago I was in charge of an online tech community. The company I worked for hired custom developers to build the software platform, but the developers never talked to me. They interviewed the boss, two levels above me (who just so happened to be the person who signed the checks) even though she had never used this online community or any other. Needless to say, the community software they delivered was horrible, missing basic-to-me features.
Formally this process would be called "identifying the project stakeholders" or "master the requirements-gathering process" but that seems too corporate-speak. I'm looking for real-world examples of what works and what doesn't, so I can write a genuinely useful article with practical guidelines.
Note that this is NOT about the questions to ask those stakeholders; that's another discussion. Here I am writing merely (merely!) about making sure you are speaking to the people whose input you need.
My questions:
• How do you decide which people to ask for input? In what way do you find those people? How do you know when you have everyone you should?
• How do you decide whom NOT to invite? Where do you draw the line?
• Tell me about the manner in which you learned that lesson. (The hard way. Anecdotes are good.) <comment><USER2> Who's going to pay for the project? Who's going to have to use it? Who will have veto power over the project? Whose bonus depends on the software working? Whose bonus depends on the successful delivery of the project?

What are you trying to accomplish? Where do you get the information you enter into the software? What do you do with the information you get out of the software? What changes to the software and how you work would make your life better? Can I sit with you for a day and observe you using the software in the course of your work day?

Most people want faster horses. A rare few can imagine the automobile that makes the horse redundant. Look for the few and treasure them. At one startup I was at, we had a lot of teachers who were grateful for anything more than what they previously had. But we had one school where they were clearly setting the pace for everyone else: we loved that school, and we implemented the bits of their needs and ambitions that'd scale to everyone.

That said, many projects are simply "do a better job of what the existing software does" and you aren't expected to invent the next Google in the course of the project.

A lot of what you ask sits in the product management and UX spaces. Marty Kagan's book "Inspired" on product management is a classic. You might also get good ideas from "Take Charge Product Management" (Greg Geraci). I don't have good UX recommendations, but I'm sure other HN commenters will.

You might also look to the customer development literature around lean startups. Steve Blank's "Four Steps to the Epiphany" and Eric Ries's classic "Lean Startup" would get you started in that direction. (And, of course, there are copious hits on Google for "customer development").

<comment><AUTHOR> I love this -- exactly what I hoped to hear.

/me looks around for more...?</comment></comment>


How Virgin America Got 6 Million People To Watch A Flight Safety Video - <AUTHOR> http://digitalsynopsis.com/advertising/virgin-america-safety-dance-video

<comment><USER2> We don't pay attention because we've seem one before, it is the same all around.

now i will be extremely annoyed as well. to hell with this.</comment>


Anxious Greeks Buy Macs and PlayStations While They Still Can - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-07-07/anxious-greeks-buy-macs-and-playstations-while-they-still-can

<comment><AUTHOR> Buying a computer to "keep its value" never make so much sense to me...</comment>


Hannah Arendt and the hierarchy of human activity - <AUTHOR> https://www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/hannah-arendt-hierarchy-human-activity/ <comment><USER2> Such an important thinker of the last century. She elucidated upon Capitalism's failure to provide the abundance that it promised, by instead producing desire: we will never have enough, even though abundance is well within our reach.

<comment><USER3> And yet, we can each choose that we have enough, and then delight in the abundance that actually does exist. It's an internal switch.

<comment><USER4> You are absolutely correct that each individual can choose, but it won't solve issues in society. What you want is groups of people to choose to have enough. First smaller, then larger. Eventually they change the culture.

It's important to change the structures of society so that it's easier to consume less.

Cost of making individual choices that go against the structures are often very hard. Cycling to your job in Netherlands versus LA are two very different decisions.

<comment><USER5> >It's important to change the structures of society so that it's easier to consume less.

Unfortunately, radical change like your idea requires upheaval and disruption and often ends up with unintended consequences.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> [https://archive.md/UQPxB](https://archive.md/UQPxB)

<comment><USER7> Sadly, I'm confronted with a desktop version of an image verification CAPTCHA while on mobile, and can't get to see the entire grid of images to pass the test.

Reading the article directly worked fine (maybe because I don't have any cookies from the past?).

<comment><USER8> Firefox Reader mode on desktop worked for me.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This article would be way better without blurry references to contemporary politics, even if you would immediately think it on-topic.

I think Arendt is wrong on some things, but it really doesn't hurt to read about her views. Idealism for example is something she thought being a root for nationalism and that it would impose an ideal that is striving towards what nature dictates. But I don't think that is how idealism is understood today, something that doesn't need an attachment to anything and can be freely defined. I would think Romanticism as a form of it, which doesn't have that connection "to nature" at all.

The article is a bit strange though, for example:

Precursors to Nazism and Stalinism, however, were the late nineteenth-century movements of pan-Germanism and pan-Slavism, which explicitly called themselves "movements" in order to signal their distrust of political parties and national parliaments.

I heavily doubt she would have said or thought anything like this. It is not clear if this are the authors thoughts or maybe some other statements.

The distrust can come from the already mentioned and real corruption, not because of any form of governance. Totalitarian movements have in common that they need their followers to believe that injustice was or is done to them. That allows to restrict the consciences of people and allows for the grab of power. Embarrassing, but I think the mechanism is quite trivial.

Totalitarianism needs the antagonist to breath. Be that Jews or yes, capitalists. That is also why you do not feed trolls.</comment>


Hobbes, Morgan Stanley OSS Programming Language - <AUTHOR> http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/5452 <comment><USER2> Same topic being discussed here:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14783539](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14783539)

</comment><comment><USER3> This is the sort of README I would like to see for any programming language, very detailed still concise, using useful and easy to understand examples. I can't wait to get to know this system more.</comment>


Ask HN: How can I discover math? - <AUTHOR>

So I've been trying to teach myself K-12 math using www.khanacademy.org now after reading http://www.maa.org/devlin/LockhartsLament.pdf I feel like I should be discovering math, playing with numbers asking more questions. The problem is that from up to this point in my life all I have been taught was to memorize a formula, plug in some numbers, get an answer. I want to learn math well, I want to enjoy the beauty of it, but I don't know where to begin that journey or how to start. <comment><USER2> Get the book "Thinking Mathematically" ([http://www.amazon.com/Thinking- Mathematically-J-Mason/dp/020...](http://www.amazon.com/Thinking- Mathematically-J-Mason/dp/0201102382) _non_ affiliate link) which exposes the process of how mathematicians think, using simple problems. You can then adapt the process to your preferred level of problems. Also learn proof technique (Velleman's How to Prove it" is a good book for this) and doesn't make any assumptions of mathematical knowledge.

</comment><comment><USER3> Check out this previous post: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1449799>

And also, I'd highly recommend art of problem solving. <http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/>

Honestly, the best way to discover math is the Hacker's way i.e. find problems to work on and then start working on them even in you don't know how initially. The very digging in process will lead to further discovery and further learning. Now, be sure to check out art of problem solving forums, people ask questions there and there are very good detailed explanations available.

Be also sure to check out Street Fighter math ([http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-098-street- fightin...](http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-098-street-fighting- mathematics-january-iap-2008/)) and fermi questions (e.g: [http://mathforum.org/workshops/sum96/interdisc/classicfermi....](http://mathforum.org/workshops/sum96/interdisc/classicfermi.html))

And remember to print out these questions and carry them with you along with tons of scrap paper. Sometimes, it helps just to read a problem and let it sink in over days...

</comment><comment><USER4> Soviet textbooks and the Princeton Companion (recommended by others) are likely to be pretty brutal for you. I suggest problem-solving as a better way in.

Take a look, e.g., at Project Euler (<http://www.projecteuler.net/>); find some books aimed at K-12 students doing mathematical contests (there are lots; what's best depends on how much you already know) and online resources aimed at the same audience (e.g., <http://amc.maa.org/>, <http://www.mathcomp.leeds.ac.uk/>); there are other sources of not-too- routine mathematical problems online, such as <http://nrich.maths.org/>.

This pretty much guarantees that you'll be _doing_ as well as _passively absorbing_ (one of many problems with which is that it's easy to think you're absorbing when actually you're not). There's a very wide range of levels of difficulty. And it's likely to be fun, if mathematics really suits you at all.

</comment><comment><USER5> "Discovering math", depending on what you mean, could be setting the bar pretty high. Memorizing formula is not what mathematics is about, but you're unlikely to get very far if you just "play with numbers". To learn mathematics and to think mathematically, you still need a structured environment: Lockhart's complaint is that modern (K-12) math teachers neither have that knowledge nor the ability to provide that structure.

If I were you, I'd go to where that knowledge does get taught: in undergraduate mathematics classes. That usually starts with some rigorous calculus (I second the recommendation for Spivak), real analysis (which might seem hopelessly unmotivated if you don't know/remember much calculus), linear algebra or abstract algebra, or discrete math. Depends on what you're interested.

Reading mathematics is hard. Google around for advice. Do lots of problems, which generally means finding proofs. This would very well fit the definition of "discovering mathematics".

</comment><comment><USER6> You asked about beauty and history, with an idea on how to discover... personally, I started with "The Math Explorer: A Journey Through the Beauty of Mathematics": (<http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1591021375>). That book got me hooked and from there I went on to pre-cal studies at university, eventually completing sequences in discrete structures, probability, up to and including calculus III, a level I never imagined I'd get to. That book was literally my starting point since I never took high school math seriously nor was I any good at that level. I think it'll serve you well considering the level at which you're at, as it did me. I've reread that book four times to date and still enjoy it.

</comment><comment><USER7> One book I'd recommend is "1089 and all that" ([http://www.amazon.com/1089-All-That-Journey- Mathematics/dp/0...](http://www.amazon.com/1089-All-That-Journey- Mathematics/dp/0198516231/)).

I've bought copies for friends and family whose maths backgrounds range from school to degree level and they've all enjoyed it.

It's not a textbook, more a conversational account of a few topics the author has found interesting through his life from a young boy to an Oxford don. It's very readable and the author's delight in maths and problem solving shine through

</comment><comment><USER8> Get "The Princeton Companion to Mathematics" - <http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8350.html>

<comment><USER9> Seriously? Your reply to "I'm trying to teach myself K-12 math" is "find out what mathematicians think about, instead"? My guess: you are trolling or have never read the Princeton Companion.

<comment><USER8> I'm suggesting it because, whatever _practical_ tutorials the poster is looking for, the Companion will make for fascinating reading.

When I was in school and plodding through physics and chemistry class, I was wildly excited by other, more advanced books, which I devoured. Ditto for biology.

I wish the Companion was out then, for I would have loved it (although, my love for mathematics wasn't in any way diminished).

Sure, the book is _not_ going to teach you K-12 stuff, but it is almost like standing on the edge of mountain, giving you a vista of the wonderful world of math.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> It will only teach you a small bit of math (i.e. Trigonometry) but try programming a little 2D rocket ship game with some physics and movement etc. It can be fun and you will get a better feel for the maths involved. don't use libraries. Use javascript with canvas - easy as pie.

</comment><comment><USER11> Find a problem that piques your interest, then learn the math that's relevant to the problem. You can choose a problem from most any subject, like math, physics, or economics.

Having a problem that piques your interest--something to work toward--is a good motivator.

<comment><AUTHOR> How would I go about finding said problem? Sorry if this seems stupid. There is no real problem that piques my interest right now perhaps because I don't really know the field all too well. I just want to enjoy learning math and get better at solving problems.

<comment><USER12> Actually, this is what the book "Who Is Fourier?: A Mathematical Adventure" is about. It's the adventure of a group of families who wanted to learn more about languages, which led them to sounds which led them to learn about Fourier transforms. It's a lot of fun and it actually has real math that you often get to learn in a signal processing class in college. While it is very focused, this book and the approach will pique your interest in other topics.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Might be a nice time for GEB. There's even a K-12-ish course for it at MIT OCW:

[http://ocw.mit.edu/high-school/courses/godel-escher- bach/ind...](http://ocw.mit.edu/high-school/courses/godel-escher- bach/index.htm)

</comment><comment><USER14> The one that made me truely see the beauty of maths: Hallucinogenic drugs - due to the hallucinations basis in geometric shapes and patterns.

Not really useful for teaching yourself K-12 math however for the beauty of it nothing better

</comment><comment><USER15> I recommend seeking out translated Soviet math textbooks. They're dense and unforgiving, but are conceptually correct. You could do far worse.

<comment><AUTHOR> Do you have any specific textbooks I could take a look at?

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Hijacking the thread here, but could someone quickly recommend a college-level calculus book?

<comment><USER17> Spivak's Calculus, [http://www.amazon.com/Calculus-4th-Michael- Spivak/dp/0914098...](http://www.amazon.com/Calculus-4th-Michael- Spivak/dp/0914098918/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpi_1) is a good bet. But it's very theory- involved.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> let's start with "how to solve it" (g. polya), if you love to learn the thinking of math.</comment>


People are fat 'because they don't enjoy eating' - <AUTHOR> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/people-are-fat-because-they-dont-enjoy-eating-964307.html

<comment><USER2> "I eat because I'm unhappy, and I'm unhappy because I eat." -- Fat Bastard</comment>


Heritage Distilling Co. To Produce 15,000 Gallons of Hand Sanitizer per Month - <AUTHOR> https://heritagedistilling.com/blogs/news/sanitizer <comment><AUTHOR> Press release (.pdf): [https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/2516/7914/files/HDC_Surfac...](https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/2516/7914/files/HDC_Surface_and_Hand_Sanitizer_and_Delivery_Together_Press_Release_FINAL.pdf?v=1584736446)

<comment><USER2> Am I right in my understanding that _hand sanitiser_ in this context is just white spirits (eg. white rum) and a gelling agent?

This should mean any distillery should be able to trivially switch to productions sanitiser?

Edit: fixed a word

</comment></comment><comment><USER2> You should post this bit as a separate submission:

 _Heritage Distilling Co. partners with local restaurants to deliver their food, free of charge

Heritage Distilling Co. is now offering delivery service on behalf of local restaurants at no cost to participating restaurants. Unlike national delivery services that take a portion of the restaurant's bill, this service is entirely free for restaurants, allowing them to keep 100% of their revenue. All orders will be delivered with a free 2-ounce bottle of HDC's Hand and Surface Sanitizer while supplies last._</comment>


Docker's New Direction - <AUTHOR> https://www.docker.com/press-release/docker-new-direction <comment><USER2> $35 million seems like a pretty small investment round for a company that apparently was once valuing itself at over $1.3 Billion.

<comment><AUTHOR> If you read between the lines, it appears to be a liquidation.

<comment><USER2> This is huge news.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Larger discussion on the techcrunch article [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21526284](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21526284)</comment>


Show HN: Build MacOS apps with Golang - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/murlokswarm/app <comment><AUTHOR> Hello there, This is a package to build apps with Golang, HTML and CSS. For the moment it works only on MacOS but it's designed to be multiplatform.

Wanted to share this with you guys. It would be awesome if you have any feedbacks. Hope you will find it interesting.

</comment><comment><USER2> Very cool! Can't wait to give this a try.

</comment><comment><USER3> Looks interesting, waiting for linux version.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm currently battling with the Microsoft Winrt driver but I'd love to see this happen on Linux too. I guess the driver would use Chromium Embedded Framework. Contributions on that would be more than welcome.

Thank you for the feedback :).

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> really cool, great work! any plans to relax macOS 10.12 as a hard requirement?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you very much for the feedback.

Let see how things going and time available. Apple did a lot of deprecations between 10.11 and 10.12 which make things a little tricky for older versions. But it's something which will be needed to be addressed for the future. I don't want the package to be tied with the latest MacOS version.</comment></comment>


The Typical Billion Dollar Startup Acquisition - <AUTHOR> http://tomtunguz.com/the-typical-billion-dollar-startup-acquisition/ <comment><USER2> > conclusions are evident from the chart. First, 83% of these acquisitions > were cash only. Only 1.5% of transactions were consummated with less than > 10% of the value in cash. Second, the larger the transaction the more likely > stock will play a significant role.

No, this is a nice chart, but none of this is evident from it. The only relevant data is in the table.</comment>


Want to come to the US? Be prepared to hand over your passwords - <AUTHOR> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/02/08/dhs_wants_enhanced_digital_vetting/ <comment><USER2> Previous discussions:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13600704](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13600704)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13598505](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13598505)

</comment><comment><USER3> Does _any other_ country do this? Are they going to start now that the US is doing it?

It's definitely put me right off traveling to the US with a smartphone or a computer.

The strange thing is: don't they already _have_ quite a lot of this information? Isn't that what the whole fight with the NSA is about? Is this just a very high profile way of intimidating dissidents?

e.g. [https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/flying-home-abroad- bo...](https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/flying-home-abroad-border-agent- stopped-and-questioned-me-about-my-work-aclu)

<comment><USER4> It's normalizing the invasion of privacy. If you subject everyone to it, then it becomes the new normal.

My parents grew up in a communist republic, and every phone call would begin with "this conversation is being monitored" said by the operator(and yes, the operator would listen in and report you to the secret police if you said something suspicious). Initially people were upset and then they didn't care, because you couldn't call anyone in any other way, so you had to accept that every conversation was being listened to.

<comment><USER5> But we are only doing it to catch serious criminals!!! [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/7369543.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/7369543.stm)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I wonder how long before social media services begin to offer a dead man switch equivalent whereby all private communication is deleted given a user defined 'wrong' password that grants access to the account?

<comment><USER7> Given that most American social media and telecom companies seem to go above and beyond to cooperate with US intelligence and law enforcement (Room 641A, PRISM, etc.) I think it's more likely that there will be a switch that dumps all private communication directly to an NSA server on demand.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Depressingly, it seems this idea was originally proposed around June 2016, with the scheme only just being made mandatory instead of optional:

[https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jun/28/us- custom...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jun/28/us-customs- border-protection-social-media-accounts-facebook-twitter)

So it's not purely tied to the recent political changes. The US Department of Homeland Security has wanted this for a while.

Either way, it's terrible. It goes against the terms of service for almost all online service providers, it opens up another avenue for customs to frame you by using your account to post messages/view controversial content, it's a massive privacy risk and it mostly punishes people who are both small time enough and honest enough to only have one account per service to hand over.

<comment><USER9> Back then there were no plans to ask for passwords, just the names/URLs of the accounts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> You would violate the terms of service for sharing your passwords with a third-party.

Facebook for example: [https://www.facebook.com/terms](https://www.facebook.com/terms) Section 4, number 8:

"You will not share your password (or in the case of developers, your secret key), let anyone else access your account, or do anything else that might jeopardize the security of your account."

<comment><USER11> This is useless, legally speaking, since the law overrides any ToS from any company.

<comment><USER3> The request from the immigration officers isn't actually a legal obligation, it's just that they can make it a condition of entry.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is the first step and after that putting your online passwords will be a mandatory step of accessing the US whether you need a Visa or not.

The next step will be a mandatory access of all your online accounts (emails, social media, etc) by the government for US Citizens.

I'm not a US citizen and I don't live there. But if you can't see this coming, then you have been successfully frightened by the system and sold on "terrorism".

<comment><USER13> As we mentioned in our trainings. In some contexts and threat models it might be worth certain individuals building their fake secondary social media presence profiles and creating a pattern of life for them, for just this reason.

<comment><USER4> It doesn't help though, because the form will ask for all online social media accounts, so if you fail to mention your real one it will either get you in trouble straight away, or at some undefined point in the future. Say you go to US for work, give them a fake account, then 10 years later you want to apply for citizenship and you can't, because 10 years earlier you lied on your entry form.

<comment><USER12> Maybe, then, if you are a real terrorist you hold on from publishing your photos/videos of beheading people on social media accounts with your name?

<comment><USER3> What about hiding your ACLU work? [https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak- freely/flying-home-abroad-bo...](https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak- freely/flying-home-abroad-border-agent-stopped-and-questioned-me-about-my- work-aclu)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Nope, not planning on ever going to the US again.

<comment><USER15> We're planning on emigrating away from the US.

We're out of stocks entirely, and are doing as much as we can to avoid directing money to the US government while these serial liars have it in their grasp. We're not buying things unless we absolutely need them.

The United State has begun a long, downward spiral at the hands of the comically-unqualified Mr. Trump. Every day that America refuses to reckon with this problem – Mr. Trump's serial lying, his nepotism, his increasingly-eratic behavior, and the dangerous Lenninist "destroy everything" views of his surrogate Bannon – the harder it becomes to undo.

Donald Trump is a serial liar, a bully, a probable sex offender, and carries with him a following of christian dominionists who are (a) in possession of nuclear weapons and (b) desperately want a war with a billions-strong religion they've decided to wage was on, via the doctrine of collective punishment.

Labor is a type of capital. Trumpism, meet capital flight.

<comment><USER16> If you think this spiral began with Trump, you're living in a fairy tale.

<comment><USER15> Never said it did.

However, Trump brings dangerous aspects with him that other leaders have lacked:

(i) he's willing to engage in direct personal attacks against the media, the judicial system, and electorate as a whole (i.e. "check out sex tape"), going as far as to tell the entire fourth estate to "be quiet for a while".

(ii) he has repeatedly cast nuclear weapons as a tool not just of mutual assured destruction, but as a potentially useful first-strike tool as well – "the power, the devastation, is very important to [him]". [1] The implications for this in Iran should be troubling – Tehran alone has 78 million civilian men, women, and children who don't want to die.

(iii) he had the gall to ask for Russia's support in securing opposition research against his political opponent, during a live news conference on July 17th, 2016. Russia remains under US sanction for its role in the MH17 disaster and the well-documented programs aimed at interfering with the 2016 US election [2]. "Russia, if you're listening..." [3]. The American public needs to know the extent of the preexisting relationship between Trump, his associates, and Putin's administration.

(iv) He has yet to eliminate basic conflicts of interest within his administration (e.g. Kushner, a son-in-law prohibited under 5 USC § 3110 in normal circumstances). He had yet to place his business holdings – which continue to fall afoul of the constitution's emoluments clause, e.g. in the GSA situation – into a true family-undirected blind trust.

(v) He has a long trend of loudly and publicly denigrating judges, jurists, the legislative bench as a whole, an entire department store, criminal suspects cleared of wrongdoing, and wounded prisoners of war who still serve the country today. He appears to have no civics-101 level set of knowledge with which to navigate the legislative or judicial process.

(vi) Trump openly used white supremacist imagery and symbolism ("88 generals, fourteen three-star or higher") throughout his campaign. [4][5][6] Noted white-supremacist website Stormfront celebrated the release of his September 6th, 2016 press release depicting multiple white-supermacist symbols.

(vii) Trump refuses to accept conclusions of scientific fact, especially those related to the impact of man on the climate of planet Earth.

(viii) Trump does not appear to have the technical competence for the job of president: he repeatedly fails to understand constitutional limits, and frequently does not seek out any substantive analysis of existing precedent and case law before issuing orders. This causes predictable chaos (as we witnessed during his immigration order).

(ix) Trump goes out of his way to harass and defame peaceful protests. When there is an isolated violent act at an existing peaceful protest, Trump follows the doctrine of collective punishment and holds the whole protest group responsible.

(x) We've never seen mass internet adoption at this level during a presidential campaign, and we've never also been the target of a state- sponsored disinformation campaign (see [2]). There are new forces at work here.

If you want to go further: Steve Bannon, sometimes-president but full-time National Security Council member, is a board member of Cambridge Analytica, the company that manipulated social graph relationship data to determine which clusters of people (sorry, "Influencers") to microtarget. [7]

1:[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSrP1KSR0H4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSrP1KSR0H4)

2: [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0a/ODNI_Sta...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0a/ODNI_Statement_on_Declassified_Intelligence_Community_Assessment_of_Russian_Activities_and_Intentions_in_Recent_U.S._Elections.pdf)

3: [https://youtu.be/ZnY7D4M4k68?t=20s](https://youtu.be/ZnY7D4M4k68?t=20s)

4: [https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press- releases/88-retired-u.s.-...](https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press- releases/88-retired-u.s.-generals-and-admirals-endorse-trump)

5: [http://www.adl.org/combating-hate/hate-on- display/c/88.html](http://www.adl.org/combating-hate/hate-on- display/c/88.html)

6: [http://www.adl.org/combating-hate/hate-on- display/c/14-words...](http://www.adl.org/combating-hate/hate-on- display/c/14-words.html)

7: [http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/the-british-data- cruncher...](http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/the-british-data-crunchers- who-say-they-helped-donald-trump-to-win/)

<comment><USER17> > (vi) Trump openly used white supremacist imagery and symbolism ("88 > generals, fourteen three-star or higher") throughout his campaign. [4][5][6] > Noted white-supremacist website Stormfront celebrated the release of his > September 6th, 2016 press release depicting multiple white-supermacist > symbols.

White supremacist with a Jewish son in law and adviser. I'm sorry, now you're just being ridiculous.

<comment><USER15> Recall: this is a populist campaign that sustained itself on a "deplorable" sad frog meme. Symbolism in politics is not irrelevant, especially when the symbols belong to groups that consider themselves to be marginalized (N.B. many white supremacists do, and will fully admit it if you hand around enough of them for long enough).

You can find the threads celebrating his announcement on Stormfront. They're real.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> By the way, EFF seeks stories about digital border searches:

[https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/02/invasive-digital- borde...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/02/invasive-digital-border- searches-tell-eff-your-story)

</comment><comment><USER19> It's already happening, even to people who are not from the 7 blacklisted countries : [https://twitter.com/wirehead2501/status/829559451610931200](https://twitter.com/wirehead2501/status/829559451610931200)

</comment><comment><USER20> Giving a third-party access to your passwords is worse than merely a privacy invasion. It gives said third-party the ability not only to read, but also to write. It's even worse if your account has elevated privileges.

And, like others, I wonder how they deal with 2FA.

</comment><comment><USER21> Makes me feel RMS is not crazy afterall.

<comment><USER22> It is a bit sad that someone is often (jokingly) referred to as crazy because of consistent application application of a defensible moral position.

I think people get stuck on the idea that it is difficult for users to get as good an experience with free-only software, or that it is difficult to make money creating that software. That's a different problem and not an argument he engages with his zeal. Choosing to defend freedom and not support tyranny is a moral decision not a purely economic calculation.

Edit: I just R'd the FA and speaking as a non-US citizen, I will not visit that country for the foreseeable future.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Setting up an IFTTT recipe to post from RSS feeds to Social media accounts is child's play. Anyone can create a fake social media footprint while they sleep, so it's pointless to demand passwords to social media accounts.

Can't expect much intelligence or common sense from an Idiocracy.

</comment><comment><USER24> wow. reposting my comment from another article here: till last year i was thinking of getting a visa and trying my luck in the valley. now it seems (having learned more about america) that a significant part of the population thinks science is a liberal hoax, thinks the government and media is constantly lying, carries assault rifles and believes shit like pizzagate is not only plausible but true.

<comment><USER25> To be fair, apart from carrying guns (which is a bit of an American specificity), a significant percentage of the population of any country is quite stupid, easily manipulated and tend to vote for populist types that cater to their low intelligence.

For examples in Europe, see Brexit, Berlusconi, the rise of Lepen in France, the Freedom Party of Austria and a lot of examples... The problem is that this time, in the US, those people have actually been able to vote for a candidate that represent their values (and it's not the second time, Bush was already a good example of that)

<comment><USER26> I think you're spot on, it's so dangerous to think this can't happen anywhere else. Stupid laws get ratified in every country. For the US, one difference is the media coverage is good, and the debate is widely publicised. Whereas in e.g. the UK, everybody just shrugs [0]. Apathy is far more dangerous than outrage.

[0] e.g. being compelled to hand over passwords in "terror" or "national security" matters, or be jailed otherwise

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> This country is pretty obviously on a downward spiral for some time now. And things only seem to accelerate. It's just sad to see things go backwards again. Especially given the influence the country has on the entire World. Let's stop this madness.

</comment><comment><USER28> I took Turkish airways from San Francisco to Istanbul. It was packed, though most were transferring to places further. Now I'm on the return trip, and the airplane is half full. I'm wondering if all the Indians and south Asians will be coming back to the US, or did I catch a slow day back to the US?

Perhaps this is the wrong place to wonder of all the effects of US immigration policies, but even here people are saying they won't go to the US.

<comment><USER29> I spent a few weeks in India last month, and talking to local techies I didn't get the impression that the Indian 'American Dream' has lost any interest. The Western media is reporting otherwise though, so read into this as you like.

<comment><USER30> People in India and the rest of the third world all want to go to Europe or the U.S. It is the rest of us you have to worry about.

As an engineer in Europe who has often toyed with the idea of going to America, that idea is all but dead, mostly because I would have to enter a legal no man's land (U.S. border security) where anything I have ever said might be used to hold me in custody and/or expel me from the country (including a comment like this one, were I dumb enough to post it on a forum tied to my real name).

For people who have a choice, America is looking less attractive by the day.

<comment><USER31> > People in India and the rest of the third world all want to go to Europe or > the U.S. It is the rest of us you have to worry about.

I would challenge that notion. The Indian community is now in a reverse immigration, that the population is reaching an equilibrium (~3 million). While the students continue to flock to US univs, many are choosing to return. And this was before Trump. I suspect this would be even more now given the h1b visas and other challenges.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Sorry don't have any passwords to share, they are in my password keeper and I left that file at home.

<comment><USER33> And then the CBP officer will put you on the next flight back. You don't have to hand over your password, they don't have to admit you to the United States.

<comment><USER30> The travel info airport websites now says that if you are traveling to the U.S., please make sure all your electronic devices are charged with a full battery.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> And who is to say whether or not someone has a Facebook account? 1 Billion FB users, 7 Billion people on earth (guessing, didn't look up numbers)

And what about criminals that know about this possible boarder check and will have dummy padded pro American social media accounts?

<comment><USER35> FB claims almost 1.9 billion users, with 1.7 billion active at least once a month. Still some way off _everyone_ , but for the right demographic (between 20 and 40, lives in a city, in a country with communications infrastructure) it's not unreasonable to see not having a FB account as _really_ unusual.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Just setup dual boot to auto load some lame duck OS with some lame duck user activity, for laptops anyway. Any attempt to load the other boot without some special password results in a "drive not found"...ahem, yah...not found. Encrypted drives of course, the people doing the inspections don't have a clue. Worried about phones, you are pwned already, hell, Intel ME pwned all of us!

</comment><comment><USER37> How do they store your passwords? Wouldn't the liability of having all those financial account passwords be enough reason not to do something this moronic? Furthermore, what if my account requires 2FA? How do they prove I even have an account? This is pure dipshitery.

</comment><comment><USER38> Why couldn't they create fake accounts?

</comment><comment><USER39> Fascism?

</comment><comment><USER40> If the UK had been able to read the rants of Omar Bakri Muhammad beforehand, we could have avoided him immigrating from Syria.

Once here, he fostered the notorious Hizb Ut-Tahrir and Al-Muhajiroun movements. Both these movements have made this country a less safe place to be.

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

Sadly in these times, and from a handful of nations - we do need to consider who we're letting in, and what their real attitude is toward the West.

In the countries that Trump wants to vet, there were spontaneous street parties to celebrate 9/11\. Let's not be naive here.

<comment><USER41> As if under Obama there was no TSA. I am starting to really despise this "fake news" machines called mass media.

They are trying to show that Trump is the Antichrist while they choose to forget how Obama has destroyed half of Middle East and setted up a police State through NSA, secret laws, secret courts, indiscriminate droning of innocent people.

Hypocrites at its best, this is what the mass media have become.

Oh right, Trump hasn't received the Nobel prize for peace!

<comment><USER42> This is classic Whataboutism[1]. The startup community has been criticizing Obama on many of these issues for the past eight years as well.

That Obama engaged in such activity doesn't suddenly mean that Trump's administration is justified, nor does it mean that things won't get much worse with Trump.

1\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism)

<comment><USER43> Writing it off as "whataboutism" is a way to avoid uncomfortable lines of questioning, so I will make these questions explicit here:

Why exactly did so many people magically become dead-set against all these government abuses on Jan 20, 2017, specifically?

Are they really here to help the fight for $CAUSE, or are they exploiting the cause for petty power games?

Can you really trust their judgement in the Fight Against Tyranny?

Can you trust them to push for durable reform against tyranny, or are they merely interested in install their own tyrant?

<comment><USER42> _Writing it off as "whataboutism" is a way to avoid uncomfortable lines of questioning_

No it's not, it's to point out a clear logical fallacy in OP's post.

 _Why exactly did so many people magically become dead-set against all these government abuses on Jan 20, 2017, specifically?_

They didn't; this is false. The same people who are angry at specific abuses after Jan 20 were also angry before. See the _thousands_ of articles posted on HN about these issues over the past eight years. This is also true from major news sources - even the liberal ones haven't failed to criticize Obama over these issues.

That having been said, it should be expected that a president who is more severe in abusing his power would provoke more anger. It's not black and white.

 _Are they really here to help the fight for $CAUSE, or are they exploiting the cause for petty power games?_

For the rest of your post, can you explain what you mean by "they", by "the fight for $CAUSE" and the "Fight Against Tyranny"? Also, can you give specific examples? This is too ambiguous to respond to.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


It's time to abolish the HTTP referer - <AUTHOR>

In times where we see that our privacy on the internet has to be protected more strongly, there's no place for the HTTP referer anymore.
Let's abolish this obsolete piece of the HTTP specification that was introduced in 1996 when tracking was not an issue.
* Websites want to know where we are visiting from? We shouldn't care.
* Websites want to use the referer for promotional purposes? We shouldn't care.
* Websites try to create statistics by using HTTP referer data? We shouldn't care.
Let's stop thinking about websites' intentions and protect ourselves. <comment><USER2> It's a good thought... can you expand on it? What is the state of Referer in modern browsers? Why keep it? Would removing it break anything?

File bugs against browser developers to remove Referer.

Meanwhile users can disable Referer,

* [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/referer-control/hn...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/referer-control/hnkcfpcejkafcihlgbojoidoihckciin?hl=en) * [http://www.technipages.com/firefox-enable-disable-referrer](http://www.technipages.com/firefox-enable-disable-referrer) * [http://www.nullrefer.com/hide_referrer.html](http://www.nullrefer.com/hide_referrer.html)

It could also be removed by a proxy.

This becomes less of an issue as sites move to https, where Referer is not sent.

<comment><AUTHOR> > What is the state of Referer in modern browsers?

Referers are still sent in all popular browers and expose information that is not necessary at all.

> Why keep it?

I can't think of any reason. Can you?

> Would removing it break anything?

It might certainly break _some_ websites. But mechanisms which rely on the HTTP referer are usually broken, anyway. It should not affect _too_ many sites.

> File bugs against browser developers to remove Referer

The referer is such a fundamental feature (not due to its importance but history/habit) that a filed bug will probably be closed within minutes ;)

> Meanwhile users can disable Referer

Certainly. I have. But as with all security-related things, how many "normal" users will do this? 99% of users don't even know about "about:config" in Firefox etc.

> This becomes less of an issue as sites move to https, where Referer is not > sent

This is wrong. Even on HTTPS, the referer is _always_ sent unless the referenced site is plain (not secure) HTTP.

<comment><USER2> > Even on HTTPS, the referer is always sent

Ah I was mistaken... I assumed Referer was never sent cross-domain in this case. That seems wrong.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Worth considering Tor browser's stance on this (and a plethora of other issues). See _A.1. Deprecation Wishlist_

[https://www.torproject.org/projects/torbrowser/design/](https://www.torproject.org/projects/torbrowser/design/)

I happen to disagree with Tor on this though (they worry about breaking sites). I've found that setting referrer to target site's host has pretty good results (this can be done with various plugins).

In general, browser maintainers seem to prioritize compatibility over security. I think a new browser or fork that prioritizes security, possibly Tor, will eventually become dominant. And I'm excited for Servo, the renderer to replace Gecko, which is written in Rust (memory safe).

<comment><AUTHOR> The Tor project is not in the position to change or deprecate such things. On the contrary, if Chrome or Firefox would deprecate the referer, we could get rid of it, gradually.

The same is true for the worrisome behaviour of `window.name`.

As I said, mechanisms that rely on the referer for "authentication", such as image requests, are broken.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> While the concern for user privacy is certainly understandable, abolishing the HTTP referer does not solve the issue. In fact it can be argued that it could do harm than good - basically every web based business relies on it in one way or another (customer acquisition channels, news mentions, backlinks, attribution, etc).

The referrer itself is not at all used in tracking the user - as the visitor data is usually aggregated by referring source. Fingerprinting and evercookies are much more common ways of tracking individual users, and you can bet that there are even more advanced methods available for government agencies with service-level access.

<comment><AUTHOR> Of course, it _is_ used for tracking. Fingerprinting and evercookies are the means to identify users, referers are one of the many things that you then track, assigned to those user identifiers.

Apart from that, inadvertently leaking information is easy with the HTTP referer.

<comment><USER4> I've worked with quite a few pieces of security software that rely on user tracking, and the referrer information was only used (if at all) to tie-in with other parts of the system (ie. which marketing channel brought the user in).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I've seen this as a security issue several times, where older enterprise tools have embedded URL session keys (horrible, I know) or other private data, and act as the referrer to public sites. This either exposes more of these tools' data and functions to traffic sniffers, or malicious site operators.

There is no legitimate purpose to the referrer within applications that isn't replaceable via internal claims based tokens, or external sites' parameterised (thus, opt in) source tracking.

<comment><AUTHOR> Exactly, there's _no_ reason to keep the referer. But deprecation is necessary, so that the tons of websites that (wrongly) rely on the referer can adapt.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Agreed. It's used for pretty much nothing but tracking/advertising, something that's not the end-users problem. I would also wager that 99% of people don't realize that $embarrassing-site.com knows that they just arrived from $social- network.com/$profile, or vice versa.

</comment><comment><USER7> With no referrer, how would content owners prevent content thieves from stealing away bandwidth by hosting stolen markup on the thief's server that still refer to images on the author's?

</comment><comment><USER8> This would break too many websites (I've seen it used by a lot of banks as part of their authentication systems) to get through any kind of standards committee. Instead download something like RefControl, and advocate for browsers to include such functionality in their core.

<comment><AUTHOR> You can change everything on the web if you only give service operators enough time to adjust their sites.</comment></comment>


When Decca records were part of everyday life - <AUTHOR> https://spectator.us/decca-records-everyday-life/ <comment><USER2> Very disappointing piece, it's just a short fluff piece for the release of a book.

There's so much behind them, could probably easily fill a few books. Despite being just beaten to first stereo recording they were _so_ much better at stereo than anyone else, which lasted until about the 80s. Then their recording innovations, their unique London cartridges that survived unharmed into the audiophile and silliness era, full frequency recording and hydrophone connection, to Decca navigator, or early digital mastering with their own equipment in the seventies.

<comment><USER3> > Very disappointing piece

Indeed. I wonder if the book elucidates anything about Decca's great recordings of the 1930's -- both the marvelous red-label Decca calypso recordings and the worthy country music 5000 series -- e.g. like when and where which records were field recorded.</comment></comment>


Startups in london - <AUTHOR>

Is there a list of start-ups in london looking for developers? <comment><USER2>
      * Links below
      * Events on Meetup (Find a Tech job in London is good)
      * Get ideas from someone in the know! See below...

I work with several startups that are flying under the radar and are not recruiting publicly, feel free to drop me a line: sian.robertson [at] oxfordknight.co.uk

</comment><comment><USER3> This can be good, but is job specific: [http://workinstartups.com/job- board/jobs/programmers/](http://workinstartups.com/job- board/jobs/programmers/)

</comment><comment><USER4> This is pretty good for finding startups in london [http://www.builtinlondon.co/](http://www.builtinlondon.co/)

</comment><comment><USER5> [https://www.siliconmilkroundabout.com/startups](https://www.siliconmilkroundabout.com/startups)</comment>


What we learned talking to +20 companies about project portfolio management - <AUTHOR> https://www.omnirocket.com/blog/four-portfolio-issues

<comment><USER2> A lot of even big companies are changing to KISS tools. This is an excellent example, and actually seems to be well researched. It's an interesting trend.

</comment><comment><USER3> A tool that replaces gut-feeling intuitively, now that's a challenge. Hope you guys make it</comment>


Show HN: Snake clone written in Nim - <AUTHOR> https://picheta.me/snake/ <comment><AUTHOR> Just something I've put together to show off Nim's JavaScript backend. More features/refinements could definitely be implemented but I figured it was time to show it off. Feedback welcome. :)

Source code for those interested: [https://github.com/dom96/snake](https://github.com/dom96/snake)</comment>


I Don't Want to Pay Up Front for Your App - <AUTHOR> http://palmer.im/2013/10/i-dont-want-to-pay-up-front-for-your-app/

<comment><USER2> 1 point of view is not enough a sample size. But OP argument is worth a try as a hypothesis.</comment>


Thermoelectrically Pumped Light-Emitting Diodes Operating above Unity Efficiency - <AUTHOR> http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v108/i9/e097403 <comment><USER2> Too bad it's paywalled. Would have made an interesting read.</comment>


Ask HN: What fintech area problems would you like to see solved in 2018? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> I've seen too many fintech pitches that go something like:

Fintech: here is our amazing solution to a problem you didn't even know you had!

Banker: oh you mean like <some common piece of banking terminology>

Fintech: _blank stares_

A fintech that is all ex-bank who spun off to solve a problem they knew they had, will probably succeed. A fintech that is all web devs solving problems that they only imagine exist will not.

<comment><USER3> This is true in many cases, because either:

A) There's no problem to be solved (which I think is your point), or

B) The problem looks unsolved because it's harder than it looks (e.g. payment fraud).

But I imagine there are spaces (e.g. consumer payments) where a pair of fresh eyes wouldn't suffer from either of the above.

I don't know whether companies like Revolut or Transferwise were founded by ex retail bankers, but I could imagine someone from outside the industry identifying the problems they solve, purely from their customer perspective.

<comment><USER2> Also C) what they propose would be illegal under the regulatory regime of at least one jurisdiction the bank operates in, and that's the only reason the bank hasn't already done it

 _could imagine someone from outside the industry identifying the problems they solve, purely from their customer perspective_

That's a fair point

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Not exactly fintech but somewhat related: Manual bookkeeping.

I suppose though that probably short of artificial general intelligence there's no one-size-fits-all solution for this because bookkeeping is too varied and complex.

If everyone agreed on a digital standard for sending invoices and receipts that'd be a first step (no, that standard isn't PDF). Unfortunately, as long as there are even companies that still send paper invoices we still have a long way to go.

<comment><USER3> Book-keeping as a whole might be too complex and varied, but you can split the problems into smaller pieces. For a start, split accounts payable and accounts receivable. Then, within AP, split between invoice entering objective data, matching against purchase orders, getting payment authorization, and coding appropriately.

Some of these part need some company-specific work flow, but not much intelligence so can be coded by any internal dev team. But some parts (e.g. extracting the objective info from PDF or scan) are harder but more standardised, and could be provided as an API. Some other (allocating to the right accounts in the GL) should be automatable for 90% of invoices, just because most received invoices are for the same thing each month.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> The challenge with fintech is regulation and integration.

The tech is easy, meeting compliance and getting other businesses to integrate not so.

</comment><comment><USER6> So the sad thing is fintech startups do not really solve things for now. They just push some banks to improve their tech.

Here is a real issue: transaction speed of SEPA wire transfers.

Here is another issue: no fintech will be able to solve it, since fintechs are no banks, and (typical for "disruptive" startups) can not solve this for the whole system as it is a regulated system for tons of reasons.

So what could fintech really solve?

How about focussing on customer facing technology? A fintech proposing and providing an open standard for banking apps where security and compliance is enforced by default would at least one problem solved.

</comment><comment><USER7> Maybe this is more regulatory or financial engineering, but I'd like to see a solution to the 99 investor limitation for private funds.

</comment><comment><USER8> Please do not "solve" anything, I like the situation with the stock market as is... Thanks a lot!</comment>


3 years in the making and 3X faster. Introducing Craft 3 - <AUTHOR> https://craftcms.com/ <comment><USER2> If anyone has any questions about the release, I'm happy to answer them.</comment>


Ask HN: Is passion a fair thing to ask for from an employee? - <AUTHOR> I mean when you are a startup and can't make decent payments as salaries, can one really expect the developer to be passionate? Or maybe it's because I am based out of a third world country where salary trumps everything. Or am I dealing with the wrong set of people. <comment><USER3> * If you want low performance, give me low money.

* If you want high performance, give me high money.

* If you want loyalty/passion, give me equity/profit sharing.

You can buy my performance i.e. time with money. You can buy my passion i.e. commitment with reciprocation. If you give me typical market wages without profit sharing, don't expect anything beyond typical performance without commitment.

<comment><USER4> There are some excellent studies out there that suggest this to be false.

One source[1] showed that:

\- For highly creative jobs, respect and autonomy to function and just enough $ to cover comfortable living expenses produced the best results.

\- As you add more money, the performance for these jobs decreased.

AND

\- For highly repetitive jobs, performance increased with pay almost linearly.

\- Offering more autonomy for lower pay in these types of jobs lowered performance.

Programming is a highly creative job. While you are making very logical assumptions (more $ == more work) I would argue that after the first month or so, that would no longer be the case.

You would then just be equating (more $ == more HOURS working) but not necessarily producing.

The findings of the study did hinge on the person seeking autonomy to make enough to cover their living expenses such that the concern for money was _off the table_.

Really interesting stuff.

I think from my own experience, after the honeymoon period of the giant paycheck wears off, this tends to be absolutely true.

As for passion, it has to come from the top down.

[1] [http://www.amazon.com/Drive-Surprising-Truth-About- Motivates...](http://www.amazon.com/Drive-Surprising-Truth-About- Motivates/dp/1594484805/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1312151498&sr=8-1)

Thanks to yengz for the reminder where this study came from!

<comment><USER5> The "excellent studies", which engineering management uses to claim that low salaries, but enough to survive, are optimal, are a crock. Where are the top CEOs making just enough to survive?

Here is the flaw. If you are properly compensated and don't have any other options, giving you a big fat raise doesn't improve your productivity, that's true and that's what the studies measure. Hey are you a developer? Here's an extra ten bucks, will you now come up with a better algorithm? No, of course not, because money doesn't make you a better developer, just as paying existing public school teachers more doesn't make them any less severely incompetent.

However, if you want to attract more productive people in the first place, you have to pay them more money because there is a competitive environment. The "excellent studies" try to prevent readers from noticing that that's not what they looked into, and it's clear they do this intentionally.

Do you think that Google would attract the same caliber of developers by paying what McDonalds pays its line workers? You must believe that if you really believe that these studies are correct in their claims that there is no advantage to paying more than survival wages.

The simple fact is that sustenance wages are not in fact ideal for attracting the best developers, designers, writers, actors and inventors.

If you don't recognize that, but continue to insist that the opposite is true, then you are intentionally seeking to deceive people.

<comment><USER6> I think you're conflating wages for "comfortable living" with "sustenance" wages.

<comment><USER5> Mmmm, the actual amount isn't all that relevant to the argument. But as far as "comfortable living" goes, the average $90,000 salary in Silicon Valley, minus the high California tax burden, does not provide "comfortable living" when a run down 3 bedroom home costs on average $860,000, vastly above the ability of said $90,000 wage earner to afford. It barely provides sustenance living. This is why many of these average paid developers have 3-4 hour commutes from far away, and others are living packed 5 to a room, and few are able to attract a mate.

This is completely a different topic from the discussion though so I'd prefer not to continue with it, if you would like to, it would be best to start a new thread.

Developers in many other parts of the country can live comfortably with an average wage. But watch out if you get sick. Sickness is for the rich. As we found out last month, if you are a long term employee at Microsoft and you get brain cancer, they give you a bad review and then declare you ineligible for disability benefits. Shouldn't have gotten cancer!

My idea of comfortable living is you can afford a house, to marry, and to afford health care. Others may disagree, but I don't consider that to be even worth debating.

<comment><USER6> I'm not disagreeing with anything you said but my understanding of the studies that rkalla is talking about is that the extra $$$ won't make your life significantly better so you'd be willing to forgo that money for "better" (I'm being intentionally vague here) work. Obviously, in the situation you're referring to the extra money makes a big difference in quality of life.

Perhaps you're suggesting that there are no cases where this is true? (i.e., one will always be happier with the extra $$$).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Define "passion". Do you mean:

1\. Someone who will respond to your above-and-beyond commitment to them (in compensation, tools, respect, etc.) with above-and-beyond results?

2\. Someone who will give above-and-beyond results even when given lousy tools, a poor work environment, unrealistic expectations, and mediocre compensation?

#1 is fair to ask. #2 is not.

<comment><USER8> I second this.

In my experience at a previous company, they upgraded every developer and QA engineer's workspace to have high-end hardware and dual 24" monitors (1920x1200, not the 1080p BS). Previously barely-missed deadlines were practically eliminated, better employee morale appeared, more innovative ideas started appearing, and various other things showed up.

All in all, this convinced me and I'm a firm believer in giving employees great tools and freedom to approach things in their own way. It shows that the company cares about you, and that goes a long way with employees and their performance backs that up.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I'm not sure that passion is something to _ask for_ as much as it is something to _look for_.

Even making shitty wages, I can't hide my passion for my work. When I was 15, bagging groceries and helping people load up their cars, I couldn't restrain my passion for doing things well, and that was $6 an hour. If I'm getting paid something approaching a reasonable wage while working on my true creative passions of UI/UX? Forget about it — I'm on fire.

So I think it's worthwhile to look for people who have that energy. With the caveat that such energy has value and if you can't provide full-market cash compensation you need to make up for it with a cocktail of other benefits like flexibility, autonomy, work environment, equity, great employee-selected tools and indulgence/encouragement for people's specific ambitions.

</comment><comment><USER6> I suspect you might be from India, so let me tell about a few things that bugged me about life as software developer in Bangalore.

I don't mind being paid below market but I definitely need something to make up for this. You could this (following in no particular order): (1) profit sharing (2) equity (3) a higher-than-market level of responsibility for a given experience level and (4) interesting work.

The other thing is that every time I start a new position I'm full of excitement and passion but this excitement drains out of me pretty quickly thanks to terrible decision making by the management, my discovery that I got lowballed on my offer or by others in the team being hired at levels disproportionate to their ability, or by my being forced to work on something completely different from what I promised when I was made the offer, or my discovery that the management are bunch of penny-wise pound-foolish cheapskates.

The TLDR here is that you need to be honest and extremely fair in your dealings. Always ask yourself whether you'd want to continue if you were in the employees position.

Don't ever fall into the trap of thinking that you are doing the employee a favor by giving them a job. Anybody worth hiring can pretty much get an offer with a phone call or two in the current hiring market.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes. We are based out of Mumbai. And the thing is we are offering everything mentioned on your list. I find the Indian developer to be more concerned about the salary.

The other issues you mentioned could be true in our case. We did give more responsibility to an inexperienced developer who has shown great initiative.

A good developer with commitment or a better developer who is all over the place?

Honestly development as a career is very hard, I have seen a lot of developers who cannot switch off, or focus on solving a specific problem. I think passion to solve a problem sometimes makes it easy for a developer to work on something for a decent amount of time and not try hacking the nxt shiny thing around.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I was passionate myself. Then a new non-technical VP was hired, and three of six directors were moved under the non-technical director the VP promoted. My title, and those of the others, went from director to Zweiter Beauftragter fur Administrative Fragen. Our job descriptions changed beyond recognition, for "flexibility", we were informed. My new supervisor informed me that I "solved my own problems"--a bad thing, apparently--and that I was "limited by what I know." I was required to attend unbelievably boring "change management" meetings, in which the entire department got to listen to the ephemera of Windows system administurbation and discuss the cleaning of digital bed pans. Whatever passion I had evaporated. I left a couple months later.

</comment><comment><USER11> Being a good manager in the startup field is an extraordinary difficult thing to do.

Here's an awesome TED talk that you can watch which is a good introduction in the field - <http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html> \- it shows that performance in creative fields can decrease when the payout is greater.

Salary is just one factor in job satisfaction, there are lots of other ways, most of them cheaper from a costs perspective, which can improve the "mood". Here's a list:

      - <USER2>
      - 20% time (autonomy to work on self-driven projects)
      - a perceived notion of fairness (i.e. no bozos as managers,
      promotions done right on merit and payout/hierarchy that
      correlates with the actual job performance, not politics)
      - free drinks/food/catering (or at least joint cafeteria area
      for lunch bonding/discussions)
      - awesome hardware
      - high employee/manager ratio to avoid micro-management
      - a tech ladder allowing growth without becoming a manager

</comment><comment><USER12> I think it depends on whether an employer views passion as a character trait or a byproduct. The distinction is very important.

I'm an employer (and a programmer) and I view passion as a byproduct of developers being properly incentivized to do something they find fascinating.

That incentive varies from programmer to programmer. Incentives can be cash, equity, profit sharing, flexible hours, encouragement and recognition, kick- ass equipment, a steady supply of new tech toys to play with, paid time and travel to conferences, etc.

The second aspect, of course, the truly hard one, is keeping people fascinated. Everything gets boring as hell eventually. As an employer I actually find this harder than determining what incentives people respond to because I'm personally aware of how quickly programmers get bored.

<comment><USER13> Do you try to keep your programmers interested for long periods of time? Or do you think that every programmer has a finite amount of time at your company and that they will move on after a few years?

<comment><USER12> Well, I've only been in my own business for three years and employing for not yet a couple so I don't really know yet.

The job I had before I started this business I always told my superiors that after three years a dev was going to start getting "the itch." I was only at that job for 4.5 years so I don't have the experience to know what really happens, but I did see guys start getting wanderlust at about three year, plus or minus. But I always felt that had more to do with unclear opportunities for growth, "just ok" equipment, and an uninspiring salary increase schedule.

So...I don't know. My gut says most will move on.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I was passionate for a previous employer, but they burned it out of me. Their inability to make decisions and leaps necessary to really be successful ate away at me. Those things affected me personally, and as an employee, that just can't happen. It's not worth it.

<comment><AUTHOR> I can emapathize with that. I do believe that could be the case with my team. Some of the guys came from another startup where they were not equity holders.

Does this happen a lot in the industry. If it does happen frequently then it makes more sense for a honest founder to always recruit/ collaborate with younger programmers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> You can't ask for passion from an employee unless you are giving them a meaningful equity stake or paying above market rates. Quite frankly, if you dont give a good stake or a great salary, employees won't naturally feel like going the extra mile.

In my experience, most employees feel that pushing themselves won't actually accrete any value to themselves, and that really kills any sort of passion.

</comment><comment><USER15> Good people are often passionate to begin with. If they lose their passion that's probably the fault of their employer.

If they're not passionate to begin with maybe they need to be motivated. Money does it for some people but it's not everything. Interest is very important too.

</comment><comment><USER16> Sell me on your project, infect me with your own passion for it. (You _do_ have a lot of belief in your project, right? It's not just something you think might work, maybe? If your idea is mediocre and you know it then this ain't gonna happen.)

Then pay me enough to make it worth my while. I have my own projects that I'm passionate about and there's so many hours in the day; every minute I'm spending working on your idea is a minute I'm deferring my own visions. You want me to pour my time into your idea? I'd better get more than just enough money to live on - I want to be able to not worry about looking for work for a while after I'm done with your project, so I can spend my time working on my own stuff that matters intensely to me and me alone. If you can't give me tons of money then I'd better have a serious stake in the eventual profits, and you'd better not want me to work on it for very long.

</comment><comment><USER17> Passion isn't something your employees can just choose to give you once asked, but it is something you can choose to give them by providing a meaningful purpose, the opportunity to learn new things, and the freedom to do great work.

<comment><USER18> > Passion isn't something your employees can just choose to give you once > asked

funny many organizations extort that level of commitment from its workers. for a short time "obey me or get fired" may work, but in long term it'll kill the workspace morale, motivation and innovation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I don't think it is a fair thing to _ask_ for, but it is certainly a fair thing for you to _look_ for.

It is the job of the company to impart passion, set an example and hold on to the people that get behind the company vision.

Without that vision or passion from the founders, none of the employees will have it and you are left with salary trumping everything (because there is nothing else, except maybe a small group of people you like hanging out with).

If you are passionate and convey that clearly, passion will trump salary for the right people, and those are the ones you want on your team.

</comment><comment><USER19> "can't make decent payments as salaries"

Yeah, that's a dealbreaker. I need to pay my bills. If you can't do that, sorry, but I have to keep my housing.

</comment><comment><USER20> Passion cannot be faked. And you can't buy true passion. Even if someone offered me $10 billion a year to do something, I'd be passionate about the money and not about my job (well, unless my job is interesting). As others have said, if you can't give high base pay, give equity. Heck, give equity anyway. Ownership helps with passion.

Give someone interesting an interesting problem. Don't hire assholes (in fact, fire assholes). Create a community where genuine mistakes aren't a big deal to their employment (and avoid cover your ass) and the passion will come. Support creativity, support big ideas, support some of the random, one off ideas that come out of creative people (easter eggs, hack weeks) and it'll pay for itself.

</comment><comment><USER21> Being from a third world country myself it is really difficult. Its even worse if your society is really corrupt. First its difficult to trade equity coz everyone is out to make an easy buck and its really hard to believe anyone however genuine they look or sound. Second, most third world countries are cash driven economies no credit cards and shit. But there is hope if you (or to) find someone who really believes in your idea. Its basicaly a hard sale. Best option is to build a very good reputation at Uni/college or your first workplace. Guaranteed, even if your idea is wack, your rep will get you the best employees/co-founders at minimal cost.

</comment><comment><USER5> "can't make decent payments as salaries"

Conversation doesn't really need to go beyond this point. It's like asking "Should my woman cook and clean for me even though I beat her each day?" Really, the cooking and cleaning is not the issue in that conversation.

</comment><comment><USER22> In my experience, you can grow and retain quality people with compensation, practices, and other incentives, but you won't make them passionate about their job this way.

There's passion about what you do (passionate about their field, tools), and passion about what you are doing (healthcare, education, making money). These are high energy, all-in types who live their jobs. They are also few in numbers.

You can hire and fire based on displayed passion, but I'm not sure it can be taught. They either have it or they don't.

Also, don't confuse passion with work ethic, which is (probably) equally valuable, but more of a character trait that can be applied to many different things.

</comment><comment><USER23> Why would you want passion? The thing you should look for is interest. Passion only means that they don't have the necessary information to tell if what they are doing is reckless or not.

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting.let me clarify my case. What I have seen so far is that most developers around want to ship 3 products a year for 3 different industries. They are all over the place. Cannot commit to solving a specific problem for a specific industry for an extended period of time.

So my thinking is maybe if the guys are passionate about the problem/ industry and not just interested in learning to do a lot of stuff, we would have a better shot at succeeding.

Correct me if there is a flaw in my understanding.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> There is a meaningful distinction to be made between passion about programming and passion about your product. The former is probably a necessity for good programmers, while the latter might not be necessary and might be hard to maintain without granting equity and/or having a really, really cool product.

</comment><comment> rush-tea If you are hiring in a 3rd world country, be careful as the law is not with you. A competitor can buy your developer code and run away with it without you are not being able to do anything about it.

so yeah, in 3rd world country, to be passionate and motivated, money mostly talks. Sad but true

</comment><comment><USER25> This might fit in with Dan Pink's talk on 'Drive':

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc>

Passion can be driven by incentives outside of salary.

<comment><USER5> I haven't watched all of those RSA videos but I've seen quite a few. It's amazing how every one I have seen is outlandish propaganda that it seems no one would fall for, yet I stand completely alone in this viewpoint.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> I think it's a fair thing to _look for_ in an employee. Who you hire is up to you.

</comment><comment><USER27> Are you hiring an expat or a local? Which country?

</comment><comment><USER28> If the market supports it.

</comment><comment><USER29> I think it's probably a required thing for every employee.

<comment><AUTHOR> I know. But is it really true, I fail to understand how a developer can be passionate about some business and yet launch 2-5 products a year. Is that passion for the business/ industry or passion to develop skills?

Most of the good programmers do it, right? Work on 4 products a year in multiple industries.

Should you hire someone who is passionate about the cause or one who is passionate about code(read growth/career)

<comment><USER29> Obviously both is best, but you're not always going to find someone passionate about the business. You should never compromise on finding someone passionate about the code though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> In return you must offer:

1\. Access to CS literature (any lit. not just titles specific to the field we're in). 2\. Encouragement for improving skills. 3\. A culture that promotes interaction between people. 4\. Machines that are fast, build quickly. 5\. Willing to pay for a personal license to dev-tools. 6\. Provide a very small percentage of company time to drop the main task at hand and pick up something completely unrelated to hack on.

This should be sufficient to ensure that your employees value their jobs and would rather continue than leave.</comment>


World of Warcraft perfectly predicted our coronavirus panic - <AUTHOR> https://www.wired.co.uk/article/world-of-warcraft-coronavirus-corrupted-blood <comment><AUTHOR> I'm posting with the article title but agree that it's a bit clickbaity. Please change if you can think of something more moderate.</comment>