The future of clouds - "Cheap and cheerful" or "Big Iron"? - <AUTHOR> http://ewan.to/post/902336260/the-future-of-coulds-cheap-and-cheerful-or-big-iron

<comment><AUTHOR> I think most of the people on Hacker News would come down on the cheap and cheerful side, are there many mainframe users here? :)</comment>


Show HN: I founded a company and a platform to fund open source developers - <AUTHOR> http://equalize.digital/immutable-coffee.html <comment><USER4> I believe in your mission. The world needs a better way to fund open source development.

At first glance, your product feels unrelated to this. It seems like a Stack Overflow replacement that's worse for posterity (read: googlers) because chats are private. It also feels like a side-gig for open source developers, asking them to basically freelance to fund their open source projects, which I don't think is how that should work.

I think you'd have more luck as a platform for paid support licenses for open source software. Bootstrapping a support license program is a Big Deal for independent open source developers who don't want more administrative work. But this feels like a miss on that front. Happy to confer more.

> Minus server costs and wages, all of the money processed through Immutable > Coffee will go directly back to the developers and experts answering > questions for the community.

You might want to look into forming a nonprofit, as this is almost exactly what it is (minus ownership stakes). If you're a nonprofit people don't have to trust sentences like this, as it's baked into your existence.

<comment><AUTHOR> Might not be a bad idea to form a nonprofit -- thanks for this!! This is my first business venture so I was doing things very much "by the books" in the way of establishing everything.

As far as Immutable Coffee being a Stack Overflow replacement, I don't think that's accurate. Stack Overflow is already saturated enough that I don't think that there's any need for another website to exist for posterity's sake. Being able to google questions and answers doesn't feel like a very important goal, especially considering how quickly answers get invalidated with how fast programming moves anyway.

As far as it being a side-gig for open source developers, I think that's an accurate assessment -- unfortunately. I did try very hard to do something that sets this site apart from traditional freelancing, and that's in the quick pace which a developer can answer questions. It doesn't take much time at all to log onto IC and really quickly claim a few questions and start helping people, in contrast with how long it takes to set up traditional freelance gigs.

Thanks for believing in the mission! I have a few other ideas that are in the works with regards to this as well, that I'm just as excited to show HN.

<comment><USER5> A nonprofit may be a great model for you and I love nonprofits.

It's been traditionally difficult for open source software organizations to get recognized as a 503c nonprofit (which allows people to make tax deductible donations). Things may have changed, but the IRS has struggled to decide if FOSS is truly volunteer work or is more of a tax shelter. A nonprofit can also be more overhead in terms of structure (you need a board), record keeping & accounting than an LLC (but not much more than a C-Corp).

Unless you're operating model depends on donations, it might be worth staying an LLC for a while.

Check with a lawyer, accountant, or Stripe Atlas for real guidance. It's been a while since I looked at firming a company.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> "open source developers work for pennies on the dollar. It is near impossible to make a living contributing to open source"

Literally thousands of developers at Red Hat, SUSE, Canonical, Intel, IBM, Microsoft, working full time, fully paid on upstream projects, would slightly disagree.

I'm not saying that every F/OSS developer makes a lot of money, but I oppose the notion that it is "near impossible" to do so.

[disclaimer: I work at Red Hat since 14 years as EMEA Evangelist]

<comment><USER7> Alright, so how do I get hired part-time or full-time to work on my own pet FOSS projects?

<comment> vertex-four Find a company that uses it and wants to see it continuing to be developed in a way that works for them, and ask for them to employ you.

<comment><USER8> So they get all the benefits of the project while i get a regular flat salary?

Why not just work as a regular programmer regardless of what i work on is FOSS instead and keep my own projects under my control for myself?

<comment> vertex-four Sure, you can do that! I was answering the person's question, in which they wanted to get paid for developing their FOSS.

<comment><USER8> The "i" in my comment doesn't refer to me specifically, it is like the "royal you" but for a single person (not sure if there is a name for it).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Sounds to me like a scrappy clone of Codementor.

I think the real way to equalize OSS software is to make it partially OSS ... maybe any company w/ < 10 mill profits it's FOSS, any company over that has to pay in man-hours (contributions) or $$ to use the product.

Amazon/FB/Microsoft and other Faang's could easily reproduce any oss software to meet their needs using their own staff...

Maybe even just have a github like site to host software and each organization pays based on their value, w/ startups/small companies under 10 million annual revenues essentially having free access.

Larger companies would pay a per employee fee, that fee would be divided up among all FOSS software that company uses. They could get some refunds for any contributions accepted to FOSS. It'd basically be like patreon for software in a semi-walled garden.

Small members could also 'opt-in' to pay $x per month that would also be divided up among other OSS projects. Either random, or they could pick by grouped projects or just pick their favorites to receive a % of their monthly donation.

<comment><USER10> > I think the real way to equalize OSS software is to make it partially OSS > ... maybe any company w/ < 10 mill profits it's FOSS, any company over that > has to pay in man-hours (contributions) or $$ to use the product.

A friendly reminder that it is Free as in Freedom, not Free as in Beer. Doing what you suggest is a good approach for Free Beer, not Freedom.

Qt has the perfect business model for OSS. Respect the LGPL license for Qt and get it for free without any extra restrictions. Or go straight for a commercial license. Plus they sell add-ons and other software and support around Qt.

And considering all the places where Qt is used, I would say they are very successful at it.

<comment><USER8> > Qt has the perfect business model for OSS.

Except for that part where their business model incentivizes them to bloat the library towards what is actually paying (car and smart fridge dashboard UIs) instead of what most people would want Qt to focus on (desktop widgets - <USER3> pretty much every thread whenever a Qt release or news is posted).

> And considering all the places where Qt is used, I would say they are very > successful at it.

Since we're talking in the context of money instead of popularity, 1000000 projects using the LGPL version of Qt for free doesn't make Qt successful, it only makes it popular.

<comment><USER10> >Except for that part where their business model incentivizes them to bloat the library towards what is actually paying (car and smart fridge dashboard UIs)

That will happen to any project that takes any form of sponsorship money. People sponsoring will always want to prioritize their needs.

> instead of what most people would want Qt to focus on (desktop widgets - <USER3> > pretty much every thread whenever a Qt release or news is posted).

KDE, with it's very successful suite of OSS, cross platform apps, Plasma Desktop and Plasma Mobile would like to disagree. You should remember that Qt is the only cross platform toolkit for desktops that is small, performant and actually works without compromises.

> Since we're talking in the context of money instead of popularity, 1000000 > projects using the LGPL version of Qt for free doesn't make Qt successful, > it only makes it popular.

Those 1000000 projects include Krita and Kdenlive, the successful and premiere apps in their categories that even give proprietary tools a run for their subscription money while being completely free and cross platform. KDE Plasma is the only fully featured independent DE that runs across Linux and BSD's.

Qt and it's business model is a success by all terms.

<comment><USER8> > That will happen to any project that takes any form of sponsorship money. > People sponsoring will always want to prioritize their needs.

Right, this is exactly what i wrote.

> KDE, with it's very successful suite of OSS, cross platform apps, Plasma > Desktop and Plasma Mobile would like to disagree.

Disagree on what? They wouldn't like Qt developers to focus on desktop widgets?

Besides, KDE and its suite is only a small fraction of what Qt is used for. It acts as a nice cheerleader but Qt is used by a LOT more than just KDE.

> You should remember that Qt is the only cross platform toolkit for desktops > that is small, performant and actually works without compromises.

That sounds like marketing buzzwords.

> Those 1000000 projects include Krita and Kdenlive, the successful and > premiere apps in their categories that even give proprietary tools a run for > their subscription money while being completely free and cross platform. KDE > Plasma is the only fully featured independent DE that runs across Linux and > BSD's.

How much of that money goes to Qt's developers? I mean, how do you go from what you wrote here to:

> Qt and it's business model is a success by all terms.

And last time i checked, the money Krita (i don't know about Kdenlive) gets is a pittance.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Interesting idea.

It might be worth offering two pricing options: (1) Pay for private answers, (2) free/bounty open source answers.

Your concept seems to have some overlap with StackOverflow. A problem with StackOverflow is their content is licensed CC-BY-SA. That can make some answers dicey for companies to use. Publicly visible answers on your site might be more valuable than StackOverflow answers if you released them as CC0. CC0 answers could also be merged into the docs of the FOSS projects. Having those answers on your site should drive more search traffic to you, bringing more leads for paid private Q&A.

On the expert side of what you're doing... if you can streamline the payment process & generate a 1099 for taxes (like Lyft-style companies do) that might remove some overhead for experts & get them interested.

<comment><AUTHOR> Payment process definitely isn't streamlined right now (the button to cash out just sends me an email), but I am planning on paying through a 1099, if that makes things any easier.

<comment><USER5> To me, what you're sort of doing is flipping the StackOverflow model around so that the authors share in the profits. That's an interesting concept to experiment with. I wonder if "Teachers Pay Teachers" might be a company for you to benchmark?

Side note... It's not often we see HN front page stories from Tucson, AZ & that's awesome!

<comment><AUTHOR> I think that there's a large way that Immutable Coffee differs from Stack Overflow, and that's in the fact that Immutable Coffee is:

* Private (answers don't circulate around the internet! that's important because of how quickly answers on stack overflow become invalidated)

and * Immediate & one-on-one (waiting for answers/responses in a comment chain on Stack Overflow is a super frustrating experience!)

And thank you! Lots of love for Tuscon. Bear down!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I feel like the easiest way to fund open source is to offer dual licensing and somehow charge businesses. There have been many that have done this and it seems to work well, most notably IMO is mperham with Sidekiq, but there are many others. Open source developers are too timid of charging for their code.

Relying on donations seems like a bad move, business-wise, because I'd guess (no data to back this up, just gut feeling) that most donations will come from individuals and not busineses, yet the businesses are the ones making money off of your code.

<comment><USER12> I recommend visiting [http://oss.fund](http://oss.fund)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Looks awesome. If CodeFund could be of any help ping me Justin at codefund.io

<comment><AUTHOR> Never seen CodeFund before, but I love what y'all are offering. I'll be in contact.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Bountysource is another interesting platform in this vein.

<comment><AUTHOR> +1 to that -- that seems like a really cool project!

<comment><USER15> From what you are posting here it sounds like you have not done much market research on the field you are entering.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> You should consider redesigning the website colors to spare visitors' eyes. I mean, the posted link opens a page with white text on black background, but clicking on the "immutable coffee" link takes to a page with black text on white background. I was viewing in a brightly lit room yet was severely jolted, can only imagine the fate of those viewing in dimly lit room or in the dark.

</comment><comment><USER17> I am also taking a look at this problem from an analytics point of view (python, pandas, jupyter, dask, etc). My thinking so far is that it would make a lot of sense to offer 1:1 support but also services around a reference architecture made of those components. Then I would pay a cut like 10-20% to Numfocus which seems to be backing a lot of this ecosystem.

<comment><AUTHOR> Not sure I understand what you're saying -- are you suggesting that Immutable Coffee should expand the topics that it's currently offering? Ideally, I'd like to, but we currently just don't have the manpower to do that.

<comment><USER17> Thanks for your reply. Open source is great but most of the time you need to put together a solution which requires the orchestration of multiple open source libraries and solutions. For instance, with analytics you need Python, Pandas, Dask, SQLAlchemy, Jupyter etc.. So packaging a solution (i.e. a docker image) and then selling certification, support and training should be valuable and a % of the money could go to no profit organizations that maintain those libraries. This is only my personal experience and I am open to discuss it more via email if it helps. I could definitely see the value of a service like yours to get to know companies that need consulting in the analytics space, but I think for now you are not focusing into any specific open source industry.

<comment><USER5> One way to test whether people will buy consulting in analytics might be to sign up as an "analytics expert" on Instant Coffee and get leads from the OP.

Then Instant Coffee is covering a chunk of the payment & client acquisition overhead you'd otherwise need to duplicate.

<comment><AUTHOR> Definitely wouldn't mind adding analytics as a topic on the website.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Interesting idea, and seemingly not dissimilar to [https://lyfevest.io](https://lyfevest.io), although Lyfevest has an all-you- can-eat subscription for asking questions, and the platform seemingly vets the experts automatically in some way (e.g. looking at the expert's public contributions).

<comment><AUTHOR> Lyfevest seems more geared towards enterprises, and the subscription will have to be EXPENSIVE to justify all-you-can-post questions. I don't think that's friendly to hobbyists and students -- which both groups that I want Immutable Coffee to be open for.

<comment><USER18> Good point.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Sent you an email, very curious about an idea I had for flipping FOSS on its head a little

</comment><comment><USER20> I'm excited to check it out. I wish there was an easy login with GitHub or Google instead of creating yet another password.

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry about that! Wasn't the first time I've heard this suggestion -- I'll definitely look into supporting this.

<comment><USER5> Your site says it's written in Ruby. Check out the OmniAuth gem for adding login providers. It's probably worth a quick look at similar gems before choosing this one.

[https://github.com/omniauth/omniauth](https://github.com/omniauth/omniauth)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> How do you plan to vet experts?

<comment><AUTHOR> I've been doing it manually: looking at resumes, code samples, and asking sample questions to judge for myself. Not sure there's any automated way to do that that will work any better.

<comment><USER21> My understanding was that you would vet open source contributors so they can support their own stuff. So looking at GitHub, commits, etc.

Otherwise your platform is really a way for random people to get money (nothing wrong with that) while the actual maintainers are busy writing code, reviewing tickets, etc.

I know monetizing open source is terribly difficult so I don't want to sound too negative.

<comment><AUTHOR> > My understanding was that you would vet open source contributors so they can > support their own stuff. So looking at GitHub, commits, etc

Ideally, this is the plan.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Tell HN: If you're having trouble with Apple Developer things, Call Them - <AUTHOR>

I realize this may be common sense to some of you, but after going through 2 months of crap with Apple and having all my iOS Dev friends tell me that it just "is how it is", I finally got on the phone with Apple today and let me tell you: it was wonderful. They finished my enrollment in its entirety in about 2 hours, and in fact told me that if I had not called, my issue may have literally never been resolved. Now my app is submitted for approval, and I'm thrilled.
Since I didn't even know this was an option, and it is not prominently displayed as an option, I thought I'd let you guys know.
The number to call is 1-408-974-4897
I've called 3 times today, no more than 5 minutes of wait time and usually only on the phone for 8-10 minutes before having my problems resolved. <comment><USER2> For completeness, here is the phone listing for all countries:

[https://developer.apple.com/contact/phone.php](https://developer.apple.com/contact/phone.php)

</comment><comment><USER3> Freaking useful sharing. It will help me! Thanks a lot!

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah I'm actually 50/50 on this, but I posted this in the middle of the day, bad time to post to HN, because I don't see it as a post that needs to be on the front page. But at the same time, I really, REALLY hope startups know this - it delayed us 2 months, and that's two months of my life I wasted not knowing if anyone will give a shit about my app.</comment></comment>


The first mass chlorination of a city's water supply - <AUTHOR> http://www.howwegettonext.com/Article/VNyy5ScAACQA9Jr6/how-one-man-poisoned-a-citys-water-supply-and-saved-millions-of-childrens-lives-in-the-process#.VZRAXnNwbqA <comment><USER2> With what we know now about beneficial bacteria, I wonder if, in addition to the pathogens, we're killing probiotics? And perhaps the lack of exposure to mild bacteria mean we're more susceptible to immune diseases?

Of course getting rid of the pathogens is a great thing, but perhaps chlorination plays a role in causing some modern problems that are related to the immune system and the gut biome? Anyone have links to studies done on this topic?

<comment><USER3> _An Epidemic of Absence: A New Way of Understanding Allergies and Autoimmune Diseases_ : [http://www.amazon.com/Epidemic-Absence-Understanding- Allergi...](http://www.amazon.com/Epidemic-Absence-Understanding-Allergies- Autoimmune/dp/1439199396)

Velasquez-Manoff on Autoimmune Disease, Parasites, and Complexity: [http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2014/03/velasquez- manof.htm...](http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2014/03/velasquez-manof.html)

<comment><USER4> "A new way of understanding allergies"? When I was growing up, my mother and father were constantly saying that kids who didn't play in the dirt were the kids who got allergies and got sick all the time. They encouraged us to play with bugs, play in the mud, and run around the neighborhood getting into things that would cause a 'concerned neighbor' to call CPS today. My grandparents on both sides had the same philosophy, and I don't think they're alone on this... pretty sure this was once considered common sense, before the super helicopter parenting + antibacterial everything trend caught on. I get that common sense isn't science, and it's great that someone is compiling the evidence, but that title just comes off as so arrogant. Somewhere out there, there's a book called "water is wet: a new way of understanding liquids".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Note what _didn 't_ happen here: he didn't create a startup company to deliver Luxury Water to rich people. He didn't patent the idea, and attempt to collect royalties. He didn't discover the idea while attempting to get rich from some tangentially related business.

Contrary to popular narrative, many of the technologies that make our lives _livable_ came about because dedicated people devoted themselves directly to solving some important problem, not serendipitously while pursuing personal wealth.

<comment><USER6> Let's not kid ourselves, this wasn't some poor sap working for the common good.

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

He was professionally established in leadership positions, both in the private and public sector. This man did well for himself.

And there are plenty of examples of men who are well off today and who do selfless things _because they can afford to_.

There is nothing wrong with _earning a living_ and even, gasp, _turning a profit_.

<comment><USER5> If, by "professionally established in leadership positions", you mean to refer to the fact that he had a medical degree, and had spent his prior career working on these problems, then yes, I agree.

That's exactly my point. But nothing you've cited is evidence that the man was rich (or even attempting to profit) from his work for the public good.

<comment><USER6> No, that is NOT what I mean. What I mean is that he:

1\. Established his own medical practice in Paterson, New Jersey.

2\. Was appointed City Physician.

3\. Founded the outpatient clinic at Paterson General Hospital.

4\. Became Health Inspector in Paterson.

5\. Became Health Officer in Paterson.

6\. Left the city's service and became the sanitary adviser to the East Jersey Water Company.

7\. Became President of the Board of Health for Paterson.

He was also a member of "a large number of professional associations".

There is more in the wikipedia page, but I'm getting bored.

He sounds like an awesome guy and certainly somebody who specialized in public health, but there isn't a shred of evidence that he wasn't a shrewd business man.

On the contrary, everything points to him being just that.

As far as him not capitalizing on his invention ... he didn't invent it, by his own admission. Also, let's not forget that he developed the delivery device in the employ of the water company. It's theirs, even if there is something to patent.

If you work at Microsoft and develop a piece of software in the process of working for them, they own the fruits of your labor. That's not a foreign concept to that era.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> And what can happen if the people responsible for a water supply screw up: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walkerton_E._coli_outbreak](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walkerton_E._coli_outbreak) [http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/...](http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/walkerton/)

<comment><USER8> >This contamination was due to farm runoff into an adjacent water well

Yet another victim of our universally awful water management in agriculture, and in general. Why is a farmer allowed to discharge polluted water onto someone else's property, whereas if a factory discharged that exact same water it would be a crime?

Our land management (which in modern times mostly falls under the purview of agriculture) needs to start treating the water cycle as the life-critical biophysical process it is, not just as an inconvenience (rain is just 'weather,' and the answer to rain is always 'drainage')

In reality, 'drainage' leads to drought. Drainage is straight hard pipes that shunt all rainfall to the ocean as fast as possible. This prevents aquifer recharge or soil soaking. Buildings and parking lots are 100% runoff surfaces. Even continuously mowed lawns are nearly so due to subsoil hardpan.

Here's a simple math equation. When looking at a continent as a whole:

      water_available_per_hectare (in megalitre/ha) = net_precipitation_per_hectare (ML/day/ha) * average_time_from_fall_to_ocean (days)

As you can see, minimizing the time it takes water to reach the ocean _minimizes the water available on the land._ [1] And under climate change more of the world is going to start looking like California.

But by using "drainage" as the de facto solution, we're driving the optimization _in the exact opposite direction._ What we should be doing is slowing down water, sending it on circuitous routes with lots of friction. There are some designs that do exactly that,[2] but they are almost entirely ignored in discussions of water use and policy.

This E. coli incident/mismanagement/market failure is tragic, but it's a symptom of a larger structural problem. We're subsidizing both water addition (huge dam projects and pipelines) and water removal (not making farmers clean up their own mess^Wrunoff), with all the predictably bad results.

[1] _Ok, I cheated a bit here. There actually is something clever that you can do - recycle the water. If you harvest and evaporate huge quantities of water shortly after it falls, you can cause new rain a few hundred miles downwind (and buffer floodwaters besides). This is quite absurd for an industrial system, but nevertheless this system powers our modern day rain. And that 's why_ trees _cause 80% of terrestrial rainfall:_ [http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v496/n7445/full/nature1...](http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v496/n7445/full/nature11983.html)

[2] _A few that come to mind: swales (i.e. contour following water soaking ditches), the various techniques of Keyline design (farm scale dams /tanks, altering the passive flow of water over land, and use of a deep ripping plow), and productive literally-cheaper-than-dirt biofiltration systems like reed bed ponds and banana circles. Google is your friend here, but a couple links:_ [http://www.cresswater.co.uk/pages/case-studies/whitsome- hill...](http://www.cresswater.co.uk/pages/case-studies/whitsome-hill- mains.php) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ima_ff5xVH4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ima_ff5xVH4)

<comment><USER7> The way the system was setup, the well that was contaminated was treated as a "deep well" that _cannot_ get contaminated by surface water. Unfortunately, it wasn't the case at all. They might have figured it out in time if they'd followed proper procedure, but the guy in charge was completely incompetent, being unaware of concepts they teach at the beginning of a water management course (such as "turbidity").

It was compounded by the fact that they were trying to hide their improper handling of another well; ironically, that other well was in fact a deep well and did not cause the contamination.

I don't know about Ontario, but here in Quebec the rules on water management in agriculture have become much more stringent in recent years. You need to have a plan in place for all the land and all the animals you own.

<comment><USER8> Wow, yeah that's really bad.

Good to hear that sane water management is prevailing! You're right, in general the actual water authorities tend to do a pretty good job, because they know their stuff and how complex it is (that guy excepted, obviously). Most of the damage comes from outdated agricultural practices imo.

Fundamentally it's wealth concentration doing most of the damage, by gradually replacing self-sufficient farmers invested in land stewardship with paycheck- to-paycheck mortgage slaves on a tractor 18h/day. This is mainly via regulatory capture leading to our [routinely] bass-ackwards farm bills.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Today he would be treated as a terrorist, which would probably have been for the best. In this case it worked, but how many mad people are so convinced of their own brilliance that they will simply think the public will adore them when they see it works?

<comment><USER10> Agreed; this guy was dangerous, he just got lucky.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> That's not the orginal title. _How One Man Poisoned a City's Water Supply (and Saved Millions of Children's Lives in the Process)_

<comment><USER12> Presumably clickbait titles are to be avoided

<comment><USER13> It was the original HN title only a little while ago. Only he didn't poison anyone really. A good title rename.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Is this the historical equivalent of Uber ignoring legal constraints in hopes of later finding a work-around or a change in the law?

<comment><USER15> Maybe if Uber were convinced they were saving lives and if they did not expect to financially benefit from working around the law.

I don't think that's the case though.

<comment><USER16> When all you've got is a hammer everything looks like growth hacking.</comment></comment></comment>


Swagger: A simple, open standard for describing REST APIs with JSON - <AUTHOR> http://swagger.wordnik.com/ <comment><USER2> The example demonstrates an RPC-style HTTP API with pretty URLs. There's no hypermedia in sight. Oh well, we'll figure it out one day...

That being said, this is exactly the sort of documentation that's helpful for this kind of API.

<comment><USER3> Just so that I'm clear on this, are you just criticizing that all requests go to /word.json?

IOW, would the following be RESTful?

GET /entries/{word} # Return entries for a word

GET /wordForms/{word} # Rturn other forms for a word

POST /wordForms/{word} # Adds a relationship map for a word

<comment><USER4> I think the point is that if you are documenting the structure of URIs you are focusing on the wrong thing - a RESTful interface documentation should mostly be about the hypermedia (HTML, XML, JSON,...) that the URIs are embedded in - a particular server should really have the freedom to construct the URIs in any way it wants and still have clients that understand the API work.

See: [http://roy.gbiv.com/untangled/2008/rest-apis-must-be- hyperte...](http://roy.gbiv.com/untangled/2008/rest-apis-must-be-hypertext- driven)

<comment><USER5> I think when done right (a subjective measurement, to be sure) the only URI you care about for a RESTful API is the root, because the API's resources are defined, along with how they can be manipulated, in the root response or can be transitioned to from there in some way that is defined there.

<comment><USER2> Yes, that's the key. If the media types are documented (like how browsers and developers understand HTML forms) then you don't need to document every single corner of the API. You can offer a good definition of the media types, and let the resources and links do the rest.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This is similar in spirit to the Google APIs Discovery Service, an API to describe recent Google APIs. <http://code.google.com/apis/discovery/v1/using.html>

This is used to power the APIs Explorer, and code/documentation generation for client libraries:

* APIs Explorer: <https://code.google.com/apis/explorer>

* JavaDoc for the generated Java library for Calendar API: [http://javadoc.google-api-java-client.googlecode.com/hg/apis...](http://javadoc.google-api-java-client.googlecode.com/hg/apis/calendar/v3/index.html)

* PyDoc for the Python library: <http://api-python-client-doc.appspot.com/calendar/v3>

<comment><USER7> I think the biggest difference is that this is a framework, not just a spec, and you can implement the server with the libraries. The google explorer makes it easy to consume google apis, which is great if that's what you're trying to do. If you want others to consume your api, you need a framework to facilitate the schema generation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Not a new idea, but it seems a pretty implementation. I've played with Spore a little in the past: <https://github.com/spore>

Client implementations include:

\- Perl: <https://github.com/franckcuny/net-http-spore>

\- JS (Node): <https://github.com/francois2metz/node-spore>

\- Lua: <https://github.com/fperrad/lua-Spore>

\- Ruby: <https://github.com/sukria/Ruby-Spore>

\- Clojure: <https://github.com/ngrunwald/clj-spore>

</comment><comment><USER9> While documentation is good, I still don't get the need for programmatic documentation.

I suppose the desire is to have a service describing itself so proxies can be code gen'd, but I'm glad I've stepped away from that world and don't miss the WSDL days.

</comment><comment><USER10> jschema and jschema-rpc both look much nicer:

<http://jschema.org/>

<http://jschema.org/rpc.html>

<comment><USER11> jsonschema has been around for a long time too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I think this is a really good idea. So far I have been using Enunciate to do exactly this ([http://www.sonatype.com/people/2010/02/documenting-the- nexus...](http://www.sonatype.com/people/2010/02/documenting-the-nexus-rest- api-with-enunciate/)). I have been happy with Enunciate so far but they seem to have lost traction and their API does not work with Java 7 for instance. Swagger looks a bit cooler too ;)

That being said, there are some thing that they do that Swagger seems to be missing (or I am just missing it). For instance Enunciate does not require any custom annotations but uses the normal Javadoc instead, which is a very good feature. And how do I run Swagger, can I plug this into my Maven build process and include in the generated war file?

<comment><USER7> We tried out enunciate as well. It's good but didn't quite fit our needs...

You can run swagger with the built-in support via swagger-core/swagger-jaxrs. Play 1.4/2.0 support is there as well and a number of folks are creating support for other server frameworks. See the samples for integration:

<https://github.com/wordnik/swagger-core/tree/master/samples>

But to be honest, you can run the whole system with static files and zero server integration.

The downside of using javadocs is that you need to expose sourcecode/docs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I vehemently detest this name.

</comment><comment><USER14> Does anyone know of a tool that can take a API type schema and can actually generate the API for you?

I'm talking about a simple CRUD type APIs for quick development. Ideally it would have user sign up and simple field validation baked in.

<comment><USER15> Usergrid ( <https://apigee.com/usergrid> ) addresses at least some of what you're looking for. If you try it, let me know, as I'm part of that team that's working on it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I'll just leave this here in case anyone still cares...

[http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/rest_arch...](http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/rest_arch_style.htm)

</comment><comment><USER17> I like the name at least.

</comment><comment><USER18> I was excited until I saw it was written in Java.

<comment><USER19> Same, will keep looking for something similar not in Java...

<comment><USER20> Yeah. Java's, like, totally lame.

/s

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I like this, but it's the third time the link has been submitted.</comment>


Finding Practical Applications for Origami - <AUTHOR> https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/theres-origami-revolution-industrial-design-180972019/ <comment><USER2> The article talks about Robert J. Lang ([https://langorigami.com](https://langorigami.com)), but he deserves more than a passing mention if we're talking about origami. He's a physicist/mathematician at NASA, an AMS Fellow, and also one of the top origamists in the world.

Here's a video showing his extraordinary origami insects: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYoTCssVyJU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYoTCssVyJU)

He wrote dozens of papers about the mathematics of origami over the years, and last year he came out with a gorgeous book on the subject: Twists, Tilings, and Tessellations: Mathematical Methods for Geometric Origami ([https://www.amazon.com/Twists-Tilings-Tessellations- Mathemat...](https://www.amazon.com/Twists-Tilings-Tessellations-Mathematical- Geometric/dp/1138563064))

He also has a bunch of origami books with "regular" animal models, but they tend to be on the complex end of the spectrum, so they're not for beginner origamists.

He also developed TreeMaker, which is a software tool for systematically designing folding patterns from a model specification: [https://langorigami.com/article/treemaker/](https://langorigami.com/article/treemaker/) (some of his complex insect models are based on TreeMaker folding patterns)

<comment><USER3> His previous book "Origami Design Secrets: Mathematical Methods for an Ancient Art" ([https://www.amazon.com/dp/1568814364](https://www.amazon.com/dp/1568814364)) was also really, really interesting.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> As someone interested in algorithms, Erik Demaine's work (and that of other researchers in the domain) on computational origami is fascinating. It basically boils down to, given a 3D shape, find a way to fold a 2D sheet to reproduce it.

[https://www.csail.mit.edu/news/origami- anything](https://www.csail.mit.edu/news/origami-anything)

</comment><comment><USER5> Robby Kraft gave a wonderful talk, "Origami Software from Scratch", at Strange Loop 2017:

[https://www.thestrangeloop.com/2017/origami-software-from- sc...](https://www.thestrangeloop.com/2017/origami-software-from-scratch.html)

</comment><comment><USER6> There is a great documentary about origami called "Between the Folds" if anyone is interested. It goes into the historical, cultural, practical, mathematical, artistic and current aspects of origami.

</comment><comment><USER7> I really enjoyed the Chuck Hoberman [1] show @ Le Laboratoire Cambridge [2].

Kenneth Snelson's Needle Tower [3] also shares some of the same design elements.

[1] [http://www.hoberman.com/](http://www.hoberman.com/)

[2] [https://www.lelaboratoirecambridge.com/22-10-degrees](https://www.lelaboratoirecambridge.com/22-10-degrees)

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

</comment><comment><USER8> NOVA did an episode a couple years ago on this, season 44, episode 5, "The Origami Revolution", which can be watched online here [1].

[1] [https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/video/the-origami- revolution](https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/video/the-origami-revolution)

</comment><comment><USER9> Article has some nice examples from medical tweezers to folding of objects that are going to space.

</comment><comment><USER10> Origami maps are a thing

[http://www.britishorigami.info/academic/mathematics/the- miur...](http://www.britishorigami.info/academic/mathematics/the-miura-ori- map/)

And TIL there's a British Origami Society!</comment>


Public Relations in a Downturn Economy - <AUTHOR> http://www.burson-marsteller.com/Innovation_and_insights/blogs_and_podcasts/harold_burson_blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?List=6d4dbc50-37e1-4c20-8040-703259fddd1f&ID=45 <comment><AUTHOR> Disclosure: I work here but thought many of the hackers here would find this post interesting and valuable.</comment>


Digital Agencies of the future - <AUTHOR> http://narrowdesign.com/future/

<comment><USER2> Great point made by the author. People aren't spending a lot of time updating their sites so they will render or render more clearly on an iPhone.

But to some extent, I don't blame them. While there is a good chance that some client/potential client is going to look at a site on their iPhone, if your business is creating sites for people that will primarily visit on their computer vs. an iPhone, then that client/potential client would understand. For all of the effort you put into having the site handle the iPhone, etc. site in a more iPhone-friendly way (without flash, making it use much less screen real estate so no zooming is needed), your competitors may be spending that time learning HTML5 (Chrome has been here, IE9 beta is out, etc.- You'd better be paying attention) and writing sites for the future, while your company is still stuck in the 2008-2009 mentality of writing iPhone-specific versions of sites.

Anyway, that said- maybe you want to get into the niche of having sites that render on the iPhone/iTouch, various Android devices, Blackberries, and other mobile devices better. That's fine, but realize that there are a number of companies who have had that as their primary job for years now that aren't design companies, but who do a decent job of making sites render better on mobile devices. But, it's still a good idea to explore that- maybe it is what your company will be known for one day: sites well-designed for mobile devices.</comment>


Civilization Accelerating Extinction at Unprecedented Pace - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/06/climate/biodiversity-extinction-united-nations.html <comment><USER2> dupe

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19838229](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19838229)

</comment><comment><USER3> Started watching Attenborough's new doc, "Our Planet", on Netflix. It's — as you'd probably expect — really good. There's plenty of his trademark sequences on fascinating wildlife, tied together with a powerful narrative on Climate Change's effect on the planet. (Tl;dr we're heading towards a world of jellyfish and deserts unless we change course.)</comment>


The new papercube version is ready - <AUTHOR> https://papercubeblog.wordpress.com/2016/11/16/the-new-papercube-version-is-ready/ <comment><AUTHOR> papercube – students of Jade Hochschule program a production line based on LEGO® Mindstorms Education [https://papercubeblog.wordpress.com/projektbeschreibung- proj...](https://papercubeblog.wordpress.com/projektbeschreibung- projectdescription/)</comment>


P&G's Gillette Sues Dollar Shave Club - <AUTHOR> http://www.wsj.com/articles/p-gs-gillette-sues-dollar-shave-club-1450371180 <comment><USER2> I find the claims that P&G makes to be interesting, because unless something has changed, Dollar Shave Club does not actually produce or manufacture under license any of its own products, rather the service is about the delivery and cost mechanism, not the actual product received. Instead, they use products made by Dorco, a South Korean company, [http://www.dorcousa.com/](http://www.dorcousa.com/).

The 4X, for instance is the same as the Dorco Pace 4 blade system, including compatibility between the cartridges/handles. I think Dollar Shave Club may provide unique handles, but the razor blade cartridges themselves are made by Dorco.

<comment><USER3> > rather the service is about the delivery and cost mechanism, not the actual > product received.

Presumably they are purchasing the razor blades from Dorco and importing them.

[http://www.uspto.gov/patents-maintaining-patent/patent- litig...](http://www.uspto.gov/patents-maintaining-patent/patent- litigation/about-patent-infringement)

> Patent infringement is the act of making, using, selling, or offering to > sell a patented invention, or _importing into the United States_ a product > covered by a claim of a patent without the permission of the patent owner. > Further, you may be considered to infringe a patent if you import items into > the United States that are made by a patented method, unless the item is > materially changed by subsequent processes or becomes a trivial and > nonessential component of another product. A person "infringes" a patent by > practicing each element of a patent claim with respect to one of these acts. > Further, actively encouraging others to infringe patents, or supplying or > importing components of a patented invention, and related acts can also give > rise to liability in certain cases.

(If you think about it, of course importing is infringement. Otherwise, patents are worthless: anything patented would simply be made overseas, if they aren't already.)

<comment><USER4> You can buy directly from Dorco in the US.

<comment><USER5> Serious question: Does this do anything to lessen the infringement claim against DSC?

<comment><USER6> PG sues DSC for using Dorco. Dorco is available directly in the states. Why doesn't PG sue Dorco?

(I didn't read the article, but that's the point I think GP was trying to make.)

<comment><USER5> I agree, and I think it's obvious that PG is only interested in using this as a means to damage DSC. I was asking if DSC could potentially use this as a defense in court, e.g. arguing that PG has a duty to go after Dorco first or at least simultaneously.

Edit: To which PG would probably argue that DSC is the largest distributor of the infringing blades and represents the greatest infringement overall.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> It is extremely telling that Gillette is suing Dollar Shave Club, a direct competitor, rather than Dorco the actual manufacturer of the blades themselves.

DSC is actually just a blade reseller, so suing them for patent infringement seems odd. Until you consider that this whole lawsuit may be part of a larger drive to either push DSC out of business or buy them out of business, in either case the cost of the lawsuit will contribute.

PS - As an aside I don't think Dorco's blades are as good as Gillette's blades yet. However I highly welcome a more competitive landscape in the cartridge blade market.

<comment><USER7> If Dorco is manufacturing out side of the US or anywhere that P&G's patent is valid and not selling them into a valid country P&G can't really sue Dorco. At that point Dorco isn't violating anything it's the company that imports them that is the first point something is really being violated.

edit: typo and pronoun vagueness.

<comment><USER4> But Dorco sell them in the US[0].

[0] [http://www.dorcousa.com/](http://www.dorcousa.com/)

<comment><USER8> It says on that site they are only a distributor. They probably aren't moving enough units for Gillette to care about them. DSC on the other hand...

<comment><USER9> No, you can order directly from Dorco USA and get their razors shipped to your door. I've done it, and the single price points and "add to cart" buttons should make that clear too. :)

"Distributor" might be a mistranslation or imprecisely phrased.

<comment><USER10> OR "Dorco USA" is a small US based distributor that licenses their name from the other company and imports Dorco razors and sells them. Might even be owned by Dorco but is likely not Dorco.

<comment><USER9> That's true. And they'd still be able to get sued just like DSC if that's the case.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Tangentially related: I moved to old fashioned razor blades a few months ago and have actually hurt myself less since then.

Bonus: It cost like a fraction of the price and you don't look like a teenager when shaving :-P

<comment><USER4> I assume by "old fashioned" you mean a safety razor, not a straight razor.

Safety razors are indeniably cheaper long term (although expect to pay $100 ish to get a good handle, brush, bowl, blades, and soap). You'll likely break even after ten years (assuming $1.50 cartridges Vs. 10c blades). You'll also likely receive a closer shave with a safety razor.

That being said... I did the whole safety razor thing. It was fun. But then I switched back to cartridges. Why? In order to get a good close shave with a safety razor while also minimizing the chance of nicks, cuts, and razor burn you need a good quality thick lather.

Unfortunately creating a good thick lather can easily take ten minutes. You cannot really use off the shelf shaving foam or gel because it doesn't provide enough protection for a safety razor.

So ultimately I decided I wanted shaving to be a 10 minute activity in the mornings, and not a 20 minute activity. Also creating lather isn't the most fun thing to do first thing after you wake up, in particular if you're working it hard (as you should).

Cartridges are quick and easy. They're the ultimate lazy man's solution. And you can use off the shelf non-foaming gels (e.g. "King of Shaves Alphagel", "Gillette Fusion ProGlide Clear Shave Gel") in the shower (and, yes, wet- shaves are a must either way, buy an inexpensive non-electrical anti- condensation travel mirror (i.e. you tip hot water into a compartment behind the mirror)).

<comment><USER12> I guess I'm lucky that my skin must not be very sensitive... I use a moderately priced safety razor handle ~$40-50 4 or 5 years ago and store brand menthol shaving foam. Old school Barbasol type foam. I rarely ever get ingrown hairs and have never had razor burn. What I did do, though, was basically buy one of every brand of blade that was available on Amazon and find the one that was the most comfortable, and now I don't deviate. Some were truly horrific, others were so close I couldn't tell which I liked more, but I've been using the Astra Platinum for the better part of 5 years now. I guarantee I've spent less than $200 in 5 years on shaving, when I was spending at least $20/mo on cartridges. The only time I use anything else is when I travel, I shave real good right before I leave and just bring a couple terrible disposables.

<comment><USER13> > What I did do, though, was basically buy one of every brand of blade that > was available on Amazon

For those interested, there is a service for this very thing now: [http://www.tryablade.com/blade](http://www.tryablade.com/blade)

<comment><USER14> These guys rock. I tried all sorts of blades from them before settling on the Gillette Silver Blue. Really good stuff!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Classic "butthurt giant is mad at new competition and sues them to death" move.

Subscribing to DSC today, wanted to do that a long time ago anyway.

<comment><USER16> I used DSC and regretted it, the razors are quite weak. I tried Harry's and was quite happy in the end. Much higher quality.

<comment><USER17> What is the pricing like on Harry's?

Do they have any razors that you tend to hold more perpendicular to your face like the older 2-blade Gillette razors, rather than the 3+ blade razors that you tend to hold parallel to your face?

<comment><USER18> $1.88/cartridge, 4 blades on each cartridge

They're somewhat flexible, so you could probably do either approach (I tend to vary and just remove all hair). I like Harry's quite a bit.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Anyone shed some light on whether there is any validity, or is it just Gillette trying to scare DSC and their customers?

<comment><USER20> it is valid but it is just being used to run them out of business. The actual patent violator is Dorco but they are a foreign company and it would be pointless to sue them. Dollar shave club is merely importing patent infringing razors into the US. But patent law allows you to sue anyone who imports patent infringing materials which makes sense because it can be hard to identify the factory doing the patent infringing but the importer is easy to identify but in this case it is clear who the manufacturer is but it is more useful to sue their competitor than to go after the factory

<comment><USER21> But Dorco sell them in the US[0]. [0] [http://www.dorcousa.com/](http://www.dorcousa.com/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I find it slightly amusing when journalists call companies like Dollar Shave Club an "upstart". It paints this picture that they're this small scrappy startup when in fact they've raised $163M, founded in 2011 and air prime time commercials. But as compared to P&G's market cap of $220B, I get it, they're small potatoes.

</comment><comment><USER23> I use two blades to shave - start with a "quality" blade (not Gillette) and finish with a cheaper disposable. It extends the life of both and gives me a very clean shave. I estimate that it's cut my blade costs in half since ditching Gillette. Oh, and don't forget the inexpensive Barbasol.

<comment><USER24> Have you ever tried using a safety razor? The blades cost pennies. I also find I get substantially less razor burn. Switching to shaving soap instead of aerosol cream keeps my total shaving cost to <$10/year.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I hadn't heard of DSC before and wish it was available in Europe. Would be interested to know how much of a streisand effect they are experiencing. And given the season that's in it, a year's subscription to this would make a handy gift.

</comment><comment><USER26> All of this would be moot if people would just grow a beard and discover all the awesomeness that comes with it! Most of all you don't have to shave anymore!

<comment><USER27> Until some beard oil company finds a way to sue Dollar Beard Club. ;)

[https://www.dollarbeardclub.com/](https://www.dollarbeardclub.com/)

<comment><USER28> Wouldn't be surprised if Dollar Shave Club brings some legal action against Dollar Beard Club.

They have copied them to such a degree with their name and their advertising it is creating confusion in the marketplace. And that's kind of a litmus test for trademark infringement from what I remember in my business law classes.

<comment><USER29> Wow, I assumed until your comment they were the same company. Kind of like how Enterprise has (or had) both rent-a-car and rent-a-van for moving, a slight tweak to the actual deliverable but same infrastructure/whatever, I assumed DSC owned DBC.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> But I thought DSC didn't make the razors? I buy them direct from Korea under the Pace brand name.

<comment><USER7> USPTO:

> Patent infringement is the act of making, using, selling, or offering to > sell a patented invention, or importing into the United States a product > covered by a claim of a patent without the permission of the patent owner. > Further, you may be considered to infringe a patent if you import items into > the United States that are made by a patented method, unless the item is > materially changed by subsequent processes or becomes a trivial and > nonessential component of another product. A person "infringes" a patent by > practicing each element of a patent claim with respect to one of these acts. > Further, actively encouraging others to infringe patents, or supplying or > importing components of a patented invention, and related acts can also give > rise to liability in certain cases.

If the P&G patent isn't valid where the blades are manufactured the manufacturer isn't in violation. It falls down to whoever is importing them. If they could sue the manufacturer then getting patents in one place would make them defacto valid everywhere and punish companies for the actions of their customers who they have no control over.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> This is all crazy considering how well a double-edged safety razor works. Cheap and efficient.

</comment><comment><USER32> Does anyone know where the complaint is or at least the specific patents? I guess they are claiming infringement against a method to coat the blades somehow to improve shaving?

Why do I have a feeling this will be another one of those cases that expose just how corrupt and broken our patent system is.

<comment><USER33> I get the opposite impression. From the brief description in the article, this sounds like it might be a good patent. But I too would be interested in seeing just what the patent is.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Shave? I thought this was hacker news, not brogrammer news. So much for neckbeards.

</comment><comment><USER35> Non pay wall: [http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2015/12/17/gillette- sues...](http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2015/12/17/gillette-sues-dollar- shave-club-for-patent-infringement/WCl1FrIZjCb093OBWUCZhL/story.html)

<comment><USER36> Or just google the article title and come in through google. Then you can see the whole thing.

<comment><USER37> Or just click the 'web' link under the title at the top of this page.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> For momentarily confused people like me: not P&T's _J_ illette.</comment>


Show HN: Landing page test for all-you-can-print subscription photo book service - <AUTHOR> http://smileboox.com <comment><USER2> I'd add a CSS3 text-shadow [1] to make the text more legible against the background image. There are other UI tricks to achieve the same goal as well. Also, I think this would be one of the rare cases where adding scrolling parallax effects would be valuable. It is, after all, a visual product.

[1] [https://www.w3schools.com/cssref/css3_pr_text- shadow.asp](https://www.w3schools.com/cssref/css3_pr_text-shadow.asp)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks! That's a great call. As one who happens to love (subtle) CSS shadows, I'm surprised I didn't think to do that already :) Not sure about the plax though... maybe.... really appreciate the feedback though!! (Curious: What do you think about the value prop? Is that something that makes sense to you?)

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Just a simple test to see whether there's any general interest in such a service. Realized we rarely print photo books due to the high cost per book (typically $50-$100 for a high quality, hardback book)...</comment>


Women in Demand - <AUTHOR> http://blog.cleancoder.com/uncle-bob/2017/10/04/WomenInDemand.html <comment><USER2> The article starts with discussing the top of the funnel (attracting M/F to domain) and hard-shifts to analyzing the bottom of the funnel (they're workers now!). I like that the analysis ends with relating the representation of Fs in certain segments of the workforce to the top of the funnel, but I'd like to see more discussion of top of funnel dynamics.

Not discussed here is an idea I've heard in gender--pay analyses that regards the funnel in general, and I'd like to see analyzed more: though discussion tends to suggest that men are for some reason smarter/wiser than women for their pursuit of higher-paying pursuits (in this case, CS/programming), the discussion may in fact be overlooking a number of factors that make that pursuit non-optimal over the short or long-run (say, relatively lower quality of life) and women are in fact wise for not going for it.

I admit that I do not quite buy the idea described above, but it does appeal to me, as a guy that enjoys learning about counter-intuitive and counter- productive ideas/behaviors.

Lots of discussion of this matter that I've seen has gone the route of "look at these fantastic projections of industry growth for CS/programming jobs [as based on current conditions]! It's unthinkable [hard to understand] why more women aren't rushing into it!" Accordingly, I'd love to find out years from now that women are less moved (convinced) by projections of future conditions that are highly based in current conditions than men are (which I think is kinda wise).</comment>