GitHub's Top Coding Languages Show Open Source Has Won - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/2015/08/github-data-shows-changing-software-landscape/?mbid=social_fb

<comment><USER2> In my opinion "When Apple opens up, you'll know the world has changed indeed" is a good last statement from the article and there is truth to it.

</comment><comment><USER3> I think an open source coding platform is not the most unbiased place for checking whether open or closed source 'has won'</comment>


'Black Mirror' Finds Terror, and Soul, in the Machine - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/21/arts/television/review-black-mirror-finds-terror-and-soul-in-the-machine.html <comment><USER2> Black Mirror often takes little details that we add in software, like a rating system, and takes them to their extreme and logical conclusion. Its premises are mostly sci-fi, but as thought experiments on how what we do could lead to a severe dystopia, it is superbly engaging. I recommend watching no more than one episode per day - I've been thinking about its topics quite a lot recently.

At the least, it's refreshing to see updated versions of Huxley/Orwellian dystopias or even departures from them. And to have all of that in condensed 50min netflix episodes, so free for anyone who uses it already, with absolutely no padding to waste your time, is such a unique thing to have. I hope it spawns many more shows following this format, as sort of a counter movement to 24- or Lost-like continuity with tons of baggage.

<comment><USER3> I've watched the first episode and had some existential questions pop up while on a walk today. Isn't that end-all rating system, like you mention, the final form of many companies like Facebook or Instagram? When the value generated on the platform grows beyond its platform to other important parts of society. I think this is only just starting to happen, like Air BnB's usage of Facebook profiles as host validation, or a social media marketer using the size of their instagram following etc. on a job application.

<comment><USER4> Apparently China plans to role out that kind of rating system by 2020, dubbed a "social credit score":

[http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia- china-34592186](http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-34592186)

<comment><USER2> It's scary how relevant some of Black Mirror's themes actually are. This one in particular is so close, I wonder whether the show's creators used it as a template.

Edit: Apparently not, as this information is only publicly available since this September. Zeitgeist at work?

<comment><USER5> I've known about sesame since last year at least - it's getting more attention now but it was definitely public knowledge when this series would have been at the writing stage.

It's an idea from sci-fi - I can't remember who wrote what, but there was a society where citizens got more or fewer votes depending on their behaviour (edit: Alastair Reynolds? Banks? Feels like it was one of them.), and knew each other's scores, and Tom Disch's 334 is explicitly about scoring people, and one segment is dedicated to "Baz" desperately trying to get his score up by producing a piece of state-loving prose, before narrowly failing and being consigned to life as a faceless "g[ue|o]rilla" soldier - although in that the state scored you, not other people.

<comment><USER6> Was the currency called whoopy?

[update]

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

I was thinking later, Cory Doctorow: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down_and_Out_in_the_Magic_King...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down_and_Out_in_the_Magic_Kingdom)

<comment><USER7> "Down and out.." or, "Why is sucks to be an asshole in a reputation-based economy".

+1 upvote, would cautionary tale again.

PS - If you haven't read Rapture of the Nerds, check it out. It's a Doctorow character (downer of a dude) in a Stross world (craaazy tech).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Black Mirror tackles one of the hardest problems about technical: How society changes around it.

We spend such a long time talking about the latest cutting edge hardware, new algorithms, new problems that can now be solved, but it's too easy to forget that people are part of this system too.

There's a great film from the 60's [1] that talks about the house of the future. It predicts online shopping and other modern appliances easily, however it is completely blind to any social change. The wife is still a housewife, the husband still goes to work and so on.

As we produce more and more new tech I think media such as Black Mirror are a great way to explore some of the more human implications.

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RRxqg4G-G4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RRxqg4G-G4)

<comment><USER7> > How society changes around it. > [a classic old film] is completely blind to > any social change. The wife is still a housewife, the husband still goes to > work and so on.

This is an exceptionally good point.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I've only watched 3 of the episodes (Playtest, Shut Up and Dance, and Hated in the Nation)...I've heard the other 3 episodes were better, but the 3 that I have watched seemed subpar compared to the previous 2 seasons. Not terrible as far as overall TV goes, but after the plot thrills were over, they just didn't leave the same queasiness-about-possible-future-dystopia that "White Bear", "White Christmas", "Entire History of You", "Be Right Back", and "Fifteen Million Merits" do (5 out of 7).

I am looking forward to watching "San Junipero", because unlike the other episodes, I have no idea what it's about based on its episode description (or 80s-themed screenshot).

<comment><USER10> > they just didn't leave the same queasiness-about-possible-future-dystopia

Actually for me they do. Maybe I'm more sensitive to this than others but I've seen the first two and both left me rather disoriented, alomst detached from reality, the first minutes after watching them. I only reach such a state through brilliant (from my point of view, I guess) film or music, or by using drugs. So: no complaints here :]

E.g. I really like how the first episode makes you not only reflect on a possible-but-too-close future that looks horrible to live in, but at the same time reminds you to realize maybe it's already a reality for some people today - possible including yourself, and that in a broader sense it has been like that all throughout history.

<comment><USER11> Watching the first one I joked about how a horror movie can be done with only beautiful people with perfect hair talking politely and dressed in pastels.

<comment><USER12> Have you seen The Prisoner? [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Village_(The_Prisoner)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Village_\(The_Prisoner\))

<comment><USER11> Only the old one. The new one is on my list.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> For people who like Black Mirror, I highly recommend the YouTube Red series from College Humor, Bad Internet. In the exact same genre, the episodes have nothing to do with each other, so I'll link to my favorite episode, "Amazon Foresight":

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQwK3jaQGKY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQwK3jaQGKY)

<comment><USER14> Jesus, so now we have to torrent youtube also?

<comment><USER13> Who is "we"? I like this content and know that content like this can't exist if the people at CollegeHumor don't get paid, and I hate all the side effects of advertising as a business model, so not only do I pay for YouTube Red but if there were a way to just pay CollegeHumor specifically for this series I would do so in a heartbeat: paying for work is how I use my labor to buy food and other consumables for all the people who work on the things that I consume in my life, not encouraging people to work on things I need or want or simply enjoy but actually allowing that to be possible.

<comment><USER14> You do know that Youtube Red exist only in 4 countries[0]?

[0]: [https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6307365?hl=en&ref_...](https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6307365?hl=en&ref_topic=6305525)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I was really sad at how short season 3 was, but quality over quantity, at the very least I am grateful that Netflix revived one of my favorite shows.

If all netflix does is pick up popular shows that arent popular enough for time slot tv, and inject new life into them I will be a netflix subscriber forever.

<comment><USER16> Netflix didn't revive it. They outbid the original producers for production rights. It would've been continued one way or another.

<comment><USER15> Why the massive gap since season 2 then? If you dont count the single episode "special" there hasnt been a season 3.5 years.

<comment><USER17> Look at the Sherlock Holmes gaps.

<comment><USER18> But that's mostly due to how extremely popular are now the two main actors, compared to when they first started doing the show, no?

<comment><USER19> Also British shows don't have teams of writers, it tends to be one or two people working alone, so workload and inspiration also affect show times.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Welcome to China, who probably read Doctorow in the wrong way...

[https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/58yktd/china_wan...](https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/58yktd/china_wants_to_give_all_of_its_citizens_a_score/)

<comment><USER21> [https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/3nyulu/in_china_e...](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/3nyulu/in_china_every_citizen_is_being_assigned_a_credit/cvsl88k/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Ok I'll admit it - "San Junipero" both made me cry and scared the shit out of me at the same time. Didn't know that was even possible. Thank you Netflix. And thank you for last Monday too.

<comment><USER23> What do you think was so scary about it?

<comment><USER24> Also not the GP, but I think San Junipero goes beyond just the inevitability of aging and death. It hits upon the meaninglessness of both life and a hypothetical afterlife. Although the people of San Junipero "live" in paradise, their existence borders on the hedonistic: thrill-seeking, sex, and drugs (alcohol.) Is a life of this nature worth living? The characters in the episode certainly seem to think so. Yet, I'd argue that living in this manner is a kind of hell.

<comment><USER23> The short story Metamorphosis of prime intellect deals with the same theme, you may be interested:

[http://localroger.com/prime-intellect/](http://localroger.com/prime- intellect/)

<comment><USER24> Great read. Thank you for the recommendation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> San Junipero is one of my favorite TV episodes in a long time.

<comment><USER26> I'd say it's among the best sci-fi stories I've ever seen on screen. Superbly structured and executed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> After binge-watching the latest six episodes, I really enjoyed this "Twilight Zone"-like promo: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=di6emt8_ie8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=di6emt8_ie8)

</comment><comment><USER28> I guess it's just me.

I simply don't find Black Mirror to be that good. To me it's like a revamped and overhyped Tales of the Unexpected ( [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tales_of_the_Unexpected_(TV_se...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tales_of_the_Unexpected_\(TV_series\)) )

It tries to be smart by attempting to address social changes we see to today, but it's clumsy and overbearing and the writing is not up to the task. I look at classic Twilight Zone and I feel they did more with less. In some respects even the writing from Tales from the Crypt offered more believable characters.

Anyway one person's (clearly) minority opinion.

<comment><USER26> A lot of what's great about Black Mirror is what it _doesn 't_ show you. It's great at showing you enough of something to know what's going on, but not hammering it home to make sure you got it like a lesser show might.

As an example, in the first episode of Season 3 (no spoiler here I think) a character leaves an area where there's a billboard with her and a guy on it, and her image fades from it. Personalized images in ads are something we've seen in other media so I'm not claiming the idea is novel, but a lesser show might still have felt the need to show someone else walking up and their image appearing on the billboard, replacing the one that had been there. Black Mirror is content to show the image fade, then cut without replacing it. This is _good taste_ and _confidence_ , and it's one of the show's greatest attributes. It manifests in many small choices like this in every episode.

Similarly, it sometimes uses _what it doesn 't show us_ to carry most of the weight of an entire episode's central theme (Fifteen Million Merits does this, for instance). It may also throw sensation at the viewer as a _bait_ , as it pointedly does in The National Anthem, revealing this when the camera chooses to entirely ignore the sensational event toward which the episode has been building to instead show us something both more mundane and _far more disgusting_ in every way that matters. The subjects of that scene push the viewer to reflect on themselves—showing us the watchers when _we_ are watchers—which is one hell of a smart gut-punch.

There _are_ a couple bad episodes, though (well, there _was_ one, but now season 3's out and by my reckoning there are now three), and if I were walking a n00b through the series I'd probably show them the series' first episode _last_ because it's both structurally different from all the rest and I think easier to appreciate when you've got a better feel for what the show's _doing_. It's a bad introductory episode, IMO.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> "The problem isn't machines, it's letting machines do your thinking for you." \- Leto III (Dune)

A friend suggests that Black Mirror is "about screens". I see what he's saying on a surface level, but, screens are just how we interface with machines doing the thinking for us, instead of people.

On the other hand, isn't bureaucracy a machine, running on meat? "Screens" used to be "Paper" \- see the crazy movie "Brazil". Replacing something hard (actually getting to know someone and their situation) with something easy (the output of a system) has been with humanity for a really long time, if not forever.

Most [of the prior _] Black Mirror episodes are about, I think, man 's inhumanity to man, just mediated by modern technology. Most of them are about some way that people are failing to connect to each other.

_ I have only watched one of the new episodes.

</comment><comment><USER29> One interesting thing about this show (to me), which probably applies to just about every science fiction, is the gap between the imagination of what technology may achieve and the actual engineering timeframes.

</comment><comment><USER30> I was a fan before it came to US Netflix, and was thrilled to get home and watch it on Friday. Unfortunately, that first episode was painful to watch, but I realized why when the closing credits didn't have Charlie Brooker as the writer. It seemed to follow Netflix's obsession with quantity of hours of content rather than quality. The idea of a social rating system is interesting, but to drag it out for over an hour was so boring that I nearly wrote off the whole season. The prior Christmas special was like 3 episodes in one and it was only 10 minutes longer. Fortunately the rest were on par, but the series feels slightly tarnished to me now. Why the fuck were Radhika Jones and Mike Schur in charge of the one episode all of Netflix's users would have autoplay on their home screen instead of the series's creators?

<comment><USER23> I think that it wasn't really bad but rather the theme is very uncomfortable. It sort of hits close to home. It is over the top but that's also the point.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> I've never seen the show. The PR, both on news sources and also from personal recommendations has been _unreal_. good for them. It's almost like what i gather an episode would be like.

</comment><comment><USER32> Also: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12761407](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12761407)

</comment><comment><USER33> Advertorials don't belong here.

<comment><USER15> If reviews about scyfy futurology style tv shows dont belong on HN I dont know where they do belong.

<comment><USER34> Seems like a good fit for reddit.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I liked the previous episodes and watched a couple of the new episodes. I really wanted to like them but it's like the writers are both trying too hard to capitalise on the obvious "trends" and not really understanding the tech deeply enough at the same time.

Self replicating, 3d printing miniature robot drone bees, that fly indefinitely on solar power and handle pollination for a whole country? And yet nothing else in their future tech (mobiles, cars, computers) has changed from what it is like now? Cmon

Same with the social status rating episode. Couldn't finish watching it, very implausible and cringeworthy

<comment><USER36> plausibility isn't the point - the scfi devices used are for reduction-ad- absurdum, to zoom-in on aspects of our current society.

Also, in the real world some things develop faster than others. In San Junipero they can perfectly simulate a world and upload people into the cloud (heaven), but they can't cure quadriplegia with stem-cells. That's ok because all science and tech doesn't move at the same pace: some tech grows very fast while other techs never get funding and die by whatever market-force fashions.

<comment><USER35> I don't disagree with you, but for me you still need to retain some plausibility or it just feels sloppy.

The perfect memory recorder in the previous episodes - that was my favourite one, because we are not very far off from it, yet the implications are profound.

But indefinitely flying, self-replicating nanobees, just because one of the writers read about drones, 3d printers and bees dying out? Feels forced and lazy, even if it's just a prop to a bigger story about bullying on social media

<comment><USER23> Self replicating bots are feasible in _some_ form, probably not in the one presented. Also, it isn't plausible that the rest of world would look as similar to ours presented in the episode as such technology would have many far-reaching implications on the rest of society.

Still, at some point you have to limit yourself. Having this one change and not change the rest of society makes it possible to imagine and relate to that one tech.

One bite sized chunk at a time.

Edit: Interesting example: What if we had teleportation technology that you can carry in your pocket? It's extremely hard to figure out all implications of this and if you manage to figure out how the world would look like it would probably be hard to relate to because it would change _everything_. So we have to keep a balance between relateability and plausibility.

<comment><USER35> I agree with you, it's walking a fine line between the two.

But in ways science fiction is in ways like chess - the author thinking more than one move ahead makes it more enjoyable.

There are many interesting topics to explore though.

For instance, I'd like to see a Black Mirror style exploration of a world where CRISPR use (on everything, including humans) is rampant and genetic evolution has become subject to memetic evolution, to cultural/technological/financial selection pressures. It's within realms of possibility with profound implications on everything

<comment><USER23> So let's say we'd make a Black mirror episode about CRISPR. What could it be about? Biomachines making most of our stuff including houses? Designer babies that glow in the dark and can communicate telepathically? Both? 10 other things? Let's choose one. It's difficult enough to imagine the social impact of that. If we choose multiple such inventions in one swoop you would have to make a lot of assumptions that each would be enough content for a single episode. Then audience will no longer be able to use what they know about today's society because they don't know what assumptions the author has made.

edit: I realize I might be overselling a point that you're already agreeing on...</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Obama at the Presidential Summit on Entrepreneurship - <AUTHOR> http://www.whitehouse.gov/live/president-obama-speaks-presidential-summit-entrepreneurship

<comment><USER2> 404, resubmit with a working link?</comment>


LG wants PlayStation 3 banned from US market - <AUTHOR> http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/02/lg-wants-playstation-3-banned-from.html

<comment><USER2> Seriously? Took LG this long to find something to complain about the PS3.</comment>


Tinderoid – Tinder on Steroids (mass liker) – FREE on iOS - <AUTHOR>

A new Free App has hit the Apple App Store this week which proves to make everyone's dating life a lot easier.
Meet Tinderoid - Tinder on Steroids.
Tinderoid works with the Tinder App to bring many much sought after features that are currently lacking in the official Tinder App.
They include the ability to view ALL of your results at the same time on one screen. Followed by the best part, you can "Like" them all with one tap! No more mass swiping needed.
For the pickier people, you can also select only certain profiles and use the "Like Selected" button.
The app description says it is free for a limited time; so grab it while you can!
http://www.tiny.cc/tinderoid
Happy Hooking Up! <comment> B-n-c Clickable: [http://www.tiny.cc/tinderoid](http://www.tiny.cc/tinderoid)

</comment><comment><USER2> sounds like a great idea for yet another unknown entity to siphon more of your data off.

tinder already wants to be able to post on my timeline.

and there's an increasing amount of catfish/spam accounts on there now :(

<comment><AUTHOR> Tinderoid captures none of your data. There is nothing to worry about!

Www.tiny.cc/tinderoid</comment></comment>


Understanding Your Innovation Problem - <AUTHOR> http://timkastelle.org/blog/2018/04/is-your-innovation-problem-really-a-strategy-problem/ <comment><USER2> If executives aren't responsible for "strategy and innovation" how do they justify huge executive salaries?</comment>


New Apple ID Exploit Allows Others to Reset Your Password - <AUTHOR> http://lifehacker.com/5991994/new-apple-id-exploit-allows-others-to-reset-your-password-heres-how-to-protect-yourself

<comment><USER2> For those worried, this is not a new exploit. Old news:

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4353155>

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5425153>

As reported, it's been fixed:

[http://www.zdnet.com/apple-fixes-dangerous-password-reset- fl...](http://www.zdnet.com/apple-fixes-dangerous-password-reset- flaw-7000013073/)

</comment><comment><USER3> Are you serious? This was revealed over two weeks ago and Apple fixed it that day, I believe. This isn't "new" and this doesn't exist any more.

</comment><comment><USER4> I'd be happy to sign up for 2-factor auth, but it doesn't work with Google Voice.

The whole reason I use Google Voice is to keep my phone number independent of the device/carrier I happen to be using. It's my permanent address in telephony. Whatever number is on my SIM card is just temporary. If I used 2FA, I'd run the very real risk of locking myself out of my account the next time I change carriers.

Knowing how Apple expects its users to commit to its product portfolio all-or- nothing, I don't expect an Android app, but it would be nice if Facebook and Apple would at least include Google Voice support in their SMS verification tools. (As for 2-factor authentication, they really should support the Authenticator project like everyone else.)

</comment><comment><USER5> This kind of reminds me of Weev's AT&T hack. Changing some values to obtain information that should else-wise not be easily obtainable. A pretty big mistake to make on Apple's part here, but it's good they took the page down because of the issues and above all, no edgy hacker stealing information and leaking it was required to publicise the security issue, who would have thought?</comment>


Impact investing is becoming more and more popular - <AUTHOR> http://www.giif.org/ <comment><USER2> Sounds great, but maybe defining what is impact investing higher up in the page would be helpful for people not familiar with the term and what it entails.</comment>


Finally something that explains Rails architecture. - <AUTHOR> http://cfis.savagexi.com/2007/09/05/rails-unusual-architecture

<comment><USER2> The HN convention for older articles is to append the title with the year.

        Finally something that explains Rails architecture [2007]

</comment><comment><USER3> Finally? This was posted in September of 2007. You can see the section under "The Rails Way" used in a large number of plugins and gems, as well. The pattern is no secret.

That said, it is a nice article. It's just not new.

There's been a fairly large refactoring/re-architecting for Rails 3, including, unless I'm mistaken, avoiding alias_method_chain.

(I want to say that this whole pattern or ruby-ism is now being avoided in Rails proper, but that would only be hearsay based on something I think I read many months ago. ... Yehuda?)

<comment><USER4> _There's been a fairly large refactoring/re-architecting for Rails 3, including, unless I'm mistaken, avoiding alias_method_chain._

This is correct, and is a significant understatement. Rails 3 internals are on the order of a complete rewrite at the architectural level. The OA is only of interest for historical reasons at this point.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I mastered a little about Rails internals by looking at the source code (of the framework), changing some methods (and entire classes) sometimes and by reading the development mailing list, I recommend the same way of learning for everyone working with Rails. Anyway, it would be nice to have an article describing the changes Rails 3 will bring to this architecture.

</comment><comment><USER6> It's a good article, but it's pain points haven't been valid for a long time. Also I believe rails 3 relies less on alias chaining and more on rack middleware.

<comment><USER7> I've been knee deep in the source of Rails 3 since I'm developing against it and the available document outside the source itself is ported from Rails 2 and often incorrect.

The source for Rails 3 is refreshingly clean and free of alias chains. ActiveRecord is the exception, it still has quite a few of them in there.</comment></comment>


Write your first Linux kernel module - <AUTHOR> http://www.linuxvoice.com/be-a-kernel-hacker/?pk_campaign=hn&pk_kwd=3 <comment><USER2> This is so great!

Writing toy kernel modules on your own is a super fun way to get into kernel programming. There's no danger of anything going wrong, especially if you develop inside a VM.

My partner wrote a kernel module for a talk I gave that rickrolls your file system -- it overrides the 'open' system call so that any time you open a '.mp3' file, it plays Rick Astley instead. (this requires you to have Rick Astley already on your computer =))

The source code for that (and a few other toy kernel modules) is at [https://github.com/jvns/kernel-module-fun](https://github.com/jvns/kernel- module-fun)

The rickroll module (by Kamal Marhubi) is the most well commented and fun: [https://github.com/jvns/kernel-module- fun/blob/master/rickro...](https://github.com/jvns/kernel-module- fun/blob/master/rickroll.c)

I wrote a blog post with more about this kernel-programming-for-fun philosophy: [http://jvns.ca/blog/2014/01/04/4-paths-to-being-a-kernel- hac...](http://jvns.ca/blog/2014/01/04/4-paths-to-being-a-kernel-hacker/)

Of course, writing code for the _mainline kernel_ is a responsible task, but writing kernel code on your own machine that nobody will ever run in production is a great way to learn, and I think it's made me a better programmer.

A few concrete ways I think it's made me a better programmer:

\- I now understand the interface between kernel space and userspace much better (I use strace all the time to debug my regular userspace code!)

\- realizing that the Linux kernel is just written in C and it's something I can read (and understand! and change!) was a big deal for me

\- understanding the basics of the underlying operating system helps me reason about my programs better

\- I now feel like if I ran into an _actual_ kernel bug or performance problem, it's something I could conceivably attempt to fix and understand, instead of hiding under the bed and saying OH NO THE KERNEL IT IS TOO HARD

</comment><comment><USER3> This is my first kernel module, which 'fakes' your system uptime:

[http://www.anfractuosity.com/projects/uptime/](http://www.anfractuosity.com/projects/uptime/)

Personally I think people should be encouraged to hack around with the kernel, rather than be afraid of it, how else can we learn?

</comment><comment><USER4> This is a good starting point for anyone interested in the Eudyptula Challenge [1].

[1] [http://eudyptula-challenge.org/](http://eudyptula-challenge.org/)

<comment><USER5> _The idea for this came to us after a long night of drinking in which it was determined that if the Linux kernel was to survive, it would need new programmers to fix all of the bugs that were recently added after a long night of drinking._

Sound thinking.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Do most kernel programmers start out working on their regular daily-use machine? My only experience is with an embedded linux environment, and I would probably recommend starting with something like a RPi so that your environment is easy to restore if you mess something up.

I also recommend "Linux Device Drivers" from O'Reilly. [http://lwn.net/Kernel/LDD3/](http://lwn.net/Kernel/LDD3/)

<comment><USER7> Whenever I do kernel stuff, it happens in a VM, limited to a subset of the cores available on the machine. That way when I inevitably bork something, I can just forcibly stop it.

Another trick I've used is making as much of my core logic as possible happen in functions that are called from the kernel hooks, rather than in the kernel hooks. Then you can test a ton of it in userland to handle basic logic and flow control bugs, finally porting the code to the module. To help with this, it sometimes is actually faster to copy some of the kernel routines you use to a different .c file and change things like kprintf and kmalloc for the userland versions. It isn't going to be a perfect port, but it helps get some of the complex stuff out of the way where you have your familiar userland tools.

All that said - I've only dabbled in the kernel a little, there are probably better ways that someone can chime in on.

<comment><USER8> Keeping the complex stuff out of the kernel is good advice. (and not just during development)

<comment><USER7> True! Unfortunately it's sometimes unavoidable. The specific case I was remembering involved writing a qdisc... it was actually more complex to move that out of the kernel via nf_queue than to just do it in-kernel. (At least some parts of it.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I might be missing something, but the final version still looks susceptible to deadlock to me.

Suppose the buffer is empty. Process A, which is reading, gets through the mutex_unlock() call and into wait_event_interruptible(), which seems to first internally check the condition. It is then switched out before it internally waits.

Process B then runs all the way through, acquiring the mutex, doing its work, and runs wake_up_interruptible(), which won't do anything, because process A hasn't started waiting. Process B then releases the mutex and gets switched out.

Process A then gets switched back in, and then immediately starts waiting, with no more events to wake it up. Why won't it just wait forever (deadlock)?

Am I missing something? Do all processes occasionally get woken up without an explicit wake up?

</comment><comment><USER10> VirtualBox uses a kernel module, and that is annoying because the linux kernel API changes with every update, which means its kernel module needs to be recompiled. Since I update my Linux quite often, that basically means:

Everytime some friends call me to play a certain game online with each other, they need to be waiting a bit longer for me because I have yet again to recompile VirtualBox's kernel modules.

Is there a way to convert something that requires kernel modules, to run fully in userspace?

I'd be happy to lose some efficiency for this. Just a 100% reliable game to run my game would be perfect.

Are there things you can do only in kernel modules and not in userspace, and does VB need this? In theory userspace can do everything you need, right? Graphics, networking, audio, ...

<comment><USER11> Virtualbox is an out-of-tree module and hence needs to be compiled. The base package is GPLv2 and is compatible with the Linux kernel license, but I don't know if Virtualbox developers ever tried to "upstream" their module. This is probably the easiest way to solve your problem. Most Virtualization Software these days use virtualization hardware extensions (Intel VMX/AMD SVM) and so the "hypervisor code" needs to be able to execute privileged instructions, eg - you can't run VMON from ring 3/userspace.

<comment><USER12> Apparently the virtualbox code is terrible, hence the lack of upstreaming...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I had great fun writing a silly toy kernel module a few weeks back, ( [https://github.com/benjojo/dev_markov](https://github.com/benjojo/dev_markov) ) Would totally recommend anyone curious giving it a go.

</comment><comment><USER14> Cool, definitely relevant to my interests. I've done various ARM/orion5x platform porting related stuff before but never a module...

</comment><comment><USER15> Really great article.

</comment><comment><USER16> Maybe it's worth emphasizing that writing kernel code is a very responsible task, not to be taken lightly. Hackers coming from a userspace background tend to think it's just "userspace with a few quirks" which is grossly wrong: your code has to be _completely free of bugs_ , as a dangling pointer, for instance, won't just send you a friendly SIGSEGV and terminate your ass, it will crash the whole system, leading to consequences for everyone who relies on its stability. Just imagine introducing a bug which crashes a Linux-based life support system. You could be responsible for endangering human lives. (I ageee that Linux isn't a sane choice here, but just for the sake of the argument.)

Also, standards to get your pull requests merged into mainline Linux are insanely high, but even given that, you can never rely solely on maintainers' code review to catch your mistakes. Take kernel hacking seriously.

<comment><USER17> >You could be responsible for endangering human lives.

I'm pretty sure what ever devices people depend on to keep them alive would be running a modified version of the Linux kernel with anything unnecessary stripped out and probably a lot of custom stuff.

They wouldn't just download it from kernel.org and throw it on there. I would hope not at least.

<comment><USER18> I wholeheartly agree with ❝devices people depend on to keep them alive would be running a -- version of the Linux kernel with anything unnecessary stripped out❞.

But the part with a ❝ _modified_ version (...) and probably a lot of custom stuff❞ made be shudder.

The Linux kernel is a _very_ well maintained piece of software, and whenever, in the embedded world, I've seen modification or larger forks of the stock/mainline kernel, they always were of worse quality and had more bugs than what I (or everyone else) has gotten used to when running mainline code (as is customary on your normal x86 PCs).

That's because code-review actually _works_ in Linux, and while it makes it sometimes very hard to get new features in, the ones that make it are usually well vettet.</comment></comment></comment>


Young adults hardly ever walk, 'because of technology' - <AUTHOR> http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57608303-71/young-adults-hardly-ever-walk-because-of-technology/ <comment><USER2> The article makes a mention of people not having friends to walk with because all their friends are 'virtual', which seems a little lazy.

In the US, a real problem is that our population is so distributed that even if you had people to hang out with in person at one point, it's pretty likely that none of them live within walking distance of you. So to meet up with friends or acquaintances, you have to drive (or use public transit, if you're lucky enough to live in a place where that's possible). Once you've driven somewhere to meet with someone, if you're going to go somewhere else you'll probably drive too, and then you'll drive home.

In my case I almost never had cause to walk for I guess what would be 'typical' reasons, despite not really growing up with a ton of technology or lots of 'virtual friends'. I just never had a reason to walk over to visit someone, so it was limited to walking to the grocery store or to the bus stop for college. Everyone I knew lived a 15+ minute drive away. Reaching college on public transit took over 3 hours, so I ended up getting a car pretty quick.

In someplace more dense like the UK, are people's friends all within walking distance?

<comment><USER3> No offense (seriously), but isn't making excuses a symptom of laziness?

<comment><USER4> Is _not_ walking to see friends on a whim because they live 90 minutes away (on foot), making excuses?

<comment><USER5> One question I always struggle with is why don't I have more friends among my neighbors?

<comment><USER4> Because we don't reach out to our neighbors the same way anymore, because they already have lives as do we. It's a self-reinforcing trend.

I suspect the _origin_ of the trend was, once we had the freedom to select friends out of a greater geographic region we happily did so, because there really is no guarantee the ten people living nearest to you are into the same things you are.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I've recently made the unintentional discovery that this and many other problems of modern life, self-improvement, and so on can be obviated by the simple expedient of getting a dog.

</comment><comment><USER7> The only link cited in that article seems to be an all-age study of walking habits, where the 18-25 year old habits gets a 1 sentence mention.

[http://www.bupa.com/media-centre/press- releases/uk/17-oct-20...](http://www.bupa.com/media-centre/press- releases/uk/17-oct-2013-research-from-bupa-reveals-we-are-a-nation-of-desk- potatoes/)

</comment><comment><USER8> It's because old people built a nation of shitty unwalkable suburbs, then blamed the consequences of their fuckups on their kids.

</comment><comment><USER9> As a New Yorker, this article seems to delineate the rural/suburban-urban divide more than anything about age or the effect of technology.

<comment><USER10> Yeah this seems pretty worthless without separating responses by location. Living in the city you're going to walk a ton without even thinking about it, and most suburbs/rural areas are set up to make walking anywhere an 18-24 year-old would want to go difficult, if not impossible.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> This seems fairly superficial. I suspect that if you factored in where people are living (suburbs versus urban areas), age would seem to make less of a difference.

I'm barely within the 18-25 range, and I walk everywhere. I live downtown and don't drive, and I suspect that I get far more exercise than a middle-aged person who lives in the suburbs and drives to work, the grocery store, and wherever else they need to go.

The article comes off very much as old people wanting to look down on the habits of the young, but I very easily feel the same way about suburbanites who drive into my neighbourhood, almost kill all the pedestrians at cross- walks, and block up the streets by milling about and walking as slowly as possible from the parkades to the restaurants.

</comment><comment><USER12> This article is just an ad for some app.

</comment><comment><USER13> This is actually topic that could be potentially interesting with some proper research and actual writing. Instead this is simply an ad for an app.

</comment><comment><USER14> My work made me carry a pedometer. It really surprised me some days, when I would just stay home at my apartment how little I walked. Sub 500 steps in a day. Basically, being at home is being on your ass all day, but I would think I would move around at least a little more than that.

</comment><comment><USER15> WTF on the headline picture, why are you picking a guy preparing to play pond hockey as walking, I mean before or after this picture one can assume he's going to be doing more strenuous activity, the connection is lost on me... confused.

</comment><comment><USER16> It's not just young adults; it's starting earlier than that. I see parents happily wheeling their 7-year-olds around in strollers all the time because it's easier than having to keep up with them. Everyone's just lazy as hell these days.</comment>


Ask HN: What is development like at your company? - <AUTHOR> This is my first "serious" software job, so I'd like hear what your experiences have been in the industry.
What is your tech-stack like? What languages/frameworks/tools do you use, and are they working for you, and why? What is the "common practice" like at your company? Do people write and/or design code well? Do you test and document code? What is the culture like? Do people communicate effectively? Are there deadlines? Is management reasonable?
I'm asking because I work at a very "well established" business software company and the reputation far surpasses the reality in my opinion.
Firstly, the software blows... super hard. Most of your product is written in JavaScript (front-end and back-end). Of course, this is a complete nightmare as we have over 500 active developers on the project. Not to mention the fact that at most 5% of the code is commented or documented in any way whatsoever. This makes maintenance, code-reading, refactoring, and testing almost impossible. Broken hacks are fixed with more broken hacks, and most of our "business data" is passed around as raw JSON objects who's structure you can't possibly know until you evaluate the objects at runtime. Perhaps the worst part is that very little of this code is tested. In fact, large areas of our project are hovering around 50-60% code coverage, and these are areas that are responsible for handling our customer's financial data. The part that irks me the most is that most of our additions and new features are merged without any unit or integration tests whatsoever. Instead, we relegate all our interns to do manual testing on our product on a weekly basis, so when bugs make it into production it's their fault for not finding them, never mind that new features are often not even manually tested by the people who developed them. Yes, you heard that right, senior developers write features without any unit tests, throw up some manual test plans, and then hand them over to the interns to test. <comment><USER2> Considering my whole career, I'd say you should probably get used to it and evolve!

I don't mean to sound defeated. Sometimes projects are done 'properly'. Documentation... Good code over 'code that just works'... etc. But sometimes the business need to just get something released can outweigh that.

Picture this - the business has an opportunity that will generate £x in revenue. This revenue will ensure your job. It'll contribute to the coffee you get to drink. And other benefits you might take for granted. The catch is, the code to fulfil this opportunity needs to be written in 3 months when you know that it should take 9.

This situation just requires a different way of working. And a different set of skills. Such as understanding the requirements to a tee so that you can produce the absolute minimum. Delegating where possible (such as letting others do the testing - if they're doing that badly, that's not your problem). I'd say over time I've gotten better at reading code that isn't commented. (hint:learn how to use a debugger for your given language). I've also gotten better at writing short snappy docs.

To answer your queastions directly, again across my career... \- Tech stack is normally 50/50 modern and legacy. \- Both the modern and legacy languages/frameworks/tools fulfilled the end-user requirements set out in the first place. \- Common practice is 50/50 people who care about their job and those who just want the paycheck. \- 75% ask for advice on architecture from the 25% that can do it well. \- Culture is what you make of it. If there's no scene, create one. (just like punk music). \- People only communicate when they need to \- Deadlines? Yes! They're normally not met though. See above! \- Management reasonable? Subjective :)

<comment><USER3> I think you make some excellent points. I think the oft mental block engineers stumble into is that management are often not clear in articulating that speed for a certain project is more important than reliability or quality for example.

There is a trend in our industry for each company to claim they fulfil speed,quality,cost.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Wow! That sounds awful. I'm sorry that you found yourself there.

As someone in "management", i fully understand that business needs do not always align with ideal engineering solutions. At my company we try to have team discussions whenever we "solve it with a hack".

I fully admit, we don't score a perfect 12 on the Joel test [1] (and I don't agree with all 12 points as always being the goal) but we do always strive to make all code we touch "better" than before we touched it.

Your situation does not sound like a place where you will learn a lot (which in my mind is one important goal of a first job).

Can you discuss your concers with your supervisor? Can you convince them to clean as you go? What are the opinions of other, more senior programmers? Is the moral bad?

[1] [https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/08/09/the-joel- test-12-s...](https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/08/09/the-joel- test-12-steps-to-better-code/)

</comment><comment> ix-hispana I work at a small company. We have 6 javascript developers. All our web projects are node, typescript, and the front end stuff the client wants us to use (though we default to angular). We enforce types for communication with node, so at least you know the structure of all the json going through the network. On the node side we use loopback, which generates a nice site to call the API from outside the project.

We write no tests whatsoever. This is a business decision.

There's a test team of 2 people whose job is to go through our crap (i.e., the user stories) and write docs.

Management has to adapt to clients. Managers use the agile words, but the client's budgeting procedure has to take precedence. Regarding estimations, there's no analyst estimating features and tasks, the developers do it themselves. Developers also talk directly to clients often and go on-site.

Since we're so small (about 30 in total), things are personal. We know everyone personally and can make out who wrote a given piece of code. I think communication must be easier with fewer people. I can't imagine having 500 people committing into my project!

<comment><USER5> I always question the 'business decision' to not write tests. How did management justify this point to the developers? Was there any push back?

I ask because our business team has a similar stance on developers writing tests (i.e. it's not worth the effort).

<comment><USER6> I think it comes down to the complexity/size of the project, the amount of turn over in the team (with higher turn over you're using going to want more tests and docs), and overall willingness to invest in the product health. Some teams rather take on the technical debt in 1 project so they can move onto other projects.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The complete lack of any automated testing whatsoever is not ideal but what's nightmarish about JavaScript? It's my favorite language nowadays (modern JS) and I've used C++, C#, Java, Python, Objective-C, Swift, Lua, and about 6 or 7 others over the 15 years since I graduated. JSON objects are easy to verify if that's how your 'business data' is passed around.

</comment><comment><USER8> Evaluating a company from head to toe can be very hard during the interview process or even the first week of work, because you only see the tip of the iceberg. I've been in many places where there is complacency to update the tech stack, or fragmented communication (imagine working right next to another programmer who has not heard anything about the project your manager gave you, or someone stops coming to work and later the management casually tells you they're fired).

I don't work right now (but currently looking) and I left the last job quickly due to disagreement on terms, so I don't know if my answer to your question would be very helpful to you.

I was hired as a telecommute contractor for a small web development agency that just set up business about 2 months ago. They had three or four other programmers also telecommute (I can't exactly remember, only really worked with one during my short time there).

First, the good stuff- their stack and development setup is very sound for the most part. Their work looked well managed on a technical level. Projects are divided among other remote developers using Gitlab. All bugs and tasks are tracked there. Most client projects use modern frameworks such as Laravel and React. We are all encouraged to use their Vagrant dev environments with virtual machines, so everyone's on the same pace. It's the most modern approach I've experienced in web dev career (which doesn't say much, my other employers were lagging behind).

Now for the bad- business billing practices that didn't quite sit right to me as a contractor. Having worked for web agencies before, I'm familiar with process of billing clients. Previously, I'm always the one making the time estimates, if the manager expects them. However, they just threw me into a project without much input and expected me to take its estimates (given by their lead developer) and bill according to what he estimated. Also was expected to be present online for 35 hours but not being able to bill for all 35. I filled out a W-9, identified as a sole proprietorship. I felt like I was controlled more like an employee, one who the company isn't paying taxes for. Plus, the business owner didn't even give me a work-to-hire agreement to sign. He actually said "we don't do contractor agreements".

So all put together, it sounded like an attempt leverage me into a very bad deal. That's how we broke it off, he accused me of being unprofessional attitude and didn't take well to my "f* ck you, pay me" approach that freelance contractors are known to defend themselves with. I never had to take that stance before, as all other clients I've contracted for paid on a more sensible hourly basis (and give actual contracts to sign).</comment>


Ask HN: Where do you store your media files? - <AUTHOR>

I'm upgrading machines and doing some housecleaning. My code goes in Github, my files go into Dropbox... but how about my music/movies/pictures? I don't have a huge library; on the scale of 100-200gb. What is everyone's preferred storage method? I was just about to setup a NAS drive or time capsule but then started to consider whether I'm not just better off with just a bigger Dropbox account or Google Drive, etc. Do people find it worth it to store everything on a cloud server? Thanks! <comment><USER2> For big files, I separate it into "important" (photos/video I've taken), highly-categorized medium stuff, and unimportant.

Important is backed up on 2 colo servers, CrashPlan, spinning storage at home, and some USB drives kept offline (at home and in storage). Flickr also has most of my photos, except for anything sensitive, and I'm transitioning to Facebook, Flickr, 500px combined.

Medium stuff is all mp3s, and is on a few drives and iTunes Match. Or games, at Steam or EA Origin.

Unimportant (TV shows, movies, etc.) I just keep on the seedbox and on a mac on the home theater system. I have maybe 2-3TB of storage total for those, so I periodically delete stuff I've watched or I don't care about.

I'm buying a Synology 1812+ and 8x3TB drives for a RAID6 NAS; probably 10TB will be random media library, and some will be backups, working space for audio/video/photo editing, etc. It would be nice to have a content library for visitors, girlfriend, etc. to use.

</comment><comment><USER3> Hard drive. USB2. Cheaper per gigabyte, you own it rather than rent it, no internet connection necessary.

Consider how long it will simply take to upload all your stuff. Assume 2.3MBit upload (ADSL2+ with Annex M). You have 200GBytes = 204,800MBytes = 209,715,200KBytes = 1,717,986,918,400 bits to upload. At 2,300,000 bits/sec, that will take 746,950 seconds = 12,449 minutes = 207 hours = 8.6 days. Even with fibre broadband (10Mbit/sec?) it will take you two or three days. Or, you can expect ~250Mbit/sec write from any old USB2 hard drive you buy, so you'll be done in an hour or two.

Of course, if you have access to a decent internet connection, and there's no problem your using it for personal stuff, or you're just more patient than me, online storage has much to commend it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Very convincing argument. Any advice for painless ways to set it up as a network drive (after the initial data transfer via USB)?

<comment><USER3> I'm afraid not - I just use a USB2 hub. I've got no need for more, as I only use one computer.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Dropbox is roughly $1/Gb per year... So you would be looking at $100-$200/year going that route. If you are paying that much for your content storage, understand you are paying a premium for the convenience of cloud storage.

If you don't need web access to your content you are certainly better off financially simply buying a 1TB external hardrive. They can be had for $50 these days.

Is price or the convenience of the cloud more important to you? I personally have opted for the external route.

<comment><AUTHOR> Convenience would be nice so that I don't need to carry movies on my laptop and could stream them, but perhaps that is a bit move work than necessary.

I was considering buying and partitioning a time capsule to use as both external storage for media and as a time machine backup. The wireless setup is nice since it becomes more transparent.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I uploaded all my photographs (some 100 gb) to Google Drive. They're way cheaper than Dropbox at the moment. For a moment I considered setting up a server for file storage in the basement, but I calculated energy bill would be more than what I pay for the cloud.

</comment><comment><USER6> Box.net has 50GB for free. don't remember when I got this but it's the cheapest I'v found</comment>


How do hackers here concentrate? - <AUTHOR>

i am trying to get a startup going and finding it hard to keep my attention focused on it.. I am very passionate about my startup but still always come up with an idea for simple small application that could potentially make money..  but again its a distraction. Any tips? <comment><USER2> What, specifically, are you trying to do for this startup? What tasks, specifically, are you failing to do for this startup?

Many people I know who have vague dreams of eventually opening a business -- and I count myself as of four years ago -- have no actual plan as to what they are doing, what the next step is, etc etc. It is very easy to fail at ill- defined goals: If I write "Improve my software somehow" in my to-do list for this weekend I'm quite likely to find everything else expand to fill all available time, if I write "Implement the achievement system and deploy it live" I have a clear goal and success/failure conditions which I can use to evaluate progress. (That was my task last Sunday and the Sunday before last, too, but I know exactly why it isn't done yet rather than just being surprised that it hasn't magicked itself up.)

After you get in the habit of making clear goals, I suggest making smaller goals with shorter steps. Long-term planning for me is a bunch of short-term plans strung together, and items on the list typically take a few hours or a day of work for me and then a week of calendar time. Even I can sustain concentration for a few hours at a time. Then I deploy it live, start working on the next goal, and check back in a week when the notebook tells me to. (This is perhaps a little peculiar to the rhythms of my business: I only routinely get uninterrupted time on the weekends, and one adaptation I've made to that constraint is that I A/B test extensively, so during the work-week my site just passively collects stats for analysis the following weekend.)

</comment><comment><USER3> The people who could answer your question are, sadly, not on HN, but off concentrating on their work.

</comment><comment><USER4> I use the age-old (well, relatively so :)) equation of headphones and electronic music. It gets you into that coding trance that is so helpful for actually sitting down and getting work done: just put on fast-paced electronica/trance, open up TextMate/emacs/etc, and allow your focus to zero in on exactly the problem you need to address at that moment.

<comment><USER5> I second that, albeit I use my studio monitors instead of ear buds as I live by myself. I listen to <http://mugasha.com> \- a startup focusing on bringing EDM music sets online in an easy to listen way - instead of 2 hour sets, they are broken up by listing.

disclosure: one of their founders is an online friend and will be my hotel roommate at SXSW later this week

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> 1) provigil or ritalin

2) write out five things you will do tomorrow before you go to bed, then don't do anything until those five things have been checked off

<comment><USER7> 1 is a delicious option, yet what has happened to the human race that we must rely on this stuff to get things done?

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I think the best way to stay focused on a project is by finding other friends that you can trust to bounce ideas off of. Sometimes you might get stuck working on something because you hit a roadblock and because you are so close to the project it is hard to move forward. If you have someone there to bounce ideas off of they might be able to help you by providing suggestions to your problems. If you are always moving forward on one project you will be able to keep focused on it and not get distracted...

</comment><comment><USER9> Via coffee. Scratch that; via well-planned caffeine consumption: <http://arvindn.livejournal.com/57651.html>

</comment><comment><USER10> What works for me is green tea like 3 cups but I guess it's the same active ingredient as coffee. For creativity, it does boost me in that department(research caffeine and creativity).

What also works is chamomile tea, relaxes the mind.

</comment><comment><USER11> Practical: Have an idea text file and make a one or two line entry. Then forget about it and go back to work. When you finish the project go back and read the file but not before.

</comment><comment><USER12> try to look objectively over your past, have you given up on projects that in hindsight could have done well?. If you have a habit of giving up when the hard part arrives, then your past 'failures' should give you motivation to work through the hard parts. If you dont have that habit, then I would pay attention to the idea that you night not be as passionate about the idea as you think you are.

</comment><comment><USER13> Bug/issue trackers, release dates, due dates. having someone else bothering you if stuff doesn't get done. partner, manager, etc</comment>


Ergonomics Podcast Every Developer Should Listen To - <AUTHOR> https://www.relay.fm/radar/3 <comment><USER2> If you're interested in ergonomics, there's a lot more here:

[https://github.com/melling/ErgonomicNotes](https://github.com/melling/ErgonomicNotes)</comment>


Please help us to take a survey, Thanks - <AUTHOR> http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/J2SPDR5 Hi all,
We are a group of engineers here in Silicon Valley building tools/apps for early stage business/startup enterprenuer to make their daily work more efficient and manageable for their success
Please take a few minutes to do the survey in following link.
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/J2SPDR5
We really appreciate your time and feedback <comment><USER2> enterprenuer - 14 times the same mistake, you might want to fix that.</comment>


NYPD revealed Patternizr, an AI-based system to track crimes - <AUTHOR> https://www.governing.com/topics/public-justice-safety/gov-new-york-police-nypd-data-artificial-intelligence-patternizr.html <comment><USER2> I am unfamiliar with this project, is the name pronounced "Pattern Izzer" or "Patter Nizzer"??</comment>


Why 'Sign Up' and 'Sign In' Button Labels Confuse Users - <AUTHOR> http://uxmovement.com/buttons/why-sign-up-and-sign-in-button-labels-confuse-users/

<comment><USER2> We also use 'Join', especially with buttons for social accounts where the behavior is not clear (if you need to sign up, you're redirect to the signup form, while if you're already registered, you get immediately logged in).</comment>


Show HN: Sitemapbot.io – crawl and screenshot an entire website - <AUTHOR> https://sitemapbot.io/ <comment><USER2> This would be quite useful for designers to take a snapshot for their portfolio.

<comment><AUTHOR> Good idea!

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> This is my weekend project, hope some people will find this useful. Any feedback is welcome.</comment>


Perso: A Maildir-to-REST server written in Go - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/dullgiulio/perso <comment><USER2> What is the purpose of this - enabling access to a support or alerts role mailbox from an internal web app?

<comment><USER3> The readme sais:

 _Perso is useful when used on testing or staging sites to have a quick means to access a mailbox remotely, for example by a integration testing framework._</comment></comment>


Inside .NET Frameworks - <AUTHOR> http://dotnetinside.com/

<comment><USER2> I am not sure... is this even legal?

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't know. Certainly could be useful when you want to search for a type across multiple assemblies. It's nothing that a local disassembler couldn't do. But yeah... seems iff-y</comment></comment>


It's a rails world babe and it ain't magic - <AUTHOR> https://prograils.com/posts/its-a-rails-world-babe-and-it-aint-magic

<comment><USER2> It's so nice to remember those memories. The good old days. Im kindda moved to tears.</comment>


Ask: When do I need to think about equity among friends - <AUTHOR>

My friend and I have been working on this idea, no code has hit the terminal but its about to. At what point should we have the talk about forming a company or equity split up. In other words, when do we make it official.
Also, any tips on how to start that conversation?
Thanks <comment><USER2> Honestly, I'd talk about it now. It can really mess things up later if he thought he was going to have a bigger / smaller part than he was. Just make sure you're on the same page, and then you can "make it official" later.

How to start the conversation: "Lets talk about equity really quick before we start so we are both on the same page. I propose X and Y split. What are your thoughts?"

</comment><comment><USER3> Ready, fire, aim. Focus on making the idea functional before you waste time splitting equity for a theoretical business. After you get something tangible, it will be clear who has the most passion and energy for this - at which point you can start formulating an equity agreement. In a way that is organic, as opposed to arbitrary.</comment>