Vanlife: Build your own van to live on the road - <AUTHOR> https://divineontheroad.com/build-a-van/ <comment><USER3> So you're in your van, parked at the beach, or a beautiful park and you gotta poop - what now? Pack up your van and find a public restroom? Poop in some sort of composting toilet that you then lug around with you and dump ...where exactly? Drive to that gym you bought a membership to ... how close is it to the beach again and how badly do you need to poop?

Yesterday's article on tiny homes, and this one make me laugh because we all get romanced by hipster vans and nifty solar panels but skip right over essential things like ... going to the bathroom! The tiny home article said (and I'm paraphrasing here) you can buy a home, pull it up to a spot of land and *just hook up the utilities!" \- it's not that simple. Septic and water are not electrical plugs - hell even electrical is not as simple unless you're in an RV park.

Edit: Just to be clear, I spend a good deal of time traveling myself. I now tow a 26 foot travel trailer (with kitchen and full bathroom) but before that towed a small utility trailer that I converted to a travel trailer for my kids and my office. We stay at campgrounds with septic hookups and showers (which I prefer over my trailer shower). Whenever we "dry camp" we then have to find a place to dump our septic, grey water etc. it's a real pain (Google "honey wagon" for a fun look at a "good" option for handling your own waste). Typically this is done at a campground (for a small fee), but I'm not sure how it would work for someone living in their van ("can I dump a bucket full of piss and poo?").

<comment><USER4> I'd like to introduce to the invention of marine toilets. They are small, portable, self-contained flushing toilets with a sealed waste chamber that is detachable and can be emptied (ideally into a permanent toilet). My in-laws have one on their boat that stores enough water for 27 "flushes" and it works great. 27 flushes is easily a weekend of waste management for a couple or small family, or could last a single person a week perhaps.

This is the toilet in question: [https://www.westmarine.com/buy/thetford-- porta-potti-135-por...](https://www.westmarine.com/buy/thetford--porta- potti-135-portable-marine-head--17959826?recordNum=1)

<comment><USER3> Oh look, a glorified bucket! Cool cool. Hey I had one of these, I also had a bucket with a toilet seat which is essentially the same thing. My point remains; dealing with your waste if you're living in a van, or dry camping is a giant pain.

I also live on the coast, and know many fishermen/lobstermen etc. - do you know where they shit? Not in a "marine toilet" Hang your ass over the edge of the boat and be ready for a round of jokes and pranks by your shipmates. Why? Because dumping your shitter is a giant pain (I feel like a broken record)

So something that's an afterthought in a real home, becomes a weekly, or every other day chore of finding a public toilet, removing your toilet (full of shit and piss) from your van, then dumping shit in said toilet without spilling (not easy) all the while avoiding police/public works employees who would rather you not dump your shit into their facilities. Sounds fun.

<comment><USER4> I think you're being intentionally dismissive at the cost of realizing that basic, essential waste management (at a small scale) is more or less a solvable problem for people who want to live nomadic lifestyles. Is it a tedious chore from time to time? Sure. Is a marine toilet the same as a open- top bucket full of shit? No (and something tells me you do, in fact, know this to be true).

Here's the reality. People choose, sometimes, to live aboard a moving vessel - either by land or by sea. These people take an audit of the pros and the cons, and they decide that dumping out a compost toilet once a day (if that) while the coffee is brewing is worth the benefit of living in nature or at a low cost, or whatever their bigger rationale is.

What you are saying is basically: "Oh BROTHER! You thought you'd like to have a dog? Good choice, nimwit, bet you never considered they have to EAT and POOP and be TRAINED." The fact is that most dog owners enjoy the companionship so much that they actually have no problem taking on these chores, because the positive outweighs the negative. Of course no one enjoys picking up dog shit, but it's a price to pay and it has to be done, so most of the time good people who like dogs do it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> As a counterpoint to this, which I find almost offensively fixated on the parts of it that post well on social media, you really can have a good time doing this without spending months and 10's of thousands of dollars getting ready. (OK, so there are certain forces involved if you want to support a blog, as this person is doing...)

\- Buy an older van (or in my case a crew cab pickup with a camper shell).

\- Add some storage space and a bed. This can be as simple as a few plastic storage containers and a foam mattress.

\- Add an inverter, a marine battery, and if you really want to get fancy a relay to disconnect it from the main system when the vehicle isn't running. No solar panels needed, just let the alternator charge it.

That's it. Spend the rest of the time figuring out how to live with your self without social media.

There are a lot of things you can do to simplify your life, if you don't have to bring your first world standards with you: \- Don't use any electronics that need constant power. Don't buy stuff that needs to be refrigerated, but do get fresh fruit and vegetables if you can eat them within a few days of buying.

\- Piss in a bottle and figure out how to be near enough to either a bathroom or real wilderness for other situations. It's not that hard with a little planning.

\- Shower less often, mostly in campgrounds. You will stink more, but get over yourself.

\- Bring a lot of books/ebooks or something interesting to study.

\- Walmart parking lots are great places to park and sleep if you are en-route somewhere and just need some rest. They usually allow overnight parking and won't bother you (local ordinances can sometimes cause exceptions).

\- Learn how to brush your teeth and wash dishes without using lots of soap and water. You can actually clean and rinse a dirty pan with about a cup of water and a tiny drop of soap.

The western US is great for this since huge areas of the desert states are easy to move around in without much planning or permits.

Don't spend lots of time driving. Get somewhere and actually experience it. Don't plan too hard. Find some stuff you think would be interesting, get to good areas, then relax and explore. Schedules are only opportunities for disappointment and stress. Try spending a whole week without even taking pictures. Learn what is fun for you, not what you think makes your life look interesting.

<comment><USER6> I agree with you.

I got a tacoma with a tall camper shell.

I tossed a piece of foam in the back, tacked some fabric for decoration, added a hanging lamp, and that's it. I have a pelican case I keep my laptop and some stuff in, but the rest of my crap stays in plastic tubs.

I don't really want to spend time tricking it out, because the point is that I want to be out doing stuff, not fabricating a home.

I've camped out about 10 days so far this year and plan to increase that to 100% by the end of the year.

I just do it because all I want to do at this stage in life is play music and rock climb. I couldn't see doing that if I was trying to go into an upswing on my profession or build a relationship.

The point is to have a place to crash so I can stay on the road with less hassle... it's much nicer to not have to drive home after a gig or to wake up and go climb without a commute or a campsite to worry about.

I also know a lot of folks living in RVs, and I don't think that the sprinter van looks like an improvement over a commercially produced motorhome/ 5th wheel/ trailer.

<comment><USER7> I'll be traveling from Ontario to Yosemite and back this summer in my Tacoma. I have exactly the same setup. It works.

I've been deeply interested in going nomadic full time for more than a decade, despite it only recently becoming a thing. Family, job obligations combined with a relatively low cost arrangement for living expenses finds me plunked down firmly.

If my wife and I split, god forbid, you'll find me on the road.

PS: Their are no construction standards for trailers/rv's. Their are built as cheaply as possible. I'd much rather do the van thing if only for the structural integrity.

<comment><USER8> > Their are no construction standards for trailers/rv's. Their are built as > cheaply as possible.

[https://www.rvia.org/standards-regulations](https://www.rvia.org/standards- regulations)

If you look you can find RV's that are built to last. The vast majority are built as cheaply as possible though.

<comment><USER7> Membership is voluntary.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I understand that people enjoy the hashtag-vanlife thing, but if it's something you're considering please remember that it doesn't make you special. Too many people seem to think that #vanlife is somehow different from camping, and an excuse to ignore all the rules that apply to normal campers.

Normal people camp in a campground or designated wilderness camping area, where there are adequate facilities to camp in a hygenic way, and you pay for a permit to get a spot for yourself for a night, and the campground is limited to the number of spaces that the area can support. Camping in a city park, street, or public day-use area is selfishly monopolizing the resources of that area for yourself, when they were designed for the use of people other than just yourself. Homeless people can get a pass on selfishly taking over public space for themselves because they need the charity, but when tech bros who want to live the #vanlife do it they're just being assholes.

<comment><USER10> While I agree that people who "can" own/live in a house are making a choice to live in a van can "take up space", I think the amount of space used up by these people in nearly infinitesimal compared to the amount of space available.

So, I don't think this is really much of an argument against this life style. Also, they won't do this forever, long term it's much more stressful than people realize. Therefore making the amount of space/resources used entirely a non-issue.

<comment><USER9> It's not the space they take up, it's the fact that they're living in a way that the place they're living in wasn't designed for. My town has a parking lot where the #vanlife people park, and it smells like piss all summer because it's a parking lot, not a campground, and there's no bathrooms there. The actual campgrounds in the area fill up quickly, and people reserve in advance. The climbing routes, hiking trails, and other recreation facilities exist roughly in proportion to the available campsites. The #vanlife people are cheating the system by illegally camping, and using resources that aren't available. If the resources were available, permits would be approved for new campgrounds or residential development.

Individuals don't do #vanlife long term, but there's enough of them that there's a consistent rolling population and the space and resources they use are roughly constant.

<comment><USER10> You are sorting of making my argument for me. You are pointing out one single place in the entire world, and it happens to be near you. While this is unfortunate, it seems like a simple solution is to petition the local government for either porta-potties or enforcement of the law.

If the parking lot is not near you, not sure why you would care at all... If it's that bad, why would these people #vanlife there? It sounds gross.

<comment><USER11> For all we know they do that as well. This is a more general petition to the world at large not to behave like they're entitled to more just because #vanlife.

<comment><USER10> You may have a contradiction in your perspective. Well off people living #vanlife aren't going to live in squalor.

It sounds like you have something against poor people living in vehicles?

<comment><USER9> your expectations are incorrect, unless you think that people living in late- model mercedes sprinter vans that have been camperized by custom van outfitters count as poor people.

<comment><USER10> Your assumption seems reasonable. But all cultural changes disaffect someone, but it doesn't mean they are bad as a whole. And this cultural movement seems to be negatively affecting you in some way. There's an old saying that may be useful here, "if you can't beat them, join them."

Why not try living in a van for even just a week and see what is going on from their perspective?

I did this with homeless people when I was younger (I lived on streets for a few days while in college) and it changed my perspective on them for the rest of my life.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I'm fascinated by the lifestyle/community and follow it pretty closely. Even built [https://vanspiration.com](https://vanspiration.com) to catalogue some builds, though I'm behind on updating a few.

From what I can tell, this was the original vanlife-manual: [https://thevanual.com/](https://thevanual.com/) The guy built out that site with Ryobi branding and then pitched it to Ryobi as a marketing thing. They gave him $15k or whatever it was, and it covered the costs of his vehicle and build. Modestly brilliant.

</comment><comment><USER13> Everything looks great, but the Instagram photos make me flinch a little. This kind of lifestyle is far from all the glamour that the photos convey, which makes me think this has turned into one big sales pitch.

I could be wrong. I'm known for being a pessimist, no doubt.

<comment><USER14> You're not wrong. I have a passing interest in owning a van or camp trailer of some sort (for camping, not living). Many of the IG accounts are "influencers" who are pimping their own niche van-life business.

"Look at me and my bikini-clad wife! (and please buy the solar panel kit I sell through my web store)"

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I went a different route due to wanting to keep a home location.

We purchased a travel trailer (25', 80 gallon fresh water capacity, 40 each gray/black) just in time for the 2017 eclipse, and I've since built it out to function as a mobile office for work as a remote developer. I have a reasonably high battery capacity, solar, a whole-trailer inverter, an entire LAN complete with wired network cabinet, and the capability to bridge onto a WiFi uplink, cellular, or satellite internet.

I'd estimate we live out of it a cumulative total of 2-3 months of the year, though I'd love to increase that.

<comment><USER16> i'm curious to see how you make it double as an office. I have looked at a few trailers with the thoughts of ripping out a bank of couches I would never use (some trailers are set up like you're going to be entertaining a dozen people) and installing a desk, but haven't seen anyone do something like that. Usually, I just see photos of people sitting at the dining table which isn't really going to cut it for me.

<comment><USER15> The wrap-around dinette in the back works for me, and I've put up a table outside during comfortable enough weather. I have my mini server plugged in inside my network cabinet, and I do not need more than a laptop screen for what I do, so I'm not really wanting for anything. The back is a huge picture window, so we choose parking locations with that in mind.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Be like motivational speaker Matt Foley - [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xv2VIEY9-A8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xv2VIEY9-A8)

In all seriousness, it is cool as long as you have another place that is home. Traveling for a living gets too much after awhile.

</comment><comment><USER18> Here's my van story: I visited my parents one summer at age 19 and spent a single day and less than $300 building our old family minivan into a home. Mind you, that van would probably sell for $500-1000 pre-renovation. I built a small platform for a bed that still relied on the back-most bench. I also built a small shelf in the very back that held a propane stove and cooking supplies. Very, very simple.

I lived in it for several years, traveling and rock climbing. You stand at the back of the van and cook, and only go inside the main cabin to sleep or read.

Skilled van-residents generally don't visit urban areas for extended periods of time. British Columbia, Montana, Utah, the Chihuahua desert, Baja, Sonora were the places to be. The whole point of a van is that it makes life really easy in more remote areas - no need to set up a tent or set up a camp kitchen.

It was highly social, as I was immersed in the rock climbing community. I'd make friends and we'd share every meal and have bad ass adventures. Then I'd go to a new spot, be introspective for the 2-3 days of slow driving and staying in semi-remote wilderness, then meet new friends at the next destination.

Pooping while living in a van requires a different perspective than that of most city people. First, there is no use of toilet paper - the water/left-hand method combined with soap is simply more hygienic (in these remote areas, people who poop like this are the only ones who wash themselves with soap and water on a regular basis). Second, 'waste management' revolves around ensuring other humans don't have to encounter the decomposition process, which normally means burying the waste and always means that one has to consider biological processes, land-use/human behavior.

Here's the real selling point: living in a van in nature means being connected to every sunrise and every sunset. You'll naturally get tired shortly after sunset, and naturally wake up 30-60 minutes before sunrise. Temperature and light fluctuations ensure a highly functional endocrine system that makes sickness/depression/anxiety nearly impossible to take root. It's a very healthy and natural way of life.

I absolutely recommend it - but not for people who want to be highly productive at crafting software/hardware.

<comment> frosted-flakes I think I'd prefer to use a disposable glove than washing my butt with my bare hand. That smell doesn't come off easily, and gloves are cheap.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> From the perspective of an avid saltwater fisherman (for which Yeti is one of the most popular cooler choices) I would encourage anyone considering a Yeti to look into the alternatives. I picked up an Rtic cooler for approximately $200 less, same size as the Yeti. Performance is identical. Other similar brands include Icer, Orca, Pelican, Engel. They all have different price points and all have sales. If you can find a scratch 'n dent sale, you'll typically save 25-50% for minor cosmetic blemishes.

</comment><comment><USER20> Wearing jeans with holes in the knees, wearing pants under your skirt, living in a van...what was once done out of necessity for those with less becomes a lifestyle choice and style signal for those who have more. Touring in an RV can be fun but #vanlife seems too much like class tourism to me.

<comment><USER21> Culture is often like that, "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction" seems to apply to a lot of things.

When you're overwhelmed by tech, constant notifications of any kind, advertisement everywhere (in real and digital life), mindless media consumption, work and wantrepreneur culture &c. I easily get why people want a break from that, weirdly enough it seems that we're easily attracted by extremes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Out of curiosity, for those that have done the van life for an extended period of time (say a year or more), how has it affected the relationships you had before?

A part of me fantasizes about trying this someday, but the thought of not seeing my friends on a regular basis sounds quite lonely in practice.

<comment><USER23> Digital Nomaded for a while.

I agree with you. It's pretty lonely 'after a while'. Everything starts to be kind of the same just with a different aesthetic.

People fetishize travel but there's immense joy in the day to day things. Community, family, good food, etc.

My preference is it's better to have a home base with a community and take trips.

My preference would be to take month long trips once or twice a year and come home to a home base.

That being said...I need to travel and get out of my head space and try to do it often.

<comment><USER8> I've been a nomad in the US for 6+ years. What has kept me on the road has been the friends I've met and community we've created.

<comment><USER22> I guess it's going to be an individual preference for what counts as a meaningful relationship with friends. For me doing shared activities together on a regular basis is what brings me a lot of enjoyment in a friendship. I have long-term friends who I mostly only stay in touch with via the phone/internet, and it's just not the same.

To be clear this isn't a value judgement, but perhaps a point to consider when thinking about trying this lifestyle.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> To put some perspective on the romanticism of all this, shorten title to 'live on the road'. I grew up going on camping 'holidays' in the UK as my father was a great romantic, the reality in the US today is a lot more regimented anywhere near surburbia. There are trailer parks in the USA for a reason - <USER2> lot of people associate free spirited travellers as littering gypsies and in many areas you are going to be harassed by the police. I have a friend who has a great looking vintage truck with a vintage camper shell on it with sink, cooker etc. He has long hair and he and his wife are constantly harassed when on the road. The police can be extremely unpleasant. He owns 3 houses but is used to the police calling him a down and out. Adding to @josefresco's comments before you spend a fortune kitting out a van rent one for a month and live in it in the mild weather spring or fall to get an idea of what it's like and what you need. Also be aware a van can get stolen with all your possessions in it. I had a 26 foot vintage airstream I was going to restore stolen, apparently any sort of mobile living space is a great target for people who live in the woods to steal and hide off road. Be realistic about what you are getting into and install excellent security.

<comment><USER25> I can't speak to Europe but I've been living in my bus for over 20 months and have never been harassed by law enforcement.

<comment><USER24> what area are you mostly in? My friend is based in California but travels cross country a lot, says it's worst in the mid west and south for him

<comment><USER25> My home area is Austin but I've traveled up the east coast a few times and through New Mexico. Many areas of CA are hard since there are a lot of NIMBY anti-homeless laws. The midwest has a ton of BLM land so it's one of the easiest places to camp, so long as you don't mind being in the middle of nowhere.

<comment><USER24> Middle of nowhere is rarely a problem I agree from my personal experiences too - it's proximity to particularly small towns with bored cops where my friend has the most problems, including just driving through. Must be a visual thing, maybe he triggers something with cops. His wife is gorgeous, maybe that is a stimulant also. Mileage may vary etc with personal experiences

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> This guide needs a section on how to get a women to ride and live in it with you. My Dad's GF told him on no uncertain terms that he'd be a bachelor if he lived in an RV. Thus he gave up on the RV idea.

Edit: It looks like we gave this website the loving hug of death. It says "Error establishing database connection" now.

</comment><comment><USER27> I hate to link to what is quickly becoming the cesspool of the Internet, but [http://reddit.com/r/vandwellers](http://reddit.com/r/vandwellers) is a community for this type of thing.

</comment><comment><USER28> Sleeping in your car is awesome. Last August my and my girl friend did a spontaneous trip across the US, we visited 45+ states. And we did the whole thing without a sigle hotel, sleeping instead inside of my Toyota Corolla. All I did was fold the seats, throw in a cheap Walmart mattress, get super heavy tint on the rear windows and signed up for planet fitness membership. It actually worked. The key thing here is that we did it in a corolla. You can park literally anywhere overnight in a corolla. We were never bothered in any way about sleeping in that car. I don't think anybody even knew. We would park in hotel parking lots at night a lot because cars come and go at all hours, the lot is always full and there's no pattern of any kind that we would be intruding on. So for example if we parked somewhere and the natives recognized all the cars except that weird corolla they eve never seen, we would kind of stick out. And if you are the only car parked inside a giant, empty parking lot at 3am you are kind of sticking out. Later on I tried sleeping in residential areas though, and I've never been bothered or asked about it once. And I've done it more than a hundred times probably. If you use common sense and don't use the world as your bathroom, you will not have a problem.

We slept inside that car with the windows closed for a couple months. Never had a problem with O2 or CO2 as far as I can tell.

I now sleep in my car regularly. It's amazing to me that it's not a thing to sleep in your car. It expands your horizon immensely. You don't get it until you have yourself gotten to the point where sleeping in your car is second nature. It's a very useful skill to have. The camp fire is a really good example.

If you were able to have a vehicle that you actually dedicated to sleeping in (I've kept my corolla stock, besides the tint) and were able to modify then you would be able to sleep anywhere at any time of year very comfortably. If you are interested in this then def read ahead.

So we have a guy inside a car with the windows closed. Several things will happen. First, the entire car and the air inside it will become the same temperature as outside. Second, his breath will create extremely high humidity inside the car. Third, CO2 will accumulate. Fourth, O2 will go down. This has never been a problem for me but it's true none the less.

Ok, the only other consideration is what temperature it is outside and how humid it is outside.

If it's cold, we have the follwing to worry about. The humidity in the air inside the car will condense on the inner surfaces of the car. This is very bad because you will have moisture under your carpet and absolutely everywhere. You won't be able to dry it and it will probably grow mold. Second, you will just be too cold.

If it's hot, the hot air in the car will retain the humidity longer, so condensation isn't a problem as much. But even a little hot is too hot because your body heat will bake you in that car.

Ok, those are all the problems and considerations for sleeping in your car. Here is how you handle them.

Energy recovery ventilator. Panasonic makes some great ERVs. These are ventilation fans that have a special interchanging ducting that transfers heat and moisture from the outgoing air stream to the incoming air stream or vice verse. So what that means is that you are putting energy into keeping the humidity and temperature within a certain range, this device will allow you to replace the stagnant air with fresh air but not blow out all that energy along with the air. These units are whisper quiet and use only 25 watts of power. Every car has an air outlet somewhere near the rear bumper. If you could hook up this unit to draw air and vent air outside, you would solve O2 and CO2. You would also partially solve humidity. And you would partly solve being too hot. If you are in a closed space, you need good ventilation.

Catalytic heater. I forget the name, it's "wave 3" or something like that. These heaters use propane but are safe for indoor use because they are catalytic, meaning the produce no CO. They are also extremely efficient. Propane is cheap and it's everywhere. This would solve being too cold.

Air conditioner/dehumidifier. If the air outside is humid, you are going to have to dehumidify. There is no way around this. Installing a portable dehumidifier would solve this. A proper, compressor based one would be required to keep pace. These use 300 watts or more. If it's hot outside, vent the hot part of the heat pipe to the outside. This solves the heat problem completely, as the dehumidifier is now also an air conditioner with no penalty on power or anything else. This would be trivial to implement. When it's cold outside, you blow the hot end of the heat pipe back into the cabin and you don't lose any heat, but humidity is controlled.

Extremely recently a fuel cell was released for use in the RV market. It runs on propane. From what I can tell it's real — some prominent RV brands are starting to incorporate it into their products. They have made many appearances at trade events for RVs. Needless to say, this will be a revolution. Adding a fuel cell like this would allow you to dehumidify/cool the inside of the car continuously all night. Charging several kWh off the alternator is just not really an option. So, add the fuel cell and a really good battery and maybe some solar and you have power for all I've menioned as well as charging phones and powering other electronics.

Between all of that, you would truly be able to sleep anywhere you wanted in total comfort. The only thing I would add woul be some stealthy cameras all around the car and monitors inside so that I could quickly asses the situation if I were woken at night.

Cheers

<comment><USER29> Catalytic propane heaters discharge the products of combustion (CO2 and H2O) into the heated space. Oxygen depletion is a health issue. Condensation can also be a substantial issue. Even the smallest are sized much too large for the small volume of a car (both in terms of heat output and required clearances). The car is likely to become unbearably hot in less time than the heater's warmup cycle.

There are closed combustion forced air systems that use LP that offer similar advantages to diesel/gasoline systems like the Webasto (no oxygen depletion, no humidity increase) [1]. The LP systems generally have better high altitude performance because they operate on vapor pressure rather than utilizing a fuel pump. There are a lot of places in the US above 5000'. A downside is LP has a much lower energy density than diesel or gasoline so the cost per BTU is higher.

[1] [https://www.propexheatsource.com/](https://www.propexheatsource.com/)

<comment><USER28> LP catalytic heaters also can leak propane and everyone who uses one is recommended to keep an rv propane detector nearby. I haven't seen these forced air products before, thanks so much for bringing those to my attanetion!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> The camper van movement is pretty popular for sure.

Sportsmobile has been converting vans to mini RV or camper van since 1965. Someone recently got a guided tour of the factory by the owner and here it is.

[https://youtu.be/p3X9UjNx9g0?t=123](https://youtu.be/p3X9UjNx9g0?t=123)

He said there were about 100 vans at the factory at the time, in various stages of conversion. And they were sold out for 14 months.

Near the end the owner shares stories of some of the customers. Some are professional nature photographers/athletes (?) who must stay outdoors for days, and need clean/dry place for equipment, eat/sleep etc. Having the van saves them much time required to travel to/from hotel to their work site.

A lot of employees of Google/Apple also are customers of Sportsmobile.

And some are even medical residents who basically need a place to sleep between shifts and choose to sleep in a camper van, parked at the hospital parking lot.

So camper van is not just for people who want to travel for the sake of travel.

I would love to have a camper van at my disposal so that I can go explore some popular sites like Yosemite, beach campsites etc. But $100,000 is big money.

</comment><comment><USER31> This brings to mind that recently someone posted in my city's subreddit questions about their visit and where they could park their van. The comments were outrageously unwelcoming and basically forced this person to consider the next city along their trip as the place they should stop. I think what works in one part of the nation doesn't necessarily translate to all of it.

</comment><comment><USER32> For those interested in the lifestyle, check out /r/vanlife on reddit.

<comment><USER33> There's more people in /r/vandwellers but /r/vanlife is cool, too!

<comment><USER32> Good catch! I'm actually on vandwellers and not vanlife, was just mobile at the moment and had a brain fart. :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> According to journalist Tim Pool (I can't link his video, sorry, I simply can't remember which one of his this was in), these conversions are so popular that the companies that work on doing them have so many orders that the wait time can stretch into a year to get one done if you're looking now. (He wants to create a mobile reporting studio.)

</comment><comment><USER35> Note: "Volkswagen", not Volkswagon

</comment><comment><USER36> Google Cached version

[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:2PvAxE...](https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:2PvAxEiBg- UJ:https://divineontheroad.com/build-a-van/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us)

</comment><comment><USER37> We did it again HN! We broke the database!

Here's a mirror: [https://web.archive.org/https://divineontheroad.com/build-a-...](https://web.archive.org/https://divineontheroad.com/build- a-van/)

<comment><USER38> 3 hours later, database still struggling.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> This lifestyle will utterly explode once self-driving EV vans with decent solar cells hit reasonable price ranges. Drive overnight, recharge for a few days with or without a power hookup...

</comment><comment><USER25> I discussed how I live in a bus yesterday in the tiny home post: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19085244](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19085244)

I converted a 25ft shuttle bus and have been living in it for over 20 months. I have everything you'd expect in a house, toilet, shower, 4 burner range, electricity, heat, AC, internet, etc. The difference is that I can take my home and dog with me when I travel.

I'd be happy to answer any more questions here.

</comment><comment><USER40> At this time I am not interested in living in a van but for a long time I have wanted some kind of auxiliary heater for my minivan. It could be powered by diesel or a five gallon propane tank. I think it strange something like this is not off the shelf as unfortunately a lot of people live in their cars or vans because they have no where else to go. For winter living it would have to be better for the engine and for fuel consumption.

<comment><USER41> An under-rear-seat, gas-powered (got its fuel from the tank) heaters used to be an option on VW vans. Aftermarket offers Propex, but they ain't cheap. Plan on a couple of thousand if someone else does all the work. $700 for just the heater, IIRC.

What we used in our VW camper in winter was an indoor-safe propane heater: [http://www.mrheater.com/little-buddy- heater.html](http://www.mrheater.com/little-buddy-heater.html)

<comment><USER40> Thank you for the lead!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> [https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ws23jj...](https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ws23jjbfQxgJ:https://divineontheroad.com/)

site seems slow or down here's cache

</comment><comment><USER43> This was a pretty interesting build, I was looking to get one of the battery packs from Nissan when they become available.

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

</comment><comment><USER44> Why do I see insulation only behind the wood and in a lot of places I still see metal.

</comment><comment><USER45> Two years ago I made a video about 3 years of living in a camper van. As of next months it's actually gonna be 5 years.

[https://optimizingforhappiness.com/3-years-of-living-in-a- ca...](https://optimizingforhappiness.com/3-years-of-living-in-a-camper-van- and-running-a-20-people-remote-business/)

My plan was to make a whole video series out of it, but just doing one video already took me so much time and with running and managing two companies[1][2] at the same time, I didn't feel that I wanted to spend more time in front of a computer editing videos. But maybe in the future I'll pick it up again and continue the series.

[1] [https://bugfender.com/](https://bugfender.com/)

[2] [http://mobilejazz.com/](http://mobilejazz.com/)

<comment><USER46> Downvoted for the unnecessary links to your companies, sorry.

<comment><USER45> No problem :-)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> Seemed like an interesting and comprehensive site until the HN effect took it down

<comment><USER48> Ha, it's crushed. I can't read it at the moment, guess I'll try back later.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> If you like the idea but lack the ability to build your own van, check out [https://www.syncvans.com/](https://www.syncvans.com/). They make some really cool rigs.

</comment><comment><USER50> Here's another website related to this topic: [https://www.mylittlebehemoth.com](https://www.mylittlebehemoth.com)

</comment><comment><USER51> Anyone have any tips for people who have friends entering the van life? I just want to see one of my best friends be successful in this transition...

<comment><USER16> #1 tip I see on van life forums -

van life is hard and won't make you magically instagram happy. any unhappiness you have right now you're probably just going to take with you on the road and end up disappointed about the difficult van living.

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> I'm not really claustrophobic but as a tall person all these stories about living in a van or a tiny house just make me feel cramped.

</comment><comment><USER53> [https://www.vanlifeprep.com](https://www.vanlifeprep.com) is another good related site

</comment><comment><USER54> and site is dead

</comment><comment><USER55> And... its gone. Database error. :-(

</comment><comment><USER56> You can buy RVs online for $26K

<comment><USER57> Hmm, oddly-specific number. Is there are a particular site selling a bunch of RVs for $26k each?

</comment></comment><comment><USER58> I lived in a van in the Bay Area for 8 months, then a totaled RV for 10. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise -- it's awesome. If you find decent parking spots (it's not hard, just use google maps) you'll find tons of areas that are quieter than those $2500/month apartments in San Jose with planes whizzing by. I got pretty good at sleeping with shooting range earmuffs. For a long time my routine was wake up whenever I wanted, bike to Starbucks or a library, read for a few hours, bike to the gym, work out, and read for the rest of the day. When I was in Pacifica I would get hours of sun, which you can't really do with a 9-5.

The problem is that it's incredibly socially isolating. Very few of my friends treated me any differently, but I still got progressively more lonely. More and more of my "reading" became surfing Youtube and chatting on IRC or 4chan with people I'd never be able to meet in person. I spent a lot of time being mad at police. I'd meet girls on Tinder with the thought in the back of my head that they wouldn't find my sketchy RV as funny as I do. I'd prefer it to paying $2k/month for a studio with no heat and stressing out about money all the time, but I wouldn't be able to keep that up, either.

It's not like you need a toilet to survive. We went without them for most of human history. You need a toilet to fit in.

<comment><USER59> As a society we need toilets to survive. Diseases spread by human waste such as cholera are a major reason why average lifespans used to be short.

<comment><USER58> Apologies if I made it sound like I was pooping on the beach. I wasn't. :)

<comment><USER60> Where _were_ you pooping then?

<comment><USER58> At your house.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


RamFuzz, a fuzzer for individual method parameters in unit tests - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/dekimir/RamFuzz#ramfuzz-combining-unit-tests-fuzzing-and-ai <comment><USER2> You are looking for QuickCheck.

<comment><USER3> Unfortunate that this project is only a partial reimplementation of QuickCheck. I was hoping that this would use fuzzing coverage.

Coverage guided QuickCheck has been on my mind for a while, I believe it would greatly improve fuzzing experience and allow to easily and thoughroughly check/fuzz things that aren't parsers/decoders/deserializers or functions that operate on strings in general.

<comment><USER4> As proposed by Dan Luu: [https://danluu.com/testing/](https://danluu.com/testing/)

<comment><USER5> As I explain in the RamFuzz overview paper [0], Dan Luu's idea is unlikely to work because fuzzing uses mutation techniques developed for file input, not individual parameter values. What does seem to work is frameworks like EvoSuite and eToc, which mutate method-invocation sequences to try and maximize coverage.

And yes, QuickCheck (or RapidCheck[1], for C++) is what you need if you enjoy manually specifying your test inputs. RamFuzz is a tool to support research into automating that and, eventually, the entire process of writing unit tests.

[0] [https://github.com/dekimir/RamFuzz/blob/master/sci/ramfuzz.m...](https://github.com/dekimir/RamFuzz/blob/master/sci/ramfuzz.md#related- work)

[1] [https://github.com/emil-e/rapidcheck](https://github.com/emil-e/rapidcheck)

<comment><USER6> It doesn't sound like you're talking about the same thing. Dan Luu's idea sounded more about adding coverage guidance to QuickCheck, which presently lacks it, not using fuzzing-like mutators.

<comment><USER5> But how exactly does Dan propose to add coverage "guidance"? Here's what he says:

 _" Since Zalewski has already done the work of figuring out, empirically, what heuristics are likely to exercise more code paths, it seems like a waste to ignore that and just generate totally random values."_

Dan does, in fact, explicitly suggest "using fuzzing-like mutators", as you put it, in QuickCheck's random value generator. But those mutators work on continuous file contents, not on a bunch of disparate parameter values generated at distinct moments in the program. An early version of RamFuzz tried to apply AFL to the log file recording all generated random values, but all that yielded was invalid logs that couldn't be replayed. I don't know how else one would leverage Zalewski's heuristics in a random-value generator, though I'm obviously open to suggestions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This applies to C++, maybe the title should be updated.

<comment><USER5> The previous submission's title does mention C++ ;)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15789033](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15789033)</comment></comment>


IQ and the Wealth of Nations - <AUTHOR> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_the_Wealth_of_Nations

<comment><USER2> Did you even read the article? The test was done in two cities in china. How is this statistically relevant for a population of a billion - most of whom are rural?

<comment><USER3> Second the first comment.

Plus, why wasn't the original title "IQ and the Wealth of Nations" preserved over a much less representing while much more link-baiting one "China has a higher average IQ than the USA"?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> To put numbers in perspective, IQ is generally defined as a normal distribution (also called a gaussian curve, bell curve, etc.--it's a "normal" distribution because it's extremely common in nature) with a global average of 100 and a standard deviation of 15 points. What this means in practice is that, roughly, about 2/3 of the population has an IQ in the range 85-115.

So, assuming each country also has the same shape of distribution but different averages, a difference of 15 points means that an average person in the "smart" country is smarter than 83% of the people in the other country. An average IQ difference of 30 points would be more like 98%.

Which, to me, seems like a pretty extreme difference. Without knowing more about their methodology I don't know if I trust these numbers much. On the other hand, looking at the countries at the lower end, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the difference was due to environmental factors such as poor nutrition.

Unfortunately, IQ is a field of study that's far too politically charged for there to be much in the way of reputable research.

</comment><comment><USER5> Hmm, as a Chinese, I think the Chinese education system is actually making people stupid. I have seen many talented people through out my education, but the didn't stand out in the end. Pretty sad.

Chinese has this kind of amazing potential, but I don't see a good way we can we exploit it.

<comment><USER6> As a teacher in China I can tell you this(the linked article) means nothing. The USA is not successful because it's got the highest IQ but in a large part because of the creativity of it's people. Something China lack's, a VERY large part as a result of it's institutions (i.e. the Chinese education system, political system, and Dang'an).

The other major part being a collectivist, conformist culture isn't something that breeds creativity. China's most creative people either leave for the USA or rot in China.

<comment><USER7> I tend to agree, but I want to add that we do not really know if this is the decisive factor or just one of many.

Creativity is important, but perhaps political, or maybe "societal", advantages (freedom of expression etc), are no less important. For example, Russia, where I am from, has had plenty of creative people, but it is still behind in many ways. What I can see is that in different societies creative people apply their talents to achieving different goals.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Sounds very much like some of the social 'science' that was done in the 19th and early 20th century.

<comment><USER9> Agreed. It sounds a bit like the rhetoric that emerges whenever a group of people who see themselves as "naturally" dominating another group become threatened by that group. For instance, a great deal of "scientific" evidence for the subjugation of blacks developed thoughout Europe after the Haitian revolution in the 18th century. The more those dominated show themselves to be equals, the more necessary talk like this becomes for the masters to reassure themselves that their place is justified.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Should be 100 in both.

</comment><comment><USER11> To call IQ and the Wealth of Nations "controversial" is putting it rather mildly. Idiotic would be a more accurate term. It's not even worth debating this on HN.</comment>


New iMacs run fans at full on all drives other than Apple supplied...  - <AUTHOR> http://blog.macsales.com/10146-apple-further-restricts-upgrade-options-on-new-imacs

<comment><USER3> You can assume the worst – Apple's looking for a way to nickel and dime customers, and to lock them out of their computers! – or you can assume the pragmatic – the thermal envelope of the new iMacs is so tight, thanks to the Sandy Bridge chipset, a beefier GPU and an aggressively designed enclosure, that more careful and accurate monitoring of the HDD's internal temperature was necessary for reliability.

Why would Apple decide source more expensive and non-standard HDDs just to "lock customers in" or "force a higher BTO price"? The new iMacs' chipset and GPU are probably already more expensive than the previous generation's and Apple's almost always unwilling to bump the total cost of the machine or the cost of any BTO parts because they're _guaranteed_ to get more backlash over those moves. Using more expensive and uncommon HDDs does nothing more than eat into their margins and complicate supply chain logistics, two things I'm sure Apple loathes.

Moving to a non-standard HDD was probably entirely motivated by engineering, not business, reasons, and most likely done to preserve the machine's thermal envelope or reduce failure rates seen on pre-production or previous generation iMacs.

<comment><USER4> Agreed. I don't think Apple really loses that much money to people who want to do DIY upgrades. This change really only inconveniences the uber-geeks among us.

However, on that note, the iMac has always been the hardest computer to upgrade. I believe it's harder to upgrade than the older Macbook Pros; I once opened up my 2006 Macbook Pro to switch out the hard drive, and I will never, ever do that again. I think it's fair to say that if you buy an iMac, you should be comfortable with buying a hermetically sealed black box that you're never going to mess with.

<comment><USER5> > _"I don't think Apple really loses that much money to people who want to do > DIY upgrades. This change really only inconveniences the uber-geeks among > us."_

It's not just DIY'ers. It's the secondary service and repair market. Now they have to buy Apple disks.

I'll suggest that it is a fundamental business strategy for Apple to seek to extract a transaction cost from any exchange involving their products. iTunes was the pivot point for their revenue model. The iPhone transferred it to hardware and scaled it for content, e.g. batteries and the AppStore. The past year has seen it rolled out widely for the Mac platform. One gets the sense that they look at the profit which companies like Macsales.com earn from upgrades as money that has been left on the table - certainly it is consistent with their recent policies regarding sales from within apps.

<comment><USER3> Considering that

1) Apple's likely concerned only with Apple Authorized Service Providers and those ASPs already had to source parts from Apple (and possibly pay for training and/or license fees, but I'm less certain on that)

2) The secondary service and repair market is a _vanishingly_ small market compared to other potential revenue streams

I doubt further monetizing the repair market ever entered the conversation when deciding whether to use non-standard HDDs in the new iMacs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> By introducing the hardware test failure for any non-Apple drive, Apple owns more of the life-cycle of the consumer's computer.

Now independent repair shops have to order Apple drives rather than something off of NewEgg, and this reduces their potential margins and makes Genius Bar service more profitable and cost competitive - particularly given that upgrade and replacement drives from the Genius Bar are only marked up once and that getting consumers to visit the Apple store has significant value in and of itself..

[Aside] IANL - but it is my understanding that in the US a manufacturer cannot void a warranty for using non-manufacturer produced parts for repairs or upgrades. The introduction of a hardware error appears to be a legal strategy to get around this.

<comment><USER4> That's a very interesting legal angle. I'd love to know if a lawyer could confirm if that's a valid way to look at it.

<comment><USER6> Seems to work for printer manufacturers.

<comment><USER7> Yes - and remember - the law in question, the Magnuson-Moss Act - <USER2> governs that a warranty can't be contingent on only using OEM equipment. E.g. - Apple can't say, "Your warranty is void unless you use Genuine apple drives, purchased from an authorized Apple outlet."

There is - however - no provision on making it an absolute pain in the ass to manufacture or implement 3rd party aftermarket equipment.

More info from the FTC here: [http://business.ftc.gov/documents/bus01-businesspersons- guid...](http://business.ftc.gov/documents/bus01-businesspersons-guide- federal-warranty-law#Magnuson-Moss)

The relevant section is under "Tie-In Sales".

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Apple's trying to build the best integrated product, and they're willing to give up some standard parts and interfaces to get there. If you want to be able to swap out components, an iMac may not be the best choice for you.

<comment><USER9> I can understand wanting to build a reliable system, but hard drives are the most unreliable part of any modern PC. A user should have the right to replace them in the event of failure or if it's simply not enough storage at a later point. Apple traditionally taught users how to service computers themselves: <http://manuals.info.apple.com/en/imacG5_20inch_harddrive.pdf>

The hard drives and RAM are by far the most overpriced components in Macs, and I see this as nothing more than Apple trying to squeeze out some extra money.

<comment><USER10> The older G5 iMac was easy to take apart. The new thinner, more tightly integrated, iMacs are not. I can definitely understand why Apple doesn't recommend users do it themselves. If you buy something like a Mac Pro Apple will give you step by step instructions on how to replace a hard drive. It's designed to be highly user serviceable. Personally I would not buy another iMac until they are redesigned to be more user serviceable.

<comment><USER11> They're not _that_ bad, really. The glass pops off with a suction cup, and to get at the drives, you just have to take out a bunch of torx screws. It's a good bit easier than the original mac mini. You're not going to cut your fingers on anything like a cheap tower, there's just a bunch of screws.

<comment><USER12> "glass pops off with a suction cup"

Doesn't sound like it was meant to be touched by non-nerds.

<comment><USER11> As opposed to the innards of... I'm drawing a blank here. What computer is significantly more friendly to non-nerds to replace the hard drive? You will still need to know about cables, and what to touch, and how to mount rails on it. Apart from the USB drives, which non-nerds know about and can use easily. Maybe one in a tray where it's just sliding. But then they're still handling a bare drive, and good luck getting one of those in an imac form factor.

The glass front is held on by magnets, and comes off with a little help. It's an elegant solution to attaching a glass panel flush to the front of a computer. It's easily removed and easily replaced.

<comment><USER13> My laptop is a single screw (Thinkpad). 2 Screws to Add RAM (well for one slot anyway).

Or there's a HD Caddy that I can swap out for my CD Drive by flcking a little switch.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> > is the freedom promised in 1984 being revoked?

This is incredibly ironic, given how expandable the original Macintosh was, as well as Steve Jobs' aversion to hardware expansion in the early days of the Mac: [http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story...](http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Diagnostic_Port.txt)

<comment><USER15> Yep. To upgrade the memory on the compact macs one needed a hex driver, a soldering iron and a spare resistor. I'm still shocked my Dad let me tinker with expensive university property like that.

<comment><USER11> That was just the Plus. By the time the SE and Classic rolled around, all you needed was the long handled torx, but it helped if you had a case splitter.

I can't believe I soldered a resistor on one of those with a 50w monster soldering iron.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Looks like getting hold of a second optical drive sensor and using that on your third party hard drive/SSD is the best solution. No shorting of the existing sensor necessary.

"I purchased... [an] Optical Drive Temp Sensor, and it works.. tape it to the HDD just to the upper right of the sata plug on the back of the drive.. on the black aluminum; middle of the drive.(according to seagate, thats the optimal place for a temp sensor) and voila.. the answer..

How I came to this conclusion was, I originally took the optical drive thermal sensor from my ODD and put it on the HDD thinking this should work.. well the HDD temp and fans work perfectly.. and the ODD fan is at full blast.. so I tried to contact APPLE for the replacement ODD temp sensor.. Mistake.. and then I found the Link above.. and used it as a replacement.. TADA!!!"

Source: [http://www.ifixit.com/Answers/View/14068/SSD+compatibility+%...](http://www.ifixit.com/Answers/View/14068/SSD+compatibility+%28Thermal+Sensor+Connector%29#answer26249)

</comment><comment><USER17> Marco Arment once again swings this as a positive thing, and that those who would want to replace a failed hard drive are just "uber-geeks":

[http://www.marco.org/2011/05/12/owc-imac-hard-drive- complain...](http://www.marco.org/2011/05/12/owc-imac-hard-drive-complaint)

I'm fairly certain that if iMacs had a bug where it randomly murdered kittens, Marco would try to swing it into an argument against animal overpopulation or something.

<comment><USER18> I'm fairly certain that if someone wrote something you didn't agree with, you would try to swing it into a bizarre straw man that you could blow away with a light breeze.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> "Hard drives fail. It is not a matter of "if" but rather a matter of "when" your hard drive is going to fail."

Really? I have had computers in one form or another for nearly 20 years and I've never had a hard drive fail. Ever. Not once. From a 386 with 16MHz of processor speed and an EGA monitor, to my last Dell Latitude that's now 6 years old. Never had a problem. Do Apple hard drives fail at a disproportionately higher rate than PC's? I recently bought a MacBook Pro and I'm starting to get nervous about it.

<comment><USER20> No, Apple drives don't fail at a disproportionately higher rate. They have the exact same failure rates as the rest of the industry since they use the same parts (with minor modifications apparently).

I've had many hard drives fail. Just recently a Western Digital hard drive in my server that was the second drive in a mirror started having issues with the ball bearings making a high pitched whining noise, going over into no longer spinning up. This is by no means the first drive to do so to me. Hard drive failures happen, the more of them you have, the more likely they are to fail at one point or another.

I've had my MacBook Pro for almost 4 years now and I haven't had the hard drive fail in it at all. I wouldn't be worried, unless you abuse your laptop while it is running most likely nothing will happen. Just make sure that you have backups, TimeMachine is excellent for that.

<comment><USER21> To play devil's advocate, this isn't out of the question.

1) Macs do tend to run hotter than PCs, and this could decrease HDD lifespan.

2) We've seen in the past that OS-specific power management settings can be detrimental to hard drives, as with this famous Linux bug: <https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/104535> Although I doubt it's actually the case, it's possible in principle for drives to wear differently under OS X than under Windows.

<comment><USER22> > 1) Macs do tend to run hotter than PCs, and this could decrease HDD > lifespan.

Google found that temperature didn't much matter according to their published research: <http://labs.google.com/papers/disk_failures.pdf>

> In the lower and middle temperature ranges, higher temperatures are not > associated with higher failure rates. This is a fairly surprising result, > which could indicate that data center or server designers have more freedom > than previously thought when setting operating temperatures for equipment > that contains disk drives.

Non-PDF summary/discussion: [http://storagemojo.com/2007/02/19/googles-disk- failure-exper...](http://storagemojo.com/2007/02/19/googles-disk-failure- experience/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I just had a similar experience with my Macbook Pro (Mid-2009): The SATA controller supports SATA II. But if you use any SATA II drive with that model, you get occasional freezes in the best case, and the machine doesn't boot in the worst. The problem is apparently an improperly shielded SATA cable, but Apple doesn't care because: They never supplied any SATA II drives for that device.

<comment><USER24> What should they do? The computer works as shipped, they didn't have to go out and find a SATA controller that doesn't support the newer standard, and they didn't have to ship the extra weight and added cost of extra shielding needed for a standard they weren't using.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Getting temp info from the drive itself seems like a simpler approach than some taped-on thermal sensor. It will be interesting to see what kind of work- around/enhancement Other World will develop.

</comment><comment><USER26> A few points: I just replaced a HD in an iMac and saw that sensor cable. What do you think the chance is that I put it back in the right spot (on the new, different drive)?

The failure mode for a temp controlled fan should always be full on.

Macs from #1, Plus, SE all the way to the current models have been unique and required some special tools. Anyone who takes apart Mac has a full set of Torqx bits. I don't see much difference between a case splitter and a suction cup.

My guess as to the new sensor is that it is better than the ones inside the drive. Or measures what matters, like external drive temp (just guessing). Apple has had their own firmware on drives forever. This has only precluded upgrades, etc. In a few cases and usually for good reason.

So, I think this is like any advance. I hope I'm right.

</comment><comment><USER27> I put an SSD in mine and, yep, that happened. So I put a bit of wire across the sockets in the sensor cable and now it monitors at a constant 30C with no fan activity. No fuss, no hassle, and SSDs don't need serious cooling anyway. Seems a bit of a mountain out of a molehill story from my POV.

<comment><USER28> I think having to short out a sensor on your computer because you changed the hard drive warrants such a story.

Luckily for you, you used a SSD and don't have to worry about cooling... What about the people wanting to add a 1TB drive or simply needing to replace their dead one?

<comment><USER27> It seems this idea might not work with the _latest_ edition but on the previous generation you could do the the same and then run smcfancontrol. A handy free tool that lets you set the minimum RPM of any fan in the system - works a treat. The article seems to suggest this might not work in the newer ones, alas, but I haven't got one to try it on.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Well, Apple probably wants to push Thunderbolt to external hub manufacturers and storage companies as the new I/O channels. In that case, Macsales.com's custom mod external e-SATA port will be an inferior solution. (10 Gbps vs 3 Gbps).

Probably in mid 2012 we will see all new Thunderbolt based external drives and hubs for storage expansion of iMacs and MacBook Pros.

But I agree, it is still a pain in ass for DIYers to replace hard drives when the disk is broken. And Apple will sell more Apple Care for iMacs and Macbook Pros.

EDIT -

It seems Macsales.com's custom iMac e-SATA is not in product page anymore. I remember they had the service before that you can send your iMac and they will drill a hole on case and put a SATA port to the unused SATA port on the motherboard.

</comment><comment><USER30> Can these fans be controlled by SMC Fan Control? ([http://homepage.mac.com/holtmann/eidac/software/software.htm...](http://homepage.mac.com/holtmann/eidac/software/software.html)) I realize this is an intermediary solution, and a dangerous one at that.

The other thing is, I don't fully understand why fan noise is such a problem? I have a PC under my desk that sounds like an F15 with afterburners engaged (and an iMac on the desk)...

<comment><USER9> I once had a dysfunctional iMac that sounded like a vacuum and it was unbearable. Maybe for some people it doesn't matter, but I can't say I like having the sound of a vacuum blasting just a foot away.

I returned it to Apple the next day and got an upgraded model at no cost.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> I am not saying this claim is bogus, but I do not believe it at face value, either.

Reading the Wikipedia page on SATA ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_ATA#Cables.2C_connectors...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_ATA#Cables.2C_connectors.2C_and_ports)), I loose track as to the number of different SATA power connectors in existence.

So, it could well be that that new connector is SATA standard, but rarely seen in the wild.

Similarly, on-board temperature sensors could be in some SATA standard/extension/optional API. [http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/howto-monitor- hard-drive-tempe...](http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/howto-monitor-hard-drive- temperature.html seems) to point in that direction. It states "hddtemp utility will give you the temperature of your hard drive by reading data from S.M.A.R.T. on drives that support this feature. Only modern hard drives have a temperature sensor."

<comment><USER32> If you read the article a little more carefully, you'll understand that it's still the same SATA 15-pin connector (I mean if it wasn't, you would have seen articles about how you couldn't swap hard drives _at all_ ).

But what OWC is claiming is that now, instead of using pins 4,5,6 and 12 for ground - that the new iMacs and harddrives inside them are using some of those pins for _communication_ , specifically temperature sensor.

This is outside of the SMART specification, which passes information about the harddrive over the data cable (not the power cable).

So you can swap in any harddrive you like - but if your harddrive doesn't have the functionality / firmware in it to communicate temperature information over the _power_ cable, then the fans kick in.

At this point, I'm offhandedly wondering if this is related more to the Intel Z68 chipset / Smart Response technology somehow.

In addition, OWC is claiming that there's "Mac specific" firmware because they swapped out an identical model harddrive and ran into an issue - but (playing devil's advocate), if these are new temperature sensors involved, a firmware upgrade wouldn't cut it - the harddrive would still be missing said sensors.

I would believe OWC more if they swapped the boards on the harddrives while leaving the platter casing intact.

<comment><USER31> I reread it, and that indeed seems what they are claiming. I still think this extraordinary claim needs more evidence to be accepted as true. I think SATA has two connectors because one runs to the power supply, and the other to the main board. If that power connectors carries data, how does that data get to the main board? Is the cable split? If so, why would they do that if there already is a data connection to the cable? Or is this a way for a CPU in the PSU to power off of the drive if things go really wrong?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Does anyone have any confirmation of the veracity of the articles?

Some conflicts... [http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&h...](http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=nl&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fgathering.tweakers.net%2Fforum%2Flist_message%2F36015618%2336015618)

<https://discussions.apple.com/message/15181058>

</comment><comment><USER34> No matter the motive I would not buy a computer with a rotational disk drive that isn't easily replaceable. Firstly it is the most unreliable component, next I might need to use the 16TB drive that became available after 2 years of me owning my computer.

It was a piece of cake to replace my MBP's optical drive with OWC kit - I have 256Gb SSD for the OS and 500Gb for data - I totally see using most of that space and it makes a huge difference speed wise.

</comment><comment><USER35> Site is slow/down, so here's a mirror.

[http://blog.macsales.com.nyud.net/10146-apple-further- restri...](http://blog.macsales.com.nyud.net/10146-apple-further-restricts- upgrade-options-on-new-imacs)</comment>


Scientists unearthed a trove of 700-year-old stone tools – used by monkeys - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/animalia/wp/2016/07/11/in-brazil-scientists-unearth-a-trove-of-ancient-stone-tools-used-by-monkeys/ <comment><USER2> _The future is already here -- it 's just not very evenly distributed._ \-- William Gibson.</comment>


Why is the #2 torrent in DHT a 25Mb file named AF.dat? - <AUTHOR> https://btdigg.org/top100.html <comment><USER2> Looks like this piece of Windows malware: [https://malwr.com/analysis/NDI4YmUxNjM0ZTUwNDY0OWFhNjM3YzFiZ...](https://malwr.com/analysis/NDI4YmUxNjM0ZTUwNDY0OWFhNjM3YzFiZmY1YmQ4ZDU/)

It uses a data file called AF.dat and connect to bittorrent.

<comment><AUTHOR> Aha, the long .torrent file it drops matches the magnet link too. The MD5 of AF.dat from that page doesn't match what I've got but maybe it gets modified...

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> [http://www.exterminate-it.com/malpedia/file/af.dat](http://www.exterminate- it.com/malpedia/file/af.dat) maybe?

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting, whilst downloading the bittorrent client ID strings were all "LT/188.8.131.52", maybe a connection to the Lineage malware from that page?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> i'm pretty sure the most popular torrent in the DHT doesnt have 644 downloads in the last week.

this must be measuring downloads/hits from btdigg.org (only), so someone is linking directly to it and relying on them to jump clients into the DHT perhaps?

<comment><AUTHOR> I can't imagine btdigg can scrape the whole DHT, but I think the idea is that the traffic they see by running many "fake" nodes is proportional to the whole, because the DHT spreads all traffic around fairly equally? I'm presuming they're using a method similar to the one presented here: [https://www.usenix.org/legacy/event/woot10/tech/full_papers/...](https://www.usenix.org/legacy/event/woot10/tech/full_papers/Wolchok.pdf)

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> For the curious, the magnet link is: magnet:?xt=urn:btih:a4a75d2e4095d457467777673e96cd331575b511&dn=AF

file(1) has nothing to say about it but at a glance it doesn't look like a uniform encrypted blob...

</comment><comment><USER5> If I was making a botnet I would use the DHT to download updates, settings etc. Not sure what else.

</comment><comment><USER6> That whole list is kind of fascinating. Interesting to see the movies and shows that are particularly popular when it comes to piracy (Marvel, Marvel, Marvel...)

<comment><USER7> ..and GTA San Andreas? That game is more than 10 years old!

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm going to guess at a password database of some kind, perhaps a "rainbow table". There seem to be frequent occurrences of long strings of the alphabet. Byte value counts are almost equal.

<comment><USER9> Aren't rainbow tables EXTREMELY large?

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Somewhat Related: [http://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2015/11/16/the-most-popular- curl-...](http://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2015/11/16/the-most-popular-curl- download-by-a-malware/)

Discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10574011](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10574011)

</comment><comment><USER11> SHA256:459b05fe2dbd56cb0f31babdf722c40bd7ce061c7701fdbb56dfb382e8cd2371

File name: AF.dat

Detection ratio: 0 / 55

[https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/459b05fe2dbd56cb0f31babdf...](https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/459b05fe2dbd56cb0f31babdf722c40bd7ce061c7701fdbb56dfb382e8cd2371/analysis/1448148451/)

</comment><comment><USER12> There's another curious entry too, "x86", with filenames consisting of a random collection of unzipping .dlls and other weird stuff... Why would anyone want to torrent such a seemingly useless collection of random files?

<comment><USER13> I think this has something to do with a Korean antivirus program called ALYac.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> P2P update for a videogame?

</comment><comment><USER15> Malware or child porn</comment>


The Correlation Between Arts and Crafts and a Nobel Prize - <AUTHOR> http://priceonomics.com/the-correlation-between-arts-and-crafts-and-a/ <comment><USER2> Very interesting article! I too have noticed this phenomenon. Feynman was noted for playing bongo drums. And it's worth pointing out that Edward Witten (generally considered to be the smartest living physicist by other physicists) started out with a BA in _history_ and a minor in linguistics. He wrote magazine articles, worked for a presidential campaign, tried economics for a while, switched to applied math, and then finally gave theoretical physics a shot, at which point he made numerous contributions to string theory, quantum gravity, and quantum field theory. He's also the only physicist to win the Fields Medal.

<comment><USER3> And his father is a theoretical physicist specializing in gravitation and general relativity, it's not like one day he got off his bed and "gave theoretical physics a shot".

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is a terrible study.

Firstly, it relies on two different sources of information about people's hobbies: detailed biographies for Nobel laureates and something called the Sigma Xi society for the general scientific population. I'm not sure what this society is or how much information it has on its members' hobbies, but I envisage some kind of form that invites you to name your hobbies. You would expect perhaps not the same level of detail as you'd get from a biography or obituary.

The second problem is taking members of the Sigma Xi society as representative of the scientific population at large.

</comment><comment><USER5> This is an interesting idea, but one source of bias that troubles me is that after people have received a nobel prize, it might bias how they are characterized by themselves or others. Maybe being a "famous person" makes us characterize a person as more interesting, and upgrade their interests to hobbies or something more serious.

For reference, according to the article _the data about the hobbies of members of the Royal Society, National Academy, and of Nobel Prize winners was gathered from biographies, memoirs, obituaries, and other research._

</comment><comment><USER6> I suppose it has something to do with the g factor...

</comment><comment><USER7> The type of science that's pursued by a person with a penchant for making things that can be showcased to others is perhaps the sort of science that's good material for a Nobel prize.</comment>


8 Tips to Writing Great Personal Thank You Notes - <AUTHOR> http://www.jslogan.com/content/view/146/106/ <comment><USER2> Step 0, actually write them.. i dunno how many people i know that don't even think about writing personal thank you's. Plus make them inventive. If yer gonna make an impression of thanks, have fun with it.

</comment><comment><USER3> lame</comment>


Breaking LTE Security on Layer Two - <AUTHOR> https://alter-attack.net/ <comment><USER2> Also [https://phys.org/news/2018-06-gaps-lte-mobile-telephony- stan...](https://phys.org/news/2018-06-gaps-lte-mobile-telephony- standard.html)</comment>


Next round YC applicant looking for Tech Cofounder - <AUTHOR>

Startup in private beta of hot niche looking for a tech cofounder to come in and lead us on the tech side of things. We currently have a private beta product up and running which is stable and works well. We have an expert UI/UX person revising our designs right now and a pretty big dev revision coming in the next few weeks.
Who we are: Three founders with previous successful businesses. We have a hustler, and hacker/hustler and a hacker as founders. Our current tech cofounder cannot take a risk at this point in his life and has decided to take on a smaller role at our startup because we are planning on applying to YC. He will stay on and help but we are looking for a tech cofounder to go "all in" with us. We are self-funded for now.
What we are building: We will give private beta invites to anyone who is interested in learning more about joining us but we would rather keep our product private for now...we don't think it's ready to be shown to HN :) What I can say is that it's a web application (HTML4/5 w/ jQuery) with a custom PHP/MySQL backend using PHP5 PDO, Pear and Zend packages, hosted on an AWS EC2 farm (mostly custom configured 64-bit Ubuntu servers) managed via Scalr. I know this description is not informative at all but we can provide more info for people who are interested.
Who we are looking for: A tech cofounder looking to help build a startup. This cofounder should be ready to go all in with us on this idea and be willing to come to SF if we get accepted to YC. The perfect candidate will have experience with all of the technologies listed above. We want someone who loves dev and just as importantly loves this industry. Passion + skill is what we are looking for.
Please send requests/info to beatjunkie84 @ that google email service.
Thanks!
TL;DR - Web application startup and next round YC applicant looking for passionate tech cofounder. <comment><USER2> I'd never understand why people put the TL;DR section at the end.

Good Luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> People use it because some people see a large block of text and don't feel like reading it all (TL;DR = too long didn't read)

<comment><USER2> but shouldn't it be BEFORE the long text?

<comment><USER3> it should be after -- there's no hope of reading the text, even if it were within your patience level, if you put the tl;dr section before the actual content. or maybe i just prepped myself to just search for tl;dr if i lost patience.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Amazon S3 Storage Cloud Now Hosts 100 Billion Objects - <AUTHOR> http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2010/03/09/amazon-s3-now-hosts-100-billion-objects/

<comment><USER2> 82 billion in the last quarter. That's some nice growth there.

</comment><comment><USER3> As cloud computing continues to grow and with some of the recent reports of degrading EC2 network performance, the question might to turn to whether there is a law of diminishing returns.</comment>


Beware of the Silicon Valley cult - <AUTHOR> https://thinkfaster.co/2015/12/beware-of-the-silicon-valley-cult/ <comment><USER2> By now everyone knows that expected payoff of working at a start-up is the same or lower than a big company, but with much higher variability. Everyone knows this.

The thing is though, no matter where you work, as a professional you'll spend 50+ hours a week working. The satisfaction you get from that time matters a lot to your happiness and sense of satisfaction. You could work at a large soul destroying company that MUST pay you more because you have to put up with their BS, or you could work at a small company where you can look the founder in the eye and tell him or her to change something you don't like (as this article disparagingly puts it, change the culture in two weeks). And the founder is going to listen because everyone on the team is dedicated to the same mission. Really where are you going to be happier?

The fact that start-up payoff is even remotely equivalent to big company salaries tells me start-ups are a great choice if you value things like your happiness, sense of accomplishment, self-esteem, impact on the world, etc.

<comment><USER3> There are plenty of large companies where you can go to your boss, express dissatisfaction with some aspect (tech used, projects youre involved with) and get an almost immediate turn around on.

Conversely, there are startups (even ones just founded) where the CEO is inapproachable and your input wont affect culture/product/whatever one jot.

As a programmer, my satisfaction comes from writing quality code on systems that are in some way complex and commonly used. There's not a lot of satisfaction to be gleaned from writing a dozen CRUD apps.

Btw, citing 'impact on the world' as a reason to join a startup is a really good way of coming across naive imo ;)

EDIT: I also disagree with your point on 50+ hours a week. 40 hours is about right with 50+ hours during crunch periods - which should be rare (2-3 a year max).

<comment><USER4> Agree that "impact on the world" is naive and meaningless. It's like new grad resumes that hype leadership skills.

<comment><USER5> It's a cliché, but neither naive nor meaningless when the small company you're working for is trying to do something ambitious.

<comment><USER6> It's naive because the vast majority of small companies crash and burn, with no impact whatsoever.

Also, since we're talking about Silicon Valley, it's naive to think that Uber- for-Dog-Walking or Grindr-for-BitCoin startup is going to change the world in any meaningful way. Most business startups are playing inside-baseball games that only certain companies care about, and consumer startups tend to be trivial contrivances for people with copious amounts disposable income.

<comment><USER5> > _It 's naive because the vast majority of small companies crash and burn_

Most ambitious projects fail, but that doesn't mean they aren't more satisfying to work on. That kind of satisfaction has to do with the work and one's team. It isn't retroactive; it doesn't flip polarity because the project succeeds or fails in the end. Such work is more deeply satisfying because of its nature, even when we know that the odds are against us. And don't forget that most projects—especially most ambitious ones—fail inside bigcorps as well.

There's a cynicism going around about about startups right now where the game is to exchange negative generalizations with other cynics, kind of like trading cards. That's understandable as a reaction in the hype cycle—the startup hype cycle has entered a downturn among the early adopter types who populate places like HN. And yes of course some startups are derivative and some are lame, though the bias to dismiss nascent things as trivial is also a huge distortion, and easy to fall prey to when you're in a cynical mood.

But any account that minimizes the joy of working on a fresh, ambitious project with a small team is clearly mistaking a baby for bathwater. Greater work satisfaction is an important reason why someone might want to work at (the right kind of) startup that has little to do with expected payout and is a form of compensation in its own right. For that type of person it can change the calculus from "meh, it's a lottery" to "the greater meaning justifies the risk".

<comment><USER4> It's not about throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You're suppose to solve some small problem you have and then by proxy impact/solve something big because other people have a similar problem. So advertising "impact" and "change the world" is superfluous.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> It's not all about money. Smaller companies, while yes, are gambles they often are a more enjoyable place to work. You get a larger sense of ownership of your area, have more responsibility than a large company generally gives you, and you have more potential for positive influence.

These all lead to a higher satisfaction in life than just what the $benjamin's$ can give you. If you're fresh out of school, you get more experience in a year than that crappy little project you'll be given at a large company and be chained to for four years.

Startups are a financial risk, but if it has a good culture, it can be a very rewarding place to work, which often leads to greater happiness.

Negatives exist: sometimes longer working hours, more demanding, less mentors/senior people to learn from, and when the culture is bad; it is really bad.

<comment><USER8> _If you 're fresh out of school, you get more experience in a year than that crappy little project you'll be given at a large company and be chained to for four years._

I had the opportunity to work at several start-ups (on the east coast) during the first DotCom bubble in the late 1990s/early 2000s. It was generally a good experience for several reasons. First, I didn't have a software background/degree, so it gave me a chance to cut my teeth and the learn from good mentors (perhaps I was lucky in this regard...my first employer was started by two late 30-somethings). Second, given what I was doing right out of school (running a small climbing gym), the pay, while still under market rates, was a fortune compared to what I was making.

Nearly 15 years later, I have no interest in taking another job at a start-up. I work for a fairly stable company, doing interesting work, with lots of flexibility around when and where I do that work. I do, however, appreciate the experiences I had when I was willing to take that risk.

<comment><USER9> That's quite a typical retirement/investment strategy: when you are young, you can take high risks that might pay-off in the long run and if they don't you still have time to rebuild. When you approach retirement, you should move your money into low risk investments because you will need them soon. I's the same when investing time in your career development.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I don't see why the conversation is always work at large company vs. working at a startup. There's a third option: start a "lifestyle" business that can eventually be semi-passive. I am currently making about $400k / year working about 5 hours / week from a few different "lifestyle" businesses which I've built slowly over the past 5 years.

There's no question that joining a startup as an employee is a terrible idea for any competent engineer. By far the best way to make money in startups is to be a founder. In every business I've started, I've always had big exit dreams, but when those fail to materialize, my startups have soft landed into passive "lifestyle" businesses of which I collect 90% of the profit. Mere employees are forced to quit in this situation and are left with nothing - this is why being a founder is so important. Also, never take VC money without a very good reason to do so.

<comment><USER11> Any recommended reading for doing this sort of thing? This is my goal long term, I just haven't discovered what to do it with yet.

<comment><USER12> Pick a business domain that needs software. Write software it needs. Sell it.

There, I just saved you hours of reading :-)

<comment><USER11> Haha, yea I know that. I guess finding the domain is the tough part >:|

<comment><USER13> Airline Rebooking - this takes them forever Any recurring visit business (Barbers, Nails, Dentist, Optometrists, Dispensaries, Restaurants, ...) customer engagement/tracking/service software Any Job estimating business (painting, construction, masonry, welding ...) Any billable hour business (freelancing, legal, babysitting, ...)

Consider walking down {Main|King} Street of your town, walking into each shop, and asking them about software they use and what they like and don't like about it. Attend a meeting of the Rotary or Chamber of Commerce and ask them.

The trick is that customer only sees problems and you only see solutions, so no customer will come to you proposing a solution to their problem, and you won't be successful guessing what problems the customer has. You have to go out and see for yourself and try to understand their pain points.

<comment><USER14> My experience is a little different... customers are great and seeing problems _and_ solutions, but I only pay attention to the problems.

Their solutions typically apply only to their 5% use-case and would be disastrous if implemented.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I think it's interesting that the culture on HN is such that we can have an article like this on the front page. Sure, the comments are dumping on it, and it's not the most compelling argument in the first place, but the fact that it's upvoted and seriously considered before being refuted is pretty awesome.

I guess I'm seeing it as an interesting case of a culture being open to criticism. How many of you were sincerely hoping, when you clicked on the headline, that the contents of the article would be a really intelligent argument about cult-like behavior in SV? One that said things you hadn't heard before? I was hoping. Why is that?

<comment><USER16> I've been browsing HN since 2009 and there's always been articles like this. Hell, if you read _pg 's_ old essays, he often took a strong pro- bootstrapping, anti-funding tone.

The problem with articles like this is they call startups a "cult" _on the grounds that_ one can get a better financial deal elsewhere. What they ignore is that some people might be entirely rational in valuing the chance to build something groundbreaking, over pure financial concerns. The _real_ criticism of startups would be that _this_ is the big swindle -- that despite advertisements to the contrary, VC-funded startups _do not_ offer the chance to build great products. The VC game inherently undermines attempts to build companies which think long-term, act on principle, and which build awesome products. Some companies manage it, but it takes exception leadership, vision and political savvy from the founders.

<comment><USER17> "Cult" might be a provocative word choice, but given the shared irrational/false beliefs that partly define the real existing culture being talked about you can't easily dismiss the word choice completely.

<comment><USER16> I wasn't commenting on the word choice. I was commenting on the focus on the financial drawbacks of startups, when the focus should be on how they stifle good work.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> > _the average salary for a senior software engineer in the United States is > right around $100K not $250k like it is at Google, etc._

Bay Area HNers would be wise to remember this line. The number of times I see comments stating that it's easy or typical to make $175-200k/yr just a few years out of school is far too high.

<comment><USER19> If you read any of the discussions in r/cscareerquestions you'd think you're a failure for not making $150k straight out of college.

<comment><USER11> Holy crap, this sub is hilarious!

<comment><USER20> The number of people who frequent that sub with more than a year or two of professional experience is frightening. The discussion is so myopic it gives me a headache.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> _> For the privilege of being a member of the cult, you get to take half of your market rate in salary in exchange for equity that will most likely be worthless._

I realized this article was rather silly after reading this sentence.

Yes, if you're working for a _super_ early stage startup, you'll take little or no salary, and bundles of equity. No one goes into a role like that without knowing exactly what they're risking.

In general, though, working for a well-funded startup is _not_ taking "half of your market rate." Even if you're taking half of senior-level Bay Area rates, you're still earning 1.5-2x the rate of developers in the rest of the world.

If you want to avoid the "Silicon Valley cult," don't worry about startups -- worry about thinking that every software developer is worth $250k. They (generally) aren't.

Quick note before I close out this comment: I'm not trying to be pessimistic or cynical, but overvaluation of tech workers isn't something that will continue to exist in the short- to medium-term, in my opinion. I want to get paid well as much as the next guy, but if we're going to talk about a "bubble," tech salaries in the Bay Area are a big part of it.

<comment><USER22> Yeah, the article is silly. He's dumping on moving to the Bay Area for a tech job, where everyone _I_ know who has done so (including myself) is thriving. And not working 100 hours a week.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I have found one advantage of startups as an employee if you want to start your own company down the road is that you get to see easy-to-make management mistake and their repercussions. In a big company, there are systems and structures in place that help prevent some (obviously not all) of those problems, and there is more buffer (financial and otherwise) to smooth out the effects.

Personally, I've found working at a startup deeply rewarding and educational, but of course ymmv :)

</comment><comment><USER24> I just shake my head when I read this article. Taking half your market rate in salary and then complaining about it is a ridiculous example. Equity is never a sure thing and everyone know that. If you take equity in lieu of pay you do so at your own peril.

I joined a start up because I didn't have the traditional experience needed to get hired at a big company. I was given a ton of responsibility and able to learn a lot in a short time. Yes, you still only have X number of years on your resume, but you can talk to people and show them the work you did, which is a lot more important than your resume IMO.

</comment><comment><USER25> It's always good to question orthodoxy so I support the general idea behind this post, but the word "cult" actually means something specific. You can search for "characteristics of a cult" and get lots of interesting lists, but here are a few that I think are interesting with regards to startups:

1) A leader with a monopoly on "truth". This varies in startups, and certainly there's usually a guy who is the "decider". However it's not usually taken for granted that he's always _right_ just that he's entitled to make the call.

2) Separating members from non-members. Cults often encourage and sometimes force separation, even from family and close friends. I have yet to see this in a startup, a mother who is no longer allowed to make contact with her child because a startup prohibited it.

3) Sexual/financial/life/etc exploitation. This one arguably does happen in startups, to varying degrees. This seems like the central critique of OP. That said, the same happens in regular companies too (migrant farm workers, emotional abuse, exploiting information asymmetries/etc) and I'm not sure the distribution is all that different.

4) Preventing people from leaving, through debt, threats, or conditioning. This actually sometimes happen in startups through offering credit.... They owe you back pay and you want to stay at the top of the payroll. But this is nothing like what Scientology does, maintaining a blackmail file on members.

5) General use of mind control. Progaganda, conditioning, etc. Generally creating an environment where human brains sort of gravitate towards the mainline. This happens everywhere, to differing degrees. I think if you watch the Heaven's Gate exit videos you see the extreme of this. This is a fire we all play with. Probably some startups overdo it.

</comment><comment><USER26> My guess is the 'trap' is the passion and intensity of working with a small team of dedicated and smart people. The author certainly makes many good points, with which I agree. However the intensity of a startup is not found in just any environment, thus it's appeal ...

</comment><comment><USER27> "We had a rockstar team with backgrounds from top tier companies and engineering schools, but no aqui-hire materialized out of thin air like I thought it might. We built kick-ass technology, but nobody was interested."

If nobody was interested, your tech was shit. As simple as that. You have a self delusion.

You maybe do some interesting things, but if people do not demand it, it means you live in a different world from people. You just have not done the connection.

That is the usefulness of marketing, not as selling whatever you have, but designing and doing what people need.

When I created my company I was lucky enough to get a virtue loop and getting it soon.

Now as angel investor one of the patterns I see most on young founders is being fascinated with new tech but missing the connection with people's needs completely.

</comment><comment><USER28> I think what people keep forgetting here is that you are comparing all start- ups to the Googles and Facebooks of the world. There are MANY promising start ups up there, it really depends on what your definition of a start up is. Number of employees? Publicly traded? Years since it was founded? Sure, working at Google/Facebook is probably better than working at Evernote. But is it better than working at Snapchat or Lyft?

<comment><USER29> Snapchat and Lyft are both $billion unicorns, not startups.

<comment><USER30> Off topic, but I propose we stop calling "unicorn" startups unicorns and instead call them zebras (based on the phrase "if you hear hooves, think horse, not zebra").

Unicorns are called unicorns based on the presumption that they don't actually exist. "Unicorn" startups exist and there are enough of them that calling them something imaginary is evidently wrong.

It would also make them sound less appealing (they're not magical and when it rains you may come to realize it was just a donkey with stripes painted on it all along). Which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> A small company is not automatically a startup.

<comment><USER32> After one startup I said I'd never do that again. I realized it was like playing the lottery. You might win big, but most likely it leaves you poor. I'm now at a small company that pays very well, is stable, grows slowly and is a great place to work. I've always switched jobs every 2-3 years and for the first time I can see myself happily working for this small company for quite a while.</comment></comment>