Disaster.radio: a disaster-resilient communications network powered by the sun - <AUTHOR> https://disaster.radio/ <comment><USER2> Ham radio (or amateur radio) operators have historically filled this role - providing essential communications in the event of a disaster.

I wonder whether this project (if it's successful) would indicate that their numbers have declined past an inflection point, where their presence and availability is no longer assumed.

<comment><USER3> This won't replace HAM radio in a disaster scenario. This might provide a long-distance digital comms capability post-disaster. Even then, LoRa throughput is so low that I don't see how it would be useful unless an entire region goes full zombie apocalypse and this network replaces... I don't know, messenger pigeons?

In a long range configuration, LoRa has a theoretical max throughput of about 140bps (bits) and that's assuming only one device is transmitting and no packet loss.

LoRa is built for low power, long range, low throughput sensor networks. It's not really suitable for a chatty mesh network. To get an idea of the intended use for it, take a look at LoRaWAN limits:

* An average of 30 seconds uplink time on air, per day, per device.

* At most 10 downlink messages per day, including the ACKs for confirmed uplinks.

* A good goal is to keep the application payload under 12 bytes, and the interval between messages at least several minutes.

<comment><USER4> A messenger pigeon could at least cary 1TB of micro sd card data. LoRa is like less than the symbol rate of honey bees.

<comment><USER5> What is the symbol rate of an sd laden carrier pigeon?

African or European?

<comment><USER3> Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> We don't have anything to do with disaster.radio (maybe that should change), but we do have an existing single board computer that runs Linux, has a LoRa radio, and wifi. A somewhat similar product, but we use this for reception of a satellite data broadcast.

[https://othernet.is/products/dreamcatcher-v3-05](https://othernet.is/products/dreamcatcher-v3-05)

It has the 2.4 GHz LoRa radio, the SX1281. It also has a wideband mixer and synthesizer, which allows transmission across 85 - 6000 MHz. You should be a ham in order to play with the tx-side. The SX1281 is _not_ compatible with sub-GHz LoRa.

<comment><USER7> Super interesting, how does it work in terms of pricing? Is the satellite data broadcast free? It's really neat how most of the US is convered. This might be a stupid question but do you need a license to use this and/or LoRa radio?

<comment><USER6> Yes, the broadcast is free to receive.

To use the transmit outside of ISM bands, you definitely need to be a ham (and stay within ham bands).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Hey there! I am the current maintainer of the disaster radio firmware [https://github.com/sudomesh/disaster- radio/](https://github.com/sudomesh/disaster-radio/) and the LoRaLayer2 routing protocol [https://github.com/sudomesh/LoRaLayer2/](https://github.com/sudomesh/LoRaLayer2/) that is intended to mesh disaster radio nodes. The website doesn't include many of our latest developments, if you would like to stay in the loop, it's best to join our mailing list [https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/disasterradio](https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/disasterradio) or follow our wiki where I am posting development updates [https://github.com/sudomesh/disaster- radio/wiki](https://github.com/sudomesh/disaster-radio/wiki)

Happy to answer questions as I am capable.

It's cool to see this up on the front page, thanks for all the interest!

</comment><comment><USER9> I have also been thinking about a P2P radio mesh: [http://radiomesh.org](http://radiomesh.org)

I'm a bit stuck at trying to manually change frequency of the LoRa radios. It seems the standard does not allow it but the HopeRF chip I use have methods for selecting frequency and bandwidth around that frequency.

If so, that would allow for a multi-frequency protocol over LoRa that could scale!

</comment><comment><USER10> I was working on something vaguely similar to this and to LoRaHaM: [https://github.com/elvis- epx/sdr/tree/master/LoRaMaDoR](https://github.com/elvis- epx/sdr/tree/master/LoRaMaDoR)

but most hams around are stuck in 2M analog, some even find configuring a subtone too complicated, so it is difficult to work on something no one will bother to use.

</comment><comment><USER11> I'd be really interested to see what impact this will have on the site they link to [http://disasteradio.org/](http://disasteradio.org/) some tiny little band.

It would be neat to see what sort of traffic spike they get after being linked from a story that made it to the front page of HN.

<comment><USER12> in answer to your question: 1000 hits in ten minutes baby! that's showbiz! (someone PMed me about it already haha)

<comment><USER13> Yay! I'm one of the devs on disaster.radio and we're big fans. We're actually having our weekly meeting at our hackerspace sudo room [https://sudoroom.org/](https://sudoroom.org/) in Oakland, CA right now and listening to your track Drop The Bomb [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0S-HOOp_VY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0S-HOOp_VY) which has been something of an unofficial theme song for us!

<comment><USER12> omg <3 <3!! I gotta play in Oakland one day, I've never been but I have met way too many hilarious wonderful kooks living out there.. PS new disasteradio album is less about post-apocalypse and more an equal mix of solarpunk and SYNTHESIZER TRANSMISSIONS FROM THE TEMPORAL VOID

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Open source radio tech is great!

This is the radio chip used in their hardware: [https://www.semtech.com/products/wireless-rf/lora- transceive...](https://www.semtech.com/products/wireless-rf/lora- transceivers/SX1276)

Very similar to the CC1200 I used in a radio I designed in 2013: [https://www.ti.com/product/CC1200](https://www.ti.com/product/CC1200)

Low data rate networks are super interesting. The long range let's you do things you wouldn't do with WiFi. But what i would really like is a high bandwidth long range mesh. The issue you run in to is who owns the spectrum. In the US it's private communications companies that buy large chunks of spectrum. I'd like to see more valuable spectrum allotted for public use. This would pave the way for free or very low cost municipal cell phone service. Unfortunately there is big money interested in making sure that doesn't happen. And with "business friendly" people in the FCC, the idea of free communications doesn't have much traction.

This radio project looks cool. Ideally we'd have a generic 915mhz radio in our cell phones. I guess since this device also has WiFi, you could connect a phone pretty easily. Let's beg the Librem folks to add a sub-Gigabertz radio (915/868/433MHz) to their next phone. :-D

</comment><comment><USER15> Maybe they should integrate it with disaster mapping software like Ushahidi ([https://www.ushahidi.com](https://www.ushahidi.com)) instead of programming yet another chat silo.

<comment><USER8> Never heard of ushahidi. It looks expensive. We developed a free, open source mapping app that uses MapBox vector tiles on to which you can drop pins that are then shared with neighboring nodes over the LoRa radio. Check out development here, [https://github.com/sudomesh/disaster-radio- map](https://github.com/sudomesh/disaster-radio-map) it hasn't been tested on latest dev hardware and might need some work to improve the loading of map tiles.

<comment><USER15> AFAIR Ushahidi is open source

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> This is nice :)

Two parts can be replaced I guess with better alternatives though:

1\. Risc-v chips for esp8266. Why? Because they are built on open source standard, are cheaply available, and are generally very powerful.

2\. 802.11ah for LoRa. Why? Well, lora is highly optimized towards power optimization at the expense of data transfer rate. Data rates offered by LoRa might not be suitable for anything much demanding other that IoT. 802.11ah on other hand is also optimized for power, but still can operate up to at multiple 100mbps of data rates, with range in many KM's and supporting thousands of connections per installment.

This might help: [https://www.electronicdesign.com/industrial- automation/what-...](https://www.electronicdesign.com/industrial- automation/what-s-difference-between-ieee-80211ah-and-80211af-iot)

<comment><USER17> ESP8266 is cheaper than RISC-V and powerful enough. It's not open source but that doesn't seem to be a deal breaker for this project.

802.11ah has only 1km range which is not enough for this purpose. LoRa is rated at more than 10km range at 292bit/s up to 50kbit/s. Also the chip used in this project costs only around $6.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Very cool. Reminds me of goTenna Mesh, which is already deployed globally (albeit closed-source and without a power source): [https://gotennamesh.com/products/mesh](https://gotennamesh.com/products/mesh)

</comment><comment><USER19> Without meaning to hijack this thread: does anyone know of any volunteering opportunities deploying / maintaining communication networks for disaster relief? Ericsson Response ([https://www.ericsson.com/en/about- us/sustainability-and-corp...](https://www.ericsson.com/en/about- us/sustainability-and-corporate-responsibility/technology-for- good/humanitarian-response/ericsson-response)) is a group doing exactly what I'm after, but seems to be internal-only.

<comment><USER20> Cisco TacOps comes to mind... is this what you're thinking?

[https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/about/csr/stories/tactical- ope...](https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/about/csr/stories/tactical- operations.html)

<comment><USER19> Thanks for the suggestion. Yes, that's the kind of thing, but understandably it also looks limited to Cisco employees.

<comment><USER20> I get what your seeking now - I wish I knew of an org to suggest. I've long felt that there should be some sort of comms focused volunteer org like this. I guess you could say all of the major network operators already have things like mobile lte towers so there may not be a need — but then you see things like Irma and think how well did they do during that event and could ordinary people have coordinated more quickly and effectively? I guess another possibility might be the Red Cross? But again using the examples highlighted in this thread where folks were literally scanning for new fire outbreaks and sending alerts via ham... I don't see that within red cross's mandate... seems like there there should be an existing org, I just don't know what it is called unfortunately.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> That's a cool use of LoRa. I think it makes a lot of sense to have asynchronous super low-bandwidth text messages in such a scenario. You won't have time to man the radio 24/7, instead you just check if there are new messages of interest every now and then. For this use case, low power usage is essential, you want to be able to receive messages 24/7 even if there is a cloud cover for several days in a row.

For even longer range it would be nice to have a certain percentage of nodes that can also communicate with HAM radio amateur satellites.

</comment><comment><USER21> If the people who created this are here in the thread, some questions on the power system...

1\. What is your baseline calculation for Wh per day produced by the PV panel?

2\. More precise specifications on the PV panel?

3\. What is the calculated load in Wh per day? How much of this is dependent on data traffic level? (eg. Does it go into a sleep mode?)

4\. Have you calculated this for sunlight levels in mid winter, off grid, at latitudes 48 and above? The Wh produced in a day, week or month by that size panel somewhere like North Vancouver, BC, will be really low from November to February due to short day lengths and winter weather.

<comment><USER22> The hardware section mentions:

> disaster.radio nodes are capable of functioning in most moderately sunny > locations

I live in Northern Europe (54N) and wanted to use an old phone as a time lapse camera in a remote location without power or internet (hence the phone rather than something like a Raspberry Pi). The battery when fully charged would last ~3 days, so I just needed a solar panel big enough to keep it topped up.

I figured a 20W solar panel would be sufficient, as most phones use way less than that when charging. In my initial testing in direct sunlight this panel was barely able to keep the battery % the same, let alone charge it. I'm not sure whether I just needed or a bigger panel, or it was just the 20W solar panel I got from eBay not really being 20W. If anyone has any experience with this I'd still like to do the project :-)

<comment><USER23> In Germany, the solar panels in commercial installations produce about 10% of their peak wattage averaged over a year. I guess these are installed in locations with good insolation. So at best you could assume some 2W on average from your 20W panel. But if it didn't even work in direct sunlight, the panel was probably broken.

<comment><USER24> In theory, couldn't you boost the input light by using a couple of mirrors (one capturing light below the panel, one above the solar-incident light shining down at a Summertime angle?) or some carefully position Fresnel-style lensing?

Is polarisation of the reflected light an issue?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Love this. I was just without internet for a few days last week, and as a bit of a "prepper" I couldn't help but think if long term disaster situations and what I would want to do for internet and communication in such an event.

I'm actually getting a ham radio for christmas (don't tell my wife I know) and while that will fill almost every NEED for communication, it certainly leaves room for improvements. Text chat is very convenient, maps are very convenient, so I think this project is a great start.

<comment><USER26> If you love ham radio, text messages, and maps, boy are you going to get your money's worth out of APRS and digital modes. Haha. We have a digi-net here locally and whenever I'm able to participate I often end up just holding my phone (AndFlMsg) to my HT. Works great.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> This is awesome! Super smart set of basic apps, and having it just be a normal WiFi hotspot is great. I could see it actually being quite usable in a disaster scenario.

Kickstarter the hardware for like $100 and I bet it would do really well. I'd buy one right now. Or let me donate!

Looks like there's an "app store". Curious how that works. I assume that would be a major bandwidth/tragedy of the commons issue, but perhaps there's some way to have a higher QoS channel for the critical apps.

</comment><comment><USER28> First thing I thought? If I can survive long enough we can still communicate in a zombie apocalypse! (Yes, I'm still persevering with The Walking Dead after 10 seasons)

<comment><USER29> I am often curious what mental itch people are scratching with "zombie apocalypse" fantasies. It's clear at any rate that "zombies" are really "people it's okay to kill". It's as if people are hungering for a simpler, more brutal time where your problems are largely constrained to kill or be killed - a kind of civilization wanderlust. I do not think it is healthy.

<comment><USER28> I'm petrified of such an event. It's why I fantasise how I may survive, because I know I wouldn't!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Disaster Radio. Does one need an FCC ham license to own/operate an endpoint? What are the frequencies? After some light poking on the website I don't see any info on that. Love the idea though.

there is also this: [https://www.nycmesh.net/](https://www.nycmesh.net/) , somewhat related and can be used as a back up information/communication source

<comment><USER31> The ESP8266 is a wifi chip, so almost certainly OK to operate without a license unless you're doing something really bizarre with antenna gain to get above the 36 dBm EIRP threshold.

LoRa can run in any band you want, but it's almost universally deployed in ISM bands as well, 315/433 or 868/915 MHz. I don't think I've ever seen a LoRa chipset that would push enough power to exceed part-15 regs.

HOWEVER, to be strictly legal, a part-15 device actually needs to be tested and certified thereas. Otherwise the parts can only be sold as a kit and stuff, which is how pretty much all lora stuff is sold right now. And you'd be hard pressed to piss anyone off enough to care.

<comment><USER30> > Otherwise the parts can only be sold as a kit and stuff

Yeah. Disaster Radio does not look like a "kit" at all. Not for "an average user" at least. I'd be cautious building and operating hardware that can potentially get me in trouble with authorities.

Still great general idea though, to build a solar-powered kit that's easy to setup and operate, a kit that makes sure there is a "plug-and-play" solution in case of a disaster (natural or not), kit that also delegates legal responsibility to the "creator"/manufacturer.

<comment><USER31> Okay, I should've been clearer about my initial post, that it's breathtakingly unlikely for anyone to get in trouble doing this.

Look at the unmitigated chaos on CB for a sense of how much the FCC feels like enforcing anything on the unlicensed bands. Probably 95% of CBers are running above-legal power, many of them by _several orders of magnitude_, and behold, the field in which the FCC grows its fucks, it is barren.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> To an extent, I feel good that the Secure Scuttlebutt guys are behind this.

A good direction to develop would be to talk to FEMA and its global counterparts. There is literature on what is needed in disaster. Instead of an insular tech-world development of such a platform having disaster response practitioner insights might be useful.

<comment><USER8> For sure, SSB is a cool community. Cel wrote demo software that allowed a disaster radio node to post messages to SSB. Check out the source on git-ssb, [https://git.scuttlebot.io/%25SyAU1pa6g6yYcELjTrBG4JY41vjuP6H...](https://git.scuttlebot.io/%25SyAU1pa6g6yYcELjTrBG4JY41vjuP6HSvAo%2BmsrP0Sg%3D.sha256)

And agreed, once we have stable hardware and firmware, talking to local disaster response practitioners would be a great way do test deployments and get feedback on the software design and usability. I'm curious about the disaster-related literature you referenced, would love to read it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> This software is available pre-flashed onto cheap LoRa boards now.

$40 for a pair [https://www.aliexpress.com/item/4000396836096.html](https://www.aliexpress.com/item/4000396836096.html)

</comment><comment><USER34> Using 900 MHz means you only get line of sight which means you need height above terrain. In a disaster maybe you can get this without paying anyone any money so this might be feasible.

Using HF would be better in almost all ways except size though.

<comment><USER35> 900Mhz will punch through some stuff and the spread spectrum chrip Lora uses will do non-LoS[1] under some conditions. The bigger issue is to get that capability Lora is a really low bit-rate(on the order of bits-per-second) and polled instead of ad-hoc.

[1] [https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/10/lostik-usb-lora- radi...](https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/10/lostik-usb-lora-radios/)

<comment><USER34> Yeah, I heard the same thing. So now I own a bunch of 900 MHz transceivers, telemetry dongles, and equipment. I don't think it deserves the good rep it gets. It may punch to the other side of the house or do okay through some pine trees point-to-point but at the slightest hill or gentle dip it's done. It's best to treat it like a microwave link. And for a microwave link it has a pretty significant fresnel zone.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> I was hoping this would use meteor scatter ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteor_burst_communications](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteor_burst_communications))

<comment><USER26> Might as well throw in EME as well ;-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> I wonder if SpaceX's StarLink (if it ever gets finished) will continue to function independently in the event of global disaster. Having equipment around that can communicate with that sounds like a good idea.

<comment><USER38> I don't think they will, at least not in their default configuration. They do have the capability to communicate between the satellites but I'm not sure that they are setup to deliver data going strictly between two Starlink'd users without going through a ground station. There's also the problem of just keeping them up, being low flying satellites they'll need periodic boosts which are planned from the ground iirc.

Both of these could be turned over to an automated system though I suppose.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> Hey, nice project. Can you comment or point me what hardware do I need to buy to get my own node?

If there are too many options maybe put a hardware matrix?

<comment><USER8> Thanks! I am the current maintainer of the firmware, juul is correct. I am actively developing with the LILYGO TTGO ESP32 dev board. If you are interested in development then you can buy one from aliexpress, if you are looking for a finished product, then you should wait for us to finish the next iteration of our custom board. Here's board that is currently supported t[https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32915894264.html?spm=a2g0o.p...](https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32915894264.html?spm=a2g0o.productlist.0.0.671054bdhI1Hix&algo_pvid=aec249fc-c80a-4c81-8220-334dc9f635b1&algo_expid=aec249fc-c80a-4c81-8220-334dc9f635b1-0&btsid=6d976d5a-e661-47f6-b371-7f0bc42c5336&ws_ab_test=searchweb0_0,searchweb201602_7,searchweb201603_55)

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> What is the specific use case of the low bitrate long distance radio? Very basic news dissemination? FidoNet like message relay?

</comment><comment><USER18> What is the estimated range of the antennas? Several miles with line of sight?

</comment><comment><USER41> "powered by the sun" buddy everything is powered by the sun

</comment><comment><USER42> How well would these hold up after a solar storm or EMP?

<comment><USER43> EMPs aren't really a plausible weapon. Sure you can detonate a nuke, but by that time, you've already launched an ICBM, so you're screwed because of mutually assured destruction.

If you want disrupt an electrical grid, there's a lot of easier -- and less likely to have an obvious calling card -- than setting off a nuke.

And if you're thinking about some other type of EMP weapon, forget it. They're not practical. While a theoretical weapon, they're not a realistic one. It's fantasy.

[https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/kwxq4v/we-asked-a- militar...](https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/kwxq4v/we-asked-a-military- expert-how-scared-the-us-should-be-of-an-emp-attack-508)

[https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/world-wont-end- danger...](https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/world-wont-end-danger-emp- attack-more-fantasy-fact-94681)

<comment><USER23> Or you have your nuke already in place because you violated that treaty about nuclear weapons in space and can set it off without launching a rocket first.

<comment><USER43> There are better uses for that nuke.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Statement on Cryptocurrencies and Initial Coin Offerings - <AUTHOR> https://www.sec.gov/news/public-statement/statement-clayton-2017-12-11 <comment><USER2> > I believe that initial coin offerings – whether they represent offerings of > securities or not – can be effective ways for entrepreneurs and others to > raise funding, including for innovative projects.

> We at the SEC are committed to promoting capital formation. The technology > on which cryptocurrencies and ICOs are based may prove to be disruptive, > transformative and efficiency enhancing. I am confident that developments in > fintech will help facilitate capital formation and provide promising > investment opportunities for institutional and Main Street investors alike. > I encourage Main Street investors to be open to these opportunities, but to > ask good questions, demand clear answers and apply good common sense when > doing so.

I don't know much about Jay Clayton (SEC Chairmain) but he seems to be taking a very pragmatic stance on tokens. From what I gather, he's saying that __some __of these tokens should be classified as securities, while others should not. And we as investors should be be diligent to probe the creators to see if these tokens are subject to regulation and are legal.

This is amazing! The SEC haven't __quite __stepped in yet. But I fully expect them to. And this gives some great insight into what we can expect in the future.

<comment><USER3> I think this is more negative for ICOs than your quotes imply. Look at this:

> By and large, the structures of initial coin offerings that I have seen > promoted involve the offer and sale of securities and directly implicate the > securities registration requirements and other investor protection > provisions of our federal securities laws.

Basically, almost all ICOs so far are illegal. He says that it's possible to make an ICO that isn't illegal by following SEC rules, but I would be surprised if a single existing ICO actually qualified because most of the benefit of doing an ICO comes from not complying with the regulations.

<comment><USER4> > almost all ICOs so far are illegal.

a lot of them are offering to sell you an asset that they advertise as being sure to appreciate, with the subtext that you will sell the asset at a later point for a gain. Selling something purely to be a store of value and appreciation is basically the textbook definition of a security, isn't it?

<comment><USER5> This is the (literal) textbook definition of a security:

        any note, stock, treasury stock, security future, bond, debenture,
        evidence of indebtedness, certificate of interest or participation in
        any profit-sharing agreement, collateral-trust certificate,
        preorganization certificate or subscription, transferable share,
        investment contract, voting-trust certificate, certificate of deposit
        for a security, fractional undivided interest in oil, gas, or other
        mineral rights, any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege on any
        security (including a certificate of deposit) or on any group or index
        of securities (including any interest therein or based on the value
        thereof), or any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege entered into
        on a national securities exchange relating to foreign currency, or, in
        general, any interest or instrument commonly known as a "security," or
        any certificate of interest or participation in, temporary or interim
        certificate for, receipt for, guarantee of, or warrant or right to
        subscribe to or purchase, any of the foregoing. [1]

It's a somewhat circular definition, but my reading is that basically, anything whatsoever that gives you an ownership interest or claim on the future profits of an enterprise can be construed as a security. You can track who owns the shares of the enterprise via entries in a central ledger (the current method for most stock companies), use paper bearer certificates (traditional way), use a distributed ledger, hand out carved pieces of pottery, whatever. If it functions even remotely like a security, it's probably a security.

EDIT: The Supreme Court's "Howey Test" [2], which came out of a 1946 case over complex real-estate leaseback deals, is in some respects a simpler method to determine whether something may be a investment contract, which is a security:

      1. It is an investment of money
      2. There is an expectation of profits from the investment
      3. The investment of money is in a common enterprise
      4. Any profit comes from the efforts of a promoter or third party

The Howey Test is reliable in the sense that anything satisfying those four points is extremely likely to be an investment contract and thus a security, but I believe there are probably securities that fail one or more aspects of the test but are still regulated, due to the broad statutory definition of "security" under the 1934 and 1940 Acts.

[1] That's from the Investment Company Act of 1940, which seems to be definitional; there are some other definitions used elsewhere in the UCC and other Federal laws (largely from 1934), but they seem to be similar, and quite a few places punt to this definition. (Quoted in [http://apps.americanbar.org/buslaw/newsletter/0014/materials...](http://apps.americanbar.org/buslaw/newsletter/0014/materials/investmentch2.pdf) which is an annoyingly "locked" PDF that you will need to de-DRM; this is left as an exercise to the reader.)

[2] [http://consumer.findlaw.com/securities-law/what-is-the- howey...](http://consumer.findlaw.com/securities-law/what-is-the-howey- test.html)

<comment><USER6> > 1\. It is an investment of money 2\. There is an expectation of profits from > the investment 3\. The investment of money is in a common enterprise 4\. Any > profit comes from the efforts of a promoter or third party

\</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>

Using the "Howey Test" on Bitcoin you find that Bitcoin and almost all other cryptocurrencies should be considered securities.

      1. It is an investment of money

yes, electricity and hardware are equivalent to money

      2. There is an expectation of profits from the investment

yes

      3. The investment of money is in a common enterprise

yes

      4. Any profit comes from the efforts of a promoter or third party.

yes, from Satoshi the original promoter and all subsequent miners.

<comment><USER7> Fails on (2). The only reason you expect to profit is you think (without rationale) that the value of the coins will increase. That's pure speculation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> This is not a statement from the SEC, but from chairman Clayton. See footnote [1]: « _This statement is my own and does not reflect the views of any other Commissioner or the Commission. This statement is not, and should not be taken as, a definitive discussion of applicable law, all the relevant risks with respect to these products, or a statement of my position on any particular product._ »

<comment><USER9> Something about that bothers me. Even in this thread some are discussing this as "SEC says". In a way this is a 'pump' for cryptos and that [1] footnote could have been straight up front in the "Public Statement".

<comment><USER10> Part of what should bother us is that it signals that the law has become too vague to predict, so things are legal and illegal based on the inklings of the law enforcers. This means people are forced to read tea leaves in the enforcer's statements to determine what will be illegal in the future, rather than just reading an objective law on paper.

<comment><USER11> > just reading an objective law on paper

That, sadly, isn't usually possible either, unless you were implying that a lawyer or team of lawyers would be the person or persons doing the reading. Tho it's still better than being "forced to read tea leaves in the enforcer's statements".

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> An incredible display of pragmatism from our regulators. Given the commentary on HN it seems that most here want everyone involved in an ICO to be thrown in jail. ICO's are an effective way to raise funds from a global pool of enthusiasts. The Ethereum blockchain itself was funded from an ICO, and it's doubtful that as much money would have been raised at such advantageous terms from traditional VC for a 22 year old kid like Vitalik. Very, very good news.

<comment><USER5> > The Ethereum blockchain itself was funded from an ICO, and it's doubtful > that as much money would have been raised at such advantageous terms from > traditional VC

I'm not sure this argument is as strong as you seem to think it is.

<comment><USER13> Considering Ethereum's market cap is currently 1/2 of a trillion dollars, I'd say it's a pretty strong argument...

<comment><USER14> It's at $70B right now, which is about 1/14 of a trillion. All of crypto is about 1/2 a trillion though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> > Sample Questions for Investors Considering a Cryptocurrency or ICO > Investment Opportunity

What a great move by the SEC. I think Ethereum, as a vehicle for many/most ICOs, owes it to the community to embrace this list and create a standard disclosure form that encourages new ICOs to answer these. And if Ethereum offers an index of tokens somewhere (I'm not familiar w/Ethereum's details), it could indicate which ones answered some/all of the questions in the form.

BTW industry/trade groups is how lots of businesses avoid regulation. Entertainment industry especially; e.g. ratings and content guidelines from MPAA/ESRB/Comic Code.

</comment><comment><USER16> A little emphasis, focusing on the aftermath from the SEC's July report on the DAO:

> "Following the issuance of the 21(a) Report, certain market professionals > have attempted to highlight utility characteristics of their proposed > initial coin offerings in an effort to claim that their proposed tokens or > coins are not securities. _Many of these assertions appear to elevate form > over substance. Merely calling a token a "utility" token or structuring it > to provide some utility does not prevent the token from being a security._ "

<comment><USER17> He even flat out says that most of the ICOs he's seen should be considered securities:

> By and large, the structures of initial coin offerings that I have seen > promoted involve the offer and sale of securities and directly implicate the > securities registration requirements and other investor protection > provisions of our federal securities laws. Generally speaking, these laws > provide that investors deserve to know what they are investing in and the > relevant risks involved. I have asked the SEC's Division of Enforcement to > continue to police this area vigorously and recommend enforcement actions > against those that conduct initial coin offerings in violation of the > federal securities laws.

I think some of the other commenters are glossing over that statement and being rather over-optimistic about the SEC's stance toward tolerating ICOs.

<comment><USER18> They've been pretty clear in the past about the Howey test and ICOs running foul of it, so that part of his letter wasn't all that new. They're already taking action and should be - just today I saw an ad promising 60x returns on an internal market.

I didn't expect to see him acknowledging the positives of cryptocurrency and the ICO funding model overall.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> It's way down, but this strikes me as the key section:

\---

By and large, the structures of initial coin offerings that I have seen promoted involve the offer and sale of securities and directly implicate the securities registration requirements and other investor protection provisions of our federal securities laws. Generally speaking, these laws provide that investors deserve to know what they are investing in and the relevant risks involved.

I have asked the SEC's Division of Enforcement to continue to police this area vigorously and recommend enforcement actions against those that conduct initial coin offerings in violation of the federal securities laws.

\---

That seems a pretty clear warning: most ICOs will be treated as securities under US law. I'd be willing to bet that the SEC will be making an example of some people relatively soon.

<comment><USER19> Well that didn't take long:

[https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/12/sec-shuts-down-munchee- ico...](https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/12/sec-shuts-down-munchee-ico/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Jeff Bezos once asked Warren Buffett why people did not follow Buffett's model of investing, since it had made Buffett the third richest person in the US. Buffett replied, "no one wants to get rich slowly".

</comment><comment><USER21> I wouldn't read this with rose colored glasses. This is not pro or against crypto. He's simply doing what the SEC does and warning speculators of the risks involved and saying that these _will_ , despite what anyone has told you, be subject to federal securities laws.

</comment><comment><USER22> Jay Clayton

'1] This statement is my own and does not reflect the views of any other Commissioner or the Commission. This statement is not, and should not be taken as, a definitive discussion of applicable law, all the relevant risks with respect to these products, or a statement of my position on any particular product. '

Intriguing that this is a personal perspective....

<comment><USER23> It isn't yet practical for the SEC to regulate crypto formally because the industry is still in its early stages and evolving rapidly. The SEC needs to balance many interests, and it's not clear what the costs and benefits will be.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> "In contrast, many token offerings appear to have gone beyond this construct and are more analogous to interests in a yet-to-be-built publishing house with the authors, books and distribution networks all to come."

I am impressed with this SEC statement.

The problem right now is with ICOs that sell tokens for something that doesn't already exist yet, as well as promise returns.

Selling a token for something that doesn't exist yet is clearly a security. Whereas selling a token that already exists, and doesn't need any additional things to be built, is probably not a security.

I am glad that the SEC seems to be getting things right.

</comment><comment><USER25> What the SEC seems to be doing is 1) warning ICO promoters that what they're doing may be illegal, and 2) going after the worst offenders first. The SEC has already acted against two ICO promoters, both of which were clearly running scams. There will probably be more actions.

</comment><comment><USER26> _As I have stated previously, these market participants should treat payments and other transactions made in cryptocurrency as if cash were being handed from one party to the other._

I think for a long time this is how crypto is viewed, it is risky but people are willing to take the risk currently. More reputable US sources like Coinbase are making this possible rather than historical risky bets like mtgox, btc-e etc. In the statement they do mention whether an ICO is domestic/foreign in their research as something you should look out for in terms of the "security" of your purchase, but also whether or not the SEC can even do anything about it.

Regulation will be coming along and they have a blueprint for how that might happen, i.e. securities vs tokens/coins/currency. Before the regulation the risk is higher but probably also the reward.

At this point cryptocurrencies and ICOs are an unstoppable train, either the SEC will be able to regulate currencies + securities or some new group will be formed to handle oversight in the US at least.

</comment><comment><USER27> It's obvious the SEC intends to enforce securities regulations on crypto markets. The big exchanges already and typically employ experts in regulatory compliance specifically related to AML and KYC laws on a federal and state-by- state level. The reason being access to Americans is by and large more important than access to any other set of customers. And "everyone" knows ICO's exist only to side-step securities laws and make a quick buck. There are very few legitimate offerings. Expect the SEC enforcement arm to come down like the hammer of god.

What I find funny is this idea crypto won't be the next level of monitoring and control of the money supply. You crypto proponents are going to be very unhappy when you see what Uncle Sam has in store. Fiat currency has much better built-in anonymity then this block chain nonsense. And see how that is controlled, regulated, and tracked through treaties, laws, and digital mechanisms?

</comment><comment><USER28> Does anyone know if the SEC has any process to formally approach them and say "This is what we're planning on doing and the structure we're planning on using -- this where we're unclear; how would you treat this?" like the IRS has with Private Letter Rulings/Written Determinations?

<comment><USER29> They do indeed - you can request a "no-action letter" confirming that an activity you have described to the SEC is okay.

[https://www.sec.gov/fast- answers/answersnoactionhtm.html](https://www.sec.gov/fast- answers/answersnoactionhtm.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Sounds like - do what you want at your own risk and due diligence. I can't help but think that large financial institutions and governments are also behind the crypto madness in order to make money on the retail's back. Otherwise, this would have been stopped by now.

<comment><USER31> I think they are behind it and haven't brought the hammer down because they don't want to encourage "going dark" (or even darker than they already are). Surely they're finding their enforcement arm much more limited than in traditional markets. Not embracing new markets will only make that worse.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Can someone explain to me how his "book of the month" club example is not a security? The managerial efforts of the club managers will increase demand for participation in the club, increasing the value of the token. What am I missing?

<comment><USER24> The difference is that books already exist.

It is not about whether a token can rise or fall in value. It is about whether the token represents something that can be bought right NOW, or if it represents a future promise of some sort for something that doesn't exist yet. IE, funding book publishing in this example.

<comment><USER32> > It is not about whether a token can rise or fall in value.

Yes, it is. According to the Howey Test.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> This is quite positive and in line with how ASIC (our SEC in Australia) are treating these types of assets.

Both are quite opposite to the way China is handling ICO's and crypto currency in general.

<comment><USER34> China's also got laws against moving a lot of money out of the country, so not entirely unexpected.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> > encourage Main Street investors to be open to these opportunities, but to > ask good questions, demand clear answers and apply good common sense when > doing so.

so what, are we going to stop seeing "US IP detected, unable to participate" in ICOs?

</comment><comment><USER36> Side note but: I asked here if anyone's actually using an ICO project:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15901992](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15901992)

Didn't get much traction. :(

</comment><comment><USER37> Much better than China's response to ICO's. This is how it should be done.

</comment><comment><USER38> Very encouraging response. Kinda shocked to be honest.

</comment><comment><USER39> What about using the ICO tokens as a sort of gift certificate for your product at a later date?

Isn't that what Brave did with the BAT ICO?

</comment><comment><USER40> ...and this is how the collapse begins

</comment><comment><USER41> After all this is written, you'll still find someone tryna peddle their little tokens out here!!

</comment><comment><USER42> _I encourage Main Street investors to be open to these opportunities_

This is ominous.

<comment><USER43> What else do your elf eyes see?

<comment><USER44> They're taking the ICOs to Estonia!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> Buy the dip

</comment><comment><USER46> I think the rate of technological change will force the SEC regulatory system to adopt an RFC process open to the public (bypassing Congress), similar to IETF, and I think Direct Democracy is an inevitable outcome of such disruption.

<comment><USER47> That's a really strong statement. RFC structured this way because they needed people to contribute whereas SEC and Congress don't want people involvement.

<comment><USER46> The regulatory process is not scalable relative to the rate of technology driven disruption.

It cannot scale.

It can either fall behind or adapt to change, IMO.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> LMAO, the SEC is going to shut down Coinbase and Bitcoin is going to zero. Suckers!

</comment><comment><USER49> Seems to me this is just a warning so that when both the SEC and US Treasury lay into cryptos next year they won't feel so bad about everyone losing their BTC/ETH "fortunes" overnight.</comment>


Making Smart Phones Dumb Again - <AUTHOR> http://wesmckinney.com/blog/dumb-smartphones/ <comment><USER2> I am inclined to think the solution is self control rather than a dumb phone. I dont want to problem solve my way out of the principles that lead me down the path of problem solving.</comment>


Ask YC: Python Desktop Frameworks - <AUTHOR>

I need to write a desktop application in python that would take a tcpdump on the users' desktop and HTTP POST the dump to a server. Has anyone used Dabo before?  Any other suggestion for Desktop Client Frameworks in Python? <comment><USER2> I've used wxPython for a very large game editor. It is (or at least was a few years ago) the most complete desktop API for python. It's very easy to use and the examples make it easy to knock together a prototype VERY quickly that can be extended to a full application.

There are some issues on the OSX port though which tends to lag behind the Linux/Windows version on bug fixes (not by design but due to having fewer developers devoted to OSX).

</comment><comment><USER3> You can use urllib with pylibpcap.

<http://docs.python.org/lib/module-urllib.html>

<http://pylibpcap.sourceforge.net/>

</comment><comment><USER4> I've found wxPython pretty straight forward - I understand Dabo is based on wxPython but haven't used it myself. I suspect it will be even more straight forward?

</comment><comment><USER5> On the Mac, you can use pyobjc to write Cocoa apps. Included with Leopard.

[http://www.friday.com/bbum/2007/10/27/pyobjc-20-pyobjc-in- le...](http://www.friday.com/bbum/2007/10/27/pyobjc-20-pyobjc-in-leopard/)

</comment><comment><USER6> sounds like ur app would be better on the commandline

but wxpython seems to be the most popular</comment>


John Carmack explains Nvidia's variable refresh rate tech (G-Sync) - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbW9IwVGpX8

<comment><AUTHOR> Video of the entire panel discussion between Carmack, Sweeney, and Johan (lead on EA's Frostbite engine) is up here:

[http://www.twitch.tv/linustech/b/471263848?t=2h27m](http://www.twitch.tv/linustech/b/471263848?t=2h27m)</comment>


Can C.E.O. Satya Nadella Save Microsoft? - <AUTHOR> http://www.vanityfair.com/business/2014/11/satya-nadella-bill-gates-steve-ballmer-microsoft <comment><USER2> When I ask what happens if they disagree, Gates says, "Satya runs the company, so he gets to decide." He says that he has learned from his experience with Ballmer, and from running his foundation, that he does "not have the full picture. So I get to give input. And if I say to Satya, 'Hey, this project needs 10 or 15 people,' I'll bet I'll get it, but it's up to him."

I bet he'll get it too ;)</comment>


Cross-browser (IE7+), drag and drop AJAX file uploader jQuery plugin - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/pmd-dev/pmdAjaxUploader

<comment><AUTHOR> I wrote a (high-level) blog post about the motivation for creating this here: [http://chargecapture.com/post/weekly-byte-pmds-first-open- so...](http://chargecapture.com/post/weekly-byte-pmds-first-open-source- software-project)</comment>


Ask HN: How are Software Engineers(SE) helping this world in any way? - <AUTHOR> <comment><AUTHOR> We build a lot of stuff used by almost every industry in this world including medical, E-commerce to name a few. We build a lot of useful stuff but we are also building all the software which is spoiling the nature and hence causing the man-made problems that we face today. How can we change and do things which makes the life of people better and nature more livable?

</comment><comment><USER2> Without SE's, lockdowns would mean a nearly full stop of economy and functioning of society. The world would be a far worse place right now.</comment>


Ask HN: Health Insurance Options for New Small Company - <AUTHOR> I've never started a company before and I'm looking for suggestions about where to look for health insurance coverage in the US. The company will start with 2 remote people, one in New York and one in Alabama. One needs family coverage and the other needs individual +spouse. Adding a few employees is planned within a year. <comment><USER2> I had an issue similar to this where my company did not qualify for a group health insurance plan because we did not have over 50% of employees in a single state (Owner in CA, one employee in OR, other employee in TX).

After some searching around I came across something know as a QSEHRA (qualified small employer health reimbursement arrangement) which allows qualified small employers to reimburse employee health coverage. We like it because it allows the employee to choose a plan that fits their needs and we don't have to manage anything other than setting the limits and adding the reimbursement amount to their paycheck.

It is important to note that if you opt to reimburse an employees coverage using such a plan they no longer qualify for any government health insurance subsidy.

The company we use to manage this plan is PeopleKeep and they have a short writeup about what it is and how it works here: [https://www.peoplekeep.com/blog/what-is-a- qsehra](https://www.peoplekeep.com/blog/what-is-a-qsehra)

</comment><comment><USER3> You should probably clarify the type of insurance. I'm assuming health insurance.

Since it's a small company, and employees are in different locations, I don't think a group policy will be worthwhile. I'd recommend a reimbursement model, where employees find their own insurance, and you can apply the reimbursement to their paycheck, so it's tax deductible by the company.

<comment><AUTHOR> I updated the question text. Thanks.</comment></comment>


2009 Rails Rumble Registration Open - <AUTHOR> http://blog.railsrumble.com/2009/7/6/2009-contest-registration

<comment><USER2> Anyone wanna go over/under on 50% of the apps being Twitter related? (I'm still participating b/c I think it'll be fun and challenging, but I'm going to rack my brain to make sure we build something at least semi-useful...)

<comment><USER3> In the past there has generally been a pretty impressively wide range of different apps.

In the past the prize categories have meant that people with more unique apps have a significant advantage at the end.

Particularly as the main prize category was the sum of your completeness, design, usefulness and originality ratings. Missing out on any of those categories would make it very hard to be competitive.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The Lame Ducks will be defending our title this year, after winning last year with MeetInBetween.Us. Bring it.

<comment><USER5> You're going to have some local Cleveland competition this year. Watch yourself!

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I think we might join this year's fun! <http://LessEverything.com>

<comment><USER7> Pardon me if I've missed something, but I find that link totally unsolicited and it adds nothing to the conversation here.</comment></comment>


Assumptions about how children learn to read have been disproven by research - <AUTHOR> https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/557915?single_page=true <comment><USER3> "But if readers can't supply the missing information, they have a hard time making sense of the text."

This is what angers me the most about the ACT exam. I recall that passages with vague and uninteresting topics were difficult to comprehend. What was even more infuriating was a passage on a capacitor physics experiment in one exam. I initially enjoyed the passage because I had a thorough understanding of capacitance and voltage across two plates, but it turned out that for the sake of the "comprehension," the equation for capacitance was INTENTIONALLY rearranged in a way that violated the laws of physics. In other words, the meaning and relevance of the content of a passage in a comprehension exam like the ACT was intended to be misleading for the sake of testing attention to one tiny detail.

<comment><USER4> Do you recall when you took the test? I'd like to find the test because I work with ACT tests daily and have never seen a passage where the laws of physics were intentionally violated for sake of "comprehension."

Additionally the ACT reading passages are very focused, not vague. They may be uninteresting but much of a student's college experience is reading uninteresting things. The ACT is designed to predict how students will perform in college, not how "smart" they are or how "good of a reader" they are.

<comment><USER5> I similarly had a question on my 4th grade qualification exam. In the science section they asked a multiple choice question as to what would change the weight of a glass of water. One of the "wrong" answers was heating it... luckily I knew that I wasn't supposed to know relativity so I answered it correctly.

<comment><USER6> That's when you leave a friendly note. But I guess you are not supposed to think for yourself. Just react.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> It's not clear to me that this article is arguing for methods that improve learning as opposed to improve testing. One of the main points seems to be that, if we taught history etc. in a more standardized way and then tested everyone for reading comprehension on those standard topics, reading comprehension scores would go up because the topics would be familiar. That makes sense to me but it also doesn't suggest to me that the students would actually be any better when reading to obtain new knowledge.

<comment><USER8> Indeed -- it's become fashionable to replace tests of critical thinking with tests of rote regurgitation, since the former are "biased" towards students with wealthy or intellectual parents.

I'm skeptical this is good idea. Even the famous "oarsman:regatta" SAT analogy, oft-cited as a culturally biased question, had a _lower_ black/white gap than culturally neutral questions on the same exam [1].

> In countries that specify the content to be taught at each grade level, > standardized tests can test students on what they've learned in school. But > in the United States, where schools are all teaching different content, test > designers give students passages on a variety of topics that may have > nothing to do with what they've learned in school—life in the Arctic, for > example, or the disappearance of Amelia Earhart.

[1] [https://archive.org/stream/TheBellCurve/bell-curve- richard-j...](https://archive.org/stream/TheBellCurve/bell-curve-richard-j- herrnstein-charles-murray-1994-jewish_djvu.txt)

<comment><USER9> > Indeed -- it's become fashionable to replace tests of critical thinking with > tests of rote regurgitation, since the former are "biased" towards students > with wealthy or intellectual parents.

That sounds like a misunderstanding of the issue. It's not shifting to rote memory but rather being cognizant of where the test implicitly depends on knowledge which isn't broadly shared — e.g. how well would poor kids do on a question which used a lot of jargon related to sailing or polo? – so it's only measuring the intended skills.

In the AP tests this has apparently meant making the tests more self-contained so you're testing someone's ability to reason about it rather than trivia recall. The science teachers I know (all former postdocs) this has been received positively since that's closer to how actual science happens — nobody works without an Internet connection.

As for The Bell Curve, linking to decades-debunked pseudoscience is not a good way to start any discussion which will end well. There are less tainted sources for any valid argument.

<comment><USER10> No significant number of kids have any experience with sailing (regattas at least) or polo. This thus doesn't favor the non-poor, and certainly not white people. The kids from rich families are so rare that you can treat them as non-existent, and even those kids aren't too likely to be into sailing and polo. Basically nobody does those things.

The only bias is toward those who should score well: the students who read a wide variety of material and are thus well-prepared for the reading demands of college.

<comment><USER11> >The kids from rich families are so rare that you can treat them as non- existent

not so if you are trying to get into an elite school... 15-20% of the kids going to the really top schools come from parents in the top 1% of incomes[1] - if you are looking to get into an elite school, well, you are competing with really wealthy people.

And if you want a job at one of the top bay area tech companies... well, i'm not saying it's impossible without a degree from an elite school, hell, I know people here who don't have any education... but it seems to me like a large proportion of their hires come from elite schools.

[1][https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college- mobilit...](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college- mobility/brown-university)

<comment><USER10> The top 1% isn't rich. That is merely upper middle class.

Those people still aren't in regattas. At no income level will you find a significant portion of people who are in regattas. Regattas just aren't a thing, generally.

We could say top 0.0001% even... and still essentially no regattas. People don't do regattas.

The question is fair.

<comment><USER11> > The top 1% isn't rich. That is merely upper middle class.

yeah, we can argue all day about what defines a class, and by older standards, 99th percentile still puts you solidly in the 'working class' as defined by people who, you know, had to work, rather than those rich enough to let their capital do it all.

but... the point remains that there's a huge difference between someone in the top ten percent of incomes and someone in the bottom ten percent of incomes. (I'd go so far as to say that there is a bigger difference between the top 20% and the bottom 20% than there is between the top 20% and the top 0.1% - <USER2> 'cause having a top 20% income gives you access to most of what society has on offer.)

And this difference is wide and deep and has a lot to do with what sort of information you encounter; I think it's fair to say that you are likely to know a lot more about boating if you are wealthy, just like how poor people are likely to know a lot more, say, about football or the price of fast food.

>We could say top 0.0001% even... and still essentially no regattas. People don't do regattas.

So, I'm closer to the top 20% than the top 1%, but I've got family members who own sailboats, and even a family member who was pretty into competitive rowing. I think this is more common than you think for this income tax bracket. I bet that'd be a lot less likely if I was born into the bottom quintile.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> >Students from less educated families are usually the ones who are most handicapped by gaps in knowledge.

Entire article can be boiled down to this. Takeaways: education is controlled by the states, and many states don't make it a priority. Over the past 20 years or so, the federal government has shifted the burden of education to the states by cutting subsidies as well, making matters worse.

My family has a lot of teachers in it. They've all retired in the 1990s, and it's far worse today than it was yesteryear. I would enjoy teaching, but wouldn't do it for the world.

It's not all the states fault either. There are some students that just don't want to be there, yet we force them to be there and disrupt the students that do. When I was growing up, they sent those students to "bad kid" schools to keep the rot away.

<comment><USER13> > Entire article can be boiled down to this. Takeaways: education is > controlled by the states, and many states don't make it a priority.

Education is a classic state issue. Why shouldn't people be able to deprioritize it?

<comment><USER14> There has to be an argument that when you deprioritize education so kids can't read or do basic arithmetic yet are expected to do taxes and follow arcane laws immediately upon hitting age 18 that its extremely harmful to future generations to defund it.

Basically, if you vote on a single issue to change speed limits everyone having the law inflicted upon them is also a voter. Or at least a hairs length away from being one if you get your license as fast as possible at 16.

If you vote to defund public schools so the power goes out intermittently and there is black mold in the ceiling and cockroaches in the lockers, you are directly harming those who have no say in what happens to them.

It comes back to general issues of regional politics in a global world. If China wants to manipulate their currency and violate IP or if Russia wants to invade and conquer its neighbors or if the US wants to occupy countries for decades on end the citizens of, say, Greece never had anything close to a say in any of those happenings but are still subject to the consequences of them. Just because you get to write your own laws doesn't mean those without a voice in your decisions will be heavily, often negatively, impacted by them.

In the US that problem is more pronounced, because the freedom of movement within the US means that states that actually educate their population have to deal with the influx of uneducated that enter them when their economies prosper with an educated employed population and the states that didn't educate their people have crippled economies incapable of growing because nobody can read beyond a 4th grade level.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> While a lot of people here are focusing on the testing, and it does seem to be an important negative feedback cycle, there's also a discussion on pedagogy that's worth having.

I've noticed what the article talks about when reading with my own daughter. She's a natural whole-word reader - meaning she might think through a few syllables, but ultimately comprehension is a gestalt event. This is where everyone usually arrives, and it's necessary because you can't really sound out words... and really, if you sound out "rug-bee" or "rug-bye" it doesn't matter that much unless you know what rugby is. (And haven't we all encountered avid readers who pronounce things wrong even though they fully comprehend the word?)

Carefully watching my daughter read like this, I also realize it only works because she knows a lot of words (and phrases, literary devices, plot details, etc).

Decoding words (ie phonics) is useful scaffolding, but it's only scaffolding. You also just need to know a ton of things.

And of course there's also the depressing findings on class and privilege, and the number, variety, and quality of words children hear. The differences are staggering.

</comment><comment><USER13> This is extremely misleading. The lack of increased scores in the student body as a whole is the result of a large growth in the proportion of students from disadvantaged and ESL backgrounds. Reading scores have been going up _within_ each of those demographics, however. [https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/pdf/coe_cnb.pdf](https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/pdf/coe_cnb.pdf) (Figure 3). In fact scores for black, Asian, and Latino students have gone up faster than for white students.

<comment><USER16> Wouldn't that be a separate, socioeconomic analysis issue? The fact remains that as a whole, Americans are not getting better at reading. So the country still suffers regardless if specific classes of people managed to improve.

<comment><USER17> > So the country still suffers regardless if specific classes of people > managed to improve.

The phrase "specific classes of people" seems to miss the entire point of the parent comment… according to the linked study, _all_ groups of people improved from 1992 to 2015, not just "specific" groups. This is a classic example of Simpson's paradox. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson%27s_paradox](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson%27s_paradox)

Imagine, for a moment, that you start a school that teaches reading and writing. You have 10 ELL students and 90 native students. When you test them in 2015, the ELL students score 50 points on average, and the native students score 100 points on average. The average score for the school is 95.

Now imagine that your school is well-known now, and you hire better teachers (all test scores go up 10 points), and 40 more ELL students join your school. Now you have 50 ELL learners averaging 60 points, and 50 native learners averaging 110, so the average score is 85.

Even though everybody's test scores went up by 10 points, the average test scores went _down_ by 10 points because the demographics changed.

To be honest, this is horribly unfair. Somehow ELL students are seen as "behind" the native speakers when that's only when you measure them in English. This propagates the idea that it's better to be an excellent English speaker than it is to be bilingual but less proficient at English. And it's unfortunate that ELL students who study, e.g., science may get poor grades at times because even though they understand the concepts and know the terminology, the terminology is from their native language.

<comment><USER18> > To be honest, this is horribly unfair. Somehow ELL students are seen as > "behind" the native speakers when that's only when you measure them in > English.

This does not reflect the reality of US practice, in which students may be labeled "ELL" even if they prefer to speak English at home and/or with their friends. You graduate from the ELL designation by passing a standardized test, so it's more of a designation for "who's stupid" than for "who has trouble with English". It's not really surprising that a group defined by their inability to score well on standardized tests turns in poor scores on other standardized tests.

<comment><USER17> This comment is perfectly representative of what I was talking about. The entire idea that ELL is a "designation for 'who's stupid'" is exactly what is untrue, and the limitations of standardized testing propagate this false belief.

ELL is a bucket that has people with learning disabilities mixed with immigrants and children of immigrants. The fact that a 14-year-old Korean kid who just moved to America can't remember the English word for "photosynthesis" is not a reflection of poor skills in science but poor skills in English. I argue that the intent of a science test is to test knowledge of science, and that giving immigrants poor marks for subjects they are good at is nothing more than a failure of testing. This failure should be known and understood when analyzing test results—no test is perfect, but we should be able to account for known sources of error. Simpson's paradox is the classic example of what wrong conclusions you can draw when you fail to account for variables which are known to affect the result.

<comment><USER18> I'm saying that labeling children of immigrants "ELL" corrupts the system and makes the category basically useless.

I agree with you as to the Korean immigrant. But ELLs as a class are not "behind native English speakers only when you measure them in English". They are native English speakers themselves, and they are behind the non-ELL class because they are selected for poor performance.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> While there is undoubtedly a lot to improve in education, it is worth noting that (if I'm reading the article right) American students haven't gotten any worse at reading either. Considering how much critique education generally receives (as is apparent in this thread), I'd say that this is half-good outcome. I'm not sure even upon what the assumption of ever-improving results is built upon. Maybe we are just reaching the tail end of the S-curve in education, which doesn't sound completely implausible considering that reading is one of the oldest subject matters to be taught generally.

</comment><comment><USER20> I've been amazed at how bad people in my peer group (I'm 23) are at reading and writing. Even in college it seemed no one was up to the task of writing a five paragraph essay without major stress. Heaven help them if they tried to read anything above 12th grade reading level or anything written before 1950 (ye olde English is hard, but should be doable).

I don't know what the right answer is, but I'm encouraged by the idea of exposing kids to difficult texts early. Kids can learn really quickly when challenged. As long as it is a safe environment (you're not going to be punished for struggling with a too-hard text) I've seen that be very effective. Treating kids like they're dumb is the #1 way to make them dumb.

<comment><USER21> But much of high school education in English involves reading ye olde public domain works, and I'm not sure they're actually that helpful for reading or writing. I feel like what kids are doing is practicing how to carry the pretense of intellectualism, but in a way that they, their peers, their teachers, or anyone else around them, feels is absolutely toy and obvious.

It's one thing to begin riding with training wheels, and it's another to keep them on even past high school. For some, indefinitely.

I feel what's important for future optimism is improvement on specifically scientific literacy and observational writing, and not Catcher in the Rye type assignments where nobody, you included, is expected to believe in anything you write. I don't think that's a healthy attitude for the next generation.

<comment><USER7> There's something to be said for learning the "canon" but high school English only does that in a very superficial way under the best of circumstances. There are fairly classic books--at least some of which are admittedly more recent than ye olde public domain--which are pretty readable today. But IMO Henry James, Bronte sisters, Tolstoy, etc. are going to be a pretty tough slog for most modern readers, especially at high school age.

<comment><USER22> They're boring, too. Why not read Tolkien instead? Or Asimov? or Clancy?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Read to your child for 30-60 minutes a day from Day 1 and by Kindergarden there are books piled on every flat surface, books piled in the car, books in the refrigerator, and you won't be able to tear the book from their tiny little hands.

<comment><USER24> In the age of smartphones and tablets?

<comment><USER5> The disturbing thing is that you're talking about giving a kindergartner a smartphone/tablet... which is asking for trouble even if I've seen it done. This is exactly because their apps are designed to be so addictive.

<comment><USER25> When I was a kid I played with Lego. Every free moment was spent with Lego. My parents were continually warned by their friends and even our family doctor that I shouldn't spend so much time playing with Lego. It was 'addictive' and the time I spent playing with Lego was time I wasn't concentrating on homework, throwing ball, and other important things a child should be doing. The point is, every generation tends to have a play devil, the thing that will lead to the destruction of our society and hamper our children's long term success.

<comment><USER7> When I was growing up it was television that was the great satan.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> The implication here is that American students, on average, should have gotten better at reading over the last 20 years.

But might their performance in fact be asymptotic to some maximum possible achievement level, as constrained by general intelligence?

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_\(psychometrics\))

<comment><USER27> That would imply that the G factor might have something to do with the gap in achievement though. And if that were the case we'd have very little justification for aiming to improve low income scores.

Since we have evidence that students do better as family income increases I'm thinking we are wondering why we can't close the gap called by other things.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> "A sixth-grader at one of his schools was frustrated that a passage on a reading test she'd taken kept repeating a word she didn't understand: roog- bye. The unfamiliar word made it hard for her to understand the passage. When Rowe asked her to spell the word, it turned out to be rugby."

I wonder if the test conditions are to blame. In real life, if you don't know a word then you look it up in a dictionary. It takes a few seconds, and you always have a dictionary with you (a smart phone). If you don't know a concept then you can look it up in Wikipedia. Rugby is an unpopular sport in the US, so I think it's reasonable that a sixth-grader hadn't heard of it. For a general reading test, and not specifically a vocabulary test, I think she should have been allowed to look up a definition. Are dictionaries generally allowed in reading tests?

<comment><USER29> How do you get a oo sound from u ?

<comment><USER28> Suit, super, sue, suicide, suet, etc.

<comment><USER29> Ah I take the point

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> A rather prescient quote from Alan Kay's Dynabook paper in 1972 [0]

> For many years it has been a tradition to attempt to cure our society's ills > through technology: "You have slums? Let's build low-cost housing!" "You > can't afford that TV? We'll build a cheaper one and you can buy it on time, > even though it will break before you've finished paying for it!" "Your kids > aren't learning and education is too expensive? We'll build you a teaching > machine which will guarantee your kids will pass tests!"

[0]: [https://www.mprove.de/diplom/gui/kay72.html](https://www.mprove.de/diplom/gui/kay72.html)

</comment><comment><USER31> > The long-standing view has been that the first few years of elementary > school should be devoted to basic reading skills. History, science, and the > arts can wait.

For a long time I've thought math education has this problem. Math as a subject is abstract and lacks context. Learning subjects like physics or computer graphics or robotics requires learning math along the way to get something done, but they come with goals and results and context that can be far more motivating to the average person than just learning the mechanics of linear algebra or calculus in isolation.

</comment><comment><USER32> Isn't reading the kind of thing that should be taught by parents before the kid even goes to school?

I have no idea how kids manage to learn how to read at all in schools, American or otherwise. Reading is... difficult. The school environment does not promote the study of difficult things well. If you haven't been prepared, you'll have trouble.

Sometimes I'm not sure what we're measuring, education quality or just how good someone's parents are. Pretty much everything I knew that helped me at school/college did not come from school/college.

<comment><USER33> >Isn't reading the kind of thing that should be taught by parents before the kid even goes to school?

No, most kids in the US start school at the age of 5. Consensus is building that forcing kids to learn to read before they are read is detrimental, and the vast majority of kids aren't ready to read before they are 5.

<comment><USER32> I'm not mentioning age anywhere in my post?

I don't recall starting school at 5, I think it was later than that, but it wasn't in the US. In the first grade already if I didn't know how to read prior, I'd be in huge trouble. Most students were actively struggling to read and continued to struggle for 2 more grades. If you are not ready to read at 5 before school, why would you be ready to read at 5 in school? Why would teaching someone to read 3 months prior would be so much more horrible than waiting for them to hit the school system and suffer in there instead? If that's the argument, school should just start later.

I came into the US school system late but people were seriously struggling with reading in 6th grade, as well. People for whom English was their native language. I am not really seeing that parental interference is not needed.

> Consensus is building that forcing kids to learn to read before they are > read(y)

This is a tautology. I'm not sure what is the magical age at which children are "ready" to read, but I am very sure that people should be able to comfortably read by grade 6, and I'm similarly very sure that the educational system alone won't accomplish that.

<comment><USER33> >I'm not mentioning age anywhere in my post?

You said "Isn't reading the kind of thing that should be taught by parents before the kid even goes to school?". Since most countries start school at either 5 or 6, 5-6 is implied in that statement.

> If you are not ready to read at 5 before school, why would you be ready to > read at 5 in school?

You wouldn't. 5 is probably too early for most kids, less than than 5 is too early for an even greater number of kids. 3 months is 5% of a 5-year-old's life. Starting 3 months before starting school, which is probably already too early, isn't going to be helpful for most students.

>If that's the argument, school should just start later.

School probably should start later. In Finland, one of the highest ranked school systems, kids start at 7.

>I am not really seeing that parental interference is not needed.

Where did you get that? I said _most_ children shouldn't be forced to learn to read before they go to school--not that parents should never teach their children.

>This is a tautology.

No, it's not that children won't learn to read before they are ready. It's that forcing them to try to learn before they are ready is actively harmful.

>but I am very sure that people should be able to comfortably read by grade 6, and I'm similarly very sure that the educational system alone won't accomplish that.

You're arguing against points I'm not making.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> The article is the usual more-effort-is-needed pablum one expects from articles on education.

Any analysis of American children that ignores demographics is silly. 44% of California children don't speak english at home. What on earth do you expect from these children if you test them in english proficiency?

<comment><USER35> The percentages of kids who didn't speak English at home were pretty high 100 years ago, too, but they definitely were better at reading English then. The problem isn't effort. The problem is recognizing that there is value in learning to read.

<comment> concrete-faucet Where I live, there are gifted schools for kids that speak Polish, Spanish and Russian. Their only goal for English is to make sure the child is proficient by the 6th grade.

The kids section at the local library branch (there is one in every neighborhood) will have half the books in English and the rest in whatever languages are common in that neighborhood.

Language barriers are only a problem if your local city makes them one.

My son is in 3rd grade and his NWEA MAP reading score put him at the 11/12 grade level, so he got put into an advanced reader class. In the fall, they read books about history, wrote about and discussed them in class. This spring, the teach chose a young adult novel that I guess is entirely appropriate from a reading-level point of view. But some of the subject matter goes way over the heads of the kids and other stuff in the book is disturbing to them. Our son simply refused to finish reading the book. The teacher wasn't going to switch books because a couple kids didn't like it, and the class depended on discussing what they read... What can you do but stop reading and/or drop out of the class?

<comment><USER36> That is really hard. My oldest was reading at roughly that spread, and finding books that were emotionally approriate but also engaging at his reading level was difficult. It took a long time for him to read Harry Potter because it was just too dark. It didn't help that he'd tear through trilogies in a day or two. You might win once or twice, but a week later you're in the same boat again.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Something odd about the word "gotten" in the context of student literacy? Or is it just me?

I see the headline here has since been edited to remove that word.

Perhaps this is some clever "English as she is wrote" kind of joke that flew over my head??

<comment><USER38> What's wrong with "gotten"?

<comment><USER37> To me (British English native) it sounds like a non-word. I'm well aware of its meaning and that many "Americanisms" are actually old English usage. It still sounds to me like something a cartoon weasel would say.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Sort of hoped it was because American students had in fact become better instead...

</comment><comment><USER40> I'd say one of the biggest shifts since 1998 is the wider availability of the internet and then computer like devices in school. Instead of doing the rote learning, they make learning into a game. Where everyone advances at a glacial pace from what I've seen.

Now that kids are growing up using handheld phones/tablets for their consumption, the likelihood of them sitting down and reading a book (be it digital or paper) seems less likely than during my childhood when we had to dream about these futuristic gadgets.

<comment><USER41> For what it's worth, I basically had to force my son to read the 1st Harry Potter book. It's slightly above his grade level and I had to actually ban him from electronics until it was finished and we quizzed him on it to make sure he actually read it. There were tears because he felt it was too hard without really trying.

After he finished it, he loved it. He's on book 3 now, reads every night because he wants to, makes a point to take the books with him, takes the accelerated reader tests for them at school (and aces them).

Now the kid loves reading... :)

<comment><USER42> Is that because the electronics were more attractive, or because he was still in the 'learn to read' phase and it was work to get through a large book? Crossing the threshold into 'read to learn' skill level is a huge turning point in how a kid looks at books [in my experience].

<comment><USER43> As an adult, I think it's because electronics are more attractive. As a kid, I gladly slogged through the Silmarillion. Given my choice of verb, I'm not sure that I could do it today. Reading the comments on HN gives me a much quicker and sharper burst of pleasure.

<comment><USER42> My hats off to you. I didn't try Silmarillion until I was in my 20s, but I was unable to stick with it to the end.

I think it has to be the social part, not the electronics per se. When I was a tween, we had mostly non-networked PCs and games (e.g. Atari, NES). We played on them plenty, to be sure, but I still spent most of my time with friends outdoors. Today it seems like most games have a social aspect to them, and right along with reading/replying to comments on places like HN, it's the feeling of connectedness that is addicting. Electronics is how, not the why. In my opinion :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> The last person you should ask about education is a teacher. It would be like asking the waiter about farming or the supply chain or vetinary medicine.

<comment><USER45> No, the last person you should ask about education are the people who teach teachers. Unless they're the kind who looks at meta-analysis and goes "huh, the textbook is encouraging stuff that's essentially a placebo".

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> Hard to get better when ur the best

</comment><comment><USER44> It's a miracle that in the UK they can read at all given the quality of teaching</comment>


In Conversation: Penn Jillette - <AUTHOR> http://www.vulture.com/2018/08/penn-jillette-in-conversation.html <comment><USER2> Great interview. I agree about context being sticky...but I can't imagine those tapes not to have leaked in this age of information.

</comment><comment><USER3> Wow. Gave me a whole new appreciation for the guy.

Here's another interview from 5 years back. [https://web.archive.org/web/20131102205959/http://americanhu...](https://web.archive.org/web/20131102205959/http://americanhumanist.org/HNN/details/2012-12-morality- religion-and-bullsht-an-interview-with-penn)</comment>


Internet's not special, says communications minister - <AUTHOR> http://www.theage.com.au/technology/technology-news/internets-not-special-says-communications-minister-20100401-rg7h.html?autostart=1 <comment><AUTHOR> Unfortunately, this is not an April Fool's day joke.

This mouthbreather's latest dribble:

 _Asked what percentage of all of the nasty material on the internet his filters would block, Senator Conroy dodged the question, responding that his filters were "100 per cent accurate - no overblocking, no underblocking and no impact on speeds"._

Later on in that same interview he asserted that his filters would only reduce the response time about 1/70th the speed of a blink of an eye, or about 5-6ms

6ms != 0 impact</comment>


Ask HN: What are the best texts to learn the ins and outs of databases and OSs? - <AUTHOR>

For DBs, I've been able to find plenty of books that dive into SQL/NoSQL syntax, but I haven't been able to find much on database design and theory.
I've had a similar problem looking for information on operating systems.
Any direction would be much appreciated! <comment><USER2> For implementation of database systems, Gray and Reuter's _Transaction Processing: Concepts and Techniques_ [http://www.amazon.com/Transaction- Processing-Concepts-Techni...](http://www.amazon.com/Transaction-Processing- Concepts-Techniques-Management/dp/1558601902). For the ideas behind relational databases, I like C.J. Date's _Introduction to Database Systems_ , [http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Database-Systems-C- Date/d...](http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Database-Systems-C- Date/dp/0201385902).

</comment><comment><USER3> [http://www.amazon.com/Operating-Systems-Design- Implementatio...](http://www.amazon.com/Operating-Systems-Design- Implementation-Edition/dp/0131429388)

That's the book Linus Torvalds read. :)

</comment><comment><USER4> Berkeley's got a solid database class up on youtube:

[https://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=-XXv- cvA_iBVK2QzAV-...](https://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=-XXv- cvA_iBVK2QzAV-R7NMA1ZkaiR2y)

Berkeley webcasts are awesome... there's an OS class up there that I highly recommend as well.

Here's the link to their CS classes:

[http://webcast.berkeley.edu/series.html#c,d,Computer_Science](http://webcast.berkeley.edu/series.html#c,d,Computer_Science)

</comment><comment><USER5> for databases this is pretty good:

[http://www.amazon.com/Database-Management-Systems-3rd- Editio...](http://www.amazon.com/Database-Management-Systems-3rd- Edition/dp/0072465638)

for Oses [http://williamstallings.com/OS/OS6e.html](http://williamstallings.com/OS/OS6e.html)

cheers

</comment><comment><USER6> I think you could find some references to useful resources here:

[http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and- comput...](http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and-computer- science/6-830-database-systems-fall-2010/index.htm)

Unfortunately no video lectures.</comment>


Today's the Day: Let's Save Net Neutrality - <AUTHOR> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/07/todays-day-lets-save-net-neutrality <comment><USER2> It's inspiring to so many people and organizations come together on this. I wonder if the powers that be will care what the people want.</comment>


TechWildcatters (Dallas, TX startup accellerator) - Applications Due March 19 - <AUTHOR> http://thestartuplawyer.com/startup-lawyer/techwildcatters-applications-due-march-19 <comment><USER2> looks awesome</comment>


Ask HN: How can a CS undergrad gain real-world skills? - <AUTHOR>

Hey HN.
I'm an undergraduate computer science student. For a while now I've been trying to gain some real world experience, for my own development, and to (hopefully) make me more appealing to employers.
I try to build projects in my free time to build up a portfolio. However, I'm always stuck for ideas; a lot of my ideas are either out of my skill (or require a lot of research/expertise), or seem too trivial. I've tried looking for open-source projects to contribute to, but have honestly had a really hard time finding projects that I could benefit.
I've had one quite large project that I managed to get through the family of a friend which involved developing quite a large PHP site with a lot of functionality (I used Laravel & OctoberCMS [http://octobercms.com] as a starting point).
My main skills are in PHP/HTML/CSS/JS, C#/VB.NET, python, and a tiny bit of Node.js. My uni teaches Java, and at the moment, I'm trying to learn Rust.
Recently, I've been trying to get small jobs freelancing on sites like http://peopleperhour.com/. While I've received one or two small tasks (integrate an API, fix bugs), I've never received a proper 'project' that I could call my own.
Although I think that I'm more skilled and have a more experience than most other students at my level, I also feel as though it'd be easy to go out of my depth doing freelancing. However, I really want to gain some skills/experience that will make me stand out of the crowd.
Hopefully this is an appropriate Ask HN. I think it could benefit a lot of other students in my position. <comment><USER2> Adopt a beginner mindset - you are a beginner. Sounds like there a few things you know you are good at, and the rest is "out of your depth". Build a new depth. Jump into something you have never done before. Sounds like you have some webdev experience, so do something else, something you know nothing about. Some ideas - use an NLP library, or something in distributed systems, or learn a very different language - e.g lisp/haskell, or build a parser/compiler, analyze images, make an AI for a game, make mobile apps... anything different. It should be confusing,hard,time-consuming and completely new all over again.

Alternatively, maybe you are a just little burnt out. In that case, stop programming, reading about programming, thinking abut programming etc. for a few weeks.

</comment><comment> Warewolf-ESB Work on an opensource project! There are tons available on GitHub, some with really basic stuff. It will look great on your CV, you'll learn a lot from other devs, and it's good for the open source software movement (i.e. everyone!).

We're always looking for contributors, you can check out what we're doing here - [https://github.com/Warewolf-ESB/Warewolf-ESB](https://github.com/Warewolf- ESB/Warewolf-ESB)

</comment><comment><USER3> Looking at your "main skills" it looks like a "jack of all trades, master of none" situation. Ok compared to other CS students you might see yourself as more experienced, but relative to what is needed to address real-world problems you have lots more ground to cover.

If you want to solve real-world problems get out of the office (Steve Blank). Talk to business owners, clubs, etc and find a need that strikes a chord with you and solve it. If you do this well, it could even be your capstone project.

Good Luck!

</comment><comment><USER4> I'm not sure if you've thought of this but you should apply to internships/co- ops while you're still an undergrad. If you have a summer break from school, a summer internship in Silicon Valley would give you the skills and experience that will make you appealing to future (post college) employers. Importantly, this will teach you how to work with others; I'm not sure how much experience you get with that from freelancing.

</comment><comment><USER5> Try to find some work. If you're free over a summer or something, an internship or a job for a month or two will teach you a ton of stuff. I've just finished a gap year and am about to head for uni, but I already feel that I know more than a lot of people with a degree simply due to being chucked in the deep end and having to figure stuff out for myself. Plus, you'll get some $$ so it's win-win :) Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER6> Internships maybe? And people don't really expect too much from your first job applications. You don't really need to do big projects to stand out of the crowd. When I graduated, my CV was mostly some of my bigger personal projects and 2 internships and I easily got a job a known company in my country.

<comment><USER7> I can't agree enough with this advice.

You could be the best CS student on the planet, but when you start at a company that all goes right out of the window. Not only is it an entirely different environment to academia, you'll (very slowly) discover that what you lack is the soft skills that more experienced programmers may have. You learn how to speak to clients, how to work alongside others in a non-technical setting, how to handle expectations, and most importantly how to say no; the kind of things that just can't be taught properly in academia.

I interned at a medium-sized company where I live, not expecting anything too great. I probably learned more in the nine weeks I spent there than I did in an entire year at university. Sure, I went to a crappy university, but I've worked alongside people from top universities (Oxford/Cambridge/ICL/UCL) that really struggled. They had their own issues alongside my own. They went into work as top students in their class, solving fairly complex problems, to maintaining a crappy web app that would fall over twice a day because the company that originally built it did it under an unrealistic timeframe, and dealing with clients that couldn't care less than Newy McNewerson had written a Raytracer in C++ over the weekend, because their site was down during a sale.

I cannot recommend internships enough. It'll kill some time over the summer break, you'll earn some money, and it'll set you apart from most of your peers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Checkout the issues list of the open-source projects that you care about on Github, pick the ones that interest you and submit pull-requests for them. You mentioned rust, you can join the #rust channel on irc.mozilla.org when you get stuck, you'll find very helpful people there.

</comment><comment><USER9> Open any freelance site like oDesk.com and search for opened job offers. You can see what is current ask for software development and make some money. If you can't get "big project", then you're doing something wrong, for example you don't market yourself properly.

</comment><comment><USER10> Build a scraper that runs throught all the forums of the internet fetching the answers that were given any time someone asked the question: "how can a CS undergrad gain real-world skills?"

</comment><comment><USER11> What is your email?</comment>


Ask HN: How has Bitcoin/Crypto/Blockchain affected your life, if at all? - <AUTHOR> I'm curious, with all the rage about cryptos going on, how has it actually affected your life?
I have been able to leave an office job and now live fully off my crypto income. And of course, I gladly share how I do it with anyone who is interested. I have the freedom to pursue passions and projects that I've always wanted because of this.
Are there any similar experiences you guys have to share? Would love to hear! <comment><USER2> That's called getting lucky and rich. Your story has nearly nothing to do with cryptocurrency and more to do with winning the lottery. Please elaborate on the crypto part.

I have also made a sizeable amount from crypto, as well as other investments, but crypto is the most fun to follow. I have been inspired to create blockchain-type applications and use crypto in upcoming projects.

My next goal is to create an app that stops parking tickets via blockchain and common kindness.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, andirk! I am referring to mining. Using my income to purchase income generating assets has provided me said freedom.

I am also eager to learn about blockchain development in the near future. But for now, I am first focusing on finishing a different project of mine.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> This is pretty accurate for determining mining income:

[http://whattomine.com](http://whattomine.com)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, sharemywin! I am well aware of that site :) I hope someone else here will also benefit from it.

Have you heard of NemosMiner? It automatically switches to the most profitable asset every 5 minutes, maximising your mining potential.</comment></comment>