Ask HN: What technologies should I focus on to enhance my carreer? - <AUTHOR> I'd like your opinion about what technologies to focus on to get the best of today's job market.
I'm currently a front-end web developer in France.
I have an experience of 3 years of web-based front-end dev. Before that, I was developping GUIs with Qt and C++ during 3 years.
My main skills are writing code, designing software architectures and as I'm in a small company I do a little UX work as well.
I have some back-end notions. I could focus on that an improve it considerably with a little time and effort, but that's not what I like the most today.
I'm considering changing jobs soon. My number one concern today is money (as i'm currently looking to pay my mortgage and eat something else than bread and pasta).
I reckon it will shift toward getting a project with a little more meaning and technical challenges in the next 2 or 3 years, when the money problem is solved.
What field/technologies could be a good time investment ? <comment><USER2> It would be helpful if the community here could comment about the state of salaries in France (depending on companies/technologies/roles/years of experience), as I noticed it is very different from the US.

I'm living in Paris and having the same concern as the OP, wondering which technologies one could invest in to have a better pay.

I heard the best way is to do contracting, but I wonder what prerequisites/technologies one needs to start contracting at a high rate.

<comment><USER3> France is a lost cause when it comes to software engineering or even creative jobs like design.

Salaries are low (I made the same money in London as a junior that I would in Paris as a senior), bureaucracy and bullshit jobs are rampant - in fact, engineers aren't really a prestigious position and some paper-pushing idiot delivering zero net value (besides creating work for other paper-pushers) will end up getting more money and recognition - the entire working culture is based on bullshit jobs, much more so than other countries and there's always this mindset of "us versus them" and being at odds with management, something that ultimately leads to disaster especially in IT (I can't imagine working if I had to be in conflict with my line manager who's also a senior developer and gives me invaluable advice). Finally IT is considered as some kind of rocket science or black magic where they require 5+ years of higher education for anything even remotely related to IT (tech support, etc) which means getting into the industry is very hard unless you are ready for 5 years of misery before being able to get your dream job.

<comment><AUTHOR> Everything you said about the work culture, I have seen. It's both reassuring (thinking I'm not the only one who feel that way) and depressing (because indeed working in an environment where 90% of the energy is put into politics to navigate to workplace is exhausting).

The second part I didn't see. A lot of colleague work without a 5+ year degree on some technical jobs.

More, I feel that the engineering spirit has been lost in the it jobs. Working as an engineer doesn't necessarly require a 5 year degree (it helps). I feel there's a lot of hype around high level tools, a lot of trends and very very few focused thinking. Most of my colleages don't seem to want to know how a computer works or how their framework is implemented. When something doesn't work as expected I see a lot of panicked faces, very few focused ones.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> React, Vue, and Angular are the big front-end frameworks right now. React is on top currently, but I think Vue will take over the industry within the next couple years. Angular seems to be going away. Most developers I talk to say they want to like it, but it's just too hard to work with in comparison to Vue or React.

A good place to start would be to learn GatsbyJS. It's a "static" site generator using React. It's super fast and easy to get started. Gridsome is the Vue alternative, but it's not quite as polished as Gatsby.

</comment><comment><USER5> Focus on your communication skills. I've worked at three start ups in the states and I can tell you that those who get promotions or more salary almost always are good communicators. Not always is it your hard skills that advance your career

<comment><AUTHOR> I hear that advice a lot. Seems to be consistent with what I see happening around me.

What kind of skills in particular would you recommend to work on and how does one go about improving said skills ?

<comment><USER5> In would recommend two things 1) learn to negotiate 2) take an improv acting class. These classes help you learn to connect with others and read them better

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Money goes where it's treated best. Why don't you go where you're treated best. You obviously have a good command of the English language. So you're not limited to France, Quebec, ...

<comment><USER7> He mentioned that he has a mortgage, so moving is probably not an option for him at this time.

<comment><USER8> Why not? He can still move while putting up his mortgaged property on rent.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The best advice I can give you is to start learning Salesforce. There is a high demand for Salesforce developers right know in France.

In Paris, you can easily get a job with 55K€ as a Salesforce developer after 2 years of experience. A confirmed developer (4 to 5 years) can earn 65K€ without any problem.

Salesforce provides a lot of content and training to be a Salesforce developer: [https://trailhead.salesforce.com/en/content/learn/trails/for...](https://trailhead.salesforce.com/en/content/learn/trails/force_com_dev_beginner)

PS: I am the CEO of a small company and we are looking for people who want to learn Salesforce and to be a Salesforce developer. If you're interested, send me an email at firstname.lastname@example.com

</comment><comment><USER10> Background: I am French from a small town, came to college in the US after high school and now working as a back-end dev.

As some others mentioned, France is not the best when it comes to tech salaries. That being said, if you want to make more money, you will either have to prove that you can bring more value or build something of your own. If you feel limited by the market in France, then a few US companies will be interested in hiring you as a contractor. You will then have to pay a bunch of taxes you didn't know about in France but your cash inflow will increase if you price yourself right.

In terms of technology, what everyone looks for is a general understanding of software (architecture, algorithms, data structure, etc) and then mastery in one or more languages. I'd recommend looking into a functional language (Scala, Elixir etc) to broaden your thinking as well.

<comment><AUTHOR> > In terms of technology, what everyone looks for is a general understanding > of software (architecture, algorithms, data structure, etc)

I'm glad to read that. I focus a lot on those aspects of the job, and I think that they are very important to produce good work. These are the aspect of the job I love most. Interviewers around here (south of france) don't seem to be interested in that. They tend to ask very specific questions about languages or framework instead.

<comment><USER10> I interviewed with a few French companies over a year ago in the case that I might have to move back home. I believe it is starting to change. Your experience is pretty reflective of what I heard from others as well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> As others have said, React is absolutely littered across tech positions right now.. Moreover, full stack development is huge right now - become familiar with RESTful API's, both creating them and interfacing with them in some popular language (python, nodejs, plain javascript, golang, etc).

</comment><comment><USER12> For the next 2 or 3 years on frontend? Definitely React. Without a doubt.

I am from Brazil and I am looking for a job right now in the US or remote. The sheer quantity of React positions everywhere makes it a certainty that the best time investment right now is React. Not a single doubt in my mind that this is true for the next 2-3 years.

But don't neglect some fundamentals that count a lot for the best paying jobs. Back-end knowledge is one. It will be valuable for employers to know about at least one back-end for web tech (Rails, Django...), good SQL skills, some basic devops knowledge like continuous integration configuration, strong Javascript, etc.

</comment><comment><USER13> I hear it's hot to make Alexa, etc apps. It's a free dev service, it only takes a background in node.js (lots of courses on that) and an idea (who knows, maybe a calendar app?)

To make money on it you can make a pro plan.

</comment><comment><USER14> Berlin is a nice city, with still more disposable income for devs than the rest of Europe.

just saying

<comment><USER15> Tallinn is better in that regard.

Salaries range from 1500 to 5000€ netto per month (or « super net » for french HNers reading this comment) for an average rent of 600€.

<comment><USER14> Berlin rent is a little bit higher, but so is salary.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I would say PHP. When everyboby is learning Go or React or k8s and when millions of websites are still running with PHP, it may be a very rare skill in the future :)

</comment><comment><USER17> React, Vue, Angular are a good fit with your current frontend experience.</comment>


Interview with Eiiti Wada, Creator of the Happy Hacking Keyboard - <AUTHOR> https://www.massdrop.com/article/eiiti-wada-interview <comment><USER2> I really like one of the highlighted quotes from him since it pretty much sums up my view on computer peripherals:

 _" Because keyboards are accessories to PC makers, they focus on minimizing the manufacturing costs. But that's incorrect. When America's cowboys were in the middle of a trip and their horse died, they would leave the horse there. But even if they were in the middle of a desert, they would take their saddle with them. The horse was a consumable good, but the saddle was an interface that their bodies had gotten used to. In the same vein, PCs are consumable goods, while keyboards are important interfaces."_

Also the title should probably be marked with (2016) since this isn't a new interview.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, that part made me imagine a world where everyone carries around a cool keyboard with their dotfiles stored on it, and logs into public UNIX machines just by plugging it in.

<comment><USER3> The Kinesis Freestyle Edge has a tiny 4MB memory drive built into it. It's intended for storing the keyboard's editable config files, but you could easily keep your dotfiles there, too.

<comment><USER4> Really? That's pretty handy actually. A long time ago I ran an experiment where I kept my dotfiles remotely and union mounted them to the right places. The real issue was getting it set up on temporary usage boxes and managing the differences.

While not as fun, this is why I built my own ErgoDox. So I can have my own personalized layout/layers and never have to worry about trying to configure the system. Just plug and go.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Hahaha, I love his answer to "hhkb is great for unix programming, how would you design a keyboard for a modern ide that uses lots of function keys and key combos?"

>I once wrote an application for iPhone. The environment was quite different from my previous experience. I am already quite old, and personally the present environment is pleasant and comfortable for me.

Which I read as "I'm too tired, that's someone else's problem."

<comment><USER6> I used Eclipse, Netbeans and Idea, even Visual Studio (old versions) and don't remember using F-keys. F-keys were heavily used in DOS era, but later not much.

Modifier keys are even more heavily used in Emacs than these IDEs.

You will probably be more productive in all these eclipses with HHKB than with full-size PC keyboard because mouse will be closer to right hand home row position, and you can't avoid mouse with these IDEs.

When Apple removed F-keys row on Macbooks, everyone missed only Esc key which was on that row, almost no one complained about removed F-keys. And AFAIK you can't press these keys with Fn+numbers on Macbook.

<comment><USER7> > And AFAIK you can't press these keys with Fn+numbers on Macbook.

There is a System Preferences > Keyboard > "Press Fn key to <Show F1,F2,etc Keys>" option available to do just that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> A rather hostile website in that whenever you click or try to select something, a signup popup appears. 90's / 2000's popups were less aggressive than that.

Web developers, please stop with the popups!

<comment><USER9> Unfortunately, usually it's not up to web developers, blame it on a business people.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> As a big fan of ergonomics, it's really hard for me to understand how anyone likes these types of keyboards....

Maybe its just my physical size, but to me, one of the biggest problems with traditional keyboards is how close the right and left key 'wells' are to each other.

I started using a kinesis advantage some years ago and find them simply amazing for a multitude of reasons.

\- First off, the separation between right and left key 'wells' decreases pressure at my wrists significantly.

\- Secondly, the small, natural curve in the wells seems to greatly reduce the effort required to reach the most used keys.

\- And thirdly, thumb keys are bomb!!

All of that said, it is a pretty expensive piece of gear... but it's also where the rubber meets the road -- where my fingers do the talking.. so why shouldn't it be nice?

<comment><USER6> One of problems with columnar/ortholinear/split keyboards is that all of them are 40%-50%ish. I never seen such keyboard with '[' and ']' keys in standard places. Sometimes there's no "'" too. Yes, this is by design, because these keys are too far away from home position, but I use Russian layout and it has 'х', 'ъ' and 'э' letters on these keys. Not the most frequent letters but still I don't like idea to have letters on some unrelated places on "punctuation layer".

Not everybody likes heavy use of modifier keys. Despite using computers from early 90s I still struggle with pressing ctrl/alt/super before alphanum key, sometimes I press keys in wrong order (i.e. I press alphanum before ctrl is fully pressed). Using multiple layers with Fn keys would be probably a nightmare for me.

<comment><USER11> I think a fully programmable keyboard might be able to satisfy your requirements. Off the top of my head Ergodox/Ergodone, Iris, Helix, and Let's Split are a few that are split and programmable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I always wanted one of these, but never got around to buying one. I've used the Filco Ninja keyboard with a similar compact layout, which I enjoyed. The keyboard I use the most, however, is the Apple Extended Keyboard II. It requires an adapter to work with USB and doesn't have media keys, but it's just the most comfortable keyboard that I've ever used. It looks odd paired to my 2018 MacBook Pro, but I'm willing to forego the aesthetics for the comfort.

<comment><USER8> It looks interesting, but I'm no vim / emacs pro (I never got used to it) and need arrow keys.

At home (leisure, gaming, forums etc) I have a Filco Majestouch, tenkeyless version. At work I have the new apple wireless keyboard, also without numpad; I prefer a low profile for work.

<comment><USER13> It is ok, but, imo it could do with a smaller space bar and more thumb keys. Also, the wasted space on either side of the bottom row is irritating when it could easily have been used for keys. The uhk-60 looks a lot better in that regard, but unfortunately is well out of my price range.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> So I was wondering if anyone else finds the lack of F keys to be a minor annoyance? I currently have been using a 60 percent keyboard and am thinking of getting a similar keyboard with F keys because some times it's just really inconvenient...

</comment><comment><USER15> I use a HHKB and its solid response on key press is irreplaceable for me.

I wonder how I can reduce the noise, though. A 5mm shock absorbing mat beneath helps to some extent (cheap one, like $2 USD), but apparently that's not enough.

<comment><USER2> I can highly recommend hypersphere's silencing rings but they are pretty expensive so it's probably more worthwhile to check out the cheaper ones made by KBDfans or KeyClack.

Here's a video demonstrating the before and after sound. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdqYnI55kVw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdqYnI55kVw)

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> My dream is a tenkeyless membrane, i.e. all keys in the usual size and layout but simply w/o numpad. Somehow our bloated over-consuming society won't make one.

<comment><USER17> The IBM SpaceSaver II is a TKL membrane board if you don't mind digging around or a big ol' IBM Logo

<comment><USER16> If only it didn't have the mouse nub. I tend to hit it a lot when typing. Otherwise it would be perfect.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Back in the 90s, I started using the Microsoft Natural keyboards at work (the ones that are 'bent' in the middle) and I am most comfortable with that layout.

</comment><comment><USER19> Massdrop website is awful.

I can't even browse it unless I am registered?

Keep your sh*t, I'd rather pay full price than agree to this kind of behaviour.</comment>


Use Machine Learning to Increase Sales from Your Predictable Customers - <AUTHOR> https://jackstouffer.com/blog/target-predictable-customers.html <comment><USER2> The use of "Machine Learning" here is either naive or clickbait.

<comment><AUTHOR> Can you elaborate? I used a feature of a machine learning library to make a prediction. By my understanding that's correct usage.

<comment><USER2> This does a much better job of explaining than I could:

[https://www.analyticsvidhya.com/blog/2015/07/difference- mach...](https://www.analyticsvidhya.com/blog/2015/07/difference-machine- learning-statistical-modeling/)

TL;DR: Just because you used a servo from a robot kit doesn't mean you built a robot (not meant in a harsh way, just using an analogy).</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: I'm selling domain names to bootstrap, interested? - <AUTHOR>

Hey HN,
I'm a student bootstrapping a startup and looking to scrounge as much cash as I can. I've got a bunch of domain names that I don't have much use for. So I'd love to sell them very cheaply to anyone who's interested. I am very open to negotiation.
I have them up on Sedo, as it seems like the safest way to sell a domain. Hopefully this works for you.
The best ones are probably: 2DArtwork.com, AtlantaVegans.com, FitReply.com, LondonRedBus.com, NYCvegans.com, Learnweb.org, and OdinGod.com. Many of them are popular search terms.
Full list:
131k.com
2DArtwork.com
AmericanAtheism.net
AmericanWorldCup.com
AtlantaVegans.com
BobbingAndWeaving.com
BrazilWorld.net
BuyBeerCheap.com
DesignSketch.net
EastVsWest.net
EchoCount.com
EconoMonk.com
FactoryChinese.com
FitReply.com
FreeLegalTip.com
GermanBorn.com
GodIsAlive.net
GodsAndLegends.com
GuideH.org
Hackski.com
HealHack.com
Kollz.com
Learnweb.org
Locaq.com
LondonRedBus.com
LondonShoeStore.com
LondonShoeStores.com
LongHallways.com
MoneyMammoth.com
NYCVegans.com
OdinGod.com
RussianBorn.com
SessionData.com
SheSaidJokes.com
TeaPartyGoals.com
TheCoffers.com
TiredNeck.com
TopSitesInternet.com
UrbanParks.net

Here's the Sedo page: https://sedo.com/search/searchresult.php4?showportfolio=d254bea7ce5e3851159b2a33a36f363994b7ca5d
Registrations end between June 2011 and November 2011 (depending on the particular domain). If you're interested, let me know on here or shoot me an email: keiferski at gmail.com. (Or buy them on the Sedo page.) Thanks. <comment><AUTHOR> Sedo page clicky: [https://sedo.com/search/searchresult.php4?showportfolio=d254...](https://sedo.com/search/searchresult.php4?showportfolio=d254bea7ce5e3851159b2a33a36f363994b7ca5d)</comment>


SSD Storage: 2018 in review - <AUTHOR> https://www.anandtech.com/show/13752/anandtech-year-in-review-2018-ssds <comment><USER2> I've been following the news and it's amazing how SSDs are still progressing, a bit slower but similar to Moore's Law. Prices for Samsung SSD 1TB external USB products:

\- 2015 $600: Samsung T1 [http://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/samsung- portable-ssd...](http://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/samsung-portable- ssd-t1-review-1tb-price-speed-capacity-security/)

\- 2016 $430: Samsung T3 [https://www.storagereview.com/samsung_portable_ssd_t3_review](https://www.storagereview.com/samsung_portable_ssd_t3_review)

\- 2018 $200: Samsung T5 [https://www.androidheadlines.com/2018/12/samsung-t5-portable...](https://www.androidheadlines.com/2018/12/samsung-t5-portable- ssd-1tb-198-amazon-holiday-deals-2018.html)

Another incredible exciting point is the amount of competition coming up, it's not just 2-3 large vendors anymore.

If things continue at this pace it seems sensible to expect a _10TB_ SSD consumer drive for under $1000 within a couple of years.

Note: not afiliated at all, just a happy consumer.

<comment><USER3> Meanwhile Apple is charging $1,200 for a 1 TB MacBook upgrade. Hoping this year we see a significant jump in consumer availability of these drives. I've been using a 512gb laptop since 2010 at least. Would be nice to start seeing multi-terrabyte drives in devices besides after market or external drives.

<comment><USER4> _> Meanwhile Apple is charging $1,200 for a 1 TB MacBook upgrade._

This is specifically one of the reasons I ended up switching to a Lenovo Thinkpad X1 Yoga, even though I'd planned to buy the new MacBook Air. The Thinkpad's SSD is officially user-replaceable and I bought a 2TB WD Blue SSD for less than a third of the cost of Apple's upgrade. Even an NVMe SSD would have been half the price of Apple.

One caveat is that although Lenovo has excellent official repair videos ([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqrspYc21PY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqrspYc21PY)), I must be doing something wrong, the Phillips & JIS heads in my iFixit Mako toolkit don't seem to fit/grip the Thinkpad's SSD screw. I'm worried I'll strip the screw if I keep trying, so I guess I'll take it to a Lenovo repair shop for some help.

<comment><USER5> At the end of the day if you're buying apple for the hardware you were doing something wrong to begin with. MacOS is one of the few good reasons to get apple products, otherwise it should be a given that you get an alternative device. Combine this with the fact that Apple has made it impossible to get stuff repaired, and what you've just said, I don't see why anyone would buy an apple laptop for the hardware alone.

<comment><USER6> For a long time, Apple had the best laptop hardware on the market. Since the web revolution and fewer people needing Windows to work, its no wonder that Mac sales have exploded. I believe that's coming to an end though. Macbook Pros have gone too far into the direction of compromise for the sake of design and are on the road to nichedom again.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Not sure if I'm asking this correctly but, all SSDs now have their own internal filesystem for managing access to blocks right? Are we getting to a point where traditional filesystems like NTFS or ext4 will simply go away? Or will they still stick around and just act as lightweight layers on top of the SSD filesystem?

<comment><USER8> At the SSD level, the drives are actually doing block management, not file management. You still need a filesystem to store metadata, manage the layout of the data, etc.

An example of something that a SSD's controller does that the operating system/filesystem doesn't have to worry about is managing bad blocks. If the SSD detects a bad block, it will replace it with a working block and update the data used by its flash translation layer to move the blocks around. This is completely opaque to the operating system; as far as it knows its underlying storage works exactly the same (until there are so many bad blocks that the drive can't keep up this convenient deception).

An example of something a filesystem does that the SSD doesn't provide is storing operating system-specific file metadata, such as permissions, creation times, multiple data streams, directory layouts, etc. SSDs deal only in blocks of data, not arbitrarily-sized units, nor metadata.

The reason that this behavior isn't more tightly-integrated is because some of the details of managing the underlying flash blocks tend to be specific to type of flash, or even different models of flash. For example, the article mentions QLC flash becoming mainstream - we're finally getting to this point because previously, QLC was so difficult to manage that your filesystem had to be aware that it was writing to QLC flash to use it effectively. There are a few filesystems designed for direct flash management like yaffs[0], but this isn't quite as efficient as a SSD's dedicated processor and software stack.

[0]: [https://yaffs.net/](https://yaffs.net/)

<comment><USER9> > This is completely opaque to the operating system; as far as it knows its > underlying storage works exactly the same (until there are so many bad > blocks that the drive can't keep up this convenient deception).

Is there a way for the drive to tell the fs that a block is bad? Or does the drive simply keep a bunch of blocks apart just in case?

<comment><USER10> Hard drives and SSDs both keep a pool of spare blocks so that they can remain functional after having to retire some defective blocks from use. This spare pool tends to be much larger for SSDs. Ordinary IO doesn't convey anything about whether a block had to be retired in the process, but there are SMART indicators that track this stuff.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Two interesting updates based on what's been announced so far in 2019:

PCIe 4.0 will be arriving in the consumer market this year, with a new generation of AMD Ryzen CPUs providing host support, and at least one or two consumer-class NVMe SSD controllers supporting PCIe 4.0 should be ready to start shipping in retail products by the end of the year. (The enterprise/datacenter storage market's transition is already well underway.)

Seagate became the first vendor I'm aware of to start marketing a SSD to the prosumer/SMB market for NAS usage. It's a rebadge of one of their recent enterprise SATA drives and isn't even using QLC NAND so it's probably going to be pretty pricey, but the idea of a solid-state NAS is no longer completely laughable.

<comment><USER11> solid state NAS not not laughable, just expansive.

RAID 10 a few NVME and you can get decent throughput (and storage size) with existing technology.

<comment><USER12> > RAID 10 a few NVME and you can get decent throughput (and storage size) with > existing technology.

is there a good reason to do this in a consumer setup? max realistic throughput over gigabit ethernet is only ~120MB/s, which can easily be saturated by sequential reads or writes to/from a single modern spinning-rust drive.

<comment><USER13> My NAS has 3x 1gbit Ethernet ports

<comment><USER14> 10Gb ports are quite cheap as well especially if you're only going point to point (the switches are still a little pricy, but the ports for a NAS to VM host are easily under $100 now).

<comment><USER15> Even switches like Mikrotik CRS305-1G-4S+IN are getting into 100 EUR range, (if you are fine with running optic cables instead of metallic).

<comment><USER14> Thanks!

I am fine with fiber; it's cheap and for a few ports at home, I don't worry about the power (especially as compared to the servers it cross-connects).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Whoa, check out that Samsung NF1 form-factor [0]. Looks like you could pack _a ton_ of small finger-sized SSD drives vertically into a small space.

[0] [https://images.anandtech.com/doci/13752/IMGP2727_575px.jpg](https://images.anandtech.com/doci/13752/IMGP2727_575px.jpg)

This is one way in which it's a cool time to be alive. I'll never forget circa 1996 when I waited 20+ minutes for my Apple Performa 550 to read and load a 30MB file from the scsi disk into memory. All so quicktime could play a grainy, low-resolution video clip for all of 30 seconds. At the time I was like "That's almost 1 minute per second of video! WTF? That sucks."

<comment><USER17> That must get really hot, I wonder how well it cools?

<comment><USER10> There's no backplane to get in the way of airflow, so it is quite a bit easier to cool than a typical hot-swap bay full of 2.5" drives: [https://images.anandtech.com/doci/13218/IMGP2722.jpg](https://images.anandtech.com/doci/13218/IMGP2722.jpg)

The new connectors between the drives and the mid-plane board are probably the most important innovation these new form factors bring to the table, though something similar could also be done for existing SAS/U.2 connectors.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> The other amazing thing is size. How much smaller and cooler m2 drives are compared to old 3.5" HDs. If you have integrated graphics, PCs can now be tiny. The big tower cases are really for gamers only.

<comment><USER19> Even gamers don't need towers, games don't benefit much from anything > 4 cores and the only limiting factor so all you really need is a mini-itx motherboard, 8-16GB of ram, and a beefy GPU attached. There are plenty of console sized cases out there you can build in that can fit a 2080 or Vega card.

Big cases are really for tons of mechanical drive capacity, > 8 core CPUs, addin cards like network switches, or a ton of GPUs in a compute cluster.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Why is there competition in the SSD market but not in the RAM market?

<comment><USER10> I'm not sure. The pattern in the DRAM market seems to have been that only the biggest, most successful manufacturers can weather price crashes while still investing enough in R&D to stay on the leading edge. In the NAND flash market, we may simply not have yet seen any oversupply serious enough to do that, for all that we're in the middle of an oversupply-driven price crash.

It is probably the case that it's easier to stay in business with inferior NAND; Samsung beat everyone else to 3D NAND by a few years but Toshiba still made a killing off cheaper, lower quality planar NAND, and Intel/Micron didn't seem to suffer meaningfully from their first-generation 3D NAND being so slow. Now everyone other than SK Hynix has caught up to Samsung and the number of players in the market is actually increasing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I wish Intel Optane nvme sticks had more capacity. The 120gb drive turned my i7 6500u laptop TWICE as fast as desktop AMD 1700x with regular drive. For example Python tests on a fairly big app ran for 3 minutes on a laptop and same tests about 7 minutes on a supposedly more powerful desktop machine.

Edit: by regular I mean 960 evo

</comment><comment><USER22> Exciting times indeed, just type _" ssd"_ in your favorite search box. I'm about to upgrade to a 512GB SSD that costs half what an SSD half its size used to cost 5 years ago! Starting this year, I'm considering getting a low-end 120GB for $25 every year on January 1st to use as a write-once backup for all my work.

<comment><USER23> edit: i cannot arithmetic today, or sanity check my arithmetic. sorry.

sigh.

<comment><USER24> I'm not sure how you got that $25 = 41 years of 120GB of storage on Backblaze.

Their current pricing appears to be $0.005/GB-month... which would be $295.20 for 41 years of 120GB of storage.

> i wouldn't trust a cheap SSD to still work in 41 years

I wouldn't trust almost any company to still exist in 41 years, including Backblaze. Preserving data over that length of time will probably require active management of the data in some form or another. DVD or Blu-ray discs might last that long... but it's hard to trust any storage medium to last for 41 years. Modern storage technology just hasn't existed that long.

<comment><USER23> > I'm not sure how you got that ...

sigh. bad at arithmetic today. sorry.

> I wouldn't trust almost any company to still exist in 41 years, including > Backblaze

as i mention in the reply to the sibling comment, the backblaze corporate entity doesn't need to last.

> DVD or Blu-ray discs might last that long... but it's hard to trust any > storage medium to last for 41 years

on an anecdotal note, i put a bunch of data on DVDs circa 2004-2008, and tried to retrieve it all spring 2018. all of the inexpensive DVDs were garbage. only the most expensive survived, and even those had a few bit errors.

<comment><USER25> Don't write optical media at the maximum possible speed, reasonably protect it from light, and it will last much longer. I always did that and haven't lost a disk yet. I'd need to recheck a few really old ones, though...

<comment><USER26> And don't stack them one on top of another. I recall reading that added weight on the disks (common when they're stacked horizontally) can result in data loss because of the dye changing structurally. Store then standing sideways, and as much as possible, closer to a 90° vertical angle.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Just bought MX500 2TB in black friday for about 200 euros. Maybe it will getting cheaper this year, but 0.1 EUR/GB is already a good deal for me

</comment><comment><USER28> surprised these are still a thing. I bit the bullet and moved to M.2 storage across pci lanes. It makes my current SSD's feel like spinning disk.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M.2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M.2)

<comment><USER29> TFA includes discussions of all SSDs, M.2 formfactor included.</comment></comment>


Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti leak reveals a very powerful graphics card - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2018/8/17/17723182/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-ti-specs-leak-rumors <comment><USER2> Any rumor of wattage requirement?

<comment><USER3> Since they have a typical two-slot cooler configuration, I'd guess 250W or less.

<comment><USER2> Looks like power specs are out. [1]

[1] - [https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia- rtx-2080-ti-2070-pr...](https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia- rtx-2080-ti-2070-price-specs-release,37647.html)</comment></comment></comment>


Trial drugs 'reverse' Alzheimer's - <AUTHOR> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8033422.stm <comment><USER2> I feel like for the past 8 years I've been regularly hearing about some new surgery or drug that substantially cures or halts Alzheimer... But is anything coming of it?

<comment><USER3> The trouble is, until it has passed a double-blind test, it's basically hearsay. We have those tests because even good researchers working with seemingly promising drugs can be fooled by optimism or other biases.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Catchy title. Wake me up when the first clinical trials show some positive results. Myriads of wonderdrugs for mice have sadly been found to be ineffective in humans.

That said, if it works for us, I'll be among the first to try it, as soon as it's availlable.

<comment><USER5> "Wake me up" is unfortunately the right expression. Not only do some drugs react differently in humans but until it really will reach the patient many years will pass I suppose.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> _This findings build on the team's 2007 breakthrough in which mice with symptoms of Alzheimer's disease regained long-term memories and the ability to learn._

This is amazing news if it's really true. Like many here, my grandmother is suffering from dementia/alzheimer's, and she remembers none of her grandchildren, and occasionally she'll remember her some of her children. It would be nice if she could remember me again.

<comment> a-priori About a month ago, I presented their 2007 paper in a seminar class, so I'm familiar with their work. The biochemistry of how HDAC inhibitors work is over my head, but the neuroscience is quite intriguing and promising.

Here's what they say about HDAC inhibitors in the abstract of the 2007 paper: "Moreover, increased histone acetylation by inhibitors of histone deacetylases induced sprouting of dendrites, an increased number of synapses, and reinstated learning behaviour and access to long-term memories".

That paper showed that the effects of HDAC inhibitors were similar to environmental enrichment in recovering and preventing the loss of memories. The interesting part is that they do not prevent neuronal loss by brain atrophy; memory improves in the mice _despite_ severe atrophy.

If you're interested, the article I'm referring to is: Fischer et al. Recovery of learning and memory is associated with chromatin remodelling. Nature (2007) vol. 447 (7141) pp. 178.

Edit: Their experiments used mice, not rats. Oops.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm curious as to how they know the mice regained long-term memories...

<comment> a-priori I haven't read this paper, but I have read the 2007 paper they mention in the article. In that study, the mice were trained in a Morris water maze task. Then, different groups are tested either immediately, 3 hours later, 24 hours later or 2 weeks later.

Some in each group were given a histone deacetylase inhibitor, and they were compared to controls that were not. All these mice were transgenic knockout mice. When put on a diet containing doxycycline, their brains begin to atrophy. (Edit: all the experimental mice were on this diet)

I assume this paper uses a similar procedure.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Good. This could alleviate a lot of human suffering if it's real.

Now is the time to start the discussion: what if these drugs are also capable of increasing neuroplasticity above baseline in otherwise healthy adults?

</comment><comment><USER9> Wow @ "We desperately need to fund more research to head off a forecast doubling the UK population living with dementia."

<comment><USER10> I had to do a bit of research recently and I was surprised to find that dementia is mostly a misnomer. Dementia is a set of symptons, not an underlying cause. The most common causes of dementia is Alzheimer's. And as cruel as Alzheimer's may be, the other non-curable disorders are adamantly _not_ better.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Though not a critique of medicine (or of what could potentially be an amazing treatment), it always saddens me when I read the headline of a medical breakthrough only to find that we really have no idea how it works. Some day, we'll understand the architecture of the brain. That day is still not today.

</comment><comment><USER12> Another brain boosting drug ? Are this kind of drugs the next large use additive ?

[http://npp.neuroscience.wisc.edu/PDF/TowardsResponsibleUseOF...](http://npp.neuroscience.wisc.edu/PDF/TowardsResponsibleUseOFCognitive- EnhancingDrugsByTheHealthy.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER10> Great. It takes a long time though to go from curing something in mice to curing it in humans. Diabetes is cured in mice.</comment>


Twitter's big bet on topics and lists is just getting started - <AUTHOR> https://www.fastcompany.com/90446827/twitters-big-bet-on-topics-and-lists-is-just-getting-started <comment><USER2> Real time Reddit?</comment>


What happens when you refuse to answer a passport control officer's questions - <AUTHOR> http://knifetricks.blogspot.com/2010/04/i-am-detained-by-feds-for-not-answering.html <comment><USER4> Contrarian viewpoint - you're dealing with humans with emotions, and they deserve some respect on that human level. If you want to take a moral stand against encroachment of civil liberties, I respect that. But why not be polite? "I apologize, sir, but I'm morally opposed to answering questions beyond what I have to. I'll comply with the legal requirements to enter the country, but I don't answer questions I'm not legally required to on principal - I think it's no good."

You're much less likely to have trouble that way, _and_ it explains why you're doing what you're doing, which makes it more likely to have a positive impact and get the officers to re-think why they're doing their job and what it means. Stonewalling them is your legal right, fine, but it seems to be a sub- optimal choice on a principals/ethics level and on a practical level. Now before anyone replies, "You shouldn't have to bow and scrape to get into your own country" - _yes I agree with you, but being rude doesn't accomplish anything additional than stating your principals politely_.

<comment><USER5> The moment you call anybody "sir" you are bowing to them.

<comment><USER6> Using the word 'sir' when talking to someone you're not familiar with is generally intended simply as a gesture of respect. It's not some sort of submissive term.

My occupation puts me in positions of authority over strangers from time to time. I pretty much always default to '"sir" and "m'am" in those cases.

<comment><USER5> Maybe it is cultural thing - nobody here calls a stranger sir.

"You" would seem to be more appropriate.

<comment><USER7> Where's "here"?

Personally the situation where I'm most likely to call someone sir is where I'm giving them a forceful verbal put down. "With due respect sir that sort of language is unacceptable here." or what have you.

I'm in the UK so also when addressing a Knight of the realm in a formal setting.

A

<comment><USER8> UK also here - I don't think I've ever used the word "sir" outside of a humorous context.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I'm astonished at the number of folks who are sincere in their belief that politeness and respect make one immune from abuse at the border. The belief seems to be based on their own politeness and lack of hassles thus far.

I crossed the border more than a hundred times over ten years with no difficulties whatsoever. I grew up in a police family and am unswervingly polite and respectful. That did not protect me from 12 hours of interrogation in a white room and a deportment (reason still undetermined and undisclosed: a Freedom of Information Act request brought a document 75% redacted) when I happened upon the wrong, bored CBP official.

Just because you've affirmed the consequent a few dozen times doesn't mean politeness will help you.

<comment><USER10> I've crossed the border a number of times myself. What has been amazing for me over the last several years is the striking difference in demeanor between foreign customs officers and those I deal with coming back into the US, especially at the Canadian border.

Coming in and out of the US through the local major airport -- San Francisco -- my experiences have been mixed coming in. Customs varies between nice and a little bit surly, but never outright so.

However, when I drive or fly to Canada? Canadian customs is amazingly friendly and welcoming -- even when crossing at odd hours like 2am when on a road trip. However, coming back into the states, be it dealing with customs at the border (major and minor crossing) or at the airport, I sometimes ask myself -- "why do I live in this country?"

Customs has a hard job and dealing with a lot of people friendly to rude during the day does take a toll. However, often times, these are the first people that someone coming to visit the US encounters. I would hope for a good first impression, but unfortunately that isn't always the case.

Going to Europe this winter it will be fun to compare and contrast again.

<comment><USER11> Every country is different.

In Tokyo I was through customs so fast I wasn't sure I was through.

Last time I entered Jamaica I was shaken down. After going back and forth for a few minutes I realized it was a shake down and simply asked him "how much?" $50 later and I was on my way. To make a long story short I had brought a few gifts for friends who were meeting me there and the customs agent claimed I was bringing items into the country to sell. Um yeah, I'm selling 4 towels?

In and out of Costa Rica was interesting. When I went I only took a backpack and surfboards. They didn't say much entering the country and only checked out the surfboard bag. Leaving the country they searched everything multiple times prior to leaving (once at security then again plane side). They were all very polite though.

Admittedly I don't do a lot of international travel but I've never had any problems entering the US have always answered the 1-2 questions with yes/no and "I'm glad to be back."

<comment><USER10> Every country is different, but coming back into the US is a uniformly annoying experience. From my experiene, US Customs/Border agents are at the very least lacking any sort of friendliness with some sort of powertrip being the norm.

Given these are some of the first people visitors to this country encounter, I would hope they would be friendly and professional rather than surly and on an power trip.

Every foreign country I have been to (mostly Europe and Canada) has been friendlier and more welcoming than every single instance that I have had in dealing with US customs upon re-entry. And, for the record, I am in the "here's my passport" and answers questions crowd.

<comment><USER11> And I have experienced the exact opposite when entering US. The agents have always been friendly and courteous. I wonder if it has to do with what airport you enter the country from. All of my international flights end up going through ATL.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I'm horrified at the amount of people calling him a douche and asshole in his blog comments for asserting his rights. I didn't think such submission to authority had become such an American trait.

<comment><USER13> As someone who used precisely this word to describe him, I'll say that it's his attitude and his worldview that any cooperation with law enforcement is fodder for a vast conspiracy to incarcerate him that motivated me. It is not an abrogation of your civil liberaties to answer a question.

That said, I also recognize the value of what he did, and I'm glad there are douchebags like him out there, exactly like Colbert's "Douchebag of Liberty" segment about the guy who flips off patrol cops as a matter of policy. Thank you, douchebags of liberty.

<comment><USER14> The attitude and worldview I find more naive and paranoid than douche-baggish. What really made me think "what a tool" me was quote "The CBP goons want U.S. citizens to answer their questions as a ritualistic bow to their power."

It's the fundamental (and obviously incorrect) assumption that they're some sort of thugs, rather than decent people just trying to do the job they are paid and trained to do, that makes the author a certified douche bag.

<comment><USER15> "It's the fundamental (and obviously incorrect) assumption that they're some sort of thugs, rather than decent people just trying to do the job they are paid and trained to do, that makes the author a certified douche bag."

I don't find that obviously incorrect. The banality of evil is probably the most important lesson in human nature of the twentieth century, and it makes many kinds of "decent people just trying to do the job they are paid and trained to do" look a lot closer to thugs -- or at best their enablers.

Could he have done what he did in a less abrasive way? Probably so. But refusing to go along with even little infringements on human liberty is an essential part of eternal vigilance.

<comment><USER13> Can you explain how you managed to transit from "The banality of evil is probably the most important lesson" to "it's not obvious that the border police aren't thugs"? Are people thugs by default in your worldview? Or just all law enforcement officers?

<comment><USER16> People in positions of power often act inadvertently thuggish, yes. It's in the nature of positions of power and the human condition. It's why it's so important to have checks and balances, and ensure that those checks and balances are exercised regularly so that they don't get rusty from disuse.

Take the Nazis. It's not like every German was evil, or even that most Germans were evil. It was the situation and structure that was evil, and the social proof, and a hundred and one other things, that add up to decent people doing monstrous evil.

Character really doesn't matter for as much as a lot of people like to think. Almost everything people do comes down to their incentives and their situation, from the lowest thug to the most noble statesman. Ascribing flaws or nobility to character is a way of personalizing these situations, often to justify treating people with very few options with harshness and cruelty, while rewarding people in the position to do good with social standing and wealth, etc.

<comment><USER13> It doesn't help when you have a society led by Hitler, Goebbels, and Himmler. By which I mean to point out that Nazism is a silly comparison to make.

<comment><USER14> Well, in fairness the thread did go on long enough to satisfy Goodwin's law.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> The inalienable right to re-entry as a citizen is an interesting point that I hadn't thought of before. I'm glad he went through all this drama so we could think about that.

I worry about his notion of having an inalienable right not to answer questions, though. The limits to your rights at the nation's borders can be surprising. Can border police deny you entry into the country? It seems, on reflection, that they cannot. Can border police arrest you, detain you for long periods of time, and book you for crimes that you may in fact be convicted of? I worry that the answers to this question aren't as crisply aligned with this guy's libertarianism as he hopes.

<comment><USER17> _his notion of having an inalienable right not to answer questions, though_

/His/ notion?

 _Can border police arrest you, detain you for long periods of time, and book you for crimes that you may in fact be convicted of? I worry that the answers to this question aren't as crisply aligned with this guy's libertarianism as he hopes._

He seems more the kind of person to make the answers align with his view, rather than hope they already do.

<comment><USER13> Throughout the United States, you have an almost unlimited right to be free from searches by law enforcement absent probable cause that can be demonstrated in court.

Except:

* This doesn't apply at the border.

* Regardless of whether the police have a _right_ to search you, anything you do to obstruct a police search can be used as the basis of an orthogonal criminal charge.

Similarly, throughout the United States, you have an almost unrestricted right not to answer questions from law enforcement.

I ask:

* Accepting that the outcome of not cooperating cannot be denial of reentry, to what extent does this principle apply at the border? The right to be free of unreasonable search is at the core of the bill of rights, and the word "reasonable" seems to mean "all bets are off at the border".

* Regardless of whether police have a _right_ to question you, things you do to _obstruct_ them may be the basis of orthogonal criminal charges. For instance, Terry stops, Hiibel, &c.

Generally, as an avid civil liberties enthusiast with zero legal qualifications, my perception is that your rights are at their practical zenith in a courtroom, and at their nadir in a confrontation with on-duty law enforcement.

<comment><USER18> "Regardless of whether the police have a right to search you, anything you do to obstruct a police search can be used as the basis of an orthogonal criminal charge."

No--you cannot ever be charged or convicted on the basis of asserting your rights. Saying "you may not search my house" is _not_ grounds for a search warrant, and exercising your fifth amendment right against self-incrimination in a trial is _not_ grounds for conviction.

Physically or otherwise obstructing an actual police search in progress can be illegal or serve as probable cause, but asserting your rights never is.

<comment><USER19> > No--you cannot ever be charged or convicted on the basis of asserting your > rights.

You can, however, be legally required to give cops your full, legal name. And you may also be required to say that you are invoking your right to remain silent (rather than simply keeping your mouth shut the whole time). Both have been subject to litigation recently.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> There is a difference between being a Citizen and a subject.

You are not obligated to sit meekly while your rights are being nibbled at or outright violated by "people just doing their jobs".

</comment><comment><USER21> They didn't hold him for refusing to answer. They held him because he was suspicious. That's their job. When everything checked out and they couldn't find anything wrong, they had to let him go.

He was only there for half an hour. 30 minutes. That's not an unreasonable time at all when you've done something suspicious like answer routine questions rudely.

Don't get me wrong. I think our airport security is absolutely useless at this point. I haven't flown on a plane for a decade because I won't submit to that useless idiocy. (I might do so if it weren't useless, despite the 'freedoms' lost.)

<comment><USER22> 30 minutes is less time than I've spent actually entering the country through that same airport.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> When I briefly worked for a "Three Letter Agency" we were told that the only answer we were allowed to give to any question like this to any of our own or foreign officials was "work of a confidential nature in the national interest"

It works well if you can do it with a straight face!

<comment><USER24> That is great! I bet it works like a free pass if you match their notion of a NSA, CIA, NRO employee.

<comment><USER25> I bet it works like a jail sentence[1] if they have some way of checking whether you actually are an employee of a three-letter agency and you aren't one.

[1] Or a hefty fine, or some other variety of considerable nuisance.

<comment><USER24> Why? What law do you think you are breaking by saying that?

Adding jobs is in the national interest, right? You could be doing that by traveling.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Way to go. The only way to be sure that we have certain rights is to exercise them. Thanks for inconveniencing yourself on our behalf. I'm inspired to do the same.

</comment><comment><USER27> His position that "politeness would make no difference", combined with other remarks he has made, suggests to me he simply doesn't know how to be genuinely polite and respectful of others. He reminds me of a woman I am passingly acquainted with who insisted that when things began to go south in business negotiations and other social settings, there was nothing you could do to stop it. Well, maybe there was nothing _she_ could do. That doesn't mean it can't be done. (From observation of her, her attitude seemed to bring a lot of her troubles to her. She was quite combative, high-handed and so on.)

I'm all for not setting foot on the slippery slope. I am a firm believer that acting to protect your rights _before_ there is a problem is the best policy. But assuming an adversarial relationship does not mean one needs to go out of their way to ensure that the relationship is as adversarial as possible.

</comment><comment><USER28> I think it is a good thing that he refused to answer the questions -- I respect that.

But I find his aggressive attitude ("But that's a small price to pay to remind these thugs that their powers are limited and restricted.") and obsession with the master/slave relationship ("I am the master, and the federal cops are my servants") to be fairly off putting.

It is not that he does not want master/slave relationships to exist, it is that he wants (nay, needs) always to be the master. He strikes me as the sort of person who would say something offensive just so that he could make a point about freedom of speech.

The world I see is not viewed through the same prism of master/slave relationships. In my world I am the master of myself. I am no ones slave and no one is my slave. It is a happy place to be.

</comment><comment><USER29> I simply provide a non-answer. I used to say "business" but lately they've been asking 5 minutes worth of follow-up questions about what type of business I'm in and where in the visited country I conducted this business and with whom. Now I say "to visit friends and family". This answer ends the questions instantly. I haven't gotten a follow-up yet. They seem to have a checkbox for this answer and that's that.

I'm glad that there are guys out there doing this sort of thing. Its important. But for me, who just wants to get through as quickly as possible, I try to remember that even though its interface is human beings, its really just a poorly constructed machine. Give it the right tokens and the turnstile spins.

<comment><USER30> I think lying about your activities can get you into some actual trouble - <USER2> this could be risky advice if they follow up on who you were visting.

<comment><USER31> In fact he specifically mentions that in the follow up point.

What is extremely worrying is the comment that 'they have a checkbox for that'.

What the hell are they doing recording the reasons for movement of law abiding citizens?

<comment><USER32> _What the hell are they doing recording the reasons for movement of law abiding citizens?_

They don't know that you're law-abiding, for one thing. Law enforcement agencies routinely record information which is volunteered to them.

<comment><USER33> >They don't know that you're law-abiding, for one thing

Guilty until proven innocent, eh?

<comment><USER32> Police investigate lots of innocent people. If they only investigated people who were already known to be guilty, they would never get anywhere.

<comment><USER34> Police are supposed to investigate crimes. Not arbitrary people.

<comment><USER32> They're investigating lots of crimes. Drug smuggling, for example -- they know it's happening, but they don't know who is doing it; and anyone entering the country could have useful information about it or be a potential suspect.

<comment><USER34> So would you be OK with the police randomly picking members of the public to investigate - just in case those people are doing something illegal somewhere?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> The wider issue here that I don't see anyone really addressing is why are US Citizens interviewed/interrogated (even casually, at the CBP desk) about their activities.

I'm a British Citizen living in the US _(so I'm mandated to fully answer all questions because I have no pre-governed right to entry into the US)_ but when I return home to UK they scan my passport and wave on me - no questions at all.

Regardless of this individual case, as a wider issue I don't understand why people (US Citizens) accept as policy and expected MO that CPB routinely asks the level of questioning that they do to citizens.

</comment><comment><USER36> Quick question from a foreigner: Did they ask him that because he went to China, or does this happen for other "less suspicious" nations (France, UK etc.), too?

<comment><USER37> I just recently came back from Japan. It was my first time leaving the country. Going into Japan was great, very straightforward, polite, and fast. I actually had a question; they ask "Where are you staying?" on the form, but I didn't know. I was meeting my girlfriend in-country, and she had made all of our reservations, and I forgot to ask her for a copy. The woman smiled and said "No problem, just write Tokyo" and that was it.

Coming back into America was terrible. I did answer these questions, and the officer tried to imply that I had tripped up, and was getting in trouble. (I live in PA, but my ticket was back to LAX only.) Then, while walking through to the 'collect your baggage' part, another officer stopped me, told me to get in a different line, since I'd collected no checked baggage. I told him I didn't have any, his eyes narrowed, and he started asking me more questions. I was like "Dude, I'm a guy. I have this huge backpack. I was only gone a week. Why would I need a suitcase?" and after a few more questions finally let me go.

I don't fly unless I absolutely have to. It's just not worth the hassle.

<comment><USER38> Counter examples:

I fly in and out of the country all the time (I believe I've returned the the US five times this year alone). I only ever have a backpack and it's not huge and I never check any luggage. I'm not dressed in business clothes, nor do I look particularly affluent. My passport is fully of "dangerous" countries (Colombia, Guatemala, China, Russia...) and is as beat up an scruffy looking as I am.

 _I have never once has trouble returning to the US._

In fact, I flew back from Mexico (several years ago, but post 9/11) without anything but a driver's license and even then didn't have any problems other than answering some reasonable questions.

I've heard anecdotally that it's more difficult for foreigners entering the US, but that's to be expected. Pretty much every country on the planet is harder for non-citizens to enter.

Oh, and for the record, I'm in Japan right now (for the first time) and their CBP was far more serious than anywhere else I've been and took longer to process everyone than anywhere I've been except Dulles (fuck that airport). I was finger printed and photographed (yes, yes, I know the US does this for non-citizens too) and this is highly atypical.

<comment><USER39> I visited Japan last year, and while I was fingerprinted and photographed, the process was very quick. I spent about the same amount of time at the customs official's desk as I did when I returned home to the US, where I was asked the typical none-of-their-business questions about my trip.

So there we are... more anecdotal non-evidence.

Actually, this reminds me of my return from a business trip to Amsterdam a couple years ago. The customs official made some kind of drug-related joke/question, which I didn't respond to (aside from just smiling slightly). It made me a bit uncomfortable and felt like he was trying to get me to slip up and say something I'd regret.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> _Ultimately, the cops let me go, because there was nothing they could do._

In this particular instance it may have seemed this way, but if you continue, you will likely find out it's not really true. They'd just rather not go to the effort of doing what they can do. Enforcement is selective, so unless you think you can get a lot of attention in time to do you some good, it's best to pick your battles wisely.

<comment><USER41> "They'd just rather not go to the effort of doing what they can do."

What do you think police _can_ do? He cites case law that indicates police can't prevent you from re-entering the country.

<comment><USER40> If they're annoyed enough, they can find something you did do, and charge you for it. Depending on how visibly you live your life, this might be easy or difficult, but ultimately they can just "remember" something you said that you didn't say, and then you could go to jail. All this is chancy, since the jury, should it come to that, may be sympathetic to you, but if you're habitually confrontational, that might be less likely. Basically, the Martha Stewart conviction destroyed what remained of my faith in the "justice" system. Here was a woman who, in theory, had the deck stacked her way... money, fame, etc. What was she convicted of? Lying to a federal officer, not under oath, about not committing a crime that they couldn't convict her of in the first place. The conclusive evidence basically boiled down to one or more officers' word that she denied wrongdoing.

Let me recap: if some police are determined to put you in jail, you can go to jail for lying to an officer, when you assert that you didn't commit a crime. They do not have to prove that you did commit the crime. Just saying you didn't do it is presumptively a lie, and a federal crime. If you give them reason to be mad at you, you're gambling with your freedom, no matter what you have or haven't done.

Note that not talking to the police is not sufficient to save you from prosecution, since the vast majority could be considered guilty of misprision of felony -- [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00000004----...](http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00000004 ----000-.html) \-- which is itself a federal felony, so if someone tells you they saw a felony committed (possession, say) and you know they didn't report it, now _you're_ committing a felony unless you report _them_.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> The mention about the records they keep (agents discussing the author's history of not answering questions) got me wondering what CBP has in their files about me and my movements across the border. At one point I read people on Flyertalk discussing how they sent FOIA requests for the pertinent records, but what they got back had all the juicy stuff (officers notes, etc) redacted.

</comment><comment><USER43> The rights the author describes his exercise of can be swept away with the stroke of a pen, and once that happens, they won't be coming back.

<comment><USER44> "The stroke of a pen" in the United States' case involves a majority vote in the Senate and agreement by the President (or else a 2/3 majority vote in the Senate). This is of course significantly more difficult to attain than many other pen strokes.

(I suspect I agree with your sentiment, but your post is vague on your actual opinion of the matter.)

<comment><USER45> It's not clear what you'd do with the people if you _did_ remove an unconditional right to reentry, either. If someone has only one nationality, and that country won't allow them in, then they become effectively stateless, which is a mess, since international law generally assumes that people have nationalities. Then someone like the UN has to try to figure out where they can be sent.

<comment><USER44> I actually assumed the right we were talking about was the right to remain silent, which would require a constitutional amendment to repeal. I am not so sure about the right to reenter one's own country.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> Do you have any rights whatsoever, if you're a foreigner entering America?

<comment><USER47> You obviously have some human rights. They can't (legally) harm you physically without any reason, afaik.

<comment><USER48> You have all sorts of rights. The main one you don't have is the right to get into the country, and that's the only one which really matters.

So definitely _do not_ try this trick if you're a foreigner attempting to enter the US.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> On one hand I agree that it's important to stand up for your rights, even it might seem like a trivial thing to argue at the time. Especially with how the TSA/Border control is evolving into less of a means of security than into an interrogation theater, it's important for us to know just how far an officer can legally question/search us and not to let them overstep those bounds. Once those bounds are crossed, it's hard (impossible?) to go back.

On the other hand, the guy kind of acted like a jerk. He could have done the same thing without seeming so short and unfriendly. Even the most power-mad officers are still people with a basic job to do.

Edit: having read his follow-up post, he makes some good points on the politeness issue. I guess I'm just happy there are people like him to have to the balls (and time to spare) to remind enforcers that they too must follow the law, even if it means a huge inconvenience for him.

<comment><USER43> He addresses the politeness issue in the follow up by saying, quite rightly:

 _To the authoritarian mind, there are only two responses to a demand: submission or defiance, and anything less than total submission is defiance._

<comment><USER13> You realize that just because he says that doesn't mean it's actually true, right?

In fact, his argument for being brusque doesn't square with his argument for the inalienability of his rights to silent re-entry. If he's right about the latter, he has no reason to "assert the fact that he won't be pushed around"; he won't be pushed around either way.

I'm left with the conclusion that I'm reading about a major-league douchebag... one who I'm glad is defining the frontiers of our rights as citizens, but a douchebag nonetheless.

<comment><USER50> You're missing what I think is one of the primary points he's trying to make - answering any of those questions instantly puts him at risk of lying to a federal officer, which is a criminal act.

In order to be polite, you have to risk being a criminal. Ergo, it makes more sense to be a little rude (and being silent isn't that rude, _particularly_ to a federal officer - for them being silent is simply one of a series of acceptable responses) and forgo the risk of criminal charges. Are you being a douchebag to a police officer when you refuse consent to a search?

He also lists a number of countries in which Customs and Immigration believe their job is "Customs and Immigration" and _not_ getting historical biographical information.

There really is a fundamental privacy issue.

True Story:

I was crossing the border from Canada into the United States in 2003, and was with a friend (an attractive blonde, Canadian, that I had declared our relationship to be "friend") at a ground crossing (Peace Arch, in BC) - <USER3> were pulled over for secondary, and went into the Immigration office. They asked us a number of questions, all of which I answered to be the best of my ability (I have neither the courage, nor moral fiber of the author - wish I did) - and they were preparing to let us go. Just as we were packing up our passports, and leaving, the Immigration Officer pulled a "Columbo" and said, "Oh, one more thing - are you still dating that Red Head, Marjorie?" I was a little floored - I had crossed the border _once_ with a (red headed) girlfriend in 1999 - that information (that we were dating, the color of her hair, her name) was clearly in a federal file on me, and they were using it to get a reaction from my companion (who, thank goodness, was actually a friend as I had described her).

So, from a privacy perspective, just be aware that as you answer all of these questions, they are going into a federal database, that certainly can paint quite a detailed pictured of your life. If you are willing to remain silent, then they have less to enter into their database.

It's interesting how when people buck the status-quo, even just a little bit, they get tagged with the "douchebag" title. God bless them.

EDIT: As a follow-on, I should note that as a Canadian, I really have no excuse not to answer all questions asked by American Customs and Immigration, but, very ironically, as a TN Computer Systems Analyst, I am almost _never_ asked any questions _whatsoever_ by American C&I, and the rare time they ask me anything, it is always the single (very reasonable) "Who are you working for". Returning to Canada, on the other hand, is an exercise in what did I do in the US, where I'll be going, what I'll be doing, who I'll be staying with, for how long, etc, etc...

<comment><USER13> You have a drastically diminished expectation of privacy at the border, because of the state's sovereign right to regulate those borders. This is a large part of the reason why border police can search you at will; the "reasonableness" of a search is largely delineated by the balance of the state's legitimate interests in searching you against your expectation of privacy.

You seem taken aback that the state would remember your previous border- crossings. I'm actually impressed and sort of pleased that they're this on- the-ball. It seems totally reasonable to me for the state to keep a record of aliens crossing into the country.

And beyond that, it seems weird that _record keeping_ would shock your conscience, but the fact that the border police can search the files on your laptop without a warrant (which: they can, according to the 4th and 9th circuit courts) doesn't warrant a mention.

Lawyer and patriot or not, this guy is living in a fantasy world, where the "business or pleasure" question is a sticky spider web patrolled by venomous legal monsters, but warrantless searches of his person, his body cavities, the documents in his briefcase and the files on his computer are totally benign.

<comment><USER51> I don't think that searches are ok for him according to item no. 9 from his update:

 _Moreover, the existence of the right of privacy is usually based on whether people have a current expectation of privacy in a certain situation. To the extent that people decline to assert their right of privacy, it slips away. Lack of vigilance by citizens begets more government power._

<comment><USER13> I'm not _of the opinion_ that my expectation of privacy is diminished at the border. My expectation of privacy _is_ diminished at the border, because the Supreme Court ruled that it is so, definitively.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> In the EU, airport authorities will refuse to stamp your EU passport, even if you ask them to (travel geek, I wanted the stamp). As an EU citizen you may not be denied entry to any EU country and stamping your passport would imply that they had the right to either allow or deny entry.

</comment><comment><USER53> I seriously wondered if he would have saved the half hour by answering the first question with "I have the right not to answer that question as I am a citizen re-entering my own country" instead of "None of your business"

The former would still be asserting his right, but in a more polite way

</comment><comment><USER35> Regardless of whether its the CBP officer in the airport or a police officer on the street, the key friction point is that if everyone demands full exercise of their rights _(ultimately, not to talk or interact with the officer, other than prove identity)_ it would be near-impossible for them to perform their function of catching criminals, terrorists, etc.

Or, to put it another way, we EXPECT that people won't exercise their full rights as part of our expectation that the police and CPB officials are able to to carry out their job.

Regardless of how you stand on the original issue of the OP, it's worth considering for a moment that our policing system relies, in the main, on people not up-holding their rights in order to succeed.

</comment><comment><USER54> While it might be strictly true that a US-ian can't be denied entry to the US, recall that there is no constitutional right to any particular mode of travel... One can "enter" the US in various foreign airports (Shannon, several in Canada) and doing a "nope, I'm not talkin'" gig will probably result in a "well, you ain't flyin' either".

I also worry that being too hostile with one's baggage might get it blown up. Certainly get it inspected closely. Might not be too good for cameras, laptops and other storage media.

<comment><USER55> You watch too much TV.

</comment></comment><comment><USER56> I thought I had problems when travelling to San Francisco's Web 2.0 Expo this year but I never thought customs officers would make you as US Citizen problems. Crazy!

<comment><USER40> US citizens may have more to worry about, actually, since the most they're likely to do to a non-citizen is refuse entry, but a citizen could easily wind up in jail for years for, in the recollection of the officer, lying to a federal officer. That was all Martha Stewart was convicted of, after all.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I wonder how "personal reasons" would have gone over. Nondescript and a lot of people will assume sensitive personal reasons and not ask questions.

<comment><USER50> I tried that once when returning to Canada. Resulted in a full (and _very, very detailed) search of my luggage. Would recommend not doing so unless you have an extra 30-45 minutes.

<comment><USER8> I had never realized that US nationals and Canadians got that grief when they got home - I thought it was reserved for foreigners trying to gain entry.

I don't think I've ever been asked anything by anyone when returning to the UK - you just hand across your passport they have a quick look (possibly a scan) and they hand it back.

<comment><USER6> I've travelled internationally maybe a dozen times in my life. I've never once had an issue on re-entering the country. In fact, I've had a grand total of two "incidents" while traveling:

1) A security agent in Amsterdam gave me some (understandable) stern looks because my passport had gone through the wash, and was very much worse for the wear.

2) In Warsaw, I misunderstood a security agent and ended up getting a large man with a gun mildly excited (which in turn got me a little excited...). Tip: If a security screener says something in a language you don't understand and waves towards your bag on the conveyor, don't just assume it means "Take your bag and and go," it might mean "Step away from the bag"

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> An ex-cop, Bradley Jardis, has contributed this account of his refusing to answer any questions whatsoever put to him by a cop during a traffic stop. It went quite well.

[http://freekeene.com/2010/06/08/a-thank-you-to-the-nashua- po...](http://freekeene.com/2010/06/08/a-thank-you-to-the-nashua- police/#more-6333)

</comment><comment><USER58> Just awesome, hope your travel in future is without incident.

I thought it was ridiculous that even in transit where you are actually not entering the US customs fingerprint all your fingers.

I was very very tempted to refuse but in the end I was too scared that I would just miss my trip

</comment><comment><USER59> The problem is, if lots of US citizens behave like him, we people from other nations will have a hard time (as if it's not already an unpleasant experience) entering US because officers will be pissed off and someone will pay for it.

</comment><comment><USER60> So, if I am to try this when I return from india (going for my friend's wedding and vacation), what would be the best response, word for word to refuse to answer questions? It seems people think his approach is rude.

<comment><USER61> Based on much of the discussion here, I'd definitely say that the only person that can give you the correct answer is an attorney that you trust.

If you can't find such a person, then the next best answer would be to respond exactly as Paul Lukacs did, since he's a Los Angeles attorney (and author of a couple of articles in reason.com).

Following any layman's advice is probably a good way to get yourself in trouble.

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> If nothing else, it shows that the system works. A right that is not able to be exercised in a pragmatic manner is almost as bad as not having the right at all.

</comment><comment><USER63> I think in Germany, if the cops don't like you they can decide to search your body for drugs. Including some unpleasant possible hiding places on a naked body.

</comment><comment><USER64> I always answer their questions with silly vague answers.

For example: Q: Why are you going to do in city X? A: Party

Q: Party? A: and see some sites.

Vague questions get vague answers.

</comment><comment><USER65> And then we're wondering why it takes 2 hours to wait in the airport.

</comment><comment><USER66> This guy gets it, kudos to him! People like him are what keep authoritarian governments at bay, and inform the ignorant masses of their folly, who are all too eager to give up their rights.

      Well, CBP has no power over me. I am a law-abiding
      citizen, and, as such, I am the master, and the federal
      cops are my servants. They would do well to remember that.

And:

      When it comes to rights, you don't know in advance what
      battle will be important. But you do know, based on
      history and human nature, that a right undefended will
      shrivel and die. If you don't fight for the small right,
      you won't be in a position to assert the large right.

Beautiful.

<comment><USER13> Federal cops are not _his_ servants; they're _our_ servants. There is a world of difference between those statements.

<comment><USER37> 'He' is part of 'us,' so why wouldn't that follow?

<comment><USER13> Because "we" have interests as a society that do not necessarily intersect "his" interests.

<comment><USER37> Fair enough.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER67> I'd file this under things which are unwise to do because they create more trouble for yourself than otherwise, with no real upside, only downside.

</comment><comment><USER68> I'm glad that some people assert rights that are a pain to assert most of the time, because it reminds everyone that they exist.

However, this guy seem like kind of a jerk as well. It sounds like they largely treated him respectfully, and calling them "thugs" makes him sound like a misguided hippy.

</comment><comment><USER69> I keep thinking "thanks for pissing them off so they will be angry by the time they get to _me_ , who do not have the option of not answering their questions.

Incidentally, is it really a crime for non-US citizens to lie or whatever to a US federal agent when you are not on bona fide US soil? It would seem that I am not in a US jurisdiction since they haven't yet allowed me to enter the country...

</comment><comment><USER70> I really cannot figure out why he did that... Yes - freedom is cool in lots of situations. It's nice not to be detained without a reason, hit without a reason, denied entrance somewhere without a reason.

This does not mean you should be a jerk to any staff member. They're asking questions - everyone knows they will. "I don't want to answer that" is way better than "None of your business" - it actually is their business. That's why they're there. Disagreeing with them is one thing, being rude to staff just because you have the right to is another.

This makes me sad. There are so many ways and reasons to fight for freedom, but being rude to people following their standard job very near the useless end of that list... Nothing accomplished, some staff members annoyed, other passengers delayed. Rather childish.

Also, he showed exactly how security works. They identified an angry / aggressive person, separated him from the crowd / put under observation, checked his bags for dangerous items. Maybe there's a reason to ask after all?

<comment><USER50> His entire position is that, as an American Citizen, it really is none of their business what he was doing. Now that I think of it, shouldn't the job of Customs and Immigration be the following for returning American Citizens:

A) Confirm that you are an American Citizen.

B) Confirm that you are importing goods properly.

<comment><USER70> I don't disagree that he does not have to answer questions. That does not mean security staff cannot ask questions. Do you think it really matters what you answer? Would anyone say "I was organising an attack on X.", "I was meeting with Russian mafia.", etc.? Most of the people will say "business", "family visit" or something similar anyways.

The person who doesn't - whatever the reason - is the one to look at.

Still - I see the reason why the questions are being asked. Even if you don't have to answer.

I'd really like to see if you'd get the same treatment if you simply said "I do not want to answer this question, because I'm not required to." with a smile instead of being passive-agressive.

<comment><USER50> How certain are you that you haven't just violated a law with that answer? And, how certain are you that response won't be used against you in a criminal case?

I'm actually serious - I don't have the legal background to understand whether your response ""I do not want to answer this question, because I'm not required to." would put me in legal peril.

<comment><USER70> You have doubts against my answer - which is ok of course. Yet, you don't question "none of your business", which is demonstrably worse in at least two ways (social interaction, perceived aggression). Can you show why? Even for a non-lawyer like me it shouts "verbal abuse of staff".

> how certain are you that response won't be used against you in a criminal > case?

If there is a way to use that answer against me, I've already potentially lost any and all cases against me. If such response can be used against you, why do you believe your law to not answer will be honoured? You'll make a lot more mistakes of saying something wrong while proving you're right, since you will have to speak many more times. It is simply not a realistic scenario. You'll have to assume some things are not a work of government against you, in order to even begin fighting for freedom of not answering a simple question.

<comment><USER50> re: "None of your business" - Appeal to authority. The author is a Lawyer and states that is an acceptable response. If you indicated you had legal training, and that "...because I'm not required to " would not put you in legal jeopardy, I'd take you at your word.

In general, saying less is probably the safest approach if you are concerned about legal jeopardy. Not answering gives the individual interrogating you less leverage. You do have a right to silence once the basics (Your identity) are out of the way. Ironically, that is how the entire episode ended - eventually a supervisor showed up and said precisely that "He has a right to remain silent. Just inspect his luggage and let him go."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> dot-sean This is a hillarious post. An officer's job is more than push people around and show their powers over the rest of us. Imagine for a second that you are the officer instead. Your job may be to get certain information and determine if person may be hiding something. She asked you a question, not because she'll forward the details of your business trip to your competitor. Of course you could lie to her and she won't know or care any different. Her job is to guage whether you seem nervous, or deceptive. That's one way for them to figure out a. if you might be dangerous, or hiding something in your luggage like Drugs, weapons, bombs, rare endangered,illegal animals etc. We blamed a lot of these people for letting 9/11 hijackers in the US and on the planes on 9/11/2001, but idiots like yourself are making their jobs are lot harder. Believe it or not, no one can make a machine that can detect a terrorist or someone that is up to no good 100% of the time. Its human interaction that prevents such events, and only that. If every moron like yourself gives these officers a hard time, and they have to check EVERY bag, it would be impossible to do so. Chances are someone that deserves more attention, oh I don't know someone like a fucking terrorist, will slip by. You and most idiots that are giving you kudos in the comments are making things a lot worse. Just because you can be a dick, doesn't mean you should. There are a lot of things you can do legally to your wife and loved ones...but I bet you don't. Maybe treating police officers and customs officers and airport personnel with some respect, understanding why they might do things a certain way, would help us all.

I hope EVERYBODY treats you like shit, legally, and because they CAN, and let's see you complain about how tough your fucking job is, numbnuts!</comment>


The 'Was it Built with Bootstrap' Quiz - <AUTHOR> http://www.bootstraphero.com/quiz

<comment> chao- I took the quiz based entirely on the single image presented, and not visiting the site itself or doing much investigating. Managed to get 8/10 primarily based on the familiar buttons/navbar. Strangely though, after the quiz I was told:

 _"12 of 10 sites identified correctly"_

<comment><USER2> Same here. "13 of 10" for me though (I got every one correct)

<http://i.imgur.com/ztgMX.png>

<comment><USER3> 17 of 10 for me... (all correct, after a few attempts)

<http://i.imgur.com/PlXPQ.png>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> <http://www.bootstraphero.com/quiz/question>

        Application Error

        An error occurred in the application and your page could not be served. Please try again in a few moments.

        If you are the application owner, check your logs for details.

</comment><comment><USER5> 10/10. In general the giveaways seem to be:

1\. Buttons and their rollover styles. 2\. Text inputs. In particular, the inset gradient, border radius, and on focus styles. 3\. Use of a grid. Obviously many people use grids, but a grid in combo with #1 or #2 is a giveaway.

<comment><USER6> Definitely the buttons - if you go with bootstrap if it has that bootstrap gradient button, and not if it doesn't you should get 8/10 correct, I think?

I would double check but the server currently gives

"Application Error

An error occurred in the application and your page could not be served. Please try again in a few moments. "

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> There were a couple nobody got wrong... I got 5/10 right.

</comment><comment><USER8> You've got a CSS bug in the quiz that's causing the buttons to not be aligned properly.

(Latest FF, 12-something by 10-something)

<comment><AUTHOR> Should be much better now, the issue was cross domain custom font loading with Firefox. So the font didn't load and then the layout exploded.

Thanks again for the heads up.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> According to this, Tray.io (Site 3 of 10) was NOT built with bootstrap. However the class names on the form controls and buttons beg to differ - <http://tray.io/login/>

I'm less likely to trust a site called 'bootstrap hero' if they can't correctly identify bootstrap.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey sorry about that, probably just a misclick on our part.

<comment><USER9> Fair enough, I'll add 1 to me score when I finish :D

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Our site (<https://circleci.com>) is built with bootstrap, and we've managed to make it feel very not-bootstrapy, with some small font changes and not using the black topbar. The only real clue is the font-awesome/glyphicon logos.

<comment><USER11> The three columns are pretty characteristic of bootstrap, if you're really trying to look different. The site looks good, so don't take that as a suggestion to do anything differently.

<comment><USER10> I wouldn't have thought so - grid layouts go back a long time and I'd say half the web uses some form of them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> If there were buttons visible, I could usually determine if it was a bootstrap site or not. Next, I would look for a top navigation banner and try to decide from that. If I wasn't convinced by those two, then always picking not- bootstrap worked out well.

</comment><comment><USER13> Clipboard.com is not built on Bootstrap ?

Edit: the thing is some buttons look Bootstrap on the capture but quit less if you visit the site.

All in all I guess some alternative for buttons design in BT would be great ;)

<comment><AUTHOR> Fixed, not sure if I just suck at marking these correctly, they changed layouts (I've been collecting links for a while) or that I've lost the ability to read a class='span12' when I see it.

Thanks for the heads up.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Thought I would get 8 out of 10. Only got 4 of 10.

</comment><comment><USER15> "11 OF 10 SITES IDENTIFIED CORRECTLY." :(

<comment><USER16> 12 out of 10! Booyah!

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Every time it wasn't built with Bootstrap I wanted to know what it was built with...

v2 maybe?

</comment><comment><USER18> DEAR BOOTSTRAP HERO,

PLEASE STOP YELLING AT ME.

THANKS,

RMRFRMRF

<comment><AUTHOR> sorry

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> New high score!!!!

"16 OF 10 SITES IDENTIFIED CORRECTLY."

<comment><AUTHOR> Fixed, the answers were being recorded correctly, but I had a bad query on the ending results page.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Should probably make sure website links open in a new tab.

</comment><comment><USER21> Increase the dyno

</comment><comment><USER22> [x] Was build with slabtext.js.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, we've got an actual professional designer working on a better...everything.

In the meantime we just did this as a fun one off project.

<comment><USER22> Nothing wrong with slabtext, since looks great.

It was just fun to get through my 10, see the completion page, and I instantly thought, "done with slabtext!"

It's your own fault, you're training me to spot these things!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> 13 out of 10!

</comment><comment><USER24> is uchicago.edu on the list?</comment>


Help us electrify this village - <AUTHOR> http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/solar-soldiers-rescue-mission?c=home

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi, It would be really helpful if you individuals can spend $10 each. It will help us raise funds for the endeavor.</comment>


LinuxAteMyRam.com - <AUTHOR> http://www.linuxatemyram.com/ <comment><USER2> Lol, this happened for Windows many years ago and everyone was running around screaming about it. Oh Linux does it too? Suddenly it's a great idea! LMAO</comment>


Tests Are About Design - <AUTHOR> http://openmymind.net/Tests-Are-About-Design/ <comment><AUTHOR> I find it much more helpful to think in terms of why and what we will test rather than how much will we test. This approach resolves a few of the frequently debated issues around testing, such as:

1\. Should I test first, or test later?

2\. What is the right amount of code coverage?

3\. Should I write more unit tests or integration tests?

4\. Should I use mocks or not?

and so on...

The above questions can have an arbitrary answer that makes sense in a certain context but may not yield the best cost / benefit ratio in other contexts. Hence, the guiding star needs to be: why are we writing a test.</comment>


BarkBox's road to 20k customers and 95% retention - <AUTHOR> http://blog.perfectaudience.com/2012/12/13/barkboxs-road-to-20000-customers-and-95-retention-dog-owners-are-dog-parents/

<comment><USER2> Some people are going to be weirded out by this "retargeting" thing. I don't think it quite meets the level of something that privacy advocates can complain about, though. It's just an agreement from ad networks that they'll show your ads when they see your cookies in a request. Ad networks function by reading cookies, so if you accept their existence you accept the basic practice. This is just an interesting new wrinkle.

<comment><USER3> I'm waiting for the first stories about people having their Christmas present surprises spoiled by their SOs seeing retargeted Amazon ads featuring the products they were browsing while doing their Christmas shopping. Or their kids seeing retargeted Toys R Us ads with the toys the parents were looking at. :)

(I don't think retargeting is bad in general, I just think that the shops that due the specific-product-including ones are treading the wrong side of the creepy line and haven't thought enough about shared computers.)</comment></comment>


Startup Investors Keep Secrets from Their Entrepreneurs - <AUTHOR> http://www.techvibes.com/blog/investors-secret-code-corporate-governance-2012-11-23

<comment><USER2> This is a very important article. Its not about good guys and bad guys, its about differing perspectives and varying expertise.

1) quote "...investor is bluffing to cover a lack of knowledge..."

\-- read: the investor has no idea what you are doing and never will. They only invested because someone else they trust thinks its a money maker.

\-- note: this is not a bad thing, its a reflection of what they are good at: money handling and profit making.

2) quote: "What most entrepreneurs don't realize is that by failing to complete a deal structure, a cap table, and an exit model in advance, they greatly extend their due diligence period and ultimately hold up the cheque writing, sometimes for months."

\-- read: and ultimately hold up the cheque writing, sometimes for months... and sometimes for fucking ever. Why? Because they are too naive or lazy to do their business homework, and the money boys walk away with their baby.

\-- note: This is also not a bad thing, it is something you _must_ be prepared for; you're a hacker right? Immerse in some VC, finance, management and negotiation books. See the world from their perspective, wiser is better.

</comment><comment><USER3> I'd recommend the book "Venture Deals: Be Smarter Than Your Lawyer and Venture Capitalist" for any entrepreneur seeking funding, especially if you feel in over your head with all this due diligence talk.

</comment><comment><USER4> The bottom line is you get what you negotiate.

If you act like a patsy you'll be treated like one. If you sell your value to the investors you'll be in the position to drive terms.

That's why early stage fundraising/investing is tricky by definition. The value is purely speculative and is little more than guesswork based on a mix of intuition, guesswork and sheep instinct. The term "spray and pray" came into being for a reason.

But once you are later stage you raise on revenues / cash flow / profit / growth rate. Entrepreneur rightfully should be in the driver seat for this type of deal.

</comment><comment><USER5> Investors are probably more guilty here - entrepreneurs, most of the time, are trying to "create value", in PG/HN speak. Investors who swindle entrepreneurs are just making money off others' efforts.

</comment><comment><USER6> Always nice to get an insider's POV and an education about what is going on in at least one angel investor's head

</comment><comment><USER7> The article is signed Anonymous Angel. Is the matter that taboo ?</comment>