Thumbs Down for Clojure - <AUTHOR> http://www.loper-os.org/?p=42

<comment><USER2> This guy is insane, everything he writes is a lame rant about how life sucks since the demise of Symbolics.

However, I will have to say that I was initially excited about Clojure and each day become more disappointed because it really does carry with it all the baggage of Java. I had vowed to avoid CLASSPATH hell the rest of my programming days and Clojure often makes me feel like I'm lying to myself.

<comment><USER3> I'm also disappointed by Python. It doesn't make using windows any more tolerable than before.

But maybe I'm being unfair, expecting my programming language to solve the problems of my operating system.

<comment><USER2> Yeah, you're being unfair, especially if you've used both Python and Java and consider them equivalent in terms of laborious configuration details. When I say CLASSPATH hell I mean the whole configuration mess that is maintaining a java environment. If you have any tips on making this not suck in Clojure it would be great to hear them, otherwise I am switching back to Python.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> "I don't care if everybody really _is_ more productive in Clojure than in Common Lisp."

That's where the author lost me. I'm willing to entertain the argument that a hybridization of Java and Lisp is not nearly as effective as one would hope - but the universal ultimate goal is MAKING THINGS.

<comment><USER5> He inadvertently revealed the secret mantra of comp.lang.lisp. Purity supersedes productivity, practicality, and pragmatism.

<comment><USER6> This is a real problem with a lot of small communities that don't understand why the awesome thing they like hasn't taken over the world.

<comment><USER7> Well hopefully they realize it won't take over the world and they are okay with that.

The minute you start doing actual work for paying clients is the minute that compromises sneak in. Certainly the last thing these people would want is for the LISP community to become like the PHP community where the few nuggets of good code are drowned out by flood of sewage. Maybe someone thinks you couldn't write code that bad in a pure LISP, but believe me you would see some pretty horrendous crap if LISP had 10% marketshare of, let's say, web programming.

<comment><USER8> Frankly, this fear just sounds too much like "Oh no, I'd hate to see anything tinge my precious baby!"

What's wrong with there being poorly written code in your favorite language? Unless these Lispers also do web development, they likely won't come in contact with the hypothetical bad Lisp-on-web code. So why should they care? Also, how is the good code drowned out? Assuming that the screening process for a job picks out good PHP developers, it isn't that hard for one to find good PHP code in the form of frameworks and libraries.

<comment><USER7> Well sure, to normal people yes. But to understand the mentality, just consider for a second that the OA is foaming at the mouth of a language that is merely inspired by LISP.

wrt the PHP thing, well, I cut my teeth on PHP, and frankly I didn't learn much by reading code I found early on. After doing it for a couple years (and completing an MIT-based CS degree) I started to discover the flaws for myself and I was eventually well-trained enough to be able to find the good code. If you know what to look for it's easy. However what's popular in PHP world (ie. what you find on Google) is not necessarily good. Compared to Ruby or Python, or hell, even Perl, it's just way harder to find good PHP code to learn from for a beginner.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Fine, don't use Clojure. Myself, I'll get stuff done, and not whine about the fact that my laptop's BIOS is not written in lisp.

<comment><USER10> It is interesting, how if someone doesn't like something they seem to see it as their mission to make sure no one else uses it? (or it appears that way, what I think it really means is self promotion, and its easier to tear down then build up when building your profile in public).

<comment><USER11> _they seem to see it as their mission to make sure no one else uses it_

I don't think they necessarily do - they're just saying what they think, but then other people read it and get annoyed (justifiably.)

That's the thing with blogs, the entire world can hear your opinion, and sometimes it would have been better if they didn't.

<comment><USER10> hahahah - yes, so true.

Actually in this article, when I re-read it, I think it is written in a sort of ironic/fun tone.

Although I love clojure, I understand the disappointment in not being "lisp all the way down" - there is something satisfying about the purity of that approach, if it is practical. Maybe one day...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> If he got anything right, it's the "good enough" thing. There's a sense of reality in clojure, of compromises and of practicality.

There's also a sense of abandonment of some of lisp's dreams. There is definitely a break from the way lisp was, and it's clearly deliberate (defn vs defun for example). But at the same time, this _is_ a lisp for the XXI century. Old dreams needed to die for progress' sake.

I strongly disagree though about the importance of understanding everything all the way down. It's not a bad thing per se, but pales in comparison to being able to work easily with what others have made. Another compromise, and one well chosen in my opinion. The vastness of java space compensates more then a hundred times the lack of transparency.

<comment><USER13> So at what point of abandoning some of the fundamental ideas do you have something else entirely?

I hate all this "dream" talk, it's not a dream it's been implemented. If you don't want to use it fine, but don't pretend to be taking all the good and leaving the bad. Imho having to deal with Java classes is just substituting one bad for another (or worse).

<comment><USER6> Well, you can either have just "perfect" implementations of an obscure language very few people are coding in, or you can also have an implementation of a similar language that is imperfect while actually gaining mindshare for both languages.

Who's more likely to bother looking at some other version of lisp, someone whose experience is C++, Perl, and Java, or someone who's used Clojure?

This isn't the perfect as the enemy of the good so much as the perfect not willing to let the good _be its friend_.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> The author embodies Lisp's self-defeating idealism. Hurray for pragmatism, hurray for Clojure.

<comment><USER15> this comment reminded me of this: [http://philip.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a- fetch-msg?msg_id=...](http://philip.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch- msg?msg_id=0006XQ)

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Wow, that was the most fappish programming rant I've ever read.

"I don't care if people are more productive! It's not the pure genius of Symbolics LISP!" WTF?

<comment><USER17> But it's not the pure genius of Symbolics LISP. The genius of the Lisp machines is in their extensibility and consistency all the way down. (This has nothing to do with Lisp, BTW, but rather with the design of the system and runtime. The syntax is nice, but largely irrelevant.)

The closest I've ever come to day to day use of a Lisp machine is Emacs. It is wonderfully different from "worse is better" systems like UNIX and Clojure/Java. With a few keystrokes, I can use my tool to change my tool... instantly. Everything is as deeply aware of everything else (if it needs to be). The result is an extremely comfortable environment where anything seems possible. (I recently switched from bash + ansi-term to eshell. UNIX is much nicer when you can see it through a lisp-colored shell.)

Anyway, I guess this isn't really related to the article... but if your view of programming consists of strings being passed along pipelines and huge, monolithic cathedrals that claim to be "IDEs", you are not seeing the whole picture.

<comment><USER16> Symbolics LISP machines were pretty awesome, you're right.

People are writing real software, right now, in Clojure. In my book, that's a win for LISP and beats wanking about what could have been any day.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Hilarious. But this sentence is great:

 _My standard of comparison for any technology will always be everything previously achieved by mankind, rather than what is available on the market today._

Exactly the right attitude, except here it seems to be harming this guy's life.

</comment><comment><USER19> I find it strange that the original author only suggested proprietary alternatives (Lisp Machines, Mathematica), noting that Common Lisp itself not immune from these same criticisms. What's also interesting is this:

Java itself, at its helm had/has people such as Guy Steele who _knew_ that since people would be unwilling to adopt languages such as Common Lisp or Smalltalk, best they could hope would be to "sneak" many of the features these languages originated (reflection, generic programming, garbage collection, DSLs, object orientation) to the people who would benefit the most from them. Java was a great covert vehicle for this "feature-sneaking", with its C-like syntax and enterprise buzzwords.

Now with Scala and Clojure (as well as Jython and JRuby), it seems like this an even _more_ ambitious to sneak powerful programming tools and paradigms (dynamically typed languages, functional languages) to the professional programmer community, this time by saying "this is just a jar/war file".

If the goal is adoption of proper Lisp-from-ground up architecture, then sure this "sneaky" approach isn't going to get anyone there. But what if the goal is better code and more productive coders?

<comment><USER20> How much impact had Guy Steele on the design of Java? My guess was always that Java was mostly designed when he arrived and he was hired for his experience in standards and his writing capabilities. Given that Mr. Steele co-wrote a book on C, worked on the standard for High Performance Fortran, the CL standard, and other things.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> _The Clojure user who is missing some routine or other will run crying to Java for help, rather than implementing the feature himself correctly.... Clojure pisses on everything I've ever loved about Lisp._

In other words, Clojure bypasses a major part of what everyone hated about Scheme and Common Lisp, the unfortunate combination of inclination, culture, and fragmentation that prevented the natural development of a library ecosystem like the ones enjoyed by Perl and Java. Furthermore, this guy's comments reveal that for some Lisp hackers, at least, the bias against libraries was real and not accidental. To guys like this, the desire to just install a library and get the job done stands right beside "too many parentheses" as a stupid noob concern that a real Lisper will grow out of. Let's hope Clojure represents a symbolic moving-on from this self-defeating and chauvinistic attitude.

<comment><USER20> not really. The Symbolics Lisp Machine came with a huge library of thousands of class and 30000+ functions.

Additionally it had compilers for Fortran, C, Pascal and others. It could compile things like TeX and X11 on the Lisp Machine.

He just does not want to build on the JVM. I can understand that. The JVM is optimized for Java and nothing else. SUN has not done much to support other languages (functional, dynamic, ...) on top of the JVM (Microsoft does that with its .net infrastructure, though). Using the JVM for Lisp is fine, because it is there. But it is ugly, since it is alien for Lisp. More alien than x86 is for Lisp.

<comment><USER21> His complaint is that the JVM libraries are not coded in Lisp: _opaque routines having no underlying Lispiness_. He would rather have no libraries at all, so every programmer needing library functionality has to "implement the feature himself correctly," where "correctly" means "in Lisp." His aesthetic sense has run amok and is out to destroy everything that isn't a "crystalline pyramid," regardless of how useful it is.

 _Additionally it had compilers for Fortran, C, Pascal and others._

Until this wacko logs in and deletes them, or replaces them with trojans to teach you a lesson about intellectual rigor ;-)

 _The JVM is optimized for Java and nothing else._

That's true, but x86 is optimized for C and nothing else, so how can you do any better (in real life?) At least the JVM has potential. Sun has realized that dynamic language performance is important, and they're busy improving support for languages like Jython and JRuby. Lisps will benefit from that work.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I retain a great deal of affection for environments like Squeak, like Emacs, where you can stand as high up or as low down as you like in the system. Emacs has primitives written in C, of course, and Squeak doesn't cooperate real well with the rest of the world, but it's still a very powerful idea.

It makes me a little sad that one cannot learn Java programming by e.g. loading up Eclipse and saying "what's the code for this thing?", in the way that Squeak, Emacs, many Forths, R, and yes Symbolics Lisp permitted.

</comment><comment><USER23> Could there be a more self-defeating way to make this argument? This is the kind of thing that makes people write psychoanalytical essays about Lisp programmers.

</comment><comment><USER24> He seems to have missed the point of being built on java.

</comment><comment><USER25> I have never heard any Clojure proponent encourage anyone to implement functionality at the Java level. I don't program in Clojure or Java, but it's obvious to me the idea is that the JVM is just the "operating system" for Clojure.

<comment><USER20> So you would not write hybrid Java and Clojure programs? You would not reuse and extend Java classes? Strange. I thought Rich went to the JVM because the eco system is so rich ;-) and not just because it happens to have a code execution environment and a garbage collection implementation.

<comment><USER26> When you're writing Clojure code, you generally are supposed to prefer Clojure features and idioms. Functions like proxy and gen-and-save-class exist because sometimes you have to create classes to use other Java APIs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> If Clojure is getting reactions like this, it must be doing something right.

</comment><comment><USER28> The author does indeed describe what is "wrong", but perhaps not explicitly.

</comment><comment><USER29> _Symbolics Genera [..] can never be un-created_

Can it be recreated?

<comment><USER6> In theory, I suppose.

Of course, I find myself wondering - in what world is such a thing most likely to happen? In a world where lisp sits in obscurity, or one where some "revolting" lisp actually gets a significant developer base? :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Two words: stone soup.

The JVM is just a starting point, and a very good one for that.

<comment><USER20> just not for a Lisp dialect. The mismatch is known and widely documented.</comment></comment>


TIL: World record for throwing a cell phone is 110.96 yards - <AUTHOR> http://h30565.www3.hp.com/t5/Mobility-Matters/How-Far-can-you-Throw-your-Cellphone/ba-p/6308 <comment><USER2> well now I have a very strong urge to throw my cell phone</comment>


Build a Realtime Serverless GraphQL API with Websockets on AWS - <AUTHOR> https://andrewgriffithsonline.com/blog/serverless-websockets-on-aws/ <comment><USER2> I've been experimenting with AppSync and it seems promising. The only thing I hem and haw about is the resolver templates, which are written in VTL (as opposed to JS). I asked the core devs about this on Twitter and they said it's so they can have a deterministic bound on the execution time for resolvers against Dynamo. Still, seems to me like giving the option of lightweight JS resolvers with bounded execution time would be a good feature. I know you have this option with Lambda, but then you run into the "cold start" issues on a per resolver basis.

Other than that, it seems like a great stack. It's scalable and has all the right features baked in to build a prod-ready app. I feel really productive when I'm using it.

After seeing Cloudflare's superior performance with their service workers at the edge (over AWS Lambda), and seeing both AppSync and Prisma and Apollo, I'm wondering if we couldn't get a stack like:

1) Service workers at the edge, globally distributed JS running in V8 isolates, that work as GraphQL resolvers against a globally distributed DB like Cosmos on Azure. 2) Built-in websockets/subscriber support either handled at the edge or from AWS/Azure/etc 3) Global caching via Apollo Engine 4) A cleaner DB abstraction like Prisma offers over Postgres

^^ seems to me like we're getting close to this realization of being able to just ship serverless code, have it automatically geo-replicated and cached for low latency, quick response times, and without having to worry about dev ops. These are huge productivity wins for devs.

<comment><USER3> Do you have to deal with cold starts on AppSync?

<comment><USER2> Not for VTL-based resolvers, as far as I can tell. I haven't run performance numbers to be sure, but it seems like the VTL resolvers run pretty fast.

If you need to do really complicated logic in your resolvers, though, you'll probably want to write a Lambda to back those particular resolvers.

So a GraphQL query's performance may vary depending on how many resolvers are involved and whether those are VTL or Lambda.

<comment><USER4> (AWS AppSync tech lead here)

Spot on! Some of the use cases for the VTL-based resolvers are to minimize cold start and latency due to network I/O for resolver invocation. I recommend that you start with the VTL resolvers if they are available for your data source and evaluate performance[1]. Switch to AWS Lambda only if you identify missing features or can't meet performance expectations.

Also, we've absolutely heard your feedback about VTL and this is a large area of investment for AppSync. One of the enhancements we launched today in the console is auto-complete in the VTL resolver editor. Let us know if it improves the editing experience.

Thanks for using AppSync - we are always excited to hear your feedback and use cases!

[1] AWS AppSync produces logs and detailed resolver execution metrics. More information at [https://docs.aws.amazon.com/appsync/latest/devguide/monitori...](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/appsync/latest/devguide/monitoring.html#cwl)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I've been using AppSync on an iOS project for the past few months. Really loving it so far. Not only does it enable a serverless GraphQL API, but it also makes it super easy to implement offline-first functionality and data syncing

</comment><comment><USER6> This is great! Thanks! I've built few GraphQL API's with Serverless and have always wondered if AppSync was the best way to handle Subscriptions, and have also never seen a decent implementation like this.

</comment><comment><USER7> I hope this is not a silly question, but does the schema in step 2 need to be saved to a file somewhere?

<comment><USER8> Looks like it's saved to a schema folder and named "schema.graphql".

See step 4 and the yaml file associated: > schema: schema/schema.graphql</comment></comment>


Is Google's Enterprise Software Too Cheap? - <AUTHOR> http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/is-googles-enterprise-software-too-cheap/index.html?ex=1361336400&en=bf01c40b766608ec&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

<comment><USER2> It seems like the major criticism leveled by the article is that Postini customers want support and are willing to pay for it and google is not offering support and not making them pay for it.

Seems like the perfect opportunity to sell Postini support now that they aren't bundled anymore. Support isn't Google's core competency anyway, they're probably leaving this to others on purpose.

</comment><comment><USER3> The real problem is inertia.

'Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM', remember? It'll take a generation to get rid of the crap, but it will happen. The CIO at USC arranged a campus-wide rollout; more will follow. Once students (who then enter the workforce and, eventually, make decisions) decide that $free >> $discounted for Office, and things like a proper mail merge/track changes/export to Word are implemented, it's all over.

Things like Scribd and ever-improving ajax applications, along with hopefully forthcoming solutions to permit web browsers to exploit multicore 'puter power, should help a lot. It always blows me away when managers make excuses for paying (out of habit) for features that their workers do not use. Free is not always better, but all other things kept equal, free+no-local-maintenance is very good for a company.

<comment><AUTHOR> The flaw I see in that argument is that you have no guarantee of service. Some people (my employer) care about that, and some don't. I'm not saying it's insurmountable. I'm just saying that the idea of a Boeing or a General Motors converting to Gmail isn't going to come to fruition under the current model.

<comment><USER3> > The flaw I see in that argument is that you have no guarantee of service.

Oh god, not this shit again.

Look at any typical SLA and tell me you don't see a zillion loopholes for lawyers to wriggle around. There's never any real guarantee of service unless an ironclad SLA is hammered out, and I suspect that if Google gets traction with Gmail for Domains, they'll do it.

When I was at Google (2003-2004) we had something like 10 seconds of user- visible outage. That was before Gmail, but it was also with a staff of ~200 people and ~250K servers. I have every reason to believe that Google can still stomp the shit out of all contenders on uptime; they just need some incentive to do it for specific services.

(my $0.02 only; I don't work for Google anymore. In fact I doubt I could ever go back; it would be too depressing to see what's become of the bullpen atmosphere in ops. Even still -- Urs may be the best in the world at what he does.)

<comment><AUTHOR> Perhaps, in your hurry to condemn, you have misinterpreted.

When I can walk out the back door and speak directly to the head of the department in charge of our application programming team, or the guys running the servers, and so on, then I feel pretty good about guaranteed uptime. More importantly, I can blame someone when it fails.

Let's presume for a minute that my smallish enterprise was to move to Google Apps, and for some reason completely beyond the control of my people (Google failure, cable cut, whatever), the service goes out. Who do I blame?

You can call it "shit" if that makes you feel better about it. But it certainly doesn't cut any ice for me to walk into the President's office and say "But Google only had 10 seconds of outage in 2003-2004." I'm still fired. Imagine how much worse it would be for someone in a large installation.

When I control the gear, I control what I can and can't accomplish. Unless you can sell me on a serious guarantee of service and compelling functionality...no thanks.

<comment><USER3> > When I control the gear,

Does Boeing outsource anything? Discuss.

Obviously if you can run everything in-house for cheaper than an organization can do it elsewhere, you should. Large numbers of businesses are discovering that's not the case, or their 10 seconds of downtime isn't actually consequential. (If it is, then having an in-house base of expertise is critical. But an SLA is not the same as an in-house ops department!)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> "left partners reeling and searching for more channel-friendly vendors for their customers' e-mail security needs."

doesn't channel-friendly just mean higher priced?

<comment><USER5> Higher-priced _and_ more brittle (so they can sell more support contracts)!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> nb. The article covers Postini, which is like SpamAssassin/DSPAM (or Zimbra for that matter), only it costs money. There are some details that I am eliding, but fundamentally, that's what we're talking about.

Postini likely adds a great deal of value to Gmail by virtue of the vastly larger corpus. If that means that Postini is no longer a viable product for 3rd-party deployment, tough shit for the 3rd parties.

What I don't understand is why a Postini user (eg.) wouldn't just switch to Gmail for Domains and forward everything through an IMAP relay.

I originally replied (on autopilot) regarding the existing Google Docs/Applications framework. If they don't merge the entire mess into a rollup offering, I'm going to be flabbergasted.

</comment><comment><USER6> Remove the middle man and bring more value to your customers. What a concept.

<comment><USER7> Actually the problem is that Google's apps are self-service, and this is not what enterprise customers are used to. Most startups discussed here don't have the option to provide the non-scallable phone support either, so it is a very relevant problem.

Hiring 1000 people in a support center in India is a very un-googly thing to do, so I guess Google will keep the prices low and persist educating their customers to be able to use the services themselves. Maybe someone can invent a better way to do just that.

<comment><USER8> "Actually the problem is that Google's apps are self-service, and this is not what enterprise customers are used to."

Having worked with numerous "enterprise" packages in various capacities, I can assure you that most enterprise software vendors offer something that only barely qualifies as "support" anyway. The difference is that Google isn't lying about their level of support,

<comment><USER9> While I do agree that most enterprise software support offices are-let's be honest-crap, that fact doesn't negate the enterprise's need for software support. Companies desire that safety blanket and "having someone to blame" even if they are lying to themselves.

A friend higher up than me in business once told me that large corporations are in the business of managing risk. This is in stark contrast to a startup founder's penchant for taking them.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Gangnam Style in Pure CSS (Easter Egg by Google) - <AUTHOR> http://jsfiddle.net/Layke/7hjTC/show

<comment><USER2> Or you could go direct to the Google page [0] and hover over the coloured stripe at the bottom.

[0] <http://www.google.com/zeitgeist/2012/#maia-signature>

<comment><USER3> Putting it up on jsfiddle lets you see all the html/css/js at the same place, and also helps you tinker with it.

You could say its one and the same thing, and I'd say it is - but maybe a lil more :)

-jeff

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Note: The animation is pure CSS, but the component graphics are PNGs. Given the simplicity of the graphics, I was rather hoping the whole thing was styled divs.

<comment><USER5> I wonder, does it count as pure CSS if it's a base64 encoded image?

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> <style type="gangnam">

<comment><USER7>
      <style type="강남구">

<comment><USER8>
        <style type="���">

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Unbelievable. :-D! Even PSY wouldn't have imagined this kind of success for that song. Although I suspect, a lot had to do with the spontaneity of the accompanying music video.

<comment><USER10> I don't know if it's a good place to ask, but I was puzzled for quite some time already and can't figure it out on my own... So, the question is, what made PSY and "Gangnam Style" __this __popular (in the West - I read on Wikipedia that in Japan it had "luke-warm" reception)? Could someone please try to explain this to me like I never heard the song and never saw the video? Thanks.

<comment><USER6> "I read on Wikipedia that in Japan it had "luke-warm" reception"

Japan and South Korea doesn't have the best of relations, which may explain why it hasn't taken off there the way it has in many other parts of the world.

<comment> B-Con They do tend to share popular pop-music, though. Some K-Pop artists convert their hits to Japanese, and rarely even write in Japanese first.

In general, it wasn't their thing. It was funny and kind of interesting, but not the sort of thing that captures a whole-sale audience in South Korea or Japan. That would be my guess as to the reason.

<comment><USER11> I think your right about Japan. They love K-Pop, but more so the boy band style K-Pop.

I'm in South Korea now though, and it is the ONLY song they listen to 24/7 (1st birthday parties, weddings, elementary school art festivals, taekwondo practice...) Ganganam Style IS the whole-sale epitome of South Korea.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Pure CSS, uses transparent PNG's... Can't say that I am not disappointed the whole thing wasn't used cleverly styled DIV's, I reckon it can be done.

</comment><comment><USER9> Related thread on gangnam popularity: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4825537>

</comment><comment><USER13> But he is not doing the horse riding dance!

<comment><USER14> if you stay hovered over him, he will :)

<comment><USER15> I think bit is talking about the part where psy lifts his right hand in the air and do a cowboy dance

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I'm getting 503 errors on the images.</comment>


Is Cancer Solvable? - <AUTHOR> https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1073110519876164 <comment><AUTHOR> Found an open copy: [http://shrager.org/vita/pubs/2019JLMEIsCancerSolvable.pdf](http://shrager.org/vita/pubs/2019JLMEIsCancerSolvable.pdf)

Re "real insight", quoted from the highlight: "Current medical research tries to minimize risk to the individual while maximizing benefit to society. Yet, in traditional research, no attempt is made to calculate the value to society of what may be gained by research. In contrast, GCTA seeks to maximize both individual and societal benefit based upon explicit quantification for each. One quantitative measure of societal benefit is information gain, which enables the prioritization of one option versus another at a specific moment in time. "

</comment><comment><USER2> I can only read the abstract and it is only 41 words. Most of them are just buzzwords. What is the real insight in the article?</comment>


OO C is passable - <AUTHOR> http://www.yosefk.com/blog/oo-c-is-passable.html <comment><USER2> This guy's blog is awesome. Go read his archives.

</comment><comment><USER3> If you want something like C, but with virtual functions, then you should look at Lua. It's fast, minimal, and designed to be embeddable. It doesn't start with OO, but you can actually easily build as much OO as you want. In fact, "something like C, but with virtual functions" almost describes Lua. (You have to add that it's Dynamic and Interpreted.)

<comment><USER4> Is Lua fast? I heard it has double as its only numeric data dype. How can that ever be fast?

Here, look at the benchmarks: [http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=all...](http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=lua&lang2=gcc)

<comment><USER5> For a "scripting language", yes. Compared to C, no.

<comment><USER3> If you're going to be crunching petabytes of 32 bit floats, then by all means, use C or even FORTRAN. Most of us don't have a requirements that stringent, and something like Lua is just fine.

Unfortunately, a lot of us are brainwashed into thinking we've got to act like weather simulation programmers, when we're really doing business apps.

<comment><USER5> I wasn't making any value judgments about languages and speed, only stating the obvious that Lua is very fast as an interpreted language, but not so fast compared to fast compiled languages.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Null terminated vtables. That's horrid. The performance must be terrible.

<comment><USER7> Why? The time to search a three entry vtable (or whatever) is still an order of magnitude lower than the time to fetch the thing from main memory in the first place. Performance optimization stopped being about instruction cycle counting a few years back.</comment></comment>


Startups that use "the" or "get" to avoid premium domains - <AUTHOR>

Facebook was "thefacebook.com" before it was "facebook.com." Groupon was "getgroupon.com" before it was "groupon.com". Likewise, Dropbox was "getdropbox.com" before it was "dropbox.com"
Something that's never discussed, though: wouldn't the original owners of "facebook.com", "groupon.com" and "dropbox.com" have seen that these companies were gaining traction, and raised the prices on these domains? I just don't get this.
If I owned facebook.com and I suddenly heard about a company called The Facebook that was getting hot as hell, I wouldn't leave the domain name up for the same price as before.
Hopefully this isn't too confusing for people to follow. I'm only asking because I want to start out on "the+insertcompanynamehere.com" and I'm worried that the "insertcompanynamehere.com" owner could respond to growth by hiking up the price of that domain. Anyone know anything about this or have any experience with this? <comment><USER2> If your the owner of a hot domain getting traffic and typeins from another brand, you have to walk a fine line with what you try to achieve. If you do want to sell it and get a payday, you have to play the negotiations right, because there is always the threat of them walking away and entering a UDRP proces. Lets say your too stubborn to know better and list your price at something incredibly high and unrealistic.

In order for them to win the domain in a dispute process, all they need to do is prove a few things:

(i) your domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and

(ii) you have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and

(iii) your domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.

(<http://www.icann.org/en/udrp/udrp-policy-24oct99.htm>)

A panel of judges will go through the presented arguments and defense and award it to a winner. Of course, it will depend on each domain's individual circumstances, as well as what the current owner of the domain is using it for.

<comment><USER3> My guess is they should set the price as the patent trolls do. If someone has a patent and threatens to sue another company, they set the settling price at just below what it would take to fight it out in the court.

Well the domain name holders are allowed to do it only once though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> <http://justintv.com/> kind of cracks me up.

</comment><comment><USER5> I'm sure the companies you've mentioned paid a solid price for those domain names.

They can't raise it too high otherwise, you might not buy, but no, they're not dumb enough to keep it low either.

</comment><comment><USER6> Facebook.com was bought with $200,000. Isn't that a good price the original owner got?

<comment><USER6> By the way, try first to buy that domain you want to buy...before gaining traction. Gaining traction brings traffic to that owner also...thus, the price is raised because of this too.

<comment><USER7> I would think that would depend on how much money you started with. You might need to gain a little traction before you even have enough money to buy a premium domain. Even if you do have the money, spending say 5000-10000 on a domain might be a little hasty before even convincing someone that your idea should be funded.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> If you have a trademark, you can file a domain name dispute and try and claim it that way.

<http://www.chillingeffects.org/domain/faq.cgi>

<comment><AUTHOR> My understanding was that if their domain was registered before your company name was trademarked, they have a right to that domain. I'll check out that link, though.

<comment><USER9> This one always baffled me: <http://www.nissan.com/>

<comment><USER10> The big banner announcing the lawsuit: Not so baffling.

<comment><USER9> That is pretty obvious...it's baffling that Nissan couldn't have settled this amicably.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm working on a startup with getmochi.com right now. IF the app launches and IF it gets popular and IF the author doesn't want to sell and IF we decide there is worthwhile business purpose to grab the original... we'll deal w/ that problem when the time comes.

<comment><USER12> Good luck on that particular domain. (I work for Mochi Media, and we weren't able to get it)

<comment><USER11> Mochi Media is a great company!! That's a bummer that you guys weren't able to get it. Congrats on the acquisition btw :)

<comment><USER12> Thanks :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'm pretty sure that all of those (plus mint.com, which started as mymint.com) had VC backing to help pay for the domain. If you want to go with that kind of domain name, it seems like getting VC is going to be a requirement.</comment>


Tor users and Linux Journal readers are classified as extremists by NSA - <AUTHOR> http://www.in.techspot.com/news/security/nsa-classifies-linux-journal-readers-tor-and-tails-linux-users-as-extremists/articleshow/47743699.cms <comment><USER2> While we are already witnessing the effects of unrestrained government interference and surveillance in our lives I shudder to consider the world the next generation will inherit from us and grow up in.

That said, F..k the NSA. I just opened all the listed links in the article.I am on at least eight more lists now.

<comment><USER3> >Countries like Canada, the UK, New Zealand, Australia, and the US, also known as the "Five Eyes", are exempt from surveillance, however.

If you're in one of those countries, you should be in the clear?

<comment><USER2> > Countries like Canada, the UK, New Zealand, Australia... are exempt from > surveillance

Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of spy-craft knows that's not how it works. Everyone will spy on everyone else when they can get away with it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Not this again, I expect better from HN readers. Please do not treat the claims in this poorly researched article as correct information.

 _NO_ , Tor and Linux users are _NOT_ classified as extremists by the Intelligence Community.

Yes, there are mentions of 'Linux Journal', 'TAILs' and 'Tor' in a file with filter definitions. But why? If we look at the actual rules in the file ([http://daserste.ndr.de/panorama/xkeyscorerules100.txt](http://daserste.ndr.de/panorama/xkeyscorerules100.txt)) we see it contains the following definition:

        // START_DEFINITION
        /*
        These variables define terms and websites relating to the TAILs (The Amnesic
        Incognito Live System) software program, a comsec mechanism advocated by
        extremists on extremist forums.
        */
        $TAILS_terms=word('tails' or 'Amnesiac Incognito Live System') and word('linux'
        or ' USB ' or ' CD ' or 'secure desktop' or ' IRC ' or 'truecrypt' or ' tor ');
        $TAILS_websites=('tails.boum.org/') or ('linuxjournal.com/content/linux*');
        // END_DEFINITION

This does _NOT_ say that anyone using TAILs or reading the Linux Journal is classed as an extremist.

Notice that they describe TAILs is a 'comsec mechanism advocated by extremists' and then go on to define a filter that selects users searching for it. However it would be used in conjunction with filters that _also_ select traffic from browsing those extremist forums. This usefully gives a list of addresses that frequent extremist forums _and_ then seek out and implement the communications security advice given in those forums, thereby indicating they are more than just casual browsers, they have something they wish to hide or secure in their communications.

So, once again, the XKeyScore definitions do _NOT_ automatically classify Linux, Tor and TAILs users as 'extremists', they merely give examples of filters that can be used to select traffic mentioning these keywords or connecting to related sites, in order to further filter traffic from known extremist or terrorist groups that also advocate using these tools for communications security. This allows analysts to determine whether an address belongs to a casual browser of these forums, or someone who wishes to keep their extremist or terrorist related browsing secret, and is therefore worthy of further surveillance of their internet traffic.

</comment><comment><USER5> (2014) publication date.

<comment><USER6> And from the last time around:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7991696](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7991696)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Is "fingerprint" here referring to the Javascript fingerprint ? ([https://panopticlick.eff.org/](https://panopticlick.eff.org/))

This is much more potent than IP address, but there don't seem to be much defense against this.

<comment><USER8> There is. You can either randomize the fingerprint (per-session fresh vm configured from a pool of possibilities) or unify it (tor/tails), provided that enough people do the same.

<comment><USER7> Is there a (recommended) add-on that does this ?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> It does seem to make sense logistically in terms of why they'd do it. Linux Journal isn't a large website, so it's not hard to just bulk add everyone to a list or whatever.

It seems they're just trying to bulk sweep up anyone that might be using TAILS.</comment>


HoverZoom for Chrome is infected with malware - <AUTHOR> http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/1t4ubn/hoverzoom_for_chrome_is_infected_with_malware/

<comment><AUTHOR> Copied from this comment from user @hpschorr : [http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/1t4ubn/hoverzoom...](http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/1t4ubn/hoverzoom_for_chrome_is_infected_with_malware/ce4h6h6)

Here's the code more readable for those interested: [http://pastebin.com/Rvp4eMvu](http://pastebin.com/Rvp4eMvu) As others have said and it seems they're starting to admit, it tracks your User Agent, form submission events (not content as far as I can see), some other computer identifying information, and loads in javascript for different actions. It sends data to [https://jsl.blankbase.com/](https://jsl.blankbase.com/) (https at least), that data being a number of things from the location (url) to your browser name, version, os name and version as well as generated identifier. It also does numerous also calls to [https://qp.rhlp.co/](https://qp.rhlp.co/) (which is a common mention on the internet) to load javascript: [https://qp.rhlp.co/gsd.html](https://qp.rhlp.co/gsd.html) (check source) [https://qp.rhlp.co/search/js](https://qp.rhlp.co/search/js) [https://qp.rhlp.co/demoda/js?v=3](https://qp.rhlp.co/demoda/js?v=3) So it doesn't look like it sends any significantly private data (form data), but, it's nowhere near a good thing. Nonetheless, tracking in extensions is shitty and monetizing extensions through tracking is a poor direction for extensions as a whole in the community. rhlp.co and blankbase.com are both registered at GoDaddy, blankbase is using the nameserver from this company [http://www.sambreel.com/](http://www.sambreel.com/) who may have either created the tracking or were paid to host it. If you're concerned about the domain usage, feel free to report them to GoDaddy , however, hopefully creators will start to realize monetizing extensions like this is a poor decision.

</comment><comment><USER2> Can anyone confirm this?

<comment><AUTHOR> Read the reddit page to get detailed discussion from the author. The github code shows the offending part: [https://github.com/Kruithne/HoverZoom_Malware/blob/master/hz...](https://github.com/Kruithne/HoverZoom_Malware/blob/master/hz.js)</comment></comment>


Anti A/B testing: signups increased by 60% after removing the blog header - <AUTHOR> http://visualwebsiteoptimizer.com/split-testing-blog/anti-ab-testing-signups-increased-by-60-after-removing-the-blog-header/

<comment><USER2> Do we really need a new term, "anti-A/B testing", to describe testing an element against the absence of said element? Does this case really not fall into the generally accepted definition of "A/B testing"?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, we don't really need a new term. I just made up so that such tests can be identified and talked about easily. If you think about it, presence and absence of an element has some different dynamics as compared to having variations of an element.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> you should say what's the size of your sample for the a/b tests. in my experience there is always a high degree of uncertainty if you are just testing with a few thousand people</comment>


Show HN: Comment on on-demand TV as if everyone is watching at the same time - <AUTHOR> http://beta.spoilr.tv/

<comment><USER2> I know there are a lot of shows that don't require full attention, but I usually don't waste my time with those kinds of shows. I don't know how people can twitter, or chat on their phone and still pay attention to good shows that require a level of attention like Game of Thrones.

<comment><USER3> Agreed. It make a lot more sense for sports.

<comment><USER4> Which is one of the least time-shifted forms of content.

<comment><USER5> That's interesting. I almost always time-shift sports. Stuff like American football is otherwise interminable.

Even when I want to get to the finish, live, I just start watching an hour after the recording begins. Fast forward through commercials and head-under- hood challenges, etc.

If it's a game I'm only semi-interested in, I'll wait until it's completely finished. Then just FF until I notice a score change, back up some reasonable number of minutes. Voila, personal highlight reel.

<comment><USER6> I likewise timeshift Formula 1 coverage so I can watch with my brothers, sometimes weeks later. This kind of timeshifted community to would be great to participate in.

Spoilers are generally hard to avoid. This year I've given in and accepted spoilers in exchange for following various communities. So far the participation has been worthwhile and knowing race outcomes and other highlights in some cases had made watching an even better experience.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's interesting. Maybe we should try sports earlier than planned, then...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Twitter has actually encouraged me to only watch certain shows "live" because the backchannel snark and commentary is more entertaining than the actual show ( _The Apprentice_ is a particular standout in this regard).

<comment><USER8> Seems like replaying the twitter chatter in time would be more interesting than creating a new content silo.

<comment><AUTHOR> We thought about importing (and timecoding) twitter chatter during the first airing of the shows. And then we realized just how scattered and off-topic that chatter really is for the most part.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This seems pretty cool! Curious to try it out. One problem which doesn't seem to be addressed is the varying length of commercials (or no commercials) depending on what platform the show is viewed on.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, we're focussing on Netflix and HBO shows at the moment to circumvent that. Working on several approaches for automatic syncing. Thanks for trying it out!

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> This is niconico's main feature. I've wondered why it hasn't caught on elsewhere.

<comment><USER11> In addition to their overlaid streaming comments on videos (think youtube) and live streams (justin.tv/twitch, etc) they actually have a section for live tv[1].

[1] [http://jk.nicovideo.jp/](http://jk.nicovideo.jp/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the link. Now I have to brush up on my non-existant Japanese skills.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is something I've actually wanted for awhile! Watching movies and TV is nice but whenever I watch it with an IRC chat it suddenly gets SO MUCH better.

<comment><AUTHOR> Great to hear. Thanks for the tweet, too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> How will you deal with users who spoil shows on purpose? Could I watch the first episode of Game of Thrones, sync with the app and post "OMG ----- dies!" right at the start?

I assume if you can watch time shifted comments they're moderated in some way (or perhaps flagged by the community)?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, there's upvoting and downvoting implemented in the beta, already and that will filter out spoilers pretty quickly. If we see anybody doing it on purpose, we'd block and eventually ban the user.

<comment><USER14> So the name makes sense?

I'm definitely not your target market here, if i'm devoting time to TV i'm focussed on enjoying that, alone or with the people in the room.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> It reminds me of Soundcloud, where comments pop in at the moment where they're inserted.

<comment><AUTHOR> Right to the point. Soundcloud's way of doing the comments was of our inspirations.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> This combined with Shazam style listening to sync up the position would be killer.

<comment><AUTHOR> Working on this and several other approaches to sync up. It's a challenge and won't happen in this phase of the beta, but it's doable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I loved watching the Republican and Democrat National Conventions while tuned into Twitter. Maybe I'll use spoilr next time around.

</comment><comment><USER18> I love everything about this!

Looking forward to having conversations with my family and friends spread around the US.

<comment><AUTHOR> We love you, too. Thank you.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> By the way, one of the shows that we already feature in the beta, is of course Silicon Valley. Be sure to check it out.

</comment><comment><USER19> Very cool concept, great domain too :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you. I have a funny little anecdote how that came to be. Will save that for a stage appearance, though ;)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> That sounds awesome!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you. We appreciate the feedback!</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Why do tech companies demo using Macs? - <AUTHOR>

shopping for a CRM app, I was struck by how many of them (read: all) use macs in their video/glamour shots.
not just CRM sites do this of course.
I get that macs are more hip than PC's, but don't most "real businesses" still use PC's?  last time I heard macs were under 5% of the pc market.
Why do tech companies prefer to show their customers using macs? <comment><USER2> "5% market share" might be roughly true on a global scale in terms of unit sales, but it doesn't tell the whole story. For example, Mac OS X is used for about 15% of desktop web traffic in the US:

<http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-US-monthly-201211-201301-bar>

Among certain groups it is higher; for example among college students, software developers (especially web developers), graphic designers, and advertising agencies. So part of this is that the companies producing the web sites you're looking at are simply using images of the computers they happen to be using.

Apple is a well-liked brand with a public image of luxury, polish, usability, etc. Companies probably want associate themselves with those qualities in their own marketing.

</comment><comment><USER3> They look better.

That is the simple answer. They have a more modern, sleek, look. Other companies like Dell are only recently catching up with them in terms of looks.

When I bought an aluminum unibody MacBook in 2008 I had a person who never used a Mac in their life compliment me on how slick the laptop looked after I closed it and got up to walk across the room.

Also consider this: Of what market research considers "luxury" laptops, Apple account for 9 out of every 10 sales. I.e., all of the other companies with what they present as luxury laptops accounts for only 10% of those sales. When you think luxury laptop, Apple dominates.

</comment><comment><USER4> I can't speak with any statistic but in the few years I've lived in the Bay Area, the number of Mac users is insanely dominating. Its quite rare to see a PC in my own experience

</comment><comment><USER5> Tech/web companies and employees are usually in a bubble where everyone uses Macs, so people easily forget that Macs only make up a minuscule portion of the overall PC market.

</comment><comment><USER6> Most of the innovative products are designed and developed in silicon valley. And most of them prefer Mac over PC. Because MAC is beautifully build, it creates some innovation in the field of personal computers. So the they uses the mac in their demos. And rest of the world follows the trend. And also because Apple is also treated as luxurious brand compared to PC

<comment><USER7> _Most of the innovative products are designed and developed in silicon valley. And most of them prefer Mac over PC_

It will be interesting to see if this changes over time given that the perception is Apple is alienating this market in favor of the general consumer market. If true the observation of this topic may change with it. It will be interesting to see if the creatives are a silent marketing tool that Apple has overlooked in it's transition to a more general consumer company.</comment></comment>


Principles of Flat Design - <AUTHOR> http://designmodo.com/flat-design-principles/ There are five pretty distinct characteristics. Here's a look at each, plus an introduction to "almost" flat design. <comment><USER2> I'm quite sick of the hordes of Flat Design submissions clogging the HN frontpage.

The issue here is that skeuomorphic UIs are commonly mistaken for "realist" UIs. Any application that resembles a calendar, whether it has fake leather stitching or not, is a skeuomorph. Any presentation software that creates slides that look like old 35mm projection slides, is a skeuomorph. A trash bin is a skeuomorph. A word processor that emulates a sheet of paper, with margins, is a skeuomorph. Any application that emulates an address book is a skeuomorph, even if it doesn't look like a real book. Its functionality is still skeuomorphic.

Flat design does not change skeumorphism; it merely reduces the textures used to their bare essence. It's impossible to do away with skeuomorphism completely, because many of the things we actually do on our machines correlate with things we do in reality.

And whoever proposes such a change is grossly out of touch with reality.

Personally, while I think ornamentation like how the old OS X Aqua UIs looked and Windows 7's Aero, is dated and clunky, the newer interfaces of OS X and Windows 8 desktop mode actually reach a fair point between flat and ornamental, bar the awful Address Book, Game Center, Notes, Reminders, and Calendar in OS X. It's folly to reduce everything to completely flat; it's a usability nightmare and I've seen power users struggle with some flat web designs on a tablet.

The solution is to keep light gradients, light drop shadows, and some gloss. Just enough to keep a good level of usability, while not adding excessive ornamentation.

The current Flat UI designs are just designer laziness. Just take a look at Google's marvelous implementation. We can do better.

Much better.

<comment><USER3> Perhaps you forgot to read the very last section, titled "Almost Flat Design"

>A style more designers tend to agree on is "almost" flat design.

>In almost flat design, the basic theme of the flat style is used but some effects are added to the design scheme. Buttons, for example, may contain slight gradients or drop shadows. Designers typically pick one effect and use it exclusively in an almost flat project.

>This style allows for a little more flexibility than some of the rigidness of the no effects thought behind flat design. Designers like it because of the added depth and texture. Users like it because the style is a little less sharp and can help guide proper interaction...

It seems that many flat designers would agree with your proposal to keep "just enough" ornamentation.

<comment><USER4> This distinction is frivolous.

It's a writer just seeking to milk the whole "flat design" thing even more by categorizing small variations as a whole design movement. It's no coincidence that a company selling a kit has the most blog posts dedicated to it. flat and almost flat design have the exact same aesthetic.

Moreover, pegging designers to a trendy aesthetic is ridiculous.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It seems to me that a lot of articles about flat ui contrast it with skeuomorphic design, which misses the point.

In all the examples, even though the visual design is "flat", there are many cases where it's still skeuomorphic...

See the pen and rubbish bin here: <http://dribbble.com/shots/947749-Task- app/attachments/107085>

The calendar here: <http://dribbble.com/shots/917819-iPad-Calendar-Login>

And the flat representation of a piece of paper here: <http://dribbble.com/shots/962125-Filetypes>

They're all flat, yes, but it doesn't mean that they aren't skeuomorphic

<comment><USER6> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeuomorph>

There is a difference between an icon and a real skeuomorph design. How would you represent a pen without drawing the shape of a pen otherwise ?

Skeuomorph is, for example, faux leather on the header in iOS notes [http://img.wonderhowto.com/img/13/10/63487286393710/0/iphone...](http://img.wonderhowto.com/img/13/10/63487286393710/0/iphone- notes-taking-care-notes-and-moving-your-iphone-notes-around.w654.jpg)

<comment><USER7> No, faux leather isnt skeuomorphic.

The bookshelves in iOS's iBooks app are. But these could easily be drawn in a Flat UI 'style' and still skeuomoprhic style.

So rich textures != skeuomorphic

<comment><USER6> skeuomorph is a physical ornament or design on an object made to resemble another material or technique. Examples include pottery embellished with imitation rivets reminiscent of similar pots made of metal,[1] or a software calendar application which displays the days organised on animated month pages in imitation of a paper desk calendar.[2]

Simulated woodgrain on automobiles is a skeuomorph, such as this station wagon which uses no actual wood construction

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeuomorph>

<comment><USER8> Same Wikipedia article: "Functional input controls like knobs, buttons, switches and sliders are often careful duplicates of the ones on the original physical device being emulated."

The save button being a floppy disk (which is no longer used), or a sheet of paper to represent a document (which may or may not ever be printed to an actual sheet of paper) are skeuomorphs by this article's defintion.

<comment><USER9> Except the save button isn't, itself, a floppy disk, it's just got a floppy disk icon on it. The floppy disk or paper iconography are not "functional input controls" themselves. They are laid upon UI chrome which is likely skeumorphic to some degree, but the icons themselves are not examples of skeuomorphism.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> For people like myself who grew up with Windows 3.1 flat design is good on phones but on my computer monitor I want a button to look like a button. I want tree views, drop-downs etc.

However, I don't want fake wood veneer on _anything_. It was a bad idea in the fifties, sixties and seventies and it's bad idea to bring it back.

I'm sure it's just what I'm used to but I think the flat design crowd has years of learning and experimentation until they can catch up with the usability of "traditional" desktop GUIs.

<comment><USER9> I think this raises a good point - flat design is not applicable in all situations. It's got to be something like a handful of large inputs on one screen. If you're depicting a large hierarchy of domain objects or a complex tax form or something, then a spacious, blocky, bold style is not suitable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Apple's rather tacky overuse of it in recent years has given the whole thing a bad name, but the current trend for totally flat design goes (in my view) far too far the other way.

Skeuomorphism isn't simply a binary thing. There's all manner of different ways represent the real world, and different degrees of doing it.

Using some general attribute of real-world objects (e.g a shadow) is quite different from simple switch toggle to represent an on-off option, which is again quite different from a photo-realistic lightswitch to represent the same thing.

The "almost" flat design that is mentioned at the bottom may be a step back in the right direction, but as it stands I find most totally flat design pretty poor from a usability point of view.

<comment><USER12> What I don't like about flat design is that suddenly there's no way to distinguish between interactive (clickable) and static (non-clickable) items.

Looking at this: <http://dribbble.com/shots/917819-iPad-Calendar-Login>

There's no indication that the blue button is interactive and the calendar icon is not. Both are bloody flat! I have to hover mouse pointer to find this out on the web app. Even worse in mobile - I have to try clicking stuff just to figure out if they are "clickable". I find it very frustrating.

<comment><USER13> I think by now it's safe to assume that the button under the form would be the clickable element.

<comment><USER14> His argument is that "the button" has no depth and therefore is not perceived as a button.

My argument is that the bright color makes it stand out without using depth (or rather, using depth in another dimension than Z), and that it's the checkmark icon that might make it feel non-interactive (checkmarks feel more like feedback than action, even on checkboxes, where it's the box itself that makes it register as actionable). A "login" or "proceed" label would have worked, or as an icon, something giving sense of proceeding further, like a play or fast forward button would have worked better in conveying the sense of action. Still, the structure of the UI makes it clear that this is a two-field form and that the third item means "go ahead", which creates a cognitive dissonance with the "feedback" feeling of the checkmark.

<comment><USER9> Right, and I think the key part of envex's statement is "by now". Meaning that in this stage of history, the ubiquity of pseudo-3D graphical interfaces means people are able to pick up on the subtler affordances of flat design. And as you say, the bolder colors and flow help, but even with that I don't think this sort of design could have worked 10 or 20 years ago.

It's sort of like how art went (very roughly) from realism to impressionism to abstract art. People got used to the meticulous accuracy of paintings, and so artists cashed in on that cultural context to start getting abstract.

People _get_ UI mechanics enough now that a huge rectangle with monochrome iconography is all you need to convey "clickability" to the average user.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Principles of Flat Design? Make it...flat? What else is there? I skimmed through the article, just seems like examples.

<comment><USER16> Yeah, lots of data, no information, or rather, very little information. Agreed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> What I find great about flat design, that as opposed to non-flat design, it's 5x less work while being similarly pleasing. That means that I don't have to hire a designer for my applications – I can create a reasonably good design myself.

Of course, you still need taste and experience to create good-looking flat designs, but the point is that with flat design, you can iterate much more quickly and you can materialize your vision more quickly.

<comment><USER18> As far as I can tell, this is the _real_ argument behind flat design -- that developers who aren't designers can produce something they _think_ looks good and works well.

It doesn't. You still need a designer.

<comment><USER17> > It doesn't. You still need a designer.

I disagree, people say my flat designs look great.

Even if one can produce only average looking flat designs, it may be a good idea to do that, because flat design has a high cost / value ratio.

<comment><USER19> I saw you post one of your designs earlier in this thread and I disagree. I don't think it looks good. It looks like you opened Photoshop and laid something out in 5 minutes with no regulars for usability, originality, or a nice- looking color scheme. It sort of looks like you we're going for a look the the iPhone app Clear, but I can guarantee the makers of Clear, Real Mac Software, spent in an enormous amount of time on their app. You're pulling this $5,000 out of nowhere. Surely you can find a designer for much less for your basic todo app. I can hire a programmer in India for less than $10 an hour to implement a design of mine. That doesn't mean I should because the code will most certainly suck. You will never succeed by bring generic and average, which is what you seem to be aiming for. If you're not willing to put in the time and money to build a great app, some of your competitors are.

<comment><USER17> Well, I think the cost / value ratio for that design is very good. Right now I'm trying to finish the app, use this design (which I think definitely above average for Android), and then polish the design or perhaps completely redesign it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> When he woke up in the early evening, he thanked me for bringing him the Kraft products, and now he says he won't eat anything that's not entirely two- dimensional. "Ich bin ein Flatlander," he piped, as he cheerfully sifted through hard copy of the bug-checked code he'd been chugging out. Karla made disgusted clicking noises with her tongue from her office. I

<comment><USER21> I wonder how many people on HN have read Microserfs?

<comment><USER8> Hopefully a lot. Coupland is a great author, and Microserfs got me in to him in a big way.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I like flat design but probably for the wrong reason.

I had some luck in other business but decided to pursue a new career in software development a while back. Basically I knew nothing about professional design but I was an avid follower of startups/new technology/trends and so on.

I love it because it's clean, simple, looks nice and it's easy to produce. I need nothing more.

</comment><comment><USER23> You decide Flat : <http://i.imgur.com/KSQXCMS.jpg> Not Flat : <http://i.imgur.com/embNQbN.jpg>

Flat wins for me

<comment><USER24> Frankly, they both look decent to me.

<comment><USER23> Non Flat looks 4% more chaotic to me . The only drawback with Flat I believe is the buttons look more like labels .

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I think the debate between flat and skeuomorphic design is a false dichotomy.

Flat de-emphasis everything. You just have to know to click on the light grey text, because obviously it's a slightly different color to the dark grey title text. It's a pain.

Skeuomorphic emphasis everything, even the stuff which is just eye candy. And there's a lot of eye candy. It's both a pain. And it looks trashy (unless it is done really well).

Good design emphasises the stuff you can interact with. It doesn't look quite as classy as flat, and it doesn't "pop" like skeumorphic, but it's a hell of a lot more useful.

</comment><comment><USER26> Most of those designs remind me of Android's Holo design style:

[http://developer.android.com/design/get-started/ui- overview....](http://developer.android.com/design/get-started/ui- overview.html)

</comment><comment><USER27> Who originally popularized flat design?

<comment><USER28> I'm sure there are solid examples of brands using flat design prior, but if you're looking for a _mass-popularization event_ I would submit Microsoft's original "metro" UI.

<comment><USER29> Whereas I would submit Microsoft's "Windows 2.0" [1] UI..

[1] <http://www.guidebookgallery.org/screenshots/win203>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> I was actually going to write something like this, but then I realized that I'm not a designer and I have no idea what I'm talking about. Thanks for putting this together; I know a lot of people dislike flat, but having a cohesive work guide is handy.

</comment><comment><USER31> Is Flat Design good for people of all ages and skill level ? I am wondering if such usability testing has been done ?

Isn't depending too much on colors cause color blind people to get confused ? How would you distinguish your app from other apps in flat design, won't everything look the same eventually ?

</comment><comment><USER16> Flat Design is a great discipline which has history in older, more popular disciplines. I believe it's fair to say "flat" has much growing to do, but it comes close to breaking with the traditional metaphor of print design. Obviously newspapers and magazines do not have leatherwork or fabric textures either: This is what makes flat design its own, it is a break from the metaphors of Print, not just skeumorphism. Skeumorphism is just one technique like the brush stroke.

That said, no one is really talking meaningfully about what makes flat its own discipline. You keep talking about all the points where flat intersects with one albeit ubiquitous technique. Talk about ANIMATION. Why does animation seem like a structural component of layout in flat design? Layering, microcosm, harmony, semantic colors, "pageless".

You guys just keep talking about one technique which is getting boring because it devalues these incredible designs which need true analysis.

<comment><USER16> You also have to discuss the technological backdrops behind each discipline. Think of how different it is today from the original creation of movable type.

Flat design is coming out of a new era in DIGITAL typography. We are limited by bits, not by physical objects like with print. Many techniques of these disciplines are outcomes of our solving conceptual, logistical and even physical problems with the discipline. Talk about this, not just: "don't these two look cool, and they look different from that." Muddied, unclear thinking...

I almost want you folks to stop trying to grope and race for the "first" on this. You're irresponsible coming up with titles just to claim the philosopher's hat when you're not doing the historian work necessary to start talking about first principles. Who are you? What authority do you have to declare first?

Seeing correlation isn't enough to declare first principles. We need an Einstein of Flat Design.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> The terrible writing about this trend is a complete embarrassment to the whole discipline of design.

You can tell few of these "writers" have had a proper design education and just learnt everything they know from tutorials.

<comment><USER33> As a developer who's taking an increasing interest in the design of the products I work on I'd love to read some of the material you'd be exposed to in a proper design education. What are the bibles of design that students are generally exposed to?</comment></comment>


The Box (1967) [video] - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXFPT7FJ38k <comment><USER2> [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpej3a7AhGI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpej3a7AhGI)

This is good as well. Your Face (1987).

</comment><comment><USER3> That's a great piece of animation. I don't know if the content-less opening and ending are there to be true to an original film reel or something along those lines, but for those who haven't visited the link it's about seven minutes of animation.

<comment><USER4> Set the playback speed to 2X, and it's only 3.5 minutes. Viewers must've been more patient in the 1960s.

<comment><USER3> That would ruin the timing and deprive the viewer of the subtlety in the animation. The single-frame transformations into animals and the connecting frames while the camera's perspective pans would be almost impossible to distinguish. This is art, not a lecture. Digesting the series of events in the most efficient way possible is not the point. No one cares how the story ends, it's nice but trivial compared to the animation itself.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Beautiful animation, but was there supposed to be any significance to the plot? Wikipedia suggests it's some sort of biblical allusion but I don't see how it relates.

<comment><USER6> The ending (during the credits) seems to allude to Noah's Ark, but I'm grasping at straws trying to make the rest of it work toward the Story of The Great Flood.

Maybe Noah, in his search for two of each creature, sets this up to find a mate for his Box Creature, as well as for himself?

<comment><USER3> The Ark is a socially acceptable way of animating the fact that they are sexual partners and gives a clever explanation to the fact that the clothing throughout the animation suggests that it is raining. The story starts by making it look like a parlor trick for free drinks then develops into what looks like a sadistic prank but it ends up finding an endearing resolution that puts everything right. Let the animation speak for itself, pigeon-holing is a fool's errand.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Jack Barker approves.</comment>


Ask HN: Why do you have to be an accredited investor? - <AUTHOR> I just saw the submission Ask HN: Bypassing "Accredited investor" (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1020613) and wondered why this restriction is in place. I googled around a bit, and it seems that the main difference is that if you take money from a non-accredited investor you have to fill out a lot more paperwork.
It seems like a strange arrangement, why can't my dad or my friends invest in my startup on the same terms as Mark Andreesen or Paul Graham? Isn't this terribly counterproductive for startups that need money, and often start with money from friends and family?
Or am I missing something? I'm from a country where the term doesn't exist, so it may be a stupid question. <comment><USER2> When a startup issues stock to investors, it is critical to keep the offering within the limits of recognized securities law exemptions. Otherwise, it is an illegal offering and any investor who purchased stock can rescind and demand his money back from the issuer or its promoters. Thus, securities laws are not to be taken lightly.

That said, it is an extremely simple proposition to structure early-stage offerings in a way that meets exemption requirements and this can and does very often involve stock sold to relatives and friends. In California, for example, there is something known as the "limited offering exemption" (Cal. Corp. Code section 25102(f)) that permits issuances of stock to up to 35 non- accredited investors who have a pre-existing relationship with the company or its founders and who represent that they are purchasing for bona-fide investment purposes and not for immediate resale. The disclosure requirements for this, and the accompanying paperwork, are very easy to comply with.

Most states have something comparable, as do the federal rules as interpreted under Section 4(2) of the 1933 securities act and under Regulation D (which sets out "safe harbor" provisions for private placements).

The main advantage of using accredited investors lies in the tremendous reduction in compliance risk when issuers are doing more complex offerings. In the early-stage context, I recommend to my startups that they attempt if possible to limit their offerings to accredited investors simply because this keeps things things safest for compliance purposes but I also tell them that limited sales to non-accredited investors are usually fine. I have done a brief write-up on this at <http://grellas.com/faq_business_startup_012.html>.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> It's leftover government paternalism from the scams and bubbles of previous eras.

Viewed charitably, it protects less-sophisticated citizens from losing money they can't afford to lose in areas where the risks and legal structures are too complicated for them to properly evaluate.

Viewed less charitably, it's just one of many traditional arrangements that discriminate against the non-wealthy, somewhat sustained (even if below the level of conscious intent) because they happen to protect the interests of those already wealthy.

Sound paranoid? Observe that there's no law or paperwork which blocks a poor person from gambling away all their money -- plus all the money credit cards will loan them! -- on rigged games of chance, including some run by the government itself (state lotteries).

But can that same person invest a few thousand to ten thousand in a private company? No, or not without costly paperwork which makes many ventures uninterested in taking such money. And that answer applies even if it's a small proportion of the investor's total savings, or in an area where they have first-hand expertise.

</comment><comment><USER4> I am a satisfied customer of and recommend Nolo Press. They publish books about "How to start a corporation" that answer questions like yours here, and also guide you through incorporating properly without paying excessive lawyer fees.

One way to understand restrictions requiring qualified or registered investors for public offerings is to look at examples of who has been busted for breaking such laws. An example I recall from a Nolo publication is the "movie deal". You pick up a copy of Variety (back in the day) and there's an ad: "Invest in a new motion picture. Major director. Outstanding cast. Guaranteed returns. Call 555-1212". Then, a few weeks later, the check has cleared, grandpa is out $50K but owns a useless stock "certificate", and the grifters have disappeared into the woodwork and broken the lease on the fancy office they rented for the "Unbelievable Films" 'company'.

<comment><USER2> Even as a business lawyer, I can heartily recommend self-help resources, of which Nolo is a good example. They use highly qualified lawyers as authors to distill legal issues for use by lay people.

During the fever pitch reached in the bubble era, I bumped into a situation where a startup had raised $7M from so-called "accredited investors" by advertising the opportunity on the web. Large numbers of the investments were in the $5K range from, e.g., a small town in Texas, and it is clear that the investors were merely clicking through a screen by which they confirmed they were "accredited" without really being so.

By the way, the SEC does allow companies to use the web in certain restricted circumstances in connection with their offerings (the above case obviously did not comply with these restrictions) and, with the several thousand investors involved, stood a good chance of being characterized as an improper public offering of securities.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> It's government looking out for "your interests." That said...

It is not as risky to go into business as it is to loan someone else money to go into business. You lose so much control, and people often gamble with retirement money because of a personal connection. When it goes well, all celebrate. However, it can tear family and friendships apart if it doesn't.

The government assumes that if you have the money to lose, you are also wise enough to avoid such issues, as well as those of fraud, etc, and that you won't lose your shirt because of it.

(People did lose a lot of money with higher risk investments in the market crash, leading to the 1933 reforms.)

<comment><AUTHOR> Seems pretty awkward, especially for a country that prides itself on innovation and starting companies.

So can "normal" people invest in startups?

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> United States individual state and also federal securities laws make a determination as to who is considered an accredited investor and who is not. (Federal Securities Laws and state Blue Sky Laws.)

Accredited investors are deemed to need less protection under the law than un- accredited investors. Basically accredited investors are deemed more able to take losses and/or more able to analyze which investments are better for their money. In certain instances un-accredited investors may have rights to a return of their invested money in the event of a financial loss, where an accredited investor must take the loss.

In the United States, investment is heavily regulated on both the state and the federal level.</comment>


Carbon Fiber Composites Recycled to Virgin Material on the Cheap - <AUTHOR> http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=280116 <comment><AUTHOR> "... recycle carbon fiber composites into new material with virgin strength characteristics. That goes for both the carbon fiber and the glue: both can be completely recycled simply by soaking the composite in an organic solution at room temperature...."</comment>


Is Bill Gates damaging public education and undermining democracy? - <AUTHOR> http://dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=3781

<comment><USER2> Whatever the deficiencies of the Gates Foundation, at least they are trying to improve things and with their own money. Children today are not helped by being "tied to the land", with teachers paid regardless of performance.

Perhaps people like John Taylor Gatto need to receive more attention.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Taylor_Gatto></comment>


Fortnite's Marshmello concert was a bizarre and glimpse of the future - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/2/18208223/fortnite-epic-games-marshmello-concert-exciting-bizarre-future-music <comment><USER2> Besides the title gore, is this writing basically contentless? No idea how many people 'attended', Sixty? Thousands? No idea how it was monitized (Something about hats and emotes), or even what players did to 'participate' other than playing the game to promoted music? Did they make 100 or a million? All I get are vauge descriptions of flashing lights and a fortnite ad.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, I agree it was a bad article choice on my part.

The concert uploaded to Yotube has 17 million views [1] and you can see what players did there, and there was a claim by Geoff Keighley[2] that 10 million people watched it live.

A better article: [https://www.wired.com/story/fortnite-marshmello-concert- vr-a...](https://www.wired.com/story/fortnite-marshmello-concert-vr-ar- multiverse/)

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyBb6Ha1Un4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyBb6Ha1Un4)

[2] [https://twitter.com/geoffkeighley/status/1091876478092865536](https://twitter.com/geoffkeighley/status/1091876478092865536)</comment></comment>


Ask HN: My co-founder bailed on me What do i do now? - <AUTHOR>

I did not want to bring this up but i feel HN offers the best advice. I am a 19 year old student in university and i build apps as a hobby. I built a survey tool to help you survey website visitors and still looking for ways to make it kick off. I got a co-founder on HN, who was supposed to help with the business and marketing side because i have had no luck in that area with my previous projects. He helped out for a while to organize the website properly, worked on the site's copy and bailed after 3 weeks without doing the main job i wanted a co-founder to help out with. So now i am stuck. I don't have an idea on how to market the site without spending loads of money or contacting bloggers (which i have had no luck before). What do i do HN? <comment><USER2> I can relate. Only a couple of weeks ago, days after submitting our YC application, my co-founder (technical half) bailed on me. Fortunately, I had a few other friends that were interested in my idea and they jumped on the opportunity. You can't dwell on it. Shit happens! As an entrepreneur this probably won't be the first or last time that something comes out of left field. I would try to find out why this dude bailed and then use this opportunity to find another co-founder, ideally one you know in person. As an active student, you have access to so many people on campus. Find someone that is passionate about your idea and compliments your skill set. If there is an entrepreneurship club or program at your school, that might be a good place to start...

</comment><comment><USER3> You can build stuff. In this economic climate, that gives you an advantage in cofounder negotations, as there's a huge supply of unattached business people floating around.

I've been in a vaguely similar position. Don't freak out, and don't think of yourself as desperate. Don't settle. Don't rush things either. University is a great place to meet people who could become cofounders, so meet people.

</comment><comment><USER4> The easy answer: find another co-founder-- one who is as passionate about your idea as you are. Of course, this may not really be all that easy.

Which leads to the difficult question: what's there to love about your idea? I'm sure there are many of us reading this who are saying to themselves, "Another survey widget? Ho hum." To which you reply: "Yes, but this one is different. This one does X."

This "X", of course, is your secret sauce. Your "unique value proposition."

Now, if you don't know what X is, then figuring that out is what you need to be working on. It's going to be hard to attract co-founders or customers without it.

If you do know what X is, then pitch it around to other potential co-founders. Locally-- you want someone in the same city. Sure, it's possible to collaborate remotely, but I wouldn't recommend it, especially under your circumstances.

To summarize: define your "unique value proposition." Find a local co-founder who is passionate about it. And then, apply to YC.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks michael_dorfman. I would try looking for one but can you offer marketing advice. There are competitors in my space including kissinsights. We don't use an obstructive and annoying widget to collect feedback. It is more affordable and simpler to use than my competitors. We give even free users the power to set their own questions instead of forcing them to use templates or pay a hefty price for that option.

<comment><USER4> Some free advice, for what it's worth:

Don't lead with "more affordable." Trying to be the cheapest in the market is a losing strategy, generally speaking.

"Simpler to use" is good. "Less annoying to end-users" is good, too.

I assume you've got pilot customers. If you don't, get some. I don't mean users-- I mean customers. Get five people to pay for your product. Get their opinions.

Now: think of a problem your product solves. I mean, one, specific, real life, concrete instance. You're looking for a story. Because that's what you want to pitch to bloggers/journalists. Features don't write stories-- anecdotes do.

Read Patrick's blog. Take his advice seriously.

And, good luck!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Make sure that the break with your ex-co-founder is a clean one, i.e. ensure that company ownership, IP rights etc is resolved in a way that leaves no room for doubt at some later point.

You should try to avoid a situation where he can return at some later point with a potentially legitimate claim to a part of any business that your company may have evolved into.

<comment><AUTHOR> We never signed any agreements so i don't think it would be a problem. Thanks for the advice

<comment><USER6> You do have a problem. He may come back later and claim half the company. He can claim verbal promises and will probably win. Best to have a lawyer draft a release and have the guy sign it.

A friend of mine hired a contractor without a work for hire agreement. The guy came back later and claimed the software. It cost my friend $20k to get rid of him. And that was when $20k was real money.

So my non-lawyerly advice is to always have some sort of simple document to protect yourself.

<comment><USER7> Yes, you need to have this person sign something stating that he doesn't own anything.

And go watch The Social Network.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Try to conduct an "exit interview" with the person who bailed. That way, you can find out why they bailed; if the reason is something that you can address, you'll do better next time. As others suggested, find another co-founder. Having equal levels of co-founder enthusiasm is the exception, rather than the rule, so don't be discouraged.

</comment><comment><USER9> you're not alone. it takes a certain type of person to start a business, let alone run one. Most get wrapped up in some romantic fantasy about what they see on TV about owning a business. Contrary to the dream, it is work.

Partners are very over rated, but YC seems to like them. I've had several, all worthless. it's tough, you got to find someone with the same passion, or there will be significant differences down the road, especially with work load and responsibility.

watch out for going into business with family members - i've never seen that work out well either.

also, verbal agreements are just as enforceable as written ones, which is why you always get a written agreement. Contracts are a tool to prevent/protect future problems/litigation. Again, this is experience talking. I made over $1M in my first business, and then spent $250K defending it from a partner with a cocaine habit. I won, but it was tough and extremely expensive. You make money with this, he will comeback to haunt you.

If you do NEED a partner/founder, be very cautious. It can be good, but more often than not i've seen partnerships wreck friendships, marriages and families...

</comment><comment><USER10> My co-founder left my project about 2 weeks as well. It would be great to connect. Connect with me at gsawhney at vt dot edu.

</comment><comment><USER11> post a "review my startup" on hacker news</comment>


Hacker News is rude? - <AUTHOR> I'm not the most experienced HN user but so far people have been quite rude to me around here even though YCs immense efforts to keep a positive vibe.<p>Of course HN is like fifty times nicer than reddit, etc. but you get the idea. Does anyone share my experience? If so, why do you think that is? <comment><USER2> Note that OP is posting this in response to someone calling out sockpuppet accounts on their submission: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11483510](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11483510)

Which is against HN rules.

<comment><AUTHOR> Ugh.

1) Posted the ApplyHN on facebook, couple friends got accounts to support me thinking it would help. Accounts with no karma algorithmically don't matter, and they're super easy to spot. Wouldn't spend time on it.

2) I was actually thinking about this kind of tone: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11500608](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11500608)

3) Also browsing HN I seem to see a negative atmosphere more and more. This is by far the best forum-style community I came across online. Would like to do my part to help keep it that way. :)

<comment><USER3> >Posted the ApplyHN on facebook, couple friends got accounts to support me thinking it would help.

On both your Twitter and Facebook accounts you posted: "Comments and upvotes increase our chances of getting selected!" You may not actually have used sockpuppets, but soliciting upvotes to create an artificial buzz around your product is still shady - and it definitely doesn't look good that most of the top-level comments to your Apply HN submission are from those accounts.

Looking through your submissions and replies to your comments, I don't see many comments I would consider "quite rude". I think you're being defensive because someone accused you of acting in bad faith regarding your Apply HN submission, and you posted this thread in an attempt to counter what you feel might be negative PR. You can't control the way people reply to your submissions or comments - the only thing you can do is avoid making a bad situation worse by complaining about it.

<comment><USER2> > On both your Twitter and Facebook accounts you posted: "Comments and upvotes > increase our chances of getting selected!

When Apply HN was first announced, I was concerned that people would be more likely to engage in voting rings because there is now financial incentive. I didn't expect to be _correct_.

<comment><USER4> I also expected something like this, but I'm gladly surprised that it is very uncommon. In most of the submissions the comments look legit.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Ha. This is the most forced-civilized place. I get told off every time I am even a little rude.

<comment><USER6> >forced-civilized place

Which is really good imo as the quality of discussion is so much higher than on Reddit. For indulging in silly memes and empty content I just browse Reddit (the larger subs), for actually thoughtful discussion I browse smaller subs or HN.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> If your idea has holes, HN will tell you, quite bluntly. Don't confuse that with rudeness.

Unfortunately, there also are people who _are_ rude. They are in the minority, but they seem to be more numerous than they were a year ago...

<comment><AUTHOR> I love people pointing out holes in my idea. I think that's what makes HN great.

Sadly, nearly all of my submissions received senseless negative comments that is _not_ feedback on the idea, more like unrelated personal comment.

Maybe there could be a way to filter out the noise.

<comment><USER8> I wish the HN software gave me a feature of choosing how to filter out noise.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Being amongst high-functioning geniuses naturally warrants sternness in response to counterthoughts.</comment>


Have you payed for coding help? - <AUTHOR> I'm curious to know if people use services such as Codementor and Hackhands. If yes, why and how often? If no, why not? <comment><USER2> No, definitely not from sites like that.

But I don't mind paying friends and acquaintances for help. All of us have a pretty sweet deal where we help each other out for free for our own stuff, but we charge each other for help on paid gigs.

<comment><AUTHOR> Okay cool.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I have not, I would be open to it thou. We have hired contractors that sometimes help us on code issues on an on-going basis thou from Upwork.

<comment><AUTHOR> How often have you done that?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> No. I've never needed any help from outside of my network.

<comment><AUTHOR> Define Network. Does that include online communities etc? :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> No, I usually will find a hacked up solution or give up.

<comment><AUTHOR> Okay. Why not pay for help?</comment></comment>


Top countries by robot density - <AUTHOR> http://chartsbin.com/view/45327 <comment><USER2> Robot density function looks like reciprocal of cheap labor function.

<comment><AUTHOR> Good point; I hadn't noticed that.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What happens when a startup shuts down? - <AUTHOR> What happens to the customers? Their data? Their undelivered purchases? What happens to the founders? The employees? The board members? What happens to the intellectual property? Social media accounts? Domain names? Leftover inventory? Outstanding debt (long-term and short-term)? What happens to the office furniture? Rubber bands?<p>What happens? <comment><USER2> Assuming a non-graceful shutdown, i.e. the company runs out of money with no acquisition offer and enters bankruptcy liquidation. Also assumes everything's legal and on the up-and-up, which can be a rarity for startups with more than one interested party.

Customers: they get a shutdown notice and the service stops working for them, and have to find competitors that do the same thing.

Founders & employees: laid off and go look for jobs.

Board members: move on with their lives.

Data, IP, office furniture, leftover inventory, rubber bands: sold at auction to pay creditors.

Social media accounts & domain names: technically this is property of the corporation and is also sold at auction, but in a sale that assumes no acquisition offer for team/brand/IP, they're often worthless. They become zombies and eventually revert to the public under whatever inactivity policy the host has (eg. domain names often get snapped up by speculators).

Debt: There's a pecking order for debts and other capital claims, and whatever money left in the company checking account + the liquidation sale mentioned beforehand goes to it. IIUC, unpaid wages come first, then unpaid suppliers. Then senior debt with liquidation rights negotiated into the contract (eg. my wife invests with philanthropic debt, which often has these clauses). Then regular debt, bondholders, then preferred stock, then common stock. Founders & employees usually hold common, which is the last to get paid out.

All the startups I've personally shut down did so with no drama, but there is a big tendency to fight over the carcass, particularly when you have people with bigger egos involved. One that I worked at, for example, involved an IP auction where the founder stealth-bid (through an employee friend) against the VCs, the auction house accidentally told both parties they had won, the lawsuits went flying, and the founder moved to China with the IP to start the exact same company and run it into the ground again.

<comment><USER3> My recollection from ending up on the losing end of a client's bankruptcy when freelancing was that suppliers are often the last in line to collect on any debts. But it may also depend on jurisdiction.

<comment><USER2> I think you're right. A little bit of Wikipedia research suggested that the top tier is unpaid wages, taxes, tort claims, and environmental cleanups. Suppliers, unless they've specifically negotiated for a lien on the company's assets, fall into the "general unsecured creditor" category, which means they get paid alongside lines of credit and unsecured bonds, after collateralized debt but before stockholders.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> In the case of NCIX (electronics retailer like Newegg but in Canada), they recently went bankrupt and sold off their servers without wiping their data. The servers contained 15 years worth of personal information for their customers (4 million orders, 250,000 plain text payment cards, passwords, email addresses, etc). The person who received the servers then started selling them on Craigslist, and allowed people to simply buy the data and make a copy.

That's one example of a worst case scenario.</comment>


Library of Congress National Screening Room - <AUTHOR> https://www.loc.gov/collections/national-screening-room/ <comment><USER2> I have to forbid myself to spend time on this website or I will basically lose any connection with reality.</comment>