Ask HN: My startup failed. $9k in debt and need to pay most of it in 12 days. - <AUTHOR> HN,
A startup that I am part of failed. Prereq: USA, C-Corp in Delaware. We have $6k in server fees to Rackspace and $3k in debt with our lawyer. We also have a huge amount of credit card fraud that went through our credit card processing account/merchant account (like $8k), which is going to be an ongoing issue for the next year+ and may end up in me and my SSN being blacklisted from Visa and Mastercard.
I used to be able to cover this kind of failure, but over the past few months, I've sunk tons of my money into this company and completely depleted my checking and savings accounts.
The account goes into collections in the first week of October (which means my credit will be destroyed). I will be leaving the startup after I sort everything out.
I need a way to make this $6k in about 12 days. My savings is shot. I have some consulting (WordPress, PHP, Rails) money coming in, but it's only $1k and might not even be on time. My co-founder owns a majority of the company but he's traveling so he's a bit unavailable.
This seems to be the "low" of that rollercoaster we call serial entrepreneurship. Thank you for your help, Hacker News.
EDIT: I'd just like to say that I'm using a throwaway because I'm pretty well known on HN, which makes this pretty interesting. I usually read these kinds of Ask HN posts and think "ouch"—funny to be on the other side.
EDIT: I'll respond soon, HN is giving me the "You're submitting too fast. Please slow down. Thanks." thing. I'm reading all your comments—they are not going unnoticed. And thank you. <comment><USER2> I don't get it. You're a Delaware C-Corp. _You_ don't owe anything, do you?

 _Don't_ take out a loan. _Don't_ restructure your debts. _Don't_ negotiate with your creditors. _Don't_ sell your car. _Don't_ take a loan from your parents. _Don't_ incur anything more than nominal legal bills.

Collect your contracts and take them immediately to your personal attorney and have them reviewed before you attach your own personal credit to your business'. Doing so is almost certainly unnecessary. You are probably just fine.

You are a businessperson, but you're not thinking like one, and you are going to get screwed. When your company's creditors worked out contracts with your business, they understood that they were assuming the risk that the company might go out of business and be unable to pay. That risk was priced into your contract terms.

If people you've done business with are now telling you that you should stake your personal finances on the debts of your company, then, absent some poorly thought out up-front agreement you had with those vendors to the contrary, you're being taken advantage of. Perhaps we'd benefit from hearing more about who those people are.

As for the merchant account: well, the people saying you could be blacklisted sure sound credible, and maybe you should listen to them. But please also note that there are people on this thread saying you should sell your car or take out a loan to satisfy someone else's debts, and take all the advice you get here with a big grain of salt. It shouldn't cost more than a couple hundred dollars to have an attorney explain to you ( _not_ your company, _not_ your cofounder) that you are almost certainly not liable for thousands of dollars of company debts.

<comment><USER3> Having a C-Corp, Delaware or no, does not remove personal responsibility. Let's say I form a C-corp and accept client's money. The company then just happens to spend all that money on me and not deliver any product or service. I believe that is still called fraud and the individual is still liable.

That may be a harsh example.

Business is still about people. Regardless of whether an individual's credit it tied to the company - and in this case I believe it is - these decisions affect his future ability to conduct business. These decisions affect his relationships with other people.

Telling everyone to take a hike may be a short-term solution. However, I believe finding a win-win solution among all parties is a long-term win.

<comment><USER2> Corporate liability does not shield you from fraud, negligence, or other torts.

It most certainly does shield you from personal liability for debts the company incurred in good faith (meaning: virtually all the company's debts).

People on this thread are giving what seems to me to be some spectacularly _bad_ advice. _Do not_ throw your own personal finances down the toilet after your company's.

<comment><USER3> That is correct. However does that make it a good idea to do so?

<comment><USER2> Yes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> The answer is to restructure the debt, every single one of those companies deals with failures and no-pays on a daily basis.

a) Most lawyers, especially extending credit terms in the startup field, will carry over that debt with interest for years. Call and state your case, make it clear it's no-pay right now either way, but you want to fulfill your obligation in the further - say start making payments in 12 months.

b) RackSpace - you owe personally or through corporation? If personal, call them and have the same conversation - speak with a manager and ask for payment terms outside of normal, otherwise you have to default. If corporate consider folding and walking away, corporate protection is there for a reason and even though it's not a stand-up thing to do, Rackspace's world is littered with bankrupt startups.

c) Visa & MC may be your big problem, getting blacklisted from merchant accounts isn't the end of the world but certainly something to avoid. Also nearly impossible to reach a human that can make decisions on terms. For a startup they should have a 20% merchant reserve on your account anyways, how far does that take you?

Bottom line, think 6 - 12 month terms instead of 12 day terms.

No reason at all you can't get there with the right amount of sucking it up and pleading your case.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you.

a) Yes, and I'm dealing with a startup lawyer, at a very well-known Silicon Valley law firm (this is when we had money). He's been very very patient with our lack of being able to pay the retainer.

b) Through the corporation. It's registered under the Inc and has the EIN associated with it. However, it also has my SSN associated as the primary contact.

c) Well, I have a feeling that most of our credit card transactions are fraudulent, being in the space we are in. (For example, someone charged $12k on a card and tried to cash out to PayPal.)

I'll call up Rackspace and give it a shot. Thank you.

<comment><USER5> The last startup I was involved in, the guy who was running it talked to the lawyers and got them to waive a good chunk of the retainer fees when it sank

<comment><AUTHOR> That's good to hear. I'd like to pay this lawyer in full for his services (retainer minus un-used retainer balance). I don't like screwing people over, even if they're expecting it to be a percentage of their clients that do that. I don't want to be in that percentage.

<comment><USER6> Let me correct a misconception here, you are _not_ screwing people over, customers having payment issues is a risk of doing business, they all decided just how much debt they let you get in to.

If you had set out to create this situation on purpose that would be screwing people over, now all that there is left to do is to shut down as orderly as you can and to have everybody absorb an appropriate part of the loss.

<comment><USER7> To take that further. Don't be _that_ percentage by not acting like them. Don't hide or promise things you can't deliver. You go to them. Lay it out and work something out.

Everyone takes risks doing people. Inability to pay is one. Bad people is another. The first is usually rarer and more manageable. The second is not so bad. You can avoid being in the second category.

*Mixergy interviewed a bankrupcy lawyer a while ago. Maybe there's something useful for you in it. One useful thing I remembered: Discounted debt is usually taxable. Be careful you are not caught off guard. <http://mixergy.com/russell-demott-interview/>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> An odd thought – you may be doing yourself a disservice by posting this through your throwaway account.

If you are as well known as you say, your reputation might open some doors for you. Some people who like you but assume you're busy doing your thing may be excited to do some work with you that would solve your problem.

Moreover, relationships matter. So if you're a menschy guy, someone whose brother works at Rackspace, for example, might take this through a back channel on your behalf.

Pride is tough. Looking back on the last time I fell on tough times, my biggest mistake was not being more transparent about my situation to people who liked me. I felt weird and silly to be not successful, to have failed, but I ended up making things harder on myself.

<comment><USER9> I would hope that anyone who wants to help in this way would contact the person behind the throwaway account. If your excuse was "they used a throwaway account and therefore I won't help", I'd imagine you weren't going to help regardless.

<comment><USER8> I think the "excuse" if you could call it that is people have no idea who this is and have no way of contacting them.

Besides that, people choose who to work with based on reputation. I'm saying if this person has banked credibility with people over an extended period, he could probably pick up a few gigs from fellow HNers.

At this point, no one knows anything about this person, and so they have no idea what skills or other unique value to ask for or trade cash for.

Besides, you're much more likely to go out on a limb for someone you know is a good guy.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> First point of advice would be to take a deep breath and slow way, way down. Everyone is pressuring you because they know you don't have cash and they want to get paid first before everyone else out of a dwindling set of assets. Slow the process down. Time - although it may not seem like it now - is on your side. Don't sell your car, don't take on a consumer loan. Slow down.

Your debt, while big to you, is minimal to the people you are working with, so they should be open to working through the issue with you.

a) Your lawyer, if it's a big firm, probably has a $2-3mm+ book, and a non- collection of $3k isn't going to effect them one bit. S/he has an incentive to work with you to come to an agreement on payment (if any) to maintain the relationship. Treat them with respect and you will get it in return. Deal with this bill last because it will be the easiest to manage.

b) $6k rackspace bill. Escalate the issue through the accounts payable department by explaining the situation and telling them they aren't going to get paid in full. If the first person on the phone doesn't get it, escalate to the next level, then the next level, etc. The gatekeeper's job is to put pressure on you to pay and create anxiety, which they seem to have done.

Once you get someone willing to work with you, fight to reduce the balance and then extend the payables as much as possible. For the value of the balance, figure out what rackspace could get by selling your receivable to a collections agency and offer slightly more - if they get $.18 per dollar owed, agree to pay $.19. Then, stretch the time period as much as possible.

c) Merchant account. This is where I would focus. This is your greatest exposure. Even if you didn't sign a personal guarantee, this could follow you professionally. Get on the phone with the merchant account holder and start dealing. Get the balance down to their cost first (that shouldn't be hard), and then see if you can grind it down farther. They have a loss reserve for this exact reason. Be open and transparent and pay the least amount possible while avoiding getting on the blacklist.

Bankruptcy (I'm not an attorney, so take this with the necessary grain of salt) is the last resort. It's long and painful for everyone involved - including you - and none of your creditors want to go there. Your creditors have an interest in working out your debts with you without going to court.

</comment><comment><USER11> We often hear too much about the successes of startups that we get caught up on the glamor of it all. It's stories like these that bring us back to reality. I'm truly sorry for your loss.

I'm sure that you've thought of this, but is there any by-product that you can sell out of the company? Any IP liquidation?

Take care.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you very much. What's more is that I'm quite well known on Hacker News—not as much as patio11 to have an article written about him, but enough that a good amount of people I meet that read Hacker News say that they know me.

Which makes it more stinging and 500% more embarrassing. But that makes it all the more interesting, huh?

It's interesting. I licensed my technology as an SP to be used with this company, so all of the IP is mostly, well, mine. I have thought about it, but haven't reached a decision.

<comment><USER12> Do you remember how the founders of TipJoy and, more recently, NewsTilt were viciously shredded by an angry mob, right here on HN? No? Because failure is nothing to feel bad about unless it becomes a predictable occurrence.

When you've got your breath back and blood pressure is approaching normal, consider opening up about it. While you may not be able to talk about all of it for legal reasons (eg it seems like your partner was rather dubious), sharing what you have learned from the experience, what red flags you saw but why they didn't seem worth stopping for etc. is valuable to many people. I'm easily embarrassed myself, so I know it's difficult; but don't fall into the trap of anticipating only the negative possibilities, and cutting yourself off from the sympathy and support of people who like you.

Now, I don't mean 'Tell HN: OK it was me ohgodImsorry'; you don't need to humiliate yourself! Take a long bath/walk on the beach/whatever, and let go of the situation for a few hours. You poured your own money into it in an attempt to keep things under control, and it was just just bigger than you were. What happens next is in the hands of others, and you can influence but not control it. Then write your creditors, mostly the same letter, and tell them what you told us - you owe this much to these different people, you have lost a bunch of your own money, [EDIT: I misinterpreted the stuff about your co-founder, as if the person had bailed on you.], and you're sorry. Express your willingness to pay it back ASAP, but stress that you wish to do it on a pro rata basis. Of course every creditor would like to be paid first ahead of the others, but making the same information available to all indicates you have nothing to hide and is more reassuring than a non-credible promise to put someone first. If you can afford it, a small check to each, even $25 or something, speaks volumes.You might want to write to the IRS and the city or county that issues your business license too - if you're not sure what to tell them, call and ask what your obligations are. You may be surprised how helpful they can be. you can call them today and get the letters out before you go to bed (go buy some stamps if you need an excuse to get up and walk around). Then, sleep the sleep of the just. Get up tomorrow, eat a healthy breakfast, and start composing your 'How I lost a kajillion dollars and what I learned as my business followed it off a cliff' post , on your existing blog, Posterous, wherever. Throw in a couple of ironically entertaining pictures. It's not a funeral notice because you're not dead - you are now a man or woman of experience, and that experience has a value. Get that up over the weekend, realize people still like you, and on Monday you get back to work.

Your job for the next week is to contact the creditors again, ensure they all have the same information, and politely but firmly stick with the pro-rata approach. Whether they agree or no, ask for their decision in writing so you can send copies to the other creditors. By the way, since it sounds like you're not in debt on your personal accounts, consider dropping by your own bank and asking a manager for advice - since they won't actually be trying to collect from you, they may be more forthcoming about how they evaluate situations like that, and heaven knows they've had plenty of experience lately. Allocate 50% of your time to debt service, and the other 50% to making some new money. That can include chasing consulting/programming work, but your existing business still has value. Call business magazines like Inc. people like Andrew Warner etc., and say you have an interesting story - use your war story post and the feedback you received on it as your raw material. Hell, call Techcrunch, because they can't milk that SuperAngel scandal forever so you might as well work the publicity angle and give them an interview. 'Life after death' is a perennial story and even success junkies need one every so often. How about your startup's business model? Your actual business may have failed, but that doesn't mean the idea itself is without merit. Can you sell the IP, or the brand, or the analytics, or the customer list, or the suspicious transactions list? Some of these may be worth money, some not, but all that information has value in some form. Just pretend you inherited it from Uncle Debtscrewed and find that value. Can you make some value out of the domain? Can you write a book?

Yes. You can do all of that, and more. Because although we all laugh when a clown steps on a banana peel and falls flat on his face, what we applaud is that he gets up again afterwards. So you don't have time to brood; you launch next Monday.

<comment><USER13> > Do you remember how the founders of [...] NewsTilt were viciously shredded > by an angry mob, right here on HN? No?

Well, actually this happened. It was tempered by lots of people being nice, offering condolences, giving good insights, a few job offers, and even some people looking to start up companies together, but lets not pretend the mob didn't come out with their tar and feathers.

That said, I fully agree with the sentiment. Failure is perfectly acceptable, a natural occurrence in a risk-taking industry.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> As far as Rackspace goes, contact Rob (@kr8tr) and see if you can work out a payment plan. He has a real passion for great customer service. Plus, he's a cool dude.

<comment><USER14> Seconded, thirded, fourthed, and fifthed. Rob is awesome. You can send him a DM on Twitter or just call him. He puts his phone number on his website.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> If you did everything right, all your debt should be under the company's name, not yourself personally.

Therefore, you're fine. The company can't pay. That's called bankruptcy. Creditors are pros too, they should be used to it.

</comment><comment><USER16> I work with Rackspace and would like to discuss your situation. Please contact me by email - firstname.lastname@example.com or by phone - +1.210.548.5616.

Robert J Taylor

Sr Sys Engineer / Mgr, Realtime Customer Intervention

Rackspace Hosting

email@example.com

TF: 800.961.4454 x 501-5505

O: 210.312.5505

M: 210.548.5616

<comment><USER17> I always love to see this sort of thing on HN!

I was going to say "this sort of thing makes me want to move my servers to Rackspace", but they're already there ;)

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I had a client who racked up an $18,000 bill with RackSpace, a debt which needed to be restructured. I think it took a year to negotiate, but eventually Rackspace let them go with just a $3,000 payment. So talk to Rackspace. Explain the situation. You might be able to talk them down.

<comment><USER19> How can someone rack up an $18,000 bill? Was that just over a single month? I'm not a client of Rackspace, but I thought they billed out monthly, so if you don't pay your bill I thought they would shutdown your service. What happens, do they leave your service running and just let your bill compound?

<comment><USER20> Rackspace is a little different than most hosts. They want you to sign a paper contract, and will give you better prices if you commit for at least 12 months.

So its possible the OP had a good bit of time left on a contract, which he's now on the hook for. It would also make sense for Rackspace to take a smaller payment in such a case, as they wouldn't have rendered the services yet anyway.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Ok, if you formed an LLC and didn't sign personal guarantees with rackspace or your lawyer then I don't see how you are personally on the hook for this.

<comment><AUTHOR> It's a C-Corp. (Edited: made an error and said S-Corp earlier) I'm not 100% familiar with bankruptcy, but I'm assuming it'd damage my name as well as my co-founder's, as well as going into stuff I don't want to get into (court, etc.)

Rather have a way to pay back this $6k.

<comment><USER22> You are protected under a C-Corp, unless they can pierce the corporate veil in court (unlikely if you didn't do anything you weren't supposed to do) you can walk away and the only assets any of the creditors can go after are those of the company. All of your personal assets are free and clear.

<comment><USER6> > My co-founder owns a majority of the company

Minority shareholder, so he's protected anyway, no way this could be laid at his private door, unless there is outright fraud on his account.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Have you called who ever is taking your account to collections and tried to negotiate more time or a payment plan?

Explain that sending it to collections is bad for you and them. If you don't have the money, then you don't have the money. But if also have to deal with a collection agency then you'll have more stress to deal with. Also the collection agency gets a cut of your (current non-existent) money owed.

If you can explain that is in both parties interest to keep it out of collections and extend the deadline or work out a payment plan, you may be more likely to get out of this situation without damaging effects on your credit.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for your suggestion. The only reason I wouldn't do that is because Rackspace was very adamant about even the extension of the deadline (they would only agree to a 5-day extension). But it doesn't hurt to ask, though it may create a strained relationship between us.

<comment><USER24> It's their job to try and collect as much as they can. Even if your contact is friendly and sympathetic, if they think you can pay on better terms than you offer they will hammer you. On the flip side it is your job to be honest about your situation and get them to accept terms that you can actually meet. Other people have given better and more specific advice but the bottom line is they will take what they can get. No hard feelings. Business is business.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> It is in rackspace's own interest that you pay off, by sending the bill to the debt collectors they're going to end up with less than if you strike a deal with them, especially if the debt collection process forces you in to bankruptcy.

In whose name is the rackspace account? Corporate? Private? Are you incorporated?

Basically what you have to do is to come to an agreement where you contractually agree to pay them an X amount per month + some interest on the outstanding balance.

Make it clear to them that if they go the debt collection route that they will likely get nothing at all but that if they will come to an agreement with you that they have your word (for what that's worth) to make up for the hole.

How did it get this far?

I'm sorry to hear about the credit card fraud, every time someone here says they'll do their own processing I keep hammering on that, so I'll use the occasion to do it once again: Please do not do your own processing, use an IPSP that has very thorough fraud controls and scrubbing in place or you are very likely to get burned.

As for your lawyers fees, it sounds to me like he'll have to give you a discount.

Your co-founder being 'unreachable' is not very nice, in for the good times together, in for the bad times together, let's hope he turns up and will shoulder his part of the problem.

Kudos for not going incommunicado like your co-founder.

<comment><USER25> Any recommendations for credit card processors for the rest of us out here?

<comment><USER6> Sure:

<https://epoch.com/>

<http://www.ccbill.com/>

<http://www.vxsbill.com/> (disclaimer, run by friends of mine)

Stay away as far as you can from IBill and e-passporte, jettis has also been going through a rough period.

I hear good things about 'chargify', but I have no idea how well their anti- fraud measures are.

My only problem with processing charges is consumer fraud, the people that actually bought the service that consume it for months and that then suddenly reverse 6 months worth of charges. This happens infrequently enough that it is not a problem. It is also impossible to protect against in an SAAS or subscription situation.

Actual fraud that makes it through is a fat '0'.

<comment><USER26> Chargify isn't an actual credit card processor, they pass through to your gateway/merchant account. Their value is in simplifying the subscription management and recurring billing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> $6k in server fees?? Was it over a couple of months? I'm curious to know the space your startup is in for that kind of server fees.

</comment><comment><USER28> It's no big deal. If you don't have the money you don't have the money... I had a similar situation at my first startup where I was on the hook for $36,000... not $9k. And everything worked out fine. You will have to restructure the debt and it will probably nick your credit but that's not the end of the world.

I will comment though that people are often confused about forming companies to prevent personal liability. If you are the only person on the books for the company, you're still on the hook for everything, whether you've got an LLC, C-Corp, S-Corp, etc.

</comment><comment><USER29> 1\. even if a company does business as an LLC or C corp, etc. if there wasn't much in assets when it was started (like cash), your corporate entity probably doesn't holdup;

2\. most likely, you signed a contract with Rackspace personally right?

3\. as for the merchant/credit card account - most require a personal guarantee anyway

So, first of all - I am sure your lawyer will defer or write off a bunch of that bill - happens all the time, especially if you have already paid a number of previous bills.

Rackspace is probably doing what most creditors do - acting as aggressively as possible. If they turn it over to collection, they are already looking at a huge writeoff (collection agencies get a nice percentage of whatever they collect and usually also have authority to write down the debt substantially in offers in compromise). So when push comes to shove, if you offer them a payment plan, I bet they will go for it or at least counter offer. Offer them $1,000 now, and $500 a month for 10 months say - that's full payment of the account. If you feel lucky, offer $3K, $1K now and $500 a month for 4 months.

The credit card account is going to be sticky - because unlike rackspace who made a profit margin on the $6K you owe, the credit card company has probably already refunded the $$ to cardholders that it "paid" to you - the fact that you describe it as "huge" doesn't help - I would assume it may be the majority of all payments advanced to you by the merchant provider. Again, you can probably propose a payment plan which has a good likelihood of being accepted.

Good luck.

<comment><USER30> Could you elaborate on point 1?

<comment><USER29> If a corporate entity is created and funded with very little in the way of assets it can be disregarded in a legal proceeding. This is called "piercing the corporate veil".

There are other factors a judge or jury will weigh as well, but assets are among the most important.

This is pretty common sense if you think about it - although most people (especially those who read the "incorporate for $99 and protect yourself from creditors) don't realize it.. just because you sign some papers and create a legal entity the law isn't going to allow you to stiff people and evade legal obligations.

<comment><USER30> I am aware of the corporate veil and the piercing thereof, but I'm not really convinced that assets are among the most important things a jury would like at. And surely it varies among industries (so a real estate investment firm would require more in assets than an internet startup in order to be considered "proper").

<comment><USER29> Actually, having assets appropriate to the business type is one of the key factors in determining whether the corporate entity will be respected and you are correct that it differs for a RE company and an internet startup.

There are plenty of citations to case law to support this but I am too lazy to go find them to post in this reply.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31>
      My co-founder owns a majority of the company
      but he's traveling so he's a bit unavailable.

Well, he/she better get on the next plane back and help sort this out. Seriously. If things are this bad they need to do their part.

They need to be making phone calls regardless of where they are.

No offense, but it sounds like if the company was on a downward spiral it was a bad time to take a vacation.

</comment><comment><USER32> The whole point of an LLC is to have limited liability. If you haven't been involved in any fraud or misrepresentation, nobody can go after your assets except in some very specific cases.

You need to speak with your lawyer, or do a little research.

</comment><comment><USER33> Can you go into detail, perhaps outside of HN, as to how you got to this stage? It could be a valuable lesson for others.

</comment><comment><USER34> 1) Try to buy time. Debt collectors will work with you. 2) Restructure as aresant said. 3) Set up payment plans with the people. Even if you owe $10,000, telling them you're broke and sending $50/month until you find more money usually will get them off your back. It shows you're serious about paying and is a good faith sort of thing. 4) If all else fails, remember, it could be worse. Having bad credit sucks, but isn't the end of the world. Protect it if you can, but your life isn't over if your credit gets screwed. Trust me on this one.

<comment><USER35> It's not about credit.

Any time a merchant account is closed for cause, such as having too high a chargeback rate, the underwriting bank has a contractual obligation to place the merchant in the TMF (Terminated Merchant File) and MATCH list. Both the company AND the names/SSNs of the principals of the company are listed. This is intended to protect other banks -- so that a company with a history of payment fraud or other problems can't simply go bank to bank as each account is closed.

Being on TMF/MATCH can prevent you from opening a merchant account for future business the rest of your life. Very few banks, almost none in the US, will open a merchant account if any of the owners of the company are listed.

<comment><USER34> Ahh, I see, I didn't know about that. Thanks for the info! :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> The other comments here will help you much more in the immediate timeframe, but here's my suggestion for after this is all over:

Write. Nothing will give you catharsis and perspective on this unpleasant experience like writing. Consider sharing your experience with the community; your lessons learned may end up saving someone else from a similar situation, and while learning from a failure is great, teaching from a failure is even better.

</comment><comment><USER37> The first thing to do IMO is review ALL the legal documentation that you have. This means:

1\. What is your role in the company. Are you just another employee or does your contract 'tie' you in some way with the company's assets and liabilities.

2\. Is there anything in the contracts that you signed (if applicable) that relates directly to you personally? If yes concentrate on that one and nothing else.

3\. Just because you poured money in the business, it does not necessarily mean that you are responsible for its liabilities. Review the documentation with a lawyer as to what your exposure is towards this situation.

From the looks of it, the merchant account is your 'weakest link'. Follow the advice of others here by talking to the merchant and sorting something out. Chances are that the future is not as bleak as it seems now. There are always choices.

Remember: Ask and you shall receive. Asking the relevant parties for extensions, better terms of payments etc. is not bad. The worst thing that can happen is for them to refuse.

Good luck and stay strong. There is always light at the end of the tunnel!

</comment><comment><USER38> If you formed your entity correctly (I assume this is where your $3k debt to your lawyer came in), you likely can declare bankruptcy for your company and take no personal liability.

You might want to find family and friends who can loan you the money without interest.

Can you sell the domain?

Just curious, how did you get so much debt from your lawyer.

Hope it works out and best of luck.

</comment><comment><USER39> Reading this rings very true to home for myself and I completely understand your situation having gone through and similarly going through the same.

I used to live and breathe my start-up, be passionate about the startup scene and thought my project was on the fast track. Debts mounted up and deciding who to pay first / last is somewhat stressful. I personally focused on paying the areas that would potentially come back to haunt me in my career first, I then restructured and negotiated settlement amounts. The surprising aspect for me was that negotiation is entirely possible, the small amount that firms expect to receive from insolvency is significantly lower than a settlement plan with yourself.

I won't go over my specifics as this is about you, but if you ever want to chat or just some advice in how to deal with this on a personal / mental level let me know.

</comment><comment><USER40> Is this a limited company? Seems pretty fucked.

I don't know what the usual legal proceedings are to declare bankruptcy, but this is why they have bankruptcy laws and limited company.

Speak to a bankruptcy lawyer. Presumably all of this is your company's debt, not your own personally, and you have not committed fraud or done anything illegal, so hopefully you're in the clear personally. It may even work out that your cofounder is the one who ends up with a black eye on his credit record if he's the majority shareholder and ends up being the person named in the bankruptcy.

You haven't specified what country you're in. I'm guessing US. From the little I know, bankruptcy protections are pretty great over there. In the UK, if you take a company that you're a director of bankrupt, you aren't allowed to be director of another company for 5 years.

<comment><AUTHOR> It is a limited company, and it's registered under a Delaware C-Corp.

I'm not familiar with the details of bankruptcy either. Will this damage my name and the name of the company?

Well, I'll probably be the guy named in bankruptcy, since my cofounder is in the UK.

Yes, I am in the US. Ouch, that sucks, see directly above.

<comment><USER5> You should edit your post if you can to mention that its a C-Corp. From what I know the C-Corp should be protecting you from personal liability, but I'm sure other commenters here have more expertise

<comment><USER41> Just for reference: The C-Corp does provide a pretty heavy liability shield. However, alot of these contracts where likely personally guaranteed. It's nearly impossible to open a merchant account for a young company without personal guarantees from the principles. The lawyer likely required personal guarantees on the retainer as well.

It's part of doing business really. Creditors really don't like corporate protection (for obvious reasons) so it's pretty easy to get yourself into a situation that they're seeing... although the high number of charge-backs is something of a head scratcher.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> Work something out with Rackspace. They will be happy to not report you to the credit bureaus. That leaves about $3k to pay to the lawyer. And maybe you can work something out with him too so he doesn't report you to a collection agency, which is probably a hassle for him anyway.

</comment><comment><USER3> First, take a deep breath.

Second, approach the situation honestly. Honesty does not mean you need to approach everyone on your knees. Most of your creditors likely do not know what situation you are in right now. Many people actually enjoy finding creative win-win solutions. You never know unless you ask.

Third, good luck. Looking back at the low parts in my life, they all worked out one way or another. Without challenge and without hardship, I would not appreciate what is good in life. Learn what you can and always remember to smile :)

</comment><comment><USER43> ironically, you're in the dominant position for negotiation. the creditors will try to lean on you (and possibly quite hard), but they're just trying to walk away with as much cash as possible. start throwing the 'bankruptcy' word around, that should cool off most creditors for the time being. communicate your situation to them and don't make any commitments until the dust has settled. don't pay anyone until you consult a few lawyers. if that takes longer than 12 days, so be it.

remember, if you do pursue bankruptcy (which may not be a bad option for a failed business), the judge will ultimately decide who gets paid what amount. no one creditor can walk away with a disproportionate share of the assets (subject to debt rankings). this removes all leverage for subordinated debt.

your first call needs to be your current lawyer. explain your situation and ask for a referral to a bankruptcy lawyer. your next calls should be to your network for more legal referrals. as these lawyers for a 30 min consultation off the clock. if they want your business, they'll give it to you.

most importantly, don't let '12 days' pressure you. your creditors can wait. they may get loud, but they can wait.

</comment><comment><USER44> Is there any way you can turn your experience with evil people defrauding your credit card merchant account into something that you can build a startup on or consult with? Or was it just a minor avoidable error that balooned out of control and that other people aren't likely to have trouble with?

How did the fraud occur? Who did it, where were they, and what did they do technically to steal from you?

<comment><USER45> Indeed, I'd be interested in hearing more about the fraud as well; however, I'd imagine that this may be an embarassing part of the story for the OP. There is mention of a large number of chargebacks, which to me indicates that a large portion of his legitimate clients believed that a service was not rendered or product not delivered.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> Does the startup have any assets/IP that are saleable? I agree with SHOwnsYou.. I'd try to buy some time.

</comment><comment><USER47> negotiate with all of those companies to lower the total, then get one of those 0% apr for 9-12 months.

Use the checks they give you, to pay down your debt.

This way you'll be down to 4-5K and you won't pay any interest on it for a year...which should give you plenty of time to get back on your feet

</comment><comment><USER48> Never use your own money! Borrow and lose other people's money. It's the American Way! _wink_

(Note: I am an American, and thus reserve the right to poke myself in the eye.)

(While this was meant to be funny, it's really meant to be "ha-ha serious" not "ha-ha funny". Start-ups are by-nature risky endeavors. Putting your own financial well-being on the line in this fashion is as foolish as tight-rope walking without a net. If you've got a C-corp your personal assets should be somewhat protected. Make sure to do your homework on this...)

Oh, and last of all: Don't Panic. You can always flee to Europe or elsewhere. ;)

</comment><comment><USER49> I think this is exactly what Lending Club is for. You'll pay 9-12% interest/year, but you'll get a loan based on credit score, personal reasons and your ability to tell a story on why/how you'll pay it back: <http://bit.ly/lending-club>

<comment><USER50> Even shorter:

<http://lendingclub.com>

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> Talk to your parents, perhaps?

(downvoting, eh?) Talk to them about _a loan_.

</comment><comment><USER52> Sell your car?

</comment><comment><USER53> time to start a new category.. "Help me, HN"

</comment><comment><USER54> 1\. Own up to you who you are. If you treat this like a dirty secret, you're going to spend the rest of your (online) life hoping that nobody finds out "the real you" and what your life/work is "really" like. People who fail collosally, and have the guts to share that, are usually held in great esteem. People who hide their failures til they're found out by someone else, on the other hand, don't get such respect.

Trust me on this one - I've fucked up at least as big as you have.

2\. Use your network, name, and rep to get a couple freelance contracts. Explain that you're willing to work really hard, so long as you can find a couple people to pay you up front because of these extenuating circumstances.

People LOVE to watch somebody kick the ass of difficulties. You will find 2 people on HN to pay you $3k for freelance work. Heck, I would, if I knew who you were.

I think it's honorable that you're not looking at just abandoning the debt because you can, but, as a last resort, if you're legally protected behind your incorporation paperwork, do it. There's no reason for this to wreck your life.

(And really, seriously consider my advice. Own it. You'll feel better and nobody will think less of you.)

</comment><comment><USER55> Note something about collections: Collections agencies are not a party to a debt and thus they have NO LEAGAL RIGHTS, and further they do NOT have the right to "destroy" your credit, or even to affect your credit. You owe money to the original party, and you only have to deal with the original party. You need to protect your credit by sending a "Cease and desist" to any and every collection agency that writes you about any debt. Send this by registered mail, return reciept as they are notorious about committing perjury and claiming they never received such letters. When you have proof, you will have them on the legal hook if they report the debt to a credit reporting agency or participate in any collection activities, including claling you, after recieving the C&D. You can find forms for these online... Here, I'll attach one below.

The original creditor maintains all rights, and they can sue you, or they can contact you, or attempt to work out an arrangment. By turning it over to a collection agency they have indicated that they don't think they can collect and are writing it off, which is fine as this is one of their options. But don't let your credit be hurt. Send the C&D to the collection agency, and they are prevented from reporting the debt on your credit report. Often this is also effective in gettign the original creidtor to actually talk to you so that you can work out payment terms.... and since they already wrote off the debt they should be willing to accept good payment terms (like 10 years, no interest, monthly payments starting in 6 months after you send them a $200 initial good faith payment... that's what I'd propose.)

Collection Agencies pretend like they have the authority and will pretend like they can sue you, they often pretend like they are law offices.... but remember their job is basically to intimidate you or trick you into paying, anything to get you to send a payment. But under the law, you have no contract with them, you never agreed to deal with them, and they have no legal rights. The original creditor can sue you, but if they were going to do that, they wouldn't have turned it over to a collection agency in the first place (Which keeps a large chunk of what they collect.)

So, don't let your credit be damaged-- be on the ball with the C&D and you can not only keep collections from harassing you, but force any creditor who really wants their money to work with you on terms.

[Your Name] [Your Mailing Address] [Your City/State/Zip]

Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested # [Insert the Certified Mail Receipt Number here]

[Insert Date of Mailing]

[Insert name of collection agent, if available] [Insert name of collection agency] [Insert address of collection agency] [Insert City/State/Zip of collection agency]

REF: Account # [Insert either the original account number or the collection agency's account reference number here]

Dear [Insert name of debt collector calling--if available--here]:

1\. You are hereby notified under provisions of Public Laws 104-208, also known as the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, that your services are no longer desired.

2\. You and your organization must CEASE & DESIST all attempts to collect the above debt. Failure to comply with this law will result in my immediately filing a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission and the [Insert your home state here] Attorney General's office. I will pursue all criminal and civil claims against you and your company.

3\. Let this letter also serve as your warning that I may utilize telephone recording devices in order to document any telephone conversations that we may have in the future.

4\. Furthermore, if any negative information is placed on my credit bureau reports by your agency after receipt of this notice, this will cause me to file suit against you and your organization, both personally and corporately, to seek any and all legal remedies available to me by law.

5\. Since it is my policy neither to recognize nor deal with collection agencies, I will settle this account with the original creditor.

Give this matter the attention it deserves!

[Sign your name here]

[Insert your name here]

</comment><comment><USER56> Perhaps the government can bail you out. Just call your friends inside the Treasury Department, etc. Cake. ;)

</comment><comment><USER57> This is why you should be using Google AppEngine and free providers, so you don't get on the hook like this.

</comment><comment><USER58> Unless you are specifically looking to avoid responsibility for this debt and are planning to let your startup sink, I don't understand why you wouldn't pay for your debt with a credit card.

</comment><comment><USER59> If you are getting the message: "You're submitting too fast", and you need to reply soon, just access HN through web proxy,create an acc, and submit! :)</comment>


What's missing from most entrepreneur pitches - <AUTHOR> http://www.thisisgoingtobebig.com/2009/10/top-5-things-missing-from-most-entrepreneur-pitches.html

<comment><USER2> I've seen a lot of these "what you should include in your pitch"-type posts, and it's alarming how little overlap there is.

</comment><comment><USER3> This seems pretty useful from a VC-esque point of view. At an earlier stage (say, pitching your startup in 3-5 minutes at some event or other) the biggest thing I see missing is some kind of story beyond the product itself. Why are these guys standing there? What's their deal? Why do they believe in this crazy idea? What makes them able to execute it? What are they up to right now (development, beta, it's launched)? What do they need?

</comment><comment><USER4> I think knowing what kind of company you'll be in 3 years time is the biggie</comment>


Fast Train to Failure: California's Mismanaged High-Speed Rail Project - <AUTHOR> https://www.city-journal.org/californias-high-speed-rail-project <comment><USER2> While this article finds an issue with the way the Tejon Pass route was eliminated in favor of the Tehachapi Pass route, Tejon Pass route would skip a station in Lancaster/Palmdale, which would be a mistake. As the article acknowledges, these are rapidly growing exurbs that are refuge from the exorbitant land prices in the LA Basin. There is existing commuter rail service between there and Downtown LA, but a HSR is a significant level-of- service upgrade, and offers connections to Bakersfield and beyond. The fact that a rail line offers connections between many points with the same service, while air service must fly at least as many services as there are destinations, is lost on these commentators.

That being said, there are many facepalm-worthy decisions made by CAHSR or by others early on in the process, like an extremely sweeping curve on a long, expensive viaduct just outside of Fresno station [1], or the barely-realistic journey times written into legislation that drive up cost. Another is the choice of the torturous Pacheco Pass over the easier Altamont, or even going around the mountains following the Strait the old rail does. Besides, there's no point to pining after LA-SF rail traffic when airports are perfectly fine between those two. But what about LA-Bakersfield? Modesto-Sacramento? SF- Fresno? That's where a train helps. And to do that, all you need is a train that does comfy, European speeds like 100 mph, instead of a painstakingly- built one that does twice as fast.

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16172313](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16172313)

<comment><USER3> What the heck is the train line doing near Fresno?

Why is it not following I-5 and making zero stops in between the South Bay and LA?

<comment><USER4> Fresno is the third largest city in the state and the agricultural capital of the state. Going through Fresno will link the three largest industries: technology, entertainment, and agriculture.

<comment><USER3> I know Fresno is relatively large but the entire purpose of this route was/is/I guess isn't to get people from SF to LA as a rival to air travel.

<comment><USER5> No, the purpose cited and the comparison made in cost justifications was to North/South _freeway_ traffic it would displace, not competition with air travel.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I used to support the HSR project on the grounds that connecting the state (both LA / Bay Area and the Central Valley towns) would yield long term economic benefits due the increased flow of people within the state. Decreasing the effective distance between people by making travel faster and cheaper has a lot of value in the information economy. Nothing beats face to face communication.

I now no longer support the project due to the large price tag. I don't believe the convenience of HSR over air travel is worth the cost of this infrastructure investment. We could get way more value out of investing in building our local public transportation and expanding the highway network.

Maybe if we went back to the drawing board a reasonable HSR plan would be possible (this article certainly provides good areas of improvement). Until then, we need to stop forging ahead.

<comment><USER7> For $100B you could buy ~33,000 $3M-dollar electric commuter planes with 10 person capacity and 600mi range - not quite anything like that on the market yet mind you - but it seems close at hand. You could cover nearly the whole state, not just LA <\--> SF, and have 330,000 person capacity. By what measure would this train be better?

Certainly not economic, noise, land-use, speed, convenience, coverage, or flexibility. Probably in terms of operational costs - but not by a huge margin. And the economics change if you scale the capacity down to match the train system and invest the rest to partially cover the operating costs.

And it took me 5 minutes to think of a (possibly) better plan than theirs.

<comment><USER8> Very impressive. But in just three minutes, I thought of an even better plan: put a $10M wormhole between LA and SF and have near instant travel. Wormholes don't quite exist yet, but they seem close at hand.

<comment><USER7> There was a plane featured on HN this week with those exact specs.

<comment><USER8> For sale for $3M?

<comment><USER7> Yes, but I have my doubts

<comment><USER9> "aims to have one flying early next year.", and HN is skeptical about it ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18602771](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18602771))

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> So, this article has some valid criticisms, but why is this the case? Why does it seem like modern America can't manage any public works projects without them taking twice as long and costing twice as much as projected? Is it regulation? Lack of work ethic? Graft? It seems like a major problem.

<comment><USER11> We're all spread out really really far compared to the rest of the world.

<comment><USER12> This is _one_ rail line that would connect San Francisco and Los Angeles, the two most populous regions in the most populous state in the US. The fact that the entire country is sparsely populated does not affect the feasibility or utility of _this_ project in particular.

<comment><USER13> A thing that becomes obvious when looking at the actual work being done is a lot of the central valley work is grade separation. The work is grade separating both the future high speed rail lines and existing freight rail lines. The whole project is filled with things like that. Work that already needs to be done irrespective of the HSR part. With that consideration the SF to LA feature is really about a 1/3 the total price tag.

I remember one time someone made the too spread out argument. I went and tried to do an estimate for a HSR line from Chicago to Denver. Via Kansans City and St louis. About 1000 miles.

Probably cost between 25-50 billion. Maybe less since for most of it the only things in the way are corn fields and cows.

Which seems like a lot of money, but then compare with the $2T spent on the 'war on terror' since 2001.

See:

[http://www.hsr.ca.gov/docs/programs/construction/road_closur...](http://www.hsr.ca.gov/docs/programs/construction/road_closure/2018_December_Construction_Update.pdf)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> As someone who voted for this project, I'm really bummed with how it's actually turning out. The actual costs are so much more than what people voted for, yet no one's being held responsible.

At the same time, I don't really have a solution to this problem. We need to invest in large scale transportation initiatives for the future — projects just as forward-looking as BART once was. Yet not even NYC can pull it together anymore to extend their subway lines on budget and on time.

Worse, every time this happens, initiatives like this become harder and harder for voters to consider.

<comment><USER15> The 1976 BART cost $10B in today's dollars to construct. If you were alive in 1976 would you have said it was a boondoggle and the project should have been killed?

IMO people consistently underestimate how much public infrastructure is worth. The US highway system was sold at a cost of $27B [1] but cost over $100B and has cost nearly $500B today [2].

Does that mean the US Highway system wasn't worth it? Of course it was, the public just doesn't understand how much it had to cost. The Iraq war cost trillions for zero benefit for future generations, even if 50% of the cost of HSR is waste it's still a better deal by far.

[1][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Aid_Highway_Act_of_195...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Aid_Highway_Act_of_1956)

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

<comment><USER16> > The 1976 BART cost $10B in today's dollars to construct. If you were alive > in 1976 would you have said it was a boondoggle and the project should have > been killed?

And what would BART cost today to build? $50 billion? Would it be worthwhile at that price? The problem is that costs for public infrastructure are ballooning much faster than inflation. That puts more pressure on public infrastructure projects to produce benefits that justify the investment. I fully expect many public infrastructure expenditures today won't ever justify themselves, for example DC's silver line.

<comment><USER17> At $50B, yes. BART will exist in some form for at least a century. It is so hard to understand how valuable it is to make something that so many people use every day for that long but it is really valuable.

<comment><USER16> How valuable? $50 billion is enough to create a fund that pays out $2 billion annually in perpetuity, or about $15 for every BART ride. That's not counting ongoing operations and maintenance. Does BART generate $15 in positive value per ride above and beyond ticket cost, relative to driving? I'm skeptical.

$3 I'll believe. Which is why the constant factors kill us relative to Europe. It costs us 3-7x to build the same infrastructure as Europe. That pushes the required value per ride that needs to be generated to unrealistic levels.

<comment><USER18> Let's take your own reasoning and let's apply it and see where the numbers fall.

The Bart cost was $1.586 billion (according to Wikipedia) or around ~$10 billion of today's dollars.

Let say that back then we had put that money ($1.586 billion) into an annuity in perpetuity and given the money each years to the riders so they will find alternative means of transport.

So if instead of building bart back in the 70's we had put the money into a perpetual annuity, we would be receiving the sum of $63.5 millions a year from the annuity (your own numbers seem to indicate a 4% yield). That is less than 50 cents per ride (according to Wikipedia Bart gives 129 million rides a year).

I don't think the cost is insignificant compared with the level of economic activity that the 400.0000 daily riders generate for SF and the Bay Area in general.

And now imagine 20 years from now how much $63.5 millions a year will buy you compared with the benefits of mass transportation.

<comment><USER19> Your math is wrong. You can (at least historically) get a 4% annuity that rises with inflation in perpetuity.

<comment><USER18> Where can I get a save investment that pays a 4% annuity that rises with inflation?

I'm genuinely curious. My father is retired and has some savings and that would seem like the ideal investment for him.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> > A comparatively small amount of state aid to LA Metro would do far more for > California's environment and economy

Like finishing the Green Line to @#$&ing LAX, maybe. It's ludicrous how bad the public transportation options are to what is arguably the most important airport on the west coast.

Meanwhile, on my monthly sorties through the Central Valley, the Authority continues with its gigantic monuments to bloodymindedness, building tracks no one will ride and ramps no train will crest. We could do so much better with that money.

<comment><USER21> Or any improvements on the 405 for us poor souls who live in the Valley+ and work in Santa Monica :(

<comment><USER22> We just spent a lot on that. [1]

Are you not seeing results?

What additonal work would you like to see?

[1] [https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/20/us/los-angeles-drivers- on...](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/20/us/los-angeles-drivers-on- the-405-ask-was-1-6-billion-worth-it.html)

<comment><USER21> Instead of adding lanes, they should have added some useable public transportation like a light rail. There is 2million~ people living in the SFV and all it has is a stupid bus line that goes to the red line. Light rail that connects the SFV to West LA and LAX would be a huge improvement. It doesn't help that Los Angeles city government is incompetent and the rich in Bel Air and Bev hills like to throw wrenches in everything.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> A negative article on HSR from a conservative think tank? I'm shocked! :P

The price tag in real dollars has increase since Prop 1A was passed in 2008, but the author is misrepresenting how much costs have increased compared to the initial estimate of $40 billion in 2008.

The absolute cost has increased because the estimated completion date has been pushed back by a decade or more and the construction estimates are in year of expenditure dollar, not current dollars or 2008 dollars.

I wrote a comment about it here.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16560843](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16560843)

Granted, I hate to see funds being poorly managed and contractors committing fraud with no accountability, which appears to have happened, but I also hate hit pieces where someone compares 2008 dollars to year of expenditure dollars like they're the same thing.

</comment><comment><USER24> The simple facts seem to be that we have lost our capabilities to deliver these types of projects. I voted against it at the time assuming it could never be build with cost assumptions they put forth. Good concept with lots of potential benefits. Unfortunately we have zero chance of being able to to do it at a reasonable cost.

[https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2017-05-31/the-u-...](https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2017-05-31/the- u-s-has-forgotten-how-to-do-infrastructure)

</comment><comment><USER25> In comparison, the Chuo Shinkansen connecting Tokyo and Nagoya (286km in distance), which runs at a maximum speed of 505 km/h (314 mph), costs about 45 billion US dollars.

<comment><USER26> Thanks for the context.

So the Chuo Shinkansen = ~ $253,218,691/mi.(9 stations)

Est. CA HSR (Stage 1) = $190,384,615/mi (15 stations)

<comment><USER27> The Chuo Shinkansen is also a maglev line built mostly underground; it's not an apples-to-apples comparison.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Why does it seem that the U.S. has become incapable of building large projects in a reasonable amount of time and budget? It seems every major bit of construction is always years late, and billions over budget. Whether it's the Bay Bridge (half of it), or a new Space Shuttle replacement, or just fixing our bridges and other infrastructure, I've never read of a large public project actually coming in on time and on budget.

In China, they're building infrastructure so fast it's crazy. Regardless of the different social and political systems, we just seem to have lost all ability to function as a society to create big things that we need. Imagine if we wanted to build something like the Hoover Damn today?

I have to assume it has something to do with half the population trying to actively disrupt anything positive the government wants to do, and if they can't completely kill the project, they try to profit off it as much as possible, essentially "proving" that government is inefficient, if not outright incompetent.

<comment><AUTHOR>
      the U.S. has become incapable of building large projects in a reasonable amount of time and budget?

_Private_ projects come in on time and on budget, or nearly so, all the time. It's the _public sector_ projects that are layered in graft.

The last major public project that came in near the original budget that I can recall is the San Jose Area (now SAP).

<comment><USER29> Which private enterprise has the power to run a hundred billion project that isn't funded by the government. Not one.

<comment><USER30> Uber, Google Search Engine, Facebook, etc.

<comment><USER29> None of them have done anything on this scale, have they? They're valuable because they don't make investments like this. Their work is on a long lever so they have great margins over massive volume.

<comment><AUTHOR> Google has spent over $200 million _on land alone_... in the valley alone... just in the past _month_.

I heard that it seriously depleted HQ's petty cash fund. (But seriously, these were, in fact, all-cash deals.)

<comment><USER29> Yeah, but they don't do that every month. And $200 million is 1/500 of 100 billion. This is like the difference between going to a nice restaurant and buying a McLaren P1. Or spending all your money as an L7 at Google vs. going to space yourself.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Self driving cars are expected roll out in the same time frame as this rail project. I think they change the ridership equation. The drive from LAX to SFO is about 6 hours, 3 hours longer than by HSR. But if I can work or sleep in the back I'd prefer to take the car. The car gives me more flexibility at the destination and more privacy, comfort and cargo space.

When self driving cars become sufficiently trustworthy a better solution might be a hybrid: high speed self driving car lanes.

<comment><USER32> If you are talking about taking a car solo, that's pretty expensive. It's hard to imagine a marginal cost under $0.23/mile for driving [1], so you are looking at a round-trip solo cost of $132 minimum - that's higher than flying (if you can plan it).

Either way, I'm not sure how much autonomy changes things. You can get luxury buses overnight for $115 overnight ([https://www.latimes.com/travel/deals/la- tr-money-20170903-st...](https://www.latimes.com/travel/deals/la-tr- money-20170903-story.html)) already which probably beats the comfort of a car anyway - how much will not paying a driver cut costs?

[1] [http://www.forthgo.com/blog/2007/05/24/marginal-cost-of- driv...](http://www.forthgo.com/blog/2007/05/24/marginal-cost-of-driving/)

<comment><USER33> I would expect it to be like renting a more expensive car but you can sleep in it for the ride over. Cost needs to beat luxury bus or flight + cost of ubering around in the city

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> For the people reading these postings, I noticed there's some misunderstandings about California HSR ...

1) It's not for transportation. It's a jobs and pension program for appointees. State leaders are willing to spend $100 billion (or more) of taxpayer money for $1 billion of pork.

2) The state cannot even manage Caltrain well, which is only 50 miles long (SF to Gilroy.) There's no way they can manage a route 400 miles long.

3) Domestic airlines do a good job of intra-state travel already.

4) There was never an affordable model for building HSR. It never made any sense financially for California.

5) Residents of Palo Alto and Atherton will sue the state into oblivion if they don't bury the HSR. And the state won't because tunnelling is $2 billion per mile.

<comment><USER29> I think most people on HN don't realize one thing, though: most Americans are very much in favour of this sort of pork barrel funding. They may say otherwise but when it comes down to it the operative reasoning is "everyone else will get the pork barrel but me so I need to get in on it". Revealed Preferences are pro-pork.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> The key sentence seems to be:

"Fortunately, only a small fraction of CAHSR's projected cost—$1.4 billion out of nearly $100 billion total—has been spent so far."

This suggests that it might be possible to make major changes, or even start over from scratch, if there's a significantly better way to do it.

</comment><comment><USER36> Should have given the project to the French company that put forward the proposal or hire a Japanese firm from the start. Leave it up to a bloated agency with a misaligned agenda to royally screw things up at the cost of the taxpayer. If you think this is bad, you don't want to know where your federal tax dollars go to. Reading this makes me sick.

<comment><USER37> But then they wouldn't be able to hand out favors and buy political clout with big construction firms and unions, which is sadly probably the main goal for the current project..

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> This kind of ballooning makes me think there should be a rule for propositions (and maybe most funding in general) that when allocating funding for XYZ, there must be clear criteria upon which the funding is removed.

Like if the proposition had said "It'll probably cost $33B and take under three hours, and will be canceled if the estimated costs exceed $50B or the estimated duration exceeds 3 and a half hours."

</comment><comment><USER39> The same thing happened in my country. Infrastructure like this always ends up about 5 times more expensive than originally thought. It doesn't really matter because there is always more money. Everyone just forgets about it and moves on.

The US however is rapidly approaching a 1 trillion deficit. And if it wants to challenge China in manufacturing they need to rebuild the entire railroad system.

<comment><USER40> _And if it wants to challenge China in manufacturing they need to rebuild the entire railroad system._

Can you explain this point? The USA has a great cargo rail system that is efficient and integrated with other transportation systems.

<comment><USER39> American railroads are slow, old, neglected, unsafe and need to be shared with passenger trains.

Forty years of planned and extensive investment in infrastructure is how China lifted itself out of its misery. There was a time when the US did the same but something happened along the way.

<comment><USER40> > American railroads are slow, old, neglected, unsafe and need to be shared > with passenger trains.

Other than need to be shared with passenger trains, where are you getting the rest? It is certainly not true of cargo trains. How fast do you need cargo to go?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Why is this so hard? Other countries manage to construct high-speed rail and subway lines for a fraction what the US spends.

Maybe it was a bad idea to have everyone with a brain cram into med-school, law-school or b-school. There are other things that need doing.

</comment><comment><USER42> Who contributed to this article?

> Connor Harris is a policy analyst at the Manhattan Institute.

[https://www.manhattan-institute.org/about](https://www.manhattan- institute.org/about)

Reading through their other literature, seems pretty partisan and not very objective.

Can we get a less biased source? I'm not doubting the problems of HSR or the project, it would just be nice to get someone with less of an axe to grind.

<comment><USER43> The state senator who actually authored the legislation establishing the California High-Speed Rail Authority was Quentin Kopp. After seeing how this has turned out he is now opposed to it (and I think joined a lawsuit against it). In an op ed he had this to say:

>...Consequently, there won't be enough riders paying fares to cover operational costs. The 2008 ballot measure prohibits taxpayer subsidy of this now-planned track to nowhere. As the "father" of true high-speed rail, I regret its "horizon" isn't now bright, unless the governor and Richard restore 2008 promises to taxpayers.

[https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/letters-to-the- editor/article...](https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/letters-to-the- editor/article173401141.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> We should maybe build a vac tube instead.

</comment><comment><USER45> If only Elon Musk had managed it amirite?

Oh wait...</comment>


Ask HN: Any self hosted solution to manage passwords in a team? - <AUTHOR> I know this has been asked before and currently there are options such as LastPass etc. But what else is out there ? Is there a self hosted option ? <comment><USER2> Check out: [https://www.passwordstore.org/](https://www.passwordstore.org/)

It's git friendly and supports having separate GPG keys for different credentials.

<comment><USER3> But wouldn't this require everyone who needs access to the $foo password, to have access to the private gpg key that created the $foo password in the store?

Without the ability to allow one of many private keys to decrypt a stored password I'm not sure it's that practical.

<comment><USER2> You can encrypt the passphrases with keys for multiple recipients. Each would be individually authorized to the ones their keys can decrypt.

<comment><USER3> What option does that? All I've seen is about changing the key used.

<comment><USER2> > What option does that? All I've seen is about changing the key used.

It's the first option on the man page[1]: _Multiple gpg-ids may be specified, in order to encrypt each password with multiple ids._

[1]: [https://git.zx2c4.com/password- store/about/](https://git.zx2c4.com/password-store/about/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I am obviously biased for following(founder) and password mgmt is just one part of it, but do check out Device42 for a low cost password vault: [http://www.device42.com/features/enterprise-password- managem...](http://www.device42.com/features/enterprise-password-management/)

There is no limit on # of passwords or # of users with the base license and has full Rest API support.

<comment><USER5> How much is the base license? The pricing page has the lowest price at 1499 USD. The copyright of 2010 in the footer doesn't give me much confidence.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> take a look at passopolis[0], a fork of Mitro[1] - which got acquihired by Twitter and later stopped supporting the project.

You can either use the free hosted service by passopolis, or host your own.

disclaimer: not affiliated with either of those, but was a happy Mitro user and then switched to Passopolis (and am still very happy to use and know the project lives on).

[0] [https://passopolis.com](https://passopolis.com) / [https://github.com/WeAreWizards/passopolis- server](https://github.com/WeAreWizards/passopolis-server)

[1] [https://www.mitro.co/](https://www.mitro.co/) (certificate expired)

</comment><comment><USER7> Take a look at ours, it's self hosted and for teams: [http://teampasswordmanager.com](http://teampasswordmanager.com)

(I'm the founder, happy to answer any questions you have)

<comment><USER8> Some feedback: consider adding a "Pricing" link to the menu, this is one of the first pages I look at when evaluating SaaS products. I know the price is visible after clicking at "Buy now" button, but "Pricing" link may be more informative for customers that haven't decided yet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Check out Pleasant Password Server [https://www.pleasantsolutions.com/PasswordServer](https://www.pleasantsolutions.com/PasswordServer)

</comment><comment><USER10> KeePass on a shared server or even a Dropbox folder works fine, as long as you're aware of the slightly higher risk of putting your database on the internet.

</comment><comment><USER11> [http://rattic.org/](http://rattic.org/)

<comment><USER3> Be aware that this deliberately provides no internal encryption.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> A good LDAP infrastructure ?

<comment><USER3> That's only going to help you minimise per-user passwords on internal/ish systems you control.

LDAP alone doesn't let you eg securely provide people access to the password for the domain registrar.</comment></comment>


Geneticists pan paper that claims to predict a person's face from their DNA - <AUTHOR> http://www.nature.com/news/geneticists-pan-paper-that-claims-to-predict-a-person-s-face-from-their-dna-1.22580 <comment><USER2> Interesting conflict between these researchers.

From Erlich [0]:

"The take home message should be that identifying someone in a group of ten people requires very little effort. Anyone with access to even low dimensional data, such as basic demographic, can do that. This is not very surprising."

"To summarize this point, the title says: "Identification of individuals by trait prediction using whole- genome sequencing data" but most of the trait predictions is carried by ethnicity of the individual (genomic PCs) rather than the trait specific SNPs."

Summarizing: DNA can estimate ethnicity, which can be used to predict a range of traits, including facial structure. These results would be far more impressive if they were able to predict faces in data composed of a single ethnicity. HLI may have overstated their results, but nevertheless they raise important points about re-id.

[0] [http://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/09/07/185330.1](http://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/09/07/185330.1)

</comment><comment><USER3> The fact that identical twins look similar suggests that most of the variation in facial identity is going to be driven by a heritable element. If you could fully execute the program encoded by a person's DNA, I'd expect to see a reproduction of their face.

However, that depends on correctly mapping the program to its output. I'm skeptical that we're at the point where we can model this correctly. I think this is why you see that all of the predicted faces in the Venter paper look like a generic/averaged face.

<comment><USER4> Yeah, but they also grew in same uterine environment.

<comment><USER5> They also probably grow up together, have similar diets, speak the same language... there are lots of correlated environmental factors with twins aside from their DNA.

A better comparison would be separated twins (widely separated). But I'm not sure if anyone has looked at the relative differences between twins raised together vs apart.

<comment><USER6> > A better comparison would be separated twins (widely separated).

The two people in The Parent Trap are twins and were widely separated, yet they still looked identical, so much so that their parents could not even tell them apart.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Anonymous participants in genome research have been re-identified in the past [0]. In one of these examples, people were re-identified merely using zip code, date of birth and gender. Everyone should assume that they can be identified once they have revealed even a few personal datapoints. The genome contains millions of datapoints.

[0] [https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamtanner/2013/04/25/harvard-p...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamtanner/2013/04/25/harvard- professor-re-identifies-anonymous-volunteers-in-dna-study/#7d5413c792c9)

</comment><comment><USER8> I'd really like to hear from the resident hacker news skeptic/crumudgen on this. Really shouldn't be possible at this level of technology.

For example We have no idea what genes control the length of someone's nose or forehead.

<comment><USER9> On mobile, so I may not get to reply fully!

We actually do have some idea about necks and I believe noses - the important elements are DNA enhancers. There was a presentation at the Society for Developmental Biology in 2012 on this topic, though I can't recall the scientist who discussed this...

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Of course it's bunk we are not even close to this level for DNA.

We don't even know if whole races are physically different at certain levels. Yet we can get complex individual data like a face from DNA?

[https://medium.com/words-escape-us/are-japanese- intestines-l...](https://medium.com/words-escape-us/are-japanese-intestines- longer-8a41ca3e7d89)

Why would Nature publish a rebuttal? What next, proof flat earthers(aka funny trolls) are wrong.

But when we look closer we see its people claiming privacy is still intact, a much more dangerous push than the original article rubbish.

</comment><comment><USER11> Could you just throw loads of genomes (about 1.5gb of data) and a photo of peoples faces and train a deep learning model? It would probably do okay, unless of course environmental factors are more important than genetics here. Judging by how different siblings tend to look I'd say genetics isn't the whole story.

<comment><USER12> In theory, yes. In reality, we don't have enough data for that to work. A model that takes the whole genome as input is excessively expressive and would overfit, finding spurious correlations everywhere. In the near term, we still need to preprocess the genome to extract lower-dimensional features of interest.

<comment><USER13> you could use montecarlo to search for an effective compression of the input data. That's Singular Value Decomposition if I'm not mistaken. Dimensional Reduction is a hot topic in coding theory. Optimaly, understanding of the biologic process involved would certainly help here. DNA is thought to be higly compressed and self modifying, so a smaller encoding is unlikely. Therefore, seperation of the DNA sequences involved in the effect under scrutiny might fail on the possibly highly random inputs without good techniques and heuristics. Effectively, pre-processing could involve _recompilation_ and all the techniques used in software analysis, only then _live debugging_ is to be taken literal.

Reduction to spectra can be used to achieve sparseness, that cover the error margin with probalistic precission including invariants and the mentioned external factors, maybe also data aquisition errors from cost effective (read cheap:) methods.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Reminds me of this satirical paper: [http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=18315](http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=18315)

</comment><comment><USER15> The technology may not be quite there yet, but there's little doubt in my mind that we'll get there within the next decade or two.

<comment><USER16> And this is just a relatively uncontroverisial prediction. Wait until they move to SAT scores.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Is Phonebloks Using Next Generation Copyright/Patent Trolling? - <AUTHOR>

Phonebloks (http://www.davehakkens.nl/) is an ideadeck web page making the rounds today. It appears to be a page made by a designer pitching a product to nobody in particular. The person has no interest or ability to make the device, they just want people to 'like' it in hopes it gets made.
This is the second such website I've come across this week after trying to see if a tchotchke from 'Doctor Who' was available for sale.  It wasn't, but some guy posted up details about how he wished someone would make one and any interested companies should contact him.
If a person or company ran with the idea are they somehow responsible for compensating the people who post things like this?  Is this a new form of poor man's copyright or lawsuit trolling?
I'm worried because if I had an idea, I'd research it first.  If I came across some website that had the same idea I think I would give pause to developing it further because of this. <comment><USER2> Pretty sure they would need to file a patent for them to patent troll you.

Patent trolls file ridiculous patents and hope to catch you on a technicality or bleed you out (and have you settle instead of going to court) -- If these people didn't put patents on the ideas, then they won't have a leg to stand on as far as patent trolling goes, right?

<comment><AUTHOR> I believe so, but what about prior art copyrighting?

<comment><USER2> Well I think if if that case were to hold up in court, I could just go around and lay all my ideas out somewhere and sue someone if anyone at all tries to make something.

I'm not a lawyer, but if you were to ask me, I'm pretty sure judges will throw cases like that out of court</comment></comment></comment>


Another Neustar UltraDNS Outage – UltraDNS Goes Down - <AUTHOR> https://blog.dotcom-monitor.com/website-uptime/october15-neustar-ultradns-outage-down/ <comment><USER2> Yeah -- it's annoying how many layers there are, sometimes. At first we obviously were worried a couple sites which are CloudFlare customers were having problems due to our service. Wasn't that, moved upstream to AWS; wasn't that. Identified UltraDNS later, and confirmed externally.

</comment><comment><USER3> A sales weasel from dyn is trying to capitalise on the outage.

Here he is being trolled for it though: [https://twitter.com/DynShane/status/654775378976768000](https://twitter.com/DynShane/status/654775378976768000)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I didn't see a better source to link to, but this seems to be impacting a lot of websites and I thought others would like to know what is going on.</comment>


Bayer to donate potential coronavirus drug (chloroquine) to U.S. - <AUTHOR> https://www.axios.com/scoop-bayer-to-donate-potential-coronavirus-drug-to-us-cc8c1a5a-6a14-4e36-8b07-07eccf4eff36.html <comment><AUTHOR> Early evidence suggests that chloroquine — an inexpensive anti-malarial drug — may work just as well, if not even better, than remdesivir, a drug owned by Gilead, which is undergoing clinical trials for treatment of the coronavirus.</comment>


Are we getting close to time travel? - <AUTHOR> http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/time-travel-may-find-home-large-hadron-collid

<comment><USER2> >"Because time travel is limited to these special particles, it is not possible for a man to travel back in time and murder one of his parents before he himself is born, for example. However, if scientists could control the production of Higgs singlets, they might be able to send messages to the past or future,"

This is absurd. If you can send messages back in time, then someone can build a robot that can accept messages from the future, and kill your parents that way^. Sending information back in time is a paradox. Period.^^

^An option available to everyone after the robot is built. Maybe this is actually enough to resolve the issues they're concerned with. I'm somewhat suspicious.

^^To be clear, I am not saying that the work is wrong or impossible, merely that their example is less than explanatory about why their theory does not have the problems of other theories.

<comment><USER3> _If you can send messages back in time, then someone can build a robot that can accept messages from the future, and kill your parents that way^. Sending information back in time is a paradox. Period_

Not quite. You're neglecting quantum mechanics.

Very roughly speaking, in quantum field theory, the probability of an event happening is a weighted sum over all the possible ways that it could happen (a path integral), and (again, speaking roughly) the options that seriously violate the various conservation laws tend to have negligible contributions. Presumably the path integral formulation would still hold up even with closed timelike curves (time travel curves).

An inconsistent state, like one where you kill off your own parents, would probably exhibit all sorts of self interference that would make its contribution to the path integral very small, whereas the consistent states would be much better represented, and much more likely to happen. Weird "violations" of physics could quite easily present themselves as the most probable outcomes, especially if the alternative was an inconsistent outcome.

A good way to think about this is in terms of waves on a string, or the "wave" of an electron in orbit around a nucleus - the only vibration frequencies that "survive" are the ones that reinforce themselves, and the rest get cancelled out by interference (in the electron case, because they don't "match up" when they meet themselves after an orbit). If you think of the state of the universe as the electron, and the orbit as a loop through the closed timelike curve, then it's easy enough to imagine quantum mechanics doing all the hard work for us, and making sure that only consistent outcomes are reinforced, while all the other ones are destroyed by interference.

<comment><USER3> I should point out, though, the fact that it's theoretically conceivable that the universe could support time travel doesn't necessarily mean that it does, and I suspect most physicists think it's highly unlikely.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Here's the article that I assume this is referring to: <http://arxiv.org/abs/1103.1373>

I hate judging based on stupid journalist writeups of stuff like this, so I'll actually look through the article, for once.

The first part of the abstract: "We construct a simple class of compactified five-dimensional metrics which admits closed timelike curves (CTCs), and derive the resulting CTCs as analytic solutions to the geodesic equations of motion. The associated Einstein tensor satisfies the null, weak, strong and dominant energy conditions; in particular, no negative-energy "tachyonic" matter is required."

Translated for the layman: "We completely arbitrarily and quite deliberately construct a geometry that allows normal particles to time travel. It turns out that under this geometry, if a particle time travels, it doesn't have to be abnormal."

Let's just say I'm not impressed so far...we'll see how the rest of the article goes...

<comment><USER3> Ok, so I gave this a really quick read-through, and as usual the article _way_ overstates what's been done.

I'll try to put this briefly, without too much technical detail.

General relativity permits (and we've always known this) solutions that involve closed timelike curves (CTCs). Usually, when we look into these solutions in detail, we find that they require strange sorts of matter to sustain themselves, or that they're unstable. Hawking proposed that the universe in some way bans any geometry that would allow these solutions.

The authors here claim that by adding a fifth dimension that's curled up like a circle, and adding a specific sort of curvature to it (the metric contains a periodic cross term between the usual time dimension and the curled dimension), you can get CTCs that are geodesics (i.e. paths that particles will take with no forces on them), and you don't get weird energy conditions or anything like that.

Then they go on about the potential consequences _if_ the universe is actually curved up like this, and so on, but don't offer any particularly compelling reason to believe that it is.

So basically, they claim to have shown that it's possible for the universe to be like this, and that no condition we currently know of prohibits it.

Meh. Could be, if we assume that they're right - it's always, of course, possible that there's some other problem with their solution that wouldn't be covered by the usual energy conditions, I'm not sure, I've been out of the GR circuit for a while so I don't know what people currently consider to be the most reasonable set of constraints that the Real World follows. But even if they're right, there are plenty of solutions to Einstein's equations that _could_ have happened and don't, so there's nothing too revolutionary here, and mentioning a whole lotta shit about branes and the Higgs boson doesn't change that.

This is still quite useful theoretical physics to do, mind you, but it's nowhere near as important as the article makes it out to be.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Maybe in this context it would be useful to reflect about _time_.

Our life is a continuous concatenating of present moments. And every present moment is new. But where do they come from? Nobody knows.

I see time as a continuous gift from Someone outside of our physical Universe. No other explanation is logically possible, because any explanation would come from _inside_ our Universe -- but fresh new present moments can't be located _inside_ , otherwise they would not be _new_.

<comment><USER5> I'm not sure if your post is meant to be read as philosophical/theological or as your actual interpretation of the way time exists in our universe.

If it's the latter, you might find sections of RobotRollCall's first comment in this reddit discussion enlightening: [http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/fjwkh/why_exactl...](http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/fjwkh/why_exactly_can_nothing_go_faster_than_the_speed/)

If it's the former, well, I guess you're probably right. Nobody knows. At least, nobody thinking about it in a purely philosophical/theological context.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> An "instance in time" is simply the state of all energy at any one moment. I say "all energy" because our reality is comprised of 1) energy in many different forms and 2) space - the container of the energy.

To travel back in time would be to reverse the course of all energy - from the perspective of a segment of the energy. Given the total amount of energy in our reality - that's not very likely.

</comment><comment><USER7> This is just silly. If time travel were possible, it would have been invented already in the future and our world would be a very different place.

<comment><USER8> What about limited forms of time travel such as the one in the film Primer - where they have a device that does indeed allow travel through time but only back to the point where it was turned on and only at the normal rate (i.e. it takes an hour subjectively to go back an hour in time).

<comment><USER3> In the article under discussion, this is not what the authors are talking about: they're literally proposing a model under which every time you traverse the extra spatial dimension, you end up at an earlier point in time. So the reach of that communication would be, in theory, unlimited.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Very interesting but its bad speculation to say we can send any type of message this way. Messages sent to the past have already been received. So unless scientists have been getting messages from their future experiments...

</comment><comment><USER10> How does someone measure that a particle has been sent to the past?

<comment><USER11> You build a mechanism now that sends a particle to the future upon receipt of a particle from the future, then later on you send a particle back in time to that mechanism.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Theoretically, traveling forward in time has already been figured out. Its just a matter of traveling REALLY fast. Traveling backwards seems to be the biggest issue...

</comment><comment><USER13> I have come from the future to tell you that time travel is not possible.

</comment><comment><USER14> Why do people bother researching into time travel? Even if it's possible, it's potentially a massively dangerous act.

Nobody should have the power to alter events outside of the present in any way, shape or form. Period.

<comment><USER15> > events outside of the present

I hate to break this to you, but there's no such thing that you can describe as simply as "the present". Since we're talking about time travel here, it's important to remember that relativity is real, and that every single atom in your body exists at a different "present".

Our GPS satellites are time travellers. Their distance away from Earth is so great that we must compensate for their different perception of time, or our reported locations would be way off.

You should not be so absolutist in your views, especially when you don't have an accurate understanding of time.

I also take issue with you suggesting that nothing dangerous should be "bothered" with in research. Look where the Manhattan project got us: We have safe nuclear reactors all over the planet, we have sent a few spaceships _outside the solar system_ (Voyager 1 and 2, for example) that run on nuclear reactors. We know that nuclear research presents great danger, but the rewards are so huge it's worth it.

All knowledge is worth some danger, especially the truly incredible knowledge like finding out that our understanding of physics is incorrect, or building spaceships that leave the solar system.

<comment><USER16> You laid it out pretty clearly, but one detail ought to be corrected -- Voyagers etc. use Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators rather than reactors.

The difference is, there is no chain reaction in RTGs; the natural spontaneous fission is relied on. The construction (lack of neutron moderator) prevents chain reaction for safety reasons -- no chance of runaway reaction. On the other hand, it means the thermal output cannot be regulated at all, and drops steadily in parallel to the half-decay time.

The RTGs are so safe they even used miniature ones in some heart pacemakers implanted years ago; they are still going [1].

\--

[1] [http://duckduckgo.com/?q=nuclear+pacemaker&v=](http://duckduckgo.com/?q=nuclear+pacemaker&v=)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> The faster you travel, the faster time goes relative to things stationary to you it could be possible that some particles are spinning off at some multiple of the speed of light, and is aging much faster than we are, and having spent millions of years existing in the space next to the collision, evaporates or flips into another place by chance.

</comment><comment><USER18> No.</comment>


NYC adds 200 more data sets to Open Data. - <AUTHOR> https://nycopendata.socrata.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> Here's the news report I heard this morning: [http://www.wnyc.org/story/nyc- releases-more-data-sets-update...](http://www.wnyc.org/story/nyc-releases- more-data-sets-updates-website/)

Figured linking to the actual Open Data website was more useful...couldn't find a press release from them, though.</comment>


Three Strange Definitions of Computer Programming from Edsger Dijkstra - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzUuCwyk5DA&feature=player_embedded# <comment><USER2> Is there a transcript somewhere? A quick search doesn't yield anything.

EDIT: I did watch the video. It defines programming as "patterns of energy that affect the world", "The next step in evolution" and stuff from the "mind of the universe" with very little content beyond that. Absolutely zero relation to the title. No connection to Dijkstra.

</comment><comment><USER3> The pace is a bit too fast but the talk is interesting. Makes me want to read his (upcoming) book.</comment>