Going back to normal: how Iceland has dealt with the coronavirus - <AUTHOR> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/we-returned-normal/613780/ <comment><USER2> Every time I read an article about Iceland I feel the need to remind people that it's a country that is smaller than most medium sized cities.

You don't see articles written about how Aurora, Colorado dealt with covid, despite the fact that they are the same size.

Things that work for small, homogenous systems rarely work 1:1 on large, heterogenous scales.

<comment><USER3> We know because the most common comment on anything done by any non-American place that is superior to an American place is to remind us that the achieving place is: more diverse, less diverse, larger, smaller, denser, sparser, more homogeneous, more heterogeneous, or whatever.

Fortunately, the reason I love America (the real culture of aggressive exploitation of gaps and inefficiencies) is alive and well in the real world as much as the culture of excuse-making is alive on the Internet.

In time, I wonder if Americans will split into categories of low-agency online commenters who believe that the greatest factors are environmental and high- agency real-life operatives who believe the greatest factors are things they can control.

<comment><USER2> This is an absurdly loaded response. I never said anything about America being great. I live in London. I was just making a point for a largely American readership which has a tendency to presume the rest of the world is far better (as you do) without having actually experienced anything else but the US.

There are many small cities in the US fairing very well, just as there are here in the UK. But you'd never read about them because they aren't sovereign nations.

Sweden is a great example of this. Typically held up by Americans as some sort of utopia, until they became the poster child for cavalier covid handling. Now people just move on and pick some other new comparison.

<comment><USER3> I've lived in London, Mumbai, San Francisco, and many American cities.

Your original comment is nothing more than the standard "Correlation is not causation" comment of these stories. It's exceedingly low information content and ever-present.

<comment><USER2> I can't imagine what this implies then about a comment pointing out how common such comments are. Negative value?

<comment><USER3> Possibly. I'm trying to get you to stop doing this, however. One can hope that we can talk without repeating endless cliches. If it doesn't work, then we've all paid the cost and gained nothing. If it works, I've paid the cost this time and we never have to pay it in the future.

Alternatively, I'm working with a friend on a way for me to browse HN without encountering these.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Interesting story about the one day test, with an incubation time of two weeks how big are the chances that if contracted on the plane that would show up in a test done the same day?

<comment><USER5> > with an incubation time of two weeks

Can we stop perpetuating this myth? 14 days is when 99.5% of the people show symptoms. The _median_ , which is far more important, is between 2 to 4 days.

<comment><USER4> Only it isn't a myth.

"The typical incubation period for COVID‑19 is five or six days, but it can range from one to fourteen days with approximately ten percent of cases taking longer."

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus_disease_2019](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus_disease_2019)

I could have been more correct by writing 'up to', but if 10% of the cases take longer than 14 days then 99.5% within 14 days should be 90%.

Playing it safe with the incubation time around international arrivals is what has led to authorities the world over adopting the 14 day quarantine.

<comment><USER5> I've looked up some papers on the maximum incubation period (by no means a comprehensive search):

\- [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32594928/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32594928/) (14 days in 99.5)

\- [https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/doi/10.1093/ije/dyaa106...](https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/doi/10.1093/ije/dyaa106/5864951#205111148) (this one says 95% within 14 days)

\- [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7302302/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7302302/) (preprint, says median is 5.35 days, and says the data support the 14 day intervention policy but gives no data about why so)

Most of the studies are with "old" outbreaks so likely more data is needed. Yet the median is still around 2-6 days.

> Playing it safe with the incubation time

That is, applying the precautionary principle. Not very scientific, but understandable (although I don't agree with it). Personally, now that we're well into the epidemic, I'd expect a little more rigor, though.

<comment><USER4> Well, given the cost associated with dealing with outbreaks it would make sense to play it safe, precautions have a cost near zero and an outbreak has a fairly large cost especially if not detected soon enough.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


yc news is one line of coding   - <AUTHOR>

<comment><USER2> So give it to us - What is the line?

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Ok. I have a question. I am not a coder, but aren't digg, yc news, reddit all using a repeated statement as easy as Select count (story_votes)/ story_age(which is sysdate-date_added) "alias" from table stories order by alias desc

<comment><USER3> Yes! Also, databases are just a set of big arrays, the internet passes on packets where packet_sent = packet_received and code is just self evaluating data. The devil is in the implementation details (technical and otherwise).</comment></comment>


Flash 3D Engine that implements OpenGL - <AUTHOR> http://www.yogurtistan.com/demo/OdaDemo/OdaDemo.php <comment><USER2> Very impressive, I'm always impressed by people pushing the limits of what can be done. However, I did find that the extra CPU required to make this work is a little bit of a concern. Nonetheless, very well done!

</comment><comment><USER3> This is totally unimpressive. You could totally do this with canvas and HTML5. In just 4-5 short years WebGL will be implemented in all browsers, so flash is totally useless here. And it uses like 50% of my CPU, which is stupid. Flash is stupid. What's the point of using flash, just because it let's you do things. Adobe development tools are terrible. CSS is awesome! Stop using flash! You're just locking yourself into a closed platform! You should develop for the iPad instead!

Edit: Yes, I'm being sarcastic. Every single submission that shows off something done in flash has a bunch ridiculous posts claiming you can do the same in HTML5. I thought I'd save them the trouble.

<comment><USER4> I think you wanted to be sarcastic, but I can't understand why. That's probably the reason you have been downvoted.

Anyway. Modern browsers with canvas, svg, webgl etc. are trying to develop what I think is essentially poor man's virtual machine. It's basically concept that Java Applets and Flash pioneered long ago. Except they didn't get implementation exactly right. This whole "Flash sux. HTML5 rox" hype is very short-sighted. Current implementations (except video) are slower than Flash (esp. on Windows) if even existent. And what do you think will happen in few years? If we're lucky we might have fast and reliable implementation of a decade old idea. The fact is that innovation doesn't come from standard bodies. In few years, we'll face this same exact situation, when attempting to use some new technology in our webapps, might it be 3D screens or thought- controlling or speech recognition, yet again to face lack of API or its 3 different implementations.

So what new does HTML5 bring to the table? Just recycling the same old idea, hoping to get it right this time.

I hope we'll have a decent and fast open implementation of Flash, or maybe Silverlight will get better traction, so that we'll be ready when everybody realize that this was just silly.

<comment><USER3> Dude, that's exactly my point. I'm saying the anti-flash hysteria is foolish.

<comment><USER4> See, the only reason I noticed it was because of this "4-5 short years." It's just Poe's law applied.

<comment><USER3> Yeah, in retrospect I should have just kept my mouth shut. By the way the virtual machine analogy is really cool - I hadn't thought of it that way before.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Is there any other information about this engine? Yogurtistan looks something like a Habbo Hotel or Second Life game.

Are they planning on releasing this engine to others? I'm asking because I'd really like to use it to make a WebGL bridge for browsers that are failing to implement it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Please free to contact me. email@example.com

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Interesting, but unusable on my Macbook at around 1 FPS. I'm hoping WebGL + V8 Javascript is successful in bringing 3d innovation to the web.

</comment><comment><USER7> I don't get it. Does it implements a software 3D engine, or emulate OpenGL API, or call HW OpenGL directly in Flash?

<comment><USER4> It _implements_ OpenGL API. That means that you can develop for that particular API that you probably know from elsewhere. Current implementation seams to be done in software, but it may well be hardware accelerated when/if Flash will get such a capability and then you could benefit from it and any other optimizations without having to modify your program in any way.</comment></comment>


Standing Desks – Save your back, change your life - <AUTHOR> http://getthinktank.com/2015/06/19/standing-desks/ <comment><USER2> Thanks for the nice post. I'm already a convert. I was suffering from some neck pain issues, which have gone away. In fact I'm kinda the "standing desk guy" at my workplace.

Here's the remaining problem. I work in an open-plan office area, I've got a desk that can be raised and lowered. But my desk is next to a hallway with a lot of traffic.

When I'm standing to work, I'm face to face with a colleague who is very curious about what I do, and likes to get into conversations. And I think that because I'm standing up, everybody who walks buy thinks that I am the receptionist for my entire work group: "Is Bill here today? Do you know if Steve went to his meeting? When does Chris usually come in?"

And when someone comes to ask me a legitimate question, all of my colleagues feel free to join the discussion, sometimes answering my question -- wrong -- before I can get a word in edgewise.

These are more open-office issues than standing-desk issues, but I'm just offering a warning that y'all in open plan offices may have some additional issues to contend with when you switch to a standing desk.

Style-wise, I'd love to have one of those gray metal foreman's desks that they had in old the fashioned factories.

<comment><USER3> Does your office culture respect headphones as a request to not be interrupted? Hunting earmuffs are useful if you don't want to actually listen to music. I've used [http://smile.amazon.com/3M-Peltor-H10A-Optime- Earmuff/dp/B00...](http://smile.amazon.com/3M-Peltor-H10A-Optime- Earmuff/dp/B00009LI4K) off and on for almost 3.5 years and they're comfortable for hours at a time and block most noise very effectively.

<comment><USER2> Right now my office culture respects pretty much nothing. Mine is the second work group to have an open plan, ever. The open plan was chosen for us because Collaboration [1]. So, we are the pioneers. My boss is sympathetic about this, but we are both treading the political waters carefully. When the entourage of managers brings an Executive through the facility on the obligatory inspection tour, they always come down my hallway and are shown the Open Collaboration Area. It has been declared to be a success, by default.

Don't get me wrong, I'm quite happy about my job, and have places where I can go when I need to think. I use my "office" as a lab.

[1] The open plan seems to work for some kinds of collaboration and not other kinds. It's great for social interaction, brainstorming, and quickly getting help. I think it's helped the newer employees come up to speed and develop internal networks more quickly.

It doesn't work for more substantive collaboration, especially crossing multiple departments and work sites, because many kinds of discussions can't be conducted in front of an audience.

Chatting with managers, I've noticed a strong misconception, that manager work needs private offices, and engineer work doesn't.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> My current favoured solution:

1\. Take any desk

2\. Put an Ergotron WorkFit T on it.

It's this: [http://www.ergotron.com/ProductsDetails/tabid/65/PRDID/915/l...](http://www.ergotron.com/ProductsDetails/tabid/65/PRDID/915/language/en- GB/Default.aspx)

The neat things about it: it raises straight up and down, it's cheap, it fits any standard desk, it accounts for keyboard, it's highly stable.

It just works, and it's so cheap that it's the go-to solution.

<comment><USER5> Is ~$400 cheap? I agree it looks like a well-thought-out solution.

<comment><USER4> When the article's 2nd option is an ugly hack and comes out as over $400, and you probably already have a desk and this works better and looks better... I'd say it was a damn good price.

<comment><AUTHOR> From my research $400 is a very good price. This isn't mobile from room to room like the cart is. Everything has it's tradeoffs...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I it works for you, fine, but I think the standing desk is more of a trendy/cool thing:

[http://www.fitdeskjockey.com/7-reasons-why-you-dont-want- a-s...](http://www.fitdeskjockey.com/7-reasons-why-you-dont-want-a-standing- workstation)

<comment><USER7> Agreed. My doctor said to me that a lot of people raving about standing desks in their 20s will have serious regrets about them in their 50s. He also said that being seated but moving around for a few minutes every hour was fine, which is a similar point to that made in the article - standing still for an hour is just as inactive as sitting still for an hour.

<comment><USER8> > standing still for an hour is just as inactive as sitting still for an hour.

That's not true. Everything I have read about it says that standing burns more calories. I notice that I shift my weight and move my legs, etc, when I am standing. It's marginal, but there is definitely a difference.

<comment><USER7> I'm no health expert, so take what I say with a pinch of (low-sodium) salt. However, it does seem to me that the amount of calories you burn standing up for a few hours is not going to make much difference to your health.

<comment><USER8> I've had less back pain since I started standing at work, and I've heard many similar stories.

You can also "walk in place" to get the heart rate up. Good luck doing that in a chair.

<comment><AUTHOR> Lots of swaying helps keep everything loose as well as keeping focused on using the leg muscles to support yourself instead of relaxing and letting the cartilage do all the work which is the only real concern I've come across for a standing desk.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Here's a prior HN discussion on affordable standing desks that I have in my notes:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8552613](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8552613)

I question his choice of keyboards. Most keyboards use cheap rubber dome switches and not mechanical ones. People will spend a lot of money on a good keyboard like this Kickstarter project:

[https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/keyboardio/the- model-01...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/keyboardio/the-model-01-an- heirloom-grade-keyboard-for-seriou)

...or build their own like an ErgoDox:

[http://www.ergodox.org](http://www.ergodox.org)

This StackOverFlow sister site question illustrates several mechanical switches: [http://superuser.com/questions/366221/differences-between- ch...](http://superuser.com/questions/366221/differences-between-cherry- mechanical-keyboard-switches)

<comment><USER10> The problem is there's no good ergo layouts with mechanical switches. Something like the MS Ergo 4000 or Sculpt, with Cherry MXes.

Closest I've found is the Matias Ergo Pro[1], but it has several inexplicably bad design decisions. Dedicated Copy paste undo buttons, that just send ctrl-z,x,c,v. Awkward positioning of Ctrl and Escape for no reason. Terrible crappy little arrow keys. Really weird shit like having a USB hub, then putting the port on the inside with no space to plug things in. After using it for a month, I'm still often making mistakes and will probably go back to the MS Sculpt, which at least has scissor switches instead of the terrible domes.

It's like every keyboard designer to do ergo has had a stroke and intentionally messes stuff up. Kinesis is stuck in the 90s with their huge success and terrible look (and again, weird layout). The Keyboardio is probably the least offensive, as long as the modifier key system is smooth. It's stupid that in 2015 we still don't have great keyboards. The stackoverflow guy's CODE keyboard even focused on backlights. Who the hell is spending $100+ on keyboards and can't touch type? Strange market I suppose.

1: [http://matias.ca/ergopro/pc/](http://matias.ca/ergopro/pc/)

<comment><USER11> Have you tried the Kinesis Advantage? For typing, I haven't had a better experience.

<comment><USER10> I have not. The design and size put me off. Plus I really want to avoid a different key layout, as it raises my error rate (and hand stress). This is important because I move about and sometimes use a laptop keyboard.

But maybe I'll have to give it a shot. I just don't see what's so hard about taking a normal ergo keyboard and making it with proper switches.

<comment><USER11> If you need to be mobile then it may not be a great choice; it's pretty cumbersome. I've been looking at the Matias Ergo Pro which looks like a better choice for someone on the go. However, I think the layout is just something that requires a bit of getting used to; after about a month I got really used to it and switching back and forth has gotten easier with use of both it and a standard keyboard.

Additionally, not sure if it matters to you, but it is terrible for gaming.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I appreciate the sentiment of this blog post, but wow, those are some seriously ugly creations to have to look at all day.

<comment><AUTHOR> I need to update the pictures of the IKEA desk and cart as they don't look too bad. The mobile desk on the other hand is not all that pretty but it's a work in progress and should get better over time... "Functional first, sexy second!" I'll suffer an ugly desk that allows me to fly anywhere on the planet and work comfortably enough.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> We do an open source one you can make yourself [https://www.opendesk.cc/lean/standing- desk](https://www.opendesk.cc/lean/standing-desk)

<comment><USER14> Still wanting to see a design for a height adjustable sit/standing desk.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6234588](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6234588)

<comment><USER13> The standing desk is sit / stand height adjustable.

It is quite heavy, realistically taking two people to adjust, so you wouldn't normally adjust it too often but it has three heights: standing, bar and sitting, as outlined in the description.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I've got a sort of wacky treadmill desk setup in my basement. Got a cheap treadmill off of Craigslist for like $200, spent maybe $15 on a simple shelf board and a piece of foam I cut up to get the shelf at the right height, and I got the Microsoft Sculpt Ergonomic Keyboard and Logitech M570 trackball mouse, both are amazing.

I don't walk constantly, but it's a fantastic setup.

<comment><USER16> Pretty much exactly what I did, $25 treadmill at a yard sale, lay a board across the arms for a "desk", have a shelf mounted on the wall above the treadmill console for my monitor and hook the laptop up to a wireless keyboard/mouse set.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Standing Desks—replace one set of health problems with a different set.

<comment><USER18> Can you elaborate on this? I'm debating whether or not I should get one.

<comment><USER19> Sit-stand desk is probably the best with the information we currently have.

[http://healthland.time.com/2011/04/13/the-dangers-of- sitting...](http://healthland.time.com/2011/04/13/the-dangers-of-sitting-at- work%E2%80%94and-standing/) [http://vuir.vu.edu.au/21403/1/Van_Uffelen_Occupational_sitti...](http://vuir.vu.edu.au/21403/1/Van_Uffelen_Occupational_sitting_and_health_risks_Am_J_Prev_Med.pdf)

Like everything in life, moderation is the key. If you are getting up and down from your desk regularly anyway then the health benefits wouldn't be very large. Standing all day isn't particularly good for you either.

I believe the science is still out on this. My main issue with the current studies is that the occupations are different. For instance, what is the difference in stress between a GP and an accountant? As far as I'm aware, there haven't been any studies that compare mortality that control for the 'same occupation'. The studies thus-far have only shown that people who have occupations that require standing tend to have lower all-cause mortality than those whose occupations usually involve sitting. If there is such a study then I'm interested in reading it.

<comment><USER20> "I believe the science is still out on this."

As near as I can tell, the science verges on non-existant... there's a few studies that sample a smidge of the space, but nowhere near enough to draw very interesting conclusions.

Standing desks seem to help, at least in the short term, but the question is, _why_? If, for instance, they help because the people in the study are, well, average Americans, and the standing desks help develop core muscle strength, yes, that will improve their lives. But if it is about that, then you could probably do much better with much less effort by directly performing exercises that strengthen your core, without incurring the risk of knee damage from a standing desk. And of course if standing is good for some other reason, that won't help the problems at all. As near as I can tell, science has nothing to say about this particular rather simple question yet. We have roughly one point in the relevant space and a whole bunch of people drawing a lot of lines through it very excitedly based on biases and preconceived notions, but nowhere near enough data. Or, basically, business as usual in the world of health and fitness. (Sadly.)

Personally I focus on strength training directly and leave the standing desk issue aside. YMMV. (Which I mean seriously. Like it or not, you have to put your chips down based on what you know now, not the science of 2060.) Let's all get together and compare notes in 30 years.

<comment><AUTHOR> Great comment, personally I do rock climbing and Ashtanga yoga for my core strengthening and I agree that you should work on improved overall strength. A big win on the standing desk is the allowance of high amounts of movement (especially when very focused on the screen). Things like the SI joints and the sacrum which get zero movement from sitting. Lots of swaying helps keep everything loose as well as keeping focused on using the leg muscles to support yourself instead of relaxing and letting the cartilage do all the work.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Tried standing desk for a while, imo something that should also be done is film yourself standing for a period of time so you can tell if your standing posture is correct; if you're standing the wrong way then it's pretty much useless

</comment><comment><USER22> Good article. I just submitted a similar one: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9873773](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9873773) . I use a GeekDesk: [http://jakeseliger.com/2015/01/24/geekdesk-max-sit-stand- des...](http://jakeseliger.com/2015/01/24/geekdesk-max-sit-stand-desk-review- two-years-with-a-motorized-desk/) and wouldn't go back to a normal desk if I could at all avoid it.

</comment><comment><USER23> I use the now discontinued Ikea Fjus shelf unit ([https://samnangp.wordpress.com/2009/11/28/ikea-shelf- project...](https://samnangp.wordpress.com/2009/11/28/ikea-shelf-project-3/;) now available as a Gorm, Hejne or Ivar, all of which have one less shelf) which I have adjusted. One shelf is my external keyboard tray, another shelf is my macbook support, at eye level. $30 standing desk.

</comment><comment><USER24> I've found if you work from home getting a dog does wonders.

I no longer can sit for any major length of time since he wants to go out and play at least every hour during the day. It's amazing how much better things got all around both mentally and physically taking those 'dog breaks'.

</comment><comment><USER25> What about the feet? You'll start having problems associated with long standing hours[1]?

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long- term_complications_of_sta...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long- term_complications_of_standing)

</comment><comment><USER26> I put one in at home, and work from home more now. The one thing that isn't the standing desk that makes it work, that is also mentioned in the article, is a wireless headset. Without it, that desk would be a total pain in the ass to work at.

</comment><comment><USER27> I've been using this one in the office for some time and it's really comfortable and visually pleasing as well: [http://biurkobiurko.com/](http://biurkobiurko.com/)

<comment><USER28> these look pretty nice.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Dang - I spent nearly $1000 on mine UpliftDesk. This could've saved me a ton. Beauty is if you pack your bags and work remote from some other geography you can take this sucker with you - amazing!

</comment><comment><USER30> There is one question though, what about varicose veins forming in legs due to prolonged standing?

<comment><AUTHOR> Lots of swaying and occasionally stepping back and fourth a few times is important and will keep the blood moving which combats things like varicose veins. There is no substitute for taking breaks and getting a good walk in...

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Really appreciate the level of detail of this blog post. Thank you!</comment>


Grubwithus (YC W11) Brings Strangers Together Over Social Meals - <AUTHOR> http://mashable.com/2011/01/26/grubwithus/

<comment><USER2> I'm sure you've thought of this, but fwiw: you should do this for big corporations. I thought of something like this as a tool for bigcos and large companies, where on my experience people tend to have lunch with the same small click, and not having particularly fun. If they could have lunch with a random group of colleagues from different parts of the company say once a week to start with, I think that would really spark new ideas and improve any company.

<comment><USER3> Thanks!!!

We are currently rolling out companies through our Grubwithus Groups, whereby companies can have meals around topics like "team building," "strategy,""dept A meets dept B," etc. Company members will join the Group and will get notified when there are meals for them to reserve.

We are hoping to roll out lunches in the near future and like you said, it would be awesome to have fun company lunches to meet other colleagues.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> What a neat idea! Having food together is the best way to socialize anyway, time flies and you have something to do, no awkward silences :)

Maybe this is something to market to the airbnb userbase?

Serving food to strangers for a fee is bound to raise some eyebrows though, this time not from jealous hotel operators but from the people that lord over food safety and cleanliness in commercial settings, especially if you also serve alcohol.

<comment><USER5> Yeah, though "underground restaurants" have been steadily growing in popularity nonetheless. A British example: [http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/feb/10/undergrou...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/feb/10/underground- restaurants-london)

I also watched a Jamie Oliver documentary series about food in the US and he managed to wangle his way into similar places in a few US cities (mostly oriented around Mexican food).

<comment><USER4> When you advertise online using a public service it's not very underground any more.

<comment><USER6> I don't agree with that, a lot of underground bands and artists use online only advertisement like last.fm and deviantart.com and still are underground.

It's just about the way you market it... you can narrowcast your marketing to only the people you wanna hit, so you keep the underground feeling but get more customers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> We're hosting a bunch of grubwithus dinners in the Bay Area with YC alumni for women interested in learning more about startups: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2144852>

<comment><USER8> Either these guys are confused or they missed the notice: [http://www.grubwith.us/restaurants/la-briciola-san- francisco...](http://www.grubwith.us/restaurants/la-briciola-san- francisco/meals/77#)

<comment><USER9> Actually it's an opportunity for women who want to get into startups to talk to YC founders - most of whom happen to be men.

<comment><USER10> I wonder if there's such a thing as startup groupies. /joke

<comment><USER11> I was at some YC parties with some girls who really seemed like groupies (from a distance, I didn't actually talk to them).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I just wanted to say thanks for not demanding permission to post to my wall when I linked my facebook account.

<comment><USER3> haha yea we hate that ourselves

<comment><USER13> Also for not having the "access my data at any time" permission which every app seems to want to do these days

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I tried this a few weeks ago in Chicago and it was great. One of my favorite parts is that we didn't have to worry about splitting up the bill. I'd love to set up grubwith.us's open only to my friends. Paying in advance also eliminates the flake factor.

This will probably change as I say this: but women outnumbered men 2 to 1 in the dinner I attended (8 & 4). What other social startup has an early adopter profile like that?

<comment> daniel-cussen Women were only outnumbered 2 to 1? Though that's not completely successful, that's pretty good.

<comment><USER15> Other way around.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Met the Grubwithus guys at the last HN Chicago meetup and they impressed the heck out of me as guys who enjoy and have experience running businesses. Best of luck to them!

<comment><USER6> Offtopic - I envy you guys so much for having HN meetups, I think I am the only Brazilian that reads HN (very unlikely), because nobody answers me about a Brazilian one.

<comment><USER17> Are you from Rio de Janeiro? If so feel free to email me.

<comment><USER6> Nope :( I live in Campinas... Close to São Paulo

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Am I the only one here that finds the use of the term "Social" as it refers to "Social Media" to describe a social activity that is possibly the most ancient form of socialising, disconcerting?

<comment><USER19> No, you aren't. Social is just a buzzword meaning "meeting strangers by means of web technology."

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> <https://www.grubwith.us/signup>

The "What city will you be eating in" lists S.F. after "other" -- straight alphabetization? Struck me as rather odd.

<comment><USER3> Thanks!!!! We will change that out to put "other" last

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Out of the box it seems very speedatingesque. While amazingly fun if you have a good group, one bad guest might ruin the night for the rest of the group. If this takes off, then awesome - a new way to meet people. However I think that the grubwithus guys are going to hit quite a few social hurdles along the way.

<comment><USER22> might need a way to rate other people you dine with to address this, kind of how airbnb works

<comment><USER3> after the meal you can post comments about your dining experience with the individuals you grubbed with. these comments are listed on their profile page for others to read.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Great idea. Suggestion: for me location matters more than date so maybe add a map view?

<comment><USER3> Map view is a good suggestion. We are hoping with more volume we can release something of this sort.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Great idea in itself, but also because services that give implicit dating opportunities always win.

</comment><comment><USER25> We are building a similar site with a bit different approach, ours is a free site which encourages people to create their events at their homes or public places, also bring together communities and create a framework for small businesses, a bit like farmers markets or the like. Check us out at: <http://eatwithme.net/>

</comment><comment><USER16> Also, FWIW, the new home page is LIGHT YEARS better than the old one. Great job. Got a designer referral?

<comment><USER3> THANKS! We did it ourselves -- just great feedback from YC and our user base. We went through a ton of iterations

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> For those browsing, it's well worth the read. Their positioning as an alternative to the groupon model is very interesting. I wonder if they think they can match the same scale though, even if it's just for restaurants. Overall, great idea! I'm going to give the Chicago version a try.

</comment><comment><USER27> Commendable. Really well executed.

How about linking up with online communities.

I'm sure a lot of people on reddit would love this for no-fuss IRL meet ups. Likewise forums/ online games etc.

Well done

</comment><comment><USER28> I'm not even a very social person, but I think this is a great idea. If I'm bored sometime, I might just try it.

</comment><comment><USER29> Someone needs to build this for dating.

<comment><USER30> A few people have actually dated after meeting on Grubwithus. Job offers too. These things happen semi-serendipitously, which makes it better, because everyone goes to the meal with the context of meeting new friends, not some awkward dating context.

<comment><USER31> I agree completely. When there are preconceived expectations it can cheapen the act or make it seem less genuine. When there are no expectations or ulterior motives beyond interesting conversation, the most real and genuine things are forged. It's better when things come up natural in conversation.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> How are people grouped together? Are people able to screen the other people that they'll be eating with? Maybe that would take some of the serendipity out of it, but it could also help curb some of the superficial conversation that occurs upon meeting someone for the first time.

<comment><USER3> users can check out each others profiles and decide if they want to eat with them or not

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Love their 404: <http://www.grubwith.us/oops>

<comment><USER3> Except that means something went wrong on your end!

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> love this idea. groupon+eventbrite+opentable of sorts so i hope they clarify on the checkout that tax + tip aren't included. I would have loved to have had something like this in Miami, as we used to organize geek dinners every so often and it was ALWAYS a pain.

</comment><comment><USER35> Does the site actually check gender? Saw several female only meals with reservations from guys.

<comment><USER30> Yeah it's a little confusing. Those are actually the YC alumni that will be speaking to female founders

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> This reminds me of Rirkrit Tiravanijas work, a contemporary artist who uses the experience of a shared meal and its underlying mechanisms to create a space where strangers can connect (usually it takes place in a gallery) and form new communities.

</comment><comment><USER37> Congratulations. I am looking forward to the dinner.

</comment><comment><USER38> Awesome job Eddy and Dashin! Love what you guys are doing :)

<comment><USER3> Thanks Tim! We'll have to grub with you when we are in Chicago.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> Congrats, looks great!

</comment><comment><USER40> Nice. Rock on, guys!

</comment><comment><USER41> Looking forward to a Denver/Boulder addition. Cool idea.

</comment><comment><USER42> Goodness, I can't wait until this hits LA and SD!

<comment><USER3> The more people sign up in those spots, the quicker we will launch. Should do well in both those areas.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> Excellent idea guys. Congrats on launching.

</comment><comment><USER44> Great idea! I'm already signed up :-)

</comment><comment><USER45> great idea. i will definitely try it out when it comes to boston!

</comment><comment><USER46> very cool - looking forward to a berkeley dinner!

</comment><comment><USER47> Great idea.

</comment><comment><USER48> Every single one that I want to go is Females only. Dont you think that men would also like the opportunity to lern from YC founders?

<comment><USER3> We actually hosted some meals during the YC interviews for guys to participate in and chat with YC alum. We will look to do something like that again in the near future. Thanks for the feedback!

<comment><USER48> awesome...im looking fwd to it.</comment></comment></comment>


The Trouble with Amazon - <AUTHOR> http://asserttrue.blogspot.com.au/2012/02/trouble-with-amazon.html

<comment><USER2> _Let's be blunt: Amazon is just another department store, except they have no physical storefront. But lack of a physical storefront doesn't mean they won't suffer the fate of all the unwieldy, poorly managed department store chains that have gone before. History has a way of dealing with do-too-much retailers (and now, e-tailers)._

The author treats the fact that they don't have a physical storefront as just a _minor_ quibble. As if it wasn't the fact that Amazon _didn't_ have a physical presence, was accessible from the comfort of your own home, and had incredibly reduced labor costs, that didn't end up being the disruptive change that put Amazon on the map.

 _To survive in its present form, it badly needs to acquire an Airborne Express (except that AE has already been acquired by DHL), or maybe a railroad and a package delivery company. Ideally, it also needs to acquire a payment- processing system (a PayPal). Why not just admit the obvious? Amazon needs to acquire eBay._

This is ridiculous - what business reasons does Amazon have for acquiring these companies, saddling themselves with physical infrastructure and additional labor costs, which may only earn them marginally more income?

Why would Amazon rush to acquire a shipping company and more labor costs, when shipping companies like FedEX are trying to reduce their labor costs by shifting the burden of local delivery to the United States Postal Service? (<http://www.fedex.com/us/smartpost/>).

There are so many differences between physical retail businesses and an online retailer, that the analogy cannot account for.

There are many cases to be made for challenges that Amazon faces, but this is not one of them.

<comment><USER3> The excess computing capacity story is a myth according to Werner Vogels, Amazon's CTO, see: [http://www.quora.com/Amazon/How-and-why-did-Amazon-get- into-...](http://www.quora.com/Amazon/How-and-why-did-Amazon-get-into-the- cloud-computing-business/answer/Werner-Vogels)

<comment><USER2> Excellent - thank you for clearing this up!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> "But in patio, lawn, and garden equipment, sports equipment, kitchen and bath fixtures, and numerous other areas, they're never going to have monopoly power."

I don't get it. The author doesn't provide enough rationale for this prediction at all, other than the vague notion that Amazon's trying to do too much. (Given they've successfully move into cloud hosting services, it's hardly a stretch to suggest they can move from selling books to selling garden equipment.)

</comment><comment><USER5> _According to Amazon's 10K filing, EGM currently accounts for 60% of the business. And that's precisely where the big trouble lies._

And 40% of the business is not in EGM. Compare that with 5 years ago, when 0% was not in EGM. I call that the opposite of being stagnant. I call that lateral growth.

</comment><comment><USER6> Seriously he thinks they might make a loss on kindle fire. Of course they freaking do. I'm pretty sure they were open about why earnings were down.

Does he not realize how much freaking money they will make on the backend of that selling digital stuff like apps and ebooks and also more physical stuff I bet.

Doesn't mention anything about Amazon Prime. Is in Australia so possibly doesn't know much about it, but yeah Amazon is a beast. Consumers don't wanna search the web they want 1 click buy.

Amazons other meaty asset is all its reviews. Take any so called obscure category he mentioned and you will probably find more reviews in there than all other ecommerce sites combined.

Consumers want easy, fast, trust, peer reviews, cheap prices. Amazon does all that. Article a good reminder to get me some Amazon shares and short sell on traditional retailers.

</comment><comment><USER7> It is true that Amazon is attempting to be a one stop shop for all merchandises physical and digital. However that goal have made Amazon's web front crowded and convoluted.

If Amazon were to extend their product models to better express the "qualities" of the products, and extend their search and recommendations for products, I believe their web storefront can easily double or triple in sales.

</comment><comment><USER8> Interesting read. I hope you're wrong...

Our business wouldnt be possible without AWS, they are still innovating which is good (and often lack of innovation is another sign of a company in big trouble)

I have never found Amazon.com particularly useful, nor have i bought anything from it. My girlfriend buys books a fair bit, but also admits the library is cheaper.

</comment><comment><USER9> The author wrote, "Ideally, it also needs to acquire a payment-processing system (a PayPal)."

Why? Has he heard of payments.amazon.com? It's tiny compared to PP but also isn't hated.

</comment><comment><USER10> This guy has completely missed the point.

Shareholders like high margins. Amazon made some moves last year that depressed their margins, specifically releasing the kindle fire, which they're selling at a loss, and price-beating brick and mortar stores with gift cards over the holidays to lure away customers. These moves have nothing to do with a loss of efficiency in their EGM business, but they do produce the smaller profits we see.

What the author mistakenly sees as a loss of efficiency is actually amazon future-proofing their business. Knowing that the market would punish them for taking all this profit and reinvesting it in growth, they went all in and took all the punishment at once.

Amazon has bright days ahead.

</comment><comment><USER11> Thank you for posting this.</comment>


Ask HN: How much do you make? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> 24k€ a year in France as a C# desktop dev. I wish it was higher but I have 35 hours workweek.

</comment><comment><USER3> Enough. What/why/where?</comment>


The Palindrome debugger that almost was - <AUTHOR> http://www.jwz.org/blog/2002/12/the-palindrome-debugger-that-almost-was/

<comment><USER2> Many years later, similar functionality made it into gdb: [http://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/ReverseDebug](http://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/ReverseDebug)

</comment><comment><USER3> Or Bill Lewis' Debugging Backwards in Time [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpI8hIgOyko](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpI8hIgOyko)</comment>


Rough patch for Uber service's challenge to taxis - <AUTHOR> http://www.cnbc.com/id/101365116 <comment><USER2> It's interesting watching this, because it seems inevitable that Uber will become exactly like the service it was meant to compete with: the Taxi industry.

The whole saga has good, bad, and meh elements to all of it.

It's good that the question of auto insurance is coming up. I imagine that many of these drivers are painfully unaware that they are in serious insurance limbo. If someone's a de facto Uber employee, then yeah, Uber should pay for damages that the driver causes. It's definitely an exaggeration to say that Uber will "leave a trail of bodies in the street", but it's also unfair that the victim gets screwed here (because there's no chance in hell the driver's personal insurance will cover this).

It sucks that the odds are so stacked against them for providing (what at least used to be, I rarely use them nowadays) a good service. I remember being in SF a couple years back and trying to hail a cab for 30 minutes before getting an Uber in ~5 minutes. It was really shitty, and Uber really came through in the end. I was glad to pay the price difference.

Regardless of what happens, there's a lot of interesting ideas here that hopefully get noticed. Surge pricing's an interesting idea. Whereas taxis sacrifice reliability for relatively stable pricing, I'm glad there's a competing service that sacrifices stable pricing for reliability. It lets you make the decision about which is more important, and I'm sure we've all been in situations where getting somewhere quickly was worth the extra money.

<comment><USER3> > It's interesting watching this, because it seems inevitable that Uber will > become exactly like the service it was meant to compete with: the Taxi > industry.

It's almost as if [http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html](http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html) _also_ applies outside of software.

> The idea that new code is better than old is patently absurd. Old code has > been used. It has been tested. Lots of bugs have been found, and they've > been fixed. There's nothing wrong with it. It doesn't acquire bugs just by > sitting around on your hard drive. Au contraire, baby!

Now re-apply that to things like taxi and hotel regulations.

I'm not suggesting things are perfect, but in many cases, these laws exist for a reason.

<comment><USER4> when you change things slightly sometimes a shift in the regulations might be bigger than you expect. A lot of the taxi regulations have to do with the taximeter - as a passenger, you're have to have trust that the taximeter isn't shafting you (FWIW I don't think that lyft or uber necessarily completely solve this problem because you don't pick your route at the outset, unlike other livery services). Other parts of the taxi regulation to do with congestion caused by taxis that are cruising, which certainly seems like less of an issue for these "alt-taxis".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It's interesting how Uber's messaging has evolved to coincide with argument that they simply facilitate the connection between drivers and people who need a ride. Where they used to say "Everyone's private driver," [1] now they say "The Uber app connects you with a driver at the tap of a button." [2]

[1] Uber.com, January 2013: [http://cl.ly/image/261W1r3J1r00](http://cl.ly/image/261W1r3J1r00) [2] Uber.com, today: [http://cl.ly/image/302s342N2r3l](http://cl.ly/image/302s342N2r3l)

<comment><USER6> Their lawyers probably told them to make the change since it will help them defend against possible lawsuits arising from accidents the independent drivers who use their platform get into while driving and/or waiting for a fare.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> The experience with these older business, like cabs and hotels, seems highlight the role of legal and regulatory frameworks in encouraging or retarding innovation. Uber and Airbnb seem to be simple and elegant businesses that in part increase supply by freeing up unused resources while competing on price and service with established industries such as taxis and hotels. Now that they have made some headway people are specifically buying apartments and cars to participate.

This issue seems like Airbnb's in NYC where room/apartment renters are being required to play by the same rules as the hotel folks with respect to insurance and safety.

One thing that recently impressed me and that I would like to see happen more generally is the Attorney General's response to the challenge of banking with respect to marijuana businesses in Colorado and Washington. Banks were turning away pot shops that are legal at the state level but illegal at the Federal level. Within a few weeks of the advent of legal marijuana sales the AG's office has stepped in to say that they want to find a solution to enable marijuana merchants and banks to do business. I am impressed by the responsiveness of "the law" in this case. Such "innovation" around regulation would be welcome in other cases where innovation mediated by technology is happening at a faster rate than regulation is used to adapting.

</comment><comment><USER8> You might also want to look at Uber's DDOS attack on rival Gett[1] ; Seems like Uber is not the good guys they seemed earlier (at least to myself). This is mentioned in the last paragraph of the linked article, but is worthy of its own discussion.

[1] [http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/24/black-car-competitor- accuse...](http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/24/black-car-competitor-accuses-uber- of-shady-conduct-ddos-style-attack-uber-expresses-regret/)

<comment><USER9> Uber's entire advantage is attempting to evade regulations. They'll be ahead of the game precisely as long as that holds, and have until then to destroy the competition. Hence the culture of dirty tricks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Every time I get into an uberx the driver starts driving away while fumbling with the gps on their phone keying in my destination. I think Uber should take the "distraction" problem much more seriously.

Regardless, we all know Uber is not going anywhere. Uber is pulling $20 MM a week. However, if they don't address the potential safety liabilities more aggressively, lawsuits might end up eating a big chunk of their revenue.

</comment><comment><USER11> One thing I've been wondering about with respect to Uber;

When they were taking all that flak for surge pricing during the storm, their defense was "Raising the price increases the supply of drivers."

That's all well and good, simple supply and demand matching.

But then a week or so later, they came out with a substantial price reduction on the UberX service. So if raising the price increases the supply of drivers, what happens to the supply when lowering the price? Isn't this the cause of the constant surge pricing on UberX since the price decrease?

<comment><USER6> It depends on whether you are in a situation where demand outstrips supply (surge pricing) or supply outstrips demand (UberX).

By lowering the price, they are trying to get more people to opt for UberX vs. taxi/Lyft/etc which theoretically brings the supply/demand into equilibrium. There is potentially the effect of lowering prices so much that drivers don't find it worthwhile to pick up fares in which case you once again help get into equilibrium since now supply is closer to demand levels. If Uber wants to counter that secondary effect, they can lower the prices by reducing their own margin w/o impacting the driver's cut.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> > _' And the only people getting rich are the investors and the executives.'_

Wat. Did he expect to get rich driving people around? I don't understand this statement at all.

<comment><USER13> Its supposed to remove the taxi company cut from the equation. But Uber's confusion about tips seems to have eroded that to nothing?

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> It's unfortunate that there are so many legal issues with a seemingly very simple service. Having to worry about insurance policies and driver damages has got to be a pain. But, that's all part of the business I guess...

<comment><USER4> it's not simple at all, because unlike a web service, you are actually responsible for bodily harm that could happen to people.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I know, let's sue the dispatcher for the irresponsibility of the driver. That ought to work.

<comment><USER16> It's about informing Uber's de facto employees that they have liability and must carry appropriate insurance. Should the employee decline to take this responsibility or should Uber fail to appropriately inform their employees, those who have been hurt or killed are left with nothing.

To _ensure_ that drivers are _insured_ , Uber has responsibility.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Uber mistreats its customers, suppliers, and competitors. How can one do anything, but hope they fail?</comment>


Rapidly falling costs of battery packs for electric vehicles - <AUTHOR> http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v5/n4/full/nclimate2564.html

<comment><USER2> Does anyone know how long something like the new Tesla powerwall lasts? What happens after the useful life of the hardware, can they be recycled/fixed?

<comment><USER3> I'm not sure about the specific chemistry used in Teslas thing, but consumer grade Lithium Polymer cells are usually quoted as maintaining 80% of initial capacity after 1000 charge/discharge cycles (when using proper recharging gear - sub $10 Chinese toys often ignore charge requirements altogether and trash or set fire to lipos within a few dozen cycles). Which fit's quite well with observations of phone batteries becoming problematic after ~3 years of daily charging.

<comment><USER4> Keep in mind that phone batteries, and laptop batteries, are generally charged to the top and then often completely exhausted. This is a worst case state-of- charge scenario for battery life, and doesn't happen in car batteries etc. For example, the Chevy Volt doesn't permit its battery to be charged over 80% or discharged less than 30%. GM expects its battery to drop only 10% after 5000 cycles.

<comment><USER5> Teslas do similar on the top-end. They don't normally charge past 80%. You can override this behavior in preparation for a long trip to ensure you have extra range available, but it reverts back to the default setting automatically after a few days.

<comment><USER4> > They don't normally charge past 80%.

I thought for Tesla it's 92% for a standard charge. The Volt is extremely conservative in this regard (Chevy was first out the gate).

<comment><USER6> As Lutz says in his book "Car guys vs. bean counters", that was done to make the Leaf battery last longer. The car industry knows that 80% of trips are under 40 miles, so most of the time, that's enough range. Longer, and they cut in the gasoline engine, so there's no reason to stress the battery life.

<comment><USER4> ??? This was an entirely confused comment. (1) we are talking about SOC, not capacity, and (2) why are you talking about the Leaf?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Personally, I'm very excited about electric vehicles. There are five in my family, so we have a big vehicle. So, to move something the size of a Suburban is a necessity. The Tesla Model X looks like a possibility.

<comment><USER8> Most full-size sedans can comfortably transport five adults. Get a station wagon, and you've got plenty of cargo space too.

You don't really need a massive SUV.

<comment><USER9> Most families of 5 have a number of years where they are not seating "five adults". I drive a sedan and have two kids under 5 years old, a 5th passenger is basically out of the question. If you had 3 kids in car seats, a vehicle with a third row is seating is your only option.

<comment><USER10> I have 3 across the back seat, all in child seats. It's more possible than most people realise.

Oversized child seats are a major cause of people driving cars bigger than they need to. I'm not sure how this has happened, but you can end up needing more space to fit a child than an adult would require. I suspect it's the proliferation of region- specific child restraint requirements, which has meant manufacturers have washed their hands of the problem. The car seat manufacturers have worked out that the more a seat looks like an oversized sofa for their precious cargo, the more sales they make. I doubt that an inch extra of foam padding makes any difference in a large impact, but it feeds into anxiety of new parents.

<comment><USER9> I would basically agree except that it doesn't change the availability of smaller car seats, the small sofa chair car sest is practically a universal design, and the highest rated brands (which is largely synonymous with "convenient and well designed") are some of the worst offenders of space usage. I just transitioned one kid to a booster seat and it actually takes up an normal adult width finally.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Battery cost is only part of the problem, the bigger problem is ability to charge where potential customers live and charging times. Unlike a conventionally fueled car, or EREV, there is no oops with a five minute fix. You forget to charge and you have to wait it out.

I think a better application is instead of focusing on individual car buyers is to go for large government users of vehicles, namely the every day school bus. A neighboring county logs nearly sixty five thousand miles a day while school is in session. With nearly nine hundred routes that leaves an average near eighty miles. Considering the wasted space in the buses structure and replacement of the engine/drivetrain it certainly looks like a good option.

Regardless of price decreases its the recharge rate that needs a lot of focus.

<comment><USER3> To be fair, it's not like you can completely ignore the remaining range in your dead-dinosaur fuelled vehicle either. If you run out of gas on a freeway or backroad in the middle of nowhere, you're still gonna get annoyed at your "oops".

I'm probably a bit more aware of this than many - I ride a motorcycle with only 200 or so km (maybe 130mile) range, and take it _lot_ of places where keeping a good running tally of where the next fuel options are, and how I'm gonna get home if the next place happens to be shut.

I suspect that in under 5 years, there'll be roadside assist vehicles with big 3 phase generators on board that are capable of Tesla Supercharger kind of rates of charge.

<comment><USER12> AAA did it in 2011: [http://newsroom.aaa.com/2011/07/ev-charging- statio/](http://newsroom.aaa.com/2011/07/ev-charging-statio/)

"Level 3 charging" here means DC fast charging: 125 amps at 500 volts (depending on the vehicle)

<comment><USER3> /me pulls a technicality and claims "minus 4 years" is "less than 5 years" \- thus being proved correct.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> non paywall version?

<comment><USER14> [http://rdcu.be/cIqD](http://rdcu.be/cIqD)

<comment><USER2> Doesn't work on mobile.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do you handle images in email templates? - <AUTHOR> There doesn't seem to be a recommended way of handling images that I can see, with three options being:
1. Linked images 2. Cid images (images are attached) 3. Base64 encoded images
My gut says to stick to linked images for simplicity and ensure the image title tags are descriptive.  At work we use cid images as they seem to show up more often during testing.
Any recommendations? <comment><USER2> This is not my area of expertise, but I do know that for a reader in Gmail, the behavior is always the same: Google downloads the image and serves it to the user from their own servers (designed to beat tracking pixels).

You might find this SendGrid post [0] helpful, but probably you've seen it already.

[0] [https://sendgrid.com/blog/embedding-images-emails- facts/](https://sendgrid.com/blog/embedding-images-emails-facts/)

</comment><comment><USER3> [https://mjml.io/](https://mjml.io/) may help you with a lot of email html headaches. I suggest option 1 - linked images, worked for me.</comment>


Lack of ZFS File System Support in Snow Leopard Due to Licensing Issues? - <AUTHOR> http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/01/lack-of-zfs-file-system-support-in-snow-leopard-due-to-licensing-issues/ <comment><USER2> Apple uses DTrace. DTrace was made by Sun. DTrace is CDDL. ZFS is CDDL. ZFS is made by Sun. I don't think it was just the license.

<comment><USER3> Nice chiasmus!</comment></comment>


In the eating disorder unit - <AUTHOR> https://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2018/01/09/hannah-brown/in-the-eating-disorder-unit/ <comment><USER2> > "Some of the help and therapy I eventually received was excellent, but as > much as my recovery was supported by the NHS, it was also fuelled by my > determination never to have to rely on it again."

When I read this line, it hit home. I've been in and out of NHS treatment for years for other (not anorexia) issues. I never ever want to rely on the NHS again. They failed me so much I now avoid having to interact with anyone in the medical field. I deliberately avoid going to my GP for anything. Mental health care in the UK is so bad that you really wouldn't believe without first-hand experience. It needs to be scrapped and started again. I don't want to rant here on Hacker News too much (almost never comment) but this hit a nerve and I'm angry just thinking about the mental health care the NHS pretends to provide.

<comment><USER3> People love comparing countries for their non-mental healthcare (physiological care?), but I never seem to hear about countries that actually have good, functioning mental healthcare systems.

New Zealand has what could be described as a well-functioning (most of the time) healthcare system, if you break your arm, it's not a worry at all. But the mental healthcare system is a complete shitshow.

It's an absolute disgrace, especially considering that NZ has the highest youth suicide rate in the world.

<comment><USER4> Perhaps it has more to do with us (i.e. humans) not having a deep understanding of mental health treatment? I mean, we really don't understand the mind very well at all.

It's not just a clinical understanding either. We culturally approach mental health differently than other health. Get cancer and everybody rushes to your aid. Have anorexia and people ask questions about why we should pay for "self- inflicted" injuries (devil's advocacy couched, but still the question is posed).

Thankfully the cultural stance is changing. It wasn't long ago that the question about "self-inflicted" injuries wouldn't have even had to be couched in devil's advocacy.

<comment><USER5> I'm a clinical psychologist in the US, and it is a complete total shitshow, a combination of stigma and bigotry from outside the system, and self-inflicted nonsense from within.

People misunderstand and have trouble thinking of mental health to begin with, so you end up with general attitudes of "people just have to pull themselves up by their bootstraps" or "just get over it," not understanding that the problem is often that people lack that ability. Other times it's just sheer lack of empathy for people who have had to deal with more difficult circumstances (or even just different circumstances). And then there's the recurring idea that behavioral sciences should just be like all the other sciences, or that it's not worth paying attention to because we don't have it all figured out like basic Newtonian physics.

On the other side, within the field it's a mess too. There should be many more professional models, for example, and a lot more to offer, but territorial battles screw it over for everyone. Psychologists, for example, shoot themselves in the foot with bullshit licensing requirements for reasons I don't understand (maybe to appear more rigorous? to keep competition from entering the field?), requirements that are even more stringent than for MDs in certain ways. There's also no reason psychologists shouldn't be able to learn to prescribe--many people enter clinical doctoral programs with as much natural sciences as premeds, and leave having all sorts of neuro-genetic- chemical-physiology coursework and research experience, often more than MDs in the area of neurobehavioral sciences per se. But psychiatrists bristle at the competition, and certain segments of psychologists want to control the field with their romanticized idea of what psychology "should be," again, for reasons I don't understand.

On top of that, there's various trends in treatment that have led to screwing clients over, to put it bluntly. I can't tell you the number of times I hear colleagues (not all, but a sold number) argue that treatment should be limited for its own sake, to prevent dependency or to encourage change. Sometimes that's true, but you wouldn't say that a cancer patient in need of treatment should have their treatment stopped just to teach them a lesson. And drugs are great for some people, but not for others, and in general, the administration of those drugs has become divorced from any kind of real monitoring of peoples' situations. Add to that the fact that many people's problems derive from the collapse of societal safety nets, which also means lack of funding for mental health services, and, well, you get the point.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> To play a bit of devil's advocate here:

At what point does a socialised health service with limited resources, stop providing care for "self-inflicted" injuries?

In a busy hospital, the doctors have to triage and make priority decisions over where to apply resources and who to treat first.

Much like an alcoholic would never be at the top of a liver transplant list, at what point would an anorexic - who in this case had already been through over 30 mental health sessions - start to be denied care? At what point is it more ethical to spend those resources treating someone else, who might actually respond to treatment?

Again, just playing devil's advocate here. My personal opinion is that the NHS is critically underfunded at the moment and that should be fixed first. But I thought it worth pointing out the ethical debate over treating self-inflicted injuries in a socialised healthcare system is quite tricky. Especially considering that almost all mental health issues can fall under "self- inflicted" if you want to be callous.

<comment><USER7> I think the analogy is a bit flawed.

The whole reason they are there is the mental health issue, so denying them because it's not fixed is more like denying a person with cancer any more treatments because they haven't responded well to the first 30 treatments.

A mental health problem is no more "self inflicted" than cancer is.

It doesn't really change your ultimate question though.

<comment><USER6> Yeah, I think that the mental health part confounds the issue. When it's a chronic physical illness, it's a lot easier to give someone pills to take for the rest of their life. Whereas mental health is vaguer and potentially much more expensive.

There are plenty of cancer drugs that the NHS will refuse to prescribe due to their expense. If you want them, you'll be told to go private. If mental health is so expensive, do we say the same thing?

<comment><USER8> It's worth looking at patterns of homelessness and mass violence in the US before you take the leap. Mental illness can't really be ignored, and untreated mental illness is dangerous for the sufferer, and the commmunity.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> It's desperately under-funded:

"The hospital itself was old and seemed to be in the process of being shut down around us. Half the wards were empty, including the one opposite – a strange sight to those of us who had nearly died waiting for a bed. In winter, when it was too cold to be taken to 'the bench', we would instead be taken down another, deserted corridor, to sit for 15 minutes in a disused waiting room. When the five-bed rehabilitation house for patients leaving the inpatient unit was threatened with closure, doctors started to send patients there at a lower weight than advised, to secure its funding. Funding applications had to be made for each patient every two weeks, and I remember at least one patient being discharged suddenly and prematurely, because she had reached a weight beyond which her Primary Care Trust wouldn't pay for treatment. Others, including me, had to prove that we weren't 'chronic' cases and therefore worth funding. "

</comment><comment><USER10> > (...) the overstretched staff didn't have much time to support me, and I was > often left crying on my own. Sometimes my tears were taken as evidence of > 'non-compliance'.

This, on its own, is already outrageous. What could lead to forming this kind of attitude?

<comment><USER11> Eating disorder is often comorbid with what's called "personality disorder" (usually what's called borderline PD).

People with that label experience significant levels of stigma and discrimination from health workers, including mental health workers.

<comment><USER12> That said, it should not be underestimated what an immense strain those people are on mental health workers. I wonder how much time those institutions dedicate to debriefing their own staff, I think that would make a big difference in how the patients are treated as well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Quote: "The advice was not encouraging."

What would be encouraging to hear?

<comment><USER14> "There's another 30 hours of counseling and therapy available"

(which at ~£50/hr is presumably a lot cheaper than a stay in ICU)

<comment><USER15> This is what drives me mad.

Professional therapy that actually works and can help patients solve the underlying self-esteem issues from childhood isn't easily available to people suffering from anorexia.

More generally, I would argue that if we increased tax and gave everyone as much therapy as they need, the money would be saved by reducing sick days for businesses, reducing other healthcare costs, and increasing productivity of mental well people.

I think we should do it even if it wouldn't save that money, but intuitively it feels like it would, so it makes not doing it even crazier...

Does any country already do this? It would seem a humane and powerful way to beat other countries / lead the world (pick whatever motivates you).</comment></comment></comment>


Planimeter - <AUTHOR> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planimeter

<comment><USER2> It is not intuitive to me why this works, which is very exciting because it'll be fun when I "get it". Is there somewhere online that explains it in an intuitive way?

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't get it either. Tell you what -- I'll put something together and post to HN. (Will take a couple of weeks or so.)

<comment><USER3> It's similar in principle to the algorithm described here: [http://www.mathsisfun.com/geometry/area-irregular- polygons.h...](http://www.mathsisfun.com/geometry/area-irregular- polygons.html)

Prytz (hatchet) planimeters are more tricky and approximate in the way they work.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I used one as a civil engineer to estimate quantities of cut and fill from plans. They are quite amazing tools.</comment>


Ranges and Intervals in Swift - <AUTHOR> http://oleb.net/blog/2015/09/swift-ranges-and-intervals/ <comment><USER2> I really want to like Swift. But so much of the language feels like it was tacked on in an attempt to check off of all the admirable features of many great languages. On the surface, this is not inherently bad. But when you dig deeper into the API organization and consider the ideal implementation for many things, like functional programming, you see that the effort was often a bit shallow. For example, functional programming that copies an entire data structure every time you make a minor change or append is a real waste of the power of that paradigm. Or placing stateful actions into the same API set as FP expressions makes little semantic sense and discourages any sense of thoughtful structure to the different paradigms. When/if Swift is meaningfully open sourced and when/if the world at large improves on these things, perhaps the future of the language has promise.

<comment><USER3> >When/if Swift is meaningfully open sourced and when/if the world at large improves on these things, perhaps the future of the language has promise.

Swift should be open sourced this year[1], though it will be interesting what strategy will apple use for contributions. I mean, who will say which feature should be developed and which not? Because if Apple will continue to do it their way, will open sourcing swift will change anything?

[1] [https://developer.apple.com/swift/blog/?id=29](https://developer.apple.com/swift/blog/?id=29)

<comment><USER2> I've come to respect highly the "crowd-sourced development" phenomenon of a massive worldwide open community all working to improve a single code base. I have seen the resounding effects of this in other languages. Apple would be silly to assume that its vast wealth could allow an internal-only Swift evolution to compete with the progress of masses. I hope they do open it up for PRs from anyone (with no doubt a simple contributor agreement in place), and a good well-oiled machinery for seriously looking at all community code.

That said, some things are fundamental to the language and its architecture, and those are the things Apple is developing internally before its open- sourcing. So it is possible the most important stuff will not be getting help from the masses.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Ok can I just say that having your blog post downloadable as an XCode playground is _awesome_?

<comment><USER5> Thank you!</comment></comment>


Hollywood Hotels Like Sunset Tower Are Hub for Deal Making - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/04/business/04hotel.html?_r=1 <comment><USER2> This article is relevant here, I think...

<http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html></comment>


Apocalypse is 30 seconds closer, say Doomsday Clock scientists - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.com/news/world-38760792 <comment><USER2> Dupe: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13493396](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13493396)</comment>


Hacker School Soylent - <AUTHOR> http://www.cookingfor20.com/2013/06/18/hacker-school-soylent-recipe/ <comment><USER2> This mix is completely devoid of BCAAs. Soy protein has no branch chain amino acids - meaning it completely lacks THE fundamental building blocks used in building all bodily tissue.

Look more into different kinds of protein. You might also want to do this for your carbs. Suggesting that brown sugar is a good way to "top up" our carb load is terrible advice - all cane sugars are simple sugars, meaning they jack up your glycemic index and then crash you after. Complex carbs have a completely different rate and method of metabolism.

Please don't offer this as an option to people until you've done some substantial (read minimal) research. At least Rhinehart's project is presented as an experiment and not a hobby-kit. Theres an ethical responsibility involved in projects like this that the OP is blatently neglecting.

<comment><USER3> Soy is a complete protein. It contains all three BCAAs: leucine, isoleucine, and valine.

<comment><USER2> Yeah, I tried to edit the "completely" out of my phrasing almost immediately but comments had already been left so I couldn't.

To clarify, soy is a complete protein. What I meant was that the levels of BCAAs in soy are relatively low - especially when only taking in ~80g of total protein / day as the recipe suggests. This is why many longterm vegetarians/vegans often still have to supplement, dispite a high-soy diet. Soy protein is composed of about 18% BCAAs and is fast to metabolise, especially when isolated and diluted in liquid. Furthermore, without solid food in your stomach, certain enzymes are never released by your body's GI so metabolism is left almost entirely to your kidneys.

<comment><USER3> I'm a long term vegan and I've never had to supplement. Plus 80g is on the high end, though obviously it depends on activity level.

The CDC recommends 56g daily for males 19 and up. Out of your daily calories somewhere between 10-35% should be from protein. [http://www.cdc.gov/nutrition/everyone/basics/protein.html](http://www.cdc.gov/nutrition/everyone/basics/protein.html)

That being said, you're correct that it isn't good to rely on one source of protein.

<comment><USER2> It may vary with age.

I have two aunts and an uncle, all of whome were vegetarians for over 15 years and then were advised by their doctors to either supplement regularly or go back to eating some meat, simply due to protein deficiency and muscle attrophy, even though they're cyclists and hikers and just generally active people.

Personal circumstance definitely matters too. I work out regularly and over the past 6 years or so I've found recovery to be most difficult, long, and painful if I dont hit my goal of at least 1g of protein per lb of body weight, daily, from variable sources for continuous breakdown.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I really don't understand this Soylent nonsense:

1\. I like food. The smell, experience and taste. Why in god's name would I eat powder to save myself the "hassle" of eating food? That's like promoting adoption as a method of avoiding the "hassle" of having sex.

2\. Why the hell would you associate the brand of a product that you believe is healthy with a movie that is about feeding dead people back to us? That's the first thing I think about when I hear the word Soylent - that "Soylent Green is people!" Yum! Let me rush right out and get me some of that.

To me personally, Soylent is the very antithesis of the idea of living this short life I have. With like 40% of people too damn fat for their own good, I don't get how anyone sees a positive outcome for them.

<comment><USER2> Its not about whether you "like food" or not.

• Not everyone has access to proper ingredients/tools/knowledge that are required for maintaining a proper diet.

• The vast majority of food is perishable and does not transport/keep/distribute well.

• Lots of people like food too much and overindulge.

Your analogy of sex would be more appropriate if you made it analogous to sleep.

Many people out there love to sleep. But I don't think anyone would argue that sleeping is a "good" or "efficient" use of time, nor do I think anyone would be opposed to providing more or better sleep to those who currently struggle with it.

Soylet is flawed, but subjectively arguing that Soylent is stupid because you like to stuff your face makes you as ignorant as those "40% of people too damn fat for their own good" that you so readily attack, it just means you have a better control mechanism.

Stop trolling.

<comment><USER4> Stop Trolling?

 _Not everyone has access to proper ingredients /tools/knowledge that are required for maintaining a proper diet. _

Actually, everyone does have this. Whether they choose to use it is another story. I've yet to meet a person on this planet though that doesn't know that you can't survive on chocolate and potato chips. The stomach cramps are a pretty good clue.

 _The vast majority of food is perishable and does not transport /keep/distribute well_

Thankfully, over the last 20,000 years we've learned to live of the things around us, like animals and plants. I don't understand this argument. There is no requirement for food to be distributed over vast distances and times. The fact that we choose to do this is a societal choice.

 _Lots of people like food too much and overindulge._

So? The already have things like Slimfast for these people.

 _But I don 't think anyone would argue that sleeping is a "good" or "efficient" use of time_

Life is about living, not being efficient. However you choose to spend your time is the best use of your time. There is no race to win.

 _nor do I think anyone would be opposed to providing more or better sleep to those who currently struggle with it._

Are you honestly suggesting that Soylent is _better_ for someone than a proper meal? You better have a pretty long list of peer reviewed research to back that statement up if you are.

 _subjectively arguing that Soylent is stupid because you like to stuff your face_

Enjoying food is not "stuffing your face". Perhaps if this is what your relationship with food is I can see the appeal. That's abnormal though.

<comment><USER5> Wow, I'm sorry but do you really believe this statement: "Actually, everyone does have this. Whether they choose to use it is another story. I've yet to meet a person on this planet though that doesn't know that you can't survive on chocolate and potato chips. The stomach cramps are a pretty good clue."

Are you trying to say you have not met any person, ever, who does not have the money or ability to find good, wholesome foods? There is an entire world outside of the US, with a number of countries having significant economic and food shortages. There are a number of people who live on fair less than "chocolate and potato chips".

I have no idea whether this recipe is a good idea or not. I believe it should be tested and peer reviewed by professionals. However, creating a less expensive, highly nutritious, complete food product that is shelf stable and easily transported would save 10's, maybe 100's, of millions of lives. You sound very short sided here.

<comment><USER4> I'd love to respond, and have, but it seems these days HN doesn't want me to say too much, and for the second time in a week has automatically killed my comment.

<comment><USER6> Maybe you should try to make better sense than just being overly critical and insulting?

<comment><USER4> I'm curious as to how I'm being insulting when the other commenter was the one calling me a troll.

Not pumping the latest SV (or YC backed, for that matter) fad is not being "overly critical and insulting".

Stop drinking the Kool Aid without thinking.

<comment><USER7> You and Camdykeman should re-read the HN guide for new users pages.

Things like this:

> Stop drinking the Kool Aid without thinking.

Are a good example of what not to say.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I really don't understand Soylent. Do people really hate eating so much? Eating is one of the greatest joys of human existence. I understand that people have other things to do, but are you really so busy you can't sit down to enjoy a good meal?

<comment><USER9> It's not that people hate eating, not at all, it's just inconvenient in many ways. Something like Soylent solves the problem of convenience and allows a person to take in nutrients while remaining productive.

It's not for every meal. You'll still want to go have dinner with friends or family, but during the day it would be nice to chug a glass of this and keep working; hands clean.

<comment><USER10> So this is different than Slimfast -- how? From what I understand, Slimfast is pretty close to a meal replacement. Or is this intended to be in the same category?

<comment><USER11> Slimfast and other similar meal replacements (like Ensure) are not really balanced for normal, active people. They're meant for people who want to diet or are unable to eat solid food.

<comment><USER7> > [...] meal replacements (like Ensure) are not really balanced for normal, > active people. They're meant for people who [...] are unable to eat solid > food.

Ensure (etc) are aimed at medical uses. That's because most people find the idea of liquid feeds weird.

But if you want to live on liquid food there's nothing to stop you using Ensure, even if you're a fit healthy active person.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> jack-r-abbit This is the first I'm hearing that "soylent" is "an open-source food movement". I thought is was one guy that tried some stuff and now is starting to build a start-up around it. It also seems weird that what is labeled as the _flagship "distro"_ of this so-called open-source movement is not actually open-source. So now I'm confused. Is this just a wording issue I'm confused about? Are we using "open-source" for everything now?

<comment><USER12> Just 20-somethings with too much time on their hands and no clue trying to be 'food hackers' in the midst of a gigantic bubble. Nothing to see here. Move along.

<comment><USER13> I am 22 but in fact I don't have enough time on my hands which is the exact reason I am trying Soylent. Trying to work my day job and my side project leave me very little time and Soylent is offering a cheap, fast, easy method to consume the needed nutrients everyday. I'm not sure what you have against it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> So I just wanted to shamelessly self promote something I've been working on.

[http://soylog-staging.herokuapp.com/recipes/1](http://soylog- staging.herokuapp.com/recipes/1)

This is my RoR apps that I was developing, but which has recently lapsed into inactivity, which allows you to create, modify and fork recipes in a very similar way to github. It will also (soon) allow you to track your usage, supplies and health. But for now, the project is on standby.

<comment><USER14> And it's crashing. Damn, hold on.

<comment><USER14> it's back up now

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I see the guy dismissing the dangers of Soy hormones...

Well, beside making chickens get ready to be killed much faster (a farmer I talked claimed that with normal rations his chicken took 4 months to be able to be killed, with soy rations, you could sell them to be killed after 40 days), I DO tested avoiding Soy like the plague, and see if it had any effect, and it had (including I did some testosterone blood testing to check).

Also, I think eating "industrial" food is a very fast way to miss important nutrients we don't know much yet about, but are present in our daily normal food.

But I get why someone would wish to do that, sometimes I feel tempted too, specially because cooking all my food (with SO help even) on Sunday takes a long time (4, 5 hours... mostly result of having shitty kitchen), and eating food while on my PC at night is not much easy... And I hate washing dishes.

<comment><USER16> Organic soy? Or GMO Soy?

Please post your analysis about the effects of soy - I'm interested.

My own research on the subject shows that the research of male soy consumption being harmful is ambiguous, but mostly proven to not be harmful. Wikipedia has a discussion on the academic research on this as well, if you want a casual glance.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> The article mentions, many times, the other soylent company. It's true, you can wait for them to ship. But if you're desperate to try a liquid feed there are many brands already in existence. These are produced by multinational companies in quality environments with known, tested, ingredients.

Ensure is one well known brand. Fortisip is another.

This recipe seems to be carefully worked out - they show the working and at least have some links to proper research. And they're not making extravagant claims.

<comment><USER17> I think the difference here is that the goal is more ambitious (100% diet replacement). Ensure is explicitly a dietary supplement. The marketing, cost, flavor, and nutrient profile reflect that.

It's like wanting to enter a high end auto race and you just buy a sports car off the lot. It will be expensive and slow. The fast cars are custom built because the market is small and the requirements are unique.

<comment><USER7> Ensure can be a meal replacement. It is a complete food. It is one of the products used to force feed people who are on hunger strike (and also anorexics detained under section of the mental health act in English psychiatric hospitals).

I'm not sure what you mean by the cost, flavour, and nutrient profile. It's a complete food. If you want more calories you use Ensure plus. If you need more protein you use the high protein product. If you want savory versions you use one of the savory varieties - here's chicken ([http://www.chemistdirect.co.uk/ensure-plus-savoury- chicken_1...](http://www.chemistdirect.co.uk/ensure-plus-savoury- chicken_1_177904.html)).

The reason Ensure is sweet or highly flavoured is to encourage people to eat - these people are ill and need the nutrition.

A person eating only Ensure is not going to be any iller than someone eating either 'official Soylent' or 'open source Soylent' \- and probably not as ill, because Ensure is created by people who know what they're doing, using quality assured ingredients and sealed in suitable packaging. This is important for Soylent to work on - I hope they include good packaging.

All the existing products tell you not to survive on a liquid diet without medical supervision. I take that be be a big sign that living on liquid feed is sub-optimal and needs to be done cautiously. Other people say it's a sign of an industry that can be disrupted.

My posts in this thread are trying quite hard to be constructive. I admit I find it difficult because I have strongly negative opinions about some of the Soylent product.

<comment><USER18> >one of the products used to force feed people who are on hunger strike

Whoa, pardon my ignorance... got a link?

<comment><USER19> I got curious: [http://www.examiner.com/article/guant-namo-hunger-strike- to-...](http://www.examiner.com/article/guant-namo-hunger-strike-to-expose- ensure-as-a-health-hazard)

> the government's so-called act of kindness toward the Guantánamo prisoners > is not just the gift of being force-fed, but forcefully fed with none other > than Abbott Laboratories' enteral formula, Ensure.

It's just one article but Ensure doesn't sound like a complete meal replacement.

<comment><USER7> Ensure is a complete meal replacement.

([http://abbottnutrition.com/brands/products/ensure](http://abbottnutrition.com/brands/products/ensure))

> For interim sole-source nutrition.

If you're tube-feeding someone you might want one of the more medical versions such as Jevity ([http://abbottnutrition.com/brands/products/jevity-1-cal](http://abbottnutrition.com/brands/products/jevity-1-cal))

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> "...soon I wouldn't be in Boston to benefit from the group's joint purchases of 50-pound sacks of maltodextrin."

Everybody seems to be harping on the issue that they like eating food, so why replace it. I'd love to have a great on-the-go shake that's better than meal replacement alternatives, however all this emphasis on maltodextrin as the main carb source makes me reconsider ever buying these Soylent, or similar, products.

<comment><USER7> > I'd love to have a great on-the-go shake that's better than meal replacement > alternatives,

What are meal replacement alternatives? (Things like Ensure or slimfast? or something else?)

What would make Soylent or OSSoylent better than meal replacement alternatives?

<comment><USER20> Well best case scenario I would go to the trouble to get out a blender and make a shake with ingredients that I think are optimal: oats, banana, natural peanut butter, whey protein, or a number of other ingredients that cover my nutritional needs in "shake" form. If I'm in a hurry I've picked up meal replacements from the store, but most have sugar alcohols, sugar, or other processed ingredients that are fine once but you don't want all your meals like that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Or you could try eating a healthy meal.

<comment><USER22> I've done that many times, and cooked healthy meals for a living for two years (I mean, click around the blog). There is no contradiction between the two : )

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> So who is going to open the first branch of fast food soylent chain?

<comment><USER24> A restaurant is overkill, how about just a vending machine? You could put quite a markup on them (like $5 a bottle) and people would buy them for the time savings.

<comment><USER7> Walgreens sells Ensure. ([http://www.walgreens.com/search/results.jsp?Ntt=ensure&x=-18...](http://www.walgreens.com/search/results.jsp?Ntt=ensure&x=-188&y=-174))

A six pack costs $8.50 ([http://www.walgreens.com/store/c/ensure-nutrition- shakes-liq...](http://www.walgreens.com/store/c/ensure-nutrition-shakes- liquid-6-pack-rich-dark-chocolate/ID=prod5877679-product)). Each bottle is one serving, and contains 250 kCalories. ([http://ensure.com/products/ensure](http://ensure.com/products/ensure))

Here's a list of the Walgreens locations in SF. ([http://www.walgreens.com/storelocator/result.jsp?oTrk=1&_req...](http://www.walgreens.com/storelocator/result.jsp?oTrk=1&_requestid=41699))

<comment><USER25> Have you ever actually drank Ensure? I like them. But I need at least 2, sometimes 3, to actually feel full. That's still $4 or so for a meal.

<comment><USER7> Yes. I think they're revolting. I wouldn't be able to live on them.

I didn't search for the cheapest option, so maybe the cost could come down a bit? I don't know if the other products make you feel fuller?

You're right about it being an expensive way to live.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> you lost me at brown sugar.

<comment><USER22> Why? I'm actually pretty anti-sugar, and was opposed to Rob's formulations for a long time because he was using straight maltodextrin for all his carbs (200 g). But 25 g of sugar per meal, with tons of protein, fat, and fiber, dramatically reduces the effect on blood sugar compared to drinking Coke or eating candy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Literally drinking the kool-aid.

</comment><comment><USER27> "I'm putting this and future recipes on GitHub, and when I get a chance I'll add data on individual ingredients and nutrients, probably as Ruby hashes and JSON objects."

Why?

Why does everything have to be treated like code?

<comment><USER22> Who said everything had to be treated like code? I just think recipes benefit from version control, plus I plan to put other stuff in that repo eventually (like Ruby scripts to help you develop your own mixes).

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> As omnivores, what's best for our health is eating a highly varied and changing diet. This is the exact opposite. Considering the cure for cancer is basically fresh vegetables, fruits, and fungi, it's not too hard to figure out what's going to happen in the long run.

<comment><USER29> > Considering the cure for cancer is basically fresh vegetables, fruits, and > fungi...

I've met vegetarians with cancer. I'm pretty certain it's not that simple.

<comment><USER30> I can't speak to the parents 'cure for cancer' claim, but it's worth noting that 'vegetarian' really only means a diet without meat.

It's quite possible to be a vegetarian without consuming any more fresh fruits and vegetables than that found in a conventional diet.</comment></comment></comment>