Boost.UI – a new C++ GUI library - <AUTHOR> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/boost-developers-archive/_aEmJlslb7M <comment><USER2> I don't really get why this is called Boost.UI. The list of example seem to just try and have one for every boost library, is that the goal? Or is the goal to get this added to boost?

As long as it's not an officially accepted library, I think using boost in the name and code is quite misleading.

Even more misleading is that it claims to be all native, while underneath it simply uses wxWidgets. I'm sure it's a way to go, but don't hide your dependency and make it sound like you actually implemented cross-platform native UI elements.

<comment><AUTHOR> It is non official Boost library like an other libraries: [http://blincubator.com/alphabetically/](http://blincubator.com/alphabetically/)

Mentioned examples demonstrates integration with other Boost libraries.

Yes, goal is to be added to Boost.

Boost.UI application eventually uses native widgets. Cross-platform elements can't be native by definition.

Boost.UI is about interface, but not implementation. And I would like to omit stereotypes about wxWidgets.

<comment><USER2> > Mentioned examples demonstrates integration with other Boost libraries.

What do you understand with "integration". Do they really integrate or do you just demonstrate how each library can be used and then somehow represented with a UI?

Examples are great, but making each one specifically for some Boost library feels odd. Are you showing off Boost libraries or are you showing Boost.UI's functionalities?

I don't think anyone will doubt that Boost libraries can be used with Boost.UI.

> And I would like to omit stereotypes about wxWidgets.

That's okay, but I still find it a bit misleading, when only at the build stage the compiler will tell you "oh btw this library requires you to have wxWidget headers".

When I use a library, I want to know its dependencies upfront and not having to browse the source code or being told through a compiler error.

<comment><AUTHOR> For example Boost.Geometry and Boost.Polygon could be used with Boost.UI coordinates, Boost.Chrono (and std::chrono) in Boost.UI on_timeout() function, Boost.Date_Time library is used in date and time pickers etc.

wxWidgets is mentioned in build instructions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> This sounds great and I always love competition, but isn't QML and QT a very good product? QML is basically the C++ cross-platform answer to Apple's easy storyboard UI tooling. Wouldn't Boost need to have very good development tools to compete with QT?

On top of that, a lot of C++ apps I know use Chromium Embedded to drive UI...

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. QML isn't C++. Boost somehow competes with Qt. Boost.UI is designed mostly for developers that prefer modern C++ syntax and integration with Boost.

There is boost::ui::webview, but it supports only html output yet, without data input and user events.

<comment><USER3> Agreed that QML isn't C++, but it can be connected to C++ code, and the "enacting clause" to start QML UI happens in main()...

I have used Boost and love how it has influenced the direction of std::C++. Do you see any potential for the C++ standard to build off of Boost in building a UI standard?

<comment><AUTHOR> Web browser engines also can be connected to C++ code and I think that this way is more promising that QML-way.

It is very early to say, but Boost.UI library has some potential to be included in C++ standard.

<comment><USER4> You can use QtQuick without QML (although its a bit of effort) and Qt itself is very modern C++ friendly with support for example for using lambda's as slots and such. You can also (and should, IMHO) treat QML as a purely data description of the UI (as you would if your UI was created with a GUI builder, which QML can also be, as eg libglade does for GTK, or html or whatever), then you can easily do all of your logic in C++ without writing any javascript logic. I've actually done this for parts of an application: I created QObjects in C++ and in QML I attached QML properties (signals) to my C++ objects methods (slots) for the logic. It was pretty nice. Basically, you can think of QML as a data serialisation format describing the UI.

Just throwing in my experience with Qt. I haven't used Boost.UI so have no opinions on it, but I'm sure its great too! (although its clearly early days, QtQuick has a super rich widget library, Boost.UI still needs some more work -- still, a promising start)

One differentiator to point out is that Boost.UI uses system widgets. I personally prefer QtQuick's GPU composited custom widgets (not that the native ones don't do this, just that it works really well for me in Qt), but sometimes its desirable (and some people prefer it) to use system native widgets. Boost.UI looks like a great choice for this.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Do you have any screenshots? Ideally, for the same UI on all supported platforms.

<comment><USER6> I thought the same thing, until I read the following line and got me covered:

        https://github.com/kosenko/ui/blob/master/example/native.cpp#L11

<comment><USER7> [https://github.com/kosenko/ui/blob/master/example/native.cpp...](https://github.com/kosenko/ui/blob/master/example/native.cpp#L11)

It's basically using wxWidgets.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Such a library will never be accepted by Boost community. Boost is a "C++ standard extension", this library infinitely far from STL and Boost standards. In fact GTK+ looks much more promising to become a C++ GUI library.

<comment><USER9> I have no idea whether this library is good or not, but being a "C++ standard extension", whatever that means, is not a requirement for getting into boost.

The only requirement for boost acceptance is basically convince enough people that the library is good enough to pass review.</comment></comment>


I let a stranger watch me work for a day and I've never been more productive - <AUTHOR> https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/focusmate-review-productivity-work-hack <comment><USER2> Now do that for a month. Or even a week. You may be more productive bc you don't want to be seen as slacking off with someone watching, but maintaining that kind of pace is untenable. Did you ever get stuck and check your email or Facebook just to give your brain a little break? Did you ever sit, unsure of your next move? Or did you do the first thing you thought of, even if it was wrong, so you didn't look like you were wasting time?

Intense productivity with someone looking over your shoulder is great for a day. After a week you'll want to quit. After a month you'll want to kill yourself.

<comment><USER3> That's fine. Having a tool I can use a few hours a few week to get me through things that are the highest product of important and annoying is super valuable. Doesn't have to be a lifestyle.

<comment><USER4> You won't be the one choosing when and for how long to use the tool...

<comment><USER5> Normal office environments already have managers that are plenty capable of watching and critiquing everything you do all the time, but at least in my experience, that's almost never how it goes. Good managers know that freedom and autonomy are empowering. I'm sure others have had much worse experiences, but I think it's mostly well-established that micromanagement is a bad thing.

Whether it's in-person or with a tool like this, if your employer is creating an unreasonable amount of pressure/stress, then that puts them in a weaker position in the job market than companies that treat their employees well. Give them feedback, and if they're not receptive to feedback, see if you can ask for a raise or find another job.

<comment><USER6> > Good managers know that freedom and autonomy are empowering. I'm sure others > have had much worse experiences, but I think it's mostly well-established > that micromanagement is a bad thing.

This is really important. If your manager or PM is constantly bothering you, you won't be able to get into your flow state, which is important in software engineering.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Procrastination has destroyed my life.

Three years ago I finally achieved my dream of working from home. I was writing my thesis and believed I could finish my masters in 8 months. I decided to fully focus on it and, afterwards, I would create my long dreamed own software company.

It worked really well for some weeks. I was much more focused than I used to be working in regular offices, with bosses. But soon I started getting distracted with amateur radio, social media, couch and TV and so on.

Then I couldn't concentrate on anything anymore. After almost a year I had finished only half of my thesis. I started to feel desperate because I hadn't even started my company, and my savings were being burned day after day. This contributed to further drops in my productivity and concentration.

I finished my masters 14 months past what I initially imagined. And I eventually had almost no energy left to work on my products. I sporadically had some boosts in productivity and managed to get something done. But I wasn't able to commit to plans anymore. I was always getting stuck. And my money going away.

My life-worth savings are basically depleted now, I have no wife anymore and I feel pretty bad and alone.

Coincidentally, yesterday I started to work on a co-working space. That new atmosphere helped me significantly and I hope it keeps this way for some time at least.

Good to know about Focusmate and alikes. I will definitely try them if my productivity drops again.

<comment><USER8> Working from home changed my life in the opposite direction. Being able to fully manage my own time and not have someone breathing down my neck has enabled me to actually _not_ procrastinate.

I used to suffer from a lot of stress and anxiety and I think that fueled my procrastination. Now that I no longer suffer from those, I can just focus on work.

For a while I've wondered how I even started procrastinating as hard as I did. I used to be the type to first get all pending tasks done and then go and enjoy my free time, but at some point it flipped. It's weird.

<comment><USER9> I think the stress and anxiety is caused by procrastination and the stress and anxiety causes further procrastination. It's a loop! The trick is to get out of the loop by establishing productive, rewarding habits.

<comment><USER7> I totally agree and I got caught in such loop. And it took me too long to do something about. Had to reach a really sad local minimum until I decided to act.

I will maybe write something about this in the future. When it comes to procrastination, people are usually so concerned about not realizing their full potentials. But it can be much worse than that. I was concerned about a suboptimal improvement and I ended up in a position worse than when I started.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Anybody else get an immediately negative visceral reaction from this? If I'm understanding this correctly, the aim is to manipulate our sense of shame/guilt to boost productivity.

After sitting with the feeling for a bit, here are some ideas that come to mind:

1\. Maybe we should ask why we feel shame/guilt in the first place. Is it "normal" to feel this? If it isn't we should not rely on it for our happiness (or productivity).

2\. What is the value of productivity? Why does it make us happy?

For me, guilt/shame is something to be overcome, not used as a tool. And the value of productivity is something that has been handed down to us by a culture which we've been thrown into. And (at least for me), it's our duty to question these ideas instead of merely giving into them to self-reinforce themselves.

<comment><USER11> > For me, guilt/shame is something to be overcome, not used as a tool.

Wow, I think I quite strongly disagree.

What do you think it exists _for_ ?

It is good for society that people have the capacity for guilt and shame.

If we did not, I cannot see any other recourse other than fear!

<comment><USER10> Okay, so shame exists because it is good for a society that is built on shame? I don't mean to be derogatory in anyway, but the fact something is stabilizing doesn't mean it is good. I believe there are better ways to build relationships with others

<comment><USER4> > _Okay, so shame exists because it is good for a society that is built on > shame?_

Yes. Shame exists because it gave some evolutionary benefits to the primates who had it, like being able to live in a society and cooperate and don't cheat/kill/fuck over each other as much (if you think we do bad stuff too much, wait till you see what we can do without shame).

> _I believe there are better ways to build relationships with others_

The problem is that made-up (e.g. of our own making, requiring us to think about them and follow them rationally), not instinctual, ways, are none effective at all compared to innate, evolutionary, feelings like shame...

<comment><USER10> Good points! I agree the feeling of shame is pre-reflective. At the same time, I think we have the possibility of comporting ourselves in a way-of-being that better copes with shame. For me, By reflectively using your pre-reflective feeling of shame as a tool for productivity feels wrong (and this is personal and I don't have the best words right now to expound that feeling)

<comment><USER4> >* For me, By reflectively using your pre-reflective feeling of shame as a tool for productivity feels wrong*

Well, with that I agree.

For one, it cheapens the quality and utility of shame.

Following this to the end, could end up with cheating on one's spouse or killing someone feeling only as bad as checking your Facebook page when you should be working...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> My first month of pair programming was utterly exhausting, but once I got into the pace, it was the best thing I've ever done.

The mutual focus is definitely a big part. You're in a social context, and there is no place to stray from the mutual task, and that discipline is very liberating, weird as it may sound, for someone prone to procrastinating like myself.

<comment><USER13> There are some pre-requisites to Pair programming. That you need to have a well defined task, that you need not be bogged down by insane deadlines and can afford to have 2 people work on the same thing and both need to be well versed at the task at hand to live up to the promise of productivity. My experience pair programming for a year was sh*tty enough to never consider it again unless I have these pre-reqs met. I'd much rather split tasks, work independently and then touch base often.

<comment><USER14> I haven't had a job that required pair programming, but I've found it can be a pretty useful tool in certain circumstances. There have been a number of times when a colleague and I have naturally fell into pair programming for tasks, normally starting with us just sharing ideas and one of us eventually jumping in front of a keyboard and the two of us trying out several ideas live. It certainly isn't as formal as "pair programming" normally might imply, but as someone who's hasn't been in the industry all that long, I've found the times that one done it with more senior teammates to be insightful, as well as pretty effective for certain types of tasks.

<comment><USER15> I'd rather have a design session and a code review in that case.

What I've found pair programming useful for is tooling and workflow.

When working that closely you'll notice when they hit a few keys and are suddenly in the right file, and you go "wait, what did you just do?" and they tell you about this great new Vim plugin.

Inversely, they start doing something really manual and you can say "hey, I do this a lot do I wrote this utility script that automates it"

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I used to think that the sense of "having to look over my shoulder" with all the productivity monitoring going on was what made me miserable at work. But I'm now in a different environment, and it has been revealed to me that the issue I had was not at all what I thought. The problem was that I was formerly employed to do technical stuff and all of the administrative work was just piled on as extra stuff, theoretically required, but all metrics involved the actual technical work. Now I have a job that is _just_ administrative, and anything involving programming is extra. Now that mentally I am in the mode of doing administrative work as my _real_ job, it no longer seems like a burden to be doing it every minute of the day, and accounting for every minute, and I don't even mind having my phone turned off all day so I don't spend any time goofing off.

What I'm saying is that the agonizing thing for me was the contradiction, the equivocation between saying "you're employed to program, etc., but you also have to do all this stuff that interrupts your thought process, but we don't really care how you cope with it..."

Now that my _primary_ task is the administrative stuff (working with project managers), suddenly it doesn't hurt! I'm being compensated and valued for doing it. Any programming I may do is extra.

<comment><USER17> You've touched upon something that made me find work a lot more bearable as well. Ultimately, it doesn't matter what your designated "primary" task is, as long as you tell yourself that your primary task is to do whatever the business requires.

I used to get extremely frustrated whenever I got bogged down by inefficiencies, grunt work, or bad technical/business decisions made by others. Until one day I came to the realization that my employer isn't paying me to do things I enjoy. They are paying me to provide them with services they need. I certainly speak up if I think there's a better way of doing things, but I recognize that big corporations by their nature are bureaucratic, political and inefficient. If I dislike my work so much, I can certainly leave and work for myself, or find a different employer. Until then, they are certainly paying me extremely well, so I have no reason to complain for having to do some grunt work.

This subtle shift in attitude has made work so much more enjoyable. Every time I find myself frustrated by something, I remind myself this is precisely the reason I'm getting paid the big bucks. My job isn't to solve all the company's problems, it is simply to do the best job I can within the work hours agreed upon, so why complain. Having low expectations truly does make you happier.

<comment><USER16> Your comment reads as a rah-rah for adjusting your own mental state by force of will. I want to make it clear that is _not_ what happened to me. I can't do that, don't believe I have ever done that, and I honestly believe it is a myth that anyone can, although I might for politeness not challenge someone who claims to.

I also have found that I have no increased tolerance for what feels like abuse when I am paid more.

The only way I have ever improved my situation is by seeking out an environment in which the people I directly dealt with were clear about what they want from me.

If you see your job as doing what the business requires or needs, that's easy to say, but _nobody_ knows what it needs! Even the CEO probably doesn't have a clue. Any large business is IMO mostly a kind of self-organizing machine with random actions directed from the top. For years, my employer was doing acquisitions and trying to diversify. Then they reversed it all and broke up their parts under different names.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I particularly enjoyed the follow-up article "I burnt out and lost my sanity/health/job/gone to opioids/alcoholism/etc after pressured to maintain this 'more productive' pace for months on end as if I'm a hamster on a wheel".

<comment><USER18> Yeah. I've experienced this working to project deadlines at several jobs. Like everything else, "crunch" and "pair programming" are good in small doses for getting productivity. I couldn't handle it long-term. I have seen some people thrive on it with no ill-effects, but I have never had an extremely-focused, very driven work personality.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Legends say that long ago outside of the bubble where people working constantly monitoring each others and there even was people who's position was literally supervisors.

This is called "office". Somehow absolute peak of my procrastination happened in those human filled dedicated work places with supervision, from bosses, peers and subordinates.

<comment><USER20> Eh, it's less about monitoring and more about shared effort and focus. Take what works, leave the rest. For a lot of us, this is a life saving and wonderful service.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I hate this trend in management so much. I'm a combat vet with ptsd, and I've noticed companies more and more trying to do stupid open office layouts to save money and achieve this same result, but there are those of us it majorly negatively impacts our productivity in the medium to long term. Add on top that now instead of being able to think about a problem deeply, I get interrupted every 3 minutes by some adhoc query by those around me, so my thinking power feels hampered to the point it's stressing me so bad it's been aggravating my ptsd and I find myself wanting to drink and smoke.

Companies are digging their own grave with shit like this.

<comment><USER22> Does your company not have productivity rooms/spaces? I've found that to be the happy middle between completely open and closed-office for me.

Though I do agree I was significantly more productive at companies where I had my own office/shared with only one other person.

<comment><USER21> Not at the moment, only because we are growing so fast though.

<comment><USER23> Maybe they aren't digging their grave then?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I can't really imagine a job in which someone is bothered to pay you to do work, but cares so little about the work you're outputting that they don't notice whether or not you're working efficiently/effectively.

I've worked from home full-time for just over 5 years now. I'm self-employed and answer to my client directly. I operate almost entirely autonomously and am given a heap of freedom, both tech-wise and with respect what hours I work. I've not once in 5 years reported my exact hours worked - but of course do report days off sick etc.

However, despite my client not being a developer (or overly technically inclined) I can assure you my client still notices if I'm being less productive than usual - which over the course of 5 years is somewhat inevitable e.g. when my daughter was born.

Actually, I find that not having someone knowing that I'm ticking over hours sitting at desk, hitting buttons, and making the screen flash, causes me to work more. For the last 5 years I've consistently worked more hours than I ever did in an office environment, not by a small margin either.

Sometimes you just don't feel "switched on", but if you're working in an office you're still tallying up hours. However, if I'm not totally switched on, I somewhat subconsciously know I need to work longer in the afternoon/evening. This is simply because I feel pressure (am motivated) to live up to the standards I've established with my client. I must add though, that my client is absolutely fantastic, any perceived pressure is almost entirely self-inflicted.

If anything, I need to start setting firm boundaries so that I work less. This means I need to start considering those less productive "hours worked" as genuine hours worked, just as I would if was working in an office.

<comment><USER25> When you take a walk and come up with clever solution to expensive problem wouldn't it be more valuable than proving you deliver keystrokes constantly?

I think you need to have some explanation, at least for yourself, what kind of value you deliver even when you are just around not so occupied.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Hawthorne Effect:

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

In short iirc at first they thought the changes they were making was what caused the increase in productivity but then they found out that the people worked harder because they were being observed and felt special.

</comment><comment><USER27> That's cute. But did you consider hiring a stranger from craigslist to slap you everytime you access facebook?

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4661940](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4661940)

Or perhaps testing websites... drunk? I love and loath these articles. They are the equivalent of "and you won't believe what this madlad did!!!!" of hackernews.

<comment><USER28> I thought you were kidding. You weren't!

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> That's interesting and I have no doubt it works. However, I think that you might simply get used to the pressure and start procrastinating either on the service itself or simply procrastinating using in the service.

The other problem is that any kind of outside force that pushes you to work harder also creates stress. This stress isn't entirely regulated by yourself and it's possible for it to backfire.

<comment><USER20> It's about making it a bit easier to get into the groove. If you're determined not to work, you'll find ways around it. P

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> I don't doubt it in the short term, but I fear these are the sorts of articles that give people one more reason to want to stick their employees in open offices.

The usual excuses presented to employees are handwavey things like "collaboration" and "teamwork", but the excuses presented to other managers can also involve things like "employees are more likely to feel self-conscious from visibility, and less likely to slack off". Even that's just scrounging for some excuse other than cutting corners to save money.

<comment><USER31> To be fair, I see plenty of folks in open office settings that DGAF about that and looks at memes or YouTube or Reddit on 30" monitors visible to any passers by.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> The article is just wrong. Social pressure makes you less productive and hampers cognitive health while working.

I can't believe anyone even feels this is worth discussing or disagreeing. From the mountains of evidence refuting the communication conditions of open plan offices, we know that knowledge workers require privacy to be productive.

The case is closed. This essay is arguing against the tide. Move on.

<comment><USER33> Pairing or close one-on-one supervision hasn't much in common with being in an open-plan workspace.

<comment><USER32> They are even more severe and intrusive forms of disruption than ambient noise and impromptu conversation of open plan offices, so they would exacerbate the negative effects already known.

Pairing in particular requires you to schedule time for it, host it in a private conference room for those two people, and have adequate video conferencing. If pairing happens at someone's desk in an open plan setup, looking at the same laptop screen or monitor (instead of a projected version), then it universally falls apart, and is significantly disruptive to other around as well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Tangentially related: is there any sort of dashboard service that would let me create a dashboard showing things like:

* email inbox count (differentiated by email inbox)

* unmoderated comment queue on website

* Facebook unread message count. Similar ones for other social media inboxes

* and maybe some custom metrics or ones triggered by a spreadsheet or todoist or something

I think this would be immensely useful for my own purposes, in seeing where I wasn't on top of things. But also useful for sharing with someone else and being accountable. Would allow analysis too, such as eliminating a certain inbox entirely, or delegating some sections, etc

<comment><USER35> No, but that sounds like a great startup idea. Sign me up!

<comment><USER34> I looked into it since commenting. Klipfolio might be able to do this, but it wasn't clear how to get a gmail inbox count.

Then I remembered I use Numerics to put monthly sales on my apple watch. I checked, and it can get email inbox counts at least! They have a ton of data customization. Will see what other services I can add.

Ios only for now unfortunately. May come to mac once Marzipan happens: [https://cynapse.com/numerics/](https://cynapse.com/numerics/)

Edit: doesn't have messages beyond email unfortunately. Though there is perhaps a way to jerry rig something using zapier and one of their supported services such as Trello or Todoist. Klipfolio does support Slack.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> I don't like working from home. Working from home feels lonely and dead-end to me. I'd rather have a commute and sit in an open office plan, despite all the obvious drawbacks.

Also, I've recently realised what makes me productive as fuck:

Pressure.

<comment><USER37> Do you stay productive with pressure though? I can work insane amounts of time (relative to what I usually do) and be very productive when everything is on fire, but if everything is on fire for a month or more, I doubt that I'll still have the same feeling of immediacy that I'll have on the first day.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> I had some time between my graduation and my job and I streamed some software development on Twitch, I don't think I had that much fun and was never so productive when others were watching me. It's such a weird effect but when someone is watching you your whole behavior changes ... and for me, in a good way. I'm naturally kind of lazy so this was really awesome.

</comment><comment><USER39> We used to do this on LessWrong back in the day; people would write or study math in a video chat room. It was surprisingly effective.

<comment><USER20> +1 for surprisingly effective. Such a good word for my experience of this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> I'm a member of a private online pomodoro group, every 30 minutes or so the bell dings and we all chat, if we want, for a few minutes then get back to work. Those who want to show their cam do, but mostly we don't and we tend to talk about the tasks we are doing and how it's going. It's informal and geared towards independence but with enough communication that I don't feel I'm isolated. I think it's a much better balance than having some panopticon- inspired structure enforcing productivity through embarrassment.

<comment><USER20> Culture and intent matters a lot. If it's an enforcement/punishment thing, it's garbage. If it's a shared and collaborative thing to get more out of life, it's a great thing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> I have worked from home as a software engineer for almost all contracts for the last 7+ years and would like to mention how it is for me.

The key point from this article to me is "just telling someone I was going to do something made me get it done".

So what keeps me on track is that I discuss with the client every week or few days what it tasks I should to try to complete. This is based on his priorities for requirements and the technical issues that I know about. Usually there are one or two primary tasks and one or two secondary that I honestly say may not get completed.

Every 1-3 weeks usually one or more of these items is something concrete that is supposed to show up in a computer program or report that the client will actually see or touch.

So for there is usually already an accountability structure. It's just not someone looking over my shoulder constantly.

I have actually worked on Upwork or whatever they call it with the constant screenshot of what you are doing. To be honest, in a way that does make you productive. However it also makes life more stressful. And I feel like I would prioritize more poorly because I didn't want to look idle so rather than doing a hard task that might require more thinking or googling or something, I might be more inclined to tackle easier tasks that would make things seem more productive from the screenshots. Overall there was just a constant distraction of wondering what people would think if they reviewed the session. I would never willingly choose to work like that again.

When I don't actually have someone looking over my shoulder I honestly do spend somewhat more time on non-work items. However, it seems like my this is automatically limited by the needs of the task items which I will be reporting on to my client in a few days or a week. And even on days when I am getting distracted, I put my main energy into my tasks until they are completed.

The idea of absolutely constant supervision during work only really makes sense when there is no trust or real respect for the worker and no other way to have accountability. I am worried that this type of article or service may reinforce management's tendencies to not respect or trust workers and want constant proof of total productivity from the wage slaves.

</comment><comment><USER42> I wonder if live streaming your work to the whole internet, potentially allowing others to comment, i.e. to help you to spot mistakes along the way, would also work. This wouldn't be applicable to everything, but for open source side projects or open companies like GitLab, that could be amazing. It would also be extremely valuable for other people, particularly in junior positions, as they could see how other people work, that they're not omnipotent, they make misteaks and sometimes get stuck too.

<comment><USER43> There are already many people on Twitch live-coding for fun and profit.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I'm excited to try this. I do my best thinking alone but work best with someone watching. I know some people can't perform even basic tasks with someone watching, but for me, it's easier and sometimes even necessary. If I'm stuck coding I'll imagine explaining it to someone (or ask someone to do it with me). If I can't nail a movement in the gym, I'll pretend to demo it.

</comment><comment><USER44> I see it as a version of telling people something you're trying to do so you feel more pressure to do it, a classic trick to force yourself to start habits.

This sounds a bit extreme though, and I'm not sure if it actually reinforces the bad habit of needing someone watching you in order to do any work.

<comment><USER23> It's also said that telling people what you are doing is bad because it satisfies your psychological desire to deliver even though you haven't actually delivered.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> Related reading about focus and folks on the autism spectrum: [https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-04/uoe- abq04051...](https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-04/uoe- abq040519.php)

</comment><comment><USER46> What I found work surprisingly well is to sit in a cafe with my back to busy foot traffic. There're lots of transient strangers passing by behind with the potential of seeing my screen. In that case, I cannot really goof off, like browsing ycombinator.

</comment><comment><USER47> I wouldn't want to work remote full-time, but that's because of the isolation, not a lack of productivity. When I do work from home now I'm far more productive than in the office. I can sit back and think about problems from a higher-level perspective without that constant itch to feel like I'm looking busy. Of course, the reason I don't get distracted is that I'm fortunate enough to enjoy my job, and I realize that doesn't apply to everybody.

Still, when I was freelancing I dealt with a significant amount of loneliness, such that I now actually enjoy the buzz of a workplace, so I could see using a service like this if I worked from home constantly.

</comment><comment><USER48> I've had experiences like this with glassblowing. When I have an interested observer, such as a student, I often get enthusiastic and make several pieces in a row and use a wider variety of techniques.

Also, many glassblowers work while hanging out together on video chat.

</comment><comment><USER37> Is it necessary to have an actual live video feed with an actual person that you've talked to before, or can you just have a video of a person that occasionally glances up to look at the camera?

Committing to (and reviewing afterwards) what you want to accomplish does somewhat work for me. Ultraworking work cycles [1] are based on that by making you write down what you'll work on, how you'll start before each (short) session. When I really need a push to do something I don't enjoy at all, this usually does the trick.

[1] [https://www.ultraworking.com/cycles](https://www.ultraworking.com/cycles)

</comment><comment><USER49> This seems to be one of the major drivers for some folks who do pair programming.

</comment><comment><USER50> I had a remote team for years. Opposite schedules etc didn't allow for a lot of FaceTime.

I used some desktop recording software and recorded myself daily with instructions on how to execute various tasks.

Through out this process I would be talking and narrating the task explaining this or that while doing the work.

Sometimes I would end up finishing the task and just delete the video, I would be really focused and prefixes when making the videos it always felt a bit weird.

Thinking back there were even a few times I would record myself just in efforts to get something specific done.

<comment><USER37> Did the effect wear off? Would you edit the videos before sending them to your team, or would they see a "how to do X" with a 10-minute sidetrack of checking HN?

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> I let my boss watch me work for a day and I've never been more productive

</comment><comment><USER25> There is a bunch of freelance/contract companies who screenshot your screen and webcam every couple of minutes and record mouse/keboard activity constantly, then after every week they validate the number of hours you spinned and that makes your paycheck.

Maybe this is ok for some line work but not for more complex problems wher you need to discus or brainstorm things. My friend who is dev/architect quit such job after year with severe burnout. Hourly compensation was very good though.

</comment><comment><USER52> Focusmate has nothing to do with pair programming. It's used by people who work remotely and don't have the benefits of working in an open plan environment.

The problem lies in how focusmate and pair programming are implemented.

Inexperienced dev managers, who have little or none knowledge of XP, use these techniques to micro-manage developers, making their life's miserable.

</comment><comment><USER53> I wonder if this writer has ever tried a Pomodoro technique. If I force myself to use that entire 20-25 minutes and work the entire time with some planning on what to focus on directly before hitting the button I find myself hyper- focused for that duration and knock a lot out; if I'm not interrupted by the surrounding zoo of the open office.

</comment><comment><USER54> Well in China they do that with cameras see if students are focusing on the classroom. I think the feeling may be the same.

<comment><USER55> A camera or knowing that someone can remotely view your computer screen at any time should do the trick.

</comment></comment><comment><USER56> its not for the irresponsible or people who are not self motivators. if someone is like that work from home may not be for you though you may also not get to for in the office as well. there are still deadlines and communication usually though so there are external pressures.

</comment><comment><USER57> If I had to work that hard continuously I'd probably quit and become a beggar instead or something. There are workaholics out there for whom this might be possible but it isn't sustainable for most people.

</comment><comment><USER58> If you did this everyday with a new stranger you'd stop caring eventually.

<comment><USER59> My girlfriend tried one of these recently. It mapped to her "Obliger" personality, per The Four Tendencies by Gretchen Rubin.

Me..? I'm a Questioner. But I'm happy for her to find whatever makes her self- employment day-to-day life more manageable and uplifting.

</comment></comment><comment><USER60> Now you know what foremen do.

</comment><comment><USER61> I was always fascinated by some of the offices in Zurich having a large glass wall, with worker's desks and computers next to them. Almost as if put on display, "see we are working here".

</comment><comment><USER62> cut rate freelancer here. whenever i feel blocked, i bring my laptop to Starbucks and situate myself with my back to the room. without thinking about it, I'm automatically more productive. it's not for show, just having my screen be public knowledge liberates me to not impulsively check aggregator or newspaper sites. Call it environmentally enforced focus. i gighly recommend it for anyone who works physically isolated from a team.

</comment><comment><USER63> It's like going to a running event. Sure you will run quicker than you usually do, but can you do it day in day out, like you do with your evening jogs?

</comment><comment><USER64> Once the novelty wears out and your subconscious processes that the stranger has no power over you I believe you will relapse into your old habits.

</comment><comment><USER65> Actually I'm testing this very idea out. Pay someone to watch you work. Get penalised if you don't. Would anyone be interested in this?

</comment><comment><USER66> My go to when I'm feeling lazy is to imagine oh I'm something like the Truman show - this usually gets me into a higher gear

</comment><comment><USER67> I prefer to go live on youtube and monetize my handsome face

</comment><comment><USER68> Author might be even more productive if the watcher threatens to or inflicts pain on her if she begins to slow down.

</comment><comment> a-saleh I remember @jessitron mentioning on twitter that streaming on twitch is helping her be more productive.

</comment><comment><USER20> I've used this service a lot. I'd be very happy to share answers to any questions people have.

</comment><comment><USER69> Only read part of the article because I got sucked into reading about Mike Myers and his comeback...

</comment><comment><USER70> Crazy. I work from home and have no such problems. Once in a while I'll have a day where I don't feel motivated to do my 'normal' tasks, on those days I try to self-educate on interesting new stuff.

I don't feel the need for a virtual nanny.

</comment><comment><USER71> Sounds effective but weird. Maybe just go to a coffee shop.

</comment><comment><USER72> Why not wear a hair-shirt while you're at it

</comment><comment><USER73> It's as if idealistic kids inevitably grow up to believe the same things as their annoying "butts in seats" older bosses.</comment>


The Biggest Buyers of Software Companies - <AUTHOR> http://tomtunguz.com/biggest-buyers-software-in-2016/?utm_content=buffer8616e&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkedin.com&utm_campaign=buffer <comment><USER2> Where is Apple on this list? Similarly, where is Facebook? These seem like weird omissions, as both have a gazillion dollars in cash on hand and a track record of acquiring software companies and startups.

</comment><comment><USER3> What about private equity? The recent M&A activity I've been aware of is by PE firms that are filling out their portfolio with firms in the same space as an earlier acquisition (consolidating the market).</comment>


How over 25 People Got Scammed into Working at a Nonexistent Game Company - <AUTHOR> https://www.kotaku.com.au/2019/07/how-over-25-people-got-scammed-into-working-at-a-nonexistent-game-company/ <comment><USER2> On my first gig as a freelancer, I had the misfortune to have such a non- paying (almost) nonexistent company as a client. Worked almost two months without getting paid. I almost abandoned freelancing after that.

Since then, I have a rule, that only failed me once: before working a month for a person, work a week or less, get paid.

There are smart scammers who are really devious but those I have met had all kind of pathological problems they were in denial with. I think that most scammers live in a fantasy world.

By forcing them to prove they have money, are ready to pay you and know how to make a bank transfer, you are pruning a lot of them.

Also, and especially in my case where I have several international clients, the "I dont understand the bank transfer got refused" excuse is very common (and sadly, very believable). Having worked through all the troubles of making a payment from their accounts to yours already sets expectations about normal delays.

<comment><USER3> Don't ever work, at all, without getting paid at least something up front, ever.

Unless you're working in a physical office, or on a platform that handles escrow or similar, of course.

Just don't do it. You will lose literally zero good, profitable opportunities by following this rule.

<comment><USER4> Wait, what? How is this supposed to work for something like consulting? Asking for a retainer up front is often a one-way ticket to a potential client saying "no thanks" and going with someone else. I _definitely_ would have lost many highly profitable opportunities with that approach.

<comment><USER5> Freelancing!=consulting,or at least not always. In consulting you'd normally sign engagement contracts, probably even come up with a proposal on what you'll do. Also depends what companies you deal with,in what industry and etc. Freelancing,at least in generally accepted terms,is slightly different,even though there's lots of overlapping areas.

<comment><USER4> I understand what you're saying, but I think the difference there is one of contractual maturity more than anything else. There's no reason a run of the mill freelancing setup can't utilize enforceable contracts, even for small projects. A statement I would agree with is something like, "Never do any work unless you have an enforceable contract in place or get a good-faith payment up front."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Your first alarm warning to walk away is the first time payroll is missed. Unless you have some personal attachment to the founders or summat, no amount of "vision" and "passion" is going to make up for the fact that the company is doomed and/or you're being scammed.

If you're not on payroll, as another commentor mentions: get money up front. If that's a problem, walk away. Take a page from my patented School of Hard Knocks: if the relationship _starts_ with money problems, you're not suave enough to salvage it. (Source: almost ten years running a consulting company.)

<comment><USER7> I think people miss this because of the Sunken Cost Fallacy.

I've been freelancing 8 years and I can't imagine taking on a project without 50% upfront. The rare instances I missed that, I've lost money -- fortunately not more than a few thousand total.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm sorry, but that first paragraph was hilarious. Hates coding and realizes they don't want to be part of the pool that actually has to work 60+ hours a week... I want to be a team manager! I'd rather tell people to work 60 hours instead of being told to work 60 hours!

<comment><USER9> I laughed at that point, too. Would have immediately showed the door to such an applicant. Reminded me a lot of little kids' job dreams: "I want to be a boss when I'm big..."

<comment><USER10> I think that is an _excellent_ career goal.

<comment><USER11> Sure, management is a fine career goal, as good as any. But when many people say, "I wanna be the boss!" in the best case, it's some fantasy about control, and in the worst it turns out to be pathological. And those are the last people on the planet you want to be "the boss".

<comment><USER10> I actually mean it the other way: a "fantasy about control" sounds extremely sensible to me. Whether that manifests as

\- being lord of your shack in the woods and its surrounding area

\- being in management

\- having your house paid off

\- being in high demand

 _All_ of those sound pretty great to me.

I like being a developer. But I think I'd rather own Papa John's. (Not _a_ Papa Johns, _all of_ Papa John's).

<comment><USER11> I see what you're saying, and I'm on board with that. But isn't it sort of a tautology? I mean, these seems to be a pretty universal human value, to want some measure of positive, affirmative things to happen to us. Even to the point that some people drive themselves (and their families) into the dirt, killing themselves trying to achieve what they think will give them that kind of self-actualization.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I hire people via upwork and freelancer to do a lot outsourced non-core tasks for my startup. One of the traits I look for is an immovable demand that 30-50% of a project be paid upfront.

It's a s __* test that is a far better indicator of experience and competence than any flashy portfolio and ratings.

</comment><comment><USER13> > Lycanic hopes that in the end, the experience with Drakore will turn out > well for Zeal. "At the end of the day, this is not a loss for us. This is a > win for us," said Dinçer. "We know tons of people who want to work with us > and not ask for money from us until the time the game starts making money."

> Lycanic was a team of two developers, Mert Dinçer and Tim Popov

IMO, Dincer and Popov hold rather significant liability for not doing their due diligence. They were involved in the situation on a day-to-day basis, and will profit the most from the scam.

<comment><USER14> I did find that quote funny. No kidding it's a win for you, by not exercising due diligence you got 25 people to work on your game for free, and you got to walk away with their work and the rights to the game. Talk about a windfall!

<comment><USER11> Not only that but the PR from this story will bring a ton of sales and buzz. They won the lottery.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Milestones. As a freelancer I have insisted on payment after milestones and it never failed me. That and very strict "no pay, no work" ethics.

The point is: Even when "there is no money", getting someone on board takes time and effort. If that someone makes a credible threat to leave, more often than not suddenly there is money. If not: RUN.

<comment><USER16> The milestone method is very common in the trades, where a lot of builders, etc. are self-employed.

Scams are still a threat in that field though. I was on a job where the client devised ways to hold up suppliers so we'd miss our deadlines and he'd get a discount. I did a 22-hour shift and my boss pulled a few all-nighters to get done on time.

<comment><USER17> A friend of mine worked on a home remodel job for which the contractor expected delays in payment. The job included a fireplace and chimney because the homeowner loved fireplaces. After a couple of weeks the homeowner called to say he would pay the damn bill but in return they had to fix the terrible draw on the fireplace because the house was filling with smoke no matter how the damper was adjusted. Check in hand, the contractor sent my friend up a ladder to drop a rock down the chimney. After the plate glass they had cemented into the flue while building the chimney was broken, the draw was fine...

<comment><USER18> Very surprised that your friend still has your contractor's license since that's a great way to get it terminated forever.

Also a good way to get sued for negligence.

And while we're at it, your friend was looking at potential criminal charges, especially if the house had filled with carbon monoxide and killed its inhabitants.

But I suppose it makes a good story.

<comment><USER17> Haha "contractor's license" what is that? At the state level, some _electricians_ are licensed. Carpenters, generals? No way. The county we're talking about doesn't even inspect private homes. (Which lack of inspection is a _good_ thing. You can always hire an inspector. In the meantime, thrifty folks are building their own homes and only hiring out for the jobs they can't do themselves.) Besides this was probably thirty years ago. My friend is _old_. His employer (is he who you want to see licensed?) probably isn't even still alive now.

CO is dangerous, sure, but lots of fireplaces have had poor draws over the thousands of years that humans have been using fireplaces. It's more common to die from CO when the whole house is burning, but it isn't a sure thing even then. Lots of practices that used to be accepted are going away now that some buildings have CO detectors installed. I had to get the fire department involved to convince a tenant in my office building that their cleaning crew shouldn't use _propane_ -powered floor buffers. The fire department guy was like "I _wondered_ why we had a CO alarm in June..."

It's amusing to me that you're so sure my friend was lying about this amusing anecdote from his past. I've seen this guy get in an argument with an employer when he thought he had been _over_ paid.

<comment><USER18> GC licensing isn't some new regulation. It's been around for a lot longer than 30 years in most states. In Colorado, carpenters and other general contractor's are licensed at the municipal/county level, not the state level. All counties in Colorado require general contractors to be licensed except the most rural counties.

It's one thing to build a chimney that accidentally traps fumes. It's another to do so deliberately. This sort of stunt in CA would be (and 30 years ago, still would have been) a criminal act.

So yeah, I'm pretty sure your friend is either outright lying or exaggerating the truth to ridiculous extremes.

 _It 's more common to die from CO when the whole house is burning, but it isn't a sure thing even then._

I have no idea where you got this statistic from, but the primary cause of death from fires is smoke inhalation, not CO inhalation. CO inhalation deaths are greatest in the winters when people run their fireplaces with the chimney flues closed or faulty internal heaters.

<comment><USER17> _...except the most rural counties._

This may come as a surprise, but I live in a rural county, and the house we're talking about is in an even more rural county. It's curious, that on HN we Americans are always reminded not to assume anything about other cultures (and rightly so), but we're eager in turn to assume all sorts of things about other states we've never seen. You've got some strong emotions about how remodeling should be done and paid for, but not everyone feels the same as you do. Certainly not everyone felt that way decades before you even thought about construction. California (or whatever other state you're referencing) is not a microcosm of the rest of the nation.

Anyway, you're wrong about that state too. Lots of remodeling gets done there, too, without the involvement of licensed general contractors.

<comment><USER18> _Anyway, you 're wrong about that state too. Lots of remodeling gets done there, too, without the involvement of licensed general contractors._

Not legally, which was my point.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I was shortly working with similar guy, although from the day one it was free/hobby project. He as a leader couldn't keep focus, he was talking about mountains 200 miles north somewhere at 5h mark in game. Then at one point whenever he asked if I can do feature x, feature y, I said: let's work on first 5 minutes of game play. Ok ok. When he came up with another ideas I said let's work on first 30s of gameplay. Then whenever he get any more ideas I asked: "is this in first 5 minutes of gameplay?". It wasn't and the whole project went nowhere. I still have /r/inat I'm my RSS reader but mostly only for daily "I want to make MMORPG" posts.

</comment><comment><USER20> It saddens me that there are so many crooks in the world, and that many of them are technically proficient, and that the internet has turned into the perfect platform for crooks, liars, scumbags and cheats.

In 1994, a colleague and I, caught up in the excitement and promise of the Internet and HTML / browsers, gave two 1 hour University-wide lectures about the wonderful promise of what was to come. We made predictions that we thought bordered on crazy (like: one day you will see the things called URLs on buses!). But what we did not foresee is the stinking morass that much of the web has become.

<comment><USER21> I will get downvoted for sure. And FWIW, I don't work at a blockchain company. But these issues seem like the type of thing smart contracts with escrow accounts were meant to solve.

Place the payment into an escrow account that pays out to multiple parties on a regular cadence, after milestone etc. Everyone can see there's a balance in the account, and it's guaranteed to be dispersed according to some conditions being met.

<comment><USER22> I don't know anything about smart contracts, but how does the smart contract know if a milestone has been met?

<comment><USER21> It doesn't. But it can guarantee regular payments, and transparency regarding the funds available.

You could implement a voting mechanism for the milestone payment. Or leave it to the boss.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> There are a lot of people reading this that may,at some point, go into freelancing.I do have a mixed experience of freelancing and seeing these things from the business perspective. 2 simple rules: 1) Always,always ask for % upfront. Ideally,50%. If they start coming up with excuses,drop them.There are extremely persuasive people out there, don't get on their hook. 2) Set milestones. Daily,weekly, or if a project is huge, maybe biweekly. If they start their crap about particular invoicing dates,money release, accountant being away or any other crap,even if it sounds convincing- drop them or put the project on halt,by limiting or restricting access, or some other ways. I'm senior enough in business to know plenty of weasel ways business people pull on freelancers, don't get fooled.

</comment><comment><USER23> It's crazy to hear someone pull a scam like that and deny it's scam because they were working hard too.

</comment><comment><USER24> Is that the correct link? It starts out ok but switches to another page after a second or two.

<comment><USER25> the au site explodes if you access with js disabled, try [https://kotaku.com/how-over-25-people-got-scammed-into- worki...](https://kotaku.com/how-over-25-people-got-scammed-into-working-at-a- nonexi-1836834497)</comment></comment>


AirBnB's Pricing Algorithm - <AUTHOR> http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/software/the-secret-of-airbnbs-pricing-algorithm <comment><USER2> Talk about burying the lede:

 _" That's why we've released the machine-learning platform on which it's based, Aerosolve, as an open-source tool."_

And worth noting the link in the article doesn't work - it's meant (I believe) to send you here: [http://airbnb.io/aerosolve/](http://airbnb.io/aerosolve/)

</comment><comment><USER3> > We selected a machine-learning model called a classifier.

Almost all machine learning tools are classifiers of some sort. It's like saying: we selected a car technology called "wheel".

<comment><USER4> I think you have an overly narrow view of machine learning or a very broad view of what classifications are.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Completely solving the problem of pricing in term of getting it right the first time is more difficult than predicting the weather. At least with the weather you can go outside and learn if it is raining. You can't just go outside look at an item and give it an optimal price that maximizes the amount and/or the amount of time you need to sell it within.

I work at a company that has pricing algorithms more complex than what retail stores use. I don't think they are useless. But, we all know they aren't "right", and they only got to be what they are through testing them out with actual customers. And some customers work to determine your algorithm and then use it to their advantage in a big way so you have to change it again, which affects other customers negatively, and the cycle continues. You can't just A/B test pricing and assume that will work in a hands-off fashion either, because customers will take advantage of that.

The complexity of pricing is that the best pricing only partly has to do with the thing being sold. You could argue it has nothing to do with the thing being sold. It has everything to do with the buyer: their needs, their resources, and their perception of the product, service, seller, the entire sales experience, market, economy, weather, etc. You name it and it probably has some affect on what the best price would be.

<comment><USER3> It would be a shame if AirBnb would price gauge based on profiling customers. I don't like, when I enter a shop, to be asked my nationality before they quote me a price.

<comment><USER6> This is already happening (depending of the country, your skin color might also make the price go higher), tourists typically pay more for a lot of stuff than what a local would pay. Though, sellers are usually a bit more subtle than "Hey, give me your passport, so I can tell you how much it costs". This is how a lot of people make a living in a lot of places. In the tourism industry, I think it's completely understandable and reasonable to base a price based on what the buyer is willing to pay, more than what it really costs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Would this not get AirBNB into trouble?

Price fixing in a cartel is illegal anywhere in the western world for good reason.

<comment><USER8> This is not price fixing or anywhere even slightly related

<comment><USER9> AirBNB is colluding with its contractors to influence and set similar prices across competing room vendors.

How is that not _exactly_ price fixing?

<comment><USER10> Price fixing is when competitors agree to set prices. If AirBnb and Hilton and Marriott started agreeing on prices, then it would be price fixing.

This isn't price fixing because companies aren't considered their own competitors.

It might be a little fuzzy if the people posting rooms on AirBnb are considered competitors, but even then it's not price fixing because there's no requirement to use the algorithm's suggested price, and no single owner can influence the general price of rooms, because there's still hotels, motels, non-AirBnb rooms, etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I still don't understand how's staying at an airbnb rental is more compelling than staying at a hotel. From my experience, Airbnb has only a single upside: you get to stay at someone else's place, which has a quite different vibe from a hotel. One the flip-side, compared to a hotel, the prices are considerably higher, you have to negotiate with a host on checkin time (most of the times), and overall you don't have any guarantees on the quality of your rental the same way you have with a hotel chain. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Airbnb has not loyalty/rewards program available either, which could be quite beneficial for frequent travelers.

The whole "local experience" seems to be a mere marketing fluff. The Airbnb experience doesn't seem to imply much interaction with the host, the same way which it's predecessor Couchsurfing did. Once you checked into you Airbnb rental, you are on your own, the same way as if you stayed at a hotel, but with even less hand-holding. Hotels at least provide a (poor) local recommendation service.

I'm wondering what a typical customer of Airbnb looks like.

<comment><USER12> I travel frequently and have tried replacing the usual hotel chain with an airbnb. I totally agree, the hassle of dealing with hosts and being left disappointed a few times, it's not worth it (for me).

Where I found airbnb more useful (and cheaper) is when my family is in town and we're traveling somewhere and we usually book a whole apartment/house with multiple bedrooms. That is usually cheaper than booking 2 or 3 hotel rooms. However, in that space there are lots of alternatives (Homeaway, VRBO, local bed & breakfasts with their owns websites).

My impression is that airbnb, in the end, is just like those other sites. More recently, I've found that more often than not, the place you book (especially in popular areas) is owned or sublet by someone who's making a business out of short term renting and with that, the whole local/experience/sharing charm is gone.

<comment><USER11> Short term vacation rentals are definitely is where the money are at.

Also, for my experience, the niche if affordable mid/long-term rentals (1-2 months) appears to be underserved. Sure I can negotiate a monthly rate with a hotel, but unless they are experiencing a lack of demand, it's not worth it for them - they can make more money on short stays.

The cheapest alternative for finding a sublet appears to be local sources (websites, asking around locals), but that could be too much hassle, especially if you don't have time for it.

Airbnb listings sometimes provide a monthly rate, but again in my experience it's not very competitive. Being not very price sensitive, I'd still go with a previous option - it has it perks of local immersion.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> We've been an airbnb host with multiple properties for a few years now in Austin. We've done our own version of dynamic pricing (manually), and the graph highlighting Austin in the article is spot on. The "Pricing Tips" tool has a long way to go, but its relatively close (within 20-30 percent). It still hasn't caught some of the big events, mostly because it only looks forward 3 months, and for popular events like SXSW, we usually book 4-5 months out at very high prices. That said, big props to ABNB for trying this and putting it out there. Hopefully their algorithm takes into account what humans are actually doing with their own pricing, and using that in it's calculations.

</comment><comment><USER14> I found that the Airbnb Price Tips feature works pretty well in mature markets but not in new locations. In some apartments we manage in Kenya for instance, there are two apartments which are exactly the same. One has no reviews and the suggested price is around 48 €. The other one has 3 reviews with 4.5/5 ratings and the suggestion is 30 €. So, it's good to look at but you always need to see if it makes sense to you. Anyway, amazing job, they left the competition 10 years behind.

</comment><comment><USER15> This is the difference between airbnb and google. Google would have Hal Varian look at this. Airbnb has a music major re-invent the wheel (not sure if the managed to re-invent the whole thing).

There is a whole field of study called pricing mechanisms. For example, second price auctions work well because of a reason.

<comment><USER16> Why attack Airbnb for trying out a new approach?

Also, Google is not that great at some things they do. For example, Google is somehow much worse at navigation than Waze even though they were at it for much longer and had tons of data. Now they even have Waze data and are still worse at it than Waze.

<comment><USER17> Is it just me, or is google maps even worse than Apple maps at this point?

<comment><USER11> I think Google maps has some top-notch turn-by-turn navigations. One thing I particularly like is how detailed the voiceover is, i.e. recommends you a lane to stay in, etc This is one thing i wish Waze would be better at, because overall it seems like it's able to find faster routes than Google, although sometimes I wonder if it's only perceived, due to the way they gasify it.

Apple maps are absolutely horrible in turn-by-turn. Either I'm driving too fast, or the turn announcement is way too close.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I can't stand AirBNB. Prices are ludicrously high. I feel like prices are higher just because it's a nicer cuter interface than Craigslist. Obviously I can't prove this. Also wish I could filter by monthly for everything not map a certain daily range to a monthly range in my head.

<comment><USER19> I feel Airbnb offers a value-added service and, in my personal experience, that has justified the extra price. Also keep in mind that the spirit of Airbnb was short-term vacation rentals; not long-term tenancies.

With Airbnb I can evaluate the host's social "credit" to some degree (have they connected with LinkedIn? What references have they provided?) and transparent straight-up reviews from past guests. Having Airbnb act as an arbitrator when things go wrong is priceless.</comment></comment>


RESTful Transactions - <AUTHOR> http://jcalcote.wordpress.com/2009/08/06/restful-transactions/

<comment><USER2> Actually, I think this quote posted in the comments is more interesting:

"If you find yourself in need of a distributed transaction protocol, then how can you possibly say that your architecture is based on REST? I simply cannot see how you can get from one situation (of using RESTful application state on the client and hypermedia to determine all state transitions) to the next situation of needing distributed agreement of transaction semantics wherein the client has to tell the server how to manage its own resources."

— Roy Fielding, rest-discuss, 2009-06-09

</comment><comment><USER3> Is there a simple paragraph that describes what "Being RESTful means/what problem it solves"? I know it's "so hot right now", but I'm not sure if I'm missing something, or if it's just restating previous results.

Is it just simply revising what the HTTP methods were designed for and how they behave on browsers/servers/caches/proxies?

<comment><USER4> [http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/rest_arch...](http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/rest_arch_style.htm)

It's not that long. I have yet to see a paragraph-length description that is an accurate summary of it (and blog-entry-length descriptions cause a lot of confusion).

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> This really is nothing new. EAI platforms have had to deal with this for years, they solve it with idempotent updates e.g. UPDATE WHERE rather than relying on locks - ensure transaction tables have timestamps which can be used for this purpose. This also improves your throughput and avoids all the problems that locking brings e.g. deadly embrace and poor performance.

Trying to perform guaranteed updates across HTTP transactions is always going to be tricky. The other factor is old database principals atomicity and ACID.

</comment><comment><USER6> See this paper: "RETRO: A (hopefully) RESTful Transaction Model": [http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddffwdq5_2csz22wfd&pagevi...](http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddffwdq5_2csz22wfd&pageview=1&hgd=1)

</comment><comment><USER7> How to do REST transactions?

1\. Put a uuid under /transactions/

2\. /transactions/<uuid>/ is a COW copy of /

3\. make changes

4\. put "commit" to /transactions/<uuid>/status</comment>