Ask HN: PayPal Alternatives for Subscriptions* - <AUTHOR>

Are there any easy to use PayPal alternatives out there that can handle monthly subscriptions, and don't require a merchant account? <comment><USER2> No... that's the short answer.

Taking people's money on the internet is a HUGE pain. The only other _potentially_ "easy to use" alternative would be Amazon I believe <https://payments.amazon.com>

Most everything else is going to require a merchant account.

<comment><USER3> Amazon Payment is easy to use, that's why we are on it.

Our experience is that amazon's payment approval process is long and strict for the consumers who have credit cards that are not from the major banks. About 5-8% of our payments ended up rejected by Amazon, while the customers contacted us and told us that they use that credit everywhere and on paypal fine. Some of them have to send us a check, but most of cases, we just lost the customers. We are switching to paypal.

<comment><USER4> >About 5-8% of our payments ended up rejected by Amazon

I'd be interested to know what the Amazon response was to this support request.

Surely, if Amazon Payments can't process it then Amazon stores can't be purchase from with these cards either and some not insignificant value of purchases are failing at Amazon's card verification stage?

Their revenue is according to WolframAlpha approaching $30Billion .. 1% of 5% of $30B is $15M USD.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> If you're taking subscriptions, I think in general you're much better off getting a merchant account and perhaps using one of the recurring billing services out there. (Chargify, Recurly, CheddarGetter, Spreedly, etc).

It's not _that_ much harder to do than PayPal (took me about two weeks), and keeps you from having your customer's credit card info locked into some third party service that you can't get out of.

</comment><comment><USER6> <https://www.wepay.com> perhaps? I see a recurring bills feature there.

</comment><comment><USER7> Social Gold (recently acquired by Google) handles subscriptions. Although they take a 10% cut.

</comment><comment><USER8> Worldpay.com part of royal bank of scotland. it's not great, but it is a decent alternative.

</comment><comment><USER9> Here's a good service that has been around quite awhile, and has generally good terms. Dunno about specific recurring support, ut you should be able to set that up with one of the support providers.

<http://www.2checkout.com/community/>

Also, google payments may work for you.</comment>


FastLZ - lightning-fast compression library - <AUTHOR> http://fastlz.org/ <comment><USER2> It does compress slightly faster and better than lz4 (when the output is written to disk on a SSD) using the default parameters:

For an input text file alpha.txt whose size is 3.3GB:

\- fastlz compresses in 1m6.446s (real time)

      $ time ./6pack ~/Desktop/alpha/alpha.txt /tmp/out.fastlz
      alpha.txt
      [##################################################] 43.4% saved

      real	1m6.446s
      user	0m26.482s
      sys	0m8.346s

\- lz4 compresses in 1m15.681s (real time)

      $ time ./LZ4Demo.exe ~/Desktop/alpha/alpha.txt /tmp/out.lz4
      *** Compression CLI using LZ4 algorithm , by Yann Collet (Jul 25 2012) ***
      Compressed 3590403790 bytes into 2418583396 bytes ==> 67.36%
      Done in 35.99 s ==> 95.13 MB/s

      real	1m15.681s
      user	0m23.081s
      sys	0m12.927s

Here is the size of the output:

      1.9G /tmp/out.fastlz
      2.3G /tmp/out.lz4

lz4 is here: <http://code.google.com/p/lz4> alpha.txt was generated as advertised on this website: <http://leon.bottou.org/projects/sgd>

Both projects were compiled from the trunk on a 2009 MacBook Pro running OSX 10.6 with gcc i686-apple-darwin10-gcc-4.2.1.

I will now make some room on my SSD to time uncompress.

 _Edit_ : I rerun the previous compression and the results are pretty stable: +/- 2s

<comment><USER2> Here are the decompression timings:

      $ time ./6unpack /tmp/out.fastlz
      Archive: /tmp/out.fastlz

      alpha.txt
      [..................................................]

      real	2m1.514s
      user	0m12.038s
      sys	0m16.199s

      $ time ./LZ4Demo.exe -d /tmp/out.lz4 /tmp/out.lz4.txt
      *** Compression CLI using LZ4 algorithm , by Yann Collet (Jul 25 2012) ***
      Successfully decoded 3590403790 bytes
      Done in 24.54 s ==> 139.53 MB/s

      real	1m47.692s
      user	0m6.320s
      sys	0m18.227s

Decompression is thus faster for LZ4 but probably very limited in both cases by writing the output file to the SSD.

<comment><USER2> Indeed for in-memory decompression LZ4 is much faster as expected:

      $ time ./LZ4Demo.exe -d /tmp/out.lz4 /dev/null
      *** Compression CLI using LZ4 algorithm , by Yann Collet (Jul 25 2012) ***
      Successfully decoded 3590403790 bytes
      Done in 8.04 s ==> 426.03 MB/s

      real	0m17.829s
      user	0m5.837s
      sys	0m2.206s

I cannot do the same bench using fastlz default 6unpack program as it does not seem to be able to skip the filesystem based decompression.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Comparing to zip (algorithm last updated 94 or so) for speed? Why not compare against the leaders, LZO and snappy?

<comment><USER4> Here's comparison table from a competing library LZ4 <http://code.google.com/p/lz4/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> <http://blosc.pytables.org>

<comment><USER6> Wow!

      > In this mode Blosc can copy memory usually faster than a plain memcpy()

I'm surprised to see something like this flying under the radar (this sounds too good to be true!). Has this library or similar ideas become a standard part of mainstream projects?

<comment><USER2> Hadoop can use various fast compressors such as snappy, LZO, LZ4 so as to be able to read and store data from and to the hard drives faster than if uncompressed.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I wonder how it compares to 7-Zip (<http://www.7-zip.org/>) and its LZMA/LZMA2 algorithm, when you have a ready-heavy/write-light situation.

<comment><USER2> 7zip is a slow compressor that compresses well. fastlz should better be compared to LZ4 or Snappy which are meant to be trade compression rate for speed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm looking for something like this for a 16bit micro (dsPIC33). A quick scan of the code and I don't see any obvious issues on running on a 16bit machine, so hopefully it works.

<comment><USER3> <http://www.oberhumer.com/opensource/lzo/> has been ported to everything.

<comment><USER8> LZO requires 64kB of memory. I've only have 16kB total. It looks like FastLZ requires 8kB. Still looking for something smaller.

<comment><USER3> I suspect you'll have to write something yourself - I've not seen an LZ-style compressor (either lz78/lzw/"arc" or lz77/lzss/lzma/zip) that can do with so little memory and have reasonable performance. (The memory mostly has hash tables; less memory with these algorithms essentially guarantees much, much longer run time or much, much lower compression ratio).

Note, though, that's only for compression. LZO can decompress in-place, as can snappy, and I'm sure others can too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> fast or not, this url/link is olddddd</comment>


How to Learn JavaScript – The Right Way - <AUTHOR> https://www.codementor.io/ryanstegmann/how-to-learn-javascript-the-right-way-8lwi09kha <comment><USER2> I get 404 on this link.</comment>


Part-Time CTO Salary Denied by Board - <AUTHOR> I have been working as a part time CTO and co-founder in a 3 years old startup. At the start of the startup, a money injection of about 40,000 USD has been injected by both co-founders (CTO and CEO), thus making a 80,000 USD initial startup capital. Fast forward to recent days, the startup has recently gotten more than 2,000,000 USD in seed funding and VC investment.
Since the start, the CTO has never got any monthly salary or any sort of compensation. The VC has demanded the CTO to join the company on full-time bases and established a plan with deadline for CTO full-time commitment.
Now, the CTO has demanded to be paid part-time monthly salary until he becomes available on full-time bases, but the board (CEO and 1 VC seat) has rejected to pay the CTO and requested the CTO to continue to work for free until the CTO is available on full-time bases. What would you do if you are in my case, as a CTO being requested to work for free with much higher expectations from the board and as the company rapidly scaling up and in great need for solid CTO role?<p>Note: both CTO and CEO are shareholder. <comment><USER2> First: The way you're mixing 1st and 3rd person in this post is very confusing. From the comments, it sounds like you're the CTO.

Second: Echoing others, it's entirely reasonable that the VCs want a full-time commitment before paying you. Do you believe in your product? You've taken VC money and put in $40k, so you must believe in it some. If you can't make a full-time commitment then it's probably time to step aside for someone else who can (as this will be best for the company). "Either sh*t or get off the pot."

Third: You are absolutely being compensated for your part-time work, even at $0. You have equity in the company, and presumably your ownership stake is growing in value. Of course it's hard to spend "paper wealth", but that's the founder's game. That should not be a surprise to you.

More than anything, I'm confused (and concerned) by your lack of commitment. If you believe in this venture, why would you NOT want to jump in full-time? If you have some other job and just don't want to give up the income, I suggest that you are not really committed, and it would be better for everyone to bow out gracefully and forfeit / sell most of your equity stake back to the CEO.

(updated: typo)

<comment><USER3> > it's entirely reasonable that the VCs want a full-time commitment before > paying you.

I agree with this, but instead of being douchebags and wasting everyones time with stupid games, why dont they just say "look, we need a full time CTO, if you can't do it we need to find a replacement."

>You are absolutely being compensated for your part-time work, even at $0. You have equity in the company, and presumably your ownership stake is growing in value. Of course it's hard to spend "paper wealth", but that's the founder's game

Friendly reminder that equity is almost always worth $0 in a startup. Its absolutely ridiculous he made it this long without getting paid unless no one is.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Amazing in 2019 we still have these clueless tech founders running about. The idea guys of the world must be thrilled.

1) get a lawyer, 2) get a friend who has some vague idea how startups work who can patiently explain it to you. It's clear from your post that you have no idea what you're doing, and that you're being screwed.

You're not being treated like a cofounder, and you're not acting like one. (Nor are you being treated like a shareholder who invested 40k, quite honestly.) You're not ready to join full time a company you cofounded that just raised 2 million? What are you even talking about dude?

</comment><comment><USER5> So I think you may have mixed up the acronyms here a little, as the post doesn't say CEO after the first mention.

But basically, I wouldn't ever work for free, and I'm just a lowly peon. Certainly not for a company with two million bucks in the bank. I don't understand how part-time or full-time status of any employee is relevant to whether or not you can be paid.

</comment><comment><USER6> At some point in a startup, you need to be all-in. No half measures. That is how it works. So if the board wants you to join full-time as CTO, I don't see why that is an issue. You can be a part-time "employee" if you want, but you need to be a full-time CTO. It is about skin in the game. Either you are all- in or you are not.

Also, don' work for free. The startup is 3 years old and CTO still works without any pay ? Something is strange here.

</comment><comment><USER7> What is the reason the CTO can't join fulltime?

I understand the investors thoughts that the CTO doesn't want to contribute fulltime, thus slowing the company down. CTO should be either replaced or joining fulltime. If CTO can't join fulltime for whatever reason he shouldn't be CTO but hold a lower position for which he could be paid part-time.

</comment><comment><USER8> If VCs don't pay you then they're VCs who don't understand how to take care of their investment.

Part-time or full-time is a separate issue. Working for free or entirely for equity when there's money in the bank is a losing game.

</comment><comment><USER9> Are you the CTO? You refer to the CTO in the third person in places here. In any case, the CTO, whoever it is, is being pressured to make a decision between being a CTO and doing whatever else they are doing.

<comment><AUTHOR> Ok, but why would the CTO work for free even in a part time bases?

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I'll join the company on a full-time basis.

<comment><AUTHOR> During the transition period and while I am still part-timer, should I work without pay for a VC funded company?!

<comment><USER11> Why is there a transition period? I think that's actually the problem.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Ask the CEO to give you his board seat.</comment>


Ask HN: What is your programming music?  - <AUTHOR>

I am learning how to program, thought it would be interesting to see what music is best for programming.  It was said that music limits your creativity in programming (Blink: Malcolm Gladwell, I believe). <comment><USER2> Full albums by Trent Reznor/Nine Inch Nails. Try Ghosts I-IV and the Social Network Soundtrack.

<comment><USER3> +1 for The Social Network soundtrack. Definitely great coding music.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Things with interesting music, but without lyrics. Nine Inch Nails' "Ghosts I-IV" is a good start, as is the NIN ambient 'music' of the sound-track to the original Quake.

The Canadian indie label Constellation has a number of artists that make good coding music, including Godspeed You! Black Emperor, Thee Silver Mt. Zion Memorial Orchestra, and Do Make Say Think.

Other relevant artists include: Mogwai, Boards of Canada, Dirty Three, Explosions In The Sky, LCD Soundsystem, Monolake/Robert Henke, The Necks, Ratatat, The Flashbulb, The Samuel Jackson Five.

There's a few particularly good movie soundtracks I like, as well: Koyaanisqatsi, Le Fabuleux Destin d'Amélie Poulain, and Blade Runner.

Another good source of quiet, interesting, music is videogame soundtracks. I'm particularly fond of the soundtrack to Ōkami, and the OCRemix tributes to Donkey Kong Country, Super Metroid, and Doom: [http://ocremix.org/albums/?&offset=0&sort=nameasc](http://ocremix.org/albums/?&offset=0&sort=nameasc)

<comment><USER5> Agreed on many of these. The "Post-Rock" genre, which usually is anthemic and instrumental makes great music for concentrating on intensive tasks. A lot of ambient electronica can be good as well, but sometimes the repetition gets monotonous.

Boards of Canada, Explosions in the Sky, Ratatat, F*ck Buttons, Tortoise, and El Ten Eleven have been in constant rotation for me lately. I often use them as seeds for Pandora as well. Works like a charm.

<comment><USER6> Agreed on Nine Inch Nails and LCD Soundsystem. Sigur Ros is also great and hasn't been mentioned.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Having listened to music mostly to block out background noise for a long time, I've recently discovered that listening to brown noise (such as at <http://simplynoise.com>) is great when I just want to focus.

Edit: fixed URL.

<comment><USER8> I think you meant <http://simplynoise.com>

<comment><USER9> I listen to it all the time. It's wonderful. I used to listen to music, but lately I've realized that I'm not smart enough to think of two things at once.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I just go to stereomood.com and pick the mood I want to get into.

<comment><USER11> Thanks for that. I've mainly been using old.thesixtyone.com - and I've grown rather bored.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I've had tinnitus for as long as I can remember, so "silence" for me means non-stop high pitch ringing. Thus, I use Pandora just about every hour I'm awake and around a controllable sound source.

For coding I usually pick techno, electronica, soft rock, classical, or more piano/instrumental types. It mostly depends on mood. I tend to avoid things with lyrics for coding.

More specifically, I've been addicted to Explosions in the Sky and Trifonic for months now.

</comment><comment><USER13> Something I've listened to a lot, otherwise I get distracted by trying to pay attention (mostly to the lyrics). Lately, I've been listening to Girl Talk's All Day <http://www.illegal-art.net/allday/> a lot, but I also like putting some NIN and Tool into the rotation as well.

<comment><USER14> This. All Day is excellent, and for more on the mashup side of things check out "wait what" <http://www.waitwhatmusic.com/>

I also love Buckethead. Energizing!

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I like rock so any band that has three or four consecutively good albums that I can just push play and listen to hours of good music is a must.

Examples, Tool, Pink Floyd, Rage Against the Machine, In Flames, etc.

edit: also, almost any station from SomaFM <http://somafm.com/>

</comment><comment><USER16> I have a tough time programming with music going. I'm more of a silence kind of guy. lol

</comment><comment><USER17> try <http://www.radio79.com/relax.php> or <http://www.chilloutradio.gr/> or <http://www.fluid-radio.co.uk/> or <http://musicovery.com/> or <http://www.kcrw.com/music/programs> (try Anne Litt) or <http://www.aleph- zero.info/>

</comment><comment><USER18> True Love Waits: Christopher O'Riley Plays Radiohead Alive 2007: Daft Punk

These two plus the aforementioned NIN Ghosts I-IV and the Social Network score are in heavy rotation.

</comment><comment><USER19> "Damn It Feels Good To Be A Gangsta" by Geto Boys, of course... (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Space>)

</comment><comment><USER20> DJ Girltalk or anything else I've heard a million times. The more I've listened to something the less I pay attention to the words and the more I let the beat take over...

</comment><comment><USER21> Massive Attack, Prodigy, Fron Line assembly, Assemblage 23, Covenant, VNV Nation, Front 242, Hallucinogen, Infected Mushroom

something like that...

<comment><USER17> Try Shulman

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Pandora radio on "Mr Scruff", lots of chill nu-jazz and such. Not much vocals, aside from samples here and there. Love it, stream it all day.

</comment><comment><USER23> The Album Leaf - their entire discography.

It's all instrumental and is somewhere in between Explosions in The Sky and Boards of Canada.

</comment><comment><USER24> Neurofunk. Try on the lifted music podcast from Spor and Chris Renegade on for a good dose.

</comment><comment><USER25> Classical music (Mozart, Beethoven, Vivaldi, Tchaikovsky), and chilly House music

</comment><comment><USER26> John Cage's 4'33", on repeat.

</comment><comment><USER27> Radiohead, Thom Yorke, Explosions in the sky, Interpol

</comment><comment><USER11> Classical music! :-)

</comment><comment><USER28> Lady Gaga.

</comment><comment><USER29> Right now, my Pandora "Nobuo Uematsu" channel. Very well tuned, IMO.

NIN, RHCP (the soft stuff), and trance.</comment>


LYSP (a really tiny lisp) - <AUTHOR> http://www.piumarta.com/software/lysp/ <comment><USER2> God, seeing straight C programs that don't use any superfluous libraries or stupid coding tricks that just obscure the intent of the programmer is so refreshing. Just one C file that anyone with a barely working knowledge of C can understand and a very clear Lisp implementation.

Just don't try to learn C from it; code is saturated with boundless copying into stack buffers.

<comment><USER3> check this one out :-D

<http://www.modeemi.fi/~chery/lisp500/lisp500c99.c>

<comment><USER2> Is that an IOCCC entry?

Off topic: are you still in the NOVA area or overseas?

<comment><USER3> Not and IOCCC entry; just something Lispers carry with them when heading towards obscure and very small territories. You might like XCL better: <http://armedbear.org/> has a native optimizing compiler and compiles to ~5MB for compiler + runtime.

I live in Australia now, mate. Sydney. It's like D.C. but with a beach, nicer beer, better public transport and laid back people :-)

<comment><USER4> And fricking sharks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I smiled at the last two lines of his test file:

(define exit (dlsym "exit")) (exit 0)

Certainly no need to define exit any earlier than that...

</comment><comment><USER6> Someone should take stuff like this and make a _Really Compact_ Netbook/Tablet OS. Such a device could undercut competitors by requiring 1/50th the resources. An instant-on grayscale tablet "Moleskine" that just worked and had a gorgeous trans-reflective screen would rule. (Haiku OS might be a better starting point.)

<comment><USER7> Lately I have been showing a lot of younger kids how to program in scheme. This means I have been setting up a lot of older laptops with linux + dr scheme as that is the ideal environment for books like the little schemer, how to design programs etc. I have to say that it feels like there should be a MUCH lighter way to accomplish this. I understand dr scheme can do a lot of cool graphical stuff too but I would LOVE it if there was a linux distro that had nothing except for a lisp/scheme interpreter like this + ncurses dr scheme type interface. This way it would run on next to nothing hardware and not run into so many strange hic-ups w/ x on spurious hardware.

A moleskine tablet like you mention with an external rollout keyboard would be so ideal. I'm not asking for a lisp-all-the-way-down (well I would like that too) OS but it would be rad if someone rolled a x-less version of ubuntu or what not w/ the exclusive purpose of teaching/learning scheme.

<comment><USER8> Arch Linux is a nicely stripped down linux distro. Provided you could find or write a nice ncurses interface for scheme, you could probably build such a system on top of Arch.

I use Arch and Musca (a relatively new, very minimal tiling window manager) on an eee pc 1000 HE and it works extremely well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I've used this library a few times for similar (not as good and not good enough to show off) fun- it works beautifully: <http://sexpr.sourceforge.net>

</comment><comment><USER10> I know only the very basics of LISP but this to my untrained eye looks rather neat!

</comment><comment><USER11> A correction: These aren't macros, they're fexprs.

There are a lot of other interesting things on the site; the cola/idst stuff is especially interesting.

<comment><USER12> The gold box/pepsi/coke/cola/jolt/id/idst/soda languages are indeed interesting, but from the outside of VPRI it isn't easy to figure out what they do. Listening to Alan Kay try to summarize it in a few minutes (<http://irbseminars.intel-research.net/>) makes it sound like even he doesn't understand it very well.

Piumarta seems to be a very sharp guy, but it's strange that a software project that is supposed to radically simplify the software stack still doesn't appear to have a working prototype of a complete two-kernel (pepsi+coke) system, almost five years after the albert paper (<http://piumarta.com/papers/albert.pdf>) that sketched out the basics was written. Kay keeps talking about how cool it is, and Piumarta has given at least one talk about how cool it is (<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cn7kTPbW6QQ>), but as far as I can tell it doesn't even exist yet. There are working pieces (which are each tens of thousands of lines of code), but from the outside there doesn't appear to be a working pepsi+coke system yet, let alone iterations on it. The VPRI progress reports don't even mention it.

VPRI seems all over the place, and Kay is talking about objects with AI- complete interfaces now. The mailing list is dead, and the wiki is pretty much dead. There's more information on Piumarta's personal website than anywhere else. I know it's supposed to be blue sky research, but it still seems weird.

My impression of the whole thing is that "complete" reflection/self- description is not a good foundation for minimalistic systems.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> the ifdef'd main in gc.c has bit rot a bit and segfaults, otherwise nice and simple.

</comment><comment><USER14> Ugh, why software rottens?</comment>


HashiCorp and Microsoft team up on Terraform - <AUTHOR> https://venturebeat.com/2017/08/17/hashicorp-and-microsoft-team-up-on-terraform-infrastructure-provisioning/ <comment><USER2> Funny how doing anything non-standard with Windows OS requires to "team up with Microsoft": first Docker, now Terraform. I read it as a quite a lot of deep changes in Windows to make it fit.</comment>


Amanuensis: The Programmer's Apprentice - <AUTHOR> https://web.stanford.edu/class/cs379c/resources/amanuensis/index.html <comment><USER2> Interesting to see again the concept of a "Programmer's Apprentice" after so many years.

Initial Report on a LISP Programmer's Apprentice [https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/6920](https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/6920)

The Programmer's Apprentice: Knowledge Based Program Editing [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220071274_The_Progr...](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220071274_The_Programmer's_Apprentice_Knowledge_Based_Program_Editing)

Both of those papers are included in the 1984 book "Interactive Programming Environments" [https://www.amazon.com/Interactive-Programming- Environments-...](https://www.amazon.com/Interactive-Programming-Environments- David- Barstow/dp/0070038856/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1538811280&sr=8-1&keywords=interactive+programming+environments)

That book also has many other interesting papers like "The UNIX Programming Environment", "EMACS: The Extensible, Customizable, Self-Documenting, Display Editor", and "The LISP Machine"

<comment><USER3> A blast from the past. But one which I've been thinking about again lately.

VR/AR will change IDE/PA UI constraints. Alter the economics of information display. "Screen" real estate gets cheaper. There's more opportunity for "I'm just guessing, and you probably don't actually want this, but just in case, it's here off to the side, where it won't bother you, but is available at a glance".

"Oh, you just typed an import statement for an npm module on github? Well... just in case, of to the side, here are its npmtrends, alternative modules, recent news and discussion, analysis of repo, of code, of forks, of issues, of its dev community and individuals, a performance profile from its test suite, ... [90% cache hit with week-old tolerance; $0.05 spent on Lambda/GCP for update; the following items are also available...]"

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> My god this is pretentious.. Most of the actual nuts and bolts stuff they are ultimately talking about is all relatively simple known stuff (as far as I can tell from skimming) But their choice of words, use of language, and also all the new terms and acronyms they are making up.. The authors intent certainly seems to be to confuse people and come across as intelligent to those who dont actually do any probing into the meaning of text.

Before programming, I was an architect. This has all the hallmarks of the many bullshit, unnecessarily wordy, borderline meaningless, architectural tracts one comes across in that field.

<comment><USER4> One of the reasons I got out of architecture was that is was fully permeated with bullshit, and no-one questions it.

My experience with programmers in general is for them to be much more pragmatic, direct and clear in their communication, and evidence driven.

Its sad to see that this sort of intellectually dishonest, architectural journal crap also exists in the software field. Lets please try and keep it down.</comment></comment>


Emp.ly just launched in beta, feedback welcome - <AUTHOR>

We are Emp.ly and just launched the beta of our new social recruiting service to share jobs, reward users & find great hires. We were also one of YC10 summer interview startups, but did not get selected. Would appreciate your feedback, comments & suggestions. If you're currently hiring do give http://Emp.ly/ a go. Thanks in advance.
Emp.ly allows to post job ads to social networks easily, get stats on how they have been shared and/or retweeted and, best of all, add incentives for people to do the said sharing and retweeting. On our Facebook app you'll see all of the jobs published or shared by your friends. There are also widgets to list all your jobs on your blog or add sharing to existing job ads.
Functionality-wise we're just warming up, there will be more exciting ways to incentivise sharing in the future than Amazon gift cards. We'll be working more also on candidate database and social ratings side. <comment><AUTHOR> The clickable link is <http://emp.ly/></comment>


AI can be trusted to take our 911 calls - <AUTHOR> https://thenextweb.com/podium/2019/03/24/ai-can-be-trusted-to-take-our-911-calls/ <comment><USER2>
      The ability to ask our TV for a movie

... isn't that reliable. For example, there is a Comcast commercial that has a woman saying very clearly "show me Jurassic Park" to her remote. The film that is actually pulled up is the Jurassic Park _sequel_ "The Lost World."

Wrong film. And that's _right in their own commercial._

Even once 911 AI exceeds humans in routing speed and accuracy, the first time a life is lost because the AI drops, misroutes, or misprioritizes a call, there will be an uproar.</comment>


Fighting to Save the Real-Life Pharmacy from 'Ulysses' - <AUTHOR> https://lithub.com/fighting-to-save-the-real-life-pharmacy-from-james-joyces-ulysses/ <comment><USER2> _[...] exclusivity is antithetical to the spirit of the place, of the community, and of the idea that Joyce wrote for everybody, especially the ordinary person._

Let us say that that is not how I would have phrased that sentence.

<comment><USER3> " _Please don 't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something._"

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)</comment></comment>


Only 20% of millennials have ever tried a Big Mac - <AUTHOR> https://qz.com/892474/mcdonalds-mcd-introduces-giant-and-small-big-mac-burgers-in-hopes-of-driving-us-sales/ <comment><USER2> This just seems like progress to me. I wonder how it correlates to the big mac advertising, which I do not recall seeing lately. While in the 80's however, I got a 7" flexi single of the big mac song and the menu song. I think marketing just went on to chase the low fat, then low carb market next. The big mac was neither.

</comment><comment><USER3> No surprising. The special sauce really isn't what the grew up with. Please the bun is bready it a turnoff for kids that grew up on wraps and microwave thin crust pizzas. The sesame seeds can also be turn-off.</comment>


Ask HN: What are doing this weekend? - <AUTHOR> Feel free to tell what you plan on doing this weekend and even ask for help or feedback. <comment><USER2> Plan was to go to the beach but considering how British beaches are flooded during this hot weekend, gonna write more hacker stuff.</comment>


Show HN: Lenient JavaScript syntax - <AUTHOR> https://xixixao.github.io/lenientjs/ <comment><USER2> Coffeescript would like to have a word with you.

</comment><comment><USER3> I never understood LENIENT languages, it just makes everything way harder!</comment>


Electronic commerce iOS APP framework Demo - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/zonghongyan/EVNEstorePlatform <comment><AUTHOR> Electronic commerce iOS APP framework The structure of the APP is divided into three main line:One of the main frame process;A framework is the user login process;Other such as advertising page, a welcome page, etc</comment>


Unfixable security flaw found in Intel chipset - <AUTHOR> https://m.techxplore.com/news/2020-03-unfixable-flaw-intel-chipset.html <comment><USER2> Never got a sufficient explaination why I would need a security engine in the first place.

My cpu being uniquely identifiable may be interesting to intels support, but certainly not me as a user.

From wikipedia:

> The IME is an attractive target for hackers, since it has top level access > to all devices and completely bypasses the operating system.

If a security expert could elaborate why I shouldn't see this as a complete disaster? Should I buy AMD or do they have the same bad ideas?

<comment><USER3> > Should I buy AMD or do they have the same bad ideas?

Buying AMD won't help with this sort of problem.

AMD Platform Security Processor: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Platform_Security_Processo...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Platform_Security_Processor)

"The PSP is similar to the Intel Management Engine for Intel processors."

It is an ARM core on the side, and AMD does not release source code for what's running on it. Reverse engineering efforts exist: [https://github.com/PSPReverse/PSPTool](https://github.com/PSPReverse/PSPTool)</comment></comment>


What HN Thinks of Major Tech Companies - <AUTHOR> http://aakilfernandes.com/blog/what-hn-thinks-of-major-tech-companies

<comment><USER2> You submitted this yesterday, but then you deleted it. Note that deleting then resubmitting is against HN rules.

Additionally, your data is incredibly flawed due to a time bias. You'd need _years_ of comments for sentiment to make any sense. (and even then, raw sentiment analysis can be flawed if the training data for the model is not the same as test data, which is likely the case here)

<comment><AUTHOR> I deleted and resubmitted because plot.ly (which serves my graph) went down right after I submitted yesterday.

I think your training data objection makes sense. I'll have to look into how Alchemy trains their data more.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What is your biggest pet peeve in your development workflow? - <AUTHOR> I'm curious as to how the rest of the community feels about development workflow. For me personally, one major painpoint is enforcing coding standards across my team. Thankfully sites like CodeClimate and BitHound popped up to help with that.<p>What are your pet peeves? <comment><USER2> Two big things:

First, Use of legacy build systems (hodgepodge of different development environments and in-house tools). We don't need a custom migration tool, we don't need to badly reinvent make in batch files, and so on. I've been slowly grinding through and bringing sanity, but it's very annoying work and the "well it works fine once you're used to it" is a strong thing to overcome.

Second, developing on Windows instead of a 'nix-derived OS. For daily programming, I like having terminals with reasonable tools installed and ready to go, and Powershell just doesn't scratch that itch and neither does cygwin or git-bash. Honestly, this is what exacerbates gripe one: if we were on a proper OS, we wouldn't have to reinvent so much stuff anyways.

<comment><USER3> On the other hand, I'm dyslexic and I have a _lot_ of trouble with CLIs.

My biggest pet peeve is that there are a lot of development technologies that have no GUI, or only a terrible half-complete GUI.

Currently I'm doing back-end development where I can get mostly everything done in Visual Studio, but whenever I have to interact with Git (which has several GUIs, all of which are either incomplete or intolerably slow) or the front-end guys (Bower/NPM/Grunt) I end up struggling in a console for waaay too long to get basic stuff done.

There seems to be this belief in the industry that it's ok if the interface is kind of rough and crappy as long as only developers are using it. Gripe if you want about Microsoft, but at least the vast majority of their tools have at least a decent GUI.

<comment><USER2> You seemed to type this post just fine--out of curiosity, did you do that aided with anything, or what sort of problems do you have with CLIs resulting from your dyslexia?

I prefer CLI tools during development because the tools tend to be simpler ("rougher") and easier to compose into pipelines. If you _aren 't_ using your tools this way, you're missing out on a lot of what makes them useful. They also are a lot easier to script and write documentation for...type this, type this, type this--okay, according to your shell history, _you didn 't type what we told you to_ and there's your problem.

GUI tools are useful for when I'm debugging graphical issues in the frontend (what is the DOM looking like starting under the cursor right now?), or need to _very rapidly_ switch context in the backend (what are these variables set to? What is the prototype and doc for this function invocation?). They are annoying to script, and annoying to document for other developers. They also tend to be much larger and less composable than other tools.

As far as the git stuff, well, it's best used from the command-line.

<comment><USER3> I do ok with text, probably purely due to practice. (Playing MUDs, writing stories, etc.) I've learned what kind of things trip-me-up and carefully read everything twice before hitting submit.

To be perfectly honest, the main problem I have with CLIs is that there's no safety net, and a single typo could lose hours of work or loads of files. There's no Undo, there's no Recycle Bin (or Trash Can or whatever you want to call it). It's unforgiving and I make a lot of errors, and the combination of those two things is that I have zero confidence so I avoid them whenever possible.

I can't think of any development-related task I've ever need to do where it's helpful to "compose tools into pipelines", except building the solution which Visual Studio just kind of magically does for me.

And yes, obviously I know Git is best used from the CLI. I hope you realize how off-putting and discriminatory that feels to somebody like me... especially now that it's become a de-facto standard _before it has a single reasonable GUI in Windows._ I can't even imagine how a workplace adopting Git would feel to a person with a _real_ physical disability.

<comment><USER2> So, on Windows, TortoiseGit isn't too bad. I like some of what the Github client does, but it gets confused sometimes and that terrifies me. For a while I maintained our in-house Git tool that enforced a particular workflow--a nice GUI that had buttons for particular work stages and checked to make sure the devs were following process. :)

That said, we kept getting nibbled by little issues the interfaces had glossed over, and eventually I just sat down with the team and started practicing and reiterating how to do what we did with git, and made sure our team's wiki had explicit reference instructions. They weren't really CLI folks, but within about a month they were all fine, and I cleaned up any messes they made and helped them gain confidence even after big oopsies (like deleting the master development branch on a weekend).

I think that if your development environment is more server-y ('nix, basically) you'd be getting more exposure and practice with composition of tools and CLI stuff. Don't give up!

<comment><USER3> I develop server apps all day. We don't use Unix servers, we use Windows servers. Which is great, because it means I can use C# which is one of the few programming languages available that actually has competent GUI tools.

Your post is misconstruing my point quite a bit. I don't _want_ to learn CLI tools. (Why would I, when they're clearly inferior to GUI tools I already have? From my perspective.)

What I want is for developers of programming tools to be more aware of usability issues in their products, and to test their products with a wider audience of users. (It's obvious the authors of Git never thought for even a brief moment about usability or accessibility issues.)

Usability isn't just for mobile apps; _all_ applications should have effort applied to make them as usable as possible to as many different kinds of users as possible.

<comment><USER4> These CLI tools are generally developed by and for * nix developers.

These developers generally prefer CLI tools for a bunch of reasons: their power, flexibility and ease of automation, integration and combination, standardized in/outputs, use over SSH and speed.

They prefer making CLI tools for all these reasons, and because it takes much, much less time to write a good CLI tool than to write a good GUI tool.

So, if you prefer hand-holding and mouse-holding, fine, use Microsoft products, they have something for almost everything you could need.

However, you can not expect developers, who work for free, to spend their free time to solve a problem they don't have, for a platform they don't use.

If you want these as GUI tools, why don't you build them yourself? No one is stopping you.

Edit: readability

<comment><USER3> > These CLI tools are generally developed by and for * nix developers.

Duh, I know that. But I'm not a Linux developer, I don't want to be a Linux developer, and I still have to use Git.

> They prefer making CLI tools for all these reasons, and because it takes > much, much less time to write a good CLI tool than to write a good GUI tool.

Too lazy to make software properly; gotcha. They wrote about 1/3rd of a good source control program, then just kind of gave up, stopped, and called it "done".

> However, you can not expect developers, who work for free, to spend their > free time to solve a problem they don't have, for a platform they don't use.

No; but I'd expect _someone_ to do it. And it would be nice if open source developers actually felt a bit of guilt or remorse over how difficult their products are to use.

> If you want these as GUI tools, why don't you build them yourself? No one is > stopping you.

I already have a job. My job is significantly more unpleasant because I have to work with Git. Volunteering my time to work with Git _more_ is not appealing to me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm part of the team that handles development for an excessively large business unit. Basically they meet up a few days of the week, argue extensively, and pass down the most ridiculous requests for us to complete. Essentially it means that no project ever gets finished, because everything is in constant rotation between back-burner and top priority. Even simple UI improvements have to be run up the chain of mid level executives who feel obligated to provide input. It kills morale, and leaves little room for innovation and actual improvement of our products.

<comment><USER6> That's why "it's better to ask forgiveness than permission" is so key working in that environment.

While you cannot do massive things and get away with it, you can get in a long of small fixes and improvements (which can add up) and just apologize if anyone notices.

If you had to ask permission for every tiny change it may take weeks and the ultimate decision would contain the kitchen sink anyway. Instead just do what has to be done and try not to get caught.

<comment><USER7> When a customer micro-manages me and does not listen to my advice I usually lose the interest in the project and just finish it to get paid. If I would be employed in such an environment I probably would not care to slip in improvements, because I would feel no sense of ownership in the project.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> When I'm working on multiple monitors/desktops and I switch to one and want to do some work there, but my 'active window' context is in previous spot where I was working!

I wish someone would invent some type of eye tracking that would intelligently assign the context to open windows on your screen(s).

<comment><USER7> You could use a window manager that supports following (instead of clicking) the mouse or keyboard shortcuts to switch focus. Maybe I have been on the geek-road too long, but the latter should be supported in Windows/OS X as well, shouldn't it?

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Syncing configuration files across environments, especially when they contain sensitive info. It's difficult and time-consuming to ensure that production configs are up to date when deploying new things. Super frustrating.</comment>


Accidental astrophysicists: Mathematicians inadvertently settle question about bending of light - <AUTHOR> http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/33082/title/Accidental_astrophysicists

<comment><USER2> score another one for the rationalists.

(I'm still fence sitting though)</comment>


The restaurant that serves up rejected food [video] - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25449219

<comment><USER2> A mobile version of the concept (Minneapolis): [http://sisterscamelot.org/](http://sisterscamelot.org/)</comment>


Projects: hijack (Hijacking the iPhone earphone jack) - <AUTHOR> http://eecs.umich.edu/~prabal/projects/hijack/ <comment><USER2> Pheh, they forgot the best application ever: iPhone-controlled vibrator:

<http://www.ohmibod.com/bodyheat/>

I was at a presentation by the app's creator, apparently the hardware was already available through some company, so you could theoretically do it with any device that outputs to a headphone jack. The iPhone's touch interface simply provided a ... unique and apparently (don't ask me!) expressive method of control.

</comment><comment><USER3> That's truly amazing what they're doing here. I'm sorry if this is an ignorant question, but wouldn't it make sense for there to be some kind of USB port or something that's actually designed for I/O on the iPhone? I mean, surely there'd be less power loss if the port was actually designed to power other low power devices. Especially if it could mean that you don't need as powerful of an external microcontroller for doing the hacking and encoding that's necessary for doing all the work-arounds from not having a real IO port.

<comment><USER4> Apple wants you to use their 30 pin interface, but that requires going through their MFi program and that lets them control the hardware ecosystem like they do the software ecosystem.

To be fair, there are certain advantages to hardware manufacturers willing to jump those hurdles. You're able to ensure no one can make software for your hardware, for one. Secondly users who plug in your hardware can automatically be taken to the app store to download your software.

<comment><USER5> Is there anyplace online people in the MFi program hang out (forums, usenet, mail lists, etc.)? I've got some very basic questions about the whole process, but it seems like such a black hole (from the outside looking in).

It would be great to use the ipods or ipads for industrial data collection, but we'll need IR and a way to get data on/off without network connectivity.

<comment><USER4> Not that I've seen, and the NDA you have to accept is pretty strict.

<comment><USER5> That's what I was afraid of. In the quantities we're looking at, maybe we'd be better off jailbreaking and selling the whole thing as a package.

Or maybe I'll just drag my feet a bit and hope there's a decent Android tablet with USB host and an SD slot coming soon...

<comment><USER6> You should take a look at Adam from Notion Ink. It's USB host. To me that's the killer feature, for this reason!

<comment><USER7> So far, it's vapourware. That's something I just can't get over when I consider ordering one.

<comment><USER8> If it's vapourware then what were they showing at CES 2011?

<comment><USER9> It's vapourware until you can buy one. A lot of things that are shown at CES do end up being cancelled before they're ever released.

<comment><USER6> The pre-orders are shipping. Mine will arrive in about two weeks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I think it's a very interesting project. I've been very interested in things that combine hardware with smart phones, since the Apple keynote that showed the first authorized hardware "extensions". (though since then, I've been disappointed in not seeing much of anything)

However, can anyone chime in about the differences there are between using the iPhone jack and using the dock connector? I know you're supposed to fill out some docs with Apple to officially hack on the dock connector, but I believe you can find hardware to do that without Apple's consent. It looks like one would have to go the jailbreak route with that project as well.

I imagine the main thing is that a hobbyist can much more easily/cheaply get a jack connector than a dock connector...

<comment><USER4> You could create un-authorized hardware and apps using the 30 pin connector, but they would only run on jailbroken devices. There are places to buy knock- off (non-apple made) dock connectors so some people must do this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Also check out the Southern Stars SkyWire. Apparently it's a true RS-232 I/O cable that plugs into the dock connector. They use it to drive telescopes, but apparently it's not limited to that.

<http://www.southernstars.com/products/skywire/index.html>

I've gotten as far as opening an input and output stream with it, but I haven't had time to dig up an RS-232 device to try talking back and forth.

<comment><USER4> Unless you have a jailbroken device, arbitrary apps you write won't be able to access that stream.

<comment><USER11> You can use the EAAccessory framework to talk to it. Just use the protocol string "com.southernstars.sw9a".

What I'm not sure of is what sorts of apps they'll let into the app store that repurpose the cable.

EDIT: Here's my test code thus far:

<https://github.com/frankus/SkyWireTest>

<comment><USER4> Apps using that won't pass certification, but you're right you can use your own provisioned apps.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Now if only you were permitted to write software to take advantage of the cool hardware you build.

<comment><USER13> Square has their app on the marketplace. <https://squareup.com/>

<comment><USER4> Worth noting they may have had to go through additional testing. When you submit an app that needs MFi hardware, they make you submit the hardware as well and test both together. They may have demanded something similar for Square.

Also worth noting that square is not drawing power, doing so might make them reject your app. Especially because this harvest method is fairly inefficient (power is being converted twice before its useful). Draw on the iphone battery may be 4x the power used.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Cool project!

Currently, I am a bit doubtful concerning whether drawing extra power from an already very battery lifetime-constrained smartphone is a good idea.

On the other hand, the batteries shold improve in the future, so with a bit of luck the idea may just as well come to maturity at the right time!

<comment><USER15> It doesn't drain the battery any more than listening to music does :) Really cool project!

<comment><USER16> Listening to music doesn't drive a constant 22 kHz tone.

[Edit] I really don't understand -- why was I downvoted here? Can someone explain why they think I'm wrong? Isn't a constant, high-frequency tone going to draw more power than variable output with significant larger gaps (and a likely lower peak voltage difference?)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Wow, that's a hell of a hack just because your smartphone maker wants to rent- seek your serial port.

</comment><comment><USER5> Clever idea, using the audio output as a power supply.

</comment><comment><USER4> 7.4mW is more power than I would have thought possible. That is really cool. Plus with some additional hackery you may be able harvest up to double by toggling the second audio channel on and off when you don't need to receive data from the phone.

I'm going to put together a board based on their specs. If anyone in the bay area is interested in collaborating on a project with it shoot me an email.

</comment><comment><USER18> Does anyone have information on doing something like this wirelessly? Provided your sensor has its own power source, couldn't you use the fm receiver built into a lot of phones to receive data from an external sensor?

</comment><comment><USER19> The O'Reilly "iPhone Hacks" book has schematics and sample code to push RS-232 in and out of the headphone jack. You'll need a self-powered device to decode FSK on the other end, of course.

</comment><comment><USER20> HiJack in full case reminded of square. <https://squareup.com>

</comment><comment><USER21> Maaaaan I had this idea over 2 years ago... except my ideas revolved more around robotics. I wish I was a bit older so I had the resources (money) and time to work on these kinds of ideas that I have. Previously, all my time was consumed by school/internship/band (I was a signed, professional touring musician). And now all my time is consumed by getting my startup going... in the hopes that it will eventually be somewhat self-sustaining enough to cover my living costs while giving me time to pursue these other more interesting ideas. Sigh... sorry for the rant that I'm sure no one cares to read.</comment>


Why goofing off boosts productivity - <AUTHOR> http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9131066 <comment><USER2> As much as I would love to believe this, no specific studies are cited...

<comment><USER3> It seems like the study is as of yet unpublished. Google Scholar didn't turn up anything, and the researcher's web page doesn't list it.

[http://www.managementmarketing.unimelb.edu.au/who/staff.cfm?...](http://www.managementmarketing.unimelb.edu.au/who/staff.cfm?HeadingId=534&StaffId=41#534)</comment></comment>


How One College Is Closing The Computer Science Gender Gap - <AUTHOR> http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/04/29/178810710/How-One-College-Is-Closing-The-Tech-Gender-Gap?ft=1&f=1001&sc=tw&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

<comment><USER2> Reality check: Harvey Mudd has 800 undergraduates total (my high school was bigger than that), implying 200 undergrads per year over all programs. [https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/science/giving-women- the-...](https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/science/giving-women-the-access- code.html?pagewanted=all) says they graduate 20 women with CS degrees a year, and this article says women are 40% of the CS majors, implying there are 50 CS majors total or 30 male CS majors. They don't say how many there were before or how that compares with other colleges, but the NYT article says that the national average is 18.2%; to bring the Mudd percentage down to ~18% while leaving fixed the 30 males, they would have not 20 females but 7. So the entirety of their gain for each graduating class is 13 students; that's not a whole lot of students that you need to poach...

The NYT article mentions that she extracted >$25m from R. Michael Shanahan, and presumably that's paying for things like sending the girls to conferences. (Mudd tuition is $57k a year. I wonder how the guys feel about that.) This article implies that she started this program in 2005; at 13 females a year over the last 8 years, that's 104 total, which over $25m is $240k a head.

> At Mudd, about 40% of the computer science majors are women. That's far more > than at any other co-ed school.

The NYT link mentions that "At Carnegie Mellon, the percentage of incoming women enrolled in the computer science program has been rising since 2008, and is at 32 percent. M.I.T.'s figure is 30 percent." Given that MIT's undergraduate body is 13x the size of HM's, their achievement is vastly more impressive.

So to summarize: this is a tiny lavishly funded program staffed with elite teachers and graced with the attention and praise of famous or notable people, with miserably small results which cannot possibly be replicated on any kind of national scale.

</comment><comment><USER3> HARVEY MUDD ACCEPTANCE RATES BY GENDER

MALE: 15.8%

FEMALE: 43.6%

Source: [http://www.parchment.com/c/college/college-545-Harvey- Mudd-C...](http://www.parchment.com/c/college/college-545-Harvey-Mudd- College.html)

The Harvey Mudd story is just actually the really boring fact that if you get to pick and choose whoever you want from a large applicant pool, you can have whatever composition of whatever random demographic your hear desires.</comment>


Dick Costolo (Twitter COO) on Stock Options Acceleration - <AUTHOR> http://www.burningdoor.com/askthewizard/2007/06/options_acceleration.html

<comment><USER2> I've really been appreciating these articles. I'm in the process of negotiating my options with my current company and I'm fairly new to all of these various ins and outs. With my prior startup most of the employees got fairly hosed I think when it company was finally acquired and I'd rather that not to be the case with this one. Still, I know I made the huge mistake already of not having these on paper upfront (I've been there 10 months now). Next time I know better.

<comment><USER3> I definitely appreciate articles on the actual nuts and bolts of setting up and structuring your company.

Advice about "fail quick" and "benefit vs features" are great, but there are so many of them out there.</comment></comment>


Miami, US city most exposed to rising sea, is having a beachfront building boom - <AUTHOR> http://prospect.org/article/sinking-feeling-politics-sea-level-rise-and-miamis-building-boom <comment><USER2> Previous discussion (on [http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/12/21/the- siege-of-mi...](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/12/21/the-siege-of- miami/), a different, IMO better, article that focuses more on the geology than on the boom): [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10747996](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10747996)</comment>


Why dumb recruits cost the Army, big-time (2006) - <AUTHOR> http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2006/01/gi_schmo.html <comment><USER2> During World War II, there were tons of issues with the healthiness of recruits. Sadly, this was because of all the malnutrition of children (and adults) that occurred during The Depression.

This did not really effect the war effort during WWII. Fascinatingly, the US never really fully mobilized for WWII, and could have easily fielded an output 2-3x higher than it did. One of the more famous pieces of data is a survey at the end of the war that asked "did you feel you had to make significant sacrifices in your life or living style during the war". 7 out of 10 said no.

Also, the US has always ramped up INCREDIBLY quickly during war. It's a testament to the latent, incredible power of democracies. For example, it was just 6 months between Pearl Harbor and the Battle of Midway, where 4 Japanese aircraft carriers were sunk and hundreds of planes / pilots destroyed.

<comment><USER3> To be completely fair about this, the US was ramping up a long time before Pearl Harbour. (This is part of the extended discussion around the attack itself, and whether it should have been anticipated.) British rearming began in 1936, the US was certainly planning in the late 30´s, actual spending began in 1939, and ramped up quickly after that during 1940.

In war, as in many other things, if you want to ride the wave, you have to be ready long before you see it coming.

<comment><USER4> Roosevelt definitely saw the war coming and prepared for it. He was hampered by the strong isolationist feelings at the time but he never gave in to them, and was careful never to run too far ahead of public opinion.

<comment><USER5> Roosevelt saw the war coming because he wanted it to come and engineered a way for the US to be attacked (the US way of war has alway been to provoke and goad the other side into firing first [or outright faking such a provocation] then feigning moral outrage) and overcome these (sensible) sentiments. The "isolationist" strain of US diplomacy was part of its founding ethos and WW2 was responsible for obliterating it from the American identity. Was this really a good thing?

<comment><USER4> Seeing as those same America First party people are the same strains of America trying to sell the upside of neo-nazism, I'm going to go with yes? Sorry I'm not edgy enough to sell myself on the upsides of racial and ethnic cleansing...

<comment><USER5> Seeing as how those America First people are the ones who came around to fighting and defeating the Nazis, that's quite a disgusting and loaded remark. It is a shibboleth among the alt-right that they are called Nazis by people like you for sharing beliefs of their grandfathers who fought Nazis and you are reinforcing that perception.

<comment><USER6> But not a disgusting remark like when you stated that 'the "genocide" of native Americans was a result of European diseases, not barbarism' in another thread and argued that evidence of deliberate killing was more like a "rounding error". [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17023220](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17023220) Not disgusting like that, right?

<comment><USER5> Yes, that's right.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've been in the Army for 16 years. Dumb recruits are their bread and butter. They wouldn't give them up for anything in the world. Independent thought,or intelligence in general, are strongly discouraged unless you're lucky enough to be in one of the tiny,incredibly rare units that does something interesting.

The military desperately needs smart people, but they only begrudgingly allow them to exist.

<comment><USER8> > Independent thought,or intelligence in general, are strongly discouraged > unless you're lucky enough to be in one of the tiny,incredibly rare units > that does something interesting.

That's not been my experience in the Army (British, but I've worked with Americans).

The Army fights hard to get soldiers to think intelligently and independently. One of the foundation stones of how the Army does things is 'mission command' (which the US uses as well) that is designed to make sure junior soldiers can think and act independently and that commanders allow them to do this and do not over-control them.

One of the major lessons you learn as a leader in the Army is to decide what you want your soldiers to achieve, and then to give them the time and space to achieve that without excess control or direction.

In fact I think the Army is uniquely good in society at developing young people to able to make their own confident decisions. The biggest difference I see between soldiers and civilians is that soldiers are able to make a decision and come up with a plan in any kind of chaos, and it's the Army that develops that.

Junior soldiers who show potential are mentored and nurtured, up to the point of plucking them out of the ranks and commissioning them if they show enough potential, no matter what their background is.

<comment><USER9> I was in ROTC for a few years, which isn't the actual military, but it is the future officers. They worked pretty hard to make sure we understood that even asking clarifying questions when assigned a task was both insubordinate and showed that you were incompetent. I don't know ow where it started but at some point one group of upperclassman took the approach of teaching the lower classman that they are allowed to listen and not speak under all circumstances, and every class after that felt like it was their turn to be in charge when they became upperclassman

<comment><USER8> > They worked pretty hard to make sure we understood that even asking > clarifying questions when assigned a task was both insubordinate and showed > that you were incompetent.

That's so totally inconsistent with everything I know about Army doctrine, people in the Army, the approach to training western militaries use, and ROTC, that I'm honestly not sure to believe you (but I'm sure you're telling the truth if that's what you say).

When you deliver orders do your crib cards not include a massive highlighted block that says to _at this point ask for questions from the subordinates and answer them_?

Don't you do that thing of keeping taking questions and then when they run out turning it around and asking them questions back to check they really asked about everything they weren't sure about?

Doesn't the US Army have a sort of little ceremonial tick that after every point of instruction the instructor pauses to ask 'do you understand that?'

If there's one group that I know that does 'there's no such thing as a stupid question' it's the Army.

<comment><USER9> Military doctrine as stated and as practiced are routinely inconsistent in practice. In the same ROTC course we spent the entire year being taught about how militaries that jumped on new technologies and adapted to change faster was the way to win war, and then right after class all but two of the cadets thought that we should never even think about replacing fighter jets with drones that had better performance because of A: the drones might take control of themselves and it'll be like Terminator, B: we've never used drones before, and C: being a fighter pilot is cool and being a drone pilot isn't.

There are undoubtedly a number of good officers and enlisted in the military by sheer virtue of their numbers, and I'm sure many of them helped write those forward looking doctrines. The reality of the actual situation inside the military is a morass of waste, micro managing and simultaneously not giving enough instructions, and politics.

The meritocracy of the military only comes into play when it is facing a mortal enemy and the people who do their jobs poorly actually are removed by dieing. When you are in the situation that US military is where it outclasses every enemy it's fought for decades by orders of magnitude then incompetence is covered over just by the momentum of the entire system.

Just look at the waste and turmoil over uniforms[0] When I was in the program it became apparent through scuttlebutt from the officers that most changes or cancellations in programs like this lined up 1 for 1 with people being promoted into positions and deciding to clear out their predecessors work so they could make their own mark. A common complaint about new second lieutenants as well, was that they were always making up some new work or replacing working processes so that they could point towards their accomplishments when going for a promotion. Those are all the hallmarks of a system dominated by politics, not meritocracy and if it's happening at the junior level those same officers are going to bring those habits with them when they promoted to higher ranks

Edit: They had the "do you understand that" pauses when I was in the program as well. After indicating that I did not understand I was taken aside and told that if I planned on continuing in the military then I should not be voicing any doubt. It was not told to me as a threat but as career advice, and they coupled it with techniques for finding out what needs to be done when you don't have information such as nodding politely and saluting your commanding officer, immediately forgetting what they said, and then finding a seargant to ask what should really be done. My school's program may have been an outlier but I heard the same stories and advice from the upperclassmen, the teachers who we're actual officers and enlisted, and enlisted members we met on base visits

[0][https://www.cnn.com/2016/08/29/politics/military-uniform- red...](https://www.cnn.com/2016/08/29/politics/military-uniform-redesign- aquaflage/index.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I'm curious how this problem has aged a decade on, when these soldiers (and their fellows) should be taking up more and more leadership positions. Are they up to it? Does having to put up with incompetence lead good soldiers to bail on the military as a career?

<comment><AUTHOR> As I understand it, with combination of the Great Recession and the winding down of Afghanistan/Iraq, recruiting became _much_ easier and so the need for gimmicks like moral waivers or tweaking test scores disappeared and recruiters could afford to try to get a better grade of recruit. I imagine that something similar took place with all of the people who did get recruited beforehand: commanders took opportunities to get rid of those who hadn't excelled or simply not encourage them to re-enlist etc, and natural attrition takes care of it all.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I took the ASVAB after I graduated college. 99 on it, and 93 on the AFQT. I am not a whiz kid. That scared me a lot.

</comment><comment><USER12> When people deny the usefulness of IQ tests, I always point out how useful it is to the US army.

</comment><comment><USER13> Honestly entire Army is a about being dumb. (In my opinion). And it is costing ton of money for us any ways.

Instead having a good productive life where you engage with society (Pizza and Netflix) and create value it is stupid to join a cult like Army where you are brainwashed into being a robotic human being fighting wars for old infirm men in Washington. Are we really supposed to feel proud about young soldiers dying in Syria, Afganistan or Iraq ? What for ?

<comment><USER14> As a counter point: most young men I knew growing up (in a upper middle class, left leaning neighborhood) really could have used some time in the military. I know I could have. I ended up getting a similar-ish experience working construction.

And that's just at the personal development level. As a society, I think some kind of compulsory service (not necessarily military, but military as an option) for young men and women would go a long way toward healing the political, class, and racial divisions in the US. It's hard to other a group of people when you've worked alongside and bonded with individuals of that group.

<comment><USER15> As a counter point, since throughout history we have had plenty of states with a big role for the military, I don't think your theory that it helps "heal" the nation passes the test. I'm not sure, I'm far from being a historian, maybe somebody could offer an educated opinion on the subject... but my point is we don't need to wait, there should be plenty of data to look at.

<comment><USER16> One data point would be Germany prior WWII the other soviet russia. In Germany, the lower levels of government being composed of ex-soldiers was factor that made Nazi takeover easier (based on Evans books for example).

As for eastern block, I knew personally people of older generation that have been through draft and their memories were not rosy. A lot of bullying, a lot of having to submit yourself to bullying or various abuse of higher ups or just stupidity. (Turned out smartest profesional soldiers were not the ones dealing with draftees). One was forced to steal, many learned to smoke and generally it was exercise on avoiding duty+doing minimum once you are after basic training. Army quality went up after all those people who really did not wanted to be there were not there.

Israel has draft too, but it is real war going on there so it might be different. Switzerland has military duty, but they do shorter stints at time.

I really don't think you can solve racial divisions by that. Racial divisons are a lot about ideologies and believes and legacy of history and so on.

<comment><USER17> Interesting, I've actually heard the opposite point made about Germany. My understanding is that the Allies considered _Junkers_ , a Prussian and later German hereditary military class, to be one of the key factors that led a Germany to instigate WWII in Europe. This is why the Allies wanted Germany to institute a draft, to prevent one segment of the population from exerting near total control of the military.

At least that's my understanding of the establishment of the West German military.

<comment><USER16> Both can be true, but i dont know much about after ear. Prior WWII ex-soldiers had guaranteed employment in goverment. By law. So, trains, post, police, social help etc were all ex-soldiers. Meaning socialized in military, military values of obeisense, duty to do what is told, etc determining how all those institutions worked. They adjusted to Nazi rule remarkably well and without any fuss, including in beginning. Also, Germany had conscription since 1935 including labor for those not trusted to be in military.

Hitler wanted war two no matter who ruled army, germany foreign policts wanted imperium, so I think it would happen even if hereditary officers were someone else.

One more thing here. Nazi army and conscription and also school system were preparation for brutal war where Germans were meant to be the most brutal. Which essentially happened. One issue with military as mandatory training to teach you values and discipline and what not is that they might teach you wrong values including to be remarkably brutal.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


I'm learning RoR and finding it confusing. Any advice? - <AUTHOR>

I've been learning Ruby on Rails for the past few weeks and, while I have found it to be a fun experience, there are a few aspects to it that still confuse me. Thus, I haven't really got the hang of it yet. I'm plan to stick with it, but I wanted to see if anyone had advice on how I can make it the best experience possible.
The problem I've been having is getting used to the many shortcuts Rails offers. These shortcuts do a lot of things automatically in the background and minimize the code we have to write. While they probably work great for RoR pros, they are terribly confusing when it comes to learning the framework.
I've been working out of the book Ruby on Rails Tutorial: Learn Rails by Example. It includes a lot of shortcuts such as resources :resource in routes.rb, model_path(@model) instead of model_path(@model.id), and many other shortcuts in the form_for() helper method. These shortcuts could easily be interchanged with manual implementations that make more sense at a glance, so there isn't necessarily a problem. However, these shortcuts are referenced in books and online and are what beginners are being exposed to. For a lot of the shortcuts, I have no idea how to implement them manually (which would be nice for flexibility).
It's overwhelming the amount of things that can be done automatically for you when it comes to Rails, which is what most books teach. They give me the impression that I am limited to what I can do in Rails. This is not true, but right now I do not have the knowledge to manually do a lot of the things that I have been taught to do using shortcuts.
Has anyone had a similar experience when learning RoR? Are there any good online references or books that avoid the shortcuts (besides the documentation)?
P.S. I am still not fully confident about how things are named in Rails. I'll create a resource with a name I've chosen, and then Rails will automatically generate views, routes, paths, and url's based off that. I sometimes have to guess and take a 'leap of faith' when deciding what names to reference as I was not the one who created them. <comment><USER2> I highly recommend reading the source. Download the source, and read through the implementations, especially around routing. For most open source, not just Rails, this is often your best bet. I rarely use any open source software out- of-box without digging around the source.

This can be confusing with Ruby because it can be tough to figure out where methods are, due to module loading. I usually load the whole Rails source in Textmate and then use something like the Grep In Project plugin so that it's easier to search around for specific methods.

You'll never get the detail you really want out of just reading documentation.

</comment><comment><USER3> The problem is that every single tutorial on RoR talks about dirty and useless scaffolding and resource features.

Just forget about resources and model path bullshit while learning RoR

Start with active record then learn basic mvc routes, controller and views. Pretend RoR is just php and get comfortables with the things you usually do in php. Then try to learn form_for and all the other bullshit out there.

From my personnal experience, never use any fancy features like form_for and all in a serious projects. When they upgrade rails your project will gets screwed. Stick to basics.</comment>


"Duke Collective" grad students collectivize their wages - <AUTHOR> http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2014/04/08/_duke_collective_grad_students_collectivize_their_wages_the_great_graduate.html <comment><USER2> I think that could work because on a small scale there's a strong social pressure to not be "that asshole" who spends the significant portion of the pool's income. However if this scales up, who knows what would happen? You get just one asshole, suddenly you need an enforcer, that enforcer needs to be watched too, etc...

</comment><comment><USER3> Academia - where the competition is so brutal, because the stakes are so small.

</comment><comment><USER4> Go to med school, not grad school.</comment>


What Is Secure Remote Password (SRP) Protocol and How to Use It? - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/swlh/what-is-secure-remote-password-srp-protocol-and-how-to-use-it-70e415b94a76 <comment><USER2> [https://cryptography.fandom.com/wiki/Secure_Remote_Password_...](https://cryptography.fandom.com/wiki/Secure_Remote_Password_protocol)</comment>


Ask HN: What is the product development process at your company/startup? - <AUTHOR> I work at a fast growing startup and if there is one thing that is certain it is change. Everything changes fast and everything and everyone needs to adapt. Part of that is the product development process (the process of creating software/product from ideation to execution).
I am wondering how other companies (established or growing) went about designing their process. For example:
- Discovery Phase: Ideation phase -> Validation phase -> Design phase -> Testing phase -> Debrief phase
- Backlog Refinement Phase
- Sprint phase
    - Sprint planning
    - Daily standups
    - Code review phase
    - Design review phase
    - Sprint retrospective
- Code Deployment phase
Also what would be some of the best practices applied (what kind of code reviews sessions happen, CI/CD requirements, etc.) <comment><USER2> We are a relatively small team (~10 people), with basically two people spending half their time developing and one full time UI designer. We dont have a product manager, QA, or devops though many in the team have experience in these areas. We are B2B2C with quite a lot of clients (>50) and users (>40k).

Due to these constraints we have settled upon the following triage style approach to product development:

\- Production issues (scaling etc), Bugfixes, Security reviews bump everything else

\- New feature requests that are simple enough for the requestor (sales usually) to verify and one dev plus designer to work for a day or two are hashed out over email or whats-app and developed without fuss but with a bit of foresight to reduce technical debt. We have a weekly sales meet to decide what to work on. Developers attend.

\- For complex features and redesigns we use googles design-sprint methodology, roping in everyone who talks to the customers and the customers themselves if possible. This is primarily to make sure everyone is aligned from the outset and _prevent revisions_.

\- We use trello to track complex tasks. We maintain a backlog in trello too, but unless customers/sales are shouting at us to develop a feature (IE demand is most definitely there), it will stay in backlog and we prioritise maintenance / cleaning.

This is perhaps the smallest team I have been a part of, my main learning from it has been how helpful to the business itself having a small dev team can be (we call it the "Accidentally Hobbled Dev Team Methodology"). It keeps the business focussed on critical features. We are expanding now, but I hope to keep a _relatively_ similar system in place while scaling as it has been so helpful.

<comment><USER3> this sounds like a good place to work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> We write requirements on behalf of our customers after the project has been developed because everything must change daily. This is, afaik, the modus operandi for most baking/insurance customers :)

<comment><USER5> >baking/insurance customers

amusing typo</comment></comment>


Ubuntu switches to Gnome desktop and gives up smartphone hopes - <AUTHOR> http://www.zdnet.com/article/ubuntu-switches-to-gnome-desktop-and-gives-up-smartphone-hopes/ <comment><USER2> > Other Ubuntu desktop-related efforts, such as the Mir display server, are > also presumed to be coming to an end now. Wayland, another open-source > display server, will probably replace it in future Ubuntu releases.

Anyone can shed more light on why Mir efforts are coming to an end?</comment>


23andMe makes personalized genetics more affordable - <AUTHOR> http://www.23andme.com/

<comment><USER2> I hate to be negative about a startup that way, but it's important to realize that "direct-to-consumer genomics" is a scam. I went to a presentation by a founder of one the competitors (there are 3-4 high-flying competitors in the business), and I had the highest expectations. But then throughout the presentation I couldn't quite figure out what the company actually does. So I asked. And the answer is marketing and litigation.

* these companies don't do any research

* they don't even own sequencing equipment

* all they do is send a sample of your spit to the lab, and send you a pretty writeup

* consider why is there no "direct-to-consumer blood tests" even though that information is far more actionable

I wouldn't even have a problem with this if it was a proper scam, like XanGo MLM, a nice nutritional supplement scheme, make-money-fast setup, etc. With these you know upfront what you are getting into. But these guys look so clean, and go out of their way to skate the narrow line next to the true medical advice. Needless to say the legal budgets must be non-trivial.

I ran this by my cousin who is in nursing school. And she goes "Oh yuh, they are teaching us how to talk to people about all the nonsense results people [in increasing numbers] will get through these outfits."

Some more reading: [http://microarray.wordpress.com/2008/06/24/deadline-today- fo...](http://microarray.wordpress.com/2008/06/24/deadline-today-for-personal- genomics-companies/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Not sure all personalized genetics companies are created equal. You seem to be pretty misinformed about what we do.

* We indeed do conduct our own research and are currently collaborating with some prominent research institutions (Parkinson's institute).

* Why do we have to own sequencing equipment to be useful and/or legit? Does Google own the webpages they index?

* We give you much more than a "pretty writeup". This includes crowd-sourced research initiatives, ancestry and health communities, and many interactive ways of analyzing your own data. A ton more things coming in the future.

<comment><USER3> Just to clarify, is this you - <https://www.23andme.com/about/advisors> ? Thanks.

<comment><AUTHOR> Heh, no. I'm an SE @ 23andMe. <http://www.linkedin.com/pub/1/016/160>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Great news =)

Good but here are things that will help me bite:

\- $299-199

\- a better database for people with Asian heritage. I could be wrong but I think no company in the West has this yet - well a company in Greenland is working on a partnership with a Hong Kong company

\- something like HIPAA or some privacy clause. I don't want my insurance companies to know I'm genetically prone to X

\- I'm not keen on someone trying to patent my genes either (don't know if you guys will or not though)

<comment><AUTHOR> To address some of the things you mentioned:

\- as we add more people to our database (including Asians), we can make new discoveries relevant to particular genetic groups

\- GINA prohibits employers/insurers from discriminating against you based on your genetic info

\- we will not patent genes. we want to empower people by giving them the ability to access and interact with their genetic information

<comment><USER5> >GINA prohibits employers/insurers from discriminating against you based on your genetic info

Laws change. And the value of words like "discriminating" also changes with various interpretations.

There are right and wrong ways to protect the privacy of customers. Relying on laws is one of the wrong ways.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Still a little expensive, but downright fascinating. Someone has put a heck of a lot of time into this.

It looks like they give you your own raw genomics data! Fun fun fun!

</comment><comment><USER7> The problem with SNP-based association is that, for the vast majority of disease-associated SNPs, the relative risk is only increased on the order of a few percent at most. When it comes to predicting the risk of an individual (as opposed to a population) developing a particular disease this is virtually meaningless. No doubt the current technology will appeal to some out of curiosity. However I do think that the vast quantities of sequence that will be generated by next generation platforms over the next few years will lead to the ability to usefully predict disease susceptibility of an individual basis.

</comment><comment><USER8> so I guess this means the injunction was lifted?

<comment><AUTHOR> We are officially licensed in California, NY is still pending.

<comment><USER9> Let me know when you've got a 454 or Solexa, then I'll sign up... :)

<comment><USER10> Why do you want a 454? I mean, as awesome as it would be to know your own genetic code, it would be of no practical use to you, even if you had a full featured tool to explore it.

And don't even get me started on personal epigenome or miRNA-omes.

<comment><USER9> Well, mostly I was just trying to see if they were headed in that direction... but there might be some logic in that SNPs do not always represent the functional differences in genes - they generally have their power because they are correlated with the nearby functional difference. The full set of DNA changes might be more precise in terms of really really pinpointing the right genes. But, I guess the true power comes with correlating everybody and their phenotypes together, in which case it doesn't matter if you're looking at unexplainable SNPs or not.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Why Lawsuits Are on the Rise at Startups and What to Do About It - <AUTHOR> http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2015/05/10/why-your-co-founder-may-just-sue-you/

<comment><USER2> > I angel funded a company 5 years ago. They won two big national contracts. > The vendor who previously serviced those accounts sued them. For what? It is > still not clear to me [...]

Wouldn't the "for what?" part be covered in the plaintiff's court filings?

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> _" The simple point is that if you control 51% of your company and/or the voting rights you can avoid a lot of headache and you can still be very generous with early people who join your mission."_

That's one way to do it. Co-founders sound a bit like partners in Proprietary Limited companies: bad news. A video from the post where Mark talks about founder problems: ~ [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0PFxUGgAJ4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0PFxUGgAJ4)

</comment><comment><USER3> The lawyers and courts are what makes the existence and power of corporate organizations a reality. Contracts and articles of incorporation exist under the assumption that there will be litigation.

TANSTAAFL...or in this case you can't have it both ways.</comment>


When to Shut Down a Startup [video] - <AUTHOR> https://blog.ycombinator.com/when-to-shut-down-a-startup/ <comment><USER2> Unpopular opinion, I just don't understand this whole reasoning and this whole startup mythology thing.

So what he said is that if its a viable, sustainable business that the founder wants to do, that adds value to society, but there is no exponential growth on the horizon, then it should be shut down.

Because (and he said it explicitly), the only thing that makes a startup truly a startup is the exponential growth and nothing more.

This is just crazy, exponential growth is extremely rare in business and only happens in situations like the way Facebook grew, by upon sign up getting the whole list of email contacts of the new user, and sending invitations to join Facebook to all of them.

Most of the times in business, linear growth is what happens. what's wrong with a 20 employee company that adds a ton of value to society, operates for 30 years and gives the founder and family a comfortable life, isn't that more than enough and worthwhile pursuing?

Exponential growth is impossible to predict and only comes by accident, it's like chasing the rainbow.

Just focus on building a real business that you really want to dedicate your life to, preferably borrowing as little money as possible if it all, how about that?

<comment><USER3> Build a sustainable slow growing business. Just don't take VC money to do so.

<comment><USER4> Succinct and ever so apt.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> In a nutshell, the situation is that the startup is:

> ... not growing but it's not dying. ... and the founder doesn't really know > what to do.

Makes me think of Paul Graham's concept of "default alive/dead":

> When I talk to a startup that's been operating for more than 8 or 9 months, > the first thing I want to know is almost always the same. Assuming their > expenses remain constant and their revenue growth is what it has been over > the last several months, do they make it to profitability on the money they > have left? Or to put it more dramatically, by default do they live or die?

[http://paulgraham.com/aord.html](http://paulgraham.com/aord.html)

I think this is a much more valuable place to start the conversation. The available options (which may or may not include shutdown) depend strongly on the answer to the question "are you default alive or default dead?"

<comment><USER6> This is the old way of thinking, profitability doesn't seem to matter much anymore. The last two startups I worked for were (luckily) profitable and growing, but when the Series A investors found out about this they got very angry and started demanding we increase spending on things we didn't need: more engineers, more AWS, more initiatives for crazy tangents, hire a growth hacker, hire a growth marketer, then some more engineers who have nothing to work on.

The demand for perpetual (even artificial, fraudulent) growth is prioritized over all else. The VCs can't get out of their investment unless things have grown. That's all that matters to them.

Neither of those startups is around anymore, they were both driven out of business by this demand for more growth. The Series A investors couldn't care less, they exited long before the end and left someone else holding the bag.

<comment><USER7> There is another reason they want spending to increase. They need you to run out of money before you hit profitability or else you won't need to do another round of financing so that the VCs can take a larger piece of the pie.

<comment><USER8> This is messed up man. I bet a lot of a good startups are killed for no good reason (and only for greed)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> My startup shutdown horror story: A start up I briefly worked for during the dot-com bubble one day just ran out of money. I could see the writing on the wall, went to another dot-com (which also failed), but kept in touch with the people there. As they described it, the boss came in one day and told everyone "OK, the company has run out of money and is now closed. You will not get paid for the work you did in the last week, all medical and other benefits are now null and void, and good luck finding a new job."

<comment><USER10> That's mismanagement to wait until the day you are out of money to inform your employees.

<comment><USER11> It's disrupting employment norms :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> If you have a team you're happy with and your cap table is not messed up, there is always a solution. See Slack, Youtube, Flickr and many others.

</comment><comment><USER13> If that zombie startup gives you freedom and a good salary, why shut it down? This is not for bootstrappers or those who pursue life-style businesses, it's for VC backed startups.

<comment><USER14> I suspect the people that feel the way you do probably wouldn't gravitate towards the risk/reward system of the startup lifestyle in the first place.

<comment><USER10> Life can change. That 'hot start-up' that morphed into something that employs you and a bunch of others might be less than what you and your investors hoped for but still substantially more than nothing.

<comment><USER15> It can change, though if it is obviously a country club your investors may not reinvest in your next thing.

<comment><USER10> Sucks to be them if it takes off then. After all, your chances of success on the second time around are substantially larger than the first. But then again, you'll also be a much harder case to take advantage off so that would rule out quite a few investors up front. And accelerators too, for that matter.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Unfortunately a lot of startups doesn't shut down cleanly. Shutting down your own startup can feel for many founders like killing your own baby.

However, the alternative such as a messy shutdown by leaving unpaid bills and unrealized contracts is even worse. Bankrupcy laws doesn't work so smoothly around the world, even after bankcrupcy you can still be liable for taxes as well as unpaid bills/wages get bad reputation which can hurt you in the future.

</comment><comment><USER17> That "zombie startup" that Aaron is describing sounds like a nice, sustainable company that isn't chasing growth but can live for a while, profitably, with the customers you have. Why shut that down? That sounds great!

<comment><USER18> What game do you want to play with your life? Do you want to play the lifestyle business game? The startup game? The consulting game? The climb-the- corporate-ladder game? The just-collect-a-paycheck-and-get-your-fulfillment- elsewhere game?

You should decide this _before_ you enter the startup scene, and ideally as you're beginning your career. Because if you think you're playing one sort of game but are playing it according to the rules of another sort of game, you're basically guaranteed to lose.

The assumption when you play the startup game is that you're playing for a big, low-probability payoff. There are a couple variations for just _how_ big a payoff (are you looking to play the outsource-R&D-and-get-acquired game? show-I'm-a-good-programmer-and-get-aqhired game? build-a-billion-dollar- company game?), but in general, when people talk about startups, they mean hyper-growth. If you don't find hyper growth, you've lost at the startup game, and should call it and invest your time into either playing again or playing a different game.

If you want a lifestyle business, you should play that game from the outset, because it means playing several choices differently. Notably, you should seek a small niche with real customers _first_ , you can afford to pick an area off the cutting edge, you should seek profitability over growth, and you shouldn't take (equity) investment.

<comment><USER19> > What game do you want to play with your life? ... just-collect-a-paycheck- > and-get-your-fulfillment-elsewhere game

This sort of rhetoric shows how much of entrepreneurship isn't really about like, making money. It's meaningless emotional warble-garble, a kind of psychological warfare that people do to themselves to stay happy in a system of really emotionally punishing rules of one-upmanship.

Like one funded founder I know, I asked him straight, "Are you motivated by acting out college-age vengeances against your peers?" and he said yes! It's not really about, "I don't want that Google engineer lifestyle," because that person does, he just wasn't qualified (in some narrow sense) to do that. He just failed at it.

A lot of people don't grow out of that.

And it's not just limited to people who didn't pass the Google interview. There are plenty of Google engineers who said to, e.g., studying medicine in college, "I don't want that doctor lifestyle," when really they did not perform competitively in their first-year life sciences class! Medicine dropouts everywhere!

The startup handbook materials seem so incomplete. They don't honestly engage with the emotions of their audience, which is overwhelmingly disaffected college-educated 20-40 year old men of means.

In fact, the reason your rhetoric is so appealing is because it doesn't put these emotional things out into the open. It amplifies the weird psychological warfare, it doesn't question it.

The right question isn't, what kind of game you want to play? It starts with what a therapist would ask, "Why are you here today?" to lead to "Why do you think you're unhappy?", questions that make the audience of your line of thinking deeply uncomfortable and something to be avoided.

<comment><USER20> Figuring out what you want to be when you grow up, what makes you happy, etc etc is a mind-bogglingly complex problem. Often, we just have to make decisions with the best information we have with whatever emotional motivations we have.

A lot of our decision making, historically, was just decided for us. Parents had children and married them based on economic benefits. Your work was just what your Dad did or through other close relationships. Now you have seemingly infinite choices. People are often making the _wrong_ decision for the _wrong_ reasons all the time. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't.

I think anything that helps you frame your actions and understand yourself and your motivations is fine. I know plenty of people who happily would identify with the 'collect a paycheck and get fulfillment elsewhere'. I also think it's perfectly valid to want to start a company to get vengeance on those who appeared to underestimate you.

The reality is there are many paths and it's very hard to judge what a valid or _right_ path is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I disagree I would not shut it down I would either sell it or keep it to maintain jobs. As for the investors if a long term plan i would convert to debt and try to get them to flat especially if friends and family. But yep, there are cases when you need to shut down and zombie mode sux if you can't escape</comment>