Ask HN: Remote workers, what headphone/mic combo do you use for video calls? - <AUTHOR> Simple enough question.  I'm about to start a remote position and I'm looking for good suggestions for a clear, comfortable, and hopefully non-intrusive headphone/mic combo for video calls.  Preferably, something wireless would be even better.  Interested to hear what others are using <comment><USER2> When having more than one person in the room, I'm using the Samson Go Mic¹.

When I'm alone, for calls and everything else really: listening to music or just cancelling the noise (AC, on flights etc.), I'm using BOSE QC35².

Both products I would highly recommend. But the headphones in particular are probably the best investment I've made to boost my productivity.

1\. [http://www.samsontech.com/samson/products/microphones/usb- mi...](http://www.samsontech.com/samson/products/microphones/usb- microphones/gomic/)

2\. [https://www.bose.com/en_us/products/headphones/over_ear_head...](https://www.bose.com/en_us/products/headphones/over_ear_headphones/quietcomfort-35-wireless.html)

<comment><USER3> Wow, +1 on the Bose. I completely forgot there was an inline microphone on the Bose QC25 cable. I just tested it with my MacBook Pro, it detects it as an External Microphone, and the quality is good enough for work calls. This is going to reduce my luggage while travelling!

Prior to that I've been using a pair of Logitech USB 250s, which have a surprisingly clear microphone (better than the Bose), but aren't very comfortable for extended use.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I tried to find a good wireless headset for my remote meetings. My discovery was:

\- Bluetooth microphones are of general terrible quality. After recording and playing back my different attempts at a nice wireless mic, the build in omni directional mic on my MBP always shockingly came out ahead. It really didn't make any sense to me. \- Long pair programming or brainstorming sessions with co-workers can outlast the headsets.

In the end, I just plug in my earbuds that came with my phone, which give me audio, and the built-in mic pics up my voice.

That being said, appreciate this question, maybe someone else has found something better.

I tried various Logitech and other bluetooth headsets made for cell phones, I also tried Beats Powerbeats. So maybe I was just going in the wrong direction.

<comment> joatmon-snoo I think it's a combination of both the tech and lack of demand. Bluetooth audio stuff is only now getting up to par (at least that's the feeling I get sniffing around /r/headphones and the like), and when the two primary audiences that care - gamers and enterprise - have reliable wired alternatives, there just isn't enough motivation for someone to really break out there.

I suspect on the tech side one of the big disadvantages a BT mic has to suffer from is how to balance power consumption with the circuitry you need to pull a good signal off. Looking this up[1] it seems that a MBP is much better positioned for that kind of hardware as opposed to a mic.

On another note I've seen some praise for the Skullcandy PLYR.

[1] [http://www.mediacollege.com/audio/microphones/how- microphone...](http://www.mediacollege.com/audio/microphones/how-microphones- work.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Just a set of mid-range earbuds with inline mic, and a clip on the cord to attach it to my collar and keep the mic near my mouth.

As long as the mic is clipped there, I've never had anyone complain about audio quality. I doubt it'd be difficult to find a similarly decent Bluetooth set.

I'd be more concerned about Bluetooth range and reliability than the quality of the mic. Audio hardware for this sort of purpose is basically a solved problem. Usually connectivity or software issues interfere more with communication than audio hardware does once you reach a certain (low) baseline for hardware quality.

</comment><comment><USER6> Apple headphones that comes with iPhone, the sound quality is really good and portable to carry.

<comment><USER7> Wanted to say the same.

Mic in earpods combined with Skype's background noise cancellation makes it so that you can be heard clearly by your peers even if you're in a noisy restaurant.

It's already in my reflexes to just shove earpods into a small pocket in my jeans/shorts whenever I put them on or stand up from my desk so that they're always with me.

As an added plus, they work like a charm with every windows/androind laptop or phone out there.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> In my company, everybody uses Jabra gear (because the company pays for it). I own some Bose Noise Cancelling headset, because I had it before, and everybody complains that there is no noise cancelling on my mic, what the Jabras have. Evolve 80, that's what everybody got and people are quite happy with it, despite the gamer look: [http://www.jabra.com/business/office-headsets/jabra- evolve/j...](http://www.jabra.com/business/office-headsets/jabra-evolve/jabra- evolve-80)

</comment><comment><USER9> I generally don't use a headphone/mic. I use a plug in puck style speakerphone.

I can do this because no one else is around when I'm working or I can close the door and be alone. The main reason that I don't use something with a headset is because I always had problems with headsets, especially wireless ones -- either they wouldn't pair, or they'd come unpaired between calls and I'd have to do the "can you hear me" dance, or I'd have something wired on my head and it'd be a pain in the butt, or ... well, the list goes on.

If you have something wireless, make sure you know how to use it really well and that you have a test or two that you can quickly do to ensure operation and that you have a backup you can quickly fail over to.

I spent four years working remote in a 24/7 operations position, and then another few years working out of a satellite office but from home at night in a similar position. Some of the marathon troubleshooting calls I was on would exhaust even the most serious of batteries.

</comment><comment><USER10> Full disclosure: I'm not a full-time remote worker, but my team has VoIP conference calls if someone's working from home on a particular day (so whenever someone's sick, or if the weather's too bad for someone to make a distant commute). I've been on both sides of these calls.

My personal preference is a combination of the Blue Yeti[0] and a pair of Sony MDR-7506[1] phones. This is a really comfortable setup since I can have the Yeti a bit off to the side (not blocking my monitor) while still picking up good quality sound, and I can also step away from my desk (e.g. to look for some files) without worrying that the headphone cable's going to be too short.

I've also got the headphones plugged directly into the mic's 3.5mm jack, which means I can control output volume from the microphone (which I find more comfortable than a keyboard).

      [0] http://www.bluemic.com/products/yeti/

      [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_MDR-V6

</comment><comment><USER11> What are you looking for---something mobile or something for your desk?

At my desk I use a Plantronics Savi 700 series. It integrates well with a wide variety of Windows phone apps---e.g., grabbing the headset will auto-answer, replacing it or pressing the button on the side will hang up---and since it's multi-line and supports Bluetooth, I can use it with my mobile phone, too. Mac phone app integration is less than stellar and mostly limited to Skype (not Lync) and whatever Cisco's softphone is called. (Older versions of Lync for Mac integrated with the headset, so I'm not sure if I broke something or Apple/Microsoft/Plantronics just dropped the ball.)

Audio quality is fantastic and with the default config, I can let the dog out and walk around the house without any issues. I don't recall how long the battery lasted with the default configuration, but I don't really remember running out of battery except on days where I have back-to-back-to-back meetings. I ended up switching on some power conservation settings that reduced its range, and since then I haven't had any issues running out of battery. (I just schedule meeting breaks to take care of the dog.)

</comment><comment><USER12> I use a cheap 3.5mm-accepting headphone set [0] if travelling, or a pair of AKG K550 [1] modified to accept a 3.5mm replaceable cable, with a V-Moda boom mic [2]. The boom mic is what makes this combo. It's really cheap, and crazy resilient. I have been travelling with it for the past year and trip over it all the time. It's still going strong, and it's also the best headphone cord I've ever had as well.

[0]: [https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00TADC6CS/ref=twister_B011QQ1W4E?...](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00TADC6CS/ref=twister_B011QQ1W4E?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1) [1]: [https://www.amazon.com/AKG-K550-Closed-Back-Reference- Headph...](https://www.amazon.com/AKG-K550-Closed-Back-Reference- Headphones/dp/B005CNR7B0) [2]: [https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00BJ17WKK/ref=s9_acsd_hps...](https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00BJ17WKK/ref=s9_acsd_hps_bw_c_x_5)

</comment><comment><USER13> I have a USB headset ([https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0091F8F7A](https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0091F8F7A) ) hooked into my Macbook, that I use for calls with Skype, Google Hangouts, and UberConference (the last two via Chrome).

Fairly regularly, the USB-C jack slips out, and the call switches to the MacBook's speaker and microphone. When I reinsert, and then switch back to the headset's speaker and microphone (by selecting them after option-clicking on the volume icon), the call stays on the MacBook's speaker and microphone. I then need to hang up and redial to get the headset working again.

Any ideas on how to switch to a headset mid-call?

It seems ridiculous, but I've solved for now by switching to this headset that hooks into the 3.5mm jack instead: [https://www.amazon.com/Logitech-Analog- Stereo-Headset-Microp...](https://www.amazon.com/Logitech-Analog-Stereo- Headset-Microphone-981-000587/dp/B00WGQNJK4)

</comment><comment><USER14> If you are working alone, do not get headphones. Use decent speakers and a condenser microphone [1] on a boom [2] mounted to your desk.

You can lean in to the mic when you need to be heard better, and it keeps your hands free.

Plus on video conferences it makes you look like a cool radio DJ.

[1] Blue Microphones Snowball (White)- Shockmount an Popfilter Bundle [https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00P0PP1XG/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_ClDo...](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00P0PP1XG/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_ClDoybX9MJFN0)

[2] GVDV Microphone Stand Adjustable Professional Desk Recording Microphone Suspension Boom Scissor Arm Stand With Phone Holder, Pop Filter And Replaceable Shock Mount Suitable For Most Microphones [https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FLQP7BE/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_2oDo...](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FLQP7BE/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_2oDoybSR1BMB8)

</comment><comment><USER15> I'm not currently remote, but I do have a 6+ hour remote D&D game about twice a month. I have this cheap bluetooth headset [1], and have honestly found it to be just fine. I use it with Skype on my laptop. The battery lasts a good long time, it sounds perfectly fine, and it's not noise-isolating, so I don't get that weird voice echo in my own head like I do with my earbud headset. Plus it can pair with 2 devices at once, and sounds surprisingly decent when I'm listening to music.

[1] [https://smile.amazon.com/MEE-audio-Bluetooth-Headphones- Micr...](https://smile.amazon.com/MEE-audio-Bluetooth-Headphones- Microphone/dp/B008FH1PJA/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1480173926&sr=8-2&keywords=air- fi+runaway)

</comment><comment><USER16> Sennheiser MB Pro 2 UC.

[https://en-us.sennheiser.com/mb-pro-1-uc-and-mb-pro-2-uc](https://en- us.sennheiser.com/mb-pro-1-uc-and-mb-pro-2-uc)

This page shows them all.

[https://en-us.sennheiser.com/business-bluetooth-headsets](https://en- us.sennheiser.com/business-bluetooth-headsets)

The Bluetooth is excellent to both computer (using included dongle) and cell phone (which I use all the time). The microphone is extremely good; filtering out all background noise. The sound is adequate for speech and loud enough for speech. They are not good with music and the maximum volume is just over adequate. (plenty enough volume for most environments, but not enough to blast music) The headset is light and the charge lasts for hours and hours.

</comment><comment><USER17> I'm currently enjoying the Thomson WHP3311BK wireless headphones. Their quality is superb and I feel comfortable wearing them for 15 hours at a time (they even don't run out of power!). For a headset, I actually use the Blue Yeti microphone, large (2/3rds the size of my monitor), but incredibly high quality (I can be 30 meters away yet can still be heard clearly by customers, helpful when I'm running around looking for papers). I used to own a ProSound YU-37, much smaller microphone and about 1/10th of the price, would highly recommend that if you work in a loud environment. It's uni-directional and doesn't pick up much background noise at all, downside with that is of course you can't run around the room and still be heard.

</comment><comment><USER18> I've been using the bose quiet comfort series. They're expensive, but they've got good active noise cancellation, if needed in loud areas. They do support the Apple microphone cable, so you can do phone calls with them. When at my desk, though, I use a Blue Yeti mic.

</comment><comment><USER19> Sennheiser PC31, I'm not sure if the speakers on those are shared with the PX headphones, which sound by the way very nice for music.

[https://www.amazon.com/Sennheiser-31-II-Binaural-Headset- Mic...](https://www.amazon.com/Sennheiser-31-II-Binaural-Headset- Microphone/dp/B0077L2WCY)

and in case your laptop/desk doesn't have mic and headphone jack you can use

[https://www.amazon.com/Sabrent-External-Adapter-Windows- AU-M...](https://www.amazon.com/Sabrent-External-Adapter-Windows-AU- MMSA/dp/B00IRVQ0F8)

that works with Linux, not sure about windows/mac.

for the cellphone plantronics voyager legend, which is expensive but works every time very well.

</comment><comment><USER20> For intensive use I'd recommend against use of headsets.

We've found the Jabra Speak 410 (USB) and Jabra 510 (Bluetooth) speakerphones to be much more comfortable and microphone and noise cancelling are excellent.

IMO speakerphones are much more natural to use than headsets for a daily use.

Jabra 410: [http://www.jabra.com/business/speakerphones/jabra-speak- seri...](http://www.jabra.com/business/speakerphones/jabra-speak-series/jabra- speak-410)

Jabra 510: [http://www.jabra.com/business/speakerphones/jabra-speak- seri...](http://www.jabra.com/business/speakerphones/jabra-speak-series/jabra- speak-510)

</comment><comment><USER21> I used to use a Jabra freestanding mic/speaker, and it's still a great choice -- they have excellent separation and no echo problem at all.

I recently upgraded to a Logitech BCC950 freestanding conference camera, and it is also excellent.

Note that both of these solutions are much more expensive than an ordinary headset or webcam (~£200 range).

[https://secure.logitech.com/en-gb/product/conferencecam- bcc9...](https://secure.logitech.com/en-gb/product/conferencecam-bcc950)

</comment><comment><USER22> [http://www.logitech.com/en-us/product/wireless- headset-h800](http://www.logitech.com/en-us/product/wireless-headset-h800)

</comment><comment><USER23> I had a plantronic C210 for a while. It was getting worn (After 4 years), so I've recently upgraded to a Plantronic C310.

[https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B007JURP2A](https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B007JURP2A)

Can't recommend it highly enough, and I spend at least an hour a day speaking on it. Some days I forget to take it off. For phone calls, Monoaural is fine sound wise, and it's IMO more comfortable for long stretches of use.

</comment><comment><USER24> I use Sennheiser headphones (don't remember the model and it doesn't seem to be on them; I bought these 3-5 years ago).

My rMacbook Pro 2015 sits on my desk under a monitor, right side toward me, with the lid closed. Because I've never really had a problem with people hearing me clearly (as long as the connection was okay), I haven't bothered to buy a mic. This is true even when the laptop's fans are racing due to, say, Docker for Mac struggling, as it does.

</comment><comment><USER25> After reading many reviews complaining about wireless headsets, I went with a wired one: Sennheiser U 320 [https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B008VQ68C4](https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B008VQ68C4). It's a gaming headset, but I use it for video conf calls and listening to music. Great quality and haven't had a single issue with it (other than being less convenient than a wireless headset).

</comment><comment><USER26> For audio I use the MEE M6 earphones with Comply foam tips (the tips really make a world of difference).

For video and microphone, I use the Logitech ConferenceCam Connect and consistently get complemented on my video and audio quality, but I wouldn't recommmend it to others due to the price – I only use it because I was able to get it for free through a promotion.

</comment><comment><USER27> As others have said, Bluetooth headsets are generally bad for consistent quality in my experience. I tend towards a wired gaming headset (turtle Beach) with a long cable just because it is simple and works with my phone or laptop. Of course most of the quality is dependent on the conferencing solutions your company uses.

</comment><comment><USER28> I use a Samson C01U condenser mic for calls. Not cheap but it also gets used for professional voice recording, and it's also not that expensive.

I tend to use speakers and rely on echo cancellation. It appears to work pretty well as I rarely get complaints. My current speakers are Harmon/Kardon ones, but I got them as a gift.

</comment><comment><USER29> I use a pair of Plantronics BackBeat Pros. Some Mac software prefers me to use them wired in, which I expect to be true of all Bluetooth headsets.

The sound is really great, the headphones are really comfortable and I don't get complaints about sound quality from the mic -- coming from Plantronics I expect the mic to be good :).

</comment><comment><USER30> Decent quality earbuds for hearing, and the built-in stereo mic on my Logitech webcam (I'm usually docked when conferencing). Never heard any complaints about clarity of my voice.

* Used this for 4 years a a remote developer with multiple meetings per day. The conferencing software is where everything usually falls apart.

</comment><comment><USER31> AKG K240 studio headphones ($70). Super comfy, amazing audio and fully over ear. Open back so your can hear some ambient noise.

Aphex Microphone X ($200) USB mic with boom arm. Sound like the golden god that you are. They make amazing pro audio gear and have condensed that from a rack of gear to a single mic and USB interface.

</comment><comment><USER32> I discovered that wearing headphones (even earbuds) for hours is pretty tiresome, so I strongly prefer using my macbook's built-in mic and external speakers. Obviously, this wouldn't work in a coffeeshop situation, but it's not a good work environment anyway.

</comment><comment> josh-wrale I use this: [http://www.logitech.com/en-us/product/stereo- headset-h390?cr...](http://www.logitech.com/en-us/product/stereo- headset-h390?crid=36) (Logitech H390). It's quite good.

</comment><comment><USER33> Sennheiser PXC 550 WIRELESS - [https://en-us.sennheiser.com/wireless- headphone-headset-blue...](https://en-us.sennheiser.com/wireless-headphone- headset-bluetooth-noise-cancelling-pxc-550-travel)

</comment><comment><USER34> Microsoft's LS-6000. I liked it so much I bought a second for my spouse. The outgoing sound quality is very good, the ear cups are tolerable for hours, and it doesn't keep me from hearing a phone ring in the next room.

For use with my phone, QC-20i's.

</comment><comment><USER35> I went to a brick-and-mortar and tried on several. I went with skull candy aviators. Comfortable for hours. Has a cable, which is a downside. I can't do the Apple ear buds, they ache after half an hour or so.

</comment><comment><USER36> Simply the ones built into my macbook or my headphones (depending on how much privacy I have). I use basic Skull Candy earbuds when I need them. I do 3 to 5 meetings a day and some pair programming.

</comment><comment><USER37> I'm using Beyerdynamic DT 797 PV. The sound quality of both the headphones and the mic are excellent. It needs 48V phantom power, so I feed it with a Focusrite Scarlett USB audio interface.

</comment><comment><USER38> I use the EarPods that came with my old iPhone 6. Any reason that wouldn't work for you? Planning to get AirPods for the wireless-ness once they hit the stores.

</comment><comment><USER39> Blue Yeti microphone + semi open sennheiser headphones.

<comment><USER40> This is exactly what I do. Surprised to find such a specific combo already in the comments.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Sennheiser Momentum Wireless 2 - the first near-audiophile quality Bluetooth headphones I've ever heard, and they also have decent mic quality.

</comment><comment><USER42> Sennheiser 363d, really comfortable to wear for long periods of time. Headphone sound quality and microphone quality are both great.

</comment><comment><USER43> for my mic, I use [http://www.bluemic.com/products/snowball/](http://www.bluemic.com/products/snowball/) really good and takes care of the background noise for you.

then for my headphones, I use JBL Bluetooth headphones or mpow wolverine ear buds.

the combination works pretty well

</comment><comment><USER44> I just use my laptop built in mic (hp 6470b). Headphones are Sennheiser hd 380 pro or Panasonic RP-HJE125-K.

</comment><comment><USER45> I use the Logitech H820e (DECT Headset) with 300ft range, so I can walk around while on the phone.

</comment><comment><USER46> Just a set of urban ears I got "for free" when I bought an iPad. Works like a charm

</comment><comment><USER47> Sennheiser ME3 microphone connected via a USB audio "pod".

</comment><comment><USER48> 2012 27" iMac built in mic/camera

</comment><comment><USER49> Sennheiser earbuds with inline microphone</comment>


Returning '(()) Considered Difficult - <AUTHOR> http://cadrlife.blogspot.com/2008/03/returning-considered-difficult.html <comment><USER2> The Java code mostly looks bad because it's a statically typed language, and templated/generified code always looks ugly (in part because it's going directly against the general grain of the language).

If you were content throwing around lists of Objects like back in pre-generics days, the original code would be pretty readable. Though still not terse.</comment>


Quantum Cybernetics - <AUTHOR> http://fqxi.org/community/articles/display/206 <comment><USER2> I hope this research evolves beyond the 'Cybernetics' buzzword. It seems like a meaningful term (control, regulation etc.) but when other disciplines take it up, it often seems to fade into vagueness. Psycho-cybernetics, socio- cybernetics, and cybernetics of child development were all hot stuff in the decades after Weiner. But little came of them in the end (mean while, Claud Shannon was doing very real work in Information Theory, which started from the same theoretical underpinnings).

There is no reason x-cybernetics can't deliver, esp. for quantum systems...I just hope that it does this time.

</comment><comment><USER3>
      What is it about this quantumness
      It appears to be so quantumless
      On the scale of a human being
      Cybernetic math
      Of a separate class
      Will enable us in seeing</comment>


Now In 600+ Schools, Lore Gives Higher Ed A Next-Gen Social Network - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/31/now-in-600-schools-and-open-to-any-student-lore-gives-higher-ed-a-next-gen-social-network/

<comment><USER2> "That's because context is key for social networks, Cohen says. Students don't want to 'friend' their professors on Facebook (or connect with them on LinkedIn in any significant capacity) and they don't want to broadcast photos from last night's party to the world of family members and grandmas on Facebook."

Hasn't Google+ essentially solved a generalization of this problem with Circles? Creating a whole new account just to keep your networks separate seems very clunky (and highly inelegant) by comparison.

<comment><USER3> I logged in to write essentially the same thing. Google+ has a lot of features to solve multi-class problems. An interesting thing would be web-based tools that Google could develop and release for different circles such that people could administer and run those circles on different parameters. I guess, the Google+ platform could enable apps that would do this. For e.g., creating a Lore-like app, that would allow you to create a blackboard for your circle, and a family-center app for your family, and such.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Although the lore.com landing page tells me absolutely nothing, it is absolutely beautiful.</comment>


How to get rich in tech, guaranteed - <AUTHOR> http://startupljackson.com/post/135800367395/how-to-get-rich-in-tech-guaranteed <comment><USER2> "And if you go in with this mentality, even when startups fail, you succeed. If you put five years into building a company and team, you will end up with a great network of talented and motivated people, lots of first-hand experience, and often some management experience as well. Worst case, your next step could be going into Google at the VP level it would've taken you 15 years to get to joining out of college to "inject some startup DNA," and catch up on salary within a few years. Unless this internet thing is a fad, that job will always be there for you."

This advice is quite precise about where it applies. If you're at a startup that is undercapitalized, working you 12-16 hours a day, 7 days a week, with poor management and no opportunities for anything but building and maintenance, you can actually wind up worse off than when you went in: no built-up network and nothing that would make you "VP at Google" material, and in the case of startups doing pay cuts (in an environment of ever-rising rents), even less money than when you started(!) He is referring to working at "decent or better" startups; problem is, you may not know you're not working at one of those until you actually work at another one.

The rest of his advice is probably worth listening to, but the above part should be considered very carefully.</comment>


Google fires activist Rebecca Rivers and 3 others - <AUTHOR> https://venturebeat.com/2019/11/25/google-fires-activist-rebecca-rivers-and-3-others/ <comment><USER2> > For a meritocracy to work, it needs to engender a culture where there is an > "obligation to dissent" Eric Schmidt, et al. "How Google Works", (pp 41-42)

So now with a ship full of passengers thinking they are headed to "bring your whole self to work" town, they are changing course, and are headed to "shut up or you'll be fired" town. I can imagine the passengers are not going to be happy about it.

As they say, it's their company and they can go anywhere they want. It's just hard to understand why they had to change course, and couldn't be the place they kept telling the kids out of college about. It doesn't seem like they are struggling to turn out profits.

I wonder what the original founders think of this? Are they happy about it. Is it the company they thought Google would be...

On the good side, it seems Rebecca already got some offers. At least other companies like people who stand up for their principles.

</comment><comment><USER3> Google did this to themselves when they invited and fostered this culture. It had its naive merits.

But like many such attempts, what happens is these groups with good intentions get coöpted and controlled by others with bigger agendas-agendas which often are not in alignment with leadership.

When the PLA got too strong Mao devised the Red Guards. He didn't want another Menshevik - Bolshevik-like episode.

Nor do companies.

It's one thing to let people "have a say" in constructing their workplace atmosphere; to make it coöperative, inclusive etc., things which align with productivity— it's another to interfere with the economics of the company.

<comment><USER4> lol this is absurd, they're fighting against rampant sexual harassment and a variety of other real workplace problems, not being mind controlled by nefarious bolsheviks

<comment><USER5> > rampant sexual harassment

Sounds like something straight from the Bolsheviks in an attempt to take down a larger entity purely for control.

The concept Google is worse than general society is out there. Try looking at the real world, of transport or construction or the service industry or cleaning or food harvesting. Pretty much anywhere but the industry of IT of which Google is exemplary.

<comment><USER4> 1\. Google is not exemplary, lmao, they have a terrible culture of paying off executives for harassment and assault which has been thoroughly documented in the NYT and elsewhere

2\. the idea that if somewhere else is worse, we shouldn't fight harassment here/in our job/in our industry, is abhorrent. this sort of blase, tone-deaf attitude towards gender oppression causes a lot of problems in tech. I'm very glad people are finally vocally fighting back.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Does firing employees for trying to unionize count as "being evil"?

<comment><USER7> It very much depends on the jurisdiction.

I would say yes in most of the cases, but if there are insufficient union oversight processes, then unionization is a surefire way to close up shop due to the eventually inevitable waste/inefficiency.

Also, it's an interesting question of how much unionization helped or worsened the automotor industry's problems around 2008. (And even before.) And of course the real point is whether it helped the workers on the long term.

Plus, do unions support changing employment laws, do they advocate for better support for unemployed folks, or people wanting to switch jobs?

<comment><USER8> >>And of course the real point is whether it helped the workers on the long term.

When Saturday rolls around and you don't have to work, keep in mind that's only the case because of unions... and health care and other benefits.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I don't understand all these protests against defence contracts, China, CBP work. Guess what? These needs to be done by _someone_ and if its not Google, it would be Palantir or Microsoft or Oracle or IBM. Google is not what used but at least they have better ethics than the most other companies who would jump to do whatever was asked of them. At least they could steer towards _less evil_. The era of _no evil_ has ended, if there was one.

<comment><USER10> They can still choose not to want to work on it. I'd imagine it slowly eats at you.

If they believe that they are the best engineering org in the world, which may be true, then whatever other company does it might do a worse job.

Google also has insane margins already - it's not really a convincing argument to anyone other than shareholders that Google needs more revenue whatever the cost.

I do get your side of the argument, however.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Seems like a bit of a National Labor Relations Act violation. Bizzare how the more defensive a company gets the more it is likely to violate labor laws.

<comment><USER12> From the original Bloomberg article ([https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-25/google- fi...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-25/google-fires-four- employees-citing-data-security-violations))

"To the contrary, our thorough investigation found the individuals were involved in systematic searches for other employees' materials and work. This includes searching for, accessing, and distributing business information outside the scope of their jobs — repeating this conduct even after they were met with and reminded about our data security policies. This information, along with details of internal emails and inaccurate descriptions about Googlers' work, was subsequently shared externally."

That would be grounds for termination in most countries.

<comment><USER13> The"unauthorized access" argument is tainted by the ambiguity of these new document access rules, or that they were introduced after hiring a "union busting" company, this article claims: [https://medium.com/@GoogleWalkout/googles-next-moonshot- unio...](https://medium.com/@GoogleWalkout/googles-next-moonshot-union- busting-7bd2784dc690)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> How come half the time I see a female engineer's name it turns out to be a transgender person? Transgender people are less than 1% of the population... is it much higher in Silicon Valley?

<comment><USER15> Anecdotally speaking, I have met at least a hundred women who happened to be engineers, and none of them were trans. Then again, I don't work in Silicon Valley, lol.

<comment><USER14> Yes the same for me with people I've worked with. But when I see someone from a news article or similar seems like they are very commonly trans.</comment></comment></comment>


Secret-sharing app Whisper left users' locations, fetishes exposed on the Web - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/03/10/secret-sharing-app-whisper-left-users-locations-fetishes-exposed-web/ <comment><USER2> It said Secret _sharing_ app. I guess people should pay attention.

<comment><USER3> The dataset also revealed the location data for each post, which could be easily used to identify individuals. Did the service stated in the EULA that location data is also going to be public? If so, did they notify this to the users in a clear, straightforward manner?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> [http://archive.vn/oI92L](http://archive.vn/oI92L)

</comment><comment><USER5> Do they officially sell user data or show ads to users?

</comment><comment><USER6> They could have made so much on Empire with that.

Actually, does anyone use Empire anymore with its reliability issues? Dark.fail is like the darknet downforeveryoneorjustme.com and seems like other marketplaces are up a lot more lately.

</comment><comment><USER7> Can we stop posting all the paywalled links? So frustrating. I would never subscribe to one of these sites.

<comment><USER8> If there's a workaround, it's ok. Users usually post workarounds in the thread.

This is in the FAQ at [https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html) and there's more explanation here:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10178989](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10178989)

[https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...](https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix&page=0&query=by:dang%20paywall)

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Such carelessness needs to be heavily punished. I didn't check the details, but I'm guessing it was some No-SQL database left open with default settings. But that's irrelevant: the company that does such a thing needs to be shut down.

<comment><USER10> >I didn't check the details

It's in the first line of the third paragraph of the article. If you're not bothered reading about the topic being posted, why are you weighing in on it?

>But that's irrelevant: the company that does such a thing needs to be shut down.

People who post their dirty laundry on an app in a time when we know everything online is recorded, tracked, sold off to others, hacked and stolen or archived in a government database and then have the gall to complain about that dirty laundry getting out should have their internet access removed from them. Parents who let their children put themselves in this situation should be monitored by CPS.

Ignorance is no longer an excuse.

<comment><USER11> > Ignorance is no longer an excuse.

Nor is it justification for the leak. It may be unwise to share sensitive data online but people aren't going to stop doing it just because it's not a good idea; it needs real consequences for companies who let that happen.

<comment><USER10> >it needs real consequences for companies who let that happen.

Companies are ran by business people who often aren't technically literate, or are at a high level, or have become detached from it, and so they hire and pay people who lay claim to expertise knowledge to create these systems.

Why stop at the companies?

Engineers ultimately allowed this, and other such breaches, to happen. We've seen auto engineers in Germany being taken to task over fudging numbers for emissions tests, what if we held software engineers to the same level of liability when their creations result in people's data being stolen?</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Baumol's Cost Disease: Why Artists are Always Poor - <AUTHOR> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol%27s_cost_disease

<comment><USER2> I don't see how the linked article supports your editorializing in the headline.

<comment><AUTHOR> It would have been more precise to say BCD explains why most artists have trouble finding paying gigs. Wages for artists rise, their output stays more or less the same [1], so the proportion of artists whose output is good enough to justify the rising price shrinks.

The artists who aren't "good enough" (whatever that means), or have trouble convincing buyers that they are "good enough", have to take other jobs, e.g. as waitstaff, to make ends meet until their careers take off.

[1] Mass production has made some kinds of artists more productive, like novelists and screenwriters, but the net effect is a similar winner-take-all situation. Many unknowns compete to be the next Umberto Ecco or Dan Brown.

<comment><USER3> I don't think the BCD effect goes as far as you say. In a nutshell, the effect is that because artists can make $X working day jobs, you have to pay O($X) for them to perform. But this effect stops working before artists price themselves out of the market, because artists actually like performing and adjust their price to clear the market. This is why you can hire a really good band to play at your party for only several hundred bucks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Apparently I've got this wrong. Baumol's Cost Disease is a theory in dispute. I just googled "Baumol's Cost Disease Arts" and found:

The first link is to the wp article. The second is an Amazon listing for a book called _Baumol's Cost Disease: the Arts And Other Victims_. ([http://www.amazon.com/Baumols-Cost-Disease-Other- Victims/dp/...](http://www.amazon.com/Baumols-Cost-Disease-Other- Victims/dp/1858985080)). The author is apparently an economics professor at a University in England. There's also an abstract from the Journal of Cultural Economics. Baumol apparently developed his claim in the 1960s by looking at the economics of the performing arts, and then generalized it to education and health care.

<http://www.springerlink.com/content/k16p700536510057/>

At the top of the second page is a New Yorker article that certainly would have made a better HN submission:

[http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2003/07/07/030707ta_talk_su...](http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2003/07/07/030707ta_talk_surowiecki)

But apparently, the jury is still out. Google also turns up links to skeptical papers:

"Has Baumol's Cost Disease disappeared in the performing arts?"

[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi...](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WWV-45N44TX-B&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1119612647&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=24e19cf9babcb2a23cd7004955670d27)

and

"Why I do not Believe in the Cost Disease"

<http://www.springerlink.com/content/xuegr8k39y17t3nq/>

</comment><comment><USER4> The other problem is that the market can't properly value artists by definition, because if you know what you're paying for then it isn't art.

edit: This is one of the arguments in Seth Godin's next book, which you can get a review copy of here:

[http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2009/12/preview- copy...](http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2009/12/preview-copy-of-my- new-book.html)

</comment><comment><USER5> I'm not sure you can argue, as the article does, that musicians' productivity hasn't increased either. In the age of digital distribution that same string quartet can (potentially) generate far, far more revenue than their 18th century counterparts.

<comment><USER6> Hmm, I'm not so sure about that. The thing is there's nothing unique about string quartets or orchestras. Prior to the availability of recorded music, you couldn't listen to music without musicians, and for something complex like a symphony or an opera that meant you had to go buy a seat.

But nowadays there are lots of orchestras, whereas the number of consumers who can tell the difference between a good performance and an outstanding performance is pretty low. This has been good for orchestras in places like Eastern Europe, who in recent years have made money by playing music for sample libraries, movies and videogames for much less money than it would cost to book a similarly skilled orchestra in the USA.

On the other hand, as the number of recordings increase, consumers have less and less need for new ones. In terms of pure sound quality recording techniques have largely ceased to improve - the fidelity modern recording gear far exceeds the resolving power of the human ear, so if you go out and buy a great surround recording of a Beethoven symphony, that's pretty much as good as it gets, technically. You won't get a better recording in 5 years; you can only hope for a better performance.

But very few consumers care so much that that they want to accumulate multiple different recordings of the same music, deriving pleasure for the individual interpretations of different conductors and orchestras. Most of them will either buy 'all the classic hits you'll ever need' (performed by some hack orchestra, but hey, it's 99 tunes in a box), or else go for what most people agree is the best (Pavarotti singing Pagliacci or whatever).

And the supply of new orchestral tunes, and the audience for them, is very small...film soundtracks are probably the main source of orchestral raw material, and the payments for that are generally a fixed fee.

One issue I do have with the Baumol thesis is that saying that wages of musicians have risen is sort of meaningless, because so have prices for other things. It's unclear to me whether the purchasing power of musicians has risen relative to the cost of goods and services, or whether it has merely kept pace with inflation...but I blame the summary nature of Wikipedia for that.

<comment><USER5> Elite string quartets like the Emerson or Takacs earn far more than the average string quartet. Perhaps the market for their music is small compared to that of pop artists but you can't argue that they're interchangeable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> For extra credit square Baumol's Cost Disease with the Cambridge capital controversy.

</comment><comment><USER8> The connection is actually the inverse of "Baumol's Cost Disease". BCD describes the increase in labor costs when the laborers have other options.

The problem for artists and writers is that they're concentrating on their artistic work, rather than building a resume and career, just because the artistic careers require so much energy, and most of what they end up doing is not transferrable to mainstream work. So they have _fewer_ career options, and those who patronize them (e.g. publishers, agents) are able to exploit their weak bargaining position.

For the same reason, academics in the humanities are often paid less than those in the sciences; science professors have other options. You can say that BCD is making the science professors rich, or making the humanities professors poor-- two sides of the same coin.</comment>


Scientists confirm the universe has no direction - <AUTHOR> http://phys.org/news/2016-09-scientists-universe.html <comment><USER2> How wise God is! Had He made it anisotropic, everybody would be gathering to the same place! (Apart from a few excentrics who would go the opposite direction).

</comment><comment><USER3> Or rather, that "The universe is not spinning or stretched in any particular direction, according to the most stringent test yet."</comment>


Applications for YC S2015 Are Open - <AUTHOR> http://www.ycombinator.com/apply/#S2015 <comment><USER2> Free idea:

"Our startup wants to change the world by reselling the free $500K in Azure services [1] to outsiders for half-off, then liquidating itself. This may not be a 'traditional YC play', or 'scalable', or even 'honest', but we'll give YC half the loot (approximately $100K) and don't even require the traditional investment/convertible note. Just tell Microsoft we're a YC company! Oh, and let us know whether you like the name 'Azurbatrage' or 'Arbitrazure' better. Stretch goal: resell all the unused Azure capacity of our classmate companies – 50X the profit opportunity."

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9023582](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9023582)

<comment><USER3> Better idea, make a script that can spin up Azure instances and mine Bitcoins on them. Then build a web app on top of it that will liquidate Azure credits to cash as a service. When someone dumps their credentials into your site you spin up $500,000 of computing power on Azure to mine Bitcoins from and then liquidate the Bitcoins you mine into cash and take like 15% off the top.

I'm not sure what the conversion rate of Azure computing dollar to mined Bitcoin would be, but this would work to some extent with $500,000 wouldn't it? What YC company wouldn't want a Azure -> cash liquidation web app.

<comment><USER2> "At Arbitrazure, we are of course open to any idea for converting free Azure credit to cold hard cash. But our research indicates that without special mining chips, Bitcoin mining is not competitive, and $500K of Azure per month (15,000 'A1' VMs) would take 8-16 years ($48-$96 million) to earn one Bitcoin ($225). That's why we remain committed to _resale_ , rather than direct exploitation."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> As a solo founder, is it worth the time to apply if I don't already have a finished product and significant traction?

P.S. I know many people would suggest to find a cofounder, but that hasn't worked well for me. In my area there aren't many experienced programmers with an entrepreneurial spirit. The few people I have tried to start something with usually fall through due to not being able to keep up. I'd rather stop wasting my time with the hunt and start just building something by myself.

<comment><USER5> Drew Houston applied as a single founder with no product or traction, so yes :)

<comment><USER4> Several years ago when there were less applications and he got turned down initially...

<comment><USER5> And also fewer partners reviewing applications. He was turned down for a previous batch because he applied with a bad idea (SAT test prep), not because he was a single founder. If we would now pass on DropBox, something has gone very wrong. I can't believe I have to argue this point...

<comment><USER6> With all due respect, the reason you might have to argue the point is probably because even back in 2007 the application page said:

         The people in your group are what matter most to us. [...] Your idea is important too, but mainly as evidence that you can have good ideas

And Drew was passed up because his idea was bad (not given a "we like you more than your idea" option). It seems like a skating to where the puck is and not where it's going kind of thing.

YC probably won't miss out on a DropBox that looks like a DropBox, but you might miss out on a Drew Houston that eventually creates a DropBox.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> How do you guys deal with conflicts of interest? For instance, suppose hypothetically someone is building a startup who's goal is to eat the company who's CEO is in your list of YC partners... How's that going to work?

<comment><USER8> From the FAQ:

Will you fund multiple startups working on the same idea?

Yes. If you fund as many companies as we do it's unavoidable you'll end up with some overlap. Even if you tried not to accept competing companies, you'd still get overlap because startups' ideas morph so much. The way we deal with it is that when two startups are working on related stuff, we don't talk to one about what the other's doing.

In practice it has not turned out to be a problem, because most big markets have room for several slightly different solutions, and it's unlikely that two startups would do precisely the same thing.

<comment><USER9> That's a start but the GP wasn't asking about competing entrants in the same batch but about a theoretical entrant that would compete with an established YC partner.

<comment><USER8> Umm I think that was a more general comment. And the reason that makes up the later part of the answer sounds very general and applies to the GP's question.

<comment><USER9> "The way we deal with it is that when two startups are working on related stuff, we don't talk to one about what the other's doing."

This seems easier to do with two startups in the same batch than with a new startup and an existing YC partner, although I suppose they could use the same approach.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Well. Now I'm completely terrified.

I've been working on a project for about 8 months, with about 3 months on- going after a decision to re-write and reign in focus, with YC as a major end goal the entire time. Now that it's actually time to apply I'm extremely nervous—especially since I'm an 18-year-old kid who hasn't even finished high school yet (1 semester left) and I'm competing with people twice my age and with several hundred times more experience. We're quite close to a major beta release so that should help the process along.

Is there anything somebody in my (and my co-founders) circumstances should seek to convey in order to increase our chances of getting accepted? I've read quite a few articles on the best application type, but none of them had a "What to do when you're completely unproven and also extremely young" section.

<comment><USER11> I'm not twice as old as you, but I've been feeling old for a while now, so I'll give this a shot. I'm going to start by pretty much channeling Paul Graham.

If you're close to a major beta release, make sure that happens on time and as smoothly as possible. Then, as Paul Graham says, know your users. Talk to them, email them, Skype them late at night and into the wee hours of the morning. That's where expertise matters the most and where you're on equal ground with everyone else. I don't know anything about your users yet either. Well, I might know a tiny bit by accident because I worked on something similar. So go learn more than me.

To quote PG: "This class can teach you about startups, but that is not what you need to know. What you need to know to succeed in a startup is not expertise in startups, what you need is expertise in your own users.

Mark Zuckerberg did not succeed at Facebook because he was an expert in startups, he succeeded despite being a complete noob at startups; I mean Facebook was first incorporated as a Florida LLC. Even you guys know better than that. He succeeded despite being a complete noob at startups because he understood his users very well."

Beyond that, I would say expect there to be what feels like near-death business/startup experiences.

If you run into trouble, great! That means you're doing something right. It isn't like school where if you prep enough, everything should be smooth sailing. You're not going to be able to ever prep enough and everything should feel chaotic. If it all goes really well, it is possible that you're super oblivious.

It is ok if things aren't going _that_ well. Treat all the lows like team bonding. If you're lucky this won't be the last or worst of it all and nothing kills a startup like a cofounder who is only in it for the good times.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I'd love to apply to YC, but I cannot under any circumstances move to the bay area. :(

<comment><USER13> Technically, you only need to be there from June-August.

That said: speaking as a cofounder of a brand new company, and despite being corrosively skeptical of YC in the past, if it weren't for the SFBA prereq, we'd apply. You're right, it's annoying!

<comment><USER14> YC isn't just about credentials. A significant part of the value is concentrated in the Tuesday dinners and in-person office hours. Even if YC did accept remote companies, the value of the program would be greatly diminished if you didn't move to the bay.

And that's to say nothing of investors, over 70% of whom are concentrated in the valley.

Plus, there's also probably some signal value here for YC. If you're not sufficiently committed to be willing to move somewhere else for 3-4 months, you may not be that serious about your startup. It's not the strongest signal, but its impact is probably non-trivial.

<comment><USER15> > If you're not sufficiently committed to be willing to move somewhere else > for 3-4 months,

... Then you might be older than 30. I don't blame YC at all; I'd do it the same way. However, lots of the industry's demands for evidence of passion/interest/excitement are things only applicable to young people.

<comment><USER16> A non-trivial number of YC founders are >30, married, have kids, and don't live in the Bay when they apply. It's not that big of a hurdle.

Consider how many people with similar commitments (kids, marriages, mortgages) get deployed for military purposes every year for roughly the same amount of time. It's manageable for families.

<comment><USER17> Military families have a ton of existing social and community support structures to help ease the difficulty of military deployments. Startup culture is not developed to nearly the same degree.

But there are possibly easier solutions to consider. I'd recommend that people with families consider flying back every week or so for a few days. Working remote for a few days and then spending the weekend with the family will be fine, and I've seen lots of people keep that type of arrangement going for many months.

It's very common in the film industry for people with families to work remote on location for most of 12-24 months.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> If I have an alpha/beta version of a product, should i be working to launch it to build traction or rather apply for YC ?

Also, I have a day job which pays well and i need the job but my passion is to build innovative/useful solutions. I wonder how i could be full time at YC or is it ok to be working part time?. I have also heard that investors would not even look at your proposal if they know you're working part time on it.

<comment><USER19> I don't think it will hurt to apply regardless :) it will help you hash out some of your thoughts as well, if you are serious about doing a startup. Good luck!

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> An idea I would be interested in submitting requires rather a lot of explanation on what makes it sexy; let's call it 1,000 words.

I realize it probably needs to be a little snappier than that, but the fundamental idea sounds a little tired and not particularly new without some explanation.

There's an opportunity to split this out in the "Idea" section, but really several strands need to be tied together in a specific order. Will it look weird to stick 1,000 words in the "What is your company going to make?" field, rather than something short and pithy like "AirBNB for Bees"?

<comment><USER21> One potential way to make a snappy one liner (and you do need a snappy one liner) is to describe it in terms of who it helps instead of what exactly it does, even if it is just "A new approach to stopping the pain felt by the X Billion dollar a year industry of Y".

<comment><USER20> That's a really good idea, actually, and I can see how to apply that. Thanks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I wonder if pre-launch Slack would have got in to YC.

<comment><USER23> I bet they would have. Impressive team with big ambitions.

<comment><USER24> Not to mention Grove / Convore was in a few years before Slack.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Just asking. Does YC value the IITs(Indian Institute of Technology) as much as they value Harv, Stan, etc. Lots of other people do value it quite a lot. How does YC see them?

</comment><comment><USER25> i'm constantly amazed by how quickly yc moves. thanks for working towards a better future and inspiring some along the way.

</comment><comment><USER26> Looks like my "universal communication UI" project will once again be rejected.

<comment> super-serial I'm making "the future of storytelling"... but it won't be ready until summer.

I'll get traction/users first before getting rejected again.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> So...here's my question to everyone applying:

What is the single motivation or incentive for you to get in? Does YC offer something that you are unable to find or obtain on your own?</comment>


Bitcoin under pressure - <AUTHOR> http://www.economist.com/news/technology-quarterly/21590766-virtual-currency-it-mathematically-elegant-increasingly-popular-and-highly <comment><USER2> _The system is now straining at the seams. Its computational underpinnings have collectively reached 100 times the performance of the world's top 500 supercomputers combined: more than 50,000 petaflops. Bitcoin's success has revealed three weaknesses in particular. It is not as secure and anonymous as it seems; the "mining" system that both increases the Bitcoin supply and ensures the integrity of the currency has led to an unsustainable computational arms-race; and the distributed-ledger system is becoming unwieldy. Will Bitcoin's self-correcting mechanisms, and the enlightened self- interest of its users, be able to address these weaknesses and keep Bitcoin on the rails?_

And this is how you spread misinformation and create fear. Bitcoin certainly has its risks, but either the author is fear mongering, or really does not get it.

<comment><USER3> He doesn't back up these statements with any evidence...

<comment><USER4> I agree with you, but to be fair you don't provide any to refute it.

<comment><USER5> Those who make the claims are obligated to support it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > Rather than relying on confidence in a central authority, it depends instead > on a distributed system of trust

Isn't it built on a distributed system of _lack of trust_? That is, after all, why it is distributed.

<comment><USER7> I would say the "trust" is in that the majority of the network is sane.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> > Every participant in the system must keep a copy of the block chain, which > now exceeds 11 gigabytes in size and continues to grow steadily. This alone > deters casual use.

Is 11GB really that much? Downloadable video games and movies easily top this size, and it's not at all uncommon for a person to "have" several pieces of similar media.

</comment><comment><USER8> This piece was clearly not written out fear from misunderstanding the technicals of Bitcoin, which is forgivable to some degree. It was written out of fear of something uncontrollable and different.</comment>


Banker bonuses will be exceptionally large this year - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/business/08pay.html?_r=1&hp <comment><USER2> If anyone's wondering what it's like to work as a programmer for a wall street firm, check out the book 'So You Want to be a Wall Street Programmer' by Andrey Butov. Very informative and insightful book about the field.

Here's a link: [http://www.amazon.com/You-Want-Wall-Street- Programmer/dp/184...](http://www.amazon.com/You-Want-Wall-Street- Programmer/dp/1847284213/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257707798&sr=8-1)

I work for a small options-market making firm, and I love what I do and the people I work with. I get the impression I'm very lucky to be in that position - most programmers working in finance work like serfs and make nothing compared to the traders who use the software the programmers make.

<comment><USER3> I actually bought that book about 3 years ago. While I found the book entertaining and full of interesting anecdotes, the focus was on IT programming and less about quantitative finance (which is what interested me).

I also remember the book mentioning salaries and it was FAR below going rates (the book mentioned a number that was about half the going rate).

Most of the information can be had by scouring the Wilmott forums, (<http://www.wilmott.com/index.cfm>), and the guys who run that site offer a free PDF book (or at least it used to be free: [http://quantjob.blogspot.com/2007/08/faq-1-what-is-guide- our...](http://quantjob.blogspot.com/2007/08/faq-1-what-is-guide-our-guide- is.html)).</comment></comment>


Why Scrum Should Basically Just Die in a Fire - <AUTHOR> http://gilesbowkett.blogspot.com/2014/09/why-scrum-should-basically-just-die-in.html

<comment><USER2> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8334905](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8334905)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8352235](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8352235)</comment>


Clever RDMA Technique Delivers Distributed Memory Pooling - <AUTHOR> https://www.nextplatform.com/2017/06/12/clever-rdma-technique-delivers-distributed-memory-pooling/ <comment><USER2> As Greg points out this has come up multiple times and in multiple strategies for implementation.

In the early 2000's I lead the design of a memory based Ethernet appliance which we called "Network Accessible Memory". The basic idea combined the fact that FPGAs were pretty cheap, you could easily build a gigabit network interface on one side and a DDR2/3 interface on the other, and with a very simple ethernet protocol have terabytes of memory basically a couple of microseconds away from a CPU as opposed to 'swap' which was milliseconds away at best. (we also simulated the architecture using a machine just exporting memory to the network)

The two biggest wins are that the memory is already 'live' when machines that might use it boot up so they don't spend time reading in state, and in a multi-processor storage subsystem you can put the buffer cache into memory without tying up any individual processor's main memory which gives you faster throughput and lower latency as you're not turning around the disk interfaces for meta data reads and mixed r/w workloads don't blow up your buffer cache.

All very cool. But all very "specialized" too.

<comment><USER3> Fun -- Texas Memory Systems was already shipping a product in that era that was FPGA-based. It did a variety of complicated network protocols, like Fibre Channel and eventually InfiniBand, with a pure FPGA implementation. The guy who ran the company was also an FPGA wizard. I was on a telecon with him once.

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

<comment><USER2> Yeah, I think they are cited in the patent we did. The key differences were a) no non-volatile storage at all, and b) we took 16 memory 'blades' (1GBit each) and combined them into a single 10gbit backed 'controller'. It leveraged a lot of ideas from the disk shelves at the time. It did give you 1GB/s read/write fully raid protected memory (with equivalent FEC bits in the packets to catch network corruption) to the network.

I expect TMS would have gotten there eventually once they moved on from 'storage' on the network/fabric to 'memory' on the network/fabric.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I know this is a "pop" news writeup and not a proper paper, but this same thing has been done many times before, for example the Cray T3E had this sort of thing built into its OS. One of the interesting challenges is that the networking stack allocates memory, so you have to be careful to avoid deadlocks when memory runs low.

A user-level example is the Global Arrays toolkit from PNNL, released in 1994: [http://www.emsl.pnl.gov/docs/global_arraysdev/index.shtml](http://www.emsl.pnl.gov/docs/global_arraysdev/index.shtml)

<comment><USER4> It looks like PNNL has been slow to update their own Global Arrays web page. The source has finally moved to github: [https://github.com/GlobalArrays/ga](https://github.com/GlobalArrays/ga)

I noticed this a few months ago when NWChem build scripts added a tool to fetch GA from github. It's nice because although the NWChem svn repo has long enabled read-only public access, the svn repo for GA was closed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I didn't see the source code for infiniswap linked in the article. Here it is: [https://github.com/Infiniswap/infiniswap](https://github.com/Infiniswap/infiniswap)

</comment><comment><USER6> This sounds like a modern follow on in the spirit of work done at UW, Duke and UBC in the 90s called "GMS". The interconnect was ATM at first, and then Myrinet (which is a sort of predecessor to Infiniband). The GMS research was done on DEC Alphas running DEC UNIX (and later FreeBSD) and involved allowing applications transparent access to huge amounts of RAM over the network.

And in fact, it looks like they cite some of the GMS papers..

</comment><comment><USER7> there was a whole movement exploring distributed shared memory in the early 90s, using VM hardware to trigger distributed swap with coherency protocols on top. in fact there was a parallel version of OSF/1

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

which isn't to say that low latency and high bandwidth doesn't make this a lot more feasible. fault tolerance is pretty hard though :)

<comment><USER3> In this case they're writing everything to a local SSD. The other usual techniques are RAID-1 (multiple copies) or a higher RAID level (if you want to conserve memory.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I think infiniswap is pretty neat technically. The real solution to this problem is to design your application so it doesn't swap though.

<comment><USER3> If you have a lot of unused memory in your cluster, and your application runs a lot faster if you use it, how is that a bad thing?

<comment><USER9> Of course very few usage patterns can avoid swap entirely, but in general, avoiding it is faster than hitting it.

<comment><USER3> Almost all usage patterns can avoid swap. In this case they're intentionally using a ram-network swap device because it's cost-effective... faster than avoiding swap.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Someone flicked the startup on-switch in Myanmar - <AUTHOR> http://pollenizer.com/someone-flicked-startup-switch-myanmar <comment><USER2> Myanmar really represents an amazing turn around for a country. One has to wonder what really happened. If you recall it wasn't that many years ago that the ruling junta took all those protesting Buddhist monks out back and shot them. It was a disgusting event. I wonder if American diplomacy (via Hillary Clinton) actually did something positive for a change --I wonder if she said "change your ways and you'll get rich, or keep it up and we'll invade and destroy you".</comment>