Redis Virtual Memory: the story and the code - <AUTHOR> http://antirez.com/post/redis-virtual-memory-story.html <comment><USER2> It's amazing what one super bright developer can do: DHH with Rails, Rich Hickey with Clojure and Salvatore antirez Sanfilippo with Redis.

<comment><USER3> That's very true. I think two factors have helped in these kinds of cases:

1\. There wasn't a "boss" or someone dictating what they should do. Creativity reigns and ideas simmer for a while to mature into good ideas.

2\. They have a mentality of "if I were to solve this problem from scratch, what would I really need?" This question expands into "What is my wish list of things that are hard to do now but me/everyone has asked for?"

<comment><USER4> > solve this problem from scratch

I'm not detracting at all, but object databases with way more advanced feature sets have been around for well over ten years (<http://web.progress.com/en/objectstore/>). Making a stripped down version of an object database is not exactly forging new ground. I know you weren't necessarily implying otherwise.

<comment><AUTHOR> Redis does not invent nothing new. It's 50 years ago technology mostly, at work. VM, Data structures, and so forth. Even the language it is implemented in, C, is old. But it's not an object database, and this is the point.

Databases are like languages. Does Ruby invented something new? No, but it's my preferred high level language. It's a matter of "interpretation" of already implemented concepts, not a matter of features set.

AFAIK Redis is one of the first DBs exposing basic computer science data structures as abstract types. You have sets, linked lists, a sorted type that is the equivalent of a balanced tree, and an dictionary (an hash table) on top of this.

What matters is if this interpretation of already existing technologies fit well with the needs of today. I'll leave the task of inventing new breaking things to CS departments as I'm a programmer and not a scientist, with all the limits and strengths that this implies.

As long as we, programmers, developers, hackers, computer entusiasts, don't realize that our work is an interpretation work, like architects, we will continue to be nerdy engineers that the society will continue to look at without to recognize the real value.

Do you evaluate a building based on his number of rooms, the ability to resist to forces, and so forth? I don't think so. Why you should use this meters for software?

<comment><USER4> Chill out man. I'm just pointing out this stuff has been around in commercial products for a very long time.

> AFAIK Redis is one of the first DBs exposing basic computer science data > structures as abstract types

With something like ObjectStore you've had persistent storage of arbitrary templatized data structures for ages. You want a hash of hashes ultimately pointing to a void* value? Easy.

<comment><AUTHOR> Even with an SQL table you can build every data structure. Pointers to pointers to pointers. But this is not the point(er) and I can't explain it any better than in my previous message.

<comment><USER4> You don't have to "build" the data structure. You are using your native structures.

<comment><USER5> As a recent redis convert let me put it differently:

Redis is a _tool_ in the unix-sense of the word. OOStore a _solution_ in the enterprise sense.

Hackers tend to prefer tools, because they can combine them to build superior solutions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The app we use for analytics currently works by logging events to the file system and loading them into a mysql database every 5 minutes. I'm trying to convince our sysadmin to let me switch the backend out to use redis, since the only thing I'm using sql for is date filtering.

The main roadblock for him is redis' lack of support for automatic failover (at least for the python client libraries I've seen), which I admit has some validity to it. I don't think it's that big of an issue for our use case, but try telling that to an opinionated sysadmin.

<comment><USER7> If you have trouble with the Python client, please report a bug at: <http://github.com/andymccurdy/redis-py/issues>

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> This is great, I was really hoping for Redis to take this direction, since keeping everything in memory wasn't great for my current project.

In the same vein, I have an idea about forking memcached and turn it into "memd". Instead of just caching for reads, it would allow writes to be done in memory too, which are asynchronously synced to disk when an item expires, or based on certain conditions (I'm thinking based on both time since last updated, and when enough updates are made). Now obviously, this only works if the data you store isn't all that important, which is probably the case for most web applications.

<comment><USER9> and that's called Redis

<comment><USER8> Well, the idea preceded Redis and applies more widely. The advantage of having it the way I mentioned is that any database could be plugged in at the back, just as memcached as no requirements for what method of persistence is used. That makes it attractive for other reasons.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I can't help but wish for a similar sql-solution. In-memory, with writes journaled and close enough to mysql that porting wouldn't be a nightmare. <sigh> one can only dream...

<comment><USER4> There are absolutely super performant in memory sql databases. You just have to pay for them.

There's also csql. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSQL>

<comment><USER10> Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm disappointed that he didn't try non-blocking IO. I suspect it would have ended up simpler than the threading approach he went with.

Still a very cool piece of work, though.

<comment><USER12> Nonblocking disk IO is a pain compared to nonblocking network, and redis compiles with minimal deps.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Well worth the read to learn the design decisions and the capabilities that are opened up with Redis by keeping just the keys and least used data in memory.

Antirez is my hero of the week :-)</comment>


Google App Engine - Changes Everything - <AUTHOR> http://bob.pythonmac.org/archives/2008/04/08/google-app-engine-changes-everything/ <comment><USER2> I love the hyperbole in the technology world. An interesting new product isn't cool, it's revolutionary! It changes EVERYTHING. The development of penicillin and Christopher Columbus ain't got SHIT on this neato cloud computing thingie from Google (that no one has actually used in a significant way yet). And if you disagree you just _don't get it_.

There's no time to wait for people to actually use it for products that customers pay for. There's no time! By then it'll _already be obsolete_.

<comment><USER3> If a product doesn't revolutionize mankind, then it's not worth the valuations. Tech would die without hype. It's the frictional force between us and the fate suffered by aerospace engineering.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I've been a fan of Google for some time, but in this instance I still think AWS works better for me. We're into Python in a big way, so in theory the Google offering should fit nicely but I like what AWS has done, I like how they've done it and they're supportive. My dealings with Google (Adsense support) hasn't been particulary positive as an experience and my concern is that they will provide the same type of support here. Also it feels like I'll be more locked in to this platform that with AWS

<comment><USER5> AWS is going to work better for a lot of people, no doubt. However, this is good for those people as well. Google opening up this kind of offering really puts the pressure on Amazon to improve the quality of all the AWS stuff. Competition is good. I'd really like to see one more BIG player in this market. I would guess Microsoft is probably going to be next, since they've already started with a SQL Server offering.

<comment><USER6> The Google App API is crufty - too many pieces that are visible to the developer. Google needs to clean it up and unify the API, which should really be a variant of the Python language (probably a subset of Python).

Microsoft _could_ try to compete here but won't or will do it poorly. Their best chance would be a variant of ASP (not ASP.NET, more below) with additions:

1\. Associative arrays - ASP had limited session and application hash variables. Microsoft tantalizingly demonstrated that they _could_ do associative arrays but wouldn't.

2\. Allow tying associative arrays to disk, as in Perl, and incorporate transaction capability.

3\. Add binary file I/O - File I/O should be built into a language. In ASP you write a C++/VB COM component to perform random I/O and dynamically instance the component on the ASP page. Guaranteed slowness/clumsiness in development/execution.

4\. Develop a database API similar to Google's BigTable. Abandon SQL Server: the database division would oppose this. Development would have to be coordinated with the creation of infrastructure even given Google's API model.

A bonus: much existing ASP code could be reused. There is far more ASP than ASP.NET code.

Why not ASP.NET?

It's too much. Classic ASP was extremely popular and technically fell just short of a sweet spot for web APIs. Along came .NET, built more for Microsoft than for either developers or the Internet. ASP.NET was shoehorned into the "web apps" slot.

Harder questions:

\- infrastructure: could Microsoft support something like Google App Engine?

\- would former ASP developers forgive Microsoft's abandonment of ASP and flock to a new ASP platform?

\- would ASP.NET developers consider using an ASP framework?

<comment><USER5> My guess as to Microsoft's involvement with a similar offering would be ASP.Net via the DLR. I could see their marketing leaning towards not just the C# crowd, but also the IronPython and IronRuby crowds.

It would be a "we'll host your DLR applications for x dollars a month", not a free offering. They would likely offer deep discounts to students and have lots of other programs to drive the cost of the application down.

Microsoft already has an online offering for data, namely SQL Server Data Services (<http://www.microsoft.com/sql/dataservices/default.mspx>). Given their past trends, they will continue to push this offering.

Remember that MSFT has a different strategy than Google or Amazon; they target corporations while Amazon and Google tend to like to target smaller groups, single developers or start-ups. This may change in the future as MSFT becomes more acquisition oriented, but only time will tell.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This is a little bit one-sided! Yes it's exciting that Google is getting into this space but Amazon was here first, has a loosely coupled architecture that allows for more flexibility, and already allows you to run apps in your language of choice.

I'm not saying AppEngine won't be better, but let's not declare Google the winner by default. If there is anyone that can go toe-to-toe with Google I think it's Amazon. This is a battle I've been waiting to see.

<comment><USER8> I agree. I really just want to use Bigtable.

Please?

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> All aboard onto the Google mothership! Buyer beware, tickets are non- refundable and the price is your soul.</comment>


Ask HN: Quants and traders: Best OS backtesting platform for trading strategies? - <AUTHOR> I'm looking for some open source software to dive into for backtesting trading strategies in/out of sample which produces useful tear sheets, nice built in functions, and quality documentation.
I have looked Quantopian/Alphalens/Zipline, but it seems like it has been left to wither and die outside of Quantopian's online platform. The documentation is frankly terrible.
I have briefly looked at Quantconnect/LEAN and it looks more promising but havent dived in to much detail.
I am also looking at the Quantstrat package in R which appears to be quite promising as well.
I'm involved in the futures markets myself but data access is not an issue. I have Bloomberg so can source my data from them.
So, Quants and traders of Hacker News who aren't using in-house corporate solutions, what are you using? <comment><USER2> I use Zipline. It serves the purpose. Typically, you need to decide what instrument you want to trade, and look at what backtesting software provides the best support for that instrument. Not all s/w cover all instruments. If you have access to Bloomberg for data. Find s/w that has a plug-in for Bloomberg.

I really like pyFolio tear sheets.

</comment><comment><USER3> Backtrader is pretty good, but eventually you will find that there really isn't anything out there that will do everything you want it to do.

So imo the best strategy is to roll your own.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. I'll look into backtrader. Eventually I'll be building my own or stapling onto existing solutions.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Well backtests depend on everything including assumptions about your data, your trading reality, corrections for multi hypothesis testing, comparisons to a billion benchmarks, working out why your advantage works when it does, etc. I dare say every team has their own rig which takes into account as many of their trading realities as possible.

To that effect I'm not sure there's a useful answer to your question which won't mislead you.</comment>


T-Mobile CEO: "This industry blows," biggest carriers offer "horseshit" - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/01/t-mobile-ceo-this-industry-blows-biggest-carriers-offer-horsesh/ <comment><USER3> I bought the iPhone 5 outright, unlocked and switch to T-Mobile after doing so. In the city (Chicago) the service can't be better. Really like that tethering is just included. LTE tethering has come in handy at a few coffee shops that don't have WiFi.

I also recently went to Europe and took advantage of the free worldwide data; was fantastic. Phone calls while roaming in Europe were reasonable, too. Something like 10 cents a minute back to the States.

All for ~$70/month. Beats the pants off AT&T.

<comment><USER4> For the past year or two, AT&T and Verizon have also offered free LTE tethering.

<comment><USER5> Where is this free LTE tethering? Have been told it still requires the extra monthly fee.

<comment><USER6> I got free LTE tethering (on AT&T) once I switched from my grandfathered unlimited plan to the newer metered plans.

Which is ironic, as tethering is the only context in which I would come anywhere close to using up my monthly bandwidth allocation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I have been a loyal AT&T customer for over 5 years. Currently I have a Nokia Lumia 920 for a contract that is 1 year old. I am going on a one month vacation out of the country. So I requested AT&T to unlock my phone so I could use it overseas. Customer service said go fill out an online form. A day after filling the form, received email saying I am not eligible for an unlock. Went to the store. Same thing.

Now, I am wondering, is AT&T afraid that I am not going to finish my contract if they unlock the phone? If they think I was lying about the trip abroad, I could show them my tickets. But this kind of behavior just seems outright sadistic.

I just bought an unlocked Nexus 5 to use overseas and I am definitely switching to T-Mobile after I return. Fuck you AT&T.

<comment><USER8> Do not get me started. Dude, I was an AT&T wireless customer back when they were AT&T, still a customer when they were Cingular, and then when they switched back to being AT&T again. Probably ten years, maybe more? But every time I bought a new iPhone I had to call them and tell them I wasn't paying their $36 upgrade fee. They would then waive it after acting like it was a huge favor. The last time the rep said she'd do it "just this once". I told her that I would have to then reconsider my options for mobile service when my contract was up.

I didn't wait until my contract was up. 14 months later I paid the ETF on two phones and switched to Tmo. I think we'll come out about even versus just waiting until the contract ended. I grew weary of AT&T's nickel-and-dime bullshit, and the lack of signal at my house. Though I will credit AT&T with quickly unlocking the phones after the ETF was paid.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> You have to hand it Legere. He's bold. Provocative. And speaks his mind. In the best interests of the company of course, but with a direct emphasis on making customers happy.

What's important to note is that T-Mobile is quickly becoming a company that delivers a great product and is customer-centric. And when the incumbents start playing catch up (AT&T in particular) you know they're making the right moves.

I've been with Verizon for a few years and I can't say their service is what it's marketed to be. Data is fast but the inability to simultaneously do data and voice is just idiotic. The monthly fees are also totally insane. I pay $140 / month for a single data line (iPhone). In contrast to Verizon, with T-Mobile you get unlimited voice and data for a little over $70, no contract and stellar customer service. I called T-Mobile to switch last month and with a little negotiating, they sent me a _free_ iPhone 5S. No contract. No bullshit.

T-Mobile's latest announcement of up to $650 in credits for switching over will increase their subscriber base by millions of new users, no question. It's bold, aggressive and customer-centric.

I can't personally speak on AT&T's network but we all know it's one of the worst companies in the world to deal with. Their service is spotty for many, many users. Their customer service is non-existent. Their data practices are borderline unethical (with hidden data caps, throttling, etc). AT&T is just an awful company. I'm stuck with their uVerse Internet service and it's just a disaster. Unfortunately, many of us have no other choice but their lousy broadband product. Let's not even talk about Time Warner.

T-Mobile's coverage, from what I have experienced, is stellar. Up and down the California coast. Mexico. Europe. NYC. Seattle. I'm always at 4+ bars. Data is fast (~18Mbps downstream). International roaming is perhaps one of the most impressive features of TMO. I remember paying $20 / MB with Verizon and that's just absolutely criminal. And they can get away with it because many customers aren't even aware of this until they get the bill.

Legere is right - the mobile landscape is just horrendous and it's mainly because of AT&T and Verizon. I hope T-Mobile continues this push towards making customers happy and simply offering better products. Their bottom line will be the ultimate proof of how this is working out for them - and from what I'm seeing, their new subscriber numbers are growing exponentially. You could say they're disrupting the industry. And that's rare from these monoliths.

<comment><USER10> T-mo's coverage in California at least is noticeably worse than Verizon's. In SF its absolutely slower, and elsewhere it is non-existent where Verizon has LTE.

I'm overall quite happy though. I switched from paying Verizon $100/mo to $30/month with T-Mobile ($250 etf paid for itself in 4 months). Its also worth mentioning that since I moved over my CDMA iPhone 5, I am using HSPDA+ (on 1900mhz where it exists) not LTE

<comment><USER11> I use T-Mobile and am quite happy with it; I pay $30 a month for basically everything I need and no contract.

It is worth noting, however, that T-Mobile has some serious problems. There are large swaths of this country where T-Mobile simply doesn't have service. For instance, last time I drove from Denver to Chicago I lost reception 1 hour into the trip and got it back a few hours before I arrived. There was perhaps one town where I had service during the drive. I thought that this couldn't possibly be right, but I stopped by a T-Mobile store and confirmed that this is the case. I thought that mobile providers worked to ensure that your phone would work at least when you are on an interstate, but not with T-Mobile.

Also, unlimited Internet doesn't really mean unlimited Internet in practice. They throttle so heavily after I hit my 5 GB cap that they might as well have cut off the data plan. Programs stopped working as the requests would time out and the app would assume I had no connectivity.

<comment><USER12> _Also, unlimited Internet doesn 't really mean unlimited Internet in practice. They throttle so heavily after I hit my 5 GB cap_

Genuine question- what do you do to hit that limit? I have the same $30 plan and my phone data usage shows me nearly hitting 2GB a month on average.

<comment><USER13> Your $30 plan must be grandfathered in.

Their current deal is $50 for an "unlimited" plan that switches to EDGE after 500MB and $60 for a similar plan with a 2 GB limit (or 3 GB, can't remember which).

<comment><USER10> He is talking about the $30 prepaid plan, which is both still available and doesn't start throttling until 5gb.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Unsolicited advice as a former T-Mobile customer: offer a real microcell and lose those shitty boosters, integrate Wifi calling with stock Android phones as it is currently unavailable for the Nexus phones, and move your call centers back from the Philippines.

I normally am not one of these America-centric culture warriors, and I have no problem understanding even very thick accents. But the specific form of ingratiating behavior that their call center employees are trained in is egregious. They are trained to, apparently, wrap every sentence front-and-back with terms of politeness and overt demonstrations of respect. A conversation can follow like this:

      Rep: Please may I place you on hold sir as I
      look up your account so that I can better be
      able to serve you and fulfill your request?
      Me: Sure
      Rep: Thank you so much and please hold I will
      return shortly to further assist you.
      ...
      Rep: Yes, hello thank you sir for waiting your
      patience is very much appreciated and I was
      able to access your account so that I can
      provide you now with an adequate resolution to
      your request.

I really hate to pick on the reps this way because this is very good work for them and they try hard to accomodate a foreign culture. They are just trained in the worst combination of verbosity and obsequiousness.

</comment><comment><USER15> I'm on some Walmart T-Mobile plan. I heard about the plan after getting my Nexus 4 so went to a local T-Mobile store and asked them if they could give it to me as a new customer and they did.

$30 monthly, 100 minutes, unlimited texts, unlimited data with the first 5 GB at 4G speeds.

I mean the 100 minutes bit is a bit nasty as all minutes are rounded up so even a 1 second incoming call I pick up counts against a whole minute. I rarely go over the limit though and usually just throw an extra $10 in the account to deal with it if I go over.

My fiance has the same plan and uses her tethering for her Apple TV Projector setup in the art class she teaches since her school wifi is pretty bad. You get a small amount of free tethering with the plan but it's only $15 for unlimited tethering in addition.

<comment><USER16> This is (or was) available to anyone signing up online (I bought my Nexus 4 from the Play store and then signed up for it about a year ago).

<comment><USER17> You can't get it directly from tmo any more, but you can get it from Walmart [http://see.walmart.com/t-mobile/](http://see.walmart.com/t-mobile/) (jump to plans)

<comment><USER18> No? It's still advertised by T-Mobile, same page it's always been on (halfway down): [http://prepaid-phones.t-mobile.com/prepaid-plans](http://prepaid- phones.t-mobile.com/prepaid-plans)

It should be in the plan list when you activate a SIM at [http://prepaid- phones.t-mobile.com/prepaid-activate](http://prepaid- phones.t-mobile.com/prepaid-activate). It was never advertised available in- store, only online.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Well, the talk is nice, but with AT&T's $15 off per phone if you own it, T-Mobile isn't really cheaper anymore, especially with family plans. And with AT&T you can get coverage between cities, not just in them. I'm thankful to T-Mobile for forcing AT&T to keep up, but since they have, I'm going with the better network.

EDIT: My cost comparison for two people who own their phones:

4 Gigs shared on AT&T: $120

2.5 gigs each on T-Mobile: $100

So I guess T-Mobile is still cheaper. But, for me, T-Mobile data does not work at all outside of my home city. Data coverage everywhere is worth 20 bucks to me.

<comment><USER20> Horses for courses, but AT&T's other anti-consmer polices and missed deadlines are what got me to move.

When I went over data allotment on AT&T, I got charged extra for that month (especially infuriating late in the cycle). Here on Tmobile, I just get bumped down to 2G (acceptable - esp. if it happens 27 days into the cycle).

When TMobile launched the iPhone5 with HDVoice, AT&T and VZ loudly proclaimed that HDVoice was coming "late 2013". Still no news. How long does it take for them to support an additional codec that improves voice and lowers their bandwidth? I'm only waiting for them b/c I have a relative that is still on AT&T, and I'd love the calls to be HDVoice.

TMobile's coverage outside of metros sucks. And I doubt it will get better soon (likely they'll double-down on becoming _better_ than ATT/VZ in-city than worry about low-density areas). If you really need coverage in exurban and rural areas, then yeah, go with one of the two biggies - but you'll definitely pay more.

<comment><USER21> This is a great strategy for gobbling up marketshare. Definitely an 80/20 move by T Mobile. Couple that with a customer centric product that isn't offered anywhere else and most people will realize they travel in between cities by plane.

Once t mobile establishes a foothold, it will have enough agency and capital to gain access to wider coverage. The biggies will be bleeding revenue and will have to license out their network to T Mobile to compensate.

Sure, their network is not a blanket. But that is temporary. T mobiles approach is likely possible due to differences in their operations which provides a competitive advantage that the biggies can't easily replicate.

Mobile networks will evolve faster than backbone. I'm excited to see what lies ahead.

<comment><USER19> > most people will realize they travel in between cities by plane.

With T-Mobile I can't even get get 5 miles out of the metro area without losing coverage. We're not talking about road trips across North Dakota, we're talking about a 40-mile drive to the next city over. Hope you weren't super into that Pandora song!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> > start with one line at $50 per month for unlimited talk, text, and Web with > up to 500MB of 4G LTE data

Thank god I live in Europe (in the UK, the equivalent costs about 20GBP per month).

<comment><USER23> In Lithuania, Europe, I spend about $9 for this (even more, with 1GB of data). Very happy about the competition between carriers in our country - it is constantly making everything better and cheeper.

<comment><USER24> I'm curious what happens if you drive to Germany (Italy, Romania etc)? How do your local carriers handle that kind of coverage?

<comment><USER22> They don't. You pay for roaming. However, in summer 2014 there will be no more roaming charges for the EU (forced by the EU commission on the carriers - <USER2> carriers were playing dirty all along, e.g. TMobile and Vodafone have companies in many EU countries, but customers still pay roaming charges in "different" networks provided by different subcompanies). This still won't mean free mobile for the whole EU, as most networks only offer free calls/texts/data in their local networks, while you have to pay a little if you're in another operator's network (in the same country).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> This guy reminds me of the Poochie character from the The Simpsons. Poochie was a dog on the Itchy and Scratchy show that they created to try and make the show more edgy and cool. Poochie wore sunglasses, a backwards hat, and carried around a surfboard saying hip things.

<comment><USER26> Nice try AT&T rep.

Seriously though, Poochie had no substance---that was the joke. This guy has brought on some real change at T-Mobile, and consequently the US wireless industry. Unlocked phones? Free roaming? I never dared hope!

<comment><USER27> "Poochie had no substance"

You take that back about Poochie!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> T-mobile is awesome.

I am not sure if this plan is still available, but I am on $30/month no contract plan. This has unlim. data, text and 100 voice minutes. It works perfectly with unlocked Nexus 4 which I got in Jan 2012. I'm never going back to contracts anymore.

<comment><USER29> My wife lost her T-Mobile G Slate tablet and she was going to replace it with a WiFi only one, so she called T-Mobile to cancel the data plan. Even though it was not covered by insurance, they sent her a replacement (upgraded to Samsung Galaxy Tab) and they converted the plan to a 200MB 4G/month plan for no monthly charge. That is great customer service.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> As a long time TMo subscriber, what is he willing to do for me and my loyalty? Sure, offering ETF payoffs for new customers is great, but shouldn't you treat your loyal customers even better?

<comment><USER31> Why would they incentivize you to do something you already do?

<comment><USER32> Because the other companies will pay you to leave?

<comment><USER31> "All"? I thought it was just AT&T. Verizon is the only network in the US that's compelling, but they don't have unlimited plans, so T-Mobile is the only reasonable carrier for people that don't want to count every bit they transfer.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> I was just overseas for 2 weeks and used the free international data and text roaming. Worked flawlessly.

</comment><comment><USER34> Can someone help me understand the economics of these incentive plans (where these companies subsidize your early termination fees, etc, to attract customers?)

Is this along the lines of what all these other companies (Amazon, Netflix, etc) are doing where they bring you in at low rates, sell to you at unsustainable prices, and then plan to increase prices over time (or do what they have to do to start turning a profit?)

Or is there a chance that, even after these incentives, prices will remain competitive?

<comment><USER35> I am not an industry expert, but it seems like a lifetime value play: even if a customer only stays with T-Mobile for one contract term @ 2 years, and assume the cost per month is $50, the total value gained would be the 24 * $50 = $1,200. No matter how much it costs for early termination of another contract, there's no way it matches $1,200 (or maybe for a VERY VERY select set of customers.)

Then, assuming people warm up to T-Mobile and say "hey - this is a good company!" , then you lock them in longer.

The cost of paying for an early termination fee could be considered equivalent to a Marketing and/or Distribution fixed cost.

<comment><USER36> Also consider the margin costs of cell service are almost non-existent. The overhead is covering huge expenses like towers and wireless spectrum, or leasing them from another major player.

After that, you just want as many people on your network as possible so long as they don't largely degrade the service for each other. And if you dominate a market you don't even care about that part because your customers have no choice.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I was on Verizon for a decade and I just switched to T-Mobile a few months ago. You cannot imagine how surprised I was at just how easy they made it for me to switch.

I purposely switched because I wanted a GSM phone because I've been toying with Arduino cell phone kits, but when it came down to the decision between AT&T and T-Mobile, it quickly became clear that T-Mobile offered a better product.

What I hadn't expected was that I wasn't going to miss Verizon one iota.

</comment><comment><USER38> Not to troll, but how is this newsworthy? Everyone knows telecoms blow and offer horseshit-- from CEO to customer. Maybe if good ol' Señior Stevenson said this it'd mean something, but coming from the T-Mob CEO it ain't nothin'

He even goes to create some horeshit when he says "T-Mobile's network is fastest." I call bullshit, and ask "where is it faster, asshat?"

T-Mobile has always had pretty good customer service, but their network isn't nearly as large as other providers...

For those who don't know, providers have different licenses in each area, more licenses = more spectrum = better reception. T-Mobile, in general, as the least amount of spectrum available (by a huge margin). They also operate at a much higher frequency than their competition so their building penetration is worse (especially over 3G/4G).

This same thing goes with network speed; some areas have more spectrum and thus can offer better speeds. Some can't. So any measurement of "we're faster" is very, very geographically specific.

Note: I worked in the wireless industry for 5 years (with a few of those at T-Mobile).

<comment><USER39> Where's the cable company exec who's willing to admit their industry blows? I think it's refreshing to hear him acknowledge how crappy telecoms are. I think it's even better that they're shaking things up.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> I'd be on T-Mobile in a heartbeat if they had, like, any coverage.

<comment><USER41> I'd leave T-Mobile in a heartbeat if I had, like, poor coverage.

<comment><USER42> It's interesting to me because people always say this is a huge issue with T-Mobile. I've been with them for a decade now, and have had very little coverage problems. I've been across a lot of the country and the two places I can actively remember where I got zero coverage was in northern Minnesota and Death Valley.

Their data does get a little flaky the when out of fairly populated areas, but I have seen this improving very quickly and can make many long drives with full data coverage.

I don't know, I think it might just be marketing.

<comment><USER43> There's a hole in their network that contains my apartment and office in downtown Austin.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> I've been using Republic Wireless for over a year. They've also tried really hard to provide disruptive options by integrating Wi-Fi calling/texting/data into the phones.

I pay for the phone off contract ($299 for Moto X), then $5 to $40 / month for various service options (all unlimited, from WiFi calling only up to 4G LTE).

The Sprint network isn't the fastest, but it's hard to beat $25 / month for unlimited talk/text/3G data. I even went a whole month on the $5 WiFi only plan (You can change your plan twice a month).

I love not being locked into a contract and only paying < $50 / month for 2 unlimited phones.

</comment><comment><USER45> Am I the only one here who just doesn't have a phone plan? Seriously, unless if you're a cab driver or something, WiFi hotspots are more than enough.

Actually, even if you are a cab driver, GPS + offline maps are completely free.

<comment><USER46> If I planned my life around it, I could live without voice and texting, and rely on instant messaging and Email instead, however I must have LTE. I can't rely on WI-FI everywhere. So, I would be paying some cellular service for LTE, and then I might as well get voice/text.

That said, I just noticed T-Mobile $30/month 100 minute voice, and unlimited data (4G up until 5GB) plan. That's pretty amazing and I will probably jump ship from Verizon.

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> I tried to move my family from AT&T to T-Mobile. I have to say first that AT&T has IMHO excellent customer service. They have worked with me many times to reduce the bill. Anyway, I liked the look of the $100 family plan, but the problem with switching to T-Mobile is that they only support LTE so families like mine with out-of-contract iPhone 4s have to upgrade the phones too, which is a major expense.

<comment><USER8> Hmm? When we switched to Tmo my wife used an unlocked 4S I had lying around while we waited for AT&T to unlock our iPhone 5s. I heard no complaints from her. As part of my job I run plenty of phones on Tmo's network, and non-LTE phones work fine for both data and voice. Your current phones will work fine. Is it possible you misunderstood something?

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> As person who travels very little by road I like T-Mobile. They have good coverage in cities and way more cost effective than AT&T or Verizon.

</comment><comment><USER49> I'm changing my service today: two lines at half the cost of Verizon. I have to support companies when they reach out like this. This is also why I quit Facebook. They don't listen to their users and I was tired of being a product. I encourage others to speak with their wallet and their choice of social media providers.

</comment><comment><USER50> And he's right. In the past I have bought a Nexus S outright and used their no-contract plan. Recently I upgraded to the Nexus 5, went to a T-Mobile store, they just switched me and suggested a better plan for the same price.

Coverage and bandwidth is great (where I am), and the no-contract plans are certainly great.

</comment><comment><USER51> I hope T-Mobile will remain independent and DT won't ruin the little innovation we are seeing in the carriers market by selling it to some other company (especially some content related).

</comment><comment><USER52> Have you noticed that ever carrier claims to have the biggest, best, fastest or most reliable network?

To reuse a famous quote "The nice thing about standards is, there are so many of them"

</comment><comment> the-kenny The funny thing is that the biggest operator in Germany, T-Mobile, offers the biggest horseshit there.

</comment><comment><USER53> It's true, the industry does "blow" and the biggest carriers offer... nothing good.

</comment><comment><USER54> While the deal sounds good, I have heard multiple bad things about T-Mobile's support of the military. I have multiple friends who T-Mobile tried to prevent from being allowed to abrogate their contracts due to poor coverage surrounding military bases, as allowed by law.

</comment><comment><USER55> Anyone have experience with T-Mobile coverage around Tulsa, OK?

</comment><comment><USER56> has anyone signed up for the global unlimited roaming deal yet? What is the service like overseas?

<comment><USER57> There's nothing to specifically signup for. Any post-paid Simple Choice plan now has unlimited global data in most countries. Service is capped at 128k up/down speeds. Everything I've read has been positive.

</comment></comment><comment><USER58> Anyone else have a Nexus 4 on tmobile in SF? I barely get coverage sometimes. I must be missing some setting.

</comment><comment><USER59> T-Mobile user here. Worst coverage ever in a state's capitol, Austin TX. Just sayin'.

</comment><comment><USER60> I've been resisting getting a smartphone for years because I didn't want to either pay $300+ for a phone or $80+ per month with one of the big carriers.

Then a couple of weeks ago, someone on an HN thread told me about the Nokia Lumia 520. I checked it out, decided to buy one, and I'm damn glad I did! Windows Phone is frankly amazing - it does everything I need it to do, it's beautiful, and it just works. I ordered a sim card from Straight Talk for their Bring Your Own Phone program for $7, and voila, I have unlimited everything on ATT's network for $45 a month.

<comment><USER36> The other service I advocate for people is Ting, since its only $6 per phone, though you have to buy the device. But the Nexus 5 is such good value for hardware it isn't even that expensive, and they have that same early termination relief deal.

I have around a dozen people on one Ting plan, and since the monthly bills adjust for usage I usually only owe around $120 total, and literally $60 of that is from the few people that use 1k+ minutes / texts a month. By comparison I know a family of 4 on Verizon with iphones and such that pay $400 a month for not even unlimited service.

<comment><USER61> +1 for ting.com. We have 6 phones on it, including the nexus 5 which _rocks_. bill is $74 this month. I love the web interface that enables me to turn off voice/sms/data on a per phone basis if they hit thresholds or if my kids don't get their homework done :-)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> Separately the CEO comes across as a total wack job using language like that in a business setting. Especially given his age.

<comment><USER63> He needs to stand out from the noise. Don't confuse the persona he's articulating with the person.

He's doing a damn fine job, for what it's worth.

<comment><USER62> From what I see he has been the CEO for a little over 2 years.

In business, 2 years is not a long time at all.

My personal opinion is it's unprofessional and not appropriate language. (I can see by the downvotes that others don't agree).

If you are an entertainer that's one thing and you can be outrageous so you stand out (but you probably wouldn't even in all entertainment venues). [1] But you also don't want to come across as a lose canon either. In business people need to feel they can trust you and one of the things they look for is a certain amount of conformity to accepted standards.

Maybe this example will make sense. You meet the woman of your dreams. You want to marry her. You would die if you lost her. It's that important. You meet her father and grandfather. How will you behave? Will you watch what you say a bit? Or will you act the same way as with your fraternity brothers or friends when you are just hanging out?

[1] And yes I can definitely see the PR value of what he is doing.

<comment><USER20> You throw around that phrase "in business" a lot. Guess what, TMobile is "in business". They do lots of business. So it works.

Sorry if the profanity bothers you. I consider the anti-consumer stance of other telecom CEOs to be more profane.

Substance > Formality, and so far TMobile has been delivering.

<comment><USER62> "They do lots of business. So it works."

It works? For how long? The person using the language has been at tmobile for +-2 years.

Tmobile has been around for way longer than that, right and before that afaik a public facing person didn't use that languag.

Add to that the fact that the rest of the traditional business world (not talking about startups) doesn't use that language.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER64> I live in San Francisco and there is no coverage when walking around the city with T-mobile. Verizon has coverage everywhere.

I'm not even talking about elevators. Just sidewalks of major central pedestrian roads like Bay St and Hyde St. I also have no coverage in my apartment with them or at work.

Coupled with the cancelation of Cel-Fi, it is impossible to use their service in many densely populated areas.

<comment><USER65> I live in San Francisco and have T-mobile service, and don't see what you're seeing. I'll hop on up to Bay and Hyde tomorrow to double-check, but in the past I've gotten adequate coverage everywhere aboveground I've been in the city.

Also, you are aware that ATT and TMO have a roaming agreement? [http://www.theverge.com/2011/12/20/2649023/t-mobile-to- get-s...](http://www.theverge.com/2011/12/20/2649023/t-mobile-to-get-seven- year-3g-roaming-deal-128-markets-of-aws)

<comment><USER64> The voice calls were cutting out on a Nexus 4 on those streets when walking on the right side of the sidewalk North from Broadway to Bay and walking East on Bay from there. I also never used ATT so I don't know how their service is.

Basically, the only time I've ever gotten good quality calls from T-mobile was when I was calling the emergency number from an area I normally have no service in.</comment></comment></comment>


UEFI secure booting - signed bootloaders for Windows 8 PCs - <AUTHOR> http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/5552.html

<comment><USER2> I believe this is a problem: "A system that ships with only OEM and Microsoft keys will not boot a generic copy of Linux"</comment>


Show HN: Get a better job offer, anonymously - my weekend hack - <AUTHOR> http://jobpoacher.com <comment><USER2> It struck me as odd that I would want to hire people this way. As far as I can tell everyone is just asking for more money (big surprise, I know) but it says nothing about what they want to do, are interested in, etc. Do I just blindly reach out to a bunch of people and hope they match my needs?

<comment><USER3> True, it also states the person has no loyalty to their current employer if it means an extra $10k a year. This could be a red flag for some, or an opportunity. I am not in the programming business, so wonder what the turnover rate is at tech firms.

<comment><USER4> Employers don't have loyalty to their employees, so this is unsurprising. These are business relationships.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I don't know how you did it, but I'm pretty sure you were spying on me. I was literally talking to a friend about this exact idea this weekend. We're trying to hire some developers and wondered if anything like this existed since its becoming very difficult to poach. I almost built the same thing this weekend.

Edit - I'm curious. Have you thought about how you will tackle the potential spam problem? Recruiters are going to go crazy over this. We tossed around a few ideas such as charging to contact the individual and making it more expensive based on things the jobseeker could do. Those things might be paying to have JobPoacher contact referrals, coding tests, etc.

Good luck with everything.

<comment><USER6> An effective method of filtering out recruiters would be to require a screening (paid for by the company). A few simple checks would cut out 95% of the problem.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I got contacted by a recruiter within 20 minutes of posting.

Suddenly, I'm thinking that it IS kind of strange that if I reply to their email, I will be beginning a relationship with someone who already knows my approximate salary.

On the plus side, they contacted me knowing that information full well. No nonsense with lowballing. Maybe it's a great starting point!

<comment><USER8> lowballers will unlikely be deterred.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Wow, I can't believe how quickly this site activated my inner voyeur.

 _I'm a CTO (Rails), and I currently make $20,000 in San Francisco. I'm ONLY interested in jobs as a Rails Engineer that pay at least $100,000 in The Bay Area._

<comment><USER10> I'm assuming the $20k he/she works at a early stage startup. There are CTOs that are working for $0 and all equity.

<comment><USER9> Yeah, me too... just the most dramatic of the narratives I can't help but create around these little blurbs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The "Poachees" listings should be searchable and sortable if they're to be of real value to would-be recruiters or hiring managers.

</comment><comment><USER12> I hope you can keep out the script kiddies - I just saw one of these:

I'm a <script>alert('lulz')</script>, and I currently make $40,000 in <script>alert('lulz')</script>. I'm ONLY interested in jobs as a <script>alert('lulz')</script> that pay at least $120,000 in <script>alert('lulz')</script>.

</comment><comment><USER13> This is nice, but could you add an option to indicate that I only want to deal technically proficient people?

In fact, I would pay a few bucks up-front if you could somehow assure that I would only be put in contact with technical people that actually work for the company doing the hiring (no recruiters at all). And I'd pay to validate that I satisfy that requirement from the hiring side as well.

<comment><USER14> Great idea!

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I hope this results in some "Piña Colada Song" situations where employers end up contacting their own employees.

</comment><comment><USER16> Why would people disclose the current salary they have?

<comment><USER17> I agree, I've never understood why that data point is relevant to the job I'm applying/being-recruited for.

<comment><USER18> I think it's even more interesting when the first number is more than the second, as it is in the listing below:

"I'm a Mobile Product Support Specialist, and I currently make _$90,000_ in Mountain View, CA. I'm ONLY interested in jobs as a Community Manager, Product Quality Analyst, Junior UX/Interaction Designer that pay at least _$65,000_ in San Francisco, CA."

<comment><USER19> I assumed it is by people who want to jump-start a new career path, eg: from developer to designer, or want to move to a different city.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Minor bug report:

I tried to fill it out with the 'links' browser. I didn't see the captcha so I did not get a confirmation email but the app did seem to retain my email address so I cannot delete the old one to resubmit when I use a GUI browser.

As an aside, I really like this because of how people don't talk about how much they make. When I see someone makes $164000 as a pen tester in Mountain View and I make a smaller amount, I feel like I could be working on interesting problems _and_ make a bit more coin. oh, well. :(

Minor suggestion: I wonder how much other people like my ad? Perhaps that's part of the mystery. That info, perhaps shouldn't be available to poachees but only poachers? I dunno.

<comment><USER21> Same problem happened to me. I'm locked out, so I guess I'll make a mailinator address and try again.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> This is really awesome, so awesome I think that you should think about how to monetize it and make some serious money. (I know that's seemingly against the "hacker ethos", but it's not often that you think of million-dollar ideas).

<comment><USER23> If I were them, I'd be scrambling to make recruiters pay $xx-$xxx to contact people through the site.

<comment><USER24> You should make it so recruiters pay when they get a response. The could only message candidates through the site initially (not via email) and their email would also be anonymized. If the candidate replied then the recruiter could be charged $XXX per reply.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> The most important feature is listing by locality IMHO. Without being able to filter out candidates to where I am, it would be easy to miss them, especially when having to search for variations (NY, New York, Manhattan).

I see in a comment you will be adding a search field which would help with the above; however the variations could still be an issue. A simple helper could be a predictable typing field for the location that allows people to select already existing locations so that there is consistency?

Good job otherwise!

</comment><comment><USER26> I wish it allowed you enter an hourly wage, since that's what I make.

I could annualize it but I don't actually work full time so that wouldn't be accurate.

<comment><USER27> And I wish they would add the ability to specify rates in euro's.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> After posting and reading all the other listings. I've realized I'm one of the few hardware guys on HN.

Any other hardware/low-level guys out there?

<comment><USER29> If you count C as low-level, here I am. Now what?

<comment><USER28> We revolt against the software majority. Threaten to cut off their sockets.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> It really needs a small "experience" section. It should be small, so a recruiter can still scan; but I really want to be able to differentiate at least between junior and senior people.

I also would like to have an "interest". I don't want to contact somebody wanting to do games for my web startup. That just wastes both our time.

<comment><USER31> Thats what a resume is for.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> If a hiring company were look at this they'll naturally see the "I currently make" amount and consider that market rate. After all, it matters not what people want to make, but instead by the amount for which people have demonstrated that they are willing to work.

<comment><USER33> It's worth noting that something like this will naturally self-select people who feel they're underpaid, so you're likely seeing the lower edge of "market rate" here.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> The recruiter that got back to me was more direct and less spammy than other random recruiting emails I get from those who see my profile on linkedin etc. I'm wondering if this is an accident or a change in the way the recruiter views these postings.

</comment><comment><USER35> I find it odd that people would put such a wide discrepency between current and desired salary.

If you are making 30K, as a webdeveloper and are seeking 60K as a web developer, I dont see why anyone would read this and think "Hey, here's a guy who wants double what he is making now, lets go get him"

Like the manager in UAE who states 130K current and 180K desired.

50K is a lot, even though its a smaller % than the 100% - Why do these people feel that if they are worth twice what they are making now, that advertising via this site is a good idea.

Maybe I'm confused?

Like this one:

"I'm a Generalist, and I currently make $120,000 in San Francisco. I'm ONLY interested in jobs as a Generalist that pay at least $140,000 in San Francisco."

This tells me absolutely nothing.

</comment><comment><USER36> Cool idea.

Small UI suggestions (realizing this was just a hack) - 1\. Add some margin- left to the copyright notice at the bottom 2\. Autocomplete on the cities (and other fields, like Occupation) will help standardize your dataset for search and sort later

</comment><comment><USER35> This one is funny though:

"I'm a Very Unhappy Facebook User, and I currently make $10,001 in creating Facebook's content. I'm ONLY interested in jobs as a Happy Facebook User that pay at least $10,002 in creating awesome content."

</comment><comment><USER37> Feature request: What happens when there are hundreds of listings? Would people be reading all those listings line by line?

A search box with filters for each input data you are collecting would be a nice fit.

<comment><AUTHOR> I can already see it cluttering up. Thanks, I'll add that shortly!

<comment><USER38> I was going to suggest this, as well as a way to browse by category. Employers probably don't want to look for "iOS developer" and "iOS programmer" and "iOS engineer", so some kind of automatic way to combine these seems useful.

Also, filtering by salary.

Overall though, love the idea.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> I like this, because it's difficult to get honest numbers about salary for a given position/location. Entirely apart from the "job seeking" part of the equation, the raw data is very interesting to me.

There will be a fake/fudge factor to account for, but it's so hard to get people to talk about their salaries honestly that it's very interesting to see some raw data there.

</comment><comment><USER39> I like the idea. A nice start to something I'm sure will grow into something pretty neat.

</comment><comment><USER40> It's an interesting idea, but pretty much unusable at this point. Definitely needs filtering, searching and a better UI with clean separation of submissions (think StackOverflow).

</comment><comment><USER41> Interesting idea. I'd like to see some stats when you get enough data, stuff like number of responses, number of people who found a job through the service, etc....

</comment><comment><USER42> One of the unintended uses for this tool is for founders to figure out what the competitive market salary is for positions they're trying to fill.

<comment><USER25> Since you don't know the persons background and skill level you still can't accurately determine this - even with the guess that someone has grown over time in compensation because of skill, there are plenty of people who have managed to slip through the cracks or have done enough job hopping to allow them to achieve a higher salary without actually have the knowledge to back it up.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> Suggestions:

-Filter by job, location, salary (as suggested by others)

-RSS

-A "find other poachees" like this one button. (Could use ranges with the filter feature to make it even more convenient.)

</comment><comment><USER44> Error when trying to delete: We're sorry, but something went wrong. We've been notified about this issue and we'll take a look at it shortly.

</comment><comment><USER45> how are you going to avoid head hunters' spam, either as fake candidates to discover new clients or with fake offers for CV mining?

<comment><USER31> I don't think this is a huge problem. The value to an employee is in the $10,000s per year, and so its worth it to go through a few spam emails to find the good offers. The value to companies is also $10,000s in saved recruiter fees. So on both sides, to go through 50 spam emails to find one good opportunity is worth it.

And the penalty for being such a spammer is that clients/employees won't want to work with you, and potentially expose you on twitter as being someone to avoid. The risks are high to spam this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> Maybe instead of "and I currently make ___" you should have "and I have ___ years experience in ____". Or at least have both.

<comment><USER47> Pay is probably a better indicator though. People can have years of experience and still not be good at the job, but pay highlights what kind of value they are generating. Someone who is not good at the job is unlikely to be in the position to earn top dollar.

There will be outliers. Like the talented person who is willing to work for peanuts just because the job is amazing. But that is why there is an infinite number of ways to find a job.

<comment><USER48> Well, in my city average pay for programmers is 12 000 $. I know of people earning 35 000 $, but that's the upper limit.

So if I wanted to use this site I would be considered bad programmer.

<comment><USER47> I'm not sure that is true. The location is noted, so it is still calculable where you stand. I don't think there is anyone who thinks $100K in the Bay Area is the same as $100K in India.

But if you're making $8,000 in your city, that raises some questions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> The footer would better if centered or placed inside the 940 grid (rather than stick to the left with 0 margin) - IMO.

</comment><comment><USER50> Any chance we could see a freelance/contract version of the form? About the only difference would be $/hr support.

</comment><comment><USER51> I think a great feature for this would be a map to visualize the results in your area.

</comment><comment><USER52> Whoa, this is a scary good idea. Wondering if I should post tonight. I feel dirty!

</comment><comment><USER53> nice. Where are you getting the recruiting traffic from?

</comment><comment><USER54> Do you have plans for how to get rid of spam?

</comment><comment><USER55> op, i just reserved @jobposter for you on twitter. email me and i'll transfer ownership to you.

</comment><comment><USER56> twitter bootstrap?</comment>


Show HN: Facebook / social media as a CMS - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/buu700/Site#readme

<comment><USER2> Wait... WordPress would "constrain the front end design" and is too complicated but this somehow solves that?

<comment><AUTHOR> Ignore the first part; for some reason I thought that WordPress could only be themed with CSS, but the templating system looks pretty good.

Regarding the last, I don't think anyone would argue that Facebook doesn't rock as a CMS for a non-technical heavy Facebook user. It's fast, it's easy, it works, you can use it from any computer or smartphone, and there is literally zero learning curve.</comment></comment>


5% of the children had one or more credit reports using their social security number. - <AUTHOR> http://digitaldebateblogs.typepad.com/digital_identity/2008/11/children-and-identity-theft.html

<comment><USER2> The most unfortunate thing about child identity theft is that about 55% of instances are perpetrated by parents or other family members. Basically, folks that have burned through their own credit and have moved on to ruin their kid's credit as well.</comment>


Please Contribute to My GoFundMe Campaign - <AUTHOR> Please tell me if  posts like this one are not welcome here.  Google seems to indicate this is OK.
https://www.gofundme.com/help-mike-survive-for-a-month
I get a big check when my code goes beta, but there are some significant bugs I must fix.
I was out of work for five years before I got this client.  My coding skills had atrophied.  I've gotten them back, but both my projects took quite a lot longer than I anticipated.
(I'm paid by the project, or for milestones.)
I have Cervical Radiculopathy - a pinched nerve in my neck that makes my left arm and shoulder extremely painful.  A chiropractor is helping quite a lot, but I must pay him in advance for November's treatments.  That's $325.
I also must buy food, pay my phone, internet and dental insurance bills.  (Dental is required by Obamacare.)
When I get my beta check I will contribute to someone else's GoFundMe campaign. <comment><USER2>
      Google seems to indicate this is OK.

Google doesn't run YC. Yet.</comment>


A Hard Peace - <AUTHOR> https://nickdenton.org/a-hard-peace-e161e19bfaf <comment><USER2> Sorry dude. Maybe next time don't out gay people and hide behind hazy notions of "journalism" when everyone gets mad at you.

Not that I support what Thiel has done, but if you live long enough you come to realize that in a given story, more than one of the characters may be an asshole.</comment>


Popularity of StartPage.com and DuckDuckGo sign of consumer concern about privacy - <AUTHOR> https://www.warc.com/LatestNews/News/Consumers_privacy_concerns_grow.news?ID=38101# <comment><AUTHOR> Per Warc:

A survey of 2,500 consumers by IDC looked at key areas of privacy concern for consumers across four vertical industries (Financial Services, Healthcare, Retail, and Government). This found that 84% of respondents were concerned about the security of their personally identifiable information, and seven in ten are more worried today than they were two years ago.

One possible sign of change is the growing popularity of privacy-focused search engines like DuckDuckGo and StartPage.com, Google alternatives that promise not to track their users.

</comment><comment><USER2> Good stuff, privacy is more important than ever in todays interconnected world. I like the last sentence: "Consequently, when their private information is put at risk they are more likely than before to change buyer behavior or shift loyalty."

When people are being monitored or believe they are being watched, they act differently. The lack of privacy is a very powerful form of control. This reminds me of a psychological discussion about parents who watch their children very carefully.</comment>


Denmark is on its way to becoming an organic food country - <AUTHOR> http://foodrevolution.org/blog/denmark-organic-country <comment><USER2> There are some problems with this article. For one thing, it's from January 2016, and it mentions Food and Agriculture Minister Dan Jørgensen, but Jørgensen wasn't minister back in January, his government stepped down in June 2015, when a new centre-right government took over.

And exactly agriculture is one of the areas that the new government have changed _a lot_. It was growing into a big scandal around when this article was written, that cost the agriculture minister of _that_ government her job.[0] So between when I am writing this post, and when Jørgensen said that in 2015, there have been three different agriculture ministers.

Given the new relaxed rules by the ministry on farmers and what they can do to the soil, I think it is safe to say that the ambitious plan that the article refers to has pretty much been scrapped.

The article is _very_ out of date right now, but it was even out of date at the time it was written. The plan was published in January 2015. The general election was in early June 2015. The new agriculture law came into effect around February 2016 (but its contents was known by December 2015).

[0] [https://www.thelocal.dk/20160229/danish-pm-announces- cabinet...](https://www.thelocal.dk/20160229/danish-pm-announces-cabinet- shake-up)

</comment><comment><USER3> The article is quite misleading with its claims of organic being better than conventional agriculture

1) The UNCTAD report that is cited actually has the following text:

"The views expressed in the articles contained in this Review are the personal views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of their respective organisations and institutions."

Many of the authors have ties with the organic industry (see [https://thoughtscapism.com/2015/09/21/myth-un-calls-for- smal...](https://thoughtscapism.com/2015/09/21/myth-un-calls-for-small-scale- organic-farming/))

2) Organic food has less pesticides exposure.

Not necessarily as organic agriculture also uses pesticides (naturally occuring ones). Though they tend to degrade quicker than synthetic ones, they are not as effective and need to be applied more often. Also the use of copper sulfate is allowed, which doesn't biodegrade and builds up in the soil.

The following is also completely rubbish

"Yes, pesticide residues are regulated by the U.S. Food Quality Protection Act, but the tolerance levels assigned for some pesticides pose potential health risks, even though they are considered "allowable.""

3) Organic foods are more nutritious and taste better.

Nope. The article just cherry picks a few studies. Following meta study comes to conclusion that organic food is not more nutritious

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22944875](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22944875)

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11833635](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11833635)

4) Organic foods help achieve biodiversity and soil fertility

Maybe on the area farmed, but it tends to not be as efficient as conventional farming, so increase acreage is needed which reduces biodiversity.

Regarding soil fertility, GMOs have actually helped thanks to no till agriculture.

5)Organic foods have no GMOs.

GMOs actually can help reduce pesticide use (but its not a silver bullet)

[http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal....](http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0111629)

<comment><USER4> I did look at the UNCTAD report a bit, and it's disquietingly short on actual data to confirm their theses. The main thrust of what I read seemed to be focussing on the idea of empowering small landholders rather than industrial- scale farming, which actually isn't all that bad of an idea. But there doesn't seem to be any examination of things like crop yield effects of organic versus non-organic agricultural methods.

Also, on pesticides: organic pesticides are usually more toxic to humans than synthetic pesticides. (This makes a lot of sense: think of the optimization functions used to select pesticides in natural evolution versus synthetic production).

I did laugh on the "more nutritious and tastes better" bit. As you say, most studies and meta-studies find no effect on nutrition.

</comment></comment><comment> a-priori _The findings of a 2013 report from the United Nations titled, "Wake Up Before It's Too Late," say small-scale, organic farming is the only way to sustainably feed the world._

The report they're referring to can be accessed here:

[http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ditcted2012d3_en.pd...](http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ditcted2012d3_en.pdf)

That report is not an official statement by the United Nations nor any of its working groups. It's published by a UN committee, but it's merely a collection of papers by individual authors. They say right in the introduction (page 3) that the opinions expressed in it are not those of the United Nations or any of its member States. So it's misleading to call it a "report from the United Nations".

It's not even clear to me which article they're specifically referring to. I only skimmed it (it's 321 pages long) and did some keyword searches, but I don't see a direct "we must do only 'organic' farming or we all die" statement. Addressing concerns like crop monocultures can be done incrementally, without abandoning the benefits of pesticides and genetic modification.

But even then, when you're talking about 'feeding the world', crop yields are the name of the game. And my understanding is exactly the opposite of this article: crop yields under organic farming techniques is lower than conventional modern farming (by ~20% according to [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X11...](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X1100182X)). Further, I recall that this gap is below the level to sustain the world's current population.

In other words, by advocating for 100% organic farming, you're intentionally advocating for a practice that will lead to starvation of part of the world's population. I can't see how that's conscionable.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> _In the U.S., fast food workers are struggling to get a respectable increase in pay. But in Denmark, the fast food industry pays its workers at least $20 an hour._

That's at least $5 more than the $15 minimum wage the same class of workers are fighting for here (in the US).

<comment><USER5> A quick search shows that a meal at McDoanld's is 50% more in Denmark than in the US. I am not really sure on the accuracy of Numbeo, but the comparative price of a meal to wage is interesting.

[https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of- living/compare_countries_resu...](https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of- living/compare_countries_result.jsp?country1=United+States&country2=Denmark)

<comment><USER2> Well, since we are talking about McDonald's, you could also look at the Big Mac Index: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index)

But yes, a cheeseburger here costs 10 DKK. That's 1.50 USD. I don't know what a cheeseburger costs in the US, but I'd imagine it's 1 USD.

<comment><USER6> More like $4.

<comment><USER7> Cheeseburger at McDonalds is about $1.29ish in the US.

<comment><USER8> To confirm, [http://www.fastfoodmenuprices.com/mcdonalds- prices/](http://www.fastfoodmenuprices.com/mcdonalds-prices/) lists $1, then add tax.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> How does one find the magical line with food whereby doing millennia of untargeted poorly-understood genetic engineering is what nature intended? Does it only become artificial when we get good at it?

I think I have too much of a scientific bent to understand the religious reasoning involved.

<comment><USER10> You seem to be conflating 'GMO' with 'organic'. Organic food is more about avoiding pesticide residue, artificial hormones or antibiotics, etc. And if you don't find things like carcinogens or endocrine disruptors scientific then I'm sorry to tell you that you're underinformed.

<comment><USER4> Uh, organic foods DO have ample pesticides used on them. Generally more pesticides, and more toxic pesticides, in fact.

<comment><USER10> "Organic foods" is an idea. Organic foods in practice may often fail to live up to their ambition though, you're correct.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> While I think it's true that organic is big in Denmark, e.g. common kindergartens in my area generally seem to be using mostly organic food in their kitchens, I don't think the summary is accurate in the sense that there's a long, long way before the whole country has switched to organic production. Or consumption for that matter. If it will ever happen.

The article is quoting the previous government, by the way, the current one just announced it's going to cut the temporary subsidies given to farms switching to organic production.

</comment><comment><USER12> "Organic" food doesn't mean a whole lot, and it's produced at such large scales that the ecological benefits attributed to "organic" food aren't there. Now, on the other hand, you can apply those to small scale, locally produced, sourced, and distributed food. Buying locally grown food is a benefit to your community yourself, and often your environment, whereas organic is just a marketing word.

</comment><comment><USER13> Organic food is pseudoscience. The only good reason to buy organic is that it is often a proxy for higher quality in general, but that's not universally true.

Modern inorganic farming methods are necessary for feeding the world. If the whole world switched to organic farming, there would be cataclysmic mass starvation.

<comment><AUTHOR> _Organic food is pseudoscience._

Really? Care to elaborate on that?

The article lists the many reasons why organic foods are better than non- organic ones. You should read it.

<comment><USER13> It's a propaganda article on a food-hipsterism advocacy website. Do the research for yourself. Very quickly though, their points about organic food being more efficient, tastier, healthier, non-GMO, and pesticide-free are either wrong, conflating correlation with causation (as overpriced luxury food is more likely to be organic), or misleading (as GMO and many pesticides are totally safe).

<comment><USER14> > _as GMO and many pesticides are totally safe_

Pesticides, yummy.

It doesn't inspire much confidence on the other hand that the pushers of GMOs are huge conglomerates that control seeds (similarly to IP rights and DRM), would sell any BS for a quick buck, and are not that dissimilar to the tobacco industry that testified that "smoking is not harmful" and sponsored tons of studies in the 70s and 80s (with real scientists, universities et al) to prove that point.

<comment><USER15> It doesn't inspire much confidence that the pushers of Organic food are huge conglomerates that push people into buying needlessly expensive food.

<comment><USER14> That would be relevant if I particularly cared for Organic food.

But there is tons of food that is neither Organic (certified and pushed by Whole Foods etc) nor GMO.

You know, it's just food. And it's what we've been having for years, and 100% of what we do have now (I never buy Organic anyway, except if it's something not available as general foodstuff).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Am I the only one who finds the word "organic" stupid? Taken literally, it means that there are no anorganic ingredients, e.g. no salt and no water. Most countries use the term "biological" instead (implying an absence of chemicals), which I find a much better fit.

<comment><USER2> In the context of Denmark, Danish/Denmark uses the term »økologi« which is closest to 'ecology' in English.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I visited Denmark from San Francisco in 2014. The food there was atrociously expensive. ATROCIOUS.

Denmark does many things better than the US ... such as bicycle lanes. But food isn't one of those things.

Plus, much of organic food theory is total pseudoscientific bunk.

Check out this survey of research on organic food in the Gimlet Media podcast: [https://gimletmedia.com/episode/5-organic- food/](https://gimletmedia.com/episode/5-organic-food/)

<comment><USER2> You are saying that we don't do food better because it's more expensive? But it's expensive _to you_. The local purchasing power in Denmark is higher than it in the US. To Danish people (such as myself), it doesn't feel expensive. Although, it doesn't feel cheap either. We are quite aware that we have the third highest cost of living.

But seriously, food being expensive is not the same as not doing food right. The few times I've been in the US, I've always been disappointed about the food available in supermarkets. It's hard to find stuff such as good milk or butter.

<comment><USER18> No it's not, food is expensive in Europe and in Denmark period. The purchasing power is high, but the cost of food are not remotely cheap to the local population, Danes spend more than twice the percentage of their annual income on food than the their fellow Americans. Also the purchasing power of a US citizen is about 25% higher than that of a Danish citizen.

<comment><USER2> _> No it's not, food is expensive in Europe and in Denmark period._

I've travelled around Europe, food is very cheap in Central, Southern and Eastern Europe. It's basically Scandinavia that's expensive.

 _> Danes spend more than twice the percentage of their annual income on food than the their fellow Americans. Also the purchasing power of a US citizen is about 25% higher than that of a Danish citizen._

Source? I'm actually really curious.

<comment><USER18> >I've travelled around Europe, food is very cheap in Central, Southern and Eastern Europe. It's basically Scandinavia that's expensive.

In Scandinavia it's actually relatively "cheaper" to locals compared to central/eastern Europe, while Danes spend ~12% of their annual income on food Poles spend over 20%. That's because the price of many food products is actually relatively similar in most countries within the EU including local production but there is a pretty high disparity as far as annual income goes.

>Source? I'm actually really curious.

[http://www.imf.org/external/ns/cs.aspx?id=28](http://www.imf.org/external/ns/cs.aspx?id=28)

Generate a report with the PPP rating.

US PPP is 55K Denmark is 45K, if you care about take home wage then the US is also higher [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_take-...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_take- home_pay) Overall the US has cheaper housing, transportation, food and local services combined with considerably lower tax burden than Europe.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Graph of average App Store review times - <AUTHOR> http://reviewtimes.shinydevelopment.com/mac-annual-trend-graph.html

<comment><USER2> Forgive my ignorance but what does "average review times" mean? Number of times app is run before review? Time of the day (although y axis limits might exclude this)? The number of reviews?

I think this graph needs needs a Y axis label with units.

<comment><USER3> I think it's the number of days it takes Apple to review your app before it can be sold in the Appstore.

<comment><USER2> oh, of course. I feel stupid now!

I got fixated on user reviews rather than Apple reviews. Quite telling of my state of mind really :)

<comment><USER4> not stupid at all, I came to the comments to find out what 'review times'meant is well. I had the same confusion.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Title should include 'Mac'. E.g. "Graph of average Mac App Store review times".

iOS version here: [http://reviewtimes.shinydevelopment.com/ios-annual-trend- gra...](http://reviewtimes.shinydevelopment.com/ios-annual-trend-graph.html)

</comment><comment><USER6> Review times seem to be falling before the Dec 21-28 shutdown.

Perhaps they're clearing the backlog?

<comment><USER3> Interesting question. Another one is, why the graph differs so much with the iOS one:

[http://reviewtimes.shinydevelopment.com/ios-annual-trend- gra...](http://reviewtimes.shinydevelopment.com/ios-annual-trend-graph.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> is there a similar one for the Google Play Store?

<comment><USER8> The Google Play store does not have a formal review process like Apple does. Once you submit your app, you can expect it to appear on Google Play within 30 minutes to an hour.</comment></comment>


What language features do you miss in C#? - <AUTHOR> http://blog.filipekberg.se/2013/03/01/what-language-features-do-you-miss-in-c/

<comment><USER2> The ability to tell the Compiler I don't particularly care for type safety and want a byte of 0x01 to be true in certain situations. Especially in the .NETMF.

<comment><AUTHOR> Couldn't you just use `dynamic` for the first feature?</comment></comment>


[2002] Distel: Distributed Emacs Lisp - <AUTHOR> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/19746944/distel-3.1.pdf

<comment><USER2> Pertinent recent project: pie, "Emacs written in Erlang", "Text is stored as a tree of binaries ... Buffers are small servers"

[https://github.com/5HT/pie](https://github.com/5HT/pie)</comment>


Your Software Shits on the Agile Manifesto (Why I'm Building ThetaBoard) - <AUTHOR> http://www.thetaboard.com/blog/why-im-making-thetaboard?r=376

<comment><USER2> This is a quite interesting blog post, despide the somewhat misleading title of the HN submission. I too think that most tools limit your ability as a team by imposing their own workflow or process on you.

Also, ThetaBoard looks nice and somewhat promising, but I don't see why I should abandon, say, <https://trello.com/> for ThetaBoard...

<comment><AUTHOR> You shouldn't. Not now anyway. One of my friends is _determined_ to use ThetaBoard to manage some of his projects and I keep telling him it's not there yet and to use Trello.com. But you have to start somewhere and I think one day it will be a viable alternative.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> What you're building already exists. Check out trello.com by Fog Creek Software. It's free and it works.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah. Trello came out after I had started working on ThetaBoard and is admittedly pretty good. But I don't think it's perfect. From a UX standpoint I think it has some unnecessary modal dialogs, etc. that can be a bit confusing. There are enough things that _I_ don't like about Trello that I decided to soldier on with ThetaBoard.

I definitely think Trello as a Project Management tool a huge improvement on what's out there. I just have to make ThetaBoard a bit better.

<comment><USER3> I use trello but there are things I find cumbersome about it too. I'm definitely interested to see how thetaboard develops.</comment></comment></comment>


Why port your Firefox add-on to Internet Explorer? Because your competitors won't - <AUTHOR> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/11/firefox_to_ie_port/

<comment><USER2> Is it just me or "IE evangelist" sounds a bit strange? :)

Hm... this article does not make sense.

First they say

 _Firefox users are more likely to "mess" with your business model. "They tend to install things like ad blockers, whereas the Internet Explorer user is more mainstream."_

Then they actually want IE users to start using custom plugins too.

Working as a web developer I have to deal with IE6 bugs almost on a daily basis. Sometimes I imagine how much time is spent on this. If we could use it on different purpose we could write a new browser with complete standards compliance.

<comment><USER3> What part exactly confused you? Your write-up is really confusing.

<comment><USER2> I wanted to say that Firefox users _"mess with your business model"_ because they have plugins for that. If you will give IE users a set of plugins to choose from, the most popular will be AdBlock. So main benefit they are referring to will be gone.

Sorry if my English is a bit confusing, it's not my first language.

<comment><USER3> Ok, I get it now.

Because you included this "They tend to install things like ad blockers, whereas the Internet Explorer user is more mainstream."

I exclude the possibility you implying what you actually meant, because that phrase says IE users are mainstream therefore they don't care installing ad blocks etc.

Therefore the assumption was that you implied, that wanting IE users is meaningless which contradicts what the phrase says, which didn't make up.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Because your competitors won't -- that's exactly the reason _not_ to spend a major chunk of your time in a porting effort. Some history springs to mind involving IBM, Lotus and, indeed, Microsoft.

Unless IE-Firefox seamlessness is the original point of your extension, this compatibility is almost certainly not a hair-on-fire concern for your users. Foxmarks shows a reasonable workaround: provide a website where you can reach all your data in a pinch, and focus on usability and extended functionality for the browser add-on.

<comment><USER3> On the contrary, my mind brings me to the "blue ocean" concept.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> > "[Writing an IE plugin using CLR that actually works on most people's > computers] is a little bit tricky," Allen said.

Ya think? I'd call that the understatement of the week.

<comment><USER6> The version incompatibilities are a large part of why I respect Sun's commitment to backward compatibility. Even when it means that I can't use things like generics, that backwards compatibility also means that I can use the same applet for almost all browsers made in the past 10 years. Of course, you can't write a browser plugin in Java too easily...

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I was tech lead on a project that involved both Firefox and IE extension development. We tried to keep the extensions very simple, so there would be as little to port and keep synchronized between versions. Both platforms were relatively new to us, but I don't think we were stupid.

The IE plugin was about 300 times more work. Seriously, people have asked me about this a lot, and that's a pretty accurate judgment of the relative workload.

Also, it's shockingly hard to find a competent COM+ developer, and the IE extension docs are actually worse than the Firefox docs, though both leave a lot to be desired.

In general, installing an extension is a pretty huge barrier; don't expect users who aren't already familiar with your service to bother installing one just to try it.

</comment><comment><USER8> I don't know what the majority think, but I tend to ignore all IE plug-ins because I am afraid that most of them may be virus and backdoors.To install plug-ins on IE, you will see a strange warning on the top first and then click many allow buttons to continue. For firefox, the install process seems safer.

</comment><comment><USER9> This is a piece of advice that falls into the category: "If everyone followed these, they'd be worthless!"

Much like: "Don't vaccinate your child. Your kid can benefit from the herd immunity with none of the risks!"

</comment><comment><USER10> "IE sucks, the users are dumb and the influencers use FF."

Not what I expected, maybe I should look up the definition of "evangelist".

<comment><USER3> someone calling 70% of the users dumb makes him look dumber.

By the way don't put in tags something that wasn't said in the article. I even went back to see how I missed reading that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Some useful IE Addons resources:

<http://ieaddons.com/> <http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa753587.aspx>

</comment><comment><USER12> I'm surprised by the claim that writing an add-on for IE is harder than for FireFox. My experience of Microsoft is that they do a good job of supporting developers through examples and documentation, whereas Mozilla does a very poor job.

<comment><USER13> Firefox plugins are easy to write if you know where to scrounge for documentation. :P

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Everyone I've talked to on this says the opposite. They say they spent 90% of their time on IE and only got 5% of their users from it.

If its going to be viable MSFT needs to build an addons page.

<comment><USER15> I think that largely depends on what type of website they are working on. I think the majority of our clients' users are still on IE. 6. :(</comment></comment>