Which Password Manager Do You Recommend? - <AUTHOR> Do you recommend using a password manager versus not using one? Why? Which one do you use/recommend? Why? <comment><USER2> Yes, use a password manager. Unless you're a password savant that can remember every character he's typed, you'll either be re-using passwords (a big no-no), or storing them somewhere. It's much more secure to remember one strong password and use randomly generated passwords everywhere.

I use Lastpass. They have synchronization across devices on their free tier, which is awesome. You can automatically import passwords from Chrome or Firefox. They even have a "security challenge" that will show you what repeated and weak passwords you're using. Lastpass also has some degree of automatic password reset on popular sites, which works pretty well.

</comment><comment><USER3> Hi, this has been asked before a while ago so I thought I'd link you to what was answered back then to get you started:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13298195](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13298195)

I give a vote for 1Password on Mac but on Linux I quite like Pass.

</comment><comment><USER4> Try Avast Passwords: [https://www.avast.com/passwords](https://www.avast.com/passwords)

It is free and it covers all platforms (Windows, Mac, iOS and Android). Even synchronization between devices is for free.

</comment><comment><USER5> I have around 100 accounts saved in my password manager so it is impossible now to be without passw. manager. I'm using SaferPass > www.saferpass.net</comment>


Get ready for a wave of Bitcoin forks - <AUTHOR> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/11/get-ready-for-a-wave-of-bitcoin-forks/ <comment><USER2> "Bitcoin Cash Plus" will airdrop on January 2nd, I haven't a clue how one would claim it or if it will be eventually worth much.

</comment><comment><USER3> The question I am stuck with. How do you get a valuation that means anything. Even with the 100,000 gold bitcoins those guys premined. They are "worth 27 mil" only if you assume they can find enough suckers willing to trade at the current price and that the price wouldn't collapse upon the sale of that many tokens.</comment>


Verifying the Substitution Cipher Folklore - <AUTHOR> http://www.spinellis.gr/blog/20160318/ <comment><USER2> You _can_ break substitution ciphers pretty trivially, just using a simple hill climbing algorithm see [http://practicalcryptography.com/cryptanalysis/stochastic- se...](http://practicalcryptography.com/cryptanalysis/stochastic- searching/cryptanalysis-simple-substitution-cipher/)

If your cipher is at least 100 characters this will solve it very quickly.

</comment><comment><USER3> Many misunderstand the classical lesson as "substitution ciphers are trivially broken by symbol frequency analysis", which isn't the point.

The point is to illustrate a property of a cipher that leaks information, in this case the symbol frequencies because the cipher preserves them. This is information that we don't normally consider valuable when working with plaintexts, but for crypto it's enormously valuable (i.e. it leaks a lot of information).

</comment><comment><USER4> _" I was expecting that this would yield an almost perfect result. In fact, the result still needs significant guesswork to decrypt."_

I've never heard that substitution ciphers are simple to break using _only_ letter frequencies. It does get you to a point where it makes the guessing a lot easier.

</comment><comment><USER5> If you'd like to play with this yourself, it's #6 in the cryptopals challenges:

[http://cryptopals.com/sets/1/challenges/6](http://cryptopals.com/sets/1/challenges/6)

I agree with the author: it's conceptually very simple, but a little tricky to code, even in the simplest case where you're relying on simple letter frequencies. You could probably do 10 good challenges on different ways to attack this problem, and towards the end you'd be getting into somewhat serious cryptanalysis: for instance, look at what Patterson and Al Fardan did with RC4.

<comment><USER6> The problems in set 1 are a little different, though. You get the important hint (which the author was missing) to use letter frequencies for a fitness function. But the cryptopals set 1 ciphers have tiny keyspaces that are easily searched exhaustively - a substitution cipher in general doesn't. To solve the author's problem you need to re-invent something like stochastic hill climbing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> He wrote like half the algorithm and then said it didn't work.

<comment><USER8> Seriously. With a simple genetic algorithm you can do _significantly_ better. Considering 2-grams etc. It's nice that they decided to write up what they "learned" with this simple experiment, but they didn't try very hard. Or look at the literature.

<comment><USER9> Nobody is disputing that. If you think they are, you have misunderstood the article.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> > _" In fact, the result still needs significant guesswork to decrypt."_

I have never heard anyone other than the author of this piece suggest otherwise. Ironically, this result is trivial. That said, I have a pretty serious classical crypto habit, so my conception of what constitutes 'crypto folklore' may be poorly calibrated.

</comment><comment><USER11> I used simulated annealing, which is a non-obvious but fairly easy algorithm: [https://github.com/Smaug123/ClassicalCiphers.jl/blob/master/...](https://github.com/Smaug123/ClassicalCiphers.jl/blob/master/src/monoalphabetic.jl)

</comment><comment><USER12> I know plenty of CS undergrads who have broken the substitution cipher a part of a assignment. Saying it isn't trivial just because you couldn't do it foolish.

<comment><USER13> Did they break it using _only_ single symbol frequency counts? Completely ignoring positional information? Because when a human breaks it by starting with frequency counts and then filling in blanks in words, that's a totally different ball game. Computers can definitely do it, but you need to put in more effort.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> [http://www-i6.informatik.rwth- aachen.de/unravel/](http://www-i6.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/unravel/)

</comment><comment><USER15> Does anyone know the history of where the word "trivial" started being used to mean "easy" instead of as "unimportant", like the author does here?

It drives me crazy - but perhaps I'm the one that's wrong. Is it correct to use "trivial" to mean "easy"?

I keep thinking it comes from people misunderstanding the meaning of "non- trivial", as in complex

<comment><USER16> It literally means "of the _trivium_ " (grammar, logic/dialectic and rhetoric) , or, more broadly, that which can be arrived at by straightforward argument, without further specialized knowledge (covered in the _quadrivium_ ). It can, but doesn't necessarily, mean either easy or unimportant. Is identity merely unimportant, or is it also easy? Is a long chain of logic either easy or unimportant merely because it's trivial?</comment></comment>


agileventures.org - <AUTHOR> AgileVentures is a registered charity and nonprofit that helps teams of developers get together online to form an Agile team and develop solutions for charities and nonprofits around the world. <comment><USER2> The |submit| page will post either the |url| field or the |text| field but not both. If there is data in both the |text| field is submitted. To submit a |url| the |text| field must be empty.</comment>


Context on Conservancy's Filing for Summary Judgment with the TTAB - <AUTHOR> https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2017/dec/11/ttab-summary-judgment-motion/ <comment><AUTHOR> The legal filing itself ([http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=92066968&pty=CAN&eno=...](http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=92066968&pty=CAN&eno=6)) is one of the most interesting and entertaining legal filings I've read in a long time. The author, Pamela Chestek, is a well-known figure in FOSS legal circles, and worked on the GNOME trademark issue with Groupon ([https://lwn.net/Articles/654124/](https://lwn.net/Articles/654124/)). It's rare to read a legal filing that makes you want to _cheer_.</comment>


The Next Admissions Challenge: Evaluating Online Education - <AUTHOR> http://chronicle.com/article/The-Next-Admissions-Challenge-/48625/

<comment><USER2> Reading the article and the comments, Its a shame with any advancement in Education, online or off. We cant look to quantify someones learning experience without tests and exams.

* Where is the acknowledgement for?

"self motivated" study

"curiosity"

"learning for life, not just for an exam next week"

With that aside, I think online education should complement or co-exist tightly with face to face education. Best of both worlds. The time my children ( which I dont have ) are old enough to be at school. The tech, internet and daily living is going to be vastly different from when I went to school. Should be interesting assuming we get some great forward thinkers on the job!</comment>


Making a fair technical hiring challenge - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/corrux/making-a-fair-technical-hiring-challenge-aad61a437ad1 <comment><USER2> You could also estimate hours needed and pay candidates who complete the task at your average hourly rate for the position you are hiring.

The risk is that you might get numerous crappy submissions just trying to leech off of it, but if you introduce a blind "enough effort expended" test, perhaps you could pull it off.</comment>


Google's Home Hub hits Apple in its new blind spot: Affordable tablets - <AUTHOR> https://venturebeat.com/2018/11/30/googles-home-hub-hits-apple-in-its-new-blind-spot-affordable-tablets/ <comment><USER2> As a screen for the hub, that might be fine, but my experience with Android- based tablets is awful and I'll happily pay $200 more for an iPad that will work very well for years rather than an inexpensive one that's hard to do just a few things with. I'd love for Android to support tablets better, but that doesn't seem to be in the cards.</comment>


I need someone to build my website. My budget is $200 and I need it ASAP.  - <AUTHOR>

How many times have you been asked this by friends, colleagues, and referrals. The person generally continues to say...
"I really don't need anything too advanced. Just a simple ecommerce/wiki/forum/community website. With a blog. It shouldn't take you more than a few hours. I actually could even do it myself no problem, but its just not worth my time. You know, I used to be the #1 COBOL programmer in the 70s."
At this point, I sarcastically interrupt "Would you like me to program your website in COBOL so you can maintain it?" They never get the satire...
"Oh, and really important. I like this website (shows random crappy website) that my friend has. Can you make it like this? You know, but different? We're ready to launch, all we need is the website, and we need it done ASAP. If you say its going to take 8 hours, I expect that you could get it done by tomorrow."
I usually respond to this with "Sure thing, if you pay in full now, I'll have it ready tomorrow morning." I'm never serious, but no one ever pulls out their checkbook either. Usually this ends the conversation, as if the website were so trivial, it doesn't warrant compensation.
My Analysis:
This happens to me almost weekly. I never accept these jobs obviously, but I find the apparent, almost desperate, need fascinating. Despite the plethora of "do-it-yourself" website builders (weebly, SquareSpace, Clover, heck even WordPress.com) these "small business" minded people aren't having their needs met. In fact, they are generally so technology inept (despite their COBOL tenure) that they wouldn't be able to navigate the "3 easy steps of building a website" on any hosted CMS if their lives depending on it.
I think this is where the hosted CMS market is failing. These companies are trying to make a CMS so easy, it's like making a Facebook fan page. The problem is, these small business people can't even make those! They usually hire a student to do that as well. What they really need is someone to hold their hand through the entire process. They demand the service of a $10k+ project budget with a top design firm, but have a $200 "I can do it myself if I wanted to" budget.
If someone could figure this out, they'd be siphoning up a billion dollar market easily. I don't think technology is the sole answer. I think it's a combination of extremely lean business processes with technology. Get cheap labor to do the hand holding while using the 3rd party CMS solutions. The small business wants to send an email describing what they want the homepage to say. They don't want to use a website builder to edit text. They don't want to do anything but talk to someone. The cheap labor can do the transition, and margins can be high.
I'd REALLY love to hear your thoughts on this. I never leave a problem as big as this just complaining. I always race to come up with a solution, and this one is a toughy. <comment><USER2> I am either giving up a huge secret or revealing how little I actually value my time...

You guys are giving up a huge opportunity.

It is easy to make a thousand or more per week from these types of jobs. A thousand isn't a lot, but it is easily done in a few hours.

 _If they are paying commodity prices, then you give them a commodity._

The key? Boiler - Plate. Have a standard contract. Have a standard website theme, perhaps with multiple skins. Make it easy for them to enter their own content. You can build a decent CMS in a few hours or a great CMS in 10-15 (for clients like this that don't need extensibility). Amortize it over the 5-10 websites you're selling each week and you're time costs go down drastically.

I stumbled onto this strategy accidentally.

 _I had nothing else to do for a few hours._

My BATNA was earn $0/hour. I wasn't going to let my pride get in the way of easy money.

So I took a small "build me a website" job. Knowing they had small requirements, it was easily done in a few hours. I kept getting more requests, I kept sending out virtually the same website, over and over. I was getting them onto the host I use also and making an additional $50-$100 for each client as well.

Eventually it was only a matter of explaining how hosting works and how to add new pages and content. After the 30-45 minute explanation, it was coming out to move like $400/hour rather than $200 for a website.

Big Tip: Record your phone calls and meetings when you're explaining how hosting works and how to work your CMS. Go over what you said each time and work to actively improve it. Take 30 minutes, record screen capture videos with voice over. Give these to the client when you give them the minor training required.

<comment><USER3> I tried something similar. I designed websites for five local restaurants, all at the same time, then SEO'd them into top positions on Google. Then I went door to door to each restaurant and showed them the websites, live online.

The restaurant owners wouldn't need to do anything. They could assume possession of the website that very day (I would only need to change some pictures and change the website name from "Your Family Restaurant" to their name).

Guess what... I only moved one, and even that one was a special deal. I couldn't even rent the other websites out for a small monthly fee.

I figure it wasn't a price point as much as they just didn't see the value in having a website. If they did, they'd already have a website.

Lesson: Let people come to you. Let them have the need first.

BTW: Every now and then, late at night, I'll get a takeout order for lettuce wraps and fried rice (sigh).

<comment><USER2> >"Lesson: Let people come to you. Let them have the need first."

That is not the lesson your experience. The lesson is the make sure there is demand before putting in a ton of time, especially when you're going to be bitter about it later.

Your project was doomed from the start.

You committed the time to build 5 websites and SEO them to the top spot before you had _any_ demand.

If you had waited until a restuarant actually wanted a website, and then realized that even a small application can be made in a few hours for a few $hundred, then you may have had better results. Pre-emptively making websites or scripts is the opposite of what I've suggested.

So the next lesson is to not do work before getting paid (unless it is also a hobby - like building a database class that you will use in freelance projects).

I would have also approached selling the websites differently. Showing someone a website you're trying to sell them and then finishing with "I just need to change some pictures and stuff" isn't that compelling. You have 5 websites. Customize one for each restuarant you're talking to. They pass? Change it up with different pictures and titles. Let the customer see what they're buying, not some representation. This is more time consuming, but it will help sales. You already sunk time to designing, building, and SEOing the sites, so an additional unpaid 20 minutes probably won't hurt you too much.

Also you can't just assume why people didn't buy the websites. You should have done some random calling after the fact to determine _why_ people weren't buying. But I will throw out a few ideas on that too.

You approached restaurants trying to sell them a commodity without knowing what they want. They could have not bought because of the price, because they didn't like the colors, they were intimidated by it's complexity, underwhelmed by its simplicity, or because they didn't think they needed a website (you really need to be making calls).

When someone comes to you with a budget and a need for a website, you are in a position of power. You can dictate more terms. Building a random websie without requirements or a scope and then approaching people takes the power out of your hands.

Finally, there are thousands of companies that don't have a website because they don't know how to make one or think they cost tens of thousands of dollars. These are the types of companies you can be trying to advertise to (but not cold call/approach).

<comment><USER3> I knew the risks I was taking, but I took them anyway. I thought a pre-built, pre-ranking website would be a sweet offer, but I was off.

<comment><USER4> Benchmark, are you still designing websites?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> In my opinion, SquareSpace (and others) is missing the boat by not having a white-label system for web developers to resell their services invisibly.

People pay web devs because they don't want to take the TIME to learn it and do it themselves.

The reason people offer $200 is because they really want to pay someone for 8 hours of work for $200, it has NOTHING to do with web design.

If you are starting a candy store, that's the business you are in. Candy. They don't want to be web developers. At the same time, they don't have much money.

A hired hand who can do the work, manage the content, setup the design, but still use the easy tools available would be perfect. Then we COULD charge $200, be done in a few hours, and have happy clients.

Most people won't care what you use to create their site as long as you get it done and it was affordable.

<comment><USER6> Aren't all the web developers just white-labelling WordPress these days?

On the money part, you're right. Small businesses that are used to paying their staff < $10/hr aren't used to paying the prices for a pro.

For some reason, devs aren't in the same mindspace to these potential clients as lawyers, dentists and architects.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> The margins are just too low on these, hell a decent copy writer is going to cost you half of that if not more. If it needs to have a polished look add a graphics person to that. And that's just to get all of the creative done. I just don't see how on the thin margin of $200 to $500 it can be done. Even with offshore labor the onshore management would eat it up to the point that it would not have a value proposition worth perusing. With canned text, stock images, and a stock template, sure it could be done. But these people never look for a just add water site. They want the "make it like x" twitter, Facebook whoever they want to knock off that week.

I have a friend who owns a vending operation and I promised to sit down with him and show him how to design his own site with GoDaddy's tools and how to use Ad Words to market his service online. He was actually surprised at how easy it was to do. Now he wont win any design awards but for his market something that disseminates some simple info is all he needs. $200 is really a DIY budget and that is all I could really see that someone could do to service this market. It took me 3hr to teach him how to handle it himself. And if someone where instructing people how to do it themselves with these simple site builders they could make a decent freelancing salary. I just don't see a product here that could do better than the existing watered down site builders. Without professional a copywriter and graphic design you will get the same results, offshoring copywriting seems like a bad idea and offshoring graphics requires some management oversight. Until these can be automated I dont see the margins.

The reality is $200 barely covers 2hrs labor for a good mechanic. Developers require a lot more knowledge and skills than mechanics. For some reason people get the idea that this should not be the case but $200 for professional services set's up unrealistic expectations.

<comment><USER8> > Developers require a lot more knowledge and skills than mechanics

Oh? Care to elaborate on this statement or stop while you're ahead.

<comment><USER7> Yes I can, my grandfather, my father and myself (in my early life) where all Aircraft Mechanics. I am still a motor-sports mechanic (hobbyist for off-road motor-sports team) and restore old Jeeps, Bronco's and Scouts. From Frame to finish. I can tell you emphatically that software development is more complex than Mechanics. Further, I do hobbies work in the automotive electronics space and develop software that uses CAN, OBDII and hack ECU's. The development environments and list of technologies required are far more spare because it is an fairly heterogeneous environment but I did not say anything about automotive programming (though I do believe that it is less complex than web, mainly because it is not cluttered by technology soup) I was speaking specifically about pull a part off, replace it, run a diagnostic machine on it mechanic. I specifically chose mechanic because it is a trade I know a lot about given that it is the family business.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Well, one solution is to point them to that freelancers site. There's always people there who are willing to put together some sort of solution for the bottom dollar. I went digging around there the other day and was completely appalled at all of the budgets I was seeing. Some of them wouldn't even cover the cost of writing a proposal for the solution.

In one sense, yes, they deserve a solution to their problems, but one can always hope they learn a bitter lesson by going with the lowest possible bidder on that site.

</comment><comment><USER10> So I'm going to be brutally honest with you...I was a freelance web designer in college and I completely agree with what you're saying. The trouble is, the solution is already out there...

www.vistaprint.com/websites.aspx

DISCLAIMER: Yes, I work for them, and yes I built that page. But you guys aren't our market (too savvy) so I posted it because you probably didn't even know we made websites.

If I were still a freelancer THAT would scare me. The price point is exactly in the budget of your stereotyped user - $200 is like the price of the PROFESSIONAL package, you could go even cheaper for the simplest stuff. As SHOwnsYou pointed out, paying commodity prices is using boilerplate, and that is EXACTLY what we use...there's no magic tricks here: we make it easy for non-technical baby boomers and older (the LEAST tech savvy) to have a website at a price they can afford. The UI is simple enough for a 40-yr-old business owner to make a site. And to the point of the original poster, yeah we are capitalizing on a booming market.

I think the problem is that people want what they can't have: a beautiful looking site at a great price. As I said, speaking frankly, you get what you pay for with our templates. I would never have created those templates and called them my work as a freelancer, but I think the HN community of aesthetically-seasoned designers/developers/entrepreneurs generally forgets that the overwhelming majority has NO IDEA what good design is like and truly DOESN'T need it. This is perhaps the BIGGEST lesson I've learned about business, and truly echoes the sentiments of the greatest creed in marketing, "KNOW YOUR TARGET MARKET."

I guess in the end, the problem from a web designer is that they refuse to produce commodity work, and justifiably raises their rates, when they COULD be making money hand-over-fist if they just kept a slew of simple, cheap templates and just did the labor of porting them to a website for their customers and charging next to nothing. Each transaction would seem like peanuts to most freelancers, and they would feel like they aren't earning anything, but this is a numbers game, and the numbers don't lie.

</comment><comment><USER11> You're right in that its not completely just the issue of technical solution or implementation.

When your friends come to you, they trust YOU to understand their problems, and know that they can lean on you (ahem, extra features please!) and that you won't run them wrong. It may be a matter of intimidation; they're too scared to ring up a web design/consulting place because of embarrassment, price rates, whatever. After all, if they really just wanted the site done, they'd have already looked at some solutions before coming to you, but often, you're the first stop.

So I wouldn't go ahead and necessarily say that their needs are being unmet, and that this is a billion dollar untapped market. I'd say your friends are ignorant of a bit of knowledge, and simply exploring their relationship network. Its the same way we'd go to our mechanic friends for an idea about getting our engines fixed, or the same way we'd ask other expertise friends for their advice.

<comment><AUTHOR> True, but most of the referrals I get are friend of a friend (or more layers). However, if my mechanic friend said "Here's a really easy way to figure out the problem yourself" I would definitely take it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I get this kind of thing all the time from friends and family mainly, almost always it is someone who "just needs something basic" and "it shouldnt be a big deal" however, I am a perfectionist and everything is a big deal lol so inevitably i spend time on it making it perfect and they go on thinking that what I did it for is what those services cost. most of the time I feel I am simply doing a disservice to people who actually have to make their living designing sites, however at the same time I have a problem saying no and throwing together a website in a couple hours typically just gives me a break from whatever coding project i am currently working on ... I guess to each their own, but I dont mind this kind of thing as something to pass the time.

Although to share a recent favorite, my Dad owns a company in which he sells gate operators and automated entry systems and he had a client that wanted to be able to bill every month by how many times an individual went in and out of the site, after explaining a few options to him i decided it would be easiest just to write a batch file that dumped the transactions form the controller into a CSV and from the CSV into access which would then generate the reports for billing with memorized reports.

I told my dad that which he understood (barely) but when the job was given to another vendor he called dad to ask what software he needed to purchase to do this, when dad told him i was just going to write a batch file to do it he responded "Oh yeah, well I could do that but I really dont have the time, so ill just let zach do that if he wants to then, let me know what I owe ya"

lol dont you just love the guy that doesnt have enough time to use the switches in a batch file?

The nerve of some people...

</comment><comment><USER13> When we started Webvanta (a hosted CMS), we spent quite a bit of time talking with small business owners, understanding their web needs, and trying to figure out if we could provide them with a "do it yourself" solution.

Our conclusion was that, for the vast majority of small business people, there is no such thing as a do-it-yourself solution that is going to yield a quality site. They need help with their writing, marketing strategy, and approach, even if all the technical issues go away. And most of them need help with email marketing, social media, and so forth.

For the $200 customer, they're just going to have to figure it out on their own, using something like Wix, or Weebly, or -- if they have a little budget -- SquareSpace, GoDaddy Website Tonight, or Intuit Sites, or something like that.

For anyone who wants a quality site, and wants to have an effective Internet marketing strategy, they should hire someone to help them. That someone typically goes by the name "web designer", but a good one is as much a marketing consultant as a designer.

Typically, this is going to cost at least 10 times the $200 figure, but that's life. Most business people undervalue design and undervalue the web, and that's what needs to change if they are going to use it effectively.

So with the Webvanta hosted CMS (www.webvanta.com), we have focused on serving professional web designers, to give them a powerful tool they can use to deliver great sites to their clients. We did not attempt to make it easy for a business owner to create their own site; instead, we made it easy for a designer to create a great site, and for the business owner to then be able to add content and maintain the site.

</comment><comment><USER14> Every project has overheads, and when you squeeze the budget very low, the overheads can outweigh the budget itself.

Websites require a lot of communication as overhead - and cheap labor will only get you so far.

Considering the ONLY value proposition you will be providing is 'price', its a difficult business model. Any business with extremely tight margins and price as their only competitive point is an uphill battle.

Keep in mind the service you will be providing will generally be poor - because your price is low, you need to keep customer service time to a minimum - leading to a poor service.

Its better to reject these clients, rather than try to adopt them.

</comment><comment><USER15> The hosted market is not failing, it's just that these socalled technical inept people have an entitlement problem.

The options in our society are very easy, either one does it him/her self or one pays another person a fair fee.</comment>


Should You Transfer Your Domain From Go Daddy? - <AUTHOR> http://andersonjr.com/2011/12/28/should-you-transfer-your-domain-from-go-daddy/

<comment><USER2> tl;dr: Yes

<comment><AUTHOR> lots of folks certainly agree with you!</comment></comment>


Ad Revenue Per Visit - What Your Eyes Cost - <AUTHOR> http://www.alexwilhelm.com/alex_wilhelm/2009/01/ad-revenue-per-visit-what-your-eyes-cost.html A breakdown of what it costs advertisers to have you visit a major blog. <comment><USER2> Capsule summary: if you know what CPM means (cost per thousand impressions) you can derive cost per visit. Take one guess how. Yep, you were right.

The interesting bit: _I get 50 cents per thousand impressions, which could be worse. That means that I am getting 1/160th of what they are. Is my content really so much worse?_

This is a fundamental misconception. Nobody cares what your content quality is. They care about the quality of the traffic that you send to them. I spend hundreds of dollars a month paying effective CPMs of $10+ on some sites which are, ahem, total garbage. Because _they send me people that convert_. (How? They rank highly for search terms that ideally I would rank highly for, but their content is such crap that people are like "Oh noes, I need to actually get this done, oh wait here is an ad which promises pain relief CLICK oh thank God a website which knows what it is doing.")

I don't care if you are John Paul II, Mark Twain, and JRR Tolkien all rolled into one, and if every blog post you write creates a new genre of literature: if the people who read your blog are anti-commercial poor teenagers who have no desire to buy the content from ads you put on there, then your CPM will be crappy.

(Incidentally, if you hide your ads in the corner under a label saying "I sold out" and you are writing to an ad-blind niche, I would not expect $20 CPMs. Hope that helps.)</comment>


Ask HN: I feel like I wrote myself into a corner with my landing page and MVP - <AUTHOR> I'm building a todo list + calendar productivity tool called Artemis (https://getartemis.app). The animation on the landing page was made with animation software (Figma and Principle) and it's like an idealized version of what I want to make. The problem is that I'm not a web developer (I do more machine learning stuff) so I've been learning web dev, but I only started recently so I don't know much.
Now I want to create an MVP but I actually don't know how to implement the ideal version that I was advertising. I feel like if I release a smaller verison, then those who signed up might feel like they've been misled. In fact, I created a small MVP already, a to do list timer that doesn't have calendar capabilities (https://timer.getartemis.app) and when I talked to a few people, they said that this isn't what they were expecting and I should get back to them once I've made a more complete version with a calendar, basically at the level of the animation on my landing page.
Should I just continue to learn more web dev to make the more complete MVP, or redesign my landing page to be more faithful to what I can make currently (a simpler version of the same concept), or do something else? How can I get people to use my MVPs without only expecting the ideal version? <comment><USER2> Your landing page offers a handful of problems your product claims to solve. Your MVP should solve at least _some_ classes of at least _some_ of those problems; babby's first todo list is not that.

<comment><AUTHOR> I see, so you think I should continue to iterate and try to solve the problems I purport to solve, even if it doesn't reach an idealized version?

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Don't advertise falsely?</comment>


Learning OS programming? - <AUTHOR>

Hi Guys. I am a freshman in Computer Science and wanna specialize in OS. if i wait for university to teach me,it would take 2 or more. By now i only know about C programming at some rate. My question is what do i have to learn to understand and write my own OS(at least like sipmle linux-s),and in which order that is the best ? and some good books & refs on these. What i need is clear path for beginning, whatever it takes i`ll learn anyway :)<p>for example,
c-->algorithms-->assembly&machine-->kernel.....etc
tnx iimushka <comment><USER2> Lesson one: C is a case sensitive language and so is english. Apologies for the snarkiness but I could not let it go.

Anyway... This is an interesting read: <http://cm.bell- labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/hist.html>

Also check out this reading list: [http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical- engineering-and-comput...](http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering- and-computer-science/6-828-operating-system-engineering-fall-2006/readings/)

</comment><comment><USER3> I highly recommend "Operating Systems: Design & Implementation" by Tanenbaum. It is a very clear book dealing with a lot of design and implementation details of operating systems. It has an in depth discussion of the Minix source and design decisions made. Now Minix does not have such a large user base as Linux, but in my kernel hacking experience in both Minix and Linux so far the Minix sources are far more pleasant to hack on.

</comment><comment><USER4> OSDev ( <http://wiki.osdev.org/Main_Page> ) has a bunch of great stuff. Start at the top and work your way down.

Also, Operating Systems Design and Implementation, aka the Minix book, is an amazing resource.( [http://www.amazon.com/Operating-Systems-Design- Implementatio...](http://www.amazon.com/Operating-Systems-Design- Implementation-3rd/dp/0131429388?tag=dudugo-20) )

</comment><comment><USER5> I'm a big fan of <http://www1.idc.ac.il/tecs/> (The Elements of Computing Systems) It takes you from logic gates all the way up, showing just enough at each level to give you a real view into what's going on there.

I think once you've got through this book, you'll have a great base for anywhere you want to go, including OS programming.

</comment><comment><USER6> <> Find out which operating system the OS class at your university uses, waaaay back in the day it was AT&T Unix, then there was Minix, these days it's usually a flavor of Linux or BSD. Find the web page for the class that has the build instructions for it and follow those. Get all the source code together and compile and run it. Now make some simple change like altering a boot string to say "Yay I did this." Don't use on of the pre-built VMWare images that just require you to type "make". Download the source code, download GCC and figure out all the configuration stuff needed to build the whole OS. Learn a little bit about each of the tools involved but stay focused on building and running whatever OS it is. Once you get that far pick one of the easy early exercises like modifying the memory manager or playing with the process scheduling algorithms. Doing all that should give you a pretty good idea if you want to really specialize in OS's and you will do very well when you do take that class.

</comment><comment><USER7> I'd recommend writing a toy operating system, there are many tutorials online. That will give you a good start. I wrote a small x86 kernel many years ago following online tutorials. It's great fun. You'll learn a lot from doing.

Since you are at university ask around for a professor that teaches or is an expert in Operating Systems and seek his advice. That's why [s]he is there.

<comment><USER8> <http://linuxgazette.net/77/krishnakumar.html>

just with a little google. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I once wrote a brainfuck interpreter in assembler which would run at boot time. It's Turing completeness closer to the machine.

But the internet already thought of that and crazier things: <http://www.masella.name/technical/BF-CPU.pdf>

</comment><comment><USER10> Don't learn C, learn assembly and take a few ee courses. Learn about new and interesting operating systems written in type safe languages. Linux, FreeBSD and friends while practical are all based on ideas from the 1970's and IMO are bound to die out within the next 20 years.

</comment><comment><USER11> hack kernel in userspace.:-) lots of fun and let your mind bend. <http://netbsd.org/docs/rump/index.html> <http://netbsd.org/docs/>

</comment><comment><USER12> Google is your friend:

[http://www.google.com/search?q=how+do+I+write+an+operating+s...](http://www.google.com/search?q=how+do+I+write+an+operating+system%3F)

</comment><comment><USER13> Check out minix3.org it is a small os you can read (source code) and play with.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Great, thank you guys :)</comment>


Why the Battle of Waterloo was fought - <AUTHOR> http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/we-better-off-napoleon-never-lost-waterloo-180955298/?no-ist <comment><USER2> Most of the article is not about why we'd be better off - not to say it isn't worth reading, but at the end we find:

"If Napoleon had remained emperor of France for the six years remaining in his natural life, European civilization would have benefited inestimably. The reactionary Holy Alliance of Russia, Prussia and Austria would not have been able to crush liberal constitutionalist movements in Spain, Greece, Eastern Europe and elsewhere; pressure to join France in abolishing slavery in Asia, Africa and the Caribbean would have grown; the benefits of meritocracy over feudalism would have had time to become more widely appreciated; Jews would not have been forced back into their ghettos in the Papal States and made to wear the yellow star again; encouragement of the arts and sciences would have been better understood and copied; and the plans to rebuild Paris would have been implemented, making it the most gorgeous city in the world."

Some arguable points, but Napoleon was... shall we say, capricious. It seems naive to think that all this would have happened the way it's put there.

Still, it makes for fun speculation. If you like that, you should read Creasy's "15 Decisive Battles in the History of the World," at least if you don't mind a bit (well, more than a bit) of Anglocentrism. There's a lot of this "if things had gone the other way" stuff and it's great conversation fodder.

Also, Hugo's narrative of Waterloo in "Les Miserables" is wonderful and worth reading if you are at all intrigued.

<comment><USER3> For as much as history portrays Napoleon as a dictator (which he was), it neglects that most of his adversaries were ALSO dictators who did equally horrible things.

In Napoleon's mind, he wasn't as much conquering Europe as liberating it from the clutches of nobility. Napoleon viewed himself as a better kind of dictator than the other European monarchs: one who rose to power through his own merit and who selected men for tasks based on their abilities, not their bloodlines. This narrative was decidedly less popular outside of France -- which had essentially executed all of its nobility in the preceding decades, so there was nobody left to disagree. But it really was a war of ideals over who should rule: an arbitrary (and increasingly inbred) line of inherited nobility, or the best man for the job?

If Napoleon had won at Waterloo, Europe would have saved itself a century of war. But the USA would also not exist in its current form -- much of the reason for the rise of American dominance in the 20th century was because Europe was rebuilt after WWII by the American war machine cranking out large quantities of steel and industrial machinery.

And who knows how the 20th century would have turned out without the US as a global superpower. Maybe without war and famine in 19th century Europe, there's never a migration and the central US remains as uninhabited as Siberia. It's fun to think of the "what if?" questions,

<comment><USER4> or America could have ended up next on Napoleons list - lets be honest the US army in 1812 would have been no Mach for Napoleon.

<comment><USER3> I think Napoleon likely would have allied with the US over the long term. The US did not have the baggage of nobility, was ruled by enlightenment thinkers, and we already had a common enemy in the British.

That said, the US was a sparsely-populated backwater outpost at the time with only about 7 million inhabitants (a million of whom were slaves). For comparison, the population of Europe during the same time was close to 140 million. We simply didn't have the manpower, infrastructure or money to meaningfully contribute to a European conflict at the time.

<comment><USER5> Not to mention the enormous logistical difficulties of landing and supplying a cross-Atlantic amphibious army large enough to conquer a continent in the age of sail.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I claim that you could quite reasonably argue "we'd be better off" if you were allowed to alter any single event in past history. It should be called "proof by fantasy land".

<comment><USER7> How would you "reasonably argue" that we'd be better off if Germany and Japan had won World War II?

<comment><USER8> Depends on the single event that led to their victory but you could easily argue that the British Empire would have been better off if it had never gone to war with Germany in 1939. Its a war that basically bankrupted Britain, caused the collapse of the empire, pushed Britain from being the major superpower into second division status, led to the dominance of its major rival (America), and has generally blighted the last 60 years of British history.

Humanity is better off because Germany lost, but Britain? Not so much.

<comment><USER9> Actually, WW1 is what led to the demise of the UK, not WW2. WW2 was just the denouement. The generations that were lost on the Somme and Flanders crippled the empire.

<comment><USER10> WWI was the cause of the demise of pretty much all of Europe, directly resulting in heavy generational damage to Western Europe, kickstarting the communist revolution in Russia (which might have been tolerable in and of itself under Leninist or Trotskyist rule, but was then classifiable as "demise" once Stalin was in power), and (in the end) imposing excessive punishments on Germany post-war that caused severe economic problems and spurred the desire for a return to glory - one promised (and briefly realized) by the Nazi party.

<comment><USER9> It also led to more centralized economies, and suppression of dissent in the U.S. as well.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> A very interesting historical read with a biased view pro-Napoleon, but the facts seems pretty well explained.

Only the last paragraph briefly discuss the title, as if the author could have predicted the future for 150 years. But as the french proverb says: "avec des si on mettrait Paris en bouteille" [1]

[1] [http://www.wordreference.com/fren/Avec%20des%20si,%20on%20me...](http://www.wordreference.com/fren/Avec%20des%20si,%20on%20mettrait%20Paris%20en%20bouteille)

</comment><comment><USER12> As several users have pointed out, this article's content is misrepresented by its title, so we've changed it. Suggestions for a better one are welcome.

The article reads a little weirdly, in fact, as if large chunk of it were missing before the abrupt change of subject at the end. But it's still a fine historical piece.

</comment><comment><USER13> Just skip to the end. It's just a long and opinionated recap of French history with some supposition thrown in at the end.</comment>


Facebook Has Removed Three Billion Fake Profiles in Six Months - <AUTHOR> https://digit.fyi/facebook-fake-profiles-enforcement-report/ <comment><USER2> Pointless posturing by Facebook to make it seems as if they're actually doing anything worth while.</comment>


Varnish Cache 5.0 - <AUTHOR> http://varnish.org/releases/rel5.0.0.html#rel5-0-0 <comment><USER2> As someone who has never used Varnish but has used Nginx's cache to some degree... whats the benefit of placing varnish in the middle vs going with Nginx?

<comment><USER3> * ESI support is really nice (if you're an API designer, you can really go nuts on this and make a super simple API do some very complex things or expressive composition from lots of simple calls)

* More fine-grained control of your caching is possible

* Easier to express normalisation of requests (increase your cache hit rate and protect your underlying origin from malicious requests by discarding cache busters)

* Inline C means you can do things like move your authentication to the edge

* In theory if you have enough RAM you can go faster than nginx's on-disk... in practice the sweet spot for the gain is small and they're both on par

But then... it comes with disadvantages too. Like most Varnish services would never let you do the nice Inline C stuff because no-one in their right mind would run untrusted code in their environment where it could impact another customer. If you see a provider do this (at any price point), avoid them.

<comment><AUTHOR> Since 3.0 you have VMODs, to counter for the well-founded lack of Inline C support around. These Varnish modules will extend VCL with C, C++ or even Rust libraries on a safer manner: [https://varnish- cache.org/vmods/](https://varnish-cache.org/vmods/)

If you make your own VMOD(can take from a few hours to days), make sure to send a PR and add it to the directory above (IOW: share it) :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Do I understand this right? It supports HTTP/2, but doesn't support HTTPS. Therefore it supports HTTP/2 in a mostly unusable form, because browser vendors (for good reasons) decided to support HTTP/2 only over HTTPS.

<comment><USER5> The reason I don't want to link Varnish against a SSL library, is that in my considered opinion, they all suck.

From a purely operational point of view, you are better of with two different SSL proxies in front if your Varnish (or other webserver), so that you can turn OpenSSL off in even-numbered weeks and the other (pick your poison) in odd-numbered weeks.

The code to hold safely onto your certificate and do all the songs and dances involved in SSL/TLS, is under all circumstances something which should be isolated in as small a process/protection domain as possible.

<comment><USER6> This is why i love hn. Thanks for answering this!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> [https://www.nginx.com/blog/maximizing- drupal-8-performance-n...](https://www.nginx.com/blog/maximizing- drupal-8-performance-nginx-part-ii-caching-load-balancing/)

In the BBC's testing, they found that with NGINX as a drop-in replacement for Varnish, they saw five times more throughput.

<comment><USER8> PHK explained the cause of this is that the Linux kernel VM system performs poorly when overcomitted.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10752209](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10752209)

So the conclusion is, as long your malloc fits in your system memory, Varnish should be blazing fast on Linux. If you need a gigantic cache, please try FreeBSD.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Historically, PHK was a very vocal criticizer of SPDY and HTTP/2: [http://www.varnish-cache.org/docs/trunk/phk/http20.html](http://www.varnish- cache.org/docs/trunk/phk/http20.html)

Of course he relented and implemented SPDY and HTTP/2 anyway.

But all the same I can't help but feel that his original criticsm still stands, and what we need is a rethink of e.g. cookies.

<comment><USER10> The original brief for H2 was to have the same semantics etc, as HTTP/1.x

From my reading PHK didn't think it went far enough, and wanted to change more.

I think he's got good points to make on session ids, cookies etc. and I suspect we'll se some of the ideas feed into future versions too.

<comment><USER9> I don't think we will, because most in the driving seat make their money identifying visitors. Cynical but true.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> It's always good to see new stuff coming out for Varnish. Do these changes warrant a major jump in release numbers especially when HTTP/2 support (biggest feature) is experimental?

Anyway, I'm looking forward to testing it out and integrating v5 with Cachoid ( shameful plug: [https://www.cachoid.com/](https://www.cachoid.com/) ).

<comment><USER12> From the horse's mouth:

> Varnish 5.0 changes some (mostly) internal APIs and adds some major new > features over Varnish 4.1.

> We are in the process of adding HTTP/2 support to Varnish ... we hope to > have it production ready for the next major release (2017-03-15).

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> From the release notes [http://varnish.org/docs/5.0/whats- new/relnote-5.0.html](http://varnish.org/docs/5.0/whats-new/relnote-5.0.html) "It is important that people understand that Free and Open Source Software isn't the same as gratis software: Somebody has to pay the developers mortgages and student loans."

Varnish is an excellent piece of software, but I thought it was totally funded by the commercial side varnish software. How does this model work? It seems odd to ask for donations while also selling an expensive supported version?

<comment><USER5> Varnish Cache Author here.

The Varnish Cache FOSS project and Varnish Software the company are two entirely different things.

By and large, the Varnish Cache FOSS project is me, and I am not employed by Varnish Software: I have my own one-man company where I "make computers to do weird things".

The time I spend on Varnish Cache is funded by "The Varnish Moral License":

[http://phk.freebsd.dk/VML/index.html](http://phk.freebsd.dk/VML/index.html)

(See also: [http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2636165](http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2636165))

Varnish Software is one of the handful of companies who pay via the VML to keep me working on Varnish.

Varnish Software has also supported the project in many other ways as well, from running the project server to donating manpower and source code.

Some of these things are being scaled down, for instance the project server had become the square peg in their round internal IT systems, so I have been migrating that off to a server kindly sponsored by RootBSD.

<comment><USER13> Thanks so much for replying. I did notice the Moral License and was confused as to how it works. I will attempt to get some high profile users I know to help pay for some continued development.</comment></comment></comment>


RancherOS: An OS for Docker Containers - <AUTHOR> http://rancher.com/rancher-os/ <comment><USER2> Docker itself as PID 1 is… creative.

Good things they've thought through:

\- boots fast, does almost the absolute minimum it needs to get up and running

\- supporting user data and at least minimal config via cloud-init

\- properly minimal: you have to use a Debian image to set up persistent storage with mkfs.ext4! (edit: when using the ISO version, which is not the primary use case)

\- but helpfully familiar: you can install distro flavoured "console" experiences with more than just busybox

\- it's almost a better Boot2Docker than Boot2Docker! (a little bit of love for VirtualBox / VMware shared storage wouldn't go astray)

<comment><USER3> I'm not sure… running a 7MB binary with tons of functionality as PID 1 sounds like a really bad idea. Possibly even worse than the usual complaints against systemd (which has at least process isolations for its various features).

<comment><USER2> Who has a 7MB binary with tons of functionality as PID 1? That doesn't describe RancherOS or systemd.

(Edit: Oh, you mean Docker itself as PID 1 on RancherOS. Yes, that's true. Certainly hairier than systemd. I haven't really dug into how much they limit what system-docker can do.)

<comment><USER2> Interesting data point:

\- /usr/bin/systemd-docker = 8.4M

\- /usr/bin/docker = 14.3M

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm leery of entrusting so much to Docker... I've had something as innocuous as pulling a remote image crash the daemon (due to a misconfigured private registry) which brought all my containers down. Imagine if this happened to all your critical system services!

<comment><USER2> That's why they have system-docker as PID 1, running essential services in containers.

One of those services is docker, for running Random Shit You Downloaded Off The Internet. :-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> "Systemd and Docker don't work well together as they both attempt to manage control groups."

Has anybody hit actual issues with this? Having used Docker and systemd concurrently for a while, I can't say this has every caused conflicts, any more than the fact that both myself and my guests manage drinks in my fridge.

<comment><USER6> In my experience it works, but is a mess. You end up with really crazy unit files that aren't actually managing the docker daemon, they're managing the docker client. CoreOS created Rocket in part because the match between docker and systemd is so bad. Rancher seems to be going in the other direction by making Docker support fully native. I do wonder how much this really buys you over a higher level framework like Mesos or Kubernetes though.

You can see Darren's discussion of these issues here: [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/coreos- dev/wf7G6rA7Bf4...](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/coreos- dev/wf7G6rA7Bf4/Olmxmo13WKQJ)

<comment><USER7> I wouldn't say the unit files end up "really crazy", but I do agree it is a bit of a mismatch and we lose out on a bit of the advantages of systemd.

Re: the post you refer to, I really don't like his proposed solution of "docker attach | docker start | docker run". I usually do this:

        ExecStartPre=-docker kill %P
        ExecStartPre=-docker rm %P
        ExecStart=docker run --rm --name %p ...
        ExecStop=docker stop %p

Of course that would not apply to any containers used to export volumes, but I tend to mount volumes from the host anyway. But I explicitly want a clean slate when I restart containers.

<comment><USER6> Simple examples looks fine, but try a setup where you have dozens of environmental variables being set, data volume-containers that need to match the lifecycle of the main container, pulling images that don't exist, ambassadors containers for cross-host linking, and other sidekicks for things like load-balancer registration and health checking. If you look at how Deis does it, they've actually created tons of little binaries to help with different tasks ([https://github.com/deis/deis/issues/2254](https://github.com/deis/deis/issues/2254)) because the unit files get too crazy by themselves. You end up trying to build a system like Kubernetes using shell scripts and unit files.

The key thing to remember with CoreOS is it puts systemd at the center not docker and only interacts with docker through the client. In fact, there's really zero docker integration besides shipping the binary.

There's also the underlying technical issue around what is PID 1. In your example, you aren't actually monitoring the container, you're monitoring the status of the docker client, which may be different than the docker daemon. For containers, the docker daemon owns the fork rather than systemd. In a system like Kubernetes you have a reconciliation loop that monitors the daemon. You could probably build a similar idea into your unit files to make them more robust, but that's even more complicated.

Having gone down the systemd route it seems like a dead end to me for distributed docker applications. If you believe in a containerized future, then choose an orchestration framework that treats docker as first order primitive. You can still bootstrap this framework using CoreOS/systemd but after that I'd much prefer to just interact with a higher-level system.

<comment><USER7> I don't build any of that into the unit files because I need additional health checking anyway. That the processes are running does not really tell me much useful - a huge proportion of the system failures I deal with are failures where the processes are still running but something else has gone wrong.

For the same reason it doesn't really matter to me if Docker is treated as a first order primitive.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I've been using Docker since forever and I think I grasp the architecture here.

But, my question is, what does this bring to the table that isn't possible with Docker + Machine + Swarm?

That's a super important question to ask, because adding another layer to deployments is not something people are wont to do to a system (Docker) that's supposed to put the simplicity back into deployments. Also, since this isn't under Docker Inc.'s umbrella people would be right to be cautious depending on it lest it die, whether that's fair or not.

I don't use CoreOS but I get it: it offers orchestration whistles that solve some people's problems. I also don't use but I understand PaaSes like Flynn: they're solving problems at a completely different layer and their ties to Docker are incidental.

But this, the primary touted advantage seems to be that it's a slim Docker image. For me (and I imagine others) that is a solved problem with Machine and/or boot2docker. On top of not imposing any new overarching architecture to learn, those tools are already widely deployed, supported, and trusted, and have the huge unfair advantage of being blessed by Docker core.

And if you really want to run Docker in Docker, that's been supported for a very long time, and you get that for free without installing anything.

So I'm at a loss to think of a case I'd advise someone to reach for this. Is there something I'm missing?

<comment><USER9> I've only played with RancherOS for a very short amount of time so keep that in mind :) I don't think we quite know exactly what it will turn out to be or exactly where it would be most effective. Without going into the technical details (because I'm not the person for that - I'll leave that to rancher), RancherOS isn't just a Docker image. It runs Docker at the core. Not just an OS with Docker in it. This gives it the potential to have an update mechanism similar to CoreOS etc.

You are correct in that it is very similar to boot2docker. boot2docker is also a very light distro with docker (and by "very light" I mean awesome slim -- steeve is amazing :) The main difference, as I see it, is in updating / extending / packages. With TCL, you need to either find the package and include it in your build or create the package with a build chain etc. which isn't trivial. In the RancherOS route, you could simply pull a new docker image.

The interesting thing to me is it offers choice. If you want to run systemd, etcd you can without changing an entire system (i.e. today, if I want Fedora with systemd I have to configure the Docker daemon opts differently than say with Ubuntu).

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Curious if anyone has come up with a way to run X11 itself in a container? (there are numerous articles on running GUI apps in containers that simply need a way to talk to Xauthority or X socket, or using VNC or xpra). I'd imagine it would need to run privileged with access to device files, or something like that.

I've kicked around the idea of a "workstation" set of containers to run on top of CoreOS, but this is the biggest hump I've run into.

<comment><USER11> Many people already have run X in a container with no trouble. They often just vnc it out.

The hard part is not running X, but running X and having it display to your hardware. This is a massive distinction. You need to passthrough your graphics device so that X can write to its framebuffer and all that bizzazz, and that's the question you really should be asking. "How do I pass my graphics device / display device into a container".

<comment><USER10> Right, this is what I actually meant

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Quote: "At 20MB, RancherOS is two orders of magnitude smaller than a typical Linux distribution, and an order of magnitude smaller than even other minimalist Linux distributions."

This claim is incorrect. Linux kernels can actually be as small as around 2 MB. The rest of a working Linux system (GNU, GUI etc.) does not belong to the kernel.

[http://superuser.com/questions/370586/how-can-a-linux- kernel...](http://superuser.com/questions/370586/how-can-a-linux-kernel-be-so- small)

A Debian Linux distribution (kernel + stuff) can run in just 32 MB. For instance:

[http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1522146/minimum- configura...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1522146/minimum- configuration-to-run-embedded-linux-on-an-arm-processor)

Quote: "I've used a TS-7200 for about five years to run a web server and mail server, using Debian GNU Linux. It is 200 MHz and has 32 MB of RAM, and is quite adequate for these tasks. It has serial port built in. It's based on a ARM920T."

<comment><USER13> Let's interpret the claim precisely before calling it incorrect.

What it asserts is that there exist some minimalist Linux distros around a few hundred megabytes in size, and this can be shown true merely by example.

The claim notably does not use "all" or "every", so the existence of something smaller does not create a contradiction.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> How you upgrade system docker when it is PID 1 ? Does the machine has to be rebooted?

</comment><comment><USER15> Regarding the "Ideal for Production" tagline - how would I go about running this in production? Specifically on linode - would I have to run a "regular" linux and then use kvm to run the rancheros iso?

<comment><USER2> I don't think you can install and run arbitrary stuff on Linode, so you'd have to convince Linode to provide an OS image for RancherOS.

(Or goof around copying stuff onto a disk image.)

<comment><USER5> You can certainly run arbitrary stuff on a Linode; I'm currently running a custom-built read-only Arch image.

You do have to put it there yourself, but if RancherOS is billing itself as small and easy to update, that seems like it shouldn't be hard.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Cant be surprised that Darren is the creator. I remember seeing him at a talk this summer and I imagined he would be the kinda guy to put this type of project together.

</comment><comment><USER17> How does this differ from CoreOS?

<comment><USER2> Besides the guts of how the OS platform itself is built and runs, the major _feature_ difference is that it doesn't have all the cluster co-ordination bits like etcd, fleet, and so on.

<comment><USER18> There's CoreOS the OS and there's CoreOS the project. The OS is just a self- updating barebones Linux distro built for hosting Docker containers.

<comment><USER2> Which is also very different to RancherOS, but I excluded how the OS is built and run from my previous answer.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Anyone else find the Docker logo extremely adorable? I know nothing about it but I smile every time I see that happy little barge-whale.

<comment><USER20> Now check out the narwhale: [http://socketplane.io/](http://socketplane.io/)

<comment><USER21> The Docker logo is cute because it isn't _trying_ to be cute.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> It's not quite an OS for Docker containers yet. It's a distro with special middleware. The next question is how much can be thrown out of the Linux kernel. Or can it be replaced with something more secure? What would it take to run this in Xen without Linux?

<comment><USER10> I think running linux containers without linux would be difficult! You probably want Mirage OS or OSv.

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

[http://osv.io/](http://osv.io/)

<comment><USER23> The Joyent guys are running docker in smartos by so called "branded zones". They emulate the Linux Kernel ABI. This works surprisingly well, as they say. See: [https://www.joyent.com/developers/videos/docker-and-the- futu...](https://www.joyent.com/developers/videos/docker-and-the-future-of- containers-in-production)

The cool thing is, that they open sourced the SDC in November 2014.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I am curious about one thing: how System Docker as PID 1 deals with reaping zombie processes?

<comment><USER25> From the discussion last night at the Docker meetup, the System Docker is responsible for the reaping of child processes. The comment from the presenter was basically "we sorta expect this (systemd) to be stable and not crash". That said, he also mentioned that it's early work and their actively thinking about solutions to this problem and the ones related to security.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Interesting... Played around with CoreOS a little bit, but wasn't quite confident with it... currently rolling Docker under Ubuntu Server containers.

I really like the idea of these micro OSes, and both CoreOS and RancherOS have some interesting aspects to them.

</comment><comment><USER27> Makes me think of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huevos_rancheros](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huevos_rancheros)

</comment><comment><USER28> I only played with docker briefly on my laptop, and never in a production system. Do you think there will be any performance hits in a system like this?

</comment><comment><USER29> Is SELinux or GRSecurity built in and enabled?

<comment><USER30> Highly unlikely, given this is a product coming out of the Docker ecosystem.

<comment><USER29> We run SELinux on all our docker hosts and are about to roll out GRSecurty as well, at present this is one of the best lines of defence you have against running code so close to root.

<comment><USER30> A hypervisor is the best defense you can have against running code so close to root

<comment><USER29> It's not quite that simple, an insecure or vulnerable hypervisor can actually make it easier to exploit a system. (Note: I'm not suggesting that running Docker as PID1 or similar is a good idea)

<comment><USER30> I think it's fair to say that it's easier to secure a hypervisor than it is to secure a Docker daemon. Lord knows we've had a lot more experience securing hypervisors.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> That name, a dig at servers as "cattle vs pets" i take it?

</comment><comment><USER32> I've used coreos and configuring it into clusters was over complicated. So much so that I switched back to ubuntu. Does anyone know how RancherOS compares?

<comment><USER33> For clustering and management, you might try running RancerOS with Rancher the company's orchestration tool.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> This is a CoreOS alternative?

</comment><comment><USER35> Does it support NFS?

</comment><comment><USER36> Docker-ception

<comment><USER37> I appreciate what you did there. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> I cant help but feel that this is a clusterfuck in disguise.</comment>


Why Media Monetisation Won't Work - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@CM30/why-media-monetisation-will-never-work-605022a2ba19 <comment><USER2> If your work can be replaced by anybody with a blog the moment you ask for money, maybe you're just not creating something that is special enough to be monetized.

<comment><AUTHOR> To be fair, a lot of existing media are in that situation right now too. It's why for example gaming magazines and strategy guides mostly died out; perfectly adequate (and often better) equivalents are available for free online. Same with a lot of other hobby magazines and what not. They don't offer anyone someone with a blog can't provide, and mostly only made money because it was difficult to get things published.</comment></comment>


How do you make money online? Why is it so hard? - <AUTHOR> I've been trying to make money online and been unsuccessful. I've been good at solving problems when I worked for others. All my previous employers ask me to re-join them at sometime, however as I want to be independent I try to make money online and I've failed many times. I wish there was a place where you could just log in and solve database, coding, scalability issues.<p>What's your success story in making money online ? And I'm talking the 500-1000$ jobs. <comment><USER2> I and a few entrepreneurs I know have build $4000+ a month software business, most from downloadable software, some from SaaS.

On average it has taken 5+ years to build it to that level from first try, you might need to find a little patience ;)

<comment><USER3> Do you mind if I ask what industries? SaaS success stories are fairly plentiful on here thanks to Patio11 and former Ask HN threads, but it's rare to hear about a successful downloadable software company. The common wisdom about downloadable software is that nobody pays for software these days. I'd love to be proven wrong here.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Are you asking about freelancing, or something different like passive income or selling products?

</comment><comment><USER5> Make a profile on Toptal, LiquidTalent or Hired. Working on projects is the way to go till youve figured out your dream job

</comment><comment><USER6> Stop being so lazy.</comment>


Ask HN: JavaScript framework that I can use "right now"? - <AUTHOR> After spending a week learning and experimenting "modern" JavaScript I think it's not worth the effort to use React.js and Webpack if I'm not making a full SPA. It's like alpha software with constant changes (I'm mainly talking about the ecosystem and its components). Documentation is also lacking, specially Webpack. Even tutorials from 3~6 months ago are somewhat outdated. Funny thing I learned Flux's basics and now they are already talking about Relay (ffs!)
Right now I have a tradicional (and huge) MVC back-end and an API (I'm not using Node.js). Assets = Gulp to concat+rev+uglify.
What would be the best approach to my pages where a lot of user interaction is needed? Using jQuery and handlebars seems ugly but I think I'll be overcomplicating things if I adopt an entire new stack (React, Babel JSX/ES6, Webpack, modules, hot-reload...) on top of what I already have.
I'm the single developer on this web app, I feel extremely productive on the back-end side but the front-end is driving me NUTS. Since it started making a good amount of money I quit my job a few months ago and it's my main income now.
I'm (literally) having nightmares about a JS bug I won't be able to solve since it's so many moving parts and I'm a back-end dev who doesn't have the time or patience to replace his entire front-end stack every 6 months. <comment><USER2> I'd use Backbone. It's old (relative to other JS stuff) but stable. It's one thing to learn and has all the pieces (model, views, events, router). Plenty of resources online or in paper form.

If you want, try applying some of the ideas of the "modern" tools to Backbone: make a backbone view that has two models - one for data (aka React props) and one for view state (aka React state). Bind both model "change" events to your view's `render` method. It won't have the performance boost of React virtual DOM diffing - but you get some of the other design benefits.

<comment><USER3> This is very, very pragmatic advice.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> jQuery.

I'm the sole developer on a "rails monolith" (254 tables, 540 models/classes, 4 years old), with enterprise-like architecture (ecommerce, event ticket sales, booking engine, access control, etc) and I'm positive the only way I'm able handle it all is because I stick to basic jquery.

My secrets:

\- The rails-ujs adapter

\- $(document).on('event', '.element', ..) is fantastic. Never debug events ever again

\- selectize select's for "find or create" relationships

\- cocoon gem for nested form relationships

\- parsley for form validation (hooks into html5 validators)

\- bootstrap 3

\- datatables.net + following the pattern of ajax-datatables-rails (gem - separate classes for each table)

\- a single javascript function that accepts a DOM element (body, a modal, section) and initializes all the elements the app knows of (selectize elements, date/time pickers, etc) inside that container

\- above function is hooked into by bootstrap's 'bs.modal.shown, bs.modal.hide, tab's, cocoon's 'cocoon:after-insert', etc.

rake stats says: 33k LOC models, 8k LOC controllers, 23k Javascript (though this must be all plugins. I'd guess 3-6k lines of javascript, max)

Needless to say, I don't believe in the frontend javascript hype.

<comment><USER5> Thank you for this comment. Several things there that I will look into! If you don't mind, could you elaborate a bit on the following:

> \- $(document).on('event', '.element', ..) is fantastic. Never debug events > ever again

> \- a single javascript function that accepts a DOM element (body, a modal, > section) and initializes all the elements the app knows of (selectize > elements, date/time pickers, etc) inside that container

<comment><USER4> $(document).on lets you keep your javascript source files relatively flat because the event handler listens on the document, rather than an individual element. So even if the element is not currently on the page (loaded in via AJAX for example) the $(document).on handler will still pick it up. You never need to bind or unbind event handlers manually. The rails recommended way is to respond to the JS format and do server-rendered javascript.... but I tend to prefer using a simple data-transport-only (JSON) api, then do the client stuff on the client side.

Simple example:

      $(document).on 'ajax:success', '.guest-form', ->
        notify 'success', 'Guest updated.'
        $(@).parents('.modal').modal 'hide'

      $(document).ajaxError (event, jqxhr, settings, thrownError) ->
      handle_ajax_error(event, jqxhr)

      @handle_ajax_error = (error, xhr) ->
      if xhr.status is 422
        error = JSON.parse(xhr.responseText)['errors']
        notify 'error', error
      else if xhr.status is 500
        notify 'error', 'Error communicating with the server. We have been notified.'
      if xhr.status is 401
        notify 'warning', 'Session has expired. Redirecting to login...'
        window.location = '/login'
      if xhr.status is 403
        window.location = '/access-denied'

So if you load in content via AJAX (I do this a lot for table views of data and the user wants to see a single record), rather than go to a separate page, I do an ajax call, put the result into a Twitter bootstrap modal, show the modal, and when the bs.modal.shown event fires, that "single javascript function" with the modal as the parameter is called, and it initializes all the javascript needed for that particular DOM container.

Example:

      $(document).on 'shown.bs.modal', 'a[data-toggle="tab"]', (e) ->

        $modal_body = $( $(e.target).attr('href') )
        general_init $modal_body

The general_init function will initialize all my selectize elements (among other things) as such:

      general_init = ($container) ->
        add_selectize $container.find('input.membership-plan-select'), $.extend(true, {}, Selects.MembershipPlanOptions)

So when writing forms, lets say to create a new "Event Ticket" I simply plop in a text field with a class of "guest-select" and I instantly have an AJAX powered search field to find/create a guest to assign that ticket to.

<comment><USER5> Thanks a lot for the detailed response! I'm a Rails developer myself, and have recently become increasingly interested in front end development. Have tried to embrace React et al. but am not convinced that it's what I need.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Having worked on a fairly large SPA using Ember.js 1.*, I can tell you that React.js (with Webpack, React Router and something like Redux) would probably be better than Ember (perhaps even Ember 2.0, which is still not fully mature).

But if you need something even more stable than React, I'm not sure there is a good option out there. I dislike Angular.js for a number of reasons (which I won't go into here). I've heard good things about Mithril, but it's MVC so as the app grows larger, you're likely to end up with the same problems you have with your current implementation.

Ironically, I'm currently considering a move to the exact stack you're considering (React, Babel JSX/ES6, Webpack...) and I find it better than everything else I've evaluated over the past year.

Thoughts?

<comment><AUTHOR> I liked React ideas it's just that it feels incomplete not to use the entire stack you mentioned. And it's too much for my taste. I'm sure webpack works fine for most people it's just that the possible edge cases with the black box that is the compiled modules files and lack of good documentation makes me lose my sleep. Combined with the alpha state of the rest of the ecosystem is not really an easy choice for a paranoid developer like me. I also faced a lot of small inconveniences because I'm using Vagrant. IIRC there were options like watch-polling that was available as a cli arg but not on the config file. And the usual CORS problems that I had to solve.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Don't kill the messenger but I tend to stick to plain jQuery + ba-hashchange for building SPAs.

I don't think its worth the time to really learn Angular or whatever is the current fad these days - quality of both the software and the documentation of JS frameworks is an afterthought to "getting an MVP ready to ship".

I'm not a ripening chamber for bananas, especially bananas with no papers.

<comment><AUTHOR> My english is awful, I was trying to say it's not really a SPA that I'm making. I want to keep the routing mainly on my back-end and only do ajax calls to my API where needed. But if it's not another alpha-state component I would love to have the added possibility of using one or two extra routes on the JS side. It's just that checking the most popular repos and reading things like these is awful: "We are currently working hard on some major API changes for version 1.0."

Is like "mini-SPA's" on a few places that deal with too many data sources and would be a pain to make my users change screens.

I really enjoyed doing "one way binding" and some ideas around React though.

<comment><USER6> > I want to keep the routing mainly on my back-end and only do ajax calls to > my API where needed.

I'm not trying to push React (I'm still evaluating it myself), but that sounds like just the job for React components?

<comment><AUTHOR> Check my other reply. React is great but I think you need to buy the entire stack since one thing leads to the other. "I'm already using JSX so why not add just this one more babel line and get free ES6. It's the last thing I'll add, I swear"

<comment><USER6> I thought React was designed specifically so you won't have to buy into the entire stack (unlike Ember and friends). I've used React components without ES6, using plain old jQuery and AJAX calls during component mount (and nothing else). I didn't feel any particular temptation to add more things. Okay I'm lying :) . It's tempting, but it's possible to do without.

<comment><AUTHOR> You weren't using JSX?

<comment><USER6> I did. It's part of React proper and merely syntactic sugar over React.DOM calls. You can use React.DOM directly, but it doesn't really change your level of investment in the 'stack', IMO.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> \- KnockoutJS (to keep HTML generation logic in the HTML)

\- jQuery (for small stuff)

\- RequireJS (so that you don't have to load all at once)

\- MomentJS (Date / Time management done right)

\- AmplifyJS (Pub / Sub and localstorage)

I really like KnockoutJS. Easy to learn and it grows with you so that you don't have to complicate your app if not necessary.

</comment><comment><USER9> I have the same feelings about "modern" JS development.

Knockout.js is worth checking out. It can be picked up in a day or so, and can be integrated into existing sites easily.

I actually started down the road of learning Backbone/Marionette to work on an existing codebase, and I'm liking what I see overall. It offers models that can sync up to your backend easily, and adds much needed structure to handlebar templates and jQuery.

If you feel like using React, it looks like it would be quite easy to use Backbone models in the same way Flux implementations are used (basically a data store w/ events). I might try this down the road as I like React but want to avoid CommonJS/ES6 and whatever the Flux lib du jour is.

</comment><comment><USER10> > I'm (literally) having nightmares about a JS bug I won't be able to solve > > since it's so many moving parts

I am similar, writing the back end was easier ... front end not so much. I hated having JS bugs due to stupid typos and less than 100% code coverage in tests.

Switched to Typescript for the front end and things became much better. Doesn't have to be 'all or nothing' either, I still have some JS glue for interacting with some libraries and more dynamic bits, but generally everything is Typescript and feels much more solid.

FWIW the stack also heavily includes KnockoutJS, DataTables, Backbone's router & a smattering of JQuery plugins for this and that.

</comment><comment><USER11> For a complete list, look through the source code of the TodoMVC projects ([http://todomvc.com/](http://todomvc.com/)).

<comment><AUTHOR> this looks really complete, thanks

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Use whatever you want. I go with ractive,page.js for routing , delorean for flux,jquery and various small libs here and there so you can change them.</comment>


Modern anti-spam and E2E crypto - <AUTHOR> https://moderncrypto.org/mail-archive/messaging/2014/000780.html

<comment><USER2> This is a great read especially about making spam expensive to reduce or eliminate it.

</comment><comment><USER3> Duplicate of [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8275970](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8275970) (even though it was posted first, obviously the other one should stay)</comment>


Meal timings affect your waistline - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190304-how-meal-timings-affect-your-waistline <comment><USER2> Though it does briefly mention it at the end, one detail I'm uncertain about with this and where they mention intermittent fasting is how much the times of days matter? Some basic posts I've read about IF essentially say that they simply don't eat until 12pm and stop at 6-8pm. But this article seems to suggest that it would be much better if they ate at 8am and stopped at 3-5pm instead?

If that's the case, that leads me to wonder if your body wants you to adjust throughout the year. Like when the sun comes up earlier, should the feast change from 6am to 1-3pm instead? Or does that adjustment not really matter?

<comment><USER3> I think the eating late thing is due to social circumstances. Now that I no longer eat outside my home I should try eating breakfast instead of dinner and measure the results.

<comment><USER2> I definitely agree with this. I think this is one of the hardest parts of doing IF. Removing the typical dinner for me personally would be a big change, let alone trying to explain to my partner, family, and friends.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Many of the negative health effects for shift workers are caused by the different timing mechanisms in the body that are affected by circadian rhythms being out of sync. For example, some systems will adjust to being asleep in the day, where others (like the liver) have less flexibility. One might imagine that when we eat would also matter in this context, since bedsides light exposure, access to food is notable for an effect on the circadian system. Evolutionarily, humans would have done far less eating in the dark, and we tend to stay up after dark on the regular, but our digestive and regulatory systems may not be staying up with us.

</comment><comment><USER5> Tangentially related: meal timings are also super important if you're looking to bulk up. Muscles "grow" in a process called muscle protein synthesis (MPS), which is triggered (rather, increased significantly) after eating a protein- rich (30-50g) meal. But after triggering MPS and once the cycle is complete, MPS cannot be re-activated for a period of 3ish hours -- so it's a bad idea to chug a protein shake directly after your workout, then go home and eat a big meal an hour later. Further reading: [https://fitstra.com/nutrition-fueling- for-fitness/#mtmiq](https://fitstra.com/nutrition-fueling-for-fitness/#mtmiq)

</comment><comment><USER6> My current diet is:

* Run a modest calorific deficit with plenty of moderate exercise.

* Optimise food intake for reasonably stable blood sugar levels.

Goes against the current orthodoxy of keto or intermittent fasting#, but so far, so good. Main thing is that high or low blood sugar swings can lead to hunger pangs or sluggishness, this seems to predict excess eating.

# so I've named this diet 'The Unpopular Diet'... :-)</comment>


Building on the 'last developable piece of land in San Francisco' - <AUTHOR> http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/22/business/san-francisco-shipyard/

<comment><USER2> I "remember" that place from the book Daemon by Daniel Suarez (not going to spoil anything). Looks exactly like I imagined it back then.

It's amazing that in a metro area apparently struggling with affordable housing huge properties like this can exist unconverted for such a long time.</comment>


Kngine: An awesome semantic search engine, costing just $1K a month - <AUTHOR> http://venturebeat.com/2010/08/09/kngine-semantic-search/

<comment><USER2> Two guys in Egypt have built something pretty amazing that tens of millions in venture capital have failed to do. Goes to show you it's the team, it's always the team.</comment>


Git-sh(1) -- a git shell - <AUTHOR> http://rtomayko.github.com/git-sh/ <comment><USER2> I think it's a good idea to create a convenient interface to "git", but I wonder if it couldn't have been implemented more flexibly as a file to be sourced by "bash".

The shell file would avoid the need for custom config file syntax (with the /etc default behavior "for free"), and it would allow the git interface to be sourced into running shells without creating new ones. It would be easier to support different types of shells. The file could be copied and adapted to produce interfaces for additional commands, besides "git".

Given that, if you still wanted a "git-sh", you could make an alias that runs "source /path/to/the/file.bash" whenever "git-sh" is typed (or "exec bash --rcfile=...", etc.).

<comment><USER3> Yes, stuff like this can be trivially done with shell aliases and functions.</comment></comment>


How would I go about asking/hiring someone to write cover letters on my behalf? - <AUTHOR> This feels like possibly one of the most "first world problems" sort of things I could ever think to ask about, and I'm certain this is just going to invite responses of people who will try to convince me this is something I have the capacity to do if I just try harder. Please, please don't do that.
My difficulty with writing cover letters is mental illness related. I have a long and complicated mental health history, and have been in and out of hospital, and it would be too difficult to give you a quick run down here. Actually getting long-term help to get me to the point where I'd be able to write them wouldn't be reasonable when I need to meet degree requirements for mandatory internships now-ish.
I just need... someone to talk to, to help me mine my past experiences for Good Hireable Action Statements (TM) that will Appease The Business Gods (TM) so I can secure my last mandatory internship so that I can graduate and start paying down the 80,000 in student debt I have acquired over the past 8 years of this life-draining degree.
Trying to do this on my own leads to depressive episodes and anxiety attacks and self-hatred and feelings of suicide, and those things don't mesh when I actually have to get up every day and function and prevent myself from starving. So, I think the best thing for me at this point is to ask someone else to do the bullsh*tting on my behalf, and be confident for me when I have 0 self confidence.
I think I have the skills/background to get hired. I get good grades, I have project experience and previous internship experience. My research supervisor has a high opinion of me (even if I can't seem to get myself to think about me in the same way -- again, mental illness related, please don't give me a pep talk.) It's just going through the motions that really, really messes with me, so I want to ask for help. <comment><USER2> Depends, do you have someone in mind already to do this for you? Or are you looking for resources. I'd try Up-work, you can pitch this and freelancers bid on the project to help you out. No shame is getting help for this. Good luck!</comment>


Porn and creativity - <AUTHOR> http://stavvers.wordpress.com/2011/06/05/porn-and-creativity/

<comment> k-mcgrady I'm usually of the mind that if something is up-voted it has reason to be here on HN...but seriously why is this here? It's one guys opinions on porn.

tl;dr he doesn't like porn but thinks the names of the films are quite funny and creative.

<comment><USER2> she is not a he, the blog is called "Another angry woman"

<comment> k-mcgrady I wasn't sure and just defaulted to he. It doesn't really change my point though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> This seriously doesn't belong on HN. I am amazed what kind of keyword search the submitter might have done to dig up this old 2011 article!

</comment><comment><USER4> Could the lack of innovation on porn movies be due to it being a volume business? No pun intended :)

</comment><comment><USER5> "society's current expectation of sex", what does that mean?

</comment><comment><USER6> Porn is bad but the puns are funny. Well, OK.</comment>


Qualcomm job listing for iPhone dev guru sets Internet absolutely aflutter - <AUTHOR> http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/26/qualcomm-job-listing-for-iphone-dev-guru-sets-internet-absolutel/

<comment><USER2> Could be LTE and not CDMA2000, since Qualcomm plays there:

<http://www.qualcomm.com/products_services/airlinks/lte.html></comment>


Chrome desktop notifications for GMail - <AUTHOR> https://support.google.com/mail/answer/1075549?hl=en <comment><USER2> How come Chrome does not support native notifications neither on Windows nor OS X?

What is the situation like on Linux?</comment>


StarVR - <AUTHOR> http://www.starvr.com/

<comment><USER2> The web site is horribly slow.</comment>