Ask HN: Do you really use all those WP theme options? I don't think so - <AUTHOR>

There are quite a few days now, since I started to think about creating a WP theme framework backend. Working with wordpress for some time, I studied a lot of themes from "wp theme clubs" and their backend. All settings sections are organised in vertical tabs, nothing more. Same thing again and again and again. I think 90% of the buyers (customers) will never use those options. Am I right or this is just in my mind ?
Should I create a theme backend using the same old/booooooring style or better try to think outside of the box and create some new, intuitive and innovative ?
Thanks. <comment><USER2> I would he interested in seeing the user feedback on this question.

I have always believed the answer to be 'No' but I am not the target market.

I am a developer that believes the entire point of a CMS is to provide a backend to add/update/edit content - not make design or layout decisions. Never give users a rope, they will hang themselves.

<comment><AUTHOR> I also would like to see some feedback, but...</comment></comment>


Hacker Makes $360k ETH from a Flash Loan Single Transaction - <AUTHOR> https://www.trustnodes.com/2020/02/15/hacker-makes-360000-eth-from-a-flash-loan-single-transaction-involving-fulcrum-compound-dydx-and-uniswap <comment><USER2> Flashloans are a kind of loan where you can borrow a potentially large quantity of a digital asset with no collateral for a small fee — as long as the asset is returned by the end of the atomic transaction.

It looks like somebody very cleverly used a large flashloan to, essentially, create an arbitrage opportunity by moving the price on a relatively illiquid asset.

</comment><comment><USER3> From tfa it sounds like they're using the traditional definition of hacker and not shorthand for someone who uses computers to steal from people.

</comment><comment><USER4> I don't understand why this is considered a hack.</comment>


What Charisma Is - <AUTHOR> http://www.paulgraham.com/recharisma.html <comment><USER3> I think the article is spot on, and I think it is a huge problem for American politics.

What do you get when you pick the most charismatic leader to run your country? Well, you could get anything. I hear that Hitler was pretty charismatic.

It is often easier seeing this from the outside, so coming from Europe this seems obvious and I have often discussed it with friends and colleagues.

The thing is that what this means is that candidates are not picked on basis of their beliefs, their knolwedge or their political standpoints, but on how they appear on television. And I think that the American education system is to blame. There are a lot of really smart people in America - <USER2> unfortunately there are also a lot of uneducated people that are easy to deceive simply because they have never learnt to look at an issue with critical eyes. They tend to pick the guy that is charismatic, not really caring or being able to dissect the issues behind the smile.

I come from an European country with an excellent (compared to America at least) education system, that makes sure that even people on the lowest rung of the social ladder have a critical eye for what political candidates and parties really stand for as opposed to how charismatic the candidate happens to be. Indeed some of our candidates are right out ugly and have no charisma whatsoever. But they know their stuff. And they get elected on basis of their standpoints, not their looks.

If you don't believe me look at this guy that won a landslide victory years ago. <http://listan.blogg.se/images/glistrup1_1139332224.jpg> Ugly as hell, but one of the most intelligent people in the country.

</comment><comment><USER4> The book Freakonomics has similar sentiments about charismatic politicians and has supporting evidence.</comment>


Against the grain: building a startup with Clojure and AWS (2012) - <AUTHOR> http://www.colinsteele.org/post/23103789647/against-the-grain-aws-clojure-startup <comment><USER2> Great read! Can we get an update, please? I'm pretty sure Room Key uses Datomic, would love to get a CTO's perspective of that as well.

</comment><comment><USER3> First off, I love Ruby and Clojure dearly.

However, the author justifies that Clojure was necessary because he only had 4 engineers and didn't have time to scale Ruby, he just wanted something fast because he had to run too many servers.

I don't buy it, unless your developers are free (highly unlikely).

The most expensive part of any tech startup is almost always developer time. AWS is pennies compared to how much it costs to learn a new tool/language or iterate slower. Clojure is amazing, and I think times will change, but Rails + all the libraries are hugely faster for me to execute in than anything Clojure can do.

If I had a choice of paying another $10K to AWS or hiring a $150K/year dev in the short term, guess which one I'm going to pick. You can buy _a lot_ of cpu time for that, and hold on to that $140K.

The thing that kills startups is cash flow, not IO or perf.

Again, I love Clojure. But I have a really hard following this guy's logic because 99% of startups don't need their boxes to go 10x faster, they need $$$ for runway.

<comment><USER4> You are missing the parts where:

      1. Ruby was only backend/apis, front-end app was PHP going over to Javascript,
         so Rails would have had a limited benefit
      2. He specifically said he needed to do a lot of concurrency which can get
         awkward to do in Ruby, and is natural in Clojure

IMO this is a use case example where Clojure beats Ruby, even in some rewrites.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Enjoyed the article. Agree totally on using the empirical evidence: managers understand numbers and will buy them if they're the right ones presented in a straight-forward way. Not always, but often works well enough.

I'd like to see a follow-up on how they used the genetic algorithms. Always neat seeing how they get applied.</comment>


Ask HN: Validate our business hypothesis for a social approach to risk planning - <AUTHOR>

RiskRef: A Collective Intelligence Approach to Planning and Preparedness
== Usage
Complete your profile and improve your Risk Score by finding risks, making a plan to solve them, and keeping track of your progress. Earn rare badges by helping others along the way.
== Abstract
RiskRef is a user-generated resource for risk management, planning, and preparedness. Utilizing collective intelligence, predictive algorithms, and game-design mechanics, RiskRef comprehensively identifies risks based on the user's demographics, prioritizes them based on impact and likelihood, and holds the user accountable in an engaging way.
RiskRef allows users to create real-world value by proactively mitigating and planning for potential life-changing surprises. Immediate, actionable feedback and suggestions are the secret sauce.
== Wireframes
http://melaniewilke.com/clients/RiskRef/RiskRef_1_Homepage.png
http://melaniewilke.com/clients/RiskRef/RiskRef_2_CreateProfile.png
http://melaniewilke.com/clients/RiskRef/RiskRef_3_GetRecommendations.png
http://melaniewilke.com/clients/RiskRef/RiskRef_4_MakeAPlan.png
== Monetization
All the usual suspects for web apps. (Innovative suggestions welcome)
== Questions for HN
So we've got the concept above and development is under way. Best of all, we have a talented team that's passionate about the project
1) Can we get some feedback on the business idea, e.g., would users pay for it, could we get users to know about it, could we build it?
2) This current Ask HN is an attempt at an MVP-like business hypothesis validation. We plan to create a landing page/Wufoo form for signups and drive people there via Google/Facebook Ads; and use Amazon Mechanical Turk to pay users to do market research and answer survey questions about the service. Can anyone else suggest strategic next steps from here?
Let the validated learning begin! Thanks so much for the support. <comment><AUTHOR> Just set up the Wufoo, what do you think?

[http://riskref.wufoo.com/forms/youve-got-a-lot-to-lose- well-...](http://riskref.wufoo.com/forms/youve-got-a-lot-to-lose-well-help- you-secure-it/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Nice, we've had a signup! That surely validates it >.<</comment></comment>


Google tracks users who turn off location history - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-45183041 <comment><USER2> 200+ comments in [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17749330](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17749330)

<comment><USER3> How come that is not in top items of hacker news?

<comment><USER4> Because the evil Google conspiracy suppressed it!

<comment><USER5> You say that as if xorporations didn't do this by e.g. vote manipulation in Reddit.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> To add one datum, I turned off location history thinking that meant that Google would use my _current_ location for Maps, Search etc while not storing my _past_ locations. Their interface and messaging did not succeed in dissuading me from this belief, despite the fact that I was explicitly looking for messaging and settings related to protecting my privacy.

Was I naive to believe this was even possible in the first place? Probably. I used to think Google were basically good guys, so I thought that when they said something they actually meant it, and I was willing to forgive them for minor mistakes and bad press. This is the first time I actually feel like they've lied to me.

I'll be migrating my personal Google accounts elsewhere. Suggestions are welcome for good alternatives, free/non-free/whatever, that offer effective privacy controls.

<comment><USER7> > Suggestions are welcome for good alternatives,

I'm in the move away myself. Here's some services I've started using, in many areas I'm still looking for other replacements. Hopefully others can help.

1\. E-Mail : protonmail.com, I really like this one, great service.

2\. Video Calls : I'm currently using signal to some extent, not very happy though, would really like something like Hangouts.

3\. Browser : Firefox

4\. Phone : Apple

5\. Things I'm still looking for : Google Calender, Drive, Chat, Backup Storage services.

<comment><USER8> For video calls, you should try zoom.us. From what I've seen, they have the best streaming infrastructure of any of the major players (FaceTime, Hangouts, Webex, GoToMeeting). Apps for all the major platforms, too. The only bad thing is that if you're on a multi-way call, they limit you to 40 minutes.

<comment><USER9> > The only bad thing is that if you're on a multi-way call, they limit you to > 40 minutes.

To be clear, that's for the free version. You can pay to remove this limit (along with getting some other features).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> From time to time I visit [https://myactivity.google.com/myactivity](https://myactivity.google.com/myactivity) and _every time_ I need to turn something off again.

<comment><USER11> Here's a subset of what Google knows about you to tailor ads for you: [https://adssettings.google.com/authenticated](https://adssettings.google.com/authenticated)

<comment><USER10> I've had that off for a while. Now my ads on Gmail only offer me to date women and men 60+.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This whole story is about the name "Location History" aka timeline being confusing as people think it means a location tracking privacy setting while it's actually a Google product name. Can we rename it to "Location History product poorly named"?

<comment><USER13> Can we rename it to "<Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC> product poorly named"?

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I bought my first smartphone about 6 months ago - a BLU R2. Really like the phone, and here's how I use it:

1\. I use puretalkusa.com's $20/month phone plan. It comes with 20MB of data per month, then throttles.

2\. Disabled Cellular Data

3\. Disabled WIFI

4\. Never setup or signed in to my Google account from the phone.

5\. Disabled anything that gave me any pause about privacy, including Location services.

6\. Covered the fingerprint reader with electrical tape.

And still, the other day my phone decided to reboot itself in the middle of the day. I only know this because it played a little jingle. After the reboot, Location services was enabled again. Hmm... I disabled it, but it made me wonder if this wasn't some kind of forced reboot so someone could ping my location. This has happened once before, in the middle of the night - a good time to find out where someone lives.

</comment><comment><USER15> "Turning off" location history == Don't show me my location history. It's not like Google (or Apple) is going to actually stop tracking you.

I love showing iPhone users the section in Settings where all their location history is. Most have no idea it's there.

<comment><USER16> The iPhone location history is on your iPhone not at Apple.

And Apple doesn't track you. They cycle identifiers regularly for exactly this reason.

Spreading falsehoods about this being something everyone does is harmful because it normalizes the abusive behavior from those that actually do.

<comment><USER15> In order for your location as given by GPS to be useful, a round trip to a server is made to convert that information into a street address. This geocoding could be done client side, but for practical purposes, it's not. This is even moreso for additional external information mobiles use to better locate you, such as known WiFi access points, "beacons" and cell tower IDs.

All of that server traffic is logged (by both Apple and your carrier), and can be requested by law enforcement if needed. Regardless of what Apple marketing and lawyers would like you to think, your phone is being tracked in real time, always. Always.

<comment><USER16> You are just guessing, right?

I'm aware of Apple's geocoding service. It uses an encrypted connection, so the server traffic is not 'logged by your carrier', and they use transient identifiers so your location is not 'logged by Apple' and can't be 'requested by law enforcement if needed'.

Carriers are a different matter, but don't make stuff up about Apple.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> People can stalk people. Beyond a certain threshold (defined by jurisdiction), it's illegal.

Why wouldn't this apply to corporations? To (legal) _entity?_

Corporations and their lobbyists spend a lot of time, money, and effort claiming they are "people". For example, with respect to their "free speech" \-- meaning, lately, unlimited spending on political campaigns.

Well, ok then, I would propose that they can stalk, _like people._

Oh, but wait, there's the catch. They've already beaten me, with their outsized pocketbooks, to the very people who would legally define this.

In the U.S., at least, the law is a _____. Pardon my, albeit self-censored, decidedly improper language. But sometimes, crudeness is the rhetoric of clarity -- in all its unpleasantness and offensiveness.

</comment><comment><USER18> It is becoming too easy to pick on Google. There are many Web apps that use location. BestBuy, just to pick one arbitrary example, will ask permission to discover my location in order to show me my nearest stores. This is, of course, very useful, and I am happy this service exists. What I do not know is whether or not BestBuy or many other companies are sharing this information with other companies. My assumption is that BestBuy et. al are using a middleware web service, and that company probably makes money selling location information to advertisers.

For me it is just depressingly hopless: as soon as I go on the Internet of phone network, I have given up a lot of privacy.

<comment><USER19> I think we have a different definition of "very useful". I find it intrusive and routinely deny those requests. It's simple to pop my zip in a form to find the nearest store.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> What if I shut down the google maps app after every use (iphone)? Surely they can't track after that.

<comment><USER21> There are multiple layers here.

The current controversy is whether Google keeps a history of your location data tied to your Google account when you ask them not to. It turns out there are two different places they record it, so you have to disable both.

Separately there is the question of whether Google can get your location data from your phone at all. On your iPhone, you can specify "Never", "While using", or "Always" for Google Maps' access to your location.

If you specify "While using" and force quit the app, no, they can no longer access your location.

I do not know for certain, but suspect, that if you use the home button or multitouch gesture to leave Google Maps, it's still effectively being "used" and thus can still access your location.

<comment><USER22> The "while using" permission does allow apps to continue using your location in the background, but you get a status indicator when that is the case.

Source: [https://support.apple.com/en- us/HT203033](https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT203033)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> To be fair this should be dropped from the front page, or merged with yesterdays post.

<comment><USER23> Massively downvoted, seriously?

I didn't mean 'remove' from the front page, but merge it with the other post and leave it in position on the front page... wow, you guys.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Still don't understand why this story blowing out all of a sudden.

It's common knowledge that the biggest internet ad company likes your data and wants it for its recommendation systems.

If you want to turn off Location History, which is a feature, a product in itself, you can.

If you don't want your searches to be tracked, use another engine like DuckDuckGo or Qwant. If you still want Google, you can disable the location tracking. In addition, they provide a tool to see exactly what they store and you can delete any entry.

Also, of course Maps will want to know your location, you can turn off your GPS anyway. The only troubling point is the storage of the location at the opening for no reason I don't know if you can disable this.

<comment><USER13> The _title_ of the article says "Google tracks users who turn off location history", and the article further develops the claim. Yes, Google offers the option to "turn off Location History". No, turning off Location History doesn't stop Google from tracking your location by other means. Google engages in physical world surveillance against the express instructions of its users, misleading them in the process.

Not cool.

<comment><USER24> Google allows you to turn off the Location History feature AND allows you to stop giving out your location.

<comment><USER25> "Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. The setting was at the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard."

This is example #687 of why not to trust Google or any other surveillance capitalist.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Wanted: Hyper Local Disruption - <AUTHOR> http://irevolution.wordpress.com/2010/07/20/wanted-hyper-local-disruption/ <comment><USER2> I wonder if creating a local wifi hotspot with a captive portal would be a good way to jump-start these hyper-local groups. So a user logging onto the local open wifi hotspot is re-directed to the local group, which might be Yahoo or Google group - or even a local noticeboard/forum that is accessible only from that hotspot.

</comment><comment><USER3> Isn't something like ning.com perfect for this functionality? Also, a Facebook group could work fairly well.

</comment><comment><USER4> This exists: <http://www.lifeat.com>

Has done for some time: [http://techcrunch.com/2007/10/16/does-your-building- need-a-s...](http://techcrunch.com/2007/10/16/does-your-building-need-a- social-network-why-not/)

Since reading that article almost 3 years ago, I've not heard another thing about it. I guess it's pretty hard for hyper-local networks to spread like the wildfire of Facebook et. al.

</comment><comment><USER5> Google Groups. My 4 unit building uses groups to share info, docs, and anything else that residents need to know.

</comment><comment><USER6> My first surprise moving into my first apartment was that, unlike dorms, people didn't socialize with one another. I found that very odd and disappointing, but soon after realized why: unlike college students, people living in apartments are at different stages of life and have different interests.

There are a few compelling use cases to hyperlocal social networking. This article touches on a few, but confuses them with the type of relationships you have with friends.

Yes, there are probably some people in your building that you would actually want to be friends with, but it's not clear IMO how to make that happen. If there really were that many people around who you could be friends with, people in apartments would hang out regularly offline, and they don't.

</comment><comment><USER7> Certainly would have its benefits for residential issues, though baking cookies for the neighbors becomes a real efficiency challenge at 400 people.

<comment><USER8> Bah. Assuming 2 cookies a person I can manage that with one oven.

500 though, then I probably need a second oven to put out that many cookies at a reasonable rate. I mean, you're not going to get them all at once, so it's pretty simple to spend a Saturday churning them out. And assuming I spent _all_ Saturday I don't think 600 people would be out of the question, though distribution would require a few friends.

Of course, that's the point of cookies is winning friends, so that part can take care of itself, just so you pick your first friends wisely.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I've had these same thoughts myself while walking to the laundry mat in my apartments. I know that Ning exists, maybe it's too general? Maybe a social network for apartments would get more usage? You'd have the problem of verifying that someone lives in the apartments (facebook used to verify you went to school.edu by your school.edu email address).</comment>


How To Publish a Scientific Comment in 123 Easy Steps - <AUTHOR> http://www.scribd.com/doc/18773744/null <comment><USER2> For those of you who dislike Scribd as much as I do, here's a direct link to author's website and pdf:

[http://www.physics.gatech.edu/frog/How%20to%20Publish%20a%20...](http://www.physics.gatech.edu/frog/How%20to%20Publish%20a%20Comment%20w%20suggestions.pdf)

<comment><USER3> What's not to like about scribd? It seems to do the job just fine...

<comment><USER4> Scribd is a step backwards. If they wanted to create value, they could HTMLify PDFs (similar to the Gmail feature or the Google preview page) instead of showing them in a stupid flash window.

<comment><USER5> You just brought up a great idea. Google can do it, but on a limited basis. A startup that could convert pdfs, word documents, and latex files directly to HTML+CSS, with negligible loss of quality, would be MASSIVE.

Of course, this requires browsers to standardize, and step 0 is for IE6/IE7 to disappear off the face of the earth. And if IE8 can't keep up with the other browsers, then it should go too.

Seriously, what you propose would be super useful.

<comment><USER6> What's wrong with PDF? It's an open standard and displays beautifully on screen or in print. I can resize it to any size and it still renders perfectly (except for embedded bitmaps of course). I'd much rather read a book in PDF format on my screen then have to hope that a website renders properly at a size that is comfortable for reading.

<comment><USER7> The main downsides to PDF are that it is not supported in all browsers, especially mobile or embedded ones and even in the browsers where it is supported, it is implemented as a plugin and so is slow to load.

PDFs open in 3sec on this computer. That seems small, but html+css pages open almost instantly.

There are lots of nice things about PDF, but when almost everything else I'm viewing is html+css it's unpleasant.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I truly don't understand why academics put up with journals. If I were in the biz, I'd be organizing a torches-and-pitchforks mob to burn them down and replace them with arXiv, personal websites, and peer review panels who link to good papers.

<comment><USER9> Because that's not how you get funded. Your funding/tenure, etc are related to where you publish, how often you publish, etc. It's a systemic issue, a system designed for a different era which just does not translate to today's science

<comment><USER8> So in my proposed system "publish" maps exactly to "get linked by this or that prestigious review panel".

Everyone who replied me seems to have missed that. Basically, review panels become journals turned inside out. They don't host the content, but they do certify it.

<comment><USER10> But is there really a difference then? Hosting the content is a tiny proportion of the work involved in running a journal.

If you're going to go through all the effort required to peer-review and certify work, why wouldn't you also throw up a website and collect the papers you certify?

<comment><USER8> A larger part is deciding what _not_ to host, given the crazy old-fashioned notion that journals ought also to have dead-tree versions, and therefore each paper costs them quite a lot for a small print run.

Why would actual science come in neat magazine-sized packets? It's obvious they must be normalizing the signal, either by floating the cutoff or just picking until the slots are full and trashing the rest.

A review panel that doesn't have to pay some company to stamp ink onto wood pulp can afford to link as many, or as few good papers as arrive. And, they can afford to do this asynchronously, as soon as they arrive.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Depressingly close to my experience, and one of the reasons I left academia, despite significant offers to stay.

I long for the day when collaborative media allow multiple authors to converge on an agreed paper. Those that disagree can converge on an alternative paper, and readers can see for themselves the data, reasoning and conclusions.

I won't see it - it won't happen in my lifetime.

<comment><USER9> It just might

<http://www.viddler.com/explore/CameronNeylon/videos/9/>

<http://www.viddler.com/explore/CameronNeylon/videos/8/>

These are related to sessions at Science Online London held over the last few days. Of course as Cameron notes, there are still significant challenges

[http://blog.openwetware.org/scienceintheopen/2009/08/23/refl...](http://blog.openwetware.org/scienceintheopen/2009/08/23/reflecting- on-a-wave-the-demo-at-science-online-london-2009/)

<comment><USER11> The problem isn't really the technology - the problem is the egos and the assignment of credit. It has been said that it's remarkable what can be accomplished if you don't care who gets the credit, but getting the credit is critical to the continuing employment of academics.

Solve that with technology and you've got a winner.

<comment><USER12> > \- the problem is the egos and the assignment of credit.

Yep. I'm not in academia, my prior education level precludes me but I dated a lady who was and over the years I have come to simply loathe the infighting and politics that academia has become mired in.

I really wonder how many good or maybe even great scientists leave academia because they're sick and tired of the whole spiel to find a job in some company somewhere.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'm studying for a PhD at Cambridge, UK, and I'm seriously interested in fixing this. Well, maybe fixing the whole thing is too big, but I'd like to try :-)

Anyone know of anything worth getting involved with? Anyone want to work on an alternative to journals?

<comment><USER14> One thing you really should at least do is retain the copyright of your own paper. Journals will allow you to retain copyright and almost all rights of your paper if you just ask for it.

Then you can always publish it on your homepage.

<comment><USER15> While this may be true in your field, my impression is that this isn't true in general. Can you offer specific evidence? Here's a page offering a different view: <http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/jono/item/toc.html>

<comment><USER14> Elsevier sends you a draconian form by default. If you tell them that you're a PhD student and want to retain copyright and later publish your article in your thesis, then they will send you a new form. That form lets you keep the copyright, keep the right to publish this on your homepage, keep the right to publish this later on paper, et cetera. It takes some courage, some pushing and patience, but you will get it.

This is one of my papers, note that it explicitly says on the webpage that I have the copyright: <http://bit.ly/PBKqx>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I begin to think that it would be easier to burn the universities to the ground and start over.

<comment><USER17> you aren't back to reading moldbug are you? :p

anytime an organization transitions from accomplishing its original goal to a jobs program there's no going back. you have to start over.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> _All data and parameters associated with any open publication should be available to anyone interested in it._

This will be fun for all LHC results; nobody can [or is willing for that matter] read, let alone truly(!) interpret LEP data anymore.</comment>


Tomorrow is 1111. #binarynewyearsFTW - <AUTHOR> http://twitter.com/shervin/status/20928028062253056 <comment><USER2> So was last year, and 01 and 00. I guess this is really just the last binary new year until the next century.</comment>


Uruguay makes dramatic shift to nearly 95% clean energy - <AUTHOR> http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/03/uruguay-makes-dramatic-shift-to-nearly-95-clean-energy <comment><USER2> Oh my, this is BS. I'm Uruguayan, I had the unpleasant experience of living there for 35 years before moving to the US. Electricity in the country is provided by a state owned monopoly, electricity prices are more than 2x US prices, while salaries are way lower (I made in Uruguay less than 1/5 of what I make in the US). Middle class can't afford a clothes drier, or home central heating. Also, there is virtually no industry, look at how much electricity the country actually uses and it's probably a fraction of what a US city does.

Hydroelectric infrastructure has been there for decades, not a new thing, and numbers can look good some years, but look at dry years. Cars/motorcycles sold there can't be sold on any civilized country because of emission standards, I could go on forever telling everything that is wrong with the country, even if I restrict myself to environmental issues, but let me just finish by saying that the only source cited in the article is official stuff, and if you think US politicians are crap, you don't know Uruguayan ones...</comment>


Ask HN: Choosing a industry/field - <AUTHOR>

How did you choose the industry or field that you specialize in? The biggest barrier I have found to starting a company ( or perhaps its another form of procrastination) is finding a field or industry that is sufficiently interesting to me, comparative to alternatives. I am curious as to how you (as an employee or entrepreneur etc) sat down and decided that from today on I am a online retailer, a web consultant, a MD of a Logistics company etc. Did you just choose the field with the most interest to you, did you solve a problem that is personal to yourself, did you follow a methodology of finding a problem like Steve blank suggests?? cheers, cameron <comment><USER2> I'm finding (not that this is a unique observation at all, though) that there are two kinds of founders: engineers who are accidental entrepreneurs, and entrepreneurs who are founders. If you need to think hard to find even a sector to found a startup in, you're probably doing it wrong. Not that you can't be successful, and I wish the best of luck to anyone, but it seems like the giants we all know come from founders who started coding to solve some problem, and let the company grow from there on its own, instead of the other way around.

<comment><AUTHOR> thanks for the response, it concerns me in as much that i think that your probably correct. its easy to excuse myself as an undergraduate, and "put it off" till later, but it seems that the successful people don't even consider second guessing themselves, instead they have started. although i take (perhaps falsely) solace when reading of firms such as sony and hp that started with the intent to create something, but without an ideas as to what those things would be.

<comment><USER2> I just wouldn't even think about it. Get yourself in interesting situations; join a research lab where you're not cleaning glassware, do GSoC, etc., and just not worry about founding a company, especially since you're still in school. Trust in randomness, and you'll find plenty of great opportunities if you make yourself available for them to find you.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Just thought today in bed that with software development, one can never completely lose. Even when unemployed, you can still build stuff, and eventually perhaps even sell it. On the other hand, I am not sure how to pass time as an unemployed stock broker, for example? One could write a book about investing, but after a while, that could become boring.

So I think for starters it might be a good idea to pick the profession where the skills you acquire enable you to create stuff...

<comment><USER4> Very interesting way of putting it, something I've always known but never considered comparing to other jobs. Then again you still need to pay the bills while unemployed :) A plumer may have more luck doing 'perk' jobs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Don't. Try around in a few forms and see what sticks. Don't think too hard about any of them: Overintellectualizing is a real problem. There's a good chance you'll find what you like fairly early on after a few attempts.

There's enough random chance and other variables involved (e.g. your marketing & business skills) that this variable just isn't worth blowing too much time on. You'll probably have to make a lot of attempts & drastic course corrections to make it stick.

</comment><comment><USER6> It is super important that you find something you are passionate about. Don't pick a field because it'll make you good money.

Make life an amazing journey for yourself and give yourself permission to jump into something with both feet and experience it fully, without the worry of "did I pick the right one".

</comment><comment><USER7> I have the same doubts as you.

My current plan is: 1 Find an industry with a ROOT problem that hasn't been solved. 2 Solve the problem. 3 Implement the solution in software form. 4 Sell the Solution, packaged in sw. 5 Profit.

I'm still trying to find step 1

<comment><USER8> Why do you think you'll be able to spot the root problem if you can't even pick an industry?

<comment><USER7> Good question The simple answer is that I've been studying Theory of Constraints.

And TOC provides the tools to identify cause and effect relationships that in the end lead to to the root problem.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking_Processes_(Theory_of_C...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking_Processes_\(Theory_of_Constraints\))

<comment><USER9> Why not just try asking people in different industries what their biggest problems are?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> just build something that you yourself need for day to day life or your hobby</comment>


Solving the Women-in-Tech Pipeline Problem - <AUTHOR> http://annekejong.blogspot.ca/2012/04/solving-women-in-tech-pipeline-problem.html <comment><USER2> It isn't obvious to me that women being underrepresented in technology fields is a problem, any more than women being overrepresented in early childhood education.

Let me be clear: I don't have a problem with women in programming, computer science, regular science, or any other tech field. I don't have a problem with a lack of women in these fields either, as long as it's not due to discrimination.

Discrimination is crappy -- but it's not clear to me that it's the cause of the disparity. This isn't the Victorian era or the early 20th century when women were expected to stay at home; based on personal observations, sexist workplaces are few and far between, at least in our industry. And the free market should solve most discrimination problems neatly: If all the companies in the world are terrible sexists who never employ women, then someone can start a startup with a saner hiring policy, snap up the un-utilized surplus of girl talent, and eat their competitors' lunch.

From the article:

> Teach computer science to middle school girls

I'd change this to:

> Teach programming to middle or high school students

A lot of schools' computer offerings are limited to "learn to use MS Office" type courses.

True, not everyone is cut out to be a world-class programmer. But understanding what's going on "under the hood" really helps you figure out computer problems; the logical thinking skills you develop from debugging are quite general; and being able to write simple scripts is occasionally useful.</comment>


Outside.in switches to Rails - <AUTHOR> http://blog.outside.in/2008/01/22/outsidein-switches-to-rails/

<comment><USER2> Definitely aston. I love Rails and am using it for my personal project (<http://www.babynamemap.com/>). However, every time I've been given the opportunity to "rewrite" some big feature/app/module, the 2nd attempt is hugely improved. It's always tighter, even when rewriting in the same language.

Simply having a better understanding of the problem domain and total solution makes the 2nd pass a better implementation. I'd guess the bulk of the benefits Outside.in experienced are due that "rewrite effect". Rails no doubt contributed though since it is a nice framework.

</comment><comment><USER3> Were the code savings due to the change of language or the rewrite itself? My experience with PHP and Ruby leads me to believe that basically anything Rails does can be done on the LAMP stack assuming you have the discipline.

</comment><comment><USER4> This topic could be the basis of a great master thesis or paper. To what extent is a programming language and a framework useful for golf programming, ie as few lines of code as possible.</comment>


A Documentary on Parkour [video] - <AUTHOR> http://www.pointbmovie.com/Watch.html

<comment><USER2> Parkour has a purity to it that is hard to find in most pursuits. The thrust towards utility and awareness of one's own environment distinguishes it from "stunt performance." Danger and physical challenge are only part of the picture. It really invites a more reflective mode of thought than other athletics.

</comment><comment><USER3> If you're interested in parkour, check out BBC's Jump London and Jump Britain documentaries. They're fascinating, fun, and inspiring. You can find them on Google Video.

</comment><comment><USER4> Is this really Hacker News? Flagged.</comment>


Amazon Workers the Happiest in Analysis of Over 1M Tech Engineers' Tweets - <AUTHOR> https://peakon.com/blog/post/amazon-workers-the-happiest-in-analysis-of-over-1-million-tech-engineers-tweets

<comment><USER2> "It didn't come as a surprise to us, and probably won't to you either, but the data confirmed Foursquare (we also included Swarm, not that it made a difference!) has had a massive fall from grace." how is Foursquare still a viable business? They probably can't even sell it to Yahoo.

<comment><AUTHOR> 1-2 weeks ago I saw someone checking in on Foursquare. Must have been years since I saw that.

This seem like a valid question :) "What would you say you do here?"</comment></comment>


On demand SWAG: Print and ship SWAG to your users on demand. - <AUTHOR> http://www.ondemandswag.com/

<comment><USER2> I really like the design of the scrolling. Most sites that do this do a terrible job, but this one is very nice, the image transitions are sweet, and the railroad imagery coupled with the way the bars of content roll by creates a bit of synergy in my head.

But I don't know what your site is about. At all.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your feedback. This site was just (very) quickly put together in order to test the waters and see if startups were interested in outsourcing brand engagement at all.

The idea is that founders want to build a great product their users love, but they also want to build a relationship with their users (by building and strengthening their "brand"). However, as important as brand engagement is, it's really just a distraction from the awesome product they want to build and improve. We want to take that hassle away. We'll design, print, and ship any sort of physical item that features your company's brand. You just tell us what and who to ship it to.</comment></comment>


Show HN: Setup Pi Hole Ad Blocking VPN Server on Google Cloud Free Tier - <AUTHOR> https://iamstoxe.com/posts/setup-pi-hole-ad-blocking-vpn-server-on-google-cloud-free-tier/ <comment><USER2> A word of caution: the VM is free, but the traffic is very much not! You'll have to pay $85/TB after 1GB.

[https://cloud.google.com/network- tiers/pricing](https://cloud.google.com/network-tiers/pricing)

</comment><comment><USER3> what's the use case for this? on desktop/mac, you have adblock/dns block lists, and on ios, you can create a local proxy which can blacklist ips locally</comment>


Movim 0.12 – Lovejoy, a responsive web-based cross-platform XMPP client - <AUTHOR> https://nl.movim.eu/?node/pubsub.movim.eu/Movim/5563a921-781d-4496-8f32-09474fc3b443 <comment><USER2> As another commenter pointed out, the registration process seems broken, but I was able to use an XMPP account that I registered with a different client, and it seems very slick. I may have to run a copy of this for my own XMPP server.

Some things that occur to me as I browse around:

* what possible reason would you have for having a "gender" and "marital status" field? those feel out of place

* The pre-defined places to put Twitter, Yahoo and Skype accounts seem weird, why not allow a list of account names

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback, the registration has been fixed. Those fields are planned to be removed in the upcoming weeks, they are indeed not relevant anymore.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Expected a fork of a popular and venerable text editor, instead got a web page with broken scrolling and teen-aged, scantily-clad anime girl mascot. It might very well be a fine product, but the packaging leaves something to be desired.

</comment><comment><USER4> Tried hard to create account on one of the server, everytime I am getting 'unknown error'.

</comment><comment><USER5> I thought it had something to do with "vim" as part of the name suggests. Nevermind.

</comment><comment><USER6> Jesus, why on earth does the mascot for this thing have to be an underage anime girl in a short skirt? Already guaranteeing I'm not going to be using your software, let alone suggesting it to anyone.

<comment><USER7> > why on earth does the mascot for this thing have to be an underage anime > girl in a short skirt?

Because the creators are french and french grow up seeing a lot of anime? because your conception of sexism might be different than the french (I assume you're an american)? because different cultures have different morals? I mean there are naked statues of women everywhere in french cities.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi, I'm the maintainer of the project, I'm actually taking into account the feedback. The reason we created this mascot was mostly to have different sets of stickers in the project.

I'm personally paying artists to create original Creative Common content and then have exclusive stickers for each Movim releases, if you have a look at the previous versions we already added a little racoon and a marmot (to also support the project ZeMarmot [http://film.zemarmot.net/en/](http://film.zemarmot.net/en/) and by extension the funding of The GIMP project). It's also to support content with free license and push forward artists within the project :)

For this set, the idea was also to submit those stickers on other services like Viber or LINE (that is actually the N°1 messaging network in Japan) to actually fund the project and bring people from other countries to it.

I'm really sorry if this is shocking some people and I'll see what I can do. Also, as an admin, you can easily remove (or add) new sets of stickers on your own Movim instance if you want.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Possible to use Stripe on a website if one's country isnt supported yet? - <AUTHOR> Is there any way to use Stripe on a website if one's country isn't supported yet? <comment><USER2> If you are talking about receiving payments, I believe this is not possible if you reside in an unsupported country. However, if you have a bank account in a supported country I believe it could work even if you don't reside there. Best to ask Stripe support though to get a comprehensive answer...</comment>


SpaceX is launching 'dark satellites'. Astronomers are skeptical - <AUTHOR> https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-darkened-starlink-internet-satellites-astronomy-explainer-2020-1 <comment><USER2> I have always assumes that the telescopes used eventually will move to the moon to get away from the light on the earth. Maybe time to speed up those plans or to start to research how that could be done. In a not so distant future where space travel is more accessible and I could image moving a telescope to the moon (or manufacture it there) becomes practical possible.

<comment><USER3> I agree. Right now it is pretty obvious China has potentially the best view of space than anyone trying. As far as I know, they haven't built a large telescope up there yet, but if they did, they wouldn't be bound to the same limitations an artificial satellite deals with. For example, size and weight.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I have to wonder if they're spraying them with flat black Krylon?</comment>


Ask HN: Why do I exist as a sysadmin? - <AUTHOR> I am currently a Linux administrator at a state university in the US. I do the standard variety of administrative things that one would expect: provision servers and VMs, manage storage pools, use monitoring tools to keep track of systems, use configuration management tools to automate installation and configuration of packages and services, etc, etc...
As more and more services and tools are rolled into cloud provider's portfolios, I can't help but think that there's no point for me to exist. Here on HN, in person with other tech-minded people that I know, and elsewhere in the tech sphere, I'm bombarded with a viewpoint that boils down to: "Be a developer, or get out of the tech industry."
Herein lies the issue. I have thus far been unsuccessful in any programming endeavors that I have attempted. I can manage to throw together bash scripts and other glue that's necessary to make automation tasks function at my work, but these are largely cargo culted from various stack overflow posts or other online resources. Whenever I attempt to dive into anything that I would consider "development", such as python programming, it's as if my brain completely ceases to function and all of the words and symbols on my screen turn into an incomprehensible alien language. It doesn't matter how long I stare at it or how much I reference the documentation, that alien language never reveals its true meaning to me.
This inability to understand syntax is not only saddening to me, it's made much worse by a variety of mental issues that seem to amplify the issue, such as: PTSD, anxiety, depression, borderline personality disorder, and dyscalculia. All of these feed off of each other in a vicious cycle of frustration, hopelessness, self-loathing, and worse.
I suppose my question is:
Has anyone had a similar experience and managed to push through the mental blocks associated with learning to program while having your own mind constantly working against you? <comment><USER4> Okay, first off, being a sysadmin or an ops person is important! You are the first line of defense, and many times, companies just need eyes on systems (all the time). It's your ability to analyze a problem that makes you useful. There are ALWAYS boring repetitive service tasks that aren't rewarded but someone needs to do (this is true for devs too). Most of this probably doesn't seem hard or new to you, but I just want to say that even non-programmers are very important to any org.

Okay, now to the coding part.

"Has anyone had a similar experience and managed to push through the mental blocks associated with learning to program while having your own mind constantly working against you?"

All the time. I have the depression, and a few other mental problems most likely, and I have to say, for as much as my brain helps me it hurts me a lot too. Especially with programming and engineering, I feel like things are impossible right up until there's some breakthrough, and then things are fine. It happens really quickly, and soon you're just onto the next problem - <USER2> times I feel I don't relish the victory of whatever I have solved enough before moving onto the next thing. You might be doing the same thing too - <USER3> can't tell how much or little progress you've made, but learning is hard, and it makes everyone feel dumb, not just you.

"I can manage to throw together bash scripts and other glue that's necessary to make automation tasks function at my work, but these are largely cargo culted from various stack overflow posts or other online resources" This is more of the job than you'd think. I honestly think you're on the right track here.

As a sysadmin, are you good at debugging other people's code when something breaks (do you try? sometimes there's org boundaries that prevent this)? That is also a hugely valuable skill. I know some people who are frightened of writing code fresh, but are great at finding and fixing bugs.

I'm not sure this will be of much help, but I also think as a society we're all about fixing our problems rather than leveraging our strengths. If coding just doesn't click with you, that's fine, obviously other tech things do click with you. Keep working on finding what works for you.

<comment><AUTHOR> "Okay, first off, being a sysadmin or an ops person is important!"

This is the first time that I have heard or read anyone say this in years. Thanks

<comment><USER5> As a fellow sysadmin, I think you have to be careful not to take certain concepts from HN too seriously. A lot of the HN crowd does seem to act like there is no role for sysadmins in the future, that developers will manage the infrastructure for their own software.

...This is bull----, and it probably always will be. There is a vastly higher demand for implementation and support and _security_ than there will ever be for people to create the stuff in the first place. While learning to code is a big plus (I am a hobbyist developer when my caffeine is flowing enough for me to process code), there will always be a huge need for people who understand the priorities and needs of the companies they work for who can recommend, assemble, and manage solutions for them. Even in a fully cloud-based setup, your average company will still need someone who understands the cloud and the applications operating on it to support them and ensure they aren't being taken advantage of.

Sure, plenty of IT jobs are getting shuffled off to blue collar outsourcing shops, but check out stories about Wipro this week to understand why that is going to backfire significantly in the long run. Our job is not just to make it work, but to anticipate problems and provide affordable, workable solutions that mitigate the risks of those we work for.

<comment><USER6> To quote the wise boxer Tyson: "everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face". The same applies to any type of system/proceeds. Someone above correctly mentioned '1st line of defence'. I will add to the 'cloud does everything' comment that 'cloud is a computer somewhere else'. And THAT computer (somewhere else) needs sysadmins, netadmins, DBAs, and a bunch of other xyzadmins to get shit done and fix the many small cracks before they become big cracks. A company can automate all the way to 11, but you simply cannot remove the sysadmins completely for the equation (one does not simply walk into Mordor!). Machines don't do things by themselves. Skynet is not imminent.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> "Whenever I attempt to dive into anything that I would consider "development", such as python programming, it's as if my brain completely ceases to function and all of the words and symbols on my screen turn into an incomprehensible alien language. It doesn't matter how long I stare at it or how much I reference the documentation, that alien language never reveals its true meaning to me."

For what it's worth, I've been a developer professionally for 5 years and I still have this experience whenever I first look at code written by other people, no matter its quality.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, this is good to know.

<comment><USER8> It's definitely the case that reading other people's code is much harder than reading your own. It's also the case that, if you write some code and let it sit around for a year, and then accidentally come across it, you're likely to wonder what kind of madman or idiot wrote it, until you realise that you're reading your own code.

It helps to keep your code so simple and peppered with comments than even an idiot (you) can understand it.

You don't learn to code by reading code, much like you don't learn to do math by reading equations, or carpentry by looking at houses. You have to get your hands dirty. Start with something "Hello World" level simple and add more bits as you go along. That's what we all do, really. The end result of such an iterative process will look inscrutable to others, but make perfect sense for you, because you made it.

Big dirty public secret: One guy's code being inscrutable to the next guy is why the next guy always argues for getting rid of the system that the previous guy developed. It's usually not because it's a bad system (your new system eventually becomes the next guy's "bad old" system, after all), but because no programmer thinks the same way.

Programming is very much a reflection of how a person thinks, of a mental model, and mental models are extremely individual things. Reading someone else's code is an exercise in empathy, and empathy isn't something programmers are known for. Programmers love to exist on their own little islands where everything works according to their internal logic. Teamwork means compromises. I once had to quit a job because I couldn't understand the internal logic of the team I had been hired to work with, as reflected in their codebase.

The main trait needed in a programmer is the ability to endure mind-bending levels of frustration. You have to keep hammering that nail until the problem is solved.

<comment><USER8> I've been at this since 1990 and I'm not only blind, but stupid! That's why I'm a programmer. You have to ask really dumb questions to be one, because computers aren't very smart, and you have to point out obvious things, because computers are blind to them. You have to think like a computer to talk to a computer, and since they are blind and stupid, so am I.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> You know, I feel like the perfect person to answer this. I used to be a sysadmin, then a devops engineer, then a "VP of Infrastructure", and I'm currently doing some hands on work again as a "lead devops engineer".

Like you, I used to be frustrated at my inability to program, and I felt like I could never make sense of any of it. I spent years in my earlier career sticking to "sysadmin things" because of that limitation.

Eventually, as automation hit the industry, I started writing more and more ruby code (we were Puppet users) and eventually I took a full time job for a year writing ruby code.

It was never an inability, it was always a confidence thing. I was scared to try and fail. By taking a full time position as a developer I -had- to succeed, and I like to think I did. I found it's not nearly as hard as I imagined, and the fact I did not have sysadmin duties competing made a HUGE difference. I was able to dedicate all day to what I was doing, not fit it into the corners of my life.

From what you wrote above, it's pretty clear that your personality woes (anxiety probably is the big one here) is convincing you that you can't do this.

I wasted years convinced that it was "too hard", but in reality I just didn't have the motivation to push through my discomfort. I don't actually write a lot of code these days, but I'm no longer afraid to pick up some code and modify it if I need to because I know it's just a matter of being patient and figuring things out as I go.

</comment><comment><USER10> On the programming front, I ve worked as a programmer for 12 years. I consider myself as not smart at all. I worked hard at learning my trade. I'd suggest you take things really slowly, some things you are going to have to rote learn.

I wish I had found this book when I was starting out: [https://www.htdp.org](https://www.htdp.org)

I've only browsed it, but it looks like the best way to get started to me.

My brother worked through [https://learncodethehardway.org](https://learncodethehardway.org) python book, he liked that. I used the learn c the hard way and I like the guy's teaching style. He makes it clear that this stuff can be hard and you need to take your time.

I was constantly overwhelmed by programming, but I just kept going. I'm now at the point where I realise coding isn't the hardest part of the job anymore.

</comment><comment><USER11> You need to write code so that your brain can assimilate this alien language and you'll be able to "think in code".

Coding is difficult, don't let anyone tell you otherwise. It's completely normal to struggle. How long did it take you to learn to read and write English properly? 15-20 years?

</comment><comment><USER12> The majority of the comments fail to miss one important thing: the cloud _is not_ an abstract magical thingy which provides _whatever you need whenever you need_. It merely abstracts away the underlying infrastructure - on hardware, network, sometimes even the OS level.

It runs on the same(ish) hardware you can find in your own server rack. It runs the same Linux (or some customly patched Linux derivative), it is connected by twisted pair or optics, it still uses the same tech you, a linux administrator, use underneath the whole shiny packaging. Kubernetes is a collection of scripts. Docker is just a script written in go to easier leverage linux kernel cgruops and namespaces.

To reiterate: cloud just _hides_ this instead of replacing it completely. Worst case scenario, nobody (outside of amazon/google/azure/baidu) knows how to set up a simple webserver on a linux box in their closet - then your skills become invaluable for people not willing to keep their data/code/service god knows where with god knows who. There are still some people that value "on- premises/bare-metal" setup. So there's one venue. Another would be to deepen your sysadmin skills to the point where instead of working _against_ the cloud, you could _join_ them. As far as I know, they are constantly looking for good sysadmins.

Now if you really want to become a dev... Well, i would suggest probably to start with what you know best: bash scripts probably. Start there. Start by small chunks. Take a small script, try to understand how it works. Try to write a small script. Try to find tasks that would be useful / interesting for you, e.g. make a script that starts playing music in the morning, constantly and slowly increasing the volume until you wake up - just make stuff: the key here is to have fun while doing it and achieve the result, not make everything perfect.

And try to do this without any pressure on yourself. Sysadmins have value, and will continue to have value. You're doing this not because you're being obsoleted, but because you wish to better yourself.

<comment><USER13> Alternate approach that works is to start simple and low level. Twiddle bits, read hardware manuals. Code your own window blinds controller. Play a chiptune directly from hardware.

Skip all the abstractions and push the numbers and currents.

Then when you get it, it is easier to go up in stack.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> If you have some experience with bash, I would recommend learning more bash.

If you want to get into development, the next step might be to learn a new language. Ruby, Python, and Javascript are pretty popular scripting languages that will have some overlap with bash that you can connect to. Pick a language that works closest to how you think and work with it in place of what you would normally do with bash.

Most importantly, understand that you are in technical role but that role is not the summation of who you are.

Additionally, not all developers have sysadmin skills, so understand that what you provide is valuable. Don't be hard on yourself, you have your entire life to keep building on what you know and who you want to become.

</comment><comment><USER15> Sysadmin is an important role but don't forget that what we call DevOps is an essential step for most of the SysAdmins these days.

If you stick with the traditional definition of SysAdmin, your job market becomes smaller every year. That doesn't mean you won't find a high paying job, it just means there are less opportunities and more competition. Are you good at it? Then perhaps you don't need those DevOps skills. There will be enough opportunities for your lifetime. Then instead focus on branding yourself. Write online about your skills, share your knowledge on internet to create a strong and visible profile that you can reference to it. Don't keep your knowledge on your head. Make it more visible even stuff that you think is obvious and easy. Then you always have a better chance in the market and it is very likely that good offers knock your door.

But, If you do feel that your career is at risk and you see kess chance in competing other SysAdmins, Then definitely invest on learning Cloud focused DevOps skills. And I think grasping the next step isn't hard for a SysAdmin. Stuff like Modern CI/CD pipeline, Monitoring and integration with Cloud providers and different services, Cloud migration, some level of scripting probably in Python, etc.

And about coding, first of all you don't have to become a programmer, . so be careful what resources and courses you take as some of them might be unnecessarily overwhelming. and secondly, like everything else, there is a learning curve. You just need to pass it and be patient.

<comment><USER16> DevOps is also shrinking fyi.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> You are not alone.

I'd guess at least over 50% of folks here would have gone through a similar phase at some point in their lives (learning block wise).

Based on my experience, especially over the past couple of years, I've realised that even if I can power through some of the subjects/topics which I find arcane (e.g. linear algebra, tensor calculus), I quickly lose what I've learnt if I don't get to apply the learning on a _real_ project, not a toy one.

In your case, I think once you've familiarised yourself with the absolute basic syntax structure if python, go find couple of real world projects and just try to get them done, without worrying too much about code elegance. That would give you the necessary confidence and understanding for moving up the next step.

You can find small volunteer projects it participate in competitions (on platforms like kaggle) which may require you to use at least a portion of python.

But most importantly, don't lose heart. Learning takes time. It's just as important to take a step back from it for a while as it is to keep at it.

I strongly recommend a series of 4-5 video lectures on Coursera by a MIT prof I think. Course was called "Learning how to learn". You don't have to take everything in it but I still believe the overall approach may help you.

Cheers and all the best!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks

I think that some of my issues possibly stem from a combination of my previous job being a hostile work environment as well as repeatedly being told by other coworkers (and even a former manager) that: "The work that I was doing wasn't valuable."

I still haven't come to terms with it I think.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> What do you mean? Doesn't matter if it's on premise or in the cloud(someone elses computer) - someone still has to manage it from the company's point. If you leave it to the devs it'll be a disaster.

With that said, this industry is moving fast and if you wanna keep up you need to learn bash/python or powershell on windows, eventually... this is true. Or you can move to smaller companies with fewer assets to manage.

If you say you can throw a bash script together than that's a good start. When doing that, try to understand what the author has done - check how the script was made, look up each function and try to remember what they do.

Once you remember functions you can always use that knowledge and look up syntax and arguments in the docs and start writing your own code. Bash is not a good place to start though, because it has a lot of weird syntax but python is rather clean.

Also take your time, don't think it's something you can learn within a week or month, give it 6months - year, don't push it. If you can't figure it out today, it's ok, try another day.

<comment><USER19> I disagree, if you leave it to the sysadmins that take their same mentality to the cloud, it's a bigger disaster.

I straddle both sides and I'd much rather deal with a seasoned software architect who comes to the cloud from that side than a sysadmin who comes from the other side.

A sysadmin doesn't want to automate his job and let the cloud provider manage what they can manage. A good software Architect is mich more likely to be push as much off on to manage services as possible and automate as much as possible.

<comment><USER18> Sysadmin doesn't wanna automate his job? Where did that come from? I am trying to automate as much as possible, because doing repetitive tasks is boring, I'll much rather read HN instead :)

But I see your point, the problem with cloud services is that they don't share the same features so if you know AWS and then you move to azure you have to re-learn not just the naming but also how to work with a new toolset which is annoying, so most sysadmins will automate, but just not at the cloud provider level but below. I think this isn't wrong though because setting up an environment can be a lot more painful if you need to switch providers for whatever reason.

But I haven't worked in a large company, only below 200 employees so my thinking might be a little different.

<comment><USER19> Fair enough.

I guess the larger issue is how much is the entire organization willing to rethink their architecture - hopefully led by the cloud experts - to be cloud native? If you are just hosting a bunch of VMs and not taking advantage of the providers manager services, from my experience, it will always cost more than just staying on prem.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Why try so hard to learn something for which you have no aptitude, when you have other valuable skills? A 5 foot 100 pound guy shouldn't be trying to learn football at the pro level no matter how high the NFL salaries are. Focus on what you're good at. There will still be sysadmins by the time you are dead. Get better at your skill set so that you'll be one of the ones standing.

<comment><USER21> Its still valuable for a sysadmins to have some ability to program/script, if only to improve his own utility and sanity (automating out trivial/mindless things); however, its not clear to me why sysadmins seem to often have trouble breaking into programming — afaict, they're extremely similar in practice. Particularly when you accept that most of software engineering is just composing libraries, while system administrators compose programs and os's. Both rely on incantations held together by poor documentation, arbitrary configuration, and convoluted tooling. Programming is a bit more structured in its language.. but otherwise they're rather similar requirements (and half of why you have SEs trying to eat SAs lunch); it's not obvious to me that the inverse task should be a significant hurdle.

Or rather, the experience of an SA _should_ translate decently into SE

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm not sure why it's as difficult as it is for me. I'm sure there are people for whom it's not as much of a herculean task.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> It has helped me immensely to change my perspective. I don't see programming problems/blockers that I encounter as _my_ "mental blocker". I see them as problems that stand themselves. There is nothing wrong with _me_. I see the problems as these little (and sometimes big) challenges. Like a level in a game. Not clearing a level doesn't mean that the character you are playing is weak. It just means that the character is not using the right tool, or mechanics. The root cause is lack of information; there is nothing wrong with the character itself. If you can detach yourself from the problem and view yourself as a player in a game, you won't get frustrated. I have even come to like it. When I finally figure out why that sneaky race condition was breaking on prod after days and nights of debugging sessions, I feel like I have defeated a big boss in a game. I actually fondly recall these kinds of victories from my past years like a life event. Hope you can do the same :)

</comment><comment><USER23> I want to echo the sentiment of other posters. I'm a senior architect on a team of several hundred people and I can without a doubt say that Sysadmin skills are hugely valuable and SAs normally have a very distinct and useful perspective on the end to end process of software delivery (of which coding is only one part).

My advice would be to explore more areas of self improvement. It's not only code out there!

You could look at continuous integration, focus on deployments, learn networking, go deep in cloud config management.

There's also the people side, like project managing technical implementations, managing vendors, or doing budgets and planning.

You might also consider database admin which is really interesting work.

I guess what I'm saying is don't feel limited by coding not being you thing. If you can learn enough to get by, you'll find many roles where it's not the core skill.

</comment><comment><USER24> First off, I think you should give yourself more credit as what you do has importance and you are valued.

> "Be a developer, or get out of the tech industry."

I don't agree with this. There are plenty of jobs in operations that require the skills you have (e.g. standing up servers and automating the heck out of things)

Writing code and creating software was one of the few things that really clicked for me, so I can't share advice on that. One thing I can say is that all of the operations work is where I feel myself spinning and getting nowhere, I push through when I have to, but I don't always have hours to spend debugging an environment--i leave that to someone who can solve the same issue in minutes.

<comment><AUTHOR> I do enjoy automating infrastructure. I guess I feel somewhat obligated to dive into the development side due to the industry trends and the constant "Anyone can code", "Coding bootcamps", and such.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> My man you are the other side of the coin as far as I'm concerned.

Instead of being on premises, you should dive into cloud orchestration and management. You are still desperately needed as an IT person.

The analogy I like to use is: when building a house, you need a civil engineer and an architect. You wouldn't hire someone who does both right? Two very separate disciplines.

It's the same with programmers and IT. We both need each other. We write the code, you make sure that baby has enough room to grow and be secure. I would never attempt to set up AWS for anything serious because that's just asking to be hacked. I would recommend we hire a proper systems IT person.

</comment><comment><USER26> I was a sysadmin and moved to software development. A big part of the difference is mindset. When I used to work with sysadmins often solutions to problems are "google for a while and then call the vendor". You need to get out of that mindset and become more self reliant. That machine you are using was built by humans, that language was designed by humans and you are likely attempting to solve a problem that isn't dramatically different than problems solved by tens to hundreds of thousands of other humans. You can do it.

Without perseverance and mental toughness it's going to be an uphill climb to become a programmer.

<comment><AUTHOR> "google for a while and then call the vendor"

This is unfortunately how most of our organization works. For certain types of things, we're actually required to do this due to regulations, bureaucracy, and what not.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> I suggest finding a language that you can learn online.

It does not have to be what you really want to learn, just one you can get stared with. Ruby has some decent lessons out there where they tell you what to type, you type it, and see the results.

First, like an essay, create an outline. Write what you want the output to look like, search stack overflow for examples, and it will get easier.

I learned Matlab, essentially deleted it from memory, and felt as you describe a few years later. I had to relearn it and just pushing myself with the pomodoro technique (20 min on, 5 min break) worked.

Good luck.

</comment><comment><USER28> What about learning devops. Take your bash skills and apply them to cloud architecture, containers etc. that stuff will be in demand for a few years. Cloud Architect might be something to aim for.

<comment><AUTHOR> I have been wanting to try out things like AWS and containers and such, but I haven't had the chance yet. I think part of it is that I haven't had the chance in a work setting to check those things out. We have thousands of physical machines and on-prem VMs. Sometimes I feel like we're kind of "old- world".

<comment><USER29> Physical infrastructure isn't going away anytime soon. I work in migrating people to public cloud and we are seeing a resurgence of people moving to "private clouds". Mostly vMware and OpenStack. Most people have begun realizing their CTOs cargo-culted AWS for their resumes and its costing more than owning DC or colocating does.

<comment><AUTHOR> I was wondering about that. Every time I looked at AWS pricing, it seemed insanely expensive for the people that just forklifted their on-prem services into the cloud without re-architecting it to fit that type of environment.

<comment><USER5> Most cloud solutions costs 2-3 times more than the on-prem equivalents. The selling point that's usually trotted out is "but it just works and you can fire your IT staff".

...Most people who move to the cloud end up still needing IT staff to manage it, and are now, by proxy, paying for the cloud provider's IT staff too. (Hidden underneath all of those cloud providers are a silent army of IT people.)

A recent conversation I had was whether to replace a server (five figures) when a neighboring organization was on the cloud for the same technology (three figures per year per device). The latter sounded a lot cheaper until you multiplied the devices by that three figure amount, and multiplied it by the five years the server's contract covered. The cloud solution became more expensive that the physical service in a little over a year.

I have similar conversations about Office 365. It costs twice as much as buying on-prem Microsoft Office, even if you buy Office every version. There's really no reason not to skip every other release of Office, which makes it practically four times the cost of on-prem.

<comment><USER19> The thing is that yes you do need IT people and there is an army of IT people hired by the cloud providers. But, you don't have to pay the full cost to hire them. Between Managed Service Providers that allow you to outsource your support and the (excellent) business support plan of AWS you can get away with a lot fewer employees in the IT department and their job just becomes managing communications between the business and managing the relationship with the MSP and the cloud provider.

<comment><USER5> From the perspective of an IT employee, the market has not shrunk. Because companies need IT staff, MSPs need IT staff, and cloud providers need IT staff. And while they've shifted a lot, I would argue that it's largely been a zero sum change.

I can definitely say last time I was in the job market, the majority of available IT jobs in my area was with MSPs, but there were tons of jobs available.

<comment><USER19> I'm speaking from the side of a business who is deciding between on prem or cloud.

If you move to a cloud provider, change your processes, and reduce your number of IT people and use a combination of an MSP and a business support plan, you can save some money. If you only move to the cloud and don't do either of the other two. You will spend a lot more money.

From the side of an IT person, it can go either way. Now that companies don't need on prem IT people. The MSPs can rural source (get people a lot cheaper in lower cost of living areas) and outsource lower level IT folks. Either way there will be a lot of jobs, but there will be more people who can do it and wages will be lower for commodity IT folks.

On the other end, the true customer facing consultants can make a lot more. But if all you can do is click around on the AWS Console, don't expect to make a lot.

I'm mostly a $long_time developer but I know my way around AWS and my next job will probably be a around AWS consultancy but I really want to stick to developing/architecting on top of AWS and not just doing "lift and shifts".

<comment><USER5> I have significant doubts on cost savings with either moving to the cloud or moving to an MSP. I've already commented a bit on the cost hike of moving to the cloud. I think there's a lot of benefits to MSPs (disclosure: I work for one) in terms of access to a larger resource base of IT professionals at the drop of a hat, but if you want a good MSP and a high quality of service, you are probably not saving money compared to hiring, since at the end of the day, you are still paying for the amount of employee time to solve the issues that crop up in your organization plus all of the management staff and profit margin of hiring an outside business.

<comment><USER19> But you can get cheaper "good enough" service by hiring overseas where the cost of labor is cheaper. Most work done by IT people is not rocket science that takes a whole lot of skills - it's "undifferentiated heavy lifting" that can be automated or outsourced overseas.. You do need a few experts. I'm saying that you are seeing jobs being bifurcated- low pay commodity jobs and high paying consultants.

MSPs can also standardized procedures across clients, automated processes at scale, etc.

If you're just doing a lift and shift and porting a bunch of VMs it will cost more and unfortunately that's all most outside AWS consultants know how to do. They were usually IT folks who managed some on prem resources, watched a few ACloudGuru videos, got one AWS cert and now market themselves as "Digital Transformation Consultants", who can click around on the AWS website.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> You transition to being a "Cloud Engineer", which is basically the same, but in the cloud. You'll be running bash scripts through a terminal emulator _in your browser_ , and define settings for _managed_ vm's using yaml. There's a brand new cloud world out there and it looks pretty much the same.

I think the next hot thing after devops and datascientists are gonna be cloud architects and engineers.

<comment><USER19> God no. Don't tell him this. There are already too many sysadmins that take the on prem, non automated, lift and shift mentality to the cloud, and leave in their wake an infrastructure that costs more than if they had just used bare metal at s colo.

If you're hosting a bunch of VMs "in the cloud" and doing the same stuff you did on prem you've just gotten the worse of both worlds - you're spending more and not getting any of the benefits of letting your cloud vendor do any of the "undifferentiated heavy lifting".

My experience with "cloud architects" who don't know anything about development is that they are actually a liability.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm aware of the "lift and shift" mentality that some people have. I know several people who work at another company that decided to just uplift their on-prem VM-based software stack into AWS. It went very poorly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Email (address in profile) me if you want to do some pair programming sessions. I've helped others get unstuck this way.

</comment><comment><USER32> > As more and more services and tools are rolled into cloud provider's > portfolios, I can't help but think that there's no point for me to exist

Are you thinking that _everybody_ is migrating to cloud? For a business there is a lot of value in having their own local servers and infrastructure, even if small. Especially if they own data.

</comment><comment><USER33> I wish we had a competent dedicated sys admin at work. I say competent because we've had tech support guys try to fill the sys admin role and the knowledge gaps...

Anyway I'm supposed to be a software developer and I end up spending a good chunk of time on sys admin stuff.

</comment><comment><USER34> You seem quite articulate. Have you thought of blogging or writing? There may be other avenues for your creativity other than coding.

I have been a sysadmin for 20 years and imagine I will be for another 20.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. I have thought about something like that, but I wouldn't know what to write or blog.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> > Has anyone had a similar experience and managed to push through the mental > blocks associated with learning to program while having your own mind > constantly working against you?

Yes, each of us.

</comment><comment><USER36> Knowledge becomes redundant all the time. Look for interesting problems around you and build up useful skills.

Maybe try Kubernetes and container tech as a bridge before building actual apps?

</comment><comment><USER37> An sysadmin can be critical in so many aspects of a project. I think its best you appreciate this and avoid this vicious cycle at all costs.

</comment><comment><USER38> Linus Torvalds once said in an interview with the "IBM Kid - from future is open" that he appreciates all sysadmins. You are one of those. Cheer up!

</comment><comment><USER39> There's no exist, there is only power.

That said, sysadmins will never become obsolete in your lifetime.

</comment><comment><USER40> I think you may be going about learning programming wrong. I've seen this several times (source: am DevOps/programmer) where my non-CS-degree sysadmin/IT coworkers will sort of "force it" when trying to learn programming. This includes things like reading technical docs way above their head, copy/pasting a lot from SO and not fully understanding things, and diving into complex code bases. It's a slog for the guys who do it this way, and I think its because there are some in-between steps that they skip over.

I usually suggest tutorials, but I get the impression from them that the tutorials they use are long, boring, and worst of all.. too easy. Then they dive into real-world work and get overwhelmed. I feel like this is akin to showing them how interlocking gears work for the first time and then asking them to fix my car.

What helped me was being in that setting where I would get small not-real- world problems to solve over and over. IOW homework, classwork, etc.. I think is what helped. Eventually I did enough small things that when I saw real- world code, I could pick it apart into pieces that I understood because I've actually programmed those pieces before. Having written it before was a huge help as well because I already had to be familiar with the concepts to get it to work... reading it was then a matter of comparing what they have to what I wrote in the past and incrementing my knowledge (rather than starting from zero understanding).

TL;DR I think there is a gap between beginner/intermediate tutorials and real- world coding. I think you may need to find yourself a path through this gap that involves solving a lot of practice problems and working your way up.

HTH and Good Luck

</comment><comment><USER41> Sorry to hear about the latter, please give yoga, chanting aum, meditation and vegetarnism a go, seriously google the gut brain axis, it might help.</comment>