Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder - <AUTHOR> http://fortune.com/2014/09/09/apple-event-overshadows-bad-news-snapchat-tinder/ <comment><USER2> As a co-founder who got screwed on a large acquisition, it makes me happy to see that Snapchat finally settled. However, a settlement doesn't change the fact that Evan Spiegel really went out of his way to intentionally screw the guy that actually invented Snapchat's model - and seemed to enjoy doing it. He's definitely not someone I'd ever do business with.

[http://www.businessinsider.com/snapchat-lawsuit-video- deposi...](http://www.businessinsider.com/snapchat-lawsuit-video- depositions-2013-11)

<comment><USER3> A few friends of mine saw Evan speak at Stanford this past spring. He was in a room with Eric Schmidt and Sam Altman (IIRC) and his attitude towards them was nothing short of smug. I don't remember the specifics of what he said but my friends said he basically "told Eric, Sam and other prominent VCs on the panel off because he thought he was more successful than them".

Take that for what it's worth.

<comment><USER4> >Take that for what it's worth.

Which is nothing. We don't have the context and it's always amazing how people, even just observers with no skin in the game, will have wildly divergent interpretations of the same events. There's definitely some interpretation going on here as Snapchat guy almost assuredly didn't say "I'm more successful than you".

<comment><USER5> You don't need expertise in a particular profession to come to the conclusion that someone is being smug, rude, etc. If I saw someone on the street being disrespectful, is it unfair for me to come to that conclusion because I don't fully understand their field of work?

<comment><USER4> I didn't say anything about the field of work, so I'm not sure what you're getting at. We don't have the context of the conversation or panel in which the supposedly dismissive and/or smug comments occurred and we don't have enough information to make our own conclusion on the behavior or the reliability of the assessment given here.

There are many reasons someone may feel that a speaker is smug. Some may be warranted and some may not. Since we don't know what happened and can't evaluate whether the parent's friends made a correct assessment or not, with this type of matter, it's best to just ignore it entirely. It has nothing to do with our familiarity with anyone's line of work.

<comment><USER5> > with no skin in the game

I took that as referring to field expertise. If that wasn't the intent, my mistake.

I get what you're saying, but there isn't video documentation of everything, so at some point you take the words and recollections of others.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I was going to link to the mandatory reading of Joel Spolsky's canonical answer on splitting shares in startups between founders and beyond. But as Stack Exchange's policy of shuttering less popular subsites that is now lost in its original form :( It was originally here [http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/6949/forming-a- new-s...](http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/6949/forming-a-new-software- startup-how-do-i-allocate-ownership-fairly/23326#23326) Is there a good reproduction elsewhere?

<comment><USER7> Found it copied here: [http://www.gravitycomputing.co.nz/joels-totally-fair- method-...](http://www.gravitycomputing.co.nz/joels-totally-fair-method-to- divide-up-the-ownership-of-any-startup/)

"""

This is such a common question here and elsewhere that I will attempt to write the world's most canonical answer to this question. Hopefully in the future when someone on answers.onstartups asks how to split up the ownership of their new company, you can simply point to this answer.

The most important principle: Fairness, and the perception of fairness, is much more valuable than owning a large stake. Almost everything that can go wrong in a startup will go wrong, and one of the biggest things that can go wrong is huge, angry, shouting matches between the founders as to who worked harder, who owns more, whose idea was it anyway, etc. That is why I would always rather split a new company 50-50 with a friend than insist on owning 60% because "it was my idea," or because "I was more experienced" or anything else. Why? Because if I split the company 60-40, the company is going to fail when we argue ourselves to death. And if you just say, "to heck with it, we can NEVER figure out what the correct split is, so let's just be pals and go 50-50," you'll stay friends and the company will survive.

Thus, I present you with Joel's Totally Fair Method to Divide Up The Ownership of Any Startup.

For simplicity sake, I'm going to start by assuming that you are not going to raise venture capital and you are not going to have outside investors. Later, I'll explain how to deal with venture capital, but for now assume no investors.

Also for simplicity sake, let's temporarily assume that the founders all quit their jobs and start working on the new company full time at the same time. Later, I'll explain how to deal with founders who do not start at the same time.

Here's the principle. As your company grows, you tend to add people in "layers".

The top layer is the first founder or founders. There may be 1, 2, 3, or more of you, but you all start working about the same time, and you all take the same risk… quitting your jobs to go work for a new and unproven company. The second layer is the first real employees. By the time you hire this layer, you've got cash coming in from somewhere (investors or customers–doesn't matter). These people didn't take as much risk because they got a salary from day one, and honestly, they didn't start the company, they joined it as a job. The third layer are later employees. By the time they joined the company, it was going pretty well. For many companies, each "layer" will be approximately one year long. By the time your company is big enough to sell to Google or go public or whatever, you probably have about 6 layers: the founders and roughly five layers of employees. Each successive layer is larger. There might be two founders, five early employees in layer 2, 25 employees in layer 3, and 200 employees in layer 4. The later layers took less risk.

OK, now here's how you use that information:

The founders should end up with about 50% of the company, total. Each of the next five layers should end up with about 10% of the company, split equally among everyone in the layer.

Example:

Two founders start the company. They each take 2500 shares. There are 5000 shares outstanding, so each founder owns half. They hire four employees in year one. These four employees each take 250 shares. There are 6000 shares outstanding. They hire another 20 employees in year two. Each one takes 50 shares. They get fewer shares because they took less risk, and they get 50 shares because we're giving each layer 1000 shares to divide up. By the time the company has six layers, you have given out 10,000 shares. Each founder ends up owning 25%. Each employee layer owns 10% collectively. The earliest employees who took the most risk own the most shares. Make sense? You don't have to follow this exact formula but the basic idea is that you set up "stripes" of seniority, where the top stripe took the most risk and the bottom stripe took the least, and each "stripe" shares an equal number of shares, which magically gives employees more shares for joining early.

A slightly different way to use the stripes is for seniority. Your top stripe is the founders, below that you reserve a whole stripe for the fancy CEO that you recruited who insisted on owning 10%, the stripe below that is for the early employees and also the top managers, etc. However you organize the stripes, it should be simple and clear and easy to understand and not prone to arguments.

Now that we have a fair system set out, there is one important principle. You must have vesting.Preferably 4 or 5 years. Nobody earns their shares until they've stayed with the company for a year. A good vesting schedule is 25% in the first year, 2% each additional month. Otherwise your co-founder is going to quit after three weeks and show up, 7 years later, claiming he owns 25% of the company. It never makes sense to give anyone equity without vesting. This is an extremely common mistake and it's terrible when it happens. You have these companies where 3 cofounders have been working day and night for five years, and then you discover there's some jerk that quit after two weeks and he still thinks he owns 25% of the company for his two weeks of work.

Now, let me clear up some little things that often complicate the picture.

What happens if you raise an investment? The investment can come from anywhere… an angel, a VC, or someone's dad. Basically, the answer is simple: the investment just dilutes everyone.

Using the example from above… we're two founders, we gave ourselves 2500 shares each, so we each own 50%, and now we go to a VC and he offers to give us a million dollars in exchange for 1/3rd of the company.

1/3rd of the company is 2500 shares. So you make another 2500 shares and give them to the VC. He owns 1/3rd and you each own 1/3rd. That's all there is to it.

What happens if not all the early employees need to take a salary? A lot of times you have one founder who has a little bit of money saved up, so she decides to go without a salary for a while, while the other founder, who needs the money, takes a salary. It is tempting just to give the founder who went without pay more shares to make up for it. The trouble is that you can never figure out the right amount of shares to give. This is just going to cause conflicts. Don't resolve these problems with shares.Instead, just keep a ledger of how much you paid each of the founders, and if someone goes without salary, give them an IOU. Later, when you have money, you'll pay them back in cash. In a few years when the money comes rolling in, or even after the first VC investment, you can pay back each founder so that each founder has taken exactly the same amount of salary from the company.

Shouldn't I get more equity because it was my idea? No. Ideas are pretty much worthless. It is not worth the arguments it would cause to pay someone in equity for an idea. If one of you had the idea but you both quit your jobs and started working at the same time, you should both get the same amount of equity. Working on the company is what causes value, not thinking up some crazy invention in the shower.

What if one of the founders doesn't work full time on the company? Then they're not a founder. In my book nobody who is not working full time counts as a founder. Anyone who holds on to their day job gets a salary or IOUs, but not equity. If they hang onto that day job until the VC puts in funding and then comes to work for the company full time, they didn't take nearly as much risk and they deserve to receive equity along with the first layer of employees.

What if someone contributes equipment or other valuable goods (patents, domain names, etc) to the company? Great. Pay for that in cash or IOUs, not shares. Figure out the right price for that computer they brought with them, or their clever word-processing patent, and give them an IOU to be paid off when you're doing well. Trying to buy things with equity at this early stage just creates inequality, arguments, and unfairness.

How much should the investors own vs. the founders and employees? That depends on market conditions. Realistically, if the investors end up owning more than 50%, the founders are going to feel like sharecroppers and lose motivation, so good investors don't get greedy that way. If the company can bootstrap without investors, the founders and employees might end up owning 100% of the company. Interestingly enough, the pressure is pretty strong to keep things balanced between investors and founders/employees; an old rule of thumb was that at IPO time (when you had hired all the employees and raised as much money as you were going to raise) the investors would have 50% and the founders/employees would have 50%, but with hot Internet companies in 2011, investors may end up owning a lot less than 50%.

Conclusion

There is no one-size-fits-all solution to this problem, but anything you can do to make it simple, transparent, straightforward, and, above-all, fair, will make your company much more likely to be successful.

"""

<comment><USER8> Good read, but the IOU plan is nonsensical... cash in one hand, or an IOU for the same amount in the other, issued by an entity with a very high likelihood of failure? What? Maybe if the IOU started accumulating 20% interest.

<comment><USER9> Sure, you'd want to be compensated for time and risk, but on the other hand you don't want to saddle the company with a ton of debt. It depends on how much money you're talking about. Either way, the point remains that it shouldn't be paid for with equity.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Money. Greed. It destroys more friendships (and marriages) than anything else.

So what's the lesson here? Don't be careless. I don't care what the idea (startup) is - get the details on paper. True, 99% of startups fail, but you don't want to be in that 1% that's making the lawyers rich.

<comment> at-fates-hands >> Money. Greed. It destroys more friendships (and marriages) than anything else.

This a thousand time.

My first hard earned rule of thumb? Don't do business with your friends. Lost relationships, bitterness, and great financial loss is never worth it. I got burned really bad and spent the better part of four years trying to get my money back.

Since then, it's just something I live by.

<comment><USER11> Friends? OK

But I've been in business with my spouse for over a decade now.

<comment><USER12> That's different. Your spouse's and yours financial interests are most likely aligned - you are both bringing in money to one family, so most likely there are no arguments who gets how much. With friends, you and your friend are competing for the same financial pie.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> at-fates-hands Interesting all the outrage about Whitney Wolfe and all the articles about her and sexual harassment and sexism in tech while her case was going on.

Now she finally wins her case and its like a blip on the radar? Pretty sad if you ask me.

</comment><comment><USER13> Honestly, I don't see either of these as nothing but positive news (for the companies, not necessarily for all the people involved).

<comment><USER14> They are probably long-term positive, but in the short-term they both could provoke negative press for the companies.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> A beautiful way of saying, "We're sorry... but not _really_ sorry."

</comment><comment><USER16> After the 3rd mention of Apple before the story intro was completed, in an article that (by all appearances) isn't actually about Apple at all, I decided that this just isn't a news source worth reading.

</comment><comment><USER17> As a side note, is it still wise/advisable to join Snapchat as an engineer? Particularly for Visa candidates whee the risk is higher?

<comment><USER18> The value of the company is already so high that much of the upside is removed. You really have to believe in the company as a whole to make that commitment.

<comment><USER19> > You really have to believe in the company as a whole to make that commitment

Or just get a good salary/benefits/etc

<comment><USER20> Somewhere like Google will likely pay better, though.

<comment><USER21> And would be harder to get a job with, presumably. I would venture that it would be much more difficult, but I'm simply speculating.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Is there any interest in "this is how I got fucked" at a startup type article, or is it so common that it doesn't matter?

I have an experience...

<comment><USER23> > I have an experience...

I think we all do! ;-)

Back in the day, I was a co-founder in a company, started by my advisor's wife. She called us (me and a colleague) to their house, and promised the two of us 20% ownership (and the remaining 60% she kept).

I worked like a dog for about 1.5 years, spending nights and weekends getting it off the ground (the business was website creation and other backend stuff). We managed to get the ear of one of the largest grocery chains in the country, and their VP came over to talk to us. My ideas were the core of the presentation. As soon as it looked like it might take off, she started cutting me out. Then one day, the locks were changed in the office!

As her husband was still my advisor, I couldn't do anything but grumble and continue working on my dissertation.

A few years later, the company was sold for $30MM.

<comment><USER24> Presumably you have your PhD now? Why not sue today?

<comment><USER23> I thought about it after I graduated. The problem is: in the initial years, people ask for recommendations from your advisor; and as a PhD, you are basically tied to your advisor for life (people will always ask: who was your advisor?).

After some thought, I decided to give it a rest and move on. I had learnt a valuable (and very pricey) lesson: always take things in writing.

<comment><USER25> I think I'd take 20% of $30MM, even including a potentially difficult court battle, over a good rec from a PhD advisor (which, as others have pointed out, is less important than you seem to suggest).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> From the headline, I thought that Apple had banned those two applications.

</comment><comment><USER27> How is this Apple's fault? Slapping the big A on the headline seems like a derail at best.

<comment><USER28> Not Apple's fault per se, just the Silicon Valley equivalent of a "Friday Night News Dump" that's common in industry and government.[1] It happened to be Apple this time, but it could have just as easily been a Google acquisition, some new Amazon product, basically anything guaranteed to get most of the attention and press.

[1] - [http://www.rff.org/Publications/Pages/PublicationDetails.asp...](http://www.rff.org/Publications/Pages/PublicationDetails.aspx?PublicationID=21671)

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> It's interesting the news on Tinder and Snap Chat came around the same time of Apple's new iPhones and iWatch release. In fact, it's no coincidence they must have been trying to hide behind the noise.

<comment><USER30> That's almost _exactly_ what the headline of the article says!?

<comment><USER31> Maybe he wanted a discussion about, how apple news bury interesting news. Instead of discussion how founders get screwed?

<comment><USER30> Then post something interesting about it I guess.

It's pretty clear it happened. Is there anything else to say about it?

(Personally, I think the Tinder thing is more outrageous than the Snapchat thing, and it was a bigger drama when it first surfaced.)

<comment><USER29> It was smart of them to release bad news at the same time as the apple announcement. Not many have talked about the Tinder Issue and Snapchat's settlement, as a result.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Seems a bit comical that the article claims this to be the first disappearing photo app. I created and launched one myself a year before Snapchat started...

The normal way for start founders to receive equity, is only from one or more of these 3 things:

\- For hours worked, based on the vesting and usually the hours must be beyond the cliff or you get nothing.

\- If you built a crucial part of the IP that the company needs to buy from you with equity.

\- Cash invested up front - less common.

He fulfilled none of those. Not even close to being a cofounder. Ideas aren't included among those.

<comment><USER33> Gah I hate it when people delete comments and then repost them elsewhere in the thread.

I wrote a longish answer to your comment here:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8295469](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8295469)</comment></comment>


Relation of Product Originality and Usefulness to Generating Word-Of-Mouth [pdf] - <AUTHOR> https://www0.gsb.columbia.edu/mygsb/faculty/research/pubfiles/5697/ijrm_wp_final.pdf <comment><USER2> "While originality increases buzz, it might lead to negative..." word-of-mouth if "...the usefulness of the product is perceived to be low."</comment>


Experimental Dating App that doesn't pretent dating is fair - <AUTHOR> http://tryblindly.com/ <comment><USER2> Literally zero information is available on the site, why even link it? Maybe wait until they put up some content

<comment><USER3> One can click the next (arrow) button and it will show a couple of pages of content explaining the concept. Works without entering an email address. (Yes, not the best UI concept).</comment></comment>


Run Google Maps on iOS without the Safari chrome - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/zoul/Google-Maps

<comment><USER2> thanks for putting this up! just linked to it from the post at tbf.io</comment>


Ask HN: Youngest possible age to start learning how to code? - <AUTHOR> In your opinion, what is the youngest possible age at which children can start learning how to code?<p>Also, what would your approach be to teaching a child at that age? <comment><USER2> I started with Logo at age 8. Mum taught me the basics and then gave me a book to read. Self taught from then on and haven't looked back.

</comment><comment><USER3> I personally got hooked at age 7 after my dad showed me how to draw circles in BASIC.

I don't think it's so much about a specific age, but to help stimulate a kid's imagination what's possible with a general purpose programming language.

</comment><comment><USER4> The moment they can read. Sure you can literally define structures and processes before that, but doing the real deal on a computer before you can read... is going to be a disaster.

You need to read your own code to get your bearings of where you are in the file. Anything more complex than 5 instructions is a no-go for non-readers.

</comment><comment><USER5> If we expand the question to include problem solving, logical thinking, building things using different components(ex. Lego), there isn't an age where a child couldn't learn. Having a strong foundation in these topics will definitely help the child if he/she learns to code later in life.

</comment><comment><USER6> I think you can start laying the groundwork for programming concepts in early childhood. Code.org even seems to have some resources for those of Kindergarten age.

[https://code.org/educate/curriculum/elementary- school](https://code.org/educate/curriculum/elementary-school)

</comment><comment><USER7> Probably once they are old enough to show that they are interested in it.

</comment><comment><USER8> How about learning not to code. Rather then being obtrusive, we should fix the education system which brain washes people worse than religion.

<comment><USER9> Let's not teach children to read or do basic math either. We should try and make sure they don't learn the skills that will give them the greatest opportunities in life.

<comment><USER8> How much is math do you actually use in programming or everyday life think substantially %age wise?

The greatest opportunities has hardly anything todo with what you learn at school in the practical sense.

<comment><USER9> Almost all people use at least basic arithmetic daily. They need it to count their change. There was a time, and not too long ago, where people could not do the basic calculations needed to conduct trade, and would require a smart man to tell them how much their chickens are worth.

Before the printing press (and at least a century after), most people could not read. This excluded them from scientific discovery too, since it was the means that people could exchange information over distance.

If you aren't able to do basic programming in a generation or two, you will probably be excluded from science too.

We're not suggesting every child needs to become a CS doc, but computers will be such a fundamental part of nearly every aspect of life, that the ones who can't hack programming will be treated like the children who can't read or count change in today's world - effectively useless. (Even more so since their "manual labour" is no longer necessary)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Is PowerTop / TLP Still Useful to Save Power on Linux Laptops? - <AUTHOR> https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ubuntu2017-tlp-powertop&num=1 <comment><USER2> I liked this article. A clear question, simple experiment and simple answer.

Those milliwatt draws though seem a bit high, and this was for pre skylake. I'd like to know how Windows compares, and I expect it still does better.</comment>


Google Taking FTC Review Seriously, Cutts Says - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/video/71427180/

<comment><USER2> It's very interesting that the "lead software engineer" is considered an appropriate spokesperson in this situation. I think it says a lot about Google's internal culture in general, and Matt in particular.</comment>


Scientists Warn of Rising Oceans as Antarctic Ice Melts - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/13/science/earth/collapse-of-parts-of-west-antarctica-ice-sheet-has-begun-scientists-say.html?src=twr&_r=1 <comment><USER2> It's perhaps interesting to note that sea levels have varied hugely even within the timescales of human history - here is an excellent Time Team special on "Britain's drowned world":

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4P9wQj6qX2I](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4P9wQj6qX2I)

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland)

<comment><USER3> Oh, so there's no problem. Keep burning the oil people!

<comment><USER4> That's not what he's saying at all. If you want the issue of climate change to get taken seriously, it needs to be good, sound, science. And that includes an understanding of how similar changes in our environment have happened before, what their effects were, etc...

<comment><USER3> Or, apparently, if you want climate change to be taken seriously you have to ignore scientists and pay attention to every amateur climate blogger's anecdotes.

<comment><USER2> I wasn't trying to imply that there is anything dubious about the predictions, just that it is interesting to note how much sea levels have varied in the (by geological terms) fairly recent past.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Yet antarctic sea ice has been increasing annually and is near all-time highs (since the 1979 satellite measurements began). That doesn't really indicate warming (to me).

[http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomal...](http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.antarctic.png)

<comment><USER6> Scientists are well aware of this. You say it as though it disproves the predictions made in the article, but you haven't said how. Particularly since the predictions take your fact into account.

[http://www.livescience.com/23333-antarctic-sea-ice-global- wa...](http://www.livescience.com/23333-antarctic-sea-ice-global-warming.html)

<comment><USER5> From that article: "But these effects are very small, and Antarctic sea-ice levels have increased only marginally. In the coming decades, climate models suggest rising global temperatures will overwhelm the other influences and cause Antarctic sea ice to scale back, too."

If the Antarctic sea ice increase is "very small" and just "marginal," then how is Arctic sea ice decrease not also _marginal_?

Antarctic sea ice is now 1.3 million sq km above the 1979-2008 mean (19% above the mean).[1] Arctic sea ice is now 0.59 million sq km below the mean (4.8% below the mean). [2]

1: [http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.recent...](http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.recent.antarctic.png) 2: [http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.recent...](http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.recent.arctic.png)

<comment><USER7> Derivatives. Instantaneous size doesn't matter. You have to measure how they are changing. Furthermore the physical (not climate) models based on these rates of change suggest that right now at this moment the rate of addition of new material to the ice sheet will not matter because the rate of melting to this point has made it unstable and the process of adding additional material will not be able to counter the processes of melting.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Will the addition of this fresh water do anything to mitigate the acidification (because of dissolved CO2) in the oceans, or are we screwed here as well?

<comment><USER9> Adding too much fresh water to the sea will affect the way that heat is conducted around the world via currents.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> A catastrophic event would move our nations into action, but even huge ice sheets take a century to rise oceans 10ft.

</comment><comment><USER10> It would be interesting to know if it is possible to keep sea level low by moving water to artificial inland lakes in currently dry places. There are many places in Sahara, Persia, China where creating big inland lakes will be possible, and desalinating and pumping water there might be cheaper than building dams or leaving big cities.

</comment><comment><USER11> So has anyone considered buying up property where the new coastline would be? Is it too uncertain?

<comment><USER12> well, first you'd have to be around for another hundred years to collect it, and birth rates at present values make a real estate investment for profit 100+ years from now rather unappealing. There are plenty of other things to invest/trade in with much better net present values~

Also there are taxes on the land, and at any point the government can take your land for economic development or to protect some rare sand turtle.

<comment><USER13> _There are plenty of other things to invest /trade in with much better net present values~_

If so, wouldn't mitigation be a more affordable response to warming than other proposed solutions? That is, society should just purchase (cheap, apparently) options on "second-tier" property, and use the massive profit those options generate over the next century to compensate those who will be harmed by the rise? What am I missing?

I realize that there are other harms from global warming besides changes in sea levels, but perhaps a similar argument could be made for those harms? For instance, options on farmland in Siberia could compensate the losses of farmers in India.

<comment><USER12> thats probably true, and trying to keep everything about the earth the same for the next thousand years to preserve what ever it is we are trying to preserve is probably unreasonable.

not saying nothing should be done about global warming, just that we should expect change one way or another.

also there is evidence some of the spikes in warming since the 80s/90s may be a direct result regulation in an attempt to end acid rain. we pulled a lot of sulfur out of the air and expected nothing to change.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Would there be enough melting to start inhabiting parts of Antarctica?</comment>


How To Develop A Mobile Application Without Breaking The Bank - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-develop-a-mobile-application-without-breaking-your-bank-2010-11 <comment><USER2> "Step 2: Find a Developer"

That's where this went from interesting to nil. I was expecting at least something like "develop it in an emulator without buying a device". The cost of outsourcing development of mobile apps isn't necessarily chump change.</comment>


Web Trend Map (image) - <AUTHOR> http://www.flickr.com/photos/formforce/3409362834/sizes/l/

<comment><USER2> Just a smidgen of searching before posting is appreciated. Especially when the original title is -identical- to your 3-day-old dupe. <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=544808>

<comment><USER3> Where is the search box on Hacker News?

<comment><USER4> <http://tinyurl.com/cjj5ms>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Courtesy of <http://informationarchitects.jp/> who happens to do some great work.

</comment><comment><USER6> If you want a printed one (which was my first thought) reserve it by sending them an email with "Reserve WTM" as the topic as per the instructions: <http://informationarchitects.jp/web-trend-map-4-final-beta/> they will only make a thousand.

</comment><comment><USER7> What amazes me more than the map itself, is the fact that Tokyo has this subway system. Looks absolutely gorgeous and so well developed... nothing like the system we're stuck with in Toronto :(

</comment><comment><USER8> Michael Dell looks lonely.

<comment><USER9> :-)</comment></comment>


Streamium.io: Broadcast P2P streaming video. Per-second Bitcoin payment - <AUTHOR> https://streamium.io/

<comment><USER2> This is very interesting if it actually works :) I will have to try it before saying anything else.</comment>


A dive into Google Wave - <AUTHOR> http://intertwingly.net/blog/2009/05/31/Google-Wave <comment><USER2> I don't think Google has been very clear about what Wave really is. There are several components:

* The Wave Protocol (<http://www.waveprotocol.org/>) is the heart of the system, and IMO the most interesting part. It's an extension to XMPP, and roughly analogous to SMTP if you're comparing Wave to email. Google will be open sourcing a version of their Wave Protocol server.

* The Google Wave client is a GWT application that uses a custom Comet-ish protocol over HTTP to communicate with the server. Analogous to Gmail's web interface or any other email client. I expect this will be open sourced as well, since the Wave Protocol server is useless without a client.

* The "robot" API is the JSON-RPC protocol that lets programs interact with Waves to do interesting things like spell checking and translation ("Spelly" and "Rosy" are Google's implementations, likely remaining proprietary). This is separate from the Wave Protocol, but may become a de-facto standard. IMO this is the second most interesting part of Wave. I don't think there's anything quite like this in existing email system (custom server-side spam filters and such?)

* The "gadgets" API lets you embed untrusted code to add functionality in Waves.

* The "embed" API lets you embed a Wave on a webpage, a la the Google Maps API.

Looking at the API docs gives a rough overview of the last 3 (<http://code.google.com/apis/wave/guide.html>) and waveprotocol.org covers the first. There's not much info about the GWT client yet.

</comment><comment><USER3> I really have no idea what he's talking about. Is that some sort of code?</comment>


Ask HN: How do you market your web app? - <AUTHOR>

I often see people building a web app with the assumption that if they build something cool, people will come. This is rarely the case.<p>How do you market your web app? Engage bloggers? Use a PR firm? Advertise online? Buy traffic through SEM? <comment><USER2> that all depends on your budget

<comment><AUTHOR> Suppose you're bootstrapping and have little cash.</comment></comment>


Profiling Go Programs - <AUTHOR> http://blog.golang.org/2011/06/profiling-go-programs.html

<comment><USER2> Taking the opportunity to show off some of the profiling tools and walk through the process of optimizing the program is a classy way to respond, first of all, and secondly I didn't know those tools existed. Very cool.

<comment><USER3> This post basically shreds the original paper. The classiness is the icing on the cake. If his version is 15x faster than the original Go version, that would make it about twice as fast as the super-optimized C++ version from the paper -- the one that was "was heavily dependent on several Google internal data structures and could not be open sourced". Lots of brainiacs at Google probably now have egg on their face courtesy of Russ Cox.

<comment><USER4> It turns out that Google is a collection of people with similar aims but differing views, not a cabal of braniacs. The original paper was written by a Googler who likely published it on his own for fun (and clearly without review from a Go developer); Russ Cox (also a Googler) "shreded" the paper here without himself passing it by the Scala enthusiasts for their take on it, etc.

Russ masterfully also demonstrated the Google cultural value of politeness, so I expect the results of this blog post will be taken in the gracious manner in which they were written.

<comment><USER5> You're right. Here's what Ian Lance Taylor (one of the Go developers) said:

"Robert asked me to take a look at his code and I hacked on it for an hour to make a little bit nicer. If I had realized that he was going to publish it externally I would have put a lot more time into making it nicer."

[https://groups.google.com/d/msg/golang- nuts/G8L4af-Q9WE/MNY-...](https://groups.google.com/d/msg/golang- nuts/G8L4af-Q9WE/MNY-zUk1r_MJ)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm very glad to see this more-serious optimization of the Go and C++ implementations of the original benchmark, which was less than thorough, and not equally fair to each language. It's interesting that the optimized Go and C++ code ultimately wound up with similar performance characteristics.

</comment><comment><USER7> Needs more joseki!

<comment><USER8> Yes, it's a shame that the language shares the same name as a two letter English word and a great East Asian board game.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> 6prof crashes on osx, i've aske on the mailing list and been told that it is only stable on Linux for now. Put a big damper on my Golang activities

<comment><USER10> See this: <http://code.google.com/p/go/source/detail?r=35b716c94225>

tl;dr: It is Apple's fault, OS X is buggy and so far there are no known good workarounds, if you know any I'm sure Russ would love to hear about it.</comment></comment>


Young men like watching eSports more than traditional sports - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/nfl-ratings-drop-study-young-men-watch-esports-more-than-traditional-sports-2017-9 <comment><USER2> And who could blame them? Most of us are not very good athletes and don't have as many neighborhood friends around to play sports with anymore.

If we want to live vicariously through someone on the screen, we share a lot more in common today with someone playing a video game than someone playing a sport.

Plus, esports are probably dafer than football, at least.</comment>


Ask HN: How do you keep track of threads with lot of comments - <AUTHOR> Once number of comments gets past 20 it becomes overwhelming, how do you keep track of a long thread with many comments. <comment><USER2> I do use an extension for Firefox (though, it's a WebExtension that I've built myself. I have not yet announced it anywhere (first time here!) because I'm still occasionally working on making it ready for the masses.

[https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/improve- hn/](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/improve-hn/)

[https://github.com/andriussev/improve- hn](https://github.com/andriussev/improve-hn)

Comment hiding is kind of important because the trees CAN become fairly large. I read somewhere that it's coming natively to HN, so that's good.

</comment><comment><USER3> _" how do you keep track of a long thread with many comments."_

Top down, read the branch, skim the leaves. Only a certain portion may of be real interest.

</comment><comment><USER4> With thread collapsing, new comment highlighting and auto-collapsing of threads without new comments.

On HN itself with a desktop browser: [https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/18066-hn-comment- trees](https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/18066-hn-comment-trees)

On mobile this is a Progressive Web App using the HN Firebase API which implements these features: [https://react-hn.appspot.com/](https://react- hn.appspot.com/)

</comment><comment><USER5> Recently I learned via an article on Hacker News the formal name for the phenomenon of looking at the gap between what a person understands and what they think they should understand: Information Anxiety. Richard Saul came up with it almost 30 years ago...and only just now I pick it up. The whole commercial internet and Windows 3 have happened in between.

Good luck.

</comment><comment><USER6> I used to use the hacker news enhancement suite on chrome, it makes it alot more manageable.

I recently switched back to safari so am stuck using the default site, and it is much harder to navigate around.

</comment><comment><USER7> <script>alert(1)</script></comment>


3D printers have 'fingerprints,' which could help trace guns, counterfeit goods - <AUTHOR> http://www.buffalo.edu/news/releases/2018/10/030.html <comment><USER2> 3D-printed guns are not a problem that needs solving. They're mostly dangerous to the user. I'm more worried about companies trying to shut down legit spare part manufacturing & repair (think Apple but in another context).

<comment><USER3> >3D-printed guns are not a problem that needs solving.

Agree.

>They're mostly dangerous to the user.

Kinda disagree.

Several reasons why:

1) On the AR-15, the lower receiver is the "gun" portion that is serialized. It actually doesn't take too much abuse - you can 3D print one without much difficulty and have a firearm that is not traceable.

2) FDM materials that are basically just enough plastic to bind metal powder in place exist and can be fired in a kiln after being printed on your 3D printer, and you get a metal component.

3) DMLS printers will someday become cheap enough for home use. Patents are starting to expire here, so this will likely happen soon - over the next 10-15 years.

But guns also aren't particularly difficult to build at home with more traditional means either, so I don't think it makes much sense to worry about the 3D printing aspect.

<comment><USER4> > you can 3D print [a lower receiver] without much difficulty and have a > firearm that is not traceable

I thought it was the barrel that added traceable marks to the bullet, through the rifling?

How does changing the receiver, which does not change the rifling, make it not traceable?

<comment><USER5> Probably just in terms of serial number / manufacturer stamp / etc which are what live on the lower.

<comment><USER4> Well if you're planning to trace weapons by their serial number then you're already going to be defeated by a simple screwdriver, let alone 3D printing.

<comment><USER6> You'd be surprised how well a serial number can be recovered even after it's been filed away. The stamping process that imprints each digit affects the metal underneath as well. Even when the physical characters have been filed away, the serial is readable using some advanced techniques[1]

[1] [https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health- science/scien...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health- science/scientists-develop-a-technique-to-find-serial-numbers-that-have-been- filed-off/2015/05/11/45e76fce-d489-11e4-8fce-3941fc548f1c_story.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I skimmed the article and can confidently say this is garbage science. The microscopic parameter changes inherent in every print (across printer types) means that any sort of unique ID (the type of ID which would be required in a court of law) on a single printer would be impossible. Using the word "fingerprint", which is essentially a UUID for humans, as a stand-in for "identifying a class of printers" is hugely misleading

<comment><USER8> "The microscopic parameter changes [are] inherent in every print" seems like a weak argument for claiming that the article is garbage science. No two fingerprints are pixel-perfect, and DNA samples can get damaged, but this doesn't mean that such methods are invalid - in fact, they can be valid even in forensic contexts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> The problem with 3D printed guns is that countries that you would be hard pressed to find a gun in legally are countries where you can't buy an ammo at your local BigBox store.

Ammo control is the only gun control 3D guns need. Now if we'll get to a point where will have a printer that can print on a molecular level and print the ammo with the gun we can discuss the dangers of 3D printed guns until then a shotgun shell 2 pipes from the plumbing store and an end cap would make a more useable weapon than a fully printed gun.

<comment><USER10> Er, paper ammunition is definitely a thing. It's not beyond reason that one could forge/press the copper components oneself, either. The tricky part, which isn't all that tricky, is manufacturing the combustion mechanism. Charcoal, potassium and sulfur; or saltpeter, sulfur and charcoal. There's more than a few sources of instructions online.

<comment><USER9> Anyone who can make cordite or cellulose gun powder at home, die press casings and make the primers and the bullets will be able to manufacture a complete gun without 3D printing, and better one at that.

Heck some high end air soft guns are made from the exactly the same material as an AR15 some even use real receivers with modification to prevent the drop in of parts converting those to a real gun would produce a more reliable weapon than most current 3D prints.

The "danger" of 3D printed guns isn't about people with the will and skill but about trivializing it to the point where your idiot parking lot weed dealer can break into a maker space hit print and come out with a SAW and ammo to boot and were probably 50 years off from that point.

<comment><USER10> I think you're over-estimating how hard these things are; especially in this day and age of online video tutorials. Try googling how to make gunpowder, you'll come up with many viable tutorials.

The rest isn't that far out of reach, either.

IE, here's an image sequence of an amateur creating a 37mm slug launcher, ammunition and _most_ of the components; some is 3d-printed, some isn't:

[https://i.imgur.com/kXsM5Ax.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/kXsM5Ax.jpg)

[https://imgur.com/a/3piHH](https://imgur.com/a/3piHH)

[https://imgur.com/a/EUA5Dp0](https://imgur.com/a/EUA5Dp0)

[https://imgur.com/a/0XPSZ](https://imgur.com/a/0XPSZ)

[https://i.imgur.com/bpAZr5B.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/bpAZr5B.jpg)

And have you seen the Shovel AK?

[https://www.northeastshooters.com/xen/threads/diy-shovel- ak-...](https://www.northeastshooters.com/xen/threads/diy-shovel-ak-photo- tsunami-warning.179192/)

<comment><USER9> I think you're underestimating how stupid people are because of the group you socialize with.

People with the will and skill can make one this isn't trivial even with all the videos in the world it will take weeks of practice and will require a good understanding of chemistry and basic engineering.

Most common criminals wouldn't know how to measure correctly, use a caliper, heck most of them won't be able to multiply add or subtract correctly.

Yet alone hammer forge an AK receiver out of a shovel.

Even if you discount career criminals as the only risk group most people can't wire a power socket, switch a lock or fix a leak you want them to forge recievers and cut grooves in barrel blanks?

Not to mention that any substantial delay would reduce the likelihood of these guns being used there is a huge difference between a kid that would have to spend 2 weeks banging a gun out in his garage and a kid that can go into the school workshop and 3D print a gun on the spot.

<comment><USER10> I don't live in the valley; I live in, and grew up in, a low-class blue collar community.

None of what has been posted or mentioned thus far is beyond the skill and scope of the hardware hacks that I've witnessed from relatively uneducated neighbors.

Frankly, you're woefully underestimating the ability of the blue collar masses.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> A quick wipe with acetone will solve most of that. I think nanoparticles in plastic stock for tracing will be the future here, and in many recycling and corprate dumping issues.

For now, the most effective tracing would be localized nozzle temp effects, inferring equipment and software by toolpath, and basic composition analysis. However, just particulate dust embedded in the plastic may be enough to determine something useful about mfg location.

Somehow, I doubt it will be anything basic police work can't uncover. Treating 3d guns as easier to produce than with hardware store parts does not reflect the current state of affairs. A trip to home depot will produce a superior slam fire shotgun with no welding, or machines beyond a drill and file. Its alarmism and fear mongering.

<comment><USER12> I mean, what would you do to trace to the printer if it were printed with 100% infill and then just lightly touched with a butane torch, put into the oven for a few minutes or even lightly sanded on the surface?

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Sure, you might be able to confirm a gun came from a given printer when you have both to look at. But the main issue with 3D printing is you can make a 3D printer in your basement. Cheaply.

Presumably if you don't want the gun traced to the printer, you destroy the printer. Or disassemble it and rebuild it which probably adjusts the various imprecisions that create that unique "fingerprint".

<comment><USER14> > But the main issue with 3D printing is you can make a 3D printer in your > basement. Cheaply.

I assume you mean "you can make a gun" cheaply. [Edit: actually, I probably misunderstood - seem further comments below and feel free to ignore this comment].

Which is not really true today? I mean, you can't get anything near a real-gun equivalent, and 3d printing really isn't that cheap compared to mass-produced goods (nor is it likely to be - things are mass-produced for a reason).

<comment><USER15> > > But the main issue with 3D printing is you can make a 3D printer in your > basement. Cheaply.

> I assume you mean "you can make a gun" cheaply.

No, he means you can make a 3D printer easily. So you can make one that doesn't have whatever restrictions or fingerprints the article is talking about.

<comment><USER14> Oh that makes much more sense. Thanks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> All of the features they use are easily changed in software. And not "an expert can get to hidden settings to change those aspects", they're as fundamental to the process of printing a model as selecting single or double sided is when printing from a conventional paper printer. Depending on what I'm printing I'll choose anywhere from ~.04 to ~.24mm layer heights, increase or decrease the speed or temperature, choose from any of ~10 spools of filament I have in a drawer, vary the infill density or pattern, (or somewhat less commonly) change the top/bottom layer pattern.

It's not like a Star Trek replicator where you push the "gun" button, you have to find the model and tweak your settings, and there won't be any single set of settings consistently used on any printer unless the user is only printing a single model repeatedly.

</comment><comment><USER17> Tangentially related, but it seems pretty creepy how all LaserJet printers purposely print uniquely identifiable information on every sheet. I expect more and more things are going to be like this, although it may be technically difficult in 3D printing.

</comment><comment><USER18> This is almost guaranteed to be used as a tool to hurt innovation in modified IP.

</comment><comment><USER19> I really really really don't understand all the fear around 3d printed firearms. You can "make" a "firearm" from parts at Ace Hardware that will discharge more times before failure than the plastic 3d printed firearms. The whole debacle really demonstrates the misplaced fears and intentional FUD. Nevertheless, this is fascinating, makes me think of all the machined items around me and if they too have unique signatures

</comment><comment><USER20> Seriously! It would be much easier to get an effective ak47 from black market than printing sub-par plastic useless gun.

<comment><USER21> The difference is that you can get a 3D-printer without doing anything shady whatsoever, as opposed to contacting a black market. This makes no difference if you're a drug cartel, but for lone-wolf shooters it does.

<comment><USER22> If you are afraid of lone-wolf shooters, the gun show loophole is much much much more problematic than 3D printed guns.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> not a reliable method, one could just change the nozzle and/or print with different parameters

<comment><USER24> Yeah, this article is full of s..tuff. Database of 14 printers and it's not even clear if it's the same model and manufacturer. So yes, you can tell something about the settings from the print..

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I assume this specific method is only applicable to filament-based printers, haven't read the study though.</comment>


The unilateral removal of comments by Jeff Atwood - <AUTHOR> http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/1990/the-unilateral-removal-of-comments-by-jeff-atwood <comment><USER2> The Stack Exchange community places a rather high value on "being nice." It's an important part of our values and we think it makes the Internet a better place. A lot of the Math Stack Exchange users came from Usenet's sci.math where epic flame wars were the norm. That community has a few members who do not consider "being nice" a requirement of public discussion, so naturally, conflict ensued when Jeff removed non-nice things (as is the norm in the larger Stack Exchange community), thus violating the "all public debate is sacred and must never be censored" norm of a small subset of that community.

Personally, I like the "be nice" norm and I think it contributes to the awesomeness of Stack Exchange. I think that in the long run it will make for healthier communities. I think that the high norm for civilized discourse on Stack Exchange is one reason that it has such a high signal to noise ratio and it's why the mathematicians are on our site to begin with.

There was never any question of "censorship" -- the entire brouhaha took place in the META site, the site ABOUT the site... nobody deleted any comments about math on the Math site itself.

<comment><USER3> > The Stack Exchange community places a rather high value on "being nice." > It's an important part of our values and we think it makes the Internet a > better place.

OK. That's a fair viewpoint, also espoused by many open source communities for instance.

> A lot of the Math Stack Exchange users came from Usenet's sci.math where > epic flame wars were the norm.

This, on the other hand, is kind of misleading. Is there some other threads elsewhere with material from Prof. Clark that is of the "epic flame war" variety? I ask this because I read Akhil Mathew's post in its entirety and even if you claim that Prof. Clark was not nice in his mentions regarding Jeff Atwood (a claim I highly disagree with by the way), his comments were in no way flame war material. So unless he's actually done this elsewhere, why even mention epic flame wars in association as it does nothing but confuse the issue.

> That community has a few members who do not consider "being nice" a > requirement of public discussion, so naturally, conflict ensued when Jeff > removed non-nice things (as is the norm in the larger Stack Exchange > community),

I have to ask: Is referencing a person's own quotes in support of a valid position suddenly "not nice". This quite honestly reeks of removing comments that only Jeff Atwood (and perhaps yourself ;) finds personally offending. I understand from the thread that there is apparently some history between Jeff Atwood and Prof. Clark -- I still don't think that justifies the response given in this case.

> thus violating the "all public debate is sacred and must never be censored" > norm of a small subset of that community.

I doubt that this is literally an actual community tenet even with professional mathematicians. The fact that they apparently permit citing relevant facts to support a point of their does not imply that they feel all public debate is sacred and non-censorable. Akhil Mathew quite clearly elucidated his position in my opinion, and I do not see where he claimed that Prof. Clark's comments should stand merely because they were debate. It seemed to me that he felt the comments should stand because they were _constructive_ in nature.

> I think that the high norm for civilized discourse on Stack Exchange is one > reason that it has such a high signal to noise ratio

Civilized discourse is certainly good for S/N -- but this is not uncivilized discourse from Prof. Clark by any reasonable definition!

> and it's why the mathematicians are on our site to begin with.

I'm sure the network effect of having other very high-quality associated sites with stable working backend software had _nothing_ to do with that. ;)

> There was never any question of "censorship" -- the entire brouhaha took > place in the META site, the site ABOUT the site... nobody deleted any > comments about math on the Math site itself.

I hate to say this, but this is disingenuous. If you prevent someone from talking constructively about the site then you are censoring him. Sure you may not be censoring him from the _main_ site, but let's not split hairs here.

As an aside I operate in a few communities that enforce a conduct policy... Prof. Clark's comments that were deleted would have been _well within_ the bounds of decorum on any of those communities. You may want to ensure that your Stack Exchange values are being consistently enforced to avoid the appearance of impropriety, as the policies seem to be quite severe to me given the actions here.

<comment><USER2> Ha! I see what you did there! A classic, Usenet-quoted, point-by-point nitpick, complete with UseNet style > quotes. I salute your ingenuity!

<comment><USER4> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem>

Joel, news.ycombinator has somewhat higher standards for civilized discussion than you are exhibiting here.

Please either participate in a constructive fashion or confine your postings to the roughnecks in the stack overflow forums.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The author has since resigned as a moderator: [http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/2029/my- letter-...](http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/2029/my-letter-of- resignation)

As an off-topic aside, when I took Real and Complex Analysis in my senior year of college, the author of the Stack Overflow post, Akhil Matthew, was in the class too. He was by far the smartest student in the room. We used a manuscript written by two professors in the department. Akhil was helping edit it, and has credit on the cover as "with Akhil Matthew": <http://www.users.drew.edu/capelian/rcanalysis.html> .

At the time, Akhil was fourteen.

</comment><comment><USER6> In summary Atwood has deemed offensive/unconsrtuctive and deleted two comments by a big contributor to the Math.SO site, without consulting its moderators. The community is now quite angry.

What he needs to understand is that not all these communities are like SO, their demographics, especially for thightly knit, professional one like Math.SO is quite different and they won't. Let him moderate their group in such a heavy-handed manner. One way or the other, he elicits respect in the hacker community (mostly), but he has no such clout among mathematicians.

<comment><USER7> I think you're being generous to Atwood here. I don't see how he has any business deleting comments in a community that (1) he did not start* (2) he is not an active member of. I'd argue that this statement is invariant across communities - hacker or otherwise.

This really is a classic micromanagement fail. The original action was motivated by a misguided sense of "being involved". The problem was then exacerbated by an unwillingness to accept mistakes and a sense of outrage fuelled by an ego-bruising.

*I do of course understand Atwood is one of the founders of the SE network of sites.

<comment><USER8> Actually, it's quite simple: off-topic, unconstructive, borderline rude comments were removed from a meta post _on a SE, Inc initiative to support the math community_. It'd be like you asking a hacker news question about how to send HN regulars to a conference, and I replied "well, Hacker News isn't worth supporting because Paul Graham has gone on record saying he's a bad programmer, and has expressed exasperation with programmers".

I _wish_ I was kidding. I really do.

<comment><USER7> The community is upset because of your fly-by-night moderation tatics. Clearly, Prof. Clark is a valuable and respected member of the community. If you felt what he was saying was inappropriate, you best recourse would have been to reply to his comment, or perhaps even send him an e-mail. Simply deleting his comments gives the impression (whether warranted or not) of high- handedness.

What I don't understand is your response to all this. All you needed to do was apologize and promise not to delete any more comments. Prof. Clark would likely have been appeased and the whole brouhaha would've petered out before you could say Peter Clark (sorry, couldn't resist!). Instead, your continued insistence on doing what _you consider right_ raises the very real concern that you might, in the future, abuse your moderator powers in more serious matters.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The commenter, Akhil Mathew, finished third in last year's Intel Talent search. He's a freshman at Harvard now.

I googled him after the announcement, and when I found his Math Overflow profile, I remember being really stunned--the idea that a high schooler could be interacting on such a high level with some of the best research mathematicians in the world is amazing.

</comment><comment><USER10> Following some of the side discussion, it seems two examples of no-nos happened in some of the responses. Never put quotes around a paraphrase / interpretation of someone's comments. Never refer to a Dr. as Mr./Mrs./Ms. It just isn't done.

Edit for link: [http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/1990/the- unilat...](http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/1990/the-unilateral- removal-of-comments-by-jeff-atwood/1994#1994)

<comment><USER3> > Never refer to a Dr. as Mr./Mrs./Ms. It just isn't done.

In fairness to Prof. Clark, it's not like he was pointing out that faux pas to someone who _didn't_ know of his position. Jeff Atwood by this point would be well aware of Prof. Clark's qualifications.

I'm not going to say that Jeff deliberately downgraded Prof. Clark's title in his reply (as opposed to the entirely possible "I just call everyone Mr./Ms.") but given Joel Spolsky's comment elsewhere in this thread about "being nice" (note: direct quote! ;) I'm feeling some cognitive dissonance here.

<comment><USER8> Check the revision history on my post; that Dr. / Mr. thing was corrected in under 15 minutes (22:07 to 22:22) ... whereas the reply referring to it was submitted at 23:00, 8 minutes AFTER it was already corrected. But who needs facts when you have drama? <http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/posts/1993/revisions>

<comment><USER11> I think you mean 38 minutes. To be fair, Dr.Clark's message was really long. Maybe, he already had your post in his editor before you corrected it. I can't fault either of you.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Stack exchange is useful for finding technical answers, but the sense of community I get there is not something I want to participate in (far too much editing/screening of other peoples' content by people who really must have something better to do).

</comment><comment><USER11> Reading the exchanges, it seems that Prof.Clark and Jeff Atwood had prior exchanges wherein Jeff was asked not to privately email Clark. It seems to be a classic case of power struggle.

But I'll say this -- Mathematicians are strange cats. My boss is one. His emails seem extremely rude but he's one of the nicest guys in person.</comment>


Ask HN: What do you run on your VPS? - <AUTHOR> I just got a lifelong VPS for free. It's pretty minimal (1GB RAM, 60GB SSD, 1vCPUs), but it's also decent for most lightweight things.<p>What do you run on your VPS? <comment><USER2> OpenVPN, Mumble server for some friends, a pile of random stuff that's not nearly coherent enough to be called a website (Flask + gunicorn + nginx + Postgres, nothing fancy), and a homegrown IRC/Telegram chat logger.

Edit: the server is a Scaleway C1 box, 4 ARM cores, 3EUR/month, running ArchLinuxARM mostly because it's something I'm used to.

</comment><comment><USER3> How did you a get a lifelong free one?

</comment><comment><USER4> And where?</comment>


Idea for a service - <AUTHOR> What with telcos increasingly selling realtime data and ISPs doing the same, I have been entertaining the idea of a service that offers a few options:
1. A VPN that not only encrypts traffic, but logs nothing, and strips all ads, beacons, trackers, etc.
2. A remote desktop service running on FreeBSD/OpenBSD/Linux with choice of desktops that is itself using VPN'd traffic that can appear to be from any region needed or desired that likewise logs nothing and strips all ads, beacons, tracking, etc.
I think this could be particularly useful for mobile users as it's difficult to do some of this on a mobile device without rooting or using questionable apps.
I would, of course, want this service vetted by trusted open source industry professionals. The service would use only open source software running on non-Intel chipsets in a friendly set of locations.
Thoughts? <comment><USER2> Basically a VPN to your home, where a pihole is in place, right?

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm envisioning servers running anonymous services that one could connect to ala proxy for mobile devices that anonymize traffic, strip out all ads, beacons, traffic, allow choice of region to appear from, etc. No logs.

Desktop service would allow a secure connection to an anonymous, secure desktop of your choice (Gnome, KDE, LXDE, Window Maker, Openbox, etc.) anonymize traffic, offer an ad/beacon/traffic-free stream, and again, no logs.</comment></comment>


IFrauds: a photo essay on the fakest iPods ever - <AUTHOR> http://technologizer.com/2008/12/22/ifrauds-the-fakest-ipods-ever/

<comment><USER2> Collapsed version of this slideshow:

<http://jottit.com/m7y9g/></comment>


How was the capacity of the 'magical Chinese harddisk' faked? - <AUTHOR> http://superuser.com/q/270194/187

<comment><USER2> Hunh? This post by splattne links to Superuser.com where the question is asked by Superuser member bronzebeard and it shows the question edited by Superuser member splattne and member Ivo Flipse comments mentions this subject was already discussed on Hacker News and he links back to the first HN post.

My head hurts :(

<comment><USER3> I guess the answer on Super User is a nice summary of the whole discussion here on Hacker News ;-)

Does your head start to hurt even more after seeing me comment here as well? ;-)

<comment><USER2> Yes.

<comment><AUTHOR> More headache. Sorry, didn't know that it had been posted to HN previously.

<comment><USER2> There is no Internet it's just a couple of dozen guys.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> <nostalgia> Remember when you would research this problem? You would maybe even dive into OS/FS source code to see how operating systems determine free space. You would gain deeper insight into implementation details for use in future projects.

Now we just ask the world and get back a superficial answer we forget in two days. </nostalgia></comment>


Unicorn layoffs keep piling up - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2020/04/15/unicorn-layoffs-keep-piling-up-as-the-economy-gets-worse/ <comment><USER2> ITT is lots of failure to acknowledge the scope of this crisis. This isn't just a pruning of companies that had weak paths to profitability anway, few businesses have the capacity to completely halt revenue for months on end and survive. Plenty of otherwise good companies are going to go broke.

<comment><USER3> ITT also will be lots of people blaming this economic impact solely on the social isolation measures, ignoring the fact that a pandemic ravaging unchecked through the entire population would be having an even worse effect. Once the pandemic started, there was no way it was gonna end well, regardless of our actions in response to it. At least with the social isolation measures, fewer people are dead by the end of it.

<comment><USER4> > ignoring the fact that a pandemic ravaging unchecked through the entire > population would be having an even worse effect

Isn't that entirely hypothetical though? Find it hard to take such statements seriously when the experience worldwide is so widely varied.

The evidence is clear that lockdowns have caused this economic impact, how can anyone actually make accurate estimates of the alternative?

<comment><USER5> Weeks before the official lock down, coworkers were already changing behavior. Going out to dinner less, stocking up on food, buying extra supplies, etc. Not everyone was doing this, but it was not uncommon. This was weeks before the first case hit the area.

I think a lock down of sorts would've happened eventually, no matter what. Once restrictions are relaxed, a large percentage of people are still going to be very, very cautious. I will not board a plane or sit in a movie theater any time soon.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Well no-one would have thought that this pandemic would have been the cause of exposing these startup companies (unicorn or not) that are struggling to generate revenue and that rely on endless VC funding rounds for hyper-growth to start shrivelling up right now.

Perhaps it's time to focus on startups that actually generate revenue and high profits and invest in technology that is a good for everyone, such as healthcare rather than 'nice to haves' which have no plan for profitability.

As strangely predicted here: [0]

[0] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21627809](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21627809)

<comment><USER7> As Theranos amply demonstrated, being in an important industry like healthcare is no guarantee that you'll be able to generate real revenue or achieve high profits.

<comment><USER8> Theranos was a scam.

<comment><USER9> Hindsight is 20/20\. Investors couldn't just step into the future and ask someone whether or not Theranos was a scam and why.

<comment><USER10> They could have asked to see the proof that it worked and asked an independent third party to verify it. That's usually what happens when people do due diligence, and it happens every day in the business world.

<comment><USER11> Also, experts raises the red flags years before the scam was finally revealed. The fraud was trivially discoverable; investors let their goals cloud good judgement.

<comment><USER12> You could claim the same about Tesla, it has a lot of expert criticizing their financials but it is still up in the air if they are right or wrong. I guess if it does fail people will claim that it was obvious all along...

<comment><USER13> No, you can't say that about Tesla, nobody ever said making an electric car was literally impossible. Quite the contrary, the technology is well understood.

The experts raised the red flags very early that what Theranos was trying to do didn't appear to be scientifically possible based on current knowledge.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> The thing about Unicorns is that at the end of they day, they're not real

<comment><USER15> On the bright side, maybe we can get some horses out of all this.

<comment><USER16> Thouroughbreds!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Time to bring back fuckedcompany.com?

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

<comment><USER18> That was one of the best sites of the dotcom era, but not because it reported news of failures. It was because it reported news of wreckless stupidity, ludicrous excess, obviously bad decisions _and then_ the inevitable failure that followed.

Without those traits of how utterly crazy startups could be back then FuckedCompany wouldn't be so much fun.

<comment><USER19> Like Aeron chairs and catered meals. Things that were considered excessive are quite common at tech companies.

<comment><USER20> I've never understood why Aeron chairs are considered excessive in the US. They cost like $600, or one month's health insurance costs to the company, last for _years_ , and have a decent resale value. Even for a company paying $20/hr (bare minimum for a desk job), that comes out to less than 1 week's wages.

<comment><USER21> Its not that they were excessive... and they do last for years. Its that immediately after getting funding the startups of the period immediately spent a good chunk of it on high end quality of life items. The most visible was the chair. And they weren't that cheap then either (they're _much_ less expensive now - in 2000, the chair was $1100 - which is $1650 in today's money. I can find a new Aeron chair for about half that and a refurbished one for a quarter)

[https://nymag.com/news/intelligencer/21364/](https://nymag.com/news/intelligencer/21364/)

> Aerons were hailed as triumphs of industrial design and were a whole > different beast from the overstuffed leather power chairs that dominated the > Old Economy. "They're not in my mind an example of hubris as much as they > are an example of companies trying to treat their staff more generously than > they could actually afford," says information architect Chris Fahey.

They were the most visible symbol of the excesses of the dot com startup office. The new pool table, the foosball table, ping pong table, espresso machines in the break room in the office that they just moved into. The chair is the one that people can point to being common to everything (and was also part of the stuff that was getting sold after the 95% layoff).

These are not companies that had lasted years to get the value out of the chair but rather in the range of months to a few years. They were spending money like it was free in hopes to get acquired before they had to sell it all and try again.

The chair? I love it and I would have seriously considered (gulp) another a month or so ago instead of a different mesh chair if I had realized that the refurbished ones were as affordable as they are.

<comment><USER22> > information architect Chris Fahey

Speaking of blasts from the past - when was the last time you saw an information architect?

<comment><USER17> An absence sorely felt in most apps and websites one has to deal with today.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> This is the time period for OpenDoor to either be a proven business model or a failure. If they survive the next 24 months, their value should be absolutely huge. If they fail, it proves that the business cannot handle periodic downturns.

One thing I don't see in these announcements are extended exercise windows. That would be a basic thing to offer employees, and someone should keep a list of HR/Finance/C-suite people at companies that do or don't do this during this period.

<comment><USER24> Carta (from the article) posted the benefits for employees who got laid off. They're pretty amazing relative to others. [https://medium.com/@henrysward/cartas-covid-19-layoff- cbb80e...](https://medium.com/@henrysward/cartas-covid-19-layoff-cbb80e3e8a5d)

<comment><USER19> 3 months severance is California law and part of the CA-Warn act. Nice they covered cobra till the end of the year.

<comment><USER24> The WARN Act is not severance! It requires that the company notify employees 60 days in advance of a mass layoff. They don't have to specifically notify the individuals being laid off.

There is no requirement for severance in California!

<comment><USER19> Most companies forgo notification and pay out two months of pay. So it becomes a defacto severance. Do you know any company that actually gave notice and kept the employees on for two months?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Is it really a surprise though? Not all tech companies operate in "essential" sector and right now people I would consider essential ( say.. dentists ) are closing their doors until the worst is over. No one is immune now. Hmm. I could have said yet and no pun intended.

<comment><USER26> Very little oral procedures are essential. If people have to be in a lot of pain and otherwise not be able to function, they can get that checked at the ER.

<comment><USER27> Very little oral procedures are _urgent_. Most of them are essential.

<comment><USER28> Indeed, even periodontitis has been implicated in serious health developments like Alzheimer's disease. Dental hygiene is very important but rarely needs to be done on a strict deadline.

<comment><USER26> That's not true. Periodontis may cause more beta amyloids but whether beta amyloids is the real cause of Alzheimers is not conclusive. Drugs that's suppose to down regulate beta amyloids have shown no efficacy on Alzheimer's. As in, it is not clear whether beta amyloid is a cause of or a symptom of the disease.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I wonder how AWS market share will be impacted by startup's going through a bear market. No doubt AWS has a big enterprise component that should weather fine, but they're also generally the default 1st choice for a lot much smaller more vulnerable shops.

<comment><USER30> I wonder myself. AWS has been pushing out more changes to their "IP Ranges" file recently. I've been keeping count, just to make sure it's not me inventing a thing:

        2020-01-05,   5
        2020-01-12,   6
        2020-01-19,   9
        2020-01-26,   3
        2020-02-02,   3
        2020-02-09,   4
        2020-02-16,   2
        2020-02-23,   8
        2020-03-01,   3
        2020-03-08,   9
        2020-03-15,   2
        2020-03-22,   4
        2020-03-29,  15
        2020-04-05,   7

Per week, there's much more activity recently, and some digging into it suggests they are bringing in more IPs. Could mean they're busier, or could just be longer term plans coming to fruition now.

<comment><USER31> They're obviously busier and bringing in more resources, considering the recent news of the clouds running out of capacity.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Debt financed companies without clear path to revenue are going to be on hold for a while.

Interesting to keep an eye on the CA EDD Warn Act page and see who else shows up:

[https://www.edd.ca.gov/Jobs_and_Training/Layoff_Services_WAR...](https://www.edd.ca.gov/Jobs_and_Training/Layoff_Services_WARN.htm)

<comment><USER33> Here's the direct link to the xlsx file: [https://www.edd.ca.gov/Jobs_and_Training/warn/WARN_Report.xl...](https://www.edd.ca.gov/Jobs_and_Training/warn/WARN_Report.xlsx)

The data may not be too reflective of the current situation on the ground, however. From the website:

"Note: Executive Order N-31-20 (PDF) temporarily suspends the 60-day notice requirement in the WARN Act. Visit COVID-19: WARN FAQs for more information."

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> I'm still amazed that companies like Zume were getting funded in the first place. Not that there was anything inherently wrong with what they were trying to do, but just... was it even appropriate for a startup to be taking on these tasks.

With Zume specifically, they were working on compostable packaging. Great... though most people aren't going to be able to actually do composting. If this packaging does perform as good or better than conventional plastic packaging, why does _Zume_ need to do that? Is it really central to their mission?

<comment><USER35> Some companies are using the virus as cover to do layoffs they needed to do before, but couldn't do without hurting their reps with the VCs.

A certain Boston based data science startup comes to mind.

<comment><USER36> which one specifically?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I suspect this would have happened sooner if it weren't for the 2017 tax act. Corporate income tax receipts alone dropped by almost $100 billion the year after it was enacted, which is almost 2 million jobs at an average $50k/year.

I'm sure a lot of that went to the corporate bottom line, but the individual tax cuts were even larger, which also contributed positively to jobs.

The hotter the economy is, the farther it's going to fall when something like COVID-19 hits.

</comment><comment><USER38> How much of this is the "SoftBank Squeeze"?

I know 2 (SoftBank funded) companies that are in trouble.

<comment><USER39> WeWork and OneWeb, or two other ones?

<comment><USER38> One in San Diego (AI, robotics) and another in Palo Alto - self driving.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> FYI - [http://layoffs.fyi/](http://layoffs.fyi/)

Do try to help out these individuals in case your company is hiring.

</comment><comment><USER41> >> In a statement provided to TechCrunch, the company's CEO Eric Wu said that 35% of its employee base would be eliminated to "ensure that we can continue to deliver on our mission."

Do they really need to use such coarse language as "eliminated" \- these aren't badies in a computer game, these are real people whose lives could be seriously derailed by losing their income.

<comment><USER42> I totally agree. The word eliminated is surprisingly common in the US but I think it has violent connotations. Alternatives are harder than I thought but separating, off-boarding, and reduction in force (RIF) might help depending on the context.

<comment><USER41> As a Brit (residing in Australia), US communication always feels so direct and littered with unnecessary complex words.

A few of my colleagues dread speaking with US counterparts because they always come across as condescending (when they're definitely not meaning to be).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> Archived version for Europeans: [http://archive.vn/ycUKq](http://archive.vn/ycUKq)

</comment><comment><USER44> A unicorn with a small moat is just a goat.

</comment><comment><USER45> I'm a little surprised considering the recent legislation that should have basically had the government loan you money which would then be forgiven if you retain staff. Is this not working out in practice, or companies of a certain size that are phased out are doing the firing?

<comment><USER11> There are different tiers of loans based on company size. While I don't have the tiers memorized, I think most unicorns would be excluded from the very generous terms.

<comment><USER46> Vox's 'The Weeds' podcast last episode [0] was about the stimulus bill (AKA CARES Act 2020, [1]).

[0] [https://www.vox.com/the-weeds](https://www.vox.com/the-weeds) [1] [https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate- bill/354...](https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate- bill/3548/text)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> As an old trading friend of mine said, this is the "shakeout"[0] of a lot of unviable businesses in SV. He recalled similar things happening during the dotcom bubble.

[0] [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakeout](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakeout)

<comment><USER48> I've been waiting for this to happen for years. Some of the unicorn/FOMO lunacy has faded in the last few years, but there still has been no big cull. At least if the economy at large recovers (which is a massive, huge if), the tech industry absolutely will be better for this. So many good ideas get crowded out by buzzword-compliant nonsense.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> I've thought a lot of VC money was extremely suspicious. These gigantic unicorns run at losses for what, a decade? Where's the value in any of this? To call this high risk is an understatement. Take Uber, for example. They're betting on self driving cars and that the populous (or politicians) allow them to operate. Mean while they've been a money hole for 11 years?

I guess Covid will be a good time to test how much of this is all hot air. I imagine those who provide or can pivot to vital services reliably will survive. These are the kinds of times where capitalism thrives, _provided a majority of actors are operating in good faith._

<comment><USER50> The interesting thing about Uber is before Covid-19 I thought that the ride sharing arm of the company was the profitable path and the food delivery arm, Uber Eats was a lost cause. Now it seems like that theory has been thrown on its head as ride shares plummet and takeouts soar. But still I think profit margins on food delivery are not that high so I wonder if Uber will escape unscathed from layoffs/closures, VC funding will only last so long when a majority of your business dries up.

<comment><USER16> They're not high, especially on small orders. It will let them get some revenue while people are on lockdown, but not massive profits I think.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> The long waited startup crash is happening but with a clever camouflage. None of the executives would ever have to admit their product sucked. They'll simply blame it on the market. It's employees who'll face the worst. I hate the VC startup culture even more now.

<comment><USER52> well, most tech companies are non-essential by nature. There are lots of companies that are only feasible in a bull market. There are lots of product people can simply go without in most industries.

Tech just has more non-essential, nice-to-have companies than other industries.

<comment><USER53> Which industry is not a technology industry according to you? And which companies would survive another century without becoming a technology company?

<comment><USER54> There are lo-tech spaces, and a great many which are not, or avoid high technology, which is what most people. mean by "tech sector", if not the even narrower band of "high information technology".

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

Particularly the cited reference, the OECD definition:

Hatzichronoglou, Thomas: "Revision of the High-Technology Sector and Product Classification", OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, No. 1997/02, OECD Publishing, Paris.

[https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/science-and- technology/revisi...](https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/science-and- technology/revision-of-the-high-technology-sector-and-product- classification_134337307632)

Page 7 specifically divides industries into four technology levels, high, medium-high, medium low, and low.

Given J.S. Mill's wonderful definition of technology, 'the study of means", there's little in human activity which is ccompletely _atechnological_. There remains, however, much that is quite some remove from the cutting edge.

In the technology adoption lifecycle, high tech are innovators. An early- adopter firm is itself still not high tech itself.

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

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER55> Pinterest went down briefly yesterday and I was alarmed that its funding had been cut off. Many of us visual designers rely on it. Pinterest is one of those companies that may or may not be a Unicorn, it looks like it has a viable path to profitability but who knows.

</comment><comment><USER56> none of this is unexpected. most of SV VC backed businesses are not sustainable. so the first instance of pressure, they crack and fold. and worse everyone is drunk and high on their own kool-aid. instead of iterating quickly on products they focus on playing around with tech. for business instead of getting paying customers, they focus on the next round. instead of having few expenses as possible, they would rather have a ice sculptures</comment>


Hardening Compiler Flags for NixOS - <AUTHOR> https://blog.mayflower.de/5800-Hardening-Compiler-Flags-for-NixOS.html <comment><USER2> Excellent! Really, anything to propel Nix(OS) or Guix(SD) forward gets a huge thumbs up in my book. Nix is one of those things that I explain and then have people telling me I'm wrong and/or an idiot because they can't believe that you can have a distribution based on building packages from source, backed by a binary cache. If you think Snappy or Flatpak/Xdg-App are cool, you owe it to yourself to look at Nix/Guix, which provide a superset of the features provided by Snappy. And then some.

NixOS + NixOps means I can have a single declarative file that describes the state of my cloud VMs, cloud load balancer, cloud Traffic Manager... _plus_ the exact software on the VMs (all the way down to the exact checkout of gcc used to compile everything and the nginx configurations)... literally everything is snapshotted and revertable.

If it weren't for a systemd-related bug, I'd have a one-command way of getting a Kubernetes cluster booted in Azure via NixOS, where upgrading a cluster would simply require editting a single file and re-running the nixops tool.

I wish more people knew about NixOS. You know how everyone writes pie-in-the- sky blogposts about the "next-gen" Node.JS package manager? Yeah, well, Nix already packages NodeJS libraries/apps, plus Rust libraries/apps, plus Go libraries/apps, plus Python libraries/apps, etc, etc.

<comment><USER3> "If it weren't for a systemd-related bug..."

I've started so many sentences with those exact words, and it kind of saddens me. I'm still hoping that the problems with systemd aren't fundamental to its architecture, and it just needs some more polishing. It certainly is incredibly ambitious as it aims to replace on the order of a dozen different pieces of software, so some hiccups are to be expected.

<comment><USER4> Nah, its the mentality within the project.

One that i think can be summed up as "code, compile, push, repeat".

More and more it seems that the incoming generation treats everything like a web site that they can change at whim. Likely because they have had the internet and source repositories the whole time, and thus do not know the value of a truly stable and maintained system.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> If there are any other roadblocks keeping you from using Nix in your infrastructure: keep in mind you can overlay Nix on top of another distribution. This way you can get a more mature base system and still have all the benefits of Nix available when you want it.

<comment><USER6> Good to know. Last I checked it had trouble with steam which kept me from trying it on my home machine.

<comment><USER7> Just tested steam last week without any issues :)

<comment><USER6> Good to hear, I may have to give it another shot.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I am glad to see this finally get merged--great work!

For those who are curious about the declarative OS and package ecosystem offered by NixOS, the newest stable release (16.09) is coming in the following weeks.

<comment><USER9> Is the new, more user friendly, CLI in 16.09?

<comment><USER8> Judging by the commits I've seen, I'm guessing no. Not sure what the time frame on this is, but it seems a lot of people are looking forward to it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Awesome work, Franz et al!

<comment><USER11> Absolutely. NixOS is awesome. The lack of decent hardening by default was the only thing preventing me from using it more confidently. I'm thoroughly impressed by the many people who have worked hard to push this through. Thanks so much to everyone who's worked on this!

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Talking about stack protector providing any sort of guarantee makes me chuckle. Both this and fortify are relatively easy to work around. PIC/PIE are the real protection, and but still nowhere near foolproof. Also new Address Sanitizer is not mentioned.

<comment><USER13> Address Sanitizer slows down execution a lot. It should only used for testing purposes, the same as -O0.

<comment><USER14> What if you care more about unsafe pointer access than speed?

<comment><USER15> Address Sanitizer isn't designed to be used in production. See this thread: [http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2016/q1/363](http://seclists.org/oss- sec/2016/q1/363)

ASAN is great at detecting many unintentional memory errors, but it's not designed to thwart malicious attacks.

If you need a specific example of ASAN binary being exploited then see: [http://int3pids.blogspot.ch/2015/04/confidence-2015-teaser-q...](http://int3pids.blogspot.ch/2015/04/confidence-2015-teaser- quarantine-write.html)

<comment><USER12> Correct, but it still prevents a large set of attacks. Instead, we need an equivalent that is more focused on security than bug detection. CPI is the mechanism for the future with somewhere below 10% overhead.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> anyone knows why they disable -pie by default? I know a lot of others do so as well, but this should be really pushed forward and be the default. Full ASLR is most likely the strongest exploit mitigation mechanism that's available right now.

<comment><USER17> We disabled -pie so we could get it merged in. We would like pie enabled by default (for the reasons you say) but didn't want perfect be the enemy of good here.</comment></comment>


I'm still alive after my startup failed. This is how I felt - <AUTHOR> http://pastebin.com/kCi68Rhv

<comment><USER3> For some people the hyper-focus is essential to their wellbeing and sense of purpose. I can understand why you feel depressed for putting your all into something and having it not work the way you had imagined.

Sure you may have lost out on some relationships, and sure you may not be able to get that time back, but it definitely wasn't time wasted, or no life.

Imagine what it must feel like laying on your deathbed, full of regret, knowing you never "went" for it. Playing it safe is the surest way to mediocrity after all.

Try not to fixate on the failure, as it's really your informal education. Take what you've learnt from this failure, and apply it to the next endeavor, whatever it may be.

Always move forward. Keep your head held high. Be a good person. You'll be okay.

</comment><comment><USER4> You sound like an old co-founder of mine. When he latched onto something, be it developing code or burning a DVD collection, he went all in, and dropped everything else for extended periods of time. While I do this at times as well, I think it's best to live a balanced lifestyle ([http://www.pathways.cu.edu.eg/subpages/training_courses/Well...](http://www.pathways.cu.edu.eg/subpages/training_courses/Wellness/images/W_I_Page_01.png)). I believe you can have a family and take vacations and still build a killer startup. Look at famous people like Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, the CEOs of many fortune 500 companies - many are married with kids - and yet still very successful in business.

</comment><comment><USER5> I feel for you, but it's not the end yet.

There are two important things you can do.

1) Looks like you wrote some cool code, so at least "github" it, so that you have a resume item & some cred when you want just a salary job.

2) Talk to people. They won't understand, but they'll occasionally do something good for you. Maybe a pancake dinner cooked or late night "dinner for losers" on a saturday night.

I worked on something for 5 years to drop it completely and move on - <USER2> heartbreaking but that CVS repo got me a job and indirectly, paid my bills.

</comment><comment><USER6> I'm curious about the project.</comment>


Dish Fined $250,000 For Blacklisting Whistle Blowing Employee - <AUTHOR> http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Dish-Fined-250000-For-Blacklisting-Whistle-Blowing-Employee-128202

<comment><USER2> Why can't we fine Obama for blacklisting a Whistle Blowing Employee......I mean how is someone whistle blowing on a corrupt corporation different from someone whistle blowing on a corrupt government agency? Seriously we have our priorities wrong, cause corruption in government is way worse than corruption @ Dish network, seriously.

</comment><comment><USER3> 250k fine is very misleading:

> OSHA has subsequently forced Dish to pay $157,024 in back wages, $100,000 in > compensatory damages, as well as the former employee's legal fees.

so 157k was paying a debt, not really a fine.

<comment><AUTHOR> The OSHA headline is fairly precise:

 _US Department of Labor 's OSHA orders DISH Network to pay more than $257,000 in wages and damages to blacklisted former employee_

Back wages typically are "lost opportunity" payments, and not debts (in plain english usage), but rather contingent liabilities (because they are un-earned until administratively granted).

Similarly to how none of this was a "fine" but it was an "ordered" payment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Wait what? What motivates Dish do that? Were they laundering money or something?

<comment><USER5> My initial thought is that there was a cushy deal and someone higher up was getting kickbacks, and didn't like it being called out.</comment></comment>