Ask HN: Day long side project - <AUTHOR>

I really want to get started selling my own software. I'm working on a small startup that is going well but will take a few months to start making money.<p>What are some ideas of a project that I could do in roughly a days time and make some money from? I'm not talking big money, just any money to get my first experience and build some momentum. <comment><USER2> Wel, if you love open source give it a try to [http://bountysource.com](http://bountysource.com)

<comment><AUTHOR> Oh wow, this seems really interesting. Although I think I will give this a try if nothing else comes up, to me this is more along the lines of contract work then selling software.</comment></comment>


Google to Make British Library Archive Available Online - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.wsj.com/tech-europe/2011/06/20/google-to-make-british-library-archive-available-online/

<comment><USER2> One of the suggestions in the article is that other EU countries are beginning to climb on board. If that is the case then with any luck at all, the ridiculous 1870 limit due to instance copyright problems may erode and eventually disappear. Should that happen it is even conceivable that a similar effect might return to or shores to accomplish the same thing. The future 'net' should include the totality of all national libraries available or what's a net for?</comment>


Democracy in Open Source: Yes or No? (+ Our Research Proposal) - <AUTHOR> http://modeling-languages.com/democracy-in-open-source-our-research-proposal-pls-help/ <comment><USER3> No. Open source should be more like Darwinism. If you want to make a change, you fork the code. If the creator(s) likes your changes, they incorporate it. If a code base is good, it survives, if it isn't it dies.

The key point is freedom - your freedom to do whatever you like with the code, and the creators freedom to do what they like.

<comment><USER4> Or the freedom to come to the conclusion that someone else's vision is worth supporting, and choosing to devote time and effort to helping them realise it.

"Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty." ― Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse: Dune

<comment><USER3> Yeah I have no issue with project managers/creators choosing a democratic process.

Just issues with users who demand it...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I think democracy is almost the worst way to take decisions when it comes to scientific/engineering things. In an open source project, a single expert should be able to overrule the mass of users/contributors if his point is technically more correct. This is very difficult to consistently achieve in a democracy.

I would love to see the results/conclusion of this research. We would finally get some data-backed insight into why/why not democracy is good for a software project.

<comment><USER6> This sort of sh*t scares me. Thinking that software is a purely technical endeavor where an expert can always be "right" and thus ignore non experts.

<comment><USER5> Note that I do not think non-experts should be ignored. I think everyone should be able to voice their opinion, expert or non-expert. But there should be a final authority where the buck stops, and their word should be final, no matter how _many_ people wanted something else.

Also, I agree that experts are not always right, but they are right in overwhelmingly more cases. Which is practically "always". The small number of times an expert is outright wrong, is a risk I'm willing to take.

<comment><USER6> You realize your first sentence is practically the definition for a democratic republic?

I wasn't taking issue with the proposed decision making mechanism. I was taking issue with the idea that there are purely "technical solutions". In math, the most intangible of disciplines, I was taught that when working solving an open problem, the most important question to answer will always be, "So what?" It's easy to come up with novel but trivial proofs all day long. If you can't explain why the new proof is important, then, so what? Go play with Legos.

If such an intangible discipline requires some justification part of its most foundational task, then surely there must be some broader justification in software development. And I'm being specific when I use the term 'software development'. It's not like we're talking about computer science or applied mathematics.

Software development builds things that are to be used by end users for a purpose. There is plenty of room in software development for non-technical perspectives, and non-technical discussions will never be black-or-white. Often a software development project with be built specifically for a non- expert. In that case, to say that the end-user "should not necessarily be ignored" is such a bad tenor to be set for the discussion.

Last, I'd like to mention the idea of a do-ocracy, which is what many OSS projects have organically turned into. In these cases, the technical expert and the novice alike can do whatever they want, because folks will either choose to work with them or not. But in a do-ocracy it's not likely that someone will be forced to do something they don't agree with or at least sign- on-to.

If you want a "buck stops here" set-up, then go to a company that has a hierarchy or pay people to do what you tell them to do. But otherwise, there is no Utopia where programmers can go write whatever software they want and that others will be required to use without getting to share in the decision making process.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> _In fact, the one that says how decisions are taken follows a Benevolent Dictator for life model. Cleary, not something we would accept in any other community aspect of our society._

There are a handful of counter examples floating through my head. The BDFL model can be described generically as willing collaboration among peers where one ultimately has the power to control the project. The strongest example that comes to mind is bands. A band can have a very similar model, they - <USER2> open source - can also have a project structure nothing like a BDFL.

 _Cleary, not something we would accept in any other community aspect of our society._

This is also kinda funny to me because if we make a theoretical BDFL more controlling than we expect from an average Open Source BDFL, we accept this model for collaboration _all the time_. It's called "management." What's not funny is that this is the premise is treated as axiomatic by the researcher.

<comment><USER8> Moreover, BDFL has clear upsides over a more democratic model. Not considering that "in any other community aspect of our society" is just stupid.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Imagine a building whose design and construction was governed by democracy. The architecture would be a horrible mish-mash of whatever happened to be popular, and likely architecturally unsound and unsafe. The actual construction would be a nightmare too, since someone would have the "brilliant" idea of painting drywall before laying it so people don't have to use unsafe ladders, ect.

Software can be millions of times more complicated than building blueprints. Why in the hell do you think democracy will work for software when it doesn't work for office buildings?

Contrast this with the way open source development generally proceeds. A single developer (or maybe a few) create a software project as the core team. They are the experts for that project. Other people can make suggestions and contribute, but it's up to the core team to decide if something meshes with the vision they have for the project.

What if someone disagrees? They can simply fork the project and try out their own vision. They are the expert of their own project.

This has some amazing consequences. First of all there can be _multiple_ winners. Project A can be very popular, yet project B, which caters to a minority, can also exist and serve people with different needs and tastes. Second, it allows parallel experiments of multiple ideas, which encourages rapid innovation to take place. Finally, it helps minimize conflict between people, since you can join or start a project that meets your fancy without penalty.

Contrast this with democracy. In a democracy it's winner take all. Majority vote determines what everyone has to live with. This creates conflict and intense competition (including bribes and corruption) to get majority vote. It slows innovation because things can only be done one way at a time, whichever way was popular. There can be no single vision, everything becomes a huge contorted mess. It's hard enough to architect software with a single vision.

You should be doing research on how to make politics more like the (multi)governance of open source development, not the other way around!

<comment><USER10> > Imagine a building whose design and construction was governed by democracy

I haven't seen that, so it's hard to imagine (and I would thus reserve my judgement on that). But I have seen comedy governed by democracy, and it's not as bad as you suggest: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Python](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Python) But I do agree it's a mish-mash. :-)

Anyway, I think it's hard to make the OSS model work in politics. In politics (and other fields), you are severely resource constrained. However, in OSS model, anybody can fork the code on their own system.

<comment><USER9> It is precisely because of resource constraints that the open source model would work better. Take education for example. What if anyone could start a school with any standard for curriculum? It would instantly solve the arguments that happen over the democracy of curriculum we have today. It would also allow experimentation into redefining how education is done. We could easily see what works and what doesn't without having to change education for an entire state or the country. How many resources have we wasted following fads? How many good ideas have been skipped because they were too risky to implement universally?

There are obvious downsides as well, but history seems to show that the benefits outweigh the downsides for this type of model.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> We're researchers trying to get funding to study how existing knowledge in political science, social science and economy can be adapted to improve open source software development. We need the input of OSS developers !

</comment><comment><USER11> It sounds vaguely interesting what existing knowledge there is on people working for free for a common cause out of their own volition, and where democracy comes into play.

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch"

<comment><USER10> > Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch

No, it isn't. You cannot put democracy itself to a "democratic" vote, that's a version of Russell's paradox.

In particular, deciding who gets to vote, even by voting, isn't democratic. The democratic decision must be potentially reversible.

<comment><USER12> Of course you can. Democracy is just the ruling of a majority of a specific group. It doesn't have any inherent "higher ideals", human rights, or whatever.

<comment><USER10> I disagree. The above condition is unorthodox, I admit, but is needed to make the definition logically consistent.

The idea of democracy is to give everybody the same voice in decision making. There are different mechanisms to achieve that, direct voting is only one of them. Other mechanisms are consensus, random selection and representation. Each of the mechanisms has different strengths and weaknesses and should be used to decide different things. You can also combine them to an extent, for instance you can randomly select members of a jury who then decide by consensus.

<comment><USER12> I do like your idealism. But what means "to give everybody the same voice"? Is this about having your voice heard? Or about actually participating in a decision? Either way, only the pure direct democracy guarantees both. In the end you still have the rule of the majority. What you might be looking for is some sort of equal representation of "minority groups"? We're somewhat doing this in Switzerland on the executive level and this only partially works because the executive is explicitly chosen to be very "consensus friendly" in other words no extreme (left/right) positions.

But this won't really work with the legislature, because there we have all kind of incompatible ideologies. There is simply no consensus possible with the contemporary ideologies (socialism, liberalism, conservatism, etc.) by their very definition. If you insist on consensus, your decision making process will simply deadlock forever. How can you ever unlock it? By shifting to a almost-consensus aka direct democracy.

<comment><USER10> It is about actually equally participating in the decision. I agree with you on direct democracy, I am big fan of it (since about 2000).

Consensus can work but only in a very small groups. That's why I explained that there are different methods to achieve democratic participation and have different trade-offs.

I don't think ideologies are big a problem for direct democracy. I think they are artifacts of representative system, where you have to choose a package of things, rather than when you can decide each issue in isolation. From what I heard, that actually happens in Switzerland - since everybody is sometimes in a minority in referendum, people don't take losing as a big deal.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I find myself harumphing at much of the proposal. It's not the topic itself; democracy can work in open source, and I think Debian is well served by that model. There are interesting things to be researched about open source project management, but the approach doesn't seem to face them head on, and is full of assumptions that could be detrimental to the usefulness or quality of findings.

I'd have to really dig into the proposal but I don't even have time to fully absorb that blog post. I'll try to expand on this after work if I still give half a damn.

</comment><comment><USER13> Name any software you use that is produced by a democratic process... anyone?

<comment><AUTHOR> A few centuries ago were no democratic societies either (and some of us still have kings :-) ). Does this mean we should have stayed like that?

<comment><USER13> No, it doesn't mean that monarchy is better. But if you want to argue for democracy in open source projects, the lack of positive examples does merit some consideration.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Let's vote for it! [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1aN7VRwyEmHP7Y4DTF4tkWz_VSea...](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1aN7VRwyEmHP7Y4DTF4tkWz_VSea6VdTXQhlbClwgllk/viewform?usp=send_form)</comment>


How did two groups of fish separately evolve genes for making antifreeze? - <AUTHOR> https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/03/how-fish-evolved-antifreeze-junk/585226/ <comment><USER2> From the headline I'd immediately guess many groups of fish were living in above-zero waters adjacent to sub-zero waters containing food. Eventually some of them experienced a random mutation which made them slightly less freezy and earned them free food!

The account of the actual sequence of mutations required was really interesting, though. It's good to see an article go into that kind of detail!

<comment><USER3> Maybe the mutation wasn't really random? I wouldn't be surprised if at some point we find that the "90% unused brain capacity" is actually doing some long-term adaptation computations and then uses various signals to put that information into reproductive cells...

<comment><USER4> We are seeing external adaptive pressures that diminish natural selection as an absolute, such as in this paper [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4333222/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4333222/)

Its nice that science is able to adapt to new information.

Natural selection needed to be an absolute to counter state-religion based spontaneous creation.

But its now not an absolute, with worthwhile investigation of how life experience can make its way into zygotes.

Maybe one day we can even prove spontaneous creation, and learn the process for that.

<comment><USER5> Maybe one day we can prove there's a teacup orbiting Saturn too !

<comment><USER4> maybe. the consequences being...?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Not really relevant, but too much of a fun fact for me not to share: the partner's name is "DeVries", which I'm guessing has a Dutch origin, and literally translates to "TheFreeze".

(I suspect its etymological origin is more related to Frysia, though.)

<comment><USER7> Not quite, 'de Vries' in Dutch translates to 'the Friesian'.

<comment><USER8> No, that would be DeFries.

<comment><USER6> Exactly, although the word probably derives from that - hence my remark about its etymological origin.

<comment><USER9> vries means freeze. even though not used like that specifically, you are right in your thought that vries means freeze. "ik vries" -> "i freeze".

friesland's name is disputed though between being founded by a guy named 'friso' and that 'Fries' means 'peoples with curly hair' :D - so much for logic & linguistics :D!

<comment><USER6> > so much for logic & linguistics :D!

Which is why I didn't want to go into the _actual_ etymology, because the only reason it was a fun fact is because the current meaning of the word is freeze, regardless of what it referred to in the past :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I love this stuff. Coolest science to learn and read about. Thank you for sharing it!

<comment><USER11> Agreed. I also want to thank good scientific journalism writing when I see it. Translating scientific news into a format geared toward a layperson is very difficult, and I thought this author did a great job. I thought his "thralala" neologism was great and made for a better read that was also easier to understand.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Interesting article about some of the mechanics of DNA and evolution.

But I wanted to call out a confusing use of the increasingly ambiguous word "partner" here: "There, she and her partner, Arthur DeVries, studied the notothens".

What sort of partner? Research partner, clearly. Oh, but with some googling you can find that they are married, so also romantic/life partner.

I appreciate the sentiment behind the takeoff in the use of this phrasing, but it inevitably leads to confusion in communication. Can we come up with a better word that is not so ambiguous? And if not, can we (or at least the editors at places like The Atlantic) try to clarify what sort of partner when the meaning is ambiguous?

<comment><USER13> Why? This is science reporting, not tabloid journalism. We don't need to know the marital status, gender preference, dietary restrictions, previous relationships, etc. Good writing about science is plenty. And "spouse" is a fine word if needed.

<comment><USER14> I agree with you, but then why bring it up at all?

<comment><USER15> They didn't bring it up.

> What sort of partner? Research partner, clearly.

The fact that the two happen also to be married need not be related to the use of the word.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Web Application on Erlang: So Far, So Good, - <AUTHOR> http://beebole.com/blog/2008/09/02/web-application-on-erlang/ <comment><USER3> Cool... I think a potential sweet spot for Erlang is doing just this: avoiding HTML and doing Javascript (client side) <-> Erlang (server side). Erlang - <USER2> at least anything I've ever seen over the last few years - is just not a good language to do templates with. And while overall that's not a deal killer, I'm a bit spoiled by Ruby; it's flexible enough to do whatever you want with it, including using a simple subset to do HTML templates.</comment>


Soylent International - <AUTHOR> http://blog.soylent.me/post/52848169533/soylent-international

<comment><USER2> I'd be interested in seeing a comparison of Soylent against Ensure Complete. They seem to be very similar in intent: [http://ensure.com/products/ensure- complete-shakes](http://ensure.com/products/ensure-complete-shakes) and based on the nutrition information for Ensure Complete from that page and the rough description of Soylent ([http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424](http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424)) I do not see a major difference.

It would appear that to get the same nutrients as Soylent I would need to drink 4 bottles of Ensure Complete per day. From the Abbott store they are $41.99 for 16 bottles: a week's supply works out at $73.48. Very close to Soylent pricing.

What makes Soylent better?

<comment><USER3> Looking at Ensure, I don't get the impression that you're supposed to be able to live _entirely_ on it.

It looks more like a meal substitute (liquid nutrition bar) than a food substitute.

<comment><USER4> From the Ensure FAQ @ [http://ensure.ca/en/faq/](http://ensure.ca/en/faq/)

" >For how long can I use Ensure?

Ensure products deliver complete and balanced nutrition that is always beneficial. There is no time limit to using Ensure products. In fact, long- term use is encouraged if you're at a nutritional risk (for example, if you're an older adult).

>Can Ensure replace a meal?

Yes. Ensure products are complete and balanced, when used in appropriate amounts they can be used to replace meals. "

I believe it is also used in hospitals with a feeding tube for long term sustenance however, I'm not finding a great source for that with a quick google.

<comment><USER5> Well, here's a source for that (they use it in Guantanamo):

[http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/04/29/3370916/more-navy- medi...](http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/04/29/3370916/more-navy-medics- arrive-at-guantanamo.html)

<comment><USER6> I wonder how the creator of Ensure (or Soylent) would feel knowing that they're products were being used in this way..

<comment><USER7> The creator of Ensure know that the products are used for force-feeding. It happens with anorexics all the time.

EDIT: But kefs makes a good point; you think you're making food and then you find out it's being used for something that you strongly disagree with. what do you do? Take the money? Or don't sell to certain markets?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This is perhaps the worst example of people who learn their science and medicine from reading Reddit that I have yet seen in the Hacker News community. It illustrates the fallibility of human nature behind every new business scheme, and shows that a business doesn't have to be a big, multinational publicly traded corporation to engage in business with little regard for customer safety or public benefit.

AFTER EDIT: I have read the numerous stories submitted here about this YC- affiliated company before, and, yes, I am painfully aware of the company founder's appalling lack of background in nutrition and medicine.

[http://blog.soylent.me/post/51007573199/the-biggest-pivot- in...](http://blog.soylent.me/post/51007573199/the-biggest-pivot-in-yc- history)

<comment><USER9> Yeah, I'm pretty sure that you don't actually know where this guy learned his science and medicine. Let people experiment on themselves. IMO there are enough humans that if a few get slightly ill from this, it is worth it for the chance that it does work (which seems significant given the experimentation he did on himself, the presence of similar, competing products, etc.).

<comment><USER10> One of the reasons we have consumer protection laws and the FDA is so that people _don't_ have to experiment on themselves in order to verify the more extravagant claims made by products.

People should have a reasonable expectation that when they buy a product, it will work as expected and as advertised. And they should have recourse if this turns out not to be the case.

<comment><USER9> I'd totally have a problem with this if it were being advertised as a highly tested, rock solid product rather than a nutritional experiment. Since that's not the case, I'm fine with it.

<comment><USER7> From the crowd funding page:

> _For anyone who struggles with allergies, heartburn, acid reflux or > digestion, has trouble controlling weight or cholesterol, or simply doesn 't > have the means to eat well, soylent is for you._

> _Soylent frees you from the time and money spent shopping, cooking and > cleaning, puts you in excellent health,_

> _By taking years to spoil_

> _The founders and scores of DIYers have been living on Soylent for months > and there is much evidence that is considerably healthier than a typical > diet._

There's no mention on the crowd-funding page that this is an experiment.

I tend to agree with you - people can do what they like with their bodies and this product would fit a lot better if it was sold as an experiment, with access to discussion forums and etc.

I notice they now have a disclaimer on that page.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Soylent have mentioned world hunger. Here's how the World Food Programme tackle it: ([https://www.wfp.org/nutrition/how-wfp-fights- malnutrition](https://www.wfp.org/nutrition/how-wfp-fights-malnutrition))

Here's the list of WFP food products ([https://www.wfp.org/nutrition/special- nutritional-products](https://www.wfp.org/nutrition/special-nutritional- products)) - especially look at the price. I guess they're making full use of charitable status and economies of scale.

Here's Plumpy'Nut, a fortified food product for starving children ([http://www.irinnews.org/report/83124/malawi-cheaper- recipe-f...](http://www.irinnews.org/report/83124/malawi-cheaper-recipe-for- treating-hungry-children))

EDIT: And even here micronutrient powders are nothing new. See the link to DSM embedded in WFP page above. Here's their corporate page ([http://www.dsm.com/corporate/investors.html](http://www.dsm.com/corporate/investors.html)). They're pretty big.

Note that an important part of Soylent, which is offloaded onto the consumer, is a source of clean water. Much of the world, especially in the target hungry world market, does not have access to clean water. I think people would criticise Soylent for that, so it's something for them to be thinking about.

I have no idea how Soylent is in anyway "disruptive" to that market.

Ignoring the "fixing world hunger" bit, liquid foods are not new. Here's a list:

([http://ensure.com/](http://ensure.com/)) Ensure

([https://www.nutricia.co.uk/fortisip//](https://www.nutricia.co.uk/fortisip//)) Fortisip

([http://www.complan.com/](http://www.complan.com/)) Complan

([http://abbottnutrition.com/brands/abbott- brands](http://abbottnutrition.com/brands/abbott-brands)) Abbott Nutrition Brands

([http://www.medifast1.com/index.jsp](http://www.medifast1.com/index.jsp)) Medifast

([http://www.optifast.com/Pages/index.aspx](http://www.optifast.com/Pages/index.aspx)) Optifast

([http://www.slim-fast.com/products/](http://www.slim-fast.com/products/)) Slimfast

Again - I have no idea how Soylent are disruptive.

Selling into other markets is interesting. I hope they've put disclaimers on some of the more outrageous claims, or they may find resistance. For example "For anyone who struggles with allergies, heartburn, acid reflux or digestion, has trouble controlling weight or cholesterol, or simply doesn't have the means to eat well, soylent is for you." contains medical claims which are treated very differently in the UK than they are in the US.

I see no evidence that Soylent have done any research at all.

</comment><comment><USER11> Not impressed. I manage to eat a healthy (and tasty) diet cheaper than that, while spending minimal amount of my time in the kitchen.

Vegetables steamed in the microwave take less than 5 minutes to prepare. (More on my eating habits: [http://blog.tasuki.org/how-i-didnt-stop-eating- food/](http://blog.tasuki.org/how-i-didnt-stop-eating-food/))

I think eating only Soylent exposes you to a significant risk of missing something vital that we usually get incidentally from regular food.

<comment><USER12> >Scrambled eggs are pushing it, preparation takes like 15 minutes and there's the dirty pan left afterwards. But sometimes I still enjoy them.

How the hell does it take 15mins to prep scrambled eggs? It should take less than 5 and your cleanup should take all of a minute

1\. Put Small/medium saucepan on stove

2\. Add 1/2 Tbsp butter

3\. Crack 2 eggs into pan (Do no beat beforehand)

4\. Put pan on mid-low flame and stir briskly for 2-3mins or until eggs are at a runny-curds texture (soft but "together").

5\. Plate

<comment> jack-r-abbit Some people prefer a few other things in their eggs. So if you need to chop some onion or peppers or meat that will add to the prep and the clean up.

<comment><USER12> Given OP's other "recipes" it seems unlikely that this is the case. Even if it were, it'd hardly add another 10minutes

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I doubt they really care about HN's opinion given the vast number of criticisms put forward, but I do really hope that they'd post more product information, perhaps more of the science, more of the research. Again, as I've said before, hiring a few more relevant scientists would help with their credibility, and might it be possible? -- improve their product. That is all. May there be no more flamewars.

(Granted, I've stopped following this story, so my information might be way out of date)

<comment><USER14> I just skimmed through their discussion board for a while, and it seems they are planning to employ a couple of industry experts (whatever that means) fulltime or for consultation with the money they made from their crowdfunding campaign.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I really like the idea but am hesitant at this early stage to buy soylent. If the general impression is still good after it has been on the market for quite a while I am pretty sure I will order. I don't think I could switch completely, but it sounds like the perfect food to have when you just don't want to invest time to cook something. This would definately be better than to just have a pizza.

</comment><comment><USER15> Here's how you create a Soylent without losing the DIY aesthetic:

1) You make it an open source project under an open license, OpenSoylent

2) You leave any health claims to be made by the OpenSoylent community. If this is unsatisfactory, you put out a bounty for MetaMed to write an independent report on the OpenSoylent wiki with references.

3) You accept people's patches to OpenSoylent

4) You create a separate, unaffilliated company to provide Soylent(tm), an implementation of OpenSoylent, with zero health claims, in a commercial kitchen, and link back to the OpenSoylent wiki for more information

Whether the above is _legal_ or not, I'm not certain, but A) it's a hell of a lot closer than the present situation, and B) it doesn't offend geeks who apply critical thought to businesses that blog.

</comment><comment><USER16> I was interested when it was one guy on a mission for himself. I've become less so now that its clear he wanted to go worldwide with this as soon as possible.

I do not wish the project ill will, but I won't be signing on at this time unless things (re: testing) get a lot more transparent.

<comment><USER17> When huge numbers of people take intense interest in your hobby and keep shouting "shut up and take my money!", to the tune of millions of dollars, it kinda motivates you to go worldwide with it as soon as possible.

You know, what ycombinator is all about.

<comment><USER16> I never thought about it that way...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I'd really get behind an Open Soylent project.

More power to Soylent to monetize this, become a business just like Ensure or Slim Fast (succumbing to all the commercial pressures such products face, like, "Y'know, let's drop pricey molybdenum and just encourage people to have normal food once a day.")

I guess I was way more excited about the project when I thought he was starting a discussion where we can all pool information on self experimentation to help each other generate a cheap, nutritionally complete chemical sludge.

</comment><comment><USER19> I'm not liking how they are going about this at all. They should ensure it is safe first before trying to sell everywhere. I don't like the perception of their intents.

<comment><USER20> And you need money to do that. Or is crowdfunding now not cool?

<comment><USER19> They aren't crowdfunding with the intent of verifying the safety of their product. They are just crowdfunding to make ample amount of product to start the cycle of selling. The fact that they already have anticipated shipping dates shows that verifying the use of this product from a health standpoint is secondary to their goals.

Why soylent has intrigued me since this first started out. The way they are going about everything makes it feel so much like snake oil...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Why on earth would they name their company/product that? Or am I just missing the joke here?

<comment><USER22> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_Green](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_Green)

<comment><USER10> While clever, this reference doesn't exactly make the name more appetizing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I just can't get over the name.

If someone tells you, "hey, the cook spit in your food" \-- it doesn't matter if the cook actually did, you're going to be grossed out by the food because you're in an icky state of mind.

So, while I know Soylent is not made out of people, it just makes the product less appetizing than it would otherwise be.

However, maybe this is just a problem for people who dig old scifi.

<comment> jack-r-abbit Soylent Green was made from people. Soylent Red and Soylent Yellow were not. This is Soylent Grey if that makes you feel better. lol

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> How the heck are people enthusiastic about this? Are there really that many people that take no enjoyment from the flavours, colours, textures and smells of the food they eat? And that's not to mention the fact that the body craves variety, the need for which it manifests by making you feel sick of eating the same thing over and over again.

<comment><USER20> Yep. I hate cooking, and honestly I end up eating like the same exact 5 meals every week. Apparently there are $500000 worth of us, so there's a market.

<comment><USER24> That's still 5 meals worth of variety. Also, what about breakfast and lunch? Are you having the same thing for breakfast, lunch and dinner on each day?

<comment><USER25> yes? I'm just surprised I'm not the only one.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Doesn't this require monitoring of blood levels? How could an average person order it and know they're healthy?

<comment><USER22> If you don't feel sick... Although I'd just go to the doctor for a checkup.

<comment><USER27> The problem is that you're average twenty-something can live off of all sorts of crap for an extended period of time before feeling sick. How many of you live off of fast food and Mountain Dew?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I wish the guys at soylent well. But, please get a nutritionist on staff so we don't have to listen to the same complaints every time.

Also, I think the difficulty in preparing food part is overblown. Haven't any of these guys heard of Trader Joe's?

</comment><comment><USER29> I've checked with someone in the industry[1], and yes, Soylent would be required to be regulated by the FDA and the like.

[1] Conflict of interest, as they work for a potential competitor in the market. However they come from a medical background, and put patient health first. Surprising exactly how important nutrition is, actually!

</comment><comment><USER30> So they're not shipping to the US or am I reading it wrong?

<comment><USER20> They were always shipping to the US. They are _adding_ international locations.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Doesn't sound very Paleo to me.

<comment><USER32> Because it's people!

<comment><USER33> People would be paleo ;)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Not sure how anybody could actually survive without a balanced diet of hot dogs and pretzels.

</comment><comment><USER35> Is it people?</comment>


Xanadu, The World's Most Delayed Software, Is Finally Released After 54 Years - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/xanadu-released-2014-6

<comment><USER2> Wait, you're kidding... really?

I have personally been waiting for the release of Xanadu for about 22 years (since I first heard about it) -- I can't believe it's finally in existence! And yes, the HTML-based world-wide-web is a decent (if somewhat inferior) version of what has been built up in my mind.

It's always been my canonical example of how vaporware has a lot more features than running software. With this out and Duke Nukem Forever coming out about 3 years ago, what else do I have to be waiting for?

<comment><USER3> Half Life 3</comment></comment>


Show HN: Mowned 4.0 – create cellphones timelines, mobile stats, phone history - <AUTHOR> https://mowned.com/ <comment><USER2> Your website isn't GDPR compliant. Analytics tracking should be opt-in. Yours is not only enabled by default but doesn't seem to provide a way to opt-out.

<comment><AUTHOR> I will add toggles for analytics and other 3rd-party services (hopefully) in the next few days.

Thanks for pointing out</comment></comment>


USCIS Will Temporarily Suspend Premium Processing for All H-1B Petitions - <AUTHOR> https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-will-temporarily-suspend-premium-processing-all-h-1b-petitions <comment><USER2> A new company just applied for "H-1B transfer" by premium processing this week. All I can say is wtf?

I'm in a potential limbo state here because:

\- I am on a notice period for impending layoffs later in the month

\- I found a new job, did all the documentation crap and my new company filed already. Hopefully, I'll get a decision in 2 weeks

\- If not (say I get an RFE or get denied for the transfer), I lose my status because I couldn't transfer to the new company && my old company will lay me off, rendering my old h1b invalid

\- In an RFE or denial, I will have to look for a job again in 60 days. For that h1b, it'll take them 7 months to tell me if it is approved or not. I can start working for the new company while this processing is going on though

\- Say, I get laid off in those 7 months again. What does that mean for my status? Can I legally change to a new H1b with another company?

\- Say, they come after 7 months and tell me it wasn't approved, does that mean I was working illegally so far?

This ambiguous and random pile of regulation over regulation sometimes makes me think, hey, it's better to just get out of this place and live somewhere else in peace. For all their talks of supporting legal immigration, US immigration process is incredibly slow, hinges on random pieces of paper and doesn't factor in that an individual can have life changing circumstances in this long duration. Life changing circumstances include marriages, family issues, health issues, lay offs etc.

The only way an individual can navigate this PROLONGED bureaucracy is if they have no dependents, no family issues, no health issues, no girlfriends/boyfriends/wives/husbands...so that they can keep fighting random nonsensical regulations, RFEs and denials.

Sigh!

<comment><USER3> Typically all you need after filing the transfer is the receipt from USCIS to start work at the new firm. You don't have to wait for a decision, so go to your new company and set a new start date.

AFAIK Its very rare to get a H1B denial or RFE, but YMMV

<comment><USER2> >> AFAIK Its very rare to get a H1B denial or RFE, but YMMV

I have received an RFE in the past for stupid things like "Prove this fortune 500 company is real and paid you real wages".

This, after having sent my paystubs and W-2s.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Before anyone jumps the gun, this has happened previously in 2015 too: [https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-temporarily- suspends...](https://www.uscis.gov/news/alerts/uscis-temporarily-suspends- premium-processing-extension-stay-h-1b-petitions)

<comment><USER5> This is not the same as the new suspension. The one in 2015 only affected extension of stay applications (if you want to extend your visa beyond 6 years). Typically people start the extension of stay process well in advance (USCIS lets you start at most 6 months before expiry).

The current one affects anyone trying to file a new petition (including those that are cap-exempt). If someone wants to switch employers they cannot use premium processing, which affects their ability to travel internationally and/or move jobs.

<comment><USER6> This is not true. 2015 freeze applied to all h1b applications including h1b transfers.

<comment><USER7> Maybe one of you two should actually cite something instead of saying "yes they did/no they didn't" silly games.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I really appreciate the transparency. This is something you don't usually see accompany government decisions. All government decisions, laws and regulations should be accompanied by a list of what the decision is supposed to accomplish, and then the media can check whether the decision was effective. Better for democracy.

> Why We Are Temporarily Suspending Premium Processing for H-1B Petitions

> This temporary suspension will help us to reduce overall H-1B processing > times. By temporarily suspending premium processing, we will be able to:

> Process long-pending petitions, which we have currently been unable to > process due to the high volume of incoming petitions and the significant > surge in premium processing requests over the past few years; and

> Prioritize adjudication of H-1B extension of status cases that are nearing > the 240 day mark.

</comment><comment><USER9> Summary of why it's temporarily suspended:

"This temporary suspension will help us to reduce overall H-1B processing times. By temporarily suspending premium processing, we will be able to:

Process long-pending petitions, which we have currently been unable to process due to the high volume of incoming petitions and the significant surge in premium processing requests over the past few years; and

Prioritize adjudication of H-1B extension of status cases that are nearing the 240 day mark. "

<comment><USER10> > Process long-pending petitions, which we have currently been unable to > process due to the high volume of incoming petitions and the significant > surge in premium processing requests over the past few years

You'd think the $1,225 paid for every premium processing request would allow them to hire more people to tackle the backlog, but I guess not, maybe they just reroute that money elsewhere :P

<comment><USER11> >hire more people

There's a federal hiring freeze.

<comment><USER10> The premium processing service has been around for years, most of the time there isn't a hiring freeze.

I guess if they were planning to use the premium processing fees to hire a bunch of extra people for the April application deadline the hiring freeze will stymie that, which just shows how stupid a general hiring freeze is.

<comment><USER12> Growth in volume/demand. They probably did hire more people over time, but needed to hire more since January to meet current deadlines. Since the freeze has been in effect for a few months now, that probably had a detrimental effect on their ability to adapt to any increased volume.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> The insanity of the immigration debate is the amount of jobs that will be lost to automation, consolidation and decreased domestic investment. The wage gains and skill gaps that will result from decreased immigration (legal or illegal) are going to force companies to alternatives. Yes, wages will rise. Yes, there will be investment in retraining and rehabilitation of un(under)employed. It will not be enough.

Its popular with Trump's base, and I support some of Trump's policies. It may even prove to be a price worth paying for a short time. Long run its pure stupidity.

<comment><USER14> There's always the opportunity cost. What if the next Steve Jobs, Sergey, page or any number of immigrants who started successful companies don't come to US but go somewhere else.

Making the world scared of coming to US can have irreversible effects.

<comment><USER15> Steve Jobs wasn't an immigrant. Using Steve Jobs as some kind of H1B argument is silly. This is a false equivalency. H1 visas are not about importing the next Sergey; the vast, vast majority are about filling skilled jobs at lower wages than the current supply of workers in the US would support. Some world renowned robotics or AI engineer doesn't need an H1, s/he can apply for an EB visa. H1 visa restrictions aren't 'harming' anyone except companies that want to pay less than the US market currently would support. The evidence is the firing of employees at San Francisco State University in order to outsource the work to cheaper foreign labor. In San Fran State's case, there isn't a shortage -- they actually fired qualified experienced people. Thus the 'solving shortages' argument is practically bullshit. The 'shortage' exists when the desired wage is lower than the supply of those willing to work for that wage. Pretending that H1 is going to bring in the next Sergey et al -- that's just hyperbolic nonsense not supported by the statistics. The next Sergey isn't coming in on an H1 with Infosys -- ultra improbable.

The EB-1 visa is designed for the future Sergeys and it's an entirely different category than H1s. Then there is the EB-2 for the highly educated and are employment based. Finally there is the EB-3 for highly skilled immigrants.

H1b visas are for TEMPORARY, NON-Immigrant, workers in a specialty occupation.

Considering this is Hacker News, it suprising how immigration and H1 seem to be conflated almost every time H1 is discussed. If people want to immigrate to the US, an EB is the appropriate visa for highly skilled workers. Those using the H1 as a backdoor to a green card are essentially committing fraud if their intent when getting the H1 is to ultimately qualify for permanent residency. I would argue that an H1 should never be granted residency but instead an appropriate EB visa applied for instead.

<comment><USER16> The EB-1 requires that the person is already successful. But why would such a person come to the US? There are better places to live, once you have enough money.

<comment><USER17> Borland, Musk, and a host of others moved in as successful people.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> In some states, the validity of the Driver's License (DL) is aligned with the H1-B petition expiry date and I am in one of those states. My current petition expires in 4 months. Ideally my employer would have applied my H1-B extension under premium processing so that I am not without a valid DL but with this new rule, we'd have to go with regular processing and wait for the approved petition before I can get my DL extended meaning I'll be without a valid DL for some time which is a real pain. Ideally DMV should extend the DL based on the receipt for the petition but a lot of states, including the one where I am, don't do that.

</comment><comment><USER19> Can anyone shed more light on what happens in the following scenario:

You get terminated/leave your current job and activate the new 60 day grace period to find a new job. Provided that a H1B transfer to a new employer can take more than 60 days now. Does one need to leave the country forcefully?

<comment><USER4> You can continue working for the new company from the moment they apply for the H1B transfer. But there are a few companies that do not allow this.

<comment><USER20> But the only problem is, if you are already terminated, you shouldn't apply for a H-1B transfer. It would be like applying fresh, except you don't have to go through lottery. And also because this is a new visa, you are not qualified to work based on the H-1B portability rule either. So you have to wait until it is approved before you join the new company.

<comment><USER19> I recall that there had been a new ruling (Jan 17) on this though limited to people with an approved I140 petition. This ensures that your petition remains valid and you are eligible for a transfer even if your existing employer withdraws your petition. That should hopefully provide some respite for people who were terminated.

[https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/uscis-publishes- fin...](https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/uscis-publishes-final-rule- certain-employment-based-immigrant-and-nonimmigrant-visa-programs)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> > "Why We Are Temporarily Suspending Premium Processing for H-1B Petitions

> This temporary suspension will help us to reduce overall H-1B processing > times.

Yes!

</comment><comment><USER22> > This temporary suspension will help us to reduce overall H-1B processing > time

Overall, This is good. A lot of "regular" cases are stuck in backlog (see: [http://www.aila.org/infonet/processing-time- reports/csc/2017...](http://www.aila.org/infonet/processing-time- reports/csc/2017/csc-processing-time-report-02-28-17)). Ideally, you want them to increase the workforce to handle all the cases but if that's not possible this is the right response for the current situation.

</comment><comment><USER23> If your process is backlogged such that you cannot handle all traffic in a cycle (covering peak and trough), refusing new traffic won't help and will only add to the backlog.

<comment><USER24> It does allow application of people who are stuck in the pipeline to be cleared faster.Granting new H1-Bs is not the only thing that USCIS does.

<comment><USER23> Yes, and puts them right back in the same situation this time next year. The total amount of work remains unchanged.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Hi, I will be completing six year by September 2017. I am hoping to get my I140 approved by June end. I was under the impression that H1B extension can be done by premium processing so that I can stay beyond my six years. But this is shocking news for me. My attorney is saying that even my H1B can't be filed in premium. Is that true ? Please advise.

</comment><comment><USER26> What does "premium" processing mean?

<comment><USER27> Basically it means that you get bumped up in the queue. Which when you think about it is really a very odd feature to add to a government (i.e. non-profit generating) service.

<comment><USER28> It's a good way to deal with scarcity. And scarcity is definitely an issue when the government agency in question doesn't necessarily have the resources available to them to actually perform at the level that they need to due to funding and political football.

Paying a premium for expedited service is fine (I'm sure you've paid USPS a few extra bucks to mail your package faster), but I do agree that it should be applied judiciously.

<comment><USER15> The State Department has a similar service for expediting passports. It's great because it lets people that actually need it fast to prioritize themselves by paying more.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> My H1b petition got approved in January,2017. My questions are 1) Does this affect stamping? 2) Does this affect premium processing for amendment?

</comment><comment><USER30> Is it right time to swith employer(h1 b transfer)?

</comment><comment><USER31> Probably a good idea to look for work elsewhere while this administration is in office.

</comment><comment><USER32> Is this supension for h1b new petitions or extensions as well?

</comment><comment><USER33> Does this suspension affect i-140 premium processing ?

</comment><comment><USER33> Does this suspension affect i-140 premium processing?

</comment><comment><USER34> When the suspension will be effective?

<comment><USER35> April 3rd

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Hi all, is this applicable to new h1b petitions or extensions as well?

</comment><comment><USER36> For anyone confused/concerned, the title of this thread is currently "USCIS Will Temporarily Suspend Premium Processing for All Petitions" despite only H-1Bs actually being affected. The title should probably be updated to clarify it only affects one category (H-1B).

<comment><USER37> Whoops that was our mistake. Meant only to take out the superfluous bit at the end of "USCIS Will Temporarily Suspend Premium Processing for All H-1B Petitions – USCIS" but somehow the H1-Bs got swept up as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> It would be a lot easier and economically beneficial to just have open borders.

What would it take to turn Mexico and Canada into our 51st & 52nd states? So there aren't border controls or inspections there?

<comment><USER39> Convincing ~50% of Americans that Mexicans don't want to steal their jobs, rape their wives/daughters, or give their kids drugs.

I'm on your team, but we've got a long way to go to get America ready for open borders, even with our nearest neighbors that are longtime trading partners and allies.

<comment><USER40> You forgot convincing the _Mexicans and Canadians_ that they are better off giving up their sovereignty... unless you planned on pulling a Hawaii.

<comment><USER41> You don't need to give up sovereignty for open borders. The EU model, recent Trumpian behavior in the UK aside, works quite well. Freedom of movement and of labor are good things, if you can convince people of it. Remember, borders are just imaginary anyways.

<comment> aaron-lebo Borders are imaginary as laws; doesn't mean they don't have a purpose.

<comment><USER42> Even more so, laws apply within borders. In a world with no borders which laws apply?

<comment><USER41> The imaginary thing was just an aside, my point was that rule of law and sovereignty can remain (and should, IMO) even with open borders in the immigration sense. I view 'countries' as experiments in human self- organization -- the more the merrier up to a point.

European nations are able to retain both language and national identity in spite of freedom of movement.

<comment><USER43> The EU leadership seems to have a problem with that, and is actively working against nations having a national identity, spending tax money to do this.

And this is why open borders are becoming increasingly unpopular in Europe.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> "The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy."

― Oscar Wilde

<comment><USER45> By saying "no, we don't want your money"? Really not seeing the application of that quote here.

<comment><USER46> The money you pay barely matters to USCIS. However this move directly helps those who are importing cheap labor.

<comment><USER45> Okay, but where is the expansion of the bureaucracy for its own sake? Or any expansion at all?

<comment><USER44> Wasn't it obvious that USCIS has not utilized modern technologies to boost efficiency, but use its own inefficiency to boost its size?

Any decent large corporation of this size should handle a large number of customers with ease. That number, I guess, would be orders magnitude more than USCIS' incoming requests. You may argue the case for USCIS is more complicated. Granted that, I still think the amount of work is much larger than USCIS.

[1] "USCIS consists of 19,000 federal employees and contractors working at 223 offices around the world." [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Citizenship_and_...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Citizenship_and_Immigration_Services)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> Wolf in the sheep's clothing. When GovernMint says something you should look for whats hidden in the policy.

1\. So if I want to change companies now I have to wait for few months to get the new petition in hand. Tell me I can't travel to my home country during this period!

This is essentially friction to job changing. This is clearly against the current administration's policy of Murica first and no to cheap labor.

2\. On OPT ? Wait for unknown period of time to know if H1B gets picked in lottery or if it gets approved. Better go home.

3\. So far FB, Google etc are always happy doing premium processing where as cheapo Indian companies avoided it. This is another big boost to cheap labor importers.

<comment><USER22> Frankly, premium processing is abused. I recently switched jobs and just needed a transfer application acknowledgement to start the new job, however, the company offered to pay for premium processing and I gladly took it.

Honestly, they should raise the prices to $5000 with exceptions for financial hardships(they already have this) to weed out non-essential usage of premium processing.

<comment><USER47> "I recently switched jobs and just needed a transfer application acknowledgement"

There is nothing called H1b transfer. It's a brand new application with some extra features like no lottery, no wait-till-Oct1, etc.

IMO, all H1b fees should be increased by $5000 and processed in 15 days.</comment></comment></comment>


Self-driving cars attacked by angry Californians - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/mar/06/california-self-driving-cars-attacked <comment><USER2> I'm reminded of: [https://qz.com/475975/video-robot-is-bullied-by-children- so-...](https://qz.com/475975/video-robot-is-bullied-by-children-so- scientists-teach-it-how-to-react/).

</comment><comment><USER3> This is easy to understand. The autonomous cars I've encountered drive terribly. They signal too early, leading other drivers to believe they are turning into a business instead of at an intersection. They drive slowly in the wrong lanes. They don't adapt to surrounding conditions. They have no situational awareness.

Of course, the company will blame the humans, but the cars are not designed to broadcast visual cues that human drivers do.</comment>


how to upvote without losing your place on the page - <AUTHOR>

<comment><AUTHOR> This seems kind of simple, but has helped me a lot - so I thought I would share it:

When browsing through pages of comments - open the "upvote" links in a new tab or window (i.e., Apple + click, Ctl + click, or whatever). Then hit Apple+W or Alt+F4 to close the new window.

This way, you won't have to scroll through pages of comments to find where you left off.

</comment><comment><USER2> you could try this: <http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/8951>

<comment><USER3> Wow. This greasemonkey script replaces explicit links with xmlhttprequests. Could we do something similar with the reply link as well? That's been a long- standing feature request when submitting reddit comments.

My horizons for what users can contribute to websites have dramatically broadened.

<comment><USER2> Done. <http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/9027>

<comment><USER3> Now can you get submit to inline the newly-added comment without reloading? :)

[edit] Agh, it already does. This totally rocks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> speaking of how to, how can I create a discussion page like this that is on the homepage?

<comment><USER5> Use the "submit" link near the top of this page. Leave the url field blank to submit a question for discussion.

<comment><USER4> oh, haha. now i see that text underneath it. i tend to ignore grayed out text. needs to be stronger in the foreground for usability..</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Two-week contract to hire. Is this normal? - <AUTHOR>

So I had an interview last week and I think it went well. No coding questions, but lots of questions about the technology (I read about it ahead of time) and the interviewer decided to offer me 2 weeks of paid work and then they would make a decision. This is for an early employee at a startup.<p>I'm thinking of taking it but I'm wondering if there are any tricks I should be aware of? <comment><USER2> Not a fan. We tend to react to offers like this as if they were obviously equitable: after all, we're getting paid for the time even if we're not good matches. But the offers are never equitable, because they're almost invariably calibrated to your starting salary. In other words, "we'll pay you for two weeks, and then, if it works out, we'll commit to paying you indefinitely".

In the real market, a commitment to pay only two weeks comes attached to a _drastic_ jump in your rate. If you expect a $100k offer, your 2-week rate isn't $50/hr; it's probably something much closer to $100/hr. There are a lot of reasons for this:

* Your cost basis as a contractor is higher than your cost basis as an employee; for instance, you're paying ~2x payroll tax, and paying to maintain your own health insurance.

* Your full-time salary includes a sizable discount that buys continuous payment, even when you aren't being utilized. A contractor doesn't make a dime when they're not doing billable work.

* Your rate includes the opportunity cost of not doing whatever else it was you could have been doing (if there's nothing you can be doing except accepting this offer, I guess you can't really negotiate it --- but then, fix THAT problem, stat.)

There's more not to like about these temp-to-perm arrangements. For starters, in a lot of jobs, the first N weeks of your employment are going to be your least productive. A lot of that time is going to be spent ramping up. One wonders whether offers like this are a manipulative way of getting people to work their asses off to minimize ramp-up cost; that practice would obviously be abusive.

Downthread, 'gruseom says he wishes offers like this were more common, because the risk of a bad fit with a new role cuts both ways. But it doesn't! Employment virtually everywhere in the US is at will. If you're in a bad fit, just leave; or, better yet, negotiate with the company owners, confident that you have a strong BATNA (what do you have to lose?).

If you come across a gig that wants to do this temp-to-perm dance, and you're amenable to it, my advice is to ask instead to just do a series of contracting gigs at a reasonable rate instead of taking full-time employment. Let the prospective employer get used to the idea of working with you, and do that at a contractor rate, so that when the time comes to cut over to full-time, your salary requirements automatically look sane in comparison.

More people should learn how to freelance. If a job's going to force you to do it, seize the opportunity to do it right.

<comment><USER3> I did this once, decided it was a dumb idea, then quoted the next guy triple. It was a good learning experience, if nothing else.

The current market is drastically tilted towards the engineering talent, provided that you actually negotiate. If companies want freebies in spite of this - walk. It's a target-rich environment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Are they technical founders or business based? I have seen this personally from non-tech founders and they use it as a trial. I think logn gave you great advice. If you are interested, negotiate your perm salary and benefits before doing the 2 week "trail".

I say this because I witnessed exactly this just 2 months ago and the small business did it as a way to try and figure out if the developer could do the job and then decided the rate they would pay and it was a bad situation. I was a contractor helping this same business and terminated my relationship with them once I delivered my promises, and the main reason was after seeing their methods to hiring. I feel it was intentional to see what they could use to low ball this dev, who left a full time position.

Just my 2 cents. Doesn't mean it happens like that everywhere. I really like logn's idea, makes perfect sense and protects everyone involved.

<comment><AUTHOR> > Are they technical founders or business based?

Both. I trust the technical guy I talked to. We'll see.

<comment><USER4> Yea, I honestly wouldn't have a problem doing something like this if I felt good about the people. I think it just all depends on your impression.

Most of us probably feel pretty confident in our skills so proving we can do the job is just part of the fun and challenge.

Good Luck!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is very common, perhaps even the norm for web development shops. Not sure about start-ups. Probably almost never happens with big corps.

I don't see a problem with it. I don't care what my employment status is as long as I'm getting paid. The only difference between contractor and employee is the forms that the employer needs to fill out and that's not my problem. However, if I'm working as a contractor then I'm not going to change anything for the employer. I'm still going to charge my contractor rates and I'm still going to take in new contract work. It's too much of a risk to throw my business cycle out of whack while the employer tries to make a decision.

<comment><AUTHOR> So I guess my next step is to try very hard for the next two weeks? :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> If they are good guys then they are aware that 2 weeks would give them enough time to see if you can do the job or not - very fair and sensible.

If they are bad guys then they know that once you accept a 2 week contract then you will probably have to turn down any other offers you get in the next few days as a result of other interviews. They can then offer you (if you pan out) a contract renewal with a longer term at a lower rate.

Tricky...

<comment><AUTHOR> They seem like OK guys. It's for a very early employee at a startup, though; Don't know if that's common.

<comment><USER7> I wish it were more common. It limits your risk (getting stuck in a bad place) as much as it limits theirs (getting stuck with a bad employee).

The criticism I've heard of this approach is that someone who already has a job is unlikely to quit just in order to try a new thing out for a couple weeks, or to take two weeks off for that purpose. But if you have the two weeks, are going to be paid, and think you might like to work there, why wouldn't you want to do this?

<comment><USER8> Well, you also have an extra risk, namely that they decide not to hire you after those 2 weeks. So it depends on how much they pay for that period. They should be paying freelancer rates, to account for the overhead (taxes, health insurance, etc) and that extra risk.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> You should have your fulltime offer terms in writing for when they do hire you full-time. You don't want to be surprised, especially if you're leaving another job.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for this tip. It's very helpful.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> yes this is normal, especially if outside the bay area</comment>


HN: I made a Twitter list of a few Y Combinator companies. Did I miss any? - <AUTHOR> http://twitter.com/dwlz/y-combinator-startups

<comment><USER2> @vidly instead of (or along with) @fliggo

</comment><comment><USER3> great idea, I did the same for the seedcamp teams

<http://twitter.com/daleharvey/seedcamp-teams>

</comment><comment><USER4> You're missing @Dailybooth.

<comment><AUTHOR> Just added :)

<comment><USER4> How about: @reddit and @scribd? Check out: <http://rankedindex.com/yc>.

<comment><AUTHOR> @reddit is not really a "company" account. It just reposts links that make it to the front page. I think most people would get annoyed by this. Thoughts?

<comment><USER5> Don't include it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> @heyzap

</comment><comment><USER7> @wattvision

</comment><comment><USER8> @fanchatter

</comment><comment><USER9> @zumodrive

</comment><comment><USER10> @rethinkdb

</comment><comment><USER11> @mixpanel

<comment><AUTHOR> Done :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> @picurio</comment>


KeyMe Raises $20M for Its Key Copying Service - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2016/01/15/keyme-raises-20m-for-its-key-copying-service/ <comment><USER2> > Apparently one of the biggest sources of mistakes when humans copy keys is > choosing the correct blank key to start with.

I just made some keys at the hardware store, and the machine scanned the key and told me which blank to use.

Another concern: what if they get hacked? Does everyone then have to change their locks?

<comment><USER3> Probably not, because most house locks are really crappy, so they're easily picked. Except they're almost never picked, because it's easier to just kick the door in.

I'm really not sure getting the bitting on a bunch of house keys would be of any use to burglars.

<comment><USER4> Spot on. Last year I decided to take up lock picking as a casual hobby. After reading up on the process and practicing on some old locks I had laying around, I decided to try to pick my own front door lock. I was able to pick it in under 3 minutes...

It was an moment of epiphany for me - I realized that door locks really only provide an illusion of security. Anyone who really wants to get into your house quickly can just avoid the lock all together by kicking in the door or breaking a window.

<comment><USER5> I think it makes a big difference for your insurance pay out if robbers entered with a copied key or left traces of lock manipulation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The prices for car keys makes it all worth it. I'd use it tomorrow if there was a kiosk close to me.

<comment><USER7> [https://www.minutekey.com/locator](https://www.minutekey.com/locator)

<comment><USER8> From that website:

       Can this machine copy my car key?

       No. minuteKEY does not copy car keys at this time,
       but can identify if your retailer can duplicate
       them and provide you with the necessary information
       to expedite the process.</comment></comment></comment>


Do you want to be successful?  - <AUTHOR> http://henrywallace.org/

<comment><AUTHOR> My first stab at being useful.</comment>


The Greatest Paper Map of the United States You'll Ever See - <AUTHOR> http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2012/01/the_best_american_wall_map_david_imus_the_essential_geography_of_the_united_states_of_america_.html

<comment><AUTHOR> Original news: [http://www.vulture.com/2014/10/breaking-bad-figures- pulled-f...](http://www.vulture.com/2014/10/breaking-bad-figures-pulled-from- toys-r-us.html)</comment>


Ask HN: Why do we fail? We were sure it would work. - <AUTHOR> How many times we believe that our idea will work. That our start-up would rock. That even our submission on HN will get many up-votes. Personally I get disappointed each time that I try to make reality the ideas that were theoretical in my mind(ideas that seem to me very very possible to happen and succeed).<p>What do we do wrong? Any idea on why theory is so much different from reality(at the field of internet and businesses). <comment><USER2> There are many things that can disrupt an idea. One is your communication of its benefits. The other is the readiness of the target audience's collective mind for such a solution.

Take electric cars. Its a great idea, some of them are really cool and could save the planet, etc. However, drivers aren't ready to give up 400 miles on a tank of gas that can be refilled in 5 mins vs. 90 miles on a charge that takes 8 hours to recharge.

In my opinion, its not that we, you or I are doing anything wrong. We just are not fighting hard enough and getting a passionate core of believers that will carry us to the next iteration of our idea. Eventually electric cars will become as useful as gas powered cars... but it will be entirely due to the belief of a small core of people that want to see that happen.

Your ideas aren't bad or wrong... they are just ill timed.

</comment><comment><USER3> I've thought about this myself too. I think it has to do with the fact that when you become convinced of something enough to actually work on it, you depart from the exploratory/learning approach and begin what more closely resembles a waterfall development approach.

That's why I think going the route of doing (or at least testing) the things you may believe won't work is better, because you just simply don't know what you don't know.

I also think a lot of successful companies were like this. They were sort of welcomed and blessed by serendipity.

</comment><comment><USER4> It's because we all have an incomplete and biased simulator in our head.

Every time you have an idea, you run it through the "real world simulator" in your head. And as smart as we think we are, this simulator is terrible at predicting the effectiveness of ideas. And worse off all, it's usually biased and leading you to believe your ideas are amazing.

That's why the lean startup movement is so effective. It makes you get out of your internal simulator and run your experiments in the real world as fast as possible.

</comment><comment><USER5> "That even our submission on HN will get many up-votes" Err I don't think a startup's success depends on the number of upvotes it gets on HN? Right?

<comment><USER6> This is HN - we value everything but profits, get with it already!

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I would Like to mentions this great book I found other day. And its really helpful [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7585467](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7585467) or [http://webappsuccess.com](http://webappsuccess.com)

Really helpful tips for startups

</comment><comment><USER7> Its because theory is always based on some assumptions that we start with.And then we keep on adding assumptions on top of it. It may be a huge startup Idea when you start but to people its just another business or website. You have got to explain that theory to people, to make it big.

</comment><comment><USER8> In execution, there's benefits of being over confident (google it) e.g. taking it upon yourself to be the leader of a group, if you'r not confident about your course of action, you may lose the confidence of your followers.

</comment><comment><USER9> This is an incredibly broad question. Can you give some details on what happened, specifically?</comment>


Why does the unknown/expired url page suck? - <AUTHOR>

I tend to hit this page fairly often as I leave my browser running in the background.  Why doesn't this page do something nice like redirect me to the main page with a message?  Instead, I have to go play with the URL to actually get any content back.<p>I can understand why it's such a plain page, but since it happens fairly often I would think it would be better to handle it more intelligently. <comment><USER2> Yeah, we should really handle it more intelligently.

Perhaps we should somehow make the continuations used here parameterizable. That way you could keep the parameters that are constant in your cookies and include those that need to change in your path & query string. ;)</comment>


Who killed the Chat Bot? - <AUTHOR> http://meta.stackoverflow.com/q/124013/155556

<comment><AUTHOR> Reopen it anyone? ^_^</comment>