Reconsider - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@dhh/reconsider-41adf356857f <comment><USER2> I'm so freaking happy that someone finally affirmed my feelings that maybe, just maybe, I don't need to start my own startup with the notion of "Unicorn or Bust". I've just felt wrong since graduating college 3 years ago, unable to motivate myself to hack outside of work, and this finally captures why I've felt so tired. I am tired of feeling like I need a Unicorn idea to justify working on something outside of my job. I want to work for myself, but it just hasn't felt possible without a plan to "Take over the world". I don't want to take over the world. I want to build something that people use and can sustain me. That's it. But for every idea, there are millions of reasons in the back of my head that stop me from doing it, all boiling down to "Well I just won't be able able to grow this as a startup".

I don't really care about growing something as a startup. I don't need to revolutionize anything. I just want to make someone's day better through software. I want to launch a cool product that people find fun, silly, useful, critical to their process, whatever you want, and NOT be beholden to interests of anyone who isn't involved in the daily operations of whatever product that is.

I just want to build something, and make it better every day. Something that I own, that I can change however I want, whenever I want. I shouldn't have felt like I needed a16z to invest in my company to believe that my product is worth something.

<comment><USER3> Personally this was my favourite bit:

      Because while that area north of Silicon Valley is busy
      disrupting everything, it still hasn't caught up with the
      basic disruption of geography.

<comment><USER4> As a remote worker and remote work proponent that was by far my favorite quote.

<comment><USER5> Any advice for finding remote work?

<comment><USER4> Get an offer first. After that then say you'll only work remotely.

<comment><USER6> That is pretty funny solution, but it might just work sometimes. How much has that worked for you?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Another submission for the flagged files.

As of 17:51 GMT, this submission is 3 hours old and has 374 points, 68 comments, sitting in position 11 on the HN front page

In position 10 is a submission from 8 hours ago with 100 points and 76 comments ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10505476](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10505476))

In position 1 is a submission from 4 hours ago with 177 points and 91 comments ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10506338](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10506338))

 _edit:_ This isn't to pass judgment on the merits of the article, which seems a bit conveniently timed to a product launch linked at the bottom. But as a community we should realize what gets flagged/pushed down and by how much.

 _update:_ at 18:51 GMT, this is 4 hours old, has 490 points, 97 comments, and is in position 26. In position 25 is a 5 hour old submission with 57 points and 15 comments ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10506372](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10506372))

 _final update:_ at 19:24 GMT, this is off the front page at position 33. Age 5 hours, 536 points, 112 comments. In position 18 is a story from 10 hours ago, 362 points, 192 comments ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10505362);](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10505362\);) the 10506372 story referenced previously is now in position 31, 62 points, 16 comments, 5 hours ago.

<comment><USER8> Is there seriously a list of HN flagged items somewhere? I fantasize about this often when I try to explain to friends how much quality content gets booted off of HN immediately these days. It's super heartbreaking and infuriating when they don't know what I'm talking about.

<comment><USER7> Not that I'm aware of. I made that joke since it's the second submission in a week I saw sunk far below its expected score (the Homejoy debacle was the other, [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10469134](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10469134))

<comment><USER8> This happens very often. It's not until you start noticing it that you start noticing it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> rm_-rf_slash People find themselves drawn to the unlikely startup success stories because they have a beautiful allure to them: if I spend every night tucked away writing code and focusing my entire life around my work, then maybe I, too, can be the next Zuckerburg!

Even though this narrative is hugely removed from the realities of startup life (most college startups go nowhere, the most successful founders tend to be in their middle age with significant financial stability, etc), it is still romanticized by founders and startup employees and other people who really should know better. So then why do they buy it?

To get people to work harder for you. Spending every waking moment in front of a customer or a computer screen eating bulk ramen sounds like a great montage scene in the movie you'll have an EP credit in, and this distorted reality is even easier to sell to impressionable young college grads who have maybe .1% of the equity (in options!) that founders and VCs get to keep.

Why are jeans and hoodies the fashion choice of founders? Because if everyone is used to dressing like a poor college student, they tend not to notice how little they're truly being compensated.

This isn't some big founder/VC conspiracy, it's complicit common sense.

<comment><USER9> > Why are jeans and hoodies the fashion choice of founders?

Because they're comfortable, familiar, and they can get away with it? I think it takes a particularly cynical and angry mind to stretch the choice of clothing to be a tool of oppression on the part of the founders.

<comment> rm_-rf_slash If you research any culture at any time period, you will find clothing as a method of control. Medieval European countries often banned commoners from wearing violet, because the color was expensive and the ruling class wanted to reinforce the idea that the nobility were fundamentally different and better. Same goes for Jews in nazi Germany's being forced to wear yellow stars. The way you get someone to dress influences the way they think.

It's the same as buying a few pizzas for your employees to get them to code till sunrise instead of paying them proper overtime. Impressionable college grads with little work experience elsewhere will take that kind of behavior for granted, and assume it is the cost of their (measly) equity. Essentially, you want them to be suckers. Comfortable suckers.

<comment><USER10> _Any_ culture at _any_ time period? Are you sure about that? That's a ridiculously strong claim.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm eagerly awaiting the forthcoming geek poet who'll write our Howl. Who saw the best minds of our generation destroyed by startups... their skulls bashed open by a sphinx of capital... that moloch "whose mind is pure machinery... whose soul is electricity and banks!"

[http://genius.com/Allen-ginsberg-howl-annotated/](http://genius.com/Allen- ginsberg-howl-annotated/)

Moloch in whom I sit lonely! Moloch in whom I dream Angels! Crazy in Moloch! Cocksucker in Moloch! Lacklove and manless in Moloch! Moloch who entered my soul early! Moloch in whom I am a consciousness without a body! Moloch who frightened me out of my natural ecstasy! Moloch whom I abandon! Wake up in Moloch! Light streaming out of the sky! Moloch! Moloch! Robot apartments! invisible suburbs! skeleton treasuries! blind capitals! demonic industries! spectral nations! invincible mad houses granite cocks! monstrous bombs! They broke their backs lifting Moloch to Heaven! Pavements, trees, radios, tons! lifting the city to Heaven which exists and is everywhere about us! Visions! omens! hallucinations! miracles! ecstasies! gone down the American river! Dreams! adorations! illuminations! religions! the whole boatload of sensitive bullshit!

<comment><USER12> [http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on- moloch/](http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/)

<comment><USER11> Thanks. I'm a few paragraphs in. Yeah, the poem is powerful because Moloch is not only a stereotyped evil other. ("The capitalists.") We are Moloch. "Moloch whose name is the Mind!" Speaking personally and unprofessionally, I feel a grand loss of innocence from the time when as a dorky kid when I wrote Emacs Lisp macros for fun. I don't blame others, I don't blame "capitalism," I don't blame teh evil bankers. I simply want money so that I won't need money so that I'll be "free," just like everyone wants this. I do appreciate what David has been saying for years.

<comment> rm_-rf_slash Capitalism is certainly worth blaming, at least for offering a lens to justify the deterioration of the global middle class.

Essentially, the wealthy have come around to the idea as seeing the poor and middle classes and resources to be exploited, like a coal mine, by offloading their tax burdens onto them. The more people chafe under low pay and high taxes, the more easily they can be tricked into thinking the social support system is unsustainable and should be dismantled before people are taxed to death.

People who created this mindset and let it fester know who they are. The rich who benefit stay silent. That's why this generation of CEOs who may be highly vocal about social issues tend to be conspicuously quiet about tax policy. For every Warren Buffett, there are a dozen post-exit founders who are happy to leave their capital gains tax rate where it is.

<comment><USER13> > Essentially, the wealthy have come around to the idea as seeing the poor and > middle classes and resources to be exploited, like a coal mine, by > offloading their tax burdens onto them.

"Come around to"? That's the _central essence of capitalism_ , for which it was criticized by the socialists who put the name "capitalism" on it in the 19th century.

<comment> vezzy-fnord Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the term "capitalism" originally coined as a synonym for "wealth" (and particularly conspicuous wealth)? The novelist who coined it was writing a satire, but its origin doesn't strike me as implying an intrinsic value judgment.

<comment><USER13> > Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the term "capitalism" originally coined > as a synonym for "wealth" (and particularly conspicuous wealth)?

I was referring to the socialist critics of the dominant system in the developed world of the 19th Century who introduced and popularized the use of "capitalism" it _as a label for an economic system_ (who, seem to be first users of the term, though that's somewhat tangential to the main point I was making.)

> The novelist who coined it was writing a satire, but its origin doesn't > strike me as implying an intrinsic value judgment.

Presumably, you are referring to W.M. Thackeray's use in _The Newcomes_ in 1854, which is counted on Wikipedia, with reference to the OED, as the first known use of the word in English; this postdates the early use of " _capitalisme_ " in French to refer to an economic system, and even known earlier uses _in English_ of "capitalism" to refer to an economic system [1]. Thackeray's use is somewhat oblique, and there seems to be some discussion among people who care about these things whether it was about wealth _per se_ or some kind of attitude or orientation toward wealth. But, in any case, his use isn't the first (even if it may have been original, not directly following the others) and is a tangent from the use of the term to refer to an economic system.

[1] e.g., W. B. Greene, _Equality_ , 1849. [https://books.google.com/books?id=yCQ3AQAAMAAJ&q=capitalism#...](https://books.google.com/books?id=yCQ3AQAAMAAJ&q=capitalism#v=snippet&q=capitalism&f=false)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> This is brilliant. The one thing it doesn't go into is the harm that will be done to healthy ventures when the bubble pops. Suddenly, everyone will have a bad taste and healthy ventures won't be able to get sane necessary resources and bridge loans, all thanks to the excesses of what's described in the piece. Not engaging in the insane startup culture described isn't just a healthy lifestyle choice, it's also taking a stand against a situation that will soon very much harm the tech industry as a whole. When the tide rushes away from the unicorn machine, it will carry away the innocent as well.

</comment><comment><USER15> Most of the time, "disrupt" is a euphemism for "put a Web 2.0 interface on". You're not disrupting shit, you're putting whitewash on a shoddily-cobbled- together product that other people have been doing better for decades. It's all style and no substance.

If you're doing something new, you'll probably own the industry just by virtue of being there first. But you'll also probably not grow to be super-huge, because if you were solving a huge problem, it probably would have been solved already.

The exception to this is when the problem _is_ huge, but the technology wasn't there to solve it before: see search (Google), social media (Facebook), mobile apps (Uber). And even then the conditions need to be just right (an app for calling cabs would probably not have been nearly as successful if it didn't coincide with a legal loophole that allows them to undercut the taxi industry).

But most ideas aren't those ideas. And that's okay. A business that solves a real problem, even if it isn't a huge problem, will likely be able to stay alive, profit, and grow just fine. Those "disrupting" companies that are all style and no substance will crash and burn when the tech bubble pops.

</comment><comment><USER16> I am big fans of 37s. I learnt a lot from reading thier blog posts especially thier unconventional (at that time) thinking to avoid crazy detailed requirement docs, focus on blank error states etc...

However, DHH's constant railing against the VC backed world seems a little tiresome. There seems to be a religious fervor to his essays that thier way is morally better (e.g. thier business model seems like a honest transaction vs VC backed startups who inflate numbers etc).

I think a lot of people get that raising VC is not the only way to build a business (there is even a nice tradeoff statement (do you want to be Rich Vs King).

It's a choice one makes. It's not morally inferior or superior to raise VCs or to bootstrap.

<comment><USER17> > focus on blank error states

What does this phrase mean?

<comment><USER18> I believe s/he meant blank and error states - the screen the user sees when there is no data to display.

In short, 37 signals believe this screen should not display an empty list, but instead serve as a guide to the user. This is commonplace now ("You have nothing to read yet, [button]add someting[/button]"), but first mentions of this are from over 10 years ago: [https://signalvnoise.com/archives/000375.php](https://signalvnoise.com/archives/000375.php)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I am in the process of creating a startup business with 2 partners.

Our ultimate goal is NOT to get rich, is NOT to be famous, is NOT to be valued billions of rubles.

We want to be free, we want to work on the projects that motivate us, we want to make our own decisions and decide when it's good to work and when it's not.

For me this is the most motivating part of this adventure. I can totally relate to this article and it even gives me hope in our way of doing things.

<comment><USER20> Make a living basically? Can work on both ends, like cutting your costs. I wonder how much you would have to be living on annually in order to have a decent idea work? Is $20k too high?

I've been working on that more than my startup recently.

We could live on $20k annually for at least 4 years. Now I am trying to figure out a SaaS that could generate that within a couple of months. I don't mind fighting with price even though that's what you're not supposed to do.

<comment><USER19> Maybe I should have added the 3 of us are still employed in companies. So we are in a somewhat comfortable position. we are already making a little bit of money that compensate for the administrative and infrastructure costs (which are ridiculously low at the moment).

We estimate that the company should earn around 25k € every month so we could quit our jobs but again our costs are very low so far.

I'm not sure to properly understand your question here ; you want to have a side business so you can concentrate on your main startup?

Anyway, good luck with your business(es)!

<comment><USER20> Nah I actually have no employment (no cultural fit anywhere) - so I am focusing on (or figuring out) building something that could generate income pretty quickly, though I understand the size of the income wouldn't be big, so I've cut all my costs down for me and my family to $20k annually.

Living on savings for now, which runs out in a couple of weeks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I love this part of the article, it's incredibly important to remember this:

"The web is the greatest entrepreneurial platform ever invented. Lowest barriers of entry, greatest human reach ever. I love the web. Permission-less, grand reach, diversity of implementation. Don't believe this imaginary wall of access of money. It isn't there."

<comment><USER22> I believe that the next evolution in startups is full recognition of this fact. Costs are practically zero for building viable SaaS products. Great developers are everywhere. This isn't just over optimism, it's largely true. What will that mean for startups and capital? My prediction is we will see new models, more "startup factories," etc. Interesting times.

<comment><USER4> > Great developers are everywhere

This is predominantly false. I would edit Great to mediocre.

<comment><USER23> Which does not diminish the original point. Everybody says they will only hire genius top-1% programmers and that's usually ridiculous. For the vast majority of products, you don't need 20 great developers to build it and make it great. You can do it with 20 mediocre developers and one or two great leads who can mentor and help them perform at their best.

<comment><USER24> If that's true, then it should be easy to name some startups that fell into technical mediocrity and recovered. Are there any?

I saw the opposite happen firsthand: a company that was about to get steamrolled by a competitor, and they knew it. There was nothing they could do, even though they had over two years to prepare. The reason they couldn't do anything was because their team was mediocre. Last I checked, that company no longer had any job listings.

How many people here have similar stories? It's tempting to believe that mediocre programmers can be mentored, but it doesn't seem that simple.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I think DHH (and a lot of people) miss out on a lot of modestly growing startups that are doing relatively boring things because they don't hear about them. It's not that they don't exist. They just don't hear about them because they're relatively boring.

The vast majority of (moderately successful) startups I see friends and colleagues starting or working for are in this group. For every one friend I see go work for a company like Uber, I see 10 more working for a startup that builds software for expense reports or HR teams or insurance companies or old school cab companies. They will never be billion dollar companies, and they probably won't IPO, and they may be an acquisition target -- but that certainly isn't their end goal. They are gaining customers and growing relatively sustainably, making smart choices about when to (or not) take outside funding.

<comment><USER26> Actually, he mentions that such startups don't need to tell their story like VC-funded startups do, to meet their recruitment goals, and so VC startups dominate the zeitgeist.

<comment><USER27> Most of those "modest" startups are also VC-funded.

<comment><USER28> Last time I looked through the YC alumni list ([http://yclist.com/](http://yclist.com/)) I was surprised at how heavily it was skewed B2C though. I haven't checked since W15 was added but a quick skim and it still seems fairly B2C focused.

It's in their request for startups though. Seed funds don't seem to be an area that attracts B2B.

I suspect it's because you have to be in the industry to understand the problem exists in the first place, so a huge segment of the YC applicants simply don't know about those opportunities as they've not worked in industry and only know about B2C opportunities.

<comment><USER27> YC is not the VC industry as a whole. For one thing, it (like SV) skews much younger and much more consumer than VCs in general. There are plenty of VCs who invest mostly in B2B companies started by founders with domain expertise.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> The documentary, Hoop Dreams by Steve James and Frederick Marx captures the mania around startups just as well as it does for getting into the NBA. It's well worth watching.

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

"Many are called but few are chosen", Matthew 22:14

</comment><comment><USER30> I don't think early investors dubbed themselves "Angels". If I recall correctly it came from the term used for similar people who used to finance Broadway shows. I like to think some ingenue in the 1920s called some rich guy "angel" and got him to fund a show and it went from there. I should Google it but I miss speculating on things...

</comment><comment><USER31> >Part of the problem seems to be that nobody these days is content to merely put their dent in the universe. No, they have to fucking own the universe. It's not enough to be in the market, they have to dominate it. It's not enough to serve customers, they have to capture them.

I think this says more about the state of VC than startups themselves. Founders feel that if they don't run around banging pots and pans while tooting their own horn/vuvuzela, they won't ever get any attention from investors. Crowdsourcing early funding is just going to make this worse.

</comment><comment><USER32> I really enjoyed reading this.

However, I personally feel distain for the perspective of how every engineer should maintain a noble sense of worth. No matter the environmental differences of being in SF or elsewhere, people are bad at engineering wall to wall. While there are still successes at both sides of the coin.

Frankly, 'Software eating the world' has nothing to do with us. It has to do with, well, the world. And my own struggle with the tech industry is how disconnected we are in the 'startup and grow' sector.

</comment><comment><USER33> "I wanted a life beyond work. Hobbies, family, and intellectual stimulation and pursuits beyond Hacker News, what the next-next-next JavaScript framework looks like, and how we can optimize our signup funnel."

 _drops the microphone_

What a great article. I am glad someone finally said something.

</comment><comment><USER34> I find interesting that this article, that got 541 points (at the time I am writing this) is out of the front page already. Makes me wonder if there is the hand of people (VCs) _not_ wanting programmers to aim for lifestyle business behind that.

</comment><comment><USER35> I think many founders echo his motivations. The one that he implicitly suggests is misaligned is:

 _I wanted the best odds I could possible get at attaining the tipping point of financial stability._

And that this is due to the corruption of investors. So I guess the takeaway is that if you raise money, choose your investors wisely.

</comment><comment><USER36> I'm surprised this needed to be said.

There are millions of small businesses (in the US) and the vast majority of them are just lifestyle businesses that bring freedom/pleasure/excitement to the owner with perhaps a possibility of earning more, but there are many that earn less than what they could make at a regular job with their same experience.

This whole world domination startup thing seems to be localized to SV really. Nowhere else is this considered normal.

By the way, there's a lot of confusion with just the term "startup" in general when it should really be reserved for something new (biz model, innovation, etc). If you're just doing something that's already been proven, which is completely ok, then it's just a small business.

<comment><USER37> Basecamp isn't a small business, nor does it stick to the already proven. They are constantly trying new things, and spinning out other companies when they're successful.

<comment><USER36> Perhaps it isn't now but this whole thread is mostly referring to the start of a company in which case everything is a small business.

Basecamp with 50 people is still small to me, I'd say companies need at least 100 people before they can be called mid-size.

Trying new things means the other spun-out companies are startups. Basecamp itself is nothing new, just different software solving the same problem as hundreds of other project management and collaboration tools.

<comment><USER37> What about executing an already "proven" idea really well?

<comment><USER36> What about it? It's already proven so still nothing new. Just new version.

I think new can be summarized as a new business model, new way to monetize something, new innovation like a product or service that didnt exist before, new industries in general, etc.

There can be multiple startups doing the same problem but most "startups" in SV aren't really doing anything new, just a more modern approach or revamped UX of existing solutions so I wouldn't call them startups. There's nothing wrong just being a small business that grows into a medium and large business.

Not everything has to be brand new and it's not always worth it either.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> _But in the end, they're money lenders._

</comment><comment><USER39> Greed, lust, and gluttony. Three personality traits our money-focused society selects for.

<comment><USER40> Given how fit the people in California/NYC are, I'd say gluttony is off the table.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> The reality is you can't accomplish anything meaningful in life without being uncertain. It is OK to be unsure. It is OK to do things that are not sexy. It is OK to make small incremental improvements.

Unicorns happen over time. Smart founders have patience and resilience to weather many storms ahead.

</comment><comment><USER42> "Lifestyle companies."

They are everywhere... but we are quieter than high-growth startups. Many of us work for them. We enjoy it. If anyone was not aware of their presence, step outside of the VC-driven culture. There is a whole other world out there.

<comment><USER43> Even the term "lifestyle company" sounds like a mocking label straight out of Silicon Valley.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> This post really resonates with me. I think there is a "silent majority" type of situation going on. Most people venturing out do it for the reasons DDH states: independence, the ability to work with people of your choosing, etc.

Most of us don't care about winning some ridiculous lottery where smarmy Wall Street types stakehorse tech wunderkinds.

Things have a way of balancing themselves out.

</comment><comment><USER45> At the end I pictured David, standing on stage, stared at by the audience. After a brief moment of silence, he drops the microphone. A loud crack echoes through the PA, followed by screeching feedback, before the audio engineer remembers to turn down the volume. Meanwhile David turns around, calmly stepping down the stage to be detained by the (Ge)StartupPolice…

</comment><comment><USER46> Relevant bit from the latest season of the Startup podcast: [https://youtu.be/qfpdzPnElVU?t=738](https://youtu.be/qfpdzPnElVU?t=738) *spoiler alert - this is toward the end of the season, in case you'd rather listen to the podcast in order

</comment><comment><USER47> Eloquently expressed pov as we've come to expect from @dhh. Legend. Now what I'd love to hear is from founders of @stripe and @intercom as they have both lived the experience of developing 'lifestyle' scale businesses before bringing unicorns to the market

</comment><comment><USER27> > In the abstract, economic sense, a 30% chance of making $1M is as good as a > 3% chance of making $30M is as good as a 0.3% chance at making $300M

I see this repeated as a truism all the time by the anti-VC crowd and it sounds great. But is there actually any evidence whatsoever of it?

The success rate for startups which have raised a Series A is substantially higher than the success rate for startups and small businesses in general. If it were _true_ that avoiding VC funding somehow gave me a 30% chance of building a $1M business, I'd be happy to give it a shot (at least for a year or two). But I just don't see any evidence of that.

If anything, it seems like companies which accept VC money have dramatically better odds of success than other startups. The only reason it seems like VC has a high failure rate is that nobody bothers to write a news article when a random small business fails.

EDIT: Downvoters, kindly provide _any_ evidence that avoiding VC funding increases your odds of success by 10x.

<comment><USER48> > Downvoters, kindly provide any evidence that avoiding VC funding increases > your odds of success by 10x.

It's not so much, avoiding VC increases your chance of success by 10x. It's not easier to reach a $1M business without VC than it is to do so with VC. However, if you don't have VC, then a $1M business is probably a relatively stable company. But if you do have VC investment, they're looking for a high return on that investment, and so they won't be satisfied with a $1M business. They'll want that $30M business, which _is_ harder, since the goal is so much higher.

<comment><USER27> If you've only raised enough money to get to $1M, then you probably haven't given up majority control and can choose to keep the business at a small size if you want.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> Sounds like the plot of silicon valley.

</comment><comment><USER50> I like this post, but we should contextualize it properly, and look at where it doesn't work. Things have developed over the past forty years which don't allow the "start small, stay small" to always be a possibility: the increase in winner-take-all markets and the Superstar effect. We see it everywhere when it comes to today's job markets, and we also see it (and _potentially worry about it being the case, and this is critical_ ) in industries themselves. This latter belief means that if you decide to start something, you may need to consider whether you should bother at all if you aren't going to go big.

Is Uber in a winner take all market? If so, they have no choice but to operate the way they do: [http://www.vox.com/2014/12/4/7336433/uber- worth-](http://www.vox.com/2014/12/4/7336433/uber-worth-)

We see it in regular job markets more generally (where we call it job polarization): [http://economics.mit.edu/files/5554](http://economics.mit.edu/files/5554)

We see it in "art, sports and culture" markets (where we call it the Superstar effect): [http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/23/business/winners-take- all-...](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/23/business/winners-take-all-but-cant- we-still-dream.html)

[http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2010/09/win...](http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2010/09/winner- take-all-economics.html)

[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/business/26excerpt.html](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/business/26excerpt.html)

We see it in newspapers:

[http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2010/09/10/198480/technolo...](http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2010/09/10/198480/technology- and-the-top-one-percent/)

We see it in attention more generally (which has second order effects, like everyone use just one or a handful of large platforms(!) and where we call it variations of "winning in the Attention Economy"): [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention_economy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention_economy)

So the choice is sometimes (perhaps even often today) not between "get big" or "stay small/medium", but get big (where big may represent firm size, level of knowledge/skill, fame, or a number of other attributes depending on the area) or "get (almost) nothing." When the distribution of customers/eyeballs/rewards are as lopsided as they are in many areas, the only choice IS "get big or go home."

More:

[http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2011/12/how_...](http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2011/12/how_technology_and_winner_take_all_markets_have_made_income_inequality_so_much_worse_.html)

[http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2010/09/win...](http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2010/09/winner- take-all-economics.html)

[http://prospect.org/article/talent-and-winner-take-all- socie...](http://prospect.org/article/talent-and-winner-take-all-society)

I don't knock dhh, and this is one of those posts I actually want to agree with, but it doesn't neatly comport with extant realities. I think even this advice, just like the advice to "get big" needs to be taken very carefully. All of these roads entail risk (obviously), but the choice of big versus small isn't as simple as implied.

<comment><USER51> Do you have any data for a dominant trend that small players can't compete with big players?

From where I'm sitting, I see the exact opposite. There are very few businesses that have few competitors.

<comment><USER50> The articles (and books/papers they reference) have copious examples. Here are just a few:

Search Engines Top four market share: 98.5% Major companies: Google: 64.1% Yahoo: 18.0% Microsoft: 13.6%

Arcade, Food & Entertainment Complexes Top four market share: 96.2% Major companies: CEC: 52.2% Dave & Buster's: 35.0%

Soda Production Top four market share: 93.7% Major companies: The Coca-Cola Company: 41.2% PepsiCo: 33.6% Dr Pepper Snapple Group: 15.4%

Lighting & Bulb Manufacturing Top four market share: 91.9% Major companies: General Electric Company: 32.9% Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV: 31.7% Siemens AG: 27.3%

Major Household Appliance Manufacturing Top four market share: 90.0% Major companies: Whirpool Corporation: 43.8% AB Electrolux: 20.7% General Electric Company: 17.1% LG Electronics: 9.2% Market concentration

Mobile OSes (iOS and Android) are another, even if no one can make money on the software itself anymore.

Banking software (FIS, Fiserv, Jack Henry, and D+H): 96% total

Internet service providers (a few large players, with a smattering of regional ones. Some areas are served only by a single company.)

Wireless providers (AT&T, Sprint, Verizon and T-Mobile) have roughly 80% of the market.

Here's a nice infographic:

[http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/04/the- char...](http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/04/the- chartist/309271/)

This is not to say that this applies to every market. There are competitive markets without clear winners (in some of the above cases, the markets are competitive oligopolies - but that doesn't help the "I just want to make a nice living as a small player" idea - you still need to be huge in those cases.) However, with the increase in mass communication, economies of scale, picked low hanging fruit, clustering effects, and concentration of talent/capital/connections, the trend has been towards winner-take-all (either through pure domination, like search, or industry consolidation, like health insurance.) Eking out a living at the margins is possible, but as I stated in the other comment, has its own set of attendant risks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> That Terry Davis comment :)

</comment><comment><USER53> What a well-written piece. I agree that there is a lot of room for sustainable, technology based businesses. These are businesses that can optionally be run remotely and don't need to limit themselves to the bay area and its insane startup culture. They can work sane hours and be sustainable for their employees. They can provide products of real value. In fact, this is exactly the type of business that I'm interested in, the only kind with a success profile that's not tantamount to the success of playing the lottery, and the only kind where one can hope to stay in control and "be one's own boss."

These types of businesses are very much startups, but have a more traditional philosophy and generally plan to stick around for longer than a few years. I'd say such businesses are often a lot riskier for the owners as they're generally risking their own money and time to get it developed rather than someone else's money. Spending someone else's money is not risky at all. Failure in a silicon valley startup isn't a real loss: it's expected.

The people who venture out on their own and take their own risk with their own capital and time should be applauded for trying to create sustainable businesses that might be beneficial to the wider economy and society rather than creating ones that try to dominate a market for a couple of years and then almost inevitably fade out (as most startups do both before and even after IPO), not really adding much to the economy or society at all, while, of course, screaming the obligatory "I will change the world" mantra. In fact, it's this idiotic mantra and the lies one must tell oneself to actually believe it that turns off a lot of great talent form the silicon valley startup version of a business. Most smart people can eventually see through such simple, repeated, dogmatic ideas easily, and don't like to be associated with the brainwashed masses for whom these ideas are reality.

</comment><comment><USER54> Not that I disagree with the main premise, but boy oh boy why waste time skewering terms like "Angel" and "liquidity event". Sophomoric.

<comment><USER55> Because it's fun? Personally, I take great pleasure in roasting sacred cows and eating them in front of the shocked faithful. I'm sure DHH does too.

<comment><USER56> Do you really think anyone was "shocked" or that this was "roasting sacred cows"? It basically said " uh you can have a great life without seeking a huge exit, and your chances might be better, too". Do people actually take this stuff that seriously?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> Not reading. Someone summarize?

<comment><USER58> There's probably a startup for that</comment></comment>


The wearable LEX chair lets you sit where you want – but will it catch on? - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/shortcuts/2019/sep/19/the-wearable-lex-chair-lets-you-sit-where-you-want-but-will-it-catch-on <comment><USER2> No! OK, perhaps if you have some kind of disability that prevents you from standing, but otherwise you can walk.

<comment><USER3> Actually yeah, I showed this to my wife. She has EDS so her knees, ankles and hips can without warning dislocate when walking. She said she'd enjoy this — if a dislocation happens she can sit to recover. Otherwise she currently must risk a dislocation and potentially fall or use a wheelchair.</comment></comment>


How to call your friends with their own number - <AUTHOR> http://prohackersden.blogspot.in/2012/02/how-to-call-your-friends-with-their-own.html <comment><USER2> This is also how the tabloids "hacked" peoples mobile phones. Many mobile telco voicemail systems are setup to recognize an incoming call to the VM system from a mobile # as being the owner of that mailbox.

I'm surprised this worked so well for the OP and you didn't just end up in everyones VM box.</comment>


Scott Kelly will return from a year in space older and younger than his twin - <AUTHOR> http://qz.com/370729/astronaut-scott-kelly-will-return-from-a-year-in-space-both-older-and-younger-than-his-twin-brother/

<comment><USER2> Cool story. Too bad STS-134 was delayed so they didn't get a chance to meet in space. According to Wikipedia, they would have been the first blood relatives to do so.

Remarkably similar careers.</comment>


How to safely send your deck to investors. - <AUTHOR> http://venturehacks.com/articles/sending-decks#comment-2246 <comment><AUTHOR> This seemed to be pretty good advice to me. I'd improve on it by pre- registering a login for the investor so that you can simply give them a username and password without forcing them to jump through any registration hoops.</comment>


Investing In A Downgraded Apple - <AUTHOR> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2011/03/17/benzinga932544.DTL <comment><USER2> Who listens to these analysts? They all work for outfits that bet against their own advice, most likely.

<comment><USER3> ironically, the market does.... it's important to remember though that when one analyst cries wolf, the headline is roughly '[All] analysts cry wolf'... the same way when you hear something like 'Scientists say global warming likely to be caused by oompa-loompa's living at the north pole' it was probably just one scientist and Fox news was somehow involved in the reporting.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: My startup is going remote-only. Is this a giant red flag? - <AUTHOR> My startup company, located in a major city, is going remote-only. Meaning, we are currently in a shared office space, but some time in the coming months, we will no longer have that space and will be a remote-only org. A variety of reasons were given for this decision, including the fact that we already have a bunch of remote workers. Has your startup successfully transitioned to be remote-only or is this a flag I should start looking for other jobs? <comment><USER2> Remote can be far more effective than offices. From what I see, full remote actually works much better than partial remote.

If you go partially remote, communication tools are disjointed; you'll have meetings with some, lunch with some, Skype with some. Skype as a core communication tool is a red flag.

But if everyone is full remote, you start to adopt more effective communication methods. Instead of status update meetings, people stay up on Slack 24/7, shitpost constantly, which also includes regular status update. You'll start adopting project management tools as a way to maintain project updates. Little private channels form up where people can vent disagreements or flag problems with the rest of the team.

If the team is only partially remote, this doesn't happen. Problems fester, tools like Slack or Trello fall apart because they're unused by upper management or the people doing the work. And these tools will be unused when there are "better" tools like face to face meetings.

I actually get a lot more honesty from remote teams because the can speak up on issues which they wouldn't face to face. Regular shitposting on Slack also breaks the ice better than doing team building outings.

</comment><comment><USER3> Does your company leadership keep its employees up to date on the financial health of the company?

If not, that's a red flag IMO. Small startups have no excuse not to keep their employees informed on this topic. If the company is in dire straits, employees deserve to know. Similarly if the company is doing well, employees deserve to know.

Of course executives will balance that obligation with the need to keep morale. If the company is in trouble, but it's not catastrophic yet, I could see why they might choose to keep that information from employees. The last thing they want at a critical make-or-break juncture like that is a stampede out the door or a bunch of engineers interviewing for new jobs.

If you have a good relationship with your manager (or the CEO in the case of a small startup), I would recommend discussing your concerns with him/her. If you do not have such a relationship, well... that's a red flag.

</comment><comment><USER4> Could be a number of legitimate reasons, do you have previous experiences of your managers lying to you about things to make you not trust them about this or is it just normal start-up paranoia?

Follow your feeling on this as you are closer to the details, and set up a contingency plan and in the meantime enjoy the lifestyle remote work could bring you.

</comment><comment><USER5> I wouldn't say so. Going remote has many benefits and can unlock a lot of flexibility for the team which can result in a higher quality of life for everyone. Going remote alone isn't a red flag. Many successful companies are remote - Zapier, GitLab, Chargify, Aha! Buffer, etc.

If you're concerned about anything I recommend you ask your manager and/or the CEO directly.

</comment><comment><USER6> The fact that you're concerned is a red flag. If things were good you wouldn't be worried.

</comment><comment><USER7> as a rule of thumb, you probably get better mileage out of always looking for other jobs, even when you have a decent one --- than say, working long hours without paid overtime, or so on.

remote-only could be great. [https://www.remoteonly.org/](https://www.remoteonly.org/)

</comment><comment><USER8> I think it's only a red flag if you don't want to work remotely. I've been doing it for about 1.5 years straight now with a 6 month stint in the past a couple years ago. With a wife and young kids, it's great. I can have lunch with them. I don't have to deal with as much office politics. My employer keeps us fairly well informed about the health of the startup.

Are there pain points? Yes, communication can be difficult and the transition can be difficult for managers. People seem to really vary in their ability to comprehend how async communication can work (as in, what needs to be a group announcement on a call versus just an update in Slack or email).

So I personally wouldn't see the change as a red flag. Having had my current experience, I would be delighted and would be considering where to move to maximize taking advantage of being remote. But it really is a "your experience may vary" based on what you're looking for.

</comment><comment><USER9> Wasn't there an established (startup maybe, but which had been around a while) company that announced they're going remote only because their office space simply doesn't get used?

Unfortunately I forgot the name, but maybe some other HNer remembers.

This doesn't answer your question, but it's a data point that it has happened before. Unless you work for them :)

<comment><USER10> It's Automattic, WordPress parent company. Previous discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14536410](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14536410)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I haven't done startups. But I do work with a mostly remote company. I would imagine that it would be easier to establish a remote-only work culture earlier on then try to transition to it later (where you might need to jetison some established employees who aren't interested in remote work).

</comment><comment><USER12> if you are getting paid, what's the issue? office space can be very expensive and being remote is a great way to save cost and extend the runway. remote companies work best when everyone is 100% remote, but it's also very difficult and painful to figure out if you don't have experienced folks running it.

</comment><comment><USER13> Off topic, I had posted an ask HN thread, it does not seem to be appearing , does it take a while to trend please? Thanks

<comment><USER14> many ask HN threads disappear off the first page very quickly. Since your account is very new that might factor into the ranking, but I'm not sure. I recommend building up your karma and trying again in a week or two.</comment></comment>


Impala: a modern, open-source SQL engine for Hadoop - <AUTHOR> http://blog.acolyer.org/2015/02/05/impala-a-modern-open-source-sql-engine-for-hadoop/ <comment><USER2> Apache Phoenix: [http://phoenix.apache.org/](http://phoenix.apache.org/) is another SQL engine on top of Hbase/Hadoop. If you have an existing HBase cluster, Phoenix is a much easier way to put a SQL layer on top by simply mapping existing hbase tables to Phoenix tables. The icing is the ability to use JDBC tooling to query the system (Squirrel, DbVisualizer).

<comment><USER3> There's also Presto from fb, and Apache Drill. Phoenix seems to be on top of Hbase, which is more funkier that plain HDFS + SQL engine.

Besides, right now there's a huge need for analytical engines on top of HDFS (data lake or whatever you call it) - that's why there are all of these: (shamelessly stolen from an email from drill users):

\- Apache Hive <[https://hive.apache.org>](https://hive.apache.org>) (SQL- like, with interactive SQL thanks to the Stinger initiative) \- Apache Drill <[http://drill.apache.org>](http://drill.apache.org>) (ANSI SQL support) \- Apache Spark <[https://spark.apache.org>](https://spark.apache.org>) (Spark SQL <[https://spark.apache.org/sql>](https://spark.apache.org/sql>), queries only, add data via Hive, RDD <[https://spark.apache.org/docs/latest/api/scala/index.html#or...](https://spark.apache.org/docs/latest/api/scala/index.html#org.apache.spark.sql.SchemaRDD>) or Parquet <[http://parquet.io/>](http://parquet.io/>)) \- Apache Phoenix <[http://phoenix.apache.org>](http://phoenix.apache.org>) (built atop Apache HBase <[http://hbase.apache.org>](http://hbase.apache.org>), lacks full transaction <[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_transaction>](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_transaction>) support, relational operators <[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relational_operators>](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relational_operators>) and some built-in functions) \- Cloudera Impala <[http://www.cloudera.com/content/cloudera/en/products-and- ser...](http://www.cloudera.com/content/cloudera/en/products-and- services/cdh/impala.html>) (significant HiveQL support, some SQL language support, no support for indexes on its tables, importantly missing DELETE, UPDATE and INTERSECT; amongst others) \- Presto <[https://github.com/facebook/presto>](https://github.com/facebook/presto>) from Facebook (can query Hive, Cassandra <[http://cassandra.apache.org>](http://cassandra.apache.org>), relational DBs &etc. Doesn't seem to be designed for low-latency responses across small clusters, or support UPDATE operations. It is optimized for data warehousing or analytics¹ <[http://prestodb.io/docs/current/overview/use- cases.html>](http://prestodb.io/docs/current/overview/use-cases.html>)) \- SQL-Hadoop <[https://www.mapr.com/why-hadoop/sql- hadoop>](https://www.mapr.com/why-hadoop/sql-hadoop>) via MapR community edition <[https://www.mapr.com/products/hadoop- download>](https://www.mapr.com/products/hadoop-download>) (seems to be a packaging of Hive, HP Vertica <[http://www.vertica.com/hp-vertica- products/sqlonhadoop>](http://www.vertica.com/hp-vertica- products/sqlonhadoop>), SparkSQL, Drill and a native ODBC wrapper <[http://package.mapr.com/tools/MapR- ODBC/MapR_ODBC>](http://package.mapr.com/tools/MapR-ODBC/MapR_ODBC>)) \- Apache Kylin <[http://www.kylin.io>](http://www.kylin.io>) from Ebay (provides an SQL interface and multi-dimensional analysis [OLAP <[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLAP>](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLAP>)], "… offers ANSI SQL on Hadoop and supports most ANSI SQL query functions". It depends on HDFS, MapReduce, Hive and HBase; and seems targeted at very large data-sets though maintains low query latency) \- Apache Tajo <[http://tajo.apache.org>](http://tajo.apache.org>) (ANSI/ISO SQL standard compliance with JDBC <[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JDBC>](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JDBC>) driver support [benchmarks against Hive and Impala <[http://blogs.gartner.com/nick-heudecker/apache-tajo- enters-t...](http://blogs.gartner.com/nick-heudecker/apache-tajo-enters-the- sql-on-hadoop-space>) ]) \- Cascading <[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_%28software%29>'s](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_%28software%29>'s) Lingual <[http://docs.cascading.org/lingual/1.0/>²](http://docs.cascading.org/lingual/1.0/>²) <[http://docs.cascading.org/lingual/1.0/#sql- support>](http://docs.cascading.org/lingual/1.0/#sql-support>) ("Lingual provides JDBC Drivers, a SQL command shell, and a catalog manager for publishing files [or any resource] as schemas and tables.")

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I started using Impala this summer on AWS Elastic Mapreduce. Previously I'd been using Hive. We had at _least_ a 100x speedup in most of the work we do because of it. Things that would have been impossible before (near realtime classification) are now feasible with mini-batches. My only (major) gripe is that AWS only supports several versions back. This makes it difficult to troubleshoot problems and find documentation. That said, the benefits far far outweight the cost.

<comment><USER5> impala is good but it's no match for the best analytics databases out there

<comment><USER6> In terms of performance or features? They had a paper at CIDR this year that claims they are competitive with a well known analytics DB (presumably oracle although it wasn't named explicitly).

<comment><USER5> afaik impala doesn't have multicore joins while almost any other serious db has. so if it uses 1 core out of 10, 20 to do the join then it might be 10x, 20x slower than the best

<comment><USER3> ...but throughput shouldn't be a problem if you have N queries at same time (N=nr of cores)

<comment><USER5> yeah, I guess if you want throughput then it's fine

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I have started using Impala/Parquet in combination with Solr for real- time/batch analytics. Impala is very fast - it basically bypasses the entire Hadoop stack to perform its own distributed processing and IO, and Parquet is a great data-at-rest format. I have found the best way to update data holdings is by landing data in Avro format (which is a great streaming format as it carries its schema around with it), referencing it as an external table, then scheduling an Impala query to convert the current Avro bucket into Parquet. I am also looking at using Spark Streaming for real-time map/reduce style processing to value add to the data flowing into Solr/Impala. Even with a moderate sized cluster I feel like I have a lot of processing power at my fingertips, and it all just works. Hadoop is really starting to shine.</comment>


Why in Windows is the system drive C - <AUTHOR> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/531576/why-is-windows-giving-my-hard-disk-the-letter-c-and-not-a-or-b-for-example <comment><USER2> Drive letters are a 50-year-old anachronism in today's world.

Most modern filesystems are tree-structured and don't use such concepts.</comment>


Carol Bartz: Yahoo "f---ed me over" - <AUTHOR> http://postcards.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2011/09/08/carol-bartz-fired-yahoo/ <comment><USER2> Any (ex) CEO that doesn't know why they got fired by someone reading a lawyer's script obviously doesn't have a clue how things work. A firing of that magnitude has to go by the book, and they have to close every legal loophole they can. No personal messages, no teary goodbyes... Just a lawyer's letter.

The phonecall method seems horrible, but what was the alternative? You don't want them in the building because you don't want a scene, either from their being hysterical, or from the guards escorting them to the door. A letter could only be worse.

No, they played this by the book, and she's upset about them doing things correctly. And badmouthing them over it.

The personal insult during the phone call really shows her character.

<comment><USER3> > Any (ex) CEO that doesn't know why they got fired by someone reading a > lawyer's script obviously doesn't have a clue how things work.

I want to be clear, here: you're telling me that it is your position that someone who was CEO of Autodesk – not exactly a shareware developer or anything – served in that role for 14 years and oversaw its rise to dominance over its space... doesn't "have a clue" how things work?

Is it possible that she simply expected a little better than a phone call, given that she's _the CEO of the company_?

> The personal insult during the phone call really shows her character.

It does. It shows me she's a straight talker and the sort of person who expects the same from others. I like those kinds of people – with them, I always know where I stand. Fuck the phonies.

<comment><USER2> I love straight talkers.

Insults like that are not 'straight talk'. She could easily have said, "I expected better than this." It's just as straight without the personal insult.

Edit: I keep thinking about this and getting more incensed. Being abusive is not straight talking. There's no need to attack him personally. Ever. She can say that the entire company has let her down... But she can't attack him personally. Abuse like this is simply not acceptable.

And a CEO should know better.

<comment><USER4> >Insults like that are not 'straight talk'. She could easily have said, "I expected better than this."

Self-censoring is still self-censoring.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I see a mess where there should be none. What's the problem with these people? Firing over the phone, seeking out media attention and badmouthing your former employer... It really doesn't matter if you are the chairman of the board or the CEO, there are things you really shouldn't do.

<comment><USER6> I can't imagine even a lowly temp warrants being fired over the phone. It's just common decency. If there are security or legal concerns then film it and have a lawyer and security guard there. But doing it over the phone doesn't make Yahoo! look good, not that much of anything does anymore.

Additionally, why wasn't this one of those "resign or we'll get rid of you" situations? That's how I've seen it worked at companies I've worked at in the past. Doing it over the phone seems purposefully spiteful.

<comment><USER7> _why wasn't this one of those "resign or we'll get rid of you" situations?_

It was: "After Tuesday's call from Bostock, Bartz says, she had two hours to let Yahoo know whether she would resign or allow the board to fire her"

<comment><USER6> My bad!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I have seen a whole lot of this woman cussing in the news lately. The image she puts out is low class, and she didn't make the company money. It's no mystery why she was fired. There is a time and place for profanity, and it's very rarely in the professional setting.

<comment><USER9> Low class? That's sexist bullshit. There's plenty of men that speak exactly the same way -- starting with Larry Ellison, and go read about his behavior sometime -- yet don't get the same opprobrium. It's because she's a woman.

<comment><USER8> I wouldn't treat a male any differently. It's low class. I don't recall any major CEO's on the front page of tech sites cussing before this. Ever. It shows a poor lack of control. What is said behind doors, not to the press, is something else entirely. That's not even touching on the professionalism of publicly calling out a previous employer. Talk about burning bridges and ruining a reputation.

<comment><USER10> Joe Biden: It's a big fucking deal.

<comment><USER8> You probably should have chosen somebody who wasn't a complete douche bag to make your example. Joe Biden cussing like that makes him look like a complete fool. I am all for cussing when situation is right, but this (and Biden's mockery) is just vulgar for the sake of being vulgar. There is a time and a place for vulgarity, press releases is not one of them. It just makes you look foolish, easily manipulated emotionally, and unprofessional in my eyes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The situation is sour to begin with. A lawyer script though? This isn't a cover your ass situation. This is about respect.

I think she honestly spoke what was on her mind. She was insulted that they would do it via an impersonal lawyer script and said as much.

</comment><comment><USER12> She was asked whether she would like to resign or be fired if she refused. Can someone clarify what advantage there would be to one option over the other? I imagine resignation would provide less financial compensation than letting them fire you.</comment>


Vocore2, a ridiculously small Linux PC - <AUTHOR> http://vocore.io/ <comment><USER2> Oh dear - no HTTPS on that page. But, it does host a store section that lets you add stuff to your cart and then click a checkout button. That button takes you to PayPal (unless an attacker re-directed you elsewhere). Its not clear to me that there would be any real way to verify that what you are paying for the stuff from that website - it seems relatively straightforward for an attacker to modify the PayPal link to send you to pay for stuff on their store.

Basically, this seems like a pretty irresponsible way to run a web store.

<comment><USER3> I e-mailed the support email about it. I got a response back - I think I convinced them to do it: "Thank you. You are correct, I will go to godaddy and get one :) it is fashion. Regards Chin"

Or he is telling me to get lost.

<comment><USER4> It seems a full day has passed since you've posted the message. I've just checked the store and it's still served through a plain old unsecure HTTP connection.

It seems you were told to get lost.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is something similar that's about to get released and way faster: [https://neutis.io/](https://neutis.io/)

<comment><USER6> The Neutis is $49, the VoCore2 is $18. They seem to have different power consumption as well. While it might be similar in size, the cost difference is substantial. The best choice as usual depends on the project.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I was interested when the campaing came up and ordered a VoCore2 + Ultimate Dock (42$) back in november 2016. Never received it (must have been lost somewhere).. so I lost all interest in it.

Looked promising, though.

</comment><comment><USER8> I have one from the original crowdsourcing campaign, with an audio dock. Interference makes the sound quality is so bad it's unusable for any practical purposes. Support was useless.

[http://forum.vocore.io/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=3500&p=5185](http://forum.vocore.io/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=3500&p=5185)

<comment><USER9> HappyAlbatross is right: you definitely have a grounding problem, either due to missing proper ground or having a ground loop somewhere. Also if you're using a switching power supply and/or a class D amplifier (that is, a switching amplifier [1]), they can be real nightmares if not properly filtered, and cheaper ones almost never are. Grounding and ground loops, filtering and decoupling are complex issues which would need entire articles, but there's a lot of stuff on the net to get you started. Long story short: don't throw away your board, the problem could disappear just by changing a power supply or rewiring ground connections.

[1] They use the same identical principle behind switching power supplies but applied to driving speakers: performance is fantastic compared to current draw, but they tend to produce lots of harmonics and RF noise just like switching power supplies.

<comment><USER10> Would you be able to test to see if your problem is power-filtering related by powering the board from a battery rather than from the wall?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Related: The Octavo systems system-on-package: [https://octavosystems.com/](https://octavosystems.com/)

It's a TI AMxx series linux computer in a package on package module like a raspberry PI is.

It comes in two variants, a regular pitch BGA and an ultra wide BGA so that it is actually possible to hand solder it! (or with hot air or a toaster.)

It is what is used on the Pocket Beagle.

It saves you the need to to most high speed signals and really the hard parts of building a higher-performance board.

<comment><USER12> The thing just is that TI didn't exactly retain the people that know the internals of the OMAP series. If you hit any bugs you're on your own unfortunately. (Your milage with the existing documentation may vary also).

<comment><USER13> OMAP's been dead a long time. Sitara is OMAP with the media blocks stripped out, and it sure looks like it's on their roadmap for a while to come.

[https://training.ti.com/sites/default/files/docs/TI%20Missio...](https://training.ti.com/sites/default/files/docs/TI%20Mission%20Critical%20Catalog%20Processor%20Overview%20April2017%20non- NDA_0.pdf)

<comment><USER12> Of course it will be produced for as long as customers want it. But the roadmap makes it also crystal clear where they are going: More DSP cores. We likely won't see anything newer than the Cortex-A15. TI builds what enough customers want, and if you're not locked in enough to their DSPs or general ecosystem, you'll move away. That in return means there won't be anything new. No single customer is big enough to warrant bigger cores alone.

A nice quote I remember "I'd rather buy TI stocks than their products".

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Similar to the Omega2+: [https://docs.onion.io/omega2-docs/omega2p.html](https://docs.onion.io/omega2-docs/omega2p.html) ... except Vocore2 is slightly smaller and the Omega2 is ~30% cheaper and has an SD card slot.

Vocore2: MT7628AN 580 MHz MIPS with 128MB DDR2 and 16MB NOR: $18

Omega2+: MT7688 580 MHz MIPS with 128MB DDR2 and 32MB flash: $13

Both have b/g/n Wifi and are 10/100 ethernet ready. Omega2 software is based on LEDE.

Note that there is a SMT version SoM of the Omega2+, the Omega2S+ which is around $10 per unit when buying trays of 50.

</comment><comment><USER15> Smallest linux computer I've seen was Transcend SD card (the wifi one). There are more manufacturers and I think Electric imp uses the same chipset.

<comment><USER16> I looked at what you meant, and first found this article

[https://hackaday.com/2016/06/30/transcend-wifi-sd-card- is-a-...](https://hackaday.com/2016/06/30/transcend-wifi-sd-card-is-a-tiny- linux-server/)

which links this article:

[https://jamesone111.wordpress.com/2014/03/19/exploring- the-t...](https://jamesone111.wordpress.com/2014/03/19/exploring-the- transcend-wifi-sd-card/)

So this is a Linux server in the size of an SD-Card that has 16 GB of storage. And Wifi. And lets clients connect to download whatever's on them.

I was thinking, wow, this must be some pro photography thing costing like $399 or something.

The cost (given in the second article) is £25 (which is $32.19 today.)

That is pretty cheap for a tiny Linux server of this size. With WIFI.

And it made the rounds 5 years ago: [https://hn.algolia.com/?query=Transcend%20Wifi- SD%20card&sor...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=Transcend%20Wifi- SD%20card&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story)

What is the world coming to.

By the way here is the one where HN discussed it the most:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7647434](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7647434)

And note the comment that Transcend released the firmware (though that link is offline today.)

However I guess there really just aren't all that many use cases for this kind of a server. Or maybe it has been superseded? One page[1] lists it as weighing just 2 grams, compared with the weight of 2.5 grams for a U.S. penny. That's gotta have some sort of applications. Why isn't this more popular at $30, or what are people using instead? Is it like, impossible to get any ports out of it, even a single serial debugging port via soldering, so you can't connect it to anything else?

It just seems so hackable!

[1] [https://www.extremedeals.com.ph/products/transcend-16gb- wifi...](https://www.extremedeals.com.ph/products/transcend-16gb-wifi-sd-card)

<comment><USER9> My use case would be to turn a 7 years old camera (which is still better than most phone cameras) into a WiFi networked camera so that when I shoot photos of items I'm selling on Ebay it directly uploads them to my home server (NFS/SMB). For that use it wouldn't even need the flash storage: just buffer in RAM until the image is uploaded.

<comment><USER17> Sounds like the Toshiba FlashAir or Transcend WiFi SD cards might suit your needs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I'm pretty sure I gave away my original Vocore - the pins were simply too small for me to solder.

The Vocore2 looks like a considerable step up, but without mainline Linux support it's of limited utility.

<comment><USER19> Ditto on the pin size. I wasn't able to find utility out of it

<comment><USER9> You may find interesting the NanoPI Duo: [https://www.friendlyarm.com/index.php?route=product/product&...](https://www.friendlyarm.com/index.php?route=product/product&path=69&product_id=197)

Not in the same league (faster + more RAM but bigger + more power hungry), but the breadboard friendly form factor makes it very close to be the ideal minimal Linux module.

<comment><USER19> This thing is dense!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> From 2016: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11397638](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11397638)

</comment><comment><USER21> I take a major issue in their usage of OpenWRT. It seems to me that every hardware I touch with OpenWRT included is out of date - or "well aged". As soon as you try to modify something in the OpenWrt interface and/or update the system, half of the features do not work anymore - luckily the reset button usually works. At least the OpenWRT variant they are choosing looks recent. Good luck!

I'm at the point where I only get Raspberry PI-based hardware. This way I know that I'm able to update/or reinstall in a year or two.

</comment><comment><USER22> This project looks awesome. I can imagine it being used instead of the ESP8266 in many of my IoT projects. That would be a huge time saver.

It will start to become competitive once it is actually cheaper than Raspberry Pi Zero. Especially as the Vocore2 is MIPS-based.

<comment><USER23> My main issue with using a full-blown linux device for IoT is that it's a full blown linux device. Not only is it harder to get up and running IMHO (vs just flashing your code to esp8266), you need to maintain a full OS which is a hassle security wise in the longer term. I get that there are some advantages, but overall I think IoT is better off as simple as possible.

Also, it's not possible to take the RPi zero seriously until they start shipping in any serious quantity - I don't like the play they've made by keeping it scarce.

<comment><USER17> > Also, it's not possible to take the RPi zero seriously until they start > shipping in any serious quantity - I don't like the play they've made by > keeping it scarce.

What do you consider to be serious quantity? You can order 250+ of them off Digikey right now or go into any Microcenter and buy them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Website says: "It will help you to make [...] the tiniest router in the world." Got one of these and I'm pretty sure they're quite smaller: [http://amzn.asia/d/idyKhjN](http://amzn.asia/d/idyKhjN)

Makes me wonder if I could turn those Japanese routers into computers (they're dirt cheap at £8.50)...

<comment><USER25> Yours are thinner, not smaller overall I think. The Vocore is basically the size of an ethernet port, judging by screenshots.

Still, in the end, you're correct that it's not real news that the size of a full Linux-capable computer is now entirely dictated by the type of physical interfaces you need. There is nothing you can do with a Vocore that you couldn't already do with other similarly-sized boards.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> For those wondering what SoC it is, as it's unfortunately buried 2 links deep, here's the page with the information.

[http://vocore.io/v2.html](http://vocore.io/v2.html)

</comment><comment><USER27> > 128MB, DDR2, 166MHz

This is small supercomputer!

My first distribution (Slackware 2.0) was running on a P75 MHZ with 8 MB.

<comment><USER28> Do you know the fischertechnik toy line? It's a little bit like Lego technic (fischertechnik fans will hate me for this comment because fischertechnik appeared in 1964, while the first Lego technic was introduced only in 1977).

They have a programmable controller for their robotics models: 600MHz ARM CPU and 256MB DDR3 RAM. We are talking about a toy line here :)

<comment><USER27> No, thanks for the heads up.

Yep pretty crazy nowadays, although if I would be playing with electronics, I guess I would just use the ESP32 instead.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> The problem with Linux in these applications is that it's not a realtime OS.

<comment><USER30> You can get pretty fantastic latencies on stock linux with some tuning, with the kind of processors embedded linux runs on you only really gain some microseconds by going to realtime variants. The main reason to prefer a true RTOS is because it will generally be simpler, and thus a bit more predictable and reliable in its behaviour, which is important for high-reliability systems.

<comment><USER31> > The main reason to prefer a true RTOS is because it will generally be > simpler, and thus a bit more predictable and reliable in its behaviour

I mean... you just defined real time there.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> >MT7628AN

Be prepared for a surprise when you try making wifi work on that thing

</comment><comment><USER33> If it had USB-C I'd have insta-bought at least 2. Why are we in Q3 2018 still releasing new products with micro usb? Otherwise looks very cool though.

<comment><USER34> Because USB-C is still a mess.[1]

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17285411](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17285411)

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> I could not make out from the documentation - are there are GPIO pins as on the Raspberry Pi?

<comment><USER36> Click though to product page, full specs are listed: [http://vocore.io/v2.html](http://vocore.io/v2.html)

"Around 40" GPIO pins

<comment><USER37> that's a weirdly non-specific number...

<comment><USER38> That's because a lot of pins are configurable (there is a muxer on them), so you could have a maximum of 40 GPIOs but if you want say, an SPI port, then you get less GPIOs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Can a USB 4G Module be connected to this ?

<comment><USER40> Might as well get a cheap Chinese android phone as the USB 4G is going to cost more than the device.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> TL;DR: this is based on the Ralink processors that are widely used in consumer routers, wifi light switches, etc.

RT5350, 360 MHz, MIPS 24K, with 32MB of RAM.

CPU datasheet: [https://www.mouser.com/ds/2/813/RT5350-1022839.pdf](https://www.mouser.com/ds/2/813/RT5350-1022839.pdf)</comment>


Ask HN: 25W Chess, a Good Idea? - <AUTHOR> I've been toying with this idea of creating a 25W computer chess tournament with prize money. Computer programs would be limited to running at 25W, to match the human brain energy usage. I hope this would level the playing field and create a fair comparison about the strength of both humans and computers at chess. What thinkest thou? <comment><USER3> > [...] it took until 2009 for something (really) interesting to happen, a > program called 'pocket Fritz' achieved parity with Deep Blue in terms of > strength while running on a mobile phone and evaluating only a small > fraction of the number of positions evaluated by Deep Blue. In terms of > power efficiency that's an absolutely enormous leap and it brought - in my > view at least - for the first time the game on a level footing. Humans and > Chess computers were now competing at approximately the same level of energy > consumption.

\-- [https://jacquesmattheij.com/another-way-of-looking-at-lee- se...](https://jacquesmattheij.com/another-way-of-looking-at-lee-sedol-vs- alphago/)

> In 2009, a chess engine running on slower hardware, a 528 MHz HTC Touch HD > mobile phone, reached the grandmaster level. The mobile phone won a category > 6 tournament with a performance rating of 2898. The chess engine Hiarcs 13 > runs inside Pocket Fritz 4 on the mobile phone HTC Touch HD. Pocket Fritz 4 > won the Copa Mercosur tournament in Buenos Aires, Argentina with 9 wins and > 1 draw on 4–14 August 2009.[33] Pocket Fritz 4 searches fewer than 20,000 > positions per second.[34] This is in contrast to supercomputers such as Deep > Blue that searched 200 million positions per second. Pocket Fritz 4 achieves > a higher performance level than Deep Blue.

\-- [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human%E2%80%93computer_chess_m...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human%E2%80%93computer_chess_matches#Pocket_Fritz_4_.282009.29)

<comment><AUTHOR> So if a typical smartphone battery is 2700mAh and nominal voltage 4.2V - <USER2> gives 11.34 Wh. Assuming typical smartphone battery lasts 4 hours at full load, it means it is drawing only about 2.8W peak. Which is much less than 25W and I believe Stockfish on mobile phone would be above human level. If my math is right - Darn, this idea wouldn't fly! (and that computation is already pretty energy efficient nowadays, good job humanity)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Droidfish (Android application using Stockfish chess engine) will trounce humans in tournament play on hardware drawing much less than 25 watts. The power restriction might give humans a fighting chance in Go again for a few more years.

</comment><comment><USER5> Cool idea. Would you also limit the volume of the computer to typical human skull capacity?

</comment><comment><USER6> It was the exact same idea I had when I saw Alpha Go beating Human Champions. I thought how was that fair? A Machine using ~600kW, while AlphaGo Zero went down to something like 1-2kW. That is still 40 to 80 Times the human brain power consumption. Not to mention our brain requires to process images, smell and other surrounding senses simultaneously. And our 25W includes DRAM, SSD, Storage and all Interconnection. Not sure if that is something Google put into its initial account as it only mention TPU, GPU and CPU.

Although as others have pointed out, Chess seems to be computationally less expensive meaning 25W is fast enough to beat any human player.

</comment><comment><USER7> It would be interesting if competitors had a high budget, to truly try to develop a great low-powered chess-playing system. Kind of like Bitcoin mining.

Without a high budget, you just have standard hardware, and essentially it's similar to playing on fancier hardware with lower time constraints and pondering turned on.

</comment><comment><USER8> Amazing idea.

You might have to limit storage as well to stop 'storing energy' on hard disks.

But seeing what people do is part of the fun!

</comment><comment><USER9> This already occurs currently. Most systems that beat humans already use much less than 25 watts.

</comment><comment><USER10> With neural network computer engine like lc0, the run-time power is not so important, because it used a lot of compute during its training phase. Also there probably need to be some memory constraints.

</comment><comment><USER11> Sounds cool! The brain connection is evocative and constraints make for interesting solutions. How would you enforce it?

<comment><USER12> Not OP but I would enforce the maximum of 25W by standardizing on a particular power supply. To prevent usage of batteries or capacitators, demanding people bring their own hardware with removable casing. You can then inspect the PCB(s).

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I would watch if you posted it on YouTube

</comment><comment><USER14> Yes! Energy usage should be part of AI - no, software! - benchmarks more often anyway

</comment><comment><USER15> But 25 W for CPU doesn't mean you can't avoid GPU offload and run everything there

<comment><USER16> I take it as 25w power draw at mains.</comment></comment>


Reddit makes me hate atheists. - <AUTHOR> http://skepchick.org/2011/12/reddit-makes-me-hate-atheists/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Skepchick+%28Skepchick%29

<comment><USER2> My brief interactions with Reddit these days lead me to believe that this sort of immaturity is not limited to r/atheism…

That said, I'm glad Reddit exists, for the same reason I'm glad that skate parks and X-Boxes exist.

</comment><comment><USER3> I think the average age of Reddit is 16. High school students have infiltrated it ages ago. This is why I don't take anything I read in the comment section too seriously.

<comment><USER4> On one hand, I understand your need to sleep better at night. On the other hand, here are facts:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reddit#Demographics>

and

[http://www.ignitesocialmedia.com/social-media- stats/2011-soc...](http://www.ignitesocialmedia.com/social-media- stats/2011-social-network-analysis-report/#Reddit)

As you can see, Reddit is overwhelmingly 25-44. The most represented group is actually 35-44. The high school demographic is negligible, and equal to the 65+ demographic.

Also, if you were to be completely honest with yourself, I bet you would not have made the comment you've made if the jokes and the upvotes were about race and lynchings instead of underage girls and rape.

<comment><USER5> He meant mental age.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Says more about r/atheism's sick sense of humour than anti-female ideals.

She did join in on the jokes though (in screenshot posted).</comment>


Why I just turned off auto updates in iOS7 - <AUTHOR> http://blog.firmhouse.com/why-i-just-turned-off-auto-updates-in-ios7

<comment><USER2> There's a reason the one-time backup code option exists, you know.</comment>


Use Emacs Org Mode and REST APIs for an up-to-date stock portfolio - <AUTHOR> http://www.sastibe.de/2018/05/2018-05-11-emacs-org-mode-rest-apis-stocks/ <comment><USER3> Slightly related. I think it would be cool to be able to browse the web using org-mode. It could be very efficient.

`* google How do I walk my cat outside`

then moving cursor to that headline and pressing C-c C-c, for example, would make turn it into:

        * google How do I walk my cat outside

        ** How To Walk Your Cat On A Leash, And Why You Should | HuffPost

        ** Should You Walk Your Cat Outdoors on a Leash?

        ** Is Walking Your Cat Really a Good Idea? - Vetstreet.com

        ** How to Walk Your Cat on a Leash... Safely - Preventive Vet

        ** How to Walk a Cat (and Live to Tell About It) | petMD

        ** Can Indoor Cats Enjoy Safe Fun Outside Too? How to Keep Your Cat ...

        ** People Try Walking Their Cats - <USER2>

        ** How to Walk Your Cat | Pet Training Tips

        ** How To Walk Your Cat: It's Easier Than You Think | PetSafe® Articles

        ** Train your cat to walk on a leash – Adventure Cats

Then, moving the cursor to the third result "Is Walking Your Cat Really a Good Idea? - Vetstreet.com", and pressing C-c C-c would expand it again with the main text content of the page and some important links:

        [...edited out...]

        ** Should You Walk Your Cat Outdoors on a Leash?

        ** Is Walking Your Cat Really a Good Idea? - Vetstreet.com

        *** Main content

        Q. Do you think it's a good idea to take my cat for walks? I saw harnesses and leashes for cats at the pet supply store.

        A. That would depend very much [...edited out...]

        trying to accomplish is getting your indoor cat some access to the outside, that's probably better accomplished with a roomy cat patio.

        *** [page link][http://www.vetstreet.com/our-pet-experts/does-my-cat-need-to-go-for-walks]

        *** Read more

        *** [Cats][http://www.vetstreet.com/category/species/cats]

        *** [Veterinarian Written][http://www.vetstreet.com/category/sitecontent/veterinarian-written]

        *** [Cat Training][http://www.vetstreet.com/category/sitecontent/cat-training]

        *** [Cat Behavior][http://www.vetstreet.com/category/sitecontent/cat-behavior]

        ** How to Walk Your Cat on a Leash... Safely - Preventive Vet

        [...edited out...]

<comment><USER4> That sounds like it would be fun to write. You could even load the search results in Helm (see the end of the video below). Then selecting a result could render the page in headless Firefox (or something like elinks) and send the text output to a buffer.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjKtkEMUYGc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjKtkEMUYGc)

<comment><USER5> Emacs has shr which renders HTML natively.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Loved his enthusiasm. I feel very much the same about emacs. It's endless and you can easily spend most of your day in it, experimenting.

I got back to emacs few years back, than contributed to spacemacs (which is great, but also makes you forget how awesome real emacs is), now giving "emacs doom" a second look. Fascinating in a completely different way.

<comment><USER7> If you don't mind expanding a bit, what would you say to a Spacemacs user to encourage that user to explore vanilla emacs?

<comment><USER6> Spacemacs feels very abstracted. It's great to have so much work done for you, but the knowledge is not transferable. Unless you develop layers yourself and can understand the internals, be difficult to use your knowledge outside of spacemacs.

I've looked at the module abstracts in doom and they don't look foreign. They do look way above my level of emacs lisp tough.

There's also the evil stuff in spacemacs which is great and I grew fond of, but if you're not familiar with emacs' native bindings, it makes it impossible to use vanilla emacs when you have too.

<comment><USER8> > There's also the evil stuff in spacemacs which is great and I grew fond of, > but if you're not familiar with emacs' native bindings, it makes it > impossible to use vanilla emacs when you have too.

In such situations, if one cannot install spacemacs, at least they can use vim.

There's also the fact that some evil users use it _because_ they want to edit text the vim way and not the emacs way. Such people wouldn't want to use vanilla emacs anyway.

<comment><USER7> I think that onyva might be referring to those situations where various plugins and emacs major modes require you to operate with emacs bindings, and are otherwise incompatible with vim bindings. It's a bit rare but I've had to switch to emacs when trying to do some things in erc (irc client), eww (web browser), and eshell (terminal).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> > Emacs is like a classical steel frame road bike, reliant, robust, nothing > fancy but easy to repair.

I usually find myself comparing Emacs to the A-10 Warthog: It's big, slow, and ugly, but when you have a big ugly job it's absolutely your best friend. Also it's spent decades surviving the most determined attempts to get rid of it.

(In this analogy, Atom plays the role of the F-35 JSF: intended to replace what already exists in a variety of missions, but absolutely not mission- capable at any of them.)

</comment><comment><USER10> I've been using the GOOGLEFINANCE function in Google Sheets for this. It works pretty well, but there are some institutional funds in my 401k without tickers, e.g. "Vanguard Institutional 500 Index Trust". Has anyone seen an API that can deal with funds like that?

<comment><USER11> For funds that track a well known index (like VFFSX), use a well known fund that tracks the same index (SPDR) and normalize the results. There will be some tracking error, but it should be small enough to not bother correcting.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Huh, neat. I threw something similar together using org-mode but calling the API via curl (because I already had that working from somewhere else). Throw the results into a table. The table contents are then used in another script to create entries for ledger-cli.

I need to fix it up because it's clunky and still requires more manual intervention than should be necessary.

I typically run it once a month (I don't care about _daily_ prices, just end of month) using the last trading day of the month.

I may update it to use this process instead, keep it all in emacs.

</comment><comment><USER13> Couldn't you also use this to test REST API's that you are interfacing with? Wonder if you could expand this to do stuff that postman does.

<comment><USER14> Emacs already has restclient.el[1]. Wonderful little tool. :-)

[1] [https://github.com/pashky/restclient.el](https://github.com/pashky/restclient.el)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I need this for crypto

<comment><USER16> There's a CRYPTOFINANCE() google sheets plugin that does a pretty good job. I've been using it the last few months.

[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/cryptofinance/bhjn...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/cryptofinance/bhjnahcnhemcnnenhgbmmdapapblnlcn?hl=en)</comment></comment>


Why you should eliminate titles at startups - <AUTHOR> http://venturefizz.com/blog/why-you-should-eliminate-titles-start-ups

<comment><USER2> While I can kinda agree with what he's saying, I think that if you are going to get loose with titles, you need to have a CEO clearly defined both internally and externally.

Someone's ass needs to be be on the line at the end of the day.</comment>


Reverse Engineering Taylor Swift's Startup Business Model - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@joey_rideout/reverse-engineering-taylor-swifts-startup-business-model-c80a4c8d8d69 <comment><AUTHOR> Long-time writer but first-time author here! Looking forward to hearing some feedback.</comment>