How valuable was your high school education? - <AUTHOR>

I had two classes that I felt helped to prepare me most for life after graduation, Money Management and Entrepreneurship. I remember soaking up as much as I could, knowing the knowledge would come in handy one day. Since my 2009 graduation, life has been about everything I didn't learn in school. How to compose a resume and prepare for job interviews, how to build credit, how to incorporate a business, how to achieve good health, etc. I can now vouch for the statement, 'Google taught me more than school'. I didn't go to college, but I am attending the university of life, where every course is self-taught.
After that sentence, some of you may itch to debate how much better off I'd be had I gone to college. That isn't the point here.
Basic life lessons were not provided. Individuals are graduating high school, without a clue as to how to navigate the real world. Something is very wrong, and pushing for fundamental changes within an archaic educational system is a pipe dream.  I feel the best we can do is take change into our own hands and supplement the education of our youth.
So, I am looking for feedback for an idea of mine. An app, LifeLesson, where both students and graduates can go to view short video clips and/or audio recordings on topics such as credit, business, health and so on. Content will be divided into two sections, experienced professionals and peers offering advice. There will be a feature that allows the student to add LifeLessons to a Notebook.
While available to everyone, I feel it is key to target individuals 17-25. They need it most and if that age bracket gravitates to it, I believe it would be a tremendous success. I haven't yet worked out how it would generate revenue as my heart is in this and for the moment, money has to take a back seat.
I'm here for you to pick my idea apart. Please bring up anything that comes to mind.
If you'd like to discuss this idea with me privately, reach me at firstname.lastname@example.com. <comment><USER2> To start of, a bit of background:

From my experience, teaching finance (not economics) is left up to guardians. Larger institutions may even have Money Management and Entrepreneurship courses available, but they will usually be electives and are unlikely to be chosen by those of High School age (kudos to you if you chose them willingly). Taking this into account it becomes pretty clear why so many people are bad with finances: they were never taught it. If their guardians are bad with finances, or don't put in any effort to teach them, in all likely-hood the students will fail to seek out this knowledge themselves until it starts biting them in the butt in the school of hard knocks.

I have been lucky enough to have a father that is a businessman, investor, and negotiator, and put in a lot of effort to teach me the dark arts. The difference that is created by having an active parent was very apparent in high school. Classmates who had taken courses similar to myself and I considered equals academically usually gave me confused looks when I talked about finances outside of theoretical economics.

#####

It'll be great if you take on this project; people will benefit a lot from it. The important part, as oxalo said in another comment, will be execution. Sending it to editors of websites that those in that age group frequent, trying to get them to review it or recommend it would be a great way to start the fire. If it starts, leave it alone and it will likely grow by itself.

As far as revenue, think about what your true goal is. Unless you're strapped for cash, you may not even need to generate revenue: hosting is cheap and small donations will be more than enough. Your time isn't free of course, but that's why suggested thinking about your true goal. It's highly unlikely that you'll spend more than a few hours here and there once it's set up, since your focus is on the base content.

Besides, if thinking about how much it'll help others isn't good enough, consider it an investment. If it takes off, it'll be a big item in your portfolio.

#####

I'll throw in some suggestions:

* Definitely have a transcript for every video. Different people learn differently. I personally avoid videos since I can read faster than people can speak.

* Definitely do a section on negotiation.

* Start of with major points that give big impact. If they stop after that first video, at least they will have left with something useful.

* For negotiation I would recommend starting them with the dark art of anchoring: knowing how to use it can single-handedly make the difference between a salary of $25k and $65k. (I call it a dark art since it's so effective, while also being a blatant abuse of human psychology).

* Some things will be difficult to teach electronically. The basic of the business world, how to give a handshake, will be one of those. You would be surprised how many people would not know how to react if you walked up to them offering a handshake.

#####

Feel free to contact me, I would be happy to be a part of this. You'll be able to find my information in my profile page.

<comment><AUTHOR> Petronio, I did choose those classes, thank you. Unfortunately, they weren't mandatory. I too was lucky enough to have a father similar to yours while growing up. I guess the keyword is lucky, most don't have the privilege.

I have felt passionate about providing some sort of supplemental educational tool for a while now. Yesterday, when a college sophomore friend of mine contacted me for help with putting together a resume, I knew I couldn't wait any longer.

Thank you so much for your feedback. Wonderful, wonderful information! I will surely reach out to you. You sound as though you would be great to work with and/or a great candidate for providing content for the app. Just those few paragraphs were truly captivating. You have a thing or two you can teach.

I can even see a cool video on how to give a proper handshake. A little camera angle play and you could have something nice!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I was actually thinking of doing something like this too, but for just finances and doing their taxes, I wasn't planning on making any money at all, but maybe just a youtube channel or a blog and to just put out the knowledge that I learned from my research/life.

It boggles my mind how my friends are so inept at managing their finances. How they have so much debt and don't know how to divide their paychecks, to put money in their savings while paying off their credit cards but while still using those same credit cards. I would like to know more about finances such as which credit cards to get, which banks are good for me, what kind of savings plan to start (Roth IRA, 401K, w/es), etc. from a knowledgeable and objective 3rd party with no ties to any of the companies they're advocating for, and that's the problem I face when I try to google these things because there's just so much information out there and it's hard to differentiate what's ultimately the best for me. Also, taxes, I have no clue how they're done I just give it to the guy at H&R block and just leave, maybe it's better this way, maybe not, I have no clue.

Another thing would be your career. i.e. I want to be a doctor. What exactly do I have to do. Step by step instructions based on time period, schooling: what schools would be good, what majors to choose depending on your location, how/when to study/take the MCATs, how/what to expect when I apply/get accepted, what happens during med school. Just an overall timeline, to do list and how to do it, and what exactly the profession/specialty does (i.e. doctors look at patients, yes, but ~80% of their time is devoted to paperwork). Adding a comprehensive guide such as this would be nice too, but for different professions, especially government jobs.

<comment><AUTHOR> Do you mind me asking how old you are? I say 17-25, but I know a wider age range could certainly use an app like LifeLesson.

Yes, these things just simply aren't taught. So you end up with clueless young adults who become clueless adults. If you do try to teach yourself, you most likely resort to Google or Youtube, infinitely broad search engines with no filters whatsoever. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it makes it harder to find credible information. However, if you do and you're anything like me, it's bookmarked and never to be found again.

I think categories and career specific LifeLessons are an excellent idea. Maybe then you'll have less students lost in an inescapable amount of debt, still unsure of what they want to do with their lives.

Thanks so much for your feedback.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I think this is a very good idea. Anecdotally, I've had many people complain about having to do things they 'didn't learn in school.' But with any good idea, it's about execution. How do you build your user base, etc.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you! I would create a thought-provoking video ad campaign that individuals ages 17-25 could relate to. Asking simple questions, how will you lease your first car? Allow a brief pause, then cut to a clip of the app and someone giving that answer, then fade over with 'LifeLesson' and where to download the app.</comment></comment>


Show HN: My Java deep learning library from 10th grade - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/Daniel-Liu-c0deb0t/Java-Machine-Learning <comment><AUTHOR> I implemented many deep learning algorithms in this library, mainly as a way to learn about deep learning. Beware, it is very slow since it is written in Java and there is no GPU acceleration. Maybe this will be of use to people who are learning new deep learning concepts.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me!</comment>


Ask HN: Would you pay $79/month for a status page? - <AUTHOR> statuspage.io appears so expensive to me ($79 or $249 per month), what do you think ? <comment><USER2> Anyone who can code or do sysAd/devOps would not pay for $79/month for a status page. But if you think of it as a business owner, anyone would.

Developing your own internal tool can be done if you can spare resources, but most of the time it will be done half-baked. Statuspage.io provides you with minimal overhead - unless you can spare dev resources, do your own A/B testing, ensuring it's up, managing another internal tool for your status pages takes up a lot of work. Another git repository to manage, another project held in everyone's cognition.

During downtimes, usually everyone is poured into solving a problem. Not updating and doing status pages.

You can say that Statuspage.io can be replaced with a wordpress website at it's most basic functionality, but even that wordpress website needs someone to take care of it, to make sure it is up and running during your lowest points. Extra stress, extra thing to worry about.

For anyone who runs a huge web business (see their list of clients), $79USD for a reliable service that acts as a crucial part of your system that faces customers during the lowest points of your service is pretty cheap. Compare it to the hundreds, if not, thousands of dollars you may lose in damage control during a downtime, just because your customers had no updates on what the hell is happening.

PS: I do not work for statuspage.io

</comment><comment><USER3> It's very expensive, they won't be able to hold that price long term. For now it's still a young and growing field, all boats are rising.

I often see eg Pingdom take flak for being expensive. However, their basic account is a mere $10, and $40 for their pro (a lot less if you sign up for a year). It's a trivial cost for them to offer the exact same status page product, just stapled on to their existing offerings. With their massive customer base, it's also very easy for them to instantly dominate the 'status page' market, and make it all but impossible for StatusPage.io to thrive long- term (assuming a good product).

Given the cost of offering these types of services is navigating toward zero per unit, in my opinion there's no chance a company can hold a $80 per month price tag.

</comment><comment><USER4> Clickable:

[https://www.statuspage.io/](https://www.statuspage.io/)

[http://status.kissmetrics.com/](http://status.kissmetrics.com/)

My goodness that's pricy. They do a good job of making their case by sharing the status pages of their customers. However, if I was one of those customers, I'd expect to be given a free account. After all, I'm baring my important stats so that you can sell more subscriptions.

<comment><USER5> Status pages are public by default... what would the point of one be otherwise?

<comment><USER4> I think there are status pages for internal consumption and those for external advertising purposes ("See - we have 100% uptime over the past 30 days!"). I don't guess I understand why you thought all status pages would be public.

<comment><USER5> I guess its because I've only ever seen external status pages.

For internal reporting, the high level overview that a typical status page gives seems pretty useless.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I agree. It is expensive. But they seem to be successful so far. So maybe we are not in their demographic.

</comment><comment><USER7> .IO domains are expensive, they need to cover the cost of it too :)

</comment><comment><USER8> compare with pingdom ? $6.96

[https://www.pingdom.com/pricing/](https://www.pingdom.com/pricing/)

Disclose: I Do Not work for pingdom

<comment><USER9> Just from browsing the two sites on my iphone, statuspage made their case better. Would I pay that much for their service? Maybe if I was a funded company it would be more attractive than wasting man hours. Do I think someone can undercut their price? Probably ...</comment></comment>


A tutorial for GNU libmicrohttpd - <AUTHOR> http://www.gnu.org/software/libmicrohttpd/tutorial.html <comment><USER2> Libsoup is nice too: [https://wiki.gnome.org/action/show/Projects/libsoup](https://wiki.gnome.org/action/show/Projects/libsoup)

</comment><comment><USER3> this is maybe interesting for embedded development too, I played a bit with a basic webserver for Arduino a while ago: [https://github.com/mulderp/arduino_webserver](https://github.com/mulderp/arduino_webserver) \- but libmicrohttpd might offer more convenience

<comment><USER4> I was looking for a lib that allows me to put together a CoAP / HTTP proxy some months ago and both libcurl and libwww weren't really the thing to use. This looks much more interesting</comment></comment>


"Common view" that Japanese are typically collectivists is not supported by data - <AUTHOR> https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ajsp.12334?campaign=wolearlyview& <comment><USER2> I'm curious by what metric? One reason I choose to live in Japan is the respect for others. Drop your wallet you're more likely to get it back and with all cash that was in it. People generally don't party loud in their apartments but in support of that it's easy to find a bar or restaurant you can rent for the night for your party and places than can seat parties of 8 to 20 people without notice are abundant (izakaya). Places to practice instruments are also easy to find. Cleaning up after a picnic or at the beach seems better than most other places.

Whether or not that's evidence of collectivism I have no idea.

<comment><USER3> _"One reason I choose to live in Japan is the respect for others."_

Interesting. For me this is one of the worst things about living in the UK.

It's quite normal for many people to go the park or the beach and just leave all their litter on the ground when they're done. Or to tip out all the litter from their car into the street when they're done eating a McDonalds meal. Things that would be totally unacceptable in Japan or even many other European countries!

In the UK I don't think it's lack of respect for _others_ that is the real problem, however. People are generally polite to each other, willing to help people out and form orderly queues. It's more a lack of respect for the environment around them (picking up litter is someone else's job) or lack of awareness of how their actions affect others (I had no idea that revving my loud ass motorbike on a residential street at 1AM was annoying people)...

Sometimes I wish that the UK was more like Japan!

<comment><USER4> > I had no idea that revving my loud ass motorbike on a residential street at > 1AM was annoying people

I was on a train going into London earlier this week and the guy sat behind me insisted on playing music loudly on his phone speaker. Which doubles the annoyance of being both terrible music (imo) and terrible distorted sound quality.

I asked him to turn it down after being annoyed for a bit, which he did for 5 minutes and then took a phone call (speakerphone, obvs) and turned the music back on.

I guess he knew I wasn't going to keep making a fuss and so didn't give a shit. It was mildly infuriating - but what are you going to do?

<comment><USER5> One possible tactic is to try and strike up a conversation with him. He'll probably turn off or turn down his music if given an opportunity to talk about himself (which most people love doing).

<comment><USER6> I think I'd rather deal with the music.

<comment><USER7> That's probably why people think it's okay to listen to music or have conversations on speakerphone. I'm not saying you are obligated to attempt to stop antisocial behaviour. You are proving his assumptions that people don't really mind.

<comment><USER6> It probably is. And personally, I _don 't_ really care. Because I have my earphones in and I can't hear anything coming from the outside world.

That's not to say that I _can 't_ care about rude behavior or do anything about it if it starts to persist. I've confronted more than one person who kept on with bad behaviors, at the coffee shop that I go to.

Usually a politely-worded request is all that's required. I may escalate to a second politely-worded request. I think that's only been needed once in 13 years of going to the coffee shop. The baristas handle it if it gets more out of hand.

There is behavior that I particularly don't have a problem with but other people do. This usually concerns the shared resource of space at the bar. One guy _really_ needs his space, about half of a bar intended to seat 3. The coffee shop is his workplace and he needs everything just so. Other people roll their eyes and just give in, in many cases moving before he gets there. This, of course, suits him just fine. He seems to calibrate to just enough disagreeableness to get his way in this particular instance.

I'm just glad I don't have to get involved and can laugh from a distance.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > This common view has persisted for decades despite prior influential reviews > refuting it (Matsumoto, 1999, 2002; Matsumoto, Kudoh, & Takeuchi, 1996; > Oyserman, Coon, & Kemmelmeier, 2002; Takano & Osaka, 1997, 1999)

Odd they don't cite sources promoting the common view (Except for Hofstede, later).

> The common view is problematic because it takes this country-level > difference and interprets a cultural dimen- sion of the country—for example, > that American culture is individualistic and that Japanese culture is > collectivis- tic—and then further applies that culture-level difference to > individual members of those cultures. American indi- viduals are treated as > if they are all individualistic and Japanese individuals are treated as if > they are all collec- tivistic; that is, the common view essentially imposes > a country-level effect (I/C) onto individual members of those nation > cultures.

So they are saying that Japanese culture is collectivist, but Japanese individuals aren't. Makes sense to me. I litter more when in China than when in Japan.

</comment><comment><USER9> Seems that you need credentials to access the full article.

Based on the abstract it sounds a good read. Japanese phrase "The nail that sticks out gets hammered down" might need to be changed to "The nail that sticks out gets to see further"

[https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/07/21/national/scienc...](https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/07/21/national/science- health/dna-influence-japans-collectivist-society)

</comment><comment><USER10> "At 88 Japan scores as one of the most Long Term Orientation oriented societies. Japanese see their life as a very short moment in a long history of mankind."

</comment><comment><USER11> I think the real difference is somewhere else. Japanese aren't individualists neither. Like other Asian people they tend to make a profound distinction between family and the world outside of the family. In other words, they think "we" and exclude you if you aren't part of the family.

</comment><comment><USER12> "Common view" is usually very inaccurate.

More principled cultural measures like Hofstede's don't measure individuality of individuals (sic). They measure relative differences in a group of people from another in the terms of the culture and values as they are collectively represented in institutions and behavioral norms.

In Hofstede's cultural dimensions Japanese uncertainty avoidance may be interpreted and perceived as 'low individuality' because it restricts expression of expressing ideas and individual behavior. It does not mean that Japanese are drones without ideas as individuals. They must express new ideas using different channels when working inside Japanese culture.

Hofstede's ranking for individualism for select countries:

        US      91
        Japan   46
        China   20

Japan ranks culturally quite high in individualism when compared to other East Asian nations. Japanese society does not have extended family system which forms a base of more collectivistic societies such as China and Korea. Where they really separate from the rest is masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, low indulgence and power distance. In contrast, Chinese uncertainty avoidance is very low. Lover than in the US.

\---

Short definitions to avoid confusion from literal interpretation of the terms (these terms don't mean exactly the same what the common meaning is):

individualism: the degree of interdependence a society maintains among its members. In Individualist societies people are supposed to look after themselves and their direct family only. In Collectivist societies people belong to 'in groups' that take care of them in exchange for loyalty.

power distance: the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organizations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally.

masculinity: indicates that the society will be driven by competition, achievement and success, with success being defined by the winner / best in field – a value system that starts in school and continues throughout organizational life. A Feminine society is one where quality of life is the sign of success and standing out from the crowd is not admirable (Sweden is opposite of Japan in this axis).

uncertainty avoidance: the degree to which the members of a society feel uncomfortable with uncertainty and ambiguity. Strong uncertainty avoidance means maintaining rigid codes of belief and behaviour, and are intolerant of unorthodox behaviour and ideas.

indulgence: the extent to which people try to control their desires and impulses. Culturally less emphasis on leisure time and control the gratification of their desires.

<comment><USER13> Well, the comparison mentioned in the abstract is between Americans and Japanese, so Hofstede's rankings seem to agree with the "common view" mentioned in the paper...

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> This kind of stereotyping perpetuates myths in both directions and encourages the 'fetishization' of others. It creates gross generalizations about things like individualism, collectivism and shame that are not in sync with reality.

Slut shaming, unemployment, deviant behavior, low status jobs are about shame. 13 reasons why and slew of other media explore slut shaming in modern society. Hn commentators never fail to remind macdonald and wallmart workers about their status. Go back just a couple of decades and its even more pronounced.

Any one who has been to school here will know status and class consciousness is predominant in society. This raises questions about the value and accuracy of these kind of distinctions.

Differences seem to come more from relative wealth levels that allow better infrastructure, facilities, less frenzy for survival, leisure, some degree of independence and opportunities for self improvement. In Palo Alto people wait for pedestrians while in New York its completely different, you can do some deep analysis on culture for this or put it down to crowding and heavy traffic patterns.

</comment><comment><USER15> I'm not going to say I can absolutely refute this paper but I can say that in my day job, which is an international not for profit in the Asia Pacific, with a strong Japanese sub presence I see collectivism and individualism, but I see a lot more collectivism. I'm told in the domestic equivalent circuit they fight like cats and dogs, but outside? It's a party line.

I also think there is a strong Confucianism element to things. Collectivism is a sister to respect for collective and hierarchical authority sometimes.

<comment><USER16> A lot of Western people (especailly a certain brand of Americans) parrot this line of thought like it's the 19th century when in fact what they're perceiving is their own inability to understand another culture. The atom bomb and hollywood has had a stronger influence on contemporary japanese culture than Confucius, but there's always this constant need to regress to a differentiated past.

<comment><USER15> I asked my colleagues who come from a range of Asian backgrounds and they tend to feel there is a resurgence of modern soft Confucianism. Obviously they could be chosing a trope to get out of the conversation too.

I'm not American. I'm in Australia but working with a body that covers all 56 Asia Pacific economies with some national chapters. The Bhutanese are very very strong on ancestor and elder respect (for instance)

So you tend to support the papers view?

<comment><USER16> Yeah, I've heard that there is some renewed interest in Confucianism which I think has to do with the global rise of fascist mythology, but for example it's still true that young Japanese are quickly losing interest in family values and traditional notions of responsiblities to society.

<comment><USER17> More like current Japanese economy makes it fucking hard to live out traditional Japanese family image. Life-long cushy salaryman jobs are sparse. Yet Japanese women who stick to the traditional image won't take up a dude working McJob. The only way save face (which is one of top priorities in Japan if not Asia) is to pretend you have no interest in that at all.

There're quite a few young people living out the traditional Japanese dream though. Birth rates seem to be coming back up too. Possibly because Tokyo (where most young people are concentrated, the rest of the country is more or less dying) is slowly becoming child-friendly. More spacious housing for affordable (as that can be) prices, more public facilities for children and child care/schools seem to be getting cheaper.

<comment><USER18> I don't know why people always focus on the birth rate in Japan. It's pretty standard to developed nations, and there are nations with a lower birth rate.

<comment><USER17> Their birth rate is now getting back up. It used to be quite a bit worse. On top of that, average Japanese life expectancy is rather long. Which makes it skewed towards elders.

And on top of that, they have strict immigration and don't feel like going Euro way at all. Thus population decline is massive compared to western europe.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Recent news:

[https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/japan-tokyo- me...](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/japan-tokyo-medical- university-sexism-women-exam-scores-shinzo-abe-a8480896.html)

This university was caught penalising women test scores due to a belief they would "waste" chairs, since women may drop out school with pregnancy.

That's textbook example of collectivism over individual to me, and a pretty extreme one.

</comment><comment><USER20> Can anyone give an example of how the "common view" could be true at culture- level but not at individual-level?

This editorial spends a page and a half talking about it without a single example.

<comment><USER21> The article says it is the ecological fallacy. Google "ecological fallacy example" and you'll find lots. A simple example: take a group of 3 people. One has an IQ of 200. The other 2 have an IQ of 50. The average IQ is 100. So the group is "average IQ" but if you pick a person at random they are likely to be substantially below average IQ. Examples get substantially more complicated in reality.

<comment><USER20> I see, thanks. I think they should have just said distributions are skewed, and skewed differently, if thats what they mean.

<comment><USER22> Using the term 'ecological fallacy' does exactly that. It is a specific, formal term. A common subtype is called Simpson's Paradox, and that comes up frequently as well.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson%27s_paradox](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson%27s_paradox)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I have troubles accessing the full article.

<comment><USER24> Sci-hub the title: [http://sci-hub.tw/10.1111/ajsp.12334](http://sci- hub.tw/10.1111/ajsp.12334)

<comment><USER23> Thank you. The Scihub telegram bot told me he doesn't have it in its database yet, so it's seems to lag behind.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Lots of anecdotes without reading the article (which is par for the course in 99% of HN threads). Anyway, here's a quick summary:

* Culture level effects do not necessarily translate to the individual. That is, Japanese culture may be collectivist without any individual being collectivist.

* Other countries are more collectivist than Japan.

* Concepts like "collectivist" and "individualistic" are not binary or mutually exclusive. (People can switch from one to another depending on context or day of the week.)

All of the examples in this thread fit perfectly into the article's section on why the common view persists despite the wealth of evidence to the contrary: confirmation bias. For instance (not an example from the article): Americans are "individualistic" even though 51% of Americans go to church (the ultimate in collectivism) at least once a month. But that massive groundswell of collectivism isn't seen as such. Even the much disliked growth in partisan politics is just another form of collectivism.

<comment><USER25> There is no article but there is a paywall instead. Before you make your self- conceited, complacent argument make sure you don't render yourself stupid next time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> "Common view" by whom? Academics who needed to make things up to in order to make a name for themselves? Media who needed to fetishize to get views?

The only way we say one culture is "collectivist" and another "individualistic" is if we cherrypick data or history?

How we branded ourselves as an "individualistic" culture when for 500 years, our identifying cultural contribution was collectivist racism. The fact of the matter is that the west conquered the world because we were far more collectivist than anyone else. It wasn't the "rugged individual" who conquered africa, america, asia, etc. It certainly wasn't the "rugged individual" that wiped out natives, enslaved africans, etc.

It's funny how we took 500 years of our collectivism and then dumped it on the japanese, chinese, etc and branded ourselves as "individualistic".

All nations are individualists and collectivistic at the same time.

<comment><USER27> The individualism/collectivism scale describes the level of inter-dependence on closely related in-groups and the level of support for them and are all taking place on the level of an individual. Things like family fall into this category.

It has nothing to do with how nations/groups conquer each other.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Collectivism is the _denial_ of the individual; it is inherently rude.</comment>


Study links artificial sweeteners and weight gain - <AUTHOR> http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/study-links-artificial-sweeteners-and-weight-gain-1.3506206 <comment><USER2> Kinda sloppy reporting. It's a meta-review (looking at past studies, no new data); only 7 of 37 were controlled trials.

Paper is here:

[http://www.cmaj.ca/content/189/28/E929.full#T3](http://www.cmaj.ca/content/189/28/E929.full#T3)

It looks like a slapdash grep for sweetener names as search terms; it doesn't distinguish one from another or see _how many_ (or even _which_ ) artificial sweeteners were studied.

It's also disappointing that they didn't study the effect of AS on the microbiome, which is where I suspect the real mechanism of action lies.</comment>


A Methane Leak, Seen from Space, Proves to Be Far Larger Than Thought - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/16/climate/methane-leak-satellite.html <comment><USER2> Cow farts will destroy our planet!</comment>


Yonatan Zunger about the Paris Attacks - <AUTHOR> https://plus.google.com/+YonatanZunger/posts/RN2yx54bxPa <comment><USER2> > Charlie Hebdo's targets ...

Who was it that killed who again?

>Charlie Hebdo's targets weren't simply religious extremists preaching from Saudi mosques; they were a portrayal of the French Muslim population as violent extremists, the dangerous other.

It sounds like the author is saying that the satire cartoon invented "racism" against Muslims. But the cartoon "targets" proved the magazine absolutely, positively, bona-fided-ly correct. They proved Charlie Hebdo right.

>You sow the wind, you reap the whirlwind. What did you expect was going to happen?

So the author actually blames religious attacks on the act of people talking about it happening. In some circular way, the cartoon magazine created religious violence?

I cannot fathom how the author would explain religiously motivated violence in places where a satire cartoon isn't there to talk about it.

</comment><comment><USER3> I really wonder if this guy has ever been living outside the US ( either in a muslim country, or in a few european countries) to make so many wrong assertions about the root cause of the whole affair. Actually i'm even surprised he's working in any field related to logic, because his whole evaluation of french attacks having anything to do with what french do or did falls on the ground as soon as you notice that they've been occuring in every single part of the world ( every country in every continent with any religion) for the last 20 years.

It is simply an ideology looking to conquer the world, which adjusts its speech to accomodate with its target. Nothing more unusual than that.

<comment><USER4> He seems to be partial to the term blood-thirsty...

This interview with a former recruiter and who now disavows the whole movement is quite interesting and illuminating: [http://www.npr.org/2013/10/25/195238189/how-does-an- islamist...](http://www.npr.org/2013/10/25/195238189/how-does-an-islamist- extremist-change-his-mind)

His time spent in an Egyptian jail in the company of other Islamists changed his mind about the ideology and its aims.

Goes into detail here too: [http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&i...](http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=377442344&m=377495115&live=1)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> The author is implying that Daesh or something like it would/could exist without religion and specifically without Islam. I doubt that. Also, just because there is Muslim on Muslim violence doesn't mean that Islam isn't the cause of it. Wars between different factions of the same religion are the rule, not the exception. So ignoring religion as a cause of these problems while touting climate change is both silly and goes against the stated goals of the essay to not tout slogans as solutions. Otherwise, it's a pretty good take on the situation.

<comment><USER6> It's more like he is implying that something like Da'esh will exist no matter if Islam exists or not. Their brand of violence is not rooted in ideological beliefs but rather psycopathic killing for killings sake. That Islam allows a way for them to recruit does not mean they are Islamic only opportunistic. The other issues of famine, fear and a power vaccume are more likely the reason they can last for so long. Groups like this in the United States tend to burn out very quickly or reduce their violence to attacks on rivals and divirsify their actions to more capitalistic actions.

<comment><USER7> > That Islam allows a way for them to recruit does not mean they are Islamic > only opportunistic.

Simply wrong. Read [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabism) The ideology existed longer than the specific group called ISIS. They just dialed it to 10 what was always more and more cooking for the last few decades. That they are a bit more extreme than how Al-Quaeda is perceived in the West now doesn't mean that the exact Islamic ideology wasn't fully formed before, including the treatment of those with who they fight.

The reason why they call themselves "people of hadith" is because they really believe to just repeat what their prophet was doing, and that that is the major goal of a true believer. It's in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith) that they can read about every beheading and stoning performed by Mohammad. They just literally ask themselves "What Would Mohammad Do" in the sense that they "reject the use of Hellenistic philosophical discourse "(kalam)" in favor of strict textualism in interpreting the Quran."

Pretending that all this doesn't exist (on rejecting to learn) won't help anybody understand what's going on.

<comment><USER6> Interesting.

I would still contend that one cannot take some form of ideology, "dial it up to 10" and then claim it is still that same ideology. What you instead have here is a set of liars that hide behind a name.

That said, it does seem that Wahhabism and Sunni Islam are perhaps a more favorable place for such extremism to culture and grow. So I concede this is as much a part of Islam as the next part (however non-mainstream or mainstream it may be).

Clearly the shift here is what allows such extremism to succeed, the funding, the teaching, the dispersion of such ideas, how are they not called out for what they are: callous and inhumane and insane?

Who is responsible for turning a blind eye for so long? Is it just tolerated because it happens 'Over There' (in this case I suppose 'Over There' would mean 'Not Here in Saudi Arabia' where the political base of this brach of Islam claims home). Or is this more like someones thugs getting out of control -- i.e. this is a sponsored movement and attempts to restrain it are actively interfered with!

I have more questions than answers! What a complex part of the world!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Just an aside, but Mr. Zunger is a large reason why I continue to spend any time following anything on Google+. He writes on all kinds of topics regularly (most are non-political), and is worth following.

</comment><comment><USER9> The notion that mass immigration from Syria to Europe is a necessary consequence of the war is trivially falsified by looking at the timeline. The Syrian civil war started in early 2011. Daesh entered the war in early 2012 as al-Nusra Front, and operated as ISIL since 2013. The Caliphate was proclaimed in summer 2014.

But mass migration into Europe did not start until summer 2015. Obviously it did not take the Syrians four years to realize that there was a war in their country.

</comment><comment><USER10> Author belittles commentators who make simplifications, but then claims root of conflict is water:

"When we talk about the ultimate causes of the situation, this is the fact we tend to ignore: at the root of it, there isn't enough water, and there isn't enough food, and droughts have been hitting the area harder and harder for a decade."

</comment><comment><USER11> A serious question which I'd love to hear opinions on:

Why are immigrants to the US from Mexico viewed so differently from immigrants in Europe? Or are they treated the same?

<comment><USER2> Immigrants from Mexico don't follow a religion that instructs them to kill.

<comment><USER12> Read the Old Testament lately?

<comment><USER13> If you're not a Hittite, Amorite, Canaanite, Perizzite, Hivite, or Jebusite, you should be safe.

That's not a snark, by the way. Contrary to popular myth, the Bible doesn't prescribe warfare on any extant nation, group of people, or region.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Charity Majors – Hiring a Tech Ops Team (video and transcript) - <AUTHOR> http://www.heavybit.com/library/video/2015-02-24-charity-majors <comment><USER2> Where 'Charity Majors' is the person talking on the subject. Not a post addressed to charity workers with a degree in the field.</comment>


Uber rival accuses car service of dirty tactics - <AUTHOR> http://money.cnn.com/2014/01/24/technology/social/uber-gett/ <comment><USER3> Wow. This is low.

The statement is absolute bullshit too: "In this instance, the New York City team was a bit too ambitious and we'll make sure they tone down their sales tactics."

No, this is unacceptable. This sort of fraudulent behavior deserves consequences larger than "hey, stop that".

I live in NYC. The Uber app has now been banished from my phone. It's too bad the Gett app is kind of an unpolished turd.

<comment><USER4> It's pretty clear they were doing this to harvest phone numbers of drivers (why does Gett give out their drivers' phone numbers?) rather than any attempt to actually disrupt Gett's business. I would be rather hesitant to call this "fraud", as that's a very serious allegation.

<comment><USER5> And they paid cancellation fees.

<comment><USER6> If drivers keep getting requests cancelled, they will be less prompt and enthusiastic about actual ones. The cancellation fee is calculated on the assumption that frequent orders will not be deliberately placed to be subsequently cancelled.

<comment><USER5> I agree that they may have violated the spirit of the contract. But the contract specifically handles the case of cancelling an order (including some restitution), so I would hardly consider it fraud.

<comment><USER6> Running into the path of a moving car isn't fraud? End result is the same for when it's an accident.

<comment><USER5> Running into the path of a moving car is only fraud if you claim the driver is at fault. If you admit responsibility and pay for any damages then it is not fraud.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> That is not only morally wrong but it is flat out stupid. Uber is the leading firm in a growing market with network effects. They should be worried about growing as fast as possible first and above all and not about competition. The network effects will take care of the competition.

The worst thing a company in a leadership position like Uber can do is take actions that acknowledge their competition. Even if they are trying to screw over their competition they are doing them a big favor by acknowledging them.

It seems that Uber may lose their first mover's advantage by their greed and small mindedness.

<comment><USER8> _The network effects will take care of the competition._

Will it? Why? Unlike social networks, I don't see why would Uber benefit particularly from network effects; it doesn't even have switching costs, since the consumer can use both concurrently.

<comment><USER7> Each Uber user benefits when there are more Uber drivers. They can get rides faster and more conveniently. Each Uber driver benefits when there are more Uber users. They can get clients faster and closer to their current position and thus make more money with less downtime. These are the network effects.

A consumer can use Uber and a competitor. This, however, is not unlike social networks, it is entirely like social networks. A consumer can use two social networks as well. However, in practice if one car service or social network does a good enough job the consumer is unlikely to use another.

<comment><USER8> _Each Uber user benefits when there are more Uber drivers. They can get rides faster and more conveniently. Each Uber driver benefits when there are more Uber users. They can get clients faster and closer to their current position and thus make more money with less downtime. These are the network effects._

As nickpinkston said, those are economies of scale, which is a related concept, but not the same.

 _A consumer can use two social networks as well._

Yes, but this is where the difference highlighted above kicks in: in a social network, the total number of users is not as relevant as the number of connections the user has, so the user can be "stuck" even if he feels the product is _not_ good enough. In a product like Uber, there's no such effect; people can switch as soon as they feel like trying the alternatives.

<comment><USER9> >As nickpinkston said, those are economies of scale, which is a related concept, but not the same.

This is still network effects, just with two different parts. The drivers benefit when there are more users, and the users benefit when there are more drivers. It falls clearly into the definition of network externalities when you take the drivers into account.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> It's interesting that all these ride services are so aggressive about recruiting drivers. I looked into driving for them to make a few extra bucks and the one thing they could do to get a leg up on their competition is clarify the insurance situation.

They all essentially claim that a driver's personal auto insurance is good enough and combined with the companies umbrella policy provides sufficient coverage. But then if you go and read their fine print that really isn't the case and if you were to be involved in an accident while driving for them there is a good chance no insurance would cover damage to yourself as the driver or your car.

<comment><USER11> Maybe this will be resolved in a court of law.

Just in the past few weeks...

"Uber Driver Arrested in San Francisco Crash That Killed Girl"

[http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Uber-Driver-Arrested- in...](http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Uber-Driver-Arrested-in-San- Francisco-Crash-That-Killed-Girl-238491691.html)

"Lyft Driver Hits Elderly Woman in San Francisco Crosswalk"

[http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Lyft-Driver-Hits- Elderl...](http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Lyft-Driver-Hits-Elderly- Woman-in-San-Francisco-Crosswalk-240944161.html)

<comment><USER4> Interesting, an Uber driver hits someone (while not even on a trip), they release a blog post that starts with condolences to the family, and apparently a lot of people (i.e. hacker news commenters) get upset at Uber.

A Lyft driver hits someone (while active on a trip), Lyft doesn't issue a blog post (a news story contained a paraphrased "statement from Lyft", but I see nothing on Lyft's own blog), and hacker news doesn't seem to care.

This strikes me as pretty strange.

<comment><USER12> An accident that kills someone vs. an accident that I'm surprised got an article written about it.

<comment><USER4> You're right, Lyft's accident was much more minor. It's clear it was only in the news because of the connection to a car service. My point was basically just that hacker news these days always seems intent on painting Uber in the worst possible light, even when they issue a public statement that starts with condolences to the victim's family, but they don't seem to care about what happens with other car services. It seems only recently that everyone was in love with Uber, but I guess now it's the goliath that needs to be taken down?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Between this and how they handled the girl who was killed by an Uber driver on New Year's Eve in San Francisco...my opinion of them has taken a decided turn for the worse in the past few weeks. And for both, I can't help but think that company culture is set from the top.

<comment><USER14> To play devil's advocate; how would you have had them handle the New Year's Eve situation better?

<comment><USER11> Did you read their statement?

They were more worried about being associated with the accident than the accident itself. Lots of weasel words and excuses in trying to claim that the driver didn't work for them, or that the driver wasn't active or doing a trip.

If I worked for Uber, I would have posted something simple and left it at that e.g.

"We have been informed by law enforcement that there has been a traffic accident in San Francisco involving an Uber driver. We send our deepest condolences to the family and victims of this tragic accident."

The end.

<comment><USER15> Just to play devil's advocate, would you apply the same standard to Musk's handling of the Tesla fires? His primary concern there seemed to be to disavow responsibility and blame the driver. While it's _true_ that the fires were driver error, that doesn't change how combative he is about criticism (see: top gear).

<comment><USER6> No one died/was seriously injured in the Tesla fires. That makes it a completely different situation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> One man's dirty tricks is another man's free market - [http://pando.com/2012/10/24/travis- shrugged/](http://pando.com/2012/10/24/travis-shrugged/)

Who needs pesky Taxi and Limousine Commission busybodies to ensure people aren't arbitrarily blacklisted from being able to call a cab?

<comment><USER8> No one; higher fees due to state-enforced limited supply are more than enough to keep the poor from riding taxis.

 _" Nearly half of [NYC taxi] passengers have a household income of $100,000 or more a year." (2014 Taxicab Fact Book)_

<comment><USER17> That's why Uber came along, the service for the common man, dedicated to reducing the price of taxis. Right?

<comment><USER8> I'm not defending Uber.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I'm sure it's not a popular opinion, but when Uber itself is a business that seems to exist on the border of legality, this type of stuff isn't that much of a surprise to me. Uber et al. specifically skirt around regulations that cab companies have to abide by, which, at least in my opinion, sets the tone at the top that legality and ethics are somewhat secondary to the mission of the company.

IMPORTANT: I've used Uber, and the experience has been great. All I'm saying is that I don't love the cavalier attitude towards city regulations on taxis, and that I think that attitude flows down the chain.

<comment><USER19> I think it is important to draw a distinction between challenging local regulations like million dollar medallions that hurt both drivers and riders and laws that prevent companies from hurting their competitors to steal their supply, the way it happened here.

There are many companies challenging the first kind of regulation that wouldn't indulge in the breaking the second kind of law. Disclaimer: I started one of them - InstantCab, which competes directly with Uber and Gett.

<comment><USER20> >million dollar medallions

As far as I understand, the only thing that medallions offer as an advantage in New York City (where they cost a million dollars) is the ability to pick up people who hail a cab off the street. Other car services exist for prearranged rides, and are called car services, not taxis.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I'm not even sure that 'accuses' should be in the title given that Uber have already admitted that they did it. Pretty shady, IMO.

</comment><comment><USER22> Lots of bantering about whether or not it's ethical / low. tl;dr: It probably is; Travis probably doesn't care.

Honestly, since all that really matters to Uber is $$ and being forced to deal with the law (and even then only barely), Gett should just sue them. It's clearly illegal (putting aside differences between NY/CA law) and it proves the point in a way they'll be forced to notice.

<comment><USER4> Is it actually illegal? That seems to be very much a question, not a matter of fact. It's obvious Uber was not intentionally trying to disrupt Gett's business. They were trying to harvest driver phone #s (so they could later try to hire away the drivers; while ethically dubious, this part does not seem illegal). Furthermore, they paid cancellation fees to Gett for doing this. It does not seem clear-cut to me _at all_ that you could label this as fraud, which I believe is the only way to claim this is illegal.

<comment><USER23> > _It 's obvious Uber was not intentionally trying to disrupt Gett's > business._

That's certainly Uber's stance, but it's not "obvious" at all :

> [OP] "In some cases, Herman said the Uber employees waited until the cars > had showed up to cancel the order. Uber said the orders were all canceled > immediately."

Deliberately waiting until the last minute to cancel a ride would certainly indicate intent to disrupt. That Uber is denying having done this should not exactly come as a surprise.

<comment><USER4> > _Deliberately waiting until the last minute to cancel a ride would certainly > indicate intent to disrupt._

Sure, if they actually did that. At the moment this just seems to be Gett's word against Uber's, and since doing that would not in any way aid Uber's goal of harvesting phone numbers, I'm not inclined to believe Gett just on their word. The most benign explanation is that the drivers simply didn't check their phone to see that it was cancelled until they'd arrived at the address.

<comment><USER23> > _since doing that would not in any way aid Uber 's goal of harvesting phone > numbers_

You're just making assumptions about Uber's goal.

It's Gett's word against Uber's, and the latter is the one who has admitted engaging in immoral and possibly fraudulent activity.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I love the doublespeak in the statement: "Our local teams can be pretty determined when spreading the word about Uber and how our platform opens up new economic opportunities for drivers"

"opens up new economic opportunities" is that what we are calling "sales" now?

<comment><USER25> To me it says they open new economic opportunities by bringing black car service to the masses and fairly cheaply (I compared Uber to a cab for a trip I'm taking soon, UberX was much cheaper). AFAIK, black car services weren't very accessible by the public not that long ago. Services like Uber or Gett let the drivers make money in a new way, which sounds about spot on to me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> _Order forms provided to CNNMoney show that more than a dozen Uber employees were involved, including community managers, operations managers, Uber 's general manager, and the company's social media strategist._ So much for blaming "our New York team".

Why does the bit at the end discuss California law? This happened in New York.

<comment><USER10> Because for whatever reason CNN decided to call a CA based law firm to interview them and of course a CA lawyer is going to know first and foremost about CA law.

<comment><USER27> Could it be because Uber is a CA company? I don't know how the jurisdictions are supposed to work though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Gett probably should sue Uber, but what sucks is they (Gett) would have to divert precious money, time, and resources to fight a much bigger company with deeper products and better lawyers, which takes focus away from product and growth, which decreases their probability of success long-term.

Very shitty, lose-lose situation for Gett. The fact that they got "free PR" out of this CNN article is probably small consolation.

</comment><comment> k-mcgrady Really scummy behaviour. Warrants a much stronger response than: ""Our local teams can be pretty determined when spreading the word about Uber and how our platform opens up new economic opportunities for drivers," Uber said in a statement. "In this instance, the New York City team was a bit too ambitious and we'll make sure they tone down their sales tactics.""

</comment><comment><USER29> This type of behavior is often swept under the rug in the startup world, eg. Airbnb hijacking Craigslist:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=261024](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=261024)

<comment><USER30> Until the link above is fixed, try this article for an overview:

How AirBnB Became a Billion Dollar Company [http://davegooden.com/2011/05/how- airbnb-became-a-billion-do...](http://davegooden.com/2011/05/how-airbnb- became-a-billion-dollar-company/)

TLDR: Dave Gooden setup a honeypot on Craigslist to test whether AirBnB staff were creating fake Gmail accounts to spam Craigslist users & suggest they should post their vacation house listings on AirBnB instead.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Just this morning there was a story on NPR about how Uber has price-gouging built into their system: during a snowstorm you may pay something like 5x the normal fare.

<comment><USER32> If you're going to call it "price-gouging", let's at least admit it's a natural part of business. Take a look at hotel rates when there's a near-by convention, air-line ticket prices over the Christmas holidays or even the prices quoted by corporate sales at businesses like Cisco, Oracle, etc.

There's not a law that says you have to charge everyone the same rate - <USER2> that you can't base it on certain types of discrimination.

Note: I'm okay with calling all those practices "price-gouging".

<comment><USER31> It's not my term, it's defined by the statutes of many states, including NY: [http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/GBS/26/396-r](http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/GBS/26/396-r)

The idea is that jacking up prices to take advantage of adverse conditions or emergencies is not the same as normal supply-and-demand based pricing in response to seasonal variations, etc. I don't know if Uber's practice fits the definition in the statute or if they're being investigated for it.

<comment><USER32> Uber has stated that their pricing is based on the number of people requesting rides (within some time slot if I remember correctly). So a snow storm might be deemed a natural disaster, but it might also lead to more people requesting rides (also triggering the price increases).

Yes, if there's not an increased demand during that snow-storm but they're caught with 5X prices, I think they'll be in trouble under those "price- gouging" laws.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> In a world where you generally only get one chance with a new customer, I wonder how many people decided not to use Gett because there wasn't availability at the time that they wanted to try it.

As much as I love über I think these tactics aren't going to win them fans. Competition in the market should be a good thing, right ?

</comment><comment><USER34> This is one of the reasons traditional cab services are heavily regulated: to avoid these sorts of battles. It's in the interest of a municipality to have stable, predictable, reliable public transportation. Price wars, selective service, and tactics like these disrupt that stability.

<comment><USER35> Uber mostly found traction in SF where they started because regulation _did not_ deliver reliable transportation. Street hails mostly worked if you could find one and didn't need them to accept a credit card, but if you called a cab company for a ride, you could easily waste an hour waiting for a cab that never shows up at all.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> I'm sure it was a "local" decision, but from everything I read and hear, lack of ethics is part of Uber's DNA as much as lack of hierarchy is part of Steam's or Github's.

Calling it "a bit too ambitious" is just further proof of Uber's structural lack of values.

</comment><comment><USER37> I think there is an interesting contrast between this recruiting approach and the Google/Apple/Intel/Intuit non-recruiting agreements people were complaining about yesterday. Yet here, the weight of opinion is on the other side, while I see them as roughly equivalent.

<comment><USER38> I don't thin the issue is Uber recruiting drivers. The issue is DOSing their competitor to do so.

<comment><USER37> Yes, the lawyer mixed in the bonus offer into the complaint, but that would appear to be a good thing for drivers, if not for Gett.

I guess the question is whether sending requests and cancellations to 100 different drivers over 3 days (about 33 different drivers per day, maybe 4-5 per hour in a workday) really constitutes a denial of service. It seems exaggerated, but it is working as Gett is getting attention.

Definitely a bad idea though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> A friend who works at a different Uber competitor is banned from using Uber. I think now I know why...

</comment><comment><USER40> Dear Uber,

I guess I shouldn't have expected much from a company that was founded on the principle of giving their customers the experience of being a baller.

I only wanted a consistent and yes boring, non-baller experience.

I'll be looking to find a boring company that just shows up, doesn't try and and cheat me during peak period and has respect for other organizations.

I once loved you, but now I'm leaving you.

Sincerely, Brian McDonough

<comment><USER41> Some of what you wrote is unfair to Uber.

>I only wanted a consistent and yes boring, non-baller experience.

You can use the Uber app to get cabs or lower cost UberX. UberX is actually cheaper than most cabs while providing the convenience of ordering electronically, knowing roughly how long to wait, and paying electronically (with receipts.)

>doesn't try and and cheat me during peak period

There have been some interesting discussion about this on Travis Kalanick's Facebook page ([https://www.facebook.com/traviskal?fref=ts](https://www.facebook.com/traviskal?fref=ts), December 24, 2013) which basically say that the alternative to surge pricing would be not being able to get a ride at all. Some people on that thread suggested that the Uber client could be improved to let people get notified when the rate goes back down and other UX improvements and Travis said the team would consider those changes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> What a dirty act. It's unfortunate that these type of tactics likely do succeed and furthermore go unpunished. But that's the cutthroat nature of business in today's world.

So I guess I say this with a disgusted sense of admiration - kudos to them for figuring out a new way to beat the competition.

</comment><comment><USER43> "Gould's railroads began to cut down Western Union connections and replace them with American Union's. (This was pure vandalism, and directly violated the 'no exclusivity' court decision Gould had celebrated.)"

\- p. 146, The Tycoons, Charles R. Morris, ISBN:1429935022

</comment><comment><USER44> I almost remember when Uber was the good guy. Stories like this keep popping up everywhere.

It's a competitive market, but there's better ways to grow than attacking competitors and banning developers (earlier story) who try to do interesting things to extend your service.

</comment><comment><USER45> This makes me really angry as a happy Uber customer. I wish there were a way to express my displeasure to Uber without having to give up a great car-on- demand service.

</comment><comment><USER46> Just thinking out loud, but couldn't this be interpreted as falling under that nebulous 'unauthorized access of a computer system' law?

</comment><comment><USER47> If Gett isn't taking legal action against Uber, then this just sounds like a good marketing ploy to get attention.

</comment><comment><USER48> Seems like the offline equivalent of a misguided 'Growth Hack' gone wrong.

</comment><comment><USER49> Fraud is a felony.

<comment><USER50> "Fraud" isn't a singular thing. The Penal Law of New York State defines around 40 separate types of fraud, most of which are misdemeanors.

[http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/index.htm](http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/index.htm)

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> why Gett can't sue Uber in this case ?

</comment><comment><USER52> I love it, great scrappiness from the local team. As CEO i'd have a good chuckle, and tell them to tone it down a bit.

Generous of the article to refer to Gett as a "rival" and not a clone.

<comment><USER21> _Generous of the article to refer to Gett as a "rival" and not a clone._

Because Uber is so crazily innovative that no-one else would ever think about doing it? Come on. It's a car service with a smartphone app. There's a reason there are at least a dozen companies doing it.

<comment><USER53> Because they saw the success Uber has experienced and wanted some of the pie?

<comment><USER3> Non-taxi on-call cars have existed for many, many decades before Uber. Especially in NYC where this article is relevant, car services are a dime a dozen and have been a regular part of city life for decades.

The difference is between picking up your phone to get one vs. using your smartphone. Uber was first to market, but it's silly to pretend that without them it wouldn't have happened. That's like calling the Pizza Hut app a clone of the Domino's app, because they both order pizzas and Domino's came out first. Ultimately Uber is a newfangled (and more convenient) front-end to a service that has pre-dates itself by a wide, wide margin.

The extension from "call the car company to get a car" to "use an app to get a car" is a pretty obvious innovation, particularly in NYC.

<comment><USER54> So what? You can say that about any large tech companies.

Google wasn't the first search engine. Apple didn't make the first music player. Facebook wasn't the first social network.

Being unique doesn't matter a single bit. Only thing that matters is that people are using them. And that's the case with Uber. Judge however you will their shady tactics, but it's ridiculous to downplay their success based on that.

<comment><USER8> Who is downplaying their success? The point is that it's not ridiculous to call Gett a rival instead of a clone.

<comment><USER54> >The extension from "call the car company to get a car" to "use an app to get a car" is a pretty obvious innovation, particularly in NYC.

Sounds like downplaying success to me. Everything is obvious once it's done.

<comment><USER3> You're reading dismissiveness into my post that was not intended. Uber has done something remarkable, but it is not so novel as to justify calling everyone doing the same thing a "clone".

Not to mention Uber is _not_ the first GPS-based car-hailing app. They were the first ones that were able to gain mass traction - which is an achievement in and of itself, to be certain, but also makes claims that "X cloned Uber" somewhat laughable. If we're going to split hairs about who copied whom, Uber is on the wrong end of that statement.

<comment><USER54> But it's precisely because Uber was able to get such traction, that other companies followed into the field. Lyft and Gettit may not be "clones", but I'd wager the followed the industry leader (Uber) in the the field.

Gettit is as much a clone of Uber as Androids a clone of iPhone. Not an exact copy, but probably wouldn't be existing without the other paving the path.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Smash Lab Sucks: An Open Letter to the Discovery Channel - <AUTHOR> http://www.smashlabsucks.com/

<comment><USER2> Always trademark something you .com. Always. Its like $250. If you're going to call your company that. Trademark it.

 _These guys seemed big enough to perform due diligence and come up with something original._

They probably did a tess search here and found the name unused. Due Diligence.

[http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=tess&state=7ro35j....](http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=tess&state=7ro35j.1.1)

<comment><AUTHOR> Agreed--we should have done that. At the time we purchased the Canadian trademark, which, once done totaled up to around $2,000. The agent at the time told us that the process for us to get an American one would cost about the same. We decided that we couldn't afford it then.

My feeling is that we could likely go after them as the program is aired in Canada as well. That being said, their lawyers are probably more numerous and well paid than ours. As such, I suspect we'd spend plenty and gain little.

So instead, we're being a buzzing little fly, spinning about their heads. (Likely not much more than an annoyance, but having some fun nevertheless.)

And isn't fun supposed to be part of it? ;-)

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Hi all,

Just thought I'd take a moment to explain why I posted this here.

When we started our firm in 2000, there were no other groups in the world named "smashLAB". A few years later a band called their rehearsal hall "smashlabs" and someone else did something with it, but we weren't particularly concerned.

When the Discovery Channel poached it though, we were a little choked. These guys seemed big enough to perform due diligence and come up with something original. That being said, we're small--what were we to do?

Month after month we watched as more people commented about what a horrible show the Discovery Channel had churned out. As a result, a Google search for smashLAB didn't just turn up results on the television program; it also brought with it numerous blogs and posts about how badly "Smash Lab sucks".

This morning we pondered changing our name; but instead, decided to have some fun. Visit the site and see what we did to amuse ourselves. :-)

Eric

</comment><comment><USER3> Nice way to grab SEO focus off of the dilemma and play it to your... well... um... not play it to your disadvantage.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's what we were thinking. Sort of a: "The damage is already done--why not have some fun with it?"

I'm not sure about exact numbers yet (Analytics reporting typically isn't that accurate until the next day), but it's been visited a great deal today.

Sort of nice to have some positive spin out of this. :-)

<comment><USER3> Plus, sometimes it's just good to vent!

I think I saw you on an elevator pitch? Was it MakeFive? How much traffic do you get from that?

<comment><AUTHOR> We did receive some traffic from it, but not quite as much as we were led to believe we might see as a result of TechCrunch featuring us. (That being said, it's certainly nice of them to have covered us!)

Truth is,the biggest referrer that we see continues to be StumbleUpon. Those guys send us lots of traffic. We love them and want to bear their children; but, given the physical improbability of that, we'd probably just buy them lots of beer.

<comment><USER3> Very interesting... I always thought that Techcrunch would bring a ton of traffic, but I guess it's moreso their blog than their elevator pitch page. It was a nice pitch, nonetheless.

StumbleUpon, eh? Is this just organic traffic or have you done something to instigate it? And keep an open mind about having children with a website... some day it'll be possible.

<comment><AUTHOR> Actually, TechCrunch did feature it on their main page as well. It did bring traffic, but not so much that our servers were choking, as we had thought might happen.

Thanks for the kind words about the pitch--it's hard trying to nail that kind of thing down. :-)

We have stumbled a couple of our pages on our own and that has done a little, but we got a little carried away, and that seemed to reduce the significance of our stumbles for it. Now it's mostly users stumbling that has brought traffic. The weird part is that it's often just one page that brings a lot of people in.

The downside with StumbleUpon is that it brings traffic, but little of it builds the userbase. It's a spike and that's generally it. Nevertheless, it does get the brand out there, which is helpful.

And as for website children… we'll just wait and see what comes of that. ;-)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Plants perform quantum computation for photosynthesis - <AUTHOR> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=when-it-comes-to-photosynthesis-plants-perform-quantum-computation

<comment><USER2> If they really do is not proven.

Chroloplast is a chemical device that obeys quantum chemistry and thus is hampered by quantum decoherence. But if how molecules there organize to overcome this is truly and not only seemingly isomorphic to performing quantum computation is unproven yet. In particular Alan Aspuru-Guzik disproved Engel's result from linked article, at the same time discovering possibility of quantum computation of another kind, claim unverified as of yet.

In other news, optimization of solar panel cell geometry was proposed long, long ago as a case of practical utility of quantum information theory.

Detailed discussion of most recent results here: <http://scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=401></comment>


The post-Jobs era: Tim Cook brings philanthropy back to Apple - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/09/the-post-jobs-era-tim-cook-brings-philanthropy-back-to-apple.ars <comment><USER2> I believe the matching gifts was entirely Tim Cook's show.

However I think Jobs is planning on doing some significant philanthropy. I don't believe he will leave it all to his family or simply write a check to a charity.

I've thought about this a lot and I believe he's got something planned that will be both innovative and backed by a significant chunk of his net worth.

He's certainly had a few years to reflect on how he wants to be remembered, a gift not everyone receives. He's going to opt to enhance his considerable legacy.

<comment><USER3> It would actually be amazing if he gave some of the money to the Gates foundation - as a way of showing that there are things that transcend competition and that all in all they would all just like to make the world better. (Also, let's face it, who else is even equipped to do billion-dollar philantrophy?)

Still, I hope we're nowhere near the point when he has to do it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I always figured Jobs was trying to maintain a neutral position with regards to charity, contributions, etc. It's hardly uncommon for people to donate to personal causes anonymously to avoid the politics and potential perceived tackiness with what's intended to be a generous act.

<comment><USER5> In town hall / all-hands meetings, the question of philanthropy (or other moral issues, like environmental stewardship) came up a LOT during the 5 years I spent at Apple.

The response was almost always "we're not looking for recognition for our good deeds, so that's why it may appear as if we're not doing much".

That's why it took so long to get a public-facing "Apple and the Environment" page; philanthropy does not come out of the marketing budget at Apple.

<comment><USER6> Given the media frenzy around every new Mac product, I thought Apple needed no marketing at all by now =).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm sure this was in the works before Jobs left. Even with its entrepreneurial culture Apple is too big to roll something like this out in a couple of weeks.

<comment><USER8> I wonder if this is part of Jobs' succession plan -- like he withheld some easy things that he knew his successor would be able to do after he left to get some initial good press?

<comment><USER9> I wouldn't put it past him to have several things that would generate good PR ready to go at a moment's notice.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Maybe Jobs just felt that most non-profits are scammy and corrupt? Even (RED) turned out to be grossly mismanaged.

<comment><USER11> The "(RED) is mismanaged" meme is debatable, at best:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_Red#Criticism>

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Headline in two weeks:

"Apple donates to anti-gay rights organization" (The Salvation Army is a 501c3)

</comment><comment><USER13> This is a good idea. Practically no one would argue against charitable matching, so it gives Tim Cook an early win with rank-and-file employees. As COO, many within Apple have not interacted with Cook, so this popular move helps establish loyalty and reduce leadership uncertainty.

In his first company-wide email as CEO he said, "I want you to be confident that Apple is not going to change," yet Cook clearly knows he is not Steve Jobs. This sets a marker to distinguish that his run of the company will be different even if he is going to try to preserve Apple's DNA.

</comment><comment><USER14> This is a very common benefit for employees of large companies. It's surprising to me that this is news.

<comment><USER15> Even the most mundane things become news if Apple does them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> bleh. So part of the price I pay for a Mac is now doled out to some charity of Apple's choosing. How about they just cut prices by the total amount of the match, and let me figure out where I'd like to donate.

<comment><USER17> I fail to see a correlation between an internal Apple policy, and the price of their products.

<comment><USER18> It's actually one of Friedman's classic arguments, poorly articulated.

[http://www.colorado.edu/studentgroups/libertarians/issues/fr...](http://www.colorado.edu/studentgroups/libertarians/issues/friedman- soc-resp-business.html)

<comment><USER19> Even Friedman's argument observes that some "socially responsible" spending might actually be in the interests of a corporation's shareholders

Tim Cook offering a tax-deductible (I assume) employee benefit that has the additional side effect of generating positive publicity probably falls into that bracket.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Eigenvectors and eigenvalues explained visually - <AUTHOR> http://setosa.io/ev/eigenvectors-and-eigenvalues/

<comment><USER2> Eigenthread at: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8918259](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8918259)

[https://hn.algolia.com/?query=eigenvalues%20setosia&sort=byP...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=eigenvalues%20setosia&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story)

</comment><comment><USER3> Does anyone happen to know how this site makes the graphs interactive? What library are they using?

<comment><USER4> D3 and MathJax

[http://d3js.org](http://d3js.org) [http://www.mathjax.org](http://www.mathjax.org)</comment></comment>


The First book with printed page numbers - <AUTHOR> http://ilovetypography.com/2014/02/21/the-first-printed-page-numbers/

<comment><USER2> It surprised me to see the digit forms in the table at the bottom in use so late, since roman and italic types from the late 1400s look so familiar, but then i realized that the various samples I've seen likely had no digits at all. The earliest I can find quickly is from 1501†. Anyone know more? It seems plausible to me that these early roman & italic types established a standard by the newly wide dissemination of these forms, as they did for certain punctuation.‡

† [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Livro- Aldus.jpg](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Livro-Aldus.jpg)

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

</comment><comment><USER3> What's the character between 3 and 4 in the table at the end of the article ? Does anyone know ?

<comment><USER4> It's 4. The columns are the digits 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0 And the rows are the character used for that digit at that point in time.

At some point later 5 mutated from looking like 4 to as it is now.

<comment><USER5> Also worth comparing with the numerals used today in Arabic:

[http://userpages.umbc.edu/~samir1/620_Project_2/L3T1_1.htm](http://userpages.umbc.edu/~samir1/620_Project_2/L3T1_1.htm)</comment></comment></comment>