Why are we still using linked in? - <AUTHOR> http://thisworkinglife.org/?p=65

<comment><USER2> LinkedIn is my default resume. If a company/person I'm submitting to pooh- poo's my Google Doc with accomplishments and links to YouTube etc. plus my LinkedIn profile and wants a paper hard copy it's a pretty good indicator the fit/structure probably isn't right for me.

This is a guideline though, not a hard-line determinant.

If the company DOES seem like a good fit and still wanted a paper resume, I just copy/paste my LinkedIn data there.

And, if you want to network with a generally older 'gray hair' crowd, they may not be on Twitter (but probably Facebook) and think Foursquare is a playground kids' game but most likely will respond to your requests on LinkedIn.

<comment><AUTHOR> It's my default resume too - i send it anywhere i'd otherwise write up context on professional history. And the need for a separate service that does that is absolutely clear.

But the real question is whether linked-in does the best possible job at this or if some other new, hypothetical service could do better? In the same way that myspace was once my default social presence, but now facebook is exclusively.</comment></comment>


The Zuckerberg delusion - <AUTHOR> https://www.ft.com/content/580f18d6-c951-11e7-aa33-c63fdc9b8c6c <comment><USER2> A convincing op-ed, even the suggestion of "train thousands of people" as a better use of Zuckerberg's fortune resonates, but then...

> He might even fund a newspaper to make up for social media's destruction of > local journalism.

I'd rank a lot of other things higher than social media on a list of "destroyers of local journalism"

1\. Craigslist 2\. Google Maps 3\. Online publishing 4\. Blogs 5\. Social Media?

Regardless of who is at fault for the destruction of local journalism, I am surprised to hear journalists advocating for "billionaire philanthropy" as a sustainable business model.

<comment><USER3> > I'd rank a lot of other things higher than social media on a list of > "destroyers of local journalism"

Why is that? I would rank it pretty high.

It's true that online advertising killed of a lot of the ad revenue that newspapers relied on, but I think social media are also killing the newspapers simply by displacing people's 'news browsing' behaviour from a newspaper or magazine to a facebook feed.

A lot of people get all their news from social media, and that proportion is growing.

To add to that behavioural effect, media outlets also give away their content on facebook as well, believing that it would be better to have a presence than to ignore the platform .

They are basically giving their product away for free on one of the very platforms that is destroying the industry.

<comment><USER2> Maybe Social Media is a nail in Local Newspaper's coffin, but Craigslist and Google Local came first, and put them in the coffin.

From Wikipedia's "Decline of Newspapers"[1]

>Free services like Craigslist have decimated the classified advertising departments of newspapers, some of which depended on classifieds for 70% of their ad revenue

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

<comment><USER3> Both are factors, and I don't honestly know which is the larger factor, however, it's no longer just local papers that are affected.

The large national dailies are getting thinner and thinner each year, each month it seems.

Compare a Sunday times from today to one from the early nineties if you remember them.

This is not good. A clickbait article on facebook that has been targeted to appeal to your biases is not the same thing as real journalism.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> From the related article:

> Mark Zuckerberg sounded a warning on Friday about the social and political > fragmentation caused by America's opioid crisis

He is trying to diverge attention away from FB by blaming opioids, lost jobs etc but has zero charisma.

Promoting his views in form of a trending Facebook news feed story might provide him a better platform /s

And I still don't get why don't these guys simply do away with the news feed and/or stop collecting data which allow advertisers target a specific political leaning.

<comment><USER5> I dont care for either of them, but I don't understand why we bag on Zuckerberg, who has at least realized at an almost reasonable age that there are other humans in the world. Meanwhile Bezos is what, ~fifteen~ twenty years older, and still seems to long for the return of serfdom. In 2012 Bezos was pretty much Bill Gates before Ted Turner and others took Gates to task for being Ebenezer Scrooge. Since then, Bezos has donated to his alma mater and to projects that are within walking distance of Amazon's main campus. Big man.

Amazon is the new Walmart. When humans have a moment of clarity and learn to go outside instead of going on FB, all the shops will be gone or called Amazon, and Bezos will be swimming in his bank vault.

<comment><USER4> Frankly I feel tired by this level of discussion. If you feel I am wrong about Zuckerberg, sure downvote my post or given points against it. But there has to be another place and time to discuss Bezos and Amazon. Currently your argument is nothing but whataboutism.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Says protecting community is more important....

> "Protecting our community is more important than maximising our profits," Mr > Zuckerberg said

then goes out and sues said community, build walls to keep the community at bay

> In the past year alone, the 32-year-old billionaire spent $30 million to buy > up the four homes surrounding his Palo Alto abode, only to demolish them, > and later built a six-foot-tall wall around his 700-acre plot of land in > Hawaii, to the chagrin of his Kilauean neighbors.

Source: Man Of The People Mark Zuckerberg Sues To Keep Native Hawaiians Off His Kauai Estate => [https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/01/mark-zuckerberg- sues...](https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/01/mark-zuckerberg-sues-to-keep- native-hawaiians-off-his-kauai-estate)

<comment><USER7> > then goes out and sues said community, build walls to keep the community at > bay

People who are wealthy and famous like him take these measures because they fear for their family's personal security. As an unknown person who also takes my family's security seriously, it's hard to fault him for that.

But that is really unrelated to the concept of "community" on Facebook. One can be quite concerned about social media's negative effect on society (promoting tribalism, othering) while granting that Mark Z has exceptional security needs.

<comment><USER8> I find it utterly hilarious that Mark Zuckerberg is concerned about his own privacy given the product he's unleashed upon the world. Hypocrisy doesn't begin to describe it.

<comment><USER7> I agree, but physical security and privacy, while related, are different. And physical security measures are different when someone's wealth puts a big target on their back.

<comment><USER9> This is ridiculous. The wealthy don't have big targets on their back.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Full Text: [http://archive.is/FEwBC](http://archive.is/FEwBC)

</comment><comment><USER10> Regarding the 'Opioid Crisis' ... while very real, the pain and suffering it is responsible for being very large - as a 'talking point' in a political context, it is very much a construct that has emerged only very recently (especially in the context of how long these drugs have been available and detrimental to communities)

In Canada for example, CBC radio which i listen to - covers the issue extensively and it is clear that the government is pushing it as an issue, directly and with long-form podcast type pieces about related issues.

It is clear that this is propaganda at the State level.

Reasoning for this approach is clear: One having citizens nodding off across the socio-economic spectrum is costly. Two: It is very easy to build consensus that addressing this is 'A good thing', in the same vein - prior recurrent talking points in the Canadian context are issues regarding native peoples. Three: The need to build consensus is a correction(carrot) for the failed 'the war on drugs'(stick) - itself a piece of political theater. Four: A successful approach to this problem will make the government look good.

Essentially, a solid 'problem' for 'government' to 'solve'. But perhaps other more systemic issues are being ignored ... and we are being distracted by the State's shallow performance of magnanimous and utilitarian care.

Examples of tackling more substantive and more divisive issues would be penalizing the pharma companies, doctors or the profit-driven market they operate in. In terms of the endless hand-wringing over the plight of native- peoples - addressing systemic racism with reparations...

So to re-iterate - the recent injection of the 'Opioid Crisis' in Zuckerberg's PR narrative is an action that is rooted in the State's performance of a 'duty-of-care' at the level of propaganda. It is hardly likely to have come from his cursory tour, and rather from careful study of Facebook's omnipotent data feed and its close relationship with the secret services and those responsible for Propaganda in this country. Basically it represents the capitulation of a very powerful private organization to the forces of state- hood. Something that Zuckerberg's clear ambition for political power might address. At the very least it represents how the State and Facebook are assimilating have already assimilated.

In terms of the substantive issues that would represent a non-capitulation, or non-assimilation, I have written about that here: [https://iainmait.land/posts/20170201-transitional- object.htm...](https://iainmait.land/posts/20170201-transitional-object.html)

<comment><USER11> This is a very good point. Create a diversion to move people's attention away from the State's failures or underperformance; political theater all the way.

This is not to say that an opioid crisis does not exist, only that it is being used for nefarious purposes.

It's not rocket science to predict the outcome, based on current events: opioids become so difficult to get, even for legitimate purposes like breakthrough cancer and post-surgical pain, that the genuine users suffer along with the so-called abusers; politicos declare victory; and we get stuck with more dangerous pain relief that has not (yet) come under scrutiny.

This is another turn of the screw that crushes the populace a little further into servitude.

Hyperbole? No.

Taken together with the other almost invisible attacks on our freedoms, such as

\- not being able to deposit $5,000 or more in totally legitimate cash without being reported to the finance cops,

\- the loss of 7th amendment rights by more and more contracts incorporating mandatory binding arbitration clauses, and

\- the need for good credit ratings effectively forcing us to have at least some debt,

a reasonable person will surely agree that the sum of these, and upcoming, small tyrannies, if unchecked, will leave most of us in servitude to the State and the "Corporate State".

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> _He might even fund a newspaper to make up for social media's destruction of local journalism._

Yes! Because if it's one thing the world sorely needs its yet another newspaper owned by an out of touch billionaire with dubious political ambitions.

</comment><comment><USER13> non-paywall: [https://outline.com/VV54Uc](https://outline.com/VV54Uc)</comment>


We're a Zambian Band (2014) - <AUTHOR> http://theappendix.net/issues/2014/7/were-a-zambian-band <comment><USER2> Nice read, thanks for posting. I grew up in Zambia in the 80s I and live in SF now, and I never heard of Zamrock before.

This comment about young Zambians - "They marvel when they listen to Zamrock. They think Zambians could not have done that." \- saddened me. It seems to apply to a lot of areas of life there now. There used to be a time when Zambians were self reliant, growing their own food and making their own goods, but now everything comes from South Africa and most Zambians are just consumers.

<comment><USER3> That part saddens me as well. I spent 6-7 months in Zambia last year working on private sector economic development and agree they have a long way to go. I'm optimistic on their growth.

OP, thanks for posting. Love Zambia and loved reading this

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is the most interesting thing I've read in a while. The music is great. I implore you to listen to this: [https://theappendix.net/audio/issue-2-3/Chifundo.m4a](https://theappendix.net/audio/issue-2-3/Chifundo.m4a)

I wonder what would have happened if the price of copper continued to rise.

<comment><AUTHOR> Glad you liked it (and I agree on both counts). There's also this shorter piece about the process of finding Jagari that you might interesting:

[http://theappendix.net/posts/2014/09/searching-for- jagari](http://theappendix.net/posts/2014/09/searching-for-jagari)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Will they be coming to my town? Will they help me party down? Sorry, couldn't help the Grand Funk Railroad playing in my head when I read that headline ("We're a Za-ambian band!")

Good article, but it brought to mind to me that music is such a shite business. Bad enough in places like the U. S., but this guy despite all his fame at one point still ends up digging a hole in the ground hoping to make a living. Granted, the rest of his countrymates are in the same boat, but I guess when hard times come entertainment dollars are the first to get the budget ax.

<comment><USER6> > still ends up digging a hole in the ground hoping to make a living

That part of the story struck me as well. The fact that there are people out there who's best hope for economic success is digging a hole in the ground.

<comment><USER7> Lots of blues, folk western artists in the 40s 50s made most of their money in menial of semi skilled jobs. Some became famous, some not. Some occasionally, when people came looking after them due to late discovery, didn't even want to acknowledge that part of their lives.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Very interesting. I've been living in Zambia for a few years but had never heard of Zamrock.

(one tiny correction would be that 'mzungu' is singular for a white person, wazungu/bazungu is plural)</comment>


The Rust borrow checker from a different perspective - <AUTHOR> https://blog.systems.ethz.ch/blog/2018/a-hammer-you-can-only-hold-by-the-handle.html <comment><USER2> As someone who is not familiar with Rust at all, wow—what refreshingly helpful error messages!

<comment><USER3> Can someone chime in as to why C++ compilers in particular are notorious for extremely verbose yet unhelpful error messages? Is it something endemic to parsing the language that there can't be errors as helpful as Rust's?

<comment><USER4> The short answer, devoid of some interesting nuance, is that C++'s template system is similar to an untyped functional programming language, so the errors you get are the compiler's attempt to make sense of the large tree of nonsense it couldn't reduce.

C++ also suffers from years of backwards-compatibility twister creating abundant cases of ambiguity if you do something wrong. The compiler will do it's best, but if your code suddenly parses wildly differently because your semicolon is missing, oh well. Rust is far simpler in that regard, so there are fewer instances where your code might accidentally make sense to the compiler if you have an error.

<comment><USER5> > Rust is far simpler in that regard, so there are fewer instances where your > code might accidentally make sense to the compiler if you have an error.

I say this from a place of love for Rust, but the first time you run into a massive generic type tree error thats root cause is a type parameter three levels deep not implementing Send (or some other trait) it takes your breath away.

There are some great jokes about this in Deisel and Futures for example. It makes Java generics look like a baby just starting to craw.

The error messages are good, you just need to go grab a coffee while you read through the book on type theory that's been dumped to your screen.

<comment><USER6> Similar stuff happens on Haskell too. I guess that since the type system is an unityped logic programming language, it is an even worse place than C++ templates. It is a smaller problem on practice only because the type declarations are much shorter programs than C++ templates.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> That's a nice way of introducing type state programming in an affine programming language!

In general though, type state programming would be even nicer in a linear language. For example, in the http server I could start writing a response without ever writing a body. Rust would happily accept this code, because Rust is always allowed to throw away resources.

An affine language controls the duplication of resources, while a linear language controls both duplication and destruction of resources. In a linear Rust, a data structure would have to implement Drop in order to be silently deleted and in the http server "HttpResponseWritingHeaders" should not implement Drop.

</comment><comment><USER8> Great write up, when I started coding in Rust, I sometimes used to get frustrated, but then realised how helpful the checker is and really made me think about structure and mechanics of my code, making me a better developer.

</comment><comment><USER5> I just sent this around to my entire (mainly Java) team. I think it might be the best intro to describe the fundamental memory model that I've read.

The walk through this basic example, showing interface changes that enforce different aspects of the code, are wonderful. It took me a long time to grok some of these basic concepts, and this explains them so concisely.

I might use this as an intro to Rust for anyone who starting to learn the language. Kudos to the author for expressing these concepts in such elegance.

</comment><comment><USER9> How do you get back something owned by something else?

<comment><USER10> You don't, unless they pass it to you (as a return value or function argument).

<comment><USER11> Or if the borrow doesn't outlive the source e.g. if a local goes out of scope.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> From that writeup, it seems like one is forced to program Rust in an object oriented manner. Is it possible to program it in a functional manner like Lisp, or a procedural manner like BASIC or assembler?

<comment><USER13> In my experience, it's not much more OO than Haskell. Even in many functional languages, you typically want _some_ OO — you'll want some core type that you export opaquely, and then you have functions doing logical operations on that.

I think two of the biggest differences are:

\- Because the type and memory systems make it possible to skip heap allocation if you're careful, it's "idiomatic" to prefer avoiding techniques that still require it. This means avoiding long-lived closures. Note that closures still are used very heavily, but typically aren't passed around between many owners like in Lisp or JavaScript.

\- Similarly, because Rust _can_ give you incredible safety and speed if you use it a certain way, people tend to write with interior mutability very often. However, unlike in most languages, Rust's type systems is a _tremendous_ help to the programmer with mutability, and it's much, much more likely that you'll see interior mutability done right. It allows you to program in a style that feels very functional even while using many imperative components. A lot of your code still ends up as basic pattern matching and simple closures.

<comment><USER14> Regarding closures, note that Rust closures don't allocate on the heap unless you explicitly use a Box to put them on the heap. Long-lived closures aren't a problem, because closures by default borrow the variables they close over (and like all borrowed references, these cannot extend the overall lifetime of the borrowed data); alternatively they may take ownership of their closed-over variables, but in that case the closure can only be called exactly once (as expected for owned values).

<comment><USER15> A closure taking ownership of the closed-over variables doesn't actually imply that it is FnOnce (only callable once). You can perfectly well have a Fn or FnMut closure that owns its captures, as long as you don't try to do any moves inside the closure. If you need to do a move in an FnMut closure, you can also wrap the captured variable in an Option, and use .take()</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Request HN: HN Reader for Android - <AUTHOR>

I know that there is already a HN Reader app for Android. Unfortunately, the lack of support for voting as well as commenting, makes the experience incomplete at best. Surely someone can do better. <comment><USER2> Please try my reader: <http://toadjaw.com/hn>

I'm still thinking of a way to implement voting and commenting into it. I have an idea on how to do it, but not sure if it'll be acceptable.

Please let me know if I can add anything to this to make it better.

<comment><USER3> You can make it more touch friendly by making the whole title area (li element) clickable, perhaps with a square button floating to the right for comments.

<comment><USER2> Thanks, I will work on that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> A more general solution might be something like Oilcan (which bills itself as Greasemonkey on steroids) :

<http://oilcan.jsharkey.org/></comment>


Microsoft Admits Defeat, Tries Antitrust Tactic Against Google - <AUTHOR> http://www.itworld.com/open-source/142124/irony-squared-microsoft-tries-antitrust-tactic-against-google <comment><USER2> For reference, other takes on this story:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2391675>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2391424>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2391237>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2391051>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2390999>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2390721>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2390430></comment>


Apply HN: CreatorsNest – On-Demand, Private Workspaces for Artists and Creatives - <AUTHOR> CreatorsNest (CreatorsNest.com) is a network of private, affordable creative workspaces that are accessible on-demand.  Each space, or "nest", is developed by repurposing residential garages and transforming them into beautiful and inspirational spaces for artists and creatives to use for a variety of purposes.  The goal here is to fundamentally change the way artists work by providing affordable space for creatives, and to disrupt the > $5 bn creative studios industry that capitalizes on artists' need for privacy.<p>P.S. The first nest was recently opened in Los Angeles.  You can view it here: http://creatorsnest.com/the-nests.html <comment><USER2> 1) Love the idea of repurposing residential garages, but are these spaces as available (with all the criteria for your needs, like bathroom access) / convertable as you think they'll be?

2) Is the plan for home owners to clear their space, renovate it in the hope you'll accept it, then list their space in an AirBnB-type model? Or is someone on your team seeking them out, signing a long-term rental agreement, and converting them yourselves? With a cut to the homeowner, cost of renovations, cost of cleaning after every use, cost of supplies & refills, how much utilization do you need for a space to cover setup costs and then maintain a profit?

3) Beyond the community, a lot of artists who use creative studios do so because they're working on projects that won't get completed within a day or two. How do you address needs for storage of things like wet paintings, clay sculpture, large print templates, etc.? Right now your booking system doesn't seem to support needs like "3 hours today, 3 hours tomorrow, 3 hours after the weekend" without multiple bookings / risking getting out-booked and kept away from stored items.

4) Do you see your target market being more artists currently in a studio (or that have used them in the past), or artists that have never yet joined one (primarily worked from home)?

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey Jay, thanks for your insightful questions:

(1) I chose residential garages for two reasons: (a) they represent a strong differentiator, and (b) their abundance and flexibility when repurposing the space. I do have certain criteria when it comes to location, but generally speaking, garage spaces are simpler to design and repurpose because they aren't meant to be living spaces. If you look at our first nest, the only substantial changes we made to it were building the wooden accent wall (costs less than $200 to do), built out the back window, added lighting and some furniture (we built the desks ourselves), and installed new doors. We learned that bathrooms cannot be built inside the garage itself due to regulatory concerns, so we had a nice one built in the backyard instead (it was quite affordable too). I think that garages are a vast, untapped resource that sits idly for many house owners, and this represents a great opportunity to maximize it and earn space owners some money in the process.

(2) CreatorsNest will not be an Airbnb type of marketplace. Since art-making is such an emotional, tailored endeavor, we want to be in direct control of the user experience and build spaces that fit an inspirational aesthetic that we want to maintain. If we open it up for anyone to list, the quality of these spaces will be highly questionable, especially since empty garages do not warrant a "creative space". We are seeking each one out by submission ([http://creatorsnest.com/build-a-nest.html](http://creatorsnest.com/build-a- nest.html)) or referrals/suggestions from users, and either signing a rental agreement or using a revenue-sharing program for x number of months/years. I've calculated that if each nest can bring in about 240-250 recurring users with an average booking of 1.5 hours, then building that space would be worthwhile. It won't take a critical mass of folks to make money off of each space.

(3) Great question. Our take on the space is for it to be used on an on-demand basis, and not as a creative studio that you are using day-in and day-out. Storage is a very craft-specific thing that a tailored studio would have to provide, as there is no real one-size-fits-all mechanism for all artforms. If you happen to be a painter that is using the space, the expectation is that you are in an awesome environment to work on your project for a given length of time, and to take that project back home with you after your reservation. I can see this potentially changing as more nests are opened up and each one becomes more specialized for certain artforms, but as of now, the spaces are meant to be more temporal in nature.

(4) My target market are folks that have never joined a studio, value privacy, but don't know where to go when they want to escape the staleness of their home. From speaking with users, I've found that there is an abundance of these types of artists who can't find an affordable solution to this problem. In Los Angeles, artist co-working spaces are flourishing, but there are two chief complaints: (1) they are over-crowded and often distracting, and (2) the monthly membership model is expensive, and they end up not going as much as they'd like to (a la gym membership). I think that in the process, we may end up bringing over some people that are already using studios, but CreatorsNest may have some limitations that they are not used to having (for example, the issue of storage space). I believe that going the on-demand route makes CreatorsNest a more accessible solution for the general, work-from-home artist.

If you have any other things you're curious about, please feel free to shoot them over!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> The site notes that bathrooms aren't in the nest but on premise and renters can use them. How will you address the fact that while many people may be open to renting out an underused garage because it's somewhat detached from the house, they don't want strangers in their homes (except when renting out whole house)?

Are you paying for any/some of the house-owner's renovation costs or how will you encourage them to remodel? Renovations are costly and the potential revenue may not be high enough to entice an owner to redo their garage. Most garages are bare by default.

What is the rental price point?

<comment><AUTHOR> Small bathrooms will be built separately from the house itself. For example, the first nest's bathroom has been built in the backyard, and it was quite affordable to do as well. Anything related to the nest will require no entry to the house itself, as we want it to be a completely independent space.

When it comes to encouraging the home owner to repurpose their garage, a lot of it will have to do with how our first nest does. If I assume a 50% occupancy rate for our first nest which is open 12 hours a day (fairly conservative in my opinion), that would yield over $120 of revenue per square foot, which would more than pique people's interest to do something with a garage that's just collecting dust. I also plan on splitting the costs of the reservation with the home-owner (specific %s have not been figured out yet), and also sharing the revenue with them as well. The cost of renovating a garage is actually not as high as you would think because it's not a functional living space (for example, the cement floor of a garage can be left as is); I predict the average cost of a renovation would be < $8k.

The current price point is at $20-25 hour for the space, which would make it the most affordable, private creative space you can currently find in Los Angeles (that is also inspiring and beautiful as well!).

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Do you plan to mostly focus on urban centers?

<comment><AUTHOR> The plan is to first focus on metropolitan areas, primarily in Los Angeles, where many artists and creatives tend to cluster. However, since we are focusing on residential garages as the physical venues to repurpose, we would be able to service different parts of the city quite effectively (since underutilized garages are fairly abundant wherever you go).</comment></comment>


David Stutz's Resignation Letter (2003) - <AUTHOR> http://www.synthesist.net/writing/onleavingms.html

<comment><USER2> A bit of context from Cory Doctorow: [http://www.boingboing.net/2003/02/13/stutz-says- farewell-.ht...](http://www.boingboing.net/2003/02/13/stutz-says- farewell-.html)</comment>


The first great battle of the Internet is over..... - <AUTHOR> http://fakesteve.blogspot.com/2008/06/phase-one-of-internet-is-over-and-we.html

<comment><USER2> Seriously hilarious fake rant.</comment>


Mint won't give a clear answer about Heartbleed - <AUTHOR> https://satisfaction.mint.com/mint/topics/a_definitve_answer_on_whether_mint_was_ever_affected_by_heartbleed https://satisfaction.mint.com/mint/topics/is_mint_com_secured_and_recovered_from_the_heartbleed_bug <comment><USER2> What is unclear about the response: "As indicated, our engineers have verified Mint is not affected by "Heartbleed." Password resets and re-issuing of SSL certificates are not required at this time."

It seems that they are saying either (a) they are not using OpenSSL, or (b) they were using a version of OpenSSL without the vulnerability. Is there anything wrong with assuming that given their statements?

<comment><USER3> "is not affected" being the operative wording. users want to know if their data _has ever_ been at risk. still, surely everyone can just assume it was affected, act accordingly, and move on?

<comment><USER4> Except in this case, seeing as it seems that Mint hasn't got new ssl certs or private keys, the only way to 'act accordingly' is to never use the service again.

<comment><USER5> Or they were never vulnerable, which is likely given what has been dug up about their tech stack.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> It's poor customer service, but according to [https://github.com/musalbas/heartbleed- masstest/tree/master/...](https://github.com/musalbas/heartbleed- masstest/tree/master/scans), they were not vulnerable when the first mass scans were done. That's not definitive, but it's at least somewhat reassuring.

</comment><comment><USER7> netcraft shows mint.com is using f5 BigIP, if they terminate SSL using BigIP and should not be affected: [https://devcentral.f5.com/articles/openssl- heartbleed-cve-20...](https://devcentral.f5.com/articles/openssl-heartbleed- cve-2014-0160#.U03iFuaSy0Y)

<comment><USER5> This needs to be the top comment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> What a bunch of fud.

> You say there's no evidence that customer data was affected, but the > heartbleed bug leaves no logs, so that is not re-assuring at all

Well, if they're looking for people making use of the data received by the exploit that _is_ re-assuring..

> You've said before that Mint servers are being updated, which suggests that > it was exposed. If this is the case, have you gotten new SSL certificatess? > (this is extremely important see next point)

Almost everyone was exposed. I'd like to know they have a new ssl cert too but not because of why you want them to.

> Even if I take a personal precaution and change my Mint and bank account > passwords, if a hacker stole your cert at any time and you haven't gotten a > new one, all my accounts are STILL vulnerable no matter how many times I > change the password. This is because they basically have a permanent back > door into Mint until you get a new SSL cert.

No, no they don't I don't think you understand ssl at all.

> Basically, if you don't answer the following questions, we have no choice > but to STOP USING MINT FOREVER in order to secure ourselves. 1. Was Mint > EVER vulnerable to the heartbleed bug (which has existed for 2 years) 2. If > so, has the SSL cert been revoked and a new one acquired?

Good, stop using it, you're taking up security analyst resources to answer your stupid questions instead of letting them make sure everything is solid.

</comment><comment><USER9> The latest (and final) response Mint gave, 2 hours after this hit the HN front page, is: "I'm terribly sorry for the delay in circling back to this topic. I can confirm that Mint was using a version of OpenSSL that was never vulnerable to Heartbleed."

Seems cleared up. Goes to show yet again, due to the massive traffic it causes, HN continues to be useful as a customer complaint center for egregious cases...

<comment><USER10> Which is the same as their first official response to the thread further up the page too!

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Typical mint. Their customer service has been terrible ever since they sold to intuit. I love the service, but the company is terrible.

</comment><comment><USER12> The absence of a clear response indicates to me that the brass is currently weighing the pros and cons of admitting there was a problem. This is the sort of thing where those who really weren't affected get way out ahead of this sort of thing with vivid detail. I deleted my account.

</comment><comment><USER13> Seems reasonable, we didn't have to update anything as Centos 5 was using an earlier version without the bug.

</comment><comment><USER14> They should at least give us some more info, like which openssl version their running (if they use openssl)

<comment><USER15> That's probably not a great idea - it just instantly confirms them as a viable future target if a bug in that particular version comes up with a hole in it later.

I'm personally okay with "We were not affected by the bug" \- random internet people shouldn't have details on the software your company runs internally. One more thing for a potential bad guy to exploit.

Besides, if they'd be willing to lie about being affected, they'd be willing to lie about using a particular version of software, so nothing gained anyways.

<comment><USER16> I agree that they shouldn't publicize which specific other versions of openssl they use/used, but they should be much more forthcoming about what systems (and potentially keys) in their architecture were affected and what data such systems had.

For instance, at my work, we very explicitly said that only two internal systems, our wiki and our issue tracking system, used that version of openssl. Those systems had no user data and had a different set of certs. It is essential to give details. [http://blog.taximagic.com/heartbleed/](http://blog.taximagic.com/heartbleed/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I still get email from Mint time to time but I've disconnected my bank account. It just didn't feel right, giving away such a crucial information when the local bank already provides means to check your financials. Do I really need to know minute by minute my spendings? Am I spending so fast and so much that I have to watch for my account being emptied on a third party app that is granted access to such intimate data?

</comment><comment><USER18> Intuit Not giving a Strait answer, next you will tell me water is wet...

Go try to read some some of their dev docs.... I do not believe anyone in the company can give clear and concise responses to anything.

</comment><comment><USER19> Just deleted my Mint account; if they're not going to be transparent around this, I flat out can't trust them with my financial information.

<comment><USER20> If you can't trust them with your financial information, how can you trust that they actually deleted your account?

<comment><USER19> Fair question. Time to rotate my bank passwords too...</comment></comment></comment>


Scraping, cleaning, and selling big data - <AUTHOR> http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/05/data-scraping-infochimps.html

<comment><USER2> On the rare occasion that I scrape a site for a project I'm usually less worried about the legal issues than I am worried that the site will recognize my script hitting them repeatedly and block my IP. Does anyone know how prevalent this practice is? I've heard that Google blocks scripts scraping their search results, but I haven't experienced it myself.

(I know it's easy to spoof the user agent, but that seems underhanded/nefarious.)

<comment><USER3> Just an (evil) idea: Create some free iPhone app/game, scrape the site in user's iPhone and send to your server.

<comment><USER4> Less evil: read about how duckduckgo uses Boss and Bing APIs

[http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2010/08/thoughts-on- yaho...](http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2010/08/thoughts-on-yahoo-boss- monetization-ii.html)

\</comment></comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>-----

and check <http://www.reddit.com/r/datasets> and infochimps, maybe dataset is already out there

\</comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>--

and ...never spider from home, you'll always screw something up: referrer HTTP header, user agent, random wait time between requests,

<http://streamhacker.com/2010/10/04/perils-web-crawling/>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2463058> see first comment

</comment><comment><USER5> Google's policies are a bit all over the place. Google translate will stop you, but some other services don't.</comment>


Hacking strength: Gaining muscle with least resistance - <AUTHOR> http://matt.might.net/articles/hacking-strength/ <comment><USER2> Some of this is terrible advice.

You want strength, you do high weight, low rep sets of compound barbell lifts.

Dumbbells are a body-building tool, not a strength building one.

Press machines are horrid horrid horrid. At best they don't target the important stabilizing muscles that compound lifts are supposed to. At worst they can pull your movements into unnatural ranges of motion, causing lasting damage to your joints.

If you have no one to spot you, buy a power rack. It'll work out cheaper, and you'll be better off.

Honestly though, the best way to get in shape is not to MAKE yourself exercise, it's to find something that you ENJOY and do that. Judo, BJJ, boxing, squash, tennis, football, badminton... join a sports club, have fun, and you won't even notice yourself getting fitter.

<comment><USER3> Also, yoga. It's ubiquitous, you can start small, and although you may, you don't have to interact with people so it's a great stepping stone for a shy person.

<comment><USER4> What do you get out of it, though?

Sure a high chance of meeting women (which is nice if you don't want to be Forever Alone), but other than the ability to strech a little more what is the gain?

<comment><USER3> It's excercise like any other, it's just using the body's own weight instead of dumbbells to create load. Stretchin is a lesser part of yoga than strength.

<comment><USER4> Oh, that makes more sense, then.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I've plugged this here before, but so what: [http://stronglifts.com/stronglifts-5x5-beginner-strength- tra...](http://stronglifts.com/stronglifts-5x5-beginner-strength-training- program).

The key observation here is that your average person doesn't need a particularly sophisticated routine to get "average in shape" (if that makes sense). I think the conventional wisdom that you need to be eating health food all the time and running an hour a day makes people feel like it's just not worth the effort. If you're like most people and not even getting 7-8 hours of sleep, an hour a day of working out isn't in the cards. But: "eat lots of protein and work out 3x30 minutes a week" is so much more approachable.

<comment><USER6> A word of caution... StrongLifts and Starting Strength promote advanced compound motions (ie., deadlift, bench press, squat, etc). So, it's great to kick start your muscle growth mechanism and gain strength. It's hard to argue against the deadlift, squat and bench press. But personally I've found that these exercises can be difficult and you need instruction. For the bench press you want to arch your back and bring your shoulder blades together to give support as you press so you don't injure your shoulder and/or rotator cuff. The squat and deadlift also aren't simple exercises. Lots of people get injured doing these advanced exercises.

I'd highly recommend watching a bunch of videos on correct form (ie., Starting Strength has a decent dvd and YouTube has some decent tutorials). But even better would be to get a very good personal trainer to teach you these lifts.

I'm just really hesitant suggesting a beginner to go out to the gym and try these moves on their own. Sounds like a recipe for disaster.

My other criticism of StrongLifts and Starting Strength is because of the complexity of the movements, the higher in weight you go the more you really should have a spotter and that just makes working out that much more complicated (need to arrange a time to meet someone, etc). If you don't use a spotter and you've progressed to some really heavy weights then it can be dangerous. There's quite of few deaths from the bench press every year.

Personally, rather than pushing myself alone a barbell squat what I'll do is I'll pre-exhaust myself with a few sets of barbell squats (moderate weight) and then go to exhaustion on the leg extension, leg press and leg curl machines. This to me is a much safer route then trying to max out on a barbell squat.

For deadlift, I do a modified stiff-leg deadlift (I learned this by watching Dorian Yates) where I start from a standing position and don't go down all the way. I also use moderate weights for this.

For bench press, I had to learn correct form (after hurting my shoulder a bit thinking I knew how to bench). I go max weight on this but I use one of those assisted power racks for safety.

To me the lifts that Starting Strength and Stronglifts promote are too important to ignore but I just don't agree with their program for everyone. For beginners working out by themselves in the gym and wanting to do the deadlift, squat and bench press... I suggest:

1\. Learn proper form on these advanced movements from an expert.

2\. Go moderate weight on deadlift and barbell squats if you're working out by yourself.

3\. Don't be stupid on the bench press by lifting your max without a spotter. I read that more deaths happen because of the bench press than any other exercise in the gym.

For beginners, I would probably not suggest not StartingStrength/StrongLifts. But rather, I'd suggest working out 2-3 times a week (average 20-30 minutes per workout) using High Intensity Training principles and techniques. The basic principles is doing one set to muscular failure per exercise.

If you're really just starting out, read Body By Science (Little and McGuff) and follow their Big Five exercise program. It's the top 5 exercises (machines) that you do once a week. Just one set each to failure and it only takes 20 minutes/week. The key is going to failure.

If you're wanting more, check out The New High Intensity Training (Darden). He summarizes the basics of H.I.T and gives some decent workouts. He suggests 3 times a week for beginners and the workouts take less than 30 minutes each. Again the key is going to failure with each exercise.

<comment><USER7> What do you suggest for someone that wants to be efficient and effective at home, without assistance, and without lots of equipment?

<comment><USER6> Working out at home, I think, you're going to have to make some compromises especially if you don't want a lot of equipment. Equipment helps because you can lift heavier weights than body weight exercises and that will kickstart muscle growth more efficiently. My wife's been doing P90x the past several months and likes the guided workouts. She's making decent gains but it's a lot of time - about one hour a day, six days a week. To me that's a lot of time/commitment and I think it can borderline on overtraining.

If I had to workout at home (I don't because my gym is just 5 minutes away and currently I'm doing a very-efficient workout just once every 3 days for under 30 minutes), then I would probably get some decent equipment. I'd might go with a good power rack, bench, and barbell/dumbbell set. Here's the workout I probably would do:

1\. Leg #1 - I would do mostly squats with the power rack and have the safety bar set up. I would do 4-5 sets with moderately heavy weights to tire my legs out but wouldn't go to total failure with the heavy weights. I might go to failure with a final set with light weight (for safety) or do a final set of air squats (or with dumbbell) to tire my legs out completely.

2\. Leg/Lower Back #2 - I would do a modified stiff-leg deadlift (see Dorian Yates do this on YouTube). This would exercise my hamstrings and lower back. I personally don't really like doing full deadlifts. I just feel unsafe with them (just personally). With the stiff-leg deadlift I'd do probably 3 sets with moderate-heavy weight and wouldn't go to total failure (to be safe).

3\. Leg #3 - I'd work out my calves by holding a heavy barbell and doing calf raises (standing on toes and back down). I'd do heavy and failure, probably just one set.

Now, the legs are done. I wish I could do leg extensions but that's tough with just a power rack. If you have space or in the future want to expand your equipment, that might be a good piece to have. Also, leg press is a great machine too but would probably take up a lot of room (but squats could perform a lot of the similar function).

4\. Chest - I'd do bench press (or incline/decline bench press) with moderately heavy weights, probably 2-3 sets (not to failure). I'd do a final set to total failure with lighter dumbbells (for safety because a barbell if let loose could really do serious damage on your face/throat), pushups, or dips.

5\. Shoulder #1 - I'd probably use dumbbells and do shoulder press for one set to failure (warm-up sets ok, but final set should be heavy and to failure).

6\. Shoulder #2 - I'd choose one of the following and mix them up: front lat raise, side lat raise, bending over lat raise, shoulder shrugs. One set to failure.

7\. Back - You can do a good back workout with pulls-ups and chin-ups using the power rack (if the power rack supports your weight). If it's difficult to do pull-ups/chin-ups, then try using a chair and doing negatives (just the down motion very slowly to build strength). You can also get a power rack with a lat pull down (I don't know how good it is but here's the link, [http://www.amazon.com/Valor-Athletics-Inc-BD- Power/dp/B002EJ...](http://www.amazon.com/Valor-Athletics-Inc-BD- Power/dp/B002EJC990)). If you have this, then do one set of wide-grip lat pull downs to failure with heavy weight and then immediately follow it with close- grip (palms facing in) lat pulldowns (this combo will work your back like crazy).

8\. Triceps - I'd do some tricep extensions (standing or lying down) for one set to failure. (Close-grip bench press is also good. Dips are great as well, especially immediately follow tricep extensions.)

9\. Biceps - I'd do barbell curls or isolated dumbbell curls. One set to failure. (Chin-ups immediately following are great to work biceps more.)

10\. Abs - I'd mix it up with ab exercises and choose from crunches, reverse crunches, hanging knee raises. Just one set very slow to failure.

My strategy in working out would be to do full-body workouts (that last no longer than 30 minutes) every 3 days. For safety reasons, I wouldn't go to failure using heavy weights on squats, deadlift or bench press (that's why I'd do more than one set and use moderately heavy weight to tire muscles out and with legs/chest I would go to failure using another easier exercise like air squats w/dumbbell or push-ups). For all other exercises the basic concept would be to lift heavy, do just one set, but do that one set to failure. You can do warmup sets (lighter weights for a few to several reps) to warm up the muscles as needed. I would suggest doing rotator cuff warmups/exercises to prevent rotator cuff injury (the most common bodybuilding injury).

Also, for all movements I suggest doing them slowly. This will remove momentum, help prevent injury, and also increase how much your muscles are working out. It's most important when you first start a movement not to to start fast, be jerky and use momentum. This could result in injury. Start slow and controlled.

I also suggest learning proper form for all exercises, but especially the squat, bench press and modified stiff-leg deadlift. There's a good youtube series called So You Think You Can Squat and another called So You Think You Can Bench. For squats remember weight back on your heels, knees out and back arched. For bench press remember back arched and shoulder blades toward each other, and your elbows tucked in a bit. Starting Strength has a decent DVD where Rippetoe teaches several students the squat and bench press (and other movements). For stiff-leg deadlift I suggest watching Dorian Yates do his modified version of the stiff-leg deadlift (<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtevN0SWp-o>). He doesn't go all the way down to the floor (just below knees). This is my personal preference for safety reasons.

For equipment, I'd recommend a decent power rack (see Amazon), a good bench (Amazon again), and a good barbell/dumbbell set. For the barbell/dumbbell set, I'd recommend some olympic plates (something like [http://www.amazon.com/Body- Solid-ORST255-Rubber-Olympic/dp/B...](http://www.amazon.com/Body-Solid- ORST255-Rubber-Olympic/dp/B001F1Y17G)) with one barbell bar and two dumbbell bars.

If you actually follow through with this, I'd love to help you get started and see your progress. I can also suggest more resources along the way. You can get in touch with me at heydave at gmail.com.

Update: Here's a video demo of some of the exercises you can do with a power rack, <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3I_HCum1Zg> .

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> A lot of what he advocates still displays that he's largely a novice, just one with more knowledge than your average programmer. But still a novice.

Research (I'm not finding the studies, sorry) has indeed shown that protein intake is minimally correlated to muscle growth. He was on the mark by mentioning that only certain amounts of protein can be used in one setting, while the rest is wasted by the body. It's not one hard and fast number; individuals bodies vary greatly according to metabolic rates, capacity to grow, and ability to gain strength.

After going from zero resistance training to 90 minutes a week, as was his case, anybody is obviously going to get much stronger. In the strength community these are just referred to as beginner gains.

When you've been lifting for a few years, 90 minutes of strenuous resistance training a week is only going to help you maintain your current body, at best, even at maximal resistance levels and training until failure. This is why it's so common to see guys who go to the same gym for years and never look any different. Over time, your body acclimates and it takes more resistance AND more volume to continue growing. Genetics and the aforementioned variability between individuals does play a large difference, but for nearly anyone, doing three 30 minute workouts a week (at maximum intensity) for more than a couple years won't result in any noticeable difference.

If you're focusing time efficiency, go for it, else there are far more reputable sources for how to gain strength and muscle mass than one guy's anecdote of how he did half a year of strength training.

<comment><USER9> I don't think anywhere in there did he suggest this was a professional's regime. This is how he went from weakling (struggling to lift his son's wheelchair) to putting on 35 lb of muscle. For, I'm thinking, LOTS of HN readers (myself included) that would be a radical change in life experience. The most interesting tips are the time savers, and the programmer's viewpoint, not the specifics of lifting technique, which you can find lots of places.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> You can quibble with some of his techniques or equipment. I found that they weren't objectionable and not far from what I've put together over the years.

The main takeaway from the whole article is to minimize the difficulty in getting your workout done. Easy equipment to setup, adjust, and maintain in a convenient environment are critical factors.

I set up a DVR with some news/interest shows that record for me every day. I used to sit on my butt in the evenings and watch them. At some point, I figured... why am I not lifting weights while I watch these shows? A few trips to the sporting goods store later, and I was rocking and rolling.

My favorite pieces of equipment:

1\. A good, versatile bench. 2\. A bar for pullups (with some extra weights that I hook my feet under for extra resistance) 3\. My dumbells 4\. A multi- angle-grip curl bar.

With minimal equipment and an entertaining setup, working out can be easy to accomplish without feeling like you have to drag your ass to the gym for interminable hours every week.

<comment><USER11> Seems bad for your neck to have eyes on a fixed TV during a moving exercise.

<comment><USER10> Mostly news shows with people talking, so I don't have to glue my eyes to the set while doing reps. Besides, a DVR is great for pausing and rewinding if something sounds interesting while I can't look.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Doing basically anything will show improvement over not doing anything. Very frequently you find various fad exercises gaining momentum because of this fact - these people go from doing nothing to doing _something_ , and when it does work they become huge proponents of a system that basically works solely on the fact that it's not nothing.

<comment><USER13> Strength coaches call this the "novice effect." It's why you can see an untrained person's squat increase if they ride the exercise bike a few times a week.

If your goal is optimality, the question is: is your training program the most effective use of your time?

On the other hand, not everybody cares about optimality, but more whether they can actually show up regularly. It takes a certain craziness to follow linear progressions, especially since it can take a mental toll (fuzzy headed all day) if you push too hard, which is sub-optimal in this field.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> My problem is I just do not enjoy exercise. I grant that some level of exercise is probably healthy, but I just don't enjoy it. At all. Not long ago I made myself run 3 or 4 days a week, for about 4 months. I did build up my ability to go longer distances but it never made me feel any better. After running I never felt energized or more productive; I felt tired and wanted to go to bed. I had similar experiences with strength training, tennis, raquetball, cycling... I don't think you can form a habit out of something if you don't enjoy it. You can keep doing it out of sheer willpower, but it will never become a habit.

<comment> X-Istence I used to hate working out, specifically because I absolutely hate cardio (looking at you treadmill, running, walking, biking, elliptical) but I found great joy in lifting. I started off slow, but even now I can really get into it.

I look forward to going to the gym and getting a work-out in when I get home from work. I used to absolutely hate it, because people told me that I should do cardio to lose weight ... now most of what I do is lifting. A little cardio and the inches keep coming off, and I keep getting stronger.

Find something you enjoy doing (I love swimming) and find pleasure in doing that, even if it is for a short period of time per day. Running clearly isn't for you, and it isn't for me...

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Just my 2c here as a national level powerlifter -

This article is terrible. If you want to get fit/strong/whatever your goal, just do it properly. Go to a gym, go and run, whatever. This is an awful article. The general theme is good, and there is some good info in there, but I wouldn't expect much result or progress from it.

</comment><comment><USER16> Nice classy article, HN.

\- Links to over $500 dollars worth of equipment on Amazon, and over $1000 overall (I guess the Marcy device isn't sold on Amazon?) but no links to any sites with good information about lifting weights.

\- Recommendation of specific supplements and lifting program (including suggested numbers of reps and sets) but only a haphazard list of random exercises and no information about how to perform them.

\- No discussion of how his suggested total time and set count imply very short rest periods, which isn't necessarily wrong but deserves some comment, especially for beginners who might wonder "WTF is going on?" when they try to do five sets to failure in ten minutes (that's 15-20 sets split into three sessions totaling thirty minutes per day.)

\- Come to think of it, very little discussion of how beginners should work their way up to such an effort, especially since they should be much more slow and careful until they're comfortable with good form. Beginners working to failure? You'd better be _very_ specific about what exercises you're talking about before you suggest that.

\- Recommendation to use creatine with no discussion of what it does. Creatine does not in itself make you stronger, but it makes it possible for you to sustain a harder pace for a longer time in your workouts. Even if you're experienced in the gym, you have to be careful about overuse injuries when you start using creatine, because the sudden ability to work harder, longer, allows you to put more strain on your connective tissue than you're used to.

\- The section on safety includes nothing about safety, except, in the last sentence, a weak suggestion that a single session with a personal trainer might be helpful. No warning that many personal trainers know little about weights. No tips on how to find one who does. NO OTHER SAFETY INFORMATION. And, again, no links to better sources of information.

\- Bizarre recommendation of a belt for safety, despite suggesting dumbbell exercises only and suggesting that no instruction is needed beyond a single "fix-up" session with a trainer. What the heck is a person with no instruction and a bunch of dumbbells going to do that makes a belt a good idea?

\- Recommendation of working out in the morning with no mention of the possible danger of working your back within one hour of getting out of bed.

\- Many links to his own articles but no links to external sources of information about weightlifting (of which there are many) except for a calorie calculator.

\- Come to think of it, no acknowledgment of the people or information sources who helped him get started and influenced his choices.

\- Finally, seriously, given the choice between creating all those links to equipment and supplements on Amazon and creating a decent list of suggested exercises with links to instruction on how to do them, we got the Amazon links. Odd priorities, there. Very odd.

<comment><USER17> Matt Might enjoys a certain amount of credibility on HN for his fantastic blogging on CS topics. While I don't begrudge his attempts to share aspects other aspects of his life and even monetize his blogging, I think you raise some valid criticisms of this post. Certainly the topic of personal fitness and weightlifting is much deeper than a single article with sparse links, I'd treat this more as his personal experience with starting instead of a definitive guide to the subject.

<comment><USER16> _I'd treat this more as his personal experience with starting instead of a definitive guide to the subject._

If it's supposed to be taken that way, it should be written that way. Instead, someone with a little bit of personal experience about a subject wrote a soup- to-nuts guide for beginners that strikes an authoritative tone, acknowledges no other authorities, implies a great deal of expertise (even implying that the information he presents is derived from scientific studies,) gives advice that is extremely incomplete and in places off the wall, and refers entirely to his own work with NO suggestion that readers should seek out any other source of information. _That's not normal._ It's bizarre. Our jaws should be dropping at the inappropriateness of it. If it feels normal to people, I can only surmise that it is due to a distortion of culture where pumping yourself up as an expert (and "monetizing your blog") is not something that can be accurate or inaccurate, or honest or dishonest, but is simply assumed as the socially normal way to communicate.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I don't disagree with the overal theme of the article, but I have to disagree on some particulars. Some thoughts:

>Habit First

Absolutely agree, especially when you're trying to get out of morbid out-of- shapeness. I personally find that mixing it into a pre-existing daily routine works well. I personally do core work and pullups/chinups before my morning and evening showers, and stretch exercises while I'm in the shower.

>Diet

IMO the Diet section is way too detailed as a first step. For someone who is trying to improve from very poor nutrition, I would advise the following:

1\. Get rid of all processed sugar products from your house: candy, juice, soda, cookies, etc. (imo all processed items are bad, but again it's about keeping the barrier low)

2\. Only walk around the outside lanes of a Grocery store (where the meats, dairy, and vegetables are). Don't go into the middle aisles where they have all the sugary, salty, processed goodies. Keeping bad food out of the house is the easiest, lowest friction way to keep a healthy diet.

> Dumbbells first

Totally disagree with this one. Compound lifts using Barbells are vastly superior to isolation lifts using dumbbells, particularly for beginners. And for beginners, Starting Strength has proven time and time again to be the most effective program. [1]

If you're "starting out", then bodyweight exercises like pullups, chinups, bodyweight squats, planks, pushups, situps, are going to be low barrier to entry, good-habit inducing work that can be leveraged to take the person to the next level when they're comfortable. Once they're at this stage, they can buy whatever barbell setup they're comfortable with (I personally really want an Olympic Lifting platform in my garage...), which is going to be much much cheaper than that complicated Nautilus weight thing anyway.

>Safety

>Even with dummbells, I was able to put loads on my back that felt uncomfortable within about three months.

That' because dumbell lifts don't engage the stabilizer muscles. As a result, those support muscles are going to be underdeveloped and you won't have developed the coordination to engage them when you need them.

> Padded lifting gloves with wrist support helped keep my wrists in a stable, > safe position and alleviated wrist pain.

IMO using outside assistance like this promotes bad form and bad habits.

>Str training machines

Ugh these machines are terrible. They (a) don't engage your auxiliary muscles well, and (b) move weights in an unnatural path relative to your body and tend to cause more injuries than just plan barbell work. A great example is squatting on a smith machine, which puts you into very dangerous positions. (yet every single small'ish gym believes that they are somehow safer than regular squat racks)

\---

I find it odd that the article started out with the premise of helping very novice people get into a healthier routine wrt both diet and exercise, yet evolved into a fairly intermediate article. IMO most people don't need to optimize strength training to this extent. Just getting in any kind of routine and eating well will go a lonnggggg ways.

[1] [http://startingstrength.wikia.com/wiki/The_Starting_Strength...](http://startingstrength.wikia.com/wiki/The_Starting_Strength_Novice/Beginner_Programs)

<comment><USER19> Not all dumbell exercises are isolation. For most _upper body_ barbell exercises, you can find a corresponding dumbell exercise which recruits _more_ stabilizer muscle. Compare, for example, the barbell bench press to the dumbell version - the dumbell version is harder since you need to stabilize each dumbell in 2 directions rather than 1.

Or just look at the turkish get up. That's all stabilizer.

Of course, there is no substitute for squats and deadlifts. The closest is pistol squats which are great for advanced athletes, but pistol squats are very hard to do if you haven't done a lot of barbell squats first.

<comment><USER20> Dumbbell bench requires more stabilization muscles, but you'll be able to build more raw upper body strength with barbell bench.

I did dumbbell bench exclusively for close to a year, and got to the point that I could get 5 reps with the 120 pound dumbbells. However, when I moved over to barbell bench, there was surprisingly litte transfer - no real difference from where my barbell bench was before I started doing dumbbell.

Absolutely agree on squats and deadlifts. Squats should be the cornerstone of a strength program.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Reads a bit like an ad for some popular products. Most equipment junkies agree that SelectTech dumbbells are the worst choice. Cheap spinlocks are better because they're sturdier, can take some abuse. Regular handles are 14" and you can get 18" handles. With Bowflex and their copycats, the dumbbells are an annoying length at any weight.

Ironmasters are the best dumbbells you can quickly adjust, followed by Powerblocks. They get shorter with less weight. Quick adjustment is not very important once your weights get above 50 lbs because you're taking long enough breaks to switch weights and get bored.

<comment><USER22> Not only that, but unless you get a few optimal weights, they are unbalanced, so you are limited by what you can do. Sure, some things it doesn't matter if the right side of the weight is the same weight as the left side, but when I tried it I couldn't get past this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> The blog post had some decent information but I think it was a bit scattered to me.

Here are the key principles to gaining muscle with the least resistance (in my opinion):

1\. Lift heavy as possible - you'll have a difficult time stimulating lots of muscle growth with light weights which I've personally tried.

2\. Use proper form - tons of people get injured on heavy resistance exercises because of improper form or lifting too much without a spotter.

3\. Go to muscular failure - the final rep where you can't lift the weight no more is the most important. It contributes the most to kick starting your muscle growth mechanism.

4\. Don't overtrain - you need to give your body ample rest and recovery for your muscles to grow the most. (Personally I'm training once every 3 days and currently this is working well for me).

5\. Train the full body - building stronger/bigger legs will help build mass everywhere in your body. Don't think you're get strong just doing push-ups. You need to work all the major muscles in some way - quads, hamstring, glutes, calves, pecs, lats, delts, triceps, biceps, etc.

6\. You only need to spend 25 minutes 2-3 times a week. Tip: look into High Intensity Training principles from Arthur Jones, Mentzer, Darden and others. They promoted short, intense workouts (usually one set to failure per exercise) that stimulated arguably more muscle growth than longer workouts.

<comment><USER23> Training to failure seems like a core principle of HIT but is there consensus on its general effectiveness? I'm two months into the basic program of Starting Strength, lifting solo at home, so for lifts like the squat I don't really want to go to failure. Is this just something to apply if you want maximum return on time?

<comment><USER6> I wouldn't suggest going to failure on squats if you're lifting solo at home. Some people are advocates of HVT (High Volume Training) and it seems to have results as well. I think going to failure on one set is more of a preference thing if you want to maximize efficiency.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> This article has some good points, but doesn't explain some of the basics. If you're after a good read on fitness, try this article: [http://www.mensjournal.com/magazine/everything-you-know- abou...](http://www.mensjournal.com/magazine/everything-you-know-about- fitness-is-a-lie-20120504)

The recommended reading list at the end of that article is extremely valuable.

</comment><comment><USER25> Buying a pressing machine is terrible advice. I'm sure it cost him hundreds or at most a few thousand. He could have gotten a set of heavier dumbbells for that money, or a barbell.

For the record, any lifter should know how to either dump the weight on a barbell or roll it down the chest. It isn't particularly dangerous to bench without a spotter if you're not going to failure

</comment><comment><USER26> Can anyone recommend a good reference for dumbbells training with compound/functional movements? Something like this but with better explanations. [http://www.mensfitness.com/training/build-muscle/dumbbell- wo...](http://www.mensfitness.com/training/build-muscle/dumbbell-workout)

<comment><USER27> This site is good. It has a list of exercises listed by muscle group and instructions on how to do them with different equipment along with .gifs of proper form and a bunch of other information:

<http://www.exrx.net/Exercise.html>

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> It looks like "least resistance" here means, "I don't want to have to go to the gym, so I bought equipment so I could exercise at home." No shit, Sherlock.

You don't need much equipment to get a good workout at home. Most of the machines at the gym are for isolation exercises. They serve three purposes: they help sell memberships, they're useful if you're injured, and they're useful for serious bodybuilders. This is, I think, common knowledge.

But I think it bears repeating that if you have an injury, free weights might not be for you.

As a side note, Schwarzenegger did an AMA over on /r/fitness yesterday. He was a powerlifter before he was a bodybuilder, and his advice is simple.

[http://www.reddit.com/r/Fitness/comments/1brg0z/im_back_ama_...](http://www.reddit.com/r/Fitness/comments/1brg0z/im_back_ama_about_fitness/)

<comment><USER29> Problem with buying your own equipment: I'm in my early 20's, so haven't settled into a permanent residence yet. I move around fairly often; I doubt this is uncommon. Exercise equipment is difficult to move (often by intention!) so buying it is just cause for headache.

I do own one 15 lb sandbell, which is basically just a more versatile medicine ball. I can do enough exercises with it to avoid not being able to move for three days after a game of ultimate. Anything more would be much too inconvenient.

<comment> shawn-butler I have found kettle bells to be both effective and mobile.

<comment><USER30> Seconded, they are extremely versatile, but make sure you do some research on how to use them effectively (books, videos, or trainers). Their unconventional shape, which makes them so effective, also makes it easy to lift in a way that is bio-mechanically unsound. Also, there are a huge number of compound lifts that you would never think of on your own (e.g., the Turkish Get Up—not a beginners' move for sure: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGRBvom4Zrw>)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> If you are considering starting out with weight lifting and muscle training, get some proper instruction from an actual strength trainer, rather than a random CS prof.

While "hacking your body" sounds appealing to CS people (work smarter not harder!), the reality is there is no shortcut. You'll have to lift a lot of iron regularly, for a lot of time, while eating correctly, for anything serious to happen.

Following advice like in this post, will most likely end you up with a lighter wallet and a garage full of unused Flexotronic Bulkmaster 2000 machines and expired supplements. In worst case with a serious injury, you'll carry around for a long time.

Today everybody's an expert on everything, but do consider taking CS advice from a CS prof, and strength advice from a strength trainer.

</comment><comment> D-Train Habit is pretty much the biggest thing here. Looking at the success of P90X and others, it's all about working out REGULARLY. Everything else pretty much builds on the habit factor -- motivation through competition/ finding exercises that are fun, diet to enhance, etc.

</comment><comment><USER32> Hacking things is good, but for some things, there just is no shortcut. Getting strong is not something you can hack. You need to do progressive resistance training using compound movements and consume a large amount of protein. That's it. There are different methods for achieving this, and they are not all equally good, but if you ask someone who is legitimately strong, they can point you to a proven routine.

If there's any "hacking" left to be done in this space, it's probably diet- related (nutrient timing techniques like intermittent fasting, carb back- loading, etc) and not workout-related.

</comment><comment><USER33> Congratulations on your success. There so many comments here on what you _could_ or _should_ have done differently. I know you'll read it and maybe you'll give some of it a try. But if what you are doing works for you, then keep at it. When you stop making gains or want to switch up your program, you know what to do. Thanks for documenting all your tips and what you have learned. Keep lifting.

</comment><comment><USER34> I followed the link to your weight loss suggestions where I learned about BMR. I don't get it. I must be a very abnormal human being. My BMR worked out to be 2660 * 1.2 = 3192 calories. But I tracked my caloric intake using MyFitnessPal for over a month and I was averaging abut 2000 calories a day and often pushing myself down as low as 1500 calories a day. Yet I barely lost a pound.

</comment><comment><USER35> > I hit 90 pounds per hand on the flat bench press (up from 25 per hand at the > start).

I call BS unless he's tinkering with terminology. 50 lbs max bench press to 180 lbs max in 5 months is impossible.

<comment><USER36> It's very possible his strength max in the beginning was much higher (100+) but a big part of learning to bench press with dumbbells is the balance and coordination.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> make exercise a a habit. lift heavy objects. consume calories and protein. supplements may help.

</comment><comment><USER38> blogspam pure and simple.

</comment><comment><USER11> Finally an article relevant to Matt's website domain.

</comment><comment><USER39> Matt Might is the new Tim Ferris. Only better :)</comment>


Ask HN: How many (actual) hours do you work a week? - <AUTHOR> I've been mostly freelance/1099 for the last 2 years doing full stack dev work. I'm happy with everything but I am struggling to get more than 30 hours a week of billable coding time. My employers are starting to complain about needing more work from me (ie, put in more hours).
Problem is I simply don't have any more time to give. I typically get up around 9-10am, take care of a few morning rituals and might get an hour of billable time in before lunch. Typically I'm back after lunch around 2pm, and there I remain in my office until between 11pm-1am (break for dinner of course). So for being in my office for 10+ hours, at the end of the day I'm lucky if I got 6 hours of billable time in.
I can only reference my old actual office jobs for comparison. I know at the last place I worked, after all the meetings and facebook browsing time, I really don't think anyone put in more than 20 hours of actual coding time. But there everyone was salary and as long as you were in your seat, you were considered "working"
I don't think I slack off. I don't browse social media. I do get caught up sometimes in watching youtube videos on programming topics and conferences or maybe taking care of my many personal development machines. But sometimes the programming tasks I have are not simply trivial, requiring many hours or days of thought, in these times, the youtubing does go up as well as other side tasks. Not really sure how to bill for that, if it took two days of thinking and screwing around the house before I had my "ah ha" moment for a complex issue.. yea I don't know. I'm just really not sure how I can possibly type for 8 hours straight without ever stopping and at the same time write code that works.
I do pay for access to a co-working space, but I normally don't go as I assume the 30+ min.  trip could be better used. Either way, going there hasn't magically gotten me 8+ billable hours a day.
Not really sure how to improve at this point. Thoughts?
Edit: Thank you so much for the quick responses. For a little bit more back story, I actually work for a small dev shop that has several contracts. They send me work that is usually already bid on as far as hours and price. Sometimes I have a say in that, and sometimes not. They briefly tried to make me salary, not sure why, I wanted to stay hourly. But then started complaining that they were paying me for more hours than I was working. Meaning taking the number of hours allocated for each ticket/feature that I had completed added up to less hours than what they were paying me for, so then they stuck me back to hourly. Basically since the tickets are hourly, it is very hard to complete 8 one hour tickets in one day (that is an extreme case but you get the point.) There are bigger tasks that are allocated 80+ hours, but still not easy to get those 8 hours of coding. <comment><USER2> Thinking back to years ago when I did individual freelance work, I would say you are actually doing quite well to get in 30 billable hours. Realistically you probably need to spend 10 to 20 hours a week on all the ancillary tasks (especially doing work that will get you more, better, future clients). So if you want to have a long-term sustainable result, it's probably best to plan on at most 30 billable hours per week.

(Of course, people who can disregard or don't have families and other obligations, could plausibly work an enormous amount of hours. But that doesn't seem like a great strategy, there are so many good opportunities to produce a lot of value and receive reasonable pay for reasonable total work.)

</comment><comment><USER3> Bad news: it's unlikely you can work longer hours productively.

Good news: working more hours is the least effective way to be more productive.

The key to productivity is reducing unnecessary work. That means:

* Things you think the customer wants, but actually they don't.

* Things that are nice to have, not on critical path to success. Sometimes the customers thinks they want them, but often they won't care if they're not actually there.

* Things that are "best practices" generically but not applicable in particular situations. E.g. unit tests if this is code that will never be reused and you have an end-to-end test.

* Digressions where you go off on a tangent and realize too late. This can be solved with timeboxing.

I could go on. In general it's possible to be _far_ more productive while still working same number of hours.

More suggestions here: [https://codewithoutrules.com/2016/08/25/the-01x-programmer/](https://codewithoutrules.com/2016/08/25/the-01x-programmer/)

More conceptual overview here: [https://codewithoutrules.com/2017/10/04/technical-skills- pro...](https://codewithoutrules.com/2017/10/04/technical-skills-productive/)

<comment><USER3> Interestingly, being more productive as hourly contractor is a bad thing mostly, since you get paid less. Working fixed contracts is better that way.

In this particular weird setup your company has, though, sounds like that's not the case. But as others have said the system they use doesn't make sense.

<comment><USER4> Bill by larger time blocks (days, weeks?). Done with your work for the day in a couple hours? Take a walk in the forest, do some fishing, work on your car, meditate or whatever.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I don't know. I've never tracked my hours, despite working contract for most of my career.

Based on managing contractors for years now, I think you might be the most honest contractor I've ever heard of. Most of them bill for more hours than they're actually coding. I don't think this is malicious -- it's simply replicating the salaried structure, where goofing off and Facebooking are still part of a work day.

If you feel like you're pretty efficient, I think fixed-fee projects are good for both parties. Hourly tracking is pretty miserable. My clients are usually excited that I offer only fixed-fee engagements.

If you do continue time-based billing, you should try to switch to weekly or monthly instead of hourly. This allows you to build in a little variability.

Somewhat unrelated: someone posted on HN that s/he only codes 4 hours a day at the most, because most people's brains only have a certain amount of cycles to devote to something truly thought-intensive. Many, _many_ people chimed in with their agreement.

That's an anecdote, sure, but there's lots of research to suggest that much more than 30 hours of productivity per week is a fantasy.

<comment><AUTHOR> > Most of them bill for more hours than they're actually coding.

I pretty much figured that. Problem is how we manage our internal work flow is based on tickets with an amount of hours allocated to each one. Some have 4 or 8, others have 40+. Many times I am given 3 or 4 four hour tickets to tide me over for a couple of days (while some bigger tickets are negotiated), but trying to get those 4 four hour tickets done takes all week (or sometimes more). I've stopped really caring if I overrun the times, but the main issue is these smaller tickets branch out across many different apps, all with their own quirks and there is a 3+ hour ramp up time just to get familiar with what the ticket even wants me to do. Then you end up with the dreaded "Why did it take 8 hours just to add a button to a page?" scenario.

<comment><USER5> It sounds like the problem is that your org's internal workflow depends on accurately estimating the time things will take.

As any experienced coder will tell you (and you've just told me), time estimates for tasks are nonsense. You should _never_ run a team by relying on time estimates because they will always be wrong and people will be unhappy (both clients and employees).

<comment><USER6> Yeah at the very least you should have gotten a rate hike when they changed the way your hours are calculated. You are now taking on the risk of the extra complexity of the project, which was previously on them. They should have to pay for that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> > My employers are starting to complain about needing more work from me (ie, > put in more hours).

> Problem is I simply don't have any more time to give.

This sounds like a classic employer move. Of course they want you to give them more of your time.

What do YOU want? Why do you want more than 30 hours a week billable time? Could you raise your own hourly rate that you charge your employer and work the same or fewer hours?

</comment><comment><USER8> Considering they equate _estimations_ of hours on tickets w/ hours you work and bill, all hope is lost. A dev shop should know better. The fact that they don't is disheartening, and makes me think management level is not run anyone w/ software dev experience.

The cynic in me says that you should just pad hours on ticket estimations to encompass ancillary tasks and bill for 40 hours while working the same as you do. It's a bit dishonest, but you may end up with happier management, and a happier you.

</comment><comment><USER9> Wow, what a backwards company. This reminds of how IBM used to measure productivity of programmers by the number of lines of code they've written.

Everybody knows that there is much more work involved in programming than just typing characters into an IDE. I've never heard of any programming contract jobs that were as strict on hours as this. Whats stopping you from leaving and explaining exactly what you just wrote to the client? You are getting a very bad deal.

<comment><USER10> > Whats stopping you from leaving and explaining exactly what you just wrote > to the client?

OP was probably broke before the job and is worried about having income.

<comment><USER9> True, if you are not in a position to risk leaving this job then I suggest you save up at least 3 months worth of living expenses and then quit. Bottom line is this company is screwing you over.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Personally, I really like my coworking space. But I got one that's 10 minutes away. Isn't there something closer to you?

Also, I have the feeling that you're overthinking this. Sit down at 08:30. Grab a brownbagged sandwich from 12:30 to 13:00. Then work until 17:00. Done, go home and enjoy your spare time. This business of sitting in your office until 12:00 PM sounds ridiculous to me, why would any wife out up with that?

<comment><AUTHOR> >Personally, I really like my coworking space. But I got one that's 10 minutes away. Isn't there something closer to you?

No, I'm out in the sticks. Hence why I fancy remote dev work :)

>Also, I have the feeling that you're overthinking this. Sit down at 08:30. Grab a brownbagged sandwich from 12:30 to 13:00. Then work until 17:00. Done, go home and enjoy your spare time.

I'm really trying to do that. Problem is a few hours time zone difference between me and my workplace. They are ahead of me. So what usually happens is I constantly end up staying up late in order to get them something they can test out in the morning (before I sign back on) that a way when I came back the next day for work, I will know whether what I did the day before is working or not. But I guess that is not working...

>This business of sitting in your office until 12:00 PM sounds ridiculous to me, why would any wife out up with that?

She manages, but doesn't like it...

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I think you may be making incorrect assumptions.

Are you sure that you need to be working more hours? Based on the setup you have, it simply sounds like you need to be accomplishing more. The actual number of hours it takes to complete a ticket is irrelevant (if I understand correctly).

itamarst had some good things to say about increasing productivity.</comment>


Redis 4.0 RC1 is out - <AUTHOR> http://www.antirez.com/news/110 <comment><USER2> Personally, modules have been the thing I wanted most in redis for years, and it's been a delightful experience working on modules for the past months. I really think it's a game changer for redis and I can't wait to see where this will take it in the coming years.

Some modules that are already out there (full disclosure - I work at Redis Labs and I've developed a couple of those):

* redis-cell - a rate limiter module [https://github.com/brandur/redis-cell](https://github.com/brandur/redis-cell)

* Redis Graph - a graph DB with a subset of Cipher for querying. [https://github.com/swilly22/redis-module-graph](https://github.com/swilly22/redis-module-graph)

* RediSeach - fast full-text search engine with fuzzy auto-suggest. [https://github.com/RedisLabsModules/RediSearch](https://github.com/RedisLabsModules/RediSearch)

* redis-ml: Machine learning models as redis data types. [https://github.com/RedisLabsModules/redis-ml](https://github.com/RedisLabsModules/redis-ml)

* redablooms - scalable bloom filters [https://github.com/RedisLabsModules/redablooms](https://github.com/RedisLabsModules/redablooms)

* Secondary indexes with a small subset of SQL for WHERE clauses. [https://github.com/RedisLabsModules/secondary](https://github.com/RedisLabsModules/secondary)

* Time Series [https://github.com/saginoam/RedisModuleTimeSeries](https://github.com/saginoam/RedisModuleTimeSeries)

PS If you're interested in creating modules, we've started a community for module developers. [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/redis-module- devs](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/redis-module-devs)

</comment><comment><USER3> I just started developing a redis module to use SQLite in redis[1].

Overall it is a great experience, I find the module interface really well done and extremely powerful.

I already saw other greats modules around and I can't wait to see what the community will be able to come up with.

[1]: [https://github.com/siscia/rediSQL](https://github.com/siscia/rediSQL)

</comment><comment><USER4> The new LRU algorithm (which he calls Last Frequently Used) is in this release.

I really enjoyed the blog post on it when it was developed [0].

Very cool to see a real-word pragmatic solutions to this common/hard problem developed in the open (and in a very readable code-base). I've read through it thinking about my own LRU use in my own applications!

      There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation and naming things.
      -- Phil Karlton

[0] [http://antirez.com/news/109](http://antirez.com/news/109)

<comment><USER5> There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation, naming things, and off by one.

<comment><USER4> [https://twitter.com/codinghorror/status/506010907021828096](https://twitter.com/codinghorror/status/506010907021828096)

<comment><USER5> I'm sure that's where I heard/saw that the first time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > There are reasons why UNLINK is not the default for DEL. I know things… I > can't talk.

Doesn't inspire confidence

<comment><USER7> Ok I'll talk ;-) The matter is that currently, if you delete a key, you know that the command returns once the memory is reclaimed. UNLINK is conceptually like DEL, but the memory reclaiming, while fast because there is a thread doing only like that, is asynchronous. So in certain use cases, while semantically identical if you think at what happens to data, the two commands are semantically different in the way memory is reclaimed. Think at this:

1\. CREATE A HUGE KEY.

2\. DEL it

3\. CREATE A HUGE KEY.

4\. DEL it

In steps 2 and 4 we know that we always reclaim the memory if we use DEL, so step 3 is never going to use more memory than it was used in step 1. Instead change this with UNLINK. Potentially UNLINK is still freeing memory as we now create back the key again, technically using more memory than the previous peak memory.

This in practice is hard to trigger since asynchronous deleting is faster than the time it gets you to build new sizable data. But I still thought this was an important difference that deserved a different command name.

<comment><USER8> Maybe a new command like "DELSYNC" should be added that acts like the current DEL behavior, and in a future version DEL could be changed to act like UNLINK?

<comment><USER9> Or call the new version DEL ASYNC or DELASYNC instead of UNLINK?

<comment><USER10> For what little my opinion matters, I agree it would be clearer if the name helped to indicate that the semantics are the same except it's just an asynchronous DEL. Better than relying on a reference to unix semantics, no?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11>
      antirez in commit 9d52411:
       Update linenoise to fix insecure redis-cli history file creation.
       1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

yey! This is the patch for CVE-2013-7458 fixed by debian in august. Details here: [https://bugs.debian.org/cgi- bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=832460](https://bugs.debian.org/cgi- bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=832460)

</comment><comment><USER12> "Redis Cluster is now NAT / Docker compatible."

Yeehaw!!!!!!!

<comment><USER13> Does it now let you replicate shards so you don't need to run slaves?

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> If you're interesrer in creating modules in golang, check [https://github.com/wenerme/go-rm](https://github.com/wenerme/go-rm)

e.g. [https://github.com/redismodule](https://github.com/redismodule)

</comment><comment><USER15> With AWS launching a bunch of cool stuff and now Redis 4 going into RC this week has felt like Christmas come early.

Antirez keeps adding features I didn't know I always needed (ok...wanted), while keeping the same performant core.

</comment><comment><USER16> Very excited to see what the community creates with the new module system. Have to imagine we will see very specific, high performance database and cache systems built on top of the rock solid core that is Redis.

</comment><comment><USER17> Any links to the timeseries modules mentioned in the post? Have found some npm modules that wrap timeseries around the API, I think, but not any modules that are directly integrating with Redis.

<comment><USER2> [https://github.com/saginoam/RedisModuleTimeSeries](https://github.com/saginoam/RedisModuleTimeSeries)

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Great news, but more than any feature I'm excited that this might mean development on Disque is picked up again.

</comment><comment><USER19> "Release Candidate"...that is a candidate for release. first words of article "It's not yet stable...". Not trying to troll, but come on

</comment><comment><USER20> Hoping the major version bump means he's merged that tls patch

</comment><comment><USER21> When will Redis get a Reactive driver (for example for Java)?</comment>


Ask HN: Interview rejected, extra freedback after offical. Laws broken? - <AUTHOR> About 1 year ago I interviewed at company X. I was rejected, but the interviewer told one of their employees his opinion about my interview.
That employee is a friend of mine and they 'politely' (unofficially) relayed that information to me after I received the official rejection letter from the company. I was honestly offended by the 'politely turned' feedback my friend gave me, which was uncalled for and quite frankly unasked for.
The "feedback" was essentially "I don't know what I'm doing, go some where and learn how to do the job you already do on a daily basis, then interview here another time.". This was all based on a sub par 15 minute phone screen (both on my end but very very much on the interviewers end - one of those people you just wouldn't want to work for kind of interviewers).
That's besides the point, were any laws broken in this case? <comment><USER2> You definitely have to work more and learn more if you think being rejected from interview equals breaking laws :\

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks a lot for the wonderful feedback, you clearly didn't understand the question. Most companies do not give specific feedback in fear of being sued. Hence why I asked the question... Let's say, instead of the person saying "you suck, look elsewhere" said "you're black, not interested" would you have answered your response differently?

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> No.

<comment><AUTHOR> Ty

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Maybe practice showing off your capability in the face of subpar interviewing skills on the part of the interviewer.

<comment><AUTHOR> I agree, but that's not the question. Appreciate the super helpful feedback though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Nope.</comment>


The Multiverse Idea Is Rotting Culture - <AUTHOR> http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/08/the-multiverse-as-imagination-killer/497417/?single_page=true <comment><USER2> "What kind of color is chartreuse? Red, right? Wrong. In this universe it's green, and you're a long, long way from home."

Damn, when did I miss myself changing multiverses! That must have been around the same time my wife changed from a loving women to the evil siren she is now!</comment>


How to unlock a phone with a broken screen - <AUTHOR> https://www.ikkaro.net/unlock-phone-broke-screen/ <comment><USER2> I wonder if a usb touchscreen monitor would mount and mirror the display of a locked device:

[https://www.mimomonitors.com/products/mimo- touch2](https://www.mimomonitors.com/products/mimo-touch2)</comment>


This billionaire wants to use dinosaur DNA to build a real-life Jurassic Park  - <AUTHOR> http://thenextweb.com/shareables/2012/08/01/this-billionaire-wants-to-use-dinosaur-dna-to-build-a-real-life-jurassic-park/

<comment><USER2> Seriously, link to TNW and not the source article? ([http://www.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/story/2012/07/31/clives...](http://www.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/story/2012/07/31/clives- going-jurassic-sunshine-coast/))</comment>