Why we never thank open source maintainers - <AUTHOR> https://windsooon.github.io/2017/11/23/Why%20we%20never%20thank%20open%20source%20maintainers/ <comment><USER3> As the maintainer of a reasonably popular library, I actually get irritated by a lot of 'thanks', because they are in the form of this sentence:

'Hi, can you implement <Feature that takes a month of work>? Thanks!'

Usually from people who have never contributed anything.

Honestly, being thanked in any shape or form does nothing for me, Id rather have users be more considerate of our time and not abuse issues and the community for supporting their laziness.

<comment><USER4> Ways I deal with this as an open source maintainer of various projects:

1\. Severely restrict the scope of the project (i.e. do one thing and do it well) 2\. Don't feel guilty about saying "no" 3\. Realize that people have no malicious intent or are lazy when they request <feature X that takes two months>. It's just like a normal customer in a business: they often have no idea of the cost and difficulties in implementing things. That's okay, it's my duty to inform them of that. 4\. Refuse pull requests for features that I don't feel like maintaining. I always try to keep people from wasting their time and ask them to confer before implementing a feature.

I don't feel animosity towards people who (even rudely) request such things. But they _can_ expect a short reply in the form of "I'm sorry, that feature is outside the scope of the project / is going to take too much of my time."

<comment><USER5> It would be nice if github made it easy for people to assign a $ bounty to every issue and when it's marked complete payouts are automatic. There are a bunch of issues in various open source projects where I would easily drop $100 on a bounty.

<comment><USER6> I believe this is what bountysource.com is for. I haven't tried it, though, and I'm not sure how completion is evaluated.

Seems problematic to let the bounty-poster decide if something is completed, but also to put it on a third party to put in the time to verify for various pieces of software they might not be familiar with (and worse to put it on the second party who implements).

<comment><USER7> Three days ago:

BountySource suspended from GitHub | [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15747328](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15747328)

Useful discussion on the concept there; they were temporarily suspended for not supporting opt-out.

Whisper Systems supports auto-Bitcoin for suspended pull requests. [https://signal.org/blog/bithub/](https://signal.org/blog/bithub/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> > It is true that some of you guys can build a tool in a hackathon

I've kept some data on how much time I've spent on a somewhat popular open source project (+/-1000 stars on github, if that means anything).

Time to implement to scratch my own itch: +/\- 24 hours

Time to write documentation, package, etc: +/\- 70 hours

Time to handle bug and feature requests, support: +560 hours

So that's an overhead of around 2500%. If I was paid to do that, it would have cost around €130,000.- (and would have netted me around €5, because dutch taxes ;-) )

The emails and other forms of thank-you's from users make it more than worth it. Plus, I get to give back to the community.

<comment><USER8> I'd also say that if you are not paid you approach the work differently. Like you can take your time with certain things maybe. A lot less stress, I'd imagine. (Depends on the project obviously. If you get yelled at by Linus, you probably should be more careful!)

<comment><USER4> True, but expectations are sometimes also higher. Documentation etc has to be of good quality. Packaging. Stuff like that. There's really no comparing it with a paid job IMHO. It's more fun i'd say.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> As an author of dozens of open-source projects, I was really surprised how entitled / rude people can be. I was even told f-word just because I used babel for compiling JS. I was like WTF. Some people act as if they are my paying customers when I get zero compensation from my open source projects. I just share my work because I think they can be useful for some. I don't have any obligations to solve their problems.

<comment><USER10> Keep in mind, the entitlement works both ways...

This isnt just for you, more of a general thing. Ive seen it a lot in this thread alone.

Creating an OSS project doesn't entitle you to be treated a certain way either. Nothing does. Being entitled at ALL is bad, so expecting good or bad is just a waste.

I try to live more by the "give everything you can, expect nothing in return, be grateful if something comes" mentality. Shitty people are going to be shitty people, and most of them are shitty for a reason - so feel bad for them, not angry or annoyed at them. Nobody WANTS to be an asshole...

<comment><USER9> I don't want any thank you notes. Never asked and never will. I just don't like people who are rude, and I find them annoying. I don't know what's wrong with feeling annoyed by them being rude to me.

<comment><USER10> Because being annoyed doesn't affect them, only you.

Choosing to experience negative emotion because someone does something is self-harm.

When you are entitled to something, you expect it, and you can't expect something and be truly appreciative of it at the same time. When you don't expect good though, the bad doesn't upset you, and the good, you actually genuinely appreciate.

<comment><USER11> "Choosing to experience negative emotion because someone does something is self-harm."

Hi :-) Fascinating comment. Do you really live that, or just it's something you read/heard and aspire to?

Trying to unpack that a little: Calling experiencing negative emotion (i.e. feeling bad) "choosing to experience negative emotion" seems psychobabble. Do you choose all your feelings? I doubt it. So, you will never feel bad because of anything anyone does, because why would you, and that would be self-harm. All that just strikes me as jargon out of a bad self-help book. It doesn't sound human, but like a robot, or maybe a guru. (e.g. Nisargadatta: 'In my world, nothing ever goes wrong.') I guess that's why gurus/monks/priests aren't supposed to have wives, girlfriends, careers, possessions etc. Because ordinary humans do get upset about stuff. And feel good about stuff. The way you call people "someone" and reduce most of life to "someone doing something" I find absolutely chilling.

That last bit about expectation sounds likes the ridiculous pessimism I thought made sense as a child. If you expect things to turn out for the worst, you will never be disappointed. That was before I realized that in life your attitude makes a huge difference to how things turn out. In the real/everyday world of someones doing somethings anyway.

<comment><USER10> You dont chose your emotions, you chose which emotions to react to.

There is an entire philosophy built around that concept, buddhism.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Anytime I find a very useful tool[1] or get help from a maintainer or author I always offer them a lifetime, free rsync.net account. A fair number of them have taken me up on it.

[1] Some examples of useful tools include: TextBar for OSX, git-annex assistant ... someone wrote a great encfs tutorial ... etc.

<comment><USER4> That's an awesome way to reward people! I've gotten offers for money, but actually getting to money to me is more of a hassle than it's worth, so I just decline.

<comment><USER13> What makes receiving money difficult?

<comment><USER14> Not the OP, but if you run a business, you must be very careful to correctly declare all your income, make sure you invoice properly, pay taxes, etc.

Just because soneone "donates" money, it doesn't mean that you don't have to pay taxes.

So in general it only pays off if it is above a threshold. If a company offers to donate 2000€, I would find a way to make it work. But if it's just a one off donation of 10€, I'd rather not bother my accountant with it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I have to admit I haven't sent a personal note to all of them that I should, not even close, but I have to a few.

I have asked a few for help or clarification too and thanked those who responded. And I have bought a few a beer or beverage of their choice when I could by donating, but that's really not much at all for what I got.

I have never asked anyone to add a feature or fix a bug, but I've not run into to many. I have offered a few hacks when I thought they were worthy of review but it's been a pretty long time since I've done that.

Since it's "Thanksgiving Day" here I will say I am very thankful for the work they do and freely give, and I know I couldn't do what I do without them. Not even.

It's truly an amazing thing for me. I grew up building "custom cars" and worked my ass off to buy tools to make things. Early on I spent at least half of every paycheck to buy tools.

Now, I use tools that are "free" and it's amazing what you can build with them.

Very little in the history of man can compare to it. It's one of the most amazing and best things I've ever seen happen and I've lived in one of the most amazing eras ever.

<comment><USER13> Right on! I'm also super grateful for all the amazing open source available these days. It's indeed truly fantastic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Actually, in all projects I've been involved in I've gotten more than enough thank you emails. Not to mention hooks for consulting gigs (which I dislike and _rarely_ do), conference invites and job offers.

Open source has been _tremendously_ cost-effective for me. I do it for fun and because I genuinely like building open tools people like using.

This is me [https://github.com/benjamingr](https://github.com/benjamingr) [https://stackoverflow.com/users/1348195/benjamin- gruenbaum](https://stackoverflow.com/users/1348195/benjamin-gruenbaum) \- I have done some work but there are _a lot_ of people who have made bigger contributions than me.

Wondering if other people feel the same way or not. I _do_ give around ~30$ a month on patreon to projects I like just as a nice "thank you for maintaining this".

<comment><USER17> > conference invites and job offers.

Don't we all get spammed by these, regardless of where we work?

Also, conference invites usually cost money rather than return money.

<comment><USER16> Conference _speaking_ invites usually cover the hotel and flight fares (in all honesty, I couldn't really afford attending otherwise).

Some conferences also offer to do paid workshops which are a big factor too.

<comment><USER18> Both you and the parent are right. A lot of conferences will cover your main travel costs for a speaking invite. But there are often other travel- associated costs so it's usually not really free if it's out of your own pocket.

Conference speaking is often worth it if it's effectively part of your job that someone else is paying for or (selectively) if the exposure for marketing yourself is worth it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I just wanted to thank NoScript maintainer Giorgio Maone, as he is currently working really hard to fix issues.

NoScript was my favorite add-on and I have no doubt that it will be once again, but it really is heartbreaking to read some of the reviews[1]. Constructive feedback is a good thing, but I just don't understand why some people feel that they have a right to use the f* word when reviewing the new version. Just simply describe what is broken and say you have disabled it until the issue is resolved, and thank the man for his hard work.

Thanks again, Giorgio Maone!

[1] [https://addons.mozilla.org/en- US/firefox/addon/noscript/revi...](https://addons.mozilla.org/en- US/firefox/addon/noscript/reviews/?src=api)

</comment><comment><USER20> I thank authors and maintainers and I expect others do too. I just don't do it publicly.

I've thanked authors of small projects which are unique and useful to me just by dropping a short email (not en masse) - Not out of some obligation, but because it's an encouraging thing to receive. I want them to know someone is finding utility in what they have done and appreciates it enough to tell them.

I don't think the larger projects are in need of this though, it would just become noise. This is probably just the cynical misanthrope in me speaking but I can't help but think it looks more like a popularity contest when it's public like this... not that i'm suggesting it could be done any other way for large projects, but then, who is going to read all of them if it's a large project?

<comment><USER21> I maintain a fairly popular repository, and it does brighten my day when I receive an email like this!

Unfortunately, you are getting more random malformated issues (ie. "DOESN'T WORK. WHEN FIX") than thanks!

<comment><USER20> Please don't feel disheartened by those types of issues. They seem to pop up on all kinds of projects after some threshold of popularity.

I haven't originated any popular repos myself, but of the few I have contributed to, these types of issues can be quite common. One of the projects is a math library and a swear 1/2 issues are people discovering for the first time how floating point math behaves and complaining profusely that it's the authors fault.

If you can gain some contributors to help you do the weeding in your issues list it can help with your sanity greatly.

This is one feature that I wish hosting platforms like github/gitlab etc had to help authors and maintainers: ability to grant issue management permissions (separately from full repo access).

<comment><USER22> > This is one feature that I wish hosting platforms like github/gitlab etc had > to help authors and maintainers: ability to grant issue management > permissions (separately from full repo access).

You'll be happy to learn that in GitLab a reporter can manage issue but not the repository already. [https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/permissions.html](https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/permissions.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Interestingly, I tried asking this on Reddit once, and the majority of replies indicated they didn't want a thank-you letter:

[https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/71fupc/foss_develope...](https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/71fupc/foss_developers_would_you_like_to_receive_a/)

<comment><USER24> It seems like they didn't want a _form_ letter, ie thoughtless spam. They seemed OK with getting personal thank-yous where the writer put some effort into it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Chiming in as a maintainer who gets lots of thanks. Typically they're genuine. I get thanked 3-5 times a week with no strings attached. It definitely helps me want to do more! I actually use it as a gauge for which projects to spend more time on.

</comment><comment><USER26> BTW this is actually to promote this: [http://www.thankyouopensource.com/](http://www.thankyouopensource.com/)

Putting the link here might make it more obvious.

<comment><USER27> It's a pity that this website is exclusively for repositories on Github and thus contributes to the harmful idea that free software only exists when it is on Github.

<comment><USER28> eh, github is hosted git, it costs approximately nothing to export your project to github, and it's a great way to "market" your project.

<comment><USER27> There is a systemic cost: the cumulative effect of encouraging the expectation to find things on Github. It also costs time to maintain an additional remote if you want to interact with potential contributors.

Using Github only to say "hey, don't forget about this piece of software that you shouldn't be looking for on Github" is a terrible habit as it artificially inflates the importance of Github for Free Software and ... we already have search engines for that kind of thing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I think maintainers would definitely love more some monetary support rather than just a thank you, specially those doing it in their free time (since some maintainers of big open source projects are well established paid employees).

<comment><USER30> The problem is that it is hard to transfer money over the internet.

I just wanted to know what bureaucratic hurdles one has to jump in Germany to even be able to receive donations on your webpage. I don't want to go into the gory details, but just come with something that I say for years very often: The surest way to become a terrorist very fast is to read up into law.

And this is only for being _legally able_ to receive and not about the taxation issues that arise when you concretely receive donations.

Also in countries there are lots of preferred ways on the methods for money transfer. For example in Germany many people don't want to use a credit card and prefer SEPA money transfer/direct debit for paying in the internet.

Yes, of course one could use some fancy cryptocurrency, but the legal/taxation issues remain.

<comment><USER31> Can you go more into your problems, because as far as I know, it is actually not that complicated.

Unless of course, you say you are non profit - then they have to accept that, complicated, yes.

But if you want small donation money for a webpage, it is very easy. You register a small company for it (cost 20-30€, time 20 minutes at the finance agency. and you can use that company for many other similar things). And then you are legally good to receive money in all forms, bitcoins or not. They don't care how you got that money. All that matters to them is how much profit you made in a year. If it is below 16000€ you don't pay (company) taxes - <USER2> they totally ignore you for being not important. If you make higher income, well, then you start having a serious business, with taxation and probably more regulation, true.

But for small things I found it not so hard.

<comment><USER30> > But if you want small donation money for a webpage, it is very easy. You > register a small company for it (cost 20-30€, time 20 minutes at the finance > agency. and you can use that company for many other similar things).

Which makes the tax declaration much more complicated. Additionally this can easily cause lots of trouble with the employment contract.

<comment><USER31> But when you make money from a website, it is a buisness. And if it is small money, it is a small buisness - where I found the buerocratic hurdles to be very small.

I mean sure, since I am a libertarian, I prefer there to be no hurdles and no taxes at all, but the majority of people think different. And you are not even a libertarian I suppose? So you just want a excemption from taxes/buerocracy for you? Or just for small things like donation? Yeah well, this is the case right now, but they need to somehow verify that it is indeed small. I found the current situation reasonable. A bit more effort with tax declaration, but not really much, having a small business.

"Additionally this can easily cause lots of trouble with the employment contract."

And this is a problem with your contract then, which you negotiated and nothing for which the state is responsible.

<comment><USER30> > So you just want a excemption from taxes/buerocracy for you?

I am not against taxes per se, but I am a deep hater of bureacracy.

<comment><USER31> So how would you do it then? How would you make the process simpler, than it allready is?

<comment><USER31> Like I thought, you are a typical german who likes to complain, but with no idea how to improve things.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> As a maintainer of a relatively successful open source project [1], I find I get a lot of thanks. Yes, it usually comes attached to an issue or a question, but there's not really an easier avenue to just say "thanks" either. So it doesn't bother me too much.

The thank you that comes attached to issues does make me more inclined to help quicker, because I just feel the person is being polite and respectful of the effort.

[1] [https://github.com/louthy/language- ext](https://github.com/louthy/language-ext)

</comment><comment><USER33> I think sending "thank you" notes to someone is rare because it's a bit odd to contact a complete stranger and thank them.

Personally I would "thank" someone for example by upvoting their post, commenting on it, or posting their project here or on Lobster, staring their GitHub project, etc. Those are more concrete stuff and personally I would appreciate this kind of actions more than a thank you note.

</comment><comment><USER34> I have a bunch of open source projects; I'm getting quite good at giving my projects new homes because I don't want to maintain them anymore.

Speaking for myself, thanks is fine but I don't need it; thanks doesn't do anything for burnout. People using my software is enough thanks. The biggest thanks is someone contributing a useful bug fix or needed feature. Time and effort is the currency in open source.

</comment><comment><USER35> Some thanks would definitely be appreciated at least to balance out the negative minority.

As a maintainer of a project¹ that many use, I've had private messages encouraging me to commit suicide etc. Not ideal.

¹ [https://www.gnu.org/s/coreutils](https://www.gnu.org/s/coreutils)

<comment><USER36> Whoah that's messed up! Who are these people? Other developers or users?

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> I help maintain an open-source project for AWS. The only thanks I need is that you come by the booth at re:Invent and give me a big hug. I'll be the one winking at everyone assuming they remember this comment from HN.

<comment><USER36> Which project? I won't be there, but here's a cyber hug to thankyou for your efforts

\(^o^)/

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Simply using open-source projects is definitely a way to say thank you. I have several projects on github and I am very grateful for developers trusting and using my code. It says much more than a 'thumps up'.

</comment><comment><USER39> Open source is a huge achievement. The sheer diversity, wealth and value of the ecosystem is priceless. A true achievement of our times and Stallman and all the pioneers deserve a gigantic kudos.

Any human group has all the problems that comes with us. Some people are insensitive, self centred, selfish, entitled, immature but there are also others who are helpful, warm, polite, genuinely wonderful human beings.

There is little reason for cynicism or negativity. You get to meet and interact with all kinds which in itself opens your life up to a whole new set of experiences.

</comment><comment><USER40> Great post. Amazing what a big difference a simple "thank you" can make, and surely helps reduce burnout.

</comment><comment><USER41> I try to do what I can but I'll admit I'm not consistent. Ranked in order of how useful the project is to me, I will:

Star their repo

Tweet or email them my thanks

Donate cash

If I make it to the point where I develop strong competency with the project and have something meaningful to contribute, I'll start looking at issues and helping people troubleshoot.

</comment><comment><USER42> I received a lot of help when I was implementing mailman from Mark Shapiro a few years back. I asked what I could do in thanks and he pointed me to his public Amazon wish list. I purchased something off of that for him. I try to make sure I am thanking people for their work that I am benefitting from.

</comment><comment><USER43> The author is promoting gratefulness, and that is awesome. I try to do my part when I can with hand-crafted emails or messages.

For what it's worth, in our work on the TechEmpower Framework Benchmarks [1], we have received a great deal of positive feedback and gratefulness. We really appreciate it since it makes the project so much more fun and meaningful for us when we hear that people have found it useful (or at least interesting). We never cease to be amazed at the generosity of the community. All of this often makes me wish we could spend more time on the project. (We're working on getting Round 15 out soon!)

[1] [https://github.com/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks](https://github.com/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks)

</comment><comment><USER44> I was once looking for a specific library that does one thing – and found exactly something like it on Github. It did the job so well and without a hitch, that after seeing it has only a few stars and no PRs, I left an Github issue saying thank you to the maintainer.

</comment><comment><USER36> There's some pretty bad thankyou's on the front page of: [https://www.thankyouopensource.com](https://www.thankyouopensource.com)

[1] [https://www.thankyouopensource.com/letter/155/Fucking- dead/](https://www.thankyouopensource.com/letter/155/Fucking-dead/)

[2] [https://www.thankyouopensource.com/letter/154/Fuck-%22Open-S...](https://www.thankyouopensource.com/letter/154/Fuck-%22Open- Source%22/)

These are terrible people

</comment><comment><USER45> Some people, rightly or wrongly, feel that their use of an open source library is endorsement and thanks enough, at least until you meet the maintainer in person or have other cause to be in contact with them.

<comment><USER46> Yes, I believe it's net positive for a project because I tell other what I am using and they get interested, this helps a project get more mindshare and some of them will eventually contribute.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> It would be nice if more of the communication with maintainers was done in public. Then discussions such as these could be filled with links demonstrating best practices (or suggestions) in action. (Some people like me may be wary of tying their HN account so permanently to a project.)

Right now in this discussion there are a lot of recommendations but without knowing more about the context in which they are applied it is hard to take them seriously. Specifically, are commenters making the suggestion having put it into practice in an open source project/community, and (if so) what impact has it had there?

As an attempt to provide something similar to what I am suggesting, here is an anonymized conversation regarding a tool I have barely maintained for a few years (merging bug fixes). The tool is used by many database administrators so not programmers but technical. It provides some of the functionality that commercial software charges hundreds of dollars to provide, so it is easy to suggest paying someone else real money to solve any problems.

 _> On Sat, Jul 4 at 8:06 AM, Maintainer (me) wrote:

I will not be able to resolve these issues in what it sounds like is the timeframe you need.

My recommendation would be that you install the trial version of a tool on the list of commercial alternatives (link). One that I have very limited experience with is [specific recommended alternative]. The page also lists all of the free tools that I am aware of.

Thanks for reporting these problems; I will create issues to track the progress of resolving them.

>On Fri, July 3, User wrote / forwarded:

Can you please help me?

>On Fri, Jul 3, User (#2?) wrote:

I'm getting another one issue. Ie the [tool] generate the script like

"ALTER TABLE ... ALTER COLUMN ... [bigint] IDENTITY (1,1) NOT NULL".

While i'm executing this script i'm getting error like "Msg 156, Level 15, State 1, Line 1

Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'IDENTITY'".

[tool] generate a is wrong one? Let me know the reason for this one . and Please address the above issues . I'm eagerly wait for your response._

</comment><comment><USER47> Thanking is beneficial mentally to the thanker. Do it for yourself.

</comment><comment><USER48> I interpreted the title as 'We have the policy not to thank maintainers of open source tools. Here is why.' glad it was quite the opposite.

</comment><comment><USER49> "Maintainers are the friends we want and the employees companies look for. They have passion, willingness to share, and persistence. They are the real MVP and they deserve a thank-you note."

^^ I liked this. Very nice and very true.

</comment><comment><USER50> Let's not forget companies that provide free services to open source projects.

<comment><USER51> Such as?

<comment><USER52> I believe Netlify[0] does that, and I've heard of others but can't remember right now.

Edited to add a link

[0][https://www.netlify.com/open-source/](https://www.netlify.com/open- source/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> I recently did just that: [https://github.com/mhgbrown/cached_resource/issues/36](https://github.com/mhgbrown/cached_resource/issues/36)

</comment><comment><USER54> Why does the author refer to the site as an NGO? Is this in the sense of "Non- governmental Organization?" If so, it seems like an odd thing to emphasize. If not, what is the correct expansion of that TLA?

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Source code link [https://github.com/Windsooon/thanks-open- source](https://github.com/Windsooon/thanks-open-source)

</comment><comment><USER55> I recommend to keep open source, but not to clear issues related to other people infrastructure, just about your own infrastructure.

</comment><comment><USER56> Just want to say thank you for that article.

</comment><comment><USER55> I recommend to keep open source, but not clear issues not related to your own infrastructure.

</comment><comment><USER57> Because the friction is too high.

</comment><comment><USER58> It's such an unfortunate word to use, "maintainer"... Sounds like a thing that had reached its full potential long ago and the "maintainer" is there to keep it on the road in one piece, for a while yet. It'll never get better, it's only ever downhill from there.

(Admittedly, that does describe a certain %age of open source projects).

<comment><USER28> That's exactly the maintainer's job. To keep it alive while the world is changing, so the software can continue delivering value. The maintainer might also be a developer, or other people might be developers, or possibly no one is developing that project.

</comment></comment><comment><USER59> Not nitpicking, but "Github uses Rails on Ruby" gave me a jolly laugh.

</comment><comment><USER60> This reminds me of the Linux kernel build bot.

Hi X,

I love your patch! Yet something to improve:

</comment><comment><USER61> Thanks for a nice writeup. Now please add some open graph sugar to your markup so I can share it with a nice preview. :)

</comment><comment><USER62> Fine.

Shout out to everyone who worked on ublock origin and the filters. Doing God's work, death to advertising.

</comment><comment><USER63> I thought maintainers did it because they are passionate, not because they are being forced to.

<comment><USER64> It's mostly a plus for their resumes.</comment></comment>


Indian scientists develop world's thinnest material - <AUTHOR> http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/science/indian-scientists-develop-worlds-thinnest-material-with-novel-technique/article22659534.ece <comment><USER2> Note: Indian newspapers* are pretty careless about phrases like "world's thinnest" or "world's strongest", so take that part with a grain of salt. They often just mean mind-bogglingly thin, and don't mean it as an absolute factual statement. For eg., there seems to be older news[1][2] from 2007 where European researchers created graphene sheets of single atom thickness, at 0.35 nm.

(*of course this probably also applies to other countries' media to varying degrees, I'm just most familiar with this tendency here in India.)

Edit: The actual journal paper[3] doesn't mention the exact thickness of the nanosheets, but it also mentions nanoflakes and nanograins and other forms of the material, and those seem to be measured at "~6-7 nm". And from what I can tell, the actual nanosheets vary in thickness and are not this utterly uniform sheets I had conjured up in mind.

Pretty fascinating stuff, there's apparently a 'NanoArtography' competition too [4], and this group won the People's Choice award with "The flower and the bud":

> The image[5] represents magnesium and boron based nanostructures synthesized > by a bottom-up approach being developed by our research group. [...] One of > the clusters resembles a full grown flower and another cluster nearby it > resembles a bud in the process of growing. The clusters seem connected by a > stalk like structure. This nanoflower and nanobud was imaged using a > Scanning electron microscope. Image width is 0.009 mm.

[1] [http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/03/01/scientists- develop-t...](http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/03/01/scientists-develop- thinnest-material-ever-one-atom-thick.html) [2] [http://sciencenetlinks.com/science-news/science- updates/thin...](http://sciencenetlinks.com/science-news/science- updates/thinnest-material/) [3] [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cphc.201701033/ab...](http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cphc.201701033/abstract) [4] [http://nano.drexel.edu/nanoartography- competition/](http://nano.drexel.edu/nanoartography-competition/) [5] [http://nano.drexel.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/peoples- ch...](http://nano.drexel.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/peoples-choice.jpg)</comment>


Work Is Work - <AUTHOR> https://codahale.com/work-is-work/ <comment><USER2> 6th time submitted today

[https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...](https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query="Work%20Is%20Work"&sort=byDate&type=story)</comment>


Ask HN: Should I support OAuth or OpenID? - w-ll

Working on a web app, we want to expand pass all this login/password mumbo-jumbo. We have facebook integration and are wondering if we should look at Oauth, Openid, both, or neither? <comment><AUTHOR> I would look into OpenID and Twitter integration (<http://apiwiki.twitter.com/Sign-in-with-Twitter>). But instead of providing just a text field when accepting OpenID, provide quick links to login with the major, more-general web app providers (Yahoo, Google). You don't even need to tell your users that you're using OpenID for authentication... just that they could login using their existing account with another major web service.

You may want to look into RPX (<http://rpxnow.com>) - it's a commercial provider that does something similar to what I described above. I'm not a huge fan of them being a hosted service, but they do make it really straight- forward to login.

<comment><USER2> As the page you link to says, Twitter uses OAuth.

Facebook Apps use OpenID.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> They do different things (federated login vs. access authorization) so focus on which you need most. Note that they are being combined, so hopefully the choice won't be necessary for too long:

[http://step2.googlecode.com/svn/spec/openid_oauth_extension/...](http://step2.googlecode.com/svn/spec/openid_oauth_extension/latest/openid_oauth_extension.html)

</comment><comment><USER4> Hmm, OAuth and OpenID are two different beasts.

OAuth is for giving your application the ability to access someone elses, without users of your application having to supply their credentials to you.

OpenID allows for users of your application to use their credentials for another service authenticate with yours.

</comment><comment><USER5> Yeah, as the other posters have said, they're different things.

OpenID allows users to log into _YOUR_ site with a single login that they can use for other sites that support it. An alternative is your regular user/pass login (which you'll have to implement anyway for users without openid).

OAuth allows you to get data from your users accounts on other websites (twitter, yahoo, gmail etc) in a secure, supported way. An insecure and brittle alternative would be to ask your user to give you their login details for a different site on your site and then screen scrape their account.

</comment><comment><USER6> I would say that it depends on the audience. I have to agree with xpaulbettsx, for some users it might be a problem to get the concept. However, I like OpenID idea a lot and plan to use it in my project.I just hate having 73 different user accounts on 57 different sites (I forget passwords and not all sites have nice tools to reset it).

</comment><comment><USER7> Start with Facebook Connect if you haven't already. In terms of UX its the best single sign-on experience.

</comment><comment><USER8> If you run a site geared towards novice computer users, my advice is DON'T. OpenID is still far too janky of a user experience, you're totally beholden to the providers, which are all different, and the "IE6" crowd just does _not_ get it.

</comment><comment><USER9> Both. Between OAuth and OpenID you are bound to catch most of your users (as they would be having either a Twitter account or a Google account).</comment>


Email the CEO - <AUTHOR> http://demianturner.com/2016/01/virgin-media-email-contact/ <comment><USER2> Not long and the contact will be unusable! I wonder how difficult it is to announce the change of a CEO's mail address.</comment>


CentOS announces second patch for bash security issue CVE-2014-7169 - <AUTHOR> http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2014-September/020593.html

<comment><AUTHOR> If you don't want to wait for yum mirrors to catch up

[http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/updates/x86_64/Packages/ba...](http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/updates/x86_64/Packages/bash-4.1.2-15.el6_5.2.x86_64.rpm)

[http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/updates/x86_64/Packages/ba...](http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/updates/x86_64/Packages/bash- doc-4.1.2-15.el6_5.2.x86_64.rpm)

What I find slightly strange is a second patch is not yet available on gnu/bash itself, so this must have been developed in-house by redhat or published elsewhere first.

I guess we could diff the second version with the first.

<comment><USER2> The new patch "bash-X.X-env-inject2.patch" is actually [http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2014/q3/att-690/eol- pushback.pat...](http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2014/q3/att-690/eol- pushback.patch) which doesn't work in bash-3.2 from CentOS 5:

      $ bash --version
      GNU bash, version 3.2.25(1)-release (i686-redhat-linux-gnu)
      Copyright (C) 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
      $ env -i X='() { (a)=<\' bash -c '/etc/crontab cat'
      bash: X: line 1: syntax error near unexpected token `='
      bash: X: line 1: `'
      bash: error importing function definition for `X'
      SHELL=/bin/bash
      PATH=/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin
      MAILTO=root
      HOME=/

      # run-parts
      01 * * * * root run-parts /etc/cron.hourly
      02 4 * * * root run-parts /etc/cron.daily
      22 4 * * 0 root run-parts /etc/cron.weekly
      42 4 1 * * root run-parts /etc/cron.monthly

for reference, thats how other shell behaves:

      busybox$ env -i X='() { (a)=<\' ./busybox hush -c '/etc/crontab cat'
      hush: can't execute '/etc/crontab': Permission denied</comment></comment>


My Summer at Mozilla - <AUTHOR> https://ryanseys.com/blog/summer-at-mozilla/ <comment><USER2> As a former Mozilla intern, I can confirm that the company has an unusually great intern program!

Sure, there's some perks like free food, laundry, free yoga and other things that are taken for granted at startups missing but some of my favorite things about it were:

1\. Mozilla has the most geographically diverse set of interns of any Silicon Valley company I know. In addition to regular recruiting at North American Universities, Mozilla also recruits from the open source Mozilla community, and that means people come from everywhere. I was recruited on-campus but two of my roommates whom I lived with were recruited directly from the community and were from Argentina and India.

2\. At least on my project (I worked in the Labs group), I got total freedom to scope out a project I wanted to work on, convince my managers about why it could be great, then go ahead and build it. This is a remarkable amount of flexibility for an internship.

3\. You got to keep the laptop. Because Mozilla's open source, we just used the default OS X with no custom stuff. Since the value would go down after the summer, they let us keep it as a perk!

4\. Once every two years, they fly out everyone in the company and a lot of people in the community to a single place to meet up (Summit). This might sound crazy in theory, but face time is invaluable in growing teams that are spread across the planet.

<comment><USER3> I'm fairly certain the Google intern demo is more geographically/culturally diverse.

Really glad this guy had a phenomenal time at Mozilla. All of the top internship programs in the bay area are equally good and I hope he gets a chance to try some others :)

<comment><USER2> I was thinking about that and I think you're right as far as the overall numbers go, but the intern group is really small (it was <20 when I was there), so the entropy in the distribution would be higher than Google/Facebook/Microsoft/Amazon.

And yeah I agree, as much as you like your first internship, switching it up for the second is usually a good idea because that mobility is harder when working full-time.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I interned at Mozilla too; my experience there was just as phenomenal. Free $3000 laptop, random games, free food, free apartment etc. However, I think the thing that I cherished the most were the people themselves, they were committed to their mission of making the web a better place. This is especially true of the Metrics team. So many of the discussions regarding privacy and the amount of information I could analyze seemed frustrating then, yet, it is only after a couple of years in industry that I realize the true value of respecting those who trust their data with you and using it to do greater good.

<comment><USER5> Do you get to keep your laptop after - or do you have to give it back at the end?

<comment><USER6> You get to keep it.

(source: comment below and friend who interned at Mozilla)

<comment><USER5> That's hella cool.

This post makes me want to work at Mozilla!

<comment><USER7> That just means it becomes taxable income.

<comment><USER5> Never thought of it like that - that's interesting.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Congratulations. You've officially been spoiled. :) You will take a job somewhere else some day and experience great anguish when it is significantly less awesome. :P

The plus side is that you can use that anguish to effect change.

<comment><USER9> This, this is a really lame.

You're a software developer which means you have the opportunity to work virtually wherever and whenever you want. You can write software on a sunny day in the local park, inside a tent in the midst of an Arctic storm, or aboard a boat in the middle of the Atlantic.

A laptop can be purchased for $200 and internet can usually be found free. There is no reason to compromise on a less than exceptional job unless you want to live in the idealized city apartment and collect a sizable salary.

<comment><USER4> I am not sure where you are going off on the parent post. Also, I don't particularly know what you mean by "exceptional job".

However, let me describe a few thoughts I had whilst there (not the submitter).

1\. Mozilla's mission is just as important as random company making the pipes more efficient for sending cat/twerking/whatever videos. They are a non-profit and are operated as such.

2\. They have some incredibly interesting problems that they are working on. From the research team to the browser development itself. Read interesting = hard.

3\. They do pay well. I know this as a former intern; also from word of mouth from people who worked there. :)

<comment><USER10> RE point 1: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation)

<comment><USER11> As that article points out, the Corporation is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Foundation and therefore shares its public benefit purpose.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Am I out of line thinking Mozilla should be far more conservative? It seems vaguely irresponsible for a non-profit to be so lavish in the number of employees they have, their office, their perks.

I'm not suggesting they need to be extreme in the other direction, just somewhat conservative.

That Google money can't last forever and it seems like they should be stockpiling a large portion of it for the long term, not blowing every dollar -- living, effectively, paycheck to paycheck.

I wonder if the employees/interns there have a sense that it's all eventually going to come crumbling down. Because I get that sense every time I hear about how they operate, and I really hope it never happens because I think they're a good thing in the world.

<comment><USER13> Mozilla _is_ more conservative with money than other companies. No corporate credit cards, no daily travel allowances, no daily breakfast, lunch and dinner (only lunch and only once a week, after all-hands).

However, being too conservative doesn't work in Silicon Valley because you have to compete with companies like Google, Facebook, Twitter etc. for talent with their perks and benefits. Whether it's good or bad in the long term I do not know but it is a fact.

<comment><USER14> No shareholders to pay.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Cool blog post! From your resume it looks like you worked at Blackberry earlier this year. Do you have any thoughts about the differences (cultural, technological, etc) between working for a large company and working for a non- profit organization?

<comment><AUTHOR> The differences are really night and day. Blackberry is too large to really have that "home-like" feel, it really just feels like work. Mozilla has character which I definitely feed off for motivation. The attitude of the people at Mozilla is much different than those at BB, as well. Mozilla and everything in it has life, Blackberry unfortunately feels much less-lively. Motivation at Mozilla is fueled by the love of the work and at Blackberry you really can feel the money is the end goal. Both companies are just really different for different reasons, but I definitely prefer Mozilla.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> That sounds like so much fun, I'm very jealous.

</comment><comment><USER17> It's always interesting to hear what other Software Engineering students have been doing on their internships.

Now, if only writing a blog post could replace your work term report. :)

<comment><AUTHOR> I wish we could replace that report with something a little more lively!

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Seems like there is a growing trend by tech companies to spoil interns with the hope of improving HR. This is great and by all means take advantage of it.

<comment><USER19> Interns are not spoiled. They are simply treated like any other regular employee.

I am not sure what you mean with 'improving HR'. Did you mean 'PR' ? Because Mozilla's HR department is doing a pretty great job.

<comment><USER20> I don't think regular employes get to keep their laptops :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Cool to see you had fun this summer, now you can come back and give a talk about things you worked on at our Ottawa Ruby/JS meetups!

<comment><AUTHOR> I'll be back in January to do just that!

<comment><USER21> Ah, I'll be gone in January =S

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Where do I sign up? :)

<comment><USER23> Here! [https://careers.mozilla.org/](https://careers.mozilla.org/)

<comment><USER24> It looks like their 2014 internships haven't quite opened up, is that right?

<comment><AUTHOR> That is correct.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Cool guy, is an "open-source advocate" but removes PureCSS's copyright notice: [https://github.com/yui/pure/blob/master/LICENSE.md](https://github.com/yui/pure/blob/master/LICENSE.md)

<comment><AUTHOR> This would be a side-effect of using a CSS minifier, not an intentional act against Pure.

<comment><USER25> Pure's stylesheets are already minified, the only result of re-minifying them is that the copyright will be removed: [http://yui.yahooapis.com/pure/0.2.1/pure- min.css](http://yui.yahooapis.com/pure/0.2.1/pure-min.css)

<comment><AUTHOR> I squash all my stylesheets into one giant .css file to serve rather than a bunch of individual stylesheets. A side-effect of squashing + minifying (which is done every time I generate my website) is that all comments are removed.

You are correct, that notice is not present, but I did not remove it intentionally. To be honest, I didn't read the LICENSE.md of Pure CSS. Shame on me :)

Feel free to file a bug against this at: [https://github.com/ryanseys/ryanseys.com](https://github.com/ryanseys/ryanseys.com)

<comment><USER26> TBH, I don't think you're in the wrong here, but expecting someone who has already brought something to your attention to file a "bug report" against your personal website is a bit arrogant.

<comment><AUTHOR> Fix'd. [https://github.com/ryanseys/ryanseys.com/commit/2c043f](https://github.com/ryanseys/ryanseys.com/commit/2c043f)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Network Solutions support indicating they are under a DDoS attack at the moment. - <AUTHOR>

My agency has client sites down because of this. I've been following along on Twitter for the last 10 minutes or so. Network Solutions support lines are ringing busy at the moment. <comment><AUTHOR> Link to Twitter search for the lazy: <https://twitter.com/#!/search/Network%20Solutions>

</comment><comment><USER2> It appears resolved now.</comment>


Java 7 optimizations corrupt loops, cause crashes - <AUTHOR> http://www.lucidimagination.com/search/document/1a0d3986e48a9348/warning_index_corruption_and_crashes_in_apache_lucene_core_apache_solr_with_java_7

<comment><AUTHOR> Use -XX:-UseLoopPredicate until update 2 is out...</comment>


Optimizing Nginx for High Traffic Loads - <AUTHOR> http://blog.martinfjordvald.com/2011/04/optimizing-nginx-for-high-traffic-loads/ <comment><USER2> I would also recommend that you gzip any static assets and use <http://wiki.nginx.org/HttpGzipStaticModule> to serve these pre-gzipped files.

No point in re-compressing the same files over and over again. I normally gzip all static assets as part of the deployment process.

<comment><USER3> Perhaps even more importantly than not recompressing... If Nginx is reading gzipped files, rather than full size files, it reduces the pressure on filesystem cache. This increases the odds that the system won't have to go to the disk to find the requested resource.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Note the absence of any particular setting which will cause it to crash if you get a link to your blog retweeted.

 _glares at Apache_

</comment><comment><USER5> Some useful Nginx optimizations, but I've always found that the bottlenecks are far worse elsewhere. Nginx is a champ at serving static files, and I have it proxy all requests upstream to Apache (and use mod_wsgi because the majority of what I work with are Django apps). Optimizing the DB schema and queries have had the most positive performance increases by far, followed by Apache tweaks, and then finally Nginx config changes. But I really love the setup I use for how easy it is to get a Django app spun up.

</comment><comment><USER6> If your app uses a database, you've got bigger problems than optimizing Nginx for high traffic loads.

That said, I absolutely love Nginx because it's so damn lightweight, and easy to setup and maintain.

<comment><USER7> Even if your app does not use a database then you've still got bigger problems. Optimizing Nginx is often a bit of a joke as you don't really get a lot for your effort. I think reducing the IO impact of Nginx is probably the best thing you can do. CPU wise you're kinda stuck with the awesome stock performance.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> _> The biggest optimization happened when you decided to use Nginx and ran that apt-get install..._

I recommend against doing this on Ubuntu Lucid without first installing the unofficial nginx PPA, unless you want to get stuck with v0.7.65.

<comment><USER7> Thank you for pointing this out, I always tell people to do this so I should really take my own advice.

<comment><USER8> Well, it doesn't negate your statement. apt-get is still a great way to install nginx.

<comment><USER9> I dont know, I compile from source the issue is that modules have to be compiled at runtime and everyone needs different sets, so there is rarely a PPA with what you want unless you build your own.

Its a build model that does not work so well with binary package managers, works better with say the Gentoo use flag model.

Oh and if you are not using any nginx modules you are missing out on a lot of its power, you should be able to move big chunks of your app like auth right into nginx, use redis and memcache directly, and so on.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I think he's got a little math problem. Many browsers will open up to 4 connections (possibly more, if config tweaked) to overlap requests for content, so you might want to consider this when configuring your worker_connections.

<comment><USER11> Each worker can handle many thousands of concurrent connections so this isn't really an issue. This is where nginx and Apache differ. Generally you want one worker per CPU core.

<comment><USER10> I know how nginx works, I use it all the time. He is saying if you have 1024 woker_connections, at 2 per connections per user, you'll get 512 users per worker process. But the truth with most modern browsers is it is 4 connections per user, woker_connections = 1024, that is more like 256 users. So if you really want to service 512 users, you need to set woker_connections to 2048. This is the math problem I was highlighting, a simple division problem.

I believe you are talking about worker_processes

<comment><USER11> Oops -- you're right I misread your comment. Sorry about that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> too bad there's not so much said about optimizing latency, serving a lot of traffic is not that difficult, but getting the best latency to serve your files 50ms faster can make a big difference

<comment><USER7> This is kind of outside the scope of Nginx.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Optimizing == Customizing as per your business needs</comment>


How Amazon Innovates: Lessons for Microsoft and Others - <AUTHOR> http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2010/02/25/how-amazon-innovates-lessons-in-strategy-for-microsoft-and-others/

<comment><USER2> Single page:

[http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2010/02/25/how-amazon- innovat...](http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2010/02/25/how-amazon-innovates- lessons-in-strategy-for-microsoft-and-others/?single_page=true)

</comment><comment><USER3> I think what Amazon has done is really interesting. Develop capability for your own requirement and then later generalize it as product offering (Except Kindle). Imagine what Amazon could have done if they had Research budget of Microsoft of Google.

Google is also kind of following same footsteps. Gmail was developed for their internal use and then came out as product. They should start offering their internal HR and Finance apps as hosted ERP solutions.

<comment><USER4> > Imagine what Amazon could have done if they had Research budget of Microsoft > of Google.

I find that hard since much of Amazon's business culture and innovation comes out of frugality. Being a low margin business, Amazon had to become so streamlined that it does not suffer from the expensive maintenance drag. The great strength of Amazon is its ability to evolve. They're a population of tiny businesses/services rather than one single entity. You'll see the rate of innovation at Amazon is speeding up over time, rather than slowing down.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Interesting. Relevant link: [http://www.fastcompany.com/1560194/microsoft-and- amazon-sign...](http://www.fastcompany.com/1560194/microsoft-and-amazon-sign- deal-granting-access-to-each-others-patent-porfolios?partner=rss)</comment>


Don't tell your audience you're ill-prepared - <AUTHOR> http://johnleach.co.uk/words/2376/dont-tell-your-audience-youre-ill-prepared

<comment><USER2> He's so right... Many people do this and it is disrespectful.</comment>


How many teams who live in the SF Bay Area opted to wait until the winter round? - <AUTHOR>

<comment><AUTHOR> It just didn't make sense to us to move to Boston when we already have an office in SF, so we opted to apply for the winter round.

I guess one argument against waiting would be that moving to Boston away from SF (and all its known distractions) would let the team totally focus for the three months on nothing but work.

</comment><comment><USER2> I didn't bother with the winter round because I live in Massachusetts and have family and friends mostly in New England, and it seemed silly to move across the country rather than waiting six months and moving across the state.

</comment><comment><USER3> I have decided to move to the Bay Area.... then I can prolly apply again.... my idea is great and I am still lookin for a co-founder...</comment>


Ask HN: Is it morally right to automate jobs people want? - <AUTHOR> I understand automation provides a lot of pros and cons. Some 'pros' include: it can reduce repetitive tasks, cut down on workplace injury, and offer greater efficiency a majority of the time. It's no surprise more companies are looking towards automation.
However, I believe there is a mismatch in terms of benefit to society and benefit to the corporations. Aside from initial capital and maintenance costs, automation provides businesses a way to profit without having to deal with the costs of paying and managing people. Assuming the role of the business is individualistic, the incentive is to pull in as much profit as possible, and work towards reducing costs. My takeaway from this is that self-interest also creates a lack of employee-interest.
For example, with low-skill, low-reward jobs such as cashier, most people may not care if they get automated (as we sort of have today with self-checkout/kiosks) since they were not very desirable jobs to begin with. Yet, what is to stop a business from automating other more "desirable" jobs that employees may actually want and enjoy doing, such as software developer, strategist, manager, etc. - the higher paying jobs that people train for and aspire for to put their productivity to good use. If it saves the business (or executives at the top) money by axing those jobs, my guess is that they will do it, regardless if it hurts their employees (or impacts greater society).
So with this in mind, where is the moral limit for automation?
Should we protect employees from having their jobs taken away for a more profitable alternative?
(I'm not counting on things like UBI in this instance because, sticking with the presumption of corporate self-interest, I'm not assuming that more profit = more paid in taxes for society, if taxes are another undesirable "cost" that businesses would want to reduce). <comment><USER2> Consider this: A blood test today costs $100 in USA. A complicated blood test costs $250.

If we could invent a serious AI algorithm that can replace lab technician and drop this cost to $10 and $25 respectively. (Note that every single item in USA such as Cars, phones and bread is damn too cheap compared to mere 30 years ago).The lower cost of blood tests would save thousands of lives each year.

A small efficiency in making bread will save lives and put food on table of more people and improve sustainability of our planet.

It is not about jobs but efficiency. Making things more and more efficient is a moral imperative. It is something we need to do for the future generations.

Secondly, a cashier losing job is not as big a deal as people make it out to be because these people will do something else. Large availability of cheap labor can invent new industries as long as government does no criminalise being poor or skill less. Minimum wage jobs for example make it a crime to have no skill.

In future I imagine human beings with driving skills sitting a automated car simulators and teaching the cars to drive or clicking on images and video feeds to teach computers to get better while receiving am minimum wage.

Losing job is also something that makes a society ant-fragile and robust. Without laying off inefficient arms of the company you will haev a fragile North Korea/ Venezuella like economy.

<comment><USER3> Can you expand on this?

> Minimum wage jobs for example make it a crime to have no skill.

<comment><USER2> Imagine a 19 year old back teenager from a bad neighbourhood. He can't walk to a local McDonalds and offer to work for free or for $1 and hour and the McD manager will always find plenty to experienced people at $10 /hr. Government has made it a crime to employ anyone whose skills is worth below minimum wage.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I think it helps to also look at this from the other angle: if a buyer wants or needs a product, and it can be made more affordable to them through automation, is it morally right to _not_ automate it?

Suppose someone loves being a farmer, but you could make food available cheaper by automating it. People need food. Should they have to pay more to eat in order to allow the farmer to do what they love?

If all other things are equal, it's good for the farmer to be able to do the kind of work that they enjoy. But all other things are not equal, so it's necessary to weigh that benefit against the cost.

(Having said that, one thing about automation is that it requires investment, which means part of the returns tend to go to investors. So not all of the savings are passed on to the end user. But hopefully some of them are.)

</comment><comment><USER5> I believe that if the job can be automated, it will be. That is the way humanity is progressing since the beginning. If you want a current example, you can look at farming practices. It is highly automated and industrialized in developed countries. It is common to see 1 person managing a 500 acre farm with machines. In developing countries, farming is still a very labor intensive process. It isn't economically viable to bring machines to farms yet and the labor rates are sufficiently low. Over the decades, I have seen more and more machines coming to the farms as the availability of labor has decreased and the wages have increased.

> software developer, strategist, manager, etc.

These jobs cannot be automated easily now, but in future, we may have a good enough AI that can do these jobs. Consider the jobs that existed in 19th and 20th century. Many of them don't exist nowadays at all. For ex., Horses were a major component of transportation. There were a lot of people involved to support this industry. If we stopped the progress of automotive industry on moral grounds that these people would lose their jobs, wouldn't we be cheating our future?

We cannot legislate job protection because then somebody else will come along, automate it, and offer the service at a lower price. What we can do is legislate for fair working conditions, wages etc, and a stable social net that will support people who can't/won't work for any reason. This brings us to the topic of UBI and others.

</comment><comment><USER6> It's arguably "right" at a macro, species POV and ruthless at a micro POV.

Logically speaking, if we refused to progressively improve how we perform tasks, we'd be cave men.

Improvement (and automation is of course a part of this) happens naturally by virtue of competitive market dynamics. In this environment, it's arguably morally irresponsible for a company to _not_ rely on automation, because it's facing a trade-off between laying off some fraction of its labor pool now or going out of business altogether later. Therefore, the correct decision is always to improve towards greater competitive efficiency, not just for the benefit of shareholders but less obviously also for employees, in the aggregate. Competitive efficiency is also good for society.

Governments are supposed to protect people from this problem, in my opinion. I think the behavior of the US government (and most others I imagine), in allocating the vast majority of taxpayer dollars to military spending and skyrocketing medical costs due to poor regulation, instead of education, infrastructure, social safety, and retraining, is what's truly morally irresponsible. There's a whole rabbit hole of thinking down that way as well (e.g. corporate lobbying is obviously a huge part of the problem and thus in some ways we come full circle).

Oh and wrt UBI and the looming AI/robotics crisis, yea we're screwed.

</comment><comment><USER7> You'll never get rid of self-interested people. They are just wired that way, regardless of the state of the world.

Things will be just fine. See the Industrial Revolution: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Industrial_Revolu...](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Industrial_Revolution&mobileaction=toggle_view_desktop)

</comment><comment><USER8> Automating tasks is freeing humanity of some amount of necessary labor to achieve (assuming any task is useful).

This means, in a society were things are correctly organized, more average free time for humans, more things we can achieve. Which is desirable, if we are not achieving self destruction or the destruction of our neighborhood. But I'm optimistic, I'm sure we will be able to figure this out at some point that I hope is not too distant in the future.

This is my feeling.

Also, if people like to do something that can be automated, they will still be able to do that. Just not as a job maybe... Or maybe not. Some people still paint pictures that are pretty close to actual photos. And, in my opinion, in a well organized society, people have enough free time to do what they like to do.

Not automating things we can automate is maintaining useless work for humans. We should just be sure about what can be automated, which is not so easy. If you replace a cashier by a machine, you may free this person from risking serious injuries in some cases, and from a task that can be dull and repetitive. You also remove some human interactions that people may appreciate (and maybe even rely on) and that a machine cannot provide. I've already gone out of a shop happier just because I had a nice or funny exchange with the cashier, or even a smile. At the end of the day, this kind of things is useful.

I believe we will always need human interactions, some jobs might not be automatable for this reason.

So cashiers might be better replaced by machines in many places for a lot of good reasons, but human interactions have to be maintained somewhere. This may not have to be part of a job however.

And i agree that sometimes, you just want to buy your stuff and go out without having to expose yourself to any human interaction.

<comment><USER9> "In a society where things are correctly organized...."

That's the heart of the problem.

<comment><USER8> I completely agree with you.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Automate the job and then send the money you're saving to an efficient charity.

EDIT: This isn't quite a serious suggestion. My point is to imagine it as the default setting. If you were going to give some money to buy anti-malaria nets, should you instead give that money to subsidise someone's wages in the US?

</comment><comment><USER11> It's not the _job_ that people want. If it were, they would do it for free.

People have needs [0], money allows transacting for those needs, and a job is a vehicle to deliver money. If people could have their needs met without a job, would they still "want" the job that was automated away from them?

What's morally wrong is a society that forces its most vulnerable people to work jobs that can be done by machines, leaving those people no time to improve their skills or standing in the world, trapping them in a permanently disadvantaged social stratum.

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs)

</comment><comment><USER12> My immediate thoughts are:

\- we shouldn't save jobs that can't be saved

\- we should protect everyone

</comment><comment><USER13> The goal of automation is to reduce the costs of goods and services, with the cost savings getting passed on to consumers of those goods and services. Whether we need more goods and services is a better question.

</comment><comment><USER14> Anecdotal example, when I was an intern at a small company my boss asked me to do this more or less basic script that would take an excel and do a bunch of stuff with its data.

It was not difficult, basically a few hours to get an MVP running, he was VERY happy.

A few days later, one of the girls working there explained to me that she was very scared for her job as she thinks the boss would like to automate it.

Needless to say I didn't go through with it.

</comment><comment><USER15> Yes it's immoral but we aren't reponsible for that because we have no power over it and even the people in charge don't have much.

The real question is: what are the forces and the rules we obey?</comment>


IP Law Makes You an Asshole - <AUTHOR> http://blackhole12.blogspot.com/2012/05/ip-law-makes-you-asshole.html

<comment><USER2> Ha ha. Perhaps this is a manifestation of a broader principle, another instance of which is Conway's Law (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_law>): _organizations which design systems ... are constrained to produce designs which are copies of the communication structures of these organizations._

I reckon this would be the reverse: the communications structure of a system ("IP" law) is a copy of the organization of the people who created it.

</comment><comment><USER3> Ideas should be free, implementations shouldn't. As long as I'm not using the actual implementation of whatever I created for my employer, I should be free to use the idea of what I created for any otherwise legal purpose.

After all, isn't everything 90% perspiration?

Now we just need to define exactly what constitutes implementation.</comment>


Honeywell claims to have world's highest performing quantum computer - <AUTHOR> https://www.zdnet.com/article/honeywell-claims-to-have-worlds-highest-performing-quantum-computer-according-to-ibms-benchmark/ <comment><USER2> That's really interesting. I only know Honeywell from a decade ago as a provider of commodity-class desktop computer parts.</comment>


Southwest's acquisition of AirTran: Why they're doing it and why you should care - <AUTHOR> http://blog.flightcaster.com/southwests-acquisition-of-airtran-why-theyre

<comment><USER2> It looks like Southwest Airlines may have fallen into a growth trap: "Among all other influences, the desire to grow has perhaps the most perverse effect on strategy" - M.E. Porter

Southwest competes on cost, and this cost position hinges in large part on the rapid turnaround of aircraft. Rapid turnaround lowers Southwest's equipment and labor costs; its aircraft, pilots, and flight attendants are "doing work" for longer periods of time each day (rather than sitting idle on the ground).

A variety of activities contribute to Southwest's ability to rapidly turnaround aircraft, but some of the key activities include:

\- Southwest's culture, where everyone pitches in to turnaround aircraft

\- Using a single type of aircraft (737s), enabling simplified service and maintenance

\- The point to point route structure, avoiding the issue of synching the schedules of hub and spoke aircraft

\- Operating at less congested airports to avoid traffic delays

From my vantage point, it seems the AirTran acquisition threatens each of these activities:

\- Integrating AirTran's distinct culture with Southwest's

\- Expanding beyond 737s to operate 717s

\- Divergence from the point to point structure to a hub and spoke

\- Entry into congested airports, such as Hartsfield-Jackson (ATL), which was ranked #20 in 2010 for on-time departure performance by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics

In short, this acquisition is problematic from a strategic standpoint and appears to threaten the basis of Southwest's cost advantage.

<comment><USER3> Another cost saving measure that Southwest appears to use is to access the "worst" terminals via the "worst" gates. What I mean by that is their flights consistently service older terminals, gates that are further away from the security checkpoint or are otherwise less desirable. I presume that this means they save considerably on their airport access fees. I personally don't mind walking a bit further to the gate, so this kind of cost savings doesn't bother me a bit. I do wonder what the distribution of AirTran's gates looks like, though.

<comment><USER4> At least at ATL, Airtran has pretty much all of C terminal. Mind you there are 30ish i think gates split 15 on each side so it's not THAT far to walk from train to one end of the terminal.

The choice of terminal is irrelevant because it just means a shorter or longer train ride from ticketing/baggage claim. Unless you're connecting with other airlines, you usually don't have much to worry about.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Two really important bits of backstory to this, if you don't follow the US airlines: Southwest is famous for flying a single plane type (the 737) and for a Greyhound Bus-type route map that differs starkly from the hub/spoke model served by ATL --- the largest "hub" in the US market.

<comment><USER6> I'm not sure if its worth reading too much into the acquisition, from a "this is going to change Southwest's business model" standpoint. Personally, I suspect that just getting access to ATL is worth the price for Southwest.

<comment><USER5> A SWA that flies more than just the 737 is a pretty momentous business model change.

<comment><USER7> I agree. However, they do fly a few different variations of the 737. They are in the process of replacing their 300s with the newer 700 series and they also have a few 500 series which are slightly smaller (122 passengers vs 137 in the 300/700). They have also recently been evaluating adding the 800 series (a stretched version of the 700 series) to their fleet.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Looking at the fleets, the article does not mention the fact that AirTran has 65 Orders for 737-700's (the type that Southwest uses), <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AirTran_Airways#Current_Fleet> and is looking at options to replace its current 717 fleet.... As well as landing slots, increased build slots at Boeing are always very welcome.

</comment><comment><USER9> I designed Airtran's telephone flight information system. I hope they keep it.... :)

<comment><USER10> Wow. I just used it while flying out of Milwaukee a few days ago.

Airtran is truly a trashy airline. I flew business and had to wipe bread- crumbs off of my seat.

<comment><USER5> I actually kind of like Airtran. Cheap biz class, satellite radio. Bread crumbs don't set me off.

<comment><USER10> Oh, and it has wifi too. Forgot about that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> > And since Southwest can't grow by adding capacity to current routes (we know > the negative cycle that creates), they must find new markets.

I don't think I "know the negative cycle that creates." Could I trouble someone to explain it to me?

<comment><USER12> I'm guessing higher capacity => over supply => loss of pricing power => lower revenue and higher costs

<comment><USER13> Exactly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I feel about Southwest the same way many around here feel about Dropbox; such a great service that gives me exactly what I want.

It will be interesting to see how Airtran employees are integrated into Southwest's fold. For some reason I love being cattle-prodded onto a Southwest flight, with the stewardesses giving us fun reminders to be timely. I think the phrase last time was "find a cush for your tush"

</comment><comment><USER15> Slightly offtopic, but does anyone dislike Southwest? I have spent my entire life flying Continental out of EWR because they were basically the only option and I had a pile of FF miles, but now I'm near 2 Southwest hubs and I'm thinking of making the switch since I'm almost out of Continental miles. It seems very different but I've read a lot of positive things about Southwest.

<comment><USER16> I don't know anyone who actively dislikes Southwest, but I do know people who dislike certain policies:

\- Open seating instead of assigned seating. First on the plane = first pick of seats, and you board the plane in order of when you checked in (online or at the counter.) I personally like this, but some people don't.

\- Limited amenities. Bring your own entertainment.

\- Singing flight attendants. On some flights, the crew giving the safety briefing will "spruce it up" by singing or doing it as dramatic poetry or something. I think it's fun, but some people find it grating.

<comment><USER5> To be fair, you also have to factor in the SWA clientele, which is noticeably less business-centric than even Airtran.

<comment><USER17> In Texas, SWA is a favorite of many, many business travelers, not least because of the casual on-board atmosphere and the funny (as in humorous) and good-natured flight attendants. Friday-afternoon flights can be almost like a party.

<comment><USER18> Perhaps that's because SWA is a Texan company and they "get" the airline?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I hope Southwest definitely upsets the dominance that the shitty airlines have on the east coast.

<comment><USER20> I've found that they have done just that at PHL. It wasn't easy to knock US off balance a few years ago and that's exactly what happened - on time, generally more friendly and they didn't manage to lose your luggage. During IRROPS (poor weather, mechanical problem, etc), its a lot easier to sub a 737 for a 737 than have to find a way to cram an A320's worth of people on an E170 or two.

Granted, the dynamics of PHL are a little different from the NYC airports, but Southwest seems to be effectively penetrating BOS.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> As someone who flys with his entire family business class to Flint on Airtran multiple times a year, this is going to suck.

All of the in-laws are in Saginaw and Flint was simply the best place to fly for those visits.

Now? I guess Detroit via Delta because screw flying to GR and driving across.

</comment><comment><USER21> One of the things many people love about Southwest is their generally relaxed, friendly, and informal atmosphere. Is AirTran similar? Do they tell jokes during the safety demonstration too? If not, do you think they'll start?

<comment><USER22> _Do they tell jokes during the safety demonstration too? If not, do you think they'll start?_

I usually fly Delta, and ALL of their servie is a joke, not just the safety demonstrations. :P

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Southwest has been ultra-competitive for many reasons, the biggest probably being its fuel hedging program. But it's only a matter of time before this competitive advantage asymptotically approaches zero, so it needs new strategies to maintain its advantage.

As a frequent flier and raving fan of Southwest, I've wondered what would change when they once again paid the same price for fuel as the legacy carriers. Today I stopped worrying. This acquisition ought to buy Southwest at least 10 more years as #1.

I'm also a frequent flier of Air Tran. AFAIC, except for Jet Blue, no other carrier is in the same class as Southwest and Air Tran. I have little doubt they will figure out how to make this work.

Now if only the feds don't fuck this up...

<comment><USER24> For the past 2-3 years or so, its fuel hedging has actually had a net negative effect on profit, as their hedged prices were higher than market price for Jet A.

<comment><USER25> While not good, that is part of hedging. It's basically an insurance premium for a policy they never had to collect on.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I find this merger interesting, having flown very little on Southwest but quite a lot on AirTran due to Atlanta being a major destination for me. I'm curious to see what changes they bring, however this comes as I find myself more and more frequently paying extra for JetBlue and other carriers that provide a bit more than baseline services.

<comment><USER27> I've got the opposite perspective, I fly Southwest almost exclusively (for domestic anyways), mostly though their big hub at Midway, I'm hoping for me this just means more or the same, but to more destinations.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I've never liked southwest, I flew with them once, and it was generally a bad experience. On the other hand I have always LOVED Air Tran. $50 upgrade to business class, with wifi, and free xm radio. This combination made for one great flight. Loosing that, looses me.

<comment><USER29> Their rewards systems is one of the most generous around as well. Four points for a business class upgrade, and lots of easy ways to ear points. If you don't have the points, business class upgrades are far more reasonable than other airlines. Between that and the WiFi on all flights, I'm going to be really sad to see them go.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> if you are younger than 23, you can book a one-way ticket on airtran for like $69 on the day of the flight. you have to fly standby, and you can't take any luggage, but it's an awesome program that i had taken advantage of.</comment>


Hash functions: An empirical comparison (2008) - <AUTHOR> http://www.strchr.com/hash_functions

<comment><USER2> Also relevant: [http://highscalability.com/blog/2014/8/4/tumblr-hashing- your...](http://highscalability.com/blog/2014/8/4/tumblr-hashing-your-way-to- handling-23000-blog-requests-per.html)

Note the bits on the sdbm hashing algorithm and how they found it to have less collisions than others, then went on so far as to add a patch for it to haproxy.

</comment><comment><USER3> Here's another hash function comparison with nice pictures: [http://programmers.stackexchange.com/a/145633](http://programmers.stackexchange.com/a/145633)

</comment><comment><USER4> Worth noting that this was before Intel's hardware CRC32 acceleration became readily available in x86 processors, which makes iSCSI CRC faster than all the others (maybe not for short key lengths)

<comment><USER5> Nitpick: You're talking about CRC32c (C of Castagnoli) - 0x1EDC6F41. By CRC32 without any additional context people usually mean CRC using polynomial 0x04C11DB7, which is much more common than CRC32c. CRC32 has also a nice feature:

"CRC-32 polynom 0x04C11DB7 can correct 1 byte error in ~1mbit[,] not that correcting single byte errors in such huge blocks is good for anything but ive found a much better one specifically 0x0D438219 which can correct one byte error in 9747877 bits" [1]

[1] [http://guru.multimedia.cx/category/error-correcting- codes/](http://guru.multimedia.cx/category/error-correcting-codes/)</comment></comment>


Show HN: My latest product - <AUTHOR> https://www.useprincipal.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hi HN, I wanted to show you Principal, the last product I built!

Principal allows you to create engaging 1:1 presentations for your target customers. For example you can create business cases, analyses or just qualitative content personalized for your most strategic prospects.

At the core, think of Principal as Google sheet + zapier + Google slides + Tracking. You search datapoints on your accounts, load them in the provided Google Sheet and load up your presentation. The system will create many versions of the doc, individualized for each of your accounts. Getting started video here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSiFdy-36U4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSiFdy-36U4)

The ideal use cases is b2b sales (especially to high-ticket enterprise customers), but it can also work well for other cases where you want to communicate individual value to your prospect. If you have any thoughts or feedback, I'd love to hear from you!</comment>


Twitter removes popular Putin parody account - the-dude https://twitter.com/darthputinkgb?lang=en <comment> the-dude I thought the timing to be curious because of the EU/Twitter hate speech deal: [https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/31/facebook-...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/31/facebook- youtube-twitter-microsoft-eu-hate-speech-code)</comment>


Does God Control the Weather? - <AUTHOR> http://www.theweatherprediction.com/issues/3/ <comment><AUTHOR> In addition to this silly page, this website has a bunch of really cool technical details on weather prediction! I know nothing about weather forecasting, but I've enjoyed reading some random articles on it.

Here's an interesting one about how the timing of front affects the forecast: [http://www.theweatherprediction.com/habyhints2/424/](http://www.theweatherprediction.com/habyhints2/424/)

Here's another one about forecasting ice on roads: [http://www.theweatherprediction.com/habyhints/7/](http://www.theweatherprediction.com/habyhints/7/)

Websites like this remind me why the Internet is great.

</comment><comment><USER2> That depends on what you mean by God, and what you mean by control. If something controls the weather, perhaps a combo of Physics, Geography and random chance, could that be a god worthy of respect and study?

I think we can agree on what we mean by weather, but I'm not certain of that either.

<comment><USER3> "If something controls the weather, perhaps a combo of Physics, Geography and random chance, could that be a god worthy of respect and study?"

Well, no -- not if that's the _only_ thing He does.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> "There is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry: 'Mine!'"

\- Abraham Kuyper, at the dedication of the Free University of Amsterdam, 1880.</comment>