Ask HN: Do I choose a few team members or lose our only investor? - <AUTHOR> Hacker Friends,
I seem to only come here to vent and ask questions that I know I can only answer myself but I digress.
I run a small start up based in the south west area. We are in the drone space, we have some pretty awesome tech, our IP is strong, we are funded and its looking like we will continue to be. Heres the kicker.
We have been in business for a little over 7 months. In that time period we have brought on some team members to write software and put them under the direction of Andrew (not his real name). Andrew believes that we should allocate equity and options to him and his team right now, this second or he will take the team we have built and walk. In a way he is holding my software team in escrow. It sucks and its not ideal.
On the other hand.
Our investor, to put it quite simply, "doesn't negotiate with terrorists". And has asked me to fire him in the morning. He has refused to allocate options at this point and believes we should wait until we raise another round. He is old fashioned and only believes in rewarding value. While its nobel its not ideal either.
So heres my problem. Do I take the nobel high road and take my men, distribute equity and pretty much kiss goodbye any chance of follow on investment. OR... Do I fire Andrew, risk losing over half my software team, and be set back months which could potentially cost me the company?
Thoughts? Comments? Questions? Concerns? I dont imagine i'll be sleeping much tonight and could use as many points of view as possible.
Best,
-C.A. <comment><USER2> Seems like:

* Your investor is 100% right about not negotiating with blackmail. You should absolutely fire Andrew soon. Your relationship with him is unrecoverable. (The demand to do it "tomorrow morning" is itself close to blackmail, and you could postpone a little to collect your thoughts and make a less emotional decision. It is hypocritical for your investor to reject blackmail while blackmailing you.)

* Your investor (and you should own some of this responsibility too) has screwed you over by expecting software engineers to work at a startup with an eternally-postponed equity discussion. I don't even understand how that works. You may need to compromise with your investor by firing Andrew (which isn't really a compromise; it's the right idea even without your investor's demand) but also insisting on an equity discussion immediately so that you have something to show the rest of the team that you're listening and want to treat them right.

* Andrew's threat to take the team with him is confusing. Where does he think they'll go? They probably want jobs that pay them money, and it seems unlikely he has one of those ready tomorrow. He (and you) may be overestimating their attachment to him. If he behaves like this among them, they may even _completely understand_ why he's leaving.

Seems like some combination of firing him, and having an honest conversation with the remaining team where you say that this is solely about him and not them, you want to make things right with the them regarding equity, and having stern words with your investor is the way to go?

(I have no qualifications which make this particularly good advice to follow, to be clear. But maybe simply being detached from your situation is helpful.)

<comment><AUTHOR> I appreciate your input and perspective. Thank you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> You should have given all the employees equity when they joined. It's better to give them equity sooner rather than later, but definitely before the next funding round (because the strike price has to be higher).

Employees with drone experience are in high demand right now. You have to give them equity to compete with other startups, as well as Amazon, Google, DJI, and others that can pay higher salaries.

Investors often have good advice from years of experience, but ultimately the CEO has to make the decisions.

</comment><comment><USER4> I'm not a lawyer, nor an accountant, not even a cartoonist (sorry Scott Adams) - so my suggestions are solely based on my experience.

You don't mention how much you have invested in the venture. If the investor is paying for everybody's salary (including yours), then the golden rule applies (he who has the gold, makes the rules).

In the hi-tech space, execution is more valuable (in the long run) than finance. Does your investor understand that? If your ideas are really good, you could stall and find a new investor who has an acceptable view on equity.

Given that Andrew and software team want equity - are they willing to pony up funds? that way you might be able to bootstrap the business. If you are able to bootstrap the business, then I would fire Andrew but not the team.

If I were in your position, I would lock-out everybody. Shutdown the servers, etc to preserve the software. Then hardball negotiate with both Andrew and the investor - separately. At the same time seeking out other potential investors. It might take a couple of weeks, but in terms of the long-term I would see it as a risk worth taking.

<comment><AUTHOR> He has invested all the capital. When we first started we were just an idea and now were weeks away from "flipping the switch"

All I care about is making the product. Not the money, or potential money. Its tough, our investor has also served as a mentor and stepping away from that mentality is difficult.

<comment><USER4> Your response clarifies a few things (but not all).

Assuming a couple things:

1) you have discussed any delays to flipping the switch arising from firing Andrew with your investor / mentor. And that he is Ok with that.

2) that your investor is prepared to pay any termination payments, especially those in-lieu of notice.

2) that you are paying your staff the going rate for the work they are doing.

3) that you have standard employment contracts - i.e. no soliciting, no rights to IP, etc

You will need to write a termination letter - which basically says that Andrew can have no contact with your staff, no rights to the code nor IP, nor compete in the technical area.

Ideally you have your investor there in the morning. You call in Andrew, give him the letter of termination and clearly say that if he tries any funny business then you will sue him. Then march him off the premises. You can send any of his personal stuff to his home later in the day.

Then you announce to the rest of the staff what you have done and that you need to pull together to ship. Once there is demonstrable results then equity discussions can take place. Invite any disgruntled staff to leave on the spot - with the same termination conditions as for Andrew.

I'm sure that some people will protest that I'm suggesting a heavy handed approach. That is true. You have cast your lot by committing to the product and your investor / mentor. Taking somebody's money comes with a commitment to them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Both Andrew and the Investor sound like jerks to me. Sometimes you have to deal with jerks and sometimes you have more than one jerk to deal with.

Building a team that works well with each other is hard to do. I don't know at what stage the project is at yet, or if you have the equity to give to the team. How well are they paid? I figured if they are paid well like at least the average salary for their position, there is no need to distribute equity until the project is finished.

The problem might be that your startup doesn't have any income yet, so you can't distribute what you don't have.

I hope each member of the team has signed a contract, one that has a non- compete clause in case they do walk and take IP with them.

You need to look for another investor or do some crowdfunding to raise funds to replace him.

No matter what choice you take, fire Andrew or get rid of the investor or even do both, you will be in for a hard time.

</comment><comment><USER6> Making an important decision like this under pressure of time is sure to result in a mistake. You need to understand why Andrew has put you against such an immediate deadline. Is it because he has another offer for his services? Is it something you said or did? Is there anyone on the software team that would be able to give you the whole story? You need to see this as well as possible from his eyes, forgiving his words as rash judgement if possible.

My guess is that Andrew sees something that you don't...maybe that the software, after a certain amount is complete, can be finished by others and his services won't be needed. On the other hand, did Andrew do this at a previous company? Do you know? I would think you need to find someone that can take over Andrew's place if you decided you wanted to go on without him? Do you have this person? Anyway, I would not fire Andrew. I would use the time he stays on to find a replacement and figure out how to replace him. Also try to document what he is doing. This kind of blackmail works once in the corporate world. If it gets out that he has done this in the past it will make him radioactive with others.

I think the first decision is to buy time. Any ideas?

</comment><comment><USER7> Allocate options to the team. Fire the blackmailer.

<comment><AUTHOR> That seems to be what has to happen. It unfortunate because he has formed a software union of sorts and is acting as a union rep. If I fire him I could potentially lose 2-3 others.

<comment><USER4> Possible but people are reluctant to jump ship when you make the traitor walk the plank. It's the sword in the back that drives the point home - if you'll pardon the pun ;-)</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Thought experiment -- what is the true value of an asset? - <AUTHOR>

Lets imagine a situation where we're watching a world from the outside, without being able to send information in to it.
Now suppose that we on the outside know, beyond a doubt that the model world will be destroyed unless the model inhabitants build a certain expensive artifact -- too expensive for any individual to build. Maybe we're to be the agents of the destruction, or maybe we can predict the future. Whatever. The essential points are that we know "if not X then destruction", that building X will require collective allocation of resources, and that the model inhabitants are uncertain about this future.
Also, the world will be destroyed soon. Say within the lifetime of the majority of our model people, so that most of them can expect to see the end of the world. The world will be destroyed in a way that does not confirm widely held religious beliefs. In other words it should appear to them as a Bad Thing, not a Good Thing.
Ok, questions: how should the model people value some person's plan to build X to avoid disaster? What is the true value of X? Are there different reasonable answers, or only one? Should we prefer metrics that are more likely to cause X to be built, or is that irrelevant? <comment><USER2> The basic value calculation is the opportunity cost of X, ie the sum of value from other things that could have been obtained instead. This must be compared to the opportunity cost of _not_ building X. For us that answer is obvious (essentially: infinity because everyone will die), but the model people are forced to estimate the probability of Doom.

Of course, a single probability number is not much good because it is open to dispute in proportion to the opportunity cost of X (as we see all the time in debates about climate change). Bayesian inference is the practice of updating estimates of probability based on the accumulation of information...but as the process is counterintuitive for most people, asking a wide majority to follow some course involving certain sacrifice for uncertain result is still going to be a very hard sell.

</comment><comment><USER3> Reminds me of this philosophy article

<http://www.fullmoon.nu/articles/art.php?id=tal>

</comment><comment><USER4> Are you John Titor?</comment>


Facebook Blocks Ad Blockers, but It Strives to Make Ads More Relevant - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/10/technology/facebook-ad-blockers.html?_r=1 <comment><USER2> This is a hostile action against their users. When someone installs software on their computer specifically to block ads from being downloaded, presented, or seen.. and then some corporation goes to extreme lengths to bypass that software, that is a hostile action. I wouldn't be surprised if it's illegal.

But regardless of legality, I think it's a sign of how much contempt these companies have toward their users, and it's a good window for someone to take a bite out of their market share.

<comment><USER3> Against their users? How do their users think they pay to run the site in the first place? Would it be better on their users to require everyone to pay for use? People need to stop acting like Google and Facebook owes them something. All the free stuff is only available if someone pays. My thoughts...there are a lot of bad ad companies out there and unknowing websites place their ads up. But, to place an ad blocker on a well known established company and then use their services without paying is flat out stealing.

<comment><USER4> I call this the social contract theory of online advertising: that by viewing a free website's content you have implicitly agreed to view the ads that pay for it. I actually think this theory has more merit than a lot of Hacker News gives credit for, but I also recognize that someone who has installed an ad blocker has clearly already rejected it, so trying to debate with them on these grounds isn't likely to get far. I would try to reframe your argument.

<comment><USER5> Are you also saying by listening to the radio you agree to listen to the ads? Watching TV requires you to watch the commercials? What about newspapers and magazines that are heavily subsidized by ads, are you implicitly agreeing to read the ads by buying them? I don't think there is any implicit agreement to vivid, or listen to ads given with free items. The Web isn't any different

<comment><USER4> To me it seems like a pretty straightforward application of the categorical imperative ("act as though your principles will become universal law"): if everyone blocked ads, we'd have no free content. I want free content. Hence, I don't block ads. You don't have to agree with me on this, but I don't think I'm coming from nutty principles.

<comment><USER6> > if everyone blocked ads, we'd have no free content.

That's right! If people did not pay for using software, there would be no... oh wait... I am writing from Linux, using Firefox... and have a github tab open...

But if people did not pay for encyclopedias... oh wait...

In fact, if companies could not monetize on ads, less clicbaiting, useless and worthless crap would be created. Sure there would be much less content overall. But most of it is useless anyway. Quality content would be behind membership payments, or just free, published by entusiasts.

The web was thriving before pay-per-view ad-fueled-cancer has consumed it with masses of ignorant clickers, so interested in Kim Kardashian meals.

Sure... things progressed somewhat, fuelled by all that money. But let's make it clear - it had it's price, changing a vision of free medium of sharing knowledge and communicating, into a centralized shopping mall, tracking your every move.

<comment><USER2> There was a period of time, after the bubble and before ad-blockers, when the world wide web was a parasitic minefield of flashing imagines and clickbait and malware.

Then someone invented AdBlock and the web was suddenly fun to use again.

People who've grown up in an ad-block era have no idea how bad it used to be. They didn't have to watch this amazing new "internet" being destroyed by greedy crooks who themselves barely understood the technology.

<comment><USER3> ad-block era??? This is relatively new. There is no era yet ;) It's like saying "The Pokemon Go Era"

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> If I hadn't already deleted my Facebook, this would probably make me do it.

</comment><comment><USER8> > "For blockers to get around these changes, Facebook said they would have to > begin analyzing the content of the ads themselves, a costly and laborious > process."

I don't think anybody at NYT has ever come across 1 of the longest digital battles since the internet became a thing, otherwise known as: P2P

Where there is a will, there will be a way. For every piece of software that will hide ads, someone out there will likely begin to write software to block this, simply cause some shitty ad ruined his/her Mafia Wars/Farmville experience.

</comment><comment><USER9> I'm more curious to see how this plays out with technology than I am over the economic and privacy arguments. Facebook obviously has the resources to find new ways around these ad blockers. Can these small ad blocker developers keep up?

Facebook still renders fine with adblock and ublock origin running.

</comment><comment><USER10> How about allowing us to pay to not see ads? I still enjoy using Facebook but I hate seeing ads. I'd pay a couple bucks a month to avoid them.

<comment><USER9> I personally don't think it would go over well but I'd like to see a site with as much pull as Facebook try it. I've seen articles claiming facebook is making $10 per user per quarter [1]. That seems high to me but if true I don't see anyone paying $10 per month for memes and political rants.

[1] [http://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-average-revenue- per-...](http://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-average-revenue-per-user-is- up-sharply-2015-11)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> The cat and mouse game between advertisers and adblockers is about to enter a new era. I'm surprised it took this long.

</comment><comment><USER12> How about doing something about spam ads and links?

<comment><USER13> They are: [https://techcrunch.com/2016/08/04/facebook- clickbait/](https://techcrunch.com/2016/08/04/facebook-clickbait/)</comment></comment>


Harvard laser research could make WiFi hundreds of times faster - <AUTHOR> https://sociable.co/science/harvard-research-lasers-could-make-wifi-hundreds-times-faster-report/ <comment><USER2> If you were wondering how lasers are involved, this is from the abstract of the paper:

>Here, we give a proof of concept of a compact radio frequency transmitter based on a semiconductor laser frequency comb. In this laser, the beating among the coherent modes oscillating inside the cavity generates a radio frequency current, which couples to the electrodes of the device. We show that redesigning the top contact of the laser allows one to exploit the internal oscillatory current to drive a dipole antenna, which radiates into free space. In addition, direct modulation of the laser current permits encoding a signal in the radiated radio frequency carrier. Working in the opposite direction, the antenna can receive an external radio frequency signal, couple it to the active region, and injection lock the laser. These results pave the way for applications and functionality in optical frequency combs, such as wireless radio communication and wireless synchronization to a reference source.</comment>


Tell HN:  Appsumo's current deal is nice for startups/freelancers - <AUTHOR>

Just thought I'd spread the word, since its a lot of good stuff for a fresh startup or freelancer:
- 6 months of MailChimp, BatchBlue, FormStack
- $120 credit at FreshBooks
- 100 pack of Moo MiniCards
$55, plus some of the proceeds donated to National Wildlife Fund.
http://www.appsumo.com/
Feel free to flag as spam if anyone doesn't think this is appropriate. <comment><AUTHOR> clickable: <http://www.appsumo.com/></comment>


InstaCraze connecting fashionistas over exclusive social shopping network - <AUTHOR> https://www.instacraze.com <comment><AUTHOR> Earn $1000+ through InstaCraze's amazing referral program.

<comment><AUTHOR> InstaCraze has incorporated an innovative social cause program as well. Check it out on InstaCraze.com</comment></comment>


Poll HN: Do you ever code while stoned? - <AUTHOR> http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/TCQ5P2V

<comment><USER2> Reminds me of the Hemingway quote: _"Write drunk; edit sober."_

I'd give it a go, if it were legal, but I've coded and written while _inebriated_ a few times. It worked out great, but I haven't got the stomach for regular drinking so it's not common. It seems to be a good way to turn down the inner censor.

</comment><comment><USER3> Here's the strawpoll version (live results, quantitative option):

<http://strawpoll.me/4231>

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> After 10 hours:

708 responses, 269 "Yes" (38.6%), 433 "No" (62.2%), 33 "Other"

I'm surprises SurveyMonkey doesn't show the results. Won't be using them again. Thanks everyone for participating in this informal poll.

</comment><comment><USER4> I haven't smoked in several years after doing so consistently and heavily, and I'm much better off for it. My mind is no longer foggy, slow, and as prone to needless diversions.

So, no.

</comment><comment><USER5> No. It's horrible. Its like growing wings and immediately locking your brain into a mental birdcage. Why would you do that to yourself?

</comment><comment><USER6> Possession of marijuana comes with a mandatory death sentence in my country, so no.

</comment><comment><USER7> What exactly would "other" be?</comment>


Please review my startup: Open, Democratic, Project Mgmt - <AUTHOR> http://bettermeans.com <comment><USER2> Like the concepts a lot. (See an old HN comment of mine suggesting a tiny sliver of what you've done, here: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=650361> )

But, all the text about the grand vision with new custom terminology is off- putting. Makes the software sound appropriate for running some sort of utopian hippie commune. A 'Manifesto' makes me think of Marx and the Unabomber.

I suspect that like ThePoint -> Groupon, your opportunity is some pragmatic subset of all the functionality you're currently offering, rather than the entire doctrine.

(This is not to say you're wrong about the big trends. Just that people will adopt the new ways of work via demonstrated success in baby steps, rather than understanding the vision and inevitability in a flash of insight.)

<comment><USER3> _A 'Manifesto' makes me think of Marx and the Unabomber._

A manifesto is just a public statement or declaration. I thought of the Cannibal Manifesto and the Hacker Manifesto in addition to the Communist Manifesto. There are lots more listed here: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifesto#Notable_manifestos>

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> > open, democratic, decentralized social enterprise management

6 words and you've already lost me.

This is followed by a complicated screenshot with arrows pointing in various directions, then a manifesto in typefaces that jangle like a political donation chain letter. Then a quote from Albert Einstein. Then a bunch of diffuse conceptual words in different sizes and orientations. Seeing floaty words like "Distributed" and "Emergent" only solidifies the feeling that this product is hot air -- even if it isn't.

You're making it extra hard to understand what it does or why I'd want it. Smart HN readers will pore through and analyze what it does, because they are looking for product ideas of their own, but the rest of the world is damn busy and unlikely to spend that much time.

Perhaps try to cut your initial presentation down by 10x. If I have to scroll at all to figure out what you are talking about, you've probably lost me until I hear from someone I know that it's awesome. Do you already have users raving to everyone they know about how awesome it is?

Not trying to be harsh, just honest! I completely respect the challenge of what you're trying to take on, and I doubt I could do any better.

Edit: Having spent a bit more time on your site to try to find more constructive advice to offer, I have to say I am impressed with your ideas and development of them. I feel myself rooting for you to succeed. But the initial impression you offer is more opaque than it should be. And it seems like your system offers an entire architecture for project management that you'd have to buy into, making that a steep first step. Do you guys use this product internally? Is there anywhere you expose how you're using it?

</comment><comment><USER5> I like this, but at the same time parts of it strike me as odd.

Nobody tells anybody what to do? Really? Who's taking out the trash next week? Who's working through the weekend to make sure the install goes okay? Who's working Christmas?

It has that open-source feel to it -- wonderful, cool, awesome -- and you wonder whether everything could really be like this, or just stuff people are excited about. After all, there are a lot of things to do in any organization that people do not like doing. And the normative payment idea? Wow! I'd love to see that actually being used. Whether workable or not, its a very powerful idea.

Having said all of that negative stuff, I think you are on to something. Congrats! I want to see real-world, for-profit organizations using this because it makes them competitive. I think that's the put up or shut up moment for this product. But if you're willing to pivot, I know you'll make it. Awesome job.

Now the critical part: traction.

<comment><AUTHOR> The trash is taken out by someone who thinks it's worth doing. If nobody thinks it's worth doing, the trash stays.

Bettermeans itself is running on the platform: <https://secure.bettermeans.com/projects/20> so far we've had no problem showing up for a critical install.

And you're absolutely correct about traction.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I've been waiting almost two years to post this! Thank you HN for you support. From giving me a kick in the butt to launch: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1558154>, to amazing feedback on content <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1836538> I continue to be grateful to this community.

<comment><USER6> Kabuks, I'm seriously impressed, and may try the open version for my project, still in the idea gestation phase (<http://shindyapin.tumblr.com/tagged/microfarm>).

Any tips on using it to start as a one-man project?

<comment><AUTHOR> It should work smoothly for you as a one-man team. But the real magic starts to happen when more people get involved and start needing to make decisions together.

If you know that your team will remain just you, it might be overkill. I would use pivotal tracker, or the free version of basecamp. But would be very curious how it works out for you. Keep me posted on how it goes.

<comment><USER6> Thanks... I definitely do not plan to remain a one-man team, if I can help it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Its certainly an interesting hypothesis and I wish you luck, but I can't see it working out the way it is now.

What you're introducing has to be implemented first as a cultural change by leadership, meaning larger organizations that exist today cannot simply adopt your system unless they fully dedicate themselves to changing. This is expensive and is pretty much guaranteed not to happen.

This leaves your target market to small and medium, fast growing businesses. The problem here is that these smaller companies want productivity tools that accelerate growth instantly; not an organizational revamp for tomorrow.

By the looks of it, it seems your product introduces more work and politics (IMO just as much bureaucracy as the system before) because members have to vote on initiatives, rate each other, etc. I can only guess that in a short matter of time, members stop caring about these artificial ratings or manipulate/game them, especially if management decides that "contribution rating" should be a form of how workers are paid. It is simply not a long-run solution; people don't want to casts votes everyday for the rest of their lives. Workers are motivated by their work, not extraneous organizational concerns.

I'm not really sure if the efficiency trade-off nets positive. But I like your different thinking, and you may be on to something.

//Bachelor of management & organizational studies...never thought I'd ever use it here lol.

<comment><AUTHOR> You're spot on that it would be almost impossible to approach an already entrenched mgmt system with this unproven model.

It's also true that there's an overhead with using the system, but that's the end of our agreement.

Because folks only vote on what they're interested in, the system works very fluidly. No work is held up waiting for someone, and you don't have to wade through votes that you don't care about.

We use our system, and use the contribution rating to pay ourselves, and distribute equity. And it's working very smoothly. I spend about 20-30 minutes a week 'rating'. And the rest of the voting happens seamlessly (much like voting on HN)

It's very, very difficult to game the system b/c everything is so transparant. It would look ridiculous.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Christ, how many sites did you steal the design from?

      http://bettermeans.com/front/pricing.html
      https://github.com/plans

      http://bettermeans.com/images/static/dashboard.png
      http://a.gaborcselle.com/blog/uploaded_images/pivotal_screenshot-708013.png

You didn't even change the class and id names. Gah!

<comment><USER9> Yeah, after watching the video, I was wondering if this was just a rebranding of Pivotal Tracker.

If you're going to steal an interface... please don't steal from such an ugly and disfunctional web app. Having to use Pivotal Tracker for 3 months on a client project made me batshit crazy. It's one of the worst user interfaces I've ever suffered long term.

<comment><AUTHOR> I respectfully disagree that we stole the dashboard design. We were definitely inspired by pivotal tracker bit we didn't steal anything.

<comment><USER10> I haven't used the dashboard, so I'm basing this solely on the video, but... umm, yeah, you did pretty much rip off Pivotal Tracker. You moved the Icebox over to the left, added a few new buttons, but in the demo when you start adding values and commenting it's a one-to-one from Pivotal. So much so, that I even looked at the company bio to see if someone from Pivotal Labs was involved.

Great idea, but just because you believe in an open enterprise doesn't mean you should go around lifting everyone else's hard work to kickstart your own.

EDIT: I sit corrected. The dashboard is a dead rip off of Pivotal. I just did a comparison of one of the dashboards linked above to the source of the tracker on one of my projects. Shared class names throughout, exact same structure.

I expect this out of an MBA with no idea of the culture and ethos behind dev, but someone who's at least knowledgable enough about HN to post it here. Wow, that's a new low. At this point, saying you're going to send private emails of apology isn't enough, if you want to be truly open the only way I see to repair your reputation is a mea culpa on your blog. Really disappointed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Has this concept been tested? As a potential customer I don't have any reason to believe that this organizational structure works.

The video is downright inspirational though, great job on that.

<comment><AUTHOR> The governance structure and voting system is very close to the one the Apache foundation uses for its projects.

The retrospectives and 360 compensation system is our innovation, and is untested (except on us!)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I think there's too much text description on the main page. Try simply having bullets to convey what the site does and why it is better. Like me, there might be several folks who wouldnt have the time / patience to read through the entire text or view the video.

</comment><comment><USER13> Love the idea, I feel like Noam Chomsky would dig this.

It might be good to have kind of a short outline or guide on how this would be used, kind of like Joel Spolsky's guide on Mercurial:

<http://hginit.com/>

</comment><comment><USER14> WOW! This is the most powerful and inspiring thing I have seen in a while. I really hope this catches on. Thank you, it is refreshing to see a webapp that is innovative at this stage of things. Your enthusiasm is contagious, it would be wonderful if it went viral.

Problems:

I can imagine a lot of CEOs laughingly dismissing this. They are not going to let some software take over. It has to be clear how this is beneficial for CEOs, and you make a point that CEOs are overburdened but still.

The overall feeling is that you are giving up control of the corporation. I think it would be better to market it as an enabling complement to traditional organizational structures. An evolution rather than a revolution. Make it clear that your product is a tool with which organizations decide the pace at which they want to move towards open governance, rather than a new set of rigid rules to be used from the start.

For the past 3 years in have been thinking and working in something somewhat related, but chose to focus on the enabling tools, rather than on the organizational ideas.

</comment><comment><USER15> I'm actually conceptually working on something similar to this. A part of me wants to congratulate you, because I do truly think you are on to something. The concept of not paying for the service if your company is willing to transcend into a democratic process - superb. I sense that you got some of these ideas from working in a crippled work environment, as I.

My advice to you: push the democratic side, leverage the idea of selling to the employees rather than the employers through engagement and fandom, simplify your motions process and dashboard. If possible, have a "democratic functions" toggle somewhere in settings.

The other side of me wants to be upset that I can't post a link...yet.

Good luck.

</comment><comment><USER16> Bravo! What an inventive and inspiring approach to something big and important. Best of luck with it.

I wonder whether you might want to simplify the landing page. I really had to watch the video (which I liked) to figure out what you're doing.

Maybe it's as simple as . . .

       A new way to work together

       Turbocharge your team with the decentralized
       workstyle pioneered by Wikipedia and Mozilla

<comment><USER17> Those are trademarked names. If you want to say "wikis and open source", fine.

<comment><USER18> They are trademarked names that are being used to refer directly to what is named. As such, there is no chance of "consumer confusion", and their use should be perfectly legal.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I think the product is good, the message is wrong.

If your message takes a 4 minute video, it's too complicated to acquire customers. That 4 minute video should be part of a help document, not an explanation.

Also, you should focus on project management, not on organizational paradigms. While I applaud your aims for achieving a better impact in the world, I think it's a bit over-the-top: it's a project management tool, you're not re- inventing the global economy through democracy - or, in reality, you can't change the world economy and it's org structure, but you can influence it via a project management tool. Focus your copy on differentiating yourself from other products, but don't get all high-and-mighty about how someone should run their company.

If I were starting a business, I would instantly be turned off if I was told that in order to use your product, I had to give a copywriter equal say to product I created and built from day 1.

<comment><USER20> While it certainly sounds scary to relinquish control, what has been fascinating is to find how much people are hesitant to overstep. In our open democratic model to date we have not been burned by giving the "copywriter equal say". In fact it has made our work richer to open it up to many voices helping us out.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> The video is fantastic and the product looks amazing, however I'm not sure if democracy is the best way to govern a company. It may work well for open source though or smaller startups where the equity is divided across almost evenly.

<comment><USER20> We have a greater vision in terms of equity, in that when you work you also gain equity. Unfortunately we are still working through the legal details of making that work. But it is articulated in our white paper (<http://bettermeans.org/front/?page_id=306>).

We will be sure to share that with all of you once we get there, because that will be the next innovation of our model that could also really shake things up, especially for tech teams and other startups looking for a way to create more fair partnership

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I think it's too "out-of-the-box" for most companies, it might fit better with non-profits which are largely driven by volunteers or startups though as their existing working model is closer to the BetterMeans model (i.e. people pick which projects to work on, etc.)

But I think there needs to be some level of hierarchical control rather than a complete free-for-all though, as things like budgets, etc. have to be managed (disclaimer: I told the Wikipedia founders the same thing when they started. I may have been a tiny bit wrong in that case ;-)

The product looks very slick though !

<comment><USER20> I totally agree that it is more suited to non-profits and other social enterprise. Those are certainly the folks we are directing our message to. However I do think it has wider applicability for any team that is interested in working together in a more decentralized way.

In terms of the heirarchy, it is not a total open free for all. While anyone can vote and comment on open projects, only the votes of the members are binding. Therefore we create a forum for all voices to be heard, while still allowing the devoted team members to drive the work in the right direction for the team.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> First, this looks like a huge project; congrats on getting it done and out there!

I think you should stick with your title here as the main hook at the top: "Open, democratic project management." The rest seems like too many buzzwords and still doesn't tell me what your app is/does.

I agree with a couple of the others that the front page has too much on it. I think you could definitely benefit from a tabbed set of panels with all of this info on it so people can navigate through it all.

Other than that I like the idea, and will be trying it out with some other team members.

<comment><USER20> thanks for the feedback, I think you make good points. We will revisit that homepage. Such an important first impression.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Looks great! What lang/technologies are you using ?

<comment><AUTHOR> rails and jquery hosted on heroku recurly for payments

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I love the idea, it will make corporate world much better places to work for most of corporates out there, it also encourages ideas of each individual, and cultivates creativity. However, i think its insane to use a software/ IT product to take the power off those politicians, and create democracy within the corporate world. My best wishes to you, kabuks.

</comment><comment><USER26> Really awesome looking app. I've definitely be interested in using it. I really like the 4 column dashboard.

</comment><comment><USER27> Good luck to you Shereef. You know my interest in that space :-)

I still think the home page is terrible, because of the amount of vertical scrolling (5 pages on my computer!). But the video rocks!

</comment><comment><USER28> You should try to streamline the landing page (and subsequent pages as well). It's not clear upon skimming exactly what you are offering.

Mozilla does a great job of this if you need inspiration.

</comment><comment><USER29> Here's a vaguely related and open source app which covers group formation and decision making: <http://www.oneclickor.gs/>

</comment><comment><USER30> i only watched the video, but i really dig the pitch. im a heavy user of Pivotal tracker (which looks very similar to your dashboard), but i find that it can be sometimes too focused on command and control (one person assigning a task to another person). it seems like your solution will encourage more collaboration off the bat, with people having to step up and willingly take ownership of projects, which could lead to better delivery times.

</comment><comment><USER31> i do not understand the video's tie in with "social justice" and the environment? is this a manifesto or project management software?</comment>


George Soros: Why I agree with (some of) Friedrich Hayek - <AUTHOR> http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/53885.html

<comment><USER2> Soros is fighting the wrong battle.

 _Friedrich Hayek is generally regarded as the apostle of a brand of economics which holds that the market will assure the optimal allocation of resources... [and] whose two main pillars are the efficient market hypothesis and the theory of rational expectations.

This is usually called the Chicago School_

No. Hayek was of the "Austrian school". The "Chicago school" came later [1]. It's really the philosophy of the Austrians that's he's objecting to. The Chicagoans arrive at many of the same conclusions, but do so not through philosophical inquiry, but through _extensive_ reliance on mathematics and metrics. Much of what we see in modern econ derives from the Chicagoans.

Anyway, I don't think that he adequately rebuts Hayek. As Mises shows in _Human Action_ , the human mind is a black box, and we have no way of knowing its motivations (frequently even our own). Therefore, it really isn't possible to say definitively that a person is not behaving rationally, and really the best model we can make (in the real world) is to assume that they are.

But even that doesn't matter. Because Soros conflates the Austrian and Chicago school, and only mentions the Austrian philosophy, he completely fails to rebut the Chicago arguments. So he hasn't really done anything to discredit a laissez-faire approach to economics.

[1] See especially discussion of Milton Friedman, [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Milton_Friedm...](https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Milton_Friedman)

<comment><USER3> I think there's a couple things happening here -

First, you're right - he's fighting the wrong battle with regards to the field of economics. The Chicago School is most definitely Not the Austrian School, and I think much of the field of actual economists would agree that market fundamentalism is wrong.

But I don't think this is a real attempt to rebut the field of economics itself - this is fundamentally a political piece. Soros isn't an economist - he's a smart guy, he's a savvy investor, he's politically and philosophically acute, but he's not an economist. What he's attacking are political philosophies, not economic theories, and at this point, the ghost of Hayek casts a longer shadow in politics than economics.

Maybe it's been happening for a long time, but the horseshit that's being peddled under the brand of economics in political circles is a big problem in the current political environment, and much of it derives from a fairly easy- to-understand set of works that pushed the market doctrine. He's arguing against bullshit economics, not actual modern economics, even if he doesn't know it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I agree with Soros in his general feelings about market structure risk in the current system. I would like to see him engage his intellect with the long term pattern that has seen nation states constantly grow more powerful.

I take an interpretation of history that says part of the reason Europe emerged is because it lacked a concentration of power. Power and flowed around many aristocrats and one Catholic church. Later, the church split, giving yet more opportunity for power shifts, and evolution.

These days the tension is between many corporations and a few very powerful nation states. Evolution is healthy, but we're in a long period where nation states have an inevitable growth. The amount of tax they collect as percentage and in real terms grows over time. The reach of states into our freedom grows over time. It's easy for governments to create child institutions. But the evolutionary guards on state instutitions are very weak. They tend to grow larger and less efficient, and are difficult to reform and abolish. They can't go backrupt (except by taking the state down as well). So government just grows and grows.

A dynamic has emerged where governments can take on risk for corporations, and share it around to the people. It's easy to see this in the context of the bank crisis, but it's much better established than that. National works projects are the same thing. They're generally a poor use of money, but the loss is spread around and nobody has incentive to call out mistakes. When they're a success, governments look good. So there's motivation to engage in risk.

It is business as usual for governments to engage in moral hazard. Our structures and narratives don't equip us to defend against this. The current structure of the banking system is only one aspect of this.

<comment><USER2> I agree with much of what you said.

It's slightly off topic, but your statement _Power and flowed around many aristocrats and one Catholic church_ makes me think of Neal Stephenson's book _Anathem_ [1].

A core theme of _Anathem_ is a society in which science and technology are pursued in monasteries that keep themselves aloof from "secular" society. Government power and religion then interact with a much different dynamic. So the role that the church played historically in mitigating the power of monarchs is, in this world, played by the scientists.

I don't think that Stephenson develops the idea far enough to start drawing any conclusions, but he does inspire enough thought that it's quite an interesting read.

[1] <https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Anathem>

<comment><USER4> Thanks for the tip. I've had Anathem sitting on a shelf for months, but didn't get past first couple of pages. Need to get into it.

<comment><USER5> It gets much easier after the first 100 pages or so. Once you get used to the vocabulary, it's more enjoyable.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Verizon is Selling Your Personal Data - <AUTHOR> https://alpha.app.net/bryanjclark/post/843872 I suggest opting out. <comment><USER2> Thanks for the PSA.

While I understand why these things tend to be opt-out by default, I'm surprised there was no email from Verizon updating users about these new settings with a link to opt-out if they wanted to.

I used to think that the telecom industry is a lot more regulated than social network companies like Facebook, but I guess that's not really true!

<comment><USER3> I received an email a while back from them basically saying they were going to start taking privileges with my data if I didn't go to a page and opt-out. I don't remember the text, but that was the gist.

[Edit] Did some digging and the email subject was: Important Update Regarding Your Privacy

It has various sections on what will be used and how with a call to action at the bottom listing your options.

Opening text: Why am I getting this notice?

Your privacy is an important priority at Verizon Wireless. Our Privacy Policy (available at www.vzw.com/myprivacy) informs you about information we collect and how we use it. Today we want to tell you about some important updates relating to two new uses of information. Verizon Wireless will begin using the information described below for (1) certain business and marketing reports and (2) making mobile ads you see more relevant. If you do not want us to use this information for these purposes, you can let us know by using one of the options described in the "Your Choices" section of this notice. This supplements our Privacy Policy.

Your choices section:

If you do not want us to use your information for any of the purposes described above, please let us know at any time by:

• Visiting www.vzw.com/myprivacy

Or

• Calling 1-866-211-0874

<comment><USER4> I received the same kind of email from AT&T awhile ago. I immediately called them up, and asked to opt-out. After 30 minutes on the phone, the representative told me that the "feature" hasn't been rolled out yet, and I should call back a month later. Guess what? I completely forgot about it. That was probably the intention all along.... Thanks for the reminder, though!

<comment><USER5> I had a similar experience with Clear (wireless) and the binding arbitration clause in their ToS. When I called to opt out (because one cannot do so online, of course :-/ ) I was transferred 6 times and in the end the drone finally gave up and just asked if putting a note in "my file" would be sufficient. At that point, I think we were equally frustrated with one another and I settled.

But I can easily imagine some lawyer-type dreamed up such a clause but failed to tell anyone else in the business about it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Offtopic: This is the first time I'm seeing a post "on" app.net and not "about" app.net

<comment><USER7> Might be something to do with people usually not linking to tweets unless they're really notable. And app.net items are effectively just long tweets.

<comment><USER8> > And app.net items are effectively just long tweets.

App.net doesn't have a limit on message length?

<comment><USER9> 256 characters, IIRC

<comment><USER10> Why? Just to be like twitter, but different, with no comprehension of why the Twitter limit exists?

<comment><USER11> Comprehending why the Twitter limit exists should let you comprehend why there's no point for App.net to follow it.

The service won't actually be used for "micro-blogging" unless users are constrained by _some_ limit, but 144 is too damn small. Nobody would ever have picked it if they weren't forced to, and these days they aren't.

What infinitesimal fraction of modern Twitter users in App.net's target market do you imagine use the service via SMS? The limit a legacy of an irrelevant use case.

I'd probably have gone a bit higher than 256 myself (disregarding attachment to powers of two), but it's an improvement.

<comment><USER12> I've been using Tent (<https://tent.io>) which also adopted 256 characters, and I think it's actually quite generous for statuses. Maybe too much; the nature of microblogging changes when you don't have to be concise. I bet the sweet spot is probably somewhere in 160-200.

<comment><USER13> Sticking to 140 would be a good standard for a microblogging standard since it would allow you to syndicate out to Twitter and you could emulate the API and automatically have other apps support that character limit.

If you go beyond 140 it is then no longer a microblog post, but rather just an ordinary blog post.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Just so everyone knows, AT&T does the same thing. You have 30 days from the date of your contract before they start passing it out, but I believe you can opt out of future transactions on the site. Try going to <http://att.com/ecpnioptout> (if you got a new contract with your iPhone 5, do it this week!)

Edit: I should say, AT&T _does something similar_. I do not know if it is the same thing, since their opt-out page makes it sound rather innocuous compared to the vague language used in the mailed letter. CPNI = Customer Proprietary Network Information

<comment><USER15> AT&T's is much more invasive -- it is across all of their telecom platforms (DSL, TV, wireless, wifi, etc). They also will log location information for advertising: <http://www.att.com/gen/privacy-policy?pid=2506>

You can find more information from their AdWorks division: <http://adworks.att.com/press.html>

If they were to begin network sniffing, they could potentially build powerful user profiles that would be more valuable than Facebook's data (and truly "frictionless"). Your passive internet browsing would start influencing the commercials you see on TV.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> These are the steps to opt out of Verizon "selling your personal data", as far as I can tell:

Visit <http://www.vzw.com/myprivacy>. If you are not already signed in to My Verizon, you will be prompted to sign in – after doing so, return to that myprivacy page.

Click the link "Manage Location Privacy settings" near the bottom, which points to <https://locationmanagement.vzw.com/>

You should now be at "Location Management" > "Location Privacy Settings". I'm guessing that this is where you actually opt-out. I'm not sure because there's nothing for me to do here – I see "There are no services available. A location service must be downloaded on the handset to be listed here.".

<comment><USER17> Exact same for me. I'd like to opt out but I have no idea how from the instructions provided.

<comment><USER18> Ditto. But I'm using an iPhone, so maybe the Verizon-provided stuff is just not there?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> A related story: I was recently shopping around for a new ISP. One I considered was Verizon FiOS. In order to see the prices in my area, I had to enter my address.

Two weeks later, I got a letter in the mail. Written outside on the envelope was something like: "We noticed you were checking out our website! Here's a special offer just for you..."

It's not the same as what OP posted, but it certainly left me creeped out.

<comment><USER20> Heh, that's why I always fake address details when I'm checking out cable or DSL options. Of course they're going to use the personal information you enter for marketing purposes, that's why they ask for specifics like apartment number and your mobile number that they don't need to determine service availability.

<comment><USER21> that's a clever way of sticking it to them, jrock. i feel sorry for my neighbors already.

<comment><USER22> It is possible to enter completely fake information, rather than someone else's address. (For example, aside from the burden on the post office, I think entering a street address for an apartment complex without an apartment number harms no one.)

<comment><USER20> Though unfortunately the mailman is usually smart enough to route that kind of mail if the name on it is correct.

Actually, it's quite difficult to fail to send someone a letter. The post office does try pretty hard to deliver mail.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> given the increasing ubiquity of these kinds of deals and the quixotic whack- a-mole game they call opt outs, how dumb would it be to cut out the middle men and just say "hey, for the low price of whatever you're paying now we'll all just sell you our habits, cookies, weblogs, location data, brand preferences and shopping habits (via some up front mobile aggregator of said data). It seems likely that people spend enough collectively tracking and profiling me that it might pay for a night out a month if we cut out the middle men. And hell, it might even have an unexpected bonus - the law of the jungle say if it runs chase it and if it chases you, run. Maybe you'd stop being desired tracking target in the end :)

<comment><USER24> You're expecting the NSA-hats will get bored watching us check into the same restaurants and movie theaters after months and years? You're more optimistic than me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> What the hell is it with you Americans and your abhorrent carriers?

<comment><USER26> People keep paying them money.

<comment><USER27> People keep having few (if any) alternatives for fast, reliable service providers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> No requests are sent when I hit the "Save Changes" button. I have a small amount of confidence that my preferences are going to be picked up.

<comment><USER29> It doesn't seem to work in Chrome. Worked for me in Firefox.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> "Verizon" and "Verizon Wireless" are separate companies. It looks like this refers to Verizon Wireless: e.g., if you have Verizon service for phone, FIOS, or whatever, you are unaffected.

Well, they're probably still selling your personal data, but not in this specific instance.

<comment><USER31> Eh, Kinda. Verizon Communications owns the majority (55%) of Verizon Wireless.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> > EVERYONE is selling your personal data.

FTFY

<comment><USER33> Not for the lucky Verizon customers who happen to catch this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Will using https prevent them from doing this? I imagine it would stop data gathering and referrer gathering but the source URL request they would still be able to see?

A VPN would be the only option to keeping them completely blind? I can set up a VPN on an Amazon micro instance for free. The amount of data used should be nothing or mere pennies per month to Amazon.

The only trouble is keeping a VPN up. I find on an iPhone at least that while once working, it works reliably, but keeping it working is unreliable. It seems when you transition from one network to another, one wifi to another, one cell tower to smother, or from wifi to cell and vice versa, the connection can often drop.

I wish there was a setting like "auto connect VPN when any data request is made".

I've tried VPN's from Amazon of my own creation as well as the VPN included with my GigaNews account.

I'm sure running the VPN on your mobile is great for battery life.

<comment><USER35> I am already looking forward to the upcoming VPN witch hunt. When US provider are really going through with the six strikes "warning" system [1], VPNs will become more and more mainstream. It is going to be interesting which kind of CP/Terrorism yadayada they are going to pull this time.

As a VPN user for closed to ten years nw (yes, I am that paranoid/live in a tough-on-downloads region) I can honestly say, that its benefits outweigh the negatives by far. But it takes some time to find a stable VPN service, that fits to your expectations.

[1] [http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/09/six-strikes- inter...](http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/09/six-strikes-internet- warning-system-really-truly-coming-to-us-this-year/)

<comment><USER36> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've always had the understanding that VPN providers would give you up to the feds in an instant if they came knocking on their door with a court order for suspected criminal activity.

I'm in the process of looking for a solid VPN provider myself, and this is the impression I'm getting after reading the terms & conditions for services like Private Internet Access and VyprVPN.

<comment><USER37> That is why you use a VPN that is incapable of doing so. There is no technical need for such a service to log anything other than rough usage.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Maybe opting out is not how to stop this abhorrent practice of selling personal information. There is much more at stake than sites just selling email address lists. There is much more detailed information involved.

Perhaps what would work better is flooding these marketers with false information. This is what hampers email lists. Most the addresses do not work.

As it stands the few (or many) people who fail to "opt-out" (or fail to use proxies) may make this sort of personal information sales market worthwhile because the information gathered is detailed and reasonably accurate. It's not just a list of disposable email addresses. It's higher quality.

</comment><comment><USER39> Using Chrome the buttons to save changes were not functioning.

For each section, select the option you want, then in console run chgCPNI(); or chgReports(); or chgAds(); depending on which section you changed.

<comment><USER40> Turning off Ghostery (ironically?) fixed the problem for me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Also, check out how long Verizon stores your data:

[http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/09/cellular- customer-d...](http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/09/cellular-customer- data/)

</comment><comment><USER42> Where can I buy this data?

</comment><comment><USER43> Tried to change settings and got an error. Quelle surprise.

</comment><comment><USER44> " _Your privacy is an important priority at Verizon Wireless._ "

From the Verizon customer privacy settings page.

</comment><comment><USER45> Does anyone know if this applies to iPad-only customers? That's my only Verizon account, but the opt-out link requires a phone number to log in. (Ditto for the "forgot user id" form.)

<comment><USER46> I retrieved my iPad phone number as per the other comment and logged into the website. Their site says my info is being shared and when I try to switch this it says the settings can not be saved. Calling the 800 number says I am already opted out.

I tried speaking with a CS agent who had no idea what privacy settings I was talking about and then said it does not apply to pre-pay customers. I think she was just trying to get me off the line.

So I'm not sure if this applies to iPad customers or if it is possible to opt out.

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> wow. At least they gave you the option to opt-out haha :)

<comment><USER48> Except the law and their own wording requires opt-IN:

"...we need your permission to share this information among our affiliates, agents and parent companies (including Vodafone) and their subsidiaries."

<comment><USER49> Somewhat - to them anyway, permission is "granted" by you choosing not to opt- out. It's a crazy, muddled-up, mixed up world.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> Here's the text you see when you log in, if you don't have Verizon. When trying to opt-out, I get an error.

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

Your privacy is an important priority at Verizon Wireless. Our Privacy Policy informs you about information we collect and how we use it. Read our Privacy Policy.

Location Based Services ("LBS") Privacy Settings A location service is any service that provides access to location information, such as maps of places of interest and turn-by-turn directions, on your handset. These services may require Verizon Wireless to access the location of your handset. For location services you use that are supported by Verizon Wireless, you can Manage Location Privacy settings.

Customer Proprietary Network Information Settings As a provider of certain telecommunications services, Verizon Wireless collects certain information that is made available to us solely by virtue of our relationship with you, such as quantity, technical configuration, type, destination, location and amount of use of the telecommunications services you purchase. This information and related billing information is known as Customer Proprietary Network Information (CPNI). The Federal Communications Commission and other regulators require the Verizon Companies to protect your CPNI.

Verizon Wireless shares information among our affiliates and parent companies (including Vodafone) and their subsidiaries unless you advise us not to. Sharing this information allows us to provide you with the latest information about our products and services and to offer you our latest promotions.

Settings Don't Share My CPNI OK to Share My CPNI

Business & Marketing Reports Verizon Wireless may use mobile usage information and consumer Information for certain business and marketing reports. Mobile usage information includes the addresses or information in URLs (such as search terms) of websites you visit when you use our wireless service, the location of your device ("Location Information"), and your use of applications and features. Consumer information includes information about your use of Verizon products and services (such as data and calling features,device type, and amount of use) as well as demographic and interest categories provided to us by other companies (such as gender, age range, sports fan, frequent diner, or pet owner). We will combine this information in a manner that does not personally identify you. We will use this information to prepare business and marketing reports that we may use ourselves or share with others. We may also share Location Information with other companies in a way that does not personally identify you. We will allow these companies to produce limited business and marketing reports. See our Frequently Asked Questions for more information about these reports.

You have a choice about whether we use your information for these reports.

Settings Don't use my information for aggregate reports OK to use my information for aggregate reports

</comment><comment><USER51> What is really strange to me is the page is different in firefox and chrome (3 options vs 2), the chrome page doesn't work, and if you turn off everything in firefox, then reload the page in chrome, chrome shows them still all being on.

</comment><comment><USER52> Unrelated, but having had to log in, I'm now reminded of a VZW security issue:

Can someone explain the doubtless backward and sloppy thinking that would convince Verizon that they should forbid their users from including symbols in their passwords?

<comment><USER53> I've taken to flagging all comments like this.

I don't think it even remotely adds to the discussion to pick some usability issue and harp on it. These kind of comments crop up for every story. Easy way to score points, not useful, buries better comments.

I think a good rule of thumb is that if you didn't need to read the article to make a comment, it's not a good comment.

<comment><USER54> That's exactly what the down-vote is meant for. If you think a comment is off- topic, down vote the post and perhaps add a comment as to why you think it deserves to be down-voted.

Flagging is expensive, in that it requires mod (human) attention. It should be reserved for spam and other egregious posts. Let the mods spend their valuable time on more important tasks.

<comment><USER55> Unfortunately, many of us don't have downvote rights yet. If this were the case, I definitely wouldn't flag unless community standards were flagrantly violated!

<comment><USER56> Don't worry; if you wanted to vote a post down, there's probably someone with high enough karma who also wants to downvote the same post.

<comment><USER55> Strangely enough, that's comforting!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> So do banks... other telecoms... Facebook... Google... etc.

</comment><comment><USER58> Verizon sent me a letter about this a couple of years ago that's when I told everyone I knew with Verizon to opt out of it before they implement it

</comment><comment><USER59> Verizon is not the only one who does this. I've seen the same from AT&T and Chase. I'm sure the list of companies that do this is very long.

</comment><comment><USER60> I haven't received an email and when I logged and checked the settings on my account I was already opted out.

</comment><comment><USER61> Well that sucks, doesn't it?

</comment><comment><USER62> Newsflash: _Everyone who possibly can_ is selling your personal data.

</comment><comment><USER63> I wonder if they are doing the same for their FiOS customers.

</comment><comment><USER64> Who isn't these days?

</comment><comment><USER65> I called Verizon and they said this is a phishing scam... Has anyone else independently verified the original claim with Verizon, other than through their website/privacy TOS?

<comment><USER66> This isn't a scam - I found that link last night when I was going through my billing paperwork from Verizon.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Selling data, or exploiting to sell ads?

Neither Google nor Facebook sell user data, they hold it close and sell ads against it.

</comment><comment><USER67> The question is not what Verizon is doing but what is Verizon _not_ doing? The answer will be much shorter.

</comment><comment><USER68> This is very, very old news.

<comment><USER69> Old news that's still very, very relevant.

I just switched to Verizon from another carrier and didn't know about this. I much appreciated the post.</comment></comment>


How do some cultures stay lean while consuming high amounts of carbohydrates? - <AUTHOR> http://eatingacademy.com/nutrition/how-do-some-cultures-stay-lean-while-still-consuming-high-amounts-of-carbohydrates

<comment><USER2> www.wholehealthsource.blogspot.com

Start from there, a researcher's blog. The post, while stating important nutrition concepts, do not explain the story. Simply put, Americans are eating more than they should, because modern foods are rewarding for the brain. Traditional carbs are not like this. Try overeating on rice.</comment>


FTC Approves Facebook Fine of About $5 Billion - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/12/technology/facebook-ftc-fine.html <comment><USER2> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20423819](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20423819)

</comment><comment><USER3> The massive spike in FB stock as this was announced is not exactly encouraging. All those executives getting paid largely in equity learned... what exactly did they learn?

They don't even have to admit they did anything wrong? Zero fault? For breaking Democracy? What the hell.

<comment><USER4> 1.81% is not a massive spike.

Also, "breaking democracy" is quite dramatic. Democracy isn't broken just because your candidate lost.

<comment><USER5> The spike is significantly greater than the fine (of course the expected fine was likely already priced beforehand and the unexpectedly low fine has reassured investors that Facebook is back to business as usual).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm surprised the 2 democrats voted against the settlement. Republicans are normally seen as the pro-big-business party.

<comment><USER7> Umm... what?? Democrats are and have always been the big business party.

The Republicans are a mix of coal and gas, evangelicals, and constitutionalists.

Edit: both parties are pro military

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Even though that's a lot of money... I can't help thinking it's not nearly enough.

<comment><USER9> Can you please not post duplicate comments to HN? Repetition lowers the signal/noise ratio.</comment></comment>


Google now officially the most valuable brand - <AUTHOR> http://brandirectory.com/league_tables/table/global_500_2011

<comment><USER2> It's nonsense to dub something as subjective as brand value as "official".

Is there a methodology behind this or is it all made up?</comment>


Ask HN: How do I help get the tech community engaged in the plight of Blacks? - <AUTHOR> I'm looking for advice or guidance on trying to get more people in tech interested or more informed about the conditions Black people face, especially in America.
I've noticed in the past this community (and other tech heavy ones) seems quite a bit more receptive to content about the protests in Hong Kong but it does not seem to have the same level of interest in the current events and Black America.
Are people interested in things that have a technology aspect to them only?
I am genuinely looking forward to hearing what people think. <comment><USER2> It's obviously because:

a) it's intensely political and thus soon becomes tribal, whether or not a person is in a tribe or making a tribal point

b) they may have the view that "the conditions Black people face, especially in America", which we are all going to conclude that you mean _institutional racism_ , is not correct and thus not something they will put their time into

Thus, it is too much trouble for them to get involved in and not something they believe is worth their time. I can even imagine attracting opprobrium for this comment, which is ironic.

So, as with all such things, try not to daemonise your opponents (send to the background to eventually die?:) and allow people to disagree. Take people's points as if they are sincerely made and without malice, accept that they may have a point. Even your question implies that people are making choices based on an irrational or ignorant bias. Cut it out and you may make inroads, which would be a good thing, right?

In short, apply the principle of charity[1].

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

<comment><USER3> At this point, is there any reason to believe that institutional racism does not exist?

<comment><USER2> Why would that be relevant to treating those who disagree in a charitable way?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> What are you looking for? In Chicago there is a POC developer meet up. There are black software developer/engineers out here.

<comment><USER5> _In Chicago there is a POC developer meet up._

This is relevant to me, and had not heard of this meetup. Can you share a link to this?

<comment><USER4> Yup, np. [https://www.meetup.com/People-of-Color- Code/](https://www.meetup.com/People-of-Color-Code/) They're a cool bunch of people there. Even non-poc show up as well.

<comment><USER5> Appreciate it! Will share with another coworker, he and I have been looking for something like this and considered starting a similar guild within our org (already have buy in from my technology executive and HR, which is dope!)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


ShoutKey - Temporary URL Shortener by jazzychad - <AUTHOR> http://shoutkey.com/ <comment><USER2> If the expiration is fixed to be 15 mins and this shortener is forced on all users, that will resolve all criticisms of shortener sites - Everyone will soon come to know how they are breaking the web, eventually forcing people to use this in the intended use case only (i.e. shouting across the room)

Sometimes the best way to break a bad habit is to enforce it

</comment><comment><USER3> Thanks for submitting this, John, you beat me to it!

I was with some friends from Twilio at a hackathon one night back in January, and we were all lamenting how hard it was to share a URL with other people at the table w/o knowing everyone's email/IM/etc... and bit.ly links are impossible to pronounce correctly. Someone came up with the idea of sharing a plain english word as the short url key. So, 9 months later I whipped it up. Hopefully a few people find it useful :)

EDIT: I should add that adding + to the end of the key will show you a preview page like bitly links.

<comment><USER4> You should make it such that links with expired keys send you to a page with an ad.

<comment><USER5> Well, I think the reason that things expire is so that he can then reuse those words (since there are only so many short words that anyone can spell), but that is a good idea for ones that have expired but now yet been reallocated.

<comment><USER4> If the key has been reallocated, it is no longer expired.

<comment><USER5> The link you created is. If you create a link mapping foo -> google.com, and then it expires and someone else wants a link to facebook.com and shoutcast picks foo as their word, as far as you're concerned, your link is expired because shoutcast.com/foo doesn't get you to Google anymore.

<comment><USER4> Yes, from the submitter's perspective, their link has been reclaimed. From the service's perspective, a key is either in use or not, and we agreed that keys that aren't in active use could have ads on them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> It would be smart if the length of the word was directly proportional to the duration of the link. 5-minute links might be more likely to get a 5-letter word, whereas a 24 hour link might be more likely to be a 10-12 letter word. Otherwise, why would I not always choose to make my link persist for 24 hours?

</comment><comment><USER7> This is a really useful service. I can see myself using it in quite a few situations.

A few points I'd address:

1\. Make sure all the words are really easy to spell. Someone mentioned the word "constituent" in another comment, which is not a word most people will know how to spell.

2\. Calling it "the temporary url shortener" doesn't really describe what it's useful for. That's because the "temporary" is not the interesting part. I don't have a good suggestion for you, but think about how to explain the value this service provides in a tagline.

<comment><USER3> agreed. I'd like to change the tagline to reflect the "easy to share links verbally with other people" aspect, but I can't seem to distill it down to a few words... I'm still thinking about it.

Edit: ooh, how aobut: "Share links with a shout!" ??

<comment><USER8> How about, "short urls you can remember"?

<comment><USER7> Not so great, since they expire after a few minutes. Remembering isn't that much a part of the service.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I love the concept! I decided to try it and got the following "shoutkey": <http://drp.ly/WfCx>

Would be funny to shout to my friend across the room "HEY, GO TO SHOUT KEY DOT COM SLASH HOMOSEXUAL"! (not that it would bother me in any way haha)

Definitely an interesting idea!

</comment><comment><USER10> A friend of mine put together a function [1] that will let you use ShoutKey directly from the cli:

shout () { curl -s "<http://shoutkey.com/new?url=$1> | sed -n 's/\<h1\>/\&/p' | sed 's/<[^>]*>//g;/</N;//b' ;}

[1] [http://www.commandlinefu.com/commands/view/6720/create-an- ea...](http://www.commandlinefu.com/commands/view/6720/create-an-easy-to- pronounce-shortened-url-from-cli)

</comment><comment><USER11> Cool stuff. How are you grabbing the words? Did you download a dictionary?

When I submitted my URL I got "constituent", which seems unnecessarily long. You should consider having a list of short adjectives and a list of short words, preferably with both being one syllable. Then you grab one from each and you get short URLs that are still easy to remember like "redbear" or "fastbulb". The best part about this idea is that it reminds me of the monster names in Diablo 2.

<comment><USER3> I'm using a modified copy of the standard linux dictionary word list. I took out some variants of words that I thought would be confusing or hard to spell. I thought about using 'word tuples' as you describe, but I think that would be more confusing and less useful overall. There should be enough single words to make this work unless it gets insanely popular (knock on wood).

<comment><USER12> I find a combination of a few short and common word easier to memorize than one uncommon one. It's even easier when it makes somewhat sense, like an adjective and a noun.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I really like the idea, but part of your concept concerns me. Having pronounceable short urls is always a plus, but having them expire is sketchy to me. It means 1 of 2 things in my mind and maybe you can put my worries to rest. I will also preface the concerns with 'I did notice that the time is variable and user chosen'.

1 You are going to litter the web with non-active(broken) links and that sucks.

2 (more likely) As you reuse words in urls there will be links that will point to things that are in no way related to the context in which they were originally used.

<comment><USER14> these shorturls are not meant for actually linking to anywhere online. just for IRL sharing with others. hence the pronounceable aspect is a big part of the utility.

<comment><USER3> Exactly. These links are not meant to be posted online or meant to last forever. The main use-case is to share them aloud with other people in the room (or write them on a whiteboard at a hackathon). I mention quite clearly that the links are temporary, so people that use them otherwise are missing the point I think.

<comment><USER15> It might be terrible from a usability stand point (or it might be an improvement), but if the point is to share the link verbally and not via a text link [or if doing so will litter the web with broken links], why support direct links at all?

Why not just have an input box on the home page? The user puts in the english word, and you do the redirect.

<comment><USER16> then rather than just type one url in and get redirected, they have to remember to type in a url, then type in a word. its easier as it is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> A friend of mine wrote an article on his blog about generating pronounceable hashes for just this purpose: <http://peterbraden.co.uk/article/pronounceablehashing>

Not necessarily a better solution than this, but an interesting alternative I thought.

<comment><USER18> Shorl.com uses a system called 'Koremutake' which has roughly the same aim (although unfortunately it seems to be tied to the URL shortener): <http://shorl.com/koremutake>

I like the added feature of insertion of hyphens to break up groups of syllables in Peter Braden's implementation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> great idea, I've often thought someone should make a URL shortener (or should I say changer) for saying things out loud. I've heard a few podcasts were they will say go to 'tinyurl.com/skf74d' (or spoken out loud 'go to tiny url dot com slash s k f seven four d') and thought surely there is a better way. It doesn't have to be short it just has to be easy to remember 'tinyurl.com/DogCatBear' is better than the above, even if its not related to the subject matter, even better would be 'tinyurl.com/SiteThatHasSuchAndSuch' or something like that.

Hadn't thought of the expiring part though thats key to make sure there isn't wasted words I guess, nice, though for podcasts/conferences you would want it to be measured in months rather than hours.

</comment><comment><USER20> Seeing an opportunity to play with metaphones, I generated a homophone-free dictionary.

You're welcome to plug it in if you decide to tinker with the project any more.

<http://qwerjk.com/unique.txt>

</comment><comment><USER21> This is a great idea, definitely going to use it. Yes, please cull out words that are notoriously difficult to spell, like notoriously.

Smallish numbers might serve well too.

</comment><comment><USER22> Now the hardest part to pronounce becomes "shoutkey" itself :)

</comment><comment><USER23> This is very similar to my own microstartup -> (shamless plug) JotOnce.com except we're for messages instead of links.

</comment><comment><USER24> Good thing ShoutKey gives you the key as opposed to you choosing it. I can imagine someone ShoutKey squatting otherwise.

</comment><comment><USER25> The expiring link part reminds me a lot of 3LNK.com, but the effort to make it easy to remember is nice.

</comment><comment><USER26> Are there enough words?

<comment><USER27> More than enough as long as this doesn't get insanely popular, because the words expire after 5 minutes.

<comment><USER28> You could also implement some kind of fake word-generation using common syllables, or word-combining (easier). Word combining is easy enough to do and will get you N^2 or N^3 options.

<comment><USER27> Agreed - that's the next logical step if needed. Maybe some heuristic to combine simple words at first, like "andblue" instead of "octobervaporized".</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Gadget Rules: A guide for using technology carefully, with intention, for good - <AUTHOR> http://iamfutureproof.com/gadget-rules Gadget Rules is a growing collection of wisdom about using technology in ways that best serve our bodies, our minds, and each other.<p>Video introduction: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbPVpZowOdY <comment><AUTHOR> Here's a short intro video for the TL;DR crowd: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbPVpZowOdY></comment>


Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates - <AUTHOR> https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05517-y <comment><USER2> In case you're wondering, burning natural gas does produce ~half the CO2 you would release from burning various types of coal, [0] the dirtiest (yes, much worse than all of the nuclear power accidents combined[1]) of all methods of electricity production.

But it still produces CO2! And at the rate at which natural gas is taking over a greater share of the energy production of the world economy, we are still looking at catastrophic global warming.[2][3]

[0][https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=73&t=11](https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=73&t=11)

[1][https://climate.nasa.gov/news/903/coal-and-gas-are-far- more-...](https://climate.nasa.gov/news/903/coal-and-gas-are-far-more-harmful- than-nuclear-power/)

[2][https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-energy/coal-and-other-fossil- fu...](https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-energy/coal-and-other-fossil- fuels/environmental-impacts-of-natural-gas)

[3][https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-energy/coal-and-other-fossil- fu...](https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-energy/coal-and-other-fossil- fuels/infographic-climate-change-risks-natural-gas)

<comment><USER3> In a five year period Methane traps ~100 times more energy than the equivalent quantity of CO2, so not burning Methane because it escapes is far worse than burning it!

[http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/methane-vs- ca...](http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/methane-vs-carbon- dioxide-a-greenhouse-gas-showdown/)

<comment><USER4> The comparative effect between CO2 and methane varies as we vary the timeframe. One thing we do know - reducing methane will have an immediate impact, whereas reducing CO2 will have a lasting impact. [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41612-018-0026-8](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41612-018-0026-8)

<comment><USER5> Methane breaks down into CO2 and water, so we get the carbon dioxide regardless.

<comment><USER6> There are many embedded assumptions in your statement that do not hold up to scrutiny. Methane "breaks down" to CO2 and water? This is difficult to parse. I do not think that methane generally breaks down to much of anything at standard temperature and pressure. Do you mean the combustion of methane produces CO2 and water? The latter is true, but OP's point is that this combustion produces A LOT less CO2 as compared to the equivalent (in BTUs) amount of coal.

<comment><USER7> According to Wikipedia, in the troposphere and stratosphere, Methane reacts with hydroxyl radicals to give CO2 and H2O.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> To anyone reading ""tremendous opportunity" to reduce methane emissions by developing systems to quickly detect malfunctions at oil and gas facilities" and running to the garage to connect an RPI to an off-the-shelf 5$ sensor and submit her YC2019 application: The tech is there. It's been there for years. Everything is in place, this is a political/emission tax/EPA/incentive issue per-se.

<comment><USER9> I was just thinking about this in reference to organizations like the Citizen's Climate Lobby. The real technology that needs to be developed here is a politically feasible way to levy taxes on known carbon emitters.

<comment><USER10> Run for office or support candidates who align with preventing/mitigating climate change. It is the only way. All of the tech in the world is useless if you can't enforce its use.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Here is a TED talk my dad just gave about a satellite they're building to track down the source of these methane leaks and fix the issue:

[https://www.ted.com/talks/fred_krupp_what_if_we_tracked_meth...](https://www.ted.com/talks/fred_krupp_what_if_we_tracked_methane_from_space_and_hit_the_brakes_on_climate_change)

<comment><USER12> What is the detection limit?

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> For folks who didn't read the article, the real problem is that methane is much more efficient a greenhouse gas at trapping heat compared to CO2: by some estimates, 86 TIMES more potent.

[https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-bad-of-a- gree...](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-bad-of-a-greenhouse- gas-is-methane/)

</comment><comment><USER14> This is so sad. Any ideas on how stuff like this could realistically be fixed? Are there any incentives that could be put in place? What would be the incentive for the people that have that power to make those changes?

<comment><USER15> There is already incentive for the private operators to not lose these gases during production or transmission as it cuts into their margins. This is like leaving money on the table.

<comment><USER16> That's not necessarily true, though, if capturing it costs more than just letting it leak.

<comment><USER15> I am not saying there are really no bad or incompetent actors.. but it costs the industry $2 billion per year because of these loses.

[https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/21/climate/methane- leaks.htm...](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/21/climate/methane-leaks.html)

<comment><USER16> And if they could fix that for $1B/year, they'd do so.

Instead, you can find industry groups quoted in that article complaining about the study.

<comment><USER17> The problem is that, given the greenhouse forcing, those leaks will arguably cost society much more than a few $billion per year. It's just that the gas industry isn't legally responsible for that. And that's why they don't want to stop the leaks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Well the regular government really dropped the ball there, fortunately the dwarf government was more vigilant.

</comment><comment><USER19> Satellite image of burning gas as a "waste product" from five years ago. Note there are no large cities of people there.

[http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/01/28/article-2269517-17...](http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/01/28/article-2269517-17381F79000005DC-867_964x643.jpg)

<comment><USER20> I downvoted you for linking to something from the Daily Mail rag. Nothing they publish is reliable or trustworthy.

<comment><USER19> Sorry mate, first image link in a DDG search nothing profound, Not even familiar with who they are, granted I was pretty sure they they did not take the snap. I will try to be mote discerning next time (the thought had crossed my mind to figure out whence it came)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I wonder how this fits into the 21% of the total emissions... being 33% (fossil fuels) of the 64% (human induced sources)

[https://whatsyourimpact.org/greenhouse-gases/methane- emissio...](https://whatsyourimpact.org/greenhouse-gases/methane-emissions)

</comment><comment><USER22> tl;dr:

> methane emissions in 2015 were about 60% greater than estimates from the > EPA's greenhouse gas inventory: a 2.3% leakage rate compared to the 1.4% > estimate from the EPA. "Instead of coming from the well to the pipeline, the > gas is escaping through vents or other openings in the system, and it adds > up to a lot of emissions," says Alvarez.

</comment><comment><USER23> An unfortunate title (does nature do click bait now?). Why use the term dwarf instead of quoting the numeric value (or say "more than double")?

<comment><USER24> Shouldn't the correct title be "New methane leak estimate dwarfs government estimates"

From the article...

"They then extrapolated the figures to estimate methane leaks at the national level."

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Not saying we shouldn't pay attention when some estimates are wrong, but perhaps it's not the best idea to take an alarmist's attitude: [https://motls.blogspot.com/2018/06/hansens-testimony-30th- an...](https://motls.blogspot.com/2018/06/hansens-testimony-30th- anniversary.html#more)

<comment><USER26> That blog is much more propagandist than anything James Hansen ever did.

<comment><USER25> So which facts did he get wrong exactly? Sure, it may looks so, but so far everything I've read on this blog is correct.

<comment><USER27> If you're thinking about the scenario A/B/C stuff, he's ignoring the effects of the drop in atmospheric CFCs.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Supreme Court refuses to invalidate gerrymandered - <AUTHOR> https://www.cleveland.com/open/2019/06/supreme-court-refuses-to-invalidate-gerrymandered-congressional-districts-in-cases-likely-to-affect-ohio.html <comment><USER2> Previous discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20295100](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20295100)

<comment><USER3> Comments moved thither.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> HN moderators: can you make this read-only and redirect comments to the other thread from earlier today please?

<comment><USER5> I don't think they do that here. Someone already linked to previous discussion.

<comment><USER3> We do that here!

[https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...](https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=false&page=0&query=by:dang%20moved)

[https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...](https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=false&page=0&query=by:sctb%20moved)</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: What do you wish you were doing in your 20s that you didn't do? - <AUTHOR> What things should every person in their 20s do that they tend to ignore?<p>What are the biggest mistakes you were making you wish you wouldn't make? <comment><USER2> I would give anything to go back and relive my 20s (I'm in my 40s now). I think about it every day. Here are a few (of the many) of the things I wish I'd done differently:

1\. Saving and investing money. Compound returns are a magical force and time is the most powerful factor. Do It Now. Apps like Acorns make it increadibly easy to get started.

2\. Take some risks. The older you get the harder it is to take risks because you'll most likely have obligations (spouse, kids, mortgage, college tuition, career hanging in the balance).

3\. Sex. 20YO bodies are very different than 30YO bodies (and a hell of a lot different than 40YO bodies). You can never go back, so take advantage of that now. Additionally, I'd be willing to risk rejection by asking the hot folks out. I was always afraid of rejection so I only dated average people. Now I realize if I'd taken some chances with some hotties, I'd have likely landed a few.

4\. Travel. Once you start gaining obligations, your travel will consist of semi-yearly trips to Disney or the beach. Take vacations to exotic places now. Backpack across Europe, go on Safari in Africa, take some risks, meet some people.

5\. Keep up with high school and college friends but stop caring what everyone thinks. Be your own person. I've spent way too much time worrying about what so and so thinks and not living my life.

<comment><USER3> I saved a lot ($70k+) from contractor jobs in my 20's and invested in index funds, this was in the bull market of start 2000. Because the stock market has remained relatively flat since then the magic of compound interest has not materialised - the funds are not worth significantly more than when I invested the money. I don't regret it but I still expect to be working for another 35 years, minimum.

<comment><USER4> What sort of contractual jobs have you worked on to being saving that much? I'm a senior currently, and at age 22 I try to save as much as a I can. Getting a side job would be wonderful.

<comment><USER3> This was in the dot com boom 1996 to 2002-ish, I was working then in ASP, SQL Server, IIS - web dev was a rare skill at that time. The excesses back then were frightening, I saw web site jobs for $50k which now wouldn't cost $500. The main factor though was living with parents, commuting only a couple of miles and being extremely frugal :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5>
      1. Develop good habits and do whatever you need to keep them. It makes the rest of this list easier.
      2. Keep lifting. The older you get, the more important this is.
      3. Don't get addicted to caffeine and sugar.
      4. Don't take any job that requires death marches.
      5. Quit any job the minute they ask you to work nights and weekends.

Stay healthy, basically.

</comment><comment><USER6> Don't get married. Compound interest by investing passively in index funds.

Not just the sex, but the meeting and getting close to new/more people.

</comment><comment><USER7> In order of relevance to ME:

1\. Give less of a fuck (without being an arsehole or deliberating provoking others), but being more adventurous and establishing my own truths, rather than accepting generally perceived "wisdom" of sheeple.

2\. Be more bold (did I mention that already?) - Yes, Boldness has genius, power and magic in it.

3\. Of course, have more sex ...

</comment><comment><USER8> Saving 5% of my gross income. That's really the only one; I was lucky in that my 20s were incredibly amazing due to a bunch of circumstances that I really had no choice in or influence over.

</comment><comment><USER9> When you guys say "more sex", does it means frequency (more times) or diversity (more people)? I understand that, in a way, more of the later also means more of the former, but I am just wondering which one is more important...

</comment><comment><USER10> I would take more life risks in my early 20's like traveling/living in different places.

In my late twenties I would take more business risks - creating apps/companies that are seemingly without business model and it would help me learn a lot.

</comment><comment><USER11> 1\. Be a better dresser.

2\. Travel.

3\. Plan to stay in touch with the people I met and the friends I made.

</comment><comment><USER12> Sticking with pointless jobs.

</comment><comment><USER13> One of my mistakes out of many: eating like I was still a teenager.</comment>


Qualcomm and Huawei: Now Things Are Just Getting Weird - <AUTHOR> https://www.technewsworld.com/story/Qualcomm-and-Huawei-Now-Things-Are-Just-Getting-Weird-86036.html <comment><USER2> The author of this article is Rob Enderle, in the past a PR person. He actually seems to have written or given this as a speech: [https://sco-vs- ibm.org/review/2004/0803.html](https://sco-vs-ibm.org/review/2004/0803.html)

I'm not entirely sure he can be believed on any topic.

</comment><comment><USER3> The 'Ai' part of this article is the only area I know about in detail, and it isn't looking so good...

Current 'AI' methods are a long long way from being able to simulate inter- company politics with any kind of accuracy.</comment>


How I Use Dual n-Back Training to Break Mental Bottlenecks - <AUTHOR> http://blog.profitawareness.com/2011/11/dual-n-back-training-to-break-mental-bottlenecks/

<comment><USER2> Are there any other similar tools like the "Brain Workshop" you mentioned?

<comment><AUTHOR> I think Luminosity.com offers them - also <http://www.soakyourhead.com/> seems to do it as well.</comment></comment>