Chinese firm Huawei controls net filter praised by PM - <AUTHOR> http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23452097 <comment><USER2> I find two things incredibly ironic:

1) The UK willingly submits all of its net traffic to monitoring, snooping and supervision by a Chinese firm. This is mindboggling. Why worry about NSA's ECHELON or PRISM now, when the government has just passed a law requiring every packet to be inspected by a Chinese system.

2) Let's learn from those who are best at censorship. Obviously China has significant experience in that area. UK has a lot to catch up, but they're working on it.

Think about it -- if somebody told you 10 years ago that the United Kingdom will outsource country-wide Internet traffic monitoring, policing and censoring to Chinese companies, you'd call them a nutjob.

<comment><USER3> I find it extremely unfortunate that more of the "democratic" countries are now starting to see China's model of censorship and surveillance of its population as something to aspire to.

This is not just a one-off. It's a trend. They all seem to want what the Chinese government has (full control over its population), while still "pretending" it's a democracy and everyone's rights are unharmed.

<comment><USER4> There's an unfortunate view in the learned press that business-like governments such as Singapore and China are able to work efficiently and generally get things done and are generally to be admired (though not always publicly). Combine that with the UK Government's Big Sister approach to managing the population and the worst effects of political correctness and you can see where this is all heading - a country safely protected from itself under the watchful gaze of those that know what's best for us - Downton Abbey on a grand scale.

<comment><USER5> It's unfortunate but it's true - China has the advantage that without those pesky elections to worry about it can take a longer term view of things and be planning over a 10 year period, not a 5 year period with re-election and all the populist stuff that requires.

Obviously that's only part of the story but the discussion certainly becomes more "interesting" than it did in the 80s when democracy seemed to give better results across the board having the moral and economic high ground.

Not for a moment endorsing the Chinese approach, just saying that there is a more interesting debate than there used to be.

<comment><USER6> Too bad that actual planning seems to take a backseat to "my own swiss bank account in 10 years" planning. The same problem "islamic democracies" (or the "islamic republic") or dictatorships have. And then western (and Chinese) companies come in who promise personal kickbacks in trade for contracts. And soon the situation happens that companies who don't do this simply can't get any business at all.

China will get killed by it's own politicians much quicker than any western democracy. They're still growing, today it's easy for them because China is growing at 7% per year. It will get hard soon and things will change. Fast.

<comment><USER5> Because no Western politician ever made decisions thinking about a non-exec directorship at some point in the future or campaign contributions.

Politics is a mucky business full of self interest the world over, let's not pretend that's a problem for China alone.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Oh, it's worse than that. Every house which uses Fibre to the Cabinet (FTTC) has to have Huawei equipment installed on the premises.

[http://huaweihg612hacking.wordpress.com/about/](http://huaweihg612hacking.wordpress.com/about/)

BT own the monopoly on the copper infrastructure and they are the only company providing high speed ADSL. If you want 80Mbps broadband, you have no choice but to use the Huawei modem.

The device is reasonably hackable (and, in fairness, complies with its open source obligations [http://www.huaweidevice.com/worldwide/technicaIndex.do?metho...](http://www.huaweidevice.com/worldwide/technicaIndex.do?method=gotoProductSupport&productId=3019)) - but there's no real way of knowing what secrets the silicon holds.

So, the UK has sold off the line equipment, monitoring filters, and mobile infrastructure to one company. What could possibly go wrong?

<comment><USER8> >BT own the monopoly on the copper infrastructure

* Apart from in Hull[1]

>they are the only company providing high speed ADSL

* Apart from Virgin Media[2]

1\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingston_upon_Hull#Telephone_s...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingston_upon_Hull#Telephone_system)

2\. [http://mediacentre.virginmedia.com/Stories/Virgin-Media- boos...](http://mediacentre.virginmedia.com/Stories/Virgin-Media-boosts- Britain-s-broadband-speeds-2322.aspx)

<comment><USER9> Virgin Media generally provide cable services rather than ADSL - maybe they offer ADSL in some areas? But your link doesn't mention that at all.

<comment><USER10> I believe Virgin offers ADSL outside of the coverage of their cable network, but then it is over BTs copper, just as all the other ADSL providers.

<comment><USER11> Virgin resell BT ADSL as a virtual ISP, like Tesco. It isn't just BT to the exchange, it is BT all the way if you cannot get cable and still go with Virgin.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> In 2011, Huawei offered to give roughly 50MM GBP's worth of mobile equipment to the London Underground as a gift, which the UK declined due to "national security" reasons.

In 2013, the UK is going to pay Huawei to filter all its Internet traffic.

</comment><comment><USER13> "Customers who do not want filtering still have their traffic routed through the system, but matches to Huawei's database are dismissed rather than acted upon."

In other words, when they screw up the implementation and it breaks something about your network connection (e.g. IPv6, TCP options, or dozens of other subtle things), there's nothing you'll be able to do to just get raw packets routed over the Internet.

This is going to break the network.

<comment><USER14> It's been in place on TalkTalk's network for 2 years now, it really doesn't break things. It's not particularly aggressive, and only looks for HTTP and HTTPS traffic, not VPNs etc.

Whether you agree with it, like it, or want it, is an entirely different question (I don't want it), but it hasn't caused significant issues yet.

<comment><USER15> Are you a TalkTalk customer?

I'm genuinely surprised that it isn't causing at least minor problems with some sites for more technical users. I manage a virus-scanning web proxy for our company and this is enough to throw up regular little glitches with all sorts of sites which "just work" when going direct.

<comment><USER16> Can you give more details. Presumably the filter is just dropping traffic sent to/from any of the IP addresses or domain names in the blacklist.

What are the glitches you're seeing?

<comment><USER15> The corporate systems for this (usually) operate by proxying all HTTP traffic, so any sites which don't play nicely with a HTTP proxy are affected. I've seen "interesting" problems with some more esoteric HTTP 1.1 features and all sorts of things with streaming sites.

You're probably right that this system isn't proxying everything, so its impact would be a lot lower. It all depends on what layer it tries to operate, which we don't really know. I'd love to see an investigation from someone on TalkTalk.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I sit here in Canada on my moose, watching with my binoculars at the craziness unfolding below me (USA) and across from me (UK).

I whisper to the other 5 people that live in Canada, "Do you think they see us?"

One person responds, "No... not yet..."

DUH DUH DUH - to be continued.

<comment><USER18> Naive

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

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Huawei is a UK registered company isn't it, certainly appears to be on Companies House WebCheck database. It also used to be called Huawei Symantec FWIW.

It's not a Chinese system, it's using Chinese technology, but then the PM uses Chinese technology, along with the entire government, every day. As do the US President and government presumably.

Yes there should be due diligence to ensure that data is not being collected and off-shored. The BBC seem to be going to pains to suggest that this is a massive Chinese espionage coup without actually stating as much.

What're the facts here. Chinese made technology is part of the UK internet. ZOMG! If the tech was from Cisco would it really make a difference.

> _both Huawei and TalkTalk employees are able to add or remove sites > independently_ //

Right so TT employ a UK company whose UK employees are able to do their job.

I'm not saying oversight isn't necessary but this seems so overplayed unless the BBC have more facts they're choosing not to disclose.

<comment><USER19> _Huawei is a UK registered company isn 't it_

Yes but that doesn't make them a UK company. Facebook & Google are UK registered companies but you'd never class them as a UK company.

<comment><USER16> But under the same token we should be stopping Facebook or Google from routing our internet traffic as "they're going to be working for the US Government". Indeed there's more evidence that FB and Google are maliciously colluding than there is for Huawei having done anything wrong here.

I'm not saying we shouldn't be vigilent just that this story has a measure of "Starbucks could be poisoning monarchists to further the aims of USA".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> This Summer of Surveillance get's better and better :-)

<comment><USER21>
      "Summer of Surveillance"

This should be on a T-shirt. Maybe borrowing the backdrop to Pink Floyd's _Dark Side of the Moon_ album and cross it with the digital rain form The Matrix. ;)

<comment><USER22> This is not surveillance, it's out right censorship.

Technically, censoring porn is no different from censoring anything else. It's only a matter of time for politicians to abuse this power.

<comment><USER16> They're blacklisting sites but you don't have to have the filter on your connection. Doesn't censorship require that someone prevent you, or indeed impede you from seeing something.

TalkTalk just ask you [ie the person who pays the ISP] if you want to be filtered or not. Perhaps they also filter illegal sites, use of a list from the IWF was mentioned, but who's going to know.

<comment><USER22> Porn site 101: every site will constantly change its IP and provide alternative domains to avoid been blocked. Thus if UK need to cut out porn sites completely, they have to implement some kind of keywords based system, which is 100% what a censorship firewall is.

<comment><USER21> Are keyword based firewalls really all that effective?

What if someone's researching classical art and searched for "nude"? Surely, that will cause a fair amount of hair-pulling to deactivate the filter in public access locations like libraries and such.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> So each time a UK residents visits a webpage his ISP will send the url to Huawei to ask for permission?

Good to see that Cameron don't waste the opportunity and get the UK to use the same hardware platform as the Chinese. The Chinese are already one of the leaders in technology for censorship, with the great firewall and all, so it could be a lot of opportunities for synergy and cross border cooperation her…

<comment><USER24> > So each time a UK residents visits a webpage his ISP will send the url to > Huawei to ask for permission?

No, each time a UK resident visits a webpage, his ISP will send the URL to a server in the ISP's network running software made by Huawei (which could be backdoored), loaded with watchlists maintained by a UK entity.

It's unclear how that software will redirect the request, but it's probably just a DNS hi-jack.

<comment><USER25> it wasn't a DNS hi-jack with thepiratebay

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Maybe this is all a clever government ruse. If DC wants more of Britain's youth interested in technology, what better way than to force them to find ingenious technological solutions to get hold of their porn?

<comment><USER27> Or some bizarre way to strengthen trading links with China perhaps. Cameron is not popular is Beijing since he met the Dalai Lama

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Cisco helped China government build the Great Firewall 10 years ago. It's very advanced and powerful. I don't think Huawei can beat Cisco in the 'net filtering' business at GFW level. I guess it's just a budget limited version :)

</comment><comment><USER29> This is very much about literacy

\- do we expect firewalls on books children read, on radio they listen to? No. We expect parental supervision

Lets get back to blaming the parents please

<comment><USER16> Do books and radio that children have ready access to have hardcore and/or illegal pornography.

Schools purchase from book catalogues that are "censored" in this sense and [legal] FTA radio is equally censored. So why shouldn't we allow people to get their internet equally censored.

Parental supervision includes using commercial services that censor hardcore pornography.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> As an aside, I find it very interesting that the BBC website is so selective about which articles they allow (moderated) comments on, for example here is an article with a comment form

[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world- europe-23465992](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23465992)

It would be good to hear them explain what the process is for deciding which articles are allowed.

</comment><comment><USER31> So now we must use a VPN for everything? of course that instantly means you're guilty of ... something.

<comment><USER32> Yes, like having a job...

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> At least in this case of outsourcing to China, they're outsourcing to the experts!

</comment><comment><USER34> Well... chinese firm Huawei also made my cellphone

should I stop using it and start using US-made or North Korea-made phone instead? ...nah, it's not that much better over there.

</comment><comment><USER35> What irony it would be!

The Green Dam project [1] which was advertised by the department of industry and information technology of P.R. China as protection of children from online pornography had been defeated after media exposure year ago. Now the authority in Britain wants to introduce essentially the same stuff!

1 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Dam_Youth_Escort](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Dam_Youth_Escort)

</comment><comment><USER36> Seriously, this incredibly misleading headline should get this post removed from HN.

Ever since the NSA story broke there seems to be a constant effort to post overly alarming headlines in the style of "look how much worse things are in places outside the US".

<comment><USER37> Can you explain why the headline is miseading? The UK is at least as bad as the US because GCHQ and NSA have a special relationship, there's no plot here to make America look good.

<comment><USER38> For me the headline, whilst technically true, was slightly misleading because "Chinese firm Huawei controls UK net filter" suggests a UK-wide net filter that Huawei controls. Whereas the BBC article headline of "Chinese firm Huawei controls net filter praised by PM" does not suggest that.

<comment><USER37> Hmm that's true, "Chinese firm Huawei to control proposed UK net filter" would probably be best if it fits. I think this is more of a proposal (albeit one he sees as de facto happening) by the PM than something he's praising.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Doesn't Huawei have components in many of the major phone & laptop manufacturers' products? Or am I thinking of another company?

<comment><USER40> Huawei is sort of "Chinese Cisco", ie. while they probably have some custom silicon in their products they don't market silicon directly instead focusing on complete devices. So, you are probably thinking of another company.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Why didn't we know about this beforehand? I wonder how much China bribed the UK to get them to use Huawei.

</comment><comment><USER42> Must be great fun to be a start-up in the UK.

<comment><USER43> As an established enterprise company in the UK, we have our "own internet" which we run between our clients. It goes over encrypted point to point IPsec channels over leased POTS and LSE lines.

This is because we can't rely on the Internet as a business...

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> This is some of the most racist trash I've seen on Hacker News.

<comment><USER10> It has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with the concern of having a company that there are concerns might be influenced by the government of a dictatorship that are renowned for using net censorship to maintain its political control, potentially be in control of a network filter that most UK network traffic will end up going through.

I don't see anything in the article that complains about Huawei because it is Chinese in itself, as opposed to because of concerns there might be political connections at play, or the generic issue of having such filtering under control of a commercial actor in general.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> UK -> China 2.0

<comment><USER46> Nah, China is relevant.

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> How hard would it be to have a script creating millions of email accounts sending billions of random emails including words like "bomb", "attack", "taliban" among others rendering PRISM useless?

<comment><USER48> Work on the assumption that PRISM has spam filters at least as good as GMail, so it wouldn't be trivial to overload it with automatically generated content.

<comment><USER47> doesnt this mean that as long as terrorists use software to make their emails like spam the prism is useless?</comment></comment></comment>


Apple to Acquire Mobile Ad Platform Quattro Wireless for $275 Million - <AUTHOR> http://mashable.com/2010/01/04/apple-quattro-wireless/ <comment><USER2> If I had to guess, I'd guess that Apple will be using Quattro's relationships to roll out an advertising service for free iPhone & iPod Touch applications - in exchange for their 30% cut, which is about right for an ad network.

I suspect Apple figured there was simply too much free-app monetization going on to escape untaxed, especially when they're bearing the costs of free application delivery. Perhaps Apple also realized that other parties were getting a bit too much insight into their marketplace through advertising.

If I'm right, this could be very unpleasant for advertising-related startups in this space that aren't Quattro. Now that Apple's got an iPhone app ad company, there's no reason why they won't make it _the_ iPhone app ad company.

<comment><USER3> Slightly more charitably, perhaps Apple recognized that for many app manufacturers who offer both paid and free versions of an app, Apple already has an existing financial relationship with them, so allowing Apple to handle the ad payments from the free version of the app is going to be more convenient.

Of course, there's no reason it can't be both.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Apple & Google maintain their collision course with this announcement.

Amazing that a few years back Eric Schmidt was on Apple's board and was not see as a competitive threat.

<comment><USER5> Months, not years. Five, to be exact: <http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2009/08/03bod.html>

<comment><USER4> I stand corrected. That is nuts.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm not sure that I'd go as far as to say there's a conflict of interest going on here (and in the Google/AdMob camp). However, it definitely feels uncomfortable.

</comment><comment><USER7> So... which search engine are they going to buy?

<comment><USER8> Search engines are a bait to bring users to advertisers, and to study user behaviour. Apple already has the users, not just by through their bookmarks, familiarity or desire, but by their actual physical devices.

A google user can quit google. An apple "user" can't quit apple without a significant investment. By their minority status in the market, they're able to do what Microsoft always wanted to do with the majority, without incurring the wrath of the law for monopolistic practices. Apple diversified itself as well; they're the largest desktop minority platform, but also the largest smartphone minority platform, largest music store, MP3 players, soon tablets, etc. They have a finger in a lot of pies, and they're weaving all these disparate platforms and devices into a giant, highly lucrative meta-platform.

<comment><USER9> _A google user can quit google._

I think this is true in roughly the same sense that an English speaker can quit English -- not strictly speaking impossible, but it requires a significant investment and wrenching adjustments to the way you have done things for years.

Try going cold turkey on Google for a week. I have attempted it before and I can't even make it 24 hours. And most damningly, I'm generally not even aware I'm failing at it -- the fingers type google.com for my navigational needs before my brain even gets involved in the loop.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Anyone able to ballpark how much the founders would clear from this deal?</comment>


Gut Feelings: The "Second Brain" in Our Gastrointestinal Systems - <AUTHOR> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/gut-feelings-the-second-brain-in-our-gastrointestinal-systems-excerpt/

<comment><USER2> This maps nicely to the two separate locations where the body produces most serotonine: In the gut and in the brain. (Serotonine isn't able to cross the blood-brain-barrier).

There are even two different genes TPH1 and TPH2 which encode the enzyme information for this. This split is apparently very old and evolved before vertebrates did.

This is also why SSRIs have so many side-effects. They target receptors in the brain, but at the same time jumble serotonine-levels in the body, which are involved in appetite, temperature, blood-pressure, day/night cycle and many other systems.

<comment><USER3> Interestingly enough, Caltech just released a study last month that shows that gut microbes directly help produce serotonin in the gut:

[http://www.caltech.edu/news/microbes-help-produce- serotonin-...](http://www.caltech.edu/news/microbes-help-produce-serotonin- gut-46495)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Douglas Crockford has a great talk that touches on the head-gut connection and how it relates to programming.

"We could not program without our gut. I have absolutely no evidence to justify that statement. But my gut tells me it's true, so I believe it."

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taaEzHI9xyY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taaEzHI9xyY)

</comment><comment><USER5> That gut-brain connection is the focus of some types of meditation where you move your center of focus from your head to the center of your body. That's supposed to be the location of the "second brain".

</comment><comment><USER6> I thought of this when I learned that ThinkPad batteries had a complex controller, almost a dedicated cpu with a real-time OS, to ensure safe and consistent state of battery cell voltage and temp. Critical systems need dedicated apparatus.

<comment><USER7> The batteries don't need that. A trivial analog temperature shutoff is plenty, and you can do cell balancing too with a handful of transistors.

<comment><USER8> > The batteries don't need that.

I would imagine not. But the economics of digital-equipment design can be counterintuitive. Sure, we could put together a bit of custom hardware. But slapping an off the shelf microcontroller in there, and writing some firmware to run it, can be a little cheaper to design and just as cheap to build. And then after the equipment has shipped, if we need to fix a problem -- or even just tweak things a bit -- then our software solution is _a lot_ cheaper.

But then someone finds a security vulnerability in our battery: [http://www.wired.com/2011/07/apple_battery/](http://www.wired.com/2011/07/apple_battery/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Previous closely-related submissions:

(10 months ago) [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7957057](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7957057) -> [http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/gut-second- brain/](http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/gut-second-brain/)

(2 months ago) [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9077837](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9077837) -> [https://www.theconnection.tv/second-brain- gut/](https://www.theconnection.tv/second-brain-gut/)

(6 months ago) [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8527114](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8527114) -> [http://neurosciencestuff.tumblr.com/post/38271759345/gut- ins...](http://neurosciencestuff.tumblr.com/post/38271759345/gut-instincts- the-secrets-of-your-second-brain)

</comment><comment><USER10> As more in this field comes to light, it makes medicine's overuse (imo) of antibiotics very concerning.

</comment><comment><USER11> Is the title misleading? (genuine question)

I've read articles (mostly from religious sources) trying to say the exact same thing about the heart (because, not surprisingly, religious texts speak about the heart as the seat of the soul/mind).

So I'm a little skeptical of such claims

<comment><USER12> It's possible that the heart is the phenomenological seat of mind for some -- either innately or culturally -- irrespective of objective anatomy. Perhaps the problem with the religious articles is that they are being overzealous in trying to link the two domains? To me it's a question of whether using a biological abstraction internally is more useful than (one of) the religious/spiritual models.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> some ancient cultures used "liver" the way we use "gut". i.e. "I felt the anger in my liver!"

<comment><USER14> Colloquial modern Mandarin Chinese uses a few words for the same, chiefly 肠 (cháng; to do with "intestines" or "digestive innards"), 胃 (wèi; "stomach"), 肚子 (dùzi; "belly" or "abdomen"). The former two are also sometimes mixed in to 肠胃, in which case they mean stomach. Honestly, after 15 years mostly in the country it still amazes me how clearly people delineate between three words for essentially the same thing, and heartily state one is correct for a given situation, as if suddenly they meant three completely different parts of the body (which, technically, 肠 does and 肚子 could, but in reality neither are clear).

For instance, if one has diarrhea (a quintessentially Chinese experience), then one has 拉肚子 ('a pulled belly'). If one has virtually any form of digestive tract discomfort, one is 胃痛 ('stomach pain'). More formally, 肠胃炎 ('gastroenteritis') is used. And yet, standing on the ground inside mainland China, greatly animated emotional responses will assure you from all directions that all are completely distinct conditions.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I wonder how stuff like this will effect that scary head-transplant idea.

</comment><comment><USER16> On a related note, //Mother's// Day is close at hand ..

[http://mshop.nationalgeographic.com/html/catalog/photogaller...](http://mshop.nationalgeographic.com/html/catalog/photogalleries/inthewomb/images/womb4.jpg)</comment>


Show HN: Everee – a crowd-sourced bucket list for completionists - <AUTHOR> https://www.everee.io/login <comment><USER2> Few things

1\. What do you want me to do when I hit that page? Just randomly browse around until I find something?

2\. It is very unclear what the product is for and why do you expect it to stick. I think for a product like this to stick you will have a very hard time explaining the benefits.

3\. Considering this is for "completionists", every list I see is basically empty. Not a great motivator.

There was a similar startup a little while ago: [https://angel.co/complete](https://angel.co/complete)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for the feedback! That's really helpful. I will think about the best way to address them. Especially number two - I am not super sure how to deal with that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> i love todo list tutorials too</comment>


Crazy Work Hours and Lots of Cameras: a group from Silicon Valley visits China - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/05/business/china-silicon-valley-technology.html <comment><USER2> This attitude of "tech for tech's sake" at the cost of everything human is so absurd on its face that I have a hard time believing that even these SV-bubble VC's truly believe it. But apparently they do. This is why people hate Silicon Valley and everything tech nowadays.

Historically, technology -- even when it has caused massive disruptions -- has generally enhanced people's lives by freeing them from a harsh constraint imposed by nature. If you have a refrigerator and a microwave, you don't have to worry so much about gathering food and spending all day cooking. If you have birth control, you don't have to worry about choosing between your sex life and your future.

Much of what Silicon Valley has produced in the past 10 years is software and platforms that 1) actually appeal to base, primitive instincts via advertising and 2) directly reduce human liberty by constraining privacy.

We need technology that has a purpose. It seems like the EU is the only governing body that actually understands this.

<comment><USER3> Respectfully dissenting on the hate comment, but otherwise very good points. +1

<comment><USER4> "Fuck! Fuck Google!"

Literal quote from my mother when I explained Project Dragonfly to her. (She's not a person who cusses often.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This has amazing parallels to the panic over the Japanese manufacturing and management methods of the 1980s. Everyone was terrified that Japan would take over the world economically, and everyone would be working for Japanese companies soon if we didn't adopt their ways of doing things.

Hell, it even made it into Back to the Future: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlUgBDgH1po](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlUgBDgH1po)

Seriously, this is what America was terrified of.

<comment><USER6> I can remember watching new reports of people smashing up Japanese electronics in front of the White House. And people were really concerned about all the US property being bought up by the Japanese.

It was the beginning of America's decline everyone thought.

It didn't turn out that way at all.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Semi-related video from 1999 of Jack Ma's early pitch about Alibaba's potential to some friends in China.[0]

His quote about hard work and long hours:

 _> "Second, we need to learn the hard working spirit of Silicon Valley. If we go to work at 8am and go home at 5pm, this is not a high tech company, and Alibaba wil never be successful."_

Apparently, of the 17 people in that room, only 1 joined/invested in Alibaba. Intense startups are definitely not the right lifestyle for most people.

[0] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Up9-C4_8dVo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Up9-C4_8dVo)

</comment><comment><USER8> "We're so lazy in the U.S.!" blurted Wesley Chan, a venture capital investor, on the first day of what would be a weeklong journey into the Chinese technology scene.

...Yikes.

<comment><USER9> yes, this only shows how not very experimented those people were, not a lot of gray hair in this article.

<comment><USER10> Good Point! Burn out is real. And Eventual. Especially when you work for a founder or have a VC who is just demeaning and sucks all around.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm from Europe, living in the US, and it always frustrated me that startups are able to do so well in the US and China, yet find very little momentum in the EU. It's crazy, there is plenty of local talent in Europe's tech hubs.

<comment><USER12> Why do you think it is like that? Access to risk capital? Lack of IPOs?

<comment><USER13> Fragmented European market; the culture and language differences.

<comment><USER12> I don't but that argument. In math you'd say that this is an "continuous function", wouldn't you? Where is the break-off point? Germany for example has 80 mio people, Japan has 120 mio or so. You'd expect the same level of activity scaled by population size. Am I wrong?

EDIT: Another example countering your point is Sweden/Stockholm. Tiny population, high number of startups and unicorns.

<comment><USER14> That really heavily depends on the market in question. They're all so different in terms of culture, regulation, politics, market structures, productivity, output, wealth, etc.

Jordan for example has the same population size as Sweden, that's about where the similarities end.

Sweden, along with Canada and Australia, are just about ideal micro US versions in technology, in terms of potential to pull off your scaling of activity. Good market economies, relatively robust technology societies and technology economies, high GDP per capita and incomes, plenty of wealth and capital to invest, stable open societies with respect for human rights, english language use giving them global benefits (Sweden having one of the world's highest english language adoption rates, outside of primarily english speaking countries), and so on.

Japan has far less spending power per capita - disposable income - than the US, and their economic output per capita is similarly far lower. Their cost of living is not far lower to offset. US GDP per capita will be around $63,000 for 2018. Japan is down around $38,000 to $40,000. Culturally Japan has historically not been friendly to risk taking, entrepreneurial activity. That has shifted some over the last 10-15 years, but not immensely (it's starting from an extreme where a long corporate career was the only acceptable path). There's a considerable difference between Sweden and Japan on that conservativism. Japan also is very different at a macro level, they put themselves into a particularly bad 20+ year debt trap that has robbed their economy of the surplus capital it needs to invest into expansion and innovation.

Germany is doing OK, in regards to technology and tech start-ups. They've lagged a bit in the transition from old industrial to new technology [1][2], it appears to be a cultural problem that is acting as friction. Culturally they're not nearly as dynamic on entrepreneurism as Sweden has become. Perhaps it's just easier to change directions at the scale of Sweden than Germany, with all the entrenched institutions and large conglomerates that Germany has.

[1] [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-12/germany-n...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-12/germany- needs-to-reengineer-to-thwart-digital-obsolescence)

[2] [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-08-16/inside- eu...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-08-16/inside-europe-s- struggle-to-build-a-truly-global-tech-giant)

<comment><USER12> Ok, so you're saying it's not size (as single root cause)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> My personal experience, after working for Alibaba, is that just the appearance of looking busy is what drives promotions, funding, and raises. Actual progress on projects is not measured, nor is code quality via common metrics (tests written, branch coverage, line coverage, test failures).

</comment><comment><USER16> Chinese citizens have en masse been exploited by those in power for thousands of years. Moreover, workers and peasants weren't critical or even overwhelmingly supportive of the cultural revolution. Now China near the highest income inequality in the world and just like in the past those in power have technology in place to keep the average Chinese worker the ability to protest their working conditions. Hopefully, this will change but it is probably unlikely.

I'd really like to ask these VC's and corporate leaders "Are 12 hour work days 6 days a week where every movement of your workers are tracked something you'd like to see as a cultural norm?"

I think it is up to employees and entrepreneurs here in the US to push back against this march to longer and longer work days. Our physical and emotional health is far more important than a title or a few extra dollars. The well balanced life is a wealthy life.

</comment><comment><USER17> I can give a first hand account. Working in a mid sized engineering consulting company there, and been working all around consumer electronics industry since 2007. Six points for you:

1\. "American style startups" only make single digit percentage of the whole tech industry in China. And out of those, the "cult like" make even less.

2\. "the American style startup" model is seen here with a lot of scepticism. Some call it a model for failure, and justly so.

3\. There are not so few very well run companies in China, including, surprise, factories! I don't know a single factory owner who is not aware how dangerous overworked workforce can be for the bottom line. A single misplaced component can fry a few thousand dollars TV set. A single labour action, can end his business.

4\. Becoming "more Western" is not a success model for a Chinese company. It became clear to me as as a rule of thumb, when a Chinese company invites "cool American MBA boys," things begin to go wrong very fast.

 _5\. So are Chinese businesses that competitive after all? Yes and no:_ Yes, as for that the capability to outcompete American companies "fair and square" is there. And no, for that the company that could've buried countless strong American competitors will never take their place, never become a household name, never list on a stock market, never own a skyscraper office, and may not even have a website — it will forever remain a no name OEM in a grey factory building in a dusty industrial town.

6\. "What's the trick?" The answer is: "the trick is that there are no tricks." Whatever place under the sun Chinese companies wrestled from Western competitors was achieved with nothing but sweat, blood, grit, and perseverance.

The best thing China has introduced me to was an entirely different, bullshit free work culture centred on value: contract, payment, and CAD files in the morning — widgets ready in the evening, without any manager in the loop.

If a Western business wants to do as well as a Chinese competitor these days, their corporate boffins should try doing that as their starting point

</comment><comment><USER18> As much as I love working in IT, if things continue down the path where you are expected to become a labourer in 3rd World Country (mentally) and as a consequence start suffering devastating effects such as physical illnesses,

I would strongly, STRONGLY recommend my kids to not pursue IT as a career at all - better be a civil engineer or even a plumber or a lawyer or a family Doctor and live a good life with good money.

<comment><USER10> Plumber = get hands dirty, sometimes real dirty, little respect, and work is hard.

Civil engineer = except for the top tier branch smart people will find a difficult community fit, moderate to modest money, too many external influences towards the discipline, seemingly prime for disruption by the tech world (already happening).

Lawyer and family doctor = too many hours in school and then too many hours in work (generally).

Disclaimer: I'm a civil engineer, work alongside plumbing engineers, know zero actual plumbers, fiancee is doctor, looking to pursue law.

<comment><USER19> Wow a doctor looking to pursue law, very cool! Isn't law worse for work/life balance? (Not taking into account the opportunity cost of already having gotten past the grueling med school and residency stages). Or is it to go into the medical side of the legal field and combine the best of both worlds, or simply a change of heart? How do you like civil engineering? Do you see tech disrupting your profession, or the field of medicine or law for your significant other? For example, I know there is software that will make paralegal work redundant eventually.

<comment><USER10> Whoops! Didn't mean to say fiancee is looking to pursue law. I am.

Definitely worse for the work/life balance metric. But I think it is unfair to yourself if you seek careers based on how little or how much you work. Sometimes you are just looking for something fulfilling. It is the problematic misc/admin problems surrounding the cool stuff that cause you to lose your passion. Like knowing the dismal outcome of a work beforehand, but having to do it anyway without success because someone else said so.

A forgotten rule for me: Know your [unique] strengths, Find your fit, Swing hard at the pitches, and serve the community with what God gave you as uniquely yours because that is your duty. But don't forget everything else you have to do too (this causes a natural work/life balance).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I think one thing that seems to be missed here is none of the products they showed were that original. It's not like WeChat was some amazing new idea. It was chat. Their only real advantage is a captive market.

<comment><USER21> WeChat is a lot more than just a chat app

<comment><USER22> agreed, it's the most successful gov surveillance tool, now even enhanced with tracking financial movements

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> This seems to be straight out of a dystopian novel. While we do have our own - of government snooping and excessive government oversight - the scenario playing out of China is not sustainable in the long term.

<comment><USER24> My fear is the scenario is all too sustainable. North Korea is at the third generation of Kim's and its political pyramid appears to be quite stable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> It is extremely concerning to me how these tech executives are so enamored with Chinas working conditions and all-pervasive data collection as if it was the pinnacle of living in the 21st century.

What happened to the dream of letting technology do the work for us, giving us vast leisure time and taking the burden of survival off? These executives seem so driven towards some ever-changing unobtainable goal that I don't think they will be ever satiated with people just... living.

<comment><USER26> Their goal is to be billionaires first. Then they can have the leisure life.

You won't become a billionaire by enjoying life on basic income.

<comment><USER27> I think though wanting to be a billionaire is, for lack of a better word, a psychosis.

There's nothing that you could possibly want that costs that much. A drive for that much money to me indicates a form of emotional damage where one no longer has a rational relationship with a numeric self-assessment.

<comment><USER28> You think of money as a way to buy things. Others think of it for what it really is - a way to gain influence and control.

<comment><USER29> Psychosis is still an appropriate term for people who want to gain influence and control.

<comment><USER28> That would make the diagnosis so common as to be meaningless.

<comment><USER29> Just because a large number of people seek control, power, and influence does not make it a worthy venture. It is a terrible trait.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I have always found this notion of "race" with China odd. I don't see how other countries doing well economically does anything but help America economically.

If anything, to me the lesson of the last century is that we've changed too fast with too little forethought.

<comment><USER30> The "us vs them" mentality puzzles me as well. Perhaps for some they feel economic growth is a zero sum game. However I see the potential growing for all players.

<comment><USER31> > Perhaps for some they feel economic growth is a zero sum game.

Maybe not zero sum, but you can't have the rich without the poor.

If you lose the race, you may very well end up among the poor.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> I have taken part in this trip on previous years. It really was an eye-opening experience, although less for long work hours and more for the scale that these "small" startups operate at.

We were talking to companies only a couple of years old that had hundreds of millions of users – and that wasn't a standout/unicorn.

<comment><USER33> In walled garden where you have few choices as a user it's not really a question of quality product/service.

<comment><USER34> It's a walled garden with over a billion people, there's plenty of choice. If anything there's _more_ choice since BBAT copycat each other furiously: imagine if every time Google launched a product, Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix and Microsoft all launched their versions within weeks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> "Then there are the work schedules. The Silicon Valley natives were introduced to the Chinese start-up concept of 996: Work from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., six days a week. Once they got over their shock, they had to ask: Does that punishing schedule make sense? "I'm not worried so much about my portfolio companies not working as hard as the Chinese companies," said Mr. Chan, now a partner at Felicis Ventures. "I'll worry when they're less creative and less efficient.""

This is scary

</comment><comment><USER36> > "I'm not worried so much about my portfolio companies not working as hard as > the Chinese companies," said Mr. Chan, now a partner at Felicis Ventures. > "I'll worry when they're less creative and less efficient."

This seems to be a hollow fear. Working that much seems like it would do more harm than good.

</comment><comment><USER37> I've always thought that in future we are going to have 4h work days. I thought it is a logical direction to go. However, it seems we are now proud of longer working hours and we are heading to wrong direction.

</comment><comment><USER38> This is interesting - implications is that VC's may have to work 996 too to keep up :)

> While Silicon Valley start-ups raise funding every 18 to 24 months on > average, the group was told that the most successful Chinese companies do it > every six months. It isn't unusual for a hot start-up to raise funding three > to four times a year

edit changed 669 to 996 :)

</comment><comment><USER39> > One Chinese technology executive said he worked 14 to 15 hours a day at > least six days a week. Another said he worked every waking hour and forced > himself to watch movies to relax.

> The reaction from a group of Silicon Valley executives: Wow.

> "We're so lazy in the U.S.!" blurted Wesley Chan, a venture capital > investor, on the first day of what would be a weeklong journey into the > Chinese technology scene.

Uh, how about not. That is the complete wrong response to that. I understand Wesley might have just been trying to lighten the mood or be nice but let's not encourage working yourself to death.

<comment><USER40> Considering how little work people actually do at work we should be pushing for a 4 day work week instead.

<comment><USER41> Much of the value is standby time. Even if workers are doing very little most of the day, the fact that you can spin up a worker instantly (between 9 and 9) in China can make their companies extremely efficient.

<comment><USER42> Depends on what kind of work, if you are front-line developer the value of work is different from that of an executive. Executive game has more perception elements to it, in such the style is as much important as substance. Its has little or no similarities with the deep work needed from most of the knowledge workers.

<comment><USER43> I think I now what you're saying, but can you please ELI5?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> "They found Chinese tech executives to be less reflective about the social impact and potential misuse of their technologies." On the one hand it's hard to find anything less reflexive than Facebook/Whatsapp acknowledging their platform was used for a literal genocide and taking a year to actually do something about it, on the other hand what we know about product tampering in China for the bigger scandals with baby formula, milk and pet food seems the anything goes for a profit should make this story's startup attitude not a surprise to anyone paying attention to the news.

</comment><comment><USER45> I'd prefer 6am to 6pm 6 days a week.

</comment><comment><USER46> We need to be more efficient to beat them, there are not other ways.

</comment><comment><USER47> I've often wondered about that. It seems we've gone backwards since the social democratic promises of the 60s and 70s. A higher level of technology should translate into more leisure and less work, not the opposite.

Neoliberalism?

<comment><USER45> Capitalism ironically. X money is never enough.

<comment><USER48> There's a lot of people here trying to blame capitalism or the right, but it seems like trying to square that circle with the collaboration of Silicon Valley and the Chinese Government is a bit of a stretch. History is important and all, but even if I stipulate your theory about the past (which I don't, but for the sake of argument let's let it go), it's SV and China doing this _today_. Anyone who wants to try to convince me that the SV+China collaboration is "of the right" is welcome to try but I warn you you're basically facing Mt. Everest here. Blaming it on people who are not even proximal to today's manifestation of the will, at best, make you briefly feel better, but do nothing to solve the problem.

<comment><USER49> What happened in the past can happen again. See, every war in human history.

<comment><USER48> What relevance does that have to what is happening _now_? Are you seriously proposing that it's OK to not worry about what Silicon Valley and China are doing, because someday in the past and maybe someday in the future, right-wing people will try to squash freedom? That makes no sense.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


I'm Renting a Dog? - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-03-01/i-m-renting-a-dog <comment><USER2> I got my dog for $300 bucks at the humane society (less actually, that was with leash/harness/bowls/etc...). She's awesome.

I got really lucky though, I was the first person to see her as she came in from the vet that morning. A family was literally there waiting if I didn't take her.

The humane society was kind of depressing. They had so many little Chihuahuas that they brought up from California. Loads of people buy them and then realize they don't want them later. At least the humane society doesn't put them to sleep.

</comment><comment><USER3> Feel like I am _very_ far from the target audience of this article, especially as they start the article with "$2400" being somewhat reasonable for a dog.

Sad to see all of these animals rotting in shelters while people spend that kind of money, to the point where leasing becomes a viable option.

<comment><USER4> My parents spent a couple of grand on a new (Labrador) puppy a few years ago. After doing a lot of research, they found a breeder who deliberately breeds for good hip health (which is a big problem for Labs in general). Their main reasoning is that our old (also Lab) has had hip degeneration, and didn't want to see a dog go through that again.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Would you use an automated contact management system? - <AUTHOR> Looking to build this for myself as I'm struggling to keep up with all the manual work.
I'm thinking of a system that adds new contacts when I have conversations with them on my email and then immediately auto tags and tracks that conversation in a lightweight CRM of some sort.
I'm assuming it's useful for sales and business development but wondering if anyone else is interested? <comment><USER2> I was thinking building something like this for myself as well - more in the context of Dale Carnegie's How To Win Friends (yeah, I know..); i.e. simple system where I can note what (might be) important and relevant for a given person.

Good luck - I would use something like this if it was already available.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'd love to get your input and have you try it out if you're interested?

P.S. What do you think of the book? Was thinking about getting it myself.

<comment><USER2> Yes, I'm happy to help.

The book is a classic - definitely worth it. If you don't have the time, you could just check a summary - the core concept is simple; however, reading it form cover to cover probably will change positively your interpersonal interactions.

<comment><AUTHOR> Is there some way for me to contact you?

Thanks. I might get the book.

<comment><USER2> You can drop me a line on hello at velkoff . io

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> How is this different than a plain old CRM ? Don't CRMs already have ways to auto tag emails ?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes but I'm hoping that the CRM would do more things on its own. Like remind me about when to contact someone again when it's time for their software license renewal. And I'd like to have this done automatically for me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'd be interested if it did consolidation of contact info from multiple sources as well.

<comment><AUTHOR> Awesome. What other data sources were you thinking about?</comment></comment>


Gifted Instuctional Stategies for Homeschool - <AUTHOR> https://familyhomeschooler.com/gifted-instructional-strategies/ <comment><USER2> Geat aticle, vey informative and helpful fo paents of gifted youth</comment>


Amazon Partnership with British Police Alarms Privacy Advocates - <AUTHOR> https://theintercept.com/2018/03/09/amazon-echo-alexa-uk-police/ <comment><USER2> Reminder, Amazon's UK site already reports your purchases of many electronics to a police database. There is no opt-out. You could argue that this makes sense for mobile phones, but they do it for many other things, too. Here's a completely ordinary television that gets you listed in yet another police database: [https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B015EL27TQ/](https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B015EL27TQ/)

In fairness, they do disclose this up front. _" Please note that devices dispatched from and sold by Amazon are automatically registered on CheckMend and the National Mobile Property Register (NMPR), this information is shared in accordance with the Amazon.co.uk Privacy Notice"_

<comment><USER3> For phones, its so your phone can be locked when stolen. For TV, it is to ensure everyone pays the TV license to fund the BBC.

Both, IMHO, are good things. My phone was stolen, I don't want the lovely person to financially benefit. Also I like everyone to pay for the BBC heck but I am a socialist.

<comment><USER4> I know a few people who got their property back because of the registry sometimes laughably years down the line when it was already useless.

The TV license is nearly impossible to get rid off these because you also need to prove you don't or can't use bbc iplayer or consume any other publicly funded content online.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Huh?

There's nothing in the article about a partnership (despite being called that in the headline). All I see is a police department that put out an Alexa app. I don't see anything wrong with, that. I'm a bit confused on how the Echo displays the pictures the article claims they broadcast, though.

<comment><USER6> I think the main point is that police data is now stored on Amazon servers.

<comment><USER7> Well, data that the Police is keen to share with as much of the public as possible, as quickly as possible. It hardly seems out of the realm of the reasonable to use Amazon for something like that.

<comment><USER6> They also want to use Alexa for incoming crime reports and internal discussions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > 'The cop [would] be able to say 'Give me the warrant details for Joe > Blocks,'...

I'm assuming this site is US based because someone from the UK and especially Lancashire would know that he meant Joe Bloggs.

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

<comment><USER9> It almost looks like Joe Bollocks this way (which wouldn't be a term universally known in the US either).

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> ...have rolled out a program to broadcast crime updates, photos of wanted and missing people, and safety notifications to Amazon Echo owners.

One has to wonder why anyone would want this?

<comment><USER11> In a local FB group we get crime updates, allows you to be active in avoiding beginning a victim; and to be vigilant to help those around you.

Tiny example - you might not think twice seeing someone fiddling with a house sign, but knowing there had been a recent spate of thefts (yes, really) one could challenge or report as appropriate.

More serious example - several attempts to abduct children within a few days of each other allowed me to remind my kids of safe behaviour; as well as reminding myself to be vigilant.

I always read the "missing" reports in the local news as I see a lot of people and have, I believe, a good memory for faces.

Given it's easy to avoid, why would you not want it. Good citizenship makes society better IMO.

<comment><USER10> 'Given it's easy to avoid, why would you not want it.'

Experience of similar programs in the UK which start off as well-meaning endeavours but soon become nothing more annoying forms of 'official' spam.

I get the point about ultra local events but, here at least, the police seem to be always the last people to know about stuff happening at this level.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Also all shipping companies also has to report to the uk anti smuggling network.

</comment><comment><USER13> Turn your Amazon Echo into the perfect paranoia machine!</comment>


Ask HN: My startup is ramping up but I have no time. What next? - <AUTHOR>

The last time I asked HN I wanted to know when I should be looking for funding. I have a great product, lots of quality traffic and a decent fan base. In the first year of business I've had 500,000 unique users to my site. It's a news site.
I have a full time job and do the project on the side. I've never thought of making money from it, but it would be nice to cover my hosting bills and maybe a car payment.
My problem is that my full time job takes up 3/4 of my day. It's 11pm right now and I'm still on a job related task. I don't see it letting up any time soon and I'm afraid that my time for the site will be limited.
Here's my question:
How do I find the time to go after investors and get some capital behind the project without quitting my day job but still have time to do it?
I can't let it die, it's my passion. It's what I think about when I wake up, while I work and before I sleep.
Any suggestions? <comment><USER2> Investors won't want to invest in someone that isn't fully committed to their vision. Just imagine if someone asked you to invest your hard-earned money in them, but they didn't even believe in their idea enough to actually leave their day job. Would you be comfortable with placing that bet?

<comment><AUTHOR> At this time I'm not financially ready to jump ship from my day job. If I had financial backing to allow me to work on it full time, of course I would. At this time it's not a viable option. I need my day job to pay my bills.

I think I have put a hell of a lot of effort into it considering I work 10-12 hour days at my normal job.

I believe some investors would see the growth patterns and understand that the future looks bright.

<comment><USER3> You could pay yourself a salary from the investor money. Happens all the time.

<comment><USER4> That is what he's saying with the "If I had financial backing" bit. He wants investor money in order to pay himself a salary and quit his day job, but hasn't been able to get the money yet.

<comment><AUTHOR> Exactly. I'm building the site, holding a day job and trying to find the next step forward as far as investors go. No investments yet, but the future looks bright ;)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> "I can't let it die, it's my passion. It's what I think about when I wake up, while I work and before I sleep."

Then why don't you make it your day job?

<comment><AUTHOR> I need my day job to pay my bills. The site doesn't make enough on its own to do that yet. Once it does I'll be doing it 100%.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Would love to hear more about your startup. Could you provide a link as well? Thanks.

<comment><AUTHOR> A little over a year ago I decided to take the plunge and pursue a life long dream of mine to be involved with the niche market of space exploration. I've always been interested in the topic but have never really done anything with it.

I started a blog and it kind of took off due to the Mars Curiosity landing. That was the first big step for me, it destroyed my servers. The traffic was too much to keep up with. After some hard work and determination I've gotten it to a place where it gets a steady stream of traffic.

I'm in contact with the folks at NASA, SpaceX, etc and am working on stories that other space outlets don't cover. I have tons of respect for the other blogs and news sites out there, but my take on it is a little different. I'm a normal guy that loves everything about the mystery that is space.

Here's a link to the site [http://www.spaceindustrynews.com](http://www.spaceindustrynews.com) .

A lot of work has gone into the layout recently and I'm continuing to work on it on a daily basis, tweaking small things, optimizing code for load time, caching, minimizing, cdn-ing.

Thanks for your interest. If you have any feedback it would be greatly appreciated.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Others may disagree with this but have you considered getting a cofounder?

<comment><AUTHOR> I have. I'm open to the idea. I have no problem sharing my dream with someone else because it is possible that it's their dream as well.

I've been reaching out for contributors as well, that may keep it afloat while I work at my day job.

<comment><USER6> I think, then, that may be your best route.

<comment><AUTHOR> I will continue to reach out to the people in the industry that I know and hopefully someone will reply in kind. As of now those that I've talked with about helping run the project are almost as busy as myself.

A lot of people in my industry have a great passion for it but most of them want to get paid for the work, I have no money to invest in them. I do give them the option to have a direct say in the company as well as invest in its future which will benefit them.

I'm a generous man and I take care of those that help me out, just gotta find the right ones with enough passion and time to help.

Thank you so much for your replies.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Coding in Color: Reverse syntax highlighting - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/programming-ideas-tutorial-and-experience/3a6db2743a1e/?hn=true

<comment><USER2> The language color forth does this.</comment>


How many Y Combinator founders are/were NOT young hackers?  Any 30+? - <AUTHOR>

<comment><USER2> Our company is among the oldest, if not the oldest, funded by YC with 32 and 33 year old founders. We are both hackers. I learned today that Joe Hewitt is getting close to 30 (and he thought he was the oldest of the bunch before today).

Also, Paul has mentioned several times in the past that the mean age of the companies they fund is climbing, and he's thinking 24-ish is the right age to start thinking seriously about a startup (finished school, had a real job for a while, so you know how much it sucks to work for someone else).

Most of the founders who were in WFP2007 are hackers. Some are more hackery than others (it's a quite wide range...some are famously good hackers, while others have only picked up a programming language, probably PHP, in the past year or two). But, even the ones that aren't hackers by nature have become hackers, to some degree, during the program...in this early stage, it's the biggest part of the work that needs to be done. When you have a launched product, the job becomes more diverse and other skills become as important as hacking, but before that, if you aren't able to contribute code or design, you're probably not serving your team very well.

</comment><comment><USER3> I was more interested in the non-hackers part of the non-young-hackers. Harj said something about how he started something without knowing how to hack; I was surprised, because I don't even know what you DO in a web startup if you don't know how to hack. How does it work?

</comment><comment><USER4> Off the top of my head maybe 5-10% are over 30 and 5-10% nonhackers. I don't think we've ever had anyone who was over 30 and not a hacker.

<comment><USER5> How does this compare to the age distribution of applicants?

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> PG has said here a few times that he's invested in several companies with 30+ year old founders. It seems not really about age as much as it is being able to take the risk and not having a lot of overhead to support (a family, mortgage, etc).

<comment><USER7> It's fine to have a house and a kid if you've already got capital. Most programmers in their 30's would hopefully have sufficient savings for about a year of no income - It is a pretty well paying job after all.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm about to turn 33, but also sufficiently rootless that it's not like I'm taking on a lot of extra risk by trying something like this. No kids, no huge mortgage payments.

<comment><USER5> 38, Started multiple companies in the past, worked for a dozen startups to boot, my co-founder is also my life partner, no kids, no roots.

Going to live in bulgaria or somewhere like that, live cheap, grow fast, hire local talent.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> It's all about commitment folks, simple as that. People over 30 and under 20 tend to have commitments that might get in the way of their startuping. My cofounder was 31, fwiw.

</comment><comment><USER10> I'm PG's age and definitely thinking about finding a way to do a startup. No, seriously. Maybe a consulting company that becomes a startup. Who knows?

But I envy the hell out of you guys who are in your 20s now. I had bad luck: when I was in my 20s, it was the late 80s/early 90s, and the economy was a wreck. No one was hiring, and doing startups was not all that easy. There was no internet to speak of, and so not only was it harder to start something (where??), but there was no place _to talk about starting something and exchange information_.

You guys really have some good opportunities, I think. If I were you, I'd just spend my 20s and early 30s (and maybe beyond) attempting to make a successful startup. Fail? Try again and learn from any mistakes. Adapt to the market as it changes and never stop learning! (Part of the reason guys my age don't do startups or invent new things is because they get complacent -- they stop learning. I have refused to do that, even though I am in an 'executive' position where I work.)</comment>


Released Too Soon - <AUTHOR> http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/16/released-too-soon/?ref=personaltechemail&nl=technology&emc=cta2

<comment><USER2> Limitations are ok, but true bugs come from a team that just doesn't care about the product. It feels like a hostage situation: if enough people buy this thing, we'll actually fix it. If not, we are keeping your money.</comment>


Tell HN: You made us do it. Hack On, the Online Hackathon with Live Streaming - <AUTHOR>

A couple of days ago I had this thought: what if someone would take hackathons online? I decided to ask HN (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2293779) and got some great responses. But even better, an hour later I get that email from a fellow HN reader, SingAlong, expressing his interest to just make it happen. So here we are now, really excited to announce that on March 19th, 2011, there'll be the first online hackathon to feature live streams of the participants.
While we're busy setting everything up you can follow us on Twitter (@hackonday) or sign up on the page for email notifcations: http://www.hackonday.com/
Sponsors, Recruiters, Hacker Space Organizers, feel free to hit us proactively on email@example.com. <comment><USER2> Hmm. Hackerspaces.org has been running global livestreamed hackathons monthly for over a year now:

<http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/Synchronous_Hackathon>

Indeed it will be the same weekend as your event... not to discourage you or anything. Lets see what you've got!

<comment><USER3> After reading more into it, it seems that they are targeting co-working type spaces, not individuals in their hackathon efforts. Yes there are synchronous live online hackathons but the niche difference here is definitely individual hackers.

(not necessarily contradicting you beardicus as I'm sure you were well aware of this, just first time I read it I was like: ohh, already done)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Sounds fun, I'll probably give it a go.

Are you having a theme? If so, consider revealing it a few days before (like maybe the Thursday before).

<comment><AUTHOR> There's no theme for the first one (yet). You can signup on the site, we'll keep you posted!

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Clickable: <http://www.hackonday.com/></comment>


Tolkien: An Unexpected Sainthood - <AUTHOR> http://file770.com/?p=38490 <comment><USER2> The article title is probably also an homage to the name of the first chapter of _The Hobbit_ , "An Unexpected Party".</comment>


Show HN: See who your network is voting for - <AUTHOR> http://www.twittervotes2012.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> Just a quick evening project, the code is up here: <https://github.com/nambrot/twittervotes2012>

I thought it would be interesting to move the discussion from spamming facebook walls to actually getting the vote on paper.

<comment><USER2> Interesting project though there are more than just two candidates. I'm not interested in either of the two choices you provided.

<comment><AUTHOR> you are right that there are more candidates. In fact, I'm a proponent of Gary Johnson. I just kept it simple assuming the vast majority of people are only interested in Obama vs. Romney

<comment><USER2> That's exactly who I was looking for ;)

<comment><AUTHOR> If this gets enough upvotes, maybe I will include him :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Safe to say that Obama is very popular with HN :)</comment>


Ask HN: Organizing business notes and thoughts? - <AUTHOR>

I'm struggling to manage and keep track of various ideas/methods to implement in my day to day to work. I get flashes of inspiration, read marketing blogs online, etc and say "Oh yes, I should try this" to myself. From there I email myself and figure I'll get around to it eventually. I don't and I'm struggling to manage my ideas and find time to implement. Has anyone faced similar issues? <comment><USER2> Of course! I carry index cards with me and write things down as they occurred to me. Eventually they end up in Tinderbox, a Macintosh-only application (www.eastgate.com). It takes some learning, but it is very versatile!</comment>