Why American Workers Now Dress So Casually - <AUTHOR> https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/05/history-of-business-casual/526014/?single_page=true <comment><USER2> I remember when I entered the work force back in 1978 right out of college and went to work for Bell Labs. We were required to wear a suit, ties and white shirt. You were not allowed to hang your jacket over your chair; it had to be hung in the closet. You could smoke at your desk, I am not a smoker but many others took advantage of that. You could smoke in conference rooms during meetings and in elevators and many did so (See Mad Men).

It has been very interesting watching the norms shift over the last almost 40 years. Women and minorities filling the ranks, casual attire, smoking prohibitions (all very good things in my view).

One, funny interesting side story, if you will indulge this old timer. When I was in high school, my father was a budding attorney and of course had to wear a suit, tie and white shirt. My mother was a struggling artist. My father wanted her to wash and iron his shirts to save money and only have to pay for the dry cleaning of the shirts. My mother refused (an early feminist perhaps). They had a huge fight over it. In the end, my Mother relented and agreed to endure the task. However, in classic passive aggressive style, she "accidentally" got a red sock in the wash with the shirts turning them a slight shade of pink. Of course that made them, for that time, unusable ! So he had to toss them. After that he simply had them laundered. Ever since then our family calls this ruse "red-socking-it", which basically means intentionally fucking up to get out of doing something you don't want to do. I think we can all think of times when someone at work "red-socked-it".

<comment><USER3> >I think we can all think of times when someone at work "red-socked-it".

When I worked at Best Buy years ago, they started making us wear earpieces. I hated trying to do my job with constant interruptions in my ear, but instead of telling management I hated it, I pretended to love it.

I started talking over the radio constantly, and I'd end every phrase by making a white-noise sound and saying over. Eventually the managers took my radio away, and they thought it was a punishment.

<comment><USER4> I went to private Catholic school. In theology class, the priest would punish chatty students by making them eat a dog biscuit in front of the classroom.

I learned which biscuit colors corresponded to which flavors, picked the least-bad one intentionally, and proceeded to slowly savor it in front of everybody. After that, he retired the punishment.

<comment><USER5> I shudder to think how many you had to eat to become confident about their flavor ranking.

<comment><USER6> One of each colour, I'd wager.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Tangentially related:

I was recently reading the autobiography of the CEO and one of the founders of Sony, Akio Morita. Sony Japan has been famous for having uniforms, like many other Japanese companies (which Steve Jobs really liked and wanted to emulate, except the idea was shot down early on. He did apply the idea to himself though, which is where his famous look comes from).

Many people would ascribe this as Sony being a typical, paternalistic Asian company - however, the reality is a bit more subtle. Keep in mind that Sony was started right after World War 2, in a Tokyo ravaged by years of bombing:

 _" When we started the company, clothing was scarce and expensive on the black market. People came to work in an odd assortment of gear; returning soldiers wore bits of their uniform or old-fashioned suits that had been saved for many years. If a person was fortunate enough to have a good suit, he didn't want to wear it to the office where he might risk burning a hole in it with acid or soiling it. Some of our employees just didn't have the money to invest in a work jacket. So with company money we bought a jacket for everyone to wear in the office.

Pretty soon these jackets became a symbol of our company family. As the company prospered, we could have done away with the jackets - we used to have a summer jacket and a winter one - because we were all being paid and could afford our own, but everybody seemed to like the idea, and so we just decided to continue to provide them. In the beginning, we executives had a different colored name tag from the others, but we eventually adopted the same kind worn by everyone else.

Today these jackets and tags are being used everywhere, even where class distinctions made people hesitant to wear them at first. Many of us liked our blue jackets, and I still wear mine occasionally."_

Akio Morita, Made in Japan

<comment><USER8> Does anyone know where I can find a picture of these uniforms? Google image search happily returns a picture of Kim Jong Il and steve jobs, but no actual images of the damn uniform.

You'd think "sony company uniform" would be pretty easy for a search engine to search for.

<comment><USER7> The later uniforms were designed by Issey Miyake, whom Jobs ordered his turtlenecks from.

Here's one picture of early days Sony where all employees appear to be wearing the same jacket:

[https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/CorporateInfo/History/SonyHist...](https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/CorporateInfo/History/SonyHistory/8ido18000007kygs- img/8ido18000007kyn2.gif)

<comment><USER9> Do you have a version that isn't potato quality?

<comment><USER10> [https://i2.wp.com/www.sopitas.com/wp- content/uploads/2016/05...](https://i2.wp.com/www.sopitas.com/wp- content/uploads/2016/05/sony-fundacion-4-e1462649780571.png)

Courtesy Tineye[0]

[0] [https://www.tineye.com/search/c9d37d27e89b6836f417109fc993ff...](https://www.tineye.com/search/c9d37d27e89b6836f417109fc993ff052d0dba06/?sort=size&order=desc)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> As a programmer, it's tempting to think that if we were still operating under 1950's social norms, I'd be the guy wearing a suit, but realistically I'd probably be the guy wearing coveralls with my name stitched on the front.

Maybe part of the problem with dress codes is that we (or most of us) aren't the self-employed white-collar professionals who have much to gain by looking successful to their customers. We're actually the blue-collar assembly-line factory workers. No one outside our immediate circle of co-workers has any reason to know or care what we look like.

<comment><USER12> This. Gone are the days of twenty-tiered hierarchies. And as companies outsource, disrupt, and automate into tiny modules of CTOs/CEOs selling products, it becomes less and less important as social structures break down in this gig economy. I think the future will view suit and ties as just another individual expression of taste among the sea of new ideas competing for paying customers - who may or may not really care how you look.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Friend of mine just got a new tech job with one of those boring old Fortune 100 companies. Wore a suit to the interview; the interviewer told him to dress it down for the job.

So he wore slacks, a belt and a button up shirt on the first day; people seemed really nervous around him, like he was there to audit them.

So he meets the people he's going to work with: his "boss" is in a stained t-shirt, shorts, no shoes, super casual. I mean like 20 years ago he wouldn't have been able to buy a soda in a beach-town convenience store. Looks at my friend like he's from Mars.

A few weeks in and my friend still over-dresses. I mean, his shirt has a COLLAR for christsakes. It looks like it has been IRONED for the love-of-god. We'll see how long he lasts. Maybe when he gets more comfortable he'll start wearing ripped jeans and a pink floyd t-shirt. We'll see.

<comment><USER13> When I interviewed for my 2nd out of college job (circa 2000), I happened to interview on a day where the folks I was interviewing with had a conference, so they were dressed up. My start date was delayed for some bureaucratic reason.

Not knowing what the dress code was, I showed up my first day in a suit, and headed up to the office, which had been moved the week prior. I'm wandering around looking for my boss, when the Commissioner's secretary (this is a .gov gig) spots me, and thinks I'm a salesman as they had an issue with salespeople crashing the place. Nobody can find my boss, and five minutes later, two policeman show up and escort me out of the building. Thankfully my boss was a smoker, and rescued me as the cops were kicking me out! :)

The particular division I was in had a pretty eclectic collection of dressers. The bigshots wore suits or sportsjackets, and most people did the business casual thing. Then there were the... others. One dude did leather pants and a massive cowboy hat, there was a male and female tracksuit contingent, and a few people wearing sweatpants of all things.

<comment><USER14> > Nobody can find my boss, and five minutes later, two policeman show up and > escort me out of the building

They didn't bother to check on the whole "I'm here to start work, my boss is <T>" ?

<comment><USER15> Maybe they said: "yeah, right; the two people before you also said they're meeting <T>, except they weren't" and continued to escort him out.

I mean, if I were asked to escort _a salesman_ out of the building, I'd immediately assume that they'll be trying to talk their way into staying, so I'd put my extra assertive face on.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Tyler Cowen (in his typical counter-narrative style) suggests casual culture may anti-dynamism, particularly of the class mobility type.

The argument (which is not fully formed, I think) is that signalling exists anyway. In a more formal envirnonment, you can signal seriousness or whatnot by dressing in a good suit to make a cerrtain impression. In a casual environment, you can't signal with your clothes but that means signals just become more subtle and nuanced.

I think Cowen is saying that casual culture means social signals are harder to fake. You might think "great! Meritocracy.*" But, merit is not a drop in replacement for formal social signals. Informal signals are. What actually replaces the suit, watch and shiny shoes is p speech, body language (or a google search revealing your prestigous keynote speech) that one is a member of a particular group. It's much harder for outsiders to tick the boxes and blend in.

Interesting thought.

<comment><USER17> These are the relevant links for the idea:

[http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2017/05/tyler_cowen_on_1.ht...](http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2017/05/tyler_cowen_on_1.html) (about half-way down, search for "casualness")

> * But what I find striking is societies with a lot of upward mobility often > tend to have strict dress codes. So you see this today with Mormons, at > Mormon businesses. You see it in Japan in its heyday years--you know, the > businessman or journeyman suit, they more or less all looked the same. > There's something about upward mobility where actually clothing is not that > casual and one is being more formal in trying to impress; and that is a [?]. > But the thing about being casual is it actually makes it harder for people > to prove themselves.*

And a follow-up: [http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2017/05/inf...](http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2017/05/informal- dress-social-mobility-sicilian-perspective.html)

> _When I [a correspondent, not Cowen] was a young associate at the biggest > law firm in Rome, casual friday was the time when my Sicilian provincial > middle-lower class background was most transparent. I didn't have the money > for smart but impressive casual clothing. But above all I didn't have the > cultural and social capital to know how to dress casual in the right way._

In general, social norms often play a substantial role as a level playing field. The people who benefit from their removal are those who can quickly understand and adapt to the unarticulated, informal rules that govern all human interaction. I'm happy I don't have to wear a suit and tie every day (and slightly sad that I _never_ have, but that's a different discussion), but let's not pretend that "no dresscode" is actually to be taken literally if you have any intention of advancing in the hierarchy that we pretend isn't there.

<comment><USER18> > So you see this today with Mormons, at Mormon businesses

As a Mormon, I thought it might be interesting to point out that to some degree that's actually part of our theology. Basically a dress code that's strict enough that everyone is equal, this de-emphasizing dress and clothing.

In a Mormon temple you're required to wear very simple all white clothing (plain white shirt, tie and pants for men, plain white dress for women, plain white socks and plain white shoes) - both as a sign of an attempt to be "pure" but also it's noted that everyone dresses exactly the same, causing for less focus on dress and external things.

<comment><USER19> Wow. The same as the Guilty Remnant.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> >Zuckerberg explained: "I really want to clear my life to make it so that I have to make as few decisions as possible about anything except how to best serve [Facebook's] community."

Interesting enough Obama said the exact same thing about his suit choices.

"You'll see I wear only gray or blue suits," [Obama] said. "I'm trying to pare down decisions. I don't want to make decisions about what I'm eating or wearing. Because I have too many other decisions to make."(1)

So decision fatigue doesn't need to go hand in hand with super casual.

(1) [http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2012/10/michael-lewis- profile...](http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2012/10/michael-lewis-profile- barack-obama)

<comment><USER21> "Zuckerberg explained: "I really want to clear my life to make it so that I have to make as few decisions as possible about anything except how to best serve [Facebook's] community."

Most likely he just doesn't enjoy fashion. Some people love fashion, shopping clothes, figuring out what do dress, and derive tremendous joy from them.

Zuckerberg and Obama aren't one of them. At least Obama is being more honest about the reasoning, while Zuckerberg is just spinning it.

<comment><USER22> Pragmatism is a good principle but as you say there are persons who enjoy clothing itself as a form of art and self-expression. Casual/minimalism (as jeans+tshirt only) in clothing is not the rational choice for everyone.

As an example: Someone who doesn't particularly enjoy music could advocate that as a means to make fewer decisions and not waste time in non-adaptive behavior he doesn't listen to music. If the ingroup has similar tastes then it's converted into a "truth" and non-conformity prejudiced.

Overall I think that the intelligent thing is to dress according to what is expected/acceptable. A lot of people seems to think that the move to casual dress is some kind of new achieved freedom and that we're growing out of being biased against other's persons clothing. The reality, as posts here can attest, is that it was simply a change in dressing code. There is still a bias, now it's just placed in the more "formal" clothing.

I personally prefer tailored/formal clothing. But as casual dressers were discriminated in the 60s-70s so I would be in the current workplace if I dressed as I desired. The solution is simple: Dress as expected in work and as you like in your personal life. We as a species have not grown out of groupthink yet.

<comment><USER23> > _I personally prefer tailored /formal clothing. But as casual dressers were > discriminated in the 60s-70s so I would be in the current workplace if I > dressed as I desired._

Would you though? Because tailored suits are a casual hipster staple nowadays too. You can meet a guy with huge victorian mustache and beard and a fine suit and they're a graphic designer or something....

<comment><USER24> I agree it's not quite the same thing. At one point not wearing the required jacket and tie was just grounds for dusmissal. Now "overdressing" in some manner is just eccentric. Of course, not everyone has the luxury of being eccentric.

<comment><USER23> I guess in those cases the tuxedo t-shirt is the best compromise...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I find these sartorial/sumptuary rules fascinating. My kid (age 19) is a snappy dresser which I (working in the Valley since I was 18, 30-odd years ago) pretty much wear whatever my hand falls on first, typically T shirts and shorts.

He says it's a status thing: I have status (within the community I work with) and so can afford to not give a shit about my clothing. While service workers (not gardeners, but sales people, lawyers, doctors, janitors, finance people, waiters, etc) all have to wear a uniform of one sort or another.

I wonder if he's right because when I am in Japan or Europe I dress better and do dress up for dinner.

I heard an interesting explanation for SF's acceptance of a much wider norm of behavior: the claim was that it goes back to the gold rush: that crazy person might just have an ounce or two of gold in his or her pocket.

<comment><USER26> It's kind of a mixture of clothing as a status uniform and rejection of that norm. Lawyers, managers and bankers wear suits and display their white collar status, a high position in the social hierarchy. Salespeople continue with suits as a form of mimickery -- you won't get thrown out of the building quite as fast with a suit versus a hoodie or polo. But the image of suits in the workplace has been tainted with corporate looting, fraud, deception and mismanagement. Dressing like you work for Goldman Sachs is akin to declaring those behaviors as an aspiration.

The causal dress counter-culture blurs the status lines that dress codes would otherwise draw. It reflects a mentality that people want leaders (or maybe even to be leaders) who are judged by the quality ideas, execution, and outcomes, versus their position in the org chart. Or the abolition of leaders entirely, holocratic style.

It's true that at some level, Zuckerberg has enough status to show up to Facebook offices in a hoodie, and he's rich enough that even if investors gave him the boot he'd be well off. But I don't imagine most programmers showing up to work in hoodies do to broadcast how important they are.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Alternate theory: the longer we aren't England the more we recognize that three layers of wool isn't a very practical outfit.

I mean shit Miami's winters are warmer than London's summers

<comment><USER28> Not all of the USA is Miami. London is balmy compared to Boston.

<comment><USER29> Which is crazy a Boston's latitude is about the same as Rome. It came as a real surprise when so realised how far south the US is compared to the UK, or in fact most of Europe. Miami is the same latitude as Luxor in Egypt.

<comment><USER30> Born in the Nordics, I never felt I'm living very far in the north as it was south of the Arctic Circle and all. But there really aren't big populations that far up -- it was well north of Anchorage, for example. Russia has some inhabited northern places in Siberia like Norilsk, though solely due to the mining industry.

I guess Europe would look very different without the Gulf Stream.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> It's something I've noticed as well and something I feel myself starting to react against. I don't own any t-shirts anymore and now dress almost exclusively in business casual, whether I'm at work or not. I plan to get myself a suit tailored this year.

I think the stereo-typical image of the "IT guy" wearing a hoodie or printed t-shirts isn't a good one, and stops us being taken as seriously as we should be. I want to be respected as a professional, not ostracized for dressing like a slob.

<comment><USER32> I can't take an IT guy in a suit seriously.

<comment><USER31> [https://tekkie.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/young-ivan- suther...](https://tekkie.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/young-ivan- sutherland.jpg)

[https://diarioti.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Douglas- Enge...](https://diarioti.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Douglas- Engelbart-728.jpg)

[http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/jmccolor.jpg](http://www- formal.stanford.edu/jmc/jmccolor.jpg)

<comment><USER33> You're proving the point: IT guys in suits are from 50 years ago. Of course, if you meat a real old-timer, you respect him, but if you see a 20-something who tries to emulate this style, it just looks ridiculous and out of place.

<comment><USER31> Then I think that reflects badly on our profession if the idea of us dressing like professionals is hard for us to take seriously.

We can take lawyers, accountants and business people in suits seriously. But we're not on their level?

I guess I'd rather look ridiculous and out of place than look the opposite. If this field is so un-respected, maybe I should make an exit plan anyway.

<comment><USER34> What is it about a suit that is inherently professional, independent of social norms? There are objective ways to perform your job better, and there are cultural gestures that convey respect and dignity, and both fall under the umbrella of what we call "professionalism". A suit has been one of those gestures at some times in some cultures / industries. But to insist that it's professional independent of culture and industry is like someone coming into my home and insisting one taking their shoes off because in some places that's a sign of respect. Even if I just told them I prefer they leave their shoes on because I don't want to talk to a professional who just removed the shoes they've been working in all day. See how much it would miss the point of a respectful gesture if they insisted on a gesture that is respectful _elsewhere_? In many tech offices that have a casual dress code, wearing a suit when you're not meeting with a customer for whom that's the norm or something would actually be seen as a disrespectful gesture to your peers, as though you're disingenuously trying to impress someone. So what makes it professional?

<comment><USER31> I think I may come from a different perspective from you, or indeed many people here. I probably should have pre-faced with this first.

While I code every day I also part BA. I have a lot of contact with non- technical people - I am not just in a big office with other members of my profession.

Basically if I'm talking to people wearing suits/business casual, and I'm wearing a t-shirts and shorts, they _will_ look down on me. You may decry the arbitrariness of social norms but they do exist and they do effect your interaction in a professional setting, whether people in silicon valley think they should or not.

I want to be respected and I want my field to be respected. If we dress much worse than other professionals, we send the message that we're not really on their level.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35>
        "the most radical shift in dress standards in human history"

OK, let's all hyperventilate. For most of the human history the author's mentioning, the old Monty Python schtick was the truth.

Q. 'ow do you know he's a king?

A. 'e isn't covered with s$$t.

Seriously, today's business world has customs and status symbols that are just as rigid as yesterday's. They're just different.

</comment><comment><USER36> We absolutely still have dress codes, they're just more ambiguous now:

[http://putthison.com/post/144964888828/the-end-of-office- dre...](http://putthison.com/post/144964888828/the-end-of-office-dress-codes- the-new-york-times)

>Unless you work in a creative industry and live in a big city (read: basically NYC), you probably can't wear anything too fashionable or avant- garde to work. We're not talking about Rick Owens, but even somewhat tame designers such as Robert Geller and Stephan Schneider. And if everyone is wearing shorts and t-shirts, the sharpest you can look is in chinos. New, open office spaces still have dress codes – they're just softly coded as social norms, not hard written into rulebooks.

>Dressing now follows subtle, in-group views – those who understand them know how to navigate the corporate world; those who don't pay a price.

</comment><comment><USER37> I remember speaking with some IBM veterans who had been around long enough to see the transition from suits and ties to casualish wear. Some of them spoke wistfully of the old days, and the point they all brought up was that while the old rules may not have been all that comfortable, they were simple and clear.

<comment><USER38> That's definitely true, and I would argue that "casual work attire" is even more ambiguous for women. One of the things I realized during my first internship is that "casual" and "casual work appropriate" aren't the same thing, even though every recruiter and manager I've spoken to has said to just wear what I'd wear casually on the weekends. There are some types of casual clothing that I wear--such as shorts, low-cut tops, crop tops, strapless anything, shorter dresses or skirts, etc--that are not work appropriate, even if this is not explicitly said or encoded in a company dress code. That being said, I would never sacrifice the luxury of wearing casual clothing to work in exchange for being able to make more straight-forward sartorial decisions.

<comment><USER39> It's not just biz-casual, all business attire is harder for women. My cousin is a lawyer in Texas, and in court the judge (yes, a judge), made a comment about her not being in a skirt. This judge was from a different era, but the incident happened within the last few years. Pretty unbelievable.

I previously worked a biz-cas place, and while everyone griped about the ambiguity, eventually you get the sense of the dos and donts and fall into line. Just takes more time.

<comment><USER40> I've noticed this as well. I'm walking around in chuck taylors jeans and a tee-shirt with a hoody in cool weather and I do it year round.

The female engineers I work with would not be what I consider casual. They wear dry clean only clothes, heals or boots. Usually clothes that are nicely fitted (As apposed to my square shirt that has arm holes sewed on. All this, +makup. (I shower, and wear deodorant, and get my hair cut weekly, but that's about it there). I could buy an entire 14 day work wardrobe for > $300.

I've wondered (perhaps worried) that is a reaction to not (or feeling) that they are not taken seriously. I can see when I walk around the halls at work that the women in my work place are putting in more effort than the guys but I don't have a cause for that.

I know that my wife likes to wear nice clothes to work. But I also know that on weekends she wears jeans and a hoody, or hoody and yoga pants. I also know that she enjoys looking at and buying clothes. I find it to be a chore, and try to do it all in about 2 hours for the whole year. I wear the same thing weather I'm doing the yard or writing code.

I don't really know why, but I can see that it's happening.

<comment><USER38> Especially as a younger female engineer, I consciously try to avoid looking younger since people consistently underestimate my technical abilities. I'm also average height for a woman but typically the shortest one on my team, so if I show up to work wearing a T-shirt, jeans, and converse I can look even more juvenile.

Here's an example of how changes to your casual wardrobe can make a huge difference in how old you look: [http://www.extrapetite.com/2010/05/reader- request-how-to-loo...](http://www.extrapetite.com/2010/05/reader-request-how- to-look-older-in.html)

<comment><USER39> Yeesh... that post perfectly exemplifies how much stress women have to go through to just look "normal". I wish I could say that all you had to be was great at your assigned job, but unfortunately that's not enough (in both tech and non-tech positions).

I'll add though, that guys do deal with these rules too (see article below) but they are pretty clearly laid out. Guys' fashion changes over decades, whereas womans' changes over seasons.

[https://finance.yahoo.com/news/goldman-sachs-elevator- guide-...](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/goldman-sachs-elevator-guide- dressing-180000058.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> I think people don't understand that today's business suit and shirt WERE considered smart casual back when people started wearing them. This was retained in business for some time after fashion changed in general use.

It's not just that dress codes have changed, more that what constitutes smart casual changed.

</comment><comment><USER42> I feel like the author of this article hasn't worked in silicon valley, because it doesn't touch at all on what I feel is the cultural significance of casual attire: Wearing what you want says that your employer values you for your brain, not your willingness to conform. Formal dress runs counter to cultures that value lateral thinking, iconoclasm, and non-conformism; all the things that have made silicon valley successful.

A suit says "I am an interchangeable cog." Normal clothing says that you're an individual with identity and tastes.

(Plus it is hopelessly uncool to be/work for squares).

<comment><USER43> This made me smile because I was thinking the exact opposite thing :) I think a lot of hipsters dress alike (skinny jeans, boat shoes, et all) and they're worried about not conforming! (not accusing you of being a hipster, just playing on silicon valley stereotypes, no idea where you work)

<comment><USER44> "Everyone in this room is wearing a uniform, and don't kid yourself."

\--Frank Zappa

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> I enjoy wearing suits to work. Sadly, at some tech companies it is a bad idea nowadays. I wore a suit to work at Google and Facebook and regularly got called security on. I made sure to always keep my badge close.

<comment><USER46> Until recently I had a worked with a friend who wears nothing but suits, not just at work but in day to day life. People found it odd for a few months but then he quickly got a rep as that really well dressed guy and most folk enjoyed it. Admittedly it helped that most of his suits were a bit more out there than typical business suits. Think slightly hipster barbershop quartet. The man had some damn nice jackets.

<comment><USER47> As long as they are decent quality. I have an aquaintance who dresses up for events in cheap terrible suits and he looks like a caracature of a used car salesman. He is genuinely embarrasing to be around, but thinks the attention is positive, because people recodnise him now. Nice guy, but I can't help but think more people need to know, so they don't do the same.

<comment><USER48> That is hilarious and sad.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> I remember, everyday I'd get dressed for work. Business casual collar shirt or button down shirt. Dockers pants. Colors were pretty dull. Light blue. Red. Gray. Black. White. Black shoes. I'd have an assortment to choose from and that is all I'd ever wear.

Since having been moved into a cubicle, however, where I am visible less than half the time, only seen when I go get a free drink from the fridge, use the bathroom, or take a walk outside, I have been dressing much more casually.

Decent shirt, but probably less than business casual, sometimes as casual as a Pink Floyd or a shirt that I got at a concert. Jeans. Sneakers. Summer=shorts. A lot of times, I'll just find a nice casual shirt and wear it for 3 or 4 days if its fairly clean. Clothing is just the last thing on my mind when it comes to getting dressed in the morning. I know I have to do it in order to go out into the world, but I don't really care what it is.

Of course, my supervisor does warn us if corporate is coming to visit for the day, for which everyone tends to be even more dressed up than usual. But that is just the way our office is. I've worked around the United States.. it seems like the East Coast and Midwest are slightly more strict in wanting people to dress business casual, and be clean-shaven, while the West Coast and Mountain areas are more lenient, and doesn't even seem to mind a mustache or beard, though either should be somewhat groomed.

East Coast/Midwest: tattoos should be covered. West Coast/Mountains: tattoos are okay as long as they are not offensive.

Just today, I walked into Walmart, and a guy who looked like the manager is loaded up to his neck in tattoos. I don't remember ever seeing that when I lived on the East coast.

<comment><USER50> That part about tattoos strikes me as very odd. I live in Australia and have both of my arms fairly covered in tattoos, no job I've ever had has asked me to cover them, even as a travel agent.

<comment><USER20> How old are you?

I'm almost 40. It used to be visible tattoos and piercings meant you were unemployable in most "mainstream" jobs. Same with odd colored hair or other unconventional appearance. I remember the "rule of thumb" was it was ok to get tattoos on your sleeves because you could always cover them up for work.

Tattoos are mainstream now so not so they are much more accepted at the workplace now. I remember I was really surprised the first time I saw someone with a facial piercing working a customer service job, it was at CVS.

<comment><USER51> Growing up in Texas it seemed like most C-level people had at least one tattoo. A lot of them were vets so they would typically be eagles or flags.

I have a theory that the mainstreaming of tattoos comes from the greatest generation. They were the generation who fought the Nazis and came back with markings showing their loyalty to their country and the people they served with.

I am the same age as you. I don't remember any boomer parents with tattoos. I wonder if our kids and grandkids will keep getting tattoos or if it will fall out of fashion

<comment><USER48> Now the stigma is pretty much gone and tattoos are basically ubiquitous. I'd imagine future generations won't find getting a tattoo to be as exciting. I suspect the fickle Instagram generation will be much more into temporary tattoos.

<comment><USER20> Kids are going to not get tattoos to rebel against their parents.

(That being said, I didn't grow up in Texas, I grew up in the Northeast)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> I work for a startup in Silicon Valley (hiring devs btw). I work from home most days because the drive from Los Gatos to Menlo Park is a nightmare. Tee and jeans are the normal dress code or track suites if you are one of our Easten European coders. ;) I go to Asia a lot on business. I am sit in Tokyo right now, in a suite and tie. I have a closet full. Only place I have to wear them - NYC, London and Tokyo. Oh well. Bespoke of course ;)

The subway sucks in a suite in the summer in Tokyo. Also they have a mandate to reduce energy hardcore after the earthquake so the AC is set at 28C the offices.

<comment><USER53> 28c in the offices in a rich industrialized country? I wonder how much productivity they loose because of that.

<comment><USER54> this is 100% anecdotal. But I got the impression that you get used to it rather fast if the climate is consistently hot for a while.

Source: I got used to Bangkok's climate in a month and happily worked with a fan only, without AC

<comment><USER55> How?

My countersource is that I didn't get used to it at all (several years) and seemingly neither of my co workers have either. The days when AC is off in the office, well it's pretty much empty.

<comment><USER56> I've been enduring 28-degree Tokyo for a decade. You _never_ get used to it.

<comment><USER52> I agree. I am here for a week a month for about the last 10 years. I think it would be possiable to get used to it if you did not have to wear a suite and tie!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> I work for a company with a strict and specific dress code - ties and slacks for men, leather shoes, etc. I think there is a huge opportunity cost to this dress code, and we lose a lot of potential good talent.

I was asked when interviewing (in a very serious tone) whether I could handle the dress code. It seemed obvious that they were aware it was a sticking point in recruiting.

<comment><USER58> > It seemed obvious that they were aware it was a sticking point in > recruiting.

Understandably. I don't even own enough clothing that would qualify to make it through a week.

This would most certainly be a deal-breaker for me unless the compensation was otherwise SPECTACULAR.

<comment><USER37> Meh. I would consider formal attire a minus, but not a deal-breaker. It's a nuisance to take care of, but at least it looks good.

<comment><USER59> Yeah, but coding in a tie every day when there are options is a tough sell for me..

<comment><USER37> If a tie is really uncomfortable, you may be wearing shirts with necks that are too narrow. Ask a salesperson to measure you for correct fit.

If it's the flopping around you object to, get a tie clip or consider a bow tie.

<comment><USER58> It's not that a shirt and tie is uncomfortable, it's that a t-shirt IS comfortable. If I can pick between two jobs where I sit at a desk all day in front of a keyboard, and only one requires a button-down shirt and a tie, the tie job can suck it.

Why would I volunteer for that? Additionally, I think in terms of tech jobs, especially in California, you'd actually have to go looking for a place that makes you wear a tie.

I don't think I've interviewed anywhere in my adult life that had a dress code other than 'you have to wear some kind of pants in the office'.

<comment><USER37> I once worked for a big company that had no formal dress code at all. I asked my manager about that, and he said the issue was dealt with case by case when someone complained about someone else's attire.

The only time I can remember it being an issue was when one guy wanted to go barefoot at work. The eventual decision was that going barefoot was out, but flip-flops were acceptable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER60> One perspective in the article was about productivity and some belief that professional business attire had fewer distractions, so in theory helped productivity.

After working 20 years in a large corporate environment where you could and I did accidentally literally brush shoulders in the hallway with a Fortune 500 executive this is utter nonsense. There are so many opportunities in a large company to improve productivity that people's attire would be near the bottom of that list.

I like working more in a startup culture where there is less ceremonial BS and more focus on delivering value.

I think a big factor with Americans dressing so casually is that how you dress is no longer a representation of your status in society.

<comment><USER61> "I think a big factor with Americans dressing so casually is that how you dress is no longer a representation of your status in society."

As a thought experiment this might be happening with car ownership right now WRT the glowing gaslighting reports about the success of gig economy car services, and in theory there's no reason it won't happen with real estate. "Casual real estate prices" is an interesting meme to contemplate.

In the really old days, people used to say an ounce of gold is what a professionals suit should cost. It still does cost that much today, centuries later, its just professionals don't wear business suits as much anymore LOL. Or perhaps the era of LARPing is ending and non-professionals are no longer wearing professional suits...

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> Over the last 12 years I have interviewed dozens of candidates for jobs. Not a single wore a suit.

The suit is really dead in the workplace (in Silicon Valley)

<comment><USER63> I've interviewed and been interviewed countless times in the last decade and maybe once I've worn a full blown suit. I don't have a problem with them, but I don't want to look like an asshole when everyone else is running around in hoodies and jeans.

I usually just step it up a notch from whatever the regular office attire is there (either by asking my point of contact or having known the office). If it's full SV/hobo style I'll do a polo and nice jeans. Business casual and I'll wear a nicer shirt and some khakis. If I really have no clue I'll go slacks and a dress shirt.

In my own office (we're all remote) I still wear jeans and a polo most days. Usually just out of sheer laziness.

<comment><USER24> Haven't worn a suit for an interview in decades. Last interviews, I wore a jacket and tie. I knew I'd be overdressing and certainly didn't need to. But it generally doesn't hurt to signal that you're taking the process seriously.

I've interviewed plenty of folks in the years since and they do pretty much the same. I'm not going to dock people because they approach an interview formally.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Everybody's talking about social norms and signalling, but there's still one objective thing about clothing - climate and health. How could a person in a suit survive in 30+ degrees Celsius? I just can't imagining wearing anything else than shorts and T-shirts in the summer that wouldn't give me a heat stroke or some other heat and sweat-related nastiness.

<comment><USER64> You can get specially made summer suits made out of light and breathable material like linen. Obviously you wouldn't wear a whole 3 piece suit in the middle of a 40 degree summer day.

But the reality is that if you need to wear a suit to work, you're not working outdoors in the heat, you're working indoors in air conditioned comfort.

<comment><USER61> If you're familiar with the black and white movie "To kill a mockingbird" the dad/lawyer wore a seersucker suit. Its hard to explain verbally, its like silk-thin corduroy. And how to explain corduroy fabric to someone not a child of the 70s.. um...

Lets just stick with seersucker is like 3-d silk but its actually very fine cotton. Its about as thin of a fabric as you can make that's not translucent.

Also traditional "real" seersucker suits were unlined although "fake" modern seersucker suits are lined.

Fitting a seersucker suit is non-trivial if done right because too tight and you'll roast and too baggy looks bad but there's this magic size where you get maximal cooling while still looking awesome. Being a cotton its so "fun" to deal with the shrinkage.

Its also not fun for the tailor/mfgr because they put a lot of work into faking thickness in the lapels. Here you are wearing something lighter than a polo shirt in total, but the lapels will be cut to appear 1/8 inch thick. Again, this was "real" seersucker and modern "fake" seersucker might be pretty warm without air conditioning.

It feels like wearing summer weight pajamas, its actually very comfortable while being stylish.

Also digital video/photo algorithms famously don't work well with the higher contrast seersucker colors.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER65> No joke, I didn't want to become a software engineer when I was young because I saw pictures in books (published in the 60s -- I was reading them in the 80s) of programmers, and they looked like stodgy boring dorks. If I had seen that SV survival guide, the entire course of my life would have been different.

<comment><USER66> Funny you mentioned that. One of my reasons for becoming programmer was my 14 year old self watched The Matrix and thought Neo was pretty awesome.

</comment></comment><comment><USER67> It's funny because for a long time I would wear casual dress down clothing to my jobs and be cool with that. However now that my company has a no jeans policy I will wear a full suit, tie, shoes getup and I really enjoy it. I've amassed a good sized collection of high end suits and just really enjoy wearing them. Obviously though I really love fashion.

</comment><comment><USER68> I was surprised by how well dressed the Japanese are every single day in Tokyo. It has inspired me to put more effort into what I wear.

</comment><comment><USER69> I have strong opinions on this topic from a differing set of influences.

In unranked order:

0\. From a part of the US where how you dress a metric for how earnestly your intentions are; be it prayer, asking for a date, or (as mentioned above) interviewing for a job.

1\. Military influences: Dad in Navy; lived and visited a big base quite often, knew many veterans (see 2, below). Uniforms in that context subsumed the above (0, above), and added how, for the military services (poster- children for "highly ordered & massively scaled"!) , uniforms matched their operations to a tee.

2\. I worked for an airline for a decade-plus and got deep into air transport operations. From the day I was hired, until I resigned, I experienced or witnessed all the different ways uniforms rocked, with one or two counter- cases where the letter of the law was, let's say, liberally interpreted <frown>. Yet, overall, in real-world use, uniforms were clearly advantageous and I got the hang of it in no time.

3\. I hope I'm not alone in this, but for me, donning a nice, fresh, crisp uniform - whatever style it might be - makes me feel more assured, more vigorous, more ... "I got this" 'tude than if I just wear whatever. (See 'Interview' block below.)

As for day-to-day, on-the-job; it's just fun to mix it up (time & laundry permitting).

Today was a blazer with a bow tie (MaxAccountantMode, heh), but to wear any tie is rare; maybe a blazer or sportcoat twice a week, at most, with the daily usual being a collared knit shirt (as made famous by Izod (!)) and intact darker dyed jeans, or industrial hiking khakis( which are my new favorites).

Finally: interviews. I wear a dark suit, shined shoes, pressed shirt (often new), proper socks, proper tie that's properly knotted. OMG ... I probably look like a salesman <see above>. But my batting average is pretty good, so I'm not sure I should change the recipe.

Cheers, /Acey

+1 thread

<comment><USER56> _" 3\. I hope I'm not alone in this, but for me, donning a nice, fresh, crisp uniform - whatever style it might be - makes me feel more assured, more vigorous, more ... "I got this" 'tude than if I just wear whatever. (See 'Interview' block below.)"_

I have often thought that one of the hidden motives behind the recent trend of making casual dress near-mandatory is to prevent rank-and-file employees from feeling this sense of self-confidence and the unconscious additional respect they would get from people around them when they dress with some formality.

I know I felt it the first time I had a professional job interview when in college; the people around me looked at me and spoke to me in a slightly more respectful way than they would have if I had been wearing typical college-boy casual.

</comment></comment><comment><USER70> I'd ask the opposite question, why do people still dress formally in the workplace? Or more specifically, why do men still wear ties?

Ties are the most pointless piece of clothing and have no practical purpose. If you want some color get a nice colored shirt.

<comment><USER71> I wouldn't agree. First to tackle the colour part, having a tie in a nice color offers a great accent to the larger canvas which allows you to use bolder colours then when applying it to the entire shirt.

And for the practicality I find myself half freezing to death this time a year when I walk to work without a tie (around 45°F/8°C with brisk winds). Having a tie efficiently blocks the wind from entering the chest area through the button seams and around the neck without requiring me to bring a bulky scarf (which is very unpleasant in the afternoon when temperatures have risen to about 70°F/21°C.

<comment><USER72> >And for the practicality I find myself half freezing to death this time a year when I walk to work without a tie (around 45°F/8°C with brisk winds).

That's why they invented this thing called a "jacket".

<comment><USER71> I usually already wear a jacket, I'm talking about wind entering the chest area.

<comment><USER72> All the jackets I've ever had have a zipper in front. You zip them up, and wind doesn't get in. It's far more protection than a silly little piece of silk cloth tied around your neck.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER73> There are two types of company I refuse to work for:

1\. Companies under French management

2\. Companies with a dress code.

<comment><USER74> > Companies under French management

I'm curious about this one, how come?

<comment><USER73> I've had the misfortune of working under French management twice. Once because I was young and dumb, and once because my employer's company was sold to a French competitor. In both cases things were horrible, and I've heard similar (or worse) stories from other devs under French management.

It mostly boils down to maddening bureaucracy.

Pointless meetings (when everything is decided in the hallways before the meeting starts, why have a meeting?).

An utterly bizarre obsession with certification over competence. You have a degree from this uni? You're hired! Even if you're as useless as they come. You're very skilled but don't have a degree from their favourite uni? Need not apply.

Simulating work is more important than working. You must be present from 9 to 5 at all cost.

Want something trivial done? Be prepared to submit it in writing (hard copy!) to management. You can expect a reply in about a month.

<comment><USER59> I've worked with two french (really great guys!) that shared the same sentiment. 9-5 at all cost, looking busy was adamant compared to completing actual work. 2 hour lunches...

They would probably never work in their home country again. There are probably exceptions, but they both worked for big banks in Paris (not the same).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER75> Others considered the external appearance the manifestation of internal character. That philosophy is bound to overlook technical greatness, but it contributed to centuries of beautiful artwork in the daily objects of common people. Not devoting care to appearances is, perhaps unintentionally, a rejection of art and artistry. We have the opportunity to contribute to our descendents, the same way our ancestors left so many interesting things behind.

</comment><comment><USER76> I remember 20-odd years ago I was working for UBS the investment bank in the city of London just as "Casual Friday" was becoming a thing.

One Friday I looked out of my office window near Liverpool Street Station and saw about a dozen smartly dressed gents in pinstripe suits with rolled umbrellas and bowler hats holding placards protesting against Casual Friday. I suspect it may well have been a stunt, but it was funny to watch.

</comment><comment><USER77> I wish we could. My company has a very strict dress code. Suits and ties are recommended, but slacks and a dress shirt and sport coat are the bare minimum. Suits are required on many occasions. And man, let me tell you, I do not look good after schlepping 3/4th of a mile to the train and another 1/5 of a mile to the office in high summer in NYC in a suit. I look like a sweaty, disgusting mess. I basically just work from home during the summer except for when I really have to go into the office.

</comment><comment><USER74> Where I'm at (NASA), there is a broad spectrum of dress formality. Generally I do the typical polo shirt and khaki or jeans. When giving a local presentation or low-level sight visit, business casual. When going to a conference or getting a visit from HQ/congress/president's staff, business suit.

I notice more academics having the same approach as well. I dress to match expectations, but generally I'm past the point where visually impressing someone would impact my upward mobility.

</comment><comment><USER78> So when do I get to start wearing my overalls to my coding job?

<comment><USER79> [http://www.gq.com/story/the-male-romper-is-here](http://www.gq.com/story/the- male-romper-is-here) You're welcome

<comment><USER78> Oh god that's just disgraceful.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER80> The office I work at right now is an old oil and gas company and up until a year ago women had to wear pantyhose. When they started the new internal development department they found out that they had to slightly relax the standards to hire people. We can now wear nice jeans, a shirt with buttons, and dress shoes. Yes, the manager still encourages everyone to wear tires, though it's no longer required.

<comment><USER72> >Yes, the manager still encourages everyone to wear _tires_ , though it's no longer required.

Wouldn't that be rather uncomfortable, especially when you try to sit in a chair with a back?

</comment></comment><comment><USER81> This has something to do with organizations being flat.

In a monolithic top-down hierarchical organization, employees are expected to conform. So attire rules reflects the culture where management and top-down decision making is common.

In a flat organization, decentralized decision making happens more often. So the culture might shift towards encouraging individual differences and more freedom in work style, including casual attire.

</comment><comment><USER82> At one company I interviewed the director of development was wearing bermuda shorts, flip flops and a worn out T shirt. As I looked around, most all employees were in shorts. All work in a common area.

When I started working I had my own private office and wore a shirt and tie at least. Fridays were "casual" \- no tie. I liked it better like that.

</comment><comment><USER83> I work in a 4 man software team in a small company where the dress code is as long as it doesn't get you arrested it's cool. I just wear jeans, t shirt and flipflops. A lot of people wear shorts and shirts with curse words. Anything goes.

It is a music company though so that probably has a lot to do with it.

</comment><comment><USER84> > The office was, until a few decades ago, the last stronghold of fashion > formality. Silicon Valley changed that.

The trend was obviously coming to an end if we're already using terms like "last stronghold", regardless of what Silicon Valley might have done.

</comment><comment><USER37> Coders have been dressing funny for a long time. Check out this smart chap from the Multics OS project.

[http://multicians.org/mulimg/ctc-sm.jpg](http://multicians.org/mulimg/ctc- sm.jpg)

</comment><comment><USER43> This is an opinion that may trigger some people on HN. Don't take it personally, it's not an attack.

I like dressing up for work, because it shows you care about what you're doing. Nowadays, it seems every silicon valley company tests in production (Facebook, Google Docs, Even some parts of Android) because they just don't care about quality or user experience.

I miss the days of getting a release ready and patched, having very high confidence we worked the bugs out of everything before shipping it to the customer, with a list of features we added or things we fixed. It built up a lot of excitement too, customers would anticipate and ask for updates, eager to deploy them or test them out.

Maybe it's the background I worked in (it's been medical software or insurance claims processing)... so it actually matters if things work correctly the first time.

<comment><USER85> How are those two arguments related? Seems like you are making two separate points.

</comment></comment><comment><USER86> I welcome a return to the days when men dressed more fashionably: [http://i.imgur.com/kAKRWQCg.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/kAKRWQCg.jpg)

</comment><comment><USER87> This thread reminds me that I need to donate those three small pairs of slacks at the back of my closet gathering dust.

And maybe find some shirts that aren't the "T" variety.

</comment><comment><USER88> I was under the impression that some workplaces relaxed dress codes to increase morale without paying more money.

</comment><comment><USER89> Is it about self-expression now? I think if people take that to heart its great.

Are actual colors coming back? Black seems to be as popular as ever. Most people don't want to stand out, at work or anywhere else, but fashion is generally so drab, I have always thought there would be a flower-like backlash of color that became popular eventually. Then you would only stand out if you were too dull.

<comment><USER90> My experience is that dressing in black _does_ stand out. Most everyday people wear colors, even in New York, so it's much more striking to wear all black/monochrome - especially if you get interesting streetwear-y pieces. Or go full Rick Owens.

<comment><USER89> I didn't say _all_ black. Black in general is still a dominant color in NY.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER91> Even the Dilbert comic strip has embraced casual dress with what Scott Adams calls business dorky.

</comment><comment><USER92> Everything is relative I guess. Compared to Norwegian workplace Americans are usually very dressed up even in the tech industry. In our case it had nothing to do with tech industry norms or trying to be efficient. Actually I am highly sceptical to the premise of the article. I think it is wrong. The Bay Area was full of hippies. I'd rather say it was the political movement against conservatism which killed the company dresscode. That would be a more fitting description of what happened in Norway. It was political radicalism among the young in the early 70s. Silicon valley was full of young people heavily indpired by this movement. Just read Steve Jobs biography ;-)

</comment><comment><USER93> Because they're fat.

</comment><comment> torrent-of-ions I dress up for work. I am one of the better dressed people at my work. I wear a coloured shirt, smart jeans, brown dress shoes (brogues) and a sports jacket. Yes, for my workplace, this is "up". I wish I could wear a suit and white shirt to work, but a general rule of thumb is only to dress one notch higher than the median.

I used to wear the same as everyone else (shorts and t-shirt), but I really enjoy the separation between work and home that nice clothes bring. When I get home I remove my shirt and hang it up. I put my shoe trees in my shoes. On the weekend I dress casually. It feels good. If you always dress casually then you never dress casually.

On Sundays I polish my shoes to a mirror shine. When my shirts are dirty I wash and iron them carefully. It's a discipline that gives meaning to my life.

<comment><USER94> I agree, it's a similar effect for me. I like that my dress pants and dress shirts serve to separate work from home.

I view my morning routine, with the special clothes, special shoes, special bag, and even my "special" commuter car (that I don't drive on weekends) as a sort of liturgical practice. I wake up, I shower, I groom, I put the clothes on a certain way, I gather my things in the same order, I get one of only a handful of breakfast options, make coffee, and leave for work. I even kiss my wife and kids in the same order (youngest to oldest, oldest of course being my wife).

This seems boring and repetitive to a lot of people, but it's actually incredibly freeing for me. Because it is all so routine, I usually spend my mornings thinking about the book I was reading the night before, or the news, or some other topic. I don't have to pay attention to what I am doing because it just happens without "me" really being part of it. It allows me to focus on ideas that matter to me instead of menial activities.

For me, this liturgy would be interrupted without those special clothes and special shoes. I would likely find myself making choices and decisions I really don't have a desire to make.

<comment><USER95> It feels very ... rigid.

In contrast to this, my mornings are a total chaos: kids. They obey rules if they arr funny. So I have to be funny, which means I just can't be that rigid.

So we just have fun every morning, which makes my work time also pleasant and light. An of course, very casual.

EDIT: I did not said that the person is autistic. Just the way it feels. There is a fine distinction. Of course there is nothing wrong with a structured life and such a person is perfectly healthy. Just to be fair, changed the word.

<comment><USER96> That's a pretty offensive description. People can like structure without having a severe developmental disorder.

<comment><USER95> Sorry, didn't wanted to sound like that. Just changed the work accordingly. There was no intention of offending anyone, so bear with me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER97> What the hell!? This sounds like a genuine case of child abuse...

<comment><USER98> Catholics and abuse and you are surprised?

</comment></comment><comment><USER99> > Of course that made them, for that time, unusable! So he had to toss them.

Honest question: your mother didn't bother to work anywhere, why couldn't she help him?

And I like this "he had to toss them", as they lived apart, and it wasn't a family's loss.

<comment><USER100> She was an artist. Making money isn't a requirement for something to be work.

<comment><USER101> Huh, I think I'll become an artist. It sounds nice.</comment></comment></comment>


HackerNews RSS - <AUTHOR> https://news.ycombinator.com/rss

<comment><AUTHOR> For those who don't know HN has a RSS link.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/rss](https://news.ycombinator.com/rss)

I downloaded a rss reader app then put in the main HN link, but the app rejected it. The RSS link worked. This may seem obvious to some, but may help others.</comment>


.su - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.su <comment><USER2> For me .su is a kind of historical curiousity. Not sure if I like it or not, or if it should be phased out, but there are a bunch of Soviet Union related sites in there too and sometimes these are pretty amusing (how about a site of the CPSU?)

Also there's sudo.su :)

Source: am Russian.

<comment><USER3> > (how about a site of the CPSU?)

You are talking about [http://kpss.su](http://kpss.su) ?

<comment><USER4> Предатели!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> There was a joke at the time:

        В связи с геополитическими изменениями домен pos.su изменяется на pos.ru.

Which roughly sounds like "because of the geopolitical changes the domain pos.su will become pos.ru". The joke is that pos.su and pos.ru in Russian sound like "will pee" and "will poo" respecitively.

</comment><comment><USER6> still trying to get pant.su but it gets renewed every time despite serving nothing publicly :<

<comment><USER7> I was disappointed to find that [http://kat.su/](http://kat.su/) has nothing to do with curry.

<comment><USER8> Well, katsu refers to a pork cutlet, which can be used with other dishes than curry. Katsudon is a pork cutlet on top of donburi, for example.

<comment><USER7> Huh, well that's my new thing I've learned today. I only ever heard it in conjunction with curry-type things (katsu chicken, which was always served with curry, for instance).

<comment><USER9> Katsu is just a japonization of the word Cuts. Chicken Katsu = Chicken Cuts

<comment><USER10> Not quite. Katsu is from Cutlet. (cutlet -> カツレツ -> かつ).

<comment><USER11> Isn't a cutlet a small cut?

As in a small "cut of chicken" is a "chicken cutlet?"

<comment><USER12> It's derived from French "côtelette", literally "little rib". It's etymologically related to "coast", actually. It being spelled "cutlet" is probably the result of a phonetic spelling of "côtelette" in English being reanalyzed as "cut-let", though, since "a cut of meat" is itself a thing.

It originally referred to the same thing "chop" does today, a slice of meat perpendicular to the spine, containing a single rib. Then it started referring specifically to a boneless chop. Then it started being used to refer to any thin slice of meat. And in a lot of the world it was introduced specifically as a breaded and fried thin slice of meat. And that's how we got katsu, the Japanese version of schnitzel.

Language is weird, isn't it?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> It had never occurred to me that the existence of the Internet and of East Germany overlapped, and that East Germany would have a TLD.

</comment><comment><USER14> I hope we keep it. It matches the maps I have from 7th grade.

<comment><USER15> I hope we will NOT keep it. It reminds me how my country was occupied and annexed by Soviet Union.

<comment><USER16> There are many things that remind people of bad things. That's not an appropriate reason to remove them.

<comment><USER17> Can you imagine if there were a .nazi TLD? Would you think it appropriate to discontinue its use, despite its historical significance?

<comment><USER18> That is not the point. There are a lot of things in the world that may remind someone of something bad. Take a look at history books. Should we not keep them either because they remind people of bad things? Of course we could use a zillion other things besides "history books" or ".su", the point is the reason behind not keeping or removing them.

<comment><USER17> "History books" have value in aggregating and presenting information with historical context. TLDs are artifacts without context. A history book that covered the 20th century and blandly mentioned that the Soviet Union was a collection of communist states, without mentioning any other events or context, would be similarly irrelevant, and should be relegated to the trash heap. Same with the .su TLD. We should definitely keep the historical records _that it existed_ , but there is no reason to continue its actual existence at this point.

<comment> Z-T-T Thousands of people own .su domains (I'm not one of them, FWIW). That's the reason for its actual existence at this point.

<comment><USER19> A few years ago a friend found binaries of GCC and gzip for Xenix on a .su domain: [https://virtuallyfun.com/wordpress/2010/03/20/gzip-for- xenix...](https://virtuallyfun.com/wordpress/2010/03/20/gzip-for-xenix/)

We were looking into Xenix as retrocomputing enthusiasts and we didn't have any compiler, so _that_ had plenty of value for us.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Russian flag-carrier Aeroflot also has SU IATA code.

<comment> Z-T-T And the hammer and sickle logo.

For Soviet-nostalgia buffs looking for a domain, although most obvious choices like CCCP, KGB, Lenin, Stalin and even Gorbachev and _perestroika_ are registered under .su, GLASNOST.SU is available.

<comment><USER21> What about non-ASCII? [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internationalized_domain_name](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internationalized_domain_name)

<comment> Z-T-T AFAIK IDNs are still possible under .su, but may depend on the registrar (non- Russian resellers may not do it).

If you mean what Russian words are available under .su, probably most, for example Ленин (Lenin) and Кремль (Kremlin), though КГБ (KGB), СССР (USSR), Россия (Russia) are registered, as are single letters like А or Х that people may like for a 'short' url.

Although the USSR collapsed not long after the creation of .su, it was briefly in 'proper' use on the internet - unlike, say, .dd, intended for East Germany - most notably via the ISP Demos, which famously used the name _kremvax.demos.su_ as the name of its Usenet site, in reference to an early internet hoax/April Fool's from 1984 ([https://godfatherof.nl/kremvax.html](https://godfatherof.nl/kremvax.html)).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I wonder what happens to .co.uk if the UK dissolves, which seems more possible than it should be after Brexit?

<comment> mike-cardwell If Scotland leaves, I imagine we'll switch from "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" to "The United Kingdom of Britain and Northern Ireland", thus keeping the "uk". ".scot" already exists.

If Northern Ireland leaves, I guess the UK no longer exists, and we switch to ".gb". Could clone .uk at .gb for a while (ten years?) and give people time to switch, but seems more likely Nominet would prefer to just charge people twice for a .uk and a .gb.

If Scotland _and_ Northern Ireland leaves, that leaves us as just "Britain". Maybe we create a new ".brit" (or whever the 2 char country code will be), and give time for .uk to disappear again.

Wales wont leave.

[edit] I just saw emmelaich's comment that .gb already exists.

<comment><USER23> The three kingdoms which are united are the Kingdom of England, Scotland and Ireland, the first two by the Acts of Union 1707 [1], and Ireland added by the Acts of Union 1800 [2].

Wales is part of the Kingdom of England, under the "Laws in Wales Acts 1535 and 1542" [3].

Without Scotland, it becomes the United Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland, leaving the Kingdom of Scotland. Scotland would be assigned an ISO 3166 code. SC, SO, ST, SL, SA, SN and SD are all taken. Perhaps they can have "AB" for "Alba". The "GB" code would be unassigned.

Without Ireland, it becomes the United Kingdom of Great Britain. Northern Ireland presumably joins the Republic of Ireland in this case.

Without both, it becomes the Kingdom of England, the Kingdom of Scotland, etc. England would then need an ISO code, "EN" is available.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_Union_1707](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_Union_1707)

[2] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_Union_1800](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_Union_1800)

[2] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_in_Wales_Acts_1535_and_15...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_in_Wales_Acts_1535_and_1542)

<comment> m-i-l According to wikipedia [0] and UK government sources [1] there are 4 countries in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland: England, Scotland, Wales (together forming Great Britain) and Northern Ireland. If Scotland and Northern Ireland left the UK, it is conceivable therefore that the United Kingdom would continue to exist but as the United Kingdom of England and Wales.

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countries_of_the_United_Kingdo...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countries_of_the_United_Kingdom) and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom)

[1] [https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20080909013512/ht...](https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20080909013512/http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page823)

<comment><USER24> Wales is a constituent country of the UK but not a kingdom.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Back in the late 90's and early 2000's, there were a set of hacking challenges called the Zebulun Challenges hosted by the site CyberArmy. For the 7th or 8th challenge (Lt. Kernel to Kernel), you had to find a proxy or have an rDNS for your IP that resolved to a .su domain in order to proceed into the simulated system you were trying to hack into.

<comment><USER26> Which isn't that hard. You just update your reverse DNS.

I assume for a later challenge they actually checked the forward DNS matched. :)

<comment><USER25> In the late 90's with dial-up connections, most ISPs would not do this, hence the search for .su proxies. Today, it is much easier when you can spin up a VM in the cloud and control DNS entries.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Russian Government owned Aeroflot Airlines still uses SU as a flight prefix.

</comment><comment><USER28> I wonder what the most exclusive tld is . probably .gov or .mil

<comment><USER29> Probably one of the corporate ones like .xyz, .amazon, .bananarepublic, etc.

<comment><USER30> I believe anyone can register the .xyz domains. They're typically on sale for $0.99 on GoDaddy for the first year, so there seems to be a lot of junk, volume registrations using it.

<comment><USER29> My bad, my main point is that likely the most restrictive would be one of the corporate/private TLDs that are for internal use mainly. .xyz was a bad example. Maybe better is .bananarepublic

<comment><USER31> There's literally hundreds of new gTLDs like this that only have the one required nic.tld on them and nothing else (because they haven't launched yet and might never). My team runs a couple dozen of these.

For comparison's sake, we should probably restrict ourselves to legacy gTLDs, ccTLDs, and open, launched new gTLDs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> I remember using a service to get a russian visa hosted on a .su domain. When I found out what .su was, it felt pretty confusing :)

</comment><comment><USER33> Anyone know of English words that we can use to make a 'domain hack'[0] out of this?

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_hack](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_hack)

<comment><USER34> .de.su would be THE otaku tld, lol

<comment><USER35> My first thought is that this TLD would be great for Japanese-language domain hacks, i.e., "i.ta.da.ki.ma.su" for a food- or cooking-related site.

(I just checked; sure enough someone's thought to register that one)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> If anyone is interested, registering a domain is $29.99/year and requires the submission of an identity document (passport, driver's license, etc).

<comment><USER33> Curious to know, but where can I buy one, and what registrars offer .su? Seems entirely absent in my usual haunt where I go to get obscure TLDs:

[https://www.ovh.co.uk/domains/prices/](https://www.ovh.co.uk/domains/prices/)

There is however the following you can get on OVH which are similar:

        .sucks
        .supplies
        .supply
        .support
        .surgery

<comment><USER37> Not sure about western registrars, but [https://www.nic.ru/](https://www.nic.ru/) sells them for 590 roubles (~9.2$ || 7.4£)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> This is kinda funny. I was able to get a .su domain earlier this year.

</comment><comment><USER39> I have a domain there, been using it for years, where else do you find 3 letters domains

</comment><comment><USER40> how about .cs for former Czechoslovakia, ema.cs usage case came first to my mind

</comment><comment><USER41> Lisa Su needs to buy lisa.su

</comment><comment><USER42> Oh. All this time I thought it was Sudan.

</comment><comment><USER43> Once upon a time I thought it would be funny to buy the .su domain for my site, and on April Fools, have a link to it and a script that output all my posts using the Cyrillic alphabet. I doubt I'll ever get around to it.

</comment><comment><USER44> how does a link like this gets to the front page of hn?

<comment><USER45> It's interesting because it's still in use, even though the Soviet Union doesn't exist. ICANN hasn't been successful in forcing the retirement.

Compare to the .cs TLD for Czechoslovakia which was phased out and replaced with new TLDs.

<comment><USER46> I don't think ICANN should retire a domain namespace just because a political entity that it used to represent no longer exists. Cool URIs don't change [1].

[1] [https://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html](https://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html)

<comment><USER45> I suppose it avoids awkward politics. It's not clear to me, at least, which country would get to control the former Czechoslovakia TLD.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do you go about storing/organizing your notes? Platform agnostic - <AUTHOR> I'm looking for solution to keep all my notes in the same place. Currently I do have several text files, google sites, evernote, wiki, even my blog with several how-to's.<p>I'd like to have everything in one place, accessible offline for reading and searching, preferably with markdown support. <comment><USER2> Do you use a multiplatform shared storage service (dropbox, pcloud, etc...)?

Do you spend a lot of time in a specific editor?

If so, consolidate those text files into one folder, and use your editor. The only issue will then be editing them from your phone - I don't, I just send myself emails, and add those notes to my files once on a computer.

I might revisit wikis, specifically for notes I need to share with others, but even then, it will be one that supports a simple format like asciidoc ro markdown, so I can keep using an editor. I have tried several systems, and none beats the convenience of the editor you're familiar with.

</comment><comment><USER3> You may want to check Balsa, but it is self hosted and may not be quite there with your requirements if you don't want to host yourself ([https://github.com/balsa-team/balsa](https://github.com/balsa-team/balsa))

<comment><AUTHOR> Self hosted is fine, thank you, will check that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm afraid you're going to have to learn emacs (org).</comment>


Adobe ships sandboxed Flash plug-in for Firefox - <AUTHOR> https://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9227927/Adobe_patches_critical_Flash_bugs_ships_sandboxed_plug_in_for_Firefox <comment><AUTHOR> How does Adobe's Flash sandbox differ from Firefox's own out-of-process plugin sandbox?

[http://kb.mozillazine.org/Plugin-container_and_out-of- proces...](http://kb.mozillazine.org/Plugin-container_and_out-of- process_plugins)

<comment><USER2> Read this: [http://blogs.adobe.com/asset/2012/06/inside-flash-player- pro...](http://blogs.adobe.com/asset/2012/06/inside-flash-player-protected- mode-for-firefox.html)</comment></comment>


WebGL: Shader Editor for Chrome DevTools - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/spite/ShaderEditorExtension

<comment><AUTHOR> This is a Chrome DevTools extension I've been working on for a while. Its purpose is to enable a feature similar to Firefox DevTools Shader Editor, which shows the list of linked programs in a WebGL rendering context, and allows to live edit the source code of the vertex and fragment shaders.

It provides some nice features like syntax highlighting, error checking and autoformatting, thanks to CodeMirror.

It's finally reached a beta phase and it needs some testing. Any help or suggestions is welcome!</comment>


Show HN: Rentry.co – Markdown-powered publishing service with preview - <AUTHOR> https://rentry.co/ <comment><USER2> note [https://rentry.co/faq](https://rentry.co/faq) (1* = Italics, 2* = Bold, Return once will start a new line. Return twice will start a new paragraph.)</comment>


Here's what GitHub developers really think about Microsoft's acquisition - <AUTHOR> https://www-theverge-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2018/6/18/17474284/microsoft-github-acquisition-developer-reaction?amp_js_v=0.1#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theverge.com%2F2018%2F6%2F18%2F17474284%2Fmicrosoft-github-acquisition-developer-reaction <comment><USER2> > Microsoft needs to treat GitHub like a LinkedIn or Minecraft, not like > Skype, Nokia, or aQuantive.

Oh please, don't treat it like a Minecraft. I don't want my GitHub subscription cost to quadruple.</comment>


Pinhole: a falling ball demo - <AUTHOR> http://rsnous.com/posts/2014-08-07-pinhole-a-falling-ball-demo.html <comment><USER2> What I'm impressed about isn't just the work he's done - which is very impressive - but his ability to explain it. That skill is a very important skill to have.

He's written many other articles about his work: [http://rsnous.com/index.html](http://rsnous.com/index.html)

And they all are great reads. I'm sure being able to explain his code has contributed to his skill as a programmer as well.

Well done, Omar.

</comment><comment><USER3> 12,000 years ago there was an impressive (for its time) dynamics demonstrator named "xspringies", (which is still listed on the rutgers site: [http://www.cs.rutgers.edu/~decarlo/software.html](http://www.cs.rutgers.edu/~decarlo/software.html) ) it would let one build mobile or anchored objects with selected internal spring constants which would respond to various parameterized imposed forces. by now someone must've written something that would far transcend xspringies. i'll assume that this falling ball demo is more sophisticated and responsive in various ways along those lines.

</comment><comment><USER4> This reminds me of Enigmo [http://www.pangeasoft.net/enigmo/](http://www.pangeasoft.net/enigmo/)</comment>


HTML parsing in Elixir with leex and yecc - <AUTHOR> https://notes.eellson.com/2017/01/22/html-parsing-in-elixir-with-leex-and-yecc/ <comment><USER3> Another great use of leex and yecc -- a SQL parser from folks at Basho:

[https://github.com/basho/riak_ql](https://github.com/basho/riak_ql)

Specifically:

[https://github.com/basho/riak_ql/blob/develop/src/riak_ql_le...](https://github.com/basho/riak_ql/blob/develop/src/riak_ql_lexer.xrl)

[https://github.com/basho/riak_ql/blob/develop/src/riak_ql_pa...](https://github.com/basho/riak_ql/blob/develop/src/riak_ql_parser.yrl)

It is a very concise and well written piece of software.

</comment><comment><USER4> The best library I've found for this sort of thing is gumbo. [https://github.com/google/gumbo-parser](https://github.com/google/gumbo- parser)

With its help I've created scrapers and crawlers that digest even the most disgusting HTML.

</comment><comment><USER5> Hmm... This seems more like XML parsing to me than HTML parsing - <USER2> particular, there's no handling of (completely valid) omitted end tags.

Definitely interesting though.

</comment><comment><USER6> The article mentions Floki which incidentally just added support for the servo/html5ever parser written in rust.

[https://github.com/hansihe/ex_html5ever](https://github.com/hansihe/ex_html5ever)

Excellent article about creating parsers though even if html parsing is a particularly difficult problem.

<comment><USER7> Floki is a great lib, used it to write a very basic URL polling CLI tool in just 72 lines of code: [https://github.com/vikeri/proba/blob/master/lib/proba.ex](https://github.com/vikeri/proba/blob/master/lib/proba.ex)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> As the author says, this is a toy project to learn Elixir; don't use in production, especially not on dynamic/user content.</comment>


Did we come from pigs? - <AUTHOR> https://theoutline.com/post/1547/did-we-come-from-pigs <comment><USER2> >Once McCarthy saw the pig in humans, he couldn't unsee it.

This could be the caption to a Gary Larson cartoon.

<comment><USER3> [http://i.imgur.com/zd9R7cJ.png](http://i.imgur.com/zd9R7cJ.png)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I miss creativity in Science.

</comment><comment><USER5> Long pig.</comment>


Surface Phone speculation spurred by new phone APIs in Windows - <AUTHOR> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/04/new-phone-apis-in-windows-renews-speculation-about-the-mythical-surface-phone/ <comment><USER2> If they're done with Windows 10 Mobile, this may be a consolidation of what was done in W10M to Windows 10 and more convergence to a single OS. ¯\\_(ツ)_/¯</comment>


Ask HN: Do antivirus companies create viruses to run their bussiness? - <AUTHOR>

I have heard that most of the viruses found on internet are produced by the antivirus companies. How far this statement is true? <comment><USER2> Anti-virus does some basic heuristics and signature checking, and honestly, they are doing a pretty bad job at detecting virusses or overlooking them (Flame for example, or the recent Adobe CA compromise)

Mikko Hypponen from F-secure, a Finnish anti-virus company, only had the guts to admit it, you can read the article here; [http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/06/internet- security-f...](http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/06/internet-security- fail/)

</comment><comment><USER3> I doubt that. I say this because there are always people who want to do something crazy(like create a virus) just to exploit an OS/app or prove how good they are. Some create malware to infect pcs so they can add to their botnets which could be sold or used for themselves.. So these antivirus companies are just trying to help out.

<comment><USER4> Isn't that a nieve way of thinking? I don't think there is any hard evidence that virus companies fund virus creation, but it would make a lot of sense if they did. Anti-virus companies have a lot to gain by a vibrant virus ecosystem.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> No way. Imagine if they got caught. It'd kill their entire company. How is a little bit of marketing going to be worth that risk? It's almost like asking 'Why don't auto body shops remove stop signs in their area to get more business'?

<comment><USER5> Actually better yet: Why don't doctors spread the flu intentionally?

Security companies are also probably staffed by people who genuinely want to stop malware. Protecting people is probably part of their motivation to go to work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Why not? I wouldn't be surprised if they created complex viruses to cause harm to other security software, but their own.

</comment><comment><USER7> They don't need to, there are plenty of people doing it for them.</comment>


Learn about security from free online training - <AUTHOR> http://www.securityinnovation.com/products/security-summer.html

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey, submitter of the above link here. I had a hard time coming up with a non- spammy sounding title for this submission, but my company, Security Innovation, does a lot of application security work and has created some very cool eLearning.

If you're interested in learning about security this is a great (free) place to start. There are six courses that will be given away for free. I encourage you to check them out.</comment>


How Room Designs Affect Your Work and Mood - <AUTHOR> http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=building-around-the-mind&print=true <comment><USER2> I'm attending University right now and in the middle of my finals exam period. Over the last month or so I've been studying and working in one of the Libraries available (I have a Room-mate that plays loud video games.)

It's the first time that I've ever left my room or living space to work and I'm amazed at how much more effective I've been in terms of the work and studying I've gotten done.

I live pretty messily and I think the biggest difference is working without looking at so much clutter on my desk, being in a room full of others working diligently and for some reason I find working on a nice wood finish to be very productive.

Experiment around until you find something that works and stick with it.

<comment><USER3> Why can't your roommate play with headphones?

As for the clutter, I definitely agree that a clear desk (and computer desktop, taskbar) helps clear the mind and helps you focus on the real work. Being around others that are hard at work does amazing things, too, I agree!

Now, I just wish I didn't have just a single bedroom apartment, because I can't quite adequately separate my bedroom from my work...a desk in the living room is then surrounded by the distractions of TV and kitchen (from my girlfriend, not myself). A desk in the bedroom, while workable, is not ideal, I think.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm a graduate student, and am fortunate enough to have an office with a tall ceiling (~14 ft). I find it's good for theorizing and thinking through ideas of how to solve problems.

However, when I want to get some work done that I know how to do, I tuck myself away in a corner of the library in between two aisles of books. With 8ft. ceilings and the books pressing in around me, I can be quite productive for ~2 hours, but then need to walk outside/ get up and move in order to keep working beyond that.

Also, I read recently that red is good for focusing and being methodical, and blue for "thinking outside the box". I'm tempted to set up a room where one side of the room is red, and the other blue. Depending on what kind of work I'm doing, I could face one wall or the other.

<comment><USER3> Tall ceilings would be nice. I don't understand why so many offices are cube farms with uninspiring walls and low ceilings. Windows are an afterthought. Lighting is all fluorescent...

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'd like to work in a tent along the beach within laptop, wifi and a counter then in the evening turn it to an cocktail bar

</comment><comment><USER6> [http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=building-around-the- mind...](http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=building-around-the- mind&print=true)

One page, printer-friendly version.

<comment><AUTHOR> I tried to submit that link, but it only redirects to the original article. Perhaps they're checking that the referrer is sciam.com to display the printer-friendly version...

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> This almost makes me want to invest in some VR goggles and play with different virtual ceiling heights, greenery, etc in different situations.

</comment><comment><USER8> For substance, a little more than in this article, check the Wikipedia page on Environmental Psychology: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_psychology#Densit...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_psychology#Density_and_crowding)

</comment><comment><USER9> Research like this can help us geek architects really create amazing experiences :)

</comment><comment><USER10> is there a cliff's notes version?

<comment><USER8> the wikipedia environmental psychology page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_psychology#Densit...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_psychology#Density_and_crowding)</comment></comment>


The Coming Generation May Not Use Social Media at All - <AUTHOR> http://tttthis.com/socialmediageneration.php <comment><USER2> The article has no data. Here's an article with data which says young people are the most frequent users of social media

[http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/03/01/social-media-use- in-20...](http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/03/01/social-media-use-in-2018/)

<comment><AUTHOR> The article isn't about the current situation, but about the possible response to it, right?

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Bull. They might not use public social media quite so much, or demand end-to- end encryption. But social media is here to stay.

<comment><AUTHOR> "is here to stay" because what?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Most of my friends loathe social media and only use it in fear that if they don't, they might be less attractive to potential employers..

<comment><USER5> How does that work? Github style contributions, LinkedIn profiles, or some sort of activity trail of planning dinner with friends on FB?

<comment><USER4> Most of them are in creative careers or advertising.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> A bunch of wishful thinking. Too many companies have too much to lose from the mobile market.

<comment><AUTHOR> Isn't there a difference between the mobile market selling products and users investing time, energy and their persons on public online platforms?</comment></comment>


ICOs like to move fast and break (lots of) things - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/11/icos-like-to-move-fast-and-break-lots-of-things/ <comment><AUTHOR> Wow, the blockchain terminal one is so freaky. It's just two monitors. And yeah, like the article says, the demo screen is blank.

Why do you need a whitepaper for a terminal anyways?!</comment>