Why I'm Moving My Business From San Francisco To St. Louis - <AUTHOR> http://needwant.com/p/im-moving-san-francisco-st-louis/ <comment><USER2> The current San Francisco influx is unsustainable. If you're somewhere else in the world and thinking about coming here to do a startup, I wish I could convince you to change your mind.

San Francisco is incredibly expensive. Rents have shot up by ~50% since 2008, office space is following the same trend, and competition for (even mediocre) programmers is intense. Worse, a lot of the cultural diversity that made San Francisco interesting has been driven out by the high prices -- it's a much more homogenous city than a few years ago, where mom-and-pop shops and other neighborhood amenities have been replaced by places selling $10 "artisinal grilled cheese" sandwiches and "mixology" bars where you can buy your choice of $15 cocktail. SF feels increasingly like a city for wealthy yuppies, because...it _is_ a city for wealthy yuppies. Living here on anything less than a good engineer's salary is becoming a tall order.

Which brings us to a very important point for all the young programmer dudes: when you all crowd into the same tiny city and bid up the rents into the stratosphere, your available dating pool shrinks to a puddle (yet another consequence of the skewed gender balance in tech. sigh.) All the pour-over coffee in the world doesn't make you happy when you can't get a date, and those artisan cocktails are far less cute when you're jockeying for position at the bar in a crowded room full of guys. If you're a 20-something male programmer looking for a date in SF, I feel badly for you. Hope you like BART, because you're going to Oakland (if you're lucky!)

Once upon a time it was only a mildly bad decision to locate your startup in San Francisco, but you could justify it with the appeal of a diverse, cosmopolitan city. Right now, there's a very real financial penalty (rents, salaries, taxes), and the cultural benefits are waning. There are a lot of great cities in the US, and on the internet, you can work from anywhere. Try those instead.

<comment><USER3> >Which brings us to a very important point for all the young programmer dudes: when you all crowd into the same tiny city and bid up the rents into the stratosphere, your available dating pool shrinks to a puddle (yet another consequence of the skewed gender balance in tech. sigh.) All the pour-over coffee in the world doesn't make you happy when you can't get a date, and those artisan cocktails are far less cute when you're jockeying for position at the bar in a crowded room full of guys. If you're a 20-something male programmer looking for a date in SF, I feel badly for you. Hope you like BART, because you're going to Oakland (if you're lucky!)

So what you're saying is San Francisco is now highly optimized for homosexuals? (part of why I want to move there from Boston, to be honest)

<comment><USER4> This is totally wrong. Yes SF has a ridiculous cost of living, but it still has an amazing ratio of single women to straight guys. Unlike the Peninsula, you do not need to be rich to meet and date attractive women in the City.

If you are an employed (white?) guy who can't get a date in SF (not to be confused with Palo Alto), you need to get out more, or just get on okC. There's a whole lot more to the City than yuppie bars in SOMA or the Marina.

<comment><USER5> Like anywhere, it can help to stand out a bit, and being a straight white guy without tons of money who works with computers is about as far from 'standing out' as you can get in that area, from my experience. I was a lot happier from that point of view when I got out of there and moved to Italy, where I ended up meeting and marrying a very smart and beautiful woman.

On the subject of "gay", something that I liked about the bay area was that gay is pretty common, and of course accepted and so it's just something that _is_ , rather than someone's "defining attribute", so it's not this big deal. That's how things should be.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Former STL startup founder here (slicehost). We were from St Louis, so starting the business here made sense and gave us several distinct advantages (cheap power, data center space, etc).

For startups, it's currently an ideal place IMO. There are quality people here doing whatever it takes to help people get a business started. Money? They can help. Space? They can help. Introductions? They can help. A low cost of living gives you plenty of time to figure things out. Throw in a ton of good restaurants, a decent art/music scene, a couple of good universities and you have something worth serious consideration. Biggest downsides are weather (winters are chilly) and you need a car.

</comment><comment><USER7> > If you're trying to bootstrap, being based in San Francisco is awful.

Especially if you have a family. I rented a four bedroom house in a great neighborhood in Sacramento that was a bike ride from Midtown for $2900/mo. We ended up buying a bigger house in the same neighborhood for even _less_ per month. No commute, food is cheap, etc. The cost savings are enormous, and I'm sure it's more expensive than St. Louis...

Yep:

[http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/sacramento- ca/st.-l...](http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/sacramento-ca/st.-louis- mo/50000)

The trick outside the Bay Area, if you are consult-strapping, is keeping the contracts coming in. Probably better in areas like St. Louis than in Sac.

<comment><USER8> I know this isn't exactly the best metric, but the demand for programmers in St. Louis seems very low. When I look at Craigslist I see a couple Java jobs, a couple PHP jobs and even one godforsaken VB.net job. Even Jeff Atwood doesn't use VB.net.

So I'm doubtful that it would be easier to keep the contracts coming in while in St. Louis.

<comment><USER9> As a coder living in St. Louis, I can say that this hasn't been my experience at all. There is an exceptionally high demand for coders around here. Barely a week goes by without someone trying to poach good programmers. Its not necessarily all sexy startups, but there is an excellent market for programmers in general.

We have a fairly good startup scene (though obviously nothing on SF) and a large number of more traditional corporate employers of programmers like Express Scripts, Monsanto, Wells Fargo, Scottrade, Ameren, Charter, Anheuser Busch, Boeing, and Northrop Grumman. There is also an exceptionally active biotechnology scene here.

<comment><USER10> I'm hoping this is the case in a year or so, when I plan on moving back to Stl from Atlanta. I know a few guys doing C# and f# work in stl. They seem to think prospects are pretty good.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I was in St. Louis for Strange Loop 2013, and I was pretty astonished at how nice (and uncrowded) the downtown was. I asked about it at [http://www.reddit.com/r/StLouis/comments/1mlum2/whats_wrong_...](http://www.reddit.com/r/StLouis/comments/1mlum2/whats_wrong_with_st_louis/) and got some interesting responses. The "what's wrong with..." was in the sense of "surely it can't be as great as it seems here?", by the way.

<comment><USER12> Most midwestern cities have no pedestrian traffic downtown. That is perfectly normal across much of America.

In a typical midwestern city, anyone who can afford it commutes to the central business district by car. They live, shop, and eat in the suburbs. They use their cars for all of these activities.

The C.B.D. ends up deserted at night when the office workers leave. Any successful night-time businesses have parking, in order to attract suburban customers. There is little reason for anyone to be on foot.

The reddit thread mentions very specific districts where you find pedestrians. I imagine those areas have excellent central parking, and deliberately-created "walkable" areas for browsing. A great development pattern to bring life back to deserted downtowns.

<comment><USER11> "In a typical midwestern city, anyone who can afford it commutes to the central business district by car."

And, as I was walking about at rush hour, I expected to see a lot of car traffic, but the streets were practically empty of autos. The nearby freeway across the river was quite busy, however. I think the reddit thread had good things to say about the former decline of the city center.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> And so it begins. The Bay Area is starting to lose some of its talent to other areas (in an already tight talent market). This is just one example and I ran into a few others in the past 2 months, that are in a gtfo state. I have also tried to hire good people from other areas of the country that used to be interested in SF but are no longer seeing it as a nice place to actually live, because they too can do the math.

</comment><comment><USER14> This is one of the things I'm jealous of America for coming from a British perspective: that is, a wide variety of cities being technologically advanced and good for startups, tech and businesses generally. Think Austin, think Raleigh-Durhan, think Philadelphia, think Seattle..

Everything in the UK is so grotesquely skewed towards London when it comes to modern tech. Some other cities aren't entirely horrible (Manchester, say) and some have a technically progressive air going for them (Brighton) but it sounds like even St Louis as a relatively small US city has more going for it in one place than most top tier British cities that aren't London (say Leeds, Nottingham, or Birmingham).

<comment><USER15> just to throw some figures at you about how big st. louis is or isn't:

> As of the 2010 census, the population was 319,294, and a 2012 estimate put > the population at 318,172,[6] making it the 58th-largest U.S. city in 2012. > The metropolitan St. Louis area, known as Greater St. Louis (CSA), is the > 19th-largest metropolitan area in the United States with a population of > 2,900,605.

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

<comment><USER16> And I'll be the annoying St. Louisan who feels compelled to put these numbers into some context for what feels like the billionth time.

St. Louis City is entirely independent from the surrounding St. Louis County and covers an exceptionally small area by the standards of most big cities (~66 sq/mi). Some similar cities have addressed this by merging with their surrounding county (Indianapolis, for example, which is about 368 sq/mi), but even those that haven't (e.g. Kansas City) still cover a much larger portion of their region (316 sq/mi for KC).

It's very easy to exit the city-proper in St. Louis and not feel at all as though you've left the core of the city. The inner-ring suburbs are quite urban and, while the distinction between them and the City itself is the source of much local posturing, it's a misleading delineation if you're trying to figure out just how big St. Louis really is.

(As a side note, this way of dividing up the region also has a significant effect on the City's infamous crime statistics, for reasons that should be pretty obvious with a little bit of thought. That is to say, if you define almost any city as only its most inner core, then you're going to end up with much higher crime rates than if you include its suburbs. And if you're comparing one city that doesn't include its suburbs with cities that predominantly do, then, well, you get the idea.)

In other words, the larger MSA/CSA numbers more accurately reflect the relative size of both St. Louis's urban core and the surrounding region.

<comment><USER17> > (As a side note, this way of dividing up the region also has a significant > effect on the City's infamous crime statistics, for reasons that should be > pretty obvious with a little bit of thought. That is to say, if you define > almost any city as only its most inner core, then you're going to end up > with much higher crime rates than if you include its suburbs. And if you're > comparing one city that doesn't include its suburbs with cities that > predominantly do, then, well, you get the idea.)

This applies to many cities in the Northeast as well. The cities are tiny compared to cities in other parts of the country.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> If you're looking for "San Francisco" feel, crowd, look, shops, and trendy neighborhoods in St. Louis. Go to the "Central West End" District. If there's one thing St. Louis can be proud of it's that district. That whole area from Forest Park (bigger than Central Park in New York) including the neighborhoods around it, Barnes Jewish Hospital, Children's Hospital Complex, GasLamp District, Central West End is really nice.

<comment><USER10> I miss tower grove park, forest park, and the botanical gardens most about having left stl. Partly because I could see the botanical gardens from the balcony on the back of my apt, though

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I love St. Louis. Certain parts have a European feel that no other city outside of Canada has. There are a lot of extremely bright, hard working people there too. It is odd. It is a city that seems to not know how much untapped talent it has.

That being said, there are parts that are rundown and sketchy. There are huge problems with drugs like methamphetamine outside of the 'normal' urban drug issues that most cities have. In addition, from what I understand, the Missouri tax system is _terrible_ (property tax on many large items you own like cars in addition to your homestead tax and sales tax on top of income tax).

<comment><USER10> There are definitely some bad parts of st. louis, but I have to say, the one main rule: stay out of east st. louis. It's pretty bad news.

Luckily, if you're in the missouri section of saint louis, you'd have to stumble pretty badly to accidentally cross the Mississippi and end up there.

<comment><USER20> To be clear, East St. Louis is not part of St. Louis and isn't even in the same state.

<comment><USER10> Yeah. But how the city is technically setup doesn't stop people from being confused and stopping there.

I'm not saying that east st. louis is terrible as an indictment of st. louis. I love stl. I can't wait to move back. I've just met a lot of random folks who don't realize that east st. louis is different, and stop by.

Luckily, if you stay on the west side of the river, you're pretty much fine. I lived in the city near the botanical gardens for awhile and it was great.

There are sketchy places in St. Louis itself, but they're not as bad as east st. louis, and that's like just about any other city I've been.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> jack-r-abbit Right now it is noon in St. Louis and 19 degrees.

Right now it is 10:00 in SF and 53 degrees.

I think weather plays a large part in why people like to live in the Bay Area. Many refer to the high cost of living here as the "sun tax." As I sit in my office wearing shorts and a t-shirt, I can't even fathom living in St. Louis.

<comment><USER13> "sun tax" is cheaper in Texas. It's zero as in 0% income tax.

<comment><USER21> The average property tax rate is 4x California's, though. On the other hand, the average property value is lower. How all those factors combine depends on your income/location/etc. The group that comes out worst is the middle class in cheaper areas, around 40th-70th percentile incomes. If you make mid 5 figures, and live in a $150k house, your tax situation would be better Bakersfield than in Houston.

<comment><USER22> For single-income household of two making $55k, the annual difference shakes out to about $500. Not an insignificant sum but also not a huge difference.

But your comparison is between Bakersfield, a medium-sized city whose largest employer is Kern County, and Houston, the world capital of energy and a major player in shipping, healthcare and aerospace.

Which city is more likely to actually pan out a $55k job for our hypothetical middle-class family? Houston (median income, $58k) or Bakersfield ($38k)? Where is that barely higher tax burden buying better schools? (I'll take any of Houston's suburbs on that count)

I grew up all over California but I've lived in Texas for the last nine years, I've seen the difference. Texas certainly isn't perfect but our cities are actually affordable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> The last picture is of the City Musuem. If you are ever near St Louis with kids you have to go there. It is one of the coolest places I've ever been to.

[http://www.citymuseum.org/site/](http://www.citymuseum.org/site/)

<comment><USER24> You don't need kids to have fun there.

<comment><USER23> I think I might have had more fun than my kids did. Climbing outside in rebar tubes 40 feet above the ground is a lot of fun. We didn't do the 7 story slide though - we walked up there but the line was not moving at all.

We are going back this summer (I live in New England but go home to Southern Illinois every summer for a visit).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> This is all great, but if you're building a company focused on earning money by doing sales (especially one that has you interacting with other tech companies), the amount of clients you can meet face to face in St. Louis (and the size of the deals) is not something I'd suspect to be competitive with what you'd find in SF.

<comment><USER26> This is where the rubber hits the road. Staff talent -- especially creative, tech, sales, marketing -- can be identified and managed as a distributed workforce. Most clients need face time. Most prospects need face time before they are clients. It's anachronistic, but mostly the way of the world. I'd love to hear differently.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> St. Louis is great. I wouldn't live there. It's very similar, at least in my experience, to my hometown of Memphis. The Italian food is obviously better, but we have barbecue. :)

America has a lot of great cities. They all don't have the technical talent level that San Francisco has, but good culture is not monopolized in San Francisco.

<comment><USER28> > The Italian food is obviously better, but we have barbecue.

St. Louis (and much of the midwest/south) also has a very high obesity rate compared to SF.

I would visit Memphis as a kid living in Mississippi. I could at least say that Memphis was better than anywhere in Mississippi :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Welcome to St Louis!

There is a very active Meetup group for entrepreneurs here - StartLouis. Please check us out!

</comment><comment><USER30> St. Louis is cheap, but it's cheap for a reason. If you think 6th and Market is bad, take a stroll through East St. Louis. It has the 3rd highest murder rate in the country. Violent crime is on the rise. [1] Basically, it's one of the most dangerous cities in the country.

If that sort of thing doesn't bother you, then you'd probably be better off just moving your startup to Oakland and maintaining a connection to the Bay Area startup network. Or, if it does, move to a more modern, safer city in the South that still has a low cost of living without many of the economic problems of the rust belt cities (and better weather to boot!).

[1] [http://www.nbcnews.com/business/most-dangerous-cities- americ...](http://www.nbcnews.com/business/most-dangerous-cities- america-832351)

<comment><USER31> Having grown up in St. Louis, I will say that the statistics about violence are highly skewed. Yes, the rates of violent crime in East/North St. Louis are extremely high. However, it's not terribly difficult to avoid these areas (unless you're really into strip clubs). The suburbs and most of the rest of the city are no less safe than comparable areas in the bay area.

<comment><USER32> I grew up in the area too, and moved back a few years ago. People often give me weird looks when I say I live on the Illinois side, assuming I'm living next to Pop's or something. The Illinois side is all really nice farmland if you just go a few miles out from the city. That is one of the nice things about Saint Louis. I grew up on several acres of land, my dad was able to commute to downtown in less than 30 minutes, and he was able to afford that on a mid-level government employee salary.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Why do you have to live in San Francisco city itself. There are many places in the Bay Area more affordable than San Francisco.

<comment><USER34> they're pretty close to the price of SF. else, please mention one that is less than an hour of commute away.

<comment><USER35> You can get a 2bed for $1k in east bay richmond :p

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> You're reminding me of a quote from Patti Smith: it's about New York, but it could easily be about SF as well...

[http://gothamist.com/2010/05/03/patti_smith_suggests_finding...](http://gothamist.com/2010/05/03/patti_smith_suggests_finding_anothe.php)

"New York has closed itself off to the young and the struggling. But there are other cities. Detroit. Poughkeepsie. New York City has been taken away from you. So my advice is: Find a new city."

</comment><comment><USER37> I moved to STL last year for family reasons. I had been struggling a bit to figure out things to do so the list in this post is much appreciated.

Good luck with your startup!

</comment><comment><USER38> if i had a business based in SF and wanted to move, i would move to west LA.

actually, i already did that, years ago.

SF is a pain in the ass to live in, even if you have lots of money.

<comment><USER39> How do you like West LA so far?

<comment><USER38> i live in santa monica, which in my mind is like an improved san francisco, and an improved los angeles, combined. i can always see a tiny twinge of jealousy when i tell current-SFers that i live in SM now. :)

it's not perfect but it's good for me. i have an amazing view from both home and the office, i can walk OR drive OR cab to get food/coffee/clothes/entertainment, and have access to the rest of LA if i choose to leave the sm/westside bubble.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> St. Louis may have the best chess scene in the US, or perhaps second only to NYC. Among other things, it hosts the US Championships every year. And Magnus Carlsen has played there. And Anna Sharevich lives there. (I.e. a lot more than the "Hall of Fame.")

</comment><comment><USER40> I used to live in St. Louis and worked at a startup that was located in downtown (right on Washington Ave) 13 years ago. Back then downtown was dead after 5pm, as everyone left to go home back in the suburbs and not much of a night life in the city.

Recently, I went back to visit for the first time in over 10 years. I was amazed that there was a night life, and families would go out to eat in the city! It seems to be turning it self around well, but I am sure there are more hurdles to make it even safer.

In addition to it being easier to get funding [1], it sounds like St. Louis is really looking to be a good spot for a startup in the US.

1: [http://archgrants.org/](http://archgrants.org/)

</comment><comment><USER41> It is not only rent but other things like higher sales and income tax rates in California. My wife and I live in the mountains in Central Arizona and the cost of living is lower than California in many ways.

</comment><comment><USER42> Economics aside, and on a more personal note: it's a shame to lose Jon. He's one of the kindest, most talented founders (and friends) I've met in SF, and it's a shame he's leaving.

</comment><comment><USER43> > 3.8x cheaper than San Francisco. Moving to St Louis is going to almost > quadruple my company's runway.

It's inversely proportional to your personal rent? Your company has no revenue, no employees, no office, no servers, no contractors, no contracts, no other costs in general? Is that really a company?

I don't think you're moving a business, I think you're just moving.

</comment><comment><USER44> I wonder what's going to happen to Need/Want's "Designed in San Francisco" claim. Would "Designed in Saint Louis" work just as well?

</comment><comment><USER45> Long-time lurker, just saw this post about my hometown so I created an account.

I have a tech business in St. Louis. I love living in St. Louis and will never live anywhere else.

A few comments:

It is extremely hard to hire\find good programmers. I've posted job ads on Dice and Craigslist, and received 2 or 3 replies. I don't think I received ONE reply from Dice. The replies you get are people that can't answer the most basic questions.

You will HAVE to use a recruiting firm that will try to poach the talent and you have to search out resumes. It will cost at least $50k for a programmer that can't even answer the most basic questions in an interview. Fortunately, I got very lucky and found one of the most kick-ass people on the planet.

In regards to East. St Louis, as other people mentioned, it is NOT in Missouri, it's in ILLINOIS. The only reason people in St Louis go to East St Louis is because the bars stop serving at 1:30 or 2AM. If you want to drink past that, everyone goes to East St. Louis. Either that, or to go to strip clubs. Given that, if it's a Friday or Saturday night, you'll see a bunch of other St Louisians over in East St Louis at Pops, or the Oz, or at strip clubs. It is definitely a bad area though. I've been to East St Louis many times and have never felt threatened.

The bad part of St Louis is North County. Unless you live there, the only reason to go there is for drugs. I've never been there, and as far as I know, you can't drink past 2AM there, and they don't have any strip clubs. I've driven by there many times, and I knew someone that worked in North County for years and never had any issues. It's like any other city, there are parts you don't want to venture through by yourself, late at night.

Unfortunately, I think most of the crime in both E St Louis, and North county, is local, black on black crime.

Downtown is somewhat desolate. If you want to live downtown, there are some cool areas like Soulard which is making a come back. Most people live in West County, South County, St Charles county, etc. I would never live downtown. Most of the action is outside of downtown. There are good sized office buildings in Clayton, West County, etc.

In the county areas, there are cops all over the place(which is a good thing). I've lived in a lot of places, and the bottom line is it's one of the safest places I've lived.

I read HN all the time, but don't know much about this start-up. Welcome to St. Louis though! As others mentioned, there are a lot of talented people here.

</comment><comment><USER46> The problem with these places is what happens, when you need to hire people to build your company. The tech world is full of impressionistic statements like 'they have a startup scene,' but when you start getting numbers on available talent, you'll see you're putting yourself in a bad position.

To take an example where I have better data, people have commented on the vibrant and growing startup scene in Santiago, Chile. Maybe it is vibrant and growing, but the total number of people professionally employed in software development (devs, testers, manager, product managers, etc.) is only about 2000.

Split that 2000 into 50 different companies (and 50 tech companies would often be held up as proof of viability for the location), eliminate the high percentage with the wrong skill set for your company, and how likely is it, really, that you could build an engineering team of 20 and sustain that in the face of attrition over time?

St. Louis isn't going to have more than a few thousand of the same sort of people. Most of them are also not products of local universities with strong engineering programs relevant to most of the kinds of software behind most tech startups these days. The supply therefore is not growing at a steady rate or being replenished.

75 startups in one location? What happens, when the half that make it past the founder stage need to hire 3-4 people? Not only are there only a few available devs of any skill level available for each, but they all have dozens of options on the same block.

For startups, a higher percentage of engineers in an area employed by companies of 50-people or less actually makes hiring harder. In such a situation, they all have options of more or less equal value, and you have little to distinguish yourself from the others. The fact that SV has Google, Yahoo, Mcsft, etc. alongside a ton of mid-sized and smaller companies makes it easier.

If you've ever tried to recruit for a startup, think about how often you bring up ownership, autonomy, "startup culture," etc. as selling points? How well does that work in an environment, when nearly everyone already has that where they are?

This is just a quick set of reflections, but the overall point I hope is made. The truth is that staffing your startup is one of the most brutal forms of competition your business will experience. You're one of many, many players competing for an extremely scarce resource that very few founders even know how to identify, qualify, or retain, once they've got them.

If you ever plan on building your company beyond a small team of friends and local referrals, you should be doing everything you can to stack the deck in your favor. The Bering Sea may be an expensive and crowded area for gold prospecting, but you're still more likely to find gold there than in Lake Michigan.

<comment><USER47> That's why you offer relocation.

If a startup has a cool mission, a cool tech stack, -and- operates in an area with a low cost of living, low congestion, and plenty of culture, art, and restaurant variety/quality, it can compete quite nicely with yet another Silicon Valley company when it comes to attracting talent.

<comment><USER28> Relocation for a startup? If your startup employer fails, you are stuck in a city far away from your support network. If you chanced a startup in the city you lived in, at least you could recover quickly, get a new job, whatever.

Relocation can work well for more established companies (and even then, two body problems often kill that), but it doesn't make sense at all for a semi- risky startup.

<comment><USER47> What happened to all those startups that "need to hire people to build (your) company", to quote the prior post and argument? I mean, you "have dozens of options on the same block." Just take a job with one of them.

EDIT: A bit more seriously, and to your argument in particular, that's where low cost of living comes in your favor. "Hmm, I could take $90k in Silicon Valley where I will have to be careful with my budget, or I could take $75k in St. Louis, where I will live comfortably"; why in the world would you accept a startup in the Valley (thus moving there) given that decision, all other factors being equal (they're not, but there are plenty in favor of St. Louis, as this article points out)?

You're showing yourself willing to move (a software dev willing to relocate will not be short of a job for long; heck, you could always later -look- to move to the Valley), and you'll be able to sock away funds for emergencies much more easily..

<comment><USER28> You moved for a startup because it was a great fit for your skills, the startup failed...now what? If there are only a few other startups, what is to say one will be a good fit? Also, your network isn't fully developed yet, maybe you've only been in town for 6 months...getting the right job via word of mouth will be very difficult.

If you don't believe developers are basically exchangeable commodities, then it is easy to see that we need a very large pool of jobs + a decent support network to find those jobs.

SF having critical mass of startups and people you already know (they moved from where you were before) makes it very appealing. SLT has none of that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> SF is all about making money fast for yourself.

<comment><USER34> and sleeping in your car then. because if you rent, no luck.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> Why relocate instead of hiring remote workers?

</comment><comment><USER50> A lot of people say SF/SV/etc is terrible because it's full of Californians, but I've lived all over the country and known lots of people from lots of states and I'd rather live among Californians than Missourians or (god forbid) Texans.

<comment> hippee-lee I work with a Texan. Really nice guy and smarter then me but he never talks down to me. He phrases his suggestions as questions and the thicker he lays on the drawl the more likely it is that his opinion will turn out to be good advice.

<comment><USER51> I know a guy like that. He's not a Texan, I don't think that part matters. He's a retired Chicago cop. I interact with him in the context of volunteer work for a few organizations locally. I have no idea how he does it, but he'll walk up, start chatting, have a question or two, maybe relate a musing he was having, and go on to talk to someone else. Every damn time I find myself doing his bidding and about an hour realizing that fact. I have no idea how he does it, other than he's a wizard. He never says "do this", or "i think you should ...". I've seen it work on many other people as well.

One day I'll unlock that superpower.</comment></comment></comment>


Mongoose - embeddable 40KB web server written in ANSI C - <AUTHOR> http://code.google.com/p/mongoose/

<comment><USER2> a tribute to d ritchie, the inventor of C and unix along with others.</comment>


Can you build an atomic clock at home? - <AUTHOR> https://www.quora.com/Can-you-build-an-atomic-clock-at-home?share=1 <comment><USER2> for time enthusiasts, rubidium oscillators were one approach as second-hand ones became available from CDMA shutdown even to the point of hacking one [http://phk.freebsd.dk/hacks/HP5065A/index.html](http://phk.freebsd.dk/hacks/HP5065A/index.html)

or see [https://hackaday.com/2016/09/25/rubidium-disciplined-real- ti...](https://hackaday.com/2016/09/25/rubidium-disciplined-real-time-clock/) [https://deltafabri.wordpress.com/2015/03/08/under-60-ns- an-a...](https://deltafabri.wordpress.com/2015/03/08/under-60-ns-an-atomic- stratum-1-ntp-server-hardware/) I'm not sure the TAPR clock block is still available

several modules are listed on [https://www.microsemi.com/product- directory/timing-synchroni...](https://www.microsemi.com/product- directory/timing-synchronization/3932-embedded-clocks-frequency-references) both for a rubidium oscillator & a Chip Scale Atomic Clock [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chip- scale_atomic_clock](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chip-scale_atomic_clock) and from Jackson Labs [http://www.jackson- labs.com/index.php/products/csac](http://www.jackson- labs.com/index.php/products/csac)

some links on [https://www.raspberrypi.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=212429](https://www.raspberrypi.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=212429)</comment>


How US covered up Saudi role in 9/11 - <AUTHOR> http://nypost.com/2016/04/17/how-us-covered-up-saudi-role-in-911/ <comment><AUTHOR> Deleted

<comment><USER2> Or a scene out of Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 911".

Nor am I the first to tie the NY Post coverage to Moore - the Post first covered the Bush-Saudi claims in 2013: [http://www.showbiz411.com/2013/12/15/murdochs-nypost- today-b...](http://www.showbiz411.com/2013/12/15/murdochs-nypost-today-backs- michael-moore-bush-saudi-claims-from-fahrenheit-911)

The article also points to a 2003 Vanity Fair story by Craig Unger, "Saving the Saudis".</comment></comment>


Scythe, the most-hyped board game of 2016, delivers - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/07/scythe-the-most-hyped-board-game-of-2016-delivers/ <comment><USER2> This is one of those games that looks complicated until you start playing. I was one of the Kickstarter backers, and was a bit unsure of the suitability of the game for casual play.

After 22 plays and counting with many different people, I can safely say that this isn't too hard to grasp. Essentially, your turn boils down to picking 1 of 4 (or 5) different actions, over and over again. Compared to Terra Mystica, this game is much easier to learn.

If you want a succinct rules explanation, Rodney from Watch it Played has a great tutorial: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffMLIL5qGQg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffMLIL5qGQg)

I will add that Jamey, the designer, has perfected the Kickstarter process for board gaming. He has a book and tons of free articles on his site - I'm a fan of his book here: [http://stonemaiergames.com/kickstarter/book/](http://stonemaiergames.com/kickstarter/book/)

<comment><USER3> > This is one of those games that looks complicated until you start playing. I > was one of the Kickstarter backers, and was a bit unsure of the suitability > of the game for casual play.

I watched the tutorial video and felt completely overwhelmed less than 5 minutes in! Is it really that easy to play? The tutorial almost felt like it was reading out game logic source code at points. It feels like it's at the level of complexity where it should be a computer game with a computer dictating and enforcing the rules but I can understand the appeal of wanting to play around a table.

<comment><USER4> What board or card games do you currently play?

<comment><USER3> Very few. When I've played games like poker and Monopoly I've seen new players struggle with the (relatively simple) rules so I was comparing this game to those.

<comment><USER4> Monopoly is rather complex for the relatively small dose of fun it provides. Poker is quite simple in its base form, so I'm not sure what to tell you there. Codenames is quite good and is available from Target. Love Letter is a modern classic of tight, simple design. These are two examples of what I would consider gateway games for people who have only ever heard of Monopoly or Trivial Pursuit.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Fun fact: on one of the art pictures you can see bear with satchel on his side that says 'Wojtek'. It's a reference to real bear named Wojtek that served during WW2 in Polish army: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wojtek_(bear)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wojtek_\(bear\))

<comment><USER6> From that link:

"He is now referenced in the new Hearts of Iron IV game, as an easter egg achievement, Bearer of Artillery."

[http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Achievements](http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Achievements)

Looks like someone could update the article to include Scythe now.

<comment><USER7> I just did.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Can someone explain to me why it needed to raise $1.8 Million dollars via Kickstarter? Does that cover production costs as well as development time?

Wouldn't it be more fair to consumers if only development cost was covered by the kickstarter and then production costs were covered by actual pre-orders?

<comment><USER9> Why are people downvoting this? This is a honest question, they had multiple tiers with some pretty damn silly stretch goals, or at least it can be considered a stretch as far as the actual costs go.

Kickstarter backers are getting the game now, for the rest of us we can preorder it for 48 GBP in the UK[1], on average each backer payed 104$ into the campaign, non backers can get a copy of the game now for 63$ (only 4$ more than the cheapest get a copy of the game option on kickstarter).

It's not that surprising that some people question what the money is actually being spent on during those KS campaigns, and with how many of them fail all the time due to mismanagement not to mention being potentially fraud cases to begin with I think it's a question worth asking.

I also think it's about time that Kickstarter forces companies to be more open and transparent about how they spend the money, Kickstarter already takes power from consumers because they become effectively investors but without any of the perks that come with being a shareholder and it just might be the time we get some of that power back.

[1][https://www.theboardgamehut.co.uk/preorders/116-scythe- preor...](https://www.theboardgamehut.co.uk/preorders/116-scythe- preorder.html)

<comment><USER10> > Kickstarter already takes power from consumers ... it just might be the time > we get some of that power back

They're not taking anything from anyone. If you don't like it don't use it. You're using really alarmist language to talk about a website people go to voluntarily. It's not food and water. It's board games. Why do you care how other people chose to use their money?

<comment><USER9> I'm not using an alarmist language.

Kickstarter and the rest of the crowd source services mix customers and investors into a mishmash that effectively strips you from the rights and privileges of either. You do not receive the rights and benefits of being an investor nor do you enjoy the guaranteed buyer protection as you would as a consumer buying a product.

And while you can try and hide behind the "it's a choice" argument this doesn't pass the simple smell test. Launching a product via crowdfunding is now cheaper and less risky than launching a product through normal means, like some one else have mentioned in this thread, there are too many companies that use it as a marketing and pre-order platform instead of what it originally was meant to be - a place to get funding for projects that would not be able to be funded through normal means. If this trend continues and everything moves to kickstarter like platforms you as a consumer suffer, you lose the rights and benefits that consumer protection laws provide, while still paying the same price and sometimes even a premium.

I don't care what people do with their money, I care about trends that could have a negative impact on myself or society now or in the future. For me this is no different than the twitter, google, or facebook "censorship" debate, you can claim these are private services and they can do what they want. I see it from a different perspective, in my eyes when you reach a certain market position you no longer can hide behind "I'm just a company I can do what I want" and you must respect the neutrality of information and the freedom of speech for everyone.

<comment><USER11> > I'm not using an alarmist language.

Yes you are.

> nor do you enjoy the guaranteed buyer protection as you would as a consumer > buying a product.

Is this actually true? I mean when you order a product you pay for a contract, it's possible the company will not deliver and go bankrupt - isn't that exactly the same situation as when you order via Kickstarter?

> there are too many companies that use it as a marketing and pre-order > platform instead of what it originally was meant to be - a place to get > funding for projects that would not be able to be funded through normal > means.

A lot of websites end up being used for something different from what they were originally intended for. Heck, the Internet itself was intended for quite different purposes than those it serves today. Who cares?

> If this trend continues and everything moves to kickstarter like platforms > you as a consumer suffer, you lose the rights and benefits that consumer > protection laws provide, while still paying the same price and sometimes > even a premium.

In a competitive marketplace there is no anti-free-lunch. No-one is getting rich off board gaming. Rather, more and better board games are being created. Customers aren't being stupid, they're accepting the risks because they're worth it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I watched half a play-through, someone may point out something I didn't notice - but it looks fairly uninspiring. The two players playing hardly interacted (it didn't seem what one player was doing had that interesting of an impact on another players strategy), further it seems like the common-case where there are one or two optimal strategies that you derive after a couple playthroughs and after which there are not enough dynamic elements add much novelty.

</comment><comment><USER13> It looks like it has same kind of mechanics as Eclipse[1] and Game of thrones[2]. I have really enjoyed those two and I hope scythe isn't too similiar.

Can someone compare scythe for these two?

[1]: [https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/72125/eclipse](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/72125/eclipse)

[2]: [https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/103343/game-thrones- boar...](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/103343/game-thrones-board-game- second-edition)

<comment><USER14> I can't talk for Eclipse or Scythe, but we brought the Game of Thrones game and it was pretty terrible. It seemed needlessly complicated and just wasn't that fun.

I hope Scythe isn't like that at all.

<comment><USER15> It is nothing like Game of Thrones. The person who made the comparison was probably just thinking of how you can choose order tokens to place, but Scythe's choices are simpler and more dynamic, and in other aspects of the game, it is quite different.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> The big question is: Is it better than Terra Mystica (the game the designer kept referencing as its inspiration)?

<comment><USER17> Short answer: no (but I'm a big TM fan)

Long answer: Terra Mystica works precisely because it doesn't have combat. It's about gaining points to win, and to do that you have to do other things, each with their own costs and cost centers. It works because it's about management of what you've got, when you play what actions, and taking advantage of the strengths of your particular peoples.

Scythe by comparison is very beautifully produced, and overall it's a good game, but not a truly excellent one. It's just not at the same level as something like TM or Kemet, for something else similar.

My main gripe with it is that too much of the game is dictated at the start. It'd be like playing chess with the first 5 moves dictated to both sides.

TM has a similar setup in that it's a static starting map, with factions that have static benefits, but the map starts changing fast because of what's available with bonus cards each turn, what can go where (or not), so you have to improvise. There's no real benefit to improvising on Scythe - indeed it's generally going to make things go worse for you. You're sort of railroaded into a certain way of playing.

Overall I'd give it a 7.5/10

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> After the stunning success of Pandemic: Legacy, I would have said SeaFall is the most-hyped game of 2016, but hype is subjective.

Scythe does a really great job of blending euro-style resource mechanics within a strong amero-style theme/board. And I totally agree with everyone; it's not as complicated as it looks. That said, I wouldn't recommend it if you're new to modern board games. There are a ton of games with similar levels of fun and strategy that are more accessible...

<comment><USER19> Can you recommend some suitable games for a beginner please?

<comment><USER20> Settlers of Catan was my first modern board game and will always have a special place in my heart Carcassonne is pretty easy and fun too.

Edit: My phone corrected "Catan" to "Satan"

<comment><USER21> Carcassonne has a nice iPad implementation as well. (As does Settlers--though it's a bit more complex and I find it's Carcassonne I come back to more regularly.)

<comment><USER22> I agree Carcassonne is a great gateway game. The basic rules are straightforward but there is some deeper strategy. There are also quite a few expansions that can add even more depth in different dimensions, so you can expand the game to your tastes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I really like the art, reminds of Simon Stålenhag.

</comment><comment><USER24> The box says 1-5 players. Is there really a single-player mode for this game?

<comment><USER25> Ditto on that. Anyone?

<comment><USER26> The article says yes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Looks complicated.

<comment><USER28> I find that, disappointingly, it often takes a complicated game mechanism for the game to keep being interesting over multiple play througs.

There are several games that are not too complicated, that also has a charm, but necessarily, more complicated mechanism makes for more variable play.

<comment><USER29> This is not always true. Chess and go don't have complicated game mechanics and they still have high replayability.

For more modern games, Smallworld ([https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/40692/small- world](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/40692/small-world)) is a great example for high replayability and relatively simple game mechanics.

<comment><USER30> The rulebook for chess and go is zillions of published books on pattern matching and book openings and book responses. To play at a high level you have to memorize and perfectly apply uncountable zillions of rules and patterns or you'll just be destroyed by someone who's memorized more rules. If you don't know all the chess book openings and you play against someone who does know them, you may as well just save everyone some time and immediately resign. Much like MtG, how much time and money are you willing to spend to win? This turned me off from the whole genre of "memorize and pattern match" games, I just don't find that to be recreational.

The pinnacle of large rulesets is RPG games, anyway. With the possible exception of some 80s classics like squad leader and starfleet battles there are no rulebooks that compare in size to the foot or so linear shelf space of a full set of Pathfinder rulebooks.

<comment><USER31> So what is it you're really asking for? A game where even a beginner can beat a long-time fan, yet one that is interesting? I think those goals are conflicting unless we're talking pure gambling.

<comment><USER32> A game that was basically an IQ test might work as well. Like having to solve those abstract pattern matching or 3D-to-2D geometry questions. Maybe. I'd guess there's some slight advantage to having answered many of such questions, but I doubt it is nearly as big a difference as, say, studying Chess or Go.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Hate games that are over-complicated, with book for rules that requires calculators, games supposed to be fun not chores.

I see this is ad for Scythe. but still.

<comment><USER34> Sounds like you like some games others won't, and others will like some games you don't. Surprise surprise.

<comment><USER35> Indeed.

If you are a board game enthusiast, chances are you'll eventually get bored with basic rules and want something more complicated that allows for interesting game mechanism or complex decisions. If you look at Board Game Geeks top games, a lot of them have a high complexity rating.

<comment><USER36> I'd note that sometimes complexity comes from surprisingly simple rules, like with Go or Chess. Next to Terra Mystica, Go or Chess might appear simple.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Real time PubSub-type notification API service? - <AUTHOR>

I have a bunch of keyword/search terms I want to be notified of if they match anything published in the blogosphere or mainstream news.
Does anyone know of a hosted service API I can use to subscribe to for real time notification of mentions of my keywords?
The traditional media notification space doesn't seem to be API orientated.  But with services like Superfeedr and Spinn3r I assumed there would be a number of such services around -- but I can't find any!
Looking for free or paid-for options.  Thanks!
(Google News/Blog search doesn't really cut it and isn't API driven - looking for REST or better XMPP orientated service) <comment><USER2> <http://developer.collecta.com/XmppApi/RealTime/></comment>


F8ce the music: Facebook applications are declining in popularity - <AUTHOR> http://saunderslog.com/2008/01/27/f8ce-the-music/ <comment><USER3> My app continues to add about 5,000+ users per day and total user count just passed 650k.

7-day rolling-window usage statistics are up about 20% since Nov/Dec and just two days ago hit a new record for number of active users in one day.

I don't force users to invite for any features, but every month or two I do flip a switch and have them bounced (just once) to the invite page as a friendly "Hey, tell your friends!" notice. I also run contests that use the invites as entries -- you'd be surprised how many people suddenly love sending invites once they realize more invites = more chances to win a $500 Nintendo Wii gaming package =)

Apps are hardly slowing down on Facebook, but I wholeheartedly agree that the problem of forcing invites has become more widespread and needs an immediate fix. That and the ridiculous amount of spammers smearing links all over developer review walls, discussion boards and fb:comment sections.

<comment><USER4> I don't want this to sound like a personal attack, but personally I'd consider the "prizes for invites" thing to be barely a step above the "forced invites" thing. Either way, you're encouraging people to spam their friends -- not because they think their friends would be interested in this particular app, but in order to get some miniscule personal benefit ($500 divided by how many users?)

Personally, I'd be happy to see the ability to send invites turned off altogether. If any friend of mine really thinks I'll be interested in a particular app, they can damn well take the time to write me a message about it.

<comment><USER3> No offense taken, it's really a matter of how you think invites should be used. Personally I'm fine with motivating people to invite their friends - <USER2> long as it's not forced on them. At the bottom of it all, my users are given the choice, whether or not my incentive might sway them.

The other reasoning for my invite system is that I created the first "Top Friends" app to make it into the Facebook directory (when there were about 50 apps total). I had actually beaten Slide to their own TopFriends release and was pretty far ahead on users compared to their TF app for a couple of weeks.

At one point, however, I noticed they had been growing at a much faster rate. Turns out that Slide had been forcing users to mass-invite every single friend when they added the app, something I distinctly chose not to do (out of goodwill for my users). Well, I know where that strategy now got me -- beaten by the company that now runs the top app on Facebook with 20+ million users.

So as a developer, leveraging invites in such a conservative manner was a bad mistake and I'll never forget that multi-million dollar lesson.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I article says that application popularity is declining, but could it also be that people are using a wider variety of applications?

I'd like to see the numbers on how many app's are installed total vs. time.

Just because the top 10 are losing market share doesn't mean all are. My guess is that more app's have been introduced into the market since developers have had time to make more, and that's where the users are going.</comment>


Google acquires ITA Software - <AUTHOR> http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/04/ita-software-acquisition-cleared-for.html <comment><USER2> There is some commentary on the terms that the Department of Justice have put on the deal here: [http://www.tnooz.com/2011/04/08/news/google-ita-software- dea...](http://www.tnooz.com/2011/04/08/news/google-ita-software-deal- approved-by-us-authorities-with-conditions/)

In brief:

\- Google will be required to license QPX software to airfare websites on commercially reasonable terms.

\- Google will be required to continue to fund research and develop the product "at least" at similar levels to what ITA had invested.

\- Google will be required to develop and offer ITA's InstaSearch product to other travel websites.

</comment><comment><USER3> By the way, Paul Graham was an early fan of ITA software, mentioning them in "Great Hackers"

<http://paulgraham.com/gh.html>

And even has an interview with ITA's original programming genius, Carl de Marken

<http://paulgraham.com/carl.html>

<comment><USER4> I discovered those essays back in 2006 when I was working for an airline, and tried to get them to adapt ITA's technology for that reason. ITA was the best on the market at that time, and the e/web-marketing guys loved them too. But the bean counters deemed them too expensive and ruled them out. I left sometime after, was tired of trying to turn chicken shit into chicken salad (there were other issues involved, not just the data supply).

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Does anyone know what makes ITA so special? Why don't any of the big airlines have APIs that Hipmunk, Kayak, Orbitz, etc. can use directly? (Do any of them?) Seems odd that everyone should have to rely on this one company for the data, when it should be originating from the airlines.

<comment><USER6> ITA is special not because of the data but because of what it does with the data. The others haven't been able to reproduce that. Think of it as the Google of airline data.

<comment><USER7> To give an example, check out <http://matrix.itasoftware.com/>

I've never found anything as useful or flexible for searching airline data.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> _How cool would it be if you could type "flights to somewhere sunny for under $500 in May"_

How cool would it be to receive suggestions for flights in May with clusters in my social graph as destinations?

<comment><USER9> Right because before I had to keep random acquaintances as friends and read their updates in order not to hurt their feelings, now I have to fly to random places in order not to hurt peoples feelings. Can't wait.

<comment><USER10> I had a business acquaintance get her feelings hurt because I didn't follow her back when she followed me on Twitter. I looked at her feed and she _literally_ had tweeted about her breakfast that morning.

I quit Twitter instead so that I wouldn't have to hurt anyone's feelings anymore.

<comment><USER6> What about just not caring whether you hurt someone's trivial feelings? That is becoming an important feeling in this ever-connected world.

<comment><USER6> Ugh, that should have said "important skill". Too late to edit now.

<comment><USER10> I wasn't getting much value out of Twitter anyway (not a judgement on Twitter's value, just on what I was getting out of it), and my business depends a lot on maintaining healthy relationships with lots of people, since we grow primarily by referral. It just made sense to drop Twitter altogether and tell people instead that I don't use it.

<comment><USER6> Sounds reasonable :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I wonder if the Common Lisp codebase will survive the acquisition?

<comment><USER12> Google higher-ups strike me as not so dumb that they'd misunderstand the crucial nature of that code...

<comment><USER11> The DOJ's conditions also seem to tie their hands a bit as far as what changes they can make with ITA's software, I realize.

<comment><USER13> Do you have a link? This seems interesting.

<comment><USER11> <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2424540>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'm sort of surprised this went through since their advantage in search mixed with the power ITA has within their field leads to very powerful mix that could put competitors at a serious disadvantage. Maybe the DoJ saw something I did not to make it less of a problem, but even as a google fan it's... ungh. I don't like this going through.

<comment><USER15> The key was Google's agreement to continue licensing QPX on "fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms". According to the linked Justice Department press release, they're also required to continue development of the publicly- available version of QPX.

<comment><USER14> Very interesting. Be very curious to see if it is enforced (although I think google is more prone to not risk it since they are under so much scrutiny if nothing else).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> So, I have an interesting perspective to share. I'm graduating and might end up working for Kayak. I know at least part of their infrastructure depends on ITA, and while the existing contract goes until 2013 (I think), Google is obviously looking to compete. Kayak also recently filed for IPO.

It's not like Google has never failed at any of its ventures, but to me it seems like it might be a tough competitor to everyone in this field, since a decent amount of traffic does come through search results. On the other hand, I think a majority of users come in directly, either through WOM or advertising or previous use.

So, what is HN's thoughts on the situation for Kayak? Would it be a wrong move to accept a job there? The engineers seem smart, the work is interesting, the culture is sane and easygoing. What's the worst that could happen?

<comment><USER17> Kayak is a great company and this is a fascinating time to be in travel search. Go for it! A first job under Paul English (even a few layers beneath him) is a big win and Kayak's engineering reputation so great that you'll have plenty of opportunities down the road.

So in summary: Worst scenario is pretty darn good for you!

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> This is a good opportunity for someone to start a competitor of ITA. Google are only required to serve the ITA clients for five years. They will probably stop afterwards, they will want people to use their search engine to find flights.

The only thing special about ITA is their excellent software. Apparently they get their raw data from another company that is willing to license the data to anyone. I am sure that there are still some old LISPers around that can write a similar software for a new company.

<comment><USER18> _Apparently they get their raw data from another company that is willing to license the data to anyone._

This is not true. In order to do what ITA does, you need schedules, fares, and availability data. You can buy the first two from clearinghouses if you have enough money. But the only way to get availability data is to either contract with airlines directly OR contract with your competitors.

 _I am sure that there are still some old LISPers around that can write a similar software for a new company._

That is just breathtakingly wrong.

<comment><USER9> Breathtakingly wrong? Are you saying there aren't any old lispers left? Or that old lipers cannot write similar software?

Before you say something is breathtakingly wrong you should read it carefully and try to understand it. This way you might also get some of the jokes that are currently flying over your head.

<comment><USER18> There are plenty of lispers left. I'm one of them. I also used to work at ITA.

The bit that is breathtakingly wrong is the notion that you can just take some smart lisper, lock them in a room, and have them replicate what ITA did and have that be a viable business. See martincmartin's and my comments later in this thread to learn why that would be incredibly hard. With a smart enough team and enough time and money, you could certainly do it, but this is a project that would take many years and its unlikely anyone would be able to keep funding for that long. ITA had a much easier job: it was competing with very poorly designed systems that ran on mainframes and had very little CPU power available.

<comment><USER19> Given what you and martincmartin are saying, I am left wondering why Google was able to buy ITA for so little. How can such a thing be worth less than a billion dollars?

<comment><USER18> Because there's a rather finite amount of money spent on air travel which means that the valuation of any one company in that sector will be well within Google's means?

<comment><USER19> Perhaps. But in that case it's a much smaller market than I imagined. Also relevant is that ITA raised $100M in 2006, so their $700M exit is hardly a home run by VC standards. It doesn't seem to match the astonishingly strong technical and market position you (convincingly) describe.

[http://www.itasoftware.com/news-events/press- release.html?id...](http://www.itasoftware.com/news-events/press- release.html?id=103). Note that the round included Sequoia who are known for caring only about big markets.

<comment><USER20> ITA raised all that money to build a reservation system to replace the old mainframe systems that are fabulously expensive to run. That would have been a market of the kind that required outside investement from a company that was already profitable (I think ITA had more people working on the reservation system than the search), and that a big VC would love to bet on.

From what I hear it worked technically, but failed commercially due to the badly timed recession. It seems like a fair bet that Google's offer wasn't putting a lot of value on the reservation system. Even if it could be made to work, it's not the kind of a business that Google is usually in.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Hipmunk might be in trouble.

<comment><USER22> Today feels like Google (attempt of) squashing YCombinator startups day.

First they're doing Youtube Live -> Justin.tv etc.

Then better flight search -> Hipmunk

<comment><USER23> It could also be viewed as epic validation that the ideas are gold. I most certainly believe Hipmunk can compete against Google; the team is completely awesome and they're far more nimble and agile. Although Google does have an unbeatable vision of Maps I'd imagine...there's no _real_ reason you shouldn't be able to get bus times and airplane times in the same place. And perhaps if you could then pay for the bus and the plane using your Android NFC...

Oh jeez. I love the future.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Who does Jeff Huber, SVP of Commerce and Local, report to?

<comment><USER25> Larry Page, I think.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> How much?? That's all that matters, that's all I care

</comment><comment><USER27> rough times ahead for flight and travel sites (which generated good money via leeds to flight search sites) ... googles killing one internet ecosystem after the other.</comment>


Tell HN about: Institutional memory and reverse smuggling - <AUTHOR> http://wrttn.in/04af1a

<comment><AUTHOR> Throwaway account for obvious reasons. I've been meaning to write something about this. Some recent discussions on HN about institutional memory convinced me to throw it online.

<comment><USER2> As others said, thank you for sharing. This seems especially valuable for the rare perspective: the story itself is presumably commonplace, but you have to have decades of experience to be able to experience it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> One of the vernor vinge books had software archeology as a discipline, for similar reasons.

<comment><USER4> Programmer/archaeologist.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> This article reminds me of the one where MacDonald's returning CEO finds out that they have lost the recipe of the special sauce. It was kept so secret that they finally lost it, and but for the CEO knowing the guy who formulated it, brought him out of retirement to make one more batch, we'd never have it on our Macs today.

Software projects are like this too. After a few years, a lot of memory is lost if people leave.

I enjoyed the reference to "alien technology". Indeed it is.

</comment><comment><USER6> Great read. I've seen it happen-my boss was asked to go back and help consult to a bank he used to work for (this was in 2008, the bank was failing and being bought) about some database archive features he implemented, IIRC. Also, in my current job, I'm currently at a customer site helping them figure out how the machine we sold them a year ago works. Engineering documentation is just as important as software documentation.

</comment><comment><USER7> The section on reverse corporate espionage reminded me of the old Robert Heinlein/Lazarus Long quote: "Never underestimate the power of human stupidity." And that humans get even stupider in groups, whether governments or corporations.

</comment><comment><USER8> The page is not able to scroll on the android browser.</comment>


Exploring the software behind Facebook, the world's largest site - <AUTHOR> http://royal.pingdom.com/2010/06/18/the-software-behind-facebook/

<comment><USER2> Something doesn't add up:

 _Facebook serves 570 billion page views per month_

 _Facebook's systems serve 1.2 million photos per second. This doesn't include the images served by Facebook's CDN._

That's an average of 5,45 photos pr. pageview, excluding CDN-served images.

[http://www.google.dk/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=(1,2+mi...](http://www.google.dk/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=\(1,2+million*60+*+60+*+24*+30\)/570+billion&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=)

<comment><USER3> Open your news feed, i get at least 15-20 photos. Go to a profile page, you see their wall and photo's they're tagged in for example. Most of the time thats above 5 as well.

<comment><USER2> I just did, and all of those are served from fbcdn.net.

<comment><USER4> If I remember correctly, Facebook uses the CDN as a cache for images, and loads from central servers when there's a cache miss. Even with a very large cache, there will be compulsory misses as new photos are loaded into cache. That might help explain their figures.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: What do you do when you join a new team with an existing codebase? - <AUTHOR> Do you<p>- look at the tests?<p>- pick a function and follow it in a debugger?<p>- pick a task and figure out how to implement it?<p>- pair program?<p>- etc<p>Personally, I've found picking a task and start doing it is helpful <comment><USER2> I wrote a whole blog post about that:

[https://letterstoanewdeveloper.com/2018/09/24/learning-to- re...](https://letterstoanewdeveloper.com/2018/09/24/learning-to-read-code-is- more-important-than-learning-to-write-it/)

Tldr:

* Do a high level scan

* Dive deep on one part

* Use the scientific method. Create small experiments to help you build your intuition about the system.</comment>


Cyberpunk 2077 Logos - <AUTHOR> https://www.valencygraphics.com/cyberpunk-2077 <comment><USER2> I feel totally out of touch with all the hype around the game, in particular the aesthetic choices is actually what disappointed me the most. The name of the game, as well as the design to me looks quite literally as if someone designed the most generic 'cyberpunk' game possible.

It looks like the cyberpunk version of GTA, which is ironic because cyberpunk is supposed to be transgressive, yet nothing what I've seen about the game is surprising or going into any new territory. The trailer just featured a few lines about unemployment, the most dangerous city to live in, almost as if someone had written a generic script you could apply to everything that is cyberpunk.

It's a little bit like scyscrapers in Dubai, which look like someone in the 90s read sci-fi from the 60s, rather than futuristic it looks retro and nostalgic, missing the entire point.

<comment><USER3> cyberpunk that isn't edgy, daring or truly political doesn't deserve the moniker. It needs to be taking some kind risk. Going through the motions of tepid imitation (read:unoffensive to the largest target market, follows precedents from similar open world games) isn't true to the genre.

Tell me, what kind of statement do you think this game could possibly make that would be memorable? or is it simply a skin on a familiar game mechanic and engine.

Blade Runner had nice visuals, but it wasn't just about the visuals. It also presented a provocative question and politics that all those nice visuals were centered on.

<comment><USER4> Cyberpunk will provoke the fantastic question of 'what if we take the current trend towards multinationals consolidating to the logical extreme, and make them rule the world'.

<comment><USER3> Do you think this game is going to explore that question in a way that changes or challenges you, or is it going to simply make a facile nod & gesture, while portraying some kitschy logos.

Do you think its actually going to attempt to challenge corporate culture?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is cool, but I can't help feel that the bright yellow banner beneath each one pulls attention away from the logos themselves.

<comment><USER6> Yeah, originally, the showcase was designed to fit in Instagram, which would've clashed nicely with a lighter background. At the same time, things are already quite busy with the text, so I didn't want to complicate it too much. I originally had just the white versions that got lost, so putting them on a background of sorts helped a bit, but I need to make the gradient behind a bit brighter. That will happen once I update the site again with the new logos I've made. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> If you like this you might also enjoy:

\- Joseph Cross' work on Destiny [https://www.artstation.com/artwork/XnGaR](https://www.artstation.com/artwork/XnGaR)

\- Designers Republic's work on Wipeout [https://i.imgur.com/pBAf4uH.png](https://i.imgur.com/pBAf4uH.png)

<comment><USER8> Also from Deus Ex Human Revolution

[https://www.behance.net/gallery/2097912/Deus-Ex-Human- Revolu...](https://www.behance.net/gallery/2097912/Deus-Ex-Human-Revolution- Companies-Logos)

Love to see details like this

<comment><USER9> That was the game that got me into video games. What a masterpiece.

<comment><USER10> I am glad you like it!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Looks awesome. As an aside, I don't think I've been more excited for a video game release since Skyrim

<comment><USER12> It seems like you are not the only one. CDPROJEKT has been the top 1 biggest company by trading volume on the Polish sotck exchange over the last few months. It even surpassed the second biggest copper producer (KGHM) in the world.

<comment><USER13> I wanted to buy in January of this year but I struggled to find how.. I'm UK. All the sites IG.com/212 etc don't have access to WSE.

<comment><USER14> I know for a fact you can buy Polish stocks, including CDPR, on DEGIRO. It should be available through Interactive Brokers as well.

As an aside, I'd advise you avoid brokers who advertise like bookies.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> It would be funny if the logos for the various "corporate" factions were just Helvetica words inside a rectangle.

<comment><USER16> Surely they could drop a few extra million for _oblique_ Helvetica.

<comment><USER17> Ooohhh sooo fancy. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r58EkDtePxo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r58EkDtePxo)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I've been gaming since the ZX Spectrum. Can't remember when I was last this giddy for a game.

</comment><comment><USER6> Hey all! Just wanted to pop in and say thanks for looking and to rglover for putting my stuff up. A very welcome surprise with all of the freelance inquiries (I am available). :) Cheers!

<comment><USER19> Fantastic job on these.

I love how you've created such a wide range of logos that are all quite unique, but at the same time fit within the overall aesthetic of the world.

<comment><USER6> Just to point out, these are just recreations of the logos that will be found in the game, so all credit to the artists/designers at CDPR, but I agree! It's such a cool diverse world that I'm really excited to see through my screen. To geek out on one thing in particular: I love the fact that they've built up old and new versions of some of the logos to add a sense of foundation to the corps in the game. All Foods, for example, has 3 logos, 1 that is old, 1 that is the older rebrand, and 1 that is their newest rebrand (maybe they're trying to hide something!) and it helps set in your mind if an area is older or newer due to the design found in an area. Such a smart detail that is so well realized.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> This is why I am in constant awe and deference to people with aethetic talent. Well done!

</comment><comment><USER21> I never pre-order games but I did with this even though I'm not sure it is really my kind of game. CDPR and GOG are basically the direct opposite of EA and Activision. Good vs. Evil. Worth supporting unlike pretty much anyone else.

</comment><comment><USER22> Super excited to play this when it comes out! I haven't had a gaming PC in years, so I'm happy that they're releasing it through Stadia.

</comment><comment><USER23> Is this the most expensive game ever developed? Somewhere I read something about 200 million dollars ...

<comment><USER24> $121 million as of few weeks ago [0] - a fair bit off the ~$250 million Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 or Grand Theft Auto 5 cost.

[0] [https://www.tweaktown.com/news/74946/cdpr-has-spent- over-121...](https://www.tweaktown.com/news/74946/cdpr-has-spent- over-121-million-on-cyberpunk-2077s-development/index.html)

<comment><USER25> ...and we don't talk about Star Citizen

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Those all look great, esp the "2nd Amendment" one.

</comment><comment><USER27> Let them release the game for Linux, especially since they are already making a Stadia version.

<comment><USER28> I would love that, however iirc targeting Stadia doesn't give much benefit to targeting desktop Linux.

I may (and hope I am) be wrong though.

<comment><USER27> I think Stadia gives a major benefit - the heavy lifting of making the Linux version itself will be already addressed by releasing for it.

I.e. they'll have the Vulkan renderer and all their middleware will work on Linux. So making a proper desktop release is a much easier effort once Stadia version will be done.

Of course I don't see Google doing anything to encourage proper desktop Linux releases, so I don't think they are actively helping anything. But indirectly, it is positive. As long as CDPR even care to do it, releasing for Stadia will make it easier for them.

<comment><USER28> I just vaguely remembered seeing something stating that the stack on Stadia is noticeably different than the stack on desktop.

However, upon doing further research, I can't find any credible sources supporting that. It's obviously a boost to Vulkan, as you note, and that's a boost to Linux.

Sounds like a win to me! (Even if they don't release on Linux, developers supporting Vulkan more seems like a Good Thing.)

<comment><USER27> Stadia itself offers some original features related especially to multiplayer, but they are optional. I.e. unless the game has a hard dependency on them, it shouldn't be a blocker.

<comment><USER28> Ah, that makes sense then. Thanks for the info.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> They don't look very edgy and have more of cartoon feel.

<comment><USER21> >They don't look very edgy

Good. Edgy is icky.</comment></comment>


American drivers should learn to love the roundabout. - <AUTHOR> http://www.slate.com/id/2223035/ <comment><USER2> I spent some time in Sydney, Australia in the early 1990's. It is where I first saw the wide application of roundabout technology to urban traffic problems --they permit a much more regular and even flow of traffic than do stop signs and lights.

I have since wondered occasionally why we don't use roundabouts more in this country.</comment>


Zipline's Drones Will Deliver Blood in the United States This Year - <AUTHOR> https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-human-os/robotics/drones/ziplines-bigger-faster-drones-will-be-delivering-blood-in-the-united-states-this-year <comment><USER2> Interesting to see they are using a dense polystyrene body. Very similar to large FPV hobbyist craft you can build. Example:

[https://m.aliexpress.com/item/32508914119.html?trace=wwwdeta...](https://m.aliexpress.com/item/32508914119.html?trace=wwwdetail2mobilesitedetail&productId=32508914119&productSubject=Skywalker-X8-white- Version-Skywalker-FPV-Flying-Wing-2122mm-RC-Plane-Empty-frame-2-Meters-x)

[https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?2042139-Viper...](https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?2042139-Viper-V2-0-3-Meter- Flying-Wing-for-UAV-FPV)

<comment><USER3> It's cheap, light, rigid and easily repairable.

Carbon fiber isn't even that light if your drone isn't a quad copter that needs pretty insane rigidity to not break apart there aren't easily available materials that are better than some form of hard coated poly foam especially for lifting surfaces.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> That title could be interpreted in a sinister way

<comment><USER5> My exact thoughts upon reading the headline, "Is that a threat?!"

<comment><USER6> More better: "Beer Drone"

<comment><USER7> Perhaps one day we can order "pre-alcoholised" blood (or saline solution) via drones and avoid the hassle of having to physically drink a beverage.

<comment><USER8> Yeah, and bypass that whole annoyance of having to taste what we drink /s

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> jake-low That promotional video in the article is pretty cool. The drone is shown "landing" by catching a taut cable with a hook, midair. Even if there's a human pilot doing that part, that is no small feat.

<comment><USER9> Would agree, I thought that was pretty impressive. That said, it seems a bit risky, since if you miss the target it's pretty much a guaranteed crash. I wonder why this approach was preferred to just using a net or similar, it seems like that would be substantially simpler. Landing with the cable is definitely cool looking though.

<comment><USER10> > if you miss the target it's pretty much a guaranteed crash

How do you figure? If you miss the target, you're still flying, come around for another pass.

If you hit the target with something other than your hook, then you crash, but just make the hook long enough that thats not a concern.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Or, as vampires call it, "aerial refueling".

</comment><comment><USER12> Is there seriously an "AudioJungle" audio watermark at the start of the promo?

Am I just hearing things?

</comment><comment><USER13> Really curious what sort of market they see in the US.

<comment><USER10> 160km (~100 miles) in particular seems limiting. There's a critical access hospital in the rural Oregon community I live in that occasionally needs more blood in a hurry, but it wouldn't have enough range to get out here. Plus with only a 101km/h (63 MPH) cruising speed, its not going to show up any sooner than ground transportation.

I can see why this is useful in Rwanda where the ground transportation infrastructure isn't as developed, but I'd be surprised if there are a lot of places in the US where its range is long enough to cover a hospital that can't keep its blood bank adequately supplied with ground transportation.

<comment><USER13> Yeah that was a big part of my question. 50 miles doesn't buy you much in rural areas. And distance from other facilities is a requirement for critical access hospitals, with nearly every rural facility participating in that program.

They are also only going to be able to get business to the extent that they are priced cheaper than just wasting blood, so there's a cap there.</comment></comment></comment>


Striking Writers to Launch Online Video Co., Seeking $30M+ - <AUTHOR> http://newteevee.com/2008/01/11/striking-writers-to-launch-online-video-co-seeking-30m/

<comment><USER2> If they're looking for $30 million as an investment, that tells me that they're trying to start another movie studio instead of a startup.

<comment><USER3> I think it is explicitly their point to be a studio. They aren't a tech startup.

E.g. "Virtual Artists will offer professional writers deals to develop and produce films"</comment></comment>


Case study: MongoDB capped collections (after trying SQL and Redis) - <AUTHOR> http://robots.thoughtbot.com/post/2403360445/yuletide-logs-and-mongodb-capped-collections

<comment><USER2> Interesting, although it's not clear what's wrong with using Redis. I would store the object id's in a list, and each object as a hash. I'm not familiar with the Ruby client for Redis, but in python, storing objects to a hash is trivial.</comment>


Why Can't Programmers.. Program? - <AUTHOR> http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/02/why-cant-programmers-program.html

<comment><USER2> Oldie but goodie - a perenial here on HN and usually guaranteed to create a lively discussion.

Usually when this is discussed "FizzBuzz" gets mentioned, so you can find suitable discussions that way:

<http://searchyc.com/fizz+buzz?sort=by_date>

Alternatively, just look for the article you actually submitted:

[http://searchyc.com/submissions/Why+can%2527t+programmers+pr...](http://searchyc.com/submissions/Why+can%2527t+programmers+program?sort=by_date)

And here it is:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1605>

Finally, here's a more recent discussion:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1142398>

There are more. Given that you've been on Hacker News for over two years I'm surprised you haven't seen them all.

<comment><USER3> I don't believe any discussion of FizzBuzz can be considered complete without a link to David Langford's classic monograph on the subject:

<http://www.ansible.co.uk/ai/pcwplus/pcwp1989.html#jul>

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I love all the wrong answers in the comments.</comment>


Ask HN: Google Goes Popular? - <AUTHOR>

Lately, I have noticed when I am doing a scientific search on Google,maybe an algorithm, resent research paper etc., I get less scientific sources than I normally would and more what I would consider "popular" sources. Has anyone else noticed this? Let's face it Google is pretty much my lens into the world. I am not near a major university library, so I do not have much choice.<p>I do not like this "pressure" to fit into Google's popular mold. Does anyone else have a better search engine for meaningful sources. I'm not saying Wikipedia, About, or Ehow are not creditable sources... hmm... yes yes, I am saying that. Any Help? Maybe something that indexes noncommercial sites only... <comment><USER2> Are you using Google Scholar for this research? <http://scholar.google.com/>

<comment><USER3> sadly, Google Scholar mostly gives me a lot of articles... that are all behind a paywall.

<comment><USER4> You should e-mail the corresponding author and ask them to send you a .pdf. It helps if you claim to be at a university from a poor, developing country and your library doesn't have any subscriptions. Some authors will also have the .pdf uploaded on their website.

<comment><USER5> Upvote, but not for the suggestion to lie.

It's a terribly inefficient system and all government grants should require any resulting publication be openly accessible. But until we get there, simply look for their website or send them a nice, short email with the publication in the subject line. If there are multiple authors, you could have more success with a middle author than the leading or trailing authors (first and last are often the lab head). An alternative is looking for an administrative contact on their website.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Add filetype:pdf to your query.

<comment><USER7> Agreed, advanced search is your friend when looking for solid research. In addition to looking for pdf's I often get better results filtering by .edu sites as well.

<comment><USER8> That will miss many non-US institutions. For example, UK universities use .ac.uk

<comment><USER9> If you want to include them, boolean logic still works for advanced search tags. You can search for 'somethingorother site:.edu OR site:.ac.uk'

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> When I was a student I used CiteSeer all the time, but I guess it depends on the area of your research.

<http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/>

</comment><comment><USER11> Google search has been almost useless for me since they dropped implicit AND for implicit OR.

As in, the query [random trie] is now (random OR trie). The query [+random +trie] returns much better results (random AND trie).

I've seriously been considering starting a search engine just to get back to a ~2002 era Google level of usability.

<comment><USER12> I agree, plus their word mangling/assumptions are out of control. I often have to use double quotes to make it clear that yes, what I typed in is what I'm searching for.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'm kind of curious: hypothetically imagine Google had super crazy search personalization... and knew when you were interested in scientific sources in a field versus just the wikipedia article. Would you be happier because your searches are great, or freaked out because you feel your privacy is being invaded.

</comment><comment><USER14> I wonder if this might have something to do with it:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1082209>

</comment><comment><USER15> Wikipedia is noncommercial.</comment>


Free Access to British Scientific Research to be Available Within Two Years - <AUTHOR> http://www.infodocket.com/2012/07/15/open-access-free-access-to-british-scientific-research-to-be-available-within-two-years/ <comment><USER2> <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4247908></comment>