Subtle -isms at Hacker School - <AUTHOR> https://www.hackerschool.com/blog/38-subtle-isms-at-hacker-school <comment><USER2> Well today's my day to be the not-so-subtle-ist asshole at Hacker News.

It's one thing to recognise that systemic forms of bias and discrimination can be subtle and invisible to those trying to fix them, but all this sort of thing does is hand more keys over to a small subset of people who are less interested in making the world more equal and more interested in grabbing, holding and exercising social power.

Shaming rituals, however light in touch they are, rarely improve things. They're just another small-p political tool to be used by politically minded people to exert social control.

<comment><USER3> The ban on debates is particularly jarring. I get the idea, a debate could easily turn into a heated argument, but if someone told me I am being sexist or homophobic when I am not then I'm certainly not going to apologize for it.

If they want to maintain a civil environment that's able to call out subtle -isms, then they should simply accept "no, it wasn't" just as freely as "oops, sorry".

<comment><USER4> Perhaps not the most subtle example:

I may tell someone to "man up and crank through the work". I didn't intend on being sexist, but someone points it out. And then I proceed to get into an irrelevant shouting match about how, in German, "mensch" is gender neutral.

If you didn't intend on being sexist or whatever, then maybe there's a better way of phrasing what you said. Or, you can find faculty later, in private, and try to come to an understanding about the situation. Anyways, I would just say "sorry" on the spot and save the debate for later.

<comment><USER3> You can manufacture as many straw-man examples as you like, but it won't matter. My comment did not say that I said anything specific or anything that could or should be construed as offensive.

Is it really so hard to believe that I did not say something offensive? Is it impossible to think that the person doing the call-out can be in the wrong, that they might be imagining or even willfully manufacturing an emotional distress?

Are we all now to be beholden to the whims and fancies of those that continually reshape the landscape of political correctness in an effort to exercise a modicum of control or power over their peers?

My proposed solution is simple: if someone tries the call-out method and they are in the wrong, you reply in a manner that is just as direct and non- confrontational. "No, it wasn't."

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _" we've been trying to stop using "you guys" to refer to mixed-gender groups."_

Am I the only one that finds this over the top?

 _" No 'subtle -isms' is about recognizing the ways we're unconciously_ [sic] _making our friends ' lives a little worse."_

I'm sorry, if your life is _made worse_ by a completely benign (and friendly) statement like "ok guys, have a nice weekend" then you are naive and irrational. Creating an environment that indulges every childish sensitivity does not do those individuals any favors and makes a mockery of their cause.

 _" For the last year, the 'No subtle -isms' rule has carried some implementation guidelines. One of these is asking people not to debate whether or not something is an -ism."_

Accusing someone of (even subtle) sexism or racism is _not to be taken lightly_ —this rule forces the accused to apologize (affirming the alleged bias) without defending or explaining themselves. This is unethical and dilutes legitimate complaints.

A proverb that comes to mind: "Those who speak most about misfortune will find it. Those who speak most about success will find it."

<comment><USER6> The "you guys" instance seems a bit silly at first but is a good example of the way our language promotes the idea of male as the default. Note that there are no feminine words which we gender-neutralize in a similar way--we refer to a collective as "guys" or humanity as "mankind," but never use "gals" or "womankind" to refer to a mixed-gender group. In this way we construct women as an other, in opposition to men: the expected members of the workplace are guys, we expect history-makers to be men, and women are the odd exception to that rule.

It is important to note that very few of the people who use these linguistic constructs are being intentionally sexist in doing so, and as such nobody is taking hurt or offense away from the use of "guys" to refer to a mixed-gender group or anything like that. This is not an exercise in respecting others' sensitivities so much as an effort to recognize the way our actions subtly reinforce the problematic and undoubtedly biased power structures that exist in our current culture. As others have pointed out in this thread, the participants in Hacker School share a common interest refusing to reinforce said power structures, and as such put rules in place to codify that commitment to helping one another change the way they interact with the world.

As others have noted, these are not accusations--which would certainly not be appropriate or productive to whip out in the middle of a meeting--but gentle reminders amongst like-minded people to watch the way their words impact the world around them.

<comment><USER7> It's subtly transphobic that you limited the discussion to men and women.

<comment><USER6> That is very true and a mistake I do make pretty often but am working to be more cognizant of. Framing the discussion around women and men does nothing to further those who are identify as both or neither, nor those who are in transition from one binary gender to the other.

<comment><USER8> Can everyone see what just happened here? This is all it has to be. It was a cis-sexist remark. Now, I tend to make similar remarks and I also try to be aware of them, and there's indeed a limit to what you can do. But this is _all we're talking about_. OP was being facetious, but a subtle '-ism' was pointed out, and the commenter just said, "Oops, yeah, working on that." And we all happily move on with our lives.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> It's really hard to predict the effect of social rules like these, which is why Hacker School does their best to actually test them empirically and change them if they're negatively impacting the environment.

A lot of people seem to be concerned about the chilling effects that these policies _could_ have. This is a valid concern, as nobody wants to be in a place where they're constantly second-guessing everything they say.

The nice thing is that we don't just have to speculate, and we can look at what _has actually happened_ at Hacker School, and the feedback from those who have actually experienced the environment seems overwhelmingly positive, both for people who have been traditionally marginalized and for those who have been unintentional marginalizers.

disclosure: I'm not a Hacker Schooler but I know Nick and Dave well. I've seen first hand how deeply and genuinely they care about making Hacker School both extremely inclusive and also free for open discussion and transparency.

<comment><USER10> How is banning the right to defend yourself against a baseless accusation in any way "free for open discussion and transparency"?

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> This is a throwaway account. I feel we are being invaded. The culture we used to have didn't cared about _isms_ or whatever you want to call them. It developed through text were it hardly matter who was on the other side of the connection, only skills and thoughts mattered. Those were the good old days, when we were free.

Now we are being invaded. We, like every other culture in the world, are ask to not use certain language and not have certain thoughts. If we do not comply, we are heretics. Only they don't use that term, they rather use some _ism_.

The wheel of history is repeating. The control freaks still want to control, they just changed one set of sins for another.

<comment><USER12> The "no debate" thing seems really odd and control-freakish on their part, I'll give you that. But if you look at people trying to make tech a more inclusive community and call it an "invasion," you're reflecting the exact view that made movements like this pop up.

If "the good old days" were really that good, why have women been almost intentionally excluded from IT until relatively recently? Do you mean "good" for people in general, or "good" for you?

When you say "we are being invaded," who is "we"? White men? People who are already "in"? More importantly, who is doing the invading? If women say "hey, these are small, tacitly accepted things in tech culture that make people uncomfortable," do you seriously think that statement is persecuting you? They're not trying to control your thoughts, they're trying to get you to be less of an asshole.

<comment><USER11> >why have women been almost intentionally excluded from IT until relatively recently?

I have never excluded women. Also IT, tech, hackers are not interchangeable terms.

>Do you mean "good" for people in general, or "good" for you?

I meant good for hackers. People with a certain world view, goals and sense of humor.

>When you say "we are being invaded," who is "we"?

Again, hackers. We never cared for race nor sexuality.

>who is doing the invading?

Control freaks.

>They're not trying to control your thoughts, they're trying to get you to be less of an asshole.

If anything, this rules make it easier to be an asshole.

<comment><USER12> You say you've never excluded women, but you are aggressively dismissing an attempt -- it seems, mostly from women -- at improving what they perceive as sexist undertones in the workplace.

If someone says "hey, we should work on addressing this sexism," and the response is, "be quiet, there isn't any sexism, you just hate fun," _that seems pretty stinking sexist_ , doesn't it? Dismissing someone's concerns by saying they aren't real doesn't address the concerns, it just sweeps them under the rug because they aren't perceived as being important enough to give a shit about.

If some group has evolved office slang that includes saying "Quit being a ginger" to people who make dumb mistakes, and then that group hires some redheaded dude, wouldn't it be within his rights to say "hey guys, it's kind of weird to use 'ginger' as a euphemism for 'dumbass'"? Yeah, maybe he's "invading" and stepping on the group's ability to insult people at the expense of other groups, but it doesn't mean he's _wrong_.

<comment><USER10> > If someone says "hey, we should work on addressing this sexism," and the > response is, "be quiet, there isn't any sexism, you just hate fun," _that > seems pretty stinking sexist,_ doesn't it?

No.

Replace sexism with unicorns and reread your premise.

<comment><USER12> That's silly -- a unicorn's presence is, for the most part, a measurable binary, it's either there or it isn't. Sexism is subjective, or at least more up for debate than "is the unicorn in the room or is it not."

If somebody says, "hey, this is some bad sexism," that's a lousy argument, because it's a vague statement that can't be proven either way. You could respond with "no it isn't, shhh" and it would be just as reasonable a rebuttal as any other.

But if someone says "these are things I think contribute to an unnecessarily exclusionary environment, here's why it should change," then I think it's disingenuous to just say "meh, no" without addressing the concerns. It's basically someone saying, "I think my opinions are being written off without being properly discussed," and responding with "That's not true, discussion over, it's written off." There's got to at least be a discussion, no?

<comment><USER10> > Sexism is subjective,

No, it isn't.

If you believe you have an actionable claim, bring it to court.

If you don't (and you know that you don't) you have no right to shame and defame people, while hiding behind some bullshit policy that prevents them from defending themselves.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> _Although our employees are diverse on some axes, we 're 90% white. There are also class barriers to attending Hacker School - while Hacker School is free, living in New York for three months is not._

I can't help but laugh sometimes. Good thing all the rich white women feel comfortable!

But seriously, how is it possible to have so few Asians? Usually the "problem" is that there are far too many. Maybe we need affirmative action for Asians, for once?

<comment><USER8> The employees--of which there are 7 or 8, I believe--are 90% white. Hardly a decent sample size. The attendees are much more diverse.

<comment><USER13> Good catch. That should be an easier problem to solve. If a few of them just volunteer to give their jobs to minorities, that will do wonders for diversity.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> What's the difference between a "well, actually" and correcting someone's misunderstanding -- or rather, when is it not welcome? My understanding is that it's when someone parachutes into a conversation uninvited to correct someone, but if I was in a learning setting like Hacker School, I feel like I would welcome that from fellow students or instructors.

<comment><USER15> A well-actually occurs when someone's understanding is 90% correct, and someone comes along and says, heroically, "you're entirely wrong, because of this missing 10%". When iterated this kind of grandstanding erodes the confidence of someone who's working with a partial understanding, which in truth is all of us.

<comment><USER16> Particularly if the missing 10% is completely unrelated to the situation under discussion.

"Ok, so the client contacts the server and receives the result, but half of the result is missing, so...."

"Well, actually, the client uses DNS to look up the server's address first."

"Ok, thanks. Now I know."

A well-done well-actually is a brilliant demonstration of superiority.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> It's really heartening that this has gone down like a lead balloon here.

Seriously, anyone who manages to take offence at a mixed group being greeted with "you guys" really needs to find something better to do. It doesn't consciously or unconsciously make anyone's life worse. It's just a couple of words that are a convenient greeting.

<comment><USER3> I once had a foreign friend comment on the unfortunate lack of a plural form for "you" in English.

We Southerners tried to solve that problem ages ago with "y'all" but the rest of the country apparently doesn't care for it.

<comment><USER17> Well, going back a few centuries further, we used to have thou/thee (nominative/objective singular) and ye/you (nominative/objective plural). For some reason we ended up with the plurals being used as the singulars and no proper plurals at all.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> At a certain point don't you have to trust people to be adults?

If someone's being a "subtle" racist, they're just being racist, and you can deal accordingly (likewise for the rest of the "subtlisms"). Beyond that, if you want people to act with maturity, you have to treat them like adults, which these rules certainly don't do.

<comment><USER19> I'm one of the founders of Hacker School. We care tremendously about treating people like adults[1].

If you think the social rules don't treat people like adults, you're fundamentally misunderstanding them. The purpose of the rules is to make us all aware of the ways that we can unintentionally frustrate and hurt each other, not to shame people. The rules are not enforced top down, nor do you get in trouble if you break one. The way you treat a person like an adult is by being honest with them when they make you feel frustrated or uncomfortable and having an adult conversation about it.

Our job is to build an environment where everyone at Hacker School feels safe to focus on becoming a better programmer. I don't think you could find a single Hacker Schooler who would disagree that the social rules made for a better environment, and there've been well over 350 so far.

[1] cf. [https://www.hackerschool.com/blog/28-treating-people-like- ad...](https://www.hackerschool.com/blog/28-treating-people-like-adults)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Sounds like a cult-ism.

</comment><comment><USER21> I ask this as a general question to all of tech culture, not to just this particular setting:

What about subtile elitism?

It's one of the biggest subtile -isms I've run into. If you didn't go to a top ten university, you're sort of in a lower echelon in the tech world. In practice this subtilely selects for people from higher socioeconomic backgrounds and/or people who have an "academic-oriented" learning style as opposed to an autodidact or self-directed learning style. It also contributes to America's regional class system... the top ten schools are by and large on the coasts. If you're from, say, Kansas or Ohio you are less likely to attend one of them than if you're from California or Massachusetts.

My impression for a long time has been that a significant chunk of the tech world is a top ten universities only club full of Stanford, MIT, Harvard, etc. graduates hiring, funding, and promoting other top university graduates. You could play a drinking game on sites like AngelList: take a shot every time someone lists "attended MIT" or "graduated from Stanford" as their _sole qualification_ for being a founder or seeking a job.

Racism and sexism definitely exist, but from what I've seen socioeconomic elitism is the most powerful discriminatory -ism in the tech world. It's not an either-or thing of course. It just adds yet another barrier that outsiders must overcome. Barriers are kind of additive... each barrier reinforces the other pre-existing barriers by adding another point of resistance.

I've got to admit that this is a personal gripe. I'm from the flyover country, and I'm also not an academic type. I hated school for the most part. I just don't learn that way. But for some reason listing things like "has single- handedly conceived, designed, implemented, and shipped the following products..." or "taught myself 6502 assembly language at the age of ten using only the appendix of the Commodore 64 extended manual" just doesn't carry the same weight as "graduated from Stanford." Even if I could say "graduated with honors from the University of Cincinnati," I doubt this would carry near as much oomph as "attended MIT" even if my grades at MIT were poor.

I can't imagine being female or black/hispanic _and_ not having the top ten degree. I feel like without "MIT" or "Stanford" I have to be twice as smart and work twice as hard. It feels like it's exponential. If I were not white and male I'd have to work... what... sixteen times as hard?

Edit: HN won't let me comment on this thread any more, so I'll put my responses here:

Re: elite universities equalizing admissions: no, it doesn't matter. There are 300+ million people in America and 7+ billion on Earth. Your odds of getting "tapped" by one of these kingmakers is vanishingly small regardless of how smart you are or how hard you work. Tweaking the selection bias of a tiny choke point does not change the overall size of that gate.

Re: the thread in general: whenever these kinds of threads come up, I find myself disagreeing with both the PC police and the hordes of right-wingers that materialize out of the ether. I really say a pox on both their houses. The wingers are hopelessly naive about the realities of discrimination. The PC police sort of have their hearts in the right place, but the problem is that PC stuff addresses the wrong causes. Women don't find it uncomfortable to work in tech because of phrases like "man up" or "hey guys." They find themselves excluded for more subtile reasons of cliquishness and in-group selection. These cliquish mechanisms are the same ones that give rise to top ten university bias, racial bias, cultural bias, etc. It's a microcosmic manifestation of what on the larger social stage is called the "old boy network." Playing language police is a lot easier than trying to _really_ break up the cliques. The latter is incredibly difficult, as humans are tribal and cliquish by nature.

Still unable to post. I'm not going to forcefully assert some kind of soft- banning since as far as I know I'm being fooled by randomness, but I have noticed that "you are posting too fast" tends to appear in a way that seems uncorrelated to how fast I'm actually posting. Maybe it's just a strange algorithm with weird edge case behaviors. But... I did want to post this:

[http://www.broadstreetreview.com/cross- cultural/Demise_of_An...](http://www.broadstreetreview.com/cross- cultural/Demise_of_Antioch_College)

It is highly relevant, as I think it illustrates how PC policing can lead to a kind of "Animal Farm" scenario. While the rhetoric might be all about diversity, the reality is that diversity rhetoric can be used as another mechanism for the real power clique to maintain its dominance.

<comment><USER22> _If you 're from, say, Kansas or Ohio you are less likely to attend one of them than if you're from California or Massachusetts._

While that might be true, there's also a population density issue. CA, NY, and MA have large urban populations, so more students are likely to attend those elite colleges.

That said, I know for a fact that admissions officers and student volunteers from these schools literally spend months driving around the country to recruit prospective students from traditionally underrepresented states. They are well aware of this perception of elitism and want to combat it. One of my good friends from MIT was from Montana. (Yeah, anecdotes != data, but this issue you mentioned is very legitimate and something that Top 10 universities are actively trying to address.)

<comment><USER23> I find your optimism surprising: [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/29/opinion/elite-colleges- are...](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/29/opinion/elite-colleges-are-as- foreign-as-mars.html). The evidence is still there that underprivileged students don't go to elite colleges at the rates that they could qualify or afford them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm going to say one last thing and then move on with my life. It seems that most of the dissent revolves around asking that debates about when these things are pointed out be kept private.

So, I got almost no work done today, and I'm all sorts of grouchy and irritable because of this discussion. I probably didn't convince anyone, and no one convinced me. So what did this debate accomplish? Who feels better now? All HS wants to do is keep this sort of nonsense from happening. Person A says something, Person B objects, Person A either apologizes or doesn't, and they move on. If they really need to discuss, they don't bring in People C through Z and ruin their days and productivity as well. Whichever side you're on, that seems like a pretty good idea to me.

Furthermore, we all make innocuous comments that are ignorant of another group's situation. When someone asks me about my wife, I don't flip out and call them a homophobe for assuming I'm straight. But if they fight me when I point it out and refuse to acknowledge the fact that maybe they could stand to broaden their experience, I start to wonder why they're fighting me so much and what prejudices they're hiding.

These rules work in Hacker School. They work because they're lightweight and no one feels like a terrible person for breaking them. If other communities are organically adopting them because the structure has been successful, I don't understand why you'd fight it so much.

</comment><comment><USER24> I think Hacker School's own words about why they no longer give feedback is a great example of what happens when one hyper analyzes the context and connotation of everything a person says and does.

[https://www.hackerschool.com/feedback](https://www.hackerschool.com/feedback)

Eventually, everyone stops communicating and just says nothing to avoid the possibility of saying the wrong thing.

<comment><USER25> I think it merely emphasizes that doing something "right" is hard and that sometimes over promising leads to less-than-ideal interactions for two parties at once. The page you links to essentially says, "we didn't like doing it and people didn't like receiving it." There is nothing wrong with wanting to give quality feedback rather than a hasty response that communicates dismissal.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> "First, we want marginalized people to feel welcome, not like they have to defend their presence."

I believe this is wrong. Catering to marginalized people do not make those people less marginalized. In fact, it can make situation worse: [http://www.amazon.com/Mismatch-Affirmative-Students- Intended...](http://www.amazon.com/Mismatch-Affirmative-Students-Intended- Universities/dp/0465029965)

I think that one should provide insistence on some important criteria evaluation instead of banning something outright.

This is from basic psychology - provide positive idea to focus on.

</comment><comment><USER27> I thought the significant absence of "age-ism" in the lists of biases to be a somewhat unsubtle "-ism." Because, you know old white men can't be the victim of bias, they're the enemy.

</comment><comment> j-m Good God, this is why I changed my OkCupid profile to omit the fact that I work at a tech startup.

A bit dishonest, to be sure, but I just want to have a chance to demonstrate in person that I'm not the kind of insensitive, entitled dickbag that makes comments like the ones in this thread.

Downvote away, guys, because hey, I'm engaging in some SHAMING here. Frankly, you _should_ be ashamed of yourselves.

<comment><USER28> > I just want to have a chance to demonstrate in person that I'm not the kind > of insensitive, entitled dickbag

You demonstrated the exact opposite just now.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Seems to me that if you say something racist/sexist/homophobic/transphobic/etc, then there are a couple possibilities.

Either (a) you meant it or (b) you didn't mean it. If (b), a gentle nudge from a Hacker School pal is good, in the same sense of a friend telling me my fly is open. If (a), well, fuck you.

<comment><USER10> Or (c) what the other person claims to be racist/sexist/homophobic/transphobic/etc. isn't, at all, and this is simply the other person's way of "Well, actually."'ing you, except not even pedantically, but completely baselessly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> This is an impossible rule to enforce, even lightly, when large portions of the population don't even recognize that those classes of prejudice exist, _especially_ within them or their friends, their family (except their grandparents, which I hear about a lot), their class, their culture, or even their country.

As everybody knows on the internet: _The real bigotry is pointing out bigotry._

A real solution is to have an opinion as an organization about specific classes of offense, and a process to deal with them. Not saying what an "-ism" is seems like the opposite of that plan. Instead of creating a minefield, build a path. Kick out anyone who doesn't follow it after having been warned.

Will you be reprimanded for saying something about Libertarians? If not, how about Democrats or Republicans? If not, how about war spending, religion, oil pipelines, or Social Security? Be specific about what the policy prohibits, and why the organization has drawn its particular line.

</comment><comment><USER31> Really, there has to be a rule about not debating what an "-ism" is?? This seems a little much for a coding seminar. How about "Don't be a Jerk" or nothing at all.

<comment><USER16> True, 'cause, after all, the _last_ thing jerks want is to spend an hour or so presenting arguments and evidences that they aren't _really_ jerks, after such as been pointed out to them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> It seems almost abusive to foster an environment wherein one can accuse another openly but that other cannot respond openly.

</comment><comment><USER33> I'm sorry, but I'm starting to get a bit sick of Hacker Schools constant whining about rules.

If you want to encourage a specific culture you do this by starting with a small set of people who have this culture in their bones, then growing _slowly_ and assimilating more people into that culture, addressing deviations _swiftly_ and letting people get back to their work afterwards, without skipping a beat.

Not by writing manuals, and then stressing everyone with looooong, reaaaaally long and exhausting "we need to talk" style posts, where we hold hands, talk about how it's so difficult to open your mouth and say something that's not offensive, and how we're far from perfect, and in fact, we're all sinners.

It's not that the intent is wrong. But this way of going about it is _so extremely taxing_ on everybody, creating an atmosphere where everything people say is judged on the "-isms" scale.

It means when you talk, you're terrified of what you're saying.

When you listen, you listen for someone to say something so you can point your finger at them.

<comment><USER30> What's the difference between your proposal and a policy of starting as a closely knit monoculture, and only accepting people that share that culture? Isn't that exactly what you should be trying to avoid?

<comment><USER33> No, why would this be something to try to avoid? Sexism and racism _is_ a kind of cultural trait, I hope you realize that.

A culture may be selective on very different criteria. It can _easily_ be blind to gender, race, age, religion, nation and many more, yet have certain very specific values. And letting people in who have the opposite values are toxic to that culture.

You can't have a culture that's "open to everything". It means you have no culture, you just adopt the zeitgeist unmodified. Everything goes. If this was the goal, this thread wouldn't exist.

<comment><USER16> I'm sorry, I don't understand your comment.

Are you trying to say that the field of technology development in general or programming specifically would be toxicly harmed if certain groups of people, identified by "gender, race, age, religion, nation and many more", are allowed in to it? Or are you trying to say that objecting to people attacking others on the basis of gender, race, age, religion, nationality, etc., would be toxic to the culture of the field?

<comment><USER33> Neither. I'm not sure how I can help you, maybe try reading it slower.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Mostly unrelated, but I wanted to say that I really enjoyed Kaptur's analysis of Python's import statement during this year's Pycon:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aS5kXzbsLLQ](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aS5kXzbsLLQ)

</comment><comment><USER10> The right to accuse someone without giving the accused the right to self defense is most certainly not a subtle -ism.

It's fascism.</comment>


Watch Documentaries Online [video] - <AUTHOR> http://www.cultureunplugged.com/documentaries/watch-online/filmedia/films.php#view=thumb&page=1 <comment><USER2> "Poverty & Oppression", "Leadership & Transformation", "Equality & Fair- share"? These titles are as political as they can be! "Documentary" seems to be a much too neutral term for the contents provided!</comment>


Bracketed paste mode - <AUTHOR> http://cirw.in/blog/bracketed-paste <comment><USER2> Does this work otuside the terminal in interefaces like browser windows? I could imagine a case where it makes sense for security purposes to not allow pasting.</comment>


135 new currencies at Stripe - <AUTHOR> https://stripe.com/blog/new-currencies <comment><USER2> Holy shamoly! This is incredible! I'm actually checking to make sure it's not Apr 1. I'm beyond-amazed at the sheer breadth of this list. I mean, PayPal itself only supports 20-odd currencies, I think.

I mean, the Brazilian Real? Literally almost _no_ payment processors support that. And believe me, I've looked for them.

This is amazing news.

(As a side question, if anybody from Stripe is listening here: how exactly is this done -- via partnerships with local banks, or via dynamic currency conversion? I ask because, in the case of DCC, you will find that there are big problems involved with Brazil specifically, and many legitimate transactions will be refused. Brazil is a very special case, and calling the BRL a supported currency could mean very many different things.)

<comment><USER3> Well PayFlow says it supports 190 markets (does that mean currencies?)

[https://www.paypal.com/webapps/mpp/payflow- faq](https://www.paypal.com/webapps/mpp/payflow-faq)

<comment><USER4> They list the currencies at the end of that page; there are only 22 there.

<comment><USER5> PayPal lets you keep the money in the currency you charged. Doesn't seem like Stripe allows this, and insists on the 2% conversion fee.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> To Stripe employees:

So let me get this straight - a US based company can accept UZS (Uzbek Sum) payments from clients in Uzbekistan and Stripe will convert the UZS funds into USD?

I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS!!!

What are the strings attached? Any limitations?

I mean Uzbekistan has one of the most messed up economies in the world. Only here a used car costs more than a new car (I am not kidding) and Uzbekistan practically has non-existent conversion. People usually use black market to convert UZS to USD.

Thus, I cannot believe you pulled it off. And if you did do it, who do I talk to at Stripe to find out the details and rates?

<comment><USER7> While Uzbekistan is a contender for "most messed up economies in the world", Venezuela, Argentina and Zimbawe, for example will disagree with you :)

In Argentina used cars cost more than new ones as well, because new ones are often "vaporware" and take months to actually deliver. Both Venezuela and Argentina use the black market too (Venezuela being far worse than Argentina)

I see the same happens in Uzbekistan :) :

[http://www.eurasianet.org/node/67469](http://www.eurasianet.org/node/67469)

Edit: see rafaelm's comment about Venezuela

[https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=rafaelm](https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=rafaelm)

I live in Uruguay but we have to deal with Argentina's problems (next-door neighbour and 3rd biggest trade partner), and Venezuela is an important trade partner, so we're very aware of their problems.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I noticed the example uses "cny" in lower case. ISO currency codes are always uppercase. I imagine the API is case insensitive then. Which may pose a problem for the poor fellow who considers GBP the pound but GBp the pence. That is an established convention on some systems (e.g. Bloomberg, I think).

<comment><USER4> Interesting point. You're right; the currency param is case-insensitive. (And with regard to GBP vs GBp, our amounts are always denominated in the smallest unit of the currency.)

<comment><USER8> Wait, so if I tell you 100 GBp, is that closer to 100 dollars or 1 dollar? Is "gbp" pence or pounds for you? The "smallest unit" of some currencies may be ambiguous (e.g. 1 BTC vs. 1 Satoshi).

<comment><USER4> 100 GBP in the API =~ $1. (The motivation behind always using the smallest denomination is to dissuade people from performing floating point math.) The smallest unit is pretty clear in most "normal" currencies, but you're right that Bitcoin kinda throws things off...

<comment><USER8> How do users or front-end developers know how to display 1 "usd" as 0.01 USD but 1 "inr" as 1 INR? I haven't seen an API for getting the display factors.

<comment><USER4> Our users are generally picking prices themselves (rather than having to render arbitrary currency/amount pairs), and so they tend to be aware of these subtleties, but we perhaps should start recommending good currency display libraries. (Or even including something in the official Stripe libraries.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This is excellent timing I was literally just this past week looking into switching to a different processor to get access to the local currencies in a few potential markets.

Very excited.

</comment><comment><USER10> Today I learned that "Gibraltar Pound", "Falkland Pound" and "Saint Helenian Pound" each count as separate currencies.

<comment><USER11> Although they are convertible one for one with the Pound Sterling. It's the same with the Isle of Mans currency the Manx pound.

This is because these are British dependencies or have a special relationship with the UK but at the same time are independent.

<comment><USER12> Note though that those pounds (I have a 5 Jersey Pound bill somewhere) are not legal tender in the UK [1].

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

<comment><USER13> Good luck defining legal tender in the UK; a lot of English retailers won't take Scottish notes.

<comment><USER10> Legal tender has a very specific definition that many people are not clear about; Scottish notes are _not_ legal tender, _not even in Scotland_ [0]. Although, they are convertible with English notes.

(IANAL, this is my lay understanding and is provided for entertainment only and should not be taken as legal advice, etc:)

Legal tender means you cannot claim a debt remains unpaid if you were offered repayment in the form of legal tender. So if I owe you £1000, you could in principle refuse to accept Scottish notes if you chose to and maintain that the debt stands (although that would be pretty crap of you, and you must accept the English notes after I've changed them at the bank).

Retailers are allowed to accept pebbles in exchange for goods if they want, and would normally accept Scottish notes on this same basis (they want your business). I believe they could even refuse to accept legal tender: a retail transaction is considered to be making a contract rather than repaying a debt and therefore has little to do with legal tender (see also: 'invitation to treat').

I also suggest that retailers in London accept Scottish notes almost without exception.

[0][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_tender#United_Kingdom](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_tender#United_Kingdom)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Where are the currency codes? I couldn't find a list on [https://support.stripe.com/questions/in-which-currencies- can...](https://support.stripe.com/questions/in-which-currencies-can-i-charge- my-customers)

In either case, this is really awesome. What sets this apart from Stripe's competitors, is that those companies (or at least Braintree) require you to set up a different account for each currency, which is a huge pain in the ass. Or at least this was the case last time I checked.

<comment><USER4> We use the standard ISO 4217 codes ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_4217](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_4217)). But we should probably include them explicitly on that list. Willfix.

<comment><USER15> Do you support marketplace models (internationally)?

<comment><USER16> Hey, yep! Stripe Connect works in all our live and beta countries: [https://stripe.com/connect](https://stripe.com/connect).

Our direct payouts product ([https://stripe.com/blog/send-payouts-with- stripe](https://stripe.com/blog/send-payouts-with-stripe)) is currently US- only, but we're working on expanding it.

<comment><USER17> ETA on payouts in Canada?

<comment><USER18> (I work at Stripe). No ETA yet, but we're actively working on it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Are Stripe going to expand any further into Europe in the near future?

I've integrated with Stripe several times now for US-based clients and am getting severely jealous!

<comment><USER4> What countries would you like to see supported? (You can sign up in a number of European countries today: [https://stripe.com/global.](https://stripe.com/global.))

<comment><USER19> For myself, Poland. I've also had clients in Italy and the Czech Republic make similar noises (although, I must confess, I know comparatively little about their local alternatives).

<comment><USER20> +1 for Poland (and the rest of Central Europe! Remove the obstacles - you'll be first from the West there instead of competing with others elsewhere in Europe(PayPal, etc.)

<comment><USER21> Not really: PayPal is there and so is SaaSy/FastSpring. (I'm currently using FastSpring from Czech Republic and would love to have the Stripe option.)

<comment><USER20> PayPal didnt really get much traction in PL. Never heard about FastSpring. There's a local alternative PayU, which is the most used option for payment integration.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Combined with Stripe Connect, this is great for marketplaces.

I did a test charge and was pleasantly surprised to find that Stripe's "market rate" is really the mid market rate and not something else. PayPal's spread is something like 2.5% and then there is sometimes (always?) a 1% cross-border transaction fee, so Stripe's flat 2% fee is looking pretty good.

</comment><comment><USER23> A slap in the face to Australian users who've been waiting patiently for half a year to use USD and still can't.

<comment><USER4> (I work at Stripe.) This limitation is a large part of why we've kept Stripe in beta in Australia. We figured it's worth allowing the people who find the current product useful to do so now, but we fully agree that not being able to charge in USD is a major limitation. We're working on it as fast as we can. Unfortunately, it's not entirely in our control.

<comment><USER23> I don't understand how this is the case when younger competitors like Braintree and Pin are able to offer it.

<comment><USER24> Both have been up and running in Australia longer than us, actually. And we want to launch multicurrency support in Australia properly: as a default part of every Stripe account with no paperwork. We could probably get a half-baked version out the door faster, but I don't think that's fair to our Australian users either.

<comment><USER25> It's seeing answers like this that make me choose products.

Nicely done.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Can the merchants keep the currency that they get paid in and elect to convert it at their choosing, or does it get immediately converted to whatever their home currency is?

<comment><USER18> Stripe will immediately convert the currency to the user's local currency.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Still waiting for Stripe support in Denmark. I'm getting seriously tired of having to deal with the old and rusty payment provider landscape here.

<comment><USER28> The currency seems supported - "Danish Krone" is listed. Is there something else that is missing? (genuinly curious)

<comment><USER29> As he said: Support _in_ Denmark. Stripe "only" supports these countries: [https://stripe.com/global](https://stripe.com/global)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> No crypto currencies yet...

<comment><USER31> To a certain extent, doesn't this weaken the case for Bitcoin?

One of Bitcoin's big selling points is "seamless international commerce". If a company (ie, Stripe) makes it painless to let customers pay in whatever currency they have, doesn't that advantage for Bitcoin go away?

<comment><USER32> Bitcoin has different selling points, one of them is independence of Stripe, PayPal and other intermediaries that are either too costly for some, or disallow certain transactions, or cause chargebacks, or not allowed in your country.

Another selling point is that BTC you can own while USD/EUR/RUR/CNY you cannot. Fiat currencies are always under control of the banking system and ultimately at the mercy of the central banks. "Bail outs", "bail ins", "QE", "haircuts", "freezing accounts" etc. are all effects of not being able to hold your own money. You can hold physical gold, but it's not portable or easily divisible. Bitcoin allows holding any amount of wealth, be it $1 or $1000000 even inside your brain. It's much easier to meddle with your savings in USD/EUR than in Bitcoin.

<comment><USER33> > You can hold physical gold, but it's not portable

Depends how rich you are. UK median annual income works out about 1 kg of gold, which is perfectly portable.

(Of course, the authorities might regard you with suspicion for carrying that much gold, but that's another issue.)

<comment><USER34> If everyone tried to convert their savings into gold, gold would be quite a bit more expensive (and thus lighter).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I guess that definitively answers my previous question[1] about whether we can charge in US dollars or Euros as a UK business, then. :-)

Quick but obvious follow-ups:

1\. How do we look up the currency conversion rates that were applied for each charge? There are various hints on the Stripe page about these new currencies[2] but looking at the corresponding API documentation either I'm missing something or it hasn't been updated yet.

2\. Are there any plans to support payment _methods_ beyond the existing card schemes, at least in countries where those cards might not be the preferred form of payment? (For example, there are various European national card schemes like Carte Bleue in France, and in China there is the UnionPay system.)

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7181446](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7181446)

[2] [https://stripe.com/blog/new-currencies](https://stripe.com/blog/new- currencies)

<comment><USER36> 1\. The currency conversion rates can be checked by retrieving the charge's balance transaction via [https://stripe.com/docs/api#retrieve_balance_transaction](https://stripe.com/docs/api#retrieve_balance_transaction)

2\. We are working on supporting different payment methods, but have no immediate ETA on when these will be available.

<comment><USER35> _The currency conversion rates can be checked by retrieving the charge 's balance transaction_

Sorry, I'm definitely missing something then. Where in the response to that request does it show the conversion rate? I only see the amount, currency and fee information, which doesn't seem to be any different to what looking up the original charge already told me.

<comment><USER36> Please let me know if this helps: [https://gist.github.com/thairu/1bb35222aefd6e27aa07](https://gist.github.com/thairu/1bb35222aefd6e27aa07)

<comment><USER35> Thanks for sharing that, it does make everything clear.

If it helps, I didn't see anything in the API documentation to suggest that the currency in the balance transaction (which is type of a Stripe record we don't understand and have never had to consider before) would be different to that of the charge. Checking the API Reference page as I write this, it currently refers to "pence" in the left-hand column when describing the amount and fees, even though the example in the right-hand column says "usd", and it gives no description at all for the currency field.

A quick clarification in those API docs, including an explicit mention that balance transactions are operating in terms of your pay-out currency where charges are in terms of your pay-in currency, might help a lot here. I imagine this, along with how to navigate from a charge to the corresponding balance transaction, will be FAQs for anyone implementing multiple currencies...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Incredible! What I value most is the simplicity. Stripe has delivered a massive feature with almost no friction. Bravo.

</comment><comment><USER38> Is Stripe ever going to support other payment methods?

Stripe has been in beta in the Netherlands for a while now, but with credit card only, choosing between Stripe and old school payment providers (which aren't half as bad as what is apparently is the case in the US) that support all of the most used payment methods, Stripe is really not an option.

Not unless I want to tell 80% of all clients to take their money elsewhere.

</comment><comment><USER39> Nice! Just starting to build my first app with Stripe so this couldn't have come at a better time.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I was just wondering, to the customer user would this cost more if the foreign currency was used or their local one given the exchange rate is sometimes very good (e.g paying in US dollars instead of the local currency)

<comment><USER40> Sometimes is the opposite. In Argentina, for example, it is better to pay in Pesos, because if I pay in dollars, I have to pay 1) the local bank conversion rate, and 2) the conversino rate at the end of the month, which may be higher.

<comment><USER41> plus retentions that might eventually be used to pay other taxes (or not)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> Wow!

Awesome. I see Naira. Phew! :)

So if I make my charge in Naira, how do you pay me in Naira considering Nigerian banks are yet to be supported. Of course same question apples to other non supported countries whose currencies are supported.

<comment><USER18> The multi-currency capabilities (including the ability to charge in Naira) are only available to businesses based in Europe and the UK with banks in Europe and the UK. We do plan to bring Stripe to more countries, including Nigeria.

<comment><USER18> _edit_ I wasn't able to edit the above comment, but I was referring to the _US_ and Europe above, not the UK and Europe.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> This is awesome. Its amazing it took so long for someone to actually make this a reality. Thanks for helping make the world flat stripe!

</comment><comment><USER44> Now if somebody could solve the recurring billing in foreign currencies issue (Indian Rupee in my case), we'd be in business.

<comment><USER43> What is the recurring billing problem?

<comment><USER44> Sorry, just getting back around to this. I think my comment was way too general.

I had a project recently that I was researching that wanted subscription/recurring payments done in Indian Rupees. Found that because of banking regulations and I believe other issues, this was not doable.

Basically, from what I found there wouldn't be a way to run a subscriptions based website out of the US targeting India and Indian Rupee as the currency.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> Thats amazing news! Live stripe, so well done

</comment><comment><USER46> Wow! The complacent incumbents in Canada are about to get a can of whoop ass opened on them.

</comment><comment><USER47> Great feature, but now I have to write a new currency handler for all of our products.

</comment><comment><USER48> It's too bad the conversion between currencies adds an additional 2% fee.

</comment><comment><USER49> Brazilian Real \o</comment>


Signs of Liquid Water Found on Surface of Mars, Study Says - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/science/space/mars-life-liquid-water.html <comment><USER2> The first I have heard of Don Juan Pond ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Juan_Pond](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Juan_Pond)) although I wouldn't say it looks like a swimming pool ([http://www.lakescientist.com/wp- content/uploads/2014/04/don-...](http://www.lakescientist.com/wp- content/uploads/2014/04/don-juan-pond.jpg)).

Edit: Here is an article from brown that also draws parallels between Don Juan and Mars: [https://news.brown.edu/articles/2013/02/antarctica](https://news.brown.edu/articles/2013/02/antarctica)

<comment><USER3> Not so long ago it was stated frequently and with certainty that there was no liquid water on Mars. That there could be no liquid water on Mars. Which having read into the topic I thought was obviously non sense. Now every one is like there's water on mars, we've know for a while - you can see the flows. In fact we deliberately don't go to places likely to be wet for fear of cross contamination. I feel like I have been fed spin. Why don't other people see this and more importantly why aren't other people angry at being mislead? I feel like there is a consistent attempt to manipulate the truth before it is presented for public consumption, in many spheres of life. Who are these people that deem themselves entitled enough to decide what is known and what is unknown?

<comment><USER4> I don't think most people intentionally do this. It just makes someone look smart if they proclaim things confidently and so they do it. I try to be as honest as possible when communicating and I have caught myself sometimes stating things with more confidence than I had. I think it might just be part of how humans communicate...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Dumb question probably, but here goes:

Given the latest NASA news about water on Mars, as in, "flowing water on today's Mars," I am still trying to figure out how that would work.

If water boils at 79ºF when the atmospheric pressure is lowered to 0.5psi, what would it boil at given Mars' atmospheric pressure of 0.087psi?

How could Mars, which barely has an atmosphere, support liquid water? Why would not the water basically evaporate quickly if not boil off almost instantly?

<comment><USER6> Those numbers are for pure water. If water is mixed with something, salts (not just sodium salt, but salts of other elements as well), etc, that changes the properties of the resulting mixture.

The water on mars is probably "salty" mixture, maybe slush, but we don't really know what it's consisted of unless we have measurements / spectral analysis of the water mixture.

<comment> m-app Indeed. NASA showed the following slide, comparing the different temperatures: [http://snpy.in/NdFEnS](http://snpy.in/NdFEnS)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Official NASA announcement: [https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-confirms- evidence-th...](https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-confirms-evidence- that-liquid-water-flows-on-today-s-mars)

</comment><comment><USER8> _R.S.L.s are treated as special regions that NASA's current robotic explorers are barred from because the rovers were not thoroughly sterilized_

We're not going to sterilize our research equipment going to Mars and we're not going to search likely sites where we could find life because we don't want to contaminate them. And yet, looking for signs of life native to Mars (or even water which might support life) is the top reason we're there, judging by the headlines. Seems like someone in NASA needs to work out this conflict.

<comment><USER9> The article mentions how equipment that needs to be sterilized is baked to a very high temperature - but I wonder, can it not be sterilized with radiation, like we already do with food? All electronics on a rover are already radiation hardened, after all Curiosity has to work while having a chunk of plutonium strapped to its back. Is this not an option of some reason?

<comment><USER10> What happens when Curiosity contaminates the RSLs with radiation?

<comment><USER11> Humans did not invent radiation, you know. In fact we live in a remarkably well-shielded area. Certainly better shielded than the surface of Mars.

Besides, we're on another planet. If our payload was nothing but the nastiest chemical we could come up with, we still couldn't ship enough to Mars for it to matter.

No, the only payload that could conceivably be harmful is one that can self- replicate, which at this juncture means life. (Ask again in a hundred years.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Wouldn't it be bad if life forms are found in Mars, according to this? [http://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05/fermi- paradox.html](http://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05/fermi-paradox.html)

<comment><USER13> Speaking in Bayesian probability, it's bad if life forms found on Mars are more advanced than human, and good if it's much less advanced, or even very primitive (as it means the Great Filter might be at an earlier stage than us right now).

And it won't be the former case, for obvious reason.

<comment><USER14> Finding life on Mars would still change one of the polynomials of the Drake Equation, which would shift upward the overall expected probability for intelligent life in the cosmos, which is probably what leonardzen means.

But "we don't have enough data yet" still seems like a good answer to the Fermi Paradox anyway.

<comment><USER15> It would shift upward the overall expected probability for intelligent life at _our level_. However, since we have no evidence of life beyond our level of intelligence, it also increases the probability that civilizations will not survive long enough to become much more advanced than our civilization.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> > For the water to be liquid, it must be so salty that nothing could live > there, he said. "The short answer for habitability is it means nothing," he > said.

This dose of realism dampens my enthusiasm _slightly_ , but if we can find such clear signs of water via satellite image I think it is a great indication that water is more present at the surface than previously thought.

<comment><USER17> Although, just a couple of paragraphs down

>"If it was too salty, they would be flowing year round," Dr. Stillman said. "We might be in that Goldilocks zone."

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Solar system life may turn turn out t chemically similar. That is because it arose on one body, then cross-infected other other bodies by meteorite transfer over many millions of years.

Mars became geologically stable before Earth, so it could have been the earliest place for life. Then Martian meteors infected Earth.

<comment><USER19> How could a meteor have launched from Mars and reached Earth? It stretches my mind to imagine a situation where a meteor drops down, picks up life, then drops it off on the next planet. Are there records of meteoric impacts like that?

The best situation I can think of is a catastrophic volcanic explosion which launches a chunk of the planet into space, but that still sounds far-fetched to me.

<comment><USER20> Here's ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martian_meteorite](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martian_meteorite)) an example how. Asteroid impact.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I know that without water life would have never begun, but I still don't fully understand why it is necessary. It is still big discovery though, if life is that common I think we should be more careful during migration there, "Marsian" common cold could wipe out the entire human colony.

<comment><USER22> > I know that without water life would have never begun, but I still don't > fully understand why it is necessary.

"Life" is a bunch of chemical processes. A necessary prerequisite is therefore a solvent in which those chemical processes can occur, and which can move substances around, whether it's within a cell, an organism, or an environment.

Of all the potential solvents, solids can't move stuff around, and in gases, only volatile and highly concentrated substances would have a chance to react. It's also _too_ easy to move around in a gas: potential gas-based "life" would just...fall apart.

So the solvent and carrier being a liquid is also likely a prerequisite for life. It also has to stay a liquid at a relatively wide range of temperatures, and be abundant enough so that all the rare coincidences that might lead to life have a chance of happening and perpetuating.

Water is the only molecule that fits the bill, and happens to be the second most common molecule in the universe.

<comment><USER21> I am not good at chemistry, but liquid methane–ethane wouldn't fit the profile?

<comment><USER21> Actually I found comprehensive answer here if anyone is interested: [http://www.space.com/13639-alien-life-methane-habitable- zone...](http://www.space.com/13639-alien-life-methane-habitable-zone.html)

<comment><USER23> It doesn't really say "why". Water ionizes really conveniently so you can make it an acid OR a base (which is sorta unusual and it can talk to acidic or basic things), and is polar (its got a + and a - electrical side, more or less, so it can talk to + or - things), and has hydrogen bonds (so you get liquid lifestyle at gas temps)

For one why, look up amphoteric and zwitterion. Water has a super convenient pH range where about a ten millionth of pure water self ionizes aka ten to neg seventh or pH of 7, and all kinds of super convenient reactions occur above and below that pH and its really easy to manipulate ionization rates around that level without using too much. You don't need just a liquid but one where you can really screw around with something like amino acids by easily and cheaply changing the ionization rate of the liquid. So there are super convenient chemical reactions that depend on the ionization level of the liquid and its really easy to manipulate water. Conveniently water "just works" without having to add tons of other stuff to it.

Liquid methane isn't polar enough to really be useful when messing with ionic substances (table salt, etc). Whatever you use for a liquid, it needs to be polar so ionic stuff like salts can dissolve. It turns out that interesting chemistry doesn't happen with non-polar substances at normal temps; thats why when you bury stuff for a couple million years the only thing left behind undecayed (more or less) is non-polar hydrocarbons (crude oil). Ammonia is polar but has other issues.

The hydrogen bonds are important. Water should be a gas at room temp. Really, it should, looking at bonds and molecular weight and stuff. Yet the hydrogen bonds that form keep it liquid at room temp. So you get "gas speed" chemical reactions at "high" room temperature, yet its liquid to a ridiculously high temp.

Maybe some custom liquid silicone with some bolted on weirdness could make a useful artificial blood plasma or "stuff" for life to live in. How it would make it without the chemical plant being made first is mysterious.

<comment><USER20> Sometimes I wonder that not only it is not possible for other forms of life to exist that wouldn't use water, carbon and others, but that we have life just because it so happened coincidentally that our universe were created with the exact properties needed for the laws of physics to support life for a short while in some places.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> NASA's 'Mars Mystery Solved' Press Conference starts at 11:30 a.m. EDT.

Live TV: [http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/](http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/)

<comment><USER25> Seems like the the NASA TV Site is not loading for me here. [http://www.ustream.tv/NASAHDTV](http://www.ustream.tv/NASAHDTV) is working however.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> They've seen seep-like events in craters and canyons for over ten years. This study determines it to be water and not something else.

</comment><comment><USER26> They won't explore the water-flowing sites to: "minimize the chances of life inadvertently crossing the solar system."

So let's just spread life intentionally. It seems like that is one of our goals anyway -- not necessarily for governments (ie. NASA), but certainly for private space flight.

<comment><USER27> The aim is to settle the question of whether life exists on Mars, or ever has, before clouding the issue with modern contamination. I say modern just in case of various panspermia-type possibilities.

That doesn't preclude eventually spreading life to Mars. Even if living indigenous bacteria, or even plant life(!) were found - I think this is the most ambitious scenario now conceivable, the 'Mars mat' of fiction suviving in caves - it likely wouldn't be an argument to stop colonisation, though it might have bearing on arguments about terraforming.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I mean that's great news but didn't they announce this like 10 times before? Isn't there a meme about this, that NASA announced they found water on Mars like once a year?

<comment><USER18> Soem of the times were for ancient water. But they have shown evidence of recent water before too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Youtube Live link, works reliably: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDh4uK9PvJU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDh4uK9PvJU)

<comment><USER30> Another link/stream/mirror (for those using Ctrl+F) - [http://mars.nasa.gov/news/whatsnew/index.cfm?FuseAction=Show...](http://mars.nasa.gov/news/whatsnew/index.cfm?FuseAction=ShowNews&NewsID=1856)

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Does anyone else think that the form of life found on Mars would most likely be completely distinct from what is found here, down to the molecular and cell level?

<comment><USER32> Other than the possibility that the origins of life and potential life on Mars are the same, I think the same thing as you.

Imagine it is completely distinct, and doesn't have cells.

<comment><USER31> Yeah, I missed that caveat. I'm really excited to see what it might be and how it could potentially change our definition of what's living.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Would that mean that this water have a very high salt content since it is not frozen?

<comment><USER34> They said "briny water" so yes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> So where is the liquid water coming from ? and as per the article if the evidence suggests that water would have flowed just 'days' before, is it in the realm of possibility to detect actual water from MRO ?

<comment><USER16> FTA

> "There are two basic origins for the water: from above or from below," Dr. > McEwen said. The perchlorates could be acting like a sponge, absorbing > moisture out of the air... The other possibility is underground aquifers, > frozen solid during winter, melting during summer and seeping to the > surface.

Although "rain"/humidity is unlikely, the article also discusses why it can still be considered a possibility since we don't have good humidity measurements at the surface.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Maybe arsenic-based life too? This special announcement for merely "signs of" (instead of corfirmation) speaks of PR and the need to secure next years budget...

<comment><USER37> Currently the mainstream opinion is that the bacteria didn't use arsenate, but were very good at using the small amounts of phosphate that was still present in the experiment. And that the experimenters were not very good at cleaning all the phosphate out of the growth medium.

So the highly publicized 2010 study is now pretty much falsified.

[http://www.nature.com/news/arsenic-life-bacterium-prefers- ph...](http://www.nature.com/news/arsenic-life-bacterium-prefers-phosphorus- after-all-1.11520)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GFAJ-1#Criticism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GFAJ-1#Criticism)

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> I'm so confused. "Definitive signs"? Is this the Nasa announcement or something else? I thought it didn't start for another 15 minutes.

<comment><USER6> This is most likely the Nasa announcement. Remember folks! Science doesn't happen in a vacuum.

The scientific papers that outline this analysis was already available in astronomy circles - the Nasa event is the press conference letting the bigger community know.

It's not like it's a secret! All the measurements were already made by the Orbitor and is presumably analysed by researchers around the world prior to this unveiling.

<comment><USER39> "Science doesn't happen in a vacuum."

This is NASA we're talking about, right? ;)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> This is good news for Apple. Liquid Spill Indicators will generate revenue on Mars too!

</comment><comment><USER41> If there would be signs of oil the US would invade Mars tomorrow...

</comment><comment><USER42> This is just amazing!!

</comment><comment><USER43> This is amazing!!!

</comment><comment><USER44> Confirmed! Mars has liquid water.

</comment><comment><USER45> If there is water of any sort on Mars, ice, liquid, salty, whatever, I think finding life on Mars is inevitable. Life is very, very persistent, and niches will be filled.

Unfortunately it's also all but inevitable that we'll bring some with us, if we haven't already. Life is persistent, and ever-surprising.

<comment><USER46> Interesting. I read that in Jeff Goldblum's voice as well. Were there any missions that lifted off Mars and came back to Earth ?

<comment><USER47> No, we don't have the capability to land something on Mars with enough fuel for it to take off again.

<comment><USER48> We don't need to: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabatier_reaction#Manufacturin...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabatier_reaction#Manufacturing_propellant_on_Mars)

<comment><USER47> You're right! Even though I cited the Sabatier reaction to a coworker today when discussing the news, I didn't really think about it when answering. Also, for some reason I thought it wasn't yet a technical reality.

I guess also wrapped into my statement was the thought that to be able to launch something back it would have to be landed very well and require some very complex machinery to prepare for launch, given the success rates of just being able to land something on Mars without it breaking. I went with the first reason off the top of my head :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> Latest incarnation of the perennial headline... Best evidence yet of water on Mars! I've been enjoying these all my life. This and "Nuclear fusion created in a laboratory for the first time" headlines.

My favorite best-evidence-yet-of-water-on-Mars was that time the Phoenix robot scooped up an ice cube and took a picture of it.

<comment><USER50> This finding is about contemporary, liquid, water.

<comment><USER49> Not a new discovery in itself, either.

<comment><USER51> yes it is...?

<comment><USER36> You haven't been following these news very closely, do you?

2008: NASA Spacecraft Confirms Martian Water, Mission Extended [http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2008/jul/HQ_08_195_Phoenix_w...](http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2008/jul/HQ_08_195_Phoenix_water.html)

2009: Meteorite Impacts Expose Ice on Mars [http://science.nasa.gov/science- news/science-at-nasa/2009/24...](http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science- at-nasa/2009/24sep_martianice/)

2010: NASA Trapped Mars Rover Finds Evidence of Subsurface Water [http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2010-355](http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2010-355)

2011: Observations from NASA's Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter have revealed possible flowing water during the warmest months on Mars. [http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at- nasa/2011/04...](http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at- nasa/2011/04aug_marsflows/)

2013: Curiosity's SAM Instrument Finds Water and More in Surface Sample [http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/curiositys-sam- instrumen...](http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/curiositys-sam-instrument- finds-water-and-more-in-surface-sample/#.Vgn9dKZrjdQ)

2014: New Evidence for a Mars Water Reservoir [http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at- nasa/2014/19...](http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at- nasa/2014/19dec_marswater/)

<comment><USER52> First three links and fifth are all talking about ice, not liquid flowing water.

Fourth link isn't conclusive

 _These results are the closest scientists have come to finding evidence of liquid water on the planet 's surface today._

The last link summarises that liquid water has not been conclusively found yet, and it is the most recent:

 _While recent orbiter missions have confirmed the presence of subsurface ice, and melting ground-ice is believed to have formed some geomorphologic features on Mars, this study used meteorites of different ages to show that significant ground water-ice may have existed relatively intact over time.

Curiosity's observations in a lakebed, in an area called Mount Sharp, indicate Mars lost its water in a gradual process over a significant period of time._

So none of your links contradict what the person you are replying to said.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Gerald Jay Sussman: The Role of Programming - <AUTHOR> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2726904509434151616# <comment> pl-smith What is it he says about type theory near the end?</comment>


FT8 – Tipping Point for Ham Radio? - <AUTHOR> https://www.flexradio.com/ft8-tipping-point-for-ham-radio/?fbclid=IwAR3S90pJsOMx8xOc3W34IsAbw9x6skK48WHWrZ6ZTzW0UARl4snnIEQzqqQ <comment><USER2> This has one unspoken bonus feature: Not having to talk to an octogenarian about politics.

I know it sounds silly, but I suspect this is one of the huge features driving it's success. Amateur radio is plagued by bad actors and grumpy old men, along with the general age imbalance that makes it fairly unpleasant for young people and extremely unpleasant for anyone who sounds vaguely feminine...

<comment><USER3> As someone who went from nothing -> Amateur Extra when i was 23 (25 now) from a random spurt of inspiration to learn ham radio and then promptly did nothing with the license i agree with this.

I don't know exactly what i was expecting from getting the license but i will say that i didn't expect it to basically just be dominated by old conservative men who don't appreciate younger folk stepping in on their air space. I have yet to actually speak to anyone because i don't feel like there is anything i would want to say.

Part of me was excited to do things like decode ISS transmission or send digital packets around the world; but i wanted to ease into the higher cost HF equipment with a simple and cheap as chips baofeng UHF/VHF radio (i know, its garbage but i like i said i wanted to ease into the hobby) and when i discovered there was nothing to do but listen to old men rant i just shelved the radio.

I considered getting the bitX40 but never ended up doing it because i don't own the house i rent and putting an antenna up seems like a lot of work for a place i might move from soon. Admittedly maybe my problem was getting a baofeng UHF/VHF instead of something that i can plug into my computer and do digital modes with. But no one was really around to help me decide what to choose or give me insight into what i may want to do with my new AE powers.

<comment><USER4> Guys, no one is forcing you to listen to that stuff. Get off the voice bands, get on digital and you'll have a blast.

Here's a fun talk at Defcon from Balint Seeber, a ham who focuses on security, to get you in the right headspace. I attended this and the group of 6 of us that hung out afterwards with Balint was some of the most impressive people I've met at Defcon. One had built a bug sniffer. Another was intercepting satellite comms over Iraq. And Balint had a prototype SDR board he shared with us. So much fun.

[https://youtu.be/cHtHBqSZE4k](https://youtu.be/cHtHBqSZE4k)

Yes, there is a community of rag chewers who use the voice bands, especially lower HF, to keep in touch with friends. That's a tiny part of the hobby and community.

<comment><USER5> Exactly this.

Too many people get funneled into this trap by the ARRL who understandably push "get on the air today!" type articles which haven't been updated since the 80's and have people getting HF radios and hunting for repeaters on the 2M band. And the grumpy old guys who are pissed off it isn't the 80's (or 70's or 50's, few seem to be nostalgic for the 60's) anymore.

In the digital radio space its a lot more open, and just being able to work with radio has become pretty easy these days. I've got a bunch of SDRs now, and I agree the ADALM-PLUTO ($100) is the most cost effective way to get a nice xmit and receive SDR. The RSP2 from SDRPlay is another one that is good for the low bands through 2G (its like $200) then the next step up is the HackRF-1 ($300) or LimeSDR ($300) or LimeSDR Mini ($170). Above that you start getting into the Ettus/National USRP radios ($3000 and up).

Small WHSPR (whisper) radios like the article mentions are inexpensive to build and fun to play with as well, not a lot of chatting but tagging beacons and getting tagged. Or putting lightweight radios in a balloon and flying it around the world ([https://www.mchsarc.com/?page_id=13](https://www.mchsarc.com/?page_id=13))

<comment><USER6> I've searched this space looking for a decent RX/TX SDR that does a few watts. It's surprisingly hard. Seems like the 5 watt $30 HTs (that are SDR based) are extremely common, but as soon as you add any flexibility it's $1000s.

<comment><USER5> Those two constraints are easily separated. Radio and separate power amplifier. You will find that a really wide band power amp is expensive so a lot of people will have two to five PAs and an RF switch to select between them

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Interesting. But as a non-ham I find the article chock full of ham jargon which leaves me completely lost.

> What happened to take an esoteric mode designed for multi-hop E skip on VHF > and overnight turn it into a worldwide phenomenon across all bands from > 2200m through 70cm? In other words, what makes FT8 a killer app?

Indeed. What does make FT8 the killer app? Anyone care to break this down in layman's terms that an EE with basic radio knowledge can understand?

<comment><USER8> So, multi-hop E-skip is a way that the signal can propagate through the ionosphere. (E-layer skip: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sporadic_E_propagation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sporadic_E_propagation)). 2200m and 7cm are wavelengths. FT8 is a digital mode that can transmit a very restrictied amount of information -- basically your callsign and where you are. Exchanging this information is enough for a contact, or QSO. The debate is about whether it's still about communication when you can't really talk to people using FT8.

Edit: And contacts are basically how hams keep score. You used to send postcards to the people you'd talked to. Old hams have binders full of them.

<comment><USER7> Ah, I think I understand. I remember hearing the term, "shooting skip", which I understand as slang CB users used for talking to people past the horizon using the ionosphere to bounce the radio waves.

So if I understand correctly this is a game hams play where you try to skip your signal as far as possible and see if you get a ping?

If I am understand this properly, this successful exchange earns you a point and the old timers used post cards as score keeping, as once the ping was established they could each mail each other.

I assume FT8 is text only?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The FT8 developers have an amazingly strong knowledge of information theory as well as the many practical considerations of communication over an RF channel. Feature addition and bug fixing are slow because the developers don't believe in abstraction, and instead code as if the only option were a direct carryover of FORTRAN 77 conventions into C++. There's no longer a public repo but [https://sourceforge.net/p/wsjt/wsjtx/ci/master/tree/mainwind...](https://sourceforge.net/p/wsjt/wsjtx/ci/master/tree/mainwindow.cpp#l7380) is representative of current code.

</comment><comment><USER10> I've yet to use FT8, but it's wonderful seeing the ham community invest in newer protocols that incorporate things like forward error correction!

Many of the popular protocols, like PSK31 and AX.25 are getting long in the tooth. There's a beauty to their simplicity, but it leaves much to be desired.

Though SDR is a bit of a misnomer, extracting data out of an audio signal with DSP on commodity hardware is becoming the new way to do radio. It certainly will never replace analog voice in terms of simplicity and availability, but it's definitely breathing life into the hobby!

</comment><comment><USER11> "Is FT8 damaging amateur radio?"

It seems to be achieving the goal of global communications while making better use of limited spectrum to do so. I can't see that as being damaging as it really is an advancement in the state-of-the-art.

<comment><USER12> Exactly so, and moreover, during a solar minimum, when HF propagation is sub- par even in OK conditions. The weak-signal stuff is what got me interested in upgrading from tech to general, and then extra. Every new thing over the decades has been met with the same "this is killing ham radio" response.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I was listening to some CW last night on 40m while working on compiling WSJT-X 2.0. What struck me is that of the several QSOs they were slow enough for me to follow in my head, the total exchange of information was about the same as with an FT-8 contact. Oh, there were the "filler" items like name and QTH and "73 73 es CUL" and human error corrections, but the information payload in the CW QSOs was not significantly higher than an FT-8 QSO.

The typical CW QSO took about 5-10 minutes to complete. The FT-8 QSO (with essentially the same data payload) took one minute. If anything, FT-8 represents a more efficient way of exchanging information than CW. It's doubtful the "death" of ham radio will cone about at the bits of a more efficient mode than CW.

</comment><comment><USER4> JT65 is amazing for weak signals. So this is quite exciting. More data on the specs: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WSJT_(amateur_radio_software...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WSJT_\(amateur_radio_software\)#FT8)

</comment><comment><USER14> I feel like I'm missing some context here; why is FT8 controversial in the first place?

<comment><USER15> Global communication in amateur radio was previously only been possible using high power transmissions (which requires a full license).

FT8 makes global communication achievable for beginner amateur radio folk.

Some amateur radio practitioners think if you want global communications without learning radio theory, use your ISP or SIM provider.

<comment><USER16> But knowing "radio theory" isn't enough to have global SSB conversations on HF. You need a high antenna and reasonably high power, something which most of the population will never be able to have because of how harshly antennas are judged by others in the real estate market.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> But wait. What it actually is? Modulation? Radio? I just didn't get it from the article, so please explain (explanatory article is ok too).

<comment><USER18> Isochronous Twitter for ham radio except only 13 characters.

It's great!

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> As someone about to start working HF after a long time with a technician license I didn't use I think low power digital modes are a valuable addition. But there is something to be said for PSK31's conversational nature.

<comment><USER20> There's a variation of FT8, JS8CALL, that allows for text chat and data transmission.

[http://js8call.com](http://js8call.com)

Seems to me that, especially for EmComm, this could be a total game changer. Field radio with small antennas, low power requirements, and nearly worldwide reach.

<comment><USER21> I feel like in an emergency situation, voice would still be the preferred mode since ARES and other HF radio organizations are dispatched to fill in coverage gaps that would have been there otherwise. You also need a working computer with the latest software, a digital interface, and have practiced digital mode operating skills.

<comment><USER22> In an emergency situation I'll probably have my cell phone, too. What I'd love to have is an app (or packaged web app using WebAudio) that encodes/decodes PSK31 so I can plug in an audio cable from my iPhone to my Baofeng and start typing.

<comment><USER20> I agree. So, why not a JS8CALL app?

As I understand it, the _real_ go-to mode for EmComm is still CW. Which implies very experienced operators. At some point in the future, you'll have more operators experienced with digital modes than Morse code. So...

<comment><USER22> A CW app should also be doable....

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I think the FCC should remove the 300 baud limit for HF which is super arbitrary and limiting for real digital modes. That limit makes modes that are quite distant from modern day commercial digital modulations viable--FT8, JT65, and so on being examples.

They are primarily asynchronous MFSK detectors with tons of symbols--pretty weird design and a work around of the 300 baud limit. We can't get cool stuff like QAM, high rate PSK, and other nice modes working because of this arbitrary old rule.

<comment><USER24> Curious, what about the symbol rate limit limits you from using, say 8PSK or 16QAM? Is it that it also effectively limits channel bandwidth to something that isn't practical to transmit and/or receive with higher order modulation?

<comment><USER23> Super late but good question. I should ask some seasoned hams about this. I'm curious as well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I've got my technicians license, and have no idea what he's talking about. Can someone explain? Even the AARL page on this that's the top google hit doesn't jargon check itself at all: [http://www.arrl.org/news/ft8-mode-is-latest- bright-shiny-obj...](http://www.arrl.org/news/ft8-mode-is-latest-bright-shiny- object-in-amateur-radio-digital-world)

<comment><USER22> FT8 is a signal encoding mode. My impression is that it is much more robust and therefore also reduces the required skill, luck, etc. in making successful transmissions under unfavorable conditions.

"DX" is an abbreviation for "distance", generally used in the sense of "making long-distance contacts." A "QSO" is a successful contact between stations, and "working" refers to the process of making / attempting to make contacts.

"Multi-hop Es" refers to this atmospheric effect using the E region of the ionosphere: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sporadic_E_propagation](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sporadic_E_propagation)

"CW" (for "continuous wave") typically refers to the use of Morse code over a constant frequency wave that's just being turned on and off, which has historically been one of the most robust modes, although it requires skill in encoding/decoding Morse by hand.

"73" means "best regards" or similar; it's from very old telegraphy abbreviations.

<comment><USER25> Thank you so much!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I'm trying hard to figure out what these "modes" are. Even after watching a video[0] I'm still not sure what is really going on. Is the whole point just to acknowledge 'pings' from other transmitters? Seems kind of pointless but I assume I'm missing something....

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

<comment><USER27> "Modes" would be much better named as "protocols" (like "Ethernet" or "IP"). Originally it was rudimentary analog protocols: AM, FM, Morse/CW that were decoded with simple circuits where "mode" might have been more appropriate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> "Zero sunspots but working DX on FT8!" I don't get it. I thought sunspots killed radio communications?

<comment><USER29> > I thought sunspots killed radio communications?

They can. Sunspots can also _greatly_ enhance radio communications. Outside of amateur radio this effect is rarely appreciated; ordinary radio service users usually only become aware of sunspots when they interfere with communication. Amateurs, however, operate on many different frequencies, and they achieve communication under unusual, rapidly changing conditions. They often use solar activity to their advantage.

The story mentions "10m DX." This is ham speak for the 10 meter or 30 megahertz band (the high end of the 3-30 MHz "high frequency" or HF band, which is extremely low frequency by today's standards) long range (DX; multiple "hop", frequently international) communication. Using traditional modes the 10 meter band is presently "closed" to long distance communication, meaning you get nothing but static when you listen and no one detects your transmissions. The lack of solar activity is the reason the band is closed. When solar activity is high (lots of sunspots) one can use a low cost transceiver, a small antenna and an easily obtained license and reach people thousands of miles away.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Is there any way I can pick this up using an RTL-SDR dongle?

<comment><USER31> Yes. Make sure you are using direct sampling, attach a long wire, string it up. Use an audio pipe to pipe the audio from your SDR software into the WSJT-X software, which also lists the default frequencies for a given mode. Enjoy!

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> By FT8 do they mean FT8 Call?

<comment><USER33> FT8Call has been renamed to JS8Call (and also mentioned upthread).

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> But, what is FT8???? :(

</comment><comment><USER34> So is FT8 is to ham radio as WebAssembly is to the internet?

<comment><USER35> From the balance of comments on this article you'd think FT8 was saving ham radio from itself. /death of ham radio predicted, film at 11

<comment><USER36> It's been dying for about 30 years I understand. Kenwood, Yaesu and Icom all went bankrupt 20 year ago. Home owners associations stopped all antennas being erected and power lines and ADSL finished the charred smouldering remains off.

Now I'm going to lock myself in the basement with my guns and cans of beans.</comment></comment></comment>


Why it's dangerous to liken DNA to computer code - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/21/why-its-dangerous-to-liken-dna-to-computer-code <comment><USER2> Articles like these ultimately say nothing new either. It points to the uncertainty in the implications of genemoddings future where essentially the stakes are higher and often so far less reversible than digital debugging. Okayyy, but the average folk would take this less as a warning and more of an endorsement towards an idea of a bioethical imperative to slow or obfuscate any progress imo(after all people buy into gmo skepticism and that's based in ignorance to basic biology).</comment>


Has a company ever rejected acceptance into Y Combinator - <AUTHOR>

I always love reading applications of companies that were rejected from YCombinator (Eg. Buffer). What are examples of companies that got accepted into Ycombinator, but for whatever reason decided to not enter the program? <comment><USER2> Yes; Sam Altman said so on EconTalk this week. Apparently it's only happened once.

</comment><comment><USER3> Both amarcus and ProblemFactory are incorrect - the link only lists companies that were rejected by YC and went on to do well. Furthermore, as recently as a few years ago the terms were less fixed - YC would call to make companies an offer (although it was stated that the offer would usually be 7%). Even further before that, it was possible to negotiate with YC. A rumor (completely unconfirmed) that I heard somewhere on HN is that Sam Altman was able to negotiate Paul Graham down.

I personally met one company that turned down YC. They've since went on to raise more than $1.5MM. They thought YC wanted too much equity.

<comment><USER4> Thanks for the clarification - I did not realise that companies are/were able to negotiate the offer.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> This link has a few examples: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7122999](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7122999)

<comment><USER4> The poster seemed to ask for companies that: 1. applied to YC, 2. were accepted, and 3. then turned down the offer.

But I'm not sure why that would ever happen - the terms and content of the YC program are published in detail, so it would be a waste of everyone's time to apply if a team is not planning to accept the offer.

<comment><USER6> Being able to say you got a YC offer is somewhat useful. It's some validation at least, even if you never use it to get a better offer.</comment></comment></comment>


TED Talk: The mind behind Linux - <AUTHOR> https://www.ted.com/talks/linus_torvalds_the_mind_behind_linux?language=en#t-889487 <comment><USER2> Previous:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11622965](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11622965)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11461113](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11461113) (5 comments)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11456863](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11456863)

</comment><comment><USER3> Can't watch it right now but I like the quote from the teaser:

"I am not a visionary, I'm an engineer," Torvalds says. "I'm perfectly happy with all the people who are walking around and just staring at the clouds ... but I'm looking at the ground, and I want to fix the pothole that's right in front of me before I fall in."

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, I also loved that part; During the talk he compares Edison to Tesla, and says: `Because if you actually compare the two, Tesla has kind of this mind grab these days, but who actually changed the world? Edison may not have been a nice person,[but] he did a lot of things`.

make sure to watch when you get the chance, he talks about his personality(both good and bad parts) and what made Linux/Git possible.</comment></comment>