When Mistakenly Put on an Email Chain, Should I Reply-All Asking to Be Removed? - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/02/technology/when-im-mistakenly-put-on-an-email-chain-should-i-hit-reply-all-asking-to-be-removed.html <comment><USER2> When I see people reply-all to someone who mistakenly sent to something like dl-employs-all get "Remove me from this!", as a BOFH I'd like to have HR consider it an official letter of resignation. Sadly they don't.

</comment><comment><USER3> In the event that I'm put on an email chain, I don't know who put me there or why, and I don't want to be on that chain, I'd probably do the same thing. Why not?

<comment><AUTHOR> _> Why not?_

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

<comment><USER3> Alright, looks like you (and this article) are right. Didn't know the context in which this was made.</comment></comment></comment>


Tesla short sellers lose $1B - <AUTHOR> https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/08/tesla-shares-to-pop-42-percent-as-model-3-profits-improve-with-musk-looking-to-china-analyst.html <comment><USER2> Can people in finance and analysts start using stagger charts[0], please? Making predictions and not keeping score of predictions is useless. That's exactly what tarot readers do.

In the left column the months (or years or days) you make the predictions _in_. Top months are the months you're making the predictions _for_. The trace (R) is the actual real value (forecast of January in January, i.e: you have the number).

So:

The forecast for October made in January is 22.

The forecast for October made in June is 13.

The forecast for October made in September is 42.

This way, we can track all forecasts and track errors. The chart has memory. The chart cuts through bullshit.

            J   F   M   A   M   J   J   A   S   O   N   D

      J     R   12  13  14  53  12  21  34  19  20  22  19
      F     -   R   14  13  51  10  20  30  17  22  24  15
      M     -   -   R   51  11  27  35  19  20  21  19  12
      A     -   -   -   R   55  17  20  32  18  21  28  19
      M     -   -   -   -   R   73  42  11  34  17  23  12
      J     -   -   -   -   -   R   61  21  67  13  22  82
      J     -   -   -   -   -   -   R   42  11  34  17  23
      A     -   -   -   -   -   -   -   R   42  11  34  17
      S     -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   R   42  11  34
      O     -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   R   42  11
      N     -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   R   12
      D     -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   R

[0]: _High Output Management_ \- Andrew Grove

<comment><USER3> > Making predictions and not keeping score of predictions is useless.

Perhaps but I think you may misunderstand how these things work. "Nomura Instinet advising clients that the electric car maker's shares could rally 42 percent over the next year." is a sales pitch for people to become clients of Nomura and trade stuff. They have no interest in any one keeping score of their predictions. It's like "England may win the FA cup, place your bets with Ladbrokes" \- not really about testability.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The market doesn't follow the news. The news follows the market. If it's on TV it's already too late.

<comment><USER5> Perhaps counterintuitively (in British English at least) the noun news is uncountable (e.g. referring to a mass rather than something that can be counted), and is singular in grammatical construction (so cannot be pluralised).

[https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british- grammar/unc...](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british- grammar/uncountable-nouns/news)

<comment><USER4> Thanks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The time to short was months ago, to be honest. Reversing the news is always a good strategy [1]

[1] unless it's news about Sears

<comment><USER4> If there's enough money believing in the company the stock price doesn't really matter. They will hold as long as they believe the company has a chance to pay out (far) in the future. It's less a publicly traded stock and more a long term investment.

<comment><USER7> > It's less a publicly traded stock and more a long term investment

I thought that was kind of the original point of stock.

<comment><USER4> The point is a lower barrier of entry because anyone can just buy your stock and therefore a larger pool of potential investors. The downside is that the mass of those investors (on average) are not as well informed as a few select big investors. This gave Tesla a great amount of money to work with as long as their star was shining but now it could backfire badly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Is this the "short burn of the century" that Musk predicted at the beginning of May? ([https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/992388944774938626](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/992388944774938626))

<comment><USER9> It's the beginnings of it. Keep an eye on the price of deep out of the money calls on TSLA between $340-$380 to see what the market is predicting as we get closer to the next earnings call.

<comment><USER10> We need to break $330~ on TSLA with power

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Reminds me of Bill Ackman's bet against Herbalife.

</comment><comment><USER12> It's still in the same downward channel

<comment><USER4> The company itself seems to be in a downward spiral getting hit from multiple sides. To me it's unclear if they'll make it.

<comment><USER9> Can you provide a citation? If they make their 5k/week production target by the end of this month (which it looks like they will), they're on their way to being cash flow positive, and also not needing another capital raise in the near term.

Challenges for sure, but "downward spiral"? Hyperbole.

<comment><USER13> I am not sure why you think it's likely they'll hit 5k/week by the end of the month, considering Musk has been promising that for the better part of a year now. I admittedly do not know enough about the financials to know if that will truly make them cash flow positive, but even if it does they still have to pay back over $1 billion in debt at the beginning of 2019.

Tesla is going to need to raise more money in less than a year (probably less than 6 months). If you truly don't believe that, I will happily take a bet.

<comment><USER9> Based on Musk's track record, he delivers. Late? Sure. But always delivers.

Disclaimer: TSLA investor with extremely high limit order set in order to prevent my shares from being lent to short sellers

<comment><USER14> How does high limit order prevents your shares from being lent out?

<comment><USER9> It ties the shares up as an open order.

[https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-putting-a-high- limit-s...](https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-putting-a-high-limit-sell- order-will-prevent-shorts-from-borrowing-your-shares)

<comment><USER14> This link does not provide evidence that it would prevent broker from lending out your shares. This "lock" is only placed internally in the broker's internal system, there is nothing preventing the broker from lending out your share anyway. If they can't get your shares back in time before your order triggers then they would just compensate you.

Where did you get this idea from, anyway?

<comment><USER9> I confirmed it with my broker. They answer any questions I might have pretty quickly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> maybe it's narrow minded, but for me, investing is all about giving a company mid- to longterm support so that they can expand their business. shorting is none of that. it doesn't create any value for society at large. if anything, it is, imv, close to professional gambling. but even gambling isn't this destructive. that's why i have zero empathy for those who lose money from shorting.

<comment><USER16> Purchasing common stock after an offering (I.e. on the open market) doesn't do anything to support a company, either. It's essentially just paper being traded back and forth.

<comment><USER17> But having the ability to liquidize their stake at almost any time makes it easier for investors to put money into the company, and therefore gets more investors on board.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Do not bet against Tesla unless you are a professional. Tesla has incredible PR and Finance departments with background proponents holding enough capital to help them through rough patches. Side note, their Q2 2013 is still one of my favorite Finance/PR plays in recent memory.

<comment><USER19> Agree with the conclusion, disagree with the reasoning.

In the end, good products and strategies win. Betting against Tesla is dumb because they've proven the doubters wrong about their products and strategies over and over again. They've stayed right on course with the ten-year plan they laid out ten years ago, and every product they've built has been loved by an overwhelming majority of its owners. Not many companies can say that, not even successful ones.

Short sellers need to tip their caps and recognize that Tesla understands what it's doing better than they do. The longer it takes them to realize this, the more money they're going to lose.

<comment><USER18> They have yet to prove any of the doubters wrong with regard to the model 3, sorry. Also, the stock is not traded on fundamentals as much as you or the rest of the public believes.

<comment><USER19> > They have yet to prove any of the doubters wrong with regard to the model 3, > sorry.

There will always be an unproven next step. The point is that in each example where we have a clear conclusion, the conclusion has been favorable for Tesla. My money is on the Model 3 continuing this trend.

> Also, the stock is not traded on fundamentals as much as you or the rest of > the public believes.

I never said (nor do I think) that the stock is traded on fundamentals.

<comment><USER18> > There will always be an unproven next step.

This makes no sense in a trading environment. The reason that shortsellers are hovering is because Tesla is trading at aggressive multiples with aggressive business goals they show signs of missing. I'd like to see your "clear conclusions" that the model 3 is succeeding.

> I never said (nor do I think) that the stock is traded on fundamentals.

Semantics at this point.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Dropcam: Another fire-and-forget camera system - <AUTHOR> http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/10/20/dropcam-another-fire-and-forget-camera-system/

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey guys, in order to make this post more hacker-ish, I'm going to answer any technical questions I can here. I used to be the Principal Engineer at Xobni, so while I'm not a YC alum I've been around these parts for a little while :)

<comment><USER2> What kind of video encoding software is on the device? Is it open source like ffmpeg (sans GPL components)?

<comment><AUTHOR> No, it's not open source. We use a custom H.264 encoder.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Scary that it's a subscription-based service. I was expecting a stand-alone IP webcam, like those from Axis. This seems to be something else.

<comment><AUTHOR> We take data privacy very seriously. The online service component is the key to customer adoption of network cameras, because it is the only way for a non- technical user to have a camera up and running in less than 30 seconds.</comment></comment>


What you get when you search for "Guitar Tuner" on Bing - <AUTHOR> http://www.bing.com/search?q=guitar+tuner

<comment><USER2> What exactly is the point the poster tries to make? That there are online guitar tuners? Or does he see different results than I do?

<comment><USER3> the guitar tuner is integrated into bing itself.

<comment><USER2> Not to me, as far as I can tell. Perhaps only for some localities, or it depends on something else?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I only get standard, typical search results.

Mobile Chrome, latest Android version.

</comment><comment><USER5> Neat. Or just use a (real) phone's dialtone, which is E.

<comment><USER6> Not necessarily. It depends on the installation and does, usually, contain 2 tones. For instance - [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precise_Tone_Plan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precise_Tone_Plan) \- none of two frequencies used in NA's dialtone is E.

<comment><USER5> Ah well it always worked for me... may have been a case of "close enough for rock'n roll" though.</comment></comment></comment>


Devonshire Research Group – Tesla Motors Part II [pdf] - <AUTHOR> http://devonshireresearch.com/research/Devonshire%20Research%20Group%20-%20Tesla%20Motors%20-%20TSLA%20-%20Public%20Release%20-%20Part%20II.pdf <comment><USER2> An interesting read! While I linked it too this is the original for HN consideration, just a heads up.</comment>


I've collected over 600 pitch decks - <AUTHOR> https://starthouse.xyz?ref=hn <comment><USER2> are these real decks? the quora one appears to be a course project. reddit also appears to be a marketing deck rather than VC pitch deck (still can be valuable but not quite the same)

</comment><comment><USER3> Nice work, maybe add the ability to link to a specific page, like [https://starthouse.xyz/facebook#4](https://starthouse.xyz/facebook#4)

There are already two comments here that could use the feature.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Addressing the issue of fake pitch decks:

I gathered the decks from a variety of sources on the web and trusted they were originals. Although interpretations of company pitch decks may be of value for some people. I'd rather this be a collection of original pitch decks.

If I had have known this would receive the interest it got, I would have spent more time vetting them before uploading. The vast majority of them are originals and come from demo days of accelerators. But going through them again, some of them do indeed look dubious and I've removed them. I'm working on adding sources/references to each of the decks as well some of the other great ideas people have had.

If anyone notices pitches that don't look to be originals please comment here and I'll take them down. Thanks :)

</comment><comment><USER4> It especially bothers me to find the same kind of post every X weeks. Compiling pitch decks, hundreds of pitch decks, use these pitch decks from successful companies. You can be one of them too! That's a lie, you can't.

Not only economic conditions, political environment and personal relationships matter, but we are simply selling the same idea to hundreds of thousands of entrepreneurs around the world. The boomers are determined to explain to us how successful they were and the steps they took to achieve their enormous fortune and success. What they forget to explain is how a large part of their success is based on the economic conditions created by their parents and mostly on fraud or dubious behavior.

We sell the idea that they can be Google or Facebook, that they can compete or create new markets. But this idea is false. They have capitalized on all economic sectors, all market verticals and captured 90% of the existing opportunities. And if they forget some of them, they can eventually buy it. They drown you before you're born.

The market is rigged, even if you find market-traction, you will fail to attract investors even with the right relationships (no luck for you syrian refugee). Even the idea is good and represent a jump in a deep tech space, you essentially will get nothing unless you come out from MIT, Stanford and so (No luck for you Italian engineer)

Your pitch deck doesn't matter to anyone. VCs are waiting for 90% of projects to sink without financing, for months to get better conditions or simply to keep the surviving companies. Something their parents would never have done.

</comment><comment><USER5> Will be great to know the source/reference of each deck. How did you get them, where did you get them ?

<comment><AUTHOR> Good idea, I can add the sources/references in. They were scattered around a lot of different websites

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> The issue with pitch decks is that they represent only the legible part of the fundraising process. The promise of a good pitch deck is that it gets you funded. However, this is far from the truth.

The truth is that the biggest early-ish rounds (pre Series B) were not closed because of the pitch deck, but despite of it.

Actually, the earlier the round the less important does the pitch deck become.

It's the illegible part, that so few talk about and that can't be shared that is the main driver. It's the social reality surrounding the founders and the round. It's the whisper and rumors inside the investor community, who makes the intro, the medium of the intro (phone or email) and many other small things.

</comment><comment><USER7> Related, I think it'd be interesting to see a compilation of projected revenue from pitches vs actual.

</comment><comment><USER8> Well, now it's time to train a GAN network on these to create new pitches from scratch.

<comment><USER9> AI generated AI startups. Why not?

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Excellent, now with sufficient training, an AI can learn to pitch itself to gain more resources.

<comment><USER11> Next HN post: notapitchdeck.com

<comment><USER12> This is honestly what I was hoping for

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> As a fun exercise once at YC Demo Day, I decided to categorize the information on each slide and then record the order the categories were presented. I then noted which presentations I found the most compelling. Sadly I can no longer find the notes, as they were on paper.

I remember the categories I came up with:

* Name of company

* Problem being solved

* Solution being offered

* Total Addressable Market

* Current revenue/signups/other hockey stick graph

* How much is being asked for/current investors

* Who is on the team/why they are most qualified

Most of the pitches went in the order above, with some minor variations. Some skipped some of the slides.

But what I remember is the the ones that seemed most notable and memorable were the ones that used a significantly different order.

<comment><USER14> YC also has a post for their seed deck template[1].

[1] - [https://blog.ycombinator.com/intro-to-the-yc-seed- deck/](https://blog.ycombinator.com/intro-to-the-yc-seed-deck/)

<comment><USER13> Wow funny. I did my analysis before this but I guess they've been using the template internally for a while.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> good resource. I wish the decks had some metadata:

1) A date as there's a fashion to these decks and what worked a few years ago might be all wrong today 2) Did they get funded from the deck? 3) revenue (or user count) at the time of the deck 4) Market Size 5) Founder's previous exit (or connection to Google/FB etc..) I know this is difficult, but some founders can get money on an envelope sketch because they made VCs wealthy in the past.

I realize this is difficult data to get, but it would make the decks much more informative.

</comment><comment><USER16> So I've always seen the word "deck" and never really understood what it meant. Turns out a "deck" is just a powerpoint? Why do people call them decks?

<comment><USER17> Physical slides were using transparencies or slides. A bunch of them stacked together would be like a deck of cards - a slide-deck.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> The demographics slide from Facebooks pitch deck in 2004 is pretty hilarious. I wonder if sean parker created this.

[https://starthouse.xyz/facebook](https://starthouse.xyz/facebook)

<comment><USER19> I feel dumb but I don't get it... do the first two pertain to the third's kegstand?

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Great work! Love it, nice website, huge library of useful resources, smooth presentation, easy to navigate, all bells and whistles, kudos, bookmarked, will use for sure. Thank you

<comment><USER21> How did you get the search to work?

<comment><AUTHOR> I used fuse.js - it's a fuzzy search javascript library which works pretty well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> The AirBnB one I thought was particularly good. Clean preso, no superfluous information, readable, addresses all the concerns, short and to the point.

The reddit one is the exact opposite in that regard, but it has cats.

<comment><USER23> >The reddit one is the exact opposite in that regard, but it has cats.

I came to comment about this, it seemed particularly bad. I can only imagine doing this if I wanted to send a message of:

"We don't really need you - we're not taking this seriously at all".

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> If these are real, I'm sure all those startup founders are thankful for having their phone numbers published in public...

</comment><comment><USER25> I want to see what this does when passed through some kind of Neural net...

</comment><comment><USER26> The pitch deck is only good if the concept, team, and opportunity are good. A pitch deck should not be hard to put together if you have those three things on your side. If you do not, no slick pitch deck will really help you.

<comment><AUTHOR> Not that I have first-hand experience at successfully pitching for huge money, but I completely agree. A lot of successful companies have average pitch decks but have great content on their side. One takeaway I've gotten from this side- project is that with pitch decks design doesn't matter but story-telling does.

<comment><USER26> The archive of pitch decks is really just post hoc confirmation of what were excellent, well-timed, and well-executed business plans. Imagine the thousands of great pitches that didn't end so well. I have seen many excellent teams with great pitches that failed for reasons entirely outside their control and reasonable ability to anticipate.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Should be enough to get a neural net to raise till round C or so.

</comment><comment><USER28> How can I be notified when this is back? I love it.

</comment><comment><USER29> Ideally these would be organized by stage, sector etc.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah absolutely, I'd like that too. I think year, amount raised, stage, sector and team size would be a good start

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Is there somewhere the source PDFs or PPTs can be found? I'd rather be able to browse the files than have to go to a website controlled by someone to page through.

<comment><AUTHOR> Understandable, it isn't available now but I could add the option to bulk download all files if people would be interested. Or I could email you the pdfs or share them on a Drive if you'd like?

<comment><USER31> I'd love to see this too - I could learn from this when offline / at slow interwebs places.. and it's the kind of bite sized learning that lends itself to short bursts like waiting in line and such.

<comment><AUTHOR> The thought didn't cross my mind when I was building it but come to think of it, it's actually something I'd like too. It would be nice to be able download them for traveling. I can implement it so

<comment><USER32> I'd love to see that feature also

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> maybe your search doesn't work, not sure...

</comment><comment><USER34> The Uber pitch deck is amusing, including the quote "profitable by design" (Uber is still not profitable 10 years later)

<comment><USER35> It's interesting, but there is a real difference between, has found product- market fit but unprofitable because trying to grow in "silicon valley style" and no product-market fit and might never make money.

To my mind, Uber chooses to lose money. They don't have to spend 700m a year advertising, and they could probably trim the fat in other areas as well (and have in the case of COVID--19),

Leaving COVID--19 alone for a second, the operating expenses have to be taken with a grain of salt, I would be very surprised if they HAVE to do a lot of those to keep the business from falling apart.

Ref: [https://news.crunchbase.com/news/understanding-uber-loses- mo...](https://news.crunchbase.com/news/understanding-uber-loses-money/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Cool idea, thanks!

</comment><comment><USER37> It's the funny that Facebook were pitching advertising to investors in 2004, and they didn't have any ads until 2007.

It's also interesting that there's no information on sources or anything to explain these pitch decks. I'm pretty sure the original would not start with " _Facebook 's original pitch deck_", so how much each pitch has been altered?

Also survivor-ship bias... these are all highly sucessful companies with amazing products. It would also be great to see how failed businesses still got funding, e.g; "Juicero" or "Theranos"...

[https://starthouse.xyz/facebook](https://starthouse.xyz/facebook)

[https://about.fb.com/news/2007/11/facebook-unveils- facebook-...](https://about.fb.com/news/2007/11/facebook-unveils-facebook- ads/)

<comment><USER38> Successful startups dont really need that good pitch decks or pitching in general, because the metrics speak for themselves. Would be certainly more interesting to see Juicero pitch deck.

<comment><USER39> For Theranos I guess it was roughly:

1) list of big names advising or on board of directors acquired through connections

2) total adressable market of blood tests

3) current cost and complexity - need full vial for each single test

4) promise of lower cost and complexity - just one drop of blood

5) at some point down the time line they likely have added DoD contract and Walgreens partnership

<comment><USER40> 6)Pre-orders (Governments in West Africa for Ebola, US military for Medvacs and Safeway)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Most of those pitch decks are "after the fact" fabrications, not the actual original decks. I'm afraid this resource is nearly useless, even if I admire how much work went into it.

<comment><USER42> Why do you suspect they're fake?

<comment><USER41> In a couple spots I know they are. In others there's foresight that the founders simply wouldn't have had. In some the tone is clearly 2 year business student etc... they are not real pitch decks. I've seen more than my share of real ones to know the difference.

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry man... I'm sure you have good reasons to question the validity of some of them and I don't doubt your sincerity. It was my understanding that they are all legitimate. I don't want to promote a 2nd year business student's work as an original pitch deck so I can look more closely into the provenance of problem slides if you could name these and I'll either redact them or adjust the title accordingly. Thanks for bringing this up :)

<comment><USER43> I just want to add my 2 cents in hope that it's helpful. I'm a co- founder/partner of a seed-stage VC fund and do keep track of the pitch decks we've seen as a partnership over the past two funds spanning six years.

Comparing these decks to the decks I have in our tracker (a dataset of similar size to yours), there's a lot of differences. Even if you only take the pitch decks of the _successful_ companies (most of which we didn't invest in), a lot of these decks look a lot more polished.

Here's what I think is going on: Some decks are undoubtably real seed pitch decks, some decks are demo day decks from accelerators, and a few of these decks (Facebook's, for example) are after-the-fact business school exercises from students.

So, I _do_ think most decks are real, but what's tripping up some people is how polished some of the decks are. True pitch decks used to get a seed round or into an accelerator aren't very polished because you're constantly changing the deck based on feedback over the span of 20-50 pitches. The truth is that many investors I know worry when they see a too-polished deck that everyone else has already seen the deal and passed :-P.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> And then displayed them in the worst way you could think of? Why does it instantly produce two-way scrolling? How do you even advance to the next slide? Why does Facebook's pitch deck have three pitch decks and an ad for the site I'm already on?

<comment><USER45> I don't get two-way scrolling here, and there's very obvious orange "First, previous, next, last" buttons under each slide.

Imagine being so entitled that you get this annoyed by something you were given for free and can close at any time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> No way to explore?

I had to search for "a" to have a kind of full list of the presentations.

Will be nice if there is some sort of categories, collections or tags.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah absolutely, I was thinking a filter by the funding round, year, team size and industry would be good. Any others? It has been a fun side project and I wasn't sure if people would be interested in it so I wanted to launch early and get some feedback before putting more time into it.

<comment><USER46> Might be too much to ask - but is it possible to add current status ( public / private / acquired / defunct ), funding source ( prominent VCs that picked them up ) or valuation ( highest / seed / other rounds )

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> Very nice - thank-you. Easy to use, great content.

<comment><AUTHOR> Glad you like it, thanks a million.

<comment><USER48> Thank you!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> Can somebody explain the images used to represent men and women on slide 16 of the Facebook pitch deck? [1]

[1] [https://starthouse.xyz/facebook](https://starthouse.xyz/facebook)

<comment><USER50> I believe it's the view you'd see under a toilet stall.

<comment><USER51> Women don't have feet?

<comment><USER52> We stand on the seat on public restrooms....or hover.

<comment><USER53> One of these sounds harder than the other but I keep changing my mind as to which...

<comment><USER54> In asian bathrooms that have "western style" toilets, sometimes there are signs telling people not to stand on the seat to use it as a squatting style toilet.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Am I in a VM? – The tale of a targeted Phish - <AUTHOR> https://labs.bromium.com/2016/05/25/am-i-in-a-vm-the-tale-of-a-targeted-phish/ <comment><USER2> _Office documents have been a favorite method of distribution for malware authors for several years._

Err, decades. Maybe not several, but at least a _couple_.</comment>


Ask HN: What can I do with 15 raspberry pi zero w's - <AUTHOR> I happen to live close to a Microcenter.  They happen to have the Raspberry Pi zero w for 5 dollars , so every weekend I walk to the store and buy a Raspberry pi zero w.  I have around 15 raspberry pi's and I am looking for an interesting project to do with them.   So far I have a few project running.  1.- Raspberry Pi zero W VPN server which I use to vpn from work into my home.  2.- I am hosting a full copy of wikipedia on a Raspberry Pi zero w and an external ssd drive.  http://wikipenguin.onthewifi.com , but I still have 13 more raspberry pi's that I can use for other projects.   Any ideas or suggestion on what I can do with them? <comment><USER2> You could make PiHole VPN: [https://github.com/pi-hole/pi- hole](https://github.com/pi-hole/pi-hole) [https://github.com/pivpn/pivpn](https://github.com/pivpn/pivpn)

For Movies: [https://github.com/Radarr/Radarr](https://github.com/Radarr/Radarr) [https://github.com/Jackett/Jackett](https://github.com/Jackett/Jackett)

For Scientific Research: [https://foldingathome.org](https://foldingathome.org) [https://boinc.bakerlab.org/](https://boinc.bakerlab.org/)

PS: I did create some project : [https://github.com/vs4vijay/SwissArmyPi](https://github.com/vs4vijay/SwissArmyPi)

<comment><AUTHOR> thank you these are awesome suggestions. Specially I think I will use 3 pies for the foldingathome.org. seems like this is a great use of these mini computers. Also the swissArmyPi looks great as a hacker pen testing device . Thank you so much

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> If you are interested in distributed systems/programming problems they are fun for that. I have setup 5-6 Pi's before and written different leader election methods and play with pulling their network cables etc. I also wrote a partially custom service discovery using etcd and tested it on them, again mostly for learning but it led to some production code later on. I've played with data consistency problems using them too. Also worked good for testing system recovery when I was writing code that did graceful recovery from failures, lot less at risk if you pull power from a Pi then a server to test the code. :)

Outside of that, you could connect them to some relays and do some electrical switching via the network etc. Or setup a few of them with the camera and do image classifications or just motion detection.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your suggestion. I was trying to run docker but docker does not run on the Raspberry pi zero w. I wanted to run etcd as a docker container but the zero w is not powerful enough or a good docker distribution does not exit. I can install etc using Ansible :) so I might try that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Run one as a home server, another as a media player, another as a Pi-Hole. Then, when you can't think of any, give them to coworkers, especially those with children, who can benefit from learning about the machines.</comment>


October 2009 browser stats: Firefox finally passes IE6 - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/11/october-2009-browser-stats-firefox-finally-passes-ie6.ars

<comment><USER2> Dup: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=920568>

Much discussion already there.</comment>


ASK HN: How to become security expert - <AUTHOR>

I would like to become an security expert.  Can someone point me to where and what forums/irc channels most security gurus hang around?  And any recommendation on great security books worth getting hold of?  Thank you. <comment><USER2> Assuming you're talking about network security (and if you're not the principles still apply), I would recommend nothing more than learning about what you want to secure first. Learn about networkring, the ins and out of networking. Where I went to school to even get into the network security course you HAD to get an associates in the general networking course. In that case, I'd look at the Cisco networking academy. (Http://cisco.netacad.net)

If it's software, the very same. Learn about the software you want to secure FIRST.

</comment><comment><USER3> Start by reading code. Then go read some security advisories. Then go back and read some more code.

Before you can do new work in computer security, you have to understand what's been done already... and the only good way to do that is by reading advisories and looking at the vulnerable code and how it got fixed until you say "oh, so THAT'S what a <insert vulnerability type here> looks like".</comment>


Xkcd: Trained a Neural Net - <AUTHOR> https://xkcd.com/2173/ <comment><USER2> The neural net that mowed my lawn only took 14 years to build and train.

<comment><USER3> And you will be tweaking it and investing in it for at least another 4 and even when you let it wild on the wide area network instead of just the local area net you will still be ssh'ing in to check up on it. That is fine, just don't do so as root.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Seriously, how do you handle that big amount of photos ?

</comment><comment><USER5> The best kind of correct</comment>


Show HN: Animated Tree in ClojureScript and WebGL - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1njeewGbKmc <comment><USER2> I really enjoy this. Keep the good work up~

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks! :)</comment></comment>


Show HN: Are you a Climber? Thrutched, Version 2 - <AUTHOR> http://www.thrutched.com/?v=2

<comment><USER2> I am a climber and thanks, I haven't heard of this before and would probably find this very useful.

edit: climbing comes up on HN every few months, we should start a mail list or figure out where everyone is and plan a trip or acquire gym partners.

</comment><comment><USER3> I'm a climber and I don't see this gaining traction against supertopo, 8a.nu or rockclimbing.com. No reason not to give it a shot though.

<comment><AUTHOR> Not trying to slay the giants yet, but I'll give it my best shot.

<comment><USER3> Rock on with your bad self! If you can differentiate with some kind of value not currently available or poorly implemented elsewhere you've got a shot.

Supertopo's the home of crusty legends, dirtbags, and the ocassional crusty legend who is also a dirtbag and a luddite. While the forums there frequently serve as THE source for up to the second info on what the hardman crowd is up to the signal to noise ratio is fucking abysmal. Clean that up and you've got something.

rc.com and mountainproject are basically identical in their strengths lie with an active younger community and good route databases. rc.com tries to be too many things to too many people though so the implementation is muddled, whereas mountain project looks like crap and gets maybe half the traffic but the route content is typically much better that rc's. Clean up RC's mess, harness their community and somehow figure out a way to get the same kind of quality content as mountain project, and again, you've got a shot.

8a is spraylord paradise and home of anyone who's ever dreamed of scoring that big chalk sponsorship. I'd leave well enough alone here.

Edit - BTW, given the domain name, you wouldn't happen to be hanging out with offwidth climbers would you?

<comment><AUTHOR> Appreciate the beta on climbing sites!

To be honest, I'm a relative newcomer to the climbing world. I've been at it for a year, and still haven't found a news site or forum that is as addictive as HN.

Re offwidth climbers -- Nope, not really. Do they have a reputation for thrutching?

<comment><USER3> "thrutching" may be the only term in the english language that sufficiently encapsulates the act of offwidth climbing, even when you're doing it correctly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I like it. There is definitely a need for this sort of information in the community.

For some reason markdown isn't working right with my first post. Specifically the embedded link:

<http://www.thrutched.com/freedom-of-the-hills>

<comment><USER4> Also it would be nice if there was room for opinions even when creating topics. I know your community page[1] says submissions should be factual and neutral. There are all sorts of things I wouldn't post based on that. For instance my favorite summer alpine climbs in the Rockies... Since it would be neither factual or neutral.

[1] <http://www.thrutched.com/community>

<comment><AUTHOR> That's a good point.

I wrote that when I was working on the "every topic is a wiki page" feature. I was in the mindset of how wikipedia operates, but I see your point that it would exclude a lot of interesting posts. Removing it for now :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> New design, clearer focus, bug squishing, and lots more! Thanks to all who offered advice on the last post: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1915280>

</comment><comment><USER5> I'm a climber, and this is pretty sweet! You might want a real logo at some point.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks! I'm not a designer, but will definitely think about a better logo in the future.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> How about a link to dismiss the about box? Once I've seen it, it just takes up space.

Excellent to see you iterating so quickly - are you split testing any of your design elements?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks Matt, I just made a changed so logged in users don't see the about box.

Nope, haven't been doing any sort of split testing -- not enough traffic!

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Well defined focus, crystal clear. nice design.

I guess this can be duplicated for any well defined community.</comment>


How Much Is An Idea Worth - <AUTHOR> http://www.productivitybits.com/how-much-is-an-idea-worth <comment><USER2> It is worth as much as the execution put behind it.</comment>


Becoming a Mozilla Technical Evangelist - <AUTHOR> http://rawkes.com/blog/2011/03/25/becoming-a-mozilla-technical-evangelist <comment><USER2> The font color and background used in this article makes for a difficult read.

<comment><USER3> Thanks for pointing that out; I'll bear it in mind when I do the redesign. :)</comment></comment>


Sidekick 4G preview - <AUTHOR> http://thisismynext.com/2011/04/15/sidekick-4g-preview/ <comment><USER2> Wasn't Danger (the makers of the Sidekick) bought by Microsoft and their product turned into the Kin?</comment>


Show HN: Mr Dict – A browser extension helps measure readings - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/panzhangwang/mrdict <comment><AUTHOR> Hi, HN!

It is my first browser extension app. It makes a little difference from some instant dictionary extensions. You just start read your story and mark new words, keep marking if another one pops up, and lookup for all in the end. Besides that, it tells you more data about your current reading.

Really excited to hear feedback from you all :)</comment>


A css game framework suitable for mobile phone h5 development - <AUTHOR> http://a-jie.github.io/Agile/ <comment><USER2> It looks good. Did I miss a collision detection demo?</comment>


Drivers claim Uber won't pay fees to launch forced arbitration cases - <AUTHOR> https://www.reuters.com/article/legal-us-otc-uber/forced-into-arbitration-12500-drivers-claim-uber-wont-pay-fees-to-launch-cases-idUSKBN1O52C6 <comment><USER2> Refusal to proceed with arbitration has been a problem.[1] Surprisingly, there's still litigation over whether this voids the arbitration clause. At the appellate level, several courts have ruled that it does.[2]

The 9th Circuit dealt with this in another case.[3] _" On the assumption that Brown's narrative is true, this case displays a dark side of our nation's policy in favor of arbitration. When a defendant in a judicial forum refuses to respond to a complaint that is properly filed and served, the court has the power to enter and enforce a default judgment. Arbitration works differently. The American Arbitration Association could not compel Dillard's to pay its share of the filing fee, and in the absence of the fee it could not proceed. Brown had no choice but to come to court. Many people in Brown's position would simply have given up. Because she did not, we have the occasion to make clear that when an employer enters into an agreement requiring its employees to arbitrate, it must participate in the process or lose its right to arbitrate."_

[1] [https://www.bdlfirm.com/arbitration-the-consequences-of-a- pa...](https://www.bdlfirm.com/arbitration-the-consequences-of-a-partys- refusal-to-cooperate/)

[2] [https://www.arbitrationnation.com/tag/roach-v-bm- motoring/](https://www.arbitrationnation.com/tag/roach-v-bm-motoring/)

[3] [https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th- circuit/1105777.html](https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1105777.html)

<comment><USER3> I would love to see it void forced arbitration.

<comment><USER2> That's up to Congress. Federal Arbitration Act.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> So they require you to do forced arbitration, then just refuse to act on it (or act very slowly).

From a business stand point, of course they would. Most of these cases will at best require time and money to sort out, and at worse cost them even more money (compensating a driver for damages or lost wages). So why wouldn't they let these get tied up in bureaucracy until the drivers decide it's not worth the effort?

Force arbitration is bullshit and anti-consumer.

<comment><USER5> I just bought a car and at the VERY last moment they brought up forced arbitration...

<comment><USER6> Which brand? I will be in the market for a new car soon, and avoiding that brand will speed the decision-making process.

<comment><USER7> Of all the competitive parameters this is one you think it's worth considering?

Voting with your wallet works if a majority of people understand the issue and vote the same way. Here you're just creating problems for yourself.

Not that the enthusiasm isn't good :)

<comment><USER6> _Of all the competitive parameters this is one you think it 's worth considering?_

No, but it's one parameter worth considering. I never stated that it was the only deciding factor.

Life is not binary.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Forced arbitration is a violation of human rights. Access to the courts should always be available. These clauses should join "sell yourself into slavery" as examples of obvious things you can't do in a contract.

<comment><USER9> >Forced arbitration is a violation of human rights.

What about two parties choosing arbitration as a clause in the contract they enter into together?

<comment> crooked-v It's a failure of society to presume that a huge corporation and a single employee can have a true meeting of the minds for complicated contracts.

<comment><USER10> I think that's how consumer protection should work: company extends shady contract, regulator says nope to the entire industry.

For example you should be able to get out of a contract with the same ease as you got in.

(also I am still a bit baffled, it took one hour to sign my contract at my gym and 1h30 at the bank to open an account, this symmetry principle might not play in my favor in the US).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Forced arbitration being lawful is one thing, but the employer both being able to force arbitration AND pick the arbitrator who is on their payroll should be illegal.

In effect you've taken a process out of an independent court and put it with a private business which is being paid by one of the parties. Seems super sketchy even to the point of criminality.

<comment><USER12> At the minimum, the arbitrator should be licensed and certified by the court. Further, the plaintiff should be able to sue the arbitrator if they failed to act in good faith (i.e., if the arbitrator was sleeping during the deposition, or clearly rendered a decision not supported by the evidence).

<comment><USER13> >Further, the plaintiff should be able to sue the arbitrator if they failed to act in good faith

They can. 9 U.S. Code § 10:

(a) In any of the following cases the United States court in and for the district wherein the award was made may make an order vacating the award upon the application of any party to the arbitration— (1) where the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or undue means; (2) where there was evident partiality or corruption in the arbitrators, or either of them; (3) where the arbitrators were guilty of misconduct in refusing to postpone the hearing, upon sufficient cause shown, or in refusing to hear evidence pertinent and material to the controversy; or of any other misbehavior by which the rights of any party have been prejudiced; or (4) where the arbitrators exceeded their powers, or so imperfectly executed them that a mutual, final, and definite award upon the subject matter submitted was not made.

<comment><USER14> Arbitors often _have no assets_. You'll be dealing with "Arbitration Corporation 12S". Which will conveniently cease business the moment anyone files suit.

<comment><USER15> That quote clearly says that you sue to vacate the award, not force the arbitor to pay you it back.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> When a lot of money is at stake, it is no surprise that litigants abuse the legal system.

Uber is contractually required to pay the up-front arbitration fees so that the JAMS arbitrations can move forward. I super-slow-walks the process. What is the remedy?

Well, JAMS itself does not really have a remedy. It is a private organization that moves forward with the arbitration process as its rules are complied with and as it gets paid.

Nor is there an obvious remedy in the courts for individual failings in this or that arbitration procedure. Courts normally are not even involved in such processes.

Only when a clear pattern emerges (as it now has) can a court intervene to remedy a problem such as this.

In the meantime, what has happened? A lot of time has passed. A lot of the claimants (I am sure) have become discouraged and have possibly lost their motivation to move forward with their claims. And Uber has moved well along the path toward ultimate success in winning it all in its market, currently resting on a valuation of $120B.

Is any of this defensible? No. Will Uber try to defend it? Yes, through double-talk and prevarication. Will it be doing so in good faith? Not at all. Will the aggrieved drivers be able to overcome it? Perhaps, but they will likely get too little, too late. And, for Uber, it will be a historic liability that vanishes into the ether as it looks backwards on eventually settling the claims while basking in its massive success.

In a just world, things like this should not happen and perhaps Uber will be upended by something or other along the way anyway. But this sort of cynical abuse of legal processes in neither rare nor the exception in cases where modern litigants have the means and opportunity to gain massively from the abuses. It is not the exception but the rule.

And this in turn illustrates the obvious limits of using law as a solution for society's problems. The law can and does help solve problems to a point. But it is always subject to abuse and, in the end, money, power, and corrupt motives often work to undercut its effectiveness. This sort of case is Exhibit A to prove the point.

<comment> crooked-v > And this in turn illustrates the obvious limits of using law as a solution > for society's problems.

This problem is a result of people being prevented from using the normal legal process to handle their disputes. "The limits of the law" only applies here so far the Supreme Court has ever-expansively applied the Federal Arbitration Act to override the laws of the states.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Allowing people to "sign" away their 7th amendment rights, in some cases in order to simply maintain already paid for services, is ridiculous. Arbitration should be between equal parties (i.e. businesses, you and your neighbor) or you should only agree to it with advice from a lawyer.

These clauses are just more corporate abuse.

</comment><comment><USER18> What rube at the 9th circuit fell for the 'ol "of course we'll act in good faith" argument??

In the long run I think this kind of practice will only hurt Uber - they have huge issues with driver retention any way, and their dream of self driving cars is laughable. Lyft (who's only a little better, but still better) will continue to gain ground in the US especially and will eventually become the market leader in mobility.

<comment><USER12> They both have to worry about customers though. I'm afraid to take either Uber or Lyft, due to the fact my credit card may be randomly charged a $250 or more "damage fee". It is ridiculous that they just take the driver's word for it without something like dashcam evidence as proof.

<comment><USER19> It's extremely uncommon to receive a damage fee, has to be substantiated with a photo and you can dispute it. Avoiding rideshare because of it is like refusing to go outside because you might be struck by lightning.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I'm conflicted about this. I think forced arbitration is a terrible predatory practice. But I also think there are lots of frivolous class action lawsuits. All the claims cited here were from a single class action lawsuit that was thrown out.

I'm all for Uber drivers making more money but they filed a class action lawsuit asking for a different compensation structure than what was offered. They knew the deal when they signed up and it seems like a sketchy attorney took on their case for a big pay day and when that was thrown out they're now taking this next step. If I sign an agreement with an employer about my compensation, I don't have a realistic expectation that I'd be able to sue them when they continue to do what they told me they'd do and I'm no longer happy with it (my recourse is to walk away and work somewhere that better matches what I'm looking for).

Frivolous lawsuits drive up the cost for customers almost everywhere. It's a big reason why medical costs are so high. People see a big organization that has some cash and they think they can file a suit as a way to quick riches.

<comment><USER8> According to this article, malpractice costs (including the cost of defensive medicine done due to the fear of lawsuits) accounts for 2.4% of health care spending: [https://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2010/09/07/the- true-c...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2010/09/07/the-true-cost-of- medical-malpractice-it-may-surprise-you/#78683f6a2ff5)

That's a decent amount of money but I wouldn't call it a big reason. One of the problems with bringing health care costs down is that there aren't any big reasons for it, just lots and lots of little ones.

<comment><USER21> [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3048809/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3048809/) That was a shockingly low figure relative to what I've heard from friends in medicine. Looking up the original paper showed that the estimators used for that figure were very sketchy, and the authors of the paper did not claim otherwise. They were simply grasping for any estimator they could.

<comment><USER22> People in Medicine overestimate these costs as they represent a much smaller fraction of total Medicine costs than they assume.

EX: Their are 1.1 million doctors assuming 250k average salary it adds up around 275 billion ish which seems huge, except that's out of 2.2 trillion in US heathcare spending. So, that's only adds up to around 10 percent of total spending. And malpractice insurance is well below what a doctor makes on average.

Pills, buildings, janitors, machines, etc all add up.

<comment><USER23> Well if your a doctor, %2/%10 is %20 of revenue for the doctor, which feels large. AFAIK it's doctors or their hospital that pays for malpractice insurance, so it come out of their pocket directly.

They probably have stories of malpractice insurance not working that well, creating ruin for the doctors because of a relatively uncommon event, much like patients using the medical system.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> The author followed up with another post, "Uber Tells its Side of the Story in Mass Arbitration Fight with 12,500 drivers": [https://www.reuters.com/article/legal-us-otc-uber/uber- tells...](https://www.reuters.com/article/legal-us-otc-uber/uber-tells-its- side-of-the-story-in-mass-arbitration-fight-with-12500-drivers-idUSKCN1PA2PD)

</comment><comment><USER25> So the law allows the perpetrator of a tort to be judge, jury, and executioner over its victims and then further allows that same perpetrator to lie to a federal court without repercussions and not even carry out the arbitration it promised. Finally, it gives the victims no further recourse against the perpetrator. And this is supposed to be just? The law has a loophole essentially saying that it doesn't need to apply if both parties agree. Absolute insanity really. What's the point of even having a civil court system then? Imagine if they did this with criminal cases. The insanity of the current system does not preclude that. What a failure of government to do one of its basic duties.

</comment><comment><USER26> Uber must hold the world record for the slowest inevitable capsizing of a corporate ship ever.

</comment><comment><USER27> How can anyone think that the court system is a panacea for dispute resolution? Or even that it is a better alternative? The courts are the emergency rooms of dispute resolution: on the civil side clogged with foreclosure cases, personal injury slip and falls, divorce protection orders and absent judges who are sitting on the criminal side because the criminal courts are drug courts. Federal courts have limited jurisdiction and criminal cases get priority. Except for bankruptcy, there is no civil side. Would you rather sit in an emergency room or see your own doctor? That is how arbitration is supposed to work. The friction point is the payment of fees. And there is no reason why the disputes of a class of people could not be submitted to arbitration. A lawyerless individual is much better off navigating an arbitration by himself than trying to navigate an American courtroom. Of course, if you don't want concierge justice, you are free to stand in line with everyone else. Understand though, that concierge justice comes at a price. The idiots at Uber simply don't want to pay the price.

<comment><USER28> If arbitration were better for customers, it wouldn't have to be forced upon them.

<comment><USER27> In many contexts, it's not forced. Much of international commerce, for example.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Forced arbitration is broken, but not entirely useless.

The actual problem is vendor lock-in and the conflict of interest in those who choose the vendor.

There should be a law that allows you to pick whichever arbitrator you want (within limits, like picking court jurisdiction), rather than being forced into a single vendor.

<comment><USER30> I argue that the actual problem is that mandatory, binding arbitration is viewed as a contractual "choice" when it is not a choice if included in a contract of adhesion (so-called take-it-or-leave-it contracts).

If a contract can be negotiated on an individual basis between the contracting parties, fine, permit mandatory arbitration. However, mandatory arbitration _should not_ be permitted otherwise because to do otherwise puts the lesser party at a distinct disadvantage, especially when all market participants include these clauses. For example, is it a "choice" about mandatory arbitration when both of the Internet providers serving my address have contracts of adhesion that include no-opt-out-clause mandatory arbitration? It is not.

At the bare minimum, the law should state that contracts of adhesion must include a 60-day opt-out clause for mandatory arbitration, with notice of opting out being provided via some reasonable means (e.g. not via Telex to a disused closet in Boca Raton). If arbitration is so great, let it stand on its own legs without being imposed by one side of the contract.

<comment><USER31> Do not say that to MPs. They would make arbitration a precondition of lawsuit as they have done here in Turkey.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Here's an interesting scenario which obtained in one of the courts that the arbitration refugees are dying to get into:

[https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston- texas/houston/...](https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston- texas/houston/article/Houston-federal-judge-bars-female-prosecutor- from-13610959.php#photo-16110453)

</comment><comment><USER32> This is true with any arbitration. If you sue someone it costs about $500 to get the case started in a government subsidized court. In private arbitration, it costs about $1,500. The person initiating the case has to pay, not the defendant. In this case, the drivers are initiating the cases so must pay the initial filing fee.

<comment><USER33> that is not how the current contract is written, and if the drivers did have to pay, then it would be assumed that they would get to pick the aribters to be used.

<comment><USER32> I haven't read the contract. Typically, an arbitration service can be named, in this case JAMS, but who pays the filing fee is not in the contract, since it's usually the one initiating the arbitration.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Give employees no legal recourse in actual courts, then make sure their sole remaining option doesn't get paid and doesn't start proceedings.

Let's say forced arbitration is acceptable (IMO, it's not). Why not make Uber provide a guarantee that arbitration must begin no later than 60 days after the claim is filed? Or would that be another example of the socialist regulations that are ruining free enterprise in America?

<comment><USER35> Seems reasonable to me. If you're going to require alternate forms of litigation it's only fair that you put a time limit on it. Otherwise this would certainly become quite a lucrative loophole for corporations to avoid any and all responsibility.

<comment><USER34> We're already headed down that route with the gig economy as a whole. The W2 is the first thing to go.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Meh. If they want to not perform on the arbitration clause, they get stuck with going to court. Seems like a win for employees?

</comment><comment><USER37> This story is from December.

</comment><comment><USER38> I'm getting really sick of large corporations essentially moulding bureaucracy to benefit themselves and fuck over everyone else.

I'm also seeing things like popup more frequently like _NET90_ payment terms... or accounting departments that won't pay someone unless they fill out a form 100% correctly (oh, and BTW if you fill out the form incorrectly they'll sit on their hands and NOT notify you... so you basically only find out via nagging).

If I owed my bank money you think I could sit around twiddling my thumbs waiting for them to guess what the proper request format is?

I recently had a company tell me that they only accept invoices ONE DAY A MONTH and there's nothing I can do about it. Uh, excuse me?

Forced arbitration is another wonderful example of course. Just sit around basically in a siege knowing that almost no individual person can outlast you (basically Uber's business model anyway, undercut the competition and put them out of business with time).

<comment><USER14> You need to CALL OUT these businesses loudly and publicly. This whole, "I'm not paying you for 90-120 days and then I notify you of a typo precisely 91 days later when you ask where the money is" needs to end.

So in that vein: Fuck GE Healthcare. They have NET120 and they will do all the things you and I have described _and more_ in order to put off payment to small businesses for as long as possible.

I didn't get a check from them until their stuff broke (had nothing to do with my software but they _thought_ it did) and I refused to help them until I got paid.

Whaddayaknow, I had a check overnighted to me with early morning delivery!

<comment><USER23> What happens when you offer a contract that says that net90 is %150 of costs, net30 is %120, net14 is %100, etc and any late payment (typo bullshit or not) has a %20 compound APR billed per month, like a credit card?

Basically a contract that would be fine if the corp doesn't play shenanigans, and wouldn't if they do.

<comment><USER39> The way I've heard works better is to pad the price in the first place, and give "30% discount for prompt payment (net14)". The people making the purchasing decision will use the discounted price, or perhaps they won't be price sensitive at all. The AP people will spot that they can save the firm 30% by paying your invoices early.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


London Stock Exchange under major cyberattack during Linux switch - <AUTHOR> http://www.computerworlduk.com/news/open-source/3258808/london-stock-exchange-under-major-cyberattack-during-linux-switch/

<comment><USER2> Let me get this straight; Which system was hacked Linux or MSFT?</comment>


Politics and the English Language [1945] - <AUTHOR> http://www.k-1.com/Orwell/index.cgi/work/essays/language.html

<comment><USER2> You only have to know a little about Orwell to know that of course his essay is not a dogma or even a style guide. The criticisms so far talk only about the English Language part and not the Politics part. That misses the point spectacularly. It was the Politics part that Orwell cared about. Here is the heart of it (and note the passive in there):

 _Political language [...] is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind._

Was Orwell right that "political chaos is connected with the decay of language"? Of course he was, so profoundly and depicting it so vividly in _1984_ that the English language itself conferred the highest possible honor and adopted his name as the word for it.

That's his negative point. His positive is that "one can probably bring about some improvement by starting at the verbal end". Hardly the voice of a style nanny.

What Orwell is trying to teach us is this: Cultivate simple language to get yourself out of the habits of obfuscation and evasion. Then you will have a better chance of seeing monstrosities like "mistakes were made" and "enhanced interrogation techniques" for what they are. The heuristics he suggests are obviously just rules of thumb. That he breaks them in the very essay that proposes them is perfectly consistent with his purpose.

</comment><comment><USER3> Great stuff:

1\. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.

2\. Never use a long word where a short one will do.

3\. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.

4\. Never use the passive where you can use the active.

5\. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.

6\. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

<comment><USER4> 1\. Common metaphors are dull.

2\. Use short words.

3\. When it is possible to cut a word, do.

4\. Be active.

5\. Hold off on loanwords.

6\. Hang the sticklers.

<comment><USER5> 0\. Stay polite.

1\. Avoid common metaphors.

2\. Write fewer, shorter, simpler words.

4\. Choose the active voice.

[edited, see reply]. I enjoy the "say it in fewer words" game, but quite a lot has been lost between the original essay and this sort of summary. As a reminder, it might work, presented to a fresh reader, I doubt if it would.

<comment><USER6> >> 4\. Choose the active tense

You want 'active voice'. Tenses distinguish time, voices distinguish subjects from recipients of action (in English; in other languages there's also a middle voice), moods distinguish the manner in which a verb describes an action (is it a command, a wish, a statement of fact etc.).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> _full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step toward political regeneration_

If this is true, then everything I have read and witnessed firsthand about the way culture works, tells me the US is doomed politically.

</comment><comment><USER8> Here's a wonderfully-written takedown of this old screed from a linguistic perspective:

<http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=992>

<comment><USER2> Really? I love Language Log, but I think that's one of the worst pieces I've seen there. It starts off nitpicky and ends up muddled.</comment></comment>


A Love Letter to the People Who Build the Internet Archive - <AUTHOR> https://blog.archive.org/2019/02/14/a-love-letter-to-the-people-who-build-the-internet-archive/ <comment><USER2> I once rebuilt an entire content site from the internet archive after a catastrophic data loss.

<comment><USER3> For me Google Cache was helping out under similar circumstances (also tried the Archive first, but apparently Google Cache was [at least back then] more up-to-date).

<comment><USER2> Now you mention it, I think we used a combination of the two. Google's cache filled in some of the blanks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I wish they had a list of torrents they need seeders for the most. Right now I'd I want to seed their stuff (say 100x items) then I gave to go through their site and one by one select files, give it to a torrent client, see how healthy the swarm is, rinse and repeat.

<comment><USER5> even better:

a binary you can execute. on first launch you allocate space and bandwidth. Thereafter, it stays within configured paramethers and just seeds whatever the archive wants you to seed.

<comment><USER6> You might find people in the Archive Team interested in working on this. Their actual mission is slightly different but I'm sure there's overlap of interests somewhere.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> It's not just fair use. 17 U.S.C. sec. 107.

Although the United States Court of Appeals have determined that HathiTrust and Google's massive deriviative works are fair use--

Authors Guild, Inc. v. HathiTrust, No. 12-4547-cv [755 F.3d 87] (USCA-02 2014) ([I]n providing this service, the HDL does not add into circulation any new, human‐readable copies of any books. Instead, the HDL simply permits users to "word search"—that is, to locate where specific words or phrases appear in the digitized books. Applying the relevant factors, we conclude that this use is a fair use.)

Authors Guild v. Google, Inc., No. 13-4829-cv (USCA-02 2015) ([W]e conclude that Google's making of a complete digital copy of Plaintiffs' works for the purpose of providing the public with its search and snippet view functions (at least as snippet view is presently designed) is a fair use and does not infringe Plaintiffs' copyrights in their books.)

For libraries and archives, they also have 17 U.S.C. sec. 108. Limitations on exclusive rights: Reproduction by libraries and archives. A broad exemption that the Internet Archive would likely assert [and likely satisfy]

</comment><comment><USER8> A year ago, I got very interested in a science-history topic that spans much of the 19th-century. Within a couple of days, I managed to find dozens of rare, original, on-topic, illustrated, computer-searchable source volumes on IA.

If there's another single library in the world that has all of those (PD) works, it's probably far away from the chair I never had to leave.

</comment><comment><USER9> The publication of the Internet Archive's self-congratulatory love letter this morning is no coincidence. Note the following paragraph:

 _Libraries are built by people, for people. Thank you so much to all of the people who have contributed to building the Internet Archive, whether they were employees or our huge group friends and family. We would not be here without you, and we hope you will continue to help bring universal access to all knowledge in the future._

Why did the Internet Archive publish this today?

Yesterday, the Author's Guild, the National Writers Union, the National Association of Science Writers, the Association of American Publishers, the Federation of European Publishers, and many more international writing and publishing organizations published an open appeal to readers and librarians concerning "Controlled Digital Lending" (CDL). A link to the appeal and accompanying FAQ can be found here ([https://nwu.org/nwu-denounces- cdl/](https://nwu.org/nwu-denounces-cdl/)). Here's the text of the appeal:

 _As working writers, translators, photographers, and graphic artists; as unions, organizations, and federations representing the creators of works included in published books; as book publishers; and as reproduction rights and public lending rights organizations; we oppose so-called "Controlled Digital Lending" (CDL) as a flagrant violation of copyright and authors' rights.

The copyright infringement inherent in CDL is not a victimless crime. As the victims of CDL, we want librarians, archivists, and readers to understand how they are harming the authors of the books they love by participating in CDL projects, even if they have the best of intentions.

The attached FAQ was written to explain to authors, publishers, readers, librarians, and archivists what CDL is, how it differs from traditional and legitimate new forms of library lending, how it violates the economic and moral rights of authors, and how it makes it even harder for authors to try to make a living from writing or to afford to devote time to writing.

When writers can't make a living, they can't afford to keep writing, and readers lose too.

Well-meaning librarians, archivists, and readers, who don't intend to deprive authors of their livelihoods, are being misled by false claims from proponents of CDL. Under CDL, printed books are being scanned and distributed online to readers worldwide by the Internet Archive and U.S. and Canadian libraries.

CDL is not comparable to lending of physical books by libraries. CDL is not "fair use" as defined in U.S. copyright law, and an exception to or limitation of copyright to allow CDL without permission or remuneration would not be permitted by the Berne Convention on Copyright. CDL interferes with many of the normal ways, including new ways largely unnoticed by librarians, that authors are earning money from written and graphic works included in so- called "out of print" books. There is no basis for a good-faith belief that CDL is legal under either U.S. or international law.

We appeal for a dialogue among writers, authors, publishers, and librarians on how to enable and create the digital libraries we all want, in ways that fully respect authors' rights._

As an author and a publisher, I would go one step further and demand that scanning under CDL be immediately halted until issues related to copyright, compensation, and takedown are worked out and implemented. (Disclosure: I also serve on the board of the Independent Book Publishers Association which is a cosigner of the appeal and issued a position statement that calls for scanning and distribution of in-copyright works be stopped immediately, see [https://www.ibpa-online.org/news/438161/IBPA-Position- Statem...](https://www.ibpa-online.org/news/438161/IBPA-Position-Statement-on- Controlled-Digital-Lending-CDL.htm))

Right now, you can go to the IA's website [https://openlibrary.org/](https://openlibrary.org/) and see what's available - many thousands of titles written by authors who are still alive and who won't receive a cent in royalties or licensing fees when someone "borrows" their books or embeds them on a website. According to the Open Library's vision page ([https://openlibrary.org/about/vision](https://openlibrary.org/about/vision)), "The ultimate goal of the Open Library is to make all the published works of humankind available to everyone in the world."

Like many people on HN, I regularly use IA to track the history of websites or download out-of-copyright and public domain works. Sharing this information is important and should be continued. I also believe in the concept of "Fair Use" for sharing and discussing excerpts of more current works. But when it comes to outright republishing of in-copyright printed works, the rights of creators and publishers need to be recognized. CDL, as currently implemented, fails to do give such recognition, let alone compensate creators and publishers.

<comment><USER10> 1) you should really explain what CDL is earlier in the post. I'd never heard of it before.

2) still don't see the connection to the Internet Archive.

3) isn't CDL covered by the Exhaustion Doctrine / First Sale Doctrine? [0]

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

<comment><USER11> According to [1], at least, "first sale doctrine does not apply to electronic books".

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First- sale_doctrine#Applicatio...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First- sale_doctrine#Application_to_digital_copies)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> The Internet Archive is a not-for-profit that deserves your support. Not only do they archive the Internet, they are involved with several projects that will help make it better and even more useful.

They have an informative blog about donations: [http://blog.archive.org/donation-faqs](http://blog.archive.org/donation- faqs). Or just go to [http://archive.org/donate](http://archive.org/donate) and make a donation.

<comment><USER13> One of the few places I donate to every year and will continue to do forever. I use it constantly and I'm amazed every time I find some old site that I thought was lost to time. These folks are doing truly important work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Aaron Swartz & Jason Scott More people like them is what we really need!

</comment><comment><USER15> Do they also archive youtube videos?

<comment><USER16> Yes! Also, YouTube shows you the URIs of deleted videos on playlists, so it's pretty trivial to copypaste them into IA and youtube-dl a copy.

I have snatched many things I loved from the jaws of YouTube's copyright enforcement algorithm this way.

<comment><USER17> TIL!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> It's crazy to think of the internet without the Internet Archive. It's really fundamental work.</comment>


Ask HN: In this lockdown period, should the world now evaluate compensations? - <AUTHOR> In this lockdown period, should the world now evaluate what jobs are really valuable for the society to function and set the compensations of those doing these jobs accordingly? <comment><USER2> Value is subjective. There is no "valuable for society." There is value for individuals, and nobody is more capable of making the decisions about what is valuable than those individuals themselves. Attempting to have some entity decide what is valuable on everybody's behalf is incredibly stupid.

The way to have compensation re-evaluated would be to completely scrap existing regulations which interfere with the ability of individuals to set or request the compensation they determine to be worthwhile for the work performed in a free market. Scrap minimum wage. Get rid of all regulations which protect established companies from competition. There should be no reason you need a barber's license to cut hair.

The labour theory of value has been debunked. Just because it cost so much to produce something, does not mean people are willing to pay more than that for it. All subsidies to enterprises should be scrapped. The market can only operate efficiently if there are accurate price signals. Government intervention in the market distorts the realities and ends up taking money from hard working, low earners, and subsidizing high paying workers, whose products or services are not providing the level of benefit to individuals that they would otherwise voluntarily pay for if they weren't involuntarily subsidizing through forced taxation.

The way out of the mess is to assert your monetary sovereignty and to be the dictator of what you deem to be valuable to you, to your family, to your neighbours, to your country, and to the rest of the world - in that order.

In order to do that, you need to be able to protect your wealth against unwanted theft. Fortunately, there's now a way you can do this: bitcoin.

<comment><USER3> I've seen a lot of reports about Bitcoin theft.

<comment><USER2> They are 100% down to negligence of the owner and not the "skill" of some hacker.

The key point for Bitcoin though, is that you should not only secure your keys from physical theft, by utilizing a seed phrase (backed up) and a passphrase (in-brain/shared with family), but also that you should never reveal to anybody the extent of your bitcoin holdings - because if somebody knows what you own, they are vulnerable to theft.

Bitcoin that you own, securely, which nobody knows you own, are not vulnerable to theft.

Hence, you should avoid any KYC service when acquiring bitcoin. If you use an exchange like Conbase, you are explicitly revealing to the State how much bitcoin you have purchased, and they will attempt to steal it off you, like they did with gold in EO6102.

If you do use any such service, and need to untaint your coins, then run them through several coinjoin or payjoin to break the linkage to your identity and have plausible deniability of ownership.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> It's never been that simple: let me give you a trivial (and oversimplified) example.

A baker's job is essential in almost every country in the world, yet the time and effort required to get to a reasonable level of skill is pretty small. Thus, if compensation was increased, competition in the market would quickly drive the compensation back down again.

Pay is, unfortunately, not proportional to the value to the society.

Humans should and do work on making it fairer, but it's been a long road so far and we are nowhere close to it (but we are better off than a couple hundred years ago).

</comment><comment><USER5> It is like asking should we stop wasting world resources and set the priorities accordingly ? Yes we should. And then what ?

<comment><USER6> Firstly let's start by making all bad things illegal.

<comment><USER4> Such broad statements are bad.

We are now both under arrest.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Define valuable, ideally without invoking Marxist labour theory of value.

The vast majority of jobs have nothing to do with, what I'm assuming you're implying, healthcare and food - the compensation should be set by those who pay for it not someone else.

There are countless jobs that neither you nor I have ever heard of let alone thought about that society needs to function.</comment>


NBC Universal making line rider-esque Flash games now??? - <AUTHOR> http://www.calamitygame.com <comment><AUTHOR> <http://calamitygame.com/index.php?s=566>

Try this one (i didnt make it but its cool) it works better if you zoom all the way out before pressing play.</comment>


Languages and Lambdas: The Mathemagic of Programming [Class on UniOfReddit] - <AUTHOR> http://www.reddit.com/r/UniversityofReddit/comments/clu38/class_languages_and_lambdas_the_mathemagic_of/

<comment><USER2> This is why I love Reddit.

The real beauty of Reddit lies in the mid-size and small sub-reddits.

Also check out <http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/> where real scientists will answer your science questions and a very small but new sub-reddit " Neuropsychology Book Club" <http://www.reddit.com/r/NPBC/> started by a neuropsychologist who will invite book authors to involve in discussion.

<comment><USER3> Agreed. You can make it a great site just by removing the front page and a bunch of other subreddits from your account, and just including /r/code and /r/programming and a handful of other good ones.

<comment><USER4> /r/code are you sure? There only seems to be around 5 submissions there.

<comment><USER5> He meant /r/coding

<comment><USER3> That's it, thanks.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


You Guys Are Millionaires Right? - <AUTHOR> http://shiftyjelly.wordpress.com/2011/11/22/you-guys-are-millionaires-right/ <comment><USER2> I found the comment fascinating _"People will spend hours researching a $2 purchase, browsing reviews, emailing the developer, checking online forums. Then they will go to a coffee shop they've never been before and buy a $4 coffee."_

It is so true, and so weird at the same time. Why the investment in research time for the app and the disdain for the coffee which will pass through your system roughly 45 minutes later? Makes me wonder if they should charge $19.99 for the app and offer a 'trial version' for $4.99 which lets you see if you want to buy it with no expiration date.

<comment><USER3> I wonder if, psychologically, it's because the game is perceived as something you will permanently own, while the coffee is temporary. People seem to weigh the first kind of decision much more heavily.

<comment><USER4> I'll throw out a random personal theory here. I think this is because buying apps is a solitary activity.

As humans we are more comfortable fitting in or following. When you go to a coffee shop or a crowded store, you're buying something because you _actually_ see others buying it. The decision-making aspect is "taken away" from you, as it was already done by people at large. There is also the element of human interaction with the barista. It's much easier to spend $4 this way.

Yes, at the coffee shop you also might have an immediate purpose -- like chat with a friend. But even when I am alone, spending $4 doesn't seem like a big investment. It feels and seems normal. And note that this doesn't have to do with the quality of the product.

In the meantime, when you're at alone and are browsing an app store, the burden of decision making is on you. In essence, the thought process is "am I making a good decision? is it normal to buy something like this? do I _really_ need this?" With that, $1 can seem like quite a bit when you have time and solitude to decide.

<comment><USER5> I think there is a lot more to this, and I think you're onto something.

Buying coffee is not only a social activity, it's something that's seen as a sociable thing to do.

Buying apps is indeed a solitary activity, and - despite the burgenoing marketplace - is still something slightly outside of the mainstream.

I suspect there is trust issues here - the average app isn't well trusted as opposed to the average cup of coffee - as well as exchanging money for a virtual thing as opposed to a physical.

edit : thinking further about this - the top n listings are just like the coffee queue. It's self reinforcing because you see other people are buying the app, which overcomes some of the trust issues. We _all_ think - well, all these other people bought it, must be something OK about it.

The problem this brings about is the self-reinforcing top of the market which becomes harder for others to break into.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Despite briefly working in the software field, I got no sympathy because of the way he communicates. Yes, I know how tough software development is. Yes, free software commoditize and runs people out of business. However, they enable the company I used to work for, develops solution that help their client. (I got laid off a few weeks ago)

No, I don't care much about software devs not making enough money in the banks. No, I am not rich, though I have more saving than most people my age. In fact, they're probably in debt.

I don't feel particularly bad for writing open source software for free or scratching my itch for free, even though I am a horrible competitor. They probably can beat me in sales technique and make more money than I ever will.

I recognize being in the software field is an honor, a blessing. It's not something that we have a right to be in. We die or live by solving people's problem and then making money off of them.

I don't recognize piracy as a moral issue, but simply a business model problem, no matter how big of a problem it is.

</comment><comment><USER7> The whole rant against "free" software is just a straw man--the movement he decries as a cult against charging for software isn't about that at all. The whole idea lies in freedom: the "free as in beer" "free" is the Java to the movements JavaScript. The name is an unfortunate artifact of the English language.

Additionally, it's pretty clearly not an outright lie: you only have to look at the successful ecosystem of free/open source software, and the companies which live on it, to see that it _does_ work. Perhaps it is an exaggeration, but it is no _lie_.

<comment><USER6> I'll buy freedom. I buy an arudino and android, and a thing-o-matic though I couldn't afford a thing-o-matic on my earning right now.

When push come to shove, I'll probably stays on android even if the world around me all use iphone just like I use archlinux everyday. Granted, I am in the minority.

<comment><USER8> Go for a reprap instead. We're much more open-dev and organic (organic is the nicer way of saying chaotic and disorganized I guess). Which continent are you on?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> "Then you see an app like '101 sex positions' or '301 Fart Noises' reach the lofty heights of App Store Success. They spent a week on a gimmick and made bank, you spent 6 months building an app of utility and are struggling."

So why not go make your own fart or sex app? There's a reason why these apps make it to the top; it's what people really want. Sadly or not, there's always going to be a bigger potential market for dumb, entertaining apps than your average practical app. I'd even go so far to say there's an art to producing the kind of apps that satisfy this segment of the market.

<comment><USER10> Indeed. I spent ~6 hours writing a gun "simulator" app that's made something like $50,000. Some of it was luck, but if you're willing to sell your soul and you can crank out a few of these a week your chances of success are probably higher than spending 6 months perfecting a single app you don't even know anyone wants.

<comment><USER11> Why sell your soul and make that decision? Why not do both, and try spending half your time creating trivial fart apps - shouldn't take more than a few hours, right? which you need to get away from your main project that's going to change the way I use my smartphone, etc., etc.

<comment><USER12> If we're offering advice from the peanut gallery (and I'm no smartphone developer, so I'm way up in the peanut gallery), why not spend that time on a program that can generate trivial apps.

Extract data [legally, now!] from some source (eg wikipedia), and skin it with some boilerplate and some generated UI elements. I think it'd be a more interesting project to implement the more general version, and once it's nailed down it's probably a better source of revenue too.

<comment><USER13> This happens all the time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> "In which I try to convince myself that my decisions are fine, despite strong evidence to the contrary".

</comment><comment><USER15> A few interesting comments from the author:

\- Piracy of Pocket Casts on iOS is about 30% \- Piracy of Pocket Casts on Android is about 20%

moving into Android development was a very smart (some might say lucky) move which has enabled us to stay profitable

We definitely need to focus more, but moving into Android was the smartest thing we ever did. We now earn more money there (consistently) than iOS.

<comment><USER16> Can you provide more information about this? What does your app do? Do you sell in-app, is your app purchased, or do you get revenues mainly from ads?

<comment><USER15> These were comments on the blog post by one of the ShiftyJelly devs. I'm not associated with ShiftyJelly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Jiggy's comment[1] about why Coffee != Apps to be spot on. Your app is an unknown quantity, getting someone to spend _anything_ on an unknown quantity is really really hard.

When you go to McDonald's (or anyone for that matter) do you get something different every time, or do you get your favorite thing? Same goes for Olive Garden or Cheesecake Factory, did you get the burger last time and the fresh fish catch this time?

Probably not.

To some degree, those fart apps are a known quantity; they make fart noises, so they have the advantage over your app of having their foot in the door for everyone interested.

It seems unfair, but there has to be a strategy there for riding that wave. Hollywood has always done it, did you enjoy Superman 7 or Harry Potter 14?

It doesn't matter, it was a known quantity and eleventeen million people went and saw it.

It seems like SJ is being forced to learn this lesson over-and-over again[2] and I've already shared my thoughts with you about that[3].

Your expectations of what you want SJ to do and exactly how you want it to do it may be too tight. You guys are clearly talented and I wonder if you need some step-back-and-get-a-better-perspective time.

Tom's comment[4] is a great example of what I mean. Does ShiftyJelly want to get into the gun or fart-app business? Probably not... does SJ want $50k? Probably yes.

It feels to me like there is some unexpected pivot in here for you guys to extract; one that you didn't see coming, but one that works out surprisingly well for you.

NOTE: Make the two app references at the end of the article links to the appstore.

[1] <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3285771>

[2] [http://shiftyjelly.wordpress.com/2011/08/02/amazon-app- store...](http://shiftyjelly.wordpress.com/2011/08/02/amazon-app-store-rotten- to-the-core/)

[3] <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2837439>

[4] <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3284450>

</comment><comment><USER18> "Very few bits of software ever written were not funded by someone."

I found this comment to be quite insightful. An interesting way to look at it.

<comment><USER19> Interesting, but demonstrably false.

Take a look through Github or Sourceforge. Many, many of the projects are people scratching an itch or just building something for fun. We can argue about the exact percentage, but it's definitely more than "very few bits".

<comment><USER18> Github and Sourceforge are supported via paying customers or advertising. =)

The point isn't that all software isn't paid for. Rather, that somewhere, it's costing someone money. And I think that was the point (or at least, that's what I got from it, which is the important part).

<comment><USER19> I was referring to the software on Github and Sourceforge, not Github and Sourceforge themselves.

Some software costs someone money. Lots of it is built for the sake of building it though. You could argue that time people spend building software could have been billable hours, but I think the author totally misunderstands the spirit of building software for the enjoyment of it.

<comment><USER18> > I was referring to the software on Github and Sourceforge, not Github and > Sourceforge themselves.

So was I. And this software is being supported by SF and Github.

> I think the author totally misunderstands the spirit of building software > for the enjoyment of it.

Which means nothing.

Consider Linus and Linux. Linux wasn't paid for directly, but don't for a minute think it wasn't supported by someone's cash.

In fact, I challenge you to find me software that didn't use someone's real money (not this billable hours thing you brought to the table for some reason) to get developed at some point.

<comment><USER19> I don't understand your argument that the software is being supported by SF and Github. Github and SF didn't spend a cent to develop any of those projects; they were created and then hosted there. If I hosted my open source software on my Linode account would you say that it's paid because I spent my own money to pay for Linode?

You picked one example in which someone gets paid to write software, but there are hundreds of thousands of software projects that were written in people's spare time, either for fun or to learn to code or to scratch their own (non- monetary) itch.

Here's a random one from the HN frontpage last week:

<https://github.com/holman/spark>

I'm not sure whether we're arguing some kind of objectivist semantics game, or if we're talking past each other.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Another theory: because there is no line of folks buying the same app in front of you.

</comment><comment><USER21> a very good post, but he seemed a little confused with the open source / free software paradigm. He must have known that open source software can be charged, the point is that you have to share the source code you are selling!!

</comment><comment><USER22> I'm so glad they wrote about piracy and made the points about how Not all software should be free. Honestly, I'll never understand that sense of entitlement people have. I was once in the same boat as the author, pirating everything under the sun. Then I got a job writing code too and I haven't pirated a single thing since. I don't sell software but I appreciate the work that goes into it and understand that these guys lose out even if I didn't have money to pay to begin with. The no money argument and the free marketing arguments are bunk. The poor will save to buy if there's no pirate copy and the majority of marketing you get from a pirated app is marketing that links to the pirate download, not the legit one!

Excellent post!

<comment><USER23> I've been wondering if independent software vendors might benefit from some humanizing of the sales effort. Instead of charging $2 for an app, how about framing it as "buy the developer a taco", or for $4 "buy the developer a grande latte". The amazing $10 app could be "buy the developer a roll of sushi". You get the idea.

Psychologically, I find it much more satisfying to be rewarding friends & associates with more tangible things than some dollar amount.

Does anyone know if this model has been attempted before?

<comment><USER5> It flips it around to begging and belittling the time spent.

A far better proposition is just charging what you think it is worth and advertising the benefits to the buyer. Telling the buyer you're going to get a sushi roll doesn't assist them. Telling them they save x hours a week, or avoid situation y - now that's better marketing.

<comment><USER23> Thanks. I should have thought about the other angle of this. Mostly I was fascinated with the fun possibilities.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Minimalistic, free and open source launcher app for Android - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/tanujnotes/Olauncher <comment><USER2> i think app icons are important.

you can see my implementation of minimalistic launcher at [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.koesnu.voi...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.koesnu.voidlauncher) and inspect code at [https://github.com/kuesji/void- launcher](https://github.com/kuesji/void-launcher)

<comment><AUTHOR> OP here. I checked out your app and it's pretty good. I think I'll stick with no icon launcher. That way, users will have choices based on their preference of icon or no icon look. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I like the idea that applications haven't any icons. It's looks very clean</comment>