How to Choose the Right Coding Bootcamp - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/learning-new-stuff/how-to-choose-the-right-coding-bootcamp-364efd35a63c <comment><USER3> No matter how many articles I read on the praise of bootcamps, none have been able to completely sway my opinion: I don't have to have a CS degree to be a good developer, but there are certain CS fundamentals lacking from bootcamps that are an investment in your future.

The issue, like another commenter mentioned, is that bootcamps are too much like for-profit colleges. Focusing on required skills only, much like a trade school, should be a viable way for people to pick up the needed skills. It seems, however, that bootcamps are over-promising and under delivering.

There is a local bootcamp for JS, HTML and CSS. For $6.5k ($12.5K is the advertised priced, but corporate and university sponsors routinely pay part of the cost) and 10 weeks, they should be able to give you a great, solid foundation in those languages and technologies. Either we got the flunky that passed by the skin of his teeth, or our HR has some explaining to do. He's been on board for about 1.5 months, and through some weird agreement beyond my control, he's just made his first commits for _very_ rudimentary tasks.

I have a couple friends who routinely sit in on interviews for developers in Houston, Columbus, and Pittsburgh . I made a social media post about skepticism in bootcamps. They agreed for the most part. They said that bootcamps can produce quality developers, but the ratio of good to bad candidates did not smile favorably on bootcamps. The chief complaint seemed to be that they had no knowledge in a specific area. That is, they knew a little of everything but not enough to be of use.

<comment> some-guy A CS degree doesn't prepare you for the developer world in certain ways that a boot-camp will, but boot-camps are just too short and crammed to really teach a developer well in my opinion. A boot camp that my housemate is in right now was required to code merge-sort for a test after three days into it, while also advertising that prior programming knowledge was not necessary before starting the program.

I would love to see something in between -- a rigorous two-year software- engineering program out there sponsored by community colleges combining CS fundamentals and good up-to-date software engineering practices on large codebases.

<comment><USER3> That's what I meant by _I don 't have to have a CS degree to be a good developer, but there are certain CS fundamentals lacking from bootcamps that are an investment in your future._ More specifically, things like time complexity, algorithms, data-structures, programming languages, compilers, and by extension discreet maths, formal language theory and software planning/architecture are some of the non-bootcamp concepts that have limited use as a junior dev working on pieces of a larger project. These CS-specific concepts become much more prevalent as one moves from, "Find a way to implement this small feature," to "We need to overhaul this entire part of the project."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I get the perception that people are afraid that these bootcamps will saturate the marketplace and bring salaries and software quality down. Which _could_ happen, but it also might not. Many of these grads could go on to create companies themselves and create new jobs, and hey before you know it you'll be working for a 'bootcamp' grad.

I'm a bootcamp grad and don't believe everyone can 'learn' to code. Same that everyone can't learn to be a doctor. Everyone has the aptitude to be spoonfed coding principles or medical terms, but its up to them to really understand the concepts and then take them to the next level. Many of the grads you see coming out of the bootcamps may not end up going down the track of software engineering, they may end up in product, qa, devops, etc... Many of them might not even become senior because they either don't have the desire to, or just don't have the capacity to do so. At the end of the day these bootcamps offer people tools, its up to the people who graduate from them to really sharpen and build great things from those tools.

</comment><comment><USER5> I really hate to see promotion of bootcamps on HN. I see them as the scourge of the tech industry. Telling people that a 6 week bootcamp is the same as a 4 year CS degree is absurd and offensive.

Throughout the first dot com boom, we struggled against perceptions that software development was something trivial done by teenagers in their spare time. This perception was highly dangerous, not only in terms of professional respect, salaries, and promotion opportunities, but even to businesses themselves and the law, as companies were forced to try to explain in court that achievements such as the Google search algorithm were on par with a major pharmaceutical project not a lemonaid stand.

Imagine a bootcamp for medicine - in 6 weeks they learn the most common procedures: how to prescribe antibiotics, how to remove an appendix, and how to set a broken arm. They're told they can learn the rest as they go, and to go start calling themselves doctors.

I wouldn't want that medical bootcamp 'doctor' to treat me, and I don't want a coding bootcamp 'developer' to be responsible for handling my medical data.

<comment><USER6> "Telling people that a 6 week bootcamp is the same as a 4 year CS degree is absurd and offensive."

Any bootcamp telling that to people is obviously lying. Most of them don't make this claim. The ones that do are better at marketing than teaching.

"Imagine a bootcamp for medicine - in 6 weeks they learn the most common procedures: how to prescribe antibiotics, how to remove an appendix, and how to set a broken arm. They're told they can learn the rest as they go, and to go start calling themselves doctors."

If a website goes down, nobody dies, let's be honest here (in the vast majority of cases). Also, you're not thinking about this openly enough - <USER2> everyone can teach themselves to learn to code, and bootcamp grads are not expected to become senior software developers in 6 weeks (plus most programs are 10-14 weeks). Instead, they're expected to get a junior level position and keep learning.

I just think that you're view of bootcamps is WAY too black and white. Have a little imagination and understand that while they're not the right thing for everyone, there's a gray area and many people actually benefit from them and get a programming or tech related job, or find out that coding is not for them, both not terrible outcomes. And then there are bootcamps that are actually harmful - but it's kind of wrong to group those in with everyone else.

Just saying not to have a kneejerk reaction about something that's a lot more complicated than you think it is.

<comment><USER7> The damaging thing most of these websites can do is leak personal information. Sometimes just annoying, but large scale password breaches can escalate to secondary problems for the public.

A 4 year CS degree does not necessarily encapsulate security training as it's usually an elective, but it at least gives the foundational understanding of algorithms to understand why something is secure vs insecure.

<comment><USER8> While I agree that a 4 year CS degree is superior to a bootcamp in terms of computing knowledge and skill, the notion that knowing anything about algorithms leads to knowing simple web based security, most of which is baked into whatever framework you're using anyway, is silly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> My biggest concern with coding bootcamps as an industry is that the people making the decision about which bootcamp to attend are dramatically under- qualified to make the decision and therefore relatively more prone to both scams and instructor incompetence.

Here's how I imagine this goes, from the author's questions:

> Do you want to do a bootcamp?

I guess so? I'd like a job, and I hear this pays well and folks are hiring.

> Do you want work as a professional developer? If so: front end or back end?

I... what does that even mean? How do I know?

> Any specific programming language you want to learn?

I like the, uhh, curly braces? So... ruby?

> How much money are you willing to spend on tuition?

As much as it takes to set me on the right career path?

> Do you need a lot of mentoring and teaching? Or are able to learn stuff by > yourself?

This phrasing is patronizing. How about "In your past experience learning STEM-type material, did you benefit disproportionately from having structured learning time and dedicated instructors, or were your more the 'learn from the book' type?"

(As an aside, if you're not an autodidact, you'll probably not do well in the kinds of positions that people are hiring typical bootcamp grads into, C-grade start-ups with at most a seed round in funding)

There is probably an opportunity out there for an assessment that yields a decent prediction for "if I take one of the better bootcamps, is there a decent chance I will get into an engineering career in tech, and, will I want to stay there?" This blog post isn't it.

(Another aside, the better bootcamps (HackReactor, for one) have already gotten rather good at this sort of screening and are generating money based on their placements and the quality of their reputation).

<comment><USER10> "My biggest concern with coding bootcamps as an industry is that the people making the decision about which bootcamp to attend are dramatically under- qualified to make the decision and therefore relatively more prone to both scams and instructor incompetence."

That's one of the main reasons I wrote this article, as I believe that doing proper research beforehand is one of the best ways to ensure that you don't end up at a scam bootcamp. I think you'll agree with me on that one.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> As a hiring manager I've visited with a number of bootcamps in SF and the East Bay. They definitely vary in quality, intensity, and in the topics covered.

I've also made two hires from bootcamps. Neither were completely new to programming (which stood out in the interview process, compared to their classmates) but they'd both honed their skills during the bootcamp. Both are excellent, and while they required a lot of mentoring from senior colleagues initially they both work hard, are highly motivated, and have a strong desire to learn and prove themselves.

Are they lacking in CS fundmentals? Yes, a little bit; they couldn't tell me what a good sorting algorithm is, they'd just call array.sort() to get the job done. Which is exactly what I'd do, even though I went through implementing quicksort, bubblesort, etc... in my CS degree.

Would I hire them to develop novel algorithms? Probably not (though I wouldn't rule them out), but they can work an ORM pretty good, can reason through workflows, and build fairly complex web applications just fine.

I think bootcamps can be a goldmine for hiring. You get to meet dozens of motivated, enthusiastic junior engineers at each hiring day.

</comment><comment><USER12> I think the bootcamps are largely a scam, extracting money from desperate people and delivering far less than they promise. Yes, they should be called out on HN as borderline scammy.

Against that is the fact that most junior dev jobs are about simple CRUD apps, which don't take all _that_ much expertise to maintain, and add simple features to.

The _idea_ that someone with 14 weeks of focused training can be marginally useful in a real world start up job, (where the code is probably already a huge rats nest) seems somewhat valid.

</comment><comment><USER13> It seems like a lot of people have unrealistic expectations for a bootcamp. Obviously it's not supposed to be a replacement for a 4-year CS degree.

Look at its military namesake. You don't come out of bootcamp a general, ready to lead an army. You come out a grunt, at the bottom of the ladder, with the basic knowledge to do the simplest jobs and the discipline to follow orders. More complicated jobs require additional training. That seems pretty accurate for what the bootcamps are promising.

</comment><comment><USER14> I went to Maker's Academy in London (£8,000 at the time, I paid for it with profits from a prior successful exit).

As someone else pointed out, this was run as a for profit college, no surprise given their VC backing, with a focus on the flavour of the week skills and buzzwords required to get their graduates a job afterwards ('agile' check,'MVP' check).

At the time our class was twice the normal size, their "teaching staff" had trouble coping, and the marketing was thrown at us daily, with promises of jobs for all.

I had no intention of becoming a developer, and was able to put some of what I learnt to good use in a new e-commerce business.

Some struggled to get any value out of the course, being told to wait for the learning curve to kick in, some were judged by Maker's Academy to be somehow deficient in their attitude or character. There were dropouts as well, who realised that coding, and the intense, corporate cult atmosphere was not for them. They were given the ultimatum of come back and try again or forfeit your fees.

The people who got the most out of it had already coded in the long term prior to attending, were good at it, and needed the employability that the course gave.

It was a case of marketing style over educational substance that was taking people in for near the cost of a year at university.

</comment><comment><USER15> As to the some of the negative opinions I'd like to ask how a graduate from a boot camp differs from a college intern? Typical bootcamps run 10+ weeks, in which students basically do nothing but learn programming. Whereas your typical intern comes to you after maybe 2 years of college where they've done at best 7 or 8 programming classes, along with a lot of other liberal arts and gen ed classes. Those other classes can be quite valuable personally but at the end of the day likely affect the quality of the programmer you're getting very little.

At my company we hire students from a few schools that require students do mandatory internships to graduate. The quality varies but honestly the breath of experience is probably the same. Except the bootcamp grads are probably somewhat older than the typical 20-22 yo interns we get. I obviously can't say for sure but I'd guess that the sheer number of hours put in by a bootcamp grad probably equals that of a mid year college student. The difference between interns and junior level employees are generally minuscule unless the junior dev has previous work experience anyway so if you're company is hiring interns anyway I don't see any reason why not to kick the tire on a few bootcamp grads.

<comment><USER16> A college intern and a bootcamp grad are likely to have a different amount of exposure to computer science fundamentals. Moreover, once the intern is done cooking, you should expect that "likely" to graduate into an "almost certainly".

When the fresh college grad and the bootcamp grad are doing mindless CRUD-y apps and basic CSS, you shouldn't expect much difference. Once things become more demanding and require a greater grasp of algorithms, data structures, and discrete mathematics you are far more likely to notice a sizable difference.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Hey, author of the article here. I'm happy to answer any questions if anybody's got any.

<comment><USER17> When I dropped out of college to start working in tech I spoke with one of my professors who urged me to do a bootcamp instead (he had some kind of loose affiliation with it) and was able to spew off some impressive statistics, 90%+ employment rate, amazing salaries, etc.

I told him that moment that there was no way those statistics were honest, at the very least they were surely either maintaining ludicrous acceptance standards (only accepting experienced developers who already had hiring potential) or were using loose interpretations of the words "employment" and "salary" where a job was a gig and perks got attributed dollar sign values etc.

I did not go the bootcamp route and to this day maintain the same opinion, the value of bootcamps is dubious at best and a cash grab similar to for-profit education in the United States at worst.

And finally I'm extremely cynical of "that one success story that proves x was a good idea and you should do it too". Although I found your article very thoughtful, I can't help but draw connections between "That one new dieting trick that helped Larry lose 20 lbs in six weeks!", and "That coding boot camp that directly led me to make more then my doctor friend".

Any thoughts on my skepticism, given that you've actually done one? Again thoughtful article, it makes me feel bad for shooting down bootcamps.

[1]: [http://www.skilledup.com/articles/bootcamps-san- francisco](http://www.skilledup.com/articles/bootcamps-san-francisco)

<comment><USER18> As a hiring manager who has hired from boot camps, I view boot camps simply as an organized medium to encourage career change into tech. They are not unlike undergraduate computer science programs - neither program is required to start a career in tech, but some people need organization and a clear path to get there.

Sometimes a little guidance and networking enables an individual to excel where they might otherwise find themselves lost. Boot camps can provide this stability, as long as the program isn't misguided.

In the end, it's down to the individual to make their career. I would never hire blind from a boot camp.

<comment><USER19> Completing them also signals dedication and a strong work ethic, which are very important qualities to have in programming, especially when starting out.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I see a lot of people here dismissing bootcamps completely, either having bad experiences hiring students from them, or just not agreeing about the message and promise of a high paying job they send to prospective students. I just want to share my experience.

I am a graduate from the first class of an early bootcamp that started in early 2013, close to the time when they were popping up all over the place. This bootcamp is still operating today. I remain in contact with some of my past classmates, and the bootcamp staff. From my personal experience, and from what the staff has told me, there seems to be two criteria shared between successful students who go on to get hired quickly and become good developers:

\- They go into the bootcamp from a technical background (either doing IT/programming/web design in their free time for fun or from past work experience)

\- They have a penchant for knowledge and self-learning (in anything they are interested in)

In my case, I messed around a lot with computers growing up and coded some simple websites by teaching myself HTML, CSS, and some Javascript/PHP. Prior to the bootcamp, I had worked as an IT Helpdesk Technician, and had dropped out of college after my first year. I did not have any CS or programming paradigm (OOP, FP, MVC, Algorithms, etc) knowledge.

In the past 2 1/2 years, my knowledge of CS and programming in general has grown exponentially. I have a firm grasp of many different concepts and can learn the basics of new ideas, languages, and libraries relatively quickly. I have worked at two different companies during this time, and have been told at both that I was almost passed up due to the bad flak that bootcamp graduates get. At both stints, I over-delivered on their expectations they had of me, and quickly became an asset and valued part of the team that helped deliver a lot of business value.

My success can be attributed to what I have learned in the bootcamp, my past technical experience, and the time and effort I put in during my free time to teach myself new skills. Going to the bootcamp gave me an accelerated head start into the world of programming, and laid down a solid foundation for me to build future knowledge upon. This is what a good bootcamp should do. They should train their students to become great beginners, who can pick up a junior developer job and quickly start contributing to their team.

Other successful students from my bootcamp all seem to share the two criteria listed above. Even if we all come from different economic, educational, or technical backgrounds. This isn't to say that ALL successful students share those two traits, some can have one but not the other.

The people that don't succeed usually end up being the ones who only see the "get a six-figure job in 12 weeks" headline. Usually, they do not have a technical background nor know of the programming landscape that rapidly changes and evolves, and the effort needed to keep one's knowledge current because of it. They might not even have any interest in programming at all. Sometimes they even have a CS degree.

So, how can you find and weed out these good developers then?

\- Ask about what they did before the bootcamp

\- Ask if they had any technical experience before joining the bootcamp, either personal or professional

\- If so, ask for examples. Really look at their portfolio and code (if they have any). Look at their github profile and see if they had commits from before they went to the bootcamp, if available

\- Ask how they learn new skills, what resources do they like to use, what kind of a learner they are

Some signs that the bootcamp graduate probably won't work out are:

\- No git history after the bootcamp

\- No portfolio, no website

\- You don't get a feeling that they enjoy learning new things

\- No technical experience from before the bootcamp

\- No interest in programming or technology at all

It isn't impossible to find a bootcamp graduate who can quickly integrate into your team and become an asset. You just have to give the right ones a chance.

<comment><USER10> Great points. This is very much aligned with my experience.</comment></comment>


The Scala ecosystem - <AUTHOR> http://appliedscala.com/blog/2016/scala-ecosystem/ <comment><USER2> I am not a Scala developer but I try to learn it. I think that the problem with Scala, as well as with C++, is: It has too much features.

I think it is better to learn several programming languages that one overloaded.

Whith an overloaded programming language you have: A very few programmers that understand the whole thing and others that understand only some parts.

Whith several simple programming languages you have: A very few programmers that understand all the languages well and others that only understand one but well.

<comment> premium-concern > It has too much features.

Examples?</comment></comment>


Recursion, Tail Calls and Trampolines - <AUTHOR> http://www.datchley.name/recursion-tail-calls-and-trampolines/ <comment><USER2> Portable tail recursion for Common Lisp:

[http://www.kylheku.com/cgit/lisp-snippets/tree/tail- recursio...](http://www.kylheku.com/cgit/lisp-snippets/tree/tail- recursion.lisp)

The lexical tlet construct doesn't use trampolines; it translates to tagbody/go. It is built on the argtags macro (early in the file), which provides an abstraction similar to tagbody/go, but where the labels can take parameters, and GO passes parameters to labels. The parameters are just variable assignments, of course. If you (goto foo 1 2 3) and there is a (label foo x y z), it means that control passes to that label, and the variables x y z take on values 1 2 3.

deftail is for tail recursion among independent functions. It is based on trampolines. The :other-tails keyword is used to declare which other functions participate. When the deftail function calls these others, those calls are assumed to be tail calls. You can also use the tail-call function explicitly (as a replacement for funcall) to abandon execution up to the trampoline loop and call a given function.

tail-call is the heart of the trampoline. It first checks whether it is already dynamically enclosed in a trampoline, and if so, it just uses that one to do the tail call. Otherwise it establishes a new dynamic contour and enters into the trampoline loop.

Thus any of the tail functions can be entered as ordinary functions. Then when they tail out to their peers, they establish the trampoline context.

<comment><USER3> Thanks for sharing this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Shout out to WebKit for being the first web browser to support tail calls in its JavaScript engine:

[https://www.webkit.org/blog/4054/es6-in- webkit/](https://www.webkit.org/blog/4054/es6-in-webkit/)

Come on other browsers!

[https://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es6/#test- proper_tail_...](https://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es6/#test- proper_tail_calls_\(tail_call_optimisation\))

</comment><comment><USER5> Since ES6 doesn't generally support TCO Id recommend using Babel. I wrote about Babel's ability to support TCO, and its downsides, here: Functional JavaScript – [https://taylodl.wordpress.com/2015/08/09/functional- javascri...](https://taylodl.wordpress.com/2015/08/09/functional-javascript- tail-call-optimization-and-babel/)</comment>


Show HN: Create a "Subscribe with Slack" button for your blog - <AUTHOR> https://www.rockstarcoders.com/how-to-grow-your-email-list/ <comment><USER2> There are some other no-cost tips that help email marketers to grow email list. [https://quickemailverification.com/blog/8-no-cost-tips-to- gr...](https://quickemailverification.com/blog/8-no-cost-tips-to-grow-your- mailing-list/)</comment>


Study Gives High Marks To Retailers' Clinics - <AUTHOR> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/14/AR2009091402162.html

<comment><USER2> I know the primary care outpatient business, and I support "Walmart medical care." (We call them "counter clinics.")

People who don't want expert medical advice go to the counter clinic, we don't have to serve resentful patients, and we can spend our time thinking about medicine with patients who appreciate our service.

Further, patients sometimes visit a counter clinic, but they have issues beyond what the counter clinic can handle. So, the counter clinic will refer the patient to us ---the medical doctors. One of our most regular patient referrals is corner CVS because the local medical doctors introduced themselves respectfully to the CVS clinic staff.

However, don't be fooled by the "cost cutting" nonsense. My estimation is that counter clinics increase total medical spending in the same way that shopping at Wal-Mart increases total consumer spending. Yes, each individual purchase of "health care" is moderately cheaper. However, given the lower prices, omnipresent availability, and cross-marketing of other products in the store, people do not simply buy the same things at a lower cost, they impulsively buy many smaller purchases of dubious value.

So, rather than visit an outpatient medical doctor for an hour for $500 (that is what we bill, though we usually only collect about $300 of that from insurance), one visits the Wal-Mart counter clinic for $70. That's a savings of $430, right? Maybe. Assume the counter clinic treated your sore throat, but you also had another issue, and later visited the medical doctor. Both issues could have been treated by the medical doctor for $500 now rather than $570 over several weeks. Oh, and you also bought "health supplements." Add another $30 recurring cost. Well, actually, you don't go to the doctor at all because you only have $500 for health care, and the doctor costs $500, but you only have $400 because you've already spend $100 on the counter clinic and supplements ---oops, actually, that $400 is already spent by your employer for health insurance.

So, you still pay, but you never visit a doctor, chronic heath conditions continue to exasperate, and in addition to suffering from chronic health problems, you eventually get very sick, progressively lose your ability to function, and are hospitalized sooner at a much higher cost.

Even a single day of missed work at $5 minimum wage due to illness not addressed by a counter clinic is quantitatively worth more than the $37 best case savings at the counter clinic. Primary and preventative care alternatives are almost never "cost savings" unless you know precisely otherwise.

By the way: there is some ludicrous cultural myth that exasperated health problems can be "fixed," or if you can just avoid "having a a serious problem" and "keep natural," you will be OK ---or at least, you can "fix" health "issues" "later."

No, you don't. You die.

Also, jeez, you spend so much time and money making your face and buying clothes, but when you have a disease, you're thinking about saving a few dozen dollars? Bleh.

<comment><USER3> The problem is that doctors charge ridiculous amounts even for simple treatments. If I have Bronchitis I know exactly what I need and the doctor knows it too. Yet he will charge a shitload for a 10 minute appointment.

The same with medical tests – the doctors draw blood and send it to a pathologist. They then charge you a 400% mark-up on that and make pure profit. Then it is the unnecessary x-rays (if the doctor happens to have a digital x-ray machine that he is itching to use).

If a doctor prescribes anything he will prescribe the most expensive antibiotics ever – even though a much cheaper run of the mill one will work as well (I don't know why they do that).

Why do they want routine appointments (once a month) for chronic medicines?

No offence, but I think modern day doctors focus on ripping off medical schemes because there is no apparent victim.

<comment><USER2> > The problem is that doctors charge ridiculous amounts even for simple > treatments.

Assuming you are a programmer, why should I pay to use your software? I would prefer to pay nothing because it doesn't "cost anything" to copy it. Oh, well, ok, I'll pay for my 10 minute share of your time at $40 / hour. You have to eat, too.

> If I have Bronchitis I know exactly what I need and the doctor knows it too.

Great. Go visit a counter clinic and get exactly what you need ---though I'm sure you know that you have acute viral bronchitis and you only needs some over-the-counter drugs to treat symptoms. Then, you can go reinvest your "shitload" in something more intelligent like car insurance or a new graphics card. Like, your lungs are fine. I'm pretty sure all lungs have been fine forever for everybody, and if not, well, you can buy a new lung from the lung store and swap it in for all those shitloads you saved in ten minutes years ago. It will probably even be a better lung than your old obsolete one.

"The same with medical tests – the doctors draw blood and send it to a pathologist. They then charge you a 400% mark-up on that and make pure profit."

You're right. Health care should be like sex. Free only, illegal otherwise, immoral regardless. There should be laws to enforce this.

"Then it is the unnecessary x-rays (if the doctor happens to have a digital x-ray machine that he is itching to use)."

Say no.

"If a doctor prescribes anything he will prescribe the most expensive antibiotics ever – even though a much cheaper run of the mill one will work as well (I don't know why they do that)."

Did you ask?

Also, doctors prescribe generally prescribe what will be most likely to work the fastest because ---if you remember from a century ago--- bacterial infections kill you and then spread to your friends and family to kill them. They don't care that you can save $30 with some similar drug they don't know much about.

"Why do they want routine appointments (once a month) for chronic medicines?"

Because

"No offence, but I think modern day doctors focus on ripping off medical schemes because there is no apparent victim."

If you know some rip off scheme perpetuated by licensed medical doctors, write it down and submit it to a medical journal. I think modern day people focus on engorging distractions while they mindlessly spawn and decay because there is no apparent victim. No offense.

<comment><USER3> > Go visit a counter clinic and get exactly what you need ---though I'm sure > you know that you have acute viral bronchitis and you only needs some over- > the-counter drugs to treat symptoms. Then, you can go reinvest your > "shitload" in something more intelligent like car insurance or a new > graphics card.

The problem is that in my country you cannot get a prescription without a doctor's appointment. What happens (at least with me) is that I wait to see if I get better by myself.

> You're right. Health care should be like sex. Free only, illegal otherwise, > immoral regardless. There should be laws to enforce this.

Nowhere did I claim that. What I meant was that doctors have a conflict of interest. On the one hand they should care for your health and on the other hand they should make as much money as possible. That causes a lot of doctors to prescribe unnecessary tests and perform unnecessary x-rays. In my country there was a law that allowed doctors to sell medicine (usually a pharmacy had to be owned by a pharmacist). This caused a lot of doctors to give out overly expensive medicine that people do not need.

> Say no.

And the doctor will tell you that _it is really necessary_. Since most people do not know the field they will believe the doctor with blind trust.

> Also, doctors prescribe generally prescribe what will be most likely to work > the fastest because ---if you remember from a century ago--- bacterial > infections kill you and then spread to your friends and family to kill them.

They actually do that to make money (see above).

> They don't care that you can save $30 with some similar drug they don't know > much about.

Those "similar drugs" are run of the mill anti-biotics that have been on the market for 20+ years.

<comment><USER2> "The problem is that in my country you cannot get a prescription without a doctor's appointment."

Acute viral bronchitis: [http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_0_9?url=search- alias%3Dhpc...](http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_0_9?url=search- alias%3Dhpc&field-keywords=cold+medicine&x=0&y=0&sprefix=cold+medi)

"They actually do that to make money (see above)."

In the USA, doctors do not make money from drugs directly, though they may indirectly benefit from pharmaceutical "good-will." However, that's more common for new drugs that patients would take chronically, like psych drugs, not antibiotics to treat common, acute issues.

"And the doctor will tell you that it is really necessary. Since most people do not know the field they will believe the doctor with blind trust."

Well, do you really know the field enough to know that it's _not_ necessary? And if so, then why would this be relevant to you?

"Those "similar drugs" are run of the mill anti-biotics that have been on the market for 20+ years."

The standard of care evolves ---as do the "biotics."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is the healthcare of the future.

The basic care that you receive will come from a physician assistant/nurse practitioner. This dramatically cuts down on cost while mantaining an adequate level of care. Physicians are going to continue to become more and more specialized. Which leads to physicians only providing specialized/unique treatments.

<comment><USER5> I agree. This is a sign that health care is in the process of fixing itself.

If you have 45 minutes to kill, you can listen here (<http://dpcare.org/wa_health_underwriters>) to a Seattle doctor talk about the issues, his company's approach, and why direct primary care is such a good thing. He advocates concierge care as opposed to the Walmart care discussed in the article, and I find the approach to be more sound. His approach is like Performace Based Logistics for medicine--the doctor that keeps you healthier makes more money, and I like that incentive. Nonetheless, both his solution and the Walmart solution are attempts at taking advantage of the same idea: paying directly for primary care can both lower costs and improve quality because the time and money required to pay for routine things with insurance is so terribly high.

I am convinced we are witnessing the birth of a revolution in medical care. I pay out of pocket for primary care, _even though my insurance would cover everything if I went to a traditional provider_. The new way is that much better than the old way -- and that cheap.

<comment><USER6> (If the doctor that keeps you healthier makes you more money, will that not drive doctors to less risky specializations? I'd imagine that a brain surgeon for example sees many more people who are likely to die than say a dermatologist.)

<comment><USER7> There was a study a long while back, I think I read it in the mid 90s, that the best doctors and hospitals had lower recovery rates, because they took the worst, most difficult, cases. I saw it as part of a discussion of the difficulty of rating health care service providers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> It's worth noting that all the pro-retail-clinic claims in this article come from a study done by the RAND Corporation. This is not an entity known for single-minded pursuit of truth. It is closely (though informally) tied to the republican party.

</comment><comment><USER9> Given the trend and lack of care about suffering in this country, in a decade all we'll be able to afford is health care "vending machines".

Instead of talking to people, you'll stick your arm in one machine socket and spit into another and it will take your blood and analyze your fluids for the flu, a dozen diseases and genetic defects. Then it will print out a prescription with a credit for the store it's located in.

You'll be force-fed advertising while the process happens and then they will sell the results to various other corporations which will then market you cures. They'll be able to do this because they will flash an EULA on the screen waving all your rights, which you have to agree to so you can get help.

Then the medical vending machine corporations will have a massive lobby for their rights in Congress which cannot be defeated because they will get the loons on their side to defend their massive profits as "American Values".</comment>


Tim Berners-Lee: Act now to save the internet as we know it - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@timberners_lee/act-now-to-save-the-internet-as-we-know-it-ccf47ce8b39f <comment><USER2> Kind of hypocritical if you ask me since he sold out the web with EME[1].

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

<comment><USER3> Why?

He wants ISPs not to be permitted to discriminate between network traffic based on its content or the identities of the senders and recipients.

He also wants a standard way for web browsers to receive and display encrypted media.

Do these desires really conflict?

<comment><USER4> I think the OP's point is that non-NN allows powerful ISPs to create walled gardens and restrict access to information that should be available to all.

And EMEs allow powerful media providers to create walled gardens and restrict access to information that should be available to all.

Not sure I but either argument personally, but that's my interpretation.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I just called my senators about the FCC vote: [https://www.callmycongress.com/](https://www.callmycongress.com/)</comment>


Reddit is down - <AUTHOR> https://reddit.com <comment><USER2> Its having server hiccups. Calling it down is pretty drastic, and wrong.

Also, they do have a status page: [https://reddit.statuspage.io](https://reddit.statuspage.io).</comment>


Show HN: redeuceur – A utility for creating terse Redux reducers - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/maxhallinan/redeuceur <comment><USER2> Heh. Quoting my tweet from last December at [https://twitter.com/acemarke/status/809427191306059776](https://twitter.com/acemarke/status/809427191306059776) :

> If I had a nickel for every lib I've seen that lets me "Write reducers with > less boilerplate", I'd have... well, several dollars, anyway

Case in point, the "Reducers" page [0] in my Redux addons catalog lists dozens of reducer utility libs , and there's even more under the "Action/Reducer Generation" page [1]. (Yes, those two pages are cluttered and need to be reorganized, but I haven't had time yet. I'll also note that I did just add redeuceur to my list a couple days ago as well.)

So, good news is that if you want to abstract out the process of defining reducers and action creators, there's a gazillion libs out there to help you do that. As always, it's up you you to decide how much abstraction _you_ want to use in a Redux app [2].

[0] [https://github.com/markerikson/redux-ecosystem- links/blob/ma...](https://github.com/markerikson/redux-ecosystem- links/blob/master/reducers.md)

[1] [https://github.com/markerikson/redux-ecosystem- links/blob/ma...](https://github.com/markerikson/redux-ecosystem- links/blob/master/action-reducer-generators.md)

[2] [http://blog.isquaredsoftware.com/2017/05/idiomatic-redux- tao...](http://blog.isquaredsoftware.com/2017/05/idiomatic-redux-tao-of-redux- part-2/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for adding redeuceur to your list! I didn't realize there were so many reducer utilities but I'm not surprised. I like the way Redux leaves room for the user to play with the implementation.

In the blog post you linked to ([2]), you say:

>Ah, the dreaded switch statement. For some reason, this is one of the most disliked aspects of typical Redux code, and I have yet to figure out why.

The Redux docs take the position that switch statements are an implementation detail. The documentation author(s) provide an alternative approach, the action type to handler map, in the Reducing Boilerplate section. I think Redux advocates get a little bit impatient with the criticisms of Redux that amount to "I don't like switch statements". I share that point of view. Switch statements _are_ an implementation detail and aren't worth arguing about when the Redux architecture does not depend on them. When I came up with redeuceur, I wanted to isolate independent operations. For me, breaking a larger function into smaller functions means less cognitive overhead. I would have used the createReducer idea from the docs but I needed support for arbitrary computed conditions rather than a simple action type map. So, it's not about getting rid of switch statements but more about making it easier for my average mind to keep track of things.

All of that being said, are you sure you're not being disingenuous when you say "I have yet to figure out why?" The strength of the animus against switch statements in Redux reducers might be a product of received wisdom or unreasonable bias. But the additional cognitive overhead of things like `break` vs. cascading `case`'s, and `default` is a reasonable basis for preferring `if` statements or something more declarative. As near as I can tell, the original Redux examples used switch statements because they were aesthetically pleasing to the author. There's nothing wrong with this. But it shouldn't be a surprise that people prefer a construct with less complex behavior, even if the complexity of a switch statement is manageable to someone with solid JavaScript experience.

<comment><USER2> No, I genuinely don't understand why people hate switch statements :) Like I said in the post, a switch statement is a construct designed to implement if/else logic on the value of a single field, and since we usually want to do work based on the value of `action.type`, a switch statement is the obvious choice.

Now, I personally tend to use a function map utility in my own Redux code, but there's definitely nothing _wrong_ with switch statements, and I don't get the vehement complaints about them.</comment></comment></comment>


A Gentle Introduction to Algorithm Complexity Analysis - <AUTHOR> http://discrete.gr/complexity/ <comment><USER3> For anyone interested in this subject I'd highly recommend the Algorithm Design Manual by Steven Skiena[0]. He goes over this in pretty good detail in the first ~1/4 of the book. This was my first introduction to Algorithm Complexity Analysis and by the end of that section I already found myself looking at my code in a different light.

[0] <http://www.amazon.com/dp/1849967202>

<comment><USER4> I would recommend the Introduction to Algorithms by Cormen. It covers not only the complexity analysis but also describes the most important algorithms, data structures and classical problems solutions. <http://www.amazon.com/dp/0262033844>

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Great article. I've understood the why and what of Big-O but never how to do the analysis.

I have a question for the informed however:

The article says that we only consider the fastest growing parts of an algorithm. So, counting instructions, n^2 + 2n would just be n^2. But why do we do that? Imagine an algorithm where we have n^12 + n^2 + n^2 + n^2 + n^2, etc. Do we really ignore each n^2 section?

[Edited]

<comment><USER6> I assume you mean n^2 + 2n right?

Given your example, you ignore the n^2 because n^12 grows SO much faster. For any "normal" amount of operations, n^12 wipes out 4*n^2 in terms of cost.

<comment><USER5> Correct, I meant n^2.

Certainly there are cases where the "insignificant" parts of an algorithm are not so, correct? In a simple case n^12 dominates a few n^2 sections, but there must be exceptions to that.

Are there cases where a more complete analysis is done -- like comparing two similar algorithms? Or at that point are you actually implementing the algorithms to test and measure?

<comment><USER4> Yes, there are cases where the "insignificant" part is so significant it's actually more efficient to use asymptotically slower algorithm for everyday problem sizes. The Big O notation is not so much about running speed but about scaling.

While the "insignificant" part would usually have to be really large to influence the running time, it's often the case that one algorithm is faster than another due to the second one having a large constant multiplier, even though the Big O notation would suggest otherwise (e.g. O(10 _n_ logn) would be faster than O(1000*n))

It's also common that even if one of the algorithms is slower in the worst case scenario, its average case performance is better than asymptotically better solutions. A popular example of such might be the quicksort algorithm, which has the worst-case running time O(n^2) but in practice is usually faster than most O(nlogn) sorting algorithms.

<comment><USER5> "Yes, there are cases where the 'insignificant' part is so significant it's actually more efficient to use asymptotically slower algorithm for everyday problem sizes. The Big O notation is not so much about running speed but about scaling."

I do understand that. My point was that the analysis is likely too optimistic in some cases. Maybe that's not an issue. I guess the whole thing is fairly arbitrary anyway, and conservative, since we're going to use "worst case" wherever it can be applied.

<comment><USER7> It's not about optimisim, but about eventual dominance of functions.

If you have n^7 and 5(n^6 + 7n^2), then for every n >= 6, the first is larger. In general, for every pair of polynomials f and g of max degrees s and t respectively, and f will eventually dominate g if and only if s > t. Constant multiples are taken into account in big-O, but in a sense they can only delay the inevitable - for any nonzero constant multiples you pick to multiply f and g by, there always will exist a point n such that after that point, f dominates g forever.

It might be that that n, however, is too large for your purposes - <USER2> that's what you mean by optimism. Sedgewick has written about other types of analysis that take this into account, see Algorithms for the Masses: <http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~rs/talks/AlgsMasses.pdf> .

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I've been doing the Coursera course on Algorithms (from Stanford by Tim Roughgarden). He's going over concepts like Big-O notation as well as analyzing algorithms. This particular article is a refreshing read, and I would highly suggest the Coursera course as an accompaniment if someone wants to go deeper.

</comment><comment><USER9> A gentle intro? It's a bloody novel!

<comment><USER10> Nope, it is just an introduction. I would love to see next parts, my memory of Complexity Analysis is very rusty. Basically I only remember people _repeating_ that course, leaving the exam just after seeing questions :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I wonder if the title is in jest. Clicking on this link and then being greeted with a wall of text (literally! It fills my entire screen) is hardly gentle.

I'm sure it's a good read just not right now >_>

<comment><USER12> I'd say thats why it is gentle. Most CS books will compress that content into 2-3 pages and expect you to figure the rest out as you go. On the other hand, this article doesn't require you to take some time to think about it at all, its all right there.

<comment><USER13> The classic CLRS Algorithms book actually starts out with a five chapter "Foundations" part that goes over computational complexity in a good amount of detail. It goes over theta, big and small O, and big and small omega notations and their properties similarly to how this article seems to. It has an entire chapter on determining the computational complexity of recurrences and another on randomized algorithms. The five chapters together are about 130 pages and probably not what I would call gentle but I found it surprisingly approachable.

<comment><USER14> CLRS has an exceptional introduction to complexity and in fact is an exceptional book on its whole. However, it is not always easy to follow for high school students who don't have a mathematical background, as it tends to get a bit formal. It's the same reason many programmers find it repulsive and wouldn't read past the first few pages. For example, the proof for the Master Theorem is clearly not that easy to follow. That's exactly the reason I wrote this article so that it's complete yet approachable to people without a mathematical background.

<comment><USER15> That being said, the section containing the proof is starred if I remember. I imagine most people, even those reading CLRS, skip over it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> similar topic in many Computer Algorithm Books</comment>


Some very cool places on YouTube you may not know about - <AUTHOR> http://www.articulateventures.com/articulate-blog/category/some-very-cool-places-on-youtube-you-may-not-know-about

<comment><USER2> great channels, thanks</comment>


Amazon begins to re-rank affected 'adult' books; theories swirl [UPDATED] - <AUTHOR> http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2009/04/amazon-begins-to-rerank-affected-books-theories-swirl.html <comment><AUTHOR> Perhaps not surprisingly, the troll from this thread (<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=560075>, showdead=yes may be needed) was a troll. LA Times links to this blogger claiming the code doesn't work. But it doesn't seem to be definitive. <http://bryant.livejournal.com/672165.html>

Weev's explanation is still the most likely candidate but it seems pretty likely Weev didn't actually do it himself; he just piggybacked on the outrage.</comment>


Preview of Qt 5 for Android - <AUTHOR> http://blog.qt.digia.com/blog/2013/03/13/preview-of-qt-5-for-android/

<comment><USER2> I used PySide to develop for Qt on the Nokia N900. What a wonderful experience! The N900 itself is based off of debian. Deploying to the phone was as simple as scp. Running was as simple as sshing in and executing my Python script. It was really great to be able to run the same source on both my desktop and phone! I'm looking forward to using Qt on Android - even better if it is with Python!

</comment><comment><USER3> I might actually do some proper Android development now Qt is there, mostly as I've spent that long developing with it I've got a lot of things in my tool bag. Nice work from all involved.

</comment><comment><USER4> I wish Google would buy Digia and make it the default framework for Android 5.

<comment><USER5> That's a silly idea. What would be motivation to do this?

Android APIs are not bad at all.

<comment><USER6> Choice of using one of the many languages Qt supports instead of Java for officially supported development.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Do we also have Qt port for iOS?

<comment><USER8> <http://blog.qt.digia.com/blog/2013/03/05/qt-for-ios-preview/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Can someone explain to me what this is exactly? Is it a framework like PhoneGap?

<comment><USER10> QT is a very popular cross-platform framework. Its mostly used in Linux and other POSIX operating systems (but it also available for Windows and other non-POSIX guys).

QT is not like phonegap in the sense that is both a high level and low level framework for creating apps for the Desktop and Mobile using C/C++. Other bindings exist so that you can use QT from other languages such as Python.

There is also QML which even though I have no experience whatsoever, I understand it to be a quick way to create an app using a declarative syntax not unlike a mixture of XML and a javascript-like language. I may be wrong on this one but I've heard that QML would appeal to Javascript fans.

<comment><USER5> It's Qt and not QT.

<comment><USER11> That's cute, you correcting him.

Sorry, that was a terrible pun.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Uproar in CA as private company takes over financially sound libraries - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/27/business/27libraries.html?_r=1&src=me&ref=business <comment><USER2> Nice paywall. As I can't read the actual article...

Libraries are becoming harder and harder to run. Fewer people have the need or desire to access them. They still serve a useful and necessary purpose in our society, but the old ways of running them will have to change.

Most towns wait until the library is ready to close before handing it off to a private company. You can imagine how the employees and users are treated during this time.

These libraries were handed over while they were still healthy. That means that the company can take them over without drastic measures and slowly rework them to be more profitable and useful.

I think it's a good idea, and I'm glad to see them doing it.</comment>


Superhuman: the Incredible Savant Brain - <AUTHOR> http://www.smarter.org/research/superhuman/ <comment><USER2> I wonder where that 100 Petaflops figure comes from. I suppose that does not mean IEEE-754 compliant floating-point operations, just crude approximations of some sort.

</comment><comment><USER3> wow, it's amazing how much our brain is wired for Music... or maybe its the other way around.</comment>


The science of fun - <AUTHOR> http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/may/31/maths.science

<comment><AUTHOR> Try out the puzzles at the end, it's lots of fun.</comment>


Ask HN: Is it likely a Berlin startup would hire an international student? - <AUTHOR>

Anyone familiar enough with the Berlin or Munich startup scene to comment on whether or not a German startup would hire an international student studying in Germany?<p>Asking for a friend - a Perl/Python engineer with 7+ years of software experience. <comment><USER2> I don't see any reason not but you should have provided your LinkedIn profile or resumé so that we could see your experience.

Then it depends of your working eligibility, do you have the authorization to work? If yes you should start to reach startups and you should easily find a job.

If not I encourage you to check out [https://techmeabroad.com/search/de/berlin](https://techmeabroad.com/search/de/berlin), it's a website that only job offers where companies want to recruit abroad and sponsor a working visa if necessary.

</comment><comment><USER3> I can only comment on the general mindset of German business people, but your friend should be fine. Persons from foreign countries are usually welcome and wanted! For more information you should specify where exactly your friend is from, but if he is already studying in Germany it should pose no problem.</comment>


Confessions of a Work-At-Home-Aholic - <AUTHOR> http://seanvosler.com/the-truth-about-working-from-home/#top

<comment><AUTHOR> thanks in advance for checking it out :) i think many of us can relate haha</comment>


Life after Google, with millions - <AUTHOR> http://www.news.com/Life-after-Google%2C-with-millions/2100-1030_3-6226900.html?tag=nefd.lede <comment><USER2> Reminds me of an axiom - if you're a jerk before you're rich, you'll probably be a jerk (in spite of and) if you become rich (excessive money amplifies your natural you like alcohol may strip your defenses). Someone saying 'when I'm rich, I'm going to start a charity and build a school... that's doesn't meaning much unless they already volunteer towards that end in some aspect...Empty words.

<comment><USER3> You can affect a lot more people by using your wealth than you can by volunteering your labor, which is probably why people put more value on things they can do with money than things they can do with their labor.

I guess most people don't view the reward from volunteering their labor as exceeding the threshold that makes it worth their time.

Makes sense to me. I don't think you should call most people jerks just because they don't volunteer. Do you?

<comment><USER4> Something else to keep in mind:

If a lawyer volunteers for an hour serving soup to the homeless his donation should be valued at minimum wage. If he helps set up a trust to stop the corrupt "directors" of the charity from helping themselves to the money both now and in the future, his hour is worth a whole lot more.

This is the same for any trained professional. Anyone who has to pause and ask him/herself, "does my insurance cover me if I donate my time doing X" has highly valuable time to donate.

<comment><USER5> But then you miss the great photo op...</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Firefox add-on to control video speed on Netflix, Prime, Twitch, etc. - <AUTHOR> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/speedup-netflix-prime-videos/ <comment><USER2> Please stop spamming this.</comment>


Jack Lew's Terrible Signature May Grace Dollar Bills Now - <AUTHOR> http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/01/jack-lews-terrible-signature-may-grace-bills.html

<comment><USER2> Let his work speak for him, not signature. I'm sure Obama chose him for that, so, if he can bring good news for the economy, one should be able to ignore some fable of ink in a corner of a bill.

If people hate those bill that much later, give em to me :D hehe</comment>


How to find reliable programmers? - <AUTHOR>

So, I am sure we all have this problem.  But is there a way to find reliable programmers in the US/Canada?  I know services like elance exist, but they seem to be overrun by overseas programmers.  That is fine, but not what I am looking for.  Any ideas? <comment><USER2> To find reliable programmers, start by being a reliable recruiter...

DO:

1\. Check with your inner circle first. You know their interests, skills, and reliability. If they're not available, ask if they would vouch for anyone they know that might be interested and available.

2\. Broaden your search to past associates who you have reason to believe would appreciate hearing about the opportunity.

3\. Check the list you've been maintaining (!) of programmers whose public work you admire and who have indicated availability for consulting work.

4\. Present the opportunity to relevant user groups or communities. Be sure their policy welcomes such queries, especially if you're not a regularly contributing member.

5\. Be upfront and explicit about available compensation. It wastes both party's time trying to get a max $25/hr opportunity together with a min $125/hr consultant.

6\. Consider permitting remote work. Some of the most effective teams I've worked with have been distributed geographically. If you can make this work, you've increased your pool of possible matches tremendously.

DON'T:

Assume that your need to find someone gives you license to be pest. The one person who ends up in the position will appreciate that you found him/her. A small group will appreciate the consideration. A somewhat larger group will tolerate the intrusion. Most of the rest of the world won't want to be interrupted. Try not to bother them.

</comment><comment><USER3> It depends on a lot of things. Are you looking for contract work, or for a full time employee? Are you looking for someone to take a lead role, or junior to another programmer that you already have? Do you need experience with a particular set of technologies? Can you spend enough to be competitive with anyone else out there, or are you looking for a cheaper solution? Do they need to live in a particular place or is remote okay?

</comment><comment><USER4> Many of the good programmers avoid services like eLance because they simply can't compete against the lousy coders who will bid $200 to develop an eBay clone in 7 days.

Perhaps you could look in the open source community of your language or technology?

<comment><USER5> Yes, exactly.

Occasionally, maybe 4-5 times a year, I get burned out on whatever current crazy startup idea I'm currently working on, and so I go looking for something different to do for a week or two.

I spend around 2 minutes looking on Elance, Rentacoder, etc, and immediately get discouraged (see above). Then, I spend some time looking at craigslist and maybe apply to 1 post in an evening's time (it's a lot of work getting your resume prepped to send). Then, a couple of days go by and I don't hear back from the one poster I applied to (I assume they are too swamped with awesome applicants to respond)...

So I go back to working on my project.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Avoid: Elance, getacoder, rentacoder, guru

Craigslist is honestly better than those places.

Ask for references, samples of past work, etc. Good programmers will have to ask you "of what kind of work" to narrow it down.

</comment><comment><USER7> Do you already know any hackers/programmers who you consider reliable?

Request a few small code samples from candidates with some short (a few sentences description) of what/who/how the code was designed for and a little bit of context (ie, was the code produced under a 24 hour deadline to fix a critical bug or the result of a six month side project).

Have your existing reliable programmers skim over the submissions, looking for a quick yes/no. Bring in (or video conference, whatever works for you) the yes candidates, and actually treat the interview as a short work session. Brainstorm about your project requirements, technology approaches, talk about challenges you see, ask them for what challenges they see and how they would approach the problem. [EDIT] - oh, make sure to vet the submitted code samples too - if a candidate can't talk coherently about the submitted samples, I would be in "thanks for coming" mode.

Ultimately, I'll echo what most posts here are saying - if some hacker/programmer in your network says good things about a fellow hacker/programmer, you're probably way ahead of the game.

If you're completely unable to evaluate technical candidate skills and have no hacker/programmers in your personal network, I think you have to move back to a suggestion by bjclark - "Hire a reputable company." Maybe you can even pay a reputable software company to vet candidates for you - I've had poor experiences with IT recruiting companies, but I've always been on the other side of the table, trying to find a good technical recruiter to work with.

</comment><comment><USER8> 1\. Don't look for a programmer. Get a developer or an engineer. If they don't know the difference between the two, that's strike one.

2\. Use your network. People you know, even friends of a friend, are far more likely to be honest about their skills.

3\. If it looks too good to be true, test it. Ask for previous works, ask how they would solve a problem, ask until you're convinced they can do the job.

4\. Be clear about what you want done. Draw up mockups, outlines, concept of operations. The less the developer has to ad-lib, the less skilled they have to be to get the job done. I'd venture to say that most of the mixups developers make are due to requirement holes. If you know what you want, you can verify its done the way you want it done too.

<comment><USER9> Even if the programmers you know are too busy to help out, then they can at least help with the search.

Job adverts and assessment questions written and reviewed by technical people look a whole lot different to ones written by the non-technical.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Hire a reputable company, not a random guy. Hire someone that has a portfolio, references, contracts, an office, a business phone number, an address, etc.

Oh, and be prepared to actually pay an appropriate amount of money. You do get what you pay for.

</comment><comment><USER11> Programmers who read hacker news is a good starting indicator :) I would also look at their previous work and how much of an online presence they have, articles, open source projects, blogs, websites, etc. And a shameless plug - if you need an independent and highly reliable programmer, drop me a line ryan at anvilflex.com

</comment><comment><USER12> If your in any city in US/Canada that has even a small startup culture, go to their meetups. I can think of 20 U.S. cities that would be easy to hook into the local IT scene. Tell us where you are and maybe someone can plug you in.

Also, many of the online resources such as elance and oDesk have US and Canadian profiles.

</comment><comment><USER13> By recommendation. Get to know good programmers. Then ask them for their recommendations.

</comment><comment><USER14> craigslist

</comment><comment><USER15> stackoverflow/jobs.37signals

</comment><comment><USER16> Good, reliable programmers are very expensive. Think $200k/year minimum.

This might not have entered into your vision of reality but I assure you that's how it works. If you keep getting shafted by cheap programming "talent" and keep looking for more, you might just be a fucking idiot.

<comment><USER17> _If you keep getting shafted by cheap programming "talent" and keep looking for more, you might just be a fucking idiot._

Swearing and making poor extrapolations off of a simple query doesn't make you cool. It actually makes you look like the idiot, not him.

<comment><USER16> I wasn't trying to be cool, I was answering his question in a straight forward and honest manner. Other people seem to be more interested in trying to blow smoke up his ass talking about interesting problem domains and how money doesn't matter.

<comment><USER18> I was actually replying to you, not him, with an observation drawn from my experience employing a great many programmers of differing ability, including perhaps half a dozen great programmers.

In terms of great programmers, money is often subordinate to a great many other things, hence adjunct. Note I didn't say money doesn't matter.

Let me illustrate by paraphrasing the conversations I have on occasion.

      Ordinary Programmer: I'm quitting.
      Me: Why?
      OP: I can get $15k more at X.
      Me: Will you stay if I match it?
      OP: Yes.

      Great Programmer: I'm quitting.
      Me: Why?
      GP: I've got a great opportunity to work over at X with Y  doing Z.
      Me: Look, I can't afford to lose you: If it's a matter of money I'll match it.
      Me: Perhaps we can see how Z might work for us....
      GP: Actually I'm pretty keen on working with Y.
      GP: It's not about the money, believe it or not I'm taking a bit of a cut.
      Me: I see. Is there anything I can do to make you stay?
      GP: Nope. Hey, once I'm settled in you should come and meet Y.

<comment><USER19> In my experience Option B above only occurs when leaving a lousy work place. I've done the same thing twice.

But after about 2 years of not making money at the "great place to work" I end up having to move on to something that is also interesting, but actually pays.

But then again, I never accept a counter offer. If I was worth 15k more to you, then why the hell weren't you paying that to start with? That just shows a lack of respect.

<comment><USER20> Absolutely don't accept counter offers. The main reason they are offered is so that the company can have you leave on their schedule, not yours. Even if this isn't their agenda, you've created a poisoned atmosphere which will make something you're unhappy with be even worse.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Howler.js – JavaScript audio library for the modern web - <AUTHOR> https://howlerjs.com <comment><USER2> I had a good experience with Howler.js v1 a few years ago and built a library that joined musical pieces together in semi-random order for a game. The system is still running on eyewire.org today.

I haven't studied v2's differences in depth, but in v1 I made a few customizations to add timers, chained cross fades, smooth muting, and perceptual volume control (i.e. takes into account the logarithmic response of hearing).

[https://github.com/seung- lab/howler.js/commit/fe445afd12cc7b...](https://github.com/seung- lab/howler.js/commit/fe445afd12cc7ba0e7ce2e4bcafb5846cfb8b01a)

[https://github.com/seung-lab/sonic- shuffle/blob/master/js/So...](https://github.com/seung-lab/sonic- shuffle/blob/master/js/SonicShuffle.js)

[https://github.com/seung-lab/sonic- shuffle/blob/master/js/Mu...](https://github.com/seung-lab/sonic- shuffle/blob/master/js/Music.js)

Anyways, thanks Howler team, you made one of my projects much easier to do!

EDIT: Removed an inaccuracy, it's been a while since I looked at the code.

</comment><comment><USER3> Makes working with audio great again: works in just about every browser I've come across, including in the Chromecast. Highly recommend it.

<comment><USER4> Doesnt work on IE11 or Edge

edit: maybe its company policy:

new Audio() gives Permission denied

<comment><USER5> It definitely works on IE11 and Edge. If your computer is blocking the Audio tag then no it won't work in IE11 as there is no Web Audio, but Edge should work unless Web Audio is getting blocked as well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> FYI, if you've built something with howler.js and want to add it to our showcase ([https://howlerjs.com/showcase/](https://howlerjs.com/showcase/)), simply go to [https://github.com/goldfire/howlerjs.com#contributing](https://github.com/goldfire/howlerjs.com#contributing) and open a PR with your site added.

</comment><comment><USER6> I first knew of this and started using it, after seeing it working in the html5 game [https://airma.sh](https://airma.sh) . It's a very nice library!

<comment><USER7> Fun game!

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Been using this in production flawlessly! Big thanks to the maker(s).

</comment><comment><USER9> Looks really cool, but the spatial audio proved to be underwhelming, even when I stood at a 90 degree angle to the audio source, it still sounded (mostly) in my other ear, and in general didn't match the position I'd expect from the game UI. Am I misunderstanding the point, or are my expectations too high?

<comment><USER5> Yeah, I've been meaning to make a better spatial audio demo, I've just been swamped lately. The capabilities of the spatial audio are actually pretty impressive with Web Audio (and thus in howler as well).

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I've used Howler on a few sites to make media players for small-time artists' sites. It's pretty neat.

</comment><comment><USER11> Does anyone know if there have been notable changes since the v2 rewrite[1], or have thoughts on how it compares to alternatives?

[1] [https://goldfirestudios.com/blog/143/Howler.js-v2.0-Released](https://goldfirestudios.com/blog/143/Howler.js-v2.0-Released)

<comment><USER5> We've been making steady improvements since 2.0 as you can see in the changelog: [https://github.com/goldfire/howler.js/releases](https://github.com/goldfire/howler.js/releases). Once I get a little more free time, I'm planning on adding and merging in some exciting new plugins and adding some highly requested features for the 2.1 and 2.2 releases (hopefully before the end of the year).

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Nice to see this here! It's my go-to library for doing anything generally sound-related on the web, and it seems to work pretty well for most simple use-cases. I haven't had the cause to use it for anything complex though.

</comment><comment> 52-6F-62 This is a neat idea, and could prove useful. I'll be sure to dig in a little.

</comment><comment><USER13> What about audio recording?</comment>


The deconstructed Standard Model equation - <AUTHOR> https://www.symmetrymagazine.org/article/the-deconstructed-standard-model-equation <comment><AUTHOR> Funnily enough, the CERN mug in the header image is _slightly_ off. Read more here: [https://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/06/26/cern-mug- summarize...](https://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/06/26/cern-mug-summarizes- standard-model-but-is-off-by-a-factor-of-2/)

tl;dr: the joke in particle physics circles goes that the extra "\+ h.c." term stands for "hot coffee" instead of "hermitian conjugate"</comment>


Bret Taylor on FriendFeed's Road to Monetization, Early Surprises - <AUTHOR> http://www.louisgray.com/live/2008/09/bret-taylor-discusses-friendfeeds-road.html <comment><USER2> _"We're not interested in selling. We wanted to forge our own culture, to create a sustainable company"_

Okay the plan is not to sell.

 _"... The team's hope, he said, was to find an advertising-based solution that delivers revenue without damaging the user experience. ..."_

But where is the advertising coming from if google sucks up so much of the advertising dollar. This is the bit I don't get. I've watched <http://spock.com> try this and they have completely screwed the application. There must be some other value in people information & conversations.</comment>


Not Lorem Ipsum: Industry based copy for the web - <AUTHOR> http://refer.ly/aWUj

<comment><USER2> What's with the refer.ly link? I prefer to see the domain of the site I'm actually going to on hackernews posts.

</comment><comment><USER3> I've run into exactly this issue took many times to count. Adding this to the toolkit!

</comment><comment><USER4> Please, don't post shortened URLs.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Ok, I just tried actually it works or not. Won't use it anymore. ;)</comment>


On the High Side: iTunes Store Likely to Skew Towards $1.29 - <AUTHOR> http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/032709itunes129

<comment><USER2> I think this is mistake, as raising costs will not go down well today. It's possible that I'll save a few bucks in that my tastes aren't current, but I don't think this is the correct move during "lean economic times".

People will probably claim this will increase piracy. I suspect anything can be used as that excuse...</comment>


How do you manage CPC/CPA ads on small sites without an advertising network? - <AUTHOR>

Has anyone here ever advertised on small sites without using an advertising network? The easiest way to do would be to pay a fixed monthly cost to the site. Are there any free or cheap software solutions that would allow CPC or CPA ads? <comment><USER2> OpenAds I think can be run on a per click basis, its free too I believe: <http://www.openads.org/faq/general>

</comment><comment><USER3> I use OpenAds to run CPC ads on my sites (although I almost always run CPM - for small sites you rely too much on the advertiser producing ads with a decent CTR when you use CPC. If you use CPM, then it puts this pressure back on the buyer).

No problems at all with OpenAds (and phpAdsNew before it). Does everything I've ever needed over the past 3 years.

</comment><comment><USER4> Why not join networks? There are several around that are free/cheap to join, and you only pay for results. Additionally google now does CPA as well as CPC, and you can target specific websites.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Thanks guys.</comment>


Ask HN: How do I encourage my roommate to clean up after themselves? - <AUTHOR> I've tried asking them repeatedly, and they just don't clean up after themselves and their cat. I'm open to ideas, it beginning to get to me. <comment><USER2> When I had roommates I always just did the extra cleaning. The way I look at it is, the level of cleanliness you expect may not be the level they expect. People are raised differently / have different expectations, so what's acceptable varies. I've seen plenty of families that go beyond "not picking up" after themselves. They basically have a floor made of garbage with walkways they've created through it. Unless you set ground rules before they moved in, asking them to clean more than they want to is just imposing on their way of life.

Otherwise, try to get them to chip in for a cleaning service or something. Maybe they are just lazy.

</comment><comment><USER3> Stop expecting people to change for you, they almost never will. If the contract is on your name, ask them to leave, otherwise, find a new place.

</comment><comment><USER4> Dig Skinner and other behavioral psychologists. Operant conditioning works great on humans. Make something pleasant for them when they do some cleaning or anything like cleaning. You just need to be careful to keep your goals secret, because people do not like to be trained like other animals.

</comment><comment><USER5> Best to be the one responsible for cleanliness in share house. Price the rent accordingly.

</comment><comment><USER6> Just get a cleaning lady.</comment>


Ask HN: I contacted my competitor and setup a meeting, what should I expect? - <AUTHOR>

I contacted my competitor over twitter and they asked me to call them. What should I expect? They also appear to be a small start up. <comment><USER2> Talk about whatever prompted you to contact your competitor.

<comment><AUTHOR> It was sort of like a "hello world" tweet to let them know I'm in the game too.

I follow your work on Pyramid, good stuff!

<comment><USER2> Figure out what they do that you don't. Figure out what they do that you don't. See if there is any potential to work together, or, whether to just remain friendly competitors.

You need to ask yourself if you really want a partner or what they can bring to the table that you can't already get.

If it is early enough in the game and there is some potential and you don't mind giving up some control, see if you can work together.

If you feel that you won't be able to work with them, then I would turn it into a meet and greet and see if there is a way to divide the world.

I don't really do much on Pyramid - I am mostly a Pyramid user, but, thanks for the complement.</comment></comment></comment>


Microsoft recommends WA and CA employees work from home - <AUTHOR> https://news.microsoft.com/2020/03/04/kurt-delbenes-march-4-guidance-to-king-county-employees/ Just got notice from Microsoft HR that we're to work from home when possible due to COVID-19, through 3/25.<p>Edit: official announcement https://news.microsoft.com/2020/03/04/kurt-delbenes-march-4-guidance-to-king-county-employees/ <comment><USER2> All FAANG+M companies in Seattle have had similar advice today - it was recommended by the King County health department a few hours ago.

<comment><USER3> Yep: "Workplaces should enact measures that allow people who can work from home to do so."

[https://www.kingcounty.gov/depts/health/news/2020/March/4-co...](https://www.kingcounty.gov/depts/health/news/2020/March/4-covid- recommendations.aspx)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Overhead in SLU today "at least I can finally find an empty conference room".

For non Seattle folk SLU is South Lake Union, home to many Amazon buildings as well as Google and Facebook

</comment><comment><USER5> I don't work at MS, just a valley tech company. We finally got the email encouraging us to work with our managers and WFH when possible. I don't think many people are actually doing it, from what I can tell from my home office. I don't know why more large tech shops aren't doing this.

<comment><USER6> People can't see who's contagious in the early stages, so they're gambling with their lives by not taking proactive precautions _before_ it's a widespread problem.

COVID-19/SARS-cov-2 is something to take seriously for several reasons:

\- To reiterate an important point: "Healthy" infected people go around unwittingly spreading it for several days to a week, so you have no idea who's really sick. And you have no idea how many people in public actually have it at any one time. It's another reason this pathogen is so successful.

\- It's a terrible flu for most.

\- It can quickly turn life-threatening. A number of bodies were discovered in Wuhan of people trying to walk or drive themselves to the hospital, but they died before reaching it.

\- FIXED: If hospitalization is needed, the average CFR is 16% (Russian roulette odds) and 49% for critical condition.

\- There is no treatment.

It's going to be a full pandemic in 7-21 days (depending on the area), and last from 19-35 days. For example, someone already died from it within 40 mi / 64 km of where my mom lives in a rural/suburban area. You have to assume the number of infected is 10-30x the number of identified cases because the CDC has strict PUI criteria that are turning away patients. (Oh, and it costs $2000±1000 if you take the test and test negative.)

<comment><USER7> >To reiterate an important point: "Healthy" infected people go around unwittingly spreading it for several days to a week, so you have no idea who's really sick.

According to the newest WHO report (also posted on the frontpage of HN) this doesn't appear to be the case. There are apparently few asymptomatic cases and the disease mainly is spread by people who are symptomatic.

>You have to assume the number of infected is 10-30x the number

This sounds like pure speculation and is probably not a reasonable thing to assume.

<comment><USER8> In Seattle, the best current estimate ([https://bedford.io/blog/ncov-cryptic- transmission/](https://bedford.io/blog/ncov-cryptic-transmission/)) is 570 infections as of March 2:

> Knowing that transmission was initiated on Jan 15 allows us to estimate the > total number of infections that exist in this cluster today. Our preliminary > analysis puts this at 570 with an 90% uncertainty interval of between 80 and > 1500 infections.

<comment><USER9> That confidence interval is far too wide to contain any useful information.

<comment> evil-olive As of Monday there were 18 confirmed cases in WA [0]. So even the lower bound of that confidence interval supports the claim that the number of actual cases is significantly higher than the number of confirmed cases (though "only" 4-5 times higher, rather than 10-30 times).

0: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/03/02/coronavirus-...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/03/02/coronavirus- live-updates/)

<comment><USER9> What should anyone do differently if there are 18 cases vs 80?

<comment><USER8> If you're going to pick a number to plan for, it's 570, not 80. Yes, the range of possible values includes 80, but it also includes 1500.

So, what would 570 (out of King + Snohomish County population of 3 million) mean? 22% of the population is under 18, so something like 125 minors would have had it (King County has ~600 schools).

The doubling period is 7 days, so ~275 of those cases would have been in week prior to March 2 and ~570 new cases could be expected between March 3-10. If 20% of those need hospitalization[1], that would be ~100 new beds.

With 570 patients (and 275 new), contact tracing is both impossible and ineffective. Let's optimistically assume that people notice their fever immediately and self-quarantine flawlessly. Even then, we don't know who these people encountered in the few days before symptoms began and can't notify them specifically. Either we accept whatever retransmission rate occurs during that period, or do what we can to reduce it by reducing the population-wide minutes spent within 6' of other people.

[1]: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/coronavirus- in-i...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/coronavirus-in-italy- fills-hospital-beds-and-turns-doctors-into- patients/2020/03/03/60a723a2-5c9e-11ea-ac50-18701e14e06d_story.html) and others

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Where does it say CA employees? Does Bay Area in the context of Puget Sound mean SF Bay Area?

<comment><USER11> Yes; when you say "Bay Area" in Washington and Oregon, you generally mean SF Bay Area.

Maybe an exception for those living in Coos Bay?

<comment> c-bayprogrammer Yes, those of us in Coos Bay and the nearby region refer to this tiny little area as the "Bay Area". Growing up, I didn't realize SF was the "real" Bay Area. ;)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Also in Seattle (well, Bellevue), my company has told us to WFH through the end of the month. Went out to lunch downtown and the usual place I go to was empty, normally it's packed.

</comment><comment><USER13> This will be an interesting challenge to suddenly be thrust as a team into WFH.

<comment><USER14> Remote first!

Beats joining a team and getting getting covid-19

<comment><USER13> Or even worse... interruptions!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Somebody should fix the link so it's pointing to the MSFT press release.

</comment><comment><USER16> I might bring my work computer home then!

<comment><USER17> I'm working for a tech firm in one of these two related areas. The idea of bringing the work computer home sounded good until IT added a number of high- bandwidth sites to the IT-mandated DNS blacklist software to keep traffic down for remote workers.

I could see things like Hulu and Pandora being less mission critical than other sites but then they blocked YouTube and, probably because google mixes domains a lot, gMail got caught in the net. People were _not_ happy about that.

<comment> brown9-2 Why does IT care about traffic to non-corporate sites on an employee's home network?

<comment><USER18> I'll assume that they're VPN'ing into work and their IT doesn't allow split tunneling. As a result, all traffic has to flow into the VPN concentrator as a bottleneck.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Correction: March 25. Microsoftie.

<comment><USER6> Does MSFT still use smartcards everywhere?

<comment><USER20> Yep. They're trying hard to phase them out through Windows Hello but you still need smart cards to at least bootstrap the Hello registration process, or for some specialized domains of trust that Hello isn't integrated into.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I first thought WFH stood for Wash F __king Hands.

<comment><USER22> I don't know why this is being downvoted so much. It's a legitimate abbreviation considering that washing hands is the most well known deterrent for the virus

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> The solution according to Hindu Mahasabha is quite clear

[https://theprint.in/health/hindu-mahasabha-plans-gaumutra- pa...](https://theprint.in/health/hindu-mahasabha-plans-gaumutra-party-with- cow-dung-cakes-to-fight-coronavirus-in-india/375026/)

These are not a group of random crank. These guys have a sympathetic and serious listener in the Indian government.

As an Indian all I can say is, "heaven help us", oh wait, they have that covered already.

</comment><comment><USER24> Throwaway username suggests that MS also directed employees not to publicize this.

<comment><USER25> They likely just don't want to identify their regular account as a Microsoft employee.

<comment> blaser-waffle Unless you're posting in an official capacity, absolutely don't link your posts to your job. Not worth the risk.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> It seems like the only way out of this without a huge infection rate is a government mandated stay-at-home period. It probably requires implementing martial law.

Tech workers going WFH seems like it will be totally ineffectual by itself.

1\. Most other workers can't afford to take time off, aren't permitted to, or can't do their jobs remotely.

2\. Schools aren't implementing study-at-home yet.

3\. There isn't mass testing in place yet.

For #1 it seems like we need some kind of massive billion gov disaster insurance bailout to compensate people. And someone still needs to do essential services, so a skeleton crew needs to be paid overtime and tested regularly by health officials.

For #2 this could be done tomorrow if it was ordered by health departments. The main downside would be people being forced to stay home from work, but at least this problem can be mitigated by families/friends.

For #3 to be implemented at the scale of millions of people, would probably require deploying the US military going up and down streets requesting samples.

Anything short of a stay-at-home period seems like it's guaranteed to get us the majority infection rate that will kill millions, mostly our parents and grandparents but a large number of young people too.

The damage to the economy of this could be huge. It seems better to overreact now, pay a huge bill ($1+ trillion, if need be), and prevent a massive loss of loss and/or economic depression.

<comment><USER27> _It probably requires implementing marshal law._

Are you serious? _Martial_ law (let's at least start by spelling it properly) is not something you just throw out there and change a setting to disable once you're done with.

<comment><USER26> There is effectively martial law (yes, I wrote it down wrong, thanks) any time there's a large fire in CA. Police patrol abandoned neighborhoods. And then everything goes back to normal. It wouldn't immediately go Red Dawn. Most people would understand the reasoning and agree with it, however inconvenient it would be.

Is it better to let millions die or risk the long-term health of the economy?

Why not force people to stay home and watch Netflix for 2 weeks? With exceptions wherever it makes sense.

<comment><USER27> Can we do better than the false dichotomy of "suspend civil liberties and give the military policing powers or everyone dies"?

I ask this as politely as I can: do you _know_ what it is you're asking for when suggesting the enactment of Martial Law here?

<comment><USER26> Sure, just explain why it's a false dichotomy so I can understand.

1\. If we get to a 70% infection rate, and the mortality rate is (a low) 1%, that's 2+ million dead.

2\. A vaccine is likely 18+ months away, which means it won't be here in time.

3\. There is no real hope of stopping the spread without drastic measures.

<comment><USER27> _Sure, just explain why it 's a false dichotomy so I can understand._

There are more options available than the two absurd options you presented. They may require more will from elected leaders and public health officials, but I take serious exception to immediately suggesting that we either suspend civil liberties or let people die.

There are several more options available before Martial Law should be allowed in the same room as options still on the table.

<comment><USER26> You still haven't explained an alternative to my "false dichotomy". What exactly do you propose as a third option?

What option requires "more will" from health officials that would actually stave off a mass infection? They all seem to be explaining how powerless they are to stop the spread.

Experts seem pretty unanimous in explaining that this is going to become a mass infection. They don't seem to be considering a martial law option, and yet it seems the only thing that could prevent it.

I'm actually not cavalier about suggestion martial law. This just seems like one of those rare public safety situations that might warrant it.

We could try asking people to stay home but this seems like it would result in huge compliance problems, which would elongate the stay-at-home period. Whereas the vast majority of people would stay home under threat of arrest.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Scala community today: fresh complaints of comment policing, Old Boys' Club - <AUTHOR> https://www.reddit.com/r/scala/comments/98u0lv/is_it_true_that_major_developers_behind_fp/e4nkpj4 <comment><AUTHOR> While on this topic:

[0] [https://www.reddit.com/r/scala/comments/98u0lv/is_it_true_th...](https://www.reddit.com/r/scala/comments/98u0lv/is_it_true_that_major_developers_behind_fp/e4p3bky)

[1] [https://www.reddit.com/r/scala/comments/98u0lv/is_it_true_th...](https://www.reddit.com/r/scala/comments/98u0lv/is_it_true_that_major_developers_behind_fp/e4mwg8c)

On a more positive note, Sam Halliday just published Functional Programming for Mortals with Scalaz

[2] [https://leanpub.com/fpmortals](https://leanpub.com/fpmortals)</comment>