How to Ruin Your Company With One Bad Process - <AUTHOR> http://www.bhorowitz.com/how_to_ruin_your_company_with_one_bad_process <comment><USER2> "As a technologist, you know that the worst thing that you can do is over- constrain the problem before you start. You'll kill creativity and prevent yourself from getting a truly great outcome."

As an engineer, I love hearing firm constraints from the beginning. The constraints are what breed elegance; there is no such thing as an elegant solution when there is no shape to the problem. It's nice if the constraints are prioritized so you know what to give up if you can't satisfy them all. But there's nothing quite like saying "Yeah, we did this thing in two weeks that everyone assumed was impossible, and we did it without a binary push" or "Through our clever architecture, we accomplished with one server what everyone thought required a whole rack."

I believe design is the same way. The designs I've seen where the dictum is "Let your creativity run wild!" tend to be uninspired, while the ones I've seen where it's "This is what the user is trying to accomplish, and we have a 4 inch screen and 10 seconds to hook them" are often much more creative.

As a manager, the constraints are annoying. But one consequence of that is that setting firm constraints will tend to shift your culture from being manager-centric to being engineer- and designer-centric, which IMHO is a good thing.

<comment><USER3> Constraints gave us Facebook instead of Myspace. Constraints gave us Twitter. Constraints gave us Snapchat.

Social networks have thrived on obvious constraints. When looking for a startup idea, sometimes I try to reimagine a popular tool or service with additional constraints.

<comment><USER4> and no-constraints gave us 4chan.

<comment><USER5> 4chan has constraints: There are only 20 pages per board (if I recall correctly) and if a thread does not get new posts and drops from page 20, it's gone forever. Just like the twitter 140 characters limit, 4chan has a history limit.

So 4chan perfectly fits in the parent's list of social network like things based on arbitrary contraints

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> One part of his conclusion struck me as wrong:

> As a technologist, you know that the worst thing that you can do is over- > constrain the problem before you start.

From what I've read on this subject, this is not the worst thing you can do. The absolute worst thing you can do from a creativity standpoint is be completely unconstrained. That "blue sky" thinking leads to a lack of focus that prevents you from coming up with good solutions. The startup mentality of "embracing constraints" is more than just a rationalization that tries to turn a negative into a positive...it's an observation of how to best creatively problem solve.

There's no doubt that over-constraining can also have negative consequences, but if you've got little to no natural constraints, it's almost always best to invent some reasonable constraints prior to diving in and trying to solve the problem. It's okay to document those constraints and, perhaps, make changes if you find the problem you've created to be intractable. But operating without those constraints, whether real or self-imposed, is the absolute worst way to approach any creative problem solving endeavor.

<comment><USER7> I always think about it from an artistic standpoint. Art forms are almost _defined_ by their constraints: movies can't use text, literature can't use pictures, ice sculpting can't use clay, mosaics can't use paint.

Of course, art is also about breaking out of those constraints and creating new mediums. But that seems more about finding a new set of constraints rather than eliminating them entirely. Decide to break free from the canvas and paint an entire mountainside? Great, now you have to consider things like the angles from which you can see the work, the way the lighting will fall, how long you have to complete the work and show people before the work succumbs to the weather, etc.

So I agree that creativity is strongest when operating within constraints.

<comment><USER8> The post opposes _excessive_ constraint. An example of that would be making your examples hard and fast, inviolable rules: there are movies that use text and books that use pictures and illustrations to great effect. The constraint may be "presentation should be primarily visual and auditory, and not require much reading". The over-constraint would be "presentation must be exclusively visual and auditory, and no text may be displayed on screen".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Great article. I've come to believe that Ben Horowitz is the best management writer today. He comes from a technical place, and has learned the ways of management via the school of hard knocks. And every interesting project worth doing comes from the school of hard knocks.

I've seen this problem in organizations many times. When you do bottom-up organization design, the most persuasive people win. Then people start justifying promotions and pay based on the size of their teams. And those who were more disciplined in the process lose, because they could have done more with more people, just optimally.

The other perverse side effect of this is some people who are great with 4-5 people teams (good player-coaches) are disasters as the head of 30 person organizations. Their style doesn't scale, but they feel the need to grow because of the poor incentives.

This type of issue comes up in consulting quite a bit, where "Fees managed" can be the key metric rather than "Customer ROI" or "Customer Satisfaction."

</comment><comment><USER10> _" If you quadruple your engineering headcount in a year, you will likely have less absolute throughput than if you doubled headcount. As an added bonus, you will burn way more cash."_

This is a great point (although I hate the term "headcount"). It takes time to get engineers up to speed in any organization, and it usually cuts into the productive time of current engineers.

<comment><USER11> A mentor of mine, David Kathan, said something more colorful, "Of course, you can have a baby in a month if you use 9 women". People should read Mythical Man Month more.

<comment><USER12> Fred Brooks has some gems. I'm especially fond of the Second System Effect [0]

[0] [http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?SecondSystemEffect](http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?SecondSystemEffect)

<comment><USER13> Which is a refutation of the idea in the essat that the best engineering happens when there are no constraints.

<comment><USER12> I'm not sure I follow. I see the constraint of the first system as the natural fear of failure that comes from doing something new. It is an implicit constraint. The second system is less constrained in my view than the first.

<comment><USER13> The author of the essay linked seemed to be asserting that freedom from constraints will produce more wonderful solutions.

My interpretation of Brooks' observation on second systems is that they're what happens when the first system has been enough of a success to give people a relatively free hand to solve problems with it - so they try to solve all the things and wind up with an over-ambitious and unusable system, from which a pared-back third system emerges.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Budgeting is particularly interesting in a situation where you receive funding. It seems it would be much easier to budget in a bootstrap situation, where growth is likely happening a bit more slowly. You're slowly adding a person(engineer, marketer, salesperson, etc.) here and there as you go along(as needed), buying more servers, etc.

I would assume budgeting is a bit different in a situation where you receive a _massive cash infusion_. You want to spend all of it to grow even more quickly but the effects of spending may be harder to measure( _because you 're spending soo much soo quickly_). So do you just replicate the growth strategy used in the "bootstrap" phase or do you adopt a new one?

In a situation involving a massive round of funding(relative to the current size of the company), wouldn't it be difficult to attribute any problems supposedly associated with the increased budget to a "bad budgeting process"? That is to say, if the growth isn't happening, then there's no guarantee that just by adding more money to "growth" that "growth" will happen. You may have just pointlessly hired managers, salespeople, engineers and bought more servers and whatnot, for growth that wasn't going to happen in the first place.

To put it a different way, when the profits don't catch up with spending, was the problem really the budgeting process? Or with the market itself? Or some other factor entirely?

Basically, _how do you identify a bad budgeting process in a situation where some entity just externally infused a bunch of capital_?

<comment><USER15> I thought you had to show investors what you were planning to do with the money before getting it?

Of course the actual budgeting will be different, but at least have a broad outline.

<comment><USER14> I would assume so. But if the idea or company fails or the planned trajectory falls short, how would the company know it was the budgeting process at fault versus some other factor?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Not so much a "process" as much as a bad planning strategy, or a company structural deficiency (in which the incentive of "tell me what budget you need" is exacerbated).

When I think of "one bad process" that could ruin any company...I think of something like, stack rankings, or, partially-automated deployment (e.g. [http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-10-22/how- lose-172222-sec...](http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-10-22/how- lose-172222-second-45-minutes))

<comment><USER17> I agree.

This seems more like a good example of the kind of mistakes/challenges that an inexperienced manager would encounter.

People are people, which is to say that people will always attempt to game the system, in one way or another. The keyword here being "attempt". Strong and experienced leadership should be capable of not only managing the human nature of the workforce and help bring out people's best, but also have enough experience to understand how to maintain the integrity of the company's culture. There is no perfect system for structuring a group of human beings. You have to deal with things as they come up.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I saw where it was going right at the start, I've seen it a lot in various startups I've worked with. Growing a company past certain sizes often winds up failing due to unbridled optimism. Reason goes out the window as growth seems it will never end; people buy into it and want to expand their role for when it hits the big time. The end is often a mess. Eventually either sanity prevails or it goes bust.

</comment><comment><USER19> This is an excellent warning to any startups looking at growing quickly. I am living through such a growth effort, and I can definitely see how the culture is changing for the worse in the company.

Counter to the author's general point, I would add that I think well-defined budgeting exercises that lead to clear targets of the kind described in the article, where people are "made accountable," appear hubristic to me. There are so many unknowns that will come up that even to pretend to be able to meet such goals feels off. I'm waiting for management science to catch up with agile development.

</comment><comment><USER20> Currently in a project situation with no budget and blue sky dreams. I can't say how much I love this article enough.

I think one of the unspoken insights here is: give your projects a budget.

I've been with two startups now that didn't do this and see them either think there is no budget or there is infinite budget. Ultimately both CEOs would say "Just come ask me" which means that you now have to pester the busiest person at the company to get a budget. It is effectively giving the project no budget.

</comment><comment><USER21> _As a technologist, you know that the worst thing that you can do is over- constrain the problem before you start. You 'll kill creativity and prevent yourself from getting a truly great outcome._

Perhaps "artificially constrain" is the real problem. Constraints that are rooted in real world limitations lead to the elegant design that others are commenting on here. Constraints that are kind of made up BS can, in fact, mess things up pretty badly, just as the author suggests.

I mean, if there is solid logic behind the constraints, it helps foster good problem-solving and good design. But constraints that lack that solid logic can very definitely cause things to go awry.

</comment><comment><USER22> > Note that this does not apply to you if you have very small numbers. It's > fine to grow engineering from one to four people or from two to eight. > However, if you try to grow from 50 to 200, you will cause major issues if > you are not extremely careful.

That's why I haven't bought his book. It just doesn't seem relevant for the kinds of smaller companies I'm interested in.

</comment><comment><USER23> "Well, that's the beauty of the game. It only takes one player to opt in, because once someone starts playing, everybody is going in -- and they are going in hard."

As per Frans de Waal's, this is true even for chimps ;)

</comment><comment><USER24> off-topic: why does Ben Horowitz always include rap music and a quote which aren't relevant to the article in question? (other than that he just likes rap)

<comment><USER25> > 0 to 100, real quick

That's the whole point of the article. He's saying don't do it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> _When I asked my managers what they needed, I unknowingly gamified the budgeting process. The game worked as follows: The objective was for each manager to build the largest organization possible and thereby expand the importance of his function. Through the transitive property of status, he could increase his own importance as well._

This will always happen with closed allocation, no matter how much it is tweaked. It's an inherent property of closed allocation systems that the definition of work is driven by managerial status assertions rather than the needs of the business, which can only be assessed, at the lower levels, organically.

Closed allocation doesn't invariably destroy a company, and it's only in software that open allocation is obviously superior. (An open-allocation nuclear plant may not be the best idea.) Most industrial efforts can tolerate the inefficiencies that come with closed allocation. Software often can't, because software efforts tend to be binary in outcome (most lose, a few are big winners) and closed allocation generally creates enough needless complexity to cripple the company before it really succeeds.

<comment><USER27> Can you name open allocation companies that _aren 't_ operating with massive free cashflow? Because you always bring up Valve when raising your theory that open allocation is the magical escape hatch from economics, and it always seems to me that's the _only_ major example you have.

Google and Microsoft also have massive free cashflow and they don't use open allocation. So perhaps the magic of Valve's "open allocation" is that they're just sitting on a cash fountain and it doesn't matter that much how they spend it.

<comment><USER28> Isn't SuperCell (Clash of Clans) using open allocation as well ? They did it before becoming a cash fountain.

My feeling is that open allocation is the most efficient with very dedicated employee and strong constrains. The manpower limitation being one of these constrains. Self organization is also more efficient with few people because communication is then more efficient. Obviously when the number of employee grows, these two conditions are much harder to met. Cashflow can only hide the inefficiency.

<comment><USER27> > _Obviously when the number of employee grows, these two conditions are much > harder to met._

This is what I mean about the "magical escape hatch from economics". Coordination is easy if you have massive surplus, because you can recover from any fuckups.

In constrained environments on large problems, it falls to bits. Toyota delegates serious authority to its workers, but they are still working inside a system they help to design. It's not an ivory tower sitting next to a golden brook.

I'd be interested to see how many companies use open allocation that have succeeded and how many have failed. I'm going to guess that the failure rate is pretty close to the mean failure rate for all new businesses.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Interesting article for sure and I think it highlights exactly how you get unwanted bloat and how to prevent it. Budgeting has always been a dark art, especially for creative work, and adding smart constraints on the front end are some ways to reign things in - however I think this largely applies to the companies who can say the following: "we had plenty of cash in the bank." I know for us our budgeting process is, what is on fire and can our limited amount of cash put it out?

Changing gears though, I have to say that I was immediately turned off by Ben quoting a rap lyric at the beginning of his article. Not because I don't like rap, I do, but because of the lyric he chose.

I think this one is particularly egregious given that the quote includes the term "nigga" \- even though it was of course self censored - which I don't think is particularly appropriate coming from a white man.

Not really a big thing, and it doesn't impact the overall message (which is why I think it only hurts things) but it may strike others wrong too.

<comment><USER30> This attitude baffles me. He's quoting lyrics. Lyrics are lyrics, and the ones he quoted in particular have no racial overtones. And even if they did, who cares?

Lots of songs have the words "cunt" and "motherfucker", but quoting those lyrics does not mean you are intending to insult a woman or accuse someone of having an Oedipus complex.

<comment><USER31> > Lots of songs have the words "cunt" and "motherfucker", but quoting those > lyrics does not mean you are intending to insult a woman or accuse someone > of having an Oedipus complex.

And yet many people (women and men) will find them insulting and offensive nevertheless, regardless of what you say your intent is.

<comment><USER30> Of course. But many people would also be offended at the word "fuck", such as in "that's fucking great". It's impossible to not offend someone, that's why you write and speak with a target audience in mind. And Horowitz is speaking to the tech and startup industry, which is generally fairly relaxed when it comes to profanity of that nature.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Andrew Chen: Why every Web 2.0 startup needs to think about Metcalfe's Law - <AUTHOR> http://andrewchen.typepad.com/andrew_chens_blog/2008/05/when-facebook-a.html

<comment><USER2> The real thing that you should focus on is avoiding being _beholden_ to the network effect.

Build something that is useful with for a single user, but _better_ for a thousand users.

<comment><USER3> Well... yes and no. If you get "lucky" with network effects, it means that something that's pretty simply technology wise, like reddit, can suddenly become very valuable, all out of proportion to the technology behind it. It's a gamble, but so are startups in general, so creating something that goes exponential is a good proposition in some ways, rather than something that just adds one user after another, slowly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Jakob Nielsen said precisely the same thing nine years ago, in an article called "Metcalfe's Law in Reverse".

<http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990725.html>

</comment><comment><USER5> Last paragraph of the article: "A very interesting variation of this is when you apply Metcalfe's Law not to the entire network of users, but rather think of a social network as a loosely grouped set of connections. In that case, some local networks might have achieved critical mass, and if they are big enough, they will be retained. However, if the smaller networks around any given group start collapsing, then sometimes even the large networks will get pulled down with them."

This also explains why some people just "don't get" facebook, while others do; and these two groups have a hard time understanding each other. It all has to do with critical mass.

</comment><comment><USER3> I'm too lazy to look for it right now (this baby thing is exhausting), but I recall reading an article saying that N^2 is a bit over the top, and suggesting a better formula, since the number of other nodes you actually connect with is less than the total of all nodes. Although the ability to connect with those other nodes is still valuable, it doesn't quite justify the ^2.

Anyway, I'll trot out the 'Information Rules' book recommendation once again. Sorry for the repeat.

<comment><USER6> In "Metcalfe's Law is Wrong" <http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/print/4109> Bob Briscoe, Andrew Odlyzko, and Benjamin Tilly argue that the value of a network should really be n*log(n) not n^2

I don't buy their arguments, certainly not for smaller values of n that Andrew Chen is writing about.

<comment><USER3> Exactly, thanks!

Why don't you buy their arguments? I think it makes a lot of sense to think about just how much value you get from additional members of a network. Some things, like eBay, are very much dependent on those effects. Other sites and systems, less so.

> The fundamental flaw underlying both Metcalfe's and Reed's laws is in the > assignment of equal value to all connections or all groups.

So the more each additional node is equal in value to the others, the closer you are to ^2. If you have a network where it's really important to be able to contact some nodes, but others are far less important, then ^2 seems exaggerated.

<comment><USER6> both Metcalfe's and Reed's laws are approximations. With Metcalfe's Law you should bear in mind that a technology or infrastructure that gives you the option of connecting with one of N people creates N^2 of value, I think you are actually arguing for a value above N^2 only because you are working from close friends to more distant stakeholders (e.g. members of your community, members of your profession, potential customers, ...). Clay Shirky makes a great point in "Here Comes Everybody" that once you can rely on everyone having access to a technology (e.g. telephone, e-mail, web browser) it is a quantum change from "everyone you currently know." I think Metcalfe's Law has actually held up pretty well. This is worth a much longer discussion if you are interested, I will contact you directly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I found this confusing. At one point the author talks about exponential decay (in which something gets smaller more and more slowly), but at another point he describes something that sounds more like an auto-catalytic process (where something reaches a tipping-point and then explodes, or in this case implodes).</comment>


FBI entrapping hackers - using FBI self-signed SSL cert - <AUTHOR>

They didn't even bother removing "Federal Bureau of Investigation" from the organization field on the "self-signed" SSL certificate. I'm not sure if I should feel flattered that I'm on the FBI radar for people of "skill" or insulted that they think I'd actually bite on something as low/primitive as darkode.
Are they looking for scraps? Or is this just entrapment to look good on the news? What I know is that they really need to step up their game if they want to get to the serious bunch.
http://i.imgur.com/3znIw4L.jpg <comment><USER2> As someone who has generated a lot of self-signed certificates in my day, unless you did that on purpose it is very unlikely to occur.

In general I suspect that self signed certificate is a joke in bad taste. What I'd be far more concerned about is their poor use of the SSL system, in the sense that they could and should have created their own CA and attached the CA's signing certificate to the e-mail, so the web-site (to known users) would have appeared correctly signed and would have made it slightly harder for law enforcement to intercept.

As is law enforcement can just catch and release traffic (MITM), re-sign it with their own self-signed certificate and nobody would be the wiser...

Plus, if you really want to be amused then I suggest you check out the FBI's real SSL certificate on their web-site:

<https://www.fbi.gov/>

<comment><USER3> Their certificate looks fine to me. What is amusing is that even though they strip out critical display elements from the website (probably css), they still manage to display insecure content.

<comment><USER2> \- Subject is invalid (and wrong)

\- Overly broad (*.fbi.com) could have used "Subject Alternative Name" to list sub-domains instead.

\- 3 year duration (for the FBI?). I mean for small online shops, that is fine, but many companies are now rolling their certificates yearly or bi- yearly (e.g. Amazon, Bank Of America, HSBC, etc).

On the positive side they are using a 2048 bit key length. I dunno. I guess it depends to what standard you hold the FBI up to. If you think their site should be as secure as a banking site or large online retailer then they fail at that...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Wow.

Maybe they're not going after "skill", they're going after people dumb enough to register.[0] They can pick up script kids that look good for the cameras and will undoubtedly brag about all their "hacking" exploits making them easier to convict.

[0]: 419 scammers use the same tactic to weed out people who likely won't fall for a 419 scam.

<comment><AUTHOR> I think they have a bigger fish to fry given all the higher profile attacks that have been showering the place for quite sometime. Maybe you're right and they are just after many low-profile kids instead of that one big fish to make some noise and show that they have been doing something.</comment></comment>


House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server - <AUTHOR> http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/296680-house-panel-probes-web-rumor-on-clinton-emails <comment><USER3> > "As a PST file or exported MSG files, this could be done though, yes? > The > issue is that these emails involve the private email address of someone > you'd recognize, and we're trying to replace it with a placeholder address > as to not expose it."

From the way it reads it looks like he is asking how to bulk remove an email address from the archived messages _so_ when they are turned over they don't contain the redacted email address.

I assume it would be embarrassing and/or problematic to share the email addresses of various ambassadors and other government officials in public records. You could also read something nefarious into it if you want.

This whole fishing expedition is hilarious and transparently political. The Bush administration ran private email servers to avoid FOIA requests, then nuked millions of saved emails when his term was up to avoid handing them over. I didn't see any huge circus or massive outcry about that.

The idea that we should be able to immediately read all the correspondence written by any public official also seems silly... it just encourages public officials not to use email. People are allowed to have private conversations. A reasonable compromise might be a time limit... say emails are held sealed for X years after leaving office, then made public?

<comment><USER4> The removal of private email addresses should be left to the State Department who was in charge of releasing those emails. In the emails released so far, Clinton's actual address has been removed from the To: field (physically, as in it was whited-out) as is at least one name from the From: field

[http://graphics.wsj.com/hillary-clinton-email- documents/pdfs...](http://graphics.wsj.com/hillary-clinton-email- documents/pdfs/C05797218.pdf)

But I could see this as a result of incompetency, that is, the IT person didn't realize that it's not up to him to redact addresses, the State Dept. could do it. I know that sounds naive but we're talking about an IT person who posted this question on Reddit using an account easily connected to him, so, incompetency is inherent in the scenario.

edit: Apparently, there is a Slashdot user named "StoneTear" who has been posting since 2002 and has made reference about working in government and knows about their data retention policies. So that mostly rules out the possibility of IT-guy-is-just-the-Senator's-nephew-in-law-who-got-asked- because-to-do-IT-because-no-one-else-was-around:

[https://news.slashdot.org/story/16/09/19/2239234/computer- sp...](https://news.slashdot.org/story/16/09/19/2239234/computer-specialist- who-deleted-clinton-emails-may-have-asked-reddit-for-tips)

<comment><USER5> > The removal of private email addresses should be left to the State > Department who was in charge of releasing those emails.

Only for her work email account.

This is her personal email account that they requested to release, but it isn't under their control.

Employers aren't supposed to be able to control one's private email account.

<comment><USER6> Yeah, a private email account which was used extensively for official government business.

With no work email account ever setup.

It's a matter of law that any and all work related emails on a personal email address are to be handed over for future FOIA requests, etc. upon leaving office.

If I used my personal email address for all communication with my companies clients for work, they'd demand all of those emails when I left the company.

<comment><USER5> > If I used my personal email address for all communication with my companies > clients for work, they'd demand all of those emails when I left the company.

But they wouldn't be able to get them, no matter how hard they demanded.

Personal email addresses exist. Companies have to deal with that fact.

<comment><USER7> > _But they wouldn 't be able to get them, no matter how hard they demanded_

I work in securities. My work emails must be archived. If I send work email from my personal email (a) that is potentially illegal and (b) I must promptly turn them over to my archives. If I refuse b, I face civil and potentially criminal censure.

Blows me away how finance has stricter controls than the people conducting bombing raids.

<comment><USER8> This is not a relevant analogy because it's not under dispute that Clinton used her email address for personal conversations, and there is nothing in the Reddit post or the Hill news story that indicates whether we're talking about personal or official business emails.

If your employer tried to force Gmail to turn over to them all your emails with your spouse and friends, no matter the subject or content, you and Google would fight it. And rightly so.

The House GOP members of the Benghazi committee are trying their hardest to get their hands on Clinton's personal emails, to dig for embarrassing messages to release. They already have her official business emails; they have had them for years. And they have openly admitted that the entire purpose of the committee is to undercut her presidential campaign.

<comment><USER9> > They already have her official business emails; they have had them for > years.

No, they have the emails _she_ claims are official. Big difference.

And she has zero credibility here. Negative credibility even, if she claims they have all the official emails you can be 100% sure they do not.

<comment><USER5> And if they want more, they can always get a search warrant for them.

That would help the Republicans gain back some credibility if they did. Right now everyone considers this a colossal waste of time, exemplary of Republican waste.

Republicans are quickly finding that there are limits to their political powers.

The public needs to be forceful in telling the House to stop wasting government money on Hillary emails.

<comment><USER9> > And if they want more, they can always get a search warrant for them.

How would that help? She deleted them.

> The public needs to be forceful in telling the House to stop wasting > government money on Hillary emails.

No, they need to tell the House that Hillary should be indited, that she is not above the rules.

<comment><USER5> > How would that help? She deleted them.

Sucks for them, then. Perhaps the House Republicans should have been quicker on their feet, instead of clowning around?

The public is in support of Clinton, and want House Republican members impeached and jailed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> The actual facts aside, this makes her appear far less electable, as her campaign camp looks like it's being run by a bunch of clowns.

Just from a PR perspective, this could not have come at a worse time.

The collapse at the 9/11 memorial, the "basket of deplorables", and the mention of the Pepe meme on her official website. Right after a couple of muslim terror attacks, some evidence surfaces purporting that she tried to cover up email indiscretions?

Most people do believe that where there's smoke, there's fire. And this cluster of events can't be good.

<comment><USER11> > The actual facts aside

I happen to believe that facts are important in a Presidential race.

Essentially your response is repeating talking points of the Trump campaign... which is OK, 1st amendment and all that but to pretend like you're making a constructive addition to the discussion / debate is folly.

Right now America has a choice between Trump, a racist, mysoginist demagogue who has never held a public office and Hillary Clinton. Hillary may have issues but she is also possibly the most experienced presidential candidate of the last couple of decades.

<comment><USER12> > the most experienced presidential candidate of the last couple of decades

George H. W. Bush was a two term vice president, director of the CIA, etc.

I've been following this election pretty closely for more than a year, and I seriously couldn't tell you what Clinton's positive message is besides "I'm experienced". _Nobody cares._ Americans don't elect technocratic planks of wood. This is the worst, most inept presidental campaign I've ever seen. She's very nearly losing to a joke candidate.

<comment><USER13> It's really interesting to hear you say that, actually, because from my perspective, she had _two_ positive messages:

\- "I'm experienced"

\- "I'm a woman, and it's high time a woman became President"

It's interesting that her campaign has finally stopped beating us over the head with the latter, at least; it was _insultingly_ sexist.

<comment><USER14> It's insultingly sexist to suggest that 51% of the population should finally have representation in the highest office in America?

<comment><USER15> If a man said that he deserved a job over a woman on the basis of gender, it would be sexist (and wrong). The reverse is also true.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> The r/conspiracy thread where things unfolded: [https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/53fw9x/bleachbi...](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/53fw9x/bleachbit_i_may_be_facing_a_very_interesting/)

One of several archived copies of the r/exchangeserver thread, "Remove or replace to/from address on archived emails?" (the user stonetear deleted his account during the r/conspiracy thread): [http://archive.is/FXcao](http://archive.is/FXcao)

<comment><USER16> Just when you thought this election couldn't get any weirder... there's a major scoop about Clinton on r/conspiracy

<comment><USER17> Hillary attacking the Pepe the Frog meme was the point at which I had to pinch myself to wake up.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Regardless of your politics or beliefs of what happened, I think a simple bit of advice is truth:

If you are going to run an e-mail server in difficult circumstances then hire a System Administrator who does not need to post obviously problematic questions to Reddit.

<comment><USER19> Under a freaking user name that can be easily traced back to them. I mean, seriously?

<comment><USER20> And this is why the NSA collecting all data on everyone should have people worried. Sure, it's just pictures of your cat and 'my life is boring, they can spy on me all they want because they won't find anything interesting"

And then 2 years later your post on an internet forums about your missing dog helps tie you the destruction of evidence.

<comment><USER19> I mean, yeah, but first and foremost you should probably strive to avoid committing felonies.

<comment><USER20> I agree 100% with that too!

The point is that even if you are posting innocuous things, it builds up a profile that can identify you in ways you do not expect. This example was for something serious.

Who knows what the next example will be like.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I highly recommend that many others use FOIA to gather communication records of their elected officials.

About a month ago I received this pdf [1] (1700+ pages of email records) of Chicago's office of the mayor after about three months of resistance. Prior to that, it took a year and a half and a law suit to receive one week's worth of Chicago's mayor's logs [2] through Chicago's IT department. To my knowledge, prior to this work, records in volume have been impossible to get due to asinine rejections. The amount or resistance (and holy shit was there a lot) led me to run several chains of FOIA requests to gather bulk communication records.

Of note in the call records are many private investigator calls. I haven't had much chance to go through the email records and could use some help if anybody's interested.

[1] [https://spaces.hightail.com/receive/oFwvr/fi-29853345-5f15-4...](https://spaces.hightail.com/receive/oFwvr/fi-29853345-5f15-4a34-9ba0-67ecf8c0d193/fv-3251eaf6-fb70-46d4-9f26-f85221c13317/DOIT%20--%20domain%20name%20log.pdf) [2] [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hgG79eIr8MbkjYrCvcTR...](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hgG79eIr8MbkjYrCvcTRN8n876KL8aXYYu5it8Lg0g8/edit) (four, mostly unstructured sheets)

</comment><comment><USER22> What amazes me besides him using familiar handle is that even after the investigation he left all those reddit posts up. Then he decides to try and delete them now after they are found.

<comment><USER23> What amazes me is that a reddit user found it but somehow all of the FBI investigators didn't.

<comment><USER24> You are amazed a group of 100 million people knew something 6 guys in an office did not?

<comment><USER25> 100 million people faffing about vs 6 full time guys who are presumably professionals in the field?

And really, it's not 100 million people. That's just the number of people on the site. In actual fact, it's probably a handful of people at most.

<comment><USER26> 100 million people (or a handful, whatever) who don't have to worry about Bill Clinton and various other powerful figured pressuring them into compliance.

You can believe that, against all odds, Bill really did just talk to Loretta Lynch about grandkids. Even so, the point was still made.

<comment><USER25> "Noice grandkids you got there. Wouldn't want anyfink to 'appen to em, would we now?"

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> The US News and World Report article is also a nice primer on this issue. [http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-09-19/paul- combetta...](http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-09-19/paul-combetta- computer-specialist-who-deleted-hillary-clinton-emails-may-have-asked-reddit- for-tips)

I have not seen this reported on by any major US news media. (FOX, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, NPR, PBS) Other than The Hill, US News, various right-wing sources, and VICE I don't see anyone writing about this. It reminds me of the first hour or two after Hillary's episode at the 9/11 event where the only major news source reporting was Fox News.

Is this something people are interested in? Is there an obligation to report on this nationally?

<comment><USER28> Fox News has now picked this up: "Clinton email wiper appears to have asked online how to hide 'VIP' info" [http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/20/clinton-email- wip...](http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/20/clinton-email-wiper- appears-to-have-asked-online-how-to-hide-vip-info.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I am getting even unhappier with the democratic national committee ranking members who did what they could to sabotage Sander's run for the nomination. Just my opinion, but as a democrat I think Sanders would have such an easier time winning the general election. I would like to see a major magazine do a "public shaming" article on the leading DNC actors who acted unfairly and non- ethically. I would like history to trash these people because they deserve it.

</comment><comment><USER30> This is interesting. I was up drinking beer with a friend until 5am this morning talking about the very phenomenon of breaking news coming from social media and sites such as Reddit. He pointed to the Boston bombing and Dallas shooter situations as reasons why the press should "just ignore" social media; his entire argument boiled down to 'bad data exists along side good data, therefore throw it all out"

I didn't necessarily disagree that there are moments where we got it wrong, for sure. I tried arguing that using those events as a point of reference for insulating journalism a bit better was probably a good idea; you know "first step to overcoming a problem is admitting you have one" and he was having none of it. Maybe this story will do the trick.

Really curious to see where this goes taking some points from that debate.

<comment><USER13> The Boston Marathon bombing fiasco was the result of reddit trying to deduce stuff in the real world based on photos and video and the like. This is reddit trying to deduce information based on reddit posts, on reddit. I think that's an important distinction.

<comment><USER31> It also definitely wasn't just reddit. Tons of people on 4chan, Twitter, and various forums were all looking into that "suspect".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> I got this from reddit but someone made a wordpress page with 4 years of his account history : [https://paulcombetta.wordpress.com](https://paulcombetta.wordpress.com)

<comment><USER33> There's enough personal information in there to confirm his identity - <USER2> picture of him with that dog would already be enough.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> "The Reddit message was sent on July 23, 2014, according to an archive of the page saved by other users. The day before, the Benghazi Committee had reached an agreement with the State Department on the production of related records"

</comment><comment><USER35> Even with proof, nothing will come of this. Sadly it seems the rules are different for anyone in power to get away with questionable choices and decisions. It has to be more than coincidental that Hillary Clinton has this much controversy surrounding her, some might say it's just conspiracy theory fodder, but let's be honest: she has obviously done some shady things, to the point where they can't even be adequately covered up anymore.

I don't want Clinton or Trump to be the next POTUS. I think they're both inadequate for the position.

</comment><comment><USER36> Reddit and the chans: the journalists we need, but not the ones we deserve.

<comment><USER37> Funny.

I wonder if corporate media will bring up this story.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> This is pretty huge. It establishes intent.

</comment><comment><USER39> "Combetta appeared under subpoena in a committee hearing last week on the alleged destruction of evidence, but both he and colleague Bill Thornton exercised their Fifth Amendment right not to testify."

Actually it's the Fifth Amendment protection against self incrimination.

</comment><comment><USER40> Interesting.

Does anyone know if there is any form of signing the outlook data exports / live datastore that would prevent easy external programmatic replacement?

</comment><comment><USER41> The original HN post got flagged and removed from HN homepage.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12533757](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12533757) 250 points (more than this post at the moment)

<comment><USER42> Be nice to see an explanation from our moderating overlords

<comment><USER43> You mean your moderating servants? At the time, there were multiple posts of the same story competing for attention, so a mod marked all but one as a dupe. But then that surviving one got heavily flagged. We reduced them at one point ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12534542](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12534542)) but the flags kept coming.

I think what's going on here (and what I just told the other moderators) is that this is one of those times when our standard practices around things like dupes and downweights—e.g. for political controversies—don't apply. This doesn't happen very often, perhaps once every couple weeks. In such cases the community will is unmistakeable, the story will keep coming up until it gets an airing, and our job is to let that happen.

I like it much better when we call these right from the beginning, but what are the odds that an r/conspiracy Hillary investigation would turn into a solid HN thread? Too small for the human eye, and no set of moderation rules can operate at that fine a grain.

<comment><USER44> This happens with every single story that touches on this subject. Over the course of the summer it's happened time after time - the flag brigade gets almost all of them.

After the flag-killed story today was reset, it still never showed up on the main page, despite hundreds of votes, although it did show up on /classic.

<comment><USER43> Sure; nearly all those stories are off topic for HN:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

I assume this one's different because of the Reddit connection.

<comment><USER42> When content moderation rules like these are infrequently enforced they cant be taken seriously.

<comment><USER43> If this is 'infrequently' I'm not sure what we do all day!

Moderation consistency is impossible, because we can't come close to reading everything here. We do our best.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45>
        > Citation needed if you're
        > going to "correct the record."

This is not Reddit, and it is not a place for accusing people of being paid shills. Please desist.

<comment><USER46> Where did he accuse anyone of that? All he asked for is a citation.

<comment><USER47> Their comment is referencing Correct The Record, a pro-Clinton PAC which, according to a popular but false Reddit rumor, employs commenters to anonymously spread propaganda. See also:

[https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/4xcwjb/what_i...](https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/4xcwjb/what_is_correct_the_recordctr_rpolitics/)

Edit: At the time of this edit, three replies have asked for a citation on "false", so I may as well put it here.

Barrier Breakers 2016, the subject of the original The Daily Beast article that spread the rumor [1], is a real project that spreads messaging (call if propaganda if you want) supporting Clinton. But that messaging is not anonymous or covert. Here are some of their social media accounts:

Twitter: [https://twitter.com/nobarriers2016](https://twitter.com/nobarriers2016)

Facebook: [https://www.facebook.com/BarrierBreakers2016/](https://www.facebook.com/BarrierBreakers2016/)

YouTube: [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMLy17PDQw_WSNoytoDX- HA](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMLy17PDQw_WSNoytoDX-HA)

Other CTR Twitter accounts (not 'Barrier Breakers'):

[https://twitter.com/CorrectRecord](https://twitter.com/CorrectRecord)

[https://twitter.com/CTR_DZ](https://twitter.com/CTR_DZ)

They post a lot of stuff - the @nobarriers2016 Twitter account has three posts in the last hour. But the accounts are clearly marked as a project of Correct the Record, and the glossy images they share are not even remotely pretending to be grassroots.

According to their spokesperson, they do not have an additional covert operation:

> "Barrier Breakers accounts are always identified as Correct the Record," > spokesperson Elizabeth Shappell said.

\- [http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/correct-...](http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/correct- the-record-online-trolls/484847/)

That article is a good read in general and explains what they mean by "pushing back":

> In an exchange on May 24, a Twitter user with a bio that reads "Conservative > Republican. Trump SUPPORTER. Fox news viewer," wrote: "Whenever CROOKED > HILLARY gets a tough question she either bursts into that blood curdling > laughing cackle or starts barking like a dog. #LIAR." Correct the Record > responded with #ImWithHer and a graphic of Clinton with text reading: "She's > the most vetted person on earth. And standing STRONGER than ever."

(You can find the tweet in question by searching - the response was from the @CTR_DZ account.)

Personally, I consider this approach fairly lame, in line with the brand social media accounts that sometimes show up in my Twitter replies when I complain about the brand. If I got a message from them, I doubt I would feel especially encouraged or interested in resharing their images. But that's a _far_ cry from being immoral, which I think employing anonymous commenters to skew the public debate would be.

Of course, I can't present absolute proof that they are telling the truth about not having an additional covert operation. But there is no evidence whatsoever that they do have one, only baseless speculation about "paid shills", of the sort that's been around forever (I remember when I used to read Slashdot, closer to its prime, and it was Microsoft that supposedly employed an army of them there), combined with a distorted understanding of a real project.

[1] [http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/21/hillary- pac...](http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/21/hillary-pac- spends-1-million-to-correct-commenters-on-reddit-and-facebook.html)

<comment><USER48> > but false

Any citation for that?

<comment><USER47> I have edited my post to elaborate. [additional text so the dupe checker doesn't hide this]

<comment><USER48> It doesn't cost $6M to run a couple twitter feeds for a few months. [https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00578997](https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00578997)

And she didn't say that Correct the Record doesn't have covert accounts, she said the Barrier Breakers accounts are always marked.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> And she still will be elected, because this year we had to have joke candidates on both sides. I guess it's probably the best time to vote 3rd party.

<comment><USER50> I honestly can't understand how anybody is considering voting for Clinton or Trump. If this world was anything close to reasonable, Gary Johnson would win in a landslide. _shrug_

<comment><USER51> As a Gary Johnson supporter myself, I freely admit that he has some extreme policies that can turn off a lot of voters. But what really frustrates me is how many people I've heard from that _do_ prefer him but are afraid to vote for him because of the spoiler effect.

I keep (wishful thinking) envisioning a scenario where he gets just enough votes that all of a sudden everyone on the fence realizes that maybe he _could_ win and joins in, and then he launches ahead

Wishful thinking and politics aside: there's a term for that phenomenon on the tip of my tongue, but I can't quite place it. Can anyone think of one? Where there's a slow growth until you get just enough of something and then it takes off?

<comment><USER52> Critical mass?

<comment><USER51> Aha, yeah, that was it! Thanks. soemoea's "tipping point" is close, too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> I have yet to see a single example of Trump's racism. It's an oft repeated cliche that has yet to be demonstrated by anyone. As much of a "clown" as trump might be, half of his labels are completely pulled out of thin air.

<comment><USER54> In 1989 he reportedly said "Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day."

He spent 5 years pushing the birther conspiracy even after Obama produced his birth certificate. He also implied that Obama was a Muslim despite his claims to the contrary.

He's implied several times that Obama sides with terrorists because of his upbringing.

He said a judge was unqualified to preside over a Trump University lawsuit because he was Mexican (turns out he was born in the US 60 years ago.) Paul Ryan called it a "textbook definition of racism".

He started his campaign with this quote: "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." Despite the fact that studies show first generation immigrants don't commit more crimes than native born citizens.

He uses language like "My African American", "The Muslims", and "The Hispanics" when talking about minority groups.

He refused to disavow David Duke on air until he "researched him more." He said he didn't know who he was, but it turns out there are numerous example of him mentioning David Duke in the past. He had primaries in southern states coming up, so publicly disavowing David Duke would have likely hurt him. Especially since David Duke has been campaigning for him. He did eventually disavow him after the media made a huge deal about it.

He repeatedly refers to Elizabeth Warren as "Pocahontas".

He said "They don't look like Indians to me" about a Native American tribe that ran a competing casino.

He said "Maybe [the protester] should have been roughed up," he mused. "It was absolutely disgusting what he was doing." about a Black Lives matter protester at his rally.

He said "I will say that people who are following me are very passionate," Trump said. "They love this country and they want this country to be great again. They are passionate." when asked about supporters who beat a homeless Latino man because "they all need to be deported."

<comment><USER44> I recall him referring to Elizabeth Warren as "Fauxcahontas", but I may just have that ingrained after her unsubstantiated claims keep resurfacing in Massachusetts politics.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER55> Long-shot speculation: I wonder if the Democrats have decided that Hillary is going to lose against Trump. Maybe they, and not the GOP, are throwing her under a very fast bus.

Does anyone know what happens in the unlikely event that Clinton is placed under indictment before the election? Does Kaine move up the ticket? Does the DNC pick someone else entirely? What options do the electors have?

<comment><USER56> I was getting ready to point out that Hillary really has a large lead, even if the day-to-day talking heads insist on making this and every race/issue seem as if it is 50/50 split. Then I checked 538.com [1]: they have her at 60% chance of winning -- pretty strong lead and hardly a normal time to throw someone under the bus -- but those graphs should be terrifying team Hillary.

[1] [http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election- forecast/](http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/)

<comment><USER57> Don't use that site for any insight. Nate Silver had Trump at a "1%" chance of winning the GOP primaries. He then admitted that he got the call wrong because he really didn't have any models and was just spitballing with friends. His accuracy in the previous general election was based on the fact that he had visibility into private polling (WAY more accurate) and other forecasters didn't.

<comment><USER58> He did have models, and they correctly predicted Trump's victory. He chose to disregard them. Then he wrote a mea culpa article explaining his mistake, which he is unlikely to repeat.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER59> Meanwhile there is a picture of Hillary _embracing a KKK member_ that the corrupt media refuses to mention. The kingmakers don't give a good goddamn about racism, except as a convenient narrative for purges. The 21st century equivalent of accusations of communism.

[https://i.sli.mg/FdqTAx.jpg](https://i.sli.mg/FdqTAx.jpg)

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

"It is almost impossible to imagine the United States Senate without Robert Byrd. He was not just its longest serving member, he was its heart and soul. From my first day in the Senate, I sought out his guidance, and he was always generous with his time and his wisdom." -- Hillary Clinton

<comment><USER60> By the end of his career Robert Byrd was a repentant, former KKK member.

Trump is being embraced by current, active KKK members.

It is obtuse to pretend there's no difference between the two.

From your own Wikipedia link: "In his last autobiography, Byrd explained that he was a KKK member because he "was sorely afflicted with tunnel vision — a jejune and immature outlook — seeing only what I wanted to see because I thought the Klan could provide an outlet for my talents and ambitions."[23] Byrd also said, in 2005, "I know now I was wrong. Intolerance had no place in America. I apologized a thousand times ... and I don't mind apologizing over and over again. I can't erase what happened."[13]"

<comment><USER61> >Trump is being embraced by current, active KKK members.

Being embraced by and embracing are very different things. There are statistically going to be child rapists that support both candidates, does that make them both child rapists?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> You're literally repeating clinton talking points. Do you think you're contributing to the discussion amongst people that in no way believe any of the garbage you just wrote?

<comment><USER43> Please take care to remain civil when commenting here.

We detached this comment from [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12536216](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12536216) and marked it off-topic.</comment></comment>


Show HN: Personal Diary App with a Community - <AUTHOR> https://www.GoodnightJournal.com <comment><USER2> A good way to build your writing habit!</comment>


Ask HN: Relocated to Canada as Rails dev and terminated - <AUTHOR> Told my job went to India and my salary was not paid off, they asked me to sign release form and said I would get money in 2 weeks. I went to lawyers and they say they are refusing to pay out, besides looking for a job what can I do. <comment><USER2> If you went to a good lawyer there's not much more you can do other than take care of your mental health (sleep, exercise). Polish that resume. Good luck!</comment>


Uber Employees Use Secret Tools to Target Drivers and Undercut Competition - <AUTHOR> http://jalopnik.com/uber-employees-use-secret-tools-to-target-drivers-and-u-1793495814 <comment><USER2> So they target specific drivers and offer them MORE money to drive only for Uber? And the drivers are under no obligation and could choose to not accept the extra and continue driving for Lyft, or drive for Lyft after the incentive is over?

How fucking nefarious!

</comment><comment><USER3> This just kinda seems like "Amazon employees use secret tools to monitor Walmart prices and undercut competition"

</comment><comment><USER4> Do they ever do something legit?

<comment><USER5> Nah

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Uber designed this tool to make drivers loyal. But knowledge of its existence will have the _opposite_ effect:

Now drivers will have incentive to drive for Lyft as well.

</comment><comment><USER7> I'm just trying to picture a team that stares at God View and the Lyft app all day, triangulating and throwing subsidies at oblivious drivers all day.

</comment><comment><USER8> Why do I only see bad news about Uber lately?

<comment><USER9> garnter-hype-cycle.jpg

The more a product's marketing is able to get them over-hyped, the harder the fall when the zeitgeist starts focusing on their faults.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Do companies ever request test solutions to build solution benchmarks? - <AUTHOR> After an initial 1-hour telephone interview, I was recently asked to solve a 2-hour data analysis code test. It went very well, but shortly after submitting my solution, an HR representative had a phone call with me that focused exclusively on side issues, such as what were my preferences regarding open offices or how I work in teams.
I was not asked about any of these topics in the first interview, and only a few hours after the first interview I had received an excited email inviting me to take the code test.
At the end of the second phone conversation, less than 24 hours after submitting my solution, the HR rep suggested that it was probably not best to continue the interview process since my feelings about certain things did not match the company's current policies.
I don't necessarily disagree with that decision, but here is the unusual part:
Just hours after this happened, I saw a new job listing from the same company for a position with nearly the same job description. But the title had been altered slightly to say it was a temporary position with the possibility for permanent hire. The revised ad also made it sound like the position was far more junior than when I initially interviewed.
I'm reasonably highly ranked on Stack Overflow for the main tech used in the test. Is it possible the company just wanted to see what my performance would be as a benchmark for a baseline? If companies do this, what steps should a candidate take to avoid completing such tests and investing personal time that results only in giving the company free performance data? <comment><USER2> >what steps should a candidate take to avoid completing such tests and investing personal time that results only in giving the company free performance data?

Probably nothing different. I suspect that investing additional time and energy is not going to be a net win for you.

>The revised ad also made it sound like the position was far more junior than when I initially interviewed.

It is possible that there was discussion internally and they decided against paying whatever it would cost to hire someone like you. "We're not paying that, get a new grad" is not an uncommon refrain in some circles. If it helps, places that like are usually not nice places to work.

<comment><USER3> Agree, it's unlikely they used you as a benchmark, because most companies simply don't believe they need to. Though they should at least test with their own employees.

Also, on multiple occasions I've been told, "don't worry about salary, focus on getting us the right candidate." When I do so: "Oh, we can't afford more than $X." I now try to test the waters with, "Developers with that experience often make north of $150K, is that still in range?"</comment></comment>


The 'Brand Sweden' typeface - <AUTHOR> http://sweden.identitytool.com/buildingblocks/secondary-building-blocks-always-use#our-main-typeface

<comment><USER2> Reading [http://sweden.identitytool.com/identity/the-starting- points](http://sweden.identitytool.com/identity/the-starting-points) and [http://www.visitsweden.com/sweden/brandguide/Form-and- Image/...](http://www.visitsweden.com/sweden/brandguide/Form-and-Image/Visual- identity/Images/), I get the impression this is for the "Promotion of Sweden" (NSU) organization.

As such, it isn't that different from a company or non-profit having its own corporate identity. For example, the Dutch state government has its own font: [http://www.farhill.nl/01_typefaces/Rijksoverheid.html](http://www.farhill.nl/01_typefaces/Rijksoverheid.html)

</comment><comment><USER3> Germany also has its own typeface: "BundesSerif" and "BundesSans" (see [http://styleguide.bundesregierung.de/Webs/SG/DE/PrintMedien/...](http://styleguide.bundesregierung.de/Webs/SG/DE/PrintMedien/Basiselemente/Schriften/schriften_node.html?__site=SG)). Designed by [http://supertype.de](http://supertype.de) – if anyone cares. :)</comment>


Government regulation of digital technology or content is a slippery slope - <AUTHOR> https://www.iafrikan.com/2020/01/16/government-policy-governance-politics-technology-tech-innovation/ <comment><USER2> its sad that this even needs to be said</comment>


How to Start a Startup: Lectures (2014) - <AUTHOR> http://startupclass.samaltman.com/ <comment><USER2> Having scanned through these lectures, one thing really jumps out at me. There is a serious lack of diversity here. That may seem trivial, but these guys seem to fit a very narrow range of experiences. Even their accents are nearly identical. I would suggest trying to learn from people of a wider background. There are plenty of great startups on this planet not founded by t-shirt-clad brogramers.

The one exception to this pattern is lecture 18, legal and accounting. Watch that lecture. Note the accent change. Note the change of pacing, the polite pauses and lack of a constant train of thought. Legal and accounting are professional fields. These are people from a different background than the other lecturers. Aggressive modes of speech may be cool in founder land, but they do not fly in established professions. If you want to separate yourself from the crowd, if you want to be taken seriously by a wider audience, learn to speak and present as these women.

</comment><comment><USER3> Yesterday my co-founder and I attended YC's Open Office Hours. Fortunately we had watched the "How to Start a Startup" series, so we knew in advance how to concisely introduce our company and also set an appropriate goal for the meeting. Every second counts in a 20 minute meeting with a YC-partner.

In under 1 minute we defined the product, market size, and traction to date.

In under 1 minute we introduced the team. It takes discipline to not promote your past successes and the degrees you earned. Instead we just stated all the founders are highly technical with a good sense for design, and we have known each other for years.

We then simply proposed 3 or 4 opportunities and then kept quiet. Our target talk-to-listen ratio was 1:5. We kept the single minded goal to obtain advice on strategy and direction.

At the very least this series is a kernel that should eventually produce your company's unique culture. I hope it resonates with you as it did with our team.

Thanks YC!

<comment><USER4> It doesn't sound spontaneous.

I don't like rules like "1 minute for this, 5 minutes for that".

But if that works for you, go ahead.

<comment><USER3> Agreed. It's a gimmick, but useful since most people talk way more than they should.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> A great resource for people looking to start a startup.

The lecture about accounting and legal aspects of startups cleared up a lot of doubts I had.Very consice.

<comment><USER2> Be warned, the legal stuff there is a very high level overview. I personally would hesitate to give such a lecture for fear of people walking away with too much confidence. I've seen too many think they can get away with downloaded contracts and advice from lawyers they saw at conferences. Remember that the people giving you money have their own lawyers, good ones, to protect their interests.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> My notes from the lectures:

[https://leanpub.com/how_to_start_a_startup](https://leanpub.com/how_to_start_a_startup)

(Just use $0--any proceeds go to the EFF)

Like others I also really enjoyed the legal and accounting lecture. It was outside of the scope of the usual startup advice you hear (technology, sales, marketing, etc.).

</comment><comment><USER7> If anyone wants to watch these on their TV, I created an Apple TV app that streams all the videos.

Just search the App Store for "startup class" if you have a 4th gen Apple TV.

<comment><USER8> I just tried it out, it's nice to have all the videos two clicks from my home screen! Thanks :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> A classic.

<comment> L-Logic There's an app that goes perfect with this course called: _Visions - An Idea Log Based on Y Combinator_. It's based directly on a project from this course. Check it out: [http://www.getvisionsapp.com](http://www.getvisionsapp.com)

<comment><USER10> Does it upload your curated ideas to the cloud?

<comment> L-Logic At the moment, there is no cloud support so all of your ideas are saved locally on your device. If you want to export your ideas out of the app, you can do that.

Is there a feature you would really like in this app? Is it iCloud backup?</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Passcode signs off - <AUTHOR> http://passcode.csmonitor.com/goodbye <comment><AUTHOR> Too bad. I found their newsletter timely, informative and well written. What alternatives are there for keeping up with cyber security issues on a regular basis?</comment>


Link to travel blog platform that included clips of transcoded videos? - <AUTHOR> I remember seeing a link posted a while back (1 year?) for a blogging platform that included embedded, transcoded video clips. It was very nicely designed. The author opensourced it, from what I remember. Does anyone remember it and can provide a link? Thanks. <comment><AUTHOR> I found it: [https://github.com/Jack000/Expose](https://github.com/Jack000/Expose)</comment>


Astropad – Transform your iPad into a professional graphics tablet - <AUTHOR> http://astropad.com/ <comment><USER2> I feel the main problem with using the iPad as a stylus input device is the latency. There's a very noticeable and annoying lag when drawing anything via a capacitive input device, unlike on a Wacom. Hopefully the rumors are true and Apple adds a digitizer to the next iPad model!

<comment><USER3> Did you see the finger crossed here:

[http://astropad.com/assets/img/pens.jpg](http://astropad.com/assets/img/pens.jpg)

<comment><USER2> Yes! It made me smile. :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'd love for the iPad to be a great digital creation tool. I really would.

But as it stands, it's horrible. It's laggy, lacks pressure sensitivity, and the apps are clunky at best.

Here's to hoping there's a push from Apple to improve things. But for the time being Microsoft's Surface line is about a thousand times better for actual creatives.

<comment><USER5> Astropad has a 7 day tryout. So, I've been using it to pretty great results. I like it.

With Wifi it's actually laggy, but with the USB cable, it has been very fast. Pressure sensitivity isn't that important to me - depends on your use-case.

Tried it with Photoshop and Illustrator and it works great. Being able to see what you draw is great, far better then a normal Wacom Tablet.

So far, it's a great option. A bit on the expensive side, but cheaper then having to buy a Cintiq or a Surface :)

<comment><USER6> I'm glad you like it!

If you can, try using your wifi on the 5ghz band. In some cases that helps a lot

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm not a professional arts it but spend a fair amount of time in Photoshop. Years ago I got a low end Wacom but never used it after the first week. Too much hassle to pull it out, and I never got the hang of looking at the screen while moving my hand.

Astropad is a good fit for me. I already own an iPad; and for <$100 I get Astropad and a pressure sensitive pen. This means the draw-on-screen experience of the $1K Cintiq and no extra peripheral to dig out.

I saw on other sites where someone complained that "pro" tablets give 2048 levels of pressure sensitivity while ipad pens give only 1024, but I can't tell a difference. (Esp when the LCD only has 256 levels per color channel!)

The geeky side of me is more impressed with how they got such low latency and high fidelity over the same wifi pipe used by other screen-mapping apps (Duet).

<comment><USER8> I was messing around with this the other day and I had a video playing on my computer. It showed up on the iPad pixelated like when tv censors nudity, pointer tracking seemed pretty fluid even with that playing.

What would be nice is a direct connection between the iPad and computer instead of wifi. My work network is a hassle to log into so I don't event do it most of the time. If I need to look up something on the iPad, i pull out my cell phone hotspot.

<comment><USER3> Pixelation is expected and by design. We are optimized for displaying high quality still images.

If a large change occurs on your Mac screen and we are unable to keep up, we show pixelated content. This is a signal that we don't have the full screen in yet, and that the screen image is loading. Astropad is honest, when the image is clear, you are assured what you see is the actual content, artifact free.

Sending high image quality over WiFi is really challenging. Ever wonder why we don't have wireless TVs? or Wireless computer displays? It's really really hard to do.

<comment><USER9> Well... we do have wireless TVs. They started that way.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I LOVE the philosophy behind this -- trying to address the dearth of functionality-rich applications (not apps, mind you) in the post-pc era.

One question: How does this improve on the poor resolution of the iPad touch interface as compared with the Microsoft surface?

<comment><USER3> It mostly depends on what stylus you use. Here are the recommended ones: [http://blog.astropad.com/styluses/](http://blog.astropad.com/styluses/)

We have a 7 days free trial take it for a spin, judge for yourself.

<comment><USER10> Cool. Thanks a lot for hanging out in the thread and answering questions! I love it when posters do that :).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Great concept, but I would avoid "Ex-Apple Engineers" and go for "Former Apple Engineers" to avoid the negative wording. Sounds like you broke up with Apple and it's a sour relationship.

<comment><USER3> Good suggestion. We actually still have many friends at Apple and left in great terms.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Can't see any mention of palm rejection and the image they show doesn't clearly show if his hand touches the screen or not while drawing. I'm curious how well the palm rejection problem is solved in these kind of apps? If not it would seem to be a pretty annoying problem.

<comment><USER3> iOS 8 introduces new features that make palm rejection possible. You actually now know the size of area touching the display.

Upon this feature, we build our own palm detection. It works quite well. We have a 7 days free trial, take it for a spin.

<comment><USER12> Interesting info, thanks - I use an nVidia Shield tablet that comes with stylus and has palm rejection features that nVidia included dedicated support for their SoC. Unfortunately it does not work well enough for me and I end up not using the stylus very much. So it is interesting that it's possible (hopefully) to solve it better than that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Looks awesome #astroboys.

ps. I'm the founder of Emotely, where I toyed around with a similar approach but then ended up focusing on game controllers instead. Early concept video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NE8-TntjYB4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NE8-TntjYB4)

Had been toying with doing something exactly like this again recently called interscreen. Made some prototypes of going over USB, it's so fast when you do that, generally it's fast over wifi. Wifi is un-demoable at conferences, which was always an annoying factor for self promotion.

<comment><USER13> ...not going to be continuing with it I don't think, but definitely going to keep check out the app. You have my purchase. :)

I wonder if there's a way to combine your tech with Tiltbrush's for a cool VR use case: [http://tiltbrush.com](http://tiltbrush.com)

Being able to tilt the device as another axis of control for your virtual drawing plane could be cool.

firstname.lastname@example.com

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'm just beginning to make khan academy style videos. That's where I use a tablet to make basic drawings, and screencast what I do.

Is astropad a good fit for this use case? I tried drawing via sketchbook express, but it was hard to keep tools offscreen yet still have enough space to make sketches on the ipad screen.

Currently I'm using jot whiteboard + Airserver, which lets me display my drawings to my mac.

</comment><comment><USER15> I tried different stylus solutions and iPAD doest NOT differentiate your palm from the pen... (or through software hack) which means you can not rest your hand on the screen (as opposed to WACOM / Galaxy Note/ Surface) And drawing all day long is tiresome. Maybe one can get used to it, I dont :-) Maybe your solution is good I hope.

</comment><comment><USER16> Great work, this has always seemed like one of those obvious things that we would have seen before. Great job making it work!

</comment><comment><USER17> I installed this on my iPad and Mac, excited to try out 53 Pencil support. Unfortunately, they don't tell you that it doesn't support 53 Pencil yet until after you start the free trial.

I wish I could start over my trial when my stylus is supported.

<comment><USER6> Hey Peter!

Sorry about that, we had to pull Pencil support at the last minute due to bugs.

The trial only records days actually used, so if you resume when we have Pencil support you'll still have time left.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Good luck, looks like a nice product. My only request/suggestion for your website is to make it clear which iPads you're compatible with. e.g. does dock vs lightning connector matter? full size vs mini? iOS version?

<comment><USER3> Good point.

Any Mac running OS X 10.9+

Any iPad running iOS 8

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Would work 100x better with a Surface Pro 2.

Unrelated, but I utterly despise any and all video playback setups that don't let me control time. This isn't a VHS tape, let me watch your promotional video how I want plzkthx.

<comment><USER3> We are Apple's #astroboys, we like one button and no knobs...

...but just for you: [http://vimeo.com/astrohq/astropad](http://vimeo.com/astrohq/astropad)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Looks very cool!

Any chance of it ever moving to Windows, or is it Mac-only forever?

</comment><comment><USER21> Not more than a month ago, I was looking for a similar products, and here it is. Good job. I have yet to try it, but especially the speed looks promising.

</comment><comment><USER22> Any information on the input latency?

<comment><USER23> In the demo video it seems significant and I think I'd find it very distracting.

<comment><USER3> Take it for a spin, we have a 7 days free trial.

<comment><USER24> Maybe have a video showing someone drawing a fast zig-zag scribble; it would answer the latency question implicitly. Ditto for palm rejection.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Just a heads up, Chrome on my phone crashes repeatedly when trying to play the video.

</comment><comment><USER26> Awesome app. I was testing it and I highly recommend it!

</comment><comment><USER27> Or buy an 800 touch pc.

<comment><USER9> You meant $800, I imagine? How about you get one of those and report back to us how useful they are for professional illustration work.

<comment><USER28> Is the MS Surface actually bad for that? I thought that was one of the only interesting use cases for it (as it has no real keyboard, is rather heavy, etc.).

<comment><USER29> I asked my artist friend to try drawing on my Surface Pro 3 a month ago (using Clip Studio Paint). Her impression was that N-trig's preciseness and lacking pressure level make the Surface 3 unsuitable for a serious work, but it's OK for light drawing session or for a rough drawing. The Surface 2 might be another story though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Add $20 and you can buy a Wacom CTH461 Bamboo Craft Tablet complete with stylus and 1024 levels of pressure sensitivity.

</comment><comment><USER31> $50, though? You can buy an actual graphics tablet for that much.

<comment><USER3> Yes a black slate on which you cannot see where you draw... have you ever tried those? This product is more similar to a Cintiq which is 1000+ value

Astropad brings the Cintiq experience to your iPad [http://www.imore.com/astropad-brings-cintiq-experience- your-...](http://www.imore.com/astropad-brings-cintiq-experience-your-ipad)

Astropad Is An App That Pretty Much Replaces Graphics Tablets [http://gizmodo.com/astropad-is-an-app-that-pretty-much- repla...](http://gizmodo.com/astropad-is-an-app-that-pretty-much-replaces- graphics-t-1686931534)

<comment><USER32> There's no way this compares to a Cintiq.

Cintiq has far higher accuracy compared to the Astropad and Cintiq also has 2048+ levels of pressure sensitivity.

Also, input lag with actual tablets/Cintiqs will be far less than the Astropad.

For casual sketching/scribbling, the Astropad may be OK but for professional level work, nothing comes close to Wacom-powered tablets (and, unfortunately, won't anytime soon due to Wacom's patents).

<comment><USER33> It doesn't have to be _better_ than a Cintiq, it just has to be closer than an equivalent dedicated graphics tablet at the same price point. I think it's a valid comparison.

<comment><USER32> Except this doesn't come close to any dedicated graphics tablet, let alone one of the most high-end tablets you can get like a Cintiq so the comparison is really bad.

All real graphics tablets, even ones in the <$100 range, have pressure sensitivity unlike the Astropad and the accuracy is far higher with real tablets.

<comment><USER7> You're conflating a lot of things here.

* Astropad _does_ have pressure sensitivity via the supported pens. * Astropad _does_ provide a visible screen like a cintiq at a much lower cost.

How can you clame it "doesn't come close to a desicated graphics tablet" when you obviously haven't tried it in the preferred setup of iPad + pressure sensitive pen? I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying ita speculation at this point.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> meh, I'm aware at how this will perform. Surface pro 1, 2 or 3 is way better.

<comment><USER35> Shame, seems like a lot of effort to fit themselves onto a platform that just wasn't made for illustration. If this is what you want out of a tablet there's no reason to get one without a digitizer.</comment></comment>


Icon Driven Development on the App Store- how we make $350/day without marketing - <AUTHOR> http://spreadsong.com/icon_driven_development_on_the_app_store_how_we_make_350day_without_marketing <comment><USER2> Great success story on bootstrapping your business, and a big congrats because it's very a difficult road and will surely challenge your nerves and sanity. :)

If your app has only been for sale for ~1 month, I encourage you to be very conservative with your spending — the AppStore is extremely volatile. While the momentum is in your favor with the Top Charts, I suggest you keep your eyes focused on improving the iPhone app and pushing updates. The other mobile markets aren't mature enough yet to approach aggressively, and sales on the AppStore could fall as quickly as they came.

</comment><comment><USER3> _how we make $350/day without marketing_

Designing a logo which stands out compared to competitors around you: I would say this is a textbook case of marketing.

Having said that, it is clever using a free marketing opportunity like that, and, even better, being (one of) the first to realize there's a huge opportunity there.

All I hope is that I won't be asked to punch any monkeys while browsing the AppStore any time soon. :)

<comment><USER4> perhaps he means $350/day without advertising?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yup, my bad- $350/day without advertising would be more accurate. I think of most of the icon/description/sales page work as positioning than as marketing, but that's probably splitting hairs too much.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Was it really the icon's graphic design, or the fact that the word "free" is positioned very prominently within it? It'd be an interesting experiment to actually change the app icon for a month and test the results. Of course that's risking real money, so it'd be understandable if you didn't want to take the chance. :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Good question- it's both, and the color scheme. If you pull up the Book category, most of the icons suck- plain, generic, bookcase after bookcase. So, a big red icon that also states FREE prominently is sure to get stand out.

Based on how we moved up the list, I attribute most of the sales growth to increased visibility from our icon as we moved up the Top 100 list, assuming that search traffic from things like 'Free Books' would remain relatively steady.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Colin, congrats on the success! It's nice to hear an App Store success story instead of the usual bad news.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks Derrek! The App Store is definitely a great way to make money, though it's of course up to developers to execute and position themselves well.

For us, the only issue is communication- we've now had a Kindle companion application, Kindling, in review for _94 days_ , without any communication outside of form responses from Apple.

We take the long view- the App Store is currently the best mobile platform, but we're working on expanding our business to other platforms. I think it's pretty crazy for any developer to be focused on one platform exclusively, and have 100% of their revenue capable of being destroyed with a single click of the 'Remove from Sale' button in Cupertino.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Congrats on the success. It looks like you're getting around 250 downloads a day. That is great

If the 8th ranked app is getting 250 downloads a day, it looks like the Books category is more lucrative than people may have thought.

<comment><AUTHOR> A lot of our revenue actually comes from the rest of the world- Australia, Canada, and the UK are all solid, and we've been in #1 Books for Canada for solid stretches.

We're actually 25 spots away from being Top 100 overall right now in Canada, so much of our revenue is attributed to the world, and not just the US. This is something we're going to expand on a lot more moving forward, as it's caught us by surprise.

<comment><USER7> Thanks for the additional info. You're right, I forgot to account for the fact that the 250 downloads is a "world" total and not the "US" total. Do US sales generally account for roughly half your sales. If so, 8th place at 125 downloads is still pretty good for the "Books" category.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Yes, nothing signifies "free books" like a Soviet hammer-and-sickle.

Who knows where the world would be today if the USSR hadn't kept the flame of publisher freedom alive through the darkest days of the cold war, when dissidents had to smuggle mimeographed copies of banned books into Paris, London, and New York.

Wait, that's not how it was?

<comment><USER9> Agreed. I find the fairly common appropriation of communist iconography to look "cool" quite offensive.

And stupid.

Especially in this case: these guys are Hungarians and should really know better.

<comment><USER10> > Especially in this case: these guys are Hungarians and should really know > better.

You seem to define "knowing better" as "agreeing with me". Since these people are Hungarians, I'd guess they know more about Hungarian culture than you do, particularly what symbols are considered offensive in that culture.

If most people wouldn't find the symbolism offensive, in practical terms it isn't a problem. (Of course, anything will be offensive to someone).</comment></comment></comment>


A New Gowalla - <AUTHOR> http://blog.gowalla.com/post/10513121010/a-new-gowalla

<comment><USER2> I have to applaud Gowalla for taking the risk of changing directions with their platform. Although it is a step away from the check-in crowd, their move is in the direction of how I tend to use Gowalla or Foursquare.

If you live outside of urban areas like most people checking in at the same places over and over looses its appeal quickly. The only time I actively use any check-in service is when I'm traveling or at a conference. I'm sure they'll continue to find their way in the new direction, but I like where they're heading.

Stellar design too.

</comment><comment><USER3> I find the new app much more interesting and useful than the old one. I can now create a "story" for a location and indicate who I'm there with, share pictures together, etc. The other thing I like is the new "highlights" tagging feature where you can tag locations with various indicators like: watering hole, or GTD, or "Sketchy" to give folks indicators of what's nice (or not so nice) at a location.

</comment><comment><USER4> > We're building a social atlas for the world. And we need your help to do it.

This makes me think of Dopplr. As somebody who was using Gowalla purely for the check-in-to-see-where-I've-been aspect, I think I'm going to end up a Foursquare user before long. I guess you have to do what you have to do in order to stay alive and hopefully end up profitable.

</comment><comment><USER5> I like the snazzy pull-to-refresh animation in their new iPhone app!

Interesting to see their take on mobile+social+local travel guides, but Yelp reviews give me a lot more opinionated information than Gowalla checkins. Not sure if their new stories are supposed to be reviews.

</comment><comment><USER6> I've never used Gowalla, but I've seen a lot of complaints on Twitter that peoples' "stuff" has disappeared. What's happened there?

<comment><USER7> I assume that means the "items" you used to pick up at various locations. They've killed off that whole concept, which used to be novel, but new people probably wondered what was up with getting a "Baseball bat" when you check-in somewhere.

<comment><USER3> IIRC Josh Williams said that only a small small percentage of people actually used them.

<comment><USER8> Which is not necessarily true...

<comment><USER9> It is completely true, less than 1 percent of all users were the users who were actively using/dropping/collecting items.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> They got less traction than FourSquare, and are now pivoting to a less profitable space in travel guides... their apps look nice, and they got a good looking logo, I guess... but this sounds like an app in search of a problem. Gowalla looks more like a social experiment, or a fun project than an actual company right now.

<comment><USER11> Less profitable space? Is check-ins profitable at all?

<comment><USER7> Yes, FourSquare has done a pretty good job at monetizing (Sponsored badges, integration with AmEx, etc...) I'm not sure whether they are profitable per say but they seem to have a pretty good road to it if not.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Well, it is a pivot, I'll give them that. And as always their design is superior but if they insist on listing locales like "Cheers" in Boston as a destination in their guide, they're going to find themselves pivoting to something else in the near future.

<comment><USER13> Have to agree.. Tokyo is not showing me the most inspiring list of destinations. I'd like an app has these kinds of lists, weighted by how long someone has lived in a city.. I can't help but feel there's a low hanging fruit there for "off the beaten path" travel guides. Simply ranking by number of check-ins is not so novel..

<comment><USER14> I'm applying to YC this round with an idea very similar to this. We're aiming to help locals make travel guides for their own cities.

What other things frustrate you about finding things to do in a foreign city?

<comment><USER12> Urbandig?

<comment><USER14> Oh, that's an interesting app. I didn't find that while looking for companies that do this already.

Our solution is a bit different - namely avoiding curation by a few people. We're frustrated by how difficult it is to find things to do in a new city, and we want to get locals to help (after all, the best way to visit a city is to visit a friend who lives in that city). Think crowdsourced walking tours.

<comment><USER12> Yes, I've looked into that. Much better than the standard walking tours with a (mis)guide dressed up in pre-Industrial garb. It's a very interesting concept for those interested in trying something new, but maybe hard to get over the fear-factor for the average tourist, who mind you, won't hesitate to fork over $32 for a tour in an aging water bus.

<comment><USER14> Can I ask what you found out when looking into it? Did you consider doing something in this space and decide against it?

We can take this discussion off HN, too. My email is in my profile.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>