A Vast, 430-Year-Old World Map - <AUTHOR> https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/vast-map-planisphereurbano-monte-places-creatures-real-imagined <comment><USER2> I love old maps like this. We have a government-funded website [1] which contains historical maps back to the beginning of the 18th century and which can be overlayed on top of current maps. Some of them are beautifully drawn, with tiny castles etc. And they are likely the results of years and years of fairly manual labor and it's striking how accurate they are. It's nice to see our street already existed back then, and some houses are still in the exact same place and some even already existed then (though there were only about 5, vs 50 now). And the church was already there of course. Many of the names of streets/forests/areas haven't changed much phonetically but mainly spelling- wise. And the old names give an insight into why villages were named the way they were.

[1] geopunt.be

<comment><USER3> For interested people, there are also old maps of Switzerland available as "Journey through time" on the government website [1] They are ranging from 1844 to 2013. It's based on Dufour and Siegfried maps, which are presented there: [2, 3]. Time can be changed by clicking on the year number in red.

[1] [https://map.geo.admin.ch/?layers=ch.swisstopo.zeitreihen&lay...](https://map.geo.admin.ch/?layers=ch.swisstopo.zeitreihen&layers_visibility=true&layers_timestamp=18641231)

[2] [https://www.swisstopo.admin.ch/en/knowledge-facts/maps- and-m...](https://www.swisstopo.admin.ch/en/knowledge-facts/maps-and- more/historical-maps/dufour-map.html)

[3] [https://www.swisstopo.admin.ch/en/knowledge-facts/maps- and-m...](https://www.swisstopo.admin.ch/en/knowledge-facts/maps-and- more/historical-maps/siegfried-map.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> interesting. Link to the actual zoomable map:

[https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~3...](https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~303661~90074314:Composite --Tavola-1-60---Map-of-the)

<comment><USER5> Nice! There is a hole/frame right above Spain, I wonder what it was supposed to be used for.

<comment><USER4> I asked on reddit but ended up finding the answer on my own.

" The note box has been cut out, indicating perhaps an intended revision that did not occur."

per [https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~3...](https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~303570~90074177:Tavola- XIII-Che-Ha-Sua-Superiore- La?qvq=q:author%3D"Monte%2B\(Monti\)%2C%2BUrbano%2C%2B1544-1613";lc:RUMSEY~8~1&mi=21)

so it's anyone's guess really

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Interesting that the name "America" is only used for (a part of) Brazil. This appears to support the consensus that America is named after Amerigo Vespucci, who first explored South America.

Shame. As a Welshman, I quite like this version: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Amerike](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Amerike)

<comment><USER7> I was always taught in school that it was Amerigo. I've never even heard of Amerike until now.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> There's a wonderful collection of US maps including historical, geologic, thematic and minute/degree over at the USGS Store[1]. There also really cheap to order/ship. I bought six maps of the Louisiana area (including one that was ~50 inches wide!) for a total of about 25 USD.

[1] [https://store.usgs.gov/maps](https://store.usgs.gov/maps)

<comment><USER9> Beautiful – thank you for sharing this!

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> 500 year old Piri Resi map also have similar drawings.

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

<comment><USER7> I've always found it interesting that the Ottomans financed Piri Reis, who created one of the greatest surviving maps of that era, but the Ottomans were such minor players on the truly global front. I'm not aware of any attempts by them to colonize the 'new world'. Maybe after Piri reported in they felt it was not worth their time? Or they likely had larger domestic problems to deal with..

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> the wikipedia page for early world maps is worth a look, it shows how they improved over the years: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_world_maps](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_world_maps)

I was struck by how much more accurate the linked one is than the c1300 mappa mundi, which lives in my home town.

</comment><comment><USER12> You can by this as a print:

60 inch print is $210 14 inch print is $40

[https://davidrumsey.reprintmint.com/002-default.html?varific...](https://davidrumsey.reprintmint.com/002-default.html?varification=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidrumsey.com%2FMediaManager%2Fsrvr%3Fmediafile%3D%2FJP2K%2FRUMSEY~8~1%2F179%2F10130087.jp2%26level%3D1%26x%3D0%26y%3D0%26width%3D31039%26height%3D31080&src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidrumsey.com%2Frumsey%2FSize4%2FRUMSEY~8~1%2F179%2F10130087.jpg&caption=%28Composite+map+of%29+Tavola+1-60.+%28Map+of+the+World%29+%28with+additional+spheres+and+labels+in+the+four+corners%29.&source=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidrumsey.com%2FMediaManager%2Fsrvr%3Fmediafile%3D%2FJP2K%2FRUMSEY~8~1%2F179%2F10130087.jp2%26level%3D1%26x%3D0%26y%3D0%26width%3D31039%26height%3D31080&title=Composite%3A+Tavola+1-60.+%28Map+of+the+World%29+%28with+additional+spheres+and+labels+in+the+four+corners%29).

</comment><comment><USER13> An old map over the nordic countries from 1539 is also quite accurate, and have some interesting creatures.

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

zoomable:

[http://art.alvin- portal.org/alvin/viewer.jsf?file=http://art...](http://art.alvin- portal.org/alvin/viewer.jsf?file=http://art.alvin- portal.org/retservice/attachment/preview/alvin-record:6964-ATTACHMENT-0001)

</comment><comment><USER14> If you enjoy old maps and fantastic creatures, you might like Eco's "Legendary Lands" book[0], which is basically an anthology of stories and visions of the world made up in the past.

[0] [https://www.amazon.com/Book-Legendary-Lands-Umberto- Eco/dp/0...](https://www.amazon.com/Book-Legendary-Lands-Umberto- Eco/dp/0847841219/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1515490323&sr=8-8&keywords=umberto+eco)

</comment><comment><USER15> I find old maps fascinating and beautiful.

One (superficial) thing that immediately jumps out at me is how similar that first image is to the weird 'flat-earth' maps produced by conspiracy-theorists and/or trolls today.

Of course the story shows us that this is merely the projection used by the mapmaker, not that they thought the earth was flat.

</comment><comment><USER16> Around the middle of the West African coast, we have >Capo de tre ponte

Presumably Cape Three Points ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cape_Three_Points](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cape_Three_Points)).

Fascinating that this landmark was known even then.

<comment><USER17> Hanno the Navigator [1] led and recorded the Carthaginian exploration of the Western coast of Africa in the 5th or 6th century BC.

By the way deliberate Carthaginian accounts of sea monsters is a source of the myths discouraging sailing in the Atlantic.

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

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Interestingly, the map has Brasil, a mythical island off the coast of Ireland: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brasil_(mythical_island)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brasil_\(mythical_island\))

</comment><comment><USER19> It's interesting how land mass between black sea and baltic sea is greatly underestimated while Finnish gulf size is greatly overestimated.

I guess somebody couldn't wrap their mind around having so much land.

<comment><USER20> Or more likely there simply wasn't sufficient data on distances or the region was not considered important enough.

<comment><USER19> Whan you think of it, mapping is an art of representing regions not important enough. To highlight important places, graphs do much better job.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> For all old maps fascinados: [http://mapire.eu/en/](http://mapire.eu/en/) Well done site with great viewing options!

</comment><comment><USER22> I'm always surprised at the awful artistic skills of maps during this period. If you look at the details, you can see how wobbly and uneven the simplest of lines and curves are. It seems odd because on the very large scale it would appear as if some sort of compass and other devises were used, but simple lines consist of overlapping strokes, erratic and handwritting that refuses to be consistently centered, and child-like scribbles for trees. For a 20 year effort, it seems careless and lacking in even rudimentary art skills. But this seems tn be every map from the period, not just this one.

<comment><USER23> Maybe because they had to get more ink between each stroke ? No fountain pen yet (appeared during the 17th in Europe)

<comment><USER22> Then why not center the letters in each box, rather than write them carelessly? Even if the lines were of uneven width, they're still not straight lines when they should be straight, wobbly when they should be elliptical.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Beautiful map. Reminds me of the maps in the LOTR books.

</comment><comment><USER25> I would seriously love if they took the scan and sold prints (maybe even a special full-size one) to help their funding.

<comment> jorge-d Well it looks like it's available to order: [https://davidrumsey.reprintmint.com/002-default.html?varific...](https://davidrumsey.reprintmint.com/002-default.html?varification=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidrumsey.com%2FMediaManager%2Fsrvr%3Fmediafile%3D%2FJP2K%2FRUMSEY~8~1%2F179%2F10130087.jp2%26level%3D1%26x%3D0%26y%3D0%26width%3D31039%26height%3D31080&src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidrumsey.com%2Frumsey%2FSize4%2FRUMSEY~8~1%2F179%2F10130087.jpg&caption=%28Composite+map+of%29+Tavola+1-60.+%28Map+of+the+World%29+%28with+additional+spheres+and+labels+in+the+four+corners%29.&source=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidrumsey.com%2FMediaManager%2Fsrvr%3Fmediafile%3D%2FJP2K%2FRUMSEY~8~1%2F179%2F10130087.jp2%26level%3D1%26x%3D0%26y%3D0%26width%3D31039%26height%3D31080&title=Composite%3A+Tavola+1-60.+%28Map+of+the+World%29+%28with+additional+spheres+and+labels+in+the+four+corners%29).

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> I would be very curious to see it distorted into a more familiar projection or wrapped onto a globe.

</comment><comment><USER27> Love how it got Frisa correctly down as a bunch of man made hills sticking out of the water.</comment>


Alienware Evaluating Customers' Interest in Linux - <AUTHOR> http://www.osnews.com/story/24310/Alienware_Evaluating_Customers_Interest_in_Linux <comment><USER2> Would have been easier for them to allow people to say no to Windows when they buy the laptop, rather than do polls and other stuff.

I would be interested in: a) easier windows refunds and b)GNU-Linux compatible specs.

</comment><comment><USER3> Gaming is one of the few things I still boot into windows for.

<comment><USER4> I'd chose linux if it was cheaper. MSDNAA is free so there is no reason for me to pay any money for another copy of windows.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> If I want a high-powered computer to run desktop Linux I go for HP. They certify and rigorously test a subset of their desktop systems to fully support Linux:

[http://h20338.www2.hp.com/enterprise/cache/321143-0-0-0-121....](http://h20338.www2.hp.com/enterprise/cache/321143-0-0-0-121.html)

<comment><USER6> I had no idea HP did that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> As much as I admire Alienware computers' design, craftsmanship, speed, etc., and as much as I appreciate the company's interest in linux, I hardly think there's any sense in Alienware linux-based computers, since they're designed for gaming and gaming only.

<comment><USER8> As much as I admire any manufacturers interest in linux, I hardly think there's any sense in anybody shipping with it. _Few_ people who want to use linux are incapable of spending the 20 minutes to install it themselves, and no matter what distro you pick you'll never satisfy a large portion of your linux using customers.

Just sell me a computer with a blank harddrive. That would be _swell_.

<comment><USER9> I want hardware support. I want a set of open specs on a laptop. That way FreeBSD, Debian, Ubuntu, and Slackware could all possibly run on it. I don't want to purchase a system in which if you use their preinstalled version of Ubuntu it works but anything else your hosed.

So when I look at a 'Linux' laptop that is what I'm looking at it for. Can I run FreeBSD with working sound/sleep/wireless?

<comment><USER8> How common are laptops that don't work well with linux these days? With graphics you're golden: either it's AMD (uncommon) and it has working FOSS drivers out of the box, or it's Nvidia where you have working FOSS drivers sufficient for work needs, and proprietary drivers sufficient for whatever gaming you could possibly be doing on linux. With wifi, you're almost always golden these days. Most laptops seem to have intel or atheros chips, but even the traditionally hellish broadcom cards don't provide much of an issue from what I understand. If anything else in a laptop could cause you any real showstopping trouble I'd be very surprised.

Note also that both of these potential hangups are something you can easily access beforehand. Every site I've used lets you pick your wifi chip from one of a few choices and will at least tell you what the GPU is.

<comment><USER9> This is wonderful in theory but I've purchased laptops pretty recently (Thinkpad x200e) which I didn't fully vet before I purchased. This laptop had lots of issues. Non Working Wifi, couldn't sleep correctly and had issues with sound.

Having everything work out of the box is not guaranteed. Ubuntu is generally better about it but not all distros have the level of workarounds that Ubuntu does. As far as ACPI is concerned not even Ubuntu is decent.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> "Would you be willing to pay extra for a Linux-based Alienware system?"

<comment><USER11> I thought one of Alienware's distinction was their support. Presumably they need to hire support reps for whatever flavor of Linux they support. Also presumably, this is more costly and intensive than hiring someone with an A+ certification. Obviously this is conjecture, but it would explain the 'charge more'.

<comment><USER12> If it was reasonably priced and decent, I would actually love support for Linux on my pc. My next one will probably be an Alienware (the mx11 netbook), and if they can make things less of a headache, I'm all for it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a geek, I'm a power user, I can fix my own computer. I just don't _want_ to. I just installed the latest version of Ubuntu on my current netbook, and surprise surprise, I need to hack some drivers and recompile the kernel. It's a chore that I just don't want to deal with any more.

More economically, if the price of support works out less than the opportunity cost of doing it myself, then it obviously makes sense to use the support.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I love alienware products very much. Their sheer no-compromise attitude to build the best gaming pc's is known through the world. I personally feel that they should enter linux market by manufacturing specific products, for ex something on the lines of google cr-48 chrome notebook. There is lot of scope in this area and personally as a hacker/programmer I know what kind of hunger we are in. Also a lot of customizations can be done on linux desktops & laptops which the traditional companies like sony,lenovo,ibm,apple don't offer. //(There is lot to talk, but i think i made all my important points)\\\

So I hearty welcome their interest in knowing our interest, but will be seriously disappointed if they didn't enter this market. :)

<comment><USER12> > Their sheer no-compromise attitude to build the best gaming pc's is known > through the world

Sorry, but this is fluff. There are many companies that make specialist gaming PCs, and Alienware aren't number one. Don't get me wrong, they're good (and the vast majority of pre-made "gaming" PCs I've seen were absolutely terrible), but they're no Scan for example.

<comment><USER13> >Sorry, but this is fluff. There are many companies that make specialist gaming PCs, and Alienware aren't number one. Don't get me wrong, they're good (and the vast majority of pre-made "gaming" PCs I've seen were absolutely terrible), but they're no Scan for example.

If you got the idea from my post that Alienware are the best manufactures of 'gaming pc', then I am sorry. All I was claiming is that their 'attitude' 'in building' the best pc's in the world. And for the sake of debate, name any other company that is as consistent as alienware in offering similar products across a wide spectrum. Please don't say my 'backyard tony' builds a better one than them. One company that is accessible to all kind of people.

<comment><USER14> Their _brand_ is that they manufacture the best gaming PCs in the world. But if one only pays attention to branding and not realities, you end up thinking Chevy's are indestructible rocks and that Sprite quenches thirst and gives you the power to play sports.

And in case you missed it, GP mentioned Scan as an alternative. I'll add Falcon Northwest.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> If I have $3k to drop and need that much horsepower I'd rather build a small cluster for the price.

<comment><USER16> You can do MUCH better building for yourself. Sadly, some of us don't have the time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> If you're paying $2-3K for an Alienware machine, you might as well fork over $99 for a Windows OEM.

Edit: A link to the actual survey

[http://www.alienware.com/Surveys/AlienSurvey.aspx?Id=2960712...](http://www.alienware.com/Surveys/AlienSurvey.aspx?Id=29607129825)

<comment><USER2> Geeks optimize everything. 99$ extra for Win (esp. if you don't use it) is 99$ wasted. Many of us are also finicky about taking a stand. A thousand geeks saying no to 99$ extra is a lot of money and a community in itself.

<comment><USER17> What would you use an Alienware Linux machine for?

<comment><USER18> There are many companies (and government agencies like NASA) that do a lot of high-end 3D visualization and processing on linux. Having one of these desktops would be nice in one of those environments.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Sigh, I can't read OSNews anymore. It's got ugly ads plastered all over it.

<comment><USER20> Funnily, it's one of the very few websites I white-listed in adblock, because they asked very nicely their readers to do so to support them.</comment></comment>


Online Brokerage Zecco Pretends To Give Away Millions, Panics When People Start Spending - <AUTHOR> http://consumerist.com/5198894/worst-april-fools-ever-online-brokerage-zecco-pretends-to-give-away-millions-panics-when-people-start-spending <comment><USER3> It's ludicrous for a _stock brokerage_ with _real_ mony at risk to pull an April Fools prank, let alone one that deals with a trader's buying power/balances. Ridiculous.

Plus, I'm sure that there's some kind of SEC rule dealing with accurate reporting of a trader's balance. I doubt they did any due diligence before pulling this.

(Or as _kirse_ said, it could have been a bug—a very serious, untimely bug.)

<comment><USER4> Right now, I am having trouble believing that this was a prank. I just can't believe that anyone would be stupid enough to do this. And if it were a prank, why would Zecco let trades be executed? I doubt that any prankster would want the company to be executing millions of dollars of invalid trades. I have a lot easier time believing this was an untimely bug.

<comment><USER5> _I just can't believe that anyone would be stupid enough to do this_

Seriously. They're in a hyper-regulated, extraordinarily conservative industry. It would be like your doctor coming over and saying "Hey, bad news chap, you've got pancreatic cancer and have about 6 hours to live" for the lulz.

<comment><USER6> I would pay for that. And also, for somebody to sneak into my apartment and set all the clocks fast by 10 minutes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This has all the markings of a good class-action suit. Zecco betrayed their duty of accurate account reporting (whether intentional as a 4/1 gag or unintentionally as a bug), and their customers acted on that information - <USER2> their harm. Am I missing anything here? I have a Zecco account (that I've never really used). I wonder if I'd be included in any class-action.

</comment><comment><USER8> First the SlideShare fiasco (<http://mashable.com/2009/04/01/slideshare-april- fools/>) and now this. April Fool's on the web is so stupid. I don't know why companies are so willing to bet their reputations for a chance at hilarity.

<comment><USER9> I thought the slideshare thing was funny, although probably not good for business. This, on the other hand, is borderline malicious; there is no way in hell I would use their service now.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> "In Smart Money Magazine's 2008 Broker Survey, Smart Money named Zecco as one of the worst in the customer service category. [6]."

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zecco.com#Criticisms>

</comment><comment><USER11> Consumorist article has been pulled. Zecco say it was a glitch not a joke: [http://www.zecco.com/forums/Important-Message-from-Zecco- Tra...](http://www.zecco.com/forums/Important-Message-from-Zecco- Tradin-53227_1.aspx)

<comment><USER12> Wow, I can't believe Consumorist just pulls stories when they're wrong. It's called "(Updated)", even TechCrunch knows that.

This particular instance obviously isn't that big a deal, but things like this make me worried for our paperless futures.

<comment><USER11> Look at that - Consumorist listened to you :) Story is back online again, with an update

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Before everyone gets up in arms... how do we know this was an April Fool's joke and not an unfortunate glitch? All I'm seeing is this website calling it a joke with no real justification.

Secondly, I'd be curious to see the intraday charts for the stocks that were purchased, just to see the effect this may have had.

Thirdly, everyone knows that Zecco sucks and if you want a great social- networking broker, go with TradeKing.

<comment><USER14> Kinda related — does anyone know the best/cheapest online broker in the UK? TradeKing looks awesome at $4.95/trade, but the best I've found so far are around $20/trade! :(

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> If customers took the loss when stocks were traded with the money, did they also take the gains?

It would be pretty bad if Zecco stuck customers with the loses from losing trades, but took the gains from the profitable trades.

<comment><USER16> A roommate of a personal friend was allowed to keep ~$600 in profits from trades using this 'fake' buying power after making a large stock purchase. Perhaps hearsay, but I'm inclined to believe that this really happened.

<comment><USER17> "A roommate of a personal friend"... that's pretty much the _definition_ of hearsay.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Three years to startup - <AUTHOR>

I'm an aspiring startup founder and am looking for advice on how to proceed.
Due to some other obligations, I have about three years until I can pursue a startup full time, at which point I'll be 27. Until then, it's nights and weekends for me. For the last year I've been getting caught up on web development and am now limited more by a lack of strategy than a lack of technical competence.
In an ideal world, in late 2012 I'd like to have a profitable, growing startup that puts me in a good position to apply to YC and the other seed stage start programs. I'd also like to be in a position where I'm not entirely dependent on getting accepted in order to be successful.
I'm in a bit of a good position to gamble since time is on my side. Am I better off working on a a project that takes 4-6 month to build and launch or one that takes 18-24 months? With the former, I can take more risks and can simply start over if it doesn't work out, but I feel like there might be more long term value in picking an ambitious, 1-2 year project. The downside, of course, is that I'm essentially going all-in on a single endeavor.
Additional details which may be relevant:
My business knowledge is slightly above knowing the differences between an LLC and an S Corp, but below having created one or knowing what to do with it if I did. I've been slowly becoming fluent in business lingo, but usually if I have a choice between hacking and reading about business structures I choose the former.
Also, I'm not good with system administration. Again, given a choice between learning a framework/building an app and learning about load balancing and things like that, I've chosen the former.
In summary, I have three years of nights and weekends to prepare to found a startup and want to maximize my chances of success. What's my gameplan?
PS: If you're in a similar boat and want to try building something together, let me know. <comment><USER2> Ok: 1\. How can you know that you still want to do this same startup in 3 years? You might get married. Get a kid. Get a great job. Loose your legs. Google might have launched your idea and killed your chances. Just saying. 2\. A project that takes 2 years to launch is a recipe for failure. Really. A startup should take, say, 6 months to launch first beta, another 6 months to get really going and get users, during the second year you slowly realize it's not going anywhere, try some alternative approached, in the 3th year you shut it down. That's typical. No way you can work on something for 3 years, launch it and not be hugely dissapointed by its reception on the market.

So taking 1 and 2 together: 1\. Accept that you won't know what you're doing in 3 years. 2\. Accept that you can't plan a successful startup 3 years in advance. 3\. Start a small project, one you can launch in 6 months, and consider it a learning experience. Then, by the time your 3 years are over, you'll be ready to start a new startup, fulltime, having learnt a lot.

Do NOT plan a 3-year commitment in advance for a startup.

<comment><AUTHOR> Peter, this is really good advice, thank you.

I'm not sure where I'll be in three years, but it does help to have a direction. I am married and we do want kids around the same time so that would obviously complicate things, which is partly why I'm trying to figure this out now. Again, thanks for the comments.

<comment><USER3> Don't wait. Get an idea, get a co-founder and hit the ground running. Three years sounds like plenty of time, but it took me eight years and four failed attempts at the same goal to get where I wanted to go.

You can't count on having a perfect run. Experiment now while you still have more time on your hands.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I don't have comments regarding the entire post, but I definitely have one regarding the size of the project: stick to something smaller that you can push out (at least in limited form) in your four-to-six-month timetable. If you choose something that will take you almost two years to launch but you can't commit full-time to it, then there will (most-likely) always be others with a similar idea who can work more hours or get their product out faster. Even if you didn't see competitors for a whole year, you'll still be stuck in part-time mode. On a two-year, part-time schedule, you won't be able to react at all to movement or changes in the market you decide to go into.

That's why I'd suggest sticking with something a bit smaller and a bit more manageable that can launch early and grow slowly over time, which is much better-suited to your schedule and existing commitments.

<comment><USER5> Also keep in mind that your estimates may be way off (on the optimistic side).

For my startup, we initially thought the idea would take 2 weeks to do. In reality, it took closer to 3 months. In my case, once we started working on the idea, we discovered it was quite a bit more complex than we anticipated.

<comment><USER6> I second this! I've taken to multiplying my time estimates by three as a way of working around the problem, but things will always take longer than you expect. There's debugging time, dealing with bugs in other peoples' code time, brain reset time when you need to stop and think, and let's not forget girlfriend time (they need attention, too).

The way that I've figured out how to deal with this, is to punt absolutely everything that isn't absolutely necessary into the next 'version' after launch. Throw all of those cool features into your feature bucket, and only implement them once you've gotten the existing feature set working.

Your mileage may vary, of course. :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Three years into opening my business I'm at the point where, if I wanted, I could go full-time with it and not worry too much about my ability to put food on the table and a roof over my head. I suppose if I wanted to I could apply to a seed-fund, although candidly speaking taking other people's money is not something I see doing in my future unless it is in return for providing them goods or services.

My suggestion for you and any other person who wants to work on nights and weekends: above all else, _ship something fast_. Most people throw in the towel because they can't get into the positive feedback loop, it seems like it will take forever until they can get there, then ork gets busy and the baby gets sick and... and then they've forgotten about it.

Nothing replaces paying customers for giving ongoing motivation, feedback as to how to make your application better (via asking directly and reading the data about how they actually use it), and giving money to fund buying the things that you can't produce yourself (like, in your case, managed hosting).

Incidentally: although I'm definitely on the quick side of the bell curve, I took money for a product which was written (including the website to sell it and everything) in eight days. There is nothing wrong with taking six months to write something, but if you could have broken that into Phase 1: 1 month and Phase 2: 5 months you'd have money coming in, a website collecting links, customers giving suggestions, and MUCH less risk of building something no one wanted.

</comment><comment><USER8> I've been doing the nights & weekends thing for exactly 3 years today (9/11). My project is <http://www.obsidianportal.com>

We're profitable but I still need a dayjob to pay the bills, so take my advice for what it's worth.

1\. Shorter release schedule is always preferable. Like others have said 2 years to launch is a really bad idea. However, my question is: Where did you come up with these numbers? Do you have 2 different projects, or are you setting arbitrary timelines and want to fit a project to that timeline?

2\. Going all-in is not a bad thing. I'm currently a "parallel entrepreneur" and it's very hard. It's much easier to focus on a single thing and hit it 100% rather than focus on a lot of things at 20%.

3\. Sysadmin is easy: sign up for a service where someone else handles it. As a Ruby on Rails guy, I heavily recommend Blue Box hosting. It's like having a sysadmin on the team, and it's not much more expensive than Slicehost. It's a good skill to learn, but I'm with you: let someone else do that stuff.

4\. It sounds like you need an idea. I know everyone says it's the execution, not the idea, but you need _some_ idea to execute on. I would suggest using your time now to try and find 2 things: an idea and a co-founder. Going to local meetups, talking to people, and such would be good things to do at this stage. Find something you can be passionate about, or else you'll never find the motivation to spend your nights & weekends on it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Micah, thanks.

My original thought process was that it'd be better to pick a long term ambitious project and launch a minimum viable product for it in two years (not a full project like I think I implied in the original post). As you and others pointed out though, I should shrink that even more until I have something that I can release in months, not years.

I have plenty of ideas, but they're mostly, in pg's words, science projects, not company ideas. See, for example, HNTrends.com. Neat idea, but not exactly something that's going to put food on the table.

There's pros and cons to looking for a big idea. If I identify something that I'm passionate about, execute it well, and lady luck is on my side, I'll be in good shape. But, the longer I drag my feet looking for a big idea, the more I increase the chances that I'll miss out by not simply executing a small idea and gradually growing it into something big. All that said, I think your initial direction matters a lot. I imagine many founders have had great ideas that they wish they could execute but they can't because they've committed to something else which is why I'm taking the time right now to figure things out.

I suppose what it all boils down to doing exactly what you said: find something you're passionate about. that'll take care of almost everything else.

<comment><USER8> I'm definitely not an advocate of "big ideas" but I do think people need to shoot higher than yet-another-twitter-app. There's a middle ground, where stuff like Basecamp sits. Not "enterprisey" but also not just a bullshit re- tweet bot.

And passion definitely won't take care of everything, but it will solve the motivation problem, which I think is the biggest problem that a nights & weekends company has. You still need to find customers and all that, and while passion helps, so too does having a useful, viable product.

I would suggest trying to get outside of the HN geek echo chamber. Ignore Twitter, the iPhone, and all the other hot stuff right now and try to find an area or group that's totally underserved on the web. Ask friends, girlfriends, family, etc. for ideas on things they hate about the Web. In my case, my wife found that small plant nurseries are stuck in like 1996 when it comes to the web, so we started <http://doleaf.com> Sure, it's not super-sexy, but it solves a real problem for these people, and they're willing to pay for it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> _Am I better off working on a a project that takes 4-6 month to build and launch or one that takes 18-24 months?_

Why not have both? What I mean is, take a big project, break it into smaller pieces of 3 months each (features 1-10 in first iteration, 11-20 in the second and so on). Since you'll be releasing early, you can gauge the response to your app, and adjust the next iteration according to the feedback (or even drop the project completely if needed)

<comment><USER10> Exactly. Having a three year timeline allows you to have an overall strategy that you can incrementally build towards.

<comment><AUTHOR> Speaking of iterating often, how's your project coming?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I read some of the comments and others have probably said what I'm going to say. I wanted to startup too but due to other obligations ( _cough_ military service _cough_ ), I couldn't do it until I was... get this... 27. So I know how you feel. It's weird to watch friends do things and be successful and feel like you have to wait until your turn.

Every year I wanted to create something I called a cyber lemonade stand. Tim Ferris calls these muse businesses. I call it something simple where I charge money, people pay me, and I learn that I can do it. This is a big confidence builder and something you can start doing right away. <http://www.feedbackarmy.com> was my cyber lemonade stand, After the Deadline <http://www.afterthedeadline.com> was my startup.

What I find interesting is that I wasn't willing to take the steps towards the lemonade stand until I was out of the Air Force and had no job. If you're serious about starting up though, I really recommend you start on this concept right away. A small project will let you experiment with the things necessary to get something off the ground (contacting bloggers to generate PR, hiring out small stuff you can't do well yourself, etc).

Once you hit that magical time when you can startup--go for it. But you're thinking the right way trying to get some training in before the big race.

<comment><AUTHOR> Raffi you have a great story and one I hope to emulate one day. Best of luck with everything and congrats on your recent acquisition.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> simple: your gameplan is to sit down and start working. push to get the _minimum viable product_ \- the minimum product that will bring in users/feedback/revenue. plan your initial timelines around this instead of the time you need to do everything you want.

learn more about the things you need to know when they come up. you don't need full-time availabitlity to make a startup happen.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. I'm halfway through Four Steps to Epiphany. Great book--made me realize I've been doing a lot of things poorly. I can't tell you how many times I've spent months working on an app with high expectations only to launch it and realize it didn't solve the user's actual needs. Doh.

<comment><USER12> there's definitely something to be said for using tight design/build/deploy/feedback loops.

lets you make sure you're doing what your users want, instead of what you think they want. build and improve with their feedback in mind.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Do you have both a 4-6 month idea and a 1-2 year idea? If you do, pick the one you are most passionate about. Keep in mind that 3 years is long time, its likely that whatever time table you start out with will be completely warped by the time you could commit full time to it.

</comment><comment><USER14> As others have mentioned 3 years is a long time, especially in web technology. You say you can't commit full-time for 3 years, but what happens if you launch the 4-6 month one and it takes off (but is not profitable) and demands your time? I don't know if your other obligations can be set aside. The 18-24 month project may be better, since you can work on it for so long, but external forces on that timeframe could either work for or against you. For example, if your idea is so advanced that the market is not really ready for it then waiting would be better. Conversely, the market could be so ripe someone else is bound to release something similar before you.

</comment><comment><USER15> The general consensus seems to be, launch as fast as possible. Don't put a year into something only to find that your idea isn't as monetizeable as you thought.

</comment><comment><USER16> _My business knowledge is slightly above knowing the differences between an LLC and an S Corp, but below having created one or knowing what to do with it if I did. I've been slowly becoming fluent in business lingo, but usually if I have a choice between hacking and reading about business structures I choose the former._

Everything you mention in this paragraph about "business knowledge" falls into my category, "Details to worry about later."

You omit, however, the single most important business issue of all, the only one of concern for now, and in fact, one the you _must_ be concerned about now: consumers. Whether you call them customers or users, _someone_ will be using your software, right? Then you better find a way to get to know them now. This is a critical component of application development, every bit as important as the technology.

Lots of things about your consumers could change between now and deployment, but you have plenty of time to incorporate them into your plan. So make sure you do.

</comment><comment><USER17> Hi Matt, I understand your scenario. I am working a project on a part-time basis that might interest you. My mail's in my profile if you want to discuss it or anything else.

</comment><comment><USER18> So Domain Pigeon is just a side project for you?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, primarily to learn Rails, among other things. Before I only had limited web development experience, mostly with some simple PHP sites.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> What markets/industries are you interested in?

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm leaning towards something to do with online collaboration, though I'm still working out the details and am open to new areas.

I think Twitter is kind of stupid too.</comment></comment>


Special Investigation: The Dirty Secret Behind Warren Buffett's Billions - <AUTHOR> https://www.thenation.com/article/special-investigation-the-dirty-secret-behind-warren-buffetts-billions/ <comment><USER2> Clickbait title and not very interesting reporting. I stopped when the author posited that Buffet was treated "like a Kardashian" by the press.

</comment><comment><USER3> > Buffett makes no secret of his fondness for monopoly.

And yet it's apparently a "Dirty Secret".

</comment><comment><USER4> TL;DR Buffett's Dirty Secret = "America's favorite investor loves monopoly, not free markets."

That's not so different from another "Dirty Secret" I was already familiar with, "America loves monopoly, not free markets." (I didn't get much further than the subtitle. For me the interesting thing about Buffett is how fascinated people apparently are in reading endlessly about the guy.)</comment>


When tech companies won't provide service manuals, this guy writes his own - <AUTHOR> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/01/13/when-tech-companies-wont-provide-service-manuals-this-guy-writes-his-own/

<comment><USER2> I'm a big fan of what iFixIt is doing. I agree with them that electronics need to get where autos were in the 70's with respect to 'right to repair.' There is also the issue of the proprietary firmware. I'm totally ok with not giving anyone a right to copy it and re-use it, but not ok with not having enough information to know if the computer controlling the engine in my car is functioning correctly or not.</comment>


AI based "gender verification" startup demonstrates AI bias again - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/Decay1312/status/1288317437486616576 <comment><USER2> This does not demonstrate AI bias. This demonstrates broken, crappy software in general.</comment>


Watch the House Judiciary Hearing of FBI vs. Apple Live - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1GgnbN9oNw <comment><USER2> FBI director Comey just let something new slip, that I may signal a part of a motive. He complained that (I may have the wording slightly incorrect:

"It's not Apple's job to protect the American people."

"They sell phones, they don't sell public safety. That's our business to worry about."

I think Comey see this as some sort of turf war.</comment>


Show HN: ThingsOnReddit – Products linked to on Reddit - <AUTHOR> https://thingsonreddit.com/ <comment><USER2> Hey, this is awesome! You literally built a product I specifically asked for here in a thread here recently: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15002985](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15002985) (it's idea #2).

Great job! If you put a Massdrop-style portal here I think it could become an amazing way to find crowdsourced products and displace e.g. Google Shopping.

So here's what you should do next:

1\. Crawl every subreddit that can be mapped to a hobby and then crawl all product recommendations.

2\. Use NLP and sentiment analysis to map recommendations to coherent products.

3\. Rank products according to the sentiment across the subreddit and aggregate the feedback into a few key pros/cons.

4\. Sort by ranking and return the products to the user.

If you nail this I would use it for everything. I constantly search reddit for product recommendations on places like /r/coffee. You can capture entire communities like /r/mechanicalkeyboards to appeal to those who trust real user reviews online instead of places like Amazon.

Here's an example flow for this functionality: you arrive on the site and the interface prompts you to select interests. You do so and you're then presented with products matched to that interest derived from crawling the relevant subreddit(s). You can see the most commonly expressed pros and cons for each product (for less functional products like watches: what users most commonly liked and most commonly disliked).

Based on my own personal experiences shopping like this I am convinced there is a startup here for the right execution. There are a huge number of people who use social media like reddit, Twitter, etc to do their shopping and this could become their shopping homepage.

<comment> 52-6F-62 While the commenter above me has much more insight, I second.

This is really well done! I personally hadn't thought of this. I collect resources from HN all of the time and pile them up in an Instapaper account, but I organize haphazardly and poorly.

That said I'd add that if you can offer for registered users or anybody a regular caching or hard-copy option. To double up on that, offer pipelining of a cached data dump to a file on Google drive or Dropbox or any other redundancy endpoint. You could grow from there in usability. Or somebody could write a middleman service for that... fun's fun.

Great work, anyway.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Reddit Search can do a similar trick: "subreddit:gadgets site:amazon.com", sorted by "top"[1]

It finds only posts, not comments. That's a good thing. Comment karma accounts for a comment's entire content. What if the comment gets upvotes for something other than an Amazon link inside it? Post karma is a bit better in this respect.

Reddit Search supports any domain. So you can search any shop. Like vat19.com and etsy.com.

Reddit allows browsing by domain. Like [https://www.reddit.com/domain/amazon.com/top/](https://www.reddit.com/domain/amazon.com/top/)

Secondly, some subreddits are specifically devoted to product recommendations:

* [https://www.reddit.com/r/shutupandtakemymoney/](https://www.reddit.com/r/shutupandtakemymoney/)

* [https://www.reddit.com/r/IdBuyThat/](https://www.reddit.com/r/IdBuyThat/)

* [https://www.reddit.com/r/AmazonTopRated/](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmazonTopRated/)

And Reddit has a JSON output: [https://www.reddit.com/r/shutupandtakemymoney.json?sort=top&...](https://www.reddit.com/r/shutupandtakemymoney.json?sort=top&t=all)

[1] [https://www.reddit.com/search?q=subreddit%3Agadgets+site%3Aa...](https://www.reddit.com/search?q=subreddit%3Agadgets+site%3Aamazon.com&restrict_sr=&sort=top&t=all)

<comment><USER4> > And Reddit has a JSON output.

I did not know that. Very cool. I tried this for AmazonTopRated => [https://www.reddit.com/r/AmazonTopRated.json?sort=top&t=all](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmazonTopRated.json?sort=top&t=all) and got a forbidden / 403 error. Turns out that subreddit is "Private" / Invite-only.

However, google cache still has links. [https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.red...](https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FAmazonTopRated)

<comment><USER3> Reddit can also send RSS:

* [https://www.reddit.com/r/shutupandtakemymoney.rss?sort=top&t...](https://www.reddit.com/r/shutupandtakemymoney.rss?sort=top&t=all)

AmazonTopRated is invite-only. Hence, no 403.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> [https://thingsonreddit.com/things/r/wallstreetbets?order_by=...](https://thingsonreddit.com/things/r/wallstreetbets?order_by=score)

Yup, pretty much what I expected.

<comment><USER6> I'd probably get downvoted for the comment I wanted to write. But nice to see WSBers on HN. The product list is exactly as expected.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'd be curious to see the success of this with Amazon Affiliates, since it is nearly a direct copy of a site I made 2 months ago (that Amazon shut down due to lack of original content). The site is [https://fastandes.com](https://fastandes.com) (currently at limited functionality).

<comment><USER8> This is not nearly a direct copy of your product. This one features a well designed UX that immediately engages and encourages further exploration. Yours made me bounce in 2 seconds.

<comment><USER7> A product can still be copied in functionality without being copied in design. The general premise (product recommendations from Reddit) is the same. I also agree my UX is bad. I have been meaning to pivot with all the data I already have but haven't gotten there yet.

Not complaining, competition is good. Just giving warning and bringing up discussion.

<comment><USER9> I searched for laptop (as suggested) and got webcams and other stuff, doesn't really seem curated at all?

<comment><USER7> The keyword searching was really bad, agreed. Akin to trying to search on Craigslist with ads having a giant list of keywords in them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Smart way of making money through referral links. I'm not even mad, that's amazing!

<comment><USER11> It really is, especially for books and music, wow. Out of curiosity is searched /r/bitcoin...

[https://thingsonreddit.com/things/r/Bitcoin?order_by=score](https://thingsonreddit.com/things/r/Bitcoin?order_by=score)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I don't fully understand the psychology behind this. Would someone be more likely to buy an item just because is it mentioned in a forum. There are similar sites that mine HN for the books that are mentioned here. Can some ELI5 to me?

<comment><USER13> It also links to the posts, so this seems like it be nice for hobby related subreddits to see what the usuals recommend. Think calligraphy or cooking. Or even scholarly subreddit a like math and see some interesting books that people have brought up.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> As someone who frequents /r/watches, I appreciate this. But it would be great to see prices more easily highlighted.

<comment><USER15> There is a roll of ducktape in 5th place by karma :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Social Media product links are the new ToDo App:

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

[http://www.dev-books.com/](http://www.dev-books.com/)

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

[http://reddittopbooks.com/tech/](http://reddittopbooks.com/tech/)

<comment><USER17> Huh, looks like it is time to install NoCoin.

[http://www.dev-books.com/](http://www.dev-books.com/)

Includes a coin-hive mining script.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> The first link I clicked on was from a comment where the author was giving an example of what _not_ to buy because it's wildly overpriced for what it does. Hopefully that's not representative.

</comment><comment><USER19> [https://thingsonreddit.com/things/r/AmazonWTF/](https://thingsonreddit.com/things/r/AmazonWTF/)

</comment><comment><USER20> This is stinkin' amazing. Great idea and nice implementation.

</comment><comment><USER21> Multiple products in a post should be grouped. There's a few pages where all the products are from a single highly upvoted post

</comment><comment><USER22> Congrats to OP for shipping. I tried to do something not so similar to this and failed miserably :-( [https://hnpicks.com](https://hnpicks.com) . I guess I just got busy and stopped half way at implementing the NLP and sentiment analysis. It was an interesting weekend :-)

</comment><comment><USER23> Great idea and execution. You're probably building a nice passive income product.

The user experience on mobile is a bit clumsy. I would recommend putting some work into that. For example it's difficult to switch to a subreddit beyond the default five displayed at the top (without an overflow: property).

</comment><comment><USER24> This would be interesting if it wasn't just live. Eg, if I could select a time period to show the most popular stuff from. Also a better way of discovering subs to browse, rather than having to know exactly what you're looking for. Perhaps an r/all equiv, but products ?

<comment> 52-6F-62 Those just sound like feature requests to me, rather than criticisms. I think the idea and execution are clean and effective. Not that you're wrong. Those are good ideas.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Something to fix - sub names are case-insensitive. Also, reddit automatically redirects to the correctly capitalized version, so it's easy to learn what it is.

That is, /r/Books and /r/books should be treated as synonims.

</comment><comment><USER25> Some other similar sites with niches:

books- [https://takcek.com](https://takcek.com)

laptops- [http://www.laptophits.com](http://www.laptophits.com)

<comment><USER7> Another for books: [http://hackernewsbooks.com/](http://hackernewsbooks.com/)

(Not affiliated, just where I took some pointers from)

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> This is a clever site. Nicely done!

I can't help but laugh at London's best, though: [https://i.imgur.com/HWgujDq.png](https://i.imgur.com/HWgujDq.png)

</comment><comment><USER27> Clicked link. Second item was a sex toy. Was not disappointed. Hit the link 10x more, always sex toys on first page. Yup, it is unfiltered!

</comment><comment><USER28> In the age of product placement I'd be extremely worried about redditors gaming the site to promote their products. Cool site though.

</comment><comment><USER29> Does this link are of amazon products only?

<comment><USER30> Amazon provides the affiliate revenue, so Amazon products are what gets linked. I'm not opposed to the business model, I use affiliate links to monetize my site, too. But it does seem silly to shy away from admitting that this is trying to make some money from the links.

<comment><USER31> I don't think they are shying away from it - it's pretty clear in the about page. Seems like a totally reasonable way to get some revenue for the site.

<comment><USER30> I was referring more to OPs answer in this thread.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Very nice idea and execution.

Btw, how do you get the main product image url to display on your site? Is there an api for that?

</comment><comment><USER33> great idea, while we were doing toptalkedbooks.com, my partner and I were thinking about doing the exact same thing for our next project. Nice UI, good execution, good luck!

just one friendly note: our site was rejected by amazon a couple time,(due to content issue), I hope your path is smoother.

</comment><comment><USER34> The top product on cooking page [1] shows the folly of using reddit for product recommendations...

[1] [https://thingsonreddit.com/things/r/Cooking?page=1&order_by=...](https://thingsonreddit.com/things/r/Cooking?page=1&order_by=score)

<comment><USER35> You may not have a need for a duck press now, but that looks like a good one if you did.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> This is pretty much tailor made for the subreddit /r/INEEEEDIT

</comment><comment><USER37> Your pagination has stopped working

</comment><comment><USER4> Very cool! Congrats on shipping!

What's your tech stack?

How long did it take you to build this,starting from the idea to build and launch i.e. deploying code to thingsonreddit.com ?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, this project uses Ruby on Rails 5 with Webpacker (React). I've found making websites quickly with Rails is very effective. The data can be found on Google BigQuery and I then used Scrapy to scrape Amazon pages for further product info. It's deployed to a DigitalOcean node and connects to an Amazon RDS Postgres instance.

The conception of the idea was Tuesday. The next thing I knew it was Saturday, and I felt ready enough to post.

<comment><USER4> Thanks for the details.

> The conception of the idea was Tuesday. The next thing I knew it was > Saturday.

That's amazing! You turned your idea into an MVP in 5 days. Very impressive.

<comment><USER38> Agreed this is amazing and inspiring. Well done!</comment></comment></comment></comment>


F.C.C. to Try Again on Net Neutrality - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/20/business/fcc-to-propose-new-rules-on-open-internet.html?hp&_r=0 <comment><USER2> Just to be clear, this approach is awesome and completely correct. However, it's important to remember that this policy isn't stable. It's liable to change with the FCC chairman. Should the next administration choose to regulate ISPs more loosely, these gains will be reversed.

The only solution is for Congress to pass these regulations and enshrine net neutrality as a fundamental principle of internet regulation.

<comment><USER3> Or we can replace the internet with a mesh net and solve the problem of regulation, centralized control and ISPs altogether :)

<comment><USER4> As someone who spent his PhD in a building with people working on mesh nets I just want to ask one question:

Would you accept return to text-only communication, not always instantaneous?

If so, mesh nets are there for us.

<comment><USER3> Did you know that cell phone networks today are mesh networks? There is a huge amount of work going into mesh network development, though admittedly, there's still a long way to go.

Also, did you see this (one of many interesting efforts): [http://openlibernet.org/faq.html](http://openlibernet.org/faq.html)

All that said, even if we just had a functioning alternative (even if it were significantly slower), it would give us options when we need uncensored, unregulated communication. It's better than having absolutely no options when your government oversteps its bounds.

<comment><USER5> > Did you know that cell phone networks today are mesh networks?

I don't think this is true, at least not using Wikipedia definition of "mesh network".

Mesh Networks are where each node relays data to other nodes, with data "hopping" from node to node.

That does not happen on cell networks. Each phone relays data to a cell tower, but thats it. There's no "hopping" from phone to phone, or from tower to tower. (Your phone might move between towers, taking a phone call from one tower to another as you drive, but there's never more than one "hop". Your phone call never jumps through three cell towers before hitting backhaul, for instance.)

For the same reason that having a few Wifi hotspots backhauled in a building isn't a "mesh network", a cell phone network is also not a "mesh network".

<comment><USER6> Not quite true. If you are driving (say, along I-95 on a long trip) it's true that your phone will disassociate with one tower going out of range to a new tower coming into range, and the phone switches behind the towers will transfer "ownership" (more like association), but once you (if you aren't driving, or your passenger) accept a phone call, things get a bit different.

The cell phone is answered. So, it goes from switch O (the caller) to switch A (where your cell phone is associated with). Eventually, you'll move out of range of towers for switch A, and come into range of towers for switch B. But because the phone network is circuit switched, you can't just create a circuit from O to B. No, what happens is that A forms a connection to B, so now the call is going O -> A -> B. Talk long enough, and eventually, your call may end up going O -> A -> B -> C -> D -> E -> F.

So while it's true that your call doesn't go through multiple towers, it _does_ go through multiple switches (as long as you are talking on the cell phone, and the cell phone is moving).

<comment><USER7> Are these links RF or Land Based? Are there any examples of fast (> 1 megabit) RF Mesh Networks with greater than 5 hops in the RF Mesh and, say, around 20 active talkers at once behind the last hops of the Mesh?

I'm happy to get 100 kbits/talker in that scenario with todays FHSS technology, 500 meters/hop, 1 watt power, 200 kHz channel width and 20 MHz of spectrum in the ISM band.

Of course, the advantage of Mesh Networks is they require little in the way of infrastructure, and scale up into the millions of nodes, with 50 million active node networks practical. But high data rates are not one of the properties of such networks.

<comment><USER6> Well, it's RF between the cell phone and the cell tower. Between the switches, it's most likely land based circuits, but really, they could be anything.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I wonder how this sort of thing will affect Google's fiber offerings. Say what you will about Google (I don't trust them, but I don't trust anyone...including YOU!) but they run one hell of a tight ship and they are aggressive when it comes to their business interests (note G+ integrations with all other GOOG services).

If Google Fiber comes to an area that's controlled by TimeCast (ComWarner?) will Google enter into an aggressive pricing war? I mean there were rumors several years ago that they intended to license the dead air waves to use as free internet. And I'd let Google inject ads into my browser if it meant getting that insane bandwidth - especially if it's for free.

<comment><USER9> Negatively. A heavy regulatory burden will raise Google's costs to enter into this business. In particular, any last-mile network that Google would build would be much less valuable to Google if the government requires Google to be "net neutral." Of course Google wants to discriminate in favor of its traffic --and why shouldn't it? It built the network!

Government enforcement of "net neutrality" is a great idea if we want to cement the role of the incumbent operators.

<comment><USER10> Your post seems confused.

There's nothing in a net neutrality demand that would change Google's costs as such. One might argue that neutrality might impact Google's potential profits - but since Google already has such a large portion of the net's traffic, it's main business model has involved a neutral net and they have been a strong advocate. Since they profit from a large portion of Internet traffic, their aim has been to increase this traffic to thus increase their profits (IE, the ability to shake-down Netflix is not worth anywhere as much as the other ways Google makes money - see: "world's largest advertising company").

On the other hand, some of their motive for entering the ISP business has been make sure the current operators respect net neutrality and don't engaging in sleazy that exploit their monopoly (throttling, ad-substitution, etc). If net neutrality were guaranteed, Google might feel less urgency in entering this business. On the other hand, they aren't doing this at a loss so they may well continue.

Also, Google has a vast internal network that carries it's internal traffic. This network isn't part of the Internet at all and won't be affected ever by net neutrality issues.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I thought the ruling said they didn't have the authority to do this without classifying ISPs as common carriers. If they're not going to do that (per the end of the article) then what changed that makes it legal this time?

<comment><USER12> I took "The commission will not seek to immediately reclassify Internet service as a utility. Mr. Wheeler said that the commission will retain the right to do so, however, if its new rules are approved and appear not to be working adequately." to mean that they'll be using the utility-classification as a lingering threat if the ISPs don't follow along.

<comment><USER13> It's odd to see utility status classified as a punishment for industry. Shouldn't it refer to the technology (water delivery, electricity, possibly internet) and its role in the customers' lives?

<comment><USER14> It is in a way a punishment. What makes a company profitable? Creating things people want and need. What makes them really profitable? Creating things people really want and need. But if you build something people _really_ need, you get classified as a utility, which limits your ability to profit from what you're building and also drives out most of the spark from the industry. Our water pipes are mostly 100+ years old, our electric grid is ancient, most of our power is provided by plants that are decades old, etc. Chicago decommissioned a 110 year old coal plant in 2012. Our utilities are not exactly places bustling with innovation, new ideas, new technologies. Regulation has effectively killed the once promising nuclear industry, for example.

<comment><USER15> I'm not sure this is a fair assessment. There's been tons of research into nuclear power, for example. Look at the generation IV reactor designs [1]. And there's been tons of interest and investment in cleaner electric power alternatives [2].

The examples you cite (coal plants staying open forever, water pipes, etc) are massive capital investments. That's the primary reason they've stayed open / haven't changed for so long, once you spend that much money you want to milk it for every penny it's worth.

Utility regulation is burdensome and costly, but I don't think it necessarily kills innovation in industry like you intimate.

1\. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_IV_reactor](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_IV_reactor) 2\. [https://www.americaspower.org/our-commitment-clean-energy- fu...](https://www.americaspower.org/our-commitment-clean-energy-future)

<comment><USER16> > _I 'm not sure this is a fair assessment. There's been tons of research into > nuclear power, for example. Look at the generation IV reactor designs [1]._

Research isn't industry. The regulations don't prevent people from _designing_ reactors; just from building nuclear power plants.

<comment><USER17> I think that's more due to the NRC and the NIMBYs, than it is due to being a utility.

<comment><USER16> I don't think the statement "The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is the reason nuclear power hasn't taken off" is incompatible with the statement "Regulation has effectively killed the once promising nuclear industry."

<comment><USER17> Right. But the relevant regulations are because people are scared of the word "nuclear", rather than because electricity is a utility.

<comment><USER18> I would also cite differential regulation.

Nuclear is a significantly more regulated industry than coal and natural gas. Consequently, it is cheaper to run coal and natural gas plants, just because there are large external costs associated with natural gas and coal (emissions, environmental damage) which are passed on to the taxpayer instead of the consumer.

It is quite possible that if natural gas and coal were forced to pay for their externalities (via regulation) nuclear would be more cost-competitive, and you'd see more advancement of nuclear technology in industry.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I feel like I could sort of wrap my head around Net Neutrality in a world with just content providers and ISPs.

Once people start talking about CDNs and peering agreements, and all those massive middleman infrastructures most consumers don't even know exist, this issue gets orders of magnitude more complex. It seems unregulatable.

What is Netflix supposed to do if Verizon just passes data around its network to keep it "full" all the time and refuses to open up good datalines to Netflix CDNs? What is the network supposed to do if a major data provider ends up choking the lines just to move from one endpoint to the other, not even stopping at customers?

I doubt any rules would work here except for actual enforcement of anti- monopoly regulations on a locality by locality basis. Maybe Netflix needs to start rolling out fiber and competing directly with ISPs (most of them are already competing by providing content anyway).

</comment><comment><USER20> Although legal action against ISP censoring and monopolization sounds beneficial, I'd prefer that government entities remove themselves from open Internet pursuits entirely.

It should be by the people, for the people.

<comment><USER21> If internet service were a luxury product, I'd agree. However, an internet connection is every bit as important as having a phone (land or cell) these days.

Assuming we completely de-regulate, you'd still have municipal governments striking these anti-competitive monopoly deals. In fact, there'd be no barrier to it at all, since we're de-regulated in this case.

Don't like Comcast? Better not move to City A, because they "own" it, even though some of the fiber was paid for by the residents.

<comment><USER22> If that's the problem, why not prohibit municipalities from creating local monopolies? Why have the FCC dictate limits on the design of network pricing and services everywhere, even where there are many options?

<comment><USER21> That sounds like regulation, to me.

<comment><USER22> Limiting governments from making corrupt or short-sighted mistakes isn't usually considered 'regulation', but even if it is, this 'regulation' is also simultaneously local-franchise 'deregulation'.

And it's more sensible, since competition is a cure-all, than federal 'neutrality' rules about what services are allowable.

<comment><USER21> Looking back the this parent's original statement:

> I'd prefer that government entities remove themselves from open Internet > pursuits entirely.

What you are describing doesn't follow this. You are in support of regulation, the thread OP isn't.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> How can one tell if Netflix is purposely being throttled as opposed to it just being heavy traffic periods?

<comment><USER24> In my experience all recent Netflix slowness is a product of congestion at peering points between Netflix's ISPs (Cogent, Level 3) and the consumer broadband ISPs (Comcast, Verizon). There's a good article in the WSJ today on the dispute:

[https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CC0QqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304899704579391223249896550.html&ei=MekEU4fvHoWQ1AGWyIDgBg&usg=AFQjCNHyOtOjhwqssjZ8zKDLuKKnWuwy3w&sig2=BDZmNqfIIuvTgeaa3j0ICw&bvm=bv.61535280,d.dmQ)

This kind of dispute is not really anything a Network Neutrality regime as currently proposed could fix.

<comment><USER25> There are a few interesting choices in your comment that make it appear to be an Astroturf:

1\. You state that it is "your experience" that "all" recent Netflix slowness is a result of peering contract disputes. Unless you are a network operations engineer at one of these companies how could you have this experience?

2\. You link to the WSJ, which is not a credible source when discussing big media companies.

That said, you may well be a real person, in which case I would recommend changing your wording on commonly astroturfed topics.

<comment><USER26> I'm not familiar with the term astroturf in this context. Explain?

<comment><USER27> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing)

Basically it's a play on "grass roots" movements. Powerful groups attempt to mimic grass roots, populist movements by hiring a bunch of employees to pose and regular people and write comments on forums, etc. And as you know, astroturf is fake grass.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I worry that the rules will forbid ISPs from having explicit whitelists/blacklists, but will do nothing to prevent them from having undersized and saturated transit links then demand payment for peering with content providers like Netflix.

What would happen if consumer ISPs were required, for each customer, to choose a single point (at the metro level, probably) where they are required to peer openly? That allow all Netflix-like companies access to customers, but since it's a point local to the customer, would not impose any long-distance bandwidth requirement on the ISP.

</comment><comment><USER29> FCC can help open up local access ISP competition. Spectrum reform, permitting dynamic sharing of existing spectrum, etc.

Anything else is a band-aid on top of an injury (the ISP monopolies) that actually requires surgery.

<comment><USER30> Any form of wireless seems like a band-aid compared to wired broadband.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> They need to regulate ISPs as common carriers. Anything short of that will result in ISPs constantly lobbing to get more say, until they get what they want. We can NOT rely on the free market to sort the ISPs out because there is 0 competition in that market.

<comment><USER32> While I agree that right now there is zero competition in that market, the reason is because we didn't let the free market decide. We gave government approved monopolies to them and now we're seeing the consequences.

<comment><USER31> What does a market with competition looks like? 20 cables from 20 different ISPs hanging outside my window? ISP is a utility, like water, electricity, and gas. Maybe once we have good wireless technology it would be different.

<comment><USER33> > Maybe once we have good wireless technology it would be different.

Or a bunch of satellites in low orbits, which is something Google wants to do. A number of companies have tried this idea, so far without economic success, but as time passes it's becoming more practical, and eventually it will probably become feasible. Once it does, many companies will do it, and you will be able to choose which company you want to get satellite Internet service from. Finally there will be competition.

<comment><USER31> The problem with low orbit satellites is the backbone connection speed. The way I understand it, the individual connections to each subscriber isn't really a problem. But say you have a satellite serving 10k clients at one time. If you have a service with any scale, that's realistic. To provide a good quality service to those users you need to get at least a 200 gigabit connection to an Internet backbone. Getting that over fiber isn't difficult, but over air, not sure if the technology is there yet.

I am so looking foreword to satellite Internet, mainly because my new home is off the grid, and I have no Internet at all there. The best option I found so far gives me 25 gigs per month for $70. I would gladly pay $140 for 50+ gb but that's not even an option. Unlimited, fast, and ubiquitous Internet would be amazing, but in my research I have yet to see any company that's even close to offering that.

If any one can recommend a satellite Internet company with high or now bandwidth caps, I am all ears. My budget is something under $200/m for unlimited or 200+gb/m.

<comment><USER33> > The problem with low orbit satellites is the backbone connection speed.

Yes, and system congestion, which you also mention. This is why so many different ideas are being considered -- balloons and solar-powered high- altitude drones to name two. But satellites, in spite of their drawbacks, at least in principle would have longer lives and wold present a lower per/subscriber cost.

Because of the propagation delay you mention, satellites work very poorly with VOIP, in fact existing synchronous-orbit satellite methods won't work with VOIP at all. Future low-orbit satellites might be more acceptable, but propagation delay will always pose a problem for anything but terrestrial fiber.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> If the FCC classifies a carrier as a common carrier, does that apply just to the service, or also to the infrastructure itself? If cable companies were made into a common carrier would cable television also have the same regulations applied to it?</comment>


Ask HN: Which PaaS providers do you like or recommend? - vanilla-almond Heroku dominates the PaaS (Platform as a Service) space, but I'm interested to hear about people's experience with other PaaS providers. Which PaaS service do you like and what languages do they support? <comment><AUTHOR> Google has some intriguing offerings with Cloud Run [0] and their App Engine suite [1]. I know it's not a catch-all solution but Cloud Run sounds appealing as you can bring any Docker image and have it run in a few different supported environments.

[0]: [https://cloud.google.com/run/](https://cloud.google.com/run/) [1]: [https://cloud.google.com/appengine/](https://cloud.google.com/appengine/)

</comment><comment><USER2> [https://zeit.co/](https://zeit.co/)

Supports Node.js, static and docker containers.

Very easy to use with custom domains.</comment>


On failing our values, our team, and our industry - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.atlassian.com/2014/06/failing-values-team-industry/ <comment><USER2> This is, in fact, a very good response to this. Mostly based on what it is not:

It's not a "sorry if you were offended" non-apology.

It's throwing a particular person under the bus or offering his head on a stake.

It _is_ thoughtful and direct and raises my opinion of Atlassian. Well done, guys.

<comment><USER3> Yep, agreed that this is how this kind of thing should be handled, so long as it's also actually followed up on as described.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Context: [http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2014/06/04/318882...](http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2014/06/04/318882549/women- complain-a-lot-interrupt-developer-says-at-conference)

<comment><USER5> thanks! +1

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Wow. Political correctness at its best: bring on the witch hunt! What if he replaced girlfriend with boyfriend? Would that still be sexist? His joke was not on the sex, but on the fact that she was his life partner. You know couple stuff. I kind of feel sorry for him because he was not intending to offend but just be funny. It would be sad if he lost his job over that. I find Atlassian's response makes sense since they are walking on eggs with such a topic.

</comment><comment><USER7> First: This isn't acceptable, especially in the current ecosystem where we are all working incredibly hard to change a sexist tech culture, and when women have very solid reasons to feel like an objectified minority.

Second: Since part of having an open mind is attempting to empathize with people even when they make mistakes (And understand the mentality behind the mistake, since we are ALL IN THIS TOGETHER), I would like to try to un- demonize this guy at an individual level -- again, not trying to detract the larger, meta picture: jokes at the expense of women are NOT OK.

I think a lot of the outrage here comes from the fact that we are reading his slide as though he said "Maven is like _a woman_." He didn't, he said _his girlfriend_. The issue is that on a public presentation the goal is to say things others can relate to, so the natural conclusion is that he was indeed making a generalization.

I'm curious if we would have read it as a more appropriate joke if he had replaced "girlfriend" with a genderless noun like "significant other" or "schnuckums."

Really, though, next time you're making a slide like this spare yourself and all of us a lot of trouble and say "my cat" instead.

<comment><USER2> If that slide said cat, it would have worked perfectly. Brilliant.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Typical pattern: a developer associated with a company says something racist/sexist/homophobic/etc., there is public outrage on the internet, the company issues a nicely formatted public apology that includes all the typical tropes: "it's not OK", "we failed our values", "we let everyone down" etc. (someone should make a website to generate those) - all while not really saying anything meaningful.

The developer is an Atlassian employee. He gave the talk at an Atlassian organized conference. I would assume his talk must have been approved internally in some way or form (unless any employee was able to give any talk they wanted without any form of supervision, in which case there's a deeper problem here).

So here's my question: why wasn't this terrible "joke" cut out from the slides months ago? Why, when the guy was preparing his talk, presumably rehearsing it in front of his coworkers, sending the PDF of the slide to organizers of the event, etc., did no one speak up and say "Dude, that slide is sexist and doesn't add anything of value to your talk - just remove it"?

The fact that this didn't happen leads me to believe that the internal culture at Atlassian must be quite terrible, and very much the opposite of an environment where acceptance and diversity flourish.

(EDIT: received 3 downvotes on this comment less than one minute after it was posted. Looks like the Atlassian PR department is keeping watch. Hi guys! :) )

<comment><USER9> > _" I would assume his talk must have been approved internally in some way or > form (unless any employee was able to give any talk they wanted without any > form of supervision, in which case there's a deeper problem here)."_

Your comment hinges on this assumption but it is ludicrous. Especially in this context. It is the antithesis of trusting your employees (and understanding that people sometimes screw up). It does makes me wonder about the kind of companies you've worked at.

<comment><USER10> Agreed. My company does not review my slides before I present them, they vest me with the responsibility to moderate myself.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> While this was a stupid judgement error (when in doubt about gender, religion or politics, just stay clear), I wonder what would be the reaction if it was a woman talking about her husband. Or, better yet, someone talking about the same-sex partner.

It would be no less wrong, but I believe reaction would be _very_ different.

<comment><USER12> It would, however, still be a terrible and counter-productive slide.

I feel like this isn't really a "the thought police have rejected your slide" moment so much as a "fucking hell, dude, that was dumb" moment.

<comment><USER11> It would be no less wrong, and would deserve the same scorn this case received.

Still, as a thought experiment, I'd love to see how different the reactions would be. It seems that gender discrimination is, sadly, influenced by gender.

<comment><USER7> Sure, in the same way you would water a sapling more than you would water a tree. You need to take special care when it is needed -- right now women face a toxic environment in the tech industry; men do not.

It isn't sad that we are training ourselves to be more sensitive to things that worsen that divide.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Referenced story: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7847351](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7847351)

</comment><comment><USER14> I read through his original slide, and I see what was wrong about it. I think changing the name of the slide to "...is my significant other" (or some other term that does not mention any sex) would have still got his point across (a satirical view on (clingy?) relationships). I understand why people are upset seeing how he made a very clear reference to one particular sex.

That being said, it is perfectly natural for him to impose his specific preferences when talking in the first perspective (a way of story telling). Eg. You always say gf/bf instead of significant other if you were making any other statement about them (good/bad).

The above discussion is purely since we are at the edge of what we would consider sexism, and although I don't know the presenter personally, I would assume his point was to compare a clingy relationship to maven (some software), and not to compare to girls in general or imply that girls are more prone to (clingy?) relationships. (I am assuming the best in him)

Given the context and mood of society though I can see how this can be perceived in the way it is being perceived. (Context being clingy seems to be associated with girls, I cant think of any other reason why one gender should be offended if it is perceived to be equally prevalent in both genders.) It seems unfortunate that this is the case, but all in all he should have kept in mind societal perceptions when making his slides. (Rule 1 of making presentations, always keep your audience in mind).

I personally would not condone such a slide since it seems to be exploiting to be exploiting a particular gender stereotype. We as a society are guided by our history and perceptions. (A quick example, asking a female chef to return to the kitchen would be considered sexist versus asking a female software engineer to return to her computer which might be insulting but would never be construed as sexist). We must take care to avoid sensitive stereotypes.

</comment><comment><USER15> Wait, seriously?

First off; technicalities: he didn't say "Maven is all women". He said "My girlfriend". Presumably referring to a specific person. His girlfriend has the right to be pissed off, I suppose.

Second off, if mild gender stereotypes are worth so much hate you might as well cancel every sitcom on TV.

<comment><USER16> > Second off, if mild gender stereotypes are worth so much hate you might as > well cancel every sitcom on TV.

Many people (including, of course, feminists) do indeed think that virtually every sitcom on TV is unacceptably sexist. And while I don't know that the slide justifies "hate," I do think that it justifies widespread criticism since it perpetuates an unfortunate pattern of gender discrimination in the industry. (Or, if you prefer, it perpetuates an unfortunate pattern of complaining and arguing about gender discrimination. Even if you think that there is no gender discrimination in tech, it seems like you ought to agree that inviting that critique is itself a mistake.)

And, no, I don't think it's presumable that he is just referring to a specific person since everything he lists is, as you note, a well worn gender stereotype.

<comment><USER2> Yeah, people don't seem to get that there is a different standard for decorum in different contexts. Late night TV? Be as edgy as you want. Conference setting? A little more professional, please.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> This is not sexist. This is anti-his-girlfriend-ist.

Some people just love being victims I guess.

<comment><USER18> Every time I see one of these threads, I'm unable to understand responses such as yours.

Whether he's referring to _his girlfriend_ or women in general, he's perpetuating a stereotype. This has less to do with sexism, and more to do with offensive stereotyping. You could replace the girlfriend example with anything from this page (first link i found) - [http://examples.yourdictionary.com/stereotype- examples.html](http://examples.yourdictionary.com/stereotype-examples.html) \- and it's equally wrong.

He's doing it as a representative of his company, and so Atlassian needs to acknowledge that it's wrong, and they're going to do something about it. An employee made a mistake in a public forum - simple as that.

<comment><USER19> From your link:

>The definition of a stereotype is any commonly known public belief about a certain social group or a type of individual.

That definition kind of contradicts your point. He wasn't referring to women in general (certain social group) or to girlfriends in general (type of individuals). He was referring to _his girlfriend_. For you to accuse him of perpetuating a stereotype, you would have to claim that his girlfriend represents _all_ women or _all_ girlfriends (which is sexist).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> "I know the engineer responsible well. I hired him. I know the slide does not reflect his values any more than it reflects Atlassian's"

If the slide reflects his values _less_ than it does Atlassian's, that's pretty bad, no?

<comment><USER21> Well, technically, "any more than" means it reflects his values <= Atlassians, and <= 0 is 0.

But I got a chuckle from what you said.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> so, the guy had bad luck with girlfriends. Now he will be witch hunted for mentioning his experience to other people.

</comment><comment><USER23> Maven is my Feminist...

* Looks Good * Complains a Lot * Demands My Attention * Interrupts Me When I'm Working * Doesn't Play Well With My Other Friends

</comment><comment><USER5> Hmmm...he was talking about his girlfriend not women in general. Who are we to contest his relationship? Maybe she is pretty. Maybe she does complain a lot. That's his choice to be with her. I don't see the problem. Certainly not a sexist slide. If his girlfriend is pretty and complains then it's factual.</comment>


Ask HN: Any CMDB software suggestion for tech startup in cloud era? - <AUTHOR> we are seeking a simple cmdb software for our startup, which can easily manage the service and it's owner/group information. Alerting system can find the true of source from there.
but after several search around didn't find the perfect one.
any suggestion? through we can write it in Django for sure, but I think this is a common requirement for any company have micro-service inside. <comment><USER2> Disclaimer: I am the founder. Device42 ([http://www.device42.com](http://www.device42.com)) can help you with that. You can use us as a single source of truth for lot of things in IT ecosystem. We still need to add auto-discovery for FaaS/micro services, but any services that are not "serverless" can be discovered today with the state/user it is running under etc. And you can use REST APIs to automatically add/maintain state information for servlerless services today.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is good, Thank you! but I think it's kind of too many features provided to a startup. I will go through to see how it works.</comment></comment>


Best options trading course / community under $100? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> The standard text on the topic is the Hull book.

You can buy the 9th edition (I think the 10th is out) for about $100 used on Amazon:

[https://www.amazon.com/Options-Futures-Other- Derivatives-9th...](https://www.amazon.com/Options-Futures-Other- Derivatives-9th/dp/0133456315)

</comment><comment><USER3> If your budget for learning about options trading is less than $100, you don't have the budget to trade options. If you insist on going ahead anyway, your education budget will go a lot further if you instead buy used books on the subject.

<comment><AUTHOR> Fair point. What and how would you spend $ during your first year of trading?</comment></comment>


Extending Python's generators to support mainloops - <AUTHOR> http://chromano.me/2015/10/02/python-mainloop-generators.html <comment><USER2> I did not understand the highly synchronous, sequential, blocking behavior of the code examples. That would absolutely make the events example not work. Or is it implicit that an asynchronous operation would replace today's blocking `next()`? That `itertools.consume()` or the final `next()` would provide an async upgrade, similar to the way Unix's `select()` works? That was never explicitly mentioned...but is the only way this pattern would make larger sense / scale usefully.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback. I think the post has much to be improved, but the idea was to get an idea of how that would be useful for other developers --

As for the `next()` and `consume()` approaches, yes, that would basically combine multiple generators in one and not block on any of them.

I will update the post with more information and also take into consideration all the work that has been done on asyncio module for Python3.4.

<comment><USER2> If we're talking about a general purpose event provider/consumer API that takes into account that some event sources will be voluble, while others will be almost always silent/blocked, then that's a real upgrade. It could bring a real event-oriented capability to generators. You see bits and pieces of that now--attempts to use generators with greenlets and coroutines, say. But until the 3.4 asyncio work, GvR hasn't seemed sufficiently interested/invested to make a big step forward on event processing idioms. Now he is.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, it seems like the work on asyncio may do what I want; I will update the post.</comment></comment></comment></comment>