The House Y Combinator Should Have Built - <AUTHOR> http://hellobubs.com/post/18452778324/house-ycombinator-should-have-built <comment><USER2> People occasionally suggest we should provide housing. I think it's a mistake for the same reason having founders work out of our space would be a mistake.

E.g. it probably is encouraging for the weakest startups to have some kind of shared workspace they have to come to every day. But for the best startups it's not only unnecessary, but undesirable. Larry and Sergey would not have been better off in some kind of shared workspace. Their garage was the ideal place for them.

The arguments pro and con for shared living space seem to be more extreme versions of the arguments for shared workspace.

If we have to choose between helping failures become small successes and helping successes become big successes, we'd prefer to work on the latter.

<comment><USER3> _If we have to choose between helping failures become small successes and helping successes become big successes, we'd prefer to work on the latter._

I have a lot of respect for this viewpoint, and the clarity with which you state it, though it is almost exactly the opposite of what I would say myself. You should write an essay on this if you can find time. It would be incredibly interesting, at least to me.

<comment><USER4> It's a concise description of the difference in incentives between investors and founders. But I'm not sure if it isn't a false dichotomy. Larry and Sergey are asserted to have been better off in their garage; how do we know that they wouldn't have been even bigger starting in a shared space? Maybe they could have attracted some other very bright sparks that reduced the size of their engineering-oriented blind spots.

<comment><USER2> I know because before I was an investor, I was a founder. We'd never have wanted to work out of an investor's space. It would have been distracting and demoralizing.

<comment><USER4> When people are having to move to the Bay Area just to be in YC, finding a place to stay etc. is distracting, not to mention stressful.

I think framing matters. If it's presented as "when you take my money, you must live on my land, be overseen by me" etc., it's almost feudal, and of course no-one with free choice would choose that kind of environment. But if it's "if you want to be mentored by me, I can host you for a short while along with a bunch of other ambitious folks", it seems different.

<comment><USER5> > When people are having to move to the Bay Area just to be in YC, finding a > place to stay etc. is distracting, not to mention stressful.

Sounds like the thing to do would be to eliminate that friction by helping people quickly and easily locate places of their own, then.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Building something _like_ this has been my dream for the last 6 years or so.

"Hacker Hostel" (That name is already taken, though).

The "I'm an accentric billionaire" fantasy of mine is basically to build this, except to run it as an invite-only non-profit.

Makes me happy to hear that I'm not alone in this thinking :) (Because it _does_ sound a bit like I'm wanting to build a hippie commune when I describe this to people).

To expand on the fantasy a little bit:

"To apply to hacker hostel, send us a puzzle, that's your application. It doesn't matter if you've never touched a computer before, or if you just finished your PhD.

If you get accepted, you can come out and live here for 1 semester, during which time you're free to create whatever you want. We'll fund the supplies, we've got a workshop, just build, and share whatever knowledge you have with the other people that are here.

If, while you're here, you build the next big thing, and are suddenly swimming in cash, good for you! We don't own your IP, although if you would donate to our trust, we'd really appreciate it."

Personally, I see a problem with the current cycle of:

go to school -> go to college -> get a job -> CAT PICTURES/Financial Services/Advertising!

I hate that. If I have have the means, I plan on breaking it.

And stuff I'm doing now: I keep a server that doesn't get any of my personal projects on it. Any time one of my friends posts to facebook or tells me that they want to learn to program computers, or that they have an idea they want to do, I give them an account on the box, and offer to build it with them, or to teach them python [the language that I know].

(Now I'm ranting, it's the tea I had for lunch, I think).

It makes me really sad that I can sit here and look at this computer with an almost total understanding of what is happening with it, and how to make it do whatever I want, and that the majority of my friends can't.

We [programmers] are all supermen. I've noticed that in the last year, a lot of us are trying really hard to give that gift to everybody else (code academy, khan academy, etc.), and that really makes me happy :).

<comment><USER7> Well, you do realize it is a hippie commune, just for people interested in building companies and cool technology. I mean, SF gave us hippies, and then it gave us silicon valley. Next step would be to have a silicon valley commune.

<comment><USER6> Haha, this is a good point. I guess the difference is that we'd be living in converted shipping containers instead of cabins in the woods.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> What if instead, your co-inhabitants were musicians, sculptors, writers, scientists, designers, mathematicians, philosophers, economists, architects, dancers, and so on, connected by their abundant creativity, passion, intellect, and curiosity?

PS: nice architecture. PUMA also did some cool stuff with shipping containers a few years ago. [http://inhabitat.com/prefab-friday-puma-city-container- archi...](http://inhabitat.com/prefab-friday-puma-city-container- architecture/)

<comment><USER9> Musicians, sculptors, writers, philosophers, economists, architects, and dancers have nothing special to contribute to companies like Parse, Heroku, or Dropbox to name a few.

What is a dancer going to tell me about running my startup? The whole point of startups moving to SF is so that they can be around other startups.

<comment><USER8> _I've learned a lot from ballet. I appreciate the coordination and the discipline. Making something simple is very difficult._

        - Jack Dorsey

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> This is a great house. It's spacious, it's airy, it's well laid out. It would be a great house to have a party in.

However, it's in Maine.

And that means that since the insulation is almost nonexistent and the windows are huge, the heating bills are going to be horrendous. When you come in from the foot of snow (which is not uncommon in Maine) you will be trekking slushy dirt all over the suddenly frigid main room.

Maine houses have mudrooms, covered porches, or other systems like airlocks to prevent too much heat from escaping while you bring in your groceries and take off your boots.

<comment><USER11> Shipping containers are great for packing full of stuff, but dreadfully proportioned for living space -- less than 8' ceilings (before insulation and finishes); less than 8' wide (before insulation and finishes); and forty feet long with a door at only one end (horrible for circulation and functional zoning because you have to walk through one space to get to another).

Just because a shipping container worked for Stewart Brand when he put together the Whole Earth Catalogs, doesn't mean they make good habitable spaces. The length was useful for laying out lots of pages in a production line and the steel walls allowed him to use magnets for 'pinning up' pages. These are not features particularly relevant to most activities including software development. [See Brand's _How Buildings Learn_ ].

The predominate feature of shipping containers is that they make great archiporn images of the sort shown in the article - a high road building masquerading as a low road building (something Brand also talks about in _How Buildings Learn_ ).

BTW, it's probably a summer house given that it has no garage, which is even harder to imagine as a design decision for a Maine winter.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Interestingly, you describe in your dream list what I would say many top business schools do: shove people together on intense projects after vetting them. The idea is that the 'cream' has already risen, so bonding is critical. And also, your IP belongs mostly to you in the YC model, that's nice, and sometimes lucrative.

It's interesting to think of you running a business school, pg.

<comment><USER13> YC is probably the top business school in the country by market cap created.

What is the right ranking metric for business schools, and what does the top 10 look like?

The best way to drive the reinvention of higher education will be to rank new approaches side by side with the old guard.

<comment><USER14> > YC is probably the top business school in the country by market cap created.

Biz schools aren't all that good at creating market cap.

Consider Stanford. It has a top-ranked biz school that focuses on startups.

Still, the CS department laps the biz school in "market cap created". I think that EE does as well, and there are probably a couple of other departments that have created more market cap. (Bio-tech is the obvious candidate.)

I think that a biz school that creates more market cap than the top technical departments is evidence that the technical departments are failing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> There are several parallels I see between the YC experience and college fraternities. A group of people (often men) with a similar interest, with a powerful alumni network.

Unfortunately, I found living in a fraternity house very distracting for my school work. There were always people doing "downtime" activities like gaming, drinking, etc. I certainly participated in these activities more than I would have if I had been on my own. It was great for my social network, bad for my studies.

I imagine a similar thing could happen in a house with too many YC founders... It would be especially detrimental because there's only 3 months to get YC done right, versus 4 years of college.

I imagine Drew Houston would have some good input on this, having been in both a fraternity and YC.

</comment><comment><USER16> What Tim Draper is planning on doing with Draper University, which is a former hotel in San Mateo, may end up being pretty awesome. [http://www.mercurynews.com/san-mateo-county- times/ci_1984021...](http://www.mercurynews.com/san-mateo-county- times/ci_19840215)

I think the rise of "hacker houses" is indicative that people really care about community and like living with like-minded people who they can collaborate with, be inspired by and socialize with.

I think there is potentially room for a hybrid residential university and incubator model. I don't think making housing required but making it optional for those who want it would be awesome.

</comment><comment><USER17> As a guy who lives in a house with 5 Bain consultants (not hackers I know, I know, but smart, driven people) I can tell you that living in a house with other people you work with is absolutely awesome. Surrounding yourself with driven, talented people really helps creating new ideas, meeting new interesting people and in general creating an awesome environment. While I would love to have a "Hacker House" my MVP of having a consulting house is working out wonderfully and I highly recommend you try it.

</comment><comment><USER5> "Heavily _curated_ community"? I'm beginning to loathe that buzzword because it's so hollow. Of course YC is selective - anyone not stark raving mad would be selective when handing out thousands of dollars of their own (and their investors) money.

A few words that would work better to describe YC (going with just the positive ones here): elite, choosy, discerning, elect, exceptional, exclusive, select, restrictive, hand-picked and so on... 'dict' is your friend.

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry. Is there another word to describe "curation", that tickles your hate nerve less?

And it's not just in selecting startups for batches, but as I mention, communication between founders, etc.

Not a bad thing, just one approach to creating a community experience.

<comment><USER5> No, not a bad thing at all, it's the natural state of pretty much anything where a person selects a set of things from a larger set. Which, given the finite nature of a great deal of that which surrounds us, is... well, a lot of stuff!

"Most of the people in our office were curated by my old boss before he moved to another division"

"The few, the proud, the...curated"

"I curated my wife from amongst those on offer in the mail-order catalog"

<comment><USER18> "Curate" (verb) is one of those words that has lost most of its meaning, due to people using it in order to steal its cachet. Previously it was associated with art museums and libraries, institutions of supreme cultural importance. Now that anyone can make a list and put it on the internet, anyone can be a curator, which means you don't get much information about someone if you learn that he is a "curator".

<comment><USER5> > Now that anyone can make a list and put it on the internet

The funny thing is that is what Yahoo was in the very beginning, 15+ years ago.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Very nice design, the layout, with common areas below meeting areas, reminds me of Pixar's headquarters <http://www.bcj.com/public/projects/project/39.html>

I remember hearing in the excellent pixar documentary that one of the intentions behind this layout was to facilitate random interactions among employees, all sharing a common, open walkway.

</comment><comment><USER20> I'm sure YC is well aware that they could be like Google (which has all but the kitchen sink where housing is the kitchen sink). I'm glad they chose a more meetup-y route instead.

<https://docs.google.com/View?docid=dg2z5whw_41cb322p>

Besides being a less well-rounded experience, it would be setting up for a more difficult transition out of YC.

</comment><comment><USER21> I've off-and-on dreamed about that as a revitalization for the old millionaire's neighborhood I live in. Lots of huge 1880's brick houses (including mine) chopped up into squalid little apartments for drunks and dumpster divers, when they'd actually be absolutely _perfect_ for living/working spaces. Big ballrooms and so forth would be great for working in. And dirt cheap.

</comment><comment><USER22> Great article with great insight, but this makes YC sound like a frat house, imo. What startup founders want to hear is that they will be successful. They don't want to hear about how it is going to help their networking and how they are going to become great friends with people, even if that is really what is important. It is, btw.

<comment><AUTHOR> I would argue that some of the most successful people are where they are because of the powerful networks they belong to... The YC network is an amazing resource of driven, talented and super smart people... wouldn't you want to be great friends with these people?

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I like the idea of the ranch in Hawaii. I agree with you--my experiences traveling when I have couchsurfed or volunteered have been orders of magnitude more memorable than when I stayed in a hotel.

What's your plan re: ranch?? Sounds like a fun project to build.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hmm. Plan might be a stronger word than where I'm at with this :)

It's a 3-5yr vision.

<comment><USER24> I just left Hawaii (to move back to Austin) after 8 years.

Hawaii is beautiful, but it's never going to be hacker heaven.

<comment><AUTHOR> Probably not... but I'll settle for Hacker Holiday.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I would participate in this, but not given away to folks for free.

I think having startups work/live in one really cool space can be really interesting and valuable, but they'd all have to pay rent. A "frat house" but for startups & geeks? I dig.

<comment><AUTHOR> Back before I knew of YC, I schemed on the idea of having a startup frat. Where pledges bust ass to build products, apps, etc. The profits are shared with those that built them, but also heavily reinvested back into the frat... But then I never went back to college. :)

<comment><USER26> PG made a good point that YC is focused on the good founders on the margin of being great. A few guys who go to school with me here at Berkeley are focused on the flip side of that. People who are starting something smaller, and need just a bit of a push. They call is Agora House, where founder live in a the House, after serious vetting. Check it : <https://www.facebook.com/AgoraHouse>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Its everyones' dream to live in a good house. But one thing that draws people back is that they don't have time to put ideas together and do research. At YC its the place everyone would die for mmmmmhhhhh I like the whole idea

</comment><comment><USER28> How about curating a list of startup friendly houses on Airbnb. Could be a good marketing approach for the landlords to say "startups X, Y and Z started here". I'm sure they'd be popular outside of YC seasons too.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, that's probably good marketing for some houses.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> How is the power supply, I see places to sit and all but did not really see power outlets. And I think people will need those everywhere (until we have super batteries that last forever).

Maybe I am thinking to far ahead :P

</comment><comment><USER30> I'd prefer a place that is less perfect. Where you can dig things into the wall, change the furniture or paint your room. Give a place but don't take my freedom.

Besides, it looks amazing! I just didn't want to move in:)

</comment><comment><USER31> I personally think this would make a much cooler hacker space:

<http://founderscastle.com/>

<comment><USER32> ...what is this? Seems like it's just four links to four houses on Realtor.com

Care to elaborate?

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Building friendships and sharing experiences is a great thing, but can't too much on those things bring down productivity?

<comment><AUTHOR> Sure. So don't spend all your time socializing :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> How serious are you about building in hawaii? :)

What island?

</comment><comment><USER35> You had me til Hawaii

<comment><AUTHOR> No love for the Islands huh?</comment></comment>


Show HN: Short employment test for HTML/CSS and JavaScript – but with live coding - <AUTHOR> http://www.testdome.com/Programming-Tests/Html-Css-JavaScript/16

<comment><AUTHOR> More info: AFAIK we are the first to offer screening tests for web developers that require live coding in the browser, correct me if I am wrong. We use PhantomJS in the background.

<comment><USER2> Hey -- hackerrank has had this for a while.</comment></comment>


SMBs - You Don't Know Jack (About the Cloud) - <AUTHOR> http://blog.virtacore.com/blog/2011/1/11/smbs-you-dont-know-jack-about-the-cloud.html

<comment><USER2> Hardly surprising. Have you seen Microsoft's "to the cloud" ads? They always feature people claiming to use the "cloud" to do some mundane task like editing a photo, and leave me wondering, "what part of that was 'the cloud?'"</comment>


Ask HN: Should I cash out my 401K and try to get my dream job? - <AUTHOR> I'm a professional and conscientious engineer who loves developing software. I've been doing this for 13 years. I've worked for a few small software companies, working on commercial software. I know I'm a great developer, but I think the fact that:
* I don't have a GitHub profile, * have not contributed to any OSS projects, * don't answer a ton of question on StackOverflow, * cannot share any of the code I've worked on * and so forth,
...are not helping in the search for my dream job. These are the things that seem to get people to show interest in a developer these days.
I have no time, (or I'm not allowed), to do any of these things while working full-time for an old-school software company. I'm considering cashing out my 401K to live on for the next 6 months and spending all of my time working on these types of things to make myself a more attractive candidate. This would really make me happy, but is quite a gamble given that I have a family.
Thoughts? Has anyone here done something like this? <comment><USER2> Many of the world's best engineers don't have a Github / OSS contributions / Stack overflow / etc. They're still quite hireable. It is highly likely you are also hireable, even without a portfolio that you can conveniently point to, although that would be an asset.

Do not cash out your retirement account. [Edit: Generic personal finance advice for everyone: Unless your children will starve in the snow otherwise, it is never a good time to cash out your retirement account. It will be very tempting to tap it to pay for your wedding, your first home, a medical emergency, your kids' college, etc etc, but if you do this, you will not have it at retirement. This is far and away the largest risk associated with self- directed retirement accounts.] It is not required to buy coffee for people with the ability to hire engineers. Coffee is cheap and jobs are plentiful in the current environment.

<comment><USER3> Have all of my up votes. This. A thousand times this. The short answer is, "no, do not cash out your 401k."

The long is answer, is that there is probably another way. Make it a goal and put savings away for specifically that purpose. Find another job that may not be your dream job is friendlier to out of the office work. Maybe consulting?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Absolutely not. You will have to pay taxes on withdrawals and a 10% early withdrawal penalty. Depending on the size of the withdrawal, this will immediately set you back 6-7 years of the 13 you contributed. If you have ~30 years to retire, even a small withdrawal will set you back by 10 years at retirement. Run some basic compound interest calculations if you don't agree.

There are many other options: moonlighting, going part-time, reducing your responsibilities at work, taking an unpaid sabbatical, etc.

<comment><USER5> > Run some basic compound interest calculations if you don't agree.

Make sure to include basic compound inflation because the figures given here seem to be hyperbolic.

<comment><USER4> OK

100k principal, add 1k every month for 30 years. Compound at 7% --> 2M

50k principal, add 1k every month for 30 years. Compound at 7% --> 1.6M

Withdrawing 50k today costs you 400k in retirement

400k = 20% of 2M = 8 years of your 40 year career

<comment><USER5> Yes, you've failed to consider the time value of money. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_value_of_money](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_value_of_money)

50k today is worth _more_ than 50k in the future.

(Consistent compounding at 7% is extremely optimistic, even before considering inflation at 3%+).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Listen to those here saying to NOT cash it out. I speak from experience. I kept my startup afloat for almost a year by using up all my 401K savings. I was in my mid-30s, and in that moment the worry of losing momentum on the startup was so strong that I calculated the risk with a strong bias. To make a long story short, the startup fizzled and I found myself in my late 30s with no retirement whatsoever. That was a while ago, and the short-term issues (being broke and with wind gone from the sails) cleared in about 2 years, and my income is again quite fine, and the spirit lives on. However, I will likely have to work until I die as a result of having no retirement savings. What has been built back since the fallout will not be sufficient for a long-term retirement. So now I work new strategies to transfer what I earn to safer investments (real estate) in order to have some assets to liquidate later in order to fund a retirement. All this said, it's not pathetic to me -- I made my decision, and I'm living with it. I expect nobody to provide me any "safety net" (that just wouldn't be genuine living). However, I would strongly discourage anyone from following this same path.

</comment><comment><USER7> No, don't.

Wait...what? You want to cash out so you can create a GitHub profile and answer SO questions? Just no.

On first pass I thought you were going to take the money and time to build something. But not this. Here's my advice: don't get a dream job, get one that makes you _happier_. Not "happy," not "happiest," not "dream job," just a bit better, so you can have a _little_ more time to put stuff on GitHub and answer questions on SO and spend time with your family. It's not just "dream job" and "old-school software company."

</comment><comment><USER8> Don't cash out your 401K.

I think you would be better off finding a sub-par non-dream job that lets you work on things that bring you closer to achieving your real dream job. For instance, if you are interested in javascript technologies you could try to find a contract involving node or angular and become more active in the online communities around those tools. After 3-6 months scope out the market with your new skills/network and see what else is available.

</comment><comment><USER9> If you are indeed a good engineer you could do all those things on a single weekend:

1.) Sign up for GitHub, fork a project, and improve it

3.) Answer 2-5 hard questions on StackOverflow

4.) Profit

They just want to see your skill. You shouldn't answer "a ton of questions" on StackOverflow. Just answer a couple hard ones. Somehow prove that you've actually got stuff done over the last 13 years. There are programmers that just started to learned the skill a few weeks ago, with tiny, but active projects in their GitHub.

ps. I hate when people say that they don't have something (GitHub account) that takes 30 seconds to signup for, is free, and is very important to solving their current issue. There's usually a deeper issue at that point.

<comment><USER10> This. Work before work, after work, on the weekends, once the kids are in bed, whatever. If you have a dream, stretch for it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Github and OSS contributions only seem like they're important because of disproportionate mentions among the monoculture of bloggers, HN commenters, etc. They're not. A good company will hire you if you can demonstrate one way or another that you're worth hiring. A bad company will value mediocre code coming in from those venues and discount other types of substantive achievements.

</comment><comment><USER12> 1) Do not cash out of your 401k. The penalty and taxes make this never worth it. Along with you not getting the long term compounded interest it is started as. Instead, work for a few more months to have an "emergency fund" that allows you to live life without an income for a few months.

<comment><USER12> 2) If you're willing to quit your job to make contributions to GitHub, you might not care if the company

\--A) makes the unlikely discovery that you are putting non work related projects on GitHub

\--B) cares that you are coding and posting online in your spare time

\--C) decides to terminate you for this.

\--If your IP is questionable, you may not want to contribute to large open source projects - or you could ask your HR for an exemption for specific projects.

3) If you don't have time (and especially if you are in a job that you want to quit), make the time. Segment your life as much as possible while your work / hourly expectations are met to a reasonable standard to which you want to work (at any company)

4) This is additional, but if you want to work at a company with a great culture, remote work, and reasonable expectations, it's important that you understand how to do the numbers above in a forward and friendly way.

\--A) If you are familiar with working too long, you especially need to learn to segment yourself when working remotely.

\--B) If you are familiar with working too long, you especially need to ensure that you don't try to encourage others to not segment their lives. (There are always things to be done, but everybody should be able to go home and spend the evening / weekend with their family)

\--C) You will be much happier in your life / job if you have the ability to not have to use your 401k to work a few months.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Thank you all for the great advice. I think the cash out of the 401K idea is really a reaction to how miserable my current position is. The culture is terrible and I want out, now. So I'm going to use my vacation time to send out a ton of resumes, practice some coding puzzles, and hack away on some code that I can provide as polished, well thought out work.

I did apply for a job at Twitter months back, but failed miserably at the two 45 minute online "coding to solve a puzzle" interviews. I was nervous, and also was opposed to that style of interviewing, and it did not do well.

I realize I need to get over it, and just accept that some shops may interview that way. It may let me know that it may not be the place for me, or open a door to a good opportunity.

The number one thing for me is culture. That the culture works for me. For any company that I am seriously considering, I will request working on a small project with the team before I accept any offer. If I had done that for my current position, I would have never come on board.

</comment><comment><USER13> What part of the US or world are you located? Are you wanting to build your own startup, work for a startup, or something else? Are you looking to learn new languages or technologies?

The reason I ask is because if you already have a decent skillset, you may be able to get a new job at a startup and learn new skills at the same time (and thus not need to cash out your retirement fund). Simply contributing to open source projects IMO is not that valuable unless you want to prove experience in a languages you've never used professionally.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> For clarity: my dream job is one that has a great culture, interesting work, is making money, and is remote friendly.

<comment><USER14> I'm in the exact same situation. I have a kid and a wife that take up the Lion's share of my time. As well as working at a PCI compliant company that forbids me from showing my best work to anyone else. It's a struggle and a challenge, but I've explained my situation and my frustrations to my wife and we try to carve out a few hours here and there and a few more over the weekends for me to build something that I'm able to show. We thought about quitting and dipping into our savings but for now it works and we can sustain this for a bit longer.

Good luck to you, and I hope that you will reach a resolution soon.

<comment><AUTHOR> I knew I was not alone, but it's good to hear it just the same.

<comment><USER15> Same here, I have three hours during the weekend that are mine to hack on projects. But beyond that I have a notebook I constantly am writing down ideas and thoughts in. During lunch time you can spend it working on problems. And then there is vacation days. How about taking a day here or there to concentrate on the projects you want to invest yourself into?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Do you have a company in mind that you would love to work for? Have you contacted them and did they reject you for any particular reason?

Start with the end in mind. "I want to have X job" is a decent start but you should narrow that down to "I want to have X job, in Y industry and here are N example companies I would love to work for."

Investigate these companies and look at the developers they hire. Do they all have github accounts? Chances are you'll see a lot of blank profiles and the occasional blog last updated in 2008.

If you do see many people with very impressive online personas then start working _with these people_. Start working on the same OSS projects they are working on. You might find you don't like these people as much as you think you do. On the other hand after a few months they might say "Hey this notarockstar guy is pretty good, maybe we should hire him".

Oh and don't cash out your 401k

</comment><comment><USER17> Please don't go by the echo chamber that is the Bay Area based Hacker News. A Github profile is nice, contributing to OSS projects is nice, yet those aren't the only things that matter to acquiring a job. Unless you are targeting specific companies which are so overwhelmingly biased towards hiring people who only fit a certain demographic. There are loads of people, for example who work in Finance, who don't have all these things. They make the transition to tech just fine.

Source: I worked for two years in SF. I am currently working in NYC. A bunch of my co-workers are incredibly smart ex-finance folks who are good at Math and C.S. I am willing to bet that most of them didn't start a github profile until they joined us.

</comment><comment><USER18> Just a point if clarification: by "cash out" do you mean all/majority of your 401k? If so it's not a good idea. Some small percentage could be considered, by in general you should only do so in an emergency. There are penalties for early withdrawals.

Can you dedicate an hour a day to OSS? Or perhaps spearhead an project at work to be open sourced?

Have you tried applying for positions that qualify as your dream job? If you haven't, you may want to start and see if those open source contributions are as key as you think.

<comment><USER19> >Can you dedicate an hour a day to OSS? Or perhaps spearhead an project at work to be open sourced?

He mentioned that he is not allowed to do these types of things while employed at his current employer. I always find that kind of clause crazy. If I want to spend my evenings playing video games the company would be fine with that, if I want to spend it creating video games no dice?

I imagine it is going to be harder and harder for companies to create anti- moonlighting clauses as time progresses.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> 1) I don't have a GitHub (or Bitbucket, or other "profile" on similar repository hosts), or anything else in your list--at least not that I advertise or share with people. Yet I'm in SV earning in the mid $100k. The kinds of companies who put a lot of weight on the things you list are disproportionately likely to be social media sweatshops with a dogmatic view of development (if it's not <latest fad JS framework>+RoR+Cloud developed on a Macbook Pro, it's not "development"). If you want to work for them, you need those things; otherwise you don't.

I have a full-time job, as I noted, and a toddler at home. Over the last six months I've found a half-hour here, an hour there to do side-projects. One of which (and my only, to-date) I just released to the Google Play store. There is absolutely no reason you can't do this.

What does "I'm not allowed" mean? I can't think of any employment contract that would restrict you from doing _any_ other development work on your own time. Just pick projects that a "reasonable observer" would not think overlap with your "day job" work.

2) You should not cash out your 401k to live on. It is not that kind of savings account (i.e. an "emergency" fund). However, if you have a solid investment opportunity in something (relatively) stable for the long-term, such as real estate, it may be worth it. I've cashed out my 401k three times, two for the wrong reasons (to fund relocations), and one to purchase a home that I now rent out and derive significantly more income (net of taxes and other payments) from than had that money been in my 401k fund.

<comment><AUTHOR> The "not allowed" refers to sharing some of the best code I've written. I find it hard to reproduce that quality of code in a 45 minute code puzzle, like the time I interview for Twitter.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> My 2 cents: No don't do it.

Six months is a very short period in time, you'll be surprised how quickly it flies by without you haven't accomplished much, at which stage you'll be out of a job and money and little to show for it.

Is there a reason you can't do these projects on weekends and in your spare time?

Even if you manage to finish some projects, what makes you think these would automatically make you a very attractive engineering candidate?

</comment><comment><USER22> Do this stuff on your own time. Can you spare a couple hours a week?

And how can you "not be allowed"? Just ignore that and do it anyway. Worse case, you are fired and have to live off your 401k, right? Best case, nobody notices.

The probable case is somewhere in the middle. You get a warning: a talking to by an "authority figure." Just tell them you "forgot" you were "not allowed."

</comment><comment><USER23> Don't do it, it will not end up being worth it. Instead make some time on the weekends to learn and build what you want. Maybe wake up earlier and spend an hour each morning on something you want to do. Experiment with your productivity outside of work and try to get things done that way instead of cashing out your 401k and setting your finances back several years.

</comment><comment><USER24> You are working as a full-time software engineer and you think 6 months of answering StackOverflow questions and working on your GitHub profile are going to be better for your resume than continuing in your job?

Get a new job. If not your dream job (yet), some job that is incrementally better. Apply for jobs. Interview for jobs. That will teach you a lot more than hanging out on SO.

</comment><comment><USER25> Your definition of a "dream job" sounds like it could be _any new job_.[1] Why not look for a new job instead (since you _should be_ relatively marketable with thirteen (13) years of software development experience)?

1\. [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7532138](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7532138)

</comment><comment><USER26> I would disagree that any of those things you think are hurting you are that important. They're certainly all nice-to-haves, but if I were looking at your resume I wouldn't think for a second of discounting it just because you didn't have those on there.

</comment><comment><USER27> I cashed out my 401k to start a company. I was in a unique situation where I started contributing to my 401k at the very bottom of the recession (luck). The returns on my 401k contributions were greater than 100% by the time I cashed out because the market had fully recovered. The company I previously worked for had 100% matching up to 15k. So, I looked at the penalty and figured since I had quadrupled my money, 10% didn't seem like a concern next to the possibility of creating a successful business.

Ended up working out. Was able to make that money back 5x in 6 months. It was a risky move and I could see it not panning out more often than not. But, to go against the grain here: there is no such thing as 'never'.

</comment><comment><USER28> Thank you for asking this question. I think it crosses everybody's mind at some point. I've learned a lot reading this. Im in my early 30's. I think the best thing to do try to grow within your current company. I think of the story of oscar mayer when he walked into a meat packing company make his company. people wonder what if he would have walked into an icecream shop or a clothing chain. Perhaps now oscar mayer's would be a huge icecream company or clothing chain. Curiosity and a little creativity can go long way but nothing replaces hard work when talking about dream jobs.

</comment><comment><USER29> I'm in my 40s. I got a job at a YC startup without a Github, Twitter, any OSS contributions, Stackoverflow activity, and without even knowing the primary language that they develop here.

If you live in an area outside of SV where programming jobs aren't as prevalent, I would be a bit more careful.

Instead of using your 401k which is a terrible idea, you really should have a savings account that you should dip into. Therefore I would continue working for the next year or 2, keep working but save every dime you can so that in 2 years you can take 3-6 months off. In the meanwhile, apply to every single job you can.

</comment><comment><USER30> The really big open source projects such as the Linux kernel or Hadoop generally are mostly done by paid developers. The interests of the companies and the interests of the developers generally align, and it works out well.

Smaller, personal open source projects may or may not help you get a job. To be honest, I've never been at a company where looking at Github pages was a big part of the hiring process. Maybe it's something recruiters look at? I don't really know. I have a bunch of stuff up on Github myself, but I don't know who looks at it, and I certainly don't rely on it to get me a job.

Similarly, I've never been at a place where the topic of answering questions on Stack Overflow came up. It's like contributing to Wikipedia-- something you do on your own time for the public good. Stack Overflow is a useful resource, but you also need to keep in mind that some of the answers there are kind of misleading or wrong.

Really, what any well-run company is going to try to figure out is whether you are a good fit at the company. If you have done some things in the areas they're interested in, that's going to be a positive. If it's just random stuff, then they are probably not going to have the time or inclination to look at it. I've done a lot of stuff that nobody has ever asked me about in a job interview. And that's ok.

If you are having trouble finding a job, the #1 reason is probably location. There just aren't a lot of jobs in some parts of the country, and most companies don't want remote workers unless they're rockstars. I wish I could give you an easy solution for this, but I really can't. You are probably going to have to choose between your career and your home town, like generations before you.

If you are somewhere in California, you can do open source work in your free time as long as it meets three criteria: 1. own time, 2. own equipment, 3. no use of employer trade secrets. It doesn't matter what they tell you... the worst they can do in California if they don't like your personal project is fire you. In other U.S. states (such as Washington), it's often pretty easy for them to claim your personal work as their own (a lot of employment contracts have this in it).

</comment><comment><USER19> Can you clarify on your statement "I'm not allowed". Are you barred from moonlighting on OSS or creating software of your own? Or are you not allowed to do these things while at work?

<comment><USER31> My employer (IBM) allows people to do things in their spare time with the following kinds of exceptions (off the top of my head, sure there are more):-

a) Do not use company time or equipment. Pretty obvious that one.

b) No doing something that competes directly with IBM. This has to be more specific than "working with computers". It means I can still get beer money for helping friends/family fix their computers/servers, but I can't start a small consultancy that aims to take possible business away from IBM. I can start a social sports related side project website because IBM aren't in that space. But if I worked on Websphere Application Server (I don't!) I couldn't contribute to, for example, Apache Tomcat/Geronimo or JBoss AS. I could write my own game Apps and sell them through the App Store. Etc.

c) Contributing to OSS in your spare time needs to be cleared with IBM, just in case. The main reason is that everyone loves to sue IBM and OSS is fertile ground given the various OSS licenses and implications. If I do some work on some OSS package in my spare time it means I'm tainted in that area. If I then do any work on a commercial application in the same area then it opens the door for people to claim that the commercial work I've done has some work that could have been influenced by the OSS code and part of the commercial application is therefore derivative of the OSS work. With some OSS licenses this could mean that the entire commercial application is considered a derivative work and, depending on the license, the source code would need to be released or IBM could not charge for the software, etc.

It's not all doom and gloom. I work with some people that have got clearance to work on OSS software, they just have to make sure they avoid working with anything related to it on the commercial side (to the point of not having access to the source code to provide plausible deniability). You also need to think in advance and not work on anything that we could reasonably be working on in the future.

We are also regularly warned to avoid even looking at any OSS related to the commercial code we work on, for fear of tainting. Same for Googling for answers to technical questions and copy-and-pasting code from SO or elsewhere. You've generally got no idea of the copyright/licensing aspects of any code you see in the results.

IBM does use OSS in some of its commercial applications. Its use is always cleared with the lawyers first though. Certain licenses must be avoided simply because they are incompatible with selling commercial software. Where the license is permissive we always make sure we follow the rules and I've personally contributed many bug fixes in the OSS code back to the community as required (or even if not required!); these have often been found as the result of formal code inspections (which IBM is effectively funding by paying employees to perform it), peer review, static analysis tools, or general SQA testing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> This question shows a lack of self confidence. Be confident in your skills when networking and interviewing. Seems like you are latching onto _one_ way of getting a more interesting job. It is a reckless plan and totally unnecessary. Finding a job is like finding a mate. There's a small overlap between what you want and what potential partners want. Willingness to fail, repeatedly, is a big help in these situations. Just keep interviewing. If you are good at what you do, someone will give you a chance.

</comment><comment><USER33> No.

You are going to fail.

You'll end up broke, pissed off, and unemployable (because you tasted freedom, and you don't want back in).

Sorry, statistics, history, and personal empirical evidence is on my side.

</comment><comment><USER34> The other comments in this thread explain it much better than I could, but I will also throw in my 2 cents and add that you should absolutely _not_ cash out your 401K. You're better off finding a better job. Once you do, you won't have to think about dipping into retirement savings for this.

</comment><comment><USER35> Don't cash out your 401K. You will get hit early withdrawal penalty.

To get to where you want, live way under your means and save up your fuck-you fund. When that can last for 12 months, then you can spend 4 to 5 months to do whatever you want.

</comment><comment><USER36> Quitting your current job to hack on a side project that gets you a better job seems completely backward.

I can understand quitting a job to pursue a business that might cash out for millions.

</comment><comment><USER37> You should look into [https://www.hackerschool.com/](https://www.hackerschool.com/)

Seems perfect for your situation.

</comment><comment><USER38> What are the tax implications? Can you work part-time? Do you attend meetups in your area? Have you been applying for jobs?

</comment><comment><USER39> Spend 2 hours per night. Don't spend your 401K.

This is basically the equivalent of going back to school and retraining.

</comment><comment><USER40> Please send me an email; let's talk!

</comment><comment><USER41> What is your dream job?

</comment><comment><USER42> First off, don't cash out your 401K for all of the reasons already mentioned (in your mind, it shouldn't even exist...that money is for future you).

I started right away with putting money into retirement accounts(partly due to this book: [http://www.amazon.com/Automatic-Wealth-Grads-Anyone- Starting...](http://www.amazon.com/Automatic-Wealth-Grads-Anyone- Starting/dp/0471786764/)).

While it hurts a bit each month to put money away, in the end I know it'll be good for "Future Me". I currently have 3 different ones: a Roth IRA (I used to put in $400/mo, but now only do $200/mo if I can...the next accounts are all automatic though and I don't skip those), the 2nd is a 403b (similar to a 401k, but available for people in the public sector) which I put $1000 into pre-tax, and the 3rd is my life insurance/savings account which I put $400 into each month (this is a bit extra on top of the regular premium so it'll build value as an additional income source I can tap into down the road). Both 1 and 3 are after taxes and #2 is my only pre-tax one. My savings account right now isn't too great partly because so much goes into the future retirement accounts, but I try and put another $300/mo into that if I can, but some months I end up tapping into that due to extra expenses that come up. (Sounds like maybe we should have a separate thread on how much people put away each month and their reasons for doing so :-).

I think some of the others are correct though, you can definitely start now in your free time with at least creating some accounts and started to do a little bit (the key thing would be being consistent with those actions...as an example, I've always been an HN consumer, but I hardly ever commented...now I'm making an effort to add my own thoughts to posts and share what I have to say because I'd like to build up my karma :-).

I agree with your comments though that it's hard to demonstrate your skills and capabilities to employers when all you have is your resume and not these ancillary profiles and public information spots that seem to be used a lot in determining whether someone's skills are adequate.

Since I work in a college IT department I feel like I'm automatically ruled out because of my background even though I always include a list of the various projects I've worked on over the past 6 years and the increasing levels of responsibility I've acquired.

The other negative I have is I'm probably my own worst critic and don't always see my own accomplishments in their best light (I'll think to myself, "Self, well you don't really have any Ruby on Rails experience so that automatically disqualifies you from all of these jobs, let's see what else is available...". That's kind of a self-imposed problem where I need to do a better job of selling myself.

Actually right now, even though I enjoy my job quite a bit, all I'd really want is the ability to tap into some of the knowledge of Silicon Valley to learn new things (by working part-time remotely and maybe sometimes in person with a company) that I just can't learn here so I can bring those into my current job and apply them, but there don't seem to be too many employers looking for that (though if you know of any, please point me too them :-).

Since I'm way out in stix of SoCal, next to the border, in the desert, in the middle of a mainly agricultural community to have access to all of the good employers/jobs I'd have to move up to the Bay, which isn't too bad (but it's SOOO expensive). I don't mind where I live so much...I just mind that the learning opportunities I have are so limited (so I end up having to find my own ways to teach myself, but that process is a lot slower than having a teacher, aka a willing co-worker, help guide you).

Key takeway though from this thread so far: Don't cash out your 401K and possibly put your family in a precarious position. Having a Happy Dad is important, but so is providing for your family. I would start small and be consistent with the activities you mentioned and treat them like projects. While I tend to forget (until I remember)...if you're consistent with your actions over a period of time you'll be amazed at how much you'll accomplish (of course this is compounded by family time, which takes away from the time you could use, but even if there's just one day a week that you can have some "Daddy Alone Time" that everyone is aware of, and the wife can be your buffer, then that'd be a good start :-).

Good luck buddy (it's tough I know!)

<comment><USER43> > and the 3rd is my life insurance/savings account

I'm interested in learning more about life insurance. Did the book you recommend advise storing value in life insurance? Most resources I've studied suggest that any life insurance product other than "term" is not worthwhile, and that it's not worth getting until some stakeholder in your life depends on your lifetime earning potential.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> no

</comment><comment><USER45> I'm going to go against the grain here and suggest that if you can invest your 401k wisely, you might as well cash it out.

The reason for this is that you're not going to get that pension anyway, because the Western world's economies are barely holding together even as we speak. No one knows what will happen, but some of us know that _something_ bad is going to happen.

It's fundamentally quite simple. Dozens of _trillions_ of unpaid liabilities are just not going to get paid, and most Western governments are getting even more indebted each year. Using money you don't actually have _will_ have consequences even for governments.

Whether your current plan is a wise investment for that 401k is another matter. I'd consider other plans too.</comment>


Senate Passes Biggest Regulatory Overhaul of Wall Street Since Depression - <AUTHOR> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703559004575256352143175906.html

<comment><USER2> Actually, its a watered-down reinstitution of some Depression era measures. It cannot and will not prevent future financial crises. It represents a colossal failure of vision on behalf of the leaders of both parties.

It fails to address the most pressing financial regulatory concerns (Glass- Stegall), creates ineffective and burdensome new requirements for businesses (Consumer Protection Division), and fails to alter the basic incentives that encourage investment fraud and shortsighted thinking (Compensation based on annual returns.)

<comment><USER3> Such is the result of the continuing polarization in the 2 party system; in order just to pass ANYTHING the center gets stretched so thin as to be nigh invisible.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Great, they pass an incomprehensible bill, then allow us to read it later.

I know I've seen a few good blog posts warning us that this is going to be a startup angel funding killer. I'm sure eventually the investment community will work around it, but short term this may be a real kick in the nuts to many startups looking for funding.

Would love to see some smart startup lawyers read through this bill and post some analysis. Any takers? Thanks in advance

</comment><comment><USER5> I wish political system was such that this sort of announcement was possible. "Today we reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act. Which the __Republicans __repealed 1999 thus allowing the excesses of Wall Street and the Banking Industry our country has suffered of late. And btw here's a list of politicians opposed to our actions and how much Banking/Investment lobbyists have paid them. And for good measure here's Banking industry profits and CEO salaries from 1999-2010."

<comment><USER6> Except that Glass-Steagall had almost nothing to do with the problem and its repeal allowed some of the measures used to try to save things (namely banks buying failing investment houses).

The crash was caused by govt trying to get people to buy houses that said people could not afford. There were tons of regulations aimed at that end and they all contributed. Yes, that includes CDOs.

Regulation is systemic risk.

And for those folks who think that "too big to fail" is a problem, what does "too big to fail" tell us about the Federal Reserve?

And for folks who think that incentives and "skin in the game" matter, what are regulators' incentives and what skin do they have in the game? Have any regulators lost their jobs over the financial crash? (The closest is Chris Dodd, but Barney Frank will be re-elected.)</comment></comment>


Startups Seize Marijuana Opportunities as Big Companies Hold Back - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/07/business/smallbusiness/start-ups-seize-marijuana-opportunities-as-big-companies-hold-back.html

<comment><USER2> >because the stigma associated with the industry has discouraged bigger companies from getting involved.

I don't believe it is stigma.

Marijuana business is incredibly risky and can be technically illegal. Big companies tend to be risk adverse and have shareholders to answer to.

I think if the legality was definite a lot of big companies wouldn't be reluctant to join in.

On another note I think a few of these companies can improve their image to the mainstream if they get rid of the slang that only current pot smokers identify with.

<comment><USER3> Right. What currently extremely wealthy CEO wants to risk going to jail over a new product line? It's the startups where people will either be on the street or making bank that are going to go after an opportunity like this. Those are the only kind of people that can benefit in the current legal environment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> When you take the legal complications away, the "marijuana business" is nothing but farming. Beyond that, it's farming involving a crop that is (relatively speaking) very cheap and easy to grow.

Once the laws are straightened out, I see no reason why big agribusiness won't completely crush all the startups entering this space. They have the scale, resources and experience to produce cannabis vastly cheaper than anybody else could hope to. A few small boutique farms might be able to eek out an existence (maybe we'll see "fair trade" marijuana?) but it's not anything I would ask a VC to put money into.

<comment><USER5> Eh it's a bit more complicated than that. Marijuana cultivars vary tremendously, but not in a way that's particularly amenable to "here try a bite and see" like when you see strange fruits at a farmer's market. As a consequence you're going to see a lot of value placed on consumer information -- many of the startups highlighted in the article are about things like customer reviews of various strains, for instance.

And more broadly even under a much more lax legal environment marijuana will still require things like proper packaging (eg the scentless bags produced by one of the highlighted startups).

It's also unclear how much of the cost is actually production. If 90% of the cost is stuff like flat taxes on end product, then big agribusiness with low production costs can't actually get much cheaper.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> It's going to boil down to this: small businesses will fertilize the industry and then when laws get standardized across the country the big pocketed companies will buy their way in. I would bet that tobacco and pharma companies are stockpiling cash offshore to buy into this market in 3-4 years

</comment><comment><USER7> One business philosophy I have in life is: "Don't compete with Wal-Mart, you'll get crushed". This segment seems to agree with that philosophy.

<comment><USER2> Target seems to be doing ok.

<comment><USER8> I don't think they're quite competing with directly with Walmart, but only due to the targeted demographic.

Walmart targets everyone, which usually results in more of a sway towards the lowest common denominator. Target's marketing (Target's target marketing?) is seemingly always geared towards upper middle class, or whatever makes up that income level now. It even shows in their branding. Take a look at how Target specific brands are expressed (Archer Farms, Market Pantry, etc) and compare them to their counterparts over at wally world.

Here's an excellent example of this: Starbucks embedded cafes in Target stores under the Starbucks brand. They did the exact same thing in Walmart, but ran under the Seattle's Best marquee in order to provide the lower priced option.</comment></comment></comment>


Is there software to monitor company culture? - <AUTHOR> I am a consultant and I have a had a lot of companies hiring us to implement improvements to culture or highlight success at the company. Is there software that does this or aids in this process? <comment><USER2> We use [https://lattice.com/](https://lattice.com/) and it seems to work pretty well for us :)

</comment><comment><USER3> Can you provide your definition of culture, please?</comment>


CERN Scientist Sentenced to 5 Years in Terrorism Case (2012) - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/05/science/cern-scientist-adlene-hicheur-sentenced-to-4-years-in-french-terrorism-case.html <comment><USER2> More recent news [http://www.nature.com/news/lhc-scientists-bring- conference-t...](http://www.nature.com/news/lhc-scientists-bring-conference- to-deported-physicist-1.21155)</comment>


Swift Language Highlights: An Objective-C Developer's Perspective - <AUTHOR> http://raywenderlich.com/73997/swift-language-highlights <comment><USER2> On containers, while it's entirely possible to constrain the type, it's also possible to use AnyObject

        var example = Dictionary<Int,AnyObject>()

I'll miss the duck typing, but having bought my house off C# work, I can work with this.

<comment><USER3> The first time I saw this idea was in Rust, which calls its type Any. I haven't seen the need to use it yet, but this seems like a decent case.

What other languages have this? How is it often used? I've never heard of a similar type in, say, Haskell.

<comment><USER4> In Java, everything extends Object, so something like List<Object> will let you put anything you want into it. I should play with more languages, I didn't realize that was an uncommon feature.

<comment><USER3> Oh, duh, of course that's true. For some reason "the parent class of every class" is different than "a type explicitly for any type" in my brain.

<comment><USER5> >For some reason "the parent class of every class" is different than "a type explicitly for any type" in my brain.

Good, because types and classes are different things despite what languages like Java and my beloved C# would have us to think.

<comment><USER6> To clarify:

"Object" as in Java is a type for any tagged box type. Primitives, such as "int", don't derive from Object, but can be promoted to a corresponding boxed type, such as "Integer".

The story is a little more complex in C#, where ValueType derives from Object and "value types", both primitive and user-defined, are truly subclasses of Object. Types not derived from ValueType are considered reference types.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Did I read that right about the range operators: triple-dot (...) is like the inclusive range that perl, python, ruby (etc?) denote with double-dot (..), and in swift double-dot (..) is actually a special range operator that excludes the upper limit?

If so, that seems backwards, and too late to fix :-(

(not huge, but unfortunate)

<comment><USER8> Python has much more sensible range operations (based on slice syntax for array slices, or the arguments to the build-in 'range' function) that are unrelated to this.

Ruby (and coffeescript, and perhaps perl) uses a..b to indicate a closed range (i.e. including b), or a...b to indicate a half-closed range (not including b). Swift seems to do the opposite. My guess for how ruby (or predecessors) came up with this was by copying bash (or sh?), which has only the .. version.

To be honest, the .. vs. ... distinction is really confusing and error-prone, and a bad bit of syntax to include in any language, period.

<comment><USER9> First thing I looked for in Swift was support for Python's slicing syntax. It's a shame they decided against using that.</comment></comment></comment>


Plague Inc. rolling out new mode where you fight to contain the outbreak - <AUTHOR> https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2020/03/plague-inc-rolling-out-new-mode-where-you-fight-to-contain-the-outbreak/ <comment><USER2> Played this game for years and it's the reason I was so convinced COVID-19 would spread globally.

The mild to low symptoms it shows in many people combined with potentially spreading before symptoms even show... is very reminiscent of the kinds of strategies I developed for building successful plagues while playing this game</comment>


Magic Leap - <AUTHOR> http://www.magicleap.com <comment><USER2> The thing I don't understand about the demo on the web page is that, those students, they weren't wearing magic leap's device, how did they see the augmented whale? what did they cheer at?

<comment><USER3> Magic Leap is just setting itself up for an even bigger disappointment than everyone seems to be experiencing with HoloLens' highly limited field of view. The company is promising the moon here, without making any apparent concessions to limitations of the technology.

If they would just under-promise, I'm sure people would be blown away when they first try Magic Leap. The way they're going, though, disappointment is almost certain.</comment></comment>


Marc Andreessen's first six months on Twitter were unbelievably epic - <AUTHOR> http://qz.com/231649/marc-andreessen-first-six-months-on-twitter-were-unbelievably-epic/

<comment><USER2> just a reminder, Marc Andreessen is the same person that says Snowden is a traitor.</comment>


What It's Like to Get Online After 25 Years in Prison - <AUTHOR> http://www.dailydot.com/opinion/santos-getting-online-after-25-years-prison/ <comment><USER2> Why did you post a link to a site which stole the content, stripped the author's name, mangled the text by repeating some of it twice, and omitted an extremely interesting video?

Moderators, please update the link so it points to the original source:

[http://www.dailydot.com/opinion/santos-getting-online- after-...](http://www.dailydot.com/opinion/santos-getting-online- after-25-years-prison/)

<comment><USER3> Presumably the duplication of the pull quotes and lack of the video comes from copy & pasting from the original web page (for whatever reason).

If you're curious (and not that it matters for his story), the author, Michael G. Santos, initially received a 45 year sentence for 'a scheme to distribute cocaine':

<http://www.quora.com/Michael-Santos-4> <http://about.me/michael.santos>

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Presumably the reason why inmates don't have unfettered access to the internet is to make sure they're not running some empire from behind bars but at the same time in this day and age this sounds like exceptionally cruel punishment.

If there is one thing that would help an ex-convict to re-integrate into society it would be to be able to read about what is going on in the outside world and to be able to self-educate so they can hit the ground running. After all if you leave jail without marketable skills chances of falling back into crime are higher which eventually serves nobody, least of all society.

<comment><USER5> My first startup actually landed me in CA state prison. (Read about my prison sentence and my new project here: <http://comebackasap.com/burn_the_boats/> )

Though I "only" served a year, the one thing I missed more than anything --including family, friends, and the touch of a woman-- was internet access. (I love my family, friends, and lady friends but a year away from them wasn't so bad. Fortunately I have no kids.)

I'd literally have dreams about the internet. One dream I remember in particular was winning an imaginary "Inmate of the Month" contest. My prize was an hour of unfettered access to the internet. It was absolute bliss checking my email, Google Voice, Hacker News, etc.) I remember that dream with vivid clarity to this day. It may seem innocuous, but to me it illustrates how we've become so accustomed to an information-driven existence.

While in prison I'd seen numerous sports trivia arguments that resulted in all-out brawls that could've easily been resolved with a 5 second Google search. (Dudes were getting sent to the SHU for as many as 6 months because of a fight that stemmed from an argument over which team Kobe Bryant scored 81 points against. Insane.)

So you may ask, "Why not ask the C.O.'s to look it up on their phones?" It's true, some CO's would do it for us. Others would tell us flat-out "no". But then you have to worry about the d __k CO's that would pretend to look it up, then give us faulty information just to stoke the flames of discord amongst us inmates. (I've seen this happen multiple times.)

As you can imagine, there is a lot of storytelling (read: lying) that goes on in prison. Imagine not being able to call a guy out on his nonsense with a couple swipes of the screen. "Oh you're in prison for moving 100 kilos of cocaine? Says here you were convicted for felony DUI." An extreme example but you get the point. In the free world, people simply can't get away with BS when each of us is walking around with miniature super-computers in our pockets.

"Cruel punishment" indeed.

<comment><USER6> So from what I understand from your story, if you hired the proper lawyers and put in the proper legal structure to properly protect yourself in the first place, you wouldn't of been sent to prison?

Jesus

<comment><USER5> You're partially correct.

Yes, our corporate attorney was useless. We had been under investigation for a year prior to formal charges being filed. He made a variety of changes to our contracts in an effort to make the company compliant with CA law, (mostly indemnifying us against any loss that may come as a result of a person placing their vehicles in our program.) He failed. I was sentenced to state prison.

Our "proper legal structure" mattered little in lieu of the circumstances that led to the company's (and my freedom's) demise.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Author is Michael Santos:

Wikipedia: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_G._Santos> Website: <http://michaelsantos.com/> Twitter: <https://twitter.com/michaelgsantos> More: <http://about.me/michael.santos>

He did a degree, began a doctorate and wrote 7 books whilst in prison, and seems he hit the ground running when he got out. Good for him.

</comment><comment><USER8> I have utmost respect for this guy, after spending 25 years in prison he still has such a positive outlook, thinking about how he can utilize the internet to his advantage.

It teaches us something about not giving up our future even if the present is less than stellar. Startups are hard, but imagine if you would have to wait 25 years to realize your ideas...

As cliché as it is, never give up!

<comment><USER4> 25 years is an enormous amount of time. Think of the cost to society to lock up people for the bigger part of their productive life.

<comment><USER9> As a purely hypothetical argument, there's a net benefit to society if someone's productive efforts go into stealing from or otherwise harming other people. How many people fall into that category versus how many can be reformed or otherwise kept from causing harm is something I don't have facts about and is probably another debate for another site.

<comment><USER10> Whether there is a "net benefit" depends on how much time they're in prison for, how much harm they caused before going in, and what kind of good they do/value they contribute once they're out. Even after the time it would take to establish an effective metric, that's something that would vary very widely by individual.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Interesting but is it only me who can't find the author's name or a link to his blog?

<comment><USER11> Probably this is a more appropriate article as it hasn't just stolen someone's content.

[http://www.dailydot.com/opinion/santos-getting-online- after-...](http://www.dailydot.com/opinion/santos-getting-online- after-25-years-prison/)

His name is Michael Santos and he did 25 years for running drugs.

<comment><USER12> That's tragic, I assumed to get 25 years he must have killed somebody

<comment><USER13> There are those out there that would likely say he killed many. The war on drugs etc. I personally wonder what he would have achieved if unconstrained, if he can do as much as he has while in prison.

<comment><USER14> It's all speculation, but my guess is he wouldn't have achieved much and would probably be dead.

<comment><USER4> What difference would 5, 10, 15, 20 or 25 years make?

In other words do you think that he will achieve something today that he would not have been able to achieve 5 years ago?

<comment><USER14> I was thinking more along the lines of, "if he hadn't gone to prison, what would he have achieved."

I haven't read much about him, but if he was a dealer and trafficker in cocaine, I think there is a high probability that he would either be dead or not have accomplished much.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I've read about this guy before and what continues to puzzle me is how well versed his Internet terminology is. Things like "amazed me to see how the search engine indexed so much" just doesn't make sense, this guy was already aware of what indexing is and yet never used a computer inside prison?

It also seems that he built up an entire online presence before he'd stepped out of prison, the way it reads.

<comment><USER16> I imagine he did it the way we all did in the 70s and 80s: by digesting every shred of information from available print publications.

<comment><USER15> I guess there is that, it explains how he knew about Facebook, Twitter & LinkedIn and also what an Apple iPhone + Safari is.

<comment><USER17> There are televisions in prison, and the net is all over broadcast TV programming.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Arguably, the internet _did_ exist in 1987, although not the same as the net we know today.

[http://www.nethistory.info/History%20of%20the%20Internet/ori...](http://www.nethistory.info/History%20of%20the%20Internet/origins.html)

Kudos to Mr Santos for his efforts at turning a new leaf in life, and I've also noticed that attention spans have decreased over the past few decades.

</comment><comment><USER18> Cache: [http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:kE6JIjZ...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:kE6JIjZLWUAJ:www.olwiki.com/archives/619.html+http://www.olwiki.com/archives/619.html&hl=en&strip=1)

</comment><comment><USER19> > On the day (of my release) that my wife, Carole

Wow

</comment><comment><USER20> Why is the author's name not attached to the article? Anyone know who wrote this?

<comment><USER21> Original article here:

[http://www.dailydot.com/opinion/santos-getting-online- after-...](http://www.dailydot.com/opinion/santos-getting-online- after-25-years-prison/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> telnet eee.fwed.dww 25

mail from: email@example.com

rcpt to: firstname.lastname@example.com

I'm coming for you bitch. You know who.

.

<comment><USER22> If you're keeping score, I got from +3 to -4 (current) for this one.

It's supposed to be a telnet SMTP session, using a fake email, and to mimic the standard cliche plot of Hollywood movies, with the convict returning to seek his revenge.

Not meant as misogynistic or anything (the "bitch" is written "in character").

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Because you were locked up for so long I'll go easy on you.

Use a font size bigger than 13px... seriously. You're lucky I wanted to know what you had to say. Normally I'd just close the tab and never look back.

<comment><USER24> He says on hackerNews with it's 9pt text and 8pt headings.

<comment><USER23> You clearly missed the fact that i said px, and not pt.

I also find it hilarious that I get down voted on this of all things. Too funny.</comment></comment></comment>


Entrepreneurs and Rejection: it's better to get a "no" than to never know - <AUTHOR> http://blog.playacrossamerica.com/entrepreneurs-rejection-better-get-no-never-know/ <comment><USER2> There is a game specifically designed to help entrepreneurs overcome the fear of rejection: [http://fearhacker.com](http://fearhacker.com)</comment>


Anti-Uber Taxi Protest Blocks Access to Paris's Roissy Airport - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-24/paris-uber-protests-set-to-gum-up-traffic-as-taxis-start-strike <comment><USER2> I feel that every time this issue gets discussed, it needs to have some background information provided, because quite frankly, taxi drivers in France suck.

From my own personal experience, I have had the following incidents: 1) a taxi driver that took me the long way round from a train station to my home. Thinking I was a tourist, because of my accent, he basically tried to take me for a ride thinking I wouldn't notice. That lifted the bill by 50% compared to the usual price.

2) A taxi driver in Marseille that wouldn't finish the trip until I gave him my phone number. My choice was to either get out in the middle of one of the roughest neighbourhoods of Marseille and try and find another taxi, or hand over my phone number (which he _verified_ by calling me on it before continuing) - I had to change my phone number after that one.

3) Countless occassions of having taxis refusing to take me as a customer because I wanted to go to a part of the city they didn't want to go to. One particular occassion struck me as bad - I had the car door open and one foot off the ground when he realised where I wanted to go and took off. Considering I was a lone 35-yr old woman at the time, dressed in a business suit, he obviously wasn't worrying about his safety.

4) I have a friend who actually works in the Boers (mentioned in the article). When I'm out with him, he won't let me get into a taxi until he's checked the guy's (most taxi drivers are men, and on the rare occassion I've had a female driver, they have been nothing but professional - make of that what you will) papers _and_ flashed his badge to keep the driver on his best behaviour).

5) If I move my grievances out to people one removed from me (ie people I personally know), you can add in a guy getting physically hauled out of a taxi and beaten by the driver because the driver didn't want to go where he wanted, another guy getting hit by a taxi when walking across a pedestrian crossing, only to have the taxi driver get out of his vehicule, abuse and kick said friend for slowing him down, and then driving off, and a taxi that took off with a friend's luggage in the boot, which he never got back.

So yeah, I have about zero sympathy for French taxi drivers - the sooner they're run out of business, the better. Their latest behaviour has just confirmed for me that I won't ever be using one again if I can avoid it.

<comment><USER3> In Greece we have a solution for this, as old as Uber but that works with the taxi drivers instead against them.

Taxibeat is an app you can use to call taxis from your smartphone. You may choose which taxi you want from the list of nearby drivers. For every driver you see his/her name, plates number, car, reviews, whether he permits pets, speaks foreign languages, has wifi, permits smoking, can help people with disabilities etc. Also you can pay with paypal or credit card.

When you take a ride, taxibeat's driver app essentially monitors the ride.

What's interesting is that since the taxi drivers that choose to work with taxibeat know what a smartphone is, know about reviews etc, they are in general very professional and I never had any issues with them, in contrast with the rest. Of course that they are accountable to a company that takes seriously its name, also helps.

The idea went so well that now we have a competitor too, taxiplon, which also works with phone calls.

<comment><USER4> This. I don't understand how the French Taxi lobbies cannot try and copy Uber's app for themselves. If I was a taxi I would LONG for a way to simplify the user's experience.

Uber's app is just the missing link. I don't understand how you still have to order a taxi with a phone call in 2015.

<comment><USER5> They probably don't want to have to deal with customer reviews. For most drivers, user's experience is pretty low on their priority list.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The other week I was in LA on business and I took a taxi to my hotel. If taxis in Paris are anything like there, no wonder Uber is so popular...

The hotel was about 5 miles from LAX. First the taxi driver suggested I might be able to take a shuttle bus (I had just landed after a 16 hour flight and didn't want to figure out and wait however long for that) and after persuasion agreed to take me. He had no idea where the household-name hotel was, so I had to give him directions from Google Maps. For that 10 minute trip I paid $25 + tip.

On the way back I took UberX, the driver was a lot friendlier and even helped to find which terminal I needed as I had no idea. Total price $6.50. I gave him a five stars and $10 tip as he was great.

<comment><USER7> Why would you even tip a taxi driver who needs to be persuaded to take you and needs your (Google maps) directions?

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Uber being available in Paris was one of the greatest thing to happen for tourists and residents alike. I agree with the general sentiment, Taxis in France are some of the worst taxis I've used. I've had a lot of bad experiences. And lest you think it's due to racism or because they thought I was a tourist (not that this would excuse their behaviour one iota), I'm French and I was born in Paris.

I can understand the financial hardship brought by Uber and the frustration with the license prices but as a group, they have not endeared themselves to me and none of my friends have generally positive experiences with them.

It's high time a service like Uber which penalises drivers for bad experience exists.

<comment><USER9> It is worth knowing that even though the licenses are limited, the gouvernement gave them all for free, it is the taxis themselves that created some kind of mafia bullshit selling it back 200k euros.

Also not very a response but Uber is kinda of fucking every laws aswell so even though the service is better and cheaper, so is my Nike made by children, it does not mean we need to make children work again for peanuts.

<comment><USER10> Yeah, I'm basically on the same page as you. I can't say I really enjoy using taxis in Paris (although I don't have any nightmare stories like other people in this thread, mostly minor annoyances like refusing to take credit cards and some general rudeness).

On the other hand having services like uber breaking regulations might end up making taxis less safe and with a worse quality of service down the line as prices keep plunging due to the heavy unregulated competition.

I think the right move would be to open the market while still heavily regulating them but I don't know how the government can convince the taxi drivers to accept that since it would mean losing their super expensive license. I suppose the government could buy the licenses itself but that would be heinously expensive (and as a tax payer I can't say I would really like that).

I really wish the government wouldn't have allowed for this license market to exist in the first place, it was obviously going to create a cartel.

<comment><USER11> The taxis unions threaten the government with strikes and airport blockades every time the topic of opening the licenses comes to the table. The mafia is strong.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Uber seems the problem everywhere Taxi market is highly regulated. Uber operates also in Warsaw, this was a news for a day or two, but later nothing really happened.

In Poland Taxi market is almost non-regulated. Taxi driver must pass medical examination, both physical and mental health is checked, plus there are a few other reasonable requirements.

As a result of this, in Warsaw there are more then 20 Taxi corporations, plus Uber, plus independent taxi drivers.

The interesting thing is that prices vary quite a lot, since corporations are not competing over prices only. Some corporations have fancy cars, some corporations are more available during high traffic hours.

Taxis offer also side services - if you run out of alcohol during party, the taxi driver can get one for you in 10 min. You have a car, went to bar, drunk to much to drive - no problem, taxi will arrive with another driver, who will drive your car home.

I understand that governments are regulating explosives production, but why the hell they mess with something so simple as driving people from place A to B is beyond my imagination.

</comment><comment><USER13> As someone quipped on Twitter, "soon enough postmen will block access to office buildings nationwide to protest the widespread use of email".

<comment><USER14> You may joke I know that a few years ago the CWU (Postal Union) in the UK used to mail floppy disks with paper work to branches rather than send emails.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Courtney Love Cobain :

"they've ambushed our car and are holding our driver hostage. they're beating the cars with metal bats. this is France?? I'm safer in Baghdad"

[https://twitter.com/Courtney/status/614022179978502146](https://twitter.com/Courtney/status/614022179978502146)

</comment><comment><USER16> Is it my impression only that Taxis in Paris are so shitty that anything is über, even ones with rusty Lada and 15 minutes of training?

</comment><comment><USER17> When a taxi driver feels justified in beating up a customer rather than servicing them, you know you're dealing with just another Mafia. Being exposed to market forces is certainly not comfortable but the sorry state of taxi services shows how economic sectors degrade when you shield them from market forces. They even forget how to act in the interest of self-preservation.

</comment><comment><USER18> Good news everybody!

The taxi geniuses even beat up an uber _customer_ for daring to use uber instead of being content with NOT using a taxi, as thee taxis were on strike! Well done!

If this was a joke, I wouldn't believe it! Comedy gold!

</comment><comment><USER19> France, where we'll protest anything that challenges the status quo.

<comment><USER20> How is that different from anywhere else where an industry is governed if not protected by government regulation? At one time regulation was meant to give some sense of guarantee of safe and reliable service, now it has become a method to prevent competition.

The number of industries in the United States which are regulated is staggering, I can only imagine the same is true elsewhere. Regulating industries is a good idea but not if it prevents competition. Regulation is meant to protect the consumer, not the business from competition and the need to maintain if not improve service.

<comment><USER19> There is really something special about France (and I would reckon some other former superpowers of the past). Because we used to be great and we're not anymore, slowly drifting into world oblivion, there is a quite toxic tendency to cling to that past in the form of excessive conservatism. In that mindset, any change is perceived as an additional step away from that past greatness which is an integral and important part of the "collective consciousness". As such, anything that changes the status quo frightens that part of us thinking that we're still a dominant world power. That is why we still push the French language hard (dubbing movies, forcing a 50% ratio of French music on the radio, having a national academy to enforce the purity of our language), why we've been beefing with the English and the American on many topics. That issue is systemic and is extremely detrimental in our collective progress to a better future.

This is the precise root of what has been described as the inherent French melancholia. And this is why Uber is a problem here, even though most French people would recognize it's a great service that actually brings something much needed to the table.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Apparently they're attacking Uber/Uber like cars they find on their way: [https://twitter.com/imnotalone/status/613961119766609920](https://twitter.com/imnotalone/status/613961119766609920)

</comment><comment><USER22> What i don't get is that ultimately, forcing all taxi drivers to work through systems like uber, could prove better for everyone in the long run, including the state. No more fraud ( how many times did the drivers forced you to pay in cash), so more taxes collected and easier monitoring of the overall taxi profession.

Having centralized live tracking of every aspect of the taxi service actually make things _easier_ to regulate, not harder.

</comment><comment><USER23> I have been cheated by taxi drivers in every city where I lived for more than a few weeks. I am 100% in support of Uber.

<comment><USER24> Why, does Uber have some sort of guarantee that you are not getting ripped off? How do they address the problem? (I am genuinely asking, not trying to post a rhetorical question)

<comment><USER25> Actually yes. You're emailed a receipt with a map that includes the route you took. If you have any complaints, you can email them and they'll usually adjust your rate.

(I don't know if that's a formal guarantee but it's my experience)

<comment><USER24> And if the gps "isn't working"? I can see it could be easily gamed.

<comment><USER26> This dispatch app IS the gps. If it doesn't work they don't get jobs/paid.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> It seems I was lucky in France, no majorly bad taxi drivers

Or, you know, just get the bus, it's cheaper (not always possible, I know)

But yeah, it seems they just began digging their own grave.

Meanwhile in "technology driven" Germany Uber has been banned

</comment><comment><USER20> According to another article it appears the taxi drivers use of violence and road blocks has worked, the France Interior minister has banned UberPop from use in the city and enforced by the police.

The verge article stated that costs for licenses can be nearly quarter million. How is that even remotely reasonable to anyone?

<comment><USER28> I don't think it's going out on a limb to say there is obviously some under the table collusion going on here.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Well, that tactic ought to end well for the taxi drivers.</comment>


How Do You Want to Be Recruited? - <AUTHOR>

I've noticed a certain (understandable) amount of ire towards recruiters around HN. There's the mass cookie cutter emails/inmails, the lack of understanding about what exactly you DO, and a host of other reasons why this distaste persists. So, how would YOU prefer to be recruited? <comment><USER2> For me it's all about not wasting my time, not because I'm a big deal, because I'm not, but because this happened frequently before I went freelance. There are so many non-starters when it comes to jobs, why do companies insist on leaving these out until the very end?

Warning: the content below is slightly dramatic but a pretty fair representation of this game.

1) Tell me the salary range up front.

2) Tell me whether you're down with remote up front.

Great, we got past 1 & 2\. Let's move on:

3) Let's talk about best practices. These are important to me because it makes my life at work pleasant.

4) Great, show me proof of these best practices you talk about. See, I knew you were a dirty liar. You're not doing <best practice> because Visionary/CEO/Financier/Business person that is guaranteed to make my life a living hell doesn't see the value in it.

If we make it past 3 and 4 (rare), we're onto salary negotiation!

5) Your idea is never exciting enough to where I'll want to do it for less than my market value.

6) Why yes, I do love programming. No, I won't work for less just because I love doing it.

</comment><comment><USER3> If the recruiter can't tell me a salary range for the job up front, I'm not interested. Why should I waste days of my life interviewing only to find out at the end that they're offering me the wonderful opportunity to take a 50% pay cut?

<comment><USER4> Its I believe mostly a sales tactic where they make you do some significant investment on your side, and when you get to end you feel more obliged to take the position because of all the effort that you put into it in the first place.

<comment><USER5> And that's why developers hate recruiters.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The inverse of what you describe;) thoughtful personal customized with understanding both "me" and your client while respecting everyone's time. It is not magic it's time consuming work.

</comment><comment><USER7> I think a lot of recruiters fail to understand that many tech folks (like myself) simply don't want to work for the kind of company that would hire an outside recruiter, period. So...how do I want to be recruited? Only by actual employees of the company I'd be working for. No middle men.

<comment><USER8> As an engineer involved with recruiting: how would I stumble across your profile/resume, and how much time do you expect engineers to spend clicking through LinkedIn profiles? Would it be a positive or negative sign to you if the company that's recruiting you is having engineers filter out candidates instead of writing code?

<comment><USER7> Personally I have a resume/profile on Careers.StackOverflow.com, Angellist, CodeEval, Github...etc...

I don't expect engineers to spend _any_ time clicking through profiles though. That's exactly the point, if you're recruiting for a startup you can afford to do things that don't scale (like reaching out the authors of your favorite open source repos, meeting people at conferences and meetups etc). If you need soooo many engineers _right now_ that you need to employ tactics like farming LinkedIn...then we're a bad match anyway.

The point of my original comment was that some people (like me) prefer to be recruited in ways that don't scale because that lets us know that it's a certain _kind_ of company (namely a small-scale startup that is hand-picking their team very carefully). And that's what appeals to me.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I want a transparent process where I know in advance what I'm getting into. I'd like to know how much they're willing to pay(the range) and what exactly I would be expected to do - the role as well as the product I'd be working on. I'd also like to know about the interview process and how long after an interview I'd be told the result (preferably immediately). Also tell me about the sort of people I'll be working with - team size, roles, backgrounds etc. Once I have that information, it's easier for me to decide on whether to attend the interview or not.

</comment><comment><USER10> Honestly, I don't want to be contacted by a recruiter.

I want a list of companies that are looking to hire. I want a list that I can individually research, then find a way to contact them.

</comment><comment><USER11> I have no interest in working with a recruiter at all. I'm fully capable of applying to a company directly if I am interested. Recruiters are parasites who need to get a real job.

</comment><comment><USER4> For me the main problem is not the recruiting, its a service worth paying for. The problem is when the recruitment company becomes the employer by inserting themselves in the middle via a services contract and asking 25% for the life of the contract.

There is basically no added value after the initial contact its purelly taking advantage of the situation in order to insert themselves as a middleman with interests often different than both the contractor and the client.</comment>