Just Wear Headphones - <AUTHOR> http://www.mattblodgett.com/2015/06/just-wear-headphones.html <comment><USER2> The "being watched" feeling is the big one for me. I don't mind wearing headphones because I love listening to music and I don't listen to it that loudly, but the sensation of feeling someone's eyes on you (to catch you on the split second you've refreshed reddit or facebook or something) is incredibly profound on the time it takes to zone into zen mode.

Anecdotally funnily enough, the opposite seems to happen for me when I am pair programming: each person keeps the other in focus, but obviously this only works when both people have the same objective. Not really related to "open office" issue, but thought it was relevant.

Or maybe I'm just a filthy procrastinator...

<comment><USER3> I don't like having people watching me, but facing other people (just having them in my field of view) is even more distracting.

<comment><USER4> this bothers me too. I make sure my monitor is high enough so I can't easily see their eyes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> At age 32 my hearing is apparently at the level of a 66 year old. I'm not much of a concert attender nor drug user so the only real explanation the doctor could give for my disappointing audiogram was my habit of regularly working with headphones on (I always took care of moderate volume, mind you).

I wasn't expecting this result at all, I actually thought my hearing was perfect but hearing loss starts at the highest frequencies and continues to the lower frequencies exponentially. The route towards "Sorry, what did you say?" doesn't take as long as you might suspect.

<comment><USER6> Thats crazy, I am sorry. Is the hearing loss irreversible ?

<comment><USER7> Hearing loss is indeed irreversible.

So take good care of your ears, don't be complacent. (I'm a drummer)

<comment><USER8> Also a drummer here...for several years I played in extremely loud bands and went to shows without earplugs. By the time I wised up it was too late. Now I have a terrible time hearing conversations in restaurants or other situations where there is background noise. I imagine in my later years I'll probably need hearing aids.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The rules of thumb about "60% of maximum volume for 60 minutes" and "if you can't hear your surroundings, it's too loud" are nonsense. Dangerous volume settings depend on a headphone's sensitivity, the output device power, the headphone's isolation ability, and the recording. These parameters vary. Wildly.

A well-fitting isolating IEM can slice off 25dB of noise, more than enough to (mostly) eliminate background conversation noise at any location short of a hip restaurant. These IEMs tend to be so sensitive that they become earsplitting at a tiny fraction of the maximum output volume, way less than 60%.

Learn approximate dB levels of various sounds, compare various noise with a meter (even an uncalibrated app will give you a ballpark idea of what you're dealing with), and listen to music at an average 65dB or less (this will obviously vary with dynamic range of your music; occasional 80-85dB peaks won't kill your hearing).

One trip to a dance club or rock concert without earplugs (100-110dB on average in my experience, 120+ has been known to happen) will do more hearing damage in a few minutes than a _lot_ of headphone listening while working. I'm pretty sure the busy street near my home routinely hits a 90dB average at rush hour, solidly in the danger zone compared to reasonable headphone use.

 _Edit:_ To learn more, read the following:

\- [http://www.rane.com/pdf/old/note100.pdf](http://www.rane.com/pdf/old/note100.pdf)

\- [http://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2011/09/more- power.html](http://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2011/09/more-power.html)

<comment><USER10> It might be helpful if you could offer citations for that. I find it hard to judge these competing claims

<comment><USER11> None of that comment seemed unreasonable to me - I've had large over-ear sets of headphones that require me to turn the volume up pretty high. It takes more to drive them, that's why some people own headphone amps.

Compare that to IEM's like the Sennheiser cx 300 - 5% of max volume at my computer might be too loud.

And it would surprise me if headphone usage at reasonable volumes is worse than going to loud concerts, even if you use headphones for long periods of time. If I'm at a concert or a loud bar for an hour or two, my ears feel really fatigued afterwards, everything seems quieter. I've never turned up headphones loud enough to experience that.

<comment><USER12> If anyone is curious, this is what the sensitivity measurement is on headphones: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headphones#Sensitivity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headphones#Sensitivity)

TL;DR "The sensitivity of headphones is usually between about 80 and 125 dB/mW and usually measured at 1 kHz." and note that since dB is logarithmic, every 6dB is 2x the energy (human-perceived "doubling of volume" is typically ~10dB; see also: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletcher%E2%80%93Munson_curves](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletcher%E2%80%93Munson_curves) )

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'm not sure that employers that have open plan offices are actually "clueless". It apparently works well enough that they don't mind the productively hit. I think it is easier for developers to believe that their employers are clueless than to believe the truth - that they've weighed that costs and decided that disrespecting developers is worth the cost savings.

The open plan office sends the message: "To us, you're not a thinker [we have management for that!], you're just an expensive typist." The exception to that would be an startup that is forthright about needing the cost savings and doesn't try to sell this lack of respect as a "feature" (ease of collaboration!).

<comment><USER14> So you're saying it's even worse than them being clueless?

<comment><USER13> Yes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Is it time to get depressed yet? This has been a topic for such a long time. It was in people ware in 1987. I thought I discovered the topic when Joel (On Sofware) wrote about it in 2000. While a few people seem to enjoy open offices, the overwhelming majority of developers I know, or who chime in on HN, value a quiet place to work and dislike open offices.

And yet, not only has nothing changed, it seems to be getting worse. It couldn't be more clear to me that developers, at least on this issue, simply have no clout _as a profession_. There may be a few individuals who can make demands, but on the balance, these are decisions imposed on us, as a group, and we are apparently unable to do anything about it.

The really sad thing is, this isn't a situation where we're asking to fly first class, or for more vacation. We're talking about asking for something that will make us more productive and increase the value we largely hand over to our employers, simply because it's depressing to not be able to do a good job due to distractions.

So yeah, I'm depressed about it. There was a time when I read these essays and felt a bit more charged up, like people were starting to understand something important and that things would change. Well, now we have open offices.

I'll finish with another variant on my broken record: the industry talks constant about the critical shortage of software engineers, but it won't give them a quiet place to work. Actually, that last sentence is too optimistic - it won't _allow_ them a quiet place to work. Those places exist, but companies often demand that their programmers spend 8 hours a day in places that are too noisy for focus.

<comment><USER16> I suggest perhaps a fetal position desk:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYSxkqL9l_8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYSxkqL9l_8)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I used to use construction 'headphones'. They do nothing but dampen outside noise - no music. It's a pretty good solution ... but a solution to a stupid problem because the right solution is more productive working conditions.

<comment><USER18> > the right solution is more productive working conditions

Absolutely! To me what's most disturbing about "Just use headphones" is it's highly prevalent information-age companies but shows a deep _lack_ of understanding for the need for _focus_ and long periods of uninterrupted concentration essential for creative work.

<comment><USER19> Its not just information age companies, it seems to me that many people in general are ignorant of the concept that a distraction-free work environment is important. I'm at a company that has been around for 50 years, and they still stuff their engineers two at a time into small "offices" (without doors, with concrete floors). I can hear _everything_.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Another seemingly imperceptible disruption is vibration, ie "physical noise". I had the bottom-of-the-totem-pole pleasure of having the (open) office space right by the restroom, kitchen, and coffee machine.

The major noises were not the main problem; the problem was the stress of people beelining for either of the three with the felicity of an elephant stampede.

Add to this office congestion the pleasure of a female stampede of high heels or male Italian shoes.

Which is not to say that a coffee machine can't shake the foundation of the building like a malcontent washing machine.

It's driven me up the fucking wall, and it is by far my biggest annoyance with an open office.

Keep this in mind, the next time you or someone else goes on about dress code - or taking things easy. Hell, give your employees the option of company- provided sneakers. Then you can still dictate style guidelines.

Either that or give people a goddamn vibration-dampened fastlane.

<comment><USER13> When I hear something like this, it sound like your pleading for _padded_ shackles. My heart goes out to you.

A friend of mine worked at a place where he was next to metal door to the outside that slammed shut loudly all day. He wore those big industrial earmuffs to try to block it out. This is the Phd physicist/developer who did all the hard math for them...

To my developer brethren (and sisters!), work doesn't have to be like that. There are companies that treat their developers well. You _really_ need to interview the company during the job interview, talk to people that work there before you go, do your research.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> As several commentors have mentioned, in ear monitor (IEM) type headphones have pretty good sound isolation properties. It's important to note that active noise cancelling (ANC) headphones _increase_ the total sound pressure on your ear drums, while IEMs _decrease_ it, overall. With ANC headphones, you have the environmental sound pressure added to the cancellation signal (which cancels according to perception, not according to physics) added to the pressure of your music. This tends to make them far more damaging to hearing, long term, than simply listening to music. The real solution, if you want to avoid hearing loss and drown out the environmental noise is to use something like Shure IEMs and a pair of shooting or industrial earmuffs. When I ran a lawn service in high school, I had a set of Shure headphones and equipment earmuffs, which blocked something like 50 dB of environmental noise and let me listen to podcasts at a reasonable volume while running a mower 8 hours a day.

<comment><USER22> Do you have a reference for ANC headphones being more likely to cause hearing loss compared to regular headphones? I find it hard to believe (but would love to stand corrected).

<comment><USER21> So, upon further reading, I was less informed on that than I had thought. The best explanation I could find is here[1]. Basically, ANC does reduce sound pressure level when it lines up correctly. If you're listening to the sort of ambient noise that it does well with, it gets the phase offset close enough to right to significantly reduce the mechanical force applied to your ear drums. If, on the other hand, you're in an environment where it does a mediocre job, it will still be producing a cancellation waveform, but it won't actually cancel anything, and that will increase the mechanical force applied to your ear drums. So, in an office environment, you'd expect a reduction from the ambient noise of the HVAC system, but an increase from the random nature of your coworkers' conversations. It's hard to say whether you'd have a net reduction or not, but it's not certain, whereas passive noise isolation is certain.

[1] [http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1ios4u/does_prod...](http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1ios4u/does_producing_antinoise_double_the_amount_of/cb6li32)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Use noise-attenuating headphones rather than noise-cancelling headphones. A pair of properly fitted IEMs or a good pair of closed headphones will reduce background noise by ~25dB simply by providing a physical barrier to noise.

The distracting effects of music largely disappear if you listen to repetitive instrumental music - house or ambient music is ideal for this.

If you're concerned about noise-related hearing loss, Canford produce a range of high-quality headphones with integrated limiters. The limiting system was designed by the BBC, to enforce safe noise exposure for employees who use headphones all day.

While I agree that open plan offices are generally a bad idea, I think that OP is rather uninformed about the use of headphones.

<comment><USER24> To build on your second point, the key is more "instrumental" than "house or ambient", though combining both is indeed ideal. Soma.fm's "Groove Salad" online radio station is a good example of such music.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I hope the open office trend dies soon. I've been to some swanky open offices with awesome perks but there are all designed to keep you in the office. I would not trade any of it for my current setup. I work from my home office and travel to a nearby coworking space to get an occasional dose of water-cooler level of human interaction.

<comment><USER26> The problem is that it meets managerial needs very well:

* awareness -- you can see who's there, what they're doing, and have kindof a feel of the tempo of the office

* "collaborative" \-- managerial work is mostly meetings, it's easy to see conversation/crosstalk as productivity

* less furniture / divided space is probably cost efficient

Add that to the This Is How We Do Things Now(TM) cultural momentum (you don't want to be using cubes like those stale corporations of the 90s, do you?). Then throw in the idea that management doesn't necessarily want employees to be maximally productive; it's better if they're productive enough but pliable and fungible.

Open plan might well be with us for a while.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> > Physical Hearing Damage

That's the one that does me in. Not because headphones cause ongoing damage, but because my ears have been damaged by several rounds of tympanic perforations and ear infections since I was a wee one.

From these I retain (amongst a number of other issues though thankfully almost no loss of hearing) a serious inability to wear any kind of headphones for more than 10~15mn: past that and it starts to feel like I'm getting needles jabbed through the eardrum and scraping around (this is not so exaggerated, the first time it happened I literally threw my cans away from me thinking some sort of biting insect had gone in and I hadn't felt it until it took a bite of my eardrum)

</comment><comment><USER28> Interesting question: How many companies who use open offices style floorplans have executives who still have their own offices?

Maybe this is just another permutation of the out of touch boss problem. Nothing makes it harder to understand the downfalls of an open office than not working in one yourself.

<comment><USER29> There is another problem here. Most executives are extroverts, so for them being in the environment like that feels right and good. Does not really help with understanding in my experience.

<comment><USER30> Also might matter that open floor plans make interacting with people convenient, and it's a large part of their job to interact with people. I really only need interaction with people for well under 10% of a normal work day.

What makes perfect sense for their kind of works does not make as much sense for my kind of work.

<comment><USER31> For me it makes interacting with people even more inconvenient. Now instead of having a conversation with one person, I'm effectively having one with a dozen or more. So everyone's booking entire conference rooms just to talk 1:1—even if the topic is fairly benign or banal, nobody likes eavesdroppers.

<comment><USER16> Just love it when people comment on phone calls you just had.

I found myself having conversations with family members where I never mentioned words that would give away what I was talking about.

What drive me even crazier is co workers that took an almost insane interest in what I was eating for lunch.

Yeah, it's a fucking big mac... have you never seen one before?

<comment><USER29> Why would you even pick up your phone without leaving the room or trying to find some quiet space? I'm trying to keep my private conversetations outside of my work environment, not because I don't want people to hear things, but because it can annoy/distract people around me.

<comment><USER16> I couldn't always predict when a call would come in over something and the only "quiet" space available is out in my car. It wasn't always a good option but I would go out there if I had to call someplace about a bill.

I was mostly surrounded by customer phone support people so I doubt I was distracting them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> I'm convinced that the ideal layout for developers is single offices, with doors, big enough for pair programming. Anything else is wasting developer attention and the opportunities for collaboration enabled while being in close proximity.

<comment><USER33> The problem with "real" micro-offices is that a lot of SMBs don't own the physical property, and instead they rent. These properties often have drop ceilings, so even if the "walls" of the office(s) hit the ceiling, sound would still very easily travel up and over (and removing the drop ceilings is expensive/hard).

Companies had an alternative: Cubicles.

They were modular, relatively inexpensive, and gave the experience of an office but without needing building work or cooperation with the landlord. But people "hated" those and companies that utilised them were seen as dinosaurs (see the movie Office Space). Then a few companies did open plan, and every said they were young, forward thinking, and trendy so of course a bunch of companies are going to follow suit...

Ultimately micro-offices would be wonderful, but they have practical and cost problems. Plus let us not forget fire codes. That alone can dictate how an office will be laid out (so fire exits are visible, etc).

<comment><USER34> Wouldn't micro offices block out natural light? I know many developers thrive in the dark, but I can not work without sunlight for long. Even with vitamin D supplements I start feeling lethargic and mentally down, which has major performance implications for both how I interact with coworkers, my creativity and how much I can get done. Surely I'm not the only person who experiences this?

<comment><USER35> So the co-working Space Wework uses glass dividers for their offices to allow for interior offices with natural light

Didn't find great pics but here's a GIS [https://www.google.com/search?q=We+Work+Offices&espv=2&biw=1...](https://www.google.com/search?q=We+Work+Offices&espv=2&biw=1152&bih=1211&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=OjmIVeXlKILjoASo06bQDQ&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAg&dpr=1)

<comment><USER36> Mmm, fishbowls.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I HATE open offices, but man is this article full of absolute nonsense. I mean that in a very literal way -- it has lots of stuff that can not be made sense of because it lacks context or any actual meaning.

> I stress to my patients and the parents of my patients that if you can't > hear anything going on around you when listening to headphones, the decibel > level is too high.

This is just stupid. It ignores type of headphone entirely. IEMs like the ER-4P ([https://www.etymotic.com/consumer/earphones/er4.html](https://www.etymotic.com/consumer/earphones/er4.html)) have insane noise isolation (up to 42 dB). When using them, I can't hear someone talking to me, standing right next to me, with no music! They physical block the ear canal and create a seal blocking outside noise.

> As a rule of thumb, you should only use [personal audio] devices at levels > up to 60% of maximum volume for a total of 60 minutes a day. The louder the > volume, the shorter your duration should be. At maximum volume, you should > listen for only about five minutes a day.

Again, idiotic. "60%" is entirely meaningless. It might as well be "Don't listen above FALASFDABURAGA". Headphones vary in sensitivity vastly, on some sets of IEMs -- 60% would be ear bleeding, deafeningly, painfully loud. On a high impedance, low sensitivity set of big headphones, 60% is a whisper. As a "rule of thumb" all it does is reinforce that the person who gave that quote is an idiot.

> If you listen to music with earbuds or headphones at levels that block out > normal discourse, you are in effect dealing lethal blows to the hair cells > in your ears.

... again, quotes from people who have no understanding that there are different types of headphones. MAYBE you could claim with fully open headphones this to be the case... but what is the level of "discourse"... _sigh_. Again, literally nonsense because it is impossible to make sense of...

> ... Music Is Distracting (entire section) ...

There exists multiple categories of music WITHOUT WORDS! Shocking I know. Most developers I know listen to these types of music because, lyrics are distracting. That isn't a cut against headphones.

> ... Feeling of Vulnerability ...

Getting to some sad points. Again, I hate open office plans, but come on -- really -- the feeling of vulnerability being caused by headphones? It is caused by an open office layout.

<comment><USER38> "This is just stupid. It ignores type of headphone entirely. "

It sounds pretty smart to me. What else is the doctor supposed to do? Until the silly Beats craze took off, one could have made a statement like that and it would have been accurate for >99% of headphones users. Assuming that the user is listening to the pack-in IEMs (or IEMs with a very similar profile) plugged into a phone or iPod would have been a safe assumption. Sure, an office full of tech geeks won't match, but for the general population of headphone wearers?

And if your phones are more or less sensitive, comparing against pack-in IEMs into an iPod or phone is probably the best way that consumers have of comparing levels.

There probably was such a statement in the original source, but it was probably (rightfully) dropped by the reporters because it would have just confused people

"There exists multiple categories of music WITHOUT WORDS!"

I find such music is also very distracting. I find good symphonic music much more interesting than boring Pop music. Interesting -> distracting.

" the feeling of vulnerability being caused by headphones? It is caused by an open office layout."

IMO, the feeling of vulnerability is caused by the combination of headphones and open layout. Normally you can tell people are behind you because you hear them. If you can't hear them, then you get freaked out and feel vulnerable.

<comment><USER24> > I find such music is also very distracting. I find good symphonic music much > more interesting than boring Pop music. Interesting -> distracting.

So find some boring (or at least repetetive/uninteresting) instrumental music.

<comment><USER38> I'd rather immerse myself in hot oil.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> As someone with a life long case of VERY serious, diagnosed, and treated ADHD, one that is exacerbated by noise (I also have an auditory processing disorder); I often feel I have to take myself out of the running for any job in an open plan office.

Theoretically the Americans with Disabilities Act would allow me to ask for accommodation for this. Practically speaking, my coaches tell me never to ask for it, as employers don't get it and think you're making excuses.

But the fact is, I do have a disability and it's the cognitive equivalent of asking a person in a wheelchair to use steps to get to work.

And as an introvert, I find offices exhausting, the constant demand to be "On" is not only distracting but productivity limiting--especially pointless meetings where I have to work very hard to manage my limited attention span.

Yet another example of how silicon valley culture works for a tiny sliver of the population.

working from home is the best solution. I never go to a coffee shop--even that is too distracting. I schedule meetings with clients in chunks of time that are better for me (afternoons vs my very precious productive mornings) and I batch them so I'm not constantly context switching.

PS I'm not a developer--so you devs aren't the only ones suffering! Good writing and marketing needs thinking time too!

</comment><comment><USER40>
      "[Noise Cancelling Headphones] So while it may work to cancel the noise
      of your office air conditioner, it's powerless against the voices of your co-workers
      (the real noise you'd want to cancel in an office environment)."

Um, this doesn't match my experience at all. My Bose noise cancelling headphones[1] are really effective at cancelling conversations.

Not completely cancelling mind you, but All-But-Cancelling.

You are playing music then too which further removes the voices, and you can play at a much lower volume for similar block-out-effects.

This does lead to some hilarious Boss-at-Shoulder moments when they have come to get your attention.

[1] [https://www.bose.co.uk/GB/en/home-and-personal- audio/headpho...](https://www.bose.co.uk/GB/en/home-and-personal- audio/headphones-and-headsets/acoustic-noise-cancelling- headphones/quietcomfort-20-headphones-apple/)

<comment><USER41> Still not a replacement for silence. Do you find your ears becoming fatigued over the day?

<comment><USER42> I have the same model (QC20i). Ears do not get fatigued. Impressive technology to be honest, didn't think they were that effective before I used them. I do agree that it's not a solution, but probably the best way to adapt.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> Wear earplugs and then put your over the ears headphones over them. The sound of your music should still get through (mostly from around the ear, through your skull). I do that with classical music and it makes the music sounds like it's coming from very far. It's very zen. Like sitting in the void while having music come to you from a distant area.

<comment><USER44> You shouldn't be using earplugs, though - I take it you're talking about something you actually put inside your ear. If you ask your doctor, they'll tell you never to put anything in your ear that's smaller than your elbow (I think it's an in-joke in the medical profession ;-)

<comment><USER45> > _If you ask your doctor, they 'll tell you never to put anything in your ear > that's smaller than your elbow_

I'm pretty sure doctors in general are not opposed to the use of earplugs. Doctors don't want you putting things like Q-Tips into your ears, because it's really easy to irritate the ear canal or worse accidentally puncture your ear drum. Ear plugs don't carry much risk (no chance of hitting the ear drum unless you're shoving them in with a stick, and should be gentle enough on the ear canal), and they are a very good idea if you're going to be exposed to loud noises. Good ear plugs can block as much noise as good earmuffs.

Doctors themselves (or their technicians) will put earplugs into your ears if they need to block noise, e.g., for an MRI or a hearing test.

<comment><USER43> That being said, the cheap cylindrical ones will get stuck in your ear canal if pushed too far.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> > Side Note: Noise-Cancelling Headphones

What I've seen done by e-sports events such as WCS is to use earphones _in combination_ with mufflers[1] to cut out the live spectator noise - yes the ones they use on a rifle range.

I can vouch that such a solution works as my room mate in residence would watch series up until ungodly hours of the morning: wearing no-name rifle range ear mufflers eliminated enough (broad-spectrum) noise to allow me to sleep with no issues whatsoever; I would assume it would cut out enough noise for concentration (given that they go as far as reducing the sounds of _gun fire_ ) - even without adding music to the equation.

[1]: [http://catalogue.3m.eu/en_ZA/PPESafetyProducts/Ear_Plugs_and...](http://catalogue.3m.eu/en_ZA/PPESafetyProducts/Ear_Plugs_and_Ear_Muffs/Passive_Ear_Muffs/Peltor%E2%84%A2~Optime%E2%84%A2_III~Ear_Muffs~nocode) \- this specific model is frequently seen in WCS.

<comment><USER47> Noise Reduction technology works great.

I use my Sony Walkman with noise reduction and no music to calm down my environment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> "There are permanent physical consequences from prolonged headphone use. The effects accrue gradually, and as such people don't notice that it's happening."

You don't have to actually drown out the ambient noise; you just have to put enough sound that you control into it such that your brain is lulled into ignoring the totality of sound around you.

"People conflate the positive psychological effects of creating a cocoon of their favorite sounds in an environment of noise they can't control with positive effects on their productivity."

The effects ARE positive, RELATIVE to the plain noisy environment they're stuck in. When I have an actually quiet workspace, I have no music playing at all, or at best something very, very low and without lyrics.

<comment><USER49> > You don't have to actually drown out the ambient noise; you just have to put > enough sound that you control into it such that your brain is lulled into > ignoring the totality of sound around you.

That depends on who is using the headphones. I can't not pay attention to any sound I hear. My brain is very good at filtering discrete signals out of backgrounds.

</comment></comment><comment><USER50> I've found Music for Programming's mixes to be pretty good.

[http://musicforprogramming.net/](http://musicforprogramming.net/)

Dream Chimney's mixes on soundcloud also.

[https://soundcloud.com/the-dream-chimney](https://soundcloud.com/the-dream- chimney)

In general, something classical, ambient, or minimal techno fits the bill.

<comment><USER51> Music for Programming has some interesting stuff, but personally, I need to systematically avoid anything with lyrics to have a hope of being productive while listening.

<comment><USER52> ...?

I could be wrong, but the vast majority of MfP doesn't have lyrics. It's all atmospheric, vague, kinda droning music.

[http://musicforprogramming.net/?c=aesthetic](http://musicforprogramming.net/?c=aesthetic)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> I'm personally more or less a fan of open offices, but the noise really is a problem and unfortunate -- I wish the social convention were to treat an open office like a library, and louder conversations happened in private offices.

In the meantime, I find that using ear-plugging headphones alone with some ear-muffs (for like construction work) over the top of the head, without actual music, is reasonably effective at stopping sound.

<comment><USER27> > I'm personally more or less a fan of open offices, but the noise really is a > problem and unfortunate -- I wish the social convention were to treat an > open office like a library, and louder conversations happened in private > offices.

Then what's the point of open offices outside of penny-pinching?

<comment><USER53> Personally, I just enjoy the feeling of being around other people. I worked in a private office in my first job out of college, and found it a bit lonely. In college, most things got done in libraries or coffee shops or in small gatherings of students or in computer labs, and it worked well. It wasn't like people were completely silent, but there was an understanding you wouldn't be distractingly loud, which isn't a social norm that seems to exist with open offices, for whatever reason.

<comment><USER27> Offices doesn't have to mean singles, 2x or 4x are pretty common and a significant improvement on open office with respect to noise and disruptions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER54> Just leaving this here:

[https://www.somewhere.com/suttree/sparks/30629](https://www.somewhere.com/suttree/sparks/30629)

The Isolator device looks amazing, better than headphones.

<comment><USER16> It's like your own private office!

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> this quote is basically it: _Music Is Distracting_

So, as someone who was taught from a young age that only one medium at one time was allowed, open plan offices are a pain in the tits for me.

I used to sit next to a bloke who play wonderful music, but it never stopped. Trying to debug anything complex was impossible.

Ultimately the only real way I could get round it was to use these: [http://www.koss.com/en/products/headphones/full_size_headpho...](http://www.koss.com/en/products/headphones/full_size_headphones/QZ99__QZ99_Full_Size_Headphones) This blocked out most of the noise.

To get over the last bit of detail I used a white noise generator: [http://mynoise.net/NoiseMachines/rainNoiseGenerator.php](http://mynoise.net/NoiseMachines/rainNoiseGenerator.php) (worth the support fee)

Now, this is still noise, but its constant and easily ignored.

<comment><USER56> It would have been a good article to help champion the cause of "don't tell me I have to use headphones to work here", if not for the "music is distracting" point IMHO.

Music is sometimes _orienting_. A decent steady BPM can keep you going through even boring slogs without getting distracted sometimes.

That all being said, having to listen to music, having to decide on what to listen to, and not being able to achieve quiet when you don't want music, that's a problem.

It's wrong to say you HAVE to listen to music. It's great to listen to when you want to, but having to listen to it all day because you can't stand the noise can be rather oppressive.

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> I work in a 4 people office and already feel it's too noisy, too many people walking behind me etc. Maybe other people are smarter than me, but for me it's not a work environment if I should develop software. But my pay is not connected to my performance so I don't have much to complain about.

<comment><USER5> Have you ever considered working remotely?

<comment><USER57> I have, my management hasn't. In theory it's no problem but if you miss the meetings you are basically screwed.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER58> Bring back the cubicles. Open offices are done not for collaboration and openness, but done to save money

<comment><USER59> Which is why they are so ironic. Most open-offices reduce employee's sense of privacy, motivation and has tons of other negative effects. What began as a money saving scheme ends up costing more to the company, but goes completely unnoticed by those who initiated the change.

</comment></comment><comment><USER60> "Just wear headphones" is the new "Just hit delete."

<comment><USER61> Wow, what an insightful metaphor. Referring to that noise as _spam_ (which it is) or a huge "Reply all" chain might get the message across.

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> I completely agree, especially about the feeling of vulnerability. It's apparently something that not everyone experiences, but there's no way I'm going to wear something that removes my ability to hear someone walking up behind me.

</comment><comment><USER63> I've carefully tuned my use of headphones and music to my preferences and to minimize distractions. Here's my list:

        1. Earbuds that block sound, or over-the-ear headphones that block sound
        2. Nothing with lyrics. Voices are distracting. I'm really just here for the
           noise that's not other humans having a conversation.
        3. Use a streaming service that tailors the music to my preferences.
           Pandora was my favorite, but I'm currently on Spotify. I don't have to
           curate my own lists and I still get music that's all similar and not
           distracting. It usually ends up being trance-like. Anything "jammin" or
           "fun" is indeed distracting.

What I'm not getting here is how the generalization "music is a distraction" is justified. Was a large sample of music types used?

As for "being watched," I'm not particularly ashamed of my work habits. I do indeed post to HN (in case you didn't notice), read news, read comics (oh, forgot to catch up on those this morning...), keep up with my online peers, ... and I work. Watch me all day if you like. I'd prefer that you also get work done, though.

</comment><comment><USER64> Hearing "just wear headphones" would mean I'd resign the same day.

</comment><comment><USER65> > Music is Distracting

Sometimes, the right kind of distraction is good. Even if having no distractions gives me the _opportunity_ to have acute concentration on the subject, in practice, having the right kinds of distractions really do help me reach peak productivity.

If I don't have music or background noise of some kind, my mind wanders and I never really reach that "acute concentration" point anyways. But I work best with the right kind of music -- or even a TV show that's _just interesting enough_ to be background noise (without capturing all of my attention).

That said, the wrong kinds of distractions truly are too distracting. The study mentioned that music with lyrics is more distracting; I know that my favorite songs (generally 70s classic rock) really do grab my attention away from work sometimes. Music where the words are unintelligible and fade into the sounds or music without words actually works a lot better. Also, obviously a really captivating TV show will definitely hurt productivity.

</comment><comment><USER66> I found this article to be worthless. I work in an open office that is fairly noisy. Although we in this area are mostly separated from the call center people (there is only one in this section, probably due to seniority), but there are some developers who are frequently loud, horsing around with nerf guns, etc. My Shure IEMs block all of this easily. People around me have conversations about which headphones they should buy, I show them mine, and then they come back and say they want something with noise-canceling but that doesn't go in their ears. Sorry, you want water that isn't wet, and it can't be helped. Scared about having your back to the unknown? Get over it; it's a personal fear that is able to be corrected. I used to be overly self-self- conscious, but no longer. The One way, which is what worked for me, is to do absolutely nothing distracting while at work. Ant website I view for more than a minute is work-related in some small way and I have no reservations about doing that for as long as I want. Right now I'm typing into a black screen that is not echoing anything that I type back to me, so anyone passing by me is only going to see what appears to be me pretending to type. Let them think that, it doesn't matter to me. A guy to my left just views time-wasting websites all day, every day. He would be the first-fire if I had any say in this, but I don't care about him. Back to the headphones... All of these things that could be described as "earbuds" are junk. They don't seal the ear canal, so you don't get sound isolation, then I would assume if there was noise in the environment's, you would be forced to crank up the volume to compensate. I am listening to classical music from a streaming playlist that is running from an mpd server on my home computer through my phone (unlimited data). There is no distraction, as I have pruned this playlist of opera and . Lyrical music and hip-hop is good, but too much of it and you get the tape loops in your mind that can be distracting.

</comment><comment><USER67> For these reasons I have been using ear muffs (similar to the ones you would use for lawn mowing). Currently I am using Howard Leight Sync. It's basically an "over the ear" ear plug when it's not on. You can also use them as poor quality headphones.

It gets hot, but it seems to be one of the best solutions I have found.

</comment><comment><USER68> I use earplugs. They are cheap, comfortable e doesn't damage your ears. I started to use them when there was some construction work in my street. But I started to like it so much that now I use them on the plane, the bus, to sleep, and to work. 3M sells some cheap ones: [http://solutions.3m.co.uk/wps/portal/3M/en_GB/PPE_SafetySolu...](http://solutions.3m.co.uk/wps/portal/3M/en_GB/PPE_SafetySolutions_EU/Safety/FeaturedProducts/EAR_Classic_Earplugs/)

The problems are: People won't notice you are using it, and start talking to you from your back. That's a sure way to get weird looking faces from your colleagues.

</comment><comment><USER69> It's extraordinarily presumptuous to suggest that headphones are an answer for many/most people. Fact is a lot of people do not like wearing headphones or listening to music/audio while working.

</comment><comment><USER70> How would you even get "offices for everyone" as a 10 to 200 person growing startup these days (in SF or Seattle)? An open-plan space and then TI to build out offices? Find some 1940s non-tech building and rent there in multiple floors?

"Office with a door" would be worth $20-30k/yr in salary and $50-100k/yr in productivity to me as an employee/user, but on the supply side, it would be challenging to provide.

<comment><USER71> There are a lot of options:

1) Put your office in a lower income area (maybe not completely desirable, but not everyone has to be in the heart of NYC or SF)

2) Let some or all employees work from home. Especially the loud ones! I don't mean specific people, of course, but some jobs are just loud: customer support, sales, operators, etc.. usually the loud jobs are awesome at-home jobs, as well! Customer support is almost always remote support anyway.

3) Restructure. Many of these companies that can't put everyone in an office have huge or multiple offices for their executive staff. I knew a company where one of the co-owner's offices was as big as the tech room which had 12 desks! The conference room was twice as big as this, and barely used!

</comment></comment><comment><USER72> Hey I have a better idea! Let's just wrap each person in thick, acoustically impenetrable foam. Then our open office plan will be a complete success.

</comment><comment><USER73> All decent points, but I'm perplexed how the author acts/implies that all programmers are going to be listening to "pop songs" or songs with lyrics.

I am completely unsurprised that there are studies showing lyrics interfere with concentration--I've been avoiding them while working for years. I've even chosen usernames in some music-systems reflecting the fact.

</comment><comment><USER74> I wear earplugs on a regular basis and they are great for drowning out excessive noise. I do remove them off and on, especially if I'm in a meeting with someone or if I have to hop on a call.

If I don't wear them, I tend to get distracted and irritated by various sounds. Now, you can still hear things, but they are dampened which is soothing for me at least.

<comment><USER75> I have chronic ear infections and pain because of earplugs overuse. But I have no choice, some sounds literally drive me crazy, yes, literally.

</comment></comment><comment><USER76> I got to know how music retards your reflexes by playing a reaction time test.

Just try the humanbenchmark.com reaction time test with and without music. When you're listening to music your reaction times will always be higher.

That's when I realized that I listening to music could be counter productive. Maybe some ambient rain noise or something would be ideal.

</comment><comment><USER77> I have glass at the top 1/4 of my cubical walls. They happen to be angled in such a way that I pretty much get 360 view of the office. The reflection is soft enough that it's not as distracting as a solid mirror would be. I feel, at least for me, this solves the feeling of vulnerability with or without headphones in.

</comment><comment><USER78> "Science says we're full of it. Listening to music hurts our ability to recall other stimuli, and any pop song -- loud or soft -"

Not very useful article if they assume I'm gonna be listening to pop music. If the writer didn't even care to talk about other types of music this is basically a very poor written post.

</comment><comment><USER79> >If you listen to music with earbuds or headphones at levels that block out normal discourse, you are in effect dealing lethal blows to the hair cells in your ears.

I can not have normal discourse with my headphones on, even if they're off. And these are just a pair of normal over-ear headphones (DT-770's).

</comment><comment><USER16> The past year I just got an office and so happy I have my back to a wall. The amount of stress from people walking behind me was getting too much to take.

I tend to find it funny that management that proposes the Open Office idea tend to be the ones who are in offices.

</comment><comment><USER80> A pair of Bose QC25's has been my most objectively productive purchase this last year. I highly recommend anyone in an open plan office to buy some, or something like them - they're expensive but worth every cent.

<comment><USER59> I find it odd that it's up to employees to fix the toxic work environment of the employers, especially when we need to cash out hundreds of dollars.

<comment><USER80> Well, I agree, but I think that horse has bolted long ago. The article discusses the risk of extended loud listening with headphones, which employees buy themselves (I've never heard of an employer buying headphones).

My point was that as long as you're buying headphones anyway, buy some good noise-cancelling ones, and you'll mitigate a lot of the risks in the article. It does suck that it's on employees to do this, but here we are.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER81> I end up wearing ear plugs inside of headphones to block out the noise. Sometimes I wear both because I'm afraid of hearing loss. But it's uncomfortable. I just feel like I have a stuffy sinus.

</comment><comment><USER82> WFH + Open plans are great and should generally be encouraged. The open plan facilitates communications and general discussion. I encourage my team to spend at least 3 days a week at work during our 'core' time (12-5pm/MWF). It gets a bit noisy and productivity drops a bit, but team morale is good and there is a lot of cross pollination of ideas and knowledge. The only difficulty I've had is nearby teams haven't adopted this approach (they don't WFH) so we have to be careful about our volume level when we're in the office.

<comment><USER14> How do open plan offices facilitate communicating if everyone is wearing headphones with music cracked up all day? And if you're promoting WFH, then pepper should be using something like email or chat, which means that open plan is unnecessary.

And have you actually done any studies to prove that the cross pollination actually harkens, or does anything?

<comment><USER82> Wearing headphones while in the open space is antithesis to our team. No one does it. Random interruptions at work are expected and even encouraged. I have not done any studies at all except to privately ask the team during 1:1s if they like it, and they do. In this market where engineers are hard to keep, I prioritize morale over productivity.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER83> [http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bio-Ears-Silicone-EarPlugs- Protectio...](http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bio-Ears-Silicone-EarPlugs- Protection/dp/B0013HGG0C/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1434990081&sr=8-3&keywords=silicon+earplugs)

Used these for years to help me sleep (I have insomnia and the slightest background noise wakes me up).

They also work brilliantly at cutting out background noise when I'm trying to focus (even use them at home if I have the windows open), silence is golden!.

</comment><comment><USER84> Go on, find me a single non-open plan employer (I live in the UK). I still remember the times when people had offices, it was fantastic.

</comment><comment><USER85> Now to be fair I am in favor of giving employees isolated rooms to work in, however the reality is that at small startups they simply cannot afford that kind of office space. If you're concerned about noise and also the loudness of music playing in headphones, you can always get what construction workers use to block out noise:

[http://www.homedepot.com/p/Howard-Leight-Thunder-T3-Noise- Bl...](http://www.homedepot.com/p/Howard-Leight-Thunder-T3-Noise-Blocking- Dielectric-Headband- Earmuffs-1010970/203066856?cm_mmc=Shopping%7cBase&gclid=CLSUo6G2o8YCFdcSHwodwA8AGw&gclsrc=aw.ds)

They look pretty intense but it's certainly one way to solve the problem.

<comment><USER86> " the reality is that at small startups they simply cannot afford that kind of office space."

But I bet small startups could afford to let employees work from home a couple days a week.

<comment><USER87> Or four and a half days a week.

Actually, any startup that chooses new open-office workspaces over secondhand cubicles solely for reasons of cost might also want to consider moving to a location with cheaper office space leases. Even $5/sq.ft. is too high for a startup, regardless of the workspace furniture.</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: My task & time management app - <AUTHOR> http://goalstacker.com

<comment><USER2> Alex, the site and app look great. Since your Twitter stream indicates that the site has been up for 6+ months, I'm curious if you can share any information about your personal vs. business signups?

I may be completely off-base, but after seeing all of the features you have to offer, my intial thought was you'd be better off positioning the app for professional teams instead of individuals.</comment>


Ori – Robotic transformation of interior spaces - <AUTHOR> http://orisystems.com/#welcome-home <comment> david-given From Andrew Plotkin's _Left Foot Living_ , an arts review pamphlet set in the future:

\---snip---

Blind Spot Storage Solutions are selling a space management tool which is -- well, certainly the most efficient we've ever heard of. It's based on the "subliminal" solutions, which create an illusionary ceiling a few inches below your real one, leaving several cubic meters of space for additional storage. But Blind Spot goes far beyond that.

You tag all your possessions; and then the tool simply keeps them out of sight. Everywhere out of sight. Walk out of a room, and it will be immediately and silently packed with books, boxes, chotchkes, and whatever else you've tagged as "in storage". Go down the hall; just before you pass each doorway, the room beyond it will be siphoned free of detritus -- which will be packed elsewhere, leaving the room just as you expect it.

The ceiling space is used for both storage and transport. Objects are whisked up into the ceiling, yanked around your living space, pulled down into efficient pile-ups. Protective fields ward everything against friction, acceleration, impact. More fields pump air around and baffle currents, preventing the explosive winds and supersonic lashings that would otherwise occur.

You never see any of this. If you stand in the center of a room and turn around slowly, a tide of bric-a-brac is crawling behind you -- just beyond your peripheral vision, and from the walls to an inch from your back. Whip your head around, and it's gone. Moved. Just out of sight.

The catch is reflections, of course. And shadows. Blind Spot strongly recommends that you tag mirrors, and anything polished. Also light sources. The tool can fake in reflections and light beams, if it knows to. If it doesn't, you'd better have nerves of steel.

Not even slightly compatible with owning pets.

\---snip---

[http://www.eblong.com/zarf/review/review-37.html](http://www.eblong.com/zarf/review/review-37.html). No date, alas, but posted years ago.

</comment><comment><USER2> "robotic" part seems to be pure clickbait. From robotic you would expect something that would act autonomously. This one doesn't even seem to be automatic - requiring one to push a button or use some app to control it at the distance.

Then again, that latter part looks scary - can somebody push the button in app to close the bed while you're sleeping? Hopefully there are some sensors to detect whether it's safe to perform the moving.

...in case there are such sensors, it might actually be properly robotic. Unfortunately no information about safety of this all is not given.

<comment><USER3> I'm guessing it is simply too weak to be able to move if someone is on it.

<comment><USER4> I hope not. I could easily imagine wanting to store things summing to more than my own weight in there given the amount of space available.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> As someone that lives in the Southern US, all I can think about is the number of spiders that would live in the cubby the bed slides into.

<comment><USER6> And just like that, all interest I had in this product vanished.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> "Sorry, I can't come into the office today, my bedroom crashed and all my clothes are stuck inside it."

I remember seeing some prior art somewhere. Oh yeah, found it:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Io5_CBPjJ6M](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Io5_CBPjJ6M)

</comment><comment><USER8> I like the idea, but I get wary at the thought of getting home at 3 AM (perhaps with company) and finding out that the bed extruding mechanism has failed... It seems the robotic part is a bit overkill, couldn't it just as well be mechanical/manual?

<comment><USER9> "And remember, always leave the bed out before going to a party. ;-)"

<comment><USER10> Now to make it truly robotic. Hook it up to calendar etc, and have it figure out that if you go out after business hours and/or weekend, it should automatically ready the bed.

Only step up then is virtual butler mode, where you can text ahead about bringing guest(s) or similar.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> That was a really confusing website to me. Lots of pictures and none that really explained what it did. The main important piece is the video in the middle, but that don't look like a video unless you pass your mouse over it. And with a slow network connection, it didn't happen to be animated as I scrolled by so I didn't notice it until the second pass.

It appears to require a hard floor and I wonder if it would make grooves in the floor after a while.

<comment><USER12> Thanks for the warning! For others in the same situation, the direct link to the diagrammatic rendering video which best shows how it works is:

[https://player.vimeo.com/video/174233048/?autoplay=1&loop=1&...](https://player.vimeo.com/video/174233048/?autoplay=1&loop=1&automute=0&api=1)

It's just a piece of forniture that moves side-to-side with electric motors when you push the switches.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Yeah, remove the motorized part and it's a nice idea. I like multipurpose furniture and rooms. But the maintenance overhead is too much, unless you really, really need to save those 1-3 minutes on switching from bedroom to office...

<comment><USER14> Agreed - I've seen other demo videos of similar furniture that can be converted by just one person - a smaller build female person to boot. IMO engineering something with clever cantilevers so that pre teen kids etc. can manipulate them is far preferable to an electronic motor having to do it.

(PS: Don't know if it is just my boarding house training from 30 years ago kicking in, but I was horrified to see the girl in the video didn't make the bed before the hid it underneath the main structure!) :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> This concept is often used to expand storage space, where the storage shelves slide sideways. While there are electrically powered systems for long aisles, here's a much simpler system from Uline.[1]

If you wanted to build something like Ori, minus the "robotic" part, you could just order the track and rollers from Uline, and build cabinetry out of Ikea parts atop a Uline base.

Business opportunity: write an app to design such things, visualize them, and order the parts. Like Autodesk Kitchen Designer, which does kitchen cabinet planning.

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Moumo_m5G_8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Moumo_m5G_8)

<comment><USER15> A minimum viable product in this space would be a home office. With the unit in the open position, there's a home office with shelves and cabinets on both sides. Roll it into the closed position, and there's a living room with a deep shelving unit.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> So it's basically this guy's transforming Hong Kong apartment. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WB2-2j9e4co](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WB2-2j9e4co)

<comment><USER15> That guy is really good. It's simple and very well done.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> An extreme version of this is the amazing "transformer" flat design by a Hong Kong architect:

[https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Rm-GpEis5uc](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Rm- GpEis5uc)

</comment><comment><USER18> Design seems similar to [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYV0qATsyts](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYV0qATsyts)

</comment><comment><USER19> Really cool product presented beautifully. But perhaps from being a security engineer, I wish it would say anything at all about how they're going to ensure a 16 year old kid can't pwn me from the internet and crush things -- here's praying it can't crush people.

I've just started getting into the whole smarthome thing, it worries me how hard it is to get information about security characteristics or even standards enforcement for these (which appear to be mostly non-existent).

I wish the public were more inclined to ask the question of 'but how is it secured?' when examining something to be placed in their home.

</comment><comment><USER20> Hallowed are the Ori

<comment><USER21> I feel guilty saying I was looking for this...

<comment><USER22> I was about to say it. Expected a massive down-vote though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Not a particularly new concept, a variation on murphy beds. And as others have pointed out the 'robotic' title is not really appropriate. I am curious though if people find the design ethos in the furniture appealing. While I like the practical and cost effective nature of IKEA type simple design I don't find it particularly aesthetically appealing.

</comment><comment><USER24> > Guided by the principal

It's "principle" in this case.

[http://www.elearnenglishlanguage.com/blog/english- mistakes/p...](http://www.elearnenglishlanguage.com/blog/english- mistakes/principal-vs-principle/)

</comment><comment><USER25> Hmm page doesn't show anything apart from the footer and header for me on Firefox nightly...

<comment><USER26> same on FF 47 :(

<comment><USER26> Found it! The "HTTPS Everywhere" add-on causes this (may have something to do with CORS as well).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Putting small motors into furniture now counts as "robotic"? Are we in a new bubble?!

</comment><comment><USER28> What keeps it from crushing you while you sleep?

<comment><USER29> Or smooshing you into the wall? Or just pinching your hand when you bend over to get something that fell under the bed?

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Apropos, as I just sold my house and am moving into a 1BR apartment. My plan was to slowly encase myself in machinery and assistants and diffuse outwards.

I have this semi-related vision of mobile furniture locomoting from one apartment to the next, during a move, like something out of Fantasia.

</comment><comment><USER31> I guess when bioengineering finally(?) takes off, we'll eventually end up with [http://dune.wikia.com/wiki/Chairdogs](http://dune.wikia.com/wiki/Chairdogs)

<comment><USER13> > except without needing electricity or computerization.

And what would it run on? power of imagination? heh

<comment><USER32> dog food and water

<comment><USER13> exactly... it would shit! :D

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Oh, good. I didn't have enough maintenance problems to worry about already.

</comment><comment><USER34> Nice, a modern Cabanon ([http://www.tinyhousedesign.com/le-corbusiers- cabanon/](http://www.tinyhousedesign.com/le-corbusiers-cabanon/)).

</comment><comment><USER35> It seems a step in the right direction, but I would really like to see a solution for the kitchen embedded in it... I can't imagine myself going out to eat everyday.

</comment><comment><USER36> So, like a fancy version of a Murphy bed?

</comment><comment><USER37> The tyranny of space.

</comment><comment><USER38> particle board ftw!

</comment><comment><USER39> price not listed.</comment>


Revamped Humvee Draws Military's Eye - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/23/business/humvee-with-chimney-for-safety-draws-militarys-interest.html

<comment><USER2> What a brilliant piece of non-obvious design. Who would have thought that putting a huge hole through the middle of a vehicle would make it better at withstanding a bomb blast?

<comment><USER3> So now we have to deal with maimed soldiers coming home instead of killed ones? That's not the kind of kickass solution I expect from the most powerful military on the planet on the subject of "light vehicles getting blowed up by people putting bombs under the roads".

Require a senator to travel in one of those vehicles in the war zone and the "Put a huge hole in the top" idea wouldn't go over so well. It would be replaced by a pontificating senator analyzing why we are waging war like retards.

<comment><USER4> well i think those soldiers would appreciate the opportunity to have a slightly better chance of surviving, even if they end up injured. i'd rather be hurt and living than dead.

<comment><USER5> I don't know if your statement applies to all soldiers universally. Or even to all injuries. I think it depends on the person and what happened to them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> If the blast is right under the vehicle, I can see how this could work... but if it's on one of the corners, say the right front tire, wouldn't the entire vehicle get flipped or thrown violently?

<comment><USER7> That is what the v hull is for; it directs the blast outward. You would lose the tire, wheel, and possibly axle, and could get a mobility kill on the vehicle, but they train for that and go with multiple trucks (more if it is more dangerous; there were places with a six truck night minimum, which was scary for me in a single unarmored 1990s BMW sedan with a 9mm...). Other vehicles radio in, cover the downed truck, may ram/push it out of the way, or tow, or crossload. The big concerns are secondary ieds, triggered after the response begins (so people out of the vehicles), or a ground assault (uncommon, and rarely effective. One truck with a .50 up top can basically hold its own.)

Traumatic Brain Injury, concussion, etc from overpressure or being thrown around is possible, but everyone is wearing armor and helmets, and there is a lot of mass in the vehicle, so if you can get rid of most of the energy of an ied, and keep people from being pierced by anything, it is probably enough. The big risk in ieds is massive bleeding; enough that military first aid prioritizes bleeding control ("massive hemorrhage" in MARCH vs. ABC); usually this is from a limb being blown off, since the torso is well armored).

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I wonder how this will affect maneuverability inside the vehicle. If Generation Kill is accurate at all, it seems like they get kinda cramp already.

But still, cool! Though I can't help but giggle at the device meant to drop the gunner... seems like a mechanism that someone will use for pranking.

<comment><USER9> Oh, they're pretty cramped. (As a Marine, I can tell you Generation Kill was pretty good.)

Actually, I would be more concerned about a tendency to rollover just by looking at it. When the armored ones first came out there were a bunch of accidents because they were so much heavier at the top that they tended to rollover more often.

We all had to take an off road class to drive them. :-)

<comment><USER10> Do you mind elaborating? I've ridden in the civilian Hummer, and the passengers in the back seat were so far apart they could barely touch each other if they stuck out their arms. What makes it cramped? Equipment?

<comment><USER9> Yeah, mostly stuff you wear. They're nice and comfy if you don't happen to be wearing body armor, your weapon, a pack, food for a day, camelback, etc.

Every time a door opens you see Marines and all the gear that was stuffed in there pour out. The hmmwv is spacious, but Marines typically wear at least their body weight in gear. Nothing is ever really comfortable except lying on your back or standing...

<comment><USER7> There is also the guy standing in the middle of the 4 seats, plus all the ammo boxes, brass, radios, blue force tracker (2 way gps; shows position of friendly units on a map), etc. Rarely found on the civilian h1.

I did like how body armor and Kevlar made it easier to sleep on rough surfaces (gravel, vehicles, benches, concrete walls, ...)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Why Can't Microsoft Make Money Online? - <AUTHOR> http://money.cnn.com/2008/11/25/technology/Microsoft-Google_lashinsky.fortune/index.htm <comment><USER2> Really, where is the real innovation? Sure they have "big" products like .NET (if you can call that innovative), IE, Silverlight. But apart from their core OS and Office products what other products have they come up with that werent in face of competition? .NET from the whole Java kerfuffle. Silverlight in competition to Flash. Where is the originality?

i suppose what MS could want online is "A computer on every desk and in every home, running MS software and internet explorer eternally pointing to msn.com"!</comment>


The American Dream Isn't Alive in Denmark - <AUTHOR> http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/08/the-american-dream-isnt-alive-in-denmark/494141/?single_page=true <comment><USER2> It's always somewhat weird to compare countries, because mentality in each country is so very different.

For instance:

> But despite this far greater investment in young children and public > colleges, Danish children of high-school graduates are still extremely > unlikely to go onto college.

While that may be true, it's not the point. The point is you should have the option to go to college, regardless of parents background or financial status.

This bit is also a little over the top:

>Based on this finding, the researchers conclude that welfare policies may reduce college enrollment. Denmark makes it more comfortable to be poor and less lucrative to be rich, so many young people decide to end their education after high school.

The wording make it sound worse than it is. There's an extremely limited set of job you can hold in Denmark, with just a high school education. While there are certainly more "uneducated" young people in Denmark, than most of us believe, it not really a career path. It will almost certainly put you on unemployment benefits, which makes you poorer than most people care for.

It should be noted that there are also other option after high school than just college.

<comment><USER3> >>"Denmark makes it more comfortable to be poor and less lucrative to be rich, so many young people decide to end their education after high school".

> _The wording make it sound worse than it is._

Absolutely, and it's BS...

As if most people that go into university in the US get "rich".

The Danish "poor" in the sense that the article mentions (e.g. working/middle class people with no university education) make a much nicer living/lifestyle that lots of US university graduates, and with much less debt as well.

<comment><USER4> In Finland it's almost common knowledge that university is a poor guarantee for wealth. I think on average in a blue collar job you can earn more and have easier time finding one (doctors being probably the only exception).

<comment><USER5> In US its been true for a generation that doctor,lawyer,engineer are the only good-payback educations

<comment><USER6> It seems to me that at least law school has been a poor investment for nearly a generation, and medical school is trending that way.

[http://www.nalp.org/salarydistrib](http://www.nalp.org/salarydistrib)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Claiming it is all about taxes and transfers is severely twisting the facts. Look up the difference between the lowest paid workers and CEOs in nordic countries compared to the US. It is a huge difference. Our engineers make about the same as American engineers, our doctors and surgeons make significantly less and so does the CEOs. However the McDonalds workers, shop clerks etc make several times the hourly salary of an American McDonalds worker.

So mobility from the bottom to the top might be no better, but the need to do move is far less as people make decent wages across the whole spectrum. It isn't purely about money either. The lower percentage of American have significantly more problems in terms of education, knowledge, health, government influence etc than their Nordic peers.

<comment><USER8> > Claiming it is all about taxes and transfers is severely twisting the facts. > Look up the difference between the lowest paid workers and CEOs in nordic > countries compared to the US. It is a huge difference.

But that's likely due to the system of taxes and transfers. The government subsidizes low-end jobs in the form of minimum wage laws; and it makes far less sense for a company to continue to hike the pay of its CEO when 75% of that money goes directly to the government in the form of taxes.

<comment> bjelkeman-again FYI there are no minimum wage laws in the Nordic countries [1], including Denmark. But there are collective bargaining processes with unions which effectively set a minimum floor for a lot of jobs.

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

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Governments can only do so much to increase intergenerational social mobility. When I look at my peers and myself, it is obvious that it is extremely difficult to emancipate yourself from the role model that is your parents. They are not necessarily role models you follow consciously, but they determine the borders of your imagination. If your family comes from a worker's background, it is extremely hard to imagine that there might be another path in life for you - you simply follow what your kin has been doing in their lifes.

The German society can be in principle classified into three social strata: workers (factory, craftsmen etc.), office employees and academics. This comes from the strong early selection into the three-parted school system, which determines at age ten or twelve whether you have the cognitive abilities to succeed in one of these three tracks. So at age ten or twelve, you are either selected to join Hauptschule, Realschule or Gymnasium. The first school prepares you to become a worker, car mechanic, hair dresser etc. The second school prepares you to become an office employee, the third prepares you for a life of an academic. Now the twist is, that it is generally your social stratum that decides which school you attend and therefore which track you will follow, thereby perpetuating this low intergenerational social mobility for a long time. Your parents often decide that you will be going to Realschule, which is what they themselves attended - or Gymnasium when your parents are academics.

Escaping this track that was selected for you at a young age is much harder than just following it. An example: my parents followed both the second track: Realschule, then an _Ausbildung_ to become office workers. My sisters both followed this track and had therefore lives nearly identical to that of our parents. I was the only one to follow the track to become an academic, and with the lack of role models in my vicinity, this was always accompanied by self doubt and simply a lack of being self-confident in the academic environment.

Getting rid of the influence your social environment has on the borders of your imagination is the really hard part for any educational system.

<comment><USER10> To give a different view: My father was a working-class child (he is an academic). He really can't understand what the problem is: Just be very diligent in school and you will be good enough for the Gymnasium (this is the road he and in a different way his brother took). On the other hand: If you aren't very hardworking how can you even be considered as able for academic studies? In his view the problem doesn't lie in the three tracks per se, but in the fact that in many working-class families being very diligent and hardworking in school isn't valued enough. Children from academic families will much more often be drilled from childhood on to work very hard for school. He claims he has yet to see a bright child from a working-class family that works very hard for school and will not get a recommendation for Gymnasium (and because of his former job he has seen lots of children).

I also know some people who just got bored of their worker or office job and went to evening school to get their Abitur later. Again this requires being diligent and hardworking, but it is quite possible.

So I don't see the problem in the three tracks per se. Instead it is a fact that if you want to move up (or do academic studies) you better love to work very hard. And this is a behaviour that is drilled much more into the minds of children of academic families than children of working-class families.

<comment><USER9> It's not a different view, it's actually reinforcing my quintessentially banal point that parents and social environment are factors that are hard to influence by governmental policies. I'm, by the way, a similar example, having become an academic despite having a non-academic family background.

The basic question is, where did your father get his wish to become an academic from? How did he manage to maintain the belief in himself despite having no academic role models?

"diligence and hard work" is just scratching the explanatory surface.

<comment><USER10> > The basic question is, where did your father get his wish to become an > academic from?

I doubt whether he even explicitly had the wish to become an academic when he was in school. I know what kind of person my grandfather was (very obsessed on learning; also for himself) and this would answer the question. So let's imagine that my grandfather was a quite different kind of person. But in this case because he was so hardworkind (by his nurture) and sufficiently good in school about any teacher would have persuaded my grandfather into letting my father study because anything else would have been a waste.

Thus he would have given no other option. If not from my grandfather then from his teachers. And because of the latter I still stand by the point that my father made: He has yet to see a hardworking child from a working-class family that will not get a recommendation letter for Gymnasium (or a hardworking child from a working-class family that is very good in school for which the teachers would not try very hard to convince the parents to let them study).

> How did he manage to maintain the belief in himself despite having no > academic role models?

I can't even imagine why the US-Americans are so obsessed on role models (in Germany this is a word that hardly anyone uses). I had no role model: I studied mathematics and computer science and I know no person in the extended family of which I claim that he or she has an above average talent in empirical or structural sciences, is working in this area or has studied something in this direction. I studied it since I was very good in mathematics and computer science and loved these areas.

My father and my sister also had no role model (and particularly for my sister I'm _very_ sure about it).

<comment><USER9> You misunderstand my point. I wasn't really criticizing the German school system, I am fully aware that there are plenty of examples of people that did not follow in their parent's footsteps. In both ways, by the way.

The experience of your father came from your grandfather's hardworking ethos. What would have happened if your grandfather would not have instilled this in your father? What would have happened if your father would not have instilled this in you? Anyone's parent influences their kid's educational pathway in myriads of ways: are there books at home? What kinds of books? Is it mostly the TV that acts as a nanny? Are there computers, or are they computer- illiterate? Do your parents make you believe that you can choose your own path, or are they instilling you with the belief that what they have is good enough for you as well?

You have experienced examples of the first kind: a family that creates a learning environment, with the experience of your father that social strata are permeable. I have a different experience which made it much harder for me.

Maybe role model is the wrong word - instead ask yourself what kind of mental, imaginative boundaries have been nurtured by your family in you (few!) and what kind of mental boundaries have been nurtured in others, that are living the same lives as their parents despite maybe being pretty smart?

<comment><USER10> > What would have happened if your grandfather would not have instilled this > in your father?

That you pose this question rather shows that you don't understand my argument: I wanted to document that it is not that important from what class you come, but rather that hardworking, intelligent children from any class can move up.

In other words: In any class it is possible to live an acceptable life (#), thus many parents from non-academic class don't consider it as so much necessary for their child to move up in society (and (#) is actually quite good news!) in opposite to the strict necessity that my fatherly grandfather saw for his children to move up in society.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The American Dream includes things like everyone having rights and opportunities to move towards being happy and successful, not necessarily whether or not they do better than their parents or not. It seems that it is more that they do, indeed, have the opportunity to do so. Instead most folks find themselves a victim of their circumstances which takes away from opportunity. I find the entire framing of the article to be misguided. And as a sidenote, I never felt that was possible living in the US.

Then I moved to Norway. Similar to Denmark, with a lot of shared values and history, but of course there are differences. Even as an immigrant, if I work at it, I have the opportunity to become successful. The definition of success is a bit different, and it seems at the higher rungs it can take a bit more work to mirror what Americans found 'successful'. The term is very different. I most definitely have the opportunity for happiness, despite the monetary "success". It might be less important for everyone to go to college proper, even, due to some specialized training happening before folks reach 18. College depends more on if you do the work to meet the entry requirements, and if you didn't, there are still ways for you to go later on. It isn't a bad thing to work retail for the rest of your life - and you won't be as poor working such a job. A lot of this "socialism" folks complain about make it easier to reach a version of the American Dream even if you aren't 'successful' by american standards.

<comment><USER12> Best i recall, the by the time the concept was formulated, the condition for its existence was already on the way out of US society. At its core, it was reliant on the ability for anything to travel somewhere, build a house, farm the land, and then claim it as their own after a few years.

This in contrast to the situation in Europe for the same time period, where most farmers rented the land they worked, and paid either in produce or by assisting the landowner during harvest etc.

<comment><USER11> I believe you are correct. Conditions weren't great in Europe, and the states gave away land in some areas. Some meaning started to change during the 50's, I believe.

Oddly enough, the American Dream and land of opportunity sort of thing still lives in the mind of some folks that have never visited, and it would seem so in comparison to their home country.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Any discussion of economics or social mobility in Denmark that doesn't mention Janteloven is missing the mark [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante)

<comment><USER14> HN ftw once again - I live in Finland have never heard this articulated this clearly before. It's very much alive here as well (based on purely anecdotal evidence).

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> _" Denmark's economic philosophy seems to be that the market is an unfortunate socioeconomic lottery system"_

Exactly this. People born to wealthy families have literally won the socioeconomic lottery without trying.

<comment><USER16> Good looking, tall people have literally won the genetic lottery without trying.

Look at inheritance as a payment for providing happiness and support. If a wealthy man has a wife that makes him happy and supports him, then why would it be a problem if he leaves her 50% of his wealth?

Children, especially your own, are a great source of happiness and motivation. Some people work mainly to leave wealth to their children and other family members - it's their main motivation.

I don't understand people who have problems with other people giving their money to those they love (children, spouse, relatives, friends etc.).

It's kinda funny - people who are for forced redistribution at a gunpoint, want to give people money just for existing. But, if someone wants to give their own children money for existing and making them happy, then it's a problem.

<comment><USER17> There's a difference between leaving a modest family house/farm to your kids versus someone inheriting a business empire worth millions. Especially if that means the inheritor refuses to acknowledge that not everyone has it that easy. It's not so much the giving that's objected to as the receiving.

Especially when there are other children suffering the effects of poverty in childhood that will give them lifelong disadvantages.

<comment><USER16>
      There's a difference between leaving a modest family house/farm to your kids versus someone inheriting a business empire worth millions.

What difference? Inheritance = payment for providing happiness and support in life. The amount can be whatever you want - millions, billions or nothing at all.

If someone has a business worth millions and decides to leave it to his wife or children, then that would be a financial compensation for making his life better. It's up to them to decide what to do with the money they've made.

      It's not so much the giving that's objected to as the receiving.

Who is objecting to other people receiving money from someone who wants to give it to them voluntarily? It's crazy what envy does to people.

Beautiful people receive more positive attention and get compliments all the time. Should they mutilate themselves, so they don't receive attention anymore?

      Especially when there are other children suffering the effects of poverty in childhood that will give them lifelong disadvantages.

So what? Why would wealthy people have an obligation to help poor people? There are ugly people, which doesn't mean beautiful people should mutilate themselves and make previously ugly people look better in comparison.

<comment><USER17> There's no need to make the _Harrison Bergeron_ argument. It all comes down to:

> Why would wealthy people have an obligation to help poor people?

Well, this is a whole question of what a "society" is and the nature of mutual obligation towards both other members of our society and other humans in general. If one day I should find you collapsed in the street, remind me that we don't have any obligations towards each other.

<comment><USER16>
      There's no need to make the Harrison Bergeron argument

If there is no need, then why are you writing about inheritance (paying someone who made you happy) in a negative way? Why are you focusing on money, but not on beauty, fame, intelligence etc. ?

      It all comes down to: > Why would wealthy people have an obligation to help poor people?

It doesn't.

It also comes down to:

> _Why would beautiful people have an obligation to help ugly people?_

Nobody is making the argument that beautiful people should mutilate themselves to make ugly people look better in comparison, right? But, why not? Beauty, wealth, fame, intelligence etc. are all examples of privilege. So, why focus on money? Why does it all come down to money?

      Well, this is a whole question of what a "society" is and the nature of mutual obligation towards both other members of our society and other humans in general.

What is your answer to that and why should I accept it? It seems that society is different things to different people. If you're envious and bitter, then society is about helping losers. If you're healthy and wealthy, then society is about stability.

      If one day I should find you collapsed in the street, remind me that we don't have any obligations towards each other.

Of course we don't. You might help someone because it makes you feel good or your social status will increase (which in turn makes you feel good). Not because of some vague, abstract concept like obligation/duty that you have towards members of homo sapiens species.

<comment><USER17> People need money to live, not any of the other things.

<comment><USER16> That's false, since money is a recent invention. It's like saying "Cats need Whiskas to live".

Even if it were true, so what? If someone needs money to live, how does that imply that money should be taken from those who have it and be given to those who don't?

You might need positive attention to feel good about yourself (since you're ugly). Does that mean that the attention beautiful people receive should be directed towards ugly people (by mutilating beautiful people)?

<comment><USER4> Because those who have it did not create it in a vacuum. And after all, there is nothing but a mutual agreement that those who do not have won't take it from those who have, and that agreement includes whatever welfare said society has.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I'll just butt in here to add a huge caveat that almost never gets brought up in these sorts of articles: Denmark is small, really small.

It has a population of only 5.7 million, if it were part of the US it would fit in between the 11th and 12th largest cities (Atlanta and Detroit).

So imagine, for example, reading an article about the state of things in Detroit, Atlanta, or Houston, and imagine the author attempting to make big, sweeping conclusions based on that data. I suspect you'd likely take any such conclusions with a grain of salt much more than you would when you hear about what's going on in Denmark, because we all know Denmark is a huge and important country. Denmark is neat and all, with plenty of reasons to justify people who don't live there finding it interesting, but it isn't necessarily a land that one can directly map onto the entire nation of America (across a gulf of about two orders of magnitude in population alone) and expect them to be comparable.

<comment><USER19> I've heard this argument quite a bit but never quite understood what the problem was supposed to be. Could you articulate why you think the comparison is troublesome?

<comment><USER20> Culture, shared history.

In a country of 5.7 million people where the capital has a metro population of around 2 million people I imagine it's a lot easier for people to want to care for each other.

I imagine that the Danish fit the notion of 'nation'[1] much more closely than people from the US.

Or at least, I think that's how the argument is supposed to go.

Like another comment said, perhaps it's just an excuse. A case could be made that went something like "Look, if the Danish can do it so can we", or "Let's look at what the best in the world are doing then model and copy their behaviour where it makes senses for us to do so."

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

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> It may be that social heritage is a big factor in determining a person's life path, but that doesn't mean economic factors aren't. The fact remains that in Denmark, any kid, no matter how poor, who has talent and puts in the effort, has nothing stopping him from getting a degree from the top universities in the country. Tuition is free and s/he will even get paid a stipend to attend.

Perhaps most working class kids will stay working class, but others, e.g. immigrants, or children of substance abusers, who have the talent but not the resources, can go straight to the top if they just do their homework. And it works. Examples are all over the place.

</comment><comment><USER22> Yesterday I saw the same study mentioned in Washington Post and I got really bummed about how journalists always seem to miss the point or at least chose an angle that twists everything (1).

This article from The Atlantic gives a more nuanced description of the study's findings.

1: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/08/03/there...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/08/03/theres- only-one-way-to-save-the-american-dream/?tid=sm_fb)

</comment><comment><USER23> > But Denmark's economic philosophy seems to be that the market is an > unfortunate socioeconomic lottery system, and so the country compensates the > poor with generous transfers paid by high taxes on the rich.

This to me is the heart of the Sanders economic philosophy as well. Everything else is an attempt to convince people that it's a _better_ philosophy.

</comment><comment><USER24> they didn't mention where pretax social mobility is highest. that's something I'm interested in. Perhaps the american dream is most alive in a place we don't expect.

<comment><USER25> Not sure about mobility across generations, but pre-tax income inequality is lowest in Taiwan and Poland.

[https://ourworldindata.org/wp- content/uploads/2014/06/ourwor...](https://ourworldindata.org/wp- content/uploads/2014/06/ourworldindata_income-inequality-before-and-after- taxes-and-transfers-–-max-roser.png)

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Wow. What titlegore. A different country has different culture?</comment>


The View from Taiwan: Tsai Calls Trump - <AUTHOR> http://michaelturton.blogspot.com/2016/12/trump-calls-tsai-world-commentariat-iq.html <comment><USER2> Key quote:

 _Hey, American progressives! The future President of the United States called the head of a state that directly elects its president, which has a world leading national health insurance program, no guns, and may soon legalize gay marriage. Check your values: which side are you on here?_

I didn't vote for Trump, but yeah, I think we should recognize Taiwan.

</comment><comment><USER3> I've noticed most of my facebook friends (who happen to be democrats/progressives) are absolutely furious with Trump accepting the call. I would hope they would be celebrating, as this article suggests.

</comment><comment><USER4> The reason so many in media and government act the way they do about China is they want the US to become the next China.

With aforementioned media / government people in the analogue to China's Central Committee, of course.

</comment><comment><USER5> Well stated. If only people still thought on articles a few days before publishing them. I will stand on my lawn waving my fist at yunguns publishing first instead of best, but I know it has always been an issue. How do we promote better discourse over clickbait?

</comment><comment><USER4> I don't know why people seem so eager for Taiwan to join - or at least not upset - China. Look at Hong Kong.</comment>


Doubts about the Linux mainstream adoption - <AUTHOR> http://www.compuforums.org/nix/6731-im-having-doubts-about-linux-mainstream-adoption.html#post40065

<comment><AUTHOR> It's not about faith. It's about reality. Like many others, I'm tempted to go carried away by my enthusiasm and believe in something without much reasoning. Actually I did this in a number of times. It just didn't worked very well for me in the end. Challenging your believes is a good thing. If it has to be about faith, fave faith in your reasoning.

</comment><comment><USER2> Dude! How about taking some chances with something that already got traction and having some faith in it?</comment>


Show HN: Review my Startup: (mobile) Programming w/o Coding for everyday people - <AUTHOR>

Hi HN,
We are a small team of brothers working in Munich (Germany) and San Francisco. We put a lot of work in our startup proxxler.com during the last two years. With Proxxler we want to give non-programmers a platform for app creation without learning a programming language or installing SDKs. Our builder allows you to use ready-built components as well as to implement some logic in a visual script editor. Currently, you can create Android apps (and install them directly to your device) as well as Flash apps for your Facebook stream.
We even hope, this can be helpful for teaching kids and high schoolers basic programming skills. Not too geeky and with a direct result that can be shared with friends.
Thanks HN! Marco
http://www.proxxler.com
PS: We still have some accounts for our alpha test left. For the first 50 HN users mailing us (contact [@] proxxler.com, use 'HackerNews' in subject) we will give direct access to the service. Additionally, you can register on the site for beta testing, which will start in a couple of months. <comment><USER2> I really like the concept of what you are doing. I was actually thinking "we need that". Your website turned me off a bit. Like the last comment, the shot of the kid was a bit weird. I had a hard time understanding what your site does. The UI is not terrible but I think you could be doing a better job. Especially since Mobile UIs are so critical to success.

Anyway, keep it up cause I like the concept and would actually use it.

<comment><USER3> Actually, it's not the worse site, but the site could use a little polishing. There's actually a lot of material put out in HN in the past about that. A lot of landing pages look like this example: [http://visualwebsiteoptimizer.com/split-testing- blog/landing...](http://visualwebsiteoptimizer.com/split-testing-blog/landing- page-best-practices/)

<comment><AUTHOR> mindblink,

Thanks for your link. I checked it out and I learned some interesting thinks.

Marco

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Like the idea! I agree that the webpage needs some improvements. I'd get rid of the white stucco pattern, and I noticed that you have four videos, three of facebook apps and the fourth about an android app. For me, that would be the first to showcase, bring it to the homepage!

Ps the kid without the body creeps me out too.

</comment><comment><USER3> Hey, congrats. Are you guys planning on releasing something for iOS also? (Also, I wonder if there's a way to have a hyperlink in your top comment. To make it easier to navigate to your site).

<comment><USER3> Oh, also, I don't know if you want to put your videos more prominently on the landing page.

<http://youtu.be/CLeDDZYPLB0>

<http://youtu.be/OD2ZDUPLEhM>

<http://youtu.be/QP1e_kS5jmk>

<http://youtu.be/CLeDDZYPLB0>

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks! Do you think they are hidden to much in the pop-up?

<comment><USER3> A bit, they're buried in the 3rd slider. And they're one of the more vivid showcase your technology.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It's a little thing but the disembodied child's head on the landing page was a little creepy

</comment><comment><USER6> First alpha test accounts have been created. Some are left ...

</comment><comment><USER7> Have sent an email, please add me to the alpha

</comment><comment><USER8> Can I have access?? Sounds pretty amazing

<comment><AUTHOR> Pls send an email to contact [at] proxxler.com including "HackerNews" in the subject.

<comment><USER8> Sorry, buddy. missed that part

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Looks very promising. Keep going.

<comment><USER9> One question though: reminds me of Google's App Inventor. What's the difference?

<comment><AUTHOR> We share some ideas, that's right. But there are some major differences. Firstly, Proxxler is 100% browser based. No install to your computer. This way we address people who are not willing to download SDKs. We support more than just the Android platform. And we are not abandoned by Google ;-)

<comment><USER9> Yep. Hate the installs. Good point. I have an Android phone. So you can skip IOS :^]</comment></comment></comment></comment>