MediaTemple Nameservers Down - <AUTHOR> http://status.mediatemple.net/incidents/1973-web-and-email-service-interruption/

<comment><USER2> Half my public infrastructure is down. It could have been a 100%, but I separated private and business systems last month. Lots of people use MT because their email and DNS logic is solid. So this is pretty serious for them. Media Temple was broken into a while back via a Wordpress bug and people wonder if this is related to that event (HN really needs a "related news" button). <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2462774>

MT also did a hardware upgrade yesterday. So they are probably a little stressed right now. <http://status.mediatemple.net/>

<comment><USER2> They have fixed the problem and updated the status page. Looks good from here.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Umm, so?

I mean, seriously, I'm not trying to be an arse about it or something, but why should the hacker population at large give a damn that "some customers [of MediaTemple] will see interruptions to Web, Mail, and FTP services".

Is it that essential a host? Is everyone here hosting something there? I mean, I'm sure it's a popular host and everything, but should there be a post every time some hosting service gets a bit of a hiccup? If so, we might as well rename this site "Hosting status news".

<comment><USER4> (not the op)

I don't think posting on HN re: hosts going down is _necessary_ per se, but as a means of keeping tabs on hosting companies, a post like this is helpful.

When I was looking for a hosting company a few years back, I went with Media Temple as a hosting company based on the praise given to it by a number of people whose opinions I respected. I had an absolutely terrible time with them, switched over to Linode last Friday, and am thrilled that I no longer have to deal with Media Temple. If I'd seen more critical / dissatisfied posts about them before I signed on with them, I could have saved myself a lot of frustration.</comment></comment>


Qubes OS 3.2 has been released - <AUTHOR> http://blog.invisiblethings.org/2016/09/29/qubes-32.html <comment><AUTHOR> tldr:

\- switched from KDE to Xfce4 [though KDE is still an option]

\- USB passthrough now available - so now you can use Skype and other video chat services

\- tighter integration Salt based management engine and "potentially untrusted VMs" in a more secure fashion than previously.</comment>


Workers involved in union activities say Tesla is illegally intimidating them - <AUTHOR> http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/25/workers-involved-in-union-activities-say-tesla-is-illegally-intimidating-them.html <comment><USER2> I think a union is something you earn - not something foisted upon you. If you dont want workers to join a union, treat them well, pay them significantly above market rates, give good benefits.

<comment><USER3> the major appeal of the union is that you can't get fired or laid off. This type of job security is crucial because it gives you massive leverage when it comes to fighting for those other things. No matter how good the pay is, you can probably get better via striking, etc.

<comment><USER4> No one choose a job based on the union. How many unions in the private market can really claim you wont get fired.

<comment><USER5> >> No one choose a job based on the union.

Unfortunately, that's an overreaching statement. I personally know a few people who have accepted pay cuts to leverage the type of job security afforded by certain unions.

>> How many unions in the private market can really claim you wont get fired.

Certainly none, but does it really matter? There's exists a threshold where the difference between _won 't get fired_ and _very difficult to get fired_ are pragmatically indistinguishable.

<comment><USER4> So was the one I was responding to. And I doubt that whatever personal anecdotes you have can be applied to unions in general as parent did.

And yes it matters as the parent wanted to dismiss unions based on these false claims.

Unions are neither good nor bad. Some of them have too much power, others have too little. Some should have a union (like uber drivers) etc.

My own father tried to start a kind of union for a group of self-employed drivers working for one company. The result was that the company he worked for simply stopped his contract and scared everyone else off from backing him and a few others up.

I have seen unions be both really bad, really good, unnecessary and not existing where they should.

They are no different than consumer interest groups and other collections of people trying to reach some sort of balance.

In many industries today they aren't needed but in some they still are.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > Tesla CEO Elon Musk ... promised to install both a roller coaster and free > frozen yogurt machines throughout the facility.

I had to double-check that I was not reading a satirical website after reading the above statement.

<comment><USER7> I get an even bigger laugh imagining the same sentence being used in an article about a different industry. Imagine "A nurses' strike today was averted when management agreed to install a rollercoaster and free frozen yoghurt machines"...

<comment><USER8> Well, in fairness, it does not seem to be the case that that mollified the workers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Unions annoy me. Working conditions 75 years ago were truly deadly, and unions served a major purpose to humanize the work force.

Nowadays we have "tax the robots" bills being sponsored by Unions and people somehow think it's "ok" to force someone to join a union to feed their family.

When I see articles like this, I know what the right answer is but it's hard to empathetic at the same time.

<comment><USER10> _> Unions annoy me. Working conditions 75 years ago were truly deadly, and unions served a major purpose to humanize the work force._

Just because a company isn't literally trying to kill you or introduce hazardous conditions for the sake of maximizing profits doesn't mean that unions aren't useful. In a lot of cases, their very presence is inhibitory to regressions in the rights of employees.

Do unions have problems? Yes, absolutely, and we shouldn't neglect those either. At the same time, scrapping them would be a very bad idea.

<comment><USER11> > _Do unions have problems? Yes, absolutely, and we shouldn 't neglect those > either. At the same time, scrapping them would be a very bad idea._

Existing unions are not taking much in the way of steps to address those problems or clean up their image in the eyes of the public. Until unions can once again demonstrate openly and conclusively that their primary concern is the welfare of the worker rather than just being another power player jockeying to get their share of the pie, scrapping them would be a very good idea.

<comment><USER12> You could say the same about many other public institutions. To demonstrate:

The media seems more interested in sensationalist irrelevant news than informing the public (it pays better).

Until the media can once again demonstrate openly and conclusively that their primary concern is informing the public rather than just being another power player jockeying to get their share of the pie, scrapping them would be a very good idea.

<comment><USER13> > Until the media can once again demonstrate openly and conclusively that > their primary concern is informing the public rather than just being another > power player jockeying to get their share of the pie, scrapping them would > be a very good idea.

I... I agree with that statement...

<comment><USER14> Good, let's just throw away the first amendment. Only government-sanctioned news can be broadcast from now on, and the sitting administration gets to appoint who heads up the department that determines what real news is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Why has nobody made a union you join through an app?

</comment><comment><USER16> If collective bargaining wasn't mandatory, and employers were free to decide who to hire and fire, the manufacturing sector in the US would be vastly larger, and offer millions more jobs to Americans.

There is very little that does more damage to society than the so-called labour movement.

<comment><USER17> Without the labour movement we'd have Triangle Shirtwaist fires and Ludlow massacres every week. I don't blame you for not knowing that, because our educational system is designed to produce obedient workers, not class agitators. You might want to pick up a history book though.

<comment><USER18> > Without the labour movement we'd have Triangle Shirtwaist fires and Ludlow > massacres every week

It's a little disingenuous to conflate the labor movement with NLRA-regulated unions, especially in the context of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire and the response to it. They're not one and the same, although modern unions have done their best to erase that distinction from the historical narrative.

You might also want to consider the other things unions of the time were involved with. Early 20th century unions passed bylaws excluding non-white members from their ranks, and then (successfully) lobbied for federal laws excluding them from the country altogether.

Without the AFL, we may not have had the Chinese Exclusion Act, and we might not have stripped Americans of Chinese and Indian descent of their naturalized citizenship, seized the homes they legally bought with the money they earned, and then given the land to white Americans.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Best Si Valley spots to visit - <AUTHOR>

I'm visiting the bay area for SiValley CodeCamp, what are the must see destinations before I head back to FL tomorrow?  I was excited to see the highway signs for Cupertino and Mountain view, but don't wanna just drive aimlessly after the conference :) <comment><USER2> This may be very nerdly, but.... Look up the addresses of 3 or 4 iconic firms (Google, Apple, Oracle, etc.) and just drive by. Pick big ones so they'll have visible buildings. I don't know why, but just seeing the buildings gives an impression of the importance of technology in the area. In any other city, those tall buildings would be banks or insurance companies.

Whatever you do, don't go to Alcatraz! :-)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the encouragement! I'm all about nerdy, so I tweeted from Google Plex (which is all I could do since everything there was closed), then went over to Apple's Headquarter's and paid my respects to Steve Jobs at the little memorial next to 1 Infinity Loop (Apple Store's only open M-F, ah well, got a pic). Then I drove over to Fry's Electronics and OMG I don't think I've seen such a huge store in my whole life, I mean, they literally had to kick me out because they had to close the store. All in all an awesome 1st night at Si Valley. Oh yeah, I had a burger at In-n-out, heard that was a very California thing, and those burgers really are as big as the ads! Plan on hitting Stanford, Golden Gate Bridge and Berkeley tomorrow after CodeCamp lets out at 3pm. If I leave Berkeley at 7:30pm, should I have any trouble getting to SFO for a 10:30 flight? I hear SF traffic can be pretty bad, but is it that way on a Sunday evening as well?

<comment><USER3> You could always take the bart to SFO. Would take you about an hour from Ashby to arrive at SFO, train schedules on bart.gov. Driving should take about a half-hour, or slightly more. If you do make it to Stanford, Steve Job's home is really close, in case you'd like to see the memorial at his place.

<comment><AUTHOR> I totally would! What's the address?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Drive down University Ave in Palo Alto starting from 101 and going all the way in to Palm Drive of Stanford Campus. It's an exciting view. Going all the way back, you will actually hit 1600 Amphitheater Parkway. If you have more time, take a peek into the streets crossing University Ave. But I also agree with byoung that Castro is a pretty cool spot.

<comment><AUTHOR> Planning on doing this tomorrow. Are there a lot of startups along the way by Stanford? Any place where I could just walk down the street and see a whole bunch of cool startups?

<comment><USER3> There's a Plug and Play on University: <http://www.plugandplaytechcenter.com/locations>.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It might blow your mind to find out there's an actual (former) marina and (current) boat launch a couple of miles from all of the technology. Go North on Lafayette/Gold St from 237 until it ends, then turn left, go to the end, turn right, and go to the end one more time and you're at the marina park.

It has water, birds, reeds, fish, the whole bit. You'd never expect it with places like Tivo and Marvell right there by the freeway, but there it is. It gives you a wider sense of what is actually going on around here.

</comment><comment><USER6> 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View has some cool sights to see. Also, check out Castro street. One of my favorite restaurants, Xanh, is a cool Vietnamese fusion restaurant/lounge.

<comment><USER7> If you keep on going, there's the Shoreline lake - a great place!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Have you seen PG's list: <http://www.paulgraham.com/seesv.html>?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, I wasn't aware of this list. I've already hit a couple of those spots, but I'll be sure check out more on future trips here. I love SV, it's like coming to Disney for the hacker (funny b/c I actually live very close to Orlando).

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Call me a stupid tourist, but I actually enjoyed Alcatraz... It's very touristy indeed, but no more than seeing the Empire State Building when you're visiting NYC. 1161Crist drive in Los Altos would be high on my to-visit list for SV. It would be so awesome to see in person that someone like Steve Jobs started out of this garage!

</comment><comment><USER9> Drive up to San Francisco and be a tourist tonight. Best city in the world.

</comment><comment><USER10> Over by Google in Mountain View is the Computer History Museum, the largest computer museum in the US. Check the hours, its worth a look if you enjoy computing history.

</comment><comment><USER11> SV is pretty bland re tourism.

</comment><comment><USER12> You have to see the Filoli house and gardens

Just beautiful !

<http://www.filoli.org/explore-filoli/></comment>


Milkman: An Extensible Alternative to Postman in JavaFX - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/warmuuh/milkman <comment><USER2> Cool to see someone using JavaFX and not Electron. I quite like it and used it for a few card games and stuff.

</comment><comment><USER3> Congratulations on picking up JavaFX for doing it.

</comment><comment><USER4> Interesting and the nice thing about him wanting to add JavaScript runner support is the JRE does have a JS engine you can embed into your apps.

The JS runner in Postman felt a little limited I couldnt for example figure out how to fetch a document.cookie from a response. It would be awesome if the JS runner can match the usefulness of the one from Postman in addition to being extendable like the rest of Milkman seems to be.

One thing I wish there was and maybe this project might be extensible towards is a JMS / better ActiveMQ / JMS client.

<comment><USER5> Sadly Nashorn, the JS engine that was built into the JVM, has been deprecated as of Java 11: [https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/335](https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/335)

It had so many compatibility issues with real JS that it was kind of untenable to use it with scripts designed for other JS environments: [https://jaxenter.com/nashorn-javascript-engine- deprecated-14...](https://jaxenter.com/nashorn-javascript-engine- deprecated-145320.html)

The only real way to deal with JS now is Rhino (which still exists!), or some custom binding to V8 or something via JNI (yikes).

Our work uses Nashorn a lot for scripting and this is a big blocker for us to move to newer Java versions.

<comment><USER3> The real way is to adopt GraalVM, which is the alternative being proposed.

[https://www.graalvm.org/docs/reference- manual/languages/js/](https://www.graalvm.org/docs/reference- manual/languages/js/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > _Git Team Synchronization Plugin_

Neat!

I personally switched to vscode rest client some time ago because the requests are just text on the filesystem so clearly visible in code review etc, but this looks really promising</comment>


Never.  Ever.  Cargo-cult. - <AUTHOR> http://weblog.jamisbuck.org/2008/1/7/never-ever-cargo-cult

<comment><AUTHOR> The author of this piece winces at hearing "but that's how Jamis does it", but I think the lesson applies equally to "but Paul Graham says...".

I mean no disrespect to Paul Graham, of course -- but as the article points out, understanding the advantages of something is far superior to accepting it solely based on the recommendation of an authority. Listen to authorities, sure; but decide for yourself whether and why what they're saying makes sense.

<comment><USER2> I think one reason it seems there's more PG cargo cult members than really exist is because a good portion of his essays are written to express and argue what is already well established among good hackers.

If someone wants to discuss with me how to run a workspace for hackers the first thing I do is say "Read Paul Graham's essay 'What Business Can Learn From Open Source'". I've been arguing those same ideas since before that article existed, but he managed to express them much more succinctly and convincingly than I can do on the fly.

If you've known me long enough then you know that's not cargo culting, but if you haven't how can you tell?

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> ..and start practising by looking up what "cargo-cult" actually means.</comment>


Flattr, and Why It's Brilliant - <AUTHOR> http://danielmiessler.com/blog/flattr-and-why-its-brilliant <comment><USER3> There still seems to be a _huge_ barrier to adoption: getting people to sign up for a subscription to Flattr their first site. There are sites worth subscribing to see and there are sites which are not. The sites not worth a subscription have an incentive to freeload on the ecosystem by not working on the pre-sale of the Flattr account and instead just soaking up the one-click transactions. The sites that are worth a subscription will have to heavily presell the subscription, without their best single reason to subscribe (imposing a paywall) and with less efficiency than just setting up a paywall subscription system for themselves. Plus, instead of getting to keep 90% of the $6 a month that they'd get if they sold you on a subscription to their own site, they'll end up giving most of it away to freeloading sites.

See also Contenture, which was essentially identical to this business model.

There are also interesting problems in a world where everyone has a Flattr account, but we're not in that world and won't ever be.

<comment><USER4> Clearly, getting signups is the biggest challenge.

But there's no way to collect without engaging in some promotion: placing the Flattr button where it's visible and talking it up.

And the first wave of signups _won't_ be sites that have the subscriber-pull to add their own paywalls. It's the (much larger) group whose only current option is advertising. These sites have a more simple calculus: can't possibly hurt, might help, might create some warm fuzzies if they like the concept.

It's after that group signs up -- spreads the knowledge -- that nudges to signup could be deployed. These probably aren't paywalls; they're more likely payspeedbumps.

Contenture had a weak name, weak explanatory copy ("freemium for the masses"?), and weak marketing/PR. Its automatic subscription-divvying process would tend more to reward collecting without promoting. And, they quit fairly early.

The key for any such system to work is awareness, adoption, and critical mass -- so it's not reasonable to take the example of a different, nearly-stillborn alternative and suggest it reflects negatively on another variant that's already acheived more attention.

<comment><USER5> This still doesn't work. For the flattr buttons to be there, there must be mugs paying for the system. Those mugs are doing it becuase they think they are going to be taking money out - but, like any pyramid scheme, only the people at the top of the pile will make any money. How long do you think those mugs will keep paying in without getting anything out?

I'm willing to go on record with the following predictions:

1\. No big site will get enough money to be worth the pixels the button takes up. 2\. No small site will get back as much as they put in. 3\. The number of people who pay in without expecting to get anything out will be essentially zero. 4\. Flattr will shut down entirely within 2 years from today.

<comment><USER4> Many early adopters will get fuzzies [1] from participating, and paying-in, and delivering shares to their favorite sites, even if they don't get net payments out. Whether that is enough to break-out into a larger audience is the question. But it could be self-sustaining at a small level -- as a mutual appreciation society, with a sort of competition going on among the Flattratti for each others' shares -- even without a breakout.

It's easy to predict something novel will fail; most truly new things do.

[1] <http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Fuzzies>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm really all about Flattr. I wrote a blog post about it when it was announced. Big wins, as far as I'm concerned:

      * By being subscription based, it's 'set it and forget it.'
      * By introducing an upper limit, I don't have to worry about overspending my budget.
      * Flattr's model appeals to me: if I upvote fewer things, they mean more. Sounds about right.
      * One click donations are so much easier than trying to find and pull out my credit card.

I really hope they do well.

<comment><USER7> what's the incentive to set it up in the first place if you're not a content creator? Non content creators will mentally file it in their 'something virtuous to do when I have enough money' aka never_never. The content creators who end up being net donors will stop because their motivation was to make money not give it. This scheme and the optimism surrounding it sounds like a throwback to the internet bubble.

<comment><USER6> Supporting content authors. No, really, I'm serious.

I made a comment below about this, you're thinking about the wrong metric. It doesn't matter if everyone does this, it matters if enough do to sustain whatever projects are using it. I myself have made money on a project through solely donations. Not a ton, but that project is also on hold for a minute.

I think you're being overly cynical, and you think I'm being overly optimistic. The truth, as always, will lie somewhere in the middle.

<comment><USER8> The first time I activated my account was to send money to Vimcasts, which I'll probably do monthly now that it's set up. If I find nothing else flattrable (I'm picky with my money), they'll get a decent amount of money out of me, and I'll call it worthwhile.

<comment><USER9> Vimcasts is so good, I likely would have done the same, if I hadn't just donated via PayPal.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I'll formalize the thoughts a bit later, but I think most important lesson is that most people who make good content for free online don't want to be paid like this. If I were flattr, I'd pick a bigger market to attack to get profitable and then keep this model alive for those who want it.

</comment><comment><USER11> I know I am oversimplifying this and it could be my inherent cheapness speaking but whenever I hear about a service where I need to pay someone to give other people my money, I back away slowly and then run. So perhaps I'm not targeted user, but I do think that if there _are_ people who would use this, we'd probably seem more thought, time, and effort go into blog posts if people felt that they would receive something more tangible than a nice comment.

<comment><USER6> When you use a credit card, you pay to give someone else money. When you use PayPal, you pay to give someone else money.

Just because it's a hidden cost that the merchant rolls into the price doesn't mean it isn't true.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> AFAIK, this is getting quite huge in Europe. I sure hope that the company itself isn't legally attached to The Pirate Bay, because if that ever goes down (and stays down)…

<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8512263.stm>

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, I hope this thing takes off and can stand on its own.

<comment><USER13> I'm pretty sure the only legal connection is Peter Sunde himself. Flattr's UK ops are based out of our (shared) office, White Bear Yard.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> There are plenty of problems with Flattr.

There is no way to charge for content - you have to rely on the user both having flattr installed and being willing to give you something.

As a content producer you have a direct monetary incentive to not link to or recommand others who also use flattr, as it lowers your cut. The service thus have to work against network effects - the more people who use the service, the worse of I am. At the same time there is no point in installing it on a website, so it has to fight network effects just to get accepted.

I doubt this will be around for long.

<comment><USER4> Those are smallish problems. At first, you're only getting signups and payclicks from the very generous and conscientious -- early adopters. But that starts the process of making a larger group aware of the mechanism.

At some point, you throw some switches that give those early adopters some other slight benefits -- single-page articles, skipped interstitials, early- access. That nudges a slightly larger, more self-interested group to signup.

Any ad-supported site already has disincentives to outlink -- the reader leaves! Other sites will get the impressions! But they still do outlink, because ultimately audiences value usefully-outlinked content.

But also, every Flattr site is an advertisement for the network. When 99.99% of your visitors are not yet Flattrers, your top goal is to increase signups, not slice a small pie even more finely. Sending people to other Flattr sites best achieves awareness/subscription growth.

And, if that became a real problem, the Flattr central command could incentivize in-network linking with partial backpropagation of Flattr shares.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I think Flattr (or something like it) has the potential to create a competitive economic system for digital goods. Traditionally, if you produce something of value, people will pay for it, and the content creator is rewarded. That model doesn't work well for digital goods, since they're nonrival (if you have an mp3, I can have it as well, with no loss to you) and nonexcludable (you can't stop people having the good, because you can't stop people copying bits).

Right now, digital content producers often have to support themselves with advertising, which is usually problematic or impossible. Advertising is kind of like a shitty version of Flattr where you automatically click the Flattr button by simply loading the page, and the amount each person donates per month is the average amount per capita that companies profit due to online advertising. It's a stupid system for a lot of reasons. The one thing it has going for it is that people take part whether they want to or not, by viewing pages and being affected by advertising.

Flattr might make creating digital goods a profitable activity -- and that's a critical to having an efficient economic system.

<comment><USER7> "Traditionally, if you produce something of value, people will pay for it" but if there's better value elsewhere that's where they'll go. In this case the best value of all is FREE ie no flattr account.

<comment><USER16> Hopefully it will reach a critical mass sufficient to allow sites to REQUIRE a flattr account to see their content. Note that this is different from requiring a subscription, since you aren't forced into donating to them. But you are forced into jumping into the 'donation scheme' so if they produce content you like, why not click it?

I'm not sure what kind of critical mass that would require though. I think in some niche areas it would be possible without much effort if there was some sort of banding together among the major content producers for that niche.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I know they say they are but Flattr isn't a micropayment service, it's a microdonation service. It's more like an "upvote" than a paypal payment. It's also about recognizing that most Internet users also are "content creators". One examples that comes to mind is social news sites. While people might like what you're doing, generally you get a lot of traffic that is notoriously hard to convert. If donating were as easy as upvoting maybe things could change.

While signup is a challenge, it will be as hard as getting someone wanting to donate the minimum amount (currently €2 I think) to someone. Also it's still in beta and hasn't been "out" for very long.

Last. While I think this "thread" is somewhat decent, could people please minimize the negativity. When it comes to entrepreneurship it's very easy to be right, as most things fail. This describes what I mean better than I can: [http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2009/09/the- problem-...](http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2009/09/the-problem-with- positive-thinking.html)

</comment><comment><USER7> I can't see the sense in it. It's analogous to a situation where a newspaper's only paying customers would be other newspapers. The content creators send each other money and the only net beneficiaries are Flattr and the vast mass of interenet users who continue to view for free

<comment><USER18> Because the vast majority of people will not be accepting donations because they aren't content creators. If a content creator puts $10 in per month, he could quickly get much more back if a hundred non-content creators each give $1.

<comment><USER7> AFAIK 'donate' buttons have never proved successful. People don't like paying for stuff they can have for free

<comment><USER19> This is not a donate button.

Donate buttons are complicated and require you to make all those decisions. With Flattr you have to decide once how much you would like to give per month and that's that. One decisions and you can click away. It's hassle free.

I don't think we know why people don't like donate buttons and your hypothesis ("People don't like paying for stuff they can have for free.") might be wrong. Maybe all that's needed is making donating easier. Maybe not.

<comment><USER20> I agree. Existing donate buttons are cumbersome and discourage the shift in perception that's needed. I think Flattr's on the right track but the subscription model at its base is still overly cumbersome and inflexible. They've indicated they have more flexible and radical models in mind. Hope they pursue them.

<comment><USER6> I hope they don't. If it gets more flexible, I won't use it. When this was brought up on Reddit months ago, everyone wanted to see sliders that controlled the percentage of amount that went to different people... it's the definition of a useless power feature.

The simplicity is the entire point. "More flexible" == more complicated, and then I won't want to use it anymore.

<comment><USER20> I agree sliders would be overdoing it. But what about penny, nickel, dime, quarter options. Of course, they'd have to be abstracted for an international audience, but make it analogous to coinage, spare change, something tangible that people intuitively relate to. I agree that you don't want too many options. You want just enough flexibility.

I think a really innovative approach would be a pledge/rescind model. Let people freely pledge up front up to a certain liberal limit then present them with the registration, payment, tedious paperwork all at once after the fact. Let them welsh out on as many pledges as they want. What is a pledge that is later rescinded worth? Less than a penny obviously but more than nothing at all. I think most people would willingly agree to follow through on their donations even with given the opportunity to back out, if the details weren't too burdensome at the outset.

The problem with every microcurrency scheme I've come across is that it enforces the kind of rigid transactional exchanges that fit traditional commerce models when, with a little imagination, they could do very interesting things with the networking and computational possibilities available through the internet.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I too had an early invite, and was all excited to click to register. Once I saw there had to be a minimum monthly payment, I was extremely disappointed and didn't sign up.

Supposing the current implementation is extremely successful, it would be the equivalent to signing up for a monthly service with Disney (or Sony Entertainment, or <insert your favorite content megacorporation name here>) : you pay the middleman, who redistributes appropriately to the content creators.

What's the problem here? This month if I want to buy 1 or 20 CD/DVD, I choose how much money I give. With the monthly service model, my entertainment disposable revenue gets converted to monthly preauthorized payments - <USER2> with all my utility bills. Not good.

</comment><comment><USER22> I had early Flattr invite, and decided not to join:

• Before I can put button on my website, I have to add funds to my Flattr account.

• I have not seen Flattr buttons on other websites, and I don't want to send whole "pie" to one or two websites I may find in months.

Catch-22.

</comment><comment><USER23> Flattr would have to be built in as an option to the existing blogging platforms first to get anywhere: WordPress, Blogger (good luck with that one!), Tumblr, Posterous, etc. Until all those happen, this won't go anywhere.

</comment><comment><USER24> Good to see it implemented.

[I wrote about the idea a while back: [http://chanux.wordpress.com/2010/03/08/donation-networks- to-...](http://chanux.wordpress.com/2010/03/08/donation-networks-to-fight- advertising/)]

</comment><comment><USER25> Flattr, and Why It's Not:

<http://www.websnark.com/archives/2010/02/by-the-way-the.html>

<comment><USER4> Not knowing the exact amounts involved isn't a bug -- it's a feature. One major credible theory as to why previous micropayments systems failed is that even thinking about amounts added too much friction. A little like converting a previous voluntary activity to a paid activity, assigning any exact value to it causes a different decisionmaking-scheme to be applied -- which can then kill conversion.

Who cares if every Flattr-click is valued differently, as long as overall, the right people are net-payers, the right people are net-receivers, and the magnitudes generally reward quality? While some activities (banking) require precise accounting, many other socially-valuable activities benefit most from loose accounting.

This criticism ultimately fails because the author himself concludes:

 _Will I put a Flattr icon on the site? Probably. There's no good reason not to._

Indeed!

<comment><USER26> It's not that thinking about amounts adds friction, it's that it changes the psychology.

Your doctor friend might give you health advice for free, but wouldn't give it for $1.

Although there is still money involved, it's not at the forefront, so I think people's psychological motivations are different when they click that button.

The challenge will be convincing people to sign up in the first place.

<comment><USER4> The monetary amounts move the decision psychologically to a new category. This new category typically triggers economic weighing of costs and benefits. Such weighing takes more mental effort than the kind of hair-trigger evaluation a marginally-costless action (like a comment upvote or Flattr-click) does. That mental effort _is_ transactional friction, a tax on seriously considering the transaction. At the margin, some people move on to the next shiny link instead of engaging in the weighing effort.

The motivation-crowd-out effect is related, as is the "don't insult me by putting a measly price on this" sentiment (which I think dominates your doctor example) -- but the theory about previous micropayments that I believe true is in fact talking about a decisionmaking friction.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> For some reason when I follow this link, I appear to be logged in as Daniel M with full access privileges - might want to fix that.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm running Wordpress, so let's investigate. Can you send me a screenshot?

<comment><USER27> It appears to be fixed now and I'm starting to wonder if I hallucinated the whole thing, but yesterday I was definitely logged in as you, to the point where I opened up the control panel and could see and edit the e-mail addresses you'd registered with.

If it happens again I'll be sure to screenshot and document it properly.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, man. I'd love to investigate it.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


With 54.5M users, Disney+ is now Netflix's top challenger - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-06/with-54-5-million-users-disney-is-now-netflix-s-top-challenger <comment><USER2> I don't expect those numbers to be adjusted for the millions of Verizon subscribers who are getting 1 year of Disney+ for free.

</comment><comment><USER3> I don't think it's Netflix that needs to be worried.

I see Disney+ ads on FB. They are advertising some Star Wars movie is now on Disney+. Smart approach: I can pay for their streaming service for $7/mo, or rent it on Prime Video for $6.</comment>


Third Circuit rules school can't discipline student for social media speech - <AUTHOR> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/07/historic-opinion-third-circuit-protects-public-school-students-campus-social-media <comment><USER2> I agree with this decision, but wish it could be expanded to cover workplace as well. School, work, and home are three distinct places and except in rare circumstances should be treated as such.

</comment><comment><USER3> I agree with the decision, but I can see cyberbullying and suicides going up.</comment>


Engineers Onstage: Ryoo on Semiconductors, Zerosoft, graduate education - <AUTHOR> http://rnd.io/engineers_onstage/20120308-ryoo-on-semiconductors

<comment><AUTHOR> This is the first of an interview series my friend Ravi and are doing where we interview working engineers and scientists in the Bay Area. An audio transcript is posted to the site, there's also a podcast available at [http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/engineers- onstage/id53496...](http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/engineers- onstage/id534963702)</comment>


Analysing Drawings for Neural Network - <AUTHOR> https://icons8.com/articles/what-neural-net-says-about-your-doodles/ <comment><USER2> awesome

</comment><comment><USER3> thank you, was an absolute joy to read</comment>


Ask HN: What is your favorite setup from Usesthis.com? - <AUTHOR>

Personally I like Mark Pilgrim's because it is so unique. http://mark.pilgrim.usesthis.com/ <comment><USER2> <http://richard.stallman.usesthis.com/>

It's quite humbling to see the hardware he is using (9" display) just because it's all that runs entirely on free software.

In almost every other article people seem to love gadgets and have a lot of cool ones, but they only measure the convenience of owning one (hence all the Apple gear I'd say).

Stallman is the only one that looked at the implications of owning non-free software and he's showing that all his campaign isn't just talk.

</comment><comment><USER3> Mark Pilgrim's was interesting. I also liked Richard Stallman's and Jason Rohrer.

They were nice departures from the standard '15" macbook pro connected to a 30" inch cinema display'

I know that The Setup aims to interview interesting people and not interesting setups, but these three were the ones I can remember that were different.

</comment><comment><USER4> None really. Something I found surprising about this site is the minimal use Linux/*NIX get from this personalities. I found surprising tha most people used Mac OS X exclusively. I like Mac OS X but I don't think I could use only that.

</comment><comment><USER5> Yeah, I'm trying to branch out much as I can. Always up for suggestions, too :)

</comment><comment><USER6> My own. Except that it hasn't been posted yet. :-)</comment>


Screamer: Efficient Implementation of Nondeterministic Common Lisp [PDF] - <AUTHOR> https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1011&context=ircs_reports <comment><AUTHOR> Lightly edited title to fit within the space (and fit [PDF] which pushed it 3 characters too far). Original:

 _Screamer: A Portable Efficient Implementation of Nondeterministic Common LISP_

</comment><comment><USER2> Can you give a summary for the average Joe programmer?</comment>


The Art of Distillation - <AUTHOR> http://www.oxfordamerican.org/magazine/item/927-the-art-of-distillation <comment><USER2> Relatedly, I once toured Sipsmith's surprisingly small (commercial garage size) distillery, which they're justifiably proud of, being apparently the first new London gin distillery actually in London in - long enough that, when it came time to apply for the appropriate license, nobody at City Hall actually knew what the process was.

A couple photos:

Wide view, showing almost everything:

[https://www.flickr.com/photos/porsupah/21526970411/in/datepo...](https://www.flickr.com/photos/porsupah/21526970411/in/dateposted- public/)

A glimpse into the maceration still, showing some of the botanicals involved:

[https://www.flickr.com/photos/porsupah/21331379849/in/datepo...](https://www.flickr.com/photos/porsupah/21331379849/in/dateposted- public/)

And a simple view of the hatch of one of the stills, Patience (the others being Prudence and Constance):

[https://www.flickr.com/photos/porsupah/21330240210/in/datepo...](https://www.flickr.com/photos/porsupah/21330240210/in/dateposted- public/)

<comment><USER3> Some really nice photos!

In the first photo, is the device with the brass windows, possibly a bubble plate column?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I wish distillation for consumption wasn't illegal in America. I enjoy brewing alcohol and I'd like to take it to another step of distilling and aging what I brew.

Sadly that doesn't look like it will be a reality any time soon.

</comment><comment><USER5> They still make moonshine in the Carolinas. I got a few mason jars of some potent stuff from a coworker who sold it out of his trunk in the parking lot of the big insurance company we both worked at in Charlotte.

</comment><comment><USER6> Great article, and it got me to pour myself a bourbon. Cheers.</comment>


The Next New Memories - <AUTHOR> https://semiengineering.com/the-next-new-memories/ <comment><AUTHOR> Is there any memory that can replace DRAM or flash?</comment>


Ask HN: How can Airbnb automatically update your expiration date? - <AUTHOR> How does Airbnb accomplish this? Why would my bank give them my new credit card number? Is new expiration date typical x years plus current expiration date?
AIrbnb's new payment terms https://www.airbnb.com/terms/payments_terms
Payment Method Information You authorize Airbnb Payments to store your Payment Method information and charge your Payment Method as outlined in these Payments Terms. If your Payment Method's account number or expiration date changes (e.g. for credit cards or debit cards), we may acquire that information from our financial services partner and update your Payment Method on file in your Airbnb Account. <comment><USER2> There are API providers that offer this as a service: you can get notifications when your customers get a new card, and the updated info.

Your bank does give them the data.

<comment><USER3> Can you point me in the direction of these API providers?

The concept behind providing this information is somewhat troubling. Lets say my card is compromised. What is to stop the person who compromised my card from registering with one of these services and getting my new account information when I change it?

<comment><USER2> For example, [https://www.chasepaymentech.com/account_updater.html](https://www.chasepaymentech.com/account_updater.html) and [http://www.cardconnect.com/erp/sap/payment- integration/accou...](http://www.cardconnect.com/erp/sap/payment- integration/account-updater/) and [http://www.securenet.com/payment- solutions/account-updater](http://www.securenet.com/payment-solutions/account- updater)</comment></comment></comment>


Ask YC: What if your partners want you to let it go after 7 years? - <AUTHOR>

I have been working on a website/service concept for over 7 years now. The work was unhurried until competition started emerging. I had to ask two friends to work on the project. But now, after we're almost half the way, they want to change the concept and switch to another startup. I admit that my project is very demanding and time consuming and that legally they own two third of it all,I am not sure I can let it go. What do you think I should do? <comment><USER2> 7 years is a long time, especially in the world of the internet.

If it has not been successful by now, you really need to look at doing other things.

<comment><USER3> 7 years isn't necessarily too long to bring an idea to fruition. It's out towards the edge of the distribution for an internet startup, but it's perfectly reasonable for something complex.

<comment><USER2> Maybe in the corporate world, but if you are small _startup_ then surely not.

The world changes so rapidly and most of what small _startups_ offer are solutions to a _current_ need. If you are doing it as a hobby or for fun/learning/charity then that is different, but as a _business_ (the purpose of a _business_ is to make money, and _startups_ are businesses ultimately) it is unfeasible. As a basic proof, try pitching to investors/VCs. Even friends/family would be reluctant to invest as a _business_.

<comment><USER3> Not every startup is a web application built around a CRUD model, seven years is a short time for bringing a new medical device to market; and a long time for a novelty ice cream flavor.

Time to market is not always as crucial as it seems; photo.net was doing photo sharing and social networking ten years before flickr got bought by Yahoo!, it's more than possible to be too early to market.

You don't go to VC's during the R&D phase, you go to them once you've worked out the technology risk and have something that could be taken to market with a sufficient application of money.

It's a good thing that there are inventors with long attention spans because we would still be chasing wildlife for dinner if there weren't.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> i mean, unless they're going to be jerks about it, why can't you just keep a hold, or a copy, of the codestream to continue to work on your idea if they're jumping ship to change ideas and startups.

</comment><comment><USER5> there are many issues that you're facing now... but it may be simplified if dealt smartly and with all integrity ... first of all you took too long to implement/execute your idea - so now you're in trouble (internal and external).

anyway lets resolve the internal issue first. You need to find out what your partners really want, chances are they want/need something else than what it looks like from outside, find out what will motivate them to stay with your project?, also it is not clear whether they prefer to quit or they prefer to change the concept, may be they want to quit because you're not flexible enough to listen to them and change the concept - you need to really listen to them and think rationally (not emotionally) whether changing the concept will benefit all, try to create a win-win situation for all. last option is to let them go (because if they are not motivated enough then it won't produce the desired result) without burning the relationship, find the replacement at the earliest. If they are united and want to close the company then find out the legal way to hold on to the intellectual property at the minimum cost to you....

if they are your true friends then they should not give you hard-time in exploring either options. If you really love your project then you have to be very firm though in a polite way so that they can figure it out that you're really serious to pursue your ambition and nothing can change your route (with or without their help) - may be they will change their mind after seeing your determination.

<comment><USER6> long story short, you need 4 things :

1\. Determination: as pg always says that most successful people are those who're determined to bring their dream come true.

2\. Code: somehow you have to manage to get the source code in your control. ,

3\. Backup plan: make plan-b ready for damage control anticipated by your partners leaving project.

4\. Speed: buddy, you need speed to roll-out to deal with competition.

<comment><AUTHOR> 1- Determination is what kept me moving all a long. I could've easily forgot about it, years ago. 2- This is what'll be trying to do. 3- They don't want to leave? What if they want to force a change? 4- I have my day job that I need to pay for my project.

<comment><USER5> if they force for the change that you you disagree in totality then there is no other way then to quit and go on your own ... if you're busy with your day job then you need to find someone who is not that busy or who is available full-time for stock options

EDIT: somehow you have to make an agreement with your partners (if possible do it legally) that if they decide to quit or if your partnership is dissolved then IP (code) remains with you (because originally the idea was yours) and in the future they cant do something similar either, i dont know whether it is completely enforceable legally but i dont think if any company (say goolge or yahoo or MS) will let me pursue the idea on my own that was originally not mine - so in the same way you can have an agreement or contract with your partners too.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Charles Carreon Drops Bogus Lawsuit Against The Oatmeal Creator - <AUTHOR> https://www.eff.org/press/releases/charles-carreon-drops-bogus-lawsuit-against-oatmeal-creator <comment><USER2> How is Carreon going to be punished?

It's great that Inman won, but he won not in small part because he's a famous personality that helped gather internet rage--and then the EFF--to his side. But what if he was a nobody? EFF would have very likely told him they were too busy, Carreon would have pressed on, and lots and lots of hard-earned money would have gone down the drain. It makes me so mad that the legal system is so one-sided. Surely Carreon at least must be paying Inman's attorneys' fees!

<comment><USER3> > How is Carreon going to be punished?

Not, unless Inman decides to sue.

> It's great that Inman won

Inman did not really "win", he did get intimidated in _not_ withdrawing the money (he took a picture of his own money instead) and Carreon filed a "Notice of Voluntary Dismissal" without prejudice (as the court ended up not being involved) so he could always pick it up again later.

And:

> Ars called Carreon to comment and found him declaring the lawsuit a success. > "Mission Accomplished," Carreon announced on the phone with Ars.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> While this end is certainly favorable for Inman, I'd have preferred if this was decided in court. This way Carreon can pretend that he had to abandon his just campaign under pressure of the savage hordes of the Internet and try again with a softer target than Inman. If he had been thrown out of court with a clear statement, things would look different.

<comment><USER5> A similar situation occurred in the UK, with a legal firm sending out extortion letters threatening to take people to court for copyright infringement.

A number replied demanding their day in court and, in the same way, the complainant withdrew the case.

However, the judge in the case refused the application and demanded they come to court, so he could enforce judgement, and punish the complainant for filing a frivolous lawsuit.

If i remember correctly, the complainant went bankrupt, dispanding his company, in an attempt to avoid going to trial.

<comment><USER6> ACS:Law was the firm in question which as you say subsequently disbanded although not before getting a verbal hiding from the judge (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACS:Law>).

<comment><USER5> Thanks for the link. I remember the details were about accusing customers of downloading copyrighted pornography, which I was reluctant to search for from my work machine.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> What is the legal punishment for filing frivolous lawsuit? For every case backed down like Carreon, there must be a lot more people caved to legal backmails.

<comment><USER8> If you do it enough, you can get disbarred: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vexatious_litigation>

<comment> mkr-hn Like this guy: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Thompson_(activist)>

<comment><USER9> It took _years_ for anyone to take responsibility for allowing him to continue to practice and abuse the system, and he was _famous_ for trolling the legal system. That tells me the bar needs some serious reform.

<comment><USER10> The 'bar' needs competition. It has a monopoly on who is allowed to practice. If there were multiple bars then there would be competitive pressure for them to clean themselves up. The medical associations need this as well. Anywhere there is one accrediting society there should probably be multiple ones. With transparent feedback on how the members of each perform.

It's one of those funny things that people never seem to notice. We believe in competition and a marketplace but look past the obvious monopolies!

<comment><USER11> Exactly where would the pressure for a bar-competitor to clean up come from? Assuming their income comes from applicants and membership fees, wouldn't they want to let in as many people as the inevitable regulations allow?

<comment><USER10> Slow reply so you may never see this. But you raise a very good point. As do the other people who replied.

* If a company misbehaves then people can boycott it and/or protest against it. It can be punished in a way that affects it's competitiveness. Public pressure can't be applied in the same way to an organisation without competition.

* If we had multiple bar associations then hypothetically certain bars would preferentially attract good lawyers and others would attract bad. Good lawyers would transfer from a bad bar to a good bar (Please excuse simplistic use of good/bad). So there would indeed need to be an overreaching feedback mechanism that would punish a 'bad' bar association full of bad but cheap lawyers.

I suppose a simplistic solution could be:

* Enforcing multiple bar associations that are not allowed more than (say) 15% of the total number of lawyers

* A mechanism for banning any of these associations if they don't keep there members in check.

A thought just jumped into my head that the Bar Association and the AMA are essentially organisations that are, 'Too Big to Fail'. If you (The public through your elected reps) can't punish something then you can't control it or force it to enforce standards.

<comment><USER11> Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I think your reasons make a lot of sense. Potentially, some associations get known as "the good ones" and then they're more competitive than the others.

Ultimately though, it comes down to the laws/regulations. If they leave room for an association that doesn't care about its reputation, the lawyers who would be kicked out of the reputable associations will simply transfer to it and nothing is solved.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I'm quite glad this brouhaha is over - it not only threatened a legitimate fundraiser, but also (should it have gone through) potentially threatened freedom of speech and expression across the web.

Enough is enough, and Carreon saw fit to realize this.

<comment><USER13> Unfortunately I wouldn't bet on the fact that this is really over. Mr. Carreon sounds, charitably put, like a rather unhinged person with a streak for vendetta.

From the Popehat's excellent coverage of this sordid issue:

"2. Dismissal is, without court intervention, without prejudice, meaning that Mr. Carreon could re-file if he wanted. Will he? Who knows."

The whole post here : [http://www.popehat.com/2012/07/03/oatmeal-v-funnyjunk- chapte...](http://www.popehat.com/2012/07/03/oatmeal-v-funnyjunk-chapter-ix- charles-carreon-dismisses-his-lawsuit/)

<comment><USER12> Ahh, interesting. Thanks for posting that link.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'll go with the whole thing was a well orchestrated multi party facade to pump money into cancer research.

<comment><USER15> Scandal, controversy, entertainment, and fundraising? All the elements of a juicy story with positive outcomes all around!

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> But as far as we know, he has _not_ (yet) rescinded his threat to sue the person who started the Satirical Charles website, right?

<comment><USER17> The fun part for him is that even if he does, the Doe in that case has already filed suit against him. It will be difficult/impossible for him to get out of that one without settling.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I wish they would go to court. I'd love nothing more than than the judge saying when he was issuing his ruling: _"By the way, I must add I'm ashamed that I'm working in the same legal system as you, Mr. Carreon. I wish I could disqualify you from doing legal stuff from now on"_. That would make my day.

</comment><comment><USER19> This is sad. It would have been much better if it had gone to court, with carreon losing the case, and _made to pay_ the legal fees to Inman, and probably a fine for wasting court's time.

At least, the charities will get the money - for all the drama and time wasted, something good came out of it

</comment><comment><USER20> Charles Carreon and his wife are almost as bad as Westboro Baptist's Fred Phelps and his cronies. Just doing it because they're too stubborn, ignorant or righteous to see the fallacy of their ways.

People like these only fuel my misanthropy.

<comment><USER21> A better comparison might be made with Jack Thompson, the lawyer who first appeared on the scene as an upstanding moral crusader against the evils of video game violence, and eventually ended up disbarred for abusive and erratic behavior.

This isn't the last we'll hear of Mr. Carreon, rest assured. He hasn't hit bottom yet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> At last sanity prevailed, it will be one of those real comic legends "once upon a time a lawyer tried bullying an artist and the artist fought back with satire"

</comment><comment><USER23> I'm kind of disappointed this is over, it was actually starting to become entertaining.

<comment><USER16> I also felt disappointed because I wanted to see Carreon punished for his abuse of the legal system. But it's probably for the best, since it will free up all of these wonderful people who were providing pro bono counsel to keep fighting the good fights.

<comment><USER24> That would've been great to see cuz he sure deserves the shxtstorm he was dragging himself into. I just can't imagine being so full of myself as to pursue such a worthless suit.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I think items like this are probably not useful or worthwhile as targets for upmodding on HN. We're basically just clicking up-arrow because we like the outcome and see the post here.

We will all hear about this, unless we live under a rock. And for those of us under a rock, it's probably for a good reason.

News items like this and a lack of community discipline to disregard them are how I remember reddit beginning its slide in quality.

The comments this story will attract on HN will not likely add anything to the discussion that's been going on across the Interwebs.

<comment><USER26> > _The comments this story will attract on HN will not likely add anything to > the discussion that's been going on across the Interwebs._

Please share where these magical communities can be found and I'll leave Hacker News. As far as I'm concerned, the HN community as a whole is extremely diverse, intellectual, and inquisitive - something I have yet to find elsewhere. That's why I'm still here. The quality discussions are exactly why I stick around.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> I'm guessing he's about to be disbarred again.

<comment><USER28> Doubtful. This is not really "abuse of the legal system". There are people who have filed thousands of frivolous lawsuits over a period of years, and that is abuse of the legal system. One lawsuit that was dropped a few days later is not abuse.

He will, however, have trouble being taken seriously as a lawyer.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> This free publicity was the best thing to ever happen to the Oatmeal.</comment>


Modern Minimalism - <AUTHOR> http://thepatshea.tumblr.com/post/63713144071/modern-minimalism <comment><USER3> > _I have an 11-inch Macbook Air and an iPhone 5. No other devices._

For some reason, I knew this was going to pop up somewhere in the list.

Smartphones are arguably one of the biggest gadget of the century. And they can be used to watch TV, movies, read news, books, as GPS, as game device and so on.

So why iPhone and no soap?

<comment><USER4> hipster logic 101

<comment><USER3> Creating temporary accounts to post harsh comments is also something that I have hard time to understand.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> > You don't need any of those soapy substances. It's all a big lie perpetrated > by people who want your money. If you eat/sleep/exercise properly, you will > almost never get sick and your body will never smell bad. You won't need to > overcompensate by wasting money on soapy substances.

[citation needed]

<comment><USER6> Yeah I mean, it's not like the advent of soap and the generalisation of it's use (along general hygiene) revolutionised the world or anything.

All those people cleaning their clothes with soap on the river in the 16th century were clearly being lied by corporations who wanted their money.

<comment><USER7> And there are more than 7 billion people in this world. In japan, sick people wear face mask to minimize the spread of their sickness. We use vaccines to protect us.

Humans are not perfect creatures.

On a side note: does he at least use soap when he goes to the bathroom, you know, to have a shit?

<comment><USER8> ... They get vaccines in Japan. I can't tell if your wording was AWFUL or you think people in Japan don't get vaccines.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> As someone who has a pretty simple life (my most valuable possession would probably be ~100kgs of books, stacked in 2 fairly small boxes), I'd love to know a couple of practical details in your life (if it isn't too snooping, that is)! The question will be fairly personal, because pretty much most other stuffs won't be essential.

Do you take a bath daily? How do you brush your teeth? You seems pretty young, and things like teeth cavity might not be a problem yet, but it's hard to say what will happen in a few year.

Why did you make a decision to not have any soapy substance? It seems like a single small bottle of something that can be used both as shampoo and body soap would accomplish the same thing. And bathing after sweating without soap just never seems to work for me.

And are you sure that you're not smelly? I'm honestly wondering since it's fairly hard to for one to detect our own smell - we just get used to it.

<comment><USER10> I noticed myself that if I wash daily, I would not need shower gel. I use it nonetheless, but I could go days without soap (or the perfume contained). EXCEPT if I drink coffee - that makes my sweat somewhat smelly (you probably won't notice it though, only I do) :)

Toothpaste: There are people who get cavities while using toothpaste 3x a day, while I haven't gotten any cavities in the last few years although I have limited brushing to 1x per day (evening). I had minor tooth surgery once, but that seems to have stemmed from an overzealous dentist drilling too fast into a minor cavity which he should just have left alone (causing shock within the tooth, leading to inflammation). But, I'm not sure whether I would ever go entirely without toothpaste. I might research into natural substitutes with similar chemical compounds.

Deo: You certainly don't need it if you eat clean and shower every day.

Shampoo: Some people report that omitting shampoo works well, but there's a nasty transition period of a few weeks in which you might look like you dipped your head in grease. Reportedly, skalp skin reduces the amount of fat secreted if you stop constantly washing it away.

<comment><USER11> > Shampoo: Some people report that omitting shampoo works well, but there's a > nasty transition period of a few weeks in which you might look like you > dipped your head in grease. Reportedly, skalp skin reduces the amount of fat > secreted if you stop constantly washing it away.

Who are those people? I'm genuinely interested. I got rashes that are made worse by shampoo.

<comment> __--__ I've been shampoo free for three years, now. It's like the parent says. My transition period lasted 4 weeks and I wore a hat the entire time. After that, my hair was the softest it's been in its life. No fuss, no muss. I wash it daily with water, when I shower. I use neither shampoo nor conditioner, just water.

Here's an article[1] by a guy who did it as well. He was linked on boingboing in 2009 and 2011. His site also has several updates, as much as a year later[2]. I think one of the boingboing guys did it too. There are links to the boingboing articles in the first link[1].

On the soap issue, I remember reading a study conducted a while back about the difference in bacteria counts after going to the bathroom. They compared not washing to washing with water to washing with soap and water. There was one particular bacteria that was only effectively eliminated when soap was used. Apparently, it was small enough to hide deep enough in the folds of your skin that water alone couldn't touch it. So, I do wash with soap after going to the bathroom, but I don't use soap on my body when I shower.

[1] [http://freetheanimal.com/2009/12/paleo-i-dont-care-i-like- no...](http://freetheanimal.com/2009/12/paleo-i-dont-care-i-like-no-soap-no- shampoo.html) [2] [http://freetheanimal.com/2010/02/no-soap-or-poo- update.html](http://freetheanimal.com/2010/02/no-soap-or-poo-update.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Getting flashes of [http://www.theonion.com/articles/im-just-a-free-spirit- who-i...](http://www.theonion.com/articles/im-just-a-free-spirit-who-is- entirely-financially,33905/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey guys, I've posted a follow-up video to answer a lot of your questions about my modern minimalism. I hope this helps clear up some confusion.

Video: [http://thepatshea.tumblr.com/post/63809364097](http://thepatshea.tumblr.com/post/63809364097) | Discuss the video: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6538136](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6538136)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> It's funny how people who say they are minimalists start listing the things they don't have in the "physical" life arguing they are not needed. But then, they have an iCloud account, a twitter, facebook, flickr, instagram, reddit, gmail, you name it account. How about a minimalist virtual life too, where all you have is an email account? an e-minimalist?

I think a minimalist life should be more about "using" less (and accomplishing more) than about plain raw "owning" less.

<comment><USER14> I think the concept of "e-minimalism" is great.

I think it is useful to recognize that "stuff" is a system, and as a user, the system of "stuff" requires some maintenance, is at risk of failure (by theft, loss or damage), though despite the drawbacks does provide benefits that make life better. My water filter makes water taste better; my sweet chair is very comfortable. My car drives me to the beach to surf regularly. Some stuff requires greater scrutiny -- the high maintenance demanded by the car in terms of time and money indicates that I would be wise to carefully consider if the benefits outweigh the costs.

Technology systems can be measured similarly -- do the costs (time, money, cognitive load, opportunity cost, presently and in the future), outweigh the benefits. Making that measurement is difficult, and our minds are not exactly rational actors when it comes to deciding to adopt technology -- we are easily swayed by social factors, and it is hard to measure the future cognitive load and opportunity cost of a technology system. Being an "e-minimalist" could be a useful heuristic.

Since benefits of "stuff" and systems can vary subjectively, I think minimalism (as a philosophy or hobby) is a subset of a larger identity question from the individual -- "what is my relationship to the systems at play in my life?" Attempting to optimize that relationship usually leads to more happiness than ignoring the question.

For some people, minimalism for "stuff" is a solid optimization. E-minimalism makes lots of sense, too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Out of interest: Where do you stay? Do you rent a flat/house? If so: How do keep it clean? What do you eat? Are you out-sourcing your food production? I am asking because, the smartphone discussion aside, i find it questionable to speak of minimalism if you just trade most of reproductive labor for money. I guess most of (single, childless) readers of HN could just live in an hotel suite without owning anything beside an laptop. I am sorry if that sounds mean, i am no native speaker, i mean it sincerly; 1 month ago i moved to another country to live here for one year and everything i took with me fit in a small backpack. I am still living quite minimalistic on 25m², but i have stuff like a broom, some kitchen equipment, even two beds - one for guests - and an external monitor. Oh, and soap ;)

<comment><USER16> I am sure this guy is still living with his parents judging by the stuff he owns. If you live on your own you NEED things like a refrigerator, a stove, pots and pans, cleaning supplies, kitchen knife, lamps, a table, chairs, the list can go on and on.

<comment><USER17> Not if you can afford eating out for every meal.

<comment> k-mcgrady Would that not go against his claim that this all saves him time. Cooking a meal at home would be much less time consuming than having to go to a restaurant and sit doing nothing while they cook your food for every meal.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Some of the attitudes in the minimalist movement strike me as cargo-cult. What I mean by that is that they seem aimed at optimizing the how-much-stuff-you- own metric itself rather than what it's supposed to be a proxy for (lack of mental burden, control over your life). This is tantamount to assuming that complexity is inherently unmanageable, which I disagree with.

Venkatesh Rao has a good post on the matter somewhere.

Edit: As for the link posted (whether or not it's genuine), I wonder about

>I don't have a bed or a pillow. I sleep in a small sleeping bag.

Is this healthy in the long run?

</comment><comment><USER19> Minimalism or not, I would like to expand on one of the points - <USER2> cosmetics in wide circulation today are really terrible. If you look up their ingredients and look at chemical properties of those, it's all about optimizing the technological process to be as cheap as possible and producing short-term pleasant sensations for the customer, health considerations being completely absent.

Basically it's an example of a problem with market economy that probably occurs in other fields too sometimes - customers themselves do not always notice long term effects of using bad chemicals on their skin and are apt to buy products that smell nice, lather or distribute easily and so on, so almost all producers end up producing products that give a good first impression at the cost of being harmful in the long term. For example, almost every shampoo or fluid soap contains some form of SLS, because it's cheap and because it makes for a nice emulsion, despite research showing it is apt to cause skin irritation. Also popular are mineral oils, which is quite an euphemism for a byproduct of petroleum distillation. If you consider this just the next quack fad, talk to someone who uses some of those chemicals in a lab.

<comment><USER20> Actually, I recently tried to verify the claims about horrible consequences of SLS from anything other than semi-conspiracy-theory sites. I might have missed something, but what I've found was boiled down to it being pretty much a non- issue. What it did turn out, though, is that we use too high doses of soaps and shampoos in general, and they are actually intended to be used in minuscule amounts.

Also, "byproduct of petroleum distillation!" is the new "unnatural!" is the new "if got intended X to Y, he would Z!".

<comment><USER19> _What it did turn out, though, is that we use too high doses of soaps and shampoos in general, and they are actually intended to be used in minuscule amounts_

Well, isn't this a confirmation of what I have said? Like producers of cosmetics encourage us on a regular basis to use up as little of their products as possible? I like what Chomsky said on a somewhat similar topic:

 _If I 'm analyzing capitalism and I point out that General Motors tries to maximize profit, that's not a conspiracy theory. That's analysis._

It's not a conspiracy theory that companies try to maximize profit, in fact that's one of the basic assumptions of free market economy. I don't even ascribe any particularly cynical viewpoints to any of the individual people involved, but in any large company responsibility becomes so diluted it's easy for things that are quite bad for society in general to just happen without anyone being left with much remorse. I think it's quite rational to expect that markets that are not regulated to some extent might degrade in those nasty ways.

<comment><USER20> Not for any kind of generous reasons, but probably to avoid problems with consumer organizations, but I recall most packaging mentioning "small amount". Might be an European thing, though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Since nobody else has pointed this out: the rest of the guy's website reveals him to be a stand-up comic. The ridiculousness of this post is intentional.

</comment><comment><USER22> Wait... is this a parody? Please tell me it's satire.

A "minimalist" shouldn't need a fucking smartphone and laptop.

<comment><USER23> I thought it was pretty obviously satire, but so many people are taking it seriously here; now I'm 98% sure it's satire.

<comment><USER24> It's satirizing the likes of Ev Bogue who actually used to post nonsense like that. I believe Bogue has changed from minimalist snobbery to "pretend to be a techie" snobbery now though. And I think he changed his name too.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Ugh, not this holier-than-thou minimalism meme again.

<comment><USER26> I have tons of possessions and when I don't feel like it I just don't maintain them! Guess what, plants aside my possessions don't give a shit and I have just the same time gain.

<comment><USER25> That's nice but the most important question is, did you write a pretentious blog post about your life style on your tumblr?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I find it a little curious that most commenters here are focusing on his mention of not using soap, but not asking about how his source of income, food, or shelter. That iPhone 5 comes with a monthly bill and requires recharging daily.

<comment><USER28> Clearly, his soap bills were hundreds of dollars a month. Now that he's quit his soap habit, he's got enough for the iPhone. For shelter, he built a yurt out of soap wrappers and self-esteem.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Meh. I am in the process of buying a foldable kayak. I plan to kayak in Patagonia in 2015 and I crossed Poland, Austria and Slovakia with a canoe the last 2 years.

Point is: my kayak won't fit in a bag. Then what? I should buy and iPhone and spend my time on fb? He doesn't even have an ebook, does he read?

I do consider myself a minimalist, but in the way I embrace only the minimum to live a full life, not just for the sake of it. You can't seriously think you can spend all your life like that. What will you talk about with your friends if you have nothing going on? What will fulfill your life growing old? You can sit and think only so much.

<comment><USER30> I'm very interested in doing a long distance river trip in Europe. Can I ask which route you took through those countries? Was dealing with locks an issue or did you just carry your canoe past them?

<comment><USER29> Hey, great why don't you email me? Do you have experience with kayaking? We are planning to go kayaking in the Guadalquivir in May if you are interested. Otherwise, I can share with you our itineraries (with locks) for the Danube (Passau-Bratisalva) and the Vistula (Cracow-Gdansk).

To your question. The routes we look are river only, meaning, we pick a river and we just keep going. Locks usually are not an issue, you either go pass them as you said (so pack well and get a cart 1) or you use a sluice.

The thing I would really be careful with is falls. Even 2m falls can be dangerous. We got very close (like 5m from it) to a 10m water fall in Vienna on the Neu Donau. It was not in our itinerary because under a bridge and not visible from google earth.

1 Couldn't resist: [http://www.vanwal.nl/photos/albums/vistula- june-2013-/img_06...](http://www.vanwal.nl/photos/albums/vistula- june-2013-/img_0654_.jpg)

<comment> k-mcgrady The site you've linked to is throwing up a security warning in Chrome.

<comment><USER29> Solved

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> k-mcgrady This is just doing shit so you can call yourself something. I didn't have a bed or pillow for 3 months. It was uncomfortable and although I got used to it I woke up with neck/back pain every morning. It's a stupid thing to do on purpose.

As for not using soap - please start again. I don't want to be shaking your hand after you've been to the bathroom. And how about in hospitals? Do you make an exception to wash your hands with the provided soap before entering a ward?

Also, getting rid of soap, socks, and a bed does not give you more time.

</comment><comment><USER31> I feel a dose of Poe's law being administered here. You're being harvested for new stand up material.

<comment><USER18> Note that the OP does stand-up himself. He may or may not be pulling a Kaufman on us here.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Every time someone tries to convince me they've found some awesome way to live their life (or do anything) and hints that they've tapped into something undiscovered, or something we'd all be doing if we weren't so blinded or busy being tricked by 'the man', I have to remind myself that we're not all the same.

It needs to be repeated. We're not all the same.

To think that we are the same and make decisions based on that assumption (and use that as a basis for any kind of advice) is at best, foolish, and at most, dangerous.

Here's my ridiculous strawman (which is for entertainment more than argument, like any good strawman):

I don't need a wheelchair. The average person doesn't need a wheelchair. So let's do away with wheelchairs!

Look, sure, I've got a lot of stuff that I don't need and shouldn't need. Upon accepting this truth I didn't dump all my shit and try to fit my life into a backpack. I'm married, which brings with it a whole bunch of compromises. This post, and many like it, reek of someone who doesn't have to make a lot of compromises. I'm sure it works for him. It may not work for you.

Wear sunscreen.

</comment><comment><USER33> Not this again.

I have just moved to another country. While my wife wraps up her job in my home country, before she moves here, I am moving from apartment to apartment with only a suitcase full of clothes, my laptop, and a phone.

Frankly, I hate it. It's great to have a safe and familiar place that you can call home. It's great to have a sofa, a bed, a stack of books, some nice photos on the wall, a kitchen with cooking tools, etc. Also, it's utterly impractical to be a minimalist when/if you get children. Or a life partner who doesn't hold the same philosophy.

I believe in the middle way: don't be overly consumerist, don't be ascetic. There is nothing wrong with having a home and owning stuff (like two jeans).

(Of course, each to his/her own, but I think for 95% of the population extreme minimalism doesn't make them happier.)

</comment><comment><USER34> I did the no-soap thing for awhile. I wouldn't recommend it, unless you're looking to live some kind of counter-culture lifestyle and purposefully alienate people in the mainstream who aren't as open-minded as you are.

Once I stopped, cut my hair and dressed more nicely, I noticed everyone around me, even the open-minded folk suddenly being a lot more friendly.

My take-away: don't cut your nose off to spite your face. Soap is one of those things society believes we need and it's not all that harmful, even if it doesn't really help things much. So just use it.

</comment><comment><USER35> How do you exercise without smelling?

<comment><USER36> Sweat isn't what makes you smell, it's stale sweat that smells.

Anywhere that bacteria and fungus can grow is going to harbour germs.

Tackle those places and you won't smell.

<comment><USER35> Tackle those places with what?

<comment><USER37> Hot water will suffice

<comment><USER34> It really doesn't. I mean, after awhile you'll get used to bathing without soap and you won't think you'll smell, but you will. Especially if you stop using deodorant as well. If you're an anti-social sort and don't really care what people think about you, then knock yourself out, but if you like people like I like people, do them a favor and get some soap. It's cheap.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> This was written by a crazy person.

</comment><comment><USER39> "I have one pair of shorts with built-in underpants."

...what?

<comment><USER40> I suppose he is talking about some kind of swimming shorts. Those often have built-in tights.

<comment><USER39> i was worried more about "one" (1) pair. But now that you mentioned it, this whole matter becomes really disgusting.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Wow, people here are obviously much more attached to their lifestyles than this guy, considering the amount of hate he received in just a few minutes. I mean, he was relatively non-judgemental about the whole thing, and people here respond almost like being attacked personally.

</comment><comment><USER41> Sounds like 18 year old me. If I met that me, I'd probably throttle that me whilst yelling "put that credit card away and get a job" and such. But if successful I guess that would cause a paradox and so it isn't likely to happen.

</comment><comment><USER42> How does watching movies on a laptop rather than a TV create "Time. I have time. Lots of it". I think he's missing the part in his life where you can own something without having to use it all the damn time.

</comment><comment><USER4> this is just stupid. my body creates so much sweat and oil. probably more than a litre evey week. there is no world without soap for me. i would itch and smell so bad that i wouldn't have friends.

<comment><USER43> When I was traveling in Asia I didn't use any soap or shampoo for a month. My hair didn't smell and it felt the most healthy I've ever felt.

<comment><USER4> you must be from north of europe. with a skin that doesn't create oil.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> "I don't use ANY soapy substances" "Time to spend ... chasing girls" Not sure why you need to chase them.

</comment><comment><USER45> This was a successful troll. I actually believed you were serious for several hours. Thanks for brightening up my day.

</comment><comment><USER46> paging Moxie Marlinspike ... [http://www.thoughtcrime.org/blog/the- worst](http://www.thoughtcrime.org/blog/the-worst)

</comment><comment><USER47> I I I I I I -- wow. You said I 53 times.

That is not modern minimalism. You are a contemporary pseudo-ascetic with narcissistic overtones.

edit - removed the angry and hot-headed language

</comment><comment><USER48> 10/10

You made me reply.

</comment><comment><USER49> get some socks man thats disgusting

</comment><comment><USER50> > I don't use ANY soapy substances: ... toothpaste, ... deodorant

So.. are you living in Europe then?

<comment><USER51> Or the USA? [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/31/fashion/31Unwashed.html](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/31/fashion/31Unwashed.html)</comment></comment>


Students Opt For Electric Shock Versus Sitting Alone - <AUTHOR> http://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/some-students-opt-for-electric-shock-over-sitting-alone-with-thoughts-1.1897702

<comment><AUTHOR> The full paper: [http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~dtg/WILSON%20ET%20AL%202014.pdf](http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~dtg/WILSON%20ET%20AL%202014.pdf)</comment>


Google believes that Napoleon is 242 years old. Google this. - <AUTHOR> http://www.google.com/search?q=napoleon+age

<comment><AUTHOR> Here the obligatory screenshot: <http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/5017/napoleon.png>

By the way, _chapeau_. Their "semantic search", "instant answers", "zero click" (call it as you like) is impressive.

EDIT: I did like this one: <https://www.google.com/search?q=jesus+age> , 2016. Apparently Christ was born 4 years before Christ (I knew there are historian who supports that Jesus wasn't born exactly in the year 0, but it always amuzes me)

</comment><comment><USER2> king tut age = about 3353 years (1341 BC)

</comment><comment><USER3> check out: Marquis de Sade. 271 years. That makes him a really old pervert.

</comment><comment><USER3> Elvis is 77!</comment>


Grandmaster level in StarCraft II using multi-agent reinforcement learning - <AUTHOR> https://deepmind.com/research/open-source/alphastar-resources <comment><USER2> Its not clear all the actions they've taken to limit themselves to human input. Some players feel that the EPM (effective actions per minute) of AlphaStar is enormously higher then a human's during a battle. This is likened to a more advanced aimbot where it teaches human's nothing and has an unfair advantage. Alternatively, alpha go has advanced the state of human go playing without feeling like it cheats.

AlphaStar is impressive but I don't think AI has quite dominated the game of starcraft as convincingly as it has go.

<comment><USER3> It seems that the superhuman EPM was more than just a feeling, because human players were able to correctly identify DeepMind's AI from its actions:

 _After 50 games, however, DeepMind hit a snag. Some players had noticed that three user accounts on the Battle.net gaming platform had played the exact same number of StarCraft II games over a similar time frame — the three accounts that AlphaStar was secretly using. When watching replays of these matches, players noticed that the account owner was performing actions that would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for a human. In response, DeepMind began using a number of tricks to keep the trial blind and stop players spotting AlphaStar, such as switching accounts regularly._

From the Nature article:

[https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03298-6](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03298-6)

<comment><USER4> Although hiding AlphaStar's identity was part of the experiment, it also seems a bit sneaky to try to hide the smoking gun of impossible actions.

<comment><USER5> The main impossible action that serves as an AlphaStar giveaway is that it doesn't use control groups. That by itself doesn't suggest an unfair advantage, though. It's just noticeable in replays. The APM still seems to be in line with high-level players.

<comment><USER3> If I remember correctly (from other games), control groups means that you can select a group of units and assign a number to them (Ctrl+n?) so you can then issue commands to them as a group.

I think that a human player's game would be significantly slowed down if they had to play without control groups. Accordingly, the ability to control units without having to assign them to control groups must be a very big advantage for the purpose of micromanaging units. It would be like playing a turn-based game when everyone else was playing in real time.

<comment><USER5> True, you might be right. It might be using an abstract notion of control groups internally (learned through watching and playing so many games), capped at the typical control group cap, in which case maybe it's not an advantage. But maybe it is able to have much more fine-grained control over every single unit, in which case it probably is an advantage.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Just curious, not that DeepMind has to bring any return on investment anytime soon given how rich it's Alphabet parent is and can easily continue to take out boatloads of money, but is there any foreseeable point of profitability for this company?

Or is this just more of a passion project from Sergey and/or Larry that they're personally choosing to fund?

<comment><USER7> They have received worldwide news coverage for some of their work. Like Alpha Go. AI/ML aside, those achievements are huge in terms of marketing and PR.

Then, some R&D expenses can be tax deductible.

<comment><USER8> Just like... IBM?</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: RasberryPi & JavaScript Powered Pizza Ordering - <AUTHOR> http://istrategylabs.com/2013/11/whoa-piepal-lets-you-order-dominos-pizza-with-the-push-of-a-button/ We made this fun little button powered by RasberryPi, Arduino, Node.JS and Phantom.JS <comment><USER2> Awesome!

</comment><comment><USER3> Love it!</comment>


Outrage on campus over student's suicide after sex is broadcast online  - <AUTHOR> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39438381/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

<comment><USER2> > "I wish I could have been more of an ally," said Georges Richa.

My eyes took one space out of that sentence!!</comment>


Assembly - Quirky for Software - <AUTHOR> https://assemblymade.com/ideas

<comment><USER2> I love it, but I'm a bit worried about how it will fare, how stake will be distributed, etc.

They barely started, and some projects already have 86 people registered to work on them... how would that work? If this works out; you'd see projects with 8000 people 'working' on it; I wonder if that would make it worth your while (besides being fun).

It isn't discussed, but I think there should be some management where you can steer the project/members a bit.

<comment><USER3> 8000 people 'working' on it most definitely helps get initial usage off the ground for apps that require a network effect. But you are right, this was my initial concern as well. People and product management seems as though it will be the major challenge for Assembly. However this is an enormous opportunity to go meta and dog food new distributed labor management systems and structures. Valve Software + "The Cloud".

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Some of these ideas are pretty good. I'll be visiting this site often for inspiration. Or maybe even to steal. I wonder how agile the process is vs. an independent team also building the same thing while having the benefit of monitoring the project's progress, ideas, discussion, etc. However, Assembly does have the advantage of getting their first customers.

<comment><USER5> Thanks.

I believe Assembly has a competitive advantage as the first mover _and_ more importantly the open development approach where anyone in the world can participate...for example in only the last 40 hours, already over 83 people have signed-up to build support-foo...a not-perfect but relevant comparison: Zendesk (largest competitor to product) has an engineering team of only ~50 including designers, QA, & devops.

<comment><USER6> Well, quantity isn't everything ... See Brooks's law

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This will be a hit if it comes to fruition.

 _A hassle-free hacker-friendly alternative to GMail. Simple freemium model, no ads, and complete privacy. Even use your own domain._

[https://assemblymade.com/amail](https://assemblymade.com/amail)

</comment><comment><USER8> Some discussion from earlier today here: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6606423](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6606423)

</comment><comment><USER9> Ok, so I had a closer look at it and now I have a question: on the homepage you have 121 ideas atm, but I don't see where I can browse them, except for the top 10. The hello page states "Every month the Assembly community picks an amazing idea for an app". I signed up and logged in, still can't see anything past the top 10. Am I not 'community' enough or are you openly 'faking till you make it'?

</comment><comment><USER10> %5 goes to idea maker, i get it. What happens to other %95 ? Is it evenly distributed, or assemblymade takes a percentage?

I am interested in contributing to projects if it's evenly distrubuted among developers or assemblymade gets a cut no more than %5. Please be clear about it.

<comment><USER5> You can see how proceeds are split in the "How do I get paid" FAQ answer: [https://assemblymade.com/help/profits#profits-1](https://assemblymade.com/help/profits#profits-1)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Interesting idea. Since they mention Quirky, it's ironic that the Quirky founder is on record (this month's Inc magazine) as saying that one of his motivations is to create real physical products, and that too many people are creating "mobile apps and social things".

</comment><comment><USER12> I'd like to see this model work but I predict it won't. For the same reason you don't see 83 collaborators in a painting.

<comment><USER5> Interesting analogy. I'm not sure the process to create a software product and to create paintings share much though...building a successful software product is inherently a team effort. You may have a few leaders influencing the direction but every successful product I've worked on depended on good decisions made by the whole team.

<comment><USER12> A more relaxed analogy to a music band has often come to mind. There's certainly a place in the world for a successful 83-piece orchestra but the piece is mostly written by a single composer. Plus, concerts most people go to today are to see smaller bands.

I did notice a strange thing about my earlier comment though. When I read an HN article in the morning I'm much more apt to write a comment or response. An argument seems to be quickly evaluated based on its feasibility rather than how rewarding it is. It's the opposite in the evenings.

As a model at least, it kind of explains why I'm writing such a thoughtful explanation tonight, after having been downvoted without an explanation that morning.</comment></comment></comment>


My 10 Mobile Developer Tips  - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.msdn.com/hegenderfer/archive/2008/06/20/my-10-mobile-developer-tips.aspx

<comment><USER2> Tip #0: Get off the treadmill that Microsoft has created for mobile developers over the last 20 (yes, 20!) years. Worth with anyone else.</comment>


Triplebyte may be the future of technical interviewing - <AUTHOR> https://gist.github.com/anonymous/9993428c2d857f61985e <comment><USER2> This looks good. Unfortunately, it was killed by a spam filter. Sorry; those are tuned more aggressively for new accounts. We've marked your account legit so this won't happen again, and you're welcome to repost it: [https://news.ycombinator.com/repost?id=10448456](https://news.ycombinator.com/repost?id=10448456).

(We did tweak the title slightly to make it more neutral.)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Author here. I'm posting this anonymously because of conflicts of interest, as described in the post. But you can AMA here. If you know or figure out who I am (it won't be that hard) please don't out me.</comment>