Super Bowl Wi-Fi password credentials broadcast in pre-game security gaffe - <AUTHOR> http://www.zdnet.com/super-bowl-wi-fi-password-credentials-broadcast-in-pre-game-security-gaffe-7000025865/

<comment><USER2> Years ago, a pbs documentary (coocoos egg?) interviewed Richard stallman. He was standing in front of a whiteboard with "prep.ai.mit.edu" user "rms" pw "rms".

Of course I tried it, of course it worked. There was a nice "motd" to the effect: be cool, don't break stuff.

I'm sure this breach was nowhere near as deliberate.

<comment><USER3> From [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman) (source is Steven Levy's book _Hackers_ )

As a hacker in MIT's AI laboratory, Stallman worked on software projects such as TECO, Emacs for ITS, and the Lisp machine operating system (the CONS of 1974-1976 and the CADR of 1977-1979—this latter unit was commercialized by Symbolics and LMI starting around 1980). He would become an ardent critic of restricted computer access in the lab, which at that time was funded primarily by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. When MIT's Laboratory for Computer Science (LCS) installed a password control system in 1977, Stallman found a way to decrypt the passwords and sent users messages containing their decoded password, with a suggestion to change it to the empty string (that is, no password) instead, to re-enable anonymous access to the systems. Around 20% of the users followed his advice at the time, although passwords ultimately prevailed. Stallman boasted of the success of his campaign for many years afterward.[15]

<comment><USER4> These days he'd run afoul of computer fraud act or something like that.

<comment><USER5> [http://www.lightlink.com/spacenka/fors/](http://www.lightlink.com/spacenka/fors/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Absolutely hilarious. Obviously, if you allow the TV cameras inside your "Secret, First-of-it's kind Command Centre", it might be good practice to make sure you don't have any wall-sized notes with your password scribbled on it.

</comment><comment><USER7> There's a widespread misconception that cryptic, hard-to-remember passwords are more secure. That's why people do foolish things such as displaying credentials on mega-TV screens. Forget words. Use memorable, _unique_ phrases.

It's not a new concept, but it's worth repeating, considering that we're still using the term "password" in 2014.

[http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2005/07/passwords-vs- pass-p...](http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2005/07/passwords-vs-pass- phrases.html)

<comment><USER8> You're right. But it just reminded me of this fact:

"Most people use passwords. Some people use passphrases. Bruce Schneier uses an epic passpoem, detailing the life and works of seven mythical Norse heroes."

Jokes aside, I'd really prefer if we'd ignore passwords and passphrases (and passpoems) altogether, leaving them for emergencies, and generally switch to keypairs and, preferably, hardware security tokens.

<comment><USER9> What exactly is keeping the world from turning a regular flash drive into a security token, and actually using it?

<comment><USER8> Not flash token but a proper HSMs.

They're quite common. Many laptops have TPM modules, popular SoCs (like nVidia Tegra) have them too, and most modern motherboards at least have a socket for one. Yet, the only use of them I've ever seen is validating the boot chain's integrity.

Also, USB tokens are not common in users' possession, but if necessary I believe you could get one within a day.

It just need a little push from software vendors. Imagine your OS or browser says "Hey, do you want to secure your credentials? Here's how...". Or just start with an option "use hardware security token" somewhere under settings - while of less impact than active suggestion, it will still strike users curiosity and start things moving bit by bit.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Weird, that portion of the screen looks more like something out of a Hollywood hacker film than something I'd imagine in real life. I'm trying to imagine what circumstances would result in that particular panel, plaintext password and all, ending up broadcast on a wall.

<comment><USER11> I'm pretty sure that screen is just running Notepad, with the default font size blown up.

A lot of staffers are likely in and out of that room in the weeks leading up to today, with the instructions probably posted by some exhausted sysadmin being asked "how to I get on the wifi again?" for the thousandth time.

<comment><USER12> This is the most likely explanation

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> If I were malicious I would setup a wifi network with the same name and password in the vicinity... I wonder if anyone else thought the same or did.

</comment><comment><USER14> For a venue this large, I don't understand why they wouldn't be using WPA2-Enterprise with a RADIUS server, so employees log onto the network with their own (unique) credentials. Ideally paired with machine certificates.

<comment><USER15> Maybe they are? The leaked info did have a username, which are not used with WPA-PSK. So those might be the credentials of a specific user.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Playing devil's advocate here. What harm was done by this? Was it really deserving of a news article and, further, a post on Hacker News? Now, maybe if there is a company out there working to replace or revolutionize passwords... otherwise I just don't see the point of this story.

<comment><USER17> >What harm was done by this?

Plenty. Anybody with ill intentions could set up a similar wifi network or tamper with the existing one and suddenly thousands of people's traffic/passwords are all being sent via MITM.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> This kind of reminds me of the time Prince William's publicity visit to an RAF base in 2012 accidentally revealed a password on a piece of paper stuck up on the wall, it was in pictures broadcast and published everywhere. Having said that, the leaking of Wifi details in the grand scheme of things isn't all too bad as other things that could have been leaked.

</comment><comment><USER19> So they posted the video online, [http://www.cbsnews.com/news/super-bowl- xlviii-security-insid...](http://www.cbsnews.com/news/super-bowl-xlviii- security-inside-the-events-secret-command-center/) , and at 1:23 you see the screenshot, but now they blurred out the password.

</comment><comment><USER20> Has this really been on TV? I mean, I've only seen that image, which doesn't look like the most clear image even, and using Photoshop won't be that difficult... Is there any video of that part?

(Sorry, but I tend to be skeptical about this kind of thing)

<comment><USER19> Yes, I took the screen shot and here is the link to the story. [http://www.cbsnews.com/news/super-bowl-xlviii-security- insid...](http://www.cbsnews.com/news/super-bowl-xlviii-security-inside-the- events-secret-command-center/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> What a horrible password. 12 characters, 2 common English words (w/ common transformations) separated by a punctuation mark.

They would have been better off using 12 random lowercase letters. It would have more entropy and be easier to type on mobile devices.

<comment><USER22> Somehow I don't think maximizing entropy was their intention.

What they really shouldn't have done is put it on a screen that was broadcast on national tv.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> It looks like Windows Server 2008 possibly? Something reasonably modern with the traditional start button?

<comment><USER24> Or a normal desktop version with the classic windows theme.</comment></comment>


Freakonomics: Incentivized Altruism - <AUTHOR> http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/23/incentivized-altruism/

<comment><USER2> A similar idea is that of "nudges" as developed by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein. Nudges are ways to create a framework of choice that is structured in a way to encourage people to make the "optimal" choice anyway. It requires a bit of psychology in understanding the flaws in people's decision-making and perception.

Some countries have high organ donor participation merely because they structure it as opting out rather than opting in. Instead of signing up as a donor, people have to sign a form to opt out. Is it better than rewarding people who do opt in, as in the incentivized altruistic plan?

At least in terms of a retirement savings plans doing the same thing, I think the automatic opt-in mechanism is better, but organ donations are trickier because they usually involve some emotional or religious conundrum over organ donation.

<comment><USER3> _religious conundrum_

I'm kind of torn on this, because often the religious conundrum is a result of poor understanding of one's own religion. For example, I know a Catholic or two who thinks that the Church prohibits organ donation on the theory "Well, cutting edge medicine is probably forbidden, and I'm a good Catholic, so..." which is not an accurate gloss of what the Church actually says about medicine (+). Now if you structured it as an opt-out, you might be able to have a "teachable moment" there with a little application packet that said blah blah blah "And by the way, most religious leaders are broadly supportive of organ donation."

My reason for the wariness is that many religions (and I suppose Catholicism as practiced by many Catholics) do not have a convenient option to look up an authoritative answer on the subject, and that means the slightly confuddled determination of a believer in ignorance of their own religious tradition might actually count as authoritative for them.

\+ Catholics think organ donation is a _virtuous act_ , subject to a few restrictions which are not applicable to the mainstream of organ donation policies.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The real problem here is that there is an incentive for everyone _except_ the donor. The hospitals make lots of money. The doctors make lots of money. The patient gets a new organ. Even the organ transport companies get paid.

But the organ donor gets nothing.

In Iran, they made it legal for organ donors or their families to be compensated and the waitlist for organs cleared out in _one day_!

How's that for an incentive.

<comment><USER5> Can you list a source please?

<comment><AUTHOR> Here's one: <http://reason.com/archives/2008/05/13/kidneys-for-sale>

<comment><USER5> Thanks, I was just dubious about the 'one day' bit (which I don't think is mentioned here) but it is certainly interesting nonetheless. I'm actually surprised there's no religious objections standing in the way of organ donation in Iran.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I agree with the first commenter in the article. I'm sure there are subtleties to organ donor laws that I'm not aware, but I personally like the idea of a hypocrisy test.

This method guarantees that only those supporting a system benefit from it (those who offer to donate organs are only those that may receive it as well). If you don't want to be in a system, then you shouldn't expect to benefit from it either.

I could contrast this system with Social Security, but the latter has too many other political and financial issues that it'd be a stretch.

</comment><comment><USER7> Levitt/Dubner themselves mentioned, there is more than money at play in much decision making, such as morals, bad conscience.

One issue (book) that comes to mind is generousity: [http://www.amazon.com/Generous-Man-Helping-Others- Sexiest/dp...](http://www.amazon.com/Generous-Man-Helping-Others- Sexiest/dp/1560259035)

</comment><comment> brown9-2 The original Marginal Revolution article that they cite has much more/better info: [http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2009/12...](http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2009/12/no- give-no-take-in-israel.html)

</comment><comment><USER8> "Only one in ten Israeli adults is an organ donor"

Strict interpretations of Oral Law do forbid organ donation though it's my understanding that most Israelis don't consider themselves religious. I wonder where this comes from.

Also, the phrase "incetivized altruism" is not an oxymoron. It simply doesn't make sense if you consider the definition of "altruism".</comment>


Bringing the Liberal Arts to Engineering Education - <AUTHOR> http://chronicle.com/article/Bringing-the-Liberal-Arts-to/229671/

<comment><USER2> I would have loved it if my "required" courses were more engaging or interesting. One semester I got three As and a B. The As were in 3000 or 4000 level engineering courses. The B was in a 1000 level "required" course.

If I had questions on why I got homework or exam problems wrong (thus demonstrating that I didn't understand the material) my engineering professors or TAs would generally explain the mistake I made. It was really helpful to me and even though I couldn't retake the exam and get the points back to get a better grade, at least I (usually) actually learned it the second time. This also helped me figure out where I wasn't learning effectively and to improve my ability to study, thus improving not only the value of my education in school but my ability to learn throughout the rest of my life.

After my first exam in my "required" class that one semester, I got a decent but not great grade. On one of the questions I looked the answer up in the book. It corresponded to what I put down on the test. I took this to the professor and asked, given this information, how I got the wrong answer. The professor replied "you're supposed to pick the BEST answer" a bit smugly and would say nothing more.

I get that a college professor doesn't necessarily have the time to explain everything to everyone all the time (which is why lectures exist, they're more efficient), but it's not as though there was a line of 50 students behind me in the hallway outside their office. I was the only one there. Probably a bad teacher rather than a bad program, but it stuck with me nonetheless.

Anecdotes, data, etc.

</comment><comment><USER3> I have a choice of not buying fries with my hamburger, but I have to buy a set "menu" of education, because there is a monopoly.

Anyway, this guy puts it better "The Trillion Dollar Liberal Arts Scam":

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGlwfbZ8mWA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGlwfbZ8mWA)

Comments are great as well.

<comment><USER4> You have a choice to go to a trade school instead of a college.

But why not try to learn something new? Engineering may be fun, but it won't put you in touch with humanity, if that's all you ever study. You may regret that in 60 years or so.</comment></comment>


TimeGT got beaten up too easily with Goole Apps 500 emails per day send limit - <AUTHOR> http://timegt.com/2010/01/14/handling-traffic-and-user-sign-ups/

<comment><AUTHOR> imho it's a good example of the truth that things bite you from places you least expect :)</comment>


The Tesla Advantage: 1.3B Miles of Data - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-20/the-tesla-advantage-1-3-billion-miles-of-data <comment><AUTHOR> Looks like data is being collected and probably used in learning algorithms even when the auto-pilot is switched off.. \--- The 1.3 billion miles of data Tesla said it has collected represents those covered by its vehicles even when Autopilot isn't switched on—it operates in "shadow mode," with sensors tracking real-world data when it's off. \---

<comment><USER2> Would it really be that difficult for incumbent car manufacturers to also collect data in "shadow mode" if they so desired?

<comment><USER3> In theory, no, but is there a competitor with a similar array of sensors and data sources in their cars? It's a tremendous head start. It's going to get interesting :)</comment></comment></comment>


A new free open-source Java web tool - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/TimelyPick/HtmlSpeed <comment><USER2> A web tool to do what?</comment>


Ask HN: What would you recommend to invest time as a research/development topic? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> _Something you really care about._ Don't invest the time because you _should_ , do it because you _want to_.

</comment><comment><USER3> I would echo AnimalMuppet and add that you should research something where your particular skills are going to benefit the project.

After you do your research, think about how you're going to get your message out to the world. That's at least as important as doing the research itself.</comment>


InnocentFelonForHire.com – High Quality Software Service, at a Competitive Price - <AUTHOR> http://www.innocentfelonforhire.com <comment><USER2> Huh I didn't know that fraud through email could be considered wire fraud.

I also didn't anticipate that abusing a rewards system could lead to a wire fraud case.

I am sorry to hear about this case, but I don't quite get how you are arguing you are innocent. What part of their case do you dispute?

</comment><comment><USER3> Two thoughts:

      - Both products (the site, and the app) are copies of
        others. Neither looks like it took great skill to
        throw together. I don't know that anyone would want
        to hire you based on these 2 examples.

      - I don't know that I agree with the sentence. IMO
        seems harsh. But you certainly appear to have crossed
        some kind of line beyond "returning too many used ink
        cartridges"

</comment><comment><USER4> Is this satire? I cannot tell.

If it is, it's pretty distasteful. If it's not, I need to hear more about this court case.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is absolutely not satire. The case is 1:13-CR-00966-JCH-KK-1.

<comment><USER5> Is that this:

[https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1pwl-vwy- nQelwZ2iGguv...](https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1pwl-vwy- nQelwZ2iGguvrtIcsJq30_U7)

<comment><USER6> I'd be very interested to know "what evidence was suppressed" and how it makes the OP innocent. If indeed the OP created 5k+ accounts and intended to deceive OfficeMax then this is anything but innocent.

"I didn't know it was a crime" perhaps.

Worse still the iOS app provides no value whatsoever. Which makes it seem like this is just a marketing ploy for a useless app.

<comment><USER7> Here[1] is a court opinion mentioning at least one type of evidence that was excluded: testimony regarding OfficeMax's accounting of rewards that would show that the rewards were not "property" that could be stolen. Not sure if that's what OP is referring to.

Incidentally, looking at all the different court opinions from this case [2] and the motions they refer to, I can't imagine how expensive it must have been to litigate this. Probably much more than what they had to pay back to OfficeMax.

[1] [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=444697524394189...](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4446975243941898063)

[2] [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=6,33&q=us+v+...](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=6,33&q=us+v+channon+officemax&scisbd=2)

<comment><AUTHOR> Suffice it to say, [1] is not what was being referred to (though it's still a fair point).

Let's talk about the costs of this case. It's been dragging on for 7+ years now and I'd love to share an official accounting of what it cost every party involved, but no such accounting will ever exist. I'm sure it's immense and well into the 7 figures by now.

We've been unable to afford our own counsel (a situation verified by, and kinda forced by, the government) so our defense has been paid for by your tax dollars. The 4 prosecutors in this case have been paid for by your tax dollars. The judge and jury? Yep, you guessed it. (BTW, judge earns more each day than the entire 14-member jury does). The 17+ agent FBI assault team armed with M4 assault rifles and hundreds of hours of "billable" phone hours by certain agents who couldn't recall under oath the names of the people they spent those hours talking to? Your tax dollars.

Even if that company gets that amount of money from us (and gets to keep it), I'm certain the amount they've paid their own people to tilt at this particular windmill will make it a loss even to the company. That's before the upcoming news of the consumer data leak makes it out there.

Dear taxpayer, you're not done paying. The only question left is whether the bureau of prisons or yours truly, or both, will be cashing those checks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Can you explain the ink cartridge thing further? I'm not from the US so this seems ridiculous.

<comment><AUTHOR> Being from the US doesn't help it make any more sense.

Corporations can use the US government as bill collectors, when they'd lose in civil court.

The joke is that any prosecutor worth her salt can indict a ham sandwich. The sad fact is convicting a ham sandwich is almost as easy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> How does this compare with "ReformedFelonForHire.com – High quality software skills, at a competitive price" => [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16925069](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16925069)

</comment><comment><USER10> Innovative approach! Hopefully someone reacts well to this ;)

<comment><USER11> As acknowledged, this page isn't the innovative one. This is: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16925069](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16925069)</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Education and Poor - <AUTHOR>

Can some one please suggest some good writing on this subject? I would prefer mostly PHILOSOPHICAL stuff. <comment><USER2> [http://www.amazon.com/School-Dead-Penguin-education- specials...](http://www.amazon.com/School-Dead-Penguin-education- specials/dp/0140801693)

[http://www.amazon.com/Deschooling-Society-Open-Forum- Illich/...](http://www.amazon.com/Deschooling-Society-Open-Forum- Illich/dp/0714508799/)

or

[http://www.amazon.com/Economic-Theory-Retrospect-Mark- Blaug/...](http://www.amazon.com/Economic-Theory-Retrospect-Mark- Blaug/dp/0521577012)

for a somewhat different perspective.

</comment><comment><USER2> [http://www.amazon.com/School-Dead-Penguin-education- specials...](http://www.amazon.com/School-Dead-Penguin-education- specials/dp/0140801693)

[http://www.amazon.com/Deschooling-Society-Open-Forum- Illich/...](http://www.amazon.com/Deschooling-Society-Open-Forum- Illich/dp/0714508799/)

or

[http://www.amazon.com/Economic-Theory-Retrospect-Mark- Blaug/...](http://www.amazon.com/Economic-Theory-Retrospect-Mark- Blaug/dp/0521577012)

for a somewhat different perspective.

</comment><comment><USER3> <http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/>

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> thank you guys. your help has been invaluable.</comment>


French intelligence agency summons eight journalists for questioning - <AUTHOR> https://rsf.org/en/news/french-intelligence-agency-summons-eight-journalists-questioning <comment><USER2> >> All have been working on sensitive stories such as French arms sales to Saudi Arabia

I read in "La Tribune" that the main export industry now in France is the armament industry.

I tried to find a reference but did not find one. However my gut feeling is that it is true, not because the size of the armament industry, but because of the deficit of the export balance since decades.</comment>


Amazon is helping police build a surveillance network with Ring doorbells - <AUTHOR> https://www.cnet.com/features/amazons-helping-police-build-a-surveillance-network-with-ring-doorbells/ <comment><USER2> "While Ring owners are supposed to have a choice on providing police footage, in some giveaways, police require recipients to turn over footage when requested."

AND

"Ring does not support programs that require recipients to subscribe to a recording plan or that footage from Ring devices be shared as a condition for receiving a donated device. We are actively working with partners to ensure this is reflected in their programs."

The story should have ended there. But I'll bite on the more IoT fear- mongering.

This type of offer is normal. Your power company will ask for API access to your smart thermostat OR put a switch on your house in exchange for turning off your A/C when it's hot.

If you're worried about the privacy angle, pay full price for it. Also ring said they're not going to allow it like that.

But think about it like this, if you're a restaurant in a mall, and your cameras catch something the cops request that footage all the time. In some cases it's part of a warrant or subpoena when you aren't even part of the investigation.

Unless a municipality or police force mandates you install these AND share access to the footage, I don't see the issue.

<comment><USER3> I wonder if placing the doorbell facing the door, rather than street, is a workaround for this.

Most people have porches, with a column, and while running wires could be tedious, it means you'll never have valuable footage for law enforcement, except in your own cases.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> App idea: log known Ring locations' gps coordinates and direction and produce a simple Watcraft 2 style fog of war map.

Bonus: Stimulates PR.

<comment><USER5> That sounds like a map for a place to not commit crime—which is probably okay by the owners.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Does anyone in the Seattle area have any evidence that they police are responding to any of these property crimes?

</comment><comment><USER7> I guess it's probably a business play in that their packages keep getting stolen so if they did this they could stop their packages from getting stolen. But it's a stupid thing to do, where Apple is going for privacy as a competitive advantage and Google keeps getting flack for it -- why not side with privacy as a business advantage rather than surveillance to solve your rather small business problem.

I have bought into the Alexa ecosystem. It would be nice if that Eco-system respected privacy. I would be more committed to it if that were the case, rather than looking to switch to Apple the first chance I get.

</comment><comment><USER8> while walking my dog in my neighborhood i've noticed that every house has multiple cameras monitoring entryways, and almost always pointing at the street.

everyone wants to be safe that's for sure but if you really think about the fact that someone is always watching you when you're walking through your neighborhood it's creepy.

<comment><USER9> As one who has four cameras pointing toward the street, I for one have better things to do than sit in my cave watching my multi-view camera setup for untoward things. Never give me a reason to rewind the recording, and you'll never be watched. I assume my neighbors are doing the same thing. Shit, I don't have time to edit my vacation videos, you think I got time to watch video of you walking your dog?

If it makes you feel any better, the video never leaves my local network. :-)

<comment><USER10> But a lot of the cameras that people install are Cloud-only (not possible to record locally)... And who knows what kind of software Amazon/Google/etc run on those videos. And what is in the cloud, I don't think that the Government needs a warrant to see it.</comment></comment></comment>


When you're in a team that I lead, there are 3 things that I'd like to ask you - <AUTHOR> http://kkovacs.eu/teamwork-ground-rules <comment><USER2> I don't necessarily disagree with the points the author raises but to paraphrase JFK "ask not what your people can do for you, ask what you can do for your people".

I've been in team leading positions before and my approach is this:

1\. Lead by example. You should be working at least as hard as anyone else who's reporting to you. Never make a fuss about it. Never complain about it. Just do it;

2\. Shield your people from crap. Part of your job when you're in a leadership position is to shield them from crap. And by crap I mean things like management BS, customer requirements and so forth. Let them get on with getting the job done. Your job, at least in part, is to deal with these (typically overblown if not outright imagined) exigencies that customers tend to have. Likewise, your people should spend very little time in meetings, particularly with people outside your team;

3\. Appreciate that every developer is different. We all like to work in different ways. Some of us are good at (and like) sailing through uncharted waters. Some like a far more structured environment. It's your job to cater to that to get the most of your people; and

4\. Make sure each person knows how what they do fits into the big picture. This can be as simple as "you're writing this component so when the reporting falls over, which happens because of X, Y or Z, the system recovers". People work better, in my experience, when they have a level of understanding about where their piece of the puzzle goes and why it's important. Again, different people want/need different levels of detail here.

Too often management also thinks that team leadership just happens. In my experience, depending on the project and the size of the team, it can take as much as 25-50% of your time. Too often you're still expected to produce work as if you were spending 100% of your time programming however.

<comment><USER3> I'm all for shielding people from crap, but is that really what you think of customer requirements? Are you building the software for your own enjoyment?

<comment><USER4> Make the requirements intelligible for developers so that at the moment she needs it they're crystal clear. Rewrite this "can we move that button a tad on the left and make it blue like your tie" into "Move button X on screen Y 3px to the left and make it #5544df".

<comment><USER3> That makes more sense to me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Sorry, but this is horrible, and simply not how leadership works.

It's the team lead's job to answer all of these questions on their own, by _interacting_ and _communicating_ with the team members. The role of the leader is to take up the communication slack of the team members because they are to _focus on getting the work done_.

Now, that's not to suggest that members shouldn't be communicating at all, but this is presented in such a way that if all team members followed it properly and consistently, they are basically self governing and don't require a leader at all.

The whole point of the leadership position is to account for each of these failures in human nature.

There was an old saying that was used in the Army that I remember fondly:

"If the student hasn't learned, then you have not taught."

In other words - it's always the teacher (or leader's) fault, because it is the job of the leader to _adapt to the personalities on the team_ not the other way around.

It's easy to be a leader of all-stars, all you need to do is stay out of the way (topic for another day). Being a good team lead is about achieving all- star results with normal people.

<comment><USER6> Well what the article is advocating is "management by exception" - basically a callback system. Where as what you seem to be arguing is a polling system.

It sounds like you want to regularly poll each of the developers, asking; "How's it going? Are you done yet? Any problems?". Where as the articles advocates a callback system, where the developer tells the manager that an event has occurred; "I'm done. I have a question"

In general a callback system is always going to make more effective use of resources than a polling system, both in software design and in management.

All this theory is fine. However the practicality is, some developers are never going to work in a 'callback' manner. You need to prompt and ask them and occasionally pull them out of whatever rabbit hole they have disappeared down. Others are going to absolutely chafe if you keep asking them for progress updates. The difference between an ok manager and a great one lies in being able to understand the human side of things and deal with each person as an individual, rather than just blindly following one theory or another.

<comment><USER7> And until a certain point, a programmer may not recognize when the code is out of hand. Even still, I sometimes spend an absurd amount of time working on something that seemed trivial, because it spent the whole day looking five minutes out of reach. Or a week looking an hour or two away. Those times don't generate callbacks because they don't seem like big enough problems.

Though if a manager polled me a couple of times that week, the second time I was the same distance into the same task, it would be a major trouble sign.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> My instantaneous gut reaction is discomfort. These are all good things, but the tone puts me off.

As someone who appreciates autonomy, I would rather be given an objective with advice on how to attain it than rules to follow. Even if the content is the same, it shows more respect.

In this case, the objective is simply situation awareness (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situation_awareness>) for both parties. The advice is to ask, debrief, and warn.

Dan Pink gave a good 10-minute talk about this sort of thing: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc>

<comment><USER9> Agreed.

Exhibit situational awareness : declarative and flexible.

Ask, debrief, warn : imperative and brittle.

More importantly, the espoused framework only works for a development task oriented situation. What happens when the either bee behind to do some project or product management work and has a less task oriented role?

Quick edit: managers (e.g. below director level) are typically high-performing individual contributors who're given employees in order to amplify the manager's performance. The 'ask, debrief, warn' framework is essentially a manager's framework and views subordinates as if they were extra hands (grab that thing, provide tactile feedback to say it was grabbed, then (oh shit) warn me it was really hot). Seems an effective way for a manager to think/operate, but, as this thread shows, isn't appreciated by all subordinates since it points out that they're 'hands' rather than situationally aware rock stars...

<comment><USER8> As a Haskell user I have to say I love the "declarative leadership" idea...

<comment><USER9> Cool. That's where I was coming from. ;) Painting with too broad and general a brush:

Google, Haskell : Declarative

Burger King, PHP : Imperative

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> While there seems to be a lot of disagreement with the letter of these rules, there's an important and salvageable takeaway from the spirit of them. And that's clarity.

Always strive for clarity. Take the guesswork out of the equation for your direct reports. Set clear expectations for them and for yourself. Help them map out what success looks like, and what reasonable timelines to get there look like. Then let them perform. And be on hand to address questions and concerns as they arise. Be ready to support them when they need it.

From them, expect communication with each other and with you. There's a reasonably high probability that neither you, nor they, are mind readers. So don't operate as though you are. (And if you _do_ have a telepath on your team, report them to the government for further study).

</comment><comment><USER11> I've worked under you (at least, under someone who ran the team like this blog post suggests), and let me tell you, it sucked the life out of the entire team. The deadlines are the team lead's problem: if you aren't aware of where some project is at until someone tells you on the day of the deadline that it will be late, it's the lead who screwed up. How could you be so out of touch not to know these things on a daily basis?

Furthermore, if you tell these things to someone who does go out of their way to communicate clearly, they are just going to resent it as patronizing and start playing games with you. Not healthy for a team or any individual.

<comment><USER12> > if you aren't aware of where some project is at until someone tells you on > the day of the deadline that it will be late, it's the lead who screwed up.

That sounds nice, except that how is he going to know? He'll have to come by every day and ask "How's it going?". Which I've experienced, and is annoying. I prefer the asynchronous model.

<comment><USER11> Agreed, constant requests for status updates are annoying and unproductive. The lead shouldn't have to poll for data all the time but shouldn't expect everything to be pushed his way, either. I don't think it's that hard to have a good sense of where things are at from commit logs, building and running the software, bug reports, and casual conversation with team members. If, however, a team member is working on something high profile, risky, or is trying his best to crawl into a cave and avoid all human interaction, they are probably going to need special attention.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Wont work in a corporation. Essentially because of the stupid end of year reviews.

What will happen is that managers will count the number of WARNs you send out and number of bugs found after your DONE. Programmers will then game the system so that they never send out a WARN and increase the number of "UNCLEARs" to make the manager look like an idiot. They will also only send a "DONE" after they;ve put the system into production.

I think the bottom line is that the programmer needs to feel a part of the team and to trust the manager. Ie the focus of the team is in making a great product and that its understood that mistakes will happen once in a while. Also that its okay to make a mistake (once in a while) as long as you have a backout plan in place and/or your on call when your feature goes live.

This kind of thinking you will not find in a corporation unfortunately.

</comment><comment><USER14> In my experience(mix of large and small companies) the one that seems to really confuse people is ASK. It seems the when people run into a problem that they are unable to solve, the majority do not think to ask for help or guidance, but choose the path of self preservation and do whatever they can to hide or spin the situation. This of course inevitably comes back to cause them or someone else in the pipeline problems, but that doesn't seem to stop most people. Is it just too powerful of an instinct for the majority of people to overcome or are we just becoming a "Cover Your Ass" type of society? Then again maybe I am just frustrated this week :)

<comment><USER15> Asking for help is an implicit admission of lack of skill or knowledge. People think this reflects negatively on them. In a good team it actually reflects positively, because it means the person thinks learning is more important than ass-covering, but then not everyone works in a good team.

<comment><USER14> You are exactly right, it is an admission of lack of knowledge. My thinking is that if the majority starts looking at learning and growing as a positive rather than a negative, then a lot more positive things will come of that. Now while this may take decades at large corporations, it is the kind of things startups and founders can implement in their small business and see some real change.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> These strike me as no-brainers. There's nothing really philosophical or controversial about them. I wouldn't even classify them as "teamwork", just basic communication.

If I hire someone to do a job then I absolutely expect them to a) ask for clarification if required, b) confirm with me once the job is done or c) warn me if the job will not be done on time.

I think most of the comments on here have read way too much into these 3 rules.

Tip: he's talking about how individual members of a team communicate with him: the boss. Nothing more, nothing less.

</comment><comment><USER17> I see the author catching some crap, but I think it's undue. Well, potentially. The clearer you are with your manager, the smoother the machine runs. The only problem is that, in the hands of the wrong boss, trying to do the right things gets you fired. This really only works for the worker if the manager is equally honest and pro-active. And the only way to find out is to put your job on the line and gain that trust the hard way.

</comment><comment><USER18> Tying these together, it seems the manager assumes all is well unless alerted otherwise. This, at an extreme, could be a "set and forget" style management: once tasks are given if you hear nothing you expect the job delivered on time. I think if this is communicated fairly it can be a useful approach, although its a wise manager who occasionally checks up on progress :)

</comment><comment><USER19> I think these are really wrong rules: they are good for non-knowledge workers but horrendous for knowledge workers.

Here is what needs to be done instead: Instead ASK, you should EXPLAIN task/project multiple times preferable using different methods of communication (email, in person, chat, etc.). You should also explain reasoning, risks, bigger context, and similar things. And ALWAYS ask for input and improvements.

Instead WARN, just check for status - often. Talk to people. We all know that software development has so many unknowns that the initial schedule is only valid if project is very simple and all unknowns are know. And many many times schedule depends on decision how things are implemented. Also WARN has negative connotation: for example, if an engineer comes back and says that she might get 10x performance improvement but things will be 10% late, is that WARN?

And DEBRIEF ... In my experience this is "outsourcing special": I learn that engineers in India like to say they are done when things are not done: just to be on time.

</comment><comment><USER20> So, communicate? But it's surprising how many people do not do this. I think as a teal leader, you should take care to repeat these points to every new person joining the team.

<comment><USER21> It comes down to a question of culture.

In many organizations I've been a part of:

* Asking is regarded as an admission of failure (and failure is regarded as a bad thing). Asking more questions (or even worse, clarification on an answer) can jeopardize your standing among your bosses, and, by virtue of the culture they cultivate, among your peers.

* Missing a deadline for any reason is a permanent mark against you, to be trotted out on every review and used as a reason to keep your salary low (I actually had a boss LOWER my salary, at which point I left in disgust)

* Reporting something done is an invitation for a dressing-down, where your boss humiliates you for everything not done to his satisfaction.

And so, with a culture of fear firmly in place, the standard operating procedure is:

1\. Never ask questions. Do a shitty job if you can't do a good job and try to cover it up as best you can, or better yet, unload the project onto someone else.

2\. Never report something "done" if you can avoid it. This gives you some "wiggle room" when the boss comes down on you over everything that's wrong with it.

3\. Never say that you'll miss a deadline. Cut corners if you have to. Miracles sometimes happen. Maybe this time you'll win the lottery.

Now that I'm a founder, I'm working hard to undo that culture, keep fear out of the equation, and encourage communication and experimentation (along with the possibility of failure). It's amazing to watch someone go at it when they're uninhibited by fear.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> In other words, you, my minions, should obey my superior intelligence and work in a way that doesn't annoy me.

<comment><USER23> Are there any specific points in there that you feel are detrimental to productive team work?

<comment><USER22> The entire attitude suggests a dysfunctional team environment. The author is creating a divide between him and those who report to him. All three points come across as complaining; complaining that it irritated him when someone on his team did not ask, debrief, or warn. My guess would be that the team lead is not an approachable person.

No where does he ask what he can do to help the team operate better.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Having managed multiple teams in the biotech/pharma realm, I can sympathize with the frustrated tone, but we are simply talking about communication.

Communication begins with the lead and is fostered in a non-hostile atmosphere.

You start with your group and then you speak to each team member individually. You discuss your communication and escalation pathways and then monitor your project.

As the lead and the driver of outcomes, you model outstanding communication and problem-solving (there are ALWAYS problems).

For me, I mastered the art of asking questions: "What else can I do for you?" "What other concerns do you have?" "What are the obstacles in your path?" "Do you have the resources/support you need?" "Are you going to meet your deadline?"

There are no shortcuts here. You show your value when you proactively manage and bring projects home to successful conclusions. As the lead, it's your game to lose.

</comment><comment><USER25> A friend pointed me to this discussion. I am really, really surprised at the number of comments which have interpreted this post as exhibiting a dictatorial mindset on the part of a team lead. The only takeaway as somebody has already pointed out is that _clarity_ matters, _communication_ matters, and communication has to be initiated by the person responsible for the job. In self organizing, agile (in the English sense, not the beaten to death software development model sense) teams, this is the norm.

</comment><comment><USER26> Maybe I am just lazy, but I love it when I come across a problem I have to ask someone about, that usually means I can just kick it over to them and have them fix it for me.

Of course I spend half my time helping other teams, so they owe me dammit.

Forgot to mention, I also start warning people I am going to miss the deadline soon after I get the assignment. That makes it even more miraculous when I make the deadline. Don't worry, I thank all the little people who helped me while I take my victory lap.

</comment><comment><USER27> 4\. Make sure when you explain "A" that the person you're talking to doesn't hear it as "B".

Not sure why, but this seems to be very common with programmers -- especially when one programmer is explaining a task to another programmer.

<comment><USER28> Because software is, by its nature, ill-defined. If you fully specify every detail of a project, you've essentially done all the work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> This reminds me of the Japanese business word "Ho-Ren-Sou", which stands for houkoku (report), renraku (contact, communicate), and soudan (consult, get feedback).

It also means "spinach", so it is easy to remember ;)

</comment><comment><USER30> Very good points, and easy to put into practice.

<comment><USER31> Not really. Each point puts me in a position where I appear as a weak or ineffective employee, which is likely to harm my coworkers and managers assumption of my skill level and therefore bonuses, raises and future employment.

If I inform you now about the risk of missing the deadline, I look weak, ineffective, etc (even if it is better for the team) but if I wait and some situation develop which I can say will prevent us from reaching the deadline, I don't look nearly as weak.

His 3 points are very good, but unless you are working a small company or a start-up, you _have_ to play politics.

<comment><USER32> >His 3 points are very good, but unless you are working a small company or a start-up, you have to play politics.

I guess that's the perspective I'm missing.

From where I sit, it's almost unimaginable that those three points are anything but a given. But I've never worked outside of small businesses/startups.

If I don't tell my boss -- the founder -- up front that we can't make a deadline, or that a feature won't happen, it's much more of a risk.

How can programmers help change large corporate culture so that playing politics _isn't_ as important? Or, at least, so that more honest communication can take place without risking blowback?

<comment><USER33> I think if anyone figures out a general solution to that one they'll probably have solved a much more important issue than corporate cultural dynamics; they'll have solved _government_.

The dynamics of risk change with the size of the entity involved. For example, in a small startup, losing a hard drive could mean the end of months of work - could kill the company. Or since everyone makes backups / uses hosted services these days ( right? ;) ), maybe a better analogy would be an employee being lost to sickness for months.

In a 100+ person company a broken hard drive should never be anything more than annoying, losing an employee is going to be unfortunate and might even significantly delay a product/feature; but it won't be the end of the business.

There's a raft of interpersonal dynamics which change too; the larger the company the less likely you are to be pally with everyone. Simple factor of surface area - you can't cover them all. So relationships become more formal. As spheres of responsibility begin to form, people develop moats around those responsibilities for better "separation of concerns".

At some point I suppose stuff starts to slip between those self-defined spheres, especially as people move in and out of roles, subtly redefining them each time. Making sure you're not being negligent (or seen to be negligent) in a multi-million dollar company is kind of a big deal if you expect to work somewhere else in future (and especially if you intend to keep working at that company).

<comment><USER32> Again, this could be coming from my lack of experience in this world.

While your points are well taken, I'm not sure how those three points change between small & large companies. I'm going to focus on "WARN": the other two seem to be less contentious.

Working in small companies, if I'm not going to be able to make my deadline, the proverbial buck stops at me -- so I'd better own up to it, and tell my boss why it happened, and more importantly, what I'm doing to fix it.

Is it just that in a large company I can spread blame around a bit more? "It's not really _my fault_ \-- my team lead wasn't on the ball, we had too much pushback from sales, and if we could cut some of the dead weight from this team..."

Is that the issue? Or is it something I don't see?

<comment><USER33> It's less that you _can_ spread the blame around than it is that the blame _is_ spread around a bit more. Tasks get broken up, redundancy gets built in.

One of the most important goals for my "parent" company after we were acquired was to make sure that I (as the first and only employee) was not going to be killing the company if I left to pursue something else or got sick, etc.

So you've effectively got it, it's just that, in a big company, unless you're the CTO or in some other relatively lofty position, the buck probably does not stop with you.

Depends on the company obviously, YMMV, but I think the important takeaway is that "big" companies aren't just larger "small" companies - they're very different entities.

There's an interesting talk from Geoffrey West that (if I recall correctly) is somewhat related to this topic (the scaling of cities vs companies) - <http://edge.org/conversation/geoffrey-west>

Apologies if I've left you more puzzled than before!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> I don't necessarily think there is an issue with having these guidelines front and center.

</comment><comment><USER35> Short and sweet. Applies to teams beyond software development.

</comment><comment><USER36> I was under the impression that it was Assume, Lie and Procrastinate.

<comment><AUTHOR> :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> What...is your name? What...is your quest? What...is the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?</comment>


Software as a Service with Amazon FPS using Remit for Ruby - <AUTHOR> http://edgenic.com/2009/01/24/software-as-a-service-with-amazon-fps-using-remit-for-ruby/ <comment><USER2> Redirecting your users away from your site just to pay is such an unnatural workflow. I can't believe that this is even remotely acceptable - you're introducing friction and obstacles at the most critical juncture.

<comment><USER3> I know you're right but I wish you weren't. Personally I'd much rather typed my credit card number into an <https://amazon.com> page than some random site I don't trust. But I'm sure that's not the way most people think about online payments.</comment></comment>


Peresvet: A Russian mobile laser system to dazzle enemy satellites - <AUTHOR> https://www.thespacereview.com/article/3967/1 <comment><USER2> This seems like a waste of money on countering satellites that already have extensive optical shielding.</comment>


Rails isn't a ghetto, the sector's got lots of work, and Zed Shaw uses it every day wearing a tie and dress shirt - <AUTHOR> http://blog.obiefernandez.com/content/2008/01/zed-is-wrong-ra.html

<comment><USER2> Translation/summary: Zed asked me to cover up for his angry rant. "All those profane indictments were actually just little jokes! He's an okay guy, really!"

All this just makes me want to learn Rails that much less. I progam with creating wealth in mind, not insane drama.

<comment><AUTHOR> In reality, though, the interpersonal drama that plays out in the blogosphere does little to make any given framework more or less effective of a tool.

<comment><USER2> True.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I'd love to find some of those $200 and hour contracts... is he for real?

<comment><USER4> Just googling around, doesn't seem to be a real number. For instance, the 4th google hit for "ruby on rails contract" says "This is a 2 month contract position paying $40/hour"

I know I just got through paying some RoR guys about twice that for some code monkey stuff. So the 40-80 range looks a lot more real than 200. Note that I'm not saying there isn't somebody out there making 200/hour, just it is not indicative of where the market is at. Heck, there's probably a few 200/hour COBOL programmers out there too, but that's not saying much for the idea of being a COBOL programmer. It's just an outlier.

<comment><USER5> He did specify that as the rate for "premium Rails talent", as opposed to $100+ for "average rails talent". Presumably he defines "premium talent" as lying somewhere between "'senior' in the job title" and "Rails Core member or equivalent"; where exactly I don't know.

<comment><USER3> Still, even a $125 an hour gig would be pretty awesome. Wouldn't mind leaving my mind-rotting intra-corp job for a few months of something like that. At least then I could work on the same platform as my startup - not only at night but all day.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Turn on HTML5 (youtube.com/html5) then click "Save As" on a YouTube video - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PSPvHcLnN0&feature=rec-LGOUT-real_rn-1r-27-HM

<comment><USER2> everytime I get the same message: " This video contains content from Vevo, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds. Sorry about that."

;)

</comment><comment><USER3> WOW! I just fell off the couch laughing!</comment>


Exercise contagion in a global social network - <AUTHOR> https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14753 <comment><AUTHOR> few interesting findings: > Less active runners influence more active runners, but not the reverse.

> Both men and women influence men, while only women influence other women.</comment>


How to use smart lights to stop people from interrupting your conference calls - <AUTHOR> https://www.coywolf.news/productivity/working-from-home-smart-lights-avoid-call-interruptions/ <comment><USER2> it can be easy i has it many times and as usual</comment>


Ask HN: Validating your idea - <AUTHOR>

Just curios at the ways by which people looking to do a startup validate their initial ideas. "talking to friends", "google ads"?... <comment><USER2> Have you read this article? [http://startupbound.com/how-i-quickly-test-and- validate-star...](http://startupbound.com/how-i-quickly-test-and-validate- startup-ideas/)

<comment><AUTHOR> i think this is a pretty interesting way of validating but it involves spending some money which most people might not have. I was thinking more about the "out of the shower" aha moments where you really just want to get instant fly-or-die feedback...is it valuable to just go ahead a build an MVP or really try and talk to people about it to see if theres a need (although talk is really cheap, hence the need for an MVP)

<comment><USER2> From what I've read in blogs and The Lean Startup talking to the people you expect to use your product is the way to go. If you're selling an application for teachers aren't the teachers the people who will know if they'd use it (to an extent)?

<comment><USER3> Absolutely. The first thing you want to do is ask someone in the domain about the problem. Is it really a problem or is this a solution without a problem? At that point you can start figuring out how you're going to solve this problem, and doing your design and iteration.

If you end up with an idea first (because you always find ideas in the shower and very rarely problems), try to take a step back and figure out what the problem is that your idea is going to solve. From there you can do your iteration.

<comment><AUTHOR> really great feedback thanks. I'm just thinking of a quick way to get that idea to a diverse group of teachers ( for example ) and get feedback in real time as opposed to just the ones I know who are likely to just say "yeah we'd use it" so they can make me happy.

I was thinking of creating a service where you can blast out an idea. If enough people signup and maybe categorize themselves, you can possibly get valuable feedback on whatever idea you just had. What do you think?

<comment><USER2> In theory it sounds nice but in practice people may be hesitant to make their idea public to X number of strangers whom they've never met. You'd also need to find a wide range of domain experts to participate. What is their motivation?

<comment><USER4> LinkedIn could be used to facilitate this feedback loop.

<comment><AUTHOR> hey! I'm curious as to how linkedin can be used...care to explain a little bit :)

<comment><USER3> My guess is that you'd find a connection that works your particular area to validate the problem. If it's a first level connection that's great, easier to ask :). Otherwise, find a second level connection and get introduced to them. Say that you'd like to discuss some of the problems that they may experience [as a teacher, entrepreneur, etc]. People love to talk about their problems to someone who will listen.

<comment><USER4> Yes, exactly caw - thanks. I view LinkedIn as one huge convention center, and the worst that can happen is people decline you connection request. If you present an honest and positive tone, people will be more receptive. Then it is possible to PM select connections to review your idea or beta, etc.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Careers as Efficient Markets - <AUTHOR> http://sfard.posterous.com/careers-as-efficient-markets <comment><USER2> In my very humble opinion, what I just read was a lengthy and macchiavellan explanation of a simple concept: if your co-workers are happy with their job and you don't, and you all get paid the same, you might want to consider looking for another job that better fill your expectations.

There's no need for EMH theories and graphs to get that.

</comment><comment><USER3> He should take this a step further and talk about BATNA. It explains a lot of other reasons why you might stay in a crappy job, such as that the job market is lousy right now. You can also say the job market is not "liquid" right now.

Many people are sitting in local maxima rather than risking their milk money trying to climb the ladder. The sculptor works at a bank and the banker works at an antique store because it's not time to follow your dreams just yet...

In IT, the best explanation is here:

[http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Up-or-Out-Solving-the-IT- Tur...](http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Up-or-Out-Solving-the-IT-Turnover- Crisis.aspx)

</comment><comment><USER4> "If all you are getting from work is a paycheck, you are underpaid." -Jim Rohn

Someone once explained to me that capitalism is based on overpaying you for the first few years of your career and underpaying you for the next forty years.

</comment><comment><USER5> I kinda get the point he's making, but the EMH metaphor doesn't work at all.

</comment><comment><USER6> Hmm,

Seems a bit behind the times...

 _Efficient market hypothesis (EMH) is a powerful idea. It started as a way to explain how prices of tradeable securities will reflect their real value._

Objectively, the efficient market hypothesis was handed it's head in the last crash. The only "power" in the hypothesis is the "powerful" ability it gives stock brokers to talk people into putting their 401Ks into some big gambles.

If it doesn't work for a relatively straight-forward market like securities, it seems doubtful it would for the very opaque and complex labor market.

<comment><USER7> _Objectively, the efficient market hypothesis was handed it's head in the last crash._

Interesting. Could you please explain the trading strategy based on market crashes like the last one which you believe is a counterexample to EMH (assuming you are not still getting rich with it)?

[http://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/01/how-to-complain-re- emh...](http://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/01/how-to-complain-re-emh.html)

[edit: clarified what I mean by trading strategy, in response to tome.]

<comment><USER8> I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Some investors clearly have made returns over the last fifty years at substantially above the market rate.

<comment><USER7> I know, I work for one of them. I certainly would not claim markets are 100% efficient.

It's joe_the_user's _argument_ that I'm disputing, not his conclusion. In general, when you make an argument that the EMH is false and certain securities are priced incorrectly (I'm guessing he is referring to houses or MBS), you should have a track record of getting rich based on trading those securities.

<comment><USER9> Does that mean everyone who does not have such a track record should believe in EMH? Or should they just not make arguments that do anything to contradict it? Or something else?

<comment><USER7> In any specific case, you should believe in the EMH. It's the safest assumption.

And yes, once you are convinced that markets are inefficient, you should not make any public arguments contradicting the EMH. You should STFU until after you have earned so much money that you don't care about earning any more [1].

[1] Obviously you can talk to potential investors/employees/etc, keeping in mind that any one of them might steal your strategy.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Trigonometric Delights (pdf) - <AUTHOR> http://press.princeton.edu/books/maor/

<comment><USER2> It's not just a PDF—it's 34 PDFs! Each chapter, sidebar, and other section is separate.

It makes for a kind of minimalist DRM. (I don't know for sure that the publisher meant it that way, though the way the copyright notice is written specifically to allow only reading "on the World Wide Web" suggests they could have an inkling.) There's no impediment to randomly browsing the full text online, but if you want to load it into an offline e-reader you have to deal with all the pieces somehow. Not that difficult, but it might be easier just to buy it.

Sure, overcoming this is a minor hurdle given a bit of effort, but you can say the same about cracking typical DRM. (I expect a lawyer could point out differences from the point of view of DMCA's anti-circumvention clause.)

Then again, the publisher may not have that much of a clue. There's no way to pay for a single-PDF version. And look at the links where the copyright notice punts you for information on Class Use [1] and other Permissions [2].

[1] <http://press.princeton.edu/class_use/>

[2] <http://press.princeton.edu/permissions/>

</comment><comment><USER3> I wonder if old school publishers will ever understand that stuff like this doesn't mean what they think it does...

"No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the publisher, except for reading and browsing via the World Wide Web."

Because in order to read or browse this book you _have_ to download the PDF and store it somewhere... So you're automatically violating those terms...

Anyway, thanks for the post, this looks like an awesome book!

<comment><USER4> Not to mention just reading it, your brain is an electro-chemical storage device! Last I heard they haven't been able to hook it up to the web just yet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> The preface's Problem 1 was a fun exercise proving a beautiful identity. Hint: Lbh arrq bayl bar gevt vqragvgl gb cebir vg, gur sbezhyn sbe fva(2k).

</comment><comment><USER6> I read some of the chapter on the origin of cos and sine. It reads a bit like the telephone book, or possibly a dictionary. Either way, I am going to ignore the copyright, download it to my electric book, and read much of it.

<comment><USER7> On the contrary, I found the book engaging and interesting. Maor's passion for trigonometry shows through in his clever examples and humorous stories. (Read the prologue about Ahmes the Scribe)

<comment><USER6> I didn't say I didn't find it interesting. I said it reads like a telephone book. I actually liked that the information seemed to me to be compressed.</comment></comment></comment>


The Tragedy of the Commons - <AUTHOR> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons#Garrett_Hardin.27s_essay <comment><USER2> Hi, Omarish. The tragedy of the commons (economists call these situations "negative externalities") doesn't apply to Web 2.0 in my opinion.

The tragedy of the commons stems from a basic cost/benefit calculation: in business, if something costs you more than you make, you either stop selling it or you go out of business. The basic problem of a negative externality is that while the profit accrues to an individual, the cost hidden from that individual and is borne by the community. So a non-viable activity continues to be performed, until the community goes bankrupt. (I.e., the field is depleted and cannot sustain sheep). Some argue that pollution falls into this category. (Note that this is not necessarily an argument for private ownership of everything: the principle problem is costs exceeding benefits, and those costs being hidden from producers so that their incentives are misaligned. Privatization is one way, but probably not the only way, to align incentives.)

But in Web 2.0, there are no hidden costs that are depleting the overall store. Companies pay for their bandwidth, pay for their storage, etc. No costs are shifted to the community as near as I can tell.

A better model for what you're talking about might be network effects - <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effects>

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Hardin talks about the tragedy of the commons and relates it to the model of sheep on a field.

 _Positive : the herder receives all of the proceeds from each additional animal

_ Negative : the pasture is slightly degraded by each additional animal

This is very similar to the web 2.0 model on the internet today where applications get smarter/stronger when people use them. Except on the web, each additional user makes the overall web application stronger. A perfect example is wikipedia itself.

When somebody publishes an article, it is a cost of 1. And then to a user reading, he or she gets the benefit of N is the number of articles, but for simplicity's sake, let's say the number of users.

Where do the negatives come in? Is there a "tragedy" in web 2.0?</comment>


Centriphone – an iPhone video experiment [video] - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqncOP7OzMg <comment><USER2> Any speculation on how he did that? In some of the shots I can see the main string splitting into what looks like two strings, but I was expecting a third.

Edit: [http://imgur.com/O0Z2UOM](http://imgur.com/O0Z2UOM)

<comment><USER3> 1) high shutter speed, lots of light 2) 240fps, twixtor in post 3) string splitting into 2, attached to top and bottom of the iphone, presumably stopping it from spinning around? 4) fisheye attachment

<comment><USER4> The case could have some kind of fin or tail that keeps it from spinning.

<comment><USER5> I immediately think of a thing from my kite aerial photography days called a picavet [http://scotthaefner.com/kap/equipment/picavet/](http://scotthaefner.com/kap/equipment/picavet/) a sort of angular momentum assisted stabilizing rig.

<comment><USER4> Interesting but I believe this is a different scenario. The problem here is to avoid the phone rotating around the axis of the lens. The air flow from the circular motion could be used to stabilise it when there is fin at the back of the case. In addition the axis needs to point towards the center of the circular motion. Fixing it with a string at each corner is probably enough for this.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Dark Site Finder: tracking light pollution to find locations for stargazing - <AUTHOR> http://darksitefinder.com/maps/world.html <comment><USER3> I use this site frequently. Whenever I travel on assignment, I look up what the seeing will be like in that area. This sight quickly lets me know what kind of imagery will be possible. I then use other sites to get an actual seeing forecast that includes info like temperature, expected cloud coverage, wind speeds, moon phase, etc.

I recently visited Australia and New Zealand, and using this site I knew I was in for a treat at night.

Here's an example from NZ from a location that is represented by the first blue color after green: [https://vimeo.com/246328898](https://vimeo.com/246328898)

Here's an example from Australia also in the same blue color on the map. However, this one starts while the moon is below horizon, and continues until the almost full moon gets pretty high in the sky to the point it looks like day light: [https://vimeo.com/241600503](https://vimeo.com/241600503)

By comparison, here's a video where all of the footage was taken from a totally dark sky area of the map: [https://vimeo.com/157779663](https://vimeo.com/157779663) The difference from blue to black on the map is pretty significant.

I am quite the fan of this site. I'm not sure on the status of the site currently, but when I first started to use it, I believe the data was many years old at the time. Based on that, you can pretty much assume that if it is old data, then it will only have gotten brighter in any given area. Very few places take light pollution into consideration with new development.

<comment><USER4> Wait... Stars are visible during the day with time-lapsed photography?

<comment><USER3> To be clear, no, that was not taken during the day. In that one clip from Australia, the light is 100% only from the nearly full moon. With a DSLR and a long exposure, that light will completely light up the area to the point that it looks like day light. The only thing to give away that it is not taken during the day are the stars being visible and the smoothness of the water. The smoothness of the water gives away the long exposure.

On a full moon in dark sky locations, it is possible to walk around without the need of a flashlight. Of course, you need to give your eyes time to adjust. It is definitely bright enough to cast shadows. I've even seen shadows cast from the light of the Milky Way on new moon nights. It is hard to believe how bright starlight can be.

<comment><USER5> I live in a "dark blue" area per the map, with a ~1h drive to absolute black. Mind you, I'm not sure I've noticed that much difference between my back yard and deep in the middle of Yellowstone.

Anyway, the thing that surprised me about long exposure DSLR dark photography is that you get pretty decent color rendition. For some reason I didn't expect that. You can very clearly see the different color temperature of the stars in Orion, and if you have a very dimly illuminated foreground as you mention, you see it in accurate full color. I guess I didn't expect it because human eyes don't register color in low light. DSLR sensors are doing it photon by photon through the Bayer filter..

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> [http://www.lightpollutionmap.info](http://www.lightpollutionmap.info) has much higher resolution data, down to tens of metres. You can also choose the dataset by year - choose the "VIIRS 2017 March" dataset for the best detail. Data comes from the Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS) satellite [1].

For example, with the extra resolution I managed to find a dark patch near the train line in between Waterfall station and Helensburgh south of Sydney - <USER2> darkest sky until you go far past Wollongong.

[1]: [https://jointmission.gsfc.nasa.gov/viirs.html](https://jointmission.gsfc.nasa.gov/viirs.html)

<comment><USER7> Is there a reason they default to the 2015 dataset instead of the 2017 dataset? Is it more complete?

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> It's been a really long time when I saw the milkyway in the urban area. I don't expect I can see the milkyway in the city (maybe at the total blackout?), but I hope to see it within 30min drive. Also, I hope to see more nebular in my backyard w/ decent telecope, I only could see a few famous nebular such as Orion, Omega, faint veils...

Too bad for little people to be able to see that amazing nightsky .

</comment><comment><USER9> I love looking at sites like this. My favorite is:

[https://www.lightpollutionmap.info](https://www.lightpollutionmap.info)

One thing I've always been curious about is there are 3 points of brightness off the coast of Newfoundland. Does anyone know what they are?

[https://www.lightpollutionmap.info/#zoom=6&lat=5811787&lon=-...](https://www.lightpollutionmap.info/#zoom=6&lat=5811787&lon=-5227188&layers=0BFFFTFFFF)

<comment><USER10> From the location of those light sources, I suspect they are from drilling rigs extracting oil from several large oil fields around the Grand Banks of Newfoundland.

There's a map of the largest fields in this article:

[http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/husky- we...](http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/husky-west-white- rose-1.4135594)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I was on a boat crusing through the Galapagos Islands and went topside to look at the southern skies. I've never been is so dark an area. The Southern Cross and the Jewel Box appeared almost 3-dimensional and the Milky Way was visible from horizon to horizon. It was the most amazing night of star watching I've ever had.

<comment><USER12> I was once on a beach in the southern part of Crete in Greece, many hundreds of kilometers away from the nearest city. There was no moon, and when we turned off the flashlights we could barely make each other out, but the sky was full of stars. It was glorious.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> This might just look like an alternative visualization of those composite images of the Earth from space at night, but what's nifty about this is that it purports to also show just how far from populated areas one would need to travel in order to maximize darkness.

<comment><USER13> Not seeing that feature. Maybe it's somewhere on the website, but the linked page seems to just be a visualization of the common light pollution map.

<comment><USER3> The entire map is the light pollution. The key there at the top of the screen. Find where you are, and look at what color the area is around you on the map. From personal experience, if you're in a downtown metropolitan area that the map shows as white, then you'll be lucky to make out Betelgeuse or Rigel in Orion, Sirius would be visible, as well as Venus, Saturn and Jupiter. Anything fainter than that will be difficult. Using binoculars will improve things quite a bit though. As you start to get into the orange colors, all of the stars in Orion would be visible. I have been able to make out the Milky Way in yellow areas. In the blue areas, I can see the Milky Way quite clearly. In the black areas, it takes me a bit of time to adjust to find Orion/Big Dipper/etc because there are now so many stars visible that the very obvious constellations are harder to see immediately.

<comment><USER14> I live in the middle of the giant cancer of light pollution that is the Netherlands/Belgium/Germany triangle. Most of Belgium is on the white-ochre spectrum. There are no dark spots to speak of within any reasonable distance. It's depressing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> DarkSiteFinder is a great tool in addition to this website:

[http://cleardarksky.com/csk/](http://cleardarksky.com/csk/)

Ex: Sierra Vista, AZ: [http://www.cleardarksky.com/c/SierraVistaAZkey.html?1](http://www.cleardarksky.com/c/SierraVistaAZkey.html?1)

Which uses various models to calculate night sky visibility. Avoiding light pollution is only one part of the game.

</comment><comment><USER16> You can see most large metropoles having a white core. In Rotterdam and The Hague (Netherlands), this white core is _in between_.

Very interesting. I live on the southern outskirts of The Hague, Netherlands. Between The Hague and De Nieuwe Waterweg is the Glass City [0] located, a large area (~20x20km) with mainly greenhouses. These greenhouses use artificial light to spur growth in plants, causing the white core in the light pollution heatmap.

When I look out on my balcony to the south, the sky never turns dark. Only when there is heavy rain clouds, the light from the greenhouses dims _a bit_. The sky is always in an orang-y darkish glow.

[0]: [https://translate.google.nl/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&pre...](https://translate.google.nl/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fnl.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FWestland_%28Nederlandse_streek%29&edit- text=&act=url) (translated dutch wiki page, english page is only stub)

</comment><comment><USER17> There should be a movement to restore darkness.

Nightlife has completely changed, music gigs are extremely well lit, where before you had a dark room and the musicians illuminated.

Old lights have been replaced one for one by much brighter LEDs.

<comment><USER3> There is a big push by dark sky advocates to have cities rethink their lighting. Nobody really expects metropolitan areas to just suddenly go replace existing lighting, but at least for new lighting installs to use dark sky friendly lights. These just keep light shining where it's needed (shining down) versus wasting energy by lighting upwards. Some cities are positively responding, and considering this when replacing/updating lights.

The astronomy campus I frequent works closely with the local and county government to replace lights to be more dark sky friendly as they are working to be officially recognized as a dark sky location.

<comment><USER18> _There is a big push by dark sky advocates to have cities rethink their lighting._

Do you have any links for formal or informal organizations or individuals working on this? thanks

<comment><USER3> I saw that someone else provided links to good info. As an anecdotal piece of evidence, I know that big box home improvement places like Home Depot have a dark sky category in their outdoor lighting department. I was flabbergasted the first time I saw that. I would love to see the affect of all homeowners replacing light fixtures with these types of lights. As an example, in the last video I linked earlier today, there are small lights on the horizon that shine very brightly in the video clips. There's one light source in particular that is a single lamp on a pole located on a ranch that is several miles away. If you multiply that by the output of every lamp in a city, it doesn't take a lot of imagination to quickly understand why we can't see the sky at night.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I don't like the key on this map. The actual map has some kind of alpha overlay that seems to go to fully transparent for the darkest parts, while the key is 100% opaque black for the darkest parts. In parts of the map it's hard to tell if you're in the darkest area. A hover info window would be helpful.

<comment><USER20> Use the slider at the top right. It controls the overlay transparency. It's not ideal but it works to identify the darkest parts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Anybody knows why there is such a large area with light in nothern/central russia?

<comment><USER22> Came here to ask this. What the heck! Here it is: [https://imgur.com/a/vXwqO](https://imgur.com/a/vXwqO)

EDIT: Never mind, apparently it's oil and gas refineries! [https://www.reddit.com/r/answers/comments/4x0v1e/why_is_ther...](https://www.reddit.com/r/answers/comments/4x0v1e/why_is_there_so_much_light_pollution_in_northern/?st=jcwa6poj&sh=16c7073c)

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> You can see updated nightly images of what is presumably the source imagery (Suomi NPP VIIRS) on NASA's satellite imagery viewer:

[https://worldview.earthdata.nasa.gov/?p=geographic&l=Referen...](https://worldview.earthdata.nasa.gov/?p=geographic&l=Reference_Features,VIIRS_SNPP_DayNightBand_ENCC)

</comment><comment><USER24> Does the legend not match the actual colors used on the map, or is the entire surface of the planet light polluted? I don't see a single area on the Earth that's as dark as the three darkest colors on the legend.

<comment><USER25> The legend isn't a perfect match - there is an opacity on the color overlays that makes the black side of the legends instead be lighter shades of grey when on the map.

<comment><USER26> Sorry to reply on this thread but I wasn't sure how to contact you otherwise. Thank you for your comments regarding my landing page copy. I think you are right, and I was assuming my bad experiences were what others would experience. I revised my page based on your feedback. So thanks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I use this site when trying to find good places to go camping. When I moved back to Chicago, I was pleasantly surprised to find a few decent stretches of night sky within a 4 hour drive from the city.

</comment><comment><USER28> I think this would be more useful if the color bar had a slider that tracked the user's mouse across the map.

Also, where does the color bar information come from? Is it from observational data of the dimmest magnitude stars or objects visible at a particular location or is it just integrating data from satellite based night-time passes to show light received on clear-sky passes?

Seems to be moderately useful but the actual utility of anything like this is dependent on the source and processing of the data used to create it.

</comment><comment><USER29> I like it but i want to know that the colors represent. For instance, what is eliminated from view in the night sky because i'm in a white, red, or green region.

<comment><USER3> From personal experience using this map, if you're the worst areas designated by white on the map, you will be able to make out only the brightest of objects like Venus, Jupiter, Saturn, Rigel, Betelgeuse, Sirius. Anything fainter will be difficult with the naked eye. As you get into the reds/oranges, you'll be able to see most of the more visible constellations. I can find all of Orion and the Big Dipper. In the yellow areas, the Pleiades cluster is pretty visible. In the green areas, you might be able to make out a faint shape of the Milky Way, but the time you're in a blue area you will definitely see it. In the black areas, it's almost overwhelming how much can be seen.

If you live in an area any where from red to white and are not usually prone to looking up, then I'd venture a guess that you might be pretty impressed by visiting a yellow to green spot on the map. Being bold and visiting a blue to black area will just blow you away.

These are all naked eye examples. Using any type of seeing aide will improve things dramatically. A simple pair of binoculars in a white part of the map will reveal so many more stars. The entire constellation of Orion can be seen in binocs. You just need a few visible starts to find your way. Any of the apps like StarWalk or StarChart will help you find your way. However, in the white parts of the map, I can never see Polaris bright enough to properly align my telescope for accurate guiding. I usually just use my phone's compass to point in the general direction of North, and go from there. In those areas, I can easily see the rings of Saturn and a few moons, make out the belts on Jupiter and several moons, and have even seen the different phases of Venus. I even took the scope out to a roof top bar a few years ago to let people see one of the PanStar comets.

<comment><USER30> It seems like there's another factor of altitude or maybe humidity that makes a difference. In my experience, Atlanta is like you describe - a handful of stars and planets. But in Denver, which is colored the same as Atlanta, I can easily make out Orion for example this time of year.

<comment><USER3> Altitude and humidity definitely play a factor in the seeing clarity. There's a reason the really big telescopes are built on top of mountains. The thinner the air, the less atmospheric distortion. The current favorite location for observatories is the Atacama Desert in Chile. Extremely high altitude and humidity in the 0%-1% range. I'd guess only Hubble gets better views.

Sea level beach locations are horrible for imaging with the ocean mist and humidity. However, visually, watching the stars rise/sink into the horizon of the ocean is one of my favorite sites for just watching. The power of ocean waves and the enormous sky just helps put into perspective our place in the universe.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I wonder if [http://www.darksky.org/idsp/communities/](http://www.darksky.org/idsp/communities/) can be discerned on this map? I can't at a glance, but of course it'd be hard to tell unless the difference were pretty stark and it's hard to tell what the right comparisons are for a given community.

</comment><comment><USER32> What stood out for me; how divided the US is. And also (expectedly), how dark North Korea is on this map in comparison to South Korea.

</comment><comment><USER33> The Gila National Forest is a pretty good-sized dark blob on that map and it truly is amazing. Midnight in March showed me an abundance of stars that I'd forgotten even existed, having lived in cities for almost 15 years. The massive fireball that lit up our campground so much we were able to turn around in time to see it was just icing on the cake.

</comment><comment> squeaky-clean I like this site:

[http://www.jshine.net/astronomy/dark_sky/](http://www.jshine.net/astronomy/dark_sky/)

The UI isn't as nice, but it has pins for recommended dark spots. I've found several of my favorite stargazing spots this way.

</comment><comment><USER34> What is that big bright area, with some very bright spots, in Russia? North of Kazakhstan.

<comment><USER35> Gas flares. IIRC about half percent of world's CO2 emissions are from here.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> This is a great resource for astrophotographers. I always check it prior to traveling somewhere new (particularly the western US) to see if it's worth packing equipment and taking a detour for photo opportunities.

</comment><comment><USER37> This is really useful, especially since you can view satellite images. Here in the Pacific NW, just having clear dark skies is not enough.. you also need a clear-cut on top of a hill!

<comment><USER3> There's a popular spot north of LA where a lot of the amateur astronomy groups meet up that sounds similar. It's the top of a mountain, but the viewing is severely limited because of the height of all of the trees surrounding the area, but it's the only/best place within a 90 minute drive of downtown LA. Beautiful drive up to the location too.

<comment><USER38> I guess that's Mount Pinos. You can go a little further north from there into the desert and it's really dark there to see the whole Milky Way across the sky.

<comment><USER39> Ojai used to be that way when I was growing up. Normal summer night could see so much.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> I was shocked to be able to see Orion quite clearly from the West Village area of NYC. Many days the sky is this brownish color, no stars.

</comment><comment><USER41> As someone living in Frankfurt, this site encourages another trip to Scotland or Norway. I miss seeing stars.

</comment><comment><USER42> Is there a way to make one of these maps show RF pollution at different frequencies using similar models?

<comment><USER3> This is a very interesting idea. In locations where serious radio astronomy is conducted, there are restrictions on radio emissions in a large area around the antenna. No wifi, no bluetooth, no cellphones, no anything.

An RF pollution map would be useful to see not only where a candidate spot to build a new radio antenna might be, but would also be interesting to see the areas around existing sites.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> This is awesome! What data does this use? Does it correlate population density with light pollution?

<comment><USER5> I don't think so. It probably uses imagery from some space based system.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> That's a lot of wasted energy.

Most people sleep at night anyway - no need to keep the lights on.

</comment><comment><USER45> Poor western Europe!

</comment><comment><USER46> Basically all of northern Canada

</comment><comment><USER47> This is spectacular.

</comment><comment><USER48> [https://xkcd.com/1138/](https://xkcd.com/1138/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Please see my other comment as to what this map is useful for. Furthermore, on a global scale, light pollution is not equivalent to population; consider the light levels of Indonesia, the world's fourth most populous country.</comment></comment>