The Culture Wars Have Come to Silicon Valley - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/08/technology/the-culture-wars-have-come-to-silicon-valley.html <comment><USER3> > But for the right, it became a potent symbol of the tech industry's > intolerance of ideological diversity.

To me, totally missing the point. Not _just_ "for the right". To many who would consider themselves mostly aligned with left wing politics, myself included, this is just the latest in a long line of media (social and news) driven forced punishment for people guilty of expressing a viewpoint or just generally doing something a bit poor taste in public. It doesn't really matter if they've done wrong. It's not a considered or proportional type of response.

Sure, there are far bigger injustices in the world than someone losing their job, but this sort of thing is wrong _because it 's for the wrong reason_. It's headlines driven HR.

<comment><USER4> I'm sorry, if you spend your time at work writing manifestos that ignite culture wars instead of working - you should be fired. Wanna write a manifesto? Create a blog post. I would be fired if I wrote a manifesto like this at my job - without any publicity

<comment><USER5> Not that I agree with the statement, but it could easily be the case he wrote it on his own time and shared it at work on their internal Google+. Unless you have a source for your accusation, in which case I stand corrected.

<comment><USER6> Even if you wrote it on your own time, sharing it with internally with your coworkers is toxic.

<comment><USER7> Serious: do you see that your response is exactly what the memo was about? He's claiming that the pre-judgment that the topic is toxic is harmful. To argue against him by re-asserting that which he questions will not be persuasive.

<comment><USER6> Are you saying my argument - that sharing a 10 page personal essay, or whatever to all your coworkers is toxic - is invalid, because in it, he asks not to be prejudged?

That's ludicrous. You don't do things that make potentially thousands of your coworkers uncomfortable _internally_ just because you want to make a point. Human Resources is a thing for a reason.

Put it on medium and be done with it.

<comment><USER7> I think you may have raised a good point - was this the appropriate forum/channel/whatever to offer his observations, questions, and criticisms?

He suggests that Google has a culture of sharing pretty openly and of offering criticism and even commentary on important issues. It would be good to have additional evidence of this to evaluate whether his statement was indeed matched to the appropriate environment.

(I am not and have not been a Google employee, so IDK for sure. I know that at my company, there are indeed particular fora in which this sort of thing could be raised. I can imagine at some companies this would not be possible, so you raise a great question. Thanks!)

<comment><USER8> It was a memo about a matter that's internal to Google, so I don't think publicly publishing it would have been appropriate. And doing so would have surely created an even larger furore.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I don't like Donald Trump any more than the next person (and I would never vote for him), but watching people line up actively encouraging punishing (or firing) people based on who they voted for is crazy, especially because _about half the country voted for the guy_.

I come from a small town where Trump dominated Clinton, and most people I know voted for Trump holding their noses. They considered him to be a less-bad option, and Thiel even said as much in interviews. Yet folks are being smeared for being "complicit" and dragged as if they _are_ Trump, or agree with everything he stands for.

I don't think that's ever happened before, at least publicly. Every candidate I've ever seen has major flaws, and people that lack those flaws and even despise those flaws voted for them anyway. I get that Trump is particularly incompetent, but if voting for a candidate that _wins the election_ is a punishable offense maybe we should rethink our political activism.

<comment><USER10> Correction: half the country didn't vote for Trump. Half the country didn't vote. About quarter of the country voted for him.

<comment><USER11> Because surely the half that didn't vote wouldn't have voted for him either. So really, when you think about it, 75% of the country voted for Clinton.

<comment><USER12> ... wat? You cant just count nonvoters for your candidate. They chose not to vote as a way to say your candidate sucks.

<comment><USER11> Well you obviously missed the sarcasm. I was making fun of the stupidity of the "ACKSHUALLY only 25% of the country voted for him" argument, which is needless pedantry and ignores that we can infer how the rest of the country _likely_ would have voted since we have such a large sample size.

<comment><USER13> You realize that {people who voted} is no where near an independent random sample and has far less power than its size suggests?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> It's unfortunate how both political extremes are just the same:

The right uses the state to censure.

The left uses people and popularity to censure.

To fight the dictators I can simply join a militia and fight a civil war.

But how to I fight people? I'm not popular, I'm not cool, I'm not socially connected. I am no one. How do I maintain my rights when those depriving me of them are everyone else?

If I'm targeted by the populist mass, where is my recourse?

I'm lucky that I live in a country where I could just study and pass a test to be a public servant, where I'm guaranteed a job and won't be fired based on public outrage. But what about others?

<comment><USER15> How is the right using the state to censure? Are you referring to the US, or in a global context?

<comment><USER16> If anything, the state censures any speech that goes against hand-picked 'protected groups'

<comment><USER17> The state doesn't censor speech. Hate speech laws (in the US, anyway) aren't very strong, for example the Supreme Court in the USA didn't rule against the Westboro Baptist Church or even people burning crosses on black family's property.

(All these people whining about "facts" being censored and none of them are using facts of their own..)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> > Netflix's Mr. Hastings warned Mr. Thiel last August, a few weeks after Mr. > Trump had accepted the Republican nomination for president, that he would > face consequences for backing Mr. Trump.

> In contrast, Mr. Hastings, a supporter of Hillary Clinton ...

From my PoV, the fact that Hastings has received no backlash for supporting Clinton after Trump won, is a sign that right-wingers/conservatives/Trump supporters are more tolerant of the opinions of left- wingers/liberals/progressives/Clinton supporters than the other way around.

<comment><USER18> Right-leaning professionals who live in major urban areas are completely surrounded by left-leaning people: almost all of their colleagues, friends, bosses, etc. I know many conservatives in these environments who would never admit it outside of a very trusted circle. They would _never_ think of making their job a platform for their views, like left-leaning people routinely do (often at the _encouragement_ of management and HR). They fear precisely what happened to this Google engineer: a smear campaign, weaponized outrage, and a ruined career.

I'm sure there's challenges to being a left-leaning person in rural Georgia. But moving to rural Georgia isn't necessary, or really even an option, for people seeking economic mobility.

<comment><USER19> Weaponized outrage online has become a real problem, no matter your leanings. Or I prefer to call it the "Outrage of the Day" or even the daily "Two Minutes Hate" since people only seem to be outraged at that issue for about a day before finding some new shiny thing to be outraged about.

But it can really screw up people's lives in that short period of time, and scares everyone into not sharing any potentially controversial views in public nowadays, which I find disconcerting living in a country that's supposed to hold Freedom of Speech as one of its highest values (yes, I know freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences, but the consequences have gotten extremely severe, career ending in a lot of cases, for statements that are sometimes taken out of context).

I'd rather people see these statements they dislike as an opportunity to engage in discourse and try to change these people's minds, instead of swift retribution, often without examination of how guilty the people in question actually are, just being told they're guilty by some random person they like on the internet is often enough to get them to jump on board.

It's especially concerning considering a lot of these people turning their shame button up to 11 consider themselves to be religious people, and most religions tend to espouse not letting yourself get swept up in hatred and casting stones at others. I'm not particularly religious, but I still don't think it's a healthy mentality to have, and I've had to ignore and heavily filter my social media in order to not see this presented to me every day, and even then I still get a lot of it shoved in my face (I can only imagine what all a person who actively looks for these things must see).

The Two Minutes Hate seems more and more appropriate the more I reflect on it. Here's a quote about it from 1984:

 _" The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretence was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one's will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp."_

<comment><USER20> Outrage is addictive and social media only makes this easier: commenting is quick and there's always the urgency to jump on a bandwagon before it disappears.

"Outrage of the Day" is appropriate because what else can fill the mundanity of your life? The trouble is they accumulate and you inevitable form judgements, courtesy to the echo chambers (I'd like to see a new word _echosystem!_ ) This also makes it harder to introduce new ideas because the 'right' opinions and argument trees are already set.

I don't see social media as good/bad, but my observation of it is making me wonder if I'm turning into a reluctant Luddite.

<comment><USER21> Megan McArdle had a good piece on the social value of shame and how the Internet subverts that:

[https://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-04-17/how-the- in...](https://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-04-17/how-the-internet- became-a-shame-storm)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Pro tip: unless it's part of your job, don't talk about politics at work. It's your place of work, it isn't /r/politics. If there is a specific policy that you'd like addressed, bring it up without a bunch of political baggage.

On a side note: The article mentions alt right people complaining that a lot of SV companies' cultures are left leaning, which I think bizarre. There are plenty of industries that lean far right, in fact, unless the company is a non-profit or is in the public sector, in my experience the typical company culture is more right leaning than left. In most companies outside of SV, diversity programs are almost non-existent or just something that is briefly mentioned on the careers page.

The fact that Google or other SV companies have robust diversity programs and have cultures that lean left is an anomaly and freaking out that you aren't included in these companies' diversity programs or that you feel on the outside of the company culture screams of entitlement and ignorance of the actual reality that minorities and women face in the rest of the job market.

</comment><comment><USER23> >Mr. Hastings, the chairman of a committee that evaluates Facebook's board members, told Mr. Thiel in an email dated Aug. 14 that the advocacy would reflect badly on Mr. Thiel during a review of Facebook directors scheduled for the next day… "I'm so mystified by your endorsement of Trump for our President, that for me it moves from 'different judgment' to 'bad judgment.' Some diversity in views is healthy, but catastrophically bad judgment (in my view) is not what anyone wants in a fellow board member."

Is it legal in the US for someone to judge a person's political beliefs or a declared support for a candidate in a performance review? I can imagine that even if the answer is 'no' that things might be different on a public board where it is less 'performance review' and more 'public face of the company', but the idea of judging someone professionally on the basis of their personal politics at the ballot box seems a little disturbing to me.

<comment><USER24> The article claims, and as a (former) lawyer this seems plausible, that in California this would be illegal as it pertains to employees.

But you're right that executives are often treated differently, and board members even more so (since they're not just management - they're not employees at all). But I believe that under federal law political views are not currently a protected status, so it would not necessarily be illegal to fire someone for their political beliefs. Though this might seem odd, it is perhaps a behavior that is sufficiently deterred by the fact that it would be very bad for business in many cases. Remaining employees could be upset by it, customers and potential customers could be alienated, and legal challenges could be mounted under various theories.

Another reason that this could be less common that might expect, given that it's legal under federal law, is that some states are not at-will employment states (like California is), so it's generally harder to fire employees in general.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> "Silicon Valley's politics have long skewed left, with a free-markets philosophy and a dash of libertarianism."

This is not in any modern sense "left" (please don't bother pedantically bringing up "classical liberalism").

<comment><USER26> I suspect the author meant "left, except for a free-markets philosophy and a dash of libertarianism".

In many other ways SV is clearly skewed left.

<comment><USER25> In what sense could that possibly be "left" then?

<comment><USER26> The American sense.

Europeans might disagree and say that all Americans are on the right.

<comment><USER25> > The American sense.

With no economic components I'm genuinely curious what you consider the "American sense" of the left, in the sense of actual policy. Pro-choice, I guess?

<comment><USER26> Well, look at Hillary's platform:

[https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/](https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/)

The economic components were maybe 1/3 of her platform, and not all of her economic positions were incompatible with free markets.

<comment><USER25> I would dispute that Hillary is a left candidate whatsoever - she is a centrist, hawkish free-market neoliberal.

<comment><USER26> Opinions differ on the meaning of left/right. Europeans would probably consider her centrist or right-wing. Californians too, perhaps.

But by American standards, her platform was well left of the average politician.

(Though I suspect, had she been elected, she would have ignored the platform and governed as a corporatist.)

<comment><USER25> > But by American standards, her platform was well left of the average > politician.

Again, only if you entirely discount her economic positions, which are the core positions of any "left" figure.

You're free to paint with however wide a brush you wish, and your other comments in this thread leave little doubt that you'll retain your opinion regardless of how this exchange turns out. But simply because the Democratic party is the "more PC" corporate capitalist party, and the Republican party is the "less PC", does not mean that either of them represents anything remotely resembling economic left interests.

<comment><USER26> I think you have a skewed idea of the American political spectrum, but everyone is free to define left/right however they wish, so we'll have to agree that we disagree about their meanings.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> One of the ironic things about this is the right has fought for years to empower corporations, and disempower workers, then goes apoplectic when Google Inc sees him as a liability and disposes of him like a used tissue. Damore sees the left as the problem, then files an NLRB complaint to try to protect himself. The biologically IQ-superior Damore might be surprised to find that the worker protections of the NLRB have been systematically hollowed out over the preceding decades by his conservative pals.

Conservatives and Republicans fought decades to enshrine the power of corporations and the 1%, and to undermine any worker autonomy. I have to roll my eyes at all this. I guess Damore found out the hard way that he's not part of the biologically IQ superior clique he thought he was part of.

<comment><USER28> The Right is not fighting for the rights of corporations. They believe that a free society best protects the rights of the little guy

<comment><USER29> It's just terribly convenient to believe that everything that's good for large corporations is also good for "the little guy".

Considering the balancing of these interests (which most people consider to at least sometimes conflict) is the core issue of politics, such a belief would actually render politics useless. You could just appoint the top 10 CEOs and wait for the trickle-down wealth to wash over the masses.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> rm_-rf_slash At this point everybody's made up their minds, assigned heros and villains and victims, and now flood every comment board on the internet to repeat their own existing beliefs.

Has anybody's mind been changed at all through this whole ordeal? Or are we just going to sail through another historic moment of cultural reckoning with our comfortable beliefs firmly intact and affirmed the whole way through?

<comment><USER6> did you read the document? Did you think it was an appropriate workplace share?

<comment><USER30> > Did you think it was an appropriate workplace share

Depends on the workplace, doesn't it?

<comment><USER6> This answer is a dodge.

Why would that matter? Every workplace has an expectation for you to get along with your colleagues.

<comment><USER30> Some places actively encourage it, and provide forums for discussing such topics. Google, for example..

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Non-white and grew up with a very religious background - even lived in a religious commune-like environment for a few years. The current environment in the bay reminds me of those days in many ways - the incredible pressure to visibly signal virtue through study, fasting, public displays of humility, etc. It's easy to trick yourself in thinking you actually believe and this is the only way, but it quickly fades once you're out of the environment

</comment><comment><USER32> I believe it's illegal in the US to fire someone for their political leanings, but not if you say something outrageous like women aren't built for tech jobs (or whatever he said).

That being said, it's never a good idea to get on a soapbox about politics at work (or anywhere really). It doesn't make a difference in your listeners opinions and only gets people with opposing views aggravated. Best to just think about the issues and vote come election.

<comment><USER15> > I believe it's illegal in the US to fire someone for their political > leanings, but not if you say something outrageous like women aren't built > for tech jobs (or whatever he said).

It's easy to circumvent the legal issue, just have a vague code of conduct and claim the employee broke said code of conduct.

<comment><USER33> "You really need to read it again. He never brings of the topic of suitability. His section about biological differences only discusses why genders tend to choose certain professions."

<comment><USER30> Quotes?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> "Supporters of women in tech praised Google." .. total lockdown of discourse is helpful to women? Outright firing anybody who dares to ask for open discussion is creating a more woman friendly working environment? This is pretty sexist. They are openly saying that in order for women to succeed we need authoritarian thought policing, and that if you are a woman you automatically agree with their agenda. Something strange is going on here.

</comment><comment> at-fates-hands Welcome to 2017 where we're currently in the throes of an ideological civil war.

Politics used to be a gentleman's game. Sure, you argue and huff and puff over bills, and the opposing parties viewpoints, but at the end of the day - <USER2> found compromise. The last decade or so? No such thing. Politics is now a bloodsport. Total victory is the only option.

\- Different viewpoints? Not allowed.

\- Compromise? Not allowed.

\- Rational discourse? Not allowed.

\- Don't believe what I believe? Your're a racist, bigot, homophobe, xenophobe, misogynist.

The Liberal ideology that has dominated politics for the last decade is now eroding, the Republicans own Washington DC right now and its rather off putting to the people who used to be in power. The whole Google issue just highlights that this isn't going to end anytime soon - but it sure didn't start with Trump, and it sure didn't just "land on Silicon valley's doorstep" this past week.

I think the larger question is when is rational discourse going to return? Google had an incredible opportunity to create a forum to discuss the issues the author brought up. Instead, they had a knee jerk reaction, based on the current environment, and fired the guy. They would rather deal with a lawsuit, a ton of backlash and a social media furor I haven't seen in a while, instead of having an open dialogue on what happened and why this guy believes what he believes. Can him, put him the box and label him an evil person and let's move on.

Nobody wins, and nothing is gained.

Another wasted opportunity.

Sad and depressing this is where we are as a country.

<comment><USER35> I'd hesitate to say liberal politics dominated DC. In the last decade there were only two years where Democrats were able to pass liberal legislation at the federal level: 2008-2010. Even then it was a slog. Republican powers keep pushing the Overton window further and further right and liberals are supposed to just accept it? No, they're going to draw a line and learn to fight back. Only "The Party of No" bears the burden of compromise at this point.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Silicon Valley is like USSR in 70s-80s: you can say anything, but for saying things not in the party's line you would be expelled from a higher social class.

<comment><USER29> > Silicon Valley is like USSR in 70s-80s:

Totally, except for the economic stagnation, widespread malnutrition, common alcoholism, kleptocratic gerontocracy, almost every way, and the actual arrests of dissidents.

Oh, and losing a war in Afghanistan also doesn't seem to be in Twitter's immediate future.

<comment><USER36> You dont' get the comparison at all. And btw, Bay Area is full of drugsters, not to say that the country is losing the war in Afghanistan, as well as couple of other wars.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> It feels like those guys in Silicon Valley are trying their _best ways_ to homogenize their minds

</comment><comment><USER6> Comments in here show that silicon valley still has a lot to reckon with their engineers

</comment><comment><USER38> _"What does it do to somebody when they feel like they literally can't express themselves?" said Mr. Andreessen, a Facebook board member who backed Mrs. Clinton last year._

Nailed it.

<comment><USER38> Immediately down voted. LOL bring it on.

<comment><USER12> No one cares about your politics, you just totally failed to add anything constructive to the discussion.

<comment><USER30> I think people _do_ care about his politics, _but_ he failed to add anything constructive to the discussion.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: A Sexy Proposal Generator for Freelance Developers - <AUTHOR> http://gun.io/blog/a-proposal-generator-template-for-freelancers/

<comment><AUTHOR> This was really fun to make (jQ + Django-Formsets) and I can do another post writing up how I did it, if anybody is interested in that.

<comment><USER2> I'd be interested.

<comment><AUTHOR> There's a really nice jQ plugin for this called <http://code.google.com/p/jquery-in-place-editor/>

It takes a callback function, which I use to populate the _actual_ form, which is hidden, and Ajaxypost it to the server.</comment></comment></comment>


JetBrains adopts snaps to further simplify developers' lives - <AUTHOR> https://insights.ubuntu.com/2017/12/19/jetbrains-adopts-snaps-to-further-simplify-developers-lives/ <comment><USER2> Since I couldn't find any explanation on the article:

> Snaps are containerised software packages that are simple to create and > install. They auto-update and are safe to run. And because they bundle their > dependencies, they work on all major Linux systems without modification.

Appears to be a packaging systems for (desktop) apps on linux with auto- updates and stuffs.

<comment><USER3> It's packaging and delivery for Linux desktop, server, and IoT apps. As elsen mentioned, updates happen automatically and roll back if unsuccessful. Automated review covers most cases and the format is simple yaml, so you can quickly push something up that you can install from anywhere.

Some guides using real world examples if you want to have a poke: [https://docs.snapcraft.io/build- snaps/languages](https://docs.snapcraft.io/build-snaps/languages)</comment></comment>


One System, Universal Service? - how-about-this https://technicshistory.wordpress.com/2018/07/22/one-system-universal-service/ <comment><AUTHOR> The sequel, [https://technicshistory.wordpress.com/2018/09/19/the- unravel...](https://technicshistory.wordpress.com/2018/09/19/the-unraveling- part-1/), is pretty interesting too.

I wonder to what extent the U.S. dominance of information technology is a result of the fact that even when we had a monopoly telecommunications provider, it was a _private_ — rather than a _state_ — monopoly, and how much is the result of us breaking the monopoly fairly early compared to other states.

</comment><comment><USER2> Author of the article here. I've had a hard time motivating myself to keep going with this series, and thus it's stalled out for a couple months. I'd be interested to hear whether others find the direction interesting, it may help me to decide whether to have another go at The Unraveling, Part 2.

<comment><USER3> I really enjoyed your work and it'd be a crime if you didn't continue!

<comment><USER2> Thanks. I've decided to skip over the segment that's been blocking me and write the next thing I was planning instead. Hopefully I will get back to it later.</comment></comment></comment>


PowerShell Tip: Providers - <AUTHOR> http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CodeBetter/~3/q4ud2mWMGzE/powershell-tip-provider s.aspx

<comment><USER2> This is actually pretty cool. I always looked at PowerShell as some beefed up version of cmd.exe with .NET Extensions.

Looking at this it would seem like the entire cmd.exe-behaviour found in PowerShell is based on alieses for .NET functions found in various providers. Basically the exact opposite of how I thought it worked.

I guess the fact that I never noticed or even thought of looking tells something about how smoothly this was implemented. Now I feel like trying to write my own provider, but can't come up with any decent ideas for what it should work against.</comment>


Books found in dumpster belonged to Thomas Jefferson - <AUTHOR> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/good-news/he-found-15-books-in-a-sierra-dumpster-then-he-found-out-they-belonged-to-thomas-jefferson/ar-BBLd9cM <comment><USER2> Under similar circumstances, I ended up with the one-page 1740 Treasurer's Account for the Town of Cambridge, Massachusetts Bay Colony.[1]

A neighbor died, and a relative came by and rapidly dumpstered their apartment. Including a stack of family photo albums.

Now, I'd a childhood experience of family sorting things into two boxes: "toys to donate to the school sale", and "childhood photos and keepsakes". Think "all your eggs in one basket". The wrong box was then dropped off at the school. A few hours later, it had been categorized as trash, thrown out, and was unrecoverably lost.

So I salvaged some of the albums in the dumpster. And eventually got in touch with the family to ask, "are your sure?". They were. But before I got around to throwing them out again, I found the document inside a folded photo card thing. And wondered if there had been more in the dumpster, among that which I didn't salvage.

And if I died today, it would likely end up back in a dumpster. Need to find it a better home.

[1] [http://www.vendian.org/1740/](http://www.vendian.org/1740/)

<comment><USER3> > Including a stack of family photo albums.

How sad. At least one can photograph the pages with a phone, as keeping those would be costless.

<comment><USER2> > How sad.

I recall them as saying it was mostly "other" families. A complexity that put it way over effort budget for me.

> At least one can photograph the pages with a phone,

:) Year 2000. Thus the pieced-together flatbed scans.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Some of the great writings are not in a dumpster but right in front of our eyes if only we knew it. A copy of J. S. Bach's Goldberg Variations sitting in front of everyone until 1974, in the hands of the director of the conservatory of music in Strasbourgh and then in the hands of a professor of music, it had in the inside cover fourteen canons in Bach's own handwriting, elucidating Bach's architecture like never before. An Italian visitor chanced upon the score and suggested these were Bach's own handwritten lines ...

</comment><comment><USER5> I know Jefferson is complicated, but I encourage everyone to visit Monticello (his estate in Virginia) and see his library* .

The man was _obsessed_ with reading (and gardening).

* On a related note, I'd also strongly encourage people visiting NYC to visit the JP Morgan Library. It's spectacular.

<comment><USER6> How does one plan a visit to the jp morgan library?

<comment><USER7> Step 1: go to NYC

Step 2: go to jp morgan library[1]

1\. [https://www.themorgan.org/visit/hours-and- admission](https://www.themorgan.org/visit/hours-and-admission)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I've always considered books just too precious to be binned or thrown away. My dad was a teacher so books were all we had, devouring whatever came our way. Sometimes rereading the same works again. We moved a lot so finding a library in the new town would be akin to finding Aladdin's cave for us. It's now a mild OCD condition in me when others don't look after my books (dog ears or folded pages. Gets my f'cking goat!). I silently judge others for not looking after their own books (jealously petting my own book with endearment). I've still kept my obsolete tech books - safe asylum.

How do people find the nerve to throw a book away? How?!

<comment><USER9> Interestingly this came up again just the other day:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12002419](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12002419)

Librarians have to weed their collections regularly, or see them overrun with bad books. Due to changes in interest or deteriorating condition, some books need to be purged so that the important ones can be maintained and new ones can be brought in.

This was a liberating idea for me, as I'm a bibliophile from a family of bibliophiles. Your collection is only as good as your curation.

<comment><USER10> I can't believe that discussion (now un-commentable) didn't include a link to [http://awfullibrarybooks.net/](http://awfullibrarybooks.net/). Good stuff.

<comment><USER9> Wow, I'm really glad this site exists! It's been a while since I fell down an internet rabbithole like it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Lesson: Give your famous books to a library collection before you die, and your ignorant grandnephew (or whomever) throws them in the dumpster to be destroyed by rain.

</comment><comment><USER12> It's interesting to me how we, as humans, ascribe more value to things based on previous ownership. Why is a watch worth $35000 if President <X> owned it, but only $350 if not? Is it not the same watch?

<comment><USER13> There's a lot of emotional weight in the article, "The". _A_ watch is an interesting thing from a functional perspective, technical perspective, an artistic perspective, and a broader historical perspective. But it's an implicit consignment to a relative definition. _A_ watch is interesting amongst watches, perhaps. Comparable between watches. Valued according to the value of other watches.

However, when you can promote that _A_ to a _The_ , now the thing stands as an absolute in the course of history. _The_ watch that Buzz Aldrin wore on the moon. _The_ pen that signed the surrender of Japan. _The_ Cullinan I Diamond that was cut with nine sibilings from the greatest raw stone ever discovered, and set in to St. Edward's Crown. The nature of the item itself becomes second to the story and the lineage associated with it, and its value ceases to be a function of what the thing does _does_ , and becomes one of what it _has done_. Omega watches are interesting and technically impressive. But if a Seiko had gone to the moon on Buzz Aldrin's wrist, it would be worth just as much.

<comment><USER14> > The pen that signed the surrender of Japan

On the off chance you're interested in that particular pen, there were actually several of them. I collect fountain pens as a hobby, and ones used to sign historical documents are of particular interest to me.

This thread has lots of information on what they were and where they ended up, including a photo of one of them: [http://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/topic/177886-japanes...](http://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/topic/177886-japanese- surrender/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> If any of you managed to get near DC I recommend checking out his library at the LoC: [https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/thomas-jeffersons- library/](https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/thomas-jeffersons-library/). Despite it's age it's very fascinating. You can learn a lot about a man by his books.

<comment><USER16> Also interesting in that part of the country for lovers of the printed word is Book Thing of Baltimore. It may be helpful for those trying to find a place other than the trash for their own old books, too.

[http://bookthing.org/](http://bookthing.org/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> $8k for books found in a dumpster? Jackpot!

The rest of the wealth can be said was rightly divided between everybody else.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pearl_(novel)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pearl_\(novel\))

</comment><comment><USER18> Makes me wonder how many treasures we lose because they _aren 't_ discovered.

<comment><USER19> Most of them for sure.

<comment><USER20> Then again, if you're Borges, you might say that all thoughts that have been thought will be thought again, therefore all books that have been written, will be written again.

<comment><USER21> The universe will most likely reach the end of its lifetime before then.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I wonder what they auctioned for. Does anyone know?

<comment><USER23> In the article it says $8000 but that was before he confirmed they were Jefferson's

<comment><USER22> Hmm, I could have sworn the URL linked to a shorter article when I read it. Or maybe I just missed that part. Thanks!

<comment><USER24> That wouldn't be too surprising. HN mods often change links to point to more original sources (sometimes to the detriment I think. eg when moving from a well done summary with commentary to the dense original report)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> It may be controversial to say this as an American, but I believe Thomas Jefferson is easily the greatest candidate for founding father that deserves to be forgotten.

\- Jefferson sired six children with Sally Hemmings, a slave on his Monticello estate.

\- Jeffersions children were put to work in the fields, and never freed for decades.

\- Jefferson himself whipped his own children.

\- Jefferson intentionally avoided a strong opinion on emancipation and maintained a negative opinion on it frequently. He was accustomed to the opulence of Monticello and without slaves to run it, Jefferson knew his status in the merchant class would be diminished.

\- Jefferson died in roughly two million dollars of modern debt. Most attributable to his lavish livestyle.

[https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-dark-side-of- thom...](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-dark-side-of-thomas- jefferson-35976004/)

<comment><USER26> \- Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence

\- He drafted the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom

\- He served as the third President of the United States

\- United States Military Academy was established during his presidency

\- Jefferson doubled the size of the United States during his presidency

\- He made sure US presence was established in the Louisiana territory

\- President Jefferson abolished the slave trade

\- He made an important contribution to the Library of Congress

\- Thomas Jefferson founded the University of Virginia

\- He wrote a book titled Notes on the State of Virginia

[https://learnodo-newtonic.com/thomas-jefferson- accomplishmen...](https://learnodo-newtonic.com/thomas-jefferson- accomplishments)

<comment><USER27> None of that rebuts how he lived his personal life. He decided that emancipation was not as important as keeping humans as slaves for labor and pleasure.

<comment><USER12> True, and how is it relevant? He did good, he did non good. As does everyone.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


The world's countries' income inequality (the U.S. ranks below Nigeria) - <AUTHOR> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/09/27/map-how-the-worlds-countries-compare-on-income-inequality-the-u-s-ranks-below-nigeria/

<comment><USER2> Clearly, we should be moving to Nigeria.</comment>


Ask HN: Could you copyright the data of an IP packet? - <AUTHOR>

In the 'Winning at Candy Crush' thread, I suggested modification of network proxies to give a group of users unlimited lives (thread here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6739711).
As a response, bmohlenhoff suggested it could be a copyright violation. While I disagree in that specific case, it made me wonder: Could an entity copyright the data field of an IP packet in an effort to thwart in-flight modifications?
I can't think of a reason I like the legal ramifications of such a thing. I'm just curious if it's possible (from a legal sense). <comment><USER2> This has been litigated in the form of garage door openers: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chamberlain_Group,_Inc._v._...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chamberlain_Group,_Inc._v._Skylink_Technologies,_Inc).

In general, a network protocol is going to be viewed as functional not expressive and thus not copyrightable.</comment>


Ask HN: Do you use your name or a handle online for development? - <AUTHOR> Ignoring the situations where you intentionally want to remain anonymous, do you use your name (or some derivative) or a handle for online interaction in the dev communities? I'm talking about things such as Github, where you want the work to be attributed to you and might show an employer or share among other developers.
And regardless of which option you pick, do you think it is unprofessional to use anything other than your name? Or do we get a pass because we have stereotyped the development community differently than the business community?
Finally, do you have any thoughts or opinions on the "branding" (I hate that term, ftr) of developers and our community as a whole? I'd be interested to see what those non-devs who read HN think of all this. <comment><USER2> Both. I'm pseudonymous on this account and have a real account for real name stuff. Generally if it's hacker news stuff or Pythonista community or another community where I signed up with this name, I'll contribute with this name. If it's more productive open source work, I'll use my real name. I try not to have direct links from this account to the other, but there are small hints left over, scattered around the web if anyone is curious (please email me if you find them!).

This name is kind of ridiculous and cumbersome, and is in fact designed to be a name you recognize but don't remember.

Unprofessional? Maybe. But the point of what I do on this account is to participate in these communities. Not to make real contributions or serious projects. Not to make things I would show off in a portfolio or something, and not to collaborate with my real life friends.

I'm wary of using the same name for every community. I have different names for different communities, and this helps me keep my "automated-collection digital footprint" pretty low for each name.

Stereotyping a dev community to use pseudonyms is not a bad thing at all. Sure, it's not strictly in our career interests, but it's good for peace of mind. I have some embarrassing comments on here from a year or two ago. That's ok. I was in high school then. I don't have to worry about it being associated with my real name by an employer -- if the employer puts in the effort to find data that connects my two names, then they've put in far too much effort and it seems they're likely to hire me anyway.

There's something to be said for altruistic contributions that don't necessarily keep your own career interests in mind.

I too am interested in seeing what the non-dev audience has to say. I think they may have the same privacy concerns.

</comment><comment><USER3> I use my real name on just about all of my online accounts. I sometimes wish I hadn't, but that ship has sailed. I keep most of my social media accounts as locked down as possible, and I've deleted a lot of them.

Github is interesting because, in the case of really popular projects (which I don't have, so this doesn't apply to me,) you probably want the project name to be the namespace, rather than the developer name. I personally find it a bit annoying that this isn't more common, but I understand why. Who wants to manage a separate account for each respository?

>do you think it is unprofessional to use anything other than your name?

If you intend for people to pay you, it's professional to use your real name, and not present yourself as a persona. Otherwise, I don't think it matters, but you shouldn't expect people to take you too seriously if you publish code under an immature or ridiculous pseudonym.

> do you have any thoughts or opinions on the "branding" (I hate that term, > ftr) of developers and our community as a whole

We need to be better at selling ourselves, rather than letting ourselves be sold. Much of the modern branding behind dev culture was created by marketers as a way of exploiting naive, young talent, in a similar way that the "American Dream" was created to exploit immigrant and lower-middle class labor.

</comment><comment><USER4> I use my real name. My real name is distinct enough that when you search for it, you find results almost exclusively about the real me.

When you search for my real name, you find almost exclusively accounts on sites like github, and a couple others, where I get to control entirely what is being shown. That's pretty good internet real estate and branding. At that point, it doesn't matter that my name is somewhat rare. If my name was Brad Pitt, by some sad coincidence, I could never own the internet for that name. But for mine, I can easily. Makes me appear like a way bigger deal than I am. And I don't want the first search result for my name to be my facebook. I don't want to be my facebook. I'd rather be my github. Not exclusively for professional reasons.

When it comes to professionalism:

We internet people don't get weird looks when we show someone something we've done under a "nickname", but we also don't get attribution for it. If your github name is "randominternetguy69", you might show it to your interviewer, but you won't get it attributed to you. Not because they don't believe its you - simply because you don't feel confident enough about it to own it. If you don't have confidence in your own work, why should they.

</comment><comment><USER5> Couple of weeks back, I was discussing this with some friends.

The one with my real name and known to my employer and all with a link to my twitter account. Here I am cautious of what I saw and remember I can be help accountable for this. I learned this from personal experience, where my manager started questioning me about my interactions online. Also, my employer did not want to talk tech in online forums as they worry that competition will be helped. I was even barred from sharing the modifications I made to an open- source project. Plus a stranger can easily track me.

Then I have an id that only people close to me are aware of.

</comment><comment><USER6> I am me; I've had my online name for 3/4s of my life, so I rarely draw any distinction, however as I've got older having my real name attached to things of note, seems more important than it did. I guess it's got something to do with leaving some sort of legacy.

</comment><comment><USER7> I don't seek employment, so... anonymous</comment>


The Fantasy of Opting Out - <AUTHOR> https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/the-fantasy-of-opting-out/ <comment><USER2> > Consider a day in the life of a fairly ordinary person in a large city in a > stable, democratically governed country.

You might think, as long as you're in a (currently!) stable, democratically governed country (so not North Korea, China, Russia, Belarus, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Nicaragua,... wow, that's a lot of exceptions! I'm sure I missed plenty, too), what do you have to worry about? Well, lets look at what happens in the stable, democratically governed country of South Korea:

 _In 2007, numerous bloggers were censored and their posts deleted by police for expressing criticism of, or even support for, presidential candidates. This even led to some bloggers being arrested by the police. Subsequently, in 2008, just before a new presidential election, new legislation that required all major Internet portal sites to require identity verification of their users was put into effect._ [1]

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_South_K...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_South_Korea)</comment>


Scams work - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@BMasson/scams-work-40b89febce85#.6bxf7fgzl <comment><USER2> The simplest defense against any kind of scams is this one: if you did not initiate the conversation be extremely careful, especially if that conversation leads to you parting with your money somewhere down the line.</comment>


Ask HN: Which technologies have the worst documentation? - <AUTHOR> Bonus points: what, in your opinion, makes the documentation bad? What resources did you turn to instead to learn the technology, and what do you use as a reference while working? <comment><AUTHOR> From my experience, I have trouble with the oracle Java docs. I definitely appreciate the level of detail, and they always have what I need eventually, but between the amount of content per page and the lack of code samples in context, it takes me 10X longer than it should to find the answer that I'm looking for.

</comment><comment><USER2> ffmpeg/libav. It has some documentation (and not that bad), but not enough I think.

what makes the documentation bad?

only description, no example, unclear about the correct syntax,

not easily searchable, can't locate the solution given a problem, even the solution is documented.

I turn to source code.</comment>


PostgreSQL vs MySQL: an apples to oranges comparison - <AUTHOR> http://ledgersmbdev.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/or-modelling-interlude-postgresql-vs.html <comment><USER2> Really well thought out article.

The single app vs. multiple apps distinction is a good frame for constructive discussion.

Not so much because Postgres is better or vice versa but because in these days of agile and YAGNI development* there's a real problem with some developers not thinking further than the next iteration.

I like that development shouldn't be weighed down by 'what if we'll need X someday maybe' but it should have at least a rough roadmap - the terminology i use next is irrelevant but I'm getting at the idea of having macro, micro and miso level goals defined - in the future we'll deliver architecture concern Y, so let's not box our implementation into an incompatible state.

</comment><comment><USER3> Wow, this is one of the best articles I've read on HN in a long time. It's a fantastic insight, and explains so much.

I would _kill_ for a whole series of articles like this, explaining the philosophical underpinnings behind various technological alternatives.

So often, HN comments seem to degenerate into PHP vs everything else, iOS vs Android, OSX vs Linux, MySQL vs PostgresSQL, based on nothing else but people's personal experiences and preferences.

Taking a step back and exploring the _why_ and _history_ behind products, and what problems they were intended to solve, feels so refreshing and educational.

Kudos to the author (Chris Travers)!

</comment><comment><USER4> I've never been able to completely dismiss MySQL since it obviously works for so many users, but I also haven't found it very useful in my work. I started with PostgreSQL in the '90s and every time I tried to use MySQL, I found myself asking either "why did it do that"? or "why would I want that"?

The article describes two databases that are very different conceptually, and I think they're mirrored by users that conceptually think about data in different ways. So if one or the other works well for you, go for it.

I should note that I have successfully deployed applications on both platforms ... once I started doing most of my database interactions through an ORM, the differences didn't really matter any more.

Vive la difference!

<comment><USER5> I think MySQL's original success came from features that are less obvious when developing (although that said it does have some friendlier development syntax (e.g. show create table) and lower startup latency in interactive use). It made running multiple instances on a single host easy. MyISAM tables give amazing performance in return for weakening many consistency guarantees, which is a worthwhile tradeoff for many use cases. Postgres is only just starting to gain the level of clustering support that MySQL has had for years.

<comment><USER6> The performance benefits of MyISAM are exaggerated. Its advantage was that is was a decently fast and very simple engine which made it possible for MySQL to reach the market quickly.

MyISAM only gives good performance when you either have only reads or just one single writer. And even then it does not always win over InnoDB and PostgreSQL. And as soon as you get a mixed load MyISAM performance drops like a stone.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Quick summary, assuming you know what MVC stands for:

Mysql - Model is in your code. PostgreSQL - Model is at least partially in your database.

There is a HUGE mistake in the article in the assumption that WRT the model design, that the database always knows best. Its possible to come up with weird situations where you just want the DB to store stuff and not nanny you. Consider a database of actual, real world, gravestone inscriptions. If someone's gravestone stone has "1890-02-30" inscribed on it, I know thats wrong but I don't care, I need to store it exactly as is for historical purposes, I don't want a DB crash or need to recompile postgres to accept it, I don't want to force the users to falsify gravesite records, I don't want to have to store as a CHAR or VARCHAR and have to write my own date handling routines in my app... The correct way to handle data modeling/integrity is to allow the app designer to decide how flexible he wants to be WRT reality, and let him decide exactly how to shoot himself in his foot.

On a bigger scale, if I made a database table and related CRUD app to store philosophical positions, if I wanted an AI to only accept "truth" then I'd put the AI in my app, I would not want the DB model and the app model to have to fight over Marx being right or wrong before the data could be stored. What if filesystems needed to verify "truth" before allowing a file to be saved? Weird.

Is it persistent storage or is it a turing complete theorem prover and why most both be in the same executable? Note I'm not claiming a "middleware" of a model is a bad idea, in fact its a great idea, it just doesn't belong in the persistant DB store anymore than it belongs in the filesystem layer.

<comment><USER8> How is MySQL going to store "1890-02-30" as a date? What internal format does it use to allow storing a date like that?

<comment><USER7> CHAR(10) worst case, or probably something a lot more like rowname.year INT, rowname.month INT, etc. Yes you could do your own homemade date type in that in postgres and your query would look like "SELECT _" and then you'd write your own date DBMS routines, but it would be icky. Compare the execution time of "Select_ from blah order by somedate limit 10" on each design, especially if the DB and webserver are on separate boxes.

It comes down to the fundamental question of who defines bad data, the DEV in his model or the DBA in his table design. Worst case is both, with no coordination, second worst case is both with coordination (wasted effort)

<comment><USER8> Wasn't it you who said "I don't want to have to store as a CHAR or VARCHAR and have to write my own date handling routines in my app"? rowname.year and rowname.month sounds a lot like writing your own date handling routines.

<comment><USER9> And I am confused as to why you wouldn't use varchar or char to record, you know, inscribed writings. I mean if it says 1890-03-300 I assume you'd want the extra zero recorded, right?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> (See also: <http://howfuckedismydatabase.com/>)

<comment> mh- well, that's completely pointless.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I have a story about performance of two of these. I maintain a Drupal website which under MySQL. Single server system, not very high load. But recently, last Monday it was in news and load increased some 10 fold. People started complaining that it does not respond, or gives "offline" message. So I managed to login to server and it had load average 130 or so, mostly under MySQL. Drupal gives no mercy to DB for sure. It just so happened that I had a recent copy of the site with PostgreSQL, as I had planned to switchover to use PostGIS, but not everything was working there yet. But site was down anyway, so I saw good option to test it against high load, I reconfigured site and restarted Apache to direct traffic to the new database. After minute or two the load average was in the range 5-6. Not normal for 2-core server really, but significantly lower than before, and the site was saved, and I was not able to perform the load test with real users. PostgreSQL was not tuned at all, just plain yum installation of latest 9.1.4, how much MySQL tuning was done I do not now, it was set up before my time. But it smashed my basic belief that MySQL should work better for large number of simple transactions. Stupid thing is that now I know less than before: I don't know any case where MySQL could preferred.

<comment><USER12> Did you try Percona or Twitter/Facebook's version of MySQL ?

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> If you cannot compare PostgreSQL to MySQL then what databases can be compared?

<comment><USER14> the point of this article is that Postgres is not just a database

<comment><USER9> You have to define "just a database" (I am the author btw).

PostgreSQL is a very different kind of database than MySQL is. MySQL is closer to a persistence layer for an application with an ability to plug into other reporting tools. PostgreSQL is a data modelling platform.

Both are "just databases" or not depending on how you want to define "database." I would say it is clear that PostgreSQL is not just an RDBMS but that's the point of other articles on the blog, not this one.

<comment><USER14> postgres provides much more capabilities than just "dumb storage of the application's state"

<comment><USER9> No argument there. See my other posts in the Object/Relational modelling series for example.

<comment><USER14> I might refer to one of your comments to this entry: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4495749>

when your code goes into RDBMS engine, then it's no longer just a rdbms engine

<comment><USER9> Well, in this case that's one of the things that makes it an ORDBMS engine.

One of the interesting things about writing the series I have been working on PostgreSQL as an ORDBMS is that it has helped me solidify my understanding of how these features fit together. It has also forced me to think about separation of concerns a lot more.

What this has taught me so far is that PostgreSQL is an absolutely amazing data modelling platform. Sure that's a lot more than an RDBMS engine. The difference is somewhere between a math program capable of doing algebra and one capable of doing symbolic manipulation to solve derivatives and integrals. (Indeed this is forcing me to rethink the way I approach relational math to account for the sorts of things an ORDBMS can do.) So yeah it is a lot more.

But "just a database" is a hard statement to nail down. If BDB is "just a database" then MySQL is "not just a database." As Paul Brown put it in "Object Relational Database Development: A Plumber's Guide" this basically makes an ORDBMS an information backplane for software services. It becomes an interesting whether whether "database" is a superset of that or not.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> It's worth mentioning that while Postgres does promote the idea that the database is the gatekeeper to the data -- where you're supposed to manage data with stored procedures, triggers and so on -- it's not in any way mandatory, and not necessarily the way people prefer to use Postgres.

Personally, I lean towards treating the database as a passive data store controlled by the application, as opposed to using the database as an application platform. For example, validating and normalizing is done in the client application.

While I would also be happy about putting logic in the database, this currently requires a split of the data logic between the application and the database in a way that I don't like: Stored procedures, functions, triggers and so on are all _persisted_ alongside data. (Internally they are treated very much like data by the database, in fact.)

This is unlike the form of the application, which manifest itself in its source code, which resides in a Git repo, and so on. The database code is always "live", whereas the app code runs at my behest. There is a reason why the article uses "create or update procedure", not "create procedure".

So if I move some of my code into stored procedures, triggers, rules, checks, etc., I have to push this code to the database using SQL scripts. This drives the code into a kind of dark, murky hole with respect to visibility and versioning. What code am I running? I'd have to look into the catalogs to see.

Also, can I run different versions of the code concurrently? Not in the same database, apparently?

And how do I seamlessly, elegantly upgrade the code? Sure, I can manufacture SQL scripts that do the "create or update procedure" dance, but what if I removed a procedure? Or what my database schema changes -- then my code has to move along in tandem with the schema.

As far as I know, current database migration tools just aren't very good. In other words, for me, personally, I don't think the toolchain is quite there. It sounds like a nightmare to manage. Having dealt with libraries such as PostGIS, which are built on functions and stored procedures, I know how gnarly this system can be.

Personally, I would like to see a database that supported non-persistent data logic. It could be plugging in actual source code (put foo.rb in a folder, database will run it and export its methods as database functions) or interfacing through an API (instead of "create trigger" to create a trigger, have the database call my REST API /user/validate for each row) or similar.

<comment><USER9> _Personally, I would like to see a database that supported non-persistent data logic. It could be plugging in actual source code (put foo.rb in a folder, database will run it and export its methods as database functions) or interfacing through an API (instead of "create trigger" to create a trigger, have the database call my REST API /user/validate for each row) or similar._

The question is where you put your API. The biggest tradeoff I see is whether you can run on many different RDBMS's or whether you are tied to one RDBBMS. But similarly the question becomes to what extent your db is tied to the application and to what extent it can be used safely by many apps.

So that's a big tradeoff. The rest can be solved the same way you solve the problems elsewhere, and there are some advantages to being able to put your unit tests in db transactions and roll them back.

There's a second big issue too which rarely gets noticed. Doing application- style development in the db rarely works well. To do this well, you really need to make your queries front and center, write good, clear queries, and so forth. I have seen what happens when app developers try to write stored procedures and I don't really recommend that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> great article. i am amazed. (many articles from ledgersmb folks (or only this person, i don't remember) are great.)

</comment><comment><USER17> I think it really depends on the type of apps you write. If you write small - medium rails apps, then the db is usually just dumb storage and if you are careful to use the ORM properly, then DBs are just plug and play. If your app is larger and you need more features, then you look more deeply into the features of each in which, most of the time, POSTGRES is the clear winner.

<comment><USER7> "If you write small - medium rails apps"

If you are writing using a MVC like rails, mysql is easier because the M is solely in the rails app rather than some of the M being in the rails and some of the M being in the DB configuration.

Theoretically there's no postgresql issue if you're comfortable splitting design and config stuff into two areas is acceptable IF all the devs are also DBAs, or if you are careful to never use any of the features of postgresql (turning it back into a persistent store), or if you never use any of the model features of rails to enforce data constraints, or if the DBA and the DEVs are on exactly the same page... adding a spinlock like that across functional areas, or maybe even across departments, is rarely a win.

<comment><USER18> For many small Rails web applications, details having sane (and rich) datetime support in the database is both nearly invisible (turning bugs into errors, and working about the same otherwise) and very useful. The same could be said about silent truncations of strings (one can get the same behavior in Postgres by using a explicit cast, or just a built-in function).

LedgerSMB -- an author of which wrote this article -- is on the advanced side of the spectrum in using specific Postgres-isms, and that's not for everyone.

There are grades in-between: using arrays for simple kinds of matching in Postgres is not rocket science and can make your life a lot easier (and faster):

      SELECT * FROM blawg WHERE tags && '{a,b,c}';

Yet another use case might be full-text search, where integrating and synchronizing an external information retrieval system (like Lucene, Solr) for simple search use cases are just more trouble than it is worth. With slightly more work than the above, one can use Postgres's Full Text Search feature.

So here I think you are supposing a false dichotomy: there is a continuum available on both databases, but the continuum extends a lot more into 'the database can know something about the data' territory in the Postgres implementation.

<comment><USER9> Certainly it isn't for everyone.

The thing is, LedgerSMB aims to be a database for many apps. You can't do that and still have an app that runs on many databases.

I am not convinced that grades in between are all that great. I think you have to choose the degree of portability you want first and the level of db-as-api you want first and then program to that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Are there any books out there that describe how to efficiently use PostgreSQL's object-relation techniques?

<comment><USER14> postgres docs are full of performance tips

<comment><USER20> I learned SQL with Postgres docs ;)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> every time I read a PostgreSql vs MySQL post the only thing I can seem to take away from it is that DBA's really seem to hate the fact that MySQL has made them obsolete and really want you to think you should switch to a platform where they are necessary.

<comment><USER20> Postgres is definitely a pain in the butt to properly setup in a network, in particular if you have never done it before. (And just talking about non- cluster use)

However, once you know the steps necessary to setup a postgres server, it's a piece of cake. In fact it's even fun because Postgres is a software that comes in pretty much the same packaging in every version. And I can even top that: with pgAdmin it has a powerful, consistent and stable tool to manage databases. (MySQL seems to be miles away from that)

I think the impression that Postgres is more difficult than MySQL roots in the fact that it's more difficult to install at home. (Why so many installation steps? MySQL is basically just installing the package, changing pw and done?)

I worked around 2 years with Postgres as a developer and I loved it. Very stable, very solid, many features and no surprises.

MySQL on the contrary seems like a toy db, at least when you want to do a lot of relationship stuff with foreign keys etc. It feels really awkward that outer white-spaces have no meaning, there is no boolean type and that the admin tools out there seem to be really immature.

Having to work since nearly two years with MySQL, I find it still painful. If you don't store Petabytes of data and don't use it for a highly frequented website, Postgres is probably your choice.

<comment><USER6> > I think the impression that Postgres is more difficult than MySQL roots in > the fact that it's more difficult to install at home. (Why so many > installation steps? MySQL is basically just installing the package, changing > pw and done?)

I think much of the blame here can be put on the people writing installation guides on the Internet. The guides often suggest setups more suited for networked databases than for a local database. When I install PostgreSQL for development machines it is just these two steps.

      1. sudo apt-get install postgresql-9.1
      2. sudo -u postgres createuser -s `id -un`

After that I can create whatever databases I like.

So it is the same number of steps to setup a PostgreSQL and a MySQL database. I admit it took me some time to figure out that this was the simplest way, and I have yet to see a installation guide which suggests this method.</comment></comment></comment>


Living in the Past, Dreaming of the Future - <AUTHOR> http://www.portev.org/commentary/living_in_the_past.htm

<comment><USER2> Lots of fun, and there's got to be a design/marketing lesson in there about how an Electric Vehicle that's nearly a muscle car at "20-70 mph" can help sell the concept.</comment>


Conditional Baptism - <AUTHOR> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conditional_baptism

<comment><USER2> I would have thought for certain that baptism would be idempotent. Even religion needs REST.</comment>


Chart showing lines of code vs. time spent reading and editing - <AUTHOR> http://fagblogg.mesan.no/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Effort_LOC-1024x740.jpg

<comment><USER2> A strictly linear relationship seems odd to me and its interesting that its nowhere near predictive of the worst file. I wonder if using a curve on the data would've been a better fit. Then also it would match my hypothesis that larger files are exponentially harder to understand due to concepts interplay ing with each other.

<comment><AUTHOR> The data is collected from a project of 6 developers of a period of 3 months. An Eclipse plugin where used to log scrolling and editing events. Every software project is different. Much more data is needed to make evidence. It turned to be a file in this project that took an in proportionate time of the projects resources.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> The scatterplot is taken from this blog [http://fagblogg.mesan.no/how-bad-is- smelly-code/](http://fagblogg.mesan.no/how-bad-is-smelly-code/)</comment>


Google Chrome to block file downloads over HTTP - <AUTHOR> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/02/07/google_chrome_blocking/ <comment><USER2> And in ten years, I'm sure they'll ban HTTP altogether.

This is unacceptable, IMHO. I was trying to use a site with misconfigured HSTS the other day, and it wouldn't let me. No override, no nothing. That's just offensive. If it gives me a warning, fine. But when it outright tells you, "no I know better than you and I'm going to be smug about it," then this has gone too far.

Browsers are "user-agents," meaning they act on behalf of the user. If they do not do this, they are not browsers anymore.

<comment><USER3> This is the documented standard behavior [1]. You'll find all conforming browsers do this.

[1]: [https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6797#section-12.1](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6797#section-12.1)

<comment><AUTHOR> That makes total sense.

"If a web application issues an HSTS Policy, then it is implicitly opting into the "no user recourse" approach, thereby all certificate errors or warnings cause a connection termination, with no chance to "fool" users into making the wrong decision and compromising themselves."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Bad title. Should be "Google Chrome to block HTTP file downloads on HTTPS origins."

<comment><USER5> This matters. I was mad at chrome till I read this comment.</comment></comment>


Signed Mac Malware Using Right-to-Left Override Trick - <AUTHOR> http://www.f-secure.com/weblog/archives/00002576.html

<comment><USER2> It's trivial for Apple to blacklist a Dev certificate through XProtect and render it useless, which is nice.</comment>


5 months of /r/place at my elementary school (One pixel per student per day) - <AUTHOR> https://www.reddit.com/r/PlaceNostalgia/comments/7ujdyn/5_months_of_rplace_at_my_elementary_school_one/ <comment><USER2> Fascinating to see some of the same movement and trends emerging from the elementary school kids, as with the original Place.

That diagonal rainbow exists somewhere in the universal consciousness, I tells ya.

</comment><comment><USER3> Great to watch the battles between patterns. I can picture the scheming, group allegiances and eventual co-operation. Lovely stuff.

<comment><USER4> The pink/blue pattern struck me as more of a depressing display of capitulation to runaway groupthink and mob rule.

<comment><USER5> What I find intriguing is that the pattern merely acts as a background.. yet the plain wall at the start was _already_ a background and did not discourage chaos.

Why does a plain background encourage chaos where a patterned background does not? My imagination may be in overdrive, but I think there are some interesting metaphors for why society works hidden in there.. :)

<comment><USER6> I wouldn't say one encourages chaos over another. The background is a simple pattern that emerges early on while the social dynamics of the "place" are being discovered by the participants. It's literally the simplest coherent thing you can create and requires virtually no communication between participants.

As time goes on coalitions form, cooperation becomes explicit and you end up with more complex patterns (the rainbow) and art (the minion). You saw this same thing play out in /r/place too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> It is really interesting how the following order seems to naturally follow itself:

1\. disorder and chaos

2\. patterns and backgrounds start to appear

3\. the battle for the main background, spreading

4\. totally background pattern, the war is over

5\. group art creations start to appear

<comment><USER8> I was sad to see the chaos and individuality go away.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> An exercise that teaches team work, communication, planning, and patience. As simple as this is, there is a lot of good skill building here for young kids.</comment>


Ask HN : How to get traffic to your new site - <AUTHOR>

I have released several websites, and I've never been successful in generating traffic. I've bought ads, tried SEO tricks, blogged, nothing seems to work.<p>What methods and tricks have you guys used to get users to your site after launching? <comment><AUTHOR> I've run into this problem with all kind of sites. I would imagine at least one of those sites would of had a good idea in them. More recently, I've made a stock trading website. Whenever, I talk to anyone who was/is a stock trader they love the site and think its a great idea. The problem is how do I get that group of people to the site to begin with.

<comment><USER2> You seem focused on whether the site is a good idea. That doesn't matter. It only matters whether the site is useful. If it's useful, you can tell one person who will then start using it regularly and telling their friends. If it's not useful, make it useful.

Why not just go ahead and link the sites you wish were more successful, then we can probably be more helpful.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> What kind of site is it? An obviously important aspect that you didn't mention is building a site that people will be interested in and care about...

If nobody cares about what you made then all the ads, SEO tricks, and blogging in the world won't help you.

</comment><comment><USER4> there is no magic formula, you have to work hard to get each and every user, slowly building up your userbase. Eventually you'll build up a big enough userbase where word of mouth will drive more and more people to your site.

</comment><comment><USER5> you may want to try <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_per_action></comment>