Google Drive: Is the Dropbox Party Over? - <AUTHOR> http://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-drive-coming-soon/34052/ <comment><USER4> When I was in YC (same batch as Dropbox) this was a constant question. "What happens to Dropbox if Gdrive launches?" I don't actually remember what Drew and Arash thought, but a lot of people speculated on it.

It was probably a real threat to them 4.5 years ago. I can't imagine it is now. Dropbox has a large, happy fanbase that's going to keep using it and keep spreading. They're going to keep growing. They've got a small bit of lock-in if you use them a lot too, the annoyance of having to upload a large amount of files to another service. They've got a product that's a joy to use, which is not something Google is known for building outside of their core competency of search.

If I were Dropbox I'd simply view this as market validation (not that they need it at this point) more than anything else.

<comment><USER5> > If I were Dropbox I'd simply view this as market validation

And if I were Dropbox, I'd worry like hell. Google isn't depending on making GDrive profitable from fees, so they can literally give it away.

<comment><USER6> You'd be surprised how difficult "giving it away" can be, even for Google. Google succeeded big on giving away email, search, and androids. Do I need to list up all the acquisitions and products that even with a mortal lock on navigation on the Internet Google couldn't convince people was worth at least $0?

<comment><USER5> Dropbox can take the approach of not worrying if they want. Standing on years of head start perhaps.

However: File sync strikes me as a lot closer to email than <insert failed acquisition here>.

Additionally, it seems logical to build/ship GDrive right into android.

I say again: I'd worry like hell.

<comment><USER7> Agreed. File sharing is the type of thing where you can't just rely on first- mover-advantage. Google has the ability and infrastructure to offer more space for free on more devices and platforms.

<comment><USER8> Dropbox's success isn't about hardware. The interface is the product.

<comment><USER9> And really it's their lack of an interface--it just works.

<comment><USER10> I WISH I could remember who said it, but I applies here and in so many other areas: You must offer the consumer something MUCH better than what they already have to get them to switch from something they like. Google Maps dis this when Mapquest was the standard.

Does GDrive do that? Not yet.

<comment><USER11> I agree with what you wrote mostly. What dropbox could do to mess up and give Google a chance to do something much better is this: don't give people more free space when the average user struggles with the 2GB limit. One of the things that made gmail a success was that hotmail and the rest cheaper out on space. People had to constantly clean up their 2MB mailboxes. Google might be able to do the same again if dropbox don't offer more space for free. But that would take away from their earnings, so it isn't an easy problem to solve.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Dropbox is a brilliant piece of software however it's hard to justify more than $10/month for backup as a consumer. Since 50Gb only now covers my photos and docs, doesn't cover my music and even my photo collection's needs trimming to fit I would move to GDrive very quickly rather than double that spend to get to the next tier.

I've long hoped that Dropbox would segment their pricing plans more. It's unsettling having an increasing volume of content not backed up and if GDrive really does deliver I would move to it. My loyalty is to DB and I've yet to be convinced on GDrive's usability but it doesn't make sense to pay an extra $100/year as a loyalty fee.

<comment><USER13> in the dropbox forums company representatives constantly comment that lower price plans are not feasible. That said, I've always been disappointed by companies that make you buy buckets of units (like postpaid cellphone plans) that they know you will never use rather than offering a per unit price. If the cost to provide 1gb of storage per month is higher than 10/50, than charge the higher price, don't hide it by shifting the cost of power users onto regular users.

<comment><USER14> I do believe them that lower prices are not feasible while they are reselling Amazon S3... this GDrive rumor might be the push Dropbox needs to bite the bullet and buy their own servers.

<comment><USER15> They definitely need to buy their own servers at some point in the future. I do remember storage is their main cost. With the big round they just closed, I can't imagine there's not a few engineers working on that already.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> As a rule of thumb, I try to rely on Google as little as possible for important services. I don't dislike Google, but their lack of customer service makes it risky to rely too heavily on their services. I use Dropbox for syncing and backup, and since I backup files that are important to me, that rules out Google Drive.

<comment><USER17> This. Unless Google suddenly become a lot more customer service focussed, I really have no intention of using their service to back up all my stuff.

<comment><USER18> If customer service is important to you, DropBox isn't a viable option either.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> This is unexpected given their position on it before [1]:

 _Google was about to launch a project it had been developing for more than a year, a free cloud-based storage service called GDrive. But Sundar had concluded that it was an artifact of the style of computing that Google was about to usher out the door. He went to Bradley Horowitz, the executive in charge of the project, and said, "I don't think we need GDrive anymore." Horowitz asked why not. "Files are so 1990," said Pichai. "I don't think we need files anymore." ... "You just want to get information into the cloud. When people use our Google Docs, there are no more files. You just start editing in the cloud, and there's never a file."_

Are they admitting they were too ambitious? This seems to weaken the case for the mostly file-less ChromeOS and competes with their Google Storage offering.

[1] [http://allthingsd.com/20110425/how-google-killed-gdrive- and-...](http://allthingsd.com/20110425/how-google-killed-gdrive-and-spiked- its-skype-acquisition/)

<comment><USER20> Excellent find. In my company we really don't have files: everything is "cloud" (we use Google Apps and a little of box.net) and that seems as a future.

If this is true, I will be a little irritated because Google is not fixing simple things in Google Docs (like that stupid thing that all new documents are immediately saved as "Untitled" without even asking me what would be a name of documents). Now they are building something completely unrelated to what they were telling us.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I love Dropbox and Google Drive would have a hard time getting me to switch. Dropbox seems to "get it" when it comes to simple, easy to use file synchronization.

The one area that GDrive might wiggle into is making it even easier to use Google Docs. I really like GDocs but I don't use them very much because its just not convenient to do so with local files. However, if I can "upload" a file to a directory on my machine and have it available in GDocs, that might turn the tide.

NOTE: One thing that Dropbox doesn't do well is file segregation; some files I want only on some machines. For example, I want me personal finance stuff on all my machines at home but not my work laptop. Or I want large ZIP archives on everything but my phone. Maybe GDrive will tackle this problem...

<comment> T-hawk _One thing that Dropbox doesn't do well is file segregation_

Dropbox does do that. In the preferences, each folder has a checkbox for "Sync this folder to this computer"; uncheck it and the folder won't be on that device. It's marginally clunky to set up since you have to do it for each folder on each device - it doesn't have a higher level abstraction like "no large zip archives" - but the functionality is there.

<comment><USER22> The trick here is that Dropbox has introduced this feature pretty late and only if you run the installer now (on a new machine perhaps) you'll notice the feature is there because the installer will ask you if you want to sync everything or selectively.

If I remember correctly, the older clients don't update to new versions automatically (or at least this was the case a year ago) and you will need to download a new client to make this feature available.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23>
      Google X: Is the Y party Over?

I think I seen this on HN about 4 times in the last year.

Is there any front where google managed to beat a good established product (except Android) ?

Only good thing to come out of this, is a hopeful price reduction on Dropbox..

<comment><USER24> Only 4? I don't think you've been watching very closely. Though maybe after deduplication...

And yes: Chrome (massive bite out of both IE and Firefox's share), email (Hotmail, Yahoo Mail, etc, take your pick), and mapping being the big ones. You could probably toss in online document editing and machine-translation too.

Google seems to do reasonably well with taking over _tools_ , and less-so for taking over primarily-user-friendly applications or features. I'm not sure Dropbox has much to worry about.

<comment><USER25> You could probably add Picasa, Reader, Virtual Voicemail / Google Voice, Calendar, Video Chat, Instant Messaging as well.

<comment><USER24> Yeah, though they haven't really dominated any of those sections - <USER2> considered a few, actually. Picasa for instance is decent and moderately used, but Flickr and especially Facebook are way way larger in almost every respect.

Their calendar is the best online calendar I've found, but nobody I know uses it except Google-aware geeks and the ones I've taught (they love it now, didn't know it existed before). And online calendars haven't really reached public-awareness or usefulness yet, it seems - the closest most people come to computer calendars is their work's shared calendar that runs through Outlook.

Instant messaging they've certainly impacted, but I _think_ AIM and MSN and Yahoo individually still out-number Google, though that may change with Plus. And Skype dominates video and voice chats, though Google is a _threat_ (again, depends on how Plus pans out).

edit: Though Voice is incredibly awesome and absolutely dominates in its niche - of course, it's the only contender. But nobody knows how to use it, and its user-base consists of a laughable amount compared to <random national telecom>, AFAIK.

<comment><USER25> Agreed that the market penetration is still limited for many or most of those things, but I imagine Google's offering has made a disruptive splash to more than a few companies.

<comment><USER24> Yeah, we agree there :) I, for one, like the disruption - even if Google doesn't do it better, it spurs changes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> It's sad, because I remember when the name meant something else, but... I just wouldn't trust Google with my files. By which I mean, I wouldn't trust that I wouldn't wake up one day and find myself locked out of Google Drive with no way back. I don't trust their user interface not to accidentally delete things, either. Google manages to give the appearance of this mysterious Tronlike glowing entity that occasionally spins off new automatic services, but not in a way that gives you the impression that this glowing manifestation of Google has ever talked with a user.

<comment><USER27> On the plus side: what are the odds that you both get locked out AND you desperately need your backups on the same day? They're both unlikely events. (You might want sync, but hopefully you won't need the backup due to a hard drive crash or some such.)

Of course, if enough people use the service, then statistically, it will happen several times.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I think services/sites can be divided into two when considering how/if people switch between them: (i) _aggregate sites_ whose value is a (generally nonlinear) function of all users who use the site and (ii) _personal sites_ whose impact is just for the person who uses it. The fact that I'm using Dropbox, too, doesn't provide any value to you (except of course economies of scale)

YouTube, Flickr, YouTube, etc. are Type I sites, it's hard to switch from them to competitors because it's hard to do it individually, a large majority of the users must switch, too, creating a chicken and egg problem.

Google Search, Dropbox, etc. are of Type II. You use these sites just because they are better than the competition. As soon as this is not the case, you, individually, can easily switch. You may call these commodity sites. That's why Bing is such a big threat to Google, and Dropbox is doomed if Google comes up with cheaper plans and sync clients as good as theirs.

That being said, one shouldn't assume that Google will dominate any market they enter, they have the _capability_ of doing do, but in practice this may not happen: putting too few people on the project, wrong design decisions, crappy clients, etc.

<comment><USER29> You may be underestimating the prevalence of Dropbox shared folders, which make Dropbox into more type I.

<comment><USER28> Good point, I haven't thought about that. I wonder what percentage of content is shared, though. But this suggests one important strategy for Dropbox, they should immediately put more emphasis and develop better tools for content sharing to make their service more sticky fro people.

<comment><USER29> I don't have any numbers, but for a qualitative review see <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3044351>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Here is the fundamental problem of competing against Google as a SW company. Google is an advertising company, as everyone now well knows. They have no problem selling SW cheap, or giving it away for free, if they can help their advertising business (either directly by hosting ads in the service, or mining data from the service for info to help target ads).

If you feel like your SW has actual value and charge for it, but Google has you in their cross hairs, you either really need a great product (that can't easily be cloned) or very strong network effects.

While I think DropBox is a great product, and harder to clone that most people give it credit for, Google I think is the type of company that could actually nail a DropBox clone. And with GMail, Docs, and Android integration -- could be a serious force.

I must admit I'm a bit saddened that the actual value of so much good SW is ~$0.

<comment><USER31> "If you feel like your SW has actual value and charge for it, but Google has you in their cross hairs, you either really need a great product (that can't easily be cloned) or very strong network effects."

Let's substitute the names of Netscape and Microsoft circa 1997 and see how this plays out.

I can't wait to hear all the reasons why the Google/Dropbox comparative scenario is so much different.

<comment><USER32> Is your argument that Google should also be taken to court by the Department of Justice and submit to one of the largest antitrust settlements in American history?

<comment><USER31> Just an "observation".

You would have to ask the DOJ about anything else.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> As a subscriber to additional storage with Google (20 GB, $5/year) I'm really happy to be reading this because it will allow me to fully use the space I've paid for. I believe it was the cheapest option when I subscribed and while I have crossed the free storage limit I have yet to fully use 20 GB.

I originally signed up for it because I was sporadically transferring a lot of high-res scans between a computer which my school owns and my own laptop, so a permanent dropbox-like folder would not have worked. Now I'll also be able to back up my music/photos dropbox-style with the same service. Smart move by Google for hitting both services, although it's kind of sad to see such a great startup being approached by the web's behemoth.

<comment><USER29> Your assumption (also the assumption in the article) is that the pricing won't change after it gets easier to fully use the space.

<comment><USER33> I would be really shocked if Google charged for a service like this, it fits in with Docs and Gmail which have both always been free and have made storage space easier to fully use. If anything, they will profit off of it by people investing in even more storage with them.

<comment><USER29> Docs and gmail let you slowly fill available space while being exposed to Google Ads. A Dropbox clone would let you fill available space quickly without ads.

<comment><USER34> Gmail has POP3, IMAP and SMTP for free without ads.

<comment><USER29> Yes, and GMail for mobile is ad-free. On average, though, I would expect more storage+bandwidth costs per ad impression from a GDrive user than from a GMail user, if GDrive turns out to be similar to Dropbox.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I keep having problems with Dropbox lately, with files that aren't synced and lots of conflicted copies. Not sure why but made me realize that Dropbox has been offering pretty much the same service for years now. Granted, the service was great from the beginning but: are they improving enough to remain competitive?

<comment><USER36> Completely agreed. Right now the most requested feature is "watch any folder". It received the most upvotes by a great margin (30%). And it was suggested 2 years ago.

Yet there is no indication of development at all on that front (or any other for that matter.)

I really like Dropbox, but seriously will look into GDrive too.

<comment><USER37> "Watch any folder" would greatly clutter the beautiful ui and conceptual model.

<comment><USER36> It's a small price to pay when making _all_ the users happy.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Dropbox is a dominant product because they understand user experience. Google's in-house products are, increasingly, failures because they don't.

* Of course, there are a lot of smart people at Google. It's not that there aren't _Googlers_ who understand user experience, it's that the Google _organism_ rejects their intuition and refuses to understand it. They methodically optimize UX to a local maximum, and throw up their hands when nobody is impressed, like a Vulcan trying to compose music.

</comment><comment><USER39> Alright, now. Pay attention to the existence of paid option.

The fact that GDrive has a paid option indicates that they are aiming directly at Dropbox. If they were offering a completely free option, it would implicitly make GDrive fall into another category thus increasing its distance from Dropbox. I would also guess that Google can _easily_ make GDrive completely free, these $5 / 20Gb is not likely to be breaking or making it for them. It is a just conversion facilitator. Furthermore consider their selected price point - it means that they want to remove all doubts when one compares two paid services and to _strongly_ entice Dropbox users to switch.

<tinhat>Google Docs must be not working as great as they would like it to. People are still not using it for interesting documents of some value, and that's a bummer. Let's try and get to these documents another way...</tinhat>

<comment><USER40> Google Storage for Mail/Photos/Docs/etc has been charging $5/20Gb for months already. This isn't a special GDrive thing. At this point, GDrive would be a UI cleanup for the existing content sync services they already have, not a new service.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> If this means I can combine the seamless syncing and "available anywhere with an internet connection" of Dropbox, with the convenience of being able to make easy edits in Google Docs if I don't have access to MS Word, I'm all for it.

<comment><USER13> google docs already does this with cloud connect

<comment><USER41> Unfortunately not when using my MacBook Pro unless I've got Win7 up in a VM.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> Google doesn't necessarily squeeze out all competitors in any industry they enter, but they do raise awareness. In some sense this is great for Dropbox because I would guess well under 50% of computer users even know cloud storage services like this exist...but many more will if Google enters the market.

The problem, of course, is if they all learn about it through gmail and Google captures them all, but I think that underestimates Dropbox's ability to counter.

Lastly, don't discount human laziness aiding Dropbox customer retention - <USER3> is a switching cost here.

</comment><comment><USER13> i remember hearing the same argument when google made google videos to compete with youtube, and we all know how that ended. That said, there were social and community aspects there that don't apply here, and google's cheaper storage prices and larger feature set may give it a leg up.

<comment><USER43> It's dangerous for Dropbox because GDrive will be automatically integrated into all Google services. I can access it anywhere from any Google service or device. No need to think about uploading, downloading, copying, pasting--it's just there. I don't use GDocs because it's the best.

I use it because all my friends use Gmail and sharing docs with them is super easy. I see GDrive having the same benefits. Sharing on Dropbox still isn't as easy as it should be. I've been trying to convince my girlfriend to sign up for a Dropbox accounts since we started dating, but no luck. With Gdrive, she will never need to.

That said, success is still not guaranteed. MS has had SkyDrive for years and I have no idea what the market penetration numbers are, but I'm sure they aren't good. Hotmail is no Gmail. I had no problems convincing a bunch of people to switch to Gmail, but only got one person to sign up for Dropbox.

<comment><USER14> Can it be scripted though? I want to set up a cron task to gzip a directory and send it to GDrive every night.

<comment><USER13> if its a desktop program like dropbox with a synced folder, you can write a script to place the gzip in the synced folder, and then it will sync automatically

<comment><USER14> That could work, hopefully it's a 1 way sync though. I don't want all of the contents of my cloud storage to be pulled down to my server.

<comment><USER13> you can use selective sync

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> I (we) use Google Apps. I'm assuming this would be another service. If we ever see it. Right now, it's vaporware.

It took me months to "train" everyone in the office on how to use Dropbox. -Ok stop laughing. I'm dealing with doctors here. :) I know doctors who can perform open heart surgery but can't use iTunes.

Anyway I'd rather not go through that training nightmare again. Google is gonna have to do something really impressive.

<comment><USER45> Erm, it's not vaporware. GApps has had this feature for years now, they're just rebranding it as google drive to compete with dropbox.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> I dunno. I've been using Dropbox for years now, I've got it set up on all my computers, and as of right now I don't really have a pressing reason to switch. Gdrive would have to offer up something new and amazing before I'd want to change over. (And it would have to be something other than lower prices, because I don't back up enough stuff to have to pay for additional storage.)

</comment><comment><USER47> Should dropbox worry? Sure, _not_ worrying would simply be stupid.

Should they be mortally afraid? No, probably not. Dropbox has a lot going for them, and one of the biggest things they've got going for them is that they are _not google_.

They can specialize, they can do one thing and do it well and they just had a huge company validate their market for them.

Look at omniture vs analytics of how that can play out.

</comment><comment><USER48> I'd love to see Dropbox open up their platform for developers to build applications on top of it. Seems like that could entail all sorts of things, such as solving the friction between using web apps with large files, or groups of files. Imagine dropping files in a folder and then being able to manipulate them on the web, and save them back to your folder seamlessly.

</comment><comment><USER49> After the scare stories I've heard regarding gmail lockouts (and not just on news sites, yesterday someone I follow on twitter was temporarily locked out of their gmail for receiving a number of files quickly) I'm more inclined to continue using services that would not all get shut off with my gmail access being locked for a single ToS breach.

</comment><comment><USER50> It's in areas like this that Google sometimes oversteps the mark and veers dangerously close to "being evil" territory... in MY opinion.

As I see it: Dropbox innovated, and they innovated well. It's inevitable that competition would arise, but competition on the scale Google can offer could well mean total annihilation for Dropbox, if annihilation is what Google pursues.

Google doesn't "need" to enter this market. And yes, I know that there's no rule that says you have to be nice... but it feels crappy to me. Dropbox has earnt it's success, and Google could easily let them grow and secure their future before releasing G-Drive. Google is in a position to be something of a patriarch in the tech world as opposed to eating it's young.

If I was working on a Dropbox competitor yesterday, today I'd be finding something else to do. That's bad for innovation.

if G-Drive actually exists that is.

<comment><USER51> Any company - big or small - is going to enter markets where they think they can make an impact. I don't think it's about being nice to smaller companies (and BTW, Dropbox isn't that small any more). It's about what's the best fit for users, and having the market decide the winner. If Google make a product that can't compete with Dropbox's ease of use, they'll flounder, as have many Google products in the past (Buzz, Notebook, Dodgeball, Lively, Answers and so on). Sure - big companies have advantages of scale and cross-promotion, but small companies have advantages of speed and lack of bureaucracy.

Competition is good for users, and arguably good for companies too. Nice just doesn't come into it.

<comment><USER50> It wasn't good for users when Microsoft put Netscape out of business, and It wont be good for users if Google puts Dropbox out of business.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Is this credible news? Building GDrive seems completely incompatible with long term vision of Google (Chrome OS, Android, etc.) (at least vision implied by listening their earning calls).

Also sync'ing with local storage means allowing users to use non-Google Docs editors (MS Office) and all these cool collaboration things Google Apps are useless when you move in Gdrive mode.

Maybe building a good iphone/Android app to edit google docs online would be better investment of their talent?

And, on side note, as cloud storage becomes integral part of our lives, the companies which will win are not the cheapest one. But the ones with the best customer service and quality of product.

<comment><USER52> I agree, I was speculative when I read this. Google is making a push for a cloud based OS - so why would they roll out a product based on local file syncing?

Perhaps, this is a transitive product that will eventually be the foundation for Chrome OS file storage?

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> Two thoughts:

\- I don't think the Dropbox party is over, and won't be for a while, because of non-techies. Dropbox is drop dead simple and non-technical people have gravitate to it and won't see much of a reason to switch. Also, Google has so many different products now, sometimes when you mention Google to non- technical people they get an overwhelming deer-in-the-headlights look.

\- As a technical person, I am excited to hopefully have more online and offline document editing capability with Google Drive. Back when I had a Blackberry, Dropbox's app allowed me to edit files through the app, but with my iPhone app, I can't edit files on my Dropbox.

<comment><USER33> _sometimes when you mention Google to non-technical people they get an overwhelming deer-in-the-headlights look._

That's interesting, I've never seen that. I always thought Google was the most beginner-friendly corner of the internet.

<comment><USER54> Bing tv adverts suggested that Google wasn't providing user friendly search results. So maybe there is some huddle of people who just can't cope with Google?

<comment><USER33> Yes, Bing is a direct competitor of Google.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER55> Well at least I hope they lower the super ridiculous high prices and make it more like $4 a year per 15 GB.

They seem greedy to me. They seem to want to be able to retire and not have to work anymore if they wanted after the dropbox startup.

</comment><comment><USER56> > Google Drive: Is the Dropbox Party Over? Yeah, because Google will put a > really nice effort making cross-platform client software like Dropbox does

Look how pathetic Google Talk desktop client is.

Is the Google Talk client really complex piece of VC++ shit that Google can't spare some decent develope from tens of throusands of genius employees?

</comment><comment><USER57> Dropbox made it so I don't even think about it. My files are just where I need them. That is the amazing part: make it so that you don't see it, but it is always there.

I think they have a pretty broad-base and google entering the market validates the business model. Though, their prices might drop a bit.

</comment><comment><USER58> By the way, to my knowledge dropbox doesn't provide drag-and-drop of files into and out of the browser window, which I see as kind of a key feature for this type of service. I know it's possible because gmail lets you drag-and- drop an attachment into a message in chrome...

</comment><comment><USER59> Dropbox has a pretty large amount of users who are more than happy with the functionality of the application as it is. With more added features to come in later years, I think Google won't just steal the market with a Google labeled cloud drive.

</comment><comment><USER60> I am excited about this. Competition in the market is good for innovation and the price.

</comment><comment><USER61> Google needs to provide very simple native syncing apps that are equivalent to or better then Dropbox's and at the same time support several different platforms out of the gate to draw people away from Dropbox.

<comment><USER29> Yes, and that's an awful lot of work. More likely they'll launch something less functional than Dropbox, but good enough to slow Dropbox down a little while Google focuses on competing with Facebook.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Only by making Dropbox a lucrative acquisition target to someone else.

</comment><comment><USER62> Don't think I'll be leaving DropBox, but redundancy is nice.

</comment><comment><USER38> I expect GDrive to compete with Backblaze and Crashplan (cheap + inconvenient compared to Dropbox), but its effect on the Dropbox userbase to be minimal.

</comment><comment><USER63> The reason I'll use dropbox over google drive? I'll store my files with a company that makes it's money from fees vs one that makes it's money from ads.

</comment><comment><USER64> Huge benefits for G Drive! For example they will even scan the contents and let you know /IRS about any tax discrepancies for example.

</comment><comment><USER65> my dropbox account was deleted without warning or notice, so i guess im ready for something new

<comment><USER65> repro steps: 1) have a dropbox account 2) join a company that uses dropbox teams 3) leave that company 4) poof, account disappears

<comment><USER29> That's one serious bug. Have you contacted Dropbox about it? What was their response?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER66> What will kill Dropbox?:

Some similar product where we can install and manage our own servers.

<comment><USER67> That won't kill it for my mama.

</comment></comment><comment><USER68> I hope they'll give the option to do your own encryption, too.

<comment><USER69> Since one of the main features of GDrive will be to share files between Google Apps, I doubt that's plausible.

There's nothing stopping you from encrypting each file before upload, but then that file won't really be usable with Google's apps.

</comment></comment><comment><USER70> If Apple or Microsoft introduce a competitor to your application, you are going to have a real difficult time staying in business. Are we to the same point with Google and cloud apps?

</comment><comment><USER71> I thought Windows 8 was going to kill dropbox

</comment><comment><USER72> I guess it won't take too much effort to get the Google username from that screenshot and just ask the guy ... any volunteers ?

</comment><comment><USER73> personally I expect the GDrive to be a bit of a failure, and Google will do what it always does...use it's massive cash reserves to buy Dropbox.

</comment><comment><USER74>
        Google Drive: $5 per year per 20 GB.
        Dropbox Pro 50 plan, $10 per month for 50 GB

"the price of Google Drive looks dirt cheap." wait what?

<comment><USER75> Google Drive is $5 per 20GB _per year_. I'd say that's a pretty significant difference.

<comment><USER74> haha, that's what I get for staying up late.</comment></comment></comment>


Computational analysis concludes that Molière wrote the plays attributed to him - <AUTHOR> https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/11/french-playwright-moli-re-did-indeed-write-his-own-masterpieces-computer-science?rss=1 <comment><USER2> Well that's refreshing... that someone managed to get a negative result in an applied field published. Thumbs up!

</comment><comment><USER3> I doubt anyone else could have faked being that snarky!</comment>


Do You Google Yourself? Are You Hiring? - <AUTHOR> http://priceonomics.com/do-you-google-yourself-are-you-hiring/ <comment><USER3> I started to work at AdRoll a few months ago and it got me to think of different ways to use retargeting, while remembering about this story.

For example, if you're looking for a job as a designer or an engineer (or whatever else), you're likely to have a site to show some of your projects. Potential recruiters that end up visiting your site can then be advertised to specifically.

I was also thinking of blogs: you can probably recapture an audience when you write a new post. I.e. one of your posts gets popular on Hacker News, but people won't necessarily start following you or subscribing, but you could advertise for your new posts later.

I'm surprised not to have heard of another story similar to that Google one since then, but there is potential if you think about it.

edit: actually, I remember reading about a guy who had targeted his significant other using a Facebook ad for some purpose (maybe a proposal?).

<comment><USER4> Congrats on the new job.

Have you tried Geeklist [https://geekli.st](https://geekli.st) ?

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Over the years I've been sort of refining what you get when you search my name.

So if you search for my name on either Google or DuckDuckGo now, the top 5-6 results are about me. It's mostly just Facebook/Twitter/GitHub/LinkedIn and other things like that, but they are all me.

I guess that is positive when I'm finished with school and need to start applying for jobs :-)

I'm not sure it will even pay off, it's not that you need to do that much, just try to get stuff you do not want to show up removed.

Covering up something stupid (with any kind of spread) probably isn't going to work. But if you have a completely unrelated result showing up for a hobby of yours that doesn't really need to be on 'your' front page then you can make small edits to make it rank worse. Perhaps remove your name, or write it differently just that one time.

Given a bit of time you can end up with only the results you want, provided you aren't known enough for someone to be writing about what you are doing with your life.

<comment><USER6> Back in 2002, shortly after GTA3 was released for PC, I started getting involved in its then-fledgling modding community. I created a really basic map mod early on, and then a bit later, I worked on a couple of slightly more advanced things, including a sort of modding tutorial. As the community grew, my stuff started popping up everywhere[1], and a little blurb in some issue of PC Gamer even named me as one of the "pioneers" of GTA3 modding.

Fast forward four or five years, and GTA3 related results still dominated Google searches for my name. I was just about to go to college, and I had an initial phone interview for a part time sysadmin job at a small company close to campus. During the call, the owner of the company happened to google me and suddenly went silent. After a few very long seconds, I piped up:

"...hello?"

"...uh, yeah. So, what's all this about grand theft auto? Were you charged?"

It took me a moment to realize what he was seeing, but once I did, I cracked up. I did my best to explain that it referred to a computer game, not a felony. I even tried to turn it into a selling point, using it as an example of how long I'd been hacking, tweaking, etc. I'm not still not sure he was entirely convinced, but nevertheless, he ended up calling me in for a second interview.

Today, the top results for my name are a bit more professional: my portfolio site, LinkedIn, Facebook, and so on. However, down near the bottom of the first page, you can still find a reference to my stint as a professional carjacker—uh, I mean as a GTA3 modder.

[1] I won't link to them here directly, but if you're curious, it wouldn't take much digging to find my full name and check it out yourself.

<comment><USER5> Haha, that's brilliant :-)

</comment></comment></comment><comment> grey-area Another cute trick is to put places on google maps at 0,0 or another strategic location, so that anyone looking at a place with that location will find it. Last I looked Ace Advertising Signs had put a place at 0,0, it's been removed now I think but you can still see the icon at certain zoom levels on classic maps as the tiles are cached:

[https://www.google.com/maps?q=0,0&ll=0,0&z=17&output=classic](https://www.google.com/maps?q=0,0&ll=0,0&z=17&output=classic)

</comment><comment><USER7> This reminds me of the age-old (apocryphal?) trick of buying google ads geo- targeted at SandHill road in Palo Alto when you're raising VC money.

</comment><comment><USER8> Over some 2 years back I tried this and it worked. I auctioned founder's name in Google Adwords and got call for interview in next 2 days. However, they did not offer the job :(

Btw, that company itself earns most of the money by ads :P

</comment><comment><USER9> Unless he has the ad executives' consent it was a bad move posting their full names in the video. Something I've noticed about mavericks (myself included, to a degree) is the willingness to engage is unusual/risky behaviour transcends the generally desirable (given that the "desirable" is classically the usual and proven). Arguing against myself, however, advertising is a fertile home for a maverick.

Generalising the experiment, I'm now curious about soliciting executives for business via this method.

<comment><USER10> These people are essentially famous in their business; what's the harm of posting their names in a video?

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> This also happens in reverse - recruitment agencies bidding on names of prospects. Certainly got my attention when I was first targeted by this approach.

</comment><comment><USER12> I know the people reading this and posting here are, for the most part, particularly those who don't mind having their real info out on the web - <USER2> for anyone who cares about privacy or being tracked it's worth noting the info-exposure aspect of self-Googling.

Google and other search engines, I would guess, have some algorithm that kicks in when someone searches on a person name, and calculates a probability that the searcher is the person whose name is searched on. This in turn may enable linking the real name with the set of data associated with the searcher by other means (e.g. hits on Google APIs, Google Analytics, etc., plus whatever other data the search engine has from other tracking and data-mining sources).

Of course much of one's online profile may be already linked with one's RW identity, but the self-Googling may add some previously semi-anonymous data to the profile.

<comment><USER13> If you're worried about this, use an incognito window to search for your name. Its a good idea anyway, because it turns off personalization.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I googled my name and found 57 others with the same name... None of those 57 names were mine though.

<comment><USER15> It doesn't matter if you don't find yourself, as long as your search term (your name) matched. So as long as some one knows your name (and that you might Google yourself), there is a good chance you'd see it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> My name is entirely unique, I've never found a reference to anyone else but myself when I google my own name. Thankfully, the references are relatively good/professional, but it's still a bit disconcerting.

</comment><comment><USER17> I google myself all the time: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zbk4Bvic5jA](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zbk4Bvic5jA)

</comment><comment><USER18> A bit late to the party here, but if you want to help non-technical people manage their personal SEO, Brand Yourself [1] is a pretty cool startup that helps with this.

[1] [http://brandyourself.com/](http://brandyourself.com/)</comment>


Ask HN: How can we solve diversity in tech talent without allocating quotas? - <AUTHOR>

Most commentary and discussions tend to highlight % of people by gender and race, while hinting at allocating quotas in order to bring better balance to the work force.
I feel this maybe a flawed approach and there could be a better way to address diversity without going down the quotas approach.
What do think? <comment><USER2> Quotas are not the answer... (I can't think of anything I've read recently that hinted as such)

The answer is similar to the answer for problems that have been recently highlighted by the Ferguson catastrofuck.

And that answer is to figure out how to remove systemic and often institutionalized biases and narratives that have been baked into our society and in turn the heads of individuals growing up and living in it. That's the first step. The second is to figure out a solution to the income inequality that opens so many doors for some, and keeps them closed for so many others. It's about creating a fair playing field for everyone, where a theoretical, honest to god meritocracy could actually perhaps exist.

How does one go about doing that? No fucking clue.

<comment><USER3> This answer will be ignored for the most part but you nailed it. As far as your last two sentences in your reply, I appreciate the honesty. The fact that the convo has elevated to this level of nuance and understanding indicates things are finally moving in the right direction though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Quotas are exactly what you need. But not _hiring_ quotas.

Feel free to adjust the percentages below, but this is what you should aim for to eventually get to gender diversity (for example):

Tell recruiters you want 50% of the qualified candidates they send to you to be female.

Evaluate resumes in a form stripped of as much identifying information as possible.

Half of all candidates interviewed should be female. If not, try to identify an additional upstream bias, perhaps at the resume evaluation stage (example: Women have less free time for side projects, so make sure that when you evaluate a Github account it is for quality not quantity).

Aim for diversity in your interviewers. Half of the interviewing employees should be female. If that isn't possible, at least one of the interviewing employees _must_ be female (and if you only have one interviewing female employee, she should get a 'creep factor' veto, _especially_ if anyone else in the company (like a founder) has a veto. If that isn't possible (because you have no female employees), _fix it and hire a woman already_.

That's it. No need for actual hiring quotas after that point, you should be able to hire for merit out of the interviewees. If you end up not being gender diverse (ie. only industry average or below), _figure out why_ (perhaps an existing interviewing employee is setting of _their_ 'creep factor' alarms so they don't accept your offer, or there is a promotion bias and talented women aren't sticking around after you hire them).

In parallel, you can make similar efforts around race, etc.

</comment><comment><USER5> Why not just hire based on merit, and let gender and race percentages fall where they may?

<comment><USER6> Because practices implicitly assumes that merit === talent, and that natural talent cannot be hidden by extenuating circumstances such as social pressure away from a given trade or poor access to learning resources.

<comment><USER7> So? Expecting industry to solve such a huge societal problem is ridiculous. The only thing tech businesses can be expected to do is not discriminate. Restructuring society to address systemic injustice that start well before kids even go to school is not something industry can achieve.

<comment><USER6> I'm arguing that a truly effective meritocratic system should be able to recognize merit that might be hidden by the kinds of social circumstances that affirmative action attempts to compensate for. Even if you don't think industry should address these issues, there's a chance that the game theoretically optimal option is to make special consideration for underrepresented groups.

<comment><USER7> But affirmative action doesn't recognize merit, it rewards luck (at being the minority given the job) and is designed to even out ethnic/sex ratios without regard for productivity.

Also, a meritocratic system only requires the "winners" are chosen on the merit of their work. It will never be possible to eliminate all disadvantages which might prevent somebody from achieving some abstract concept of potential.

<comment><USER8> How do you define merit then? It may never be possible to eliminate all the disadvantages, but moving towards equality in outcome is still worthwhile.

Like a blind person can't be made to see, but screen reading software and braille text is still better then not having those things.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> By instituting quotas, wouldn't companies be explicitly discriminating against potential employees (e.g., white males) based on gender and race, which is illegal under U.S. law?

<comment><USER8> Consult your local lawyer, which I am not. That said, see The Supreme Court case [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Steelworkers_v._Weber](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Steelworkers_v._Weber)

It lays out requirements for a legal quota system.</comment></comment>


Pyforest – lazy-import of all popular Python Data Science libraries - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/8080labs/pyforest <comment><AUTHOR> pyforest lazy-imports all popular Python Data Science libraries so that they are always there when you need them. If you don't use a library, it won't be imported. When you are done with your script, you can export the Python code for the import statements (so that you don't violate the Zen of Python "explicit is better than implicit").

You can already pip install pyforest. It will be available on conda soon.</comment>


Ruby, PHP, MySQL, Perl, Free Hosting for geeks - <AUTHOR> http://1.ai/ <comment><USER4> The initial question that comes to mind is: how will this be sustainable? It's all well and good to offer this service, but will it be a drain on your finances 6 months down the road? Will it become a drain if more than 250 people sign up for it? I understand that one can get a server with 128GB of SSD storage, quad core, and 16GB of RAM for around $100/mo if one looks enough, but that would only serve 256 people at your quotas. Would you be able to offer the service if you had to spend $1,000/mo?

As a follow-up: why should I use Dotgeek over Heroku or AppFog? Both of those are commercial offerings with a free tier, but their commercial pricing makes me a lot more confident that it will stick around. What are you offering that trumps their offering?

Kudos for trying things (and I'm not trying to sound harsh at all). Still, this feels like it would have been more interesting in 2006 than today where we have many options at free tiers and even more paid services to choose from. I guess I'm just wondering why I would want to sign up for this rather than something else. If this is more about learning systems administration, then it's an awesome project and I'm sure you'll learn a lot and gain great experience. It's awesome to try things even if they aren't meant to be commercial alternative services just to get the experience of doing them.

<comment><USER5> Hello Mdasen ! thanks for your comment and the very good questions. To start with a quick answer: "Would you be able to offer the service if you had to spend $1,000/mo?" Yes :) At the moment we have 3 servers and we are far from full capacity. Of course nothing can scale to the infinite but, from what I could observe, there are always people coming and going. We do have bigger hard disks than 128 gb so the quota in a single server is higher than 250 or it should be.

Why should you use 1.ai dotgeek over heroku or appfog ? If you do have a commercial application you should run in a paid service because, in the end, hosting your commercial or critical app will depend on support. This said our space is for developers/geeks/learners that want to try something not necessarily commercial.

Another reason I would see vs. Heroku free (I think is only fair to compare with the free option) is that here you do have a simple SFTP access and you run things like in the "old days"- your way. We also give MySQL which is not part of Heroku free. I also feel that the performance of an app in our server would be better vs. others free tiers.

I think that both Heroko and AppFog are great concepts as they take away the servers duty from your hands.

We do not compete with any paid service hence it is only entirely free and somehow "as is". I agree that this might be useless to many yet I would think that for a young developer - student or really anyone that wants to try something without any financial commitment it is a pretty good offer.

Thanks for the kudos (I don't think you have been harsh at all) I think dropping your app via SFTP (being Ruby, PHP or even a perl app with Dancer) is a very straightforward process and _could_ be useful. Judging from the great numbers of signups after this post I think that at least some are curious which is always great ! Thanks again David

<comment><USER6> Minor copywriting note: The autoresponder email says "your hosting space request is now under approval.", instead of "under review".

<comment><USER5> will fix it - thanks for the feedback. Just approved your application :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> FYI, so I thought "Ok, I might try it for something simple" and signed up. Got an error that I hadn't accepted the terms/conditions, which incidentally, are very easy to miss. So I checked the button again, after re-entering my password. Then, I mind-farted and wrote "June" for the 5th month of the year, so the submission failed again. After re-entering my password a second time, and re-checking the terms and conditions box, and re-entering the captcha answer, on the third request, got an error that my "About You" wasn't long enough.*

Then, I gave up.

Full text was: "Learning ruby & javascript. Will host some simple one page apps with Sinatra. Current project: simple anagram finder." What else do you need here?

<comment><USER5> msluyter: sorry to hear about the signup troubles but the motivation length is min 140 chars. We don't think that this is too long (one tweet?). Adding a more line or few more words should do the trick (e.g. write something about yourself or if you prefer a poem!). At least we don't use re-captcha - <USER2> time I sign up for a site using that I need at least 4 or 5 attempts ! Thanks to this HN submission we are received a lot of applications so you can make it too! (if you want of course).

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm maybe cynical here, but this service will go away within a year. And it won't be because of too high direct costs for the host. It will be because of too much hassle.

When you do something like this these days, you only attract trouble (and a very few well-meaning people): spammers, script-kiddies, pirates looking for cheap storage or seedboxes and hacker groups valuing the anonymity for their releases which in turn will attract DoS attacks which will be a huge hassle for the provider to deal with.

So within a year, you won't only have to deal with too many users taking too many resources, you will also have to deal with annoyed providers, with law enforcement constantly asking for data you can't provide and of course with constant DMCA takedown requests.

And that's why we can't have nice things any more :/

<comment><USER9> Well it looks like they have an approval process so I feel that they can easily ban users that abuse their service. With that said, I'm sure that's an issue they will have to eventually face, but that is the liability that all hosting companies have.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Why there's no python?

<comment><USER5> mostly for our limited knowledge of python but we could certainly add it in the future if there is some interest ! While there is no official support we want to be able to fix things if they do not work. This said I had a look last night and we could probably add it soon as it seems simple enough

<comment><USER11> +1 for python support

<comment><USER12> +1

<comment><USER5> we are adding python support in this very moment. Tests are fine with flask trying django now :) should be live tomorrow.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Your signup process is really frustrating. First, your About you should give me an indication of how many characters have been completed and how many are left. Second, your Captcha is asking for the X month of the year. Most people I know dont say September (when typing at least), instead just say Sep. There is no visual clue or early warning before you bounce me 4 times. Frustrating.

<comment><USER5> sorry to hear that but the the x month of the year would still be September and I don't know anyone that would say "see you in sep". The "about you" is 140 characters - like a tweet which is essentially just a couple of lines. There is a link go the explanation below that field. Writing "I want it" or "I need it " is not sufficient. Please understand this is required to be sure that the service doesn't die on the weight of spammers or people planning to use this for other trouble making activities. Over 300 people made it since this news was published so...yes you can (if you want).

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I sent request for approval and its pending for 9 days..don't think its for everyone.Anyways python support will create more interest.

<comment><USER5> sorry to hear that - perhaps the motivation/about you was too short? We have some pending applicants because of the short or vague information provided ..at any rate just drop me a line at dotgeek at 1 dot ai and I will activate it asap.

<comment><USER14> Thanks for the quick response and you are right I did not provide project specific details because I do not have at this moment.But yeah I was hoping to get some place so that if I start something I could use that.

<comment><USER5> I think I have found your application - approved now && live at <http://monami.1.ai> :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> When are you going to support some enterprise-grade technologies like Python and PostgreSQL? Sure, those tools you have now are great for hobbyists and part-time hackers (with maybe the exception of Ruby), but a real dev sandbox should have some better tools to work with. Take Google for instance, they chose Java and Python.

<comment><USER5> well mysql is used by google and twitter too so I don't really see them as hobbyists only (+ we use it daily for business and not just for an hobby). Python support is in the cards and we are just looking at it right now. BUT again this is _not_ an enterprise-grade service and really not comparable to google. But thanks for your input - this clearly isn't for everyone but can be useful to many.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Oh man, I remember using dotgeek a long time ago for some minor PHP stuff. Awesome to see it expand (and still exist).

<comment><USER5> yeah it was in 2003! first to launch PHP 5 hosting with the nightly build! these were the days with no cloud and now everything has changed ... so yes we are back with a better service and more servers ! thanks for looking at this (I think I even remember your name from our old users !)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Any plans to support JVM based languages? I imagine something like Tomcat would work with your ideology of uploading a file (in this case a .jar) via FTP and being up and running. Adding JVM support would add many languages to your supported list quickly :)

</comment><comment><USER5> thanks for posting this - I am behind 1.ai so if you have any question ask away :)

<comment><USER18> Why is there no paid subscription option? Do you have any plans of such?

I'd like to upgrade to a paid, supported service if my website gets any traction.

<comment><USER5> Hi dexen, the reason is that there are already many excellent (or so we hear) options for paid hosting /apps deployment and we think that there isn't a need for yet another another good service (unless you can really make a difference. We had some ideas in this direction like with having all the apps cloned in 3 live servers in different locations including the mysql database but this was just an idea) but we do give some support through the forums and occasionally via email :)

<comment><USER5> and actually mdasen did summarize many of the good paid alternatives which are backed by solid money and infrastructure.... but to be fairly honest the another big reason is that we are all busy with our full time careers and do not need the money / start a new commercial activity well the "fun" becomes work !

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Step 1. Attract geeks / nerds / hackers.

Step 2. Get sourcecode

Step 3. Win!

<comment><USER5> hello dlsym, well we have no secret plan for World domination through code if is what you meant :) on a serious note for very sensitive code (e.g. private) I would recommend a dedicated server or an instance. It goes without saying that we do not touch hosted code (beside a general, automated file check that ensure that there isn't anything malicious going on).

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> This looks really cool, it seems perfect for hosting games in the playtesting phase, as a free host without onerous bandwidth restrictions. +1 for Python support.

</comment><comment><USER21> I don't really need this (right now), but I'd like to commend you on using a sensible Captcha and not some ridiculous fuzzy image.

<comment><USER22> I wonder if a captcha is really even necessary here considering that all users are reviewed?

<comment><USER5> good point - probably not but judging from the number of people that applied anyway and yet pasted a lot of random text in the "about you box" (or copy and paste galore of lore ipsum) probably make it a little harder to them to submit bogus applications makes sense :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> It looks awesome, kudos! Just a quick question, are there any plans to support node.js / Express? :)

</comment><comment><USER24> Is it possible to point my own domain(s) at an instance, instead of having to use a 1.ai subdomain?

<comment><USER5> at this point we don't configure domains for the users other than the subdomain but you could forward it using a free service - but if you really need it drop us a line after you try it out and are happy about it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> It's disturbing that you're not making any money out of it, but I'm all for it.

Kudos for you.

<comment><USER5> thank you for the kind words ! Oh well if it was a paid hosting it would be yet another hosting service and would have probably not even made it to hackernews. There is a lot of "money can't buy" fun and pleasure to see what smart developers build + helping people starting out and learning something new. Isn't it ironic that so many things are free online (e.g. having a blog, storing files etc.) yet hosting is not ?

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Do you provide access to a full shell/ssh? If so, is 'screen' or 'tmux' available?

<comment><USER5> no we do not - it is SFTP only at this stage. The idea is pretty much "drop and run" your apps being Ruby, PHP or Perl.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Just signed up. Looking forward to giving it a try.

<comment><USER5> Thank you - it has been approved && is now live at <http://saltcod.1.ai> \- you should have received the full info via email

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> What's the catch?

<comment><USER5> There is really no catch other that there is no professional support (see.. for a slightly longer explanation <http://1.ai/specs>) and that we take no responsibility for your data (e.g. you should always keep a backup. this doesn't mean that we do not care about the service just we do not want to be liable if something goes wrong).

<comment><USER29> What's paying to keep the service running?

<comment><USER5> It is paid by myself and I do not need to make any money out of this - <USER3> to the official mirror I am running for the PHP project. The service doesn't need ads/paid subscriptions but again it is not to be compared with a paid service as we do not provide professional support.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Why I'm walking away from one of the best jobs in academia - <AUTHOR> http://www.vox.com/2015/9/8/9261531/professor-quitting-job <comment><USER2> He's leaving a well paid job that gives him considerable influence because there are serious problems in academia that cant be solved easily. I find it difficult to imagine that he will find a alternate career path without that issue. Every profession/industry has serious systemic problems. I think the author needs to either search his heart more deeply to find out the real reason why he's leaving his job, or reconsider his decision to leave it if it's not too late.

<comment><USER3> Completely agree with you

> I think the author needs to either search his heart more deeply

That's the problem with graduating so early and following your initial studying path. You didn't have time to think about what you were doing, was it the right thing, was it what you wanted, etc...

I always wondered how that kind of case usually ends. The people who've been doing one thing only in life, and ends up in a job right away. I guess your world can crumble in your mid-life.

<comment><USER4> > That's the problem with graduating so early and following your initial > studying path.

I don't think the choice of study path is a problem. After all, he was doing this for 20 years and does not have a problem with what he was teaching. He has a problem with the people that benefited or did not benefit from his work. ... "Why don't you do something more meaningful with your life?" ...

The real problem is he thought life would be perfect, that there would be no problems he would have a hard time solving, that everything would be as imagined.

And the early success did give him false visions of grandeur and an amazing world. Early success just was not sustainable. In the end, the reality that overcame was that life sucked and will continue to suck. Only little pockets of joy exist here and there. Especially when you are a bleeding edge researcher.

<comment><USER5> > In the end, the reality that overcame was that life sucked and will continue > to suck. Only little pockets of joy exist here and there.

Ever considered a sideline as a motivational speaker?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm not quite as demoralized as the OP author; but I can say that now that I have seen how the sausage is made, I have a lot less respect for the institution and the process. These places are stuffed with lazy, unmotivated (or perhaps demoralized) risk-averse people[1]. Crab mentality? Check. There is also every kind of greedy shameful opportunist charlatan on the campus; they can smell money from a mile away, and they will soak it up like a sponge while they produce nothing (I'm talking mostly about gratuitous mid-level administration). Industry is just as bad, companies will engage in so-called "partnerships" which are mainly a way for the legislature to give tax money to profitable businesses, using colleges to launder it. I'm embarrassed to admit that I have seen it first hand, and could do nothing (nothing reasonable) to stop it. I can also say that it will not help your career if you refuse to participate. I can't wait for some of these people to retire or succumb to entropy, of even better if some of them are jailed. I suppose it is naive to hope that their replacements will be better.

I have a couple of words of advice for the guy though. Don't worry about the jerk who watched breaking bad in class as long as he isn't bothering anyone else. Also don't worry about the ones who sit behind and watch along. It's their prerogative if they want to pay $50 bucks to have a place to check their social media and watch reruns. They're doing a public service, subsidizing the other students' education.

Re: Online Ed. Even though it currently sucks, it's here to stay. It's in beta right now, and it may change a lot before some college actually gets it right, but it isn't going away and that's a good thing. Colleges that are followers, (ie: Blackboard customers) are going to lose big. The winners will be the ones who continue to innovate until they nail it, the rest will be decimated and or become testing centers.

As in every profession, there is a cohort who associate one's ability to find dark trousers and a collared shirt with "professionalism". Whoever thought that there was no conservatism at the Uni was wrong. Ignore them if you can, placate them if you must. Spend your energy where it does the most good.

[1] - And also some very fine people.

<comment><USER7> I would love to read an account of the games that administrators play, or of how businesses use universities to "launder money", if you know any. We've all seen numerical analyses that suggest that administrator compensation is way out of whack, but I've yet to read a good ground-level account of it.

<comment><USER6> Not sure how good it would be but maybe someday if I ragequit I'll post it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > Online education isn't the solution

Eh, speak for yourself, it is the solution for millions of people who want to _learn_ something, not only have the degree as an end goal...

<comment><USER9> It's probably worth observing that he's specifically referring to his field: history. The couple of times that I've dipped into liberal arts classes online I've thought they were pretty horrible. I'm sure you can have captivating lectures but with limited personal interactions and feedback--especially with a MOOC--they don't really work as classes. Discussion boards don't scale that well under the best of circumstances.

MOOCs can be reasonably effective as learning tools for things like programming. They don't have a real business or certification model but that's a somewhat separate discussion. But for history, literature, etc. I'd mostly rather just read a good book.

<comment><USER10> There's no reason why MOOCs can't be effective in the humanities. I think the problem is that there's much less overlap between those who are skilled at teaching, say, history and those who are skilled at creating good online courses.

I've noticed this same lack of overlap in the field of journalism. I know quite a few people who are really good (and successful) in their field, but despite being in their late twenties or early thirties, they're shockingly inept at operating computers.

This is a problem, in my opinion, because much of what (specialist) journalist do is find the story in high volumes of data. And computers are great for that: RSS readers, DEVONthink (or other personal databases), good google searches, collaboration through, at the very least google docs, etc.

And yet they settle for ordering books, reading huge stacks of newspapers, cuting out the good articles and writing in their paper notebooks, and composing word documents that they send around via email with -2 added to the filename.

But I digress. My point is that there's significant low-hanging fruit in combining technology with the 'stuffy' areas of academia or fields like journalism, but relatively few people from either side collaborate in this area.

In part, I think this is because of a fundamentally different personality/temperament and social surroundings, and in part I suppose it's because this 'low-hanging fruit' is not low-hanging when it comes to profit. That saddens me.

But the fact remains that if I as a data/tech/web geek were to 'fuse' with one of my journalist friends, great things could happen. While such a 'fusion' is unlikely, I'm still trying to find a good starting point for collaboration.

<comment><USER9> I concur to some degree with your points about data journalism--which are highlighted by the relatively few good examples that are out there. (OTOH, a lot of journalism also legitimately involves getting out from behind a desk, talking with people, and writing in paper notebooks.)

>There's no reason why MOOCs can't be effective in the humanities. I think the problem is that there's much less overlap between those who are skilled at teaching, say, history and those who are skilled at creating good online courses.

One fundamental question is what a MOOC can bring to a literature or a history class and I'm not sure I have a good answer. It's certainly not interaction with my peers--given the interaction mechanisms don't scale and there's such a wide disparity of background. It's not interaction with the professor; that certainly doesn't scale. It's not peer grading. It's not powerpoints. It's not video of a professor on a webcam. It's not multiple choice questions.

Is it engaging video/multimedia/high quality lecture? Well, maybe but how is this now different from a quality PBS or History Channel series (or iTunes University or one of those Great Courses DVDs you can order)? Broadcast is a solved problem. Want to learn about the Civil War? Watch the Ken Burns series.

<comment><USER10> > One fundamental question is what a MOOC can bring to a literature or a > history class and I'm not sure I have a good answer.

[...]

> Is it engaging video/multimedia/high quality lecture? Well, maybe but how is > this now different from a quality PBS or History Channel series (or iTunes > University or one of those Great Courses DVDs you can order)? Broadcast is a > solved problem. Want to learn about the Civil War? Watch the Ken Burns > series.

To some degree yes, the advantage of MOOCs can be precisely that on a bigger scale we can use higher quality approaches. Local 'meet-ups' with professors or the like could be used in combination. Why not outsource the lecture part, or at least a significant amount of it? At the very least this could take care of all the <topic> 101 classes that I suspect are pretty similar across universities.

But more importantly, I think there's a _ton_ of stuff that computers can do in this area other than broadcast. Think of classics like the "Encarta Encyclopedia", or "The Way Things Work", or consider how games like Assassin's Creed result in tons of gamers learning a lot about certain periods in history.

Or consider this recent post on HN, "The Pixel Factory"([http://acko.net/files/gltalks/pixelfactory/online.html#0](http://acko.net/files/gltalks/pixelfactory/online.html#0)).

The problems are cost and ability. A single teacher or university is not going to create interactive visualizations, 3D environments to explore, or 'games' (place-events-or-persons-on-the-timeline?). He doesn't have the time/interest/money, and unlike someone already working in IT he might not have a clue as to what's possible (or how to do it).

With MOOCs, it should be possible to scale these efforts and bring together some of the best teachers with some of the best tech folk and create something that can be vastly superior to regular classes, and something that has a wider reach.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> > When I started out, I believed that government regulation could solve every > problem with relatively simple intervention.

You don't have to be a tea-partying libertarian to see that such an idea is shockingly naive.

<comment><USER12> > You don't have to be a tea-partying libertarian to see that such an idea is > shockingly naive.

But, it is a viewpoint deeply held. I've spoken with people over 30 and even over 50 years old that still bought into the idea that government is the solution to all problems.

On the other hand, the view that capitalism and privatization fixes all problems is just as flawed.

There is no one-system-fits-all and it can't even be said that one system is necessarily a better choice in any given situation. Status-quo is usually a good choice though, if it is working.

<comment><USER13> For a thousand generations we did without both (govt and capitalism). SO a lot of systems are possible. Problem is, we need a system that scales, and village life doesn't scale. SnowCrash had a solution, sort of - walled communities with little interaction (except for the Pizza Guy).

<comment><USER14> Pizzanomics

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> " _The quickest and most painful solution to the crisis would involve greatly reducing the amount of money that students can borrow to attend college._ "

I suddenly think I agree. But I don't expect it to happen.

The major downside, of course, is that a significant fraction of young Americans _won 't be able to go to college_. (The corollary, that they won't be able to find jobs, is pretty much taking care of itself: they won't be able to find jobs anyway.) By and large, going to college is a good thing in itself: being exposed to challenging ideas and different people is good for an individual and for a democratic populace, even if _I_ (or you) don't agree with the opinions someone ends up having. But in an environment like this, _that_ isn't really going to happen.

The other downside is that some people (a small minority?) with limited financial means won't be able to reach their full potential. Take someone who could have gone to MIT and invented brilliant new things after being exposed to the full range of difficult ideas. Instead, they go into a job training program and come out excellent at a limited range of very marketable skills. (In the article's situation, essentially all computer science, software engineering, information systems, and so on _are_ job training programs, so....) Perhaps that's actually a positive, as far as the individual is concerned, but it's certainly an opportunity cost overall.

</comment><comment><USER16> Education today puts way too much emphasis on the education as the end instead of it being a means to an end. Students are, understandably, so caught up in achieving a grade to "level up" instead of a) really learning the material and/or b) reflecting on whether the material is interesting enough to spend their life pursuing.

<comment><USER6> I think maybe it's a way for the institutions to avoid responsibility for the result.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Well, I wonder what he plans to do next. My mother always said "It's easy to criticize (or destroy) something. It's hard to create."

I agree there is a lot wrong with the world currently. But I also wonder at the wisdom of his decision. I walked away from a job at a Fortune 500 company for health reasons. This seems like someone who is extremely privileged, doesn't really appreciate how privileged they are, and is throwing away a position not easily gotten back if the decision to go turns out to be one he regrets. Perhaps he won't. He has been published in various venues and done a lot of different things. Perhaps he will readily land on his feet. But I wonder if he will discover that it isn't any better anywhere else and regret this choice.

</comment><comment><USER18> I hear the guy, but it rings hollow. His life has been nothing but success, reading through his piece does not reveal any true failures career-wise. I fear this decision is going to be taken back in a few years and he will become faculty again as he realizes that he really was that one very lucky person, an afford not given in other circles. Best of luck to the guy as he figures out life in not roses and that taking a stand can be very stupid and not nobel, something I think he thinks he is doing here.

<comment><USER19> > I fear this decision is going to be taken back in a few years and he will > become faculty again as he realizes that he really was that one very lucky > person, an afford not given in other circles.

There is a very good chance that he will never get another tenure track offer if he changes his mind. The job market in history is very, very tough.

<comment><USER17> He is also probably burning bridges by writing this scathing article. That alone may make it impossible.

<comment><USER18> I'm not talking Harvard or Temple for job prospects for him coming back, but rather a tenure track job at a C- level school. Something that is secure and muddles along at above the poverty line. His record, though tarnished, will be more than enough for many places that will take him. Does he have a family or children? I suppose not, as fathers are (anecdotally) more risk adverse. If he chooses to have a family, I suppose that his decisions may change.

<comment><USER19> > His record, though tarnished, will be more than enough for many places that > will take him.

The job market in history is more competitive than you could ever imagine. The competition for a tenure track position at a D- level school is insane. Many strong candidates are unable to get any tenure track offers, even at a community college.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> The author is completely spot-on that the problem arises with the funding system. It's a classic case of policymakers confusing correlation and causation, and subsequently cause and effect: They have assumed, and continue to assume, that getting a college degree _causes_ higher employability/earnings/etc., even though the data only indicates _correlation_; consequently they said "more must be better" and tried to push as many people into college as possible in a misguided attempt to cause higher wages.

The truth is more along the lines that high employability for abstract (and disproportionately high-paying) professions is highly correlated with academic ability, and it is the latter that accounts for more of the overall success than the degree itself. In other words, many high-earning people would have some of those higher earnings even if they didn't go to college at all. The fact that many of those people choose to go to college is an _effect_ of that ability, not a cause.

</comment><comment><USER21> I have always believe we didn't have a student loan debt problem but a student loan loaning problem. Not everyone deserves let alone needs to go to college.

The idea that the government will loan money to people regardless of major is just wrong. Worse, since the government is paying a schools are accepting of such federally guaranteed money then why cannot the government dictate costs as it does with medical care? Why cannot it state, in your area one hour credit is worth X. We will not loan more than that. Textbooks cost Y.

Schools, both public and private, are mills to take in effectively free money to pay out in seriously overpaid positions as football coaches and administrators (college Presidents and such) all the while many rest of very fat endowments.

<comment><USER6> >Not everyone deserves let alone needs to go to college.

Not every degree plan deserves/needs subsidization in this manner. But, be careful or we may end up with a very utilitarian college system (assuming that's a bad thing).

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> The Vox article lists his name as Oliver Lee. From his bio at the bottom plus an Atlantic article [1], it appears his full name might be Oliver Lee Bateman, an assistant professor at the University of Texas at Arlington [2].

[1] [http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/06/the- cas...](http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/06/the-case-for- grade-inflation/373251/)

[2] [https://www.linkedin.com/in/oliverleebateman](https://www.linkedin.com/in/oliverleebateman)

<comment><USER23> He has apparently written about Justin Beiber's bulge. It's an entertaining romp worth reading.

[http://www.mademan.com/justin-bieber-and-the-battle-of- the-b...](http://www.mademan.com/justin-bieber-and-the-battle-of-the-bulge/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> >The quickest and most painful solution to the crisis would involve greatly reducing the amount of money that students can borrow to attend college.

Ya that won't happen. The fed wants their share of the pie as well, and since you can't get out of your student loan, even through bankruptcy, the government will eventually get their money back plus interest. There's no incentive for the government to reduce it. If anything they'll increase the funding so they'll get more interest out of future generations. Also college being the de facto next step after high school it'll be like this for at least decades to come.

You'll have to be like the Japanese tsunami stone markers: "beware of tsunami and don't build below this point", and tell your kids "beware of easy money and make sure it's worthwhile" but it's gonna be pretty hard to go against the government system.

</comment><comment><USER15> A great quote (that I've said a few times myself, but I'm humble and don't need my name associated with it) from an article[1] linked by an article[2] linked by the post:

" _I bring up my own experiences as a reminder that if the plural of anecdote isn 't data, the singular of it sure as hell isn't, either._"

[1] [http://www.vox.com/2015/6/5/8736591/liberal-professor- identi...](http://www.vox.com/2015/6/5/8736591/liberal-professor-identity)

[2] [http://www.vox.com/2015/6/3/8706323/college-professor- afraid](http://www.vox.com/2015/6/3/8706323/college-professor-afraid)

</comment><comment><USER25> Seems like there should have been 100 footnotes: *in the university I worked at, not all of academia.

</comment><comment><USER26> > I was a cultural historian, in command of critical theory and immersed in > the latest and best work on gender and sexuality...

So is the real reason you're giving it up because you've realized that critical theory is a load of crap? No? It's "the institution"'s fault? Suuure it is.

<comment><USER27> Nice catch! He must have realized the real motivations behind Critical Theory (a torch that was passed from Psychoanalysis to the Frankfurt School) and once you know this stuff you can't un-know it, and all of the will you once had for teaching goes away with the realization one has been utterly duped.

EDIT: Now that I've read the piece, the author seems unaware he was duped. He says "Activism informed my teaching" which would be a very damning quote had he known the motivations of those behind Critical Theory. He must have really just drunk the kool-aid without questioning, as they're taught to do (otherwise they're "authoritarian"!).

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> > Finally, I realized not even students were too invested. When my best friend > visited my campus to give a talk, he observed one of my lectures. I've got > many shortcomings as an academic, but lecturing isn't one of them. I've been > on TV, radio, podcasts — you name it. By professor standards, which > admittedly aren't that high, I could rock the mic. But while my friend sat > there, semi-engrossed in the lecture, he found himself increasingly > distracted by the student in front of him. That student, who like all in- > state students was paying $50 per lecture to hear me talk, was watching > season one of Breaking Bad.

Well, a lack of investment by students is a plausible interpretation. Another is that the OP isn't as good at lecturing as he likes to think.

<comment><USER29> But why did the student even bother showing up?

<comment><USER30> Because you can get stuff from lectures without paying full attention. I download those Open Yale Courses lectures, and listen to them while driving to work. Driving, obviously, takes up some fraction of my brain, but I find that I still have plenty left over for listening.

Would I get more out of it if I listened while sitting at a desk and taking notes? Probably. But I'm getting a lot more than nothing out of it.

And obviously TV-watching is harder to combine with lecturing (among other things, the student presumably had to have closed-captioning on), but fundamentally the idea of doing two things at once when neither of them demands your complete attention isn't that weird.</comment></comment></comment>


Does Your Building Need A Social Network?  - <AUTHOR> http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/10/16/does-your-building-need-a-social-network-why-not/ <comment><USER2> Cool idea, but I really don't see my flatmates hanging out on social networks.</comment>


ReMarkable Tablet Gets Desktop Linux - <AUTHOR> https://old.reddit.com/r/RemarkableTablet/comments/gkktxy/desktop_linux_on_remarkable_xournal_doom_and_more/ <comment><USER2> Looks like this is for the old version. The new version is going through staged preorder now.

If it'll work on the new that'd be enough to make me want one, but kind of rough to do it in the hopes it'll be able to run linux. The official OS sounds like its actual ebook reader software is pretty crap. If I'm going to pay that much for a device like this I really want a nice reading experience, not just note-taking.

<comment><USER3> I agree completely with respect to the e-reader point. I was _almost_ ready to preorder V2, but that shortcoming gave me pause. I really hope they step it up a notch with that.

<comment><USER2> I did a little more research, and it appears that you can run KOreader on the V1. It doesn't seem to be supported at all, but it looks easy enough.

If you're not familiar with it, KOreader is pretty nice, supports all the formats I'd want and has decent features and performance (in general, haven't tried it on these devices specifically).

Would still need to see if it'll work on the V2, but if I knew it would I'd perorder right now.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Is the lag on V1 really that slow, or is it because it's struggling to run Linux UI?

</comment><comment><USER5> What I find amazing about Linux is how people get it to run on all kinds of devices.</comment>


Difference between Startup Weekend and a Startup - <AUTHOR> http://startupjuncture.com/2013/05/22/the-difference-between-startup-weekend-and-a-startup/ <comment><USER2> I think that I remember you from Startup Weekend London in Sept. 2011. It was one of the most interesting projects at that event.

"With a few exceptions, most team members go back to their real lives, day jobs or studies the next day." That's what I've also noticed.

I think that networking with like-minded people is one of the best part of Startup Weekend (and similar events).

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes indeed, I was at SW London in 2011. What were you working on? Still working on it? I totally agree the networking is one of the best parts of SW, I've met some great people via it.

<comment><USER2> I was working on a site for foodies called Foodedoo and we did not continue after the weekend. It was my first Startup Weekend and I had a great experience anyway.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I've had similar experiences at two SW's I attended: great excitement during the event, great people, etc. Yet the follow-up of actually going for it seems to be a different thing .

I've had a discussion on the topic with Nick Stevens on the topic (actual # of startups being launched out of SW's), who highlighted the mission of SW: "Startup Weekend is a global network of passionate leaders and entrepreneurs on a mission to inspire, educate, and empower individuals, teams and communities." They seem to succeed very well at that mission in any case!

<comment><USER4> Two times on the topic... sorry

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Very well written. This is also a big reason why there are so many startups that don't last past 3 months. That to me is the threshold between fun and exiciting to actually getting to the real stuff. Much like working out at a gym for the first week or two and going crazy versus going to the gym on a regular basis and actually getting muscular.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks! And very good point you make too, I'd agree that around 3 months is the time where you can either go for it or walk away, and most walk away I would guess.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Very insightful post. In my experience, the startup weekend teams are also too large: most startups have 2-4 founders, not more.

<comment><AUTHOR> Cheers. That's a good point too. My SW team of 9 was good everyone contributed something over the weekend, but a lean team of 2-4 with the skills you really need to execute could probably do more</comment></comment>


Show HN: WhereYou? - <AUTHOR> https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.tonyjhuang.whereyou

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey everyone, long time user of HN, first time poster. Made an Android app over the weekend to help you find your friends with one click. Tried to focus on simple design principles, uses Google Maps to display location and navigate.

Let me know what you think :) Obviously this app needs you to find someone else to try it out. Or you can find me as 'tony'

<comment><USER2> Hi Tony,

Congrats on building and releasing this.

I can't test it for you, and there is my feedback: from the description, I can't tell exactly what the point is. The screenshots suggest it's like the retired Google Latitude? What makes this app different? Why would I want it? The description says I can meet new people? So can everyone see where I am? Is it for friends or strangers?

Anyway good luck! And all the best.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey! I didn't realize that my app listing was so ambiguous! I've updated the description to address some of your points and added a new screenshot that details the notification aspect of the app.

Check my other comment to see a little more on how it works. Thanks for the feedback!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> How is this different from sharing your location on, for instance, WhatsApp?

I understand it's easier to do so, and the UI is beautiful, but I believe the value proposition of the app should be clearer.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm not too sure how WhatsApp does it but I was aiming for more of a ask-and- tell system, where your friends can request your location and you can send a one-time response on where you are at that exact moment.

Do they have more of a 'track me everywhere and let anyone that I chat with know' system like Facebook?

<comment><USER3> > Do they have more of a 'track me everywhere and let anyone that I chat with > know' system like Facebook?

Nope. It is a simple option to share your location and send the coordinates via text (within the app) to your friend/group of friends. As simple as that.

It really only takes two taps, it's hard to beat that.</comment></comment></comment>


The Ideagraph: a non-profit wiki project for debating and achieving consensuses - <AUTHOR> http://ideagra.ph

<comment><USER2> will world peace be achieved with something like this?</comment>


Afrofuturist Portraits Created with Deep Dream Algorithms - <AUTHOR> https://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2019/01/nettrice-gaskins-art-afrofuturist-kendrick-sade-nnedi-ai-deep-dream.html <comment><USER2> Folks are tripping over the term "Afrofuturist" here in the comments.

Pretend this was an article about music, and the title was "Stunning Electronic Music Created with [...]". Would you object to the term "Electronic"? It's a specification of genre, and there's no harm in that specificity.

This case is no different — "Afrofuturist" is a style of art, and there's no harm in being specific about the style of art.

If there's anything harmful here, it's the rapidity with which folks jump straight to criticism due to perceived "racial spin" and "buzzwords".

There doesn't need to be something new here in the "technological sense" for this link to be interesting. Hacker News is often interesting for linking to and discussing the intersection of technology and society. So, gang, let's not disregard the human-facing aspect of the story. Here are some examples of interesting things about this story we can talk about:

* How does this artwork advance the discussion around the relationship between AI and race? (This is a very hot, very interesting area of discussion, now that we've seen the consequences of racially-biased training data producing racially-biased applications of AI)

* How does this artwork, and its use of the technology, interact with other Afrofuturist artwork, and its use of technology?

* Let's wonder about what sort of Deep Dream artwork you could create using training sets based on race, and what sort of an interesting artist statement you could make pursuing such a project.

* Ignoring the race angle for a minute (since, after all, this is still under the umbrella of "cool artwork made with AI"), does anyone have any insight on whether you can create music using something like Deep Dream?

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm amazed at the pushback over "Afrofuturist", the term has been around for decades and is an important theme in science fiction and pop music (think Janelle Monáe), let alone _Black Panther_ :

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afrofuturism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afrofuturism)

<comment><USER3> Sun Ra!

<comment><AUTHOR> EXACTAMUNDO.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Very much non-news article in my opinion. I don't see anything new here in the image restyling processes or anything unique - it's just applying existing algos with a racial spin.

<comment> munk-a They are pretty pictures to look at, it'd be nice if this article was just titled Stunning Portraits Created with Deep Dream Algorithms... it might be nice to get a better delve into the actual techniques used, but I always appreciate seeing art and technology melded together in neat ways.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Afrofuturist? Desperate use of buzzwords in the article, as the title would suggest. Race is throw in there but adds nothing to it (it rarely ever does). Nothing really new in the technological sense.

Non-news to me.

<comment><USER6> In fact, "futurism" is contributing nothing either.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> What is the correct terminology for the binary blob that is a result of training? Is that resultant blob called "the algorithm?" I see people use the word algorithm to describe the training and the actual result of the training. I think the most appropriate term for the resultant blob is "agent" or something like that.

<comment><USER2> I believe I've heard it referred to as a "model".</comment></comment>


Wikiquiz: a wikipedia-driven game - <AUTHOR> http://wikiquiz.heroku.com/

<comment><USER2> Well this was a bit disappointing: [http://img1.uploadscreenshot.com/images/orig/11/32200275254-...](http://img1.uploadscreenshot.com/images/orig/11/32200275254-orig.jpg)

Perhaps set a lower limit on image sizes that get used?

<comment><USER3> 4 time of 5 I got some icon :(

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, I definitely submitted this a bit early. I've added a fair amount of icon detection (no more search icons or books with question marks) and I've overhauled the interface so it's ajaxy and a good bit more fun to play. Thanks for the feedback!

<comment><USER2> Much better!

I'd still suggest a lower limit on image sizes. I'm seeing icon-sized pictures of the Golden Gate Bridge show up, etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> It might be a more usable quiz if the source pages for a given question were somehow clustered.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lists>

<comment><AUTHOR> That's a great idea. Right now it's using Wikipedia's random article generator (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random>) to drive content, but it would be cool to group by a given category.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I tried it three times and twice loaded images that are a part of any Wikipedia page, like the W with the globe in the corner.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, definitely makes it much less fun. I've added filtering to address this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I have been considering using images from wikipedia in a project that is much different than this but I was wondering: is it okay to embed the images so that they load from wikipedia, or would you need to download them and save them to your own server? This might be called inline linking?

</comment><comment><USER7> Nice. May want to rule out images that are too common (the search magnifier) or routine/small (nationality flags, though I got most of those right).

Also, especially after answering, I'd like to click through to the real article to see the image in context -- so it's be nice to provide that link.

It might be interesting to use the same corpus in a different challenge -- for example, five articles and five pictures, match each to the right article.

</comment><comment><USER8> Interesting, but you need to have the correct appear below the try another link (so it doesn't move when correct fades away).

And please filter for icons.</comment>