Playstation 5 Controller Revealed - <AUTHOR> https://blog.us.playstation.com/2020/04/07/introducing-dualsense-the-new-wireless-game-controller-for-playstation-5/ <comment><USER2> meh, though clear buttons might come back in style.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah tbh it kinda has Xbox aesthetics IMHO.</comment></comment>


CloudRail: Easily integrate whole categories of providers - <AUTHOR> https://stackshare.io/cloudrail <comment><USER2> Why would you add an extra failure level and pay for the privilege?

<comment><USER3> Same reason everyone uses Segment for analytics and I use Passport for nodejs logins.

There is a ton of value in creating a dev-friendly API but for many businesses the dev is not the customer. Leaves room for someone to step in to ease the process.

Also it helps prevent lockin to a single provider. Like API insurance.</comment></comment>


A Patent From 2004 Describes Dual EC As Key Escrow - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/eqe/status/417035396044697600 <comment><USER2> Interestingly, the patent even mentions the actual use case:

>Therefore, if the ECRNG is used to generate the encryption key K, then it may be possible that the escrow key e can be used to recover the encryption key K. Escrow keys can provide other functionality, such as _for use in a wiretap_. In this case, _trusted law enforcement agents may need to decrypt encrypted traffic of criminals_ , and to do this they may want to be able to use an escrow key to recover an encryption key.

</comment><comment><USER3> This patent was originally owned by Certicom, now part of Blackberry. One of the inventors was Scott Vanstone who's excellent book, Handbook of Applied Cryptography lives on my desk.

The patent seems to indicate that Dual EC is known to be usable for escrow, something that the NSA surely knew. But given the pedigree of the authors, it must have been known by a bunch of other people well before the March 2013 publication date.

There's something odd going on here.

<comment><USER4> > _But given the pedigree of the authors, it must have been known by a bunch > of other people well before the March 2013 publication date_

Unfortunately I cannot recall the details of key escrow as it was implemented in Lotus Notes. It is a fact Notes used BSAFE. And it appears to be true that key escrow, or key recovery, was an intentional feature of this RNG. But I did not learn, at the time, how key escrow was implemented in Notes.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Been waiting a little while for this one to come out.

Key escrow schemes were the establishment answer to the problem of crypto enabling crime. The idea was that strong crypto would be outlawed, and the government would instead provide regulated crypto that would include overt backdoors for lawful access. Thankfully, that idea perished in the crypto wars of the '90s.

One line of reasoning about Dual EC, the PKRNG that is believed to be the backdoor referenced by the NSA BULLRUN leak, is that it could have been innocuous and suffering merely from bad optics: while there would in the universe be ECC points that would allow attackers to "decrypt" random numbers and recover PKRNG state, those numbers had been generated and discarded honestly.

The presence of this patent and its explicit claims on key escrow applications grievously harms that argument. It's circumstantially but potently damning.

For whatever it's worth to you: while I don't believe that it had much real- world impact (I think pretty much exactly what Lucky Green said about Dual EC in the most recent Reuters discussion), I'm 99% convinced Dual EC was intended as a backdoor. There is at least one scenario where it actually made sense in practice --- that is, where it could plausibly have been deployed.

The PKRNG "escrow" scheme is especially damning, because it's intrinsically surreptitious. Conventional key escrow schemes presume that all users know their keys are escrowed. A PKRNG escrow scheme kicks in even in systems that assume they aren't escrowed. It's an evil idea.

There is at least one plausible (though I think dumb) argument for PKRNG (it allows you to compose a whole cryptosystem in terms of a smaller number of primitives --- if you need the PK primitives anyways, it might be nice in a formal sense to have the CSPRNG rely on those same primitives). But there are no practical arguments in favor of a CSPRNG having PK structure. CSPRNGs based on stream ciphers, for instance, regularly rekey: their outputs aren't all bound under a static root secret. PKRNG is such a goofy idea that it was hard to take it seriously as a backdoor to begin with.

If the whole Twitter thread doesn't pop up for you like it does for me, here's the link to the actual patent:

[http://www.freshpatents.com/Elliptic-curve-random-number- gen...](http://www.freshpatents.com/Elliptic-curve-random-number-generation- dt20070816ptan20070189527.php)

Tanja Lange makes another devious point: since ECC PKRNGs are patented, there's a financial disincentive to ever using alternate parameters for it, because tuning your ECC PKRNG and using (presumably) non-backdoored points could result in your system being royalty-encumbered. Man. Ick.

<comment><USER5> Why didn't you come out with it?

<comment><AUTHOR> What a weird question.

<comment><USER6> The first sentence of your post could be interpreted to mean that you _knew_ about this for "a little while" but decided not to inform the rest of us, in which case I don't think it's that weird to ask "why didn't you tell us?"

<comment><AUTHOR> Because I wasn't at liberty to.

<comment><USER7> Then why did you answer "What a weird question" instead of just saying so?

<comment><AUTHOR> What other answer could there have been?

<comment><USER8> The initial comment was possibly ambiguous as to whether you had known about this specific thing.

Even after that is clarified, it could have been professional courtesy rather than 'not at liberty', and possibly other reasons would have worked too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Here's a link to the Google Patents page: [http://www.google.com/patents/US8396213](http://www.google.com/patents/US8396213)

Relevant lines are "Intentional use of escrow keys can provide for back up functionality. The relationship between P and Q is used as an escrow key and stored by for a security domain. The administrator logs the output of the generator to reconstruct the random number with the escrow key."

</comment><comment><USER10> See this ladies and gentlemen?

This is why you don't patent stuff that's supposed to be _secret_ , regardless of what other people think

<comment><USER11> It's actually possible to file a patent along with a secrecy order. This is done to protect the government in case someone else ever tries to patent the same idea at a later date. And before someone freaks out, this is not new. It was imposed during WW I, WW II, and then codified in the Invention Secrecy Act of 1952.

<comment><USER12> In particular, patent GB630726 by Leo Szilard, Producing neutrons, covering nuclear chain reaction, was one such secret patent. I think it probably was a good idea to keep that secret.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Here's the video of the talk from 30c3 that I assume was referenced: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-TM9ubxKIg](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-TM9ubxKIg)

It's actually worth watching if you haven't been closely following all of the crypto related revelations this year.

</comment><comment><USER14> Can anyone please explain what this means for someone who doesn't understand crypto?

<comment><USER15> I'll give it a shot, but I have absolutely no experience with cryptography.

I found this video to help explain the concept:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulg_AHBOIQU&feature=c4-overvi...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulg_AHBOIQU&feature=c4-overview&list=UUoxcjq-8xIDTYp3uz647V5A)

The relationship between P and Q (two points on the elliptic curve, see the video) allows someone to predict the RNG behavior. This is alleged to be used by the NSA, and the paper above predicts this relationship being used to provide an escrow-like ability for a 3rd party to access encrypted data.

Someone please correct me if I am wrong, as I would like to further my understanding as well.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How does the GPL affect open-source contributions? - <AUTHOR>

At my work, we're about to open-source a bunch of projects. Prior to now, we have released all of our projects under the terms of the GPL. But there is some healthy discussion going on as to what effects the GPL may be having on the likelihood of their receiving contributions from outside our organisation.
With that debate in mind, I set up this survey to try and get some broad data about the subject:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1pBe1R-GBHUju0bbG4mnAdEVN8dJIjZHQvhQ_ZMCKexY/viewform?usp=send_form
Just to clarify, we're not talking about usage here. The projects that we've released thus far have done pretty well on that front. It is specifically the topic of contributions to the codebase that we are interested in.
If you have time to fill in the survey, that would be great and very much appreciated. It is only four multiple-choice questions, and I will share the results here. If they're interesting enough, I may blog about them too.
Thanks. <comment><AUTHOR> Posting the results because I said I would. But there are only seven of them so they're definitely not representative of anything significant, sorry.

        1. Do the terms of your employment prevent you from contributing to GPL-licensed projects during the course of your work?

        * No, I am allowed to contribute to GPL projects as part of my work.: 7 (100%)
        * Yes, my work forbids me from contributing to all open-source projects: 0 (0%)
        * Yes, my work forbids me from contributing to GPL projects specifically: 0	(0%)

        2. Regardless of your answer to 1, is your decision to contribute to a project on a personal basis affected by whether that project is GPL-licensed?

        * No, the GPL does not affect my decision: 1 (14%)
        * Yes, the GPL makes me more likely to contribute to a project: 3 (43%)
        * Yes, the GPL makes me less likely to contribute to a project: 3 (43%)
        * Yes, I only contribute to GPL projects: 0 (0%)
        * Yes, I never contribute to GPL projects: 0 (0%)

        3. Do you think the GPL is a good or bad license choice for standalone/executable projects?

        * The GPL is a good choice for standalone projects: 5 (71%)
        * The GPL is a bad choice for standalone projects: 1 (14%)
        * I'm undecided or indifferent about the GPL: 1 (14%)

        4. Do you think the GPL is a good or bad license choice for library/framework projects?

        * The GPL is a good choice for library projects: 1 (14%)
        * The GPL is a bad choice for library projects: 5 (71%)
        * I'm indifferent or undecided about the GPL: 1 (14%)

</comment><comment><USER2> [clarification: I believe that businesses are not moral agents]

The business case for releasing code under GPL comes down to three points:

       1. It is legally required because of other GPL'd code.
       2. It has value as goodwill.
       3. It is part of a dual licensing strategy.

Item [1] is black and white.

There is a gradient from [2] to [3]. Community editions most obviously serve a mixed bag of motives under dual licensing. Under other operating models such as paid support, the motives are a bit more obscure.

The downside of GPL is that someone has to take responsibility for enforcement and to a lesser extent maintenance and triaging pull requests. From a business standpoint, if these activities aren't worth the effort, it makes less sense to GPL code than to keep it proprietary or MIT/Apache/BSD license it and get on with life.

<comment><AUTHOR> So in our case, the projects being open-sourced are not part of our core business. I guess our aims for open-sourcing them are two-fold:

1\. To promote us in the eyes of prospective employees.

2\. To benefit from collaboration on what would otherwise be in-house tools.

That second point is something we're not seeing a ton of so far. Whether the presence of the GPL has an effect on that, is what I'm wondering.

Unfortunately there have only been 6 responses to the survey so far, but that highly limited and unscientific sample would indicate that contributions aren't affected by the GPL.

<comment><USER2> There are more open source projects than volunteers. Something has to be pretty awesome to attract people's passions and time commitments.

My impression is that a job is more attractive if the work includes working on popular open source projects used in-house than in-house projects that are open sourced.

Lastly, many big companies will still need lawyering for anything open-sourced under GPL because they are targets for lawsuits and GPL is so easy to violate. GPL and other copyleft license compliance is not passive from the perspective of software developers, just from end users.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Clickable:

[https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1pBe1R-GBHUju0bbG4mnAdEVN8dJ...](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1pBe1R-GBHUju0bbG4mnAdEVN8dJIjZHQvhQ_ZMCKexY/viewform?usp=send_form)

</comment><comment><USER3> Every time I tried to license a project under GPL (e.g. my FurBB project), I received backlash from the community. I've therefore been using WTFPL licensing for everything.</comment>


Ask HN: Fitness, looking great, and performing your best - <AUTHOR>

I'm getting ripped, healthy, and happy in 13 minutes a week (as seen here from my blog post): [http://mkeas.org/body-by-science]
There are plenty of things that are helping me do this, and I'm taking NO SUPPLEMENTS whatsoever.
- Bulletproof Diet [http://bulletproofexec.com]
- Cold Exposure - 10 min cold showers [http://muscleevo.net/cold-showers-weight-loss/#.UNHXQXPjl_I]
- Whole Body Vibration training
What are the most useful tips from your own habits/methods? <comment><USER2> Slow-carb diet (from the Four Hour Body) and Intermittent Fasting (primarily eat in the evenings, per The Warrior Diet) and Kettlebell exercises (swings and getups).

My life is too busy (I'm a pastor) for anything more complicated, but I find that this combination works well for me.

Clickable links or it isn't true! :-)

<http://fourhourbody.com/>

<http://warriordiet.com/>

<http://www.dragondoor.com/shop-by-department/books/b33/>

<comment><AUTHOR> Intermittent Fasting (IF) is great. I really found that it was more helpful to read up on Ketogenic cycles and Autophagy (the process of removing waste/toxins from cells). Check out Bulletproof Executive and look up some papers on PubMed on these. They are great!

<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=autophagy%20fasting>

I have found that, after moving away from the Slow-carb diet and moving towards a more Paleo diet, I have more energy, can sleep less, and perform better.

More importantly, I want to help with things like not wasting the vitamins I ingest and help my dental health. Thus I have been trying to not have hardly any gluten or even legumes and oats because they contain Uric Acid, which prevents the body's ability to process vitamins in the gut. See: <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21501233>, <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16643619>, <http://www.gout- pal.com/lowering-uric-acid/2009/08/>

<comment><USER2> Thanks, I'll look into the links you provided.

Interesting that you mentioned dental health, as after a year or so of following the slow-carb diet, my dental nurse complimented me on the good condition of my teeth and gums. Sugar is not our friend!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> clickable links:

I'm getting ripped, healthy, and happy in 13 minutes a week (as seen here from my blog post): [<http://mkeas.org/body-by-science>]

\- Bulletproof Diet [<http://bulletproofexec.com>]

\- Cold Exposure - 10 min cold showers [<http://muscleevo.net/cold-showers- weight-loss/#.UNHXQXPjl_I>]

</comment><comment><USER3> "It might help… a little. But I think it's largely a waste of time as far as weight loss is concerned."

The link you posted seems think cold exposure doesn't work. Why are you doing it?

<comment><AUTHOR> From 4 Hour Body and Bulletproof Executive, both have found that Cold Exposure indeed does help raise the energy burned by your body by recruiting Brown Adipose Tissue to burn off White Adipose Tissue (Fat cells!)

Also, I find that taking a Cold Shower before going to bed helps me fall asleep drastically faster (from 30-40 minutes to less than ten minutes)</comment></comment>


Google Calculator Inaccuracies? - <AUTHOR> https://www.google.com/search?q=259680.68+-+37.98+-+259635.70

<comment><AUTHOR> I noticed this today while doing checking some totals for a project. It seems there is definitely something not right. I haven't seen this before.

What is also interesting is if you enter the same numbers manually into the on-screen calculator it will give you a different answer of: 7 vs 6.99999999997

However if you update it and search for <https://www.google.com/search?q=259680.68+-+37.98+-+259635>

and then enter the same numbers you get 7.70000000001 vs 7.69999999998

Any ideas on what is happening?

</comment><comment><USER2> decimal fractions can't necessarily be represented by a finite amount of bits (just like the fraction 1/3 is 0.333333...). Computers work with finite amounts of bits, so you're losing some accuracy. Other representation methods could be used to store the numbers (e.g. store the nominator and denominator as whole numbers), but you can't get around the fact that an infinite amount of numbers can't be represented with a finite amount of bits (e.g. the square root of two can't be represented accurately as a ratio).</comment>


Get that job at Facebook (2012) - <AUTHOR> http://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook-engineering/get-that-job-at-facebook/10150964382448920%22 <comment><USER2> Never interviewed at Facebook but have been offered roles at similarly hard to get places. Though I am working at my own startup now, the absurdness of the interviewing process at majority of such places confounds me.

In short, I can't cope up with them well without going through quite a few glassdoor type questions of that respective company. And partially it is because most interviewers already have a set of solutions that they are looking for, and can't appreciate novel solutions and at times even better time/space complexity if they do not fit the standard mold. In my experience only some very hot startups had smart/ open enough interviewers to appreciate new solutions or see the relevance of new CS research results that may solve their question.

Before one starts attacking me on being a CS philistine, I want you to ponder on my background- current work involves designing & implementing pretty intricate & complex algorithms, and earlier research & publications in a range of ML related sub-fields, mainly NLP & recommender systems. I also read CS papers for pleasure, code in multiple languages and did reasonably well in programming competitions- no longer participate, latter is many years ago.

For a similar experience, though from a far more accomplished person, see Tanya Khovanova's blog post on hiring 'the smartest people in the world': <http://blog.tanyakhovanova.com/?p=402>

Also, FYI I don't resent the system a lot. It is better than it being an old- boys-club; I just dread going through the bootcamp of memorizing/ revisiting trivial stuff in case I ever have to look for a job again.

<comment><USER3> The thing that really bothers me about these postings is the advice that you should 'prep'. Conceivably, many applicants will already have a job that requires them to code 8 hours a day. But somehow, the skills required to pass their interview are so out of line with what a programmer does day to day, that extracurricular studying is required.

It would suggest that the interview itself selects for mostly irrelevant skills if that is a problem they're having with the process.

<comment><USER2> Another reason I am not fond of this- it is easily hackable. I know some pretty average people who prepared for months, went through all questions they could find online, ignored their day jobs and cleared the interviews, while some really talented people could not.

Funny that this got brought on the Facebook thread. Though I never applied at FB, I have 'mentored' two people who made it through the process. Mentoring as in, helped them make sense (and see the general pattern) of the solutions which they saw online but could not appreciate/ understand on their own. Though I guess they had lesser trouble regurgitating the solutions in the interviews.

<comment><USER4> Its very easy to game the interview at big web companies. I mean even if they ask all these text book academia related questions- Algo/DS ones etc.

I remember once there was a question on Quora about an IIT BTech guy who had offers from all major web companies. Some one asked him how he did it. And his advice was that you had to simply 'practice'. Simply go out on the internet check for good interview forums work on it an hour every day. Even if you are actually a worthless programmer on the ground. You can pretty much ace any interview with simply practice.

This also reminds of my Math classes in pre-university college here in India. I would generally try to solve a problem in more than one way and show it to my lecturer. One day she scolded me badly, that my experiments might end up in me scoring less marks. Her point was the evaluators were used to seeing a certain pattern of answers over years. And if the student had a new innovative answer, they would simply mark it wrong because it didn't their 'one true' answer, even if the solution was more elegant and better than the common pattern. Therefore the only way of scoring high marks was to practice all the common patterns.

Rote learning works at all levels.

I remember some days back I watched a interview of RMS on youtube, and he was asked a question on how you could be a good programmer and what books you had to read. And he gave a straight reply- You had to simply work on some hard real world problems/projects and bring them to closure. That was his advice.

Too bad these days we check people on everything apart from their actual work.

<comment><USER2> Agree on all points.

Interesting that you brought IIT up. Though I barely cleared IIT JEE and did not attend it for I could not get CS at any of the good schools, I had the feeling that it was becoming more and more hackable with the proliferation of coaching institutes. When I was in a top 5 PhD program which attracts the best of IIT K/B/M guys the quality drop became more evident over the years. There were and are still very bright IITians at my school, but I saw more noise coming in at later years.

And for those who are not aware- there are cram shops in India which 'train' you to clear Google/ Microsoft interviews. And this has been going for at least 6 years, if not more. Now from talking to my friends in India I get the impression that the superficial interview difficulty is higher in India than the Bay Area for similar companies. And that is despite the work quality being much higher in Silicon Valley.

It's all very funny and ironic.

<comment><USER4> >>there are cram shops in India which 'train' you to clear Google/ Microsoft interviews.

This is so true, that I can't even find ways how to assert it more.

As a fresher, I attended a off campus interview here in Bangalore(Those who don't know- these are generally mass hiring drives, where hundreds/thousands get hired) where I happened to talk to a guy between written test sessions who even had taken very elaborate 'class notes' on clearing these interviews. He had gone through something like a 3 months coaching class just to attend these interviews. There are standard coaching materials, which are updated pretty frequently. Pretty much anything that they can ask you in these interviews will be covered. They have made you hard practice it so much it will be cake walk to you make it through.

>>And this has been going for at least 6 years

I can assure this has been going on for a very long time now.

>>It's all very funny and ironic.

Its all about the volumes. A recruiter told me, if a resumes falls down during a mass hiring drive they don't even bother to pick it up. We live in an era where recruiters search monster.com based on some keywords and pick up candidates based on that. So we are now down to SEO optimization for resumes. And then coaching classes to game the interviews.

As a side note, in all major IT services companies in India you have to take 'certification exams' for pay hikes and promotions. I've seen people drop everything they do and practice clearing these for months. The worst part is you have to 'memorize' the whole material. Later I would see those people go on to get promotions and hikes, while the actual who go the work done fail(due to lack of time to practice) in the certification exams.

<comment><USER2> >> where I happened to talk to a guy between written test sessions who even had taken very elaborate 'class notes' on clearing these interviews.

Pretty sure there would be coaching classes to get into coaching classes with higher hit rates of finally clearing the interviews. It's that broken.

Whenever people talk about the madness of India's youth, I can't help not quoting Soumen:

"It's hard to overstress the liability of a nation of a billion people out of which 700 million are functionally illiterate and the rest have no wish to follow instructions, even when they are asking for a favor."

[http://www.cse.iitb.ac.in/soumen/APKGKAH/illiterate/Applicat...](http://www.cse.iitb.ac.in/soumen/APKGKAH/illiterate/Applications.html)

>> As a side note, in all major IT services companies in India you have to take 'certification exams' for pay hikes and promotions.

Hope you are fortunate enough to be not working for such places anymore.

<comment><USER5> Broken? It sounds exactly how optimization systems work :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I hope this doesn't sound facetious, but what I hear over and over again is that places like Facebook have difficult technical interviews that are algorithm focused to create more false negatives than false positives because they work on hard problems.

What are some concrete examples of hard problems tech companies face that require novel solutions and why are algorithms problems the best way to find the people qualified to solve them?

I know these seem like a naive questions, but these two things seem to be taken for granted in every interview discussion (or even if someone argues against them it's mostly a "this is how I find good people" argument). I think it's pretty clear this isn't the only way to find good people, I'd just love to hear more about the thinking behind this interview style and what it really means to these companies when they say "we deal with hard problems." The only concrete example I've ever been given is someone at another big Valley company speaking about difficulty of master-master writes between data centers at a large scale. Which certainly qualifies but I'd love to hear what other "hard problems" are out there.

<comment><USER7> one I was given in an interview:

You're working on the front-end development for a chatting website. Each conversation gets it's own 100x200px div and they are placed on the screen such that two conversation windows are never intersecting.

We want to display a new conversation window, write an algorithm to determine where a conversation can be placed such that it does not overlap with any current conversations. Assume that the website is being displayed at 1024x1280px.

<comment><USER8> You can fit at most 60 chat windows on the screen. So surely you can just start at the top left and wrap around every 10 windows? When you get to 60 you can't display any more.

Or is the problem different? For example you already have some arbitrary number of windows already displayed at arbitrary locations that you cannot move?

<comment><USER9> I would assume that you have an arbitrary number of windows already displayed that you cannot move.

<comment><USER8> In that case, it's probably most space efficient to place each new window next to an already visible window or at an edge of the screen.

So keep a list of possible candidate positions. Each of these positions represents either an edge of the screen or a position directly above/below/to the left/to the right of an existing window. You will need to calculate different offsets for each of these circumstances to generate candidate positions. You easily eliminate ones that fall outside of the screen.

Each time you attempt to add a window you iterate the list of candidate positions. If a candidate position can fit a window (just use brute force 2D AABB collision detection against all windows, or a quadtree/spatial hash to optimise) then place the window there. If it cannot fit remove the position from the candidate list.

Once you have added the window, calculate all the candidate positions (for each side) and add these to the list of possible positions for later windows.

Well it's late and that's the best I can manage.. I know somebody will point out a flaw here :)

<comment><USER10> You know, for people who have taken graphics classes, this seems like a much easier question because they know about AABB trees. That is the problem at the heart of the question. Also, your idea about candidate positions is wasteful. Just invert the tree so that it contains empty space instead of full space. Then, on insert, remove from the tree.

<comment><USER8> I guess you still need to find empty spaces that would overlap between branches at various levels. Under some circumstances you could end up backtracking around the tree quite a lot to find somewhere to park when you have a lot of nodes with some free space but not enough.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> >>Take your time preparing. Do code katas and practice interviewing with friends. Try solving the interview questions on our site.

This makes me wonder, who or what kind of a candidate the person even trying to hire. Programming or any career for that matter is by and large a kind of job that requires you to perform everyday, you have to be consistent. Its not an Boxing match or America's got talent contest which happens once an year for which you do all the preparation for 12 months and then perform on the last hour. Software projects or any project for that matter simply don't work that way. You don't read books for months, decide to do the project and then hammer out all the code in an hour.

>>Impress us with your mastery of whatever language you're best at.

Again, whom are you trying to hire?

>>Hard training makes for an easy battle. Brush up on techniques that you may not use every day, but are very useful when you need them: recursion, graph theory, tree traversal, combinatorial problems, etc.

Sorry but this is getting boring. This algorithm thing is so badly gamed, it doesn't even make a good point of testing a candidate anymore. I've known people who work an hour everyday practicing these interview problems and can ace through such interview in a breeze, but wouldn't even last hours in a demanding work environment.

The best way to check if a candidate is good for you is to do a through check on the quality and kind of projects/problems they have worked on in the past. If they have done well, hire them. Else regardless of whatever they might know from the text books, if they can't get the job done or haven't in the past. They are worthless to you anyway.

<comment><USER11> The problem with the previous work done is that could be difficult to show or check. If you worked on a regular company, the work done is not available. I agree that a discussion about previously done software can be very interesting, but that could be gamed too...

I'm afraid that interviewing is never going to be easy for both...

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> One thing I have seen repeatedly in interviews for engineering positions of all levels is people who have not gone back and reviewed the basic algorithms they learned in second year. I know coding questions as posed in interviews are not the best measure of job performance, but they are also one of the few we have that is guaranteed to be sourced from the candidate in question. To perform well at these sorts of questions, you should be familiar with basic algorithms and techniques. It's a common language that you and the interviewer can speak. Not knowing that language is gimping yourself unnecessarily. Don't know what a graph or a queue is? You're gonna have a bad time.

Take a few hours to study up before interviewing at the big engineering- focused companies.

<comment><USER13> If you agree that these types of questions are not a good measure of job performance, why encourage this line of questioning? Wouldn't it be better for the industry as a whole to discover better ways to determine future job performance?

<comment><USER14> knowing these are not going to guarantee good performance. But not knowing them is a clear indication of incompetence. A programmer who doesn't know basic algorithms and data structure is a bad programmer.

<comment><USER15> Obviously more knowledge is good knowledge. And perhaps the bar for being a good programmer involves being able to

1) Implement a red black tree on a white board

I would argue, though, if that's the bar, there are probably other bars that are a bit lower that at least some of the algorithm triumphalists would fail, such as to

2) Throw up a basic and secure Wordpress site on an Amazon EC2 instance

or

3) You're running into an issue where you're getting an error message about running out of file descriptors. Tell me what's the issue here and what you'd do about it

or

4) write a basic, safe script that makes backups of each file in a given directory and its subdirectories

or

5) tell me what the fuck is the clearfix?

Now, if intermediate algorithms is something that people should be able to do, surely you'd agree 2-5 are even lower bars to meet (since they're things that virtually all of those "bad programmers" are able to do). By the same token, though, it's absolutely the case that many hires at the BigCos actually wouldn't be able to respond to 2-5.

I wouldn't say that those people shouldn't have been hired; after all, people learn! But if algorithms are actually part of the everyday job, someone could also learn them, no?

To the extent that you're testing for raw intelligence--which is the most important aspect of any of these types of jobs--algorithms are a good ruler. But to equate the measurer with the measure is somewhat foolish, because it's a means to an end, not the end itself. If you can use other probes of raw intelligence, those function just as well as being able to vomit up algorithms and data structures that, as people point out, any person who spends a month or so studying can get a solid grasp on and then never need again.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> > "Practice writing code in a simple text editor without syntax highlighting > or completion macros."

Maybe applicants shouldn't be able to "undo" during the interview? Or maybe applicants should be able to manually convert the code to assembler? Or, heck, have them use one of those behemoth computers with the blinking lights that we have to plug wires into sockets to program?

I mean...why should we rely on any technology that has been developed to make software engineers more effective and that the majority use daily? That would be like if we let sales people use tools they rely on, like charisma, during interviews!

The only sensible argument I've heard for why companies interview with programming puzzle questions is that it "takes too long" to do an interview better (like the way simonsarris pointed out Sencha does). At the point a company is unwilling to look at applicants as humans, and instead treats them as numbers/percentages, I wonder if they're a company worth working for any way.

<comment><USER9> Here is one answer for you.

Many programmers will take longer to configure their environment than you have available for the interview. Therefore if you tried to let them interview in the programming environment of their choice, there would be no actual interview. (And you'd have to undo whatever they did before the next interview.)

<comment><USER17> Let the candidate bring a laptop?

<comment><USER9> There are lots of good reasons why you might not want random people plugging in their laptops on your computer, and likewise reasons that you wouldn't want them to walk away with your interview materials loaded on their personal computer.

<comment><USER18> Most interview questions are verbal, and a laptop is capable of compiling code. Your problems with it seems factitious.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Why? Work 70 hours a week finding new ways to put more ads in people's lives.

<comment><USER20> Don't trivialize Facebook. There's no other place online that so easily melds chat, messaging, wall posts, and general keeping up with those closest to you (even when they're not close to you physically). Despite its problems, Facebook provides a lot of utility for many people without having to be cynical about it. I'll put up with all the ads that are somewhat relevant and are not so obtrusive to the extent that they are popups.

<comment><USER21> I don't think anybody who trivializes Facebook is speaking to the problems they have to tackle at the scale they're at. I think the real cynicism comes from the real added value coming from Facebook at the cost to society it brings (i.e. lost time, ad sales, impact on human interaction, etc.).

<comment><USER20> Impact on human interaction is a concern in the age of social media. We will always find a way to lose time. I'm not sure if any generation is/was immune to that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> My interview technique is this; I look at their resume for the typical buzzwords. Next, I ask them to explain about said buzzword, what they worked on, what they thought of the technology.

Then, we dig deeper. Anything they say, I continue to ask them followup questions. Eventually, we dig deep enough to know whether this person truly knows said technology or just put in on their resume for buzzword compliance.

It might go something like, "Oh, I see you've had some experience with REST. What is REST?" ... "How does REST relate to HTTP? Is HTTP required?" ... "What HTTP verbs are considered idempotent? What does that even mean, how is this useful?" ... "How would you implement a {insert} application using REST?"

There's no "tricking" the candidate this way. If they know their stuff, they get to talk in depth about it allowing them to shine. You will recognize this person, as we all love to talk about things we actually know something about.

And the other type will also be spotted. They get nervous when you start probing deeper on what they said they should know. They start giving really bad, contradictory and even laughable answers as you go.

</comment><comment><USER23> I should also point out that Facebook is hiring not just engineers but also designers, product managers, infrastructure people,...

I just joined a couple of weeks ago as a product manager and in the short time here, I've loved it.

<comment><USER24> How is the interview for a product manager?

<comment><USER25> I was hoping to get an answer as well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I'm sort of disappointed that this is #1 on the board.

I don't have a problem with the piece per se, I just have the general feeling that an article on how to impress mid level managers to get a job at some giant established company is considered "hacker" news is.. I mean, am I the only one that thinks that's the antithesis of hacker ethos? There's no "hack" to this, it's like reading a pamphlet on how to get a job after college or something. It's not /wrong/, per se, but there's no real special insight here, and it basically reads like a PR piece.

</comment><comment><USER27> This was posted 2012-07-20. The link title ought to reflect that.

</comment><comment><USER28> I really like this _kind_ of post and I wish more companies would write about their expectations before you actually get to the interview.

Still, it seems like rather run-of-the-mill process. It will certainly filter out the bad, but you may miss some very good workers who work in different ways. Facebook still seems to be totally focused on code problems, and doesn't even mention if what you've already built is important.

In my opinion, _stuff that someone has made_ should probably be considered the most important thing by miles. It doesn't have to be open-source code, but that certainly helps.

Second most important is communication skills, especially how well they can explain things they have worked on.

From this post, Facebook seems more interested in making sure developer can re-re-re-implement merge-bubble sort-reduce, I'm sure while occasionally printing "Buzz". I understand why these tests can be necessary for a lot of people[1], but I imagine the caliber of people that get past screening at Facebook aren't of that type.

<comment>

The most delightful interview I ever had (I was being interviewed) was one where the development team didn't even ask me any general programming questions. They took what I had written as fulfilling that pass, and went straight into several conversations with different developers about the ways we go about making libraries. They asked me to talk about decision making process and how I might explain or advocate for various concepts. I'd like to think if they had any suspicions they might have switched gears to a FizzBuzz level, but I can't know for sure.

These talks got very in depth, and whiteboard-writing was had, but at no time did they ask a programming question that wasn't rooted in the concrete. It was always directed: _"How did you...?" "How might we...?" "Didn't you run into problems with...?"_

Never did they ask me to implement a common algorithm, which feels silly. I can't remember all of them (or even most of them), and if I needed to in the course of my work I'd consult Professor Wikipedia long before I touch my own corruptible memory. Never did they ask me to implement an obscure algorithm, which popular companies seem to enjoy but I imagine filters out a lot of good candidates who happen to have spent time knowing the wrong things. I do not understand why obscura in itself might impress.

Instead, they had me _make worthwhile claims_ about (my or other's) code and then _prove them._

Then they showed me what each of them was working on, ensuring there was two- way discussion on each. They showed me problems they were having, what they were doing, and asked my opinion. They showed me bugs, and we sat down and set breakpoints, talked it over and stepped through until the issue was resolved.

This process lasted two days, and the entire time I was _delighted._ They did an incredible job of making me feel accepted as a fellow professional developer. I ended up not taking the job for personal reasons, but the entire process and people involved were all wonderful.

(The company was Sencha).

[1] Jeff Atwood's "Why Can't Programmers.. Program?" has a good discussion on that [http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/02/why-cant- programmer...](http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/02/why-cant-programmers- program.html)

<comment><USER29> Hi. I work at facebook and do many interviews.

 _Facebook still seems to be totally focused on code problems_

I would say that statement is categorically false. In fact, the article lists 4 criteria, only one of which would be "code problems". The interview certainly has a focus on coding, but it most assuredly is not a total focus. And people can, have, and will pass the coding bar, and still fail to get an offer.

 _stuff that someone has made // communication skills, especially how well they can explain things they have worked on._

Both of these are critical parts of every facebook interview.

 _From this post, Facebook seems more interested in making sure developer can re-re-re-implement merge-bubble sort-reduce_

I don't think that is a well supported inference from the post in question.

<comment><USER30> The main downside of these kind of interviews is that the candidate has to _prepare_.

This may be well suited for fresh grads, but not for mid-career senior engineers.

You should seek good candidates as is. But, you already assume that one needs to prepare...

<comment><USER31> Hi, author here. With respect, I am a mid-career senior engineer too. I trained for a few weeks before interviewing at Facebook because, well, changing jobs is important. There is zero harm spending some time warming up mentally.

I recommend that people prepare because I've seen many many obviously smart people not make it through. It's like showing up for a singing audition without warming up your voice. You might have a beautiful voice, but you have to show it in the best condition possible.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> The comments on that post are an excellent indictment of Facebook comments/public posting. They're almost Youtube level.

<comment><USER33> They're sub youtube level. 80% of those people are either illiterate or spam bots. It was cringe worthy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> I didn't realize Facebook did tech talks, I'm glad to see they do and they're linked from this site:

[https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=vb.9445547199&ty...](https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=vb.9445547199&type=2)

My only complaint is I wish they were on Youtube, I'd like to make playlists and watch them on my TV.

</comment><comment><USER35> Those comments at the end... geeze.

"pls give me job at facebook call me 5551231234"

"send link to aplication to firstname.lastname@example.com"

<comment><USER36> All Facebook blog comments are of similar nature. It's pretty astounding.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> Here's a question: at companies with these kind of approaches, how many of the founders and early employers would have done well in these interviews themselves?

Obviously, services grow and the Facebook of 2013 is very different from the Facebook of 2004, but it's kind of funny to see companies that succeeded because the original team was able to ship (period) evolve to focus on hiring CS majors who can reinvent the wheel on a whiteboard.

<comment><USER38> If you inspect the actual early employees, a majority of them were ivy league grads who most certainly could solve these easy interview problems (It also helped that they could ship code).

<comment><USER39> That doesn't mean they would have done well in the interviews. Quite a different thing entirely, really. I mean, there's some correlation, but it's not that strong.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> I interviewed at Facebook (a while ago - they were still on University Ave). This article is a pretty accurate description of the interview process that I remember, but could apply equally well to technical interviews most places.

The "fit" category is fairly vague, but a better description of it (and what I think about when interviewing candidates) is "how would I feel if I had to stay late fixing a live site issue with this person?" Ideally that doesn't happen, but I find it helpful framing question.

For coding questions, I generally have a pretty low bar - and it's gotten lower. Generally I look for understanding of basic data structures, and the ability to manipulate them. I realize that's slightly biased towards recent grads, but I think linked-lists, binary trees, and pointers are fair game even for experienced candidates. I'm sometimes amazed at how many people have problems with what I think are simple questions.

SQL and schema design questions are also good, and lend themselves very well to iterative questions. It's easy to start with simple problem statement, have someone get a reasonable solution, and then throw additional requirements in.

<comment><USER41> _I'm sometimes amazed at how many people have problems with what I think are simple questions._

Simple is not the same thing as relevant.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Is there anything like HN for tech entrepreneurs only, maybe a subreddit somewhere? I see here regularly posts regarding jobs/interviews/etc. which are all great ressources but since they got so many upvotes -- this one is on #1 right now -- I wonder sometimes how many on HN are full-time (tech) entrepreneurs and how many are employed/freelance coders.

<comment><USER43> I'm in neither of those demographics, but I'd imagine part of being a good entrepeneur is understanding the hiring processes of companies that you will be competing with for talent, so this article should be popular on your hypothetical website too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> Communication from Facebook recruiting team is ZERO after applying. Not even an automated reply.

About a week back, I applied to Facebook after solving a puzzle on their Interviewstreet page successfully within given time.

Sadly I didn't get any kind of acknowledgement from their recruiting team, neither saying I am rejected nor that they have received my application.

</comment><comment><USER45> Does anyone at facebook know how the full time hiring of interns works? I'm starting an internship in the bay area office in a few weeks and it looks like the odds of coming out with an offer are pretty slim. Right now there are ~500 people scheduled for the summer intern block and I believe that facebook currently only has about 1000 fulltime engineers. My understanding of internships at 'lesser' tech companies seems to be that if you impress your superiors you'll probably come out with an offer. The idea that i'm getting from facebook is that I have to compete against basically everyone else. I'm very excited by also a bit nervous.

</comment><comment><USER46> Does facebook still use PHP?

<comment><USER47> Yes, but no. Since moving to HipHip which is a translated/compiled version of PHP, we have been able to fork the language to clean it up. We have a strongly typed version, Generators, etc.

Syntactically it looks a lot like PHP and is backward compatible for many thing, but it's not really PHP anymore. The HipHop team has done a ton to make the language a lot more enjoyable to work in.

<comment><USER46> I did not know you went to such extent. At that scale that makes sense. Do you plan to open source it?

<comment><USER47> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dwek7dZDFN0> is a pretty good talk about everything coming down the pipe. Generics, Strict typing, Collections, etc.

Too my knowledge (I'm not directly on the Hip-Hop team) it will be open sourced, additionally we also generally present a PHP patch as well to allow it in future versions of standard PHP.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> Interesting and informative post, but it seems to be focused on software engineers. What is the process and screening like for hardware engineers?

</comment><comment><USER49> > Give feedback. We regularly survey candidates about the interview process > and take feedback seriously.

Yet so few companies give feedback.

<comment><USER50> From a legal perspective, that's a dangerous move. There are any number of ways an interviewer's feedback could be misinterpreted (or correctly interpreted, I suppose) as being an illegal reason for issuing a no-hire. Even if you're careful, there's a non-zero chance of a really bad outcome. It just isn't worth it.

<comment><USER49> I know about this legal thing, but still.

By the way, I'm wondering why do some people insist of working at a company which doesn't want them? Besides money from a lawsuit, of course. Even if the interview wasn't "fair", it's someone else's company, so they should be able to hire whoever they want.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> I need to use Facebook to login to take their 'programming' test. I'm PISSED.

</comment><comment><USER52> Facebook needs to be asking candidates just 2 questions. (1)Can you increase the number of minutes per hour your mom spends on Facebook? (2)How much do we need to pay you to feel comfortable doing that?

</comment><comment><USER53> I wish more companies shared their hiring process for developers. Anyway, I hope they do not stick too much the puzzles.

I'm looking forward for the time I'll be able to solve their problems, too.

</comment><comment><USER54> How many people do you actually need to run a website? The whole thing can be maintained by a small team probably.

<comment><USER38> You're greatly underestimating the complexity of Facebook. I bet they have greater than 200,000 machines. Creating the infrastructure to just manage and deploy to those machines would already go beyond your 'small team'.

Not sure how you imagine a 'small team' managing a system that has an exabyte of data. From network infrastructure all the way down to cold storage, a 'small team' would be needed for each.

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> I left after "elemental awesomium," someone TL;DR?

<comment><USER56> TL;DR: You'll never work at Facebook because you don't have the attention span required to spend 5 minutes reading an article.

<comment><USER55> Well good, I was worried they'd forcibly hire me, so good to know I'm safe. The issue is less attention than having 5 minutes of time available to read obvious self-congratulatory posts filled with annoying startup-y words.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> Working at fb sounds like cool experience. Though im wary of companies who still make one suffer through such interviews. Thats what keps me as a contractor. None of that interviews funny business.

Fb recruiter, if you read this, shoot me an email.</comment>


Why Is The World Run By Bean Counters? - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.forbes.com/stevedenning/2011/07/16/why-is-the-world-run-by-bean-counters/?partner=yahootix

<comment><USER2> The abuse of survivor bias in this article pisses me off.

There are much more valuable lessons to take away from Amazon et al. than "be radical, be new, run the world differently." For starters, the companies he uses as positive examples all spend an enormous amount of their attention on optimizing the user experience. Wouldn't that be more valuable to emulate?

</comment><comment><USER3> Accountants and MBAs should not run anything, except a calculator. Lutz was right to say that car guys should make cars, software guys should make software, etc.</comment>


Calculus Is So Last Century - <AUTHOR> http://www.wsj.com/articles/calculus-is-so-last-century-1457132991 <comment><AUTHOR> Not that it needs to be said, but I posted this to spark discussion, rather than because I wholly agree or disagree with it. I personally think people should just study what they want whenever they want to, and for many people that will include neither calculus nor advanced statistics, and this is perfectly fine. Of course, others will want to study one or the other or both of those, at some point when they're young or maybe only developing an interest in them when older or whatever, and that's perfectly fine too...

As for the idea, implicit in so much discussion of this sort, that the workforce demands we all become data scientists... eh. It's not nearly true, and if it were, what a sad world that would be.

Tl;dr: Calculus is great. But only for students who have some interest in it or its uses. Down with mandatory calculus! And down with mandatory statistics as well! Freedom!

<comment><USER2> Without reading the article, but being familiar w/ the learn-what-you-want movement, it's important to know how subjects are useful IRL. This is usually where the teaching of mathematics fails students, after learning adding and subtraction so you can make change.

Regardless of subject, there should be intro courses covering the usefulness/benefits/pleasure of mankind's body of knowledge.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Non-paywall link: [http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ccy0r_9VAAIzNsq.png](http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ccy0r_9VAAIzNsq.png)</comment>


Govt. tracks Cell Phones all at once, Accurately, without GPS or a Warrant - <AUTHOR> http://sswam.wordpress.com/2010/11/04/big-brother-can-track-cell-phones-accurately-en-masse-sans-gps/ <comment><USER2> The linked article talks of "forcing" carriers into this.

The "trueposition.com" web site makes it clear that they ship their hardware ("TruePosition Location Measurement Units") ostensibly for 9-1-1-from-mobile purposes.

For that reason (and others) it seems to me extremely likely that carriers don't need to be forced to support mass tracking at all. It's already there or easily slipped in. (The TruePosition platform does not rely exclusively on the Location Measurement Units.)

Heh.... This merits looking into:

[http://www.trueposition.com/web/guest/press- releases?p_p_id=...](http://www.trueposition.com/web/guest/press- releases?p_p_id=62_INSTANCE_lSc3&p_p_lifecycle=0&p_p_state=maximized&p_p_mode=view&p_p_col_id=column-2&p_p_col_count=1&_62_INSTANCE_lSc3_struts_action=%2Fjournal_articles%2Fview&_62_INSTANCE_lSc3_groupId=10124&_62_INSTANCE_lSc3_articleId=28427&_62_INSTANCE_lSc3_version=1.0)

Here (about that):

[http://www.forbes.com/2010/06/23/iphone-congress-mobile- tech...](http://www.forbes.com/2010/06/23/iphone-congress-mobile-technology- cellphones.html)

<comment><AUTHOR> I updated and expanded my article based on your feedback, and removed the wording 'forced'. Thanks very much.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> A peer-to-peer towerless mesh network ( e.g. Terranet <http://www.terranet.se/> ) could solve this problem.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, perhaps free, community-operated p2p wifi networks could replace the monolithic paid cellular networks. It might take a long time before this would happen though.

<comment><USER4> There's also this thing called OpenBTS, but a search for it only lists about 17.000 results [http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=openbts&#...</a>

<comment><USER3> Why not eliminate the possibility of something pretending to be a base station to a number of nodes in the immediate area? With a mesh network, a takeover of an area by a single device may be less likely. Still, there would be a chance of one or more of the nodes causing mischief, and if multiple nodes in an area are compromised that could certainly be an even greater issue. So, direct point-to-point communication is still more preferable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> A couple examples of how such a universal surveillance system might be used:

big brother could identify the people who meet with known peace activists or political rivals, find their meeting places, and disrupt meetings or capture participants. They could track a target user until he might travel to a less populated area, then dispatch someone or something to capture or kill him.

<comment><USER5> Or you could just leave your cell phone at home when you're going on clandestine missions.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I made a shorter url for this post: <http://sam.ai.ki/mofo></comment>


Square Closes $200M Series D - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2012/09/17/square-closes-200m-series-d-from-starbucks-citi-rizvi-at-3-25b-valuation/

<comment><USER2> So to the stock-optioned employee what does this mean? Somebody who started early with the company vs somebody who starts after this round? Keeping track of the value of options after several rounds seems to be quite complicated.

<comment><USER3> Depends on a few factors.

\- What is strike price of the option?

\- What is the expected market value of the company?

If a company is valued at $1billion dollars and has 10 million shares, then each share is expected to be worth $100. This is a rough estimate, and assumes that the valuation accounts for future revenue, violatility, etc.

If you have options that gives you the right to put (sell) the shares at $150, then you are making $50 on each option, since you can buy your $100 share in the company and sell at $150, guaranteed. 1,000 options would be $50,000 profit at that share market price and stock option strike price.

This means you can expect the option to be worth $50, except that options typically have a date at which the options expire. The price of the option changes relative to this date, and is worthless after the date.

This is also dependent on you being able to exercise your stock options, which is unlikely unless the company is being publicly traded. A series D funding means the company is still privately traded, and the market price isn't set yet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> In comparison,

\- Facebook raised $200MM in its Series-D round with DST in 2009, at a valuation of $10B.

\- Twitter in 2010, with plateauing growth, raised $200MM (series F), with a valuation of 3.7 B.

Square has strong growth and a proven revenue model and still just got a multiple of 16x. Clearly the market has adjusted its expectations quite a bit. In other words, it is going to be quite hard for a Pinterest to raise money at 1.5B valuation today.

I'm going to have to conclude that reports of another tech bubble burst were quite exaggerated.

<comment><USER5> Proven revenue can be counter intuitive when raising money. On the one hand, it makes it much easier to raise. On the other, it's such a solid metric that you can't build a story for investors that gives you insane valuations.

It would not surprise me to see a hot startup with really good traction/growth and a fuzzy but credible "here's how we make money" raise at another crazy valuation soon. If you can paint a picture of a huge market, show impressive ownership of that market, you can let investors use their imaginations from there.

<comment><USER4> Agree with you that proven revenue model doesn't help create growth multiples.

But in Square's case, the story for investors would likely have been: here's ways x, y, z, in which we can make money, and even in case none of these works, here's our proven revenue model.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Wonder how much of that 8 billion in payments/year they see. 2.75% (their fee) of 8 billion is 220 million. How much of that do they have to pay out to the payment networks?

<comment><USER7> A lot of that depends on their average transaction size. Square charges a flat rate despite there being per transaction fees, so 10 $1 charges are a lot less profitable for Square than 1 $10 charge.

They almost certainly actually lose money on the $1 transactions (their fee is under 3 cents but you'd typically have north of 20 cents of interchange fees).

[http://www.federalreserve.gov/paymentsystems/regii- average-i...](http://www.federalreserve.gov/paymentsystems/regii-average- interchange-fee.htm)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm curious what the plan is for that $200 million. Obviously Square is printing money at this point, but what other direction do they see to move out from mobile payments?

My guess is maybe they are going to go after other parts of the small biz segment like making e-commerce easier and so on. Ultimately, if Square can get 3% off the top of every transaction a business makes for the vast majority of businesses, there is a lot of money to be made for sure.

<comment><USER7> > Obviously Square is printing money at this point

Not so sure that's obvious. They're processing a lot of payments for sure, but not all of them are profitable. They spend a lot of money on hardware and customer service. Fraud surely costs a bundle too. It's a business that only makes sense at a very large scale.

<comment><USER9> Agreed. 3% is an overly optimistic estimate for how much they are making off each transaction since they are charging 2.75% and no per transaction fee and interchange isn't too much lower than that (maybe around a 2 or 2.2% blended rate?) Then you have to account for per-transaction fees, chargebacks, etc.

Given the pricing, I am guessing that they are making anywhere from break-even to 1% on each transaction. At my most generous estimate, that's $80M of annual revenue before any costs, but I'd wager they are pretty damn close to break- even and not making too much, yet...

So I agree with you, they are growing very quickly and have pretty tremendous potential, but I'm not sure I'd say they are "printing money".</comment></comment></comment>


Musk's ventilator fiasco shows need for more oversight of Newsom's mask deal - <AUTHOR> https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/editorials/article241982586.html <comment><AUTHOR> _So, millions of Californians heard the governor announce Musk's heroic donation of "ventilators." Yet not one unit has been delivered – and Musk likely never had the real ventilators our hospitals need._

</comment><comment><USER2> Duplicate: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22870225](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22870225)</comment>


Western intelligence hacked Yandex to spy on accounts - <AUTHOR> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-yandex-exclusive-idUSKCN1TS2SX <comment><USER2> 'Western' meaning the usual aggressors, the _"Five Eyes" intelligence-sharing alliance of the United States, Britain, Australia, New Zealand and Canada_.

<comment><USER3> Here it's vague enough to be meaningless to the point of irresponsible journalism. _WHICH COUNTRY?_

<comment><USER4> The article mentions, that sources could not confirm which nation launched the attack.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Unsurprisingly Yandex say that this was detected early, no damage was done and no user data was accessed via the hacking.

Obviously that rings hollow... but, I wonder, what kind of security protocol do high gov officials in RU use, do they follow better security hygiene than the West?

This release coincides with G20 meetings. Intentional or happenstance?

<comment><USER6> Something like this maybe?

[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/11/russia- reverts...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/11/russia-reverts- paper-nsa-leaks)

;)

<comment><USER7> I could swear there was something recent I've read about determining which keys are being pushed by hearing the sound of the keyboard...

<comment><USER8> Are you thinking of this recent paper about acoustic side channel attacks on smartphones?

Hearing your touch: A new acoustic side channel on smartphones ([http://arxiv.org/abs/1903.11137](http://arxiv.org/abs/1903.11137))

<comment><USER7> Oh wow! This wasn't the one I was talking about, but very cool nonetheless. It's similar, but with keyboards. I hate posting this without evidence, but I think there was also something having to do with watching a plant or a pane of glass vibrate to know what is being said inside a room. The keyboard noise and the vibrations may also be unrelated. If I can find these articles, I'll come back and post them here.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Kind of ethically dubious to this type of work. There is moral outrage when Google tries to do military contracting, but none against when federal government doing this type of extra-legal actions.

<comment><USER10> I expect my government to spy on foreign citizens and governments. If they do something truly terrible like kill civilians or disrupt the natural society of a country I'd have to take a hard look. Google is a private firm and subject to market forces like boycotts over military contracting. It's because governments and Google are two very different things.

<comment><USER11> And you also rely on them for information as to who is truly terrible.

<comment><USER12> "And you also rely on them for information as to who is truly terrible."

No, not at all. Thankfully we have many people in press, innumerable sources of information, and a lot of public discourse on these things.

Unlike in some regions, where journalists are murdered, sometimes by the state.

<comment><USER13> You guessed: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Couso](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Couso)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'm rather fond of Yandex. They have great engineers and make a solid product. Being Russian doesn't bother me, as I have nothing against the Russians. Yandex search has a fantastic image search that rival most others. And the fact that one does not have to provide a mobile number is a plus.

<comment><USER15> Their search engine is not bad too, and I use it as my primary search engine. They also helpfully provide a link to other search engines so that if you are not satisfied with their search result you can search on the other search engines with just a click. This ensures that they get crucial data (the search query) to improve their search results and also doesn't leave their user disgruntled due to non-relevant search result.

On the flip side, they are just as intrusive as Google. When I installed their browser or mail app (don't remember which one) it asked for my ios PIN / password (no ios app ever requires a PIN / password for installation - and no, I am not talking about an iCloud password which is required for app installation if you have enabled it for app installation).

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> That's sad. One of the main features of Yandex mail was that your data was reasonably safe from Western intelligence.

</comment><comment><USER17> In my view, if you're hacking for espionage purposes as a nation who defends classical liberalism, then I'd argue your actions are justified. I do not understand why sources involved with this (or related stories) would talk to reporters.

Despite our flaws, there's a difference in Russia or China hacking and the US. To suggest otherwise is advocating moral relativism in my opinion.

I do, however, support a pardon for Snowden and Assange.

<comment><USER18> Err? So, suggesting a uniform standard that says hacking is bad is advocating moral relativism?

There is no end to this "ends justify the means" crap. "Well, we're the good guys, so it's ok for us to torture, depose governments, nuke civilians, fix elections, assassinate foreign leaders, spy on our citizens..." Etc.

<comment><USER19> It doesn't matter whether "we're" the good guys or even if there are any good guys. Where there are groups with different interests there will always be conflict.

Given that there will always be conflict, you can choose to do nothing and be out-competed, you can act in the interest of the group to which you belong, or you can act in the interest of the other side.

It's possible to argue that these actions are not, in fact, in the interest of your group, but that has nothing to do with some facile Hollywood conception of international relations as good guys vs. bad guys.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> One of these days, New Zealand will turn on us, and we will all be speaking Eeenglish and living in hobbit holes.

</comment><comment><USER21> Are we at all surprised by this?

Really, it's a lot like the allowable amount of insect parts that the US Govt. Food and Drug Administration allows in food. You're shocked a bit to read it, but the truth is you've been living it (and eating it) for some time.

See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Food_Defect_Action_Levels](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Food_Defect_Action_Levels) for example for what I mean about "allowable amount of insect parts"

<comment><USER22> If we weren't hacking into Yandex, I'd be asking for new chiefs at the intelligence agencies who would. What the heck of the point of an agency if you're not gathering intelligence?

<comment><USER23> What does hacking into Yandex give us other than a reason for Russia to do the same?

<comment><USER24> They are doing the same. Intelligence is dirty business but it has to be done.

<comment><USER25> Must it be done?

<comment><USER18> No. The intelligence is crap; the CIA has missed basically everything important in its history. It is frequently politicized. It only goes to the President, who might ignore it or misinterpret it. We do much better just by reading newspapers well.

<comment><USER26> > missed basically everything important in its history

Or the things it has caught don't make newspaper headlines. Because the plots were defused, and thus can't be used to cause chaos and fear in citizens, something newspapers seem to delight in.

<comment><USER27> > Or the things it has caught don't make newspaper headlines. Because the > plots were defused, and thus can't be used to cause chaos and fear in > citizens, something newspapers seem to delight in.

That sounds like conspiracy thinking. The media isn't able to suppress the CIA's good deeds, and I don't believe they'd try. "Big alien invasion averted thanks to heroic CIA agent" is a great headline. So great in fact, that fiction books are written on that premise.

With all the minor and major leaks from the intelligence community, they're supposed to have a super tight and successful conspiracy going to hide the fact that they are actually effective? I have some doubts, both on the technical part (large conspiracies are hard) and the reasoning.

<comment><USER22> The CIA constantly says "we have prevented X terrorist attacks in the last Y years" and nobody believes them

<comment><USER28> We have no reason to believe them.

They have a demonstrable history of lies and terrorist-style anti-democratic activities themselves for political and economic purposes.

<comment><USER22> There's no arguing with you. You'd rather believe that you're being persecuted than in the complexities of actual reality.

<comment><USER29> Please don't cross into personal attack on HN. It doesn't help, and provokes worse from others.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Chidley: XML to JSON Converter (Go) - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/gnewton/chidley

<comment><AUTHOR> chidley creates Go structs from XML. It can also generate code for a Go program that will convert the given XML to JSON or back to XML. Works on huge files by supporting XML decoding streaming. Tested on 137GB wikipedia XML file (and many others). Handles XML namespaces. -Author

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry, forget link: [https://github.com/gnewton/chidley](https://github.com/gnewton/chidley)</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What tech jobs are good for therapists to transition into - <AUTHOR> My partner has been working as a mental health therapist for the past 5 years. Although she loves helping people and her job can be rewarding at times, she is starting to burn out completely. This is mostly due to intense case loads, long hours, lack of support, costly training for licensing, and of course low salaries.
She is highly considering a career change but is hesitant because she has no idea what she wants to do. She is incredibly an incredibly brilliant person. So being a software developer, I of course suggested she learns how to code and maybe go from there.  She's not opposed to the idea of learning to code, but it's important to her that she can still use the skills that she already has as a therapist and apply it to her next role. After some discussion, we concluded that no matter what she goes into, the next career move would have to meet the following criteria:
1. Easy-ish transition from therapy 2. A position that is interpersonal and involves helping people 3. Little to no cost training. Learn on the job would be ideal.
If anyone has any suggestions, it would be greatly appreciated. I would also love to hear from former mental health workers, social workers, therapists, etc. who may have experienced a similar transition.
PS. We live in Chicago if you have any ideas or know of any opportunities available in the area :)
Thanks! <comment><USER2> Errr, I helped my therapist gf get a promotion to run her program by helping her identify the programmatic week points of the way her organization runs.

Maybe a UX interaction designer that specializes in Invision? Therapy and UX would go well and help her learn the game while she builds skills.</comment>


Robert Scoble's Severed Head, Truthiness, and the Surrender Chicken - <AUTHOR> http://quorareview.com/2011/01/31/robert-scobles-severed-head-truthiness-and-the-surrender-chicken/ <comment><USER2> Sharp. Informative. Funny. Absolutely Right On Tristan. You certainly got my attention. Sue

</comment><comment><USER3> Any time you speak Truthiness, you have my attention. Nice article Tristan.

</comment><comment><USER4> Very well done! They should listen to all the points.

</comment><comment><USER5> Makes all the right points, sharp.

</comment><comment><USER6> Great read. Thanks</comment>


NextFlow: Sane CoffeeScript Flow Control - <AUTHOR> http://procbits.com/2012/06/28/nextflow-sane-coffeescript-flow-control/

<comment><USER2> Why not just use the features of javascript? For async.js:

      async = require('async')
      arr = [(->),(->),(->)]
      aysnc.series.apply(this,arr)

</comment><comment><USER3> What is the appeal of these types of libraries over promises?

</comment><comment><USER4> GOTO 5</comment>


The End of App Stores Is Rapidly Approaching - <AUTHOR> https://onezero.medium.com/the-end-of-app-stores-is-rapidly-approaching-b972da395097 <comment><AUTHOR> I sincerely hope the resistance Apple has put up against web apps either (a) breaks down soon, or (b) starts to negatively impact them. Their app store is just so full of bloat, which really needs to be removed sooner rather than later. I mean, simple calculator apps can be 30mb or above - how can that be a good thing?!

<comment><USER2> You aren't right here, PWA app can be much much more smaller.

<comment><AUTHOR> How am I not right? I'm saying exactly that. That a PWA will be much more lightweight, compared to native apps that are unnecessarily large.</comment></comment></comment>


An abstraction over whatever package managers you have installed in your system - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/denisidoro/xpt <comment><AUTHOR> xpt is an abstraction over whatever package managers you have installed in your system. No need to run different commands based on the distro you're running anymore!

xpt can install software based on custom recipes. This allows you to add a custom behavior to a install script or to add a fallback in case no compatible package manager was found.</comment>


Review My Startup Weekend Pitch - <AUTHOR>

I'm attending Startup Weekend tomorrow and I'm sort of nervous. I'm a college student/ biz dev guy and I'm going by myself and I don't really have a good pitch. I was wondering if you could critique this pitch:
I came across this start up idea when I was diagnosed with Gilberts Syndrome in August. I lost a decent amount of weight from having stomach issues which was unfortunate because I play in an amateur football league during the summers.  I realized gaining muscle was as hard as losing weight, because a strict diet is more important than working out.  I'd like to build something like Weight Watchers for weight gainers. Assign points to certain foods that have high protein and carbohydrates and have custom diets for customers.  I think the biggest issue for putting on weight for people who were sick or need to bulk up for a sports team isn't working out but what to eat and how much of it to consume. This tool would solve this problem.  I need a developer and a designer.
What do you think? <comment><USER2> I've never done a pitch. However I have recently gained weight through a weight training programme (with a careful eye on nutrition).

Reading yours it left me thinking.

1\. How would it make money.

2\. There's a load of information out there on gaining weight how would you compete with that. (How are you going to acquire traffic).

3\. Where's your expertise, you didn't mention how much weight you put on or what you learned.

<comment><USER3> I agree with the expertise statement. I think the money was somewhat covered tangentially with the Weight Watcher's comment. Basically it's WW (points, prepackaged meals, guides) for body building.

What I didn't feel was a connection to your product. I can't connect with your disease, and having to recover weight as how this is posed. If you turned it around and said something to the effect of "I lost a bunch of weight due to my disease and I had to gain back muscle mass in time for football season" then perhaps that would draw in more people. You leave off "football" and just go with a more generic sports to draw in more people. What's the customer's pain? While your disease is the reason for you designing this program, it's not what makes me use it.

Your situation reminded me of Titin, a weighted training vest created by someone at my school. I've heard his pitch and (IMO) it's banking more on pity points than actual product. I don't think you want people to pity you, but instead understand your passion for making this and that you'll continue to improve on it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I think it's also an interesting issue. I'd do some research into the types of data you'd require because until you get some nutritional info into the app, it's an empty shell.

See what open source food data (like openfooddata.com) is available to use in your project.

I guess this would show to you have thought about building out the content of the site which is the most important bit.

</comment><comment><USER5> I'm not commenting on the idea, but that isn't a pitch. It sounds like a neat idea, but read more about how to craft a pitch. Also, as a SW veteran I can promise you there is nothing to be nervous about. You'll be laughing about being nervous on Sunday, I promise.

</comment><comment><USER6> I think it's a great idea. You should turn it into some kind of a game/goal achieving tool. This, along with weight maintenance, could be interesting for athletes and those with various weight issues.

Good luck, and let us know how it turns out.</comment>


Google killed a small smart glass maker after acquiring it - <AUTHOR> https://androidrookies.com/here-is-how-google-killed-a-small-smart-glass-maker-after-acquiring-it/ <comment><USER2> What? This article makes absolutely no sense.

How is buying a company that clearly was not doing well financially (acquisition price at $150m, ~$200m raised with the last $40m being a debt financing, so it is a bail out), in what is clearly messaged as an acqui-hire for talent, in any way comparable to Amazon using its investment arm to acquire confidential information and replicate company products?

Respectfully, the author doesn't seem to understand what's actually going on here, this seems like a standard acqui-hire for future work on a smart glass product within Google. I highly doubt North didn't know they were going to be discontinuing the Focus before the acquisition closed.

What would have actually been unethical is waiting for North to run out of money and then try to hire their people at lower salaries or something.

<comment><USER3> > _What would have actually been unethical is waiting for North to run out of > money and then try to hire their people at lower salaries_

Why? It would have been riskier. With aqui-hire they get everyone and someone else could scoop them. But at the end of the day the North team failed to make a product that sold.

<comment><USER2> I didn't say it would be a good business decision =P

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> In the article it says this move by Google is worse than Amazon investing in businesses and stealing info. How is this worse? Google bought the whole company, didn't make partial investment. They can do whatever they want with the company.

<comment><USER5> "Worse" doesn't just mean "worse for the companies involved", it can also mean "worse for society". The net result of Google continually buying startups and shutting down the projects is that fewer products receive long-term support, receive any iterative improvements, or can be relied upon to exist later.

<comment><USER6> It's still too early to say and we don't have enough visibility. Pairing North's tech with Google's distribution would expand the reach and potential of this type of product. North could've been running out of money before the acquisition so Google swooping in ensured the tech lived on. These are all plausible outcomes that would end up being "better for society"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> These stories about competition being thwarted often seem to ignore the elephant in the room — the companies being acquired weren't doing well. I'm sure the North team feels like they took the best option they had realistically available to them. We can speculate about what might have been, but unless most scenarios involve them going out of business and everyone looking for new jobs, it's not very accurate. You could say most startups take the chance despite low chance of success, but North has done that and ended up on the wrong side of that distribution once already, and any further attempt would be saddled with the existing debt and cap table. This is a clean slate for them.

</comment><comment><USER8> This article seems to completely miss the point. Google paid the founders a lot of money to acquire their IP and know how which they will integrate into Glass. Why would google run two identical products? Nonsense article.

<comment><USER9> founders probably made nothing actually. Investors and Debt have priority and they got bought for less than was raised. I definitely still agree the article is garbage.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Would anyone have _any_ direction on what kind of projectors North was using for this product? I have no idea where to start searching.

In the same way, I would also be very interested in any further info on Ellsworth's Tilt Five projectors, bottom right-right of [1] (full text of interview [2]). Interesting video with info on the (retroreflective) optics system here [3].

[1] [https://web.archive.org/web/20200722042213im_/https://i0.wp....](https://web.archive.org/web/20200722042213im_/https://i0.wp.com/skarredghost.com/wp- content/uploads/2019/09/Tilt_Five_manufacturing.jpg?w=680&ssl=1) presumably shows three generations of the product. From left to right board, camera and projector.

[2] [https://skarredghost.com/2019/09/24/interview-jeri- ellsworth...](https://skarredghost.com/2019/09/24/interview-jeri-ellsworth- tilt-five-ar-kickstarter/)

[3] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AB4NjMWKV0s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AB4NjMWKV0s)

</comment><comment><USER11> This is a bizarre article. North was unsuccessful in the market and basically ran out of money and time. Google picked up the people and IP and those efforts are now being directed elsewhere within Google. The idea that Google killed off a competitor is not accurate, as North had already failed to succeed. It was a good effort, and like most consumer hardware attempts, brutally hard.

</comment><comment><USER12> The article doesn't say anything about the internal (to Google) disposition of the team or thechnology -- only that the previous public product roadmap is cancelled. I'm unimpressed.

</comment><comment><USER13> Would it be worse if they didn't acquire it, but crushed it in the market? Obviously we won't know.

<comment><USER14> Google can't crush shit when it comes to hardware.

<comment><USER15> Software either (outside of vanilla Android) - They can't make a consistent "ecosystem" to save their lives.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> this seems normal, why would Google continue to market a product rather than integrate the tech into their own branded product, I know Waze is still Waze but I think that's far different for obvious reasons</comment>


How social links fare vs search links in traffic growth - Automatt-2 http://www.sexywidget.com/my_weblog/2009/05/a-deeper-dive-into-passed-links-as-a-source-of-website-traffic.html

<comment><AUTHOR> by social links if you mean links of your site in search engines, than the answer is obvious

<comment><USER2> No, that's not what I mean. I'm comparing the growth rate of traffic coming via "passed links" (twitter, facebook, email) vs the growth rate of traffic coming via search.</comment></comment>


Battered by extreme weather, Americans are more worried about climate change - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/nov/20/battered-by-extreme-weather-americans-are-more-worried-about-climate-change <comment><USER2> More like battered by constant media propaganda, americans are more worried about climate change.

</comment><comment><USER3> It's about time.</comment>


Show HN: A career-aware course recommendation engine - <AUTHOR> http://courseforward.com

<comment><USER2> Intriguing, but currently only useful for developers and designers. The closest match to my "next step" is marketing, which is "coming soon" (as are a number of areas I don't care about, including accounting, insurance, finance, and human resources).

Notably missing, IM(NS)HO, are "management", "senior management", "corporate strategy", "executive management", etc. Also missing are "operations", "operations management", "service management", "project management", etc.

FYI, I chose "marketing" because product management and its service equivalent (defining and validating products and services, planning roadmaps, and working with marketing communications and sales support, etc.) were likely to be the closest to where I am and where I am heading (corporate strategy, executive management, etc.).

BUT! I think the biggest missing category was "QA": Perhaps others would see such a thing, but since I saw "mobile", "design", and a number of other areas that have little to no relevance, I was surprised to see neither QA (related to development, design, and mobile) nor security nor identity management work (basically what I have spent the last 25+ years doing).

</comment><comment><USER3> You guys need to really work on a couple things with this. First, are the job salaries pulled based on geographic location, or overall? That makes a huge difference.

Second, once I sign in through linkedin, I have no idea what to do next. You've successfully gotten me to understand that my profile is 25% complete, but the helpful introduction and flow towards initial registration is now nowhere to be found. I need some text here to show me what to do. "Pick a career path" or something similar would even be helpful.

I then have to click on the jobs in the field I choose, but nothing tells me I need to do that either. A CTA there would be really helpful.

So, I chose my job and entered my skills. Then, when I wanted to go back, I figured out how to do that, but afterwards I was back to 25% complete; so now I have a different idea of what the 25% stands for.

This is a really awesome idea, and could be really successful, but you've got to give the user some guidance since the UX isn't standard.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your feedback! I just pushed a few changes to address some of these UX shortcomings. I plan to persist things at every step of the account creation wizard. Hopefully that will reduce astonishment.

The job salaries are US-wide median. Many computer science and data science jobs are in large costal cities where the cost of living is higher, so these salary figures are more in line with what you'd get in SF or NY.

<comment><USER3> Hey, you guys are about 2 blocks from my apartment it seems like; if you need someone to beta things out or give a hand with something, let me know; my email is my HN logon @gmail.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is cool but...you've got courses listed as free but when I go to the course they're asking for money ([https://www.udemy.com/introduction-to- bootstrap-3/?affcode=E...](https://www.udemy.com/introduction-to- bootstrap-3/?affcode=E0IYeF5RR3YIUQ==))

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for catching this. We are constantly scraping like 30 course providers on a weekly basis. A lot of Udemy courses start out free to attract attention, then start charging. I'll get this fixed!

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Looks pretty solid

</comment><comment><USER6> Will definitely use this to learn web dev. Thank you!

</comment><comment><USER7> This is a very cool idea. Execution is good as well.</comment>


Conservative TV networks tout conspiracies - <AUTHOR> https://www.axios.com/conservative-tv-networks-tout-conspiracies-db3ed30c-1292-46ec-870f-cdc3be95cc50.html <comment><USER2> No mention of the delusional, years-long coverage of the Russian collusion hoax by mainstream media, and those videos have stayed up on YouTube and Facebook — I suppose some "conspiracy theories" are more socially acceptable than others.

<comment><USER3> There's no hoax, we know that Russian operatives purchased ads across social media to influence the 2016 election. We know that members of Trump's campaign party went to the Russians for dirt on Hillary Clinton.

Missing a smoking gun does not mean that this was a hoax.

<comment><USER4> By that logic, could not any accusation have merit so long as enough "evidence" is produced to support it?

For example, producing a false document on a political candidate, then using it to drum up media speculation, while pushing politicians to "do something" to the point where they have no choice but to buy in to the narrative, and accept the talking points and media speculation as truth.

Gosh, I can't imagine anyone doing that! /sarcasm

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I think we need some new definitions. Conspiracies exist and theories are solid methodology for processing information. A conspiracy theory by definition should not be ridiculed. I think we need another term to truly describe the kind of baseless hypothesizing that goes on in cable news, Reddit and 4-chan.

<comment><USER6> Unfortunately, the way language works means we would have a much better chance establishing a new word/phrase for the opposite case (the rational act of theorizing). "Conspiracy theory" is unlikely to be retaken to mean something so undramatic again.</comment></comment>