Leaving it on the field.  No more side projects. - <AUTHOR>

I have wierdly come to a place in which I realize that side projects are bad for my career.
Years ago, they nurtured my talents, provided entertaining distraction from my day job and kept me curious.
After experiencing 2 years of burnout and coming fully back to life, I realize that side projects were partly to blame.
I think side projects taken too far not only is a source of exhaustion and stress but degrades my ability and desire to focus on my employers admittedly mundane work.
But since I left side projects behind I can see the quality of my paid work going sky high relative to 5 years ago.
No matter how smart, curious, creative, focused you are, there's real danger in stretching yourself too thin.
Would like to hear others experiences with this. <comment><USER2> I had a similar experience to you: I used to do a ton of side projects. About three years ago, I started working at a job where I had a very long commute, and that combined with attempting to continue those side projects burned me out hard. I started leaving programming to what I did for my day job, and if I had the hankering to continue programming I'd just stay at work later.

After a couple of years of that, I admittedly feel mixed about it. I do feel like I've regained some of my lost personal life - though it was too late to save my marriage, particularly since in that first year or so after I came to the realization above I simply ended up working until late in the evening instead - deferring personal projects by simply replacing them with other work and not with maintaining my relationships. Once she left, I finally realized that I not only needed to cut out these side projects, but I also needed to maintain some kind of reasonable work-life balance. (it took me a long time to get to the point where I can accept that this failure of mine caused the dissolution of our marriage - I always viewed my programming and work as a way of making sure that there would always be food at the table and that she'd always be able to do whatever she wanted, but in retrospect it wasn't worth much when she was the only one sitting at that table, and when it didn't seem like she had a partner at all. It took me a long time to be able to say that.)

I now feel a bit less burnt out, and have a desire to start side projects again - but at the same time, I don't want to go back to spoiling the rest of my life for it. I honestly can't figure out how I can resolve the three and still have time to sleep.

So anyways, I sympathize with your situation. Sadly, I don't have any good answers. All I know is that there must be a way to find a good balance, and that I have thus far been unable to find it - and I don't know about you, but my failure to do so has cost me a great deal.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes it has. I identify with everything you said my marriage was ruined in a similar fashion.

I think I tricked myself in a way thinking side projects made me a better developer when really I was just addicted to coding and avoiding greater responsibilities.

Basically a recipe for disaster. Rather than feel insecure about not coding all the time I now find that I can solve problems better and quicker when I'm not exhausted from solving problems.

<comment><USER2> Oy, aye - I feel you on that. Hang in there. I wish that I had more solid advice to give, though perhaps seeing that someone else came to a similar conclusion is helpful - I know that it has for me.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> There is also the danger of forgetting what the sky looks like and what normal people sound like.

</comment><comment><USER4> the way I see it, my side projects are my career. My paid work is just what I do to keep the lights on.</comment>


Techcrunch hacked by OurMine - <AUTHOR> They removed the article, but there is still a post on their front page: https://techcrunch.com/<p>This the version googled has cached:
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:JP0ef1CueKYJ:https://techcrunch.com/2016/07/26/ourmine-team-important-message/+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk <comment><USER2> I have been following the recent hacks by the OurMine group, and find it all fascinating.

If anyone knows more about the group, their motives and how they actually manage to compromise various high profile social media accounts and websites, please do share it here.

<comment><USER3> >I have been following the recent hacks by the OurMine group, and find it all fascinating.

Just some kids using someone elses tools to search through someone elses database collection. In this case the compromised journos password appears to have been "camus8" or "albertcamus8".

Don't reuse your passwords guys.

<comment><USER4> Whatever service let someone get away with a 6-character password in 2016 should be put down.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> A screenshot: [http://i.imgur.com/FPdi7mx.png](http://i.imgur.com/FPdi7mx.png)

</comment><comment><USER6> See also [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12164790](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12164790) and [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12165210](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12165210)

</comment><comment><USER7> I managed to capture it 12 seconds after it happened (I am a regular tc reader)

[https://goo.gl/5L9y5R](https://goo.gl/5L9y5R)

</comment><comment><USER8> Looks like their post got published to the RSS feed as well. Can't undo that.

</comment><comment><USER9> Please don't post links to hacked websites. A screenshot would do

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> They removed the post from their front page.

</comment><comment><USER10> Don't see a link here, but Techcrunch posted about it in an article:

[https://techcrunch.com/2016/07/26/a-hack-by-any-other- name/](https://techcrunch.com/2016/07/26/a-hack-by-any-other-name/)

</comment><comment><USER11> I'm guessing they just pwned one of their employees via some kind of social engineering. Nothing to see here.

<comment><USER12> WordPress VIP that hosts TechCrunch does require 2FA. Not saying it could not have been social engineering, but the usual dumb methods may not work.

<comment><USER11> The most popular method at the moment seems to be SEing phone companies into transferring the account to a phone owned by the attacker, therefore bypassing 2FA.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: What credit monitoring service(s) do you use? - <AUTHOR> Given what has happened with Equifax, I don't know if I should trust their free credit monitoring product offering. Is there a product that you suggest for credit monitoring? What do you use? <comment><USER2> Don't. "Monitoring" services only catch things after they have occurred (i.e., after a loan has been taken out under your identity).

Just freeze your file at all the firms, and you'll prevent those loans from even being given out under your identity (well, except for shady places that don't check anything, but there is no way to 'protect' against those anyway).

</comment><comment><USER3> Do a credit freeze - this means no companies are able to pull your report. If your credit needs to get pulled (for a mortgage or something) you will need to unfreeze. This will currently cost $5-$10 per agency.

Credit monitoring is only useful in that it will tell you when someone opened an account in your name. The damage is done: resolving the issue will take tens of hours of your time.</comment>


Ask HN: What are other HN-like communities for solopreneurs? - <AUTHOR> Would love to connect and exchange notes with other solopreneurs. <comment><USER2> [https://www.indiehackers.com/](https://www.indiehackers.com/)

</comment><comment><USER3> [https://discuss.bootstrapped.fm/](https://discuss.bootstrapped.fm/)

[https://indiehackers.com/](https://indiehackers.com/)</comment>


How Not to Bomb Your Offer Negotiation - <AUTHOR> http://haseebq.com/how-not-to-bomb-your-offer-negotiation <comment><USER3> Lol. This guy was involved in a massive scam in the online poker world years ago. not sure if he's completely changed. I don't know what he's doing in the SW world.

Source: [https://www.highstakesdb.com/2375-haseeb-qureshi-admits- to-c...](https://www.highstakesdb.com/2375-haseeb-qureshi-admits-to-chip- dumping-quits-poker.aspx)

[http://www.cardrunners.com/blog/internetpokers/the-girah- sca...](http://www.cardrunners.com/blog/internetpokers/the-girah-scandal)

<comment><USER4> He explains himself here: [http://haseebq.com/about/](http://haseebq.com/about/)

If you didn't see his previous posts he's clearly a pretty skilled self- teacher - negotiated up to 220K offers at Google and Airbnb despite going to a bootcamp.

<comment><USER5> >he's clearly a pretty skilled self-teacher

I think it's pronounced "self-promoter."

<comment><USER6> Yeah, this is just sad.

I know people personally that worked their asses off learning systems programming, algorithms, and advanced mathematics at top-tier four-year colleges with absolutely fantastic technical CVs that got offers that aren't even half of that.

These are surely some of the smartest people in the world, too, but I suppose they don't play the "bluffing" game all too well (er, "negotation" \-- call it whatever you want, ex-poker player).

I'm not sure what makes this guy who ostensibly got his hand held through a three-month "learn to copy and paste Ruby from StackOverflow" camp eligible for a salary that is higher than some surgeons make.

Without reading the article, sounds like he successfully bluffed to one company that another offered him some really high salary X, and then he went straight to the moon (or should I say, made out like a bandit) from there.

As much as we like to think our hiring process is meritocratic, when confronted with someone with just the right physical characteristics or the right charismatic charm, our human social biases still seem to have a lot more power over us than we'd like to admit.

I remember that one study that successfully correlated inches in height/stature to substantial dollar increases in salary.

<comment><USER7> He didn't get a 250k salary, that was total compensation, largely RSUs on a standard vesting schedule. He also donates 1/3rd of his pre-tax income to charity.

He wasn't just a graduate of a hacker bootcamp, he was hired on by App Academy after he finished and was quickly promoted up to Director of Product. He spent a lot of time teaching people how to pass whiteboard interviews. He was probably better prepared for an interview than your average Stanford CS grad, and already had prior experience as Director of Product and a portfolio of side projects.

He didn't bluff any company. He went through Triple Byte, the trendiest new tech recruitment startup. He got an offer from Triple Byte themselves even though he didn't even apply for them, got an offer from Google, and when word about the Google offer got out every other company started bidding for him.

He's also just a really smart guy in general. If you spend 15 minutes talking to him, he'll leave an impression. It's not a bluff or a con, he's just a really smart, really analytical guy.

<comment><USER8> Sounds like less of an indictment of him, and more of an indictment of the software interview process in SV and shark-feeding nature of the bubble.

<comment><USER6> Yes, I am less interested in the details of his specific case (I realize I might have made some rash judgments earlier on), and more interested in furthering the discussion behind the general trends underlying the Valley's hiring processes and brainstorming ways to possibly even improve them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> It might be important to keep in mind that there is a large difference between negotiating to buy a car and negotiating to work some place.

A lot of the stuff you read seems to be geared toward "buying a car" \-- used top 10 tricks, outsmart somehow the dealer, maybe act like an asshole a bit, and you're leaving and never seeing them again.

I don't see it always working too well in job negotiations. Approaching it that way may backfire. So you "tricked" your future manager to give you a $50k more. In the end though, if they feel they didn't get a good deal because you oversold yourself, you won't have a good time eventually. The last thing you want to do is end up starting work and already having a target on your back, because the owner / manager feels a bit swindled by your "tactics".

Surely you can end up in a large organization, maybe slip through the cracks, but in the end, you better be sure you can deliver according to what you are paid.

<comment><USER10> Most companies employing programmers do not want employees to know each other salary. This means that if you are an individual contributor applying to such a company then your manager is not going to know your salary at all. The salary is going to be negotiated with somebody higher up, whose reports are other managers and not ICs. I would not worry about this.

<comment><USER11> Are you kidding? I would be highly surprised if a manager didn't have access to the budget impacts of his/her direct reports.

Where is this place where such info is hidden? Because I definitely don't want to work there.

<comment><USER10> I've never had a salary negotiation with a future direct manager. And I've worked/interviewed in quite a few game companies as well as some non-gamie ones like Google and Microsoft.

<comment><USER12> I didn't interview with my current boss, but he definitely knows my total comp down to the dollar and stock/bonus/salary split - I've seen it on his screen during annual performance & bonus reviews. This is at a big 5 company.

<comment><USER10> Well, it's a company, which does not care that employees know each other salary then.

<comment><USER13> There are very few companies that keep salaries secret from managers. My manager knows exactly how much I make and how much everyone under me makes. His manager has the same visibility a level higher. What he doesn't know is how much his peers make or how much anyone in his peers' orgs make.

Salary secrecy can't really extend to managers unless you want your managers to do a poor job rewarding people. How's it supposed to work when someone comes to their manager and asks for a raise? "I think I'm underpaid and want a 10% raise." "Well, I don't know what you or anyone else makes so I have no idea if you're underpaid. Deal with it I guess."

<comment><USER10> I am not sure what are you arguing here. If you have people reporting to you then you are a manager and your manager, who manages managers might know your and your reports salaries. All I said that the first level manager, whose reports do not have reports of their own is unlikely to know anyone salary but his own.

>How's it supposed to work when someone comes to their manager and asks for a raise

Every where I worked, you (as an individual contributor)go to the higher up, who knows your salary with the recommendation from your manager, saying that you're doing excellent job or whatever.

<comment><USER9> Hmm interesting. I am poster higher up which started this chain. I worked in 4 places. In all cases my manager knew how much I make.

I imagine in some large companies depending on how top down there, they don't do it. But I wouldn't present it as a rule.

So how does asking for a raise work. You work with you manager all year. Then all of the sudden you go over his head at the end and talk to his boss about wanting a raise? I have never seen that. Sounds a bit strange.

Anyway, original point still stands. The lowest level boss which does know what you do and sees that you have a $50k higher salary and yet do work that not really $50k extra worth will put a target on your back.

<comment><USER10> Well, since I haven't seen what you described other than in small firms, where the first level manager was also the last or the one before last, let me ask you this: does the lowest level manager have the authority to give raises? If not, then does not the raise come from over his head anyways? And if yes, then why is not he or she negotiating your salary from the start? Or is he? If he is then, again, there shouldn't be a problem since you both agreed that your compensation is fair for both sides.

<comment><USER9> Not sure if he has authority. Not all time. Yes for a small company he did. For a large company I discuss it with him because he is the one who knows what I did last year best. If I got to higher ups and say "give me more money", they'll say something like "I think I've seen you in the kitchen, or the conference room". Well, in reality they'll read a performance review probably from my manager. And then probably talk to the manager anyway...

But what happens is I talk to my manager and they they'll go find out and make a case for me if they are not authorized to do it themselves.

> If he is then, again, there shouldn't be a problem since you both agreed > that your compensation is fair for both sides.

Well that was the original premise of the post. If negotiating like one negotiates buying a car, showing counter offers and so on. They might feel like you tricked them, if you then don't do the job to the level of your salary.

<comment><USER10> >They might feel like you tricked them, if you then don't do the job to the level of your salary.

This will also be a problem if you do worse job than expected and your manager does not know your salary. Simple solution - don't do a bad job if you don't want to be fired.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> My main technique in negotiation is to make sure I've framed my own boundaries. I always know at what point I walk away, what's simply non- negotiable. Everything else is on the table, and it helps me frame the conversation. If I find whoever I'm negotiating with simply won't meet the walk-away limit, I walk away. No hard feelings, no regret – all of those what- if feelings were dealt with as I set the minimum limit _before_ going into the conversation.

As well, I make sure that minimum level is a level I am genuinely comfortable with. It's not a cop-out, it's a level where I will sign and feel happy about it. Anything more than that is a bonus, but if I don't get that I'm perfectly happy.

I've found since I started doing this, and staying true to actually walking away if things aren't working out, the whole conversation has been much more professional and easy. Key to this though is that walk away means walk away, no childish "give me this or else I walk" nonsense. If you walk, you walk, that's it. Non-negotiable means just that.

EDIT: Probably worth mentioning as well that I do plenty of research _before_ setting that walk-away level. There's one aspect which is what I instinctively want, but then there's other things that come in to play as well of course, relocation if applicable, cost of living etc.

</comment><comment><USER15> It's this kind of personality that I look for in my organisations, mainly to isolate and slowly get rid of. The focus on "me" is so toxic. No amount of brilliance makes up for circles of damage to other, modest, hard working people.

<comment><USER16> Having a bunch of people who think the same, leads to group think. Having someone who like attention isn't necessary bad. Just like having someone who complains a lot isn't bad. (in fact if you look at team dynamics they'll end up being the most important type of person to have on a team to create a high performing team.) It's how the team and management react to a team member that creates toxic environments. If you have someone who points out valid issues and you choose to ignore them then of course they're complaining is going to become an issue. However if you fix the majority of major issues said person comes out with your team morale will go up because their product is better.

As they say there is no I in team, so acting like a single person can ruin a team feels rather stupid. It's a team that ruins a team.

<comment><USER15> Oh, I'm a great fan of diverse thinking in a group. Trouble with dominant individuals is they wipe that out, since most people will accept someone's contradictory opinion if it's backed up by force and charisma. And yes, such people can absolutely ruin a team, I've seen it happen many, many times. That is why I treat them as problems to solve.

<comment><USER16> Basically you're solution to the problem of team dynamics is to basically bully them out? (Isolate and then remove, sounds like workplace bullying)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Best is in my opinion to really practice salary negotiation with a friend. The most important aspects are:

1) Talk about salary at the very end of the interview process (by then the company should know your value).

2) Let the recruiter / manager say a number first.

3) If you get the offer, no matter how you feel, act satisfied, but not too satisfied.

4) Try to negotiate up reasonably.

I talk more about this in my talk at Europython on tech-recruiting and salary negotiation: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6PTaTDHUG4&feature=youtu.be...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6PTaTDHUG4&feature=youtu.be&t=1595)

Disclaimer: I am a recruiter. If you're looking for a tech job in Zurich, I probably can help you out - you find my contact details in my HN handle.

</comment><comment><USER18> Slightly-related: has anyone interviewing with Airbnb used the author's public starting offer of $220k total compensation to negotiate their own starting offer? Genuinely curious.

[http://haseebq.com/farewell-app-academy-hello-airbnb-part- ii...](http://haseebq.com/farewell-app-academy-hello-airbnb-part-ii/)

<comment><USER19> Really sad to know he didn't get a good offer in Airbnb and you both think it's a good offer. But this looks totally like a new grad offer.

I have my friends who just got offers in Airbnb who are getting paid 180k in salary and ~600K in stocks which is basically $330k/year.

My other friend who is senior engineer with 5 year experience is compensated around 500k/year.

I have similar experience and i recently did a job switch with around 11 competing offers and negotiated well more than the previous number. I negotiated with every offer except snapchat whom didn't move their needle but their offer was good not the best.

If you're really good, you can easily negotiate up to 400k/year real money(cash + stocks).

\- Googler/Fb employee with 4 year work experience here.

<comment><USER20> O.o These numbers are surprisingly high, to the point of almost being unbelievable.

And I go around telling my friends that software engineers can make 120k right out of college, and I'M getting laughed at by my friends at how apparently unbelievable ridiculously high this is.

I've got 3 years experience and I'm making not much more than that working at a midsized startup (I went to a top tech school and everything!).

And then I go on Hacker News and learn that the fair salary for people working at big companies, with around my experience is 330k!?! Man what am I doing wrong.

Is this what it is like being the mythical, 10x developer unicorn that I hear so much about?

<comment><USER21> Skepticism is the best policy with things like this. It's easy for an anonymous person on the internet to make claims like this.

<comment><USER22> I am a master donut artist at Dunkin Donuts. I make $5.3 million a year. See how this works?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I quickly skimmed through the article and it seemed to me that most of the advice given where taken from here:

[http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary- negotiation/](http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary-negotiation/)

</comment><comment><USER24> > Now say you end up turning down their offer. They've spent over $24,000 just > extending this single offer to you (to say nothing of opportunity costs), > and now they'll essentially have to start over from scratch.

Most of that is to hire someone, not just 'you'. And they aren't even close to having to start from scratch if you don't accept.

<comment><USER25> True. But they really do want you if they made an offer. I have never heard of someone asking for 5k more get their offer yanked, but I know people afraid to ask for that reason.

The exact # they lose if you say no isn't the point. You are the top choice. Doesn't mean they will double your offer but they do like you.

<comment><USER24> I have had success with asking for modest increases. I think it helps to have a good reason, like them not doing any 401k matching.

<comment><USER26> Is the median salary for the position a valid reason for an increase? For example 93000 is the median for software engineers in US according to the government.

<comment><USER24> I wouldn't specify 'median' exactly. That sounds too technical - it doesn't have the same innocence and emotional appeal. I'd mention what other local companies are hiring for the same position at, and mention being surprised they aren't offering at least that. Or mention having friends that got hired for the same position at a salary that's 10k more than you're being offered. If you do it smoothly, I think the worst case scenario should be that they say they can't go any higher, or that they come back with a higher offer that's only 1/2 or 1/4 more than what you mentioned. Like Sun Tzu said, don't corner the enemy.

<comment><USER27> Replace median with typical and you're set. The only way to weasel out of that is to show you're below average. Now then, any kind of negotiation is risky for obvious reasons.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> There are definitely some good points here. As someone who has done a decent amount of negotiating on both sides, I will say that while it's true that even in a startup your boss won't much care if you negotiate... they might care if you mercilessly try to squeeze out every. last. drop. as described here - <USER2> if you do it unfailingly politely. In a situation where there only a handful of employees and you're reporting to the founder, they may actually care about that last 10k you squeezed out at the deadline. Probably not enough to withdraw the offer, but perhaps enough to put a bit of a damper on the future relationship. I'm not saying it's not something that could be overcome. If you really are a 'rockstar', it would probably be quickly forgotten. But still, there is some value to leaving a small amount on the table. Especially since you can always negotiate a raise if your performance is indeed excellent. (Although admittedly your current salary does always anchor that somewhat, so I'm certainly not recommending giving up a _lot_ initially.)

</comment><comment><USER29> As a side note I've found that negotiation room in EU is so tiny if not negligible. Maybe it is just me but I suspect it's a mix between a different culture and a - generally - more unionized and segmented job market.

Wondering if you guys have experienced the same.

<comment><USER30> I'm sure you can negociate if you have offers from Google, Facebook and Palantir in London. Negociating only works in hot markets, and there are very few of them for tech in the EU.

<comment><USER14> Maybe, but the compensation range for developers in London is much narrower than you might think. From what I've seen, most startups offer in the range £30k-70k per year, probably with some mostly useless stock option deal. I've seen salaries out of Amazon and Facebook starting at £50k, and even at investment banks, for more junior positions. These are all basically suckers, given the cost of living in London, among other things.

Anything below £70k isn't worth consideration, unless you really want to be in London I guess. There will be better offers elsewhere.

Above £70k the range is basically £70k-100k, for a number of reasons. At £100k you end up in a different tax bracket, to the point where you may want to start considering taking other perks other than salary, to keep your tax cost down. Also, if you're being offered that kind of money, you're likely accepting a director-level offer, so really for engineers the meaningful range is about £70k-100k. Since you mentioned Palantir, I'll mention that I met with a recruiter of theirs who mentioned in our first (and only) meeting that their salaries were in this specific range.

For contract work, you can quite easily break the £100k barrier, but obviously now you're running your own shop with all of the issues that brings. Or possibilities, depending on your perspective!

<comment><USER30> Both Facebook and Google pay about £80k for new grads (£60k salary + £20k in stock and bonus). Seniors earn about double that. Palantir pays interns £5k / month plus free rent.

<comment><USER14> Sounds about right. No one mentioned the free rent thing to me, but I guess that's in corporate housing where you don't want to stay _anyway_. May I ask how you know?

<comment><USER30> Usually corporate housing at top tech comapanies is pretty sweet. I have friends who got offers.

<comment><USER14> I've lived in corporate housing and it's all but sweet. Sure, the first period is all fun and well, but you can't _live_ there. It's kind of like living in a drab hotel, or fancier dorm rooms. It's not home, and never will be. At least that's my experience, mileage varies of course.

<comment><USER30> Well, as I said, it's only for interns, so usually for 3 months.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Someone needs to interview this guy's coworkers and ask them what they think of him.

</comment><comment><USER32> I highly recommend reading Never Split the Difference, by Chris Voss. The book offers a different take to negotiation, written by a former FBI negotiator.

In his words, he could never split the difference in a hostage negotiation. When you enter the process understanding this, you do things differently.

<comment><USER33> Can you elaborate a bit please? Does this mean not meeting half way between your offer and theirs? And then what?

<comment><USER32> Good questions. His techniques rely on building a relationship, empathy, and many other techniques.

If you enter the process with a split the difference mentality, you invariably leave a lot of value on the table.

It's late where I am, I'd just go read the book if you want to know more.

<comment><USER27> Companies do not work on empathy, but on maximum reward for acceptable risk and investment.

<comment><USER34> This would be true if your offer was negotiated with a distant bureaucratic committee (or board), but most of the time, regardless of who they represent, you're just dealing with people.

<comment><USER14> Many companies, particularly the larger organizations, have pretty strict boundaries though. Case in point: in a large corporation we tried recruiting an incredibly talented developer, but because of company rules, we couldn't offer him what he asked for despite us thinking he was definitely worth it (and really, it wasn't outlandish in any way) but HR would never let it fly because rules. His problem then, I think, was that he mentioned what he'd earned elsewhere, so some policy dictated we couldn't offer more than 20% than that, or whatever. Stupid, silly policy, and just goes to show you should never divulge information the other party just isn't privy to. (I've never told recruiters what I earned before, that's not their business.)

<comment><USER35> > His problem then, I think, was that he mentioned what he'd earned elsewhere, > so some policy dictated we couldn't offer more than 20% than that, or > whatever. Stupid, silly policy, and just goes to show you should never > divulge information the other party just isn't privy to. (I've never told > recruiters what I earned before, that's not their business.)

Actually, that sounds like a _great_ reason to volunteer my current salary. As long as I'm not desperate I don't want to work for a company that maintains such an idiotic policy, because it tells me something about how they view and value their employees.

<comment><USER14> If I didn't know better, I'd agree with you. Thing is, this organization is quite good, but HR is useless. Unfortunately, all hires have to go through this draconian and incredibly difficult HR department – for reasons I guess – and they just seem to throw spanners around for a living, especially into works. HR acts largely as their own separate entity, which isn't uncommon with these kinds of organizations, and play more or less by their own rules. What they do isn't indicative of the rest of the organization. It bugs me a lot that we couldn't offer him what he wanted, and for no good reason either.

<comment><USER36> > Thing is, this organization is quite good, but HR is useless. Unfortunately, > all hires have to go through this draconian and incredibly difficult HR > department

If HR is that bad, and the organization gives HR that kind of power, how can you say the organization is "quite good"?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> My takeaways....

1\. Communicate your BATNA but be subtle. When I was looking for a job two years ago and spoke with recruiters, I heard from a few that it would be "hard" to get $21K more than I was making at the time. I told them that I was happy with my current job at a major well known company (I wasn't) and that's what it would take to get me to leave.

2\. Salary was the main reason I was leaving, but like he said, it's much easier to negotiate one time signing bonuses and things that don't cost the company money -- like more work from home days.

3\. Know your worth - it's hard to negotiate more than your market value. When I was interviewing I had 10 prospects that were in various stages of the interview process. I was able to confidently cut the process short for some knowing I had others and I had outside recruiters negotiating on behalf so they could get their commissions.

</comment><comment><USER38> Such a silly article; not a great way to start a relationship with your new colleagues.

<comment><USER27> Are you assuming HR is truly your colleague? Or maybe CFO or CEO?

No, they are your bosses. They might be colleagues, but that is secondary.

<comment><USER21> Can't emphasize this enough. This kind of mistake is common in our industry, though. I wish more software developers understood that when they say "human resources" they aren't lying: we are resources, like paper, electricity, and IT infrastructure. We are not their "colleagues," they don't see us as "colleagues," and it is damn obvious we aren't treated like colleagues.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Nolo has a some decent advice about negotiations: [http://www.nolo.com/legal- encyclopedia/contract-negotiation-...](http://www.nolo.com/legal- encyclopedia/contract-negotiation-11-strategies-33340.html)

</comment><comment><USER40> > _I like the term BATNA a lot, mostly because it sounds like a gadget Batman > would lob at bad guys._

Glad I'm not the only one who thought this :)

</comment><comment><USER41> How Not to Bomb your landing page (Hostgator error). Use a CDN.

<comment><USER42> this link was here on HN a while ago, but on Medium: [https://medium.freecodecamp.com/how-not-to-bomb-your- offer-n...](https://medium.freecodecamp.com/how-not-to-bomb-your-offer- negotiation-c46bb9bc7dea#.veznhprsz)

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> Lol Hostgator</comment>


Ouya: Potential, Even if it Fails - <AUTHOR> http://codinginmysleep.com/ouya-potential-even-if-it-fails/ <comment><USER2> Ouya is not a clever product. It is a clever idea.

> far too hard for indy developers to get their titles on traditional consoles

That's not true, it's far too hard to get _exposure_.

> the mobile game market is thriving.

For the lucky few, because again this market is all about exposure.

> there's a big demand for open harware [sic]

From who? Most people want iPhones.

> It's bound to be a better set-top box than anything I've yet used, so even > if it fails as a gaming device it should still succeed at a role that it was > never even intended for.

Rampant speculation.

<comment><AUTHOR> >From who? Most people want iPhones.

The 32,169 backers pledging $4.1 million within the first 3 days would seem to indicate there's a demand, now wouldn't it. Also, the million new Android devices coming online every day and the 400 million already out there seem to be suggesting that the iPhone may be the Jesus phone, but Jobsianity isn't the only super-religion out there.

I'll not argue about the importance of exposure, but will say that it's much easier on PC and mobile platforms for a quality indy game to get good exposure than on the big 3 consoles.

Finally, yes, rampant speculation, but for a product that hasn't actually been released yet what did you expect? Market analysis of the nonexistent market? Adoption rates of an unadopted product? Of _course_ it's speculation.</comment></comment>


Bitcoin balance lookup - <AUTHOR> https://duckduckgo.com/?q=1NhLgwiPGUCz5F7KL6gSYGo1peZ2DrCrrX <comment><USER2> Here's the Fed's balance:

[https://duckduckgo.com/?q=1Ez69SnzzmePmZX3WpEzMKTrcBF2gpNQ55](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=1Ez69SnzzmePmZX3WpEzMKTrcBF2gpNQ55)

<comment><USER3> It would be nice if:

(1) You could do _< address> in EUR_... [https://duckduckgo.com/?q=1Ez69SnzzmePmZX3WpEzMKTrcBF2gpNQ55...](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=1Ez69SnzzmePmZX3WpEzMKTrcBF2gpNQ55+in+EUR)

(2) It auto-converted to a reasonable default currency for your country, based upon IP address.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> FYI, does not play nice with DDG's dark theme.

<comment><USER5> Thanks! We're working on making these instant answers look better with different themes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> You should incorporate firstbits into the system as well. That will make it very handy and better than most current online tools. Instead of remembering a whole Bitcoin address, the first 6-7 characters would do. Will make usability better as well (I know there's debate about whether firstbits are good or evil, but it would still be interesting to include that feature).

<comment><USER7> The Bitcoin wiki seems to view firstbits as a very negative thing. From a quick reading, it looks like yet another "Real Names" attempt, but this time for bitcoin addresses.

The wiki even says the founder of firstbits went around generating a bunch of addresses to get the "good ones".

[https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Firstbits](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Firstbits)

<comment><USER8> That's not really their utility though. The value of firstbits is that you just type the first few bits of the address you want to look up and hit enter. It's like auto-complete.

<comment><USER7> Except it depends on that address being previously used. Otherwise people can attack it by entering a shorter prefix leading to another wallet. If I know you're gonna send to 1234567890, I'll go register 1234567899, so if you just type in 12345, it hits my account.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I use [https://blockchain.info/search/%s](https://blockchain.info/search/%s) with keyword "bit" in Chrome, so I can "bit SOMEHASH" from the omnibox and it searches more than just address balances (transactions, etc)

</comment><comment><USER10> This is pretty nice. Are you planning to spread the integration out to other popular cryptos as well?

</comment><comment><USER11> Uhm, it shows "no more results" on my system. Maybe the change is being propagated?

<comment><USER12> You might need to enable "Open Instant Answers" in Settings / Results.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Is there a !-shortcut as well?

<comment> k-mcgrady I don't think they could make it any shorter than typing in the address. Using a !bang would just make it longer.

<comment><USER14> The only way that I can think of to make it shorter would be typing x chars from the address and it would list balances from all matching addresses using auto complete (it probably only need a short part of the address to be unique) but of course most people probably use copy and paste and it would not matter

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> And where's Doge balance lookup? :P

</comment><comment><USER16> Great.... Now what? You've advertised the integration of an API on HN. Now what?

</comment><comment><USER17> cool</comment>


Airlander 10: Longest aircraft damaged during flight - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-37174417 <comment><USER4> A spokesman said: "The flight went really well and the only issue was when it landed."

Well, that's kind of every air flight ever. Its sticking the landing that's the hard part. Its not the fall that kills you; its the sudden stop at the end.

<comment><USER5> One of the advantages of large lighter than air craft is that they actually tend to crash in slo-mo, so the "sudden stop" tends to be pretty slow. In the case of the Hindenberg, a lot of the people who died did so because they jumped out too early and fell to their deaths, rather than "ride" the craft down.

Even in the worst disaster, the USS Akron, most deaths were due to drowning and hypothermia after the ship went down, rather than impact.

<comment><USER6> The majority of Hindenburg victims burnt to death - "riding the craft down" doesn't seem quite such an attractive option.

<comment><USER5> Well, obviously you don't want to hang around very long after its on (or even close to) the ground. IIRC, most of the burning deaths were crew-members in the upper parts of the ship who were either caught in the fire in its first stages or didn't have a way out even after it hit the ground. The lower decks weren't ignited till it hit the ground.

But the point is that "impact" wasn't a common cause of death for those who stayed in the ship until it was near the ground. Even when the lifting gas is being vented fairly rapidly, they tend to comedown at survivable speeds.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> For anyone who has not had the chance to read it there is a good article from the New Yorker on airships: [http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/02/29/a-new- generatio...](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/02/29/a-new-generation- of-airships-is-born).

It was a fun light read. Although at the end I just felt like I got a lesson in really expensive, and partially complete vaporware (vapor-commercial-ware?) and was left with little hope for their future.

<comment><USER8> I highly recommend that article as well. Though yes, like you I was left with a sense that this industry is never going to take off, so to speak.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> As the saying goes, any landing you can walk away from is a good one. A great landing is one where you can fly the plane again.

<comment><USER10> Ah, ya beat me to that quote!

Growing up, we flew in my dad's 4-seat (and later 7-seat) Cherokee very frequently and he'd always comment on his landing. He judged his entire flight by how easy it was to identify when the tire made contact with the runway. I remember a flight in high winds that he put down so softly that nobody could tell when we hit the ground. I also remember a landing when I was alone with my dad where we encountered a cross-wind a few seconds before making contact resulting in my slamming my head into the top of the cockpit and yelling "Mother F*cker!" (I was 14, he'd never heard me swear before and it was a bonding moment that he shrugged it off and thought it was totally warranted given the circumstances).

<comment><USER11> Bad landings seem to be something that unites almost all pilots. The better ones make bad landings less often, but nobody is immune.

Regarding your bonding moment, one reason I like to fly by myself is so I can swear as much as I want. Part of me is always slightly terrified of having a stuck mic.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> It nosedived on landing, and suffered some damage to the cabin. The crew was fine.

That's a huge win for lighter-than-air flight in my book. A jet aircraft would be a smear of aluminum, carbon fiber, and jet fuel all over the runway.

<comment><USER10> Actually, a nose-dive landing occurred at LaGuardia in 2013 - <USER2> Airlines - I believe the incident had something to do with the front landing gear failing. There was a small fire (as you mention, jet fuel is quite flammable and if there's a leak and a spark, that's a foregone conclusion, I'd imagine).

But the aircraft itself didn't look too bad which is a testament to decades of engineering experience with a device of such complexity[0].

[0] And found a link! [http://gothamist.com/2013/07/23/video_southwest_planes_nosed...](http://gothamist.com/2013/07/23/video_southwest_planes_nosedive_ont.php#photo-1)

<comment><USER13> I guess that's why you're not supposed to take your seatbelt off until you get to the gate...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14>
      "The company has denied claims from a witness that a line
      hanging down from the vehicle hit a telegraph pole about
      two fields away from its landing."

Telegraph pole? Is that a British colloquialism or do they still have telegraph poles over there? Or was that how they knew the witness was lying?

<comment><USER15> British term for a wooden pole that has wires at the top, regardless of what the wires are actually for.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Watch the 1080p version.[1] Did they have a control system failure, or was this pilot error? The front fans are steerable, but there's no sign of an attempt to correct the nose-down attitude as the craft dives. Watch the front fan positions. After the crash, the front fans move, but by then the cockpit has been crushed and there's probably nobody in control.

This thing is the same concept as the Skunk Works' P791 prototype - <USER3> heavier than air, steerable fans - but the flight controls seem to be much less effective and the landing gear is far worse.

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkYbw4R_- RQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkYbw4R_-RQ)

</comment><comment><USER17> Lots of different descriptions around this story: "Damaged during flight"..."has been damaged after nosediving on landing"..."damage to its cockpit when it hit the ground"..."Collided with the ground"

But only one honest: "The Air Accidents Investigation Branch has confirmed it is investigating the _crash_ "

It crashed. During flight it collided with a fixed object (technically an "ollision") resulting in damage to the aircraft. On its second a test flight, the experimental aircraft crashed.

<comment><USER11> They all look honest to me, and the one you're praising is much less informative than three of the four you criticize.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Down the Irons!

<comment><USER19> Empire of the clouds[0]: part two…

[0][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_of_the_Clouds](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_of_the_Clouds)</comment></comment>


HTTP Error 418: "I'm a teapot" - <AUTHOR> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_HTTP_status_codes <comment><USER2> And it's already been removed. Jokes don't last long in Wikipedia.

<comment><USER3> It's not really a joke, it's actually from an RFC. The IETF has a noble tradition of publishing amusing RFCs on April 1st. cf. IP datagrams on Avian Carriers, Electricity over IP et al.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Anyone swapped to a MacBook Air as a primary development machine? - <AUTHOR>

I'm considering swapping from my recent gen MacBook Pro and virtual machine development environment to a MacBook Air and a server in a cloud somewhere. Does anyone have any experience on this? Is the latency frustrating?<p>I'm a LAMP/Ruby developer and I typically work with databases around the 5-10GB mark, so quite light. <comment><USER2> I have for the last 2 years. Lots of YC founders seem to. It never occurred to me there was anything unusual about it.

<comment><USER3> How about desktops? Are they out of fashion among YC founders? I thought every developer appreciates convenience of large screen and plenty of computing power.

Do you/YC developers hook up your MacBook Airs to large screens or don't bother?

<comment><USER2> I believe most people use laptops that they hook up to larger screens when at their desks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> i personally recommend a macbook pro with an i5 or better, why? the cores, the macbook pro/air 13" use the outdated core 2 duo which supplies at best 2 cores, the i5 and i7 have 4. from a memory perspective, you'll only get 4 GB at best with an mba, with the pros you can go to 8 GB. this is great for running not just virtualization, but also if you're like me and you have 20 things open and running at the same time.

i dev in jquery + python + a mysql backend on fedora 14 running on vmware fusion. it's fine on my macbook pro 13 (2.66 GHz/2 cores/8GB Memory). highly recommend getting an SSD and maxing out the memory. my only complaint is the number of cores, wish i could have more cores.

in terms of being able to dev on an mba, it's totally possible, it's not like you're compiling code. so it really comes down to how much memory and how responsive you need the machine to be. also if weight plays a role in your decision making.

</comment><comment><USER5> Love my 13" MBA (2nd gen) with 2GB. Gave up a $4K 15" MBP with 8GB and SSD for it, and haven't regretted the decision once in 3 months or so.

MBA is much quieter (fan rarely runs, when it does it's much quieter), way more comfy on the lap or in bed, much cooler, and has a strikingly better display (brighter, crisper, slightly smaller size no big deal since rez the same).

I work in a Rails + MongoDB stack plus do a lot of design, so I'll routinely have RubyMine, Photoshop, Illustrator, mongod, mongrels, 3 browsers, and a few dozen browser tabs open at once.

If I had to make the purchase again, I'd get the 4GB model, since it's RAM that usually limits me, even though the swapping is fast with SSD.

Miss the Firewire occasionally since I like to use a Duet to lay down guitar tracks in Logic, but will probably get a dedicated iMac for the studio soon.

</comment><comment><USER6> I use one every day, mainly doing RoR development. I also have SQL Developer connected to oracle for most of the day; seems more responsive than my MBP tbh, I think it might be due to the SSD.

I also use it for image editing/gfx work.

The only time the performance has been noticeable has been installing apps via homebrew. Compilation is — obviously — slower than my MBP, but honestly it's not so slow that it'd worry anyone. Unless you're compiling a lot of stuff, all the time, you're not gonna notice.

It's my primary dev machine and I love it. I heartily recommend it.

And to reiterate some of the recommendations; get the 4gig of ram. I'd also recommend the 11" over the 13". I mean, if you're gonna get a small laptop, you should get the smallest one you can comfortably use.

I hook mine up to an external monitor + mouse + keyboard. It's sweeeeet.

</comment><comment><USER7> I ditched my 15" MBP for an Air and couldn't be happier. The SSD actually makes it feel much faster. I do the same kind of work as you do. I think you'll be very happy with your purchase. I already converted 2 people to the Air and they also love it.

</comment><comment><USER8> I use a MacBook Air for all of my work when I'm not in the office and I love it. I could even use it as my primary dev machine at work and feel great about it.

I'm very happy with my machine, which is a souped up 11 inch. The only contraint is monitor size, which is easily remedied with a large external monitor or an iPad via Air Display (<http://avatron.com/apps/air-display>). The MacBook Air honestly feels much faster than my work MBP due to the flash memory.

</comment><comment><USER9> I've been using the first-gen MacBook Air as my primary machine from around when it was released to about a week ago when its hard drive died. A bit slow at times, but the ease of carrying it compensates for that easily. And I've understood the SSDs on the new ones fix the speed issue.

Depends of course on what kind of tools you expect to use. I'm a web developer working on the PHP stack (even using a PHP-based app server instead of Apache), so I just need a simple Ubuntu desktop with a text editor, terminal and a browser.

</comment><comment><USER10> The new Air is titled "The Next Generation of MacBooks" and, having had mine for 2 months, I have to agree.

I expect one of the MBPs to drop the DVD and go SSD only and the result to be some amazing improvements in weight/thinness and battery life.

My recommendation: WAIT to see if this happens in the upcoming MBP updates. (the inventory stories seem to indicate this is 4-6 weeks away)

</comment><comment><USER11> I switched my primary from a macpro to the maxed 11" air back in december and have had no problems with it. I'm also a LAMP dev and designer with some slices for dev environments.

The screen res is workable with an external monitor and latency hasn't been an issue so far. I recommend upping the ram to 4gb though.

</comment><comment><USER12> I switched from the pain of developing Ruby on windows to a 13inch Macbook air with 4Gb of ram and am loving it. I do ruby and mobile development on the machine and couldn't be happier.

</comment><comment><USER13> Yes. I'm making an iPhone game, and it's fine. The downsides are: the fan spins up when I watch Youtube, and I don't really like the glossy screen.

</comment><comment><USER14> I do this with my CR-48.</comment>


Elm at Prezi - <AUTHOR> http://engineering.prezi.com/blog/2013/05/21/elm-at-prezi/ <comment><USER2> For those interested in compiling down to Javascript with a strongly and statically typed language, there's a brilliant proper subset of Haskell that compiles down to Javascript called "Fay": <https://github.com/faylang/fay/wiki>

<comment><USER3> i like the looks of opa too: <http://opalang.org/>

<comment><USER4> I would like it, but why oh why does it have Algol-like syntax? It started with ML-like one IIRC, so whyyyy? (it's just an expression of disappointment, not actual question)

<comment><USER3> yeah, that disappointed me deeply too :(

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _[..] and every line of JavaScript code costs too much time to maintain._

At this point, go to the next blackboard. Write after me:

You can not debug Elm. There is no debugger. You can not debug Elm. There is no debugger.

<comment><USER6> is there any theoretical limitation?

<comment><USER5> No, its plain old lazyness. All these "compiled to JS" language makers would rather add more fancy syntactic sugar or extend the standard library than getting their goddamn bases covered.

I have no problem with that, but please don't go on about how you are much more productive in this language than in JS, and how much cheaper the code will be to maintain.

<comment><USER7> I think it's ridiculous to call people "lazy" who wrote an entirely new language from scratch and released it for free, because it's lacking one feature.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > The cost of writing JavaScript is just too high

Every time I see such strongly worded statements, I get amazed by how the authors got to analyze the skills of every developer in the world.

<comment><USER9> Usually, to calm myself, I reword it like this :

For us/In my opinion, the cost of writing Javascript is just too high.

See? Now the rage is gone! I think I'm going to sell this trick...

<comment><USER10> I was taught in early rhetoric and composition classes that it is poor style to include "In my opinion" and other qualifiers in pieces that are clearly rhetorical or opinion based. The repetition is unneeded. In engineering discussions it is very common to differentiate between opinions and knowns. When discussions happen between people who don't agree on these things, someone gets annoyed. The engineers get annoyed when people state opinions as fact and think the other person is making unjustified assumptions. The non- engineers get annoyed and think that the other person is being pedantic.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Here's a list of languages that compile down to Javascript: [https://github.com/jashkenas/coffee-script/wiki/List-of- lang...](https://github.com/jashkenas/coffee-script/wiki/List-of-languages- that-compile-to-JS).

I didn't realize how many there were.

<comment><USER12> It's fairly crazy, but then again there are ~700 programming languages listed on Wikipedia, so really, there are just a lot of programming languages _in general_.

In terms of Foo->JS there seem to be two main camps, at least that I've noticed: writing a "better" JS (CoffeeScript / Dart et al), and writing something that converts your language to JS so you don't have to learn JS (ClojureScript, Scala.js etc) at all.

The latter can have ~700 of those before you've even started to duplicate yourself, so there is still a ways to go :P

Arguably there are only half a dozen or so "real" contenders in the former category (in the same way when you decide you want to learn a new programming language you don't pick from all ~700).

<comment><USER13> > so you don't have to learn JS

So you don't have to use a language you find deficient, so you can share code with your backend, so you can use the same tools you're used to ...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I recently attended a coding dojo where we wrote code in elm and tests in coffeescript. I was new to both languages but I was surprised how easier elm felt compared to coffeescript (note: I have some haskell background ;]). Here are the results: [https://github.com/dzsodzso63/PreziCodingDojo/tree/master/fr...](https://github.com/dzsodzso63/PreziCodingDojo/tree/master/frpDojo)

<comment><USER3> livescript is a more haskellish descendant of coffeescript: <http://livescript.net/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Great news that Evan can dedicate fully to Elm as his main job. I'm very curious about the language and its departure/simplification over traditional DOM manipulation with JS. I hope the best for the project and would love to see some effort for the compiler targeting asm.js :D

</comment><comment><USER16> I've really enjoyed playing with FRP, I even wrote a little gem in Ruby for it: <https://github.com/steveklabnik/frappuccino/>

And built some simple GUIs using Shoes: <https://github.com/steveklabnik/frp_shoes>

<comment><USER17> Me too, I did a project for grad school using FRP. <https://github.com/jcurbo/functionally-reactive-solar-system>

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> It seems like Haskell users are quite intent on not using Javascript... Elm is written in Haskell. So is Fay. And of course ghcjs.

<comment><USER19> The world seems to be intent on writing mountains of code to avoid writing javascript, and usually ending up with a system that compiles to more javascript than if they just wrote javascript. Saying javascript is broken is a nonsense, they mean they feel they should be above writing javascript due to its quirks and inconsistencies. Whatever they write the end result is still the "broken" language they wanted to avoid. It all seems like a huge waste of resources and smart people's time to me, but then I've been writing javascript for getting on for 15 years so perhaps im past it and don't "get it" anymore.

<comment><USER20> > The world seems to be intent on writing mountains of code to avoid writing > javascript, and usually ending up with a system that compiles to more > javascript than if they just wrote javascript.

Does it really matter how much javascript gets created? That statement could be made for any higher level language where X lines of the higher level language compiles into 5X lines of the target language. Maybe you could hand write your program in the target language using only 4X lines, but the point of the higher level language is to make it easier for the programmer to avoid mistakes as well as reduce source code size, not necessarily compiled code size.

<comment><USER21> Except that when JavaScript is the target code size does matter because it has to come up over the wire no? That's why something like Dart advertises the fact that it does tree shaking. (Elm may aim for the same efficiency who knows?)

<comment><USER22> You can do tree shaking in JavaScript with tools like Google Closure Compiler and uglifyjs (a bit more limited). Any language which compiles to JavaScript aught to be able to make use of these tools.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I find function application without parentheses enclosing the parameter list to be highly unreadable. Is there something wrong with me?

<comment><USER24> It's just new and you're not used to it. There's nothing wrong with finding new and different syntax confusing, as long as you're willing to keep an open mind.

If you use it for a while, you'll get used to it. After a while, I've found it makes the most sense. I think it's better because it reduces the amount of syntactic noise in the code.

It's a simple design decision. Function application is the most important part of the language. So it gets the best syntax: none.

<comment><USER23> Can you give an example of composed function application? E.g.,

      f(a, b, g(x, y))

Thanks

<comment><USER24> You use parentheses only for grouping. So

        f a b (g x y)

is how you would write your example. In Elm, you could also use the function application operator to avoid writing the parentheses:

        f a b <| g x y -- EDIT: flipped the operator around

In Haskell, this would be done with $, which used to exist in Elm as well:

        f a b $ g x y

Once you get used to mentally parsing the $ as grouping the rest of the expression together--admittedly, it does take a little while--the last version is probably the most readable. At least that's what I've found.

<comment><USER25> Small revision, the second code line should be:

        f a b <| g x y

Just like F# :)

<comment><USER26> F# could also write that as g x y |> f a b. Which can read much more intuitively - you are sending the results of g x y to the function f a b.

(I think its that, I'm a little rusty..)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I am so excited! It's nice to see a functional language like Elm getting financial support from a company.

</comment><comment><USER28> Elm 0.8 was recently announced with a range of improvements for those interested: <http://elm-lang.org/blog/announce/version-0.8.elm>

</comment><comment><USER29> not to be confused with the elm, the old unix mail client:

<http://www.instinct.org/elm/>

<comment><USER30> I knew this was unlikely to be the subject of the article but clicked through anyway... oh well.

<comment><USER31> I was really hoping someone had compiled Elm to JS. That would give me some hope that mutt would be next...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> I was really impressed by elm, but I strongly prefer working with a library that provides some of the features without transpiling. If anyone else is interested, I'm looking for some help with my project: <https://github.com/jlatt/frp.js>

<comment><USER33> See also Microsoft Research's Reactive Extensions for JavaScript, released under the Apache License 2.0:

<https://github.com/Reactive-Extensions/RxJS>

<comment><USER34> Or even better, Bacon.js

<https://github.com/raimohanska/bacon.js>

<comment><USER33> Thanks for the heads up!

Do you have time to explain why bacon is better than Reactive Extensions, and thus the only frp library for JavaScript that you chose to link to? I don't have too much experience with frp in general (primarily just the Reactive Extensions for .NET), and even less with JavaScript implementations, so I'm not really in a position to begin making the comparison.

Edit: ah, found <https://github.com/raimohanska/bacon.js#for-rxjs-users> for starters!

<comment><USER35> It's _much_ simpler for a start - you've got a good chance of being able to read and understand all of the code in an afternoon.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Elm is the future and I'm glad to see it now has some good company's support.

<comment><USER37> Elm is the future as much as Java is dead in the software development industry.

<comment><USER38> > Elm is the future as much as Java is dead in the software development > industry.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like what you've done here is just take one narrow interpretation of Nekorosu's comment and used that as the basis for a dismissive reply that offered no value.

\--- _Dateline 1995:_

Nekorosu: "Java is the future"

Cuttooth: "Java is the future as much as C is dead in the software development industry" \---

It's a big industry, cut. There's room for everybody.

<comment><USER37> The point was that JavaScript is king and this "Elm is the future" suggests that it'll be a major player. Right now it's a niche toy language. There's room for plenty of those, sure, but it takes years of work and development for a language to become worth its salt. Java had its fair share of issues for a while, and arguably still does.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Awesome...you have me intrigued. I would worship the ground you walk on if you targeted asm.js.

</comment><comment><USER35> Slightly off topic but does anyone know of ans FRP library for python?

</comment><comment><USER40> Inversion of control is a good thing. Why would you want to avoid it?

<comment><USER41> I'm genuinely curious, why do you think inversion of control is an unqualified Good Thing™?

<comment><USER34> Because of certain limitations in Java-style type systems...?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> Congratulations, Evan!

<comment><USER25> Ahhhh, I recognize that user name! Thank you!! :D</comment></comment>


Sharing Professional Content on LinkedIn and Twitter - <AUTHOR> http://blog.linkedin.com/2012/06/29/sharing-on-linkedin-twitter/ <comment><USER2> I don't get it...why can't LinkedIn show tweets via the API/widget like every other Twitter-integrated site?</comment>


The Feds Can Now Probably Unlock Every iPhone Model - <AUTHOR> https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2018/02/26/government-can-access-any-apple-iphone-cellebrite/#50ba3a5d667a <comment><USER2> Bruce Schneier says¹:

> _There 's also a credible rumor that Cellebrite's mechanisms only defeat the > mechanism that limits the number of password attempts. It does not allow > engineers to move the encrypted data off the phone and run an offline > password cracker. If this is true, then strong passwords are still secure._

¹[https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2018/02/cellebrite_un...](https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2018/02/cellebrite_unlo.html)

<comment><USER3> >The story I hear is that Cellebrite hires ex-Apple engineers and moves them to countries where Apple can't prosecute them under the DMCA or its equivalents.

Crazy if true.

Doesn't this also create a weird incentive problem where the FBI (or any other law enforcement agency) who would normally be tasked with helping Apple with this doesn't actually want to?

<comment><USER4> So Israel is like a high tech Guantanamo where our government goes when those pesky laws get in the way.

<comment><USER5> No? The law doesn't prevent the government from searching your property in a wide range of circumstances: e.g. with a warrant, pursuant to a valid arrest, etc. That's the whole idea of warrants: so there is a controlled way to search private property. The government goes to Israel to defeat technological roadblocks to doing what it's allowed to do under the law. This technology isn't being used to break into phones at surprise checkpoints, it's being used to search phones of people who have been arrested.

<comment><USER6> You left out why that's different from Guantanamo, and instead just defended it generally.

<comment><USER5> Presumably guelo thinks Guantanamo permits the US to do things that would be illegal here. But breaking an iPhone pursuant to a warrant wouldn't be. Having a warrant (or a suspect in custody) permits the government, by design, to do lots of things that would otherwise be illegal. The government doesn't need to ship safes to Israel to avoid violating safe cracking laws when searching pursuant to a warrant.

<comment><USER7> >implying the government asks for a warrant for many of their invasive activities

they don't play by their own set of rules.

<comment><USER5> Ah yes, the old "government does X, so i'm going to speculate it also does Y, and it's up to you to prove otherwise" trick. Arguing on the Internet is so much fun when we get to just make things up.

<comment><USER8> Come on now, there are _literally thousands and thousands of thoroughly documented cases of law enforcement and government agencies violating the law_.

The Israel == Guantanamo thing doesn't exactly make sense to me either, but now you're arguing nonsense. Certainly, _we all know_ that the government, including law enforcement, doesn't always follow the law.

That's almost the entire argument for putting any limits on governmental power at all.

(That's not to say we should restrict them from doing this, though; if they can crack a phone, good for them, I suppose. But it's another thing to be concerned about.)

<comment><USER5> There's thousands of law enforcement agencies in the U.S., handling tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of cases each year. If they break the law with respect to a small percentage of those cases, you'll end up with thousands of examples. But with respect to any given thing, statistically, the government is probably _not_ breaking the law.

Here, the "Israel == Guantanamo" thing doesn't make sense if you assume that the government is using the Israeli hacks to break iPhones it has in custody because of a warrant or arrest. You can speculate that the government is stealing peoples' iPhones and breaking into them without a warrant, but it's an actual logical fallacy to point to different things the government is doing to argue that the government is doing this thing too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> How is chain of custody maintained if the process is a secret? Couldn't a person argue that the data obtained was planted?

<comment><USER10> They'll probably drop the case if the defense points this out (seriously, look at Stingrays).

<comment><USER11> Or they just do parallel construction.

They gather the evidence illegally, and the conjure up a legal means to re- find the evidence they already know exists.

<comment><USER12> What here is illegally gathered?

<comment><USER8> Nothing, if they have a warrant (or equivalent legal authorization).

But the reason most of us care about having our data encrypted is _not_ actually because we are committing heinous felonies, and want our phones to hide the evidence from legitimate cops (though of course sometimes that's the case).

It's because we don't _trust_ the authorities to follow the law. If they can crack your phone legally, they can also crack it _illegally_. (Say, after seizing it within 100 miles of the border, which they can do any time they please for whatever reason (including no real reason)).

So even though this ability isn't necessarily illegal in and of itself, it's certainly of interest to those of us who are concerned about the threat vectors that are presented by government forces that do engage in illegal practices.

<comment><USER12> It's my personal belief that this line of thinking, which is common among "geeky" types but not among the general population, is a form of slight delusion or power fantasy.

Is there anything you can provide to convince me it's remotely possible?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'm too lazy to find a link for it, but last time I read about Cellebrite, they were cloning the data and simply trying unlock codes in sequence until one worked. They could restore the cloned data before each try, or possibly do it on custom hardware or an emulator, and start with a fresh copy each time, so they never triggered "erase after 10 failures". It's a pretty straightforward approach, but it doesn't scale well. Works for targeted cracking of high-value targets.

<comment><USER14> This is not true. You cannot just clone the data and run passcodes against it, because the data is not encrypted by your passcode. Instead, each file on iOS 11 is encrypted with a different AES 256-bit key, and cracking even one 256-bit key through exhaustive search is thought to be out of reach of humankind ([https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/6141/amount- of-...](https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/6141/amount-of-simple- operations-that-is-safely-out-of-reach-for-all-humanity/6149#6149)). The file keys are wrapped by, among other things, the device's Unique ID, a 256-bit key generated by the Secure Enclave, and accessible only to the Secure Enclave, not any other hardware or software running on an iOS device.

In the end, the only options are: bruteforcing passcodes on the original device while attempting to trick the device into allowing more than 10 failures, or prying open the Secure Enclave to obtain the Unique ID — both options a lot more complicated than just cloning the data and trying passcodes on it.

<comment><USER15> _or prying open the Secure Enclave to obtain the Unique ID_

People have been cracking secure coprocessors of the type used in payment cards, TPMs, and the like for a long time, dare I say even those which were designed to a higher level of security than Apple's. The fact that there is an entire phone attached to it doesn't make much of a difference, but the technology behind this (FIB, microprobing, etc.) has been steadily dropping in price and increasing in availability for a long time.

<comment><USER16> Fwiw, Apple has a $100k bounty on this type of exploit (pulling secrets from the secure enclave).

<comment><USER17> But Cellebrite apparently makes millions off of its service, so the economic incentives are still on their side.

<comment><USER18> I understand what you're saying here: why share the fact they've broken the SE for $100k when they can keep making millions.

But if they cracked the SE, and kept that fact to themselves, they would be making even more money because every government on the planet would be coming to them. This is provided they kept it to themselves.

It would mean a significant spike in the number of phones being cracked and people being arrested/charged/hung/etc. This would be a statistic that would jump off the charts and trigger Apple to essentially develop a solution straight away.

The only way this would work is if they had cracked the SE and are doing an Enigma: keeping it top secret and only cracking very high profile targets with the technology, which I guess is possible.

<comment><USER19> > This would be a statistic that would jump off the charts and trigger Apple > to essentially develop a solution straight away.

How, though? If the only information Apple has is that their SE scheme is broken, how is that supposed to help them develop a solution?

<comment><USER20> The risky.biz podcast proposed a solution, half seriously and half in jest, offer 50 million for the bug bounty. It would destroy the working relationships and trust of the group of people that is required to come up with multi stage exploits, and apple has the cash to do that once or twice.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> > relatively inexpensive, costing as little as $1,500 per unlock

That's not be good. Since we're bound to have that cost-of-unlock war anyway as new workarounds are found, it should at least be higher. I'd hope for $50k+ so if it's really needed, it goes through several levels of approvals.

</comment><comment><USER22> Why didn't Forbes send them an iPhone X running iOS 11 to hack, to find out if it's true or not?

<comment><USER4> I imagine Cellebrite is very picky about who gets to be there customer. Wouldn't want someone sending a trojan device that reveals their secrets.

<comment><USER22> I would think Forbes Magazine would be a great customer for them.

<comment><USER23> > _I would think Forbes Magazine would be a great customer for them_

Forbes would unlock one phone and then alert Apple by way of their story. Celebrite's ideal customer pays for lots of iPhones to be unlocked.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I wish there was a kind of "dead man switch" app that would wipe a device if it is not unlocked for x days or met some other kind of personalized criteria.

<comment><USER24> An app would need an environment to run in, but the main CPU/etc may not be available if the recovery process involves removing chips or other hardware modifications.

A better idea would be to put an RTC + watchdog timer[1] into the security chip that holds the keys and power it continuously with a small amount of _external_ power. The power must be available _and_ the watchdog timer must have time remaining to disconnect a circuit that pulls the memory holding the keys to ground.

More advanced types of tamper resistance and self-destructing chips are possible, but they tend to have significant downsides.

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

<comment><USER16> Apple is being sued for making phones slightly slower, can you imagine the lawsuit if they were "deliberately lobotomizing" phones? You know that's how it would be said...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> So they get owned earlier this month, and then a fluff piece appears later this month that doesn't mention any of the findings even tho it calls out the dangers of hoarding vulns.

This is a planted marketing/PR piece.

</comment><comment><USER26> This might be a good scenario for Apple. Apple doesn't have to build a backdoor, which is good for PR, and the Feds got what they want to they'll stop bothering Apple. Which is the position Android/Google was in all along.

<comment><USER27> So the tinfoil hat theory here is that Apple itself leaks the cracking tech to Cellobrite to ease the fed pressure, and keep reputation intact? Sorry, I don't buy it.

<comment><USER28> No one at Apple would share source code? You never heard of iBoot.

<comment><USER29> That's not really the strongest interpretation of GP's statement. It wasn't implying that nobody would ever share source code for any reason, but that the _company_ would deliberately decide to share source code in order to obtain fly-by-night compliance with government requests while maintaining its public image.

<comment><USER28> That happens all the time too, and I'm sure Apple is no exception. Want to score that big NSA storage contract? Pony up your HDD firmware... for "security assurances." Suddenly, NSA has exploits for all 7 major HDD manufacturers.

[http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/nsa-hid-spying-software- in...](http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/nsa-hid-spying-software-in-hard- drive-firmware-report-says-1.2959252)

Hmm, how did Apple get cleared for DOD use?

[http://www.zdnet.com/article/iphones-ipads-cleared-for-u- s-m...](http://www.zdnet.com/article/iphones-ipads-cleared-for-u-s-military- use-dod-fortifies-cloud/)

What process would be required for that? Hmmmm.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> [https://xkcd.com/538](https://xkcd.com/538)

All I want is my every day encryption to be a big enough pain in the butt to crack that the feds can't break it without spending a medium amount of money.

===Edit HN: Apologies this was lost in my subtlety, but consider the game theory aspects. Your best bet is to _just enough_ of a pain in the butt it's difficult to reach you, but you certainly don't want to be singled out on a national stage either. Maybe I'm the only one that considers this angle?

<comment><USER31> I'm not even on the Fed's radar. I don't want a mugger to send my stolen iDevice up the food chain to a Russian syndicate and have them able to in my Lastpass, internet banking app, live bitcoin wallet until I've had enough time to change all the credentials.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Claims in one hand, shit in the other. Prove yourself. P

</comment><comment><USER33> Not too surprising based on economics alone.

Presumably a security professional selling a usable exploit to a company like Celibrite pays far better than the $0 that comes from releasing it as a "jailbreak" to the general public.

<comment><USER34> I'd assume things like these are generally difficult to release to the public in any meaningful way, since they often require hardware hacks like desoldering components.

<comment><USER35> What ? No they don't.

All of the jailbreaks have just involved tethering your phone to iTunes or visiting a particular website or app. There's never been a need to do any desoldering.

<comment><USER36> All of the jailbreaks _that were released as easily accessible jailbreaks_. It's definitely plausible that this exploit requires direct access of pinouts on the motherboard.

The difference is just that those exploits which were difficult enough that they required soldering generally weren't released or didn't get much traction.

That being said, I remember soldering a modchip on my original xbox 16 years ago</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Scientists most likely found water in an Exoplanet - <AUTHOR> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/07/140724092820.htm

<comment><USER2> Actual article headline:

"Hubble finds three surprisingly dry exoplanets: 'Hot Jupiters' had only one- tenth to one one-thousandth the amount of water predicted"

Ever thought of a career penning clickbait?</comment>


How a handful of tech companies control billions of minds every day - <AUTHOR> https://www.ted.com/talks/tristan_harris_the_manipulative_tricks_tech_companies_use_to_capture_your_attention <comment><AUTHOR> I'm curious about two things:

(1) What is your reaction to this TED talk by Tristan Harris?

(2) What strategies do you use to try to keep control over where your attention is focused?

<comment><AUTHOR> My answers:

(1) I noticed a long time ago that by listening to radio on long drives I was being bombarded by advertisements. Over the past couple of years I've become more aware of how algorithms also shape the non-advertisement content I am presented. The power of algorithms to funnel attention really hit home for me when I saw my friends' toddlers quickly being classified and funneled toward the same YouTube channels of other children playing with dolls. So my reaction to the talk is that this is an important issue to at least pay attention to.

(2) My first attempt at dealing with advertising bombardment and algorithmic manipulation was to switch to purchasing content as much as possible. A couple years ago I ran an experiment where I switched from free broadcast radio to a paid audio books during car rides. I felt like my listening left me in a better mood and gave me opportunities to explore subjects at greater depth. Later, I introduced Netflix, HBO Now, and a few podcasts. I also switched exclusively to paid video games. I recognize that these services also have algorithms that want to keep me subscribed, but I feel slightly better about that because I perceive the quality of content is given more algorithmic weight. Especially with the switch from radio to audiobooks I've felt more in control of how I'm programming my mind. More recently, I took a break from social media. I'm just starting to about how I want to use it going forward.</comment></comment>


10.3-inch reMarkable Paper Tablet and eReader - <AUTHOR> https://getremarkable.com/ <comment><USER2> Anybody known anything about the people behind this? On the one hand I really want to order one, on the other hand I'm quite worried that it will ship 9 months late and be terrible.

<comment><USER3> Well, the reason I joined as a CTO was to make sure that when I got one myself it wouldn't be terrible. So I swear on my honor that it won't be terrible, if that calms your mind. :-)

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Besides what looks like a well-executed writing and reading experience on e-paper (at last…), the live syncing of sketching looks especially promising (as shown in the video).

<comment><USER3> Thank you. The live syncing cost me a fair amount of sweat to get finished for filming.

We decided early on to not fake anything we show, so no CGI in the product video for example. So I had to implement fully functional apps on all platforms (we now have apps for windows, macos, linux, android and ios), and at the same time fixing wifi drivers and whatnot on the device, to get a couple of seconds of video. So it is nice to see it appreciated.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> $379(preorder)/$529 August 2017? Hope that you can ship before CHINA can duplicate. Neat device, surprised if you dont have an offer from Amazon or Apple yet.

<comment><USER3> We are already well into the process with our ODM, so a Chinese company can't really get it to market faster either.

And because a lot of the solution we have to the latency issue is in software, they can't really duplicate it until we release the device with the software so they can get their hands on it and reverse engineer it. :-)

(And yes, I have already seen attempts at getting access to places where we could have put our source code, luckily nothing I'm not prepared for.)</comment></comment>


Go Paperless - <AUTHOR> http://prolifictimes.com/2013/02/26/digitize-your-mail/ one of the Newest startups to hit SF ! <comment><USER2> I don't understand.

I don't understand how giving a company access to all of your mail, permission to open and scan it, and to create their own database with it as they see fit, is somehow an optimization against a walk to the mailbox and then tossing the extra envelopes into the bin.

As if they're not going to send their own advertising to you anyway (they will eventually, now that they can sort through your mail to know just how to target you), or just sell your data (which of course they can because they now have complete access to it, to say nothing of the ability to decide what you get to see and what you don't.)

There are locks on mailboxes and laws against reading other people's mail for a good reason.

</comment><comment><USER3> Making key copies from a picture ... that sounds like a business.

<comment><USER2> for certain values of "business" sure...</comment></comment>


New iPad is in production - <AUTHOR> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704364004576132643125168876.html

<comment><USER2> Absolutely no content, sources, or anything new whatsoever. Not news.

<comment><USER3> "Absolutely no content, sources, or anything new whatsoever. Not news."

Normally you'd be right, but the WSJ regularly gets the pass from people on the need for actual sources due to their reputation. This is news.

<comment><USER4> Also note the by-line. All of the major WSJ reported Apple links that have ended up correct, have involved this reporter: Yukari Iwatani Kane.

[http://www.9to5mac.com/12745/Why-does-the-WSJs-Yukari- Iwatan...](http://www.9to5mac.com/12745/Why-does-the-WSJs-Yukari-Iwatani-Kane- get-the-planned-Apple-leaks)</comment></comment></comment>


I got a bunch of traffic last month from YCombinator. How do I find the article? - <AUTHOR> Yes, I have tried searching for my url and company name (chopshopstore). Nothing comes up. Was hoping someone might be familiar with the tread. I would love to see what generated the interest. <comment><USER2> I think this was it:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12365178&goto=news](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12365178&goto=news)</comment>


Laravel resigns from PHP-FIG - <AUTHOR> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/php-fig/HWX2IeiRx9Y <comment><USER2> Larval isn't the only group leaving; Guzzle, Propane, SabreDAV and Doctrine have left too.

Reading the mailing list and some other threads on /r/php there seems to be an opinion that the FIG did excellent work creating the autoloader, code style, logging and HTTP Message standards however other recommendations such as caching massively expanded in scope with little community input.

Also the signal to noise ratio on the mailing list was very high resulting in a laborious and off-putting read trying to catch up.

</comment><comment><USER3> The problem is that their newer standards are "too standardised" leaving very little room for the frameworks to differentiate themselves. Add to that the drama that comes with any PHP related development and you can understand the outcome.

</comment><comment><USER4> Struck me as a group struggling to continue to justify its existence. Excellent work on code style and auto loading and other areas though and I hope the community continues to look toward those resources.</comment>