After Water - <AUTHOR> http://blog.longreads.com/2015/06/02/after-water/?share=1 <comment><USER2> That site was beautiful, most of the time. The looping GIFs made it hard to read, cause you'd have to wait for them to restart to continue. The header that fades in/out when you scroll only made scrolling more frustrating. (If I'm scrolling up, I'm trying to read something, which you promptly cover up with your fading in header.)

</comment><comment><USER3> "But that 2 percent, while small, is vital"

Sorry, no it's not.

"California's agriculture business might be, at this point, too big to fail."

How can people say crap like that with a straight face?

PS: If you actually look at a chart of rainfall over the last 100 years this is really fairly close to normal rainfall levels over the last 10 years. But, most charts only go back to an unusual peak and make it seem like that's normal. Nope, this is fairly normal, this it's really just a case of getting used to unsustainable well usage. Which indirectly subsidized a lot of water use when well water runoff ended up in streams.

<comment><USER4> It is not all crops but far too many stories focus on crops, California actually expends most of its water on livestock if you count the water used for crops to feed the livestock.

Regardless who is using the water is a man made disaster not one created by nature or climate change. Turning a desert into a breadbasket requires a large amount of water and eventually your going to exhaust your supplies when there no one was ever really charged proper rates for the water they used. They kept the prices artificially too low for too long that people became dependent on the prices and now feel entitled. In a way they are, the government through mismanagement created it.

Still would it not be a good idea to treat areas of severe drought like those of severe flooding? You will be paid for the lands and no one comes back?

<comment><USER5> If the numbers in this article are correct, more water goes to environmental purposes (ie. Protecting the Delta Smelt) than for Agricukture. [http://www.nationalreview.com/article/416918/no-farmers- dont...](http://www.nationalreview.com/article/416918/no-farmers-dont- use-80-percent-californias-water-devin-nunes) I don't know if the numbers are correct, but this use of water was not included in the water you chart in he article.

<comment><USER6> If you're interested, this post by Scott Alexander does a fairly thorough analysis of where the water is going:

[http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/05/11/california-water-you- do...](http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/05/11/california-water-you-doing/)

TL;DR: No, more water does not go for environmental purposes than agriculture. California uses about as much water for growing just Alfala (used as food for cows, among other things) as it does for the whole Delta.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> (numbers not precise at all)

I see that graph of rainfall, jumping between ~350mm in droughts and ~700mm in wet years; From what I hear, the farming industry has allocated perhaps 3000mm of water rights, is presently consuming maybe 600mm (depleting aquifers) down from their usual 700-800mm, and is complaining about reservoirs running dry and water deliveries not showing up. Water rights that the owner does not attempt to use in a given year are lost forever: It's not "Finder-Keeper", it's even worse than that, overconsumption is being guaranteed by this system.

If California wants to be sustainable - and not that word has a specific meaning, 'to be able to continue indefinitely', rather than a vague greenness - it needs to reduce the number it actually uses to perhaps 200mm-300mm. Because reservoirs have run low, aquifers have been mined dry, saltwater intrusion and subsidence has been happening, and the geomorphology has been all out of whack. The invisible damage they're doing to the natural resources they rely on using just 100% of rainfall is enormous; They've killed most of the native ecosystem, most of the native rivers entirely, and turned the hills to fire tinder; The un-farmed areas rapidly went from grassland and swamp to desert. At 175% of rainfall things begin to happen like destroying the topography ("Congratulations, your farm is now on a hill. Water doesn't flow uphill.") which have overt, direct externalities, things visited on one's neighbor rather than on one's great-grandchildren. That's insane. One wouldn't expect even a rugged individualist frontiersman to tolerate their neighbor jacking up their property a few millimeters a day in the dead of night in order to rob them of canal usage; Shotguns would be employed in remedy. Aquifers have an interesting property in that they're not necessarily trivially refillable - pore spaces compress and become less permeable. If you let the Everglades loose again, eliminating humans from Florida, it would look drastically different than it looked in pre-Columbian times because the land has sunk and water would now flow over it rather than through it.

So: What will cut back agricultural water usage ( _usage_ , not deliveries from canals) by around 2/3 in a durable way, which minimizes the hit to GDP? That's what California should be asking itself. Anything which accomplishes this goal is acceptable from a sustainability & environmental standpoint, be it bureaucratic micromanagement, pricing, blanket moratoriums, state seizure, _whatever_.

<comment><USER8> Why does a large-scale desalination, like in Israel, is not on the table?

A quote from [1]: "Once unthinkable, given Israel's history of drought and lack of available fresh water resource, with desalination, Israel can now actually produce a surplus of fresh water".

Israel is a perfect example, since it's another large food producer located in a desert, just like California.

1\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desalination#Israel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desalination#Israel)

<comment><USER7> Because it's expensive. Really expensive. Replacing California's agricultural water supply with desal plants would cost something on the order of $2,000 per acre-foot at _current-day_ energy prices. That's something like 80 billion dollars per year before you consider distribution, and it doesn't filter through the local economy, it's shipped straight to foreign natural gas and coal exporters. California's agricultural output sells for around 40 billion dollars a year given water that's free & unmetered from the ground, and a feudal fiefdom ownership share from the rivers/canals. That pays for the land, the labor, the processing, the fertilizer, the seeds, everything.

At some point it's cheaper to just grow things in places other than California.

<comment><USER8> >Replacing California's agricultural water supply with desal plants would cost something on the order of $2,000 per acre-foot at current-day energy prices.

It's actually 3 times cheaper. Price of desalinated water from Soreq plant (the newest / largest one in Israel) is about NIS 2.20 = USD 0.57 for a cubic meter. One acre-foot is 1233 cubic meters. $0.57 * 1233 = $702. See [1]

As for capital investments, I would like to see how did you come up with the numbers. 20% of Israel needs for water are covered by a single plant that costed $500 mln, according to [2].

Update. According to [3], California uses 49 billions of cubic meters of water every year. Soreq plant produces 150 mln m3/year and costs $500 mln to build. So, naively, to desalinate 100% of California water needs, the required investments are $164 bln.

To cover just the deficit, about 20% of that is required, which is about $33 bln.

1\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_Israel#Seawater_desalination_.282000s.29)

2\. [http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/534996/megasca...](http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/534996/megascale- desalination/)

3\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_in_California](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_in_California)

<comment><USER7> * Construction costs are modest relative to energy costs.

* [https://www.c-win.org/news/desalination-dramatically-increas...](https://www.c-win.org/news/desalination-dramatically-increase-cost-water.html) and other sources say $2000-$3000 per acre-foot. How heavily is Soreq subsidized?

* 49 billion cubic meters is 40M acre-feet

<comment><USER8> I think $2000-$3000 price is the price Carlsbad pays for its desalinated water ([1]):

" January 17, 2008, article in the Wall Street Journal stated, "In November, Connecticut-based Poseidon Resources Corp. won a key regulatory approval to build the $300 million water-desalination plant in Carlsbad, north of San Diego. The facility would produce 50,000,000 US gallons (190,000,000 l; 42,000,000 imp gal) of drinking water per day, enough to supply about 100,000 homes ... Improved technology has cut the cost of desalination in half in the past decade, making it more competitive ... Poseidon plans to sell the water for about $950 per acre-foot [1,200 cubic meters (42,000 cu ft)]. That compares with an average [of] $700 an acre-foot [1200 m³] that local agencies now pay for water."In June 2012, new estimates were released that showed the cost for the desalinated water had risen to $2,329 per acre-foot. Each $1,000 per acre-foot works out to $3.06 for 1,000 gallons, or $.81 per cubic meter."

This particularly bad implementation does not mean it could not be made better. In the same source [1],

"In 2014, the Israeli cities of Hadera, Palmahim, Ashkelon, and Sorek were desalinizing water for less than US$0.40 per cubic meter.[28] As of 2006, Singapore was desalinating water for US$0.49 per cubic meter."

As for subsidizing the water plants, the question is unclear, but I've got an impression that it's not the case, the Soreq technology seems to be really more efficient.

1\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Desalination#Economics](https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Desalination#Economics)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Lovely illustrations.

<comment><USER10> I find them quite cumbersome, having to watch a gif for some time just to get a few statistics that could be had at a single glance if it weren't for that gimmick.

Animations don't allow you to read at your own pace.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm having trouble finding any sympathy.

<comment><USER12> It's pretty reasonable for people to expect that water will be available in cities. This is a small community, and even if they were able to identify unsustainable water usage, they don't have the political power to stop the agriculture machine from sucking the water dry, especially since water right laws were written before California was a state and trying to change them could be viewed as unconstitutional.

They should absolutely move and find an easier place to live, and take charge of their own lives. But it definitely sucks.

<comment><USER13> "They should absolutely move and find an easier place to live, and take charge of their own lives."

What are your views on large-scale immigration?

<comment><USER12> I'm for it, or maybe neutral towards it. People should be able to move if they want to. It definitely presents challenges, but they're manageable challenges.

Sorry for NoMoreNicksLeft's rudeness.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


1-on-1 meeting questions - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/VGraupera/1on1-questions <comment><USER3> My 1on1's at a 100k+ international corporation always went like this: Manager: so how's it going? Me: great Manager: any issues? anything you want to discuss? Me: everything is fantastic! I'm very happy with my job :D Manager: cool cool... well let's do this again next month. Me: yay!

I don't want someone in a similar situation like I was to get inspired by lists like these and go into their next 1on1 wrecking havoc with the status quo. When you, your manager, his manager and the next guy up are just cogs in a machine churning for years through the same kinds of faceless conglomerates - you either shut up and put up or end up on someone's Excel spreadsheet highlighted in yellow. Then during the next round of layoffs (you know they're coming) the yellow cogs will be replaced with fresh green ones and you'll be out on the street cramming algorithm questions all over again and interviewing with A.I. HR filters for the next 6months. Understand where you work before opening your mouth, people ;)

<comment><USER4> What a strange, helpless way to look at the world.

Employment is not a boss->servant relationship, it's a relationship where both parties gain something. You offer a service, and they pay for that. End of story. They act out? Then you find someone else who needs your services.

As a programmer myself, I'm in this great position where there is a shortage of good developers, and plenty of companies searching for good developers.

When I go to my manager, I'm not going in there with "please don't fire me sir, please.", I'm going in there with "Hey, fix your shit or I'll have a new job next week that pays more from day 1, and you will search the next 6 months for my replacement and train that person another 6 months before (s)he's somewhat productive."

<comment><USER5> First of all, if your manager is any good, (s)he will already have replacements in the pipeline, given the musical chairs nature of the industry.

Second, why aren't you already at a different job that pays you more instead of hanging that over your manager's head?

Third, don't underestimate how many other good developers that are out there, looking for the next job. It might not require 6 months of training for the next person, who could be as competent, or even more than the person that's being replaced.

I'm not sure what kind of company you work for, but 6 months of training is ridiculously long, unless there is a lot of institutional knowledge that's siloed amongst a small subset of employees - which should never happen in the first place, if your manager was any good.

<comment><USER4> > replacements in the pipeline

Depends on the company. Some still want to grow at a faster pace than they can hire.

> instead of hanging that over your manager's head

You are correct that this in not actually something you say to your manager. This is the thought that should be in your head. The real conversation needs to be constructive.

> 6 months of training is ridiculously long

I didn't mean training, I meant "to become as productive as you". My point is that the employee has the advantage on new hires: you instantly get full pay, but still need to ramp up your productivity.

<comment><USER5> > This is the thought that should be in your head. The real conversation needs > to be constructive.

Agreed on that. If your manager isn't doing his/her job, or just wants quick outs of 1:1s, that conversation needs to be had instead of the status quo

On training, I have seen companies where it just takes a few months for a new hire to get anything done. Silo-ed institutional knowledge, spaghetti codebases, too much emphasis on processes and meetings, no proper new-hire onboarding, etc. Those are usually red flags. But yes, I wouldn't expect a new hire to be completely as productive as a seasoned employee even after a few months, but should be enough to get going.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Questions aside, I honestly thought the steps to submit a new question was satire...

      Contributing
      1. Fork it
      2. Run npm install
      3. Add your resource to questions.json
      4. Run node index to update README.md with your changes
      5. Create your feature branch (git checkout -b my-new-feature)
      6. Commit your changes (git commit -am "Add some feature")
      7. Push to the branch (git push origin my-new-feature)
      8. Create new Pull Request

[https://github.com/VGraupera/1on1-questions#contributing](https://github.com/VGraupera/1on1-questions#contributing)

<comment><USER7> If they ever make a website for the collected data, consuming JSON is less brittle than parsing a README file.

<comment><USER8> It's Markdown, not just "a README file". It's designed to be easy to edit by hand _and_ easy to parse; there's literally nothing at all gained by using the JSON file that they have. At all.

<comment><USER7> You'd be more likely to have a bug parsing the markdown file than the structured JSON. There aren't many tools out there for converting markdown files into JSON and piecing what you want out of it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> As a grunt IC 1 on 1s are a nightmare for me. I never know what to talk about. All current project stuff is hashed out in or after scrum. Career development is more of a once per year thing (at least not weekly). If I had a problem with any of my team members I would have brought it up by now (assuming I thought others felt that way, I don't want to be the only one to bring it up or I'll be seen as the problem). For your feedback, I'm just going to tell you whatever I think you want to hear. Am I happy? Not really, but more because I'm stuck with a 9-5 for the next decade and obviously I'd never tell a manager that... what's left? Personal life nonsense? I'm your co-worker, not your friend. The less I know about other people's personal lives the better.

> I'm trying to make my 1-on-1s better and would appreciate your honest > feedback on this one — what did you like about it, and what could be > improved?

Make them optional or email me your canned questions so I don't have to squirm trying to think of an answer on the spot that will keep the status quo and get me out of the meeting without any "action items" for the next one.

<comment><USER10> > Personal life nonsense? I'm your co-worker, not your friend.

Changing this attitude contributed as much to my doubling and then almost tripling my salary over the course of a few years as much as anything technical did.

Your managers and coworkers are human beings and engaging with them like human beings will open doors for you.

I pretty much only talk about personal stuff in one on ones, and will use maybe one out of five as a venting session or to talk about ideas I have.

You want to be someone that people, particularly managers enjoy seeing come in to work every day, and that's not always or even mostly about being productive. Sometimes they just want someone they can talk about sports or video games with, or someone they can talk about their home life with over drinks — and sometimes I do, too. Spending 40 hours a week with people you don't like is lonely.

It's not just about kissing ass— I've started more than one project because of conversations I had over drinks where people were just venting about their jobs and I realized I could do something to make their jobs easier.

<comment><USER9> Oh yea, I'm well aware, and I play the game as best I can. I go to the occasional happy hour, I shoot the shit with my managers and co-workers, I talk about their kids or hobbies or whatever they want to talk about. I just don't want to do any of these things. It's draining to pretend you care all the time. But if I don't it affects raises / bonuses (only job related things I care about) and also project placement (which indirectly affect my raises / bonuses).

I also realize my lack of genuine interest probably bleeds into my work personality, but there's not much I can do about that. It's not like something is going to magically make me actually care about work, so faking it is the best option I have.

<comment><USER11> Yes, faking it is not the ideal, because as you said, it's very draining. The idea is that you aren't faking it, you're genuinely finding something fulfilling about work, or at least the people there.

To be honest it sounds like you're experiencing a poor culture fit. I felt similarly to you until I went to a smaller team for the first time in my career. My team-to-be was in one of the interview phases with me, so we could all gauge fit ahead of time. It's been an entirely different feel, and I'm now genuinely enjoying work -- not because of what I'm working on, but because it's a good team to be a part of.

No, I'm not hanging out with my coworkers after work -- everyone has long commutes so we all scatter at 5 -- but I genuinely enjoy working with them. It doesn't feel like a game anymore, like I'm purposefully playing politics. Whether it's good for my career or not, I really don't care -- what I care about is the fact it's done wonders for my general quality of life.

Not everyone can find a place with a perfect fit, but you sound kind of miserable to be honest, and I just have a guess that you'd maybe have better happiness elsewhere. You say that raises/bonuses are the only job-related things you care about -- my hunch is this might change for you if you found a place where you genuinely liked the people.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Many of these will come off as frustrating and manipulative.

When I, a manager, ask "what is the biggest obstacle facing you and how can i remove it," I'm offloading the manager-level work of identifying blockers for my team on the individual.

And hey, that might work, your teammate might have an insight you're missing. But then, if they do have that insight, you've volunteered to do a shitload of work for your team.

Thats is, in theory, good- but ive never had a manager that was willing to actually do the work when they asked the questions on this list. They'd squirm out of their offer, and try to rephrase it as something i could do. Leaves a bad taste in your mouth.

<comment><USER13> >>When I, a manager, ask "what is the biggest obstacle facing you and how can i remove it," I'm offloading the manager-level work of identifying blockers for my team on the individual.

That gets a bit circular. In my mind, "asking my team members" is THE number one method of "identifying blockers for my team". Think about it - if a manager _didn 't_ ask for input from their team members, and instead assumed they can identify blockers, on their own and in vacuum, how would we portray such a manager? :-)

>> ive never had a manager that was willing to actually do the work when they asked the questions on this list

That is indeed the crucial second part; works for anything though - <USER2> it's "lessons learned" at the end of the project, or "requirements gathering" from the client/user-base, or "soliciting feedback" from team members - obtaining information is critical #1 step; only useful if you then action it.

Just because both effective and ineffective, willing and unwilling managers ask questions, doesn't make _questions_ themselves bad. It does depend on the actual manager and the relationship they have with a team member.

So I'd say such questions are "necessary but not sufficient" criteria for managerial success, and having a list is similarly "useful but not sufficient" :)

<comment><USER14> > _Think about it - if a manager didn 't ask for input from their team > members, and instead assumed they can identify blockers, on their own and in > vacuum, how would we portray such a manager?_

A smart manager can also observe things, but on top of that, in a healthy atmosphere some employees will provide that feedback on their own. If subordinates trust that voicing their concerns will have positive, or at the very least non-negative impact on how they're seen, they'll tell you all about the blockers and the uncertainties.

<comment><USER13> >>in a healthy atmosphere some employees will provide that feedback on their own.

Absolutely; but again, such atmosphere does not come out of nowhere. It may get boot-strapped by the initial cycle of:

1\. One-on-one meetings where team members are encouraged to bring up thoughts, concerns, ideas, etc.

2\. Manager who reacts positively to such feedback; actions it (within the constraints of organization & reality); and communicates outcomes honestly

3\. Faith & mutual trust are established and team members feel more comfortable bringing up feedback on their own.

At least in my experience, not everybody is willing to provide feedback of their own initiative to a new manager. You have to earn it...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Am I the only one who scrolled down the whole list looking for the questions and issues you can bring up as a coworker? On the 1-on-1's I have with my manager I determine most of the agenda because I know where the gears need lubrication. How would she know if I don't tell her?

I'm a professional and I don't need a boss who tells me what to do or how to do it: that part I'll find out by myself. But my manager needs to know what I'm doing and what issues I could use help with (like problems that need attention of upper management) and occasionally I'll ask for backing for a decision that might have consequences for our or other teams.

So this feels like a useful but very lopsided list.

<comment><AUTHOR> How do you make sure you do your best work without proper feedback?

<comment><USER15> Not sure I understand your question. I will tell my manager what I'm doing. If she likes me to do different things (or the same things differently) the 1-on-1's are the best moment to talk about that. That's how I get feedback.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> The best 1-on-1 meetings feel like a natural conversation between two professional adults. This list of questions can provide some ideas for starting points if you pick and choose carefully, but not all of the questions are a good idea.

Specifically: While it's important to listen to your employee's complaints about the company, it's equally important to avoid giving them the wrong impression that you're going to fix everything for them. Questions like "If you were CEO, what's the first thing you would change?" or "Are there any aspects of our culture you wish you could change?" or "What's the No. 1 problem with our organization, and what do you think's causing it?" can make employees resentful of the company when the manager can't actually make changes.

Many of these questions can also create a false expectation that it's the manager's job to solve all of the employees' problems for them. It's important to listen to your team and work to improve their situations, but it's equally important that you work on empowering them to solve their own problems where possible. A common mistake for first time managers is to try to absorb every small issue their team encounters, which creates an unsustainable atmosphere of dependency on the manager.

Another common mistake of first-time managers is forgetting that managers must also represent the company to the employee. As a first time manager, it's tempting to think you're going to be the super manager you never had, using your powers to fight back against the company and make everything right for your employees. In reality, you need to balance the employee's wishes against the company's direction. You can't force the tail to wag the dog. Make sure you communicate what is and isn't within your power to change. Avoid commiserating with employees with employees about minutia, and instead set a tone of professionalism and reasonable boundary-setting.

Most importantly: Don't forget to reiterate the organization's goals, project updates, and other company information to employees. It's easy for managers to forget that their employees might not see or hear important developments unless their manager communicates it down the chain. As a manager, it's your job to keep your employees informed and up to date. Simple updates in the form of "Your work on X project is very important for the delivery of Y product, which the CEO identified as our top priority for retaining customers" are much more effective than "When do you think X project will be finished? We really need it." Context and relevance are critical for helping your team make the right decisions.

<comment><USER14> Agreed, with perhaps a small wish of my own:

> _Simple updates in the form of "Your work on X project is very important for > the delivery of Y product, which the CEO identified as our top priority for > retaining customers"_

If, as a manager, you don't want me, your employee, to just smile politely and roll my eyes, make sure I can trust that when you say "top priority", then it's _actually_ a top priority. Personally, I work better when I can identify and align myself with the goals of the organization (I'm a sucker for the "something greater"). But I hate the bullshit. "Your work on X is critical" is demotivating if I can tell that all work is described as "critical", and every project in the company is "top priority".

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I don't understand the negative attitudes here. Yes, a 1-on-1 should be a normal conversation, but this is a great starting point to those who don't have the experience yet!

<comment><AUTHOR> What kind of questions and data do you prepare for your 1-on-1s?

<comment><USER18> My 1:1s have the following format:

\- Current tasks

\- Career development/Goals (we have 6 week and yearly goals that the employees select for themselves with a little guidance from me)

\- Special topic, different each time and very much aligned with the posted list. My question for next time is about values.

\- Feedback, both delivering and soliciting (this has proven to be the hardest for me, as it takes time to think about and articulate feedback well)

I do the 1:1 at a nearby coffee shop since I think people feel more open outside the office.

<comment><USER19> It's also important to talk about relationships with others on the team and other teams.

<comment><USER18> I like that! I'll think about how I could incorporate it. Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Contrived wooden questions like these would be a solid reason to not work for a manager.

If someone isn't able to empathise with other humans well enough to discover how they're doing without trying to artificially manipulate a conversation with a checklist, they certainly shouldn't be managing anybody.

Just talk. Do it often and do it honestly. That's all.

<comment><USER21> > _Just talk. Do it often and do it honestly. That 's all._

One good thing to always keep in mind:

What comes easy and effortlessly to you can be a real struggle for others.

Some people need help with things that you find utterly trivial, just like you probably struggle with things others excel effortlessly at.

<comment><USER22> People have different strengths and weaknesses, and should try to find jobs that fit theirs. It seems doubtful that someone for whom the conversation starter suggestion "How's it going?" is useful has the strengths needed to make management a good choice.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I think 1on1s are the managers Swiss army knife and the best way to support employees in their development.

If possible I do them as walk'n'talks, people are more open and ideas often flow better when walking outside the office.

<comment><USER24> Walks n talks are great but they aren't 1:1's in the way the author is envisioning them. The difference is a walk n talk is something you do when you have unscheduled free time and want to sidestep email for a direct conversation. A 1:1 is More like a weekly postmortem.. you celebrate wins, you figure out how to not repeat mistakes. But from a manager's perspective, a 1:1 is all about ego management. For example, if I am a ceo, there's some things I can do in a staff call to resolve conflict and bottlenecks but not much - otherwise I squander the energy of the staff meeting. Instead, I can have 1:1's starting first with revenue... what are the roadblocks. Outside a 1:1 setting I can't get the sales manager to get honest with me and own up roadblocks that his/her own doing vs the ones from other departments. From there it's a cascade of meeting with successive department leads until I'm down to the one guy who owns fixing them all - product. If you're the manager of a team further down in the org, you don't have this end to end ownership for the entire business but the theories are the same... organize your week so you're building a pipeline of issues and then meet with the people most able to resolve them. Doing it in a regular 1:1 session helps isolate egos and creates consistency.. if you're trying to solve roadblocks that appear/resolve inside that weekly cadence, you're doing too much of your own employees work for them. Ideally you're focused on the next major milestone and the one after that.

<comment><USER25> Gp's "walk and talk" just mea s having a meeting while walking outsit instead of sitting down. it's good for casualness and rapport but terrible for organizing thoughts and remembering what to follow-up on.

<comment><USER23> Yes. I'd often have at least once per month the weekly 1on1 in the office. Also depends on people, some are ok with broad development, some feel better with action items and todos to follow up on.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> My 1:1s with last boss I had went like: "how are things..." "good" "1:1 complete".

And that was on Slack.

The guy just hated them, so that was my idea and made him happy.

And I don't disagree with that. Sticking rigidly to one true cadence of one true meeting is a religious ritual we can do without.

If a 1:1 adds anything to your team, it indicates defects. Everyone should be raising issues as they come up and have a close enough working relationship with their boss that a cyclical meeting adds nothing.

And most of those questions are weak: bosses annoy and lose respect of their subordinates when they go all "facilitator" and "servant leader". A leader guides, they don't ask subordinates to tell them how to do their jobs. There are plenty of traditional ways to glean improvement information than appearing weak by asking "how can I be a better boss".

</comment><comment><USER27> It's disappointing that 100% of the questions are from the perspective of the manager.

<comment><USER28> Agreed! Was looking forward to some questions from the employee perspective. I find constructive criticism and feedback to be very helpful in staying on track.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> A great one-on-one begins with good questions. This post gives some great hints.

[https://marcgg.com/blog/2019/11/30/one-on-one- openers/](https://marcgg.com/blog/2019/11/30/one-on-one-openers/)

</comment><comment><USER30> Can someone point to me the goal of using NodeJs to produce a list like this? Why not just modifying the .md file directly?

<comment><USER31> Looks like the questions are actually collected in machine readable form in a JSON file, and only rendered to Markdown

<comment><USER32> Now if there were just a markup language for adding smeantic meaning to hypertext ...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Looking at the responses here … it's not about

"1:1s are basics, if you don't do them you are a failed manager."

Nor do I believe the truth is best described as:

"a 1:1 is a creepy corporate checkbox to be checked and best avoided".

Isn't the answer always …

it depends?

On the person, on the company and team? On you, as a manager?

I have had colleagues who probably would have sent me a resignation letter within days after doing a 1:1 with canned questions like that.

I've also had colleagues who thought that a regular 1:1, going through the motions, was a sign that I cared and did something formal for them. (Despite normal chats and checkins.)

Even if you have a 1:1, it doesn't mean that you need to go through an ever same set of stale questions. But structure can help you both to make sure the basics of the work relationship are covered.

With that in mind, I see sets of questions such as this as a toolbox. Sometimes it's a good thing you can just look at the toolbox, try a few tools out, see how they fit and choose the right one for the job at hand (situation, person). I think it's great those exist.

If you're doing a 1:1 to check a box, then it doesn't matter. If you care and want to use a 1:1 as a tool, then it doesn't hurt to try out different approaches.

</comment><comment><USER34> > _How are your parents /grandparents?_

"Grandparents are dead. Parents are divorced. Father is a roaring alcoholic, mother is on a death bed with cancer. Also they are both A-grade assholes that made my childhood miserable."

Really sets the mood for the rest of the interview, doesn't it? In other words, stay the hell away from any personal questions.

<comment><USER35> Thank you for your honesty. It sounds like you aren't close with them. There is nothing wrong with that.

Do you have anyone you are close with to talk about things? Is there anything going on in your personal life you need to deal with which may be impacting your work?

IE: I care about more than just the work you do, I care about you. I'd like you to be happy and know more about your life to ensure when you turn into an ass I can justify the behavior and dismiss it. "His dad died recently. His dog died this week. People have been taking at him due to projects being behind and he was on vacation the week all hell broke lose retiring his involvement" Shit happens, if you're looking for happy things from your employees don't ask them these questions.

If your quote is truly what's happening in your life, I'm sorry. That sounds miserable, in posting here: I can't tell why you shared that. If I was your manager, is this a recent development and you need time to process? If not what prompted you to be so honest with me? Is there anything else you'd like to share?

<comment><USER36> Not the OP, but his or her situation is very similar to my own. There's a really good chance I would give my director a snarky "full truth" answer about my disaster as a family if asked. If she then took the opportunity to pry further, I would be greatly annoyed to say the least. I'm an adult and can compartmentalize an atypical family, thanks. It's not miserable, it's just nothing.

<comment><USER35> Thank you. I agree: prying further would be very rude. Knowing that detail can help determine the implication/feelings on other responses, such as if you later shared "my parents stopped by last night". I can avoid asking "did you have fun?" and instead ask "how did it go?" Or "anything you need today?". The answer may be "no", however you may add something (ie: I just need a breather) which helps let me know to avoid placing additional burdens on you today if they are not urgent.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Have people really save the thing like "I stuck because of this of that..." for 1-1 questions. Arn't you suppose to raise awareness among your team before that point, ask for help from co-worker etc...

I just cannot understand how a technical block is saved for 1-1 meeting.

I would love 1-1 meeting is more about:

\- personal life: where thing that block you are person/family duty and manager can help with your schedule such as flexibility of wfh.

\- vision/long term goal: some wish list you want to implement or improvement. But even so, I already created google doc for these and 1-1 are just to discuss more about them.

So when 1-1 happen too frequently, I'm out of question and feel stress and don't know what to ask/talk. Any advice for people like me?

Some of question on this list is just bad because they cannot be asked more than one. Example: "How do you prefer to receive feedback?"

</comment><comment><USER38> I would say that a manager who brings up personal questions in 1:1s is leveraging their power to cross boundaries. In my mind it's akin to harassment.

<comment><USER39> So much this. I don't have kids. We are struggling with fertility issues. In my 1:1 my ex-manager would bring up that topic EVERY SINGLE WEEK. He also tried to develop a family relationship, where his wife would 'advise' my wife about what type of treatment we should seek. At one baby shower for a common friend, his wife asked me if we are sad seeing other people having babies. Being on H1 visa, I could only push back so much. From his perspective, he was providing 'emotional support'.

I sucked up. And quit the job when the right opportunity came.

Since then, I made sure to not bring any personal stuff in conversation with any colleague, including my manager for whatever reason.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Can someone recommend tools, hacks or techniques they use to run a perfect one-on-one meeting (tools like [https://PullPanda.com](https://PullPanda.com), [https://Gitalytics.com](https://Gitalytics.com) or [https://valycs.com](https://valycs.com))?

<comment><USER40> You can try peoplebox([https://www.peoplebox.ai/](https://www.peoplebox.ai/)) to run meaningful 1-on-1s. It integrates with your calendars so before every 1-on-1, it sends some pre one-on-one questions to your reports and suggestive talking points. You can collaborate on agendas, action items and track them all in one place.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> I'd much rather see a list of things to bring up as the subordinate that will actually effectively improve one's lot.

</comment><comment><USER42> We have mandatory 1:1 and yes, questions are similar. I found them useless and not productive at all. Most hypocritical ones are about carrier development. Let's say 1:10 ration of the managers and deportees, not matter how you 'develop' there is simply no place for promotion. Technical track is rather rare outside of FAANG.

</comment><comment><USER43> My favorite conversation starter for work related or at social events is:

"So, what's keeping you busy these day's?"

People always have things keeping them busy, work project, home project, personal project.

This question is much more inviting to conversation than "how is it going" or "what's new"

I have never asked this question and received "nothing" in response

</comment><comment><USER44> Managers and team leads in my company have to make 1-on-1 meeting with their team mates every month on an published calendar schedule. We have made everything possible to help them: learning materials, master-classes, QA sessions, etc. At the beginning, they were anxious that these meetings look like getting into one's personal zone and they didn't known what to talk about and how to get rid of embarrassment.

Now they say that they are amazed how much information people are willing to share to find support and solve common problems in work, which managers have no ideas about. I'm one of those who thinks that 1-on-1 meeting is a great tool to make workplace better. Surely, everyone has to understand its goal.

</comment><comment><USER45> Speaking of career progression and management... has anyone here been able to transition from an IC to management/leadership at a remote company?

Remote work feels like the ideal job when your happy with your position long- term. I don't know how to do it working remote.

</comment><comment><USER46> Do you feel you're getting enough feedback? Why/why not? Feedback.

Do you have any feedback for me? Feedback.

Do you think that you receive enough feedback? Feeback.

Is feedback helpful for your personal development? Feedback.

What can I do to help you get the feedback you want? Feedback.

All replicants will be detected.

</comment><comment><USER47> Title's a bit unclear, these are _manager_ questions for 1-on-1 meetings. Would be interesting to see a similar list for questions you should keep in mind as the direct report in a 1-on-1.

<comment><USER48> Looks like there are career development questions in the section below the manager questions. [https://github.com/VGraupera/1on1-questions#career- developme...](https://github.com/VGraupera/1on1-questions#career-development)

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I've just made this - [https://1on1hacker.com/](https://1on1hacker.com/). It shows questions from the list in random order.

</comment><comment><USER49> >> Are you on track to meet the deadline?

So wrong if not put the right way... I'd prefer : I see you're struggling, maybe we could make your life easier by removing some work, accepting the quality to be a little less good, maybe we could just accept that some things will be late...

I usually get :you're late, tell me why. Then I explain. Then my manger says : "I don't understand"... Then I fail to explain the obvious : I'm f __*in overloaded.

</comment><comment><USER50> When did 1:1's become manager interrogation sessions? What happened to just connecting and providing space to talk about whatever is on the emp's mind?

<comment><USER51> A lot of employees either A) don't know what to talk about or B) aren't sure what their current manager considers safe topics.

Questions like the above (though not all of them) can help spark discussion and get them to open up. I've personally seen a number of times where team members have a lot to say about something and didn't realize I wanted to hear their ideas on that topic.

Obviously, delivery matters, and choosing a good question is important. If you have a foundation of trust already built (see Psychological Safety research) then a lot of those questions can help.

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> Thank you for sharing this.

I'm a strong technologist who has inherited people management responsibilities for some junior technologists and I definitely consider people management to be the thing that I suck the most at in worklife.

<comment><AUTHOR> I think this is what happens to a big portion of devs after promotion to management. Do you have any advices for people in your situation?

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> imo 'development discussions' is wrong as it creates apparent power hierarchy in the company and very often does more harm then good.

having a mentor and doing regular self reflection is the way to go.

</comment><comment><USER54> "Are you on track to meet the deadline?" is the worst 121 opener, I can't think why it's on the list. Unless you're an old-skool command-and-control type of course.

</comment><comment><USER55> I looked at these and had immediate flashbacks of Eliza. Given the recent (hopefully by now tempered) enthusiasm for chatbots, this might be a great starting point for one...

</comment><comment><USER56> For my taste, "Are you on track to meet the deadline?" is an intense discussion starter, as strong as a punch.

<comment><USER57> I think that depends entirely on _when_ the question is asked. If you get asked "Are you on track to meet the deadline" 50% of the way through the scheduled time then it should be a) An opportunity to reflect on your progress b) A chance to ask for help if needed

Of course, if a shitty manager asks you that 3 hours before the deadline then ha ha ha good luck

<comment><USER56> Well, it is an important question, when talking with a manager.

But I find it to be of a totally different caliber than "Hey, what's going on?" or "How are you? How is life outside of work?".

Vide asking "How was your last medical checkup?" in a personal conversation. Well, if it is good or OK-ish, it may be fine. In all other cases, it may turn a conversation into much more emotionally instense and sterssfull.

<comment><USER57> I honestly think that is a reflection of the kind of management your company promotes.

In previous places I've worked, "are you on schedule?" would be an implicit attack - but in my current workplace checking in on people and making sure they're not silently struggling is a regular and casual thing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER58> "Are there any obstacles I can remove for you?" is a poor first question.

If you (as a manager) haven't spent time figuring that out before the meeting, then you haven't done your share of the work. You'll be wasting your staff's time and energy in awkward 1-1 meetings.

"How is it going with [obstacle that has already been identified]?" is what I would expect a vaguely competent manager to say in place of this.

</comment><comment><USER59> This would be one long, wasteful meeting if I asked all these questions.

</comment><comment><USER60> The meeting so useful, you have to crowdsource the agenda!

</comment><comment><USER61> Not once in my 25 year career did I work with a manager who gave 1/100th as much shit as this list would require. They may exist, but I've never seen one. I strongly suspect that the author of the list hasn't either, and this is a highly idealized, "spherical cow in a vacuum" type list.

</comment><comment><USER62> Wow, this is amazing. I can't help but think of all the sarcastic answers I would give the so-called manager with a slight grin on my face.

Seriously, I think this list is a potent illustration of modern management bullcrap.

Come on guys, don't do this to your team, they are not children...

<comment><USER63> it's like talking to a superior who poses as a psychologist without any training in it. lots of power to the manager and an invitation for abuse. pretty much the reason why I'd never slave as an employee. sorry you're being downvoted. it seems there are many here who have underlings and therefore benefit from such a farce.

<comment><USER64> You're always answerable to someone - clients, investors, the board.

But even barring that, "just don't work for anyone else" is not actionable.</comment></comment></comment>


Spain's iPhone killer actually a rebranded Xiaomi - <AUTHOR> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/18/spains_iphone_killer_accused_of_fakery/ <comment><USER2> >the Zettaeuropa site now appears to be back up and running without any comment on the allegations.

>Comunicado oficial ZettaSmartPhone

>Literrally means "official statement"

Yes, lazzy reporting.

As an extremenian myself this make me feel terrible ashamed.

</comment><comment><USER3> I have not followed the news but was this really "considered the country's own answer to the iPhone"?. By whom exactly?

One thing is to say "A Spanish company's iPhone killer is a scam" an another "Spain's iPhone killer is a scam". I hope racism/cliches did not play a role here.

</comment><comment><USER4> All these allegations, not a single tear-down? Smells like lazy reporting.

<comment><AUTHOR> One of the links from the article actually provides a photo of a tear-down [1]. Apparently if you remove the label in the battery slot there is a hidden logo from Xiaomi.

[1] [https://www.facua.org/es/images/noticia10806h_2.jpg](https://www.facua.org/es/images/noticia10806h_2.jpg)</comment></comment>


Facebook stock drops below an arbitrary number in a popular number base - <AUTHOR>

Seriously, HN, please stop submitting micro-updates to the Facebook stock price. The fact that it dropped below $20 (briefly) is terribly tedious. All it means is that (a) Facebook's stock has dropped a bit more and (b) Facebook's stock is below a small multiple of a power of ten.
If Facebook stop suddenly drops by 90% then it might be worth discussing, or if Facebook suddenly submits an SEC filing that reveals that the end is nigh. Until then let's not get obsessed with its stock price.
There are only 30 spaces on the front page, let's reserve them for something meaningful, not what looks almost like technical analysis and the nonsense about 'support levels'. <comment><USER2> I'm as bored by micro-updates about FB's share price as the next person, but consider two propositions:

1\. Drastic drops aren't the only interesting ones. If FB were to decline slowly all the way to (say) zero, presumably the decline would have become interesting and newsworthy sometime before that point regardless of the slope of the decline. Where exactly is this point? Who knows. But given the human mind's heightened interest in multiples of 10, $20 seems like as good a candidate as any other. (Along with probably $10 and $5.)

2\. Whether you believe in them or not, stock prices are said to have psychological support levels. Above price X, the investing public is inclined to view a stock favorably. But if it drops below that, a new narrative may begin to emerge that itself can have an effect on the price. You call this "nonsense" but provide no evidence in opposition to the conventional wisdom. It may be that "objectively" there is nothing special about the number 20, but markets are made by interactions between people and in modeling the behavior of people, psychological facts are relevant. One psychological fact is that people take an interest in multiples of 10, and movement across them can therefore have significant consequences.

</comment><comment><USER3> it moved again :)</comment>


Ask HN: Do you use Julia outside of technical computing and ML? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> I use it for systems work (compilers, debuggers, etc.), but I may not count ;).

</comment><comment><USER3> Yes.</comment>


Cool Machine Learning Resources - <AUTHOR> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xx4-HKixnyRcEbqEedv223Oc33gw5bSvats-WzRL95c/edit?usp=sharing <comment><AUTHOR> Hi all, author here. Wanted to give some more background on why I made this sheet, and why I think it would be cool if other people used and added to this sheet. I've been working to teach myself machine learning, software engineering, and stats for years now. The internet is full of helpful articles, curated book collections, and well-answered Stack Overflow questions, as well as gobs of less useful junk. My two biggest problems have been: 1.) Separating the good stuff from the bad stuff and 2.) Finding the right type of material for different stages in the learning process. Unfortunately, Google has let me down. So this is my attempt at compiling and tagging the most helpful resources, so other people (and I) can speed up our learning process. The sheet is completely open, so please feel free to modify or feel free to comment if you have any suggestions. Thanks Internet!</comment>


Aloha Followers – Find out more what languages your Twitter followers speak - <AUTHOR> http://alohafollowers.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi all, lots of English speaking Twitter users believe that English is widely spoken around the world… and on Twitter. Surprising fact: only a little over 30% of tweets are in English! So I've built Aloha Followers. It scans a few thousands of your followers in real-time and extract their languages. It's there to show you how diverse the language map is even for your Twitter account. And for businesses, it could mean that they should tweet in other languages to get their followers more engaged!

Enjoy and let me know if you encounter any issue with it.

<comment><USER2> Please edit the title to start with "Show HN: ..."

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Why you need permission to see my twitter password and post on behalf of me?</comment>


Nebulous Notes for iOS, a text editor for Dropbox - <AUTHOR> http://nebulousapps.net/blog/2010/08/nebulous-notes-is-available-now.html

<comment><USER2> I recently read about another Dropbox text-editing app coming out soon too: <http://www.secondgearsoftware.com/elements/>. I've been waiting for apps like these for awhile. I like using TextMate to write and organize my notes as txt files but haven't had a good way to sync and edit them on the iPhone/iPad yet. I'm surprised it's taken this long actually.</comment>


React.native isn't - <AUTHOR> http://blog.metaobject.com/2015/04/reactnative-isn.html

<comment><USER2> I would like to hear more discussion on this subject, since there seems to be a confusion in the community regarding MVC (myself included.) see also author's previous article [http://blog.metaobject.com/2015/04/model-widget- controller-m...](http://blog.metaobject.com/2015/04/model-widget-controller- mwc-aka-apple.html)

I'm a React developer, have little experience with native development myself. With that in mind, here is a small implementation of how I would envision how developing a native app with React's always rendering in mind: [https://github.com/ustun/mvc-vs- react/blob/master/singleview...](https://github.com/ustun/mvc-vs- react/blob/master/singleviewtest2/ViewController.m)

Notice every UI action results in a call to a model method, immediately follows by render. The whole model-view syncronization is centralized in a render method, so it is not allowed to modify view manually in UIAction methods, you just set model methods and then render.

What React does is to make this seamless, that is you call setState which in turn triggers render automatically. This way, the data flows from your model to your view.

Of course this doesn't take into account how this flow goes when child views are involved, normally you would want to call render in each childview as well, and that's where virtual DOM comes into play with React.

<comment><USER3> You should read this article form Martin Fowler: [http://martinfowler.com/eaaDev/uiArchs.html](http://martinfowler.com/eaaDev/uiArchs.html)

It has an excellent analysis about GUI architectures. This problem is not new and as such, there are already proposals to solve it. Every proposal has his pros and cons. It is a shame that we prefer to immediately "invent" our solutions instead of first looking to the past and check how it has been solved. A lot of people has told me that is not important to know the how and why things work in order to be a good developer, but this is exactly what happen when you have a lot of developers that don't understand the fundamentals

<comment><USER4> > It is a shame that we prefer to immediately "invent" our solutions

Exactly, that is one of the reasons why I started to work on this: [http://mvc.givan.se/](http://mvc.givan.se/)

<comment><USER3> Very nice, I think you should include some Sequence Diagrams to explain the differences between them :-)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Software Scientist - <AUTHOR> http://www.evanmiller.org/the-software-scientist.html <comment><USER2> _" By and large, programming is a young man's game"_

As a middle-aged programmer who is a much better programmer now than I was when I was young, I'd argue with the article's initial premise.

<comment><USER3> > much better programmer now than I was when I was young,

I don't think that's the angle the author was talking about.

He's actually saying this:

 _" By and large, programming (in terms in jobs/careers/economics) is a young man's game"_

The qualification I added in parentheses would be a fair reading based on his previous sentence: _"...take a job as a software engineer."_

Likewise, his 3 bullet points after the "young man's game" is about "jobs", not skill or intellect. Basically, it's about ageism in context of job slots.

Despite all the employment verbiage surrounding "young man", people are still _misinterpreting_ it as:

 _" By and large, programming (in terms in intellectual ability) is a young man's game"_

Perhaps readers are too conditioned by the mathematician G.H. Hardy quote, _" math is a young man's game"_[1] in which he _was_ talking about about intellectual output.

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._H._Hardy#Hardy.27s_aphorisms](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._H._Hardy#Hardy.27s_aphorisms)

<comment><USER4> >> Perhaps readers are too conditioned by the mathematician G.H. Hardy quote, _" math is a young man's game"_[1] in which he was talking about about intellectual output.

Readers might just be conditioned to taking things at face value.

The author's next blog post is titled _Attracting Millennial Engineers_ \- [http://www.evanmiller.org/attracting-millennial- engineers.ht...](http://www.evanmiller.org/attracting-millennial- engineers.html)

I can't tell if it's satire.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> To summarize, the article suggests making the "software science" job title to:

* "reduce career path anxiety" * "enhance engineering organizations' self-understanding" * "advance the general understanding of the right way to develop software" * "raise awareness about the sponsoring engineering organization" * "bring out some of those 'big picture' thinkers from the woodwork"

The third point is the only one close to the traditional role of a scientist, though "general understanding" takes more than data and statistics from a single organization. Otherwise, this seems to be a pretty blatant misappropriation of the name "scientist"!

</comment><comment><USER6> I don't understand how this role doesn't fall under the scenario of: "The engineer becomes a manager"

In order to do a superlative job as a manager of a software engineering team, one has to master these same skills. Perhaps the term "Software Scientist" will help distinguish good software engineering management practices from bad ones, but I fail to see how "The Software Scientist" is not a management role.

<comment><USER7> Agreed.

The only way that the post makes sense to me is that if the organization is large enough, have a role that supports CTO / VPE's efforts and tried to do it in a more data-driven way.

So this way CTO / VPE still have those responsibilities, but have a person who is fully focused on measuring the impact of changes and getting data.

I think these would be very special roles and very few organizations, so not enough to really talk about it as an alternative to the two traditional tracks. That said, there is certainly there is value in this role.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Young people are very popular because they don't know how to negotiate their worth and hence are cheap. Older people may be more experienced but compared to hiring two or even three (more?) younger ones they will produce less code that will (probably) be less buggy and a bit better laid out but you won't be able to get them to sleep under their desks or work unpaid overtime. And those other advantages won't show right away. So in the end the younger guys get more done for the money _and_ they are probably a lot more pliable.

<comment><USER9> If you're so good at negotiating that you end up without a job because no one will pay what you demand, then you are actually bad at negotiating.

<comment><USER8> No, they get the job 6 months later, to clean up the mess at double the original pay...

<comment><USER9> That doesn't seem consistent with your first post. Overall, would you argue that older engineers do or don't suffer worse outcomes because they require higher pay? Is it the case that employers hire younger engineers instead, or is it the case that in the long run, older engineers get jobs at the higher pay they demand?

<comment><USER8> Younger people tend to be the ones hired early on in the life cycle of a product or company because they're cheap, easy to push into a mold (or so management likes to think) and can do just as good a job (or maybe even quicker) than older people in making something that visually looks like it might work.

Then, as the project matures you'll find that that gained speed comes at a price, a price that will sooner or later offset the higher wages demanded by the ones that are further along in their life (dependents, more aware of their value).

If there are young _really_ good programmers (it does happen, I've met a couple) then they tend to be exploited even worse, they will end up creating a large amount of value for peanuts.

But that's rare enough that it doesn't change the situation too much.

So I don't see any inconsistency, it's just time shifted.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> If I ever reach the level of an IBM Fellow or similar as a software engineer, I won't care about whether you'll call me a "software scientist" or "man with long beard" or "that guy". I promise.

> The engineer becomes a kind of nomadic hermit ("Principal Engineer")

"hermit" implies some level of isolation. Is that really the case of distinguished/principal/fellow engineers? Is there any evidence or data available?

<comment><USER11> Principal and Distinguished are, usually, titles added to convince HR to pay market salaries.

        Mgr: "We'll need $140k to get him."
        HR: "The band for Senior Engineer is $100k to 125k."
        Mgr: "So you can't do $140?"
        HR: "Nope."
        Mgr: "What if I hire him for a *Principal* Engineer position?"
        HR: "I need to talk to the CFO about whether we need Principal Engineers."

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Actual LOL. So we have programmers, developers, software engineers, coders and now... Software scientists?? Oh well it will be a good filter on CVs.

<comment><USER13> I'm a software physicist myself.

<comment><USER14> I think I'll go with "Software Alchemist" :-)

<comment><USER12> I forgot software architect too

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Would such a person practice real science, or just apply the first test that cones to mind, and ignore all of the confounding factors?

<comment><USER16> I agree. This sounds ominous:

> _Statistical education. This is currently optional_

The data world is going to be an interesting place in the near future, filled with people running statistical tests they don't truly understand, and drawing spurious conclusions. But, I guess it already works that way in some fields.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> The military is a "young man's game." Most new recruits are 18. But the people in charge, who do the strategizing and so on, are not. It sounds to me like the article is suggesting another way for experienced programmers to be held in high esteem, not suggesting that old programmers are no good. So I honestly do not understand most of the criticisms of this article being posted here on HN. Maybe there is no real difference between a "software scientist" and a manager. Maybe there is. But it doesn't sound to me like this piece in any way insults older programmers.

<comment><USER18> You have older NCOs in the military as well as senior officers, but for the most part rank and seniority is a pyramid in the millitary; just like most hyper competitive dev shops...there are older people at the top, just much fewer of them than younger people...and where did the other people go who fell off the pyramid?

As a PhD holding computer scientist and practicing researcher, I cringe at the title "software scientist"....

<comment><USER17> It's fine if you cringe. :-) I am just saying that I simply do not see the slam on older programmers that others seem to be taking away from this article. It seems to me there are plenty of older programmers on HN and some of most esteemed folks here are _not_ 22-25 years old and are, instead, a good bit older (in some cases, old enough to have kids that age, in theory if not in reality).

(In fact, I suspect none of them are that young -- but I don't know all the ages of, say, everyone on the leaderboard, so I can't assert that as fact. Edit: Also, not everyone that age here can rightly be called a programmer.)

<comment><USER18> Note: I also cringe when people called me doctor. Titles are also poor replacements for respect and confidence.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> >You'd think that any programmer with a basic grasp of recursive algorithms would be hesitant to take a job as a software engineer.

What does this mean? Is software engineering "below" programming? Do software engineers write less code?

I've only been in the industry for a few years, mostly working on my own. I've assumed these titles were arbitrary. Are they not?

</comment><comment><USER20> I think of this role as "The Fixer". On most teams I've worked on there is someone who ends up doing the hard parts, knows the obscure parts of the system, and tends to end up optimizing queries, cleaning up algorithms, and generally guides the long term technical direction, whether they have a title to go with it or not.

In my experience, while a software scientist or fixer is highly valued, they aren't necessarily highly paid moreso than anyone else on a team. Also, a technical lead is not always going to do this job or do it well if given it.

The largest part of development doesn't rely on someone with this specialization to write the initial code for any feature, yet without this skillset a team will ship some terrible code without realizing it.

I don't really see any group hiring for this kind of role.

</comment><comment><USER21> The first paragraph seems to imply that, to understand recursive algorithms, you need to be young. And rightly so, the software industry is not for old people. Did I get the argument right?

<comment><USER22> No, he is saying that if you understand recursive algorithms, you should be able to apply that reasoning to reason yourself out of a career on software, since it is a given that most developers will be forced out of engineering by a certain age

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> A fantastic article, and I hope we see more relevant research gathered under this banner. Not having a name for something can be a big problem in even knowing what's out there.

As a side-point, I am often shocked that we don't see more research into how to make software teams more productive coming out of places like Google/Facebook/Microsoft etc, given that these companies (claim to) live and die by the effectiveness of their engineering. If a large amount of their expenditure is in software, to the point they'll buy entire companies just for the engineers, why aren't they financing the large-scale experiments that will settle certain questions for good?

<comment><USER24> Is there any evidence that Facebook/Google/Microsoft are productive? They have a lot of money and a lot of engineers to throw at a problem.

When I worked at an investment bank, the code quality was crap, and the staff turnover was high. Didn't matter, because they literally had enough money to throw at the problem and keep hiring more people.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Another article that assumes programmers are engineers. Since I like gardening, I suppose I should be called an environmental scientist.

<comment><USER8> Horticultural engineer is the term I think you're looking for.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> ✊🍆

</comment><comment><USER11> This is just another title upgrade (first "software engineer" in lieu of lowly "programmer", then "software scientist") that represents a half-baked understanding of the problem, which is that typical business-driven engineering doesn't work well, isn't very challenging, and is enough of an intellectual wasteland that, after 7-10 years, you'll have learned everything worth learning unless you become an elite engineer (e.g. Principal "hermit", thus named because top-1% engineers don't have much company except at a few dozen companies worldwide) or a manager. That all is true. The ghetto of the average line-of-business software engineer is not a place where one can be over 35 and unembarrassed about remaining there.

This said, I think that the "data science" title is silly. It used to mean "what we call machine learning to make it sound more practical and less AI- ish", then it meant "watered down job that occasionally involves running an off-the-shelf regression or clustering algorithm", and then it meant "any job that involves data". I don't hold out higher hopes for "software scientist".

We seem, in this industry, to have given up on restoring integrity to software engineering itself, so that everyone over 30 is strategizing to become some kind of XWP ("X Who Programs") rather than a JAP "Just A Programmer"), as I've discussed at length here: [http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2012/08/26/xwp- vs-jap/](http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2012/08/26/xwp-vs-jap/) . We are so desperate to establish ourselves as better than "those programmers" who crank out Java classes and can't function without an IDE... and I understand this, because I don't want to be lumped in with them on compensation or autonomy. That said, I find it sad that we haven't managed to sell what we do (solve problems using software) as something with intrinsic integrity.

Because we've been raping the word "scientist" (e.g. "data scientist" for someone who worked with Hadoop once) for half a decade or more (and should really give it back to the people who have the right to use it) I would be more inclined to call myself a software _strategist_. Career-wise, I'm far past the level of the average engineer, and refuse to do (unless it's my own company, in which case I'll do the most undignified work just because it needs to get done) the sort of jobs that regular "software engineers" do in most companies (e.g. line-of-business Java-mines work) and I don't think of _code_ as where I add value, but rather my knowledge about _problem solving_ in a more general sense. I've probably evolved out of an engineering role (as defined by the business) and into that of a strategist who does some engineering and coding (especially because it can be a lot of fun). Of course, I'm hesitant to write a "software strategist" essay, because I don't want to see that title get mangled either.

<comment><USER27> "Software Strategist" doesn't sound, to me, like someone who writes any code.

<comment><USER11> I've come to the conclusion that there is zero upside in your job description requiring you to write code. You might have to write in Java, or lose a weekend every 9 weeks to production support, or maintain some shitty legacy code.

Instead, you want the freedom to write code, but a job title that makes it clear that you don't _have to_ write any code. If you're a data scientist or an architect or in R&D, you get this freedom. It's best, in sum, if you get to build things and solve problems by writing code, but aren't seen as a cog that can be plugged into any code-writing or -reading hole.

<comment><USER27> You may be right. I was thinking more from a communicative standpoint than a job requirements standpoint.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Fukushima Robot Operator Writes Tell-All Blog - <AUTHOR> http://spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/industrial-robots/fukushima-robot-operator-diaries

<comment><AUTHOR> The blog is a straightforward, honest description of the work environment experienced by the robot operators cleaning up the damaged caused by the tsunami to Japan's Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant. It includes both technical content and interesting information about organizational politics. The blog was created from April to July of 2011, but was recently taken down for unknown reasons. The IEEE article includes an overview of its content, human-translated and edited versions of nearly 50 blog posts, and a few videos, which were also taken down from YouTube.

This is the source for the BoingBoing article posted at <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2921100></comment>


SF's wealthiest renters are having trouble paying for housing, Harvard research - <AUTHOR> https://sf.curbed.com/2020/2/7/21124263/sf-renters-harvard-rent-research-wealthier-san-francisco <comment><USER2> _"With only limited federal support, state and local agencies are doing what they can to expand the affordable housing supply," notes the Harvard study, but without a "comprehensive response from all levels of government," there's a cap on how much they can do._

Wacky idea: they could stop preventing people from building more housing.

<comment><USER3> I don't think you understand after the 2008 crash the banking industry decided that more housing was the last thing the United States needs. They had every intention of reinflating the asset bubble and they've succeeded.</comment></comment>


Compiling JavaScript into Native Binaries: NectarJS - <AUTHOR> https://codeburst.io/nectarjs-compiling-javascript-into-native-binaries-for-every-platform-2efb2083a4a <comment><USER2> Not open source. This disappoints me a lot. I've never seen paid compilers or languages take off.

Would have been nice to have some details about the runtime, does it use LLVM? What's the GC like?

<comment><USER3> There are a few paid compilers but they are mainly targeted at niches. One example at the top of my mind is Xojo [1], which is basically a cross platform visual basic clone (although not as good, IMO, but that is mainly because it doesn't seem to understand the strengths of VB [2]) and i see it being mentioned more often lately than at the past (it used to be known as REALbasic but they changed the name because the "basic" part wasn't very marketable anymore).

Also Common Lisp and Smalltalk have several high quality commercial compilers. Generally you'll find that most commercial compilers tend to go after niche markets with less popular languages that still have some sort of demand and don't mind paying for software.

[1] [https://www.xojo.com/](https://www.xojo.com/) [2] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16001418](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16001418)</comment></comment>


Shelter.travel – Your nature refuge, far from crowds - <AUTHOR> https://shelter.travel <comment><USER2> Popping up a chatbot overlay that _doesn 't even work_ is a quick route to immediate user abandonment.

I wish that site designers would realize that a useless chatbot is much, much worse than none at all.

</comment><comment><USER3> As long as these places are close to home, I could certainly use it for nature retreats</comment>


Ask HN: I can't read effectively anymore, how to fix this? - non-entity I'm not sure how to explain it, but when I sit down to read a peice of text, my eyes see texr, my brain parses text, but that's about it. Its like my brain is "out of foucs".Often times I have to run over a single sentence several times before I'm able to extract any meaning of it. On to0 of that I cant seem to fully read anything whether it be an article on the internet (which usually gets roughly skimmed and closed) or a book (which I'll skip through beefily and close)<p>When I was a kid / teenager, on the other hand, I could read anything fictions or non-fiction, technical or scientific cover to cover if I wanted, and even maybe get somethingout of it. <comment><AUTHOR> Take notes, generally write a lot e.g. by copying paragraphs or, even better, try to summarize the key point of a paragraph or page into a sentence or two. Use markers. Reading aloud as suggested by FroshKiller is perfect. Do crossword puzzles. And don't use regular screens for longer reading (paper is still best, e-ink kind of ok).

Read a lot (and writing!) even if "nothing sticks". It sure will feel frustrating, but don't worry, it will improve again over time "simply" with practice. Don't feel abnormal, all this is quite ordinary as you grow up and more and more "stuff to think about" accumulates. It takes practice to get to a brain-relaxed state again. Mindfulness, meditation etc of course can help a lot too.

</comment><comment><USER2> Sounds like you may need glasses.

I sometimes won't be able to write, not because I have nothing to say, but I associate writing with pain (I have bilateral tendinitis).

Similarly, you may have eyestrain but not be conscious of it.

</comment><comment><USER3> You can improve comprehension by reading aloud.</comment>


Linode: Native IPv6 now available in all locations - <AUTHOR> http://blog.linode.com/2012/02/28/native-ipv6-now-available-in-all-locations/

<comment><USER2> Hopefully Amazon will do this with all EC2 locations soon! They're a bit behind the curve here.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is excellent. Also, I was not previously aware of the "World IPv6 Launch" linked to in the post which also looks like a great initiative: <http://www.worldipv6launch.org/>

</comment><comment><USER4> does linode still offer only /128s?

<comment><USER2> From the FAQ [1]:

 _We are also offering the ability to have an entire /64 or /56 subnet routed to one of your IPv6 addresses – even one of the Pool addresses, which means you can fail over the entire subnet._

[1]: <http://www.linode.com/IPv6/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I don't do IPv6 yet but I'm glad Linode is ahead of the pack.

</comment><comment><USER6> I think this belongs here: <http://xkcd.com/865/></comment>


IE8 Blacklist: forcing standards rendering opt-in - <AUTHOR> http://www.isolani.co.uk/blog/standards/Ie8BlacklistForcingStandardsRenderingOptIn <comment><USER2> "This list updates automatically, and helps users who aren't web-savvy have a better experience with web sites that aren't yet IE8-ready."

What nonsense. It's IE8 that should be web-ready, not the other way around. That's pretty legendary arrogance right there.

</comment><comment><USER3> I think people moan too much. This is a reasonable compromise where most sites will continue to render in standards mode (which is a good thing for web standards) while older sites largely continue to work in IE8 (which is good for browser uptake, users and developers of older sites). You can't please everybody all of the time, but this is the best solution I can think of. Is the alternative that older sites are broken out of the box with IE8 and users actively avoiding it because many sites don't magically work in IE8 somehow better?

Rather than forcing every site to switch, only /a tiny minority/ of sites will be caught in the crossfire and be forced into IE7 mode incorrectly, and those who are can remedy this relatively easily whether via the HTML5 Doctype switch, a META tag, IE8 header tag or even contacting Microsoft to get it fixed. Instead of requiring /every site/ to it, we're talking about an utter minority of sites accidentally getting broken in exchange for it fixing a large proportion of problems.

<comment><USER4> What is to keep an organized attack on a site's display method in IE8 by overuse of the 'compatibility mode' button when it's not appropriate? Especially since tech-un-savvy users will then see a site in compatibility mode when they didn't do anything in their browser, and they'll assume the site is busted?

Also, at which point do we stop assuming the majority of users are not tech- savvy? How much longer do they have to catch up? Everyone knows which hole the food goes in, no one makes special easy-to-eat food for the food-un-savvy crowd.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> this is getting beyond belief, so I'm going to have to support the flaky weird rendering quirks of IE6 (since so many people still use it), IE7, IE7 Compatibility Mode (which seemingly isn't actually compaitible) _AND_ IE8!? And that's hoping that IE8 'standards' mode is reliable enough to lump in with all the real browsers (mozilla,webkit,opera,etc).

Here's a fucking idea to help booster the economy - how about MAKING people upgrade from IE6. BOOM! Hundreds of thousands of web developer (wo)man-hours saved, increasing efficiency across the whole web-based IT sector.

<comment><USER6> > Here's a fucking idea to help booster the economy - how about MAKING people > upgrade from IE6. BOOM! Hundreds of thousands of web developer (wo)man-hours > saved, increasing efficiency across the whole web-based IT sector.

Under normal circumstances that might be a good idea. But given the output gap in the economy, the last thing we need would be less work for web developers. If the government wants to stimulate the web-design sector, it should introduce a hundred new rendering engines, each with a slightly different interpretation of the CSS specs, and then give out grants to businesses to make their sites compatible.

<comment><USER5> ah yes, I see what you mean, didn't fully think it through did I? - I was kind of hoping that all those suddenly free programmer hours would be funnelled into creative programming and start-up ventures, boosting the economy sans government spending...

<comment><USER7> Another interesting example of the those who view _job retention_ as the means to economic stimulus versus those who view _job creation_ as the prefered means to that end.

I tend to agree with you. Funding make-work projects benefit the workers involved (and tangentially the businesses they buy from), but innovating and spawning whole new companies/industries seems like a better use of our time and effort.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> _sigh_

I remember lobbying for this change along with many others when we did it in the first place. Then I was completely shocked when Microsoft actually listened. Now I am completely unsurprised and depressed by their latest flip- flop (MSFT has a history of depressing me, which is why it isn't surprising).

The way to move the web forward is obviously to take 2 steps forward and 1.5 steps back, right? Right?!

</comment><comment><USER9> Include "X-UA-Compatible: IE=edge" in your responses and you will never have to worry about this issue. It is easier than complaining about it.

</comment><comment><USER10> So microsoft would still like to operate as if it could rule the web the way it rules operating systems?: by fiat. And responds to outrage and outcries by _tweaking_ its fiats?

Firefox, Google Chrome, and even Apple cannot help but be pleased at the continued MSIE machinations to abuse power.</comment>


Ask HN: Understanding of networks is necessary for Web Developer? - <AUTHOR> Hi HN,
I'm a happy Web developer, who is good at front end technologies. I also know how a public private key works to make a secure connection on HTTPS.Fundas of OSI layer of networks.
Is understanding networks ( in depth each and every bit of protocol) is necessarily for a great web developer?
If not all networking concepts, what all network concepts do HN thinks its mandate for an Web Dev guy?
Thanks. <comment><USER2> Only if doing web development involving the Internet, which is, well, a network.

<comment><AUTHOR> So what all things you think one need to be mandate on networks?

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> In depth not but ideally I would say you need a CCNA level understanding. Btw in depth I would understand to be a country's delegate at the ITU or OSI.</comment>


Ask HN: Would a platform-indep devtool installer be useful? I'm building one - <AUTHOR> I had this idea where there is just one command to install something (e.g. docker) on any machine, be it Ubuntu or Fedora or Mac, for development purposes. More information in the readme:
https://github.com/rushiagr/xin
Do you think it is going to be useful? <comment><USER2> you mean like a package manager? what's wrong with apt, brew etc

also there already is a command to install docker on any machine

curl -sSL [https://get.docker.com/](https://get.docker.com/) | sh

and as a bonus:

[https://xkcd.com/1654/](https://xkcd.com/1654/)

<comment><AUTHOR> > you mean like a package manager? what's wrong with apt, brew etc

Yes, like a universal package manager, but only for quick and dirty dev environment setup. The problem with apt, brew etc is that brew is for Mac only, and APT is for debian-like distros only.

the script at [https://get.docker.com/](https://get.docker.com/) is exactly what I was thinking of building. Thanks for the pointer. Now I can't think of anything for which Xin-like thing would be useful apart from Vagrant installation.</comment></comment>


What a meth: Woman held for 3 months after cops mistake candy floss for drugs - <AUTHOR> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/11/28/woman_jailed_3_months_after_cops_mistake_candy_floss_for_meth/ <comment><USER2> Moral of the story: if the police have to ask for permission to search your {car,house,person}, the answer should pretty much always be no.

The 4th amendment is your friend and will atrophy if not used.

<comment><USER3> Then they call in the dogs and cue them to indicate probable suspicion. Problem solved! /s

<comment><USER4> I understand that in at least some jurisdictions you can refuse a dig search and just be arrested.

<comment><USER3> That doesn't sound like much of a win.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Hacking the Oculus Rift DK2, part III - <AUTHOR> http://doc-ok.org/?p=1138

<comment><USER2> I don't see how this is "beating Facebook".

<comment><USER3> Facebook has yet to release their promised, but long overdue (about 3 months) linux SDK. So about 10 days ago, a group of developers felt compelled to reverse engineer and come up with their own FLOSS version.

Meanwhile, facebooculus is still claiming they will release "soon", and claim to have multiple dedicated developers on it. They have been saying this for weeks. It would be embarrassing, but huge with if a small group of unpaid enthusiast/researchers/hackers beat the facebook team by releasing a working linux (and open source) version.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Where is the source code?</comment>


Ask HN: Who is bridging the economic divide? - <AUTHOR> In the late 1950s/early 1960s, Arthur Rock brought finances from the East Coast, where the money and advertising was, to the West Coast, where a new industry based on silicon processors was developing. This was the beginning of the Silicon Valley venture capital industry.
Now, Silicon Valley is where the money and advertising is located.  Venture capital expects young companies to move nearby.  It seems to matter a lot who you know. In short, SV now appears to be the 2010's analogue of the 1950s East Coast.
Meanwhile, in the rest of the country, costs and wages are low. The money pumped into the economy by low interest rates has pooled in coastal cities with ties to the financial industry.  Like a gardener with a clogged hose and only control of the spigot, the Fed can't fight deflation in the rest of the country without driving inflation sky-high in the financial centers. The economic divide is visible in political results, with the interior clearly unhappy with the economic status quo.
So, which VC's and startups are bridging the divide?  Who is arbitraging the economic differences between inflationary coastal cities and deflationary interior?  What techniques and strategies are they using?  Who is going to be the next Arthur Rock, bringing money from where it is to where it is needed? <comment><USER2> where is 20fold based?

<comment><AUTHOR> Near Cape Canaveral, Florida. Seeking funding here is a bit ironic: I've been told I should move to a "tech capital" like Silicon Valley. We have plenty of high tech here, but it's funny how if you want to start a high tech company located here, step one seems to be 'start in California'.

Btw, I've seen your posts on here before. I happen to know another Paul Houle who is also a physicist, but who works with radon in Pennsylvania. I'm not sure if he's a relative of yours, but based upon my current sample set, being named "Paul Houle" gives you a 100% chance of being a physicist. :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Just to be clear, I'm not asking just to gripe about funding difficulties. I see a huge differential, and I would like to know what strategies are being used to arbitrage the difference. Is there something an everyday Joe can do, or do you have to be in finance? I am interested in the economics of the situation. I'm not an economist, but as far as I am aware, it is unusual to have two regions with a common currency and labor market, to have such a large differential in economic conditions. It's like if oranges sold for $1 in Florida and $10 in Minnesota, and nobody was shipping oranges. I figure someone has to be making money on the difference - how?</comment></comment></comment>


What will you trade me to send something to the space station? - <AUTHOR> http://www.onetoyspaceship.com/2013/03/trade-6-send-something-to-space-station.html

<comment><AUTHOR> Or what should I trade?</comment>


Ask HN: Has anyone had success as a "dev partner" for a SaaS co - <AUTHOR> Lots of SaaS companies have "dev partners" or "integration partners" that specialize in integrating those tools into a specific company's technology. Has anyone here used this as a successful source of growth? If so, how to you define your niche? Is it by industry (e.g. biotech), tool domain (e.g. logistics), a specific tool, etc. <comment><USER2> I am just starting out on this route, so I cannot give you any indication of whether or not it will be successful (yet). My product ([https://www.usecloudpress.com/](https://www.usecloudpress.com/)) integrates with various Content Management Systems, so I am reaching out to the people working at those CMSs to try and reach their end users.

I have had some early feedback from some of the users of these CMSs, and the feedback was very valuable in shaping the product.</comment>


A Behind-The-Scenes Look at Pixar's New Short Film "Piper" - <AUTHOR> http://www.audubon.org/news/a-behind-scenes-look-pixars-new-short-film-piper <comment><USER2> "This amounted to 4.5 to 7 million feathers on each bird in Piper"

I'm pretty certain they mean "barbs/barbules for feathers", as in curves (cylindrical tubes fit to curves in 3D space which are normally used to render hair/fur/feathers) making up these feather elements. In other words each feather is made up of hundreds of curve primitives.

4.5M actual feathers themselves on each bird would be absolutely ridiculous and unnecessary.

<comment><USER3> I would guess they count each frame individually, since the feathers in each one have to be posed and rendered individually.

<comment><USER2> They wouldn't count each frame individually, as that's not how it's done - they'll have "guide feathers" which are manually keyframe animated, and the feathers in-between are interpolated from the guide feathers (which is how hair/fur is done).

Per frame this just results in different positions/shapes for the curve primitives which make up the feathers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Watched "Piper" before "Finding Dory" the other day. We liked it better than the feature film.

<comment><USER5> The rendering was beautiful, and you could tell instantly that it was above and beyond anything seen before. A sweet story without dialogue that tugged at my heart as well!

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I find it incredible how they consistently out-do themselves with every single release. There's some real magic going on in that studio.

</comment><comment><USER7> If anyone reading this is attending SIGGRAPH, several of us will be presenting a production talk for Piper on Sunday 2PM.

[http://s2016.siggraph.org/talks/sessions/life- shorts](http://s2016.siggraph.org/talks/sessions/life-shorts)

</comment><comment><USER8> Saw this a week or two ago -- was absolutely blown away by the quality of the animation. Far and away the most realistic-looking animations I've ever seen; the birds still had a little of that "a computer drew me" look, but the water, the sand... it was breathtaking.

</comment><comment><USER9> I haven't seen the short, but every bird clip reminds me of my favorite: Kiwi! (2006) > [https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sdUUx5FdySs](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sdUUx5FdySs)

</comment><comment><USER10> we saw finding dory yesterday with my son (3.5). it was his first ever movie theater experience. after 30 minutes of previews of other cg animated films, when Piper played it was almost like hearing the folks at Pixar say, oh nice guys. and here's a little something we put together. amazing. my wife said it was one of the best short films she's seen; I dally in 3D (Blender with Cycles is absurdly fun), so understood the technical prowess behind such this lovely film.

and my son was silently enraptured.</comment>