Automattic is closing its San Francisco office as most employees work remotely - <AUTHOR> https://qz.com/1002655/the-company-behind-wordpress-is-closing-its-gorgeous-san-francisco-office-because-its-employees-never-show-up/ <comment><USER2> We didn't switch to allowing remote work but started remote and always been remote. We had an office space at Pier 38 that was closed by the city in 2011[1], so had to scramble to find space. At that time we thought we would expand more in Bay Area and found a good deal that also could support other employees visiting the Bay Area. For example, in 2013 we held our whole company meetup, but have outgrown it. The main US WordCamp used to be held in SF but now as cost goes up we are moving them around last two in Philly, next in Nashville so another use of the space wasn't needed.

We found it easier to grow and expand all over the world and didn't grow as much in the Bay Area as thought. Currently only 20-30 people of our 550+ live in Bay Area

Also as far as space goes, that is just one photo of the downstairs area of the space. You can see more at [https://automattic.com/lounge/](https://automattic.com/lounge/) and some early shots here [https://customspaces.com/photo/uklO4BLxis/](https://customspaces.com/photo/uklO4BLxis/)

P.S. I'm the guy in the green shirt in the photo, woo hoo!

[1] [https://techcrunch.com/2011/09/06/pier-38-shut- down/](https://techcrunch.com/2011/09/06/pier-38-shut-down/)

<comment><USER3> It's what I don't get about the whole outsourcing, tech sector debate; if bay area tech employees are so expensive, why not hire people that are equally or at least sufficiently as qualified in other parts of the USA, where you could get away with paying them less even though it would provide them with wildly higher quality of life than they would get anywhere in the Bay area from most perspectives. Essentially the question is why the heck outsource to places like India, where people don't speak proper English and the technical skills are lower in many ways, which is only compounded by communication issues, let alone why hire H1B visas from, e.g., India at Silicon Valley rates; when you could have hired net far better Americans in the long run. Western and American society suffers from a shortsightedness that will end up destroying not just the USA, but the advancement of all of the rest of humanity through that kind of mentality. You can only live on the inertia of others for so long before momentum ceases.

<comment><USER4> If they were equally qualified they would still demand a comparable salary. A full stack dev in Houston makes nearly as much as one in SF with the same qualifications.

<comment><USER5> A quick jaunt to Stack Overflow Jobs, Glassdoor, or h1bdata.info will show you that in the vast majority of cases, no. Different markets have wildly varying pay.

If you meant "overall net income", then the Houston dev would likely come out ahead after taxes and rent/mortgage.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Had a party at the WordPress office a few years back and it's a great space. There's a lounge, kitchen, the bathrooms are nice, some room for bikes, and the rest of the space is setup to be multi-use. There's a big stage area and the corners are furnished to be pretty cozy.

Of my past work places--death star cube farms in old silicon valley to tiny rooms in sweltering Berkeley summers to shiny live/work lofts to giant sprawling disneyland like campus to noisy hipster coffee shops--that WordPress office would be up there in terms of a good place to work at.

The real story is the upward trend that if you give an inch, your employees will take a foot. If you offer telecommute, workers will not show up.

I've been freelancing and telecommuting the past five years. I've built my workstyle around chat bubbles, slack channels, video calls, and emails whether 2PM or 2AM.

I've built my lifestyle around that. As in I work around my life. Things just... get done without a direct measure of productivity anymore.

Sitting somewhere from 9 to 5 is like watching TV from the 2000's, ordering Netflix DVDs when we live in the 2010's with streaming Netflix.

And as one disappear, so does another and another. When you look around and realize no one else is there anymore it just becomes a ghost town while the virtual water cooler becomes more and more vibrant.

No ones goes to the office anymore, it's too lonely.

<comment><USER7> > if you give an inch, your employees will take a foot.

Employers have been eating up to 10 hours (2 hours per day) of unpaid commute time of employees for ages. Is it then really surprising that no one wants to waste time coming to work. If that time was paid, if commute time was paid, then maybe you would consider it. But it's a very simple economic calculation. It's like why am I paying for that time. I don't have to, so I won't. That 10 hours is 20% extra salary that is not paid.

And if your argument is that you could live closer, then the counter argument is that employers should have their offices in affordable areas where any employee can afford to easily live because rent is cheap. Not in the middle of downtown because that's what their peers or customers expect.

<comment><USER8> It's interesting to view commute time as the employer's time rather than employee's time, and therefore as time that should be compensated. I'd always thought of it as the employee's time, and the employee's decision about where to live and how to commute, etc. As an employee I'd factor in the commute when making decisions about a job.

Playing with this idea a bit: do you view the clothes that someone (only) wears to a traditional in-person office as rightfully the responsibility of the employer? Lunch?

<comment><USER9> To some extent, yes on all counts.

> As an employee I'd factor in the commute when making decisions about a job.

Meaning you make concessions to either where you live or where you work. Isn't that a sign that it's not completely your choice? If all jobs could be done from home you would have all choices of housing available.

> do you view the clothes that someone (only) wears to a traditional in-person > office as rightfully the responsibility of the employer? Lunch?

Same reasoning here: The only way you're not making concessions is if you happen to like the clothes that fit within the dress code of the company (if any).

And as for lunch, I've done IF for a few years (stopped a while back), and it's really difficult if you don't tailor it around work when it comes to work lunches, fitting meetings, available restaurants around work if you don't bring your own lunch, etc.

I don't have much problems with either of it, as I've accepted it as status quo, but it's obviously not a free choice.

<comment><USER8> > Meaning you make concessions to either where you live or where you work. > Isn't that a sign that it's not completely your choice?

Well yes, I mean there are many things about my job and my life that aren't completely my choice if by that we mean I have to make prioritization decisions and tradeoffs. Not being forced to work from any specific location eliminates one of the constraints, sure.

The point was more about the idea that commute time should be compensated for those whose employers to require them to come to an office. That's not obvious to me. Suppose, for example, I chose to live 2 hours away from my office. Should I be compensated for the 4 hours per day I spend commuting?

<comment><USER9> > The point was more about the idea that commute time should be compensated > for those whose employers to require them to come to an office. That's not > obvious to me. Suppose, for example, I chose to live 2 hours away from my > office. Should I be compensated for the 4 hours per day I spend commuting?

Yes, you're right. I wasn't arguing for a mandate, but merely questioning the status quo. But if I could change it, I guess I would say;

Not if you have the choice to work from home instead. Otherwise, I don't know, maybe? Obviously no one wants to pay wage to someone who chooses to live hours from work, but likewise if my employer forces me to be somewhere far away when I can get the same work done remotely, that's equally bad.

Of course both parties has the choice of switching employer/employee, but I digress.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> If you ask anyone inside IBM or Yahoo, going from remote to in-office was all about significantly reducing the headcount. The moves also coincided with reducing the number of sites, so many people would have to move far away or resign.

I think the benefits of working remotely are still poorly understood, and long-term the companies that are being built remote-first are going to have a significant engineering advantage over those that bolt remote working on after the fact.

<comment> tuna-piano If true, it seems like a silly way to reduce headcount. The employees who feel like they need the job will move, but those who know they can get a job elsewhere will not. This adverse selection leads to some of your best employees leaving, with your worst staying.

Better to just pick and choose who you want to keep.

<comment><USER11> > This adverse selection leads to some of your best employees leaving, with > your worst staying.

Doesn't matter. Failing public companies like IBM and Yahoo don't care about better vs. worse employees; what they care about is reducing costs, and that tends to make better employees _more_ likely to be laid off, because they're more expensive. Wall Street doesn't give a damn how good your employees are; it just wants them to be cheap.

<comment><USER12> That seems overly cynical. I doubt Google would be the company it is today by hiring cheap employees.

<comment><USER11> Is Google a failing public company?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> It sounds like the crux of the issue is connectivity is now fast, reliable, and cheap. Employees don't need to waste time commuting anymore, so they don't.

Now spare a thought for those of us sweating in the digital wasteland that is Australia.

Every so often I have to walk over to my fridge and nudge my 4G modem to improve the signal strength. I have a script running 'round the clock to reset the darn thing if the connection drops completely (this somehow it fixes it). I need the 4G connection because the copper wire to my house is so broken it can no longer support an ADSL signal.

Fibre is apparently coming in like... 2019? It is expected to run at a maximum of 25Mbps.

Needless to say, remote work is not exactly on the cards.

<comment><USER14> FWIW, I have 100Mbps on NBN fibre in Brisbane, and I remote work (for a WordPress agency, as it happens).

Fast internet is definitely possible in Australia, although right now, you might need to move to get it (alas). It's also not yet cheap (but we can partially expense internet, and you can also write it off for tax).

<comment><USER15> I've got 100Mbps plan over copper with FTTN. Generally get about 96mb/s down and 35Mb/s up. It's great.

But I'm lucky, and I get that. We play the broadband lotto, and it's not easy to win. If I move I no doubt will be back in the ADSL2 world hoping I'm close to the exchange.

<comment><USER13> 100Mbps on FTTN? That's not bad!

I'm holding my breath for when the NBN finally rolls through my area. Even 25Mbps would be acceptable at this point.

I had a chuckle today when I saw a restaurant in the Perth CBD was using a Vividwireless 4G modem. I would have thought the middle of the city at least would have a decent wired connection.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> If you look at the pictures I can't say I'm surprised. It doesn't look like a nice place to work. Two long desk, concrete floor, it looks very temporary.

<comment><USER17> If my employer weren't providing me with a proper monitor, as appears to be the case in these pictures, then I wouldn't be coming into the office either.

(Actually, if my employer weren't providing me with a proper monitor, I'd be refusing to work on the grounds of the occupational health and safety risks of working primarily from a laptop for an extended period of time.)

<comment><USER18> Automattic does provide monitors for all employees. In fact, they will arrange a session with an ergonomics consultant upon hiring you to set up a proper home office, as well as give you an allowance to buy a proper desk, chair, keyboard, etc.

At the San Francisco office, there's a table with cinema display monitors you can plug your laptop to, they're just out of frame on this picture.

I'm 100% sure the people on this photo are not using the external monitors because they don't want to. Some people prefer a consistent workflow everywhere (be it at home, the office, Starbucks or at the beach) and you can't quite get that with an external monitor.

Source: Worked at Automattic

<comment><USER17> Well, that's good to hear! I'm surprised by how happy people seem to be using a laptop monitor, but at least it's their choice.

<comment><USER19> I'm surprised as well, though I see that trend where I work as well. People who have a monitor sitting on their desk, but they never use it. They only use their laptop. For myself, I love desktop space.

<comment><USER20> I've changed over time for some reason. I have a nice dual monitor, mechanical keyboard setup in my office at home. But I really got into the habit of working on my laptop--probably because of a lot of travel. These days, I'm more likely to just work on my laptop at home and not even in the office. At work, I have an external monitor and keyboard I could use but I never do.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> As a remote developer myself. I still value having an office.

I think being remote with an office setup is the best you can get. I can go in at any time I want, and still have the nice environment to work from of.

Being remote doesn't necessarily mean no offices.

<comment><USER22> Yarp! That's what our coworking allowance is for. I've been a member of a local coworking space for longer than I've worked at Automattic, and always got value out of it. But there's many coworkers that don't get value from it -- so no need for them to pay for / expense it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I feel like I have the best of both worlds. I work remote, at least from my employer's prospective, but I recently leased an office in town.

I now have a quiet, private space to work, and a nice 5-6 minute bicycle commute :D

It costs a little bit (~$300/mo for the space & utilities - yay for small- town-Ohio pricing), but it's totally worth it.

<comment><USER24> This is how I like to manage my 100% remote position -- I rent a small space to convert into an office, or just hop into a coworking space depending on the amount of time I'm going to be somewhere and the infrastructure that needs to be built out.

I have worked "from home" for years and have much better mental health (and therefore better relationships) if I have a separate space to work from.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> >The goal is to make the company's workforce more nimble

No the goal is to reduce head count with out laying people off. Companies that go from Remote to Non-Remote do it because it is an easy way to reduce head count with out having to Lay people off, it is a methodology to force people to look for work elsewhere.

People that can not relocate or have built their life around working from home can not or will not make the transition back to working in an office easily. As such they will seek out employment that better fits their needs which is ultimately these companies goal because they want to avoid that "XX Company is laying off X,XXX people in the next quarter" headlines

<comment><USER26> >Companies that go from Remote to Non-Remote do it because it is an easy way to reduce head count with out having to Lay people off, it is a methodology to force people to look for work elsewhere.

Isn't the article suggesting that Automattic is doing the opposite? They are allowing people to work remote? By your logic, this would be to help _retain_ workers, right?

<comment><USER25> The story also talks about IBM and Yahoo and how they are doing the opposite of Automattic, this is where the quote is from and what I am talking about.

While the headline is about Automattic the actual article covers more than just them

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I'm sick of working in open spaces. If you cannot give me a cubicle, let me work at home.

There are countless researches clearly saying that open spaces are bad for productivity yet for some reason they always win. And it's easy to see why, you only have to throw buzzwords like collaboration, team-work, open ... and done.

<comment><USER28> What I dislike most about a cubicle is the lack of natural light. (Open space doesn't necessarily mean that natural light is available, I know, but a cubicle makes it even less likely.) I am all for productivity but the cubicle setup feels like going to an extreme for the sake of the last few available percents worth of concentration improvement by stepping over parts of our inherent nature. I am willing to tolerate that only for limited periods if I absolutely need that productivity boost, I am not however considering that good for me or anyone else for the normal daily work regime.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> So they bought an oversized office space, provisioned it like a warehouse, in a location that is horribly expensive to live near or get to. Are they surprised employees would rather not go there?

<comment><USER30> They leased a warehouse and provisioned it like an office. People probably like to go there, but they like to not go there more. I don't think they are terribly surprised as they created the remote working policy deliberately. It is more a counterpoint to IBM and Yahoo and their policy of not allowing remote work any more.

<comment><USER22> Local employees do like to use it, but as we've grown, the majority of employees are not local to it. Fewer bay area employees proportionally, fewer events in SF (due to price, we tend to do meetups elsewhere -- and with recent customs concerns preferably not in the US for our international coworkers), fewer usage.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Working remotely has been a great experience for me. My wife and I started traveling around the US since I am fully remote and her company offered to let her work remote for a while so we could do this.

We either work out of the Airbnb we rent or a cafe. In some cities we were close to a reasonably priced co-working space and would work out of there.

The big draw for me has been the flexibility. We try as hard as possible to do asynchronous work, so some days I will take a few hour break in the middle of the day and go do something, and then work later into the evening.

</comment><comment><USER32> I find this quite funny: "And if they'd rather work at Starbucks, Automattic will pay for their coffee"

I can understand occasionally working out of a coffee shop. But who does this all the time and remains productive? And is it really fair to the coffee shop?

<comment><USER33> I work out of a coffee shop every morning and come into the office around lunch time. It helps break up my day into getting serious work done and things that require communications.

As for being fair to the coffee shop, it's just become a way of life recently. If you don't want people working from your shop, don't offer wifi. The shop I'd been going to for over a year recently stopped offering wifi so I started going to a more worker friendly shop.

</comment></comment><comment> tuna-piano Humans desire to be a part of a community. For the last several decades, that community (in the US) has been in large part the workplace.

Is anything replacing the workplace as the form of community for people or is that something that is just being lost?

<comment><USER34> The workplace stopped hosting healthy communities decades ago. Forcing people into being there all day is just making sure no other community appears to fill this need.

<comment> steve-howard I'm sure you're well aware that this depends on the workplace.

<comment><USER34> Not really. At least, not to any sizeable amount. It depends more on the country, but if a decade on the same job is a long time on your region, then no workplace will have a healthy community.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Shame that such awesome space was barely being used right in the middle of SF. There is a pretty severe shortage of office space in the area. Automattic should both make a pretty good profit by subleasing at current much higher market rents and help alleviate the shortage.

Even better would be if this low density land could be incorporated into the huge 667 Folsom office/residential project planned next door. You could build 50,000+ sqft on that large lot and help both the office and housing shoartage. Unfortunately SF's planning process is so slow and uncertain it is probably too late even if the owner and tenants agreed.

</comment><comment><USER36> doesn't strike me like a nice office. looks like a co-working space for startups. add more people and it will look like a hackathon than a company workspace.

<comment><USER37> That may just be the intent. I see that appear in a lot of hip modern offices, with parts modeled after Starbucks / coffee shops because that's the environment a certain type of person prefers to work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> It's gotten far easier to telecommute in recent years and that keeps the productivity much higher than it used to be. My partners and I tried remote work back in 2007, even spending 10k to video conference with Marratech [1] (Google-owned). Today it's trivial to have good fast communication while working remotely.

[1] [http://www.marratech.com/](http://www.marratech.com/)

</comment><comment><USER39> The article claims they had 5 people visiting the office regularly. That does not sound much compared to 550 employees. However, according to their map [1], there are only about 10 employees in SF itself, a few more in the surroundings.

Maintaining a 15,000 square feet office in that area for the amount of employees seems oversized in any case.

[1] [https://automattic.com/map/](https://automattic.com/map/)

</comment><comment><USER40> I've just started working remotely. I think one of the major benefit for me is actually that we mostly communicate via e-mail/messaging services.

Of course there are plenty of situations where talking face to face is more informative, but I often find that to be rare.

Communicating via text has the added benefit of documentation and allows you to think about what you are actually writing. I find describing what I plan to do with a client via text helps me organize my thinking.

I work in data analysis though. So maybe this doesn't apply to other fields.

</comment><comment><USER41> Judging just from the photo, I'd work from home too if my workspace was a warehouse with a bunch of picnic tables.

</comment><comment><USER42> Funny how fast the 'remote' tide has turned in the last year or two. These days, most prospective employers/contracts I find would prefer me to work remotely. Although personally, I'd rather work onsite ! This is for London and the South East of England.

</comment><comment><USER43> What does a remote team do to enterprise value assuming a long term acquisition?

</comment><comment><USER44> I am wondering how a globally distributed team is set up from a law perspective. How can I employ someone from another company? Create a subsidiary in their country?

</comment><comment><USER45> Looking at that picture, it looks like some kind of backroom place in some store where employees gather to have lunch.

</comment><comment><USER46> What type of work can one do without double monitors and a mechanical keyboard?

<comment><USER47> Mechanical keyboards make annoying noise that will disturb other people working there.

<comment><USER48> Buckling springs are always noisy (you can reduce but not eliminate the noise by putting vibration damping materials inside the springs). "Clicky" switches like Cherry MX Blues are always noisy. Other key switches are much quieter, and most of the noise comes from operator error. You're not supposed to press them all the way down like a membrane switch. The operating point of mechanical key switches is near the middle of the travel. If you press too hard they'll bottom out and make a lot more noise, as well as tiring your fingers more. If you're prone to doing this by accident you can fit soft o-rings around the keycap stem to cushion the end of the stroke.

<comment><USER47> > and most of the noise comes from operator error.

This argument reminds me of the "you are holding it wrong" excuse by Steve Jobs concerning the reception issues with the iPhone 4:

> [https://www.engadget.com/2010/06/24/apple-responds-over- > ipho...](https://www.engadget.com/2010/06/24/apple-responds-over- > iphone-4-reception-issues-youre-holding-th/)

<comment><USER49> The problem is "buying it wrong" a seller like wasdkeyboards (or others) has dropdowns for half a dozen types of Cherry brand switch and a couple dropdown options for sound dampening o-rings.

At home I use an original model M and I'm quite happy with it and frankly it just isn't that noisy. If people don't like the noise, the problem is they're packed in too closely; perhaps my loud breathing also offends them if they're that deeply invading my personal space.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Volvo Life Paint - <AUTHOR> http://www.volvolifepaint.com/

<comment><USER2> It appears to be a rebranded [http://www.albedo100.co.uk/](http://www.albedo100.co.uk/) .</comment>


You'll Get a Cow if You Work at This Company - <AUTHOR> http://thenextweb.com/shareables/2011/12/01/work-at-this-company-and-youll-get-a-cow-a-fixie-and-an-unlimited-supply-of-your-favorite-beer/ <comment><USER2> I'm a little bit confused with this "trend":

[http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57324275-93/work-with- the-c...](http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57324275-93/work-with-the-cool- kids-culture-is-a-weapon-in-2011s-hiring-battle/)

Look at the design of the site and the buttons and the "weird" offers:

<http://jobs.scopely.com/>

<http://jobs.usehipster.com/>

<http://jobs.amicushq.com/>

Is this produced by a new web service that creates a cool job advertisement?

<comment><USER3> > Scopely isn't looking for people that don't get the joke.

No, I get the joke. I just don't think it's funny. There's a big difference, and I think the startups that are using this gimmick need to think really hard about who exactly they are targeting with these things, because it sure does seem to me to be people who value style over substance.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> this type of job-listing is ridiculous. not because it is juvenile or the sort of a thing that may be indicative of a bubble, but rather, because it is condescending.

in the job market, there are two things i'd like to trade for my skills and time: dollars and equity. i also appreciate and put value on a company having a nice office to work at and that they have a laid-back culture, but they can just say that. i don't need them to buy me my beer or coffee to "signal" that they are hip, i'd rather have the cash and pick my beer when i want to get drunk. i also don't need them to "signal" that they are green by buying me a bike -- i'd rather have them tell me that they care about that and what things do they do as a company to be green.

in general, all these things companies do to "signal" culture strike me as stupid. just say what you value and have your important actions reflect it.

<comment><USER5> Some startups prefer developers who are looking for more than just dollars and equity. While important, those are certainly not the only things that motivate us. We're in this because we want to reshape civil society through innovation, and because we're having the time of our lives doing so. Better to have teammates with similar motivations, and not those driven simply by the bottom line.

<comment><USER6> The fact that you keep jumping in and defending yourself after every negative comment makes you look like you are seriously lacking confidence.

Nobody is questioning that you believe in what you do and are doing well at it, and enjoying your work. What we are questioning is your methods.

Let me put it into perspective (my perspective):

If you want to donate $2000 dollars to heifer.org for each employee, just do it. Don't put it in my name. I have my own charities, and would prefer to make my own choice.

Don't buy me a bike. I am disabled and that perk just slaps me in the face with it.

Don't buy me beer. I do not drink, and find the implication that drinking is required for your culture to be a little creepy.

Don't say that I am getting $2000 for R&D. That is pocket change for true R&D, and makes me worry that not only do you not handle budgets well, but that the companies future innovation funding could get messed up in HR negotiations.

The bottom line is that most of your perks scare me. Not because there is anything wrong with offering them, but because it shows a severe lack of empathy for the diversity of people in this world.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Maybe I'm just getting old and uptight but I find things like "unlimited amount of beer" to be a real turn-off. It has a feel of immaturity. "Yeah, let's get drunk! Woohoo!" Really?

It's not the first job ad where I see something along these lines. Sure it tells me that the culture is probably laid-back, but depending on how it's phrased, it can be sound very juvenile.

<comment><USER8> I like a beer to relax with coworkers after most of the workday is over. If I have one every day, that's 260 beers a year. Let's say it's good beer and we are buying in bulk, so each bottle costs $2. That's $520 a year for just one person. On a 10-person team where everyone has a couple beers each night, you'd be spending $10,400 on beer, which is a benefit worth mentioning.

You're not going to be drunk from two beers, either, so if you drink at work instead of going to a bar, a little more work has the opportunity to be done. All in all, a nice benefit for everyone.

If you don't drink alcohol, I'm sure they'll buy you an unlimited amount of Perrier or energy drinks or whatever else you want.

<comment><USER7> Honestly, I don't mind or care about people drinking at work. _I_ probably wouldn't mostly because beer makes me very sleepy.

But it's really a matter of phrasing.

"We typically have a couple of beers together at the end of the day" sounds much better than "we'll provide you with an unlimited amount of beer" and likely gives the intended image of the company culture. The former tells me that people like to relax together, the latter focuses on the beer _you_ will have access to and incidentally on the dollar amount of that beer, not the social aspect of it.

<comment><USER9> Perhaps, but then, "we typically have a couple of beers together at the end of the day" doesn't sound as novel or noteworthy as "we'll provide you with an unlimited amount of beer."

For better, or for worse, the "unlimited amount of beer" line is catchy. It's memorable. And it sends a very strong signal of the company's culture. That cultural signal will turn off quite a few would-be applicants, but it will attract many others. And isn't that the point of a well-thought-out job listing in the first place? You want to find people who'll kick ass at the job, but part of that ass-kicking is cultural fit. Perhaps a bigger part than many of us would admit at first blush. (In this particular case, they seem to be casting a line for New York hipsters. If that's what they want, great. If it's not, then they might want to rethink their listing).

Of course, there is certainly a way to take "startupy" culture too far. Recall the '90s tech scene, for instance. But that depends less on the culture in question, and more on whether or not the company is getting the results to back up the unique culture. A unique culture is pointless, and possibly even destructive, without productive results.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Sort of backwards to my company Cattlesoft where we prefer our employees to already have their own cows before coming to work for us.

We develop software for the cattle industry and have had far better luck with hiring people who own cattle or grew up on a ranch as they better relate to our customers.

Of course hiring someone who has their own cattle herd means they can't easily pick up and move to our location so we all work from our own ranches and keep in contact via Campfire and Skype.

<comment><USER11> I have two pygmy goats, is that close enough?

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Ok, so what is the appeal of fixed gear bikes? They can't be that good for exercising/fun, it seems like not being able to shift would make riding sloooow anywhere that isn't Kansas.

<comment><USER13> Other commenters already mentioned the limited amount of pieces to break or maintain (a big plus). Other benefits:

1\. The amount of waste between your legs and the road is supremely limited. Until you've been on (evan a cheap) fixed gear you really haven't felt how much power gets lost in a bike with a de-railer setup. It's very addicting.

2\. Weight. Sort of related to above.. The truth is, I like climbing most hills on my fixed better than on my geared bike because it's _so_ light. Gears are nice, but there's no substitute for just plain doing less work.

<comment><USER8> You can build light fixed-gear bikes, but most fixed-gear bikes you buy at a store are going to be heavier than a racing bike from the same store. Of course, the price difference is going to be $3000, so perhaps that doesn't matter much. I have a steel single/fixed bike for commuting and a carbon-fiber racing bike, and the racing bike is about 7 pounds lighter than the fixed-gear bike. (I do have some bells and whistles on the commuting bike that add weight, like a chainguard, fenders, and a rack; but those only add about a pound or so.)

I'm going to try to build a sub-15-pound fixed-gear bike in the near future, so we'll see how that goes. The reason you see so many 15-pound derailer bikes is because 14.99 pounds is the lower limit for UCI races, and the people that spend money on light bikes are doing that to ride them in UCI races.

As for wasted power; I picked a gear that matches my fixed gear bike's gear and rode both for a mile at a 95rpm cadence. Same heart rate both times, which means my body is working equally hard to propel both the same distance and speed. Pushing your sail-like body through the air is where your energy goes when riding a bike. Everything else is a rounding error.

(It would be nice if someone with power-measuring pedals and a power-measuring hub could try both scenarios, though. Then you would know exactly how many watts are being lost in the drivetrain.)

<comment><USER13> Sorry.. yeah, I was comparing relatively comparable budgets (or frankly even fixed budget N vs geared budget N*2).

As far as the wasted power, so again.. I don't have a 3k road bike. Both my bikes cost < 700$ to put together, and at that price the fixed gear is probably gonna be lots more efficient :) I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the power loss might be somewhat psychological either. Might be the feeling of the pedals pushing you in the soft parts of the stroke that in-part make you feel that connected with the pavement... either way, it feels good. Probly as good as a few hundred bucks for a bicycle can feel :)

[Edit: Oh! Forgot another thing I really like about fixed's.. Silence! Admittedly, bit of icing on the cake more than a core reason for riding.. but the complete lack of sound that comes from a fixed can be a pretty beautiful thing when riding early morning or late at night (when there's not a bunch of other noise to drown out freewheel clicking anyways)]

<comment><USER8> Honestly, cheap bike components aren't inefficient, they just wear out very quickly. Low-end components use plastic where high-end components use metal, and really high-end components use titanium instead of aluminum.

In my opinion, cheap components look and feel ugly regardless of what kind of bike they are attached to. The good news is that you can build a fixed gear bike out of good equipment for what you'd pay for a racing bike groupset.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I was really hoping this startup was actually giving the developers a cow - not donating to an organization that donates livestock (including cows) to hunger stricken areas of the world.

I have donated to the Heifer project before, but never saw "my cow". Regardless of that, it's a great organization. Amicus on the other hand is great at getting news sites to write misleading titles about them.

<comment><USER11> Cows are nature's job creators.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> At my office, we have a couple of old BMX bikes that were picked up at garage sales, including one spray-painted blue and white with a small Star of David awkwardly inscribed on the front with a Sharpie and the words "East Side" scratched out on the tube.

We ride the bikes around the office because it's like 8 guys in a 3000+ square-foot warehouse (and because we've camped out in the good offices, but those aren't quite near the restroom).

I didn't get a cow when I started. Instead we got an office convection oven. I bake bread in it from time to time, though it's actually proved more popular for lunchtime frozen pizzas. There's also a panini press. Today our CEO brought in turkey soup leftovers and some ribs.

(We're hiring, but mostly looking for a really good computer vision guy at the moment: <http://www.nearbuysystems.com/company/vision> )

</comment><comment><USER16> 1999, is that you?

</comment><comment><USER8> I'd prefer to spend my signing bonus however I like.

</comment><comment><USER17> "empowers non-profits and political campaigns to leverage the social networks of their supporters to raise more money, attract more members, and win more votes"

To me, it sounds like their product will be a Facebook app that'll ask permission (I hope) to spam my friends.

<comment><USER5> You can check out our demo at <http://amicushq.com/> if you'd like to see what our product does.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> We need more companies with real business models focused on solving social problems. I couldn't be more excited about this rising crop of "do well by doing good" companies. I expect big things from Amicus.

</comment><comment><USER19> ridiculous

<comment><USER20> Is it? You know what I hear from developers a lot? "I make enough money. I'm interested in solving interesting problems and working with interesting people."

So Amicus gives a small-ish amount of cash (relative to other signing bonuses I've seen), but ties in several other perks that say a lot about company culture. Each of their ideas says something about the company:

Counter Culture coffee - I didn't know anything about this brand before seeing this listing, but it appears their focus is sustainability and education.

Donated dairy cow - I've heard of this one before, and another similar program with goats. More "responsible world citizen" action.

Gym memberships - Combined with other items on the perk list, it appears that Amicus wants to provide you the opportunity to live a balanced life that includes fitness.

iPad 2 - Ostensibly for "prototyping", but really a statement that they want to provide you with tools that allow you to work while comfortable. More balance.

Iron Man Helmet - Manditory for all company events, I'm assuming. This is just fun!

Unlimited beer - The statement here is that the company is laid back and trusts you to do the responsible thing.

Fixie bike - Hipster fantastic, but who are we to judge? It reinforces the fitness/balance statement.

<comment><USER6> Yes, it is ridiculous. They are ensuring that they get people who are interesting... and all the exact same flavor of interesting. It feels juvenile, even if they intended it sincerely.

Maybe they are find people, and maybe it is a fine company. I have no way of knowing. But this approach does not appeal to me, personally because is feels like it is trying too hard.

<comment><USER5> We think it's possible to work hard, make an impact, and still be playful while doing so. That approach might not be for everyone but we certainly love it!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> You lost me at dairy cow.. :(

</comment><comment><USER22> an organization's culture should drip from every pore, just like the sweat that builds its products and services.

In the end, it's about effectiveness, and I predict this move will get Amicus in touch with more compatible candidates, than simply writing a large check.

<comment><USER5> Thanks James, we agree!

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> So if they hire you they'll ... wait for it ... give you money, plus, some other trinkets you could have just bought with money yourself. Hmmmmm. Put me down as preferring to get either _just_ money, or, things I can't get already with money. easily. But don't make purchasing decisions for me. I may have better things I could spend money on.

</comment><comment><USER24> awesome</comment>


Ask HN: How to Make the Most of YC Startup School? - <AUTHOR>

I just moved to San Francisco and am new to conferences and meetups. I'm a recent grad programmer working for a startup in the city.
I received an acceptance email for Startup School 2014, was wondering if you had any tips on making the most of the conference.
Thanks!
PS: I'm looking for a permanent place to live in the city, please send a personal email if you know anyone who has a room available or is searching for roommates. <comment><USER2> Talk to as many people as you can, and if you see people that you recognize, make sure you talk to them. Tell 'em what you're working on. Don't be afraid to talk to the speakers.

<comment><USER3> I don't think the speakers hang out with the audience. Do they?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Form connections that will last past the conference, get people's contact information so you can get together again later. Also like rohunati said, talk to everyone.

</comment><comment><USER5> Thanks for asking this question! I am also going there and was wondering about it. As others said, I will try to talk to as many people as possible about my apps, ideas and questions i have in mind. Hope to see you around as well :)</comment>


Open Whisper Systems partners with WhatsApp to provide end-to-end encryption - <AUTHOR> https://whispersystems.org/blog/whatsapp/ <comment><USER3> I trust Moxie more than governments or companies, so this really makes me happy. If you've read things on his website ([http://www.thoughtcrime.org](http://www.thoughtcrime.org)) you'll know how important remaining secure from the government is to him. This is a huge step in the right direction. I'd also like to congratulate WhatsApp on their decision, I have a lot more respect for them now.

Congrats Moxie and team. You guys are doing a great thing for humanity.

<comment><USER4> All of that work is irrelevant unless we have an open baseband and an open SIM card.

Without that, your carrier _owns you_ at a bit by bit level in the memory of "your" computer.

<comment><USER5> Have carrier attacks from the baseband been seen in the wild?

By comparison, application-based encryption of messages addresses a bunch of real threats. The NSA is not the only threat; malicious wifi operators, for example.

<comment><USER6> > malicious wifi operators

Malicious GSM operators as well.

"Fake cell towers" are rampant across America and operate without warrants. Thats why the police are trying to hard [0] to protect their existence. There is a new project today announced to track all the IMSI catchers around America: [https://www.indiegogo.com/p/1016404](https://www.indiegogo.com/p/1016404)

These tend to be used to track locations of people but they can also be used to intercept SMS and mobile internet traffic.

[0] [http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore- city/bs-...](http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bs-md- ci-stingray-officer-contempt-20141117-story.html)

<comment><USER7> What do fake cell towers have to do with baseband firmware?

<comment><USER8> They're vectors for layer-2 attacks. The (valid) implication is that you don't have to assume Verizon is colluding with NSA to be concerned about attacks on the baseband.

<comment><USER7> Good point. But at the same time, a secure, bug free baseband won't save you from a fake cell tower that's intercepting and recording your text messages.

<comment><USER8> No, but it would save you from layer-2 attacks that corrupt memory and can thus read _encrypted_ text messages.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Not only is this huge by itself (600 million users with E2E encrypted messages by default), but I'm _hoping_ this will put a big pressure on Google, Microsoft and others to adopt TextSecure's protocol (or something very similar), too.

This is how you deliver strong security to the masses. Not by convincing all your friends to adopt some weird and obscure chat app with the only benefit that it's "more secure" (most won't care), but by getting large service providers to adopt it and push it to hundreds of million of users without them even noticing.

Oh, and I assume that if Whatsapp adopted it, Facebook Chat isn't too far behind...right?

<comment><USER10> Highly unlikely seeing as Facebook uses the content of your messages to market ads to you, build up a profile of you, identify you and identify trends (links, keywords).

The fact that Facebook owns WhatsApp makes this announcement a big surprise as I think they profit far more with unencrypted messages (although WhatsApp was just delivering, not storing them supposedly).

<comment><USER11> I have never seen an ad on Facebook that was obviously targeted based on my chats, in fact, targeting ads based on my chats would be a pointless, money- losing approach for them as I never talk about commercially relevant things with my friends.

The ads I see on Facebook currently are for SSL certificates (guess what I bought recently), BGP routing optimisation products (not sure why), and TransferWise (I used them once). In short, lots of remarketing and something presumably targeted at one of the news sources I get in my feed e.g. slashdot.

These are all pretty nerdy yet also pretty reasonable ads. Ads targeted based on my chats would mostly revolve around .... well, not sure. At best, nights out or local cinemas. I doubt there's much profit in that.

<comment><USER10> It's possible to build a more complete picture of someone's interests based on what they share privately via Facebook chat.

It's also public knowledge that they've been parsing messages for links to then 'like' the appropriate pages inside Facebook.

Rather than debate about how much profit there could be in it, which is entirely down to what the user talks about, I think it is important to realise the potential here even if it not fully realised at this point it time.

Also remember that they are keeping chat history indefinitely in HBase clusters (because they are 'sentimental') so as your habits and interests change over time this will become invaluable data to marketers who want to understand consumer behaviour.

I think it's great that WhatsApp are implementing end-to-end encryption but their now immediate connection with Facebook doesn't sit well with me. Perhaps I'm an idiot, but it doesn't take long to realise that there are perhaps competing interests at play here.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Since this doesn't seem to be ready to be fully announced yet, I checked last week and Open WhisperSystems is still looking for iOS developers to help. Moxie mentioned on twitter that security and crypto experience is not required, but they are looking for f/t devs not just p/t help.

Also they have a browser extension that could use some help from front-end devs:

[https://github.com/WhisperSystems/TextSecure- Browser](https://github.com/WhisperSystems/TextSecure-Browser)

It is still pretty early but the project has Bithub as well. From my understanding, this is their planned desktop version.

</comment><comment><USER12> The Verge had an article about this, whatever "this" is: [http://www.theverge.com/2014/11/18/7239221/whatsapp-rolls- ou...](http://www.theverge.com/2014/11/18/7239221/whatsapp-rolls-out-end-to- end-encryption-with-textsecure)

But that's also 404 now, here's a cached copy: [http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:NAz9uOi...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:NAz9uOinm9QJ:www.theverge.com/2014/11/18/7239221/whatsapp- rolls-out-end-to-end-encryption-with-textsecure)

And here's a copy of the article text: [http://pastebin.com/Y5CUPqDJ](http://pastebin.com/Y5CUPqDJ)

They talked to Moxie about it, so it doesn't look like a hoax. More like it wasn't supposed be announced yet.

It goes without saying that this would be a _big deal_. And it would explain a lot of the slow movement w.r.t. an iOS client. Although The Verge wasn't sure if and when the encryption would be available on iOS. And WhatsApp is closed source software, something that's unlikely to change, which really isn't what we want from a secure messenger. So I might keep Text Secure installed for the time being.

But still. OTR (and the enhanced/modified version of it TextSecure is using) is probably the easiest to use way to communicate in a reasonably secure fashion, and it'd would be fantastic to see it used by hundreds of millions of users all of a sudden -- even if it's sitting on top of insecure mobile operating systems and untrusted-yet-privileged hardware.

<comment><USER13> >> But still. OTR (and the enhanced/modified version of it TextSecure is using) is probably the easiest to use way to communicate in a reasonably secure fashion, and it'd would be fantastic to see it used by hundreds of millions of users all of a sudden -- even if it's sitting on top of insecure mobile operating systems and untrusted-yet-privileged hardware.

Have you had issues getting OTR to connect sometimes? Myself and about 5 friends have been using OTR with ChatSecure on the phone and pidgin on the desktop. Sometimes the OTR connection just doesn't engage, and we suspect it's because there are multiple instances of the chat client signed in and it like "crosses the streams" or something. CryptoCat has similar issues. Is there a perscribed way of using OTR that won't give us these problems?

TextSecure hasn't given us any problems yet ... though, we never see the encrypted text messages in our SMS, even when we use textsecure over google voice. Does TextSecure just bypass actual SMS channels?

<comment><USER14> That's a common problem when using OTR with the same account in a multi-device environment. It is fixed by the introduction of instance tags in libotr 4.x [0]. You should check the versions of libotr used by all your clients - <USER2> they are all libotr 4.0+, you shouldn't have these problems.

[0] [https://otr.cypherpunks.ca/UPGRADING- libotr-4.1.0.txt](https://otr.cypherpunks.ca/UPGRADING-libotr-4.1.0.txt)

A simple workaround is to use a different account for each device (e.g. firstname.lastname@example.com, email@example.com).

TextSecure's developers recognize that a good multi-device experience is essential to provide a comparable experience to other messaging apps. Their approach is different from OTR's, and is described here [0].

[0] [https://moderncrypto.org/mail- archive/messaging/2014/001022....](https://moderncrypto.org/mail- archive/messaging/2014/001022.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> "[...] and our roadmap for our own products remains unchanged."

What is that roadmap? TextSecure for iOS is stalled...

Awesome for Moxie and team, his is huge news. But the world still needs a cross platform, open source, end-to-end encrypted platform... It's just too important to trust Facebook with.

<comment><USER16> Text messaging for Signal is not "stalled", just still in development.

[https://github.com/WhisperSystems/Signal- iOS/commits/textSec...](https://github.com/WhisperSystems/Signal- iOS/commits/textSecure)

<comment><USER17> it might be fair to say that it's taken longer to release than the devs anticipated or hoped. but the good news is that anyone here can contribute to the code and help to change that!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Incidentally, the WhatsApp cofounder donated $1M to the FreeBSD foundation today.

The other link posted, theverge.com, is 404 as well, btw.

</comment><comment><USER19> I don't suppose they will open source the WhatsApp client as part of this. Assuming so, that sounds like a compromise for Open Whisper Systems.

</comment><comment><USER20> But wait... Didn't Facebook Inc; Buy whats app for 19 billion? So does this mean Whisper Systems is working with 'facebook' on this...? Maybe i'm wrong...

<comment><USER21> Yep. And Facebook have done other privacy-aware things recently - such as setting up a Tor hidden node: [http://arstechnica.com/security/2014/10/facebook-offers- hidd...](http://arstechnica.com/security/2014/10/facebook-offers-hidden- service-to-tor-users/)

<comment><USER20> TOR can be compromised easily however... Edit) So they say...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> If this is true and has no strings (backdoors) attached this is huge. This means end-to-end encryption for messages from more than half a billion people and an incredible privacy win compared to SMS usage. Brought to you by facebook.

<comment><USER23> I do not think there are likely to be backdoors: Moxie just wouldn't allow it without walking away and saying something loudly. He is _not_ on the NSA's Christmas list. :)

<comment><USER24> Trusting one person simply because they're cool, with the privacy of 600M users, is pretty foolish. Even if everything you say is true, and Moxie signs off on the implementation, nothing prevents men in black suits turning up the day he leaves and suggesting they introduce a subtle bug.

<comment><USER25> Agreed. This fanboy kinda trust and reliance can be very damaging.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Why do all of these services insist on you giving them your mobile number? Even Telegram, which claims to be the all giving god of encryption and privacy, insists on having it no matter what. It's a massive barrier to entry which I'm not willing to cross, and I'm sure other people aren't either.

<comment><USER27> Whatsapp requires a telephone number as it uses that for your ID. Same with RedPhone. TextSecure (android) can certainly be used without registering -you just miss out on the push-via-data service.

<comment><USER26> > Whatsapp requires a telephone number as it uses that for your ID.

I understand that. I'm questioning why they've set such an arbitrary restriction in the first place.

<comment><USER11> It's not arbitrary. It simplifies things for users a lot. No usernames or passwords to remember. Many telcos link your phone number to your identity which you cannot really lose, so therefore also no chance of losing your WhatsApp account. Also, more importantly, solves the contact discovery/social network problem by letting you reuse the phones address book.

<comment><USER26> You'll find that many people are very reluctant to give up that sort of information about themselves though, whether it be for privacy or because they don't like being incessantly spammed. I understand it existing as an option, maybe even a default, but to make it to the only method of authentication seems insane. Sure, many users will deem that the benefit of using the application overwhelms any negative implications, but it would be nicer if they weren't forced to make that tradeoff in the first place.

I'm not against the option existing, I'm against it being the only option.

<comment><USER11> >You'll find that many people are very reluctant to give up that sort of information about themselves though

Erm. I suspect you don't realise that WhatsApp has over half a billion users. It's as large as the major webmail services and nearly as large as Facebook itself. Society has reached consensus on this issue very fast - phone numbers as your identity work well, and any app that wants to be accepted by the market has to work this way exclusively.

<comment><USER26> > Erm. I suspect you don't realise that WhatsApp has over half a billion > users.

I'm well aware.

Just because something has given up this information doesn't mean they approve of being asked, just that they evaluated that the positives outweigh the negatives. If I put out snail pellets to save my lettuces it doesn't mean I enjoy the death of any animal, it just means that I value the outcome of healthy lettuces more than living mollusks.

> any app that wants to be accepted by the market has to work this way > exclusively

I see nothing that suggests this, outside of a successful app despite it. Maybe they'd have more users if they didn't have such an asinine policy. We don't (and probably can't) know for sure.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Great news, WhatsApp needs all the help it can get on security matters.

[https://www.eff.org/secure-messaging-scorecard](https://www.eff.org/secure- messaging-scorecard)

</comment><comment><USER29> I recently tried WhatsApp alternatives that provided end-to-end encryption on Android (I use TextSecure, but only 1% of my contacts do). Wickr was the best, but a little too paranoid for daily use. WhatsApp has a better UI and sends messages faster. I would _love_ to trust that their end-to-end encryption is legit, and WhisperSystems being involved helps, but.. seems I'm still skeptical.

<comment><USER30> What about Telegram? I've been fairly pleased with it and its interface is a shameless rip off of WhatsApp. (which isn't a bad thing mind you)

<comment><USER31> Telegram should be considered insecure. See this post for a nice summary: [http://security.stackexchange.com/a/49802](http://security.stackexchange.com/a/49802)

<comment><USER30> That seems more like an ad-hominem than anything.

Their secret chats specifically seem like they would be entirely secure.

<comment><USER32> Steve Gibson did a pretty detailed analysis of Telegram on Security Now #444, recorded 25 Feb 2014. He concluded that Telegram's security was inadequate and recommended Threema as an alternative.

[http://twit.tv/show/security-now/444](http://twit.tv/show/security-now/444)

[https://threema.ch/en](https://threema.ch/en)

<comment><USER30> Thanks for the link to the security-now show, good stuff and does a good job of explaining the reservations in the crypto community around Telegram. I'm now looking at other options.

I do like that Telegram launched with an API, but ya, it sounds like security isn't something that can be trusted. Thanks for the informative link.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> I need convincing. Facebook can't monetize end-to-end encryption, and WhatsApp doesn't ask before uploading my contacts. Encryption from the client to the server is a start, but there's not enough here to make me use it.

<comment><USER34> > I need convincing. Facebook can't monetize end-to-end encryption,

Completely right. Facebook paid $19Bn for whatsapp. How is _not being able to keyword-search messages_ going to help them cover some of that cost? It sounds great but doesn't add up.

<comment><USER35> In this case, the metadata (who is talking to who, and when) may be more valuable than the messages' contents.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> can't find any official statement from WhatsApp anywhere. Most of the sources just cite Marlinspike.

<comment><USER37> Yes, it sounds too good to be true. Like the Yes Men's "New York Times Special Edition".

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> This is so unbelievably awesome.

</comment><comment><USER39> So, does this mean that users of the Android TextSecure app (and perhaps even Signal for iOS) will be able to communicate with WhatsApp users?

<comment><USER40> Unlikely. Yet they will share the same level of secrecy and encryption for their communications now.

<comment><USER41> >> "...same level of secrecy..."

Well, no. As pointed out elsewhere in this thread, if Whisper Systems doesn't own the whole app, then the Whatsapp code might include code (that they "forget" to show Moxie) that phones home to the Zuckerberg mansion/windowless black buildings in Virgina.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> So how does the initial key exchange work here?

<comment><USER43> TextSecure uses the OTR protocol [1,2], which itself uses Diffie-Hellman key exchange [3] to allow the communicating devices to agree on a shared key without the key being transmitted over the channel [4].

OTR actually uses "ephemeral" Diffie-Hellman [5], where a new shared key is generated for each session. This provides forward security by guaranteeing that a key compromise in the future won't render past messages decryptable.

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TextSecure](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TextSecure)

[2] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-the- Record_Messaging](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-the-Record_Messaging)

[3] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffie%E2%80%93Hellman_key_exch...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffie%E2%80%93Hellman_key_exchange)

[4] [http://security.stackexchange.com/a/45971](http://security.stackexchange.com/a/45971)

[5] [https://whispersystems.org/blog/advanced- ratcheting/](https://whispersystems.org/blog/advanced-ratcheting/)

<comment><USER44> TextSecure doesn't use OTR, it uses a construction based on the Axolotl ratchet as described here:

[https://github.com/trevp/axolotl/wiki](https://github.com/trevp/axolotl/wiki)

It's much much better than OTR in that:

\- Asynchronicity is on by default (you don't need both parties to be up and running at the same time to start a convo)

\- You don't need to wait for your recipient to answer before you can write something (ie you can send multiple messages one after another, directly)

\- Because you can do both of the above, you can easily do multiparty, something OTR struggles with.

For more details:

[https://whispersystems.org/blog/asynchronous- security/](https://whispersystems.org/blog/asynchronous-security/)

[https://whispersystems.org/blog/private- groups/](https://whispersystems.org/blog/private-groups/)

<comment><USER43> You're right and I was wrong. The TextSecure protocol was originally based on OTR, but I hadn't appreciated the degree of divergence from it required by their introduction of asynchronous ephemeral key negotiation.

So, thanks! I learned about some cool stuff.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> The submitted link ([https://whispersystems.org/blog/whatsapp/](https://whispersystems.org/blog/whatsapp/)) is 404. Also, at this time, the Whisper Systems blog doesn't actually show a blog entry referencing WhatsApp.

<comment><AUTHOR> huh, it worked for me just a minute ago. Wonder if they just took it down? (edit: looks like it's back up now)

Here's the text of the page I got:

At Open Whisper Systems, our goal is to make private communication simple. For the past three years, we've been developing a modern, open source, strong encryption protocol [1] for asynchronous messaging systems, designed to make seamless end-to-end encrypted messaging possible.

Today we're excited to publicly announce a partnership with WhatsApp, the most popular messaging app in the world, to incorporate the TextSecure protocol into their clients and provide end-to-end encryption for their users by default.

Your messages may already be encrypted

The most recent WhatsApp Android client release includes support for the TextSecure encryption protocol, and billions of encrypted messages are being exchanged daily. The WhatsApp Android client does not yet support encrypted messaging for group chat or media messages, but we'll be rolling out support for those next, in addition to support for more client platforms. We'll also be surfacing options for key verification in clients as the protocol integrations are completed.

WhatsApp runs on an incredible number of mobile platforms, so full deployment will be an incremental process as we add TextSecure protocol support into each WhatsApp client platform. We have a ways to go until all mobile platforms are fully supported, but we are moving quickly towards a world where all WhatsApp users will get end-to-end encryption by default. This is still the beginning

We're continuing to develop the TextSecure app [2], and our roadmap for our own products remains unchanged. We've been working with WhatsApp for the past half year, and have learned a lot through the process of deploying the TextSecure protocol at the scale of hundreds of millions of users. We're excited to incorporate what we've learned from this integration into our future design decisions, and to bring this experience to bear on integrations that we do with other companies and products in the future.

We believe that by continuing to advance the state of the art for frictionless private communication with open source software, open protocols, and simple libraries, we'll have additional opportunities to support mass adoption of end-to-end encryption.

WhatsApp deserves enormous praise for devoting considerable time and effort to this project. Even though we're still at the beginning of the rollout, we believe this already represents the largest deployment of end-to-end encrypted communication in history. Brian Acton and the WhatsApp engineering team has been amazing to work with. Their devotion to the project as well as their thoroughness in getting this done are inspiring in a world where so many other companies are focused on surveillance instead of privacy.

Get involved!

If you'd like to participate in Open Whisper Systems, there are still a few more days to apply to Winter Of Code [3], our retreat in Hawaii this January. Or check out our Android [4], iOS [5], and browser [6] clients on GitHub to join in on development.

If you'd like to donate to Open Whisper Systems, we accept Bitcoin donations [7] that are automatically paid out to each merged PR via BitHub [8]. You can also make tax-deductible donations by credit card through the Freedom Of The Press Foundation here [9].

Links:

      [1] https://whispersystems.org/blog/advanced-ratcheting/
      [2] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.thoughtcrime.securesms
      [3] https://whispersystems.org/blog/winter-of-code/
      [4] https://github.com/whispersystems/textsecure
      [5] https://github.com/whispersystems/signal-ios
      [6] https://github.com/WhisperSystems/TextSecure-Browser/
      [7] http://bithub.whispersystems.org/
      [8] https://whispersystems.org/blog/bithub/
      [9] https://freedom.press/bundle/encryption-tools-journalists

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> Also the article from The Verge went offline [http://www.theverge.com/2014/11/18/7239221/whatsapp-rolls- ou...](http://www.theverge.com/2014/11/18/7239221/whatsapp-rolls-out-end-to- end-encryption-with-textsecure)

</comment><comment><USER47> This is a huge improvement and I'm very glad that WhatsApp is going this route.

However, from my point of view, TextSecure isn't there yet. The ideal solution should be decentralized, like XMPP. That makes gathering meta data so much harder.

</comment><comment><USER48> This is going to backfire big time on WhatsApp and get them banned from many countries like India , Saudi Arabia etc.

</comment><comment><USER49> ...and once this is rolled out, they'll add auto-deleting messages, et voila! Snapchat destroyed over night!

</comment><comment><USER50> First a million bucks to FreeBSD, now this? Keep it coming WhatsApp!

</comment><comment><USER51> Amazing news!</comment>


Ask HN: Advices on tools to use for a project - <AUTHOR> I'm developing a project that will have an interface similar to that of Milanotes ("whiteboard" where stuff can be put). I have some experience in backend (mostly Django+DRF) and also some experience developing native applications (iOS, macOS mainly). For this project I feel like it's best to start with a website and only if it proves successful add mobile applications. Since I have little to no experience  developing "modern" front-ends, I'd like to ask your opinion on what tools would be best to do this.
I've been looking at React and Vue. From my understanding they only deal with a the actual front-end and I will need to add a layer that communicates with the backend.
Between React and Vue what do you suppose would be easier to use to accomplish what I want?
Would it be better I use another framework that already has backend glue logic?
Thank you <comment><USER2> React and Vue are both great, well-supported libraries. I'd personally recommend React, especially as someone new to frontend development, in part because React is much more broadly used and as a result it's often easier to google for errors/suggestions/help.

You don't need a framework for "backend glue" necessarily - I prefer not to use one at all. If your app is communicating w/ your backend through REST/graphql and returning JSON, the client logic to query the server is really simple - just query your backend endpoint using a library like fetch or axios and get your data back. Your "layer" can just be a .js file that contains your queries.</comment>


Difference Between the Ideal Disparity of Wealth, and the Reality - <AUTHOR> http://billmoyers.com/2013/03/06/income-inequality-goes-viral/

<comment><AUTHOR> OP here. The most common argument against this type of thing is what Paul Graham calls "The Pie Fallacy" [1]. But I think that argument is fundamentally flawed. While wealth can be created from nothing, one typically requires a certain amount of wealth to get to the level where they can start creating wealth.

[1]<http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html>

<comment><USER2> I think that you confused wealth with money. pg's article you quoted makes this distinction pretty clearly:

 _If you want to create wealth, it will help to understand what it is. Wealth is not the same thing as money. [3] Wealth is as old as human history. Far older, in fact; ants have wealth. Money is a comparatively recent invention._

 _Wealth is the fundamental thing. Wealth is stuff we want: food, clothes, houses, cars, gadgets, travel to interesting places, and so on. You can have wealth without having money. If you had a magic machine that could on command make you a car or cook you dinner or do your laundry, or do anything else you wanted, you wouldn't need money. Whereas if you were in the middle of Antarctica, where there is nothing to buy, it wouldn't matter how much money you had._

Later there's an example of creating wealth:

 _Suppose you own a beat-up old car. Instead of sitting on your butt next summer, you could spend the time restoring your car to pristine condition. In doing so you create wealth. The world is-- and you specifically are-- one pristine old car the richer. And not just in some metaphorical way. If you sell your car, you'll get more for it._</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Best Personal Sites? - <AUTHOR> I'm looking for personal home pages to use as reference for a site design. What are your favorites? <comment><USER2> I'm in the visual design space which for me includes branding + marketing. I used a one page HTML to showcase my portfolio, give personality, and share what my skill set is. Launched two weeks ago and I'm currently interviewing for Sr. roles at FAANG as a result:

[http://taylorgood.com](http://taylorgood.com)

<comment><USER3> I like this layout a lot. What did you use to design it?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm totally jealous about [https://www.monokai.nl/](https://www.monokai.nl/) and [https://shauninman.com/pendium/](https://shauninman.com/pendium/). IMO some of the best personal sites.

</comment><comment><USER5> Definitely [http://worrydream.com](http://worrydream.com) (Bret Victor's home page).

The animated transitions are pretty neat, and were even neater 4 years ago when he first built them, but my favorite part about the site is the way he lays out his whole design philosophy through a number of well-documented projects.

<comment><USER6> I love his layout! Dynamicland is fascinating.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Obviously not claiming it's the best, but I recently redesigned my freelance page if you want to borrow some ideas:

[https://www.seanw.org/](https://www.seanw.org/)

Aimed for minimal but nice looking, and tried to push all the tech jargon to the side so you can ignore it if you're non-technical.

</comment><comment><USER8> By no means is it in the category of best, but I like to think it's at least fun.

[http://shanelessa.com](http://shanelessa.com)

It's missing an about section, but that's because I wanted to experiment with my site, work, and resume speaking for who I am over marketing copy. Affects SEO and likely perception, but I built this recently for a grad school application. If rejected will begin applying for a new job/seek new/clients, and am curious to see how receptive it is then. If it performs poorly then, then a new iteration will be made.

Last note, it's not optimized/built for mobile as of now, so points off for that :/

<comment><USER9> When I have the window taking up just the right half of the screen, I can't reach the scrollbar in the projects page.

The idea is pretty cool, though, and fun indeed.

<comment><USER8> Thank you for raising this usability issue! Definitely noting that for the next round of updates

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Ask HN: What are some great personal blogs/portfolios?[1] This was a question about content, but I would imagine that most answers are also valid to your question.

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19114037](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19114037)

</comment><comment><USER11> Don't want to sound immodest, but I've worked hard on my latest website design: [https://lukaszkups.net](https://lukaszkups.net)

Latest Deus Ex game fans should recognize what was my source of inspiration there ;)

</comment><comment><USER12> Here is a collections of Gifs of a lot of personal websites collected in one place:

[http://umihi.co/thumbnailed-portfolio-websites/](http://umihi.co/thumbnailed- portfolio-websites/)

</comment><comment><USER13> Honestly, youre better off going to Dribbble or Behance for inspiration. With all due respect to the HN community, the majority of personal websites shown here are very engineer-y, meaning there's a lot of talk about what static site generator they used, and how the HTML was a tight 2kb.

Click the link and you're shown something that would look outdated in 2006. Unless you find a blog relevant to your area, you'll abandon that site fast. Medium.com is getting pretty bad, but even their typography makes me at least stick around to scan the first couple of paras.

</comment><comment><USER14> [https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/dmr/www/](https://www.bell- labs.com/usr/dmr/www/)

<comment><USER14> In case anyone think I'm joking, no I'm serious. Todays sites have all these flashy useless animation, its hard to find the information you're looking for, takes forever to load, etc. Dennis's page (now memorialized) has been up for decades, the links are all still valid and will continue to be.

<comment><USER15> In the same spirit, I'll suggest [https://brutalist- web.design/](https://brutalist-web.design/)</comment></comment></comment>


The iTunes Expanding Album Effect in HTML/CSS/JS - <AUTHOR> http://thomaspark.me/project/expandingalbums/

<comment><AUTHOR> The text and background colors are generated from the album artwork (like in yesterday's Panic post) using a modified version of the Color Thief library. More info about the demo here: [http://thomaspark.me/2012/12/the-itunes- expanding-album-effe...](http://thomaspark.me/2012/12/the-itunes-expanding- album-effect-in-css-js/)

</comment><comment><USER2> I shared it here: <http://dot- js.com/posts/ed7625ba-1349-4330-8edf-4e888b25fff0>

</comment><comment><USER3> Really cool animation. It seems like this could be done in pure HTML/CSS if you used the checkbox (radio button would probably work better) or (possibly) focus hacks.</comment>


AMD RX Vega GPU Release Date Will Be Announced at SIGGRAPH 2017 - <AUTHOR> http://www.droidreport.com/articles/10152/20170621/amd-radeon-rx-vega-release-date-confirmed-for-early-august-as-amd-preparing-to-ship-vega-to-aib-partners.htm <comment><AUTHOR> Based on the keynote presentation schedule, I'm guessing the exact announce date will probably be on the 2nd day, July 31.[1]

[1][http://s2017.siggraph.org/schedule- glance](http://s2017.siggraph.org/schedule-glance)</comment>


Ask HN: The best university degree(s) for a budding entrepreneur/engineer? - <AUTHOR> I'll be finishing high school in a few months and I've been struggling to choose a degree that will best prepare me to start a company in the future, in addition to networking with smart/driven people who I can work with to get there.
I've been following the "start-up" scene on and off for a little under a year, and I seem to have an affinity for "entregineers", people who not only understand advanced scientific/engineering concepts, but also help bring them to the world (Elon Musk, Henry Ford, Thomas Edison).
I'm a high achieving student, so entry for most degrees isn't a problem for me.
I have been leaning towards double degrees which have a Commerce/Law component and some form of engineering (Mechatronics/Aerospace/Mechanical/Electrical). I'm unsure as to which one to choose though.
As "Hacker News" is a haven for start-up founders, many with engineering or business degrees (or both), I thought of no better cohort to pose this question to.
What degree (or degrees) would you choose to best prepare one to become an "entregineer"? <comment><USER2> I would do electronics, computer science & mathematical statistics, but then get some deep subject knowledge in a soft domain that really interests you (e.g. med, biochem, genetics, pharmacology, neuroscience etc).

There are soooo many problems out there just waiting to be solved by skilled engineers/mathematicians/statisticians, but the sad thing is that most of these people have no subject matter knowledge, and therefore are ignorant of the opportunities. Likewise the subject matter experts without the statistical/engineering background are unable to grasp what could be done, so never even contemplate the questions. Even "top" researchers in some of my fields are completely unaware of the possibilities. They are ignorant and unaware of it, and sadly even collaborations do not seem to help.

There's gold in the intersections of disciplines.

Edit: But, this is only one approach, and assumes that you want to break new scientific ground as well as make money.

<comment><AUTHOR> I totally agree with your statement that "There's gold in the intersections of disciplines.", and I've put it down on my list of things to become (a polymath).

I've quite seriously looked at the medical sector as one that lacks technological innovation, and both this answer, in addition to makerman's answer seem to validate that opinion.

Look where things lack innovation seems to be the best way to go.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> MIT- arguably best engineering curricula, more focus on applicability/hands-on ability than Stanford (supposedly- I have not attended both), and Boston area is prime for start-ups.

Also they have a very strong culture of entrepreneurship with the 100K, E-club, venture mentoring, etc.

As for specific degree combination- as previously commented- it doesn't matter that much imo.

</comment><comment><USER4> At the end of the day degrees are just pieces of paper. Don't fall into the trap of going into college thinking you are going to double major in X, Y and get a minor in Z. It isn't high school anymore, so take classes you are interested in or you think will add some value to your life and adapt to the structure of a degree program over time. College admissions committees reward the biggest tools (I would know) but now that you've made it, don't waste absurd amounts of time with course work/resume filler bullshit and focus on passion projects, building relationships, etc. -- more important stuff.

Also, organic startups have a much better chance of succeeding so building a rich knowledge base in a subject that interests you is your best path to success rather than picking the degree path that may be most relevant to entrepreneurship. That being said, it may be helpful to ask people what their undergraduate education experience was like (classes/books that really influenced them, projects they worked on, etc.) and pick up a few ideas regarding where to begin?

</comment><comment><USER5> Don't worry about the specific degree so much - you will realize someday that there are more important things like how talking to people and actually share their viewpoint can help you figure out what people want. Translation: get a feel for the school by visiting the campus. It's great you are a good student, but there's much more to entrepreneurship than sheer smarts - it helps if you go to a school where you can meet a lot of non-engineer/management type folks. In the real world, these are the people who will most likely be using the product and it helps to hear what they have to say.

That said, just pick a degree you like and take loads of math classes (if you don't, at least take stats), some C.S classes (take ones with C, scheme). Actually, read Cal Newport's blog - <http://calnewport.com/blog/2009/11/20/a-study-hacks-primer/>

</comment><comment><USER6> If you're looking for breadth and entrepreneurship, I recommend University of Wisconsin - Madison's Biomedical Engineering (BME) program (or similar). I'll be graduating from the program in December. It is also relatively prestigious as it's the only engineering major on campus with a formal application process, and engineering majors on campus are already the hardest.

It doesn't prepare you for industry well (because of it's broad focus) but it really allows you to explore many different engineering fields, perfect for entrepreneurship imho. Although there might be curriculum reform in the future to fix the "unpreparedness" for industry, but change comes slow in Universities.

The program requires you to take introductory classes in biomechanics, bioinstrumentation, biomaterials... and probably a couple more I'm forgetting. In the end, you choose one of these "tracks" and your degree basically turns into one of the other engineering degrees with some bio tacked on, less depth, and more breadth.

One of the other great things about the BME program is that we're required to do a design project EVERY semester, which is a really great opportunity and a pain in the ass (you only get 1 credit for it). But it's a great learning experience working in small teams all the time.

The problem with poor reception among the industry for BMEs is that if they want objects built, they'll hire MEs, if they want circuits, the'll hire EEs, etc. There really isn't any good entry level position fitting for a "well rounded" degree like UW's BME. But again, if you're looking for entrepreneurship, you probably don't care for these entry level positions anyway, but just fair warning.

Conclusion: Look into the details of each program at the schools you're looking into. My example is unique to my major at my school, I know BME programs at other schools are very different, and the other engineering programs here at UW are different from BME. Ask current students students and recent grads about the specific programs you're looking into.

</comment><comment><USER7> Focus more on the resources at your school than on the degree. You want to attend a school that has good entrepreneurial resources, such as student start-up incubators, business plan competitions, mentoring, etc. Regardless of what degree you have, these are resources that you can use to learn about entrepreneurship and build a company while still in school.

Stanford, Duke, and University of Texas (Austin) are schools I know of with good entrepreneurship resources. Since you're about to graduate in a few months, you may have already picked your school. In that case just make sure to seek out whatever entrepreneurship resources are at your school.

If your school doesn't have any entrepreneurship resources, go make some! Start a business plan competition, or a business incubator.

Good luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> I have been seriously considering Stanford, as it seems to be right at the centre of the technology entrepreneur's Mecca of Silicon Valley.

I have yet to find people like myself in my area and I've heard that SA is choc full of ambitious/intelligent/successful people who are ready to start new ventures, in addition to all the VCs being located there.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Who you are is a more accurate predictor of entrepreneurship and success. That being said the two schools that have the best track records are Stanford and UIUC. Stanford (Google, Yahoo, Sun Microsystems) and UIUC (Netscape, Paypal, YouTube, Oracle, Yelp, Farmville)

[http://www.quora.com/What-startups-have-come-out-of- Stanford...](http://www.quora.com/What-startups-have-come-out-of-Stanford- since-2004) [http://www.quora.com/What-startups-have-come-out-of- Universi...](http://www.quora.com/What-startups-have-come-out-of-University- of-Illinois-Urbana-Champaign)

<comment><AUTHOR> "Who you are is a more accurate predictor of entrepreneurship and success." is a wonderfully succinct way to put it, and I hope to become more and more like those who have succeeded in the future (e.g. solid work ethic/reading about a variety of subject/talking to more people).

I guess I'll just have to improve myself, and chase the smart people, who seem to swarm to these universities.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Regardless of where you end up, I highly recommend trying to start or run a student organization.

Learning to motivate unpaid volunteers to do work for you is one of the most valuable leadership experiences I've ever had.

</comment><comment><USER9> Read The Success Manual - Summaries of 100+ greatest Business and self help books of all time <http://thesuccessmanual.bighow.com>

</comment><comment><USER10> I went to Stanford thinking it would be the best decision. It turned out to be a terrible decision, and set me back years. The best-laid plans...

<comment><AUTHOR> Why was it a terrible decision?</comment></comment>


Will Spam and Porn ruin Tumblr's Reputation? - <AUTHOR> http://www.mockingweb.com/will-spam-and-porn-ruin-tumblrs-reputation/

<comment><USER2> It's somewhat ironic that spam and porn are never cited when someone quotes their vanity metrics, e.g.: <http://mashable.com/2011/08/31/tumblr-record- uniques/>

</comment><comment><USER3> If anything, I think the special brand of "tumblr porn" has differentiated it from other blogging platforms.

</comment><comment><USER4> "Users are getting worried about spams and malware spreading at a constant rate in Tumblr."

Really? I've used Tumblr every day for a couple years now. I have never seen any "spams" or porn. This user isn't "worried."

</comment><comment><USER5> No.

<comment><USER6> Pithy, but I usually answer headlines framed as a question "No". If evidence was present or the idea cogent then no question is required.

"I'm simply asking questions" - an intellectually lazy way of implanting an idea.

<comment><USER7> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridges_Law_of_Headlines>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> spam and porn are part and parcel of any successful website</comment>


From broke English teacher abroad to Uber Software Engineer in 8 months - Pete-Codes https://www.nocsdegree.com/from-broke-english-teacher-abroad-to-uber-software-engineer/ <comment> Pete-Codes Hey, author here.

So this person actually put that title in the email to me.

Aaron basically realised he didn't want to be a broke ESL teacher any more, learning to code and is now working at Uber and has got a 100% remote contract.</comment>


Ask HN: What percent of your income do you spend at Amazon? - <AUTHOR> Ask HN:  what percent of your total take home income do you spend at amazon.com? <comment><USER2> Why do you want to know?</comment>


The Biggest Difference Between Coding Today and When I Started in the 80's - <AUTHOR> http://thecodist.com/article/the-biggest-difference-between-coding-today-and-when-i-started-in-the-80-s <comment><USER2> Yes. But in 80's you did not have memory constraints, because 64 kilo was plenty and 640 kilo was total excess for all ages. When you had only 256 bytes of memory, you had to invent the weirdest shit on your own, as there were no books for it.

</comment><comment><USER3> Exactly matches my experience. Started programming in 1975. Had to write code from Knuth's algorithms hundreds of times.</comment>