Personal Branding Without Being a Douche - <AUTHOR> http://www.jasonshen.com/2011/ive-heard-great-things-about-you-a-nondouchey-guide-to-personal-branding-and-self-promotion/

<comment><USER2> Interesting -- this goes straight to some concerns I had about Zach's whole 'brand' and 'persona' response to the (overblown) controversy on swearing. I agree with most of what Jason says here.

But I still have an issue with the notion of my character and reputation being tied to the language of 'brand'. I think it cedes too much ground to the encroachment of marketing into some of the essential parts of human interaction, reducing what we present and edit of ourselves to mere marketing.

Contrast with _why. Here's a guy who clearly edited himself in a radical way, created a persona, built a following, but it would be hard for me to see _why as a 'brand', because the content of his persona was focused on creativity and his contributions to the community, not his marketability.

I totally get that we're all always editing ourselves to present a certain point of view of who we are, from the profile pics we use on Twitter/FB/LinkedIn, to the style we use in our tweets, speeches, presentations, etc. -- it's impossible to eliminate that from our interactions publicly and online.

But do we have to concede that much ground to the business side of things that we call it "branding"? I hope we have different ways of tying our public selves to a kind of integrity that goes beyond the ethics of commerce, to something deeper.

Commerce is such a powerful force in our everyday lives anyway, can we find a broader language to describe this process than something that tends to reduce us to products?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the thoughts.

I used the word "personal branding" mostly because it is the established term that covers what I'm talking about. But I agree with your point in that it sort of turns people into products.

I guess a larger point I should have made in the blog post and that I did in the talk is this:

Your name has a meaning to people, even if you choose to not think about it. Recognizing that what people think / feel when considering "you" is something I want to encourage. Shaping your reputation/brand/name into something positive and making it a useful tool for achieving your goals is, IMO, a worthwhile endeavor.

<comment><USER2> Hi Jason, thanks for responding. I liked your post, and I appreciate that you didn't coin the term -- 'personal branding' has been around a long time.

But the idea of 'Public Rhetoric' has been around far longer, and that's what we're really talking about -- the connection between what I present in public speech or other forum, to a truth about myself -- the 'ethos' of rhetoric.

It's an ancient problem, and the concern I have with propagating the language of 'branding' is that it pulls it too close to the ethics of Mad Men for my taste. There are other ways to, ahem, spin this I think.

The intent of our public rhetoric should be more than just commerce or marketability, as you demonstrate with the charity you started at Stanford.

But I see a problem with the language of 'branding' so close to the idea of 'charity.' It raises a question of ethos -- why are you doing this? For self- promotion or for some other human good?

Of course this has always been a problem, and language can always be used to obscure our true motives. But declaring something as 'branding' outright seems to me to subtly give too much license to our more selfish intents. I'd rather we still talk about Speech or Rhetoric or Reputation than Branding, if for no other reason than it at least creates some distance between commerce and altruism.

And now I've taken this conversation into Aristotelian waters way outside my pay grade...

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey Dave,

It's great to have a discussion about this. I think the concern that people have with businesses is that profit is a rather cold motive. We wonder if at the core of every corporation is an empty vessel, an icy void, a dispassionate pursuit of the bigger bottom line.

As I mentioned in the post, I think the best brands (and businesses) have a mission that is higher than profit. Of course, some might dispute that claim as simply another cold-hearted way to make a buck, but from what we know about Steve Jobs, it seems that he really saw Apple as a vehicle for delivering insanely great products to the world.

And that's why their advertising and marketing resonates so much with us.

I think of it like this: brand -> reputation -> character -> legacy. You've got to work backward from what you want your legacy to be. The usefulness of calling "branding" is that we can use other words/tools/strategies from business and marketing in an analogous way.

Business can be more than "just commerce" in my opinion. But yes, we have to watch our words because they suggest our intent. Would love to hear more about your thoughts on this.

Jason

<comment><USER2> I completely agree that business can be more than just commerce. I actually love my current gig for that very reason. I would love it if companies that value local commerce and community responsibility could co-opt our typical idea of business back into something bigger.

But language tends to go the way of our cultural stories, and the question here is, which narrative about business is dominant -- the narrative of disconnected douchey 1-percenters or the more benevolent narrative put out there by companies like American Apparel?

Unfortunately, it would seem that the former is what our society tends to associate with 'business' and 'branding', and companies like American Apparel (assuming you, er, buy into their whole story of championing local industry) haven't turned that tide. Maybe someday. For now, imo, Mad Men still rule the day.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> The throwaway paragraph about fashion holds much truth, I have found. I decided a year ago to learn how that stuff works. I can't even begin to list the benefits that come with it - it isn't only women that like you more, but men are more likely to take you seriously if you aren't walking around in jeans and a t shirt.

Here's a good site to get started:

<http://www.magnificentbastard.com/>

Lots of good advice, I agree with most of it. A more important step is to head to a high-end clothing store, the type that sticks a salesperson on everyone who walks through the door. Yes, the clothing is expensive, but in conjunction with the professional advice it is very much worth it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey tycho77 - welcome to HN and thanks for the tip. This site looks really useful.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I was at DefragCon the other day and James Altucher had a quote based on his experience with personal branding.

"Anytime you hear someone say 'Personal Branding' it means 'I'm going to lie to you and steal all your money'"

I thought it was pretty spot on based on my experiences with all the people that are so gung-ho about the buzzwords. :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the love Joel... =)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Calling it personal branding instead of reputation is high douchebaggery.

</comment><comment><USER6> Very true: "You have to stand up for yourself and sometimes that means being a bit more aggressive than you normally are. This is the way of the world."

</comment><comment><USER7> I'm not one to lunge personal insults around - but is it bad that when I read the title "Personal Branding Without Being a Douche", the first site I thought of that could use help in this department is the site below?

sebastianmarshall.com

Then again, I did think of it, so maybe they're doing something right.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm actually friends with Sebastian. But before we knew each other personally, definitely admired his blog from afar. His style is not for everyone, but I think his content is really really good.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Isn't this "100 pushups" and "cold showers" guy? Um...

<comment><USER9> Yeah, it is. So? Why would doing personal experiments to improve yourself be a negative for personal branding?

Some of his experiments may be considered silly by some people, but that doesn't take away from the fact that he is working on becoming the best version of himself he can be - an admirable mission everyone should strive to have, but few unfortunately do.

I don't know Jason, but he seems like a really cool guy with a lot of drive, dreams and ambition.

<comment><USER8> Cold showers aren't self improvement. It's the most contrived and limited form of self-punishment I can think of. Much of the developing world showers this way all the time.

Promoting pectoral-shortening exercises among an audience of people who a) largely do not understand how to exercise their bodies in a balanced way and b) spend most of their days hunched or slouching in front of a computer, is not self-improvement. It's sophomoric bragging, and it's irresponsible.

How can I put this? Everything he uses to self-promote seems like he set a goal which sounds impressive (e.g. "100 pushups"), but actually requires a fairly short period of commitment to achieve. It's as if he's molding his entire life for SEO, blog hits, and self-promotion, rather than achievement and improvement. To me, that's douchey.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your thoughts.

I wrote about my personal experience with cold showers and how I feel they have improved my life. This is an experiment with an N of 1. Most notably:

"It also helps me temper my emotional responses to things. I no longer have the panicky feeling that a ton cold water on your skin gives you for more than a few seconds when I take my cold showers – I've trained myself to calm down and overcome this natural response. And I've noticed this ability to temper my response overlap into other areas of my life"

If you haven't tried taking cold showers regularly you might be surprised by the results.

I never posted the 100 pushups article on HN so I'm not sure what you mean about being irresponsibly promoting pushups.

I agree that the 100 pushups requires a relatively short period of commitment. Yet it seems impressive. Which is why in my post I wrote:

"It turns out, with about 4-6 weeks of pushup training 3x a week (~10 mins per session), you can do build your capacity to do something rather difficult: 100 pushups in a row."

The point of that post was not to show off how awesome I am, but to encourage people to go after goals that seem difficult because with consistent effort, large goals can be conquered.

I find it unfortunate that my life comes across to you as molded for SEO and blog hits as that is not my intention. As I state in this post and in my about section, I write to provide resources to help others.

<comment><USER10> Dude, you're getting a fair amount of hate on this thread and I commend you for the way you handle it. Every time someone comes along knocking you, you just respond with "Thanks for your thoughts" then go on to explain yourself. You can't say you don't practice what you preach.

In all honesty, this is the only post of yours I've ever read. I might dig in further and decide that I think you really _are_ a douche. I don't know. But so far I like your style. Especially how you handle all the negativity.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> "My blog is my public face to the world and if I post something horribly offensive here, my brand goes with it."

Friendly advice: folks might be more inclined to take your advice and your "brand" as something actually post-adolescent if your public face to the world consisted of choices of words other than your odd, _repeated_ use of variants of the word "douche" in your writing and in the headline you self-posted here on HN....not amusing and actually offensive to many women _and_ men.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the advice. I recognize that not everyone will jive with my style or choice of words, but similar to Zach Holman's use of swear words, I chose to pick the word that I feel works best.

I think most people are familiar with the term "douche" or "douchebag" and that it's usage is similar to "bastard" -- very far removed from the original meaning. I certainly don't mean to offend anyone but like I mention with the case study of Amit - it's pretty much impossible to please everyone.

<comment><USER12> There's actually an entire podcast on "Savage Love" dedicated to the subject of whether "douchebag" is offensive to women. Many women called in and said that since douching has been discovered to be harmful to the vagina, it's good that douchebag is used as an insult, because it reinforces that douching is a bad thing, hopefully discouraging women from partaking in it.

Doesn't mean that people won't be offended by it still, but an interesting way to think about it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Really interesting. I could see an argument being made there. I think the bigger thing is that douche is relatively disconnected with women. It's not as direct as, for instance, calling someone a "pussy", which is more directly negative toward females.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Comic Sans Criminal - <AUTHOR> http://www.comicsanscriminal.com/ <comment><USER2> Here's what I would like to say about this issue of a font being for a purpose:

Yes, most of the examples presented on this site are heinous and tremendously bad typeface choices. But that has nothing to do with the fact that comic sans was designed to mirror comic book lettering. The designer's intent is not embedded in the typeface, only his actual results.

Papyrus falls into the same category. People get bent out of shape about it: "It was meant to look like Egyptian lettering, but now it's on my Greek menu! It makes no sense!"

Guess what? It doesn't matter what it was "intended" to convey, it matters what is actually conveyed when people read it. Frutiger was designed for airport signage, but it happens to look great outside of airports too. Granted, it was never meant to be a niche font, but the principle applies: you shouldn't get upset on account of people using something in ways you didn't foresee or intend.

All this to say, if you're going to argue that a font is ugly or doesn't belong somewhere, that's fine, but your argument shouldn't be based on what the font was intended for. Sometimes the things we make turn out to be way more useful than we thought.

And I'll stick my neck out here and even say that I think Papyrus often looks good on menus :)

<comment><USER3> Regardless, I think the point is to choose fonts in the context of what you're writing, not because they "look cute". Now, whether you chose that font because of its original author's purpose or because you have some other purpose is a separate issue. In that regard, it seems like you agree on the major idea: that you should _have_ a purpose. The way you choose that purpose is a detail.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> You hate comic sans do you? You know what I hate? Obnoxious jerks trying to make people feel stupid because they didn't use the right _typeface_ when they made a sign to put on the staff refrigerator.

Do you know what the purpose of that sign is? It's not to evoke en emotion, not to convey some abstract message about the corporate structure of the refrigerator, not to let everybody know that the fridge is successful enough to afford some designer who can spend time obsessing over font choices, it's to abstract the thought of "please stop eating my yogurt" into a universally- understandable form.

This type of thing is important if you're Charles Schwab and you're trying to make me feel warm and cuddly about trusting you with my money. The message I'm getting from your ads goes beyond just the words. This is the same as keeping the grass in front of your building trimmed, making sure your staff irons their clothes, that your building isn't in disrepair, that your board members aren't caught doing embarrassing thigns, etc. etc. It's all image. It's 3 forks at dinner. Do you need 3 forks? No, you don't.

Likewise, do you need to worry yourself with things like the typeface that you're using to write a birthday invitation for your 9 year old?

No.

<comment><USER5> > Do you know what the purpose of that sign is? It's not to evoke en emotion, > not to convey some abstract message about the corporate structure of the > refrigerator, not to let everybody know that the fridge is successful enough > to afford some designer who can spend time obsessing over font choices, it's > to abstract the thought of "please stop eating my yogurt" into a > universally-understandable form.

Are you trying to argue that Times New Roman is not up to that task? Because otherwise I don't see how all this discussion of the sign's purpose makes any difference to the fact that it looks stupid.

Similarly, somebody might be wearing a pair of women's granny panties on his head because his ears get cold, but that does not explain why he would do such a thing when there are earmuffs, scarves and hats readily available.

<comment><USER4> >Are you trying to argue that Times New Roman is not up to that task?

No.

>I don't see how all this discussion of the sign's purpose makes any difference to the fact that it looks stupid.

It only looks stupid to a tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny minority of people who seem to feel as though they should devote a significant portion of their time reminding the rest of the world that they're stupid.

>Similarly, somebody might be wearing a pair of women's granny panties on his head because his ears get cold, but that does not explain why he would do such a thing when there are earmuffs, scarves and hats readily available.

This isn't even remotely similar and you know it. Using Comic Sans instead of Times is more like using a salad fork to eat your steak.

<comment><USER5> That's simply not true. I don't devote any significant portion of my time to reminding the rest of the world that they're stupid, but I still think Comic Sans looks dumb.

And no, it is not similar to using a salad fork to eat steak. You've even pointed out the difference in your comments: "Do you know what the purpose of that sign is? It's not to evoke en emotion…" This recognizes that choice of font has a significant practical impact in many contexts. Which fork you use for salads is always just a fiat, and experts in the field of dinner etiquette realize that it doesn't have a rational basis.

Wearing panties on your head is a much better analogy. Granny panties will keep your head warm, and people who want to feel superior and open-minded might say, "Hey, stop being elitist about what counts as acceptable headgear" — but none of that changes the fact that wearing panties on your head looks silly and there are better ways to accomplish that goal.

<comment><USER4> >And no, it is not similar to using a salad fork to eat steak.

And yes, it is. Fonts _can_ evoke emotional responses, but so can steaks. In the example I used (reminding a coworker not to steal your yogurt from the fridge), however, the point isn't to cause an emotion, it is just to convey a very simple, very 1-dimensional message.

In the example of eating a steak with a salad fork, the point of the action is to get the steak into your mouth, not to convey to message to those around you know you are a member of the class of people that know which forks to use on which portions of their food.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Dear all, my name's Matt Dempsey, I'm the designer and author of ComicSansCriminal.com.

For a bit of context. I'm a Graphic Design student in the second year of my BA. This website formed 1/3rd of a self directed project which consisted of an educational leaflet, a set of stickers and a website. The website is basically a web version of the print booklet, which I focussed least of my effort on. The website was never intended to be seen by a large number of people, it was coded quickly with little thought for web standards because I only expected it to be seen by my tutors for a quick 30 second read.

I do not think I am above anyone else and am not trying to preach. The world spread inappropriate use of Comic Sans is an issue I'm tired of. This is a simple, straightforward website to try and let people know that it's inappropriate to use it in some instances and that there are alternatives. I stated at the end of my project that if I could just get one person to stop and decide whether a font was appropriate before using it as opposed to just using their default Comic Sans, then I would have succeeded and would be happy.

The fact that I've had 80,000 unique visitors in the last 14 hours is something I had never anticipated and was not prepared for. I've corrected the "it's" issue, which I spotted myself soon after launching but was unable to rectify due to being away from the computer with the PSD files on until later today. Please let me know what the other grammar issues are and I'll rectify those too.

At the end of the day I think you guys are taking this a little too seriously. It was supposed to be a bit of fun, a tongue-in-cheek piece of work viewed by a few people that would hopefully make someone stop and think a little. That's all.

Thanks for your feedback, it's been a pretty overwhelming day!

</comment><comment><USER7> This, from a grocer's apostrophe criminal:

> It quickly became popular for use with young children in primary schools & > other childcare thanks to it's [sic] fun, child-like appearance

<comment><USER8> The markup is also fairly criminal: no content; all background images.

<comment><USER9> Not only that, it doesn't even render properly on a netbook screen. Don't we check our resolutions any more?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> A rebuttal by Comic Sans: <http://www.mcsweeneys.net/links/monologues/15comicsans.html>

<comment><USER11> Excellent. The typography reminds me why I stopped using webmail. People like my mom actually wrote me messages in this font, and I was powerless to change it.

Now I read my email in Emacs, and everything is very pretty DejaVu Sans Mono-9.

<comment><USER12> GMail has had the option to disable custom fonts/images/HTML since 2005.

Just FYI.

<comment><USER13> Some people just aren't satisfied until they're reading their mail in Emacs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I feel like I need to link to this story whenever Comic Sans is mentioned: [http://www.metafilter.com/86695/I-thought-I-was-the-only- one...](http://www.metafilter.com/86695/I-thought-I-was-the-only-one#2824387)

<comment><USER15> Reminds me of an book about grief called _Tear Soup_ [1], which is typeset in Comic Sans. It's actually somewhat appropriate, since it's a large picture book ostensibly aimed at children (but not insultingly - adults can learn something too).

[1] [http://www.amazon.com/Tear-Soup-Pat- Schweibert/dp/0961519762...](http://www.amazon.com/Tear-Soup-Pat- Schweibert/dp/0961519762/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1293033762&sr=8-1)

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> The legal newspaper I read had a 1/4 page advert a few weeks ago along the lines of "__________ Law Firm deeply regrets to announce the untimely death of its senior partner, Mr. _________"

It was, of course, in Comic Sans. Although it seemed rude to inquire, I'm still wondering whether this was some horrendous _faux pas_ by the secretarial staff, or whether it reflected some well-known habit of the deceased and was thus entirely appropriate.

</comment><comment><USER17> The only thing worse than using Comic Sans in the wrong context is projecting an insufferable attitude of superiority about font choice, especially when said insufferable attitude is displayed on a website that makes highly questionable design decisions of its own.

<comment><USER18> And genocide. Genocide is more wrong too!

<comment><USER17> And pedantry such as taking rhetorical tropes literally!

<comment><USER19> Amazing how some people love destructive criticizing and never give back suggestions or explain the problems...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Oh my good lordy lord, this has just taken me back fourteen years to what could be the greatest IRC client ever:

MICROSOFT COMIC CHAT!

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Comic_Chat>

This was the original source of the font in question. Binaries must be found, VMWare awaits...

<comment><USER21> Jerkcity is still using it, and that's good enough for me. HUGHUAHALAGPHMPPH.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> If the webmaster is reading, your click to scroll doesn't quite work right in Opera - it always scrolls from the top of the page, rather than the current position, resulting in all the previous slides flashing past each time I advance.

<comment><USER19> Same issue for iPhone here. Also rotating the device screws the page even turning it back to vertical

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Nice UI.

Can they pledge not to use images to render text?

<comment><USER24> How is it nice UI? I'm forced to read eight words at a time, then click to get eight more words. I have no idea how long this is going to last, and I can't skip ahead to see whether it gets more interesting later on.

<comment> mike-cardwell Vertical scrollbar?

<comment><USER25> That doesn't solve their terrible usage of light blue font on a white background. I agree, this UI sucks.

Edit: and vice-versa apparently. How can this person be so aware of typography but completely fail at picking readable colors? Furthermore, this website doesn't even work with readability, so it's not like I have any recourse.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> The funny part about this font has always been that people choose it _in positive response to it's style_. It's often been quoted as friendly and welcoming, and that's not so surprising when most people have only get experience with Times New Roman these days.

If you want to kill Comic Sans, put another friendly But well-designed font on every computer in the world and then redesign as many things as possible to increase its public mindshare. Only once there's a viable friendly-font alternative do people even have a place to go away from CS.

<comment><USER27> But I don't get the impression that folk like that want to kill Comic Sans per se. If you put another "friendly" font out there, the point about not writing probation notices in it would still stand.

<comment><USER26> I'd much rather someone set a probation notice in anything on the list below than in Comic Sans. I'd also rather they set it responsibly, but though you can't fix a sense of style at least you can provide people with better tools.

<http://www.fontshop.com/fontlist/alternatives/comic_sans/>

(especially MVB Pedestria, obviously, although I don't think most people would consider it in fair running with Comic Sans)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Is Comic Sans really easier to read for dyslexics, or am I missing an obvious joke?

<comment><USER29> It has long descenders and ascenders which make it easy for dyslexic readers to differentiate letters. Dyslexic readers also find handwritten looking fonts easier to read because they are more familiar with that style.

<comment><USER30> Probably in part due to them being less symmetrical. "bd" are almost identical in the font on HN, but mirrored, while in handwriting you form different connection angles because you write them differently.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Curiously enough, I keep seeing smart people using Comic Sans font when they shouldn't. Very, very smart people. Some of my best professors, some of the most talented programmers I know, etc. Even SPJ! ( <http://vimeo.com/15467880> )

And then it comes to me if I'm sitting here caring about presentation more than the content like a prude. I'm not picking on anyone -- just remarking on my very own situation =).

<comment><USER32> This is a great example of the difference between intelligence and ignorance.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> It's interesting how this website, while presumably written by a typography enthusiast, contains text that is almost entirely all-caps.

<comment><USER34> It has a few grammar errors too, which is never good when telling _others_ how to write.

<comment><USER35> Mixing grammar with type? I don't think that is good at all.

<comment><USER36> Leaves one hell of a hangover in the morning, I can tell you.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> This grammatical criminal could go "sans" a few apostrophes -- "thanks to _it's_ fun, child-like appearance."

</comment><comment><USER38> Despite the hatred among typophiles, Comic Sans managed to become an ubiquitous font.

I think that we must look beyond the dogma/bigotry and try to understand the popularity of the font.

Its fun personality has been mentioned in several posts in the comments, but comicsanscriminal.com ironically offers another major argument in favor of the font: its legibility.

Comic Sans is popular at elementary school and among dyslexic people because it is easier to read for them. Even though non-dyslexic adults are better at deciphering other fonts, I wouldn't be surprised if the attentional/cognitive load for reading Comic Sans was lower that what's needed for any of the so- called "better" fonts.

This could be scientifically tested easily.

</comment><comment><USER39> Smooth-scrolling pages are _all the rage_ right now. Fashion trends on the web are fascinating

</comment><comment><USER40> Their comic font alternatives are pretty bad, though. Blambot has a few better ones.

And of course there's "Comic Jens"[1], which is in the same vein, but not as obnoxious for some kind of reason. (And free, available as a web font etc.)

[1]: <http://www.netzallee.de/extra/comic-jens-en>

</comment><comment><USER41> "Comic dogs don't talk in Times New Roman." - Creator of Comic Sans.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qefD5YHPeEM>

Touche, but then lawyers, doctors, police officers, senatorial aides, and cancer researchers shouldn't be talking in Comic Sans.

</comment><comment><USER42> Hmm: <http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1237941/comicsanscriminal.png>

<comment><USER30> <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2028132>

They beat ya to the punch.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> The links to resources on better comic fonts and - even more so - dyslexic- friendly fonts make this actually useful.

</comment><comment><USER44> Help out typography "illiterates" like me: what are the two fonts you used for most of what you wrote?

<comment><USER45> While this doesn't answer your direct question, try taking a good-sized block of text (a couple paragraphs from Project Gutenberg, lorem ipsum text, whatever) and print it side by side, in several different fonts. Compare the feeling you get from the typography itself.

I mostly write in MonteCarlo (<http://www.bok.net/MonteCarlo/>), but programming fonts are a different discussion entirely.</comment></comment>


Poverty is the new slavery - <AUTHOR> http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3445_162-57476855/tavis-smiley-poverty-is-the-new-slavery/ <comment><USER2> This is the written equivalent of poverty porn. It's obviously very well written, but doesn't actually suggest any pragmatic solutions other than to elevate the poor to the status of martyrs. The single call to action which it does give conveniently isn't aimed at anyone at all. Whose responsibility is it to make poverty a priority? Congress? The public? The rich?

Pieces like this just leave a bad taste in the mouth - it'll obviously help shift copies of Mr. Smiley's book - but I'm not sure its going to do anything for actual poor people. And if there's anything worse than massive social inequality, its trying to make money off the back of it while masquerading as some kind of social crusader.

</comment><comment><USER3> Where does this idea come from that the percentage of total wealth controlled by the extremely wealthy is unprecedented in American history? It would be an interesting assertion except that anyone with even basic knowledge of American history would know it is not true. This is not a value statement about the facts, only an observation about the relative ignorance of people making this claim. I thought they taught this stuff in school.

In fact, what is unprecedented is how little wealth the extremely wealthy currently control. As a share of the GDP and total wealth, historical titans such as Andrew Carnegie and John Rockefeller were vastly wealthier than anyone alive now when adjusted for current dollars. In fact, the only American in modern times that even approached the wealth of numerous historical figures is Bill Gates.

I think there is a systemic problem creating an impoverished underclass but the obvious ignorance around the claims of unprecedented concentrations of wealth just grates.

</comment><comment><USER4> The idea that poverty is slavery is not new. The notion of "wage slavery" is nearly centuries old[1]. (People disagree whether it's appropriate to draw parallels with chattel slavery, i.e. people as property.) This CBS News article is really about the high rate of poverty and disproportionate distribution of wealth in America today.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery>

</comment><comment><USER5> White is the new black, 50 is the new 40, and now poverty is the new slavery.

 _The fact that one percent of the nation's richest individuals control 42 percent of the nation's wealth is, to me, a stunning revelation in the wake of a recession._

When you say things like this, you presuppose a world where we could take all the money, put it in a pile, then share it equally. But such worlds do not exist among systems of intelligent actors working in their best interests.

Poverty is a symptom, not a problem. The author doesn't go into what it's a symptom _for_ , perhaps because such detailed analysis of how we got here is beyond his ability, or perhaps he just wants to have a good lament and rant. Don't know. But in either case, I got nothing from this aside from "bad things suck"

<comment><USER6> _Poverty is a symptom, not a problem._

Also, I'm not sure what observations could be offered in support of this rather bold contention you're making here. Yet you seem to be stating it as if it were something intuitively obvious, practically standing on its own merit.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> _There are nearly 150 million poor and near-poor people in America who are not responsible for the damage done by the Great Recession._

150 million poor and near-poor people, really? Nowhere in the article is the definition of "poor" mentioned.

<comment><USER8> That's half of the country, so I guess their definition is if you make less than the median.

<comment><USER7> According to wikipedia:

 _According to the U.S. Census Bureau data released Tuesday September 13, 2011, the nation's poverty rate rose to 15.1% (46.2 million) in 2010,[2]_

Which mean the "near poor" people are lumped in with the poor population so that it become somehow, 150 million people, which is about half of the population of the US.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Debt is the new slavery (and often connected to poverty). It's the old company town / company store model applied to the entire developed world.

<comment><USER10> The model where you work to pay off a degree you only got into debt for because you needed it to do the very same work does seem to be getting uncomfortably close to at least a mild version of indentured servitude. In indentured servitude, you worked to pay off the transit expenses needed to get to the work (and then the housing expenses at the destination, which you couldn't pay yet because you first had to pay for the transit).

That's one reason I'd rather have a state-funded university option provided, instead of funding it retroactively via debt. Basically, the current generation should fund the next generation's education, rather than loading it onto them at the beginning of their careers as debt. Or, if student debt is necessary, its repayment should be tied to income, so payment doesn't amount to more than, say, 25% of someone's income per year.

Though in a way, that's still much better than being on the really low end, because many college-degree holders do get okay jobs. If you've never driven through some of the poorest parts of the American south, it's a quite surprising experience, especially going off the highways into smaller towns. In parts, doesn't feel very first-world at all, with whole stretches of people living in what seem to be barely-standing-upright shacks.

<comment><USER11> What's wrong with people paying back the cost of their training to make money? Why should other people be forced to pay to improve the lives of others?

There should be policies that protect students from making bad debt decisions to pay for education that won't pay for the debt. Other than that, I don't see student loans as a significant contributor to poverty.

<comment><USER10> I generally believe that society should educate kids up to the level that society expects of them to get a decent job. We don't ask kids to pay back the cost of their K-12 education, for example, even though the cost is substantial. And it's not clear to me that there's anything magical about the age 18 as a cutoff (I mean, you can't even buy alcohol at that age! so clearly we don't consider you an adult).

Either college should be purely a luxury, not needed for most jobs, or it should be covered. I don't like the idea of people "starting out" with a big pile of debt before they can even get to the workforce; that doesn't produce any sort of level playing field. If anything, I'd support Thomas Paine's idea that people should start out with a modest _positive_ net worth, granted upon reaching adulthood, in recognition of the fact that everyone has equal right of inheritance to at least a small portion of the existing wealth produced by the country's previous generations.

To me, it's the responsibility of the current workforce to fund the next generation's ability to reach it. I don't see anything wrong with funding education from general taxes, in any case. It's one of the classic, almost universally agreed upon things that a state should do, which even classical liberal writers (e.g. Jefferson) were strongly in favor of publicly funding.

<comment><USER11> _"We don't ask kids to pay back the cost of their K-12 education, for example, even though the cost is substantial."_

If it were possible for such a large amount of debt to be granted to a person with no track record and structure it in a way that it could be reasonably paid off, I'd be for individuals paying for their own education beyond what's necessary to be an informed voter. I doubt that's possible, so everyone paying it off over a lifetime via taxation isn't such a bad compromise.

After a certain point, however, the ability of a person to pay off their own debt can be reasonably estimated, and we should let individuals pay for their self-improvement rather than forcing everyone else to pay. In general, we should strive to assign costs to those that benefit from them. Most of the benefits for an education accrue to the student. Some accrue to society. Why not pay for education using a similar breakdown?

 _"I don't like the idea of people "starting out" with a big pile of debt before they can even get to the workforce; that doesn't produce any sort of level playing field."_

Using taxes to pay for education guarantees that you'll be paying for education until the day you die.

 _"To me, it's the responsibility of the current workforce to fund the next generation's ability to reach it."_

I agree, but I'd say it a little differently. Successful people have a responsibility to ensure that every person has a chance to be successful as well. That said, I don't think such responsibilities should be mandated by law. Putting someone in prison because they don't help other people become successful sounds wrong.

<comment><USER10> What are the advantages to your proposal? It seems like it would simply start out everyone with a large burden, for what benefit? Lower taxes for the better off? That seems like a poor tradeoff.

It could _almost_ be equivalent to my proposal if you limited the amount of debt repayment to a percentage of income; then it'd be more like a tax you opt into (if you go to the university, you opt into an extra 10% tax). Sweden does something like that for a small portion of university fees. The main difference between that and a normal tax is that the tax would have a cap, which basically benefits the people who hit IPO jackpots and such. Again, I don't see a benefit to that.

Mostly I don't see any benefit to all this accounting, unless it's a roundabout way of making sure that people who hit outlier incomes don't have to pay past a cap. Or is there some idea of libertarian "efficiency" that this is all going to produce? I'm more of a social democrat, and think all this extra accounting is what produces the inefficiency; just tax people and provide public services, the way Denmark (where I currently live) does.

<comment><USER11> _"Or is there some idea of libertarian "efficiency" that this is all going to produce?"_

There's efficiency to be had in aligning costs with benefits. As a society we probably pay for more Classics degrees than we should. Beyond that, minimizing the amount of money that is forcibly taken from people is inherently good.

I agree with the ends that most social democrats seek. I just think they should be funded voluntarily, perhaps with some help from the government to inform people where additional funds would lead to the greatest benefit. I don't know if such a system would be practical, but it seems like the ideal we should strive for instead of using force as a first resort.

<comment><USER12> _Beyond that, minimizing the amount of money that is forcibly taken from people is inherently good._

You'll have to elaborate on this a little better, because it seems misinformed. For example, it would suggest that saving Warren Buffet a billion dollars while taking fifty grand from a hundred poor families is preferred. And that's horseshit.

<comment><USER11> If Warren Buffet is currently having a billion dollars taken from him that goes to a hundred poor families, stopping that is good. Would I rather forcibly take some of Warren Buffet's money to feed some poor families instead of letting them starve? Sure. But those aren't our only choices. Playing Robin Hood is immoral and should be a last resort.

<comment><USER10> I guess I don't see taxes as particularly immoral. Of all the things the state can impose on people, having people who've already made some decent money chip in a percentage for the common good seems low on the list. Even (unpaid) jury duty seems more objectionable than that.

Though I do share some of your concerns about "force". I think criminal sanctions are resorted to too quickly for a lot of things, both taxes and other infractions (any time you lie to the government, or otherwise do something it doesn't like). I'd rather emphasize civil remedies to collect.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> "The fact that one percent of the nation's richest individuals control 42 percent of the nation's wealth is, to me, a stunning revelation in the wake of a recession"

What percent of the wealth should the richest 1% control? Until someone can posit some kind of somewhat reasonable answer to that, I don't see how we can by stunned by whatever the actual figure is.

Unless everyone has an equal share of the wealth, so that there is no such thing as rich people and poor people, it is MATHEMATICALLY REQUIRED that the richest X% have >X% of the wealth, and if within each wealth range there are some more wealth than others, then it is necessary that the ratio w(x)/x, where w(x) is the percent of the wealth owned by the top x% be an increasing function.

<comment><USER3> It is not just that, many people severely overestimate the net worth required to put you in the "top 1%" just by working backward from the numbers. The best estimates put the "top 1%" point at around $1.2-1.3M using the IRS's method of calculation.

People with $1.2M in net worth are usually pretty middle class, especially in the more expensive parts of the country. The bulk of the top 1% are hardcore savers and small business owners. Not nearly as many fat guys with top hats and cigars in the top 1% as is often implied.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Poverty is like slavery in a very flippant sense. You only have to read some of the first-hand accounts of human trafficking to get the sense of the difference.

<comment><USER10> Some of those human-trafficking accounts are related to poverty as well: desperate people sometimes voluntarily sign up to human smuggling services (e.g to get them across the US-Mexico or Turkey-EU border), with mixed and often bad results. Many sex-trafficking cases are poverty-related also, not all based on kidnapping random people.

Admittedly, that's not Americans in poverty.

<comment><USER15> Lots of terrorists use cell phones, so using a cell phone is terrorism?

<comment><USER6> No, but _reductio ad absurdum_ is a poor argument technique.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The article claims that America's poor are being fleeced. I'm not sure I agree with that. Rich people are paying less taxes than they used to, but it's hard to make a case that the wealth of the poor has been forcibly redistributed to the rich (predatory lending aside).

<comment><USER16> Didn't the country at large just drop enormous sums of money propping up failed companies full of rich people?

Edit: Additionally, I think "wealth" and "money" are not the same thing and as such any argument that the wealth of the poor is being unfairly taken cannot be denied purely on the grounds that they don't pay much in tax. Their wealth is being taken before they even see a monetary representation of it.

<comment><USER15> Since the poor and near-poor pay far less in taxes than the services they receive, that's irrelevant.

The middle class and non-connected sort-of-wealthy are the ones getting screwed by the bailouts.

Unless you assume that the poor have a right to what others earn (as opposed to simply the right to not get screwed and exploited by the wealthy, as the parent is talking about), then the poor have nothing to complain about as far as bailouts go.

<comment><USER11> _"The middle class and non-connected sort-of-wealthy are the ones getting screwed by the bailouts."_

They're still better off with the bailouts than they'd be without them. They'd be even better off if policies that prevented the necessity of bailouts were in place back then. I hope the policy changes since then have been enough.

<comment><USER17> ENOUGH?! To a first approximation, there has not been _one_ policy change in the US that will reduce the necessity of future bailouts.

(Basically, the single overwhelming issue is "too big to fail". To the limited extent that this has been addressed at all by regulatory changes such as Dodd- Frank, it has been to make the problem worse.)

<comment><USER11> Can you explain how the problem has been made worse? I used "hope" mainly because I don't know the details.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Calling something slavery doesn't make it so. Statements like this are ridiculous, and they also minimize the evils of _actual_ slavery.

</comment><comment><USER15> If I wanted to read this kind of thing, I'd hang out on the front page of Reddit. I come here for my news in the hope that even if it is a vacuous political op-ed masquerading as sociology, there will be some sort of technology connection.

</comment><comment><USER19> Although our current poverty situation may be due, in part to income inequality and policies that favor the wealthy. I think it has more to do with how we deal with poverty, which is essentially to throw money at the problem and hope it goes away.

I'm a big fan of helping people help themselves. Many people live in poverty because of poor financial decisions or because they don't have skills to succeed in the workforce, not because their taxes are too high. In fact our current tax structure incentivizes people to stay in lower tax brackets because as you start to earn more money, you have to pay a higher percentage of your income to the government. I think the following changes would go a long way to solving the poverty problem.

\- Focus on providing the basic needs (housing, food and medical attention) by providing those goods and services to those in need instead of just giving people money.

\- Stop giving loans (especially high-interest loans) to people who do not have good credit. In my opinion the government should not allow loans to consumers to have an more than 10% annual interest.

\- Stop using the IRS and tax policies as a welfare assistance program. They are probably one of the worst entities able to determine if someone is really in need.

As others have pointed out, American poverty doesn't really even compare to situations of people in third-world countries. Poor in this article refers to a statistic released by the census bureau, which best I could tell is calculated using thresholds based on one's income and how many people live in a household. Instead it should be based on whether someone is getting enough to eat, has somewhere to live and can get medical treatment.

</comment><comment><USER16> The United States will, I think, continue to see this for a long time. U.S. internal propaganda is very effective at convincing people that they are not so much poor as temporarily embarrassed millionaires, and as such political movements to change the system against poverty are met with disapproval by the people who need it the most.

</comment><comment><USER20> This is a very valid point. There also seems to be a historical correlation of wealth imbalances and great Recession/Depression.

I'm currently working on a crowdfunding (both equity and project) for universities, because I believe that democratization of the venture capital markets will be a good thing for America.

Like most things, the more data points (i.e., crowd investors), the more rational and likely to succeed is the endeavor.

</comment><comment><USER21> >The fact that one percent of the nation's richest individuals control 42 percent of the nation's wealth is, to me, a stunning revelation in the wake of a recession.

OK, but IMO disparities in income is a more relevant in a discussion of poverty, and disparities in income in the US are not as high as disparities in assets.

</comment><comment><USER22> Poverty is the old slavery too

</comment><comment><USER6> New? More like the same old, same old...</comment>


Ask HN: Internships for a 13-year-old? - <AUTHOR> I'm Lachlan (@lachlanjc on Twitter), a 13-year-old with skills in Rails, React, Front-end, and UX. I've built Noodles (http://www.getnoodl.es/), a cooking app, and helped build Helpful.io (http://helpful.io) with the community on Assembly (http://assembly.com).<p>I've been looking for internships this summer at startups/larger companies, but most require having already studied CS in college or something along those lines. Has anyone heard about good internships (most likely in NYC) for this summer? <comment><USER2> Maybe not the most popular opinion here, or maybe it will be, but advice from a father of two boys:

Enjoy your childhood for the remaining 3-5 years before worrying so much about your professional career. You have decades of working in software ahead of you, if you continue on that path. Just enjoy your childhood, go out and play, or even just work on projects you enjoy. Once your childhood is gone, you'll regret not spending more time "not working."

You sound like you already have the work ethic, now make sure you focus on why you need it.

<comment><USER3> It's easy to romanticize "carefree childhood", but I think that's baloney. I've loved working with computers for literally as long as I can remember. When I was 13, working with computers _was_ playing! Getting paid to play would have been a dream come true for me at that age.

<comment><USER4> I've loved it, too, but I don't look back and treasure my countless hours coding. It's great to have a skill, but the things I remember are time I spent with my family and friends.

<comment><USER5> Would you go back in time and do things differently? I personally wouldn't, I would do things the same way again; I was crazy motivated when I was younger.

<comment><USER4> I had an amazing time as a teenager because I spent all my time coding or with people I care about. The only negative consequences was that I got bad grades. I certainly don't regret getting bad grades.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Lachlan, make sure you're open to job opportunities that aren't initially in software. When I was 13, a doctor (and close friend of the family) hired me to organize sign-in documents for new patients at his office. While there was no mention of software at the beginning, you better bet that by the end of the summer, I had finished a tool that let patients sign in electronically and invalidated the need for my initial job.

Just don't be dismissive of initially non-software opportunities, especially because those are the types of opportunities you're most likely going to see from family friends (the only people who might be able to hire you at this age).

<comment><USER7> Just wanted to second what Andrew is saying here.

In my experience, the most valuable knowledge in software (unless you're in the elite crew of coders) is domain knowledge - the ability to bridge the "functional" or "business" needs with the software that can automate/improve/innovate in that space.

You can be a mediocre coder and bring incredible value to a team by knowing the domain very well.

You only get this kind of knowledge by studying or living it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> No US company can legally hire you. The only exception I know of is working for your parents.

[http://www.youthrules.dol.gov/know-the- limits/under14.htm](http://www.youthrules.dol.gov/know-the-limits/under14.htm)

You can legally work as a computer programmer once you are 14, but there are strict restrictions on the number of hours you are able to work.

</comment><comment><USER9> Honestly, what's the point of you having an internship right now? You'll have plenty of time to get work experience. More importantly, you are already far ahead of the game. The apps you've built show not just an impressive range of programming/design knowledge, but more importantly, knowledge of _purpose_ \-- why we build things, why we do things --...which is something 23-year-olds often lack, nevermind 13-year-olds.

You seem to have your own DIY-initiative and an ability to learn independently and execute. It seems like an internship would add little to that, and at the same time, there's the opportunity cost: what would you have built on your own outside of that structured internship time?

(nevermind the risk of burning out early, and regretting not having a more carefree adolescence)

</comment><comment><USER10> I don't think we could get you an internship due to liability mentioned in other comments in this thread, but I'm from NYC and also started looking for internships around that age so I am familiar with your challenge.

The first time I had an internship the person I was working for insisted on calling my mom when I showed up because he didn't know how young I was haha. One place you might be able to have success is Eyebeam [http://eyebeam.org/](http://eyebeam.org/) I did an internship there when I was in college, but as a non-profit learning center I think they might be more likely to have something for you, check em out. You might also try contacting the High School for Engineering [http://www.afsenyc.org/](http://www.afsenyc.org/) and see if they know of anything or have any opportunities.

Also, if you'd ever like advice about working/interning in the NYC tech scene (or programming in general) feel free to email me, contact info in profile.

</comment><comment><USER11> It's going to be hard to find someone to trust you. Going into the office, people are going to treat you like a 13 year old and expect you to do boring stuff, because they can glance at your work and tell if you're doing it correctly - or at least the way you want them to.

On the internet, no one knows your web server is running lisp. On the internet, no one knows you are 13. Refuse to do video calls, but be super responsive to email and IMs. You'll miss out on jobs, but there are a zillion out there.

I'd suggest, you build something you want. You're in a unique position to spend years building something amazing, that could make you some money. Work is essentially building someone else's dream. If your dream and their dream align, it's great. But for most people, most of the time, work sucks.

Heck, blog about react techniques. make awesome tutorials. I'm 3x your age and just started learning how to make minecraft mods. I'd suggest that, not because you're 13, but because it's kind of cool.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's definitely true, jfoutz. I built Noodles because I wanted to, and I'm thinking about some more projects I might take on personally.

I'm also going to try and start writing tutorials to make learning things less painful for new folks, because with more recent frameworks like React there just aren't a ton of articles out there yet.

Thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Once you get to college, you're going to realize that you'll never have a vacation like you did when you were young. Real life starts and it never ends until you die.

Spend your summer doing something that you love. If that's coding, do that, and don't worry about getting paid for it yet. Also don't worry about building your resume -- you can start doing that when you're 14, if your heart is really set on it.

No one looks back on their life and thinks, "I wish I'd spent more summers working when I was a teenager." If they're lucky, instead they'll think, "I wish I could go back to those summers and really appreciate them for what they were: the last time I really didn't have to worry about anything."

For some perspective, I worked for software companies as a teenager and it hasn't helped me at all in my career. It wasn't worth the time, although having money was nice. But I don't remember the money now or what I did with it.

<comment><USER10> Counter-perspective: I do wish I'd spent more summers working in software. Going to camp and doing regular kid things made me miserable. Working for software companies as a teenager absolutely helped me in my career, and it was absolutely worth the time.

<comment><USER4> Thanks for your perspective.

I guess I'll add this to my own comment: working at a real job as a teenager isn't going to make or break his career. He's a smart and driven kid, just as you seem to have been. If he enjoys coding more than socializing or traveling or whatever, he should certainly code, but he's already well beyond his peers (and always will be).

It's just very different to work on your own stuff at your own pace vs. working for a boss. I also suspect completing more of his own projects would actually be better for his career than whatever a company would allow him to do.

<comment><USER12> This. I'd suggest making his own stuff instead of getting into an internship, maybe building some small apps he could even charge for and make some side money. Start at 13 and build enough of those, and he might never need a job. I wish I'd done something like that in college, when I had plenty of free time.

Plus, that was what always impressed the most during job interviews. I was generally one of the top prospects in the interviews I did -- not because of my GPA, or the school I went to, or past job experience, but because of some of the interesting projects I'd done either on my own or to help out my father with his businesses. It shows not just skill (which lots of other people have, even if it might be a bit less than you) but ambition and drive (which, it seems, not many others have).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I started professionally when I was about your age. But back then internships were a very different thing. And so were startups and large companies to be honest. Unfortunately most of the large companies I have worked for have rules about hiring or even having people younger than 18 on premise for work purposes due to insurance and liability reasons. Many of the start ups would not hire anyone under 21. They state it is for the insurance and liability reasons but in actuality it is due to the fact that many have a "beer fridge" or go out drinking quite a bit and do not want the liability of an under aged employees.

With that said, there is hope. First off, many companies are lax in their HR departments and you might just slip through if you have the right connections. This means hustling as has been suggested: getting emails for employees, showing them your ambition and character and drive, and getting a foot in the door. This may turn into a frustrating endeavor as you might be rejected a few times, but it could work with perseverance.

Second, what makes you think you need an internship at all? You have skills, start something yourself. Maybe you want to freelance for a while, this could make for a lucrative summer experience and you will learn amazing skills that will stick with you the rest of your life. Maybe you have another app you'd like to build and grow. Again, this would be a fantastic learning experience.

</comment><comment><USER14> No one is going to publicly solicit someone as young as you. If you really want to find work, you're going to have to hustle for it. Start tracking down emails and contacting people personally.

Surely someone will appreciate your ambition and give you an opportunity, just don't expect it to fall into your lap. No one is listing internships with the expectation that someone pre-college will fill the opening but don't let that deter you. I say this as someone who landed an internship at 17.

<comment><USER4> Don't go around asking companies to do something illegal for you. I agree that hustling is good, but not when you put the burden of your success on someone else.

<comment><AUTHOR> Working on projects with people you meet/know isn't illegal. Getting a real job would be, but not this :)

<comment><USER4> If those people are in a company and that company benefits from your work, they could still be breaking laws related to internships and child labor.

Unpaid internships are illegal except under some very restrictive conditions.

That said, these things don't seem to make it to court, so you're probably not risking anything by doing them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> There doesn't seem to be much in the way of real intership programs for your age group.

However, your resume is super impressive, and you're clearly gifted. I'm going to bet that there will be people who will want to support your ambitions and create an ad-hoc internship for you. So here's my advice:

Treat your internship search like a job search!

Cold-call and cold-email CEOs of NYC-based startups that use Rails or React. Medium-sized and small companies might have an easier time accommodating, but it can't hurt to try bigger companies too just for kicks.

E.g. try this line for cold-calling: "Hi, this is Lachlan. Are you $CEO_NAME at $STARTUP_NAME? Yes? Cool! I'm a 13-year-old middle school student, and I built a web app with Rails and React last year. I'm looking for an internship this summer. I was wondering if that's something you'd consider."

Regarding child labor laws: Businesses with employees tend to already have a lawyer they regularly talk to (for contracts and compliance). They should be able to run the labor law issues by their lawyer for you - maybe you'll have to wait until your 14th birthday, maybe it's possible to structure it as a "trainee" program that falls under different laws, maybe something else. So I'd just bring this issue to their attention and leave it up to them to figure it out.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks joliss! That sounds great — I'm going to look around on StackShare and find some interesting companies.

About the labor laws: I'll be turning 14 right before the internship could start (at the end of the school year), but that's definitely true.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> [I am not a lawyer]

In the United States, Federal labor law limits the employment of children. The restrictions on employing people under age 14 are rather severe and would probably preclude any sort of internship:

[http://www.youthrules.dol.gov/know-the- limits/under14.htm](http://www.youthrules.dol.gov/know-the-limits/under14.htm)

This is probably the summer to work on side projects. Next year the rules allow a far wider range of employment opportunities:

[http://www.youthrules.dol.gov/know-the- limits/14-15.htm](http://www.youthrules.dol.gov/know-the-limits/14-15.htm)

The fuller explanation is here:

[http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/whdfs43.htm](http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/whdfs43.htm)

Good luck.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for that! I'll be 14 by the time the internship could start, so it sounds like one could work out in regards to the law.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Hi Lachlan!

I admire your work and ambition. I started my career at your age as well, mostly building websites for friends and family.

As mentioned in previous comments, there are US laws that stand in the way of companies actually hiring you, and nobody wants to break the law.

It might be a good idea for you and your parents to look up what exactly the US laws are that apply to your situation. Some online research might answer that question or you can send a quick note to your family attorney.

If you don't have a family attorney I'd be happy to put you in touch with my attorney, he started coding at your age too and I'm sure he could point you in the right direction.

That will tell you exactly who can and can not hire you and take that hurdle of research out of the negotiation process with potential employers.

After you know the legal details I would start looking in your direct surroundings for opportunities ( friends, family, classmates, classmates' parents, etc ) or with smaller companies that are more flexible to make changes accommodating a minor ( e.g. getting rid of the beer fridge temporarily ).

For example, I run a small engineering studio in Los Angeles, it would be easy for me to get rid of all of our beer compared to a big corporation that might have to make more extensive changes to their offices and have a request like this pass through many layers of corporate bureaucracy.

Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER18> Why not just learn another language like C++, Java, C#, etc, and spend the summer making a video game? Sounds like your skills are mostly web-devy right now. Branch out?

<comment><AUTHOR> newobj: I'm working on learning other languages/frameworks, but I'm really not interested at all in building or playing video games :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I would advise continuing to work on skills using the insane amount of online resources available. While also working to build up an open-source profile of side-projects. Side projects not only show that you truly do enjoy developing, but they also provide a great tangible means for exemplifying your skills. You have a great jump on learning these skills but because of your age you will need tangible proof that you have real skill. Because of this I think open- source side projects are a perfect fit. They're fun, hone your skills, and prove you can create (and maintain, document, etc.) a software system.

Oh and I can't agree enough with all the people saying savor the time. I can remember countless days where I was 'bored' stiff all day, while nowadays I find myself dreaming of being able to not have to sleep daily so I could fit in even more hours for projects, both personal and professional.

I firmly believe that as you age your perceived notion of time passing only accelerates.

</comment><comment><USER20> Have your parent or guardian create a profile on odesk.com and just get to work bidding on jobs within your skillset. Undercharge and knock them out of the park. Your terrific reputation will allow you to start receiving more work and build a brand. Perhaps one day you will be able to hire a freelancer to assist you in the monthly thread.

</comment><comment><USER21> Why do you want to do an internship?

If it is because you like programming, I don't think anyone is going to hire you for a few years. Why don't you do a few projects on your own and see what you can come up with?

If it is because you're turning prematurely preprofessional, for god's sake enjoy your childhood. Go to a pond and skip stones on the water.

<comment><USER22> Indeed, the best thing to do is to spend your time engaging in activities that someone else things is fun, instead of what you enjoy.

<comment><USER21> I already included in my answer the option that he genuinely enjoys programming, in which case he should self-start projects.

You'd be surprised, however, at the amount of kids who go "professional" from a very early age because of parental pressure or something like that. All I said was that if that is the case, it is too early to go professional.

<comment><AUTHOR> littletimmy: It's not at all driven by my parents. I'm doing it only because I love it.

On self-started projects: Noodles was my first of them, and I'm working on some more. Side projects are great, but right now I'm looking for something bigger.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I would ask you why you're looking for an internship.

If it's for the cash, as people have mentioned, you're going to have a tough time due to legal issues.

If you're just interested in getting more experience, I would try to find a mentor who could recommend potentially interesting projects to work on. There are a bunch of interesting computing technologies that are becoming more and more accessible to use (e.g. image recognition, NLP, machine learning, augmented/virtual reality, etc), and I think there are a lot more exciting things to do than work on yet another webapp.

Personally I spent ages 14+ learning how to hack websites and web browsers, and I found that to be a lot of fun, but there are piles of other things to get excited about. If you want some cash, companies will pay bug bounties to people as young as 13 for finding security vulnerabilities in their websites (see: HackerOne etc).

<comment><AUTHOR> It's not for the cash — I'm not even concerned that I'll get paid at all. I more want it because endlessly building things on your own isn't as challenging or as much fun as being with a team for a little while. I'd also like to meet some more new people along the way.

On security: I've emailed several companies about security bugs on their websites, but I hadn't considered being paid for it. I'll check that out!

Thanks.

<comment><USER23> Email me (email@example.com) sometime if you want to chat about web security stuff. I'm 17 years old and I tend to spend my free time working on bug bounties etc. I can certainly give you some pointers on this sort of thing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I really doubt you will find anything at your age but there are lots of opportunities to do cool stuff.

You can always look for really popular websites that need a total redo. Try buying a horse trailer or a horse and the horrific sites that await you are a world of opportunity to replace. Examples: [http://www.horsetrailerworld.com/](http://www.horsetrailerworld.com/) [http://www.dreamhorse.com/](http://www.dreamhorse.com/)

Hard to believe after 15 years those sites haven't changed and are still some of the most popular equine sites around.

Not any real money to be made in this but someone needs to fix this mess.

I'm sure there are dozens of other types of sites like this but these are two I'm familiar with.

</comment><comment><USER25> As someone who was once in a similar position:

\- Due to child labor laws it might be an uphill battle.

\- If no one will give you am internship you can try and join a bigger open source project.

\- If all fails I'll happily not give you an intership and not have you working with robotics aimed software. Remote though. ;)

</comment><comment><USER26> How about taking an online course this summer instead of an internship (Coursera's machine learning would probably be a very big project depending on your current level of math or the MIT SICP lectures & book to start learning CS/functional programming)?

The path to mastery is mostly self learning in my limited experience in software so far, so the earlier you learn that and build the skills to learn on your own the better off you will be. Learning on your own without a teacher, grades, mentor, or internship will prepare you more for the real world than most college students.

</comment><comment><USER27> Getting an internship at 13 can be difficult, but not impossible. Here's my advice from my experience coming to NYC for an internship while in HS:

\- Try your hardest, and don't let anyone tell you you can't.

\- Figure out if there are any employment laws that could affect you working somewhere.

\- Don't tell people how old you are, until it's absolutely necessary (legally), let them judge you on your skillset and portfolio

\- Ignore their requirements. Apply and ask for the position anyways!

<comment><AUTHOR> 👍 Thanks sodevious!

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Hi,

I don't know the legal ages in the US, but in Europe you can't take work officially below 16. What I recommend is rather to make contact with the leaders of some serious open-source project you like and contribute. You gain some fame and get in touch some people who will happy to take their company bounty to recruit you later. :)

PS: it is just wording, but you probably looking for a apprenticeship, not an internship if you are looking for a formal work.

</comment><comment><USER29> While US Law and I am guessing the laws in many other countries may prevent you from working for a company not owned by immediate family if you really want to get some experience in I would recommend looking into contributing to an open source project. OSS contributions look great on a resume, get you real world experience and contributions are judged based on the quality of the code, not the age of the coder.

</comment><comment><USER30> Some of the answers saying you can't be employed at your age are not necessarily true. I'm a couple of years older than you but what you can do is to structure your employment in such a way that you are an independent contractor and your employers compensate you for your services. This way you would be self-employed and not subject to the relevant employment laws in your region.

</comment><comment><USER31> Contribute to an open source project. Drupal has had serious, valued contributors as young as nine and ten. One of them, Dmitri Gaskin, keynoted a Drupal conference where he talked about his experiences as a contributor. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMJCOViG0jE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMJCOViG0jE)

<comment><AUTHOR> ksenzee: Nice! I spend a ton of time working on open-source projects over Assembly: [http://assembly.com/](http://assembly.com/). Thanks for the suggestion.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> What others have mentioned - it's really hard to hire a 14 year old legally. Maybe try contributing to an open source project?

</comment><comment><USER33> You can't really legally work anywhere at 13/14 -- I would totally recommend involving yourself with open source communities, joining a hackerspace, or looking for tech-related non-profit organizations that are interested in volunteers. Google Summer of Code might be a good option for you!

</comment><comment><USER34> Not sure about US law but I believe it is illegal for someone so young to do full time white collar work in AU.

</comment><comment><USER35> You gotta know someone. Like parent's friend, relative or something like that. At age 13 that is pretty much the only way. Hell, it was how I got my IBM internship at age 18.

</comment><comment><USER36> Alternatively you could do this: [https://www.recurse.com](https://www.recurse.com)

</comment><comment><USER37> Google summer of code would have been a good option, and definitely a great option for next year though.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> By the way, I will be 14 once an internship would start. This opens up the child labor laws a lot.

</comment><comment><USER38> Lie about your age and work online.

<comment><USER4> This is a very, very bad idea in the US. As a 13-year-old, you can't legally sign a contract, and that has serious implications for both parties as well as your parents.

Edit: comment below is correct, please disregard what I said (although it's still a very bad idea to trick people into signing a contract with you).

<comment><USER39> > As a 13-year-old, you can't legally sign a contract, and that has serious > implications for both parties as well as your parents.

That's not generally true, in US jurisdictions; minors can legally enter into contracts, but contracts with minors outside of certain limits are generally voidable at the option of the minor. And a number of states have additional rules which provide conditions which allow some contracts of minors which would otherwise be voidable to be binding if certain procedural steps are taken.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Hey Lachlan,

I'm a 19-year-old software engineer for Barracuda Networks. When I was about your age, I was very interested in programming and computers as well. :) (You can actually find screenshots all the way back to the very embarrassing beginning where I tried to figure out how fonts + iframes worked here: [http://www.screenshots.com/ghostlypets.com/2005-12-15](http://www.screenshots.com/ghostlypets.com/2005-12-15))

Like you, I spent a lot of time wishing I could just "be at MIT already" or "just get hired to do some work." As most people have said here, however, in the US, you can't legally be hired, as much as this sucks.

However, you should check whether the high school you're soon to be attending has a FIRST Robotics program. You'll get to work on a team, similar to a small startup company, to build a robot (and a website, and a business plan, etc.)

Additionally, one thing that I found was pretty helpful to me was to find some small niches that needed devs (when I started, I used virtual pet sites as this niche, being a Neopets fan, and later moved to Bitcoin when that got popular.)

I got recruited when I was 18 because the company saw me on LinkedIn, saw my Github, and was already interested in me. It was awesome. I'm glad I'm here, it's what I always wanted. But I also have less time to work on "side projects" (i.e. the type of projects you get to work on right now), which means less time to learn what I want to learn and more time to learn what the company needs.

So my advice to you would be to find some niches you're particularly interested in and explore them to the fullest extent you can. Learn multiple languages, learn multiple paradigms, learn multiple architectures.

The web and computers are more complex now than they were when I was young, and they are going to continue to get more complex. The more abstractions you create, the more there is to learn in the entire field of programming. But when you get into a business role, you have to focus on what makes something work, rather than what's new, what's interesting, or what you don't already know. Now is the time to keep doing that sort of thing, and figure out what you _really_ like about programming.

P.S. Looking at you and your friend's sites and blogs, you are the kind of devs companies will be trying to hire. :) When I was young I spent a lot of my time "looking up" to a lot of devs with jobs. Having a job isn't the end-all- be-all to being a dev. It's not even close. There is so much to learn, and so much to do, that nobody will ever be a "better" dev than another. Just stronger knowledge in certain areas. :)

P.P.S. I focused too much on web dev when I was young. You can learn a lot about languages, and it's awesome because you get immediate results. But frameworks like Rails provide a lot of abstractions, and if you want to learn the core concepts behind computer science, using them isn't the best way to learn. Try writing your own framework, try writing a game (command-line if graphics is too daunting). You'll learn algorithms, data structures, and paradigms. That's the type of thing that translates between languages. :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, John! I really appreciate your response; you've got a lot of good advice there. I'll quickly respond here from my phone.

I'm trying to learn some other languages/architectures, and side projects are basically everything I've worked on so far. With school in the way it's hard to find enough time for everything. That's why I'm trying to find something really interesting to work on this summer.

Also: I looked into those laws a bit and it seems like once I'm 14 (I will be once an internship for me could start), I can work 8 hours/day while school isn't in session.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Consider Google Summer of Code.

<comment><USER42> Can't. Gotta be a university student.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> I'm 16, and I was in your position as well, also at age 13. I think I might be able to give you some perspective.

At 12, I started working on an open-source Ruby gem in a not-so-niche market (would rather not say, might give it away). I (American) had an offer from overseas (Britain) to work on a very small project in Ruby using the gem I created. I got paid about $200 I think, over PayPal. That made me want to start working.

Someone reached out to me right after my 13th birthday, saying they wanted to hire me to work on a Rails application, and their idea seemed good. I got nervous when the guy (whose LinkedIn seemed legit) sent over an NDA, but I figured, how much trouble can a 13-year-old really get in? I didn't even tell my parents. I was basically getting paid to work on my gem, which I would have been doing already - no big deal. After about 2 months, I think the guy caught on to my age or lack of experience, because he told me I had finished what needed to be finished. All in all, I made $3500 for about 60 hours of work.

I continued working on my gem for free after that, and other companies reached out for internships, etc. I turned all but one down, because school had started in the fall, and that turned out to be only two months or so of an unpaid internship. I dabbled in other side projects after that - I was bored of working on the same project for what was now a little over a year.

Imagine my surprise when I come back just 6 months after that, and there are two forks of my gem on GitHub and it's been downloaded 30,000+ times (not even counting the other two forks). And yet, the work offers had dried up. I didn't have a website, no recruiters had my contact information, and I was a little lost on what to do. I volunteered that summer, telling myself that more opportunities would arise.

I haven't worked on that project in months. I'm not sure if I'm burnt out from programming (haven't done much of that recently either), but I'm definitely burnt out from that project. I logged onto RubyGems recently and between the original gem and all the forks of it, it's been downloaded 100k+ times. If I created a blog, and started updating the original gem again, I'm sure I could find some work. But I'm not interested in doing that, and I'm not sure why.

I'm headed off to college in the fall internationally, with less work experience than I would've liked and less money in my pocket, too. I'm not sure what the lesson from my story is, but hopefully it will make you take the "too fast, too soon" ideas to heart. Don't stop coding - if it's what you love. But don't let high school pass you by either (just read that you're actually in middle school). My best memories aren't receiving my checks in the mail or making a résumé or even coding, but the time I spent with my friends.

To answer your question directly, no - I was never successful in finding advertised internships for young people. It was discouraging. I'm probably lucky that guy who paid me for months didn't confront me about my age - I'm not sure what would've happened.

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting story. I think that while I may not find an internship this summer, I can just work on side projects and keep learning — that can always continue, even if I can't work with other folks. I really appreciate your story, and interesting perspective!

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> start your own company!</comment>


6 Things I Learned From Not Drinking For 1 Year - <AUTHOR> http://www.theantimba.com/6-things-learned-drinking-1-year

<comment><USER2> The title understates the drinking; he was getting so drunk he was hungover (or still drunk!) every Saturday and Sunday into the afternoon. A bit of moderation, and a couple beers once a week would still give him the majority of these benefits.

But hey, it seems to make him happy, so props.

<comment><USER3> Hey there - I'm the author. Didn't expect this to make it here.

But to address your point: Yes, I for sure had a problem and the title understates it. I just wanted to write in a light hearted way for two reasons:

1) I knew my mom would read the post so didn't wanna worry her. 2) Alcoholism is a serious topic and hard to talk about, but when you tell your buds it makes life easier. And having a sense of humor makes things way easier to discuss...so that's my attempt to be humorous about a serious topic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> It always seems odd to me that every time someone makes a post about the benefits they experienced from going sober, a bunch of people feel the need to defend their own drinking habits out of the blue (even though no-one is attacking them). Congratulations on a sober year, OP.

<comment><USER3> Thanks friend!

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I drink socially (read: 3-4 beers a week) and run 5km a day. I've never felt better. Extremism is not healthy in either direction.

<comment><USER3> I'd disagree a litte. I wrote that post and for some people (like me) there just is not much a middle ground. Maybe I'm just too immature, impulsive, or I don't know what, but I can't moderate myself.

<comment><USER6> Have you seen Craig Ferguson talking about alcoholism? I thought it might be helpful for explaining to people. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZVWIELHQQY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZVWIELHQQY)</comment></comment></comment>


Lin-Manuel Miranda is now fighting ticket bots across the US - <AUTHOR> http://www.theverge.com/2016/8/15/12486238/bots-act-ticket-resale-fines-hamilton-chuck-schumer <comment><USER2>
      I'm not throwing away my / bot
      No I'm not throwing away my / bot
      I'm just like an attendee / No need to be unfriendly
      And I'm not throwing away my / bot</comment>


Looking for Abstraction in Medieval Art - <AUTHOR> http://shc.stanford.edu/news/stories/looking-abstraction-medieval-art <comment><USER2> Disappointing! Should have used ML.</comment>


Velocity dispersions in a cluster of stars: How fast could Usain Bolt have run? - <AUTHOR> http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0809/0809.0209v2.pdf

<comment><USER2> Every now and then funny stuff pops up on arXiv. It's the forum for publishing for semi-serious side projects by physicists and astronomers.

</comment><comment><USER3> _Second, we thank the pizza guy from Peppe's who provided us with a very good half- n-half "Thai Chicken" and "Heavy Heaven" pizza on a late Friday night."_

</comment><comment><USER4> I love how the coach's experience and gut feeling aligns so closely to equations by physicists - that if Usain pushed himself to the fullest and the wind conditions were right, he could run close to 9.50 or even a bit below.

</comment><comment><USER5> Warning: link is a PDF.

Scribd can't seem to convert it.</comment>


Wine Release 1.9.6 with Vulkan support - <AUTHOR> https://www.wine-staging.com/news/2016-03-21-release-1.9.6.html <comment><AUTHOR> "Although this is the first beta version, we are happy to say that this version already passes all (~80300) Khronos Vulkan conformance tests (32 + 64 bit) when using a compliant driver on the host system. We also tested the windows version of the game "The Talos Principle" and various samples from the LunarG SDK and so far, we aren't aware of any bugs."</comment>