A horrifying startup accelerator story - <AUTHOR> http://www.davidgcohen.com/2013/08/29/a-shocking-accelerator-story-that-youll-need-to-read-twice/ <comment><USER2> This story is really frustrating and sad to hear, but I have to say, in the three years I've been working on my startup, never once has anything good happened from paying for access to any type of person (investors or customers), using any currency (equity or cash).

We did YCombinator, which could be described as an "access" play, but apart from that, every time someone has offered us access to something in return for something else, we've always politely declined and then just gone and won the business or relationship on our own merits.

Gatekeepers suck, and doing business with gatekeepers leads startups to doing sucky things and pulls them down as well.

The minute I read him deciding to do a second accelerator so he could get access to "his vertical" I started getting a sinking feeling in my stomach.

<comment><USER3> Paying someone for access never ends well. Do you think the people whose access is being sold are happy with the arrangement? By definition you're entering into a sleazy area. This is why apartment brokers selling access to apartments are sleazy.

<comment><USER4> Probably not in the US, but keep in mind that very often in many other places, what the person selling access is also doing is screening for the person whose access is being sold.

This sort of arrangement works pretty well if the person selling the access is actually offering a decent service to both sides. However, it needs to be mutual, pre-arranged, and with plenty of duties all around (in most of the world "duties" end up meaning "kickbacks" but the system won't work if it is limited to that).

<comment><USER3> I get that screening is a service, but it's very gray. US (& UK) companies need to act with a higher standard globally. Barclays got in trouble with some corporate matchmakers.

[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfina...](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/9514166/Barclays- Qatari-ghosts-haunt-bank.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Came here hoping for a particle accelerator horror story. Bo-ring.

For anyone else who thought the same, here's an article about a russian who got his face caught in a proton beam: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoli_Bugorski#Particle_acce...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoli_Bugorski#Particle_accelerator_accident)

<comment><USER6> This was what I thought - some poor guy was doing maintenance at the wrong time.

<comment><USER7> And didn't even get superpowers out of it. :/

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'd just like to say that the reason I created Seed-DB ([http://www.seed- db.com](http://www.seed-db.com)) is because the world of seed accelerators _should_ be more transparent. I've currently got a list of 170+ accelerators around the world, and the list makes it pretty clear which ones get results and which don't. (Or don't care enough about publicizing results).

If you have any feedback for me as to what would be useful to you when choosing between accelerators, please let me know. Email is in profile.

<comment><USER9> How do you update that list? I'm familiar with a few of the lesser known accelerators on it and I'm aware of some pretty nice exits they've had, but their exit column is listed as $0 on your list.

This is probably complicated by the fact that many of the smaller acquisitions (<$100m) are for undisclosed sums. Not sure how you can ever account for that unless you make wild guesses.

Also it looks like companies which are very valuable but not formally exited yet (AirBNB, Dropbox etc.) aren't accounted for here... a column for "current portfolio valuation" might be more valuable. Again, if it were ever possible to put such a thing together accurately, which I doubt.

<comment><USER8> There are a couple of different lists. The first is the list of accelerators, which I update as soon as I learn about a new accelerator. (Often I add it before they've funded any companies.)

The next list is the list of startups for each accelerator. This is a pretty manual process, though I do give admin permission to accelerators to go in and add their startups themselves. I suspect for the accelerator you're thinking either a) I don't have their full list of startups and/or b) the startups that have exited aren't marked as such on Crunchbase.

You're correct that for many acquisitions I do have to make guesses about exit value; I clearly mark each exit value on Seed-DB with a H/M/L icon to indicate my level of confidence in the value. (Where people have come to me afterward my guesses have been roughly 50/50 over/under.)

I've got some ideas about calculating a valuation, but even if I put that together I would likely not make it public since it's just guesses multiplied by guesses. Plus, there are companies that just buck trends in trying to guess valuation based on funding signals... my favorite example here is Weebly. They went for 4 years on ~$600k of funding before raising a monster $45million round.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> This doesn't seem to be about an accelerator as much as about a person with a behavior disorder that sounds very much like narcissistic personality disorder. NPDs cope with their incompetence by abusing and blaming those around them, creating chaos and misery yet still managing to escape responsibility 9 times out of 10.

The right thing to do here is anonymously expose the managing director.

<comment><USER11> My thoughts exactly. In my business experience, I dealt with two individuals diagnosed with borderline personality disorder. Of course, I did not see their medical records; it was hearsay. However, it explained much about their behavior. It's a sad story, but it is also the face of mental illness, which is all too real. Learning to recognize and deal with this is another thing to store in one's experience quiver.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is a throwaway account because I want to publicly expose AngelHack (or HACKcelerator): After we "won" a local hackaton -that had an entry fee- they didn't help us with the housing, zero, no cash for any of the 20 "winner" teams and only gave $1000 (per team, not person) for fly expenses (hint: not enough) then suggested us to stay in one of the worst hostels in San Francisco (European Hostel).

Later on I also found out that they are already searching volunteers around the world to help them out organizing the 2014 competition... in my opinion all this is pretty shady but we the teams are holding up just in case the demo day brings something good (a.k.a. investors and new contacts).

</comment><comment><USER13> Design tip: if a quote is a quote, have a quote style. If a quote is the entire content of your article and is many paragraphs long, rethink styling it as a quote and instead label it, or something.

<comment><USER14> Absolutely agree. It was very difficult to read, and I ended up having to remove the italic and color styles applied to that section, just to be able to read the article.

<comment><USER15> Readability that shit. Though honestly, in this case, I couldn't even be arsed to do that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I've read several posts where people are trying to identify a female-lead accelerator - exactly counter to the warning in the story:

"I may have also changed the gender of certain people (i.e. he/she), again, with approval of the author."

So lets not point fingers based on gender alone.

</comment><comment><USER17> Have fun figuring out which one it is: [http://www.seed- db.com/accelerators](http://www.seed-db.com/accelerators)

<comment><USER18> [https://angel.co/socraticlabs](https://angel.co/socraticlabs) seems to fit the bill. Of course, keep in mind that this could very well _not_ be the accelerator.

<comment><USER19> The MD seems to have confirmed it: [https://twitter.com/heatherg/status/373318278833135616](https://twitter.com/heatherg/status/373318278833135616)

"I've emailed @davidcohen and asked him whether he would be willing to share my response. Awaiting word."

<comment><USER20> I wonder if "it's not us" would have sufficed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> A word of warning: these personality types are incredibly common in the startup world, for a number of reasons: Driven, strong personalities are valued. It's easier to hide in a small company. As a founder, it's relatively easy to build a team that will tolerate your excesses.

Don't be afraid. Moving on after one month is ok. It won't irrevocably stain your resume. The self-aware hiring managers know this dynamic exists, and won't hold it against you.

There are thousands of amazing, hard-working, kind, creative, interesting people and teams. Find one and cherish it.

<comment><USER22> I think a fair number of those personality types hide in larger companies, too. They don't have the clout/vision/cult-leader personna of a founder with that personality type. After a number of years of observing people like that who should be marched out the door - but aren't - I've concluded they must be blackmailing someone powerful within the company.

<comment><USER23> It doesn't have to be blackmail. It could be that the person has so entrenched himself or herself in his or her role that even their boss can't really fire them. This is especially true in companies that tend to hire top management from outside or do a lot of lateral transfers. It's entirely possible that the middle manager here knows more about that part of the business than his or her boss, and so the boss can't let this person go, because the boss doesn't know enough about the requirements of the position to hire a replacement.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Classic narcissistic personality disorder. Run for the hills. With NPDs, it is always everybody else's fault. Add pathological lying, some bipolar, and maybe just for fun booze/drugs and they'll drive you insane too.

<comment><USER25> where do you pick bipolar from?

<comment><USER26> Assuming you're trying to reply to auctiontheory, I read that as borderline personality disorder - [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borderline_personality_disorder](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borderline_personality_disorder)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Startups looking for accelerators remind me of authors looking for agents and publishers - we don't realize how much power we have in the relationship, and also how much we can do for ourselves without someone to "help" us for a chunk of our equity.

Of course the right accelerator/VC/agent/publisher, at the right time, can help. It works best if you see them as a piece of YOUR plan, rather than see yourself as a supplicant to their network/deep pockets.

<comment><USER28> Amen

I've been approached by a few startup-ish projects in the past few years, all wanting to 'partner' up and 'join an accelerator' or 'apply for startup program XYZ'.

I proceed to ask "what are you going to do with the $50k you'd get if you get in?"

There's typically a blank stare.

Now, I get that you get more than just money; hopefully you're getting connections and introductions and press you couldn't get on your own. But not always.

But I'm still shocked that typically there's _no_ answer at the top of their minds. And they're asking _me_ to _invest_ the next 6 months or more of my life with them to 'do a startup'. As a tech/dev, I _am_ an investor, investing my time, knowledge, energy and passion in to something. If they can't convince me to invest, they're not going to convince an accelerator.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> My experience was not nearly this bad, but still horrifying for me, my co- founder, and our families.

We had been talking off and on with an accelerator for about a month. We had pitched them, had a few calls, but lived on the other side of the country. They wanted to meet in person which was really not feasible for us. We worked at full-time jobs while hacking away on the side and scraping together whatever money we had to fund our company.

A little flashback, first: I had dropped out of grad school and taught myself programming to start my first company. After a year of living on my wife's student loans, I got "acquihired" by a startup that was run by one of the accelerator's mentors. They gave me 3% equity, a $10k moving bonus, $15k for the company, and a $75k/year salary. I said yes.

Three months later, I decided to quit. I was the only technical person in a company consisting of the two non-technical co-founder, co-CEOs, a project manager, and myself. They had burned through $700k already and hadn't built anything yet. It was becoming clear that my product was going to be their product. In the best case scenario I would spend the next four years working on my original startup, only now for pennies on the dollar.

The purchase of my assets still hadn't gone through and I hadn't yet been paid, aside from the moving bonus and salary. The co-founders claimed I had acted in bad faith and asked for the moving bonus back. I explained that I wouldn't have moved had the moving bonus not been offered (as I couldn't have afforded it). If they had wanted that money back in case I quit, our contract should have specified as much. They relented, and we went our separate ways.

Fast forward another year, back to our accelerator story. The accelerator decides they want to afford us the opportunity to meet in person. They agree to pay for flights so long as we pay for our own hotels and car rental. We also have to talk up the trip on social media, talking about how they paid for our trip, our meetings with investors, etc. Small price to pay, we think.

We make the trip and have some pretty productive meetings. They seem to like us. We fly back, and after some back and forth, they decide they want to invest. Of course, they still need to do their due diligence, so it's going to take some time. In the meantime, my co-founder and I get fired from our jobs. You see, our boss found out about our trip to the accelerator since it was broadcast over social media. It was cool when we were working on a startup after hours. It wasn't so cool when we were talking openly about actually starting a company.

It doesn't matter, though. We made it into the accelerator. They send over the paperwork. It's a convertible note with pretty standard terms, fully signed by all the partners. We sign and send it back. We can't believe it's happening. I sign a lease on an apartment in the new city and my wife and I pack up our apartment. My co-founder does the same.

Suddenly the music changes. They go dark for a couple days. I'm nervous because I have a U-Haul scheduled. I finally get a call with one of the partners; I'm supposed to start a 3,000 mile move the next day. He explains that they can't do the deal. A check isn't coming. He can't explain why.

My mind races and I think: it couldn't have been that mentor, could it? My resume was fully transparent. They should've seen the connection. And they did their due diligence before they made the deal. How could that have slipped by?

I ask for an explanation but to no avail. They can't explain it. Not even a little bit.

Now I have to try to reorder my life. My job is gone. My apartment is already rented out to someone else. Luckily the landlord at the new place lets me out of my lease. I reschedule the U-Haul to take us to my wife's parents' house instead.

My co-founder was devastated. He wasn't used to startups. In fact, to this day he's been bouncing around trying to find a similarly stable job. I can't help but feel responsible. I recovered better. I decided to start consulting for other startups and have made a pretty good go of it.

That's my accelerator horror story. Anyone else have others?

<comment><USER30> Thanks for writing this up.

> _They agree to pay for flights so long as we pay for our own hotels and car > rental._

This seems crazy to me. In my head, if a few hundred bucks for flights & lodging is too much to ask, how much dough could they really have to invest? Is this standard?

> _It 's a convertible note with pretty standard terms, fully signed by all > the partners. We sign and send it back. [...] He explains that they can't do > the deal. A check isn't coming. He can't explain why._

Is there any legal recourse available in this situation?

> _My mind races and I think: it couldn 't have been that mentor, could it?_

Which mentor are you talking about here?

> _Now I have to try to reorder my life. My job is gone. My apartment is > already rented out to someone else._

You know, I've seen deals fall apart so often that until cash is in the bank I don't change my life. Maybe it's from my time as a car salesman in college - until the bank funds the loan, I wasn't counting my commission. Deals fall apart in all sorts of crazy and ridiculous ways.

<comment><USER31> > until cash is in the bank I don't change my life.

if you're in sales, this is EXTREMELY important, doubly so if you sell for a startup. the deal isn't real until the money shows up.

customers will take advantage of your kindness, lie to you, manipulate you, appeal to your vanity, and they can smell desperation from a mile away. "give an inch and they'll take a mile" \- these folksy old timey sayings don't come from nowhere.

there are all sorts of shitty people out there that will play napoleon for a day just because they feel they have power over you. it's sickening.

do not start work until you get the money. do not ship product until you get the money. do not pay your suppliers until you get the money. do not pay your sales people commission until you get the money - money didn't show up? well that wasn't a sale, now was it?

if they don't want to pay at LEAST a deposit, they're not serious. END OF STORY.

very simple in concept - very difficult in practice because there are some people who are just plain naive out there. one of the most important skills you learn as a startup is how to say no.

<comment><USER32> This is an important lesson, but it's not an absolute rule.

You need to have a sense for your customers, how much power _they_ have over the money, and how much they'll suffer if you're inflexible.

I've spent years working with teachers, who (as patio11 will tell you) are not a great target market for ready cash, but who are very honest. I used to have an informal policy where a teacher would just _tell_ me they were working on getting a purchase order, and I'd credit their subscription. I changed that to only crediting them a month at a time (after one situation where I realized towards the end of the year that one PO had never arrived.. it was stressful for the teacher, but all resolved amicably), but still, there's trust involved.

If I didn't trust them, a lot of these teachers would just be stuck without access for weeks -- the site would be far less useful to them.

\- Edit: "until the cash is in the bank, don't change your _life_ " still applies in my situation; payment was slow and unreliable (though paid in the long run), and that does affect planning.

<comment><USER33> In your case you have an established business, and you have a class of customers you understand and therefore who you can extend tailored win-win credit policies to. As you note in your edit, that's a different thing than the stuff that changes your life, like all that went in to establishing your companies up front.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> I've walked away, shaking my head, from several YCombinator-alikes. They're too often about trying to put together deal-flow without understanding what's helpful. Now I'm all for new things if there were solid principals, strats and connections, but that's rarely the case.... anyone with half an aptitude is likely already in play. Basically, their "help" is a waste of my time and something I can do on my own, better, without giving up an iota of equity. My conclusion is you don't need most of them, most of the time, even the ones that try not to be instant wantrepreneur bootcamps. If you're focused, hungry and persistent... you already have what it takes. So where's the value?

</comment><comment><USER35> I had an awful experience years ago that reminds me of some of these stories. I'd have to tone it down to make it believable.

Short short version: a guy with no money pretended to be a deep-pocketed investor, talked me into leaving my day job. At least that's how the story begins. Then it gets progressively more insane.

<comment><USER36> I met a one of these faux investor, charlatan, stone soup types a few years ago. When he talked about making investments, it took a while to figure out he'd invest time and no cash. When he talked about how was was affiliated with some impressive named and organizations, he really meant he'd done a shitty website for a semi well known author and he'd visited the Harvard campus once. At every turn when I asked him for a hard commitment of something I could use, actionable advice or hard cash, he never produced.

I recommend demanding excellence from your investors and expect them to demand excellence from you. Strong relationships improve when tested, others buckle and fade away. That's been my experience anyway.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> Nothing as bad, but heard of bad experience by teams at Microsoft + Techstars accelerator in Seattle where both sides lost interest in the class in the middle of the program. Not sure how good/bad the fundraising was across the board.

<comment><USER8> Details are here: [http://www.seed- db.com/accelerators/view?acceleratorid=95003](http://www.seed- db.com/accelerators/view?acceleratorid=95003)

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> With that many red flags, why would anyone accept an investment and enter a relationship with such an organization? The things people will do for funding... I'd rather have a day job or a consulting gig in a heartbeat compared to a situation like that.

<comment><USER39> In college I flailed around for funding for an idea for a bit. I accepted the first offer I found. Said "investor" jacked half of his money back out of the account (he needed a card because he was supposed to do some work on the financial end) and spent it on parties and shit. Very similar tendencies to what was described in the article and lots of the same red flags. He then threatened to sue me if I talked about the whole thing. Thinking about posting the whole story somewhere.

But the broader point is: if you need investment and can't find anyone else, it's very easy to convince yourself that it won't be as bad as it will.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> Seems mostly a story about one problematic manager with some personality disorder(s).

</comment><comment><USER41> I've become very wary of accelerators that make bold promises, although my experience is nowhere near as bad this story.

Having been approached by 3 different accelerators, the story is always the same:

1\. They offer a very nice chunk of funding

2\. Declare how fantastic their team of mentors and legal connections are

3\. They say they have some very low equity requirements

... fast forward ... about to sign an agreement ...

4\. Funding is suddenly limited, or is now a range, with the upper figure as what they originaly offered... but with additional caveats

5\. The equity requirements are now greater, since they 'forgot' to mention that additional equity is required at the end of the program

6\. There is also suddenly an 'entry fee' to cover various expences that they also conveniently 'forgot' to mention

7\. Many of their so called mentors/connections have not even agreed to be part of the program

There are certainly many good accelerators out there, but there are many more two-bit players out there willing to screw over early stage startups just to get themselves some funding (and equity, on the off-chance one of the startups actually become successful despite their 'help').

</comment><comment><USER42> > _At this point we decided that some of this behavior was pathological_

I want to say that this fact should have been obvious long before, but I have the benefit of third-person hindsight.

</comment><comment><USER43> It seems to me like a lot of accelerators would be better off throwing this one to the wolves ASAP before they all get tainted by a stench of unknown origin.

</comment><comment><USER44> I've always been scared to death at how many people who add zero or negative value are involved in this process.

</comment><comment><USER45> I had the displeasure of meeting this MD earlier this month. She was one of the most offensive people I've ever met. Treated the employee she had with her like shit. Was a total bitch. I knew nothing about her, the accelerator, or this story when meeting her, and I still knew instantly that I never wanted to talk to the women again.

How did the founders of companies in her accelerator not see the same thing I did in our first meeting?

</comment><comment><USER26> The accelerator went back on their word fairly early on in the arrangement. When someone does that, that's basically the time to start looking at walking away IME - dishonesty is a matter of habit, chances are they're not going to turn over a new leaf and everything else is going to be fine from there on in.

</comment><comment><USER46> Was just having the discussion of whether or not to accelerate your company with one of the leaders of Bizdom accelerator in Cleveland.

[http://www.replyall.me/zach-talks/to-accelerate-or-not-to- ac...](http://www.replyall.me/zach-talks/to-accelerate-or-not-to-accelerate/)

One issue I haven't brought up yet (but will) is whether a young company wants that kind of "access" or whether having to crawl before you walk makes companies iterate and get it right and get the "access" the old fashioned way. Sometimes think accelerators give companies access a little too quickly for the company's own good.

</comment><comment><USER9> Just as there are horrifying VC stories, so there are bound to be horrifying accelerator stories. With VCs it's really the top tier firms that are the ones you want to work with; many of the others are under pressure at all times to make up for mediocre returns, which is not a formula for a happy working relationship with them. It's going to be the same with their earlier stage cousins...

</comment><comment><USER47> It's stuff like that that just made me launch my own accelerator on the East Coast (in addition to running a few startups): [http://www.colodesk.com/](http://www.colodesk.com/) We don't trick people, but we do "force" them into success or failure quickly.

</comment><comment><USER48> I actually received an email from "Pre-Accelerator", submitted just now: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6301565](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6301565) which seems to be in the same theme with this topic.

</comment><comment><USER49> Site is down for me: "Error establishing a database connection"

<comment><USER50> That's one hell of a horror story.

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> Obviously their webhost only accounted for people reading it once.

</comment><comment><USER52> Site down. Not cached by google. Anyone have a link?

</comment><comment><USER53> what is the real recourse here? you can't out them because of their connections in the community and needing to do business with their business partners in the future? I wish someone like David Cohen or PG would out them publicly and let the court of public opinion do the rest.

</comment><comment><USER54> _" The weird thing is that the MD keeps making intros, speaking highly of us and sending people our way. We think she does it because she doesn't want us talking about our experiences._"

Well that doesn't seem too bad, it even feels like the story had a happy ending as it sounds like they've been able to get investors and the startup is working.

<comment><USER55> It more feels like the MD wanted to keep schmoozing and acting important ignoring the reality of the situation.

There have been a few stories over the passed couple of years where someone name drops and schmoozes to elevate their own profile. In the end, they are found out to be frauds or worse.

Any area that gets a lot of hype will have those that want to cling on.

<comment><USER39> >> It more feels like the MD wanted to keep schmoozing and acting important ignoring the reality of the situation.

I wouldn't be surprised if "she" demanded something if she even knew of an investor OP's company ended up taking on.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER56> maybe a noob question but usually, the agreement to do an accelerator program is usually overseen by an attorney? or is it just a handshake between accelerator and acceleratees?

<comment><USER8> The 'agreement' between them is meaningless (in a legal/financial sense) until they both sign the docs to officially transfer money for an equity stake.

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> is there a glassdoor for startup accelerators?

</comment><comment><USER57> Error establishing a database connection... that is all I get.</comment>


Coursera Raises $49.5M Series C Funding Led by NEA - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2015/08/25/coursera-raises-49-5m-series-c-funding-led-by-nea-expects-second-closing-will-bring-total-to-60m/

<comment><USER2> Really great to see this. I was a heavy Coursera user in high school (took 6-7 courses at a time) and loved it. It taught me a lot about what I was interested in, what I hated, and pushed me to really learn things before I got to college. Many people I know couldn't stick it out, but I finished all the courses I started at the time and met some amazing people.

The interface and experience has come a long way since I first used them. I hope they encourage more community building and interaction. That was one big area that I felt was missing from the education that I've gotten through college and high school.

<comment><AUTHOR> The community aspect is one of the biggest advantages there is when it comes to MOOCs. I have taken and completed multiple courses across different platforms but Coursera remains my favorite by far. Especially for countries such as India where the education system can be excruciatingly rigid at times, it has been a lifesaver!</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Should I Sign an NDA?? - <AUTHOR> I'm a founder who freelances to support my startup. I'm in talks with a client to build a 'Fintech app to assist with personal financial planning.'
My company is in the blockchain space and there is a low chance of any conflict.
The potential client is a director at a wealth management firm. She's requested that I sign an NDA before we meet.
Should I sign it?? <comment><USER2> NDAs are practically universal in the software consulting market. It would be borderline unprofessional† to refuse to sign one on principle. Two things you can do if you're really worried about this: (1) offer your own MNDA instead of their paper, or (2) pay $300 or so to get a lawyer to review their NDA.

If you go with option (2), you can buy yourself a little time to try to qualify the client prospect by saying you'll sign an NDA, but you'll have to have it reviewed at some expense before signing, so you'd like to make sure there's an actual deal there before signing.

† _This is probably not exactly the word I want to use here._

<comment><USER3> > NDAs are practically universal in the software consulting market.

Please would you explain what you mean by "practically universal".

<comment><USER4> Not OP, but also in software consulting. Working with software means in most cases working with customer data, which is sensible by nature (either because it contains some kind of knowledge or employee details).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> That depends. What does the NDA say and what are the clauses?

NDAs are typical when sharing perceived sensitive information. If the clauses are wholly about protecting that information transference and not otherwise binding you, then consider it. If the NDA clauses would restrict any further business by you in the market or domain, then run.

 _IANAL - if you have access to one and can afford one - do that_

<comment><USER2> An NDA that restricts future business is a non-compete. It's a valid point: businesses do sometimes sneak noncompete language into IP agreements, which are sometimes what they mean when they say "NDA".

You can clause-by-clause compare an NDA to your own standard MNDA and, if you're not confident they're basically the same document, offer your own MNDA instead of theirs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> If you are consulting you should already have your own version of NDA and lawyer which will do necessary review of their NDA. Many gigs require NDA. In some cases it is just a checkbox so that big bosses are happy so you cannot assume that the client is "pain in the neck".

Regarding your startup, my personal opinion is that it is not smart to work on gig which is in fintech while you are working on fintech startup. It is just not worth trouble. Even if you do not sign NDA. Find some other gig. This my personal opinion.

</comment><comment><USER7> Some folks seem to be a bit crazy about NDAs on both sides. As someone who has asked and been asked many times. I would say thoroughly read the NDA, make sure it allows for knowledge that is already public, and knowledge that you already have (esp on block-chain). Its reasonable to keep financial data confidential, likewise proprietary idea's. So as long as its reasonable there is no reason not to sign it.

<comment><USER8> Like many others here, I'm not a lawyer, so don't take this as qualified legal advice.

But yes, I totally agree here. I once lost out on a great opportunity because I was stubborn about signing an NDA that probably would have had zero effect on my future work. In reality, it's usually a formality that companies make you sign to protect themselves. Or maybe because their investors demand it. But most companies aren't looking to sue you and most people signing NDAs aren't looking to screw over the companies they do work for. But yes, occasionally companies do come across someone who is up to no good (e.g. an unscrupulous consultant who also does work for a competitor) and in those rare cases they want the NDAs there to protect themselves.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Do you have investors? Check any documents or shareholders agreements you've signed to make sure you can actually do this type of work without breaking an existing contract. At the very least you may need written permission from your investors in order to go ahead.

As for signing an NDA, I've found that often people who require them are pedantic about unimportant things and difficult to work with, so unless there is a very good reason they'd need one I'd be very cautious about getting involved.

</comment><comment><USER10> One should have a strong bias against signing an NDA, or indeed anything at all, as a condition of hearing about a possible gig. Most clients, especially individual clients, should be able to describe what they need in a non- confidential way prior to agreeing on terms. Once you know what's expected, and what's in it for you, then it is normal to sign a work-for-hire agreement that contains NDA terms. If you're a free software person, you might find that objectionable as well but that's more of a personal ethical choice, and if you've made that choice you would likely not be entertaining this current gig in the first place.

</comment><comment><USER11> For that situation, I wouldn't. If I'm visiting someone at a Fortune 500, yeah, I usually have to sign one at the door. If it's someone with "an idea", I won't sign them.

I've literally walked away from deals because of pissing contests over signing an NDA. But sometimes I say screw it and just sign it if I'm already interested in the work; although in that case, I make sure it's a mutual-NDA. Pick your battles and all that.

But here's the thing: they're a bad way to start a prospective relationship and unenforceable. So it shows that the person you're talking to is a) litigious and b) doesn't understand how the law works. Those are people I tend to avoid.

I'll also say this: I've never signed an NDA and then been told something I didn't know already.

<comment><USER2> Why do you believe NDAs are "unenforceable"?

<comment><USER11> I should add "under california law". But it's very hard to prove anything, and whether you end up winning or not, it's expensive.

Of course there's nuance there, but in the case of "Hello contractor, I've got an idea and I want you to sign an NDA for me to tell you about my predictive analytics solution", unless the contractor literally steals the name of the company and weirdly specific plans you provided in writing, there is no case. And even if there was a case, do you have tens of thousands of dollars to chase it?

Is there a famous case where an NDA became a key factor? I think Facebook would be the one everyone thinks of, but that wasn't a case of an NDA, there was a lot more going on there. But if Mark had just said "Actually, I'm severing any business relationship and starting an entirely new codebase, company, etc. by myself" he probably would have been fine. Especially in California.

<comment><USER2> You're describing the only case in which an NDA would legitimately be enforceable, and acknowledging that they're enforceable in that case.

As I said elsewhere on the thread: it's true that some companies try to sneak more general IP agreements into NDAs, including noncompete clauses, but the terms of a standard MNDA are pretty straightforward.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> _My company is in the blockchain space and there is a low chance of any conflict._

How are you 100% sure of that if you haven't heard the idea from your potential client?

</comment><comment><USER13> I personally won't sign an NDA without a non-refundable $10,000 deposit.

Not worth my time to go through those hoops. If they think their stuff is so snowflake special and need to protect it with an NDA, they can pay my fee for signing an NDA.

<comment><USER14> Of the times you have proposed NDA in exchange for a fee, what were the outcomes? They pay? They walk? They waive the NDA?

<comment><USER13> Walked. Apparently their idea wasn't worth $10k. Or they probably didn't think their idea was worth paying 2x hourly rate on top of the deposit.

NDA's and Non-Competes both change my requirements.

Without them my rates are $150/hr with 40 hours pre-paid upfront to discuss the project. When we move forward those 40 hours are credited to them.

If non-compete/NDA is involved, my rate goes to $300/hr with non-refundable $10,000 deposit that does not translate to credits.

<comment><USER15> Hey Josh, This was very helpful. Ryan

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I dunno, the fact that your startup is in the blockchain space is a little too close to banking/fintech for my tastes. PLUS, larger companies don't have a problem abusing NDAs if they can get something out of it.

<comment><USER2> Why does it matter how close the spaces are?

<comment><USER16> Because then it's more likely to have overlap between their startup and the NDA content. And the more overlap, the easier it would be for them to threaten about NDA breach in the future.

The most likely scenario: if their startup does really well and becomes popular, you can be sure that this company with the NDA will look and see if they can grab some money with a lawsuit threat.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> One thing to consider is if the client you're dealing with requiring it, or is their firm requiring it by policy? If it's the later, the kind of leeway you'll have in terms of getting appropriate terms signed off by their legal team is quite different.

For example, for early discussions a mutual disclosure agreement is another nice way to get compliance with a company's standard legal terms (ie. both parties agree to not reveal anything confidential or sensitive), and can be useful to get things started far enough to get upper management support required to make exceptions to their standard legal procedures. (I've been in the situation where my and a supplier's legal team's where far and distant enough from a project not to prioritize resolving incompatible differences in standard contract terms for months eventually requiring a loud "nudge" from upper management behind a closed door.)

<comment><USER2> This will be the case at virtually any firm that (a) has a lawyer either on staff or retainer and (b) works with customer private data of any sort. There won't be any leeway whatsoever from firms like these on NDAs.

<comment><USER17> That is basically the case that the person you're talking to requiring it (small company), if the 'contract' is basically a substitute for a hire, or if programmers are viewed there as fungible goods.

For companies large enough to have a large bureaucracy of legal staff whose standard terms are a Byzantine compromise of many different departments / businesses requirements / and past initiatives. Then local legal aids will typically had a fixed set of options of types of contracts they'll entertain quickly (in order to get anything done). For example, they might have a mutual disclosure agreement on file. Later, if the questioner offers something important enough to get upper management's attention minor modifications can be made within limits. Then again you have to offer something unique and important for that to happen.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Only if you can carve out exceptions for things related to your work in blockchain. See a lawyer, for real.

But most importantly, find a lawyer that can balance your needs and what is practical.

For example, real world here. I was signing a contract with a contracting house to work at a big bank. The lawyer told me: "This is a basic - screw-you one-sided contract. But don't worry too much about that - because the more one-sided sometimes the better when you go to a judge. HOWEVER, these 3 items you MUST get changed."

One of the specific things I remember is the phrase "related to" because in software everything is related to everything else in a legal sense. (IANAL)

Contrast this with a well-meaning, less experienced lawyer friend who said - you have to change everything - it is a horrid contract.

Because I was very specific, and could clearly articulate the reason for the changes - the changes happened. But big difference between the 2 different lawyers' suggestions.

</comment><comment><USER19> NDAs that just cover exact work you are doing for the client and protection of their clients are fine. Really most just want you not talking about what you are doing with the client to others or taking their clients.

Non-competes are the problem and a huge anti-innovation monster out there lurking to get you. They can appear in NDAs, contract agreements and standalone. Refuse to sign these or make sure they ONLY last as long as the contract itself if you must. Some clients try to get you to sign a non-compete for 2+ years on 3-month contracts, many times they are just sending on a default template but some do it on purpose. That is just blatant ownership especially when you come on to transfer knowledge and skills to them in building up their products. They can own the work you do for them because they paid for it, but don't let them own you.

</comment><comment><USER20> I have a _much_ bigger issue with non-compete agreements than I do with signing an NDA.

Yes, I'm happy to treat confidential information confidentially.

Don't mess with my ability to earn a living, though. That's what non-compete agreements seem like, to me.

¯\\_(ツ)_/¯

</comment><comment><USER21> I guess that would depend on the nature and scope of the NDA. I would be more concerned about the contract you'll get from the wealth management firm. It may have some boilerplate about everything you develop is our property.

</comment><comment><USER22> That's not uncommon, and I work for a wealth management firm. All consultants sign NDA's if they are going to pitch services to us. But, you'd be surprised at which companies are looking into blockchain..

</comment><comment><USER23> I would ask for a pre-meeting before signing anything. then they have to decide what they want to share. And maybe in the meeting you can figure out whether or not you want to pursue a contract with them.

</comment><comment><USER24> Find a lawyer and get an NDA made that you can use with your clients. It's almost always better to use yours than theirs, as there is a smaller chance for surprises.

</comment><comment><USER25> My org signed one NDA with BigCorp, and I watched a sister org on the same project with more leverage not sign an NDA, and have the same level of engagement and more leverage by not being yoked to an NDA.

There's a pro-con to it, no doubt. If you think you have leverage, skip it. If you don't have leverage, probably easy enough to eat it.

</comment><comment><USER26> Has she also agreed to sign your NDA as well? Given your position as a founder, it's more important that she sign a binding NDA than you sign any NDA from some potential client. It seems she has things very backwards and is a confused person. She should sign your NDA. You should not sign hers.

<comment><USER2> The norm here would be for the NDA to be mutual. Yes, don't sign a unilateral NDA. Sure: if a prospect offers a unilateral NDA, you could consider that a red flag. In ~12 years of consulting, I've never seen that happen; even the janky NDAs that include noncompete language have had mutual NDA language.

If their NDA is basically the same as your NDA, it's not worth fighting to make sure you're signing your paper and not theirs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> No...

Unless you read and understand ALL of it and there is no crazy terms in it.

</comment><comment><USER28> Non-disclosure agreements have become pro-forma. They're as expected as handshakes in any early meeting between people who might discuss intellectual property. And in IT, _any interesting conversation_ is by definition intellectual property. So, you don't have to sign it, but then you don't get to have interesting conversations.

</comment><comment><USER29> I wrote about exactly this: [https://medium.com/startup-study-group/why-i- wont-sign-an-nd...](https://medium.com/startup-study-group/why-i-wont-sign-an- nda-4193aeda7251)

<comment> old-gregg Mm... no. You wrote about a completely different problem. Signing an NDA for an _idea_ is indeed not a good idea. In the case of OP there's an established business with, presumably valuable, internal information to be revealed to a contractor (vendor). NDAs are understandably common/expected in cross-vendor relationships.</comment></comment>


Twitter is blocking Flurry app install links - <AUTHOR> http://www.jakeludington.com/life/2014/twitter-blocking-flurry/

<comment><AUTHOR> On the plus side, it looks like you can get a Twitter card for your app using a tracking link without paying for a Twitter app install campaign.</comment>


App.net is Destined for Failure - <AUTHOR> http://danr.us/appdotnet

<comment><USER2> When TheFacebook launched, you needed a Harvard email account to use it.. which had a much larger cost of entry than App.net's $50 annual fee. It was a tightly wound coil of users that helped prove the model and obtain additional funding.

<comment><USER3> TheFacebook also had no idea what a large social network they could become and never had the expectations to be what they are now. App.net is mirror itself off Twitter so they obviously know how big its possible to grow. Also TheFacebook was using exclusivity as a motivator to get people to join and request the service for their schools. App.net isn't exclusive its just a paid service and since its not a luxury item its not something people will pay for just for the sake of paying.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Lets be honest here: Facebook makes roughly $0.80 per user per month. App.net most likely will never achieve the dizzying heights of hundreds of million users who are leeching off Twitter and Facebook, but it doesn't need too. As Facebook has proven by their failure of an IPO, their lack of business model has destined them for failure. At least App.net have a business plan right from the beginning, something Twitter and Facebook never had and still to a certain extent still do not have.

The issue with a free service is if the free service is good enough like in the case of Twitter and Facebook even if you offer a premium paid service people aren't going to pay because free is better, free almost always wins. The great thing about App.net is that they're openly telling everyone they will be charging right from the beginning, so App.net won't have to compete with their own free offering which puts them in a great place.

My understanding is that App.net is incorrectly being touted as a Twitter clone, it's more-so a massive real-time API that is going to give developers amazing infrastructure and functionality to implement into their own ideas. Lets be honest if Facebook or Twitter completely opened up their API for $50 per year without any restrictions and a guarantee you won't be screwed over, a lot of people would buy but the problem is Twitter and Facebook are dependent on advertising revenue they wouldn't offer a fully-open API they couldn't make more than $50 a year off of with ads.

I was sceptical at the beginning App.net would be different, but now I am pretty excited at the possibilities of the service. The growth of the funding for this thing is crazy, I doubt App.net will struggle to succeed here. Everyone loves to hate on something instead of coming up with a great idea themselves.

Sounds to me like Dan doesn't know what he's on about here. What is he basing all of this assumptions off of? People gladly pay $99 a year for Apple's developer program, I see App.net being the same in that they offer a service that will help people build great apps they can self-monetise much like the Apple developer program only without restriction.

<comment><AUTHOR> It's true that App.net won't have to compete against itself, but it will have to compete against Twitter, which is free and already has the momentum.

The API doesn't seem as massive as you think. From what I understand, it's just a read/write API to App.net. Users of these new apps that will be built on App.net will still need an App.net account to use them. App.net is going to be a service, not a protocol or platform. That's not to say that people can't build apps that use this API in interesting ways. Look at what bonfire.im has done on top of Twitter. I'm sure that lots of things can and will be built on App.net. But, at that point, the network just becomes another backend-as-a- service. Not only is that not groundbreaking, but it's going to serve it's purpose poorly, because the apps built on it are limited in scope to users who use App.net. If I wanted to build a service and were choosing a platform, why would I choose one that currently has 9,000 potential users in total?

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Yes, how dare this company focus on making as much money as possible.

They should be focusing on getting a ton of VC funding and flipping the company to Facebook instead.

Your argument is essentially "App.net is going to fail because it has a business model." Take a step back and think about that.

<comment><USER3> The argument is that App.net has a business model that isn't going to work, not that it has a business model at all. A business model doesn't guarantee revenue, here is a business model I am going to sell rubberbands for $1000 a piece and it only costs me $.05 to make them. Great business model but that isn't going to get many people to buy. This is a very niche product that will work if the expectations are kept in check and they understand what they have is a niche product. There is nothing wrong with having such a product you just have to make sure your goals are aligned with that. I wouldn't consider myself the average user for these services (Twitter, Facebook) at all as my knowledge on tech is far beyond the normal user and I have absolutely no issues with the way these services are monetizing. The average consumer who uses the services couldn't care less about the ads nor would they pay anywhere near the amount being proposed.

<comment><USER6> I for one don't even notice the ads in Twitter. Where are they? That's either a good or bad thing. Good, in that it's not a huge nuisance to me. Bad, in that Twitter isn't doing a great monetizing users.

<comment><USER3> The ads are sponsored tweets, if you are using an extension like adblock then you probably don't see them but regardless they are very unobtrusive ads that don't pose much of a nuisance.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> App.net has a very smart business model. It's goal, at least for now, is not to have millions and millions of average users, or Lady Gagas, or Justin Biebers. It's goal is to attract industry professionals, designers, developers who are willing and who are also capable of paying $50 a year to be part of a limited network. At its early days, I think that App.net will resemble the early Twitter. Its users were people who believed in its success, they were mostly the same demographic that App.net is aiming at now and a lot of great things came of that. The masses didn't believe in Twitter, they found it useless - and it was a much better service back then, without them.

</comment><comment> J-H I don't think App.net needs to have more users than Facebook and Twitter to succeed. For social networks these days, quality is better than quantity.

</comment><comment><USER8> I still don't really understand your argument and I think you missed the point completely. Sustainable sites don't need to grow like Facebook because per user revenues are constant as usership increases, as opposed to Facebook or any add based sites.

If app.net can make a great product, they'll find a way to sell it and people will buy it. Not 900 million people, but many people. Add to this the fact that they could leverage added value in certain key areas like privacy, which facebook can never do, and it doesn't seem so bad for 50$ a year.

A couple of years ago you would have been considered a fool if you thought that a 500$ phone would ever sell.

<comment><USER9> $50 a year is a lot to a student, or a parent with kids, or someone without a job, or a family with inky one source of income, or if you are one of the billions of people that survive on $1-2 a day.

That's why in places like india, Africa a $500 phone is still seen as laughable. Even ignoring developing countries and emerging economies, charging 50 bucks is going to be a stretch and seems a bit crazy if you want to appeal to people outside of the silicon communities....

But then again I thought twitter was a silly fad

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> You don't think it's possible that the $50/year is just a Kickstarter-style price to get early funding, and they're just going to charge $5 a month from here on out?

It seems like your premise bends on the idea that the model is always going to be like this.

<comment><AUTHOR> $5 a month is $60 a year, which is a price increase.

<comment><USER10> But it _feels_ like less. $5 is like half a meal at Chipotle. If you can't afford that, I don't know what to say to you. That is not a lot of money.

Did you know that many professional organizations charge $100 per year to join them? How is this different?

I mean, you totally missed my point. I'm not sure what else to say.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Twitter-like messaging should be a protocol, not a single-source service.

I hope App.net fails.</comment>


I Got My Attention Back (2017) - <AUTHOR> https://craigmod.com/essays/how_i_got_my_attention_back/ <comment><USER3> I built this service to help deal with this problem: [https://omreader.co](https://omreader.co)

It allows you to read blogs (RSS feeds) and email newsletters on your Kindle. I originally started working on this to help me read financial news without needing my phone which I find to be a really distracting environment. I would find myself mindlessly opening up and scrolling through reddit or HN and in my experience, repeatedly doing that has a tendency to destroy ones ability to concentrate. It's super nice to be able to wake up without your phone near you and still be able to read long form content.

I just launched it out of beta but any feedback would be great.

Edit: HN is currently hugging the database to death. The site is still working fine but I apologize for any slowness. I will upgrade the database tonight.

<comment><USER4> I launched something similar in 2014 - a few years too early, I guess: [https://betalist.com/startups/thedailycrunch](https://betalist.com/startups/thedailycrunch)

Good luck with your service :) officially supporting apps on the Kindle would open up a very interesting (if niche) market - I'd love to see "the slow web" become a thing.

<comment><USER5> "The slow web" is already there :) It's also called "write a paper letter to a friend".

It's amazing how much more satisfying reading an article can be, if you got it as a slightly crumbled paper printout mailed to you by a trusted friend, who is awaiting your thoughtful comments on it in the upcoming weeks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'd actually appreciate anyone's opinion or advice on this...

I grew up on computers and the internet (absent, technophile parents made that very easy) and by the age of 13 or 14 my computer really just felt like an extension of myself. When I was in undergrad, I realized that the only way I'd ever actually properly study is if I had someone on my dorm floor take my computer from me and refuse to give it back for some designated period of time.

After undergrad, I "relapsed" a bit in the sense that I would be on my laptop for 14+ hours a day every day, constantly context switching and never really getting any good work done. I'd still accomplish my work but would never really get to the things I wanted to get done, like practicing piano or reading a book.

I started a new job in October and was able to start 'fixing' myself a bit by leaving all my electronics at the office after work, and by December I could actually feel a tangible difference in how I was thinking and making decisions. Unfortunately, after COVID hit, the office closed, and now I've had the least amount of separation between my physical life and digital life, between work and leisure (as I'm sure is the same for all of you).

Do any of you have any systems that work for you in terms of a path towards self-control? I have very little self-control and a very addictive personality and I really don't like the way I spend my time at the moment. At this point I'm even considering finding Adderall or something similar as I don't feel capable of accomplishing this on my own.

<comment><USER3> Here are some things that have worked for me:

1\. Keep your phone on silent (or shut off) in a different room than your office (or wherever you're trying to work)

2\. Install an app like Refine on your phone and block all social media and sites that you open up frequently (HN would possibly be an example)

3\. Keep your phone in a different room before going to sleep.

4\. If you like listening to audiobooks, consider getting an Amazon Echo. I like to listen to audiobooks before falling asleep and with the Echo you can set a sleep timer and then play an audiobook and it will stop playing after the sleep timer expires.

5\. On your laptop (assuming you use Mac or Linux) add social media and other frequently visited non-productivity related sites to your /etc/hosts file.

Personally I try to avoid drugs for these kinds of things. In my view it's a matter of self improvement and self-discipline which are things that can be developed with effort.

<comment> yjftsjthsd-h > On your laptop (assuming you use Mac or Linux) add social media and other > frequently visited non-productivity related sites to your /etc/hosts file.

NT has a hosts file, they just stuck it somewhere in system32.

<comment><USER7> c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts

Had to stick reddit and hackernews in there on my work PC long ago.

<comment><USER8> I tried that but I'm such an addict I changed it back.

A better solution for me is a chrome extension that blocks it for 20 minutes at a time. Long enough to make decent progress and get started on work, but no so long that I resent it and give up.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I want to throw my phone away and switch to a "dumb" phone so I can rid my addiction to it, but I have become dependent on several core apps such as Google Maps. I wish Android would allow me full control to delete every app on there but the ones I most need. But unfortunately, its restrictions prevent me from doing so. For example, I want to delete all web browser apps so I am not tempted to the addiction of the internet, but Android won't let me. Does anyone here know how I can bypass this? I am close to purchasing the Light Phone 2 as a means to address my addiction, but again, it is missing Google Maps which I am heavily dependent on.

<comment><USER10> A simple solution is to:

1\. set up parental-control restrictions that lock you out of these apps;

2\. hand your phone to someone you trust, and tell them to set the unlock password for the parental-control restrictions (so that only _they_ will know it);

3\. ask that said person also does you the service of typing the password to disable the restrictions when requested—but only with 24 hours' notice. (I.e. you ask, and then 24 hours later they'll do it.)

That way, you'll never be tempted to unlock the restrictions for trivial things; but you can still e.g. reset the phone if you want to sell it. (You just need to wait 24 hours first.)

<comment><USER11> Solo tech fun:

\- Set a long parental control password, you won't remember.

\- Write it into some file.

\- Put that file into an encrypted container, with a short to medium generated random password you won't be shown .

To access the phone you have to brute-force the container password.

<comment><USER10> Makes me picture a person who wants to learn lock-picking, putting randomized locks on internal doors between rooms in their house :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Another way to look at it is: stop context switching (all the time).

Personally a lot of context swithing is giving me stress and is draining my energy. It also makes me less productive. So I believe the article is spot on.

<comment><USER13> This is absolutely true and shocking difficult.

You can disable every notification on your phone, mute all non urgent email, change the way you read news, block social media for a day or delete it permanently... all the small things help.

But the worst interrupters are the hardest to tame. If anyone has a Slack containment strategy, I'm all ears.

<comment><USER14> How about removing Slack from your phone and using only the web interface while in the office?

<comment><USER15> Yes. This worked well for me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Here's the problem I see with unplugging to work; maybe it's an actual problem, maybe I'm just fooling myself.

I work on software. I want the finished product, to build something useful for myself or others. I don't necessarily want the "journey". When I work, my concern, or fear, is that I'm going to work on some library or method, multiple days, then find that someone else did it better in a library I can just import. As I work I also look for these libraries, and look at questions on StackOverflow. I don't consider that time wasted. Between that, and docs that are all online nowadays, I don't see how I can work while disconnected.

<comment><USER17> Scrape the doc sites with httrack or something. Don't turn the internet on unless you actually hit that library problem, I think it's generally pretty clear when a significant problem has already been solved. Or move on and solve that problem tomorrow, and go do deliberate research on it and download everything at night, and then work on it again offline the next day.

<comment><USER18> FWIW I've used offline docs via Dash[0] when working away from network access before. It works great!

MacOS only though.

[0] [https://kapeli.com/dash](https://kapeli.com/dash)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Keep in mind that this is not mainly a technological problem, it's a problem caused by technology; which means that technological solutions will only go so far.

I've spent several months in similar or more extreme forms [0] of isolation, and I'd recommend anyone to consider trying it out just to get a taste of what's possible.

These days I don't even carry a smartphone anymore, as I've found the sum of it's effects to be negative.

[0] [https://www.yogameditation.com/retreats/the-3-month- sadhana-...](https://www.yogameditation.com/retreats/the-3-month-sadhana- retreat/)

<comment><USER20> > These days I don't even carry a smartphone anymore, as I've found the sum of > its effects to be negative.

I'm pretty close to this point myself. The big thing that keeps me from just ditching the phone entirely is Google Maps. I guess I could just chuck the thing in a drawer until I need to use it to go someplace.

<comment><USER21> You could buy a standalone GPS device, I know Garmin make ones for hiking, I'm sure there are other probably cheaper options out there.

<comment><USER22> For all the people up and down this thread saying "just buy a dedicated GPS", realize that Google Maps is not a GPS device. It has restaurant reviews and information about parks and bike paths and parking lots and busy hours and traffic data and street closures and pictures/menus and so much more.

If the question is "what restaurant do we want to go to after we leave the theater, within walking distance or public transport, that's open right now and accepts credit cards but also has vegetarian options", a simple GPS isn't going to answer that question in a way even remotely similar to Google Maps.

<comment><USER23> You could also look this up at home on a dedicated computing terminal before going out.

<comment><USER19> I actuallly did, even drew nice street maps in my notebook.

But once I was there, simply asking someone in the street turned out to be a much better idea.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> The text starts with "there are a thousand beautiful ways to start the day that don't begin with looking at a phone. And yet so few of us choose to do so.".

Is it really so? I'm only a single datapoint, but checking my phone is the _last_ thing I do in the morning. Getting children up, coffee, shower, planning some today's work in my head - if the phone isn't ringing then I may well not fiddle with it until later in the morning or even the day.

<comment><USER25> Yesterday I spent 9h 31m on my phone (according to the built-in screen time tracker on my iPhone). It doesn't make me happy, but I can't stop scrolling. I think I have an issue.

<comment><USER26> > Yesterday I spent 9h 31m on my phone (according to the built-in screen time > tracker on my iPhone). It doesn't make me happy, but I can't stop scrolling. > I think I have an issue.

What are you scrolling, which app has that hold?

<comment><USER27> I'm not the person you replied to. However, when I used to browse reddit - <USER2> phone logged an unhealthy amount of time spent on that app (in roughly the same ballpark).

<comment><USER28> I don't use an app to browse reddit, so it usually went like this: close reddit tab. Open new tab. Automatically type in reddit.com.

And I'm sure, 100% sure, that I'm not the only one with that problem...

<comment><USER29> You know I've had times in my life where I've had this issue as well. I personally think our inability to turn off the deluge of pixels is a real problem. But I want data to back up the thought. In 2017 Youtube users watched a billion hours of video a day. [1] Some rough numbers show that in 2018 Facebook users spent about a billion hours on facebook every day [2].

Multiply these numbers across reddit, tiktok, the various international social media giants. Are the >2 billion hours a day people spend glued to their screen limiting social progress? Is it fear mongering and ignorant to even ask? One thing I know for certain is there will be a growing group of people seeking help to limit their watch time on these services. The algorithms are simply too addictive.

[1]: [https://youtube.googleblog.com/2017/02/you-know-whats- cool-b...](https://youtube.googleblog.com/2017/02/you-know-whats-cool-billion- hours.html)

[2]: [https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/02/06/people-still- spend...](https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/02/06/people-still-spend-an- absurd-amount-of-time-on-fac.aspx)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> I installed a small switch from Home Depot in line with the power to my router so I can turn it off at any point and it takes a few minutes to power back on (which is good that it takes a bit). No signal in the house at night. Easy way to control access for all parties in the house. I like his idea of no internet till after lunch.

</comment><comment><USER31> If curious see also from 2017:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13392292](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13392292)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13457580](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13457580)

</comment><comment><USER32> Meatspace hobbies help a lot with this. If you're knitting or gardening or painting or planing a piece of hardwood it's a heck of a lot easier to keep going than to switch back to your Skinner Box devices.

I get properly irritated when I'm doing yardwork and my phone blows up, because I have to stop what I'm doing, pull off the gloves, check for how much dirt got through/into the gloves, then pull out the device and deal with the glare to see that... nobody is dying, they just wanted to show me something funny. God. Damnit.

</comment><comment><USER33> The book Walden by Henry David Thoreau would be a nice read for anyone interested in additional experiences from this article. I wanted to start gardening at a local club, but due to the situation it has been hard to do so. I encourage anyone who might not want to travel to participate in community organizations that involve gardening or related activities. Or alternatively, taking long walks also helps! Thank you for sharing!

<comment><USER34> At age eight I was persuaded into taking a job as a newspaper carrier, which I kept until I was 16. I regularly wonder how much those few hours, six days per week, to let my mind wander during those formative years, gave me, me.

<comment><USER33> Exactly! Before the virus hit I would walk long distances just wandering, mostly because I liked to move from place to place. I think of a lot of things while walking, but even more, it's a great and easy way to benefit the body and mind.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I'm constantly amazed how often I step outside to smoke and a problem I've been grappling with is immediately answered without even much thought, the answer arrives. Perhaps many of us don't realise how much attention is stolen from looking at the screen.

<comment><USER36> Nicotine also has nootropic properties

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> I've found that the most effective way of regaining focus, is to find something real to do or think about, and write them down as a list. When a time of idleness comes, check the list and occupy the mind with it.

My phone easily distracted me when I'm idling in the middle of some task, for example, waiting for a compilation to finish. But when I'm practicing music, despite my phone being always on as the metronome, I don't get tempted at all. There's no need to fight an urge of browsing the internet.

I have found that the addiction to internet is not really that strong; it cannot compete with what I really want to do. So, as long as I don't let the idleness creep in, I can keep my modern smartphone with me.

<comment><USER38> This idea is expanded in "Bullet Journal", which I highly recommend to try.

[https://bulletjournal.com](https://bulletjournal.com)

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> What stuck out for me was the bit about farmers in Myanmar playing Clash of Clans. This is something I noticed when I was in South Korea for work a few years ago, _everyone_ was constantly playing CoC and similar games. Of course these are very different countries, but I wonder if there's a cultural factor at play that makes these games popular in East Asia? I live in a developing country but I never see people playing games on public transportation, usually people browse Facebook or Instagram or whatever.

As for the rest of the article, `echo "0.0.0.0 twitter.com" >> /etc/hosts` works for me.

<comment><USER40> Families I know in India 10-ish years ago used to be against the whole technology wave and were concerned with the effects of electronics. Now that they have gotten their hands on smartphones and other devices: oh man they will put the American stereotype of being obsessed with the screen to shame. 24/7 Whatsapp, Instagram, and mobile games. They will come to the same realization as we are though. Just a matter of time.

<comment><USER41> It isn't just the phone. We as a species seem to be mesmerized by visual screen-based media of any kind. For example, here's an article about a Russian family that retreated deep into uninhabited parts of Siberia during the Stalin years and lived a Middle Ages lifestyle until they were discovered in 1978:

>> "Karp Lykov fought a long and losing battle with himself to keep all this modernity at bay. When they first got to know the geologists, the family would accept only a single gift—salt. Over time, however, they began to take more. They took knives, forks, handles, grain and eventually even pen and paper and an electric torch. Most of these innovations were only grudgingly acknowledged, but the sin of television, which they encountered at the geologists' camp,proved irresistible for them…. On their rare appearances, they would invariably sit down and watch. Karp sat directly in front of the screen. Agafia watched poking her head from behind a door. She tried to pray away her transgression immediately—whispering, crossing herself…." <<

[https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/for-40-years-this- rus...](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/for-40-years-this-russian- family-was-cut-off-from-all-human-contact-unaware-of-world-war-ii-7354256/)

<comment><USER40> Great share, thanks

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> This is a great-looking website. It made reading this article a delight. It's a great choice of fonts and spacing that's very pleasing to the eye.

</comment><comment><USER8> I'm the worst about this, but I found a trick: bike to the park with a book. Leave your cell phone at home.

In order to get my hit of internet I have to bike all the way home again, so I'm forced to focus.

</comment><comment><USER43> > I walked Brooklyn. At best, everyone was funereal. At worst, in tears, > inconsolable. It's impossible to overstate just how dour the world felt at > that moment.

> The entire city — country? world? — had been infected by a terminal disease, > the prime vector of which was memes.

> Simone Weil writes, "Attention, taken to its highest degree, is the same > thing as prayer. It presupposes faith and love." Then is the lack of > attention the opposite? Does it presuppose fear and hate?

\- - -

I think there's really something to this. I have to admit there have been a number of times I've been caught up in something "tragic" on the internet, generally some political battle, and felt like the world was falling apart. But then if I step away from the computer and go for a walk in the nearby park, I see hundreds of people just relaxing and enjoying life, not caught up in the daily trivia. I often bring my kids along and watch them just run and play, carefree.

And I sometimes wonder: if we just turned it all off, shut down the internet, radio, and TV... would we be happier?

I've lived through a few long power outages as well, (1 day or longer), and on those days, rather than things feeling dire, things felt light and playful. The neighbors all came out and chatted, the kids all played up and down the street. It was nice.

I realize that our world would not function very well without the mass communication systems that link us together. But I also wonder if something like a scheduled, controlled, power outage every Saturday would be really good for us all.

<comment><USER44> > I think there's really something to this. I have to admit there have been a > number of times I've been caught up in something "tragic" on the internet, > generally some political battle, and felt like the world was falling apart. > But then if I step away from the computer and go for a walk in the nearby > park, I see hundreds of people just relaxing and enjoying life, not caught > up in the daily trivia. I often bring my kids along and watch them just run > and play, carefree.

That daily trivia is mostly useless, because news cycles aren't capable (of willing) of sustaining attention for long. I think the current coronavirus situation in the US is a great example, where the news switched focus to the BLM protests and relaxed the covid coverage despite the issue not being fixed. now they are already moving away from blm even though the issues that sparked the protests are obviously not solved either, and covid isn't any less of a threat than it was before. The same has happened countless times: the focus is not a reflection of important issues because each issue gets only it's 15 minutes of fame.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> From the article:

>Returning to those (mythical?) halcyon minimalist information days: You could read all of the news in a single day. Grab the two or three papers and read. The information had edges; it could be understood by a single human over one cup of first-wave coffee. Were you insatiable, the library was available to dig deep on the topics of the day.

I wrote this comment in 2018, I think it's relevant here:

>I think we've tipped over to the other side of the "convenience/humanity" pyramid. We climbed to the top some years ago where the lack of excess convenience gave us the opportunity to make things our selves and interact with other people face to face (which I think are very important human qualities) while being comfortable. Now we are sliding down the convenience side of the pyramid, unable to grasp what is important and fundamental. We are literally snowballing (e.g. obesity epidemic).

</comment><comment><USER46> Choosing "dumber" technology has drastically helped my ability to stay focused when reading longform articles (including this one!) while retaining more useful information. I wrote an iOS Shortcut that converts a web page to PDF and sends it to my reMarkable tablet. It works very well.

<comment><USER47> I'd love instructions on how to set this up for myself. I've ordered the reMarkable 2 and this is definitely the use-case I have in mind.

<comment><USER46> Sure! The Shortcut goes like this:

Accepts: URLs

\- Set variable input to Shortcut input

\- Get contents of webpage at input

\- Make PDF from Contents of Webpage

\- Set variable file to PDF

\- Open file in reMarkable (toggle Show Open In Menu to off)

<comment><USER47> Saved this for later. Many thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> The ironie of reading this on HN. Just think about it. And think about reading this comment too.

<comment><USER49> Not really; it's exactly where people who _need_ to read it are most likely to be found. Reminds me of an old British TV series called "Why Don't You...?" that was made for kids during the school holidays and was all about doing something other than watching TV. The full title, which was sung over the opening titles, was "Why Don't You Just Switch Off Your Television Set And Go Out And Do Something Less Boring Instead?"

</comment></comment><comment><USER50> I've been living in a beige box for so long that I honestly don't even know what to do without a computer in front of me. How do you occupy the time?

Take a walk, cook, read a book, talk to a friend, build a birdhouse... all options, I guess, but it seems really easy to find yourself with large chunks of time with nothing to do. Just ate, it's too hot outside, eyes are tired, friends are busy-- now what?

I know this is a failure of imagination on my part. Has anybody made a database of offline activities? (See, I need my beige box to even figure out what to do without it...)

It makes me feel sad and pathetic that I don't know how to actually live life outside of the internet.

<comment><USER51> Buy/acquire a whole load of books and have a large bookshelf in your house/apartment. These books should be on a range of subjects that interest you. When you find yourself with spare time, pick up one of the books that takes your fancy. I find just reading will improve my world-view, feed my imagination, and provide inspiration.

Of course without access to a library of book store, you might have to use the internet to buy the books in the first place!

Good luck!

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> > Nintendo recently released their first iPhone game, Mario Run.

> The edges are clear. You pay once, and there's no other way for Nintendo to > extract money from you. No single player is a mark. There are no whales.

Nintendo didn't make Super Mario Run, nor is it the first game with their name on phones. Their first two games, Pokemon Go and Fire Emblem Heroes, are both very much unbounded and, especially Fire Emblem, there are certainly whales and in-app purchases and all that. I burned well over a thousand dollars on it before I decided enough was enough.

<comment><USER53> I was pretty sure this was wrong, because there was a lot of hubbub about it being the first Nintendo-made game on phones, so I checked. From Wikipedia:

> Super Mario Run is a 2016 side-scrolling platform mobile game developed and > published by Nintendo for iOS and Android devices. The game is one of > Nintendo's first games developed for mobile devices, and one of the few > instances that a game in the Mario series was officially released on non- > Nintendo hardware.

Pokemon Go was developed (and published) by Niantic, and Fire Emblem Heroes came out over a year later than Super Mario Run did (and is also not a Nintendo game).

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> I've started instituting a new rule of no internet on Sunday. in practice this means i dont look at anything that requires a web browser. I still make use of internet based service such as tv streaming apps etc. I usually start out the day feeling anxious about not looking at my phone, and then end the day feeling a lot more relaxed than usual and I usually did something fun because i wasnt just reading crap on my phone all day to fill the void.

</comment><comment><USER55> Everyone has their hacks, heres mine: I imagine all the interfering as an itch. Once can practice not minding an itch, that skill can be transferred over for example for not springing for some food. So the idea is to take stock of current state of mind and whatever "itches", tag it and apply skill. This goes for those dopamine related "itches" as well.

Of course everyone is different and everyone's situation is different.

</comment><comment><USER56> I wish there were an actually-good newspaper that was actually just news, without dozens of pages of opinion and ads, that I could subscribe to/read IRL.

<comment><USER57> axios.com is the most similar that I have seen

</comment></comment><comment><USER58> One trick that worked for me:

* Don't keep my phone in my bedroom. I keep it several rooms away and now wake up to an analog alarm clock. Out of sight, out of mind, for me at least. I've seen my phone screen time drop from several hours a day to generally < 1 hour (of course some of this has been diverted to more computer time, but on net, it's less screen time overall).

</comment><comment><USER59> \- Ditch social media

\- Forget tabbed browsing, try Surf/Vimb + Unbound under Linux/BSD

\- Try Gopher, visit HN thru gopher://hngopher.com

\- If you do Reddit, don't comment, check it under gopher://gopherddit.com

\- Avoid multitasking

</comment><comment><USER60> Great read thanks for posting.

</comment><comment><USER61> "Attention must be paid" \- Arthur Miller

</comment><comment><USER62> > That was the first thought I had the morning after the election. I woke. The > crushing weight of a new reality reimposed itself on my mind. And then: I > want my attention back.

Articles that begin like this always sadden me. I find myself unable to to continue from this point.

</comment><comment><USER63> "That was the first thought I had the morning after the election."

Which election? Is this set in 2020?

Edit: N/M, I see it's from 2017.

</comment><comment><USER64> I have not yet gotten my attention back. Did this piece ever get to the point?

<comment><USER56> the author's advice boils down to "timebox your internet access, and especially avoid mindless internet use in the morning"</comment></comment>


Show HN: Experience a low-grade euphoria with this ASMR builder - <AUTHOR> http://asmrion.com/?open <comment><AUTHOR> Hope you will feel a pleasant relaxation )</comment>


Why is it bad to have 70B in cash - <AUTHOR> http://pocketcyclone.com/2011/01/18/why-is-it-bad-to-have-70b-in-cash/

<comment><USER2> $60B, but, who's counting.

The fact that they have that much cash means that they cannot find anything that would materially affect their stock value (ROI for the investor) greater than the expenditure.

If they acquire a business, it needs to provide a greater return than the cash it took to buy that business. This is a problem Google and Cisco and a number of other companies face as well. Cisco's answer was a dividend - which was a sad statement for the tech market.

Google can buy all of the companies for tens of millions it wants for the foreseeable future, but, none of those companies materially affect the ~94% of their revenue brought in through search. That's why Google can be all over the board with Solar projects and alternative energy and self driving cars, etc, but, at the end of the day, will any of those ideas provide the same ROI as search?

Sure, something will come along that will do it, but, holding the cache horde right now until something encouraging comes along is slightly better than paying a dividend and having to borrow when they do find that investment they've been on the lookout for.

And Apple's stock price reflects their cash position. Don't think Wall Street doesn't analyze that and use that as a basis for assigning value. If they announced a dividend, the share price would jump to the current price + the expected dividend, then would settle back down to the appropriate valuation.</comment>


Why Java still rulez - <AUTHOR> http://download.oracle.com/otn_hosted_doc/jdeveloper/12cdemos/JDevOverview12c/JDevOverview12c.html

<comment><USER2> Java's demise was ensured when Oracle bought it.</comment>


Visualising Sorting Algorithms: Python's timsort - <AUTHOR> http://corte.si//posts/code/timsort/index.html

<comment><USER2> This is has been on HN a few times, old comments can be found here:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=555549>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=750858>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=555971>

</comment><comment><USER3> Hands-down the best resource for visualizing and comparing different sorting algorithms I've seen.

However, I'm missing the best algorithm of them all - bogosort! It would definitely get a unique visualization using this method, lots of random noise until it's suddenyl all sorted.

</comment><comment><USER4> Pleasing aesthetically, as well as functionally. Good aesthetics always count for something, even with such a cut and dried task.

Anyone printed these out nicely and put them on a wall? I think they'd make good posters.</comment>


Show HN: Unbounded – The serverless NoSQL database you query with JavaScript - <AUTHOR> https://www.unbounded.cloud/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hi, I'm Will, the creator of Unbounded. I co-founded the security company Cambia, later acquired by Tripwire, Inc.

Unbounded is a schemaless, serverless, NoSQL cloud database you query with Javascript. If you can code it, it's a valid query.

Store any JSON data with no limitations on primary key names, property names or embedded objects. Map, reduce, and receive query results to your webhooks.

Free starter tier, only pay for what you use.

The first medium post on Unbounded is also live:

[https://email@example.com/create-a-zero-setup- micro...](https://email@example.com/create-a-zero-setup-microservice- with-unbounded-3d2a114db4)

Unbounded was conceived as an elegant solution to the problems introduced by managing massive contact lists for an enterprise CRM platform, while being carefully designed to reduce developer friction.

For example, one reason we use Javascript as a query language is because it's likely a language you're already familiar with, instead of forcing you to learn yet another quirky dialect of SQL.

Unbounded is more than a database, it's a turnkey way to create a data transformation pipeline that can scale, without setting up servers, lambda functions, message queues, task processors, "Glue," etc.

You send us Javascript, and we'll execute it against your data in parallel, writing the results back to disk or sending them to you via S3 or webhooks, while queuing and retrying any failures. At the same time, you can still execute queries directly to pull out records like you would in a DBMS.

I'll be here to answer questions all day long!

<comment><USER2> I am confused. The JavaScript, does it run on the frontend, like firebase? or I send it to the backend? If I send the script to the backend, how to debug? How to do entitlement? For example, I only want user A to access its own data.

<comment><AUTHOR> Queries run on the backend in isolated VMs. To separate data for different users, you could use the saved query feature to isolate portions of data from each other, or alternatively create a separate database for each user. Providing comprehensive debugging facilities is an interesting idea...perhaps some kind of local testing sandbox would be useful there? What do you think?

<comment><USER2> I want breakpoints, being able to check variable's value and logging. It would be better if the environment requires zero setup.

<comment><AUTHOR> One of the advantages of javascript versus a proprietary language is we can take advantage of the excellent tooling built-in to the existing js ecosystem. On the occasions where I had to write T-SQL stored procedures for example, I hated being locked in to a specific IDE for syntax highlighting and debugging. Moving forward I'd like to provide easy templates, perhaps through NPM or the like, for setting up Unbounded projects. Thanks for the feedback.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>