You Know You're in a Big Company When... - <AUTHOR> http://wiki.c2.com/?YouKnowYoureInaBigCompanyWhen <comment><USER2> You know you're in Big Company when you suddenly find out there are two whole other teams building exactly the same thing but they didn't know of each other.

<comment><USER3> And even after they find out about each other their respective managers refuse to let them cooperate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Didn't read till the end but I would say: you know you're in a big company when you get decent salary. Small to medium enterprises pay for the same job only almost half (at least in Germany).

<comment><USER5> Funny that it is the other way around in our country. Larger companies play on recognizability, stability and have well ironed-out processes requiring less skilled employees. While in smaller and mid-sized companies the experts (experienced employees) are the main driving force.

<comment><USER4> Blue collar workers are unionized in big companies. It's good for everybody's salary, but sometimes they demand too much. I am curious, what they will demand in coming years when economy is cooling down.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> When you find out the big project your leading is competing for resource with a project that is decommissioning the same system.

</comment><comment><USER3> >Whenever you have a spark of inspiration, your first thought is Is this idea really worth fighting for?

>You decide it isn't.

Ouch, that one hit too close to home.

</comment><comment> GuB-42 Another one that happens to me often.

"I work for $company"

"Oh do you know John, he works there too"

Either you don't, or the John you know is another person.

<comment><USER2> You know you are in a Big Company when there is a procedure to handle when people have the same first and last name.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> If you think a big company is convoluted, try the government where the internal tools and services never seem to do what they were meant to do, or even worst, they are almost always down. Another example, support sends you an email to tell you that the email isn't working. One wonders, how the heck government even does anything.

</comment><comment><USER8> "The company's web site lists dozens of locations, and yours is not included."

Happened to me as well! :)</comment>


Amazon Is Abusing Apple's Enterprise Certificates Too - <AUTHOR> https://infinitediaries.net/amazon-is-abusing-apples-enterprise-certificates-too/ <comment><USER2> This is quite a bit different since Amazon Flex users probably fall in the Eligible users category as contractors. But of course, IANAL. :)</comment>


Traffic cameras bring Ohio town to screeching halt - <AUTHOR> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/07/red-light-traffic-cameras-bring-ohio-town-to-screeching-halt/

<comment><USER2> They put similar cameras up in the Phoenix area.

In Arizona, there is a law that you have to be served with a ticket or it isn't valid; so when people received their tickets they just threw them away. Process servers would eventually come by to serve you but if you didn't answer the door they couldn't just leave them. Eventually serving the tickets became such a burden that they took the cameras down.

</comment><comment><USER3> Wait, people are just angry that they can't speed? Even cheating by a few miles an hour drastically decreases the chances that someone you strike will survive ([http://humantransport.org/sidewalks/SpeedKills.htm](http://humantransport.org/sidewalks/SpeedKills.htm)). Maybe nobody walks there...

<comment><USER4> The fact that part of the fines goes either to the municipality that installed the things or their manufacturer puts them in a conflict of interest, and that is something that must be avoided at all costs. It's not enough that the law _is_ clean, it must also appear clean.

Every lawyer does that. If you have ever called one about this conflict or that the very first question that they ask who you have a conflict with. If they have dealings with that person they will tell you that they cannot take your business. I don't understand why cities think they are exempt.

<comment><USER5> _It 's not enough that the law is clean, it must also appear clean._

I'm glad you specifically pointed that out.

Lessig makes a similar argument in _Republic, Lost_ [1] where he urges people to change how they ask questions about seemingly illogical congressional decisions. Specifically

Not: Did the contributions and lobbying buy this apparently inconsistent result?

Instead: Do the contributions and lobbying make it harder to believe that this is a principled or consistent or sensible result?

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic%2C_Lost](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic%2C_Lost)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> There are apps for this. Just saying.</comment>


Ajit Pai: The greatest threat to the internet is Silicon Valley, not ISPs - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/12/18662862/ajit-pai-fcc-facebook-google-amazon-apple-regulation-net-neutrality <comment><USER2> In Pai's world ISPs would break Google's and Facebook's advertising monopolies by tracking your browsing habits, selling bundled services, and otherwise taxing and gatekeeping access to the network and potential competitors. And the Federal government would gladly subsidize them in right-of-way monopolies and rural access grants to do so.

</comment><comment><USER3> Sure, sure! And ditching net neutrality regulation is a great way to bring broadband access to rural, urban and lower income areas! That worked out!

It's like Mark Twain said, everybody has some purpose in life, even if it's only to be the "before" exhibit.</comment>


Is a $35,000 Tesla Model 3 Envisioned by Musk Profitable? UBS Says No - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> It should be profitable. Tesla doesn't spend any money on marketing. Maybe it is not "profitable enough" compared to the other vehicles but without it how will Tesla become a car company for the masses and get considerable size.</comment>


JDK 7 Developer Preview - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.sun.com/mr/entry/jdk7_preview

<comment><USER2> Features: <http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk7/milestones/>

List of general goals: <http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk7/features/>

Dynamic languages should see a performance increase, apps requiring high concurrency : <http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk7/features/#f515>

</comment><comment><USER3> It's interesting that there is no Mac version of this. Perhaps an indicator that JDK 7 for Mac is going to be delayed?

<comment><USER4> I've been using OpenJDK builds found at <http://code.google.com/p/openjdk-osx- build/>. As far as I can tell, the OpenJDK project itself does not include the port as part of the JDK7 release but more so as a related project between Oracle and Apple.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Why are they sending the page with the "Content-Type: text/plain" header?

<comment><USER6>
        Server: Sun-Java-System-Web-Server/7.0
        Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 21:27:58 GMT
        X-robots-tag: index,follow
        Last-Modified: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 20:20:31 GMT
        Expires: Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 GMT
        Content-Type: text/html;charset=utf-8
        Content-Length: 22882

        200 OK</comment></comment>


Hailo tried to take on Uber – but now its brand is being killed off - <AUTHOR> http://uk.businessinsider.com/hailo-tried-take-on-uber-now-merger-with-mytaxi-daimler-2016-7 <comment><AUTHOR> I miss Hailo :'(

 _MyTaxi_ has been a disaster from the off.</comment>


Dear Yahoo! You're Fired! - <AUTHOR> http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/05/15/dear-yahoo-youre-fired/

<comment><USER2> And now we have all learned to never piss off Carl Icahn... the dude swings with a big bat:

> "I have therefore taken the following actions: (1) during the last 10 days, > I have purchased approximately 59 million shares and share-equivalents of > Yahoo; (2) I have formed a 10-person slate which will stand for election > against the current board; and (3) I have sought antitrust clearance from > the Federal Trade Commission to acquire up to approximately $2.5 billion > worth of Yahoo stock."

Which translates to:

"Oh by the way, I bought 59 million shares last week, and I feel like buying $2.5 billion more just so I can fire you and sell your company to Microsoft."

Amusing to say the least.

<comment><USER3> Incredibly amusing ... and a powerful lesson that reinforces my decision not to let other people get involved in control of my company.

Yahoo's actions weren't in the best interest of its shareholders, but I think they were in the best interest of its user base. How disappointing that the shareholders care so little for Yahoo's users, or its identity as a company.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> It seems to me like if something like this were to succeed - Icahn forcing the current board out and replacing it with a group whose primary qualification seems to be that they'd approve a sale - Yahoo would lose a lot of leverage to negotiate a favorable price for its shareholders. Does anyone know how that's dealt with? Would he already have agreed to terms with MS before initiating this?

<comment><USER5> It will still be the boards responsibility to get the best deal for the shareholders. It is also unlikely that MS could go down from their $33/share bid that they already committed to. But I do see your point.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Mark Cuban looks like the only guy on the proposed slate of directors with any direct experience running a web/software business.

<comment><USER7> I think the idea here is to sell it, not run it. So the main qualification of the new board would be: can phone MSFT and ask them to again offer $33/share.

<comment><USER2> Can I be on the board then? I'm sure they'll all get a sweet payoff from the deal.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I wish gossip whores like Arrington wrote the way angry corporate raiders (or their secretaries, maybe) do.

<comment><USER9> I understand that you have issues with TC and Arrington, but I'd think this post would least compel to point something like that out. He merely posted a letter that I happened to find interesting. Save those lines for the moments when they are really necessary.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I believe John C Dvorak had this right: MS lacks direction. They should stop becoming Web 2.0 masters and instead focus on releasing a simple, effective, high-quality OS (which they've failed with since W2K/XP imo).

</comment><comment><USER11> Interesting to see that Mark Cuban is in the board nambed by Ichan.

<comment><USER12> I thought the same thing. I love it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Icahn is not infallible when it comes to internet companies. While Time Warner is not 100% tech, it should be noted that his proxy war never came to fruition.

</comment><comment><USER14> "completely botched"? Can you be a little less technical please?

</comment><comment><USER15> It's obvious that the MS offer of $33/share is superior to Yahoo's "standalone" prospects? Really? Long-term, who do you think is on the decline and who isn't? Between the two, I'd bet Yahoo over MS.

<comment><USER16> You're basically saying you think the stocks are mispriced significantly. If that's true, there's a huge opportunity to buy Y! and sell MS, and you'll make a killing. Why aren't you taking it?

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> > The server at www.techcrunch.com is taking too long to respond.

Perhaps it's TechCrunch that should be fired. The site responds less often that Twitter.</comment>


The Ultimate Guide To Getting Nowhere In Life - <AUTHOR> http://garyharan.com/2010/04/18/the-ultimate-guide-to-getting-nowhere-in-life.html <comment><USER2> How demeaning. Agree with some of it but notice how there is nothing here about anything else you might like to do with your life outside of having a job and owning a business. Like a wife and a family.

A 9-5 job is pretty much great in those circumstances if you just want to enjoy life - I work for a 10 person company and I've seen what the owner has gone through in the last 10 years it's been going - he has no life. Obviously it doesn't have to be like that for everyone, but if I have to choose between my family and slogging my guts out for something which may or not pay off and consume all my time - I know which one I'd pick.

<comment><USER3> You're right about the matter of wife and family, but not in way most people believe they are right about it. There is a wide chasm between finding joy in something, and feeling the compulsion to sacrifice for it.

That you find joy in your family is fantastic, if only because you've found something to enjoy. That your boss has been slogging away for ten years on his business is fantastic, as long as his enjoyment of is worth more to him than the things he's not done. So long as he or you don't regret it.

The important difference is between compulsion and choice; or even more dangerously, a choice that is made, and then justified retroactively as a compulsion.

It isn't worth itemizing all of the things people are compelled to, except that this list is a somewhat abbreviated version of them: get a good (read: easy) 9-5 job; spend money as catharsis; and let other people take the lesser worn path and, if they succeed, live their joy secondhand as much as you can. Also on the list: having a wife and children. They are defaults, and I'm not the first to say that defaults can be quite compelling, and can be just as easy to pass off as compulsions afterward.

Keep in mind, these being external compulsions does not mean that everyone does them for that reason. It just means you have to be more careful about how much of your desire is actual desire, and how much is just aimless drift.

Doing things just through compulsion rarely leads to enjoyment. It might have been when the compulsions weren't just compulsions, but a lot of what we feel compelled to do is fossilized wisdom from what other people would have thought would make them happy, and maybe it did for a few people. The rest are still waiting for the pay off, or have just given up and have become satisfied being content and comfortable.

I don't think most people have to settle. I think the problem is a higher level than the author gets at in his essay: even when people have options, they feel compelled not to pursue them. In the worse case, they feel compelled to destroy those options -- I've seen this happen, and it is tragic. I don't think it has to be this way.

I don't think you're doing wrong, btw. But your comment reminded me of all the times I've seen people sacrificing to compulsion at the expense of fulfillment; it seemed worthwhile to get those thoughts out there. :-)

<comment><USER4> "even when people have options, they feel compelled not to pursue them"

Thats a really good point and its scary when you see it all around you. And I think the reason it happens is because you dont see anyone else pursuing those options.

I have, recently, moved out to Queens and now live with roommates so as to save money. previously I had my own 1 bedroom in Manhattan. No one at work understands why I did this.

The one thing I've learned though is that if I get a negative reaction from my co-workers then I might be doing something right :) ...

<comment><USER5> Well if it would make you feel better, you have sucky coworkers :)

It should be obvious that most people don't derive pleasure from the place they live. Better use the money for something else.

<comment><USER6> I'm not sure about that. I think it's more that people tend to derive pleasure from one or two "must haves" about the place they live, but don't care much about the rest. If those "must haves" don't align with what _you_ value, it looks irrational, but it's perfectly rational to _them_.

Personally, I can't stand living in a place that doesn't look out over greenery. I find I'm so much calmer and get more done when I can come home to a place with grass and trees and bushes, so I'm willing to pay a few hundred dollars a month extra for that.

I find it similarly irrational to think of all the people that can't live anywhere but the city. I mean, they pay _more_ than I do, _and_ they have to live with roommates, _and_ their places are usually smaller, _and_ they have to specifically go somewhere else for greenery, _and_ they're looking at an hour commute. (I'm particularly perplexed by people who spend $5k/month to live in Manhattan, which is like SF * 10 in terms of all that overstimulation and has less charm to boot.) But over time, I've realized that these people aren't _stupid_ , they just have different priorities from me. Some absolutely love having lots of small ethnic restaurants on their block. Some enjoy having most of their friends within walking distance (which admittedly would be pretty nice). Some like to go out clubbing every night, and there're lots more opportunities for that in the city. They aren't opportunities that particularly matter to me, which is why _I_ wouldn't make those trade-offs. But they matter to the people in question.

<comment><USER7> I agree it's all about priorities. Once you live in the city and get used to the hustle-bustle and the fast paced life where most things are close-by and you can walk to most places or take public transit, it becomes part of your system.

I've lived in cities most of my life and when I had to live in the suburbs once, it was very hard to adjust to the quiet at first. Not seeing a lot of people walking around, going about their lives made me feel something was missing. The mobility and being able to use your feet as the primary means of transport was something I missed dearly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I know many people who have/do the first 3 things on that list and probably find more joy in their lives than this guy gets out of looking at the temporary traffic spike hitting is blog because of a really demeaning post he wrote up in no more than 5 minutes.

Happiness and life fulfillment are very much found in the 9-to-5, pay-check- to-pay-check demographic of society. There are things in life one must attend to that likely force people to get 9-to-5's. You know, like a wife and kids. And then there are those who are content with what they have and don't carry that gene that gives one grandiose visions of changing the world. There's nothing wrong with having that trait, I think I've got it, but you should accept the fact that there are people that are _happy_ with their day-to-day jobs. Not everyone is a 22yr. old college grad who can explore and take on the world with little to no financial responsibilities destined to change the world in some unprecedented and legendary way.

<comment><USER3> _Happiness and life fulfillment are very much found in the 9-to-5, pay-check- to-pay-check demographic of society._

I wish this were true. The impression I get is more of numb, passive contentment, at least from enough people in this demographic that it is bothersome. They seem to have traded happiness and fulfillment for the image of happiness and fulfillment, and it is difficult to tell the difference until you ask the hard questions that make them feel uncomfortable and defensive. That's why most people don't, and that is why the groups are assume to intersect perfectly.

 _There are things in life one must attend to that likely force people to get 9-to-5's. You know, like a wife and kids._

How much of this is a _must_ , and how much is a result of choices they made? And how much of this forcing is a result of emotional and social pressure, as a result if imminent, tangible risk? That is, how much is a result of wanting to convince others that one is a responsible parent, as opposed to one actually being irresponsible?

<comment><USER9> _They seem to have traded happiness and fulfillment for the image of happiness and fulfillment, and it is difficult to tell the difference until you ask the hard questions that make them feel uncomfortable and defensive._

Or perhaps a person took such a job because his life goals simply do not relate to work. Being another cog in a cube farm may not be interesting itself, but it can be used as a source of funding for things that genuinely are. A 9-to-5 isn't my weapon of choice here (since some things I find interesting also happen to be readily marketable skills), but it is an effective one.

<comment><USER10> The satisfaction, or lack of, one gets from a 9-5 or any form of work is related more to the attitude one applies to the work than from the particulars of the work itself. At least that seems to be the conclusion drawn from the research done on "flow" states by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. It seems to correlate well with my own experience and seems to be a recurring theme in shows such as Dirty Jobs and Undercover Boss.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Well said. A 9-5 job is a great way for time to disappear into a void that you'll never get back. If you're not paying attention, you'll lose years to something like this.

I know everyone isn't suited for entrepreneurial life, but as a talented developer you can always join a startup as employee 5+ and get a reasonable amount of security and pay, with a chance of a good-sized upside.

Even if you're happy in a 9-5, medium/big company job, do yourself a favour and keep that buffer around. There are so many things you can do with it to improve you life and buy yourself freedom - more than just buying stuff for cash.

<comment><USER12> "I know everyone isn't suited for entrepreneurial life..."

Is that because they started out that way, or because society tells them they should get 9-to-5 jobs and be happy about it?

<comment><USER13> I think it's because they started out that way! Of course, almost any skill or desire can be learned, but everyone is born into this world with their own unique set of aptitudes and weaknesses. The unique amalgamation found in each person lends its owner to certain roles and stations in life where excellence is easier to achieve.

Some people are perfectly OK working for someone else. They enjoy the labor of it, they enjoy the pay, they enjoy the company, they enjoy the security and relative comfort and anonymity. It doesn't really bother them that someone else is making 3x more off of the work performed than they are. That's OK. There's all kinds of people who are OK with this idea, too, but believe me that it's much better for some types to remain content with this than to branch out.

Some people are not content with that setup. They want to change things, they want to control how they spend their time (i.e. no hard 9-5 commitment), they want to keep the money their labors produce, they want to direct and lead and organize and control the intelligences and powers for their ends. This is OK and good too.

There's just different types of people in the world. We need employees, both employees on the way to independence and employees who don't mind becoming company men. It's good to have both.

The real thing that should be universal is a plan to develop financial independence such that one is never forced to work a job after it turns south, and such that people do not have to live in fear of their bosses. Of course, many bosses get mad at this idea because it weakens their ability to control their employees.

<comment><USER12> _Some people are perfectly OK working for someone else. They enjoy the labor of it, they enjoy the pay, they enjoy the company, they enjoy the security and relative comfort and anonymity. It doesn't really bother them that someone else is making 3x more off of the work performed than they are._

These people seem almost mythical... I've never met anyone like that.

 _There's all kinds of people who are OK with this idea, too, but believe me that it's much better for some types to remain content with this than to branch out._

Why should I believe you that it's okay for people to be content with that? If I met anyone who was content with that, I would try to wake them up to the reality of what's going on.

<comment><USER13> > _These people seem almost mythical... I've never met anyone like that._

Almost all of my associates from corporate jobs are like this. Most people have no problem at all with a standard employee relationship given good conditions and circumstances, and it is nicer in general if you can stand it. There's much less to worry about, there's consistent flow of guaranteed pay, there's a lot of people to interact with and meet, etc. The majority of people are perfectly OK with this, even with the knowledge that corporate is making a lot more money off of their efforts than they are.

It is okay to be content with that if everything else is good. One of my old managers just wanted to be that, but was forced into a leadership role by happenstance, and it was horrible for him and everyone under him. He cared much more about remaining non-confrontational and diplomatic than he did about being effective. This is bad; it led me to quit.

Of course, not all 9-5 employees are like him, and some are great leaders. But they're content with the money and the situation so they stay with it.

Some people have a hard time tolerating that, which people often become entrepreneurs. These people are good and important too.

If no one was content with employment, we'd be full of one-man shops and our efficiency would be majorly decreased. Employees are important. Founders can't really get rich independently (i.e. without an acquisition) without employees; there's just no way they could do enough work on their own.

Most employees understand what's going on and they're fine with it. You'd be surprised how many people stick with a "good-paying job" as their ideal. It's weird to me too, but most people are fine with it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Hacker News - and blogs in general - are another way to live vicariously from your couch.

(Thank goodness for noprocrast!)

<comment><USER15> Thank goodness for LeechBlock: <https://addons.mozilla.org/en- US/firefox/addon/4476>

It's like noprocrast for everything. (Although I wish they hadn't mangled the UI in the last update.)

<comment><USER16> The nice thing about leechblock is that it lets you set up a set amount of time per hour on particular sites.

Unfortunately, this means I get cut off mid-sen

<comment><USER15> I take it that might be a joke, but it's not the case for me.

When the timer runs out it doesn't lock me out until I navigate away from the page, and it even allows a POST so I can submit the comment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Even the life he describes is pretty damn good by historical standards.

<comment><USER18> Yeah, I think his idea of failure is a lot of people's idea of success: a reasonably comfortable 40 hour/wk job that pays well and doesn't involve risks of getting your arm chopped off in machinery, and a bunch of free time & money to spend on entertainment. Not what _I'd_ choose to do, but neither are lots of things; I wouldn't choose to work at a tech company that expects you to carry a pager, work nights/weekends, and thinks it owns your life, either.

(I do agree that saving a bit of money is good for pretty much everyone; buffers come in handy.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER19>
      Most people work just hard enough not to get fired and
      get paid just enough money not to quit.

      --George Carlin

<comment><USER20> Also called marginal utility.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> So, if I'm reading it correctly, it seems like his guide says: if you're rich and educated, you'll have more opportunities and be less stressed.

That's pretty insightful. You'd think someone would have realized that by now.

<comment><USER22> The author's point is precisely that this sort of freedom is available to more than just a wealthy elite. After all, it's not the "rich and educated" living paycheque-to-paycheque and wasting away in dead-end jobs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> What makes these inverse guides so appealing, anyway...

<comment><USER24> I don't know. It's really just a cheap trick that makes half-assed advice sound much cleverer than it really is. But it works!

<comment><USER25> We need to go one step further and make inverse inverse guides: "How to not fail at not failing" etc.

<comment><USER7> Funny you say that. pg used an inverse-inverse title for his 2007 Startup School talk. It was titled :"Why to Not Not start a startup"

<http://www.paulgraham.com/notnot.html>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I think his offhand implication that reading books is superior to TV is wrong.

Most fiction has exactly the same purpose and function on TV, which is to entertain. Yes, reading some books makes you "cultured" but so does TV; just to a different culture. I consider watching all the latest sci fi to be just as "culturing" as reading all the latest sci fi.

<comment><USER27> Reading makes you better at reading (duh) and writing. Two essential skills that are used daily.

What skills does your TV gives to you?

<comment><USER6> Passively sitting down with the latest Dan Brown novel won't make you any better at reading or writing. Sitting down with a novel that's just beyond your comfort zone (say, Dostoevsky if you're used to Dan Brown) will make you better at reading, and sitting down with any novel and actively _paying attention to how the writer shapes the story with words_ will make you better at writing. But that's an apples-to-sushi comparison: it takes a lot more mental effort to actively engage with a book than it does to passively sit in front of a TV. A more appropriate comparison would be actively reading vs. playing Starcraft, which gives you a bunch of essential skills, eg. multitasking, resource management, positioning & prioritization, etc.

Basically, you get out of any activity what you put into it. If you put zero effort into reading, you're going to get zero skill out of it.

<comment><USER26> The reading I did as a child was well beyond what other children my age were reading, but it never required "effort," because it was pleasurable.

It's a mistake to think that activities which require no effort are useless.

<comment><USER28> The most pleasurable things, in my experience, require great effort. You just don't notice because they're pleasurable.

<comment><USER29> We can thank Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi for this idea. Flow is what you get when you intersect a properly challenging task with a properly adept skill-set, and it is immensely pleasurable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> I read a lot of books (and sometimes even write them), but I don't see a lot of value in reading over watching TV. I treat both as something to do when I don't feel like doing anything that requires thinking. If you like TV, watch TV. If you like reading, read. Or do both.

<comment><USER31> If you are talking about escapist fiction, I would agree with you, but some books definitely require thinking. That said, I think some TV does as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> I think this is more a guide to becoming a normal American than anything else. There's not necessarily anything wrong with that either. Can you imagine what life would be like if everyone were a great hacker bent on changing the world to suit them?

<comment><USER33> Much more interesting and dangerous that's for sure. Although in my limited experience great hackers aren't necessarily in it to change the world but to discover how it works, sometimes by creating things that were supposed to be impossible.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Some of my most cherished friends view work purely as a way to support their family and lifestyle. They don't worry about getting nowhere; in a sense, they're exactly where they want to be already.

Attention-grabbing title aside, this is a great article for people who would like to do something interesting but feel that they "can't" for various reasons or who aren't sure how to start. I can think of several people in high school or college who would appreciate this article.

(I really like the color scheme and font choices, btw!)

</comment><comment><USER35> wow - this is basically a not-so-thinly-veiled Horatio Alger rehash with a condescending sense of humor. Life is so simple when you mistake other people's problems as errors in judgment. Thanks, Superman - you've saved the day once again. but what do you expect from a guy who, according to his bio, "[brings] wines to the market in bold new ways." No thanks. A lá Gang of Four, I'll get drunk on cheap wine instead.

Plus, it's a flawed analysis because on the one hand he's critiquing a particular aspect of capitalism (the consumerist side - what did he think was going to happen with all those advertisements and credit cards), while still maintaining that as a whole it works (he proudly states he's an "entrepreneur," who can balance work and family (subtext: so why shouldn't you?)). What's more, his arrogance turns into hypocrisy, because as an entrepreneur, whether he wants to admit it or not, he profits off of the backs of other people, the same kind of people that make poor decisions regarding long-term financial matters. As a matter of style, his flippancy which lacks the slightest modicum of decorum is insulting, while his failure to call into question the root, systemic causes to the problems he outlines is inexcusable.

</comment><comment><USER36> "(CNN) -- Lars and Jens Rasmussen were broke and jobless -- with only $16 between them -- when they made it big in the Web world by selling their idea for Google Maps."

SOURCE: [http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/10/27/rasmussen.brothers.google...](http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/10/27/rasmussen.brothers.google.wave/index.html)

I'm pretty sure these guys got somewhere even without a cushion of money under their bums.

<comment><USER18> I'm not sure just how poor and underprivileged they were; it sounds like not getting a job and doing a startup instead was a choice, and that initially at least there was a cushion of money. Lars Rasmussen got a PhD from Berkeley in 1998, and then by 2003 somehow ended up in Australia, where he founded a tech startup and sold to Google within the year. Most actual poor people can't buy a plane ticket to Australia!

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> Ha. By these standards I am way ahead of the game. How many GamerPoints for this "nothing" achievement?

</comment><comment><USER38> Step 5: Write blog posts telling people how to live their lives.

(extra points for preaching to the choir)

</comment><comment><USER39> I don't need a guide for that, I do just fine on my own.

</comment><comment><USER40> What's even more interesting than the article is one's reaction to it. So telling which aspects one immediately focuses on. It's always about oneself.

</comment><comment><USER41> Reader base meet article.

</comment><comment><USER42> Ok, so what if you're already in the rut this article describes. This accomplishes little for the people that are already stuck in this life and dissatisfied in it, but feel trapped.

Well, no, that's not fair. It makes them feel worse. Nice try, but fail.

</comment><comment><USER43> 5) Play Farmville.

6) Browse 4chan.

<comment><USER44> I think those are two different demographics.

Those who play farmville are the ones this posts is speaking about. While the 4chan crowd as a whole are a young computer literate and savvy crowd. Though correct me if that demographic assumption is incorrect.

<comment><USER30> 4chan is basically HN, except that on 4chan, everyone has a more reasonable perspective about their worth and ability. Oh, and you can post pictures.

<comment><USER45> I see what you did there.

Sweet, sweet irony.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


A Large-Scale Study of Programming Languages and Code Quality in GitHub - <AUTHOR> https://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2017/10/221326-a-large-scale-study-of-programming-languages-and-code-quality-in-github/fulltext <comment><USER2> Its a long read, so which programming lang produce the least amount of errors ?</comment>


"Rockstar" RoR Developers Needed in Northern VA - <AUTHOR>

Currently hiring four Ruby on Rails Developers to work with our team to build the core of our application. While we can't discuss the application publicly, we can tell you that it's an exciting, challenging and growing product in an open source environment. Email me: firstname.lastname@example.com for more information. <comment><USER2> Wait, what? You want developers with egos the size of Texas, who will drag into work 8 hours late, hung-over and with a gaggle of groupies (or prostitutes, whatever) hanging off their arms; and then get caught in the bathroom an hour later snorting coke off groupies' tits; then go out, get drunk, wreck a car, get into a fight with the cops, land up in jail, and then call you at 3:00am to come bail their asses out of jail?!??

Maybe you should go for some Ninja developers instead? Just be careful when they start turning invisible and pranking you...

<comment><AUTHOR> Love your sense of humor. Maybe I'll change that to ninja developers instead. Thanks!</comment></comment>


HyperLogLog – Cornerstone of a Big Data Infrastructure - <AUTHOR> http://research.neustar.biz/2012/10/25/sketch-of-the-day-hyperloglog-cornerstone-of-a-big-data-infrastructure/

<comment><USER2> My previous job was at an advertising firm, and we used HyperLogLogs for almost all of our real-time analytics infrastructure. They are incredibly space and time efficient. Each "counter" fits into about a single page of memory, and can count into the trillions with <2% error.

We developed an extremely high performance server around it (hlld): [https://github.com/armon/hlld](https://github.com/armon/hlld).

We were typically hitting with with tens of thousands of requests per second across about 50K counters. Although it was benchmarked to >1MM ops a second.

Similarly, we also make bloomd, which is an equivalent for using bloom filters, which provide a more set-like abstraction: [https://github.com/armon/bloomd](https://github.com/armon/bloomd)

</comment><comment><USER3> HLL also has two nice real-world optimizations possible depending on use-case.

We're storing 100,000+ unique counters, but only around 1% have more than 100 unique objects counted. Some of those 1% have millions of records so HLL is very useful. As the HLL itself is a fixed size (~10kb for decent accuracy) regardless of #counted objects, in the small case you can replace the HLL with a pure set of counted values and produce a HLL when it grows beyond a bound. Because you're storing the raw values, the transition to HLL is seamless.

Once you've moved beyond raw storage of values there's a harder but still space-saving technique. If you look at the raw bytes of a ~10kb HLL structure with "only" 10's of thousands of counted values around 90% of them will be zero. Below a certain bound it can save a lot of space to have a map of locations and non-zero byte values rather than a raw array of bytes.

<comment><USER4> One thing people forget about in all the excitement over HLL's is how effectiveness of compressed bitsets, which aren't lossy and so yield precise answers. They exploit the same "90% of them will be zero" phenomenon for space and execution efficiency, but are much more flexible... in exchange for consuming more memory and being slower than HLL's.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I must be missing something...

<comment><USER6> Fairly certain this would be one of those generated papers.</comment></comment>


Therapists Struggle to Help Millennials with Their Tech-Related Problems - <AUTHOR> http://www.realclearlife.com/health/therapists-millennials-tech-problems/ <comment><USER2> Okay, so here are my likes for the people discussed in the article:

Botwin+=10

Levick+=100

Kersting-=1000 (With the attitude that he harbors towards his clients that guy seems completely unfit for his job!)</comment>


The Zens Liberty is the AirPower wireless charger that Apple couldn't make - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/21242641/zens-liberty-review-wireless-charger-apple-airpower-coils-qi-charging-price <comment><AUTHOR> They seem to have beaten Nomad & Aira to market.

[https://nomadgoods.com/pages/base-station- pro](https://nomadgoods.com/pages/base-station-pro)</comment>


Concept; Control the desktop game with your smartphone/tablet - <AUTHOR> http://www.bandcontroller.se/

<comment><USER2> Really really nice, i liked it. Particularly I like the motion controlled one. Well done. The first one with the slides was a bit hard to use on android, nothing you can't fix with some work I think. The second one of the cube.. I'm not sure what happened, i pinch&zoommed and completed the level without actually understanding a lot. But nice job nonetheless.</comment>


Beautiful Racket v1.0 - <AUTHOR> http://beautifulracket.com/ <comment><USER2> Cool. I'm always game for a good discussion of DSL's and Lisp (Racket).

But what struck me immediately was the quality of the "Why Lisp Why Racket" essay. This is probably the most compelling that I've seen as it gets specific and cites near-term benefits – not just the elitist "it's good for you" or "it'll make you smarter" stuff. Nicely done.

<comment><USER3> Thanks for recommending that essay. Reading through it I found myself first agreeing, every other attempt sings about Lisp's wonders without showing you the what/why/how, only woo. Then, here I was halfway through this essay also not yet knowing what the fuzz is about, and when the author finally gets around to it I end up not really sold on it. I have given Racket and CL my time before only to end giving up, not having found "enlightenment" or even the motivation to keep at it. Another day, with more free time I expect I'll give Beautiful Racket also a try.

<comment><USER4> So glad to see him articulate what I've always felt about x-exprs.

It often gets overlooked because we all understandably want to hype something in a language that's really cool, original, abstract or otherwise reflects well on us. But being able to intuitively, iteratively and rapidly work on XML & HTML files is lush, and the IDE with built-in REPL is just gravy for this purpose.

Even if working on XML and HTML files is boring and a technically solved problem in most languages, it feels better in Racket to me, and the essay did explain why it feels better.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Looks like an interesting book. And, on my surface pro, it's pretty. It's not very readable, as it is only dark-on-light, high contrast -- I prefer "night mode" for reading long-form.

And it's unreadable on my Android device (both Firefox and Chrome), due not being a responsive design - the text is simply too small to read. For comparison I've read a handful of books on my Android - both epub and Kindle.

A minimal test of design for reading on the web, should be - how much easier is this to read than the Linux Documentation Project's HOWTOs, or the Debian install guides? If the answer is "it's harder", something's wrong.

(Although, that is a nice idea for a side-project, a simple (set of) stylesheet(s) for LDP/Debian/Plain html documents that adds responsive styling - fonts, choice of light/dark, perhaps CSS columns on a wide screen like the Surface).

<comment><USER6> It's only readable on my iPhone because it's a 6+, on anything smaller it would be infuriating and it's not ideal for me anyway. Not only that but in 'reader mode' the formatting is completely wrecked such the the content actually disappears. This is all a shame because my preferred way to read something like this is on a mobile device, although I suppose it could be semi-deliberate to nudge you towards buying.

Edit: I was assuming buying would get you an ebook version that would solve the mobile readability issue, but I don't see any mention of that on the 'why I should pay' or 'how to pay' pages. In fact it only mentions the 'web based book you see here'. Exasperating.

<comment><USER7> For some reason, Butterick is averse to both making a PDF available and to responsive design. Perhaps — as a typographer and book designer — he prefers to control how the layout looks even if it means it looks bad on smaller screens.

From the FAQ:

* Will you ever release this book as a PDF or e-book? No.

* Do you plan to optimize this book for mobile? No.

<comment><USER5> I could care less for a PDF - but epub is a pretty useful format for actually reading a book. And a Kindle book is also rather nice (mostly due to kindle syncing location in the books across devices etc - I would prefer to buy ebooks without the DRM, as there's the worry one will lose access for various technical or business reasons).

And I'd like an offline copy - I do sometimes read in places without Internet access.

Without _any_ of these - I'd be hard-pressed to buy - even if the content is excellent.

<comment><USER8> Butterick cares deeply about typography and Amazon doesn't so I can see why he doesn't make a Kindle version. I too buy mostly Kindle books because it's easy to remove the DRM. It's been a while since I looked, but that was more difficult on Apple and Google ebooks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> > I concede that the thumping noise is better for you with a paperback. > But otherwise, the web-based book is better for everyone.

The author's style seems to be very opinionated and blunt, and I appreciate that, but a web-based book is not better for me.

The reasons listed are great examples of the benefits of web-based books, but I do not find web-based books readable.

I read the FAQ, and I get it: he's not releasing a paper version. Ever. I may power through it on a screen, someday, if it is well-received.

<comment><USER10> Have you considered an eReader such as the Amazon Paperwhite?

<comment><USER11> I've found linear navigation to be a bit of a blocker with e-readers; they're great for narrative, but with something more reference-like, you often need to hop back and forth and the interface is more limiting.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Matthew recently moved off of twitter and publishes an email newsletter: [http://tinyletter.com/mbutterick](http://tinyletter.com/mbutterick)

It is one of the few newsletters that I actually enjoy reading and is satisfyingly infrequent.

</comment><comment><USER13> I'd just like to say that I admire Matthew Butterick's creative experimentation with business models for web publishing and absolutely adore _Practical Typography_ to the extent that I've purchased several of his fonts and intend to purchase Beautiful Racket as well. It can be hard to imagine that there's a world for type design on computers outside the formulaic mundanity and advertisement-laden nature of the rest of the web, but then you get brilliant stuff like _Practical Typography_ and now _Beautiful Racket_ and you can see the world we don't have in contrast to the one that we do...

<comment><USER14> I don't know. It looks non-functional and ugly to me.

[https://i.imgur.com/DmPKqhM.png](https://i.imgur.com/DmPKqhM.png)

This is in contrast to something like nytimes.com which is really well designed.

<comment><USER15> Are you using Firefox? I see the same black box in Firefox too (which is actually an SVG inside an <img> tag), but in Chrome, it renders fine: [https://imgur.com/a/NdvKN](https://imgur.com/a/NdvKN)

<comment><USER16> I get the same thing in Firefox

<comment><USER17> yep. ff/lnx here, all good.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> There's a lot to like about racket. The cross-referential documentation is amazing - thanks to Scribble built in as a documentation language. Another thing which makes it super fun to write is module+ - the ability to interleave a submodule within another module. Writing unit tests in line with what they're testing is a great way to provide examples of what a function does.

</comment><comment><USER19> I'm an intermediate scheme programmer (experienced in C, Python, etc), and one thing I really didn't like about R6RS in general, and Racket in particular, is the amount of bloat.

I'm a staunch minimalist and one of the things that appealed to me learning scheme for the first time was the minimalism of the language syntax. Then I started learning about Racket (and Clojure) and realized they give you the kitchen sink of syntax and language features and take all the minimalism away.

So my question is: How much extra effort would it be if I wanted to do whatever is described in this book in an R7RS implementation, like Chibi, instead of R6RS?

<comment><USER20> First, a small defense of Racket. Racket has a small core relative to its apparent size; most of the bloat is in optional library code. All the fancy special forms for pattern matching, classes, contracts, etc are just optional macros from the libraries, and everything eventually expands down into this rather small core language:

[https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/syntax- model.html#%28...](https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/syntax- model.html#%28part._fully-expanded%29)

The default `#lang racket` is a big batteries-included language including all that stuff, but the core `#lang racket/base` isn't very big. I always program in `#lang racket/base` and pull in just the libraries I need. For me the most beautiful part of Racket is this juxtaposition of a small core language and a big extended language implemented through a standard library of macros.

You can also install a distribution of Racket that leaves out bloat like DrRacket, Slideshow and the teaching language packages from the release variants page: [https://download.racket- lang.org/releases/6.8/](https://download.racket-lang.org/releases/6.8/)

As to your question, Beautiful Racket appears largely a guide to the language extensibility features that are specific to Racket and not shared by other Scheme systems like Chibi. Things like the `#lang` system, lexer library, and syntax highlighting integration in DrRacket. I imagine you'd get the most benefit out of it by working through it in Racket, and subsequently thinking about how to apply the ideas in other systems like Chibi.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I'm no marketing guy so please excuse what may be some naive questions prompted by his how-to-pay page. I gather that tiered pricing is considered good practice, but how effective is it to use a jokey, edgy and possibly sarcastic or insulting tone when explaining the rationale? Does it not undermine his professional credibility, or is there some new trend in this area that I'm unaware of?

Is it a good idea to tell people how much to pay based on how much you think they should be able to afford, or is it better to let them decide for themselves with just a little subtle help? I'm thinking of how Apple sells iDevices at several price points separated by big increments for small increases in memory rather than directly asking people how rich they are.

On a related note, if you were in charge of a budget for acquiring books on behalf of an organization, would you be able to justify spending any of it on a web published book like this one with no hard copy? Would it raise any eyebrows to opt for a higher price tier with exactly the same offering as a lower one?

</comment><comment><USER22> I have read part of this book and it is a really well written book especially to use racket to construct computer languages . I didn't understand how to use racket to make languages until I read this book.

<comment><USER23> read the first tutorial and I don't think it's lisp/scheme newbie friendly

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Very interesting. I'm currently going through the little schemer using Racket. I'm tempted to read this one after it.

</comment><comment><USER25> I cursory read the FAQ, somewhat funny that it's a series of questions with a "no" answer, that made me curious about the author, so I looked for public speakings on YouTube. Right now the first hit is a 18 minutes presentation of this book (so I think as I haven't watched it yet) called "(sixth RacketCon): Matthew Butterick -- The Making of "Beautiful Racket"".

I thought that someone else here could be interested...

edit: clarifications

</comment><comment><USER26> Question for someone experienced with Racket: does Racket offer immutable/persistent data structures?

<comment><USER27> I'm not sure about persistence, but it definitely has immutable data structures. See e.g. the docs on hash tables: [https://docs.racket- lang.org/reference/hashtables.html](https://docs.racket- lang.org/reference/hashtables.html)

As mentioned in the comments here, Racket's documentation is wonderful. I've yet to come across a better mix of technical reference, guiding narrative and a wealth of usage examples.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> _The luxury of ignoring details is one of the great pleasures of programming._

That's perfect :)

</comment><comment><USER29> Has anyone used Racket for a long running application server? Last I remember it did not have native threads (ie, it could only use one core), and I don't know about it's reliability compared to something like the JVM.

<comment><USER30> It uses separate native threads with shared state for futures, though there are limitations on supported operations without defeating parallelism; it also offers message passing parrallelism with places, which I think are implemented as native processes.but may be threads (it's conceptually shared-nothing processes, but so are Erlang "processes" which are multiplexed onto native threads.)

But, in any case, Racket can use multiple cores, though the APIs for doing so are different than conventional threading APIs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Is there any pdf version for this ?

p.s. thank you for wonderful job anyway.

<comment><AUTHOR> Unfortunately, no: [http://beautifulracket.com/about-the- author.html#faq](http://beautifulracket.com/about-the-author.html#faq)

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Each one is very different !</comment>


Gaming laptop, Macbook Air or PC + tablet/Chromebook? - <AUTHOR>

My laptop just died on me, about to start a new term next month, MechE. I feel that the MBA would be more suitable(thin, light, long battery life), however I cannot ignore my desire to game(which I do regularly). If I choose the Macbook, I'd have to give up gaming for good(afaik Macs aren't spececd for gaming). The tablet(Nexus 7/iPad mini) would be paired with a BT keyboard, Chromebook would be the HP Chromebook 11.
My university's tech lab only house super old workstations(i3, 2GB RAM). I only check WolframAlpha and review past year questions on my laptop in the library while doing psets with paper and pen, also Matlab and Solidworks.
And then there's the price factor. The MBA would obviously be the most expensive choice($100 over my budget), and the price difference could be put to better use.
Here are the specs:
Macbook Air 13" i5 8GB 256GB SSD
"Great" config desktop from logicalincrements.com + Nexus 7/iPad Mini/HP Chromebook 11
Lenovo Y510P 15.6" FHD / i7-4700 / 8GB / 1TB /GT750M SLi 2GB DDR5
Asus N56JR 15.6" FHD / i7-4700 / 12GB / 1TB / GTX760M 2GB DDR5
Which would be a better choice? <comment><USER2> I'm currently at uni for CS so our needs might be slightly different, but I'll run through my current set-up as I am also in the process of retiring my main laptop for a desktop/tablet/netbook.

I'll just say if you're looking at purchasing a gaming/multipurpose desktop, you're better off building your own IMO. I've never enjoyed gaming on a laptop (but that's just me), and you can build a monster gaming computer for < $1000 and assembly is really easy. Also, when particular parts start getting old/failing you can just swap them out instead of purchasing an entirely new system. Check out /r/buildapc, those guys live to optimize each others builds and offer a ton of help. I'm currently going through the process of gathering all the parts for a custom desktop to be ready to go before term starts and it has been a really fun process.

I currently own the 1st gen Nexus 7 and am overall very happy with it. It is my main means of digesting information such as e-mail/news and can easily be paired with a BT keyboard and stand to take notes on. I've also used it to read textbooks on and it is great for that! There are also excellent ssh programs which I use to get into the school network and my home system (once it's up and running). All that being said I don't generally use my Nexus for school work, but if I had to I don't think it would be a problem at all.

I also have an HP Mini 110 (I think) running Linux. It has a 10 inch screen and is my main 'on the go' laptop. I've used this to take notes in class as well as program in coffee shops or the library, ect. It is my first choice over the Nexus for school mostly because of the screen real estate over the nexus (all 10 inches of it :D), but that is mostly just for coding purposes.

So I guess my vote would be to go for the desktop/tablet/laptop combo, especially if you're looking at doing some gaming. Then you have power at home and something light weight to lug around with you on campus and will certainly fit any WolframAlpha/Matlab needs you might have.

Hope this helps!

<comment><AUTHOR> I've been thinking the same, but I'd settle with a Nexus 10 instead. Chromebooks aren't big where I'm from, and it's really hard to get good support for them. My friend had the same netbook as you, well truthfully I'm not impressed. Also my budget simply does not allow a netbook AND tablet, so I'll just have to settle for either one. Thanks for reply, helped cut down my choices down to the MBA or the pc tablet combo.</comment></comment>


Verizon iPhone Likely Coming Jan. 11 - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/01/reports-verizon-iphone/ <comment><USER2> Old news, dupe, and barely HN material</comment>


It's a great time to start a business - <AUTHOR> http://37signals.com/svn/archives2/its_a_great_time_to_start_a_business.php <comment><USER2> RE: Caterina, it's funny when people write articles saying not to do what they did. I'm sure there were even more compelling post-bubble lists for why people shouldn't start web businesses in Canada, which obviously didn't stop her.

Of course if you always tell people they'll fail, you'll be right 90% of the time, but you'll also miss every single success.

When it comes to your own start-up succeeding, like Mark Cuban says, you only need to be right _once_.

</comment><comment><USER3> I totally agree with this. Think about how much it cost to start a business even seven years ago: you had to buy servers and dev tools, etc.

Now you can test an idea for a few thousand dollars and a couple of weeks time by a few people; the market will tell you if it works or not and you're off.

If it doesn't work, who cares-at least you tried and didn't waste too long at it.</comment>


Magpies' brain power may be boosted by living in larger groups - <AUTHOR> http://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2018-02-08/australian-magpie-brain-power-boosted-by-group-size/9401674 <comment><USER2> > The idea is the larger the group, the more relationships you have to > maintain, said the study's lead author Ben Ashton of the University of > Western Australia.

> "So not only do you have to remember all these individuals, but you have to > remember your relationship with them and how to behave appropriately with > them," Dr Ashton said.

I wouldn't be surprised if it's less the direct mental workload of managing a larger social graph, but instead the greater chance to learn and push themselves (particularly at a younger age) as they are exposed to more ways of approaching problems from more peers.

<comment><USER3> Competition as well. It can make people (and animals apparently) rise to the occasion.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Note that the Australian magpie is a completely different bird from the old world magpie. They're not particularly closely related.

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

<comment><USER5> There is also the Auatralian Murray Magpie, which is another name for the Magpie-lark and is also not the bird in thr article.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Don't they assume a causal relationship? Maybe those groups are bigger because they're smarter (and they get food/other resources more effeciently).

<comment><USER7> """

To understand how learning plays out as birds age, the scientists also tested 21 juvenile birds in the groups at 100 days after leaving the nest, and again at 200 and 300 days.

While the youngest birds didn't exhibit any difference in their results, a pattern started to emerge at 200 days.

"This suggests the social environment has an effect on cognitive development," Dr Ashton said.

"It's not purely a genetic thing, there must be some kind of environmental factor at play."

"""

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> My first thought was of the hive mind of rats from Planescape Torment

</comment><comment><USER9>
      brain power
      boosted

These are vague terms. The birds _seem smarter_ , however I think this would indicate little more than what can be observed in feral children, as compared to children raised in tribal circumstances or better.

Social exposure leads to imitation and collectivized learning. The innate intellect doesn't change, but the limitations are expanded, since discovery can be diversified and not everyone needs to be an autodidact across every specialized skill.</comment>


New wiki - nuospace - <AUTHOR> http://www.nuospace.com/

<comment><USER3> Disclaimer - I am one of the BrightSide founders :).

"enterprise" is part of the "Enterprise Wiki" - in other words wiki for business. There are other "Enterprise Wiki" products out there - <USER2> and Confluence, for instance.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> "enterprise" on the web site is misleading - it's actually meant for smaller- midstage companies who can't afford SharePoint and don't like a shared hard drive.

</comment><comment><USER4> Why would you intentionally target the "enterprise"? That space is for people with resources small outfits don't have.

</comment><comment><USER5> I like the math captcha.

<comment><USER4> why? simple ones like "what is 6+3" are trivial to crack.

<comment><USER3> Any captcha is crackable, this one was the most "customer-friendly" and trivial to develop.</comment></comment></comment>