Why is Clojure so slow? - <AUTHOR> http://martinsprogrammingblog.blogspot.de/2012/02/why-is-clojure-so-slow.html <comment><USER2> Clojure has a slow _startup time_. It is not in itself slow.

It's important to get these distinctions right! Some people, unfortunately, form impressions from headlines and in this case it's extremely inaccurate. If you read the article you'll get the truth - there are startup time problems causing issues with using Clojure for command-line programs.

That's much less damning overall than "Clojure is slow."

<comment><USER3> You should have read the entire article:

> How fast is Clojure at running your code once it finally has got going? ... > Clojure is on average 4x slower than Java and 2x slower than Scala.

That's pretty freaking slow.

<comment><USER2> And about twice as fast as Erlang, 5x faster than Ruby, Python or PHP and 10x faster than Perl.[1]

It's all relative.

[1] [http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64q/which-programming- lan...](http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64q/which-programming-languages- are-fastest.php)

<comment><USER4> While interesting, those benchmarks are only useful if you implement something remotely similar to the actual benchmarks. Just glazing over them, they seem to be "unfairly" targeted at low-level languages.

That said, they are fun to look at. I just had a wtf-moment looking at this:

[http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/performance.php?test=n...](http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/performance.php?test=nbody)

~20 seconds vs ~20 minutes??

<comment><USER5> This sums up my feelings for the benchmarks:

[http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?test=fa...](http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?test=fannkuchredux&lang=all)

Note that the "alternative" Lisp SBCL and Java 7 programs both outperform Fortran.

Of course I agree with you on wtf-moments. WTF makes Ruby take an hour, and SBCL take 10 seconds? That's two orders of magnitude! But no matter, I imagine a more clever Ruby programmer could reduce that, or just call out to a native library.

<comment><USER6> >>Note that the "alternative" ...<<

A program that simply switched according the command line arg and then printed:

        3968050
        Pfannkuchen(12) = 65

:would also out perform :-)

>>I imagine a more clever Ruby programmer could reduce that...<<

Is "a more clever Ruby programmer" some kind of equivalent to "a sufficiently smart compiler"? :-)

>>or just call out to a native library<<

When is a Ruby program fast? When it's written in C ;-)

<comment><USER5> > A program that simply switched according the command line arg and then > printed…

Of course making programs do less can improve speed, and a great way of doing that is compile-time computation via macros! You can finish the program before it's even run.

> Is "a more clever Ruby programmer" some kind of equivalent to "a > sufficiently smart compiler"?

No, since we assume human intelligence here. :P As the Graphics Programming Black Book puts it in the Chapter 1 title, "The Best Optimizer is between Your Ears".

> When is a Ruby program fast? When it's written in C ;-)

I'm going to use this one.

<comment><USER6> I've spent enough time asking for programs for the benchmarks game in Ruby forums, to start to doubt whether the "more clever Ruby programmer" will ever come forward ;-)

Maybe "a more clever Ruby programmer" always drops-down to C?

Maybe there's only _a more clever Rails programmer_ :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> To Clojure-curious people: please ignore this article. It is misinformed.

Others on this thread have pointed out that the Alioth benchmark takes startup time into account. Yes, this imposes a startup penalty on Clojure.

More importantly, the implementations of each individual benchmark vary significantly in performance quality. High-performance Clojure requires a couple of tricks in type hinting, using unchecked arithmetic, and preferring native Java arrays.

I looked at a couple of the benchmarks, and the mandelbrot example uses those tricks. Notice the performance there: [http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64/performance.php?test=m...](http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64/performance.php?test=mandelbrot)

Notice that Java 7 and gcc run at about the same speed, and Clojure is only about 2.2x slower (than C). Scala is about 1.9x slower (than C). gcc is about 1.5x slower than Intel Fortran.

To make the benchmark more fair: (1) all timings should disregard startup time; and (2) all JVM languages should have the opportunity to run the benchmark a few thousand times before timing it. Otherwise, it measures JVM startup time, and then it measures how long it takes the JIT to achieve maximum optimization. By comparison, the C and Fortran code runs at full speed almost out of the gate.

All-in-all, considering that Clojure is an extremely high-level language I consider its performance impressive [1]. Yes, the inner loops need to be coded in a slightly un-idiomatic manner, but you can do all this in the comfort of your REPL, which makes the process of making optimizations reasonably painless.

[1] Don't forget to scroll down the mandelbrot results and look at the stellar performance of other popular high-level languages.

<comment><USER6> >>"Otherwise, it measures JVM startup time, and then it measures how long it takes the JIT to achieve maximum optimization."<<

Please take that Clojure mandelbrot program, make repeated timing measurements without restarting the JVM and then report how those times compare to cold start on your computer.

The mean "warmed" times for the Java mandelbrot program were actually _slower_ than the reported cold start time for the same program.

<http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/help.php#java>

<comment><USER7> Sure thing. I made it run for 4000 cycles twice. The first (cold) run took 2831.323 ms, and the warmed-up run took 2571.397 ms. About 10% faster.

Judging by the invocation noted at the bottom of [http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64/program.php?test=mande...](http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64/program.php?test=mandelbrot&lang=clojure&id=5), the comments about Java in the FAQ do not apply to the Clojure code. The benchmark seems to have been invoked straight from the command line.

<comment><USER6> Cool! Now let's check the basics:

\- 2831.323 ms for what workload? The benchmarks game measurements are made at 3 different workloads; but the times that matter are those for the largest workload, in this case N=16,000. So please show the times for N=16,000.

\- the benchmarks game measurements are made with output redirected to /dev/null

\- both the clojure and java programs are invoked straight from the command line, and include start-up. The Help page provides additional "warmed" measurements for the fastest Java programs, for comparison - because sometimes the JVM startup costs are larger in the mind than they are when measured :-)

<comment><USER7> Well certainly, in a real-world program which runs for long periods analyzing tons of data, JVM startup costs and JIT costs amount to nothing, as they are paid in the first few seconds. But we are talking about short, synthetic benchmarks here.

I ran mandelbrot for 4000 cycles, just invoking the function which does the work twice and wrapping each call in Clojure's (time ...) form. This all happened in an AOT-compiled .class file, which guaranteed a cold start. For what it's worth, I didn't bother tuning the GC or any other JVM parameters — I suspect I could have made it run a bit faster by manipulating generation sizes.

<comment><USER6> >>I ran mandelbrot for 4000 cycles<<

That reduced workload only runs the program for 1/10th the time of the workload shown on the benchmarks game website.

Run the program for N=16,000 and see that "JVM startup costs and JIT costs amount to nothing" even for these "short, synthetic benchmarks".

(Incidentally, the "usual" cold start measurement shown on the website is the best of 6.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Don't compare Clojure to C, comparing it to Python or Ruby makes more sense because they're all high-level dynamic languages. Sure Clojure runs on the compiling JVM but that doesn't put it into another category; you can also JIT compile Python in a few ways.

If we can make working websites and even games in Python, we can make them in Clojure too. What kills Clojure for small scripts and not-long-running applications is the startup time and that can mostly be attributed to JVM. Also, the memory footprint of a JVM process tends to grow a lot over time.

I see Clojure rising above specific platforms, though. JVM is in a slow death spiral. CLR might have some traction on Windows. If Python got it platform resettled on something more sophisticated than CPython, that might be a good ecosystem for Clojure.

<comment><USER9> _Don't compare Clojure to C, comparing it to Python or Ruby makes more sense because they're all high-level dynamic languages_

For me the more obvious comparison would be with other Lisps. Which, back in the dim past when I was using 'em, were often _damn_ fast.

<comment><USER10> If you're looking for a fast JVM-based Lisp the obvious choice would be Kawa Scheme: <http://per.bothner.com/blog/2010/Kawa-in-shootout/>

But as fogus said, speed is only one piece of the puzzle. <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4223562>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> How slow is slow?

If it takes me 3 months to deliver a given program in Clojure and 6 to deliver its Java equivalent, the Clojure one already has 3 months of lead. Assuming the Java one is twice as fast, it'll take 45 days to catch up.

Development time is expensive, computers are cheap and get twice as fast every year or so.

While a long startup time is annoying, it can certainly be optimized out if someone focuses enough attention to the low level aspects of the runtime.

<comment><USER12> I get what you're saying, and you're sort of right, but it's still interesting to figure out _why_ that startup time is so slow, or what other things slow it down. That talk from Daniel Solano Gómez about Clojure on Android was pretty interesting in that regard. I would want to encourage that kind of investigation, although this blogpost has a terrifically flamebait title.

> Development time is expensive, computers are cheap and get twice as fast > every year or so.

It's a bit funny that you're citing Moore's law when Clojure is specifically designed to overcome its breakdown and get out ahead of that lagging curve. (Paraphrasing an early talk from Rich Hickey: "The hardware guys are _punting_!!")

You can turn that right around as fuel for your original point, that Clojure and it's approach to concurrency buys you tons of developer productivity, compared to whacking about in the weeds with Java. I totally agree there, those higher level features are valuable and worth something, but they do not cost nothing.

<comment><USER11> single thread performance isn't increasing that quickly, but machines like the Xeon Phy should be rather sweet for highly threaded (or processed) apps. Also, if we can make GPUs run Java bytecode, we would unlock a whole lot of GFLOPS that are just pushing pixels now.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> _"When using the ClojureScript compiler on a hello word example with advanced optimisation, we end up with some 100kb of Javascript. [...] The Google Closure compiler certainly helps here by removing lots of unused code, and the resulting Javascript file is indeed free from all docstrings etc."_

So does the ClojureScript compiler basically just embed a Clojure interpreter in every file? I'd be interested to see the code prior to optimization.

<comment><USER14> No, ClojureScript does not interpret ClojureScript at runtime. The Clojure forms are compiled down to JavaScript directly. More info at [http://blog.fogus.me/2011/07/21/compiling-clojure-to- javascr...](http://blog.fogus.me/2011/07/21/compiling-clojure-to-javascript- pt1/)

<comment><USER13> I wonder if his figure is simply mistaken, then. Because 100 _kilobytes_ is a heck of a lot of code for a hello world. The compiled representations in your blog post seem far more reasonable.

<comment><USER14> 100K is a lot of code for a Hello World, so don't use ClojureScript to write Hello World apps. The cool part is that building a largish app will not necessarily grow the output JS.

<comment><USER13> Sure thing, but my curiosity still stands. :) If you're using Closure Compiler to perform dead code elimination (100kb is the "heavily optimized" number, as far as I can tell), how is it that `console.log('hello, world!');` requires 100kb of essential (non-eliminatable) scaffolding?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Hello World execution time benchmark with other languages:

[http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/chicken- users/2011-03/m...](http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/chicken- users/2011-03/msg00070.html)

[http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/chicken- users/2011-03/m...](http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/chicken- users/2011-03/msg00090.html)

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2698579>

</comment><comment><USER16> Have a look at Rich Hickey's keynote presentation from Conj2011; <http://blip.tv/clojure/rich-hickey-keynote-5970064>

He pretty much starts off by talking about making Clojure "leaner", faster at starting up etc.

He mentions stuff like a "production" jar with less metadata, hoisted evaluator and even some kind of tree shaking ala ProGuard.

</comment><comment><USER17> If Clojure could dump the Lisp image like SBCL's save-lisp-and-die function, the startup time would be greatly reduced. I wonder if JVM itself can dump its current state and then restore execution.

Another approach to the problem would be similar to FastCGI: keep one Clojure server process running and execute scripts on it.

<comment><USER18> > If Clojure could dump the Lisp image like SBCL's save-lisp-and-die function, > the startup time would be greatly reduced. I wonder if JVM itself can dump > its current state and then restore execution.

It's still hard to understand why aren't Oracle working on something like that. It's not as if they don't care about desktop at all -- JavaFX is going to be part of Java8 and they are even working on a new packaging tool-chain for it. JVM's start-up time and inability to allocate memory when needed (as compared to up-front way it's done now) are the major reasons why Java/JVM is (still) a bad solution for desktop and cli applications.

<comment><USER19> There is something like that as internal research project, but never made into the mainstream JVM.

[http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/Programming/...](http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/Programming/mvm/)

<comment><USER20> Interesting - that paper talks about isolates, which are implemented in Dart. Dart core team members used to work on HotSpot and other Java tech (CLDC).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> It's an implementation problem of Java.

I never understood why the JVM folks didn't get along to develop a JIT cache. That means the first time I start a Java program it would run normally slow. But from the second run on it would use the native cache and run immediately fast with native performance. That would eliminate many performance problems of Java.

I know that there already is a solution which uses a Java server to serve the application as client which reduces the startup time but this is not very convenient to use.

The slowness of Clojure is a typical problem of all languages which are based on JVM. Racket Scheme, for instance, which is a Lisp like language but NOT based on JVM, needs just 0.062s to print "Hello World" (compiled) on my system.

<comment><USER22> Did you read the article? The majority of the Clojure startup time is spent on initializing the Clojure runtime.

"spends 95% of the startup-time loading the clojure.core namespace (the clojure.lang.RT class in particular) and filling out all the metadata/docstrings etc for the methods. This process stresses the GC quite a bit, some 130k objects are allocated and 90k free-d during multiple invokes of the GC (3-6 times), the building up of meta data is one big source of this massive object churn."

<comment><USER21> > The majority of the Clojure startup time is spent on initializing the > Clojure runtime.

That's correct but even without this startup time Clojure is significantly slower than other functional languages. Look at SBCL and Racket in

[http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/which-programming- lang...](http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/which-programming-languages- are-fastest.php)

That doesn't mean that I don't like Clojure. I am even considering it for a business project. But Clojure is definitely unsuitable for small apps (shell scripts etc.)

Btw the benchmark listing doesn't take LuaJIT into account. This JIT is the fastest I have ever encountered, way ahead of JVM regarding startup time.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Clojure startup time is slow. AOT helps a little. <http://clojure.org/compilation>

Clojure runs quite fast, in my experience. I have written an web app <http://rssminer.net>, in Clojure (and some Java). On a small VPS(512M RAM, 1 core CPU), It can handle about 300 request per second, On my desktop, about 2000 req/s. Which is not slow, at least.

The persistent data structures Clojure use is fast too. I did some test a long ago, It's roughly the same speed as Java collections.

</comment><comment><USER24> I remember seeing somewhere that someone looked into tackling the problem of the startup time by stripping the clojure core libs of unessential metadata like docstrings etc

I'm not sure if they went through with it though

<comment><USER25> Why would one do that if that's slow and an image can't be saved? One does not need to have docstrings in the running Lisp. The typical solution to this problem is to have a file with docstrings, an index and look up the docstring for some symbol from the file when needed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> The Clojure's start-up is slow because the source files are compiled. But once your program is launched, its perfs are correct and very close to Java. About the immutable data structure, don't forget each method doesn't return a copy of the data. It's more clever using changes detection.

You can read a lot of information about this part of Clojure in the book "Practical Clojure". I'm reading it and I'm learning some stuffs about Clojure.

To conclude, Clojure is fine for "long" program running.

<comment><USER27> As others have stated, the OP was comparing run time separately from startup time, closure was found only to be about 4 times slower than java after startup costs are a storied away, which is quite believable given the benchmarks.

For most programs that aren't compute intensive, you won't notice a penalty, but the same is true with ruby or python.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> What I would like to see is a `defconstant` macro, which introduces a constant that can not be changed anymore without restarting the JVM.

(def x 1) ; x = 1 (def x 2) ; x = 2 now

(defconstant y 1) ; y = 1 (defconstant y 2) ; Exception

Also a way of fixing functions would be good, so that no lookup is required. Calling such a fixed function has no overhead, it would be a direct call.

<comment><USER28> Well, there is defonce [[http://clojure.github.com/clojure/branch- master/clojure.core...](http://clojure.github.com/clojure/branch- master/clojure.core-api.html#clojure.core/defonce)]

As for function lookup, I recommend reading this thread: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2928285> Also, vars are by default static (but can be made dynamic with ^:dynamic).

<comment><AUTHOR> `defonce` unfortunately doesn't help. Without restarting the JVM I can overwrite that var. And that is okay, because defonce is just a protection mechanism, to not delete data when a namespace is repeatedly reloaded. This reloading occurs 99% at development time. Useful tool.

But I would like to have real constants. A final class with a static final field (and potentially type information), or something like that. This would give the optimal lookup time, as the JVM would have the direct address.

When I (defonce x 1) I can still (def x 2), without restarting the JVM. I want this to not be possible with a defconstant.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I don't know if I should laugh or cry. Let's just say rock stars are not engineers.</comment>


Influencing Founders: Have We Reached "Peak Hoodie?" - <AUTHOR> http://www.hunterwalk.com/2013/01/influencing-founders-have-we-reached.html

<comment><USER2> I think Musk is the most influential founder of our times now.

<comment><USER3> Good call, even just considering the startups he alone has planned for the next several decades!</comment></comment>


An examination of the curbside pickup experience - <AUTHOR> https://blog.routegy.com/2020/06/30/examination-curbside-pickup-experience/ <comment><USER2> I've had mostly mediocre or downright poor experiences with curbside pickup.

Most recently at Lowe's I called the number on the parking sign and was put on hold, and then it hung up after a few minutes. When I called back it was busy so I moved to a normal spot and donned the mask and went in. Then, when I got to the desk, I had to do the back-and-forth of giving an order number, name, etc, and then wait for them to find the order.

Full disclosure: I co-founded Routegy and happy to answer questions about how we're helping businesses build better contactless experiences, including curbside pickup.</comment>


Simple Trumps Complete - <AUTHOR> http://brianarmstrong.org/blog/simple-trumps-complete/ <comment><USER2> I'd add Ari Paparo's diagnosis of blink.com's failure, which he attributed to not making things simple and instantly useful enough: <http://www.aripaparo.com/archive/001456.html></comment>


Exception Handling in Programming Languages [video] - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4t-2TI5Qvc <comment><AUTHOR> I think checked exceptions get a bad rap, but Cliff makes a good point: defaults matter and rethrowing should be the default.

go's error codes are better than in C but just act like "all exceptions are checked" from a Java angle.

I think checked exception make sense at module boundries. If I'm calling into Zlib or Guava, their function's type signatures _should_ call out error modes and thus be checked.

That's my "solution": keep checked exceptions based on the function signature but NOT based on the exception type. It's roughly what best practices are now. Wrap it in runtime.

I think Optional/Either/Try/Manad versions boil down to about this same scheme.

</comment><comment><USER2> Kind of sad to see that the discussion was mostly about topics like Java's checked exceptions and/or stack traces.

Object-oriented exceptions, non-terminating, with handlers and restarts:

[http://www.nhplace.com/kent/Papers/Exceptional- Situations-19...](http://www.nhplace.com/kent/Papers/Exceptional- Situations-1990.html)

<comment><AUTHOR> Haha, agreed.

It was a conversation between Hotspot (aka "the" JVM) developers at jcrete though, so I guess that's understandable.</comment></comment>


How I Fell in Love with a Schizophrenic - <AUTHOR> http://asserttrue.blogspot.com/2013/01/how-i-fell-in-love-with-schizophrenic.html <comment><USER2> There is a person with schizophrenia who posts to HN, who is shadowbanned due to the comments they leave, which are nonsensical due to their illness. Turn 'showdead' on in your profile, then hit <http://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=losethos> and now <http://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=SparrowOS> .

They've been writing their own operating system in assembly for the last few years: <http://www.losethos.com/> and now <http://sparrowos.com/>

For more: <http://qaa.ath.cx/LoseThos.html>

<comment><USER3> Hmmph. I noticed the (dead) comments by SparrowOS a few days ago and was very curious about them. They didn't look like any sort of spam or advertising, because there were bouts of normal conversation amidst them.

I posted a "Ask HN" question inquiring about this user and his comments, and my post was marked "dead" within a minute. Only thing I've ever had marked dead on here (that I'm aware of at least).

Thank you for your explanation; I would have never guessed it was something like schizophrenia.

<comment><USER3> Alright, I did some reading on SparrowOS/LoseThos. See this page (<http://qaa.ath.cx/LoseThos.html>) to learn a bit about him and the amazing work he's done on his personal operating system.

In fact, it appears the nature of his posts has been discussed quite a bit on HN over the last few years. I'm still somewhat new here though, so I imagine as people continue to join HN questions about his postings will continue to be asked. And you can't really blame them for being asked (how was I supposed to know what that prose meant?). I suppose the best solution is that instead of downvotes and ridicule (as I found in many previous topics on here), linking to the same page I have above would eliminate a lot of contention and confusion.

EDIT: Yikes, I'm not sure I'm coming across like I meant to. I'm not implying being different is bad AT ALL. Sparrow, I really like your operating system and will download it tomorrow to learn about it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> God bless you.

I have worked with people like this, seen marriages to schizophrenics (somewhat less severe that Sally), and seen families supporting children with severe autism. Many of these are wonderful people and you are blessed to be able to see this.

But you, yourself, are going to need help to make this work.

Doing this for 18 months is one thing but you are going to need to build serious structural support for yourself to make the long haul. Build friend and family relationships where you can talk about what you are going through and which are committed to helping you through it. Make money, save as much as you can and avoid debt like plague, you already have enough stress in your life. Get a life insurance policy, get a will that creates a trust for Sally and receives the proceeds of the policy. If you are of any faith consider building up your church community.

You are essentially married to a not-normal person. You're going to have not- normal problems. It's okay to feel sad and tired and frustrated. Have people around you to help carry the load.

You have taken on a vocation as mental health advocate and social worker. Case management, navigation of the health system, is actually a profession, if you look around you'll probably find tools and practices to help you deal with the enormous administrative overhead involved with services.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but you should go get yourself checked out for psychological and emotional dysfunction. You are clearly yourself not- normal, which is awesome, but take seriously the possibility that you've got weaknesses of your own that need work. If you had ADHD or depression meds would make enormous improvements in your functionality. Even if it's all good, being in therapy, even only once a month, might not be a bad idea. Having a professional who knows you and can spot signs of depression or stress or anxiety could be handy.

I can't say enough how much I admire your vision and determination. My apologies if all of this has already occurred to you. Please take care of yourself.

</comment><comment><USER5> I'll cast a dissenting opinion.

Do you really, honestly think the author will be happy - and for long (say more than 2 years, after the initial thrill of doing something odd and new)?

It does not looks like a sane relation to me, but more like a relation based on needs - such as the need to "save" someone (frequent with young upperclass women) or such as a profound emotional need to display love.

 _"I'll throw myself in front of a bus for her if she wants it"_ \- this doesn't looks like a good thing to say about a relationship - especially about a relationship with someone hearing voices who might recommend such things.

Are normal persons (or life) so boring that one needs to import another person problems - especially unfixable problems given the state of our technology regarding schizophrenia?

(my cousin has a severe form and spends most of his time in various institutions)

<comment><USER6> I was diagnosed with schizo-affective and bipolar disorders when I was 19. I was on disability until I was 26 (I am now almost 31), even though I worked part time as a software developer through that entire period.

I've managed to live a pretty "normal" life so far, even with my health issues. I have both Bachelor's and Master's degrees. I've been with my wife for 5 years so far. I've held down jobs pretty well, with ever-increasing levels of responsibility. I have healthy hobbies that take quite a bit of attention but do not become overriding obsessions.

My wife and I have different struggles than most other couples. She is most definitely not with me because it's novel, nor to "save" me or any other sort of co-dependent nonsense.

Schizophrenia may not be fixable, but it is controllable to a degree and with care it doesn't have to mean a life in institutions or a life without a satisfying career.

<comment><USER7> How does the Schizophrenia present itself in your daily life? I'd love to hear some examples so I can better understand your experience.

<comment><USER6> First I have to say that my symptoms have been pretty well-controlled for years. After my diagnosis I lost a lot of weight and became very physically active. This seems to have helped in a miraculous way (according to several doctors). Managing stress, sleeping well, eating well and keeping active seem to work as good or better for me than medications.

I have mild hallucinations. Pretty regularly I have odd physical sensations, like the skin on my legs is sloughing off or very convincing body dysmorphia. Stuff like this is worst when it keeps me awake. Exercise or a hot shower tend to fix this.

When I am really stressed out I have some auditory (usually more or less ambient noise) and visual (usually motion at the corner of my vision) hallucinations. The visual/auditory hallucinations usually only kick in when working 50+ hours a week for extended periods and worried about personal things. To minimize these periods, I work super hard when I am working and try to keep complications to a minimum. I'm sure it has held my career back somewhat not to have the same capacity for work hours as others. (Yes, 50+ hours a week is minimal for a lot of people, but for me I need that extra time to relax and recuperate.) The last visual/auditory hallucinations I had were pretty recent. The past couple of months required some 60ish hour weeks, I had a good deal of disrupted sleep and my wife had some health problems.

I have strict routines. When they are broken I tend to get upset. For example, I have a rigorous exercise routine. When it snows and it makes it harder to get to the gym or out for a run, I get disproportionately angry. I eat things in a very particular way, if someone disrupts this I get angry and will probably tell them about it.

I don't like it when people repeat what I say unless I explicitly give them permission. An example is that my wife might discuss something with me and then discuss that with someone else, and include my view on the subject. That upsets me.

I do not struggle much (at all?) with paranoia or catatonia.

There is some more, but I'm not super comfortable sharing in a public venue where potential future employers are likely to see.

I recognize all of these things are not normal. Over the years I've built up a good set of filters that keeps most people from even noticing. That's not to say I bottle up the reaction, it's just that I've built in some mental processes that help keep the keel even.

<comment><USER7> Thanks for sharing! You seem to have found a way to live in both worlds at once quite nicely. Feel free to delete the post while you can btw, if you're concerned about privacy issues.

<comment><USER6> I'm glad you appreciate it.

I thought about deleting the posts. I'd really rather practice not worrying about what people think about it. It's a part of me and if others can't accept it, that's okay.

<comment><USER7> Right on, that's the only way to live.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Unfortunately this relationship has the makings of a codependent relationship. When you combine a man who is probably insecure since he searches for dates on craigslist and a woman with a litany of mental issues you generally have a codependent relationship. The insecure man needs to feel "needed" and the women needs to be "saved". Most of these relationships do not end well and lead to long-term unhappiness for both parties.

<comment><USER4> Well, yeah. That's certainly a risk here, isn't it?

And what shall the gentleman do? "Well I love you but it's probably a mistake because I'm probably a mess myself so let's just walk away from it?" Even were this situation as bad as you imagine that strikes me as a soul-killing response to problems.

I agree this looks rough but I've seen some very bad situations that ended up looking like something from Disney. Those situations had heroes and those heroes went through some crazy shit. There is hope.

So. The guy is going for it. Are we satisfied to comment that it will all end in tears? Or shall we look for some way to help it to a better end?

It isn't enough here to note the risk. You have to offer something constructive. I don't say "not hard", perhaps this relationship is a terrible idea and if it is so then it is no kindness to pretend otherwise.

But the OP simply isn't going to hear "dude, co-dependent, not good". If you see trouble clearly enough to say so then you have a duty to offer some path around it or through it.

<comment><USER9> > And what shall the gentleman do? "Well I love you but it's probably a > mistake because I'm probably a mess myself so let's just walk away from it?"

It is OK to size up a potential relationship and make a practical decision about pursuing it before you actually fall in love with someone.

For most people, starting a relationship with a severe schizophrenic is a bad idea. You're letting yourself in for a lot of suffering and very likely you'll further injure your loved one when you eventually leave because you can't take it any more.

I think part of growing up is recognizing that not every person you feel attracted to is actually a good person for you to be involved with. Letting feelings of attraction trump one's better judgement causes a awful lot of misery in the world (usually in much less dramatic but much more common scenarios).

I'm speaking of the general case here. As you say, sometimes seemingly reckless relationships do work out. Kas clearly doesn't regret falling in love with Sally and I hope that they go on to have long and reasonably happy lives together.

<comment><USER4> "It is OK to size up a potential relationship and make a practical decision"

Absolutely.

But that size up should consist of more than simple pattern recognition.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> _No doubt there's a lot of hard work ahead, for both of us. But you know what? I never saw anything in this life that was worth a damn that didn't involve hard work. The idea is not to shun the hard work but to embrace it. Embrace it with both arms, squeeze it hard, and accept it, not with fateful resignation but with the sure knowledge that if you do embrace it, good things will come, eventually. The alternative, giving up, is unthinkable._

That, exactly that, is what life is all about. If you don't get it don't bother living life until you get it. Simply put, because your existence won't have any meaning to drive yourself through the hard work ahead through the path that will change a life beside your own.

To the OP, people like you still give me hope about the mankind. All my best feelings and thoughts will be with you and your beloved one. I'm sure you'll get through that, and live happy. It's just a matter of time.

<comment><USER11> "If you don't get it don't bother living life until you get it."

So, WoW?

<comment><USER12> Perhaps you should wad a book instead.

[http://www.amazon.com/Shut-Stop-Whining-Get- Life/dp/11180245...](http://www.amazon.com/Shut-Stop-Whining-Get- Life/dp/1118024516)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Be careful who you fall in love with. While it is easy to fall in love with a person who is objectively perfection, it is also possible to fall in love with someone who is deeply flawed. The strength of the bond is no less.

Sometimes the old method of having one's parents choose a mate appears to be the better thing. Some cultures will investigate a potential mate's family background several generations looking for physical or psychological problems, thus averting potential disaster or the bearing of flawed offspring.

On the other hand statistics show that when love strikes, such marriages last longer and result in more children than arranged marriages.

Can you choose who you fall in love with? Likely no, but you can know when it's happening and terminate the process if you see serious warning signs. In this story the warning signs were explicitly posted at the entrance gate.

<comment><USER14> Aren't you lucky you don't have a severe mental illness? Obviously anyone that does should be avoided like the plague, regardless of how many good qualities and virtues they have about them. If you're that broken, you just don't deserve romance and love. But obviously life is still worth living, so don't kill yourself silly!

<comment><USER7> > If you're that broken, you just don't deserve romance and love.

Woah, woah, woah. Surely you don't mean that anyone _deserves_ my or your or anyone else's romance and love. These things don't mean anything unless they're freely given.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> To the OP, thanks for encouraging others to think about mental illness and improving the situation in the US.

Side note to others - in my experience with people with schizophrenia, they usually prefer to be referred to as just that, "a person with schizophrenia", not "a schizophrenic". People are more than just their illness.

<comment><USER16> This is in line with the APA recommendation for referring to anyone with a disability - psychological or physical. They aren`t characterized by their disability; they`re a person foremost.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Wonderful story, thanks for sharing.

 _It's an outrage that a disabled person is expected to live independently on $661 a month._

Even in Canada where we have social assistance and state healthcare the disability pensions here are abysmal. I spent my adolescent years growing up with a single disabled mother and that's pretty much all she gets to this day; less than minimum wage. If it wasn't for me working long hours after school and the alimony from my estranged father we wouldn't have made it. It's frustrating that she cannot live close to where her primary health care providers practice and cannot even get to them on her own any more.

I wish we'd spend less money as a society on jails and war and more on eliminating poverty and researching ways to enhance the human condition.

<comment><USER2>
        > When I feed the poor, they call me a saint,
        > but when I ask why the poor are hungry, they call me a communist.
        >
        > - Dom Helder Camara

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Finding out that someone you already care about has a mental illness is really tough. What do you do? Run for the hills, or stand by their side? If they were _physically_ sick, it would be a no-brainer: it could just as easily be you who's sick with the flu or cancer or what have you, and you'd want your friends to be there for you.

But when it comes to mental illness, it's different. Those afflicted are somehow no longer a part of our in-group, and it becomes easier to turn our backs on them. This post is a sort of therapy for me as well, you see, as I've turned my back on two similarly afflicted former friends. Difficult decisions indeed.

</comment><comment><USER18> One of the most devastating things about this disease is that the majority of its sufferers refuse medication, based on the fear, distrust, and paranoia brought on by their condition.

To be sure, medication is not always effective for schizophrenia, but the disease's course without medication is a terrible one.

I'm not sure how schizophrenia is handled in other countries, but in the US you can't force medication except in a hospital (often via the ER). And there is a dire lack of facilities that specialize in treating and supporting people with schizophrenia.

<comment><USER19> "based on the fear, distrust, and paranoia brought on by their condition."

This is unfair. From my limited understanding, it's not just FUD, the medications do "dull" their wits and have very unpleasant physical side- effects that any person would legitimately not like. It may make them "more normal" to some extent, but at a cost.

<comment><USER18> > "based on the fear, distrust, and paranoia brought on by their condition."

While I know this to be true in cases like that of my own family member, your comment about the side-effects of anti-psychotic meds is entirely valid.

<comment><USER19> Right, it's certainly exacerbated by the condition. I mentioned the unpleasantness of some of the drugs to help one understand why a person would suddenly stop taking them under a "supposedly rational" state.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> > It's an outrage that a disabled person is expected to live independently on > $661 a month.

> It's the kind of thing that makes me ashamed of my own country.

I think the author is extremely ungrateful for having been born in a country that even provides _that_.

Do you know that _software engineers_ at Microsoft India, yes Microsoft of all places, get paid Rs. 30'000/month ($600/month) when they join in as a trainee?

People, we're talking about software developers under the monicker of "trainee"; people who've been through 4-year college _and_ been smart enough to get accepted to Microsoft India (in a highly competitive country) -- getting paid $600/month.

This guys has all his facts wrong when he says $600/month is bad in Gabon, and he's being totally ungrateful when he criticizes the U.S. gov. for what they're giving; not showing an iota of thankfulness.

Does the author know nearly 50% of children (hundreds of millions of children) in _India_ are _malnourished_?

In India, a completely healthy person who can't find a job, will be left to starve by both government and society. It's a ruthless, cold, heartless nation compared to the government of the U.S. In fact in India, even food meant for the poor is stolen by greedy politicians. It's a terrible country.

You should be thankful to be an American, instead of expecting even more from a government that far surpasses most countries in the world in terms of what it does.

<comment><USER21> I always find it a little silly that people assume their country is amazing without looking up the facts: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_state> if you look at welfar expenditure by GDP you'll notice that it ranks around 26 assuming I counted correctly, behind most of the western world. This is not intended to hate on America, one of the wonderful and horrible things about America is that there is amazing opportunity and terrifying risk to living in the country. Most developed countries even out the risk and reward a little more. I find this fascinating and I wonder how many factors such as innovation, attitude, ambition, etc have related causation (rather than just correlation).

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I highly recommend looking into the work of Paris Williams: [http://brainblogger.com/2012/08/07/schizophrenia-and- psychos...](http://brainblogger.com/2012/08/07/schizophrenia-and-psychosis- brain-disease-or-existential-crisis/) [http://brainblogger.com/2012/06/23/is- schizophrenia-really-a...](http://brainblogger.com/2012/06/23/is- schizophrenia-really-a-brain-disease/) [http://brainblogger.com/2012/05/29/full-recovery-from- schizo...](http://brainblogger.com/2012/05/29/full-recovery-from- schizophrenia/)

He also has a book called "Rethinking Madness" which is amazing.

Basically, there is no medical evidence for classifying schizophrenia as a disease. He believes that it is a state the mind creates for itself when it's surroundings stress the person out too much. There are very high recovery rates for schizophrenia in 3rd world countries, which he believes is due to the lack of medication.

<comment><USER23> > There are very high recovery rates for schizophrenia in 3rd world countries, > which he believes is due to the lack of medication.

Looking at the state of schizophrenics in India, I find this hard to believe.

<comment><USER24> If you're looking at scizophrenics then by definition you're looking at the ones who haven't recovered. My understanding though is that they don't just do better because they're given less drugs, it's also because of social differences in terms of how families interact with each other.

<comment><USER23> > If you're looking at scizophrenics then by definition you're looking at the > ones who haven't recovered.

Well, yes, it's really easy to say that a disease doesn't exist if you ignore all the people who are suffering from it.

> they don't just do better because they're given less drugs, it's also > because of social differences in terms of how families interact with each > other.

What "social differences"?

Schizophrenics in India are far _more_ likely to go undiagnosed and untreated, which only exacerbates the problems for them _and_ their families. That's a big difference from saying that there's a high recovery rate, let alone that it's not a disease.

<comment><USER24> "Schizophrenics in India are far more likely to go undiagnosed and untreated, which only exacerbates the problems for them and their families."

Not sure if that statement is entirely reality-based:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prognosis_of_schizophrenia#Inte...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prognosis_of_schizophrenia#International)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> My heart felt feelings for you my friend, your that kind of man, which I want to be, someone who has truly lived the saying:

Beauty stays till 40-50, Intellect till 60-70, after that, only those who love each other for the heck of it, truly stay happily ever after.

</comment><comment><USER26> My late brother-in-law was diagnosed with schizo-affective disorder last year. Unstable, paranoid, and off his meds, he took his own life a few months later, still in his mid-twenties. He left a surreal suicide note. His family wants someone to blame. It has been very hard.

Thanks for sharing your and Sally's experiences. It takes a lot of courage to do.

</comment><comment><USER27> When reading your post it reminded of my own "sally". She is straightforward , kind hearted, truthful, caring etc. When we find such a person in our lives , the love that comes out is purely unconditional! We finally realise that no matter what this person says, looks, behaves, what she does or does not, or if the world may come to an end, no matter what we will love with uncondition love. Its a gift (love) to the pure hearted from god himself!

</comment><comment><USER28> Thank you so much for having the courage to openly discuss your relationship with a person with a mental illness.

Your calm words will, I hope, do a lot to explain what it's like.

> _I think most guys, on a first date, upon hearing a young lady talk > seriously about being visited by aliens, would probably find some reason to > cut the evening short. I merely listened. Sally "knew" the alien visitation > wasn't real. But it felt real enough to her when it happened. So I asked her > to tell me about it in detail. And I listened, without passing judgment. She > ultimately laughed the whole thing off, but I knew it was an important part > of her reality._

Talking to people who have hallucinations or who hear voices is sometimes fascinating. Sometimes they start the conversation and you don't know that anything is different, and because they are not lying the story sounds utterly convincing. And then, maybe, some odd details start creeping in. Or maybe the story is about alien visitation and it's obviously not true from the start, even though the person telling the tale it utterly believable.

> _She didn't know that when a yellow car pulled in front of her on the road, > it didn't mean there was danger ahead._

At their gentlest these paranoias and delusions seem similar to everyday superstitions. I think that's what makes it harder for people to understand just how strong the feelings are.

> _As a disabled person (who can't work a normal job, because of the severity > of her residual symptoms), Sally gets a monthly check for $661. That's it. > That's all. No more. Here you go: $661 a month, now go take care of > yourself._

This is the thing I really want to talk about.

I live in the UK. We've had a variety of different disability benefits over the years. Unfortunately those benefits have not kept current with modern treatment; nor with modern political directions; and now we're in the unpleasant situation of needing to cut our massive welfare bill, but not having any suitable alternatives for people yet, and not having adequate support for disabled people.

For example, in the 1980's people with bad back were told to not move, to lie flat on their back on a firm mattress. Many people were signed off work for years because of bad back. We know now that's terrible advice. If there's no underlying illness causing the backache (and there can be serious illness causing backache) you should carefully take pain killers, and keep moving. Some exercise will help recovery, and some other exercise will prevent relapse. So, now, with bad back you might need a bit of time off work to let the pain killers start working, and then a bit of time to get the exercise going, but then you can return to work full time.

Applying that to MH problems we see that people with mood disorders like depression were cocooned away from stress. "Don't go back to work, because you'll trigger another episode of illness". But many people want to work. They do not want to live a life on benefits.

Ideally you have a programme that finds people the work they want to do, and then gives them time-unlimited support for that work. That support would be things like helping someone sort out transport; explaining to a boss what reasonable adjustments (a legal concept) means; discussion about difficulties staying in work and how to resolve those; discussion about any prejudice that is happening etc.

Such programmes exist, but are patchy and usually _very_ busy with long wait- lists.

And because our benefits system hasn't caught up people can get caught in nasty situations. There's a variety of benefit schemes to help people get back into work, but if you're working (even with a severe, enduring MH problem) they might take the disability benefits away from you, which can then shut down other parts of your support network; and which can be very stressful for some people. Coping with complex benefit and tax systems is not helpful when you've just started your first job in 12 years.

So, while we have made a lot of progress, there is still a lot of progress to be made. I wish you and Sally all the best for the future!

<comment><USER29> "I live in the UK. We've had a variety of different disability benefits over the years. Unfortunately those benefits have not kept current with modern treatment; nor with modern political directions; and now we're in the unpleasant situation of needing to cut our massive welfare bill, but not having any suitable alternatives for people yet, and not having adequate support for disabled people."

One thing that is being tried is more direct scrutiny of people on various disability benefits who are certainly capable of working and caring for themselves, but got 'in' under a more permissive system when the bills weren't as high.

I know this because of some acquaintances I know in the UK who have been on various disability benefits for some years, and they update us on the hoops they're having to jump through to requalify every so often. Keep this up and weed out the people who are capable, so there's more resources to go to those who truly need it.

<comment><USER28> The costs of weeding out the capable are high. Not just financially; you have to interview and assess people who might have severe and enduring mental illness and who might be very anxious about that interview and assessment process.

Unfortunately at the moment the assessment, while with a real doctor, is merely a box ticking assessment. You turn up in a clean shirt and tie (because you have a crippling OCD)? You don't get points. You turn up unshaved, unshowered, in an unclean t-shirt? You get points. At the end someone adds up all the points you get. If you get more than X (for physical problems) or more than Y (for MH problems) you get the money, otherwise you're fit to work.

Very many people who are deemed fit to work go on to win their appeals.

And that's the fundamental problem.

Is a wheelchair user able to work? Obviously, yes, there are many jobs someone in a wheelchair can do. Is a person who is totally blind able to work? Again, yes, there are many jobs that person could do. It's the same for people with mental illness; they might be able to work in a quiet office but not do anything customer-facing. The might be able to do many jobs, but need a bit of help to get those jobs.

Moving people off disability (disabled and not working; (we also have "cover extra costs of living because you're disabled benefits which get paid if you're in work or not)) benefits probably just moves them onto different benefits. They might still qualify for housing benefit and tax credits; the person caring for them might qualify for carer's benefit; etc.

Benefits and Tax in the UK is a mess. :-(

<comment><USER29> I don't think the situation is as bad in the US, but the fundamental issue of "getting paid benefits to not work" has rarely been balanced on any useful scale with a system that says "are you working already? here are some useful support services?" (child care, medical, extra cash, etc).

We _seem_ to only have systems that provide benefits/services to people who don't work at all. Going back 20+ years, I worked (at a burger king!) with someone who ended up quitting because it was 'better' for her to be on our state's welfare program. Why? If she worked, and earned more than (IIRC $120/week or something) then she would lose all her benefits, which added up to far more than she could buy on the $120/week she might earn working at BK.

What struck me then that would make far more sense is to offer a sliding scale of benefits, but phase them out if you didn't work at all. She could have stayed working at BK at, say, $120/week, and in return received another $100 in benefits, have been far better off, but instead, the system deemed it better to have her earning nothing, and living off the state for $150/week.

My numbers are probably off some - it's been 20 years since we had that conversation, but it was one of the first times it struck me how backwards our regulations and policies are. It's not gotten any better in those intervening 20 years.

<comment><USER30> It's a problem of perverse incentives. Intelligent single people without heath issues can live vary cheaply most of the US. But, covering your basis when things go wrong is expensive and many people will intelligently avoid that if there is any sort of a safety net. Especially when just heath insurance costs you more than rent or food.

On the other hand, if you want to be self sufficient both now and in retirement you need to make around 50% more. So, where is the break even point?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Brilliant post kas. I'm impressed by your loyalty and cogency.

If the two of you ever considered having kids, there'd be a few things you'd do well to prepare for. I am the child of a severe manic-depressive/alcoholic. I can't begin to tell you the myriad ways this has effected my development, but the influence runs deep and strong. Your children will grow up in an environment of chaos, where crisis is often the default state of affairs. I'm not saying your kids will, in the grander scheme of life, be any worse off for the potentially unstable environment in which they grow, but it can make them feel unusual, left out and alone in comparison to their peers. With any luck, they'll be as well-rounded, if not moreso than anyone else, not in spite of but because of their experiences with a close relative suffering from severe mental illness.

I wish you the best of luck and send all my love to you both.

<comment><USER32> He had mentioned in the article she can no longer have children.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Besides the story of unconditional love, I'm completely amazed that it happened through Craigslist, of all the places in which you can meet someone today

</comment><comment><USER34> >She didn't know that numbers don't have "assigned colors" to them.

For some people (most of them, I imagine, not schizophrenics) they do: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synesthesia>

>Our meeting was the fluke of the century. I happened to be scrounging around on Craigslist one day looking for a furniture item. Sally happened to be on Craigslist looking for pet supplies.

Read: one person was posting to a personals section, the other browsing. Not much of a fluke.

<comment><USER35> As a small child, I used to have a strong association between numbers/letters and colors, though that has faded to the point where I barely remember them. The fact that 2 is yellow is strongest in my mind.

For the record, I do not suffer from schizophrenia.

<comment><USER36> No no no, 3 is yellow, didn't you get the memo? This is what it was for me when I was about 7 (no mental illness):

1- Red - Sharpness 2- Blue - Blunt/powerful 3- Yellow - Soft 4- Green 6- Orange 7- Purple 9- Black 11-19- Shiny/Metallic colours

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> My goodness...I am in a similar situation to the lady mentioned in this article, yet arguably more functional, and I haven't even come close to meeting someone who was this tolerant and accepting. Is this guy just very special? I can't figure it out.

I alternate between brutal honesty on my condition (the approach of this woman) and hiding it (what I'm going through now), and I'm not sure if it's better or worse either way.

<comment><USER37> Oh geez, I think I figured it out - I hadn't read the whole article fully.

I'm pretty aware of people and tend to stay away from "savior" types who think they can come in on a white horse and save the day. As well intentioned as they might be, the behavior often seems unhealthy. I don't know enough about this particular situation but the phrase "I'll throw myself in front of a bus for her if she wants it" seems like a typical thing one of them would say.

I often marvel at the dysfunction of seemingly "normal" people going around without any sort of diagnosis, compared to my actual behavior, which is always at least somewhat stigmatized. I hope that for their sake the relationship works out for them, but for my own peace of mind, I push those people away...

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> I recommend to all reading the novella by Machado de Assis called "O alienista" (The Psychiatrist). I couldn't find an english version online, but here is a review: [http://quarterlyconversation.com/on-the-alienist-by- machado-...](http://quarterlyconversation.com/on-the-alienist-by-machado-de- assis)

</comment><comment><USER39> This is an inspiring story to start the new year with. Thank you.

</comment><comment><USER40> Now this is the god of love stories. Thanks for sharing your life with us.

</comment><comment><USER41> Great story...

</comment><comment><USER42> Good luck, OP. Major props for seeing someone with a horrible disease (that terrifies most people, hence the stigma) as a human.

You have a hard road ahead of you. Some advice, from someone with plenty of experience with bipolar disorder (family, romantic relationships, business partners):

* Study Eastern approaches to mental health and spirituality. Buddhism will accept you regardless of whether you have any metaphysical beliefs whatsoever. "You may not believe in God, but God believes in you." (Actually, Buddhism is theologically agnostic and compatible with theism or atheism, but that's an aside.) Don't expect miracles, because it takes decades to get good at this and mentally ill people can't "meditate out of" their illnesses, and but the insights into the mind from meditation and yoga can help both of you.

* You both should avoid all recreational drugs, including alcohol and tobacco. Both of you. Normal people can use drugs like psilocybin, marijuana and LSD with low levels of risk. You can't. Even if you're neurologically normal, your circumstances are abnormal and these drugs are unpredictable even in the best circumstances.

* You have hard travels ahead of you. It's probably good, even if your mental health is totally normal, for you to see a therapist.

* Exercise. It won't always clear everything away, but it will make the situation better.

<comment><USER14> It's not a disease it's a condition. Sorry just a lot of people would find that word offensive.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> $661/mo

Just throwing money at someone with a tenuous grasp on reality is not kindness. More won't help.

<comment><USER28> I ask, gently and politely, what the alternative is? I'm genuinely interested in any ideas and I'm not asking to be confrontational.

I'm mostly asking about people who don't pose a danger to others, but who have several episodes a year where they might require a short in-patient stay in hospital.

<comment><USER44> A type of assisted living maybe?

Someplace where food, shelter and medical care are provided, but not locked or anything - people are free to come and go (including to a job) as they please.

Individual rooms with privacy of course.</comment></comment></comment>


China Bans Free Text Editor Notepad++ – PCMag - <AUTHOR> https://www.pcmag.com/news/china-bans-free-text-editor-notepad-plus-plus <comment><USER2> Likely as their current release is code named Stand with Hong Kong, right there in the downloads page:

[https://notepad-plus-plus.org/downloads/](https://notepad-plus- plus.org/downloads/)

</comment><comment><USER3> Would love to see a BannedinChina.com site similar to made-in-ny, made-in- boston.

Off the top of my head:

\- South Park

\- Notepad++

Would be great If every site had that banned-in-China badge too.

<comment><USER4> And in the future we can build a website called not-bannedinchina.com</comment></comment>


Minimalism in feature implementation presentation from Social App Workshop - <AUTHOR> http://vimeo.com/13770948

<comment><AUTHOR> I would love feedback on content, style, usefulness, etc.</comment>


Rumours are beginning to swirl about an update to the iPhone SE - <AUTHOR> https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/iphone-se-2-apple-latest-update-next-new-release-date-features-x-a8351511.html <comment><USER2> If it has a headphone jack (rumored NOT to be the case), then maybe I'll still have an upgrade path on iOS. Not sure I would willfully move to a device without one.</comment>


Walt Mossberg Quits Facebook - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/18/technology/walt-mossberg-quit-facebook.html <comment><USER2> Have we really gotten to the point where "some dude quit Facebook" is considered news? The fact that the NYT has degenerated to this is disappointing. While there are certainly fair criticisms of Facebook, this trigger friendly news coverage of the company is becoming outrageous and is detracting from any previous viable points.

<comment><USER3> Have we really gotten to the point where Walt Mossberg is considered "some dude" on a technology news website?

<comment><USER4> Having worked in tech my whole life and been a frequent visitor of the site, I have never heard of him.

Regardless, this is still fair criticism. This would be like seeing in the scrolling banner of "Breaking News" on CNN "<Insert Well Known Person in their field> quits job at <Insert large company>"

Belongs in maybe the entertainment or business section, maybe, section, but wouldn't classify it as "tech news"

\----

Having thought about it a little more, I can see a valid case when said person in question, considered monumental enough, leaves a platform, business or field and is reported as news. I guess it's more of a reflection of how little HN'ers (including myself) think of Facebook in the grand scheme of things. It's just a website. What's next, we report that he or she has left Flickr or Reddit? That's kind of what I think GP and myself were getting at. Now if this person was the founder of Facebook, or instrumental in the success of the platform, and then decides to leave, I think absolutely it would be tech news.

<comment><USER5> Your comment surprises me.

Walt had a pretty impressive group of friends:

[https://www.slashgear.com/walt-mossberg-steve-jobs-and- bill-...](https://www.slashgear.com/walt-mossberg-steve-jobs-and-bill-gates- on-technology-at-wsj-all-things-digital-305511/)

<comment><USER4> I am not saying that to belittle the man in any sort of way, or diminish his accomplishments, I am just simply saying it shouldn't be surprising that people haven't heard of some other people, despite how famous others think he or she might be. Pretty sure there is an XKCD for this. I have my categories of people where I would react the same way ("What do you mean you have never heard of Carl Sassenrath!?" as an example).

<comment><USER6> That's hilarious, I have definitely heard of Walt Mossberg but I have never heard of Carl Sassenrath

<comment><USER4> ;) He is the father of multitasking! Definitely an important figure in computing history -- he created the Amiga Computer operating system kernel and also was a pivotal figure in HP's early successes as well. I think he works at Roku now.

Also a reminder how crazy young the field of computer science is -- important figures are still as young as 62! Kind of cool in a way. I hope to get to meet him in person.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> At its core, facebook contains a useful service. It's messaging capabilities are good, and the fact that identities and connections facebook are persistent effectively combats the problem that plagued much of the early internet: constantly changing pseudonyms and emails. I know that it is not necessary, but it is convenient. Additionally, its support for multimedia posts, links, profiles and other adds a nice, rich experience.

Unfortunately, many of the internet's great consumer businesses were built on this premise that advertising will pay for everything. That premise has been a good one for many years now, but, advertisers are getting savvier, and the addressable market is getting addressed pretty well. yes, there is room for growth, but, for many advertisers, that growth is not inside their target markets. While targeted marketing does provide value, I think it is an open question "how targeted is enough targeted?" Meaning that there is not definitive and universal data on where the benefits of less privacy really result in positive outcomes for advertisers. I would guess that in many cases greater accuracy in audience targeting does not result in statistically significant improvements in conversions when balanced against the increased cost of hyper targeted vs semi targeted ads. I am sure this depends heavily on many factors.

The challenge, though, is that facebook has to grow revenue, and, they have pursued this with advertisers by attempting to differentiate their ad products on the basis of hyper targeting. they _do_ have differentiated ability to do this, and it gives them a competitive edge. It means that they spend the majority of their time building products that the liminal areas around personal privacy and ethics.

This puts them in a very difficult spot, because many of their competitors _in the ad business_ are doing the same thing, and trying to get the same level of detail. Google has not launched multiple social networks just for the fun of it...they did it to serve their customers.

The monetization and differentiation that facebook has pursued has pushed them to be on the bleeding edge of selling granular, user-specific data. This seems unlikely to change without an outside force to force a change of behavior in their competitors as well. If you take away the competitive pressure to do something (by making it illegal, for example) then it can avoid further progress in this arms race.

<comment><USER8> > and the fact that identities and connections facebook are persistent > effectively combats the problem that plagued much of the early internet: > constantly changing pseudonyms and emails

This, was a problem?

<comment><USER9> It was. In the 90s, people's email address changed pretty much any time they changed jobs or schools. Their phone numbers changed too, every time they moved. For college students, it often meant multiple complete changes of contact info per year.

The churn is much lower now.

<comment><USER8> Useful maybe for extended friends and family, but (when I used FB) I never even considered it as a viable option for contact beyond that small group. Maybe there's a generation that accepted Facebook this way that I'm not aware of (my kids don't even use it)

Also, there's a large gap between the 90's and when Facebook took hold that it could be considered the "default" online identity for anyone. In that time, free email that lasted years/decades exploded and we were no longer tied to work/school email.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> "I am doing this — after being on Facebook for nearly 12 years — because my own values and the policies and actions of Facebook have diverged to the point where I'm no longer comfortable here," he wrote on Facebook.

<comment><USER11> I'm not totally clear on how his posting on Facebook invalidates his message (assuming that's the argument being made by posting this comment). Facebook is, for better or worse, one of the best ways to get a message out to many people, especially if they are friends or followers. I don't think it's unreasonable to post a final "I'm leaving Facebook" message there so everyone sees it.

<comment><USER12> I think we can talk about this in a non-gotcha sense, so for what it's worth, it is interesting that he felt the best way to reach his audience with this message was the platform he's leaving.

If he had a better way of reaching his audience, why not use that instead?

<comment><USER13> Because this is the best way to reach people who wouldn't see it any other way?

If some subset of your friends/connections are only reachable by Facebook, they are the ones you are going to disconnect with by doing this. Makes sense to me.

<comment><USER12> Well yes, but it's interesting, to me anyway, that Facebook is that platform for him, the platform where he can connect with the biggest number of his audience.

<comment><USER13> It holds even if it isn't the biggest number. It could be a small number, but how else would you reach them?

<comment><USER12> If Facebook is the only way to reach your audience, maybe don't quit it?

It clearly isn't here, so his post would have made more sense outside of Facebook.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> If it's out of principal, I'm surprised it took him this long, but hey, we all have our own breaking point. I especially appreciate the non-hysterical tone of the message, rather than the too-common table-wiping rant.

<comment><USER15> _If it 's out of principal, I'm surprised it took him this long, but hey, we all have our own breaking point_

My personal breaking point is coming.

In the early days, I would post on Facebook a couple of times an hour.

It's become less and less as Facebook became more and more obnoxious, both on the front end and the back end.

Today, I'm down to using Facebook only on weekends. And even then sometimes it's only on one of those days. Facebook has made it easy for me to not care about it anymore.

<comment><USER16> I was an avid Facebook user in the earlier years (2008-2010), and a regular several-times-a-day checker from 2010 until early 2017. I griped often about how it had become "boring", full of random looking stuff interspersed with occasional nuggets I was really interested in. I tried to write a filter to strip out the boring stuff and failed, and it hit me that they were deliberate and optimal in their mixture of crap and good to keep me just within my tolerance level. I turned off notifications on my iDevices in late April and have checked it occasionally whenever I feel like it. I might look at it two or three times a week. I can't quite bring myself to abandon it (because it serves a useful purpose in terms of communication and keeping up with far- flung friends and family) but on the whole it's pretty useless and obnoxious on a daily basis. They overextended themselves by a wide margin. They went a Like too far. ;)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I remember when and after a friend twisted my arm to join, my reluctance in part due to having read how the young(er) Zuckerberg treated his nascent online property and his classmates.

Well, I considered, perhaps people can improve. And, it's not just him anymore, it's an institution that and whose people will establish and enforce more acceptable, accountable norms.

Not so much, I guess. Shame on me, for overriding my intuition.

<comment><USER18> One has to strike a bit of a balance. I wouldn't want them to be as heavy handed as YouTube, by contrast.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Remember when facebook first came out, and we laughed at people with AOL accounts? Now its facebook in aol's old position, laughable.

</comment><comment><USER20> People that work at Facebook here, does it make you uncomfortable about the future, and make you question what you are doing, when things like this happen?

<comment><USER21> No because the issues are not just Facebook issues or technical issues. What is happening involves society as a whole.

And society does not have perfect systems and even known solutions in place to handle this stuff.

There are deep sociological and psychological issues that have been uncovered over the last couple years, that have always existed beneath the surface in society. At a time of hyperconnection, if it wasn't Facebook surfacing them, it would have been YouTube or Twitter or Reddit or whoever else. I am not saying grave errors haven't been made and the future does look scary.

But now that the issues (from fakenews, to terror recruiting, to child abuse, to identity theft etc etc etc) have surfaced in a manner that cannot just be wished away, who else out there has the skills to do something about this stuff?

There is seriously no one out there, besides the Chinese govt with experience handling/understanding data flows at this scale. The expertise being built up in Facebook is going to be fundamental in addressing and eventually finding solutions to these problems. I have no doubt about that. Nobody else is seeing the data we are seeing. It's going to be a hard couple years ahead, with lot of turmoil, but we have a much better idea about what the issues are and therefore solutions are more likely to be found not less.

Read Walt Mossberg's own columns after Obama got elected in 2008 about the promise of social media. That hasn't changed. My mother has cancer and her biggest support system day to day is a group on Facebook. So I know personally what value a well functioning social network can create. How it can contribute to well being. The good stuff happening is not going away.

<comment><USER4> > There are deep sociological and psychological issues that have been > uncovered over the last couple years, that have always existed beneath the > surface in society. At a time of hyperconnection, if it wasn't Facebook > surfacing them, it would have been YouTube or Twitter or Reddit or whoever > else. I am not saying grave errors haven't been made and the future does > look scary.

> But now that the issues (from fakenews, to terror recruiting, to child > abuse, to identity theft etc etc etc) have surfaced in a manner that cannot > just be wished away, who else out there has the skills to do something about > this stuff?

I appreciate you having the courage to reply as an employee there, but but this is exactly the type of Zuckerberg-esque deflection I would have expected from the man himself, or a C-level, but not an everyday tech employee. Have they really brainwashed everyone there to the point that they've bought into the narrative that they have no culpability in any of this? Sure the root issues were there, but you are paid to surface them and exploit them. If in the pre-internet age of television and radio, do you think people let stations get by with that lame excuse of throwing their hands up and saying "well it's deeper societal issues, we are just the transmission mechanism!"

<comment><USER22> Television and radio are broadcast mediums. Facebook is a different medium altogether and not an apt comparison IMO, since all individuals produce the content... it's a sort of "democratized broadcast content".

Facebook can and is taking responsibility over policing this content to some extent but you have to realize the two extremes the whole enterprise has to flirt with: (1) respect individual liberties but allow for the full spectrum of negative human behavior, or (2) try to play god and create a global set of moral conduct and use it to silence and thought-police those that don't comply.

I hope you can see the trickiness here and that there is no utopian panacea to easily solve this issue.

<comment><USER4> That is very fair. I think it would be more stomachable to people if Zuckerberg wasn't making billions off of it in the process.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Nit: the TRS-80 Model 100 didn't come out until 1983. I realize the NYT is just quoting the Verge article where the original error is, but portable computers like that were merely a dream in 1977.

</comment><comment><USER24> gotta rep Tru Thoughts, I'm listening to the latest Unfold [0] and reading here about dear Walt, selector dishes up this gem:

Homeboy Sandman & Edan - #NeverUseTheInternetAgain (Stones Throw)

life imitates art!

[0] [https://www.mixcloud.com/truthoughts/tru-thoughts- presents-u...](https://www.mixcloud.com/truthoughts/tru-thoughts-presents- unfold-161218-with-miink-flowdan-and-sampology/)

</comment><comment><USER25> He probably quit Facebook due to Facebook being constantly defamed in the media - and now the media is reporting on him leaving. It's like that Jake Gyllenhaal movie where he starts off as an ambulance chasing freelance reporter and ends up causing crimes so he can film them.

<comment><USER26> He literally _is_ the media.

What's wrong with the idea that that he observed something, made a decision, and then acted on it? Or is he presumed to have no agency?

<comment><USER25> Maybe you're right - maybe Facebook is doing all this bad stuff and Walt Mossberg happened to notice and decided to follow through.

But I'm skeptical - I think the more traditional news media (aka the folks who write stories and collect facts) tends to view news aggregators as a threat to their business model. I think the idea that Facebook ought to be required to screen whatever news it aggregates for "truthfulness" is absurd and I (sometimes) think that the constant refrain of "Facebook did X Bad Thing" is closer to activism than journalism.

But I could be wrong - I'm not as certain as my first post indicated.

<comment><USER27> I don't think news media outlets are very concerned about social networks anymore; NYT is on literally every app in everyone's pocket, whereas before it was just in the hands of their direct subscribers and sales.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Values?

I understand not using Facebook because it's annoying and filled with ads... but what values is one upholding when they quit Facebook because they show ads? That advertising is evil?

I don't watch TV because it sucks and is filled with ads, in other words it's not worth it. But I don't pretend that is some kind of moral victory.

<comment><USER29> You're conflating privacy violations with advertising.</comment></comment>


Microsoft ASP.NET Core JavaScript Services - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/aspnet/JavaScriptServices <comment><AUTHOR> This was demoed today on the ASP.NET Community Standup at [http://live.asp.net](http://live.asp.net).</comment>


Buck: A high-performance build tool for Android - <AUTHOR> http://buckbuild.com/ <comment><USER2> It will be interesting to see what happens to the Blaze clones, Buck and Pants, now that Google got around to open sourcing the original (ish?, not sure how much they've forked from Blaze) as Bazel.

My naive understanding is that they all share the same basic mental model/approach; has anyone played with all three and can compare/contrast? Would be a great HN submission if so... :-)

</comment><comment><USER3> The Vine team is using Buck and Gradle side by side to take advantage of both (Buck for dev, Gradle to use with standard Android tools) [http://engineering.vine.co/post/117873038742/reducing- build-...](http://engineering.vine.co/post/117873038742/reducing-build-times- by-adopting-buck)

<comment><USER4> Interesting idea, thanks for sharing that post ! Compilation times are seriously affecting my ability to work (and the fact that my startup thinks it is a good idea to provide shitty computers to their engineers does not help at all, my machine freezes during compilations). Unless Google announces something during I/O, we might take the plunge and start converting our buildscripts to Buck.

<comment><USER4> And Google delivered at I/O (or at least promised that a fix is incoming).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Gradle's syntax is too hard to understand for a beginner. If you write 'something', you cannot say if that's a method, field, property, task, closure or whatever. And nobody writes a well explained tutorial for that.

Either Gradle should make the syntax understandable, or adopt some other JS- based build tools or Buck.

<comment><USER6> That's actually Groovy that Gradle uses for its syntax. And it would be nice if Gradle allowed other scripting languages to be plugged, e.g. Clojure, JRuby, Jython, or Nashorn.

<comment><USER5> You said it right, and I would add JavaScript to the list that you suggested. That would make it at least readable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> V-2 _Note: Buck works only on Mac OS X and Linux. Windows is not supported_ \- you lost me there

</comment><comment><USER7> Finally my android builds are fast enough to not lose the focus waiting for the build to finish! Thank you, guys. I wonder if Buck supports Kotlin, or if not - how hard would it be to add it?

</comment><comment><USER8> Awesome man. 2 minutes saved every build. Its like getting a part of your life back.</comment>