The Worst Is Yet To Come: Anonymous Banker Weighs In On The Coming Credit Card Debacle - <AUTHOR> http://executivesuite.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/25/the-worst-is-yet-to-come-anonymous-banker-weighs-in-on-the-coming-credit-card-debacle/?em

<comment><USER2> Profit always comes from risk.

If I can borrow a house and live in it and get bailed out in the ensuing default storm, I win.

If I build my house in an area prone to flooding and can get bailed out, I win.

If I can originate a gazillion loans at a fee and without repercussions for defaults, I win.

If I can run a company into the ground while getting nice perks and a salary without any repercussions, I win.

If I can get elected to high office through lies or distortions or conduct my term in an incompetent or questionable or criminal fashion and leave the mess for the next office holder, I win.

Welcome to capitalism, now increasingly featuring socialized risk.

And with the recent discovery of Too Big To Fail, this form of capitalism just gets better.

</comment><comment><USER3> _A good credit score does not equate to the ability to repay debt._

This seems to be a recurring theme across the world. I tend to be left of many debates on this forum. But this is a strange thing to have settled on: It is the _lenders'_ responsibility to make sure that their customers can afford repayment. _Consumers_ will take as much credit is offered to them. The complaint is rarely about making information available to consumers. It's about making the correct decisions for them.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not blaming media or politicians for taking this line. It seems true. People do not seem to be able to manage their debt. A stable solution will effectively put the decision of how much to borrow in the hands of someone else: Banks, Governments etc. not consumers.

Then this article goes on with the assumption (again, seemingly correct) that consumers are incapable of resisting the banks' marketing. Since many desicions are essentially made at the bank, they make a decision on a high credit line at a high interest rate. He suggests correcting this by making unsolicited direct marketing illegal. Supposedly, consumers would then actually look for a card with a reasonable interest rate instead of accepting whatever is given to them.

<comment><USER4> Substitute the word "adult" for "consumers" in what you say,

" _Adults_ will take as much credit as offered to them." (No, they won't.)

"A stable solution will effectively put the decision of how much to borrow in the hands of someone else: Banks, Governments etc. not _adults_." (Wrong again.)

etc. By contrast, if you replace "consumers" with "children" then it still makes sense.

Really, whatever solution we come up with needs to punish people according to the rules as they stood at the beginning of the game. No new _ex post facto_ rules, please. Banks and ( _some_ ) adults bet on black when the wheel went red. Let them pay.

<comment><USER5> > Substitute the word "adult" for "consumers" in what you say, "Adults will > take as much credit as offered to them." (No, they won't.)

What you are doing is suggesting that being an _Adult_ carries with it certain behaviours such as not spending more money than the adult can afford to repay. However, the word Adult actually means being of a certain age, and perhaps you would like to assume that everyone of that age has that level of maturity and prudence.

I think what you really mean is that adults ought not to o these things, and if they do these things, they are defective in some way, and therefore don't count. This is a little like those drug studies where anyone that dies while taking the experimental drug is tossed out of the study.

So when I say "Martha over there got a $26,000 line of credit even though she is a home-maker with no income and no assets in her name," you say "Martha isn't really an adult, she is a foolish child in a woman's body."

The simple fact is, adults do many things you and I might consider reckless or illogical such as borrow more than they can afford.

As proof of this, I give you George W. Bush.

<comment><USER6> When I was a kid, I was (naturally) a big fan of kid rights. I always thought that kids should be able to vote, enter into contracts, be considered legally a "person", drive if they could reach the pedals and see out the windshield, and decide whether or not they went to school.

My reasoning for this was not that kids were so smart or mature that they could do this responsibly. It was that the vast majority of _adults_ were dumb and immature and can't do this responsibly, and yet we give them all these rights and privileges anyway.

Since becoming a legal adult in 1999, I have seen little to make me believe I was wrong in this assessment.

It's interesting - if you consider children=dependent and adults=independent, modern society has made children of us all. _Everyone_ (except wackos like the Unabomber) is dependent on someone else now - the economy is just too intertwingled to function without other people. Folks leave the nest of their parents to become dependent upon their employers, and then leave that behind to grovel at the trough of investors, and if that doesn't go well, they become slaves of the credit card companies. That seems to be the price we've paid for all our cool new toys.

I, for one, welcome our new Neverland overlords.

<comment><USER7> Not all people are created equal.

There are distinct changes in the brain that happen, as well as changes in hormones that also _may_ support age-based restrictions on activities.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I don't think the lenders were being terribly irrational. Credit-card issuers make their profits from interest and late fees. If a customer racks up a large balance on a card, makes only the minimum payment for years and years, and then defaults, the credit-card issuer will walk away with a net profit, even if it has to write off the principal of the original loan. And usually customers in this situation can be squeezed for quite a while before they default.

One simple way to ameliorate the problem in the future would be to require every credit-card statement to include a warning: "If you do not borrow any more on this card and make only the minimum payment every month, it will take you ____ months to repay your debt completely." Such a requirement was considered when Congress amended the bankruptcy code a few years back, but the bank-industry lobbyists kept it out of the final bill. That should tell you how much the banks wanted their customers to be fiscally responsible.

<comment><USER9> Don't forget a 25% default rate per year can still be cash flow positive when they are charging a 29% interest rate and adding on other fees.

<comment><USER9> Just adding the math for those who might have missed my point.

If 3/4 of people avoid default the rest don't so .75 * 1.28 = .9675 which is less than 1, but the 25% that fail don't all fail on the first day so they are probably going to average ~6 months of payments so .25 * .5 * .29 + .9675 = 1.00375 which is larger than 1. Add in some fee's and whatever principle people payed back before defaulting and you are making money.

Next year some people that made it this year will fail but your adding some people to make up for those that defaulted last year. In the end you need people to average 4 years before defaulting which I suspect is normal.

<comment><USER8> _nods_

And until the card issuer officially writes down the debt, the principal that the borrower owes to the issuer is counted as an asset on the issuer's balance sheet.

<comment><USER9> Yep, but they don't write down all of that debt they first charge insane late fee's and interest for a few months and then sell that highly inflated debt to a collection agency or package up that debt before it defaults and sell that to wall street.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Every once in a while I sense what true panic would be like when I look around my local WalMart and ask myself _"what would happen if all of those credit cards suddenly stopped working?"_

I'm more afraid of this than even the darkest jihad plot from the most extreme nutjob in the middle east. I'm not much for the TEOTWAWKI doomsday scenarios, but if all of the credit cards stopped working? _damn! that'd be tense._

<comment><USER11> I find this very hard to understand.

Credit cards are virtually non-existent where I am (despite a strong marketing push). For cash-less payments or ATM withdrawals everybody just uses debit cards.

If people go to minus with their accounts (it's possible also with debit cards), they feel really bad.

How can society become so dependent on credit cards that you can get seriously scared what would happen if they stopped working?

<comment><USER12> Where do you live?

I'm guessing not the United States. Yes, it has gotten that bad here.

<comment><USER11> I'm in Europe.

I do understand that it is bad in US, but not how it became so.

It probably isn't just because of "credit" aspect of the credit cards.

Even here people buy stuff on credit. Just it is structured in a different way - credit is bound to products, not people. For example it's popular for retailers to offer payments over longer time for more expensive items.

If this stopped to work, nothing much would happen. Few people wouldn't have large screen TVs, or leather sofas, or similar stuff.

Maybe US problem is that credit was too fluid, so that people started to use it to pay for essential things (food, rent, bills, etc)?

<comment><USER10> Yes that's it exactly. I've even known some people to use cash advances on their credit cards to pay their mortgages.

The problem goes much deeper than that though. Many people use credit cards for all purchases and have structured their lives around not having ready access to cash even for necessities like food. The credit cards have become vital time lag buffers for cyclic pay.

The real panic would occur when people realized that they were out of food, have no cash and payday is 3 weeks away.

The bank that issued the credit card has folded, so it no longer works. You are hungry, and there are 200 people standing next to you in the same predicament.

Many _many_ people have no (zero) cash reserve and don't really understand why this might be a _very_ bad thing.

So I am afraid.

<comment><USER11> Wow, I didn't realize it was this bad. People can be very silly.

As the old saying goes: _"civilization is only four meals away from anarchy"_.

<http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article492642.ece>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> A fool and his money are easily parted. True for consumers, true for banks.

<comment><USER14> Or as the great Gordon Gekko once said, "A fool and his money are lucky enough to get together in the first place." :-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Actually, the worst to come is the unfunded pensions (public & private) and social security. That is a debacle foreseen since the 30s.

</comment><comment><USER16> Holy smokes! A $7000/month mortgage on $150K per year? That's a HUGE mortgage payment. (Mine was considered steep at around $2K/month).

</comment><comment><USER17> More interesting to me is the question of what actions can be taken to get on the winning side of this.

If its really so inevitable, what sort of positions can I put on to profit the most from this?

</comment><comment><USER18> Credit for investment purpose is encouraging. But not for consumerism.

<comment><USER19> You'll find that if you dig down into the situation, credit for consumers _is_ credit for investment purchases. That's one of the root problems here; your default doesn't just hurt you, it hurts everyone invested in you. And that cascaded, big time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> these corrections have lasted a historical average of 17 years. The current one started in 2000 so we have another 9 years to go.

<comment><USER21> care to share a source on the 17 year claim?

<comment><USER20> <http://www.zealllc.com/2007/longwave3.htm>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I can't believe that anyone still believes anything they read in the NY Times.

</comment><comment><USER23> Side note:

Everybody telling you that there is a solution for the current world-wide financial crisis is simply a non-expert.

There has never been a situation like the current one in history:

The Big Failing of Communism is already past. The Big Failing of Capitalism is currently happening.

You rich ones should prepare...

P.S. You don't need to believe me, you will simply see it happening soon...

<comment><USER19> The Big Failing of Communism is past.

The Big Failing of "Capitalism That Thought It Was Rich Enough To Afford Some Communism" is happening.

Unfunded pension guarantees? Governments ordering banks to make loans they can't afford? The failure of government corporations like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac due to being disconnected from the market? Massive nationalization of debt in response to the crisis?

Very little of this crisis is "capitalism" in any sense of the term. Government meddling is present in every aspect. Nay, _massive_ government meddling.

<comment><USER23> There are simply too many bad (really bad) things growing exponentially in our current times.

(Nobody wants to hear it, but it will come: we all will be poor within the next few years. That is, the small world-wide percentage of still-rich-ones will all go away...)

So, the whole planet will have a 'reboot', and since a reboot starts from 0, there will be an exponential growth of wealth for everybody!

Now, the above is either foolish or prophetic...</comment></comment></comment>


No pardon for NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, says US government - <AUTHOR> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/no-pardon-for-nsa-whistleblower-edward-snowden-says-us-government-10427525.html

<comment><USER2> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9961527](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9961527)</comment>


Building a phone system? Use Freeswitch - <AUTHOR> http://www.freeswitch.org/node/117 I feel in love with this project ever since I learned about it while looking for Asterisk alternatives.<p>If you are using Asterisk now, or are planning on building any kind of VoIP-related system, I recommend you try Freeswitch, it is a lot simpler to setup, configure and use in general, and has a great online community of users and developers. <comment><USER2> It's a pretty old article. Asterisk has advanced to 1.6 with a more stable modules split, locking, etc. since the time this article was written. (It's still not very good though - IMHO)

If you really want to build a phone system, check if you need a PBX at all. There's a lot of OS software that handles telephony. There's opensips or yxa if you don't need PBX features, only proxy. From PBXes there are asterisk, freeswitch, yate (some people say that headers from grand central indicate google uses it) and some other less popular ones.

This article is mostly about - asterisk crashes, and fs doesn't ;) Don't go for the popular ones - check which features you need first and then decide.

</comment><comment><USER3> Has anyone here used Freeswitch?

Asterisk is impressive that it gives a customisable PBS of sorts, but peel away the hood and it's all duct tape and bubble gum, terrible documentation left in the hands of a run-down unmaintained wiki and extension libraries unmaintained since 2004 full of out of date warnings about which bits are and aren't working in various versions of Asterisk.

It works, but it's not pleasant or fun. Is Freeswitch better?

<comment><AUTHOR> I've been trying and experimenting with Freeswitch for a while now. I first tried it about a year ago and I can say it's come a long way since then, there's been a lot of improvement and everyday new people are coming on board (at least users). The development team is awesome and give great support on the mailing list or through IRC.

At my company we are currently using Asterisk, but are in the process of switching to Freeswitch. Everything seems very well thought out, and in my opinion, it is way simpler than Asterisk. There are many modules for a lot of different functionality, there's support for javascript, lua, perl, java, C, C#, ruby, python, php, a skype gateway, and many more.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I have used Asterisk for many systems and even modified some of the C code in it. I would not say it is as horrible as it is portrayed here.

I started to set up a FreeSWITCH system, figuring if it was a clean redesign I might as well get on board now. Then I discovered it used XML in config files, which made me question the developers credentials and I never looked at it again.

<comment><AUTHOR> The XML thing has been questioned a lot, but once you understand how it works, you'll see it's no trouble or shortcoming at all. Usually you barely have to touch the XML config files, you can do everything with scripts in the language of your choice, or through the events socket, much like AGI/AMI in Asterisk, but a lot better.</comment></comment>


Apple Kills 'GrayKey' iPhone Passcode Hack - <AUTHOR> https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2018/10/24/apple-just-killed-the-graykey-iphone-passcode-hack/ <comment><USER2> >Police officer Captain John Sherwin of the Rochester Police Department in Minnesota said of the claim iOS 12 was preventing GrayKey from unlocking iPhones: "That's a fairly accurate assessment as to what we have experienced.

>"Give it time and I am sure a 'workaround' will be developed ... and then the cycle will repeat. Someone is always building a better mousetrap, whether it's Apple or someone trying to defeat device security."</comment>


Programmer Done Syndrome - <AUTHOR> http://www.artlogic.com/blog/2009/12/programmer-done-syndrome.php

<comment><USER2> Also see "The different kinds of done" by Andrew Burke at Shindigital: <http://www.shindigital.com/blogpost/37></comment>


A Contradiction at the Heart of the U.S. Economy - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/22/upshot/is-the-economic-outlook-great-or-lousy-making-sense-of-markets-mixed-messages.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&abt=0002&abg=0

<comment><USER2> No real contradiction, the middle is in recession, while the economy at the very top and at the very bottom is in growth.

Jobs are being created, but a hell of a lot of them are the jobs that were still being done on behalf of US companies but were shipped overseas due to it being cheaper.

These jobs are not so much being created but are just being moved back now that other economies have grown, which should be good for the poorer sections of the US.

However the middle is being squeezed so you have well qualified people competing with the less qualified for the lower paid positions that would not previously have required many qualifications.

I strongly suspect (though given I am making a prediction about economics, full caveats apply) that the real story of the economy isn't so much that it is going into a period of recession or growth, it is more that it is becoming structurally unstable.

Not everything is a simple rise or fall in temperature. Some things are phase changes.

edit - Another thing to consider is that the banks are currently sitting on massive reserves that are maybe six times larger than normal. As soon as the interest rate is allowed to tick upward, the banks will plough that money into things, but while rates are low they can make more money by gambling. However, when that interest rate ticks upward, you will suddenly see a lot of land slip into negative-equity. This will temporarily destroy much of the house sales market while at the same time putting a lot of land going cheap at auction, meaning that the banks will put that money into new-build as that will bring more profit, so there should be a massive construction boom, while those in the middle who rely on being property owners will see their wealth diluted further. Maybe.</comment>


Apple Reveals Its Suppliers for First Time  - <AUTHOR> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204409004577158764211274708.html?ru=yahoo&mod=yahoo_hs <comment><USER2> What's possibly even more impressive is that they are the first technology company to join the Fair Labor Association, opening them up to independent outside audits.[1]

Except from the supplier report:

"Apple recently became the first technology company accepted by the Fair Labor Association (FLA), and we look forward to working with them. While we have worked with third-party auditors for several years, Apple will also open its supply chain to the FLA's independent auditing team, who will measure our suppliers' performance against the FLA's Workplace Code of Conduct and the results will appear on their website. It's a level of transparency and independent oversight that is unmatched in our industry."[2]

[1]: [http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/apple-joins-fair- lab...](http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/apple-joins-fair-labor- association-137285303.html) [2] [http://images.apple.com/supplierresponsibility/pdf/Apple_SR_...](http://images.apple.com/supplierresponsibility/pdf/Apple_SR_2012_Progress_Report.pdf) (page 3)

</comment><comment><USER3> Also see Apple's mini-site about this: <http://www.apple.com/supplierresponsibility/> (which has apparently been around for about a year[1]).

I'm very pleasantly surprised by this news. This is way more transparent than I'm used to seeing Apple being, especially since the report itself doesn't paint an entirely rosy picture about the current situation.

[1]: [http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/02/14/apple- supplier-r...](http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/02/14/apple-supplier- responsibility-report)</comment>


Who are some quality law firms who have deferred payment plans? - <AUTHOR>

<comment><USER2> Orrick is pretty badass. They work with Facebook, Pandora, Meebo, etc.

<http://www.orrick.com/practices/corporate/emergingCompanies/index.asp>

</comment><comment><USER3> Depends if you want a single partner from incorporation to IPO, or if you just need some one-off legal advice while mucking around. I had a really good experience working with Carr & Ferrell on IP. Most of the bigger firms won't work with you if all you want is a proofread on some provisional patents. They were recommended to me by someone high up at Wilson Sonsini, and they did a great job.

</comment><comment><USER4> Wilson Sonsini has one. At least they did last fall. They gave me a package deal on incorporation and deferred payment for 6 months. wsgr.com

</comment><comment><USER5> Gundersen-Dettmer has one.</comment>


Show HN: My experimental take on a decentralized ledger - <AUTHOR> http://github.com/open-core/network <comment><USER2> Needs a brief documentation "how it works" or something... I really don't understand the concept, I'm very familiar with bitcoin and somewhat familiar with ripple/stellar. How is the ledger maintained? How do we form the consensus on the valid ledger? What are the incentives for running nodes? etc.

</comment><comment><USER3> How would this prevent a flood attack ? What I mean is in Bitcoin and presumably Stellar, you need coins to create transactions. There is therefore a cost to spamming the system.

<comment><AUTHOR> It doesn't prevent a flood attack. The challenge in this approach does not lie in "preventing it" but in "dealing with it".

<comment><USER4> Do you have some ideas on how to deal with it?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It's interesting that it says that "Warning: Requires Postgres 9.5. You WILL lose sync if you run against an earlier version. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED."

Which PostgreSQL features new in 9.5 are being used that cause that? Or are earlier versions somehow buggy?

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm using upserts... The reason I'm using upserts is basically just lazyness because I didn't feel like refactoring the source code to work around requiring upserts. Also, I'm not very confident in C++ so I did not want to take on that task.

<comment><USER6> You can fix this with basic SQL

IF record EXISTS then UPDATE else INSERT

<comment><USER7> No. Conccurrency makes it way harder than that.

<comment><USER5> In PostgreSQL, you can set the SERIALIZABLE isolation level for the whole database, put a retry loop around all database transactions and completely stop worrying about concurrency issues.

I think all database applications should be written like this at least until performance starts being an issue.

<comment><USER7> Entirely depends on the the type of workload / application architecture. In some cases the rollback ratios will be massive (I've seen 70%). In other cases adding such a retry loop is unattractive because the latency jitter. Or retaining all involved data for a retry is unattrictive.

Yet Another problem is that you need to enforce all sessions potentially involved in a data race need to use serializable; that can be easy or hard, depending on the scenario.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > Transactions are FREE (the fee is always zero)

How would you deal with DDoS attacks? Taking down a ledger like this could be easy...

<comment><USER9> Cloudflare doesn't have to charge a fee for every http request, although transaction fees do seem like the elegant solution.

<comment><USER10> Cloudflare is a massive, well-funded, centralized entity.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> How is it protected from Sybil attacks on consensus algo? The algo description is definitely needed.

</comment><comment><USER12> Is there any interesting lecture that got you this far or did you study source code?

</comment><comment><USER13> Check out [https://morph.is/v0.8/](https://morph.is/v0.8/) if you haven't seen it, decentralized encrypted file storage and email, exciting stuff.

<comment><USER14> > Distributed Spam Proof Mail! Uncensorable, inherently spam proof and > transparently encrypted and sender authenticated messaging! Secure enough > for Edward Snowden! Easy and fool-proof enough for a child!

43 exclamation points on the front page. He has the hype cranked up pretty high. Still, it's nice to see all of these P2P efforts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Cool. I really liked the idea of Stellar, but I just cant get over the premined coin distribution. Nice to have a truly decentralized alternative!

<comment><USER16> What do you like about Stellar? It's not decentralized at all. Being premined is just the icing on the cake.

<comment><USER15> Stellar is indeed decentralized but not distributed [1]. What I like about Stellar is the concept of gateways and trust. It adds a whole new dimension for transactions.

[1] [http://web.cs.ucla.edu/classes/cs217/Baran64.pdf](http://web.cs.ucla.edu/classes/cs217/Baran64.pdf)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Basically, `Bitcoin - Politics`. A nice idea.

<comment><USER18> It's also `Bitcoin - all_the_hard_problems_bitcoin_solves`. Still nice but you can't compare it with Bitcoin. This is more the sort of service banks could use to track loans.</comment></comment>


SolarPHP 1.0.0 Stable Released - <AUTHOR> http://solarphp.com/blog/read/66-solar-100-stable-released

<comment><USER2> Hrm. Mild naming collision with Solr. I doubt they'd bother renaming the project at this point though.

<comment><AUTHOR> Actually, that's a bit of a sore spot with Solar's creator. Solar was announced before Solr was, but Solr wouldn't rename their project. :-/</comment></comment>


34 Social Sites to Promote and Sell Your Products On - <AUTHOR> http://openastorenow.com/article/34-social-sites-promote-and-sell-your-products

<comment><AUTHOR> Let me know if I missed any sites and I'll be sure to add them.</comment>


Pink Formica Cafe by Child Studio - <AUTHOR> https://designzine.net/interior/pink-formica-cafe-by-child-studio/ <comment><USER2> Those newspapers hung from the wall look to be too large to be read comfortably on those round tables.</comment>


Ask HN: field in Computer Science least explored? - <AUTHOR>

What are some topics in Computer Science least known to us? and why? <comment><USER2> There are many open problems in Computational Complexity Theory.

[https://complexityzoo.uwaterloo.ca/Complexity_Zoo:P](https://complexityzoo.uwaterloo.ca/Complexity_Zoo:P)

It is a difficult subject matter: instead of proving something about a specific program, you must prove results about all possible programs that achieve a task given some set of constraints.

IMHO, it is amazing that _any_ results (e.g. [1]) are known at all in that field given how little structure they must work with...

Think of this field as the particle physics of CS---not very useful in the real world, but still very cool to learn about.

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

</comment><comment><USER3> NLP, it's truly poised for a renaissance.

</comment><comment><USER4> Least known? I think we know the topics even if we aren't good at them.

There are lots of medical problems and brain problems and large scale coordination problems we know about but haven't solved or reduced to solvability yet.</comment>


Top compounds for further research following CORD-19 Network Analysis - <AUTHOR> https://www.causaly.com/blog/covid19-250-treatments-network-analysis-cord19-5e9cafa69e8753001b5ac78d <comment><USER2> Great analysis

</comment><comment><USER3> That is some high quality work.

</comment><comment><USER4> This is PHENOMENAL work.

<comment><USER5> It is, but it is missing an important dimension. It counts the number of vectors the compound may be useful against, but not the efficacy of the compound on each vector. So there might be 66 targets for a given compound, but they may be weak effects across the spectrum.

But yes, very useful.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Javascript try/catch, where should I be using it? - <AUTHOR>

What are some good examples of where to use try/catches in javascript? <comment><USER2> 1\. Validate some JSON from a server. Throw "Bad network" or "bad json" 2\. Validate user input and all things related..</comment>


Could You Cut the Cable or Satellite Cord?  - <AUTHOR> http://www.markevanstech.com/2010/11/25/could-you-cut-the-cable-or-satellite-cord/ <comment><USER2> I haven't had pay-for television in almost 4 years now. Hulu + Netflix + bunny ears for OTA TV satisfy all my TV-watching needs.

I don't miss it. Almost all of my TV watching happens on a secondary monitor while I work, anyhow; dedicating time to just watching TV feels terribly unproductive.

<comment><USER3> I've been without TV for about 5 years now after noticing a creeping & growing revulsion for what I saw on it.

Even if I'm not more productive, I'm less desensitized without one.

<comment><USER2> No argument there. The vast, vast majority of TV content is abysmally bad. I like that I get to just pick what I want to watch and don't have to mess with the rest.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> If I could get NFL Sunday Ticket and fine a box/plan that had everything else I needed...yes.

Right now, Apple TV is simply more expensive (the content, not the device) than it's worth, and Hulu+ is missing some good stuff.

I find it odd that the music industry is moving towards single monthly and unlimited watching, whereas the TV industry seems to be moving in the other direction.

</comment><comment><USER5> Watching TV mostly makes me angry. Idiots selling idiotic things to idiots. In the past month, at least three times I started yelling at the TV and left the room, only to realize that I was being melodramatic.

</comment><comment><USER6> Made that break almost ten years ago, never miss it.

Now I'm trying to move past optical media, I hate it.

</comment><comment><USER7> Just did it. Bought an HD antenna, got an HD tivo. Cut DirectTV. Not looking back.</comment>


Apple Is Now Dead To Me - <AUTHOR> http://mikecanex.wordpress.com/2011/02/15/apple-is-now-dead-to-me/

<comment><USER2> Based on other content on this site, it sounds as though Apple was already dead to this author.

</comment><comment><USER3> Talk about sour grapes. Seriously. Where is the content in this article?

</comment><comment><USER4> I suppose taken to the extreme, someone could just sell a 'myAppStore' app in the Apple AppStore, and then use that to sell Apps without giving apple anything. Obviously that wouldn't do. Similar principle with the iBooks store.

<comment><USER5> If I recall correctly, you can't even pull that sort of a stunt on Android, now.

<comment><USER6> Correct. They even pulled a Kongregate app because it looked too similar to an app store.

Of course, this being Android, it's easy to just install it from an apk.

<comment><USER7> Ironically, there are reports that Amazon plans to release a "curated" Android marketplace app which will have to be installed from an apk, although they're trying to do an end-run by getting the manufacturers and carriers to do the installing for them.

Between their marketplace and this 30%, Amazon may be preparing to go "all-in" on Android...

<comment><USER8> Given that installing from an APK is as easy as "Here's a download link, click it on your phone, then select the APK from your downloads list", I don't see that there will be much of a barrier to entry there. Even without carrier support it won't be hard to get up and running.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I don't see Amazon offering Apple's ebooks on the kindle.

<comment><USER10> That has more to do with Apple. There is nothing stopping you from putting other .txt and .mobi files (as an example) on your Kindle.

<comment><USER11> Indeed; my Kindle has no books from Amazon on it; it's all .mobi and .txt files I've loaded in myself. That's what makes it such a great device: I get to choose what I load onto it.

<comment><USER12> It really sucks that I can't put .mobi and .txt files on my iPad. Damn you, Apple!

<comment><USER6> Non-iPad owner, so forgive me if I missed the joke, but can you seriously not do that on the iPad/iPhone? Weird. I use my Droid as a USB drive all the time.

<comment><USER12> Of course you can do that on an iPad.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> That's very different from what the press release said this morning on App Store [<http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/02/15appstore.html>]:

 _"Our philosophy is simple—when Apple brings a new subscriber to the app, Apple earns a 30 percent share; when the publisher brings an existing or new subscriber to the app, the publisher keeps 100 percent and Apple earns nothing," said Steve Jobs, Apple's CEO._

In other words, for Kindle, if a new subscriber registered through channels other than the Kindle iOS App, then Apple does not take a cut.

<comment><USER14> It's not where the customer registers, it's where the sale occurs.

A publisher must make all content that's available elsewhere also available in the app, and at the same price.

If the customer buys in the app, the transaction settles to the iTunes account and Apple takes 30% off the top.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I bought an iPad thinking I'd be able to access my Kindle books from it. In fact, I bought more books on the Kindle system specifically because I could read and sync them across the most number of devices. I'm not saying Apple isn't within their rights to make this move, it just really pisses me off. This is the kind of crap I'd expect from Verizon, not Apple.

</comment><comment><USER16> What's the argument here? That Apple isn't entitled to a slice of revenue generated on its own platform?

I missed the part where the author explained why this is a reasonable stance to take...

<comment><USER17> I think you have this backwards. Apple doesn't provide distribution for Amazon Kindle. This is like if you bought an HP laptop and charging 30% for each purchase you make with an application simply because the content falls within a certain category. Nothing is stopping Apple from declaring tweets news feeds and charging per transmission. It's not likely to happen but they can do it at any point. This just illustrates the danger of doing business on a closed platform with absolute control. They are looking more and more like Microsoft everyday. As developers or businessmen you would be a fool to support Apple.

<comment><USER18> It's more like you bought a ticket to an event hosted by Apple and while there, Amazon set up a free booth giving away carry bags.

Every time you buy something from Amazon (at the event) to put in the carry bag, Apple takes 30% of the purchase price whilst screeching "WE ALLOWED YOU TO GIVE AWAY THOSE BAGS!"

So, you've paid money for a platform. Amazon showed up on that platform and gave away something for free, taking a freely available booth to do so. THEN they used that to encourage you to buy things from them. And Apple went nuts and demanded they get 30%, even though you paid for entry and they were giving booths away for free.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Apple should be careful about creating a MAP in a roundabout way.

<http://elr.lls.edu/issues/v21-issue3/elahi.pdf>

</comment><comment><USER20> Apple provides a content distribution platform connected to a network of millions of devices, of course they're going to take a cut of revenue generated on their network

<comment><USER21> That's all very fair, but I think what people are taking exception to is Apple's attempts to prevent their customers from accessing other content distribution platforms where Apple doesn't get a cut.

<comment><USER20> Why should they not be allowed to generate revenue from someone who is using all of their technology and network distribution work to make their own money?

<comment><USER22> I think you are missing the point here, as an example, Amazon cannot sell ebooks in its own site if it's cheaper than the version in app store, if so they remove it from app store. Apple is trying to control pricing outside of its distribution network. That's what I understand from the whole story.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: What kind of Pebble apps would you guys be interested in? - <AUTHOR>

I've recently gotten into developing for the Pebble Smartwatch, and I'm interested in what type of apps people are interested in seeing...<p>Thoughts? <comment><USER2> Something better than MorpheuZ. I currently use it because it's the best solution out there, but damn, it's hard to use. Keeps crashing

</comment><comment><USER3> I don't have a smartwatch yet, but one thing that would really make me consider getting one would be a navigation-centered app. I'm thinking of one that would be capable of displaying both maps and directions in a clear manner. The few apps I've seen so far for that purpose have been clunky looking and don't inspire confidence.

</comment><comment><USER4> I would love something to reply to WhatsApp or other messages with a prepackaged response, something like "I'm driving", "In a meeting", it could be customizable from the phone</comment>


Show HN: Beautify-with-words unminifies JS with unique words for variable names - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/zertosh/beautify-with-words

<comment><USER2> While it's a good idea, I feel like it should rename with real words, or not rename at all. From the example:

      function(bedad, latay, vublu) {
                if (!adag(this, "on", bedad, [ latay, vublu ]) || !latay) return this;
                this._events || (this._events = {});
                var cyem = this._events[bedad] || (this._events[bedad] = []);

bedad, latay and vublu don't make it much easier to remember which variable is which than just using a,b,c

<comment><USER3> I forked the original to address this [1]. Here's a sample:

        var strategy = moduleInterfaceFactory.Events = {
            on: function(strategyFacade, strategyFactoryDecorator, interfaceFacade) {
                if (!flyweight(this, "on", strategyFacade, [ strategyFactoryDecorator, interfaceFacade ]) || !strategyFactoryDecorator) return this;
                this._events || (this._events = {});
                var strategyPattern = this._events[strategyFacade] || (this._events[strategyFacade] = []);
                strategyPattern.push({
                    callback: strategyFactoryDecorator,
                    context: interfaceFacade,
                    ctx: interfaceFacade || this
                });
                return this;
            }

[1] [https://github.com/ANorwell/beautify-with- words](https://github.com/ANorwell/beautify-with-words)

<comment><USER4> While I find this humorous (which I assume was the goal), I think using common development terminology could be worse than complete jibberish since you start to apply irrelevant meaning when reading the beautified code.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I really like the idea behind this. Anyone have any experience using something similar?

My specific question would be whether using longer gibberish variable names is any more helpful than using short names. I don't know if 'quinis' is better than 'h' or 'tenmiey' is better than 'a'? I guess at the very least it should provide a much easier find and replace once you figure out what the variable should actually be named.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm the author. Search-and-replace is the main problem this solves. Another neat effect is that if you use something like Sublime Text, you can highlight a word (variable), and see all the occurrences. Makes it much easier to figure out what unminifed code is doing without all the collisions from "h" for example.

<comment><USER5> Makes sense. I would add that tip to the readme. I don't think it will be immediately obvious to people, so bringing attention to the ability to find and replace will make the renaming a more attractive feature.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> In some cases it should be able to figure out a good name for the variables. eg (var hello = 0; hello < 10; hello++) {} hello would be better named i.

</comment><comment><USER7> Feature suggestion: An optional variable prefix/suffix to make them stand out, making it easier to replace variable names as you read through the code and see what you've chosen and what was auto-generated.

Alternatively, an option to pass in a partial mapping for variable names you've already figured out.

</comment><comment><USER8> Very cool. Nice work.

I think it would be even cooler as a Firefox extension -- open up a .min.js file in one tab, hit your button, and get a new tab with the beautified js. I don't know anything about FF extensions, but since this is written in JS in the first place, it seems doable.

(Or alternatively, it would also be cool as a standalone site, just paste the URL or uglified JavaScript in a box, and get the pretty version.)

<comment><USER9> I think the way to go would be to create a standalone site and then have a bookmarklet that opens the existing page on that site.

Edit: If you want to use your own bookmarklet, feel free to start off with this: void(open("[http://beautifywithwords.com?url="](http://beautifywithwords.com?url=") \+ location,'_self',''))

Edit2: [http://jsbeautifier.org/](http://jsbeautifier.org/) has some similarities to this (and integrates with various browsers, editors, etc.) but I don't think it replaces variable names. Perhaps it would make sense to integrate your code into it as an extra feature?

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I've always wondered what coding is like for those who don't speak english, or only speak a little. I imagine it's something like working with code beatified by this tool.

Almost every codebase is filled with english verbs and nouns. They are one of the primary tools for making source code readable by humans, not just machines.

Very cool tool.

<comment><USER11> I'm not a native English speaker, and I've actually started programming way before I've become fluent in English.

It wasn't that difficult. I remember not knowing how things would translate to my own language, but from the code, I'd know what they meant.

Now that I think back, my first steps in English were probably made in programming and cartoons; before my mum realised I enjoy languages and signed me up for advanced lessons.

So, it's nothing weird. I'd like to think programmers have a higher-than- average IQ, which makes understanding and learning easier. Maybe I'm just biased! :-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Wow, this is amazing. Wanted something like this for so long. Forked to support passing in a list of pre-canned words to use: [https://github.com/rpetrich/beautify-with- words](https://github.com/rpetrich/beautify-with-words)

</comment><comment><USER13> Neat. More useful for projects without unminified sources, like Google Analytics.

Here's the output for ga.js: [https://gist.github.com/yahelc/00299f2e4a3c07cafa1a](https://gist.github.com/yahelc/00299f2e4a3c07cafa1a)

<comment><AUTHOR> You read my mind. That was one of the sources I was going through that motived me to make this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Often with AngularJS, after minification, you find you've not properly injected a service or something and looking for a missing 'a' is near impossible. This would be really useful to hunting that down. Would make a great post-min debug Grunt module.

<comment><USER15> You might find ngmin[1] helpful for that. Then you can use the shorter injection syntax and have it expanded via a compilation step. Since you mentioned Grunt, you'd probably want to just use grunt-ngmin[2].

[1] [https://github.com/btford/ngmin](https://github.com/btford/ngmin)

[2] [https://github.com/btford/grunt-ngmin](https://github.com/btford/grunt- ngmin)

<comment><USER14> How I never found that.. thanks! That is going to save us a world of pain in debugging.

<comment><USER15> Glad to help!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> All JS on the web is open-source even if you don't want this :).

</comment><comment><USER17> The variable names remind me of the names in an early RPG video game.</comment>


Grab a Shitty Rod and Start Fishing - <AUTHOR> https://www.dickiebush.com/articles/fishing <comment><USER2> See also: analysis paralysis. The first hurdle a new programmer has to get over is choosing a programming language to learn - but everyone will give you different answers. And even after picking one, some spend significant mental resources worrying that they chose the wrong one.</comment>


Master Card, Cisco, and Scotiabank Join the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance - 52-6F-62 https://entethalliance.org/enterprise-ethereum-alliance-becomes-worlds-largest-open-source-blockchain-initiative/ <comment><AUTHOR> How pointless.

The whole point of Bitcoin was to have uncensorable, decentralized asset that can be used to exchange value without any trust etc.

That is the only reason we endure this utterly shitty and inefficient blockchain thing, and we exchange money for this otherwise pointless online points.

I have no problem with ETH as cryptocurrency / smart contract platform. But this whole Enterprise Ethereum Alliance is just one big BS. Etherum community is trying to pump ETH value by associating with brand names, and corporations are trying to pump their stock value by presenting themselves as innovative. BS - empty words and marketing gimmicks. Just read through that page.

Just watch Blockchain vs. Bullshit: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMEOKDVXlUo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMEOKDVXlUo)

<comment><USER2> Enterprise Ethereum has almost nothing to do with Ethereum the public blockchain, or crypto-currency. Ethereum based blockchains (that is based on Ethereum the software, _not_ the canonical global instance of that software) provide an ability to create an auditable log of events.

Those events might be "who accessed my credit card account and when" or "who requested access to my health records and when". These chains can exist entirely independently of of the global "Ethereum" chain, and can operate entirely without the concept of a crypto-currency (aside from using it as a scheduling mechanism within your blockchain cluster).

People need to stop getting hung up the cryptocurrency aspect of blockchains.

<comment><USER3> > Ethereum based blockchains provide an ability to create an auditable log of > events

If all they want is a log of events, why not use a tried and true database whose performance is more well understood? MySQL, Cassandra, whatever.

You can add the ability to audit the tables by signing data updates with public key crypto.

<comment><USER2> By using a blockchain, you enable auditing organizations to participate in the authentication process. For instance, I might publish a private message to the blockchain that is an authentication request to resource X. A smart contract would then act on that authentication request, and publish either an ACCEPT or REJECT message. By bringing auditing organizations into the blockchain, every authentication attempt is sent to the auditing organization before access is granted.

The key is that every transaction must be made known to the auditors before it is acted on. By logging to a traditional db, you're at the mercy of the party responsible for sharing out those logs.

<comment><USER3> Here is your schema:

DATA | auditor_sig

\</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>

Now:

a) Assume 3 components: client, server, auditorService

b) How to write to server:

      1- client sends DATA to auditorService

      2- auditorService signs DATA and returns S(DATA)

      3- client writes (DATA, S(DATA)) to server

c) How to read:

      1- client reads (DATA, S(DATA)) from server

      2- client verifies S(DATA)

      3.1- valid? -> continue

      3.2- invalid? -> delete DATA from server

There are ways you can configure this to make either of these services have more weight (I made the server weak in this setup), and you can also give read access to everyone if you want it to be public (and only a subset of clients get write access). You don't need a blockchain.

</comment><comment><USER4> At this time, there are 78 comments to this post, none of them addressing technical concerns. Quite unusual for HN.

I've devoted my life to cryptocurrency since 2011 and still question whether or not this system even makes sense. It seems too expensive with the technology we have today. Once privacy, such as zk-SNARK, is added, it becomes unreasonable.

Perhaps this is what a bubble looks like. I wasn't there for the dotcom boom. Loss of critical thinking.

<comment><USER5> Really intrigued by your comment!

Could you elaborate on what drives the high cost? Or what would need to change for this to viable?

<comment><USER3> Decentralized validation and ordering of transactions is expensive. In Bitcoin, it requires:

1\. Miners to validate 1MB of transactions every 10 minutes

2\. Users to be able to confirm that the entire chain of transactions was properly validated by the miners

Some ways to make #1 more efficient make #2 more difficult, so they are somewhat at odds with each other. For now, we're looking at a write throughput of between 1tps to 20tps for Bitcoin and Ethereum.

If you don't care about #2, then you don't need the mining model anymore, or even a blockchain. You can just put all your transactions in MySQL, Cassandra, R3 Corda or whatever and you can subsequently crank up your transaction throughput. You can get >10,000tps with MySQL.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Always surprises me a bit because it seems to me like those large corporate players don't necessarily need all the features offered by Ethereum (or Bitcoin), especially proof-of-work, since there's enough non-adversarial cooperation between them that a simple distributed ledger with traditional (efficient) consensus mechanisms would suffice for most of their applications. They wouldn't have to deal with the drawbacks of Ethereum's very strict threat model.

I'm curious what applications they have in mind, or if they maybe just participate to get in on the hype and explore their options.

<comment><USER7> Those companies are using Ethereum without PoW in their private networks. They plug in a different consensus model.

<comment><USER8> I don't understand what you mean by this. To my understanding, the companies' transactions/data are either on the Ethereum blockchain or not. Do you mean that they are using some other type of distributed ledger algorithm unconnected to Ethereum?

<comment><USER9> You can use the Ethereum project code to speed up and reduce the cost of development, since a lot of man-hours has gone into R&D by the Ethereum foundation (you fork the codebase). Ethereum is open source, anyone can do this. EEA members will likely run private, permissioned blockchains, likely using proof of stake or some other energy efficient consensus mechanism.

When you use a private blockchain, I like to think of it as being a bit like using a corporate intranet vs the public internet. It's disconnected, but it's possible at some point that data will flow across the public Ethereum blockchain if it's in the members' interest.

For example, imagine a private, permissioned blockchain using proof of stake for the insurance industry[1]. Since it's permissioned, only the major players get invites, and since they know each other, trust is higher than on a public blockchain. Each player has a certain number of shares/tokens, used to validate transactions. They use this to streamline their business. At some point (purely speculative on my part) they may wish to share information with some other entity who is not a part of their private blockchain. It's possible that data from the private blockchain could pass along the public Ethereum blockchain at this point, perhaps to an external auditor, regulator, other financial institution, etc.

[1] There is a proof of concept in this vein- [http://www.swissre.com/reinsurance/insurers_and_reinsurers_l...](http://www.swissre.com/reinsurance/insurers_and_reinsurers_launch_blockchain_initiative.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> It seems like Ethereum is getting a lot more industry support than Bitcoin ever did.

If Ethereum continues it looks like it could kill off Bitcon, the looming possibility of a hard fork might be contributing make that happen really soon.

<comment><USER11> Is this industry support, or more collaborative research project like R3?

I have talked to some bank representatives, and while they have been testing ethereum technology, they do it on their private chains on their private networks. No word of production use. In general banks seem to budget a lot of funds towards various r&d activity, on which majority of stuff never ends up anywhere.

<comment> 52-6F-62 It's industry support for this particular implementation of blockchain tech, which seems to have a validating effect on the larger community surrounding it.

There have been talks/speculation about interaction between the public chain and private chains in an analog to internet/intranet relationships -- that is, being of a common protocol.

<comment><USER11> The question is, do they use or plan to use this technology in production? I very much doubt that, at least anytime soon. However great opportunity to pump the price :)

<comment> 52-6F-62 I suppose it depends on whether or not their work with other members of the EEA produces anything viable. If not, c'est la vie. It's a step in that direction, though.

I think it's definitely a plus to have industry-experienced groups participating in looking into whether or not the tech is worthwhile. (It's kind of the Jobs-mind to the Wozniaks who dominate the space presently)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Where are the press releases from Master Card, Cisco, and Scotiabank about this? Press releases of "big company partners with little company", coming from the little company, are always suspicious. It may just mean "they signed up for our mailing list".

<comment><USER13> Seems like they're doing a separate press release.

[1] [https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/6o2o3d/comment/dk...](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/6o2o3d/comment/dke47x0)

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> > The EEA describes itself as a standards group designed to help enterprises > build their own interoperable technology, mostly using private versions of > the ethereum blockchain.

Ether price soaring right now, but isn't Master Card's bussiness direct competition of the public Ethereum blockchain as a payment system?

<comment><USER15> I have always thought that but it just crossed my mind that credit cards are basically just terrible loans. You could still give out loans in cryptocurrencies. Maybe Master Card could just switch if a particular crypto currency gained wide adoption. They could start issuing new cards with some sort of technology that allowed for cryptocurrency transactions at businesses. Or maybe they can use existing card tech, I really don't know anything about that.

<comment><USER16> What makes them terrible loans?

Also, much of the benefit of credit cards is from the fraud protection and mediation that companies provide -- it's not so much that they're loaning me $X00, but that they're covering the transaction details against fraudulent use and provide a dispute mechanism if don't feel the merchant has lived up to their offer post payment.

I find it much more likely that MC is trying to be the MC of cryptocurrencies -- eg, by packaging up a USB dongle that automates transactions using "secure" means, which they then insure against abuse. From that perspective, ETH makes a reasonable platform.

<comment><USER17> I think he just meant because it's a 20%+ loan typically. But really a person shouldn't be holding a balance on a credit card.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Based on this, it seems to me that financial corporations didn't want to take the risk of decentralized crypto-currencies making them obsolete, so they decided to create their own crypto-currency, one they can control...

<comment><USER19> Regardless of your opinions about Ethereum, its origins were decidedly non- corporate.

<comment><USER20> According to Wikipedia it was started as, and at, a Swiss corporation, followed by raising a crowd investment.

So it was a funded corporation before it was a cryptocurrency.

<comment><USER21> however that swiss corporation is Ethereum Switzerland GmbH which kinda exists for the sole purpose of making Ethereum

<comment><USER22> It exists for the sole purpose of benefiting its investors and whoever may be behind any investment fronts used to push that currency. I wonder who they might be?

<comment><USER23> The Ethereum crowd sale participants?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> 52-6F-62 I heard the head of R&D (of Scotiabank) talk at a conference a little over a month ago and at the time he made it seem like Scotiabank had experimented with existing cryptocurrencies and blockchain tech and were disatisfied and thought it would be some time before the technology was approachable for their bank. I guess they were just playing coy.

<comment><USER24> Or, that statement is true, but the genuinely want to explore blockchain technology and thought joining the EEA would be the best way to do that.

<comment> 52-6F-62 Quite possible. They've definitely obfuscated their hand. Their R&D department is respectable, I have to say, so I'm sure whatever approach they're taking is measured.

Seeing as the EEA is primarily a group to coordinate research and development on this implementation of blockchain tech, it makes sense to join even as an investigation into it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I suppose the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance should be contrasted with IBM and friends Hyperledger. These are a couple of well backed consortia which from 30,000 feet are similar.

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

<comment><USER26> What exactly is hyperledger solving?

<comment><USER27> From what I have seen and read, they aren't solving problems that haven't already been solved, merely attempting to improve the security and efficiency of a solution. One example they have touted is their work with Maersk on tracking shipping containers and their contents in a tamper-proof fashion as well as providing a way to interact with that data. Will any of this really result in greater efficiency, interoperability and savings? Time will tell.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Andhra Pradesh, one of the four who have joined this alliance in the announcement, is a state of India. Visakhapatnam is its largest city, with just about 50 million people, more than the state of California.

<comment><USER29> And it's great to see that they're interested in the technology. Blockchain could be a great way for governments to keep track of data in a transparent way and could potentially be implemented much cheaper than current database solutions.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> I'm really surprised at seeing Govt. of Andhra Pradesh here. Curious how they got here in the first place.

<comment><USER31> Microlending applications?

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Title didn't mention the significant partner showcased in the website - 'Andhra Pradesh Government'. The first state govt (India) outside the US to join the alliance. AP was recently divided into separate state (Telengana) and lost it's capital (Hyderabad- home to top IT MNC's) to it. They are actively investing in Fintech, including a new institute for blockchain - [http://www.apeita.in/blockchain/](http://www.apeita.in/blockchain/)

</comment><comment><USER33> If you'd like an easy way to keep up to date on Ethereum: [http://www.weekinethereum.com](http://www.weekinethereum.com)

</comment><comment><USER34> What are the advantages Ethereum has over Bitcoin, except faster transactions?

<comment><USER35> Better politics, internally and externally. Internally because the community isn't as hardcore. Externally because it hasn't been publicly associated with black markets the way Bitcoin has.

<comment><USER36> As a relative outsider, it doesn't seem to me like ethereum has a great history of good politics, given the whole DAO, hard fork, eth classic setup ([https://www.cryptocompare.com/coins/guides/the-dao-the- hack-...](https://www.cryptocompare.com/coins/guides/the-dao-the-hack-the- soft-fork-and-the-hard-fork/))

<comment><USER35> I'm not a fan of the DAO decisions, but reversing a _prima facie_ fraudulent transaction is uncontroversial in banking.

Bigger than that is the tone with which the Bitcoin communicates. There's that prominent Bitcoin enthusiast who likes to cuss and scream and demonize perceived opponents on Twitter. There's another one (maybe the same guy?) who moderates with a vengeful bias on Reddit. That kind of shit-throwing is anathema to a large company.

<comment><USER37> > There's another one (maybe the same guy?) who moderates with a vengeful bias > on Reddit. That kind of shit-throwing is anathema to a large company.

Also due to some being unhappy with the moderation of /r/bitcoin there's a separate community called /r/btc. Then again, there are many communities on Reddit that have split up due to disagreements about moderation, such as for example /r/meirl vs the previously vastly more popular /r/me_irl [1]. (The latter of these still has about 3x the amount of subscribers though, but /r/me_irl has grown to become large indeed.)

[1]: [https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/3z2pax/me_irl...](https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/3z2pax/me_irl_vs_meirl_what_happened_there/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> If you are into the EEA, you should check it out its cousin, the Monero Enterprise Alliance: [https://mea.business/](https://mea.business/)

<comment><USER39> I've heard great things about their fungability.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> Ethereum itself can be used as a financial language, which can be quite revolutionary for the banking industry. Instead of using the proof of work consensus, banks could have their own consensus method. Which does allow for the order of scale that the real world needs.

</comment><comment><USER41> I see the mastercard logo, but not included in the list.

<comment><USER42> See this reddit comment ([https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/6o2o3d/enterprise...](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/6o2o3d/enterprise_ethereum_alliance_becomes_worlds/dke47x0/)):

>AK on behalf of EEA here. Mastercard is indeed a new member of EEA. They asked not to be in the press release document but approved being on the EEA official website. They may be doing their own communications on this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> Ethereum as a currency will never go mainstream with a price swings like this

<comment><USER44> It's still very young, and I think there may be multiple dApps built with eth that will be used in real life in the next 5 years.

<comment><USER45> maybe, but hundreds will just sit there without gas :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> No mention of Master Card. Mods please edit the title.

</comment><comment><USER47> To the moon!

</comment><comment><USER48> It's too bad that Etherium prices are down so much right now from a few weeks ago.

<comment><USER49> Does that make it a good time to buy?

<comment><USER50> It certainly makes "yesterday" a good day to buy.</comment></comment></comment>


Audio of over 100 Rare Book School lectures now available online - <AUTHOR> http://rarebookschool.org/news/rbs-lectures/

<comment><AUTHOR> A bit of background on this - Rare Book School is a rather fascinating organization devoted to "critical bibliography" (basically, the study of books as both objects and texts, although people involved also study digital media and even formats like magnetic tapes). It's an interesting corner of the academic world that attracts a lot of eccentrics as well as some very smart people, most notably the historian who recently exposed a Galileo forgery ring, written up here:

[http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/12/16/a-very-rare- boo...](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/12/16/a-very-rare-book)

</comment><comment><USER2> I went to UVA and took a couple of "rare books" courses (titles like "History of the Book", etc) under Terry Belanger, who was awarded a MacArthur fellowship in 2006 (I think) for his work. Rare Book School is a summer program that brings together specialists and students from around the globe to further and spread knowledge of bibliographic history -- printing, papermaking, binding, distributing, font creation, etc. It meets in the workspace of the Book Arts Press in one of the UVA libraries. They have their own "stacks" with a really eclectic collection. Everything from a bazillion different versions of John Updike's novels to one of a kind 16th century manuscripts and illuminated books. They also have a fully functional letterpress.

I'm only mentioning all this to get to the point that matters to me personally: Mr Belanger was my advisor and helped me with my senior project, which was to research and then stage an exhibit in UVA's Rotunda. I had a ton of fun... and realized I never wanted to be a museum curator. And that, my friends, is how I started my career in tech -- via a temp job through Manpower where I was hired as a web developer. :)

Proof: [http://rarebookschool.org/all- programs/exhibitions/nickel/](http://rarebookschool.org/all- programs/exhibitions/nickel/)

My word of mouth marketing attempt: [https://rarebookschool.org/2005/exhibitions/two_nickel.html](https://rarebookschool.org/2005/exhibitions/two_nickel.html)

And if anyone is _really_ interested, here's where you can buy a copy of the exhibit catalog: [http://www.abebooks.com/Two-Nickel-Ephemera-Concerning- Thoma...](http://www.abebooks.com/Two-Nickel-Ephemera-Concerning-Thomas- Jefferson/12845001305/bd)

<comment><AUTHOR> That's a great story! I took my first Rare Book School class last year and Belanger is still teaching there, although he stepped down as director a few years ago. The Washington Post was actually filming a video about RBS when I was there. Talking to the journalist about Bezos and his plans while being surrounded by people operating an 18th-century style letterpress was kind of fascinating. This is the video if anyone is interested:

[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/style- blog/wp/2014/08/28...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/style- blog/wp/2014/08/28/u-va-s-rare-book-school-a-summer-camp-for-book-nerds/)

<comment><USER2> RBS is a hidden gem. I like to think every research domain has something similar. Thanks for sharing the video -- that's cool. :)

(one of the things we did in one of his classes was learn about the history of printing and then prep & print our own folios using that press. pretty awesome, and a new perspective on the rapid pace of technology.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Love to learn what biblio scholars think of the digital age. It strikes me that though we have mastered highly persistent and physically robust methods of data storage, the machine languages we actually consume and transact in shift so rapidly. . . digital data strikes me as actually far, far more delicate and ephemeral than ink on paper.

<comment><USER4> You may be interested in Matthew Kirschenbaum's work on the literary history of word processing and, well, archiving software. He gave a talk, "Software, It's a Thing," at a conference at the Library of Congress in 2014: [https://medium.com/@mkirschenbaum/software-its-a- thing-a5504...](https://medium.com/@mkirschenbaum/software-its-a- thing-a550448d0ed3)</comment></comment>


2008 - How Many Hours To Develop A Business And Product? | The Recursive ISV - <AUTHOR> http://www.davidscottkane.com/2008/12/14/2008-how-many-hours-to-develop-a-business-and-product/ <comment><USER2> I think the idea of tracking time while you work on your app is admirable. But at the same time, every app is different. I've got about 500 hours into my app designing it, coding the front end, and doing planning for marketing. The backend isn't even done yet. My partner is doing that and I don't know how many hours he has invested.</comment>


Photo of the racks in the original Google datacenter - <AUTHOR> http://friendfeed.com/e/a2e7bd13-d598-4f54-a8e7-d020076a74ba/Have-you-ever-seen-such-a-well-cabled/ <comment><AUTHOR> For your amusement :)

<comment><USER2> Got anymore? I'd love to see what kind of network gear was in there at the time, etc. Very cool. Thanks.

<comment><USER3> Here's an upclose one on the first gen rack: [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e0/Google's_...](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e0/Google's_First_Production_Server.jpg)

My understanding is that they found the HP ProCurve switches were a better deal to buy two chassis and stuff all the blades into one box rather than buy the blades and add them to one. It was cheaper that way.

<comment><USER4> What were those switches for? (not the network switches, the physical on/off switches with the green and white wires)

Fans?

<comment><AUTHOR> Power switches. There were 4 machines per layer, 80 per rack.

BTW, here's a video (taken by someone else): <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z19-6tvGSq4>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Here's what their datacenters look like a couple years ago (with Chris DiBona): <http://flickr.com/photos/ttrueman/296867981/sizes/l/>

<comment><USER5> Dude, that's at the UW.

<comment><USER3> I'm not sure what UW you're referring to, but I took that at an ACM conference at UIUC: <http://www.acm.uiuc.edu/conference/2006/>

<comment><USER6> Are these conferences still happening? I can't seem to reach any more recent than 2006.

<comment><USER7> Yes, they are:

<http://www.acm.uiuc.edu/conference/2007/speakers> <http://www.acm.uiuc.edu/conference/2008/>

I remember seeing videos of Yegge's and Munroe's talks. Yegge's is worth watching.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Looks like most of the midsized companies "data centers" I've been in recently. At least the cables aren't all over the floor for you to trip on as well.

<comment><USER9> And at least it's not this: <http://www.sysadminday.com/horrors.html>

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> heh, slot 1/a cpu connectors. ah, the 90s.</comment>


Hacktivist attacks dropped by 95% since 2015 - <AUTHOR> https://www.zdnet.com/article/hacktivist-attacks-dropped-by-95-since-2015/ <comment><USER2> I'm not sure how exactly they can accurately measure it.

An appropriately completed "hacktivist" hack might not even be an obvious case of hacking? Maybe just a "leak" provided to someone in the media?

I'd argue that a hacking entity pushing it's identity is both an extra security risk / risk for going off track.

The focus is a lot on Anonymous, and bit like Wikileaks, I'm not sure Anonymous ever "was" what some technology enthusiasts and news folks really wanted it to be. There's plenty of fiction out there that folks enjoy about the super cool hacker who is out to fight the powers that be and change the world, but like most things reality does not cooperate.

The article does seem to touch on what happened in terms of public opinion:

>But nothing has led to the group's demise more than the inefficiency of most of its attacks. Defacing websites and launching DDoS attacks rarely gets anything done.

>Neither does stealing data from websites that are completely unrelated to a specific topic. In many cases, Anonymous hackers ended up dumping personal user information into the public domain and hurting innocent people for ridiculous causes, attracting both scorn and ridicule.

>This, in turn, has led to increased attention from law enforcement agencies, which cracked down on both members of the bigger Anonymous and LulzSec groups, but also the smaller ones.

</comment><comment><USER3> Back in 2011, when the wild ride that was Anonymous was at its apogee, it looked like an incoming Western Digital Spring. It's not wonder that fizzled down. Even if disadvantaged in the digital front, some of the affected can intimidate very effectively in real life: [https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/nov/02/anonymous...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/nov/02/anonymous- zetas-hacking-climbdown)

Both organized crime and law enforcement can use violence, even if their objectives are opposed.</comment>


Plain English explanation of Big O? (2009) - <AUTHOR> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/487258/plain-english-explanation-of-big-o

<comment><USER2> There have not only been discussions of this before, some previous HN contributions have provided significant criticism and enhancements. If you value the advice and expertise of the HN community at all, you should consider reading some of these earlier comments:

Here are some of the previous submissions:

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=695988> (4 comments)

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1520552> (24 comments, 1000 days ago)

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2344181>

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3807175>

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3846993>

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5164236>

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5636683>

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5778469> (submitted just yesterday)

Here's a pretty tight, explicit search for the same item:

[https://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=title%3A%2...](https://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=title%3A%28plain+english+big%29&sortby=create_ts+desc)

Additionally, you might be interested in reading these:

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4655061> : Big-O Misconceptions

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5770232> : What does O(log n) mean, exactly?

<comment><USER3> Maybe HN should introduce "it was here" button, for people with enough carma.

<comment><USER2> Some ability to merge discussions has previously been discussed, but lots of people on HN think it's not a problem.

Here are a few times it's been mentioned:

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=122751>

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2766949>

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2826798>

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3018533>

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3657234>

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5382906>

Here's a poll asking what people think:

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2822041>

Here's a submission from me asking for exactly this feature, with it's associated discussion:

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3349371>

Here's a counter viewpoint from someone I generally respect, but who disagrees strongly with me on this topic:

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3357125>

<comment><USER4> well it clearly is a problem. I'm not clicking each link in that.

<comment><USER5> Seeing a grouped list of links all at once is much more convenient than seeing (or missing, most likely) each link individually over the course of a few months.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Wow, I remembered including this in the 4th issue of Hacker Monthly[1] 3 years ago(!).

1\. Hacker Monthly #4 (I just made it free), if you like to read this in PDF/MOBI/EPUB format along with few others timeless HN articles: <http://hackermonthly.com/issue-4.html>

</comment><comment><USER7> Here's what I told my parents over dinner one day:

You have a problem that needs to be solved and a way of solving it that takes a certain amount of time. I the problem grows, how much longer will it take to solve with that same method? If the problem is twice as big, will it take twice as long?

For example, I need to move a steak from one plate to another. My method is to use a knife and fork to cut the steak into bite sized pieces and move each piece to the other plate. If I have two steaks, I can expect this method to take twice as long. What if I have 10 steaks? It might take a bit of work to make room to properly cut a steak. At 20 steaks, I probably just don't have room on the plate anymore and it takes much longer than 20 times the time to move those steaks than it did to move 1 steak.

Now let's say my method is to just dump the contents of the first plate onto the second plate. If I have two steaks this takes about as long to do. What if I have 10 steaks, or 20? It starts getting clumsy and the time it takes to move them using this new method gets longer at a predictable rate. At 200 steaks I probably can't just dump one plate onto the other, I can't even lift the plate!

The question then is, up to how many steaks is the second method better than the first? Is it always better as the number of steaks goes up? Is there a better steak moving method? What if we change the container from plates to something else?

</comment><comment><USER8> Come on, this was posted less than a month ago here. My browser even still marks it as visited.

<comment><USER9> I missed it back then. I read this posting and got value from it.

So, for future reference, is one supposed to know in advance what news or articles one is looking for and search HN first? Im confused as to how this is supposed to work. If I missed it a month ago, am I not allowed to see it posted again, by some one else who might well have missed it a month ago?

Or, do you suggest that moderators look out for duplicates, block the links and comments, and merely post a link back to the original?

Or should people who don't read every article, and log it in some way just not be here?

But, people have up voted it. So, it must still have value. Are those people not wanted? Are they wrong in some way?

I don't understand the criticism at all. Cant you just ignore the article, instead of belittling those who did get value form a second posting?

<comment><USER10> I don't think it's a criticism of the people who read the article, rather of those who posted it. Just like logging a bug, you should make sure someone hasn't logged it already. A bit of repetition on a yearly basis would be fine, but if all popular articles or topics were posted monthly or more with no added information, you can see how it would kill HN. And just like the bug example, there would be benefit if all comments were funneled to existing threads.

And then it gives the chance for the old-timers to lord over the newbies here, so there's a bit of that.

This particular article, however, is somewhat of a special case. The fact that programmers don't seem to understand big-O notation is a concern to me. I think it is as fundamental to programming as knives are to a chef, something that should be learned in any CS study, or intuitive to any self-taught programmer.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Surely someone out there has pinterested this along with that old relational- databases-as-Venn-diagrams post into a giant textbook of accessible computer science.

(This is a serious request.)

</comment><comment><USER12> I think this shows how powerful mathematical notation really is once you understand the concepts (which i admit is not easy). One formal definition versus pages of explanations. It's the same with other programming concepts like monads. Many have written blog posts explaining monads in Haskell and those are great to learn how to apply them but in the end the formal definitions explain them best.

</comment><comment><USER13> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_O_notation> \- see "formal definition". The core of it is one sentence in english, and it's even shorter if you choose to use only mathematical notation.

All you need to know in the context of applying this to algorithms is that there has to be some notion of "size" for the problem, and the time it takes for the algorithm to complete is a function of that size.

Once you internalize that, understanding complexity analysis will be much easier. You don't have to memorize complexities of common algorithms.

I'm not really sure why it's so difficult to wrap your head around this concept, but apparently it _is_ difficult. This is the second time I'm seeing this link on HN in the past month, I think.

</comment><comment><USER14> O is how you choose to work on something, like how you choose to wash the dishes.

n is how many dishes you have to wash.

Which is faster? Washing, then drying, then putting away each dish one after the other, or washing all of the dishes, then drying all of the dishes, then putting them all away?

If n is 1 then either method is the same. If n is 10 then maybe the first approach is a little less efficient, but when n is 100 then obviously the batched approach is more efficient.

Big O notation is just the formal way of comparing which algorithm is more efficient when applied to large data sets.

<comment><USER15> Sorry if I've misread your example, but I think this isn't quite correct. While the "batch" method of dish-washing (washing all at once, then drying all at once) is probably more convenient and efficient for humans, if you were to formalize your "dish-washing" algorithms, I believe both of them would have running times in the same class of functions -- ie the same big Oh.

In pseudo-java-code:

        void washDishes(Dish[] dishes) {
            for(Dish d : dishes) {
                Sponge s = getSponge();
                s.wash(d);
                Towel t = getTowel();
                t.dry(d);
            }
        }

        void washDishes(Dish[] dishes) {
            Sponge s = getSponge();
            for(Dish d : dishes) {
                s.wash(d);
            }
            Towel t = getTowel();
            for(Dish d in dishes) {
                t.dry(d);
            }

        }

Maybe, in practical terms, there would be differences in efficiency, but those are exactly the kinds of constant factors big Oh is meant to abstract, and for the purpose of example, both of these are O(n) given input size (number of dishes) of n.

I hesitated to post this comment, since it's kind of a "well, actually"[0], but unless I'm mistaken this example is fundamentally flawed.

[0] <http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2011/Feb-17.html>

<comment><USER16> In your first method, you call getSponge() and getTowel() d times each, but in your second method you only call each once. That would be significant for large values of d, if I'm not mistaken.

edit: using "d" to refer to the number of dishes here. that could have caused confusion, my bad.

<comment><USER15> That's actually exactly what I was trying to point out. It may be significant practically, or might not, and definitely would be if you were really washing the dishes ;) But in terms of big Oh, they're the same.

If you assume that all of the methods (getSponge, getTowel, wash, dry) do the same amount of "work", ie take the same amount of time to execute, then the first function takes 4d units of time (continuing to use d as the number of dishes). The second takes 2d+2 units of time. We define these as (mathematical) functions in terms of d, which compute the time spent for a given input size:

        f(d) = 4d
        g(d) = 2d+2

It's possible to prove that both of these function are O(d).

The formal definition of O(n) is:

        f(x) = O(n) if and only if there exists some constant c
        and some value x0 such that, for all x > x0:
        f(x) <= c * n.

It's a way to talk about the growth rate of functions, what people usually mean when they say some algorithm is O(n) is that the function calculating the runtime based on input size is O(n).

This is pretty trivial to show with f and g above, pick c=5, x0=1.

Roughly, you can drop additive and multiplicative constants when computing the "big Oh" of a function. I'm leaving out an awful lot of formal mathematical details here, partly because I'm rusty, but also because all of this is much better presented elsewhere, in numerous algorithms textbooks and courses. (btw it's possible I've made a mistake in the above, for which I hope you'll forgive me)

Lots of people would recommend the big white book from MIT, but I'm fond of "The Algorithm Design Manual" which is less formal and rigorous, and thus perhaps a little better suited to professional software developers who are just brushing up.

[http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and- comput...](http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and-computer- science/6-046j-introduction-to-algorithms-sma-5503-fall-2005/index.htm)

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

<comment><USER16> Makes sense. I think I glanced over the text before and after your pseudo-code too fast. You're absolutely right about the constants not affecting the Big Oh part. For some reason I initially interpreted your comment to say "these two algorithms are equally fast". My mistake :o

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> if plain english could handle big O, we'd probably be programming in it ?</comment>


Swiss council to accept Bitcoin payments - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-36257465 <comment><USER2> > "It is highly concerning that a state institution should accept Bitcoin, > since it is not a secure currency,"

I don't think this person understood what the word secure ment. There are many negative things one can say about Bitcoin, but being not secure is clearly non of those.

<comment><USER3> I think he's worried that someone will break into their website and steal all the bitcoin. There could be no way to track down the offender, and no way to reverse the transfer.

You might say that security is the probability of a successful attack times the penalty. Maybe it's harder(less probability) to steal Bitcoin than to get your routing and checking account number and drain the account, but in the second case you call up the bank and get the money back(less penalty).

I don't know that 'Bitcoin is not a secure currency', but storing large quantities of Bitcoin is a security hazard the same way storing large quantities of gasoline, crude oil, and fireworks in your garage is. It makes sense to classify that as a security issue, since "The bad guys light a match in our garage" is an attack vector that needs consideration in the security policy.

If you keep the Bitcoin on an airgapped computer, require two technical personal for every interaction and document every step, install cameras on the premises to watch for intruders, ensure that any received "hot" Bitcoin is backed up to a separate secure "cold" facility using regular secure transfers, ensure that the Bitcoin is transferred daily to the machine and that the machine itself transfers it to a new address that nobody knows until its needed, and use one of those fancy 3-party transactions requiring the mayor to sign off on any withdrawal; then maybe it would all be secure.

Similarly, oil refineries do manage to process crude oil without burning down. I bet you the people who secure it are paid a lot.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Should You Do Something Extra to Get a Job? - <AUTHOR> Hey HN,
I've been interviewing/applying for about 5 months now and I figure it's time to start re-evaluating HOW I am applying.
I watched a TED talk of a guy who read a companies IPO prospectus and created a website that included four new feature ideas. He clearly went above and beyond in the interview process to get the job. Is that how people are getting hired these days?
Anyone have any other examples? Maybe ones less time intensive? ;) <comment><USER2> Time intensive is the point. You can amortize the effort over multiple job applications so it is OK. If you can be the person who is doing something creative rather than watching TV then that can help you win.

I wouldn't get hung up on any particular application. I've seen cases where I overprepared for an interview and wound up being rejected because of my gender or other stupid reasons.

</comment><comment><USER3> Any activity which demonstrates tenacity, creativity, intellect, generosity, or any combination thereof will immediately raise your profile amongst the field of candidates.

You don't need a TED talk for inspiration :-)

</comment><comment><USER4> Anybody who is making a TED talk clearly has resources and skills that put him/her over and above the majority of candidates, so I'd take that example with a grain of salt.

If you're putting out your resume and not getting any responses at all, then you either don't have a complete resume (not listing enough keywords) or you don't have enough years of experience.</comment>


Firebird: Historical Reference (2011) - <AUTHOR> https://firebirdsql.org/en/historical-reference/ <comment><USER2> An often forgotten piece of history about Firebird is that it demonstrated how Open Source (Free Software, etc.) makes products more secure and trustworthy.

Long story short: Interbase was a closed source DB by Borland that contained a backdoor which would give full access to all data to an external attacker. The backdoor went unnoticed for roughly 7 years, then one day Borland released the Interbase sources and just before the new management closed it again and ceased any contribution to the code, the community forked it on Sourceforge naming it Firebird. Within a few months since the code was made public, the 7 years old backdoor was identified and fixed.

[https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2001-0008](https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2001-0008)

</comment><comment><USER3> It always puzzled me why Firebird didn't get more popular. It was a great little RMDBS.

<comment><USER4> Is it in some way worse than SQLite?

<comment><USER5> Do you mean better? Firebird allows multiple clients.

<comment><USER4> No, I wanted to know why it's used less often.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Taking the Long View - <AUTHOR>

I've been thinking a lot about the future and what type of nights-and-weekends project I want to work on next. Probably not the next project and probably not the one after that, but eventually I want to turn one of them into a company that I can work on full time.
There's a lot of great guidance out there on how to come up with a killer business idea. YC's "Make something people want" stands out among them. By adhering to that maxim alone you could probably do very well, but I feel like its missing something.
There recently was a discussion about a site called Parrot Secrets, which sells an eBook about raising and owning parrots. According to one site, the owner makes a few hundred thousand dollars a year from the site and he doesn't even own a parrot. He made something people want and has become very rich because of it. I don't want to start a site like that.
"But why not?" I kept asking myself. Indeed, if the goal is to make money, there's a lot of easier ways to do it other than a Y Combinator-type startup.
I realized that I very much want to build a long term company. Something that I can still be running 20-30 years from now. Not some fish-widget-flashy-url-shortener-social-network-thingy.
My question boils down to this: How do you identify an idea that has the potential to become a long term business?
I think the key is founding a company with a vision and not simply focusing on acquisition. Bonus question: How does YC feel about companies who say they are not interested in getting acquired? <comment><USER2> _How do you identify an idea that has the potential to become a long term business?_

if you can answer that with accuracy, let me know :)

i think the best way to make it happen, though, is to do exactly what you said you don't want to do -- build some widget thingeys. work on things that interest you in the short term, that are meaningless and you could throw away for something new. maybe these individual meaningless things can morph into something meaningful. if they don't, you can ignore/trash and move on.

if you sit and wait for the perfect thing you might wait forever. don't just spin your wheels, pick a direction you want to go and start driving.

just my $0.02.

<comment><AUTHOR> Maybe you're right; I'm thinking there are some fundamental priciples which can increase your chances of success. I'm not just sure what they are yet.

Thanks for the response.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Consider "Built to Last"

[http://www.amazon.com/Built-Last-Successful-Visionary- Compan...](http://www.amazon.com/Built-Last-Successful-Visionary- Companies/dp/0887306713)

by Jim Collins

<http://www.jimcollins.com/lib/books.html>

and Jerry Porras, which is an analysis of companies that did that. Vision, of course, but not visionary products. Vision that leads a sustainable, cohesive culture.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the pointers -- looks like exactly what I'm looking for.</comment></comment>