Maker Faire halts operations and lays off all staff - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2019/06/07/make-magazine-maker-media-layoffs/ <comment><USER2> Couple of points.

When I was a lad, making electronics meant you could listen to shortwave radio or talk to people around the world, when there was little other opportunity.

Plus, things like cars were still hackable with a few transistors and passive components, you could make a customised indicator timer, or turbo timer or what ever, and it was probably way cheaper if you knew what you were doing.

Fast forward, very little you can now make is cheaper, or creates a functionality not otherwise available retail/off the shelf.

Now for me, it was great - my dad was a radio amateur, I grew up with the those things, he lectured at uni and I had access to PDP-8 and 11 when no one had a computer at home and most people interacted with punch cards.

I spent literally years of my younger life tinkering and discovered/learned by direct exploration and experimentation all sorts of things eg the rectification of copper oxide, Q factor and how to get it and use it, all the things you can use as earthing and antennas in radio systems (some pretty strange things in there), I wrote and sold Atari 400 games when I was 13 on, learning things like how to write a floating point library in a 6502 in minimal space, create physics engines for games, just to name a few, the list goes on.

Now I have worked as an electrical engineer designing and building large and small industrial power and control systems for over 30 years.

Most days I draw down on some former hobby or tinkering experience in some way in my work.

Not sure the maker movement we have seen recently will create the same trajectory for too may others, maybe I am wrong, but a lot of what I did was because there were no equivalent consumer goods and the best info available was at the local library or maybe the odd magazine if you were lucky.

<comment><USER3> When I was a boy I'd stop by the local TV repair shop and they'd give me old TVs. I had a lot of fun with them, like randomly swapping the tubes around and seeing what would happen. My mom was sure I was going to electrocute myself.

You're lucky your dad could mentor you with that stuff. I didn't know anybody who knew anything about electronics, so I just floundered around with it. That all changed when I got to college, where there was electronics expertise everywhere and I was finally able to build things that worked.

For example, someone finally showed me how to solder properly. What a difference a couple minutes of help makes!

<comment><USER2> Strangely enough I got almost no mentoring, he was like, the stuff is all there if you want to use it, I got taken to the uni labs on weekends and the family went to the library once a week religiously.

He was both a lecturer of maths and computing, but also taught teachers how to teach. His attitude was that if you were really interested you needed to do it yourself and learn through successes and failures and build up all the concepts in your own mind - it was the concepts, not the facts that made all the difference going forwards.

Now this is so much more true than ever, because facts and calculations are available as a "service" effectively on the internet.

Abstracting the concepts and synthesizing new ones through extension, application of lightly related techniques/ materials/methods, cross pollination, etc in your mind is the truly irreplaceable skill that leads to disruption and innovation.

<comment><USER3> I did better with cars, for the simple reason that when I took them apart, I could see how everything worked. With electronics, you need an oscilloscope to see the magic. All I had was a VOM.

Ironically, there were lots of kids taking cars apart in high school, so I could help and get help. But in college, nobody, and I mean nobody, was interested in cars. It's still hard to find anyone who is, hardly anyone has a modified car. My (medium modified) dodge wouldn't merit a glance in my high school daze, but today people go ape when I drive by in it.

<comment><USER4> >With electronics, you need an oscilloscope to see the magic. All I had was a VOM.

The price of test equipment is one of the reasons I went into software despite having an EEng degree. Tinkering with a computer is way cheaper, and I sort of gravitated towards stuff that had software in it, then ended up realizing that I don't really care about electronics all that much. The degree served well for getting a job in writing firmware, I guess.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I got into Maker Faire and making things, then I ran out of time. I had to learn Kubernetes. My kids were interested then they weren't. My son is very technical and expressed interest in robotics, but he keeps coming back to game development and blender, and that is fantastic. I have a half dozen micro boards gathering dust for projects I was going to Make. I guess I haven't seen value enough in my daily life from my little creations, and fundamentally making something novel is remarkably difficult. I'd really like to wire that gear up with MaxMSP or processing and make some beautiful sonic spaces, but for now it stays on the shelf. Is this just me or did something fundamental of that kind of experience undermine the maker movement in general?

<comment><USER6> I've noticed that it's hard to get really great returns on maker projects. Maybe it's my impatience but software provides me something immediate that's cool and useful. Besides, debugging software is worlds easier for me than debugging circuitry. Also, why are microcontrollers stuck in the C++ world? Stuff like CircuitPython is changing that, but it's not that ubiquitous. I'd love an ergonomic and mature Rust ecosystem on Arduinos, or even a _gasp_ JavaScript runtime. Shouldn't chips be fast enough for this? I'd love to run some basic web stuff on an Arduino.

Adafruit has been driving a lot of usable, rewarding electronics. They've been pushing LEDS (mostly WS2812 and APA102) in usable, prepackaged form factors. I really love their LED strips that are already diffused. They're beautiful and immediately usable. They're a little expensive, but I use their products to try out my ideas. But besides them there's not a lot of companies who make physical hardware appealing and available.

Side-note, why aren't there LED strips with a 3.3v logic level??? Almost all microcontrollers have a 3.3v logic level but APA102/WS2812 have a 5v logic level. Very annoying to convert.

<comment><USER7> C++, hell, I'd say C. The more abstraction, the less reliability. My group would never use anything but C in our embedded projects. I think it's the "move fast, break stuff" attitude of non-embedded developers that has poisoned everything.

<comment><USER8> C++ is a trash language; somebody said it's object orientation is like trying to make an octopus by stapling four more legs on a puppy. It allows devs to abstract to the point of absurdity and obfuscates intention. C is much more hygenic, imo.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I "run" a makerspace...

I put that in quotes because its barely running, and I've basically quit.

Wealth innequality is extreme. The people who can afford it buy their own 3D printer or laser, do. The people who can't afford them, can't afford to pay dues.

Everybody wants to donate their broken junk to the space, but nobody wants to give us cash to pay the rent.

<comment><USER10> I believe the easiest way to alleviate this issue is to pool together capital to buy machines that can't be purchased by individuals. This encourages more affluent makers to join and pay dues.

<comment><USER11> That was the business plan of TechShop. It didn't work out in the long run.

In SF, the TechShop space is sort of reborn as [https://theshop.build/](https://theshop.build/) Also, [https://www.noisebridge.net/](https://www.noisebridge.net/) is still cranking along.

<comment><USER12> What makes noisebridge more successful? It seems like they have a smaller space and less machines than Techshop RIP but host a lot more meetups.

<comment><USER13> My impression is it's more a community like most hackerspaces, less "tools as a service" most commercial makerspaces are seen as, so people are more willing to volunteer time or resources.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> It's a real loss. It likely could have survived as a bootstrapped business, but being venture backed meant either large growth or death. Dale hints at this in the article, and the choices Maker Media has made over time make more sense knowing the pressures of investment were top priority.

<comment><USER15> I didn't know it was venture backed. I am having a hard time imagining that as a swing-for-fences, 100x-1000x return kind of business. It sounds more like the kind if thing where a cash strapped business works out a long term deal with an understanding property owner who has maker kids constantly asking for a better 3-D printer.

<comment><USER16> If you knew anything at all about their funding you would know thats not at all why they got funded. Print is crazy expensive and eventually the muse ran out.

<comment><USER17> Can you elaborate? "Print is expensive" isn't a great reason for an investment fund to pour millions into a magazine publisher. What was the potential upside?

<comment><USER18> Consider that the washington post was purchased for $250M. That was about four months current revenue. Admittedly Make Magazine is great but probably not pulling in $700M annually.

If they could have convinced a "famous tech billionaire" to purchase Make as a vanity project / property ...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I've had a minor bone with make media over their ownership of the term "makerfaire". To me, a makerfaire is a generic term that has absolutely nothing to do with the magazine.

Our local hackerspace tried to organize a makerfaire, and when we found out how much we had to pay to make media to use that name (I don't remember the specifics, but it was enough to make us all reel back a bit) we ended up just changing the name to maker "fest" instead.

It's very sad that the magazine is also dying :(, but I have always been a bit salty of make media's attempt to own the term "maker". Perhaps this saltiness was more common in the community. It honestly soured me against any of their products.

I still think that what they did was amazing, but there was just always that little sourness in the back of my mind when I'd recommend their publication to anybody. I think there is a lesson in there about branding. To my mind, allowing thousands of volunteers all over the world to throw "maker faires" is like a dream come true for a magazine like that. It's a huge amount of advertising and brand association for them. If it was me, I would have put together an open set of graphics and styles for people to use at all of the maker faires, to make sure that every single one of those events was associated with my magazine.

<comment><USER20> > I have always been a bit salty of make media's attempt to own the term > "maker"

The concept of "people who build stuff as a hobby" is not really new at all. The coining of the term "maker" is, and honestly feels a little awkward to me. However, its possible they were part of the coining of that term, so its probably okay that they tried to capitalize on it.

Maybe if we had a more general/less-branded term to use, it wouldn't feel so forced.

<comment><USER21> It seems not only forced but a bit back-handed. Like a certain connotation of a lack of...rigor.

Like "coder" vs programmer/software developer.

<comment><USER22> I mean, as an engineer by BS, makers have a "i'm not a engineer" vibe with it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I was a Make magazine subscriber since the second year and gave several gift subscriptions. I contributed a couple of small (unpaid) pieces to the magazine, and was an exhibitor (also unpaid) multiple times at the NYC Maker Faire. I thoroughly enjoyed the Maker Faire set-up days and thought they made exhibiting worthwhile. It was like having a back-stage pass to the Oscars of Makerdom - all the stars were there and happy to talk shop. I knew I was creating free content for them that they were profiting from but thought I was getting a fair deal.

My subscription lapsed just about every year for some glitch or another and they were unable to convert any of the gift subscriptions which should have been very easy sales.

My opinion about supporting Make Media changed after the RealSexyCyborg incident in the winter of 2017:

[https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/kassycho/a-male-ceo- has...](https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/kassycho/a-male-ceo-has- apologized-after-saying-that-this-female)

Bunnie Haung (who I met at a Maker Faire set-up day) vouched for her and Dale still persisted in slandering her. I let my subscription lapse and quit going to the NYC Maker Faire. 2017 was the Maker Faire highest attendance and has been declining since then.

<comment><USER24> >My opinion about supporting Make Media changed after the RealSexyCyborg incident in the winter of 2017:

Thanks, the damage was and is pretty bad- and long-lasting. But, "be like water" and all that. I'm slowly pivoting to hardware development. Studying welding and CNC operations now also.

But- as far as business dealings with Make my one direct experience, in an area I'm qualified to talk about is that their China strategy was simply awful. Just textbook how to fail in China. They chose a Chinese partner that did not understand Maker culture, was incentivized to not support it (even curtail it), and let them run the Make brand into the ground during a time when billions of RMB was going into Maker initiatives:

[https://theasiadialogue.com/2016/05/26/makerspaces-for- the-p...](https://theasiadialogue.com/2016/05/26/makerspaces-for-the-people- chinas-approach-to-cultivating-an-entrepreneurial-mindset/)

Not just government grants, but parents willing to pay generously for after- school hands-on activities that cultivate creativity. Lego absolutely nailed it, they were and are the model for Make to follow: [https://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/2188280/bric...](https://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/2188280/brick- brick-store-store-danish-toymaker-lego-builds-its-empire)

I told Make all this last year. Even with all the shit they pulled- I want Chinese kids to have something better than factory jobs making shanzhai shit. I will talk to Make or anyone else if it means more creativity here. I am a true believer- I would make a lot more doing literally anything else if I wasn't. I offered to get Make legal representation, connect them with the investors that were asking for an introduction- just at least hear them out. Nope. Patronizing and dismissive. They were convinced their current Chinese partner had "lots of guanxi" and had it all figured out. It was a huge, huge missed opportunity for absolutely no reason at the absolute height of demand. Now, of course, the Maker market has cooled off: [http://www.sixthtone.com/news/1003171/made-in-china-the- boom...](http://www.sixthtone.com/news/1003171/made-in-china-the-boom-and- bust-of-makerspaces) and things would be much harder.

Make seems to make very bad business decisions, driven by enforcing an in- house ideology and social hierarchy that really has no relation to the Hacker ethic at the heart of the Maker movement.

<comment><USER25> There are few companies I look up to as much as LEGO, they had a bad financial time in the 0's, where they had to sadly sell off the parks. But now they have really found what makes them special again. Including expanding to new markets like China. It came as a pretty big surprise for me that they got some Lepin factories closed down and raided by the Chinese authorities. They are as you say a good example of a company that knows how to work in China.

<comment><USER24> >It came as a pretty big surprise for me that they got some Lepin factories closed down and raided by the Chinese authorities. They are as you say a good example of a company that knows how to work in China.

This is becoming more and more common. Adafruit is another example, really good IP protection in China so no one has knocked off their boards. I have a Chinese IP lawyer I recommend who is great at this, but unfortunately most foreigners feel American IP protection is sufficient so won't spend the little bit it takes to protect themselves (better) in China.

<comment><USER26> > Adafruit is another example, really good IP protection in China so no one > has knocked off their boards.

Could you please (briefly) elaborate on these protections or point me in the right direction to look, ie articles and/or search terms? I mean absolutely no disrespect but as a westerner without any real knowledge of China I only know the stereotype of China being like the wild west where everything gets ripped off. I'm happy to do some research to learn more about it if you could advice me where to look!

<comment><USER24> >I mean absolutely no disrespect but as a westerner without any real knowledge of China I only know the stereotype of China being like the wild west where everything gets ripped off. I'm happy to do some research to learn more about it if you could advice me where to look!

No offense taken! It seems crazy but things change fast- and yes we still steal loads of stuff and tend not to respect IP not registered in China. I have not found a really good write up in English, I've been meaning to get together with some local friends and do something. But yeah- totally ok to be skeptical, we don't have a stellar track record

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I was surprised to find out that they were backed by venture capital. When he says that "I'm committed to keeping the print magazine going and the Maker Faire licensing program." I'm assuming that is for the various other maker and mini maker faires that are organized outside Maker media? I think it would be great if they could reorganize as a non profit and continue with a scaled back operation. I also wonder if by doing the interview with the media they are not trying to strengthen their negotiating position with their creditors. I've attended a couple of the Bay Area maker faires, and several ones in San Diego and while there definitely has been a dropoff is attendance and exhibitors (both quantity and to some extent quality) I still think it's a good event and has a lot to offer. I think it would be good if they also had some exhibits focused also on repair and reuse. The last San Diego County Fair I went to I think the neatest thing I saw was some guy from a local phone repair shop fixing phones.

</comment><comment><USER28> Not indicated in the current headline is that it appears that Make Magazine is halting as well. From the first paragraph:

> [...] Maker Media, the company behind crafting publication MAKE: magazine as > well as [...] Maker Faire, [has laid] off its entire staff of 22 and pause > all operations.

<comment><USER29> I wonder if they'll be able to fulfill the N-magazine subscription I paid for when I bought my ticket this year?

<comment><USER30> Traditionally when a magazine goes under, the publisher sends you the remaining number of issues of some other loosely-related magazine. But since Maker Media isn't a traditional magazine publisher I'm not sure what they can do in a similar vein.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Maker Faire was a really cool event, I also exhibited there once. The barrier to show something used to be actually quite low and it was easy to get in touch with people dealing with similar topics.

On the other hand I never understood why that had so much focus on kids stuff. Of course it's easy to get attention from kids as long as things move, blink etc. But this stuff isn't really sophisticated, neither are the associated workshops - of which there are plenty.

If you think about it, it makes no sense because kids don't have money and complex projects require actually a lot of planning and deep understanding of the topics involved.

I think they should have focussed on more advanced projects. In fact a lot of projects both at Maker Faire but also in the Maker scene in general are quite unfinished. This can be nice when it comes to art but technical projects are most interesting when they reach MVP / release status.

<comment><USER32> This is an issue I always found was diluting the Makers' movement: everything was mostly focused on beginners.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> There's been some of talk of trying to own the "maker" space rather than fostering "maker" spaces. I suppose that's part of the problem.

I subscribed to Make for a few years in the late aughts but let my subscription lapse because I stopped having time to tinker. It was a great medium to learn until it wasn't.

I suppose many events coalesced over the years leading to its shuttering

\- proliferation of YouTube DIY

\- shuttering of print media and electronics stores

\- cost decrease of prefab devices

\- cost decrease in means of production

\- bundled kits

\- "democratization" of means of production (3d printing, etc)

\- Make attitude shift from "hacking" to selling you shit / custom brands

This sucks for the maker community and Make folks but is a serious win for anyone still soldering on or trying to foster the hacker / maker mentality.

</comment><comment><USER34> A totally naive point of view, but it would be awesome if some players in the maker space that are profitable (Adafruit, R-Pi, Arduino etc..) could band together and form a non-profit to keep this effort going. The maker community is generally so very non-corporate that I'd hope a partisan organization would be easy to form and run with out individual agendas or products getting involved in any overwhelming way.

</comment><comment><USER2> With a bit of further reflection, I have a 15 year old that lives for computers esp games, taught himself multiple computer languages from Youtube and Khan etc. He actually writes OK code and thinks about it the right way.

He won bits and pieces like Minecraft Mod of the Month, the school EMITS (STEM) prize, at a school that specialises in it etc etc

I thought he was going to program games, but he has decided he wants to be an electrical engineer (which I am) still not sure of the exact motivation, I have a pretty good life with lots of interesting work, maybe he hopes for that.

But, if he wasn't so highly motivated towards computers, I think I would tell him to spend the equivalent time he would spend getting a 4 year or 6 year EE degree and learn to make fine hand crafted shoes. Send him to Florence. Some big money in custom shoes if you build a name and quite rewarding if you like that sort of thing.

An Arduino isn't going to keep my feet warm, dry and stylish, for $800 (or even $5000 in extreme cases) a pair.

And that need isn't going away because Arduinos exist.

<comment><USER35> Funny you should mention shoes - my wife was demoing making socks at our local mini Maker Faire last year. There is a small, but devoted community of people who use their machine shops to build modern versions of the antique hand- cranked knitting machines used to makes socks. She has a room full of them, and it is a great blend of modern tech, antique machines, and hand crafted goods that was perfect for a Maker Faire.

We're interested to see what fallout this has on such local gatherings, whether they will continue or not.

<comment><USER36> > There is a small, but devoted community of people who use their machine > shops to build modern versions of the antique hand-cranked knitting machines > used to makes socks.

Whoa, what? Okay, super interested in this. Especially after seeing so many local schools and universities auction off or scrap what probably amounts to tons of old-iron textile processing machinery.

Please let me know if you have any relevant links! Would appreciate muchly.

<comment><USER35> My wife is the expert on it, but I know this is the main company she works with for her new machines: [http://stores.erlbachergearhart.com/](http://stores.erlbachergearhart.com/)

(She also has a collection of antiques she has picked up over the years.)

But really, you can find most of the links you would want if you search for: "circular sock knitting machine"

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> In Germany we have a German edition of Make:, which is done by Heise Verlag (of c't fame), and they seem to be doing fine (and there is no VC involved). It seems they have licensed the trademark (it was called "c't hardware hacks" before) but operations are done through the Maker Media GmbH. They also organize Maker Faires all over Germany, so I guess it is possible to do this and make a profit, at least in Germany.

[https://www.heise.de/make/](https://www.heise.de/make/)

<comment><USER38> It sounds like the wrong type of business for receiving VC investment. Expos/conferences can make good money, but I expect it's a few magnitudes less than what an investor would want as a return. I wonder what the pitch deck looked like when they raised the investment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> I've been a "maker" since I was a kid. Same Ham radio, dad tinkered with stuff, best friends family ran a lawn mower repair business that others have chronicled.

Now most of the things I make are electronics with mostly a CPU, and some way to talk to the remote device but 90% is code. Woodworking is via either my own tools, or a friend's shop.

I'm on the board of a Maker group and our two big things is rental (pontifier's comment) and our insurance. It's sad to see people pay $400 for an Apple Watch and then whine about a $10 a month shop fee.

Interesting thing is Public Libraries are becoming Maker Spaces (not a TM) with printers, laser cutters, sewing machines, etc. Our county built a new library with an "innovation center" in it with all this stuff.

A local museum runs a "Fair for Makers" (again not a TM) that this year had 22 exhibitors in their main building and about 40 outside. Also had craft brew and food trucks, all for $5 a person. No fee to present so it was a nice day for everyone.

Sorry to see them go out of business, I think they started something very cool.

</comment><comment><USER40> Huge bummer, I loved it as a participant. Didn't realize it was a venture- backed business... for some reason I thought it was a nonprofit.

<comment><USER41> It had the feel of a non-profit. It's too bad they can't rework Make magazine into something PBS would be into.

<comment><USER42> The fairs can be reworked into something non-profit, though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> Between this and the tech shop bankruptcy, is there a broader issue with financial viability in the maker industry?

<comment><USER44> Tech shop as a public resource could probably be better as a municipal, library-like entity. Any attempts at this model working?

<comment><USER45> Look around at your local public library. Most of them are barely hanging on, except for the ones that haven't made it.

I don't see cities investing the hundreds of thousands of dollars it would take to build out a maker space, not to mention the money to staff it, run the training courses, maintain the equipment and pay for the insurance.

<comment><USER10> I know of a local library who's actually going through with this. They have a grant and tons of dedicated volunteers to design curriculum and plan out the space. I hope to see that project succeed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> I went to the maker faire for the first time some 6 years ago when my wife asked me to, it wasn't something I really thought I'd find interesting. When I got there I Realized I was dropped into a community of like minded hackers and builders and art makers. It lead to a real epiphany and I ended up joining a team at Google that ran their Maker Faire presence. Over the subsequent years I built and demo'd some really cool things including a scanning microscope made from a shapeoko, a fully interactive Google Doodle, a demonstration of the North American solar eclipse. I learned a ton of electronics and how to 3d print and laser cut. I went back this year and while Google had a booth, it was scaled down a lot, but still filled with cool projects done by googlers in their spare time.

I was always unimpressed with Intel's high budget spectacle (run by an external marketing firm) and I have to conclude that the indie portions of the maker faire, which aren't particularly cost-effective, are ultimately the most interesting parts. I saw a guy who built a self-solving rubik's cube- servos inside ([https://hackaday.com/2018/09/24/self-solving-rubiks- cube/](https://hackaday.com/2018/09/24/self-solving-rubiks-cube/)) and met with people who grind their own telescope lenses, etc, etc, and have tons of admiration for their passion and abilities.

With all that said, Make was never particularly well-run and we kind of saw this coming over the years.

<comment><USER47> The art minded part of it is what is really important to me. Hopefully someone can figure out some way to make that profitable (or at least sustainable) in the future. There is no shortage of tech conferences but I do not see a lot of gatherings where people share and talk about their exploratory projects that are done just because they feel like they would be interesting.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> That's sad to hear. I went to my first makerfaire last year, and I got to experience some of the most amazing things ever

\- Making my own T-shirt through a heat press

\- Watching battlebots fight live in person. I got to see how battlebots were maintenanced and designed. And take a look firsthand on how the Kraken (one of the battlebots) was built from prototype to what it is today _(it uses a air compressor which is kind of weird)_

\- Seeing all sorts of cool cosplay

\- really interesting side projects - micro-3d photography and photo stiching of insects, 3D gif makers from 30 cameras in a single room using python, arcattack music from tesla coils, zoetropes, etc

\- K-12 local community projects - kids were teaching adults how to solder, make DIY type of stuff, etc.

There's lots more to be said but makerfaire is one of a kind

<comment><USER49> > it uses a air compressor which is kind of weird

If you want lots of mechanical power in short bursts, compressed air is a winner, because compressing air is a very good way to store lots of energy that you can release quickly, and it can be coupled into mechanical action without bulky coils.

Industrial tooling (you've heard air tools in your local auto shop, probably) and heavy robotics love the stuff.

The big downside is noise, which explains why you might not encounter compressed air in your day-to-day life, even though it is every bit as fundamental as, say, high voltage power transmission.

<comment><USER48> Air compressor was weird to me because most battle bots AFAIK use a hydraulic systems, Kraken is one of the few to use compressed air. Actually, to be precise they use SCUBA tanks used in ocean diving.

Also they got a cool logo and have their own font-face

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> I went to the one in San Mateo a couple weeks ago. It is the only time in life I have seen hobbyists, tinkerers, professional engineers, entrepreneurs, hippies, cosplay fans, university students, and kids under one roof.

</comment><comment><USER45> It poured rain at this year's Bay Area Maker Faire in late May, which is absolutely unheard-of. I had a really bad feeling when that happened that it might be the end of the venture. The cash outlay to run an event like that must run into the hundreds of thousands, and if attendance was cut in half, then they lost their shirts on it.

<comment><USER51> > Dougherty said that despite rain, Maker Faire's big Bay Area event last week > met its ticket sales target.

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> > _" 1.45 million people attended its events in 2016. MAKE: magazine had > 125,000 paid subscribers and the company had racked up over one million > YouTube subscribers."_

This should be able to pay for 22 staff.

<comment><USER53> Not if you also have to get your VCs the return they are expecting.

<comment><USER54> I don't completely understand the logic. After all, if they shut down, the VCs won't get anything, either. So why not keep it running and reap at least little rewards.

<comment><USER53> Once you take the funding, you have to spend it all on expanding operations, new staff, marketing, promotions etc. If you then can't generate a profit, unless you raise more rounds the increased expenses are going to kill your business. So in this case the VCs cut their losses instead of giving them more money.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER55> The reality is that this isn't the kind of venture that brings in money, and that's not as much an indictment against Maker Media so much as it is against the adverse conditions of which any venture is up against. I.e., we live in a (flawed) society. At least the ethos behind the Maker movement lives on.

</comment><comment><USER56> I was gifted a subscription to their publication for years as a kid, but never got as into it as I wanted to. I loved reading about what others had made but felt like I never had the experience or expertise or money to make things myself. In hindsight, I probably could have done lots of cool thints.

When the subscription expired I didn't renew. This makes me so sad to see now - I feel like there's a world where I would have been extremely into this culture, and I feel like not having this publication around will prevent others from becoming that.

<comment><USER41> Make and the reprints will forever be one of those things that's inspiring to read. In reality, outside of Chinese factories there aren't communities of mechanically inclined tech savvy people interested in spending their time putting together other people's EE projects. Anyone capable of completing a Make project is unlikely to want to follow along and retrace someone else's project unless there's a real incentive to do so, such as saving money or building something that's impossible to buy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> The first Maker Faire I brought the kids to was awesome. Over time they got more expensive, crowded and less fun. The kids complained so much at the last one I decided to stop taking them.

</comment><comment><USER15> Bummer. I hate seeing cool & quirky things go down the drain.

On a recent visit to SoCal, I saw a billboard for the Renaissance Pleasure Faire. I haven't been in years, I'm no longer a local, but I was happy to see it still going more than 30 years after I first heard of it. Hopefully it's still as much fun for people experiencing it now as it was for me back in highschool!

</comment><comment><USER58> Does anyone here have context on the pitch that got them $10 million in venture funding? Hard for me to envision how that could have worked, but their VCs must have had a pretty articulated investment thesis.

</comment><comment><USER59> > "Dougherty said that despite rain, Maker Faire's big Bay Area event last > week met its ticket sales target."

Why would you set a target so low that meeting it still results in bankruptcy?

</comment><comment><USER60> Maybe we should go back to shop class in public schools. For me at least, this was my earliest exposure to making things, at it set off a lifetime continuing curiosity.

</comment><comment><USER61> Nothing of creative or artistic value will survive in the Bay Area - I'm done trying to fix this wasteland.

</comment><comment><USER62> This seems like a predictable outcome in a consumerist society driven by planned obsolescence and the need for infinite growth.

</comment><comment><USER63> _They've been paid their owed wages and PTO, but did not receive any severance or two-week notice._

Are there any VC out there that have ethics standards around winding down a failed venture, especially towards termination of employees?

<comment><USER64> That's on the founders and management, not the VC. You can choose to plan ahead and make sure you treat employees _and customers_ fairly based on tracking your expenditures and reserves or you can run into the wall at full speed.

We did this. It wasn't that hard but it required a lot of honesty. Having been through it I'm always shocked when startups fail with no warning.

</comment></comment><comment><USER65> This seems like the sort of social good organization that should be revived as a non-profit with government support. This is such an important organization for the future of education and economic innovation.

</comment><comment><USER66> I kind of wish they'd tried to restructure and reboot with some sort of crowd- funded initiative. Though perhaps they considered and discarded the idea for good reason.

</comment><comment><USER67> I took my kid to the most recent one in the Bay Area, which was fun. And crowded. And a bit expensive. Too bad it wasn't working out, but glad we got a chance to go once.

</comment><comment><USER68> Maker Faire did so much good. No matter what happens, I know thousands of people saw a Maker in themselves because of MAKE and Maker Faire. I know it inspired me.

</comment><comment><USER69> Things don't last forever but it was impressive that Maker Faire got started in 2006 and survived the Great Recession which hit the Bay Area particularly hard. I went to _the_ Maker Faire twice, the first time being especially magical. But I never went to any of the sub Faires. I think like Tech Shop, expansion was never going to be sustainable.

Again, things don't last forever but I'm grateful for what it was, when it was.

</comment><comment><USER70> Worked there for a couple of years and really loved it. The people were wonderful, and the Faires were an incredible experience. It will be missed.

</comment><comment><USER71> Radio Shack should buy Maker Faire.

<comment><USER72> Only if both get acquired by a Yahoo/Barnes and Noble merger

</comment></comment><comment><USER73> Makerfaire as an experience was great. Food, wonky projects, competitions, and overall a fun event to hang out with friends, connect with others and learn. I would say kill the magazine and focus on improving the event experience and focus on community building and find a way to reduce or eliminate the dependence on corporate sponsors.

Maybe the community has changed or moved on or matured and makerfair has served its purpose. Maybe this marks the end of an era and it's time to move onto something new. I went 4 years in a row while in undergrad but stopped attending after graduation I think because it was getting a bit stale. Seemed like lots of projects year after year were simple iterations or very similar to previous ones. Also it felt like at some point there was a transition from wow look at this funky science/tech/art project to hey do you want to buy my product?

</comment><comment><USER74> I could not understand this news the first time I heard whispers of it. I'd been to makers faire many times and they showed every sign of slow growth and tons of enthusiasm. It took me this paragraph to understand what happened:

> "It started as a venture-backed company but we realized it wasn't a venture- > backed opportunity" Dougherty admits, as his company had raised $10 million > from Obvious Ventures, Raine Ventures, and Floodgate.

> "The company wasn't that interesting to its investors anymore. It was > failing as a business but not as a mission. Should it be a non-profit or > something like that? Some of our best successes for instance are in > education."

</comment><comment><USER75> Coincidentally, I found myself on Obvious Ventures earlier today and was impressed to see they backed Make:. [https://obvious.com/portfolio/maker- media](https://obvious.com/portfolio/maker-media)

That brought back fond memories of early Make Magazine collaborator, I think editor, Phillip Torrone presenting at one of the first WordPress WordCamps.

</comment><comment><USER76> I thought this was remarkably self-reflective:

> "It works for people but it doesn't necessarily work as a business today, at > least under my oversight"

</comment><comment><USER77> Their faire in San Mateo was crazy expensive. Kids tickets (for even 4 year olds,) were $30 and adult tickets were $50. Parking was ridiculous at $35 per day, despite this being San Mateo and the events center having plenty of parking. Parking for the Oakland A's and Warriors is cheaper than that. The proximity to the Caltrain was advertised as a "10-15 minute walk" despite the distance being almost a mile. With several small kids and it being rainy that weekend, the thought of walking a mile in the rain wasn't very attractive only to pay $220 for two adults and four kids under age 7. Helpfully there were bicycle instructions from San Francisco in case someone thought that might be a good idea. For being billed as a "family friendly event," It was anything but, just on the logistics front alone. It's like the organizers are detached from reality and live in some kind of dream world where $245 is a fair price for a family of 4 with parking. That's about double what I pay to go to Major League Baseball games with the family. I get it, they don't like cars, because climate and all that. But some of us live in reality. To get to the Caltrain from my house in Mountain View, it's a two mile walk. So with kids we'd have to load the car to drive to the station, so we might as well just drive to San Mateo.

My point is simple: tickets and parking were insanely priced and it's no wonder that the overall business failed because clearly the management had some trouble reconciling reality with their perception of their own value.

<comment><USER78> Yes, the location was really not ideal in terms of access, but tbh I don't know where else in the bay area you could hold that kind of event.

I think the bigger issue was that every year it felt like 98% of the same exhibits in the same places. So it was the kind of thing you did once. Twice was a mistake. In 2016(?) I volunteered at a friend's booth, and didn't even really want to walk around because I'd already seen it all. And ppl gobbed the booth because it something different.

<comment><USER79> To be honest I think most of the really awesome makers don't usually show up at Maker Faire. 95% of the exhibits are of the "Look ma I put a servo inside a puppet" variety. Very few of, say, the Hackaday-front-page caliber. There are some, but not enough to make it feel mindblowingly awesome.

<comment><USER80> I'd say there's no point really for individuals unless you're selling something with a decent profit margin. Publicity and talking with people is easier to get online.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER81> Education products is always a tough market due to people viewing education as basically discretionary instead of an investment.

</comment><comment><USER82> Some folks from the community created that initiative! Let's support!!! [https://twitter.com/MATRIX_Creator/status/113722465869100236...](https://twitter.com/MATRIX_Creator/status/1137224658691002368)

</comment><comment><USER83> This is really sad. I still remember being excited to pick up a new issue of Make: every month or so when I was in middle school. Also fondly remember watching "Weekend Projects" with Bre Petis (well before his MakerBot Years).

Lots of great folks - Sad to see this movement die.

<comment><USER13> IMHO, the movement is just fine. Make as a company, and partially as a brand, failed, but that doesn't mean _that_ much.

</comment></comment><comment><USER84> I've never been to any of the events in US, but I really liked going to Mini Makerfaires in Europe. I understand these were all licensed under the Makerfaire brand. I hope they will continue in the future, even if under a different name.

</comment><comment><USER85> I have somehow never heard of this and now I feel as if I've missed out.

<comment><USER86> +1. Never heard of this. Would have probably been a customer. I bought a few raspPi to tinker with stuff but have no idea how those things work and always end up not doing much and getting stuck.

Something like MAKE would have helped a lot!

</comment></comment><comment><USER87> I've been a subscriber since the first issue, and still have every copy of the magazine they mailed, although most were just kept and unread. Is there any market for a full set of magazines?

</comment><comment><USER88> Print is dead. Worst industry on the planet to focus on. Had maker picked one thing and done it right, it could still be here. It tried to be too many things at the same time.

<comment><USER89> Print may be dead but I read every Make magazine and am always happy to find it in the mailbox.

edit: Not meant to add anecdotal data but instead to validate target audience of article.

</comment></comment><comment><USER90> Damn that makes me so sad. I LOVED Make in my late teens and early 20s. I always intended to subscribe when I could, but life happened and I don't make things nearly as much...

</comment><comment><USER91> Shouldn't they have updated their websites by now?

You can still buy a new subscription to the magazine...

</comment><comment><USER92> omg, I went to the Maker Faire in the Bay Area for the first time this year. It has always been a dream of me to go but I was never in the US at the right time. I remember thinking that I wanted to go again, I was not expecting it to be the last one.

</comment><comment><USER93> Make cool shit (great) profitable again.

</comment><comment><USER94> Walk softly on the Earth.

</comment><comment><USER95> Techcrunch's privacy policy is just an insulting joke. It proposes to opt out of their tracking through their hundred of partners, by clicking through each, one at the time.

I wanted to share that article, I think I just wont...

<comment><USER81> Install ublock origin, problem solved.

<comment><USER96> I have 3 layers: Privacy Badger (with some custom made work), NoScript, AdBlockPlus. I have 'maxed out' all Firefox privacy settings (battery monitoring, geolocation, 3rd party cookies, etc.). I also got some strong hosts file ([https://someonewhocares.org/hosts/](https://someonewhocares.org/hosts/))

I feel pretty private :)

Also when I go to a website that it doesn't ring a bell, I spend a few seconds 'working on it' (PrivacyBadger, NoScript, ABP) so I won't have to bother again with their crap.

<comment><USER97> You may want to consider switching from ABP to uBlock Origin. There's lots of articles explaining it in detail, but essentially uBO is open source and ABP is a $50mm/yr business that allows some ads through and I think (but am not positive) have a history of data sharing.

<comment><USER98> ABP is just as open source as uBO is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER99> This is terrible news. The first MakerFaire I attended was in 2013 in San Mateo. Going gave me a ton of inspiration to get into electronics and 3d printing, and that's what I have been doing in my spare time since then.

There was nothing like it, the Faire was like a Disneyland for nerds.

Admittedly the past few Maker Faires had become a bit lackluster as the focus of the faire shifted from attracting adults in the industry to children instead. Still a shame.</comment>


Ask HN: Help me generate an idea for my next project - <AUTHOR> Ask HN: Generating ideas for my next project.
My previous one was [CryptoMilli](https://www.cryptomilli.com). In the back of my mind, I want to work on a single page app with the ethereum blockchain as the backend.
With the amount of energy it generally takes, I want to at least work on something worthwhile. That's why I'm giving myself a week or two to evaluate a bunch of ideas, choose one and ditch the others. (Dating a bunch to find out which one I could fall in love with, at least until it's done).
Any pointers, suggestions will be highly appreciated. <comment><USER2> Make a digitally verified lab book

It would be kind of a wiki but each update/edit is externally verified.

In science, each lab has several lab books where everybody documents everything they did. In the rare event of a patent discussion between two labs or unis the first entry in the lab book decides who gets the patent (it seems to be way more complicated than that by now). Usually these lab books are regulary counter signed by the supervisor to 'prevent' tampering but it's not a particularly secure system. Having the blockchain verify each entry's date and originality could be fun. (but I wonder how useful it would be in the real world - would patent lawyers take this up or just ignore it and say they're happy with the old system?)

<comment><USER3> In my lab experience, electronic lab notebooks were incredibly bloated, slow, and buggy to the point of being unusable. I'm most familiar with what was in place at Merck about 8 years ago: ELN (Electronic Lab Notebook). I agree with comments that the countersignature is both lax and absolutely necessarily from a records perspective. Most importantly, building a new lab notebook system would require importing data from whatever it is you'd be attempting to displace. Lab notebooks have significant roles in IP disputes, and it would be critical that the contents and timestamps are preserved.

To underscore how terrible ELN was at our site, many managers instructed their reports to keep traditional paper notebooks, photograph each page, and upload to an ELN entry. Countersignatures were then performed on the ELN platform. This was at a relatively small Merck site, and maybe the issue wasn't as pervasive elsewhere.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Build an ethereum contract (or verify and use an existing one) that refunds all money received unless a 'goal' is met, like a 'guaranteed money back if useless' GoFundMe.

Allow people to submit ideas that you're willing to vet completion for (this gets tricky/arbitration-y, encourage splitting this up into phases/steps rather than a giant lump sum) like an 'only pay if you get it' Kickstarter/Upwork.

With a twist: find a way to use all the pending deposits for proof of stake and return most of what is earned to those who have committed to potential projects. Consider making your own transaction fee equal to the ethereum transaction fee for all your transactions.

I may spam a couple more as separate comments...

</comment><comment><USER5> First find a problem, then think of the obvious solution to that problem, then solve the underlying problem to that solution.

You can find some good problems from this essay.

[https://medium.com/black-n-white/the-problem-with- problems-4...](https://medium.com/black-n-white/the-problem-with- problems-47ee63bb3511)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for sharing ThomPete I read the article. I will go through the HN thread link you pointed out in a bit.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> If you've decided to use Ethereum, you should find a target group that really needs the immutability and verified consensus. For the average user, Ethereum is both very expensive and very inconvenient.

So maybe look for industries where they're currently moving a lot of paper around to achieve consensus between market players and/or regulators?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks a lot for the suggestion Pavlov. I will let this float in my head and search/read more about some use-cases.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Design a polling system for media houses to use when they conduct opinion polls for a particular topic. Making it decentralized and blockchain backed will ensure truth of data and make the results tamper proof.

</comment><comment><USER8> I got a pet project in concept stage :) Very experimental though, no guaranties at all it will work:

A mix of link aggregation and twitter (taking the best of both worlds) and than adding hierarchy by ratings from the link curators. This hopefully means avoiding suggestion engine clickbait, and democratic mainstream kitten pictures. It's always the 1 to 1 trust of subscriber and curator. This also goes away from timeliness and chronology.

Further experimental features:

\- adjust your subscriptions by dampening or raising certain curators weighting

\- meta subscriptions: Subscribe everything someone else subscribed to (with dampening when there are too many nested hops). Should take viral to an extreme (for good or bad).

\- see each post only once (flip or scroll to the next page and it becomes permanently archived for you)

\- nested folders and subscription based on folders (splitting personalities and allowing to split topics. In combination with meta-subscriptions one could subscribe to accounts of resort editors to make a "magazine")

If you are interested, I wrote a few pages about it I'll happily share.

<comment><USER9> I am working on a system like this for music, (scans links on YouTube Reddit SoundCloud etc) I'd be interested in reading what you have. My email is email@example.com

<comment><USER8> I'm currently editing it a bit, I'll send it in a few days (feel free to remove your address from the comment, I saved it).

I also think such a system is well equipped for matters of taste, where some peer-bubbles can even be beneficial (there is so much bad art I never want to see...).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Find a way to break the metadata chain connecting Tor users to onion servers on the Tor network. Most specifically the 'logged in here, connection happened on the server discovered there' edition.

Not sure ethereum is good here vs. privacy-first alternatives, but also not sure if all that is needed is Mechanical Turk, or a Stallman-esque browse-by- email. Maybe a protocol where people can get paid to run an email re-mixer as an onion service?

Build a system where users get paid to click random buttons, invoking services on onion sites. The hard part would be preventing side channel attacks... same request length, truly randomizing delay between task submission and completion (or some sort of subscription to send a block of random data regularly but sometimes it's user-controlled), no permanent logs vs. getting paid, etc.

Riffing on a few useless ideas here on a low-traffic day since the ideas are not going anywhere without execution.

<comment><AUTHOR> I am not that familiar with Tor. Maybe someone in this thread will experiment with this idea.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Implement microtransactions. This is a good 2nd business (for mixers!), where you have existing customers who might be willing to pay a bit extra to be able to support their favorite creators. It gains extra potential if you act as an exchange, giving a currency that has a solid history of cheaper transactions.

You might gain additional leverage by being willing to collect for people who aren't connected, but that can get awkward (allow donating to charity). Also, taking care of getting funds to designated recipients who want nothing to do with ethereum basically means the legal setup reporting money transfers.

I think the window for this is closing as some mainstream currency is going to do this right, or some cheap-transaction currency will become mainstream/accessible enough.

I am posting ideas as separate comments. Hope the weekend crowd can give you something useful.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Summary of submitted ideas:

* Digitally verified lab book (a wiki style update/edit verified by 'signing parties') [a_bonobo]

* GoFundMe-like smart contract [j_s]

* Polling system for tamper proof results on opinion polls (for media houses) [apexkid]

* Trend Analytics of crypto-currencies on platforms such as Twitter/reddit. [AznHisoka]

* link aggregation + hierarchy of ratings from link curators to avoid suggestion engine clickbaits and sockpupetts inflence [anotheryou]

* Micro-transactions for existing customers who want to support their favorite creators. [j_s]

Good suggestion:

* Read/listen/watch to learn the basics (in a domain) in order to unleash your creativity [fazkan]

Thanks everybody for your time and consideration. At the very least, I wrote down more questions of my unknowns, what-ifs, and basics to read/experiment more with. This means a lot :)

</comment><comment><USER10> Common man you dont want others ideas, just practice writing 10 ideas a day that can solve some problems. Dont filter while writing.

Also word to the wise, if you are asking other people for ideas to implement in a space (ethereum) so that you can learn the technology, implies that you dont know much about the field or have clear basic concepts. For now I would just read/listen/watch to learn the basics in order to unleash my creativity...

your sincerely, nobody...

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the advice. Going back to the basics is almost always a good idea before forcing down the trees. Will do.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Do what interests you. What are you interested in? Fish, sports, books, travel, food etc. Choose a domain first, then select something to apply to that.

<comment><USER12> You may have meant 'domain' as in an area of interest, in which case this is good advice. For years though, I was a proponent of the 'buy a domain name first' method of idea validation. As a result I spent far too much time and money on domain names when I should have been testing the idea/market.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Trend analytics on how often the various cryptocurrencies are mentioned in Reddit.

Sensible price alerts to prevent people from obsessing over their stock or crypto portfolip (ie an alert for BTC is in the 12k range as opposed to a daily price alert)

</comment><comment><USER14> Make torrents editable. (eg. one torrents contains discography of a band. band releases new album. torrent owner adds one folder to the torrent which gets distributed to all the peers).

Someone will do this, mark my words.

</comment><comment><USER15> Find a problem that does not have a solution yet. Make a solution to solve the problem and offer free for life licesenes to companies that want to beta test it and give feedback and bug reports.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the input Orionblastar.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Find a way to overlay an ERC20 type system on top of a zero fee coin like XRB, IOTA, or other. Not what you asked for but I'd love to see it!</comment>


China Forces Norway to Adhere to 'One China' Policy - <AUTHOR> https://sentinel.tw/norway-one-china-policy/ <comment><AUTHOR> There are two notable points in this piece:

1) China suspended normal diplomatic relations with Norway, tossed out a free trade agreement, largely shut down fishing imports from the country and made it far more difficult for Norwegians to get visas to travel study or work in China. All of this was because of an activist being awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, which is process controlled a foundation, not directly by the Norwegian government.

2) It took six years for Norway to get normal relations back. After many failed attempts, what they finally had to do was jointly acknowledge the One China Principle _and China 's core interests and territorial integrity_. Beyond Taiwan, this clearly includes the China's "nine dash line" claims in South China Sea, which was ruled illegal by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague last summer.

There's also various content about interfering with Dalai Lama visits and other topics that are pretty familiar to most Europeans.

Update: correction about the Nobel Peace prize thanks to dagw's feedback.

<comment><USER2> _Nobel Peace Prize, which is process controlled a private family, not by the Norwegian government._

Not entirely true. First of all the Nobel Foundation is completely independent of the Nobel family and has been since the start. Secondly while the Committee that decides who gets the peace prize is technically independent of the Norwegian government, it is appointed by the Norwegian government and many of its members have always been former Norwegian politicians (a former prime mister of Norway, for example, sat on the committee that gave the prize to Liu Xiaobo).

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. I hadn't realized it was such a thin technicality. I just updated the comment.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Wow, shocking to read of such deep capitulation from a country like Norway, which positions itself as egalitarian and goes the extra mile in various areas such as excluding certain companies from investment by its global sovereign fund on ethical grounds[1].

This was also chilling to read: _" And when the Dalai Lama was invited to Norway in 2014 by the Norwegian Nobel Committee to celebrate his receiving the Nobel Peace Prize 25 years earlier, conservative Prime Minister Erna Solberg refused to meet with him, as did every single member of Solberg's government. Due to warnings from China, His Holiness was not even allowed in to the Norwegian Parliament's formal reception room, despite the room being empty during the time of his visit."_

[1][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Pension_Fund_of_Nor...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Pension_Fund_of_Norway#Excluded_companies)

<comment><USER4> > Wow, shocking to read of such deep capitulation from a country like Norway

China forces every country that it has normalised relations with to adhere to the 'One China' policy. Does your country have a Chinese embassy in it? Guess what, your country adheres to the 'One China' policy too.

<comment><USER3> Pretty sure other countries' recognition of (which does not necessarily equate to acceptance or support of) China's position on this do not extend to the level of sovereign embarrassment and capitulation outlined in the post.

<comment><USER5> As barkingcat suggests, pretty much every country on the planet that has normalized diplomatic relations with China formally accepts the One China policy. This is part of China's chess strategy for forcing the world to accept its ownership of Taiwan.

I will go out on a limb for a second and suggest that the day will come soon enough when the United States formally bends the knee on this issue as well. We are headed in that direction much faster than anyone anticipated.

The 'free world' has chosen to worship the Almighty Dollar as its lord and sovereign. China is where most of your dollars come from now. Ergo, China has the mandate of market-capitalist heaven, and you work for China now.

<comment><USER6> Yup the US is not far behind.

As far as "sovereign embarrassment," there is no such thing. If you want Chinese trade and embassy relations, you put out whatever news releases, go on television, press conferences, and at the UN General Assembly you stand up and proclaim exactly what Norway has said. It's an "embarrassment" in the poster's mind, but pretty much every country has done it. Then you go behind China's back and buy Taiwanese stuff and talk to the President of Taiwan in backchannels because everyone needs cpu's, microchips, and cell phones. The level of hypocrisy is pretty high in global politics.

I do not agree with this, but it is the state of the world.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I live in Norway. There has been pressure for some time on the government to do this because of the salmon exports. Fishing is not as big as oil, but it is still an important part of the economy here. Losing China as a customer meant bad news for a lot of folks in the fishing industry here. Also, since Norway is trying (unsuccessfully so far, but still they are trying) to lessen dependence on oil, this loss mattered even more than you might think at first glance.

Not saying that caving to normalize relations was "right," but it definitely had quite a bit of domestic support here.

<comment><USER8> > Fishing is not as big as oil, but it is still an important part of the > economy

Meh. It employs 7k-10k people and contributes 0.7% of the economy. That is chickenfeed, and a particularly dumb thing to give up their principles over - particularly because processed fish are a fungible commodity and could be sold for the same price outside of China.

<comment><USER9> > processed fish are a fungible commodity and could be sold for the same price > outside of China

yes. right. that aspect of this story puzzles me. i thought that was how globalism worked.

i mean, can't Norway just sell the fish to, say, Canada, which could then sell _its_ farmed salmon to China, etc?

i can't quite see what difference this will make. is Norway geographically closer to China than other salmon producing nations? how do they explain this?

<comment><USER10> Those triangulations are possible only if the destination country is willing to pay a premium for the banned goods.

Norwegian salmon would cost more in China because the Canadians are going to put some markup on it (and fairly, because they'll have to do some work on their own.) Or keep the same price for the consumer and gain less. In both cases Norway is going to lose money compared to normal commercial relationships.

<comment><USER9> Right. Sorry, I didn't explain my thoughts well.

This is more what I had in mind: Instead of selling its salmon to China, Norway sells all of its salmon to the US, France and Germany. So now US, French and German consumers buy _that much less_ salmon from other salmon farming countries like Chile and Canada. And Chile and Canada are free to sell _their_ farm-raised salmon to China.

<comment><USER10> In principle you are right. In practice the supply chains must get some incentive to switch to new suppliers. Perfect cooperation would suffice but usually it's price cuts.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> International "meta"-law is so ridiculous. I mean the customary rules concerning recognition of states, embassies, passports [1], etc..

If I was ruler of a small country, I would say "of course we won't recognize Taiwan. We will _foobar_ them. They don't get an embassy, but they get a _blah_." (which de facto will be exactly the same thing)

[1] Concerning passports, no matter how radically different states are, the US, the Soviet Union, North Korea, the Vatican, one thing they can all agree on is that people have a "nationality" and must carry a "passport" when going over borders, the passport has a certain size and spaces for "visas", etc.. It really makes me consider how "radical" a state is if it partakes in this global system. Especially interesting, if you remember that a few centuries ago, none of this existed at all. In history lessions in school, I wondered how Lenin could travel through all of europe unhampered when he was fleeing from the tsarists. Well, there were only little borders or passports as we know them now around.

<comment><USER12> > If I was ruler of a small country, I would say "of course we won't recognize > Taiwan. We will foobar them. They don't get an embassy, but they get a > blah." (which de facto will be exactly the same thing)

That might not be a smart move. Small nations get a lot out of banding together and acting as a bloc. If you foobar Taiwan, it might freeze you out of diplomatic channels that are more important to you than wanking off China.

Plus, you don't have to kowtow to China when you have the US around. If you're _really_ lucky, you'll rate a US military base and watch your economy take off. Sadly, if the Trump-ites get their wish, the US won't be much of an alternative for much longer.

<comment><USER13> Taiwan is quite used to countries working around China like this. Only 20 countries have formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan, none of them very influential.

<comment><USER14> And those that do use the official name of Taiwan's gov't, the Republic of China... which makes PRC look bad since they have a "China" across the strait with democracy and freedom.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> An interesting detail left out of the article is that Norway's neighbor Iceland ended up signing a free-trade agreement with China in 2013, both Norway and Iceland had negotiations underway in 2010 when China broke ties with Norway.

Norway and Iceland are both EEA members, effectively with one foot in the EU, Iceland was the first European country to sign such an agreement with China.

Norway and Iceland having free-trade with China while having deep access to the European single market leaves EU expansion in an odd situation. Neither country could become a full EU member without hurting trade with China, or alternatively the EU would have to make a similar FTA with China beforehand.

I've wondered what the realpolitik of the situation is. Is China's main interest in these deals to drive a wedge into further EU integration? Are they trying to create a situation where Norway and Iceland joining the EU would be contingent on the EU accepting a FTA with China?

<comment><USER16> Norway at least have no current interest in EU membership. Support for EU membership has for a long time been so low (last year polls indicated 71% no, compared to an almost even result in the '94 referendum) that there's no prospect of another EU referendum anytime soon.

<comment><USER15> Norway and Iceland don't need to become full EU members for a China FTA creating conflicts between them and the EU. There's already overlap between products covered under Iceland's FTA with China and its FTA with the EU/EEA, but in practice it doesn't matter much because any gains from lower import duties are negated by expensive shipping from Iceland.

If Norway signs a similar agreement an EEA country with open land borders with the EU will have a FTA with China. At that point the EU would either need to never liberalize certain trade with the EEA least Norway become a shipping and distribution hub for Chinese goods into the EU, or accept that to get closer integration with Norway and the other EEA members.

There has been increasing liberalization of trade between the EU and EEA members, just last month the EU and Iceland agreed to drop almost all import duties on agricultural products[1].

In addition to all of that, with global warming gearing up the Northeast Passage[2] might become a viable shipping route between China and Europe, at that point shipping from China to Norway will be the shortest shipping route between China and Europe by far. Sailing from China to Europe via the NEP to Norway cuts time at sea and fuel consumption by more than half compared to going via the Suez Canal.

1\. [http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press- room/20170911IPR...](http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press- room/20170911IPR83504/eu-to-boost-trade-with-iceland)

2\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_Passage](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_Passage)

<comment><USER17> _" If Norway signs a similar agreement an EEA country with open land borders with the EU will have a FTA with China. ... Norway become a shipping and distribution hub for Chinese goods into the EU"_

No, it doesn't work like that. Norway is not a member of the European customs union. Goods moving between Norway and the EU are subject to customs checks and, potentially, tariffs. You can't just trans-ship Chinese goods landed in Norway onward into the EU without customs declarations, inspections, and all that.

Of course, private citizens can travel pretty much freely across the EU-Norway border. Goods can move freely in small, personal-use quantities (Norwegians certainly like to shop across the border at cheaper Swedish supermarkets, etc). But as soon as you start shipping stuff in commercial volumes, it is subject to customs just like any other Chinese goods coming in to the EU would be.

<comment><USER15> I understand that Norway doesn't have duty-free import of goods into the EU. What I'm referring to is that the existing tolls and import duties weren't negotiated with the assumption that Norway has tariff-free access to the biggest producer of cheap goods in the world.

I elaborated a bit on this in a sibling comment[1], but let's say for example that the import duties on electric drills from China into the EU are set at 30%, but the same duty for Norway is 10%.

After signing a FTA with China Norway can simply import the drills at 0%, then re-export them to Germany at a rate of 10%.

Even if they can't simply re-export finished products a Norwegian company could buy cheap Chinese parts for making drills, then finish constructing them domestically and export them to the EU.

Even if they don't directly re-export anything from China Norwegian industry would be more competitive than its neighbors, e.g. a Norwegian paper mill might buy cheap acids for industrial from China that their neighbors in Sweden don't have access to. This would make Norwegian paper cheaper than Swedish paper, and Sweden would pressure the EU to adjust its import duties accordingly.

Thus the EU will start having to either treat Norway and Iceland more like China in terms of tariffs and import duties, or to treat China more like Norway and Iceland.

1\. [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15409391](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15409391)

<comment><USER17> Norway certainly can't import Chinese drills at 0% and then re-export them to Germany under the Norwegian tariff. Those drills are still of Chinese origin, and re-labeling them otherwise would be illegal. Only Norwegian drills can benefit from Norway's 10% tariff.

As for goods of mixed origin (manufactured in Norway but benefiting from Chinese inputs/components), that is indeed where things get complicated. And that's one of the reasons why trade agreements typically run many thousands of pages and take years to negotiate! But the WTO has pretty comprehensive "Rules of origin" to use as a starting point.

<comment><USER15> Yes legally it can't, but enforcing this on an open border with a direct road connection to the rest of the EU is going to be quite interesting.

Right now this situation exists in theory, but in practice pretty much nobody in the EU has any cause to try to import something via Norway, since its trade deals are quite similar to what the EU itself has.

But the EU has huge tariffs on some Chinese products, including slapping China with 30-70% tariffs on basic metal alloys in some cases[1][2].

The difference can be so large that it becomes beneficial for you as a private EU citizen to drive up to Norway yourself to fetch e.g. basic alloys at lower prices.

Nothing remotely like this situation exists within the land borders of Schengen today. There's the agreement with Iceland, but as it's an island enforcement is much easier.

1\. [https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/09/reuters-america- update-2-eu-...](https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/09/reuters-america-update-2-eu- sets-steel-import-duties-to-counter-chinese-subsidies.html)

2\. [https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/oct/07/european- un...](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/oct/07/european-union-import- duties-chinese-steel-port-talbot-tata)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> oh-kumudo Which in fact, is what most countries in the world signed up for. Also, it is a prerequisite for any country to even establish ANY formal diplomatic relationship with China[1]. It is almost certain Norway government has acknowledged this way back then through some bilateral treaty, and this time it is simply a reiteration.

TL;DR:this is no news

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One- China_policy#Diplomatic_re...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One- China_policy#Diplomatic_relations)

<comment><USER18> The US has never recognized the One China policy or China's claim over Taiwan. Instead, the US merely acknowledges China's position.

Of course, as a superpower, you have a little bit more negotiating leverage.

However, China's only been successful at bullying countries into recognizing some of its more absurd positions because it has negotiated on bilateral bases, where in almost every case China holds significantly more relative economic clout.

If the US, the EU, the UK, Canada, Japan, and Australia collectively took a position and agreed to provide support for any country that was individually attacked or sanctioned by China for its position, then you'd probably see a much more restrained policy response from China (although their rhetoric would likely be quite loud).

We've known for years that China's foreign policy has largely consisted of "salami slicing" — pressing hard for small concessions that cumulatively result in dramatic changes to international norms, and in the past states engaging in such behavior have been met with a strong and united international response, but for numerous reasons, the reaction to China still remains quite muted.

<comment> dis-sys > If the US, the EU, the UK, Canada, Japan, and Australia collectively took a > position and agreed to provide support for any country that was individually > attacked or sanctioned by China for its position, then you'd probably see a > much more restrained policy response from China (although their rhetoric > would likely be quite loud).

cold war version 2? nice try.

<comment><USER19> I'm not sure how a Cold War 2 wouldn't be preferable to a CCP-centric world.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Looks like a PHP/mySQL non-static site (I wonder if some popular blogging platform?) crumbling under the load. Luckily someone pressed the turbo charge button (x-turbo-charged-by: LiteSpeed <\-- seriously?) on the cpanel box so it can now accommodate a page view a second!

<comment><USER21> Even WordPress pages end up faater than much of what is nowadays produced.

Gogs doesn't do any caching at all, every request opens a new database connection. After 30 accesses per second gogs dies.

WordPress can cache SQL queries with memcached, and can scale to tenthousands of accesses per second with that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> [https://web.archive.org/web/20170110193419/https://sentinel....](https://web.archive.org/web/20170110193419/https://sentinel.tw/norway- one-china-policy/)

</comment><comment><USER23> > _China Forces Norway to Adhere to 'One China' Policy_

China does no such thing. Norway sells out. For money.

But at least they held out for six years. A better score than most of the rest of us.

</comment><comment><USER24> The continued growth of China (and India) can strengthen organizations like the EU and give rise to other blocs of small countries. Collective bargaining power is the only way to have leverage with a country that's 20-60 Times larger. It's not unlike the unionization of labor in response to the weak bargaining position of the individual worker and I expect a similar pattern to repeat including union busting and bribery and a populist response. All very dangerous. If China pushes too hard, then the pendulum will swing hard in the other direction and China will be facing strong union fronts, populist movements that stubbornly demand painful concessions and resultant trade wars. We've seen this pattern before and it gets worse before it gets better.

</comment><comment><USER15> Since the site is melting under the HN load here's the full linked article:

HEADLINE: Norway just recently established normal ties with China after a six- year break. But in order to do so, the Norwegian government had to embrace the Chinese development model and social system, as well as the 'one China' framework.

ARTICLE: Since 2010, Norway barely had any diplomatic relations with China, due to the fact that Chinese activist Liu Xiaobo was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize that same year. The Chinese government demanded an apology from Norway, together with a guarantee that the prize was never to be awarded to a Chinese activist again.

But since the five-member Norwegian Nobel Committee is an independent institution, the Norwegian government was in no position to issue neither an apology nor a guarantee. Nevertheless, China decided to punish Norway by immediately shelving a free-trade agreement that was being negotiated.

Chinese officials also stopped visiting the Norwegian embassy in Beijing, and its ambassador no longer received invitations to diplomatic events. Visas became harder to obtain for Norwegian tourists and professionals alike, and a range of exchanges in different fields was canceled with haste.

However, in late December last year, Norwegian Foreign Minister Børge Brende suddenly appeared in Beijing to announce that the two countries were resuming normal diplomatic and trade relations. Negotiations on the free-trade agreement started again, much to the joy of the Norwegian Seafood Council, which estimates salmon exports to China to increase twentyfold in the coming years. The joy was shared by the tourism industry and the business sector alike.

It was also shared, obviously, by Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg, who acknowledged that the strained relationship what China had not only weakened Norway's trade but also its say in global politics, since China has been throwing its weight around to marginalize Norwegian influence in several international organizations.

But there is no such thing as a free lunch. When declaring the re- establishment of ties with China, Brende also had to present a two-page joint declaration that included passages like: "The Norwegian government reiterates its commitment to the One China Policy, fully respects China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, attaches high importance to China's core interests and major concerns, will not support actions that undermine them, and will do its best to avoid any future damage to the bilateral relations."

Hence, after Tsai Ing-wen took office in Taipei, China has not only engaged in checkbook diplomacy, as was the case when Sao Tomé & Principe switched diplomatic allegiance in late December. It is also demanding leading democracies to embrace the "one China" policy to atone for "mistakes" made years ago in totally unrelated policy issues.

William Nygaard, chairman of PEN Norwegian Center, criticized the fact that the two-page joint statement doesn't include a single word about human rights. John Peder Egenaes, general secretary for Amnesty International Norway, finds this particularly strange given that human rights is a Norwegian foreign policy priority — especially the support of human rights champions. "This policy," Egenaes said, "has to apply to China, as much as to any other place."

Stein Ringen, a Norwegian political scientist and professor at Oxford University, even branded the event as "an outright humiliation" to Norway, accusing his country's politicians of surrendering to China's demands. Ringen is particularly worried about terms like "territorial integrity" and "core interests" in the joint declaration, which he means de facto constitutes a "formal acceptance" from Norway not only regarding Taiwan, but also China's claims in South China Sea, which was ruled illegal by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague last summer.

While in Beijing, Foreign Minister Brende said that resumption of normal relations with China was made possible only after long-time and laborious diplomatic efforts. Those "laborious efforts" seems to have begun almost immediately when his Conservative Party assumed power after the 2013 elections, replacing the prior left-center coalition. Already later the same year seven pillars from the imperial Summer Palace, brought to Norway over 100 years ago by a Norwegian cavalry officer, were returned to China.

And when the Dalai Lama was invited to Norway in 2014 by the Norwegian Nobel Committee to celebrate his receiving the Nobel Peace Prize 25 years earlier, conservative Prime Minister Erna Solberg refused to meet with him, as did every single member of Solberg's government. Due to warnings from China, His Holiness was not even allowed in to the Norwegian Parliament's formal reception room, despite the room being empty during the time of his visit.

The two-page joint agreement signed by the conservative government also states that Norway "fully respects China's development path and social system, and highly commends its historic and unparalleled development that has taken place." For good measure, the declaration further highlights that Norway is "fully conscious of the position and concerns of the Chinese side" concerning the Nobel Peace Prize.

Alas, just short of a formal apology, China managed to get everything it wanted from the Norwegian government. In fact, the two-page joint statement can arguably be seen as an apology by diplomatic language, for an independent committee's decision to reward a peaceful activist, who is still to this day behind bars while his wife is enduring a strict house arrest.

As if that was not already enough, China added insult to injury by using the Norwegian resignation for propaganda purposes. At the time of the declaration, foreign Minister Wang Yi said that Norway understood how bilateral relations could be improved only after "deep reflections" and "solemn consultations" with China.

"Norway has paid its price due to its intervention in Chinese domestic affairs," the party mouthpiece Global Times mused, before summing up the case with the following observation: "Norway has a population of merely 4 million, but it tried to teach China, a country with 1.4 billion people a lesson in 2010. It was a ridiculous story."

<comment><USER25> "who is still to this day behind bars while his wife is enduring a strict house arrest."

Liu Xiabo is since dead, actually: [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/13/opinion/liu- xiaobo.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/13/opinion/liu-xiaobo.html)

<comment><USER26> The article is from January.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Utopian meets dystopian

</comment><comment><USER28> The reality is, money talks, even war is sometimes caused by economic reasons, if not all the times.

with that being said, the rising power of china, with its sheer size, it can essentially now bend everything to its will, including US who has so much trading deficit these years.

and, more cases like this will be down the road, people will probably have to get used to this new ruler in a few decades, mostly not by war, but by its economic power.

<comment><USER29> Unless we can all unite, and bring China back down to where it belongs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> How did _Liu Xiaobo_ become so important? So much happening for this guy expressing his opinions, wtf?!

If an American or someone from most European countries would express similar opinions wrt his own country's government... nobody would blink a fucking eye, regardless of who gave him what prize...

(And we all know that Nobels for anything _except_ science _are_ 100% bullshit. Heck, I'd even question the relevance of the ones for medicine...)

<comment><USER31> In American high school I learned not just about Nathan Hale and Martin Luther King Jr., but also about Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi, and Sophie Scholl. These figures are famous for the strength of their moral beliefs, the brutality they endured as a result, and their perseverance despite such adversity.

On these points, I think Liu Xiaobo is of equal merit. This would explain his visibility in the West. If students in China aren't taught similar stories or values, then I could understand the difficulty to relate.

<comment><USER32> Students in China are definitely taught about "figures are famous for the strength of their moral beliefs, the brutality they endured as a result, and their perseverance despite such adversity."

But considering that Liu Xiaobo preached about the inferiority of the Chinese race and how they needed to be colonized by the West for a couple hundred years, they would most likely compare him to an Uncle Tom/Chan type of person.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> What's that got to do with the price of fish?

Ah...

</comment><comment><USER34> It will be interesting if the nobel committee give another Nobel Peace Prize to China ;)

</comment><comment><USER35> Can't read the article because the site is down. But it seems like a reminder why countries join supranational organizations like the EU: To increase their collective bargaining power.

</comment><comment><USER36> There's no real commitment here, just a face save for China. The diplomatic language was clearly coerced and has no impact except satisfying Chinese narcissism.

</comment><comment><USER37> I dont understand the word Forcing here. Norway had a choice to continue denying The one China policy. Putting pressure on Norway thru various means is not forcing. Forcing would be done via a military operation leaving little choice.

<comment><USER38> Applying pressure that is irresistible is the literal definition of forcing.

So yes, China was definitely forcing Norway to recognize Taiwan and Hong Kong as a being a part of China.

<comment><USER39> But here the pressure wasn't "irresistible"; they were not being threatened or attacked. They would just be making less money than they do this way. I hardly call that irresistible.

<comment><USER38> Financial force is force.

<comment><USER40> What is it called when all it takes to convince you to do something you consider unethical is the promise of money?</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


BitCrumb - Shine a Spotlight Through Your Searches - <AUTHOR> http://www.bitcrumb.com/?hn

<comment><AUTHOR> Have you ever spent half an hour searching for something, not really found what you were looking for, and then a few days later realized that one of the pages you saw when you were searching was really exactly what you were looking for? But now you are not entirely sure how to get back to it?

In our experience, the joy of the realization is shrouded in the dread of having to spend another half hour trying to find the right page again.

So to solve that problem, we built this app.

</comment><comment><USER2> I don't really want to send anyone my web searching history, however I would be interested if the plugin could export data to csv,xml or json. That way I could datamine my search history with whatever tools I like to use.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's a really interesting idea. When we got started on this 6 weeks ago, we were actually thinking about going down a path very similar to that, of putting it all into a desktop application, rather than building a web app. It does potentially finesse the privacy issue. We perceived the tradeoff as being between powerusers being able to extract and fully analyze the data, versus more casual users wanting the data everywhere, and getting the other general conveniences of a web app. We'll write up a blog post to try and gauge interest, thanks again for the suggestion.

<comment><USER2> Why not offer both? Casual users might prefer to use the web app, advanced users can mine their own data. However, if I were to use a plugin to export my search data, I would expect it to be good at capturing/extracting search queries on a variety of websites and maybe have some additional features. Otherwise, I could just mine my Firefox history directly.

By the way, you could build a web app that runs on the desktop with Appcelarator's Titanium, or port the existing one to Titanium.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, that's the right answer. We just stepped out to grab lunch, were talking about your idea, and decided to basically build what you're suggesting here in this second message.

If you want us to let you know when we have something together (probably less than a week), my email is in my profile, shoot me a note, if you'd like.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


New developments in AI - <AUTHOR> http://blog.steinberg.org/?p=11 <comment><USER3> > _It is, admittedly, both technically and philosophically complex. But at the > most concrete level, the use of MCMC (Markov Chain Monte Carlo) type methods > to iteratively 'solve' Bayesian networks, allow us - in certain cases - <USER2> > make strong claims about causes from naturally observed data rather than > from carefully randomized experiments._

I am not familiar with these techniques, but judging from past experience with statistical and modeling claims, they more likely just make it easier to get the "evidence" you want from whatever data sets you choose to massage.

</comment><comment><USER4> "But confidence to the point of arrogance is practically a degree requirement for computer scientists."

Spot On.</comment>


Uber doing 1m trips per day in China alone - <AUTHOR> http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/e533bb8a-1081-11e5-b4dc-00144feabdc0.html

<comment><USER2> The amount of growth for Apple, Uber, etc in China for luxury products is astounding. Where do the new Chinese upper middle class work? Why is this not happening in other growing economies like India or Brazil? (or is it happening and I'm just not seeing it?)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> The graph of China growth in this: [http://im.ft- static.com/content/images/b11657c0-1079-11e5-b4...](http://im.ft- static.com/content/images/b11657c0-1079-11e5-b4dc-00144feabdc0.pdf)

Is ridiculous, wow.</comment>


Ask HN: What qualities should you look for in a mentor? - <AUTHOR>

What qualities should you look for in a mentor and whats the best way to approach such people? (I'm based in SF) <comment><USER2> There are some excellent answers to this question on Quora: [http://www.quora.com/What-are-the-most-important- qualities-t...](http://www.quora.com/What-are-the-most-important-qualities-to- look-for-in-a-mentor)

In my experience, approaching a mentor and asking them to be your mentor is not the best way to go about it. I found that a mentor relationship will occur naturally if you're ready for it and you have shown that you are insanely passionate about something enough to take action before ever approaching a mentor.

I guess one way to determine if somebody can or will mentor you is to simply ask for their advice on something that you are doing or have done. You have to show a lot of initiative though - it can't be conceptual in nature. For example, you wouldn't want to approach a rock star in your space and say "I'm thinking of doing this, would that work?" Instead, approach them and say "Check this out, here's what I have done. What do you recommend I do next?" If they get excited about what you have done, then you may have found a good match. Let that relationship grow and do not force them into being a mentor. I think a lot of the best mentors never consider themselves as mentors because they simply like helping out people and projects that interest them.

</comment><comment><USER3> Mentor qualities: \- Someone who has accomplished what you're looking to achieve. \- Someone who can helped expand your network \- Someone who picks up the phone when you call

How to meet them: \- Follow them on twitter \- Connect with them on Linkedin or FB \- See if they speak or attend events.

It might be analogous to stalking but be incredibly classy with them. If they're not responsive, move onto your list of potential mentors. Hope this helps.</comment>