Ask HN: Why learn non-JS languages/framework? - <AUTHOR> Hello HN,
At the risk of sounding completely stupid, why would I want to learn things like Rails, MVC5, Django over something in Javascript/Node?
It seems there are significant advancements being made in the JS world compared to others.
I am a die hard Python lover, but I do not know what do to at this situation. <comment><USER2> This feels like what happens when a web developer fails to realize that the web is not the be-all-and-end-all of software development.

Do you want to create fantastic 3D graphics and visual effects? Best learn C++ and OpenGL.

Do you want to develop a highly resilient parallel system that can be patched without downtime? Learn Erlang.

Do you want to program an embedded system, or anything where you need to be close to the hardware? Learn C.

Do you want to program mobile apps? Java, Objective-C or Swift.

Do you want to "program" hardware on an FPGA? Verilog.

Do you want to quickly make 3D games or other interactive experiences? Try C# and Unity.

Do you want to advance your own knowledge of programming and computation, even if you don't have a particular platform restriction? Learn any language in a different language family than you're used to, something like Clojure or Haskell or Prolog.

And as you get familiar with other languages, you'll find it's easier each time to pick up the next one.

Your question might better be phrased as, "As a web developer, what are the advantages to learning non-JavaScript-based web frameworks and languages?"

With my limited experience in the web world, the only good, practical answer to this modified question that I can come up with is "diversification". If all your eggs are in one basket when it comes to programming skill, you're very vulnerable to a language or toolset falling out of vogue. I know some Flash developers, for example, who have been absolutely devastated by the happenings of the past several years, because their toolset was far too rooted in Flash. JavaScript is pretty ubiquitous these days, so I doubt something quite that dramatic would happen to it, but it's possible that it could—for example, I can imagine best practices shifting over the next ten or twenty years so that nobody writes Javascript directly anymore, but only languages that compile to it. I'm not saying that _will_ happen, but it's an example of something that _could_.

<comment><USER3> It's pretty clear from the post that he's talking about web development.

And I don't think your 'all eggs in one basket' argument makes much sense. JavaScript will always be the (or, a) scripting language for the browser, and if something new emerges, we will all have plenty of time to prepare.

As for backend trends, they evolve slowly. One needn't worry about being caught unprepared for some sudden change.

<comment><USER4> > JavaScript will always be the (or, a) scripting language for the browser, > and if something new emerges, we will all have plenty of time to prepare.

Thing is - what if it already emerged, but you missed that?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> You don't sound even minimally stupid. :)

I wouldn't necessarily advocate any of those specific frameworks, but I do think there is life outside of JavaScript. I actually don't think JavaScript (particularly on the server) is a very good language at all. Blasphemy, I know.

As someone who has spent time with JS frameworks like Ember, Meteor, and the rest, as well as libraries and component systems like Rendr, React, and Backbone, it's certainly not the case that JavaScript is free of frustration. In fact, I've found the opposite to be true: despite the enthusiasm, some of these solved a bunch of problems only to create others.

The truth is, if you focus on being a great _engineer_ then picking up another language and framework isn't very difficult. It will make you a better programmer to see how other systems solve problems.

Not to speak out of both sides of my mouth, but I do advocate being a master at one or two languages and learning how to write idiomatic code. I just think there's room for more than literally one.

If someone tells you that Node is here to save us all from certain disaster and JavaScript is the One True Answer, I would simply nod your head, smile, say thank you, and then run as fast as you can.

<comment><USER6> > "I actually don't think JavaScript (particularly on the server) is a very > good language at all. Blasphemy, I know."

That's a relatively common sentiment here, and I agree that JavaScript isn't that great a language. In fact I would argue that it has so many warts, so many problems that if it weren't for its first-mover advantage in the browser space, JavaScript would be dead by now.

<comment><AUTHOR> even #javascript agrees to this. To be honest, picking up anything JS related was easy for me. I love npm, I love grunt (actually gulp now) compared to what ruby brings to the table ...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Basically JS represents a very narrow slice of what the world of programming is really about. It's just a weird and artificial environment in many ways. Also, despite its current success, it's bound to go away, eventually.

<comment><USER8> This is great advice. If you spend your time only reading about the latest startups, you'll think everyone is using Javascript and Node for everything.

The _vast_ majority of software is not written in either of these two. And it's not a knock on them, there just a tremendous amount of software out there and most of it pre-dates the Javascript/Node environment.

<comment><USER9> I would think if you were only reading about the latest start ups, it would sound like everyone were using Rails. At least that's been my experience

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> It really depends where you are in your career. If you are just starting out and would like to work in general web development, committing yourself to JS only would be stupid beyond belief. That would assume that JS based frameworks are going to be ubiquitous in the near future. They definitely won't be and there are many reasons to doubt that they will be ubiquitous in the long term as well. The same can be said for any language or framework, language convergence does not seem to be happening. More likely the landscape will remain unstable in the medium to long term. Therefore, as a generalist web developer you will be better served by polyglotism. Learn MVC and other application design patterns. Learn server side programming and client side programming. Learn SQL and others ways of interfacing with persistence layers. In short, don't stop learning and don't assume that there is one holy grail or one right way to do it. There are many jobs and many tools. Being a good programmer is about finding a way to match the tools with the job.

<comment><USER11> > If you are just starting out and would like to work in general web > development, committing yourself to JS only would be stupid beyond belief.

You're suggesting they focus on SQL instead? Ha.

In my opinion, java script is probably your safest bet if you want to focus on one thing related to general web development that will remain valuable for a long period of time. The trend I've seen with out clients (top 500 eccommerce sites) is more and more use of javascript. I would say learn jQuery and understand how Angular works.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Is there any framework in the JavaScript world as mature as Rails or Django (or with as many features)? This isn't a rhetorical question; as the author of the _Ruby on Rails Tutorial_ , I'd like to know what (if anything) I should be looking at next.

<comment><USER13> Meteor is about to hit 1.0. The current go to tutorial for Meteor is [https://www.discovermeteor.com/](https://www.discovermeteor.com/). And a good snapshot of the current learning resources can be found at [https://www.yauh.de/best-learning-resources-for- meteorjs/](https://www.yauh.de/best-learning-resources-for-meteorjs/).

I still owe you an email.

<comment><USER14> I saw "Meteor" presentation on their website yesterday. The 'real-time' client-server approach is impressive. I was impressed. Their straight-forward non-MVC approach might be handy for small projects.

To me "Meteor" looked more like a _direct competitor_ to Sinatra than Rails.

Anyhow "Meteor" seems pretty impressive.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Ten years ago (or less) if you had proposed building ANYTHING beyond basic form field validatation logic in JavaScript you would have been laughed out of the room. JS/Node is popular now but it's a fad. Things that seem exciting are really just reinvented wheels when you look closely. That said it's not a bad idea to learn it. Just don't think it will be something you're using heavily in 5-10 years. Same is true of any other language in the space though.

</comment><comment><USER16> I'm surprised no one mentioned single page web applications -- that's where I see JavaScript's strength at the moment, compared to the other server-side frameworks you named.

JavaScript: While Node.js is awesome, it is definitely not the best choice for everything -- not everyone needs its features (despite the hype). But if you want to build web apps on the client side, you have to either use JavaScript, or compile to JavaScript.

A client side web app however still needs a back end API. The good thing is, if your front end runs (mostly) on the client side, you can pick almost any language / framework for the back end you want (e.g. Python).

> I am a die hard Python lover, but I do not know what do to at this > situation.

Now if you don't know Django yet, my suggestion would be to learn both Django (given your Pyhton background) and one of the client side JavaScript frameworks, e.g. Ember.js, Angular.js, React.js or maybe Meteor (depending on your use case). (And if you learned both Ember.js and Django, you probably get an idea of what Ruby on Rails is like …).

</comment><comment><USER17> I'm actually not aware of any advancements being made in JS that haven't already been made on other platforms. For example, the JVM is much more performant than Node, has more libraries, better build tools, better development environments and so on.

I also think that other languages are more flexible and productive. JavaScript is a very crufty language with a lot of gotchas and odd behaviors. Dealing with these wastes developer time and makes large projects harder to maintain.

I'd much rather work with a language like ClojureScript and have the benefit of using the same language on the client and the server, while using a well thought out language.

Writing apps in ClojureScript is far more pleasant than with JavaScript. There are also fantastic libraries available such as Reagent ([http://holmsand.github.io/reagent/](http://holmsand.github.io/reagent/)) and Om ([https://github.com/swannodette/om](https://github.com/swannodette/om)).

</comment><comment><USER18> > Why would I want to learn

First off, because learning is good for you! Even if you dislike a language, there's probably something to learn from it if it's widely used.

There's a lot of great developments in the JS world and Node has really pushed the envelope in terms of asynchronous IO and making it easy to use web sockets and such. That said - most apps you'll make don't need some of the more unique features of Node and personally, I find it's easier to make web apps in high level languages like Python.

That said, it comes down to personal preference. It's the ol' optimization vs. discovery problem - you can't figure out what the best tool is for you without exploring new things.

I wouldn't worry about JS/Node replacing server side code, to be honest. Python and other languages are slowly going in the same direction (see Python 3's asyncio module). Learning a new framework or language is never a waste of time.

</comment><comment><USER13> Paul Graham has an essay discussing what he calls the "Blub paradox." [http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html). Perhaps the discussion there isn't immediately applicable to your question, but I think some aspects of PG's discussion are abstractable and applicable.

Ultimately, if you don't know what the other options are and their strengths and weaknesses, you will only ever have a hammer. And you won't even know that your only tool is a hammer. And you'll be trying to eat with it and sew with it, thinking that it's your only option.

If your life depends on manipulating bits. You should learn all the ways to manipulating bits. Because you will then know the best way to manipulate a bit in any given situation. Maybe you should be focused more on one than the others, but that doesn't mean you should ignore everything else.

</comment><comment><USER19> Right tool for the job. If you think JS solves everything I would propose you take a few introductory CS courses ;)

<comment><USER20> But all the hip startups are using JS, it must be the best

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Why learn anything other than x86 machine code? ;)

Seriously, from a software engineering perspective, the past decade has been a peculiar time: JS used to seem like a joke to many, but it's got past that and is now a serious contender as a platform compared to established ecosystems. However, we're also starting to see other languages include JS as a target platform; once _that_ matures, those other ecosystems can piggyback on JS's features, and it loses much of its appeal.

From a computer science/hobby programming perspective, JS is a 'Jack of all trades, master of none'. If you only know JS, you might get _really good_ at churning out code, debugging language-specific nuances, sculpting libraries to your whim, etc. but I would argue that you _won 't_ be really good at the big- picture stuff.

Without the perspective of multiple paradigms, you might not see the wood for the trees. Your _thinking_ will be a fuzzy mixture of important ideas lost in a sea of JS implementation details; you won't have the clarity that comes from thinking about a problem from multiple perspectives.

It can be difficult to learn a different technology; especially if it's not by your own choice. The key is that, once you've got past the initial "It can't even do X, Y and Z!" stage, you'll realise that:

      - It *can* do X, just in a way you didn't recognise because you didn't fully understand X
      - It can do A, B and C that you never even knew existed
      - Y is actually an anti-feature, which you didn't realise the problems of before

With all that said, if you're trying to learn new things, there's not much 'bang for your buck' going from JS/Node to Python/Django, Ruby/Rails, PHP/Symfony, or even whatever Perl's up to these days, since those languages are all very similar; of course you'll find a few nifty frameworks/approaches which are popular in each, but if you look around on GitHub you'll usually find slightly-crappier reimplementations in most of those other languages.

If you want to get some real "Aha!" moments, try something out of your comfort zone like Erlang, Haskell, C, FORTH, Prolog, Maude, Scheme, etc. (admitedly JS is like a cheap knock-off of Scheme, but those missing pieces like call-cc, tail-recursion and macros can drastically change the mindset of its users).

If you want to get stuff done, stick to what you know ;)

<comment><USER22> I dont see why people downvoted you. You had the best all-round advice. especially this part:

"It can't even do X, Y and Z!" stage, you'll realise that:

\- It _can_ do X, just in a way you didn't recognise because you didn't fully understand X

\- It can do A, B and C that you never even knew existed

\- Y is actually an anti-feature, which you didn't realise the problems of before

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> 1) Learning different programming languages is one really good way to grow as a programmer.

2) The web is just one of several mediums for delivering content these days.

3) Node.js has a highly suspect concurrency model that might not be suitable for all the various types of programs you could be building.

<comment><USER24> Why highly suspect ? We know and use cooperative concurrency since decades.

Agreed on the "not suitable for all" but no one said that.

<comment><USER23> Cooperative concurrency is fine and a lot of languages use cooperative concurrency just fine. The issue with Node is that it completely ignored the multicore reality that we live in. Everyone argues that multithreading is so complex, and it is unless you have the right abstractions. But what is guaranteed to always be complex is single-threading with process forking. As soon as you want to communicate between processes, and you will want to communicate between processes, you now have to implement IPC. In come the message queues... that is once you pick which message queue to use.

We've also been using event-driven IO for decades and Node is the only modern run-time to ignore the obvious perils of evented IO. Instead of doing what languages like Go and Erlang did, which is have event loops in the run-time that are completely transparent to the developer, Node pushes the evented IO right into the application developer's face. Are there remedies for writing good evented code? Absolutely. But why should application developers need to be schedulers in the year 2014?

<comment><AUTHOR> The stuff you were saying about forking, IPC... it made me giggle because I just wrote a midterm on these concepts last night :)

Thanks.

Erlang seems interesting, would you mind expanding on Erlang or GO?

<comment><USER23> Everything in Erlang is asynchronous and non-blocking but this is almost completely transparent to the programmer. When you start an instance of the Erlang VM it spawns as many threads as you have CPUs and a thread for an event loop. Each thread can have thousands of Erlang processes (Erlang's unit of concurrency is called a process) executing. Inside of the thread is an Erlang scheduler that allocates execution time to each Erlang process using a technique known as reduction counting.

Erlang also has great features for distribution. Communicating with processes that live in another Erlang VM node is also transparent. It's debated whether this is a good thing or not because some people think communicating over the network shouldn't be transparent due to partitioning, but in a lot of Erlang programer's experiences this is a wonderful feature.

The result of all of this is that the Erlang code you write looks synchronous but is executing concurrently. You have both CPU concurrency and IO concurrency. The Erlang VM takes care of most of the nasty bits of asynchronous code, which is what a good language run time does for you.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks,

Where is Erlang used predominately? Is it a "good" solution for web development (if that's even possible)?

<comment><USER25> Jose Valim, a RoR developer, created a language (Elixir) just for your use case. Go have a look!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Because the only way to learn the answer to that question, is to learn why people are using the other languages, which in turn, likely means researching them and learning them for yourself.

To answer your question more on point, the first thing you'll find is other languages add much, much more safety into their language than js-node can. Indeed, that's what makes js-node as much fun as it is. But if you're a new business owner, and you have to choose between building your server backend on java/c#/etc technology, which can be rigorously checked for stability, and js, chances are high you're going to go with the languages that have such automatic checking features.

</comment><comment><USER27> One good reason is the market. The wider your skillset, the greater your opportunities.

</comment><comment><USER28> Each framework, programming language can learn you something new. Many framework/languages feel very similar.

If you really want your mind to learn something you can get back to your JS code, you should try to use a functional language:

\- Clojure (I recommand compojure-api for the server and reagent in clojure script for the frontend)

If you really want to blow your mind:

\- Haskell (scotty if you want to start small, Yesod if you want all batteries included) for the back and Elm (for the frontend)

It will make your code cleaner in the end, and you'll start to focus on the important stuff instead of just the syntax.

</comment><comment><USER29> I work 100% in javascript at the moment, but it's only because I happen to like it and find it interesting _right now_. Not because of any inherent advantage to the frameworks/runtimes.

Do what you enjoy. That will change over time, and so should your tool-chest. As long as you keep learning and stay true to yourself, you'll progress naturally through different languages, frameworks, etc. Try not to box yourself in, there's really no advantage to limiting yourself.

</comment><comment><USER30> I think JavaScript's here to stay, which is why I've specialised a little in it recently. However, I also think that there are lots of programming concepts that are moving from other languages towards it.

It's worth exploring a few other languages to just get a greater feel of the future, and to also protect against the chance that JavaScript loses its ground.

</comment><comment><USER24> It's like learning a new programming language: the more you know how to speak/code/design, the more you can express and understand others.

You should have a look to rails, it's still the state of the art in term of framework design. The java/scala Play framework is also worth trying.

</comment><comment><USER31> To be honest, I would personally choose python over node any day when developing web applications. Before Go appeared into the scene, I would have told you to go with node for concurrent server stuff. There are plenty of libraries written for node, though.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I cannot edit the main thread but, thanks for all the answers.. Some of the interesting messages mentioned, Go, Erlang, and JVM (I know that JVM is faster than Node, but how do i go about using JVM backend with say XYZ frontend. And what should XYZ be?)

</comment><comment><USER3> None of the existing answers seem particularly convincing to me. Here's how I have chosen: pick the framework that is most popular with the people you want to work with, projects you want to work on, or companies you want to work at.

If you're building simple websites for clients (publishers, small business owners, etc.), PHP is probably still the best choice, and usually Wordpress. It runs with no config on standard web hosting platforms and you mustn't underestimate the power of the Wordpress plugin ecosystem + the fact that most people are comfortable with Wordpress.

If you're building more advanced websites (not web-apps) for clients, Django is a great choice, in large part because it has an excellent drop-in admin panel, but also there's a ton of third party apps available.

Ruby is also a good choice for this, having an even more solid ecosystem.

That said, Ruby is trending down, Python is trending up. Also, hipsters are now learning node.js and nearly everyone who went to engineering school knows Python. Hipster savants are learning Go, Clojure, Haskell, and Scala (in order). Who do you want to work with?

node was built with event-driven apps in mind. In other words, it's for web apps. It would be unwise to build a traditional website with node unless you have a particular reason to.

Same with Go, Clojure, Haskell, and Scala.

If you want to work at a cool startup, you won't do yourself a disservice learning node. If you want to work at a cool startup doing more hardcore stuff (think Firebase or Cloudfront), you wouldn't do yourself a disservice learning Go or Clojure.

If you want an all-around framework and to broaden your skills, go with Ruby or Python. If you're more of a hipster (aesthetics, web-only) then choose Ruby. If you're more of an engineer (academic, data science), choose Python.

Another perspective on Ruby: Rails skills will be in demand for maintaining old code-bases for awhile into the future, even if it's declining in relative popularity.

<comment><USER32> > That said, Ruby is trending down, Python is trending up

[http://trends.builtwith.com/framework/Ruby-on- Rails](http://trends.builtwith.com/framework/Ruby-on-Rails) vs [http://trends.builtwith.com/framework/Python](http://trends.builtwith.com/framework/Python)

Or am I interpreting this wrongly?

 _shrug_

<comment><USER3> My claim was anecdotal. For some data, TIOBE tells a different story than what your source claims: [http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index....](http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> you should learn perl and catalyst, because they're awesome :)

<comment><USER34> catalyst over mojolicious? Looking into both, and mojolicious seems to be winning at this point.

<comment><USER33> depends on what you want to do. catalyst has a proven history of big teams working on big projects and not getting in each others way. as well as one man teams working on small projects.

it's mature, well supported and powerful. there's a bit of a learning curve when you first start, but that's the way with everything. although it might be made worse by it's opinionated approach to the way you have to lay your project out, but not long into it you'll be thankful for that, as it helps keep everything clean and clear

mojo is more flexible about how the project is layed out, has async and websockets and stuff, but i've not used it, so i don't know the ins and outs so i can't comment

that said, you should try them both, see which one suites your needs best.</comment></comment></comment>


The unbundling of Harvard has begun - <AUTHOR> https://socialstudies.substack.com/p/-the-unbundling-of-harvard-has-begun <comment><USER3> I'm not sure if this gentleman has a thesis but Harvard online education is worth not much. The whole value proposition of Harvard is that you socialise and bond with the sort of people who get in to Harvard. You probably have the phone number of whoever runs Goldman Sachs [0] and you know the President of Whereveristan's daughter because she was in your class. The little things in life.

It is possible but unlikely that Harvard has Secret Math and Unknown Physics that their undergrads are exposed to, but their literary and philosophical studies are going to have access to the same books as everyone else. Online- only Harvard has as much value as any top-10% university on the globe. There is absolutely _no_ shortage of incredibly clever people who are willing to explain things to a student. I think we had an article the other week pointing out that hiring a private tutor is a better option if what matters is the quality of education.

[0] Although I see the new CEO doesn't come from Harvard. Last bloke did though.

<comment><USER4> > It is possible but unlikely that Harvard has Secret Math

Here is an entire undergraduate course in abstract algebra, taught by retired Harvard professor Benedict Gross.

[http://matterhorn.dce.harvard.edu/engage/ui/index.html#/1999...](http://matterhorn.dce.harvard.edu/engage/ui/index.html#/1999/01/82345)

I know Gross personally, and have heard him lecture several times; although I haven't watched these lectures in particular, I'm guessing that that they're just about as good as it gets.

You can also find online lecture courses in a variety of subjects offered by MIT, Yale, etc. It's telling that these universities feel confident in giving away this material, to anyone, for free.

<comment><USER5> lol i don't understand your point "harvard doesn't have secret math - <USER2> proof is all of these publicly available math lectures from world renowned mathematicians"

the value of harvard math profs isn't reaped by the undergrads, it's reaped by the grad students that work closely/directly with these profs. i'm not 100% sure of this but benedict gross probably isn't holding several hours of office hours every week for his undergrad algebra classes (although he might for the grad sections).

now the knock-on effect, obviously, is that the very good math phd students that pursue and are admitted to harvard do provide a lot of value for the undergrads (since they're TAing/holding office hours for those undergrads). but those same harvard phd students then go get tenure track positions at mediocre schools where office hours are held by profs. so it all evens out as far as undergrads go :)

<comment><USER6> As somebody who's studied some advanced maths, I think that their point is that abstract algebra _is_ effectively a sort of secret maths techniques, sitting in plain sight but somehow sprayed with repellent or maybe equipped with a Somebody Else's Problem field.

I have had more than one afternoon where I learned a concept wholly from this sort of lecture. The ability to ask the professor questions can be useful, but almost all of my questions are actually answered by being more careful about listening to what they are saying the first time.

<comment><USER5> >abstract algebra is effectively a sort of secret maths techniques

abstract algebra (rings, groups, fields) is taught in absolutely every undergrad math program in the country (in the world?). there's nothing unique to harvard in this aspect.

<comment><USER7> Harvard teaches a lot more than the average undergrad program.

A Harvard undergrad degree covers a depth of knowledge that matches a master's degree at an average program.

You can read the definitions of algebra in 1 day. That's not what a class is about.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> "I'm Brett... and Twitter power user"

I can't believe a grown adult considers this some sort of qualification.

As for "education-based communities on the backs of (social) media empires"... what a horrible thought. Imagine getting your education from a Twitterati or Fox News-backed organisation.

"Psychology is the most underrated major in tech."

Maybe for someone with a psychology degree who's looking for a "Silicon Valley" job. I don't think I'd see psychology majors clamouring to get through the doors of IBM or Capita.

<comment><USER9> Even worse:

"Twitter is where all the action happens in the tech industry"

<comment><USER10> Yeah, I stopped reading at that one.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> A big function that universities play is circumventing some arguably bad interpretations of labor law. In the United States, it is essentially illegal to hire based on the results of an intelligence test. This is the result of various cases interpreting and applying the disparate impact doctrine. But no one bats an eye when you send your recruiters to only the "elite" universities or when your company is overwhelmingly staffed with top-20-university graduates and won't even consider the applications of people from "lesser" schools. That's despite the fact that which university you attend is largely a function of your SAT score (and to a lesser degree, your grades), an intelligence test.

No one looks at Harvard on your resume and thinks "they must have learned so much at Harvard". The thought is laughably absurd. It's not that someone can't learn something at Harvard, it's that everyone knows Harvard academic rigor is a joke and you can just as easily party your way through 4 years and graduate with a B+ average. They think "they got into Harvard, so they must be smart". The most important department at Harvard is the admissions department.

This strange power is then abused for the sake of funding the institution, pursuing its political goals, etc. Donor's children get preference. Politically-favored groups get preference. Applicants who signal that they share certain views get preference. I'm sure the motives are often quite noble, but it is corrupting nonetheless I think. They are just counting on the fact that it's still worth treating a Harvard degree as a proxy of intelligence despite the fudging they do at the edges.

<comment><USER12> That's how it works in China and other East Asian countries, if you ever read the history of Korea, government offices were essentially monopolized by Yangban in the late Joseon dynasty. Which was basically an aristocratic class of test takers.

Meritocracy over a period of time warps into its own form of elitism.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I celebrate efforts to educate and credential students that don't put them into a lifetime of debt. But, a few points of order/grains of salt:

Even though going to college means you may take out more debt that you can pay off in any reasonable amount of time, bailing on college to classes from social media entrepreneurs or to start a company backed by Peter Thiel is a risk-heavy strategy that will not pay off for most. Yes, autodidacts with a safe family situation will likely do well.

But what about students from poor backgrounds, students without stable family life, or just students who don't fall into the upper echelons of industriousness? How many of these students are thriving right now in a world of Zoom classes? Talking with friends who are teachers, many students are just skipping their classes altogether. Why would we expect them to do well in this new online world?

College, although way too expensive, works decently well for many of these students. I don't think online influencer courses will substitute.

Yes, unbundle Harvard. But the harder and more impactful piece is providing quality education to those who aren't in the tails of the distribution.

<comment><USER7> Conflating Covid-19 pandemic with online school is ridiculous.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I always hear the argument that college/grad school is silly because you can go read the textbooks yourself.

It requires an immense amount of motivation to grind away reading 80 pages of a boring CS textbook every day. The structure and motivation provided by an institution encourages people to go deeper, meet deadlines, and not just skim the boring stuff. It isn't the only way to learn, but when I did a master's degree I felt motivated even when the road was rough.

<comment><USER15> My master's degree was essentially thermodynamics, all the various aspects of it, and I have never met anyone self-taught in that area. You just do not sit down and just learn about the physics of energy (storage, conversion, transmission, ...).

Part of the reason is that at least in mechanical engineering, the curricula are more or less well-curated and grew over many decades, if not centuries. You learn maths, electrical engineering, mechanics, fluids etc. all at the same time, and they all intertwine. Sometimes one is the basis to learn about the next (mechanics lays the foundation for fluids mechanics; maths is simply the foundation of everything you do and learn). Other times you discover meta- connections that elevate your understanding of everything in combination (voltage, pressure and temperature as _potentials_ , current, mass flow and heat flow as _flows_ resulting from that potential; each with their respective resistances: ohm (or impedance), friction, heat transfer coefficient).

It all comes together beautifully and forms a new, elevated whole.

I am willing to bet I will go through life without ever meeting someone self- taught, in my field. Computer science might be different, but people confuse computer science and coding. Coding you can self-teach easily, computer science not so much. That is more on the level of self-teaching maths, and I have never met such a person, either.

<comment><USER14> Thank you, diarrhea.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I couldn't finish reading this. While interesting, I sense a lot of hype, and deliberate bending of meaning (e.g. federal government less strict about requiring college degree -> all companies less strict)

Traditional college is not just about information scarcity either. People also go to bond, network, participate in extracurricular groups, party, etc.

Traditional college isnt going to go anywhere.

Also, it's depressing to think of society sitting behind a screen all day. I think most people feel the same way. We need to stop using technology to tear apart the social fabric of society.

<comment><USER17> >Also, it's depressing to think of society sitting behind a screen all day. I think most people feel the same way. We need to stop using technology to tear apart the social fabric of society.

You are witnessing the mere beginning. Wait for despair before a typical job consists of donning a vr gear with some controllers (possibly brain implants) to control a humanoid robot far away. It's hard to think of a job that couldn't be automated this way except for security, as cutting off the signal would be a big failure point + laws that prevent civilians from using robots for violence. The only other real limitation is latency, so Indians in India probably won't cut grass in SF, just Mexicans (in Mexico).

In the longer run, this could kill cities or even states. People could live on ships in international waters, under a flag of some tax haven, but near the place they want to work to ensure low latency. Wages would equalize globally very fast.

Last but not least, versatile enough humanoid robots also mean nearly perfect sexbots - whether ai or remote controlled.

<comment><USER18> Butlerian Jihad can't come soon enough.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Any article that mentions unbundling, disruption, bubble and tipping point in less then a thousand words deserves mention in the Malcolm Gladwell hall of fame.

Here's the opposite argument: universities will eat bootcamps for lunch because in the post-COVID era they will be hungry for the same dollar and I would much prefer getting a Harvard Online degree than from Fullstack Camp TM.

There's no doubt that higher education will be transformed by the COVID19 crisis but it's extremely unlikely (in my view) that the shifts will go along the lines predicted by Silicon Valley 'product thinkers.' There's a reason why Universities have lasted longer than civilizations.

<comment><USER20> You bring up an interesting point. How do people feel about boot camps? I looked into them a while ago when a friend asked me for a recommendation since he was interested in switching careers. The reviews and experiences I came across were mixed. Some positive and a lot of mediocre ones. Boot camps didn't seem like they were the disruption to 4 year degrees they were once billed as.

If online bootcamps and schools were killing it right now then I could see the argument that they're the ones to watch. But as it stands I don't know that there's an obvious winner. Like you said, universities might be the ones who end up driving the change.

<comment><USER21> I feel like I have seen mostly negative reviews and impressions come out of them. I'm sure there are some good ones, but I remember specific claims against some of them being that they inflate their own job placement numbers by just employing previous graduates as TAs and instructors to keep the machine going.

I think a much more practical option in the long-term will be something like what Shopify is doing with their Dev Degree program - [https://devdegree.ca](https://devdegree.ca).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> This is a strange choice of title because Harvard is easily among the institutions that will be least affected by the pandemic.

While it may be true that for the world's elite that the value prop of Harvard is rubbing elbows with other elites, it's also true that for the rest of us the value prop of Harvard is merely having it on your resume. There's no shortage of talented students who'd love Harvard on their resume even if they have to spend a year remote.

Some of the opinions expressed in this article seem rather naive, such as:

> Use your time to start an online business. Live at home, spend as little > money as possible, and find a side job if you need to.

For students in a pandemic, "live at home, spend as little money as possible" is basically implied outside of education expenses. So at this point we return to the standard debate: is a diploma worth the cost of tuition and opportunity cost on time spent? This argument has been played out a million times and is otherwise unchanged by the pandemic.

<comment><USER23> Rubbing elbows with the elites is worth even more if you're not already part of the club

<comment><USER22> Perhaps but an average middle class high schooler who's spent hundreds of hours working on a college app worthy of an ivy isn't worrying about that, I guarantee you. That's not the kind of concern you have time for when you're in a college prep pressure cooker.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> PSA: The 80k price tag is the sticker price. The actual average cost of Harvard is < 15k when you account for aid and parents bargaining down the price. So please try to negotiate the price if you are actually considering paying 80k.

<comment><USER25> It appears that most families making under 65k USD/year pay nothing to send a child to Harvard. Families making up to 150k USD/year are expected to pay a maximum of 10% of their income.

The sticker price is what Harvard charges rich people. Harvard has a massive endowment, and probably doesn't really rely too heavily on tuition anyways.

<comment><USER26> Large endowments are not always a straight forward metric to use for determining how well off financially an institution is. Lots of contributions to endowments come with strings attached on how the money can be spent. Wouldn't be surprised to hear about a large number of new costs associated with COVID that wouldn't be covered by a lot of an endowment.

[1] [https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/05/22/colleges- face...](https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/05/22/colleges-faced- whether-increase-endowment-spending-finances-grow-more-dire)

<comment><USER25> Sure, not all of the endowment is fungible, but it's $40 billion. Harvard is insanely rich by any measure.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I'm looking forward to a time when you can simply pass a highly creditable exam without having to attend class. This will probably require the reputation of an existing high-rep university, but once it's happenend, things are going to be very different.

Imagine if you could be anywhere in the world but claim to have passed the math course of some famous university. I think that would change a lot of things about how we view education and qualification.

<comment><USER28> It's somewhat ironic that this is how many universities worked a hundred years ago.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> There's a lot of confirmation bias on this thread. If people want to believe that an elite institution is worthless, they will try to focus on the facts that yield that conclusion. But consider,

\- Most of the educational material that this article describes as the downfall of universities, has been posted by universities. Don't you think that shows how little it matters?

\- Anyone who gets into Harvard will have no trouble attending financially. The aid covers the cost. The crazy tuition are for the richest people, who have no trouble paying.

\- Textbooks and papers have been available at your library for the past few decades. The freedom of information was enough s.t. someone in the 1970s could replicate the experience of studying in college.

e.g. "You wasted $150,000 on an education you coulda got for $1.50 in late fees at the public library." -Good Will Hunting

\--

I think what we really want to solve isn't to reduce the value of elite institutions, but rather scale what's already there. The issue is that what's there is much more intangible to identify.

</comment><comment><USER30> Is this just a big organic advertising operation? Or is this shallow, "buzzfeed-top list" style writing really something that can be called Reporting?

I guess it's only appropriate that someone that wrote their thesis on the telephone game/chinese wispers ends up making a newsletter summarising twitter rumours.

<comment><USER31> A personal newsletter/blog is not reporting and I don't think the intention is to pretend it's reporting.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Freshman year is the real deal. Its where you meet new friends and bond. I cannot really see the value of an online only first year.

I see this also as an opportunity to improve the online aspect of education. I remember one of my electrical engineering classes had all the lectures recorded and available at the library. This was before YouTube. But it was great that you could re-watch them for points you missed. Better online material could be a boon for primary education. Imagine a public school with a low budget. What happens to the very talented students?

<comment><USER33> In other words, you pay what you pay to attend Harvard, to a large extent, because of its network effects. And that is really the reason at the end of the day. This is especially true in areas where network is expected to be a big factor --think Economics, Law, Business.

And that's why you pay that much to go to Harvard, to gain access to their network.

<comment><USER25> That's writing off a lot of the educational benefits of a university. YouTube lectures don't recreate the college educational experience. You don't get the group sections with the TA, office hours, personal feedback on your assignments, a group of students studying the same thing who you can work with, undergrad research experience, personal tutoring from graduate students (which undergrads at some elite universities like Harvard and Oxbridge get through their dorms), etc.

Most people don't pay much to attend Harvard anyways. Only the rich pay anything near full tuition. It's probably cheaper for the average family than most state colleges.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> This blog post is self-contradictory. On one hand it says "people aren't going to pay full price for just online college", and then in the other "people will be able to learn from 'influencers' just as well as they do from colleges."

The reason people don't want to pay full price for online learning is because they know it has much lower value than in-person instruction.

</comment><comment><USER35> ~$80K per semester at Harvard. I now understand why almost every graduate of Harvard tends to bring up the fact they graduated from Harvard on nearly every conversation.

I went to a public school and my 4 year tuition cost is equivalent to half the cost of single a semester at Harvard. I only graduated a couple of years ago so inflation is negligible.

Guess who I work with the most and still earn the same wage (if not more)? It makes you wonder if Ivy League is nothing more than a brand name at this point.

It's like buying anything "Supreme" or Gucci related, except for the "intellectuals".

As for the article, I didn't really care too much for it. Sort of just skimmed through it and it seemed like an ad for something he was part of. The only thing that caught my eye was the tuition bill at Harvard.

<comment><USER13> > I only graduated a couple of years ago so inflation is negligible.

If only inflation were the only thing driving the price up! The whole problem with college cost is that cost is increasing faster than inflation.

I went to a similar university to Harvard. I enrolled in 2013, and the total cost per year was under 60k. It's now 80k. Cost of attendance is increasing at ~ 4% per year, which is entirely unsustainable. Crazy how a couple years means a difference of 20k per year = 80k over 4 years.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> This type of analysis is built on the assumption that the main function of education is student transformation. I think ranking is implicit in the existing system and online education platforms ignore the ranking aspects.

</comment><comment><USER37> I couldn't get through his ramblings. But I got the gist of it, and of course it's typical Gary Vee-type of hustle porn advice about skipping college and starting a business. Sigh

</comment><comment><USER38> The first time I've read "Harvard announced that it would continue 100% online learning in the Fall but keep tuition prices the same" I thought this means you can watch all the lectures for free and only have to pay if you care to visit them offline, get the assignments and the diploma. Apparently this is not the case although many Harvard courses actually are available online for free.

</comment><comment><USER39> But widespread remote work will probably make résumé bling even more important.... :/</comment>


Ask HN: Any ideas to boost sales and profits for pastry shop? - <AUTHOR>

I am advising a friend that owns a pastry shop and trying to come up with ideas about how to push traffic through the door.
Not 'bottom of the barrel' traffic - by offering deep 50% discounts. But real traffic, that can boost revenues and profits.
This pastry shop is located in Jamaica, so keep that in mind when responding.
I am thinking about choosing one pastry product, then doing a campaign around 'trading in' the competing product from a major competitor. This competitor is MUCH larger, and the quality of the product isn't as good - but the price is lower.
Any other ideas? <comment><USER2> A key thing would be to make more revenue from each existing customer who walks in the door, so revenue is higher for the same customer base.

Counter staff should be trained on how to effectively offer each customer something additional with their purchase without alienating the customer.

Structure pricing so that the customer can buy additional pastry products for relatively little extra expenditure. For example buying 2 pastries instead of one gets you an extra one for free. Go and examine the pricing structure of the most popular beer in the area that you live. You will see that they structure it so that it's always worth considering buying a larger volume because you get much more bang for your buck. When someone buys a single pastry the counter staff member can say "for an additional $2 you can get 3 pastries, would you like to choose two more?"

Encourage purchase of additional products such as drinks.

<comment><USER3> >For example buying 2 pastries instead of one gets you an extra one for free.

Do this, but check the numbers based on what people currently buy. If most people currently buy two, offer four for three, as opposed to just giving away an extra pastry to most of your clientele.

This can be especially good for larger quantities -- if someone comes in every Friday for a box of muffins for work, give them a second box for 50% off. Or offer them a 20% off if they commit to getting a box every week.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> _This pastry shop is located in Jamaica, so keep that in mind when responding._ I have never been to Jamaica, so I am not sure what to keep in mind.

Sell shirts with the name of the shop on them. Give free samples near the competition. Maybe instead of a trade up campaign a get a free one of theirs when you buy ours.

</comment><comment><USER5> Instead of deep discounts, lower discounts and 2 for one offers. Get people coming back.

Build email lists and Facebook fan pages and send out special discount codes or printable vouchers. Give them a free small pastry every fourth purchase within a week (stamp a voucher or better still, record their names/emails....). Maybe they get a discount for referring friends too.

</comment><comment><USER6> Just some random thoughts: 1\. Since your product is better than the cheaper competitor's- offer a "like it or we'll buy you one of their's" guarantee- if you're really better that should help.

2\. Someone else mentioned this, but offering free samples next to the competition would be a good way of differentiating yourself.

3\. Are tourists the target market? How about making deals with local hotels- have your pastries featured in their cafes/restaurants, or give discounts to hotel guests (make sure the hotel advertises the promotion)

4\. An off the wall idea- you can try to "fake" popularity by hiring a bunch of people to stand in line/create the appearance of a busy shop/popular product. This could attract real clients.

</comment><comment><USER7> Does it have a window facing the sidewalk?

Put pastries in the window. Angle some bright lights so they shine on the pastries.

And make sure they're bright.

Pastries are often an impulse buy. Most shops look quite dark on a sunny day. You need people to notice the food.

You want everyone who walks by to see the pastries. Not a pastry sign, pastries.

Also if your friend has a wife/partner get them to walk around the block in the morning and at lunch. Have them stop and look in the shop window at the pastries.

People naturally look at things that other people are looking at.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Wow...all of these ideas are pretty good. I will definitely discuss some of these with my friend.

Thanks much guys, and keep them coming if you have any more :)

</comment><comment><USER8> A/B test the menu/pricing.

</comment><comment><USER9> it comes down to brand and articulating that brand in an unique way so that it is news.

ok here are some ideas: 1\. This is an idea from a book "The Summer Kitchen". In there the lady opens a pastry shop in a rich neighborhood. The grand opening they do a mother daughter cupcake party since their brand is we are family. they do a whole lot of other things - a good read.

2\. Per the book "Feeding the Media Beast", news is something that is new, not ordinary. Duh. So what can you do that would say you are not ordinary. I was reading an article about a bakery that made a doughnut cupcake and had a cupcake that was smothered with maple syrup and bacon. This was reported in last week's Boston Sunday Globe. Yes that makes definitely stand out. Plus they made sure that they ONLY sold these maple bacon cupcakes on the weekend. As the book "Influence" says use scarcity to attract.

3\. First you need to identify who is your ideal customer profile. Who is coming to your shop? Why? They are not just coming because of pastries. help them maximize this experience. make it an experience. How can you help make not just a trip to the pastry but something more.

4\. As in the book "The Entrepreneur's Manual", he speaks about a barber who started a barber shop that gives free drink with a haircut. Yes it became widely successful. Then he realized that the guys were stuck with the kids since the family comes together into town to shop so he provides a free baby sitter while you get the haircut and provides a barber especially for kids. then he realizes that women want to get the free baby sitter too so opens a womens shop. This book is the bomb. The Gap analysis in here is terrific. Do the gap analysis for the pastry shop - see what is missing.

Hope this helps.</comment>


Don't lecture me - <AUTHOR> http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/tomorrows-college/lectures/

<comment><AUTHOR> Great documentary featuring Mazur's research on physics education.</comment>


A Letter from the Publisher of Nautilus - <AUTHOR> http://m.nautil.us/blog/a-letter-from-the-publisher-of-nautilus <comment><USER2> Might be an absurd proposition, but according to their website, the publisher is a non-profit called NautilusThink, meaning it's eligible for the Pineapple Fund ([https://pineapplefund.org/](https://pineapplefund.org/)).

Now I don't know what the odds are, but considering there's about $79m left, I'd say they aren't too far from the odds of the potential acquisition talks coming through.

It won't solve the underlying issue, but it will make possible to at least think about better ways of solving it.

<comment><USER3> Wow, that's very interesting. I hadn't heard of it before.

As a minor technical note: If the site is truly hosted by GitHub Pages as it proclaims, how does it have HTTPS support on a custom domain?

<comment><USER4> There are workarounds for this, but as I understand it GitHub won't validate an SSL cert for a custom domain.

I found this tutorial [1] very helpful when setting up my own site [2] (which you can see is HTTPS and served by GitHub Pages [3]).

[1] [https://www.jonathan-petitcolas.com/2017/01/13/using- https-w...](https://www.jonathan-petitcolas.com/2017/01/13/using-https-with- custom-domain-name-on-github-pages.html)

[2] [https://oisinmoran.com/](https://oisinmoran.com/)

[3] [https://github.com/OisinMoran/OisinMoran.github.io](https://github.com/OisinMoran/OisinMoran.github.io)

<comment><USER5> tl;dr: content on GitHub Pages, fronted by CloudFlare with SSL

Takes the traffic burden off Pages.

<comment><USER6> Also:

> Using flexible SSL, all communications between CloudFlare servers and GitHub > ones are not encrypted. Not really secured, even if your domain would be > served in HTTPs. [1]

[1]: [https://www.jonathan-petitcolas.com/2017/01/13/using- https-w...](https://www.jonathan-petitcolas.com/2017/01/13/using-https-with- custom-domain-name-on-github-pages.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This is what a company looks like when it runs out of money...except for the part of admitting it. I know it sucks for the writers that haven't been paid, but a business not paying $50,000 across more than a dozen contractors is hardly news.

<comment><USER8> I've been involved in the publishing industry as both a freelance writer and a publisher who has hired freelance writers. If you have a modicum of experience and relatively good financial records, it's quite easy to estimate your publication's cash flow.

In this case, by his own words, John Steele is either completely unqualified to run a publication or he is completely full of shit. Grants don't just magically disappear...you know one will expire for several months before it does. Subscribers don't just magically stop subscribing...a qualified publisher will see complaints build and will recognize a groundswell of frustration for what it is.

And, seriously, who keeps commissioning work because they're convinced a merger is right around the corner??

<comment><USER9> _And, seriously, who keeps commissioning work because they 're convinced a merger is right around the corner??_

I think almost every founder of a new enterprise makes promises like this.

<comment><USER8> Because they're convinced a merger is right around the corner?? I'd agree if you said they were convinced a big accounts receivable was sending a cheque, but counting on a merger to pay all your debt to contributors is naive at best.

<comment><USER10> Ha, no it's worse for a startup, because you take on obligations hoping that you'll make a big sale of your new thing to a market that hasn't heard about you, has no reason to trust you, and no current intention of sending you any money at all, ever.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Mr Steele is, on the surface at least, running Nautilus from his heart. For that, I am grateful, although I'm sure his freelancers see it quite differently. I've read a lot of excellent content there over the years. I hope that there is a way that they can pay off their debts and carry on in a similar fashion.

<comment><USER12> (removed, it shows they paid a company fully owned by him, but there is no way to know where that company spent it's money)

<comment><USER13> Not true. See my comment above. The filing shows a payment to another company that he owns, not to him. These could just be publishing costs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Their annual digital Prime subscription is on sale for only $12. That's dirt cheap for such quality content. I just bought one. I encourage others to take advantage of this sale price and buy their subscription. (Note - I am not affiliated with them in anyway - just want to support good content.)

<comment><USER15> I got the yearly print subscription this year. They managed to get me one copy & it was 4 months delayed. I too just want good content but if you can't provide it without stiffing the content creators or your customers go away.

<comment><USER16> Kinda the same. Brought a 2year print subscription in May.

Haven't received a single issues, contacted them a couple of times, said to wait & then they "shipped themselves". Still got nothing. :(

<comment><USER16> WOAH nevermind just got the July/August issue! woow!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Just voted for Nautilus with [http://nautil.us/primeuser](http://nautil.us/primeuser)

Its definitely one of the best sources for long reads and tbh I never thought about it. They should display a support us banner like theguardian does.

<comment><USER18> Just got the print subscription. One of the best outlets I've ever read from; I'm glad to support them.

<comment><USER19> Can you mention if you actually receive it? Some others were complaining that they never actually got their print subscriptions.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I find Steele's argument that his staff never knowingly commissioned work that they knew the magazine couldn't pay for to be a total red herring.

It may be true that his staff were in the dark, but _he_ wasn't, and to the extent that he authorized them to commission that work, he permitted them to commission work that he knew the magazine couldn't pay for.

Nautilus might be a first-rate science magazine, but it's only first-rate because it commissioned first-rate writers.

Do you think it will ever be able to attract and retain that caliber of writers now? I certainly don't. Definitely not with Steele at the helm.

EDIT: I looked up NautilusThink's 2015 IRS Form 990 (the latest available on GuideStar) and found an interesting line item. In that year, John Steele was paid $2,408,000 for "consulting fees" for the publication of the magazine. (The previous year he was paid a more modest $134,000.)

<comment><USER21> > John Steele was paid $2,408,000 for "consulting fees" for the publication of > the magazine.

That can't be true, and if true, disgusting. That's half a million more than they claimed to have paid for the totality of their content from the start of publication.

If an editor who made millions from a publication by extracting what must be a majority of its revenue as personal income allowed it to go $180K into arrears with the low-paid providers of its content without even making a personal loan, I'm grossed out.

I'm deciding this isn't true. You should add a link.

<comment><USER22> In 2015 Nautilus was transferred from an LLC to a 501(c)(3). As the transfer was in process, NautilusThink paid Nautilus Venture LLC to produce the magazine because the staff and contracts were still in the name of Nautilus Ventures. Is was a cost passthrough. Nautilus is fully owned by NautilusThink and Nautilus Ventures was closed.

<comment><USER21> Makes sense, thanks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I find it very disturbing that other commentators on this post are encouraging to subscribe to this magazine. If you don't pay your employees that's pretty bad. If you actively mislead people into thinking that you can pay them that's even more horrible. I find this behavior reprehensible and we should wait for this joke of a magazine to end.

<comment><USER24> i don't know, i wouldn't call this magazine a joke. I think the quality of the writing is top notch, and the level of the topics is extremely interesting. i don't disagree that what's going on financially is pretty reprehensible, but at the very least i can still attempt to support the writers who probably spent a lot of time writing these awesome pieces by reading their work.

<comment><USER23> I would rather figure out who the writers are and send them money directly . Maybe then they could feed their family.

<comment><USER25> If anything it's a call to go back to individual sites/blogs and finding some kind of micro/subscription architecture that works. Flattr kinda failed, but Patreon has at least made some headway.

<comment><USER24> you know, i just went straight to patreon to check out their writers section and they have a bunch. i wish more writers would take advantage of this tool.

i actually also just went to check out some of the writers on patreon. first name that came up is jim davies who seems to be a professor amongst other things. another is george musser who is a contributing editor to scientific american. now i dont know who hasnt gotten paid, but i wonder if the people that are writing for nautilus are mostly all already very accomplished and have no need to use things like patreon.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> They stopped shipping my magazines to Europe. I believe I'm two numbers behind since august. I've sent a couple of emails complaining about it and got the same response all the times - "we're facing delays".

Regardless, I believe I got at least 10 emails about donating to the magazine in the last 6 months.

Maybe they're just broke, which is sad.

</comment><comment><USER27> I'm a prime member for nautilus for 2 years now. I can't support all the good journalism sites I visit. But that doesn't mean I (or you) shouldn't support any. Just pick one.

</comment><comment><USER28> I find the publisher morally reprehensible, i understand that he had a dream a wanted to pursuit, but he gambled on unwilling parties money.

Hope he solves it, not for his sake but that of the people he owes money.

<comment><USER29> "Still, my over-confidence that a merger was around the corner prompted me to over-promise, continually, when payments would be made"

This sounds very similar to trading while insolvent to me. It happens a lot in small businesses and it's a major pain to freelancers who have to wait for payment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> We need an alternative to free content on the web. I often read Nautilus and never pay them anything, it's wrong. Any SV-based disruptors interested in this? These contributors are special, they contribute a lot to society and they are probably underpaid and under-appreciated.

<comment><USER31> I said it before and I will say it again: We need a non-profit, simple, and universally supported small-payment system which enables a user to easily donate 1-5$ to a random website without relying on Paypal or creditcards.

Flattr was a good step in the right direction but unfortunately it never reached critical mass.

If Google and Facebook combined their market force to introduce such a system then it would be an instant game changer when it comes to supporting websites. Nowadays I can use Facebook/Gmail to log into random webpages, why can't I also use those accounts for tipping?

<comment><USER32> Honest question: Wasn´t the original idea of cryptocurrencies to be able to do exactly that? Small transactions for the web.

<comment><USER33> Relevant Link: [https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/12/bitcoin-fees- ris...](https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/12/bitcoin-fees-rising-high/)

<comment><USER34> Bitcoin isn't the only cryptocurrency

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Mr. Steele,

thank you for being forthright and explaining the situation publicly. I am a reader and your open letter has prompted me to buy a subscription.

I empathize with you. Making predictions about the future is difficult and there are times when they will be incorrect. When these predictions concern incoming cash and they fail to materialize, the situation becomes frustrating.

I wish you all the best and hope that you will be able to overcome this challenge, as well as any future ones that come your way. I do so for the very selfish reason of being able to continue to read quality content in the future.

<comment><USER36> Why would you give him money after this?

<comment><USER35> It made me realize that I have been freeloading the entire time. The backpay issue arose because they do not have enough revenues. I was consuming their content for free without contributing. This letter explained the issue plainly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I have voted with my money! It is one of the best science magazines out there.

<comment><USER38> Me too. I resisted in the past because they ask for a phone number and I don't want magazines to have that in their CRMs (fool me once...) but it seems like they can accept an obvious fake.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> > "I want to again make clear that nobody on the Nautilus staff commissioned > any work that they knowingly thought wouldn't be paid for..."

On one hand I feel for the guy. This is every dreamer's nightmare.

On the other hand he sounds naive, if not a liar. To commission work on a deal that was still 100% unfinalized isn't exactly playing fair.

Entrepreneurs are by definition optimistic. They see the opportunity as brighter and risk dim. That's great when things are going well. However, it's a dangerous trait when things go sideways.

Perhaps he should have been more transparent sooner? Ya think?

</comment><comment><USER40> Why is he paying them in full, one at a time? "7 of you get to enjoy Christmas, Fuck the other 12?"

<comment><USER29> Part-paying an invoice is such a pain to both parties that it's hardly ever done. I suspect he's paying in the order that they were recieved, longest- standing debts first.

<comment><USER41> Sounds like a decent idea for a startup.

<comment><USER42> HN comments are full of terribad startup ideas, but this has to be a new record

It's an extremely niche saas business. You have to build billing and banking integrations. You have to make a bunch of enterprise sales. And all your potential customers are by definition on the verge of bankruptcy, already behind on invoices

You've found it; the Worst Startup

Not hating, I just think it's hilarious, happy holidays

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> As a reader and supporter, sad to read what's going on at Nautilus, one of the best science magazines ever. I hope they get over this in no time.

</comment><comment><USER44> Is Mr Steele being paid himself during this period?

</comment><comment><USER36> I am so disgusted that I have given this guy money. What a ridiculous non- apology.

</comment><comment><USER45> If you don't know that you _can_ pay for work that you contract, there's no high ground to seize over not knowing that you couldn't.

</comment><comment><USER46> Some form of Kickstarter campaign would be nice. Only to bridge current situation. Nautilus is seriously good source, I would hate to lose it.

</comment><comment><USER47> As a reader, this is sad to hear. Nautilus provides real quality content. One of the best magazines out there.

</comment><comment><USER48> nautilus was the first publishing company that I subscribed to... Although I feel bad for the company, I feel worse to have given money to an organization whose owner is gambling the livelihoods of their employees.

</comment><comment><USER49> The deal's not done till it's done.

</comment><comment><USER50> If they would accept bitcoin donations, I am sure a lot of people here would help.

</comment><comment><USER51> For those who ever read the articles of the magazine and wondered why the special flavor of doubt in scientific knowledge is often present there, as well as veiled "spiritual" agenda, see:

[http://nautil.us/about](http://nautil.us/about)

Nautilus has received financial support from: "John Templeton Foundation"

Which themselves state:

"By supporting multi-disciplinary scientific, theological, and philosophical research, we aim to deepen our understanding of the possibility and purposes of the divine."

[https://www.templeton.org/funding-areas/science-big- question...](https://www.templeton.org/funding-areas/science-big-questions)

<comment><USER52> The low bar for evidence some have these days is appalling.</comment></comment>


How to beat procrastination - <AUTHOR> http://waitbutwhy.com/2013/11/how-to-beat-procrastination.html

<comment><USER2> The mystery of procrastination is essentially you've lost the compelling, whether is it external or internal, motivation or obligation, deep down you absolutely hate it since it has turned into a pure taxing to your brain and your subconscious has seen through it accomplishing it is not attractive to you.

The reason procrastination occurs is because a viable escape does not exist while you've been constantly attempting.</comment>


Distributed system authorization using JWT - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@therealcomtom/distributed-system-authorization-using-jwt-259836d50d90 <comment><AUTHOR> A very common challenge for application developers is knowing which users are currently using the system or logged in on multiple devices to prevent unauthorized access based on permissions the user has.</comment>


USB-IF Publishes Audio Over USB Type-C Specifications - <AUTHOR> http://www.anandtech.com/show/10719/usbif-publishes-audio-over-usb-typec-specifications <comment><USER3> The USB-C spec is just terrifying. All that functionality. All those pins in a tiny space. High-voltage high-current power, in either direction. HDMI. Analog audio. Even supports USB. Either end can be the master. There's even a protocol to support a tiny display on the cable to tell you what's going on or what's wrong. And some more features I missed. Yes, the mobile handset industry wants to get down to one connector, but they may have overloaded this one.

Nobody is going to get 100% of this right for some time. Coming soon: lots of questions on Stack Overflow that begin "When I plug a USB-C cable between my X and my Y, ..."

<comment><USER4> That's the case already with USB Power Delivery Standard: The dream of "One Wall adapter and one car adapter" to charge all your devices (phones, laptops, battery driven accessories).

Actual situation: not really.

Examples: Apple's MacBook 12 charger delivers non-standard 14.5V and the Dell XPS 13 only accepts 19V. USB PD however allows 5-12-1USB and on top of that the old USB Battery Charging standard with 5V@2A.

Additionaly USB-C allows methods to authenticate peer devices. We will for sure get DRM'ed chargers and whitelisting for some accessories...

<comment><USER5> I actually wouldn't mind a little white listing.

Folks like Underwriters Laboratory could serve as CAs, issuing certificates for compatibility with different profiles / standards. Then chargers could refuse to throw current at unproven devices.

Of course then you need the ability to boot your charger into some kind of "promiscuous" mode for development or backwards compatibility purposes.

To get REALLY ambitious, your charger could have an Internet connection and monitor a blockchain for certificate information. Some careful protocol design could let users override the DRM at will without letting cheap chinese crap factories ship exploding devices.

<comment><USER6> > your charger could have an Internet connection

<comment><USER7> Quoted out of context

> To get REALLY ambitious

<comment><USER8> Honestly we already have standards for tethering over USB... Still crazy, but it could actually work.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I don't understand the point about saving space by eliminating the DAC. At the end of the day, to produce sound, we need a DAC. So there will have to be a DAC somewhere. How is creating bigger dongles "saving space". The users have to carry bigger accessories.

It's like Intel's Skull Canyon mini-PC. They miniaturised the PC but the power supply is now nearly as big as the PC. What's the point of shipping a mini-PC with a humongous power supply?

<comment><USER10> At least in term of Apple, it makes a bit more sense when you consider that apple owns Beats, the best selling Bluetooth headphones in the world, and also that they'll get paid a flat fee for each lightning compatible set of headphones made.

It's about the courage to make lots of money!

<comment><USER11> Yeah, isn't that what all those personal development gurus were telling us for years? You need courage to be rich!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Yea, let's replace a 3.5mm diameter jack with an 8.4mm x 2.6mm jack. All that space saving!!!!

Note the supported formats are all DRM-encumbered? No Vorbis? no FLAC?

Gotta love that money grab.

<comment><USER13> After moving audio to USB-C, you only need one jack for charging and audio. Space saved right there. You'll also notice that 3.5 > 2.6, so it allows for thinner phones (for whatever that's worth...).

USB-C also grips the jack on the inside, likely making the connector inside the phone smaller. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

<comment><USER14> Which is great, right up until you want to charge the device _and_ use the audio jack. Now we're back to a splitter.

<comment><USER15> This argument, which was everywhere when apple launched the 7, seems like such a straw man. How often do people actually do this? Me: never. If you are charging your device, odds are good that you are within a foot of your desktop of laptop.

<comment><USER16> Twice daily. Charge the phone while running a line into the car's aux in.

<comment><USER15> do they even make car stereos anymore that do not have Bluetooth?

<comment><USER17> Bluetooth audio quality is lossy and poor, compared to an analog line. Plus, my car's Bluetooth driver crapped out, putting it in a constant "starting up" state that even pulling the battery hasn't resolved.

<comment><USER18> > Bluetooth audio quality is lossy and poor

Bluetooth audio _can be_ lossy and poor.

The default minimum standard SBC codec is pretty terrible, no doubt, but every device worth using supports many other codecs which are sufficiently high quality for car use. AAC and MP3 are commonly supported, which also happen to be the formats your audio probably is already in. A player focused on quality could, in theory, pass the raw input data over the Bluetooth link for it to be decoded on the car/headphone side. In that case there would be no quality loss, though you'd lose the ability to mix in other audio such as notifications, so I doubt this mode is used by default on smartphones. Dedicated music players may support it.

Since there's arbitrary codec support technically with support from both sides you could also send a lossless stream up to the bandwidth limits. I don't believe there's widespread support for any lossless codecs, but the technology definitely allows it.

Even if you're just using one of the high-quality lossy codecs like aptX you still have to keep in mind the environment. Unless you have an uber-luxury car the noises of normal driving will have more of an effect on the audio quality than the Bluetooth stream. Sure, you might be able to tell the difference when parked, but unless you spend a lot of time sitting around waiting in your car that's not very relevant.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> It seems like the spec supports digital and analog audio data. That seems like a potential nightmare for consumers - your headphones may plug in to you phone, but they don't have a DAC, and neither does your phone. Or what if they both have DACs?

I'm sure this will be standardized in the future, and I can see the advantages of dropping the connector. I just really like cool things that can be done with the DACs and ADCs built into people's phones

<comment><USER20> "The USB ADC 3.0 defines minimum interoperability across analog and digital devices in order to avoid confusion of end-users because of incompatibility."

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> USB type C specification is looking like the F35 specifications: able to do everything.

Jack of all trades often are masters of none, and audio is a little sensitive topic in electronic ; it does not need a big bandwidth but it hates lag, and non guaranteed time slices and it hates noisy background.

If Audio in this case do works without surprises I will be surprised and will admit that I was a miscreant unbeliever.

Still putting smartness in a device that is so far from the CPU violates some clear common sense in async handling in the realm of hardware for time critical devices...

</comment><comment><USER17> An interesting confluence; Headroom just published an article about attempting to use a dongle, and the cost to the sound quality.

[https://www.headphone.com/blogs/news/this-is-the-dawning- of-...](https://www.headphone.com/blogs/news/this-is-the-dawning-of-a-new-era- for-portable-devices)

Not the best comparison, but a good quick overview of the "state of the art" right now.

</comment><comment><USER22> Allowing support for analog over the SBU pins _and_ pure-digital sounds like it will cause confusion and support headaches when people buy cheap analog- only headphones and try to use them with a digital-only device...

<comment><USER23> The analog audio is the supposedly less common and it still requires some digital hardware in the connector to negotiate the move. Might add well put a small cheap DAC and amp in.

I'm pretty sure analog only headphones will become quite rare. Still much better than forced digital only.

<comment><USER24> Analog-only headphones (mid-range to high-end ones at least) will never go away. People who care about having good headphones also care about having an equally good DAC and amplifier to go with them, and they're not going to be willing to pay the premium for decent ones every time they buy a new pair of headphones (good DACs and amplifiers are NOT cheap), nor will they be willing to pay for a mediocre DAC that they never use.

It would be suicide for headphone companies to stop producing analog-only headphones, unless they can force everyone to scrap their analog-only sources (it might be possible with consumer toys like smartphones, and they might be able to convince gullible audiophiles if they can find the right marketing gimmick, but it will never happen in the professional world).

And what about all of the analog-only headphones already in use? Quality headphones are not disposable products (they can last for decades when properly maintained), and nobody in their right mind is going to throw them out until every last analog output in the world has been magicked out of existence.

<comment><USER25> > good DACs and amplifiers are NOT cheap:

You consider "a few dollars" as not cheap? [https://para.maximintegrated.com/search.mvp?fam=precision- da...](https://para.maximintegrated.com/search.mvp?fam=precision-dac)

Anyway it doesn't matter. If you want the best quality, the source (i.e. the phone) has to feed a digital signal.

Then it's turned into sound by either a $10 earphone or a $1000 Hi-Fi system. How well that external device amplifies and generates the sound is up to that external device, they both get the same (good) quality source.

And if your sound system doesn't support digital, you can get a USB-to-Jack35 converter.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> So if analog audio support is optional and all headphones are required to support digital, why would a vendor actually bother to implement analog output?

<comment><USER27> The niche audiophile market will pay large sums for questionably effective hardware.

For anyone doing serious audio work, being able to change your DAC might be nice.

I agree though, the justifications seem shaky

<comment><USER26> I agree that there are benefits to consumers to have an analog interface - <USER2> just don't see any incentives for vendors to implement then. (Aside from vendors serving niche markets as you described)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Does this imply that "audio over lightning" is on the way? I'm looking at you, Apple.

<comment><USER29> I'm not sure what you mean. I use this every day in my car.

<comment><USER30> In your car's situation you are sending digital to your car stereo and its decoding and sending to your speakers. I believe OP was referencing analog audio.

<comment><USER28> Thanks for clarifying. Yes, I mean a little adapter box that I stick on the end of my iPhone that converts from digital to audio, so I can use my regular 1/8" aux cable for headphones.

<comment><USER31> Isn't this exactly what the adapter that comes with the iPhone 7 does? Either that or there's analog over lightning.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Will this support existing devices with USB type-c?

</comment><comment><USER30> The comments associated with that article are abysmal.

<comment><USER33> Standard Internet tech blog comments really. On a higher plane than Engadget/Gizmodo/Verge comments, but still dominated by enraged teens who really really want to prove to everyone that the phone their parents bought for them is better than the phone someone else's parents bought for them.

In the Usenet days, there were comp.*.advocacy groups created specifically to absorb those kinds of discussions, but nowadays every comment section everywhere is an advocacy group. Lousy comments beget more lousy comments and drive away good comments.

<comment><USER30> > Lousy comments beget more lousy comments and drive away good comments.

Solving this problem would make for quite a company.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do you validate sources outside of your area of expertise? - <AUTHOR> Hi HN,
The indefatigable avalanche of conflicting information around COVID is becoming too much to bear, though this problem is not unique to the current circumstance. I am curious, what is your personal method for validating information on topics that you are unfamiliar with? For example, I am comfortable, like many of you, with topics relating to computing/technology and with some spare time can dig into a paper and perform at least a cursory examination of it's methodology and findings. When I face the same problem but instead on a complex subject in virology or biology, I do the best that I can, checking the logic wherever possible but there is still much field specific knowledge I do not possess.
So what do you do, especially when faced with two pieces of conflicting information in an unfamiliar field? Do you defer to certain public or private institutions that are comprised of experts in the field? Do you choose to side with the information that has the largest number of experts agreeing with the presented conclusions? How can I, a layman, even adequately evaluate the credentials and past publications of a researcher?
I feel like I have fallen into a rabbit hole. Who to trust? <comment><AUTHOR> Since posting I have found a relevant paper: "Experts: Who should we trust?" published in the journal Philosophy and Phenomenological Research in 2001, University of Arizona (Goldman)

[https://dacemirror.sci-hub.tw/journal- article/74629e4919a196...](https://dacemirror.sci-hub.tw/journal- article/74629e4919a196eb265629836d3d0a1e/goldman2001.pdf)</comment>


Haiti Earthquake Survivor: "My iPhone Saved My Life" - <AUTHOR> http://mashable.com/2010/01/20/haiti-iphone-survivor/

<comment><USER2>
          My iPhone did not save me, God and the prayers
          of tens of thousands of His people did.

Was it the same God that caused/allowed the disaster in the first place? Yeah, I'm gonna have to go with iPhone.

<comment><USER3> In one line you're inciting a religious war _and_ a "religious war"

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Way to sensationalize and exploit a human tragedy. Way to trivialize suffering.

:-(

Of all the stories, both happy and sad, you choose to publicize the one about one of your own, and his gadget. If 200 thousand people didn't die, I would be all ears, listening to how vacationing business man used his iPhone to evade death.

</comment><comment><USER5> For the cost of an iPhone, you can save a lot more than one life. Donate right now!

<http://clintonbushhaitifund.org/>

<http://awe.sm/helphaiti>

etc.

</comment><comment><USER6> Come now, everyone knows the iPhone battery wouldn't last 55 hours.

<comment><USER7> I'm not sure if you are being sarcastic or not but I'd point out that he probably wasn't using the thing continuously for all 65 hours until his rescue. Also when in stand by mode my iPhone lasts for many days w/o a recharge so I'd say this story is quite believable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8>
      My iPhone did not save me, God and the prayers
      of tens of thousands of His people did.

[http://mashable.com/2010/01/20/haiti-iphone- survivor/#commen...](http://mashable.com/2010/01/20/haiti-iphone- survivor/#comment-30638961)

<http://twitter.com/webguydan>

</comment><comment><USER9> The NBC Article has more detail about the apps that the man used while under the rubble and how they helped save his life:

[http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local-beat/Earthquake- Survivor-...](http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local-beat/Earthquake-Survivor- Says-iPhone-a-Life-Saver--82081602.html)

<comment><USER10> Do people these days really need assistance from an app for that:

"Woolley used his shirt to tie off the three-inch gash that was opened on his leg and a sock to bandage the back of his head."

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> It's like the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.</comment>


Introducing JamBook: The world's thinnest, lightest notebook. - <AUTHOR> https://vimeo.com/47758237 <comment><USER2> Is this a _design_ , where the idea is that I make my own JamBook out of things found around the house (much like the Hipster PDA: [http://www.43folders.com/2004/09/03/introducing-the- hipster-...](http://www.43folders.com/2004/09/03/introducing-the-hipster- pda)), or is this a _product_ that I would buy from you?</comment>


Amazon #2 in digital music sales - <AUTHOR> http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20080326/tc_usatoday/amazontakesonapplewithcopyprotectionfreemusic

<comment><USER2> As someone who buys a LOT of music, Amazon's DRM-free .mp3s are what finally got me to switch to digital music for most of my purchases. It's awesome to be able to buy a single I like, or an album from an artist I'm not familiar with yet without having to go out and lay down $15+ for a CD.

I WOULD prefer it if the downloads were direct (they use a client downloader that you have to install on your machine), but I'm still pretty impressed with the offering.

And it's nice to see the major labels starting to really come around to digital sales.

<comment><USER3> Have you considered illegally downloading your music instead?

<comment><USER4> I know almost no one in their mid twenties or younger who doesn't. The, unsolved, problem is that music worth listening to is few and far between.

<comment><USER2> I would have to respectfully disagree on that score. While there is no accounting for taste, I think that there's a lot of excellent music being done these days. I've even heard a few albums in the past few months which are among my all-time favorites, would highly recommend to anyone and everyone. Iron & Wine's latest album, _The Shepherd's Dog_ is, in my opinion, the best of the last year.

[http://www.amazon.com/Shepherds-Dog-Iron- Wine/dp/B000TQZ7O4/...](http://www.amazon.com/Shepherds-Dog-Iron- Wine/dp/B000TQZ7O4/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1206748782&sr=8-1)

So yes, there's a lot of dreck out there, but I don't think it's fair to say that one has to search very hard for music "worth listening to".

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I've been using eMusic for years, and absolutely love it (I think it was #2 for quite a while). But now that Amazon offers DRM-free MP3s that I can play on my Linux boxes, I'll use it for major label stuff that I can't get from eMusic. It's pretty rare that I have the urge for mainstream stuff...but it does happen. Their prices are reasonable, as well. Nothing to complain about, actually.

But, I certainly won't be letting my eMusic subscription lapse.

</comment><comment><USER6> Are the MP3s available as a web service? It would be cool if there was a kind of wholesaler for MP3s, so that competition for the best shopping experience could arise.</comment>


Ask HN: What's the easiest way to add invite codes - <AUTHOR>

I'm at the point on a project where I want to add invite codes and share it with a select few people (and slowly grow it after that). I'd prefer to not to add another table and a bunch of logic to the core app itself, knowing that I'll just tear it out in a month.
Anyone know a good service for this? Any other good methods?
LaunchRock: if you're reading this, this would be an awesome addition to your service. <comment><USER2> Well, provided that this doesn't need to be highly secured. You could base invite keys on some property of the verification code. For example, you could design a system where a code is valid if the sum of the first five digits is equal to the product of the next three digits.

A system like that is easy to code and requires no database. The downside is that your would be relying on security by obscurity. For something like an invite system that may perfectly acceptable.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> FYI: found an old thread on the subject <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=306957>

Still, any better suggestions would be welcome

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> And to totally answer my own question: <http://www.prefinery.com/pricing/></comment>


Google's Disco is an iOS Trojan Horse - <AUTHOR> http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/why_would_google_release_an_iphone-only_group_mess.php?sms_ss=hackernews&at_xt=4d90993efded90bb%2C0 <comment><USER2> This assumes a lot about a pretty mundane app. It seems more like Google is letting Slide do its own thing within the company. It was only acquired half a year ago, I'd be shocked if this is a precursor to a feature baked into Android.

<comment><AUTHOR> Would you, really? I think that Google has to do something to get into the ring on this one. Facebook bought Beluga. Google's just gonna stand by and do nothing?

<comment><USER3> You're talking about a category of application which very few people are even using at the moment. Both Facebook and Google buy a lot of companies.

They're not "doing nothing", they're letting a small team try to develop something, which seems a perfectly appropriate reaction. How often has Google jumped into a totally new category with any real conviction? They half- heartedly launched Buzz long after Twitter was a hit, they killed Wave, etc.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Actually curious on this point - is there an app for jailbroken iPhones to see what data is being sent out from your phone? A simple way? Packet sniffer with your phone's IP?

<comment><USER4> See Andy Baio's "How I Indexed The Daily" for information about using a proxy to monitor/inspect traffic from a device similar to an iPhone.

<http://waxy.org/2011/02/how_i_indexed_the_daily/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> You shouldn't say trojan horse in the computer field, it has too many connotations.

Interesting idea, but with msn, gtalk, facebook and the hopefully-still- upcoming BBM, multi-network clients should rule.

</comment><comment><USER6> Is this app worth a download?

Is there any iOS app out there that come close to BBM? It seems that all the one I tried were very buggy.

<comment><USER7> From reading the article, it seems that it isn't, yet. The posited theory is that Android will eventually include the app in its default install, so at that point it might be worth installing if most of your friends are Android users. Until then, skip it.

<comment><AUTHOR> (Yeah, totally not worth it.)</comment></comment></comment>