The improbable rise and fall of Couchsurfing - <AUTHOR> http://kernelmag.dailydot.com/issue-sections/features-issue-sections/13124/life-and-death-couchsurfing/ <comment><USER2> According to a recent Mixergy interview with founder Casey Fenton, Couchsurfing tried for years and years to be approved as a 501(c)3 organization (basically, a charity) so they could receive grant money to support cultural exchanges. Eventually the IRS gave them a final, non- appealable determination of non-status. Apparently, the cultural exchange aspect was not a strong enough reason when most people probably couchsurf to save money. So their business model was broken, and they had to stop being a non-profit and become for profit, which, at that point, costs $1 million to convert. I presume this is because non-profits must give away their assets to another non-profit if they cease operations. So $1 million in VC dollars plus other investment converted them into a for profit. Alas, not with such great results. I think it is unfortunate the way the meme has spread that the founders were just making a money grab.

[http://mixergy.com/interviews/casey-fenton- couchsurfing/](http://mixergy.com/interviews/casey-fenton-couchsurfing/)

<comment><USER3> I wonder if in the case of an international-by-default internet organisation, there might be some international workaround. Maybe they could have registered the business elsewhere or even physically moved to another jurisdiction. Maybe they could have formally merged with an existing cultural exchange non profit like the various 'year abroad' exchange organisations.

If a for-profit company, quasi-nonprofit or organisation without a well defined status wants to operate as a non profit and they seem to be getting results... It seems a terrible waste not to help that exist, as a society or a legal system or whatnot.

If you have a million to spend on converting from non-profit to something else (or was that contingent on converting into a US for profit?), perhaps there are other options out there. What's the distinction between for profit and non profit in a "favourable" jurisdiction like Isle of Mann or The US Virgin Isles?

It sounds so needlessly wasteful.

<comment><USER4> Are all tHe employees and assets going to be physically located outside the U.S. too? Otherwise IRS still wants a piece. If it were that easy to avoid taxes everyone would do it.

<comment><USER3> Aren't non profits allowed to pay foreigners salaries, subject to local rules? Do US non profits pay local corporate taxes when they operate abroad?

<comment><USER5> They may or may not, depending on their domestic status with regards to the country of operation.

Foreign corporations, for- or non-profit can operate in the USA. But they need to register in their state of operation in the U.S. as a foreign corporation. And unless they get a determination of tax-exempt status from the IRS, they would be subject to U.S. corporate income tax with respect to their U.S. operations.

Even U.S. corporations have to register as foreign corporations to operate outside of their state of incorporation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I've been going to CS meetings for years and they've always seemed the same to me. Half residents (foreign and local) and half travelers. Most are there because their life, or the times, don't allow for making easy friendships, thus they get several of the benefits w/o the commitment.

At this point, personally, I end up making a few 'friends' and then sitting at a table or in a small standing group with half friends and half travelers. The friends part means I don't have to ask those hostel-type questions to every single person I talk to (where are you from, how long are you here for, what are you doing here, when are you leaving).

After some time, no matter the city, I start to realize who has been hooking up with/is interested in whom, and often times, one realizes most are there for a combination of this and the easy social aspect.

...

As for the site, their new redesign messed up a lot of functionality and completely did away with crowdsourced data from the communities. The CS city groups have totally become a "let's go get drinks since I'm in your city for two days" type thing, not to mention travelers are constantly asking the same questions and since CS took out the search function, including the previously mentioned deletion of years of crowdsourced info/tips, the site & quality of content has just gone downhill.

<comment><USER7> What do you mean by 'crowdsourced data from the communities'?

<comment><USER6> After the redesign, links to groups were deleted (meaning they restructured the URL hierarchy and how one part of the site connects to the other). That's almost fine, as long as they implement a nice search functionality and allow access to hundreds of backpages of user-created posts for each city group, etc...only they didn't. They totally deleted all that crowdsourced data (the posts) and threw the search functionality in the trash (search is a horrible user experience now).

In summary, by crowdsourced data, I mean when someone asks where the best park is (for ex), they might get several viable answers from locals. After a few months, this post gets buried but with search it can easily be found again.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> CS is great example of how the growth can kill community. Even five years ago CS was kind of underground community of travellers, hippies, hitchhikers and odd people like that.

Then the VCs come in and mainstream media started to write about the site, which brings new crowd of people. Now it feels like dating/hookup site and meetings are now mostly expat gatherings of weekly drinking party of local english teachers.

I used to be active member of community, surfing over 5 continents, attending meetings in many many cities and countries. I don't surf anymore, but I do visit some meeting from time to time and I can tell how the vibe is completely different, also the long time members are gone.

<comment><USER9> Do you have any idea where they went?

<comment><USER8> Thats a great question. I don't think there are (and going to be) community in the same style like CS.

<comment><USER9> Why do you think that (for the future)?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I hosted lots of couchsurfing type people, on I believe a pre-CS network in the same light, circa 2005. Can't remember the name. Later, I joined CS. There were some great characters that turned up in my house in Qingdao, China (right by the ferry-ride to Korea) .. global cycle-tourists, Japanese-American documenters of vanishing island dance traditions, and a schizophrenic East German woman. The latter was our last guest due to the difficulty of the experience. I never actually stayed with anyone else, only provided a room and sort of free tour guide services which is a big unmentioned portion of what these networks are/were.

I still get emails from CS though .. including one this morning from a Canadian who typically laments, in English: _I have had a great trip so far but unfortunately have not got to meet and connect with many chinese people due to language barriers._ Imagine that.

(Edit in reply to Michael below (out of posts): From the statistics at [https://www.warmshowers.org/country_count](https://www.warmshowers.org/country_count) it looks like Europe by far holds the most numerous number of members in the smallest geographical area, ie. it should be easiest to navigate solely by WarmShower hosts in this region.

Typical living costs for cycle touring Europe are 5 (stretch but possible) to 10 (feasible) to 15 (comfy) EUR/day for food. If you can budget 20 you can get drunk too. Add 5 for museums, I reckon you're good. 25EUR is about 28USD. The exchange rate is the best it has been in 10 years. Go now!!!)

<comment><USER11> If you want to host more cyclists, check out WarmShowers. It's still in a nascent stage with a decent community thus far.

<comment><USER12> WarmShowers sounds like some sort of sexual fetish. No thanks.

<comment><USER13> I don't know how to put this nicely, but warding off people with reactions like this seems like a feature, not a bug.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> While it's true that couchsurfing.com isn't what it used to be, I don't think the same can be said about the individual couchsurfers.

It's a bit too easy to lament how the quality of surfers has gone down as the community size has grown. While couchsurfers today are a more diverse crowd I think exposing the idea of couchsurfing to people who aren't you stereotypical backpacker is not necessarily cause for lament. Sometimes all it takes is a nudge in the right direction for them to become involved too.

I was active myself on the old site and after a couple of years break I've decided to start again now that I have the space to easily host. During the few months I've had visitors stop by my flat here in Edinburgh I've had the pleasure of meeting a great amount of very different and almost always interesting people ranging from poor students on their first couch surfing trip to a guest hitch hiking overland from China to classical musicians from London to a travelling Blues Dance teacher.

Being in a cultural hotspot like Edinburgh I naturally receive a lot of requests, many of which looks blatantly copy/pasted. However since I decline most requests for lack of time anyway it's not much effort to filter through and find the people who seems like they are interested in meeting me and invite them in.

So at least speaking from my own experience I don't think there's any cause for alarm over the quality of the people on couchsurfing. But then again, I always found the meetups to be dreadful. As for the site itself I find the redesign annoying and wouldn't mind switching to a better site if any good contender came up, but so far the community on CS however much in decline is still much more active than any other site I know of.

<comment><USER15> I'm almost scared of suggesting it since it might get destroyed by marauding infidels, but I am a fan of bewelcome.org. It is much smaller, of course. They run OSS!

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I can't really share some of the sentiments – I'm using CS for a few months now, host plenty and so far have had no problem finding a couch in popular places (London, Berlin) with reasonable due diligence when picking guests and hosts.

I think a lot of the criticism is just life-cycle rooted. Sites grow, evolve and users of the "first hour" no longer see "their site" as what it once was and leave. I could say the same for... Ebay, for example – used to be fun to browse and sell. Now there are commercial sellers galore, millions of products and all the magic is gone. But that's my personal perception. The site still works. Just not for me, so I have moved on. Doesn't qualify calling Ebay "fallen" imo.

</comment><comment><USER17> I had an informal interview at Couchsurfing's SF office a few years ago. Having met the people behind today's CS, it all made sense why the site had completely lost its magic.

The employees I had lunch with spent most of the time dogging on the "technically incompetent hippies" that founded the company. The recruiter balked at my question about why they switched to Ruby on Rails, saying that, "anyone who thinks Ruby doesn't scale frankly doesn't know what they're talking about." My intent wasn't even to question the validity of the question, but the guy immediately got defensive.

Everyone I talked to was drunk on the "startup culture" they were trying to latch onto. Every person talked about the great monetization opportunities.

I had felt that CS had lost its magic many years before this interview, but the people running the company were the nail in the coffin for me.

</comment><comment><USER18> I always thought that the main attraction of couch surfing was the fact that you got a free place to sleep. Sure, meeting locals is a nice side effect, but for many people the fact that it is free is the thing that enables travelling in the first place.

We've hosted a bunch of people, and it's usually young people with little income (often students). And Couch Surfing works great for that: The website matches up people who look for a free place to stay with people who like sharing their place. And despite all the politics, couch surfing still works great for that!

</comment><comment><USER19> I have been hosting 30+ people in Montevideo, Uruguay since 2011 and while I find CouchSurfing not as beautiful/user-friendly as AirBnb I really don't care. And I am a designer. The community at least in my country is and still really strong. I haven't had a single problem whatsoever and It really changed me for the better in an immeasurable way. Maybe other startup can hit the nail on the usability, credibility, signal-to-noise ratio. As a host who receive +5req / weekly, the main filter is always yourself. You need to do your due- diligence (aka stalking) and set your own rules. There's way more good people than bad people. Fortunately I haven't find one of the latter.

TL;DR; Join. So far there's no other community like couchsurfing, take the best of it. It will impact you deeply.

</comment><comment><USER20> Hospitality organisations long pre-date Couchsurfing. Servas, the oldest such organisation, was founded in 1949 as part of the peace movement and now has over 16,000 hosts worldwide. Servas has avoided most of the issues that have afflicted Couchsurfing by requiring new travellers and hosts to be interviewed and vetted. Prospective members are expected to share a belief in internationalism, and use the network to build meaningful cross-cultural connections.

<comment><USER21> Are you a Servas member?

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I think the original couchsurfing spirit is fundamentally incompatible with the startup "guzzle money and grow" mentality. For a successful community you need to keep things local to build trust networks - this is fundamentally a low profile operation, not something that's going to scale massively and make a big splash, because it involves tight groups on small scales. I think the SF startup scene just doesn't have the mentality to make that work - everyone is chasing the Next Big Thing (emphasis on Big), so a community website that, for example, makes it's mark in a handful of German cities isn't what founder CEOs and VCs are looking for.

</comment><comment><USER23> BeWelcome is frequently on the verge of collapse, and IMO is simply too small and unreliable to be of genuine value. It serves mainly the French folks who set it up nearly a decade ago, as a form of protest against the founder of HC. Some sort-of funny criticism is here: openbw.blogspot.com

If you want to see a _really_ ambitious CS-replacement project, sign-up at trustroots.org! These guys are experienced travelers and hosts, and very skilled and up-to-date, professional coders. They invested years of unpaid tech talent into CS and BW, before finally starting their own site last winter.

[https://github.com/Trustroots/trustroots/](https://github.com/Trustroots/trustroots/) Got some MEAN skills? Get in touch with them!

</comment><comment><USER21> Hey, it's Drew from Horizon (one of the new apps mentioned in the article). Just wanted to let everyone know, if you're interested in hosting/surfing among the HN community, there is a private hacker news group that is available by using the following group unlock code: hn2015#$

</comment><comment><USER24> i used couchsurfing myself, as a host and guest all over the world. one point the article didn't talk about - Airbnb. once people realized they can charge money for the empty room/couch they ditched couchserfing. i find it too bad because in a way we all hurt ourself by charging each other. there was something magical about the vision that says - host someone from other county for free and next time you'll visit there you have a free place too.

<comment><USER25> Together with my friends, we are living in a large apartment, so there's often one room empty or extra space for people to sleep. We used to frequently host couch surfers, but in the end we have made the most friends and had the best experience with airbnb priced to just cover the room rent.

We found it to greatly reduce conflicts between guests and hosts, and actually get people more engaged in our small community.

With couch surfing, I often had thoughts like "I pay for your room and you can't even put your dirty dishes away". Since we offered the room for free, we kind of expected some sort of autonomy from their side to help us out in the household or maybe cook some dinner for everyone if they stay longer than one night. They often expected that we would go explore the city with them and give them a lot of attention.

On airbnb that problem somehow mostly vanished. If things with the guest aren't great, at least you get paid. Thus you also don't need such a strict screening process anymore. Due to this, there seems to be much more diversity regarding the types of people we get to meet.

Many of them actually just want a quiet room to sleep in, and it's absolutely fine. Some people however really get involved and become good friends. Especially when they stay longer (which almost never happens on couch surfing), the fact that they pay rent just like everyone else seems to make some of them much more open to suggest improvements and be proactive.

We've met a lot of diverse, interesting people through airbnb, some of which ended up staying for a long time, some coming back regularly. On couch surfing we've mostly met the traveling couple, group of friends coming here to party and young backpacker stereotypes.

What killed couch surfing for me personally though, was that no matter how many people I've hosted, I could never find anyone who would host me when I was traveling somewhere. That really destroyed the magical vision for me.

<comment><USER15> > What killed couch surfing for me personally though, was that no matter how > many people I've hosted, I could never find anyone who would host me when I > was traveling somewhere.

So much this. I've probably hosted easily 30-40 different groups or individuals (which is perhaps not a lot by CS standard, but fine, I've done my dues, no?), and I have only been able to surf 3 times, of which 2 were arranged by the attractive young lady I was travelling with (I am not 100% serious, that is sexist, but I suspect this dynamic does play a role). On the other hand, I have frequently sent out 20-50 reasonably personalized surfing requests, depending on popularity of destination, etc. Of course you'll have to take my word that I didn't just copy and paste a one-liner like "Hey I'll be in your city from x to y July, can I stay at your place?", but still, CS is dead to me, I don't even try to surf any more.

Another telling thing is that in many popular destinations (New York most recently for me) the first two pages of search results include predominantly photos of muscular males posing without t-shirts. Somehow I didn't feel drawn to that. :(

Great idea, tragedy of the commons?

<comment><USER26> For me, it greatly depends on the location. At locations where hostels are readily available and cheap, I had easy time couchsurfing, e.g. Mexico, and had a very good time (that was last summer, 2014). In SF, yeah, good luck, and better be a handsome girl/guy (and maybe get some unwanted advances).

Though, actually, back in 2010 I did find a CS host in Brooklyn, NY within maybe 5-10 requests, so YMMV.

Israel, I've been told by my guests, is very easy.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> guard-of-terra Their redesign is awful also. I stopped coming since it now requires 3x clicks to do the same.

</comment><comment><USER27> I was curious as to why the non-profit model didn't work, and was surprised it was registered in Deleware. I am automatically a bit nervous when a California based non-profit registers in Deleware. Sorry, but I want to download those free previews on www.guidestar.org, and find out who is on the BOD, and who is making the most money in the 501c3. If I can't find the detailed financials; I don't donate.

Why would a non-profit register in Delware:

"One advantage provided to corporations under the DGCL is flexibility in internal structure. Unlike some states such as New York, the DGCL requires a corporation to have only one director. A nonprofit corporation in Delaware must have members, but directors can serve as the only members. Unlike California, there is no requirement for a majority disinterested board. Finally, Delaware does not require the naming of corporate officers.

Delaware also generally applies less cumbersome regulation to the formation and operation of nonprofit corporations than some other states. Unlike New York, which requires in certain circumstances the approval of various state agencies prior to the formation of a nonprofit, an individual can form a Delaware nonprofit corporation simply by filing a certificate of incorporation. Delaware also does not require nonprofit corporations formed under Delaware law to register with its Attorney General's office or file annual separate financial reports to the state (though if the nonprofit operates in Delaware, it may be required to file a copy of its federal Form 990 with the Delaware Attorney General). Finally, unlike some states, Delaware does not require any state government approvals for nonprofit corporate changes such as amendments to the certificate of incorporation, mergers, and dissolutions."

Looking at the Federal From 990 is important--IMHO. The public shouldn't have to pay to see that informantion. I don't know if couchsurfing even filed 990's? A disinterested board is important--for any non-profit--IMHO. Registering with the attorney generals office is important--IMHO. My point is if you are a San Francisco non-profit register in California. If you have a good cause, and all financial information is open public viewing; you might be surprised just how much money you raise?

[http://communityenterpriselaw.org/2014/01/is-delaware-the- be...](http://communityenterpriselaw.org/2014/01/is-delaware-the-best-place- to-incorporate-a-nonprofit/)

<comment><USER28> Well, maybe its time to sign for BeWelcome (non-profit)

[http://www.bewelcome.org/](http://www.bewelcome.org/)

Can BeWelcome be sold? [http://www.bewelcome.org/wiki/Can_BeWelcome_be_sold](http://www.bewelcome.org/wiki/Can_BeWelcome_be_sold)

Differences with Other Networks [http://www.bewelcome.org/wiki/Difference_with_other_hospital...](http://www.bewelcome.org/wiki/Difference_with_other_hospitality_networks) No.</comment></comment>


How can I make wearing headphones at work more acceptable? - <AUTHOR> http://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/7533/how-can-i-make-wearing-headphones-at-work-more-acceptable

<comment><USER2> "change to social norms will require integration"

Sorry, but how about trying to relax a little bit and simply ask your manager if it's cool to wear headphones?

</comment><comment><USER3> Since joining the salaried workforce, I haven't worked at a place where wearing headphones would be out of place. Is this something that is common? What industries?

<comment><USER4> Financial IT - policy here forbids wearing headphones or earphones during normal in-office working hours.

Their line is: you are here to collaborate, otherwise why bring people together in the first place?

I do agree with that to an extent. I've worked in offices where *phones were common and the users always seemed to be snarky when I tried to interact; particularly those who put them on as soon as they arrived and didn't take them off until home-time.

It doesn't just impair work collaboration, it also degrades the social atmosphere in the office.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Measure the volume level in the office with a shitty iPhone application or something. Cross reference to health and safety standards for your country. Generally, you will find it's pretty loud - especially if you have salespeople or a cubicle layout. If anyone asks, point to the figures.

<comment><USER6> If your office is loud, the last thing you want to do is to drown that out with headphones and music! You want earplugs, which can be subtle enough that they fit in socially, even in a no-headphones office.</comment></comment>


Better Than Free - <AUTHOR> http://changethis.com/53.01.BeyondFree <comment><USER2> article: when stuff that can easily be copied is worthless, only stuff that isn't easily copied can sell. Question: Well, what can't be copied?

Everything can be copied, always. The only difference is quality. My photocopied textbook looks crappy and may have pages missing, so it's in my interest to buy the actual book. My cheap knockoff made-in-china hammer is only partially embedded into the handle which could fall apart and hit my toes, so it's in my interest to buy a better made-in-china hammer. My fake italian designer glass coffee table is 2mm thinner than the real glass table, and my designer friends will pick up on that and make fun of me, so it's in my interest to buy the real thing.

It's also relative: how much do I value 1 missed assignment question, or a bruised toe, or pretentious artsy friends? If I don't value them very much, I will choose the copy.

To make things worse, manufacturers these days produce products that has equal or worse quality than their "competitors", and charge more for it. Gucci watches are pieces of crap whose quality is way worse than $10 watches you can get at the mall. Falling-apart jeans say falling apart is a 'feature' when Old Navy's fall apart just as well. Crappy software makes unreasonable demands when their much less annoying "competitors" offer a better product for "free".....you see the problem?

First and foremost, we are consumers. It is unreasonable and naive to believe that consumers will choose an inferior product for the same price or more. Simple as that.

<comment><USER3> Things that cannot be copied:

      1. The personal touch (Attention)

      2. The unique history

      3. Authenticity

      4. Atoms*

What we are seeing is a drastic drop in the cost of knowledge and an exponential increase in it's availability.

As physical objects become more fungible, capable of being replaced by functionally identical copies, the aspect that will make one object more valuable than another is it's unique history, the knowledge about it, and the social meaning of that knowledge.

Does the fact that you know that Gucci watches today are crap mean that a Patek Phillipe is more valuable? Does it become important to you to know the history of the workshop that produced the watch? Is a watch that had been pawned by a refugee fleeing the holocaust more valuable because you can point to it and say 'A man bought his life with this.'?

A watch that you commissioned to your own specifications from a master craftsman should be the most valuable of all since the master's shop time is limited, and you needed to know enough about watchmaking to make an intelligent request.

One aspect of the consumer society has always been about the social status and peer approval created from purchases. The ground of status is shifting away from the inherent quality of the goods and towards the knowledge of the relationships embodied by the goods.

* arrangements thereof yes, but unless we get some new physics, the actual elemental material is unique, you can't fax yourself more helium when you are running low.</comment></comment>


Show HN: I'm Creating a GitHub Repo Quality Bot - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/Schachte/Git-Enforcer <comment><USER2> I do like the idea overall. So, let me tell you why I instantly hated it and closed the tab.

Your Show HN headline did a great job, I was excited to see what a github repo quality bot does!

This is a personal preference, but I find the name "Git Enforcer", the police officer emoji, and the git logo with a police hat on it completely off- putting. Not the atmosphere I would want to foster when I'm trying to use persuasion to get colleagues to adopt good practices. In my world, police are authoritarian bullies who demand instant compliance without negotiation, or else they'll brutalize you.

It's humbler and more inviting for a bot to come across as an assistant. "Git Enforcer" comes across as something a clueless boss imposes. I think all the wrong-footed design cues come from the name "git enforcer".

Basically your bot is a _linter_ for collaboration behaviors. It can't actually enforce anything, all it can do is nag. Actually, if the name was GitNag and the icon was a horse, I would find your bot charming.

Speaking of linters, lately I've been using [Black]([https://github.com/ambv/black](https://github.com/ambv/black)) for my Python. Its self-description in that Readme sold me on it instantly.

I wish you well with this! It is a cool idea.

<comment><USER3> In Ruby world I use [http://batsov.com/rubocop/](http://batsov.com/rubocop/) every day. In Perl world [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perl::Critic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perl::Critic) I personally couldn't care less about logo or naming.

<comment><USER2> That's just like Perl to have a literary name like Perl::Critic :-)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Looks nice indeed but it reminds a lot this tool: [https://github.com/danger/danger-js](https://github.com/danger/danger-js)

</comment><comment><USER5> Git Enforcer... Doesn't have anything in common with Git.

<comment><USER6> True. But it's a helpful messaging touch stone to get people into the intended headspace.

That said, I agree the branding is a big off.

All that said, Great project, OP. Keep up the good work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Why do you use labels and comments instead of GitHub's Statuses API [1]?

[1]: [https://developer.github.com/v3/repos/statuses/#create-a- sta...](https://developer.github.com/v3/repos/statuses/#create-a-status)

<comment><USER8> I'm not involved in this project, but I would guess that it's because it validates both issues and PRs, but only PRs have statuses on GitHub, More precisely, only commits have statuses, and issues aren't associated with commits.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is exactly correct. I haven't finished the pull request feature yet, what you're seeing on the repo is just issues. I will be taking requests for any desired features

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Looks nice</comment>


Ask HN: Anyone Hiring Based on Open Source Code Review? - <AUTHOR> Maybe some of you can sympathize.  I'm looking for a new job, and am certainly qualified, but I  don't like all these tests.
Why I don't like tests:  I have gobs of open source projects covering the gamut of full stack, and a good resume. I'm not going to spend 2 hours each on a bunch of tests for companies, especially if they have made no offer to me.  That's ridiculous.  Whether it's front, back, full, w/e, I probably have something in my portfolio similar already.
If I haven't used w/e framework or tool on your list, I'm certain I can pick it up in a day or two, even a new language (who doesn't like learning?).
Hire good programmers and trust them to do their thing. <comment><USER2> Coding interviews have gotten out of control. Most of the people giving the coding interview couldn't pass it themselves. Even worse, the people who can pass these tests only do so by memorization--once they are hired, many are not competent Software developers.

<comment><AUTHOR> I wonder if they think the time sink will make you more likely to take the job.

And I think it devalues good programmers, because a test is not likely to display their true strengths.

<comment><USER2> In my opinion, it's infantile bro culture hazing and feelings of inferiority. Oh, you can't traverse a binary tree using Breadth-first search in aarch64 assembler? You obviously aren't qualified to work on our web application.

<comment><AUTHOR> I've applied for front-end jobs and get asked some C.S. puzzle, to do something no front-end developer has ever needed to do (unless they wrote the one module everybody else uses).

And yet, it's not like I couldn't grok that if I needed to... just pay me and I'll figure it out, no problem.

The difference between me and the applicants they are filtering, is that I can both learn and implement w/e algorithm, in any language you want. Want proof? Just look at all these other algorithms I learned and wrote.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Also, It shows no respect to qualified applicants. You want me to work for you, but you won't spend time going over my previous work.

My personal opinion is that programming should go the way of sports and entertainment: we should have agents. I have almost started this company several times. HMU if you want to help me start that.</comment>


Interview with SmartThings: How a Faulty Pipe Unlocked The Internet of Things - <AUTHOR> http://www.twilio.com/blog/2012/12/smartthings-interview.html

<comment><USER2> [http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/smartthings/smartthings-...](http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/smartthings/smartthings- make-your-world-smarter)

</comment><comment><USER2> This is a great idea, but it's much much much too expensive.

I want the sensors to be under $10, and maybe a $50 - $100 hub to work with them.

Edit: And there's a service fee???? (Waived for the first customers.) No way!! am I relying on something that needs to 3rd party to work. (Never even mind the fact that you have to pay them - just the fact that they need to exist makes this a non-starter for me.)

<comment><USER3> Check out micasaverde.com and mios.com. Offers the same type of home automation products with no service fee, and there's an API if you want to hack it.</comment></comment>


PostgreSQL Gets Religion About Replication - <AUTHOR> http://scale-out-blog.blogspot.com/2008/06/postgresql-gets-religion-about.html

<comment><USER2> I'm sure I'm not the only one that wishes they had this yesterday. Being able to read from slaves would be a _huge_ help.

</comment><comment><USER3> Granted, there is no built-in replication, but there are certainly options...

[http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Replication%2C_Clustering%2C...](http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Replication%2C_Clustering%2C_and_Connection_Pooling)</comment>


Ask HN: How can I learn what I need to learn? - <AUTHOR>

I have things I want to build but I'm hampered by my super-basic programming ability.
I'm a tech-oriented person, I work IT support and build computers often, but I've just never been able to get the hang of learning how to code (well).
However I really want to learn so I can build my ideas. The major problem I'm having now is that I read about so many different languages, frameworks, structures, etc. that I really can't figure out what I should be using, or what I should learn. I really couldn't tell you the difference between different types of databases, but I know that I need to use one.
I'm guessing for a web/mobile based app/service I'm going to need JavaScript, but what "kind"? React, Angular, Node, or none of the above?
Is there anywhere I can look to to learn what I should be learning so I can do what I want to do?
EDIT: so far I've used Codeacademy a bit, but it's hard to stay focused and disciplined using that I find. I've also started a few courses on Udemy but it's the same thing.
My programming experience so far is using MIT App Inventor to make a Pokedex app (I think it's pretty good though) and a little bit of VB back in highschool. I do know a tiny bit of HTML/CSS and super beginner basics of JavaScript. <comment><USER2> It probably sounds like I'm just being a shit, but any kind of anything is better than every kind of nothing.

If you're hanging around here, you've probably seen the advice again and again in terms of projects: get something (terrible) working, and start iterating. A working project in the wrong language is almost always better than not having a project. Programming languages/tools are similar. Thinking about the "right" language or framework before you start is putting the cart before the horse in a big way.

The reason for both of these is that most of the "hard" work is actually not the code itself. In the case of a project or product, the "hard" work is figuring out what to build and how it should work. In the case of becoming a better programmer, the language or the framework is only a slice of what you learn by building a project.

Almost inevitably, regardless of the technologies you use, you'll make some decisions you'll wish you hadn't in a few months/years. This is especially true when you're starting out. A project rewrite is usually faster than the initial creation, and you'll tend towards picking up additional languages/frameworks faster than the one(s) before.

<comment><AUTHOR> "the "hard" work is figuring out what to build and how it should work"

That's something I like to think I'm good at. For my major project I have a 6/7 page planning document that I've been working on, and I have design mockups made. I think I know pretty well what I want to build.

I really would like to just start/try with something, but I'm worried that could end up being a "death sentence" in the future where I find out I just wasted a few months learning something that doesn't work or help me succeed.

<comment><USER3> "I really would like to just start/try with something, but I'm worried that could end up being a "death sentence" in the future where I find out I just wasted a few months learning something that doesn't work or help me succeed."

I'm assuming you're building a web app. Both Rails and Django work. There's plenty of evidence that they work, and that people can learn either of them as they build. Just toss a coin: heads->Rails, tails->Django.

If you chose Rails, start with 'Learn Ruby the Hard Way', and then progress to Hartl's Rails Tutorial.

If you chose Django, start with 'Learn Python the Hard Way', and then progress to the official Django Tutorial, and then to the book 'Two Scoops of Django'.

You don't need to worry that you're wasting time. It's the worrying itself that is wasting time. Just toss a coin and get started.

(Many of us have been where you are.)

<comment><AUTHOR> I've eyed Rails a bit and it's something I'm going to look more into. I just wasn't sure if it was what I was looking for.

If it's good for a web and mobile app then that's great, and I guess it can do both front and backend so that seems pretty good too. Would you say it's a better choice for my situation than going with some form of JavaScript?

<comment><USER3> Don't overthink it. Just start.

For your situation, I would pick Rails or Django. There's no reason not to start with one of those. If you decide you want to use JavaScript, then your next post on HN might be in one year:

"I've been trying to learn JavaScript for the past year, but I'm struggling to get anything built. Every time I think I get it, I read about another new stack which is meant to be better than the last. I started with just JQuery, but then Backbone, and then Angular. Then I heard about React and decided to start again from scratch. But I can't get past the todo app examples..."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Perhaps instead ask "I have this idea, it goes like this, how the hell do I build it?"

Wait, is this the analytics for musicians idea we're talking about? (spotted in OP's history). If so... my 2 cents is that analytics is a tricky game. Platform providers have their own services be it Google or Soundcloud where such data is stored and seen. You want to access and gather that data somehow, and charge musicians to see it?

Anyway, before you can learn what you need to learn, you need to learn how the basic building blocks of your idea are made. Eg, a global highscore table, how to build one of those little suckers. Shop around the thousands of free articles on that subject. Get things working in a dev environment..... [actually getting things polished and finished takes sweat and long hours and the odd bad day. The worst thing is when you think you've had a lightbulb moment of progress, only for it to be actually confirmation that you went down the wrong road 4 hours ago, or even days ago, and in some rare cases years ago!]

<comment><AUTHOR> Smart to look through my history, but it's not really related to that. That was something I was looking for during my research for this idea. That was more like a side thing for the future.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> To a large extent, you just need to pick something and try it out. Start small, build something with react (or whatever). If you like it, great, maybe build something else with it. If you didn't like it or got hopelessly stuck, try something else.

I don't have the link now, but there was some one who made one website a day for 30 days to learn different techniques and also just to get in the habbit of _shipping something_. That might be one way to go.

<comment><AUTHOR> I appreciate your advice, but at the same time I don't just want to learn to code for the sake of learning to code. I have specific goals and ideas but I'm not in a place where I can achieve them.

I should've been more specific in my post that I'm trying to learn what "technologies" (not my favourite word) are going to be most relevant/useful to spend time learning.

<comment><USER6> I'd worry less about specific technologies and more about learning the basics of building of a web app. It doesn't really matter what you use. Successful sites have been built using pretty much all languages. When I taught myself programming about 16 years ago, I bought a book on Cold Fusion that had step- by-step chapters on building a CRUD app, I used MS Access as the database, and did basic JavaScript for validation. If I was doing the same today, I'd use PHP, PostgreSQL and JQuery. The concept is the same. Learn how to create, read, update and delete records from a relational database via a web front end. Learn how to loop over records and display them. You've got to walk before you can run.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's actually what I'm looking for. I want to learn:

\- "the basics of building of a web app" \- "how to create, read, update and delete records from a relational database via a web front end" \- etc.

The problem is that you can find so many tutorials or books, etc. on specific things like Rails, JavaScript, or MongoDB but I don't know of anything for the actual underlying thought to using those.

I don't know enough information to be able to choose what I should look at using.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> MIT OCW's class Intro to Programming using Python will teach you general programming concepts that are common to many languages. You will start with basic things like iterators and work through some algorithms and the basics of object-oriented programming. It is an awesome mix of challenging and a lot of fun.

There are two versions but I think they are largely the same, just organized differently. I took the earlier one:

[http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and- comput...](http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and-computer- science/6-00sc-introduction-to-computer-science-and-programming-spring-2011/)

[http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and- comput...](http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and-computer- science/6-00-introduction-to-computer-science-and-programming-fall-2008/)

Feel free to e-mail me (address in the profile) if you have questions about this particularly.

</comment><comment><USER8> I strongly suggest looking at udacity's nanodegrees or coursera's certificates.

There are great courses and nanodegrees created by google, facebook, and other employees from big companies where you'll get to build projects and learn best practices.

Udacity recently released an android nanodegree co-created with Google.

[https://www.udacity.com/course/android-developer- nanodegree-...](https://www.udacity.com/course/android-developer-nanodegree-- nd801)

There are great paid and free courses on those platforms that will take you from intro to programming to deeper topics such as Machine Learning, Robotics, etc.

</comment><comment><USER9> Freecodecamp.com is superb

</comment><comment><USER10> I'm basically on the same boat as you (except that I am learning because I enjoy it), and with one other difference, I had no previous experience except for tinkering with things I didn't understand and didn't lead to any meaningful insights.

To get a good feel on how to write simple scripts in python, you can take the class on coursera: Programming for Everybody (Python). If you don't care about the grade, there is a class currently going. The people in the forums for that class are fantastic. There is another class starting on october 5. [https://www.coursera.org/course/pythonlearn](https://www.coursera.org/course/pythonlearn)

A good follow up course which will get more in depth is Introduction to Computer Science and Programming Using Python over at edx. This class is a bit more demanding than the previous one that I mentioned. [https://www.edx.org/course/introduction-computer-science- mit...](https://www.edx.org/course/introduction-computer-science- mitx-6-00-1x-0)

The first time around I dropped out, it was too much for me. So I took a few other classes, including Introduction to Algebra at edx to give my brain some exercise. [https://www.edx.org/course/introduction-algebra- schoolyourse...](https://www.edx.org/course/introduction-algebra- schoolyourself-algebrax)

If, you are interested in learning for the love of it, I would recommend Systematic Program Design (which is divided in three parts - the first part just finished last week but the materials will remain open for people to catch up) [https://www.edx.org/course/systematic-program-design- part-1-...](https://www.edx.org/course/systematic-program-design-part-1-core- ubcx-spd1x)

This class will teach a design process that can be applied to any programming language, using a simple programming language to help teach the design process. The book can be found at: [http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/matthias/HtDP2e/index.html](http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/matthias/HtDP2e/index.html)

There are a few other classes over at udacity that I'm planning on taking but can't recommend them yet as I haven't seen them.

Lastly, a few months ago a friend asked me about programming, so I wrote a quick and dirty blog post that has a little bit more information. Keep in mind that I'm a beginner as well - so take it with a grain of salt. [http://teichopsia.svbtle.com/how-to-get-started-in- programmi...](http://teichopsia.svbtle.com/how-to-get-started-in-programming)

Note: There is a paragraph about a class called Intro to computer Science over at udacity. The class mentioned in this post at edx is a better class.</comment>


Flow Analysis & Time-based Bloom Filters - <AUTHOR> http://www.igvita.com/2010/01/06/flow-analysis-time-based-bloom-filters/ <comment><USER2> tl;dr A Bloom filter implements the predicate isMemberOf efficiently--at the cost of some false postives. Its performance degrades when the set is large. Solution: index your set by time, implementing a Bloom filter for each epoch.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is a neat idea. However, the Redis backend seems rather pointless. If I'm understanding the code correctly, each bit of the filter is implemented as an item in Redis. From the comments[1] the overhead is ~130 bytes. So each bit ends up needing 1000 bits? At that point, it'd be even be more efficient to just use a hashtable with the SHA256 hash of the item as the key and storing a count+expiry time...

[1]: In the comments: "The simple backend I added treats each key as an individual bucket, and based on my rough testing, Redis added about ~130 bytes of overhead per key - which, of course, is a huge difference compared to the bit vector."

<comment><USER4> New version of bloomfilter.rb uses SETBIT/GETBIT: [https://github.com/igrigorik/bloomfilter- rb/blob/master/lib/...](https://github.com/igrigorik/bloomfilter- rb/blob/master/lib/bloomfilter/redis.rb)

The "bit" per key was prior to setbit/getbit functionality. The new implementation is, in fact, very efficient.

<comment><USER3> But not for the one that supports expiry:

[https://github.com/igrigorik/bloomfilter- rb/blob/master/lib/...](https://github.com/igrigorik/bloomfilter- rb/blob/master/lib/bloomfilter/counting_redis.rb#L55)

As the point is to use Redis's expiration feature, which obviously does not apply to individual bits.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> First, it seems like unnecessary overheard - memory, and potentially network - to store a Bloomfilter in Redis. A modern machine can pretty easily fit a BF containing hundreds of millions of items with a very, very low false positive rate into memory. Why get Redis involved?

Second, an alternative solution might be using multiple, smaller Bloomfilters, and dumping the oldest BF shard whenever the most recent one fills up. This wouldn't be appropriate for all use cases, but it's simpler, and potentially superior in some cases.

<comment><USER6> The article mentions specifically that storing the Bloomfilter in Redis or memcached is done only to allow sharing between multiple processes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> > Finally, we also make use of the native expire functionality in Redis to > guarantee that keys are only stored for a bounded amount of time.

So if I'm understanding this, the time-based aspect comes solely from the fact that Redis/the backend is storing the timestamp of entries and also deleting them behind the Bloom filter's back?

Well, that's a lot simpler than the strategies I was imagining.

</comment><comment><USER8> Hey - I love this site, I'm reasonably new to Ruby stuff and it gives me a taster of things I love reading about, and things I'd like to do. Can anyone please suggest any other similar blogs/places?

Thanks!

<comment><USER9> There're a lot of gems on Ilya Grigorik's blog, start there.

<comment><USER8> Yeah, its been a regular haunt of mine for a while. If you know of anymore, please share!

<comment><USER10> Articles (including Ilya's) are frequently submitted by authors to <http://rubyflow.com/>

<comment><USER8> Thanks Peter.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Cool, I might add this to bloomfilter.js if I get a chance: <https://github.com/jasondavies/bloomfilter.js></comment>


I'd rather be dead than linger on in an old folks' home - <AUTHOR> https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-goldman-worse-than-death-20190310-story.html <comment><USER2> 10 years ago I was diagnosed with a progressive neurological condition. I knew that it would put me in a wheelchair, take my ability to type, strip one by one every physical function, and eventually, but definitely not quickly, kill me.

I knew I couldn't go through that. So I decided I would take my life at the appropriate time. I still hold to that decision. I did the planning, I have the means.

But something happened that I didn't expect. As I have got worse, it's never quite felt the right time. I am much worse now than I thought I could ever stand to be, for a long time I have been reconciled to death, but life is still worth living enough to live.

I wonder if I will ever take that step. I absolutely reserve the right to. But I am constantly surprised at the value of my own life, even stuck essentially in two rooms, and requiring constant care.

The very black-and-white, all-or-nothing, I know how it's going to be 100%, attitude in this post struck me as naive. I strongly believe that it's his life and it should be his choice. But it did feel naive to me.

<comment><USER3> I have been diagnosed with multiple sclerosis 2-3 years ago. I have been contemplating a lot about what I am going to do, and if I would be able to do it when and if it comes to that. I do not wish to rot away on some hospital bed waiting for my life to end. I might just end up overdosing on morphine if it ever comes to that. Hopefully not. I try to maintain optimism, I hope that we will be able to significantly slow down demyelination, stop it, or even reverse it. We will see...

<comment><USER4> > I hope that we will be able to significantly slow down demyelination

Recent drugs can already significantly slow down demyelinination but these stronger drugs come with stronger side effects. And that's why I suppose you are doing a MRI follow-up to check the activity of disease: so that doctors know which drugs they should prescribe you.

Today immuno-neurology research is a hot field in which converge both research for neuro-degenerative diseases and research for various forms of cancer. You probably already know that most MS pts have an almost normal life expectancy. I think it's quite probable that in the next decades the disease will become stoppable for the majority of patients. (just think of tech and medicine 30 years ago...)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I have personal experience with someone like this. For many years, my wife's mom would declaim "if I ever end up in a hospital in a coma with no hope of recovery, just pull the plug; that's no way to live". We would all just nod and move on to the next topic of conversation.

Tragically, later in her life, she had a fall and ended up in the hospital in a coma, with the doctors saying they were not sure if she would come out of the coma. She did, with big chunks of her memory gone, but her first lucid communication was sheer panic at the idea someone might pull the plug. It took a while to reassure her that no one was going to pull the plug.

That incident has stuck with me all these years. People make bold statements about how they would behave in a crisis, and much of it is nonsense, the lack of an ability to truly put yourself in that situation, coupled with other factors like pride.

Likely, when the author gets to the inevitable stage in his life, he will change his mind, and he won't be a different person. Instead, if at this time he retains enough cognitive ability and memory, he will say "what a fool I was".

<comment><USER6> Well there's also many examples of people who pulled their own plug when the going got too laborious and they saw the writing on the wall. He could end up being one of those people. Not everyone changes their tune regarding this matter. Some grab a pistol; some jump out a window.

<comment><USER7> > No More Games. No More Bombs. No More Walking. No More Fun. No More > Swimming. 67. That is 17 years past 50. 17 more than I needed or wanted. > Boring. I am always bitchy. No Fun – for anybody. 67. You are getting > Greedy. Act your old age. Relax – This won't hurt.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> For folk in the US, please remember right-to-death in your end of life plans. In other countries, look it up and figure out where your suicide switch is installed.

I went through an awful ordeal with my mom in late stage ALS. My mom was always adamant about being kept comfortable and taking an early exit.

But. Her sister convinced her to move to South Carolina instead of Washington with me. This led to a nightmare of her getting eventually moved to a terrible hospice facility, hen getting an airlift so she could be in a better hospice in Washington.

By the time she got to Washington, we were out of time to go through the right-to-death paperwork and self-administration. She had to go out the hard way, which in her case was slowly shutting down over weeks, including ten days of being unable to drink anything and slowly becoming unable to breathe. We watched Gilmore Girls together, slowly waiting for the end, and me torn between wanting her to be released and wanting every second with her.

I'm saying this so people understand, if you want a way out, get to a right- to-death state. It needs to be a priority.

</comment><comment><USER9> I honestly can't wrap my head around nonexistence, a brief 0-100 year existence, and then nonexistence again. I've lost days when I think about it too much and start panicking. I want to exist dammit. I love existing. I love my life. People act like they're going to live forever too, but really life isn't that long, and you only live a portion of it in a young body capable of doing all of it.

<comment><USER10> > I honestly can't wrap my head around nonexistence, a brief 0-100 year > existence, and then nonexistence again

Death might not be non-existence. Many religions, philosophies, spiritual teachings, say that it isn't. Of course, maybe they are all baloney–and a lot of them have to be mostly that–but there is at least a chance there is some truth in one or more of them.

Maybe quantum immortality is true, and all of us live forever, but it is a lonely existence, cut off seemingly forever from family and friends. (I hope that isn't true, it sounds rather hellish.)

Could we be living in a computer simulation? If we have no idea, shouldn't we assign a 50% probability? But, if we are in a computer simulation, our simulators might decide to provide an afterlife for us. And if we have no idea whether they would or not, shouldn't we assign a 50% probability to that? Which gives us 25% chance of a simulated afterlife – not the best odds, but far from the worst either.

We could be physically resurrected into some paradise by various random processes (quantum tunnelling, quantum fluctuations, thermal fluctuations). The probability of that happening is immensely small but non-zero. No matter how small it is, if the future is infinite, then almost surely it will happen eventually.

Most people who think death is non-existence accept a materialist position in the philosophy of mind, but often without giving any great thought to the alternative positions. If idealism is true–and we have no hard evidence it isn't–then death being the cessation of existence is far less likely. If idealism is true, then quite possibly minds are inherently immortal, in which case an afterlife would be metaphysically necessary.

<comment><USER9> For me, a lot of that seems like wishful thinking. We didn't exist before birth, and we think nothing of it. More than likely, that's where we are headed. We just have a really hard time excepting something that is so fundamentally against our current state of existing.

<comment><USER11> >We didn't exist before birth

At the risk of sounding all "woo-woo", this statement bears some qualification.

How do you define existence, here? Are you equating it with consciousness? Surely your constituent parts (atoms, molecules, particles, etc) existed before your consciousness, and continue to do so afterwards.

I think you'll also agree that the arrangement of matter and energy you call "your life" is regulated by natural processes.

In principle, it's possible for the thing you call "your life" to be a brief window within some larger process (a meta-life, if you will) of which you have no recollection.

I don't know if I believe any of this to be true, but metaphysically speaking, it's not at all obvious that we "didn't exist before birth".

<comment><USER12> > _How do you define existence, here? Are you equating it with consciousness?_

Yeah, I, for one, equate it with consciousness. I could not give less fucks if my "atoms, molecules, particles" existed before me or will exist after me.

I want the whole conscious being, able to kiss, hug, think, love, hurt, eat a steak, and so on to extend.

> _I think you 'll also agree that the arrangement of matter and energy you > call "your life" is regulated by natural processes. In principle, it's > possible for the thing you call "your life" to be a brief window within some > larger process (a meta-life, if you will) of which you have no > recollection._

If I don't have "recollection", then I still don't care.

<comment><USER11> I think you may have completely missed the point being made.

<comment><USER12> No, I've got the point being missed. I just don't find the distinction useful at all.

The whole point being made was that "metaphysically speaking, it's not at all obvious that we "didn't exist before birth".

Which I say is irrelevant, if we need to distort "exist" so much as to mean some "larger processes" or our "atoms and molecules" existing.

Metaphysically speaking it might not be obvious, but the way the grandparent, me, and almost everybody else uses the term existence (i.e. regarding the conscious person, or at least their soul) it's obvious that we very much do not exist.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Until five months ago my parents (in their 80s) would have decisively said the same. They designed their house so it would be comfortable even as their range of motion diminished (e.g. bedroom they could move into downstairs). Yet five months ago they completely changed their minds and move to one next week.

Why?

My mum's a physician and she saw many people degenerate in their own homes, and find themselves in trouble (fell/got stuck, had to wait for someone to find them). For them that was disturbing, but they also saw people get quite lonely as they and their friends could no longer make it out of the house. Their friends are dying too. And finally they realised it just takes more and more time to accomplish simple tasks like paying the bills. They'd rather be living than looking after their lives.

This author is American and my parents are living in the USA as well. There's very little support for old people in the US except for unpaid labor by daughters or daughters in law (the number of adult sons looking after aging parents is much lower!). In home care is expensive (1.5% of US GDP already -- I looked it up) and thinly served. When I compare that to the care my grandparents had and my in laws (in three other countries) the US appears to be the least supportive -- though in part this is due to people moving around a lot.

<comment><USER14> Do you really want to drag gender wars into this? How many of those unpaid daughters are getting their needs paid for by wage-earning spouses?

<comment><USER13> As it happens I have looked at these statistics as I am working at a startup in the elder care space. The fact is it's overwhelmingly the females of the next generation who do this work, regardless of whether they have a job outside the home, and surveys report significant _dissatisfaction_ and resentment with that state of affairs. "I don't see how this is dragging gender wars in"

Increased automation will allow a significant number to "just" do the fun parts — no bedpan or nappy changing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I've now cared for two elderly relatives, both dear to me, through to their deaths. One, in extreme pain despite copious amounts of medication, begged and pleaded for death for a number of days before finally passing. The other, while still lucid, expressed her desire to go quickly, that she was ready. But she, too, went through days of agony before passing. I watched on as both these people became nothing but their pain until they mercifully died.

There are other forms of horror I've witness family members live through, like slowly losing your memories. Forgetting your loved ones and yourself bit by bit.

I'm fine with withering away, even in an old folks' home. But at some point you lose who you are. I'd rather be dead than linger in a state in which I have no concept of who I am, or who I once was. No memory of what I find precious, or of whom I love. The moment I'm just a scared animal in pain, with no hope of ever being human again, please just kill me.

<comment><USER16> > with no hope of ever being human again

I think what's difficult is the combination of hope that it will get better, and the fear that you are ending life before it has a chance to get better.

I absolutely feel the same away about my own life as you do, but it's harder to pull the trigger (metaphorically) when it is someone else's life, even when it is obviously the right choice.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I remember visiting my grandmother with my new girlfriend when grandma was bedridden and nearly blind. She wasn't always lucid, but she was this time -- we had a nice talk about things in the past, she got to meet my girlfriend (who is now my wife), but during a lull in the conversation, she said "Johnny, I don't know why I'm still here, I just want to leave but my body won't let me".

That led to a long conversation of mortality with my gf and both of us promised that we'd help each other out if we got into that state and were ready to leave. I hope by then it's legal.

<comment><USER18> My grandmother was fairly irate that she recovered from pneumonia and grandfather did not. She kept asking when she was going to die and was very straightforward about the entire ordeal. She said something along the lines of 'all my friends are dead and I've lived long enough.'

<comment><USER19> I wonder how your family took this? I had a similar experience with an elderly person on my wife's side of the family. At that time of our lives, I couldn't understand how someone could refuse medical treatment and seem to yearn for death. Now that I'm a decade older, I see that her actions were not without reasonable cause...one might even say they were courageous and bold. She was simply done. She'd lost a child earlier in her life. She loved her family but everyone was well off and content. She didn't like doctors and hospitals. She was in near constant pain from arthritis. And she was just...done.

<comment><USER18> It was a mixed bag as far as reactions. Some family is religious, some incapable of expressing emotion, some work in healthcare and have seen death enough to accept it. Living in pain with no personal hope is a big gap. Having others force their idea on you about what you should accept as 'things to live for' seems more depressing than anything to me. It's always harder on the living because we are selfish in wanting a person to stick around who does not want to.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> As an Indian, I will never ever be able to wrap my head around the concept of an old-age home that seems normal in western societies.

Whenever I find myself feeling a bit envious about the obvious advantages that are there in western countries, the reminder of the existence of this absurdity immediately removes all feelings of jealousy.

<comment><USER21> What's the alternative in India?

<comment><USER20> If you're not living in absolute poverty, it's completely possible to take care of your parents as they grow old. My father took care of my grandfather until his last day and they lived under the same roof albeit on different floors.

No matter how my life turns out, I will still do the same for my parents as they have done for theirs.

For large swathes of the population, putting your parents in and old-age home is seen as a complete and utter betrayal for the sacrifices they made for you.

<comment><USER22> You have x hours to spend. You can either spend them with yout children or spend them with dementia laden old parents who don't know who you are

What's better for you? For your children? For your parents?

A granny flat may be acceptable, but having the in-laws under your roof? It was awful when I was a kid, and we had mother-in-law round for a week or so after she came out of hospital for a knee replacement. We all found it intolerable.

I don't want to be a burden on my kids, and my parents dont want to be a burden on me.

Unlike in India though, I wouldn't sue them.

[https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia- india-47154287](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-47154287)

<comment><USER20> I think the key difference is that the visit from your mother-in-law was a novel or unique experience which you might not have the emotional tools to handle. It isn't exactly fair to compare that inexperience with what is a way of life in India.

The visit may have been uncomfortable for you because of the absence of societal and cultural rules to help streamline these situations.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I too would rather be dead than rotting away in an old folks home. At least that's how I think about it now.

My comment will probably get down-voted for this next part, but it's not meant to be mean-spirited, self-righteous, condescending, or anything like that. Just one person's point of view.

Despite my preference, my hope is that I would surrender to and accept God's will. The Lord's Prayer says "thy will be done" and not "my will be done". Jesus did not press the easy button.

<comment><USER24> I agree. It sounds esoteric, but if there's any purpose to existence, then there's purpose to the suffering one might go through near the end of life. There's almost certainly a reason nearly all religions consider suicide a grave sin, and I don't think worldly reasons (like the welfare of society) are solely the cause.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I just want euthanasia as an option, if the future me wants it. I definitely wouldn't want to put this kind of binding decision over future me (regardless of whether "future me" is actually me).

<comment><USER26> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half_a_Life_(Star_Trek:_The_Ne...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half_a_Life_\(Star_Trek:_The_Next_Generation\))

Star Trek: The Next Generation has an absolutely _brilliant_ episode on this topic that touches on a lot of the things brought up in the article, as well as a concern you've brought up here in your comment:

 _I definitely wouldn 't want to put this kind of binding decision over future me_

A character facing this very conceit admitted that in the past, he was-like many others of his species-in favor of a policy whereby at 60 years old their kind would sacrifice themselves in an honorary fashion so as not to impede the progress of their descendants.

 _Fifteen to twenty centuries ago, we had no Resolution. We had no such concern for our elders. As people aged, they... their health failed. They became invalids. And those whose families could no longer care for them were put away, into... deathwatch facilities, where they waited in loneliness for the end to come, sometimes... for years. They had meant something; and they were forced to live beyond that, into a time of meaning nothing. Of knowing that they could now only be the beneficiaries of younger people 's patience. We are no longer that cruel_[1]

But the character later has a change of heart over the policy he was invariably complicit in supporting, while IMDB doesn't have the quote, paraphrasing it poorly-he opined about how his present and potentially future self may rebuke his past self for such a policy--a question of hindsight.

Great episode, I encourage one who's interested in the discussion created by this article to read it. It's one of my personal favorite TNG episodes, as it creates an interesting confluence of emotional narrative and philosophical narrative that comes to a narrative conclusion, but leaves the philosophical question open in ways most episodes of the same 'template' don't.

[1][https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0708724/quotes/qt1125551](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0708724/quotes/qt1125551)

<comment><USER22> Wasn't that about perfectly healthy people being forced to die against their will?

Ethics at least covered the idea that Worf (paralysed) contemplating suicide.

<comment><USER26> _Wasn't that about perfectly healthy people being forced to die against their will?_

The specific episode I referenced it wasn't so much about perfectly healthy people being _forced_ to die against their will, since the character in question intimated quite heavily that their species had made a conscious decision that this is how their elderly would "pass on".

He repeatedly made it appear as if their species treated it as an honorable affair, and that it was a celebration.

Further in the episode, his daughter comes onboard the Enterprise and expresses that she does still love her father but is ashamed of him for defying a long standing tradition. So I'm not sure if it's a matter of anyone being "forced" in this case to die before they may emotionally be ready to.

The episode kind of plays on this through the meta-narrative/"B Plot" of the character (Timicin is his name, by the way) working to revive a dying star and save his species, after the entire episode and all of the build up, his experiment ultimately fails, dooming the star to die anyway, his planet doomed to the same fate.

The episode routinely ruminates on the concept of death as a choice, only once do we see an instance of what could be called 'force' when Timicin's government demands he comes back and undergo the ritual suicide, but even they finally relent to his wishes and tell him that if he wishes to stay with the Enterprise and continue living, he may-they wont pursue him further, but he will effectively be disregarded by his society and his scientific achievements effectively destroyed.

The takeaway, I believe it was Picard who noted that sometimes death must come in whatever manifestation it comes, even if we feel it's something that can be stalled by wit, intuition or will-this happens during the scene we see the experiment fail and the cast comes to the realization that there may be nothing that can be done with current technology to save the local solar system.

Timicin ultimately makes peace with it, as does Counselor Troi's mother (who fell in love and didn't want to see him throw his life away), and realizes he can still die in peace and allow his contributions to flourish with younger generations of scientists who might be able to learn from his research and keep their local star from dying out for good.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Can anyone explain what it means to "thrive in hospice"? My impression is that the plan is 1) to discontinue "heroic measures" and 2) dope you up with opioids "to make you comfortable" so much so that your body shuts down. I'm fine with the first, but I don't see how that qualifies as thriving. I'd like to hear if anyone's experiences are different.

<comment><USER28> I have two experiences to share:

Mother in law had heart attack, ended up with low function. She had 10 good years, then the "evil zapper" as she called it, would trigger regularly. She hated it and directed that it be turned off.

Two blissful weeks followed. Just knowing it was not going to happen again perked her right up. The last night, she got up late and I made her a great sandwich. She knew this was it. Went to sleep, and was lucid only one more time.

She said thank you.

The other was my Father in law. He was very old, fell and broke his arm. His body just could not cope. He ended up in hospice care, both of these at home, BTW. Neither wanted to be in some hospital room.

He went through a very painful week of shutdown, but was mostly lucid. This was terrible.

Medical cannibis was available in my state, and he requested a "stiff dose" because the opiates made him a mess. Experiencing some cannibis was on his bucket list and smoking it was out of the question.

I looked up how to make a very potent drink, did it and we gave him a shot glass full of it.

Frankly, the next 10 or so hours were amazing. He got up, out of bed (not supposed to be possible at this point), came out to see everyone, yell at the idiots on TV, and tell us all stuff he wanted to tell, along with old songs and jokes he wanted people, his grand kids to remember.

We all asked (What the hell?), and he said I am stoned enough to forget I am dying. No more of that talk, gimme a beer. (We did) He was Irish, and to him this kind of thing was "going out right and proper"

He passed a day or two later. After that fun night, he went to sleep, restful, seemingly way more comfortable. Was not lucid again.

We did not have to use much of the death drug kit they sent us home with.

I have only done home hospice. I think it has beauty and pain. I think it is a just and solid choice for one to make when they have family they trust completely.

Both thrived. Was brief. No way would it have been the same in a sterile boring, unfamiliar room.

Both contained meaningful end of life experiences. Both appear to have a worthy end. Worthy in that is was their terms more.

That is all. Hope this helps.

For what it is worth, I was moved. I will definitely go that way should my end be known and it being possible.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I have the view that all persons with psychological illnesses should have the right to receive euthanasia and only if they desire with medical professionals examining them if coercion exists or not. Society is currently selfish, arrogant and ignorant when it comes to authority over people who desire death. I know one person who is being discriminated based on her painful illness and while knowing a person who received euthanasia who suffered less pain in his life than the other person. The first person being diagnosed with gender dysphoria and the second person with cancer. The events lived in life can be more important than the illness when it comes to how pain is felt & dealt with.

</comment><comment><USER30> I will never want to die and I will never allow anyone to kill me, stop any potential life support or anything of that sort.

I'd rather be alive than decomposing.

</comment><comment><USER31> Lots of good conversation on this challenging topic. I would like to throw out a nugget of information for anyone finding themselves having to go down this path: There are many different levels of care when it comes to 'old folks homes'.

We had to go down this path last year with my mom to get her out of living alone in a house. I thought the options were to move in with one of us or put her in an old folks home. Turns out there are many different levels and options: Independent Living, Assisted Living, Memory Care, Skilled Nursing, Private Duty Nursing, Hospice, Continuing Care Retirement Communities, etc.

We found an independent living situation that gives my mom the independence she needs but also the social, dining, and transportation needs that enable her to live a good life without us having to worry about her safety and well- being. Of course, she does like to say with a wink that we put her in an old folks home but she enjoys it.

</comment><comment><USER32> For some time now it has been on my mind how the... how to best express this? the default stance is that everyone wants to live as long as modern medicine can stretch their lives. Very reluctantly, a few places relatively recently began to allow people with debilitating conditions to end their lives at their will. As far as I am concerned, I already only live because I feel a duty to the small school(-ish) I started and finance. It was always meant to be a relatively short lived affair. When your bucket list is empty, you are alone in this world, when you don't have anything to look forward why go on? I have known for years now that I don't particularly want to survive my 50th birthday (some six years from now) and there's no dignified way to just end it.

<comment><USER33> Why 50?

Make it 65, and then find something to look forward to in 20 year's time. Even if it is just GTA XXI

<comment><USER32> Because if my luck persists my mortgage gets paid down by then.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> If anything can be learned from the article and the commenters, it is that it is very difficult to know your own, true stance on this matter until you're in the position where you need to make a decision. It is easy to say that we would choose to end our lives than live with a crippling disease, but we forget about the omnipresent hope that is within us all, the same hope that got our ancestors through disasters, war, and unimaginable suffering. Unfortunately, in most cases, a person is not able to make the decision until they are already suffering.

I don't know where I stand on this issue, truthfully. I feel that people should have the right to choose, but it seems like most people really struggle to predict what they will want when push comes to shove.

</comment><comment><USER35> Jacqueline Jencquel is a French woman who has decided she would die in January 2020 : [https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/paw59z/meet-the-woman- who...](https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/paw59z/meet-the-woman-whos-picked- her-own-death-date)

</comment><comment><USER36> As discussed with my father today, a good care home for elderly should be a social club rather than a health care institution foremost. Let us all go out in good company with high spirits, and maybe some coffee and spirits to go with it.

</comment><comment><USER37> [https://outline.com/jcfEVE](https://outline.com/jcfEVE)

</comment><comment><USER38> Make the most of the time you are given for there are no take-backs or do- overs in suicide.

</comment><comment><USER39> Another reason against gun control. If you need to end it, a gun is a quick way.

<comment><USER40> So is Heroin. Hmmmmmmm.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Relevant slate star codex: [https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/07/17/who-by-very- slow-decay...](https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/07/17/who-by-very-slow-decay/)

How a doctor trully dies.

</comment><comment><USER42> I never planed to be thirty - so there is that.

</comment><comment><USER43> This is a very unpopular idea, but I'll say it anyway because it's relevant: With a modest amount of meditation practice you can cause your awareness to exit your body. I say this from personal experience but it's also in the yoga texts. Typically you come back, but if not, it's called yogic suicide. That's why a lot of monks are burned "alive" in a meditative posture--they're not actually in there being roasted, they hit the eject button.

It's a much nicer way to go out than many alternatives, and once it becomes more common knowledge I'm sure we'll see much more of it.

Sadly even the idea tends to make people angry, esp. if they have invested in a worldview where the brain is the sole originator of consciousness, death is the end, etc, even though all they have to do is try it for themselves, though for some reason most don't. Just don't tell me it's a hallucination until you've done it successfully yourself. I'll say I was certainly surprised. It is like sticking your finger into an electrical socket and then being shot out of a cannon out the top of your head into another world.

If you're interested look it up, it's not nearly as hard to do as people make it out to be, though I still can't do it exactly on command, I am getting better at it with practice. I don't claim to know everything about it, but the world you enter has some strange properties and its not as simple as just waltzing around as a disembodied spirit with x-ray vision or something. There's some overlap of the objective world and this other world which is not as rigidly objective as this one. Future researchers will figure it out I'm sure. It's a fascinating frontier of human knowledge, and I will say as far as hacks go, hacking your consciousness is a pretty good one.

<Holds up flame shield>

<comment><USER29> > Just don't tell me it's a hallucination until you've done it successfully > yourself.

I cannot resist, I've done meditation with never performing the out of body experience and I've read about it in great detail. I would still think the possibility of it all being a hallucination and even if performed with thinking it was definitely real. Hallucinations can be so real that they're impossible to disprove. Consciousness might not even be real in the sense that most people think about it as because reality tends to be deterministic with the impossibility to prove otherwise.

<comment><USER43> That's partly why I suggested people try it for themselves, because while I agree my personal subjective experience doesn't qualify as evidence one way or another for it being real / not real, it's much harder to dismiss once you've had it happen.

FWIW, this wasn't actually my goal when I started meditating, it just happened after some months of regular meditation, and I had to piece together what it was from limited information. As you can see from the number of downvotes, there's still a strong prejudice against even the suggestion that these are valid experiences with potential utility. So it goes!

<comment><USER29> I don't doubt your experience or even the countless others who have had it happen and shared online. I just find it possible to be a trigger-able hallucination. Similar to what is possible with drugs. It's impossible to ever know if an out of body experience is real or a hallucination. I do find it interesting though. I think meditation is a healthy process to keep in one's arsenal of activities.

<comment><USER43> I appreciate your open-mindedness. The only point I would make in reply is that is is possible to know if it's real or a hallucination, it just hasn't been thoroughly tested. It is possible to design an experiment to test the extent to which our normal world and this seemingly other space might intersect.

It would also be possible, though ethically controversial, to test whether or not a person in an OBE state could reliably alternate between being pronounced dead, and then resuscitated. It would be a substantial finding to learn that someone could will themselves to both "die" and also to be revived.

What is certain is that as meditation becomes more popular these experiences will become more common and no longer ridiculed. We will then learn more by virtue of level-headed people sharing information about them. Who knows what we'll find?</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Redeye VC: Company Math vs VC Math - <AUTHOR> http://redeye.firstround.com/2009/10/company-math-vs-vc-math.html <comment><USER2> This is superbly clear. The post linked to at the end is also a must-read:

[http://www.angelblog.net/VC_Mandatory_Moonshot_The_Unwritten...](http://www.angelblog.net/VC_Mandatory_Moonshot_The_Unwritten_Terms.html)

I have the impression that people like Wilson and Kopelman are at the forefront of an emerging wave of VC: leaner and better aligned with founders. I hope that's true.</comment>


Configuring multiple Flask sites with uWSGI and nginx on an Amazon EC2 Instance  - <AUTHOR> http://blog.iqyax.org/configuring-multiple-flask-sites-with-uwsgi-and-nginx-on-an-amazon-ec2-instance?pid=0

<comment><USER2> As a python user with relatively little EC2/nginx experience, this is exactly the sort of thing I've been looking for. Thanks!</comment>


Stravinsky's "Illegal" Arrangement of "The Star Spangled Banner" (2015) - <AUTHOR> http://www.openculture.com/2015/07/stravinskys-illegal-arrangement-of-the-star-spangled-banner-1944.html <comment><USER2> I want to bring this comment to the articles author and readers attention.

> Terry Vosbein says: July 5, 2015 at 12:40 pm

> I made a comment here yesterday, and its disappearance is disturbing. I > wrote that I liked the arrangement by Stravinsky, but that the author had > misused the term "dominant seventh chord." Today I find my comment erased, > the article re-written, and the new version just as incorrect.

> The original version of the Star Spangled Banner utilized dominant seventh > chords. In fact. most tonal music from Bach on forward utilizes dominant > seventh chords. A lot of them.

> It is true that Stravinsky's "sin" was to muck with the harmonies. But the > description as it stands is pretty meaningless. He did not add a dominant > seventh chord. He re-hamonized a few chords with tonal, yet not traditional, > chords. They may be a bit startling to one used to the original harmonies, > but I assure you, the inclusion of a dominant seventh chord is not the > reason why. \---

In my ears Stravinsky's version is much clearer and richer than the simplier original version. The original is like a pop song for kids, the improved version does not fulfill all cadences immediately, he leaves them open, as in most better arrangements. E.g. hear the last notes of the trombone.</comment>


"video" conferencing with 1% the bandwidth? - <AUTHOR> https://hackernoon.com/video-conferencing-without-the-video-6330ee1b1e3e#.7xmx6bhqm <comment><AUTHOR> Author here. Very curious of HN community's thoughts on this idea. Would you use such a system? What for? Why or why not?

We're considering whether to build out the avatar conferencing system. As mentioned in the blog, there are some obvious pluses and minuses to such an idea, and likely a lot of less obvious ones not mentioned. Thanks!</comment>


Ask HN: What are you using for backups? - <AUTHOR> My new computer is arriving soon and I'd like to have backups running on it from day 1. Right now I have a manual process where I dump stuff on S3, but I'd much rather pay someone trustworthy so I don't have to think about it.<p>Backblaze and Crashplan are two options that have come up, anything else? I'm ruling out Dropbox/OneDrive/iCloud since I want one-way sync (lots of heavy audio files that I work on extensively) <comment><USER2> I don't personally like "whole system" backup services like Backblaze Backup and Crashplan. They end up backing up too much system cruft that I don't care about. And it's not like they create a beautiful bootable image or anything, right? Also watch for the "unlimited" plans. If historical deletions are important to you, these aren't a fit. Files you delete on your system eventually get deleted in backups, too.

I find that most data is better kept elsewhere (bookmarks in browser sync tools, email and contacts with email provider, personal documents in cloud providers, multimedia - yes, copied to multiple external drives or a NAS, S3 - maybe write a script and schedule it).

I used Arq Backup for about a year and while I liked the idea, the UI is absolutely awful and the restores were painfully slow. It's way too hard to control the backup behavior to do what you want. I didn't feel like I could trust that the data was going to be reliably restored.

For system migrations, I just use target disk mode to go from old Mac to new with the migration assistant, which is also stupidly fast between Thunderbolt 3 SSD Macs if you're using a proper cable (300MB/second for me). Very nice for when you want to satisfy your new computer excitement.

I feel that time machine has the same utility, or to provide backups to non- technical users who either refuse the cloud or don't know how to work a file manager (or both).

This could be a pain but depending on your needs: an often forgotten option to look into is Blu-ray Discs. They could be a nice option especially for redundant long term storage and the price per gigabyte is very low.

</comment><comment><USER3> I dislike the idea of backing up my data on other people's computers and disk drives. And paying for all that internet bandwidth is another negative.

So I have several USB3 external hard drives which I backup to in rotation, more or less the same sequence as we used to do with LTO tapes. On Apple Macs I use TimeMachine and on the Linux servers some custom scripts which basically achieve the same result.

Of course, the backup scripts exclude temporary and other non-essential files. The other key factor is to monitor drive errors and being aware of the MTBF of disk drives and replace them before they become unreliable.

</comment><comment><USER4> I'm personally happy with rsync.net for offsite backup storage of my personal stuff, they're active on HN and decently priced imho. My use case consists of random rsync/sftp selective backups and bare git repositories. Not sure how great the experience is with large media assets but if it's in the price range you're willing to put up, they seem quite dedicated to the backup use case and support is supposedly good if you ever run into problems. I've never had to contact them though, it was pretty much setup and forget.

</comment><comment><USER5> I use DVDs for backups. All of my files (when compressed in tape archives) fit on three DVDs (one for /home, one for /var, and one for all other files; this includes all system files too).

However, you might have more files than I have, so DVDs might not be suitable for you. See how many files you have so that you can see how many DVDs you would need, and then you can see if it is suitable for you or not.

</comment><comment><USER6> I'm using restic and b2 to backup anything important I care about. All system junk I don't bother to backup. All in all, I'm paying around $8/month to backup my important documents, photos etc. Restic lets me encrypt them as well, so bonus points definitely.

<comment><USER7> TIL: rustic supports Windows: [https://restic.readthedocs.io/en/stable/020_installation.htm...](https://restic.readthedocs.io/en/stable/020_installation.html#windows)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I have a storage box on Hetzner ( [https://www.hetzner.com/storage/storage- box](https://www.hetzner.com/storage/storage-box) ), and I use rclone every day to one-way sync the backup folders.

I have also used Backblaze before, works the same way with rclone.

</comment><comment><USER9> I use arq for automatic daily backups to s3 as well as Time Machine once a month to an external HD for an extra layer of redundancy. But more importantly than that, I have a checklist for testing that my backups actually work and that I won't somehow end up locked out of a server etc.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Great feedback, thanks everyone! One thing I forgot to mention is that I'm on Windows, is there a good rsync clone I could use?

</comment><comment><USER10> ZFS makes this almost too easy. I just create zfs snapshots and 'zfs send' them to a backup drive.

</comment><comment><USER11> tarsnap?</comment>