121 Strategies to Get Work Done Fast, Save Time and Organize Your Life - <AUTHOR> https://comtify.com/blog/121-strategies-to-get-work-done-fast-save-time-and-organize-your-life?ref=HN <comment><USER2> 10 seconds into reading on mobile this sites forces multiple stacked pop-ups down my throat. No thanks. It highly disturbs the reading experience.

Screenshot: [https://www.dropbox.com/s/j39660oej84rrkt/File%2027-08.jpeg?...](https://www.dropbox.com/s/j39660oej84rrkt/File%2027-08.jpeg?dl=0)

<comment><AUTHOR> @chrisked just stopped both popups. Did not realize this is happening on mobile. My sincere apologies. Do read it now..

<comment><USER2> Thank you. Will do!</comment></comment></comment>


Last speaker of ancient language of Bo dies - <AUTHOR> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8498534.stm <comment><USER2> Just like with biological species, the moment when the last (or even last few members) die is just a symbolic event, most of the diversity is lost much earlier. (It is a small subset of language/folklore/traditions/etc. one person can keep in their head, just as one individual carries just a small part of the genetic diversity of the species).

<comment><USER3> Diversity in languages is more like diversity in open source licenses. The fewer the better. I like being able to exchange ideas with people.

<comment><USER4> The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis would tell you differently. The very ideas that you can hope to have depend on the language you use to interpret the world. Lose a language, lose a perspective.

This is also one of the things 1984 is about.

<comment><USER5> I don't disagree with your point. However, my understanding is that the Sapir- Whorf hypothesis says the language you speak determines the range of things you can think about. But that doesn't seem to preclude the existence of a "super-language" that encompasses the range of every currently used language. Maybe we could make one? Or maybe one will evolve naturally over time?

<comment><USER4> This is an old program of the philosophers. Can you, even in principle, find the language at the back of reality? Can you eliminate all ambiguities when you refer to ordinary objects? Are we all talking about more or less the same things? How could we talk about exactly the same things?

The picture gets a little muddled when you think of the choices and distinctions each language makes. Some of them will contradict each other.

Suppose Language 1 has 150 words for snow, but only one for love, while Language 2 has 150 words for love, but only two for snow. Would the uber language preserve the distinctions for each word? Maybe you're losing something by learning all this detail.

You can do the same thing with the intensional meanings of words (connotations). I think one of the original Sapir-Whorf examples traces the meaning of a word for corn in Language A to words in Language B that mean "enemy food". Would the uber language remove connotations? It would probably lose the word from Language B.

But this gets into an even deeper point, which is that when you use a language, words aren't isolated. They frame a certain outlook on the world that hangs together. There were probably a bunch of words in Language B that talk about foreign or "enemy" things. Can you really say those words and mean them without taking on their perspective?

There are many more examples. We have this kind of thing in English too. We have "kill" and "murder". We have the Anglo-Saxon words and the Norman words.

And finally and most importantly, what perspective on the world does the super-language take? Objective? Involved but fair? Polemical? Propagandizing?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> _"Languages in the Andamans are thought to originate from Africa. Some may be 70,000 years old."_

Wow - I wouldn't mind a linguist vetting _that_ claim. How would we even _know_ that a language hasn't evolved enough to become an entirely different language in over ten times the length of recorded human history?

<comment><USER7> That claim is utterly bogus. There's no indication that the languages have anything in particular to do with Africa, and indeed, no evidence that the language has 'evolved' more or less than any other. There is nothing unique to Andamanese languages to support the rapidly multiplying claims that they're 'ancient' or 'neolithic'. They're just isolated.

<comment><USER8> Yes, you're right, they're not "ancient" in any meaningful way. However, studying long isolated languages is still interesting, since whatever similaraties can still be discerned between (say) Indo-European and Andamanese languages were presumably present in the common ancestor of these languages, which probably existed more than 60k years ago. Thus by studying an isolated language, we might learn something about an ancient language.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This article doesn't mention any efforts that might have taken place to preserve the language, did they record her speaking it? Did she try to teach anyone else the language? etc.

<comment><USER10> I thought the same thing -- if this is such a big deal, did they try to preserve the language by having someone else learn it? I would have liked it if they at least commented on this; maybe there's a good reason they weren't able to.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Shouldn't that be an event when _second to the last_ speaker dies? The one left has no one to talk to anyway :(

<comment><USER12> Very true--she could have been making it up. Who's to say you don't know the language when no one else does?

<comment><USER13> Isn't every language "made up"? Whether you sit down and invent it all at once, or it naturally evolves from an existing language, someone had to be the first to "know the language when no one else" did.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Look on the bright side, one day the last person who likes VB6 will die too.

<comment><USER15> And Pascal will go down with me:) I loved that language. Now and then I will code Pascal for fun.

<comment><USER16> Rumors of pascal's demise are greatly exaggerated. I still end up doing an awful lot of coding/maintaining in object pascal. A royal ton of old process management and accounting systems seem to run on it. There was this little patch of time starting in the mid 80s and extending all the way through the 90's where it seems like a lot of stuff was done in pascal.

Just when I think I can finally ditch that windows 2000 VM with Delphi 7 on it, another project dinosaur comes stomping out of the mist.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Am I the only one who read that as "ancient language of Bodies?"

</comment><comment><USER18> The picture with the subtitle "Professor Abbi and Boa Sr became firm friends" is rather striking evidence of the diversity of human types present in that area of the world.

Some Google searching brings up an article with a descriptions of mitochondrial sequencing done on the Andamanese. Apparently they are of African pygmoid descent.

It's a rather good object lesson -- if you want to be a professor (the one on the right), don't let your ancestors get trapped in a genetic backwater for tens of thousands of years, missing out on all those good brain gene selection events.

EDIT: Not pygmoid after all. The pygmoid features are the product of convergent evolution. The evolutionary trend towards small stature seems to be due to resource competition from living on an island with barely enough space to support human habitation. It looks like they came through southern Asia.

<comment><USER19> Don't you think it's a little premature to conclude that the quality of her brain (and not, say, geography) accounts for the difference?

<comment><USER18> Uh, no, this subject is a tangent and we shouldn't really get into it here.

However, a couple of general statements: There are reams of genetic and psychometric data available. More than enough to develop pretty good idea when and where the most probable selection events for good brain genes occurred and how fast they spread. Your word 'premature' tells me something about your acquaintance with that data.

Also, there is one very simple rule: totally genetically isolated communities only have access to their own mutations. Their population is small, so the number of mutations is also small. Non-isolated communities get swept by every positive selection event that comes along.

<comment><USER20> It's tangent, but I'm interested. Are you alluding to particular events in recent history or kinds of events?

Any pointers to reading on this?

<comment><USER18> A recent book on this and various other topics related to recent human evolution is "The 10,000 Year Explosion" by Cochran and Harpending.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> He was too lonely.

<comment><USER7> It was a woman.

<comment><USER22> She, not it.

<comment><USER7> Expletive 'it'. As in, 'It was a woman who died.'

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Does that mean that she was the face of Bo?

I'll get my coat.</comment>


How to make any Web page inline-editable - <AUTHOR> http://asserttrue.blogspot.com/2009/08/how-to-make-any-web-page-inline.html

<comment> onreact-com I read "edible".</comment>


More about Infections and Alzheimer - <AUTHOR> https://padiracinnovation.org/News/2020/07/more-about-infections-and-alzheimer <comment><AUTHOR> A team at the University of Texas combed through millions of medical records in a national database. The goal was to find factors that reduce a person's risk of getting certain diseases, including Alzheimer's.

"And one of the things that came back was flu shots," says Albert Amran, one of the authors.

"So if we have some general means of improving immunity, it might help reduce Alzheimer's disease," reflects Svetlana Ukraintseva, an associate research professor at Duke's.</comment>


What Apple Must Change Now That Jobs Isn't CEO - <AUTHOR> http://www.marco.org/2011/08/26/top-5-things-apple-must-change-now-that-jobs-is-not-ceo

<comment><USER2> I get the joke and I don't mean to lessen Jobs' accomplishments in any way. But don't underestimate the challenges Cook faces.

Services like Netflix are eating into Apple's video business while services like Mog and Spotify attack on the music side. Android devices have already overtaken iPhones in market share and Microsoft is determined to gain a foothold (which Nokia's distribution channels might provide outside the U.S.). Android tablets are quickly getting better (Honeycomb is still lacking but is 1,000 times better than first generation tablets). On the Mac side you're already starting to see more attempts at cracking the Mac's security (since the platform is now growing fast enough to create a big target). On the home front Apple still hasn't really cracked the living room market (and I say that as an Apple TV user)

From a business perspective they'll obviously start to see at least a little brain drain as the lure of working with Steve Jobs is now gone. Record companies are still determined to get out from under Apple's thumb and Amazon's new tablet seems to represent the most significant threat Apple's ever faced in that regard. Plus you have market saturation among Apple's traditional market of upper middle class and above (i wouldn't say they've reached that point yet but with their current sales levels the day is rapidly approaching)

So it's hardly smooth sailing. I mean, being on top is great but it also means EVERYBODY is looking to take you down.</comment>


New Antibody based drug to prevent Migraines - <AUTHOR> https://gizmodo.com/the-worlds-first-drug-to-prevent-migraines-has-just-bee-1826138298 <comment><AUTHOR> Interestingly enough I was at the doctors today with my wife to get her every 12 week Botox shots for her Migraines (30+ shots). Her doctor brought this new treatment up. Anything that fixes this is great! That being said, she is getting free anti-wrinkle treatment as a bonus feature of the Botox. I said that - and she was not amused :)</comment>


An Apple ][ Emulator in JavaScript - <AUTHOR> https://www.scullinsteel.com/apple2

<comment><USER2> I quite like this Apple ][ emulator[1]. It's a bit raw, but the video emulation (ripped from xscreensaver) really gives it a nice feel.

[1] [http://death.porkrind.org/a2f/apple2+.html](http://death.porkrind.org/a2f/apple2+.html)

<comment><AUTHOR> excellent find and accurate in the way it generates color. Best bit the software. Excellent to see how each programmer tackled the 6502 emulation:

[http://death.porkrind.org/a2f/6502.js](http://death.porkrind.org/a2f/6502.js)

[https://www.scullinsteel.com/apple2/js/cpu6502.js](https://www.scullinsteel.com/apple2/js/cpu6502.js)

<comment><USER3> But which is faster?

<comment><AUTHOR> @robinduckett I really don't know? You could test this with some code. I focused on the 6502 chip because I was interested to see if you could program machine code with the code.

An integer benchmark perhaps?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> The sound is broken on my machine and disabling it from the options somehow makes it sound even louder.

<comment><USER5> Did you find a solution to this? I had no problems with sound the first time I tried it, but since then I'm getting what you described.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> We used this emulator as a reference source frequently while we were developing DiscoRunner. It's pretty good for JavaScript =)

</comment><comment><USER7> what! No Burger Time! Bah!

<comment><USER8> or Beer Run for that matter

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> warning on the sound levels. Turn down the mixer controls before clicking.</comment>


The Best Recruiters – followup to The Recruiter Honeypot - <AUTHOR> http://www.ewherry.com/2012/08/the-best-recruiters-followup/ <comment><USER2> "One last tidbit, recruiters don't read blogs. Surprisingly, Pete's inbox has continued flowing since the initial honeypot email post — roughly one ping every 31 hours — with no signs of dwindling."

I recently switched jobs and found that simply turning my Monster and Dice profiles to public/looking for a matter of days resulted in months (and still going) of backlogged pings from recruiters. I'm not so sure if it that they don't read blogs as it is that many of them exist at the end of some weird data pipeline I don't quite understand.

<comment><USER3> Probably a lead generation system; a friend of mine just told me the same story. I'm a little surprised that these systems don't have some kind of staleness or backoff mechanism such that you're still receiving pings.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I made a comment similar to this when the honeypot story was first posted here. I took down my LinkedIn account and the number of recruiters contacting me has dropped to just shy of zero. But I still have my StackOverflow account (including a Careers acount), github account and home website.

The recruiters that do still contact me are _very_ good. They are tech savvy, very understanding of my interests, skills and projects I've done, and are very much looking to create a relationship with me. Some of these recruiters I talk with on a regular basis. They ping me every few months to see how I'm doing and there's respect flowing in both directions.

So what I don't get, is why do "recruiters rely exclusively upon linkedin" (quoted from the honeypot post)? If they're recruiting tech jobs, why aren't they going to where the tech people are? I found LinkedIn a nuisance at best, yet I rather enjoy StackOverflow and github.

<comment><USER5> They get paid for bodies and until HR folks get savvy, they pick the place that has the least work involved and most bodies.

<comment><USER6> Caring about your job isn't solely the domain of engineers.

<comment><USER7> There are plenty of lazy engineers too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Tip number 1 is something you should always do in emails. Framing it from the point of view of the recipient is way more effective than talking about yourself. Unsurprisingly, we all love to say "I" and "we" more than "you"

<comment><USER9> Saying "I" a lot is usually a sign of submissiveness/inferiority/deference anyway.

<comment><USER10> Should emails be dominant/superior/disrespectful?

<comment><USER9> I'm not making a value judgment, I'm mentioning something that comes from recent research.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Google Kills Lively  - <AUTHOR> http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/19/google-kills-lively/ <comment><USER2> As a TC commenter pointed out, the traffic graph for Knol looks just like that of Lively: [http://www.google.com/trends?q=lively.com,+knol.google.com&#...
Maybe (hopefully?) Knol is next.

<comment><USER3> Poor Google. They've got all these neat ideas that just don't work.

<comment><USER4> I'm going to disagree and say Google hasn't had many neat ideas in years. I can't think of anything they've done recently that's had anywhere near as much impact as PageRank, AdSense/AdWords, Google Maps, or Gmail. All of those were released in 2005 or earlier.

Knol is a tweaked Wikipedia. Lively is a Second Life clone. Open Social was the response to Facebook Apps.

Chrome, Android, and maybe App Engine are the only recent things I can think of that have any potential.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> So google, a company that prizes automation and data-driven decision-making over subjective filters and editorial oversight....doesn't do so hot with community-driven projects?

Not so surprised.

I dunno, I get a warm feeling when stuff like this flops for them. Shows they're human. They probably learned a great deal that will be applied elsewhere.

<comment><USER6> Exactly my thought. They should focus more on what they are good at, data- driven algos.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I wonder if google will open source the software.

<comment><USER8> I'd be willing to bet that that's not going to happen due to how involved it was and that it wasn't built off of any open source ideals.

Is this the first Google product to be explicitly killed (not counting ones that go stale after being acquired)?

<comment><USER9> 'Google Answers' was shut down (but leaving the archives up) in November 2006, after over 4 years of operation.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Answers>

<comment><USER8> Ah yeah Google Answers...</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Open Source Projects for social causes? - <AUTHOR>

I want to help develop open source software which tries to solve social issues e.g. environment, the poor, disabled. Where can I find such projects? <comment><USER2> "The award-winning Sugar Learning Platform promotes collaborative learning through Sugar Activities that encourage critical thinking, the heart of a quality education. -- Sugar is the core component of a worldwide effort to provide every child with equal opportunity for a quality education." <http://www.sugarlabs.org/>

</comment><comment><USER3> With regards to energy, hacking on <http://www.lesswatts.org/projects/powertop/> might be useful

With regards to disaster relief, Sahana is a good project to hop onto</comment>


Snap Circuits SC-300; for those asking about learning electronics 101 202 - <AUTHOR> http://www.amazon.com/Elenco-SC-300-Snap-Circuits/dp/B0000683A4/

<comment><AUTHOR> Amazon has positive product reviews; am not affiliated with either. Please be awared of choking hazards. Happy Holidays!</comment>


SJSU Mass Email Failure - <AUTHOR> http://www.kyle-brady.com/2009/08/21/sjsu-mass-email-failure/

<comment><USER2> "I responded to the original, 400-person email in "Reply All" fashion, saying:"

ARGH.

<comment><AUTHOR> That was on purpose, designed to produce an "ugh" response.

The more embarrassment, the better.</comment></comment>


Apple uses PNG images to explain why you should use SVG & CSS - <AUTHOR> http://developer.apple.com/library/safari/#documentation/NetworkingInternet/Conceptual/SafariImageDeliveryBestPractices/SubstitutingRasterImageswithVectorAlternatives/SubstitutingRasterImageswithVectorAlternatives.html

<comment><AUTHOR> Really Apple? Why not just throw a couple of SVG images in there and a little CSS and call it a day.

It was likely more work to make those buttons and images in Photoshop.

</comment><comment><USER2> Their help library CMS is probably restrictive...</comment>


The Cost of JavaScript in 2018 - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@addyosmani/the-cost-of-javascript-in-2018-7d8950fbb5d4 <comment><USER2> I'd love to see this on the Frontpage in a few hours, since it's an incredibly engaging writeup. Apparently, for LTE/4G networks, we're not really into too much trouble on high end phones. Problem is, that's not what most people are dealing with, it's a "perfect situation" that does not present itself in real life. Nice article.</comment>


Silicon Valley needs to end its snobbery about computer science degrees - <AUTHOR> http://venturebeat.com/2012/05/04/silicon-valley-needs-to-end-its-snobbery-about-computer-science-degrees/

<comment><USER2> i thought the entire point of the valley was that you got bragging rights that you dropped out of school?</comment>


Company uses Machine Learning to create diets to cure type 2 diabetes - <AUTHOR> https://metropolitan.fi/entry/virta-health-claims-cure-type-2-diabetes-machine-learning-diet <comment><USER2> Large scale reinforcement learning on diets I believe would save millions of years of shortened human lifespan and poor health.

Medical professions already agree that diet plays a massive role in health and longevity. Large scale reinforcement learning will be able to give a far more accurate view on exactly what elements of diet have what effects on health on an individual basis.

Sadly, this kind of tech will remain illegal in most of the developed world, and the benefits will never be realised.

</comment><comment><USER3> Basically: a keto diet app, presented as a cure for diabetes. The ML aspects are unclear though.</comment>


Flexiscale: UK competitor to S3 and EC2 with SLA - <AUTHOR> http://uk.techcrunch.com/2007/10/03/flexiscale-launches-on-demand-hosting/ <comment><USER2> GBP72.00/month for 1G RAM instance (not including bandwidth or storage).</comment>


Ask HN: Secret messages in public forums - <AUTHOR> You might be familiar with movies/series where hidden/secret messages in public online forums/channels are part of the plot (involving some form of steganography).
Have you ever encountered such a situation (e.g., Reddit, or even HN)?
N.B. The staggeringly elaborate Cicada 3301 puzzle [1][2] does require deciphering steganographic messages, but they aren't posted in public channels.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RatbYqc0-jE
[2] https://uncovering-cicada.fandom.com/wiki/Uncovering_Cicada_Wiki <comment><USER2> Yes this happens all the time and how is modern espionage, for the time being, extensively communicates.

Typically this happens on websites that look like junk/ad websites to you and me. Also sometimes they will look like the ads you see on parked domains.

There will be hidden words, or perhaps you will need to know how to adjust the CSS in chrome developer tools. Often times it is a small URI fragment you need to append to the URL, or a specific place to click every time.

Again I want to emphasize how common this is, and the "dark web" is not used nearly as much in terms of overall volume by such groups.

Owlhousing.com was until recently and still probably is one such site. It looked like some junk casino ad website, but scroll down for a very lengthy period and you would find...sophisticated electronic Microscopes for sale out of Hong Kong. Now it is some car website.

The best way to find these websites is to use Spyse.com. Using the "prefix" search operator enter something like "000000000" or "aaaaaaaaa". Hundreds if not thousands of sites show up. No real person would take out these domains. Start with them.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is only vaguely related, but when I was younger I used to imagine a way for two people to communicate in secret openly without too much effort. Basically, person A will write messages to forum 1 under a decided alias and person B will respond to those messages on forum 2 under their decided alias. Two different forums, completely unrelated to each other, but only the two people will know where to look for the corresponding answer. To anyone else, it may look like total nonsense but if they hide it within posts that are vaguely on-topic, it could fly by with no one noticing at all.

Edit: Improved wording

<comment><USER4> Actually i had a better version of this:

Person A: says "hello Joe" Person B: answers: "Great to see you again buddy!"

After posting message, sender hashes his message with secret salt: "hello Joe" -> 2959D03A72B897C and then posts secret, real text to [https://secret- share/#2959D03A72B897C](https://secret-share/#2959D03A72B897C)

Receiver does the same to read the actual message.

Fun part?

Sender and receiver can actually piggyback on other people's conversations, twitter feeds, newpaper headlines this way to hide secret messages.

<comment><USER3> I like that a lot. And we are just two random people with random ideas. Just imagine the variety of ways people are already secretly communicating _right now_ right in the open and none of us are any wiser.

<comment><USER4> Absolutely.

The best way to hide the secret is to make adversary believe that secret does not exist

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I saw this a few years ago on Reddit and wish I had saved the thread because it was pretty interesting.

I was reading a thread between two users that seemed totally normal until a user posted a screenshot of their comments. It showed a second conversation between them that was happening in secret. If memory serves the person who posted the screenshot said it was an extension (possibly RES) where you view certain tags and allows you to see the extra comments based on the tags.

After seeing that I couldn't help but wonder how many secret conversations were happening out in the open on Reddit.

</comment><comment><USER6> There was a mysterious sub on Reddit that had random encrypted messages being posted. I believe the original sub is private now but the sub that discussed it is still up, /r/Solving_A858.

[https://old.reddit.com/r/Solving_A858/](https://old.reddit.com/r/Solving_A858/)

<comment><USER7> Saw it once, I think it might be someone's storage. Use reddit to save hashed data. Or DNS!

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> desudesutalk[1] on imageboards. Lainchan has a special board for ddt and I've seen some sporadic messages on 4chan.

[1] [https://github.com/desudesutalk/desudesutalk](https://github.com/desudesutalk/desudesutalk)

</comment><comment><USER9> Instagram as command and control infrastructure for malware.

</comment><comment><USER10> 7fa3b767c460b54a2be4d49030b349c7

</comment><comment><USER11> In some sense, SSL is this :-)

</comment><comment><USER12> Fnord.

<comment><USER13> Covfefe

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> orfhergbqevaxlbhebinygvar</comment>


Techcrunch's Facebook page mistakenly published their pre-production website - <AUTHOR> http://tcpreprod.wordpress.com/

<comment><USER2> Seems like it a marketing gimmick !</comment>


Typewriter repairman was told computers were king. he's still in business - <AUTHOR> https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-typewriter-repairman-20190206-story.html <comment><USER2> Well, they are.</comment>


The Gervais Principle, or The Office According to "The Office" - <AUTHOR> http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-or-the-office-according-to-the-office/ <comment><USER2> This is the first blog post that's ever been good enough that I donated to the author merely for having written it. Both brilliant textual analysis and insightful social commentary - definitely worth the read.

Or maybe I'm just constructing my delusional world to justify having spent $3 on a public blog post!

<comment><USER3> You're right, the author is insanely smart. My only real critique is that he is overly embracing of the sociopath concept, probably because his only personal experience comes from within organizations. If he ran his own business I think he'd be able to see this more objectively. Still, he gets a ton of credit for creating all the insights that he does.

<comment><USER4> I think he has a certain admiration for the sociopath.

<comment><USER5> They get the job done, no arguing with results.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> "The simple reason is that if you over-perform at the loser level, it is clear that you are an idiot. You've already made a bad bargain, and now you're delivering more value than you need to, making your bargain even worse."

I'm surprised this post is so popular on HN. Isn't working for a startup - pouring your time into someone else's company for below-market wages and some piddly fraction of a percent in equity - basically the definition of cluelessness, according to the author?

<comment><USER7> The article handles the case of people who derive a meaning from _outside_ of their work and the people who are looking for financial success and power/status within a corporation.

As I've mentioned in a previous comment, the article doesn't take into account the fact that there are people who

a) look for a meaning that isn't centered around money or power

b) derive it from their work

If you're an engineer _working for_ a start-up (taking a below market wage, working long hours, so on) only because you are hoping for a large pay day, then you _are_ a fool. If you're working for a start-up because you enjoy programming or because you're looking to learn what it takes to _run your own_ start-up then you can get _a lot_ of a start-up so the equation doesn't apply.

On the topics of start-ups and money, Paul Buchheit said best: [http://paulbuchheit.blogspot.com/2007/12/is-there-more-to- li...](http://paulbuchheit.blogspot.com/2007/12/is-there-more-to-life-than- money.html)

<comment><USER8> I think the author has these options covered:

\- If you do it because you enjoy it, then you are, by article's definition, a _"loser"_ (in terms of potential monetary gains) [1].

\- If you do it in order to learn about running your own startup, then you are _"sociopath-in-training"_ (ala Ryan from The Office).

And that's it. The author doesn't claim you cannot have happy and meaningful life as _"loser"_ (by his definition), deriving pleasure from the work itself.

He just tells that for _"losers"_ somebody else will reap a significant part of the monetary reward for the value that their work creates.

\-----

[1] Similar principle works for "sexy" jobs - that's why poor game developers get abused so much.

<comment><USER9> Very good points. The author _does_ try to disambiguate "loser" (though I don't think he does disambiguate "sociopath").

My problem with these terms is that they just can't be disassociated with their common meanings. This is a common rhetorical trick - an author defines the word one way, and sticks to that definition, but inevitably uses the impact of the more common word (while claiming that the earlier disambiguation clears him of the need to defend the more common usage).

In short, I think we need a different word than "loser" to describe the category of workers who 1) make a good salary 2) enjoy their work, and 3) yes, could make more money or get a better deal outside the organization.

I'm also unwilling to accept the use of "sociopath" to describe all start-up founders, no matter how airtight the author has been in locking down a definition that avoids all the negative connotations of the more general use of "sociopath."

I guess that I'm really just saying that some words just can't be disambiguated.

In this case, the ambiguity is in the interest of being humorous and interesting, which is why it doesn't bug me all that much (though in other contexts, it can be infuriating).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> This is a pretty amazing analysis.

I think a lot of really talented engineers in Silicon Valley fit into a kind of hybrid category I might call 'loser with sociopathic tendencies' (gotta love these terms--hey, I didn't invent them, I'm just following the article). Although they deliberately choose to remain at the 'loser' level in terms of the org chart, they have a 'sociopathic' level of awareness of how the business operates (maybe from being an early employee or founder of previous startups). They're never truly comfortable at the 'loser' level, but maybe not willing or capable of making a move to the 'sociopath' level, and consciously avoid the 'clueless' level (which I think they eventually enter anyway, even if they avoid becoming managers, by entering some kind of 'emeritus' engineering position).

The article suggests that Toby might be in this category, which I didn't think fit at first, but maybe it does--this type of person seemed to me to generally be laconic, cultivated a high degree of irony about the nature of the organization and their role within it, and usually carried an 'escape plan' as a prominent part of their mental outlook (based on either past actual or future fantasized stock option earnings) --all quite similar to the Toby character.

I also think there's a type of person who views anyone at the 'sociopath' level as being inherently morally corrupt, and therefore preemptively excludes him/herself from ever reaching that level, even if they'd otherwise be capable of it. I don't think this is a correct view; the 'sociopath' type may just be the type of person who is more willing to face the full reality of how the business is run and make tough decisions that involve firing and so on. For example, even in the show I don't think the David Wallace character is portrayed as being particularly corrupt. Ryan, on the other hand, is purely selfish and greedy for power--but this actually causes him to fail at the higher levels (which I think often happens in real life as well).

(By the way, in case it's not obvious, I'm trying to use these terms in the sense they're defined in the article--I don't mean them to be truly pejorative to anyone operating at any of these levels.)

<comment><USER7> You could also argue that engineers derive a meaning from their work that isn't in terms of money or power (they do work that they enjoy).

<comment><USER11> Which means that an engineer is a "loser" in this system; and in terms of monetary gain, they may very well be. The author stresses that "loser" is not the same as "bad person" or "living their life according to wacked principles".

<comment><USER7> The problem I had with this article is that while it covers the case of people who are "losers" monetarily but have meaning _outside of work_ (Pam, Angela) it doesn't cover the case of people who find that meaning _in their work_ ; the latter category includes most _good_ scientists and engineers and many business professionals as well.

That being said, the engineer position is also fairly privileged: the pay of a Silicon Valley engineer -- even if you take into account the standard of living (provided you live in a part of Bay Area that's comparable to most suburbs e.g. San Jose, rather than a hip part of SOMA) -- is more than middle management in most other parts of the country. The starting salary for a software engineer out of college can be as high as $75,000-$95,000. They can live a _very comfortable_ lifestyle, where additional money (outside of "fuck you money") just brings diminished returns. This isn't true for many scientists (postdocs generally make a pittance).

<comment><USER12> I think you're getting out of scope. This isn't a 'life' theory, it is a 'business/management' theory. In terms of business/management, those scientists/engineers are losers. They will never rise to the top, and are destined to work for people less skilled them themselves.

Note that there isn't anything -wrong- with that. As you say, there may be reasons they do that, whether it is derived pleasure, or something else, but because they aren't actively gaming the 'ladder', they aren't going to move up it, and thus will always be losers.

I think this article works better, if you don't call them losers, and instead call them exploited, because there is such a strongly negative connotation associated with the term loser that it is hard to get past. The author is really saying that bottom layer is exploited (not compensated sufficiently).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> This is just the most amazingly accurate description of working in a corporation that I have ever read. This is mindblowing. Simply amazing. The one thing that I think he may have missed is that people do go from clueless- loser to checked-out loser. Amazing amazing amazing.

I've been aware of this for a long time as I do work in a BigCorp but I've never seen it written down so well. Amazing.

<comment><USER13> I bought the guy a coffee too.

Amazing. I wish my command of the english language was half as good as this guys. I'm really gushing here. I just cant get over this post.

Wow.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Google Cache, since the site isn't responding for me:

[http://220.127.116.11/search?q=cache:7rjRSf4HfywJ:www.ribbonf...](http://188.8.131.52/search?q=cache:7rjRSf4HfywJ:www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the- gervais-principle-or-the-office-according-to-the- office/+the+gervais+principle&hl=en&client=firefox-a&gl=us&strip=1)

</comment><comment><USER15> _MacLeod's "Loser" layer had me puzzled for a long time, because I was interpreting it in cultural terms: the kind of person you call a "loser." While some may be losers in that sense too, they are primarily losers in the economic sense: those who have, for various reasons, made (or been forced to make) a bad economic bargain: they've given up some potential for long-term economic liberty (as capitalists) for short-term economic stability[....]The good news is that losers have two ways out, which we'll get to later: turning sociopath or turning into bare-minimum performers._

That makes all kinds of crazy sense.

<comment><USER16> Yes, although I'd disagree that it's objectively a "bad bargain". You won't get rich quick, but if you have a basic understanding of finances and a moderate amount of self-discipline you can get rich slowly. If you don't want to go into management, I'd say that's a good bargain.

<comment><USER17> but why should it be this way at all? The fact that their compensated wealth has become totally disconnected from the reality of productivity makes this a pretty shocking way to run a world. But one very compatible with our simian social organizing.

Or to put it another way, why should someone who is (arguably) producing most of the value have to stand for getting rich slowly, when the clueless middle managers fail upwards into nicer cars & long vacations, and sociopaths -- who seem to spend most of their "workday" jockeying for position, power, & prestige rather than doing useful things -- get 6, 7, 8 figure salaries & giant stock options?

The real crime is that the productive, competent people are encouraged & incentivized to coast because of the ludicrousness of the system.

Sounds objectively like a bad bargain to me.

So much so that those productive losers should start a company & try to keep the sociopaths out. in fact, if you buy that web -> lower barriers to entry -> less need for predatory sociopathic apes. They'll always try to get in, but that's another story...

<comment><USER18> The reason that losers are losers is that they don't have the balls to start their own company or seize power within an organization. They are free to attempt those things, but they don't, either because they fear risk, don't understand the nature of business, or are too nice to make the sociopathic choices necessary to survive. Sociopaths might not lay the bricks themselves, so to speak, but they take the risks and make the leaps that result in true productivity gains.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I have never read a more apt description of large organizations or a better deconstruction of a tv show. The author should turn his incisive intellect onto startups next (although I don't know of any "The Office" like shows to aid his analysis)

<comment><USER20> There was actually a story arc in The Office where Michael gets fired and founds a competitor. All the normal dynamics are upset--Michael is freed from the role of the clueless middle manager and manages to put his sales skills to use, Pam elevates herself to a sales position, and the now disgraced, out-of- the-industry Ryan seizes the opportunity to get back into the game.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> i've never felt as happy about not working in a large organization as when i finished reading this

</comment><comment><USER22> It gets this half-right/half-wrong:

> While some may be losers in that sense too, they are primarily losers in the > economic sense: those who have, for various reasons, made (or been forced to > make) a bad economic bargain: they've given up some potential for long-term > economic liberty (as capitalists) for short-term economic stability.

Halfway with the author so far. Generally, being salaried is a bad economic bargain for people with the self-discipline and perseverance to go off on their own. There's other reasons it can be good - a friend of mine is a business consultant that's really good, really brilliant, could definitely run his own shop. But he makes decent enough coin and loves his work and coworkers, and said he doesn't want to deal with the highs and lows of self employment. He's trading off lifetime net income, most definitely, but maybe he's happier? I keep trying to convince him to do some kind of entrepreneurial project with me and failing, but maybe someday. He certainly is extremely happy.

But anyway, I'm still with the author mostly. Next point:

> Traded freedom for a paycheck in short. They actually produce, but are not > compensated in proportion to the value they create...

This is sometimes true. If your work isn't set on incentives, then you aren't compensated in proportion to the value you create. This relates to the above: If you want lifetime net income, look to get compensation tied to incentives as closely as possible.

Being self employed and only getting paid for performance gets you there the fastest, but that doesn't only mean you only make more money! Some months you work very hard, and have LESS money at the end of the month for your troubles. This sucks quite badly when it happens.

> ... (since their compensation is set by sociopaths operating under > conditions of serious moral hazard).

And herein lies the author's mistake - the reason people aren't compensated accordingly to their production is that it's incredibly hard to judge production. Jack Welch, one of the better HR people of all time, said he only got 2/3rds of his hiring decisions correct at the very end of his tenure and peak of his skills at GE.

The person who holds back the coin from the productive salaried employee is not his boss or the company owner. It's the unproductive salaried employee. Great companies recognize highly productive people and try to compensate and reward them accordingly, but production is notoriously fickle and variable.

Bosses and especially owners don't scheme to keep pay for productive people down - they _want_ to pay stars, because they want to retain their stars. And if a competitor isn't paying their stars, they'll happily give them a raise and a signing bonus for jumping ship. It's just that it's so damn hard to evaluate who _really_ is producing. The guy that produces 10x the normal amount of production for his job isn't having his pay thwarted by any "sociopaths", he's having it thwarted by colleagues who shuffle papers, schedule meetings, and make themselves appear busy while producing nothing of value.

There's reasons (primarily stability, but others too) to stay in this arrangement, but if you want to maximize your net income, you need to move to a way where you get paid based on what you produce, and be willing to accept the swings and bad things that come with that. That's easy to do in measurable fields like sales. To do it in a more intangible field you might have to open your own company.

<comment><USER11> "the reason people aren't compensated accordingly [sic] to their production is that it's incredibly hard to judge production." ... perhaps ....

... but perhaps Karl Marx was correct when he said that (basically) the essence of capitalism is in the systematic skimming of "surplus production" by the controllers of capital. In other words, EVERY employee is not paid according to their production.

I also think that this commenter has really swallowed the ideology (ie, is clueless): not every boss wants production from their underlings. Perhaps the _owners_ want production, but _managers_ don't necessarily -- changes in production might make them look bad, it might reset the expected quota level for their department, it might upset next years budget, etc. The interests of employees <> interests of owners, and managers are employees.

<comment><USER20> Marx's argument is not based on this kind of thing at all, but rather on the mere existence of profit.

It all comes down to your theory of value. Marx uses a labor theory of value that might say that a chair is worth exactly the wood and the human labor that is invested in producing it. When a chair manufacturer employs people to build chairs, they pay the employees less than their labor is worth, sell the chairs, and pocket the margin.

The market theory of value says that something is worth what someone is willing to buy and sell it for. So if you decide to work at the chair factory for $5/hr, you and the chair company have agreed that your time is worth $5/hr. If the chair company sells a chair for $50, the chair company and the consumer agree the chair is worth $50. (Of course, the chair company might be willing to sell for $20 and the consumer might be willing to pay $70, so there is a "surplus" to both sides. But that simply arises from the distinction between individual value judgments and market value.)

The market perspective is the only one where productive activity makes any sense at all. From a labor theory of value, a chair, a table, a skyscraper, or a startup is only worth the amount of labor that was invested in it. But if this was true, then wouldn't we be just as well off to spare the labor and hang out on the beach instead of working? The market theory of value says that if you invest labor, you might create something more valuable than the labor you put into it, which is the only theory that justifies productive labor in the first place. It also says that if you invest your labor into building something no one wants or is willing to pay for, you simply waste it. The labor theory of value would gel with many people's naive ideas here: I put so much work into this damned thing, isn't it worth something?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> "Protestant Ethic will-to-power".

Was that the wind in the weatherstripping, or Nietzche's ghost howling?

<comment><USER24> Possibly Nietzche's ghost being chased around the house by Ayn Rand.

<comment><USER25> You forgot Max Weber.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Darwin has contributed so richly to our metaphysical vocabulary.

<comment><USER25> I guess he just replaced other phrases. And Lamarck could have done the word trick just as well.

<comment><USER4> I'm using Darwin to mean Evolution by Natural Selection. Perhaps Lamark. I honestly know very little about Lamark, but my understanding is that his theories didn't turn out to be very strong. Interestingly, even if they don't describe biology important ideas metaphysics.

I don't think so. Darwinian evolution is not just a description of a natural process. It is a powerful metaphysical principle. IE, Darwinism could happily exist in theory, without any physical form. It just happens to have a physical form, biology. But this fact is the reason that it has had such an impact on our vocabulary.

People that have used Darwinian-like thought before can apply it elsewhere. This kind of analysis draws a lot from that. I think there are few philosophical principles that have this power. I cannot think of a many pieces of philosophical work with this kind of an impact.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> A great movie on corporate darwinism:

      The Method (2005) Spain/Argentina
      http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0427582/

</comment><comment><USER27> You weren't meant to have a boss <http://paulgraham.com/boss.html>

</comment><comment><USER28> i tried to read this, since so many of you seem to like it. i couldn't make myself read more than two or three paragraphs before i had to give up.

i am really surprised this is popular amongst this particular group of entrepreneurs. i think if you have to put this level of thought into how crappy your workplace is, you should have quit years ago.</comment>


Cash Ban the Best Thing to Happen to Indian Digital Payments - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-23/cash-ban-the-best-thing-to-happen-to-indian-digital-payments <comment><USER2> I bet some people will think this is good news. Of course it is good news for digital payments providers. For all the other 99,99999999% of the population, including the users of digital payments, it is horrible news.

<comment><USER3> Why is it horrible news?

The whole thing seems like a clear win to me.

<comment><USER4> When most of a country doesn't have access to digital payments, lack of cash is a problem. Although to be fair, the poor aren't the ones trying to buy things with large denomination notes anyway.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I am assuming a lot of people are coming into the thread reading the title and not the article. All cash is not banned in India. Only a couple of denominations have been demonetized and are being replaced by their newer counterparts.

This has happened in India before without issues. The current problems exist because of the scale at which it is being done and the short period of notice given.

Digital payments are taking off because there is a shortage of currency for the amount of money being demonetized. This is not a move made by the Indian government to push surveillance or other nefarious purposes.

<comment><USER6> >This is not a move made by the Indian government to push surveillance or other nefarious purposes.

what makes you think that?

<comment> Ar-Curunir Because they are not banning cash? Only replacing certain variants with newer denominations.

<comment><USER7> You mean less useful and smaller denominations, not "newer". They are trying to make cash unappealing to use by requiring more bills to carry out a transaction.

If the government came and said "Because terrorists drive cars between the hours of 1pm-3pm, we are banning all car use between those times." You wouldn't say they replaced the current driving rules with newer ones, you'd be upset you couldn't drive between 1pm-3pm and instead had to use a less efficient means to carry out your business.

The government is unjustly punishing the whole class because some individuals made the decision to break the rules, and as punishment, it is now harder to maintain financial privacy. Yay. Just what I wanted, less privacy in the age of everything is in a database and everyone is on a list.

<comment><USER8> >You mean less useful and smaller denominations, not "newer". They are trying to make cash unappealing to use by requiring more bills to carry out a transaction.

They removed Rs500 and Rs1000 from circulation, yes. A newer _Rs2000_ is already in circulation and a newer Rs500 soon to follow. So this statement is inherently wrong.

> If the government came and said "Because terrorists drive cars between the > hours of 1pm-3pm, we are banning all car use between those times."

The govt actually said "Because terrorists drive fake cars of model A and B, we're making it illegal to drive A and B on the roads. Anyone who has a legit model can take it to the manufacturer to get it replaced by a newer model." I'd still be upset about the discomfort, but at least the example used would be more accurate.

> The government is unjustly punishing the whole class because some > individuals made the decision to break the rules, and as punishment, it is > now harder to maintain financial privacy. Yay. Just what I wanted, less > privacy in the age of everything is in a database and everyone is on a list.

It is currently estimated that just 1% of Indians pay their taxes [1]. I don't have any views on whether there will be a drop in financial privacy (since I see the govt tracking bank accounts, which they were always able to do), but I'll be glad to see that number rise from a paltry 1%. Also, cash transactions aren't outlawed, so you're more than welcome to keep you transaction "private" if you please. There are talks of a cap to cash transactions, but nothing has really materialized yet.

And finally, I'm not for or against the measures the govt is following. I'm glad _something_ is being done, but am also skeptical about how effective it will be in the long run. It will depend on what additional measures the govt. brings to curb further accumulation of black money with the new denominations, and the ability to buy and hoard assets bought by said black money.

[1] [http://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/03/guess-how-many-people-pay- tax...](http://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/03/guess-how-many-people-pay-taxes-in- india.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> There was a great introduction to this story on yesterday's The World [1]. Sounds like a pretty massive disaster all around.

[1] [http://www.pri.org/stories/2016-11-23/indias-crisis-over- ban...](http://www.pri.org/stories/2016-11-23/indias-crisis-over-bank-notes- hits-women-especially-hard)

</comment><comment><USER10> "Hemp Ban the Best Thing to Happen to American Paper Industry"

<comment><USER11> "Cooking Ban the Best Thing to Happen to American Fast Food Industry"

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Just to set the stage: India is highly polarized on this issue. A lot of discussions around govt policies right now end up in heated debates. Loosely speaking, liberals aren't very much in favour of the right-wing govt in power and often criticize every major policy announcement, not always based on merit.

The majority of working-class people in India are going through a phase of love and adulation for the ruling party and the Prime Minister, so any public opinion on social media against the establishment is met with intense opposition.

The news media aren't helping decipher the actual state of reality. Much like the US elections, Indian media fuels the polarized population with provocative news stories, and "alt-media" outlets publish opinions and fake news as facts. Many accuse major media houses of unfairly favouring the right-wing govt (much like Fox News in the US) due to connections of the govt with business houses that run them.

The demonetization move comes at a time when political parties are gearing up for elections in major states. From extravagant political rallies to feasts, a lot of aspects are funded by _cash_. Politicians have a history of hoarding cash for elections and "buying" votes from the poor. The demonetization issue was also promoted as a way to deal with a fake-currency printing industry allegedly being run in arch-rival Pakistan. This bodes well with the "Nationalism Wave" promoted in recent years.

<comment> Ar-Curunir > The news media aren't helping decipher the actual state of reality. Much > like the US elections, Indian media fuels the polarized population with > provocative news stories, and "alt-media" outlets publish opinions and fake > news as facts. Many accuse major media houses of unfairly favouring the > right-wing govt (much like Fox News in the US) due to connections of the > govt with business houses that run them.

Is this really true? The mainstream media houses are all helmed by pseudo- liberals that have in the past been very biased towards the Congress Party.

<comment><USER12> Shall we say we have left-leaning and right-leaning news channels, and depending on your personal inclination (read: echochamber), you could be accusing the _liberals_ on left-wing newsmedia as "pseudo-liberals" (often accused of being anti-national too!), and disagreeable newsmedia as favouring the govt?

<comment><USER13> So, can you edit your original post to be politically correct (read: non- echochamber)? Instead of just mentioning a certain inclination that you may not agree with, you can just say left-wing/communist media hasn't been in favour whereas right-wing media is in favour of this move?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> This is certainly a promising sign. A few years back I consulted for a company trying to make a push into the Indian market and the payments piece pretty much killed us. Dealing with HDFC became a daily nightmare and the amount of bureaucracy and red tape involved was soul-destroying. Based on my (very) limited knowledge of Indian payments, my guess is HDFC probably still sits behind these new solutions but if they can somehow streamline the process and shield customers from most of the BS I really hope they flourish.

<comment><USER15> This is true. I worked briefly on a startup idea to disrupt the payment services in India but gave up after the amount of red tape involved. In India banks want to control everything that is related to/about money. Banking is full of red-tape controlled by big banking houses in India. Company like Airtel & Vodafone couldn't push their mobile based payment systems for larger adoption. It is amazing to see how paytm got wider adoption and lobbied the bureaucracy and government to pave way for payment banks. But still the amount of investment that is required to get into payment services in India even as a payment bank is enormous. Startups in no way can compete with this without having VC's backing them right from the beginning.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> This may have been a good idea, but it is terribly implemented. Especially, notes of denomination 500 should not have been banned with immediate effect.

In general many poor people, even in cities, do not have bank accounts and face lot of issues when opening such accounts. Sometimes bank require a "reference" from an existing customer to open an account. Sometimes many such poor families (say 20 families - think of it as a big landed area with 20 small houses) live together at a single address, paying rent for a single room, and the banks will refuse to open so many accounts under a single address. Their are several such smaller issues that crop up when trying to open an account that are not well known and that only the people in a particular city or locality face.

These people cannot deposit their savings since they don't have a bank account to begin with. And they definitely have savings in Rs 500 denomination since 500 is nowadays often used in the markets. Essentially, this ban has hit hard the common people. The very rich are hiring others to do the transactions and exchange of money. The lower middle class and poorer sections are left wanting for cash. Hence, good idea, but bad implementation.

<comment><USER17>
       In general many poor people, even in cities,
       do not have bank accounts and face lot of
       issues when opening such accounts.

Sorry, but I absolutely can't stand when I see these kinds of arguments, because everyone reading this would believe this to be true apriori.

Check this article from Feb 2015. Only 23k families were without a bank account. In a country of 250m families! In the last two years I think they opened 200m - or something like that - accounts. [http://www.business- standard.com/article/current-affairs/nea...](http://www.business- standard.com/article/current-affairs/nearly-every-indian-household-has-a-bank- account-115021101677_1.html)

Agree about it not being very well managed, specially the ATM calibration issue.

But I have no doubt, it would massively help in making digital payments mainstream. Already since 9 Nov, digital payments have overtaken credit/debit cards as stated in this article. Possibly it would even make India an even bigger market than China.

It would also fight tax evasion - right now India borrows 60b$-70b$ every year - when coupled with tax reforms like GST which is set to kickoff next year. Btw, since last few years you need to supply an Tax Id whenever making transactions of more than 1k$ in cash, so this step fits in perfectly with that as well.

There's some short term pain, but the medium/long term gains massively outweigh it.

<comment><USER16> I don't know where they get those statistics? Do they include the daily wage working families? I have several near my own home (in a city) and none of them are able to open bank accounts.

<comment><USER17> RBI + MoF it seems.

Not sure. The only explanation I can think of is that they don't have Aadhar being illegal migrants or something like that. Or that the bank they are visiting is mismanaged - for which someone should file a complaint.

Btw, you can tell them that they get a full savings account at post offices as well. If they have some savings, it's better for them since interest is higher for families with BPL cards.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I see a lot of commenters bring up privacy viz. tracking transactions and tax avoidance. Now I'm all for respecting people's privacy; but I also don't see why the govt. shouldn't be able to detect and extract what is legally owed to them.

Raghuram Rajan, the ex-RBI governor was in favor of tracking transaction data too (and wasn't in favor of demonetization), especially since he felt that the tax rate in India is already reasonable compared to other Industrial nations. [1]

So instead of ending the discussion at "It invades people's privacy, full stop", can we talk about ways of ensuring greater chance of collecting taxes? Maybe examples of how other countries have successfully tackled it?

[1] [http://www.newindianexpress.com/business/2016/nov/10/the- cle...](http://www.newindianexpress.com/business/2016/nov/10/the-clever-find- ways-around-demonetisation-raghuram-rajan-said-two-years-ago-1537108.html)

</comment><comment><USER18> This is a huge move and in the end will benefit India in a big way. Basically by banning cash you are making transactions much easier to track. In turn this kills a lot of black market activity and stamps out corruption. By doing this India is making a move toward creating stronger protections toward businesses in the way of contract law and and intellectual property. This makes it much more favorable to innovation (your IP is more protected because the government is stronger)

<comment><USER19> But what happens when there is a major disaster? How will people pay if there is no internet/electricity etc.? At least with cash you can plan ahead...also what are the poor people to do?

<comment><USER13> I guess the linked Bloomberg article doesn't make it clear?

Cash hasn't been banned in India. Only ₹500 and ₹1000 denomination currency notes have been scrapped. Replacement currency notes (₹₹500 and ₹2000) with new design are being disbursed at banks and ATMs. It would take few more days to stabilize, that's all.

<comment><USER19> Thanks! I was responding to the comment by saying that banning all cash wouldn't be necessarily good...but yeah the article does make it sound like all cash would be banned...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> tbh I'm reading the opening anecdote about soda hawkers and roadside egg vendors accepting PayTm and thinking _last time I was in India and R500 and R1000 notes were legal tender, I wouldn 't have expected those guys to have accepted the large denomination notes (no change), never mind digital payments_...

</comment><comment><USER20> misleading title, cash hasn't been banned just ₹500 and ₹1000 denominations.

<comment><USER13> True. Even ₹500 and ₹1000 aren't banned per se. They are being replaced with new currency notes (of 500 and 2000 denomination).

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> > This is not a move made by the Indian government to push surveillance or > other nefarious purposes.

So why do you need ID when changing the notes? It looks like move to approximately sum up who had how much money in cash.

<comment><USER5> I assume you were trying to reply to me. Yes that is the case because India does have a huge problem with people not paying taxes, taking bribes and other illegal activities. So this may be a necessary step taken to acheive that.

There are more clear cut cases of the Indian government trying to create a surveillance state. Trying to group this under the same category just creates unnecessary noise.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I pray that this never happens in the United States. Money is the most powerful thing in any modern society. When transactions are controlled and surveilled then what can stop total control by a determined government?

The black market is a bogeyman. I hope others see this as well.

<comment><USER13> No offense, but do you think your transactions are not surveilled by your government or any of those three lettered agencies? ;)

<comment><USER23> That's his point. Yes they are, when they can be. You can't track cash transactions.

<comment><USER13> So is the case in India. Cash transactions aren't banned. The linked article title is misleading. Existing ₹500 and ₹1000 currency notes are being replaced with new ₹500 and ₹2000 ones.

<comment><USER22> I didn't know that. Was the motivation simply to get everyone to turn around their cash?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Is this going to be today's "bitcoin" article?</comment>


Should Some Startup CEOs Focus More On Their Startup? - <AUTHOR> http://www.centernetworks.com/startup-ceos-business-focus

<comment><USER2> Allen scores again. Too many CEOs are spending their time socializing and engaging in flame wars rather than doing things like working on a business model or building a company. Valleywag coverage should be a CEO's shame, not a PR goal.

<comment><USER3> Too true, this case is just plain ridiculous and it definitely should not be considered as an example for other startups.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Too much ranting for here.</comment>


Ask HN: Why would DigitalOcean require 30GB for a Wordpress droplet? - <AUTHOR> Found this rather odd, needed to create a wordpress site today and decided to spin up a droplet on DigitalOcean.
See: http://imgur.com/qOmfMh5
The Ubuntu 14.04 image with Wordpress requires 30GB space, which seems rather odd to me. Any idea why DigitalOcean is doing this? <comment><USER2> I'm assuming that they recommend a droplet with 1GB of memory which comes with 30GB of storage. MySQL takes up a good chunk of resources on the 512MB droplet.

That said, I host three wordpress websites off a 512MB droplet with 20GB storage. Just fire up a barebones 512MB droplet and install wordpress yourself. Be prepared to play with a lot of settings and configurations to not run out of memory all the time.</comment>


Unschooling - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unschooling <comment><USER2> I was "homeschooled" instead of going to High School, but by reading this definition I was effectively unschooled.

I'll say it worked great for me who struggled with bullies and traditional school systems for whatever reasons. I later went on and got a GED (took all the tests in one day and did very well). Later went on I went to a community college and then state university finished with a BS in CS.

For me things tend to be much easier to understand if I need to understand it in order to solve a problem and then I could go as deep into a topic as necessary. For example if someone had told me that geometry and trigonometry were what I needed to know to be able to 2D game graphics and presented it in the context of game programming I would have been a million times more interested. I was definitely one of those kids who asked "why do I need to know this?" And typically the answer was not forthcoming, even though being older I understand this much more clearly.

Also, I'll add that I don't know that you have to necessarily cram a bunch of information into a kid just because they're a kid. If they learn how to learn and later on need it, you can still be quite well equipped to learn more. In fact it seems easier to me as you get older and have more context around all subjects.

</comment><comment><USER3> I was unschooled, unschool my son and will continue to as we have more kids. AMA.

<comment><AUTHOR> I was unschooled as well, in the 1980s, and I'm considering the idea of a modern interpretation of this for my future son.

Any pointers on how to manage the ubiquitous devices we find ourselves preoccupied with these days? Maybe this is more of a general kids question than an unschooling one :)

<comment><USER3> We like using Google speakers instead of screens for things like music and podcasts. We don't let him have any screentime, but we'll change that when he's five to try and have active things. Make screens boring (e.g. greyscale, bluelight filtering, no passive apps).</comment></comment></comment>


Dear Satya, Please fix your Microsoft Office 365 experience - <AUTHOR> http://dontmakemework.com/2014/12/28/dear-satya-please-fix-your-microsoft-office-365-experience/ <comment><USER2> Microsoft's online offerings have been a pain for me. I have numerous accounts under different email addresses and it takes for ever to get logged in to more than one at a time. Running one in chrome, another chrome incognito, another Firefox, another ie. Their "single sign on" is a ux disaster.

Edit: Offerings include Office 365 online, and different azure accounts, and an msdn account.

<comment><USER3> Chrome supports multiple profiles that don't share cookies. Try that. Very useful for dealing with multiple accounts on a single service.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Well, I love Office 365. It has got very good UI interface which works perfectly well except few minor bugs.

</comment><comment><USER5> I started using outlook.com and related services about two years ago and loved it. Now that I'm on Office 365, I miss the simplicity of outlook.com.

On top of that, there was no upgrade path between the two products.

</comment><comment><USER6> "Also, as one software developer to another, I'd recommend having a Chief User Experience Officer and make sure your user experience is adequately tested across the entire purchase and usage lifecycle, instead of in silos."

I fear that Microsoft, like most other large tech companies, has more User Experience designers, experts, and "officer"s than ever. They removed those things you struggled to find in order to make it "easier".

<comment><AUTHOR> What can I say but it's a Dilbert World :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Are there dedicated websites for Google Docs? We use Google Docs at work and just do everything through Google Drive web interface.

Likewise I'm a Office 365 subscriber at home, and I have Excel installed for password protected spreadsheets, but I do everything via One Drive... I wasn't even aware nor did I even think there was some dedicated web app for Office 365...

</comment><comment><USER8> Hmm, my experience did not match this at all. Office 365 has been a joy to use. Really, just go to office.live.com (directly linked from office.microsoft.com if you start there) & sign in... You are prompted to create or upload a document similar to Google docs.

<comment><AUTHOR> Good UX is about making it difficult or impossible to do the wrong thing and easy to do the right thing. Organizations shouldn't make you have to know all their different sites to be successful. So If I had known to go to office.microsoft.com as opposed to thinking I could go to microsoft.com, then that would have avoided a lot of initial frustration on my part, but I didn't and I think I'm like a lot of people who don't necessarily know about all the different Microsoft sites.

For Microsoft's sake, I hope I'm in the minority.

<comment><USER8> I am confused, because the big Office link from the main site goes to the same place.

Either way it is clear that unlike say Google Docs, the online versions of the apps are viewed as more of extensions to the desktop 365 apps instead of a standalone product.

In addition, if you use OneDrive (like Google Drive) creating an office document or viewing one goes straight to Office online and skips all these steps altogether.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> >>" Chief User Experience Officer"

Do big companies often run an army of UX people to be managed with a Chief UX title across products? Does any company already have it?

<comment><AUTHOR> The concept of Chief Customer Experience Officer is definitely growing. What I've seen is usually a director, rarely a VP, whose role is to drive a consistent experience across the various products, but it's a struggle as they rarely have the authority to force the collaboration required across various fiefdoms.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Just so you know, you click the name in the top center of the Word/PowerPoint/Excel document to rename it.</comment>


DOJ to Propose Changes to Legal Shield for Tech Companies - <AUTHOR> https://www.msn.com/en-us/finance/companies/doj-to-propose-changes-to-legal-shield-for-tech-companies/ar-BB10Zse6 <comment><USER2> In this article, Vicky Graham and David McLaughlin describe Section 230 as: "legal shield enjoyed by companies such as Google and Facebook". This is disingenuous, at best.

Section 230 does 2 simple things. It says platforms aren't liable for what users post there. In other words, users themselves are liable for what they do.

Second, it gives platforms the ability to take down harmful content w/o risk of legal threat.

These two things protect every small blog w/ comments and every fledgling social platform. It's the law most responsible for allowing the internet to flourish, by helping small content creators operate w/o the threat of unearned liability.

What Section 230 does not do is act as shield for criminal activity. The feds are not hampered in any way from perusing legal action against site operators who commit a crime.

Damage to Section 230 will exclusively harm not-huge tech companies because that damage will allow courts & Govs to punish small/med operators - not for what they do but for what their users do.

Like most reporters covering Section 230 stories, Vicky Graham and David McLaughlin appear to be clueless that eroding Section 230 won't harm Google or Facebook in the slightest. Only the largest tech firms have the massive resources to ride out what follows if Section 230 is pruned away or is killed altogether.

The other issue here is that the purpose of the EARN IT act is to render encryption meaningfully insecure (via backdoors), so that Gov/LEO can break it on a whim.

Lastly, notice how the reporters here just parrot what was told to them. They don't try at all to vet or analyze what they're publishing. It's stenography.</comment>