The Dark Side of Silicon Valley: A Note from Gizmodo's Editor Katie Drummond - <AUTHOR> http://digg.com/2016/gizmodo-takeover <comment><USER2> > I think we live in an era of incredible promise, which, yes, has probably > been said of every era that predates this one, and will be said of every era > that follows it. Our particular era of promise is one rapidly being > transformed by technological change: We are more connected than ever and > have access to evermore sums of information; we work more consistently and > yet enjoy greater and greater flexibility in how and where we earn a living; > we indulge in more idle time while deliveries of groceries and new running > shoes arrive at our doorsteps; soon, all our Ubers will even drive > themselves.

Right off the bat you have a chronocentric perspective. Our progress is not universal, it just appears that way to us Westeners because we're marinated in it. Actually it is specific in both time and space.

Even within our countries there are huge portions of the population, especially outside the cities, for whom there has been little progress for considerable time. There has been regression. That's a large part of why Trump got elected. Have you a single article on any of this?

Furthermore you Katie, are not a skeptic of Silicon Valley. Peter Thiel, whom you abhor and call names in this article, is. So is Nicholas Carr and Jaron Lanier.

> At Gizmodo, the answer is this: We approach technology with both enthusiasm > and scrutiny, covering the Silicon Valley elite with the skepticism and > rigor that their billions of dollars and vast influence deserve.

You don't attack Silicon Valley, you just attack the personalities within it. It's like thinking the point of Christmas is fairy lights. If only we could arrange them properly with the right lighting configuration Christmas would be improved. No!

SV does need skeptics from the left and the right. It does not need a constant stream of whining about who is dicking who and how many women Elon Musk follows on Twitter. I checked your website. You don't have a single article on Gwynne Shotwell, who not only has an awesome name for a rocket company president but is running the show at one of the most important technology companies on (and off) the planet.</comment>


What will pypy do for your website? - <AUTHOR> http://casbon.me/what-will-pypy-do-for-your-website-benchmarki

<comment><USER2> Can we please stop using "ab" for benchmarking and perhaps switch to a tool that actually generates HTTP/1.1 requests?

</comment><comment><USER3> The graphs are really small.

I'm using Chromium on Linux Mint.

<comment><USER4> They are just thumbnails. If you open them in another tab you'll see they aren't being dynamically resized or anything</comment></comment>


UI Kingdom – Handpicked Free UI for your real life projects - <AUTHOR> https://www.uikingdom.xyz/ <comment><USER2> awesome project

</comment><comment><USER3> thanks</comment>


UMASH: A fast and universal enough hash function - <AUTHOR> https://engineering.backtrace.io/2020-08-24-umash-fast-enough-almost-universal-fingerprinting/ <comment><USER2> >> _We accidentally a whole hash function… but we had a good reason!_

I think they missed a couple of words and meant to say that they "accidentally _created_ a whole _new_ hash function", but I can't be sure. UMASH was designed after Backtrace evaluated various existing hash functions and realized that none quite fit the specialized "fingerprinting" caching use- case.

<comment><USER3> It's a reference to an old meme

[https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/i-accidentally](https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/i-accidentally)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Will add it to smhasher today. Never heard of it before.</comment>


Ask HN: What keeps you going? - <AUTHOR> The question is intentionally vague. What keeps you going every day? Every week? What are you grateful for? What gets you out of bed? <comment><USER2> This is something I've been pondering. Last year almost drove me into the ground, yet I'm still here. Another poster commented mortgage. That was my sole driver for several years. But I hated my job, city, etc. I decided to declare bankruptcy to remove that from the equation.

What keeps you going....?

Memories, knowledge and connection. Memories forged with people or solo, by adventures I live. Knowledge learning new things, creating, doing. Connecting with people hearing their stories. I do as I do, not for others but for me. I love hearing others story's, sharing adventures. But when I step out each day, I frankly don't give a shit what others think.

What are you grateful for?

I'm grateful that I wake up every morning. That although I'm not the healthiest I can still function. My will power to push through. My insatiable curiosity.The people in my life, etc. The experiences I've lived good and bad. That I'm where I am.

What gets you out of bed?

Right now, a crane. It's a chore to drag me out of bed. I used to get up, hit the gym. Driven by improvement, starting by increasing lifts, run a bit more. Then give the best in my life, and make memories at night. I'm working on getting back to that point.

</comment><comment><USER3> Good question. Noone that I know gives a shit about programming or hacking and the music I record is pretty much misunderstood, so I'm not sure really what gets me out of bed. Just hard headed I guess.

</comment><comment><USER4> This answer is intentionally terse (and only somewhat glib).

The mortgage.</comment>


Could Coding Become the Next Mass Profession? - <AUTHOR> http://also.roybahat.com/post/15307941431/could-coding-be-the-next-mass-profession

<comment><USER2> Citation missing, but I've read a paper that claimed rather convincingly that you need a certain mindset both to be good at programming and to enjoy programming (unsurprisingly, this comes hand in hand).

It's not really problem solving, it's rather a specific kind of structured thinking. It's the attention to detail and the will to think through every aspect of an issue, to find a complete solution. That's also a useful skill outside of software or even engineering (I'd imagine law isn't all that different in that regard), but apparently it's really critical for software engineering. At the same time it's not necessarily linked to general intelligence or problem solving ability or creative thinking, it's just a particular way of approaching problems.

Said lost article had tests showing that only a small fraction of the population thinks this way, something below 10%.

Of course this isn't proven, but it matches with my personal experience. This always makes me very skeptical of things like end user programming, or programming as a mass profession. People without the skill can create programs, in particular in environments, but the results are usually quite fragile and expensive to maintain. "Real" programmers can usually create much greater value at lower cost, so there really isn't much of a point in employing lots of "not really" programmers.

<comment><USER3> I agree with you: what we think of as 'pro' programming -- writing large programs in formal languages and running it past an interpreter/compiler -- is probably only something the few will really get into.

However, there's a couple of exceptions to this idea I'm not sure how to handle.

 _MS EXCEL_ : It's a programming experience, of a sort, and is incredibly popular. I think it uses similar skills to writing code, but is just much more 'gentle' on the brain. There's a programming nature in excel formulae;

        =SUM(A3:A14) / COUNT(A3:A14)

if you see what I mean...

 _BASIC_ : Back in the 80's, everyone and his dog had a go at BASIC programming. Most of my friends and their dads got their hands dirty typing in programs from magazines. It suggests that getting lots of people involved in simple languages might be feasible.

<comment><USER4> Yes exactly! There have been times in history (pre-printing-press) where most people couldn't even read. I'm sure there where many scribes who would look down their noses and say that the common man would never take the time to read for himself.

Our society has grown to be incredibly complex. Imagine taking your great- great-great-great-great-grandfather and dropping him in modern times today and asking him to fill out the forms to get a drivers license, prepare his own taxes, set the clock on your dvd player, or send an email on an iPhone.

I guess my point is that the "common" man is pretty capable of feats that would be considered extremely technical from a historic vantage point.

<comment><USER5> I was also about the use writing and reading as an example of knowledge that used to be limited to just specialized roles. While there are still professions that deal exclusively with writing exceptionally well, it's now part of our basic education. I think in a similar way, computer literacy could be just a matter of education.

<comment><USER6> yes, but we get 12+ years of reading and writing education.

<comment><USER5> I believe we could really start teaching code at a relatively young age too, or at least start teaching them the ability to have the mindset for programming.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> It's an interesting question how much of the population is really capable of becoming productive coders in a professional setting. Certainly we already have a wide class of coders doing things like advanced Excel spreadsheets which require much of the critical thinking required to write general-purpose code, but even there you find that there is a distinct subset of people who really grok it and break through the next level of creative problem-solving ability.

I would argue that unless you can break through that wall where you have the tenacity, will and base knowledge to debug anything that is thrown your way, you will not be employable professionally as a coder because inevitably you will get hung up on something. I'm not sure the obvious outward computer-geek level passion is required, but I certainly think you need a real sense of satisfaction with the problem solving aspect of the job. How much of the population possesses that? I'm not sure, but I'm guessing far less than half.

My prediction instead is that hackers will continue hacking until we achieve artificial intelligence, and then computers themselves will do the heavy lifting and we can all be creative directors. At that point we will have to contend with far more difficult existential issues such as how to structure society and happiness for a species that is evolved from a difficult struggle for survival in a world where automation accounts for every physical need. Maybe philosophy will be the next mass profession.

</comment><comment><USER8> I think the piece is overly optimistic about the prospects of coding becoming common place. We have dealt with the software crisis since the inception of software and up till now, no one has proposed an even half way plausible plan on how to address it. As such until someone solve the software crisis in a measurable way that can improve the quality and predictability of code. It will remain a craft, as such only the most skilled craftsmen will be of real value, with the less skill providing solutions that are far more expensive to maintain.

As well the for the majority of the population, writing software is just not attractive it's what technical minded people do, which is 10% of the population at best. Couple that with the fact that the industry up until now has not been that attractive to females and you start to see that there are a bunch of technical and cultural issue working against coding becoming the next mass profession.

The majority of people look at a logic puzzle and see frustration, they don't see a challenge that is interesting to solve. The minority that do, have the spark that is needed to code. Figure out how to give everyone that spark, and you may have a flame, but you still have to deal with all the other issues once you get the fire going.

<comment><USER9> I agree, and also I'd like to add something. While it's not really an attractive job to many people, it's also relatively difficult for most people. Farming is different in that it's easy for anyone to do (it's just manual labor). Realistically, you can't expect a large portion of the population to be capable of programming.

<comment><USER10> > Farming is different in that it's easy for anyone to do (it's just manual > labor).

I have a small grain farm and also develop software professionally. I find software development is the easier of the two, personally.

Problems in software all go back to the rules of computational theory. It's not exactly easy, but the space is fairly limited and can be understood with some effort.

Problems in farming are all over the map. Sometimes you have to engineer a new piece of equipment to get you out of a jam, other times you're dealing with biology, medicine, mechanical work, sales, you name it, you probably have to deal with it. And you need a solution _now_. By tomorrow, your profits for the year will be gone.

<comment><USER8> I grew up on a citrus farm in Florida, I was the first generation to leave the far after NAFTA due to the fact that we could no longer compete as a family farm. While Farming has a lot of variables that cannot be controlled and is grueling work, I did not find it to be any more mentally difficult than development. There is a lot of science in farming for sure, but one thing about farming that is very different than software development is that only one person needs to do the thinking and can then delegate to less inclined individuals. The structure of the workforce is different in that a single thinker can do the processing for a group, in software there is no such luxury, if I do all the thinking for another developer then I might as well take the 10 minutes to write it down and save the salary of the other developer. That's the big difference, roles can be delegated in some professions, in others they just cant. To some extent they can be in software, you can have a test developer, and a build manager but for the most part each one is working out specific, unique problems in their domain.

<comment><USER10> > but one thing about farming that is very different than software development > is that only one person needs to do the thinking and can then delegate to > less inclined individuals

True, although, technically speaking, that work still exists. The programmer just delegates it to the computer instead of having people do it. There is no reason why you couldn't have an assembly line of humans hand-compiling your programs, if you really wanted to. Once you give them the basic rules, they can set forth and complete any task that you ask of them. It is just repetition at that point.

Farming is quickly going in the same direction. The delegatable jobs are, more and more, being done by machines.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I think the shortage of software development skills really has to do with the lack of there being enough people who get impassioned with this kind of stuff. When I step out of my bubble I realize that its really difficult to find cultural-personality fits for what building software requires. Most people are just not like 'us' for better or worse. Most people don't get giddy over implementing a new algorithm or building an elegant framework, etc. etc. and probably never will.

Here is an exercise... flip the table and think if our industry was going away and you needed to find a job in a completely new industry/job role. Personally for me about 95% of the things I can think of make me want to immediately throw up... sales, medicine, advertising, law etc. - no thanks they are just not me. I've known people who have transitioned into tech from other industries chasing the money here... they are usually gone within a year or 2.

The other problem is despite all the crap about "I learned to code in 2 months" it is a really long haul to become good. Probably similar to becoming a good author or painter.

Lastly, it is quite well known that _some_ people in software can have a lot of economic problems as they get older not to mention some of the cultural problems in tech in certain places that have been well covered here. I guess the point being that I think its really really difficult to do software development if your not genuinely excited about doing the day-to-day stuff.

<comment><USER12> _I think the shortage of software development skills really has to do with the lack of there being enough people who get impassioned with this kind of stuff._

I was at a party recently I was asking someone about their work. I was really interested in how they solved certain problems, etc... We were probably only talking a minute or so when she says, "Can we not talk about my job and ask me about my car or some great meal I've had?" So I apologized and we talked about other things.

But it did get me thinking that at a random party I'd be happy to talk about my job/industry/etc... While I have a lot of interests, I don't think I've ever thought, "I'm tired of talking about programming or technology". Usually when I stop talking about it, it's for the sake of those around me :-)

<comment><USER13> I think you can look at this another way too. How many people in other industries voluntarily embark on pet projects or hobbyist experiments that involve the same things they do at work?

How many people in other industries blog about their profession in their own time? And not just about their day to day, but about new things they've found or interesting things they've figured out.

People want to go home and leave work at the office, but it's not at all uncommon for a programmer or developer to carry on in their spare time, working on their own stuff. You probably started off your career as a hobby in the first place.

Sometimes it can be hard to switch off when plenty of other people manage it fine. It seems almost implausible to imagine a fellow colleague who wasn't interested. I also think that specialist journalism is another profession that almost expects 'extra-curricular' interest in the field.

<comment> the-cakeboss >How many people in other industries voluntarily embark on pet projects or hobbyist experiments that involve the same things they do at work?

Well this behavior isn't limited to those involved with software development. I'd say that this is the case for any profession that involves the formulation and then creation of content, ideas, products etc.

Take this guy for example: [http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2012/01/the_be...](http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2012/01/the_best_american_wall_map_david_imus_the_essential_geography_of_the_united_states_of_america_.html)

A lot of other fields necessitate a customer in order to perform, such as medicine.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> "Better, because writing code is a creative act which can be done with or without a traditional (antiquated?) office-based job, and can create enormous personal and economic value."

This article emphasizes _making_ , which I think is important. It reminds me of my great-grandfather, who came to the US from Poland and started a clothing manufacturing business (that still exists to this day). I learned to make custom-tailored clothing by being in the business.

There was an opportunity back then for anyone willing to learn to make something and sell it. There simply aren't too many of these kind of opportunities today. Coding is definitely one of them. All I have learned from tailoring- the act of making something from scratch- has helped me as a developer. And vice versa.

"Most academic training is focused on teaching students theory, not practice."

The maker type of entrepreneurship requires a practical, work-based education, and college doesn't always provide for that. You learn to make by doing. It's circular: You learn to make by making. The resources for learning to code are readily available, and anyone willing to start making their own projects can teach themselves.

Another thing school can't teach you is _what_ to make. This is where learning to code comes in: if you have experience with something else, you can code tools for that something else.

</comment><comment><USER15> I have to seriously doubt this. Being good at programming requires a very similar type of brain as the one required to be good at mathematics. The argument is often "if only programming were to become standard curriculum which everyone is required to learn in some capacity, more people would be programming-literate."

Mathematics, in some level, has been required at all levels of education for quite some time and yet very few people can become proficient at anything at the college algebra level or above. If programming were to become as commonplace in our education system as math is, I believe you would see much the same thing. Many people would be able to memorize enough rules to get through the basics, but once it comes time to show that these basic concepts are understood in the form of applying them to more advanced concepts, you're going to see more people failing to get by, just as you do in anything other than basic math classes.

I certainly couldn't imagine a career becoming mainstream that requires mid- level calculus, or even algebra, and certainly not advanced analysis and proofing. By the same token, I find it hard to believe that any profession that requires understanding more than basic computer science concepts (simple looping and conditionals, no OO) will become mainstream. However programming today (writing a Rails app) is significantly different than it was 10 years ago (writing massive programs in C/assembly), so it's possible that programming becomes much easier than it currently is.

</comment><comment><USER16> Chemistry, Engineering, Mathematics, etc. all existed before coding. So far, the number of people willing to do hard 'mental' tasks has been pretty low. More than a few people I have known haven't gotten into working with their brain that much until later in life, once they decide that the types of jobs generally available to the unskilled aren't what they want to do.

3 months to learn to code Java? I shudder to think of think kind of code those places produce.

Maybe people can learn to make database queries maybe, but most problems I've been asked to solve quickly morph and start requiring a lot more to get working, even to accomplish tasks that seem 'simple' on the surface.

If coding was simple to learn, UML->code would work flawlessly (as in a tool that generates code from UML). I don't think this has proven to be the case.

</comment><comment><USER17> Of course! It's gonna be THE profession. I imaging in the future more and more things will be doable in 'software'. For example, manufacturing factories will be so automated and full of robots, that you can actually start building assembly lines in pure code. Subway & Railroad systems will drive completely by them self, controlled by code. Container ships & harbours might operate someday purely driven by software. Bottom line: Demand for coders is gonna explode and someday all we need is just coders.

<comment><USER11> Sorry but I have to completely disagree that someday all we will need is just coders. Code is just a way of getting a computer to do something specific. So what should a computer do? Usually a computer should do something identified as valuable. So who figures out what is valuable? Typically everyone else... business people, researchers, administrators, doctors, analysts, etc. Having just a bunch of coders would be essentially worthless in that we will always need people in other roles to figure out how different techniques can be applied in different fields. After that is identified, the coders can then get to work on figuring out how to get a computer to do it.

<comment><USER17> true, although the point I was making is that sooner or later fields like agriculture, energy, manufacturing, transportation, logistics and others will be completely automated and just require coders to operate. That leaves _some_ other fields, but these are huge parts of the economy. That's not gonna happen tomorrow of course, but we'll gradually get towards is and coder demand is just increase steadily over time.

<comment><USER18> I do not think this is accurate either. Just because something is possible (and it is a big IF to say that it is possible to reach 100% automation, economy wide) does not mean that it will end up being that way.

Consider, let's say, manufacturing. We have pretty much nailed down the details of how to automate a factory. Still, we do not see that the world manufacturing has been dominated by the most technologically advanced countries. When you automate, you have to pay upfront for your robots (with a ROI measured in years). With human operators, you defer payment until after you have collected the benefits of their labor (in terms of finished product inventory, not revenue). Not that it has not been tried, car companies tried to pull it off in the 70's, because in the books it looks like the robot is an asset, while the payroll is a liability. But they all discovered the hard way that cash is king and have been struggling with imminent bankruptcy ever since.

Instead, the big powerhouses are less advanced countries with large pools of young workers and weak labor laws. There a manufacturer can get started with much less capital and pay as it goes, instead of building these huge, high- maintenance, illiquid capital investments. And when the market shifts (and it always does) they can retool an pivot much faster too.

Apply the same logic to economic activities where bussiness processes are not throughly documented or even understood (like crafts and professions), or those which depend on contingent uncontrollable factors (like agriculture), and you will see that the idea of a fully automated society is beyond human reach.

Maybe if we manage to build a super-intelligence to solve all these problems for us, we may have a chance, or maybe there are fundamental limits that just cannot be overcome. But in either case, as of today, I think this is more science-fiction than actual science.

<comment><USER19> I can't dig up the link, but I recently stumbled across an article that highlighted a start up that was building a robot that would kill weeds (for agricultural purposes), replacing migrant workers.

I agree that not all workers will end up being programmers, but a shift towards automation is inevitable as routine human labor will eventually be too costly and inefficient, regardless of the location. China is already starting to show signs of rising labor costs due to an improving economy and a shortage of labor. I would bet against human labor in the long run, as counting on lax labor laws and a population of workers who are willing to tolerate abject poverty as a method for keeping production costs down seems like an unsustainable solution.

<comment><USER18> I am not saying it is not technically possible, but that it might not make financial sense long term. Nor I am saying that we should do without any automation (agriculture, by the way is already highly mechanized), I consider that there might be a sweet spot beyond which further development is not worth the hassle.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Unlike prior shifts in national economies, coding--good coding at least--does not lend itself to the application of mass labor unlike manufacturing. In the prior mentioned shifts, hunter/gatherer --> agrarian and agrarian --> industrial, you could teach someone to do one or two repetitive jobs without consequence to the rest of the system. Every night at 5, shovel hay from loft to stall or every time a piece from machine A emerges, screw this knobby on and insert into machine B at a 45 degree angle. I would posit that coding requires far more awareness of the greater system as a whole. Changes made in one branch of the code will have a rippling effect throughout the system.

</comment><comment><USER21> Nope, never a mass profession. Here's why.

1\. This partially depends on which area of programming you are talking about. The web development industry is not an area which sees mass hiring. Most web development shops are small teams or one man shops. Running a web development shop is very hard because you have to make a living from running your business as opposed to punching a clock at work. Web development is difficult enough, add all that is required to make a living off it and that cuts the number of people who are able to make it by quite a bit. The article mentions Elance and Odesk jobs which pay "$15 to $20 or more per hour" but the only people who are able to make a living off those wages are living in low wage companies. In the U.S. you might as well be flipping burgers rather than attempting to live as a freelancer at those rates.

The same could largely be said for startups, mobile apps, etc.

2\. How many coders does companies such as Google and Facebook have compared to the peak of companies such as Ford? Coding is not and never will be the sort of mass employment industry as manufacturing has been.

3\. Coding requires a great deal of self motivation to learn and keep up with. Most people aren't willing to put in the effort that this requires. I learn by doing and I have never had the patience for books, classroom learning or even tutorials. Most people can't pick this stuff up without the sort of structured learning environment which doesn't work well for learning how to code. The number of people who are willing to put in this effort is likely the same percentage of people who are coders today.

4\. The labor crunch in the coding industry is not just a crunch of people who know how to code, but rather a crunch for coders who are near the top. The industry could find plenty of people if they are looking for mediocre developers, but that's not where the jobs are going.

5\. Knowing the basics of coding for working magic in spreadsheets isn't the same as being handed the keys to commit code to the crown jewels of the company. No matter how many people who know how to code and no matter what the basic expectations are for prospective employees, there won't ever be a significant increase in the number of people who are able to write the code which drives the company.

If the industry needs more coders, then probably the best solution at this point is to be more open to remote developers. That will increase the pool available. Education will also increase the pool, but not on a massive scale.

<comment><USER22> > but rather a crunch for coders who are near the top. The industry could find > plenty of people if they are looking for mediocre developers, but that's not > where the jobs are going.

Exactly: to me the talent "crunch" seems to be for: Rockstar/ninja programmers will 10 years experience that live in the SF Bay area.

... and then they wonder why they can't find people.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I don't think programming in its current form will become similar to unskilled labor. The important part about the examples at the beginning of the article (construction, factory workers) is that there were engineers (smart experts) behind the innovation that simplified a task so that an unskilled laborer could do it.

Can programming become so dumbed down that anyone could do it? Sure, there are plenty of tools out there that are "App Makers" for whatever platform/genre you want. But are those tools churning out apps that make a company? I haven't seen one.

The thing about software is that it is a ton of small pieces put together to create something new and unique. Factory workers put together a ton of small pieces, but to create something that has already been invented. A car, for example, has a specification created by smart people and put together by unskilled workers and machines.

</comment><comment><USER24> My guess is that in the next few decades, not knowing how to code will be equivalent to being illiterate. This doesn't mean everyone will get paid to write code, but I suspect there will be _far_ more programmers in the future than now.

Of course, coding in and of itself is likely to change dramatically, as languages will gradually support higher and higher levels of abstraction, making programming more and more approachable for the average person. But no matter what the code looks like, a strong grasp of logic, problem solving, and how software works will probably become a fundamental skill in society.

[http://www.quora.com/Does-the-computer-programming- professio...](http://www.quora.com/Does-the-computer-programming-profession- have-a-future/answer/Yevgeniy-Brikman)

</comment><comment><USER25> Coding? Maybe. Actually developing new software? No.

What is the difference? "Coding" is applying the tools you have to solve a problem that is in an already solved class of problems. (I.e. use VB to slap a quick UI on a database)

Developing new software often means solving a new class of problem.

There's nothing wrong with that distinction - coding certainly has value. But it's an important one to keep in mind. Both for your career, and for businesses that employ one or the other kind of developer.

But I'd argue that "coding" as outlined above is more the new literacy than the new profession. It is an ability you will need to get any job done well.

</comment><comment><USER26> I certainly hope it does not become the next mass profession. I don't understand people that want everyone to learn to code. Its simple supply and demand, friends. As the supply of coders goes up, demand for my services go down.

<comment><USER27> Maybe that would be the case in other professions...but as a coder, I would LOVE to have more people involved in it. I think programming is one of those areas in which a rising tide lifts all boats.

I find that most of my time is either dumbing things down (i.e. printing the output of a relational database into a flat spreadsheet or worse, a PDF) for those who barely understand basic Excel or attempting to parse such dumbed- down information from other systems. If it were status quo in this world to understand the concept of delimitation and meta-data, my ability to create even more compelling applications, visualizations, and analyses would be greatly multiplied.

<comment><USER26> I definitely understand. I'm just looking at it from a purely economical perspective. Sure, as the mass's technical prowess goes up, my ability to create cool things also goes up, but as the mass's technical prowess goes up, the earning potential in programming goes down.

Any time a resource becomes less scarce, it's value drops.

<comment><USER27> Sure, though I'd argue that maybe you're too shortsighted. If you were one of the few literate people at the time of Gutenberg, you might have a good start on everyone else...yet if that kind of literacy ratio never improved within a generation, I'd argue that you might have ended up poorer. Especially if you had the hankering to be more than just a reader...few literate people means few reasons to write books/pamphlets.

<comment><USER15> But we're not writing code for it to be read by other programmers. We're writing code for what it does when it's executed. More programmers does not make a greater market for programmers. At least not for that reason.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Sure there is room for more people to become software developers, but let's not use the word 'profession'.

Quote from Steve McConnell:

——————————

According to legal precedents, a profession has:[1]

· A requirement for extensive learning and training

· A code of ethics imposing standards higher than those normally tolerated in the marketplace

· A disciplinary system for professionals who breach the code

· A primary emphasis on social responsibility over strictly individual gain, and a corresponding duty of its members to behave as members of a disciplined and honorable profession

· A prerequisite of a license prior to admission to practice

——————————

<http://www.stevemcconnell.com/psd/06-novumorganum.htm>

Software development in general hardly meets those qualifications. There are plenty of professional software developers, but software development is not a _profession_. This is a critical distinction, not just semantics.

</comment><comment><USER29> If programming (or CS concepts) were to become part of common literacy, that wouldn't necessarily mean programming qua profession would be the next mass profession. Writing is part of common literacy, but professional writers aren't a huge portion of the population. There are a lot more people who write in the course of their work in some other profession, though.

<comment><USER30> There are a lot of people who program in the course of their work in some other profession. Most engineers can hack some Matlab, at least. But the bar is much higher--most engineering professions are at least as intellectually challenging as programming.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Farming became obsolete because of economies of scale.

Factory work became obsolete because of economies of scale.

Manufacturing became obsolete because of economies of scale.

What do you think is our generation's economy of scale?

I think the near future will involve making it possible for anyone, even those without a technical background, to quickly build beautiful internet products.

What do you think is the next big leap? What would make coding obsolete?

<comment><USER32> Obsolete is a strong word. What happens in these industries is that they get split into the high-end (organic farming, small order manufacturing) and the mass-production low-end. Yes in many ways margin have fallen but overall production has gone up, way up.

That being said - retail seems to be our generation's victim. In the last decade, we've replaced media consumables with digital equivalents. This alone has mostly killed music, book, and movie rental stores. It's not just retail stores but retail services - tax prep, insurance, and financial services. Some of this took place in the 90's, but it continued in the 00's and it will continue in the 10's.

<comment><USER31> I do agree that is a strong word. I guess what I was referring to was it's obselenece as a mass profession. I assumed that was implicit, wrongfully.

I was hoping to drive home the point that while coding is the "it" thing right now, eventually someone will build a framework that makes having a technical background moot (similar to the power YouTube has given to the home movie producer or music artist).

I think you may be right in regards to the retail prediction. Amazon is going to continue to absorb the majority of retail sales, especially as baby boomers (the highest spending demographic in history) completes the retirement cycle and diminishes disposable income in the market.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Saeed Dehnadi and Richard have done some interesting work on... A cognitive study of early learning of programming, available at Saeed's page:

<http://www.eis.mdx.ac.uk/research/PhDArea/saeed/>

</comment><comment><USER34> I think there are certain skills that strongly overlap. I never studied programming, but I did study music. I've seen that pattern many times. So perhaps students at music schools should consider developing secondary skills in coding. I certainly wish I had done that.

</comment><comment><USER35> This is a tough job, most people don't want it.

People like to be lawyers and study business more instead of becoming programmers.

</comment><comment><USER36> >One Ivy League computer science program only required one course where students actually write code.

Which program is that?

</comment><comment><USER27> I wish coding were viewed as not just a profession, but a necessary skill to be literate in today's world. It seems impossible to me that our society can keep up with the pace and breadth of information that our digital-systems create.

And I don't mean that everyone should be able to understand assembly. I'd almost be happy if the average person can understand what makes a comma- delimited file parsable by Excel. Seriously...try asking someone who is not in the computing field about that.

</comment><comment><USER37> "Coding" isn't one thing. We wouldn't imagine that it makes sense to put a home "cook" whose idea of making a pie encompasses placing a can of premade pie filling into a premade pie shell in the same bucket as a chef with several Michelin stars under their belt. Coding has as much range and as many different roles as cooking does, if not more, but there doesn't exist a well defined set of labels enumerating such divisions of skill and specialization.

Certainly "coding" will increasingly become prevalent in more and more professions. But that says little about whether the coding equivalent of "chefs" will be more numerous or not.

</comment><comment><USER38> Programming is as much an art as a science.

It's as much the ability to find the dots as it is being able to connect the dots to make a usable picture.

I think some of the more basic, entry level, spec-based maybe development could become available for the masses, but until we do a better job of training people to engage and develop both heir creative artist and creative scientist, I'm not sure.

</comment><comment><USER39> 63% of Americans aged 18 to 24 couldn't find Iraq on a map after we'd been at war there for three years. So let's discount those people right away. The rest -- the other 37% -- have jobs and at least some kind of education. Most of them aren't interested in solving puzzles; they're interested in making money. That's what comes naturally to them.

I'm a mid-level coder. I bill $100-$150/hr. freelance. I specialize in cleaning up the messes left by the Indians and Romanians they hired the first time. I turn their disaster into a functional app, or website, on time and on budget (a budget about six times what they thought they'd be paying, but still not enough for the aggravation). It's a hellishly difficult job that makes me want to pull my hair out by the roots; but I'm good at what I do.

I DIDN'T go to college, and I never took a class in programming. And yet there are only one or two other guys in the world I'd trust to work on my code. So all of this, really, is bullshit. It's nice, but it's a lie. Either you're born with the kind of screwed up brain I have, that lets you see through the code, or you're not. They can commodify everything and turn everyone into a product, but they can't make more of us.

<comment><USER19> "63% of Americans aged 18 to 24 couldn't find Iraq on a map after we'd been at war there for three years."

This is a little off topic, but this statistic is a bit disingenuous. The stat implies that Americans are dumb because they can't locate a country on a map, despite the fact that we are heavily engaged with that country. However knowledge of foreign policy and of geography are two different domains. A person could read an article a day about the Iraq war without ever looking at a map of the mid east.

<comment><USER40> """However knowledge of foreign policy and of geography are two different domains. A person could read an article a day about the Iraq war without ever looking at a map of the mid east."""

Yeah. And I wouldn't trust the foreign policy knowledge of such a person.

A person not interested in checking out for himself the geography of the place of war, and even the culture and history of the enemies, is just an idiot being force-fed news stories.</comment></comment></comment>


Dominictarr/JSON.sh: a pipeable JSON parser written in Bash - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/dominictarr/JSON.sh/ <comment><USER2> That's a pretty cool project. But I wonder what to do with it. If I understand correctly, it transforms the JSON into a format that's easier to parse yourself.

Personally, I use jq and it has a built-in query language of some sorts.</comment>


How do you manage your 30" Monitor on a Macintosh - <AUTHOR>

The default behavior on OS X doesn't make effective use of large monitors.  New windows tend to Maximize, and those that don't, won't intelligently tile.  The default behavior of xterm on a 1998 instance of FVWM makes better use of my monitor than a 2008 instance of the Macintosh OS.
For whatever reason, expose and I just don't seem to get along - I like to have all my windows in front of me at the same time (ergo the 30" Monitor).  Another approach, multiple smaller monitors, isn't trivial to do with laptops.
I recently tripped across:
http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000928.html
Which seems to do a lot of good things on the PC - does anyone have insight into an equivalently excellent tool or procedure for the Mac? <comment><USER2> Most Mac apps seem to remember its window size when you open a new window: Safari, TextMate, Firefox, Pages etc.

So I make drag these apps into nice grids: \- a small left hand strip for Twitterific, iChat, Skype etc. this strip also pushes the next windows a bit more to the center. Helpful because the 30inch is so wide. \- Safari, Texmate, Firefox etc. is next.My default Safari width is often the width of Apple.com so no scrollbars are shown. \- leftover space is for PDF documentation and when I need 2 windows next to each other e.g. 2 Xcode windows. Plenty of space left for that.

Apps like Logic Pro, Aperture, iPhoto, iMovie, iTunes are run maximized/fullscreen.

Terminal.app is indeed ill-equipped when it comes to resizing etc. I usually build a couple of window groups that fit my needs (e.g. four-in-a-square with a wide window for logs) and open-and-close such a window group if the current layout isn't optimal.</comment>


Ask HN: How would you develop your next "big idea" if you were alone? - <AUTHOR> I have a new project idea, which obviously for me is like "the idea", but it's kind of complicated to do it for just one person (me). Also if you consider that it can take a really long time to do that it could end in frustration and nothing... Please also note that I have a 7 hour job.
My first though was to try to find someone which might be also interested (preferably no one from the company I'm working at), but since I'm pretty new in the city that I'm living, I basically don't know anyone outside the office.
The problem to find someone from some meetup group, is that I'm afraid that my idea get stolen.
Note that I would no have problems to spend some money for this project. Like paying for an external company to help me with the development. Would you do that? Do you know any company/startup which will do that, preferably located in Germany?
How can I make this idea to happen? <comment><USER2> Your idea will get stolen, _if_ it's good. Most likely, it's _not_ good and your idea won't get stolen because no one gives a fuck about you and your problems, which is a _good_ thing.

If you _are_ in the .1%, then you probably don't need to getting regurgitated advice from the rest of the 99.9% (i.e. the retards like me that use this website who have no idea what the fuck they are talking about).

How many people use this site monthly, like 100k? Maybe 10k of those people have been in real startups and maybe 1k of those people have gotten non- trivial funding. Out of those 1k, 950 are retards. Out of the 50 people who can give you great advice, they all have other things they would rather be doing, and might not even login for a few weeks.

Shut the hell up and get to work, dude.

<comment><USER3> > Shut the hell up and get to work, dude.

As simple as it gets.

Start working on it. Create something, a simple MVP, to test your idea. Then worry about the details. If you do it before you even begin with your project, you will end up with a hundred reasons not to start it at all.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Unless you are famous, no one will steal your idea. The truth is it will be very difficult to get anyone to even care about your idea. Google, E-Bay were rejected many times, no one cared. The positive side to this is you can sharpen your pitch. Once you get strong positive (honest) feedback you know your story is getting stronger.

Do not pay for $1 of development until you have done lots of validation. Have you talked to experts in the industry? How many potential customers said they'd be willing to buy? Have you spec'd out an MVP? Have you had someone who's run a successful startup review your business model?

Once your ready to hire developers, you again need to plan carefully. There are 100 ways to get burned. Also it takes skill to manage their effort and know when things are going wrong.

</comment><comment><USER5> Build a teensy tiny part of it. Then build another. And another.

<comment><USER6> Eat that elephant one bite at a time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> You have to write it yourself. Stop giving reasons why that can't be done.

</comment><comment><USER8> _" I'm afraid that my idea get stolen"_

You should find someone trustworthy and share it with them. I've had a few ideas which I think can be turned into huge companies - at first I was afraid to share, and after sharing, first with friends and family, and later with my university's startup office, I realized that no, they aren't interested in stealing your idea (the startup office actually advised the largest startup in the country, and they obviously didn't steal the idea, even though it wasn't too hard to duplicate on paper).

Obviously don't divulge it to people who can become competitors (like people here) before having executed at least a bit.

Nobody will be as enthusiastic as you. Heck, you'll have to explain your idea over and over, and shout it to the four corners of the earth once you want to start selling!

[http://cdixon.org/2009/08/22/why-you-shouldnt-keep-your- star...](http://cdixon.org/2009/08/22/why-you-shouldnt-keep-your-startup-idea- secret/)

I don't know what the startup scene is in Germany, but if you're in a large city, there are hacker spaces, coworking spaces, meetups, etc. Not knowing anyone shouldn't be a problem, it would be ideal if you can enter a hackathon and establish some rapport and work together.

Speaking from experience, you have to be willing to work hard to make it succeed - my own project is languishing because I don't put in the hours (I work 10 hours a day). But put yourself out there, and validate early. Get it in front of customers.

I hired a freelance programmer and it didn't go all that well due to different expectations of his commitment. It would be great if you can build a crude prototype yourself.

</comment><comment><USER9> for me it all starts with marketing. how are you getting the word out about it? if you can't:

1\. Build a landing page and collect names of people that are interested then it's going to be hard to market.

2\. if it's B2B, generate leads from advertising or SEO trouble.

<comment><USER10> +1 on this one. Try to find 3 customers first. Ask what they actually need and charge for solving their pain.

And on getting ideas stolen... Most people dont even enough time for their own ideas. But Feedback helps a Lot.

Which city are you living in? Any Start-Up/Meetups or Dev Meetups you could Swing by?

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm doing the same thing. Been working on it for a year now and I'm solo.

Not going to lie, it's fucking hard sometimes. It's definitely not for everyone. Some days I want to give up and some days when things come together I feel that it's all worth it. That's the life you have to be prepared for - drastic ups and downs.

Since I'm bootstrapping the company I just don't have the money to hire full- time people yet. So what I did is bring on a few advisors who can help out in exchange for equity. Mainly in the areas that I'm not very strong skill wise. If anything they are someone to talk to. It can get lonely being solo.

As far as meetups and presenting it, that's usually better after you have something. If you already have something and have traction, people are often more interested in joining you rather than competing. Before then talk to prospective customers and make sure people actually want what you have.

Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER12> hmm. on my own without much money to bootstrap with I'm just focusing on getting the mvp out. if it fails, I'll just write another app/pivot based on both feedback and empirical testing. I think that's the conventional wisdom for keeping a startup lean and not getting too invested in one big idea.

as for creating the code with less effort, I'd say either a good microframework _OR_ a more monolithic one - both have advantages and disadvantages for a small project. the advantage with a node/express backend vs meteor for example is that you can just write the API and only add the components you need googling as you go. if I only want an android app that uses VERY simple auth and a very simple db that sequelize can map, I can then have more flexibility and not have to learn as much. there is less code to maintain often, not as much autogenerated code. I can also write a native android or react native app instead of being nudged towards a cordova/phone gap solution. the con is that if you're new or especially if you haven't worked a tech job before your code can get disorganized or buggy, especially if you don't know TDD (I still want to learn). also meteor has easy deploy solutions and a lot of magic.

similar dynamic applies to sinatra vs rails, django vs flask, etc.

as for sharing ideas, this doesn't scare me at all if it's just a chat with friends or likeminded people - actually I don't worry much at all. if someone else can make it /better/ and /faster/ than me then I just picked the wrong niche, I'll just need to pick one where I'm the best next time. I think it's better if my app can succeed in a market with perfect information because then I'm specializing to the best of my ability.

I'm still learning but this is the wisdom I've got from reading about how to do this stuff on your own and trying and just doing the work. I'm curious to get feedback on my way of thinking about this as I'm sure I could improve even further

</comment><comment><USER13> If your idea isn't worth failing spectacularly for, then it's not worth doing.

</comment><comment><USER14> Break it down and let freelancers develop the building blocks which you integrate by yourself into the final solution.

</comment><comment><USER15> > I'm afraid that my idea get stolen

[https://sivers.org/multiply](https://sivers.org/multiply)</comment>


Jason Fried: Why You Can't Work at Work [video] - <AUTHOR> http://bigthink.com/ideas/18522

<comment><USER2> Video summary:

Jason Fried is one of the co-founders of the software as a service company 37 Signals and gives a good pep talk in this video that is sure to resonate with anyone that works in a typical office with more than a handful of employees in it.

He believes the modern workplace is "optimized for interruptions and interruptions are the enemy of work." Work is like sleep in that we can't immediately fall asleep and we can't immediately get work done. There is a period of ramp up time before real work starts but there are so many distractions in the office that it makes it nearly impossible to stay in the flow of doing real work.

Jason plugs a few of 37 Signals software tools such as Campfire which allow employees to work with each other and communicate in an efficient manner without interrupting each others work flow. He also gives a few good jabs at managers who make a job out of interrupting the employees rather than just letting them work.

<http://hnsummary.com/2010/03/29/why-you-cant-work-at-work/>

</comment><comment><USER3> One more thing. If your managers suck and they keep interrupting _all_ the time or at the wrong time or don't respect your time and that it is a failure when they interrupt you, then you have a sucky manager and he's probably not even going to log into campfire or whatever, he'll just ask or interrupt anyways, so I think the biggest problem with interruptions is lack of respect for interruptions and stupid managers.

</comment><comment><USER3> Ok, I agree with some of what he's saying, he says: "It can wait a day". Well, yes. In theory.

The truth of the matter is that if you're doing actual client work, you have to contact the client, then you might have to pinball things with your programmer or your designer or whatever, those things take time. If they all wait a day, and the client waits a day for you, before you know it, it's been a week. Maybe two weeks, and you don't have a clue why it took so long. This is just one example.

Of course this totally depends on what line of work you're in, but that's maybe my point. Not all companies are 37signals working on a SaaS product.

If you take a week to respond and do something for your client and your competitor does it in a day, you're going to lose.

Of course reducing interruptions is paramount for any business, but you can't get rid of them completely in most fields. You just have to control the interruptions, learn to distinguish between important and not so important stuff, keep as much communication in an asynchronous manner as possible, but when you need something asap, you need it asap.

Sorry for the long winded response.

<comment><USER4> Eliminate as many interruptions as you can, but no more than that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> One great advantage of "work": gives you a reason to SHAVE every day.

<comment><USER6> Not in my case. In fact, doctors appointments, haircuts & family gatherings etc provide my main imputes for shaving -- or when the stubble starts getting trapped in my phone :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> This was basically his Startup School talk. He definitely has many great points but I question a few. Such as, using IM as a replacement for speaking directly to a coworker within an office. How can this be more efficient? I don't see it.

<comment><USER8> I didn't watch the video, but you can ignore IMs or reply to them later, not unlike emails, but much less so when someone is talking to you face to face.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> For me, it is important to personally know my coworker. You cannot do that with chat.

If coworkers know each other, there's a degree of comfort to be much more open and honest to each other without taking offense.

<comment><USER10> _For me, it is important to personally know my coworker. You cannot do that with chat._

I disagree. My employer's development group (only six people) is split between Pittsburgh and Santa Cruz, CA. Most of my work is with one of the programmers in the California office. I have spent probably a total of three weeks with this person (over three years), but I'd argue we have a very good working relationship, and a good friendship.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I tried to rate the video five stars and it was just THROWN ASIDE and the site tried to force me to login.

Usability FAIL.

</comment><comment><USER12> The video says it will be available in 14,000 days. I will probably have forgotten by then.</comment>


Show HN - My weekend Django project (Pick the violent felon) - <AUTHOR> http://violentornot.com

<comment><USER2> Would definitely like to know the nature of the crime for each in the "correct/incorrect" view.

E.g. for this guy: <http://violentornot.com/inmate/44200/>

The data would be: [1]:MURDER 1ST DEGREE [2]:SOLICITATION [3]:DANGER/ REPETIT/ ENHANCE [http://www.azcorrections.gov/inmate_datasearch/results.aspx?...](http://www.azcorrections.gov/inmate_datasearch/results.aspx?InmateNumber=120022&SearchType=SearchInet)

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, that's coming for sure. I was focusing first on scraping if they were violent and then making sense of the data. There are a ton of other states too, and they are for the most part completely different. So linking to the docket was all that I could do in just the few days I have had a chance to work on it :P

Edit: The way it checks if it's violent or not is by checking the "Crime info" column. For the inmate you linked to he is D/R-1, or marked as dangerous. Occasionally I've seen murderers marked as ND, which means not dangerous. Not sure what that's about....

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Is this ethical? Sure, it is just taking data that is already publicly available (it looks like all of the mugshots are from Arizona's DoC) but it almost seems like mocking sideshow...

P.S. It would be spiffy if you used AJAX to preload the next set of images.

<comment><AUTHOR> Well it's less mocking and more "will a large set of votes show us people's split seconds judgements". Hopefully at least...I'd like to think we'll be able to see trends emerge based on gender, ethnicity, and appearance in general.

Currently working on the preloading...a lot of the time spent loading is keeping track of inmates you've seen and inmates you've voted for. Going to roll out a way to determine how biased you are based on your votes (if there is interest)

Quick edit: At first all of the images were pulled in with AJAX, but I wasn't sure if that would affect the performance (and Adsense to be totally honest, there's no great way to monetize something like this. Maybe an application but that's a bit of a ways off). If anyone has any experience with ads and AJAX sites I'd love to hear suggestions.

<comment><USER3> I see. It would be interesting if you could track the users' cursors and see if they "hesitate" or switch back and forth between certain pairs of mugshots!

And surely other AJAX sites use AdSense, does anybody know how they do it?

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm hoping that I can track "time spent choosing" or something to that effect. I know when I've gone through the dataset (there's about 50k inmates in there, and I'm working on more states) I have had a lot of split-second guesses. And I'm usually wrong! So, I'd love to be able to see how long people spend guessing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Sorry it's so slow though...still a novice when it comes to AWS instances :/. Definitely not using them the way they were meant to be used, or there's a rogue DB query or 5 in there.

<comment><USER3> This week, I bet you could get away with shifting the blame to Amazon!

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Wow, I went 0/4 at first and then 6/6. Lesson: I have no idea if my instincts for this sort of thing are correct.

Interesting idea.

<comment><AUTHOR> Sounds a lot like what I've done...I'm 50/50 at best. Vote streaks are just session-based unless you are logged in, but since I have enabled voting I'm at like 54.13% with about 300 votes or so. Not too impressive, even after looking at mugshots all week...

<comment><USER4> Huh, so much my theory that I was just getting warmed up with the first four . . .

<comment><AUTHOR> Hah yeah I definitely haven't warmed up yet. I think my longest streak has been 7 or 8...there's always a match-up of two scary people that just throws me for a loop.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


React Fiber is Ready - Beta Released - <AUTHOR> http://isfiberreadyyet.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> Beta release for React v16.0</comment>


Fireball over US, Wednesday, April 17th 2019 around 02:57 - <AUTHOR> https://fireballs.imo.net/members/imo_view/event/2019/1775?platform=hootsuite <comment><USER2> I saw this last night in NW Washington, DC (10:57 local time) while walking my dogs.

It was very large and very bright. For several seconds after it had disappeared, I expected a large "boom" to occur. Quite an unsettling moment.

edit: Looks like some dash cams caught it:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbXdL5YTu50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbXdL5YTu50)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szdGhRNg6h0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szdGhRNg6h0)

<comment><USER3> Being in D.C., did you expect it to be an ICBM? I would have.

<comment><USER4> Really? Out of the blue like that?

<comment><USER5> You know the bombs are coming and you have less than 30 minutes. Do you alert the public or grab your family and get to safety?

<comment><USER4> It's more a question of if you think anyone (in possession of icbms at least) would take that risk in the current state of the world? Seems unlikely. That said after I posted I was reminded of the time I woke up the sound of the air raid siren in Latvia. That was disorientating to say the least.

<comment><USER6> Countries have quite happily committed suicide. Consider the attack on the United States by Imperial Japan. Everyone in that government knew that the war they were starting was unwinnable. They were right, and their empire and government was dismantled in 1945.

You can't expect rational behavior from governments. In a time of crisis, there will always be some idiot in power, who doesn't want to face reality, or cares about their pet issue more then overall well-being, or feels that they have no alternative options.

<comment><USER7> Excellent (and terrifying) read. [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_2020_Commission_Report_o...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_2020_Commission_Report_on_the_North_Korean_Nuclear_Attacks_Against_the_United_States)

<comment><USER8> Interesting. But I doubt South Korea would attack the North, knowing perfectly well their main cities can be razed to the ground by NK's conventional, not even nuclear weapons. At the same time, I don't think North Korea would start blasting off nukes over major cities, that would be pointless. In the worst case, a single nuke over the ocean, but close enough to a target, would be a sufficient signal of readiness to defend itself. Directing nuclear bombs to major targets as a first move doesn't make much sense, you don't leave the enemy any other option than obliterating you.

Note that the incident is started by North Korea downing a civilian jet, even if by mistake, South Korea reacting, NK going berserk with nukes, US responding with conventional weapons... Hmmm, a bit kind towards the West. The US certainly come out as the level headed guys, which doesn't sound very coherent with recent rhetoric and events.

<comment><USER7> In the book, the guy with the "Nuclear football" basically runs away at one point, but yeah, I'm not seeing a non-nuclear response. Tit-for-tat is the entire basis of MAD.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> "The preliminary 3D trajectory computed based on all the reports submitted to the AMS shows that the fireball was traveling from North to South and ended its flight in the Atlantic Ocean in front of Bethany Beach, DE," the American Meteor Society said. [https://wtop.com/science/2019/04/watch-fireball-streaks- acro...](https://wtop.com/science/2019/04/watch-fireball-streaks-across-dc- area-sky/)

<comment><USER10> I live about 4 miles south of Bethany Beach on the Atlantic. I was inside, but the light lit up my house so much I thought either my house was on fire or a car was about to crash into my home.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Video: [https://imgur.com/MoKD67j](https://imgur.com/MoKD67j) from Reddit at /r/nova.

<comment><USER12> Giving a whole new meaning (er, a whole old meaning) to "nova"; took me a sec to realize that was the subreddit for Northern Virginia. :P

<comment><USER13> aren't novae stationary?

<comment><USER12> I was thinking of the original etymology of "nova", which is derived from the Latin term for "new star". Though to be insufferably pedantic, a real nova within the bounds of Earth's atmosphere would not seem particularly stationary to those unlucky enough to observe it from the ground. :)

<comment><USER14> > which is derived from the Latin term for "new star"

No, "nova" just means "new." Nova Scotia translates to New Scotland.

<comment><USER15> The Latin term it was derived from is "nova stella", meaning "new star".

<comment><USER16> Guess what "nova" means ...

<comment><USER17> A show on PBS.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> The Chelyabinsk meteor[0] came to my mind. I can not believe it happened 6 years ago already.

[0][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelyabinsk_meteor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelyabinsk_meteor)

</comment><comment><USER19> I got the site to load but it was very slow and took a second try. I happened to be standing outside in Reston, looking East and saw the whole thing. I've never seen anything like it. Extremely bright with a green tinge, moving fast like a meteor. It was visible long enough that I was able to tell people to turn around and check it out.

Definitely a little unsettling. It was bright enough some folks that hadn't seen the whole trajectory thought it might have been fireworks.

</comment><comment><USER20> A fireball flying in from the north would scare the crap out of me if I lived near DC.

<comment><USER21> I presume it's because a thing following a great circle from Russia would have the thing coming in from the north?

<comment><USER20> Right

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Is there data on point of impact or suspected origin? Is this a relatively common occurrence? Interesting, thanks for sharing.

<comment><USER23> >point of impact

Atlantic ocean off of Deleware.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Looks like this site is already experiencing the hug of death. Anyone have a mirror?

<comment><USER25> Appears to be working for me, but here're two links to the videos they have listed, for those curious:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbXdL5YTu50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbXdL5YTu50)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szdGhRNg6h0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szdGhRNg6h0)

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> If it's still intact, who owns the meteor (I assume it's a meteor)? The person on whose property it landed?

<comment><USER27> Well, certainly the country it landed in. It fell in the sea, so i guess it depends on nautical jurisdiction.

<comment><USER28> It depends on if it's public or private land.

[https://www.space.com/18009-meteorite-collectors-public- land...](https://www.space.com/18009-meteorite-collectors-public-lands- rules.html)

<comment><USER27> If it's inside US territorial waters, yes. But if it's outside...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Is it just me or do those events occure more often than say, 3-5 years ago? I understand we observe more, record and report more, but there should not be a significant difference from 5 years ago, right? I used to read about them and it was one-off wow event, now I read about it and feels like everyday news...

<comment><USER30> There's been a huge proliferation of cameras in the last 10 years and more recently as dashcams have come into increasing prevalence as camera costs come down more and more.

<comment><USER31> If you don't own a dashcam (or 7) now is the time to get one. It can massively help you (if you are a safe (read: slow) driver). /PSA

<comment><USER32> Which one would you suggest?

<comment><USER30> There's a thousand different reviews available but I've been a fan of Wirecutter for almost anything they've taken the time to review and I've had pretty good results so far.

[https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-dash- cam/](https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-dash-cam/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> another dashcam from here: [https://twitter.com/stevechazin/status/1118354864214614016](https://twitter.com/stevechazin/status/1118354864214614016)

<comment><USER34> Last time I checked <video> worked fine without javascript >>

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Site down. What's the gist?

<comment><USER36> Rock fell, no one died.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> It was simply ULA trying to land one of their boosters like SpaceX does.

</comment><comment><USER38> Cool site. It adds legitimacy to sightings, I like that.

</comment><comment><USER39> Tis a shame I started to go to bed earlier during the weekdays recently. Otherwise I may have been able to see this outside my apartment window.

Personal grumpiness aside though, I'm relieved that it didn't end up making landfall considering how close it was to some pretty major cities. I wonder if there's any hope for recovery of the meteorite itself since it appears to have fallen in the bay/ocean. Is it possible that it's close enough to land that they could find even a few parts of it?

Either way, I'm hoping more footage of the entry event starts coming in. Preferrably with audible reactions.

<comment><USER40> It would be neat to find, but--who is going to go scouring the seafloor off the coast of Delaware for a not-very-large magnetic rock?

<comment><USER41> Depends on whether the DoD believes it was a rock. Delaware is pretty close to D.C.

<comment><USER42> We have other ways to determine the nature of a falling object. Much can be assertained from its trajectory, deceleration, and luminance. It's trivial to determine that this was not a reentry vehicle.

<comment><USER21> Exactly. If that was a vehicle/projectile, even watching the dashcam videos of it, it's quite obvious that parts of it underwent rapid, unplanned desintegration. So it likely would't have done anything significant if it was (it was not.)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>