Why I retracted my Nature paper: correcting the scientific record - <AUTHOR> http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2013/06/19/why-i-retracted-my-nature-paper-a-guest-post-from-david-vaux-about-correcting-the-scientific-record/ <comment><USER2> There are many well documented cases showing that both Nature and Science are particularly susceptible to these types of shenanigans. I don't know if this is unique to them because of their particular competitive spirit, or if distaste in examination extends to most journals and it's just that Nature and Science see far more scrutiny than other journals.

These high profile journals serve the purpose of publicizing discoveries that are thought to have far-reaching interest in science. However, at the same time, they have the strictest limitations on publications, meaning that the methods section, the foundation of science, are rarely described in any detail. So they have some of the worst practices for publication while supposedly chronicling the most important discoveries.

So while Nature/Science papers make the news and make people's careers, it's important to downweight the certainty of the finding until there is independent verification.

<comment><USER3> From the horse's mouth: only 6 out of 53 "landmark" oncology studies were significantly reproducible [1]. Bayer did a similar study, found that they couldn't reproduce the results of about 2/3s of the papers they tried to use for drug discovery R&D [2].

This is a near universal consequence of academia's incentives and extends into many of the sciences (although biology is most susceptible due to its complexity).

[1] [http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v483/n7391/full/483531a...](http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v483/n7391/full/483531a.html)

[2] [http://www.nature.com/nrd/journal/v10/n9/full/nrd3439-c1.htm...](http://www.nature.com/nrd/journal/v10/n9/full/nrd3439-c1.html)

<comment><USER4> >This is a near universal consequence of academia's incentives and extends into many of the sciences (although biology is most susceptible due to its complexity).

It is not simply a matter of incentives (although they play a part). Another issue is pure publication bias. If you get 'landmark' results, a paper is much more likely to publish then if you got the results everyone would expect. In many ways this is one of the necessary functions of the journals, as it allows people to look at the new stuff without sifting through many articles of expected stuff, but it does create a bias.

Add to that the incentives of needing to get published, and constrained resources, and a willingness to publish what could be sub-par methodologys (of course they are par), and it is clearly not the best system.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Science publishing is a classical case of the Market for Lemons [1]. The authors are like used car salesman in that they know so much more about the results in their paper than their readers and referees. Even if just a minority of authors abuses this, the value of publishing a paper plummets and honest authors don't bother any longer with the whole process. The well has been poisoned.

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons)

</comment><comment><USER6> What I find the most surprising in this story, without having to take sides about the merits of any of the discussed papers, is that the initial refutation of the work of Bellgrau et al. was reviewed by Bellgrau et al.

If this fact is true, then there is a clear conflict of interest: Bellgrau et al. should have declared it and declined to review, or, barring this, the editors should have noticed it and ignored the review.

<comment><USER7> If a paper is being contradicted by another, it's quite common to send a copy for review to the original authors. Who better to look for holes in a new paper than someone who's expert in the field _and_ about to have a big problem on their hands?

The editors are the ones who make the go/no-go decision. In my field, I've seen papers that are faulty and have been rejected by experts be accepted by major journals. There's a lot that goes into the go/no-go decision by an editor; I don't envy that job.

If the article is correct, then the editors at Nature may have made the wrong decision. Most of us are sufficiently un-expert in the field to make any conclusion.

<comment><USER8> I believe in this case, where two outside reviewers recommended acceptance and the original authors recommended rejection, that the appropriate action for the editors was to get the two outsider reviewer's opinion on the original author's report. Even better, a third outside reviewer should be contacted to assess the original author's report.

<comment><USER7> I'd even call for greater numbers of referees. There are big practical problems with doing so, but the uncertainty associated with the traditional two or three referees is >50% ( sqrt(3)/3 ). An ensemble of 7-8 referees may produce a more reliable result.

<comment><USER8> Refereeing is already a huge time sink. I don't believe doubling the referee burden is a possibility without a major incentive changes.

<comment><USER7> Agreed completely. Doing it right takes a lot of time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> For those who are not familiar with the topic: retracting a news and views was like giving the journal a (quite deserved) middle finger.

</comment><comment><USER10> Fascinating issue and the rest of the Retraction Watch website is eye opening!

I rarely read academic journals anymore but I had always assumed the top journals did a good job of filtering out bad papers and quickly retracting those that were later disproven. Like every human activity it is not so simple.

[http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/](http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/)

Edit: Warning this is blog addictive - I just spent a solid hour reading. It's kinda science gossip but still important.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Now that we have online publishing, and all scientists around the world appear to have email and Web access, we can do much better. Jelte Wicherts is a young professor of psychology who would like to clean up peer review and scientific publication practices in that discipline and other disciplines. In Frontiers of Computational Neuroscience (an open-access journal) he and his co-authors give a set of general suggestions

Jelte M. Wicherts, Rogier A. Kievit, Marjan Bakker and Denny Borsboom. Letting the daylight in: reviewing the reviewers and other ways to maximize transparency in science. Front. Comput. Neurosci., 03 April 2012 doi: 10.3389/fncom.2012.00020

[http://www.frontiersin.org/Computational_Neuroscience/10.338...](http://www.frontiersin.org/Computational_Neuroscience/10.3389/fncom.2012.00020/full)

on how to make the peer-review process in scientific publishing more reliable.

"With the emergence of online publishing, opportunities to maximize transparency of scientific research have grown considerably. However, these possibilities are still only marginally used. We argue for the implementation of (1) peer-reviewed peer review, (2) transparent editorial hierarchies, and (3) online data publication. First, peer-reviewed peer review entails a community-wide review system in which reviews are published online and rated by peers. This ensures accountability of reviewers, thereby increasing academic quality of reviews. Second, reviewers who write many highly regarded reviews may move to higher editorial positions. Third, online publication of data ensures the possibility of independent verification of inferential claims in published papers. This counters statistical errors and overly positive reporting of statistical results. We illustrate the benefits of these strategies by discussing an example in which the classical publication system has gone awry, namely controversial IQ research. We argue that this case would have likely been avoided using more transparent publication practices. We argue that the proposed system leads to better reviews, meritocratic editorial hierarchies, and a higher degree of replicability of statistical analyses."

The practices recommended in Wicherts's article would have made an incident like the earlier retraction from Nature reported here much less likely to be necessary in the first place.

</comment><comment><USER11> Absolutely shameful. Nature editors should step down and issue a public apology immediately.

<comment><USER12> I'd tend to agree if we had some 3rd party verification of the inability to reproduce the results of the initial study. Right now it's somebody vs somebody else.

<comment><USER13> The article mentions several independent failures to reproduce.

<comment><USER14> Further, "We think it's reproducible" is an absurd defense. If it's reproducible, point to a reproduction. If it hasn't been reproduced, you don't have any clue if it's reproducible.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Did I read correctly, that the authors of the original paper were allowed to review the rebuttal article, and even worse, their single negative review caused the paper to not be published?

Isn't there some concept of recusal, conflict of interest in allowing a researcher whose results are being challenged to review the challenge, and veto its acceptance? That's absurd on its face.

</comment><comment><USER16> Like virtually every other collection of people, the biomedical sciences have their own drama and politics.

It is unfortunate that these occasionally impede the progress of science, and downstream, the eventual treatment of patients. Even so, much good work is done and will continue to be done into the future, despite politics.

</comment><comment><USER17> These journals like to say they need the exclusivity, prestige and money to support their editorial process. Yet, given the exclusivity, money and prestige, they apparently don't do a great job.

On the other hand, is there a clear alternative? Is there a way to organize the review process such that the power of the editor is reduced, yet the quality is maintained? I'm not sure.

It seems like this would require non-anonymous open review and a some kind of rating/comment system for papers. It's possible that what ends up happening is that it creates more work for the reader in the same way that it takes effort to tease out a products true worth on Amazon. That might not be a bad thing at all.

<comment><USER18> The alternative is open post-publication peer review: any scientist that reads a paper in her/his field of expertise may act as a reviewer and publish a rating or review of that paper.

The end result does not create more work for the reader, as something like the average of ratings received by a paper gives in many cases more information than just the name of the journal where it has been published. For example, this Nature paper currently has a rating of 2% on Epistemio, although it has been published in the prestigious Nature: [http://www.epistemio.com/p/Jr3gS9VW](http://www.epistemio.com/p/Jr3gS9VW) .

The journal name is a too weak information as compared to individual ratings of papers, as the distribution of the quality of papers from a given journal is very skewed.

See also the papers in [http://www.frontiersin.org/Computational_Neuroscience/resear...](http://www.frontiersin.org/Computational_Neuroscience/researchtopics/Beyond_open_access_visions_for/137)

<comment><USER8> This will never happen without some incentive for scientist to review papers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> While it is dramatic, these kinds of issues are often used by people who want to deny any scientific subject. They can claim that all research is worthless.

<comment><USER20> Doesn't that make it even _more_ important that research journals should be transparent and follow their own policies? If top journals were willing to admit mistakes promptly it would be much harder to claim that valid alternative views are being suppressed for political (or other) reasons.

<comment><USER19> Yes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> > it showed that expression of CD95L on Sertoli cells in allogeneic mismatched > testes tissue transplanted under the kidney capsule was able to induce > apoptosis of invading cytotoxic T cells

I imagine the way reading this made me feel is similar to how an average person feels reading about complex computer science issues.

<comment><USER22> Basically it's just saying that if you take a particular genetic sequence and introduce it into foreign cells, you can put them into a body where you'd expect an immune response (t cells), but in fact you actually see those cells die instead (apoptosis).

It's too bad it didn't turn out to be true as it would have been an incredible advancement in transplantation.</comment></comment>


What do you think of my new blog theme? - <AUTHOR> http://blog.jenius.me/

<comment><USER2> I like it overall. I thought that the icons on the left hand side were clickable and it would filter by that type but no. Personally I like categories and tags, so more of that please.</comment>


California Professor Leads a Methamphetamine Ring, the Police Say - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/03/us/03professor.html?src=me&ref=general

<comment><USER2> Life imitating Art? Isn't this pretty close to the basic plot device that is "Breaking Bad?" You just have to wonder if one is influencing the other...

<comment><USER3> We're only missing a reason to empathize with the anti-hero, unless maybe this guy has cancer too.</comment></comment>


Google Wallet for digital goods Retirement - <AUTHOR> https://support.google.com/wallet/business/answer/6107573

<comment><AUTHOR> I'd be curious to know what prompted this retirement. Having moved from Google Checkout to Google Wallet, it's more than a little frustratingt. The Wallet customer experience was pretty good and the integration process was fairly simple. It's a shame to lose this and lose yet more faith in Google to keep their services alive.

<comment><USER3> They're only shutting down payment for digital goods, so I'm guessing it has something to do with fraud and risk.

<comment><USER4> Payment for digital goods is the only payment that's left from the Checkout shutdown (other than Android).

<comment><USER5> Instant Buy is for non-digital goods.

<comment><USER4> Instant Buy doesn't actually process payments, it gives you a virtual card and then you need to use your own credit card processor.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Does anyone know of any replacements?

I get zero chargebacks via Google and struggle to find anything that's comparable?

I've got the usual horror story behind PayPal (that cost a lot) and Stripe does not have adequate anti-fraud.

At the moment Amazon Payments seems to be a worthwhile competitor (they guarantee no chargebacks related to fraud) however their service is much harder to integrate. Although plenty of humans in the mix which is a very nice touch.

As a merchant, this is why Bitcoin is so valuable.

<comment><AUTHOR> Google was handy because their policies weren't overly restrictive - <USER2> this is what sunk the digital goods api... Stripe is wonderfully easy to set up but doesn't allow integration for certain types of app e.g. telecoms (I understand that this is because of retrictions banks have placed on them).

Trustworthy Bitcoin payment processors are tricky to find. The stripe approach to this does give the lowest amount of customer friction imo (i.e. options to convert usd to btc on the spot) but the market restrictions and the beta status make it a non starter for now.</comment></comment>


Transportation Department Looks To Regulate Navigation Apps - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2014/06/16/transportation-department-looks-to-regulate-navigation-apps/

<comment><USER2> Could someone read through the website/bill [1] and verify this story even comes close to accurately portraying the bill?

As far as I could find, the text of the bill doesn't even mention the issue of navigation apps. Nor does the website. At the very, very most it mentions egnaging with state governments about driver safety issues. Which might possibly maybe include talking with people this issue, and definitely is not "regulation".

The NYT article mentions the agency has released general guidelines. That's a hell of a long way from "regulation", though... and it's completely unrelated to the bill or any legislative action afaict.

As far as I can tell this article -- at best -- massively hugely ridiculously sensationalizes.

[1] [http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/DOT_surface_reau...](http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/DOT_surface_reau..).

</comment><comment><USER3> I really wish there was a way to plug my iPhone into my car screen (2007 Prius) in a way that I could leverage Google Maps or Apple Maps on the primary screen instead of the phone screen. The GPS in this car is convoluted and broken, the Garmin I have is outdated and slow and the maps on iPhone both Apple and Google Maps are substantially more powerful and accurate.

We really need some new technology where we can plug in the power of our smartphones into the car with a larger screen without having to use the clunky interfaces the auto manufacturer or aftermarket systems give you, or rely on holding or mounting the device itself..

</comment><comment><USER4> If they mandate that handheld navigation apps freeze out certain controls when the device is in motion (as in a car, boat, etc.) in an attempt to make things "safer" it will destroy the usefulness of any device.

Not everyone operating a hand-held device is the driver of the vehicle and forcing you to come to a full-stop in order to input an address is already the main reason why I'll never pay for a vehicle's built-in navigation system ever again.

<comment><USER5> And with today's phones you can usually just say the address to the phone.

<comment><USER4> I don't have a phone smart enough to do this, and my experience with voice- inputs for most things usually forces you to pull over and type it in by hand anyway after several minutes of screaming.

<comment><USER5> Google now is surprisingly good at this. Just the other day I needed directions to Costco in an area I didn't know and using only feel I was able to get it just to the point of meeting one more interactionbefore he would give me directions. In fact I used the voice recognition on my phone to type this entire comment without edit.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> One way to help the government establish tight controls over what kinds of programs you can run on any of your computers is to implement a single point of control and a single point of failure for the internet through ISP's. That way any programs anywhere that don't follow the agency's lead have to do their work without internet connectivity, or proportionally throttled speeds.

Then when these devices come closer and closer to who we are and what we think, the government will have the proverbial "internet delete button" for ideas and programs that should not be running through human minds or their devices.

The government wants backdoor and root access into the computer in everyone's pocket. This is for the best because the government is deeply concerned about the health and wellness of every single citizen.

How about we turn it around, and give the people guaranteed rights and root access into all of the smartphones of the senators, politicians, and lobbyists doing secret deals and bribes so that the civilization can help reign in rampant corruption that is destroying this country? I get a feeling this alternative "society wellness program" would get quietly blocked. Since when did the government become responsible for health and wellness? I thought government was only responsible for a few things that the free market could not do for themselves?

Whack-a-mole legislation on the internet isn't working, people just route around the damaged parts, what we need is a centralized government internet white list. A constantly updated list of things anyone can do, or any particular person can do, rather than a list of things that are illegal.</comment>


Why Does Talking About Creepers And Harassment Make People So Angry? - <AUTHOR> http://www.popehat.com/2013/07/01/why-does-talking-about-creepers-and-harassment-make-people-so-angry/ <comment><USER2> "creepy" is just a code word for "unattractive" or "awkward"

i've been called hot, sexy, and creepy in the same hour span on a night out.

speaking up in the conversation at the wrong time, or just having the wrong look on your face can be "creepy". staring off into space while thinking about code? watch out, you could be creeping someone out. overhear something and decide to but in with a "hey i think i know what you're talking about..." \- watch out. potential creeper.

it is a word that is rapidly losing meaning due to massive overuse. i'm guessing a lot of people have been called 'creepy' before without knowing _why_ (the accuser NEVER, EVER will tell you why, as it's usually a "feeling" and not a "fact") and that's why the accused are getting upset.

<comment><USER3> _" creepy" is just a code word for "unattractive" or "awkward"_

No, it's not — at least not necessarily, which seems to be your implication.

One can be awkward and not be a creeper. One can be unattractive and not be a creeper. One can be a creeper and be neither awkward nor unattractive. And, yes, one can be all three.

The difference between them tends, in my (male, second-hand) experience, to be one of persistence. Awkward doesn't always stick around long past the point where it's no longer welcome. Creepers, awkward or not — and unintentionally or not — do.

EDIT: phrasing.

<comment><USER4> Actually, I'd argue that over the age of 25 or so, one _can 't_ be awkward and not be a creeper. If you're still oversexualizing every interaction with women like some 14-year-old, as evidenced by awkwardness, there is something deeply wrong.

So the theory goes, ay any rate.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Because it is an attack on gender. Creepers and harassment are exceedingly rarely discussed in gender neutral ways- it is usually a man doing something to a woman, or sometimes a discussion of the reverse. It is not often both in a neutral way.

Additionally, the behaviour are things that a lot of people still do. Whereas with racism, to use the author's example, might draw the same ire (and it does in certain cases) as it divides people- there is mostly a generally accepted line that we know is publicly agreed on. But with harassment, until men are not so testosterone filled to constantly chase women, there will always be an element of their behaviour that women are going to find "creepy" at some point.

As such, in every post you are condemning behaviour that around 50% of the population will have done at some point. You're asking more than half of your readers to carefully evaluate the proposition and say "I see that my behaviour sometimes can have adverse affects. This doesn't necessarily make me a bad person but we should all actually think about how this affects other people more often, because this is a bad thing". Whereas a good number of people are simply going to see an attack on them, and reply in kind.

Note that talking about racism does make people very angry when you do the same thing- if you're talking about something that is murky and not clearly one way or another- say using a term that some people find offensive but many do not- then you're going to get exactly the same angry responses because now a good % of your readers are feeling targeted.

<comment><USER6> I'd also like to add that the word "creeper" should be kept out of these discussions. It seems obvious that sexism is very common in United States computer culture. But the word "creepy", when used to describe an undesirable man, is every bit as derogatory as "fattie" or "slut" when applied to a woman. It's the kind of word that is used for character assasination.

As you say, it doesn't go well when you imply that every man in a large group is supporting sexist behavior. The proper way to handle this issue is to just be direct when someone is behaving inappropriately and not use ambiguous language:

"Don't touch girls who obviously don't want it - that is _sexual harassment_. Not cool."

"Stop treating this woman like a sex object in a social setting - it is inappropriate."

"Don't stare, it makes people uncomfortable."

One final thought which I haven't heard from anyone else: I think one thing that can make a lot of nerd guys angry when it comes to this kind of behavior, is that many less-than-socially-masterful guys observe that women may respond very negatively to behavior that other men get away with. How sexual harassment is handled by women is very dependent on the situation and instigating person. The exact same behavior which would be met with disgust and derision at a tech conference, could be considered flirtatious and hot if it came in the right tone of voice from a hot guy at a nightclub.

This is obviously no excuse for acting like an asshole in the tech community. But I think a lot of people severely underestimate the role that status, attractiveness and social skill has when it comes to these questions. The tech scene is not the only social environment where sexism and misogny occurs, but it is certainly the one with the highest concentration of men that can safely be shamed for it.

<comment><USER7> >The proper way to handle this issue is to just be direct when someone is behaving inappropriately and not use ambiguous language

It is not the responsibility of women to educate when they feel uncomfortable or fear for their safety.

<comment><USER8> Responsibility is the wrong word here. If women want certain behaviors to stop, it is logical for them to explain _exactly_ what they don't like. Expecting already awkward men to read minds is self-defeating.

<comment><USER7> It is not logical for a woman (or anyone really) to remain in a situation that makes her uncomfortable and especially not logical to remain in a situation where she fears for her safety. Responsibility was the correct word--the onus on creepers to stop being creepers, not the women who are being creeped on or harassed to explain why that behavior is inappropriate.

Also, awkward isn't synonymous with creepy. See rosser's reply elsewhere in this thread for a better explanation of creepy: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5975094](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5975094)

<comment><USER8> Of course there are many situations where simply removing yourself isn't the end of the story--coworkers, friends of friends, etc. One should be encouraged to speak up in situations where they are made to feel uncomfortable, especially considering that "creepy" itself is a subjective experience. But its not that they have a responsibility to, it's simply an effective way to communicate your wishes to another person. Expecting someone who is being creepy to just know that they're being creepy seems almost oxymoronic.

<comment><USER7> Women/people certainly CAN choose to educate. Your presumption that she SHOULD or, rather, "The proper way to handle this issue is..." is what I took issue with. There is no "proper way to handle this issue" except the way that makes the violated feel safer. If that means she moves away from the perpetrator, then that is proper way. If it means opening a dialogue about improper behavior, then that is the proper way too. Ultimately, it comes down to the woman/person in question.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I think at least part of the problem stems from society's expectations of the "role" of men in relationships. Right or wrong, men are still largely expected to be pursuers but the rules are not well defined - often different women will have different ideas of what is appropriate which makes the whole thing clear as mud.

One approach is to avoid it all completely, to act as if everybody within a professional context is completely asexual. I think that approach really only works for robots and people who have zero social interaction with other people at work. It's unrealistic, so back to square one with the ambiguity of being human around other humans.

We end up with a cognitive dissonance born of competing and vaguely defined requirements and expectations. That's a recipe for frustration in any context - add the emotional and hormonal aspects and its going to be really stressful for a lot of guys - and that stress is going to come out in unpleasant ways.

</comment><comment><USER10> The reason it makes people angry is that "creeper" has become the male equivalent of slut shaming. I was thinking long and hard about this and it suddenly hit me.

1) It entirely a judgement in the head of the person making the claim. There are no objective agreed upon standards for it, so there is no way to refute the claim. When someone calls another person a slut, they are using their own standards of sexuality, something about which there is no universal standard, and judging the person against that standard. Because the standard is the accuser's own there is no way to claim that they are objectively wrong.

2) Because of the above, it is entirely context dependent. As others have brought up, this means that the exact same behaviour from two different people can be called "creepy" in one instance, and desirable the next. Examine the difference in reactions between a person who does not fit the idealized marketing body type making themselves sexually avalable and a person considered "hot". I have seen women called slutty for the same behaviour that was proclaimed as "awesome" all because they were seen as less conventionally attractive than the other woman.

3) It immediately associates that person with a negative societal perception and group. Because of this both words have incredible power, although much good work has been done to dull the impact of slut but it is still damaging.

Due to all of the above, calling someone a creeper is an incredibly powerful way to immediately disempower that person, place them on the defensive, and quickly impact them in a negative fashion. We recognize that a combination of the above three points makes the word slut an incredibly negative word that should really never be used, and I'm sure we'll get there with creeper/creepy. But if you want to know why it makes people angry, well just remember that question the next time you get worked up over someone casually dropping a "slut" bomb on someone else.

</comment><comment><USER11> I think it's because the group in question -- nerds, essentially -- are among the least sexually successful population of males. And, generalizing here, that's because in various ways, they typically don't understand other people in a relatable way. So, owing to not being able to understand women, they get rejected and they can't understand why -- it feels like a black box. This feels unfair, and creates a sense of victimization.

So to tell people who are (maybe understandably) bitter and resentful, who are feeling like rejects and victims, that their behavior is the problem -- well, that just feels spiteful and insulting. From the perspective of the nerds, women are arbitrary and cruel, so fuck them and what they think of us. Further, now that women are becoming integrated into parts of nerd culture, this feels like an encroachment into the territory which was previously able to provide a haven/escape from female rejection.

This, at least, is what my experience has been in talking with others. I don't think I personally ever felt this way, but I also have never identified strongly as a nerd either. I'm definitely generalizing heavily.

</comment><comment><USER12> This entire essay is about how other people perceive a certain thing in a more extreme matter than would be warranted by logic, but the author makes the mistake of using the same extremities in his essay, thus nullifying his own argument. (Did that make sense? If not, it basically means: he is saying "there are a lot of nutters who are angrily responding to discussions about creepers and harrassment", but he doesn't really define what a nutter is, and by calling them a random pejorative term since they are disagreeing with him, he is making a similarly extreme statement.)

Let us examine some of his statements to illustrate what I'm talking about:

"What I'm doing is questioning the disproportionate and, to be blunt, disturbed anger that arises over this particular subject." ← What do you mean by disproportionate? Disproportionate compared to what? Plus, 'disturbed anger' s kind of a tautology, people are usually disturbed when they are angry. I have a hard time visualising 'undisturbed anger'.

I'm questioning why the — pardon me — hysterical terms like "lynch mob" are so quickly brought to bear when this is the subject. ← _Hysterical_ itself is an extreme term. Why is he using it without clearly illustrating what he means? Maybe some of the people who are angrily commenting have suffered through accusations of sexism that they felt were completely unwarranted. Or they could have psychological problems. We don't really know.

"I'm questioning why on some issues — say, race — incoherent basement-stinking fury is relegated to places like Stormfront, but when it comes to sex it's alarmingly close to the mainstream." ← Alternately, it might just you who thinks that the largely mainstream thought is _basement-stinking_ , another unnecessarily pejorative term, probably relating to the basement-dwelling unwashed nerd stereotype

"I'm asking why is it that if I write about racism, truly nutty and racist response are fairly rare, but if I talk about sexual harassment or sexism, I can count on being classified as a "white knight" or "mangina" or "pink shirt" or homosexual or something." ← Well, but you are similarly accusing those who disagree with your views as having "basement-stinking" fury, right?

In general, I this article provides little logical meat to chew on and more of the same extreme-termed language that it claims to be against.

(H'm, not sure why I was downvoted on this. Can the downvoter comment?)

<comment><USER13> It's not the language that makes people nutters. They might have downvoted you for discounting the entire article for something that doesn't matter.

Have you never seen the reactions the article is talking about?

<comment><USER12> I have seen a wide variety of reactions from people to this issue. They range from law-oriented, logic-oriented, or biologically-based viewpoints to exasperated "Damn, it, it was just an invitation to coffee!" types to completely illogical and counterproductive things like threats of violence.

My point is that the author here doesn't really say which of these he doesn't "get", but just blanket calls people who disagree with his viewpoint "nutters", and talks about "basement-stinking" reactions, and then claims that they are very common and says he doesn't get why. So he/she is really vague about the issue, and does not give any concrete data or opinions in the discourse relating to it.

EDIT: Another example, the last sentence of the article: "are these freaks going to keep jumping up and down on my lawn?" ← Do you think this is a measured, logical response by a person who is talking about responses to accusations of sexism etc. at tech conferences?

<comment><USER13> It's not that people that disagree are as a class nutters.

It's that nutters are disproportionately attracted to certain types of posts.

And yes it is a measured response, there are almost always a lot of annoying nonsensical shouters whenever the topic comes up.

<comment><USER12> "It's that nutters are disproportionately attracted to certain types of posts.

And yes it is a measured response, there are almost always a lot of annoying nonsensical shouters whenever the topic comes up"

This is what I disagree with. I don't think posts on sexism attract significantly more "nonsensical shouters" than posts on, say immigration, or abortion or any other topic. I don't have direct data on this, but neither does the article, which is why I'm questioning its propositions.

<comment><USER13> Immigration and abortion also attract a lot of nutters. You realize you picked some of the most emotionally charged and stagnated arguments in the world, right?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I think it's because the men in the ensuing backlash put themselves in the place of the creeper and empathize with a feeling of persecution or believe the behavior to be misinterpreted by the author/experiencer. Most men won't feel intimidated or fear for their safety just by the unwanted presence of a woman, so it may be difficult for some to empathize with the opposite of this experience. Add on to this that, as humans, we judge others for their actions, but ourselves for our intent. Many men are not going to physically hurt women, and commenters that empathize with the creeper come to assessment that since they wouldn't hurt her, then she must have been over-reacting. (This fails to take into account that the woman in the situation doesn't at all know what the man she is intimidated by is going to do or what kind of harm he could cause her.) Add the stereotype of the regular nerd culture participant as being socially awkward and thus unaware of many rules regarding social interaction, and it's easy to paint a caricature of an unaware fool who was just misunderstood and is now being bullied for his awkwardness.

"Most men fear getting laughed at or humiliated by a romantic prospect while most women fear rape and death." -Gavin de Becker

</comment><comment><USER14> Is the author of the original post as dense as he professes to be in his total inability to understand the angry responses to the discussions of "creeper?" I have a hard time believing that, so I conclude he is writing in a mode of rhetorical trolling in service of making his point.

either case, his obtuseness as to why labeling people as creepers might cause anger is dismaying, particularly coming from a high status make with a privileged background. (Harvard Law and ask that).

Of the many problems with his essay, probably the simplest to point out is the snide callousness of defining people as "creepers" who allegedly engage in "creepy" behavior.

As an anecdotal observation, when I hear female acquaintances use the term creep/creeper it almost always refers to unwelcome sexual advances by lower status males.

I have not heard the term used much to describe the more harrowing examples of sexual harassment outlined in helpful internet posts describing just what "creeping" is. Or if the term is used, there is clarifying language ("asshole, jerk") to make the distinction that it was a more serious situation.

</comment><comment><USER15> I wonder if it might just have to do with the fact that the people most inclined to comment on an article are the people that disagree with the premise most strongly. That goes with /any/ subject, not just this one. People that agree usually just hit "like" or move on. So if you're only paying attention to the direct comments, you're going to get a skewed view of things.

I neither agree or disagree with his premise, but I don't know that you can take the responses to his articles to represent some "trend", because you're basically filtering for a certain thing (disagreement) when you write on controversial subjects and just read the comments.

I guess I just read that article as: "I presented a strong opinion to the entire world AND PEOPLE DARED TO DISAGREE WITH ME?! WHO ARE THESE MONSTERS?!". Well I mean, you presented it to the entire world, what did you expect, 100% agreement? It doesn't necessarily mean anything though.

</comment><comment><USER16> If I am thinking of the same situations as the author, it goes something like this:

Person X experiences a completely mundane situation (a respectful but unwanted sexual advance in an elevator, overhearing a PG-13 discussion at a conference) and writes a blog post about it.

The initial response is an equal mix of "Hurray for you, Person X! You are the bravest person on Earth!" and "Wait, this is a completely ordinary and inoffensive situation."

Later, the person making the advance or having the conversation are fired from their jobs or questioned by the police, and the "wait, this is not a big deal" group of people become very upset.

</comment><comment><USER17> > Why Does Talking About Creepers And Harassment Make People So Angry?

Because it is usually followed by demands and hate. "I am woman, you are sexist because you are a man, now gimme your money".

<comment><USER18> Why wouldn't the same happen when we talk about other forms of prejudice, e.g., racism?

<comment><USER5> It does, if what you're discussing is outside the realm of something that is clearly racist. If it's open for discussion, people get angry very quickly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Human nature is often shitty and here's the status ranking that tends to emerge, except in mature/stable monogamous couplings:

        High-status men > High-status women >>> Low-status women >>> Low-status men

Few people will put it that nakedly, but let's get it out there. I'm not defending this. I hate that it's that way. It's unfair to women (who have a ceiling placed above them) and unfair to low-status men (who are treated as garbage, criminals, effluent).

This rank-order exists because humans are not naturally monogamous. High- status men can have more reproductive yield than any woman (200+ children, easily) so there is more incentive to compete and, in pre-monogamous times, it was aggressive men who took the most risks and ended up on top (or dead). Low- status women outrank low-status men because they still have wombs (a scarce resource) while low-status men only have unwanted genetic material (and are a risk of upset to the high-status people).

Most "creepers" or "sketchy guys" are socially awkward, low-status men who get scapegoated for the horrible things done by a small minority of (high- and low-status) terrible men. Most are not guilty of anything other than being socially unwanted.

Society is so bad at finding and punishing the actual male criminals (who are still out there) that the hammer tends to fall on the socially awkward instead... because they're not quick enough to get out of the way when it's falling.

There's a perfect storm for flamewarring on these issues because both genders have a genuine injustice to get angry about. For women, it's the fact that most societies still are pretty horrible to them, that they are forced to compete in a career game that favors sociopathy (more commonly male), and that a small minority of very bad men still commits disgusting crimes (and sometimes gets away with them, especially when it's high-status men involved; see: Stuebensville). For men, it's the hypocritical nastiness (hypocritical because the most common offenders when it comes to, for example, rape are usually the entitled, arrogant high-status men) directed at low-status men. Note also that almost all men (probably 75%) will have low status at some point in their lives (especially risky times are the freshman year of college and the first 2-4 years in the work world).

<comment><USER6> Well formulated.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> For the same reason that people lose their _damn minds_ when the word "privilege" comes out. They don't understand the issue, they don't understand what it's like to be on the other end of it. "She should take it as a compliment", etc. It's a defense mechanism for those that realize they might be creepers.

</comment><comment><USER21> Anytime someone uses the word "Creeper" it quickly identifies the person as a Millenial. It sounds passive-aggressive.

The word is "Stalker" kids. A creeper is someone who creeps around at night.

<comment><USER22> So, the term for someone who behaves in a socially inappropriate and over- reaching way, but isn't literally stalking anyone is.... ?

<comment><USER21> It's called stalking.

<comment><USER22> No. Stalking is a specific thing (for one, it has a specific subject) that is not what we're talking about here (generic behavior, amongst other differences). [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalking](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalking)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> whaat. where the creep pride

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLPZmPaHme0](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLPZmPaHme0)</comment>


Ask HN: Which directions would you recommend to research? - <AUTHOR>

Hello,
I have recently started doing a PhD in Information Systems. My general research subjects are User Modeling/Information Filtering/Recommendation Systems. I will also try to look at those subjects from a mobile point of view.
Which "burning" topics/problems do you know that exists in this field? Which issues/directions would you recommend focusing on?
Thanks,
Liu <comment><USER2> Filter Bubbles? [http://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_bu...](http://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_bubbles.html)

Feels a bit like over-fitting, getting stuck in a local maxima type of problem.

Take music. Why is it that people get stuck? I'm stuck. I feel it. 90's metal is all I listen to willingly (current British pop hitting my ears is GF's fault). There are "generations" of music and people just stop liking new songs. They feel unfamiliar.

Apply the same to a world view(news, politics) or anything really. How do we make recommendation systems that allow users to grow their tastes?</comment>


Ask HN: What is your dream job search site like? - <AUTHOR> For developers what would you want in a job search site that would make you actually use it? What would you want to be able to search and filter on? If you were specifically looking for lead developer roles and up what would make it different? <comment><USER2> A job search that actually understands that Software Engineer, Programmer, Coder, Developer are all related and should show me those jobs (after the exact matches). It is infuriating trying to figure out what a company's internal job titles are.

Put the company boiler plate (We are a great place to work, we value Blah, Blah, Blah) at the bottom of the job description. A jobseeker only wants to read the job description and move on if it is not what they are looking for.

Allow tabs! If you provide a list of returned results I want to be able to open all the jobs I am interested in their own tabs rather then page back and forth between the job and results.

Contact information, resume, and one or two pre-screen questions required max! Do not ask me me to fill in forms, or verify whatever parsing you are using. Don't make me do that crap until you are sure you hiring me and need to do a background check.

State very clearly the following:

Is Co-location required? Can you work remotely (partial/full) Is Travel Required

Recommend similar jobs to the ones I apply to and be sure they are good recommendations

</comment><comment><USER3> Salary. I'm now at a point in my career where most jobs are looking to pay less than what I'm making and I don't want to jump through a bunch of hoops only to find we have very different salary expectations.

This is the primary reason I've switched to using recruiters.</comment>


Torching Your Firewall--On Purpose - <AUTHOR> http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/qatorching-your-firewall-on-purpose/

<comment><AUTHOR> Does this look like good advice for parents or grandparents of HN participants who aren't at a hacker level of computer savvy?

<comment><USER2> Insofar as it doesn't request the user to do anything unsafe, yes. The ShieldsUP test is a remote test that requires no configuration changes on the local machine.</comment></comment>


Solve large jigsaw puzzles using genetic algorithms and OpenCV - nemanja-m https://github.com/nemanja-m/gaps <comment><USER2> To be pedantic, this is not really a jigsaw puzzle, the pieces are squares, I'm guessing the technique may be applicable to real jigsaw puzzles, too.

I'd like to see this applied to puzzles with unique pieces like the ones here ([https://libertypuzzles.com/about](https://libertypuzzles.com/about))

<comment><USER3> I thought the same thing when I saw it, but I think this just makes it a _more_ challenging problem. You don't get the constraints of edge and corner pieces to start. There is no confirmation of fit with unique interfaces. When every piece is equally interchangeable the problem is more difficult from a human perspective.

Although, from a computer perspective it also makes the edge comparisons nice and clean.

<comment><USER4> But in case of square puzzles their orientation and border match is limited

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm rather disappointed to see the Lena image _still_ being used as a demonstration for image processing techniques (regardless of its historical context).

At best, it's crass and tasteless. At worst, it's openly disrespectful and hostile to women. There are millions (billions) of images on the Internet that are available for use under a permissive license - it doesn't take a lot of effort to use something else.

<comment><USER6> Why is it crass and tasteless? And why is it openly hostile and disrespectful to women?

<comment><USER5> If I need to explain to you why using a nude image of a model (taken from a pornography magazine, no less) is hostile and disrespectful, then I suspect you are part of the problem.

<comment><USER7> Genius.... If somebody asks you to explain something, well better just say they are part of the problem and not explain it at all... that will really improve things. Great contribution there.

It is NOT a nude image. It might be a cropped version of a what originally was a nude image, but that doesn't make it a nude image. If i crop you out of a picture, its no longer a picture of you? Now it is just a woman with a hat and a shoulder that is not covered with some fabric. If mentally you instantly see the original picture, perhaps you have 'stared' too long at that playboy issue.

Though the point others make in this thread, i think is very valid, it is not a jigsaw puzzle. I was expecting software for when i visit my mom (who likes making jigsaw puzzles), quickly snap a picture on my phone of the table with all the pieces and it would assist me in solving it while she leaves the table for a bit to make tea/coffee. (leaving mom flabbergasted with: how did you...)

<comment><USER5> For any curious minds wondering about the provenance of the Lena image, here's a short article written in 1996 by the (at the time) editor-in-chief of IEEE Transactions on Image Processing. The controversy (and both viewpoints) are summed up quite adequately.

[http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~chuck/lennapg/editor.html](http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~chuck/lennapg/editor.html)

To respond to your point - while you might be _technically_ correct in that the Lena image commonly used today is not a "nude" image per se... are you genuinely saying that you don't understand why some people don't like it - <AUTHOR> why it's unpleasant and/or degrading to women in the field? Its provenance is well known, and the very association with Playboy (nudity notwithstanding) is likely enough to irritate or upset women in image processing/computer vision circles (I say this having had personal experience of various -- female -- lecturers at my alma mater disagreeing with the use of the Lena image).

<comment><USER8> I think you're either intentionally or unintentionally looking to create/perpetuate controversy where there is none. The post you linked mentions itself that most people weren't even aware of the origin of the image, which I think is probably the only thing which may cause it to be offensive towards prudish people in general.

Personally, I find it strictly _more_ offensive that people are outraged on behalf of these supposed women, who are so delicate that the use of a heavily cropped playboy image outrages, offends, or discourages them from a field of study. I think regardless of which image you choose, you'll always find some group of people who are offended by it, and anyone who is offended by an image as tame as this one probably has some growing up to do.

<comment><USER5> There are several prominent women in CS that I know personally and respect (some of whom are image processing/CV researchers), who find the image sexist and demeaning. I sympathise with their viewpoint and am inclined to agree with them. I'm clearly not looking to create controversy or be offended on other people's behalf - I'm just trying to _not be a dick_.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Would this also work for fitting non-rectangular images together? For example, lets say I have a whole bunch of irregular shaped pieces of flat paper (with pictures on them) and I want to fit them together in a single orientation to cover the smallest 2D area?

<comment><USER10> That sounds more like a bin-packing problem than a jig-saw problem. If the irregular pieces fit in a specific way the problem is simplified (just check interfaces), if they don't the problem is much harder as you'd have to calculate the minkowski sum of each additional piece to see how they fit together.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Reminds me of the lego sorting project, [https://jacquesmattheij.com/sorting- lego-the-software-side](https://jacquesmattheij.com/sorting-lego-the-software- side)

</comment><comment><USER12> Having seen the Sudoku solver that's also on the front page, I won't be truly impressed until I've seen the ARKit implementation...

</comment><comment> brian-armstrong I wonder, is a jigsaw always solved when you find a configuration with the least amount of high frequency energy?

<comment><USER13> I suspect the answer is no in theory and yes in practice.

If any image is legal as the final picture, I can construct a picture which changes suddenly at the intersection of puzzle pieces. That would be a terrible puzzle in practice, though. You would have to carefully consult the box to see if you had put it together or not. So I suspect for any real jigsaw puzzle, the answer is yes.

<comment><USER14> There are jigsaw puzzles that'd do exactly rigid kind of thing to annoy the puzzle assembler and even ones that have a uniform color do the measured entropy at all edges would be 0.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I wonder how well it would perform against the Eternity II puzzle.

</comment><comment><USER16> So how do you calculate the fitness score?

<comment><USER16> >> the sum (over all neighboring pixels) of squared color differences (over all three color bands) should be minimal

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I wonder if a technique like this will work for unshredding documents.

<comment><USER18> We can already do that even if the shreds are 1px wide [https://github.com/robinhouston/image- unshredding](https://github.com/robinhouston/image-unshredding)

<comment><USER19> The example image contains a large scale object spanning the whole image and has lots of fine-grained detail. While an impressive demo, it probably won't work as well on black-and-white documents, because the edge will have very little information to determine adjacency. Additionally, shredded documents can have two sides and the shredded stripes might be so small that it becomes difficult to tell up from down. That adds another exponential search space on top of the Traveling Salesman Problem.

That said, reconstruction of shreds is probably possible in most cases, although there is still lots of research to be done in this space. For example the Fraunhofer Society has a project to reconstruct torn documents of the East German StaSi surveillance agency [1]. There seem to be very few detailed publications on their methods, but I did find a high-level overview [2]

[1] [http://www.bstu.bund.de/EN/Archives/ReconstructionOfShredded...](http://www.bstu.bund.de/EN/Archives/ReconstructionOfShreddedRecords/_node.html)

[2] [https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4763-3_8](https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4763-3_8) (The Springer page is paywalled, but the DOI can help you find cheaper sources.)</comment></comment></comment>


A running list of sites that don't use AWS - <AUTHOR> https://blog.owenwalters.net/2019/02/05/a-running-list-of-sites-that-dont-use-aws/ <comment><USER2> I spot at least three errors. Just because a company signs a large deal with GCP or Azure doesn't mean that they don't have workloads on other providers. I guess I'm not too clear on the point of this list?

AWS sneaks in everywhere--including groups at Google and Microsoft.

<comment><AUTHOR> I tried my best. Mainly using dig and case studies that specified using Azure/GCP as their exclusive web provider. I'm very open to fixing errors but I'd need some idea of where you think they are and ideally some evidence to back your claim.

In terms of why I'm doing this, there was an Amazon boycott a while back and someone pointed out that one of Amazon's biggest source of revenue is AWS. So I wanted to see if it's possible to avoid AWS while browsing the web. I'm not saying its practical but I thought it was interesting.

<comment><USER2> Not for nothing, but some of these companies are into the "hundreds of millions and up" level of infrastructure. Migrating that requires less "a customer boycott" and more "an act of god."

<comment><AUTHOR> You're right that this isn't practical but it was interesting to put together and thought it'd be interesting for other people with the same idea.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


I built 12 different web apps in 12 weeks - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@mackenziechild/how-i-finally-learned-rails-95e9b832675b/

<comment><USER2> The Wacky-YouTuber-Thumbnail strategy only works if your content is wacky or the personality of the host is wacky. Those thumbnails are not appropriate for _coding tutorials_ and the sequence of the thumbnails in the blog post made me close the tab.

(Although, there would be a market for wacky coding tutorials...)</comment>


Amazon asks workers sheltering at home to return or request leave - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-24/amazon-asks-workers-sheltering-at-home-to-return-or-seek-leave <comment><USER2> Direct from the source, here is what Amazon is doing:

[https://blog.aboutamazon.com/company-news/how-amazon- priorit...](https://blog.aboutamazon.com/company-news/how-amazon-prioritizes- health-and-safety-while-fulfilling-customer-orders)

> We've extended the increased hourly pay outlined below through May 16. We > are also extending double overtime pay in the U.S. and Canada. These > extensions increase our total investment in pay during COVID-19 to nearly > $700 million for our hourly employees and partners. In addition, we are > providing flexibility with leave of absence options, including expanding the > policy to cover COVID-19 circumstances, such as high-risk individuals or > school closures. We continue to see heavy demand during this difficult time > and the team is doing incredible work for our customers and the community.

<comment><USER3> None of this really disagrees with the article; it's an issue because people typically on a leave of absence don't get paid (notice the lack of "paid leave").

<comment><USER2> I never said it did? The article is behind a paywall and is based off this blog post which is not behind a paywall.

<comment><USER4> No, but saying look at all they're doing without addressing kind of the key part of the article does kind of miss the point, and makes your response seem more like a response from PR then a comment on the text.

<comment><USER5> I genuinely would like to make sure I'm not missing something: what's the "key part of the article" that's missing from the Amazon press release?

<comment><USER6> The key part, from an Amazon warehouse worker perspective, is that they're not extending the unlimited unpaid time off option. Huge loss in scheduling flexibility.

<comment><USER5> From the press release:

"If any team members are unable or unwilling to work a scheduled shift, they can use unlimited unpaid time off through the month of April without penalty, and we are supportive if someone chooses to stay home."

<comment><USER7> Unlimited unpaid time off... for the next seven days. Even a cable company would blush at using "unlimited" like that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > _Amazon said earlier this month it had hired an additional 100,000 > employees_

Not the main point of the article, but can I just say that's _huge_. That's... the same size as Google's _entire_ full-time workforce.

Granted they're low-skill warehouse positions, not highly paid engineering jobs, but still.

The ability of a company to hire _one hundred thousand people in a month_ is absolutely insane.

<comment><USER2> Even crazier, they have already announced an additional 75,000 openings. Just nuts.

<comment><USER5> As of 2019, Amazon employed 798,000 employees, so we're looking at almost 1 million people, earning $15/hour at a minimum, with 401(k), health, vision, and dental benefits. Absolutely nuts.

<comment><USER9> I'd be really surprised if these were real- '401(k), health, vision, and dental benefits'. Anyone can offer 401k without matching, medical without contributing to the premium.

<comment><USER10> Amazon publishes this page detailing the benefits + their per-paycheck costs [0]. The prices for the coverage received seem very reasonable.

[0]: [https://www.amazon.jobs/en/landing_pages/benefitsoverview- us](https://www.amazon.jobs/en/landing_pages/benefitsoverview-us)

<comment><USER9> Ah ok- I stand corrected - the medical is pretty reasonable. The 401k match takes 3 years to vest.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This seems reasonable and beyond what other major employers are offering, but as is the fashion I'm sure Amazon will be convicted in the court of public interwebs shortly...

<comment><USER12> What's a few avoidable deaths between friends, after all?

There are multiple active outbreaks in crowded factories and other facilities, just like an Amazon fulfillment warehouse. They do not have necessary safety equipment and procedures in place yet. Forcing people to show up to work under these conditions is murder. They could fix it, though.

A starting point would be Amazon providing tests and ensuring that everyone has been tested before returning to work, along with ensuring everyone has masks and gloves and enough time to thoroughly wash their hands throughout their shift. Press reports up until this point and complaints from employees suggest none of that is consistently the case.

<comment><USER2> From their post on the topic it sounds like you should be happy with their plan:

[https://blog.aboutamazon.com/company-news/how-amazon- priorit...](https://blog.aboutamazon.com/company-news/how-amazon-prioritizes- health-and-safety-while-fulfilling-customer-orders)

> Millions of masks have been distributed across our network. They are > available to all Amazon associates, delivery service partners, Amazon Flex > participants, seasonal employees, and Whole Foods Market stores employees. > We are encouraging everyone to take and use them.

As for testing, they have been unable to do it through regular channels so they are building a lab to do it themselves:

> An important safety step might be regular testing of all employees for > COVID-19, including those without symptoms. We have begun assembling > equipment we need to build our first lab to process tests and hope to start > testing small numbers of our frontline employees soon.

As for cleanliness:

> We have increased the frequency and intensity of cleaning at all sites, > including regular sanitization of door handles, handrails, touch screens, > scanners, and other frequently touched areas.

> Our enhanced cleaning has added almost 200 additional points of contact per > site across our janitorial teams, and we've increased the size of our > cleaning teams threefold to support our buildings.

> We require everyone to wash their hands often with soap and water for at > least 20 seconds, especially after using the bathroom and before eating, as > well as after blowing their nose, coughing, or sneezing. If soap and water > are not readily available, alcohol-based hand sanitizer stations are easily > accessible throughout our buildings.

> In addition to break times, employees can log out of their system to wash > their hands whenever they choose, without worrying about impact on their > performance goals.

<comment><USER12> Credit for the effort, but it has been a consistent issue over the last month and employees are still voicing concerns.

[https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/04/21/enough- enough-l...](https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/04/21/enough-enough- largest-strike-yet-amazon-workers-call-sick-over-unsafe-working#)

Once the vast majority of employees say it's actually fixed I'll give Amazon real credit for it, but it's empty PR until then.

<comment><USER13> This article mentions 300 people, which isn't a very big fraction of Amazon employees. I'm sure some employees who aren't participating sympathize, but what number would convince you that the "vast majority" think it's fine?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> There's no greater demonstration of their internal class divide than what would happen if they asked HQ employees to stop working from home and do the same.

<comment><USER15> ... force people whose job can be done from home to go to the office for the sake of "solidarity" !?

<comment><USER16> In some large (and dysfunctional) companies the solidarity, handshaking, and hob nobbing has become the actual work, and it can't be done from home

<comment><USER15> LOL

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Rapid surges in hiring are often accompanied by harder negotiation stances in pay and condtions since new hires have not had time to socialise or organise and hence unionise.

Bezos is notoriously opposed to organised labour. I think this surge implies a fight, and a long one.

<comment><USER18> No one getting hired to work in an amazon warehouse is negotiating anything beyond what shifts they will be picking up.

<comment><USER17> Once you have an established contract and term of employment, organising for better working conditions is the next step. Or perhaps your preference is a perpetual marginalised and casual workforce?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Are you eligible for unemployment on such a leave?

Also, I don't fault Amazon for limiting paid-leave if the worker isn't sick, but it's only reasonable to ask people to come in if they are given decent PPE. Temperature checks are insufficient for a virus that may have a large # of asymptomatic carriers and a lengthy pre-symptomatic period for many that get sick.

</comment><comment><USER20> Without the paywall: [https://outline.com/YnuzdH](https://outline.com/YnuzdH)

</comment><comment><USER21> How long until Amazon's warehouses are 100% fully robotic?

Or 99% fully robotic? (With a small team of managers to check in on the robots)

<comment><USER22> I'm curious what the percentage is right now.

<comment><USER23> You can go tour one. The robotics are pretty impressive.

It reminded me of the scenes in Beauty and the Beast where the teapots and brooms and candlesticks were all orchestrated together to clean up/set the table/etc.

<comment><USER21> I wasn't aware amazon warehouse tours were an option...

I think I'll plan one for when we're out of lockdown in my area.

Thanks for the outing idea!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I'm curious what Amazon warehouse worker is going to take this deal when there's free state and federal government checks being dished out.

<comment><USER25> Have you quit your job to collect these allegedly easy to obtain checks? Or is this character flaw exclusive to warehouse workers?

<comment><USER26> Obviously you wouldn't quit your job if it pays a lot higher than the new unemployment payouts, and/or if you can easily work from home...and nobody but you is claiming that it's a character flaw to choose not to risk your life working if you have the safety net to avoid doing so.

This is a really bizarre, immature reaction to a discussion of the incentives trade-off at play here.

<comment><USER25> I'm not addressing the extremely wise decision that a government make it financially possible for people not to spread disease. Nor disputing that the vast majority of people are willing to do this under these extreme circumstance.

I'm addressing the assumption, wrapped in theories about incentives, that everyone (strangely except any persons expounding the theory) is eager to quit work for "welfare" at the first opportunity. And, by extension, that this is why there must never be a social safety net that can keep anyone alive. Because, according to this demonstrably false theory, society would collapse.

People do not quit their jobs to receive handouts exactly because of their principles and because they are not the cynical robots that theoreticians make them out to be. Corporations may maximize wealth regardless of harm to society or others but the vast majority of natural persons don't.

<comment><USER26> > I'm addressing the assumption, wrapped in theories about incentives, that > everyone (strangely except any persons expounding the theory) is eager to > quit work for "welfare" at the first opportunity

Again, the GP comment didn't say or imply anything like this. You're just accusing random commenters of irrelevant thoughtcrime based on trying to fit into every square peg into the round hole of the same vacuous political gamesmanship that dominates most conversations that touch on the economy. Paying attention to incentives doesn't at all imply that you think it's a moral failing for someone to follow incentives. In fact, I'd imagine that it's quite the opposite: people who get hysterical at the sight of rational, apolitical discussion are infinitely more likely to weight descriptions of incentives with moral dimensions that they don't have or need.

This is what it looks like when people are actually interested in trying to understand the economic situation, without immediately having to snap into us- vs-them political gamesmanship. HN isn't perfect, but it's at least better than that; Go to /r/politics or something if that's what you're interested in.

<comment><USER25> If the top comment is a genuine question with neutral tone then so is the similarly phrased "When will Republicans start mass arrests of journalist?" I don't explicitly state a value judgement and I can follow up with "you can't blame them for acting in their self interest". Yet claiming it is a neutral question would obviously be mistaken.

Likewise the claim that "following incentives is excusable" includes, among other hidden assumptions, that it is actually happening and that there is actually an incentive. It is obfuscation in both cases. It certainly does not make the question an economic one.

I don't see anything above accusing anyone of thoughtcrime. I assume this is a shibboleth used to dismiss political opponents, end conversation and instruct fellow travelers what opinion to have on the mater. At any rate, I'd be more concerned about thought police from a leader who purges anyone who disagrees with him[1] than a random internet voice.

[1]The most recent being: [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/22/us/coronavirus- live-cover...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/22/us/coronavirus-live- coverage.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> [https://archive.md/rY2I6](https://archive.md/rY2I6)

</comment><comment><USER28> Cannot trust Bloomberg Media to report facts.

</comment><comment><USER29> *paywall

<comment><USER21> Just disable javascript if you're seeing a bloomberg paywall, the article should still read fine.

<comment><USER30> Well hey!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> > The company has said criticisms of its safety measures are unfounded.

Well, the French justice forced them to improve their safety measures. They had to close down for 5 days to do so. I don't remember reading about them doing that worldwide. However, I do remember them complaining in emails sent to their French customers that they are forced to improve the safety measures and that the French justice is not nice. It was a bit ridiculous and not well received.

<comment><USER32> That's not what happened at all.

The French imposed very arbitrary guidelines on only delivering "essential" goods and they had to stop all deliveries to address them

All these "essential" good definitions are complete nonsense anyways. What one person deems unnecessary can be very, very necessary to someone else.

<comment><USER31> I do really disagree.

This is a source from today : [https://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/2020/04/24/coronavir...](https://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/2020/04/24/coronavirus- la-justice-confirme-en-appel-le-rappel-a-l-ordre-d-amazon_6037670_3234.html)

<comment><USER32> Which says what I said.

They shut down because they needed to figure out what was meant by the "essential" order. The fine was too large to do anything but pause operations.

> On April 15, the online store preferred to close its six large French > warehouses, ensuring that it had no other choice, given the amount of the > penalty. "How to precisely define food, hygiene or medical products?" " > Asked the business.

<comment><USER31> They have a list. But anyway, why are they restricted to "essential" orders only? To improve the safety of the Amazon employees.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> This is going to be like the 9/11 first responders where they had to beg for health care and health insurance for the rest of their lives.

We have no idea what the lifetime implications are for someone getting sick. Put lifetime healthcare coverage with no cap in their contract. What are they going to somehow be "too healthy" ?

</comment><comment><USER34> > These extensions increase our total investment in pay during COVID-19 to > nearly $700 million for our hourly employees and partners.

This is a drop in the bucket for Amazon. They are able to pay much better but do not. If the savings were being passed onto the customers, that's one thing, but with all the recent news about Amazon's practices, it's easy and convenient to take the cynical route.

<comment><USER2> What dollar figure would make you happy?

<comment><USER34> Not talking about it in absolute terms. How about talking about it in terms of median wage per job title? Putting big numbers in glitzy blog posts only serves to dazzle and obfuscates how easy it would be for Amazon to double or triple that number with basically no dent in the wallet from doing so.

<comment><USER13> You think Amazon could spend an extra $700 million to $1.4 billion with "basically no dent in the wallet"? I guess I understand why you're frustrated if you think that's the case, but it's just not true.

<comment><USER35> Jeff Bezos owns 55.55M shares of Amazon stock ([https://www.secform4.com/insider- trading/1043298.htm](https://www.secform4.com/insider-trading/1043298.htm)). Since just April 1st, the value of that stock has increased by ~55.55M*($2400 - $1900) = $27.775B. I know net_worth != cash, but he can and routinely does (see link above) liquidate stock to fund other projects.

In this context, I think $700M is equivalent to a coin tossed in a fountain.

<comment><USER13> That's fair. This cashflow is obviously not available to Amazon directly, but I could see an argument that Jeff Bezos specifically ought to make more funds available. (Maybe he will - if you believe the headlines he was entirely hands-off the retail business until recently.)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Handmade Engraved Watch - <AUTHOR> https://www.omichronouswatches.com/collections/frontpage/products/bamboo-watch-w-green-backgroundmen <comment><AUTHOR> These are some handmade watches I make and personalize with engravings of photos, logos, or messages. Any questions or comments? I'd love any feedback.</comment>


Ask HN: When do startups typically hire their first Product Manager? - <AUTHOR>

I'm a Product Manager at a B2B SaaS company that is profitable and has grown to over 250 employees – I have acquired some excellent experience along the way.  We have some top-tier financing from VC's and we are cash flow positive.  I've been working there for about 5 years and have recently moved to the Bay Area (got married).  I'm now looking to spread my wings a bit – and find another role at a smaller company - I miss the old days of small teams, faster decisions.
I am one of those "didn't finish school and started working at an internet company in 1997"-type people.  I have a knack for being the guy who can bridge developers and users needs…I have previous experience in IT running a server farm and ISP, as well as working on the Sales Engineering side, managed a SaaS product support team of 15 and currently am a customer focused product manager for an enterprise product in a fast growing vertical. I know that I can contribute to a company in a variety of ways.
The reason for the post -  I am trying to figure out what to do next here in San Francisco.  Ideally I'd like to have the ability to work at a small company where I can make a big impact on the product/operations side of things as a company scales up and moves from being "pure engineering" to a more wholistic company that needs things like product management/marketing, operational systems and processes put in place (ie: Marketing/Sales operations).
I'm wondering 4 things:
1) reading HN, It seems everyone on the startup side is looking for a co-founder with coding abilities (makes sense), when does it make sense for a guy like me to get involved with a growing company?
2)When do YC companies tend to start opening up to "non-coding product manager types"?
3)Know of any cool companies looking for a well rounded product guy who is fun to work with, thinks creatively and knows how to market web apps/products?
4)Do technical founders in the bay area consider founding  companies with "non-coders"?  I know there is a bias on HN towards "no", but does it happen?
TL;Dr – I'm a Product Manager and want to work at a startup in a non-coding capacity, what makes sense? <comment><USER2> Hi...we are actually looking for someone like you. We are a startup in San Francisco in the mobile app space. We have technical people but are looking for a Product Manager like you. If you are interested, please email me at firstname.lastname@example.com Cheers!</comment>


Tiny lensless endoscope captures 3-D images of objects smaller than a cell - <AUTHOR> https://phys.org/news/2019-08-tiny-lensless-endoscope-captures-d.html <comment><USER2> It'd be nice to see a few of the images. Did I miss a link to them?

<comment><USER3> It looks like the images will be part of the presentation at the frontiers in optics conference next month.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Nanolive.ch is doing this quite well, high enough resolution to make structures like mitochondria clearly visible. Also able to make time lapse of living cells. (I don't have any business connection to Nanolive, just an Instagram follower)

</comment><comment><USER5> Where's the photos guys?!

</comment><comment><USER6> At 200 microns across, I'd be worried about inadvertently causing puncture wounds. (Might be an unfounded worry.)</comment>


Hasbro to Buy Peppa Pig Owner for $4B - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49443785 <comment><USER2> Judging by the comments in this thread & the way the media is writing headlines this makes it sound like Hasbro is buying Peppa / a one-off cartoon studio for $4b

When in fact what Hasbro is actually buying is Entertainment One (EO) which is a massive media conglomerate . (1)

EO acquires stakes and licensing rights in dozens of properties, including the studio behind Peppa that they paid ~$210m for in 2015 (2)

For Hasbro this acquisition lines them up with a licensing rich catalog to push out their wares and open new worldwide markets.

Beyond that EO is a:

\- 50 year old company \- Generates >$1b in revenue / annually \- Thousands of employees \- Hundreds of entertainment properties with more than 80,000 hours of film and television content and approximately 40,000 music tracks. \- Mini- disney model of robust acquisition and then licensing / merchandising

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entertainment_One](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entertainment_One) (1)

[https://www.crunchbase.com/acquisition/entertainment-one- acq...](https://www.crunchbase.com/acquisition/entertainment-one-acquires- astley-baker-davies-ltd--68dfa045#section-overview) (2)

</comment><comment><USER3> I found Peppa Pig a great resource to start grasping a new language.

The dialogs are repetitive enough to be gentle practice for recognizing words through speech, and the characters' struggles in learning new concepts also lead to some helpful descriptions that can supplant a dictionary.

<comment><USER4> That's really interesting. I've always shied away from dubbed sources under some vague "it doesn't follow the distribution of the target language because it is translated", which feels kinda stupid, typing it out.

But Peppa big is probably watched by as many children in my target language as any native programming, so in a sense it is as native as anything else.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> As the parent of a kid in the target audience, Peppa pig represents one of the most popular youtube channels.

<comment><USER6> I have to wonder realistically how long a character/canon has traction in order to pay back a $4 billion investment.

Something like Mickey Mouse is probably past the end of its lifetime now, but Star Wars franchising is going strong and was probably a good buy for Disney. Things like He-Man were barely blips.

<comment><USER7> Mickey Mouse is anything but past the end of its lifetime. He and his associated characters are refreshed often. Mickey and the Roadster Racers is a relatively new show and quite popular with my own child and those of our friends, and we're far from the over the top "Disney people".

<comment><USER8> Mickey Mouse will be public domain in 5 years from now.

<comment><USER9> Assuming Congress doesn't extend copyright terms...which they repeatedly have throughout the course of history.

<comment><USER10> Thanks to Disney and Sonny.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This 1-minute clip is usually good for a chuckle: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jil0WCh_UoQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jil0WCh_UoQ)

Hopefully that's not too off-topic. Maybe not everyone knows peppa pig.

<comment><USER12> Peppa is also the subject of a weird tiktok meme at the moment (or maybe the moment's passed already ... I don't know, I'm old and lame :P ) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0uxRav86NI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0uxRav86NI)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Peppa Pig was all over China this year for Year of the Pig merchandise.

</comment><comment><USER14> I think what's amazing about the Peppa Pig franchise is how it appeals to both sexes and even parents. The only thing lacking before was the toy line.

</comment><comment><USER15> It's amazing to learn that something I've never heard of is worth $4 billion.

<comment><USER16> Take a guess at the number of cities in the world with over one million people. See how many there are, and how many of them you knew existed. Think of how many countries have companies worth 4B. The world is a big place.

<comment><USER15> Ok, there are probably a few more stipulations about this particular thing that make this surprising such as being on youtube which I visit quite frequently.</comment></comment></comment>


Spotted salamander young come pre-equipped with photosynthetic algae - <AUTHOR> http://nautil.us/blog/the-salamander-that-has-photosynthesis-happening-inside-it?utm_source=tss&utm_medium=desktop&utm_campaign=linkfrom

<comment><USER2> Not a lot of energy, probably. The big question is... if salamander embrios are photosintetic, why they tan?. Why they need to have so many melanin?

I think that if someone put salamanders in the dark with a non luminous source of heat we will probably see a very different result. Dark is just colder.

The fact that salamanders could absorb a lot of chemicals just by the skin does not implies necessarily that they could _avoid_ it if they want. If you live submerged next to a radioactive source, how could you stop the radioactivity generated outside entering your body?.

Maybe the article answer all those questions, but I'm a little sceptical about this theory right now.

</comment><comment><USER3> I wonder how much energy the salamander gets if it stays the whole day under the sun compared to one staying all day in the dark. Could this be quantified?

</comment><comment><USER4> How does the photosynthetic algae zooxanthellae that's found in many corals differ from the algae in the salamander?

<comment><USER2> A lot. Both are even from different Kingdoms</comment></comment>


Southwest kicks Muslim person off a plane for saying "God willing" in Arabic - <AUTHOR> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/muslim-passenger-southwest-airlines-khairuldeen-makhzoom-arabic-phone-uncle-baghdad-cair-statement-a7347311.html <comment><AUTHOR> Quote from the article:

An agent escorted him outside and asked him why he was speaking in Arabic considering "today's political climate". "You need to be very honest with us with what you said about the martyrs. Tell us everything you know about the martyrs," the agent said to him.

The political science graduate explained he had only said "God willing", and the questioning soon ended - but not before dogs were brought in to sniff his luggage, he was searched and his wallet was taken away.</comment>


Sony Shares More Details On PlayStation Network Breach - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2011/04/27/sony-shares-more-details-on-playstation-network-breach/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Techcrunch+%28TechCrunch%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

<comment><USER2> At first sight it may sound reassuring that the credit card security codes weren't stolen, but the devil's in the numbers.

If you have one million credit card numbers, then you'll on average get a thousand succesful transactions if you try a random security code with each card - they're only three digtis. I don't know how many tries you get before the card is closed, but from personal experience I know it's more than one, which affects the probabilities a lot.

<comment><USER3> Visa and MC generally do not actually require the code for online transactions in the US. Visa does require it for transactions in Europe, though.

I believe that if the merchant does send it, the credit card association charges slightly less. If the merchant sends it and it does not match, the result depends on the bank that issued the credit card. Some cause the transaction to be declined, but many just report back whether it matched or not, and leave it up to the merchant to decide whether or not to proceed with the charge.

Arguments for sending it: possible slight lowering of fees; reduced risk that the sale will lead to a charge back.

Argument against sending it: it is one more piece of data the user can screw up entering.</comment></comment>


Microsoft employee's phone tweet leads to ouster - Suraj-Sun http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-20109152-75/microsoft-employees-phone-tweet-leads-to-ouster/

<comment><AUTHOR> That's a dumb reason to fire someone, unless Microsoft somehow pays their recruiters negative money.

<comment><USER2> Violating a partner company's NDA to give personal opinions of an unreleased product can be a severe matter.

For comparison, if a Sony employee tweeted the following: "The iPhone 5 is using Sony's CMOS camera module, that's pretty cool. The call quality on the iPhone 5 is ok, I would rate it a 7 out of 10" -- do you think that Apple wouldn't mind?

<comment><AUTHOR> It costs something like $100,000 to hire a new employee. Is this worth spending that much money on when you could just say, "hey, don't do that"?

(With Apple, yes, because Apple is very fickle about this sort of thing. But with Nokia? What's Nokia going to do about it? Go back to their own OS over a pre-release review? Seems unlikely.)

<comment><USER3> First you assume they'd need to backfill the post. Second, I've never heard that number before, and don't believe. I've hired a lot of people, at F500 and startups and it has never been perceived as that costly. Firing is costly though, but hiring less so. And a place like MS, the hiring process is fairly streamlined.

Lastly, what's Nokia going to do about it? Share less info with Microsoft because they don't trust them. That early preview of the phone with the in- progress camera -- well don't give it to MS now. Wait another month or two and get the camera issues worked out first, they may tweat it. Down the line, they could use an NDA violation to get out of some contractual agreement they don't like.

This is the big leagues. This is a multibillion dollar play. Unless this guy was a Scott Guthrie or David Cutler, I think they won't lose any sleep over it. Recall MS has pushed out far bigger fish than him in the past year or so (Bob Muglia, Amitabh S., Robbie Bach, J. Allard).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> > "We routinely do not discuss personnel matters, but I can confirm that Joe > Marini no longer works at Microsoft,"

I love it. We'll tell you what we otherwise wouldn't about a person who got fired for telling what we otherwise wouldn't tell you. That makes them so trustworthy and consistent.

<comment><USER5> Confirming employment is standard, isn't it?

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm not sure how telling everyone that Microsoft is working on a Nokia phone is leaking confidential information. Didn't MS partner with Nokia recently for the purpose of making Windows 7 phones?

<comment><USER7> i think he actually tweeted thrice about the phone, and one of them was his rating of the camera quality/phone as 8/10

<comment><USER8> Makes you wonder if he would still be employed if he had used 10/10.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I think he would've been fine with just the first tweet--we all know that a Nokia WP7 is coming. But then he goes on to tweet two more times and review/rate an unreleased product. Not smart.</comment>


React with LevelDB and Websockets - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/wookimiii/leveldb-with-react

<comment><USER2> looks great! Do you think it's a good replacement for meteor.js?</comment>


Show HN: Create generative background images from a string in Go - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/pravj/geo_pattern

<comment><USER2> Some Go API style nits:

\- it's unusual to pass a map with expected keys like this. Normally you'd pass a struct like: p := New(Options{ BaseColor: "...", Color: "...", Generator: "...", })

\- You could define the known patterns as constants so they're documented and so users don't have to worry about typos

\- Field names are normally camel-case without underscores, e.g., "Base_color" should be "BaseColor"

\- You could use Go's build-in image/color package instead of accepting RGB strings, but that's more of a judgement call.

If you're accepting pull requests I might send you some, but they're breaking API changes so it's up to you.

All-in-all though it's a cool project and I'm glad to see it in Go :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi @ImJasonH, I Developed this, let me answer you points :)

I believe these points are not contributing in breaking API :D so lets talk on them first.

2\. You mean instead of an array I'm using here [1], We should add them as constants and write separate documentation for each? This sounds nice as it will help obviously like you said.

3\. Ohh, I missed this convention, thanks for pointing this out. :)

4\. As you said its more of a judgement call, I believe that RGB strings are fine and easy for users. You find any wrong in RGB strings?

So, I'll be very happy to co-operate if you are doing pull request covering points 2 and 3 :) And I'll try to cover your point 1 on my own :)

Cheers \o/

[1] [https://github.com/pravj/geo_pattern/blob/master/pattern/pat...](https://github.com/pravj/geo_pattern/blob/master/pattern/pattern.go#L17)

<comment><USER3> If you're reworking your API, you may want to consider functional options:

[http://dave.cheney.net/2014/10/17/functional-options-for- fri...](http://dave.cheney.net/2014/10/17/functional-options-for-friendly- apis)

I haven't attempted it myself, but it looks very interesting.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is really cool! I quite like the js port [https://github.com/btmills/geopattern](https://github.com/btmills/geopattern) which you can drop into a website very easily.

<comment><USER5> This is awesome, thanks for the link.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Please excuse the somewhat off topic and possibly ignorant comment but is importing classes from a URL a feature unique to the Go language?

<comment><USER7>
       import "github.com/pravj/geo_pattern/pattern"

will import from the file system, at $GOPATH/src/github.com/pravj/geo_pattern/pattern/

however, go get will fetch from the URL and install it in said path (it's a mixed blessing)

The [free] Little Go Book [1] makes a special note of it :)

[1] [http://openmymind.net/assets/go/go.pdf](http://openmymind.net/assets/go/go.pdf)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> > [https://guides.github.com/](https://guides.github.com/)

At first, I thought "create generative background images from a string" meant that the algorithm could be fed any string and it would use that string as a sort of seed for the creation of fractal/geometric art. So I thought that the text overlaying each of the rectangles on the GitHub Guides page was the seed text for the art underneath it. After reading further, I see that assumption is wrong. But I think it's an interesting idea to couple the text on a page with automatically generated geometrically and chromatically pleasing art. I see this sort of organic and causative dynamic as the future of a large part of software development, especially as we enhance our toolset with the power of evolution (e.g., a website that evolves by itself through A/B tests and little human intervention).

</comment><comment><USER9> I see they have an MIT license, which is great, but I have a theoretical copyright question. If they didn't license out the code and, instead, made a background-image-generating website, who would own the copyright to the computer generated images? I'm guessing they would but does anyone know for sure?

<comment><USER10> It would probably depend on the background-image-generating websites TOS.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> This is not meant to be snarky, but what's the point of this? What use does the pattern being uniquely generated from a SHA of a distinct string have over a random pattern being generated from a SHA of some random string?

<comment><USER12> Say I'm using this to generate a background image for each post on HN. Also, I want them to be consistent, so everywhere you see a mVChr post it's got a green ringed background.

I could generate a random string for each user, but then I'd have to store it somewhere. It's better to just use the username as the seed.

It's the same fundamental principle behind identicons.

<comment><USER11> Got it. I can envision the uses for it now. Thanks for the explanation.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Nice idea and implementation. We developed a related application which creates colors from git commit sha strings. Have a look at [http://gitart.me/repos/rails/rails](http://gitart.me/repos/rails/rails)

<comment><AUTHOR> @zorbash Wow, the concept sounds nice :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> nice project, and pretty cool visualizations!

i did port a lot of the xscreensavers to plan9 and then a few of them to go when go came out. this reminds me a lot of some of them. now if only there was a way to animate them!

[https://code.google.com/p/goxscr/](https://code.google.com/p/goxscr/)

they work using x11, mostly on linux :)

</comment><comment><USER15> This library and the ruby and JS ones are really cool. Does anyone have ideas of other patterns that could be implemented and added to them?

</comment><comment><USER16> Making this run as a locally-hosted website with net/http would not be a difficult project at all.

</comment><comment><USER17> Infinite hotel wallpaper.</comment>