Pete Smith on Silicon Milkroundabout: Startups team up to take on the banks - <AUTHOR> http://postdesk.com/blog/pete-smith-songkick-interview-silicon-milkroundabout-startup

<comment><USER2> Having grown up in the UK, owning my own company was never something that even occurred to me- I wasn't until I moved to NYC that I saw just how great it can be. I'm sure that there are some cultural reasons for that, but I think one of the most important factors is simply being surrounded by people doing their own startup thing and picking up on their enthusiasm.

Given that my visa restrictions here in the US forbid me from easily working for my own company, I'm always thinking of returning to London. So, this sort of event is great to see- the creation of Tech City and an obvious growth in startup culture means that London could be a great place to do business.

</comment><comment><USER3> Kudos to Pete, Ian, Michelle and the rest of the team. It is incredible to see how much change has happened in the last four years in London and impressive to see how deep YC is into it.

I wondered round and saw James from WebMynd, Hiroki from GroupPay, Devin onto his new company Lyst and other YC's as part of the attendees.

I can't emphasise enough what a different place London it is now to where it was four years ago and while part of that is the passage of time, a chunk of it is definitely the efforts of the SK team. Well done guys.

<comment><USER4> cheers peter

the event brought so many great London tech start-ups together..

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I looked at a number of cites to base my new company and chose London for it's mix of diversity, access to talent and strong business culture.

For a tech heavy startup SF was the only other serious competitor.

I must disclaim I am English.

</comment><comment><USER6> I was there on Sunday and I have never been to anything like it before. It was so well organised, fantastic companies working on some brilliant projects. Big thanks to SK guys.

<comment><USER4> great to hear it!

do you think you'll find a new job as a result?

<comment><USER6> If I was actively seeking a new job, I can say with 99% certainty that I would have left with one. However I'm in a place where the startup movement has inspired me to try something on my own. If things don't work out I've got some great companies to contact.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Ranking startup jobs by runway is a great idea.

<comment><USER4> i agree that that kind of transparency would be amazing for candidates. tough to get all startups to sign up to a public declaration of their runways, however!

but it's usually possible to get a straight answer if you ask as part of the interview process

at songkick we've always been honest about runway, certainly with later-stage interviewees

if a startup who is making you a job offer refuses to answer the runway question, that says something about their general attitude to transparency across the whole team

<comment><USER5> Trying to pull the wool over anybody's eyes; employers, customers, investors etc is only ever a stupid idea longterm.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> i had great fun doing this interview -- we were all on a real high at the end of the event, and sam asked some great questions

the event goes from strength to strength!

</comment><comment><USER8> Go easy on the ellipses and em dashes.

<comment><USER5> I think it's been typed in Word!</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do I auto buy domain names? - <AUTHOR> Hello, I'm wondering how to automatically by domain names.  It seems like there are companies that swoop in and buy them faster than the manual process.  I can't seem to find a reliable way to buy them automatically.
Anyone have more insights on this?
Edited - fixed title. <comment><USER2> I understand that no matter what there are going to be some squatters out there hoping for a chance to strike gold with a unique domain name, or maybe they are just collectors for some weird reason.

But, please don't make the problem worse by hoarding/snapping dropped domain names automatically.

<comment> pickle-wizard I have a nonsensical word that I use for naming things when testing. The other day I decided to register the domain as sometimes it would be handy to have some throwaway DNS names for things I'm testing. Well the .com was taken and on the page they have it listed for sale for $2400. No one is every going to pay that.

Now that the .dev TLD is GA, I just bought the .dev domain for $12/yr. Works good enough for my purposes.

I really have a strong dislike for domain squatters. They are literally adding no value.

<comment><USER3> Like * drop shipping * trading * and so many other jobs that make money out of money without benefiting anyone except themselves

<comment><USER4> That is a completely inept comparison. Domain squatting serves no purpose other than lining the owner's pockets in what many would consider an unethical manner. Domain names are finite and cannot be replaced as a manufactured product can. A more accurate comparison would be buying every lot of land in an area, another finite resource, without any intention to use the land for yourself with the only goal of then marking it up significantly to milk a potential purchaser without adding any value to the transaction.

<comment><USER2> I know of an owner of a grocery store in a small town where I used to live, he bought a few lots of land here and there in the surrounding area such that there wasn't any contigous area big enough for a competing store to be.

It was a small town of maybe 500 people, and the nearest city was 6 miles away.

<comment><USER4> I'm not too sure which one I would consider worse. That approach would be similar to buying every desirable domain containing a certain keyword when you operate within the same market. I personally believe the way to beat out competitors in a market is by the quality of service and value added, not by utilizing an artificial barrier that prevents anyone else from entering. I can understand his approach even if I don't necessarily agree with it. Although, I also believe that competition is better for any market.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Buy a tag and become a registrar[1] with your target TLDs. Try to colocate your servers with the registry you are targeting. This gives you root level access to the registry and you'll have lower latency than a lot of the dropcatchers. It used to cost about $100k a year to get a .com tag, but I'm not sure nowadays. The fees vary by registry. Every time you setup a dropcatch or use a registrar, you are adding an extra service between yourself and the registry where the domains are actually registered.

[1] [https://www.verisign.com/en_US/channel-resources/become-a- re...](https://www.verisign.com/en_US/channel-resources/become-a- registrar/verisign-domain-registrar/index.xhtml)

<comment><USER6> This sounds like the best answer. Becoming a registrar allows you to do other cool (questionable) things like domain tasting. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_tasting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_tasting)

<comment><USER7> And from yesterdays frontpage article, all the cool kids are doing it!

> As messages pointing to one particular web site would quickly get blocked by > spam filters, RX Limited would open up new sites. Initially the new domains > were purchased individually from domain sellers such as GoDaddy, until RX > Limited set up its own domain seller, ABSystems, allowing RX Limited to > spawn new domains on a much larger scale. -- > [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Le_Roux#RX_Limited](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Le_Roux#RX_Limited)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I used to do this and I would just place orders with the top dropcatching services:

      - snapnames.com
      - namejet.com (I think orders placed on NJ are now also added to Snapnames)
      - pool.com
      - dropcatch.com
      - pheenix.com

If you want .io domains, park.io

Place orders on all of them and just wait.

</comment><comment><USER9> Mike Carson hints at his methods for this in interviews on how he built Park.io.

Basically lots of custom scripts to try and buy dropped domains using registrar API (i think gandi.net has one). The skill was in increasing the speed of these scripts. Apparently he and another person competed for dropped domains by speeding up their scrapers.

1\. [https://www.failory.com/interview/park- io](https://www.failory.com/interview/park-io) 2\. [https://www.indiehackers.com/podcast/034-mike-carson-of- park...](https://www.indiehackers.com/podcast/034-mike-carson-of-park-io) 3\. [https://saasclub.io/podcast/million-dollar-saas-mike- carson/](https://saasclub.io/podcast/million-dollar-saas-mike-carson/)

</comment><comment><USER10> If you mean domains that expire, I've used [https://www.snapnames.com/](https://www.snapnames.com/) several times over the years to do this with success each time. park.io, mentioned below, is also good but not so useful for .coms.

<comment><USER11> Seconding snapnames.com. I've been using it since 2007 to grab interesting domains when they expire. You can place bids on registered domains and they just wait until the domain expires. My favorite thing is to track acquisitions of companies with interesting domain names and bid on them. Inevitably the acquiring company stops using the domain and lets it expire.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> The top dogs like HugeDomains own hundreds of registrars and using their connections to chase domains. These are not resellers, the registrars are there only to catch domains. Your chance of winning the drop game is near zero if they want it.

If you want to scoop up free names, there's lots of bulk tools on registrars to let you buy in bulk.

[http://domainincite.com/21309-dropcatch-spends-millions- to-b...](http://domainincite.com/21309-dropcatch-spends-millions-to-buy-five- hundred-more-registrars)

</comment><comment><USER13> No but your question made me think of this: Someone recently tried to scam be by offering to sell a domain similar to one I already own. The message I received wanted 200 USD, a reasonable price for a domain that was owned and unavailable to purchase for years, I had even attempted to contact the owner and received no response. Instead of responding to the 200 USD offer, I pulled the domain up in aws, it was available, I clicked buy immediately for 12 USD.

<comment><USER14> A lot of Spammers do this same thing, but send that first email out a couple weeks in advance of the domain expiring so it looks more legitimate.

If you agree to buy, then they buy on expiration and sell to you for the higher price.

If you agree, but then the actual owner renews they just ignore you. And if they aren't totally evil return your payment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I used to work for Freenom, and while they have a policy against domain squatting for free tk/ml/ga/cf domains, they have an API that lets you buy domains from any other TLD at cost price.

Freenom themselves make money from ads on residual traffic after free domains expire.

</comment><comment><USER16> I'm sure there are other ways, but I believe Route 53 has API support for domain registration. So you could write code to do this for you, based on whatever your criteria are. Not sure if they have any tld limitations that might be a problem or not...

</comment><comment><USER17> I snagged sergio.dev in the dutch auction when it fell in price using Gandi.net - maybe they offer a snatching service?

I picked what price point I wanted to buy it at, and they auto-purchased for me.

</comment><comment><USER18> You can choose a different company to buy a new domain. But you suggest a domain name similar to your work.

</comment><comment><USER19> There is [https://park.io](https://park.io)

</comment><comment><USER20> Why do you want to do this?</comment>


The missing link of computer meaning - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/meaningfuljs/meaningfuljs/blob/master/doc/the-missing-link.md <comment><USER2> Related: E-Prime, writing English without the verb "to be", [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Prime](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Prime)</comment>


Stewaard: Turn Support into a Recurring Business - <AUTHOR> http://stewaard.com

<comment><AUTHOR> guys, we built Stewaard to help open source projects monetize their projects through support. hope you love it</comment>


New Scraping and "Pipes" tool - <AUTHOR> https://dexi.io <comment><AUTHOR> Thank you. Yes we can!

</comment><comment><USER2> The twitter and Google Plus links still go to the old name (cloudscrape). Do you still have the feature to solve captchas?</comment>


Ask HN: How to tell your friend his idea sucks - <AUTHOR> I have a friend from a top notch business background, but no startup experience. His ideas may sound cool or work once it already has gained momentum but he simply doesn't understand how hard it is to launch something and get it to hit. How would you tell one of your best friends that his latest idea will never work (unless he started with like 10m in funding)... <comment><USER2> A few thoughts:

1\. Is he asking for your feedback? Founders are forever hearing "that will never work, you should go back to your job." If he's not soliciting your feedback, consider deciding not to pile on.

2\. Conversely, if he _is_ asking, give it to him straight. People have a tendency to think "this will never work" while saying things like, "wow, that's cool!" Don't be that guy. He won't appreciate it when he thinks back to the years of time wasted.

3\. If you do give feedback, focus on concrete and constructive building blocks, not your value judgments. "How will you solve the chicken and egg problem?" is a far more useful phrasing than "Your latest idea will never work." For bonus points, brainstorm solutions with him. This is harder and more time-consuming, but more helpful for your friend.

4\. Remember that the most successful ideas are often the most counterintuitive. Twitter is my favorite example here, but honestly it applies to most huge tech companies. Keep an open mind through the process.

Good luck! Entrepreneurs can seem schizophrenic, balancing logical considerations with the desire to do something extraordinary and contrarian. But helping him navigate this is what makes you a good friend. :)

<comment><USER3> 3 especially. Communicating the "why specifically" is what distinguishes you from the "don't get it" types and is less hostile than implying that he couldn't possibly understand the why.

I've been in many situations (though more about philosophical ideas than business ones) where someone would repeatedly insist that something I was proposing was wrong, and only by extensive research did I find out that the whole time they could have just said X, and it would have made sense. (Or discover that they didn't understand the field or idea as well as they claimed.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Whenever someone comes to me with a great idea I kindly refer them 4 articles for studying.

Learn HTML, CSS, JS, and Michael Hartls book on Rails.

80% of them will give up when they realize I'm not going to do the work for them. 19% will spend a week on codecadamy before giving up. The final 1% are so motivated that it is no longer relevant what they do in life. They will be successful. Period.

<comment><USER5> More than 100 persons have come to you with great ideas?

<comment><USER6> If you're going to be pedantic, at least be overly so:

Assuming each of his figures is accurate to within half a percent: We need at least 67 people to be able to round to 1%, but we can't quite get 80% out of 67 or 68 people (we end up rounding to 79% or 81%.) It turns out 69 people is adequate -- 1/69 rounds to 1%, 55/69 rounds to 80%, and the remaining 13/69 also rounds to 19%.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I always respond with "Find the money." That is, find a buyer today for the simplest version.

THOUGH, this did not end well when after many drinks I met a guy who runs (presumably illegal) gambling out of his house and wanted to expand on it with an app to let people place bets on the players. I sent him an email as a record of contacting him with the single line "Find the money." Apparently he was scared shitless for a week before he remembered who I was.

</comment><comment><USER8> It's hard to comment without actually knowing the guys idea, and seeing as you're a new account it's hard to say whether you really know what you're talking about either. I've had the displeasure of working with some very negative and arrogant people in the past who failed to see good in any idea that wasn't one of their own. Not saying you're one of those people, just saying.

<comment><AUTHOR> Fair enough. I don't know much but you know when you've been through a startup yourself and banged your head against the wall for couple of years on every aspect of starting a business what kind of struggles he will face (that a Harvard business school class will not shed light on).

I am an optimist and want to see good in everything. My problem is he's doing a startup he has no real passion for and doing it because he thinks he can make some quick money after 1 or 2 years... The list of motivation to how he's going to find his starting team (as a non-technical founder) to his expectations on how seed round is actually raised as well as not understanding marketing funnel for his business really hurts his chances... let alone the value proposition being no better than a competitor that is well funded and already dominates in seo, sem.

<comment> bjelkeman-again For a start, you know it is very unlikely there will be enough traction after a few years to make a quick buck. Secondly, not being passionate about your startup is going to be fairly transparent, and that is a major warning sign for any investor. As many has suggested, talk these things through with your friend, a number of good suggestions in here. If that doesn't work, maybe he needs to learn the hard way?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> You don't. You can give your input with the known challenges, but you don't tell him to stop doing the idea. People learn by failing and your best friend's idea may never work, but what he learns from that and what spawns from that might work.

I remember specifically when a company pitched their idea that it would never work, and 3 years later the business is doing really well.

The only way you can really tell your best friend to stop, is if you have direct experience in what he is trying to build and have succeeded.

Your friend will learn the hard way and that's the best learning that there is.

</comment><comment><USER10> Someone showed me Twitter very early on and I thought it was totally pointless.

Anyway, I'd encourage your friend to put a very minimal product out there and iterate on it, rather than putting a ton of time and resources into it first. That's just good advice for any idea.

</comment><comment><USER11> What's wrong with "In my opinion that wouldn't work unless you had like $10 million in funding - because of X, Y and Z".

</comment><comment><USER12> First, you ask if he wants your honest opinion. No one likes unsolicited critism.

Second, what makes you qualified to say his idea sucks? Many people in history were told their idea sucked.

Next...sometimes it's good to let people fail. It builds character. We learn by making mistakes.

But if you feel like you must give criticism...don't simply say it sucks. That's just as useless as saying it's wonderful. If you don't like his idea, say what you don't like about it AND give a suggestion about how to make it better.

The bottom line: your opinion is just one of many and a suggestion is always better than a criticism. Especially when he's your friend.

</comment><comment><USER13> The real question to answer is, _does_ his idea suck? I think a good way to answer this question in general is to ask him for specific examples of how he envisions users using his product and why. I.e. who the user specifically is and what he/she is thinking before and after adopting the product.

The great thing about this question is that it's solely a test of the idea. If his idea (whatever iteration it's in) is any good, some number of people will want it. It's a theoretical exercise that excludes the later question of whether he will execute well.

</comment><comment><USER14> I have a friend who always has these crazy business ideas. A bunch of them could work, to be honest. He has a bright mind, but he never actually builds anything. He wants others to work for him and do the technical stuff. Whenever we talk about his projects, I'm completely honest with him as to what kinds of problems he might need to solve before even getting a chance at growing a business. He likes the input, as I have a more rigorous scientific education than him.

So the point is, depending on your relation with your friend, you might simply be honest with him.

</comment><comment><USER15> "Your idea sucks."

What kind of a friend are you if you can't tell him/her straight that his idea sucks?

</comment><comment><USER16> "Hmmm. That's an interesting idea. But how are you going to solve [this gaping problem]?"

</comment><comment><USER17> Tell them only what is good about their idea.

This isn't meant to be a trick either. You should think really hard about what is good, and what works with their idea, and let them know what it is and why. They can use that to iterate and make something better. Many peoples' friends bad ideas end up solid products, but not because they were told what was shit, because they were told what was good and they optimized for it.

</comment><comment><USER18> Your friend is lucky to have a friend that is willing to tell them the truth; most people are cowards when it comes to saying the most important things until it's too late. We're pretty much trained from birth to tell people what we think that they want to hear because it feels good to tell someone that they're brilliant. Giving someone the truth even if it's bad feels awful. If we only ever tell someone that their idea is great, what do we do when their next idea is actually great? "This one is really really great!" "Last time I was lying but this time it's actually great!"

I strongly recommend the book Difficult Conversations to everyone, period. It's one of the best books on negotiation that have been written in the past 20 years. It's very hands-on and practical, and after reading it I immediately felt like I had levelled-up in all of my communications. It made giving feedback much simpler.

[http://www.amazon.com/Difficult-Conversations-Discuss- What-M...](http://www.amazon.com/Difficult-Conversations-Discuss-What- Matters/dp/0143118447)

Instead of telling someone that their idea sucks, you should instead tactfully tell your friend that after consideration you don't think his idea will survive a customer development process. Then suggest he reads The Four Steps to the Epiphany or The Lean Startup (or paraphrase the important concepts) and urge him to validate his concept before becoming too emotionally invested, lest he invest in a solution in search of a problem. Dane Maxwell makes a great point about retiring from having ideas in favour of what he calls "idea extraction":

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2F-2-I2-5k](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2F-2-I2-5k)

Your friend should remember that a startup is a temporary business structure that exists only to prove or disprove a hypothesis about a market opportunity in the fewest number of steps (time, money, resources). You don't say why his idea will never work (my wild guess is that it's probably a two-sided marketplace, which is near-impossible to launch because it's actually two businesses at once that both need to succeed at the exact same time == marketing $$$) but rookie founders are often trying to do WAY too much. Maybe there's a gem of an idea there that's good, and it just needs to be simplified to its essence.

You might ask your friend "why you?" both because he might not have any business starting this company where anyone person might. Investors like to see an unfair advantage; wealth, political connections, celebrity status are all examples... but the best is having someone on your team that has deep experience in the domain. Starting a real-estate site and nobody on your team has worked in real-estate? Good luck.

Also in the "why" category is a literal "why are you doing this?" question which many people glaze over. Sometimes people just have a flight of fancy and do things that seem like a good idea without it actually being something that they truly care about. Aside from being a recipe for disaster, Simon Sinek explains that people don't buy what you do, they buy why you do it:

[http://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_inspi...](http://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_inspire_action)

Finally, you might want to explain to your friend how an investor evaluates a startup. In order:

1\. Market opportunity 2\. Team 3\. Traction 4\. Product

Most founders HATE this because they don't want to confront that product is the least important criteria for a term sheet. Obviously you need a great product; that's table stakes. Investors have to first be convinced that there is a real market opportunity, and it has to be big enough to matter if the company succeeds. Bad pitches start with a focus on the product and promise that the market opportunity is there. Good pitches are all about how you've put together a great team to attack a large, demonstrable market opportunity. Great pitches are about great teams with a great opportunity that have demonstrated growth through traction.

In the end, products frequently change and investors know this. Very occasionally you can convince an investor that your product vision is so important that it needs to exist even though you have a questionable market opportunity, an unknown team and no sales to date. However, at this point you're actually competing with every other startup pitching that investor because no matter how brilliant that they think you and your idea are, they have a fiduciary responsibility to the LPs to make the best investments that they can. If a VC backs a product they like over a boring product with great traction, team and opportunity, then they are not a very good VC.

In the end, most startups fail and your friend is awesome for being willing to try anyway. Despite his fancy MBA if this is his first rodeo, he owes it to his future self to be honest about what he's doing. He should spend a year at another startup learning by osmosis before he tries to start up.

This is all strong opinions which are strongly held. I think having strong opinions is one of the most valuable things someone can do. In fact, my job is to tell important people awkward truths and anyone who suggests you should not "pile on" negativity is not someone you should go to for startup advice.

</comment><comment><USER19> I have unofficially mentored a dozen entrepreneurs over almost half a decade and the only thing I can tell you is the exercise is a waste of your time.

The feedback driven growth model taught in your favourite b-school does not work on entrepreneurs. The best entrepreneurs are the lousiest on taking advice.

I did figure out what works after a long time, but it is completely counter- intuitive. You can do two things, and two things only:

1\. Give the entrepreneur confidence. This is in some ways the exact opposite of honest feedback.

2\. Once you have given him confidence, try to extend 'his' thought process based on your knowledge/experience. It is too hard to explain what I mean by this and I won't even try. I am unable to do this in most of the cases.

"Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself. "

</comment><comment><USER20> You don't have to tell him his idea sucks. Just go over the process of what he will have to do in order to succeed. Maybe once he understands the grind of starting a successful business, he will realize how much work and effort it really takes to start a startup.

</comment><comment><USER21> If you really think the idea won't work, ask him questions you think are critical for the idea to succeed. If he has all the answers--doesn't matter if they don't sound realistic to you--then leave him be. Most successful startup founders had plenty of people telling them the idea is stupid and will never work, but still succeeded. You may think it won't work based on your experience or knowledge but things change. For example a same idea can succeed or fail based on timing, execution, founder's network, etc.

Plus, failure is a part of the journey. Don't discourage someone from failing.

</comment><comment><USER22> Ask questions that he shouldn't be able to answer well if it's actually a bad idea. If he responds with bad answers, ask follow up questions. Repeat.

Maybe it's not actually a bad idea and his answers will convince of that.

</comment><comment><USER23> None has any idea what will be successful; right place, right time and execution will probably be more important that what your friend is building...

</comment><comment><USER24> First identify what he's actually looking for. Does he want honest criticism, or a pat on the back? Then give him what he wants.

</comment><comment><USER25> What do you hope to gain by telling him this?

<comment><AUTHOR> I have much more to lose than gain. I failed in my first startup and spent 2 years and most of my life savings. We're trained in business very similarly (prior to my first startup) so I know how he's thinking about the business model and I see a ton of risks that he just wouldn't realize until he has gone through it on his own.

I want him to leverage everything I've learned, everything I've failed at so he increases his odds of success but want to do it in a constructive and appropriate way not to damage my friendship.

<comment><USER26> It will help to frame it carefully in your own experience, and in the context of "what's the best way to test", not "here's what will happen" as if you were omniscient.

Quoting from peteforde's response above: "a startup is a temporary business structure that exists only to prove or disprove a hypothesis about a market opportunity in the fewest number of steps (time, money, resources)."

You have a gut feeling that it's going to go poorly, based on some solid experience that he lacks. That's fine; it _doesn 't_ actually mean his business (or some pivot from it...) won't succeed. How many stories have you read where the great idea is just a few twists away from the shitty initial plan?

Just help him find a way to spend less than two years, and less than his life savings, to find out if his idea can get traction. You have concerns about risks he's not considering -- help him consider them (and address them).

In this kind of discussion, with each risk discussed (and each step his idea/plan is refined in response), you're helping him succeed, not cutting him down by being a know-all naysayer... that's what friends are for.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Products for which you are supposedly the target user: tell him why _you think_ you would not not currently use it.

Products for which you are not supposedly the target user: you don't know enough to tell him it wont work. (edit)

In all cases: you can help by pointing him to tried and test methodologies for validating ideas. e.g. Lean Startup (Reis).

</comment><comment><USER28> Be honest and upfront tell him it sucks but back it up with your reasoning. If he can counter your reasoning it might be that you're in the wrong. Only one way to find out. Honestly if you can't call your friends ideas shit they probably aren't friends worth keeping around. (In my experience)

</comment><comment><USER29> 1) Don't tell him it sucks, convince him it sucks.

2) Let him go ahead and try it. He'll learn more from trying and failing than anything. He'll also come up with several new startup ideas in the process of working on his first one.

<comment><USER30> I frequently struggle with #2 when "teaching" young children. How much do you let them flail when you know their idea is destined to fail? Even if you can see that an idea is clearly a flop, nobody believes you when you tell them. Gently nudging seems to have the best results. Let them pursue their idea but nudge here and there to lead them to find the flaws on their own. "I saw a guy try something like this once and this is one of the problems he ran into..."

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> You appear to already know what to tell him! You believe, and possibly have good reasons that you can tell if asked, that his startup would not fly unless he gets at least 10m in funding.

</comment><comment><USER32> Do they really suck? If someone had pitched Instagram, Twitter, or even facebook to me, I would have probably said they suck..

</comment><comment><USER33> .Design - business, building, or birthday card - is iterative.

To.a first approximation, no 'latest idea' works. Help him iterate.

</comment><comment><USER34> just tell him to try to sell it to potential customers and to potential investors (without lying). if it's really a bad idea, that should make it obvious.

or send him to me and i'll tell him (assuming it really is a bad idea). =)

</comment><comment><USER35> How do you know it won't work?

Have you launched startups before?

</comment><comment><USER36> You tell them, as a knowlegable person in industry X in order for your idea for be a success you'll need at least $10 mm in capital in order to provide funding for:

      A $1mm
      B $2mm
      C $500K
      D $6.5mm

It's business he'll understand that you've analyzed and identified the obstacles and put together the budget to overcome these issues, I used to work in mining, many projects that will become successful require funding far in excess of $10mm.

After you say that, if you feel confident in his abilities and like the idea, you may want to become part of the business having demonstrated your ability to consult and manage risk to the business.

PS. His idea doesn't suck, it simply requires an amount of capital that may or may not exceed what he has at his disposal.

<comment><USER37> Heh, that's a really good point. Almost anything is doable with enough money.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> via postcard

</comment><comment><USER39> by sleeping with his girlfriend, then you don't have to listen to any of his future ideas! Problem solved.</comment>


Show HN: Sphela, real time public groups for Twitter - <AUTHOR> http://sphela.com

<comment><AUTHOR> I made this with redis, node.js, backbone (frontend and backend!) and jquery UI. Has taken about 4 months so far.

It's entirely open source, and you can (somehwat) easily set it up on your own server: <https://github.com/apphacker/sphela>

I should note that if you create a thread or reply directly to someone it will send out a tweet for you. I need to make that more obvious.</comment>


That famous space shuttle photo: When is sharing stealing? - <AUTHOR> http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/05/23/6703177-that-famous-space-shuttle-photo-when-is-sharing-stealing

<comment><USER2> There's a bit of an undertone in the article, stating that "if you don't let yourself get paid for photos you publish online then you must be doing something wrong". Or at least that's the feeling I get from it.

It's just a photo. The photos that the article refers to are not works of art. They were not meticulously planned, they were not taken by experienced professionals using expensive professional equipment. They're just photos made by people who happened to be in the right place at the right time. They then decided out of their own volition to share their photo online, an act that takes less than 1 minute of their time. If commercial organizations start (ab)using the photos then I think it's good to point that out, as they are making money off of it. Otherwise I'd say: happy sharing.

Personally, I don't take photos for money. Every photo I publish on my blog I consider to be in the public domain, and I'd be glad if people use it. If I enjoyed making it or if it didn't take me any effort to make it, then I'm happy to share it for free.

<comment><USER3> If we decided that art could only be produced by 'experienced professionals', using 'expensive professional equipment', and must be 'meticulously planned', the world would be a far less interesting place.

<comment><USER4> Curious if you can point out any examples of well-appreciated art that was not produced by 'experienced professionals', using 'expensive professional equipment', and must be 'meticulously planned'? I can't at the moment. Just curious what you might have in mind.

If we're talking about amateur stuff that gets thrown out at random, that's cool. But I'm not sure that putting well-appreciated art and random amateur art in the same category is a constructive argument. Like even all the really good Youtube artists who are hitting it big these days go bling bling on equipment and put a ton of effort into their work, and they're getting paid via Youtube ads to boot.

<comment><USER5> "Fountain", by Marcel Duchamp. You might argue that Duchamp was an experienced professional at art in general (being 30 and the producer of less-famous works), but it's a urinal that he purchased in a store and signed.

It's also one of the most influential art pieces of the 20th century. It, and his "found art" movement in general, are the cornerstones of the redefinition of art and mark the invention of conceptual art. Art no longer has to do with who made it, or how, or how much effort was put in. It's about intent. If you buy a pencil and say it's art, it's art (if perhaps not very good art).

<comment><USER6> Apparently Duchamp actually went to great lengths to create or to modify the items he "found", and then denied changing them at all, in what is perhaps yet another level of irony. Or so I've read.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Readymades_of_Marcel_Duchamp#Do...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Readymades_of_Marcel_Duchamp#Doubts_over_readymades)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> On the same morning, HN promotes the tale of John Perry Barlow lambasting the G8 over copyright protection, but then also promotes the tale of a randomly tweeted photo getting used without permission on numerous news outlets.

Is the HN community split down the middle on copyright issues, or simply not clear in its thinking? Is the morality of copyright purely decided by which side of the coin a big corporation is sitting?

Or is one of these news posts meant to be interpreted ironically?

<comment><USER8> As you point out, it's news. An upvote can imply newsworthiness or professional interest, rather than personal approval.

<comment><USER9> More simply stated: upvotes imply that it's worth discussing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> > _"I think the problem is that photo-sharing services don't allow you to > easily provide copyright information," said Sullivan, who operates > SearchEngineLand.com._

Flickr's done that for years. The problem is with the social networks where photo-sharing is an incidental function.

> _He thinks photo sharing services could offer users simple options like, > "Would you be interested in selling images?" -- and could even act as agents > for consumers._

Flickr does that, too.

<comment><USER11> Flickr doesn't exactly act as an agent for customers; they do however have a partnership with Getty to sell pictures, but as far as I know only a very small percentage of pictures are concerned.

<comment><USER12> Flickr allows you to choose a license when you upload an image, including limiting commercial uses. How you charge is a separate issue.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> He stressed several times that the owner should file their copyright within 90 days as if after 90 they lose out on the ability to claim their rights but I don't believe that's true. Copyrights are instantly granted to the creator. There is no requirement that you file with the fed, it's just a service offered. By uploading to the web, she created a public record that she was claiming to be the owner.

The only issue i see here, in terms of copyrights, is if someone else would try and step in to claim ownership. Of course, that isn't the case here.

So why is the copyright office brought up with such urgency? What does it matter if she does or doesn't file?

<comment><USER14> > He stressed several times that the owner should file their copyright within > 90 days as if after 90 they lose out on the ability to claim their rights > but I don't believe that's true.

He only mentioned it once, and merely asserted that it would make things easier.

"Photographers who want to exert their rights will have a much easier time if they file paperwork with the U.S. Copyright Office."

The confusion, I think, is with this sentence: "That means someone like Gordon could decide to pursue legal action for up to three months after her 15 minutes of fame subside."

Taken as is, that makes it sound like their is a 90 day limit. However, I think it's just poorly written, and means to imply that it will be easier to pursue legal action within that time frame (especially when you consider what was said previously).

"So why is the copyright office brought up with such urgency? What does it matter if she does or doesn't file?"

Apparently, according to the article and the people quoted, it will make going after copyright violations easier.

<comment><USER15> If you don't register your copyright within three months of first publishing a work, you can't claim (ludicrously excessive) statutory damages from more than 30 days before registration.

<http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap4.html#412>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> That story reminds me of a more personal anecdote. Some day in the past year, my girlfriend found a picture of herself (taken from her Flickr) used as the "anchor" for some article on a online magazine's portal.

No mail to ask her about it. Nothing.

When she asked to get it removed, they assured that they always take their photos from paid stocks, or free of rights, so that it's not their fault. They didn't give more details, but eventually removed the picture.

The problem is that we live in an age when most people just use Google image to illustrate their stories, and assume that they can use just anything, because they found it there.

<comment><USER17> Why does Google Images get a free pass then?

<comment><USER18> > Why does Google Images get a free pass then?

Google Images gets a "free pass" because their use is a "fair use" as defined in US copyright law.

""" Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

1\. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes

2\. The nature of the copyrighted work

3\. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole

4\. The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work """ <http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html>

Google Images uses the copied images to guide users to the original (#1), uses a reduced-resolution thumbnail (#3), and in general may have a neutral or even positive effect on the value of the work (#4).

Of course, a simpler answer is that the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said Google gets a free pass because Google's use was highly transformative. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_10%2C_Inc._v._Amazon.co...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_10%2C_Inc._v._Amazon.com%2C_Inc)

You can argue about what definition of "free" includes defending against a lawsuit carried through the US Court of Appeals...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> The irony is,if they had not shared it,it would not be famous, this article would not exist.

</comment><comment><USER20> I think the author of the photo took a great stance on the situation. There was no value placed on the image until it became popular and like she said, there was no intent to make money from the image. The various news outlets that were mentioned, though, definitely should have tracked her down and at least requested usage rights. Until the internet as a whole develops its own form of copyright law, people will continue to abuse things like this.

</comment><comment><USER21> A system to reward the photo taker would be nice. In one minute, photo is taken and published. It sould take no more than another minute for news companies use the photo by paying a small standard fee to the person who made it available. It could be like a 'donate' button or a more serious fee just to provide some benefit to the person who was in the right place/time. Usually, they don't expect anything. Maybe a Flattr like system?

</comment><comment><USER22> Is there a "watermark" application that you can place the copyright on a picture taken from your phone? Sure, it could be edited out, but I assume that would provide a little better protection.

</comment><comment><USER23> Surely if you tweet an image you've taken you're putting it into the public domain? Aren't you consciously and knowingly injecting it out into the ether? You WANT it to be distributed - isn't that the whole point?

<b>Edit:</b> If you're downvoting please explain why. I think I'm making a valid point, I'm interested to hear another opinion. And downvote me for the quality of my argument, not because you disagree. That suppresses valid and interesting debate.

<comment><USER24> > Surely if you tweet an image you've taken you're putting it into the public > domain?

Surely not. In fact, in some countries (e.g. France) this phrase does not even _make sense_ legally (under french copyright law, it is _not possible_ to put something in the public domain until the term is due).

You're putting it for public viewing, but the copyright remains yours, and it does not implicitly allow third parties to make money out of it without compensation.

> You WANT it to be distributed - isn't that the whole point?

That does not make it public domain. Nor does it need to.

<comment><USER23> Legal definitions of "public domain" aside, if you're putting something onto twitter you presumably want it to be shared. Isn't that the point of twitter? If you do retain the copyright, does this mean that people have to pay for retweeting?

This image only became famous but virtue of the fact that it went viral on twitter and the wider web. If she'd not tweeted it - and as someone with no press contacts - had attempted to sell it directly to media organisations I'm betting she wouldn't have had much success.

I think it's pretty hypocritical to try and leverage free services like twitter for self-promotion and personal brand-building then completely back- track on that ideology and claim some kind of restriction on a particular post cos it suddenly has been delivered to a wider audience and may suddenly have value.

<comment><USER25> Putting an image onto Twitter or other such services is clearly putting the image for distribution, but under the common terms of that service; you're saying the image is available to see _as you posted it_.

The issue here is separate, for-profit redistribution in other media, which definitely requires prior consent from the originator.

<comment><USER23> Sure. Selling it for cash I can understand the argument against that. But has anyone done that? And why would anyone pay given that it's available anyway?

So you can make the argument that publishing the image forms part of a publisher's content proposition from which they benefit (more viewers, more magazine sales or whatever). But you can make the same argument for twitter itself: twitter's value and the wealth of it's owners is derived exclusively from content it's users post. So can a user claim compensation from twitter for the value it has derived from their posts?

The same argument applies to say StackOverflow. I've spent countless hours answering questions and helping people out. SO sell ads against this content, and my content drives search engine click-throughs. Do I have a claim against SO?

<comment><USER11> Sorry, but you're wrong.

> But has anyone done that?

Good examples of paid-for TwitPic photos include pictures in the wake of the Haiti earthquake, or the pictures taken of the Boeing which emergency-landed in the Hudson.

> Whey would they pay, given that it's available anyway?

Because they have to—the user only relinquished part of her rights on the picture, namely distribution on the Twitter/TwitPic medium, not her entire rights. If you think that were the TOS to change, the users would still upload pictures, you're so very wrong—see the TwitPic debacle recently and how MobyPicture gained a few k users because they state in their TOS that they can't sell their users' pictures without prior agreement.

You seem to think that your analogy is good, but I don't think it is. Were a magazine to publish SO answers in a Q&A section in a paid magazine, I think SO would be subject to licensing fees. In that case, the relationship between SO and you is governed by their TOS. Check them out, you'll have your answer.

<comment><USER23> I'm not trying to make an argument that fits within or agrees with current legislation. I am making a purely logical argument - I'm sure for example there's stuff in twitters ToS that give them rights over whatever you post so that you couldn't claim compensations from them, and ditto SO.

<comment><USER24> > I'm sure for example there's stuff in twitters ToS that give them rights > over whatever you post so that you couldn't claim compensations from them, > and ditto SO.

Gives _them_. If you're posting pictures on Twitter or putting comments on SO, you can hardly fault them for displaying those.

But when AP starts selling your twitter pictures or SO comments on its feed, it's a whole different bucket of filth, and a very, very different situation.

We're discussing the second case here, not "I put a comment on news.yc and news.yc displays it".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> many of these websites people use to freely host photos strips the uploader of copyright privileges in the first place.

<comment><USER13> I don't believe that's true. Can you cite one service that does this?

<comment><USER11> The TwitPic debacle recently—TwitPic changed their TOS to state that TwitPic could sell their users' pictures without authorization from or revenue sharing with, said user. So, TwitPic?

<comment><USER27> TwitPic doesn't strip your copyright. Their TOS states that you grant them the right to sell the image uploaded to them, but you still hold the original copyright. It was clearly described in the linked article.

<comment><USER11> I think the question was whether there were sites which stripped you of your copyright _privileges_ , not of your copyright. I've argued elsewhere in the thread that these services cannot strip your copyright. However, if you give a license to a website to profit from your content, I think we can agree that the website stripped you from your copyright privileges (at least a big part of them).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> What a surprise, an old media outlet is in favor of old-style copyright.

<comment><USER29> I think the 'surprise' here, if there is any, is that so-called old media claims to be in favor of so-called old-style copyrights, except for when they want to copy something, and then all bets are off.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Nobody talks about the copyright owned by the creators of shuttle. In some countries you have to pay to use photographs of buildings (taken by you). Why should a photograph of shuttle be different?

<comment><USER18> US copyright law has a couple of impacts: 1) not recognizing a copyright on scenery 2) works created by the government are public domain</comment></comment>


Twitch Plays Baxter - <AUTHOR> https://www.twitch.tv/twitchplaysbaxter <comment><USER2> We (Instapainting.com) did this on Twitch with what I believe was the first robot on there: [https://www.instapainting.com/twitch- paints](https://www.instapainting.com/twitch-paints)

Summary of results: [https://news.artnet.com/art-world/instapainting-twitch- paint...](https://news.artnet.com/art-world/instapainting-twitch-painting- robot-391319)

</comment><comment><USER3> This is awesome. I was about to ask at the office who set this up, but I see you bought it second hand.

Still plan on sending to everyone at the Rethink office to check out!

</comment><comment><USER4> Anyone have the backstory on how they have a 40k robot on a twitch channel?

<comment><AUTHOR> We were able to buy it second-hand at a much lower price

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Baxter is... special.

</comment><comment><USER6> Have they tried reaching for the camera yet :)?

<comment><USER7> That would probably be the first thing the setup would prevent :)</comment></comment>


Japan's Hikikomori Already Faced Stigma. Then Came 2 Shocking Acts of Violence - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/06/world/asia/japan-hikikomori-recluses.html <comment><USER2> When I was young (from ~16 - 19) I entered a hikikomori type of way. I couldn't tell you what started it, really. I had never been one to make friends. I grew up largely alone, and never felt lonely. That level of isolation into one's teenagerhood defines one's identity, I think. You can cycle inside your mental landscape almost eternally, spiraling ever deeper into increasingly abstract conceptions on onesself and onesself's relationship with the world.

I joined a forum for shut-ins like myself. Many were older than me. They had realized that they are slowly being left behind by the world they knew, as their friends and family 'moved on' in life but they stood still in their homes. It wasn't agoraphobia, although some were agoraphobic. Some was due to trauma they cannot recover from. Others were disillusionment from society. Misanthopy. Autism. There were a myriad of reasons.

These people taught me a lot about what it means to be alone in a social world. There was much pain, even anguish. It's easy to lose onesself in anger when the world seem so still in your room. It's one of the only things that makes one still feel like a living creature, and not a ghost waiting to leave the shell.

I had friends who aren't around anymore. Their anger went self-directed. They couldn't escape the pain. Others lashed out, and I couldn't be friends with them anymore. They followed pattern of self-isolation that prepetuated even over the internet. I'm not surprised that violence occured.

It's rather interesting to me that the concept of a hikikomori is viewed generally as a Japanese specific construct. In reality, I think the hikikomori concept is reflective of an international disenfranchisement of young adults as they come into their own and realize the world has many problems that they are ill equipped to tackle, within themselves and within the literal global landscape.

I'm 25 now. I didn't think I'd live this long. Sometimes I mourn the isolation I left behind. The world is so bright and big, filled with light and wonder almost blinding, sorrow and suffering almost deafening.

</comment><comment><USER3> Society discards people, society makes it impossible for discarded people to come back, society is shocked some of discarded people do horrible things. Society looks elsewhere to blame.

<comment><USER4> > "In the past 20 years, the number of hikikomori who have committed a violent > crime is only a few — no more than 10 cases, for sure," said Tamaki Saito, a > psychiatrist at the University of Tsukuba, about an hour northeast of Tokyo, > who is a leading expert on hikikomori. "If we compare that with the general > population, I think it's fair to conclude that hikikomori noticeably have no > relation to crimes. They are a group with a low crime rate."

> Although some studies suggest that hikikomori commit acts of domestic > violence at higher rates than the general population, experts say the most > pressing problem is that those with the condition, like others in Japan, > rarely seek help for their mental health problems. Hikikomori may be > affected by schizophrenia, depression or anxiety, or they may be on the > autism spectrum.

This seems like a mental illness problem, of which "hikikomori" is one side effect. It may likely be exacerbated by a stronger need to conform to culture and/or societal expectations.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Note that hikomori = recluse, at least from the article title. Perhaps it was changed after posting?</comment>


Software Firms Fear Hackers Who Leave No Trace - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/20/technology/20code.html

<comment><USER2> IMO this is one of the larger dangers and why SCMs that can be audited are essential.</comment>


High-flying geese are 'the astronauts of the bird world' - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/03/science/bar-headed-geese-oxygen.html <comment><USER2> To give an idea of how little oxygen there is where these geese fly, consider that the rule of thumb is a loss of 1 inch of mercury (an outdated unit, I know) for every thousand feet of altitude gained. Obviously this rule of thumb gets less accurate at high altitudes, but it's not supposed to be perfect. The "standard" sea level pressure is 29.92 inches of mercury, so at 26k feet you've lost about 87% of the air pressure, and thus 87% of your oxygen. That's crazy, this is the kind of altitude that kills humans without supplemental oxygen, and these geese not only survive, they can fly under their own power for quite a while.

<comment><USER3> I think your numbers are a bit off

>At 26000ft, the standard barometric pressure is 38 kPa (287 mmHg). This means that there is 38% of the oxygen available at sea level. (from [https://baillielab.net/critical_care/air_pressure/](https://baillielab.net/critical_care/air_pressure/))

I camped a night above 26000ft without supplemental oxygen (it packed up) and was ok but definitely a bit knackered the next day.

<comment><USER2> In my defense of the inaccurate numbers, I calculated it using a rule of thumb I know as a pilot and the numbers are accurate per the rule, and I didn't look at any other tables. To quote myself, "Obviously this rule of thumb gets less accurate at high altitudes, but it's not supposed to be perfect." In particular, as you go higher, there is less atmosphere pressing down and the decrease gets smaller, so your quoted numbers are likely accurate.

Regarding you spending a night above 26k ft, I guarantee that you were in nearly peak condition, trained for that hike, and spent time at high altitude getting acclimated (or you live at high altitude and were acclimated unconsciously). Even then, most trained hikers at 26k ft can only sustain a walking pace for a length of time. These geese retain enough aerobic power to maintain flight at that altitude. Saying that you were a "bit knackered" the next day is not recognizing how close to the edge your body was- did you measure your oxygen saturation levels and would you care to share them so that everyone can see that you calling yourself a "bit knackered" had you well into the clinical range for hypoxemia, and every doctor in the world would tell you come back down the mountain?

While not everyone will die, the zone above 26k ft is literally called the death zone. The lack of oxygen is like a poison, every body handles a different amount, but 26k ft is certainly high enough to say it "kills humans." People have survived cobra bites as well, but most people agree that cobra venom is lethal.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Why does HN link to so many pay-walled NY Times articles?

<comment><USER5> Because the NYT is a quality newspaper that still does a lot of original journalism and does fact checking. They aren't perfect, but they are much better than most.

<comment><USER6> The NYT enjoys a significant brand aura which blinds many to the significant editorial and journalistic misconduct commited by the organization.

<comment><USER5> > They aren't perfect, but they are much better than most.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Is there another 'reason' they fly so high(predator avoidance, optimum energy usage, etc), apart from what the article mentions about the Himalayas shooting up under their migration route?

<comment><USER8> The same reason why jets fly that high? After all, rarefied air offers less resistance and if there is one thing that birds are adept at it is figuring out how to more efficiently use the air. It would be interesting to see if they only do this when the jetstream is to their advantage or also when it is neutral or even disadvantageous.

<comment><USER3> The fact that they hug the terrain and go down when they can implies they prefer it lower and only climb that high to clear the mountains. For planes doing 500+ mph air resistance is more of a thing. Then again the jet stream could be handy for them if blowing the right way.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I wonder if these geese might use some breathing technique similar to what high altitude fighter pilots use above 40 000ft where even 100% oxygen is not enough partial oxygen pressure. Inhaling, then exhaling with resistance. Having experienced overflying migrating geese every year it certainly sounds like they restrict their exhaling with loud guttural sounds.

</comment><comment><USER10> I remember reading about them catching jet streams now and then, a few years ago approaching super sonic speeds. It's incredible.

<comment><USER11> That definitely doesn't ring true, in the conventional sense of the concept of " _breaking the sound barrier_ " which would inflict aerodynamic buffeting on the geese.

There are three or four principles that stand in the way of such an idea.

First, just look at the geese compared to falcons, eagles and hawks. Geese are not classed as serious bird of prey, and don't dive at hundreds of miles an hour to attack their food. They aren't built for that. They run marathons.

Second, watch geese fly, and it's obvious they aren't very fast. Certainly they are not breaking 100 miles an hour regularly.

Third, inside a column of moving air, flying with a good tailwind, they'll catch a bonus to speed. Ground speed. Not air speed. Even if their progress across the ground is drastically improved by riding an air current, and they do well to exploit the natural assist, what they're doing is not "super sonic" in any sense, literal or figurative.

Subsonic speeds at sea level are usually 600 to 700 miles an hour. If their wind current is a moving column of air, there's no way they're going faster than even 300 miles an hour, ground speed. Ground speed, meaning that inside the air current, they're still flying at goose speed, but briskly jogging toward " _the front of the train_ " to maximize apparent speed. So they aren't overcoming aerodynamic drag.

There's no way a goose is flying faster than 200 miles an hour in a hard vertical dive at the ground.

There's no way, even in a dive, that a tail wind is adding more than 400 miles an hour to provide the goose with bonuses that put them near 700 miles an hour.

This is plainly wrong information.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> See also:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20899356](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20899356)

</comment><comment><USER13> i wonder what do they do about radiation from cosmic ray exposure at that altitude

<comment><USER8> Nothing, they're geese.

<comment><USER14> GP probably meant potential genetic traits or behaviors that could've evolved to reduce the damage from cosmic rays

<comment><USER13> right

i mean ,did they develop some kind of protective mechanism to deal with exposure (not only radiation but UV and all the other stuff thats up there)

<comment><USER8> [https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/04/140424223057.h...](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/04/140424223057.htm)

May contain some useful clues. That's going to be tough to set up an experiment for.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Google uses only low-cost, off-the-street pigeons for its clusters - <AUTHOR> http://www.google.com/technology/pigeonrank.html

<comment><USER2> Awesome. However I've been working on sqerrel based slgorithms. Rodents seem to be able to multiply faster and thus provide better scalability than pidgeons. The problem is that my competitor who's doing feline ranking keeps sending cats to my farm with disasterous consequences.</comment>


Big Business Is Overcharging You $5k a Year - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/10/opinion/big-business-consumer-prices.html <comment><USER2> Excellent, another paywall article.</comment>


Ask HN: How do you become a good mentor? - <AUTHOR> I have recently become a team lead and have a decent amount of experience being an engineer myself, but have found that the hardest part about my new responsibility is figuring out how to be a good mentor and to help the more inexperienced engineers on my team grow. I am not sure exactly what makes a good mentor or how to get there. <comment><USER2> 1\. Act with something akin to what in the financial industry is called "fiduciary responsibly" \- in other words, act in "their interest" \- not in you interests, or that of your profession or any organization - but constantly ask "what is best for your mentee".

2\. Understand that "you can't step in the same river twice". Whatever you did for success almost certainly won't work for them. Always keep in mind the "current reality" of the situation, not the historical one.

3\. Gather the facts - over time. "First seek to understand" \- don't jump into any recommendations.

4\. Don't pretend one meeting will accomplish anything. The "minimal effective dose" for mentoring is probably one meeting every two weeks for six months. More frequent over a longer period of time would be better.

5\. Take notes. Review your notes from previous interactions each time you interact, and get an update on what was said at that time.

6\. Don't give "advice" \- give "ideas" and "suggestions". Make it crystal clear that you could be wrong, and encourage the mentee to get other mentors and to simply reject your suggestions if they don't feel it will work for them.

7\. Be humble. Don't be a mentor to feed your own ego - your only goal should be to help your mentee grow and win in a way that is best for them.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is fantastic advice! Thank you for your input.</comment></comment>


Linode Introduces $5 VPS with 1GB RAM - <AUTHOR> https://www.linode.com/pricing <comment><USER2> Previously post and discussion [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13645213](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13645213)

</comment><comment> git-pull For reference, DigitalOcean's $5/mo droplets have 512MB memory [1]. This will crash if you're building a golang projects like gogs or C extensions in node or python. YMMV, but I had to bump on DO droplets to 1gB memory for installation, even if 512mB could do it while running.

Linode is top tier. Support is great. Interface makes sense. Instances are fast. One of the things that led me to DO was the $5/mo instances though. It's hard to resist a cheap personal server you can host all your legacy projects stuff on.

[1] [https://www.digitalocean.com/pricing/#droplet](https://www.digitalocean.com/pricing/#droplet)

<comment><USER3> As someone with 5-10 active Go projects in production, may I ask why you're compiling on the server? I use cross-compilation to build locally then sync to the server. Am curious to understand other use cases.

<comment> git-pull > I use cross-compilation to build locally then sync to the server.

I don't have a lot of prod code in golang. It's just a gogs server, the rest of is in other languages. All of which the best practice is pulling down requirements (some of which build c-extensions against headers which versions differ) on the server.

As a side note gogs has been really great. For those who don't know you can grab it at [https://gogs.io/](https://gogs.io/).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Can anyone comment what kind of throughput a VPN can do on one of these? I assume it is CPU limited.

I like the idea of a private, personally controlled VPN for $5/month, but if the CPU limits it to 10Mbps, not worth it.

<comment><USER5> Unless you're using an abnormally CPU heavy VPN, you should be able to saturate the NIC without issues. Linode has 1Gbit NICs though peering, like always, is a potential problem.

<comment><USER6> _though peering, like always, is a potential problem_

Would you mind to explain? I am not sure what you mean.

<comment><USER5> The internet can't really be treated as a single homogenous network. It's made up of many many smaller networks which connect to each other ("peer"). If you want to get traffic from say a residential connection in the US to a residential connection in Europe, you have to go through the US residential ISP (say Comcast), at least a few exchanges and then through the European ISP. The connections between these networks don't have infinite capacity and can definitely become congested. The network you're on determines the route you can take and hence whether/where you get congestion.

In my experience, it's usually not too big a problem with any major server provider and major ISP in the US until you get to about 100Mbit. At 100Mbit on Comcast, I start to have issues with Europe, depending on the particular AS over there.

Worth noting though that Linode has diverse set of peers so if there are issues they're more likely to be with the ISP on the other end than with Linode: [http://bgp.he.net/AS63949](http://bgp.he.net/AS63949)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Army Captain Sues Obama Over War Authorization - <AUTHOR> http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/05/05/us/islamic-state-war-powers-lawsuit-obama.html <comment><USER2> After the refined-twitter post[1], I'm really starting to think I should change my user agent string. The Times mobile site is also dramatically better than their desktop site..

hmm....

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11631157](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11631157)

</comment><comment><USER3> Well there's a career that's over.

Next transfer will be somewhere very very cold.

I thought there was a ruling you can't sue a sitting President?

Why does this fall on an officer in the Army, why doesn't Congress actually realize it needs to pass authorization? Every year there is some excuse. Too busy re-naming post offices that they are trying to put out of business.

<comment><USER4> Why bother authorizing a war and have blood on your hands?

<comment><USER3> Using that logic, why pass anything at all through congress.

Oh wait.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Fat chance that this will inconvenience Obama or the next president over in regard to the ISIS one bit.

<comment><USER4> Actually asking elected representatives to support war can yield surprising results, not just then but later. You could argue that Obama's initial vote against the Iraq war was crucial in winning him the nomination in 2008. Now of course his White House says the war he voted against gives him authority to do something he thought they shouldn't do in the first place, but let's just call that an interesting development.</comment></comment>


Always a Bridesmaid: Vera Rubin and the Nobel Prize - <AUTHOR> http://news.discovery.com/space/always-a-bridesmaid-vera-rubin-and-the-nobel-prize.htm

<comment><AUTHOR> Excerpt:

 _If you asked Rubin, she might tell you that her greatest contribution to science is her four children, all of who have scientific careers: two geologists, an astronomer, and a mathematician. But she's also been justly lauded for her research, having analyzed over 200 galaxies since 1978. She has won election to the National Academy of Sciences and snagged the 1993 National Medal of Science in the process. But the Nobel Prize continues to elude her._</comment>


Ad-Blocker has been blocked by mozilla - <AUTHOR> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1576681 <comment><USER2> To be clear, this isn't AdBlock/AdBlockPlus, but a random one trying to take advantage of a similar name and logo.

</comment><comment><USER3> They didn't block the "real" adblocker (uBlock Origin) but another one that was executing remote code.</comment>


Show HN: Nutrition explained in a 13 part audio series - <AUTHOR> http://peak-human.com <comment><AUTHOR> I'm making the film [http://FoodLies.org](http://FoodLies.org) and have interviewed a lot of top researchers, doctors, and though leaders of all aspects of nutrition and even the environmental impact of eating different foods. I picked the most important topics and people and got them to do an audio interview with me as well. I modeled it after the awesome "How to Start a Startup" class with Sam Altman.

</comment><comment><USER2> This is a terrific podcast. Brian is an obviously well-read and inquisitive host. He asks great questions, interviews intelligent guests, and makes all of this complex information very accessible. Highly recommended.</comment>


Ask HN: How do you split strings (to get keywords)? - <AUTHOR>

First trial, one splits on whitespace, but this sucks on interpunction and special characters.
Second trial, you use a alpha-numeric whitelist and split on anything else, but what about umlauts? What about hebrew or cyrillic?
Third trial: split on characters < 32, whitespace and interpunction characters; this works somehow but is ugly. What would you do to get keywords from a string? <comment><USER2> It depends very heavily on the origin of the string, as that would determine the special cases that needed to be dealt with. Can you provide more details?

edit: Based on what you said in your original post, I would say to have a list of possible delimiters (which would probably need to be added to for some time), and tokenize the string according to that, and discard any token that appears in a second list of words that don't matter (conjunctions, articles, prepositions, etc...). Before discarding said strings, you'd also want to check if they're operators used in your app, or anything like that.

<comment><AUTHOR> I think of something like a comment or an abstract; security is not an issue here because input validation and escaping is done elsewhere.

Basically, I think of a string like "ham, egg." which should result in "ham" and "egg", and "Ветчина, яйцо." should also result in "Ветчина" and "яйцо".

The challenge is that you cannot whitelist all possible characters as there are (imho) too many charsets.

<comment><USER2> Well barring the practice of specifying meaningful characters, the only thing I can come up with is to have your program use statistics to take it's best guess at what 'special' characters are. Let's say 95% of the characters are between 65 and 90, and every now and then there's a 44-32 pair. Then your program could be pretty sure that 44-32 is a delimiter, and that 65 and 90 are the ranges of characters used in keywords. (The above examples are ASCII).

However, that does nothing to eliminate words like 'in' and 'of' in a query, which you may want to do. It isn't very practical at all, I think, and you probably want to look at more practical ways to list possible delimiters, etc... Although the above could help you determine what charset you're using.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> How about term extraction?

[http://developer.yahoo.com/search/content/V1/termExtraction....](http://developer.yahoo.com/search/content/V1/termExtraction.html)

</comment><comment><USER4> _"Second trial, you use a alpha-numeric whitelist and split on anything else, but what about umlauts? What about hebrew or cyrillic?"_

A multi-lingual version of this could use the Unicode "General Category" character classes (Letter, Mark, Number, Punctuation, Symbol, Separator, Other).

</comment><comment><USER5> Not sure what your main goal is, but in my compilers project class, we used lexical analyzers to break out tokens from the input stream.

Try looking up "Lex" or "Flex"...these were the tools we used. There may be better ones around now.

Here's a quick google: <http://dinosaur.compilertools.net/>

</comment><comment><USER6> I just found LingPipe on Monday, and haven't had a chance to try it yet. But it has 'entity extraction' in text mining. Not sure if that is what you're looking for. It's a Java library. <http://alias-i.com/lingpipe/>

anybody have any comments about it?</comment>


Ask HN: I'm inheriting an incompetent dev team. What the hell do I do? - <AUTHOR> So I recently accepted a team lead position with very small start up. The CTO is very competent, so I imagined his team was quite good as well. Long story short, it's very obvious that the CTO has been carrying the team this whole time. Worse, the CTO is leaving the company, so now I have to be the one that explains simple crap like Big O.<p>I don't feel right immediately leaving a new job, but I don't know how long I can surrounded by these guys without losing my mind. <comment><USER2> Everyone starts with no skills. Everyone can learn those skills, if:

1\. They're motivated.

2\. They're doing activities that lead to the right kind of learning.

So if you can teach well (or learn how to teach well) and they're motivated, this is a problem that will be solved in time.

The problem with a startup is that you're often on a tight deadline. The nice thing about a startup is that often software development's goal is _learning_ (e.g. "are there any customers for this product?"), not building something that lasts, and so "quality" may not matter.

So it's very hard to say in the abstract without understanding the constraints you're under and the company goals.

</comment><comment><USER3> First, show them respect by expecting that they will complete their tasks. That's not to say that you're setting them up for failure, make sure the tasks are appropriate and they are committed, but don't spend your time trying to teach, at least not at first. At least some of them can educate themselves.

Mitigate risk by having everyone write test code and do peer code reviews.

You'll probably do a lot of fire fighting initially. If your team is >7 and truly none of your devs are "competent" (unlikely), then hire someone who is, even as a contractor. If you don't have headcount, then fire someone to get headcount. You need at least one other person you can rely on to fix urgent problems if you don't have bandwidth to do it.

You said "very small start up" so I'm assuming team is <15, but if it's that size then you prob need sr devs to help you lead the team. With a couple good hires, you can wrangle a fairly large team of very junior devs.

I've had dozens of devs (~30) report directly to me, and a lot more than that indirectly. I've never seen one who was totally incompetent. There was one guy, and no matter how much I tried to encourage him, he was performing way too poorly so I removed him from my team. Years later by coincidence I found out that he was working at a friend's company. I asked about him, and it turned out that he was a strong contributor on his team.

People sense when you don't respect them and once that happens the interpersonal dynamic will negatively affect the team, so you have to police your own attitude. Maybe you don't have much experience leading a team. You could say, possibly, that you are as incompetent leading the team as they are in swdev. Please try to respect them regardless of their competence level.

Find out your dev's strengths/weaknesses, so you know who to use when. I had one eng who wrote the absolute most heinous code imaginable, but he got tasks done super fast. I had to rely on him several times to meet customer delivery dates -- and had to accept the technical debt too. You make those tradeoffs.

</comment><comment><USER4> If that's any consolation, stuff like Big O almost never comes up in most software jobs. I"d be more worried about these guys writing buggy and unreadable code.

<comment><USER5> I know what Big O is. (Obviously, they're a chain of tire stores - at least, they used to be.) My first job out of school, though, I didn't. I think maybe I learned it around ten years into my career. I've needed it very little.

<comment><USER6> I used to manage a team of devs who looked down on other devs for not knowing what Big O is. I've argued with them more than once that yes, their algorithm is technically more efficient, but the 20 extra network calls they're adding means it's going to perform significantly worse without exponential growth. I'd rather have a person on my team who can develop solutions for the circumstances they're working in over a person that can write perfect, white paper worthy code for spherical cows in vacuums any day.

<comment><USER7> I think that's an orthogonal issue. Prematurely optimizing, or inappropriately optimizing code by over-engineering its efficiency is mutually exclusive from knowing how to optimize in the first place. It's a bit of a false dichotomy - you don't have two camps, one which understands optimization and does it too much, and another which doesn't understand it and produces code faster.

It's a fair expectation to have developers reasonably cognizant of computer science fundamentals and _also_ to utilize them sparingly and appropriately. In the same way, it's important to understand how microservice architecture works and what its benefits are for scale at a theoretical level, at least. But that does not mean that you split everything into microservices for a GitHub side project or for a SaaS with fewer than 100 active users.

When you need the tool, you open your toolbox. But the mere presence of the tool does not mean it will be used. I also don't think it's fair to look down on peers for a lack of education, as long as they are not willfully antagonistic to improving themselves.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Do them a favour and quit, so they can get someone up to the challenge in.

<comment><USER9> I think this is unfair to the OP, obviously she/he is stressed about the situation, perhaps offer something a little more constructive.

<comment><USER8> I appreciate what you're saying, and agree this could be an opportunity for not only OP to grow as a professional and also educate multiple team members...

But in my opinion, OP appears to be asking for a justification to leave the role, not for advice on how to get the most out of their situation.

In order to offer some advice on how to get the most out of their situation, I feel I need to first explain why it's an opportunity in the first place.

In a saturated industry, there will be someone else who would ask "I've found myself in a lead position, in a team of underdeveloped engineers, how can I be more effective in my capacity as a lead?". So why bother converting OPs viewpoint? If they've got into a lead position, they've probably been working a while.

Therefore, it would benefit OP to move to another role they're happier with, and also open up an opportunity for someone else who could better benefit the employer.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> It's important to have faith in your team, if you don't believe in them then they won't perform. If the CTO was carrying them then that's a way of showing them he didn't believe in them.

As team leader, facilitate their growth. It's actually a good learning opportunity for you.

</comment><comment><USER11> I can understand being surrounded by people who you don't think of as highly skilled but some of the statements such as "so now I have to be the one that explains simple crap like Big O" and "I don't know how long I can surrounded by these guys without losing my mind" make me think you might not be happy in a leadership role.

In any sort of leadership role you're supposed to be trying to extract the best work from your people. Generally you are not going to be able to do that effectively if you are looking down on them. Give them a bit of respect, encourage incentives and comaraderie. Your new job is to be explaining stuff to them so they can work better. If you don't like them figure out how to make them better - its usually easier and way less expensive than firing and hiring.

<comment><USER12> I erased my comment because was not _positive_ but here are my 2 cents...

The author comes out as a arrogant. Looks like he expects his team to be _skilled_ but it's crystal-clear that he wouldn't follow a leader that is less _skilled_ than he is.

My take is that if the author cannot explain what BigO is in 5 to 10 minutes and how to use it effectively, providing simple examples and leaving room for questions, he is absolutely NOT fit for the job - I don't think he understand what a _team leader_ actually is.

I had 4 team leaders/CTOs so far, the first was extremely technical (probably the best, I've never came across another DevOps that was so well-rounded technically). The second was less so, but he was extremely well rounded in managing people. I came to appreciate his ability to express a concern or point mistakes I've made without insulting me in any way.

Being a leader is about taking technical decisions but first and foremost it is about teaching and managing ppl.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> You have three options: teach them, fire them, or quit.

The first question is, are they teachable? If they are, the best answer is to teach/train them so that they become more competent. If not, the only options are to fire them or quit.

The second question is, presuming they're trainable, are you able and willing to train them? This isn't just a question of your knowledge. Do you have the willingness to do so? Do you have the patience to do it? If not, you're back to fire them or quit. But in this case, the problem is not just the team. Part of the problem is that you aren't able or willing to do part of what leads do.

</comment><comment><USER13> Joel has some good advices [1], if you do not want to quit your job. If none of these works, you should quit. Dead hourses should not be ridden but buried deep.

[1] [https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2001/12/25/getting-things- don...](https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2001/12/25/getting-things-done-when- youre-only-a-grunt/)

</comment><comment><USER14> Management is the art of getting people to do what they can do and channeling what they do in a productive direction. That requires recognizing each individual's capabilities and limitations including one's own.

Well that's not so much just management. That's also how teams work. Somebody has to play goalkeeper and hopefully there's someone who can kick the ball in the net and a bunch of people in between able to run (a lot). And some people who can come off the bench when someone gets injured.

Sure I hate sports analogies. Being a good teammate is about more than technical skill or resume. It's about playing well with others.

Good luck.

</comment><comment><USER15> OP here.

You guys have made a lot of great points and I've come to see how I've already set myself and my team up to fail with my poor attitude.

I'll work with my team to give them projects that will allow them to grow. The current CTO is a massive micromanager and I'll make sure not to make the same mistake.

Also, please drop the Big O thing. I chose a random CS concept for the sake of anonymizing myself.

</comment><comment><USER16> I think context matters here. In a small startup everyone on the team is expected to be able to contribute their skills to make the startup grow. There is no time for training and teaching. So either convince founders or management that they need to bring the right skills in house or leave knowing you tried to help the company but they have different priorities. In general though you should try to help people not look down on them.

</comment><comment><USER17> If you didnt give the example of what it means for them being incompetent, I would not know. I think this is the world where people refer each other to jobs and not employed based on competence. You just confirmed that what Ive read on codding horror is true.

Hire me I would say, although I'm not sure its possible or best thing.

Leave as quickly as you can?

Have fun and let it crash ?!

</comment><comment><USER18> Difficult decision. You can 1) stay and try to transform the team by training them and/or switching the devs or 2) leave.

It's hard to give a recommendation without knowing the team. However, choosing the first option is a long, tedious and draining process. You learn more about management but will rather degenerate in general. So leaving and looking for a better environment might be an option.

Maybe it is also good to just rely on your gut feeling.</comment>


Bill Gates: AI is the holy grail - <AUTHOR> http://mashable.com/2016/06/01/bill-gates-ai-code-conference/#grsWxkvwpOqD <comment><USER2> Shouldn't longevity be the holy grail? I accept that singularity will arrive soon, but I'm alright without it as well. Getting older sucks much more though.

<comment><USER3> We die for a reason, a damn good one. Humanity moves forward one grave at a time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I know it feels like we are close to creating AI but it seems like nothing happens until there is a breakthrough in understanding mind/consciousness which seems farther away.

<comment><USER5> Why do you think so ? if we start with the assumption that AI can look different than human intelligence, maybe there isn't a need for consciousness ? or maybe some very basic form of consciousness like we already have[1] in will suffice ?

[1][http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/automaton- robots-b...](http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/automaton-robots- become-self-aware/)

<comment><USER4> > maybe there isn't a need for consciousness?

I absolutely agree with that and I guess my comment was not clear. It is common in AI discussions to see the (usually implicit) assumption that to create AI we have to create consciousness which I think is an unwarranted assumption. Nevertheless to the degree that intelligence is an attribute of consciousness, I think we need to understand consciousness at least well enough to recreate that attribute in a computer. Whether doing that requires consciousness or not remains to be seen (we don't know) but I suspect not.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I like calling it Biomimetic Cognition.</comment>


Ask HN: mobile Site made simple, care to share your feedback? - <AUTHOR>

I just made the latest updates on my site http://www.gmbhnews.com , it's a mobile webapp and will appreciate your feedback, if you have a mobile device (iphone/BB/android/ipad...etc) please to try it on it and give some feedback based on your user experience, and what you will do better or what you do/don't like <comment><USER2> I don't have an iPhone (waiting for 4 ;/) and so I cannot give a proper review. But as a first impression I think there's to much clutter, you should think at a better category organization, like putting "Top 10 a..z" in their own category as now important category are sinked and there's way to much to scroll, even on a PC.

Also try a more subtle item gradient, it's too "eye catchy", just try to whiten more that grey (maybe make it fully white).

And the site speed looks a little bit slower but this just might on my end so no real problems there.

Good luck ;)

<comment><AUTHOR> thanks for the great feedback</comment></comment>