On-Line Pizza Idea Is Clever but Only Half-Baked (1994) - <AUTHOR> https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-08-25-fi-31168-story.html <comment><USER2> Make sure you read the article not just the headline - this person actually NAILED it (not ironically):

> Instead of simply letting people order a pizza, why not let them design it > as well? Instead of showing an ordinary menu with a list of toppings, show a > picture of a pizza with the toppings clustered on the side. Let teen-agers > and college students build their own pizzas on-screen. Present a palette of > toppings and let people place their mushrooms and green peppers and > pepperoni anywhere on the pizza they want. The real pizza is customized > accordingly. In other words, computer-aided pizza engineering.

> This is precisely the sort of interactivity that computers and networks are > good at.

> [...]

> Of course, this network designability concept easily extends to bouquets of > flowers, boxes of chocolates, fruit baskets and the $6.85-billion annual > market in mail-order clothes shopping. It would be perfect for all kinds of > gift giving.

<comment><USER3> Honestly, I don't think they did nail it, specifically regarding customising the pizza visually. Sure, some sites let you do this but noone cares really. I think the main draw is you don't to talk to anyone. Not having to have a social interaction with a stranger is a major selling point. Also, doesn't apply to pizza, but for other things the main advantage is you don't need to order during business hours.

<comment><USER4> I order pizzas on-line quite frequently, and to me it has very little to do with talking to other people. The main draw of on-line ordering is that I can _pay_ on-line. I don't usually carry enough spare change in small enough coins and bills to be able to pay for a pizza on delivery without an extra trip to the ATM and then a shop (to exchange bills for smaller denominations).

<comment><USER5> Do you really have ATMs that spit out $50 and $100 bills? Around here the highest bill is $20. And I've never run across any place that wouldn't take $20s.

<comment><USER6> Huh now I'm curious where _you_ live that they don't do this? In Canada 50s and 100s come out of the ATMs. In Japan, you get 10,000 yen (~$100 USD) in ATMs.

<comment><USER7> I've never seen a US ATM spit out anything but $20 bills. Ever.

Higher denominations are so rare that many businesses don't accept them.

<comment> T-hawk TD Bank around NYC has started to do $50s by default in high-demand locations, obviously so the machine needs refilling less often. One workaround hack is to withdraw a number like $80, to force the transaction into $20s instead. Although I've never yet had a problem spending a $50.

Also, ATMs on casino floors in Vegas dispense $100s.

<comment><USER8> Interesting that it's a Canadian bank (TD) doing this. I wonder if they're using the same ATM tech in the US as they're using up here.

I've noticed a couple of banks in Canada where, if you ask the ATM for $100, it'll ask you if you want a single $100 bill, two $50 bills, or five $20 bills.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Sorry, none pizza left beef is not in uncle enzo's three ring binder. La cosa nostra pizza regrets the inconvenience, but your order cannot be completed at this time.

<comment><USER10> Excellent reference. Did you poon anyone on your way in?

<comment><USER11> Snow Crash is cited in the first line of the article

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I'd feel remiss in not mentioning that Hashicorp's Terraform infrastructure- as-code tool has a provider for Domino's Pizza

[https://ndmckinley.github.io/terraform-provider- dominos/](https://ndmckinley.github.io/terraform-provider-dominos/)

<comment><USER13> This one's going to require some serious QA testing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Just ordered Deliveroo. Currently they are still a marketplace, but I wonder when they will go full "Amazon Basics"? They know what people want when, what prices they want to pay, what quality they expect, how long they are ready to wait.

with all this data its just a matter of time they offer they own kitchens that create 20% of the products that fullfil 80% of the market need for 60% of the market price.

wonder why no delivery company has done this yet?

<comment><USER13> DoorDash [1][2] and UberEats [3][4] now both have "ghost restaurants" (virtual restaurants) as well as "ghost kitchens", which are kinda the next evolution of shared / incubator kitchens but particularly focused on preparing a small amount of dishes mostly for delivery. Most recently it seems they're also starting to pay attention to the carryout market as well, but I think that's a small slice.

[1]: [https://techcrunch.com/2019/10/14/doordash- kitchens/](https://techcrunch.com/2019/10/14/doordash-kitchens/)

[2]: [https://www.eater.com/2017/10/31/16580814/doordash- kitchens-...](https://www.eater.com/2017/10/31/16580814/doordash-kitchens- virtual-delivery-restaurants)

[3]: [https://www.eater.com/2018/10/24/18018334/uber-eats- virtual-...](https://www.eater.com/2018/10/24/18018334/uber-eats-virtual- restaurants)

[4]: [https://www.sun-sentinel.com/entertainment/restaurants- and-b...](https://www.sun-sentinel.com/entertainment/restaurants-and-bars/fl- et-ghost-restaurants-miami-fort-lauderdale-palm- beach-20191022-nrc4xstd5nhl3ljhn3jf3ijzeu-story.html)

<comment><USER15> With the increase in dark patterns to hide delivery fees and sneakily increasing the tip at the end, I'm predicting carryout to become increasingly more prevalent when people get sick of companies trying to force them to pay $10 for delivering $20 worth of food

<comment><USER13> I think so too. I live in an area where carryout is very easy and the apps make payment and timing super convenient vs ordering over the phone or walking in and waiting an unknown amount of time.

As far as I can tell, none of the apps are marking up menu item prices for pickup today the way they do for delivery. I hope that keeps up.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I graduated high school in 1996. I really wanted a computer. This was around the time where there were Power Computing clones that were licensed from Apple.

But my buddy just started college at the University of Oregon. They had a computing center that was this tiny little store that was on the second floor above all the big rack-mounted computers. I thought it was beautiful. I still love seeing walls of servers.

But Apple used to give massive discounts to University students. I was not one, but my friend was. So I gave him $1,400 in cash for a Performa 6214, a Apple Multiple Scan 14 Display, and a StyleWriter 1200. It was around a 50% discount for being a student at the university. I spent two months gutting and rebuilding my friends parents RV for the money.

I hate cryptocurrencies.. For some meandering reason my point is this.

Computers were expensive in 1996. Some internet providers still charged by the hour.. I got a 14.4 connection using my friends dial-up info from the university. I paid 200 dollars for my modem.

So the barrier to entry to the internet was steep back then. So ordering pizza was a novelty. Computers were wildly expensive, internet was by the hour, and slow.

So might as well just pick up the phone and be done with it in two minutes.

Back to Bitcoin.. Don't say it is just like the internet. The internet was hard in 1996. I can drop a five on Coinbase and get Bitcoin, but I don't want to because it is stupid.

<comment><USER17> I wonder what the internet would look like if people still had the since of awe, wonder, and appreciation of what exactly is going on when we connect to the internet. I can remember being a small child, 6 or 7, and connecting to the internet in the 80's and joining a chat room full of adults who were professionals, talking about the problems of doctors, engineers and financiers. It was absolutely amazing and I couldn't get enough. And then I blew through my 30 minute allowance the first month and my parents cancelled "the internet" after a $500+ phone bill.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> This article was already talked about six days ago here:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21320814](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21320814)

<comment><USER19> The link was even showing as visited. I kept refreshing my browser because I thought my cache was stuck!

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I find what I like most about ordering pizza online is that you are looking at a menu that calculates the cost and lets you put together the order. Then instead of having to then call someone up and read it out to them, you click ORDER and you are done.

The bad bit about using DOMINOS website is the shitty popups and 'you want this?' 'you want that?' yum-cha style experience that wastes a lot of time.

<comment><USER21> I like being able to google for coupon codes. Trial and error doesn't go over so well on the phone.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Now I'm wondering if the people that did the pizza ordering scene in _The Net_ read this article. It does the same thing with the pizza design and showing the toppings.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CnWs8jDbXo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CnWs8jDbXo)

</comment><comment><USER23> The year before, I think just after we'd seen Mosaic / glimpsed the future, a colleague had observed that 'one day soon you won't have to hang up to order pizza'. (Most of us were on dial-up back then.)

Not flying-car level of techno-prophecy, but prescient in a way I didn't immediately pick up -- ADSL / cable improved our speed, but the significantly larger impact was from having always-on Internet access.

</comment><comment><USER24> When you see online written with a hyphen you know it's from the 90s.

<comment><USER25> Sierra was called "On-Line Systems" in 1979, and "Sierra On-Line", with the hyphen, starting in 1982. Definitely not a 90s thing.

<comment><USER24> Yes, I should have said 90s or earlier.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Awesome UX for pizza ordering in Tomsk, Siberia [http://www.xn-- 80aaa4abubjt5ea.xn--p1ai/](http://www.маминапицца.рф/)

</comment><comment><USER27> I remember buying a digital tablet of sorts at that time..I can't remember the name of it. It was a startup that sold them as a glorified web browser (and eventually went out of business because many hobbyists did just that and got rid of all the advertisements), but there was a way to root it and install Linux.

This device had the ability to order pizzas through Pizza Hut. I tried it once and it worked pretty well.

<comment><USER28> Perhaps you're thinking of the i-Opener?

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-Opener](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-Opener)

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> We hyphenated "teen-agers" back then? It's well known that hyphenations tend to be temporary, but that one is news to me.

</comment><comment><USER30> After thinking we were in the golden era of food delivery, getting food in 45-60 minutes, I was recently blown away.

In major cities like Tokyo and Osaka, I had food in my hands in as little as 18 minutes after pressing "order" with an average around 25 minutes.

The software (ubereats) is the same, the difference is in restaurant efficiency and cultural norms.

</comment><comment><USER31> Really makes you feel humble about anything you might say about emerging tech today.

<comment><USER32> Or the opposite of that, since so much of what was said in the article is basically true. Ordering pizza via the internet wasn't a big deal. Getting the customizations across correctly, OTOH, made a huge difference, and every pizza ordering site now uses interactive ordering processes similar to what the author described.

<comment><USER33> And yet I still end up just calling the pizza place by phone since it's easier than navigating a slow and awkward UI and having to enter my payment details rather than paying on pickup.

<comment><USER4> Where I live I stick to using one of the two dominant platforms for ordering food. The UI is half-decent, but more imporantly, it's the same no matter which restaurant you source the order from. That's a relief compared to the garbage individual pizza places put on-line.

<comment><USER34> Does it remember your payment details? That would make it a win all by itself.

<comment><USER4> AFAIK it can, though I don't use it - I don't trust these sites _that_ much. Web flow of paying with my bank account is fast enough, and with recent popularization of a mobile payment system, the flow can be as fast as pulling out my phone, PIN-authing to my bank app, typing a six digit number shown on my phone into a web form, and confirming the purchase on the phone. Takes 30 seconds.

<comment><USER34> I'm glad there's a safe way to do it. But that honestly does sound pretty complicated...

<comment><USER4> Perhaps the fault of my description. It _is_ really simple. They payment process with BLIK (the mobile payments system) boils down to: select you want to pay with BLIK on the merchant's site[0], type a six digit number into a box, press OK, press OK on the phone. An extra speed bump is involved with knowing what number to type - it's a randomly-generated token with 3-minute expiry time; to get it, you need to login to your bank's app. All the apps I use (perhaps all of them in Poland) offer a simplified login flow here anyway; for me, it's "click the bank icon, click BLIK, type 4 digit PIN, see the six- digit token".

It really is fast and easy[2] enough that it's become my default payment method in Poland, but honestly, prior to that, I kept going through the slightly more involved flow described in [0]. I really don't like giving my card details out, especially that at least three large e-commerce sites I did give those details to can pull money out of my account with zero confirmation or notice beyond me clicking the "buy!" button on the site, so I assume a criminal with access to that data could do it too (and it's a debit card, so I can't exactly do a chargeback).

\--

[0] - Or with one of the intermediaries[1] that you know handles it, which without mobile payments I'd be using anyway. The intermediary lets you turn what would be "give your card details to the merchant/payment processor" flow into "login to your bank directly through your bank's login page to just authorize a transfer request from one of your accounts" one. The nice thing about it is that a) it's faster (I remember my bank credentials, not my card number), b) the whole is is PUSH, not PULL - I send them money, c) it's not tied to a card; I can pay from cardless accounts, and d) the merchant doesn't get my card number or account details. The UI flow is simple too, there's a string of redirects and prefills that make a payment with the intermediary just a few clicks, a login, and some 2FA thrown in the middle.

[1] - Like these guys: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PayU](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PayU).

[2] - And safe! When you can get improvement on all three of the trade-off triangle, it only shows how much the older system sucks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> This would have been inherently inaccessible to people with visual disabilities. Besides: 5 years later, I ordered the first pizza in my hometown. It never arrived. Gotta love the new trends of the Internet.

</comment><comment><USER36> Being able to order a pizza via a new technology is a humorous benchmark. Reminds me of the first pizza ordered with bitcoin.

The next big one might be the first person to order a pizza with a brain implant.

</comment><comment><USER37> >"Fundamentally, there's not much difference between ordering a pizza over the phone and ordering one on-line. "

Except for dealing with people, friction is constant

</comment><comment><USER38> Judging by the performance of Grubhub's stock today, this headline was spot on, and seeing it here on HN is utterly ironic :)

</comment><comment><USER39> [http://archive.is/JMFbi](http://archive.is/JMFbi)

</comment><comment><USER40> Does anybody else still get 30 minute delivery guarantees? I haven't seen one of those in 10 years

<comment><USER41> As I understand it, they were pulled because employees would drive in a very unsafe manner in order to meet the guarantee and not get penalized/chewed out by their boss. I think somebody died...?

<comment><USER42> Yes. There was a lawsuit after a fatality. The delivery driver was a witness against Domino's.

They now have a satisfaction guarantee. If you call and say it was too slow, you'll be calmly told they don't offer a time guarantee, but if you were, for example, dissatisfied with your oder, you get free pizza.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> Some are including games and entertainment with their pizza buying experience ;) [https://garfieldeats.com/](https://garfieldeats.com/)</comment>


Superhero Tricks For Startup Parents - <AUTHOR> http://maplebutter.com/superhero-tricks-for-startup-parents/

<comment><USER2> i am not an expert but he is having day job, family, not one but two startups and side projects. that does not sound good to me. he should totally focus on one thing on professional front.

<comment><AUTHOR> Guilty as charged!

<comment><USER3> sounds like it's working out for him...congrats on accomplishing so much!</comment></comment></comment>


FBI Worries Facebook's Privacy Policy Will Be a 'Child Predator's Dream' - <AUTHOR> https://sociable.co/social-media/fbi-worries-facebooks-privacy-first-policy-will-be-a-child-predators-dream/ <comment><USER2> Strong end-to-end encryption is a good thing for society as a whole. Yes, there will always be bad players who will use good things for evil purposes. This is a simple fact that has been with us for millennia. This means that those who are tasked with dealing with such problems need ample training in how to do the basic investigative work and not rely on taking the easy way out by destroying the strong protections that are needed by society as a whole.

For any group to say that strong end-to-end encryption is a bad thing because bad people can use it for bad purposes almost presupposes that good people do not need such things and that there is no need for good people to worry about protecting themselves. I wonder what these same groups would say when they themselves become targets for other bad players?

Bad players will use whatever means they have at their disposal to carry out their actions and if we start to curtail reasonable protections for society as a whole just to catch these bad players, we will simply be playing "whack-a- mole" and will not make any progress on dealing with the problem.

</comment><comment><USER3> The right to a trial by jury protects child predators. The right to remain silent protects child predators. Laws constraining search and seizure protect child predators. The protection against cruel and unusual punishment protects child predators.

<comment><USER4> Child predators will eventually be outed because no one can keep a secret like that absolutely secret. Someone, somewhere will talk.

These US Constitution rights also protect people who aren't child predators. You can't strip these rights from suspected molesters without also removing them from regular citizens.</comment></comment>


Boogie Board writing tablet costs $30, features 'no power LCD technology' - <AUTHOR> http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/01/22/boogie-board-writing-tablet-costs-30-features-no-power-lcd-technology/

<comment><USER2> Magnetophoretic writing tablets were 3 for $10 at the drug store down the street last week. They don't require any power to draw, display, or erase and I'd guess their contrast ratio is better than the current electrophoretic/e-ink displays.. but the ones I got are cheap knock-offs. The true Magna Doodle has better resolution and contrast.

<comment><USER3> My exact thoughts when reading this, I was playing with a similar device yesterday but it was my daughters Dora the Explorer Magna Doodle... maybe TechCrunch should feature that next.

<comment><USER4> > Dora the Explorer Magna Doodle

That product doesn't have the word "tablet" in it, so no dice. And no making it to the homepage of HN.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Reminds me of something fun we used to do when we had ample free time as kids: We would put random color patterns with crayons on construction paper and then overlay the entire page with black crayon and then scrape through the black to 'draw' with colored fills (the fills being the previously hidden background we made first).

Try it - it's awesome for kids.

<comment><USER6> How did you "scrape" through the black? Just with fingernails?

When you say, "overlay with black", you just mean that you colored over the top with black crayon?

I have several nephews + nieces who might actually want to do this.

<comment><USER7> Fingernails work, it's what I used when I did this a few times. Your nails just get really gunky :\ Otherwise, a smooth-edged knife works pretty well. Anything with a decent edge, not sharp. Rounded edges don't work.

Overlaying with black is, yes, covering the whole page with black crayon.

So, the steps:

      Fill ENTIRE page with colored crayon patches / squiggles.
      Color over ENTIRE page with black crayon.  Try to make it TOTALLY black.
      Scrape off with fingernail / knife / wooden clay tools / whatever.
      Hang on the fridge to admire for several generations.

Ultimately, it's a cheaper way of doing those scratch-drawing things, and doesn't require sharp tools and a careful hand to not gouge the paper.

<comment><USER8> This is a good technique not just for kids, but for making art in general. I recommend trying it with oil pastels.

Also, the bottom layer need not be colored randomly, but could use a single color or maybe a limited-color palette. Likewise, the top color need not be black, but should cover the colors underneath. Lots of room for experimentation here.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Reminds me of one of those neon static writing pages I had as a kid. You'd press on it with a stylus and it would stick to the backing, making the color change to be more bright. To erase, you'd just pull it from the backing to unstick it. Low tech stuff.

<comment><USER10> Hopefully this has some advantage because those plastic sheet things are awfully cheap, e.g.: [http://toyday.co.uk/shop/party-bag-toys/magic-drawing- board/...](http://toyday.co.uk/shop/party-bag-toys/magic-drawing- board/prod_3749.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> This needs the ability to save to a flash drive and it would be golden. Can't imagine a watch battery could still be enough power however.

<comment><USER12> "This needs the ability to save to a flash drive and it would be golden"

As I understand it, this isn't possible; The board isn't 'displaying' anything, the stylus just presses on the crystal and changes the state of the crystal. The only time electricity is involved in the panel, is when you press the 'erase' button, which uses a single refresh of all the cells.

Since the 'state' is only in the LCD itself, adding on a method of saving the drawing/doodle, would require a lot more electronics, and cost, than there is. Probably magnitudes more.

<comment><USER11> That makes sense. Thank you.

I think that by "this" I was referring to the concept more than the specific product - but I was definitely unclear.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> What is the even remote benefit of this without the ability to upload to a computer?

</comment><comment><USER14> Back in 1800-s people were already using similar things - they were called portable chalkboards.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Anyone have an idea on how this could be made minimally useful? (save image of scratchings to thumbdrive or sd card).

</comment><comment><USER15> If one could erase parts of the screen by themselves, a much larger version might be a clean replacement for a whiteboard. Perhaps a few colors would be required as well. And, the ability to save images. Now, it'll cost $3K.

</comment><comment><USER16> Add bluetooth sync and I'll buy it.</comment>


Ask HN: Pros and cons of "Individually Designed" Engineering Majors? - <AUTHOR>

I am a rising junior studying industrial engineering at Northwestern University. I have always been interested in startups and entrepreneurship, but only recently (1-2 years) started to learn programming. I am particularly passionate about data science and my summer internship at a startup in the Bay Area has made me question my current path.
Currently, I am considering ditching IE to mix in some algorithms, machine learning and UI design, which would work very well with the probability, stats and modeling classes I've already taken. Pursuing a combined degree sounds great in the short term, taking only classes that I really care about.
I'd like to get some perspective in terms of employment and other considerations. <comment><USER2> I'd advise against it for two reasons:

1\. It'll be taken less seriously by employers. Instead of a well known, established degree like IE, they'll wonder if the word "engineering" is just thrown in to a less difficult major to make it sound more impressive. In other words, they might think that you didn't do a rigorous degree.

2\. You won't be exposed to things you don't like. The major downfall of self education is that you aren't forced to learn things that seem unpleasant now but are useful later.

My suggestion is to keep the IE major and take a couple programming electives while learning to code on the side. You'd probably be able to get into a CS masters program easily too.</comment>


Best productivity tools for your dev life - <AUTHOR> https://areknawo.com/best-productivity-tools-for-your-dev-life/ <comment> 0-o Lists like this are very useful. I find myself switching between different productivity apps often to keep in fun and interesting. Wunderlist and Trello are defintely two of my favorites.</comment>


Boeing-SpaceX Team Split Space Taxi Award - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-16/boeing-spacex-team-split-space-taxi-award-lawmaker-says.html <comment><USER3> "A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket, which would power the Dragon V2 capsule, exploded during an Aug. 22 test flight. Musk said afterward in a Twitter post: "Rockets are tricky.""

Am I the only one who finds this a bit misleading? That was a highly experimental version of the 9 that failed. And it failed while trying to do something no rocket this size has ever done. It seems that would be worth mentioning.

Next paragraph: "The Atlas V boosters chosen by Boeing have a flawless record launching high-priced military payloads."

...yet the google finds me this: [http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=1222](http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=1222) "Two top secret National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) ocean surveillance spacecraft were fired into the wrong orbit June 15 when the 200-foot-tall Atlas V rocket they were riding on stopped firing too early in space following launch from Cape Canaveral, Fla."

I guess I'm not surprised the media is uninformed (or biased) but it still ticks me off enough that I feel the need to point it out.

<comment><USER4> I wondered that too. She's written 8 articles for Bloomberg and 7 of them are about Boeing - all in a positive light. Imagine she has the ear of Boeing PR.

[http://www.businessweek.com/authors/2763-julie- johnsson](http://www.businessweek.com/authors/2763-julie-johnsson)

<comment><USER3> Good catch. She's in Chicago too, which is where Boeing is headquartered.

<comment><USER5> hmm shes probably on payroll.

Bloomberg is sort of a catch22 with musk. They try to highlight him as much as possible, even so far as to over praise him with really stupid matters. Then one little mistake or negativity, it is blown up and seriously investigated and written about.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I listened to the post-briefing audio feed where reporters called in and asked additional questions.

A very common question people have is about why the money is broken up between Boeing and SpaceX as it is. Why does SpaceX get a smaller amount?

The awards were based specifically on the estimates that each company submitted in their proposals. In other words, Boeing said they need $4.2 billion and SpaceX said they need $2.6 billion.

This is very telling because the proposals are for the same NASA requirements. SpaceX is saying they can do it 1.65 times cheaper than Boeing.

NASA is not currently commenting on their decision process for choosing to award these two companies.

My personal supposition is that its a best-of strategy. NASA has a high priority to get human launch capability back under our control. They also have competing requirements. Do it as inexpensively as possible. Use multiple partners to fulfill the commercial spaceflight mission. They also need the assurance that the companies they work with can actually complete the contracts.

Boeing is an old dog and partner to NASA. They have decades of experience behind them. SpaceX is relatively new and while increasingly successful with delivering launch vehicles, they've not yet built human launch craft. It makes sense, when you think of it as a way of hedging NASA's bets, to choose these two companies even though their award amounts are vastly different.

<comment><USER7> Did SpaceX even need 2.6 billion, or did NASA have to buff their number so as Boeing's funding didn't look too out of proportion?

<comment><USER6> Like I said, the award amounts were based on what each company asked for in their proposals.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I find it interesting that Boeing is constantly trying to get into every story that they made all their milestones on time. I think perhaps they are dealing with the fact that the CST-100 system looks like something from the 70's when compared to the Dragon V2.

Its clear to me that SpaceX is taking the bigger risk here, they have way more things that are untried but I am so hoping they make it to the finish. Boeing would develop a slightly better capability than Soyuz (7 astronauts vs 3) but SpaceX would deliver capability far in excess of that, 7 people landed where you want them on land or on sea.

<comment><USER9> >I think perhaps they are dealing with the fact that the CST-100 system looks like something from the 70's when compared to the Dragon V2.

They both look pretty plain to me. I mean, Musk can lay on some shiny metal here and there, but they're both soulless capsules. I really like the Dream Chaser; a 1/4th size STS that can be mounted on the tip of existing rockets is very tempting.

I think Boeing's marketing wants people to know that it won't have the Musk- like cult of personality, but it can deliver the goods, thus the talking points about hitting milestones.

I wish both of them the best of luck. This isn't a competition, its delivering LEO for NASA. I think people who see it as some kind of "my guy vs yours" are missing the point.

<comment><USER10> > I really like the Dream Chaser; a 1/4th size STS that can be mounted on the > tip of existing rockets is very tempting.

It's much heavier than a Dragon v2, meaning it carries less payload for the same launch cost, for more or less the same land-where-you-want capability. It's pretty, but pretty does not solve the problem.

<comment><USER11> IIRC it does have the advantage of simplicity in use (if not in construction) over the Dragon: it lands without fuel and without needing refuelling. Re-use could amount to wiping it down and kicking the tires, then winching it up onto a new booster.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Hilarious how SpaceX gets $2.6 billion to develop human space flight, while Microsoft pays almost the same amount to buy Minecraft. Talk about ridiculous evaluations in the tech industry.

<comment><USER13> Yeah, you're right. People are actually willing to _pay_ for minecraft instead of have it coerced out of them by government.

<comment><USER14> As far as government coercions go, it's hard to understand how someone could have a problem with forcing people to give up money in order to develop the most important technology in the history of technology. Would you mind explaining your point of view in a little more detail?

There won't be a market for space travel until it's a reality, so this would seem to be one of the only ways forward.

<comment><USER15> > it's hard to understand how someone could have a problem with forcing people > to give up money in order to develop the most important technology in the > history of technology

I'm not trying to defend stefan_kendall3's position, but you made a pretty large personal value judgement in that statement. _You_ think this is "the most important technology in the history of technology"; many people don't.[1] In fact, many people think that human spaceflight, including some of the Earth orbit missions we already run, are a waste of valuable resources that should be diverted elsewhere.

[1] For the record, I think human spaceflight is pretty important in the long term, but disagree that it is _most_ important area of technology. I think certain areas of medicine should be placed ahead of it, for example.

<comment><USER14> Good point! Thanks for the point of view.

I was genuinely hoping someone would provide a defense of stefan's position, but it's looking less like it'll happen. That's too bad, because it was a chance to learn something.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> "It's two contracts to the same requirements" (press conference), but Boeing needs $4.2 billion and SpaceX makes due with $2.6 billion. What am I missing?

<comment><USER17> If they're cost-plus contracts, then it just means SpaceX can build capsules at nearly half the cost of Boeing.

<comment><USER16> I'm basically curious what incentivizes NASA to put that much money into the Boeing option. Is SpaceX' design too radical and unproven, making a backup option a good idea even if the backup is more expensive? Are there political implications in play, like keeping Boeing's workforce employed?

What's the big picture?

<comment><USER18> The big picture is that NASA has created competition in the commercial space market. If either of the parties fail to live up to their obligations, NASA has a backup. If both succeed, all the better for NASA. Competition is good.

<comment><USER16> That's true; looking at it terms of supporting industry-wide infrastructure it does seem more sensible than throwing everything behind one vendor.

Edit: Comment 8326972 by terravion also suggests picking a single winner wasn't an option, which I wasn't aware of, aside from the issue of the relative award magnitudes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> This is as good a turnout as one could hope for, really. It assuages the entrenched interests, keeps the companies in more fierce competition, and gives even more political legitimacy to SpaceX.

Any more details on why SNC got passed up?

<comment><USER20> > Any more details on why SNC got passed up?

Because they had enough money for one or two, but not all three. And they want two so that they can spread the risk.

SpaceX are almost finished and are so far ahead in development that it would be an outrage for them not to get part of the contract.

And Boeing because there would have been a lot of political backlash if they didn't get the nod, due to their political influence.

Although this may not be the _official_ reason, I am pretty sure that this is the real reason.

<comment><USER21> Boeing is also the safe bet. There is zero chance that in three years Boeing will be bankrupt and have no way of completing the capsule. Realistically I could see this happening to both SpaceX (1 in 500) and SNC (no clue about the ods maybe 1 in 50).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I'm actually quite surprised by this. I thought once the congressmen started complaining that it needed to be single contract[1] that NASA would go all Boeing. Good on them, I think they've struck the best balance they can do politically, financially, and technologically.

[1] [http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/05/us-house-pares- nasas-...](http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/05/us-house-pares- nasas-2013-spending-back-to-1959-levels-potentially-forces-nasa-to-explore- europa/)

</comment><comment><USER23> Charlie Bolden is one of the best, if not the best NASA administrator ever. You can't say enough good things about him. It's a great time for human space flight, it really seems like the dawn of a new era.

<comment><USER24> Seems like we've looped back to 1959 to me.

<comment><USER25> Could you go into more detail? As in, I'm not sure if you're replying about administration, contract awards, or tech; all of which would be interesting to read more on.

<comment><USER24> I mean that we're about three years out from having the means to launch astronauts into low earth orbit, a capability we had in 1962.

<comment><USER23> .But the circumstances are entirely different, in 1959 it a national effort to save face after sputnik, to solely fly men in space and land on the moon, full stop. Thats jt dismantle the program, today Bolden was talking commercial enterprises n.nnabout flying people destinations in low earth orbit other than the international space station (ie Bigelow hotels). Thats the difference imo.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> They are being awarded about what it costs for a couple months for the wars in Iraq.

Sigh, our priorities suck.

<comment><USER27> It even worse than that b/c a new administration will come in and turn everything on its head again. "Sorry SpaceX, we changed our mind. Oh, you can't afford for us to change our mind? Terribly sorry to drive you out of business. But you can't blame us. It was the other parties fault."

<comment><USER26> Actually, Russia being aholes helps guarantee their funding.

If Russia did a 180 and suddenly behaved itself and left Ukraine, maybe your scenario could happen but what is the likelyhood of that.

<comment><USER28> Human spaceflight has really only ever been well-funded in response to a Russian (or Soviet) threat. So bring on the new cold war!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> every time this space-x stuff comes up, I always take a moment to remind people of Reaction Engines and - <USER2> [[http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html](http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html)]

I realise there's practical differences in terms of the current rate of progress between Space-X and Reaction Engines, but in the long term (and making the huge assumption that they'll get Skylon built), I think Reaction Engines has the better plan.

</comment><comment><USER30> I am excited to see where this goes. I really like that NASA is getting out of the way of things that drag down its scientific ventures.

<comment><USER24> Human space flight has essentially no scientific value. The only thing we learn from it is how to keep people healthy in space, which is a wonderfully circular rationale.

<comment><USER22> I disagree. The closer humans (preferably scientists themselves) are to scientific instruments, the more quickly observations can be made and new (even spontaneous) experiments be performed.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I have underestimated the Musk-Fandom. I'm also behind the guy but am lolzing at all the knowledgeable armchair astronauts and their expert conspiracies.

If only they would have relied on the opinions of web developers rather than experts in the aerospace industry.

I'm happy with the outcome but I don't hate Boeing so I'm obviously biased. That being said, I hope Elon demonstrates his ability, and will cheer him on.

<comment><USER32> > conspiracies

I'm not sure if "lobbying is effective" counts as a conspiracy.

<comment><USER33> In many countries it actually does, by law

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Great. 1 step forward and 2 steps back.

Loser: [http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/05/16/nasa-dream- chaser...](http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/05/16/nasa-dream-chaser-space- shuttle-tests_n_3284292.html)

Winner: [http://ronvanderende.nl/?p=513](http://ronvanderende.nl/?p=513)

Oops I'm sorry I meant: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CST-100#mediaviewer/File:CST-1...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CST-100#mediaviewer/File:CST-100_at_Delamar,_2012.jpg)</comment>


Ask HN: How do you begin the process of developing a web application? - <AUTHOR> I'm curious about others processes for beginning the development of a web app. It's always hard for me to "just dive in" and start, so I'm curious to get some feedback from the community.<p>After you have the initial idea, what's next? Start defining features? Draw up a mockup on a piece of paper? Start writing the DB schema? <comment><USER2> Write something, anything! It doesn't even matter how good it is, just get _something_ up and running. Then change it. Change it again. Repeat.

Have you ever written anything before? Good. Then take the closest thing you have from your repository, strip out the code that doesn't apply and file it under the new name. There. You're already x% done. Now finish.

I've tried many different approaches, but this one has worked best for me. It may seem counter intuitive, but I have found that things move along much faster when I enhance a minimal product than if I stew with my thoughts for too long.

[EDIT: No offense taken, but I took out the template. Now close your browser and go write your own.]

<comment> tomh- No offense, but please don't use this template :)

<comment><USER3> I didn't understand what happened with the template and what it was.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I buy a $1 project notebook, put the name of the project on the front page, and start jotting down things in the notebook. This could be database tables, paper mockups, notes on features to add, roadmap, whatever.

Eventually, on a day I'm feeling particularly inspired, I can't stop myself from coding. This sees me make a quickie Rails development environment and push hard to get One Cool Thing accomplished. As long as I have one thing done, further attempts at coding don't feel like breaking ground (hard work!), they're just extensions to existing functional code.

You'll laugh, but the One Cool Thing I did with Appointment Reminder was making it so the logged in user can switch the color scheme for her pages. This has rather little practical utility but it was quick to do and satisfied my monkey brain: "visual changes == making progress, ergo, five visual changes == LOTS of progress."

Often the first thing I do is something with domain logic that I can only execute through the console to start out with. Crikey I love my Rails console. Right now for client work I have a program which goes to a particular government agency, slurps down a gigabyte of data, does some number crunching, and then tells you things any well-informed high schooler knows about a particular subject. The difference between the program and the well-informed high schooler is that the high schooler would get bored after listing 5 or 10 of the facts but the program can punch through thousands.

</comment><comment><USER5> Personally, I dive right into the DB Schema. I use a modeling tool and just start with the basic relationships. For example, a User table and then as I think of features I think about how I will need to store them, how each entity relates to the other, etc. I'm a nut for normalization. At some point the schema is good enough to start coding some basic pages to login and do things. Of course, the schema never stays the same but evolves with the app.

I think the biggest reason I enjoy doing this is because I'm driven by visible progress. I do just enough DB work to then do a little bit of coding so I can do _something_ in the app. Basically giving my self little feature goals here and there.

<comment><USER6> Same here. I use django though so it's basically just typing up some quick models. If not, I'll write them in notepad in the form of:

      @Table:
      - fieldname char
      - field2 int

<comment><USER7> I like to start with the underlying structure of the data as well, which for database-driven web sites means the schema.

"Show me your flowcharts and conceal your tables, and I shall continue to be mystified. Show me your tables, and I won't usually need your flowcharts; they'll be obvious." -- Fred Brooks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Sinatra, Haml, Blueprint, Sass, jQ.

I have a template that does login, tabs, and layout.

I sketch in terms of "ghetto REST"; GET /foo, GET/POST /foo/new, GET /foo/1, GET/POST /foo/1/edit, POST /foo/1/delete. I write handlers before I write markup.

I write the same %ul#foos // - @foos.each do |foo| markup for every feature I start. Ditto the edit form.

Prune down, customize, work out page flows (which is easy once I have a base of things that works properly), pick a couple hotspots that want Ajax-y behavior (not because it's hard, but because whenever I start a project Ajax-y, I'm always unhappy with how brittle the result is).

I use Compass for the Blueprint/Sass style, but I don't waste too much time making things look good; my template gets me to about 80% of "competant" and 85-90% of "usable" and then, if I care, I spend money on a designer. I find knowing that I'm going to do this is liberating; means I don't waste a whole lot of time lining up pixels.

I never touch Photoshop. I can't mock up graphically. My brain just doesn't work that way. But then, I came to web dev from 10+ years of Unix commandline dev.

<comment><USER9> > But then, I came to web dev from 10+ years of Unix commandline dev.

Same here, and I'm beginning to think that that is slowly becoming a handicap rather than an advantage.

<comment><USER8> Meh. I feel like I get shit done. I've seen a lot of very "professional" web code (note "day job"), and I think my stuff stands up OK.

If I was 22 years old and trying to impress YC with a demo, or launching in front of the mass market with only my own design skills and no cash for designers, I'd be worried that my front-end skills were hurting me. But after a couple years of contact with customers and prospects: front-end is definitely not what's hurting us.

There are 3 other devs on my team, and while I've been convicted for a while of the idea that we need to hire someone crazy excellent with jQ, we're all former backend people. I think we get things done just fine.

I don't have a "methodology" so much as I have a semiconscious bias towards a process that keeps me typing and doesn't give me a lot of opportunities to stop and noodle --- at least not until I have so much traction that dropping things would be painful.

I know (especially from reading the threads here) that most front-end people have a definite preferencing for designing and wireframing up front. They're probably right. But I don't find refactoring and redesigning to be so painful that it outweighs the inertia I'm fighting when I first start a project. I need to fight past the inertia before I can profitably spend energy on design.

<comment><USER9> s/convicted/convinced/g ;)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10>
         1. Draw some ideas out on paper, and work out the minimal viable feature set.
            For some people this is just a buzz word, but I'm a firm believer in it.

         2. Use Balsamiq mockups to neatly replicate what I've drawn and make adjustments
            (this step could be skippable, but it only takes 10 minutes generally, so
            it's nice to have)

         3. If it's client work, export the mockups as PNGs and send them a link

         4. Create the design in Photoshop, rarely pixel perfect, I just use it as a
            supped-up Balsamiq, to get a feel for the design

         5. Create a Rails or Sinatra base, depending on the complexity of the project.
            For a Rails project, I git clone http://github.com/ashleyw/Slate

         6. Write some Cucumber features, referring to any notes or drawings I made in
            step #1

         7. Design the model structure, write some unit tests for them, and then
            implement each model until the tests pass

         8. Once I have a model basis, I move on to the controllers and views (HAML),
            going by the Cucumber features I wrote until they pass. Semantic markup is
            important here, but styling is not.

         9. Replicate the Photoshop design in CSS (or SASS)

        10. Launch

        11. Reiterate adding features which didn't fit into first version

</comment><comment><USER11> As a programmer I'm finding out it's best not to code anything immediately. Think [first] about the idea, conceptualize it, let it soak in your brain. Take some time to let it refine itself a bit.

[Next] would be a marketing website. Grab a theme off themeforest.net and work on a one page slideshow explaining your idea. Do this from a marketing perspective: _sell it to your customers._

I find this is crucial because it forces you to refine your idea into a _marketable_ idea. If you are taking 3 paragraphs to explain what your app does, what problem it solves, or why people should care, well your idea is probably not that great, much less marketable. What this also does is sell yourself on the idea. Once you've taken the time to craft out some great marketing copy, you begin to think "hey this _does_ sound like a good idea!". You also have an easy way to get initial feedback from your network.

[Finally] after using your marketing site to get inner-circle feedback, you go after some customer development. Customers tend to need to see an actual working _something_ though so it's probably best to code out and MVP. I'd start with modeling the data and then work out the core features and at long last, I get the joy of coding!

<comment><USER12> This HN post was a pretty good example of what you describe (not complete to your specs, but a nice start): <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1365807>

The professional logo goes a long way toward making it feel legit.

> _If you are taking 3 paragraphs to explain what your app does, what problem > it solves, or why people should care, well your idea is probably not that > great, much less marketable._

This may also be a function of your marketing/copy-writing ability; it doesn't necessarily correlate with idea quality or marketability. It could also indicate that your focus simply needs refinement.

<comment><USER11> Hi Joel, thanks for replying. The part about the marketing copy is surely correct. But for many HN'ers including myself, I _would need_ to be good at marketing copy if I want my business to become in any way sustainable. Many people on here are flying solo, for better or worse. But it would be clear to say _your business_ (i.e. someone inside your business) needs to be good at marketing!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I don't do anything once I have the initial idea.

I let it sit around in my head for a few days/ weeks... If it keeps bothering me then I try and get the core of the functionality down as quickly as possible -

I get something online which I show my friends and family. Once I've taken, or not taken, their advice I move forward.

I push forward a bit with my gut feeling and get my girlfriend to work on the design. (She's an awesome designer, I'm really lucky!)

I flesh it out around the edges, user registration, 404, 500 error pages whilst I'm waiting for the designs. (Or I just work on something else.)

And then I'm in "beta."

</comment><comment><USER14> You can try what the 37signals guys recommend at [http://gettingreal.37signals.com/ch06_From_Idea_to_Implement...](http://gettingreal.37signals.com/ch06_From_Idea_to_Implementation.php)

      1. Brainstorm
      2. Paper sketches
      3. HTML + CSS mockup
      4. Code

</comment><comment><USER15> I tend to think in terms of architecture, so how the data will fit together and what the major compontents will be. The functional requirements are usually something that crystalize in my head on the back-burner over a period of weeks until I pull the trigger and jump in. I often write some throw-away code that captures some of the non-trivial couplings between pieces as a proof of concept and then start filling in the gaps upwards.

Usually on the interface side there's a separate process that meets in the middle. I'll often either do some dummy HTML pages or (yeah, laugh) Keynote slides that give me an idea for the interactional mechanics.

That said, and it probably shows, my strong suit is in developing libraries, not applications, and I tend to paint with that brush even when doing apps.

<comment><USER8> That's pretty much where my webdev style comes from too --- library design --- so that, how I write C library code (foo_new(), foo_release(), foo_get(), foo_put(), etc) just gets expressed as (say) Sinatra handlers.

Then I call the library in different ways to build something useful out of it.

Never thought of it that way, but that makes sense to me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> 1\. Write 2-3 sentences about each potential user type for your app. 2\. Assume each of the users will spend a max 1-3 minutes on your app, do just 1-3 actions. Which would these minutes be spent on, what are those key actions? 3\. Find some white paper and a thick calligraphy pen. Draw the flow in very broad outlines, as a storyboard. Max 3-4 screens per flow. Paper and pen are the best. Forget computers. Forget details. 4\. Think if those key flows are something users are willing to pay money for. If not, start over from 1. 5\. Once you have a few short flows where users would go mad and pour money over you, start thinking about wireframes and details of the mockups.

</comment><comment><USER17> There are several attack angles I tackle in semi-random order:

1\. What problem am I really trying to solve? _The point is to think about the users._ I draw boxes that walk through the user sessions I want to support. For example, "user wants to do X lands on the site, they find the link that says Do X, they click on it, which shows them a screen with UI elements 1, 2, and 3....". They're called storyboards, and you don't need to be very detailed.

2\. Knowing what I want to serve to the user, I think about the data that needs to be stored, how I'm going to obtain it, how to store it (database choice + schema), and other backend plumbing bits. This step is critical as I'm a firm believer that your database schema is a competitive advantage of a business. Get it right and you'll be able to serve your users better. However, it's important to realize that you won't get it right first time, and even if you do, it will need to evolve with your app. This is why I love schema-less databases.

3\. With all this sorted, I tie up with a web framework I've written. It handles the routing, has data validation/sanitization helpers, handles user authentication, and all the other functions a web app needs. I just copy/paste these standard files into the new project's folder and I'm well on my way into the project because I can start focusing on the business logic.

Yes I plan on open sourcing this framework when I get a chance. It's constantly evolving though and there a few things I need to fix before releasing.

</comment><comment> tomh- Personally this is what I do:

1) Idea

2) Write a small paragraph explaining the idea

3) Derive features

4) Make todo list

5) Make mockups using mockingbird (awesome tool)

6) Write some code

7) Get bored and go back to 1) (not recommended)

Between 5 and 6 It should be better to work on the design rather than code. Code should be last imo. Also I hope someone could erase step7 and actually launch the product :)

<comment><USER18> It may work well for you, and you should certainly feel free to work however you like, but I've found that diving into the code as early as possible works better for me.

I'm generally driven by seeing something working, even if it's only working enough that I can see some data on a page or have a single button that makes something happen.

If I can keep a good decoupling between my views and my models it's pretty easy to go back whenever I get the itch and make things look nicer without touching anything else. Unless you have a lot of javascript doing intense dom operations on a page you should be able to redesign it at will without worrying about breaking anything else, so I don't really worry about getting it right the first time, or really any time unless I'm getting ready to show it someone who's going to judge it on visual rather than functional grounds.

I've found (and, again, this may only apply to me and not you) that leaving design for later helps keep me from getting bogged down in details and losing my steam. If I have a very concrete picture of how something should look in my head I start worrying about getting my boxes to line up right and why my line heights are off and all that stuff that doesn't actually contribute to getting anything working. If I've purposely left the design aside I've in essence given myself permission to be okay with things looking crappy until I feel like fixing it, which helps keep me going on things that actually contribute to working code.

<comment> tomh- It doesn't work for me, because I'm bad at design unfortunately. But from my experience from client projects where I dive into code first to implement specs from my clients without having them a final design usually tend to be slow progressing projects. Sometimes they die half way because it works but it looks terrible and the user experience sucks, even though they know its not finished yet, it kills motivation by a dissapointing user experience.

If you have a design which looks awesome, at least for me, I have greater motivation to get it work. The more detailed and comprehensive the design is, the more eager I am to make it work.

But again, this is what works for projects I've done for clients. Personally I don't have any good finished projects, none of the methods I tried worked there.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Many project float around my head for a bit of time. If something seems persistent I tend to make some notes on it to track ideas, features, core concepts, whatever.

If I decide to actually do it, I kick off a Ramaze project. This lets me start fast, light and simple while giving me a solid migration path should the app get complex. Last thing I want to do is have to change frameworks midway through; it'll be an excuse to not do stuff. I can start with a single-file app and build out as much as needed.

I use Rhesus to jumpstart such things, with personalized templates for assorted needs. I get the layout I want with the core files I know I use, skip the cruft.

Then I iterate. I put pretty much every app into a git repo so I can easily try stuff and not get lost down some dead end.

I also like using Selenium to drive test cases from a user perspective, see that I have important site-wide behavior in place and working. And it lets me automatically "walk" an app and mull over the big picture.

</comment><comment><USER20> 1\. Top-level requirements: What problem or problems is this application going to solve, and for whom? If you can't answer these questions clearly, you aren't building a serious application, you're just playing around. (This does _not_ mean that you can't change your goals later, but you should always be building towards a clear, specific target.)

2\. Functional requirements: What are the use cases, and how will the user interact with the application in each of them? Use storyboards, mock-ups, whatever helps you to understand what the application will do from the user's point of view.

3\. High-level design: How will you model the data and functionality you've identified in the previous steps? Typically for a web app, a lot of this will be about setting up a data store server-side and figuring out how to implement any interactive behaviour client-side. You don't have to work out all the little details at this stage, but you need to choose a viable technology stack and know how the big picture is going to look.

4\. Start prototyping: Set up the basics, enough to represent one key feature or perhaps a small group of related features, and create enough of the model/database behind the scenes to support it. Again, you don't have to code up every last bit of HTML and CSS at first, but you need to have a general idea of how things are going to fit together.

5\. Refine what you've got and add further features and more details to the model, until you start to see how things are coming together. Go back often to check that the design and implementation are still meeting the requirements. Go back to the requirements themselves and make sure they are still appropriate as you gain experience in the field and/or you receive feedback from users/prospects.

It's very trendy to just dive in at about step 4 and starting hacking away, at least among the young, entrepreneurial types who seem to dominate forums like HN. By all means try it: if nothing else, you will learn why steps 1-3 are important.

Still, please don't bet your life savings on the project getting anywhere if you don't at least know where you think you're going before you start. You might well find that you change direction on the way, but aside from a few high profile exceptions, it is relatively rare in reality to see a successful business where someone just started coding something up one day and fluked their way into running a serious, profitable business before time and money ran out. Good ideas aren't worth much without a good implementation, but implementations aren't worth anything at all if they solve a problem no-one has.

<comment><USER21> "you should always be building towards a clear, specific target"

Why?

<comment><USER20> Because if you don't know what you're building, you aren't really following a process at all, you're just experimenting randomly and hoping something good happens. Personally, I advocate relying on thinking things through and solving real problems rather than trusting to blind luck that you will somehow wind up solving a problem that someone has and will pay you to fix. YMMV.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> "All this has happened before. All this will happen again" -- Pythia, BSG.

The first thing I do is research the daylights out of every competitive product I can find and compile a super set of features of all of them, noting pricing, positioning, messaging, etc.

Then I circle the features that matter to me and I add my own secret sauce features. Then I turn the computer off and start sketching.

Sketching isn't the act of coding or even designing. It's the act of thinking. Look at Leonardo's sketches -- particularly the ones of the human body. <http://www.drawingsofleonardo.org> He isn't documenting in so much as he's working out what he thinks about how something will work, not just on the outside but on the inside as well. This is particularly true for his anatomy sketches. IMHO he would have been an awesome software designer.

I believe that coding is the art of thinking clearly. Lack of clarity in what you're building almost always results in bad code, the kind that no amount of tweeking can fix.

IMHO the absolute best prototyping tool out there is graph paper and pencil. Personally I like the marbled notebooks because they can take a beating and you can write on them reclining.

Once you've got all the screens of your site drawn out and even some copy written in the margins then you can turn the computer back on and revisit each of those competitive sites and see if your idea still hunts. If it still does then start coding.

</comment><comment><USER23>
        mkdir mynewapp
        cd mynewapp
        git init mynewapp
        mkvirtualenv mynewapp
        echo Django > requirements.txt
        pip install -r requirements.txt

</comment><comment><USER24> Draw a mockup on paper and figure out how you want your app to work. Once it's done, get the simplest case working in real software.

I find that by getting something simple working helps me keep motivation whilst going forward, even if the code is crappy. Conversely, I've started a non-trivial number of webapps by designing a DB schema and an application architecture, each of which left me burnt out before anything of value was even written.

</comment><comment><USER25> Personally, I just write. I write pages and pages of stream-of-consciousness thinking about the application, everything from how it will look to how the backend will function to how it will make money. Once I'm done with that, I sleep on it (as it's usually 5am by that point), and the next day work on mockups and DB schemas if it still seems like a good idea.

</comment><comment><USER26> Make a mockup in HTML/CSS or Photoshop/Fireworks, then show it to someone.

</comment><comment><USER27> I use a Rails scaffold for a certain feature of the app (usually the simplest) and I build off of it. The generated code may change completely, but that's the point; it's just a scaffold to get me started so I can write the real code. If your framework of choice doesn't have that feature, you could try writing something similar yourself.

</comment><comment><USER28> There's multiple point of entries! Just do it!

Define/Pick ONE core feature of your web application. Make that feature work, no one cares how you do it. Once you are finished with that core feature, use it as a base for all other new features.

An analogy, to create a sculpture of a head. First shape your clay into a ball, now you got your base feature.

Go get them Tiger!

</comment><comment><USER29> Check your ego at the door. Do some sketches. Have some conversations with friends and other people about the idea. Focus on initial reactions and gut feelings. Sleep on it. Wait a week. See if it's exciting after a week. Do some more paper prototypes. Sleep on it. Wait a week. Compare both sets of sketches. Focus on common elements. Write something down. Get advise from domain experts. Sleep on it. Wait a week. Have some potential users do some sketches. Compare with your sketches. Focus on common elements. Sketch some more. Learn Ruby or Python. If you don't know HTML / CSS use Photoshop and send it to a company like XHTMLIZED. Use Rails or Django. Host it in the Cloud, preferably with Engine Yard or Heroku. Use MySQL. NoSQL will come soon enough. Review all of your sketches. Test it. Ship it. Check your ego at the door.

</comment><comment><USER30> 1\. Sketch & remove features (usually fit in a page or 2, 3) until I have something minimal. While sketching, I also figure out the main features and then the main db tables and methods/functions. Sometimes the sketch paper has some competitors there, ideas around how to make money, user experience notes etc... Often a little supersimple objectmodel or db scheme too. Always fits on 1 page.

1.5 Put that sketch on my "ideas" wall. Most ideas never make it. But for the ones that do:

2\. Set up local domain mynewsite.peter, and optionally put codeigniter on it.

3\. Put 1 or 2 html pages up.

4\. Create a database table or two, code some functions that call it, and get something working.

Now I have something working, I iterate on it finetuning it for a while. And if I still like it, I might improve it a little and put it online for friends to play with. I've done projects that I launched but only ever used myself.

</comment><comment><USER31> mkdir projectdir; cd projectdir; git init; copy in my Ramaze app skeleton; git add .; git commit. For larger projects, I'd very early on enter tasks and milestones into Pivotal Tracker. Next steps: I crack open my editor and begin typing out the DB schema. Move on to ORM Models, and begin to get bare bones, undecorated views + controller methods. Not long after that will be page layout(s) and CSS. By then, the project should be well on its way, with some functionality that actually works as planned.

Usually with these things, once you have your idea, it's just a matter of filling in the blanks. To quote from the movie Amadeus: "The rest is just scribbling."

</comment><comment><USER32> I come from a business background so for me, the first step is to have an idea. Then I start a very basic and simple business plan to go with it.

The business plan outlines how users will interact with the site and here is where I set milestones and dates on when things should be complete.

By making a business plan it helps me see what I need to do and about how long things will take.

Next I start with coding and database, since everything has been put into my business plan it is very straight forward.

One thing to note is the plan can change, and it does often. Stay focused and always set goals and milestones to keep yourself on track.

"If you fail to plan, you plan to fail."

</comment><comment><USER33> Find a potential customer and run the idea past him/her.

</comment><comment><USER34> Figure out how to do the bit I don't know how to do. The rest of the application is mostly just stuff I know how to do and only need to make sure I do properly.

Figuring out how to do something is always more exciting to me than actually coding it, although normally the two can't be separated. Sometimes I need to implement a minimal framework first in order to have a setting to solve the problem.

</comment><comment><USER35> for me #1 thing is to use google to see how many searches are there a month for relevant keywords.

If you know that 18,100 people a month search for "website monitoring" you know that there is some market for it.

Then of course you gotta check for other competition on that keyword to make sure there isn't someone doing the same exact thing you plan to do

<comment><USER36> That's funny, I checked that term just 2 days ago. Are you building some website monitoring tool?

<comment><USER35> nah, just wanted to give real stats instead of "make what people want - 15,000,000"

actually kinda funny "what people want" gets 1,300 searches a month

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I always start with design.

Once you have a design, turn the design into html

Once you have the html, start building out the functions in the design.

</comment><comment><USER38> I hate to market myself like this, but this seems like a good thread.

My startup is building something to super-simplify how you go from initial idea to final product, especially if you are not a programmer and still want to do it on your own. Drop me a note at harsh[at]zopte.com and I will send you an invite.

</comment><comment><USER39> 1\. Idea

2\. Sketch interfaces on paper

3\. Code html/css interfaces in Rails

4\. Extract DB schema from interface

5\. Create models in Rails

6\. Connect models to the interface with controllers

edit: formatting

</comment><comment><USER40> Yes this is always a mystery to me too. I am not a web developer. When I develop a web project there are always others who do it differently and better. I improved by some steps doing it the hard way, but it would be great to have some insight from people experienced in this.

</comment><comment><USER41> In terms of starting actual development, rather than the whole process from conception onwards:

1\. Define DB schema

2\. Define URLs. I find this is the best way to figure out what bits I actually need to write

3\. Solve any difficult/tricky bits first, even if just as a proof of concept

4\. Implement the rest

<comment><USER42> 4.a) Implement REST

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> 1) Idea

2) check market potential using google keyword tools and get an answer to the question: Can I make money with this?

3) If 2) ist positive, then write it down and go to 4) , if not, forget about it.

4) set workflow then mockup

5) code

6) SEO

7) try to get ramen profitable

</comment><comment><USER44> Find customers.

</comment><comment><USER45> 1\. idea

2\. list features in order of importance

3\. select top 50% of 2.

4\. paper mockup with various iterations

5\. code

6\. revise with external feedback (usability study?)

7\. go to 3/4/5.

</comment><comment><USER46> 1\. idea

2\. google the idea

3\. html mockup

4\. code

<comment><USER47> Or, my favorite:

1\. idea x

2\. google idea x, find nothing

3\. spend 2 weeks working on it

4\. realize your idea isn't actually x, but more like y.

5\. google y, find a bunch of people have already implemented it.

<comment><USER48> 6\. So go back to doing x.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> Brainstorm Paper sketches HTML + CSS mockup Code

</comment><comment><USER50> Just dive in, and start! Prototype, model, plan. Fake it until you make it, in other words.</comment>


Looking for Tom Brady - <AUTHOR> http://venturefizz.com/blog/looking-tom-brady

<comment><USER2> "2) Ambition & Something Yet to Proove"

sp. Prove? Or was that just emphasis?

I see a lot of these types of posts recently where people have fun stating that they are looking for some elite individual/company. That's great, but setting the bar on its own won't get you much.</comment>


In the Desert - <AUTHOR> https://gimletmedia.com/episode/53-in-the-desert/ <comment><AUTHOR> This is a followup to [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10947023](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10947023) (why people keep coming to one couple's house to find stolen/lost cell phones)</comment>


Show HN: Voronoi Selection for graph visualizations in AR/VR - <AUTHOR> https://www.microsoft.com/developerblog/2018/03/09/voronoi-selection-cancer-drug-network-visualization-mixed-reality/ <comment><AUTHOR> Direct link to github repo: [https://github.com/anderm/voronoi-selection- in-3d](https://github.com/anderm/voronoi-selection-in-3d)</comment>


Comparing JavaScript IDEs - <AUTHOR> https://paulb.gd/comparing-nodejs-ides/ <comment><USER2> I think this person confuses 'IDE' with 'editor', and compares apples to oranges in the process.</comment>


Jason Fried: Why work doesn't happen at work  - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XD2kNopsUs

<comment><USER2> Related post: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1951274> with some additional comments on gigaom.com.</comment>


The radical plan to destroy time zones - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/02/12/the-radical-plan-to-destroy-time-zones-2/ <comment><USER2> As long as we're rewriting the calendar, I have a bone to pick with Hanke- Henry.

Just make every month 30 days, and tuck five or six intercalary days at the end of the year according to the standard leap year rule. These intercalary days will be holidays for visiting family, and we'll shift them and New Years so that they will occur in the spring, where weather is generally more conducive to travel. Additionally, the 1st of every month will be a holiday, "New Month Monday," for celebrating whatever you want to commemorate for that month. For countries that want more holidays, add your next one on every [fourth | second | single] 15th of the month.

Countries that want fewer holidays will be excluded from our new time utopia on principle.

<comment><USER3> 1 Month = 4 Weeks seems better. A week is a very natural measure of time and this has less fudge-days (at most two).

<comment><USER4> The International Fixed Calendar - [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Fixed_Calendar](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Fixed_Calendar) .

> The calendar year has 13 months with 28 days each, divided into exactly 4 > weeks (13 × 28 = 364). An extra day added as a holiday at the end of the > year (December 29), sometimes called "Year Day", does not belong to any week > and brings the total to 365 days. ...

> International Fixed Calendar inserts the extra day in leap year as June 29 - > between Saturday June 28 and Sunday Sol 1.

Kodak used it for years. I recall that it helped with business operations because it was easier to compare costs and production between the months.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> This isn't a new idea. In Arthur C. Clarke's "Imperil Earth", the future Earth has only four time zones, and there's thought of moving to just one.

(If my memory is correct; it's been a while.)

<comment><USER4> Err, "Imperial Earth".

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Is anyone still using Swatch Beats? No? I wonder why?

Do many companies run human calendars on UTC? No? I wonder why?</comment>


New Facebook layout available for developers.twitter like - <AUTHOR> http://www.new.facebook.com/profile.php

<comment><USER2> I'm not sure. I think one of the cool things about the old facebook layout is that it can fit so much on one page without looking cluttered. Granted, some apps -- and the people who add them in spades -- are ruining this, but I don't think the new layout looks that great.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> i don't know how this will be received my facebook users. If history has taught us anything, it will not be received well.

</comment><comment><USER3> Very slick. Amazing improvement.</comment>


Ask HN: DIY storage or not? - <AUTHOR>

We have developed a generic syncing app (web, desktop, mobile) on top of cloud storage (S3 initially).  We are moving to testing soon and can offer either a hosted version or let customers use their S3 account.  Which offering would you advice we focus and why?
Our thoughts:

   1. Focusing on latter differentiates us
   2. Allows us to "plug" into future cloud storage (Goog, Msft, etc)
   3. However, not sure if market today is "too niche"
   4. Audience is individuals and businesses
 Thanks in advance. <comment><USER2> I'd offer a hosted version. Most people will not want to go about setting up S3, dealing with private keys etc. Where's your market?

<comment><AUTHOR> Our core focus will be businesses that want to control their own storage.

Is entering your S3 secret ID and key too cumbersome for most customers?

<comment><USER3> Yeah, I think it is too. As technical people its not a big deal for us, but you should make it as easy as possible for people otherwise you'll lose the business to a potentially inferior competitor who makes it nice and easy

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Definitely go with hosted. Every account you force people to sign up for will drop your user base by a ton. Would you be posting on Hacker News if you also had to sign up for S3 (or give your current S3 account) in order to provide storage for the comments?

In addition, storing their S3 credentials has all its own problems. Remember that the AWS credentials are pretty powerful. If your database is compromised, those keys could be used to drain peoples' bank accounts via Flexible Payment System (FPS). Handle AWS credentials as you would a credit card number, which means avoid at all costs!

</comment><comment><USER5> I suspect that folks who have an S3 account today are sophisticated enough that they'll undervalue your value-add. Moreover, folks who don't have an S3 account don't know your storage costs.

FWIW, "control my own storage" is overhead for almost everyone; it is overhead that they'll pay to avoid.

</comment><comment><USER6> _We are moving to testing soon and can offer either a hosted version or let customers use their S3 account. Which offering would you advice we focus and why?_

Is there something that precludes you from offering the option to use either (or even both), like development time?

<comment><AUTHOR> We wanted to focus on one option. Having both initially takes more dev time, support, different marketing message, etc.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I trust you've read what Joel has to say on generic syncing apps: <http://joelonsoftware.com/items/2008/05/01.html>

So I would say, 3.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, have read it and disagree. The act of syncing (sharing, backup, versioning, access) has to be super easy to use (i.e. tied to the OS). The problem with syncing apps in the past was they were hard to use so people stuck with their USB drives, emailing themselves, etc. Dropbox comes to mind as a syncing app that has made it easy to use.

Similarly, mp3 players weren't killer products until iPod came along :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> if you can only do one option do the hosted version, you are in an information bubble where most people you know use it, outside the valley most people never heard of it.

\+ chances are if a person has an S3 account, they most likely have the knowledge to do what you are doing themselves

</comment><comment><USER9> Definitely go hosted. S3 is not fun or easy for most people to set up.

</comment><comment><USER10> It is good to be the middleman!</comment>


How Untitled Goose Game became a real video game - <AUTHOR> https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/10/10/20897212/what-is-untitled-goose-game-explained-nintendo-switch-pc-mac <comment><USER2> My favorite piece of Goose Game fanart so far is this one: [https://i.redd.it/wbts33d7u6u31.jpg](https://i.redd.it/wbts33d7u6u31.jpg)

A bad goose variation on [https://i.imgur.com/WPuSziL.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/WPuSziL.jpg)

It's a simple and hilarious game. Haven't finished it yet, but strongly recommend to anyone who's on the fence.

<comment><USER3> if this isn't the work of a viral marketing company, they certainly have the possibility of a new line of work ahead of them after this. I can't remember seeing a viral marketing campaign as effective as this in a long time.

edit: this comment is apparently oddly controversial for a startup-oriented forum. Perhaps someone could explain why? They have really struck marketing gold in a way most small companies would envy.

<comment><USER4> It nearly got me to purchase something on the Epic Store.

Nearly.

<comment><USER5> I don't understand why people have problem with Epic Store. Isn't this just the competition everyone should want? Steam takes 30 % of your money. Epic takes 12 %. They are competing on cost. Why would that be a problem?

Why is that part of capitalism where Steam has near-monopoly on Games okay, but not the part where they have to compete with someone? Why would someone have loyalty to one huge corporation over another?

I don't get it.

<comment><USER6> Valve and by extension Steam have built a very positive reputation.

IMO they have squandered a lot of it lately but they remain very popular and people are just extremely used to the steam launcher.

I for one am VERY happy that somebody is forcing Steam to stop being complacent and is competing on margins (30% is a LOT of money).

<comment><USER7> They're not competing on margins, they're "competing" by making game developers sign up for exclusivity deals.

<comment><USER6> How do you call the lower store fees ?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I didn't read to the bottom, but just in case this wasn't mentioned: UGG was funded by a government grant, Film Victoria, specifically for game companies to "produce a prototype or full game, and marketing and related expenses"

[https://www.film.vic.gov.au/showcase/untitled-goose- game](https://www.film.vic.gov.au/showcase/untitled-goose-game)

edit: I mention this as interesting trivia, not as in, "Watch out, Untitled Goose Game is a front for the (Australian) feds"

<comment><USER9> Film Victoria is a state based organisation. The Australian Federal funding for this type of thing was closed in 2014 [0]. I believe they are one of the few states to provide funding to indie game devs.

[0] [https://www.kotaku.com.au/2014/05/government-funding-for- gam...](https://www.kotaku.com.au/2014/05/government-funding-for-games-pulled- the-australian-games-industry-reacts/)

<comment><USER10> Funding from the Vic government has made lots of cool indies possible. I'm pretty used to seeing their logo pop up at the beginning of a game now. It's really good to see such a successful arts funding program, and the thriving community that it's helped make in Melbourne.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> >"Untitled Goose Game is a safe, socially acceptable way to relieve stress," the Washington Post declared shortly after the game's release. "It's the new punching a wall. It's the new crying at your desk."

Likening crying at your desk to a delightful video game is exactly the kind of analogy that I would expect from one of Jeff Bezos' employees.

<comment><USER12> > is exactly the kind of analogy that I would expect from one of Jeff Bezos' > employees

There are so many valid criticisms of Bezos, the companies he owns, etc. This is so unnecessary. The quoted line says nothing about Bezos.

<comment><USER13> I think they're trying to loosely relate the implied socially unacceptable ways of relieving stress with this persons employment at a Bezos company, companies which have been in the news because of bad working conditions for employees.

Just one example: [https://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/11/27/undercover- reporter...](https://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/11/27/undercover-reporter- reveals-brutal-working-conditions-at-amazon)

Given that, it is not too much of a stretch to associate Jeff's example and style of leadership with this person's statement - in a mostly tongue-in-cheek manner, mind you.

<comment><USER14> This is shoehorning of politics where it doesn't fit. I know that's popular on Reddit but it rarely leads to interesting conversations, just low quality generalizations/flamewars all based on a weak analogy.

This article is about a video games, the story doesn't mention Amazon or even her workplace specifically, the quote was a lighthearted joke (jokes use exaggeration to be funny, ie. "punching a wall" at an office), etc.

<comment><USER13> I agree in the sense that I wouldn't have made the association myself either - I also think that the quote was almost definitely just humour. I'm just explaining what I thought the connection they'd made was.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Looks like a whole new genre of games have recently been invented:

\- Goat Simulator: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvWGLcdI8o8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvWGLcdI8o8)

\- Untitled Goose Game: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LL2AtHo1gk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LL2AtHo1gk)

\- Pigeon Simulator: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yb30jQ_Bpmg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yb30jQ_Bpmg)

<comment><USER16> Long ago someone already had the bright idea of making individual sims of tons of different animals all based around the same shitty engine, each with their own separate DLC and flood the android market with them. I was really interested in animal sims for a while.

I think we're headed into good territory though. Check out this clearly Harvest Moon inspired cat sim: [http://cattailsgame.com/](http://cattailsgame.com/)

Personally, I would like to see an animal-centric classic Gamemaker style RPG a la _Chef Boyardee 's Barkley, Shut Up and Jam: Gaiden_ with an audacious plot on the level of Cats & Dogs.

<comment><USER17> Oof, don't remind me -- it's been close to a decade since I backed "The Magical Realms of Tír na nÓg: Escape from Necron 7 – Revenge of Cuchulainn: The Official Game of the Movie – Chapter 2 of the Hoopz Barkley SaGa" on Kickstarter.

<comment><USER16> Hey! As of June this year the developers have said they're still working on it, just most of the team has left so it's just the core two devs now working part time. I'm considering reaching out to lend a hand just so I'm not playing this game in my forties.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> This seems to imply the finished product is somehow not a joke. I think the finished product is one of the best jokes I've experienced in years.

<comment><USER19> Ok, we've changed the title above to a different chunk of the article's subtitle.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I am impressed and surprised to watch Panic Software's transition from exceptional mac software developers, to exceptional Game Producers. I'd love to hear from them about their choice to start publishing games, and their strategy for success in that market.

<comment><USER21> I love Panic. Playdate looks awesome, I am happy for their success, and I wish them the best.

That said, I think both the games they've produced (Firewatch and Untitled Goose Game) are duds. They're flashy, well marketed, and totally underbaked. I expected to love both of those games, being a fan of "walking simulators" and story focused games (which Firewatch fumbled), and Hitman and stealth games (which UGG fumbled).

<comment><USER22> For me personally, Firewatch was the first "walking simulator" I was actually able to finish. I thought it was phenomenal.

<comment><USER21> I'm happy you liked it!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> For another entertaining "This went much farther than expected" but for two people who already had full time jobs and no desire to leave them, make a start up, or start a new business in any way, see Tom Scott and Matt Gray's Emojli: an emoji-only messenger app [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsyhGHUEt-k](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsyhGHUEt-k)

</comment><comment><USER24> Light hearted mischief come alive with the animal kingdom's lead scamp as the central character.

The game itself is great fun for a casual game and it's fun to watch people play and laugh.

The inherent share-ability / meme-ability of goose antics is viral marketing at it's best.

Well deserved success, I hope they do a goose-2 with co-op mischief!

</comment><comment><USER25> I love how this is almost exactly the same story as Goat Simulator. Modestly successful indie studio, looking for something to do after wrapping up their last project, starts work on a goofy little game about a chaotic, malicious farm animal, more for fun than anything else. Somehow it goes massively viral and becomes their greatest success.

</comment><comment><USER26> DeSinc did a brilliant piece on the various glitches in the game that let you go over fences etc.

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

</comment><comment><USER27> In a sleepless night, I made a bookmarklet that lets you honk and drag around images on a website of your choosing.

[https://kay-is.github.io/undefined-gooselet/](https://kay- is.github.io/undefined-gooselet/)

<comment><USER28> Related: Katamari bookmarklet: [http://kathack.com/](http://kathack.com/)

(No, not mine.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I feel like this is somewhat close to the Goat Simulator.

In that case, this will likely join my list of fun, but pretty odd games:

* The Stanley Parable

* The Goat Simulator

* I am Bread

* Starwhals

* Octodad

<comment><USER30> I can't really speak to any of the other games but The Stanley Parable is an amazing game. Replays are very rewarding; trying to experience and find everything which lies inside that very peculiar office building.

<comment><USER31> "This is the story of a goose named Stanley".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> I was unable to find it funny :|

<comment><USER33> Personally, It's a game I love to hate. growing up near a large lake, I got to see these flying rage machines up close, and to play as one opened up a part of my brain I had closed up for years.

I want more games like this.

<comment><USER34> (i'm curious why this reply is apparently downvoted?)

<comment><USER35> Occasionally the HN hate machine rains down upon you if your comment doesn't fit someone's narrow idea of what a comment should be. I upvoted, but really it's best to not take votes too seriously or personally as people on here are fickle

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> This game is great. It's really fun being an a-hole goose, lol.

</comment><comment><USER37> "What a fowl day" song: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjhfDQbJ3Lk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjhfDQbJ3Lk)

</comment><comment><USER38> Something about the lack of margins between sections on that article makes it very hard for me to read.

<comment><USER39> Firefox Reader Mode is now one of my favorite features (Chrome probably has somethign similar?)

<comment><USER40> It does, but it's disabled by default, enabled by a hidden setting and you have to use the menu to trigger it.

[https://www.howtogeek.com/423643/how-to-use-google- chromes-h...](https://www.howtogeek.com/423643/how-to-use-google-chromes- hidden-reader-mode/)

Cant make avoiding adverts too easy, after all.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> just going to leave this here: [https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/peace-was- never-an-option](https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/peace-was-never-an-option)</comment>


Why Nokia is releasing a netbook - <AUTHOR> http://www.techradar.com/news/mobile-computing/laptops/why-nokia-is-releasing-a-netbook-628515

<comment><USER2> Its about time a mobile phone company gets into the netbook market. 3G broadband, WiFi, bluetooth, 12 hr battery etc etc. Sold! I can definately run my business from anywhere with that device, and not have to lug my current toshiba. Great laptop, but built to do it all like a desktop.</comment>


Hackterms: A dictionary of programming terms - <AUTHOR> https://www.hackterms.com/ <comment><USER2> Creator here - thank you for sharing!

Hackterms is a crowdsourced dictionary of coding terms. While learning to code, I'd often fall down a rabbit hole of research for things I didn't really need. There are lots of resources that teach you how to do something, but few explain when and why. So, I built Hackterms to answer these questions:

1\. at a high level, what does this tool/process/concept do?

2\. When is it used? What are the alternatives?

3\. Is this worth my time to learn now?

Let me know what you think!</comment>