Freedom of Information Release on Nikola Tesla (2011) - <AUTHOR> https://vault.fbi.gov/nikola-tesla/Nikola%20Tesla%20Part%2001%20of%2003/view <comment><USER2> Most of this doesn't appear to be confiscated documents, but rather just letters sent to the FBI and a few scanned (covers of) books.

The 3rd part of the release is somewhat interesting as it's about flying saucers (from a news letter). It has the statement(s):

> This letter will not reach you in time to sight a flying saucer over New > York on the night of June 10, from 10pm to 1am

It then goes on to discuss "space people".

Honestly, I'm wondering what exactly they released, as this was just a letter sent to Nikola Tesla... So it's not all that interesting, besides getting insight(s) into some tabloids of the time. Nothing really all that juicy, unless I'm missing something.

Part 1: [https://vault.fbi.gov/nikola- tesla/Nikola%20Tesla%20Part%200...](https://vault.fbi.gov/nikola- tesla/Nikola%20Tesla%20Part%2001%20of%2003/view)

Part 2: [https://vault.fbi.gov/nikola](https://vault.fbi.gov/nikola) tesla/Nikola%20Tesla%20Part%2002%20of%2003/view

Part 3: [https://vault.fbi.gov/nikola- tesla/Nikola%20Tesla%20Part%200...](https://vault.fbi.gov/nikola- tesla/Nikola%20Tesla%20Part%2003%20of%2003/view)

<comment><USER3> Part 2: [https://vault.fbi.gov/nikola- tesla/Nikola%20Tesla%20Part%200...](https://vault.fbi.gov/nikola- tesla/Nikola%20Tesla%20Part%2002%20of%2003/view)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> It's important to keep in mind that near the end of his days, Tesla sure seemed to be experiencing some mental illness. He made wild claims that were never quite backed up by proof, claims that even now no one seems to believe were actually possible.

It's a sad end to a brilliant mind.

But then, when you're the FBI and WW2 is ongoing, you pay attention when a famous and brilliant inventor claims to have death rays and super weapons.

<comment><USER5> He made wild claims that were never quite backed up by proof, claims that even now no one seems to believe were actually possible \</comment></comment><comment>-

when Leonardo da vinci sketched out a parachute or a helicopter-looking self propelling device prototypes that took 500 years to actually build - what did contemporaries think of him?

who are we to judge a great mind? we simply cant. yes he might have gone mad, but there is a very fine line between madness and brilliance and its often blurred. all we can do is take these ideas and test/iterate/test. id rather bet on a horse that is capable of running than on a just born foal.

<comment><USER6> > who are we to judge a great mind? we simply cant.

It's not like these "great minds" are alien superintelligences. How much smarter do you think they were than the average person, in terms of IQ? Maybe 2x maximum? Seems quite possible to judge. Tesla was not a Singularity.

<comment><USER7> IQ is an irrelevant metric. Look at his achievements pragmatically.

In terms of understanding of electric phenomena, its difficult to point at another with a similar level of understanding (or at least productive understanding).

With that in mind, it would seem he's quite a bit "smarter" than even very intelligent people, with the same life long pursuit.

<comment><USER8> > In terms of understanding of electric phenomena, its difficult to point at > another with a similar level of understanding (or at least productive > understanding).

Maxwell? Faraday? Heaviside? etc. Or are we explicitly talking circuits?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> For anyone interested in a really good biography on Tesla, this [0] is the best one I've read. It's written by John J. O'Neill, a journalist who knew Tesla personally for 30 years or so IIRC. It sticks to the facts, eschewing the various myths about aliens and such that tend to stick to him, and it covers his whole life, from what is known of his childhood all the way through his death. It's a super interesting read.

[0] [https://www.amazon.com/Prodigal-Genius-Life-Nikola-Tesla- ebo...](https://www.amazon.com/Prodigal-Genius-Life-Nikola-Tesla- ebook/dp/B00295RQQU/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1508860080&sr=8-2&keywords=nikola+tesla+biography+by+John)

<comment><USER10> That's one of the biographies I've read about Tesla, and which I referenced in an earlier comment I made upthread. It should be noted that others have said it isn't without bias. It was an excellent read, though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> > Exhibit M. Part 03 of 03 pg. 43. The article further discusses the subject > of wind, tides, lightning, and water power as a source of commercial energy. > The last sentence of this memorandum states: "With my wireless system, it is > practicable to transmit electrical energy at a distance of twelve thousand > miles with a loss not exceeding 5 per cent. I can conceive of no advances > which would be more desirable at this time and more beneficial to the > further progress of mankind."

No further details are given, or the exhibit itself, but interesting nonetheless.

[https://vault.fbi.gov/nikola- tesla/Nikola%20Tesla%20Part%200...](https://vault.fbi.gov/nikola- tesla/Nikola%20Tesla%20Part%2003%20of%2003/view)

<comment><USER12> i believe this is referencing some of his ideas on global wireless power transfer.

> Early on he seemed to borrow from the ideas of Mahlon Loomis, proposing a > system composed of balloons to suspend transmitting and receiving electrodes > in the air above 30,000 feet (9,100 m) in altitude, where he thought the > pressure would allow him to send high voltages (millions of volts) long > distances. [...] Experiments he conducted [at Colorado Springs in 1899] with > a large coil operating in the megavolts range, as well as observations he > made of the electronic noise of lightning strikes, led him to conclude > incorrectly that he could use the entire globe of the Earth to conduct > electrical energy.

> His observations also led him to believe a high voltage used in a coil at an > elevation of a few hundred feet would "break the air stratum down", > eliminating the need for miles of cable hanging on balloons to create his > atmospheric return circuit. Tesla would go on the next year to propose a > "World Wireless System" that was to broadcast both information and power > worldwide. In 1901, at Shoreham, New York he attempted to construct a large > high-voltage wireless power station, now called Wardenclyffe Tower, but by > 1904 investment dried up and the facility was never completed.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_power_transfer#Tesla](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_power_transfer#Tesla)

i've heard a claim that the idea described in the latter quote would effectively involve "igniting the ionosphere" which would permanently change the color of the sky, but i can't speak to the accuracy of that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Another Croatian - Serbian conflict regarding his ancestry in 5,4,3 ...

Kidding aside, what would people like him achieve if they had resources of today, computers and internet...

<comment><USER14> there's no conflict there (not that it's too relevant, but his ancestry is quite clear)... I guess there will always be people who like creating conflicts :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Everytime i read something about Nikola Tesla, i go back reading: [http://theoatmeal.com/comics/tesla](http://theoatmeal.com/comics/tesla)

<comment><USER16> I like the oatmeal, but that comic is just a collection of urban myths about Tesla. [http://edisontechcenter.org/tesladebunked.html](http://edisontechcenter.org/tesladebunked.html)

<comment><USER17> > Mr. Inman [author of The Oatmeal], like many comedians seems to be > fundamentally unhappy and finds an outlet through humor. Oddly enough his > behavior is similar to Tesla's in that he reacts in a nasty fashion if > someone challenges his ideas

Yikes, got a less biased source? It's 2017, it's sad the emotional feud between Tesla and Edison continues like this.

<comment><USER18> You're cherrypicking the part of the document that addresses the comic and I do agree the tone could be more professional, but it a fairly serious rebuke of some pretty terrible claims. Ironically, when Hawkings, Linus, Dawkins, Hitchens, etc use the same tone, the tech community seems to not have any problems with it. The factual aspects of this page are pretty good and I'm hard pressed to find any issue here historically. I'm something of a amateur Edison-era historian, love this period, and feel that if we want to properly honor history and the lives of the people who more or less helped build the modern world, then we should be honest about the facts and park the fanboyism.

I do feel they gloss over the elephant electrocution and even by standards of that time was a bit shocking, even if there were almost no animal welfare laws. To be fair to Edison's group, this PR stunt was tasteless, but the elephant was already sentenced to death. My understanding is the alternative would have been a grisly shooting with an elephant gun which is far less humane than electrocution.

Again, the Oatmeal comic is pretty poor representation of the period. I understand its popular and ties in with Tesla fandom and an over-represented demographic on the web, but I think those honest about knowing what these men did should dismiss it and dig into more academic sources. This period is so exciting and interesting, its a shame a lot of youngsters grow up with a simple minded 'Tesla vs Edison' narrative which is such a stupid oversimplification of an amazing and progressive period in US history.

<comment><USER19> > A cartoonist (a guy with no engineering, legal or historian background) born > in 1982 on the wrong side of the continent

> cynical style typically demonstrated by the worst of US-born Millennials

> Disclaimer: The works below are the opinion of the author and not the > official viewpoint of the Edison Tech Center

That's enough for me to forget this whole article. I'm not buying all the "facts" in The Oatmeal's comic either, but wow, when you have to lash out at someone for being a young cartoonist living in Seattle...

<comment><USER20> Why not? A wide and impressionable audience now understands this part of history as interpreted by an internet celebrity.

The ability to publish misinformation on the internet far outscales the ability of anybody to refute it. At some point you have to filter out the noise by appraising the source. If that means dismissing inflammatory history lessons from young cartoonists in Seattle, or dismissing medical advice from has-been Playboy models on the basis that neither group knows what the hell they're talking about, then so be it.

<comment><USER19> So we should take the word of a random "author" who didn't even bother to publish his name and credentials over Inman simply because this guy blasted Inman for being a Millennial? That's just as wrong as accepting some dumb comic as the authority on history.

This guy, whoever he is, goes on about "crap on the Internet" then cites a 3rd of his sources from the Internet, four of those being Wikipedia. Even better, half his non-Internet based sources are _museums_ \-- no further information provided. His sources are mostly unverifiable crap, then he stoops to an ad hominem. It's garbage.

<comment><USER20> > So we should take the word of a random "author" who didn't even bother to > publish his name and credentials over Inman simply because this guy blasted > Inman for being a Millennial?

No. I'm not saying anyone should "just" believe either party over the other.

For all of Inman's bold assertions, he cites no sources whatsoever-- not even random crap on the internet-- and ends his comic with an appeal to vandalize Wikipedia to support his argument.

Without knowing anything about ETC, from an objective standpoint, I agree with ETC's assertion that Inman isn't qualified to be publishing unsubstantiated claims about anything related to a dead man's character or accomplishments.

<comment> King-Aaron > I agree with ETC's assertion that Inman isn't qualified to be publishing > unsubstantiated claims about anything related to a dead man's character or > accomplishments.

He's an entertainer and comedian, not a bastion for everlasting factual histories of the world...

I seriously feel that a large percentage of commenters on HN need to step back a bit and be less rigid in their assessment of society around them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Interestingly, "John G. Trump" (on pages 178-185) is President Trump's uncle. He examined Tesla's papers and reported his findings to the FBI.

<comment><USER22> I smell a conspiracy theory!

<comment><USER23> Do you even John Titor?

<comment><USER22> confused.biz

<comment><USER24> El. Psy. Congroo. [0]

[0] [https://myanimelist.net/anime/9253/Steins_Gate](https://myanimelist.net/anime/9253/Steins_Gate)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Raw FBI FOIA files and articles about them on some other major figures including Richard Feynman:

[https://www.muckrock.com/project/subjects-matter-fbi- files-1...](https://www.muckrock.com/project/subjects-matter-fbi-files-10/)

</comment><comment><USER26> I don't have high hopes for historical accuracy but i'm excited to see The Current War which puts some of these topics to film:[https://youtu.be/wMECv6yLOFM](https://youtu.be/wMECv6yLOFM)

<comment><USER27> I'm excited for another Weinstein ensemble, but we'll have wait [http://variety.com/2017/film/news/the-current-war- postponed-...](http://variety.com/2017/film/news/the-current-war-postponed- weinstein-company-1202590094/) :-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Check out this great 3 minute video to know who this man was and the conflict he got into with Thomas Edison: [https://youtu.be/iEJNJ0rFSe8](https://youtu.be/iEJNJ0rFSe8)

<comment><USER29> I cannot speak for the entire video, I only looked up the elephant story, but that seems to be told inaccurately. I might agree with the general sentiment (Edison is a jerk), but wouldn't quote any of the anecdotes told as fact.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Why do I see "We're sorry... The request has been blocked." when I try to open this site? Anyone else see it?

I can see it normally when I access through Tor.

<comment><USER31> It's the FBI, man :) Your TOR exit point is probably blacklisted ;)

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Why does the FBI have all these files on Nikola Tesla?

<comment><USER33> My paraphrase of page two with a direct quote: He possibly did stuff important to us and "other nations controlled by insane dictators." We should consider watching him and protecting him.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> It's hard to see those documents. Is there a digital version of those papers or has anyone translated it to a readable font?

</comment><comment><USER35> 249 pages! Other comments said that it was released a year ago. Can someone write about the juicy stuff?

<comment><USER36> The stamp on the papers say it was marked unclassified in 1980-82, which would have been ~40yrs after most of the papers dates (and his death). Was it really only released a year ago?

<comment><USER37> Well you may believe me or not, but this was in circulation at one of the Serbian BBS around 15 years ago.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Nikola*

Sorry for being picky about it, but I always think that we should respect people enough to spell their names correctly!

<comment><USER39> I get similarly annoyed that Maria Skłodowska-Curie is known only as Maria Curie pretty much everywhere, even though she was very particular about including the Polish portion of her surname on all of her work.

<comment><USER40> Or even "Marie Curie"

<comment> yoz-y From personal experience, the French have little regard for native writing or pronunciation of names.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> The title is misleading.

The FBI 'released' these documents to the public over a year ago.

<comment><USER42> Thanks, we've updated the title from the submitted "FBI Releases Nikola Tesla Documents".

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> I wanna see time travel research and Tump connections: [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4754000/Late-1800-s-...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4754000/Late-1800-s-books- spooky-connections-present-day-Trumps.html)

</comment><comment><USER44> d

</comment><comment><USER45> Definitely incomplete, questionable whether intact.

</comment><comment><USER46> Distraction from the upcoming JFK dump. half /s

<comment><USER47> These documents were released a year ago, and were declassified in 1980.</comment></comment>


Show HN: My Sticker Calendar App is on iTunes - <AUTHOR> http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/shinycal/id552222965 It's just a whimsical little portfolio piece. I just missed putting stickers on a calendar like I did when I was a kid. The calendar is my own and it contains some clever code. (Note how the "leftover" days on the previous and next month behave.) There's also a O(1) double-ended queue behind the UIScrollView so that there's the illusion of infinite scrolling with only 5 objects. <comment><USER2> The app sounded only goofy on a first read-through, but I think if your copy describes more benefits of the application for users, it would come off as more useful! Have you heard of Jerry Seinfeld's "Red X" productivity trick[1]? This application can be used for exactly that. If the description discussed that first, instead of the relation to childhood "star charts," then it would read to be more useful more quickly.

Congrats on shipping code!

[1] [http://lifehacker.com/281626/jerry-seinfelds-productivity- se...](http://lifehacker.com/281626/jerry-seinfelds-productivity-secret)

<comment><AUTHOR> _> Have you heard of Jerry Seinfeld's "Red X" productivity trick[1]?_

Yes. I'm trying to get to the point where I program every day without fail. That's a good suggestion. I'm going to put that on the app website.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> It's just a whimsical little portfolio piece. I just missed putting stickers on a calendar like I did when I was a kid. The calendar is my own and it contains some clever code. (Note how the "leftover" days on the previous and next month behave.) There's also a O(1) double-ended queue behind the UIScrollView so that there's the illusion of infinite scrolling with only 5 objects.</comment>


The Value of Not Chasing Your Pay - <AUTHOR> http://writepay.blogspot.com/2016/03/the-value-of-not-chasing-your-pay.html <comment><USER2> I wonder if they like TextBroker....

Sponsored content at it's finest. I'd down vote, but I don't have the karma yet.

<comment><AUTHOR> It isn't sponsored content. I posted it here not to promote Textbroker but because some of the ideas generalize. There are plenty of freelancers here.

FYI: Downvoting applies to comments only, not to posts.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Asking for a raise - <AUTHOR> I am terrible at these types of things, but have resolved to get better and sell myself like I should be doing.
I am looking for helpful tips, possibly some advice on how much of a raise to ask for and a decent resource (website/job listing ..etc) to backup/generate my numbers.
A little bit about my current situation. I believe I am vastly underpaid. Probably about 1/2 to 1/3 of market rate. This is mostly because I work for a special interest that depends on donations from the public. I expect a lower rate and a market rate would be more then our executive director makes, but just how much less is one of the places I am stuck. We are also having a great year despite the recession.
My responsibilities include: (note I'm the only tech guy) - Management of website (I rebuilt in RoR. got ~250k visitors last month) - System Admin of servers running said websites - 30 windows office computers and network - Phone system
I'm not sure what to put in as job title when using salary calculators. <comment><USER2> You're at a non-profit? OK, let me be clear: if you leave, your NP is fucked.

If market is more than the ED makes, and you want to make anywhere near market, you have to leave. They're dramatically underpaying market, and have to for structural reasons, so they won't be able to hire someone anywhere near as good as you. To retain you at market, they'd essentially have to go on a special fundraising binge to pay your salary. That's untenable in this fundraising environment.

Also, the title thing is hard because you're doing two very different jobs: software engineer and helpdesk.

I'd recommend that you leave if the money is important, but you should (if you reasonably can) try to lock things down so that there won't be much in the way of maintenance of the website. The office computers and phone can be troubleshot with one-off contractors (again, helpdesk); there's no way to "bring in someone from the bullpen" to put out fires on a complex RoR app. (For one, NPs have no idea how to recruit or verify the credentials of someone like that.)

<comment><USER3> Maybe you could also check if your could get away with spending 1 or 2 weekdays freelancing out of your non-profit orga's offices. I've workd for quite a while for nonprofits too and had good experiences - that is, if you're not already totally overworked.

<comment><USER4> This is a really great suggestion - many non-profits will go for it; keeps their staff (you) happy, keeps you connected to them, and they can bother you on "freelance days" too.

But that's the problem: you've probably already got more on your plate than a time-serving big-corporate IT person would. And being present means that you're first and foremost available to the people in your vicinity.

Keeping the relationship with the NP in good shape can be hard work; some colleagues may consider you a money-hungry sell-out (and the conversations with your customers may just reinforce this idea), more problematically keeping the perception of balance in your interest in the NP versus outside clients could be difficult.

Good luck!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> A few months ago I used a few psychological techniques with great success that helped me land a 10k raise.

Basically, I reminded my employer of my value to the market, my value to the company and introduced the suspicion that I was looking elsewhere.

A few recruiters had called the main office asking for my contact information. I replied back to the admin person and made a side comment/joke about my loyalty to the company. She responded with saying that she thought that she should mention my loyalty to the owners.

We had just gotten off a very successful project, and I sent an email to the owners asking if they'd write a recommendation for me on LinkedIn. I framed the request as wanting to get the recommendation now while the success of the project was fresh in their minds. Each one replied something like, "Woah! You aren't leaving, are you?"

These events did three things: reinforced my scarcity, reminded them of my value to the company and let them consider the possibility of me leaving.

Shortly thereafter, I got a 10k raise without even asking for it. :)

If you don't want to go through so much effort start looking for another job or start your own. As far as job title, put in the one that you would most enjoy and go for that.

<comment><USER6> It's amazing how these little things have a big impact on a negotiation. In fact, sometimes you can inadvertantly enter into a negotiation...

Once I was called into my boss' office, complimented on my work, and offered a salary raise. I was caught off guard (there was no big project that I recently completed or anything), but managed to contain my glee. In light of all the nice things my boss just said about me, I asked for a bit more then they were offering, negotiated a bit, and walked out with a nice deal.

Later I found out that there was a rumor around the office that I must have been interviewing and that's why I had been coming in a little later and wearing fancy clothes. Really it was just that I had a new girlfriend who worked at a high-end clothing retailer (discount!), and lived a bit further out of town (thus coming in later).

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> The biggest thing you can do to improve your chances is to look for work elsewhere. If someone else will pay more for the same work, then you have an obvious bargaining point at your current job. And frankly, it's much more likely that you'll get a significant raise by changing companies. You current employer probably doesn't have another 100-200% of your salary just lying around in a budget somewhere.

<comment><AUTHOR> Correct.. I just realized after typing all that in, that if I ask for 5-10%, any number I use as market rate is gonna be much bigger that it doesn't matter.

There doesn't seem to be much of anything in my area for decent paying tech jobs. But I'm looking.. and working on my own start-up, that thanks to HN is making me realize to just get it out the door.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I've had success in asking for a raise with a technique that breaks down into two parts:

First, frame the issue as a problem for you. A problem your bosses can help you with: I.E. your unhappy about the mismatch between your salary and your responsibilities. You leave step one when your bosses agree with you that it's a problem. I'd try to stay away from specific numbers and focus on your needs/feelings. Be general, talk about how others in your area are paid more, but shy away from exactly how much. This allows your manager to 'help' you with your problem without a commitment to what the 'help' might look like. Bosses _love_ to be helpful.

Second, once they admit that there is a problem, you can start talking about a solution. Remember, your bosse's hands may be tied with rules about max raises, bonus schedules, review cycles, and other such crap the corporate world throws in front of good bosses. So, before hand, figure out what solutions you'd be willing to accept. Maybe a deferred raise, bonus, more vacation, less work hours for the same pay. Try to be as flexible and honest as you can. The second stage is your time to start talking about specifics, but try to accommodate the limitations placed on your boss. That said, do your homework, if your boss is lying to you, don't call them out, just get ready to walk.

Last, be prepared to quit. It's hard to talk about how unhappy you are at your job if you haven't thought about alternatives. If it goes well you won't have to leave, but it's good to go into the discussion with the confidence that you could quit if you had to.

Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER9> Think of it this way -- the difference between your salary and your market value is effectively money you're donating to the nonprofit. If you don't want to donate that much, either ask for a raise, or quit, get a new job, and write a check to the nonprofit.

</comment><comment><USER10> Before you go in to discuss your raise, first sit down and try to write down the exact economic contribution you have made to the firm - ideally link cost- savings or revenue-generation directly to the activities you have performed.

This activity will serve two purposes:

1) Provide you with additional confidence that you are justified in asking for a raise

2) If during the salary discussion your employer asks "why should you get a raise?" rather than responding "Because elsewhere people make more money!" You can say "Because I made (or saved) the company $XX,XXX amount of money last - hence it would be cheaper to give me the raise than to not have me around next year!

<comment><USER11> In my experience, employers are not particularly happy when you do this kind of thing. I can't tell you for sure, but my assumption is it's make them feel weak or helpless & the last thing they want is to seem like that, especially to a key employee.

Maybe find a more subtle way to push this, but being very direct (for me) has only ended up with an employer who is upset that I know my role is delivering 5-7x my salary.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Salary is important and in more ways than just having more money. Titles vary at different companies and have different meanings, so salary is the easiest way for a bigger company to place you into a title at that company. Once you're in the company, sadly, title matters since most people at a company don't know what each other make. So if you want to advance your career, you actually have to get raises with every promotion. Don't accept a promotion without a corresponding pay raise -- since promotion means either more work or more responsibility.

Changing jobs is the easiest way to make more money. If you change too often, you'll be pegged as unreliable, so the strategy only works to a point.

Your job should be giving you annual reviews, this is a good time to get a raise and if you don't get one, complain about it. If you don't get annual reviews, asking for one is a nice way of saying you'd like a raise and feedback is actually really nice in either direction (compliments, points of improvement).

Threatening to leave is the worst way to get a raise. But it is important for your employer to understand that you can leave and that you choose to stay -- such loyalty is rare and is something that should be rewarded, with money.

If it comes to it, get an offer in hand from the new company that you are going to go to. Then quit. Don't threaten to quit. And don't bring up money as the reason unless they ask why you decided to leave. Then say "I needed more money, I love working here, but I understand your budget constraints and didn't want to put you in a tough spot." It's business. You're not an asshole for leaving. There's no contract that says you must stay and don't think for an instant that you're so effing awesome that you wouldn't get layed off if they had to do it. It's business. Because it's business and money is now in play (assuming they asked) they might decide to make a counter offer. If they don't, you're taking the new job. If they do, it's because you deserve it and they've decided that the cost of replacing you (explicit cost and opportunity cost) is higher than your raise. Yes, you're replaceable, and despite what others have said, your NP is not fucked. They will survive without you.

By the way, if you're awesome and your boss is awesome, this is never an issue, I've asked for raises casually over beer or whatever, and got them before. A few thousand here, a few thousand there adds up in time. Keep a 5 to 10 year perspective on things.

Lastly, I would point out that salary is not everything. I've made more at other jobs than the one I have now and hated them. It's hard to put a price on happiness.

</comment><comment><USER13> No-one else is posting from the perspective of an employer, so let me point out what seems obvious to me. No-one who works for a non-profit is going to be making what you refer to as "market rates". You signed up for a lower salary when you joined, and so unless you get satisfaction from the mission of the non-profit you should move on. Otherwise the salary issue will canker over time and you may even come to resent the non-profit for being... a non-profit.

The most important thing is that you do not leave the organization in the lurch. You do not want to be remembered as the guy who pushed them onto ROR and then bailed leaving them with a system they couldn't use. Or the guy who signed on when the economy was rough and then started complaining about salary six months in. Basically, avoid letting the money issue come between you and your coworkers/employers since it is probably not their priority. Figure out your long-term goals and move towards them while giving others time to adjust.

</comment><comment><USER14> If you really want to stay in your current position (ie. you have a strong desire to contribute to the goals of that organization), another option would be to negotiate reduced hours for the same pay (say, 20 hours/week).

Depending on the organization, you might be able to recruit some part time volunteer or intern help to pick up the slack.

Then use the extra time for side consulting and/or working on a startup.

</comment><comment><USER15> Don't ask for percentages.

Ask for a flat amount. They don't pay you in %'s, they pay you in dollars. Point this out to them if they try to point out the percentage.

Say X is the rate advertised for any of these places. I'm not looking, but feel I deserve a raise of at least ____

<comment><USER12> Once you get to six figures, I recommend using percentages ;-)

<comment><USER15> If you're asking in %'s, you're likely not asking for enough :oD

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> From what I have seen, it's either going to be really tough to get a raise, OR very easy.

I've tried to use bargaining chips like having a job that paid significantly more to try and hike up my salary (didn't work in 1 case, worked very easily in another).

Simply asking for a raise while alluding to your value in cost savings, other pending offers & highlighting your loyalty, know-how & good work ethic will usually do the trick. If not, be ready to move, quickly.

</comment><comment><USER16> > note I'm the only tech guy

This is the #1 indicator that you are underpaid. Just ask for your desired salary and if you don't get it, quit. If you can't quit without being in financial trouble - that's your problem. You won't be getting a raise then.

Don't make this more complicated than it has to be.

<comment><USER17> Except he might actually like working there.</comment></comment>


How To Get People To Tell You The EXACT Product They're Want - <AUTHOR> http://mixergy.com/collins-interactive-offer-interview/

<comment><AUTHOR> I had to edit the title as it was too long.</comment>


When intuition and math probably look wrong (2010) - <AUTHOR> https://www.sciencenews.org/article/when-intuition-and-math-probably-look-wrong <comment><USER2> How you state the problem has a lot to do with the resulting probabilities. Many times the answer is ambiguous until you definitively identify the space of states that a state can be drawn from.

Bertrand's paradox is an example of this issue: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand_paradox_(probability)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand_paradox_\(probability\))

</comment><comment><USER3> This example along with all the similar ones drives home the basic idea that probability is tied to its model and its model is often best phrased as a generative story. If we agree on the generative story we'll agree on the model and then your intuition probably works just fine. In situations where the story is obscured—in this case, only the end results are mentioned so that the story is ambiguous—then you can have ambiguous answers.

</comment><comment><USER4> After a long writeup about the treachery of ambiguous problem statements, the article ends with ... a misleading ambiguous statement:

> the ukulele-playing and dancing ambitions would affect the probabilities > about the sex of his sibling.

I suspect that this whole article would have been much better if was written by one of the interviewees instead of the jouralist. Sigh.

</comment><comment><USER5> The best intuition I've heard for the two-child problem is as follows.

Suppose you have two doors with two children behind them. The 1/2 chance of a boy version works like this: Say you randomly open one of the two doors and there is a boy. That doesn't give you any information about the other boy, so you say that the probability of the other one being a boy is 1/2.

1/3: This time beforehand you know that there is at least one boy. Then you open a door and it happens to be a boy. That tells you something about the other door, which alters its probability to 1/3.

<comment><USER6> Interesting you mentioned doors, since my first thought on reading the article was of the Monty Hall Problem, specifically _is this guy trying to parody the Monty Hall problem by coming up with purposely obtuse interpretations of purposely vague questions to complicate what would normally be considered a trivial conditional probability question?_

But the Monty Hall problem came later. This just feels like the probability equivalent of Xeno's Paradox, except revolving around arbitrarily shifting unstated assumptions about selection effects rather than arbitrarily reducing distances travelled.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Stupid question perhaps, but why not:

      boy           girl
      boy(notgirl)  boy
      boy           boy(notgirl) <-reversed order
      girl          boy

    ?

<comment><USER8> You were probably annoyed before you've read the whole article, like I was at that moment. But it goes on:

"Not so fast, says probabilist Yuval Peres of Microsoft Research. That naïve answer of 1/2? In real life, he says, that will usually be the most reasonable one."

"If I specifically selected him because he was a boy born on Tuesday (and if I would have kept quiet had neither of my children qualified), then the 13/27 probability is correct. But if I randomly chose one of my two children to describe and then reported the child's sex and birthday, and he just happened to be a boy born on Tuesday," "the probability that the other child will be a boy will indeed be 1/2."

<comment><USER7> Well I got annoyed a little bit further down when they started to coalesce events arbitrarily, and stopped reading.... I probably don't understand why it's meaningful or even valid to do that though...

On the other hand, I spent a rather sad year reading statistics because I thought it was interesting, and got so bored that I got a job as a developer instead, so I am rather confident that it's not for me to truly understand...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I'm not sure I totally understand, but maybe someone can confirm this for me. If we add more "extraneous" information, it seems like it pushes the probability closer to (the naiive answer of) 1/2\. If we add lots of extraneous information, does it get really close? What if we did something like this:

I have two children, one of whom is a black-haired, blue-eyed son with an owl- shaped birthmark on his right leg born on a Tuesday in Argentina during an eclipse while a flock of 231 seagulls circled clockwise overhead. What is the probability that I have two boys?

Am I just muddying the water, or is the probability vanishingly close to 2?

<comment> 08-15 > is the probability vanishingly close to 2?

It is. Here's how it clicked for me:

Forget about Thursday; someone tells you "I have two kids, at least one of which is a boy who is _special_ ". Now you get these cases for the two children: Bg, gB, Bb, bB, BB (where g is a girl, b is a boy, B is a _special_ boy). Without the last case (two _special_ boys), everything is symmetrical, and the probability that the second child is a boy is 1/2\. The less likely it is that the guy has two _special_ boys, the closer the answer is to 1/2.

This also means that the everyday answer is actually 1/3, because parents always think that all of their children are _special_ , so the problem reverts to the simple Two Children Problem with the equally likely cases BG, GB, and BB (yes, the girls are _special_ , too).

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Peter Norvig has an iPython (jupyter) notebook that explores this same puzzle: [http://nbviewer.jupyter.org/url/norvig.com/ipython/Probabili...](http://nbviewer.jupyter.org/url/norvig.com/ipython/ProbabilityParadox.ipynb)

</comment><comment><USER11> Argument by Gary Foshee

"My solution was based on set theory. Look at the entire set of all families with two children. Then look at a subset: those with two boys. Then look at another subset: those with a boy born on Tuesday. If you look at it that way, then 13/27 is the correct answer."

<comment><USER12> 13/27 is the correct probability if we got the answer "I have two children, one of whom is a son born on a Tuesday" by dialing random numbers from the phone book and asking "could you confirm if you have to children, one of whom is a son born on Tuesday?" Which might or might not be equivalent to the actual data generation process.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> It always helps me to picture a probability space (as in, an actual physical space, where size correlates to probability).

Assuming that children are always a boy or a girl, and are equally likely to be a boy or a girl, the 'complete space' of families with two children would be distributed as ABBC where A means two boys, B means a boy and a girl, and C means two girls. By excluding C from the space, ABB remains. So indeed, the probability would be 1/3 that both children would be boys.

But now I have made another assumption, namely that the family is picked uniformly random from all families with two children with at least one boy.

As you can see, there are quite a lot of assumptions. One convention seems to be that when you can't tell for sure how something is distributed, it is uniformly distributed.

For example, when a person blindly grabs a ball from a box with one red and one blue ball (and no other balls), the probability is not always 50% that he grabs the red ball. The red ball might be a bowling ball and the blue one might be the size of a marble.

While in this example it is reasonable to assume a uniform distribution, you can point out similar, but more subtle assumptions in most questions about probability.

A more complicated example: Weatherman A predicts the weather right 70% of the time. Weatherman B predicts the weather right 60% of the time. Weatherman A predicts rain tomorrow, weatherman B predicts dry weather. What is the probability that it will rain tomorrow?

The 'right' answer is 14/23\. In order to arrive at this answer, you need to assume that the predictions are statistically independent (which is an unrealistic assumption). Indeed, it is easy to sketch a situation in which the probability is different: it is always dry, weatherman A predicts rain 30% of the time, and weatherman B predicts rain 40% of the time. This is consistent with the question, and the probability that there will be rain tomorrow is obviously 0%.

This lack of rigor always bothers me.

<comment><USER14> Your second example has completely different assumptions than your first. To get 14/23, you don't have to assume that the predictions are independent, only that they are independent given future weather.

Let W be 1 if it will rain tomorrow and 0 if it will not rain, with 0.5 probability either way. Let A be weatherman A's prediction and let B be weatherman B's prediction. We have

      P(W = 0) = P(W = 1) = 0.5
      P(A = w | W = w) = 0.7 # Weatherman A is right 70% of the time
      P(B = w | W = w) = 0.6 # Weatherman B is right 60% of the time

      P(A, B | W) = P(A | W) P(B | W)

Now we want to know "Weatherman A predicts rain tomorrow, weatherman B predicts dry weather. What is the probability that it will rain tomorrow?"

That is, what is P(W=1 | A=1, B=0)?

        P(W=1 | A=1, B=0) = P(A=1, B=0 | W=1) P(W=1) / P(A=1, B=0)
        = P(A=1 | W=1) P(B=0 | W=1) P(W=1) / (sum_w P(A=1, B=0|w)P(w))
        = 0.7*0.4*0.5 / (P(A=1|w=0)P(B=0|w=0)P(w=0) + P(A=1|w=1)P(B=0|w=1)P(w=1))
        = 14/23

If you don't like the assumption that the predictions are statistically independent (herding, etc), then you just have to come up with the conditional joint P(A,B | W). That wouldn't be difficult given a small amount of data since W is binary. You would put a dirichlet prior on the distribution (basically just a beta distribution with an additional dimension) and essentially just count the times each triple (a, b, w) happens.

Still, the problem isn't a lack of rigor, it's a lack of clarity in stated assumptions.

To be specific, you didn't state the assumption that P(w)=0.5, which you used to compute 14/23.

<comment><USER13> I don't understand your point. I was arguing that the way the problem is posed seems to imply a unique solution. I was showing the problem was ill-posed, and that many probability problems have similar subtle or less subtle hidden assumptions. Here, this assumption is P(A, B | W) = P(A | W) P(B | W). I don't think you even need P(W = 0) = P(W = 1) = 0.5.

These assumptions usually seem quite natural to make, but can be very unrealistic (why would the predictions of weather men be independent? I would bet they are not in reality). This is a very bad to teach students. It is always very important to know which assumptions you are making, and if textbooks do this wrong, it will be nearly impossible for students to get this right.

I would think of a student which struggles with this problem as a better mathematician than the student which just uses P(A, B | W) = P(A | W) P(B | W) 'because the formula is in his textbook', but the second student is more likely to get rewarded (especially in American education, since the USA seems to be especially fond of textbooks which give a ready-made recipe for every problem that a student is supposed to solve).

<comment><USER14> > I don't think you even need P(W = 0) = P(W = 1) = 0.5.

You do,

In the article, the prior of interest is the prior gender of a child, which can be safely assumed to be 0.5. Similarly, independence of children's genders is a very good approximation as well. It wasn't necessary for the article to state these assumptions because they are obvious common knowledge.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Best advice (in general not just this particular problem) I heard was by Joe Blitzstein (Harvard): Practice, practice, practice.

Much of statistics/probability is about pattern recognition, and developing pattern recognition requires lots of practice.

I enjoyed and learned a lot from his Harvard course Statistics 110: Probability

Video Lectures [http://projects.iq.harvard.edu/stat110/youtube](http://projects.iq.harvard.edu/stat110/youtube)</comment>


What Makes Indiana's Religious Freedom Law Different? - <AUTHOR> http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/03/what-makes-indianas-religious-freedom-law-different/388997/?single_page=true

<comment><AUTHOR> Can someone ELI5 why any business would want less money just because some of their customers are gay?

Even if you're against homosexuality, as long as you're not participating in a sexual activity with a member of the same sex, it shouldn't make a difference.

Even the homophobes I grew up with understand this point.

It just seems like a lot of people in Indiana have very poor business sense.

<comment><USER2> It's a purely emotional issue. It doesn't need to make sense.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, but their weakness (turning away customers because of sexuality) is also a business opportunity.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I love how religious freedom and freedom of speech are used to make opt out anything you don't like for corporations.

<comment><USER4> The Constitution protects your right to free speech. Do you really understand what is being protected?

The Constitution protects your freedom of religion. Do you really understand how it is protected?

The Constitution says, "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union..." Then in the Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments) the freedoms of the people are listed. Another way to look at it is the "Limitations of the Government" are listed.

Therefore, the 1st amendment protects your right to religious freedom, by saying "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;". If you read it carefully, you will see that the intention was to prohibit the government from making any law for or against religion. Even a law protecting you against someone elses religion would be illegal. However, it does not protect you from the Jehovah's Witness trying to give you that Watchtower, nor does it protect that JW from getting yelled at by me to get the fuck off my porch. It does however, protect the JW from having a cop arrest them for giving out the Watchtower.

Get it, it protects you from the Government not from other people.

The same amendment goes on to add "or abridging the freedom of speech". If you fix it, it would read "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech". Again NO LAW shall be made. In other words, I can tell you to shut up, but the government cannot.

These statements are pretty straightforward and absolute. The quicker we all get this the better off we will be.

So your statement is true for corporations and individuals. So you could opt out too. Like it or not this is how the founders wanted it to be. And I am glad for that. Now lets make sure the government knows that these are limits on them not us!

<comment><USER3> And this rights should be solely reserved for physical human beings. Not for business entities.

<comment><USER4> And if my Grandma had two tires attached to her feet, she would be a bicycle, but the reality is she does not, and while they should not be, corporations have personhood. Look up Corporate personhood, and you will see that since 1819 the Supreme court has upheld that corporations hold the same rights as individuals. Sorry, there is a difference between what should be, and what is!</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Hacker news Channel : Read news like its TV (Review my startup) - <AUTHOR> http://www.sess.in/channels/3

<comment><AUTHOR> This is my latest attempt at start-up...

You can also create channel for yourself. By going to <http://www.sess.in/>

You can record your browsing and let all channel viewers see it. Requirement is that you need to use Firefox, IE8 or Chrome 8-

Waiting for your feedback.

</comment><comment><USER2> Very interesting... but kind of confusing.

The playback seemed to show the _current_ version of the target pages, with my login... and the scrolling and cursor playback weren't aligned.

What sort of uses are you hoping to enable?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your feedback.

>The playback seemed to show the current version of the target pages

The way recording and playback happens, only URL of visited pages is recorded, so you can understand the reason why it was showing latest pages.

> the scrolling and cursor playback weren't aligned

I think it should work. If you mean playback did not show it correctly, then I will look into it.

> What sort of uses are you hoping to enable?

I plan on letting users record their browsing session as a demo or educational purpose. I haven't finalized how to best use it. What would you use it for?

<comment><USER2> You could possibly snapshot the page when the recording happens – if the page changes a lot – so the playback still makes sense.

I could scroll the displayed page, but the cursor still seemed to be moving about as if at the original viewport offset. At one point it seemed to snap back.

The interaction has potential... I almost grok the filmstrip of frames right- and-left... but not quite how cursor time-series interacts with the frames.

Yes, I'd agree a possible application would be recording web-driven presentations. With no install required, it could be better than existing 'screencasting' options. More tools to mark up a page with annotations/overlays could be helpful for that.

Watching users interact with sites, if normal clicks rather than intentional drag-opens can be enabled, might be interesting for remote usability studies.</comment></comment></comment>


Why You Should Learn HTML5 Now Before It Explodes In Popularity - <AUTHOR> http://www.diygenius.com/why-you-should-learn-html5-now-before-it-explodes-in-popularity/ <comment><USER2> I feel HTML5 today's "Web 2.0" of a few years ago. It's an overblown term that doesn't really capture what it is. CSS3 is cool. Canvas is cool. More native video is cool, I guess. The other new html elements are... ok... but quite frankily I'm fine with <div>s and changing them to <sections> seems annoying more so than helpful. HTML5 doesn't seem to bring anything radically new; most of what it allows could be done before, just with more workarounds and quirks. It's being hyped up as some next great thing, and not really a radical new development, it's much more incremental really.

And plenty of people are still using IE8 and Windows XP, and will for the next few years, so I don't think it's really more critical to learn HTML5 than over HTML4. Actually, it's hardly even possible to learn one without the other.

<comment><USER3> You should emphasize the "overblown term" part of that. Non-engineering-types who say HTML5 aren't literally talking about the W3C's HTML5 spec in isolation. What they _mean_ is "frontend web technology". Non-engineers lump Backbone.js and HTML5 in the same bucket.

<section> tags have nothing to do with a normal person's understanding of HTML5. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> > If there was one programming language I'd recommend to learn for the long- > term, it is HTML5.

I would recommend going a step further and learning Object Oriented HTML5, no point just learning to program in plain HTML5. /s

<comment><USER5> I hear CSS4 will be fully Turing-compatible...

<comment><USER6> _I hear CSS4 will be fully Turing-compatible..._

I need to go spend some time in the angry dome..

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I used to get upset about it, but now I've just come to accept that when people talk about "HTML5", they don't mean HTML. They mean CSS3, JavaScript, all of the APIs that come with the HTML5 spec, etc.

This graphic sums up pretty nicely what "HTML5" actually encompasses: [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f7/HTML5-API...](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f7/HTML5-APIs- and-related-technologies-by-Sergey-Mavrody.png)

<comment><USER8> To me it seems that the HTML5 is a bit feature-creep.The term "HTML5" in layman's eyes is expanded by some new tech every 4-8 months, isn't it?

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> To "toastedzergling"'s comment also ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6007986](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6007986)), the term "HTML5" seems to always be used in the wrong way. People use it as a buzz word, when they don't actually realize what they are really describing. In the context I usually hear it, they typically mean CSS3 or javascript features, not actual HTML5 features.

While I think HTML5 does offer some exciting features, I also think people need to know the differences between what HTML5 is and more importantly, what it is not.

Because even the graphic they show in the article ( _"HTML5″ is currently the #1 job trend based on the fastest growing keywords found in online job postings..._ ) says just how recruiters and job listings use that specific term. 90% of the time I see that used, it's a keyword as just wanting you to know general HTML, but they use the phrase HTML5 over "HTML" because it sounds better.

For kicks, this site probably marks the biggest confusion that I always hear with HTML5: [http://iscss3partofhtml5.com/](http://iscss3partofhtml5.com/) _spoiler alert: NO._

EDIT: No clue why I'm being down-voted? As the perspective of a front-end designer who just recently was very active in the job market, this was ALWAYS the case. None of the companies were actually using true HTML5 features or wanted to use true HTML5 features, they were just using CSS3 or jQuery. Obviously it was just a recruiter trying to use buzz terms to describe knowing general HTML.

</comment><comment><USER10> I'd rather recommend learning to make Google Glass apps.</comment>


Stronger Shell - <AUTHOR> http://m.odul.us/blog/2015/8/12/stronger-shell <comment><USER3> Just about everything I've learned about bash has been from the #bash IRC channel on Freenode. You'll see the same repeated warnings of not learning from the public web, due to the fact that misinformation spreads like a wild fire, and some articles out there are just flat out wrong (sort of like w3schools in the #css circle).

There is just one thing I will _never_ understand. The tired argument of "...but it isn't portable". Features that are new, and make programming bash easier (such as "[" vs "[["), are looked down upon in some circles because it isn't portable. If I'm programming for bash, then upon deployment, I'll be using bash. To use another shell, and hope it just works is a bit insane.

I'd also like to second using the Fish shell. Far better than bash/zsh for everyday use, and I just can't go back to other shells.

<comment><USER4> Seconded. I can't live without fish, and I hear this "but what about my bash scripts?!" argument a lot. Unless you're actually sourcing the script, it has a magic "#!/bin/bash" line on top that makes it work correctly!

<comment><USER5> It's not that simple. Changes in the syntax for strings and environmental variables are going to bite precisely newcomers who would benefit the most from fish. And sourcing happens.

I do know that all these problems result from fish having a saner syntax compared to bash (hell, FWIW I'm still mad that globs are not regular expressions and have a different syntax) but everytime someone points out these problems the reaction is "#!/bin/bash", which kinda misses the point.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'd be remiss if I didn't use the comments to mention the amazing and totally free, "Unix for the Beginning Mage". The author of the article also didn't mention this great resource. It's an amazing book and a short read. It took me about 3 hours to work through completely. www.unixmages.com

If you don't know how to use your shell, block yourself off an evening with this book and change how you forever use you computer.

<comment><USER7> I, too, was looking for this in his list. It's a really great resource.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> > You must have spaces inside your test expressions (so [[-z $FOO]] won't > work; [[ -z $FOO ]] is correct).

That's because '[[' is a special bash extension which started out as a better '[' which is actually a binary (/usr/bin/[). And, well, you have to have a space between an executable and its first argument.

(nowadays '[' and '[[' are builtins in most shells, but the external binary still exists).

<comment><USER9> The core difference is that:

\- `[` is treated as a statement

\- `[[` is treated as an expression

Which, for example, is why you can't use `>` in `[` based expressions. Bash thinks you want to redirect the output of `[` to somewhere else. This restriction is lifted for `[[` and makes for much more natural looking code.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I personally can't stand bash for writing scripts (it's fine for typing one- liners into terminal though). This question and its top answer capture the insanity of bash quite nicely [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3601515/how- to-check-if-a...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3601515/how-to-check-if- a-variable-is-set-in-bash) .

<comment> david-given Is there a better shell? By which I mean more flexible, more consistent, and simpler. (Anyone who says 'zsh' is disqualified.)

I've briefly looked at rc, but while it's significantly simpler and more orthogonal than sh it's got it's own weirdnesses; but the 'Design Principles' section here is worth reading: [http://plan9.bell- labs.com/sys/doc/rc.html](http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/rc.html)

Surely there must be a usable shell wrapped around an actual modern language?

<comment><USER11> > Is there a better shell? By which I mean more flexible, more consistent, and > simpler.

Yes, PowerShell. And it may actually arrive at Linux/Unix soon, due to CoreCLR. The specification is already open, but until now not much progress has been made towards bringing it uncrippled to Linux/Unix

PowerShell is extremely consistent. Examples: All commands are strictly on the _verb-noun_ form where there are only 40 or so "approved" verbs. Noun represent the topic, so if you are working with ACLs, the commands are Get- Acl, Set-Acl, and if you are working with network network adapters, the commands are Disable-NetAdapter, Enable-NetAdapter, Get-NetAdapter, Rename- NetAdapter, Restart-NetAdapter, Set-NetAdapter. All (PowerShell) commands require the parameters in the same way (no - and -- confusion) as it is actually the _shell_ that does the parameter parsing.

The grammar is "modern" so it has no surprises for anyone used to context-free grammars (like C, Python, Java, ...).

PowerShell is certainly flexible as it comes with the ability to invoke anything that has an exposed .NET API, or even has a WBEN/CIM standard interface (like some network switches etc).

<comment><USER12> I had an opportunity to use PowerShell recently. The task was simple: on a bunch of freshly installed windows 8 boxes, kill a running graphical program of a certain name, copy over new executables, and restart that graphical program. The kind of thing you do essentially constantly on Unix boxes.

I urge anyone at all with any interest in PowerShell to give it a shot. Spoiler: it's not possible without an epic level of hackery; but along the way, you will uncover that PS uses the same parameter to mean very different things for different commands, that the 'everything is an object' conceit doesn't work when the object you want doesn't exist, that PS is chock full of hacky, revolting cruft _already_ despite its youth, hacky revolting cruft that makes oh-my-zsh look like /bin/rc, that most windows commands will fill your screen with banner(8) style output even on success, and that no two windows commands are alike.

Given which decade it was developed in, PowerShell represents the most absolute and fundamental failure of software I've had the pleasure of encountering in the last five years; and I've seen Windows 8.0. Anyone who thinks PowerShell is at all any good has, axiomatically, never seen any other shell besides cmd.exe before. You may think I'm exaggerating. Please, try the example above, then report back here with a list of what you had to do.

<comment><USER11> Using the non-aliased verbose form of the cmdlets:

        $hosts = 'host1','host2','host3'
        $source = '\\host0\c$\source'
        $dest = 'c:\dest'
        $executable = 'C:\Program Files (x86)\Notepad++\notepad++.exe'

        Invoke-Command -Computer $hosts -ScriptBlock {
            Get-Process | Where-Object Path -eq $using:executable | Stop-Process -Force
            Copy-Item -Path $using:source -Destination $using:dest
        }

Explanation:

Line 1-4: Set up variables to make the script more explanatory. Line 1 defines an array (the "," operator)

Line 6: Invoke-Command takes an array of (remote) hosts (the -Computer parameter) to execute the script block (the -ScriptBlock parameter).

Lines 7-9: The script to execute at each host simultaneously (the Invoke- Command executes the scripts in parallel at each host)

Line 7: Get the process list (Get-Process), pipe through the filter (Where- Object) which selects only the process(es) executing the desired executable, pipe those processes to the Stop-Process cmdlet which will forcably stop the process.

Line 8: Copy files from the desired source at an UNC path to the local machine at the destination

Now, the above script was the _canonical_ way, using the long form. For casual scription, I could have written just this:

        $hosts = 'host1','host2','host3'
        $executable = 'C:\Program Files (x86)\Notepad++\notepad++.exe'
        icm $hosts { ps | ? Path -eq $using:executable | kill -f; cp \\host0\c$\source c:\dest }

<comment><USER13> While likely to work (I don't use powershell), I think you missed the main constraint posed: kill a running GUI with a certain name.

Your solution finds the process to kill only if the executable path is at a known location.

How would you do this if you only know what the process name will be -- e.g., what if the executable path is on D:\stuff\gui.exe on host1 and E:\secretstuff\gui.exe on host2, if gui.exe always runs as a process named "Updatable GUI Thing"?

<comment><USER11> Silly me, I assumed that the executable path was the requirement. My bad. If you need to find a process just by it's name, it is even simpler: Just indicate the process name (possibly with wildcards) to Get-Process (alias _ps_ ):

ps Notepad++ | kill

Actually, _kill_ (alias for _Stop-Process_ ) takes a name parameter directly, so the "kill" line from the script could be written as simply

kill notepad++

But your question is actually really good, because what if we did not know the neither the process name nor the executable, but -say- only the _Window title_? Get-process (alias _ps_ ) will produce a sequence objects describing the running processes. If I want to know what properties those objects have that I can possibly filter on, I can pipe the objects through the Get-Member cmdlet (alias _gm_ ):

        ps | gm

This produces a table-formatted list like this (shortened):

        TypeName: System.Diagnostics.Process

        Name                       MemberType     Definition
        ----                       </comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment>----     </comment><comment>----
        Handles                    AliasProperty  Handles = Handlecount
        Name                       AliasProperty  Name = ProcessName
    	...
        MainModule                 Property       System.Diagnostics.ProcessModule MainModule {get;}
        MainWindowHandle           Property       System.IntPtr MainWindowHandle {get;}
        MainWindowTitle            Property       string MainWindowTitle {get;}
        MaxWorkingSet              Property       System.IntPtr MaxWorkingSet {get;set;}
    	...
        Site                       Property       System.ComponentModel.ISite Site {get;set;}
        StandardError              Property       System.IO.StreamReader StandardError {get;}
        StandardInput              Property       System.IO.StreamWriter StandardInput {get;}
        StandardOutput             Property       System.IO.StreamReader StandardOutput {get;}
        StartInfo                  Property       System.Diagnostics.ProcessStartInfo StartInfo {get;set;}
    	...
        Product                    ScriptProperty System.Object Product {get=$this.Mainmodule.FileVersionInfo.ProductName;}
        ProductVersion             ScriptProperty System.Object ProductVersion {get=$this.Mainmodule.FileVersionInfo.ProductVersion;}

Lo and behold, there is a property called _MainWindowTitle_. So to stop a process by it's main window title I could write:

        ps | ? MainWindowTitle -eq 'Deepthought Main Console' | kill

That is, find all processes, pipe them through a filter selecting only those where the _MainWindowTitle_ equals the desired text, and pipe those processes to the Stop-Process cmdlet

</comment><comment><USER14> How many people learned shell scripting while engaged in morally ambiguous activities? For me it was scraping for porn ~25 years ago. I imagine lots of people learned scripting while "penetration testing".

</comment><comment><USER15> I've found that as soon as bash script goes to more than a couple lines, or as soon as it needs anything modestly complex, like "if" statements or functions, then it is almost always more efficient to write it in ipython. If you know python, then ipython is really superior way to do any ops and administration tasks. I've also found it easier to use for server setup than alternatives like ansible or puppet. I can just use standard, reusable classes and functions to do all my various activities.

<comment><USER16> Perhaps it's just me, but flow control statements and functions in Bash have yet to scare me off. It's still faster, and readable, to write even moderately complex scripts in bash.

This is doubly true if you have to chain together external scripts - <USER2> "easy" ways to do it in Python can have some very major limitations.

I liken Bash scripting to Perl scripting. You can write safe, beautiful, and readable code in both. However, you can also create a summoning circle to the 5th circle of hell if you don't spend the effort to make it safe, beautiful and readable.

<comment><USER15> Part of this was that I became an expert in python before learning much bash, so it was just much easier to write in the language I already knew, and I found the bash syntax strange with a bunch of gotchas. I'm sure though, that if I did a ton of bash scripting I would not even notice the gotchas.

You are correct that the main weakness of ipython is that it doesn't have pipes, and that chaining is very limited. But usually this does not impact me. And if all your scripting is in python, then you just import functions and run them, rather than chaining scripts together.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> What suprises me is how often Bash is being used as 'the shell' and software projects use it, even when they could simply call /bin/sh instead. This is particularly bad for people who port software to other platforms (where BSD systems dont come with Bash, for example) and have to deal with pure shell scripts calling Bash. One recent example is CoreOS/etcd that's currently dropping Bash in favor of Sh, because they simply didnt need it.

Bash is a shell, but Bash is not the shell!

<comment><USER18> It may be better for those people to call /bin/bash, and fail early and obviously for anyone who doesn't have that; than to call /bin/sh, attempt to write portably without really knowing the quirks of this variant of the language, and possibly fail subtly in obscure situations.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Confession: The horrors of bash set back my programming hobby until high school. Even then, I didn't actually like interacting with my computer programmatically until I found a comfortable set of tools sometime in college. I'm lucky that my day job lets me use the tools I like and avoid systems like the bash shell.

<comment><USER20> Interestingly my experience has been opposite. My first programming adventure was automating some file validation using bash. I agree though that the silly and inconsistent syntax made me really appreciate python when I started learning it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> If you're writing shell scripts, you might as well write Ansible playbooks. You can use Ansible playbooks locally without the SSH layer.

Bash/sh is a horrible programming language.

</comment><comment><USER22> You don't need to learn Bash to write shell scripts. Many other languages support executing commands with special syntax (PHP and Perl have backticks for example).

I write my scripts in PHP if they're moderately complex, and only use Bash for dumb lists of commands.

</comment><comment><USER23> actually _[_ is same as _test_ and the last _]_ is just the last (useless) argument of _[_ , iirc

<comment><USER24> Actually you most probably have /bin/[ on your filesystem as a standalone 'test' executable or a link to 'test'. [ is a shell builtin in bash though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> interviewers tend not to test for shell skill even though your shell skills are usually more relevant to daily tasks. I'm debating whether to improve on my shell skills or algorithm skills.

<comment><USER26> My interview for the job I have now actually had me do some hands-on shell activities and had very little algorithms, but that was partly because they were wanting me to work with code deployment and other tasks where it would come in handy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> One this which greatly helped me was understanding that [ is a program, like any other, which takes arguments. It's a small thing, but made the shall less magic.

</comment><comment><USER28> Bash is good as a system shell. For interactive shell, zsh/fish/... wins.

That's why I only learn Bash. One lesson for everything for both purposes ;)

<comment><USER29> fish would be better than bash as a system shell as well. More consistent, for example. However, bash is available and usually preinstalled everywhere, in contrast to fish.

<comment><USER28> I agree. But "fish" is quite strange to me, especially its way to recall history. In "Bash", I can type "^ R" and browser the history very fast. In "fish", I have to type and select with up/down array; it's not easy to browser the history randomly (FIXME).

My #Bash" history has > 96k entries (woh, believe it or not; because of this too big number, "xterm" \+ "screen" always stuck when exitting; but "urxvt" \+ "tmux" work perfectly thanks to "urxvt" daemon mode.)

Porting this huge history database from my daily "bash" to "fish" is just a nightmare ... :D

<comment><USER30> Actually fish will import your ~/.bash_history automatically!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Was worth reading if only to find out about ShellCheck.

My current project has a lot of bash. The program itself is just `foo | bar | baz | ...`, but the associated test script has grown quite long.

I've just added an extra test which calls shellcheck on each script, and it's spotted a bunch of redundant code for me :)

</comment><comment><USER32> I generally avoid aliases. I prefer to rote learn complex commands; if it's fitting for an actual shell script then I'll just bang one of those little guys out in no time.

</comment><comment><USER33> Please don't write shell code that you _ever_ intend to distribute to _anyone_. The future will thank you.

</comment><comment><USER34> Nice! Thanks for sharing!</comment>


Calvin: Fast Distributed Transactions for Partitioned Database Systems - <AUTHOR> http://highscalability.com/blog/2013/5/23/paper-calvin-fast-distributed-transactions-for-partitioned-d.html

<comment><AUTHOR> The code for the same can be found here. [https://github.com/yaledb/calvin](https://github.com/yaledb/calvin)</comment>


The Exotic Taste of Rice - <AUTHOR> http://recipes.hypotheses.org/6948 <comment><USER2> Why were the ambergris (obviously rare) and marrow left out? Both are very high in fat and would have dramatically changed the texture of the recipe.

<comment><USER3> For those unfamiliar with ambergris, it's a waxy secretion from the digestive system of whales that is sometimes found floating in clumps in the ocean: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambergris](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambergris)

<comment><USER4> So, like a (real-life) marine version of the melange/spice produced by the sandworms of Dune/Arrakis...? ;-)</comment></comment></comment>


Net Neutrality Won't Save Us If DRM Is Baked into the Web - <AUTHOR> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/07/net-neutrality-wont-save-us-if-drm-baked-web <comment><USER2> Once 5G surpases wired ethernet there will probably be a reduction in the chokehold telecom companies currently have over their customers. Obviously there will be a mad scramble to buy all the available frequencies, but even then the market will be less of a monopoly solely as a result of airwaves being easier to deliver thus increasing competition.

</comment><comment><USER3> It's sad that some of the same companies that have shown their support of net neutrality also support the adoption of EME. What's the point of an open internet if we have a closed web?</comment>


How to make wooden gears - <AUTHOR> http://woodgears.ca/gear/howto.html

<comment><USER2> I watched the youtube video of the author making the wooden gear and I was amazed at his level of craftsmanship, and how effortless it looked for him to make the gear. It's magical to watch.

I suppose for a non-programmer it may appear that hackers do the same sort of magic, except with a computer.

</comment><comment><USER3> I've enjoyed his site for a while now and I think I posted this on HN before, but my favorite post is him making his own bandsaw (this is the second version): <http://woodgears.ca/bandsaw/homemade.html>

I bought the plans and hope to start on my own next month.

<comment><USER3> Also, check out his "eyeball game" - a test of your visual geometry ability: <http://woodgears.ca/eyeball/index.html>

<comment><USER4> Also, the requisite mention of the PIPE ORGAN he built.

<http://www.sentex.net/~mwandel/organ/organ.html>

<comment><USER5> Gosh, this is so awesome!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> If you're interested in this sort of thing it wouldn't hurt to get an estimate from a water-jet cutting place. It's a really good process for cutting complex 2D shapes in flat materials for low-volume production runs.

(Of course you need to get the gear outline into an appropriate file format first.)

<comment><USER7> Have you compared waterjet and laser prices? There's a shop down the street from me that will do custom laser cutting (in Masonite or wood) but they want me to bring in an EPS file to get a price quote. What should I expect to pay?

<comment><USER4> You're mostly paying for labor, and they generally charge for an hour -- so get as much done at once as you can.

You can also use either process with Aluminum sheet. both have their advantages.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Maybe not the right place for this, but why is gxs's comment dead? It's factually correct (as far as I can tell), and provides more related reading material.

<comment><USER9> It looks like a mod killed his account by mistake. I unfortunately see a LOT of dead comments that are perfectly fine. Usually they are preceded by a single bad comment, which at least explain why their account was killed, but I see nothing in gxs's comment history.

There isn't really any way to ask for reinstatement except to email pg - that's if the person even realizes their account killed, since the system conceals this from them.

<comment><USER10> Hi, thanks to both of you for bringing this to my attention. I don't believe my account was dead, as my last comment received a reply.

It may have happened because initially when I edited the comment for a typo, it displayed duplicate comments after I hit update. So naturally, afterward I deleted one of them. My guess is I got caught by some spam filter or something.

For what it's worth, my original comment was just pointing people to Matthias Wandel's site: <http://www.sentex.net/~mwandel/> where he actually has lots of cool projects. In particular I like the marble machines and his demo on how combination locks work.

<comment><USER9> I guess your account is active again, but this comment <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1809590> is still dead. Don't know why.

<comment><USER11> this also appears to have happened to Dav3xor on this article: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1810165>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> His binary adder is awesome too: <http://woodgears.ca/marbleadd/>

</comment><comment><USER13> "..but that's no problem, I can just cut that off with an angle grinder."

I'm going to try to use that solution for some of my daily problems...

</comment><comment><USER14> This is great. Does anyone have examples of simple machines that can be built with gears like this?

<comment><AUTHOR> Hmm. Maybe go to a LEGO fan site like lugnet? There're always people showing off this or that differential geared thingie.</comment></comment>


FTP meet HTTPS: An easier way to talk to Github - <AUTHOR> http://ithaca.arpinum.org/2010/10/14/fun-with-netrc.html

<comment><USER2> If you add your ssh key to an ssh-agent you won't have to type the password for it each time and the password won't be stored anywhere.

You do still have to trust the root user, but this is still way better than putting your password on disk.

<comment><AUTHOR> Probably a good point, but my sense is that HTTP is the future (and faster) for git{hub}. I may be wrong about that.

Based on the quick downvote, I am wrong. Fair enough, but I'm curious to know, is HTTP _not_ more efficient/quick than ssh now for git? I thought it was.

<comment><USER2> Connection overhead is small for both (if keep-alive is working on https), request/response overhead might be smaller for ssh but probably not terribly and they both use AES encryption (by default) for the transfer so they should be very similar in performance.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the reply. I updated the post to include your objection and point here.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Git uses libcurl for its http support. Libcurl is what is looking at your .netrc. But really, use ssh and ssh-agent. (That reminds me, I really need to send in that libcurl patch which adds support for the OS X keychain.)

\- a dinosaur (thanks for making me feel old today)

<comment><USER4> Please submit that patch- that'd be hugely useful!

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Being behind a rather restrictive firewall at work, I certainly recognize the advantages of HTTP/HTTPS vs. SSH (or anything else).

Still, when it comes to not having to remember or retype passwords for network connections, isn't that exactly SSH's strong suit?

I'm all for espousing the advantages of the new thing, but isn't this one of HTTPS's major disadvantages, comparatively? I mean, my github password isn't stored in plaintext on disk anywhere, and I can still do whatever I want without a password (OK, one password per reboot) from any of my machines.

</comment><comment><USER6> "...back when dinosaurs walked the earth, people used this...for FTP sessions."

How I wish this were true. Before I started doing freelance web development full-time, I figured FTP had died out in the 90s, just like telnet did.

I now understand FTP remains the norm, and I waste hours dealing with it (then gripe about it on the Facebook group 7 Billion Strong Against FTP <http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=130658460303379> ).</comment>


How I Hacked 40 Websites in 7 minutes - <AUTHOR> https://hackernoon.com/how-i-hacked-40-websites-in-7-minutes-5b4c28bc8824 <comment><USER2> Script kiddie. Nothing to be proud of, seriously.</comment>


Anna Loulou, Jaffa's underground bar shuts down - <AUTHOR> https://roadsandkingdoms.com/2019/farewell-to-jaffas-anna-loulou-bar/ <comment><USER2> If you are looking for eclectic middle eastern dance music, Zoon van snooK often features it as part of his Oddtronica series [https://soundcloud.com/blooplondon/zoon-van-snook- presents-o...](https://soundcloud.com/blooplondon/zoon-van-snook-presents- oddtronica-25-wspecial-guest-ulrich-schnauss-mast-3)

</comment><comment><USER3> Wow, that would have been interesting to visit. A sanctuary for meeting "the other" on human terms.

<comment><USER4> I think your idea of the environment in Israel is a bit different than my experience there.

All of Israel has Arabic Muslims who are free to travel. If you walk the streets of Tel Aviv you'll see all of the article's ethnic groups.

<comment><USER5> You experience differs from reality, then.

Palestinian-Israelis* are free as blacks under Jim Crow laws were free. Maybe less of a "no colored allowed" signs out there, but the sentiment is. FFS, Netanyahu just admitted in public what until now was known but wasn't said: a large part of the Jewish population of Israel does not consider Palestinian- Israelis to be equal.

Just ask your Palestinian-Israeli colleagues __.

* the term you used could be considered derogatory, I'd try to not use it if I were you. __for non Israeli readers, I 'll have to explain the joke: the probability he has one is minuscule to none.

<comment><USER6> Why could the term "Arabic Muslims" be considered derogatory?

<comment><USER7> > Why could the term "Arabic Muslims" be considered derogatory?

In reference to ethnically Palestinian citizens of Israel, it might be considered derogatory for the same reason referring to Muslim American citizens with ancestry in sub-Saharan Africa as "African Muslims" would be.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Does a place like this exist in the NYC area?

<comment><USER9> There used to be an Arab-focused LGBT dance party called Habibi, which isn't the same thing, but at least the DJs may know where else to go</comment></comment>


Google will soon let you auto-delete your location tracking data - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/1/18525384/google-location-tracking-data-auto-delete-history-app-and-activity-data-3-18-months <comment><USER2> Yeah, after 18 months. Thanks for this "generosity" Google, but I'll keep all my tracked activity _paused_ instead.

[https://myaccount.google.com/activitycontrols](https://myaccount.google.com/activitycontrols)</comment>