Introspect Yourself - <AUTHOR> https://dcgross.com/introspect-yourself/ <comment><USER2> I would classify this as "Self help" advice based on personal experience. Over all its very good advice to learn to collaborate with others.

There are so many persuasion filters here "Partner at Ycombinator", "Co- Founder", "Director", "Apple", "High Achiever writer in general". With this many strong credentials, it would be very very difficult to critically read such advice and then think of alternative ideas.

"If you don't retrain your model based on input from the crowd, you'll never converge on truth." This is true for machines.

Other high achievers believe in the alternate version.

"Reasonable men adapt to the world around them; unreasonable men make the world adapt to them. The world is changed by unreasonable men." Edwin Louis Cole

"truth is my goal. Controversy is my gym. I'll do a hundred reps of controversy for a 6 pack of truth" \- Kanye west.

"Your life goal should be not to win any particular game, rather to win the sum of all games." This metaphor of everything is a game really really works well for certain people. I personally witnessed it.

It would be a sad life if you turn everything you do in life as a game where you need to compete with others to win and never question the nature of the game itself.

"Do what you love" is an over all long term approach that sustains your energy and focus for long term.

Most ideas of high achievers are very contradictory, in general its a good idea to listen to so many of them and pick something that meets your style.

<comment> aaron-lebo Definitely agreed. The version of introspection presented here is inherently outward then inward, which is fine, but I'm not sure that's actually that useful. If the crowd has fucked up values, adapting to their fucked up values isn't a victory, it's just conforming to fucked up values. I think YC is a great example of this, many of the companies they fund are unethical and shallow moneygrabs (I'd be happy to detail them, but it's not useful). If you adapt to that, well, good luck because you might be an unethical and shallow carpetbagger.

I've got the problem of being too introspective, which can lead to a lot of beating yourself up, but after 30 years I get myself, which is nice. I'm not sure you can do that if you're constantly chasing what a lot of people value though which is success, "influence", money, a social life, etc. Those are all great indicators of success, but if you don't slow down how can you really stop and think about yourself? Not to introduce Trump (okay, going to do it anyway), but that's a guy who has spent 70 years chasing stuff, being addicted to fast food and TV. Has that guy ever stopped and thought about what's wrong with himself? What he can do better? Strongly doubt it. Much of our society is that, caught up in some loop where they never have the ability to do anything but react.

If we're honest with ourselves, much of what the world values is stupid if not outright evil. When people don't see that I don't believe they've really thought things through. That's pretentious, but we gotta get real about how we and others work or nothing will change.

Guess what I'm saying is by all means be introspective, but really _be introspective_. Don't measure yourself against bad yardsticks, be honest about your flaws and strengths. Don't do it because it's some game to maximize your utility, do it because if you don't do it, you are worse off.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> "He who knows men is clever; He who knows himself has insight; He who conquers men has force; He who conquers himself is truly strong." \- Lao Tzu

I'm currently reading Seeking Wisdom: From Darwin to Munger by Peter Bevelin that covers the fundamentals on how to think. 200+ pages on how the mind works from common misjudgements to systems thinking. Highly recommend it to anyone interested in self-improvement, especially better decision-making.

</comment><comment><USER4> Glad to see this subject surface on HN. This is a topic that's near and dear to me, to the point that over time I've accidentally cultivated my closest friendships almost exclusively with people who share this interest/capacity.

I frame it as living more deliberately. Every moment is an opportunity to better yourself, better your position, better your brand, or help others better themselves. Introspection is the means to identify those opportunities and build habits around them.

This concept as a whole is a conversation that, in my opinion, happens all too infrequently. Everyone should try to find someone that they can talk to about this concept because there's a ton of value in being able to vocalize these internal monologues. Talking to someone about your introspective processes and conclusions brings another level of intellectual honesty to the entire process.

<comment><USER5> "Every moment is an opportunity to better yourself, better your position, better your brand, or help others better themselves"

I'd also ask "why" to this one repeatedly (socratic method perhaps). In my mind that leads to "purpose of life" \- which is, I suppose, a philosophical question with no easy answer.

<comment><USER6> Perhaps it is rooted in the role of fitness in biological evolution.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Understanding yourself is something I've been advocating for a while. I've developed a platform where the goal was to ask yourself deep questions [https://www.deepthoughtapp.com/](https://www.deepthoughtapp.com/)

It has helped me have a more holistic view of myself through a wide range of question and topics, and especially from the answers my friends have shared.

<comment><USER8> What a wonderful site. Thanks for sharing. It's like oblique strategies for your whole self.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> For anyone getting a 502: [https://web.archive.org/web/20180425160041/https://dcgross.c...](https://web.archive.org/web/20180425160041/https://dcgross.com/introspect- yourself/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Back up! Sorry.

<comment><USER10> Currently getting "SSL_ERROR_NO_CYPHER_OVERLAP"

Firefox 59.0.2

<comment><AUTHOR> Back up! Sorry.

<comment><USER11> getting it now -- 1023am PST

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> About taking it to far; there is a good article at ted about the right way of being introspective[0]. I highly recommend it.

The summary of it is ask what questions not why questions. "Asking "why?" in one study appeared to cause the participants to fixate on their problems instead of moving forward."

[0] [https://ideas.ted.com/the-right-way-to-be-introspective- yes-...](https://ideas.ted.com/the-right-way-to-be-introspective-yes-theres-a- wrong-way/)

</comment><comment><USER13> " _An extreme form of self-improvement is what some call having a "chip on your shoulder"._ "

"What's the meaning of the phrase 'Chip on your shoulder'?

"A perceived grievance or sense of inferiority."

\-- [https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/chip-on-your- shoulder.ht...](https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/chip-on-your- shoulder.html)

"Having a chip on your shoulder" indicates you get into many fights.

</comment><comment><USER14> I'd like us to start using the term "enlightenment" for these types of discussions. This is the whole goal of introspection, self-help, self-finding, etc. When you start to search around for ways to enlightenment, the doors are blown open with the number of paths that one can take to introspect yourself.

</comment><comment><USER15> _Your life goal should be not to win any particular game, rather to win the sum of all games._

Would anyone be able to help unpack this? I feel there is some depth to this idea but am not quite making the connection.

<comment><USER16> The analogy I would use:

In card games like _Magic_ or _Hearthstone_ , there's a lot of randomness. Sometimes you don't draw the cards you expect. A common problem for new players is that they'll focus specifically on these scenarios, and they'll say, "well, the game is just luck."

But the point of games like these are to increase your win _percentage_. Variance is expected. A good deck is not one that wins 100% of the time but one that, over time, increases its win percentage.

Now, whether or not a game has elements of luck, there will still be scenarios outside of your immediate control where you lose. You may not know enough to win, you may not have enough practice or discipline to win. Even in this scenario, your goal is (often) not to win every single game you play - it's over time to increase your win percentage.

Or in other words, in both a luck and skill-based world it might still be worthwhile to lose a 'game' if it means you can win two in the future. In particular, this comes up a lot in entrepreneurship - a good entrepreneur is one who harnesses variance to their advantage, rather than focusing on just the immediate challenge or project in front of them.

\----

Note that I _don 't_ believe this is universally true. It's true for some games, and it's an important point to learn if you're trying to deal with variance. However, there are certain scenarios where failure is incredibly costly, and you can't focus on the long-term in those scenarios. So, overall it's good advice, but you should still take it with a grain of salt.

<comment><USER17> I would argue that "winning" here in general would be to play games where there is less randomness and more skill, where you will have a larger edge over someone who hasn't done their studying.

It doesn't make a lot of sense to apply yourself to areas where 90% of the result is determined by luck (unless you truly enjoy it).

<comment><USER16> Sometimes. It sort of depends.

I mentioned above that there are scenarios where failure is incredibly costly, but the opposite is sometimes also true. Job hunting comes to mind.

I use luck to describe anything with variance that I can't control. So by that measure, job hunting has a ton of luck involved. But I don't need to have a good win rate for job applications - I just need _one_ job application to succeed.

That's something I can play the odds with - if I have a 10% chance of getting hired at any given company, I can send out 10 applications and have... what, a 60% chance of getting hired? I'm bad at math, but you get the point.

In _Hearthstone_ terms, aggressive decks also used to use this strategy as well. I don't know if this still works, but at one point at least all a deck needed was a >50% win rate and enough games to hit legend because wins gave you more points than losses removed. Something like that, I forget the exact mechanic.

People would play decks that won or lost based on randomness very early - their overall percentage was pretty bad, but because they were _just_ effective enough, and because their games were incredibly fast, players could take advantage of the fact that (at least at the time) wins were more valuable than losses.

Again, take that with a grain of salt. This wouldn't hold true for games where you get limited tries, or where losses matter a lot more than wins, etc. You have to figure out whether or not it makes sense for the specific 'game' you're playing.

<comment> squeaky-clean > but at one point at least all a deck needed was a >50% win rate and enough > games to hit legend because wins gave you more points than losses removed. > Something like that, I forget the exact mechanic.

For anyone interested, it's that you gain/lose 1 "star" with each win/loss. And if you're on a "win streak", you gain extra stars, but never lose extra stars for being in a losing streak. So a win on average is slightly more than 1 star when you consider streak bonuses.

So you get a deck with roughly 50% winrate that can play matches as fast as possible. And then hope that in your 50/50 coin flip of a game, you end up getting "heads,heads,heads,tails,tails,tails" instead of "heads,tails,heads,tails,heads,tails". And it turns out doing this quickly can rank you up faster than slow games with a much higher winrate.

But also to your point, in Hearthstone terms reducing your randomness is also a significant part of strategy. For example a deck I run now has a card "Draw the lowest cost minion from your deck".

This card is valuable not just because it instantly puts a monster in my hand, but because it also gets it out of my deck. Reducing the chance that I will draw a low-cost minion in the late game, increasing my odds of drawing the high-cost cards I do want.

Like if you were playing Blackjack and had the option to "remove a 2 from the deck". Super useful when you want a face card. Not useful at all when you're holding a 17.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Great post! I especially like this idea:

> Retrain your model based on input from the crowd... [to] become an enjoyable > player to be around.

Regarding this introspection:

> I [am] always thinking that I should have done that thing better. This is a > dangerous propellant. It pushes me. But left unchecked, it means I'm rarely > happy.

I've suffered from this, too. What's helped me most is gratitude. Every morning I think of five things I'm grateful for. I got this habit from Tal Ben-Sharar - the professor of "The Happy Class" (Harvard's most popular course ever).

</comment><comment><USER8> > Make sure you learn from success, not just failure. What are the common > factors that lead to a really good day? Good sleep? Good weather?

How are people tracking these factors? There's a whole movement around this, called "Quantified Self". The concept it simple: track a set of variables and try to glean some insight however I'm having trouble implementing this in my life.

Track what? Track how?

</comment><comment><USER19> This article, particularly the Others section, is a very good elucidation of the particular form of social anxiety I have.

</comment><comment><USER20> In this article the goal of life is described as winning games, and doing everything else is subsumed as a means to that end.

Helping others, having empathy, not hurting others.. those presumably wouldn't be worthwhile things to do if they didn't help one "win".

<comment><USER6> The word game can be extremely broad. Life is complex enough that an individual can select their own rules and conditions. There is no activity involving choice and constraints that I can unsee as being fundamentally a game.

<comment><USER20> That people are worth helping and not hurting, regardless of whether one "wins" is what's missing.

In this article, such actions are worth doing only because they're means to winning, not (say) because you actually value other people, their thoughts, and feelings. The impression one gets is that to the author they're just pawns in his game, and if he could "win" by trampling all over them he would.

This impression is strengthened by the reductionistic, instrumentalist analogies (like the mind being a computer program) sprinkled throughout the article. If people are merely computer programs and life is just a bunch of games that you're trying to win, why be nice to them? Oh, it's because if you're not they might not let you play.

<comment><USER21> Sure, the author is saying "pay attention to yourself and things will change" that's a "selfish" viewpoint, but if your take away is that the author is "evil" because of it, I think is a stretch. I think he's using "winning" as a proxy here for "being fulfilled".

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> ... talk therapy? Journaling? Long walks coupled with self-reflection ...

</comment><comment><USER23> This link leads to 502.</comment>


APL Demonstration From 1975 [video] - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DTpQ4Kk2wA

<comment><USER2> That was awesome. APL was my first language, and I've used those IBM selectric terminals, as well as Decwriter APL paper terminals. The "computer room" was a noisy place. Game of life animations didn't work well.

<comment><USER3> IBM APL2 was my first language, along with C. At one time Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley had gigantic APL2 workspaces (ML) and Sharp (MS) that they used for most of their mortgage trading and underwriting analytics, and a few dozen APL programmers. They were noisy places cause people were always screaming obscenities at each other

An acquaintance of mine had a job in high school, that entailed coding for Ken Iverson in APL. That's how he learned

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I watched this video a while back (and I don't think this is the first time it has been on HN). What is astonishing is Professor Bob Spence does not seem to make any typos during the half hour long video. It is good to see renewed interest in APL. I am still waiting for an APL interpreter on a tablet to take advantage of virtual keyboards to deal with the APL glyphs. [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9f/APL...](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9f/APL- keybd2.svg/1000px-APL-keybd2.svg.png)

<comment><USER5> And it simply must support overstrike since that is no longer a display problem. The simplification of the keyboard that results is amazing. I've always been surprised that overstrike did not re-emerge with "bit mapped displays" and printers.

I started APL on a Selectric typewriter with the dancing type ball at IBM in 1967. The sounds of that demo still resonate more than I would have ever expected.

In 1975 I was using it to teach myself numeric signal processing. I think I learned it more deeply and quickly because of APL. One didn't so much code functionality as simply express what one wanted to see the consequences of. APL made exploration so easy you couldn't help it.

Had IBM had any idea what to do with APL, Matlab would simply not exist.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> This was posted on the other APL thread earlier today, but in case you missed it: Conway's game of life in one line of APL [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9xAKttWgP4](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9xAKttWgP4).</comment>


Ask HN: Is there a "SaaS-as"? Heroku for SaaS? - <AUTHOR> I like writing apps but the overhead of setting up all the parts to support them is a pain. (ex. landing page, newsletter sign up, recurring payments, blog, knowledge base, etc). It would be nice to have a hosted platform for getting a company up and going.
So it'd be: Unbounce + Themeforest + Wordpress + Recurly + WooForms + Zen Desk + ???
Anything like this exist? Ideally it would use API from these services and have bundled deals in place. Skinnable so you can use your own branding.
If not, would anyone use such a service? <comment><USER2> I would definitely be interested in that service, if just to try out minimum viable products and see if they're worth developing further - it would let you fail faster.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's the idea. If a project gets going you'd probably want to bring some of it in house. If it was using APIs w/ OAuth or something they could be your accounts and you could move them over to your own servers down the road.

You'd essentially be an integration point. You could probably get some affiliate arrangement with the different services and offer the service at close to free to the consumer.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> You mean "SaaS-aas?"

<comment><USER4> Funny thing, I registered saasaas.com for this exact same idea (though I had other projects since and did not go further).</comment></comment>


Iran Launches Its First RTB Platform - <AUTHOR> http://techrasa.com/2016/06/18/adro-launches-rtb-platform/ <comment><USER2> Is this government sponsored? If not, then why "Iran Launches"

<comment><AUTHOR> No, it's a private company named Adro but they are the first and only company that implemented RTB for digital ad market</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Iwant to start a new SaaS startup, but I don't have a bank account - <AUTHOR> Long story short, I don't have a social security number or passport (and I cannot procure either of those things), so I cannot get a bank account no matter what. What are some ways to channel funds to an account that I can control?<p>PS I'm not an illegal immigrant; I just have a pending case with immigration, and I'm not allowed to work at the moment. I'm pretty sure starting a startup isn't considered employment. <comment><USER2> If you are accepting payments, it's likely to be considered employment/work by anyone who told you not to work. I recommend against assuming anything when it comes to bureaucracy and pedantic laws.

</comment><comment><USER3> To be safe I wouldn't accept payments yet. I would develop your SaaS app on your own until you are cleared to work, then look at accepting payments through Stripe once you get a bank account. You have plenty to do before accepting payments.

Use this time to build out the initial version of the app and talk to potential customers to validate your idea by signing up for free to test out the app. Once you're cleared to work you can approach them to sign up/pay.

Check out [http://startupsfortherestofus.com](http://startupsfortherestofus.com), listen to all their episodes.

Good luck.

<comment><AUTHOR> I've worked in restaurants before, so I want to create a scheduling app. Nothing fancy, just something less cluttered than current solutions. But thanks, I'll start working on the app first.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> You're a little stuck because in order to validate that people want what you're offering, you'll need to get them to buy something.

I wouldn't spend time working on the full product without being able to sell anything.

I guess your challenge here is to try and validate your idea without accepting payments in some way.

Or find a co-founder with a bank account.

</comment><comment><USER5> Did you come to the US without a bank account in your prior country?

I'd work on the startup as far as possible but not take payments yet. It would be treated as income, the startup as a business and with immigration pending I wouldn't risk it.

<comment><AUTHOR> I do have a bank account in my prior country, but currency exchange rates aren't favorable, because I'll be collecting money in USD, depositing it in my local currency, and then taking another currency exchange hit when I withdraw from an ATM in the US.

<comment><USER6> Raise your price (or take the hit) and move on. Your biggest problem isn't getting paid, it's getting anyone at all to buy anything from you, which needs (1) for you to make the thing (2) for you to get customers, but doesn't need for you to solve this problem efficiently.

(this is all assuming that you can do this work under your current visa)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Self employment is employment

</comment><comment><USER8> I can't comment on immigration law. But as for accepting payments without a bank account, Bitcoin is probably your best option.

</comment><comment><USER9> If you can't work... You can't work.

</comment><comment><USER10> How about a bigger international bank like HSBC, get an account in your home country with them? Then use a local branch?</comment>


If Amazon is the future of work, then be afraid - <AUTHOR> http://pro.gigaom.com/blog/if-amazon-is-the-future-of-work/ <comment><USER2> Amazon's warehouses aren't the future of work. They're its history.

That kind of zero-skilled, follow-the-instructions work is going fully robotic, much more quickly than people realize. Amazon themselves are investing heavily in robotics.

<comment><USER3> The question then becomes what happens to all of those unskilled and now unneeded workers?

<comment><USER4> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income)

<comment><USER5> Do you see a Guaranteed minimum income as a viable alternative? Do you consider basic income and guaranteed minimum income the same thing?

<comment><USER4> I think guaranteed minimum income creates worse incentives, everyone making under the limit would be persuaded to work less or work under the table. With basic income the incentive to make more still exists at all levels of income.

<comment><USER5> I can see that. I was thinking that some hybrid would be interesting since I am just not sure a basic income would actually be affordable. Something like everyone is guaranteed X and anyone working for Y subtracts Y/F from X where F is some factor (2 or 3 maybe). I get the feeling the "When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."[1] might manifest. I do wonder[2] if something radical like takers of basic income cannot vote or serve jury duty might push people to work.

1) Benjamin Franklin

2) not advocating - this part violates some of my basic beliefs

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Man, fuck this world.

Go into a STEM job? Well, maybe you'll get hired, maybe you won't, you have to hope that you picked an area that was hot 4 years ahead of time and that the people managing recruitment don't have their heads up their asses. Also you need to hope that any company isn't already in the process of globalizing or outsourcing said STEM jobs because they can do _those_ cheaper elsewhere (see IBM story yesterday).

And if you didn't go into STEM, well, fuck you because STEM is the only college that's any good by 95% of all accounts.

And if you didn't go into college, then fuck you because you're going to do back-breaking labor with no guarantee of financial security.

Something's gotta change or things are going to be grim. They're already getting grim.

<comment><USER7> Things have always been grim. The crows are just coming home to roost in America. Why do you think so many Indians and Chinese people are doctors or engineers? Fear. It is not about competence. It is not about passion. It is the fear that drives them. Because life is hard there without a safety net. A life where health care has to be paid for out of pocket. A life where your daughter's marriage requires piles of money.

"The world is what it is; men who are nothing, who allow themselves to become nothing, have no place in it"

What is the solution? I don't know. The future is going to belong to people who refuse to let themselves be nothing. It is not going to be about STEM jobs, math or science or art. The future is something you are going to have to find. Or become irrelevant. Scary, but sometimes that fear is useful.

<comment><USER8> Hold on ...

Life in India and China for the middle class isn't as bad as your comment makes it out to be (perhaps unintentionally). Human beings have an amazing ability to adapt. Health care and other costs in many developing countries aren't totally insane. The big difference is hope for progress - the middle class is growing in many developing countries. Also, people have a support network that would seem surprising to a westerner. E.g. the joint family system.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I'm going to copy and paste from something I wrote in another thread.

From my experience with warehouses/fulfillment centers, all the other options are same or worse than Amazon with regards to worker treatment. Besides, on Amazon plenty of merchants do their own fulfillment, and those that do fulfill with Amazon are going to fulfill with Amazon on eBay or Rakuten or their own website anyway. To do so morally you'll have to look into the fulfillment details of any individual company you do business with.

Honestly, it just sucks to be an unskilled worker in today's society, its not something new to Amazon.

<comment><USER10> I hear this often if I try to discuss Amazon.com work conditions, but I don't like the excuse. Costco is the largest company that comes to mind which makes much stronger claims and (if you believe them) treats employees, even 'unskilled' employees, better.

Here are some Glassdoor reviews for Costco Wholesale:

[http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Costco-Wholesale- Reviews-E2...](http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Costco-Wholesale- Reviews-E2590.htm)

I'm sure this isn't a good comparison. But Costco is doing fine and has a large market cap (52B).

This isn't new to Amazon.com, but Amazon.com is exemplary in treating employees in high-demand (i.e. easily replaceable) positions poorly. We should talk about their warehouses because their policies alone could nudge the industry to being more compassionate.

Bezos repeats that "long-term" "willing to be misunderstood" stuff a lot, but how many companies have tried really treating replaceable workers well? Maybe the current conditions inhibit workers from fulfilling their potential and making larger impacts than carrying boxes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> For the life of me I can't fathom how moving the bulk of our workforce to temporary employees benefits us as a nation in the long run. Is there anyone here who an provide any metric to support this as a good thing?

I do see where some wish to blame the consumer for this trend which is a bit surprising to me. That idea seems paradoxical in that the majority of people do not have good paying would, by necessity, want things to cost less. Yet if you propagate this throughout ecosystem you end up in a viscous cycle where companies, in order to meet lower price points, squeeze their employees which only propagates the cycle.

Most of us on this site are not the type of unskilled laborers who are currently impacted by this. Yet such trends have a way of working their way up the the food chain so to speak. Companies will trumpet "think of the consumer" as a way to depress or wages.

<comment><USER11> It is the consumer tho'. I can't count the number of people I know who are very vocal about workers rights, human rights, living wage etc but happily wear clothes and carry personal electronics made in sweatshops. Ironically, it's the rabid capitalist types who are willing to pay for locally produced items made by skilled workers.

<comment><USER12> Stuff made in sweatshops pays a wage to extremely poor workers. Stuff made locally pays a wage to workers in a developed country with reasonable safety net protections. Why would you expect the human rights defender to privilege the comparatively wealthier worker over the poorer one?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> This has been going on in warehousing and Distribution Centers for a long time -- over a decade. Same goes for many call centers.

I don't like the nature of the work, but I look at it like this: if you want robots to take dreary work from people, then that work needs to be quantified and structured. These kinds of things are the last step before total automation.

So in a way, the news is even worse than crappy jobs. These jobs are leaving. This is just the last vestiges of them. What will replace them? Beats me. I think the question itself is wrong, that is, as things change and become more efficient, there are new scarcities having nothing to do with food or shelter that people pay for. If you could predict the future of these scarcities you'd be rich beyond belief. So while it sounds like a good question, "Where do all these people go?", it's not one that's answerable in this case -- nor was it ever answerable.

One thing I know: this issue has nothing to do with Amazon. They're just being used as a prop here.

<comment><USER14> The type of work that is being described is very typical of best of breed warehouse management systems. I agree that Amazon is a prop in this story as there a tons of other large scale companies that have the same types of systems. Maybe they don't all use temp workers, but labor management systems are not rare.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> They (media, leftist groups) tried to create a scandal about this in Germany and succeeded to some extent. I found it kind of amusing that the mere description of people having to do actual work already seems to be so shocking to middle class people. If you don't work with your brain, you work with your body... I don't think working a farm or maybe a slaughterhouse or whatever other manual labor jobs there are are much better than an Amazon warehouse. I saw a documentary about garbage men recently and apparently they have to be fit like Marathon runners. Some jobs simply are hard.

Now I am glad I don't have to do that kind of job, but people should question what they are really asking for. They should then really support basic income, and also be prepared to pay a lot more for stuff. In fact, I wish instead of complaining people would just cough up more money. I wonder how big the engagement would then still be.

Or, you know, go full communism and have everybody take turns at doing the hard manual labor, no matter what education they have. In Christmass time, there would be a random selection of people who would be sent to Santa's warehouse (I mean Amazon) to work.

<comment><USER16> > I found it kind of amusing that the mere description of people having to do > actual work already seems to be so shocking to middle class people.

Indeed. "They don't have air conditioning!"

Oh...so the Amazon warehouse workers are like every other warehouse worker, factory worker, agricultural worker, miner, oil drilling hand...

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I spend a lot of time thinking about this too - because computer/ robotic automation is not just going to take warehouse jobs, it will eventually come for all of our jobs.

But this doesn't have to be a bad thing, if you think about it from a community perspective, how great would it be if all our basic needs were automated and low cost? Theoretically, this should free people up to pursue other interests, like science, art, sports, religion -- kind of like the premise Star Trek TNG.

Unfortunately, this isn't the reality today. If things keep going like they are, then this automation will enable a small oligarchy even greater wealth and power, and leverage over the civilization. I don't mean this to be alarmist, this is a really logical progression, and 'they way things are' has created some pretty amazing achievements for us to-date. I think this will be the next big social evolution and I can't wait to see how it unfolds.

<comment><USER18> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income)

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Amazon: Building better robots with human flesh.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if Amazon suddenly announces a secret R&D project involving a floor of robots pretty soon. In fact, the type of monotonous line-following, retrieval and packing fits well within the line of past factory workers who've been all but replaced with robots.

I'd even cheer them on if they did that instead of dehumanizing those workers.

<comment><USER20> _I 'd even cheer them on if they did that instead of dehumanizing those workers._

And I'm sure those workers would be grateful for your cheering when they're standing in the unemployment line.

<comment><USER19> Once upon a time, I've stood in both a factory floor and in the unemployment line.

At one of them, I still felt like a human being. Guess which.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> This reminds me a lot of the story Manna. In the story, robotics and machine vision is still behind human workers, however computers are able to perfectly optimize every other detail, and so tell human workers what to do step by step through an earpiece.

I love the idea actually, but I think most people would find it unsettling. But why not have perfectly optimized work routines and get the same amount of stuff done in half the time? Unfortunately I doubt the benefits would go to the workers and they'd still have to work the same amount of time, but that's true for all increases in efficiency.

<comment><USER22> ObReference: [http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm](http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm)

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> > "The feedback we're getting is it's like being in a slave camp," said Brian > Garner, the dapper chairman of the Lea Hall Miners Welfare Centre and Social > Club, still a popular drinking spot.

Just like a slave camp. You know, besides the fact that you get paid, can own property, have the full rights of citizens, can quit at any time, and go home at the end of the day.

> There is much to admire in Amazon's rise, but in some dark corners of that > sprawling empire the top line numbers and razor-thin earnings are being > boosted by a dystopian model of neofeudalism that is jarringly out of step > with the company's shiny, 'leaning into the future' brand.

A "dystopian model of neofeudalism"? For reals, guys?

I have complained about jobs that were doubtless better in every way than warehouse jobs at Amazon, and I'm sure that there are legitimate complaints, but it's hard to take this article seriously. The axe to grind is so prominently on display that it's difficult to know what part of the story can be read as an objective description of the facts.

<comment><USER24> > Just like a slave camp. You know, besides the fact that you get paid...

Each successive future we strive for should have standards higher than the previous. We can do better than putting literal slave labor behind us. We should achieve a standard where the metaphor doesn't even apply.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> It sounds like they treat people the same way all of us treat EC2 instances.

<comment><USER18> > _It sounds like they treat people the same way all of us treat EC2 > instances._

Well, the Borg Collective has perfected that technique, actually. But yeah.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> This sounds bizarrely similar to a portion of the Ken Burns documentary about the dust bowl. Basically, towards the end of the great depression tons of people migrated to California looking for work. Upon arriving they found little employment and those that did find work were doing hard labour,farms along with employment agencies were working together to drive down the cost human labour even further.

This created an enormous class of extremely poor that could be let go at any moment for any reason. While farms and employment agencies raked in profits.

Just because a company is acting within the law doesn't mean they are ethical or moral.

Maybe robots are better than human subjugation, maybe this is the beginning of new type of economy.

</comment><comment><USER27> I think it's just capitalism, and economics.

Consumers are constantly pushing down the prices on everything, expecting more and more for less and less. Faced with this reality, companies have to streamline and become more effective in order to succeed and profit. This is what Amazon are doing.

We moan about having to pay for baggage, choosing seats, food and even using the bathroom on flights now - but this is solely because of our want to push down the headline price of flights. The price has been reduced...but the cost is still there.

AFAIK, Amazon aren't doing any illegal, they're just working very efficiently.

<comment><USER28> And the only solution is regulation. Minimum wage too low? Raise it.

If Amazon wants to be efficient, it can be on the back of its margins, not at the expense of humans.

EDIT: Ran into this on reddit, thought it was very timely:

"Sorry, It's Not A 'Law Of Capitalism' That You Pay Your Employees As Little As Possible"

[http://www.businessinsider.com/companies-need-to-pay- people-...](http://www.businessinsider.com/companies-need-to-pay-people- more-2013-8)

<comment><USER12> Or, they'll just accelerate the automation plans they're already pursuing, and simply fire people. What good is an higher wage, if you're unable to get a job?

<comment><USER28> What good is automation if your customers don't have any money?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I'm reminded of the first half of the fictional short(ish) story "Manna"[1] by Marshall Brain.

[1] [http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm](http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm)

</comment><comment><USER30> It is asserted multiple times in the article, but is there any evidence that Amazon uses temp workers at all their facilities or just in this one UK example? I haven't seen any accounts of heavy use in US warehouses, but they could be out there.

<comment><USER31> There's been a whole lot of articles about heavy use of temps in US warehouses. I think I recall one from a few months ago which talked about how the average temp in some CA warehouses was around 90 degrees most of the day and was staffed almost entirely by temp workers.

Edit: found it.

> Amazon uses temporary employees in its Breinigsville warehouse, works them > to the point of heat exhaustion--no, really, it parks ambulances outside-- > and then lets them go after they've failed to perform.

[http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2011/09/what-it- ta...](http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2011/09/what-it-takes-ship- amazon-purchases-you-overnight/42704/)

And it seems there's an update - [http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2012/06/amazons- wa...](http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2012/06/amazons-warehouses- sound-cooler-more-humane-these-days/53157/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> It's perfectly reminiscent of factory work. Drudgery, efficient drudgery.

</comment><comment><USER33> The contracting culture is indeed awful. It gives companies a way to fire workers without making the headlines. Also let's them not dirty their hands with benifits. But it's unfair to blame Amazon alone. Many organizations do this, including the US Federal Government. The DC metro area is filled with offices where the "employees" walk in and the "contractors" badge in. The tech contractors still make handsome cash, but the job scurity is not where it should be

</comment><comment><USER34> If the future of work is work I'm extremely depressed / afraid. We are beyond the point of continued human labor to support ever increasing consumption. Buckminster Fuller showed the way [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckminster_Fuller](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckminster_Fuller)

</comment><comment><USER35> Same story, in the US, IMO told better: [http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/mac- mcclelland-f...](http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/mac-mcclelland- free-online-shipping-warehouses-labor)

</comment><comment><USER36> So how long after robot warehouse workers do you think we'll have robots enforcing laws? I'm getting a picture of Soylent Green but with robots instead of humans controlling the crowds.

<comment><USER8> Doesn't Elysium come out this Friday?</comment></comment>


Hello@jdoe – Greeting, editorial rules and name on Internet - <AUTHOR> http://linuxfr.org/users/apichat/journaux/salut-toto-salutation-regle-editoriale-et-nom-sur-internet <comment><AUTHOR> This French article may interest you. The maine purpose is to remove this usual semantic of email username@hostname and to replace it by greeting@name</comment>


Why Does It Cost $750k to Build Affordable Housing in San Francisco? - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/20/us/California-housing-costs.html <comment><USER2> LA has similar problems: [http://seliger.com/2017/08/30/l-digs-hole-slowly- economics-f...](http://seliger.com/2017/08/30/l-digs-hole-slowly-economics- fills-back-proposition-hhh-facilities-program)</comment>


The Guardian unpublishes 13 stories after investigation into fabrication - <AUTHOR> http://www.poynter.org/2016/the-guardian-unpublishes-13-stories-after-investigation-into-fabrication/413947/ <comment><USER2> It would be interesting to know which articles were pulled.</comment>


Sudo Blog - <AUTHOR> https://blog.sudo.ws/ <comment><AUTHOR> One of the authors on twitter ([https://twitter.com/PCzanik/status/1173873611926581248](https://twitter.com/PCzanik/status/1173873611926581248)) wrote: "Sudo is more than just a prefix for admin commands. I try to cover less-well-known features, news, or anything sudo related."</comment>


The Good Side of the 'Terror Futures' Idea (Yes, There is One)  - <AUTHOR> http://dpennock.com/pam.html

<comment><USER2> People that were shocked at the idea of a futures market in terrorism and other global events had probably never understood the term "futures market" to begin with. It was a great idea. Though it had questionable utility given the nature of deliberately hidden information before terror attacks, it would have been more useful in guessing things like revolutions.

</comment><comment><USER3> An interesting and related situation is when large blockholders in corporations simultaneously hold significant short interests in derivatives of their company shares. This is espescially useful when a value destroying acquisition is on the table. If the blockholder also owns a significant portion of the target, they can use their block to force the acquistion, profiting from the gain in the target and the loss for the acquirer.

</comment><comment><USER4> Terror futures could be a good way to factor socio-political factors into a market prediction engine.

This might be the reason they were developed in the first place.

</comment><comment><USER5> Isn't there a YC startup that's related to futures markets of sorts? (or fantasy markets)

... Wisdom of Crowds was a great read, too..</comment>


Go (lang): one year ago today - <AUTHOR> http://blog.golang.org/2010/11/go-one-year-ago-today.html <comment><USER2> Having bet my entire startup on Go, I am really thankful for the steady, but measured, improvements to the language. It's been a real pleasure to work with.

It may not be as beautiful as CoffeeScript (which we also use), as rich as Python, as safe as Rust, as concurrent as Erlang, or even as hackable as Ruby, but it certainly offers an unparalleled set of features which is hard to find in just one language — decent standard library, decent syntax, decent performance, super easy concurrency, a helpful and reasonably sized developer community, a relative level of stability, automatic memory management with good enough control over memory use, usable interoperability with C, native client support and even a standard testing framework.

Thank you and happy birthday to all the fellow Go developers out here on HN.

<comment><USER3> Although I have used Go in the past and do like it - thought I would just point out that nearly every positive about Go you mentioned had 'Good enough' prefix it. Are you actually finding Go good or only enough for your current needs?

As a question: do you see parts of your startup expanding past the area of Go? Would a mixture of other languages help?

<comment><USER2> Great question Stuart. I'd first like to say that in today's environment, it would be insane not to take advantage of a mixture of languages. If you have the expertise within your team, you should definitely leverage the strengths of the various language eco-systems. We've been developing an RPC-like system (think ZeroMQ meets BERT-RPC) so that services can be written in whatever language is most suitable — Go, Python, Ruby, CoffeeScript, Java — and our datastore core is written in C. Hell, we're even working on our own object- capability language using PyPy's translation toolchain.

But, having said all that, the biggest surprise has been how Go has become the dominant language within our code base. We initially started using Go to just handle the networking layer. But it soon became apparent that Go was perfectly viable as a general purpose language. And today the majority of our code is written in Go.

So, whilst we'll continue to leverage other languages for what they are good at, I can confidently say that Go will be at the heart of our technology stack for the forseeable future. And with the various "good enough" statements, I was trying to say that although Go is not the best language ever for specific features (e.g. syntax, standard library, etc.), it definitely offers the best all round set. And the situation only gets better every day. So I'll definitely say that Go is more than good enough.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> It continues to amaze me how much is packed into the Go language. It's not perfect, but the language specification is something that you can easily read in one go; something that is impossible for languages like C++. This results in more intuitive behaviour and, in my limited experience, fewer bugs.

I hope other language designers take note of Go and put more emphasis on simplicity in the future.

I would also be very interested to know which companies are using Go, and for what.

<comment><USER5> A relevant quote from a (relatively academic, static typing-oriented, functional etc.) sector of the language design community:

 _Google is hiring people to design languages and tools that know absolutely nothing about modern language design techniques, or what modern software engineering tools look like._

 _If you're paying any attention at all to Go, you're not learning anything. In fact, it's possible you're damaging your brain. It's projects like these that make Google look really bad and unattractive to programming language researchers, especially as compared to Adobe, IBM, Sun, and Microsoft._

From here: <http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/3896>

<comment><USER6> Hahaha. I'm an academic but I still laugh because we are so horribly arrogant and yet quite oblivious. We always introduce our papers and grants with "this is a very important problem with applications in blah blah blah" but we honestly have no idea what that really means or if it actually is the big problem for engineers (as opposed to an annoyance) and go on to do present our work developed in a bubble and tested on whatever we have access to in our labs. Consider erlang, such a language would never come out of academia. It's far too focused on reliability and maintenance. Those two problems are never on our radar in any real way.

<comment><USER7> Are you a programming language researcher?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> From the tutorial: "The language forces the brace style to some extent."

Well, that's it. If I can't have a brace-war tearing the dev group apart for months and kill productivity, I want nothing to do with that language. What's next, significant white space?

<comment><USER9> No but it does has insignificant white space - the language doesn't care but you are free to argue about it.

<comment><USER10> It also has gofmt which neatly takes care of pretty much any such arguments.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Hopefully with people from the dynamic languages camp trying the language they'll clean up the syntax. It's ugly and makes a lot of the example code hard to read.

<comment><USER12> Syntax is never _really_ a problem. We do a lot of work in Erlang...

 _Erlang is based originally on Prolog, a logic programming language that was briefly hot in the 80's. Surely you've seen other languages based on Prolog, right? No? Why not? Because Prolog sucks ass for building entire applications. But that hasn't deterred Erlang from stealing it's dynamite syntax._ [source: <http://damienkatz.net/2008/03/what_sucks_abou.html> _What Sucks About Erlang_ ]

In reality, syntax just fades away after ~5 minutes of real world usage. As Steve Jobs would say, it's not that big of a deal.

<comment><USER13> Erlang's syntax isn't representative of Prolog's. It was originally implemented in SICStus, sure, but Prolog lets you add your own operators, and Erlang added a ton on top of the (rather clean) Prolog syntax. How would Ruby (or whatever syntax you like) look if you made a DSL _by adding every operator that wasn't already in use?_

You know all the problems with the ambiguous ; , . stuff that Katz gripes about in that post? Prolog terminates every clause with a period, and all related rules just occur in sequence. Prolog has a read function, much like read in Lisp - "read the next complete (s-expression|Prolog clause) from stdin". The original Erlang compiler needed to read all of the alternative clauses for a function in one go* , so they strung them together with "," and ";", which are Prolog's _and_ and _or_ operators. (They could have fixed this when they started self-hosting, but probably had other priorities.) In practice, it isn't a problem (and Erlang has many perks to make up for those minor syntactic irritations!), but that can't be blamed on Prolog. It's sort of like if you used Lisp's (read) to load more expressions, but since your compiler needed you to read a whole module at once as an implementation detail, you used [ and { pairs instead of parens. Yuck!

In Prolog, that sort of code looks like this:

        parent(terach, abraham).
        parent(abraham, isaac).
        parent(isaac, jacob).
        parent(jacob, benjamin).

Note the conspicuous lack of semicolons.

* I'm reading between the lines here, so if Robert Virding swoops in and tells me I'm wrong, _Hello Robert!_ :)

If anything, the reason that Prolog isn't good for entire applications is that it's fundamentally a rules/database query language. It's awkward for stateful / procedural code, but if you treat it like (say) a much more sophisticated SQLite, it will be good to you.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> spyne-02139 If IRC activity correlates to interest in the language, then data shows a bleak picture of interest in go-lang. Here is the total character count per day as a percentage of the activity on November 12, 2009.

      http://i.imgur.com/8ERaf.png

      X axis is days (approx) since 11/12/09
      Y is % of chars as compared with the busiest day (11/12/09)

I've used the language for big projects and little projects. The strict error handling is fantastic. I like everything about the language except one thing. Just one, and it's a big nasty thing. I hope Russ, Rob, Iant or someone from the development team reads this, because it needs to be said, and others have said it, and it's the reason I stopped programming in go. Go might not need generics, the go development team might not need generics, but I DO! You wonder why there isn't a rocking go web framework? Because generics would be a huge help and no one wants to piece together a tedious solution immediately deprecated by the announcement we've been waiting a year for, "Go is getting generics!" All I want for christmas is generics ... and a pony.

<comment><USER14> Nah, the interest for new things from big companies always peaks shortly after the announcement. If you cut off the outliers e.g. before day 45 then this graph would look much rosier. Or, to put it another way, would the graph for any successful language like Python or C look any different in the first year after the initial announcement?

<comment><USER15> Yes, Haskell IRC activity pattern is different:

<http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/irc/>

Compare also:

[http://gmane.org/plot- rate.php?group=gmane.comp.lang.go.gene...](http://gmane.org/plot- rate.php?group=gmane.comp.lang.go.general)

[http://gmane.org/plot- rate.php?group=gmane.comp.python.gener...](http://gmane.org/plot- rate.php?group=gmane.comp.python.general)

[http://gmane.org/plot- rate.php?group=gmane.comp.lang.haskell...](http://gmane.org/plot- rate.php?group=gmane.comp.lang.haskell.cafe)

<comment><USER14> Those languages were all quite old and popular by the time those graphs started. It's not apples-to-apples to compare languages with a decade or more of use to a language whose inception was a year ago.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


As a freelancer, how many projects do you take on at once? - <AUTHOR> <comment><AUTHOR> My approach at the moment is to work on two projects at once. I try and spend about 4 hours on one project and then 2 hours on the other. Then I alternate each day. This doesn't always work so some weeks I'll just dedicate entire days to one project and then other days to the other. It's a pretty good approach because it means I always have paid work. As soon as one project is finished I spend that time looking for new work. I usually find my next project before the second one ends so there is always overlap. The downside is that I prefer to focus on one thing and dig into it. I can't really do that with my approach. If I did then there would be gaps where I am looking for work between projects. The other downside is that I don't work as fast as other people. I always quote longer deadlines because I know I have to account for working on both projects. I'm interested to know how other people handle their workflow. I'd love a better approach. How many projects do you take on at once and how do you handle your workflow?

</comment><comment><USER2> I try to have at least 2 at any time.

The upper limit depends on several factors such as deadlines, the communication skills of everybody involved and the ability to work on projects remotely.

When you find yourself juggling projects and not being able to communicate with each customer on a weekly basis at least you probably have taken on too many projects.

</comment><comment><USER3> The last couple of years I've been doing 2-3 long term projects at once. I try to work project on one project at a time for a few days or week. The sort of problems I work on sometimes don't have obvious answers so thinking about one project exclusively means that sometimes I wake up with the answer.</comment>


Ask HN: Hacker News for finance? - <AUTHOR> What's a good forum for news and importantly, discussion about the markets/finance/world-economy? By good, I mean that which is to finance, what Hacker News is to technology.<p>Does anyone know of such forums? <comment><USER2> Second zerohedge.com and also tickerforum.org, and learn the lingo / slang / inside jokes if you want to participate, expect a fair amount of dark humour, it's how people cope.

</comment><comment><USER3> I think you need to narrow your search parameters a little bit here. Just as there are thousands of sites about technology, so too are there thousands on which you can discuss finance. HN is unique in its potent mix of entrepreneurial minds and technical folks; what kind of analogue would you seek for finance? A particular niche? Or just 'real cool people'?

Zero Hedge is nice, check out also other blogs online that you might like, and at least follow along in their community :)

</comment><comment><USER4> <http://stocktwits.com> is pretty awesome

along with their great blogs/contributors

</comment><comment><USER5> <http://www.thestreet.com/>

</comment><comment><USER6> zerohedge.com (sucky Wordpress style comments after article however) ; minyanville.com ; and many more, depending on the focus - what exactly are you looking for? Your scope is pretty broad.

<comment><USER7> I've been looking for blogs dealing with commercial real estate. Any ideas?

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> <http://forlue.com></comment>


A Truly 'truly' Decentralised Platform to Manage Compute Power of AI/ML Training - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/ravenprotocol/hello-world-raven-protocol-f749bf5fc8cf <comment><AUTHOR> A couple of bright minds from around the world recognises that true decentralisation of AI/ML training cannot be done unless the compute power required to do that has significantly become inexpensive. How do you do that>? A blockchain empowered compute power sharing platform called Raven Platform</comment>


Ask HN: What is broken on the Internet today? A lot of sites dont work? - <AUTHOR>

I feel like the Internet is weird today.
1. StackOverflow says: "Stack Overflow requires external JavaScript from another domain, which is blocked or failed to load."
2. Yahoo.com - The main news scroller doesn't work.
3. GoDaddy.com - I tried searching for a domain and none of the buttons seem to work.
I thought it was Chrome but confirmed same behaviour with Safari and Firefox.
What is broken? JQuery CDN hosting perhaps? <comment><USER2> So your computer is brown and you think the internet is broken. Restart your pc

<comment><USER2> I hope every one knows that I meant *broken its just a typo on my phone. Although it gives it character</comment></comment>


Why I'm Moving from San Francisco to St. Louis - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/p/why-im-moving-from-san-francisco-to-st-louis-3513b9ae84a8 <comment><USER2> You forgot to mention its also home to Strangeloop, one of the best developer conferences I've ever attended: [https://thestrangeloop.com/](https://thestrangeloop.com/)

Full disclosure: I'm hosting a workshop at Strangeloop this year.

<comment><AUTHOR> Our Director of Engineering is going to Strangeloop--I think he may be volunteering--he has nothing but great things to say about it.

There's also Startup Voodoo later this month.</comment></comment>


A Brilliant Mind's Pauses: The Fiction of Pushkin - <AUTHOR> https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/brilliant-minds-pauses-fiction-russias-greatest-poet/ <comment><USER2> Pushkin more or less shaped russian language as we speak it today. He defined russian literature and poetry for centuries ahead. Reading him is like returning home you never knew you had.

<comment><USER3> How so? (I've heard this before, but some specifics would be appreciated).

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> How surprising and refreshing it is to find an essay about Pushkin on HN!

</comment><comment><USER5> I stumbled across Pushkin's works because of my high school curriculum and I must say it was one of the most enjoyable pieces of literature I've read next to The Lord Of The Rings and The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy, which needless to say were not part of my high school curriculum.

</comment><comment><USER6> i've been writing a lot of poetry throughout the last four years. it's the only way i can write. i get so bored with writing the "infrastructure" of a longer narrative.

it's easier to play with language and story while writing as little possible. only writing what comes to mind and letting the story fill out in the reader's head instead of on the page.

i really enjoy this poem by pushkin:

[http://www.poetryloverspage.com/yevgeny/pushkin/angel.html](http://www.poetryloverspage.com/yevgeny/pushkin/angel.html)

</comment><comment><USER7> Reading Pushkin in original is pure delight. Really enjoyed this write-up. Thanks.</comment>


Ask HN: Contracting from UK to US advice needed - <AUTHOR>

I maybe about to start contracting for the first time, I'm located in the UK but the company I'll work for will be in US. If I'm successful the salary will be above the UK 40% income tax amount.<p>* I've heard that I'll have to pay tax in the US and then claim some of that tax back in the UK, does anyone have any experience of this, how do I go about this and roughly how much tax do you end up paying on your income after being taxed by both countries? * Is it better to be self employed or ltd company in this situation? * Is there any advice that people can give me about what they've learned about contracting from the UK to the US or about contracting in general <comment><USER2> I'm not an expert, but I'd suggest having your own limited firm which can invoice the US company (and avoid income tax because it's a b2b transaction) and then taking the money out of your company as dividends to avoid NI.

SJD and Nixon Williams are the two main accountancy firms that tech contractors use in the UK, I'd suggest giving them both a call and describing your situation and go with whichever one seems better setup to handle it.

<comment><USER3> Read up on IR35 as well

<http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/leaflets/guide_limitcomp.htm>

Read through those questions and ensure you have a setup which does allow you to work through a ltd company

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> HMRC provides free training on this kind of thing. Look up your local Business Education and Support Team. I get letters from them all the time.

Also, I'd talk to an accountant who knows about these things.

<comment><USER5> You may want to make sure the accountant actually knows what they are talking about - I had a colleague who ended up having to pay tax in the UK _and_ the US after some advice from a large "big name" accounting firm.

I'd try and find an accountant who has actually got some clients who are doing what you plan to do.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> _I'm located in the UK but the company I'll work for will be in US._

Are you going to be staying in the UK, i.e., contracting remotely?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, I'll be contracting remotely from the UK

<comment><USER6> In that case, you don't need to pay any US taxes. Just file your UK taxes normally.

The US company you're working for will probably ask you to fill out some IRS forms, but keep repeating the phrases "non-resident alien", "not working in the US", "independent personal services", and "non US-source income" and with some luck you'll get through to them eventually.

EDIT: The above is not legal advice, I'm not a tax lawyer, and you should look up the US-UK income tax treaty to confirm that it doesn't do anything screwy. But I've run into this several times with Canada/US contracting, and I'd be shocked if UK/US was any different.</comment></comment></comment>


A Brutal Inheritance - <AUTHOR> https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/virginiahughes/dna-test-rape-family-tree <comment><USER2> What an incredible story. These two men are such heroes for the way they have sought to make peace and take ownership for such a sad event in their pasts.

</comment><comment><USER3> Is this a low-key ad for 23andme?

<comment><USER4> No. An advertisement is a paid placement created by a marketer. This is an exhaustively reported and fascinating piece of feature journalism.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> This kind of stuff is atrociously common in our evolutionary history. Every single one of us has innumerable rapists and rape victims among our ancestors.

</comment><comment><USER6> when is the movie coming out?

</comment><comment><USER7> Did I miss something? The whole article goes on like there was a conviction for rape, explicitly calling it rape. I mean I realize it's Buzzfeed, but "safe to assume" seems like a dangerous way to present something of this magnitude.

<comment><USER8> As if there ever could be a conviction of rape against a white prison warden raping a black inmate.¹

The standard of proof that you are demanding here is disingenuous.

Also, I noticed that on this site people have a profound misunderstanding of what journalism is. Journalism is first and foremost _story telling._

The stories are based in truth of course, but the core of any news story in the story, it's right there in the name of it!

If we replaced this with articles based on raw 'data', as many on this site seem to suggest, then no one would read them.

1: In the south, during the 1920s, in a hard labour prison camp with whips displayed on the walls, no less.

<comment><USER7> Did you mean to reply to my post? I'm saying this writer has presented as fact things which no one knows for certain.

<comment><USER8> I did read your post, and I disagree, the writer presented the speculation of the two main characters¹ as to the nature of the 'relationship' between the prison warden and Bernice.

Basically, the writer related to us what those two men believe about this event. There are two independent sources for this belief, and to me that's acceptable journalistic practise.²

He is helping the two men tell their story, you are free to disagree with their speculations, but that's what they told the writer.

1: And other relatives.

2: Now the subhead, does contain the word 'rape', and that's maybe the only thing I can fault the article on. However, headlines aren't typically written by the journalist, but rather by a copy editor. I'm not sure what Buzzfeed's practises are on this.

<comment><USER7> But if you can only fault the headline, then I don't think you read the article very thoroughly, because the writer explicitly states it was rape multiple times throughout the article. I'm not sure how you rationalize stating falsehood as any kind of "acceptable journalistic practice", but _nothing else matters_ if the writer is making false claims. And if the cop- out is that this is "storytelling" and not "journalism" then it's a whole other issue of duplicity in publishing this clickbait with false information under the _buzzfeednews.com URL_. But I suppose this is the difference between Buzzfeed and legitimate journalism.

<comment><USER8> > I'm not sure how you rationalize stating falsehood as any kind of > "acceptable journalistic practice"

You're just being obtuse¹ now, it's such a reasonable inference given the circumstances that it's petty of you to place such a high burden of proof on the writer.

Also you're denying one other important piece of evidence in favour of rape. Why did the mother never speak about it?

If she had had a joyful affair with such high ranking member of society, wouldn't she be proud of it?

Why do I even bother...

1: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


HP brings Windows 7 back 'due to popular demand' as buyers shun Windows 8 - <AUTHOR> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2323993/hp-brings-windows-7-back-due-to-popular-demand-as-buyers-shun-windows-8

<comment><USER2> The Windows 8 (especially post-8.1) pushback baffles me. If you put any effort at all into learning how to use it effectively, the acclimation period is definitely shorter than Win95 or WinXP was. I use it on a desktop machine with two 30" displays and only mouse/keyboard inputs (i.e. no touch). You certainly couldn't pay me $150 to go back to Win7 at this point.

I even find that I use Metro apps on my desktop fairly often. I have the live tiles for a few key apps like Mail, Calendar, Weather, Google Voice, and Twitter arranged as a dashboard of key notifications that I care about and flip over from the desktop more often than I thought I would.

It's also nice how Metro apps can raise notification toast on the desktop now in 8.1 (and desktop apps like Outlook can also tie into that same system, similar to Growl but built-in). Since I'm on the desktop 95% of the time, that definitely helps bridge the gap between Metro and desktop. I can get a lightweight notification when I get an @mention on Twitter, for example, without leaving TweetDeck running all the time.

On my laptop with touch and on my Surface, Win8.1 is far and away better than Win7 could have possibly been. The Metro side of things is great there - especially since both have HiDPI displays and Metro apps .

Surprisingly, I still haven't installed Outlook on the laptop because the 8.1 update to the Metro Mail app makes it good enough for my relatively light email use while mobile. Since all of the settings sync across machines automatically, the Mail app was already configured with the six accounts I use regularly as soon as I logged into it, so it was a no-brainer compared to installing Outlook or opening six web apps all the time.

<comment><USER3> From memory XP wasn't well received at first. It just hung around so long that people got really comfortable with it and didn't want to change.

<comment><USER4> Because it didn't offer much that Windows 2000 didn't provide?

<comment><USER2> I don't know this for a fact, but I think very few people were coming from Win2k to XP. Win2k was relatively niche, even in business, from what I can remember of my experience back then. It was essentially only the people who were running NT 4.0 Workstation before who used Win2k in the interim between that and XP.

<comment><USER5> It was getting popular in hobbyist circles (probably mostly in pirated form), especially after new PCs started shipping with Windows ME.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The changes between Windows 7 and 8 always seemed terribly minor to me -- a few control panels and settings shifted around as they do every OS update, the start menu became larger and looks a bit different but functions essentially the same (right down to preserving your Program Files hierarchy from Win95 if you scroll down from the tiles screen), but nothing major in the big scheme of things.

If Microsoft hadn't made these changes, and in the next few years became completely foreign and irrelevant to the current young generation of consumers who grew up on touch devices that work more like Win8 than Win7, would we be panning them for sticking with "what works" while their consumer base switches to Android/iOS?

<comment><USER7> Metro apps that are full screen are a terrible idea. I hate running skype and it taking up an entire monitor (yes, I know about skype desktop, and use it now, but it's not the default). I hate the PDF reader that is always full screen and difficult to close (alt-f4 is the only way?).

Full screen applications don't work on a desktop where multitasking is the norm.

<comment><USER8> Does the default PDF reader allow you to print yet?

<comment><USER9> As far as I know, it did from day one using the "Devices" charm thing. Later on they also made it available using the menu at the bottom - swipe in from top or bottom on touch screen, right click screen otherwise.

<comment><USER6> Or press Ctrl+P. I don't recall that ever not bringing up the print menu.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I really do not understand why we must have one size fits all operating system in the first place. Some things work better for mobile (metro, ios, android), and some work better for desktop/laptop Windows, OS X, Linux.

Why must we try to make them the same? I would argue a set of well defined junction points like Apple did with airplay in order to share content between mobile and desktop segments is a way more elegant solution.

<comment><USER11> They could have a one sized fits all operating system, however they need to tailor the interface to each type of device. Using a mouse on a "touch" interface is a terrible experience, same as using touch in a mouse environment. I have not tried Windows 8 update, however first impressions have done the damage to Windows 8 already.

<comment><USER12> I use Win8 daily and have no issue using a mouse or my fingers, actually the mouse is far more accurate and faster so I fail to understand your statement.

<comment><USER13> Swipe gestures are a pain with a mouse, because you need to move the mouse to the right spot, click, drag in the opposite direction and then release, requiring a non-trivial amount of effort; and it just feels wrong when you're expected to do so regularly because you know there has to be a better way (like the way it used to work). Decades of desktop UI design focused on "discoverability" also mean that an unindicated need for a swipe gesture in order to access core functionality is frustratingly non-obvious to people experienced with classic desktop interfaces, and these will tend to be people whose advice is requested in purchasing decisions.

Swiping is awesomely natural on a touchscreen, but obviously sub-optimal otherwise. Reliance on a swipe gesture should be avoided in UI design for a mouse/touchpad and keyboard environment, in favor of buttons and menus, and mouse wheel/two-fingered scroll support.

<comment><USER14> If swipe gestures even work with the mouse in Windows 8, I didn't know it and it never occurred to me to even try, though now I'm curious to see what happens when I get back on my laptop. I never even considered trying. You don't do swipes if you have a keyboard and mouse in Windows 8, you use your buttons, menus, clicks, and mouse-wheel just as you suggest. Where did you get the idea that the Win8 interface required gestures?

<comment><USER14> You don't need to swipe, you just move the mouse to the corner of the screen (or use the keyboard shortcut.)

<comment><USER13> So you can! Well that's embarrassing. Guess I could try using the thing before I stick my foot in my mouth.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I've been using windows 8, and now 8.1, since public release.

For me, windows 8 answers a few questions.

1): What do we do when users want to use their fingers instead of a mouse to click buttons made for the (superior) accuracy of a mouse pointer?

2): What do we do when monitor manufacturers sell 4k+ displays and windows applications aren't written to scale up that way?

3): How do we sell users and developers on using desktop applications again (instead of web apps)?

I think all three questions are answered well, and users will be less hostile to the changes once enough applications move to Metro, and consumers are buying 4k tablets.

At the moment, what I am hearing most is "Why change something that worked so well? Why do I have to learn something new?". The next generation PC hardware will answer that question.

I spend all of my time in windows, and I wouldn't want go back to 7. I like the new start screen; I find my applications a lot quicker when all I need to do is hit the windows key and type the name of the app, or file, or whatever I'm looking for. Windows 8 really shines on the surface, where a high DPI screen and touch come together. I use desktop apps on the desktop and mostly ignore metro; but on the surface I prefer metro apps which are more finger friendly and easier to read.

I like the new store architecture, and the limitations made on apps written for it. I will have to worry less installing an application from a publisher I don't recognize. I read a lot about the APIs, but I haven't written anything for it yet. I am waiting for metro to be available to enough users to make it cost effective to put effort into it.

If I were working at Microsoft right now, I would be shouting at the top of my lungs "Let's put out commercials explaining why Windows 8 is better!". I don't feel Windows 8 is a technological or UI disaster; I feel it's a marketing disaster.

</comment><comment><USER16> Counterpoint: "HP Bringing Back Windows 7 PCs? Not so fast..."[1]. TL;DR: this is a marketing tactic, and HP is actually offering fewer systems with Windows 7 than it was last year.

[1] [http://www.zdnet.com/hp-bringing-back-windows-7-pcs-not- so-f...](http://www.zdnet.com/hp-bringing-back-windows-7-pcs-not-so- fast-7000025351/)

<comment><USER17> Isn't it only natural that they sold a lot of Windows 7 PCs last year, as Windows 8 was only recently released?

<comment><USER16> Sure. The point is, "bringing back" implies that there was a period of time where Windows 7 PCs weren't being offered by HP, which appears not to be the case.

<comment><USER18> I think the idea is that Windows 7 is done, new computers moving forward will have 8. In the same sense that I can't go to a Honda dealership and buy a brand new 2011 Honda Civic. (I could if they have one still in inventory, but they're not getting any new ones)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I've been using Windows 8 on my laptop for well over a year, and I quite enjoy it. Especially with Windows 8.1, I just don't see how you can love Windows 7, and at the same time show an extreme displeasure for Windows 8. Have these people even used Windows 8?

IMO, the resistance has more to do with bad Microsoft PR and the anti-MS bandwagon, than flaws in the OS.

</comment><comment><USER20> This article greatly exaggerates. A quick search shows HP offers only 2 Windows-7 laptops, but offers 35 Windows-8x laptops. Similar numbers go for desktops as well.

[http://www.shopping.hp.com/en_US/home- office/-/products/Lapt...](http://www.shopping.hp.com/en_US/home- office/-/products/Laptops/Laptops)

</comment><comment><USER21> Can't "Back by popular demand" refer to the $150 discount on old systems instead of Windows 7 itself? I'm leaning that direction since I associate snowmen with December holidays.

Look at the ad itself: [http://www.hp.com/country/us/en/hho/welcome.html](http://www.hp.com/country/us/en/hho/welcome.html)

<comment><USER10> That is really standard HP discount. I do not remember ever going to HP website and not receiving $100-$450 discount for something.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Who would have thought that shimming a tablet UI onto a non touch PC would be a bad idea...

</comment><comment><USER23> Windows 8 is noticeably faster, has nice improvements all around and it's probably the first Windows that looks aesthetic.

People are afraid of change, simple as that.

<comment><USER24> Windows 8 is the most unusable collection of software I have ever had the misfortune of fighting. It is the worst experience I have ever had with an operating system, coming from experience with dos, windows 3.1-95-xp-vista-7, ubuntu, and arch.

The built in apps feel like MVPs. The interactions are unintuitive, and many things that should "just work" smack you in the face time and time again.

the whole thing feels like it's been slapped together without any thought for actual usability, and with zero polish.

edit: i should note that I have not yet tried the 8.1 update

<comment><USER25> I've been using Windows 8 on my desktop PC for some time now (primarily used for gaming and entertainment, not development) and for my purposes it's a clear upgrade over 7. Yes, the Metro apps are terrible but you don't ever need to use them. I spend almost all of my time in the desktop, and the few times I need to use the new Start interface, the workflow is exactly the same as Win7 (press Windows key, start typing program name, hit Enter).

<comment><USER26> This sounds like the same, unconvincing argument I always hear about Windows 8.

"It's a bit faster, there are some other minor obscure improvements, and if you just ignore all of the crappy new stuff it's not a big deal!"

If boot times are a big issue for you, then I get it. For me, they aren't, so I'm inclined to pass on the update. Perhaps it would work great with a Windows Phone or Surface (I'm tempted to try those at some point, so if anybody would like to share their experiences with theirs...), but it doesn't seem like it was designed for a desktop. So why should I put it on my desktop?

<comment><USER23> > if you just ignore all of the crappy new stuff it's not a big deal

It really isn't a big deal, because you're not being forced to use the Metro apps. You can populate the start menu with regular application shortcuts and you're on your way.

<comment><USER26> So why the hell am I upgrading?

<comment><USER9> I use it on a three monitor desktop. My favorite new features are file explorer and task manager.

Also the skydrive + settings sync is really nice. Whenever I install on a new device, everything's set up on first boot.

Lots of other features that don't make headlines but are genuinely useful: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windows_8](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windows_8)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> the cognitive disarray caused by the metro menu is the worst UI innovation since mystery meat navigation. that being said, disabling it in favor of a classic start menu makes Windows 8 on par with 7.

This sort of workaround does not make things OK for the average person.</comment>


Getting a Fair Toss From a Biased Coin - <AUTHOR> http://www.billthelizard.com/2009/09/getting-fair-toss-from-biased-coin.html <comment><USER2> von Neumann is credited with coming up with the fair toss trick:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_coin#Fair_results_from_a_b...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_coin#Fair_results_from_a_biased_coin)

<comment><USER3> Thanks, I didn't know who originated that method. I added a note citing von Neumann.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Flip the coin to get sufficient entropy, then take the md5 of the bits generated. That should give you some number of virtual flips as output.

<comment><USER5> Since you can't end up with more entropy than you started with by using a deterministic process, if you're going to do that you may as well use the bits to seed a random number generator.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Haha! I saw the title and thought "how would I..." and reinvented it in seconds, almost (mine differed in that I'd allocate the H or T value of each pair arbitrarily by fiat ahead of time).

Edit: oops! I failed to reinvent discarding by pairs. That makes my attempt a fail. D'oh!

</comment><comment><USER7> Neat idea. But how do you convince your friends to do this?

A: I call heads.

<flip>

B: It came up tails! I win!

A: No, wait, we're not done yet. We need to flip it again, if it comes up tails, we start over.

B: What? No, give me my doughnut!</comment>


How a Hydrogen Fuel Cell Engine Works - <AUTHOR> http://www.rybrook.co.uk/magazine/news/how-a-hydrogen-fuel-cell-engine-works/ <comment><USER3> Has anyone tried to calculate roughly how cheap and energy dense batteries have to get before hydrogen fuel cells become uncompetetive for small/medium vehicles?

I figure, hydrogen's technological downside is a fuel that's hard to store and handle (can't fill a portable tank and carry around like with gasoline, can't fill at home like with batteries). Pure battery's downside is shorter range and longer time to "fill". Hydrogen's economical downside is a more complex system with more parts to assemble. Battery's downside is the cost of large amounts of batteries.

In both cases it seems that hydrogen has the upper hand in the short term, if they solve the cost of the fuel cell itself. But in both cases it seems to me like pure batteries have downsides that are likely to improve over time.

It would be interesting to know where the break-even point is, given we have a cheap fuel cell.

I'm worried that the hydrogen fuel cells are a bit of a blind alley for cars. Heavy trucks and cargo ships is another matter though. But then maybe biofuels aren't so bad if we can just combust them cleanly enough.

<comment><USER4> The consensus seems to be that hydrogen fuel cells have never been competitive for cars, so any future reduction in battery costs and building out of charging infrastructure is only going to make that worse. So it's interesting that you think they have a short term advantage.

There's also plug-in hybrid cars which would fill the gaps that pure EV don't yet cover better than fuel cells, by allowing short commutes or restricted city centres to be pure electric with no emisions, while still allowing for quick refuels on longer journies and defeating range anxiety.

<comment><USER3> > So it's interesting that you think they have a short term advantage.

I think you missed this part ", if they solve the cost of the fuel cell itself. "

Until they solve the high cost of the fuel cell, no, they don't have an advantage at all. But I feel like it's reasonable to assume that it can be solved.

That is, I want to give hydrogen the benefit of doubt, but even then I see issues.

<comment><USER5> AFAIK even if the fuel cell was free it would still not be competitive. The reason being that you need 2-3x more electrical energy to get the same kinetiv energy if you store it in hydrogen rather than lithium based batteries. There goes the entire price advantage you have over gasoline cars - in order to get the mass market it needs to be cheaper both upfront and to run it, which only batteries can achieve, safe some revolutionary new way to convert electricity to hydrogen.

There could be niche usecases though, such as long range trucks or buses - <USER2> energy density is more important than fuel cost.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Google for the fuel cell handbook from the DOE. Last I looked it was a clear intro. Wrt charge balances and driving force you need to remember this is a 3 phase system- h2 splits, ions migrate, charge balances by electron flow. Product is steam that wafts away so it is reasonable to think of a fuel cell as a battery with replenishable fuel. It's been a long time. I walked away from fuel cells in '02 or so. Nothing has changed and battery tech has completely owned any large scale opportunity

</comment><comment><USER7> > 2\. Hydrogen molecules activated by the anode catalyst release their > electrons.

Can somebody describe how - and why - oppositely charged particles get separated?

<comment><USER8> Since I'm no chemist I don't get the details, but the thin platinum anode "forces" Hydrogen to split into H+ to go through it, while electrons cannot traverse and thus will flow to the other output...

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_cell#Types_of_fuel_cells....](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_cell#Types_of_fuel_cells.3B_design)

Very tricky system.

<comment><USER7> Thank you. My question is about how that "forcing to split" works.

An example of how a catalyst works can be presented in terms of energies. If a set of atoms (like, two atoms of hydrogen) can be in several different states (like, as a molecule or as two separate atoms), and there is an energy barrier between those two states, then the system "sits" in a potential hole. In order to get to another state, it has to increase energy to overcome the barrier. Catalyst can help with that, providing a new path between two energy states which doesn't require that high jump in energy.

However, when initial state (the molecule) has much lower energy than the final state (two separate atoms), catalyst doesn't help. There can't be a "low energy path to the top of the energy mountain".

Here we don't have splitting of neutral molecule into neutral atoms... but I'd still listen to an explanation.

<comment><USER9> Hi,

I am afraid I won't dig into this now due to time reasons (I have to go back and read up stuff), but I just would like to give a remark regarding the concept you have sketched out:

The different states you describe do not have to be on different energy levels. A catalyst provides an alternative reaction mechanism that might have a different activation energy. It can result in a molecule of similar energy state, and, yes, you can have a reaction towards an energetically higher state.

I am sure there is many a publication that models the electronic transitions that occurs when gas molecules react with metals. Funky stuff, which involves number crunching with models of atomic/molecular orbitals or bands, and even more funky spectroscopic real time measurements of reactions.

Chemistry has gone a long way since alchemy, and there are many abstraction layers to get through if you want to have an explanation that would satisfy a physicists. At the end, you will move from empirical knowledge towards a world of quantum chemistry/physics. That is the beauty (or curse) of the discipline that is chemistry.

Now, if you are curious how such a thing works, I suggest look up the "Wilkenson catalyst" (a Rhodium based catalytic hydrogenation agent) as an example. It gives you an idea how organometallic compounds work at various levels of depth.

<comment><USER7> > and, yes, you can have a reaction towards an energetically higher state.

Where does that extra chemical energy come from? Other degrees of freedom of a molecule?

In general, I'd expect the reaction H2 -> 2H+ + 2e- not to be anything like dominant. It's the separation of charges which is the source of energy of the cell, and the energy is released along the path of those charges recombining. Or am I missing something here?

> there are many abstraction layers to get through if you want to have an > explanation that would satisfy a physicists.

Yes, I'm interested in the actual physics of the process, not in the net chemical result...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Huh. I always just assumed that hydrogen cars were internal combustion engines, in which they filled a combustion chamber with H2 and burned it off. I'm surprised it's nothing like that.

Today I learned.

<comment><USER11> Internal combustion engines tuned for hydrogen fuel also exist. However the benefit of a fuel-cell vehicle is being able to recharge the batteries with the fuel-cells, regenerative braking, or at a charging stations.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_internal_combustion_e...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_internal_combustion_engine_vehicle)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Are people actually amenable to driving cars carrying substantial quantities of pressurized hydrogen and oxygen? It's a bomb on wheels.

<comment><USER13> I never considered that. Surely it'd be illegal if a car crash would cause a massive explosion.

<comment><USER14> There's no pressurised oxygen, only hydrogen, the oxygen is extracted from ambient air as needed. If you work out a safety valve system that's good enough (which has presumably been done, since Toyota Mirais are driving around where I live), rapid release should be reasonably safe. Hydrogen is much lighter than air and will evaporate quickly.

It's not as safe as diesel, but no worse than gasoline, or even large Lithium batteries.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> 700 atm? I would never drive with a tank of any significant size held at that pressure.

<comment><USER16> I have a friend who has been working on Hydrogen and fuel cells since 1999. He told me in 2001 that it was never going to happen for cars and that fuel cells just are not going to pay off except for a few instances that aren't really clear.

2016 he says the same thing. Fuel cells will never be the fuel for cars and no clear viable application. The issue is that you can't just go with hydrogen into a magical filter and split the hydrogen atoms and get energy without it costing multiple more then gas or electric.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> RIP Stan Meyer

</comment><comment><USER18> It magically gets the free hydrogen from a bearded white man in the sky...

Then you add platinum which you get from the contract with the devil.</comment>


FLI: A binary interface to let Scheme use Python, Lua, Ruby etc's Library - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/guenchi/FLI <comment><USER2> Racket has this for C-based APIs. My mind is kind of wondering how this would ever be stable/maintainable to use for Python, but Lua seems possible but I would rather do my scripting in Racket then Lua and use the C APIs directly.

[https://docs.racket-lang.org/foreign/index.html](https://docs.racket- lang.org/foreign/index.html)

Looking at Julia (Which has a no "boiler plate" philosophy when using C or Fortan) the function is just called.

Interesting to look at for comparison

Julia ccall- [https://docs.julialang.org/en/v0.6.1/manual/calling-c-and- fo...](https://docs.julialang.org/en/v0.6.1/manual/calling-c-and-fortran- code/)

Racket FFI - [https://docs.racket- lang.org/foreign/index.html](https://docs.racket-lang.org/foreign/index.html)

<comment><AUTHOR> I am researching julia's code.

[https://github.com/JuliaPy/PyCall.jl/blob/master/src/PyCall....](https://github.com/JuliaPy/PyCall.jl/blob/master/src/PyCall.jl)

I guess it is like this: Importing the pycall library is to turn on the python interpreter thread and not interrupt it. Then you can call any python library you want.

<comment><USER3> The GIL is mostly managed by CPython and the host application doesn't touch it directly. Host extension modules may use PyEval_SaveThread et al. just like regular extension modules to release the GIL during blocking operations _when called by CPython_. There is a separate API for fondling the GIL when you're in a host-created thread (not created by CPython) and want to call CPython. Those are orthogonal (called by CPython vs. calling CPython).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm pretty neutral to Scheme and the other Lisps, but at the very least this seems like a cool project.

</comment><comment><USER5> How does Chez Scheme compare vs. CHICKEN Scheme? For a layman, they both seem to compile to binary; Chicken via C, Chez maybe not? Which one has a bigget community?

Also, do you know of any static typing extension for Chez?

<comment><AUTHOR> Chez is compile direct to Native Code

Chicken has much more library and bigger community.

BUT...

Chez is the only commercial compiler (before open source) and very stable and fast...

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I just looked at the repo, haven't tried this yet. Could be very useful to me if tensorflow, pytorch etc. are callable

<comment><USER6> BTW, guenchi thanks for writing this code! Much appreciated.

<comment><AUTHOR> I have been working hard to promote the construction of the (Chez)Scheme community for a year. Being useful to you is the best gift for me.

By the way, we have a scheme binding of tensorflow. That calling direct by tensorflow's C API.

FLI is in order to solve the problem of calling Numpy by Scheme which is lack of C - api.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Can anybody explain how this works ? Is it only works for interpreted languages ?

<comment><AUTHOR> Every language with FFI has the same ABI. Because they use C Language's ABI to port another language.

Looking at it from another perspective, any language can call another language through this ABI.

So any language with FFI can call any compiled binary code. For interpreted languages, you must embed the runtime (or interpreter).

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Could be very useful with Lua code.

<comment><USER9> If that's your use case you might want to check out [https://fennel- lang.org](https://fennel-lang.org)</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What do you use to collaborate remotely (share screens and talk)? - <AUTHOR>

I've been using Google Hangouts, but it seems a little flaky. I'd like something more robust and reliable but without breaking the bank if possible. I've used Skype in the past, but their offering isn't quite good enough to pay a premium. I code and design with a remote partner. <comment><AUTHOR> Found this tool for collaboration, but I wish it had voice chat built in: [http://screenhero.com/](http://screenhero.com/)</comment>


Bitcoin's Cheap Energy Feast Is Ending - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/articles/2018-01-04/bitcoin-s-cheap-energy-feast-is-ending <comment><USER2> wait so supply is going to get constrained? and if an eft gets on the exchange? would that mean demand will shoot up and supply is getting curtailed. wonder what that does to prices? econ 101 question.</comment>


BitTorrent founder Bram Cohen has left the company - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/19/17757670/bittorrent-founder-bram-cohen-has-left-the-company <comment><USER2> Not all that surprising that he leaves after the company was bought by a scamcoin.

<comment><USER3> I haven't kept up with those news. As a torent user (through a different client, I use qbittorrent) is there anything I should be wary of?

<comment><USER4> Nope, BitTorrent, Inc. is just as scummy as its new owners. Both of the proprietary(!) clients it distributes, BitTorrent and uTorrent, are loaded with adware and other garbage. The inventor of the open-source BitTorrent protocol we all know and love, Bram Cohen[0], already left the company late last year to start another company, Chia.Network[1], which is yet another cryptocurrency company.

[0][https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bram_Cohen](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bram_Cohen) [1][https://chia.net](https://chia.net)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> So he is no longer seeding?</comment>