Police had woman's Facebook deactivated during standoff - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/maryland-woman-shot-by-police-in-standoff-posted-part-of-encounter-on-social-media/2016/08/02/d4650ee6-58cc-11e6-831d-0324760ca856_story.html <comment><USER2> Tragic and unfortunate, all around.

I wonder what FB's policy on this will be going forward. In many ways, these livestreams are a public good and provide transparency and additional accountability in these situations. If people elect to stream them, it seems wrong to shut it down. On the other hand, perhaps there is a public good in not showing an ongoing live police operation?

I think I'd lean toward not agreeing to shutdown such streams, unless perhaps it's a hostage situation or terror event of some kind. (Getting into squishy definitions there, I'm sure, which is why I qualify it provisionally.)

As to this particular incident... I wish the deceased hadn't resisted. It seems in this case the police exercised much more caution and restraint than has been the case in many other recent examples of shootings. And I think one thing generally stands: if you threaten to kill a police officer and especially if you do so while holding a weapon (or certainly pointing it at them), you're likely to be shot.

<comment><USER3> This was a hostage situation. Was the 5 year old boy, not a hostage to his crazed, gun-wielding mother in this standoff?

I love Monday morning quarterbacks.

<comment><USER4> >I love Monday morning quarterbacks.

honest question, what does this mean?

<comment><USER5> > Monday morning quarterback: A person who analyzes the mistakes they made > they day after they've made them. Derived from complaining over quarterbacks > on monday morning after the sunday game. [0]

[0]: [http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=monday%20morn...](http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=monday%20morning%20quarterback)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > According to a police report from the March stop, which the department > released after the shooting, Gaines was stopped when an officer saw that in > place of a license plate she had a piece of cardboard on her vehicle. The > cardboard declared, "Any Government official who compromises this pursuit to > happiness and right to travel, will be criminally responsible and fined, as > this is a natural right and freedom."

So she was a Sovereign Citizen ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_citizen_movement](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_citizen_movement))? [http://heavy.com/news/2016/08/korryn-gaines-instagram- videos...](http://heavy.com/news/2016/08/korryn-gaines-instagram-videos-full- before-shooting-with-son-police-traffic-stop-shotgun-shesyourmajesty/) quotes her spouting more of the sovereign citizen legal gobbledegook. Apparently there's even a black version of all this stuff: [http://www.rawstory.com/2014/08/sovereign-citizens- express-f...](http://www.rawstory.com/2014/08/sovereign-citizens-express- fears-of-lawlessness-by-rejecting-laws/)

<comment><USER7> "quotes her spouting more of the sovereign citizen legal gobbledegook"

It's sad that the top comment on this thread is just name-calling.

Why do you consider her views to be 'gobbledegook'?

<comment><USER8> I don't see it as an attack on their views in general (though the sovereign citizen stuff is pretty odd, IMO) but that those sorts of people tend to ramble in an extremely weird way. If you haven't seen this specifically then think of a sort of madder, less coherent version of Glenn Beck or Alex Jones.

<comment><USER7> So, it's not a vague attack on their views, but a vague attack on their communication style?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I think this is a very unfortunate situation, but the thought of Facebook disabling her account at the behest of the police, that doesn't feel right. We seen that we cannot always trust the police perspective in shootings, so instead of disabling the account, perhaps Facebook should have instead continue to record the feed but disable the comments.

<comment><USER10> "Mr. Zuckerberg sir, an incredibly violent and hostile individual with a gun is livestreaming a standoff with the police. It's very likely this livestream will involve somebody brutally dying or getting horrible maimed. Also, this stream could jeopardize an important police operation underway to neutralize this dangerous person. Should we pull the stream?"

"No! Of course not! The internet is the land of Freedom! Hosting this content isn't bad for us at all!"

<comment><USER11> Entertaining strawman, but a sane 'no' would look more like "There's no reason to think the stream will lead to maiming, and you're just lying to me when you say that the subject streaming her own view could jeopardize the police operation."

Edit: I think I misread the first sentence, I suppose you meant a content warning rather than cause and effect, but that's not a great reason to turn off cameras pointed at police.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> A [dead] poster commented this, but I think it bears repeating that there is an ACLU app specifically for recording police. [1]

I'd personally trust that far more than Facebook.

[1] [https://www.aclu.org/feature/aclu-apps-record-police- conduct](https://www.aclu.org/feature/aclu-apps-record-police-conduct)

<comment><USER2> This is a great reminder, thanks.

Slight concern that the developer on ACLU's behalf is something called Quadrant 2, Inc, which seems to be owned by an individual operator as opposed to a larger established company. Not sure what the company's track record or policies are.

But just an aside there. This is cool to see and great to have as a reminder.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> This is going to get upvoted because of the title, I really hope that people read the actual article before posting. The worst part is that this women put her children in extreme danger and had a history of instigating police and threatening extreme violence through social media.

Furthermore others on social media actively encouraged her violence which directly led to her death and serious injury to her children. It reminds me most of the school shooting in Oregon where the attacker was actively encouraged on internet forums to commit the act. Though like in that incident I think this women would have acted the same regardless.

<comment><USER14> An alternate explanation is a woman was protecting her child from a threat --real, perceived or otherwise. Poor choice? Probably. But I think you've only explored one side of the story and a lot more information has become available in the last 12 hours.

<comment><USER15> A shotgun is not a reasonable way to protect oneself from a state. The state probably has more police officers than you have bullets. You'll only make it worse.

<comment><USER16> Unfortunately, the common narrative today to is to take up arms against what you perceive to be an oppressive government.

<comment><USER17> Actually, the narrative today is to take up arms against the haters and anyone who tries to get between you and your dreams.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I wonder if there was a way to resolve this standoff without her death. I.e. letting her shoot all the shotgun shells she has, or just waiting until she gets tired and slips up, gets hungry, etc. Yeah, it requires a lot of patience but hey, you can save a human life. I don't think she would have harmed her kid so waiting in cover seems like a relatively safe thing to do?

<comment><USER19> if police are about to shoot, and have good cause to, then it would seem reasonable that they be allowed to use sleep gas or tranquilizer, similar to what doctors use during operation. Seems better than killing them.

Downside could be lawsuites against the police for "damages" that the sleep gas caused.

<comment><USER20> As nice as it would be to have a reliable nonlethal alternative to firearms, there simply are no nonlethal weapons capable of stopping someone who is presenting an immediate threat. Tranquilizers and anesthesia are administered by an anesthesiologist, a doctor trained to determine a dosage based on a person's body mass. Too much of a dose, or even administering it too quickly can cause serious complications, or even death. Even under the controlled environment of an operating room 1/20 patients die under full anesthesia a year.

Sadly, the most reliable method of stopping a person presenting a threat is with a firearm.

<comment><USER21> Could you clarify what you mean by 1/20 patients dying? I looked at [http://patient.info/health/anaesthesia-death-or-brain- damage](http://patient.info/health/anaesthesia-death-or-brain-damage) and it said the risk of death (England and Wales) was 1/100,000 full anesthetics.

<comment><USER22> Definitely questioning that 1/20 figure, I had full anesthesia with a surgery earlier this year and I'm pretty sure I'd be informed of that kind of risk.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> This seems entirely appropriate. It would be consistent with the practice of news outlets sometimes not showing an ongoing police operation live.

<comment><USER2> What is the rationale for news outlets not showing an ongoing police operation? Is it so that the suspects / perpetrators can't use the external information against the police? If so, does that rationale applicable when it is the suspect / perpetrator broadcast their own available information?

I don't know the background for these policies, so asking the first question non-rhetorically.

<comment><USER24> Tends to attract even more lookieloos.

<comment><USER2> That's a good point of concern, for sure.

<comment><USER25> It is also the reason why broadcasters do not show field invasions from fans in football (the _real_ football). There are some people with very loose screws in their heads. Claiming fame with stupid shit like that totally justifies it in their mind.

Invasions dropped very substantially after the TV stations enacted this policy.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> The ACLU has an app that can be used to record police encounters. Fortunately, the ACLU won't be shutting it off at the police request.

</comment><comment><USER27> >"She was intelligent, strong, determined, beautiful. She was a dedicated mother, an awesome friend. She was determined to enlighten people. There's not enough accolades I can give her,"

A mother determined to endanger the life of her son in a firefight with police. Though it seems it may not have been her fault that she turned out that way. Quite sad.

<comment><USER28> Right, she sued over lead in water and so far seems to be a very accurate assessment of her deteriorating mental health by the time of encounter.

If some police departments can deliver bombs via drones, maybe warrants can be too!

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> My first thought was they are trying to prevent a similar situation to Antonio Perkins in June:

[http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2016/06/17/man-shot-killed- whil...](http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2016/06/17/man-shot-killed-while-live- streaming-orig-vstan-dlewis.cnn)

Where he was live streaming to Facebook while being shot by police. If the police can prevent streams like these from being seen, it gives them a huge legal advantage. It means the public won't be able to see what happened and can't put political pressure on DAs to prosecute cops. It's much better for them if they can keep that footage internal to Facebook, the police force, and the DA if at all possible.

Very smart.

</comment><comment><USER30> Considering her followers were encouraging her to not give in to police demands, this was entirely justified.

<comment><USER2> I think this is a good point. I wonder if livestreams could be enabled but perhaps comments/feedback could be disabled or invisible to the poster. This could also address concerns that external viewers might feed a suspect/perpetrator intel on the police operation which might impinge their efficacy in an already difficult notice.

<comment><USER31> Then the poster could just instruct the viewers to send their comments to some other social media post/service.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> This incident didn't really have anything to do with Facebook. The cause was buried in an offhand remark in the middle of the article: apparently the woman's behavior was a result of brain damage from lead paint. The headline should have been 'Lead paint claims yet another victim'.

</comment><comment><USER33> I'm curious if the police would have entered and shot at her if they couldn't get the live stream shut down.

</comment><comment><USER34> Couldn't they have just cut the Internet for the place and block her cell phone?</comment>


Ask HN: How to identify potential of a person? - <AUTHOR>

Is testing his/her IQ+EQ a reliable measure? TIA <comment><USER2> _Is testing his/her IQ+EQ a reliable measure?_

No.

</comment><comment><USER3> Potential for what?

It is only possible to measure fitness for a specific task. Often a trait that would help in one situation will hinder in another.

</comment><comment><USER4> Talking with the person. For a couple of hours.

</comment><comment><USER5> No.

There are two things you need to measure, ability and determination, the first you can test for the second can only really be shown by a track record.

Ability is very task specific, so what you test for will need to depend on what sort of potential you're looking for. For example for programming a number of studies have shown one of the strongest indicator of being able to program is the ability to form a consistent mental model of how something works (which you can test for without someone having programming experience).

</comment><comment><USER6> No, after you get above 145 (top 98% or 3 SD) the accuracy decreases quickly, instead they give you a different test which takes quite awhile to administer. Just ask problem solving, thought, and logic questions; it's easier, cheaper, and you get you see how they think.

 __WARNING __, in some jurisdictions IQ testing is of questionable legality within a job setting and can be considered discriminatory (I know, stupid. They now say you can't discriminate between candidates based on intelligence.)

<comment><USER7> Where is this?

<comment><USER6> Don't know exactly which areas I just know I've been warned by a few attorneys I know that due to the changes in case law (not newly passed laws). That in some areas it can be argued and argued successfully that not hiring an individual based on their intelligence can be a discriminatory practice. If the test doesn't result in a nominal result between racial groups, in extension the intelligence test can be found racial discriminatory.

<comment><USER8> There is a book called _Incompetence_ , by Rob Grant of _Red Dwarf_ fame, set slightly in the future where it is now illegal to discriminate on race, age, gender... or competence.

Highly recommended reading, both as entertainment and as preparation for the inevitable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I don't think there is any particularly accurate way to assess "potential" objectively. Maybe some of these things can give you a (very) vague indication, but I wouldn't put much stock in any of them, personally.

I think a better question would be "How do I help people live up to the potential they do have?"

</comment><comment><USER7> IQ + EQ + Credit Score + Past successes is about as close as you'll get.</comment>


Sierra town hit hard by disaster, tripped up by another problem: Google Maps - <AUTHOR> https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Sierra-town-hit-hard-by-disaster-tripped-up-by-13284911.php <comment><USER2> Google maps definitely shows 140 open. Not sure what they are going on about.

<comment><USER3> The article refers to specific timeframes for the error, mostly in August, one period in September. Not sure what you are going on about.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Thoughts on the Impact of GPT-3? - <AUTHOR> What are your thoughts on GPT-3? <comment><USER2> I think about the massive size, that only a handful of companies can even make use of it, and the carbon footprint that impacts the planet

</comment><comment><USER3> GPT-4 next year is going to be scary good.</comment>


"Arrow This": clearing up how ES6 = arrows handle 'this' and others - <AUTHOR> http://blog.getify.com/arrow-this/ <comment><AUTHOR> disclosure: self submission</comment>


Pervasive myths about older software developers - <AUTHOR> http://www.lessonsoffailure.com/developers/pervasive-myths-older-software-developers/ A topic near and dear to my heart. ;-) <comment><USER2> Another "I have witnessed X" so "Y must be true" post.

I've been programming commercially for 32 years and in all that time, I have found very little correlation between age and ability to deliver quality software.

I have worked with younger, inexperienced, and uneducated programmers who were willing to learn, with minds like sponges and who were a pleasure to work with. They often found or thought of things the rest of us overlooked.

I have worked with younger, inexperienced, and well educated programmers who thought they knew better and were obstacles to progress.

I have worked with older programmers with the same one year's experience 22 times. Oy.

I have worked with older programmers with excellent domain knowledge and limited technical range. Their personality and willingness to succeed were often the key to progress.

I have worked with older programmers with excellent technical range and limited domain knowledge. Sometimes it's hard to teach an old dog new tricks, but when you can, results can be golden.

I have worked with brilliant older programmers with extensive experience and open minds. The best of all worlds.

(By the way, I have also worked with programmers of many ethnicities, female, handicapped, gay, Republican, religious, even left-handed, and have found little or no correlation between their "description" and their "performance". One of the beauties of programming is that the easiest way to evaluate your performance is through your work itself and not much else.)

<comment><USER3> I was right there with you until you mentioned southpaws. I really have little tolerance for that sort of degenerate character. ;)

I think that a persistant dedication to improvement is the elusive common trait among "successful" people and projects.

I agree with you that "code talks," but want to caution people who would be demure that tooting your own horn when you have victories can get you more pull with management when you have proposals of your own -- i've known too many programmers far better than I be ignored by mgmt because they were the "quiet type." Yes, the is a mgmt failure and I have endeavored to proactively "pull out" the opinions of such people on the teams where I have influence, but a light doesn't do as much good when it is under a bushel.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm about to turn 50.

I've had a /great/ last ten years. I'm not sure what the next decade is going to be like, but keeping fit and keeping up with industry stuff that matters are high on my list.

I've seen many older developers "die" by

\- Getting into management (and not keeping up technically)

\- Becoming complacent and not learning new things on a continual basis

\- Getting stuck doing the same thing for years

I don't mean you should be a butterfly -- nobody likes working with someone who's only spent three months on any project and to whom everything new and flaky is "oooh, shiny!" -- but I've seen too many people just get stuck and seem not to care.

My father in law retired as a C programmer when he was 75. I've seen people considering starting a start-up at 60. If you take care of yourself and your industry smarts, I don't see why this couldn't be you, too.

<comment><USER5> Certainly it's about staying relevant no-matter where you are at in your career age-wise.

Unfortunately though I think older developers face more scrutiny as far as their skills go. It's funny but being more fit/healthy does take the edge of of this 'problem' to some degree, but nothing cures it better than thorough technical knowledge and a solid work history of 15-20+ years.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Old developer here. Nice to affirm that these are "myths" in the sense that they are often not true, but given a random old guy these may be quite accurate. These are observations that people have made of real individuals that do not generalize to the whole group.

> Myth: Older software developers are more jaded and cynical and therefore, > less desirable in the workplace than younger ones. Younger developers are > more enthusiastic than older ones.

I would have to say I have been both growing in enthusiasm and getting more jaded. The getting jaded part means you no longer want to hurl yourself at something that experience tells you is doomed from the start, but the enthusiasm means maybe this new twist will make it work.

One of the great powers of youth is ignorance - the kind of ignorance that enables you to take on projects that are too big and require you to push beyond your original capabilities until you conquer. This ignorance is the source of tales that start: "if I had known what I was getting into...."

<comment><USER7> When I was about 14 years younger, I embarked on a project that, in retrospect, was way more than I could handle, but I was, as you suggest, too ignorant to realize it.

It took me a long time. Years of part-time effort. But I finally rolled out the first release. I learned a whole lot along the way, and it felt awesome to bring the project to some level of completion.

I'm probably too experienced now to be fooled into starting a project that I know is way more than I could handle, but maybe I should do some of those projects anyway.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> The one point of contention I have with the article is about older programmers 'thinking more slowly'. This is again reiterated in the comments below the article. This is not true, we actually learn faster as we get older as long as we stay mentally active. In other words, we 'learn how to learn'. There are things that I can grasp now so easily that eluded me when I was 20. If you can't think faster and learn easier when you are 40 than when you were 20, you aren't exercising your mind enough.

There's a reason why the best lawyers are NOT those right out of law school as a general rule.

<comment><USER9> This is a very good point. 'Thinking more slowly' isn't a problem in any other field.

I think that in software development, a lot of the time, 'thinking more slowly' with age is actually thinking more carefully. You have more experience, therefore you have a larger knowledge base; so of course it takes longer to query. It also means that you get better answers, rather than the first answer that pops into your head. At 26, for me to get the same type of results, I imagine that I might have to do some research.

Do you have any examples of what you do to stay mentally active? It also seems important to keep physically active (from my experience with older guys, the ones who are thinking best are typically in the best physical condition).

<comment><USER8> I think perhaps the best way to answer how to stay mentally active with the question, posed to me, that got it through my own head.

Start by asking yourself this question:

Why do you think that time seems to speed up as we get older?

Now stop, and really think about that question. Don't skip ahead. Think of some possible reasons. It's a phenomenon that we all experience. What's the cause?

When we are preschool age, time seems to last forever. As we get older, the years start rolling by more quickly and I've been told by more than one person in their 70's that it never slows down, it only speeds up.

Why?

The answer is actually that we've 'been there, done that'.

When we are young, EVERYTHING is new. When we are experiencing something new, time seems to slow down, especially because we are enjoying it and taking in so much.

As we get older, our brains start to filter out what we have seen before. You know that feeling when you drive home and don't remember driving home or anything along the way? Boom. There you go. Your brain just ignored the trip.

Have you ever gone on a three day trip to some new place and felt like your were gone for two months? It's only three days, right?

Well, what you effectively do when you experience new things, you slow things down again. Your mind stays active, and here's the kicker...your brain actually figures out better, more efficient ways to move information around the synapses in your grey matter. No, that's not 'mumbo jumbo'. The reverse is also true, which is why once someone experiences depression, they are always susceptible to it. The brain learns the path to certain behavior.

This is why confidence mantras work. Want to make your mind more powerful every year from here on?

Try new things.

<comment><USER10> > You know that feeling when you drive home and don't remember driving home or > > anything along the way? Boom. There you go. Your brain just ignored the > trip.

That's your brain entering a sleep state, and it's dangerous. Counter this by constantly sweeping your eyes across the road to stay alert.

I like everything else you wrote, but as a driver, motorcyclist, bicyclist, and pedestrian, I hate to think that people would view "no memory of my commute" as "my brain optimized it!"

<comment><USER11> That's not a sleep state. That is a form of disassociation.

<comment><USER10> I think you mean dissociation. I've seen studies indicating that brain activity in this state is equivalent to sleeping. Regardless, being behind the wheel in this state is dangerous.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> From anecdotal evidence I will put forward another theory. Because CS and programming are relatively new and rapidly growing fields a large number of programmers in the early years were random office workers who could type, press ganged into development duties. Education started to catch up in the 80s and 90s so young kids with a real grounding in fundamentals were coming into organizations staffed with older developers who didn't have a clue. On average, older developers were incompetent, not because they were older, but because they were less likely to a) have any formal education in what they were doing and b) a particular interest in what they were doing besides the paycheck.

<comment><USER13> I can't comment about middle America banking, but this was definitely NOT the case in Silicon Valley. People who became programmers were extremely bright and a very diverse lot. A significant number were accomplished musicians. A lot from mathematics and engineering. I even worked with a guy who dropped out of physics because programming was personally more rewarding than being yet another post-doc at Fermi Lab. My associates didnt learn CS, they invented it. (OK a bit of hyperbole there, but that was what the times were like.)

<comment><USER12> That's kind of my point. During that era, if you knew what you were doing you were really impressive, not just another coder at BigCorp.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I am at 35. Just last year i managed to find balance and value in life. I don't care anymore about "quick success" or coolness. I care about value. Age discrimination is a niche for some businesses to minimize expenses in a short run, but small, dedicated and experienced teams can bring so much profit and value. When you are young you operate on blind fate, you don't have proven methodology to attack "The problem", you don't know when to stop and make turn, simply put you are giant ball of energy without direction.

You need supervising on regular basis :)))

And if you didn't hear - life begins at 40.

If you are healthy and smart you can push your energy more effectively and find satisfaction in so many things.

</comment><comment><USER15> This is some highlight from the book "The Secret Life of the Grown Up Brain" by Barbara Strauch

Neuroscientists found that:

* Longitudinal studies shows cognitive skills peak at middle age.

* Older people are happier. As one ages, they become calmer, more positive, and being able to regular them emotion better.

* The amount of white matter in the brain, myelin, continue to increase well into middle age. (i.e. better brain function)

* Older people are using both hemispheres of the brain to handle complex task, a phenomenon known as bilateralization. This is linked to higher cognitive ability.

[http://tungwaiyip.info/blog/2010/10/29/secret_life_of_the_gr...](http://tungwaiyip.info/blog/2010/10/29/secret_life_of_the_grown_up_brain)

</comment><comment><USER16> If you accept the article's theses that older developers are a big asset AND that they're at a disadvantage in the marketplace due to discrimination, there's an opportunity here. Rather than try to woo and retain 30 hotshot developers in their 20s, it'd be easier to hire 18 or 20 developers in their 40s. The turnover would certainly be lower, the output should be equal (or greater?), and there'd be less need for extensive management oversight.

Anybody know of a company that's tried that approach? If none exist, that leads me to think that either we're onto something interesting or that this approach simply doesn't work.

<comment><USER17>
      >> it'd be easier to hire 18 or 20 developers in their 40s.

Great developers in their 40s have a wide range of contacts from their years of working, and rarely if ever look for jobs on job boards. Finding great developers in their 40s, and prying them out of their present jobs, is a non- trivial task. (One I am actually in the process of this week).

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I'm 58, doing arcane mainframe systems stuff, mostly in my sleep. Pays well and got the kids through college, but I've been doing it for a long time.

The days are past when I could routinely wrap the clock on an interesting problem. If I did that now I'd be a zombie for a couple of days. Oh well: there aren't all that many interesting problems that come along in the day job anyway, so I make up interesting ways to solve the mundane problems. I wrote some REXX code not so long ago that builds and traverses trees to process an obscure many-to-many relationship in our database schema. One of my comments said that I was trying to see "how much of TAOCP I can remember".

If anybody ever looks at that code I'll bet a buck they won't know what TAOCP means.

None of the people at work my age know what HN is, and only one has ever even heard of Slashdot. Hell, I run the only Linux desktop in the whole enterprise - everybody else is plain vanilla MS-Windows. The kids who run the MS-Windows server farm, 20-somethings, have their own set of blinders on and if studying something doesn't lead to a Cisco or Microsoft certificate they won't bother with it. Young mercenaries, harumph. One of them admits to having heard about tomshardware so there may be some hope for him.

Sigh... nobody to talk to. I checked out a hackerspace in my area, but the kids there (don't mean that to sound pejorative, but I _do_ have 30 years on them) were doing odd web hacks and Makerbot tricks and drinking cheap beer, none of which I found very interesting.

So I take out my creative frustrations at home, hacking at my personal machines. My darling this past year has been Clojure, and going to the Conj back October was an exciting thing. I kept up pretty well and discovered I wasn't _quite_ the oldest guy there, so I haven't gone completely stale.

Have to pay a bit more attention to my body than I used to; I was immortal when I was 24, but now I've got those wrists and my liver to take care of.

(Man, they can't get those telomere therapies going fast enough.)

</comment><comment><USER19> It has nothing to do with age, it is just a spark, I still have it in my eyes, burning as bright and hot as when it all started for me twenty years ago.

</comment><comment><USER20> I'm a "young gun" (26) without a formal degree in CS. I believe the number of graduates in CS dropping isn't affecting finding talented people. The talented people aren't taking CS and are not even graduating or going to college.

I graduated with a degree in mathematical economics from a liberal arts school and took some CS (Java and C++) along the way, but ended up not pursuing a degree because I could tell the technology being taught was outdated and largely irrelevant. I taught myself Ruby and Ruby on Rails mostly through reading books and blogs while trying to solve a problem for a client I was providing desktop support.

A friend's consulting shop recently hired their 20 year old intern b/c he is a great hacker, and he, in turn, dropped out of a CS program largely recognized as "very good" b/c it was he thought they were basically teaching "solved problems."

The point here is that a good hacker comes at any age, and your technical ability and attitude mater regardless.

I love working with the older guys b/c they have failed, a lot, and can steer me in the right direction and offer wisdom whereas I bring enthusiasm and an open mind.

</comment><comment><USER21> I totally agree with most points.. it's really more of a mentality thing than an age thing. The only part I don't totally agree is the commitment part. It's hard to deny that you have much more free time at 20 years old than at 40. I mean, I'm ~25 and I feel I don't have enough time to do and learn everything I want.. I can't imagine that I'll have any more time with children.

<comment><USER22> Not everyone in their 40s have children. And some of those who do have seen them off to college.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> What we need (to really prove the point of article) is a _number of_ successful software startups where average age is say 38. How many of us (I am turning 40 soon) dare cross the Paul Graham Limit (23-38) on higher side? Looking at the cream of younger software craftsmen (e.g. @github) I feel many older programmers (forget outliers, please) have a mountain to climb.

<comment><USER24> Outside the echo chamber of Silicon Valley and the web, the average age of a startup founder IS 38.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I started programming when I was 14. I'm now 19 and have had the opportunity to work with several other programmers from a very wide age range.

As a young programmer, anyone who has been programming for 10+ years is an ABSOLUTELY necessary resource. Us younger software engineers have a lot to benefit from their experience, and the quicker we realize this the better.

Personally, I haven't noticed any difference in cognitive ability or agility between programmers I've worked with in their early 20's vs 40's. And typically, those who have that extra experience seem to almost always build more reliable and extensible solutions.

I really hate to say it (being as I am 19), I would hire my friend Virgil (who's in his 60's) along with anyone with over 10+ years of experience before I would myself or anyone fresh out of college.

<comment><USER25> And I disagree with the "Thinks more slowly" idea. Its just absurd. Really, I think most people in this industry would agree, its a lot more like "Thinks about a lot more".

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> My random assortment of thoughts (subject to revision):

Myths are just that. Some, but not much basis in reality. My experience based suspicion is that skills are weakly correlated with age, but more dependent on total focused-hrs spent.

A key realization for me was that the benefits of 'deeply focused hours spent' are not linear. While older programmers have more chance of achieving level X skills, the highly focused and motivated 16 year old can do great work. Greatness is a function of getting to the edge and pushing it. Age is becoming less relevant, meaning that great work can be done regardless of age (I hope!).

</comment><comment><USER11> In my highly limited experience, subjectively, one of the key differentiators is being okay with change, and being ready to go into the unknown: the unknown language, the unknown tool, the unknown unknown.

</comment><comment><USER27> Inspiring but ... he's trying to refute anecdote with more anecdotes, which can't really go past the point of pointing out that we really don't know what the true situation is. Some data would be more informative. However, individuals are not averages, so these generalisations aren't that useful even when they have data.

</comment><comment><USER28> Personally, I've grown a lot as a software developer because of my experience with project failures. I had one that turned my life upside down, but that helped me gain the attribute of fearlessness.

I've seen the worst that can happen, and that's given me both courage and maturity.

</comment><comment><USER29> I'm 45. I don't feel as efficient as when I was 25. But I still really enjoy programming.

Most moderately (in)competent developers stop programming in their mid 30 if not earlier, this is a blessing.

Without passion nothing great can be done in this world -- Hegel

</comment><comment><USER30>
      There are two kinds of fool. One says, "This is old, and
      therefore good." And one says, "This is new, and therefore
      better."

      -- John Brunner, "The Shockwave Rider"

</comment><comment><USER31> Old guys also rant about how being old is not actually a disadvantage.

<comment><USER6> Downvoted? As an old guy it's the first thing I thought when I read the article.

<comment><USER32> It is an uninsightful thought at best and an ad personam argument at worst.

<comment><USER31> Lets look to the article itself for 'uninsightful'?

'5 Pervasive myths' indeed - the article actually supports all five, and all five are in fact true.

      - old guy

<comment><USER33> I think he was saying the downvoted guy's comment is uninsightful.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> One thing that I think hasn't been recognized by popular engineering culture is that the guys who started programming in the 1970s had a lot less to work with, and had a harder time. They often worked in assembly, and a soldering iron was a legitimate debugging tool.

Those who started programming in the 1980s had compilers but languages were something you went out and bought, and they were sold like enterprise software, expensive, slow to be updated and not sophisticated.

Those who started programming in the 1990s came of age when a major revolution was being effected by Java. But you still had to build a lot of infrastructure, and engineering involved a large amount of tedium.

The last decade has seen a huge advancement in the quality of the tools, and thus the barrier for entry for programmers is a lot lower.

I even remember meeting one young gun who was proud of the fact that he didn't have a computer at home because this was a job, why would he do it at home?

this is the opposite of the hacker mentality. In the 1970s you had to be a rare breed of hacker, and by the 1990s mainstream hackers could get into the business.

Now people who never wrote a program before entering college are graduating with CS degrees. So it is not only that they don't have a lot of real world work experience, they often haven't been programming at all for more than 4 years.

This is a huge shift in demographics and attitudes. I'm sure many of them are very intelligent and genuine hackers... but they are a very different culture.

<comment><USER35> _"... Those who started programming in the 1990s came of age when a major revolution was being effected by Java. ..."_

Java revolutionary?

C was revolutionary. It allowed hardware independence compared to assembler. BASIC was revolutionary because it made programming a computer easy enough for kids. Perl was revolutionary to hack the web, as is PHP. TMTOWTDI. But the true revolutionary language is still probably Lisp. Python, Ruby, Javascript are still evolving in a Lispy sort of direction.

<comment><USER36> _Java revolutionary?_

It dragged C++ programmers halfway to Lisp, in the sense that hardware abstraction through a VM and automatic GC gradually became acceptable.

<comment><USER35> _"... It dragged C++ programmers halfway to Lisp, in the sense that hardware abstraction through a VM and automatic GC gradually became acceptable. ..."_

that's funny in a bad sort of way, funny but true.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> The thing is, when you're older, there's really no way to reach the younger generation. They aren't listening to you because you're older, for the most part, and they've been listening to their "out of touch" parents their whole lives. They won't understand until their your age, and then they'll have to deal with another younger generation.

This isn't a criticism of anyone, just my obeservation about why there is a gap.

It is a shame too, because youth has the energy and age has the wisdom, and if the two could be combined, companies would benefit.

<comment><USER9> Isn't this kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy type situation.

Older workers aren't relevant because the younger generation won't listen to them.

The younger generation won't listen to older workers because older workers aren't relevant.

I work with two older guys and its great. They've got all of the domain knowledge and I can just bounce ideas off of them. They can tell me 'we don't really need that', 'that won't work because xyz' or 'we already tried that and it didn't work because xyz'. It has saved me a ton of pain multiple times.

The big deal is the domain knowledge however. Most companies just aren't willing to pay enough to keep domain expert software engineers around.</comment></comment>


How Doug Engelbart taught kids to ride a bike (without training wheels) - <AUTHOR> http://collectiveiq.wordpress.com/2009/12/11/how-doug-engelbart-taught-kids-to-ride-a-bike-without-training-wheels/ <comment><USER2> Apparently a much simpler way is to just take the pedals off the bike:

[http://www.sandcanyoncyclery.com/index.php?option=com_conten...](http://www.sandcanyoncyclery.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=70)

<comment><USER3> I recently helped somebody (adult) to learn to ride a bike, and I'm pretty happy with how I did it. The first and only thing I insisted on was how to stop, i.e. how to come from both feet on the pedals and bike moving (mostly pushed by me) to a proper stop with one foot down. Once he could do it from a reasonable speed on both sides... it was pretty much over.

I took the idea from a friend who once got on a motorcycle without a good idea of where the break was, with rather funny results. First concern should be how to stop. The rest can be trial and error.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> That's brilliant! Just the other day I tried taking my almost-three-year-old's training wheels off and tried to help her go straight without falling, but quickly decided she "wasn't quite ready". Maybe she still isn't, who knows, but this method sounds like a great idea -- I'm gonna try it tomorrow. :-)

</comment><comment><USER5> Second grade I received my first bike, a pedal bike, which puts me at 8 years old. I recall, precisely and clearly the experience of being pushed on the bike, being told to pedal, and once it got going, pedaling to the very end of the road.

<http://bit.ly/gmaps-firstRide>

Actually turning around was a bit of an adventure, but I managed that (and precisely recall the experience as well) - and so, 5 minutes after being introduced to my bike, I had pretty much mastered the basic skill.

I wonder if there is an age at which training wheels really don't make sense, and how many children after around five years old or so actually bypass the training wheels stage - I'm guessing it's a majority.

<comment><USER6> I've got another anecdote to support this: I taught my girlfriend's little brother (age 10) to ride his bike in about 30 minutes one afternoon. He'd never ridden, not even with training wheels, and is not particularly athletic.

All it took was running along beside him and letting go, then following and catching if he started to tip.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> This is a perfect example of scaffolding. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructional_scaffolding>

</comment><comment><USER8> I initially learned to ride a bike on a grassy area (much softer falls, I highly recommend this). As I got much better my dad graduated me to the road. Everything was going great during this transition until I saw a kid a couple years older than me pop a wheelie. I thought this was awesome and being very confident in my new found skills, I immediately decided that I should give it a shot. I yanked up and back hard on my banana seat bike, I don't think my dad had any idea I was going to do this, and we both quickly learned my mistake as I tipped over backwards and my face met the asphalt. With my front tooth laying on the ground and my dad likely standing there wondering what the hell happened, I bolted home in search of my mom with blood streaming out of my mouth. I was probably about 4 or 5 at the time. So my advice is make sure the person/kid is wearing a helmet and possibly even a mouth guard those first few trips out and beware of the pop a wheelie.

</comment><comment><USER9> It doesn't hurt that the gyroscopic behavior of the wheels also makes it unnecessary to do steering corrections at high enough speeds. Once you're going fast enough, you can hop off the bike and it'll still go upright for a while.

</comment><comment><USER10> Better than the way I was taught, My older brother gave my bike a shove and told me to pedal. It only took one fall to figure it all out :)

<comment><USER5> What age?

<comment><USER10> Was taught at the age of 4. From my experience (younger siblings also) 4-5 yrs of age is about average right?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I don't see how training wheels would help learning at all? Just wondering if there is an age when kids can not yet learn riding a bicycle, and then training wheels would enable them to use a bicycle anyway (like you wouldn't expect a 6 month old who can barely walk to be able to learn cycling, I suppose). That would be the only reason I can see for using training wheels.

<comment><USER12> Training wheels don't have to be in constant contact with the ground. With my kids I installed the training wheels several inches off the ground. The kids had to balance to use the bike effectively, but the training wheels would catch them when they leaned too far.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I wonder if there's an equivalent see-saw for inline/roller/ice skates. The only training wheels I had were knee/elbow pads.

<comment><USER14> The way I was taught to ice skate was to try and walk on ice with the skates, not actually try to slide along. I suspect this too is the minimum amount of complexity that still lets you get a feel for the situation and develop the ability to stay upright. I think it worked pretty well for me, I don't have any bad memories about it. (I was 6)

Learning to cycle was less successful. I distinctly remember crashing into a tree; in fairness, my dad's decision to teach me in the middle of a forest on uneven ground was probably not the smartest move.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> They're called "balance bicycles" or "run bicycles" and they're readily available from dozens of manufacturers.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balance_bicycle>

I don't know why anyone cares that Doug Engelbart discovered something already known by millions of people - that pedaling isn't the important part of learning to ride, balancing is - but hey, here's my golf clap for him. {clap clap}

<comment><USER16> If anyone is interested in building one of these for their toddler, there is a great pattern located here: <http://crumleydotorg.chattablogs.com/archives/038834.html>

I used the above pattern to build 2 of them for my 2.5 year old twins... they love them and have great balance now.

Here's how mine turned out: <http://dl.dropbox.com/u/113513/bikes.jpg> <http://dl.dropbox.com/u/113513/bike1.jpg> <http://dl.dropbox.com/u/113513/bike2.jpg>

I broke-even in price, it cost approx. $60/bike which is what it costs to get a similar "elmo" bike at target: <http://www.target.com/Elmos-Beginner- Bike/dp/B00155X3UI>

If you're going to break the bank, it's going to be b/c you couldn't find cheap wheels. This is where I went wrong, since I spent about $11 per wheel at home depot. I later found them for $4 at a smaller local hardware shop. ;p

<comment><USER17> That's a good job you did there. And so much more satisfaction making your own than just going out and buying one.

What better gift to your child than something made with your own hands and on your own time.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I learned on my own, but on the grass.</comment>


Microsoft buys Tellme for over $800 million - <AUTHOR> http://gigaom.com/2007/03/14/microsoft-buys-tellme/ <comment><USER2> Apparently VCs put $238 million into Tellme. That is a lot of funding.

</comment><comment><USER3> Charming splash page they set up: http://www.tellme.com/

<comment><USER4> Indeed. Is it just me or are those two ugly buttons at the bottom completely superfluous? Couldn't they have just made the logos into links. It would've been so much nicer.</comment></comment>


Profs: you should use JavaScript to teach Computer Science - <AUTHOR> http://blog.erratasec.com/2017/01/profs-you-should-use-javascript-to.html <comment><USER2> >"Python isn't used in the real world, it's far down the list of languages programmers will use professionally.

Buahahha. And JS is used "professionaly". Hahahahahhaa.

Check numpy, you uneducated kit.

>it's got great library support for things like graphics, machine learning, robotics, cryptography, networking, databases, and so on.

Just 4 examples: Scapy, numpy, youtube-dl, py-crypto, uncountable bindings to any sql server, SageMath. Your turn.

</comment><comment><USER3> _" Python isn't used in the real world, it's far down the list of languages programmers will use professionally. Python is primarily a middleware language, with neither apps nor services written in it."_

Good idea for learning JS. Above statement, BS alert.

</comment><comment><USER4> >"Java is a fine language, but there's a problem with it: it's fundamentally controlled by a single company, Oracle."

And MATLAB is not?</comment>


Louis C.K talks about starring in, writing, editing, and directing his own show. - <AUTHOR> http://www.avclub.com/articles/louis-ck,58516/

<comment><USER2> I like this:

"Through talent, focus, and a work ethic that is the envy of his peers.."

Also, that he has what some would consider failures that did not stop him in his tracks. He got up, dusted off, and continued to work hard.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I posted this because in many ways Louis C.K. is quite amazing in that he does every thing on his own. He describes his creative process and what drives him, and while reading it I noticed several parallels to the sort of hacking culture that HN loves.

</comment><comment><USER3> Thanks for pointing out a more in-depth interview, oppose to the commonly rushed and promotion heavy Late Night appearances!

To get more insight in his approach as a stand-up comedian, I highly recommend to watch HBOs "Talking Funny".

<comment><AUTHOR> I loved that special HBO special!

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> s/staring/starring

Sorry.

<comment><AUTHOR> No thank you!</comment></comment>


Fruit Ninja sells 13 iPhone apps a minute - <AUTHOR> http://smokinapps.com/news/fruit-ninja-sells-6-million-paid-downloads-in-10-months/

<comment><AUTHOR> Birds are mad. They want to eat the fruits.</comment>


Sony tries to upload movie trailer to YouTube, posts entire movie instead - <AUTHOR> https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2018/07/sony-tries-to-upload-movie-trailer-to-youtube-posts-entire-movie-instead/ <comment><USER2> sounds like marketing gimmick</comment>


Facebook Sets Expiration Date for Controversial Ad Feature - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/01/09/facebook-sets-expiration-date-for-controversial-ad-feature/

<comment><USER2> After reading the FB blog post, it seems like this article is somewhat misleading. Yes, Facebook is removing "Sponsored Stories", but only because all ads will now include social context; in essence, all ads will become types of "Sponsored Stories."

It's only pro privacy because users will be able to opt out of allowing companies to use their likeness in ads. But really, what this really means is that all Facebook advertisements are going to be what "Sponsored Stories" were. No controversial features are being removed, they're being actively _pushed_ by Facebook.

<comment><USER3> Misleading statements and ever changing goal posts. Sounds like Facebook to me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Horribly written headline on WSJ's part; one could read it and think Facebook's given up on advertising.

<comment><USER5> I think you mean _very carefully written_ headline. As much as people mutter about clickbait, the art of headlining is old and subtle, driven by business pressures, technical considerations (eg, the width of a column) and psychology.

The sentence is true, though incomplete. Facebook has many ad programs, and has chosen to shut down one of them. That it also happens to oversell the content through ambiguity is icing.

<comment><USER4> True.

<comment><USER6> Kudos to the HN staff for the quick revision. Edited headline here is much more relevant.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm confused as to why that's a violation of privacy. Your friends can already see you Facebook profile picture and what posts you like, so how is this so different? The only difference I see is the location the likes are being shown. Is there something I'm missing that makes it such a huge privacy problem?

<comment><AUTHOR> I am also not very clear about what the difference is between sponsored stories and a regular "yeukhon likes foobar page" on newsfeed. According to this [https://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=10100328087082670](https://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=10100328087082670) they just make it more persistent so it appears on a different location and appears more regularly than a simple "Status check-in" which goes away. That's the impression I get.

Doing so I can see a possible issue is endorsement. That is, I go to starbuck near Columbia and I don't need my friends to know that I was there a week later. Or I don't need Facebook to tell my friends that I like X group or X product two weeks after I have liked it. If I want to endorse my likes for real, and actually want people to hear about this great product or this great mission on FB, I would have just make a bunch of status update myself.

But FB seems to think differently: let me take care of that for you. Instead of the user (me, I) doing all the selective publishing to tell my friends what a great product I think foobar is offering, FB will automate that process and put it in my friend's newsfeed and sidebar regularly when that product/group is on some ad campaign. In essence, I think FB is doing too much on behalf of the user since "endorsement" is a serious legal matter. Not entirely a bad thing. I have found some great stuff from these SS too, but I think for other people SS is not. I am not sure if this is the actual issue behind SS, but hopefully it is.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> This is uninteresting to me. But in a few years, I wouldn't be surprised if most of their users are turned away in droves because the first thing you see when you log on is a huge sponsored story right above the fold.

</comment><comment><USER9> _Note: This post has been updated to note that Facebook users can opt out of appearing in ads by changing their settings_

This seems like the buried lede? Note even in the story!

<comment><USER10> That's always been the case, this isn't news.</comment></comment>


Theranos and the Blood-Testing Delusion - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2016-04-27/theranos-and-the-blood-testing-delusion <comment><USER2> This article points out the major issue in blood testing: it's not a panacea. So often, particularly outside the life-sciences press, the idea that we'll be able to test for everything and that it will be useful gets shouted from the rafters.

The problem is, it's not that simple. Biological variation and lab procedure variation and just plain dumb bad luck makes it so that any lab test should only be considered a single datapoint. To be taken seriously, but not to be taken as "the answer" in and of itself.

Technology can solve the lab procedure variation issue, but can't solve biological variation. Maybe it can alleviate the biological variation problem by making it feasible to test more frequently. However as you multiply the things you're measuring and multiply the frequency of testing you might end up testing too many hypotheses too frequently for your statistics to be reliable.

I'd love to have more tests more frequently. I work in medical informatics after all. But We need to be cautious about what will come out of it and not over-promise.

Much as we'd like it to be true, big squishy bags of water with bits of hardened calcium in them are not computers. Anything biological is hugely more noisy and far less deeply understood than anything we deal with in information technology.

<comment><USER3> > The problem is, it's not that simple. Biological variation and lab procedure > variation and just plain dumb bad luck makes it so that any lab test should > only be considered a single datapoint. To be taken seriously, but not to be > taken as "the answer" in and of itself.

And even if the results are accurate it's often not useful. See the amount of over-diagnosis and over-treatment that results from too much testing.

<comment><USER2> Indeed, and never forget the false positive paradox:

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

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm consistently surprised at the low bar for due diligence in startup funding. In my personal experience, it goes something like "send us a business plan, pitch deck, three customers (that you handpick) for us to talk to, the legal paperwork, and maybe some bank records but not usually". I always assumed investors required credentials to Google Analytics or Mixpanel or iTunes analytics or whatever to actually verify that the usage numbers are what founders say they are, yet I've never had an investor do that or even heard of it being done. It's completely baffling to me that Theranos can raise ~$700M w/o any third party testing or diligence.

This article suggest it's because Holmes is "enthralling" and investors had an "exaggerated faith in the power of medical testing". Faith and charisma are very abstract concepts, but data and testing aren't, so why rely on the former instead of the latter? As Deming said, "In God we trust; all others must bring data."

<comment><USER5> I do diligence for a living. It's just not economical to do a full diligence on every investment when you're investment thesis is a portfolio approach.

<comment><USER6> Agreed. Also there are typically legal repercussions for misrepresenting your business that are outlined in deal terms.

<comment><USER7> Exactly. If things go south, legal can uncover and if lies were presented then things can turn criminal as theranos now knows.

<comment><USER8> But that will not recover your investment.

<comment><USER7> It can depending on how much capital or assets are still around.

Jail is also a pretty decent incentive to make people avoid overtly lying. Unfortunately its disproportional used on the poor and minorities instead of on professionals.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> >> That way she could see how many diseases were caught early, how many diseases were missed, and how many times false positives occurred

I don't understand why this article continually mixes one thing tests do(measuring physical quantities) with another(predicting disease) ? The way to evaluate theranos is whether they measure the physical quantities correctly(and it appears they are not), not with the complexity of predicting disease from those numbers. That's a job for other parts of the medical establishment.

<comment><USER10> You can catch many things early, if you test your blood often. Cancer is the big one.

<comment> nommm-nommm Assuming this is true (which is a stretch) this is tricky business - you are assuming detecting all types of cancer in asymptomatic individuals has no downsides. In reality it has major downsides, this is the reason why the the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force no longer recommends the PSA antigen test be used for routine population wide screening.

[http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-case-against- early-c...](http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-case-against-early-cancer- detection/)

<comment><USER11> That's _early_ testing, specifically " _average-risk men aged 55 to 69 years "_.

E.g. my 82 year old father would be dead or severely suffering today if his routine, over 69 years of age PSA tests hadn't prompted his doctor to order a biopsy 5 years ago.

<comment><USER12> Your father _might_ be dead or suffering today. It is impossible to be certain about the natural course of a disease after you intervene. I'm glad your father is doing well, of course, but we should be cautious: stories like this one tend to bias people towards treatment with what is technically a false representation of facts. I hate to seem pedantic, but accuracy is crucial in discussions like this.

<comment><USER11> Given the Gleason score, let's just say would/might -> most likely.

<comment><USER12> I don't doubt that you (or whoever) had additional information and made a sound decision.

Point being simply that someone reading your original comment (or such comments generally) doesn't have the full context and might not realize it. I'm not making a point about your situation, but about how the internet is often misused by people seeking to make their own decisions. A subject that fascinates me.

<comment><USER11> Well, all that's after the fact 20/20 hindsight.

Initially, all he and his doctor knew was that he was 77 years old and his routine, approved by the powers that be, PSA test results took a worrisome turn, bad enough that a biopsy was indicated.

My father's case only supports the Official Word, that starting at age 70 you should get PSA tests. WRT to people making their own decisions, I highly advise that, if you're 70 or older, to get regular PSA tests!

<comment> nommm-nommm >My father's case only supports the Official Word, that starting at age 70 you should get PSA tests. WRT to people making their own decisions, I highly advise that, if you're 70 or older, to get regular PSA tests!

I highly advise you don't take medical advice from hga on Hacker News based on one anecdote. The Official Word from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force is "The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends against prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer."

[http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/U...](http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/UpdateSummaryFinal/prostate- cancer-screening)

[https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/screening-for- disease-i...](https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/screening-for-disease-in- people-without-symptoms-the-reality/)

Surgery for prostate cancer has some very serious side effects...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I think a lot of the blame falls on the hype machine from Silicon Valley these days. SV has mastered manipulation of the press, and that's a power that can be used just as much for bad as it can for good. The drive to have the next celebrity CEO as well as being the talk of the town has driven this media craze. Relying on the media to drive celebrity rather than accomplishments and engineering chops is what changes SV back into any other mundane cronyistic industry.

Looking back at the Theranos hype, it was exactly the phrases that SV loves to hear, but without any of the data to back it up. That can work in software to some degree, where you can just build what you need, and it's just an engineering problem. You can't do that with science; nature is not as malleable as code.

<comment><USER14> One thing about Theranos that seems different from most SV hype stories is the insane level of focus on the founder. Every piece that reports on Theranos spends more time on her than it does the product. I'm speaking from minimal experience here (my start-up credentials right now extend to one short-lived company), but I think normally VCs aren't willing to "fund the founder" vs. "fund the product" outside of the very early stages of a start-up. Theranos has been around for a decade and the fact Mrs. Holmes is a Stanford dropout is still nearly in every single article about the company. Contrast this to Mark Zuckerberg and his former association with Harvard is nearly never mentioned anymore (In articles dealing with Facebook).

<comment><USER15> That is an interesting call-out. I think originally, that it was a deliberate part of the Theranos story, trying to piggyback on the life stories of the likes of Gates, Jobs and Zuckerberg. Now it's beginning to backfire.

Facebook never had such a personality centric story past the panache of coming out of Harvard and the Ivy League.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I wonder how this bodes for paper diagnostics? [http://www2.technologyreview.com/news/412187/tr10-paper- diag...](http://www2.technologyreview.com/news/412187/tr10-paper-diagnostics/)

Maybe the solution isn't higher one-shot accuracy, as with nanotainers(tm). Maybe it is higher frequency? The idea of creating blood diagnostics for pennies is so compelling.

Hate to see diagnostic research suffer from one bad investment. Am reminded how Minsky-Papert's book on Perceptrons created a winter for neural net research.

</comment><comment><USER17> Theranos has a really curious set of investors and board members: [http://www.techinsider.io/theranos-board-of- directors-2015-1...](http://www.techinsider.io/theranos-board-of- directors-2015-10)

Maybe it didn't matter that much whether the tests actually worked.

</comment><comment><USER11> If you want frequent testing, and this is not my idea, but that of someone who's been doing serious biology for decades, the most obvious was is to see what we excrete, something that's part of a toilet.

Needless to say, this won't make for a glamorous startup....

<comment><USER18> Interesting. Any links to diagnostics that can be run from fecal samples compared to blood samples?

<comment><USER11> Don't forget urine, the kidneys give quite a view into one's bloodstream.

Don't have any links, it's just something that is said to likely be fruitful.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> The thesis here is that having a personalized healthy baseline for many bookmakers will be far more powerful than comparing a diagnostic against population based averages.

Also that higher time frequency I the data will also be revealing.

There is some research in support of this idea[1] but it remains highly speculative.

[1][http://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2012/03/revolution- in-...](http://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2012/03/revolution-in- personalized-medicine-first-ever-integrative-omics-profile-lets-scientist- discover-track-his-diabetes-onset.html)

</comment><comment><USER20> The thing that amazes me is that Theramnos was valued at 9M. Tabcorp's market cap is $13B on revenues of $6B; Quest is $11B on revenues of $7.6B.

With a $9B market cap already, even if Theramnos were able to take 100% of the market and have a higher margin product it would be at best a 2.5X return for its investors -- hardly a "10 bagger"!

I never "got" it because of those economics and the crazy science of tiny samples.

</comment><comment><USER21> >> He used his sister's breast-cancer markers as an example... her risk may not have changed at all, the variation being the result of natural biological fluctuations and inherent uncertainty in the measurement. >>

That natural biological fluctuation is exactly what pinprick blood testing could help with, because (in concept) the blood test could be delivered much more frequently, and measure the true variability.

<comment><USER20> I don't see why pinprick testing would help; it's not like a regular draw is that unpleasant (I went through a period of my life where I had two cylinders drawn every week).

The opposite problem exists with the tiny samples: blood like any other fluid, is not at all points identical at all times. You can easily demonstrate this for yourself: go to the drug store and buy a cheap glucose meter and take a bunch of samples just around the same finger, much less different fingers. You'll see a surprising level of variation. The larger samples of a conventional draw are shown to vary less.

They still vary (as the line you quote says) but less than the highly local samples.</comment></comment>


How to Create Email Templates That Get More Clients - <AUTHOR> http://pandadesk.com/blog/2012/03/use-these-email-templates-and-get-more-clients-in-just-one-sitting/

<comment><USER2> The tips about how to compose the message are worth a try but I really hate it if businesses contact me with my name in the subject. I instantly classify such e-mails as spam. There must be other ways to choose a subject line that will attract the attention of the recipient.

<comment><AUTHOR> I suppose it depends on the recipient. But it might also work if the subject line can refer to something specific that the recipient has done recently (like "Comments on your latest blog post re: Facebook marketing" or "Loved your interview on Example.com"). As long as the body of the email is sincere and relevant to what you put on the subject line.</comment></comment>


Tech giants have turned San Francisco into a dystopian nightmare - <AUTHOR> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-7956517/IAN-BIRRELL-tech-giants-turned-San-Francisco-dystopian-nightmare.html <comment><USER2> All major West Coast cities from Seattle to San Diego have massive homelessness problems, so the title cannot be true. Reading the article there's a more plausible theory that runaway tolerance has allowed the issue to metasthesize. However, that could be refuted by evidence that an "intolerant" city has a massive homeless problem

</comment><comment><USER3> It's unclear to me the connection between tech giants and the horrors of drug addiction. Are the tech giants supposed to enforce laws on the street, or is this the duty of law enforcement officers? Is it because of the great disparity in wealth that makes "tech giants" culpable? I think that's bullshit. The blame rests on the city officials, in my opinion.

<comment><USER4> The connections are not simple to see immediately. There are many interwoven systems at play here. For example, high pay attracts engineers, landlords prefer high earning tenants. Other companies start in SF because there is a lot of talent there. They grow and attract more engineers.

That's just one system that can contribute to a changing city, and there are many others. (including city officials like you mention).

I'd encourage you not to dismiss the idea outright and try to fit it with a simple root cause.

<comment><USER3> The article points the finger at tech but in my opinion utterly fails to make a connection.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> With Boudin as DA expect it to get a lot worse.

On a positive note SF's homicide rate was 41 in 2019. That's incredibly low, hasn't been that low since 1961 [https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/san- francisco/san-fran...](https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/san- francisco/san-francisco-officials-unveil-new-crime-stats/2218901/).

</comment><comment><USER6> Why is it the tech giant's fault that the city failed to convert money into housing? Why did the city let the tech giants in if they are so harmful? If you don't want drug addicts to use their drugs on the street why don't you build special drug clinics where they can clean drugs [0] for non inflated prices [1] at controlled dosages [1] if they sign up for a program for addicts?

[0] dealers often are addicts themselves, take their own cut and fill the missing amount with foreign substances and more potent substitutes which then cause multiple orders of magnitude more health issues (including death) than the original drug

[1] when you have to spend $1000 per month on your drugs you are more likely to become homeless, homeless people have to steal or become prostitutes to fund their drug addiction

[2] physical dependency to drugs can be satisfied without becoming high. this means you can have people that go to the clinic every week for the rest of their lives but live completely normal lives but if you shut down the clinic they will die a few weeks later because they overdose on street drugs like every other drug user

</comment><comment><USER7> I'm a little tired of people coming to San Francisco, staying only in the tenderloin, spying on the homeless, writing about how disgusting the tenderloin is, and coming to the conclusion that the city is a liberal dystopia. Every city has places like the tenderloin, ours is just more visible than yours. That doesn't make San Francisco a dystopia.

The writer of this article should probably also visit Noe Valley, McLaren Park in the Excelsior, Merced, Hayes Valley, visit Salesforce Park. Go on a walk in Golden Gate Park on a Sunday, browse dive bars in the Mission, and see a show at the Castro Theatre. Walk up Potrero Hill at sunset, get some coffee at at Trouble in the sunset, visit the MOMA or Academy of Sciences, and sit around at Washington Square.

Then write your article on how San Francisco is a shit-filled dystopia.

<comment><USER8> I wouldn't be so quick to diminish the severity of SF's crisis. As per the article:

> But one statistic stands out: almost half of homeless people in the United > States are in California, according to a recent White House study.

> And San Francisco, a comparatively small city that is home to tech giants > such as Twitter, Uber and Airbnb, has the highest rate of 'unsheltered' > citizens – at ten times the national level.

<comment><USER7> Don't get me wrong, we do have a homelessness issue. It's just that the city is also other things and other people.

<comment><USER8> I live in Metro Vancouver, BC. We get our fair share of articles about street crime, homelessness, and opioid abuse.

Rightly so, because we have a crisis. San Fran has a crisis, too.

Your city may be other things to you, but this crisis is coming to define it in both the eyes of outsiders and in the lives of a significant number of its residents.

<comment><USER7> That's a good point, I'll think about it some more.

I suppose I just wish that writers could talk about the issue with a little more nuance.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The article does not support the title. Tech companies are hardly mentioned at all. The article devotes the entire length to blaming the city government and lax criminal policies.

<comment><USER10> It could be that tech companies attract people who are more educated, disciplined, and therefore more politically progressive than the average person (because they think that policies that work for them should be applied to people who are less educated and less disciplined).

<comment><USER11> SF was already highly tolerant of the homeless population before the recent startup and tech boom moved there from Silicon Valley.

If anything, people have been complaint that techies are _less_ tolerant and progressive.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This has nothing to do with the tech companies, and everything to do with failed local and national governmental policies.

</comment><comment><USER12> Amazing how quickly this fell off the front page. I get that it's Daily Mail, but there's still an important conversation to have here, right?

<comment><USER13> The conversation is that you shouldn't click Daily Mail links.

<comment><USER14> On HN, we go by article quality, not site quality. No major media site is reliably good, and even the reliably bad ones sometimes produce a good-for-HN article, i.e. one that can support intellectually curious discussion. I wouldn't say that about this post though. The topic is not only divisive, but has been covered many times before, and curiosity withers under repetition. But the call should be about the article, not the site.

[https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...](https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adang%20%20%22article%20quality%22%20%22site%20quality%22&sort=byDate&type=comment)

<comment><USER15>
      On HN, we go by article quality, not site quality

But you do ban entire sites[1] without explanation.

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=ancient- origins.net](https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=ancient-origins.net)

<comment><USER14> Of course. If we didn't, HN would be a spam site.

Explanations are always available when people ask, and we answer questions like this every day.

We banned the site you linked to because promotional accounts have been spamming HN with dozens of submissions from it, and because it appears to be mostly blogspam, i.e. lifted from other sources. I just did a spot check, and indeed the most recent submission ([https://www.ancient-origins.net/news- history-archaeology/med...](https://www.ancient-origins.net/news-history- archaeology/medieval-ship-0013178)) was lifted from [https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/newport- mediev...](https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/newport-medieval- ship-opening-date-17288380). HN readers expect us to ban that kind of thing. This isn't the class of sites I was talking about above (note the word "major").

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I don't get it. To me, everything the article mentioned about dystopian nightmare sounds like a issue of the government, not caused by the private companies.

The root of the cause is they aren't redistributing the wealth well. They should offer the poor, an affordable medical care, a shelter, and just simply hand them the money. The cost should be lower than dealing with daily thefs and drug dealers crowded in the street. Most of them choose theft and illegal drug because they can't afford the foods, houses, and medical care.

<comment><USER17> > They should offer the poor, an affordable medical care, a shelter, and just > simply hand them the money.

Surely, when news get to other poor people in the USA you will jet be rewarded with a new, probably larger, batch of urban poor?

My guess is you will run out of money before the USA runs out of poor people? (And that doesn't include the literally billions elsewhere who will be motivated to join in the fun).

Sadly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Nowhere in this article does it blame tech giants except the title.

<comment><USER8> The article mentions, several times, the number of billionaires and millionaires who live in the city, as a result of the tech industry.

The housing issues cannot be disentangled from the buying power and demand of tech workers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> "high tech feudalism" is such a succinct and accurate description

</comment><comment><USER20> I wonder how the tourism industry is doing. I visited friends in San Francisco a number of times in the early 2000's, and spent two weeks there for my honeymoon in 2007. I'd love to take my 6 y/o daughter to show her some of the places she's seen in our photos, but it sounds pretty horrible out there. (This article is the most over-the-top sounding coverage I've heard yet, but I tend to think, based on what I hear from friends, that it's probably mostly accurate.)

<comment><USER21> Apparently tourism is solid.

from: [https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/heatherknight/article/A-...](https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/heatherknight/article/A-year- after-calling-his-own-city-filthy-SF-13842394.php)

"Tourism is still booming, despite San Francisco's miserable side making headlines around the world. In 2018, 25.8 million people visited San Francisco, up 1.2% from 2017. They spent $10 billion, which was also up slightly."

As an anecdote, my S.O. watches a Youtuber, a Japanese airline stewardess who makes typical travel/foodie content. She had a San Francisco vid a few months ago.....which made the place look like heaven on Earth. I don't think she even once touched on or mentioned some of SF's problems. I wonder how many other foreigners are formulating travel plans based on similarly one-dimensional picture-perfect content.

<comment><USER22> I wonder how many of those tourists would even care. Income inequality is a global problem and many tourists come from countries that have been rapidly developing in the last few decades. The situation in SF might not be that shocking to much of the cohort.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Pretty bad written article. I wouldn't give any credit.

</comment><comment><USER24> Feels like clickbait.</comment>


Threads can infect each other with their low priority - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/Dobiasd/articles/blob/master/threads_can_infect_each_other_with_their_low_priority.md <comment><USER2> As far as I can establish with a cursory skim, the article describes priority inversion, and states:

"OS schedulers might implement different techniques to lessen the severity of this problem, but it's far from being solved once and for all."

The article fails to describe what "solved once and for all" might mean.

Given that Priority Ceiling Protocol and Priority Inheritance are two common solutions used in real-time schedulers, I would like to understand why priority inversion is not a solved problem.

On the other hand, I have yet to learn whether Mac OS has any synchronisation primitives that mitigate mutex priority inversion.

<comment><USER3> _Given that Priority Ceiling Protocol and Priority Inheritance are two common solutions used in real-time schedulers, I would like to understand why priority inversion is not a solved problem._

Because Windows and Linux are not designed for hard real time. There's a "rt_mutex" thing in Linux, which does priority inheritance, but it's not used much.

QNX took this seriously; it has priority inheritance not just for mutexes, but for interprocess messaging and I/O too. But it's a real-time OS. It passes through not only the priority, but the CPU quantum for non hard real time tasks. So a group of rapidly interacting processes are effectively scheduled as if they were one process which happens to cross address spaces.

On most non-real-time OSs, if you have a microservices-type program which is rapidly passing control back and forth between multiple processes, it will work fine as long as there's spare CPU time. If there's no spare CPU time, performance suddenly drops badly. That's because the processes being released by mutex unlocks go to the end of the line for CPU time.

This is something microkernel designers take seriously, because it has a big impact on microkernel performance. Unikernel designers, not so much.

<comment><USER2> I agree, there are operating systems where few guarantees are made about protection from priority inversion, at least not without specific programmer intervention. As a programmer you need to be aware that priority inversion can be a thing.

However, this has no bearing on whether or not priority inversion is a "solved problem". "Solved problem" generally means that there are well known, widely studied technical solutions to a problem. My understanding right now is that priority inversion _is_ a solved problem -- it is a standard topic in any introductory textbook on real-time systems with solutions that I stated. But maybe I'm wrong -- certainly the author seems to think so -- hence my question stands: _I would like to understand why priority inversion is not a solved problem._

<comment><AUTHOR> > I would like to understand why priority inversion is not a solved problem.

Maybe I just was not careful enough in choosing this phrasing when writing the article.

Do you think it would make sense if I change "but it's far from being solved once and for all." to "each of them with different upsides and downsides."?

<comment><USER2> Trade offs yes. I think I understand now that you meant that it is common that application-level priority inversion is not automatically avoided by the OS -- programmers still need to worry about it. Even if theoretical solutions exist, they may not be available on your chosen platform, or they may need to be manually configured (e.g. PTHREAD_PRIO_INHERIT).

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. I committed a change ([https://github.com/Dobiasd/articles/commit/8ac8db11eb95de688...](https://github.com/Dobiasd/articles/commit/8ac8db11eb95de688abbe1e8975e0d40a428df83)). Feel free to open a PR if you have a better phrasing in mind. :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Solution from the article: Don't fiddle with thread priorities.

Solution that works well in real life: Use lock-free (or, better still, wait- free) data structures.

The trick is that, for those of us in the devices and media world, and despite not always using RT schedulers, we generally need (largely) consistently prioritized performance for critical operations. For example, I actually need my device audio buffer callback to be timely to avoid displeasing gaps.

How have whole industries managed to deliver sellable products in these spaces without resorting to RT kernels? In many cases, careful uses of thread priorities and, yes, mutexes, have been involved.

This article feels like it was written by someone half-way through:

Junior engineer: Just use thread priority.

Senior engineer: No! Thread priority is a minefield.

Principal engineer: We're going to carefully walk through this minefield.

<comment><AUTHOR> > This article feels like it was written by someone half-way through [...]

You might be right. I'm not a principal engineer. :)

The first solution in the wild we came up with back then when confronted with this problem, actually was to use a lock-free queue. Only later we figured out, that we did not need the prioritizing after all, and our software worked just fine with all threads having the default priority.

<comment><USER4> Jr./Sr./PE is just a strawman for illustrative purposes. No ranking aspersions intended... In order I've been SDE, Sr. SDE, Senior PE, Sr. SDE, PE... It's pretty meaningless outside of the scope of one company's system.

There are plenty of hardware/software systems out there that leverage thread priority to keep low latency operations humming along (e.g. clearing a hardware FIFO) or keep background operations out of the way (ish) when the system is heavily loaded.

The interactions between threads are often sparse and directional (e.g. producer/consumer) in a reasonably designed system. Needing to play with priority to govern the interaction's between one's own internal thread boundaries can be a bad code smell. Using it to better satisfy external restrictions (e.g. user input, hardware interaction, callback handling) isn't too uncommon if you want to maximize the utility of your hardware.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> > If possible, avoid headaches by just not fiddling around with thread > priorities.

No, learn the ins and outs of the primitives of your OS. Threads are perfectly fine to run at different priorities but as soon as you start communicating between them they become a chain of sorts and if resources are exhausted (such as a queue reaching a maximum size) or if you artificially couple the threads using some kind of sync mechanism then your priorities will not what you want them to be.

Prioritization works well for _independent_ threads, not for dependent threads, which are somewhat closer to co-routines that happen to use the thread scheduler rather than that they call each other directly.

<comment><USER6> The PI the article describes does not need an exhausted queue, just merely used.

<comment><USER5> That's because that particular queue is not implemented lock-free. If it were you'd have to exhaust it first.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This article seems like 3 pages of my CS Operating Systems unit summarised into an article. Since I started reading Hacker News I've always assumed the userbase has a typical education equating to at least a CS education.

Am I wrong for assuming that this article seems fairly low level for the user base here? It just seems to me that if you can read this article and understand push, pop, thread priority, mutex, transitive, etc then it's more than likely that someone has already lectured at you about the issues that can arrive with using mutexes for locking.

<comment><USER6> I would say your assumption is wrong. A lot of people have a CS background, but there are many others that don't.

<comment><USER8> Also there are different approaches. I hardly do any low-level threading but I'm aware of the fact that locking and context switching can be expensive. I don't think that one always has to learn theory first, it can also go the other way.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This is called priority inversion.

One way to deal with this is to make it so that when a low-priority thread dequeues a message from a high-priority thread then the low-priority thread temporarily inherits the client's higher priority, then later goes back to its lower priority. The problem is identifying when to go back. Solaris doors was an IPC mechanism that did this well, but at the price of being synchronous -- when you throw asynchrony in that approach doesn't work, and you really do want asynchrony. If you trust the low-priority threads enough you can let them pick a priority according to that of the client they are servicing at any moment.

</comment><comment><USER10> I was hoping for a cool story of os bugs currupting threads. Instead, as others pointed out, this is just a more verbose explanation of priority inversion.

I would like to read the zombie injection story still.

</comment><comment><USER11> [https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/e7sb5p/threads...](https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/e7sb5p/threads_can_infect_each_other_with_their_low/)

</comment><comment><USER12> Note that this is only catastrophic when using _realtime_ thread priorities, i.e. thread priority kinds that cause a runnable higher priority thread to run instead of a lower priority one regardless of how much time they have been running already.

In general OSes, the commonly used thread priorities are not realtime, and you need admin/root to set realtime thread priorities.

Also indefinite deadlock can only happen if realtime threads want to take up more CPU than available (which in particular requires to not have more cores than realtime threads), since otherwise they will eventually all be sleeping/waiting, allowing any threads waiting on the mutex to run.

</comment><comment><USER13> Can this be resumed to "A consumer cannot be faster than the producer"?

<comment><USER14> The infection is the other way around here, the producer thread is slowed down due to a low priority of the consumer.

TLDR for article: the consumer has a lower priority and pauses on the context switch of the mutex lock, but doesn't get rescheduled for a while. The producer then has to wait for the consumer to get rescheduled and unlock the mutex before it can enqueue something.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Isn't this an issue on the OS side? It should only actually lock the mutex once the scheduler returns, and not on the entrance to the function.</comment>


Ask HN: How do I hire someone to write code for me? - <AUTHOR> I'm a software engineer interested in posting software problems (with detailed specifications) on my site and paying for solutions.
Is it really as simple as print out / sign a contractor legal agreement and then send them the money when they're done? Are there any guides for do's and don'ts when hiring software contractors?
From my research I see that Nolo has a legal document for this[1], but it's US-centric (it's likely I'll be hiring people outside the US). LegalZoom also has something which I may try[2].
[1] https://www.nolo.com/products/independent-contractor-agreement-for-software-consultant-for-firm-noe3-pr231.html
[2] https://www.legalzoom.com/legalforms/independent-contractor-agreement <comment><USER2> In the U.S. there are tax reporting issues. If you're a business and you pay an independent contractor (U.S. resident) over $600 in a given year, you'd need to issue a 1099-MISC form and send a copy to the contractor and the IRS.[1]

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_1099-MISC](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_1099-MISC)

<comment><AUTHOR> This is good to know. I'm located in the US, but I assume this only applies if the contractor is located in the US. I wonder if you need to do similar reporting if they are overseas.

<comment><USER2> I've updated my original comment with clarifications.</comment></comment></comment>


Jif Peanut Butter Weighs In on GIF Pronunciation Debate - <AUTHOR> http://mashable.com/2013/05/22/jif-gif/

<comment><USER2> One would think that .gif would inherit the hard G of its parent.

Japhics just doesn't sound right.

<comment><USER3> How do you pronounce modem? How about codec?

:)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> So, they're saying it's pronounced "Jif (registered trademark)"? Terrible abbreviation...</comment>


Ask HN: What is your kid's favorite book right now? - <AUTHOR> My 7 months old baby girl is too young for books, but we will start reading together soon and I can't wait for it :).<p>I'd like to know what are your kid's favorite books right now. Please post both book info and your kid's age. <comment><USER2> I have 2/4/6 year olds which I read to every night - it's rare we ever miss a night, so good on you for starting early!

For the youngest, Sandra Boynton books are good, they have great pictures.

I'll also recommend any books with pictures of real kids. One such book is Global Babies - other similar titles will be suggested.

I also like the Little Master Baby Lit series. Easy books that introduce classic characters your child will remember as they age.

One other recommendation - get board books and understand/be ok with their destruction. They are durable enough, but your kid may chew/rip/throw the book. That's ok, you can teach respect for books as the child grows :)</comment>


Computer science is the top major for women at Stanford University - <AUTHOR> https://techbullets.com/for-the-first-time-computer-science-is-the-top-major-for-women-at-stanford-university/ <comment><USER2> Original article: [http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0S32F020151009](http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0S32F020151009)</comment>