Ask HN: We aren't getting users to create stories on our content platform – why? - <AUTHOR> We are building a product TYMLINE (https://tymline.co/)
It's a timeline based story blogging platform. Here, people create timelines to narrate stories of any kind like relationship, career, travel, hobbies etc as timelines which can be discovered basing on users interest.
We got about 10k visits with around 250 sign ups but only 10 new people have created timelines organically. Others either read a story or check the platform and drop off.
Sample timeline:
https://tymline.co/SiddharthRam/siliconvalley?ref=hn
Where are we going wrong in the product?
Any suggestions or feedback to improve the product would be helpful for us to iterate further.
TIA <comment><USER3> By default, products fail to appeal to users, in the same sense that, by default, ten-digit integers are not perfect squares.

Is this something you and your friends eagerly want and constantly use? I.e. that you and your friends would use _if you weren 't working on this startup,_ and had merely come across it as potential users? If so, you should be able to get users from among your friends and their friends. And if not, it's a made- up idea ([http://paulgraham.com/startupideas.html](http://paulgraham.com/startupideas.html)) that you can't expect to fix by tweaking it.

My guess is it's the latter. This sounds like a made-up idea to me.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks Montrose,

We built this product as an experiment to document experiences in a much easier way than writing a blogpost.People who are not interested in blogging could tell a cohesive story by stitching a set of posts which are easier to understand.

We are trying to experiment this and see if it could be used as a microblogging tool for experiences and stories as an alternative to writing a blogpost.

We will surely reflect on your feedback but if you have anything that we could look to pivot can be helpful for us to consider from here on.

thanks again

<comment><USER4> It seems so similar to blogging to me, I find it hard to see the difference, personally.

<comment><AUTHOR> The difference is here the posts are structured into threads to make it easier to convey a story than writing a blogpost.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> They're not timelines. They are merely chronological narratives divided by paragraphs in outline fashion. The tool can't be used to create a real timeline either. The timeline is a gimmick; what do you offer the narratives that Medium doesn't?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback.

I didn't get the point when you say the tool cannot be used to create a real timeline ? Could you elaborate on what you expected ?

In medium, one has to construct the narrative which is not an easy task for everyone to do especially for people who cannot articulate well. Timelines have proven to be a form of narrative since ages and we wanted this tool to be given for people to construct a narrative of any life story they wish to say.

If you think it could have been done in a better way, I would love to hear your thoughts on what you expect over a medium in order to construct narratives easily?

It would help us in shaping the product. Thanks again

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> It's an interesting concept - an entire timeline can focus on a single theme, unlike Twitter or FB feed.

I can see myself using this as a travel log to share with friends, _if_ I go on an interesting journey (which sadly I haven't done in a long time).

Using it for documenting progress in a hobby is also interesting. I have never done it before, so can't say I'll start now, but still it's a mildly attractive idea.

I don't see myself using this to document my career. Firstly because I don't think there's anything special about mine to document it publicly. Secondly, because it's already documented in personal journals - warts and all - <USER2> lessons learned which I don't particularly care to share with anybody. Thirdly, I don't have any great photos or anything to make my career timeline look interesting to other people.

I can't think of any reason why anybody would document their relationships publicly. Do people actually do that?

I think you should focus this product on serving travel and hobbyist communities, and market this to them.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback.

We had done a product hunt for valentines day and people have created timelines as we provide a private timeline feature.

Your thoughts on travel and hobby resonate with us and have seen early users using for that purpose. Could you try creating one timeline of your recent travel or a hobby and share us your feedback on creation of timeline. That would help us in improving the product further.

If you can share your email address or initiate a chat on the product we can take the discussion off HN and could serve you better.

TIA

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> your home page just says real big "sign up to..."

I would think most people are not interested in signing up for anything, especially something they don't know what it is. (does anyone want more spam, or trust some place they know nothing about)

I would put the sign up smaller and the home page show the best 3 -5 examples of awesome uses for your timeline thing.

I looked at a few timelines, and all I could think to myself is, "tumblr" \- with a slightly modified theme. Or wordpress, or blogger, or just about all the other "post here on our portal" things out there.

Not sure why people would want to post on your thing, or the other things actually.

If I was looking for a place to post my previous stuff, I would want to know more about cost. Wordpress.com runs ads on the side and you can go premium to remove them, get themes, etc. They have a strong track record for fighting for their users against lawyers and stuff as well, and mostly not censoring.

The cost of each place is different. Given that the content is controlled by others, we don't want to trust valuable content to other's land.

If you made it really easy to export everything automatically, and made it really easy for a group / gathering of people to share to a common timeline, I could see a group of people uploading candid wedding pics to a place they could all share easily.

Otherwise I don't know why people would trust content here as opposed to other more well known places. The others aren't perfect, but you can be sure that a certain level of trust exists for most content posted.

Commercial Spam is always looking for new places to post, but the well funded commercial stuff is already making stories on instagram and snapchat and similar elsewhere. I think it'd be a long time before you had enough viewers to catch their interest.

Just some random thoughts from here, I am likely not your target audience.

Airdrop party pics and share a url with new friends easily maybe, make them private for a fee? You'd need to be easier than Flickr to upload and share.. I dunno.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks mate for the feedback.

Liked your airdrop party thingy. will think about it.

Do you think having multiple themed timelines tailored to specific use cases and some premium features will get people to use it ? oh yes and making it easy by getting some integrations on with fb/twitter/linkedin/ google photos and so on.

<comment><USER7> "themed timelines" \- yes, each theme that party city pushes every couple of months.. but also like the premium filters that snapchat offers on occasions people like.

If I was married to your idea thing here... I would make it so anyone could upload pics or text notes, vieos, etc to a url - and the cms would auto detect via time uploaded, or time photo was taken and places - (exif data if avail) - and have one click sort options.. one click - show all pics uploaded by time uploaded.. show my exif data.. show my each different person's uploads..

in order to get people to really use it.. it needs to be faster and easier to go to your site, grab a semi-secret url, upload and share.. than any other portal.

Why not just use facebook? not all of the people at this party are on facebook, nor do they neccesarily want to "become fbook friends just to share a pic" \- plus to use fbook you need to sign in, or register, and share all kinds of data.. meh

so have some people you find at a local shopping center see how fast they can share a pic with people they just met.. is it faster to upload to flickr than your site? Is it faster to share via imgur? Why? How can your thing be faster?

I think, no registration to start a timeline, just upload and get a url that is easy to share via sms text msg, qr code, fbook invite..

only register if you want to save the timeline for more than 24 hours...

the on boarding process of riot.im is the best I've seen in ages.

your differential thing is faster to share, and more privacy in that you don't need to become fbook connected...

offer one click zip-all to download/ backup for a fee.

offer to make the url password protected, and auto send that pw via sms text to friends..

sponsored themes for wedding gold themes could be a semi easy sell to wedding companies..

one tap screenshot your any timeline pics (maybe with glitter flowing animation?) - with "davids bridal gowns" in the frame.. and easy save to drive / dropbox.. export to facebook... share via pinterst.. (individual items / pics etc)

This could work.. I have been thinking of this kind of thing for a long time.. been looking to make something like this where any group of friends could have their own "facebook" which is not facebook for $60 per year.. not each person, just one person in the group could pony up the dough..

if the system auto-backed up stuff - and notified each person in the group that the yearly dues were coming up and one person could pay it to keep storage for another year, or any number of people in that group could split the bill.. this could work.

random thoughts from thinking of making a similar project..

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> First, fix the landing page - you need to present value before you can expect a conversion. This means making something that is interesting and aesthetically pleasing.

Second, if this is a business idea, I'm not sure how you monetize this. Is it ads from user visits? If so, you are going to need a ton of user visits.

Third, up the social media game. If you want visitors you need to make these articles/timelines sharable and unique.

Fourth, I'm in agreement with others here when they say this is not a timeline. Medium/Wordpress provide the same functionality. This can be replicated in Wordpress/Medium just be including subtitles with dates in between paragraphs.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is an experiment to see if timelines can be used for telling stories much easier than writing a blogpost.

The posts are sorted as per dates and creating threads is much easier here than articulating on a medium.

The restriction on content size and picture based storytelling keeps this quite different from MEDIUM. As we go further, notification system for posts and embeddable features will differentiate from other platforms too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I don't see why I'd want to use this, instead of something like Twitter Moments.

But perhaps more importantly, there is nothing on the front page of the site to explain what the product is and encourage a signup. The Explore link is tiny and I nearly missed it (that is probably closer to what your front page should be like). And that catchphrase "Travel Your Memories" doesn't make sense to me.

But on the signup form, what is a "PHUSER"? I don't even know how to complete the signup form. Is that meant to say Username? (It should also be an Email Address, not an "Email id".)

<comment><AUTHOR> PHUSER is a pre filled invite code which we kept. It doesn't make sense and confuses the users. Didn't think that through.

We are working on fixing the complete user flow and making it more user friendly. Will consider your feedback for sure.

Twitter moments is not much customisable but being a platform we can come up with numerous additions which will be personalised to the user.

Consider this to have all timelines of your stories at one place - sharable, discoverable and editable at any point of time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Your logo in your nav bar is way too small, it's practically unreadable. I have no idea what I'd want/need an invite code and yet I'm being asked for one if I want to sign up. There is nothing on the home page that lets me see anything about how this product looks or behaves.

Pages seem kind of slow to load, it takes about 5 seconds to render each page in the "explore timelines section". Each page is also really heavy at like 4.5MB, several times larger than an image gallery site I frequent. Probably contributes to the slow load times.

Also, I don't really see any times on the timelines.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for feedback!

We will change the logo size. Agree on the landing page not explaining about the product. Will work on it.

We have the servers located at India and we are probably guessing the slow page load is because of this.

We are working on reducing the size of the page, which is something we have overlooked.

If the above teething problems are solved, can I know if you feel the product will be used by people gradually?

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Out of 100 visitors, 90 will passively look. 9 will participate (commenting/discussing). 1 will create (post).

These are very general numbers of course and really depends on the actual service, but it's a good rule of thumb to follow.

<comment><AUTHOR> Aware about this. But if you could share some insights specific to this case it would really help.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Hi, one of the key reasons users don't use a product even If they like it is because it fades away from their memory. Only way, a social product will survive is if it can be part of their daily routine. Also, the initial friction to get going should be low.

Why not target segments that will derive greater value from your product like couples abt to get married who may want to create invitations. Software teams who would like visualize their release timelines etc.

</comment><comment><USER13> At the risk of stating the obvious - this is one really dorky name _and_ it's on a .co domain. It looks and sounds dispensable, so it's understandable few are willing to commit to using it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Will consider this feedback. Thanks a lot :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> How did you acquire the visitors? Did they indicate interest with a search or click to get to your site?

<comment><AUTHOR> A click to get to our site through partner events of few brands as they used our product for content marketing

Early users who created content and shared it on social media

Some initial content seeded by us garnered a lot of visits

<comment><USER14> If you're interested, I just finished a conversion tool designed to help sites get more signups. Won't know until we try, but I'm pretty sure I could increase your signups by 30-50%.

I'm soft launching this week and willing to set you up for free so I can test out my tech. My email is in my profile.

(same goes for any other HN reader who stumbles across this -- free optimization service for anyone who reaches out and is a nice person.)</comment></comment></comment>


Ask YC: How do you network with people? - <AUTHOR> http://www.paraschopra.com/blog/entrepreneurship/for-entrepreneurs-why-and-how-to-network.htm

<comment><USER2> There are a number of different kinds of events. One of the nice things about the Bootstrappers Breakfast (<http://www.bootstrappersbreakfast.com>) is that they take place in the morning and are more low key, allowing you to meet and compare notes in a quiet setting with 8-15 people so that you can get to know them a little better.

A good way to be memorable is to follow up with someone within 48 hours with a piece of info or a person that can help them with a challenge they are facing. The best way to do that is to focus as much on them and their challenges as who you are and what you need when you talk with them.

I jot notes on the back of their card or on a separate 3x5 card if we have a longer conversation so that I don't have to trust my memory.

</comment><comment><USER3> Networking is about more than distributing a business card and shaking hands. Don't schmooze. Reframe as "Make new friends" and you'll do well.

When meeting someone new: \- Give yourselves an "official" reason to talk again, e.g. something to follow up on. It can be small like a exchanging a link or two. \- Give them an "unofficial" reason to talk again, e.g. they should want to talk to you again. Be funny/interesting/poised for success.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I am intrigued how do you hackers here network with people both online and offline. Care to share tips, tricks, dos and donts?

<comment><USER4> Hacker News. ;-)

<comment><AUTHOR> :)

Is hacker news sufficient to fulfill all the networking potential a hacker has?

<comment><USER4> Probably not. It is, however, sufficient to fulfill the networking potential a hacker has when he is not hacking.

You need to have solid skills to back up all your connections. People don't get hired just because they know people; they get hired because they know people _and can get the job done_.

(An occasional conference or face-to-face event probably wouldn't hurt, though. ;-))

<comment><USER5> _People don't get hired just because they know people_

wanna bet ;)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> My team goes to events, frequently. In the past month there were two technology mini-seminars, upcoming a conference and a BarCamp. All locally, and we've met some great people, including some of our investors.

<comment><AUTHOR> Great. I do it too. BarCamps are a great way to meet interesting people. But the challenge is how do you sustain the relationship. After couple of email exchanges, people just get bored of conversation.

<comment><USER5> "Hey, nice meeting you at BarCamp, want to grab some coffee this week?"

simple things like that. The whole point of BarCamp is for AdHoc social networking, restricting your relationships to email after the fact is defeating the purpose.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: If MS spun off Windows, would it be forgiven? - <AUTHOR> Just hypothetically, say MS for whatever reason spun off Windows into its own company.  Or kills Windows and releases the source to PC vendors et al to do as they will.  Then it's just a company that does Office (a productivity suite for all OSes), Azure (cloud supporting all OSes), XBox, HoloLens (misc), and other products and research.  And maybe or maybe not has some OS that runs the Surface line, but independent of the "Windows" it let go of.  All somewhat "trendy" stuff (if any other company were doing it) with none of the vestiges of the past.<p>Does this gain any kind of acceptance factor among the anti-MS crowd?  If not, would anything along this line do so, or is it just a lost cause? <comment><USER2> I think the issue for me is their overwhelming lack of respect for their users during the Windows 10 "free upgrade" push. The heavy-handed GWX nagware push, the use of dark patterns like switching 'Install' and 'Cancel' buttons, repeated re-issues of the update which installs GWX. Then there was the telemetry built into Windows 10, which "could be turned off" but mysteriously kept re-enabling itself. Then pushing that telemetry into earlier versions of Windows via updates. Now rolling updates into monthly undocumented blobs.

To regain any kind of trust from me, they'd need to begin with a public apology for their approach, and a commitment to a far more open, accountable, and respectful approach in future towards their users' privacy and autonomy over their own systems.

<comment><USER3> MS admitted from the beginning that the None/Security level was for Win10 Enterprise only for example.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The product itself doesn't matter here. The way it was marketed, distributed, developed matters. MS did some bad stuff on all fronts, regardless of which software was involved. IE, Windows, Office, consoles all had their bad days because someone decided to force or bundle software in questionable ways. On the other hand there were some amazing projects done by MS teams: Singularity, security research ([https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/research- area/secur...](https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/research- area/security-privacy-cryptography/)), and many others.

Being pro/anti whole MS without exceptions is silly.

(also even new Office has a lot of "vestiges of the past")

</comment><comment><USER5> I mean, it's still the same company. Just because they stop developing one of their products where most of their malice manifested, doesn't mean that they let go of the idea that doing these things was acceptable in the first place. So, I'd still be very much wary of their intentions.

</comment><comment><USER6> Letting PC vendors do as they will sounds like a bad idea. Superfish will look like Little Nemo compared to the Candiru/Piranha hybrids that would follow.

</comment><comment> UK-AL Only is for FSF fanatics is this an issue.

</comment><comment><USER7> Let's not forget LinkedIn</comment>


Cloudflare terminates service for 8chan after El Paso shooting - <AUTHOR> https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/05/cloudflare-cuts-service-for-online-forum-8chan-after-el-paso-shooting.html <comment><USER2> See [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20610395](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20610395)</comment>


Andrew Chen: 5 factors that determine your ad CPM rates - <AUTHOR> http://andrewchen.typepad.com/andrew_chens_blog/2008/04/5-factors-that.html

<comment><USER2> While it makes sense, it's sad that creating a site that gets frequent return usage and a lot of user passion results in poor monetization.

<comment><USER3> Sites which get frequent return usage and lots of user passion don't result in poor monetization: They get far more traffic, which compensates for the low CPM rate.

<comment><USER2> They "make it up in volume"? This is true for the big boys (FB, MySpace, etc). But is it true for all of the "sorta successful" sites out there that merely get a few million page views a month?</comment></comment></comment>


Southern California braces for summer blackouts due to Porter Ranch gas leak - <AUTHOR> http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-aliso-canyon-blackouts-20160405-story.html <comment><USER2> So when they decided back in 1979 to remove instead of replace the faulty safety valve whose absence caused the leak, was no one aware that a leak could lead to two weeks of blackouts in LA?

Which is worse, that they knew and didn't replace the valve anyway, or that no one knew?</comment>


Undergrad improves CERN supercollider algorithm - <AUTHOR> http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/03/23/23108/

<comment><USER2> Well I think Einstein said that if you haven't made your major contribution to society by 30, you will never make it.

<comment><USER3> It's probably 35 or later nowadays considering we're living longer and there's more flexibility in terms of careers.</comment></comment>


Chrome extension to track your Twitter follows - <AUTHOR> https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/twitter-friends/naijihjfccfofepjpfdbpoclacnnmepl <comment><AUTHOR> I wrote this Chrome extension in response to the rumors that twitter was unfollowing accounts without the user's knowledge.

The code is up on github and no data is sent to the cloud or anywhere outside the browser.

</comment><comment><USER2> Whenever you're submitting a working product that you built, prefix your post's title with "Show HN: ".</comment>


Ask HN: What are some small things that makes a website look Good/Bad/Annoying? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Off the top of my head, I dislike: slow loading, non-sized images loading later and changing page layout, putting focus into an input field moving page elements, floating elements that cover content and can't be dismissed. And many more that I can't think of at the moment.

</comment><comment><USER3> Major annoying: The 'dickbar' (really, any fixed, unscrollable, element):

[https://daringfireball.net/2017/06/medium_dickbars](https://daringfireball.net/2017/06/medium_dickbars) [https://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/03/06/dickbar](https://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/03/06/dickbar)

</comment><comment><USER4> Sound. Any sound without the user having explicitly started a video/tune/... If you do that I will avoid you at all cost.</comment>


Tesla superfandom becomes toxic, negative for electric revolution [op-ed] - <AUTHOR> https://electrek.co/2020/05/12/tesla-super-fandom-becomes-toxic-negative-electric-revolution-op-ed/ <comment><USER2> I'm pretty much as much of a 'superfan' and you can get in regards to all of the Musk ventures. Elon's handling of the COVID19 thing, for me, has been a bridge too far. While prediction models for the pandemic have been all over the map, Elon's COVID-truther stance has been pretty incredible to watch. His Twitter posts on the subject have not been well thought out and many have been outright conspiratorial.

Depressing.

<comment><USER3> Yeah.

That being said, I got more sympathy when I learned how absolutely absurd Gavin Newsom's reopening conditions were - halt reopening of a county until "No more than one new COVID-19 case per 10,000 residents in the past 14 days" and "No COVID-19 deaths in the past 14 days".

It seems much more logical to base it on the R-number (number of people infected on average by each infected person), like we do here in Norway. The more the R-number goes down, the more things can be reopened.

<comment><USER4> I do wonder if we will end up with R converging towards 1 in that case. Every time it falls people get gun-ho and start going out, then it rises until we see the figures get alarming again.

<comment><USER5> That's exactly the plan in many countries with the current caseload well within the capacity of the healthcare system (i.e. Germany). Balancing overloading the healthcare system with reopening business.

<comment><USER6> You can't keep everything shut down until there's a cure. We need to find a way to live with it, and that means reopening those businesses that are the safest and most urgent to reopen, while testing extensively and keeping a close eye on whether it gets out of control again.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've been reading Electrek for many years, Fred Lambert is definitely a huge fan of Tesla no doubt. When Fred wrote,

       Obviously, it's ridiculous for Musk to call someone who is a Tesla investor
       and who wrote thousands of articles about Tesla's positive impact on the world "anti-Tesla"
       simply because he didn't like a few of my articles during a time when the company was making
       some very questionable moves. Musk even ended up reversing some of those moves later that year.

It is painful to read that, as I am sure Elon surely knew how that felt, as spoke at CBS 60 minutes about when Elon's own heroes dismissed him.[1]

One should always tolerate different opinions, as Ian Bremmer put it.[2]

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

[2]: [https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/801590659291480068](https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/801590659291480068)

</comment><comment><USER8> Elon Musk can be admired or despised for many reasons, but the merging of the companies with his persona was always troubling to me. I find it deeply unhealthy.

Same with Jobs I guess.

<comment><USER9> Running a company itself is deeply unhealthy. To me, his cult of personality around his companies looks like his way of coping with that extremely high stress.

<comment><USER10> Most CEOs don't behave like this.

<comment><USER11> CEOs of other auto manufacturers don't last as long as Musk (he has the longest tenure globally, by far). They also aren't product architect of their company, nor CEO and lead designer of another large manufacturing company either.

<comment><USER10> He doesn't have to do that, he made all of those choices.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I don't follow Musk closely, but his ventures seem pretty interesting. I mean who isn't impressed with those self landing rocket boosters from SpaceX (obviously he has teams of engineers and to make this happen)

Periodically, I remember that Tesla has not be profitable for more than a few quarters. And I end up wondering what is the end goal. I get that you can perpetually raise money as long as you find investors.

This might not be the right place to post this question: In the long run, what is the plan for making money at Tesla?

<comment><USER13> The company is driven by the mission to accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy. Since that transition hasn't happened yet, taking profit slows that mission. So their goal is to eventually look like one of the world's largest energy companies in terms of making money.

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

<comment><USER14> Is that why they sell pollution credits to the highest bidder, undoing all of the environmental benefits from buying their cars?

<comment><USER12> "the road to hell is paved with good intentions"

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Lots of people make the point that there are just toxic people on twitter of all persuasions and whether it's cancelling some movie producer or shouting "TERF" at every female journalist, it's just a small group of bad people that show up everywhere.

I think that misses the point that Elon Musk _is_ one of those bad people. He _is_ the one spreading rumours that someone's a pedofile or that Tesla has a secret deal to go private, or that Coronavirus is nothing to be worried about. People didn't just happen to congregate around him, they're hanging out with their friend.

</comment><comment><USER16> A big party will attract some small people.

</comment><comment><USER6> This is not just a problem with Tesla, it's a problem with many, many issues and causes. See the small group of vocal Bernie Sanders "superfans" who would rather vote for Trump than for Biden, and consider Elizabeth Warren somehow a traitor to the progressive cause.

I think this might also be related to the difference between patriotism and nationalism. I've recently seen a bunch of memes about how patriotism is wanting your country to be the best it can possibly be, while nationalism is believing your country is best no matter what. The former is a drive to improve and to fix problems, while the latter means that any constructive criticism is taken as hostility. (I'm aware there are other definitions of these words, but this is the one that works for me in exploring this issue.)

A blind belief in the infallibility of the thing or person you support, will easily turn toxic. It's not a healthy kind of support.

<comment><USER17> > See the small group of vocal Bernie Sanders "superfans" who would rather > vote for Trump than for Biden,

While I agree with the majority of you comment and take on superfans in general, I think it's important to note that a large amount of those "superfans" for Sanders are actually astroturfing efforts.

I don't have sources handy, so take it with a grain of salt, but it seems pretty clear to me that on Twitter and Reddit those "superfans" are just trying to promote the idea that voters shouldn't vote for Biden as a way to remove their vote in the general.

Again, I agree with what you said here, just want to point out the astroturfing happening.

<comment><USER6> That's no doubt part of it in the case of Sanders, but I think that also fuels the effect that turns real supporters toxic.

Also because you can see the same thing happen in other areas where people identify extremely strongly with something. In fact, the history of Christianity is filled with moments when Christians acted completely contrary to their teachings due to toxic identification with their brand. Although I guess in that case there were also politically motivated people pushing them in order to take advantage of it.

<comment><USER17> I agree here - obviously the astroturfing turns real supporters toxic in this case, otherwise there wouldn't be a reason to do it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> This article talks a lot about the superfans corrupting Elons point of view... but Elon is so much like his superfans. Any criticism is met with attacks. _Don 't want to use his plan to rescue kids in a cave? You're a pedophile._

Elon was like this before the superfans. They reflect his behavior, not the other way around.

<comment><USER19> Yeah, I think the author is actually a different form of 'superfan' (or cult member), who takes the stance that Dear Leader can largely do no wrong, and any mistake they make is due to the malign influence of corrupt lieutenants.

> While we obviously don't endorse this type of language, it then led to a > good example of a Tesla superfan feeding misinformation to Elon Musk, > corrupting his feedback loop.

This feels like pretty standard cult behaviour. It's never Elon's fault; it's the fault of those other misguided (though ultimately righteous) believers. You get similar stuff with dictatorships and religious cults; Netflix has a rather good documentary on the Rajneeshpuram cult which shows this in action.</comment></comment>


UC Davis pepper spray cop gets $38G worker's compensation settlement - <AUTHOR> http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/10/24/uc-davis-pepper-spray-cop-gets-38g-worker-compensation-settlement/

<comment><USER2> He certainly didn't deserve any death threats.

But I wonder how much compensation the students got for being maced -- in contravention of his own department's guidelines for using such measures.</comment>


Stick Google Plus Buttons on Your Pages, or Your Search Traffic Suffers (2011) - <AUTHOR> https://imanetwork.org/hot-topics/081811-stick-google-plus-buttons-on-your-pages-or-your-search-traffic-suffers/ <comment><USER2> Hopefully the peeps at Google are wise to the groups trying to game the +1 system for their own PageRank</comment>


TransformerTTS: A Text-to-Speech Transformer in TensorFlow 2 - <AUTHOR> https://as-ideas.github.io/TransformerTTS/ <comment><AUTHOR> We've just open-sourced our implementation of TransformerTTS: a Text-to-Speech Transformer. It's based on a Microsoft paper: Neural Speech Synthesis with Transformer Network. It's written in TensorFlow 2 and uses all its cool features.

The best thing on our implementation though is that you can easily use the WaveRNN Vocoder to generate human-level synthesis. We also provide samples and a Colab notebook. Make sure to check it out and please star ⭐ the repo and share it! We're already working on the Forward version of TransformerTTS and we'll release it soon as well.

\- Samples: [https://as-ideas.github.io/TransformerTTS/](https://as- ideas.github.io/TransformerTTS/)

\- Github: [https://github.com/as-ideas/TransformerTTS](https://github.com/as- ideas/TransformerTTS)

\- Colab notebook: [https://colab.research.google.com/github/as- ideas/Transforme...](https://colab.research.google.com/github/as- ideas/TransformerTTS/blob/master/notebooks/synthesize.ipynb)</comment>


Kinase: A Framework for Building Web Scrapers in Chrome - <AUTHOR> https://blog.b12.io/introducing-kinase-b12s-web-content-labeling-framework-2f18b30b7bbe <comment><USER2> Hi all! B12 co-founder here. We'd love to answer any questions you have, or help you get started in using Kinase!

<comment><USER3> Wow, this really rocks. Funny to see this right now as I've been experimenting with web scraping for the real estate sector - a project that I've made available open source here:

[https://github.com/RealEstateWebTools/property_web_scraper](https://github.com/RealEstateWebTools/property_web_scraper)

One of the things I really would like to do would be to make a chrome extension to help people export data as they search for properties. Will look into this product as soon as I get the chance and provide some feedback.

</comment></comment><comment> usman-m Curious how you guys use contexts?

<comment><USER2> Good question! When a designer is extracting content from a customer's old website, they save all of the structured information about that customer in a single context, keyed by the customer's ID.</comment></comment>


Blue Apron slashes its IPO range - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/blue-apron-ipo-range-cut-2017-6 <comment><USER2> Already being discussed here: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14655030](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14655030)</comment>


10 Top JavaScript Blogs to Improve Coding Skills - <AUTHOR> http://blog.livecoding.tv/2016/07/12/top-javascript-blogs/ <comment><USER2> JavaScript Weekly. Knowing what's happening now and then. Next point is google whatever you don't understand and read them all. Don't try to learn something new from a single blog. Many guys are the great coder themselves but not a good educator.

</comment><comment><USER3> Site point, smashing magazine, and not a mention of blogs like 2ality, addy osmani, or perfection kills by kangax.

Truly a horrible list.

<comment><USER4> Any other JavaScript blogs you think are worth following other than the four you've mentioned?</comment></comment>


Cascade of stop loss orders and liquidations caused ETH to trade as low as $0.10 - <AUTHOR> https://blog.gdax.com/eth-usd-trading-update-5d8142b5bdc1 <comment><USER2> If this wasn't shady cryptocoin BS all these trades would be busted.</comment>


Amazon: Our Most Fulfilling Web Service Yet - <AUTHOR> http://aws.typepad.com/aws/2008/03/our-most-fulfil.html

<comment><USER2> What an AWESOME idea. I wish I had some sort of widget to sell.

</comment><comment> patrickg-zill This is astounding and will really shake up the fulfillment business.

</comment><comment><USER3> Amazon are truly pioneers here. We use EC2 and S3 and are looking at their database (thought our guys are fighting it a little!) so in theory someone can now run not just a digital business, like we do, but if you actually sell something now you can do it all from home and run the whole thing on Amazons platform. Kudos to them for their forward thinking

</comment><comment><USER4> Does anyone know if you can only use their US warehouses or Europe / Germany is also available?

<comment><USER5> Germany and UK too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Wow. Any idea how much they charge?

Edit: free for the web service, they charge for the fulfillment. Not unreasonable, though I don't know what competitors charge. <http://www.amazon.com/gp/seller/fba/fba_pricing.html>?

</comment><comment><USER7> They're going to compete with UPS (which is transitioning into fulfillment and even IT repair at its depots!) on this and I guess they're targeting the long tail first.

<comment><USER8> Of course they also use UPS to ship (I assume), so UPS gets a piece of theirs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> And it's free!

</comment><comment><USER10> Really cool.</comment>


In Dependencies We Trust: How vulnerable are dependencies in software modules? - <AUTHOR> http://www.researchgate.net/publication/279196437_In_Dependencies_We_Trust_How_vulnerable_are_dependencies_in_software_modules <comment><USER2> This reminds me of the time I unlocked the premium version of a trial fractal making program by bugging one of the shared libraries it came with.

The shared library in question was libcrypto, which is open source software. It wasn't hard to download the source for the correct version and bug one of the RSA functions to always return true, causing the program to think any correctly formatted license key is valid.

If it weren't for the vulnerable dependency idk if I could've made a key generator; they used the public key/private key infrastructure so to make a keygen I'd need their private key.

<comment><USER3> For that case, with a little more effort you could probably patch the call to whatever statically linked call crypto libraries to also return true. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Increasingly I wonder if we should go back to a static linking for our software systems. Dependency management is obviously great, but it has been conflated with the practice of remotely downloading dependencies multiple times over a network, which is increasingly obviously insane.

A sane alternative to me (leaving aside the vagaries of git) would be using a dependency manager, but checking in the resolved libraries, delegating the auditing of said libraries to a specific person on the team. No remote resolution of libraries during deploys, or when a new dev starts working on the team, etc. but you still get the benefits of version coordination across libraries.

Yes, I know you can run your own nexus server, git is horrible w/ binaries, etc. I'm speaking conceptually here.

<comment><USER3> "static linking", as in compiling libraries into the final executable, wouldn't help here. If anything it makes the problem worse since it's harder to find all instances of a library when applying updates.

But maybe you mean "bundling the dependencies", or at least refering to exact versions by cryptographically secure hashes, including all transitive dependencies. I've seen lots of "package.json" files refering to ">=2.2" which is horrible from a reproducibility standpoint. I like the way composer writes out "composer.lock" files which specify exact versions. Thus, even if you don't want to check in the "vendor/" subdirectory into your VCS, you should at least more or less be able to reproduce your dependencies exactly. Of course, checking in your "vendor/" dir is even better since your build no longer depends on an internet connection and an available remote server.

Or maybe all those scripting languages and their associated package managers (npm, gem, composer, etc) should take a note from the dpkg/rpm/C-style "lib*.so" world. Settle for stable APIs and stick with a release for the lifetime of an OS edition.

<comment><USER5> Re: your issues with package.json, npm has long had the capability to produce 'shrinkwrap' files analogous to composer.lock/Gemfile.lock etc with the 'npm shrinkwrap' command. That doesn't excuse the use of '>=' version specifications (I frankly don't see any use case for it), but all these package managers are explicitly designed to allow flexibility in specifying dependency versions - in theory, if your dependencies follow semver, you should always be safe with a patch-level version bump. (Of course, in actual practice........)

<comment><USER6> The use-case for '>=' etc. is when writing an open-source library which depends on other libraries. Even with npm's ability to have multiple versions of each library at once, you don't want to have to ship a new version every time one of your dependencies does. Even if you don't mind the hassle, you'd still making it harder for your users to promptly install security fixes.

Using it for an open-source application can make sense for similar reasons, but for an internal application where cutting a release and deploying upstream security fixes are the same operation it's pretty pointless.

<comment><USER7> > Even with npm's ability to have multiple versions of each library at once, > you don't want to have to ship a new version every time one of your > dependencies does.

Nothing about using == forces you to ship a new version every time one of your dependencies does. When your dependencies ship a version, this changes nothing for you if you're using ==. In fact, >= is _much more likely_ to force you to ship a new version when one of your dependencies does, because a breaking change in your dependencies can break your code. And when a breaking change breaks your code, it does so without warning. >= is a _cause_ of your problem, not a solution.

> Even if you don't mind the hassle, you'd still making it harder for your > users to promptly install security fixes.

If you're worried about security, then you shouldn't be shipping arbitrary dependency updates to your users, you should be evaluating the security of each release _before_ pushing them out. And honestly, if you're writing security-critical code, you shouldn't be using a language that dumps everything into a global namespace. "JavaScript security" is an oxymoron.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Very relevant: Sustrik's description of "Software's reproduction mehanisms" [http://250bpm.com/blog:51](http://250bpm.com/blog:51)</comment>


Indian Embassy in Moscow did receive a request for asylum From Snowden - <AUTHOR>

Indian Embassy in Moscow did receive a request for asylum in a communication dated 30 June from Mr Edward Snowden. And the Indians carefully examined and found it not necessary to provide one. <comment><USER2> Why is this a text-only post without a link? Because this looks like a news item, without a source.

<comment><USER3> [http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/07/02/usa-security- snowde...](http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/07/02/usa-security-snowden- india-idINDEE96107520130702)

<comment><USER2> thanks

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Heh. Why am I not surprised?</comment>


When A Daughter Dies - <AUTHOR> http://www.freakonomics.com/2012/10/16/when-a-daughter-dies/ <comment><USER6> I lost my sister to cancer 9 years ago when she was in her early 20s and I was in my teens. Her experience with the medical system was humiliating, futile, and expensive. My parents have never fully recovered emotionally. It has taken me years to integrate the experience, and I still have ghastly memories of the pains she endured recovering from unnecessary surgeries. When I read something like this i feel how much I would like to see a change. It's only partly a techological change--it is also imporant for us as a people to let go when nothing can be done, not to make things worse out of a need to be seen doing something. Unfortunately when a panicked parent is demanding that something be done to save their child, someone will be willing to do something even if the first person knows that nothing can be done.

When it is my time to die I intend to fully engage with the experience of dying, and not to numb the experience with knife wounds, drugs, and over- stimulating hospitals. Until then I intend every day to live fully, with great sensitivity, and to remember that each day I live is one my sister did not have. There is no entitlement to health or longevity; some things cannot be predicted nor controlled.

<comment><USER7> > _"it is also imporant for us as a people to let go when nothing can be done, > not to make things worse out of a need to be seen doing something"_

In the case of cancer, universal care unfortunately seems like running in the opposite direction. Sometimes admitting that nothing can be done is the right thing.

Look at the case description - I wouldn't be surprised if the total bill was at least between 100k and 200k - for 20 days of useless care which ultimately resulted in the patient death.

There are some good economical analysis showing yearly cost that'll make you cry, especially if you consider the alternative uses of that money and how many lives could be saved - say in other countries.

With our current technology, universal healthcare for fighting cancer seems like trying to stop a fire with gasoline.

<comment><USER8> Universal care is not running in the opposite direction.

I live in a country with universal healthcare.

I have several relatives who were diagnosed with terminal cancer. In this case, the hospital simply told them, the cancer is terminal and they've been given doses of morphine until they passed away. In USA, hospitals are facing conflict of interest. On one hand, they shouldn't be providing unnecessary expensive care but then they wouldn't be making as much money. No hospital should be ever put in this position.

Honestly, I'm shocked at how many people in US are against universal health care.

<comment><USER9> How does this:

> I have several relatives who were diagnosed with terminal cancer. In this > case, > the hospital simply told them, the cancer is terminal and they've > been given > doses of morphine until they passed away.

Go with this?

> Honestly, I'm shocked at how many people in US are against universal health > care.

You can ask for palliative care from US doctors any time you like. You tell them you don't want to be treated and they'll send you home to die. Morphine prescriptions at that point aren't tough to obtain.

The shocking thing to me is that anyone would want universal health care that leaves them with palliative care as their only option.

If I'm diagnosed with cancer that may be terminal, I might choose to go out in a blaze of money desperately looking for a cure... or I might choose to give up and die quietly. It should be my choice, though.

When you look beyond the political demagoguery for obvious power grab reasons, you see that the US healthcare system produces just about the best results in the world:

[http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2011/11/23/the-myth-of- amer...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2011/11/23/the-myth-of-americans- poor-life-expectancy/)

I'm shocked at how quickly people would give away their Freedoms for the illusion of being cared for.

<comment><USER8> If you are lucky to be rich, nothing is stopping you getting better health care and trying to add 1 or 2 years of life at extraordinary cost.

It just won't be covered by your insurance. To me, universal healthcare is a tradeoff. Everybody will get at least some care and nobody will go bankrupt because of medical bills.

Rich people will be still able to get whatever care money can buy. I don't understand how this is a question of freedom. Nobody is giving up freedom.

<comment><USER9> > If you are lucky to be rich

What if you work hard to be rich, and then you choose to use your money to pay for expensive treatments for you or your children? What if spending a bunch more money buys you a great deal more than a couple of years? What if the discoveries made at your great expense helps others who aren't so rich?

> Nobody is giving up freedom.

That's the justification of every little bit of thrown-away freedom we've made over the last hundred years in America. Ah, the smell of boiling frogs!

By being forced to put taxes into a least-common denominator system out of your control, you can't help but to give up freedom.

<comment><USER10> > then you choose to use your money to pay for expensive treatments for you or > your children?

That's fine in any country with universal healthcare.

> What if spending a bunch more money buys you a great deal more than a couple > of years?

It's possible, of course, but generally you'll have the best health outcomes with decent (cheap!) preventative health measures. The current insurance-based care system in the US doesn't gain anything from preventative care. Universal healthcare systems have a strong incentive to take this cheap route to a healthy population, fortunately.

> What if the discoveries made at your great expense helps others who aren't > so rich?

Um; you can be proud of that, then? Of course, you _can_ be a rich person who pays for treatments to be developed which you can then deny to poor people; that's called "the pharma industry".

> Ah, the smell of boiling frogs!

That's a myth; look it up. The frogs jump out when it gets uncomfortable. The same thing applies to most slippery slope arguments -- you have to prove each step would force the next. Most systems actually have forces pushing as well in the opposite direction.

Personally, I see how getting reasonable universal healthcare working in the US will be a difficult course, but I'm also convinced we have to fight our way through the problems (mainly: the corporations currently earning enormous profits from the current system...) and get it working. I grew up in the US, sometimes without medical insurance; I've also spent much of my life with a sometimes-expensive "preexisting condition".

Obviously, it's not "fair" if I'm bankrupted simply because I had the bad luck to have this condition -- hey, not everything in life is fair -- but I'm pretty sure that on balance, I'd be a more profitable economic unit/taxpayer to the US if I simply didn't have to worry about that.

How many people don't launch startups because they can't risk it?

<comment><USER9> >> Ah, the smell of boiling frogs!

>That's a myth; look it up.

Uh, yeah, I know that it's not biologically true. It's a metaphor. It doesn't matter that it's not biologically true just like it wouldn't matter if I used the allegory of the Frog and the Scorpion or the Ant and the Grasshopper.

> How many people don't launch startups because they can't risk it?

How many people don't launch startups because they don't have the disposable income needed to take risks?

You could compare US startup rates per capita with other countries featuring Universal Healthcare systems. Wanna guess what that graph would look like?

<comment><USER10> > Uh, yeah, I know that it's not biologically true.

You're skipping over my actual point; "slippery slope" is a logical fallacy by itself.

>How many people don't launch startups because they don't have the disposable income needed to take risks?

That's my point. You need to have _much more_ disposable income if you're going to pay for medical insurance while you're hacking away in a garage. If you're keen on cutting down your life expenses, you can get then down really very low, even for a family... but expensive medical insurance doesn't play along.

> Wanna guess what that graph would look like?

Hard to say -- how would you make it apples to apples? Obviously "has universal healthcare" isn't the most significant variable in a straight comparison.

<comment><USER9> > "slippery slope" is a logical fallacy by itself.

Not necessarily. I wasn't making a fallacious slippery slope argument of the form A leads to B leads to C : B, therefore C.

I was simply pointing out that we are CURRENTLY in a state of greatly reduced Liberty and we got here slowly, step by step. I wasn't positing an inevitable terminal stage which would indicate a slippery slope argument. The stage we're in regarding Liberty sucks plenty enough as it is.

> Hard to say -- how would you make it apples to apples? Obviously "has > universal healthcare" isn't the most significant variable in a straight > comparison.

Right you are. Since I'm not looking for a PhD in the area, I'll go with my impression that the US has a great deal more entrepreneurial opportunities than any other country on earth, especially when you put it against reasonably comparable countries with universal healthcare. Add to that impression my experience in starting up companies here in the US (in the Bay Area) where I had plenty of disposable income because I wasn't paying high taxes to go to large socialist programs for healthcare, housing, food, etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This hits close to home. I came within a hair's breadth of losing my infant daughter to cancer just over a year ago, and a few things come up in my thoughts:

\- Not all medical systems are the disaster described here. We elected to move back from the US to our native Canada to undergo treatment, and our experience in ward (pre and post-op as well as on the oncology floor) was a dream (at least given the circumstances). We experienced nothing but exemplary inter- disciplinary cooperation, compassion for the patient (and family) experience, and a professionalism driven by clinical need rather than liti-mitigation. These qualities were exhibited even more strongly during the initial phases of treatment post-discovery, which unfolded along a timeline similar to the one discussed here.

\- Academic hospitals _are_ exhausting. My spouse ended up being the real hero in this story (she was still breastfeeding at the time, and only one parent was allowed to overnight in the room). My job was to make sure she and our daughter had recovered enough each day to make it through a night of vitals, endless beeping, and the occasional overnight chemo administration (don't even get me started about that).

\- The need for patients and their families to drive the narrative of their hospital experience and be their own champion is critical. I had worked in healthcare for many years before this nightmare began (my old office was at the hospital across the street from her room) and knew the system very, very well. We divided up responsibilities so 'I looked outward, and [my spouse] looked inward', meaning that I spent my time making sure that the relevant referrals happened, that medications were administered on time and on dose, and so on. My wife looked inwards towards our daughter, making sure she was fed, entertained, and comfortable. This setup worked very well for us, and was a likely contributor to our level of care.

\- The power of parents to be strong in the face of terrible (often inevitable) odds is truly inspiring. We were lucky enough to know with reasonable certainty fairly early on that we would one day be leaving the hospital and resuming a normal life. Many, many families we met were not so lucky. To see a parent express joy and love in the face of such long and terrible odds is a truly unique experience. I myself am a measurably better parent for having witnessed it.

<comment><USER12> Great thoughts. Very happy for your family that you came through this successfully. Lots to be thankful for there.

So, I've seen a couple of your comments on HN in the past, and just wanted to mention it would be helpful if you had some contact information (e.g. Twitter, URL, etc.) in your HN profile so people can follow-up one-on-one when it makes sense to do so. Unless, of course, you're trying to avoid people. :-)

<comment><USER11> Heh, I never actually noticed there wasn't anything there (I don't think I've been back to my profile page since I filled it out 866 days ago). Updated; feel free to follow-up as desired :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I was struck by the amount of care that was seemingly influenced by fear of litigation. An ambulance driver diverted to a closer e/r despite having a physician onboard. A nurse wouldn't sanction ice chips without the admitting physician's chop. Exhausting and time-consuming tests needlessly repeated.

I once asked a veterinarian acquaintance of mine why he hadn't become a physician. "Wouldn't you rather drive something fancier than that pickup truck?" I needled, gesturing out the window at his old F150. "Yeah" he replied, "but those guys spend most of _their_ time doing paperwork. _I_ get to practice medicine."

<comment><USER14> I've had several conversations with my vet about how his practice is so much smoother because he doesn't have to deal with an insurance industry (both from the sides of patients and a huge malpractice insurance cost) that essentially is just there to screw up everything. Few people attempt multimillion dollar lawsuits against vets because fluffy died from something that was unpreventable, but that's what happens daily in the US.

As a patient individually, health insurance is great. But as a system is so horridly broken that it slows stuff down.

Also, for anyone reading, getting into Vet school doesn't mean that you're not competitive enough for standard med school; quite the opposite. Getting into vet school is damn hard.

<comment><USER15> > Also, for anyone reading, getting into Vet school doesn't mean that you're > not competitive enough for standard med school; quite the opposite. Getting > into vet school is damn hard.

We were always taught in school that becoming an animal doctor requires better qualifications/grades and is harder than becoming a human doctor - <USER2> as there is more than 2 anatomies one must become an expert of.

<comment><USER16> Over here in South Africa, you actually go to med school for a year, and then apply for veterinary medicine. So you have to be the best of the med school applicants to get a place. Hardest course to get admission to of any.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> >The purpose of this brief chronicle is not to criticize the practice of medicine.

Perhaps that wasn't his purpose, but that was the result. And it is a scathing, justified criticism, especially coming from an experienced doctor.

My father died of lung cancer, and we went through similar experiences with the health care system.

Before claiming that something is not a criticism, we have to ask whether or not we can imagine a better outcome, ask what is getting in the way of that outcome, and then make a change. This could be something small, like moving patients around less, and with less resistance. (The purely _informational_ resistance in medical care is appalling, and this story shows it's real human cost. Electronic patient records is not about assuaging "people who can't be bothered to fill out forms".) Or it could be something huge, like revolutionizing what late-stage cancer patients, and their families, expect, and how they will be treated.

If you get late-stage cancer, the health insurance company should hand you $100,000 in cash, a large supply of morphine that can be easily self- administered, and a ticket to Hawaii. Huge bag of weed optional. The message is clear: you're going to die soon, so make your peace with it. Talk to your family.

My father fought until he fell unconscious, his personality ravaged by whole- brain radiation and chemo, in complete denial. He never got a change to face his sentence with courage, and he never really talked to me before he died.

So yes, the practice of medicine needs to be criticized.

<comment><USER18> I also tend to think that the word 'criticism' is linked with a negative aspect that is undeserved.

Consider a glowing movie review that is thorough and thoughtful - <USER3> criticism, but in no way negative.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I don't want to de-rail the conversation too much but this line brought home to me one of the most sickening injustices of the civilised world - "When the chemotherapy does not work, you will have to finish the job."

No one should have to plead with their father to end their life early, this should be a choice that anyone can make without fear of consequence to their loved ones. This should be a well established and regulated part of terminal illness.

</comment><comment><USER20> In the thankfully few times I've had to endure hospitals, I've always been struck by how unbelievable primitive what they're doing actually is. Sure there are some genuine technical miracles (dialasys, pacemakers, etc) but I always get the distinct impression that most of it is window dressing; a kind of theatre to make it seem like they're more in control and much less helpless than they really are.

<comment><USER21> I've come to the same conclusion. "Modern" medicine is just marginal assistance to your body's own healing mechanisms.

<comment><USER22> I sometimes begin to think the same way, and then I remember about these:

[http://futurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/oscar- pistori...](http://futurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/oscar- pistorius2.jpg)

[http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/artificial-heart-abiocor- hand.j...](http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/artificial-heart-abiocor-hand.jpg)

<https://www.23andme.com/>

<http://www.guadalupemed.com/images/xray.jpg>

<http://www.eyeclinicpc.com/lasik/lasik%20steps1.jpg>

[http://www.piersondental.com/Portals/22078/images/rootcanal%...](http://www.piersondental.com/Portals/22078/images/rootcanal%20\(1\).jpg)

[http://www.bismarckfamilydental.com/dental-implants- bismarck...](http://www.bismarckfamilydental.com/dental-implants-bismarck- north-dakota-nd/images/dentalimplants.jpg)

[http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/staticresources/health/images/ear_c...](http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/staticresources/health/images/ear_coch.jpg)

[http://emedtravel.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/brain- mri-1.jp...](http://emedtravel.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/brain-mri-1.jpg)

And that's just off the top of my head. I think modern medicine has advanced a lot more than we give it credit for. I know a lot of hackers tend to compare other industries to the tech field, and expect everything to advance at a rate like Moore's law, but that just isn't feasible in most fields.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> He described her as a "previously healthy 50 year-old daughter" and then she went from feeling weird to death in a month? I had no idea cancer could be so aggressive, is it 1 in a million that it can be this aggressive (from showing symptoms to death) or is this something common? This would explain why early diagnosis is so emphasised, I still didn't understand how much it could matter.

<comment><USER18> Cancer can absolutely be that aggressive, and many of your internal organs don't have the sorts of pain and proprioception sensors we think of from our experience interacting with the world through our skin.

It's possible to have twenty small tumors throughout your body, causing no real issue, and then shortly thereafter they continue growing enough to impinge nerves, blood vessels, airways... And you're suddenly diagnosed with stage IV cancer.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Stage four cancer? These are things I've learned from almost twenty years as a "hospice spouse."

It's probably time to call hospice, not the "We can beat this oncologist." It's probably time to write a living will and a sign the DNR. It's probably time to decide how and where you want to die.

It's most assuredly time to decide how you want to live the rest of your life.

<comment><USER25> Not always. I know a guy who has been living with stage four colon cancer for four years who, recently, has seen his tumors contracting for the first time ever.

So while I agree that you need to identify a point where you say, "Let me die in peace", I don't think that point is always the day you've been told you have stage 4 cancer. I'm not sure that the 20 days reference in the article is really time to come to terms with that.

<comment><USER26> This is truly the problem with evidence based medicine. You can say how a given treatment will impact a population (i.e. 1 out of 100 patients with stage 4 colon cancer will survive past 6 months) and say it's not worth it, but when you're talking to a single patient, you don't know what the outcome will be. Maybe the treatment will be in vain or maybe he or she will be the one patient that goes into complete remission.

What do you do then?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Not to be insensitive (I've had a few encounters with cancer myself, from both the p.o.v. of a healthcare professional and from that of a relative/friend of a patient), but WHY is this on the front page of HN?! The story is (unfortunately) very typical and repeats time and time again in all parts of the world... but this type of description really brings no new information to "the anti-cancer game"... I know it touches everybody's emotions and stuff, but is this really the place to have these conversations?

</comment><comment><USER28> Your point number one occurred in New Zealand too. And the US is pressuring the NZ government to abandon its very successful drug purchasing agency as part of a free trade agreement. Having one agency purchase drugs for 4 million people creates a fair bit of bargaining power, which US companies do not like.

</comment><comment><USER29> Steven D. Levitt's father Michael Levitt

<http://www.med.umn.edu/gi/faculty/vamc/home.html>

<http://www.mayoclinic.org/news2009-rst/5207.html>

is a medical doctor and academic researcher in medicine at the University of Minnesota. I used to file his grant applications into the office file drawers as a duty of my part-time job while pursuing my undergraduate degree. Michael Levitt is perhaps the world's leading authority on intestinal gas and still has an active research program in diseases of the human bowel. He indeed has seen many patients at a research hospital over the years, the same hospital where my mother worked as a nurse for most of her career.

Dr. Levitt writes in the submitted article, "Overnight admission to the hospital is recommended for 'observation' and rest prior to the trip home. Fifty years of experience have taught me that admission to an academic hospital is not restful. I have stopped counting the patients who want to be discharged to get some rest." I have an immediate family member who was given excellent care at the same academic hospital Dr. Levitt knows so well. My relative is in excellent health now decades after that treatment. But indeed, even with best care, the patient experience at a research hospital is not restful, as world experts on the patient's case vie with medical students and a variety of other health science trainees and practitioners to learn from the patient. When a case is puzzling, as was the case of my relative, research- oriented practitioners are curious about how to understand the case, trying to find established, verified practice to help the patient, and otherwise working "empirically" (an ominous word--to me--used by my relative's main doctor to describe a procedure he attempted when he wasn't sure what to do next) to do whatever they can to help.

As the father of a daughter, I can hardly imagine a rougher kind of news to hear. Another immediate relative lost a fiancee to cancer years ago, and that relative's memories of that time are full of frustration. The various kinds of cancer are still so varied--as mentioned in the article--that there is essentially NIL prospect of ever having a general treatment that will be an effective first-line treatment for most forms of cancer. Instead, there will continue to be surgical treatment for come cancers, a growing variety of chemotherapies for a variety of cancers, in the best luck genome-matched to vulnerable cancer cell strains, and radiation treatment for other cancers.

Ultimately, though, we will all have to learn to die better,

[http://zocalopublicsquare.org/thepublicsquare/2011/11/30/how...](http://zocalopublicsquare.org/thepublicsquare/2011/11/30/how- doctors-die/read/nexus/)

because we will all eventually die of something. Meanwhile, if you are a parent, this submission is a reminder to cherish your children while they are here, and if you are a medical researcher, as Michael Levitt is, this is a reminder to continue to strive for better understanding of health and disease, while remembering the patient experience as new tests and treatments are devised.

</comment><comment><USER30> My father spent much of his last year of life in hospitals. It was a frustrating experience as well.

As far as the expenses went, he had Medicare in addition to supplemental insurance as a retired Marine. So he paid nothing out of pocket. I can definitely understand how this would add to the frustration of the experience.

A huge problem is that no one is actually in charge of a patient's treatment. The individual doctors were quite good, with maybe one or two exceptions, but there was never enough evidence of actual coordination between them for me to feel very confident. I saw him on a daily basis, but much of my time was spent staying on top of what half a dozen doctors and nurses were doing or planning to do at any given time and keeping everything coordinated. I worry about people who end up in the hospital without anyone else around to watch over them.

Hospitalization can be a very frustrating and disorienting experience, especially for older patients. The thing about hospitalization is that it's essentially a form of captivity. You could write a good psychological horror story that took place in a hospital, and it wouldn't be too far from reality.

<comment><USER31> I hate to say it, but hospitals need medical project managers.

My wife had some minor complications after a C-Section. We must have recited our name, address, insurance provider, drug allergies, first pet's name, etc about 250 times during the 8 day stay.

The older nurses rocked. The attending physician was someone we know well and rocked.

Everyone else, from resident down to tech were not to be trusted. An incompetent tech burned my wife's arm by putting a blood pressure cuff wet with bleach. A resident waited until I went to grab breakfast to try to pressure her into a procedure that she didn't want.

<comment><USER32> > I hate to say it, but hospitals need medical project managers.

They are called GPs, or internal physicians. Dr Cox (Scrubs) is an example. The new name is Hospitalist, I think (actually, there's a push to have this as a distinct specialty, so experienced non-specialists have a better development path). If you didn't have a doctor competently managing your case, it wasn't because no-one was responsible, but the doctor who should have been managing the case wasn't.

<comment><USER31> Physicians are always at arm's length. Nurses rule the roost in the hospital -- within each unit, there is a senior RN who is really the person managing your care.

The problem is, nowadays you often move from unit to unit -- the MRI machine or w/e is an enterprise resource. So when you move from Labor & Delivery to Post-Partum, or from the ER to Imaging, etc, there needs to be some sort of liason/hand-off process between two qualified individuals. Right now that's done via clipboard and a $9/hr orderly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Very sad, very scary.

What is the cost-benefit ratio for a routine MRI scan every six months?

<comment><USER34> This.

This is the cure for cancer we need: affordable routine scans.

Though more scans means more results for doctors to analyze. Hopefully algorithms can make that part cheaper too.

<comment><USER35> No.

Affordable routine scans will result in massive overloading of the health system with unnecessary procedures, and the complications arising from those procedures will kill more people than would have died otherwise from whatever shows up on those scans.

There is no such thing as an intervention without risk, and that starts with the risks associated with general anaesthesia.

Scanning is one thing, interpreting a scan and deciding when and where to intervene is something that does not scale well at our current level of technology. Basically it needs a human to sit down and spend time analysing the scan to make sure that what is there warrants intervention. So even if the scan costs would drop to 0 you'd still have the component of the interpretation to deal with.

The end result of overloading the system like this is that those with symptoms that need care are less likely to receive it or receive it timely, and that those that didn't need the care will suffer from complications.

Knowing when to scan and when not to scan is a crucial ingredient in giving good care.

<comment><USER34> Ok. What if no one looks at the scans?

What if I get scanned every month and no one looks at them until I start showing symptoms?

My aunt got breast cancer recently. She got mammograms every year but the doctors never saw anything. Finally there was a mass discovered, and a when they went back to look at the old images, they could see it growing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> An awesome book titled "The lives of a cell" by "Thomas Lewis" delved into the problems of Medicine (among other things) in the later 70s. He was amazingly prescient about the problems that Medicine faces today. He also offered some wonderful solutions for fixing Medicine.

<comment><USER37> Just to note, I think you mean Lewis Thomas, namesake of Princeton's Lewis Thomas Laboratory.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Heartbreaking. I hope for a cure for cancer in our lifetimes.

<comment><USER39> There will never be a cure for cancer. There will be cures for cancers.

<comment><USER40> I would even say there will never be cures for cancers. There will be treatments.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Very sad and heart-breaking. While reading the story, I couldn't stop imagining myself in his daughter's shoes and wondering "what would I do if I was in her place?"

Would I struggle and suffer in the hopes of living a few months longer or accept the fate and go in peace sooner. This reminded me of discussion with my wife during will preparation about how long should I be kept alive before plug is pulled.

</comment><comment><USER42> We are all working on the wrong things. How can society not be spending far greater percentages of GDP on health care research? Yet the medical establishment, supported by Congress, operates as a guild that keeps people/innovation out, and the system wastes billions of dollars a year on futile treatments in the last year late in life, instead of finding cures.

</comment><comment><USER43> Selfish question here: can one actually screen reliably for most cancers from age 40 to say 60 and actually do something about it?

That is say, do as complete as possible cancer screening every 3 months?

The worst seem to be the ones like pancreatic cancer, you have a very little chance of catching it before it has spread.

I just want to see my daughters grow up that is all.

</comment><comment><USER44> I suffered a mini-panic-attack halfway through reading this, and had put my head on the floor until the nausea passed.

</comment><comment><USER45> Great read and for myself, someone who is not part of the medical community though who is a father of a daughter, I can imagine the professional and personal frustration that must have been felt. Thanks for the write up - <USER4> not have been easy (even clinically) to put together.

</comment><comment><USER46> Oh wow, this brought back some painful memories. My mom died of lung cancer 3 years ago (in a third world country)

I can't begin to tell you the things my family and me had to put up with.

</comment><comment><USER47> Effective treatment against cancer can be found outside the USA, not inside. Eg: See [http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2012/nov2012_Innovative_Laser...](http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2012/nov2012_Innovative_Laser_Therapy_01.htm)

</comment><comment><USER48> very touching and heartbreaking read..

</comment><comment> johnx123-up FWIW, my Indian friend says there's a medicine for cancer in South India with Siddha. When I searched <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siddha_medicine> some editors seem to have removed references to cancer from the article.

<comment><USER49> Yeah, because it's complete bullshit. Leave your pseudoscience clap trap away from vulnerable people.

<comment> johnx123-up I'll be happy to get more details on your reasoning. Do you have any bad experience with it?

<comment><USER50> We know how cancers work to a pretty good level of detail. This means that it can be fairly straightforward to classify many treatments as ineffective.

The other point is that cancer research is incredibly well funded by non- partisan, non-commerical organisations (charities like Cancer Research UK don't have an active stake in one approach over another). The notion that these alternative remedies are being wilfully ignored doesn't stand up to any remotely rigorous evaluation.

<comment> johnx123-up > We know how cancers work to a pretty good level of detail.

IIRC, Steve Jobs was survived with alternative medicine for sometime than surgery. So, I'm more interested to know any research conducted on alternative medicines (to prove that they're wrong and ineffective). As it seems to work for Indians this can better be tried like yoga

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> This reminds me of the story of Dr. Ben Carson, a famous neurosurgeon who also teaches oncology at John Hopkins. In 2002, he was diagnosed with prostate cancer and successfully underwent traditional treatment.

However, Dr. Carson has stated publicly, both at conferences and on radio interviews, that he believes he was largely cured by a controversial holistic treatment called glyconutrients.

However, due to legal liabilities on the company's part, they banned all testimonials and would threaten lawsuits to anyone who publicized this information.

20/20 did a story on glyconutrients, disproving them based on glycobiologist Dr. Ronald Schnaar from John Hopkins School of Medicine. Dr. Schnaar said, "All of the sugar building blocks that we need in our body are made from the most common foods we eat."

Contrary to this, Dr. Carson says we do not get these simple sugars from our natural diet and said that his family, his employees and everyone he knows uses glyconutrients with great results.

He said he considered not having traditional surgery but he didn't want others mistakenly following his path to the detriment of their health.

Dr. Carson is not a glycobiologist. However, he is the Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery at John Hopkins and a colleague of Dr. Schanaar. He's been awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom and had a film made about his life story starring Cuba Gooding Jr.

But none of this information about his alternative cancer treatment is widely known. Not one word on his Wikipedia page (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Carson>) nor on the page about glyconutrients.

It's disappointing there's no unbiased scientific research to explain what is factually true. And it's unbelievable that such a high profile cancer survivor could make these claims with virtually no one knowing.

Dr. Carson's speech <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROzftYwJihg>

Dr. Carson's Story in the Dallas Weekly [http://glyconutrientsarevital.blogspot.com/2006/08/dr-ben- ca...](http://glyconutrientsarevital.blogspot.com/2006/08/dr-ben-carson- glyconutrients.html)

Related Local News story on Baby Hadley <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oK3U4mrqslk>

<comment><USER18> Let me point out the logical flaws in your post:

1\. Post hoc, ergo propter hoc - "he tried a controversial holistic treatment, therefore he was cured" - My father was cured of prostate cancer just after he quit smoking. Therefore I advocate quitting smoking as a cure for prostate cancer.

2\. Fallacy of the single cause - "he believes he was largely cured by" - it's unlikely that any single cause is responsible for something as large as being successfully treated for cancer. Many prostate cancers are simply left untreated with no harm.

3\. Hasty generalization - "his family, his employees, and everyone he knows" - We can know nothing about the effect on the general population from anecdotal evidence.

4\. Red herring, subtype appeal to authority - "However, he is the Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery" - entirely irrelevant to prostate cancer treatment.

5\. Ad populum, in reverse - "None of this information [...] is widely known" - whether it is widely known or not, it should stand up to scrutiny on it's own.

And of course, my post itself suffers from 'argument from fallacy' - <USER5> need not be false just because it is argued for in a fallacious manner.

That said, you can roll your quackery up and take it with you.

<comment><USER52> Excellent post, saved me the trouble of pointing all of those out!</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: What it takes to call yourself a senior engineer? - <AUTHOR> What it takes to call yourself a senior engineer? Does age matter? Can you call yourself a senior after few years if you are really smart and willing to learn even more? What if you see gap between your colleagues and you, even if they are older - do you have to wait anyway? Or maybe age doesn't matter. If so isn't it strange to say about yourself a senior, just few years after graduation? What if you switched career path - you are expert in one tech area and then switched to software engineering and you are pretty good at it but can't count 10+ years in there? Or at least you feel you are pretty good... But can you judge by yourself, really? And most importantly when should you respond to senior engineering job posts? It is all too vague. <comment><USER2> Age doesn't matter. The title exists if someone else thinks your senior in the context of your current work. Senior at company A may be Software Engineer II at another due to organizational differences or lack of experience in the topics worked on.

From my limited experience, a senior engineer in my eyes is someone at work who is a subject matter expert in the systems they are currently working on within their team or department. In addition to that, the litmus test I use to classify a senior engineer is, "would I go to this person for advice for most issues or questions I have within this team?" For me it's both technical expertise and sophisticated communication skills to be able to effectively communicate to other team members and mentor them.

Beyond this role, I see ownership and autonomy within larger parts of system as being the next step.

</comment><comment><USER3> The senior title comes with many responsibilities that exceed the previous stages. For example I'd expect a senior to be able to take a well rounded approach to problem solving. They need to be able to use their years of experience to bring in technical value to the company. I guess the rest depends on the actual job spec. Normally you'd find the list of responsibilities to be longer.</comment>


Parallelising Python with Threading and Multiprocessing - <AUTHOR> http://www.quantstart.com/articles/Parallelising-Python-with-Threading-and-Multiprocessing <comment><USER2> I'd like to point out that the Python standard library offers an abstraction over threads and processes that simplifies the kind of concurrent work described in the article: [https://docs.python.org/dev/library/concurrent.futures.html](https://docs.python.org/dev/library/concurrent.futures.html)

You can write the threaded example as:

      import concurrent.futures
      import itertools
      import random

      def generate_random(count):
        return [random.random() for _ in range(count)]

      if __name__ == "__main__":
        with concurrent.futures.ThreadPoolExecutor(max_workers=2) as executor:
          executor.submit(generate_random, 10000000)
          executor.submit(generate_random, 10000000)
        # I guess we don't care about the results...

Changing this to use multiple processes instead of multiple threads is just a matter of s/ThreadPoolExecutor/ProcessPoolExecutor.

You can also write this more idiomatically (and collect the combined results) as:

      if __name__ == "__main__":
        with concurrent.futures.ThreadPoolExecutor(max_workers=2) as executor:
          out_list = list(
          	executor.map(lambda _: random.random(), range(20000000)))

In this example case, this will be quite a bit slower because the work item (in this case generating a single random number) is trivial compared to the overhead of maintaining a work queue of 200000000 items - but in a more typical case where the work takes more than a millisecond then it is better to let the executor manage the division of labour.

<comment><USER3> To take advantage of process level parallelism you still have to have a pickle-able function, i.e. defined at the top level in a module.

      In [1]: import concurrent.futures

      In [2]: with concurrent.futures.ProcessPoolExecutor(max_workers=8) as executor:
         ...:     out_list = list(executor.map(lambda _: random.random(), range(1000000)))
         ...:
      Traceback (most recent call last):
        File "/usr/local/Cellar/python/2.7.6_1/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/multiprocessing/queues.py", line 266, in _feed
          send(obj)
      PicklingError: Can't pickle <type 'function'>: attribute lookup __builtin__.function failed

<comment><USER4> Good point. Just a couple of points on futures: 1) they're backported to python 2[1], and 2) to make the example work, you need a pickleable function as you say, for example, if you have ipython running in a virtualenv:

        import pip
        pip.main(["install","futures"])

        import random

        def l(_):
            return random.random()

        with f.ProcessPoolExecutor(max_workers=4) as ex:
            out_list = list(ex.map(l, range(1000)))

        len(out_list)
        #> 1000

[1] [https://pypi.python.org/pypi/futures](https://pypi.python.org/pypi/futures)

<comment><USER4> Whops, forgot to add a line to import futures:

        import futures as f #Include after pip.main(...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This example is not too realistic and just narrows it down to the case where a job can be divided into isolated tasks with no shared data/state.

Often times threads need to update shared dict/list etc... With multiprocessing this cannot be done. You can use a Queue for this but it's horribly inefficient.

Generally speaking if you need performance and Python is not meeting the requirements then you are better off using another language.

<comment><AUTHOR> I agree, the scope of the article is somewhat specific to the "toy" example presented.

Generally I would use C++ or (gasp!) Fortran with either MPI or CUDA for these sorts of tasks if performance was the most critical factor.

I'm excited by the Julia language though!

<comment><USER6> It's py3 but there is a back port of it for py2 that works wonderfully. I've recently begun using it and will never look back to multiprocessing (on which it is built).

<comment><USER7> You probably meant to reply to the thread about concurrent.futures.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> For the every day when I want to make embarrassingly parallel operations in Python go fast I find joblib to be a pretty good solution. It doesn't work for everything, but it's quick and simple where it does work.

[https://pythonhosted.org/joblib/](https://pythonhosted.org/joblib/)

<comment><AUTHOR> I was going to discuss Parallel Python ([http://www.parallelpython.com/](http://www.parallelpython.com/)) in the next article - have you used that? How does it compare to joblib?

<comment><USER8> I haven't used that, but it looks interesting. After a brief look it seems like they both submit jobs to Python interpreters started up in other processes.

Parallel Python (PP) seems to have a clunkier API, but also more functionality. I think the biggest advantage is that it can distribute jobs over a cluster instead of just different cores on the same machine. I might look into PP if I need to do things on a cluster, but I think I'll still stick with joblib when I'm on one machine.

That's just my first impression. I'd be interested to read your blog post.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I've had good success using Celery to parallelize tasks/jobs in python.

www.celeryproject.org

Also, it has a very nice concept called canvas that allows you to chain/combine the data/results of different tasks together.

It also allows you to switch out different implementations of the communication infrastructure that Celery uses to communicate and dish-out tasks.

</comment><comment><USER10> For python developers who dislike the continued existence of the GIL in a multicore world, and who feel that multiprocessing is a poor response given the existence proofs of IronPython and Jython as non-GIL interpreter implementations, please consider moving to Julia.

Julia addresses nearly all the problems I've found with Python over the years, including poor performance, poor threading support on multicore machines, integration with C libraries, etc. I was a big adherent of Python but as machines got more capable, the ongoing resistence to solving the GIL problem (which IronPython demonstrated can be done with reasonable impact on serial performance) I could not continue using the language except for legacy applications.

<comment><USER7> I don't know what you are talking about. The GIL has never bothered me. I have been using Python together with multiprocessing and threads with concurrent.futures. For integration with C libraries I use Cython; generally interfacing with C is one of Python's strong points, don't know where you got that from. Have you actually looked into why Python has a GIL? It's a pretty clear trade-off, I think. It seems intuitive to me that requiring lots of small locks to avoid a global lock might not be beneficial, and attempts to get rid of it such as PyPy is doing with software transactional memory involve big changes, so it's not like you can decide overnight "let's get rid of the the GIL".

Julia looks nice but comes with its own set of problems: no inheritance, 1-based indexing, less libraries, less mature.

<comment><USER10> Yes, I have looked into why the Python has a GIL. I've even written C interface code which released the GIL and then reacquired it when necessary (I know a ton about this, having spent too many of the last 20 years integrating C and python). Yeah, I actually know what the tradeoffs are and can evaluate them (I used to work with the author of IronPython).

you have several choices for C integration in Python. SWIG, which is now generally considered a huge mess, hand-wrapping, which is a tedious pain, and dlopen/dlsym methods that talk to the C api direectly (which requires something like GCCXML to handle type recognition for complicated APIs).

I don't think PyPy's approach to transactional memory is the right direction either.

In short: multithreading on multicore machines is how you write performant software in industry. The hardware is designed for, the compilers are designed for it, and if you don't take advantage of it, you're just wasting machines.

Now people could argue that multiprocessing addresses it, but it's just message passing between different process spaces, which while a wonderful and powerful tool, is ultimately just more cumbersome (hey, I used to write big MPI/OpenMP apps that did both models at the same time).

Anyway, the ultimate existence proof is that IronPython was both faster serially _and_ in parallel, without the GIL, than CPython. So basically we _know_ it's possible. The Python developers have no will, inclination, or ability to make it so,.

<comment><USER7> It would be interesting if you could give some arguments for your positions. Why is STM not the way? Why, if IronPython is as good as you say it is, doesn't it see greater adoption or why don't other implementations use its strategies for removing the GIL? Wikipedia says that IronPython scores worse on PyStone benchmarks compared to CPython, and it's likely that this is a consequence of IronPython's fine-grained locking which is required in the absence of a GIL.

As for interfacing with C, like I said, Cython really makes this a lot easier than the approaches you mention. You mention IronPython as not having a GIL, but then IronPython doesn't allow easy interfacing with C code, e.g., it's not compatible with numpy ...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Python threads, aren't they just single threaded execution?!

<comment><USER12> Yes, they are concurrent but not parallel.

<comment><USER13> See other replies to the post you've replied to: threads in Python can be "parallel", if one of the threads releases the GIL. This can happen during calls to I/O, or more generally, any C call that decides to release the GIL. Most of the time, you're doing I/O anyways, so it suffices. If you're not (you're truly doing computation), then there is multiprocessing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Have you seen there is an error in the code for the threading part?

the right way if you want to use a thread is thread = threading.Thread(target=CALLABLE, args=ARGS)

and not

thread = threading.Thread(target=CALLABLE(ARGS))

</comment><comment><USER15> For the example task we could use the multiprocessing Pool and (the undocumented) ThreadPool.

This implements the worker pool logic already so we don't have to.

<comment><AUTHOR> I was considering adding this but I wasn't fully sure that it would be good content for a "first intro to parallel programming" article. Perhaps a good candidate for the next one?

Thanks for mentioning it though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> For network bound operations Twisted's cooperate / coiterate come handy.

</comment><comment><USER17> Or just use a better language. One is that is actually compiled and fast?

<comment><USER9> Speed is just one of the many things that people consider when evaluating what language/stack to use for a particular job/task.</comment></comment>