Microsoft trials XP on XO laptop (Nooooooooo) - <AUTHOR> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7130637.stm <comment><USER2> What a cancer. On the plus side, this might put some pressure on developers to make the XO's OS really good. But, of course, OS choice is unlikely to be based on technological quality.

</comment><comment><USER3> I'll be very surprised if Microsoft can get anything but a very very stripped down version of XP running on XOs 433MHz processor at any sort of reasonable speed.

Maybe it will be based on MinWin: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MinWin>

<comment><USER4> That's weird to hear. I ran XP on 433MHz (Celeron) computers in 2001; it was a little slow, but nothing too scary. My parents still have a 533 running XP at this moment, and as far as I can tell it's just as IO-bound as the laptop I'm typing this on.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> In other news, GM trials coal as fuel for its 2008 Cadillacs.

<comment><USER6> Coal gasification is actually a reasonable way to get high energy content fuel from something other than petroleum.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> It worries me that when the XO will be able to run XP, we'll see the same stunts pulled with the XO as we saw with Classmate (see Mandrive and Nigeria).

</comment><comment><USER8> Yeah, that would seriously blow if MSFT could increase the USA's export market, as well as provide healthy salaries for programmers.

<comment><USER9> But the goal of the OLPC project isn't to make money/salaries/increase export share in any way. Its to give computers to third world countries where people have little to no access to them. Microsoft trying to sell XP with these laptops - which doesn't seem to make much sense, since they're supposed to be cheap - wouldn't help the project in any way. So basically, it seems like any market share/income they might make wouldn't be much and would come at the expense of the very people the project is trying to help, and so yes, it would 'seriously blow'.

<comment><USER8> _isn't to make money_

I have a feeling...I haven't looked into it...but I have a feeling that most of the associated vendors are making a profit on the thing. I can't imagine an assembly plant saying, "Sure, we'll sell at cost because your heart is (allegedly) in the right place."

<comment><USER10> I suspect it's more about easing people into MS products in the first place.

Hundreds of thousands, maybe millions eventually, of people being exposed to their first computer and what does it have in it at the moment?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This is a good thing! It will strengthen XO's perceived position relative to the several other light-laptop projects.

</comment><comment><USER12> Time to bring back the hand crank!

</comment><comment><USER13> If anyone doubted that going with the x86 architecture for the OLPC was a mistake, this should convince you.

</comment><comment><USER14> Could we have a way to flag headlines with an un-needed editorial?

</comment><comment><USER15> embrace and extend. ouch. :)</comment>


My Eccentric Approach to Entrepreneurship - <AUTHOR> http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2008/04/my-eccentric-approach-to-entrepreneurship.html <comment><USER2> His first three points: "Spread risk through multiple projects and multiple partners", "Do as much as possible myself" and "Question everything all the time" sound like a perfect recipe for pissed-off cofounders.

I don't think I'd want to be this guy's partner if I knew that (a) he'd only be working part-time, and when he felt like it (b) he'd insist on doing everything himself while he was around and (c) he'd probably spend most of the time that he was around questioning all my decisions.

<comment><AUTHOR> Well, I haven't had any complaints yet...

I currently have two co-founders on two different projects, and then three projects I am doing myself (with lots of ideas bounced off my wife and other entrepreneurs).

One of my co-founders I previously founded a different company with that was sold to a public company. He is also currently running another business. So he knows the modus operandi pretty well.

My other co-founder also runs another business. So there really isn't any time resentment there either.

In answer to your points a-c:

(a) I work on all the projects all the time, at least to the extent that I am thinking about them and coming up with ideas continuously. In other words, I don't silo them in my head. While they are quite distinct, they all are Web based, so there is significant useful overlap.

It's not when I feel like either. We schedule specific times to meet, discuss, and work as needed.

(b) I don't insist on doing everything myself, but I do insist on knowing the details of everything inside and out. That being said, on all my projects (right now) I am the only (highly) technical person, so I naturally do all of that stuff myself, e.g. coding/sysadmin/etc.

(c) I do question everything, but all the projects are much off better for it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Doesn't seem that eccentric except the first bullet point:

"Spread risk through multiple projects and multiple partners". What happens when one starts to take off? You'll either leave opportunity on the table or you'll ditch your other ones (screwing all of your other "partners").

Not to mention the fact that getting a startup to ANY traction is hard enough when you're monomaniacal about it. You think you're that much more effective than other founders that you can pull it off part-time?

<comment><USER4> I think people are assuming that he is working on a startup exactly like they are (the same equity structure, type of business, roles, etc.) The author really isn't very clear about what he contributes or how anything is structured. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, although his second bullet point does make me nervous. He may have a performance-based equity arrangement...who knows? Some programmers are 10X as effective as others supposedly, right?

"You think you're that much more effective than other founders that you can pull it off part-time?"

Well, I do. I'm not the author, but I have a similar approach in regard to his first bullet point. I may have a different structure (I hire employees with equity more often than I work with 'cofounders', and I have a somewhat formal VC-ish corporate structure with outside investors for each project, but 95% of the software/internet related ideas we execute are mine, and I'm actively involved in every aspect of the companies.) I think the difference between our approach and that of most startups is related to this: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Myth> The need for 'monomaniacal' focus from every cofounder is largely a result of having limited resources...if you can't afford an attorney, you have to learn to do it yourself. If you can't afford a designer, you have to learn to do it well yourself. And so on. You have to be a Jack-of-All-Trades out of necessity.

But, once you've had a financial success or can line up backers based on your past experience, you can focus on marketing, innovation, and strategy. You work ON your business instead of IN your business, as the saying goes. I don't worry about cross-browser compatibility anymore. I have an expert for that. I don't worry about A/R, I have people for that. I don't worry about log analysis, and so on. I'm capable of doing those things and I know what to look for to monitor that things are running smoothly, but it is not a good use of my resources to actually do those things. There are people that are better than me at all of those things. I DO monitor the systems and deliverables of my coworkers, but I don't get lost in the nitty gritty details. I work on the things that I think matter the most for success. I occasionally do things I shouldn't (such as write production code) because I enjoy them, but I really wouldn't if I were optimizing everything. You'd be amazed at what you can accomplish when you aren't bogged down in minutiae. Once you have systems in place, you can really scale your expertise across a number of companies.

I think my employees, cofounders, and investors are happier with this structure than they would be otherwise...but I KNOW they are wealthier because of it.</comment></comment>


Waterfalls - <AUTHOR> https://vimeo.com/eagleisystems/rocknwater

<comment><USER2> The video is really amazing. But try to remove the HD quality! ehhh.. what?! it becames one of the ugliest video I've never seen.</comment>


Ask HN: Do You Cuss in Meetings? - <AUTHOR> Something I've noticed is that if nobody cusses and tries to be professional then it means that meetings are going to be boring, filled with anxiety and generally have dense atmosphere. Because certain essential emotional realms are not explored. If swearing is a big deal, then most likely there isn't much genuine laughter as well, people are afraid to speak up, no criticism, no valuable feedback, engineers are easily intimidated by the higher ups into tighter deadlines, no comradery, etc.
It is such a good heuristics that I'm tempted to conclude that no cussing means a room filled with losers. I don't mean gross language, I mean something like occasional fuck here and there.
I'm Russian, and this is the experience I have with Russian people, but I think it also applies to American and European cultures. In general Russian people are more emotionally reserved, and the language doesn't help either, because there are no equivalent words for "you" and "guys".
I think cursing is some kind of mental barrier. If it is not broken, then there is an array of social problems that most likely will remain unsolved. It's kind of like first sex in a relationship, if you don't have it early then the relationship will probably go sour. I've seen entire room go dumb to almost comical level and be unable to decide whether the task is going to take 1.5 days or 2 days, as if that mattered at all. Because of bad emotional energy, engineers were afraid to say 2, because then there is a question why not 1.5 or even 1, but it's not really a question, it's pressure and intimidation. Explaining why in honest terms even without cursing is not within the domain of acceptable things to say.
I know it sounds weird. It's just that there are vastly different meetings, some are productive and positive where cursing is not a big deal, and some are a game of trying to save face and look good, without there being any need to do so. <comment><USER3> No, I try to never cuss because I don't feel like it's useful. A large part of it is because of the culture of the area where I currently live, but I never really understood the point of cussing even though I grew up in an area where cussing was common.

\- when I'm mad, cussing won't improve things \- when I want to lighten the mood, I could make any variety of joke \- when I want to emphasize something, I use the tone of my voice or appropriate vocab

I guess I've just never understood the point of it. I occasionally cuss to myself, but I try to be a bit more expressive when I'm talking with others.

So yeah, I never cuss in meetings, and I very rarely cuss in general.

<comment><AUTHOR> The point of cussing is to add emotional color. Remember that and don't judge people who cuss in a cool way. They don't judge you for being dry or uptight. As an example of how useful cussing can be, imagine that you want to critisize your manager for being unpersonable. Calling him fuckface, a dick, an asshole, to his face would help. If you can't do it, there likely a huge problem in your relationships, or it simply isn't your communication style. But if it is and you can do it, it has power. Good vibes when critisizing.

Now I overthink this whole thing and went too deep in my comments, failing to do it fluently. I still belive cussing is an important tool in communication, and if it is frowned upon to cuss in a room, then I doubt it is a room filled with winners. They are concerned with superficial instead of essential and lack emotional intelligence.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> It really depends on person to person. I have had teammates who's vocabulary would be quite colorful even in normal life. These were the people who would be more prone to cussing during meetings.

There were others whom I have never heard mention any cuss words ever. Those people would not do it in a meeting, whatever the situation.

I have had a superior who used to cuss a lot during meetings. It didn't make anyone comfortable because people were not used to hearing such language outside meetings. The new joiners in the team would feel uneasy, especially those that were just out of college.

So it really depends on the context, the people participating in the meeting and the agenda of the meeting.

</comment><comment><USER5> I think too much is bad and a sign of immaturity. However, whenever you feel like you can use them it implies you feel close and safe enough with the other people to do it. I swear with my team only because I think you need to be as open as possible with them and sometimes the only way to describe the mess you are in is a f __*.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah. When you don't feel close and safe, it's bad, it means there is a problem. It means there is no trust and it is going to slow everybody down, make less intelligent and efficient, and the company is going to lose money.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I used to cuss a lot. But I realized that cussing just helps me feel a bit better - and does not solve the problem at hand.

I also realized that cussing makes some people feel worse than they normally would, and it ruins long-term productivity and relationships.

So I stopped cussing.

<comment><AUTHOR> I hink you are wrong to blame cussing here, it's mostly about emotions. If you were cussing from a place of frustration or complaining, then of course it would make people feel worse. Even without cussing. But if it helps you think more positively then it's good.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Yes I cuss at meetings. Not a lot. You know an occasional 'damn' or 'shit'. But I also know that using fowl language is the sign of limited vocabulary. And thus a reflection that I am not as smart as I should be.

Kids curse a lot because of 2 reasons: 1) they are trying to get attention (usually subconsciously) 2) limited vocabulary.

Of course a lot of this has to do with volume and if the language is directed at anyone. 'You stupid _ssh_ l _' Is a lot different than 'be careful of the _ssh _l_ s out there'. Or 'Damn that hurt' vs 'Damn you'.

<comment><USER8> It's not a sign of a limited vocabulary.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> This is HR realm stuff, if one person is offended then it's wrong, ie indefensible from a harassment in the workplace standpoint. I don't agree with this necessarily but that's the reality in the USA.

Personally I have no problem with coarse vulgar language, even so far as insults and abuse. If done well it can be beautiful even. But then I went through army basic training so I'm inured to it (I enjoy Linus rants for example). I don't use it though.

</comment><comment><USER10> You might be on to something. But I work somewhere that has good laughter but not much cussing. I've also worked somewhere where the culture is the higher ups cuss but the lower level people didn't, there was almost a status about it. So it varies, but I think the underlying point is can people be free to be themselves, or are they anxious about what the company thinks of them.

</comment><comment><USER11> It is a tool like any other. I find that some colorful language can loosen up a room. It can also intimidate people or create other problems.

You have to know your environment.

<comment><AUTHOR> Basically what I'm saying is that most environments where cussing isn't allowed are diseased. Also, I failed to mention that I don't mean negative or angry cussing at all, only positive that leads to laughter, awe, inspiration, feelings of pride, satisfaction, and so on. So somebody berating someone is not what I had in mind.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> It's only good if it goes naturally. You know how it happens - <USER2> occasionally swears and in a minute everybody in the room is swearing, even baby doll - alike girls. When forced swearing brings more emotional strain that it resolves.

</comment><comment><USER13> My parents referred to cussing as "poor man's poetry," which so far as I can tell was a phrase originated by John Moore [0] in _You English Words_.

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Moore_(British_author)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Moore_\(British_author\))

[1] [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=LFi2CgAAQBAJ&pg=PA256](https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=LFi2CgAAQBAJ&pg=PA256)</comment>


Ask HN: What happened to Search? - <AUTHOR>

It seems frozen in matrix time, from 2+ days ago, with no new entries henceforth. <comment><USER2> I'm not seeing that - I just randomly picked a searchable word of the current front page ("raspberry") and it shows as recent as "4 hours ago".</comment>


First Amendment doesn't apply to private operator running public-access channels - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/17/18682099/supreme-court-ruling-first-amendment-social-media-public-forum <comment><USER3> It's a catchy headline, but doesn't accurately reflect what happened. The question was whether a private cable operator that _runs public-access channels on behalf of a municipality_ is acting as a private platform, or as a "state actor".

The court ruled that it is indeed acting as a private platform, and therefore "not subject to First Amendment constraints on its editorial discretion".

<comment><USER4> Worth mentioning that public access channels are normally something like your local version of PBS. For Brits maybe something like BBC but at much smaller regional scale.

In many cases they are extensively funded by tax payers.

___

And the fact that these were channels pretty much in existence due to taxpayers. Made them a great target to turn more places into a public forum, in hopes of it also having a ruling that affects social media.

Which is why people were worried about it affecting social media.

<comment><USER5> _" public access channels are normally something like your local version of PBS. For Brits maybe something like BBC but at much smaller regional scale."_

I don't think that's accurate at all. Public access channels are TV stations which will broadcast content created by any member of the community. I don't know how they are now, but decades ago in NYC all sorts of bizarre shit got broadcast on public access, from weird conspiracy theories to borderline pornographic material to awful performance art project some NYU or SVA student slapped together. The main thing all the content had in common was that it was ultra-low-budget, since it was usually created by a single person on a cheap video camera.

It was absolutely nothing even remotely like the BBC or PBS, which are both organizations with significant funding and a highly professional staff of people working for them. Most importantly, the BBC and PBS create their own content, while on public access channels the content is created by members of the community. Usually, on public access there's some kind of signup roster where you as a community member put your name in a free slot, and when your time comes you get to play your video. Some public access stations might let community members use their studios or their equipment, but for the most part you're on your own.

The closest thing I could compare it to would be youtube, but without any advertising or search or choice of what to watch. As a viewer, you just had to watch whatever video a random community member played at the time you turned your TV to that station. 99.9% of the time, the content was absolutely bottom of the barrel amateur garbage which probably had close to zero viewers. Frankly, I'm surprised these stations still exist, as these days most people probably get their random user-generated videos from youtube.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> It looks like US supreme court is as clearly divided as the US political parties. A large number of US supreme court critical decisions are 5-4 decisions. And a large majority of them have clear partisan divides. If only Obama had his chance to appoint Scalia's successor, the US supreme court might have been very different.

<comment><USER7> [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/0...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/06/28/those-5-4-decisions- on-the-supreme-court-9-0-is-far-more-common/?utm_term=.6efc49b027e0)

"since 2000 a unanimous decision has been more likely than any other result — averaging 36 percent of all decisions. Even when the court did not reach a unanimous judgment, the justices often secured overwhelming majorities, with 7-to-2 or 8-to-1 judgments making up about 15 percent of decisions. The 5-to-4 decisions, by comparison, occurred in 19 percent of cases"

<comment><USER6> I am not saying 5-4 is the most likely result, just that even 19% of decisions being 5-4 is huge.

<comment><USER8> There's only 5 combinations of yes/no votes you can get with 9 indistinct entities, so 20% isn't unusual at all

<comment><USER3> True, although if you consider each entity distinct there are 512 combinations and the one split along partisan lines is probably vastly overrepresented among other 5-4 possibilities.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The clear conservative/liberal decision split is interesting. I can rationalize why it is that way in retrospect. (Private companies, even non- profits doing a job for the government, have a right to curtail the use of their resources for most reasons.) But I'm not sure I'd have necessarily predicted it.

It's probably worth noting that the EFF filed an amicus brief essentially arguing against (as I understand it) a broad definition of state actors because of the benefits of having both moderated and unmoderated platforms. So, presumably, this ruling was more in line with their argument than the dissent.

<comment><USER10> If the title was something along the lines of "Agreeing with the EFF, Supreme court rules First Amendment doesn't apply to private platforms" I think you would see very different responses.

People here usually have a lot of respect for the EFF (rightfully so), but I think people in these comments are focusing more on what 5 judges voted than the issue at hand.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> The issue the majority ruled on was whether the private party in this case had "stepped into the government's shoes."

5 Justices said it had not. That doesn't surprise me very much.

<comment><USER12> Specifically, at question was whether or not a private non-profit, appointed by the state to operate in place of a public org, was bound by the same 1st amendment requirements.

It does bring up some interesting questions. Could a governor outsource specific depts and free them from 1st amendment concerns?

<comment><USER13> > Could a governor outsource specific depts and free them from 1st amendment > concerns?

At face-value it seems so, which is scary.

<comment><AUTHOR> Can't avoid taking it at face value - the city outsourced its public channel to a private operator which was enough to lead five Justices on another trip down the garden path to fencing limits on government to government actors in an orthodox sense. These 5-4 splits are scary and dangerous.

<comment><USER14> I think this situation is somewhat different from your characterization. It isn't really a "public channel" that somehow belongs to the city/state. It is privately provided service that is just mandated as a side-effect of granting the private company a cable franchise.

But I'm struggling to come up with a good analogy that involves private infrastructure that exists only due to government action with a 1st-amendment component.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Maybe this is too simple, but this seems like an easy way to get rid of the first amendment: Just privatize everything!

</comment><comment><USER16> This lets those with the most money set up non profits and use taxpayer dollars to fulfill political agendas on public access channels and permit firing employees that object to the new propaganda making machine so long as at least one viewer objects to that employees work?

Sign me up and call me Sinclair.

<comment><USER9> If your goal is to exert broad political influence, I'm guessing that public access cable channels are probably not your most effective route.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> It wasn't clear to me, after a quick skim, if the public-access channel had received state funding and therefore was effectively the state but outsourced. I would assume it had, which in my eyes doesn't mean it's a 'private platform' but more a privately operative public platform.

</comment><comment><USER18> I wonder if being public traded cant be used as a tool to say the company isnt private ?

<comment><USER19> Publicly traded doesn't mean owned by the gov't or a gov't entity. The 1st Amendment of the Constitution says the gov't can't infringe on free speech. Just like you can restrict speech within your own house, a company - <USER2> or public - can do the same. Neither can be told by the gov't that certain speech is not allowed.

<comment><USER18> Yes and no, the 1st amendment says the govt does not have the power to infringe on your preexisting right to free speech.

I am not sure where the govt thinks it can give corporations that power since the corporate entity is a fictitious person created by the govt.

Free speech is a right, the right to travel is a right corporations cannot prevent you from doing either. Arguably the internet is public property.

The line blurs when you offer the public access to your computers but no one has the right to curb your speech. Corporations might have the right to delete data but then they arguably lose the safe haven of simply being a service provider.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> These are governments. Governments are corporations. The distinction between then is completely imaginary, and need only be propounded where it serves a purpose.

There is no intrinsic justification for the bill of rights. There is no reason why we can't enshrine protection from corporations.

<comment><USER21> > Governments are corporations

No, they aren't.</comment></comment>


Geometric Algebra for Python - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/pygae/clifford <comment><USER2> Hi everyone, I'm Hugo one of the maintainers of this package, glad to see lots of interest! If anyone is interested in some of the applications of GA in robotics etc then check out the talk Eric and I gave at GAME2020 back in February [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj9JslblYPU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj9JslblYPU)

<comment><USER3> A few months back I made an effort to learn GA. I did get some traction, but eventually shelved the effort. The thing that put me off is that no one could explain how to do units analysis in GA. I am mainly interested in physics and engineering applications, especially robotics and also RF engineering to some extent. Without being able to see how dimensions combine in GA, I have zero confidence in the correctness of my results. Arithmetic without dimensional analysis is not physics. Full. Stop.

So, if you could point to any resources that show how to properly dimension GA values, and how GA operators combine dimensions, that would get me started on GA again.

<comment><USER4> The units work just how you'd expect; as far as I can tell there's nothing new or unique about units in GA.

If you multiply two vectors with units of meters, you get a scalar + a bivector, both with units of square meters.

If you divide two vectors with units of meters, you get a scalar + a bivector which are both dimensionless.

Etc.

<comment><USER5> What are units of the geometric product of two vectors?

Edit: didn't read clearly. Better question is why would we want to have a scalar with units of square meters in this case? Shouldn't 0-grade objects all have the same units?

<comment><USER6> > Shouldn't 0-grade objects all have the same units?

No, and this is a really important point. Scalars can have any units. For example, you can have a scalar with units of time, or mass, and you can take the dot product of a force vector and a displacement vector to get a scalar with units of [force]·[distance] = [work].

If you instead form the wedge product of those vectors, you get a bivector with the same units: [force]·[distance] = [torque] (note that the units of [work], [torque], and [energy] are all the same).

If you take the geometric product of a force vector and a displacement vector, the result is the sum of a scalar and a bivector, both with the same units of [force]·[distance].

<comment><USER7> > If you take the geometric product of a force vector and a displacement > vector, the result is the sum of a scalar and a bivector, both with the same > units of [force]·[distance].

This part is where I have problem with GA: what the hell is the physical[0] interpretation of such a sum? For example, a four-vector <p_x,p_y,p_z,c·E_k> (momentum and kinetic energy) can be thought of as kinetic energy being the temporal component of (4-)momentum, but no similar interpretation seems viable to combine work and torque into a logically unified quantity.

0: I'm not sure if this is the right word - the interpretation as single unified value with no special-case treatment of its components might be another, equally not-quite-right way of putting it.

<comment><USER4> The physical interpretation depends on context, but the concrete arithmetic is the same whether you write it using GA language or some other mathematical formalism (matrices, Gibbs–Heaviside style vectors, differential forms, tensors, complex numbers, ...), so if you have a problem with it your problem is with the physics.

Like with any expressive language (e.g. English, C++, or matrix algebra), GA makes it possible to state a wide variety of nonsensical things. But that's not the fault of the language.

Where GA really shines IMO is in the ability to divide by vectors, something that is extremely useful but gets super cumbersome using other mathematical languages.

The biggest "problem" I have with GA is that it takes a lot of practice to get familiarity with all of the powerful stuff it can do. There are pages and pages of (extremely powerful and useful) short identities which are impossible to memorize by just looking at them, and can only be learned as far as I can tell through years of hard-won experience. I feel like I still only really have a handle on the most basic stuff.

I find regularly myself working on some complicated coordinate-based calculation for 3 pages of scratch paper full of mistakes and wrong turns, only to experience déjà vu, re-express the original thing in GA language, and end up with a clear and geometrically interpretable 4 lines of simple algebraic identities which solve the problem. But I'm not always sure if I'd be able to figure out which 4 lines to use right off the bat, without first going through the coordinate slog.

<comment><USER7> > some complicated coordinate-based calculation

Isn't that just what distinguishing scalar/vector/bivector/trivector/etc is for? I don't have problems with coordinates because I don't bother with coordinate-based calculations in the first place. What I don't get is how adding two multivectors of different [ranks? eg scalar + bivector] is supposed to simplify anything.

> > > the geometric product [...] is the sum of a scalar and a bivector

> any expressive language [...] makes it possible to state a wide variety of > nonsensical things.

Yes, but if _everything_ the language makes it possible to state is nonsensical, then what's the point?

I assume there's _some_ sort of point to geometric algebra, but I have yet to encounter any convincing explanation of what that point is, and why I shouldn't keep my dot and wedge products properly separated.

<comment><USER4> I just said that for many single calculations, GA has saved me literally hours of headaches, in addition to making the result dramatically clearer and more insightful.

Nobody is going to force you to try something you don't want to try. I don't think I'll be able to convince you.

<comment><USER7> > I just said that for many single calculations, GA has saved me literally > hours of headaches, in addition to making the result dramatically clearer > and more insightful.

Er, right; I was[0] asking for a example of a such a dramatically clearer and more insightful result, relative to just using normal dot and wedge products. _Using vectors at all_ saves hours of headaches if all it's being compared to is coordinate-based calculations.

0: Well, the comment before that one was asking about the _interpretation_ of the geometric product.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I don't understand the "geometric algebra" goal. The people that I've seen pushing for it usually say kids in high school are being taught the wrong thing, we should do away with the cross product and start teaching this geometric algebra. I'm not too familiar with the content, but to a superficial look it seems they are just using exterior algebras and (maybe?) clifford algebras? Assuming that is the case then why the rebranding (and sometime change of standard notation) to "geometric algebra" for concepts that already had a name at the end of the nineteenth century (that is bound to piss the general math community off)? Also why are people so against teaching the cross product? There are many reasons why Hodge duality is important, not just in abstract math but also in physics (it enables the most geometric definition of Maxwell equations for example)

<comment><USER9> AFAICT the proponents of GA claim it explains lots of things that don't make a whole lot of sense without it.

One example is why you multiply normals by the world_inverse_tranpose. Apparently the reason is because normals are actually bivectors, not directional vectors as they are usually explained.

another is that at least in code, they apparently solve lots of issues that other methods don't

See: [https://marctenbosch.com/quaternions/](https://marctenbosch.com/quaternions/)

[https://marctenbosch.com/quaternions/code.htm](https://marctenbosch.com/quaternions/code.htm)

and: [https://bivector.net/](https://bivector.net/)

and [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tX4H_ctggYo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tX4H_ctggYo)

<comment><USER10> > One example is why you multiply normals by the world_inverse_tranpose

I know linear algebra but I have no idea what the heck this means. Is this a gaming thing?

<comment><USER5> Computer graphics. When transforming a coordinate system by a linear transformation represented by a matrix, normal vectors to surfaces transform differently than regular vectors. GA/exterior algebra explains this: the useful thing we call normals is represented by the same data (a 3d vector) but actually has to have a a different "type" to make sense. In higher dimensions they are not interchangeable with vectors.

<comment><USER10> Ah gotcha, why don't bivectors transform normally

e: I'm restating the question in a form I understand, not asking it.

<comment><USER11> If T:V->V is a linear transformation and "^" is the exterior product then T(u^v)=T(u)^T(v).

For example, let T be a reflection about the plane spanned by e1 and e2. Then T(e1^e2)=e1^e2, but T(e1 x e2) = -e1 x e2, where "x" denotes the cross product.

<comment><USER10> I should have been clear, I was restating their question, not asking it again.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> It's great to see some geometric algebra.

But I'm not quite sure what the package is for.

Is it for playing with geometric algebra? It is really rather simple to implement geometric algebra. As easy as understanding the internals of this package (which is not small for what it does). And in some ways a necessity for understanding the math. Like I wouldn't expect someone to just use quaternions and matrices to do 3-D, without learning how a matrix or quaternion multiplies. And I wouldn't start with a package of dozens and dozens of files in multiple directories, with a ton of inter-imports†.

So I'm assuming the package is for practical use, so it will be nice to see what they envisage it for. The only example is a single trivial operation. I'm aware it can be used for quantum physics. But my experience has been 3-D graphics. And there it is very meh.

So my long-standing problem with geometric algebra in software engineering has been... why? A frustration because it is a lot of fun.

My (imho) advice if you find it fun: you can write your own version in an evening.

\---

† I wonder if packages are equivalent of books 20 years ago. I remember that temptation to buy a book, as if that was how you acquired some knowledge. I was guilty of that so many times. Now, want to get geometric algebra? There is a package for that.

<comment><USER13> > I remember that temptation to buy a book, as if that was how you acquired > some knowledge.

yeah... what foolish things we believed 20 years ago...

(tries not to look at the large pile of books accumulating dust in the corner of the room)

<comment><USER14> Tsundoku

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> You should check out the bivector community [https://bivector.net/](https://bivector.net/).

Join the discord [https://discord.gg/vGY6pPk](https://discord.gg/vGY6pPk).

Check out a demo [https://observablehq.com/@enkimute/animated- orbits](https://observablehq.com/@enkimute/animated-orbits)

</comment><comment><USER16> I work with ML. Even a dense vector can be relatively high-dimensional (something like 128-D is common) I'd love to use Geometric / Clifford algebra for rotations of these vectors; the notation is much more intuitive. However, last time I tried using this library, it insists on generating all the N-vectors, of which there's a combinatoral amount w.r.t. the number of dimensions. For rotations, I really only need bivectors (IIRC)

Is there a way to use Geometric Algebra for higher dimensions?

<comment><USER2> High dimensional GAs are a relatively hot topic of research but something we haven't aimed to target with this library (mostly because its not our main research area). My personal preference for working with high d algebras would be Stéphane Breuils and Vincent Nozick's GARAMON library ([https://github.com/vincentnozick/garamon](https://github.com/vincentnozick/garamon)) ([https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00006-019-0987-7](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00006-019-0987-7)), it is efficient and easy to use, and the authors are very friendly and helpful. You could also try out TbGAL ([https://github.com/Prograf- UFF/TbGAL](https://github.com/Prograf-UFF/TbGAL)), I haven't used it myself but the work of the Leandro Fernandes is typically high quality.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> What are the applications of Geometric Algebra aside from computer graphics?

<comment><USER18> The GAME2020 event (Geometric Algebra Mini Event) showcased applications in graphics, physics, robotics, neural networks, mathematics. The lectures (from Cambridge, UVA, UPEM, TU Delft, ..) are all available here : [https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsSPBzvBkYjzcQ4eCVAnt...](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsSPBzvBkYjzcQ4eCVAntETNNVD2d5S79)

<comment><USER19> "Mini Event" = several 1 hour long talks

Was hoping for more (time wise) digestible introductions.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> If anyone wants to play around with the geometric algebra over R^3 in C++, I wrote a little library a while back which handles vectors (3d), quaternions (4d), bivectors (3d, quaternions without the scalar part), multivectors (8d)

[https://github.com/markisus/g3](https://github.com/markisus/g3)

</comment><comment><USER21> Please check out my geometric algebra software at [https://github.com/chakravala/Grassmann.jl](https://github.com/chakravala/Grassmann.jl)

</comment><comment><USER22> I find it fascinating that geometric algebra and algebraic geometry are two distincts and totally different things and i wonder which term came first.

<comment><USER21> haha, well they are both probably about equally old i believe.. i think the two topics can be inter-related, but they are indeed separate areas of study with different emphasis, and I don't believe that many algebraic geometers know about the geometric algebra historically, since GA was quite obscure and hard to utilize until computer algebra made it easier

<comment><USER22> whereas AG is just as obscure and hard to utilize, even with a computer...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Geometric Algebra is useful because it's a generalization of complex number and quaternions.

It explains complex numbers and quaternions intuitively.

<comment><USER24> I agree with the first sentence.

But I don't think it's intuitive to learn about complex numbers through GA. Complex numbers are a great jumping-off point to learn GA since it is simple and most people eventually accept that the imaginary unit squares to -1, and because complex numbers have a striking geometric interpretation.

But I feel almost certain that people should learn about the special case of complex numbers before they ever learn about geometric algebra.</comment></comment>


Digg Archive lets you download your old data - <AUTHOR> http://digg.com/archive/

<comment><USER2> It's been long enough since I've been on digg that I don't have the same email address.

I'd much prefer if they provided the data to the internet archive rather than one-by-one providing information to users.

<comment><USER3> This. Give it to Archive.org and let them have their way with it.

<comment><USER4> well... idk about just giving away peoples private messages, and personal communications. But yes, anything that was public and linkable on the site should obviously still be available for posterity sake. I get the impression this initiative is to get users back their personal information from the site.

Hopefully they're still planning to also make the rest of the public content accessible as a mirror somewhere.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Hah, I just recovered some data from a banned account. It's kind of nice, because it at least contained my comment from when we sang Bohemian Rhapsody in the "Kid drugged up from dentist" thread.

Quite nostalgic.

</comment><comment><USER6> Looks like it only has 2010+ data. It didn't give me anything older then that. :(

Edit: I take that back... submits go back further, and I see a lot of submits in my export that aren't mine.

<comment><USER7> My download doesn't seem to include anything of mine.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> They would have been better off not offering this feature at all, then half assing it like they have.

My account apparently has 0 diggs and 0 comments.

Seeing that some people are getting other peoples stories and comments in their exports...well thats just sloppy!

And still no commenting system? What is this, 1999?

Quickly losing faith in the new Digg, not that I care though and not that I ever had much faith to begin with.

</comment><comment><USER9> it would be nice if they played up the option to import your data into pinboard or kippt, I almost didn't notice the links.

edit: nevermind, after you request the archive they have a much bigger page with more info: <http://i.imgur.com/M7xIy.png>

</comment><comment><USER10> Hello. I am Jay Ridgeway. The person processing the historical digg data. If you did not receive the data you expected, please send an electronic mail to email@example.com with a) your digg username or address and b) a description of the problem. I will see what I can do.

</comment><comment><USER11> Looks like they still aren't able to get the old digg and comment information out. The returned JSON had stories I had submitted going back to 2006 but nothing else. Good on the new owners for at least giving this a shot though and letting people get something out.

</comment><comment><USER12> Ummm, my data included 2 comments and four submitted stories that are certainly not mine: one on colon cleansing and three on flower related themes.

So the data is, shall we say, "incomplete" for comments and wildly wrong for submitted stories.

<comment><USER13> I participated on digg.com sporadically, and only when drunk; nevertheless, I can confidently attest that none[1] of the content in my 'archive' was ever associated with my digg.com account (and therefore, obviously, none of the actual posts and comments I made on digg.com are present in the archive).

[1]: except this one specific bit: "user":{"username":"masonmark","user_id":"298680"}

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> What they give you is very incomplete. Ironically all the data in my 'archive' was from 2010 right before the v5 collapse with all the stories about digg's own fate.

</comment><comment><USER15> Digg is a perfect example of: "Don't fix it if not broken"

</comment><comment><USER16> 0 diggs, 0 comments.. don't think so Digg

</comment><comment><USER17> What is a digg?</comment>


Boeing says 737 Max software is fixed, now it's up to the FAA - <AUTHOR> https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/05/16/737-max-boeing-software-fix-done/3697037002/ <comment><USER2> The FAA has received a lot of criticism over this 737 Max fiasco, charging that it has become Boeing's lapdog. Now's their chance to prove that it's not true.</comment>


Ask HN: Alternatives to Adsense? - <AUTHOR>

I run a site with 5M pageviews/mo which just got banned by Adsense for a single user-uploaded photo of a topless woman. Anyone have experience with other ad networks, preferably ones that are quick to get up and running? <comment><USER2> In my opinion there are no good alternatives to AdSense. Depending on your content you might be able to run CPA or CPC advertisements.

<http://www.cj.com> <http://www.peerfly.com> <http://www.maxbounty.com>

</comment><comment><USER3> You might want to get in touch with the BuySellAds guys. They've been looking for large publishers for a new ad space monetization system of some sort:

<http://buysellads.com/publishers/unreserved>

</comment><comment><USER4> As an ex-Opera employee I have to suggest Admarvel. But really there are so many articles on this I suggest you just google it.

</comment><comment><USER5> AdBrite. As extensive and reliable.

<comment><USER6> And out of business ;-)</comment></comment>


MIT 6.S094: Guest Lecturer Sacha Arnoud, Director of Engineering at Waymo - <AUTHOR> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LSX3qdy0dFg <comment><USER2> I got to talk with Sacha in person after this lecture, and it's amazing to realize just how far ahead Waymo currently is against the rest of the competition. Really looking forward to 2018 and seeing commercial public release finally happen.</comment>


Online education and Online degrees are dead - <AUTHOR> http://educationoutrage.blogspot.com/2014/05/online-education-and-online-degrees-are.html

<comment><AUTHOR> More about Roger Schank:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Schank](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Schank)</comment>


Animal welfare: where we donate, and why it matters - <AUTHOR> https://beta.observablehq.com/@henryaj/where-we-donate-and-why-it-matters <comment> Axo-Sal A really good educational resource for people! It's clearly needed since the majority don't have a clue about where the most harm is done. So upvote and share!</comment>


Drupal 8 released - <AUTHOR> https://www.drupal.org <comment><USER2> It amazes me that people still use this. Or has it gotten better?

<comment><USER3> It depends on what aspect of it you are talking about, and what time frame you are comparing it to. Drupal has _a lot_ of nice features, and once you learn how it is structured, it's very easy to extend.

For that matter, the Drupal community have been trailblazers over the last decade in many aspects of CMS design and, in turn, what people and developers expect from a CMS. I'm not saying that it is perfect, and sometimes it lags in UI, but it is always moving forward.

Personally, I'm looking forward to exploring D8.</comment></comment>


Stop calling night owls lazy, we're not - <AUTHOR> https://levels.io/night-owls/ <comment><USER2> One thing about the middle of the night - you're not liable to be interrupted. No jackhammers tearing up street gravel, no buzz saws, no lawn blowers, no phone calls, no interruptions, just uninterrupted time. Where you can concentrate intently on figuring out a program, if you want. The middle of the night is the time you can really get work done.

<comment><USER3> I agree, but the downside is that all these noises are going to wake you up the next morning, while you're trying to sleep.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Within the business environment there is an unwritten rule that applies surprisingly often: Coming into work early tends to mean you are enthusiastic and a go-getter. Staying late means you are inefficient and have poor planning.

<comment><USER5> And not being around between 10 and 3 is just flat out inconsiderate.

I'm a huge fan of flex hours. I think folks need to find a work rhythm that works for them.

But you also work _with other people_ and working such that your schedule causes conflicts with others is an enormous, inconsiderate pain in the ass.

There's nothing worse than holding a team meeting only to have Joe Night Owl never show up because he works from 12 to 9. Or trying to figure out some of Joes code only to find he's never around when the rest of the team is.

<comment><USER6> There is a high likelihood that Joe became a Night Owl because of inconsiderate colleagues.

Many developers will report higher productivity either early in the morning or late in the afternoon/early evening if they work in an office environment:

[http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/108133/are- de...](http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/108133/are-developers- more-productive-at-night)

Why? During these times, they are less interrupted or distracted by other people in the office.

Ideally, Joe could explain the situation to his manager/colleagues and find a way to work productively in the office during office hours.

My personal experience, however, despite discussions and requests not to be disturbed other than at predefined times, I still get interrupted far too often. Other people will place their "need" to get something from you over your productivity almost always.

I am currently the only developer at my office. When I work at the office I am almost always the last out the door as I _start_ getting productive as everyone else leaves for the day.

To retain some productivity and sanity, I try to work from home 2 days per week. It is telling that on those days I often feel mentally fatigued before the end of the day.

<comment><USER5> _My personal experience, however, despite discussions and requests not to be disturbed other than at predefined times, I still get interrupted far too often. Other people will place their "need" to get something from you over your productivity almost always._

That's an issue of:

1\. Office environment. 2\. Work culture.

Put folks in an open office space where they're free to "collaborate", and no great surprise folks get interrupted all the time.

My own work environment gives every engineer two person offices with a door they can shut, and we've all taken advantage of that on many occasions.

 _To retain some productivity and sanity, I try to work from home 2 days per week. It is telling that on those days I often feel mentally fatigued before the end of the day._

And that's a reasonable compromise. You're not totally prioritizing your own productivity to the exclusion of all else, but you're also arranging some "flow time".

My problem is with engineers who are chronically out of sync with the rest of their team all the time. I've personally seen how detrimental that can be to team gel and productivity.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I think one reason why 'normals' complain about night-owls is that they are secretly jealous of those who can choose their time of waking up rather than have it dictated to them. Therefore an early wake up 'builds character,' according to them anyway.

</comment><comment><USER8> Who calls night owls lazy?

1) invent a grievance

2) fiercely argue against it

<comment><USER9> I've received plenty of pushback for being a night owl.

Fortunately most of my employers have allowed flexible schedules, but school was far less accommodating. Plenty of friends have accused me of being a slack for sleeping in until noon (ignoring the fact that I'm frequently working until dawn).

When I'm home, my father always berates me for sleeping in. Even though I work a lot more than he does every day, he just perceives sleeping past 9am to be lazy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> [https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific- fundamen...](https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific- fundamentalist/201005/why-night-owls-are-more-intelligent-morning-larks)

"... more intelligent children grow up to be more nocturnal as adults than less intelligent children. "

Night owls are smarter?

</comment><comment><USER11> I don't think self-described 'Night owls' must be lazy, but they are usually non-conformist, which might make them very unsuitable for some jobs and some organizations. If I was hiring for such an organization, that factor would matter to me, even though it is obviously a poor way of assessing their potential value.

</comment><comment><USER12> _Night is the other half of life, and the better half_ \- Goethe

</comment><comment><USER13> I'm a night owl with a slipping sleeping schedule, but the psychiatrist seems to have a point about depression: there seems to be a link between perceived light, circadian clock and depression. Which is not exactly pointing a finger at all night owls, but at least to people with slipping schedules like me.

</comment><comment><USER14> It is said that a man with a reputation of waking up early can sleep in until noon.</comment>


Show HN: Building a CQRS/ES web application in Elixir using Phoenix - <AUTHOR> A case study describing how I built a web app following the Command Query Responsibility Segregation and event sourcing (CQRS/ES) pattern. In Elixir using the Phoenix Framework.
https://10consulting.com/2017/01/04/building-a-cqrs-web-application-in-elixir-using-phoenix/
It uses two open-source Elixir libraries I've authored to provide the building blocks for such applications:
* EventStore: A CQRS event store that uses PostgreSQL (v9.5 or later) as the underlying storage engine. [1]
* Commanded: Provides support for command registration and dispatch; hosting and delegation to aggregate roots; event handling; and long running process managers. [2]
It's an unorthodox approach to building Phoenix web apps. The article details why you might consider applying it.
[1] https://github.com/slashdotdash/eventstore
[2] https://github.com/slashdotdash/commanded <comment><USER2> Clickable: [https://10consulting.com/2017/01/04/building-a-cqrs-web- appl...](https://10consulting.com/2017/01/04/building-a-cqrs-web-application- in-elixir-using-phoenix/)

</comment><comment><USER3> Thanks for this. Very in-depth. I just started toying around with ES in Elixir and this definitely helps.

Can the source for the application be found anywhere?

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry, the case study web application is closed source.

I plan to build an open-source reference application. I'll write-up the process, with links to commits, as I go. There's a mailing list on my site, or subscribe to the RSS feed, to stay informed.</comment></comment>


Dow plunges 1100 points as coronavirus market tumbling into correction territory - <AUTHOR> https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/26/dow-futures-fall-after-microsoft-issues-coronavirus-warning.html <comment><USER2> Ah yes, the old "use digital currency as an N95 mask" defense against pandemic virality.</comment>


Google is not the answer: How the digital age imperils history - <AUTHOR> http://www.salon.com/2015/05/30/google_is_not_the_answer_how_the_digital_age_imperils_history/

<comment><USER2> Having recently copied old HDD to a NAS, I dug up some data that mattered a lot at that time (chats, picture and video collections) and now it seems like it was unnecessary. Most of it belong to the past and has no real significance.

I see the value of collectors of certain kinds of public goods (games, art, ...). Since they will take care of their passion while previous owners can let go of now worthless objects.</comment>


Is the Answer to Phone Addiction a Worse (grayscale) Phone? - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/12/technology/grayscale-phone.html <comment><USER2> [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.leedroid.s...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.leedroid.shortcutter&hl=en)

In anyone was wondering how to quick toggle grayscale on android. I came across a couple of articles on breaking phone addiction by using a grayscale filter awhile back, but couldn't figure out how to toggle it quickly in Android. This app (not affiliated) is able to after granting secure settings permission via ADB. Pretty happy so far.</comment>


Ask HN: Who do you follow on Twitter? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> I'm also curious about this, I've just joined twitter and I'm looking for accounts to follow

</comment><comment><USER3> John Carmack posts some interesting stuff from time to time.

</comment><comment><USER4> BernieSanders

</comment><comment><USER5> For tech related follows:

I tend to follow some prominent people in the programming languages / frameworks I'm interested in, which is mainly Rails and Elixir / Phoenix things. As I've gotten more interested in DevOps type things I've found people in that space also. And then some prominent VCs and other random people in tech I've come across.

The interesting thing is that the 'X Person liked this' feature that injects tweets of people you don't follow into your timeline actually works wonders for finding more people in tech to follow. I've stumbled into following people with very different backgrounds / viewpoints as myself to be more informed of the greater scope of the tech world.

A list of some of the people: [https://twitter.com/mipsytipsy](https://twitter.com/mipsytipsy) [https://twitter.com/IanColdwater](https://twitter.com/IanColdwater) [https://twitter.com/martinfowler](https://twitter.com/martinfowler) [https://twitter.com/wycats](https://twitter.com/wycats) [https://twitter.com/polotek](https://twitter.com/polotek) [https://twitter.com/ChrisKeathley](https://twitter.com/ChrisKeathley) [https://twitter.com/samsaffron](https://twitter.com/samsaffron) [https://twitter.com/vsupalov](https://twitter.com/vsupalov) [https://twitter.com/nateberkopec](https://twitter.com/nateberkopec) [https://twitter.com/redrapids](https://twitter.com/redrapids) [https://twitter.com/keystonelemur](https://twitter.com/keystonelemur) [https://twitter.com/kelseyhightower](https://twitter.com/kelseyhightower) [https://twitter.com/pragdave](https://twitter.com/pragdave) [https://twitter.com/jessfraz](https://twitter.com/jessfraz) [https://twitter.com/searls](https://twitter.com/searls) [https://twitter.com/wbruce](https://twitter.com/wbruce) [https://twitter.com/ChrisGSeaton](https://twitter.com/ChrisGSeaton) [https://twitter.com/eileencodes](https://twitter.com/eileencodes) [https://twitter.com/sasajuric](https://twitter.com/sasajuric) [https://twitter.com/dhh](https://twitter.com/dhh) [https://twitter.com/josevalim](https://twitter.com/josevalim) [https://twitter.com/chris_mccord](https://twitter.com/chris_mccord) [https://twitter.com/benedictevans](https://twitter.com/benedictevans) [https://twitter.com/tenderlove](https://twitter.com/tenderlove) [https://twitter.com/pmarca](https://twitter.com/pmarca) [https://twitter.com/davemcclure](https://twitter.com/davemcclure) [https://twitter.com/bhorowitz](https://twitter.com/bhorowitz)</comment>


'Artificial egg' made from plants set to revolutionize cooking - <AUTHOR> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2416808/Artificial-egg-PLANTS-backed-Bill-Gates-set-revolutionize-cooking-goes-sale-Whole-Foods.html

<comment><AUTHOR> >> _The team today started selling their 'plant egg', called Beyond Eggs, in Whole Foods in California - and say it could soon be available in supermarkets worldwide._

It's also backed by Bill Gates.</comment>


Tesla Smart Summon Videos: Parking Lots Are a Problem - <AUTHOR> https://arstechnica.com/cars/2019/10/i-watched-over-100-tesla-smart-summon-videos-heres-what-i-learned/ <comment><AUTHOR> TL;DR from the comments: "Pretty clearly, Smart Summon would frequently fail a driving test administered by even the most lenient DMV examiner.... A better name for this feature would be _Court Summons._ "

<comment><USER2> This seems like a product that was very obviously rushed to release. That sort of blasé behavior toward customer safety doesn't strike as a good look from Tesla.</comment></comment>


Banana taped to wall which sold for $120k eaten in front of crowd - <AUTHOR> https://news.sky.com/story/banana-taped-to-wall-which-sold-for-120k-eaten-in-front-of-crowd-11881268 <comment><USER2> It would have been black and rotten in a week anyway. Best to eat it while it's still edible.</comment>


WebSDR: Software-Defined Radio receiver connected to the internet - <AUTHOR> http://websdr.org/

<comment><USER2> I will do this one day.</comment>


PLEAC-Haskell - <AUTHOR> http://pleac.sourceforge.net/pleac_haskell/

<comment><USER2> Are there any plans by the maintainers to get off of SourceForge? I realize it doesn't have the risk of distributing binaries, but still, any time I see SourceForge now it's a huge red flag.

<comment><USER3> [http://sourceforge.net/p/pleac/code/](http://sourceforge.net/p/pleac/code/)

CVS?? Now there's a name I've not heard in a long time... a long time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> PLEAC is a good resource as long as you watch out for the Blub paradox. "But when our hypothetical Blub programmer looks in the other direction, up the power continuum, he doesn't realize he's looking up. What he sees are merely weird languages. He probably considers them about equivalent in power to Blub, but with all this other hairy stuff thrown in as well." [[http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?BlubParadox](http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?BlubParadox)]

<comment> vezzy-fnord Wasn't the Blub paradox particularly in relation to dynamic languages with advanced metaprogramming capabilities?

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Looks like SF is falling apart, every link I try from the PLEAC home page gives me a guru meditation error. Pity, because it sounds like a worthwhile resource, a shame too because SF used to be so good. This is the sort of thing that really should be on some kind of distributed file system so that it is not beholden to any one organization. I could give some space and a few kB/s of bandwidth.

</comment><comment><USER6> This is awesome. I've never heard of PLEAC before but it's exactly what I want to see when starting a new language. Idioms and best practices are much easier to grasp when factoring out superficial differences.

</comment><comment><USER7> PLEAC is absolutely the best resource if you are an experienced programmer in the throes of learning a new language.

</comment><comment><USER8> Great resource. Why does it not cover files/directories, databases or sockets/Internet which is where I could most benefit?</comment>


Taking the Leap - <AUTHOR> http://swombat.com/2013/3/15/taking-the-leap

<comment><USER2> I don't remember ever taking a Leap.

I think it's because I moved from Employee to Contractor, to Consultant/Occasional Contractor before I really got deep into building products that it never seemed like I was in a particularly scary place.

I was already spending several months at a time voluntarily without work, and taking contracts when I needed to. The only real difference was that instead of travelling and rockclimbing full time during those breaks, I was parking it in one spot with the laptop and writing code. And I guess I started referring to those consulting gigs as "bootstrapping".

That might be a good path to look into if you want to make the transition from "guy in a cubicle" to "dot-com thousandaire". There's plenty of room to take it slow.

<comment><USER3> I am really curious, can you go into a bit more detail as to what each those transitions meant for you, and how you went about doing them?

For example what exactly the move from employee to contractor entailed, or the one from contractor to consultant?

<comment><USER2> Moving to contract work is pretty straightforward. It's essentially just finding a new job. Lots of places prefer to hire contractors for individual projects, so it's not too tough to pick up a 3/6/9 month contract someplace.

Most contractors tend to try to move from one contract to the next with as little downtime as possible, or work for an agency that sorts it all out for them. For me, the downtime was the big payoff, since contracting pays roughly double what a salaried job does. If you have no attachments, you can spend a fair amount of time slacking off before picking up another contract. I used to push it as far as 9 months off between 3 month contracts and still put plenty into savings.

Repeat the above enough times, and you'll be able to break off work that doesn't require you to be on site, or pick up work from new clients from word of mouth. Some people refer to this as freelancing, but then they don't get to charge as much if they use that term in front of a client. Naturally, it's best to describe yourself as a consultant instead, and double your rate again.

<comment><USER4> The transition from full-time to contracting is what terrifies me. Having to constantly look for a new job every few months just worries me. Of course, it's probably because I am the sole breadwinner for my family but how do you overcome that sort of paralyzing fear? I've had thoughts that maybe I will do it later on down the road when everything is more settled but I don't know if things will ever be "settled".

<comment><USER2> It definitely helps to establish a reputation for yourself before you take off and start contracting. You should be at the point where you know without a doubt that you could send out a few emails (or respond to one of the standing offers in your inbox) and pick up another gig. As such, "paralyzing fear" never came into the equation for me or any of the successful contractors I know.

And of course once you've done it a few times, you'll have previous employers bringing you back in for more projects. So at most you might only need to go through that fear stage a few times before you've established yourself.

<comment><USER5> > _"It definitely helps to establish a reputation for yourself before you take > off and start contracting."_

Does this mean moonlighting and taking side gigs? If so, can it be done without sacrificing personal/family life? Not to mention, possibly living with exhaustion.

<comment><USER2> No. Just work for a few different companies and demonstrate that you're the best guy on the team to the people who matter. Eventually you'll get a call from a guy who's putting together a team and got your name from one of your old managers as somebody who's good at that sort of thing.

Of course, it never hurts to build cool, visible things that you can point to when people ask what you're capable of.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Thanks for the post! It couldn't have come at a better time for me. I'm actually in the process of quitting my "real" job (next Friday is my last day). I'm completely terrified but so thrilled to do something that's exciting, scary, and where I will undoubtedly learn a ton.

<comment><USER7> Congrats! I wish you good luck and prosperity. :-)

I am in a similar position. Starting in April, I'm dropping my full-time employment down to 3 days/week to give myself time to start building my business. It's exciting to put things in motion and stop dreaming, hoping, wishing, and other effectively useless activities.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> "Do not take funding...For most new entrepreneurs, investment is a cushion that delays their learning. If you're thinking of raising investment to cover your personal costs, don't - instead, learn to make money. It's really not that hard."

You said this was controversial so I don't feel at all bad for refuting this. I'll start by agreeing with the idea that making money is a learning experience and entrepreneurs should do whatever it takes to make money...but don't forget these two things:

1) An investment is way more than the money. If you accept an investment round from a reputable investor, you are accepting mentorship--in the form of recruiting help, connections to other companies or industries, not to mention an investment is made to help an entrepreneur to scale so the company can make money at an exponential rate.

2) Some companies do not strive to make money initially--their goal is to create a great product for their users--but for their service to continue, they need money to operate and scale...this is has been especially true in social media, case in point with Pinterest. Pinterest has raised a shit ton of money, but haven't started monetizing to a great extent. If they had just gone for the money from the beginning, whether through ads or what not (and this applies to even Facebook), their service would probably have been far less attractive and usage significantly lower. Many times, monetizing is about timing. Pinterest WILL monetize as Facebook did and Twitter is figuring out, but it has come after a while of being in establishment. Without investment, these companies would again, not be where they are today. That money is absolutely necessary to keep operations going, whether its through labor, scaling, office space, etc.

So your companies may have been revenue-generating from the beginning, and if that's the case then by all means, making money and not taking investments is decently good (still controversial) advice but that advice is not applicable to companies that aren't revenue-generating in the beginning. You can't forget about these companies as they actually tend to be what consumers move towards and is exactly why when companies like these do monetize, they are able to.

<comment><USER9> Counter-counter point:

1) Yes, but you can get the mentorship without the burden of the investment, which locks you into a specific idea and protects you from learning how to make money.

2) Absolutely correct. If you're just starting out, don't start one of those companies. These are great companies to start _after_ you've built something profitable and learned the basics of running a successful business. Why not start a lottery ticket company (that's how I call them) first? Because they're harder and less likely to succeed. I'm a big fan of setting yourself up to succeed. :-)

<comment><USER8> 1) What if your company is indeed growing but not scaling at the rate that it needs? An investment would boost that ability correct? An owner would be able to hire more employees, perhaps buy more necessary technology, etc.

2) I don't think that is good advice. Zuckerberg had built things previous to Facebook but never anything that made money. I am not as familiar with Twitter and Pinterest's founders but I don't believe they had money-making businesses before. If a service is good and attracts people, why not build it??

<comment><USER9> 1) Then you're not in the "early founder who just jumped out of the corporate world" ship anymore. Congrats. You're now the owner of a successful business looking to scale.

2) That's a lottery ticket, not a plan. 99.9% of the facebook-alikes failed so miserably you didn't even hear about them. That's roundabout your chances if you go that way. I wouldn't quite my job for a 0.1% chance of making it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Interesting skydiving analogy. The overall advice maps pretty closely to general guidelines for going into the literal sport.

1\. Cut personal costs to a minimum.

Skydiving is an expensive sport. You can and will spend thousands just to get the lowest level USPA license. Plan to make cuts so you can plan to jump regularly. Being too cheap or having an irregular jump schedule is not good for you, especially when starting out.

2\. Do not take funding.

In a few cases, a drop zone might let you clean bathrooms and pack parachutes in exchange for student jumps. However, taking out loans isn't worth it in the long run.

3\. Connect with mentors and peers and listen to them.

Skydivers are full of opinions some of which are well-intentioned. However, the wise student will listen to their skydiving instructor and take advice from non-instructors ( or "peers" in general) with a very big grain of salt. This includes advice from the Internet.

4\. Don't tie yourself to one idea.

It's smart to have a plan but you have to make sure you have a plan B or C both in freefall and while flying a parachute. The situation on any given skydive can turn on a dime and you have to be ready to react without panicking.

5\. Don't make plans or set deadlines.

The tag line for that is a bit deceiving with respect to what the advice here actually says. You DO want to plan your skydive. The bit about "not looking back" once you commit I can buy. Once you're out of the plane, it's obviously too late to change your mind and go back in.

</comment><comment><USER11> "The mistakes that killed or maimed Vocalix and Woobius, my previous two startups, were not very original. They were awfully predictable."

Has Daniel written a post-mortem about them somewhere?

<comment><USER9> There were so many things that killed Vocalix that that's kind of smeared across multiple blog posts, like:

[http://inter-sections.net/2008/05/07/13-tips-for- creating-a-...](http://inter-sections.net/2008/05/07/13-tips-for-creating-a- successful-new-online-product)

[http://danieltenner.com/post/32887444139/0005-starting-up- wi...](http://danieltenner.com/post/32887444139/0005-starting-up-with-a- friend-html)

[http://swombat.com/2011/3/14/fit-your-product-to-the- right-m...](http://swombat.com/2011/3/14/fit-your-product-to-the-right-market)

Both ended in a somewhat messy way (in fact, Woobius is still not quite ended) so I didn't feel like there was a clear point to draw a line and write a post- mortem.

<comment><USER4> Thanks for writing the article and for sharing what went wrong. I really love your advice for not taking funding and connecting with mentors and peers.

I'm sitting in my comfortable chair so I don't know what the other side of the field feels like but I am curious about the advice regarding not setting plans or deadlines. This might be a personal thing but I always found myself more focused and more likely to do something if I have a plan and/or deadline.

Does your advice specifically mean don't go back to the corporate world by X months or does it extend to all aspects of trying to find that right idea?

<comment><USER9> The advice there is specifically about not setting a plan that "if it's not successful in 6 months, I'll go back to this other job in a corporation" - because I can practically guarantee you the deadline will pass without the desired success and it will just make you feel bad, or worse, you might have made a public commitment and then maybe you'll actually go through with it.

So, do make plans about what you'll achieve, but don't make plans to "achieve it in X months or go back to the corporate world".

<comment><USER4> I can see the relevance in that. Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Great post Daniel.

Food for thought: I also took money for my first ($10s of millions), and while I did OK I'm no philanthropist. (Odds are high that the bits you are reading traveled through equipment that my company built.)

It might be: Because of taking money the first time that we appreciate the ability of dialing back the burn to zero and building from scratch. Investors are rarely worth it.

</comment><comment><USER13> This was a great write up - thanks! Taking the leap is especially scary, particularly when I've got a mortgage and so many bills. I hope to make it one day.

</comment><comment><USER14> For me it is a crazy leap, I have huge student debts, some other random debts, normal corporate jobs don't pay enough to cover the debts, and finally, there are no bankruptcy for individuals in Brazil, you stay forever in debt, and when you die relatives inherit your debt.

<comment><USER9> That sounds pretty terrible... is there a way for you to escape from this crazy country to one where you can declare bankruptcy? It sounds like you're basically in indenture servitude at the moment.

<comment><USER15> Even in the US, declaring bankruptcy won't get rid of student loans.

<comment><USER16> That was because a lot of students were abusing the older bankruptcy law to get rid of their student debt immediately upon graduating.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> It'd be nice if the title were changed from "Taking the Leap" to "Taking the leap"; as well as being the true title of the article, it would remove any potential confusion with the Leap Motion devices. (I know I was initially uncertain which it would be talking about, though I considered the correct one more probable.)</comment>


PDF with the official list of SOPA supporters was removed? - <AUTHOR> http://judiciary.house.gov/issues/Rouge%20Websites/SOPA%20Supporters.pdf?

<comment><USER2> You've misspelled 'Rogue' in the URL. The correct spelling yields a PDF.

<comment><USER3> Wasn't the actual file on house.gov misspelled as "Rouge" originally, and now apparently corrected?

<comment><USER2> I have no idea; that's possible.</comment></comment></comment>