Fun - a new programming language for the realtime web - <AUTHOR> http://marcuswest.in/read/fun-intro/ "What if you could build realtime web apps with the same ease as you build static web pages in PHP today? Without long polling, event handling and state synchronization, the engineering complexity of realtime web applications would drop by an order of magnitude. There would be a fundamental shift in the way we build the realtime web. This is the future of Fun." <comment><USER2> Quote - "What if you could build realtime web apps with the same ease as you build static web pages in PHP today?"

It's interesting how far we've come, no? PHP-based pages were once considered dynamic.

<comment><USER3> I'll play devil's advocate:

Building static PHP pages is easy (and is demonstrated in the first block of code). So easy it's hard to beat by a significant margin, especially for small projects like this seems geared towards.

Building dynamic - much less real-time - PHP pages is not-so-easy, and certainly not _that_ easy. At absolute simplest you have to look into JavaScript as well.

<comment><USER2> I'll admit I was a bit cryptic with my remark. :D I was considering things from a server standpoint when I wrote that comment, and from that sandpoint it's extremely obvious that PHP is dynamic, since the page is constructed every time.

But after a few minutes I realized that if you look at it from the client's point of view, the rendered page really is static. It's not always the same between requests, but once it's rendered, it's not likely to change. So you're right in that respect!

What I got a kick out of is that my remark could be taken both with and without its tongue-in-cheek intent. It really _is_ amazing that, once upon a time, PHP was considered dynamic. And now we want more!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> From a cursory reading, this isn't particularly new, even on the web. Essentially what he's done is implement bindings/key value observing, but with a new syntax instead of the one we already know (i.e., javascript). On the desktop Cocoa has done this very well, and on the web Cappuccino and SproutCore have copied the cocoa approach. There are also more lightweight libraries that provide binding support without a heavy framework.

<comment><AUTHOR> The difference is the realtime synchronization across all clients. Fun comes with a complete network stack, ensuring that the state you're viewing is always up to date. Does that make sense? I actually do think that's a new value proposition.

<comment><USER5> Still, creating a new language just for bindings (across all clients) still doesn't make sense to me. A good javascript library or framework should be good enough.

<comment><AUTHOR> There's a javascript library under the hood that does just that: <http://github.com/marcuswestin/fin>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> What they are describing is essentially data binding at the language level. The thing to keep in mind is that "out of sight, out of mind" data binding can result in very slow code, but it's a fantastic pattern for UI dev.

<comment><AUTHOR> The bottleneck with Fun is going to be the network latency.

Any piece of UI that needs extra care, e.g. a very long list of items, is implemented in javascript with appropriate lazy rendering.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> This certainly is an interesting idea. It seems to me though that all of your application logic is jammed into a single file at the presentation layer. This might suffice for very small apps, and that's fine if it is your goal. I can't imagine that you just define all of your logic in one file.

How would you go about reusing code? Could you potentially separate out logic from your template?

I would also like to see how this could be done more unobtrusively. It would also be good to show what the output html looks like after it is compiled to html.

<comment><AUTHOR> Absolutely!

You can declare something akin to a function, which takes arguments and emits HTML. Imagine e.g.

        let taskTemplate = template(task) {

                  task.title

        }

        for (task in tasks) { taskTemplate(task) }

I'm not decided on syntax yet.

You can definitely separate out logic from template this way.

Fun outputs javascript, not HTML - the javascript then builds the DOM.

<comment><USER8> But it still outputs something that is only consumable by web browsers. It seems to me like the potential productivity gains you'd get out of Fun would only be for tightly coupled systems where you're not worried about exposing an API, and all clients use web browsers.

<comment><USER9> Web browsers are not so "only" :) pretty good platform to start with if you're going to pick one

<comment><USER8> Yes but not a great platform to get locked into. What if tomorrow your client asks for a native iPhone app?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Actually, there's a lot more to it than simple 'key/value' binding, depending on how it's implemented. It allows you to build very live pages that are driven directly off your data model. Normally, websites build dynamic content using a templating system on the backend, but live updates need to be done in a horribly awkward manner using a Javascript builder syntax or manually gluing together things in JS. This avoids this problem and unifies it into one nice syntax.

I built a similar language like this powered a site of mine that was actually in production (well, Alpha) - and it was a huge productivity boost, resulting in far more interactive pages. (The site never got out of alpha, and never had designer love, so it's stale, but you can see it at <http://www.magnifeast.com> \- try entering a los angeles address).

The downsides to this approach are compatibility (most libraries won't work out of the box), SEO, and performance problems for generating large pages (particularly in IE).

(BTW: this is a secondary account, I'm normally sshumaker - noprocast rule and all).

<comment><AUTHOR> Why not open source what you have?

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> A similar sort of thing is already possible using the NOLOH PHP Framework (<http://www.noloh.com>) using its Listener Control. Using a quick example similar to the post you can simply do something like: <http://noloh.diffpaste.com/#/691/>. Furthermore, you can specify the various options, whether it's stream, short-poll, or long-polling.

A video demonstrating it from this past March's Confoo web conference can be found here: [http://www.youtube.com/phpframework#p/c/C102458C2FFD8ACF/7/8...](http://www.youtube.com/phpframework#p/c/C102458C2FFD8ACF/7/8r0FR0Dx4zE)

We're also planning to add a more direct syntax in the future so that you can easily set properties of objects directly to a changing data source without having to handle the assignment in a controlled callback, which we initially mandate due to taking the cautious route, thus allowing you to handle for data and security issues.

Disclaimer: I'm a co-founder of NOLOH

<comment><USER12> Looks rather interesting. I'm not sure I follow licensing options. So it's a framework one cannot use for free in commercial projects? Also, are there any performance reviews of it and is that "Loading..." configurable or hardwired? Thanks.

edit: I may be out of the loop a bit, but how does google and other spiders crawl pages like that?

<comment><USER11> Loading is configurable, it's just an object like anything else. See LoadIndicator <http://dev.noloh.com/#/api/WebPage/LoadIndicator/>.

We're sorry about the confusion regarding licensing. Essentially free for anything non-commercial (open-source, educational, non-profit), and development. We offer free hosted sandboxes, in addition to free downloads for developing.

Essentially, you only pay when you go live with a commercial product, and even then we offer affordable options. There will be a comprehensive performance review in an upcoming issue of php|architect magazine. Since the framework is built from the ground-up to be lightweight and on-demand the result is considerable. You can read more about that here: [http://www.noloh.com/#/home/&expanded=performance](http://www.noloh.com/#/home/&expanded=performance).

In regards to the spidering question, see: <http://dev.noloh.com/#/articles/Search-Engine-Friendly/>.

You can also read a comprehensive article in this past May's cover story in php|architect, <http://www.phparch.com/magazine/2010/may/>.

<comment><AUTHOR> Fun is MIT licensed :)

[http://github.com/marcuswestin/fun/commit/05870f3f54fda43090...](http://github.com/marcuswestin/fun/commit/05870f3f54fda430909dddc9ee47311987e5410b)

<comment><USER11> We feel that NOLOH is significantly advanced to warrant a small fee for commercial purposes. As you can see from my previous post we offer several free license options, including free licenses for open-source projects.

Fortunately/Unfortunately (depending on your viewpoint), we live in a capitalistic society and need to recoup some of the costs associated with our team's development over the past six years.

Furthermore, we open-source every new module and component on our github either through an MIT or BSD license. We've even taken the unprecedented step of integrating github into our site as can be read here: [http://dev.noloh.com/#/blog/2010/06/30/demos-demos- everywher...](http://dev.noloh.com/#/blog/2010/06/30/demos-demos-everywhere/).

Like Google, we open source anything non-related to the NOLOH core. Similarly , they don't release the details or the code to their search engine. Also, we're working on legalize that would open source the core if anything were to happen to us.

<comment><USER13> Your comparison with Google is flawed, google does not ship the core software to third parties for integration in to their product, it's purely a service. So google not shipping their core as open source has a different impact on their users than NOLOH releasing the source of their core would have on theirs.

<comment><USER11> So if we were to create a WebApp then it's perfectly okay for it to be closed, but as soon as we decide to write tools, then it has to be open?

As was mentioned in the previous post, we try our best to open source anything non-central to the core. We also try our best to document everything within the core and provide you the ability to extend and override anything, thus reducing any real need for the source to be open. We're even working on legalese to ensure that the source would be opened in any catastrophic event to the company. What else can we do?

Whether or not NOLOH is open has the same amount of impact on our users. If they have an issue they report it and we fix it, furthermore, they could override any functionality in the meantime if they so desired.

Essentially, it seems that you're arguing that nobody is allowed to charge for development tools anymore. We should just open it up, and donate all that time, money and R&D. If we want to eat we should be creating WebApps, rather than creating the tools to help you make yours.

<comment><USER13> > So if we were to create a WebApp then it's perfectly okay for it to be > closed, but as soon as we decide to write tools, then it has to be open?

Ideally, yes.

> As was mentioned in the previous post, we try our best to open source > anything non-central to the core.

Those parts are not relevant to the continuity of businesses and those parts will not benefit from being open from my point of view (many eyes, user contributions) as the core would.

> We also try our best to document everything within the core and provide you > the ability to extend and override anything, thus reducing any real need for > the source to be open.

For those parts where you decide that is the case.

> We're even working on legalese to ensure that the source would be opened in > any catastrophic event to the company. What else can we do?

Open it up. Live dangerously. Look at where it took MySQL.

> Whether or not NOLOH is open has the same amount of impact on our users. If > they have an issue they report it and we fix it, furthermore, they could > override any functionality in the meantime if they so desired.

That's good.

> Essentially, it seems that you're arguing that nobody is allowed to charge > for development tools anymore.

No, I never said that. _You_ can keep it closed and charge as much as you want, but _I_ would _like_ it to be open source. Think of it as potential user feedback.

> We should just open it up, and donate all that time, money and R&D.

...

> If we want to eat we should be creating WebApps, rather than creating the > tools to help you make yours.

Look, I understand exactly where you're coming from. I used to write licensed software for a living (the first version of the webcam software was a nice example, it did several hundred K in turnover annually at some point) but I've seen the writing on the wall and closed source is not going to be around forever for code such as this. Right now you have first mover advantage, you have a very solid codebase that you have put your time and effort in and if you can roll out fast enough and wide enough you can cement your position for the next 10 years or more.

By open sourcing it you cut off the route where some other group of smart guys with spare time on their hands looks at what NOLOH does and re-implements it. You don't create lock-in with tools the way Microsoft could do it with office, we're not talking about end-users, we're talking about developers here.

They already understand the way their job is done and to a very large extent that means that they've learned the downside of relying on closed source. And as a result plenty of them now have a very simple policy: Toolchain to create my product has to be open. Especially on the BSD and linux platforms, less so on Mac and Windows.

The stuff you've built is aimed squarely at that BSD and Linux fraction of the market, the portion where the resistance against closed source is going to be the strongest, you're building on top of PHP which itself is an open source product.

So the whole chain from OS, language, probably the db and the primary language is open, then you insert a DSL or middleware (however you want that to be classed) and you undo all that.

So you'll find some resistance to your policy. But I find the concepts embodied in NOLOH interesting enough that I've signed up for a trial license, so who knows, I might even overcome my dislike for your licensing policies.

Note that MySQL made some very good money by dual licensing their product and eventually a huge exit. It's not impossible.

<comment><USER11> Thank you for signing up for a trial license, and thank you for the mention in your recent blog post.

It's interesting you chose MySQL as an example, since they in fact didn't open-source everything, the Enterprise stuff as I recall was/is still closed.

Don't get me wrong, we would open source the core if we could, the problem we have with that is that we're not large enough to fend off a competing framework from implementing or cherry picking our technology, whether it's a direct copy, or a derivation. Once that's done, what's the incentive for anyone to try NOLOH? The more established tool may not feel the same, but on a comparison grid they would still be able to check off whatever feature we provide.

They may not have the vision, and the experience won't be the same, but for many users that won't matter.

<comment><USER13> I can see several possible routes out of that swamp:

\- the ransom model

\- find an investor that is able to fend off a competing framework in the marketplace (drupal has raised a fair amount of money on top of an open framework)

\- take the plunge and drop licensing as your income stream in favor of another model

The reason why I picked MySQL is because I think they're the poster child for the situation you're in.

At this point you're trying to sell bibles to the satanists, you are aiming a closed source product squarely at the most die hard fanatic open source portion of the market.

The money is in the services, the (enterprise) support and the fame & glory related income (speaking engagements, that sort of thing), and if you want an enterprise version that technically should be classed as a freemium model.

The road you're on right now I can see enough frustration building on both sides of the divide (wannabe NOLOH users that insist on open source and yourselves) that at some point someone might just get up and build it. Then you've got even bigger problems. Open source is an ecosystem, if you want to play around in that ecosystem (and that's where you are) you can try to adapt to the ecosystem or you can - by virtue of the quality of your product and your unique value proposition - try to adapt the ecosystem to you.

Entities that resist the general trends and conventions in an ecosystem are usually called food ;)

I'm not aware of any company that has successfully managed to do that outside of the CAD/CAM world (varicad, specifically) and even that is not strictly speaking a developer tool.

If NOLOH is as great as it seems to be then the open source route would probably be the more profitable one in the longer term, even if in the shorter term it would mean a complete loss of license income. The 'ransom' model might get you over that hump.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Is it just me or does this seem like a "Fun" way to code up an unmaintainable mess?

Some of the ideas such as the state synchronization stuff is neat, but would probably be better suited as part of another framework/template language.

<comment><AUTHOR> Totally - remains to be seen!

Someone should take the underlying realtime datastore (<http://github.com/marcuswestin/fin>) and bundle it with mustache or <angular/>!

<comment><USER15> <http://github.com/ahe/choco> bundles a different js datastore (js-model) with sammy and has mustache support

<comment><AUTHOR> Nice - the relevant fin API used under the hood by Fun is dead simple:

        fin.set(id, property, value)
        fin.observe(id, property, function callback(mutation){})

Would be rockin to see if we could hook up fin to js-model!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Reminds me of how Flex does data binding, but with the added feature of blurring server and client. I don't think I like this idea, and I'm not sure it would save me code or headache in the long run... Still neat though.

</comment><comment><USER17> I notice that you haven't technically OSSed it yet (not released under any license). Is this just an oversight?

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry about that - fixed in [http://github.com/marcuswestin/fun/commit/05870f3f54fda43090...](http://github.com/marcuswestin/fun/commit/05870f3f54fda430909dddc9ee47311987e5410b)

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> The "Fun" language looks a lot like Ruby and the Camping web framework with inline Markaby templates created by Why (the lucky stiff): <http://camping.rubyforge.org/>

It's 4k of pure ruby art. Check it out.

</comment><comment><USER19> "To bind an element that reflects a piece of state to a piece of data, all you do is set data attribute in the element."

Reminds me bit of register globals. And generally blurring the line between clientside and serverside processing feels bit scary.

</comment><comment><USER20> For those of us who gravitate toward the code examples instead of the English it would be more clear to leave out the PHP example at the very beginning. Took me a moment to figure out what was going on.

<comment><AUTHOR> Good feedback! I had the time to add a simple

        // PHP code

and

        // Fun code

comments at the top of the code examples. Not great but hopefully helpful :) This was meant to be a high-level intro. I'll be diving into explaining the nitty gritty of the language next month.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Jemplate, anyone? This was already done.

<comment><AUTHOR> Jemplate does not do the realtime stat synchronization across browsers I don't think

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> This is really awesome!

</comment><comment><USER23> Sounds fun</comment>


Ask YC: Should a startup's business model be kept secret? - <AUTHOR>

While most startups are focused on making something people want and getting users, they might have half an eye on a business model.<p>The thing is, should business models (whether it's advertising, a buyout, etc.) be kept secret? <comment><USER2> Depends. I can think of some business models that would offend your users if they knew about them, so they should not be publicized (whether they should be pursued at all is something else):

\- planned obsolescence (cars, electronics)

\- vendor lock in (iPod/iTunes, MSFT Office)

\- selling personal information (magazines, social networking apps)

</comment><comment><USER3> Great article I found on /. a few years back which I still find relevant today, Cult of the NDA:

<http://www.frozennorth.org/C509291565/E1939404619/>

"To all those entrepreneurs with innovative, unique business ideas who want to capitalize on them before someone else does, I have one piece of advice: Get over it. "

You have a lot to gain by bouncing ideas off of friends and getting some honest feedback. Why deprive yourself of that?

</comment><comment><USER4> Unless a business model is truly (REALLY truly) innovative, there shouldn't be any reason to keep it secret--users care about the product and its cost (be it monetary or otherwise) to them, investors would be silly to invest were they not aware of the models, and even in many cases of an innovative model, the model itself may draw added attention. There are obviously exceptions, but generally speaking I think startups have bigger things to worry about than who knows what their business model is.

<comment><AUTHOR> Right, it makes sense to tell investors--otherwise, they'd be crazy to just throw money at you.

So far, I find that there really isn't much to keep secret. The only things that people seem to keep secret are technological sauce, # of users, amount of income, and future plans, are what come to mind.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Call me stupid but I don't get the whole "People love my product, but I don't know how I will make money..."

 _HOW IS IT A BUSINESS IF YOU CANT MAKE MONEY?_

I tend to take a more traditional approach to considering my idea's as businesses. If there is no cut & dry method of monetization I don't waste anymore time on it.

<comment><USER6> The solution to the conundrum: don't know != can't.

<comment><USER5> Of course, but why waste time on something you "don't know" will work.

Why not optimize on time and go with something that will work ( that can make money ), and save those hours spent on the "cool free thing" for later (aka your own time). It's just _one less problem_ in the future.

At least in my opinion. I mean viaweb had idea of how they (you) were going to make money right?

<comment><USER6> _why waste time on something you "don't know" will work_

For the same reason that I'm willing to fly to any large airport without knowing for sure that there will be a taxi waiting. There almost always is. And there almost always is a way to make money out of anything a lot of people find useful.

<comment><USER5> Reflected on that for a minute and I'd say you are right.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> unless you're doing something truly unique with it or by giving it away you give away your startup's idea which itself might be somehow secretive, why bother keeping it secret? seems like it would be more of a hindrance than a benefit

<comment><USER8> ie, if you have a patent pending on it.. keep it secret until then.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> No, someone has probably tried it before.

</comment><comment><USER10> this is the same as the "are ideas worthless?" debate. Your business model is nothing more than "your idea of how you will generate income". therefore some may think it is only as valuable as your experience and your credibility. a buyout is an exit not a business model. your plan will remain secret as long as you are not making money. my advice is tell your investors how you will make money if they ask, and let anyone else figure it out on their own.</comment>


Apple Reports Third Quarter Results - <AUTHOR> http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2012/07/24Apple-Reports-Third-Quarter-Results.html <comment><AUTHOR> The truly amazing number from this Q3 results, is not that it has missed most analyst estimates (and that's what the tech press will focus on), but that it has generated $41.7bn of accumulated cash flow during the first 9 months. That's +54% jump from the previous year's 9 months accumulated cash flow ($27.1bn).

That is record breaking, whatever the benchmark.

</comment><comment><USER2> Crossposting from the other thread, I thought this was the best part of the earnings call...

From Jacqui Cheng's liveblog of the call on ars:

Q: Can you talk about what your conversations are like with carriers in terms of pricing, subsidies, etc.?

Tim Cook: (laughing out loud)

I don't want to talk about specifics with carriers, but generally I'd say our role is to make the very best smartphone in the world that has an incredible user experience that's far superior than anything else, that customers want to use every day at the end of the day, carriers want to provide what customers want to buy the most important thing for Apple is to continue making the best products in the world. we are maniacally focused on it

</comment><comment><USER3> Mountain Lion tomorrow eh?

<comment><USER4> And maybe new iMacs? Need more than one sub-model to show off that OS X "retina" support.

(please please please...)

<comment><USER5> Well if the rumored plans are true new iMacs will be coming out towards the end of the year. The 13inch MacBook Pro is the next Retina in line.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> As impressive as this is, it is below analyst consensus, and the stock is down 5% afterhours :-(

<comment><USER7> > As impressive as this is, it is below analyst consensus, and the stock is > down 5% afterhours :-(

This happens _every_ time. Apple exceeds their own guidance; grows at a rate faster than nearly anyone else in the Fortune 500, and yet still fall short of the (insane) analyst guesses (predictions would be unsuitable).

I believe Horace Dediu did an article some time ago on amateur vs professional analysts and their track records against Apple's earnings calls. I can't seem to find the link but the degree at which some were off (with regularity) would be concerning if I were paying them for the advice.

<comment><USER6> I remember that as well -- bloggers got it right, analysts got it wrong. This morning I read "somewhere on the internet" that bloggers were predicting ~$10 while analysts where predicting ~$12. If I didn't just imagine that, this would remarkable in that even the bloggers overestimated.

<comment><USER8> This reminds me of "The Wisdom of Crowds"[1]. Could it be a case of the masses collectively being more intelligent than the so called experts?

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds>

<comment><USER2> The experts are generally over-conservative for a reason. The tldr reason is that they get fired for losing people's money so absolute accuracy (where misses are 50% high and 50% low) is not their incentive.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Have Govs installed a back door in mobiles? - <AUTHOR> I've been told that on an official visit of UK Queen to some EU country people took pictures with their mobile, but nobody was able to get the actual image in their devices. My question is, does anybody know if mobiles are equipped with backdoors that can be operated by government to discard the image taken by the camera? thanks <comment><USER2> Personally, I don't think any company can get as big as Apple, Google, or Microsoft without succumbing to government demands.

We know there were backdoors in Windows ("_NSAKEY"). Because of that it would be naive to assume that there is not a backdoor there still.

As for the others, it would require blind faith to think they haven't done the same. The only exceptions would be open source systems.</comment>


Why Millennials Can't Grow Up - <AUTHOR> http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2013/12/millennial_narcissism_helicopter_parents_are_college_students_bigger_problem.html <comment><USER2> Yay! Another article where the older generation shits on a younger generation.

Is it possible - and this is just me talking here - that maybe our generation isn't composed of a bunch of emotional weaklings who can't bear the stress of life, but that you guys fucked it up pretty badly for us? Your self-interested conservative personal responsibility do it yourself policies bankrupted the economy because you were asleep at the switch, and now we can't find jobs.

I can guarantee you that if you flip back several decades you'll find an article in Life Magazine written by some asshole asking the question "Why are the baby boomers such pussies? We fought World War II for crissake!"

A load of horseshit. Life is hard. Help, you assholes.

<comment><USER3> The average parent's age for first child has never been higher, just like the rate of 20-somethings still living with their parents.

No matter what the reasons for that are, you can't refute that it's bound to have some interesting consequences on the psychology of the 20-somethings in question.

<comment><USER4> Average age is only up because women started child bearing later.

About a hundred years ago it was common for men in their very late 20's to have finally built a life of their own and get a bride. A bride who was 16 or so because that meant she still had plenty of child bearing years ahead of her.

What if men just got back to that same state, while women have joined men in this status instead of having the whole teenage pregnancy thing?

<comment><USER5> Either you have rich grand/great-grandparents or we come from VERY different places. My family has been historically poor up until my dad, who is just middle class now. Both sides of my family have struggled until death. I don't know of anyone other than maybe one or two who had parents growing up that had "built a life of their own," then married and started a family in their very late 20s.

<comment><USER4> Historically I come from a family of peasants. Especially after WW2 both sides of my family were poor, but there was a period before then that one side was rich farmers.

They were only rich because my great grandfather bought the farm where he used to work as essentially slave labor (they'd only get food and board in return for being manual labourers, it was a thing back then).

But anyway, this age thing was something I read in books about late 19th and very early 20th century.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> It seems every generation discovers the same new problems of every generation before it. And as each earlier generation matures, it describes the new generation disparagingly.

This article described the movie The Graduate, which everyone felt described a generation coming of age in the 60s. Pick other movies and books for other times.

Take it far enough back and you have this quote

" _Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority, they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers._ "

which sounds contemporary but dates back centuries (often attributed to Socrates, but not likely that old). It sounds contemporary in every time.

I conclude things aren't suddenly getting worse -- [http://joshuaspodek.com/arent-suddenly-worse](http://joshuaspodek.com/arent- suddenly-worse) \-- which makes my life better.

<comment><USER7> Hey Josh,

I actually agree with your quote - but a surprising number of your posts / comments / submissions are or have links / references to your site.

That's not inherently bad (I'm not against self promotion at all), but it sort of comes across like your contribution to the site is one big promotion for your site rather than focused on the contribution to the community.

Hopefully this isn't too out of line - but I thought I'd mention it as I've seen a few of your posts in the past couple of days referencing that site multiple times & realized they were all yours.

<comment><USER6> I go back and forth because I usually prefer to post on topics I like to write about, which means I've often written about them elsewhere. I try to write posts that get votes, implying the community values them, so I try to make posts that stand on their own without clicking the links but get more depth with clicking. If the material is relevant I could still leave it out, copy it, or link to it. I'll use your feedback as a data point suggesting reducing the links. I'm a fan of constructive criticism, though it feels funny doing it publicly like this.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Hooray for anecdotal evidence! I even agree with some of it, but there's sweet fuck all to back up any of it.

A highlight for the those of you that couldn't make it through the whole way:

"A generation ago, my college peers and I would buy a pint of ice cream and down a shot of peach schnapps (or two) to process a breakup. Now some college students feel suicidal after the breakup of a four-month relationship."

This shit is publishable?

<comment><USER9> Ok i din't read it all the way through so thanks for posting that. But SERIOUSLY?!?!? You know it wasn't our generation that wrote "romeo and juliet".... And i thought this was backwards now? I thought young people now care even far less for relationships and more for sex...

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> This isn't a story representative of a generation, this is a story about one messed-up 30 year old. I can't think of anyone I know who can't figure out how to do laundry and homework in one day, and I don't think it's because I'm in a circle of particularly self-sufficient Gen-Yers.

Honestly, if the Onion were stuck for content they could publish this article word-for-word and I'd gladly believe it was supposed to be satire.

<comment><USER11> If I understood the author correctly, she is a psychotherapist talking about people she sees professionally. So, this could just as easily be a story about how Millennials are much more willing to see a therapist for these sorts of problems than their parents' and grandparents' generations were.

<comment><USER12> Or maybe it is about people who are 30 and need therapy?

Why generalize an entire generation? ... because, page views.

I'm 32 and I HATE laundry and every single person in my age group that I have met hates it too.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm thirty but I do notice many of my coworkers and other folks my age cannot grow up. It's not even just a matter of getting a job. Most of the folks I know are still partying all the time as if they're at a high school kegger.

I'm not sure of the exact cause, but I do think people having children later in life (late 30s, early 40s for many people I know) coupled with the fact that most of them are only having one child causes a bit of over-involvement and softening of parenting. There are too many "special snowflakes" who grow up and cannot handle the fact that none of us are these special creatures and you have to compete for everything you want and need to live.

I think shifting blame to older generations is a result of some of these things. Yes, there have been some messed up things handed down to us, but it's nothing we can't fix. We just have to get our act together, plan things out, and work hard.

Life IS hard, but it's how you respond and adapt to hardships that define you. Blaming everyone else is not going to do anything.

<comment><USER13> "you have to compete for everything you want and need to live." I think I'm a special creature. This really depresses me. Do you think this is the ideal situation? I don't understand why this is currently the case. In my opinion there is more than enough to go around, and the majority of our daily problems are caused by other humans.

<comment><USER14> Woah. That's the problem to a T. You hit it right on the head. You are not a special creature. There are approximately 6 billion other creatures nearly as capable as you trying to make a go of it right now, and a substantially greater number who tried to make a go of it and are now dead.

The majority of our daily problems are caused by ourselves, not other people. We think too much about ME and not enough about others. Try taking 30 minutes a day to intentionally improve someone else's day.

And as long as I'm writing here, I'll note that parenthood becoming something we hold out as long as possible to start down is probably one the single greatest issues facing Western culture, and I'm not even convinced it's altogether a bad thing (teenage pregnancy not great, yada yada yada). But the full weight of responsibility of keeping someone else alive is enough to wake anyone out of their delusions of self.

<comment><USER13> I agree that "we think too much about ME and not enough about others". I don't understand how "having to compete for everything you want and need to live" will encourage people to care less about themselves and more about others. I think the opposite is true as evidenced by the current state of affairs.

I don't agree that "the majority of our daily problems are caused by ourselves". I think most people's daily problems are the result of more intelligent and selfish people taking advantage of them.

I agree that "taking 30 minutes a day to intentionally improve someone else's day" is great advice and a fantastic investment of your time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I fit into that description. 30. Lot's of problems related to money and discipline. No helicopter parents through.

What I realize quite often when I'm talking to friends and what I hear very often when I talk to my parents is a lack of deep social connections.

If you have a social circle you really like and you can count on it's far easier to organize yourself and get your stuff done. Because you learn that stuff together in your circle. You just grow faster in a group of like-minded people than fighting all the bullshit alone.

Finding this social circle is pretty hard for me. If this social circle is lacking or you just does not care about you if you don't fit their worldview you are on your own. Now you are scared and desperate to to fit somewhere in.

Everyone is fighting their fight alone. It's more often than not a piss-match about status and money and importance than a real friendship. The partying is the illusion of this social circle that you want to keep in your life. If you drop this you'll have to face that you are totally alone and nobody gives a fuck about you.

If I talk to my parents or grandparents I realize that they still meet with their colleagues from school or university or old jobs.

If you don't function now nobody cares. Old friendships just vanish.

This may be my problem. I'm not sure. Maybe I'm an loner or idiot. But there is a difference in comparison to earlier generations and most people I know or talk to feel pretty alone very often.

</comment><comment><USER16> Maturation cannot occur without independence. The Great Recession has prevented independence for a large number of young people.

<comment><USER17> I don't buy it. If it was a real recession rather than a chronic shortage in marketable skills, some of these millennials wouldn't have mommies and daddies who could afford to keep them around. My dad grew up in the Depression and somehow managed to support himself from manual labor from the age of 14. Show me an unemployed hipster 20-something willing to do day labor but unable to find any. You can't find one.

Maybe this "Great Recession" is an effect, and not a cause, of the fact that white Americans are increasingly too decadent to work for a fucking living.

<comment><USER14> Amen. And of course eventually we'll have something like a massive ecological disruption (or War with China) that will fuck everything up all over again and we wont have time to write asinine op-eds about "what's wrong with people" (or comment on them, pot ... kettle black). We'll be too busy digging our asses out of despair.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> A lot of these parents are enablers. They made it ok for their overachiever kids to have no job as opposed to a job not in their field of study.

I graduated during the recession of 2003-2004 which was almost as long as the Great Recession. We've been technically out of the recession for over 3 years.

</comment><comment><USER19> What's wrong with contempt for authority? Is there a more appropriate target for contempt? As for lacking respect for elders, why do they deserve respect? I certainly should not have listened to my elders when I was younger. They did me no favors, and it took decades for me to stop listening to them. Now that I'm old enough to be one of them, I must say that I am supremely unimpressed.

</comment><comment><USER20> I'm 21, do not have a college degree, work for 7.50hr, and feel exactly like this with the exception that I have to deal with it on my own because I neither have the time or money to spend on therapy. I've learn to deal with things and keep it moving because no one else is going to lend you a hand unless you have something to give in return; that's how I see it anyways.

<comment><USER21> Similar situation here, my only problem is that while I am able to (barely) sustain myself, depression and similar issues are continuing to stymie what attempts I can make to better my situation. I honestly don't know what I think these days, other than that something needs to change, and I'm starting to wonder if I'm not as much of the problem as I like to tell myself.

<comment><USER20> Stop thinking that. Think of yourself as the last piece of wonderful on earth and that everyone is here to compliment you, as egotistical as this sound it will boost your morale.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> This is just a bot regurgitating all the mille stereotypes.

</comment><comment><USER23> Yet another "Millennials Suck" article. Woooptie doo. What's really going on is the Baby Boomers are getting old and they're sounding like that old Grandpa in his rocking chair bemoaning "kids these days."

</comment><comment><USER24> Things are inherently different with and for the Millennials:

[http://www.pewresearch.org/millennials/](http://www.pewresearch.org/millennials/)

[http://cew.georgetown.edu/failuretolaunch/](http://cew.georgetown.edu/failuretolaunch/)

I particularly appreciate the data from PEW as it allows for contrast vs. Gen X / Boomers at the same age / place.

</comment><comment><USER25> I think millennials are simply on the verge of realizing that the American dream they've been sold is a lie, and they don't know what to do.

Meanwhile the older generations are screaming at them "Pay for my medicare and medicaid that won't be there for you! Pay taxes to pay my state funded pension! I don't care that you cant afford a home, or medical care, or college! I don't care that we outsourced your jobs and that you can't make enough money to be poor!"

</comment><comment><USER26> This is entirely anecdotal but "Amy" could very well be my sister-in-law. Yes, she's 30. Her previous two boyfriends had the same first name and the current guy she's seeing also has the same first name. I don't think that's coincidental. I think partly my mother-in-law is to blame because of helicopter parenting and always leans on my wife (the older sister) to serve as an emotional support.

</comment><comment><USER7> Great counterpoint in the New York Times the other day on the shifting values of millenials.

[http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/opinion/sunday/millennial-...](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/opinion/sunday/millennial- searchers.html)

This is more the extrapolation of one struggling 30 year old onto a generation rather than the symptoms of an entire group of people

</comment><comment><USER27> People keep looking for that magical ONE reason why everything is the way it is. It's NOT just 1 cause of these problem, it's numerous.

The Job Market - Automated and outsourced jobs have limited workplace opportunities over the decades. From all the older folks I talk to, they mention how much easier it was to get a job and how many jobs there were back when they were young compared to today.

The Money - Inflation has made the price of everything more expensive, yet most wages have relatively stayed the same. So I'm getting payed the same amount yet the price of everything around me is getting higher. I feel like I can't ever catch up.

Growing up and Relationships - Almost every single friend I have ever had has divorced parents. The rare few whose parents are still married are miserable. Is this what awaits me? Find love, start a family, be miserable? Growing up is extremely discouraging when you can see the terrible results of "growing up" all around you. I don't want to hate the person I love. I'm afraid of finding a spouse because I've seen what happens when others do. It's like walking down a dark alley covered in others' blood, and every time you turn around to run away a sea of voices taunt you with "stop being a pussy! grow up and go down the dark alley like we did". I don't want to go down a road knowing there's something bad at the end. Sorry.

Work Hard/Don't work hard Paradox - It pisses me off when I hear someone say "kids these days don't work hard enough!" and "Go to college so you can get a good job in an office somewhere and not doing manual labor" in the same conversation. This one is just confusing. Which is it? When I get a job working hard I'm looked down upon by peers because I don't work at Google or Facebook. I'm looked down upon by my parents because the job doesn't have dental and health and 40 hours a week and $20/hour. Hard working jobs do not pay well because they're so plentiful and there's a lot of people trying to get hired. So the prices are crap.

America's Greed Problem: You cannot tell me you don't see it. From the bank bailouts, to the behavior of the car companies that needed to be bailed out, to outsourcing jobs, to the housing market (caused by people buying up homes, barely doing work on them, and flipping them to the next sucker) it feels like America's collective goal is to #1) create as shitty of a product as possible and sell it at the highest price possible and #2) find the most efficient and legal way to fuck people over. My parents worked so hard to buy the crappy house we have now at 7 times the price of a house in Bulgaria, and still it's always falling apart and needs maintenance while homes in Bulgaria are built like a rock, out of brick and cement, more energy efficient, and cost less.

Extremist Politics: It feels like the liberal and conservative parties have gone to more and more polarizing extremes to differentiate themselves and counter-balance the other party's philosophies. This has turned into 2 parties that don't listen and don't think but instead react using old traditionally memorized values. When looking at Republicans and Democrats, they've all but stopped "thinking" about each problem that faces the nation and instead throw their "blanket solutions" over whatever problem comes their way. If one party were truly better than the other, we would have kept them in power permanently. Instead we switch parties every decade or so. This political environment isn't getting problems solved. It's not giving me hope for a better future. And it sucks that my only choices every few years are between people who are either hard working but backwards thinking or people who are educated but lazy and bureaucratic.

Oh and the best part: Every 4 years I get to pick a president from 2 unproven daydreamers with unrealistic promises.

For me personally, I don't want to grow up because I don't see the payoff in growing up. I know watching my parents abuse themselves by overworking only to come home and be tired and miserable isn't much of a motivation. And the response from others has always been "well that's life you lazy p.o.s.". People don't even know me yet they call me lazy. I've worked outdoors, in warehouses, in tree removal, at theme parks. I've had really hard manual labor jobs. I can assure you I'm a hard worker and not "lazy". People will work hard but there has to be a payoff, that's how all games work. And when the game of life doesn't come with its rewards, people don't want to play anymore. Even the makers of Farmville knew that.

</comment><comment><USER7> Related (humorous) video:

 _Millennials: We Suck and We 're Sorry_

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4IjTUxZORE](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4IjTUxZORE)</comment>


Mac OS X Netbook Compatibility Chart - <AUTHOR> http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2008/12/17/osx-netbook-compatib.html <comment><USER2> And the comments show why I wouldn't base a decision purely on this chart.

Not covered on the chart, but apparently also variable: audio in, power management/fans, OS update success, two finger scrolling...

</comment><comment><USER3> Run != Run well or with any usable experience. Don't forget how demanding OS X can be on machines.

<comment><AUTHOR> Is that comment based on first-hand experience? The Macbook Air debuted not too long ago with a 1.6ghz chip. It wasn't an Atom processor inside the Macbook Air, but is the performance that much different?

<comment><USER4> Yes, the performance difference between a Core 2 Duo and an Atom is significant.

On the other hand, I just recently installed Leopard on my January 2003 model PowerBook, with an 867Mhz processor and I'm entirely pleased (to put it mildly) with the performance, so I can't see these faster systems having any trouble.

<comment><AUTHOR> My bad... That was poor choice of wording on my part. What I meant to ask was "Is OS X's performance on these netbooks really that bad?"</comment></comment></comment></comment>


India's Snapdeal Says the Country Doesn't Have the Programmers It Needs - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2015/05/28/snapdeal-says-india-doesnt-have-the-programmers-it-needs <comment><USER2> All this says to me is Snapdeal doesn't know how to recruit. There are LOTS of companies that are actually finding a sense of validation and satisfaction in not being able to find people - it makes them feel elite and special. It's a sort of non-recruiting that boosts the corporate ego. "We are so awesome that we just can't even find ANYONE as awesome as us."

There's no shortage of programming talent. Only a shortage of recruiting talent.

[http://fourlightyears.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/theres-no- shor...](http://fourlightyears.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/theres-no-shortage-of- programming.html)

I sent one of the best developers I know to a job interview, he was rejected.

[http://fourlightyears.blogspot.com.au/2014/12/i-sent-one- of-...](http://fourlightyears.blogspot.com.au/2014/12/i-sent-one-of-best- developers-i-have.html)

Employers don't want great developers, they want what they want.

[http://fourlightyears.blogspot.com.au/2014/12/employers- dont...](http://fourlightyears.blogspot.com.au/2014/12/employers-dont-want- great-great.html)

<comment><USER3> Well they are not talking about developer. They are talking about technology specialist, which India severely lack. One of the reason is where in India would you study enough to become a specialist. You will have to go to a foreign University and hence India will have to hire people from outside India.

<comment><USER4> As someone born and raised in India, I find attitudes like this quite annoying. Programmers tend to be passionate and self-learners; you want an university to teach you? Look at what some programmers from Tamil Nadu came up with: [http://hasura.io/](http://hasura.io/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> click-bait article really. Its like saying Google doesn't have the programmers in US it needs. my points: 1) Snapdeal is in Delhi- Not really a hub of software engineers. Most of them are in south of India and very few people really want to move to Delhi. Also, people from south India almost never like to move to Delhi. Even people from North like to stay in Bangalore because it offers many career opportunities.

2) Snapdeal is really no big deal in India- With flipkart,google,microsoft and a bunch of awesome new startups in south, and Snapdeal having no presence in bangalore/Chennai/hyderabad etc- Programmers have a lot of options.

3) I know very very few people who use snapdeal. with amazon,flipkart and ebay i don't see why snapdeal is relevant. Why would a good programmer move to join this company? its not one of the big ones. Its not a cool startup and equity will be low.

<comment><USER6> Its funny you say that because everyone I meet knows flipkart but don't really use them but use snapdeal all too often.

From foreign news articles it does seem like flipkart & amazon are the big deal which is why I find it confusing why in india snapdeal is a bigger deal.

<comment><USER7> Snapdeal has better prices on a few products, but the overall experience isn't any better (wrong products being shipped, customers cheated by soaps/bricks in product cases). Flipkart/Amazon prices are a little higher but the overall experience is better. Both offer pretty good support as well.

Flipkart is technically more impressive than Snapdeal. (Flash sales/in-house hardware, etc). It has it's own brand similar to Amazon basics - DigiFlip, some of which are of decent quality - cables, chargers, etc.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> In general, a company complaining about there not being enough programmers is saying that there aren't enough programmers _at the price level they are willing to pay_.

Just raise the salary. Watch as programmers magically materialize.

<comment><USER9> My favourite analogy is property. I cannot find any nice houses selling for £100K in London. Surely it means that nobody is selling any. Or maybe they just cost more and that's a reality.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Some interview anecdotes from India (Not all mine) :

For an SDE interview obsessed with binary trees after around 4 possible traversals, the fifth one was: "Can you write code to traverse Binary-Tree in a zigzag manner ?" "seriously ?" Rejected.

Questions asked in a PHP dev interview: "Can you write code to invert this link list ?" "Yeah I could in college, but I haven't touched C for last 5 years. I can explain the logic though" "Being a Php developer doesn't mean you forget how C looks like" Rejected.

Salary negotitation "My current salary is 50k, I am hoping for 10% increase" "We will give you 30k, dont you want to work for a world class technology product company " "Ok, can you still match my current salary ? I might join in that case" "Do you want to work for a world class technology product company or not ?" "Sorry" Rejected. candidate too demanding, lacks passion.

"Do you know Node JS ?" "No I am interviewing for a frontend developer post" Rejected.

As these interviews point out, most of us are bad engineers.

Yes we Indian developers are shit. We are expected to work 24 hours a day, taking orders* from product managers, who many times just become PMs because they did not want to (or never understood how to) code and are expected to feel oblige to take the smallest cuts from the bonus pie, not paid for/encouraged to take any courses (one of my bosses actually suggested me to unlearn all the "cool shit" as I was increasing expectations of good work of other employees ) , and we are inefficient at that.

But even after this, it is not at all fair to compare us to the foreign recruited people who earn twice, generally have more experience (as every experienced person in India becomes a manager), and could do all cool github coding in their career (try telling about Github to one of my previous PMs, he will point you to know more about scrum) . After all its only in foreign developers one can find "10 years of big data" (Hadoop recently turned 10 btw) and "15 years of building scalable applications in Golang" type of experience.

There are a few Indian startups which are changing the scene. For the rest, its better they hire from outside the country. If someone can make a bold statement like this, he should have done his homework.

<comment><USER11> This makes me very curious about the culture around the Indian tech industry. Why does there appear to be no encouragement for exploration or experimentation? Further, why does there seem to be a strong emphasis on prestige? For example, I know full well how powerful and prestigious Google is, but that doesn't make me want to work there. I get the sense that that kind of attitude is not common in India.

<comment><USER4> Indian society has traditionally enforced collectivistic values.

From a young age, be they a male or female, one is conditioned to unwittingly absorb the various rules and responsibilities of a narrow lifestyle (get married at ~25; have babies; earn a living; stay married till death; have grandbabies) that there is little space and time for creative pursuits.

It is all thankfully changing now of course.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> TLDR; What exactly do they expect if they openly advertise "B.Tech from premier institutes. IIT's, REC's, BITS, etc" as a job requirement for almost all of their engineering roles?

[https://careers.snapdeal.com/careersection/ex/jobdetail.ftl](https://careers.snapdeal.com/careersection/ex/jobdetail.ftl)

I am guessing, this is some kind of cheap publicity stunt.

<comment><USER13> I would have partly agreed with Snapdeal since finding good engineer has always been hard.

But this filtering by IITs/NITs/BITs shows - how out of touch they are. I know some of the most brilliant programmers in Bangalore/Pune and they are not from these "premier institutes". In fact, being from NIT Trichy myself, I have concluded that - most engineers from these colleges are risk averse and likely stick to a well trodden path of B.Tech + MBA or head to US for MS.

<comment><USER12> Anecdotally speaking most of my _good_ IIT/NIT/BITs folks moved out of the country/went for MBAs after graduation.

The average ones got hired locally by multinationals like EBay / Amazon / Google etc..

So the ones who were actually applying to companies like Snapdeal etc.. were the 4 point someones who really have nothing but an "IIT degree" on their Resume.

I interviewed a couple of those for our startup. Honestly speaking, we found more interesting people via Employee referrals - even if they didn't graduate from these universities.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Snapdeal happens to be looking for people with 10+ years of experience in Big Data/Cloud , while in India 10 years ago, even product companies were hard to find, and I am not sure cloud focussed and big-data companies existed anywhere other than places like SV. In such a case it seems only reasonable that they are finding it hard to find the programmers they need in India.

</comment><comment><USER15> They could consider opening development center in Bangalore or Hyderabad instead of US. If there are good enough developers in India for Google and Microsoft Snapdeal should not have problem finding the right people.

</comment><comment><USER16> Neither does it have the ethics to hire good ones. Recently, someone created an account using my email address. Now I get all kinds of spam from that account. Although it's easy to fix that by blocking their domains, I went ahead and contacted them about the issue. The standard reply was, "someone will get back to you..". After a while I simply asked them to close the account, here's the reply:

\</comment><comment></comment><comment>

Greetings from Snapdeal!

We are writing to inform you that we are unable to close your snapdeal account,however if you wish to unsubscribe the same,kindly confirm accordingly.

Please accept our apologies for the inconvenience you have experienced.

In case of any further assistance or clarification on this issue, please reply back to this email.

Assuring you of our best services always,

Yours sincerely, Team Snapdeal

\</comment><comment>--

What the hell does "unable to close" mean. Account killer rightly calls them "deeply blacklisted" [https://www.accountkiller.com/en/delete-snapdeal- account](https://www.accountkiller.com/en/delete-snapdeal-account)

Fortunately, I have the time and resources to legally force them to close my account. I never agreed to their terms or privacy policy, yet it's been shoved down my throat. This is not an isolated incident though. I know numerous people who had bad experiences shopping with them. You often don't get your refund easily if the product is defective. I can imagine that a company with such a smug attitude towards customers would be a class A shitty employer.

</comment><comment><USER17> 10 years experience with big data and cloud? That doesn't really say much about the quality of a coder.

These arbitrary metrics are pretty pointless IMHO. You can learn what you need to generally in around 1-3 years. Someone with 10 years experience could easily have been doing a job that gave them about 1 year's worth of experience but for 10 years, rather than having 10 years of varied experience.

</comment><comment><USER18> I'm a bit out of touch. How are the salaries for software developers in India these days? A few years ago it was pathetic. Could be a factor, though.

Sometimes I really feel like going back to India and starting a development bootcamp in my hometown of Chandigarh. Reading articles like these brings me a few steps closer to actualising that desire.

<comment><USER19> I left India 3 years back and from what I gather, salaries at reasonably good places have pretty much doubled and in few places tripled. Am not even talking about Google/Fb.

<comment><USER20> I agree, but you also have to consider the crazy inflation rate there. Not to mention cost of housing and no decent public infrastructure. You need a lot of money just to get a reasonable standard of living there.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> These start ups don't get the talent they need, because they purposefully don't hire the talent they need. Atleast three times in the past I've had recruiters tell me these yet to be named start up's can't hire me because they hire from the IIT's only. In short don't bother to apply if you don't belong to our self congratulatory crowd. One time I was told this in an onsite interview, I had to tell them on their face if such was the case they need to tell me before hand, instead of wasting my time having me travel to their place.

And the interview methods are so badly broken, you are only likely to hire mugpots who memorize math theorems and repeat them in interviews. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying algorithm knowledge isn't important, but these people aren't test your algorithm skills, they are testing your skills to repeat the algorithms you memorized. Honestly I don't know of any serious math problem worth solving can be solved in minutes, unless you already know about it(Or you are Terrence Tao or Gregori Perelman). Which in case your are not testing problem solving skills, you are testing how many problem solution sets the candidate has memorized.

Now guess how people get around these interviews. Most people who ace these interviews are from so called elite colleges nearly spend all the time in the day on interview forums. Instead of actually working. And since they spend so much time there, they feel obligated to use that effort in switching jobs more often for better pay. This leads to a big crowd of people who abandon projects mid way only to hop from one company to another. All the while day productivity at offices being very low.

Now if you are hiring such people why should you complain? You are getting exactly what you wanted.

Hire for productivity and for people's commitment to make your projects and company successful. The results will follow.

</comment><comment><USER22> other requirements: 10 year plus experience with Deep Learning and Azure DocumentDB

<comment><USER23> Has deep learning been around for 10 years ?

<comment><USER9> Also 10 years of _practical_ use of any quantum programming languages. Also 10 years of experience of using all mainstream frameworks that will be released in 5 years.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Investors should first hire a bunch of auditors and financial analysts before engineers to go through their books of accounts. All their books are cooked.

</comment><comment><USER25> How come foreign companies seem to find the ones they need? You never hear about a lack of Indian talent. Never have experienced it. I have always been able to find knowledgeable indian programmers to work with remotely.

</comment><comment><USER26> I think there's a lot of talent in india. Just need to search deep enough.

<comment><USER9> Best talent in India is to be found in USA.</comment></comment>


The Al Jaffee / Mad Magazine Fold-In Effect in CSS - <AUTHOR> https://thomaspark.co/2020/06/the-mad-magazine-fold-in-effect-in-css/ <comment><USER2> This is fun, thanks for making that! There's a treasure trove of Al Jaffee's work that can be shared with future generations.

Al Jaffee just retired at 99! Here's article on his retirement, which is also linked to from the original site: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts- entertainment/2020/06/06...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts- entertainment/2020/06/06/al-jaffee-mad-magazine-retires/)

</comment><comment><USER3> how the fold in came to be an every issue feature is kinda a fun story:

From his 95th birthday article (gothamist). It has a nice video too:

[https://gothamist.com/arts-entertainment/hanging-with-al- jaf...](https://gothamist.com/arts-entertainment/hanging-with-al-jaffee-mad- magazines-95-year-old-journeyman-cartoonist)

"One morning I woke up and I spread out all the magazines I was subscribing to which included Playboy, and National Geographic and a couple of others. When I opened them up, the things that popped out was the first one, Playboy, was the fold-out; and then National Geographic had something that showed the new stadium being built by some athletic team. Then there was another one with a fold-out. Of course, the way we work is something triggers a thought, and what triggered in me was if all of them are doing expensive, full color fold-outs, why doesn't MAD Magazine do a cheap fold-in? MAD was black and white at that time.

I thought about it for a moment, and then I looked in the newspaper and there was a story about Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton and Eddie Fischer and accusations that Elizabeth Taylor was going from one guy to another. I thought, "Well, that might make a fold-in. I did something very simple, which was to put Elizabeth Taylor on the left side, and Richard Burton was somewhere in the middle, but on the right side, there was just some young guy. The question was something like, "Who's going to be Elizabeth Taylor's next?" We thought it would be Richard Burton, but if you folded it in, it was just that guy on the right side, and it says, "some guy in the crowd." That was the gag. I took it into the editor, Al Feldstein. I said, "Al, I've got an idea that strikes me funny, but you're going to reject it because if you printed it, it would mutilate a page in the magazine." He looks at it. He says, "I like this." He immediately jumped up and ran into Bill Gaines, and then came back to me and said, "Bill said, 'Lets do it. If the kid folds the page, and he feels he's ruined the magazine, he'll buy another magazine for his collection.'" Ever the money man.

I did it, and that was it. It was a one shot gag. A couple of weeks later, Feldstein rushes up to me—I happened to be up at MAD at that time—and said, "Where's the next fold-in?" I said, "Al, there is no next fold-in. That's it. It was a one time gag." He says, "I want another fold-in." "

</comment><comment><USER4> This is such a great example of how CSS is often overlooked. Very impressive. I learned a lot from reading it.

I bet if you had asked how to do this on StackOverflow without any prompting about language, you would have seen a LOT of javascript Me included.

EDIT: I literally just went to a project I'm working on and removed a piece of JS code that animated a feature because of what I learned from this example.

<comment><USER5> What is the advantage of doing something in CSS vs JS?

<comment><USER4> All of the peer answers are excellent, here are my $0.02:

As a design principle, it makes sense to use/re-use the capabilities of a component, rather than an agent acting on that primitive. For example, HTML already has a built-in CSS engine that can animate. Re-writing the animation in JavaScript is redundant and adds more code, which means more bugs, more size, more maintenance, etc.

Consider this example in C: using printf("%f", val) versus writing your own convert_float_to_characters_to_stdout(val) function.

There are cases where you may want to do the latter because printf is a very large function for embedded controllers and sometimes excludes format specifiers to save space, especially %f. But normally you just use what you are given rather than re-inventing the wheel.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Cool effect but totally broken on Safari. :(

The halves don't line up, and then when it's done the right half flashes back to a random portion of the image, and then when you move away to "unfold" it's missing a chunk in the middle.

<comment><USER7> _Cool effect but totally broken on Safari_

Works fine in my Safari: 13.1 (15609.1.20.111.8) on Catalina (10.15.4).

<comment><USER6> I'm on Safari: 13.1.1 (15609.2.9.1.2) on Catalina 10.15.5

<comment><USER8> Check your pinch-to-zoom. I can mess it up by zooming while it's animating. But it looks okay on normal zoom levels on Catalina with Safari 13.0.4.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Broken for me on Chrome, after the animation a portion of the lower right quadrant re-appears, flipped.

</comment><comment><USER10> Every time I see something like this I'm reminded of how little CSS I actually master.

<comment><USER11> It's OK!

No matter what possible specialty you pick, there is probably someone better at it than you.

But only you have the exact mix that makes you... you.

Just focus on what brings you joy, and appreciate the skills you do have today. I'm sure you could figure CSS out if you decided it was your main goal.

<comment><USER10> There are certainly people a lot better than me when it comes to CSS. Some of the dynamic aspects of CSS (i.e. anything that contains a "duration" for instance) seems somewhat unnatural to have in the CSS, but that might be taste.

I once worked for a company large enough to have its own designer who created the designs in Photoshop. Then we had another guy who created HTML templates + CSS from it; then all I had to think about was the back end code, those were the days. Now I'm a one man band struggling with some of the instruments :-)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> These were great growing up. The March Madness one made me laugh. It's good to know that these things still give that effect. Will almost certainly be lost to future generations.

</comment><comment><USER13> See also [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23442041](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23442041) about Jaffee.

</comment><comment><USER14> Awesome (on MacOS Chrome)! Really neat what you can do with CSS. And thanks for the shoutout for Al Jaffee!

BTW: Does anyone know if there's an archive of the german mad magazine ? The translation is an experience in itself, and while I found a commercial CD with all the mad archives in English, nothing for German.

</comment><comment><USER15> Can someone explain exactly how this is work is working? I realize it's using CSS transforms but I can't visualize it in my head from reading the code.

<comment><USER16> Right half folds inward, and right half's right half folds outward.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I built the renderer and thus page turner mechanism for Wrap [1], which kind of reminded me of this. It was interesting to build it and I learned a lot about performance optimizing CSS. Apologies if it sucks now as I haven't been involved on the project in many years.

[1] [https://www.wrap.co/](https://www.wrap.co/)

</comment><comment><USER18> EDIT: I misunderstood how this works!

Really cool! Might be good to make the "closed" the default and the mouseover open it?

<comment><USER19> That would be like telling the punchline first, then the joke.

The folded-in view is the surprise.

<comment><USER20> Except in this image, isn't the folded out view much more interesting, ie more of a surprise? I thought the idea was to have a juvenile joke, but the hammock coming out from tri-fold and the cake appearing from the cauliflower-haired old man appears to be the surprising part.

Anyway, the text is a little off for me - the letters clash NO, AM, FO, IN (almost the whole I is gone) - but it appears to be the underlying thing is just an image, so is the image off. A ½px margin sort of fixes it.

Overall impression is very slick.

<comment><USER21> The way it works in the paper magazine is that the image is printed on a single page, and you receive it unfolded like any other page. (That's why there are instructions on the top right about how to fold it. If it came pre- folded, you wouldn't need those instructions.)

So the format of the joke as used in the magazine is that you see the unfolded version first.

Anyway, in the one you're talking about, if you read the top-center text, it talks about what the artist gets to do for his birthday. As he blows out the candles on the cake, he wishes he could spend his birthday on the beach. The joke is that he actually celebrates it by trying to think of something to draw, i.e. he has to work.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> These are wonderful! I resubscribed to MAD Magazine a few years ago when my oldest son was able to understand the humor. The fold-ins were his favorite part. What an amazing run for Al Jaffee and MAD magazine--truly a part of history.

</comment><comment><USER23> Aaaand the two halves don't line up in Safari, ruining the effect.

Figures.

<comment><USER24> Same on Mobile Safari

<comment><USER25> Try it again, the author said he fixed it in the comments on his page. It is working correctly for me on iOS.

<comment><USER26> Not working for me on iOS.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Oh, is this what they did in that episode of Malcolm in the middle...

</comment><comment><USER28> As a kid, this was my favorite part of Mad Magazine.

<comment><USER29> Same here. I think as a kid I tried to work out what the fold-in would look like without messing up the page itself. :-)

<comment><USER30> Me too. I grew up in Germany and on one of our trips to the US (late 70s maybe) we discovered Mad Magazine. My dad decided we all needed a subscription - he was always trying to find ways for the kids to brush up on their English. So for many years we had Mad Magazine mailed to us in Germany. We tried not to mess up the page for the other readers in the family.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Cool idea, but (1) :hover excludes mobile users, maybe pick a more accessible event trigger? and (2) alignment issues

<comment><USER32> Touch works for me due to :active.</comment></comment>


Instagram (2012) - <AUTHOR> http://www.bhorowitz.com/instagram <comment><USER2> >Two years ago we invested $250,000 in Instagram. Thanks to the spectacular vision and effort of Kevin Systrom and the Instagram team, the investment will be worth $78,000,000 when the Faceboook acquisition closes.

My Goodness me. What a return on investment.. That's massive.</comment>


Researchers demonstrate the ability to fuse atoms inside room-temperature metals - <AUTHOR> https://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/energy/nuclear/nuclear-fusiontokamak-not-included <comment><USER2> Getting things to fuse is "easy" in the sense that you can do it on the lab bench with a farnsworth hirsch fusor, but that has no hope of ever reaching break-even. This article doesn't talk about break-even potential at all and yet they jump to potential applications.

<comment><USER3> Is breaking even in such an experiment in violation of any thermodynamics laws? Or is it that we just haven't figured it out?

<comment><USER4> In theory anything lighter can fuse toward Iron. Anything heavier can fission the same direction. Splitting or fusing Iron requires input of energy even in theoretical scenarios at 100% efficiency.

In practice a great many nuclear reactions are not chain reactions or don't yield enough energy to be useful. Really large atoms kinda want to fission due to the speed of light: forces can't propagate from one side to the other fast enough to completely balance out. So splitting Uranium is a lot easier to make useful because we have a head start as it were... if you leave it alone in a box some of it will go ahead and split in pieces for you for free.

Fusion is just more difficult. If you leave hydrogen atoms confined in a box approximately none of them will spontaneously fuse to form helium.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> >To overcome that barrier requires a sequence of particle collisions. First, an electron accelerator speeds up and slams electrons into a nearby target made of tungsten. The collision between beam and target creates high-energy photons, just like in a conventional X-ray machine. The photons are focused and directed into the deuteron-loaded erbium or titanium sample.

that way of X-ray generation is of very low efficiency. They should have put that deuterium loaded erbium, titanium (or Pt or Pd like in the famous cold fusion experiment) into the Sandia Z-machine. The typical target for the Z is either LiD or frozen D, and i wonder why they have never tried more heavy metals, especially Pt or Pd, loaded with D given how heavy nuclei is supposed to help in the fusion based on the cold fusion effects and which this NASA research seems to hint at too:

>But the lattice helps again. "The electrons in the metal lattice form a screen around the stationary deuteron," says Benyo. The electrons' negative charge shields the energetic deuteron from the repulsive effects of the target deuteron's positive charge until the nuclei are very close, maximizing the amount of energy that can be used to fuse.

Honestly, my best bet is that Musk, who needs at least fission or even better fusion for Mars (space is the only business case for any plausible peaceful fusion), would soon start a venture for it. The inertial confinement, either Z-machine style or laser (modern lasers are much more efficient than NIF) is clearly the way to go, especially for space and when you need real result instead of large government sponsored research.

<comment><USER6> _Honestly, my best bet is that Musk, who needs at least fission or even better fusion for Mars (space is the only business case for any plausible peaceful fusion)_

An interesting assertion. What are some of the reasons why you're certain that fusion will not be a useful source of energy in peacetime/civilian applications? Is it likely to be "too cheap to meter," as we were promised fission power would be, or do you think it'll always be too expensive to be practical?

<comment><USER5> Cheapest electricity is natural gas one. Imagine a natural gas plant with free natural gas. That would decrease the electricity price by about 1/3 (fuel price is up to 2/3 of natural gas based generation, and the generation is between half and 2/3 of electricity price). The fusion power plant ideally is equivalent of that free natural gas power plant. Though it can't be further from it on practice. Any feasible in the observable future fusion involves neutrons. That in addition to affecting reactor design - cost and complexity of building, operating and maintenance - brings in the whole regulatory regime just a notch lighter than fission. Taken together we'd be lucky to match the current natural gas - I personally think no chance in hell. Carbon emission of natural gas isn't an issue because nobody [who matter] cares about it today, and then, when the issue is finally forced for resolution, adding carbon sequestration would still be a comparatively minor expense. And that not even talking about already free fusion used in solar and wind based generation - hard to beat economics of that fusion reactor.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Reading this kind of news makes me very excited but again afraid at the same time, thinking is it again one more case of Fleischmann–Pons defamation in progress. As it sounds very much as saturation of palladium bar with isotopes of hydrogen.

</comment><comment><USER8> From the article: "What we did was not cold fusion," says Lawrence Forsley, a senior lead experimental physicist for the project. Cold fusion, the idea that fusion can occur at relatively low energies in room-temperature materials, is viewed with skepticism by the vast majority of physicists. Forsley stresses this is hot fusion, but "We've come up with a new way of driving it."

<comment><USER7> How they define "cold fusion" temperature, if we look previous lab fusion experiments they all had very narrow point of fusion, welding arc has temperature of 10000 F withing few millimetre, that is what most of those previous so called cold fusion experiments did. But in reality fusion should occur at 100 million K. Cold fusion is refereed as room temperature, is there some trick in defining room temperature?

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Just 20 more years and we'll have cheap, safe, limitless energy!

<comment><USER10> To be fair, the timeline was predicated on spending levels that were never met. In fact, funding levels never made it above the "fusion never" threshold: [https://i.imgur.com/3vYLQmm.png](https://i.imgur.com/3vYLQmm.png)

Interestingly, the projected budget was $100B-$300B in 2020 dollars. Certainly puts $4T stimulus plan into perspective!

<comment><USER11> I have seen this graph many times before on HN. I'm not sure how accurate it is. Maybe the investments in fusion have recently ramped up (the graph ends in 2012), but the end point of the "actual" fusion investment shows something a little less than half a billion dollars. Is this supposed to be worldwide investment, only US, only US Department of Energy, or what?

Anyway, just in 2019 the US DoE got a budget allocation of more than half a billion dollars ($564 MM to be precise, see [1] page 162). ITER's financial statements for 2019 ([2], page 43) shows member contributions of € 400 MM, which is again about half a billion dollars.

If we could manage to add up all the various research budgets for fusion, we would probably be quite a bit above the "never fusion" line, we could maybe reach the "moderate level" in the graph (the orange line).

But the question is: is this needed? MIT alone has a fusion project (SPARC [3]) that appears to be ahead of ITER. A spin-off of that project is the Commonwealth Fusion Systems [4], which managed to raise about $200 MM of funding entirely from private organizations.

Is it possible that we'll see a repeat of the Human Genome Project scenario, where the US Government invested $10 BN and more than a decade of reasearch, only to see a private company (Celera [5]) come in an steal the thunder at the finish line, with only a 20th of their budget?

My point is that as society progresses, there is a time when a certain thing becomes achievable on a medium budget, which only 50 years before would be impossible on an infinite budget. Just think about sending a rocket to the Moon in 1920 or creating an mRNA-based vaccine for the coronavirus in 1970. It is very, very likely that if the US government had allocated $50-100 BN for fusion research in 1970, we would not be any closer to fusion today. However, today, 50 years later, we are at a point where fusion appears achievable only based on private investments.

[1] [https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/05/f62/fy-2020-...](https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/05/f62/fy-2020-doe- sc-fes-congressional-budget-request.pdf)

[2] [http://e.issuu.com/embed.html?d=2019_iter_annual_report&u=it...](http://e.issuu.com/embed.html?d=2019_iter_annual_report&u=iterorganization)

[3] [https://www.psfc.mit.edu/sparc](https://www.psfc.mit.edu/sparc)

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

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

<comment><USER12> Fusion seems like a rare opportunity to do remarkable impact for human society while also making a remarkable profit. Frankly, if I was a billionaire, I would treat fusion investments as half-charity. That's why I don't understand how so many billionaires have pledged to give a large % of their wealth away but the most promising privately funded fusion energy project only has $200 million in funding. That kind of discrepancy increases my respect for tech evangelists, Ray Kurzweil, etc...because marketing the future might bring it closer. We need more of that.

<comment><USER11> Bill Gates is doing just that, but with fission rather than fusion. If the aim is to fight climate change, then fission is a proven technology, while fusion is a very risky bet.

<comment><USER12> Great. We should build standardized SMRs everywhere ASAP. Nonetheless, we don't have to pick between SMRs and fusion reactors. We can do both. The riskiness of fusion can be counteracted by taking an investing-as-charity approach to the whole field. If a billionaire is fine moving humanity closer to a low scarcity, carbon-free future without necessarily getting a commensurate payout, they should invest in fusion. Additionally, if they continuously invest in fusion and spread their investments across multiple fusion "bets," they can maximize their chance of making an outsized return.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> DO NOT BE MISTAKEN This is the same Pons & Fleischmann Cold Fusion effect. I will not argue semantics but Pons & Fleischmann, and Andrea Rossi are also due credit for researching this phenomenon. it makes sense if you think about it... imagine a 3D metal lattice...only say 8 atoms... you tightly pack as much Hydrogen as possible in the middle of the lattice.... everything is under immense heat and pressure.... spinning like crazy.... you hit it with a jolt. or a hammer.... and everything sorta smashes into each other and explodes. or maybe this is the 'inverse beta decay' / controlled electron capture method.

<comment><USER14> It is certainly reminiscent of P&F, in loading a metal matrix with deuterium. And the effect this paper documents could ... conceivably ... possibly ... maybe explain the erratic and fugitive positive results that P&F-style experimenters sometimes produced. But I don't think your certainty is well- founded yet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Is there any reason this couldn't be used for general purpose energy? They work for NASA so perhaps they are just mentioning propulsion to keep their funding.

<comment><USER16> I'm guessing because it'd be expensive and have a low power output. That'd make it uncompetitive for a power plant, but fine for a deep space mission; you'd need very little fuel, so as long as the device itself isn't too massive, it'd be great.

<comment><USER17> Not sure about the low power output. With the caveat that I'm a nuclear engineer but _not_ a fusion expert, from what I understand the deuterium density is actually quite high compared to plasma-based systems like tokamaks. NASA's press release says the deuterium density in their lattice confinement process is a billion times more dense than the plasma in a magnetic confinement system ([https://www1.grc.nasa.gov/space/science/lattice- confinement-...](https://www1.grc.nasa.gov/space/science/lattice-confinement- fusion/)), though I note it's not clear exactly what they mean. So that is promising.

If they can figure out how to sustain a chain reaction or otherwise extract a net energy gain it might still be useful as battery even if they end up having to put more energy to fabricate the fuel in than you get out. Something like how current RTGs are used, except I expect it would have _much_ higher energy density.

This is all speculation, however, and there is a lot of work left.

<comment><USER16> Interesting point. I just guessed at a plausible reason to focus on deep space, I don't know whether that's actually the case.

It seems like it couldn't have too much power density though, or the solid lattice would melt.

<comment><USER17> The lattice melting is probably not a major issue, you just have to cool it to remove the heat as it's generated. At a basic level you face the same problem in a fission reactor and the solution is straightforward -- extract the heat into some sort of working fluid (or gas) to keep the fuel from melting. Fission reactor fuel is actually not even terribly dissimilar to the stuff described in the article, most often it's fabricated as a sintered powder.

Again, this is super early so this is all wild speculation, but generally engineering challenges are easier to solve than fundamental science problems. Of which there remain a few. That said, most of the problems with MCF are engineering issues and we still don't have that working yet either so...</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Career building suggestions for a self-taught dev? - <AUTHOR> Hey! So I've had an interesting couple of years professionally, and I've spent the bulk of my time teaching myself how to code. I recently released my first project – www.jamsontoast.com At first glance it's probably super easy to dismiss as 'just a music player' but if you spend some time with it, you might be able to tell that I put some serious effort into it.
I wanted to get some opinions on how I would go about beginning a career with my newly acquired skills. I am really interested on the product side of things, and have an eye for good design. More importantly I am open to (and quick at!) learning new things. I am extremely interested in mixed reality, because there is probably a lot of work to be done there in terms of interaction design. I think MR in particular would be a good fit for me because I think I'd do quite well at the intersection of design and engineering – I'm not the person to ask how to shave milliseconds off your DB reads/writes.
I think a pretty obvious move for me to make would be to get an actual job as a developer. I'm working on a freelance project at the moment. But I really want to go work at more interesting places – small to growing startups would be ideal, because that's a place where I can work on product today, while also contributing to strategy for tomorrow. And I'm working on trying to make that happen, but so far I'm mostly getting the silent treatment. I'm not sure how I'd go about presenting myself as an employable self-taught dev. I'd imagine that in India, with its massive supply of CompSci grads, I don't really stand out. I'm more than happy to move elsewhere, but I'd imagine that just adds an unnecessary layer of complexity. Also my professional network in this industry is somewhere between lacking to non-existent. It probably doesn't help that I don't use any personal social media accounts.
Looking forward to your suggestions! <comment><AUTHOR> My background, in a nutshell: I graduated with a marketing degree from a school in upstate NY, was working in Manhattan at an ad agency. My US visa expired, so I moved back to India, where I was doing similar marketing strategy stuff in Mumbai, both at agencies and in-house at organizations. Brief detour in the middle where I co-founded a (now defunct) startup which was trying to build an Expedia-like portal for medical tourism. Now I'm here, figuring out what's next.</comment>


Emulating the Original Gameboy's CPU - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@raphaelstaebler/building-a-gameboy-from-scratch-part-2-the-cpu-d6986a5c6c74 <comment><USER2> Writing a game boy emulator is like climbing Everest now. But be wary of the crevasses!

[https://mgba.io/2018/03/09/holy-grail-bugs-revisited/#the- ph...](https://mgba.io/2018/03/09/holy-grail-bugs-revisited/#the-phantom-of- pinball-fantasies)</comment>


WIRED asked me who I think are the 10 Hottest startups in France - <AUTHOR> http://www.rudebaguette.com/2014/03/25/wired-asked-10-hottest-startups-france-said/

<comment><USER2> [http://www.lepetitballon.com/](http://www.lepetitballon.com/)

[http://www.bobler.com/](http://www.bobler.com/)

[https://www.qunb.com/](https://www.qunb.com/)

[https://www.bunkr.me/](https://www.bunkr.me/) [https://sketchfab.com/](https://sketchfab.com/)

[https://poutsch.com/](https://poutsch.com/)

[http://captaindash.com/](http://captaindash.com/)

[http://www.netatmo.com/](http://www.netatmo.com/)

[http://www.withings.com/](http://www.withings.com/)

[http://www.air-detox.com/](http://www.air-detox.com/)</comment>