Linus Torvalds Shows His New Polite Side While Pointing Out Bad Kernel Code - <AUTHOR> https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Linus-Torvalds-New-Politeness <comment><USER2> I actually work with someone like this and didn't even realize it until I read this article. This person will immediately berate anyone that has done anything slightly "wrong" and imply that they are stupid and shouldn't be wasting everyone's air.

Seeing how Linus changed his phrasing and still kept the message really opened my eyes. Fortunately, this is my last week working with this person so I won't have to put up with it much longer. :)

<comment><USER3> That's pretty terrible that you're dealing with stuff like Linus' first message there at work.

I'm no bleeding-heart cream-puff, but that's really an unacceptable tone to adopt for a work environment. I would not accept that tone from a colleague.

I wouldn't call his second message fantastic either TBH.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> There needs to be somebody that says no once in a while, and calls out poor quality work. This isn't 'Nam, there are rules here.

It is distressingly common in software to see code pushed that literally could not have ever worked correctly if it had actually been run. And even more common to see code that clearly has only been run on the happy path. And that is just lazy, and _should_ be unacceptable.

</comment><comment><USER3> There's still _just a little_ room for improvement there...</comment>


Vantage Sports - Sports Analytics from the Future - <AUTHOR> http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/397447350/vantage-sports-sports-analytics-from-the-future

<comment><USER2> I've been following these guys for a while and I can definitely say really cool technology! Backed!</comment>


For $5k, Chevy Will Let You Assemble Your Corvette Z06's Engine Yourself (2015) - <AUTHOR> https://www.caranddriver.com/news/for-5000-chevy-will-let-you-assemble-your-corvette-z06s-engine-yourself <comment><USER2> When I did the rebuild [1] of my 1987 Land Rover Defender 110, I did it through a shop that ran a special program where owners could rebuild/repower their Defenders under the tutelage of the shop owner. In fact, the build was so dependent on my labor that I, as the customer, had to sign a contract that I would complete my part of the bargain in a timely manner or else I would have to pay him his hourly rate to complete it for me.

It turned out to be an amazing experience. I stripped the truck down to a bare frame and built a brand-new rolling chassis [2] with new motor [3], transmission, transfer case, and suspension. I moved the old body over onto the new chassis, which gave it a sort of retro look with proper period-correct gear but the reliability of all-new parts. The shop owner was there to direct me what to start on next, to answer questions when I got stuck, and to help me lift the really heavy things, but for the most part, I wrenched alone.

Over eight weekends of work, I went from knowing how to do only the most basic of maintenance (oil changes, etc.) to being quite confident that I could do another project just like this entirely on my own. The cost was about the same as paying someone else to do the work but I can be confident that everything was done right--every bolt torqued correctly, every dirty thing cleaned, every broken thing replaced. I take my truck out to the desert for multi-week camping trips and the experience gave me much-needed confidence in my ability, my tools, and my gear.

[1] [https://www.flickr.com/photos/defender90/albums/721576407048...](https://www.flickr.com/photos/defender90/albums/72157640704807135)

[2] [https://www.flickr.com/photos/defender90/13052224614/in/albu...](https://www.flickr.com/photos/defender90/13052224614/in/album-72157640704807135/lightbox/)

[3] [https://www.flickr.com/photos/defender90/12399960314/in/albu...](https://www.flickr.com/photos/defender90/12399960314/in/album-72157640704807135/)

<comment><USER3> I'm super intrigued by this -- almost surely over my (non oil-changing) level by far, but would still be interested in more info on it.

Is it something that is advertised by the shop? In what location (or region) was this? What was the expectation in terms of timeframe, and how many hours were you typically putting into the project in any given week? If you're comfortable, shop info/specifics would be great but no worries if not.

Awesome outcome BTW, and is something you can be very proud of and continually enjoy -- love it!

<comment><USER4> I'm not Op but I'll bet that this was probably a shop run by an owner big in the Land Rover/offroading community. Working on Land Rovers is probably his favorite hobby and he can cut breaks for people that will probably get into the community more.

The offroading community is huge and tight knit.

<comment><USER2> In my case, the shop was still very new and the owner wanted to get into restorations (he was in the parts biz). After my project, he took on a few more owner-builds but now primarily focuses on doing resto jobs himself for his customers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I visited the Bowling Green, KY factory for a tour. It is one of the most interesting tours I've ever attended. Some other tidbits about the Engine Build. You get to build as much or as little as you want of the engine. They'll put a metal decal on the engine saying it was built by the owner with your name.

Also if you visit the factory make sure you visit the Corvette museum across the road. The most interesting thing about that museum is a good section of it was swallowed up by a sinkhole. Many corvettes were swallowed up. Most were restored but several were totaled to disrepair. You can see them on display and shed a tear. There is a good section of the museum dedicated to the sinkhole mishap.

<comment><USER6> It's the generic trouble with museums - concentrating all the irreplaceable stuff in one location. Like the Library of Alexandria.

<comment><USER7> The alternative is that information is not discoverable, like old letters found in attics and ancient Egyptian tombs. Finally, with the advent of a the digital age, we can make data easy to find and have off-site backups. Still no good solution for physical artifacts, though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Ironic that the DIY option is more expensive. I'm reminded of the British "kit car" scene, which started as a tax dodge for the Lotus 7: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_Seven](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_Seven)

"Under the Purchase Tax system of the time cars supplied as a kit (known as "completely knocked down" or CKD) did not attract the tax surcharge that would apply if sold in assembled form. Tax rules specified assembly instructions could not be included, but as the rules said nothing about the inclusion of disassembly instructions, they were included instead and all the enthusiast had to do was to follow them in reverse.[citation needed] However, once the UK joined the EEC on 1 January 1973, the VAT system was adopted instead so the tax advantage of the kit-built Lotus Seven came to an end."

The car is still sold as the Caterham 7, still available in kit form.

<comment><USER9> FYI, Auto manufacturers still have S/CKD plants, where a previously assembled vehicle is re-assembled.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knock- down_kit#Automotive](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knock-down_kit#Automotive)

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> There's an interesting contrast between the (traditional) automotive and today's consumer electronics industries; ever since the early days of cars, manufacturers have tolerated and even encouraged the growth of a large aftermarket parts industry, to the point where you can build an entire "Chrysler", "Ford", or "GM" driveline from the engine to the wheels with entirely non-OEM parts. Of course, the manufacturers themselves will sell parts to anyone who wants to buy them.

Contrast this with companies like Apple and Tesla, who attempt to maintain tight control over their products and use legal action against those who want to "open them up".

(From what I've seen, European and Asian automotive companies are somewhat less open, but once again there is still a large aftermarket.)

<comment><USER11> Yes and working on cars is a heck of a lot of fun as a result. Car modding and tinkering is a huge hobby and from what I can tell only supports these brands and the OEM sales. You need a Chevy in the first place to outfit it with 3rd party high perf parts. Something will break as a result and you'll be back buying more parts and investing even more in the GM/Chevy ecosystem. It's the opposite of how record labels try to attack music 'pirates' who also tend to spend more on music too. (Perhaps their love of music is what correlates high piracy and high purchasing? Hmm)

It adds to the romanticism and involvement. The original GT40 Le Mans car from the 60s that originally beat Ferrari was built from parts that you could go to your local Ford dealer and order. Maybe I'm wrong but I think that if you had enough money at the time you could actually buy all of the parts to build the same .427 they were using in the professional races. Pretty cool.

<comment><USER12> Do you have a source on this? It seems like an exceptional claim.

The GT40 was a bespoke race car built to settle a grudge. Henry Ford II wanted to beat Enzo Ferrari at his own game after the sale of Ferrari to Ford fell through. Ford failed to beat Ferrari in their early attempts with the GT40 and the entire car went through several revisions to reach the LeMans winning form. These were not typical parts and I would be surprised if they were widely available.

Also, domestic US engine displacements were given in cubic inches. In this case a Ford 7 liter engine is 427 (whole) cubic inches. A period is not prefixed because it is not a fractional measure.

<comment><USER13> The 427 is an FE family engine, which was used in NASCAR. The engine used in the gt40 was based in a NASCAR build of the engine (modified to handle right turns ;) ).

Back then, you could order performance parts from dealerships and whole engines. Could you walk in and order a gt40 engine? I have looked and have not found a part number. However, some race engines did not have part numbers because they were aftermarket parts.

<comment><USER14> You still can, and they have warranties.

[https://performanceparts.ford.com/engines/](https://performanceparts.ford.com/engines/)

[http://www.chevrolet.com/performance/crate- engines](http://www.chevrolet.com/performance/crate-engines)

[http://www.chevrolet.com/performance/connect-cruise- powertra...](http://www.chevrolet.com/performance/connect-cruise-powertrain- systems) up to 727 horsepower, with transmission and electronics included and ready to go. Connect and Cruise.

<comment><USER13> Those crate engines sure are a great deal. Back in the 90s you had to get an aftermarket block, heads, crank, pistons, and rods for four that (not adjusted for inflation) to even consider reliably making over 400hp on anything. I remember saving money for an A4 Ford block sold by SVE. Never got it cause it was about $2k and came bare and unfinished.

Nowadays, an LS crate engine and a smallish turbo can get you 600 wheel horsepower on pump gas.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> speaking as a former drive train and engine mechanic for a luxury dealership, this is a bad idea at best. Granted, the LS series engine is just a simple pushrod iron behemoth, you're still asking for trouble.

My last place of employment wanted to do something similar, but it was shot down by the owners once they determined that practically every shop insurance provider flat-out said no. That $5000 fee is likely just for OSHA and your insurance company to look the other way in a state where regulations arent so stringent. All of us as vehicle techs also said no.

The average luxury customer isnt qualified to do much more than sit in the waiting room and watch an episode or two of Ricky Lake. Luxury customers betray an absolutely criminal lack of self control sometimes. Ive had customers wander back into the shop to stand over my shoulder demanding to know everything im doing and why. Ive had an old persian customer who demanded to drive his car home that day and wouldnt leave the shop until I completed the week long work. Ive also had wealthy couples leave their kids in the car. Another customer demanded I never drive the car or sit in it. Point being: anyone stupid enough to waste $5000 on the chance to work on an engine they couldnt possibly understand on their own, isnt going to be someone you want in a shop. Dynastic wealth leaves you with a Reaganomic level of competency.

The z06 is only an $84,000 car, but If i were the mechanic who had to deal with $5000 tourists chasing piston return springs across the shop floor and pulling main bearings out of their kids mouths, I'd do everything I could to find a new job.

<comment><USER16> Tell it to Tavarish ( [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuaOvUJOMa4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuaOvUJOMa4) ). :-)

This isn't targeted at the "average luxury consumer", it's targeted at someone who is willing to spend $5K to do this as a vacation. I used to see a lot of Corvettes at the autocross events, and that average owner knew more than a thing or two about mechanicals.

Now, if this program was "You can _SAVE_ $5K by assembling your own engine.", you are probably going to get a lot of idiots. The people willing to pay $5K are probably going to be intense enthusiasts, and in my experience those people could do this job.

Not all of them, of course. The kids that brought a GTR and a Sylvia to the track for open track day, and then proceeded to be trounced by pretty much everything else on the track, I wouldn't want putting together my engine. :-) They weren't happy at not being able to keep up with Miatas in the hands of very skilled drivers with R compound tires. :-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> It's pricey, but I love this. Now, if only someone would let me build a Merlin V12 :-)

<comment><USER12> I had the opportunity to attend a series of private classes at a local air museum. One of the sessions covered the engines in the planes and how they are maintained today. The class format included a lecture and a hands-on exercise. The hands-on exercise that night was a cam and rocker arm "replacement" on the museum's Merlin engine. Someone else got to tear it down but I got the chance to reinstall the cam and rocker arms. It was on a cutaway display engine so it will never fly of course but still, it was a wonderful experience. I can honestly say that I have installed the cam and rocker arms on a Merlin. Not many people can do the same :)

<comment><USER17> Which museum did you take the class at?

<comment><USER12> The Flying Heritage Collection in Everett, WA.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Does it hurt resale value if an engine was "owner built"?

<comment><USER19> My guess is the plaque and "professional photos" are a way of demonstrating that adequate and appropriate levels of attention have been paid to detail - and also politely but firmly making the statement "now be nice and just fix this."

So yes and no.

It will probably depend on a given recipient/vendor/repairer/whatever values making a fuss of the customer over plain technical competency or not.

For want of a better want to articulate this, I've just realized that it probably happens all the time for people with tons of money to like "helping" with things, and cause irritating damage in the process.

(And that's not including every-day micro-manglement in some large proportion of work environments everywhere in the world... or the client horror stories everyone has...)

<comment><USER20> It probably can't hurt the value more than the price of the engine itself. It's not like a kit car, where you have to worry about the entire body and drivetrain, it's one (very critical) component which can be yanked and replaced or rebuilt. I suppose if someone really borked it, it might hurt the value of the transmission as well?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Here's something I'm seriously tempted to do this summer. There's an auto museum near Kalamazoo that offers a course on how to drive a Ford Model T. I have no problem driving a traditional stick shift, but the Model T has three levers on the floor and two on the steering wheel so it's a challenge!

[https://www.gilmorecarmuseum.org/education/model-t- driving-s...](https://www.gilmorecarmuseum.org/education/model-t-driving- school/)

</comment><comment><USER9> Does anyone know why "hand-built" is a desirable quality for an engine? Several automakers advertise this for their top-of-the-line vehicles.

I know it makes for very good marketing, but is that it?

<comment><USER21> Parts matching. Example, while the block and pistons are made to within tolerances, it's possible to put together an engine with parts that mate well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> > Pay more to mess with the product you are buying and be able to brag about > it at the pub!

Why not buy it used and fix it yourself? Cheaper, more fun, puts hair on your chest, gives you proper bragging rights, puts marketing departments in their place

<comment><USER10> The cost could be considered as paying for the training and use of their facilities, since it's not a "here's a room full of parts and the manual, now do it yourself" type of thing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I look forward to people doing this and putting the photos and (presumably) video online!

<comment><USER23> It's not quite the same, but each year Hendrick Motorsports and Automotive group have an engine building competition. You can watch some of the builds on YouTube: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nn1E9HgEaKo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nn1E9HgEaKo)

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Factory five and superformance kits, i hear, are kind of a good experience to complete.

</comment><comment><USER25> How about assembling a complete kit car, like K1 Attack?

</comment><comment><USER26> Didn't they do this on Gas Monkey?</comment>


My life with 12 programmers, 2 rooms and one 21st-century dream (2016) - <AUTHOR> https://www.salon.com/2016/09/17/hacker-house-blues-my-life-with-12-programmers-2-rooms-and-one-21st-century-dream/ <comment><USER2> I know the author wised up and moved on, but I would rather work construction for the rest of my life than be a programmer and live like this.

I worked for a startup for a couple of years that really got it right. The CTO really wanted a certain lead developer as his first hire (they had previously worked together) and the lead dev said (paraphrased, of course) "Nope. Not interested in working more than 40 hours per week. Not interested in startup culture. Not interested in grueling deadlines. I like taking long breaks in the middle of the day to go for a run. I come in early, and I get home to my family early."

They gave in to every one of his demands and from my understanding, in the 3 or 4 years since he took the job, devs have only worked longer than a 40 hour week maybe 5 times total.

That dev team has consistently deployed great feature after another at an incredible rate. I have since moved on but I don't think I'll ever find a place that respected their workers like they did.

I don't have a point to that story, no takeaways, no morals, no snappy advice or anything. But paired with my current not as good job, and this article from my worst nightmares, it's made me a bit nostalgic for that wonderful time in my life where I worked for a great place that trusted that happy employees are good employees.

<comment><USER3> What is so hard about saying no to overtime? Just turn off the computer and go home.

<comment><USER4> If you are the sole person responsible for the main feature of a startup, and it isn't completed, you know that the only thing you can do is put every hour you have into it to try and make it work.

That is what is so hard.

<comment><USER5> > you know that the only thing you can do is put every hour you have into it > to try and make it work

This, of course, illustrates, why it's difficult: when one _knows_ something that happens to be false.

That's why it's important to have these kinds of discussions here, even they appear to surface concepts that may seem obvious to some people. To other people, it's important to read/hear that perspective, lest "tunnel vision" or an "echo chamber" takes hold.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This really is only one small segment of the programming population. I really hate superficial shit like this that paints tech workers in a bad light bc most have ordinary jobs and live ordinary lives and aren't social recluses.

I work typical 9-5, wife and kids. We go grocery shopping and make dinner every night together. We live very modestly and we have lots of non-tech friends and family. It's literaly nothing special.

<comment><USER7> This requires more upvotes. I can't believe so many people in this thread are agreeing with the view that is painted in this article as the majority.

I went to SF without money for a bootcamp, I did not experience this. The author seems to just have done it without preparing or thinking much.

First, if you are joining a bootcamp, there are other people in your cohort with whom you can find support, roommates, etc (that's what I did).

2nd, even if you end up in such a bad situation, you KNOW it's for only 12 weeks. And very intense 12 weeks anyway, so really, all you need your room for is sleeping.

3rd, you socialise with other students and teachers in that bootcamp. Can't you see that most of them are NOT like the nerdy roommates he describes?

4th I have a few friends who work at Pinterest... yes _that_ Pinterest. They can afford their own place in SF, thank you.

5th, the OP wanted to do a 12weeks bootcamp to then work remotely and be a ski bum? That's nice, but he obviously didn't really research what a bootcamp really offers. I've done a bootcamp - I'm now working for myself, but that's 5 years later. I would have NOT been able to work remotely my first year, I needed way too much mentoring and help to continue learning. Bootcamps don't promise to make your a senior engineer in 12 weeks, they promise to teach you how to learn, so can get a cheap entry level job and _continue_ learning on the job, with _mentoring_.

Sorry this sounds like a rant, but I've seen too many people giving a bad image of what bootcamps have to offer. I've had a great experience doing mine and this is true for most people I know who did one too. It just has to be taken how it is.

<comment><USER8> >I would have NOT been able to work remotely my first year, I needed way too much mentoring and help to continue learning.

I work mostly remote these days--in tech but not a developer at a company with a lot of people who are remote to greater or lesser degrees.

I can't imagine having started out that way though. Communications mechanisms and so forth were different at the time but I can't imagine starting out without physical proximity to co-workers.

<comment><USER9> > Communications mechanisms and so forth were different at the time but I > can't imagine starting out without physical proximity to co-workers.

I started programming without co-workers, or instruction, or related experience. I did get a lot of use out of IRC for a while, but I don't really see what difference having someone physically proximate might have made.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> This part struck me as so sad:

> Programming for me was never supposed to be more than a means to an end

Programming is one of my favorite things to do and I do it even when my job is something else. Why do it if you don't like it? No wonder it seemed hopeless.

<comment><USER11> >Why do it if you don't like it?

Uhh, because it pays well, has good job security and benefits, doesn't require multiple degrees, is respected socially, isn't physically intensive, etc. etc.

Most all of my non-programmer friends don't really _like_ their jobs all that much, so if you're not passionate about anything else, my question is why _not_ go into software development?

<comment><USER10> Then go write back end code for Allstate. (I don't mean any insult to Allstate nor their staff; simply that it'll be a reliable, well paying 9-5).

The things the author complains about (low pay, long hours, uncertain future) are positive things for me, which is why I chose the path I did. It usually includes working with really interesting people.

I'm glad he abandoned it as it sounds like he would not enjoy it. There's no evidence from his article that, say, the Pinterest fellow or the people who'd come home and open their laptops are actually unhappy, except the author himself and the "mid-30s" person in the bunk above him.

<comment><USER12> "Low pay long hours uncertain future are positives for me"

I think you mean you'll accept them to work somewhere you want to work, if the exact same job came up but with higher pay, a guarantee that you'd only work 35hrs a week and a clear future you'd prefer the low paying hard hrs job?

I work in a none programming job in an unrelated industry and I find start up culture really weird, you have seemingly smart people willing to sacrifice their lives to build something like Pinterest (no disrespect to Pinterest but it is what it is, a social network, not putting men on the moon)... your years 20-30 should be be some of your best years, don't waste them living in a closet.

<comment><USER10> The point is the exact same job _won 't_ come up with higher pay and shorter hours; the jobs I like and have been doing for 30 hours really do involve passion+ and a huge lever arm. Crazy, sure, but I've been doing it for 30 years.

> I find start up culture really weird, you have seemingly smart people > willing to sacrifice their lives to build something like Pinterest (no > disrespect to Pinterest but it is what it is, a social network, not putting > men on the moon)... your years 20-30 should be be some of your best years, > don't waste them living in a closet.

I also find it weird -- building Pinterest doesn't seem interesting, and these days (last 15 years) most of the startups are just retail shops that happen to be online. Yawn. The companies I've enjoyed starting and working for have been deeply tech oriented and actually have tried to, or managed to, have significant visible, technical effect on the world. But really, working at Apple in the late 70s/early 80s++ would have been fun, crazy, long hours, huge esprit de corps, and yes, shared housing. But don't you think it would have been worth it?

The dot com boom brought all sorts of carpetbaggers who merely wanted the money, and they changed things for the worse. Though most of them ended up in SF (used to be you lived in SF and worked in Silicon Valley, so the morning traffic jam was _leaving_ the city, not entering it). Though we do have plenty of douchebags down here, the great thing is the SF is like a douchebag magnet. It's paved over most of the craziness of SF replacing it with blandness, but at least it acts as a honeypot for the benefit of the rest of us. This poor kid is simply one of the victims.

\+ the real kind, not the "let's make a corporate mission" kind. When you actually want to live in the world where your product is ubiquitous and you only work with people who like their jobs. Crazy to work with people who _don 't_ like their jobs, and no amount of money would make that kind of life (working with people who don't like what they do) worth living for me.

++ this example is well before my time; I just picked it because everybody would know it

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> This is of course in no way representative. If you are a software developer in SF you get very quickly to $140k+. That guy in the closet was probably stashing way North of $60k annually, not counting equity. Do this for 7-10 years and you can retire silver else and are probably in your early 30s. If you work at FAANG you can easily take home way North of $200k. No reason to rent a illegal closet at that point unless you want to be super prudent.

As for the author's situation. There are not camps in other cities. He could have attended one elsewhere and then relocate if he wanted. It's also only 3 months. You'll survive. I rented a tiny room between kitchen and living room that saw lots of threw traffic in a shitty old house in Munich when I was a student so that I could do a internship at big Corp. It was less than ideal, but when you are young you can live shitty for a while. It will make you appreciate what you have later.

<comment><USER14> >>That guy in the closet was probably stashing way North of $60k annually, not counting equity. Do this for 7-10 years and you can retire silver else and are probably in your early 30s.

Retire with $750k (assuming stock market gains over that 10 years)? Man, I don't know many people who can do that, at least not in the US.

Don't get me wrong, it gets you out of the "work or starve" level, but it's also not exactly "I don't have to work a day the rest of my life" money.

<comment><USER15> ...and now you're a 30-year-old rich guy with no mates who knew nothing of his 20s. No thanks.

<comment><USER16> There's mountains of broke 30-year olds with no mates who did nothing in their 20s.

We try to maintain a false dichotomy where the alternative to working extremely hard is partying, travelling the world, and of course tons of sex.

Most people don't do either.

<comment><USER17> If you're not going to do something awesome why not work hard?

<comment><USER18> I don't think you wanted two "not"s in that comment (or else I don't understand; please expound).

<comment><USER19> _If you 're not going to do something awesome why not work hard?_

Broken down:

If you aren't going to do something awesome _(like travel a lot)_ , [then] why not work hard [instead]?

<comment><USER18> Ah thank you. I was stuck on a tight linkage between awesomeness and work:

If you're going to do something awesome, why not work hard [to achieve great things]?

or

If you're not going to something awesome, why work hard [because what's the point if it's not awesome]?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Posts like these really continue drive home the message of "Silicon Valley is just a shell of what it used to be. Only go there for the sake of relocation or with a job offer in hand." There's nothing left for the dreamers or hopefuls in SV who have nothing to run on but just that--hopes and dreams. It just makes so much more sense to take a pay cut and swing for the fences in Atlanta, Houston, Austin, or Phoenix. Hell, I'll still throw in Boston and Seattle because they're still THAT much cheaper than anywhere in SV.

<comment> FLUX-YOU The weather in Atlanta, Houston, Austin, and Phoenix is brutally hot and/or humid and shows no sign of getting a cooler average.

It's difficult to do stuff outside when it's that hot, especially as you get older.

<comment><USER5> (True also for Los Angeles, though at least that has the Pacific Ocean)

This is the (not so?) subtle quality-of-life aspect that people seem to forget when mentioning other cities as alternatives.

The Bay Area isn't popular/expensive solely due to network effects. Climate and geography (nearness to ocean, mountains) make it comparitively more appealing than the alternatives, for a variety of ages and lifestyles.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I came up the same way as the author of this article. If you don't go to Stanford or otherwise earn yourself a CS degree, you've got to rightly, and almost by definition, build experience and connections from the barest of circumstances.

Nobody said a nice, well-paid coder job, let alone a successful startup and early position there, would be easy.

Besides, he misses the point. There _are_ brilliant men and women in the SF Bay, doing magical things. Maybe they spent time on the Sisyphean path he and I did, maybe not.

But don't go bashing everyone here because you _chose_ the riskiest route and then _lived_ it. He's right that this place remains a beacon of hope and opportunity all over the world.

That's a good thing dammit

</comment><comment><USER22> I got out when this kind of situation became pervasive in SF. The old enthusiasm and love for tech were ground out into this kind of boring dystopia that resides there now. Its immensely sad, SF used to be such a vibrant and energetic place.

</comment><comment><USER23> I call bushit on this story. This article is greatly exaggerated to grab your attention.

$1.4k for a closet in an Airbnb with 13 people, where you don't get a key and have to sneak in? Heh.

I have found a large room in a newer complex through a company pairing roommates in just a few days. It was $1800. Heck, you could pay $1k for a room in Berkely or Oakland and commute in by Bart.

<comment><USER24> There are $1k rooms in Berkeley?

<comment><USER25> Yeah you can find singles for 1k, just make sure you get housemates to share the cost of living space and kitchen.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> are you kidding me? it's written as if it took place over years and decades. "the longer i stayed in the hostel, the more my life slipped away".

it was weeks. i wouldn't be surprised if the guy living in the closet was the owner of the unit. (or lessee)

the author thinks he's going to graduate from boot camp and "make it"? please.

this article and the fact of its (self) publication tells us a lot about the author, and almost nothing about startup life. if you understand that, it is interesting in its own way.

<comment><USER8> While one suspects that many of these coding bootcamp stories don't have happy endings, I'm not sure there's anything particularly extraordinary about enduring far less than ideal living conditions for some closed-ended period. Out of school I spent a fair bit of time in shipyards and on offshore drilling rigs which had minimal dorm-style accommodations. Which was fine at the time but certainly not something I would have wanted to do indefinitely.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> It's a weird story for me and I have absolutely no understanding for it. (no, I don't mean tolerance) I'm not from the US and am far from any startup experience, but I am a young programmer myself, without either good budget nor education.

Programming is the love my life but I would never bear this situation at any cost for it.

He states himself that programming was just "means to an end" for him. So why even bother? I just can't comprehend? Sorry for being ignorant or something ... I'd really like to understand

<comment><USER13> >He states himself that programming was just "means to an end" for him. So why even bother?

Because you gotta pay the bills somehow. This is something you only ever hear from people in our profession and I think it sometimes leads to self- exploitation.

Nobody would ever say "He states himself that driving the garbage truck was just "means to an end" for him. So why even bother?"

<comment><USER27> But, hopefully, and rarely nobody has to live in that conditions to drive a garbage truck.

There is so many stuff out there he he could've paid the bills with, why did it had to be programming in this kind of experience?

<comment><USER13> Programming had much better pay and benefits than most jobs. There is plenty of people who work multiple jobs and still are in awful living conditions. You should check out the book "nickel and dimed" by Barbara Ehrenreich

Also keep in mind that the author of the article is going to a boot camp. He is not getting paid, but paying. Once he is done he will likely earn ~$100k and can move into better conditions. It's very unfortunate that the author never was able to talk to the people he lived with who already had a job and find out why they still live there. Maybe they were just saving a ton of money. I knew someone who was earning a good tech salary, but chose to commute every day from Dublin for hours. That guy chose to safe the money and bought a gold coin every month.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I think this article represents a small segment of people that can't manage their finances and/or strive for better living conditions .

Even at with the base rate of $100k/year - which is cheap, you can rent a beautiful $5k/m apartment and split it with a friend. Heck, you can even cook and eat organic only. Use Uber to move around. Even then, at "maximum living conditions" you should be able to save north of $50k/y. There's countless beautiful Airbnbs at the same price in case you can only rent short-term. Also, you either choose a corporate job or something you love. You can't work 15h/day on something you don't love.

All in all, this article it's halfway BS, halfway poor management of one's own living conditions and financials

<comment> dan-robertson This does not add up. At 100k pa in San Francisco you would get something like 67k after tax, minus 30k for rent, minus (let's be generous) 15k for other expenses leaves 22k, not "north of 50k"

<comment><USER14> Yeah, it is always deeply ironic when someone complains about people who can't manage their finances well, then asserts that it is possible to save north of $50k with a salary of $100k in SF.

<comment><USER28> I considered that amount to be net income. Obviously.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Sounds like a New York tenement circa 1900 except at least those were cheap.

</comment><comment><USER30> I will be trying remote working soon, this whole culture of co-location is the reason you have SF, London, NY etc.

I moved away from London because its economically and socially tough.

With a remote job I will be able to make a London salary but live wherever I like, enjoy the outdoors and live life how I see fit.

SF, Madrid, Berlin, NY are sparkly places where a lot of people (bar the lucky few) end up trapped.

<comment><USER17> Have you lined this up already? Do you have examples of places paying London salaries to remote employees?

<comment><USER18> London salaries are surprisingly low to this US-based employer with employees in a handful of cities around the world.

I was expecting "NYC salaries" and instead found more like "Atlanta salaries" which I can't figure out how the economics works for London-based employees.

Given that, lots of US employers with remote work available will be able to hit London salary level I think.

<comment><USER31> London is an amazing city.

I don't think there is much more to it than that. People just enjoy living there even if it doesn't make as much sense economically.

<comment><USER30> I disagree.

The pollution, increase in knife and gang crime, work yourself to death culture and overcrowding due to immigration.

This makes London not feasible for the long term. If you look at statistics of immigration / emigration from London by age. Anyone below 30 is net migration, whilst above 30 its the opposite.

<comment><USER31> Ok, well you are in the minority of people who don't think London is an amazing city then. Not really sure what your point is. It's still a place people want to live, even if quality of life is lower than other places. It's just that desirable in many people's minds.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Seems crazy to live like that for $1200/month when you could find a few roommates and get 4 people in a 2 bedroom for about the same. Still tight, but it beats 12 people in a 2 bedroom for sure!

<comment><USER33> Folks doing bootcamps often are doing it on a shoestring budget. They can't scrape together significant deposits and proof of income needed to rent a more legit place.

<comment><USER34> And a bootcamper might need a place for 14 weeks. Hard to get a lease for that length of time.

Though I don't know why people need to live in an expensive city for a bootcamp.

<comment><USER11> I imagine the best boot camps are in tech hubs, which are usually expensive cities to live in.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Probably worth mentioning that this article is from 2016, but I'm sure not much has changed.

In fact, this article may have been inspired by a much longer piece from the previous year (1) which focuses on the kinds of dropout teens that Peter Thiel would later come to encourage to head west. Fascinating read.

(1) [https://stories.californiasunday.com/2015-06-07/real- teenage...](https://stories.californiasunday.com/2015-06-07/real-teenagers- silicon-valley/)

<comment><USER36> > "Hackathons are technological Woodstock"

This sentence embodies what repulses me about current Silicon Valley culture: The self-satisfied claim to San Francisco 60's heritage, only, you know, with peace and love being replaced by greed and egotism.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> Unrelated, but my first thought process was a video I've seen of a semi- homeless guy living in an A/C storage locker. He had to sneak in everynight and do some tech macgyver solutions.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPVCTLPNUzo&t=0s&list=LLI462...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPVCTLPNUzo&t=0s&list=LLI462thar4CFee8GIqXwEPQ&index=457)

</comment><comment><USER38> Is this fairly common in the valley?

<comment><USER39> ...I don't think so? Or at least, it's totally alien to me as someone who's spent ~6 years in SF tech.

1,200 $/mo is more than enough to get a room to yourself in the nice neighborhoods; admittedly, you'll need to put in the time on craigslist to find sublets, "interview" with potential roommates, etc. I can see if you're desperate to find a place in a hurry, an airBnB like this might make sense for a month, but more than that seems insane.

Getting scammed by false promises of equity riches is definitely a thing that happens to people, but it's far from the norm. Again, take a job like that if you need something right away, but spend your time hunting for something better, because the _vast_ majority of programming jobs in SF are nothing like this.

<comment><USER5> > 1,200 $/mo is more than enough to get a room to yourself in the nice > neighborhoods

One of the difficulties potential renters can run into, especially ones from out of town, is that no matter how nice the neighborhood is from a residential standpoint, it might be much less nice from a commuting standpoint (be it work or the coding bootcamp).

Whenever I try it, I find public transit within SF to be remarkably time- consuming, even to travel short distances. That means living outside the city can be both cheaper and result in a shorter (time, not distance) commute, which might seem counter-intuitive.

<comment><USER40> I know this isn't for everyone, but I'm just curious - what about cycling? Are the distances large or is it simply a congestion or street layout issue for driving and public transit?

<comment><USER5> SF is also famous for its hills, especially the steepness of some, which creates an additional barrier to cycling beyond the usual "not for everyone".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Based on the description I'm 99% sure I live in the apartment complex described in the article. I can confirm there are a few illegal Airbnbs operating here. The complex has even been trying to combat it by putting out a program where that's ok as long as you follow certain rules. The rent here is nuts, but if 14 people are living in a 2 bedroom apartment here then the operator has a very profitable scam going.

I mean, the real problem is that it's impossible to break into SF if you don't already know a lot or make a lot. As long as a 1br costs $2,000 or more you'll find operations like this.

</comment><comment><USER42> I would rather try to civilize some other area than put up with that.

</comment><comment><USER43> If you are paying 1200 per month to be in soma with 12 other people that is batshit crazy. And someone is making batshit crazy money off you.

There are plenty of places you could get with a few friends for less even in soma. After the first week I would've been talking with others in there about moving out together. Seriously you work at mother f'ing Pinterest and you are ok living like this?

</comment><comment><USER44> Nice write-up. Honestly speaking I'm pretty glad the system works that way. It puts a good filter on people who want to enter the tech without the real interest in tech. Money is just one part of scheme. Another part is value. If you want get a lot of money but not ready to bring a whole lot of value then the writing is on the wall.

</comment><comment><USER45> Is this monthly rent what is expected or is this an outlier case?

<comment> gm-conspiracy From multiple recent cursory craigslist searches, it seems you can find a bedroom of your own in a shared apartment/house for $1200, but you would share a bathroom.

For around $2000, you would share an apartment, but have your own bedroom and your own bathroom.

For $3000 to $4000, you can have your own space and bathroom, but that would unlikely be more than 500sqft.

All seem to want a security deposit equivalent to one month's rent.

<comment><USER5> > All seem to want a security deposit equivalent to one month's rent.

Also, the California statutory limit on deposits is two months of rent, so, with a law-abiding landlord, that's an upper bound.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> Hmm, strange way to live...

</comment><comment><USER47> is REMOTE a strong word ?

</comment><comment><USER48> The only time you should be working 80 hour weeks is to build your own business, not someone else's.

That brings me to the second point, the only time you should be working is to build your own business, not someone else's.

A lot of people fail at both.

<comment><USER49> Agree on first, disagree on second. There's a lot of reasons to work a well paying corporate job.

But here-here on the first point: never take stock at startups, kids. It's never gonna work out well. Wanna work at a startup? Make one.</comment></comment>


How to launder $4B worth of Bitcoin - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@ben_longstaff/how-to-launder-4-billion-worth-of-bitcoin-156f1a401f3a <comment><USER2> /me takes furious notes...

</comment><comment><USER3> Title is wrong. Should be "How _not_ to launder $4Bn worth of Bitcoin".

</comment><comment><USER4> Well, I guess I'll never get my money back then. Darn :(</comment>


NVIDIA's Optimus technology shows its graphics switching adroitness on video - <AUTHOR> http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/03/nvidias-optimus-technology-shows-its-graphics-switching-adroitn/ <comment><USER2> Now we're talking. I didn't think that the previous way to have 2 GPUs on a board made much sense.

</comment><comment><USER3> I would have also liked to see a fallback on soft rendering in that demo app (and the FPS number).

But it would have most likely crashed the system if they would have started the app while the GPU was removed physically.

<comment><USER4> The system is rendering Windows Aero without the NVIDIA GPU being enabled. That means there must be another DirectX-capable integerated GPU in the system that is on when the NVIDIA GPU is disabled.

How does the system decide when to switch over to the second GPU?

<comment><USER5> Optiums is built for Intel's new Core i cpu's, where the cpu has a moderately capable gpu integrated on the same die.

What I've read indicates that Nvidia is using a database of application profiles to determine if the dedicated gpu should be activated.

edit: I just read that the drivers will use heuristics so that application profiles won't be needed in most cases. Basically, if an application initializes DirectX, CUDA or OpenGL, the dedicated gpu will be activated by the drivers.

[http://blogs.nvidia.com/ntersect/2010/02/world-meet- optimus....](http://blogs.nvidia.com/ntersect/2010/02/world-meet-optimus.html)

<comment><USER6> Apparently [1] you can also add profiles for enabled apps in case the heuristic fails for some reason, or you want to force using the low-power CPU.

[1] c't Magazin 6/2010

<comment><USER6> Typo: low-power _GPU_.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


How Google's layoffs and project cancellations are affecting its culture of innovation - <AUTHOR> http://www.25hoursaday.com/weblog/2009/02/15/HowGooglesLayoffsAndProjectCancellationsAreAffectingItsCultureOfInnovation.aspx

<comment><USER2> "This expectation that a new Google product will need massive adoption to justify its investment or be cancelled within four months, as was the case with Google Lively, will be a significant dampener new product launches."

That depends on how Google treats the people who are part of failed initiatives, and how many things are cancelled overall.

At many companies, sadly, people are fired for simply being on the wrong project at the wrong time. If Google doesn't set that precedent, then its employees will be less worried if their projects haven't taken off.

It's also important not to kill "most" things, because people can only take so many failures. The culture of innovation could die from attrition: how many times do you want to pour your heart and soul into things, only to see them die? Hopefully Google doesn't cancel projects too often, and has a well established "salvage" operation for parts of old projects.

<comment><USER3> I don't see why they don't simply give the lively team a chance to spin it out and run with it, that way at least they have a fighting chance.</comment></comment>


Anyone remember the max amount of people allowed in a given aol chat room? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> in 1997 it was 23 [https://books.google.com/books?id=UPA1-sKZniQC&lpg=PA36&dq=m...](https://books.google.com/books?id=UPA1-sKZniQC&lpg=PA36&dq=maximum%20of%20twenty- three%20users&pg=PA36#v=onepage&q=maximum%20of%20twenty-three%20users&f=false)

<comment><AUTHOR> My man! (Denzel voice!) . . . You want to create some cool chatbots with us(Blastchat) . . .</comment></comment>


Ask HN: At what point could exe's run on Linux - <AUTHOR>

With the slow but seemingly eventual open sourcing of .NET, at what point could native windows programs run on linux? Or what is preventing this from happening that would need to be changed? <comment><USER2> Windows Presentation Foundation and WinForms will not likely be open sourced so I doubt it will be anytime soon. Many console applications will likely run today with a recompile.</comment>


Dyson 360 Eye - <AUTHOR> http://www.dyson360eye.com/ <comment><USER2> I worked on this product back in 2002-2005. I developed the initial wheel system for this and early prototypes of their digital (switched reluctance) motor once we realised we'd need a very high power density compressor motor. Sadly the battery technology has taken a long time to get to the point where it can now give a useable run time, even when the vacuum only consumes 100W (typical cabled vacuums use 1.7-2kw). Also the prices of other components, high power embedded CPUs, cameras and sensors have reduced dramatically since then. It uses an intelligent algorithm to maximise the potential of the runtime, meaning that it tries to elminiate running over the same patch of floor more than once. This is what it uses the 360 camera for and SLAM image processing and maths that I still don't fully understand :) The chap with grey hair switching it off at the end of the teaser video[1] is the brains behind all the navigation and image processing software, Mike Aldred, very clever guy.

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6ReNFlxqJc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6ReNFlxqJc)

<comment><USER3> Do you know which image sensors it uses?

<comment><USER2> Back then (9 years ago mind!) it was a Sony sensor probably long obsolete now. 1024x1024 res which is shockingly low res but easily good enough for SLAM feature mapping.

<comment><USER4> It's still a Sony one. No idea which.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Others have commented similarly, but I just have to say that we've tried various Dysons over the years, and they always start off brilliantly. E.g., we vacuumed a nominally clean bedroom with a new Dyson upright and it was like steam-cleaning, or better, since it was dry--we pulled out a whole container's worth of dirt.

But then after 6 mo to a year, they start to fall apart, with (their many internal) joints not sealing, vacuum power dropping, motors failing eventually, etc., etc.

I don't think Dyson engineers understand nor design for long term durability.

We've switched to Miele vacuums and couldn't be happier.

<comment><USER6> I've had my Dyson upright for probably nearly a decade now (or at least 7-8 years that I can account for at minimum). It started off as a vacuum for a retail store I owned, and was used every single day for about an hour solid, for about 4 years, until I sold my stores... and has since been my home vacuum being used weekly. I've never had it break down, or any parts fall off, and it still works better than any other vacuum I've tried.

Maybe I just got lucky, not sure, but I've been very happy with mine.

<comment><USER7> I have no doubt the Dysons made a decade ago were excellent vacuums. In my experience the ones made the past few years are very much not worthy of the good name.

<comment><USER8> Although I've had good luck with HP Printers mysef (still own several 4250's higher speed and do plenty of output with high quality) sounds like similar comments I've read about recent HP products.

<comment><USER9> I've found that this kind is very common; a company will build a good reputation on high-quality products and then slowly lower the quality to make more profit.

It's a bad deal for consumers.

<comment><USER10> It's almost to the point where there should be trademark laws that start to enforce a type of product to protect consumers. Like when Pyrex changed the composition and started breaking. I know it's not feasible to so cleanly draw such lines - for instance, I'd prefer if Lenovo wasn't allowed to use ThinkPad on their current line of items.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I always thought Dyson was crap, based solely on their obnoxious ads and garish design. Then I bought my wife their cordless upright vacuum for her birthday (I know, I know, but she _asked_ for it).

I was astonished when the vacuum became my favorite piece of tech in the whole house.

We have a roomba that works fine, but it's extremely hard to imagine that I won't buy this thing immediately.

<comment><USER12> There was a recent reddit AMA by a vacuum repair guy, talking about the best brands: [http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1pe2bd](http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1pe2bd)

He was not impressed with dysons: [http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1pe2bd/iama_vacuum_rep...](http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1pe2bd/iama_vacuum_repair_technician_and_i_cant_believe/cd1e9x0)

I have to say in my experience, having had 2 dysons - they both broke within 2 years.

<comment><USER13> Had a DC07 for ~13 years never had to touch it beyond rinsing the filters once.

Of course the plural of anecdote is not data.

<comment><USER14> I had the same experience. Can't remember the exact model number but it was a normal upright model. That thing was amazing. Shame the wife got it in the divorce :( (heh)

The only things that broke were simple to replace (and pretty cheap to be fair) parts like the hose which split because I over stretch it one too many times. Can't really fault it for that though.

I have had wood floors everywhere now so make do with a dirt cheap hoover but if I had carpets I would buy another Dyson without question. It did such a fantastic job and maintenance was as easy could be.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> So, it drives around your home with WiFi internet access and a 360 degree video camera. Privacy concerns?

<comment><USER16> "I'm just sweeping the floors, bro. Don't mind me."

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> > _Available for free on IOS and Android platforms, the Dyson Link app allows > you to control and schedule how and when your Dyson 360 Eye™ robot vacuum > cleans. It enables you to view maps of cleaning progress, even when you 're > not at home. It activates your 2 year guarantee, automatically downloads > software updates and, should you ever need them, provides access to > troubleshooting guides._

So… A device that's remotely controllable (and updateable) from Dyson's central server. With a built-in 360° camera.

<comment><USER18> * Always-on internet connection required

I kid, but it does say "The Dyson Link app may not be available in all markets.", so I'm assuming that it will not _require_ an internet connection to function properly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I really want to know how this compares with the LG Roboking. Inevitably, all the comparisons (especially those in Dyson's own marketing) will be with Roomba, which has terrible AI, terrible suction, terrible range and hasn't significantly changed since the first version released in 2002.

Back in 2002, the "insect" AI was actually quite innovative, and necessary for the computing power available at the time, but it's not 2002 anymore.

The latest Robokings are much closer to the Dyson in terms of AI (possibly better as details on the Dyson are still a bit vague). For example, it will map out a route through multiple rooms. If it needs to recharge, it will return to its base station and pick up where it left off. Unlike the Roomba, it does not use a random pattern so it will generally achieve about 97% coverage, compared to about 75% coverage for Roomba. It will also do it in roughly half the time.

The Dyson will likely have better suction, but presumably it still won't be good enough to completely replace a standard vacuum, so that may not matter at all. I think the things that matter most in a robot vacuum are:

\- Can it clean multiple rooms efficiently, recharge itself when necessary and pick up where it left off after emptying its dust compartment?

\- How quickly can it do that?

\- How much noise does it make when it's running?

\- Will it avoid getting trapped on rugs, curtains, under couches, etc?

Ideally, it should empty its own dust compartment too. As far as I know, Karcher make the only robovac that does this and I'm not sure how it stacks up in other areas. Plus it is really, really expensive.

</comment><comment><USER20> WOW !!! these videos explains all ...

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oguKCHP7jNQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oguKCHP7jNQ)

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

<comment><USER21> WOW, that thing is tiny!

I have a hard time imagining how it can vacuum a whole house.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Automatic localization is bad.

This is why: [https://yadi.sk/i/W5YUMQq6b2aXi](https://yadi.sk/i/W5YUMQq6b2aXi)

<comment><USER23> Is there a way to change the page to English? Unfortunately it's not as simple as changing the URL.

Edit: Clicking the globe icon then changing country. Mine was stuck in Japanese.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I bet they didn't consider the scenario of a cat riding their vacuum, when they located the vision sensor on the top.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Of2HU3LGdbo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Of2HU3LGdbo)

</comment><comment><USER25> Bit off topic which I know isn't viewed well here but down vote if my comment angers you profoundly.

My sister recently finished a MSc in Robotics and is looking for work in the UK for Dyson or a similar company. If anyone has worked in Dyson or a similar company (established or startup) and would be willing to discuss her options for applying in the industry and provide some guidance could you please e-mail me at firstname.lastname@example.com?

</comment><comment><USER26> It looks _tall_. So tall that it might not fit under my couch or under the first-level of some tables. Anyone know the dimensions of this?

<comment><USER27> Haven't got a ruler to hand but it's about 4-5 inches. It's not very wide compared to others, hence why it looks tall.

<comment><USER26> My Roomba is (according to the specs online) 3.6" tall.

I'm trying to imagine the Roomba height in relation to the couch and tables... Another inch or 2 might be a deal breaker for me.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> "17,000 rpm with digital pulse technology" ... I guess that means a PWM DC motor controller?

<comment><USER29> "Digital motor" raised my eyebrow too. Apparently it's this: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reluctance_motor](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reluctance_motor)

Guess marketing didn't think "Reluctance motor" had quite the same ring, and I'd tend to agree.

<comment><USER30> Linked from that page is this article which goes into the design and development of the motor a bit: [http://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/design/power/dyson- vac...](http://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/design/power/dyson- vacuums-104000rpm-brushless-dc-technology-2009-06/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> This is the first scroll to navigate page I've encountered that worked for me at all. I can see from the comments that others are not having as much luck. This new trend seems to be a horrible waste of time (for both devs and end users). I hope it goes away soon. The page is kind of cool if it works though.

As for Dysons, my parents are on their second one. The first one still mostly works, but a small clip in the back broke off. It will no longer stand up on its own. I have a small hand held one and it is really quite nice. They are definitely a bit fragile, but when they work they really work well.

</comment><comment><USER32> Lots of negativity in the comments.

A couple questions:

1\. For the robotics people, is the "360° eye" camera an innovation, or is this already a standard component of robotic vision?

2\. What's the next step for robotics in the house after vacuums?

<comment><USER33> Any task that humans really hate to do, but like or need to have done.

In one giant category: cleaning. That includes dusting, cleaning walls and ceilings, cleaning showers and tubs and toilets, cleaning windows.

Cooking food. Starting initially from simple things, evolving to more elaborate combinations. Chef3000 can now cook over 500 things! Self-cleaning!

Mowing the grass. Some companies are already deep into trying to solve this of course.

A total laundry system (this is decades away from being practical, and may require the classic sci-fi robot that does everything). Give the system the clothing, it sorts and understands fabrics and colors, or can be trained to identify specific clothing, washes it, dries it, folds it.

<comment><USER34> Cleaning bathrooms is horrible. I don't know why we haven't built bathrooms that can be sealed, towels/art put in a cupboard, and then a button pushed to pressure spray the interior and blow dry it. Waterproofed components, lighting and cabinetry wouldn't be impossible.

We pay a cleaner mostly because the bathroom is little joy to clean.

<comment><USER35> > I don't know why we haven't built bathrooms that can be sealed, towels/art > put in a cupboard, and then a button pushed to pressure spray the interior > and blow dry it.

I recall that Buckminster Fuller tried to build that sort of bathroom: the idea was that it'd be basically a one-piece metal thing with no seams or cracks for mold/dirt and all rounded corners, so one could just spray it down. I guess it didn't work for the same reason a lot of his ideas never got picked up.

<comment><USER34> There are self-cleaning public toilets in many places these days.

I think it would be possible if the right suppliers set their minds to it. I guess it requires the spraying and drying technology and that won't exist until the bathroom hardware itself exists, and that won't change until the spraying/drying is an option.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Catadioptric omnidirectional vision is a really cool technique. I've always wondered why it isn't seen in the wild more often. I first saw this technique being used in Robocup Midsize League [1]. There's lots of good papers on doing localization and object detection with a distributed system of robots with omnidirectional cameras from that league.

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acrS0kPY-J8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acrS0kPY-J8)

</comment><comment><USER37> If you're interested in the LIDAR in a similar autonomous vacuum, this great presentation by an engineer is a must-watch/listen:

[https://cmusv.adobeconnect.com/_a829716469/p17388090/?launch...](https://cmusv.adobeconnect.com/_a829716469/p17388090/?launcher=false&fcsContent=true&pbMode=normal)

He gives examples of what the LIDAR sees, how the algorithms work, etc. in very clear yet technical knowledge.

<comment><USER38> Neato vacuuming robots uses LIDAR for navigation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> So, the HN comments are pretty much negative. People seem to be overlooking the most important thing. A hugely successful product in this category will be the spark that launches the home robotics revolution. More players, more money invested, etc.

I'm really not sure why robots aren't already vacuuming our floors, raking the leaves and mowing our lawns by now.

<comment><USER11> Well, I think this already happened. About half the families I know have a Roomba robot vacuum or a knockoff.

But it's a big step from vacuuming floors to mowing lawns with sharp blades.

I don't personally have a leaf problem, but I would very much like to see a clever window-washing robot. Could be -- would preferably be! -- very slow and small. Something that runs constantly and could go home and charge/clean itself.

A sibling bot could clean bathtubs and sinks (and I would love to see toilets added to that list, but that may be a bridge too far).

I think robot vacuums are pretty established, but fall short of constituting a 'revolution'.

<comment><USER40> Why don't people know about mowing robots?

My parents had one for about a year now. They use it to mow their huge garden. It has worked extremely well throughout this summer.

It got stuck maybe three or four times at the start of summer, when they were playing around with the boundaries to make sure it gets to as many places as possible and doesn't push itself outside the boundaries because of some tight spot. It seems those problems are solved now. Maintenance is checking the blades every couple of weeks (and exchanging broken or dull ones once or twice a year) and brushing it off a bit.

These mowing robots have been around for decades now. You basically lay a cable (on the surface or slightly underground) all around your garden and big, permanent obstacles and set up a charging station.

Depending on the size of your garden the mower drives around several hours a day, several days a week. During this it is practically completely quiet. Whatever it cuts off it just leaves on the grass. Since it is permanently cutting that's not an issue at all and not even noticeable.

It basically drives around randomly, but maybe has features like focusing on a certain area when it encounters especially thick grass somewhere. (I think newer ones have GPS, too, but this hasn't really been necessary at all in my parent's case.)

The mower will automatically shut down when it bumps into something (and it will try to find another way around it) and it will also stop when lifted up.

My parent's robot always found back to its charging station on its own this summer, except those couple times it got stuck when they were still experimenting with boundaries. And that's despite my parents having a quite complicated and large garden.

The result is a lawn that looks better than ever before (basically always like it was just mowed) and extremely even. Also, my parents can now focus on the gardening they actually enjoy (and they aren't the youngest anymore, which is not ideal if you have to mow a huge garden manually).

I don't think I would want this robot driving around with a toddler on the lawn, but that's about it.

This problem is solved and robots do an excellent job.

(Here is the brand of robot my parents use: [http://www.husqvarna.com/us/products/robotic- mowers/husqvarn...](http://www.husqvarna.com/us/products/robotic- mowers/husqvarna-robotic-mowers-for-homeowners/) There are many others.)

<comment><USER11> Looks great. I don't know why I didn't know about these yet (well, most likely because I live in an apartment with no lawn), but thanks to you and patrickk in this thread I do. (His video link is very informative, btw).

A robo-mower would have indeed made a better housewarming gift for my sister than the cordless Dyson I bought her (same as mine)... although it would have set me back $2,300 instead of $300.

Still, very cool.

OK floors and lawns, ✓ DONE! Next somebody please point me to the already- existing window-washing robot.

<comment><USER41> WINBOT [http://www.amazon.com/WINBOT-W730-Cleaning-Frameless- Windows...](http://www.amazon.com/WINBOT-W730-Cleaning-Frameless- Windows/dp/B00CJUTOQU)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> Is pricing available yet? I've been thinking about a robot vacuum since I moved into a new house with all hard floors.

<comment><USER43> According to the DailyMail, it will cost around £750, or around $1230.

[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2743185/Dyson...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2743185/Dyson- launches-world-s-smart-robot-vacuum-live-cameras-map-house-puts-away.html)

<comment><USER44> £750 is normally around $750

<comment><USER45> It's really not: [https://www.google.com/finance?q=GBPUSD](https://www.google.com/finance?q=GBPUSD)

<comment><USER46> OP was probably referring to the fact that things sold in the UK are generally more expensive than the US. Something sold in the US for $100 might be £100 in the UK, even though the conversion rate would have you think it should be £60.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> Good luck getting underneath furniture or cabinet overhangs!

<comment><USER48> I'm more concerned about stairs.

<comment><USER49> Basic roombas handle stairs and overhangs, you just need a very basic IR rangefinder on the circumference, if a finder or two "loses ground" there's probably a hole, treat as a wall.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> "This unique 360° vision system uses complex mathematics, probability theory, geometry and trigonometry to map and navigate a room. So it knows where it is, where it's been and where it's yet to clean."

I hate the "Oh, why don't we use slightly complex words to make the consumers feel impressed" marketing practice. Like when shampoo ads use phrases like "advanced [made-up-word] technology."

Edit: That was a bit grumpier than it should have been. I haven't had coffee yet.

<comment><USER51> I have heard multiple people to complain that Roombas are just wandering around randomly. It's worth to note that none of these complainers had a Roomba at home, so the issue might only be a perceived one. But nevertheless in marketing these things count, and who knows? Maybe Dyson tried it and found the sensored version superior in engineering terms too.

So on one hand you have people complaining about 'random movements', and you have an automated vac which doesn't do that. How do you communicate this? The feature is clearly important enough for them to put it in the name. It's not called Dyson TankTrack or Dyson DoubleBristle, it's called Dyson 360 Eye.

So they could say: "doesn't move randomly" but that's probably not true, and doesn't sound any good. Quite likely it falls back to random wandering to re- locate from a kidnaped-robot situation. Besides negative statements ought to be avoided because they focus the costumer on what you don't have, instead of what you have. (at least so it goes the marketing wisdom)

They could also just say: "does SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Mapping)" would be accurate, and would be totally cryptic for anyone who is not in the know.

Of course I haven't tested the robot, but if it does what they imply, then the consumer shouldn't feel impressed because of the complex words. They should feel impressed because this is impressive. Does it vacuum better? Who knows, we will see.

<comment><USER49> > I have heard multiple people to complain that Roombas are just wandering > around randomly.

The roombas do, as far as I know, mostly wander randomly. Not only (they'll also follow walls and stuff), but they most definitely don't map a room plan which they methodically go through, they don't have the sensors to.

There are other vacuums with room mapping (samsung's navibot), I'm not aware that they do better than roombas in the long run (although they probably pass over each spot at least once per session, which roombas don't necessarily do)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> For the web inclined guys here. What techniques are used to show motion/animation? looks quite smooth/impressive

<comment><USER53> As a web developer and web user I completely refuse to tell you, otherwise I worry you might copy this horrendous site design elsewhere.

This is a site anti-pattern (at least at desktop resolution). The site is only readable when I shrink the browser down until that terrible animated nonsense goes away.

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> Can they put panorama camera on the bottom so it can actually look under the couch to see dirt?

</comment><comment><USER55> How can something so high vacuum properly under the furniture?

Is that an obvious flaw, or am i mistaken?

</comment><comment><USER56> I expect this is a the top of HN because people are interested in hacking their Dyson robot and write some custom Anroid/iOS apps to control it? Otherwise, it's a vacuum, or is this some type of sponsored Sears post I don't know about?

</comment><comment><USER57> Unreliable, expensive parts, poor design and now they're introducing more technology and robotics!?!

I've owned a few Dyson products - totally horrid. Never again. The only positive think I can say is that their service department sends out parts quickly.

</comment><comment><USER58> What is a "digital motor"?

<comment><USER59> Dyson make a number of dubious claims.

[http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/13087/what- is...](http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/13087/what-is-a-digital- motor)

[http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reluctance_motor](http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reluctance_motor)

The UK regulator of advertising lists a few upheld complaints, and some informally resolved complaints against Dyson.

[http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications.aspx?SearchTerms...](http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications.aspx?SearchTerms=Dyson#results)

</comment></comment><comment><USER60> Fantastically annoying page design.

Scrolling takes many seconds to just show the next page, with no indication that anything is happening. Just blank blackness.

Then each page requires you to hunt and click little circles with pluses in them, just to show a paragraph or two of copy.

Would it have killed them to just present all the text at once? Perhaps use tabs or some other "normal" solution to the problem of wanting to talk about different aspects of a product? This whole "scroll to begin" paradigm is so annoying, I think the fact that they felt they had to include that little helper _just to tell people how to get to the content_ is an indication that perhaps a better design exists.

Still, I'm glad that there's a robotic vacuum cleaner with better optical bandwidth than humans. I'm sure that's a major selling point in (robotic) vacuums.

(Also, this is a re-post of [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8267476](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8267476)).

<comment><USER14> Clearly it was designed and tested in IE as that is the only browser that it actually works in. It almost kills Firefox for me.

<comment><USER34> Worked really well in Chrome/OSX for me. Transitions were a bit slow and it's not how I would build the site, but it did work.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> They claim that avoiding vacuuming the same area twice saves power, but is that true in every situation? Math-wise, it seems possible for a self-avoiding path (with thickness) to be _longer_ than a similar path (with thickness) that does self-intersect, so the vacuum is on longer, so it actually consumes more power.

Edit: And if you do go over the same spot twice, you should be able to detect that with your navigation system so that you can turn the brushes and suction off or something.

</comment><comment><USER62> dyson is the new apple

</comment><comment><USER63> Probably won't even considering buying this vacuum due to the page design. The images didn't load. Jerk scroll. What a mess.</comment>


Microsoft Is Dead. Long Live Microsoft. - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/23/opinion/23carr.html?ex=1248321600&en=313e86d1b0f2ac2f&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland <comment><USER2> I read about the fallout from that announcement sometime last year. By announcing that they were giving back money to their shareholders, they opened the door for savvy stock market gurus. These guys milked it for all it was worth by first loading up on the stock in order to get the cash from the dividends. Because all these people were buying the stock, its price became artificially inflated, so they proceeded to borrow against the stock at this point (in order to short-sell later). Then the dividends came, and they got the $3/share from Microsoft. Immediately after this, they proceeded to sell the stocks that got them the dividends, which led to the stock price falling sharply. Finally, to round it all out, they proceeded to make good on the short-sells once the stocks were low, leading to a nice profit all-around.

I wish I remembered where I read about this scheme; it sounded pretty brilliant to me. I always wondered, though, if a bunch of people playing the stock market profited from this, who lost out? I guess the long-time shareholders and Microsoft, itself.</comment>


Egypt's ridiculous licensing law for online media is being implemented - <AUTHOR> https://www.iafrikan.com/2018/10/22/egypt-media-policy-governance-politics-regulation-licenses/ <comment><USER2> Don't think Egypt has any media. However, it does have powerful propaganda machines. This law must be part of the propaganda machine, so they can revoke any "media" that doesn't align with Mubarak v2.0 (CC). The people sitting in the Egyptian parliament (does it exist), must have non-positive IQ. It is impossible to enforce law. Register the accounts outside Egypt, or move the hosting oversees, problem solved.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes but they ban websites (stated in the article) via ISPs. They previously banned HuffPo and New York Times citing fake news.</comment></comment>


Newly Discovered Object Could Be a Leftover Apollo Rocket Stage - <AUTHOR> https://cneos.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news134.html <comment><USER2> [2002]</comment>


Why Airbnb is suddenly struggling to make money - <AUTHOR> https://www.vox.com/2020/2/12/21134477/airbnb-loss-profit-ipo-safety-tech-marketing <comment><USER2> I haven't yet used AirBNB because the whole thing seems sketchy to me. The behavior of the company itself and the behavior of some of the hosts make my nervous about using them, and the last thing I want to be with this sort of thing is even a little bit nervous. So, at least for the time being, I'm more than happy sticking with traditional hotels and bed-and-breakfasts.

If AirBNB finds a way to fix these issues, then I may become interested in giving them a try. But I will want to see at least a couple of years go by without undue problems first.

</comment><comment><USER3> Why did this get flagged?

Anyway, the AirBnB story is interesting because we get to watch how these sharing economy companies will spend and innovate around trust and safety, two things they eschewed or were largely ignorant of in the beginning.

I am a happy customer of AirBNB and wish them luck going for the IPO. I think their business will only be more valuable and legitimate as they implement these measures into their business.</comment>


Lines form around the US for the Surface Pro launch (pics to prove it) - Suraj-Sun http://www.neowin.net/news/lines-form-around-the-us-for-the-surface-pro-launch

<comment><AUTHOR> These photos are from the Seattle launch. So I am not sure how many of those are employees, MVPs or related but it does mean that it needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

<comment><USER2> I agree that we should take it with a grain of salt. Remember that at the RT launch, MSFT employees had to line up to get their free RTs.

Also lots of reports are stating that some stores received low single digit quantities (including the display model).</comment></comment>