An Update to Our Community and an Apology - <AUTHOR> https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/334248/an-update-to-our-community-and-an-apology <comment><USER3> Some useful links to the situation. (You can find all these in the responses).

Monica Cellio's account: [https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5193/stack-...](https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5193/stack- overflow-inc-sinat-chinam-and-the-goat-for-azazel)

A news paper article on the situation: [https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/10/01/stack_exchange_cont...](https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/10/01/stack_exchange_controversy/)

A list of mods fired or resigned: [https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/333965/firing- mods-...](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/333965/firing-mods-and- forced-relicensing-is-stack-exchange-still-interested-in-cooper)

A mods reasons for leaving: [https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/b...](https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/brothers- i-must-go)

<comment><USER4> I would like to add that I found [https://stats.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5765/moderato...](https://stats.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5765/moderator- resignation) a very comprehensive and faceted summary.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Reading some of Monica's commentary on this, it pains me to conclude that she doesn't know just how bad the situation is. She appears to have approached the issue in question respectfully and highlighted her concerns diplomatically, and she believes there must be a "big misunderstanding" because of the extreme response with which she was met. Surely all parties are interested in reaching an outcome everyone can live with, right? Wrong.

The reason her questions and were met with summary punishment was due to the fact that the moral crusaders she was attempting to engage with _do not tolerate ideological noncompliance._ There was no "misunderstanding." Chipps and the rest could detect that she was likely to continue to ask questions about the policy, and anyone who dares question such policies is clearly a "bigot" and a "transphobe," and why would you want someone like that to be a moderator?

Word to the wise: people like this (moral crusaders) will not hesitate to burn your organization _to the ground_ if they don't get their way. They'll run coups (like this), condemn you on Twitter, and scare everyone into first being silent, then leaving the org, either out of fear of being the next to be condemned, or just the exhaustion of dealing with it all. I have seen this happen to non-profits, conferences, even private school boards (take a look at Oberlin for an example). If you get crusaders like this in your org, you should consider it an existential threat.

Well, off to delete my Stack Overflow account.

<comment><USER6> I just deleted mine. Then I discovered on that delete page that you have to separately delete the accounts you might have on other exchanges. This is bad UX.

I searched the net for a bit and it seems the way to do it is via:

\- [https://stackoverflow.com/contact](https://stackoverflow.com/contact)

\- Select Other in the drop-down list,

\- Then you enter a message that you want them to do delete your accounts for you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> -542 before it was locked. That's incredible.

People are really really afraid to talk about this particular topic (which they don't mention in the statement), because this type of call-out to be banned happens a lot.

The book "The Coddling of the American Mind" is an amazing book that documents how this is happening in academia, and it's happening on the software world too. Most people in our industry, in the US, EU and others, tend to be moderate and/or centrists. We don't want to rock the boat; politics is fun to talk about but when that one guy and/or girl goes off in the office, everyone wants to change to topic or go back to their desks and code.

But under the surface, no one agrees with extremism; both extreme fake-left or extreme fake-right. I'd like to think the majority of people just want to live and be kind to each other, but that can lead to ambivalence when people with directional agendas want to push a narrative at the expense of everything else.

If people start talking about the hard issues, but do so respectfully and by making arguments that are sound, we should have clear, rational and reasonable debate. A decision might be made we don't agree with, but as long as the discussion happens, everyone can learn from it and we can agree to disagree and move on.

The polarization of groups of people over ideological lines has never ended well.

<comment><USER8> Saying that most people don't agree with extreme positions is a bit of a tautology, since positions are defined as "extreme" if few people agree with them. There is therefore nothing universal or fundamentally meaningful about this label, and the same position (e.g. support of interracial marriage) may be considered a perfectly normal or a radically extremist position depending on the time and place.

<comment><USER9> Eh, in some instances you can define extremeness relative to alternatives, not number of believers. Execution as a punishment is more extreme than a fine regardless of how many people favor execution over fines. I would argue that generally a position being extreme results in fewer believers, not that fewer believers results in a position being extreme.

<comment><USER10> Agreed. This is how we use the term in political science anyway. Even if an "extreme" opinion becomes majoritary, it remains just as extreme on a supposed "spectrum" of possibles. "More" than "extreme" usually takes you off-spectrum, e.g. anarchy (which is often considered beyond extreme right, at least in Europe) or "hive mind" would fit beyond extreme left ideas of collectivism (a sci-fi concept of unified minds and thinking, like colonies of ants but next level. lol.) Both are off the political spectrum though, can't describe them using the same elements.

Reality is obviously much more "blurry". Most political experts would argue (rightfully so, imho) that most "extreme" views are in fact not "left" or "right" of moderate ones; they sit in a different "plane" so to speak, a third space distinct from left/right (you'd indeed find a lot of right-ish and left- ish ideas mixed in with most "extreme" ideologies; you also find lots of moderate and extreme views in otherwise 'normal' (statistically) parties).

Left/right itself, or moderate/extreme, are also pretty poor and unsubstantial ways to define any idea or anyone, it's a poor man's shortcut to summarize _a context_ , not ideas themselves. Most people today would sit far left of anyone in past history, for instance, while being much more individualistic at the same time.

Reality is complex. The media don't like complex (is media plural? shall I call it something else in pronoun?). Hence, theatric storytelling of the left versus the right, and/or moderates vs. extremes, iced with a general misunderstanding of statistics. I will now refrain from making any conclusion.

<comment><USER11> > e.g. anarchy (which is often considered beyond extreme right, at least in > Europe)

Anarchists are leftists, Ancaps are on the right.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> >Last week we made an important decision for our community. We removed a moderator for repeatedly violating our existing Code of Conduct and being unwilling to accept our CM's repeated requests to change their behavior.

Hang on a sec...

>their behaviour.

Wasn't monica fired for suggesting she used gender neutral pronouns generally? Because they said she should use the preferred gender specific pronoun when known?

And now "Sara Chipps" is doing exactly that?!

<comment><USER13> > Wasn't monica fired for suggesting she used gender neutral pronouns > generally?

In the comments to the linked question, Monica Cellio says StackOverflow have not told her what parts of the CoC she was violating. I don't think it's public knowledge why she was demodded.

(Is 'fired' an appropriate word to use, when Monica wasn't an employee?)

<comment><USER14> The most direct statement seems to be from [https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/10/01/stack_exchange_cont...](https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/10/01/stack_exchange_controversy/)

> _Asked to confirm that Cellio was the moderator in question, a company > spokesperson said, "Cellio (she/her) would not use stated pronouns, which > violates our current CoC …_

<comment><USER5> Also from that article:

 _> Cellio, for what it's worth, does not include any preferred pronouns on her Twitter account._

Yet, when they refer to her, Stack Exchange puts pronouns next to her name, clearly against her own "preferences." It's like they're literally forcing onto her an ideology or worldview which they know she does not share.

What bizarre, hypocritical, vindictive behavior from Stack Exchange.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> The title is misleading, this is not an apology.

As a former operator of a (much smaller) community website, I understand the motives behind SE actions. They want to avoid discussions about gender-neutral pronouns and other contentious topics completely. There are only risks and no benefits for SE business in such discussions.They actually do not want discussions, just questions and answers. Jeff Atwood once wrote a blog post about their effort to stiffle discussion on SE sites. Notice how their comments are difficult to use and see.

Unfortunately, SE is many people with different goals, someone made the move to update the CoC, and now SE management has to tame the public outrage.

IMO, the right management decision is to silently fire or move the person behind the CoC update, remove moderator status from Monica forever and publicly define limits to SE discussions in future annoucements.

<comment><USER16> Curious why you would remove moderator status from Monica?

From my understanding it appears that she was demoted for merely posing relevant questions.

As I don't believe SE has even made any specific claims backing up their decision, I'm curious as to why you suggest this is the correct decision to make.

<comment><USER17> I think they should remove many many more moderators, for no reason other than not doing so risks turning their site and resource into a Wikipedia 2.0, a place where cliquey moderators hang out to discuss their favorite flame bait topics all day, populate gigabytes of meta pages and lash out at unwitting, novel contributors. Wikipedia think a lack of a fancy SPA editor is the reason behind their editor demographics, and they couldn't be further from the truth.

Ideally start with just straight up removing half the current moderators. Pick at random.

<comment><USER18> The Thanos plan for fixing StackExchange, really?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Is that an apology? It reads more like "I am sorry that you are angry, but we did nothing wrong so suck it lololol"

I don't know if the SO mod (Cellio) is in the wrong, but they did not give any explanation why Cellio was removed. I am unconvinced by this update.

<comment><USER20> If a corporation ever admits doing something wrong, it's admissible evidence in a lawsuit against them. That's why corporations never admit any wrongdoing regardless of how obvious it is that they did.

(And before anyone post the usual " _corporations suck_ " rant, the exact same principle applies to individuals. Anybody who ever watched James Duane's "Never talk to the police" video knows why. Why would it be any different for a corporation?)

<comment><USER21> That is an odd statement. Corporations admit wrongdoing or mistakes all the time and not to mention there could never be any lawsuit from something like this.

It is just that they introduced a rule and still feel it is a correct one.

<comment><USER4> Them introducing (in the future) a rule (which we don't know the details of as of yet) is more or less orthogonal to claiming that Monica violated the current CoC.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> It's hard to be believe that people who are brave enough to deal with LGBTQIA issues in their own lives and face actual in-your-face challenges would actually give a crap what pronoun someone used on a technical forum, and it seems absurd to regulate such behavior. If I don't want to be a dick and am aware of the preference, then I will try and use the person's preferred pronoun - but I'm certainly not obligated to do so on SO or even in person. The other person can take offense or not, it is their/his/her own choice. I suppose the problem can be solved by just always using the person's name, or using other anaphora such as "the OP", or @username, etc.

<comment><USER23> So, the solution you proposed is exactly what the moderators asked to do. Seems fair enough to me. They were told that not playing the pronoun game is the same as harassing whomever they are speaking to.

The whole situation is ridiculous to me. How have we come to a point where not only do people think I care in the slightest who or what they have sex with (or don't, whatever), but they demand I call them by some word they made up to classify themselves as something? Don't tell me what I can or can't say, and I wont tell you who/what you can and can't screw.

How do fascists not realize they are being such? "You don't have proper thoughts on matters so you aren't allowed to speak".

<comment><USER24> > How do fascists not realize they are being such?

What an outrageous level of hyperbole. It is not fascism to ask others to not intentionally misgender people.

<comment><USER25> Agreed. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills reading most of the commentary here on HN or elsewhere about this.

I get that there's some details about this case that are a bit ambiguous, but it doesn't seem obviously worth a witchhunt of SO. If it seemed to SO like a moderator was looking for loopholes for not enforcing a CoC, then I don't think it's wrong for them to consider the moderator as working in bad faith and not moderator material.

<comment><USER26> Likewise. I am shocked by the lack of empathy expressed by many here and on SO. Pronouns may be a small thing for a cis person, but for others they are a way to reclaim an identity denied to them. To deny anyone that basic level of respect is unconscionable, regardless of whether a code of conduct enforces it or not. A person tasked with enforcing community norms who is unwilling to do that and more, who subverts drafting a policy in bad faith, has no business being a moderator.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Out of 5 paragraphs of text, the only "apology" was "We're sorry for the confusion and uneasiness that caused." which is the equivalent of spitting on someone's face and apologizing with "I'm sorry you felt spit on."

I feel like we're watching one of the pillars of modern software development crumble.

<comment><USER28> Why would they apologise? They aren't sorry they sacked this moderator. They fully stand by their decision.

<comment><USER27> Well, the title of the post is "An Update to our Community and an Apology" so we should expect an apology in there.

<comment><USER28> Yep, and they're sorry for the uneasiness and confusion. I'm saying they aren't going to apologise for the sacking itself, because they stand by it.

<comment><USER29> Sorry has multiple meanings in context. I can be sorry you got the hiccups during a speech. That's not an apology.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Some of the responses to this article showcase opinions that I see a lot on Hacker News and which make it really hard to be on this site as a trans person sometimes. There's a lot of attention being paid to the people who resigned, or whose moderator status was revoked—and how accommodating they may or may not have been—but it seems like very little of them are focusing on the people who this preferred pronoun policy was designed to help in the first place.

I know lots of people in my life who are genderfluid, or who use nonstandard pronouns. They aren't the caricatures that some of the people in this thread are making them out to be, they're real people who are out there doing their best and live as themselves, and it's really difficult seeing this thing they struggle with every day be labeled a "political" issue.

<comment><USER31> Sometimes i consider myself lucky that i don't know anyone seeking special pronouns - because i imagine i would repeatedly use what i visually see, not what they request.

These days i seek to find a gender neutral word i can get into the habit of using _(it, or they, or something similar)_ , for fear of mis-nouning someone. Though, i also have the fear that if i use something neutral, when someone requested a specific non-neutral pronoun, i may be negatively impacted.

As someone "on the spectrum" social norms are already difficult. All of this talk just makes me nervous.

<comment><USER32> Think of special pronouns as names. All the etiquette we have surrounding names apply equally to pronouns.

It's not expected to remember someone's name if you've only met them briefly, but the more you've interacted with the person, the more embarrassing not remembering their name becomes.

Mis-naming someone intentionally, repeatedly, is rude and quickly moves into harassment territory.

But the flipside is also true, if someone demands to be called a long and complicated and unusual name, then that person is rude, and can't expect others to comply or remember.

Pronouns work exactly the same. If someone tells you they prefer a pronoun that is different from the gender they present as, it's polite to remember this and use this when talking about the person. But if you forget, it should be treated like if you forgot that persons name.

If you intentionally and repeatedly mis-gender someone, it is rude and quickly moves into harassment territory.

And, finally the flipside, if someone has an onerous or complicated preferred pronoun, _that_ person is rude and can't expect others to comply or remember.

<comment><USER29> > ...if someone has an onerous or complicated preferred pronoun, that person > is rude and can't expect others to comply or remember.

To the extent that there is any controversy here, it's in this guideline. I'd just soften 'rude' to unreasonable.

1\. I have not seen any code of conduct make room for this scenario. It's taken as a given that pronoun preferences are reasonable.

2\. Some people think singular 'they' and 'their' falls in this bucket.

3\. Some people think writing in passive voice, etc., should be considered a good faith effort to be accommodating.

Pedantically applied, most codes of conduct make room for the judges and queens to insist on "his honor" and "Her Majesty" as pronouns, at least in some contexts.

I honestly wish some people would decide that this whole thing is too complicated to legislate completely and institute some sort of jury system, at least on appeal, to decide what counts as reasonable.

<comment><USER33> You cannot compel people to talk in a certain way. To do so is totalitarian and evil.

<comment><USER32> If we work in the same place and if I consistently and intentionally call you a different name than your actual name, I'm harassing you, I'm bullying you, and if the place we work at has decent HR policies, I will get fired.

So I am absolutely compelled to call you your actual name, I'm compelled to talk in a certain way if I want to keep my job, and this isn't totalitarian or evil, it's simply having manners and treating each other with respect.

<comment><USER34> Agreed entirely with this. But it's also just an evolving social norm that these HR rules are based on. (As a few generations back, I assume, males got away with maybe calling their female colleagues "missy".) So, with that, I'm just curious where the average HR stands on pronouns.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> When you get militant about subtle behaviours this happens. There is too much nuance in human interactions for policing them to this degree. You will always offend someone. They had a choice of offending those who didn't like gender neutral pronouns or those in the SE community that supported that mod.

I don't really have a horse in that race but I don't see a way they could have come out of that without offending anyone. If we're going through a culture change that changes the way we address people so be it, but it's going to get messy once we start enforcing new social rules.

</comment><comment><USER35> Stack Exchange as an organization might (somehow) be prohibited from releasing all of the background information that they have used for their decision making. But I am surprised that they haven't released _any_ information, given the serious allegations made against them. And I haven't read anything corroborating Stack Exchange's "side" of the story, whereas a large number of people seem to be standing up for Monica.

I see three possibilities: 1\. Monica telling the complete truth, there is a terrible misunderstanding, but SE doesn't want to lose face by backing down 2\. Monica is lying 3\. Monica is terribly confused

At this point, we all have to assume it's #1. If it's #2 or #3, SE really needs to come out and say something (beyond "we stand by our decision but our process needs updating") for the good of the communities. Stack Exchange is nothing without the community, since 100% of the content on SE was directly contributed by the community.

<comment><USER36> In one of the comments, by Monica it seems, she's not convinced of any wrong doing:

> "repeatedly violating our existing Code of Conduct": citation needed. "CM's > repeated requests to change": citation needed. – _Monica Cellio_

And later she clarifies that she doesn't know the specific thing that caused it:

> @Randal'Thor let's start with them telling us exactly what part of the > current CoC they think I "repeated violated". There's a lot of discussion in > that email including of deeply personal identity-background stuff, so I want > to know what the charge is before I decide if that response would help. They > didn't even tell me what they think I did. – _Monica Cellio_

Edit: added 2nd comment by Monica

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> I've never seen a code of conduct that makes calling someone by the wrong first name a bannable offense. So why is it so with pronouns? IMHO it's because this issue is politically unsettled -- it is not universally resolved across society. A fair percentage of people do not accept the concept of transgenderism, and instead see a transgender woman as a mentally ill man (and vice versa).

While this issue is politically unsettled, it cannot be correct to enforce one side's view by banning people on the other side of the argument if they don't tacitly concede the argument via enforced pronoun usage.

[Personally I hold no strong opinions about transgenderism, I just hate to see society splitting apart.]

<comment><USER38> It is completely appropriate to enforce a trans-affirming policy. A view that considers a group of people -- other people that participate on the site -- mentally ill, has no place in workplaces, large-scale online forums and polite society in general.

<comment><USER37> I'm not among this group we speak of, but I will never accept that view of them. They are not malicious, they are just different, and we should be tolerant of them even if they are not tolerant of transgenders.... in the same way that we are tolerant of Islam even though Islam is not tolerant of women's rights.

I consider them (Christians) to be mentally ill what with all that christian god stuff they preach. Do you therefore think I also have no place in "workplaces, large-scale online forums and polite society in general" because I consider this "group of people -- other people that participate on the site -- mentally ill"?

I think this way leads to a Oberton window that only narrows, like a boa constrictor. I prefer broader thinking and more tolerance for a wider set of views.

<comment><USER38> The goal should be to _shift_ the overton window towards greater justice, not simply broaden it.

Yes, a view that all Christians are mentally ill has no place in workplaces either. This does not mean that you cannot privately hold such views, but that you should not act in the workplace in ways that show you hold those views (so you should not misgender a trans person, for example).

<comment><USER37> My mother is in her 70s. She won't willingly knowingly recognize a trans person to be of the "gender" they claim, because she honestly believes deep in her mind that doing so is a sin against God and man, and she would be forfeiting her place in heaven. She wouldn't hurt a fly but she's between a rock and a hard place. The only emotion she ever expresses is guilt. I think she is delusional (mentally ill) and I blame religion. If some website decided to kick her off because of a silly pronoun, even though she was behaving entirely sincerely, because IMHO they are intolerant of her viewpoint (and she is not an isolated case), then I would be inclined to leave said website as well.

I will not reply to anymore of your comments as you have expressed your view that I shouldn't be allowed to, and I don't want to offend you any further.

<comment><USER38> Your premise is wrong. A pronoun is not "silly" to a trans person! If your mother was misgendering a dog that would be one thing, but it's a _person_ we're taking about here. A human being. Your mother does not simply get to hurt other people's feelings because of her religion.

It is still inappropriate to call all Christians mentally ill. I know plenty of Christians who have no trouble treating trans people with all the respect they deserve.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> This is sad, but I feel it was an inevitable consequence of allowing religion- orientated stackexchanges to be created in the first place. It's practically inviting a holy war. The people running them would likely be those who care deeply about doctrine, and the chances of a headlong collision over LGBT doctrine were always high.

<comment><USER40> Allowing? Why would you not allow them in the first place? In any case, there shouldn't be any collisions if they are separate network sites except in the case of fiat decisions from the top.

<comment><USER41> The nature of SE is that each site has a very specific topic. The SE company approves which sites / topics are allowed. So yes, by consequence of how the system works they would have to explicitly approve a "Christianity", "Judaism", "Islam", etc. stack exchange.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> This is pretty bad. It would have been way better to post nothing than to post this.

If you want to have a community, then treat your community like intelligent humans. And to be clear, you absolutely _depend_ on the good will of your community. This is non-optional.

Admit your mistake and fix it. And if you think that your mistake was the timing, then talk to someone who understands the situation.

<comment><USER43> This is what makes me pessimistic about the world will live in. It doesn't matter. SE will probably be just fine. Not enough people will leave for it to matter.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> This _really_ seems like a "respect mah authoritah!" situation followed by "oh crap it's blowing up, apply more power! This will not be re-litigated." Looking from the outside as someone who's mostly ignored SE for the last few years, this feels to me like something personal combined with _making_ an opportunity.

I can't help but feel that the current "Director of Community" at the core of this will be moving to a different non-community position before long. It seems like a poor place to have someone who's managed to drive out a significant percentage of the volunteer moderators for the whole network.

And _my_ preferred pronoun this week is blergl.

<comment><USER45> You may have been making an interesting point, but the "preferred pronoun of the week" bit at the end kind of kills it.

Have you ever met someone who changes their gender identity weekly, or asks people to use a derivation-free nonsense word to refer to them?

<comment><USER46> Yes, they proudly call themselves gender-fluid and state that they change pronouns frequently.

And many state to use non-existing words as pronouns such as xhy, requiring a mental effort to remember a new word they invented and also to remember to whom that word is associated, so the satire of using blerg as pronoun is spot- on while also offensive to some.

<comment><USER44> _Ahem._ "Blergl," not "blerg." I've expressed a preference for a pronoun, please make the effort to address me in the appropriate manner.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> SE's actions seem heavy-handed to say the least, and to be fair it is a private platform dictated by their own rules - but what this will lead to is disillusionment within the community and honestly I feel this has been a long time coming.

If neither the mods nor users feel heard, who does this "platform" serve?

<comment><USER48> why does the stack network ( [https://stackexchange.com/sites#](https://stackexchange.com/sites#) ) have any advantages?

I see a lot of complaints, about questions closed as redundant etc, and about moderation, but what keeps someone from putting a better version up? In particular unlike quora, the reputation of the person answering doesn't seem as important. most people would accept anyone's answer as long as it works.

so what's the important network effect here?

<comment><USER49> I've been wondering the same thing myself lately, the only advantage I can think of this accumulated information on the site (in the form of Q&As). I'd imagine a majority of SE traffic is people reading old questions, though if anyone knows this assumption to be wrong please correct me. I also wonder if scraping the Q&As and posting elsewhere would be some sort of legal violation? It would be fairly trivial to host the current body of knowledge up to this point on a static site and then start fresh.

<comment><USER50> > I also wonder if scraping the Q&As and posting elsewhere would be some sort > of legal violation?

The (unilateral) relicensing was another recent issue, but generally not. All user contributions are licensed CC-BY-SA 3.0 so I don't see legal reasons stopping you. Google won't send you any traffic, though, because it will be duplicate content and the original has a gajillion links pointing to it.

<comment><USER51> And a gajillion comments on code

# see [https://stackoverflow/something](https://stackoverflow/something) to understand the next two lines

And then one day SO closes.

(I saw some software build pipes explicitly looking for SO comments and rejecting the code)

<comment><USER52> I link to websites when I copy someone else's code, for attribution. How do these "build pipes" expecting me to do it instead if the code is from stack exchange ?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> One way to handle these kinds of contentious moderator debates is with freedom. Since Stackoverflow/Stackexchange does not open source their code, there are a number of Free Software clones which handle questions and answers Stackexchange style.

I will link to just one: [https://github.com/ASKBOT/askbot- devel](https://github.com/ASKBOT/askbot-devel)

Point being, there is nothing stopping someone from hosting this code and making their own Q&A board with their own moderation policies.

</comment><comment><USER54> Their aim was building "a more welcoming and inclusive network". The first step towards this is... excluding people, apparently.

<comment><USER4> Directly from the stackoverflow.com homepage: [https://i.imgur.com/XB1ORxW.png](https://i.imgur.com/XB1ORxW.png)

Very ironic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> Does anyone really think that the use of gender neutral language (using they rather than he or she) is mis-gendering in the absence of knowing someone's preferred pronoun set?

<comment><USER56> If they honestly don't know the persons gender then it isn't clear to me why they would choose a pronoun to begin with. If I don't know someone's name I don't just start calling them Bill, I ask them their name and when they say "Hi I'm William but I prefer Bill" and move on with my life knowing to refer to this person as Bill, not William.

If it was a genuine accident I personally see no problem with it and from my personal anecdotal experience the only place I've seen anyone get upset over an accidental misgendering or accidental dead naming was on outrage pieces done by outragePorn news sites just looking for ways to clickbait vulnerable anger-prone clickers.

If someone _intentionally_ misgenders another I personally just assume the misgenderer is an asshole, just as I would if someone intentionally and repeatedly calls someone by the wrong name.

<comment><USER46> The problem is that in many cases you can never know for sure if someone is _intentionally_ missgendering or if it was just a mistake (e.g forgot their pronouns or if is confusing them for someone else), which is extremely easy to do in online forum because we lack a lot of social clues present in real life that help us remind who are we talking to, like their faces and their voice; more-so because internet moderators interact with hundreds of people on a daily basis and is completely reasonable to forget some details of each conversation they participate in.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> The weirdest thing about this whole kerfuffle is that _gender is entirely irrelevant_ on Stack Exchange. Due to the Q&A format where each answer is supposed to stand alone, there's rarely if ever a need to refer to other users in content. If you do need to, eg. in the comments, long-standing convention is to use @username instead of pronouns. And if despite all this I wanted to use pronouns for some weird reason, it's genuinely difficult to figure out which ones, because most usernames are non-gendered and there's no obvious/mandatory place to look them up for a user.

<comment><USER58> The point of the issue was that it was stated that to use gender neutral pronouns was deemed to misgendering in itself. One couldn't just be neutral. By not using any pronouns at all would be the same thing ( I guess? ).

Consider the hypothetical case of a user using @usernames for some users and the preferred pronouns for selected others.

<comment><USER59> Sounds a lot like trying to force my speech. I'm going to say "the individual" or "they" and if that upsets people then I guess I'm someone who upsets people.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> There was a thread on this earlier today too, but it fell off the main page really quickly:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21149770](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21149770)

<comment><USER60> That one got both a software penalty (flamewar detector) and a moderator penalty (similar). But there have been so many submissions about this that it seems there's a community interest in discussing it that is more than just latest-routine-outrage. So we rolled back the clock on this one and put it in the second-chance pool (described at [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11662380](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11662380)). Not sure if that was a good idea or not.

<comment><USER19> Thank you for doing this. I thought i was stuck in a time loop aka Groundhog Day when I saw the thread in HN's front page, and my post was timestamped at 7 hours (instead of 2 days) ago.

I believe this is an important issue. Regardless of whether SO is right or not, they do owe their community (of which I am not a part of) an explanation. Unlike the Google's gender controversy, SO is mostly operated by unpaid volunteers. If you are a paid worker, your share of responsibility and the expectation from/to your company is very different from community driven projects such as SO.

tl:dr SO needs to be held to a higher standard than your usual commercial companies.

<comment><USER60> (Yes, the software relativizes the timestamps on a thread while re-upping a submission; see [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20169818](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20169818). It's confusing but keeping the original timestamps is worse and we've yet to figure out a better way to do it. I suppose this needs to go in the FAQ.)

<comment><USER61> I don't understand why you don't have banners, on stories that have had editorial changes, to say what the editorial changes are. For example (not suggestions for text) "story reposted with different timestamps", "title changed from 'X is the best thing eva'", "link changed from 'www.superspammy.co.net'", or whatever.

Is transparency of editorial actions bad somehow?

<comment><USER60> tptacek's reply is correct. The other thing is that we try to be careful about not compromising HN's minimalism, which would be so easy to do.

<comment><USER61> "no discussion of moderation" (like the rule on not discussing downvotes) seems to handle the first part.

Often, but not consistently AFAICT, a moderator (such as yourself Dang) will add a comment to the effect that a title was changed or a link was rewritten, it's just hidden in the comments; that's a strange thing to do if you fear discussions devolving towards meta topics.

Problems arise when people comment on a story when the substantive parts of the story then have been changed.

As for the second part, surely optional features (as there are already, eg "display dead") don't _compromise_ minimalism.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> To me, the most interesting thing about the whole episode is that the post was locked and unable to be voted upon after massive downvotes from users.

<comment><USER4> Keeping the debate even moderately civil requires constant vigilance from the moderators and community managers. There is a constant stream of nasty comments - you don't see them because they are removed quickly. There were times where no one was present to moderate, so the post was _temporarily_ locked. It has since crossed into the four digits of downvotes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER63> I don't know about who, what, where, when or why... but the "don't ship on Friday" comment in an apology statement regarding the handling of firing someone is completely brain dead / tone deaf. In the very few official statements I've worked on, they are reviewed by so many people (so many that even _I_ had to vet it). Unbelievable that "don't ship on Friday" got through.

<comment><USER3> Looks like the mod that made that post is a developer. No offence to other developers but my personal opinion is we developers are best to leave the delicate communications to the marketing team.

There is every chance she is better equipped than most but I know my expertise do not extend very far into the realm. I've not met many devs that do have expertise in those sort of PR fronts.

On that note, I'd suggest this indicates more of an organisational issue than anything that should fall on this one person. I don't think they were (as an organisation) prepared for this sort of thing. Maybe there isn't even a dedicated PR person there?

<comment><USER64> > _Looks like the mod that made that post is a developer. No offence to other > developers but my personal opinion is we developers are best to leave the > delicate communications to the marketing team_

Not correct. Perhaps she used to be a developer, but the poster is currently "Stack Exchange director of community Sara Chipps", according to TheRegister article linked to in this thread.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER65> > If we have to remove a diamond in the future we will follow a published > process.

Asking as a non-native English speaker. Diamond surely doesn't refer a jewel here. Is it a simile for a valuable thing (which surprises me; are moderators that valuable?) or some other figure of speech I'm unaware of?

<comment><USER66> Like you I was curious. Turns out community moderators get a small diamond symbol next to their names on StackOverflow: [https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/75192](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/75192)

<comment><USER65> Ah, that explains it. Thank you!

<comment><USER67> A long time ago I used to moderate on stackexchange (with a diamond) so I'd like to add some important details. That meta post covers it if you know the site well, but it might not be so obvious.

Any user with sufficient reputation can vote for some moderator action to be taken on a post. For example, 5 users can vote for a question to be closed. Users can edit. Sufficiently high reputation users can vote to delete and undelete posts as well as closing and unclosing them and get special tools to review questions.

Diamond moderators are a level above this. Their votes are immediate and binding (if a diamond moderator votes for something, it happens straight away with the exception of up and down voting, which behave as normal). They are also empowered to email users and suspend them, including practically indefinitely, and can lock a question or answer so users cannot do anything to it (even very high reputation ones) and thus have a lot of responsibility.

To get such a diamond, there are two routes: be picked to do it on an early stage beta site (where SE staff select users to do the job temporarily) or run for the job in an election. It's a thankless task, which involves dealing with the very worst of SE's users. You can also be employed by stack exchange. These users also seem to have a "staff" blob on their profile now too - <USER2> early on in the site (when it was just SO) they had two diamonds, I think, but that was removed to make the distinction between staff and community not so obvious.

On sites like reddit and here, when users complain about "the moderators" they very often mean ordinary site users using the functionality that comes with their reputation and not specifically the moderators with extra power and a diamond after their name. SE's definition of "moderator" is only those users with diamonds.

"Hand in my diamond" has in an SE sense become like "hand in my badge".

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER59> Did something happen to this post on HN? I swear I read these comments like a day ago. And now they're all 1 or 7 hours old. I'm honestly having a bit of sanity questioning going on here.

<comment><USER68> See dang's reply here. TL;DR: you're not wrong.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21167710](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21167710)

<comment><USER59> Thank you! Didn't see that among all the comments.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER69> I've observed that Stack Exchange is worse now than when it started and that the points award system moulds and warps respondents.

Now that it has gone overtly commercial they face issues which may not be solved.

What will programmers do to fix this, will they come up with an alternate architecture?

I guess programmers could take the questions they've answered. Reformulate their answers (and hopefully update them in many cases) and publish them in a distributed way, under their own control.

</comment><comment><USER70> What an awkward post. Reads like a network outages post mortem

</comment><comment><USER71> Did they actually do _We learned (or were painfully reminded, rather) to never ship at 6 PM (EDT) on a Friday._ to a practicing Jew?

</comment><comment><USER72> is there a summary of events that occurred? There's lots of confusing accounts and it's impossible to piece together the facts.

<comment><USER73> It's a bit confusing because a mod was removed, and a bunch of other mods resigned in support, and then it came out that she'd been removed for refusing to use people's preferred pronouns.

Stack Exchange is perceived by many people to be unwelcoming. There has been persistent concern that SE is even more unwelcoming to people with protected characteristics.

SE have made considerable effort to fix this.

Recently they've been looking at codes of conduct.

The most recent version of this includes a request, or maybe a requirement, to use a person's preferred pronouns.

Some people refuse to do this because God tells them it's wrong to do so. Other people refuse to do this because, well, I dunno I've never understood why calling someone "he" instead of "she" is such a burden.

Stack Exchange is telling those people that their refusal to use a preferred pronoun is not compatible with being a moderator at SE, and so they removed one mod.

She posted her version of events to one of the SE sites, and this caused a bunch of other mods to "resign" their posts in support of her.

EDIT: I've tried to word this as neutrally as I can.

To respond to a couple of comments: Bob says "please use 'he' when talking about me, and Ann says "No, I can't do that because God tells me it's wrong. I'll use 'them' instead." \-- I don't see how this can be anything other than Ann refusing to use Bob's choice of pronouns. Note that I haven't used the word "misgendering".

<comment><USER74> You conveniently omitted that the definition of misgendering had been reinterpreted to include using "their" as a gender-neutral pronoun, which (until now) is a common practice intended specifically to avoid misgendering.

<comment><USER75> As a person who is 100% supportive of trans choosing he/she pronouns to fit their identity, and someone who hates the idea of "non-binary" people demanding a "they" pronoun, - I can kind of see a point, depending on how singular they is used. If it is always used regardless(as the demodded person claimed they do), then I see no problem with it. If it is only used to avoid someone's preferred pronoun, then I can see it being discriminatory behavior. E.g. every cis female in a class is referred to as she or they, every cismale is referred to as he or they, but every trans male or female is only referred to as they.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER76> [https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/334399/summing- up-t...](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/334399/summing-up-the-main- issues-the-story-so-far/334417#334417)

A supposedly neutral timeline of events.

<comment><USER77> > 13\. A copy of the TL transcripts was leaked.

Anyone have this?

</comment></comment><comment><USER78> There's an apology for 'causing confusion' due to bad timing and a promise to update the community, but no news here. Just seems like a link to a heated fight.

<comment><USER79> I'm sorry you feel that way.

<comment><USER80> It seems like a correct observation to me. A nothing / false apology that seems to serve little other than to kick the hornet's nest.

I'm curious, how do you see it?

<comment><USER42> Ya...that was a joke. "I'm sorry you feel that way" is the classic apology- free use of the word "sorry". It means "I pity you for your plight" rather than "I recognize my mistake".

<comment><USER81> agreed. using quotes and/or appending an ascii wink might have helped

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER82> How much easier the world would be if we just:

\- Don't offend people

\- If you are offended, be the bigger person and ignore it

<comment><USER83> 1) easy, theoretically. See below for practical. 2) no matter how you these days, someone is __always __offended. Either because they are unable to create a proper perspective for themselves (I am sorry if this is wrong pronoun for you reader, I am not aware what you prefer), or they don 't want to create one.

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> It really sucks that if you run a site where people talk, you take on the responsibility to police what they say. The legal system seems to handle scale relatively well but community standards of niceness may not be easy to formalize/scale.

</comment><comment><USER50> I'm amazed by how professional PR/Community Management/marketing people can be so tone-deaf. Especially when they don't post this by themselves, but on behalf of, and most certainly with a lot of discussion in, the company.

<comment><USER84> There is no good way to post that. (They are essentially doing nothing, but had to say something)

That is why it's usually short, neutral and has little details.

Anything else just adds more fuel to the fire.

PS: I am not saying I agree with them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER85> Since this is quasi-political, using a throwaway

But I noticed StackOverflow in 2016 made a really good choice: Having their code snippets in MIT: [https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/271080/the- mit-lice...](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/271080/the-mit-license- clarity-on-using-code-on-stack-overflow-and-stack-exchange)

But based on this drama: I'd consider SO a platform to stay away from.

Let me be clear: Acting like a professional and an adult is an essential when communicating with me. Regardless of what the subject is or how dear it is to you. If someone had an opinion on mere speech - they could take a walk and understand other people have feelings and lives to live, not just them.

I wish we began to make a standard for people to keep their composure and communicate better. I see two sides: People who are willing to spoil relationships and burn bridges over political nuance of the week, and a voiceless majority who have the same exact problems, but are willing to take a breath and work it out.

</comment><comment><USER86> This sounds like exactly the same slippery slope people were concerned about when Coraline Ehmke's "Contributor Covenant" showed up.

People are starting to get pushed one direction or another, and it might not necessarily be the decision that they really wanted to be pushed.

</comment><comment><USER87> I would like to point out the obvious.

Say you are a girl, but you really would rather be a boy. Your real, legal, name is Susi, but you prefer to be called "he" and "him". So you create a Stack Overflow account. Why not just call yourself John and not tell anyone that you are a girl? Is it really so important to let everyone know you're "transgender"? If you call yourself "John", no one will say "prove that you have a penis. I don't believe you". How could they? We just see a screen name. Or do you rather have a name that implies you are a woman, but still want people to "see" you as a man, although if they look with their eyes they will see you are a woman, your name says you are a woman, but then you want to go by the pronoun "he". It just seems like you're trying to be complicated.

I cannot understand what people are talking about when they say "hey, it's really bad if you assign the wrong gender to people." Heck, we're talking about an internet community! I cannot assign a gender to anyone who doesn't assign it to themselves first. If you call yourself Gabriella, be prepared that I think you are a woman. If you call yourself Peter, be prepared that I think you are a man. If you call yourself Andrea, you're a woman. If you tell me you're an Italian, and Andrea is a male name there.. okay, I can accept that.

Making up pronouns and saying "i only feel good if people call use klu/kla as pronouns" \- that is ridiculous. I learned my pronouns because my parents told me what they are. There is a form of humbleness when you accept that you are not the center of the universe. End of story. I don't like people who feel entitled to make others worship their whims. You are not the center of the universe.

There are only usernames!! It is irrelevant to discuss here if it is legitimate to equate physical appearance with gender, because that's not an issue when all you see is a screen name.

</comment><comment><USER88> Seems the theory I read somewhere that over time Euphemisms become dysphemisms and dysphemisms become euphemisms is getting applied here.

</comment><comment><USER89> Another Mod's post: [https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/b...](https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/brothers- i-must-go)

</comment><comment><USER90> When did the US start weaponizing pronouns? From a European standpoint this all seems extreme to the point of absurdity.

<comment><USER91> I don't know the details of the stackexchange case linked above. But, in general, it doesn't seem that complicated to me. The language you are using -- "weaponized pronouns" \-- is pretty distorted.

If one is aware of how someone prefers to be called and the preference is completely reasonable (such as a trans individual preferring their transitioned pronoun), then one is simply being an asshole by refusing. Not only that, they are doing so to a group that has historically been treated terribly by most of society -- essentially kicking someone while they are down.

Innocent mistakes are one thing, but stubborn refusal to treat someone decently is inexcusable.

P.S. I understand a very small number of vocal individuals may take things past requests for treating people decently, but let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

<comment><USER90> Why would someone, care at that others refer to them (sorry I'm talking about a hypothetical person so I don't know preferred pronoun) by name or gender neutral? If you know that I prefer to be addresses "their royal highness"(I do btw), does that make it rude of you to refer to me by name or as OP? I get calling someone who prefers he, she is insulting. But that's not what the supposed crime was here. It was a moderator preferring gender neutral, which seems completely reasonably.

And the language is perfectly fitting. Someone used preferred pronouns to get a moderator canned for just discussing the merits of the rules, not even breaking the yet un-published rules. That is a weapon.

<comment><USER92> You can't refuse to use someone's preferred pronoun just because you want to. If someone wants to be called he, using them is insulting and demeaning. You would be literally not accepting how he is. Obviously this is not the case in generic writing. But I don't think that is how 2 people want to communicate.

<comment><USER93> Yes! I absolutely can refuse to use someone's "preferred pronoun." I summarily reject your assertion that using the gender neutral and grammatically correct "they" in place of "he"/"she" (not them) to refer to anyone is ever insulting or demeaning. You can say it's insulting and I just don't agree that is true in general. Yelling loudly and with outrage doesn't make your claim stronger than mine.

I am not rejecting anyone's gender, I am simply not acknowledging it because it is usually _not_ germane to the discussion. It's not that I don't believe people deserve respect, trans or otherwise. I just don't think it is an appropriate point for discussion in most instances.

If a white man says they wish to always be referred to as "the white guy" am I also obligated to do so? Is it not "accepting" of their whiteness if I don't use language to refer to it everytime? Especially so if they are on the internet and I can't even see them?

I don't know what color you are. I really don't care. I have no interest in referring to your race when addressing you, likewise your gender. I communicate with people everyday and gender, race, creed, and nationality just never come up.

And if someone insists on sharing their pronouns or their race or creed unsolicited, that is on them. That should not obligate me to do anything with it.

Edit: I've been downvoted. But would anyone actually like to explain how referring to someone in a gender neutral way is somehow more insulting than referring to them in a race, religion, ethnicity, or any other identity- forming aspect neutral way? Things we take for granted all the time when we use the neutral (not just gender) pronouns them/they?

<comment><USER94> As you said, race, religions, genders and so on are all about identity. And people are defined by their identities.

If you know the person you're talking about is a cisgender woman, using the gender-neutral pronoun will feel insulting, because by assuming she may or may not be a woman, you look like you're not accepting her as a woman.

It gets yet more offending if you're doing this for a transitioning person. The change of pronoun is their first way to make their transition known, well before having expensive surgery or getting a court order for having their name changed. Refusing the use of their preferred pronoun means you don't accept their transition nor their new gender.

Whether these people are here to see your messages or to hear you talk doesn't matter.

You could be as insulting when talking about ethnicity or religion, in some way. But gender is special because it finds its way in every conversation at some point. Pronouns are used everywhere and every time, you cannot escape it.

Finally, it all boils down to what it costs _you_ not using the preferred pronoun of someone, when you know it. What are you winning for doing this? What's the expected outcome of this "active and voluntary refusal" for you?

I don't think you assume all people you encounter on HN are bald and blind just because you don't know the color of their hair or their eyes. Why would you be so adamant doing this specifically for their gender?

<comment><USER95> []

<comment><USER60> We've banned this account for breaking the site guidelines—quite egregiously—with flamewar and ideological battle. Doing this will eventually get your main account banned as well, so please don't do this.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER96> Perhaps the most striking thing here is the surety of all these responses, it's all nefarious, lies, sleight of hand.

I can at least sympathize with not being told what you did wrong, but this is still a he-said-she-said case. Until either SE or Monica releases details, the only two people who know are SE and her.

<comment><USER97> Monica already posted everything from her side here:

[https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5193/stack-...](https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5193/stack- overflow-inc-sinat-chinam-and-the-goat-for-azazel)

Or is there some specific piece of information you feel she is withholding?

<comment><USER96> She posted her side of the story, with no material backing information making, as I've said, a he-said-she-said tale. We don't know anything material of the exchange. Yet everyone feels compelled to assume bad faith on SE's part.

<comment><USER98> This is basically guilt determined by a closed court in which the accused has no representation and no reason is given for the judgement, and in fact even the rule they've been found guilty of isn't disclosed, even to them.

So what is it exactly that they've done to earn any benefit of the doubt?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER99> I miss the good old days of the Internet, when men were men, women were men, and children were FBI agents.

</comment><comment><USER100> How much are SE moderators paid?

Should I understand that people do that for free and then that this drama ensues when they are thrown away? If so, I'm not sure whether my reaction should be to laugh or to cry.</comment>


Why FreeBSD should not adopt launchd - vezzy-fnord http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/08/26/0/ <comment><AUTHOR> Mmm. Unix like OS with controversy newly swirling about init replacement. Déjà vu.

<comment><USER2> I hope the experience is less filled with tedious "mah Unix philosophy" for the BSD community than it was for the Linux community, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

<comment><USER3> The linked article is fortunately not really in that genre. It's criticizing the specific proposal in a reasonable amount of detail, not just vaguely criticizing the abstract idea of launchd for being allegedly "not unix enough". The main thrust of the criticism is that wholesale porting over the OSX services layer to FreeBSD produces a poor fit, because a lot of the OSX design is designed for a different purpose: as developer-facing tools used to configure/ship a desktop/laptop OS, not sysadmin-facing tools used on servers. Also, it's all tied up with Mach in a way that is fine if you're running Mach (as OSX is), but drags in a lot of baggage for FreeBSD.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> bmir-alum-007 FBSD: I was just dealing with circular dependency hell (or misunderstanding of docs/conventions) in some rc.d scripts.

Maybe someone here knows how to do this properly (or better):

        # /usr/local/etc/rc.d/dnscrypt-proxy
        #
        # PROVIDE: dnscrypt_proxy
        # REQUIRE: ldconfig cleanvar NETWORKING
        # BEFORE: SERVERS local_unbound
        # KEYWORD: shutdown

^--- _REQUIRE: ... NETWORKING_ always seems to cause a circular dependency (as per running: rcorder /etc/rc.d/* /usr/local/etc/rc.d/*)

Help appreciated, not required, just showing a real-life example.

<comment><USER4> did you open a bug? this should be fixed in the port, not on your local machine.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> They don't have to use it exactly as OSX uses it

It's not doing all of that stuff in pid 1

<comment><USER3> Even on OSX it's not all done in PID 1; the post isn't quite right about that. I believe plist parsing is done by launchctl, not in launchd itself.</comment></comment>


Akshell: The HN Effect and Our Accidental Launch - <AUTHOR> http://blog.akshell.com/hn-effect/

<comment><USER2> Congrats guys! Now that the hump is over, what are the traffic levels like?

In 'What went wrong' you imply that you didn't do enough to capture user info but in 'What went right' you say you kept the barriers low by _not_ requiring registration. In hindsight, which of those was the bigger deal?

<comment><AUTHOR> We got about 1K uniques today before this post. So far we've seen 800 uniques on top of that, with 80+ users concurrently online. This is likely to drop off, as we are no longer on the home page, so the lesson here is that accidental launches are better than planned relaunches.

To answer your other question: ideally I think we should have gone for a user experience whereby we let users try the service out without registration, but prompt them to save their work by registering when they try to leave.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I always enjoy these types of posts! I think its very beneficial for those who are preparing for their own launch (or to just improve in general).

</comment><comment><USER4> Excellent work guys! Thanks for sharing your experiences I'm sure (and hope!) they will benefit many of us here :)

</comment><comment><USER5> great work guys!

</comment><comment><USER6> Very interesting platform. Congratulations!

</comment><comment><USER7> Oops! In a good way!

</comment><comment><USER8> Useful platform)

</comment><comment><USER9> Great stuff!</comment>


The Crazy Secrets of Internet Cam Girls (NSFW) - <AUTHOR> http://gizmodo.com/5941976/indentured-servitude-money-laundering-and-piles-of-money-the-crazy-secrets-of-internet-cam-girls-nsfw

<comment><AUTHOR> Indentured Servitude, Money Laundering, and Piles of Money</comment>


Firefox 4, chrome 6 and 7 still vulnerable to CSS history hack - <AUTHOR>

Check this out :
http://privacylog.blogspot.com/2010/08/mozillas-css-visited-solution-is-still.html
What do you folks think ? is there any real risk still ? <comment><AUTHOR> clickable [http://privacylog.blogspot.com/2010/08/mozillas-css- visited-...](http://privacylog.blogspot.com/2010/08/mozillas-css-visited- solution-is-still.html)</comment>


Why The Public Radio is sixty dollars (2018) - <AUTHOR> http://pencerw.com/feed/2018/11/21/why-its-sixty-dollars <comment><USER3> This product just seems... like a throwback to the first decade of this century.

A time when we rebelled against over-advertised, and over-priced Gillette Fusion cartridges. Not by growing beards (that would come in the 2010's). But rather by shaving with $100 German double-edge razors, badger hair brushes, and artisial shaving soaps instead.

This here is a cheap pocket radio, like you could find at Walmart for $5. Except that it is built to tune into only one frequency, it has no headphone jack, and its form-factor is a old-timey mason jar. It's "artisanal", and "locally-sourced" and all that, and it does look like a pretty conversation piece. But do people still gravitate to stuff like this?

I'm asking from genuine curiosity, because I'm not sure whether the "hipster" era faded away, or if it's still there and I just grew a little too old?

<comment><USER4> (Note: I co-created this product, wrote this blog post, etc)

Your skepticism is something I hear a lot, and something I make it a rule not to argue with. A lot of people look at The Public Radio with disdain, and at least as many look at it without any emotional reaction at all (which is arguably worse). This was never meant to be a mass market product, and it's okay that not everyone likes it.

I will say, however, that our customer base might not be as young, bearded, and IPA-drinking as you might expect. We do sell a lot to Brooklyn (I live in Brooklyn; Kickstarter is in Brooklyn; etc) but one of our biggest customers to date is KUER, which is Utah's NPR affiliate. We've also sold large orders to a pop station in Singapore, an Orthodox Jewish community radio station in New Jersey, and to someone's grandma in rural Nebraska who makes mason jars into light fixtures that look like fireflies (one of our first customers, back in ~early 2014).

As to whether the market's going away: As I mentioned in another comment, I'm continuously surprised when I see The Public Radio in the wild and can say without reservation that we have sold _way_ more of these things than I ever expected. And if it were someone else's creation, there's a good chance that I'd look at it with furrowed brows as well.

<comment><USER5> I really admire this respectful and level-headed comment. I think your product is neat, keep it up!

<comment><USER4> Wow, internet compliment of the year. Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The price is a good conversation about globalizing supply chains.

But what's really cool is they have a way to program radios which are sealed inside a cardboard shipping box, without batteries installed.

[https://wp.josh.com/2017/03/18/capacitive-coupling- casestudy...](https://wp.josh.com/2017/03/18/capacitive-coupling-casestudy- programming-the-public-radio-without-removing-it-from-its-sealed-shipping- box/)

<comment><USER4> Yeah, Josh's method of tuning The Public Radio is _super_ cool. We never actually implemented it in production, but our manufacturing line is in some ways even cooler (it's fully just-in-time) and is remarkably advanced for a FM radio in a mason jar :) I wrote it up in a separate blog post here: [http://pencerw.com/feed/2018/2/8/the-public-radios- assembly-...](http://pencerw.com/feed/2018/2/8/the-public-radios-assembly- fulfillment-processes)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> The key part seems to be this:

> In other words: We're making a piece of consumer electronics just-in-time in > the US.

It is indeed hard to bring down costs that way, but when each unit needs to be individually programmed, as in this situation, this is a sensible way of doing it.

This is also a good way to do low volume production in general for hardware side-projects and the like. My own Relay ([https://foundrytechnologies.com/relay.php](https://foundrytechnologies.com/relay.php)) is made in the same way - the components come from China but the assembly and firmware upload is done in the US. This also keeps the firmware confidential, which works well for IP protection. For higher volumes, I'd think we'd eventually move the assembly offshore, but not the firmware upload.

<comment><USER8> I'm constantly surprised that people aren't more alarmed at how much china owns the supply chain. It's virtually impossible to make electronics without at VERY LEAST buying components from china. Seems like a lot of power in their hands.

For example, I'm deeply uncomfortable with doing business with china because of the million Uyghurs in concentration camps - but if I want to buy simple passive electronic components to populate a circuit board I've got no other choice?

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I am impressed if this business works. You're selling something for $60 with the same functionality as something I can get on Alibaba $0.30-$1 per unit. And the people are buying it because of all the artificial restrictions.

<comment><USER4> (Note: I co-created the product, manage the business that produces it, and wrote the original blog post)

In many ways I'd say the answer is still in flux. On the one hand this is a part-time business that has not, by any means, made either myself or my partner rich. On the other hand, we sold our first units in 2014 and are in continuous production today. It's a weird side business to have, but we've figured out a way to make it fit into our careers/lives.

In other words, I'm continuously surprised that The Public Radio continues to be a _thing_ and am always slightly shocked when I see one in the wild. And it's nice to have something like that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> For those confused as I was, you can switch the current station but it's not convenient or meant to be done often. You can basically disassemble the radio and press a button to cycle through available FM stations and leave it on the one you want.

Why this button isn't just available on the lid is beyond me. While I do appreciate simplicity I really don't understand the value of a single station radio either.

> [https://www.thepublicrad.io/faq](https://www.thepublicrad.io/faq)

<comment><USER4> Hey! Co-inventor of the product (and author of the link) here.

The reason that the button isn't on the lid is because that makes the lid uglier and, more importantly, undermines the philosophy behind the UI - <USER2> is to keep the device as absolutely simple as possible. The idea came from my partner (Zach Dunham) and was inspired partly by Radiolab's 2008 episode, "Choice" \- it's a bit of a deep cut but I recommend listening to it and thinking a little bit about how choice functions in the FM radio world (which is, obviously, competing with Spotify & podcasts) today.

Also note that we developed the product in ~2013, when everyone in the hardware scene in NYC was all into IoT and making everything bluetooth. I think there was part of us that believed that IoT (and connecting _everything_ to the internet) was misguided and that having a long term relationship with a local news/radio source (which for me is Hot 97, but for most of our customers is their local NPR affiliate) is actually really cool/powerful/valuable.

Lastly, you should note that a _lot_ of our business now comes from selling The Public Radio to radio stations (again, mostly NPR affiliates) to give out as fund drive gifts. For obvious reasons, having a single-channel radio is attractive to both the station managers and their donating listeners.

<comment><USER11> > Lastly, you should note that a lot of our business now comes from selling > The Public Radio to radio stations (again, mostly NPR affiliates) to give > out as fund drive gifts.

Here in NYC, we have two NPR-affiliated public radio stations that often play different content, WNYC AM and WNYC FM, and their parent organization also runs WQXR (a classical music station) and NJ public radio. So even if you only listen to public radio (like I do), an untunable FM-only radio wouldn't be enough. ("Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.")

My ideal "simple" radio would be one that worked like my car radio: you can preset any number of AM/FM stations and then select them with forward/backward buttons. (And once you have a display that can indicate the station, it would be sad if it couldn't also be an alarm clock.)

<comment><USER12> _Here in NYC_

There are hundreds of other markets in the United States than New York City (and tens of thousands worldwide), and the vast majority of them have just one public radio station.

This isn't a "public radio tuner." It's a single station tuner.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I think it would be a good promotional gift for public radio pledge drives.

<comment><USER14> Apparently it is:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21108556](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21108556)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> This is an interesting post from the perspective of logistics operations for a small scale consumer electronics product.

I'm fascinated by the idea that one of the features they chose to cut from their initial release - arbitrary tuning - has ended up significantly constraining how they can manufacture their product at their scale.

I'm guessing that there's a deeper philosophical reason for not building an end-user tunable radio that isn't simply "it's a feature we decided to cut so we could ship on time"

</comment><comment><USER16> I'm an avid radio listener, literally every room in my house with a power outlet has one or more tabletop radios in it. Why would I want a radio that only tunes to one channel?

I tend to use vintage (80's era) clock radios at home for my tabletop radios, because of their decent pricing.

<comment><USER17> Maybe you're not the target market. I only listen to radio in the car, so I'm not that market either.

That said, it's a brilliant idea and I can see the appeal to many who _do_ listen to one public station all day.

<comment><USER16> I mean I do only listen to one station all day, I virtually never change the station, but I like the ability to do so.</comment></comment></comment>


The long lost art of squatting - <AUTHOR> https://quartzy.qz.com/1121077/to-solve-problems-caused-by-sitting-learn-to-squat/? <comment><USER2> I squat all the time. Especially when I am listening to someone speaking in my kitchen. I feel like a child.</comment>


Why I left my job (for my own startup) - <AUTHOR> http://prasantnaidu.posterous.com/why-did-i-leave-my-job

<comment><USER2> The font in the article is horrible. Had to turn it off

</comment><comment><USER3> good one. Keep going.</comment>


NYU Makes Tuition Free for All Medical Students - <AUTHOR> https://www.wsj.com/articles/nyu-offers-full-tuition-scholarships-for-all-medical-students-1534433082 <comment><USER2> @mods: this is a dupe of [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17775906](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17775906)</comment>


Lawful monitoring of Internet interception system in India - <AUTHOR> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Facebook-off-bounds-for-cops/articleshow/10685642.cms

<comment><USER2> No need to worry. This project will be contracted to some politicians relative, and they'll come up with some bullshit. Our Data will be safe.

</comment><comment><USER3> Something doesn't seem right there. Firstly, FB and twitter are off bounds because of US regulations but Gmail isn't?

And "The new interception system would be instant because we would have the email IDs and passwords of suspects and we can track their conversations 24X7,"? WTF does that even mean? How do they plan on getting the passwords?

Indiatimes is not the best news source we have here in India, to put it lightly. I suggest we ignore this till somebody more credible reports.

<comment><USER4> > And "The new interception system would be instant because we would have the > email IDs and passwords of suspects and we can track their conversations > 24X7,"? WTF does that even mean? How do they plan on getting the passwords?

It means the Delhi Police cyber-crime branch is manned by clueless morons who probably have never heard terms like SSL, TLS....

Your data is indeed safe.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Here's some more info on global tender floated by Delhi Police: [http://www.medianama.com/2011/11/223-delhi-police-floats- int...](http://www.medianama.com/2011/11/223-delhi-police-floats-internet- interception-system-tender/)

Looks like this is similar to USA's CALEA.

<comment><USER6> Exactly, all India really needed was an implementation of the "Mediation Device" according to their needs, which in turn hooks into all the various proprietary lawful intercept interfaces that just about all networking gear already provides.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Unacceptable... system..... it'll be a step back to free speech in indian democracy the day this tool goes live..

</comment><comment><USER8> how is this possible? i won't give my pass to them so how can they see anything that goes via secure connection?</comment>


Fastest Way to Lose $50 - Our Failed Admob Experiment - <AUTHOR> http://blog.fotobookapp.com/59958087 <comment><USER3> $50 is not really a marketing budget. You'll get more downloads from this being on Hacker News... oh, wait... clever.

</comment><comment><USER4> You paid WAY too much.

Let's look at theoretical numbers. Say you have a mediocre conversion rate of 1%. At 30c per click it will cost you $30 to make a $2 sale. Thus, the most you could have expected from this venture is like $3, but even worse, you managed to not figure on Apple taking 30%, so your'e back to $2 in potential money on a $50 spend.

Ouch.

Next time bid a penny and see what happens. At a penny you could profitably sell your app at a 1% conversion rate. That's $1 cost to make $1.40. Not great money, but it's at least got potential and if you got enough volume of sales you could become a top app and make some sick money.

Also, never listen to Ad Networks on what to bid. Bid based on YOUR profitability, not THEIRS. If you can't afford more than a penny a click, then fine, move on.

<comment><USER5> In retrospect, yeah, I feel like an idiot for bidding the suggested bid. I've run pretty substantial campaigns on both facebook and google adwords though, and always had good experience bidding somewhere within 20% of the bid.

I also maybe was slightly duped by this statement after setting moderately restricted targeting:

"You have selected market area or demographic targeting options. As a result, you will receive significantly fewer impressions."

But thanks, and for anyone reading this, don't advertise paid apps on Admob, and don't bid anything higher than $0.10 if you have a small campaign.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I don't think this reflects poorly on Admob at all - more that paying 30c per click lead for a $2 app doesn't work, and $50 isn't a sample size.

even at a 5% conversion rate from click to purchase (highly unlikely - <USER2> this type of app you are talking about less than 1%) your customer cost of acquisition would be $6. do the math.

with these apps you have to be looking at review sites, social media, blogs (like you have now), link exchange with other apps, making it free and putting ads in it, etc. the hit rate is very very low.

<comment><USER7> I think you're missing his main point, which was he set it to spend "evenly throughout the day" and it was all gone in one minute.

<comment><USER8> Emotionally shocking, yes, but what is really expected? Why _should_ the ads be spread "evenly throughout the day"? esp. for such a pittance? The spread has no advantage. Google is handling a deluge of data, and he wants a controlled long-term distribution of a few miniscule tidbits. Yes, expecting Google to behave an obvious way makes emotional sense; methinks it's all just happening on such a vast scale he/we don't grok that blowing $50 on ads in seconds does, in fact, make sense.

<comment><USER5> I just thought they should be spread throughout the day because I selected the little radio button that read:

"Spread ads evenly throughout the day"

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Mobile ads are largely a money drain. Most clicks are accidental and will not lead to a sale. I'd only recommend using AdMob if you are promoting a free app and are doing a burst campaign to break into the Top 25 chart of a particular category.

Secondly, a $50 budget is peanuts and paying $0.25/click for relatively un- targeted admob clicks is crazy. We normally pay $0.05/click for such crappy traffic.

We've spent 1000's on mobile ads and it's only an effective strategy for pushing your downloads a bit higher so that you have a better chance of hitting a 'gold spot' in the charts. E.g. when you are 26th and you want to get into top 25.

<comment><USER5> I agree. The ~$0.25 CPC bid was suggested, we actually only decided to go with the suggested bid because they had warned us that demographic targeting would limit exposure.

We actually ran a similar campaign a few days previous where we had over 1,000 clicks at a .04 CPC and didn't see any increase in downloads.

<comment><USER9> From a 1000 clicks i wouldn't expect more than 50 downloads of a FREE app, for a paid app, you'd be lucky to get even 2 or 3 downloads.

<comment><USER5> Fair point. I think the lesson learned was that the targeting that we thought we were employing was not nearly as effective as we had anticipated (25-44, limited geographic area, iphone 3GS, iPhone4, iPad2).

We also were just amazed at the clicks registered in just seconds. The stat reports were already in and email alerts received in less than 2 minutes time. (Daily Budget and "Spread throughout the day" notwithstanding)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I ran a $50 Admob campaign over the weekend for a new FREE app we have on the Android Market. It did exactly what I needed it to, it got me about a hundred downloads. Today, that app has a little over 400 active users.

The ball has started rolling, and it only took $50.

THAT BEING SAID, the first time I ran an Admob campaign, I had just about the same experience as this writer.

Admob works great for getting lite-version, free, download apps a little traction. I will never again run it for a paid app.

IN-FACT, in the Android Dev Console, you'll notice that only your free apps have the "Advertise this App" link next to them. I assume that Google probably is very aware that Admob campaigns can work great for free apps, but it's a different ball game when it comes to paid apps.

Lastly, I'd like to add that I took the time to create a graphical banner for my free app ad that made a BIG call to action - Download my new puzzle game for free.

<comment><USER5> Thanks for sharing. Your conclusion for the majority of app developers is spot on-- for small-medium market paid apps, Admob isn't worth the money.

We're probably much better off spending it all on our Free version with limits to prove the value to free users and hope they upgrade.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> In retrospect (and maybe this should be a follow-up experiment), we should have advertised ONLY our free, limited version and focused on getting the cheapest CPC possible.

$50 at a $0.02 CPC would yield 2500 clicks. For a free app, if we saw a 10% download (a very healthy assumption I know) that would be 250 downloads of the free app.

Maybe after proving the value of the app with limits, we get approximately 10% to convert to paying of the 250 downloads.

That's 25 paid, or ~50 pre apple tax. Still losing money with very healthy assumptions, but I think we'll try this as well...even after the negative experiment and will post our results.

<comment><USER11> I just want to say thanks for posting your experiences. Everyone here is ragging on you for "too small sample size" and "u did it wrong" but I appreciate that you came forward and shared.

For the people who scoff at a $50 ad budget, that just tells me they've never done this with their own money. It's easy to brag about campaign size when you're spending out of someone else's wallet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> If you want guaranteed results, use a cost-per-install campaign. I work at an ad network that specializes in these kinds of campaigns.[1] You'll have to pay a lot per-install, considering how poor conversions are going to be. Our network automatically calculates your eCPM on the fly and will rank campaigns according to that—and so too it works with most competitors' network.

To be honest, with your tiny budget and a two dollar app, there's no effective way to spend your money with a positive return on investment.

[1]: <http://chartboost.com>

<comment><USER13> Doesn't Apple's policy not allow Pay-per-install Ads or something? I remember Tapjoy ran into issues because of that.

<comment><USER12> They don't allow incentivized downloads. (Ie. we'll give you in-game credits if you download the app that this ad advertises.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> The only ad platform I have ever had any success with is Reddit's cheap $20 self serve ads. I haven't tried any Facebook ads though so there's that giant I have yet to try out. Reddit's great though mainly for the feedback and people who are actually interested in what you're selling and willing to critique/x post your ad.

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting. We did think of Reddit but maybe thought that an iPhone app which is a Facebook utility is probably not a Redditor's cup of tea.

<comment><USER15> I experimented with AdMob and JumpTap over a few months with budgets ranging between low tens to low thousands for each campaign and even for an app that was $5, it basically didn't work.

I didn't get good results with Facebook either, but maybe due to the nature of your app, it'd be better.

Ditto for Adwords.

I only dabbled slightly with Reddit and it seemed that it would show some promise if I invested more time in it.

You might also consider paid downloads promotions. Something like <http://tapzilla.com/> (YC S10). The co-founders Edmond and Francis are both helpful and responsive when I run a campaign. It wasn't the right avenue for my app, but Fotobook sounds like a better fit, as a utility and at lower price point. I'm not sure if Apple's recent foray against paid downloads affects them.

<comment><USER5> Thanks, we'll check out TapZilla.

Amazed that people will spend so much time and energy trying to save $1 but won't spend time trying to make $1...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> To help capitalize on all the HN traffic, you might want to include a more prominent link to fotobookapp.com (probably in the first sentence when you introduce the app). It took me a while to see the link at the end of the article.

Also, the "App Store" link in your posterous profile doesn't actually link anywhere.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks Michael - fixed the broken link.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> How much does news.ycombinator.com charge per click ? What is the conversion ratio of news.ycombinator.com users who clicked on the link ? ;-)

<comment><USER5> Yeah...maybe we'll make our money back.

But this comment stream has taught me a alot, we want to run a considerably larger experiment with our free application and will report back.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> FWIW, $50 is a very small amount to spend on advertising like this. So small that I don't think you can draw too many conclusions from it.

<comment><USER5> That's very fair, we're just submitting this as a benchmark.

We also (mistakenly) also spent $50 on Admob a few days before this. We didn't even realize we had spent it, that's how fast it happened.

I just can't conceptualize technically how these stats could be real.

<comment><USER8> A year ago, Google was doling out results at a rate of 34,000 searches per SECOND. In your case, that's filtering and spreading your ad across some 3.4 million searches. Not unreasonable to assume your demographic restrictions fit about 1% of those searches; the limits sound narrow, yet seem candidates for the largest group of Google power users (whom I would independently assume are dominated by 25-45yo upper-economic-half US state residents owning camera- laden iOS devices).

You're trying to take a drink from Niagara Falls and wondering why you're soaked. (Been there, done that. Memorable, but not productive.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I guess that is normal. 150 clicks and 0 downloads for 1.99$ app.

I think around 50+ clicks were accidental, and immediately back key was pressed before loading the content.

And with other 100, i guess your assumption was wrong that there is big enough market for this.

But something else is interesting here, you really can make money on ads from free apps --

</comment><comment><USER20> In the past, Facebook Canvas applications and Website applications have received C&Ds for the "save photo" functionality.

See: <http://www.vincentcheung.ca/blog/facedown/cease-and-desist/>

<comment><USER21> I do not know how the author's application retrieves Facebook photos, but I believe that Facedown (which was a desktop application, not a web app) was shut down because not because it was saving photo albums, but because it required users to input their Facebook credentials into it and tried to download photos by scraping album information (by pretending to be a web browser).

I have operated a reasonably popular Facebook application that has similar photo saving functionality (using their API), and not have not run into any issues. It has transformed from a desktop application using the REST API to a Graph API using web application at <http://socialphotodownload.com> . Unlike Facedown, I try to follow Facebook's Platform Policies.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> It seems ridiculous to me that Admob ignored the $15/day budget and spent $50 in two minutes.

<comment><USER23> How does it make a difference at all? Unless what you are promoting can't take the traffic, it's irrelevant. When you're paying CPC you have no reason to care when the clicks come in, 10 clicks a day for three days isn't any worse or better than 30 clicks in five minutes.

<comment><USER24> It makes a difference because it's an explicit setting. $15/day. And who knows how that scales? What if going through $500 only takes 45 min?

<comment><USER23> As long as it doesn't spend more than the customer wanted to spend, it's irrelevant.

Let's say I want to spend. If I have $500 to spend, and I want to pay CPC, how is getting $500 worth of clicks in 45 minutes worse than getting $500 worth of clicks over three days?

<comment><USER25> I think it is relevant because it's _wrong_. Unless it says somewhere that it's a suggestion or it probably won't work like that.

If you tell AdMob to not spend more than $15 a day and then it immediately spends triple that amount I wouldn't say that's giving you a fair shake on what they promised.

<comment><USER26> AdMob sucks. IMO they do this on purpose to discourage small publishers. I've also heard, from a reliable source, that they also send you worse traffic until your account is more "established", and if your early CTR sucks, you may never get the bump. I've heard of people having to start new accounts after their first few campaigns do poorly.

I suggest you try InMobi and AdModa. (Not affiliated with either except that I've been happy with the traffic I bought there)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I liked the first comment (in the post) by Andrew Maine. Basically, it's simple math. If you expect a 5% conversion on a $1.99 app (which will earn you $1.39 after Apple's cut), the most you can spend for a viable business model is 6 or 7 cents per click.

Less if you want to make an actual profit on the app and not just get more users. But then, if you want more users, maybe the app should be free?

<comment><USER28> But once you make a conversion, do you have any way to subsequently contact that same user to make them aware of your other app/service/product offerings?

Also, if the app is recurring billing, the formula changes completely.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I know I'm not the only one who feels really sorry for the fellow. I'm imagining him sitting by his laptop and scrupulously making sure his target demographics are correct for his ad campaign, and this nonsense happens. Google should make it clear in the FAQ that your campaign will be short lived if you ad funds under a certain amount.

</comment><comment><USER30> maybe the stats are fake. i think thet want you to buy 5k minimum to get some start of a result

<comment><USER5> We actually got a clarification from Admob that I should include in the blog post:

"[P]lease note that budgets under $200 per day can still be spent in a matter of minutes."

I was just frustrated that they didn't include this anywhere in their campaign or ad group setup or their FAQ. I had to write them to get this answer.

And then, why even allow for daily budgets below 200?

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> You can try things like getjar.com which offer a cost per download model. Or list your app on my directory @ mjelly.com!</comment>


Artwork created by AI sold for $435,000. Algorithm engineer not credited. - <AUTHOR> https://www.technologyreview.com/the-download/612348/a-controversial-artwork-created-by-ai-has-hauled-in-435000-at-auction/ <comment><USER2> While I can agree that it would have been better for the creator of the algorithm to be credited given that his contributions were a big part of what made the artwork possible, I can't really come up with a convincing argument that he should have any _legal_ rights over the artwork (including the right to be credited). I fear it would set a dangerous precedent if using particular software grants the creator of the software rights over the result.

Of course you require some degree of artistic input for it to be able to count as a separate work, but in my opinion selecting a particular image out of a (nigh infinite) generated set of images should still count.

<comment><USER3> I think the lack of credit is fraud towards the purchaser.

Since this was a first, the noteriety of it should be good enough for it to be a good investment.. But did the buyer know they were buying the first drop of water at the beginning of the rain season?

I think there would be an expectation on the brand of the producers serving as a reputation and limit on the supply of "real" works. But the engineer doing a project with IKEA would make "realer" works.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> When an artist paints a portrait on canvas, the people who made the paint, brushes, and canvas aren't credited. While the algorithm and its creator should be mentioned, I don't see them as a contributor to the work. It's just another tool for creating the artwork.

<comment><USER5> That's a pretty poor example. Not all tools are equal, and one of the important ways to describe a tool is by what degrees of freedom it affords the user, and what aesthetic decisions are baked into it. A paintbrush has a lot of degrees of freedom and makes few assumptions. Even for tools that do a lot for you, finding unexpected/unintended degrees of freedom or subverting those aesthetic decisions is one way that artists innovate. From the article it seems that most of the aesthetic decisions in the resulting work were baked into the tool, not made by the artist.

That said, a huge part of an artist's work is contextualizing their work and building a story around it, so in some ways if these guys were able to successfully convince people that it was worth $435k then good on them. I just don't expect that to last. When video equipment was inaccessible to most, simple video art was innovative and new. Now that the tools are easy to get and use the work needs to be more sophisticated.</comment></comment>


Whitepaper on telemedicine trends, market research, and startups 2020 - <AUTHOR> https://www.byteant.com/blog/telemedicine-app-development-market-study-and-startup-opportunities-2020-whitepaper/ <comment><AUTHOR> We have done our research so you can get the full picture on telemedicine market 2020. Startup opportunities, funding changes and barriers - you can find all in this piece.</comment>


Show HN: Invisible Tic-Tac-Toe - <AUTHOR> http://codepen.io/deltasoneca/full/dNYKWq/ <comment><USER2> Even if I win it marks a win to the computer.

<comment><AUTHOR> You're right. Tks

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Very nice! loved the graphics.</comment>


Byepass – F*cK PssW0rds - <AUTHOR> https://byepass.co <comment><AUTHOR> It's time to eliminate the password field. Terrible tech. Terrible user experience.</comment>


Supreme Court allows parts of travel ban to take effect - <AUTHOR> http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/26/politics/travel-ban-supreme-court/index.html <comment><USER2> That's a glass half full view of SCOTUS upholding the travel ban and making travelers prove they have a legitimate nexus to the U.S. to get a waiver.</comment>


Russia: Life After Trust - <AUTHOR> http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/01/lessons-from-putins-russia-for-living-in-trumps-america.html <comment><USER2> Russia and Russians suffer from the legacy of the strongman/strongwoman.

They do not trust or like fair rulers --they'd see them as unsure, flailing and a pushover. Since the Kievan Rus they have only known strong rulers from the Czars to mr Steel himself --the only break being Gorbachov and Yeltsin.

This is one of the reasons Putin --even if he wanted, cannot look like he's giving in. He'd be seen a sellout to the country ala Gorbachov/Yeltsin.

They are bound to strongmen/women for the foreseeable future. It's not an easy habit to get out from under especially given their historical context.

<comment><USER3> Got any basis for your nationalistic ramblings? Or are you just content to misjudge an entire nation from your chair?

<comment><USER2> Oh, what is it they call that, reading history? But if you don't have the time, you can do some searching for yourself. Or, you know, talk to some Russian exiles.

[1][https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/21/ivan-the- terri...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/21/ivan-the-terrible- cult-strongman-leader-tsars-popularity-rise-russia)

[2][http://blog.oup.com/2012/05/russia-putin-elections- power/](http://blog.oup.com/2012/05/russia-putin-elections-power/)</comment></comment></comment>