Here's what Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer said that really made me angry - <AUTHOR> http://finance.yahoo.com/news/heres-yahoo-ceo-marissa-mayer-204754971.html <comment><USER2> It has nothing to do with being there on Saturday. It has everything else to do with the kind of people and their ability to invest themselves in their goal, and showing up on Saturday is a great indicator of that.

I interview a lot of programmers, and I can tell you with about 95% precision whether they will work out and be great based on the single question 'tell me about the programming projects you work on for fun'. If they have some project they work on for fun, even one, that isn't for a class at school or for their job, then they are very very likely to be a great hire. If they don't they are very very unlikely to be a good hire. Side projects don't magically make you smart and capable and good at problem solving and getting things done, but it sure seems to be fundamentally related.

And from personal experience, I've worked for 2 startups, one where people worked all weekend and one where they didn't, and interestingly they were doing almost the exact same thing. One had an $80MM exit, the other just slowly went away. Small sample size, for sure.

<comment><USER3> How do you know? I mean, how do you test for false negatives in the hiring process? Perhaps you're rejecting lots of people without side projects, but they go on to be successful anyway?

<comment><USER2> Sure, I mean I didn't say I actually use this test to make hiring decisions. I can just directly test lots of things like ability to code or problem solve (not perfectly for sure, but I do my best to evaluate directly the skills that can be evaluated directly). I am just making the point that there are often very highly correlated attributes that people can have, and one that is easy to test for can give you a lot of information about the ones that are harder to see.

<comment><USER3> I agree their might be some correlation. What I'm saying is:

\- If you really meant you can get 95% precision in hiring from the answer to one question, I believe you only if you're super-conservative in hiring (i.e. will reject unless you're super-confident). In this case, your recall and false negatives is also going to be really high, so your single-question test isn't really helpful.

\- If you actually meant 95% accuracy (i.e. precision in the everyday sense, not the math sense), then I don't believe you, because you probably can't estimate your accuracy, unless you also hire some people who fail the interview process.

There are awesome programmers and technical leads who don't have side projects just because they are so focused on their work and being a good parent.

I'm probably over-analysing your original statement, so I'll stop here.

<comment><USER2> Right, I understand what you're saying, but even being a parent people might put a side project on hold or not have as much time to spend on it, but that doesn't mean they can't talk about what they have done in the past.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Honest questions: all the hard working Yahoo employees who worked many many hours overtime under her instead of being with family and friends, what did they get out of this in the end?

Marissa was paid big $, I understand she needed to work hard for that money but everyone else, what reason did they have 20 hour days?

</comment><comment><USER5> I wonder what the actual work she did at Google that would make you work up to 130 hours a week, or at the least pull one all nighter a week. Was it heads down programming? I don't think anyone can maintain a great level of code for long at that level. Manager stuff? Maybe. Infrastructure, did she supervise or help set up servers? Startups don't have to do that anymore, at least in the beginning, just spin up servers at AWS. Like the blog author says, a lot of things that needed to be done in house back in the day can be done remotely now.

</comment><comment><USER6> I kinda get what she is saying. It takes a certain amount of passion and dedication for someone to show up on weekends. They must truly believe in the company or the idea to put in that type of effort.

This dedication and passion will also reflect itself in the product. Many people can make a mediocre product by putting in the minimum amount required, but for something outstanding it usually takes more. Much more. What she has said is nothing outlandish.

<comment><USER4> That is just a fantasy, Reza and Marissa live in a fairy tale where working long hours equals passion. It doesn't.

I have had co-workers who practically lived in the office. Every time something urgent came up they would volunteer to work the weekends and late nights. Surprisingly the same guys were also known among the developers as people who got the least amount of work done. And while the management was initially impressed with their hard work and "commitment", every single one of them was let go in the very first rounds of lay offs.

<comment><USER4> Let me also add that when you are very passionate about something you _may_ end up working long hours and weekends. You will probably also enjoy it.

But the opposite does __not __apply. When management expects you to work long hour you will not become more passionate about your work.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Common misconception.

Direction is more important than speed. If you are running in the wrong direction it doesn't matter how fast, or if you come in on the weekend. _If_ you are headed in the rigt direction then speed and velocity can be important. It's easy to want to believe that success is repeatable and due to an observable formula...

</comment><comment><USER5> Wherever company she lands at, run. Not only does she have this attitude at rest, she's going to have a chip on her shoulder to prove she's not a failure at whatever venture she winds up at next.

</comment><comment><USER8> Her attitude comes from the privileged ideal of hard work = success, which stems from the classic attribution error: "I'm successful therefore it must be because I'm better than everyone else in x y or z ways", and often one of those factors is a belief in one's own hard work pay9ing off. Which blithely ignores all the less fortunate people working even harder at three jobs to pay tthe bills.

</comment><comment><USER9> The weekend work = success is hardly a new item, there was a reference to it in Microserfs... Written in 1992. The VC/money guy said he'd invest in biotechnology but staff didn't work weekends. And as soon as he finds one that did he could bet the farm and retire.

As for the rest of it, same tired tropes from the author. I already knew what he was gonna say when I realized who it was.

As.for Marissa... She's kinda right. And every current Googler is thankful they can reap the rewards.

</comment><comment><USER10> Zero attempt to find data to prove or nullify his hypothesis. Curious how the data from co-working spaces pan out...

<comment><USER11> Isn't this inverting the burden of proof here?

She made the extraordinary claim that she didn't even need to know who or what people were working on, just that they were there on weekends. She provided zero data.

It's just as likely that the weekend working startups are the one that will fail. Obviously by burning out, but also by losing sight of the big picture. This seems stereotypical of hackers coding the latest greatest features with zero customers. They could be seriously misusing their available time.

Companies (startups or not) should be able to set their own pace. People should learn to use their time well and save their energy for when they absolutely need to burn the midnight oil. Besides, getting burned out or sick doesn't help anyone.

<comment><USER2> If you want to go 'slow and steady' and have great 'work/life balance' (and work with a lot of mediocre people and play a lot of political games..) go get a job at a big company.

Startups are not for that mentality, no startup has ever won by playing it safe and making sure people get plenty of sleep.

<comment><USER11> > Startups are not for that mentality, no startup has ever won by playing it > safe and making sure people get plenty of sleep.

Who's saying anything about playing it safe? It's all about strategically using your resources, not squandering them. Be it time, money or sleep. It's about engaging your afterburners when you actually need them, not when you are flying in circles.

<comment><USER2> So what do you do when people work until 11pm every night and keep showing up on Saturday? Tell them to go home?

There are teams where people are having more fun 'kicking ass' and getting things done, and have a great time with the people they are there doing it with, and frankly they would laugh you out of the building (literally) if you even for one second referred to them as 'resources'. I have seen people wander into the office on the weekend just because they were bored (including myself), or were looking to hang out and hack on some stuff. It's not something that burns you out, it's a passion for some people. The good people.

I think you have had a very limited (and limiting) work experience, to be honest.

<comment><USER12> You're assuming the parent advocates discouraging passionate team members which isn't fair. "Resources" and "resourcing" are pretty standard terms esp. in the agency space and with companies using contractors as an example. Not sure why you take so much offense. Perhaps you are referring to co-founders or equity owners that would laugh one out of the building?

The notion that everyone has to grind on weekends to build something successful is ridiculous. Mayer is right about hard work. But she's simplistically equating "time logged" with "hard work".

What's success in this conversation? I'd be willing to bet most the startups that go to her husband's co-working space will fail. That's based on data and more accurate of a statement than hers.

<comment><USER2> I'm not sure whether you even read my comments. It's not the weekend work that makes the difference, it's having the sort of people that show up on the weekend.

<comment><USER12> Yes I read them all, but I'm not sure you read your own.

"no startup has ever won by playing it safe and making sure people get plenty of sleep"

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Slightly off-topic, how did this get picked by Yahoo? Do they get enough editorial freedom to publish something that doesn't favour their CEO? I'm pleasantly surprised for one.

Could this also mean the editorial team believes this to be true?

<comment><USER14> It's CNBC content.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> $117 million over 5 years; $36.6 million for first six months.

But that was a 1 cent comment.</comment>


Appalachian miners reject retraining because they think coal will make comeback - <AUTHOR> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-trump-effect-coal-retraining-insight/awaiting-trumps-coal-comeback-miners-reject-retraining-idUSKBN1D14G0 <comment><USER3> Consider it from their perspective. If they leave a job as a union-protected coal miner, their options are garbage, trained or not. They'll be going from a situation where they can expect and get reasonable compensation which grows faster than cost of living increases, pensions, etc to being treated like a cost center to be manipulated and reduced, forced to hop jobs every 4 or 5 years to even remain at market rate for their skill level, etc. You really can't expect them to not be defensive of their position, especially considering the history of open flagrant abuse and violence they've faced in the past.

<comment><USER4> I'd try to consider it from their perspective, but I get confused by the part where they vote overwhelmingly Republican to protect their union jobs and government subsidies.

<comment><USER5> Perhaps you get confused about the long history of Appalachian Coal Miners voting solidly Democratic, 100 years of such, only to see their votes taken for granted and their livelihood disappear.

West Virginia, despite being as far from Cosmopolitan as you can get has been a Democratic stronghold until the last election cycle

<comment><USER4> 100 years ago, the Dems were still the party of southern pride. I think the shift is about more than "economic anxiety"

Also, West Virginia isn't all of Appalachia. SE Ohio, rural Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Tennessee, and North Carolina are coal producing regions that are also very conservative.

<comment><USER5> Except that has nothing to do with why they voted as they did going back to before the 20th century as rural America has never been about today's Democratic ideals. The Miners and their Unions have been supportive of Democrats since before FDR.

Edit could the downvoter parked here show their face, literally five seconds after posting and you're downvoting have to assume you've gone down the thread downvoting everything, so just say hi

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> So shockingly, people who have been fooled by a con artist (Trump) refuse to believe that they've been fooled.

And I get the argument that learning is difficult for some, and that union jobs are better than non-union jobs, and that it is difficult to move from an active job to one that is more sedentary. But so is losing your job in a dying industry and being unable to provide for your children, which is the alternative.

And I feel for them. I really do. They've been taken by the political equivalent of an email from a Nigerian prince. They wanted to believe so badly that they didn't check the history of the person making the promises, and ignored what facts they did get.

<comment><USER7> Agreed. But I don't think this all falls on the current administration. US energy policy has been weak if not non-existent for as long as I can remember. Why shouldn't they believe it? No one (had the stones) to declare it dead; not part of our energy future; etc.

Furthermore, along the same lines, look at domestic oil. That is, fracking. Production has hockey stick'ed in the last 10 - 15 years. We didn't shift to renewables. We stuck with oil.

So again, why shouldn't coal believe the same? Most of the signals support their POV than otherwise.

Note: I agree 100%. Coal is f'ed. As it should be. But from the miners' POV there really isn't a clear message that say "time to give up." Clinton didn't say it. Bush didn't say it. Obama didn't say it.

<comment><USER8> The shift to fracking is US energy policy. With geopolitical goals behind it.

Gee, making the Middle East less important to the US and putting the pinch on Russia, who'd want to do that?

<comment><USER7> Yes. I understand that.

It was also to prop up the otherwise failing econony.

But most in the coal industry don't see - perhaps by choice? - the nuances.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Sitting (or, trendily, standing) before a desk all day working in a computer is not for everyone. These guys do hard, dangerous work in the mines in an environment that is very different from office work. They probably would have a very difficult time adjusting, not only to the office environment but also to the social rules in place in such environments (I write this with some experience of the difference between white collar and life-on-the-line work). It is no wonder that there is little interest in retraining into a field which is so different.

I find myself more surprised that the article ignored such basic points as these. Not that I am absolutely correct in my assessment, but that these kinds of points weren't addressed. Almost as if they didn't even occur to the author. The focus was on empty classrooms and money unspent and, perhaps, stubborn coal miners, while being wilfully ignorant that the jobs on offer are probably completely uninteresting to the communities affected. It probably seems better to them to hold out hope that coal will come back than to sit around driving trucks or coding.

<comment><USER10> Your theory doesn't explain why they don't retrain in welding, plumbing, electrical work, construction, vehicle maintenance, etc which are all more similar to mining (particularly within certain parts of each field) than they are office work.

At least in my state, many of the (re)training programs are for those and consist of a couple weeks of lecture followed by a few months of apprenticeship -- I suspect that they're simply sticking with the familiar while there's hope. People do that.

The empty classrooms is probably referring to the fact that every program begins with a little domain specific knowledge, so the people observing the intake look at that part of the funnel that every program goes through -- and then make comments about it from their perspective.

The article is a little deaf in saying "100 programs from coding to nursing". I'm guessing the fields are actually widely broader than that in the kind of work, since he found a program in _coal mining_ among those 100, and I don't consider that between coding and nursing in any sense. (I think that left you with the impression they only train office or service work, for instance.)

</comment></comment><comment> chroem- Before someone inevitably mocks these people as being less enlightened, this isn't that surprising. Labor isn't fungible: retraining would involve abandoning a career and all the seniority it entails, going back to school and losing the ability to work and generate income, and finally being forced to relocate. Is their attachment to coal tragic? Yes. Is it unreasonable? No.

Imagine if tomorrow there was an AI that obsoleted the entire software industry. Would you willingly retrain as a carpenter?

<comment><USER11> I've asked this question before (what would you do if software development went away[1]) and the response indicated that they would not, or could not entertain that thought. Instead they posited that such a world would be impossible or that developers could go back to school to be lawyers - <USER2> realizing that new law school grads had a 25% unemployment rate.

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=chrisbennet&next=123...](https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=chrisbennet&next=12378832) half way down the page, search for "As a thought exercise"

"As a thought exercise, what will/would software developers do once 90% are made redundant by A.I. or something? Maybe "suck it up" and go back to school to become nurses?"

<comment><USER12> There are tons of things I'd want to try if I became redundant due to automation. However, if that were to suddenly happen the world would quickly change so dramatically that we would not be able to determine what careers are stable and worth training in, so I'm not sure that's a fair example.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> According to the latest energy report from Lazard, the subsidized cost of solar and wind is now below the marginal cost of operating nuclear and coal plants.

And the unsubsidized cost isn't far behind and is still falling. It fell 9% last year.

<comment><USER14> This.

For those willing to move around, there will be a huge demand for transmission line workers linking solar and wind resources to where they're needed.

It's hard blue collar work that pays fairly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Maybe they reject "retraining" because the programs available suck and are useless and unlikely to actually help them improve their life, and then tell stories to out of town reporters when asked. Just a theory.

<comment><USER16> Or when reading the article

"[...] he found more than one hundred federally funded courses covering everything from computer programming to nursing.

He settled instead on something familiar: a coal mining course. 'I think there is a coal comeback,' said the 33-year-old son of a miner. [...]

'I have a lot of faith in President Trump,' Sylvester said."

<comment><USER17> Could you have also mentioned the part where they aren't paid while training and they have no guarantee of a job after training?

<comment><USER16> I could copy and paste the whole article.

I could quote your lines.

I could quote the lines where it says he is training for $13/h low paying coal job because coal companies sell their assets to companies that only hire temporary workers.

I could quote the part where it says that new companies will not come if there is no trained workforce, so those people are stuck in a catch-22.

I could quote the part where it says that people retrain where there is no hope, but don't retrain where there is coal left.

I could quote the part where it says coal companies move to natural gas.

I could quote the part where one miner says the coal is a great career path for the next 50 years.

Or people could be interested and read the article.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> There's a lot to unpick here. There's permanent unchanging things like the continued decline of the coal industry (there are precious few scenarios where it is cheaper and/or better than all of the many alternatives available). There's the danger of wrapping up your profession and your identity (something we in tech should be on our guard against). But then there's the grim and hopefully ephemeral spectacle of a bunch of rich politicians lying to their faces and giving them false hope.

The only way the coal industry survives as a major employer is as a form of disguised welfare.

</comment><comment><USER19> _Coal miners are resisting retraining without ready jobs from new industries, but new companies are unlikely to move here without a trained workforce._

The Economist ran an excellent piece a few weeks back contrasting Scranton, PA and Greenville, SC. The latter was able to re-invent itself by attracting BMW to build a plant there, which saw them out of their catch-22. PA, despite offering billions in subsidies over the years has had no such luck.

[https://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21730406-what-can- be...](https://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21730406-what-can-be-done-help- them-globalisation-has-marginalised-many-regions-rich-world)

However, exactly how to do this is still uncertain:

> South Carolina has not become an all-purpose manufacturing powerhouse. In > fact, manufacturing employment is lower in the region than it was when BMW > set up shop. But real incomes are growing and the population is booming. > Greenville is 70% bigger than it was in 1990.

> Its success shows the value of co-ordination. There is a chicken-and-egg > problem in establishing a cluster. Firms would like to be where there are > workers, suppliers and infrastructure; workers want places where firms are > already offering good new jobs. Neither will go where the other isn't. But > action on a number of fronts can, under the right circumstances, attract > both at once, creating a kernel round which a cluster can grow large enough > to become self-sustaining. After that, it may well invigorate other areas of > the local economy.

> Strategies which build clusters through such two-way seduction are hard to > assess.

</comment><comment><USER20> Retraining in general apparently has a bit of a mixed success rate at best. Instead of reading this article about the terrible, clueless Trump-supporting miners who are just too thick-headed to retrain, it might be worth reading up on what happens to those who do make use of retraining programs: [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/23/magazine/retraining- jobs-...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/23/magazine/retraining-jobs- unemployment.html) Also, perhaps, about the past history of government retraining and investment programs in Appalachia and why people there didn't believe Clinton's promises during the election were worth much: [https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/29/us/politics/coal- country-...](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/29/us/politics/coal-country-is- wary-of-hillary-clintons-pledge-to-help.htm)

</comment><comment><USER21> RE-training is a poor choice of words.

If you are unemployed and sitting around, why not pick up some new skills if training is free? You can always go back to mining if it comes back. It's not like learning something new means losing old knowledge.

If you know mining, and an electrician, a mine electrician will be payed much better than either alone. Combining skills is where it's at.

<comment><USER22> Skills that are actually useful and have enough demand aren't that easy to get. I'm extremely skeptical when people claim we can solve the automation job losses by retraining everyone. Converting a 50 year old miner to a programmer capable of solving real world problems seems like a pipe dream. Sure, there will be exceptional individuals who love to learn new things, but they are exceptional. Look at the market now - programmers already have high salaries, and it's still hard to find the talent.

<comment><USER23> This video explains well the job problem for people who are unable to learn fast:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjs2gPa5sD0&t=8s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjs2gPa5sD0&t=8s)

<comment><USER24> that was a great 10 min watch, thanks!

while there are several good points made in the video, one really made me think: if you're in an IQ segment that gives you lot of opportunities - as the prof said: "not just opening word, but programming" -, it is really easy to forget that many people might struggle with "reasonable simple" tasks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Even if it does why use American coal? That's why coal mines closed in Europe: cheap imports from South America and Australia.

<comment><USER26> Actually, your question should be: Why use Appalachian coal? And indeed, coal production has shifted to Wyoming where it is cheaper to produce with less labor. So even if coal comes back, it will not likely come back to Appalachia. Source: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/coal- jobs-i...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/coal-jobs-in- appalachia/?utm_term=.7c5b8b318675)

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> I thought a few years ago that China was buying a large amount of coal, in fact most of it. Has that changed?

</comment><comment><USER28> Something something his job depends on not understanding that thing.

</comment><comment><USER29> It will, and that just pisses the Socialist Marxist Left off.

<comment><USER30> Lame political trolling is definitely not needed on this site. Could you please never do it again?

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

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Sad how one wing of the party manipulates the other.</comment>


Ballmer: Traditional media will not bounce back - <AUTHOR> http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/jun/24/microsoft-steve-ballmer-cannes

<comment><USER2> He doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. "Reset"? It's called a correction and it's a widely accepted economic phenomenon. But to say that things will never reach the same level again or, "I don't think we are in a recession, I think we have reset," he said. "A recession implies recovery [to pre-recession levels] and for planning purposes I don't think we will. We have reset and won't rebound and re-grow"

It's folly. Of course we'll regrow. He's right about the no bounce part, but the growth will come slowly and surely. The correction gets rid of the fat companies that can't add much more value to the market. The real growers are all that's left afterward.</comment>


Traction Book – A Startup Guide to Getting Customers - <AUTHOR> http://tractionbook.com/ <comment><USER2> Co-author here.

I actually started exploring this book topic in late 2009 through an initial series of open-ended interviews that involved a lot of people from HN and were discussed on HN quite extensively (when it was much more startup focused). Here is that set: [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6r4nAnkQO3VpddRSVwUVDg](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6r4nAnkQO3VpddRSVwUVDg) (e.g. patio11 [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuzNs- LhC_8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuzNs-LhC_8), Alexis [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enEqAq1x9UQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enEqAq1x9UQ), Garry Tan [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Win0moC4cA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Win0moC4cA)).

I started angel investing around the same time and I quickly came to the conclusion that the pursuit of getting traction needed much more structure akin to product development frameworks. I also got increasingly busy with DuckDuckGo, and so it took finding a great co-author and many years to actually get this book across the finish line.

Here's the announcement post from my blog: [http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2014/08/get-traction- tod...](http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2014/08/get-traction-today.html)

Happy to take any questions.

<comment><USER3> I realize that a lot of growth channels tend to become saturated over time and they no longer make financial sense to invest in. What channels have managed to sustain themselves as profitable growth channels over longer periods of time?

<comment><USER2> I know this isn't a very satisfying answer, but the truth is it is highly dependent on the specifics of the product and market situation. All nineteen channels we examine in the book have been sustainable growth channels for companies, and one of our core theses is that the underutilized channels for a particular market space can often have the best returns. Unfortunately that means you need to test and that's what our Bullseye framework is all about -- how to approach finding the right traction channel for your particular situation.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Heh, interesting bit of synchronicity... like 30 seconds after I originally clicked on this, somebody comes in and hands me a package. It was my Amazon order with my copy of _Traction_.

We are one of those startups that has a product, but doesn't have any paying customers yet, so needless to say, I'm champing at the bit to dig into this. If the info in here is actually useful in getting some early traction, this book will far more than pay for itself.

</comment><comment><USER5> I just finished this book the other day. Great book! As a developer, I'm usually deep in code so I'm not the best at sales and marketing. The book has great examples of what others have done to get traction. My biggest takeaway was that the book helped me get into the sales/marketing mindset which helped generate a few ideas of my own.

<comment><USER6> Great to hear it!

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've thoroughly enjoyed and learned from every bit of Traction Book thus far, highly recommend to anyone who is considering purchasing.

I originally posted this on the GH AMA but my account was pending moderation and I got skipped... so.. while you're both here:

Do you have any recommendations on using the traction channels to solve the chicken and the egg problem? Or any other specific reading towards solving the C&E problem?

Do you have any methods for tracking conversions in offline channels or is it basically just talking to your customers and asking how they heard about you?

<comment><USER6> In the book we talk more about offline channel tracking, but basically you can tie them to online activity (e.g. discount codes, unique URLs, etc.) or via the "how did you hear about us?" questions.

For beating chicken and egg problem, generally you want to figure out which side is more difficult to get (demand or supply side) and then think about what traction channels work to acquire people on that side of the C&E problem. Happy to chat more over email if you'd like specific help.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Book is part of Kindle Lending Library, so if you have prime and kindle, you can get it for free (borrow).

<comment><USER9> Argh, how do you tell? I just paid $9.99 for the Kindle version and I have Prime.

EDIT: I see Lending: Enabled under Product Details.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Mid way through the book. Very good read. I wish we had it a couple years back. But its never too late. As someone said definitely a good way to get marketing mindset. I would read it along with Lean Startup and go in with the right tools.

<comment><USER11> Lean Startup struck me as very much in the Business Book mold. The concept is a good one and he spells it out well, but there's really very little there that's of much practical use if you've mostly already bought into the concept.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Nice! It's part of the Kindle library, so I'm able to borrow it for free via Kindle unlimited. Will definitely buy a hard copy if it's as good as it seems to be.

</comment><comment><USER13> Any idea when we'll see the hardcover copy available direct from Amazon UK?

For non-linear books such as this I often prefer a physical copy as I can very easily flick back and forth between sections.

I could buy the hardcover copy from amazon.com for an additional £7.55 shipping cost but would prefer to purchase from amazon.co.uk and pay less (or nothing) for shipping.

</comment><comment><USER14> Looks like an interesting read.

How big is the audio download? (I'm on a quota here in the jungle)

Can you name an Android pod app to use with it?

Thanks

</comment><comment><USER15> I wanted to buy the audio book but castify doesn't want to sell it, they want me to sign up.. why?

</comment><comment><USER16> Just purchased the audio book.

Thanks for putting out an audio book. I really wish all books were in audio form. There's so much free time where audio is possible but reading is not (driving, walking, running...).

<comment><USER6> Awesome, thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> hmmm, i signed up for the list but can't figure out how to get my 3 free chapters

<comment><USER6> Or go here - [http://snip.ly/5Wwo](http://snip.ly/5Wwo)

<comment><USER18> Thanks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Discount for HN readers?

<comment><USER6> We have no power to discount on Amazon, but you can get the first 3 chapters free here - [http://snip.ly/5Wwo](http://snip.ly/5Wwo)</comment></comment>


Pharmacist accused of not filling birth control prescription - <AUTHOR> http://kron4.com/2017/06/04/pharmacist-accused-of-not-filling-birth-control-prescription/ <comment><USER2> Sack them, simple as.</comment>


Lightbot: Kids learn programming concepts - <AUTHOR> http://www.light-bot.com/hocflash.html <comment><USER2> About two years ago, I was responsible for the curriculum of a number of after-school "learn programming" classes for kids aged 11-14 (Canadian grades 6-8), and we used a slightly older version of light-bot as one of our teaching tools, among others.

After using light-bot as a central piece of the first classes we ran, I decided to make less use of it, because it had significant usability issues for the kids. The awkward click-targets and instruction management were very difficult for the kids, who wanted to experiment and change the order of their bot programs frequently. I'm very glad to see that that's one of the biggest improvements in this version of light-bot: instructions highlight when you mouse over them, clicking them removes them/adds them immediately, the position they will end up in when you release a drag is highlighted, etc. Great work on that! Starting with just enough instructions and slots to demonstrate the direction of flow is also a good move.

There are a few other issues that seem to have popped up: there are so many buttons on the relatively small screen that at any point, it can be difficult to tell what to push next. What do >> and >>> mean to an 11-year-old, or < vs a wraparound back arrow?

I haven't tested this version (I no longer teach those classes), but I can imagine kids clicking arbitrarily around until things move forward without them quite understanding why or whether they were successful, or just being paralysed by not being sure what to do. That paralysis was very common for us, and it sometimes took a lot of encouragement to get kids to just play around and try whatever came to mind.

Regardless, I think light-bot is fun, challenging, feels good to beat, and helps to familiarize kids with step-by-step operations and looping structures especially. Procedures often required some extra conceptual explanation, but also get a good treatment. Glad to see it being updated and promoted!

<comment><USER3> I used the hour of code version of light-bot on the first day of a 5 day intensive programming course for 11-14 year olds to get them exposed to programming concepts. It worked great - we graduated from it to other content after a few hours with it but it was a great introduction to programming for the kids.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is a very clever game and I had lots of fun playing with it, but it seems to be a dead end in terms of the size and complexity of programs that you can create. A similar, but more versatile teaching language is Logo[1], implemented way back in 1967. Logo's "turtle graphics"[2] have similar primitives, such as "FORWARD 100" or "LEFT 90"[3], but the numerical arguments let you create much more complex patterns, and named procedures let you create programs that are much easier to understand than just "P1" and "P2".

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logo_%28programming_language%2...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logo_%28programming_language%29)

[2] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtle_graphics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtle_graphics)

[3] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UCBLogo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UCBLogo)

<comment><USER5> My children (~7yrs) found LightBot to be a useful starting point. The main things they got out of it was the idea of following a set of instructions and that groups of instructions could be reused. It's not a game they played over though. They played the provided levels though once, then graduated to Scratch. The progression from Lightbot to Scratch seems to work, in that Scratch takes over from where LightBot leaves off.

My one gripe with LightBot was that it's not open source, so the kids couldn't look inside it. The ideal would be if gCompris included a LightBot style activity.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm a mentor for a Lego robotics team and have been for years - this year's season will mark my eighth year of Lego Robotics. I love to help the kids learn and I even try to teach them (to some extent) how to code.

The thing that gets their interest every time is something physical. I can sit them in front of Scratch for four hours twice a week, or this, or LOGO, or any of a multitude of other solutions, but the two things that never fail to interest them are Lego Mindstorms and my quadcopter. My quadcopter usually catches their attention (wow, a machine that can go over a hundred miles an hour! cool!) but the Lego Mindstorms robot is what keeps them interested.

This is because they have no idea of how to build a quadcopter that can go as fast as mine (which is reasonable, considering it took eight months to build mine - it's among the fastest in the world and may even be the fastest) but they do know how to drag and drop blocks to make the robot go.

My point is: there has to be some kind of moment where you snag the kids' attention. I don't see any moment here that would make the kids excited. Seeing my quadcopter soar through the sky at over a hundred miles an hour fascinates them. Seeing the robot move across the board, shoot projectiles or battle another robot (at their command!) fascinates them. But having a virtual character follow commands in an interface which looks like it came out of a preschool? I doubt it.

It looks like this may be targeted towards very young children, but in that case my worry is not that this won't snag their attention (very young children are much more interested in a computer game than my quadcopter) but rather that they'll simply forget about it by the time they learn to read and write (and thus even be able to start reading and writing code.)

Here's another comment I made about teaching kids to code: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7450503](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7450503)

<comment><USER7> I can see the merit in having something that snag's kids' attention. When anyone is intrinsically motivated to understand something, that is the moment when they'll truly look to understand rules and really start learning.

I would have to say that the physical devices thing is perhaps your own projection for being the best way of snagging kids' attention- of course, you do work with robotics and quadcoptors, but for many kids, real games (and that means not Scratch or Logo) are what catches attention.

LightBot's design starts basic. But the puzzles become quite difficult. From what I've seen, kids associate with the character and first become interested due to that connection, and then are later motivated to complete puzzles because each completion actually feels rewarding and something that they truly had to figure out (very few things do that nowadays outside of puzzle games for kids).

So perhaps physical toys are your cup of tea, and they may be for many kids, but just think about how many kids today would rather play Minecraft than play Lego Mindstorms. It's not a physical contraption and can be seen as an educational tool in many regards. I would argue that physical toys aren't always the best motivators for kids in the same way that video games aren't for others.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Designers of these systems need to understand that their target market can't yet read, and the whole system is worthless for small kids if you need to be able to read written prompts.

My five year old zips around the ipad and could do a lot more than he's doing, but he's just not going to take the time to sound out words and try to figure out what the game is telling him.

<comment><USER9> Is reading without sounding anything out not expected by 5?

<comment><USER10> Essentially, you can't really force these skills on kids. These things happen on individual pace for every kid out there. Some are better at art, some are better at speech, some are better at math and some learn to read earlier than others. That's why the school starts when it starts. By that time development seems to even out across the board.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> A similar and fun boardgame is RoboRally: [http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/18/roborally](http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/18/roborally)

<comment><USER12> I kickstarted the (apparently unintentionally) similar [http://www.robotturtles.com/](http://www.robotturtles.com/) boardgame. My 3.5 year old loved it and picked it up right away.

From my few minutes with it, Lightbot seems like a great follow-up game for older kids.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Wow this is very well done. I had entirely too much fun playing around with it. I've been using minecraft and some mods like computercraft ([http://www.computercraft.info/](http://www.computercraft.info/)) to try and teach my nephews but this may be more fun to help explain concepts.

<comment><USER14> I started a programme at my son's primary school to teach rudimentary programming skills using Computercraft, but ultimately found the Minecraft environment proved too distracting for the children. Supervised, they did absolutely fine, and Computercraft essentially provides a Logo like environment using a modern programming language which is superb. Computercraft is engaging, and setting up tasks for the kids to perform with the turtles was instructive and fun. Left to their own devices however, the children were more inclined to just mess around in the sandbox. I still think Computercraft can be a useful tool for an educator, but it absolutely requires supervision and guided learning.

<comment><USER13> Yeah I think this is where the new(ish) adventure mode in mincraft can come in handy because I see the same thing. With adventure mode you can define world parameters such as "only these blocks are mineable" and so forth. With that you could setup a world where only the tasks you want accomplished could be possible. But I'll be honest, that's a lot of work for someone trying to teach!

<comment><USER14> Interesting, I wasn't aware that adventure mode allowed for that kind of customisation. I don't think that mode was available in Minecraft when I was running the workshops, but can see how that would be useful. You're right that it's a lot of work though - teaching with something like Scratch is certainly easier to get up and running.

<comment><USER15> Yeah, those features are very new. IIRC, they were introduced in the snapshots for 1.8, so they haven't even reached the stable version yet. (Minecraft 1.8 is nearing completion, after ~8 months of development).

Once 1.8 is officially released, someone could create educational adventure maps. I have played some 1.8 maps, and the new features can essentially make Minecraft into a game engine for voxel-based adventure games.

Here's an example from earlier in the 1.8 dev cycle -- there are even more features now. [http://www.minecraftmaps.com/adventure-maps/mystery-of- the-t...](http://www.minecraftmaps.com/adventure-maps/mystery-of-the-time- keeper)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Very nice tutorial. My daugther (6y) has enjoying the 1st levels. But she do not get the proc part of the second part.

Dyarosla, can you consider adding an easy level with "P1"? A very very long blue line would be perfect to learn to call P1x12 instead of enter (Walk+Light)x12.

Can you also add more basic levels: she had liked to solve them, but now she doesn't want to play again. The levels are "already done" or "too hard".

</comment><comment><USER17> I remember playing the original Lightbot on Kongregate back in 2008, and still remember thoroughly enjoying completing it. I've always had a soft spot for well-made puzzle games and for some reason I've never really connected that to my natural curiosity with regards to programming.

</comment><comment><USER18> I have both Android versions and although my 5-year-old is pretty intelligent, I find the game too hard for him, i.e. sometimes I need to help him and often I have hard time myself, too.

</comment><comment><USER19> I got angry at this because it "didn't work". I simply didn't read you only have to light up the blue tiles. Maybe i have to go back to reading lessons...

</comment><comment><USER20> light bot is looking great and has certainly come a long way! I was inspired by an earlier version to make a similar game that revolves around events and forking. If you have a modern browser (webgl 1.0) you can try an early version here [http://moaijs.moaiforge.com/progrocket/index.html](http://moaijs.moaiforge.com/progrocket/index.html)

</comment><comment><USER21> Site failed horribly on firefox android fyi. Will have to check it out later at home though :-)</comment>


Ask HN: How to train yourself to become a quick thinker? - <AUTHOR>

By "quick", I mean within a very small amount of time, you are able to:
1. look at things from _many_ different perspectives quickly,
2. find/construct relationships between remote things quickly,
3. recall relevant knowledge/experience from memory quickly,
4. observe the environment and quickly grasp essentials about the situation,
How to train yourself to be better in this kind of "quick thinking"?
What are your recommendations of books/videos/courses? What are the necessary thinking habits/approaches/methodologies? What are the training methods/processes?
Note that here, if forced to choose, we are seeking the ability of "breadth and quantity" of our thoughts, not "depth and correctness". Of course we are not against the latter, but your recommendations should focus on "quickness". <comment><USER2> I don't think it's possible to literally speed up the way brain processes the information, neurons will probably fire and transmit the information at a constant rate.

So if we want to "think faster" we are tallking about:

\- strengthening connections between the neurons

\- learning new patterns, so that instead of reprocessing the information(reinventing ideas) brain would "cache" the familiar patterns as memories.

I guess either way, the solution to both things comes down to developing skill. Picking a type of problems and solving them a lot, until brain builds up the circuits for them.

I think that when a person "observes the environment and quickly grasps essentials about the situation" he is simply recognizing a familiar pattern, so to be better/faster at that you simply need to learn more patterns(experience). The same goes for the point 3 - the more often you use/recall some information, the better you will be at it.

Regarding the points 1 and 2 - I highly recommend a book "Serious Creativity" by Edward De Bono, learn and practice skills this book is explaining. This is the best book on creativity I've ever encountered, it addresses exactly these issues.

Besides that, a practical advice would be to remove things that slow you down. Remove anxiety, distractions, learn to focus better. Learning meditation is very useful for that.

<comment><AUTHOR> Practice a lot to get very familiar with many patterns, to a degree that those patterns become second nature so it takes little time to recognize them. Also thanks for the book recommendation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Good question. In my view, thinking fast has to do with how well you can process emotion. Do you get stuck in the headlights or do you dive out of the way of the truck coming at you?

That is not a question of preparedness mentally. It is a question of emotional preparedness. As in, how do you process fear?

As to the ability to process information, that is also related to emotion, as in, what do you care to pay attention to and what do you readily discard?

Knowing how you feel and then being __capable __of processing emotions quickly as they arise is probably the most important skill there is for us humans and that is true whether you lived during the Rennaissance or in a cave or if you work at google.

If you are interested in more about the subject of becoming more capable, let me know. I am writing a book about it presently and would love to share it with you and get your feedback. The results have been pretty great. People say that focusing on capabilities makes them feel lighter and younger. I also feel lighter, my thoughts flow at lightning speed, making me more prepared for change. I can be found at poppitup on twitter. Just follow the cat.

<comment><AUTHOR> emotion and feeling! this is a wonderful angle to look at the ability of "quickness in thinking". I always suspect there is more to the 'hard' portion(knowledge/experience/skills) that contributes to one's quickness. The 'soft' part might be _more_ important. This is one question needed to be studied. Another question is how to tap into and train the emotion/feeling part to modify/increase/utilize it, or is it mostly innate?

About the "quickness" I am asking for, If a gun is pointed at me and I am forced to come up with an analogy, I would say I am asking for the "quickness" in James Bond's behaviors and handling of situations, not the thoughtfulness and depth of Sherlock Holmes (although he was not slow for sure), if you know what I mean. Sorry for the bad analogy.

very interested in your book, will definitely follow it.

<comment><USER4> > About the "quickness" I am asking for, If a gun is pointed at me

Read _Principles of Personal Defense_ and/or _To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak the Truth_ by Jeff Cooper

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Take up Yoga.

My personal experience is I benefited on the points that you have mentioned and then some more. Would sound corny but the best way to describe the experience is like what was shown in the movie 'Limitless' \- it was of course not to that extent, but after doing Yoga for few weeks I felt as if some fog was lifted from my brain (which prior to that I didn't even realize was there), I was able to connect things much more efficiently, do pattern matching and all at subconscious level. Also, I realized I could remember long numbers (ex. ph no.) much more easily - I was never partial to mathematics right from childhood. If I have to rationalize it then I would think its not only because of exercises, inverted postures (which allows more blood flow to your upper regions of the body) etc. but also due to breathing exercises - which not only helps your lungs but brain as well.

There are scientific work around Yoga and improvement on cognitive abilities, one that I could find easily: The Acute Effects of Yoga on Executive Function [http://kch.illinois.edu/research/labs/neurocognitive- kinesio...](http://kch.illinois.edu/research/labs/neurocognitive- kinesiology/files/Articles/Gothe_2013_TheEffectsOfA.pdf)

<comment><AUTHOR> Very interesting. I have been thinking in taking Yoga class for years. Might be the time to start it now.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I think it's all practice, and a little natural talent. Then again I can't say I'm the fastest thinker. That is, I don't know. I've never compared myself.

What you're talking about here takes practice and a super powered brain. But at the same time, maybe you need to be more specific. I ask myself these questions sometimes as well. Try learning a diverse skill set, rounding yourself out. At the same time, know and accept the brain's limitations. For example, you wouldn't start a car in 5th gear. But those are the kinds of things we do with our psychology all the time. Like multitasking, stressing ourselves out, fatiguing our brains, eating shitty food, breathing poorly.

But why is quickness so important?

Drugs, in the right doses, can sometimes help you do this.

Maybe understanding "why" would help as well.

<comment><AUTHOR> about the why, I think the ability to think quickly (in wide breadth and large quantity, even with some shallowness due to time constraint) becomes more and more important in modern times, compared to, say, the Renaissance days, because the vast amount of information available, the increasingly complicated and complex situations we face in work place and daily life, and the fast pace of everything moving at, the subsequent demand for people to handle all these.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> A few thoughts and observations:

\- Thinking in strict sense is slow by nature. The only way to make it faster is to avoid it, that is to simply know the stuff. The more you know, the faster you think, that is do what looks like thinking.

\- Emotions may disrupt any expert; you'll forget what is 3 by 5. There's a comment here already that mentions it, and I second it, because I was that guy. One of best decisions in my life was going to a shrink :)

\- There's a structured approach to problem solving; formulate the problem (current state), the goal (the desired state), list alternatives, weigh them, choose. This may sound obvious, but a lot of otherwise smart people do not do this and simply pick the first idea that pops to their minds. Changing to structured problem solving helps immensely; it's actually used as a therapy.

\- Some high-level heuristics may help: six thinking hats, TRIZ (although this one doesn't think it's a heuristic), morphological analysis, and so on. Their primary purpose is exactly that: quickly generate many different ideas and views and make sure to cover as many important bases as possible. Each has a special flavor; TRIZ, for example, aims for elegant minimalist solutions.

\- Every blessing has a curse. I once read "Vengeance: The True Story of an Israeli Counter-Terrorist Team" (it was made into the "Munich" movie) and there was an episode when a Soviet special agent got killed primarily because he was a trained special agent who is always ready and aware of what's going on. Quick thinking looks very useful, but there will be situations when it isn't.

<comment><AUTHOR> Structured approaches and systematic methods to generate many different views, these are probably the best ways to achieve fast thinking and getting good enough results in work/daily life endeavors.

Having a system in place and becoming one's second nature (through training) will help one to remain guided and calm in heated/hectic situations(James Bond?), basically turn one's mind into some kind of machine which runs fast and emotion free. Machine might not produce _the_ best solution, but it can produce a lot quickly (hopefully some are good and creative). Frankly I believe in today's society one needs more of the quickness to be successful(in a worldly sense).

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Sleep is number one. Without it, you will think much much slower. When you are deprived, parts of your brain shut off and 'rest'.

Once that's taken care off, stimulant is another way. Coffee in general is a widely accepted way to accelerate thinking.

As some people mentioned, general anxiety or fear/emotion could impact thinking both positively and negatively. A healthy dose of cortisol could improve performance but too much of it especially if you get into panic/terror mode would impede fast thinking.

Fasting once you past through the low glucose phase could actually help assuming you are not one of those who are plagued with persistent brain fog due to lack of fuel during a fast.

Toxic load matters. If your body chemicals are out of whack or intoxicated it might cause brain inflammation which would impact your thinking.

But more importantly the baseline is genetics - how your brain is wired really matters. The amount of grey matters & glia along with the unique way your body myelinate connections impact how fast you could think.

Nootropics - could help to a certain extend but they ALL have side effects, some permanent so I don't recommend them.

</comment><comment><USER9> You need to think of significance of factors here. I would say they are the following in this order:

General Intelligence, Stress Level, Familiarity with the task at hand, Good night's sleep, Coffee/tea/other stimulants, Nutrition, Exercise

I think the single most important in this list is stress levels which can really lower your iq by dozens of points at a particular moment. Everything except the first is modifiable.

</comment><comment><USER10> I think everyone has the capacity to be a quick thinker.

The two main components to being a quick thinker are not what you think.

The first one is a competitive spirit. If you have ever played any sports and you have felt the desire to win, this will get you half way to thinking quickly. Train yourself to be able to look at the problem and give up many different possibilities rather than just the smoking gun fix. Sometimes in a enterprise environment fixing the smoking gun is the most inconvenient. Being under pressure and using the competitive spirit can be one of the most satisfying jobs.

The second one is know your environment. You have to know your environment from top to bottom and everything in between. You have to be able to visualize the problem from inside and out in order to narrow the problem down to its core. The first thing you do at a new job is to find the documentation for everything and study it.

This vision of the environment could come from many different crafts whether it is a Network Engineer, Software Developer, DBA, or Systems Engineer. But you have to be in a position of knowledge about the entire infrastructure.

In order to recall knowledge/experiences from memory quickly you have to be an expert pattern matcher. Sometimes its a new problem that has never been discovered or documented but very rarely. Search google for the main topic and if you find a gazillion answers you know its a common problem. If you cant find anything you know someone has changed something or broke something and is more than likely a misconfiguration. How do you gain the knowledge in the first place? Reading. Reading books and blogs and stack overflow and everything you can get your hands on. You wont retain all the knowledge but you will remember that you found a fix for it at one time or another and can search for it again quickly.

<comment><AUTHOR> I totally agree on the "competitive spirit" point. If one has a strong desire to take control and to win, the needed energy and sense of emergency will come quickly.

To expand on this point, I think in addition to the competitive spirit, a carefree mindset also helps to keep cool, make you to step back a little bit, to think quickly in unconventional ways.

I am not so sure about your second point. I understand more knowledge and more experience will help us, but is more studying of documentations/technical know-hows the best way to spend our time in the aim of improving our fasting thinking ability? I have experienced too many occasions in which much less knowledgeable/skilled people came on top in businesses/arguments/political competitions.

<comment><USER10> I should have said this is from my 20 years of experience in an IT department. And as a response to my second point, it was in reference to technical problems that you see in an enterprise environment. I though you were directing your questions to technical knowledge not business/arguments/political competitions, my bad.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Have you heard of 'mindfulness' or vipassana meditation? at it's core it's about developing your ability in "pre-symbolic" thinking ie before narrating the situation inside your head.

There's tons of books on the subject but read both parts of this:

[http://www.medialens.org/index.php/current-alert- sp-29853922...](http://www.medialens.org/index.php/current-alert- sp-298539227/cogitations-archive/57-mind-training-part-1.html)

</comment><comment><USER4> There's an active community at [http://artofmemory.com](http://artofmemory.com)

<comment><USER5> That is more remembering things and not for 'quick thinking' per se - OP's goal. There is a very interesting book on the concept of 'Memory Palace' (on which 'artofmemory.com' is based on): Moonwalking with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything [http://www.amazon.com/Moonwalking-Einstein- Science-Rememberi...](http://www.amazon.com/Moonwalking-Einstein-Science- Remembering-Everything/dp/0143120530)

<comment><USER4> These techniques can also be applied to "concepts", not just objects and words. Reduced latency of human access, e.g. placing related concepts "nearby" in human memory, has similar benefits as database indexes which colocate related data. Some data visualizations help with associative thinking. "Quick" thinking may involve navigation around a high-dimensional conceptual space, which could be simplified as projections onto 2D images which can be stored in a memory palace. Flatland is a classic essay on the 2D/3D boundary.

Another way of approaching the question would be to look at people who can have "quick conversations", e.g. longtime team members. There's a shared body of experience and shared vocabulary for complex concepts, addressable by shorthand.

Memory and emotion go hand-in-hand with perception.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> take up rock climbing.

<comment><AUTHOR> care to elaborate on it a little more? thanks.

<comment><USER12> Rock climbing is mostly safe, mostly methodical and meditative but there are times you have to think quickly or you will fall.

It doesn't have to be deadly; you could learn it while on belay at a climbing gym.

An electrical fault once set a payphone on fire in a dormitory where I was living. That was our only phone so it wasn't like we could call for help. Everyone stood around watching in terror as the flames grew.

I grabbed a paper grocery sack out of a trash can, covered my hand with it then slapped my palm over the fire.

Everyone said I was a hero. They didn't expect that of me because I have always been - particularly back then - rather shy and quiet. But to me it was the obvious thing to do.</comment></comment></comment>


Twelve things to do with an old Apple computer - <AUTHOR> http://www.tuaw.com/2010/04/07/12-things-you-can-do-with-an-old-apple-computer/

<comment><USER2> Kind of reminds me of this: <http://3.flowsnake.org/cheapskate-mac-guide.html></comment>


Computing normals for 3D Bézier curves - <AUTHOR> https://pomax.github.io/bezierinfo/#pointvectors3d <comment><AUTHOR> A small but significant update to the Primer: the section on how to get decent normals in 3D finally makes sense. Previous it only explained how to compute Frenet normals (based on simple, four line maths), but those do _really_ weird things and cause normals to twist violently or even flip from one side of a curve to another... which is pretty useless when you're doing any kind of 3D graphics works.

So I finally managed to get a better approach documented, based on a nice paper on Rotation Minimising Frames, with some textual explanation, some code for the programmers amongst us, and an interactive graphic to show how much better that is compared to Frenet normals.

<comment><USER2> The midpoint reflection is an interesting way to compute the next frame, I haven't seen this before. When I've implemented rotation minimizing frames, I used a less tricky version: project the previous frame normal & binormal onto the next tangent plane, then renormalize. A friend called this "poor man's Bishop frames". (Used in production on some CG movies you may have seen.)

My projection method fails when the tangent turns more than 90 degrees, of course, so adaptive sampling of the curve is required for the general case. I assume that adaptive sampling is still required for the method presented here? Are there some advantages to mirroring around the midpoint's tangent plane?

It is worth noting that for the Quadratic Bézier curve, the Frenet Frame is a rotation minimizing frame. Frenet & RMF only differ for cubics and higher.

This guide is excellent, BTW, I refer to it all the time. Thank you!

<comment><AUTHOR> Quite welcome!

Getting a tangent to change that drastically over a small interval is quite hard, except on a cusp, where the curve itself is discontinuous (so anything that happens at the cusp is always going to be wrong). Of course, cusps only occur in planar curves, but you _could_ still run into that. Splitting the curve at the cusp and treating it as two curves, to be joined "however is the most aesthetically pleasing way" is basically your only option.

A shift and renomalization is a very efficient RMF, but can lead to weird things when the projected binormal ends up lying in the plane of curvature. Say, a curve that starts off going up and left/right, then changes direction from left/right to front/back. If we're not framing on small enough intervals, the binormal of a frame on one side of that change projected to the other side of that change will suddenly lie in the plane of curvature, and renormalisation can suddenly be broken.

<comment><USER2> > Getting a tangent to change that drastically over a small interval is quite > hard, except on a cusp, where the curve itself is discontinuous (so anything > that happens at the cusp is always going to be wrong)

FWIW, I ran into near cusps with 3D curves immediately in production with hair physics simulations. They don't happen a lot, but the frames are needed for guide hairs, so popping when frames flip is extremely noticeable, even though they not crazy common.

> Splitting the curve at the cusp and treating it as two curves, to be joined > "however is the most aesthetically pleasing way" is basically your only > option.

I came up with an adaptive sampling method that can guarantee a step size with no more than a given minimum change of angle. It worked well in my case for CG hair with cubics. (Not published, but happy to describe if you have any interest.)

I've also seen a really neat parametric remapping method for quadratics that can precompute all parameter values with an exact constant change of angle for every step.

<comment><AUTHOR> As long as you have near-cusps rather than real cusps (and to be fair: real planar cusps in 3D are easily avoid by just forcing planar curves to be non- planar during your pre-render pass) simply drastically decreasing the sampling interval over low-radius-of-curvature sections is a perfectly valid approach. It's fast (ish =D) and gets the job done.

<comment><USER2> I tried much smaller steps, and it never got me there with a reasonable step size. It was a lot less expensive to do adaptive sampling than crank up the step size. Plus, you already know, there's no guarantee with regular sampling. Near cusps can be arbitrarily small. Production wanted a guarantee, even if things were to run slower. I think adaptive was faster, but their primary concern was to know they wouldn't have surprises or have to call in support once there were hundreds of hair shots in the pipe.

The other advantage of maximum angle sampling is when calculating arc length of a curve with piecewise approximation.

Anyway, It's entirely possible that seeing as many very near cusps as we did was because our physics simulation was under constrained or not very good. ;) But for whatever reason, my experience left me with the feeling that they're common enough to be a serious concern, rather than rare and easily avoidable...

<comment><AUTHOR> Absolutely, when dollars are on the line, the procedure is always 1: make it work. 2: make it fast. 3: make it nice and write a paper on it. And while step 2 is sometimes optional, step 3 _always_ is =)

If you run into cusps a lot on a hair simulation, that feels like evidence of a bad model, but plenty of good things have been done with bad models so that's hardly an indictment on the process. If your model yields loads of cusps, you need a solution, and this type of RMF is probably a very expensive solution.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> While it may be less efficient, it seems like the rotation minimizing frame can be constructed more intuitively with quaternions.

Using Unity's functions, it looks like the rotation for the current point can just be: ``` Q(t) = Quaternion.LookRotation(P(t)-P(t-1), Q(t-1) * Vector3.up); ``` (where Q is the list of rotations and P is the set of Points)

Possible also with the method IQ defines in this article (accumulating aligning delta rotations over the course of the curve): [http://iquilezles.org/www/articles/noacos/noacos.htm](http://iquilezles.org/www/articles/noacos/noacos.htm)

</comment><comment><USER4> I feel like every month I see another article about calculating bezier curves. Are there _that_ many people who are interested in reading about bezier curves?

<comment><USER2> > Are there _that_ many people who are interested in reading about Bézier > curves?

That's how Hacker News works. To make the front page, enough people have to up-vote the article.

I think comments might influence the article ranking too, but I don't know that. If you're not interested in this topic, why comment on the article?

As to why there might be a lot of developers on Hacker News interested in Bézier curves, they're used a lot, and they're taught a lot. More or less all video games & CG movies ever made use them for animation & modeling. Most fonts in use are defined by Bézier curves. SVG & web animations use Bézier curves. Motion planning and mapping people use them for boundaries & routes. And those are just a few applications.

<comment><USER4> I commented on the article because I feel I see this topic come up more frequently than I would expect, and wanted to know if others felt the same way. Do you think that is too far off-topic of a discussion for HN?

<comment><USER2> No, it's not too far off topic, meta discussions are welcome, especially if you're genuinely curious. (Your phrasing & emphasis made you not sound particularly curious to me, FWIW.) This particular meta discussion, however, is less relevant than the topic of Bezier curves for HN in general. You can't have it both ways.

What good would confirming that some other people feel the same way do? We've already established that the fact people are both submitting and up-voting Bezier articles means that there are enough people interested, relative to other articles. The existence of this article on the front page means that the only thing wrong here is your own expectation that people aren't interested in Bezier curves, right? Personally, I'm pretty sure that some people reading HN don't care about Bezier curves, but I know for a fact that quite a few do, because enough people are posting and bubbling up articles on the topic.

I have no idea what percentage of the HN crowd cares about Bezier curves, but fortunately it doesn't take a majority to get articles on the front page. I love that niche topics come across the front page, that it only takes a handful of interested people. That's exactly why I come to HN.

So, enjoy it and have fun. If you want HN articles to have more things you find interesting, then submit and up-vote the things you care about.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


A Patch to SDL2 to Fix Cursor Bugs - <AUTHOR> https://blog.parsec.tv/an-update-to-sdl2-to-fix-cursor-bugs-3aa7ae5ed97b#.jddnfxibw <comment><AUTHOR> We ran into some bugs with SDL2 when implementing it to stream games to the Raspberry Pi ([http://bit.ly/2nIIReG](http://bit.ly/2nIIReG)). There were issues with relative mouse and absolute mouse mode and cursor placement. Hopefully, this fix helps others. Our changes are tracked in Github ([https://github.com/parsec-cloud/sdl-2.0.5](https://github.com/parsec- cloud/sdl-2.0.5))</comment>


Why Is Money in Asia Circles? - <AUTHOR> https://www.dampfkraft.com/money-asia-circles.html <comment><USER2> The money in China is not always circle. All the dynasties, the money used to be rectangle 铢, paper 票, and circle. And Before Spanish trading, the circle money in china has shown up, like the Qin dynasty, they use circle money in 221 BC.

<comment><USER3> Yep, fiat paper money was adopted in China since the 11th century.

<comment><USER4> The article is not about the origins of currency in Asia, nor on who first introduced (a) "circle currency", but why three major currencies ended up being named similarly (today).

Even if as the parent comment says China had round money previously that would not explain that, unless you can provide a line of reasoning similar to the one in the article showing how/why Korea and Japan ended up with "circle" based on that previous Chinese money the parent mentioned. Not that the article provides any hard prove, AFAICS it's conjecture based on what sounds likely, and I think it at least _does_ sound a lot more likely than an explanation based on that Chinese 221 BC "circle money".

<comment><USER5> > _Even if as the parent comment says China had round money previously that > would not explain that, unless you can provide a line of reasoning similar > to the one in the article showing how /why Korea and Japan ended up with > "circle" based on that previous Chinese money the parent mentioned._

First, why wouldn't they? They borrowed terms and cultural ideas from one another all the time and have several words common. If anything, it's the theory in the article that has the burden of proof.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The title's a bit hard to parse; I though "Asia" was a modifier to "Circles". "Why is Asian Money Circular" might be clearer.

<comment><USER7> "Why is money called 'circles' in Asia?" is what I'd suggest.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Chinese money has always been round. Ironically they were called 方穿 (square through) money. They were there since the warring states era.

Article is about the etymology of yuan (circle) and it's derivatives like yen and won

</comment><comment><USER9> 圆 is a deep match for silver coins, because it also means full moon, which is the ultimate silver circle.</comment>


A teenager won a $25,000 award for a solution to eliminate blind spots for cars - <AUTHOR> https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/06/us/teenager-invention-blind-spot-trnd/index.html <comment><USER2> I think it's great she came up with a solution..but mounting a web cam to the top of your car isn't really practical.

<comment><USER3> Or new, this has been around since the 90s in concept cars. I will do a search for the prior art if i have time. I do recall the first backup cam was volvos safety car, which inspired the 240 (which never got it, and only got airbags 20some years later.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> [https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/195951-jaguar-concept- ca...](https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/195951-jaguar-concept-car-has- transparent-pillars-advanced-hud-with-mario-kart-like-ghost-mode)

Prior art. This is fake news at its best.</comment>


Show HN: Extractor API v1 – the text extraction workflow API and UI - <AUTHOR> https://extractorapi.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hey HN - coming at this solo, my first SaaS, after years of being a freelance copywriter and content manager.

A few years back I discovered Python, and very quickly after NLP. To a writer with a love for sci-fi/tech, I was enamored, and spent ungodly hours on my employer's GCC-hosted Jupyter Notebooks, coming up with all sorts of impractical experiments with Spacy, Facebook's Starspace, Gensim, and the like.

For one, I needed a lot of training data. I'd go crawl thousands of pages of text from news sites, using Scrapy and storing data directly on the server. For text extraction and boilerplate removal, I used newspaper3k, and eventually a custom extractor that used a random forest model to select proper element "candidates".

I wanted a simpler way to aggregate text for a dataset, query it, create subsets based on keywords, and so on. The paid options out there - Diffbot, Aylien, Ujeebu, Scrapinghub's news API, etc. weren't exactly what I was looking for.

After learning the minimum amount of JS required, I built a shitty local app where you could paste a bunch of URLs and get back a JSON with the extracted text. I posted it up here, on HN, and there were a few hundred visits, absolutely demolishing the $5 DO instance. I figured others might want something like this.

So I built extractorapi.com - a text extraction API and UI that revolves around the idea of "Jobs". For example, let's say you gathered a list of URLs from the NY Times, or The Economist, or Bloomberg. You then provide that list of URLs to a job called "my_articles". For example:

api_key = "YOUR_API_KEY" endpoint = "[https://extractorapi.com/api/v1/jobs"](https://extractorapi.com/api/v1/jobs")

headers = { "Authorization": f"Bearer {api_key}" } data = { "job_name": "my_job", "url_list": [ "example.com/article1", "example.com/article2", ... ] }

r = requests.post(endpoint, headers=headers, data=data)

This job will then process your input URLs server-side, and once complete, you can query the extracted text or title within the job. All jobs and extracted text are saved on your account - you can use the API or the web app to explore the jobs you started programmatically, download them in .csv or .json formats, and check their progress.

I go into more detail in this Medium piece, "Creating an Automated Text Extraction Workflow": [https://medium.com/@aleks_82234/creating-an-automated- text-e...](https://medium.com/@aleks_82234/creating-an-automated-text- extraction-workflow-part-1-6f2197d50749)

I get that it's hard to market to devs like myself (why buy when you can build?), so I'm looking for any feedback/criticism/suggestions on your experience with Extractor API. As Faulkner points out, you must kill your darlings - let me know if all this shit doesn't make any sense, or if it's actually helpful. Or somewhere in-between.</comment>


Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Is for Hackers (2013) - <AUTHOR> http://cbtsanfrancisco.com/cbt-is-for-hackers/ <comment><USER2> (2013)</comment>


Ask HN: Open-Source Election Software? - <AUTHOR> The Iowa caucus results are delayed tonight, apparently because of usability issues in a mobile app. I'm sure there are talented developers creating the app but somehow design or technical flaws are hindering the democratic process. Is there a way for developers to volunteer to help user test or do software reviews for software which is integral to the political process? This seems like an issue important enough that people would be willing to spend their time to help out. <comment><USER2> Voting should be done via paper. It can't be hacked at scale, requires little to no QA (get senior citizens to test layouts) and can be validated manually.

There is absolutely no need to have immediate results of any election in the United States. For a presidential election there is 2.5 months in between election day and when the new person takes office. Most other elections also have similar periods of time for change in leadership.

What problem is being solved by using consumer level software for voting?</comment>


Bitcoin may be susceptible to Goldfinger-style attacks - <AUTHOR> http://lists.randombit.net/pipermail/cryptography/2011-July/001038.html

<comment><USER2> What I like about bitcoin, even if it only a side benefit, is that make people think about things that most of the time are taken as granted.

That the conclusion is flawed, as it is in this case, is not that relevant.

PROOF: Suppose you have garnered half of all the bitcoin in existence. An absurd supposition, but it is only to make a point.

Now you have half of the purchasing power of the bitcoin economy, the other half being hold by other people. Now if destroy half of your coins you (surprise, surprise) you only hold ⅓ of the all bitcoins. So you have succesfully reduced you purchasing power. Congratulations.

</comment><comment><USER3> Hyperbolic headline. I'm not a bitcoin fan but read the post: it's just a property of the bitcoin cryptosystem that if one can destroy others coins then their own increase in value. It's not in itself a vulnerability by any means

<comment><AUTHOR> I submitted it. Now that I look at the headline with fresh eyes, I agree -- it's exaggerated, so I'll change it. Thanks.

UPDATE: Changed the headline to use Bruce Schneier's description: [http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/03/bitcoin_securi...](http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/03/bitcoin_securit.html)</comment></comment>


HTML book recommendations. - <AUTHOR>

I want to begin programming so I'm starting with HTML, could you wizards give me a recommendation on tutorials or books to read, to master this?<p>Thanks :) <comment><USER2> HTML: <http://headfirstlabs.com/books/hfhtml/>

Programming: [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Anews.ycombin...](http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Anews.ycombinator.com+learn+programming)

Also try the Search link at the bottom to see what else has already been asked on the subject.

</comment><comment><USER3> Don't start with HTML, it isnt programming and it might leave you disillusioned. Try Python or Ruby.

<comment><AUTHOR> I can understand Python (I've heard a lot about how easy it is) But why Ruby? :)</comment></comment>


Why Agencies Can't Do Rev-Share Deals with Startups - <AUTHOR> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/rev-share-agencies-like-getting-married-first-date-melinda-byerley?trk=pulse_spock-articles&trk=hp-feed-article-title-share <comment><USER2> It's all about risk. Many startups have either a non-existent or a non-proven business model. Why would they want to take the risk that they would never get paid?

A good friend of mine ran an SEO agency and had revenue-sharing relationships with a few companies. What ends up happening is that as soon as they start making real money, the company looks at the percentage of money the agency is getting as a liability (why should I be paying them this much??) and either wants to fire them (after the agency did all the work to get them the revenue) or pay them just a flat rate (which is typically much less than what the services are worth or what was being paid before).

So it's a lose-lose for the agency. It's much better just to charge for services.

<comment><AUTHOR> that's pretty much a synopsis of the article, thank you! :D</comment></comment>


Get all the photos your friends took with you, forward and backwards in time. - <AUTHOR> http://blog.bu.mp/introducing-flock

<comment><USER2> Flock was a web browser until last year: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flock_(web_browser)>

I know there are only so many names, but in this case both flocks are social apps, tracking updated photos between friends.

I wonder if Zynga (the owners of flock.com now) will have anything to say about this, though I find it hard to imagine it hasn't already been discussed.

</comment><comment><USER3>
        Flock uses new battery-friendly location technology and
        sophisticated algorithms to magically know which of your
        Facebook friends you are with when photos are taken.

My bet is that they're using the background significant location change service. Each time iOS wakes the app with a significant location change notification, Flock combs through your photos and sends their GPS coordinates from the EXIF data to the Flock servers.

What I'm really concerned about, though, is that to pull this off the app must send your location to the Flock servers for correlation with other users' photo locations. This means Bump now has a reasonably accurate location log for everyone using the Flock app.

I wrote a test app for the iOS significant location change service that logged my location for a week, and it was surprisingly accurate. Enough to clearly tell when I was at work, at home, driving down the freeway, etc.: [http://www.tomjstokes.com/130/iphone-ios-4-2-background- loca...](http://www.tomjstokes.com/130/iphone-ios-4-2-background-location- service-observations)

</comment><comment><USER4> I wish there was a way for ordinary hackers to work on electric airplanes, space shuttles, or robots on the side rather than photo sharing apps.

<comment><AUTHOR> Solar airplane: <http://solarimpulse.com/en/timestop/job-offer/>

Space ship: <http://www.spacex.com/careers.php>

Robots: <http://www.willowgarage.com/pages/jobs>

We are hiring also: <http://bu.mp/company/jobs>

<comment><USER4> I only bring it up because in the first paragraph you said it started as a side project. I apologize for my comment though, this was a bad thread to post it.

My original point though, was that sometimes I feel like we make these apps, because that's what we're capable of making by ourselves. The links you posted are great opportunities for what we can do together. But I think there's still a large opportunity out there. Think about how many people actually completed the Stanford AI course. I think it was something close to 20k. There's a HUGE amount of people who have day jobs, but have the potential to do BIG things on the side. Except they're all off on their own, so they build iphone apps.

I'm starting to get an idea here :D

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> How will this be any different than the shared photo albums built-in to iOS6? Granted, I have not had the pleasure of using Flock or iOS6 - so this is not a rhetorical question.

<comment><AUTHOR> The two problems we see with getting all the photos your friends took with you are 1) you have to remember to share and whom you want to share with and 2) its a pain to share them all with just a couple people (and have their photos added as well). We think all that work is what prevents us from getting all the photos our friends took with us.

With shared photo albums on iOS6 it will be really easy to share a set of photos on your phone. It will not remind you to share and it will not consolidate everyone's photos into a single album.

Watch the Flock video to see how this works: <http://vimeo.com/46398388>

With Flock you just use any camera app as you normally would and when you leave the event Flock gives you a 1-touch page (not automatic, users still have control) of what to share and with whom.

<comment><USER5> "Flock is not just a brand new app; we see it as a brand new _kind_ of app. While most apps today jockey for our ever-dwindling time and attention, attempting to become one of the apps that we think about the most, Flock is different. We designed Flock so you don't have to think about it at all."

Great quote that really stands out after downloading the app. Fiancee and I are going to give it a try this weekend with some friends. I'm assuming, now that I've used it for a few hours, that it combines location AND time to make a best guess on what an event was. Very cool.

One thing that would be nice is to block out a certain location. For instance, we both take a ton of pictures at our house on a daily basis. For me, it's pictures of delicious things I'm pulling off the Big Green Egg. For her, it's pictures of our dog and her freshly-painted nails.

However, the instant combination of our travel photos earned a phone call from said fiancee. She loves it. Big props.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I've been using this app in beta for a while and it is so awesome. I really think this follows a new design pattern for mobile where the app is so smart it pings you when you should use it.

</comment><comment><USER7> forward in time? Break ALL the causality.

<comment><USER8> "Here are the photos of you dancing at the party next week. Do you still want to go?"

<comment><AUTHOR> In-app purchase: dance lessons

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Somewhat unrelated tip: The font on this blog is too small. I just measured and it is taking up only 20% of my screen.

I'd suggest a bigger font to make it more readable. Over 85% of people use a screen bigger than 1024x768 [1]. Take advantage of that. :)

[1] <http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_display.asp>

<comment><USER10> Over 85% _of w3schools.com users_ have a screen bigger than 1024x768. Most people have never been to w3schools.

<comment><USER9> I'm pretty sure their survey data comes from lots of websites, not just theirs.

<comment><USER10> I'm pretty sure you haven't read the statements right before the table:

W3Schools.com is for people with an interest for web technologies. This fact indicates that the figures below might not be 100% true for the average internet users. (...) Anyway, our data, _collected from W3Schools' log-files_ over ten years, clearly shows the long term trends.

But if you're not convinced, you can read in their forums:

        - The w3schools Browser and OS statistics are based on the data
          collected over the w3schools site or do have more sources?
        - Only the W3Schools site.

<http://w3schools.invisionzone.com/index.php?showtopic=35566>

By the way: <http://w3fools.com/>

<comment><USER9> I concede the point. I'm definitely wrong.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This, finally, is the fourth paragraph:

 _Flock finds the photos you take together with family and friends and magically brings all the photos from each person's phone together into a single shared album._

At least it stands alone, making it somewhat more (quickly) identifiable.

And such formulation (as in this comment, by the way) is what is known as "burying the lede". [1]

I mention it because I'm getting rather tired of not just blog posts but also essays, news articles, and even marketing copy (which the OP could also be considered), that makes me read 200, 300, or 500 words before I learn what they are talking about.

\--

[1] <http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bury_the_lede>

</comment><comment><USER12> How is this different from popset?

<comment><USER13> It has a different name, is made by different people, the two apps have entirely different feature-sets and focus, etc

<comment><USER14> Both have the same value proposition. Flock has far clearer messaging.</comment></comment></comment>