Something Changed at Tesla - <AUTHOR> https://jalopnik.com/something-changed-at-tesla-1840068128/ <comment><USER2> The author is trying pretty hard to pull this narrative. When I first saw it, I thought the Cybertruck looks hideous. But then, I don't care much what my car looks like. I often wished the outside of my Golf was more scrappy, rougher, something I don't need to care about denting. The Cybertruck would be perfect for me in that sense: you can use that truck and do a lot of work with it without having to worry about the paint or breaking something. It's a perfect design for it's intended purpose. To me, it doesn't paint a dystopian future. It paints a future where appearances serve an intended purpose, instead of the current opposite. A pickup truck is an utilitarian object. The cybertruck design is purely utilitarian. I love it.

Now if they could make a Cyberhatchback, I'd buy it right now.

<comment><USER3> There is absolutely nothing utilitarian about the design.

Trucks in the 1920s and early 1930s were utilitarian. This thing is 100% about the look.

<comment><USER4> Agreed. In fact one of my biggest arguments against the design is that it will NOT appeal to the average truck owner, because the design gets in the way of the utility. For example, a lot of trucks have toolboxes on the front side of the bed. Due to the triangular sides that pitch at the front of the bed, you can't reach into the bed there from the side of the truck. That's already a nonstarter for a work truck. Another thing is bed rails. The triangular design again prevents the installation of horizontal rails that keep things relatively level. Same story for a roof rack. It's nearly impossible to craft a roof rack for this design that doesn't look goofy and ride extremely high.

Look we can argue about stagnation in truck design but there's something to be said about a timeless design feature, like the classic truck bed. I think Tesla misses here and so their main market for this will be competing against off-road SUVs like Jeep Grand Cherokee or Range Rover. The Cybertruck will not compete directly with say, Ford's F150 and the Silverado.

<comment><USER5> Don't know if it was designed this way, but if it has a "frunk" like most electric vehicles do, that would ideally be where the tool box goes. Much more accessible.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I think the author is reading way too much into the design.

It looks the way it does to drive down production costs and because of the limitations of the processes used to manufacture it: [https://electrek.co/2019/11/24/teslas-cybertruck-looks- weird...](https://electrek.co/2019/11/24/teslas-cybertruck-looks-weird- because-otherwise-it-would-break-the-machines-to-make-it/)

If there is some concern that Tesla is predicting some dystopian future it should have begun the moment they introduced 'Bioweapon Defense Mode'.

<comment><USER7> While the idea that this design is all about reducing costs does make a lot of sense, it doesn't explain the near-bullet-proof windows. Also, while the stainless exo-skeleton reduces some manufacturing costs, it seems like it would increase weight significantly which would increase battery requirements. Considering batteries are still one of the biggest cost components of these things, that doesn't really sound like a cost reducing measure.

I try not to read motivation behind events, but personally, I'm down with buying a vehicle designed for the apocalypse. Maybe he's trying to target the prepper demographic here. Once you add in the solar option, this thing becomes fully self-sufficient (with the obvious caveat that it's only recharging 10 miles per day)

<comment><USER8> The fact that the windows and doors were compared against bullets and sledge hammers seems a marketing stunt. The specs for the materials are no doubt from the requirement "make trucks extremely rugged".

<comment><USER7> That doesn't really fit with the idea that the design choices were based on aggressively keeping prices down though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The design is a statement, it's even a declaration of war.

I think they are targeting people who do not care for environmental issues and who still think that electric vehicles are something for beaus and weaklings. If these people can't be convinced to transition to EVs for ecological reasons, just give them another reason. It doesn't matter _why_ they drive EVs, just _that_ they do. (Well, and to give other car companies a kick in the butt in this market segment).

It is a design you can't ignore, it looks metal af and _no matter_ what your pickup currently looks like, it will appear _wimpy_ next to it.

Also observe that it no longer sports a Tesla logo. The teaser image [0] that Musk posted before still had one. There is none on the inside either, as far as I could tell, so maybe they are moving the Cybertruck away from the Tesla brand. The presentation was on SpaceX' premises as well, if I remember correctly. (Compare that to Zuckerberg who thinks that Facebook isn't credited enough for the success of its daughter platforms WhatsApp and Instagram and is moving them _closer_ to the (imo) toxic brand of Facebook).

[0] [https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1106714774694297601](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1106714774694297601)

<comment><USER10> > it's even a declaration of war.

Yeah, it is a declaration of war against pedestrians. Thankfully this thing will never catch on here in Europe and I'll continue being safe while crossing the street.

<comment><USER11> > Yeah, it is a declaration of war against pedestrians. Thankfully this thing > will never catch on here in Europe and I'll continue being safe while > crossing the street.

Speed is what kills, not a slightly harder body.

Even the lightest car has enough mass that it's going to really hurt pedestrians if it hits one at speed.

And if any car - even this one - hits someone at 5 mph, it's not going to do that much damage.

<comment><USER12> > And if any car - even this one - hits someone at 5 mph, it's not going to do > that much damage.

About 2% of auto or light truck vs. pedestrian collisions under 10mph produce severe injuries, and at all speeds light trucks are more dangerous than autos, so I think you are overgeneralizing here.

<comment><USER13> 5mph != <10mph

> and at all speeds light trucks are more dangerous than autos,

Citation needed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Maybe it's overanalyzed? The design is unusual but does look like a low poly lamborghini, so it has some appeal as sports item. But is the design even legal? Is it legal in every country to not have side mirrors? That front LED light is also blinding. And is it OK for a car to have so dangerously stiff side doors?

I don't know if it says much about the future of cars, it's a more of a lifestyle item and it remains to be seen how many of the preorders are being serious.

<comment><USER3> The linked article is more revealing:

[https://jalopnik.com/a-deep-look-at-the-design-of-tesla-s- cy...](https://jalopnik.com/a-deep-look-at-the-design-of-tesla-s- cybertruck-1839993654)

<comment><USER15> This one is much better: [https://www.motortrend.com/news/tesla-cybertruck- electric-pi...](https://www.motortrend.com/news/tesla-cybertruck-electric- pickup-engineering-manufacturing)

<comment><USER3> That's just bumper-to-bumper hype.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Worth noting that Jalopnik is famous for this sort of controversial take on things to encourage discussion. I love the site but, apart from its excellent investigative journalism regarding Goodyear tires and the criminal coverup[1], its content has never really been about insightful analysis that would warrant being referenced here.

1: [https://jalopnik.com/goodyear-knew-of-dangerous-rv-tire- fail...](https://jalopnik.com/goodyear-knew-of-dangerous-rv-tire-failures-for- over-20-1824997252)

<comment><USER15> It's telling that their opinion fully contradicts what the truck's design team said about their thought process (cf [https://www.motortrend.com/news/tesla- cybertruck-electric-pi...](https://www.motortrend.com/news/tesla-cybertruck- electric-pickup-engineering-manufacturing)) and that they don't even care to consider it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I've had a vehicle to get me from A to B for most of the last 25 years, but this is the first one I've actually _wanted_.

For context, my first question was: "how much firewood will it carry"?

<comment><USER7> Up to 100 cubic feet with the cover closed, up to 3500 pounds if you add some redneck plywood panels to stack it higher :D

I was thinking about shuttling mountain bikes up to the top of the hill myself. I could easily get 6 bikes and 6 people. If they could get summon to work on forest roads this would be the perfect shuttle truck.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> People that use trucks for actual truck things won't buy this. The design of the bed is a design flaw. Imagine you work construction and you have tools in the back of the bed. You will have to climb inside the bed of the truck everytime to load and unload the tools. You cannot access the bed from the side because of the stupid design.

There is no way this will compete with the EV F150 that will come out near the same time frame as this.

Tesla doesn't even have a method to produce the body of these trucks at the scale needed for production.

Most of the people that pre-order these trucks won't see them until at least 2025, if not later. You think people are going to wait for these over buying an EV F150 that Ford can produce at scale of the normal F150. Maybe some will because of the brand, but most will go for the F150.

<comment><USER19> Can you do that in any modern half ton? They're so much taller than they used to be; you have to be at six feet tall to reach the bed from the side.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> First of all, this is typical Gawker-site blog spam. It has zero insight.

Second of all, while I'm sure you can find some tesla fans who will go for it, especially with a $100 refundable deposit, I think they just made a bad call. How they go from Model X/3/S to this, escapes me. I love flat car panels, but I don't think anyone who isn't already a tesla fan will go for it. It's viscerally ugly. They got many fundamentals right. The problem is the look. Trucks are not utilitarian. They are SUVs with the roof removed to make it less useful so that men will be comfortable buying it. Utilitarianism is not a legitimate excuse for this design.

It looks like a bunch of Silicon Valley nerds designed a truck they'd want to drive. It definitely has that niche appeal, but certainly no mass-market appeal. Is Tesla's long term strategy to stay in the high end? I wouldn't be surprised if they're doing this kind of niche appeal because the price of batteries has not come down far enough to make a cheap decent electric car yet.

<comment><USER21> Trucks pre-date the SUV and while there is certainly a market segment of people who buy a truck and don't have need of a truck the idea an SUV is a more utilitarian vehicle in the literal sense of the word is beyond the pale.

Agree the Tesla cybertruck is hideous and unlikely to appeal to a mass market for consumers or commercial operators.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I've only now taken a look at the truck from all sides, and it does many things that I've thought of from the standpoint of new design movements being reactions to previous design movements.

IMO we're currently sorta ripe for cohesive neo-neo-modernism in consumer tech, after the plenty of show-offery and getting designs ever more 'friendly'. We've seen that shift in e.g. aluminum Macbooks after earlier iMacs, but cars seem to trail behind since there's apparently no design nerd like Jobs there. Cars are all bulbous and curvy now. The closest to a modernist car that's not looking outright DIY, is the first-generation Audi TT: just a rounded box on another rounded box.

So what would a modernist car feature nowadays? Let's look at the Cybertruck:

\- Resurrects the wedge shape and makes the panels even flatter than they were in the 80s, instead of the ubiquitous 'curve on curve' of today after we learned to shape panels whatever which way. Lots of cars from the hatchback wave of the past decade, like Opel Astra J, looked simultaneously family- and rally-oriented with no discernible design statement: that feels like baroque indulgence, it's got to stop.

\- A flat, straight LED line of light instead of barely-comprehensible current headlights. (Just two giant flat rectangular panels would also do pretty good, but would resemble SUVs from the 90s.)

\- No decoration of any kind on the front. This one is important, and Tesla did well here. It's pretty much the last bastion of brand-specific decoration when cars all look the same shape—but (afaik) even the radiator grille on ICE cars is only for appearance now, and Tesla has already shown that it's ready to dispose of that. With the truck, the deed is done.

Funny enough, even recently most attempts at artistic depictions of 'future cars' imagined them more complex, not less. It will be curious to see how designs turn around now.

<comment><USER23> > It will be curious to see how designs turn around now.

This is exactly what I've been wondering. Can't wait to see how the rest of the market reacts to this new direction.

Are all cars going to shift this way? That would look cra-zy on a highway!!

<comment><USER22> Eh, the collective market is probably incapable of reaction that's not measured in at least a decade, even though someone really should tame those shapeless blobs with headlights spilling all over the hood and sides. I'm placing my hopes in artists first of all, then maybe we'll get some spartan looks and reincarnations of the Stratos Zero/Countach wedge in consumer sport cars, and then hopefully some of that seeps into the mass market.

Won't be surprised if Japan barges in, if this becomes a trend at all―it seems their cars looked cleaner until just recently. Though this might also mean that they're gonna carry that complexity momentum now that they sorta gained it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> What the author is missing, perhaps, is that Elon thinks he will need trucks on Mars, and won't be able to take enough with him. But if the heavy parts can be stamped out by a machine he _can_ take, then he can have trucks there made, largely, from steel plate refined from Mars dust, and glass refined from Mars dust.

It won't matter so much if they're too heavy, because gravity is less. It will need two or three layers of glass, with a vacuum gap between, for warmth, and to maintain shirtsleeve air pressure. It won't matter how they look, because nobody will ever go outside except for work, and try to send out robots even then.

He needs steel refining and rolling to make rocket body/tanks. I wonder how the thickness of the body panels compares with those of his new rocket thing...

One thing the author got dead right: these things will look very dated very, very quickly.

<comment><USER24> Yeah I think he was only half joking when he tweeted:

"Tesla Cybertruck (pressurized edition) will be official truck of Mars."

<comment><USER3> Wow, when did that come out?

Called it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Just add some attitude adjustment in the software so they cant drive right up peoples arse on the freeway and problem solved, instantly better than all other trucks!

</comment><comment><USER26> I think the first commenter on that article said it best:

"The Cybertruck is designed with the sole purpose of brutally driving down the cost of production. PERIOD.

...

They aren't building dystopia. That's your neo-cortex story telling. They are driving down costs to get the price of what would be a $65,000 truck to a $45,000 truck so they can remove excuses of why people shouldn't buy one."

<comment><USER27> And bulletproof material is designed to reduce cost how?

<comment><USER28> Cost of ownership is almost inversely proportional to durability. This car priced at 40k a will last me 20 years? This is 2k per year for this car.

If they are offering leases, they can offer them for less if they can sell it at a high price when they get it back.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> This is the first article to acknowledge something I noticed about the Cybertruck: that it seems to be drawing from a dystopian and cyberpunk aesthetic. I don't know if that means Elon is portending the end of western civilization, but it's a very interesting choice and I don't think the article writer is wrong to unpack what the design connotes.

</comment><comment><USER30> Personally I love the design.

First thing I thought of is that it looks a lot like a stealth fighter - interestingly, does that mean it can avoid radar speed detectors too?

<comment><USER31> I'm definitely not an expert, but from what I've read, there's a lot of irony in the angular look of the F-117a becoming the icon of "futuristic". That plane, first of all was designed in the mid to late 1970s. Second, notice that newer [stealthy] planes don't look the same? What people say is that the facets were purely a necessity to simplify the calculations needed to make it stealthy. People did incredible things when computing power was expensive to solve problems analytically, which became obsolete once you could just apply brute force.

Also, I don't know about the business of making movie props, but it seems plausible to me that when making cars for SF movies, decades ago when budgets were lower, probably involved large sheets of plywood, cardboard, foamcore or whatever, hence big facets would be the most expedient design.

It's weird how arbitrary so many signaling mechanisms are.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> > because we are running out of oil, the precious and finite resource that is > utterly destroying our planet.

Not really running out. The US is the largest oil producing nation in the world now, and our output is at the highest levels[1] in history. Oil is practically dirt cheap and I don't see it breaking out in price anytime soon.

[1] [https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=M...](https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MCRFPUS1&f=M)

<comment><USER33> ,,The stone age didn't end because the lack of stones''

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Even if the general shape of the cybertruck follows from the materials and production process, the packaging and marketing is clearly playing off dystopian fantasies. Both of these things can be true at the same time.

Selling cars is as much about telling a story as it is about explaining how you will get someone from point A to point B. That's even true for "boring" family cars - the story they are telling is one of reliability.

<comment><USER35> Personally I think looking upon the stort elements is the tail wagging the dog. Theym story is the means for the emotional elements. Like many fugly SUVs made themselves inefficent roll over risks to try to sell illusions of security the styling is selling a power fantasy in addition. Not uncommon for truck marketing.

Not only collision protection which they pride themselves on but overkill "sledgehammer resistance" and projectile resistance to not worry about it. They even boasted solar roof options to give gradual recharge.

<comment><USER36> Sledgehammer resistance isn't useful in practice.

Getting T-boned is one of the worst types of collisions even though the B pillar usually doesn't get breached. All the energy of the collision is still being transferred into the occupants which often results in a coma with no visible injuries (other than getting your brain smashed). The purpose of crumple zones is to dissipate the energy of a collision and avoid these types of accidents.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> They designed from first principles. That's it. What would a truck look like if you built in the utility that's desired with a pickup truck - Cybertruck is what you get. They kept it simple with the EV benefits and good design twist.

250k pre-orders at last tweet I saw from Musk - and the online video reviews are reasonable people saying they love it, pre-ordered and will buy it, even if they're still not 100% sold on its look.

<comment><USER21> How do you review a product you don't have access to?

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> I had similar thoughts, but, um, skate where the puck is headed?

<comment><USER39> I think that's the authors point. Not admonishing the design but that this is what our culture wants

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> This article just screams anti-EV. Jalopnik writers have a huge bias towards ICE.

> Cars are a reflection of ourselves, whether we choose to festoon them in > explicit messages or not. They can show what we hope for, what we aspire to, > not just how large or how modest our bank accounts are. They are how we > present ourselves to our fellow human

Ya, not everyone believes that

<comment><USER13> Seriously, cars are not a fashion item and anyone who thinks otherwise is speaking from a position of privilege.

<comment><USER41> Sales numbers on hideous cars (eg. Pontiac Aztec) of the past say otherwise. There is absolutely some correlation between how fashionable a car is and how well it sells.

<comment><USER13> Yet the Prius sold by the droves despite its "obvious hideousness" declared by reviewers at the time of its release.

<comment><USER42> The hideousness of the Prius was on purpose: it was visibly signaling that the owner was someone motivated by environmental concerns.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> This was a nice exercise in creative writing. The Model X and the truck are different vehicles for different use cases. One is a luxury vehicle and the other is a cheap as chips (almost) utilitarian vehicle that can take a beating. Neither is a metaphor for the future of mankind.

</comment><comment><USER44> Or maybe they're just trying to target two different markets. Don't put all your eggs in one basket...

</comment><comment><USER45> It's a truck you dork. You do work with it. It gets dented. Gravel comes up and chips your window.

<comment><USER46> I call that 'patina'. If anyone is upset their truck has a scratch they probably shouldn't own one.

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> I'm buying one and so is William Gibson. Cars never appealed to me until I saw the Cybertruck.

</comment><comment><USER48> Aren't trucks supposed to be about "drive somewhere and do some stuff"?

</comment><comment><USER49> I disagree with this article. Of course your messaging is going to be different when selling a pickup truck and a SUV. If anything I see commonalities between Model X and Cybertruck- both are unashamed with their design, even though it might be impractical to some, or ugly.

This reminds me of English class in high school where we were made to read into themes and "literary devices." A lot of times the themes were substantial, and the authors intended them to mean something and convey a message to the reader. But many times they didn't- we were tasked with finding a theme so we would look for anything that resembled narrative so we could finish our essay.

This guy is looking too hard.

<comment><USER50> I also thought it was telling he kept mentioning Tesla X, which is a product category exclusively for upper-middle class and is hardly Tesla's mainstream vision for cars, nor the most popular.

If anything they should be talking about Tesla's 3 if we're going to talk about what our car designs mean for our future vision for society (which of course will always have it's limits).

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> TLDR: author projects their anxiety and angst onto an electric truck.

</comment><comment><USER52> This whole article and it's sentiment is wrong. It's a good example of a person who is not capable of thinking from first principles or who never watched the reveal. Which describes basically everyone's reaction to the truck.

What is a truck? A utilitarian vehicle. Does aesthetics add utility to the vehicle? No. Does it cost lots of money to make the car look swoopy? Yes. Does it increase the utility to give the vehicle an exoskeleton rather than a traditional frame? Yes. Should we make the car swoopy instead of making it an exoskeleton? No.

Literally every logical angle points to doing what they did. They maximized utility and minimized cost. Is this a good formula for a regular car? No! Is this a good formula for a utility vehicle? Yes! Are there lots of idiots out there who like to daily drive "utility vehicles" for their commute? Yes!

Doug D reviews the car and said it costs too much. But he only ever compared the upfront cost of the trucks. You save money on fuel and maintenance with an ev, and his omission of that was glaring.

People saying strong glass is bad because first responders. If I want to have strong glass then that's my right. And living in the sf Bay Area, I don't just want strong glass I fucking need strong glass. Elon musk shared a video on twitter of the glass resisting a 1kg steel ball being thrown at it. When it broke on stage it was a fluke. And 9mm resistance would also be really nice. Apparently Doug D never visited Oakland.

<comment><USER34> > Does aesthetics add utility to the vehicle? No

If you don't think there wasn't a ton of thought put into the aesthetics of the cybertruck, you don't understand how cars are designed. It's not a design that emerges from pure functionalism at all. Pure functionalism is a bus or a train, a dump truck, or a goods delivery vehicle, like the kind that brings beer to a corner store. I say that as someone who would probably buy a cybertruck.

> Apparently Doug D never visited Oakland.

Leave Oakland out of it. You wouldn't believe it but children play on the streets here without wearing any body armor at all.

<comment><USER13> > You wouldn't believe it but children play on the streets here without > wearing any body armor at all.

Doesn't mean it's smart. Oakland might be safe but children playing on the streets without body armor isn't an argument because the same can be said for most war zones.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Do you anticipate technical questions during live interviews? - <AUTHOR> My partner was recently at one of the first interviews in her life for a software engineering position. I was surprised to hear how it went. The interviewers quizzed her on arithmetic problems and asked many direct questions about specific APIs and programming languages (e.g., "What is the difference between an interface and an abstract class in Java?").
During the ten or so interviews that I've been to, I have never been put on the spot regarding my technical knowledge. Instead, my interviews have always been more like a casual dialogue where I describe some of the previous projects that I've worked on and answer soft questions about my expectations. A few times I've been asked to submit code that I could complete at home.
I've been wondering whether my experience is uncommon. Therefore I would like to ask whether you anticipate and prepare for technical questions about some of the technologies that you're expected to know. <comment><USER2> > _" What is the difference between an interface and an abstract class in > Java?"_

This sort of question is quite common when interviewing for a dev. position. There may also be a short coding test to take during the interview, which will test both your reasoning skills and your dev. skills.

If the job is to develop in Java, for example, and since you put on your CV that you know Java (since you got a face to face interview) they will probably quiz you a bit to check to actual knowledge and experience of the language.

I would definitely prepare for this sort of relatively basic questions.

<comment><AUTHOR> Do you frequently get direct questions about your technical knowledge during interviews or is your experience more like mine?

<comment><USER2> I had direct questions similar to the one you describe in all interviews for hands-on technical positions I can remember.

<comment><AUTHOR> Sounds like my experience is more unusual then. I would love to hear from other people. Java has been front and center on my CV since I graduated from college and for the ~10 mid-size and small companies that I've interviewed at, not a single one has put me on the spot regarding my knowledge. Not that I would mind. My partner was a little thrown off, though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> It depends where you are interviewing. If you are interviewing at startups or pure tech companies you can expect a fairly deep technical interview that most of the time while factually valid is not necessarily true to the daily job requirements. If you are interviewing at most SMB's (outside the tech startup scene) or any Enterprise company then you will get more a skills & experience based interview, not a deep dive technical interview. The skills & experience interview will be what have you done, ask you some questions around your experiences, ask you questions around things you claim expertise in, like a programming language, check you for team fit etc. But then they move forward, there is no long drawn out technical interview about algorithms etc unless the job is specifically hiring that as a primary skill. This IMO is the way startups should be hiring for anyone with more than 3-4 years of experience. I get using pure CS interviews when someone has NO to very little experience because you can only rate them on what they should have learned in school, but once they have experience then their abilities change, and they won't remember every algorithm, especially when they can look it up in 10 minutes because it isn't something needed everyday. Instead, they'll remember all the things to deliver product, issues to avoid, how to architect solutions, how to debug problems, all of which are FAR more critical than remembering how to code out a specific algorithm.

I have never seen anything wrong with probing someones knowledge on their claimed expertise, but I also went through the dotcom days where we did this same tech style interviews and as the implosion was taking place it was obvious doing these interviews was hurting companies not helping. Hurting because companies were full of super book intelligent people that couldn't get a product out the door that worked to save their lives. I saw it daily in my work, so many companies, cool ideas, good product market but they'd spend forever and a day working on technical details versus shipping product, huge waste of money and time. Most companies I know of back then that are still around today in some form moved to more experienced based interviews with technical screens around the specific issues you will be addressing regularly in whatever position you are applying to. And left the CS skills type interviews for new grads, and even then toned that down some. Some places like Amazon and specific tech companies (Microsoft) still use highly CS driven interviews, but they also have the highest number of new grads applying so that mostly makes sense. And when you apply to those companies at the higher levels with more experience the interview styles change generally.

So I don't think your experience is uncommon overall, it just depends where you are interviewing and what your level of experience is, if they are doing it right.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for the insight; this makes a lot of sense to me.</comment></comment>


Would you drink water out of a can? Pepsi wants to find out - <AUTHOR> http://www.ecoti.in/ULWdvZ62 <comment><AUTHOR> On one hand, this seems like a terrible waste of metal. But at the same time, it reduces the amount of plastic bottles. Depends on how cans are recycled, I guess. Also, a plastic bottle can be reused, but a can can't be.

<comment><USER2> Those cheap plastic bottles for drinks are never reused. They're barely recyclable.

Aluminum, on the other hand, is astoundingly recyclable. It is recyclable in the way a person thinks recycling would function: You can make like-new aluminum from recycled aluminum. We can recycle used aluminum cans right back into fresh aluminum stock to make cans again. It requires about 5% of the energy costs as new aluminum.

Plastic bottles are not this. If, and that's a big if, they get recycled, they get turned into other things for 1 more lifecycle. They become synthetic bits in clothing. They become parts of carpets. Then they become trash after that.

By contrast your aluminum can could've been through 100 lifetimes as a can previously and it'd be just as good. In the case of aluminum, it is only a waste of metal if people trash it.

<comment><USER3> Don't aluminum cans these days have a plastic liner? Not nearly as much plastic as a plastic bottle, but I wonder how it effects the economics of recovering the aluminum.

<comment><AUTHOR> Well, a lot of aluminium cans are left un-recycled — especially in developing countries.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Somewhat related: I would love to see them bring back Crystal Pepsi.

</comment><comment><USER5> Lifewtr, its what plants crave</comment>


Facebook Applied for Patent to Predict Who's in House Based on Family Photos - <AUTHOR> https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/nicolenguyen/facebook-household-prediction-patent <comment><USER2> Even before we knew how nasty facebook behaves behind closed doors, I would have found this creepy. Not that I'm surprised companies are doing it...the profit available to whichever company grabs the most data about people is huge, so there will always be huge resources devoted to figuring out more and more about people (even details they've chosen not to share).

I used to be somewhat naively optimistic about companies like Google and Facebook. I knew so many people who worked at those places, and I had such positive feelings about their ethical core...but, in hindsight, that optimism and that faith was poorly placed. They're companies that make money entirely based on the profitability of violating people's privacy. Of course they're gonna be evil; evil is where the money is in the advertising industry.

<comment><USER3> Say you founded a company tomorrow which started rocketing on unicorn tracjectory, but wanted to do better.

What words or actions could you invoke that would allow it to be distinguished from what some previously friendly sounding companies said or did during their ascent?

<comment><USER4> I think the only way to stay true to a well-meaning mission statement is to not go public, but that's kind of a non-starter for most VC backed companies. And even if you do stay private for a long time, the death/departure/retirement of the founders would be likely to result in acquisition either by PE/a public company or preempt an IPO

<comment><USER5> Another option, specifically for tech companies, is to create free products and use support contracts as a revenue generator. Companies that follow this model include Red Hat and Elastic. They've both been tremendously successful while adding a lot of good to the world. The open source community keeps them honest.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> We're 5 years away from this shit being regulated away in Europe for good. It's ridiculous. The only reason it's not illegal is that we never had the technology so no reason to worry about it.

<comment><USER7> is the 5 years some kind of future roadmap? Also, why should this method be illegal?

<comment><USER8> This should be illegal because I have a right to privacy. Corporations should have my permission in order to store, process and sell information about me.

<comment><USER9> Which country do you live in and specifically which "right to privacy" do you mean? Is there a law you're referring to?

For instance, in the US, the only right to privacy we truly have is in our own homes, with the blinds closed. If you are in your home standing in front of a window naked, I can legally take your pic as long as I'm on public property (street/sidewalk) and I'm not trespassing. There are other places where people have a "reasonable expectation of privacy," such as a restroom or changing room, etc.

> Corporations should have my permission in order to store, process and sell > information about me.

Are you sure you haven't already given it to them? Most people don't read that fine print of the contracts, or terms of service, or privacy statements that they are signing or otherwise agreeing to, but it's generally in there how they will use your info.

If you use FB, have you read all of this? You agreed to it: [1] [https://www.facebook.com/privacy/explanation](https://www.facebook.com/privacy/explanation) [2] [https://www.facebook.com/policies](https://www.facebook.com/policies)

<comment><USER10> > Are you sure you haven't already given it to them? Most people don't read > that fine print of the contracts, or terms of service, or privacy statements > that they are signing or otherwise agreeing to, but it's generally in there > how they will use your info.

> If you use FB, have you read all of this? You agreed to it

There's something messed up about the idea that you shouldn't expect privacy unless you wade through the fine print perfectly, every time. The deck is stacked against the privacy-seeking individual, and it's practically impossible to guard one's privacy as an individual.

Businesses have gotten used to getting a free ride when it comes to managing consent for personal data use. Those costs need to be shifted to be more equitably shared between those businesses and individual consumers. We reforms that put GDPR-type requirements around the use of personal data.

<comment><USER9> I wholeheartedly agree. I just don't see the US doing this though. Without laws to back them up and have a level playing field, there are no rights. I find it _incredibly_ sad that other countries are now protected to a greater extend than the US, but we lack the political and social will to do actually anything meaningful about it. I think it's also generally easier to pass something like this (GDPR) in the EU where they don't have corporations nearly as large as FAANG (MS too). If a large part of their economy was based on companies that were using data the way FAANGM is, I'm not sure it would be been possible for them to pass. That's just a gut feeling based on no real data.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> So it's illegal to peep inside your neighbors' windows, but automating this on a mass scale is patentable?

Tangent: Now I'm curious if criminals can patent methods for committing crimes. There's a whole science to pick-pocketing, I'd love to read clever pick-pocketing technique patents if they exist!

<comment><USER12> Which would be more costly? The criminal sentence for pickpocketing or the patent infringement lawsuit that follows?

<comment><USER11> Additionally, would this incentivize pick-pocketers to steal more valuable items?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I wonder how many FB engineers read HN. In case some of them do: please, LEAVE Facebook.

Don't be part of the problem. Don't justify contributing to mass surveillance just because you can work on cool tech. Don't be evil, goddammit.

<comment><USER14> So all of the engineers with a moral conscience leave, selecting for less moral engineers? This doesn't seem like a great strategy.

<comment><USER13> I would love to believe that reducing the engineering supply because most people don't want to work there could have a significant impact on the amount of outcome that FB can produce. Thus, a net positive, yes.

<comment><USER15> Then you live in a wonder world because fb is the most popular booth at every University career fair in the U.S.

<comment><USER13> Dystopia vs utopia. I prefer utopia.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Google Photos, with all your Android pics, already "automatically analyzes photos, identifying ... People, Places, and Things. Google Photos recognizes faces, grouping similar ones together; geographic landmarks (such as the Eiffel Tower); and subject matter, including birthdays, buildings, animals, food, and more."

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Photos](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Photos)

<comment><USER17> It's much more than that. :) If you have a large collection of photos uploaded to google, you can make some pretty insidious searches that will return extremely accurate results.

Try searching "bikini" if you have any snapshots from your beach vacation uploaded. Even with all location metadata/camera information stripped from the images, Google was able to find 99% of them using keyword searches like that. You can go further and search specific body parts, too. I think that's pretty creepy as well.

The typical HN response is to dismiss arguments like this with, "Well, don't be so careless to upload photos in the first place!" but what happens when laypeople use Google Photos as marketed and as a backup service for their entire lives? I don't think those people would be comfortable knowing that Google can not only accurately identify 1) people and their friends implicitly and 2) identify when those people are scantily clad or nude.

Just imagine a bad actor getting access to your photos via Google and being able to instantly pull up any compromising or sensitive information you may have forgotten about with a simple keyword search because that's something they, for some reason, index.

<comment><USER16> And even more :)

Someone, sometime, took a party photo with you in background on Android. Google recognized your sorry mug, and stamped it with location, date, time and list of present people. And now it is evidence in court.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> As creepy as it is to see detailed illustrations, I've always assumed they've been doing this for a long time.

IP address patterns joined with timestamps, tags, and other social interactions are too easy to link and beneficial for all sorts of targeting.

</comment><comment><USER19> For anyone thinking this is something novel. It's not.

It's very common for relevant companies e.g. telcos to try and predict the composition of your household so they know what plan you should be on and how much data you are likely to use.

Likewise for energy companies it's useful to optimise their demand curves.

<comment><USER20> If the headline had been, "Utility Co. uses data to predict household size," it wouldn't have this much HN activity.

The problematic parts are that 1) Facebook was thinking about using personal photos in way that users don't expect and don't intend; 2) the data is photos, meaning it's possible to ID the subjects with high accuracy; 3) Facebook is not using this to plan their costs, but rather to help advertisers get inside our heads.

<comment><USER21> > "Utility Co. uses data to predict household size,"

How about "Utility Co. shares data with city, predicting when you have an Airbnb guest or take a vacation"?

I'd say a utility using data from its own systems is the definition of what used to be allowable. Sharing that data without consent and using unorthodox sources (detecting objects in the background) is what most people find objectionable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Relevant mention: just saw new billboards in LA for the Facebook Portal video chat devices today. Anyone who uses these should expect to be data-mined good and hard.

<comment><USER23> I feel like the best audience for the product is elderly people. The Portal has a serious shot and helping to fight isolation and loneliness. The downside of the Portal is giving up a bit of privacy. Isolation with elderly is such a big problem that for me at least, it's worth the potential downside. I tried setting my 94-year-old grandparents with an Echo Show last December and what unfolded was hilarious: [https://nanagram.co/blog/echo-show- unboxing](https://nanagram.co/blog/echo-show-unboxing)

But in all seriousness, in the coming weeks, when I was able to get the Echo Show to actually work, it was an incredible tool for communicating with my elderly grandparents. The two main problems with it (besides being unable to say "Alexa") were them hardly ever being in view of the fixed camera and the volume buttons not being user-friendly. Ultimately it didn't work out. My grandmother is now between assisted living / rehab / hospitals and I'm seriously considering the Portal.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> If they continue keep doing these kind of creepy things, one day, it will become Myspace.

It's already a ghost town for most part where middle aged people are adding random political articles.

<comment><USER21> As long as those middle-aged people keep clicking ads, younger people keep clicking Instagram stories, and angry mobs keep sending each other incendiary messages on WhatsApp, the Facebook juggernaut has nothing to fear.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Most companies file patents for various reasons, even eithout actually having the invention implemented. Often times, there is compensation for the employee in case one is filed

<comment><USER26> Most companies? Source for this claim that the majority of companies in our industry do this.

<comment><USER20> Anecdotally, it does seem like most of the big tech companies do this. It's a side effect of the "first to file" rather than "first to invent" system in the US.

That doesn't make it better, though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I had a small though experiment about how to model a system influenced heavily by social media that tracks users and builds extensive profiles of them.

On first level, such a system (let's call it A) is equivalent to a imaginary loaded die with a control that lets one control what comes out when rolling it. A system (let's call it B) without social media is more like a fair die. On a long run, the net outcome of system A will be heavy with induced biases and that of system B will be fair but could be with slight biases due to natural randomness. If the system A is controlled by private interests rather than societal welfare, it would lead to unhealthy societal setup. Hence, the system A is inherently flawed and is also dangerous to overall well-being. System B doesn't have this flaw inherently.

... PS: purely thoughts and so abstract.

</comment><comment><USER28> What if someone reveals the GPS coordinates of the FB eecutive offfices?

What if FB execs "checkin" every place they are?

Do they want this? No.

What if FB were to scan every single license plate that drove by their HQ campus and reported that to the authorities?

Would people want that?

Where is the line drawn?

</comment><comment><USER29> I think if any company will reach that of The Circle, it will be Facebook.

</comment><comment><USER30> This is cool. I wouldn't have to tag people as mom, son, etc. My photos would be auto-categorized. If the kids are home and the thermostat is up that's fine. If not, it's not.

Yeah, definitely cool.

<comment><USER21> I'm a bit more cynical and think that the beneficiary of this is not you and the objective is not to reduce your electricity bills. Rather, you (collective you) are the product, and the companies that want your attention and will pay the most are the customers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Ohh another genius engineers needed a patent added into their resume in order to ask for a promotion.

</comment><comment><USER7> Isn't the patent trivially contestable? Dont advertisers mine such data to infer relationships, such as parents/children? Don't people infer the kind of relationship just by looking at a (physical) photo of a couple in a house ?

<comment><USER32> Go ahead and contest it then.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> With all this what would a paid market for WhatsApp/<share stuff only with people I care about app> with full privacy look like?

Or is this what slack is?

</comment><comment><USER34> Is there a real advantage for them to patent this as opposed to keeping it a trade secret? Why would they patent this and make their intentions known publicly?

<comment><USER35> My thoughts exactly. It's easy enough to hide infringement of a patent like this that I doubt they'd ever be able to enforce it anyway. Did they forget that journalists scan patent filings, especially from big, newsworthy companies?

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Is it naive of me to be completely fine with this?

<comment><USER8> Yes, it is naive. Is it acceptable for Target (or FB or Google) to know that a girl is pregnant before she has shared the news with her family?

[https://slate.com/human-interest/2014/06/big-data-whats- even...](https://slate.com/human-interest/2014/06/big-data-whats-even- creepier-than-target-guessing-that-youre-pregnant.html)

Human beings have a right to privacy and right to control who knows their personal information.

<comment><USER36> I absolutely agree that we have the right to privacy and control of our personal information, but I'm choosing to offer the information they're using. I see how that gets tricky at a larger scale with many people who won't necessarily assume or know that this is being done, but I have no issue with them discovering information about me personally based on the information I'm offering them.

<comment><USER37> Right, and if the FB audience was all hackers we'd be fine. But I honestly don't think that the average person _can_ meaningfully consent to data collection like this any more. Unless you have deep technical knowledge it's not even slightly clear what you're giving up and what it means.

<comment><USER36> I understand what you're saying and agree that it's difficult to achieve real transparency. I believe that companies can and should do a better job of helping users understand what they're doing with data. I just wonder where the line is when you're talking about inferred information that a company can independently guess based on information you've agreed to disclose.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> FB should be renamed to EvilCorp...

</comment><comment><USER39> Can this company just quietly go away?

</comment><comment><USER40> Is a PR campaign in progress against Facebook ? Lots of negative articles in a short period of time.

<comment><USER41> Maybe they finally broke enough things.</comment></comment>


Only work for people you believe in - <AUTHOR> https://insights.excitingrole.com/only-work-for-someone-you-believe-in-1a7389965263 <comment><USER2> And who is the one person you should really believe in/work for? That's right, that's you.</comment>


LG 5K display must be kept at least 2 meters away from Wi-Fi routers - <AUTHOR> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/01/apple-lg-5k-display-issues <comment><USER2> This monitor was Apple's chance to ease the USB-C transition and IMO they blew it.

The previous gen Thunderbolt display effectively brought all the useful ports[1] back to the MacBooks with one cable, and made even the Air viable for a professional. It certainly was a big factor for me back in 2011.

Unfortunately with the current 5k display, the three included ports aren't even USB 3.1 gen 2. Like many other pros, I prefer to have dedicated keyboard/mouse, speakers, and Ethernet, and would have been happy to run a second cable if it brought those things back.

Right now it's looking like our best 'pro 5k' option is duct taping a hub[2] to the back of someone else's display. And it's not clear which hubs support the 15" MBP 87W charging requirement.

Feels like such a missed opportunity.

[1] [https://www.amazon.com/Apple-MC914LL-27-inch-Thunderbolt- Dis...](https://www.amazon.com/Apple-MC914LL-27-inch-Thunderbolt- Display/dp/B004YLCKYA)

[2] [https://eshop.macsales.com/preorder/owc- thunderbolt-3-dock/](https://eshop.macsales.com/preorder/owc- thunderbolt-3-dock/)

<comment><USER3> I have this 5k monitor. It sits around 30cm from my ASUS 2.4 and 5ghz router. It's connected to my Macbook Pro 2016 15". I connect one USB hub via a USB A to USB C adapter. This hub powers a MIDI keyboard, Native Instruments Maschine, FocusRite Scarlett audio interface, SD cards when I put them in, USB hard drives when I plug them in. The hub hides behind the monitor. I personally love sitting down to work with this monitor each day and I don't understand the arguments against it. There is nothing better on the market today for the spec you get.

<comment><USER4> > _" There is nothing better on the market today for the spec you get."_

Aside from the small detail of the monitor getting blown away by a router nearby - a router nearby is not exactly an uncommon occurrence in a computing environment. Not to mention the other issues like possible kernel reboots and flickering caused by unknown factors.

<comment><USER5> In context, it _is_ a small detail (anyone serious enough buy this monitor and able to afford it will likely be able to relocate their router), and there's still no other 5k option on the market.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Does this mean LG is violating the FCC requirement that a device must accept interference?

<comment><USER7> It's the reverse. The FCC is about jamming the signal not being jammed.

<comment><USER8> It's both:

 _Title 47 - Telecommunication. § 15.5 (b) [...] subject to the conditions that no harmful interference is caused and that interference must be accepted [...]_

[https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2015-title47-vol1/xml/CFR-...](https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2015-title47-vol1/xml/CFR-2015-title47-vol1-sec15-5.xml)

<comment><USER9> Not true.

When the FCC says you must accept interference, that means you have to live with it if the interfering device meets emissions standards. It doesn't mean the device has to be functional in the face of interference.

<comment><USER10> Are you sure? Seems to be pointless if it just means that it will not be irrecovably damaged.

<comment><USER11> Let me try an example: I have an amateur radio rig that transmits only on the allowed frequencies and it meets FCC standards. You are my neighbor using an antenna to get your TV. You allege that my radio transmissions interfere with your TV viewing. Legally, I'm allowed to tell you to pound sand and you have no recourse. Because your TV has to accept radio interference that is otherwise legal, whether your reception is affected or not.

(Of course, because I'm not a complete dick, I would assist my neighbor in properly shielding his TV or otherwise mitigating the situation, rather than tell her to pound sand.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I'd be curious if an enterprising soul with some foil and a ground could identify the specific vulnerable hardware and put out some notes on how to, err, patch it.

</comment><comment><USER13> I have one of these displays at the office (as well as the 4K version) and they both very much feel like an Apple product sans the aluminum casing.

So this makes me suspect that the metal case was really supposed to be there when the electronics were put together.

<comment><USER14> I disagree. I used one at an Apple store and it was terribly slow. It looked great, of course, but as soon as you tried to use Expose or Mission Control (whatever it's called now) it turned into a slideshow and almost made me think the computer froze up.

<comment><USER15> The computer being unable to render it's UI fast enough has exactly what to do with the _display_...?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I'm not a fan of Apple, but I think it's unfair to blame Apple in this case. If it's an LG monitor, it's LG's problem.

<comment><USER17> The kernel panics and lockups are not LG's fault.

I somewhat agree with you, but the manner in which Apple is promoting this display combined with the utter lack of ports on the MBP (hooking up my previous two displays would have been a dongle nightmare) make me less willing to excuse them.

<comment><USER18> Yeah seriously. The display crashed multiple El Capitan running MBPs at my office.. so they had to upgrade to Sierra. You think it would work flawlessly instead.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Well I'm glad I didn't invest in this monitor yet! My desk in less than 2 meters from my wifi and I can't move either easily... (wifi mounted to ceiling, nowhere else for the desk)

</comment><comment><USER20> I have an ASUS VG248QE (144hz) monitor, and when i put my phone under it, the screen goes black

</comment><comment><USER21> Bet that USB-C cable is the issue. I've come across plenty that had horrible RF shielding.

<comment><USER22> I wonder if a simple ferrite bead would fix the issue.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I had a 60in plasma TV from LG that was systematically disconnecting my DSL connection when the image was too bright. The telephone cable was going under the wooden floor under the TV. Solved it by switching to an LED TV.

</comment><comment><USER24> What seems a complete disregard for the costumer is that the solution proposed by LG itself is to "increase the distance between the monitor and the router".

Seems that working directly with Apple made them take a hint from the "you are just holding it wrong" excuse of Steve Jobs.

<comment><USER25> Steve Jobs never said "you are just holding it wrong".

<comment><USER24> He wrote, ipsis verbis, "don't hold it that way".

[https://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/2010/jun/25/ipho...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/2010/jun/25/iphone- reception-problems-solved)

<comment><USER25> The very source you linked says he said "Just avoid holding it in that way".

So he did not say what you said ipsis verbis, and he certainly did not say "You're holding it wrong". That was made up by reddit.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> gm-conspiracy [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_47_CFR_Part_15](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_47_CFR_Part_15) ?

<comment><USER26> Part 15 is only for transmissions. However, it sounds like it isn't handling reception very well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> I haven't had any issues with the 5K monitor and it's about 3 feet from the router. At least for me it works incredibly well.

<comment><USER17> You are lucky. I have an LG 5K, and I have experienced every symptom (excepting the "no nearby wireless" bit, as I'm not sure if there is wireless nearby) described here:

> _kernel panics on the host machine, random flickering […], and USB devices > not being reliably detected when plugged into the monitor._

I'll have to check where my APs are, now that I know about this association. But it's been a damn struggle; I feel like 50% of the times I connect to it, I have to disconnect & reconnect USB devices to get them to be detected on the host.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Best alternative?

</comment><comment><USER29> I've had a couple 27" 1440p monitors since those cheap Korean (QNX and the like) came on the market a few years ago.

The natural upgrade path for me would be to ditch those and get a big-ass 5k monitor eventually, but I don't see the market really moving in that direction in an affordable way.

One 4k isn't going to cut it and I'm worried two 4k monitors is going to be to much from a field of vision perspective....maybe I'm wrong there.

Has anybody upgraded from a couple 1440p monitors to a couple 4k monitors, and what's your experience been?

<comment><USER30> One 40" 4K has been perfect for me. Roughly the same DPI as my old QNIX (~110).

I got the Samsung UN40KU6290 (does 4k@60 with 4:4:4 chroma) for under $300. The PC mode is crisp and responsive. Calibrates well enough. Only complaint is slow GTG time can look blurry when scrolling text.

<comment><USER31> I've got a UN40JU6500 (40" 4K Samsung) on my MBP (15" late 2013) but it doesn't do @60, as far as I know.

Are you driving this from a Mac or from a PC? What kind of cable are you using exactly?

<comment><USER30> Both. For my mid-2014 15" MBP I had to get an active MiniDP-HDMI adapter. Looks like your MBP is limited to 30Hz...

[https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT206587](https://support.apple.com/en- us/HT206587)

<comment><USER31> Also, did you have to do any SwitchResX hackery? That's the only way I could get macOS to recognize the monitor as a Retina display.

<comment><USER30> Nope, but I run it at 100% scaling. I did notice that if the source on the TV is not labeled "PC" then the Mac uses YCbCr 4:2:0 and looks like garbage. Setting the input label to PC must send a different EDID because it seems to use RGB... On my Windows machine I can just override that in the nvidia control panel.

<comment><USER31> Oh, you run it at the full 4K (3840x2160) resolution? Must have good eyes.

Right, nothing works unless you label the relevant HDMI input "PC".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> This monitor is pathetic. 900 dollars for a monitor and it doesn't even support upstream.

Save your time and money and buy a DELL or something that actually works guys.

<comment><USER33> What is upstream?

<comment><USER2> According to a comment[1]" "An upstream port connects to the host device (PC) while the downstream ports are where you plug in peripheral devices (thumb drives, printers, etc.)."

Of course the 5k monitor does have three USB3 ports. (Not Thunderbolt ports, ostensibly because there isn't enough bandwidth left.)

[1] [https://www.cnet.com/forums/discussions/upstream-vs- downstre...](https://www.cnet.com/forums/discussions/upstream-vs-downstream- ports-600980/)

<comment><USER32> I like how they use USB-C inputs for USB3 ports as well. Not at all false advertising and confusing for end-user.

<comment> yoz-y Why? This is the promise of USB-C "Every port uses the same connector, so you only need one type of cable". Of course, with the different cables supporting different ports it is not ideal.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Jacquard Loom: A Driver of the Industrial Revolution (2016) - <AUTHOR> https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-institute/ieee-history/the-jacquard-loom-a-driver-of-the-industrial-revolution <comment><USER2> An episode [1] of my favorite TV show ever, Connections [2], did a great job of showing what an important step the Jacquard loom was in getting to today's digital systems.

[1] [https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3dvbkg](https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3dvbkg)

[2] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connections_(TV_series)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connections_\(TV_series\))

<comment><USER3> Came here to post this. Love James Burke's work! Connections is my all-time favorite documentary. It changed how I think about technological progress (or really, historical progress generally).

Frankly this article should have credited Burke since it reads like a summary of the Connections episode you mentioned. But I guess everybody steals from everybody.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Related discussions: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8479430](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8479430) (2014)

and [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9993953](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9993953) (2015).

</comment><comment><USER5> Possibly of interest to others, Jacquard Loom also inspired a song by Boards of Canada:

[https://bocpages.org/wiki/Jacquard_Causeway](https://bocpages.org/wiki/Jacquard_Causeway)</comment>


Nexenta: Take Ubuntu, unplug Linux kernel, and plug in OpenSolaris kernel - <AUTHOR> http://foss-boss.blogspot.com/2008/11/nexenta-can-you-say-solabuntu-part1.html

<comment><USER2> I think you meant to link to here:

<http://www.nexenta.org/os>

</comment><comment><USER3> And it supports DTrace and ZFS. nice.</comment>


My First SEC Trial Transcript Has Some Real Comedy – SEC vs Schvacho - <AUTHOR> http://blogmaverick.com/2014/01/21/my-first-sec-trial-transcript-has-some-real-comedy-and-a-message-to-mary-jo-white-sec-vs-schvacho/

<comment><USER2> Hmmm...I understand he has a bone to pick with the SEC but a captivating blogwriter he ain't</comment>


Building ages in the Netherlands - <AUTHOR> https://parallel.co.uk/netherlands/#13.8/52.365/4.9/0/40 <comment><USER2> For those who are curious, the building age data comes from the Dutch government (as others already said). It was imported into OpenStreetMap about 5 years ago by a few dozen volunteers including myself.

The data contains addresses and buildings (outline, building started date, and an identifier to make updates easier). This means we removed all existing buildings and addresses in the country, which felt really risky, but because the import was done manually and only tool-assisted, it seems we managed to get it right. Took a few months, but once enough volunteers hopped on, it went quite fast. If I remember correctly, once you got the hang of it (your third import or so), an average municipality took about 2 hours (we have 350 municipalities).

For the Dutch speakers among us, more info about the project can be found here: [https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:BAG](https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:BAG)

I am not sure where Mapbox' height data comes from. In OSM, you can give a "levels" tag to indicate how many levels a building has (from which the height can be estimated), or a height tag in meters if it is known, but the buildings don't have that. Perhaps it is just assumed that large buildings are a bit taller and building=house is an average house height unless otherwise noted? Or maybe they use the Dutch AHN, which is a very accurate height scan of the Netherlands. Some people made it into a 3d picture, e.g. [https://snipboard.io/Sq6C38.jpg](https://snipboard.io/Sq6C38.jpg) (this only uses AHN data, not OSM, so it only has the tops of objects as points, but that's still quite an accurate outline).

<comment><USER3> To be more precise: it was imported en masse once, and has been meticulously maintained via localised imports ever since. OpenStreetMap in the Netherlands shows how open data can flourish when volunteers and government collaborate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Back when I was at Mapbox and we were developing the library used for this sort of visualization, I did a take on my home city of Portland, OR in a similar fashion:

[https://blog.mapbox.com/visualizing-an-entire-citys- building...](https://blog.mapbox.com/visualizing-an-entire-citys-buildings- live-with-runtime-styling-453fe7e39ae6)

(Disclaimer: some of the images, and especially the code formatting, don't seem to have survived very well)

I wrote there a bit more about the data processing side of this, and I tried to make a compelling mobile visualization that was fast. I'd use it a lot for demo and pitch-type meetings, and especially with an HDMI connector direct from iPhone to a 50, 60 or 70" display, the frame rate and fluidity was super impressive.

To this day, I just plain love the tech that we built.

</comment><comment><USER5> Impressive visualisation. Seems to be an extrusion of the Kadaster (government) building data towards the maximum height of the structure.

Much more precise data is also also available: there are height maps of NL with a resolution of 5 points per square meter, IIRC (not my field). Eg [1], but perhaps more parties do similar work.

[1]: [https://ahn.arcgisonline.nl/Postcodetool/s2.html?app=Postcod...](https://ahn.arcgisonline.nl/Postcodetool/s2.html?app=Postcodetool)

And as mentioned elsewhere, they indeed misrepresent renovations & construction work as building dates.

<comment><USER6> And even better, you can view the underlying data as a 3d point cloud here: (crashed my Firefox on mobile) [http://potree.entwine.io/data/ahn.html](http://potree.entwine.io/data/ahn.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Cute, but riddled with errors. In my area (Arnhem / Nijmegen) it assigns 1975 as the date for buildings that are much newer. It also sets my house as 1925 when 1900 would have been more accurate (it was, however, split in 2 around 1920 or so - maybe that's where the confusion comes from?)

<comment><USER8> They didn't create the dataset. The dataset is from the government's Basisregistratie Adressen en Gebouwen (BAG).

If you spot errors, contact your local municipality, since they provide this data to the central registry.

<comment><USER9> It's possible they're misinterpreting the dataset.

<comment><USER10> In my case, the dataset is wrong. My entire neighbourhood was built in 1987, and my house had extensive renovations in 2010. Now my house is marked as being built in 2010. Oddly, pretty much every house in the neighbourhood has had some big renovation or other, but only mine and one other one ("2008") have the wrong date in the registry.

I'm not going to correct it, because it doesn't matter.

<comment><USER3> > I'm not going to correct it, because it doesn't matter.

It does matter (although it is possible you simply don't care). This data is used for a lot of purposes, which may include the calculation of your house's estimated worth for taxation.

Most municipalities do appreciate the feedback via [https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl](https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl). A more accurate public dataset benefits society as a whole.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> There is similar one for Katowice, Poland: [http://katowickiebudynki.eu/](http://katowickiebudynki.eu/) (2d, with Leaflet.js)

<comment><USER11> ...and the downvote if for?

(I am not related to the project above, just in case.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> TIL my house was built in 1338. I honestly had no idea.

<comment><USER13> It's a mark of distinction to live in a house that old. You should be proud!

<comment><USER12> I'm just sad it's 1 year off from 1337, to be honest.

<comment><USER14> you could say it's better than l33t

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Very impressive visualization, works smoothly even on a mid range Android phone.

<comment><USER16> Yeah, this is cool stuff.

It feels similar to me to OSMand+ (an open alternative to the very laggy Google Maps).

<comment><USER3> OsmAnd+ isn't open (it has a proprietary licence), but the source of the map data (OpenStreetMap) is.

There seems to be a free software alternative for OsmAnd+ called OsmAnd~ by the way:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OsmAnd#Licensing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OsmAnd#Licensing)

The non-premium version called OsmAnd seems to be FOSS too.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Does someone knows wich 3D API there are using ? \- BabylonJs (guess?) [could explain the smooth visualisation] \- another one ?

<comment><USER18> I believe they used Mapbox for both the basemap and 3D visualisation

[https://docs.mapbox.com/mapbox-gl- js/example/3d-buildings/](https://docs.mapbox.com/mapbox-gl- js/example/3d-buildings/)

<comment><USER17> Thank you

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Very much worth viewing in relation to the effects of WW2 [http://googlemapsmania.blogspot.com/2014/04/amsterdam- during...](http://googlemapsmania.blogspot.com/2014/04/amsterdam-during- war.html) with [https://maps.amsterdam.nl/woii/](https://maps.amsterdam.nl/woii/) being the one you want.

<comment><USER20> Yes, this was my thought as well. I was in Rotterdam last summer which was mostly leveled by WWII bombing. It was very striking how much more modern the city was than cities like Amsterdam which came away with much less destruction. Obviously the destruction was horrible, but it was really interesting to me how it paved the way for redevelopment and vibrant newness. I guess this should be obvious. The chain of cause and effect is very straightforward and unsurprising in retrospect. But somehow at the same time it also seems counterintuitive how destruction can enable advancement.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> For those who missed the description on the webpage, the data that is visualized is called "3D BAG", which we get by combining the "BAG" (buildings) and the "AHN" (point cloud) data sets. The 3D BAG ([http://3dbag.bk.tudelft.nl/](http://3dbag.bk.tudelft.nl/)) is created by the us at the 3D geoinformation group ([https://3d.bk.tudelft.nl/](https://3d.bk.tudelft.nl/)).

</comment><comment><USER22> It's got my house dated incorrectly. Looks fancy though.

<comment><USER23> Yea I was wondering this, the house I was born in is in a street of mostly 1920's houses, and then one corner house is from 1875, doesn't seem right to me. 99% else seems right though, really fun to look trough

<comment><USER3> You can look up the source data here:

[https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl](https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl)

It is possible to provide feedback there; your local municipality will look into any feedback provided.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Pretty impressive. But it would be nice if you could turn-off certain era's to see how an area evolved.

<comment><USER25> That reminds me of a scene in Clarke's novel "The City and the Stars", where there is a map that lets one view the entire billion year history of the city of Diaspora. I thought that was a cool idea when I read the book decades ago and now we can actually do it!

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Rotterdam, which was bombed during WW2: [https://parallel.co.uk/netherlands/#13.49/51.91912/4.48476/8](https://parallel.co.uk/netherlands/#13.49/51.91912/4.48476/8)

</comment><comment><USER27> The colors for "really old" and "unknown" shouldn't be so similar.

</comment><comment><USER28> A lot of houses in Amsterdam date from around the same time as the founding of New Amsterdam

</comment><comment><USER29> The buildings are shown in 3D, but it seems it is only a 2D representation + height.

<comment><USER30> Hell of a lot easier to generate, and to render.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Is that base layer something which is standard in OSM and how do I get it?

<comment><USER32> No, the data is from official government sources. OSM data is good, but mostly not _that_ good in comparison with official sources.</comment></comment>


The Nature of Temptation: Why those who speak against vice so often fall for it. - <AUTHOR> http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2009/07/05/the_nature_of_temptation/ <comment><USER2> This reminds me of some advice that's often given to mountain bikers, "Look where you want the bike to go."

If you stare at the rocks or the cliff, that's where the bike will go.</comment>


Bitcoins from Feb 3, 2009 just moved for the first time - <AUTHOR> https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3ln77n/coinbases_from_feb_3_2009_just_moved_for_the/ <comment><USER2> How much does this translate too? In mid 2010, 1 coin was worth about 5 cents.

<comment><AUTHOR> Looks like around $60,000 for 270 coins.</comment></comment>


Build a Better Bulb for a $10 Million Prize  - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/25/technology/25bulb.html?_r=1&hp

<comment><USER2> I've scrolled past this headline 5 times now, and every time I've thought it said "Build a better _BLUB_ for a $10 million prize".

This place has ruined my ability to read 4 letter words.

<comment><USER3> Glad I wasn't the only one!

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> imo this is how government should work, not do the work for us, but promote and reward for the work that is done.

</comment><comment><USER5> I was somewhat surprised by the cost. They mention current LED bulb prices around $100 and are driving it towards $20-$25. Which ones are they talking about? I found some on Amazon for $5-$10.

Maybe it's not the right kind of white light. I know that LEDs have pretty low spread (they only cover 10's of nm in wavelength) and in order to assemble a good white light you have to have the right number and intensity of LEDs to produce the consumer-friendly color.

<comment><USER4> I believe the actual problem with LED's is the fact that lowering voltage output to an LED doesn't make the light dim.

I remember reading an article about this somewhere, it was a little over my head but a pretty interesting read if someone has the link available.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm glad they're responding to people's reactions to compact florescent bulbs. A lot of people could be saving money with them, but aren't. My father, for instance, refuses to switch. I asked him, and he said he doesn't know why. Even after I made sure he knew they weren't that expensive, and would save him money over the medium-term, he won't consider them. Maybe if LED bulbs have more bugs ironed out when they're introduced, they'll be more accepted.

</comment><comment><USER7> Another case of "government intervention" that will benefit us in the long run.

</comment><comment><USER8> <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=842723></comment>


Ask YC: Can you search HN? - <AUTHOR>

Is there a way to search old articles on HN. I missed a blog post/ article on link exchange or affiliate program etc and just cannot seem to find it. :( <comment><USER2> There's

<http://searchyc.com/>

Or alternatively your favourite search engine with the site:news.ycombinator.com operator (or equivalent).

This is definitely a frequently asked question but sadly not covered in the FAQ.

In fairness, searchyc.com is the top result on google for any of "search ycombinator", "search y combinator" or "search hacker news", so you didn't look very hard.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for that information. It was also right, I hadn't looked to hard.</comment></comment>


Twister OS for Raspberry Pi 4 - <AUTHOR> https://raspberrypiprojects.com/twister-os-raspberry-pi-4-get-that-osx-and-windows-10-look/ <comment><USER2> Meh. Although Linux gives you the freedom to skin your desktop, why skin your way there when you can try out the real thing on a Raspberry Pi [0] with real x86 Windows apps running on it rather than just only x86 DOS games.

[0] [https://www.windowslatest.com/2020/02/09/heres-how- windows-1...](https://www.windowslatest.com/2020/02/09/heres-how- windows-10-runs-on-raspberry-pi-4-and-3/)

<comment><USER3> Your provided link doesn't mention the ability to run x86 windows apps on arm windows. Is this actually a thing?

<comment><USER4> From the link:

> _Unlike IoT, Windows 10 ARM is ARM-targeted spin of the OS, which comes with > a traditional desktop and Win32 apps support via emulation._

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> If you want a DOS-flavored pi, check out the dosbian project, from the same guy who made combian64: [https://cmaiolino.wordpress.com/dosbian/](https://cmaiolino.wordpress.com/dosbian/)

</comment><comment><USER6> Man i really waited for long to have another 'OS' based on Linux :(</comment>


Fruit of 4 years of 14 hours per day, 7 days a week - <AUTHOR> http://www.killerbeanforever.com/

<comment><USER2> Even if the film turns out to suck, you can't help but admire this guy's dedication. I wish I had this sort of work ethic / commitment...

</comment><comment><USER3> I have been waiting for this since I saw Killerbean 2.

I will pay to view this film.

</comment><comment><USER4> My wife and I have watched the trailer several times and we love it. Two of our friends are also excited about it.

I don't know how you will distribute it, but remember that you have four customers willing to pay kronor here in northern Sweden!

</comment><comment><USER5> Hope that guy has a fucking good backup policy.

<comment><USER6> He was the lead animator on Matrix Reloaded. And, of course, he has this film to show.

<comment><USER7> i think he meant data backup

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> If the film-maker is serious about the time he spent on this project... this is pretty mind-blowing. I've never, ever heard of someone this passionate about anything.

<comment><USER9> Not too far off of med school plus residency, etc., which lasts roughly twice as long.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> This shows some amazing dedication, but the beans don't have any facial expressions so the emotion in their voices seem kind of strange.

Still, I'm pretty sure every kid on earth would love this movie, based on the preview.

<comment><USER4> I am 40 and I love it. What does that say about me?

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> The preview is awesome! Hats off to your dedication!

</comment><comment><USER12> Wow!!! That was amazing. And yes, your story is very inspirational.

Thank you. Looking forward to seeing the film on the big screen...

</comment><comment><USER13> KAZE : Ghost Warrior (HONOR IS LIFE)

One Person, Two Computers, Six Months

+

He show you all details in his book.

<http://www.kazeghostwarrior.com/flash/index.htm> <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1556222270>

</comment><comment><USER14> You are an inspiration!

</comment><comment><USER15> It sucks.

(totally kidding!)</comment>


Dwb is a lightweight webbrowser written in C based on webkit and gtk - <AUTHOR> http://bitbucket.org/portix/dwb <comment><USER2> Someone should do some sort of writeup of these minimalist webkit browsers. I like the idea, but between dwb, xxxterm, surf, uzbl, vimprobable, etc., I have no idea where to start.

<comment><USER3> Thanks for all those project names! That's the start of a writeup.

<comment><USER4> Just to add to your list: <http://www.twotoasts.de/index.php?/pages/midori_summary.html></comment></comment></comment>


France hijacks PPE shipments bound for Italy/Spain - <AUTHOR> https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/coronavirus-european-solidarity-sidelined-as-french-interests-take-priority-1.4216184 <comment><AUTHOR> 'For now, Mölnlycke "is avoiding France altogether," says a Swedish source. "So that is the consequence. The French market is avoided because it is not seen as reliable."'

<comment><USER2> [https://www.foxnews.com/world/france-us-coronavirus-masks- ch...](https://www.foxnews.com/world/france-us-coronavirus-masks-china)

More or less reliable than the US one ?</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Do you donate to Wikipedia? Is their donation request motivating? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> No. Their assets are increasing by tens of millions every year - [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fundraising_statisti...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fundraising_statistics). They'll be fine without my $5.

<comment><USER3> Thanks for sharing this! I just donated a week ago after receiving yet another email that made it sound like they're barely making ends meet. Now I feel cheated.

<comment><USER4> it looks like they have some savings now, but wouldn't make it 2 years if they stopped getting donations. it makes sense to me that they would continue to fundraise unless they had an alternative recurring source of funding

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> No. The biggest value that Wikipedia provides is the content. None of the donations are going to the content creators, very little of them are going to covering IT costs. And a lot of them are used for paying big Bay Area wages to people in the foundation whose work I regard as highly peripheral to the core value provided.

<comment><USER6> What work do they do that you consider peripheral? I'm asking from a place of ignorance.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Not directly, only through Humble Bundle if given the option.

I don't feel that I need them to live; I appreciate TV Tropes more and that's where a donation would go first. They are a nice luxury, but I opt for the non-Wikipedia answers where possible, because Wikipedia tends to explain things in a convoluted manner.

Plus they do make a lot of money and I feel the fundraising copy has been misleading about that.

I feel that the Wikipedia model doesn't work as a non-profit. I'd be happy to subscribe to some paid version where contributors get distributed a portion of the earnings, ala Spotify. Right now, it feels like some contributors get nothing, while some have a happy full time, full salary job. It's brought some good to the world, and I'd like the Wikipedia staff to make above average salaries, but it should be taken fairly out of everyone's pockets.

</comment><comment><USER8> Absolutely. It's one of the small corners of the web that brings positive value to the world ad-free. It's brought significant value to my life. I'd like to see it continue, so I have a monthly donation towards it.

</comment><comment><USER9> I love wikipedia as much as anybody I have known. I currently don't donate but would love to once my situation changes. Their donation request is the most horrible one I have seen. They should definitely work on their tone and presentation. Having said that I feel they shouldn't need to ask for donation because they are basically providing the top search results for most of the search engines and Digital voice assistants like Alexa and should be able to have a stream of income from the big corps with out effecting their integrity.

</comment><comment><USER10> Yes, for many years already. I don't need the request to be motivating, I need the wikipedia to exist.

</comment><comment><USER11> I do, I feel obligated to donate at least $5 per year as this is one of my most visited sites. The internet would not be the same without wiki, and it makes me feel like I am supporting the Internet by those small donations.

</comment><comment><USER12> This impresses me just like a donation jar at a major bank begging customers to donate money to some noble cause.

WTF? You really don't have enough money to support the cause?

Someone need to write Chrome extension to hide this.

</comment><comment><USER13> Yes, both time and monetarily. Why? Because it's one of the few informative sites that's still free and I use it's services often.

</comment><comment><USER14> I have in the past but I probably won't again. It seems like they have enough money and they can pay their staff more than I make.

</comment><comment><USER15> > Do you donate to Wikipedia?

Content, occasionally.

Money? Not yet.

> Is their donation request motivating?

Well, obviously not sufficiently to cause me to give them money.

</comment><comment><USER16> Save your donation for ProPublica.</comment>


EMC's 8-K SEC Filing Giving Notice of RSA Security Breach - <AUTHOR> http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/790070/000119312511070159/d8k.htm

<comment><AUTHOR> _Form 8-K is the "current report" companies must file with the SEC to announce major events that shareholders should know about._

Source: <http://www.sec.gov/answers/form8k.htm></comment>


Show HN: Build your own local lockdown economy - <AUTHOR> https://www.edinburghlockdowneconomy.com/your-local-lockdown-economy <comment><USER2> While I think the idea is good, this is really just a local business directory, of which there have been many. There's not much I could find that specifically addresses problems of lockdown.

Regardless, it's always good to see alternatives to Facebook groups.

The nature of the business should perhaps be more prominent than the name - it's what they sell that's important when browsing a directory.

I also note that while Edinburgh is the target, businesses from Fife and East Lothian are not easily distinguishable from more relevant local businesses.

Some kind of map integration would be useful to see location and, where relevant, delivery radius (which seems to be an issue at the moment). This would help me work out what I could reasonably collect in a single trip.

Good effort, particularly the information to others to reproduce their own versions. I think there's work to do to make it live up to its name.

<comment><USER3> 100% a local business directory but we tried to apply a lens of 'what are these businesses doing differently during lockdown'. For some this is a huge shift in their business model or way of operating, others it might just be shipping free to local people.

We'd love to add a solid way of helping people only see which services they can have delivered to them. The issue here is that every business has a different rule - 1m radius from shop, specific postcodes, only on certain days of the week. We're no-coders and this problem pretty much exposes the limitations of a solution like this. Despite that, it would still take a developer weeks to crack that one and how many extra weeks to ensure the 500+ business listings had the right data to support a technical solution. We gambled that lockdown wouldn't last long enough to invest in it and instead just show a delivery area label so you can see at a glance.</comment></comment>


Ask HN:What do you think about social daily deals website - <AUTHOR> http://www.squaregain.com

<comment><AUTHOR> SquareGain is the first social daily deals website. It is daily deals with strong social integration.

1) Users can create profile on SquareGain, add friends, share deals, send messages, views others' deals and build their social profile

2) Many merchants have one problem with daily deals - they do not know if deal customers are returning as regular customers. We are trying to solve that problem by allowing merchants to add revisits to a user's profile when they revisit without a deal. At the same time users are given incentives to revisit by awarding them loyalty points. The more they revisit the merchant, the more loyalty points they get. So this is a win-win-win situation

3) Users are also given other incentives like unlocking badges on buying more deals in a category.

4) We are trying to popularize the use of QR Code by emails the user a QR code on purchase of a deal. All the user needs to do is show the downloaded QR code to get the deal.

Would love to hear your feedback.</comment>


Need book recommendations for programmer to product developer transition - <AUTHOR>

Some friends, distributed across a few states and continents, are developers. They have one or two products being used by clients and a couple more in the pipeline.
It is becoming obvious that they are following into the same trap as many techies before them. The products are not fully defined and new features keep getting added. When an obstacle comes up or if a client has an idea, work shifts to a different product, the first one being left unfinished. Sometimes the vision of the product is not clear to the team. The look & feel and usability is left to the personal likes of the developer implementing them. The people involved know computers, programming, databases, system administration, etc. They are all intelligent, curious, etc. They have the kind of skill set any employer would kill for, but they are their own employers now! They are not the kind of folks who read blogs or new.ycombinator posts so, on their own, they don't know if zynga is a good model to follow or twitter.
What are some good, to the point, books which will help coders become the kind of people who are good at "building stuff?" Manage team, develop vision, manage process, avoid typical pitfalls (like constant requests for proofs of concepts which earn no revenue), etc., etc.
Look forward to suggestions! <comment><USER2> Inspired: How To Create Products Customers Love by Marty Cagan

<comment><AUTHOR> The table of contents looks very interesting. Thanks!</comment></comment>